[Cole]

We did not hostage the president.

That's like saying: If a gang went into a bar and their target happens to be at the bar, but the President is at the bar having a drink, they then tie everyone up in the bar. That means the President has been raided... of which he has not at all.

[Enzyme]

Cole, if you tie up the President against his will, hold him against his will and prevent him from doing whatever he wants to do, then you've hostaged him. You've taken away his personal freedom and authority as head of a government by force. This is hostaging.

Also, it's rather unlikely to meet the President at the bar. You'd be excused if you randomly stumbled upon the President in a bar, as it's not something you'd expect.

It's rather likely to meet the President in the Government HQ in the President's office. You can't be excused if you claim that you're surprised the President what there, as that's something you naturally would have to expect.

[Vadar]

Cole, if you tie up the President against his will, hold him against his will and prevent him from doing whatever he wants to do, then you've hostaged him. You've taken away his personal freedom and authority as head of a government by force. This is hostaging.

But can I ask what are we supposed to do ? Let him roam free with radio access ??

[ForceGhost]

Cole, if you tie up the President against his will, hold him against his will and prevent him from doing whatever he wants to do, then you've hostaged him. You've taken away his personal freedom and authority as head of a government by force. This is hostaging.

Tieing someone up doesn't mean you're hostaging them. Hostage rope got changed to just rope for a reason. When officers cuff people during a house search doesn't mean they're hostaging them, nor are they arresting them. They're cuffing them for their own safety.

[Enzyme]

Cole, if you tie up the President against his will, hold him against his will and prevent him from doing whatever he wants to do, then you've hostaged him. You've taken away his personal freedom and authority as head of a government by force. This is hostaging.

But can I ask what are we supposed to do ? Let him roam free with radio access ??

Maybe you should have avoided grabbing the President against his will entirely to start with?
If I have an issue with an Officer, then I wouldn't try to attack said Officer as he's meeting the President himself. That'd put me in a lot more trouble than I'd want to be in.

[ForceGhost]

Cole, if you tie up the President against his will, hold him against his will and prevent him from doing whatever he wants to do, then you've hostaged him. You've taken away his personal freedom and authority as head of a government by force. This is hostaging.

But can I ask what are we supposed to do ? Let him roam free with radio access ??

Maybe you should have avoided grabbing the President against his will entirely to start with?
If I have an issue with an Officer, then I wouldn't try to attack said Officer as he's meeting the President himself. That'd put me in a lot more trouble than I'd want to be in.

That may be your character, our characters got away scot free. We ended up taking out the targets, getting away and riding off into the sunset. The plan worked perfectly and no targets other than the intended got injured.

[Enzyme]

So by your logic, the rules allow me to hostage whoever I want as long as I don't end up killing them?

Oh, I'm, also. I'm not hostaging them per se, just holding them against their will, preventing them from doing what they want, robbing the person of their personal freedom while also threatening the person with guns. 

That's completely different from hostaging someone, right?

Wait..

With your logic, if your friend visits your home; I'm not hostaging you if I force entry inside your house, tie you up and prevent you from doing anything,  brandishing my gun before executing your friend and leave. I didn't hostage you?

[ForceGhost]

So by your logic, the rules allow me to hostage whoever I want as long as I don't end up killing them?

Oh, I'm, also. I'm not hostaging them per se, just holding them against their will, preventing them from doing what they want, robbing the person of their personal freedom while also threatening the person with guns. 

That's completely different from hostaging someone, right?

Wait..

No, you still need a valid reason for tieing someone up and I said nothing to the contrary.

But tieing up someone doesn't equal hostaging.

[Vadar]

So by your logic, the rules allow me to hostage whoever I want as long as I don't end up killing them?

Oh, I'm, also. I'm not hostaging them per se, just holding them against their will, preventing them from doing what they want, robbing the person of their personal freedom while also threatening the person with guns. 

That's completely different from hostaging someone, right?

Wait..

It doesn't make sense to wait for them to come down. They were all sat at a table occupied with the meeting with no guns drawn other than one SSA. Why would we wait when we had that golden opportunity to do things not just without shooting at all causing any extra causalities but also silently not to provoke anyone.

If there was an issue why wasn't it handled there and then ?

[Enzyme]

So by your logic, the rules allow me to hostage whoever I want as long as I don't end up killing them?

Oh, I'm, also. I'm not hostaging them per se, just holding them against their will, preventing them from doing what they want, robbing the person of their personal freedom while also threatening the person with guns. 

That's completely different from hostaging someone, right?

Wait..

[text]

If there was an issue why wasn't it handled there and then ?

That's why I'm also investigating Internet's conduct in this case as HR.

[Vadar]

So by your logic, the rules allow me to hostage whoever I want as long as I don't end up killing them?

Oh, I'm, also. I'm not hostaging them per se, just holding them against their will, preventing them from doing what they want, robbing the person of their personal freedom while also threatening the person with guns. 

That's completely different from hostaging someone, right?

Wait..

[text]

If there was an issue why wasn't it handled there and then ?

That's why I'm also investigating Internet's conduct in this case as HR.

But if an Administrator has deemed it alright by not interfering then why is this PR breaking this

8. Do not post reports if you know the incident has been dealt with in-game by members of staff, because you do not agree with the outcome or otherwise.

Regardless of the outcome of Internet's conduct in this case this shouldnt be a thing and would rather be an HR message or Staff Report.

[Enzyme]

To my knowledge, this incident has not been dealt with in-game properly, and I will, therefore, allow that this PR will remain up as is so it can be evaluated properly.

[Kvatch]

[text]

If there was an issue why wasn't it handled there and then ?

That's why I'm also investigating Internet's conduct in this case as HR.

But if an Administrator has deemed it alright by not interfering then why is this PR breaking this

8. Do not post reports if you know the incident has been dealt with in-game by members of staff, because you do not agree with the outcome or otherwise.

Regardless of the outcome of Internet's conduct in this case this shouldnt be a thing and would rather be an HR message or Staff Report.

That's the issue. Internet didn't deal with it.

[ForceGhost]

To my knowledge, this incident has not been dealt with in-game properly, and I will, therefore, allow that this PR will remain up as is so it can be evaluated properly.

But we took the Administrators word as we received it, how can we break a rule by following the administrators guidance?

[Vadar]

That's why I'm also investigating Internet's conduct in this case as HR.

But if an Administrator has deemed it alright by not interfering then why is this PR breaking this

8. Do not post reports if you know the incident has been dealt with in-game by members of staff, because you do not agree with the outcome or otherwise.

Regardless of the outcome of Internet's conduct in this case this shouldnt be a thing and would rather be an HR message or Staff Report.

That's the issue. Internet didn't deal with it.

But he did do something as the Administrator cleared it.