Planets and Aliens? - CR breech or not?

[Agar]

I find it rather strange to ressurect this thread when it was pretty much settled a week ago, by someone in charge.

My character missed him leaving. I just noticed it was void of a lot of foolishness.

I don't personally know the player, but my character met his, and his style of play was forcing others playing to bring things into the game that I don't feel is the theme of Cantr. I'm just another player, not on staff, which is why I started this thread, to get a definate yes or no to if the character was in need of being contacted, so I could let the appropriate people know who to contact if that was the case.

As it stands, Oasis, currently a Players Dept member, feels it does fall under the definition of a CR breach, but barely. As it's not serious, I have not reported the character to anyone on staff.

From a PD perspective, it's a fine line, as Julie2 has indicated. Spaceships and aliens should not be used, as these concepts are beyond the comprehension of Cantrians.

That someone claims to be descended from anything is also ludicrous, and a concept unknown to Cantrians. Yes, the fellow is clearly insane. A CR breach? Borderline, but not serious. The biggest being the mention of "planets", which is not something that is normally assumed to exist beyond the Cantr realm.

Vendetta? Maybe. But if someone told me there was a thief headed this way, and they knew it because they heard about it on ther cell phone, They'd be using OOC concepts that don't exist in the game and shouldn't be allowed to continue talking about it. Hearing about it on the radio is another story ...

[Wolf]

Three things I'd like to put my two cents in for...
One:

... I don't personally know the player, but my character met his, and his style of play was forcing others playing to bring things into the game that I don't feel is the theme of Cantr...

Ah, finally a point specifically made which I had hoped to read on the two earlier pages of the thread, but luckily I didn't hit "reply" until I got to the end of it.
And in that post you scored two good points; the one quoted here, and the one where you pointed out the issue had been settled.

Two:

"shimmering" is in the present tense. So you can look at it anytime, and see the sun shimmering off of it. People are awake at different hours of the day, what with our players being from all around the world.

I say Cantr has no night.

Ah, so you wouldn't be able to say that something was shimmering yesterday, therefor Cantr has no past.
And it can't be shimmering tomorrow, because tomorrow isn't the present... interesting to see how a universe simply seizes to exist every day, then jump into existense again the next day (which would be the current day), while building on what was reached in it's former embodiment...
Also, imagine saying that the northpole (or was that southpole? or was it equal for both?) has no night or day... for part of the year, there's a period without daylight, or without the darkness of night.
I know, some of you folks are bound to remember this from school, but bare with me, for me, school was a loooooong time ago...
Heck, I remember seeing the original Star Wars in a cinema when it first came out.
But the point is... "Shimmering" in itself does not strictly impose a present tense limitation, and in the description of the jewelry that was used in the example, it didn't say that the piece was shimmering in the sun right now.
So, sorry to drop this on ya, but you did not land the last blow in such a debate
But, I'm intrigued to see which side would be able to best such a debate in their advantage, as there will always be arguements supporting every faction.

Three:
The original subject of this thread sparked some curiosity in myself, because I might have been guilty of a small glitch in reasoning too.
In my case, I have two chars which have last names similar to two other chars.
And while they spawned in different places, never met, never might meet - I simply let each character "live" it's own life, I had imagined that if they were to meet and get into conversation, the last names would be implying that they were somehow related, even if only in a distant way.
Based on this assumption, I went a step further, and envisioned them as having some kind of clan- or tribal-tattoo, on their face or in other visible places... which would help them recognize someone related to them.
Again, I was not playing them in a set way, I was just letting them react to their immediate surroundings, with none of them having anywhere to go or any pre-set plan, but still... after reading this thread, I can see how it could be seen as an oversight on my behalf, or even a breach of any magnitude.
If this were to be the case, I'd just chalk their last names up to coincidence and be done with it heh...

[The Industriallist]

"shimmering" is in the present tense. So you can look at it anytime, and see the sun shimmering off of it. People are awake at different hours of the day, what with our players being from all around the world.

I say Cantr has no night.

Ah, so you wouldn't be able to say that something was shimmering yesterday, therefor Cantr has no past.
And it can't be shimmering tomorrow, because tomorrow isn't the present... interesting to see how a universe simply seizes to exist every day, then jump into existense again the next day (which would be the current day), while building on what was reached in it's former embodiment...
Also, imagine saying that the northpole (or was that southpole? or was it equal for both?) has no night or day... for part of the year, there's a period without daylight, or without the darkness of night.
I know, some of you folks are bound to remember this from school, but bare with me, for me, school was a loooooong time ago...
Heck, I remember seeing the original Star Wars in a cinema when it first came out.
But the point is... "Shimmering" in itself does not strictly impose a present tense limitation, and in the description of the jewelry that was used in the example, it didn't say that the piece was shimmering in the sun right now.
So, sorry to drop this on ya, but you did not land the last blow in such a debate

Um...if you read the sentence, shimmering is in fact used in the present tense. It does not say 'will be shimmering' or anything of the kind. The sentence unequivocally states that it is, at the moment of observation, shimmering in the sunlight.

It could only be shimmering at some other time if the sentence said that it 'was shimmering' or 'will be shimmering' at that time...no time reference but the implicit present appears in the description.