guten abend, ladies and gentleman! may i introduce myself. my name is heinrich eichhorst, born on 20th february 1972 in berlin / germany. i come to identity city recently - you may hear it on my accent. i studied law in germany before - yes i did some extra rounds but finally i got my degree. it was quite a bit difficult that the goverment of identity city adjuge my foreign education. but hey, here i am! i speak german fluenty and my english is entirely sufficient. so if you have problems with the police or even law - no matter what kind of - don't hasitate and contact me ! german thoroughness and professionalism speaks for my favour. true my motto: you want to get out? - come to the kraut! kind regards und freundlichen gruß heinrich eichhorst, on 27th of september 2017

Hello all, I've searched the forum's for 'RDM', 'Deathmatching' to try to find out how Identity will solve the issue of many other RP games - RDM. If for some reason there already is information about this that i missed could you please link me to the specific comment/forum with the answers! I began pondering what possible ways there are to solve random deathmatching and keep RP without simply unleashing the ban hammer/kicking players off the bat. One solution to this in my eyes would be the allow players to decide if the scenario was RDM / non RP. The way this could be done follows: Scenario: 'John doe' is walking down the street when suddenly 'ilean Dover' drifts round the corner hops out and shoots poor john in the face, gets back into his car and speeds off. John dies and has to respawn back at his house. After being in shock to what just happened poor John becomes enraged and storms into the Court office building to file for a court case against this random iLean women who shot him in the face. John was smart and recorded 'on his GoPro (Aka OBS or whatever recording software you use to record a game)' and uploads it as unlisted to youtube. He simply fills in an in-game form with his name, the date, the name of the filed against and a link to the footage/evidence. Now this is where the scenario is up for debate and i want to hear your thoughts. I believe the Judge and Juries should be senior members of a server (e.g they must have a certain amount of hours in-game in that server - for public server atleast) before they can even apply to be a Judge/Jury. For private servers this simply can be the admin team off the bat or the same as the public servers members who have no criminal record (or a record below a threshhold) who are trusted enough to be given the power of a Judge/jury. What do you think? - Back onto said scenario. The judge and jury team will look at the evidence before they even meet john and ilean to determine whether there was an RP reason to stop any false claims (e.g someone who is just salty in a RP fire-fight). minutes later John and Ilean (iLean is told to go to court or face a 'point#' and possible a kick/ban from said server) are called to court. John explains his side and points to the evidence, Ilean states her side and gives any evidence (Evidence can be seen from a big screen which plays the submitted evidence). The judges and jury come together to make a decision. If John was just a salty player who actually had robbed or attacked Ilean prior to this encounter and stole a LOT of money from Ilean and she simply was getting revenge then John would receive a 'point#'. However, If ilean was guilty she would receive a 'point#'. #Points system - a point system could be used to determine punishments. For example, 3 points lead to a day ban from the server, 5 points a week, 7 points 2 weeks, 10 points a ban (from private servers and another week ban from the public servers). * Judges and Juries will have a lot of power in private servers so could either be elected, based of admins for private servers or to be one you must be approved by server owners. Public server jurys/judges could have access to a seperate forum called 'Point requests' where they note down the outcome to the court hearing. This will be managed by trust moderators or devs (on Identitys side to choose who should be trusted) who will then apply the point (this is to stop corrupt judges/juries from kicking innocent people. What do we think of this idea?