I have never seen these player rules posted by Elvenar. I have only rarely seen restrictions in fellowships. I do have a rule against 0 or 1 star trades without notification. The rules I have are not, nor have they ever been, used to coerce others. In my fellowship we accept the judgement of Elvenar in assessed value of the goods, and most others I know do the same. Others may not and that is their business.
No one here has put down or disrespected another that I have seen. I do not understand why you insist on saying this. Opinions are expressed here. I have stated that I do not agree with 0 or 1 star trades without good reason. IN MY OPINION if you consistently do this, you are attempting to make a profit, or yes, gouging others. This is not the way I choose to play.
With regard to being taught incorrectly....who are you to pass judgement on others teaching methods? You don't want it passed on you, so stop preaching you know best. There are many ways to play this game. Burying your judgements in a mashup of word salad doesn't change the fact that you are judging.
In the classic words of my childhood...you ain't my daddy and you don't get to tell me what to do.
They are not Elvenar rules, they are player rules -- rules players make up and thus Elvenar, itself, has nothing to do with them. Your rule against posting 0 or 1 star trades without notification is one of them.
The judgement of Elvenar is not a judgement about value, but about cost. Their calculations are based upon production costs and, as I've been arguing consistently, if you choose to trade by value to you rather than cost to produce, you should be free to do so. In fact, the game acknowledges that since it allows you to value your goods up to 8 times more than the production costs evaluation upon which the star system is built.
Rules which are posted in the fellowship page and/or announced by the AM or a Mage, imply punishment for not following those rules. The ability to punish is a form of coercion. On the other hand, if a player joins a fellowship with such rules he or she is agreeing to them and thus, the punishment is what the player chooses when he or she breaks the rule.
Coercion is not teaching. Teaching is when you have an open and frank conversation about the subject, acknowledging the valid points and challenging the invalid. Coercion is judging a persons behavior is bad enough to label "gouger" or some other derogatory term, or otherwise punish them.
They are not teaching, they are ruling. And even if they are teaching, if they are teaching things that are untrue, or incomplete, they are teaching things that can harm the player they are teaching.
There are two kinds of judgment. The first says, "you are a a bad person because you do this," the other says, "this is not a good thing to do." The first is directed at the person and is not, nor has it ever been, something I've done (I can't promise that's 100%, but it's pretty rare). The second is pointing out a behavior and saying it's bad.
Finally, in my "mash of words" I must point out that making moral judgments is just part of how we find our way through life. It is impossible to live without morals and even the worst of bad people have some..."don't get caught" being, perhaps, the chief one in really bad people. The difference between making such moral judgments and not is where your focus lays. I focus on the actions, not the person and the only way, as I've said above, for a person to be harmed by my opinion is to either agree with me they are doing something they shouldn't, or take my opinions way too personally.
AJ