The Deal With It Attitude

[Peaches 0]

5 minutes ago, Nihoolious said:

I think there is some confusion on what I am against there. To clarify I didn't make this thread to question the use of Rule 4 in general. Its a rule thats been around since I joined the community in 2013 and I saw it exercised soon after joining with the mass ban of SKA. I understand its purpose and why it exists, for important issues that need to be dealt with in a way the traditional process can't do. Why I don't agree with is how it has been used recently with the Aiko report being one of the biggest offenses that can be seen by the public, I'm sure there are some questionable final warnings I don't know about.

Picture this for me:

You believe yourself to be a rule abiding member of the community. You are roleplaying within the rules to your knowledge and behaving on the forums in a similar way. However, the admin team says you made a mistake and you are giving a punishment through Rule 4. This could be points, a final warning or permanent ban. You cannot contest this punishment, it is set in stone. You don't think you did anything wrong but the admins exercised their right to deal with you in the way they saw fight. Now imagine this same thing is happening to other people, maybe even your friends for reason you don't agree with. 

Would you still have the same opinion over the Deal With It attitude then?

Yeah, hear it from me first hand. For example getting on to see all the main people I play with removed from the community off one persons comment. That isn't likely to get contested, one who hasn't even been given a warning point. It sucks, I literally have no urge to play on this server anymore considering all, since they were the reasons I played here. It sucks.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Peaches

[Shazzzam 66]

What do you mean you can't contest it? 

You may appeal this by contacting emails and appealing to Rolle directly at [email protected]

Now, you made me open a beer and read the drama, but I can't help but see that you are speaking of something you are not fully understanding.

My opinion: I do not agree that there were no logs, no nothing. If this is not bias, why was the report not handled as every other report? I fully understand the fact, that the admins can do whatever they want regarding this exact situation, but you guys are like the judges and the report section is the court room. And what I see happening in that exact court room is just a verdict backed up by insufficient evidence. 

There is another thing about this though. The logs may have been reviewed between Rolle and Aiko, the whole situation might have been thought about hidden away from us. Every report is openly reviewed in the report itself, however this one might be different. We see it as just a verdict being thrown out because we don't see a long-a*s review between many staff members.

[Peaches 0]

1 minute ago, Shazzzam said:

What do you mean you can't contest it? 

You may appeal this by contacting emails and appealing to Rolle directly at [email protected]

Now, you made me open a beer and read the drama, but I can't help but see that you are speaking of something you are not fully understanding.

My opinion: I do not agree that there were no logs, no nothing. If this is not bias, why was the report not handled as every other report? I fully understand the fact, that the admins can do whatever they want regarding this exact situation, but you guys are like the judges and the report section is the court room. And what I see happening in that exact court room is just a verdict backed up by insufficient evidence. 

There is another thing about this though. The logs may have been reviewed between Rolle and Aiko, the whole situation might have been thought about hidden away from us. Every report is openly reviewed in the report itself, however this one might be different. We see it as just a verdict being thrown out because we don't see a long-a*s review between many staff members.

yeah but how often does that really happen?

[Cuteboi39 775]

Just now, Shazzzam said:

What do you mean you can't contest it? 

Oh sweet summer child.

[Roland 7212]

12 minutes ago, Peaches said:

For example getting on to see all the main people I play with getting themselves permabanned on purpose by posting porn, gore and racist images due to one person receiving 3 warning points.

Fixed that for you. No need to sugarcoat it.

[Peaches 0]

2 minutes ago, Rolle said:

Fixed that for you. No need to sugarcoat it.

I wasn't talking about the exodus. I was referring to this report, all the involved members were my main friends. I had no friends in the exodus I cared about.

edit: Not to mention, I didn't agree with the actions of that day considering I didn't get banned myself from it.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Peaches

[Roland 7212]

2 minutes ago, Peaches said:

I wasn't talking about the exodus. I was referring to this report, all the involved members were my main friends. I had no friends in the exodus I cared about.

Oh? I didn't realize anyone was permabanned for a comment in the report. I thought they were trolling in game. My bad.

[Osku 918]

1 minute ago, Rolle said:

Fixed that for you. No need to sugarcoat it.

Man, so much fixing going on in this thread...at this rate everything will be fixed and everyone will be happy in no time!

[Shazzzam 66]

2 minutes ago, Pado said:

Oh sweet summer child.

There is clearly a statement that it can be appealed. If that appeal never happened, why would they even say it? So it sounds like the perma banned guys have a chance and it's not completely impossible to return? 

Even so, why does everyone act like people who break rules should be banned for some days and keep being tolerated over and over again? I have been banned as well, that's why I read the rules and looked over past reports to try not to "fuck up" again. A mature person would consider that every action causes a reaction. Everything you do has a consequence. The perma banned people, either are immature enough to not consider the possibility of consequences or they knew exactly what might have happened and regardless, chose to go on with it. It is the unchangeable mindset of people, that get's them in a clinch such as this. If they were prone to fixing themselves, perhaps this would not have occurred. Think outside the box.

[Peaches 0]

Just now, Rolle said:

Oh? I didn't realize anyone was permabanned for a comment in the report. I thought they were trolling in game. My bad.

it was r4'ed because law claimed it was a false report. It started out as a report as normal, but since he said that towards the end due to them claiming  they made "ugandan knuckles memes" he was contesting that portion as a "false report". So Aiko r4'ed it due to him saying that. It wouldn't of gotten r4'ed getting 4 people banned who didn't even comment if law didn't say "false report" which is why I said that.

[Nihoolious 1994]

3 minutes ago, Rolle said:

Oh? I didn't realize anyone was permabanned for a comment in the report. I thought they were trolling in game. My bad.

Is there evidence of this trolling? If so then this is you saying to have reviewed it and determined they will not be returning to the community? 

[Cuteboi39 775]

Just now, Shazzzam said:

Think outside the box.

I apologies, I will go fourth and pray upon the rocks and seek salvation.

[Centurion 110]

My opinion as a kinda neutral party, not knowing or really caring about either side. Personally, i dont care about the perma bans that were handed out, just the way they were. Why not follow the report format, post the evidence so everyone could see and be transparent,  and then have the admin/staff team come to a conclusion. Why the unnecessary rush? If you felt that their rp for bad and trollish, just temp ban them so they cant hop ingame till the report is done. The veredicts would be the same and you wouldnt look like salty assholes who lost a car in a cideo game. Just my two cents.

 

Sorry for any grammar mistakes, typing on my phone. 

[Samaritan 635]

Do I agree with how the report went down (as it looks), no I don't however as Rolle has stated this issue will be discussed further so I will reserve my final judgement when I have more information.

On a wider note:

'The Deal With It' attitude is prevalent for non staff as well. It isn't just about staff attitudes, it is also some members of this community who use 'I'm not changing for anyone' attitude. Things only work if there are compromises on either 'side', but if both sides are pushing then no one comes away happy. As a compromise, cautions, warning threads etc. were introduced as a more lenient way of a sanction but certain members still pushed it. People use the word maturity so much and yet act immature themselves and moan when they get points. "Lets discuss this in a mature fashion in TS" is thrown around so much then we get complaints that those asking for a mature conversation in TS just verbally beat the other group/person down. Reports have turned less into about stating the facts and more about shitting on the person who did the reporting.

We are a community, community means to be together and at the moment we are not with this petty 'us and them' attitude. Being in staff is a no win situation, you try to enforce the rules that everyone has agreed to by continuing to be in this community and yet people consistently push things because for them it is funny but here is the kicker, for others it isn't. The game has become second to the forum and trying to best each other with some 'witty' comment or status update.

So you have to ask yourself a question, is it fine for non staff to have a 'Deal With It' attitude but when staff do that is just so awful that we need to slam the entire staff team with they all must have this attitude.

Peace to all.

[Roland 7212]

32 minutes ago, Nihoolious said:

Is there evidence of this trolling? If so then this is you saying to have reviewed it and determined they will not be returning to the community? 

An admin was there, experienced it first hand and made the call to treat it as trolling. That's plenty enough to use rule 4 and to me as good as any evidence, because I trust the admins judgement.

 

33 minutes ago, Peaches said:

it was r4'ed because law claimed it was a false report. It started out as a report as normal, but since he said that towards the end due to them claiming  they made "ugandan knuckles memes" he was contesting that portion as a "false report". So Aiko r4'ed it due to him saying that. It wouldn't of gotten r4'ed getting 4 people banned who didn't even comment if law didn't say "false report" which is why I said that.

I don't think you know why the Aiko did things she did. She spoke to me about the situation before using rule 4, I think I know better why the call was made. They received a permaban because of trolling.

[KyleRP 0]

In all seriousness though, this verdict should have, in my opinion this rule 4 should have been done by another staff member at least (probably shouldn't have been done at all until evidence was put forward) to make it not look like Aiko was verdicting her own report and being biased.

Edited February 20, 2018 by KyleRP

[Peaches 0]

12 minutes ago, Rolle said:

An admin was there, experienced it first hand and made the call to treat it as trolling. That's plenty enough to use rule 4 and to me as good as any evidence, because I trust the admins judgement.

 

I don't think you know why the Aiko did things she did. She spoke to me about the situation before using rule 4, I think I know better why the call was made. They received a permaban because of trolling.

I just mean what she claimed the reasoning was behind the r4 instead of the regular report she claimed trolling but said they were trolling in the main post too? The only new addition she added in the r4 post was that "Going as far as to say that I am falsely reporting you!"

"Anyway, I am told that they attempted to drive the bus into the water. Which failed, and by the time I got there they had finally managed to push it into the water and blow it up. They congratulated the captain and that he did a great job, and celebrated it. After that, they all ran off...and logged...I am guessing. " not to mention this being a big part of the report regarding "Trolling" and she is clearly only speculating on the topic and all her friends where the ones to tell her. Seeing as she said "I am told" and "I am guessing" in conclusion. Not saying that none of it was or wasn't trolling, she claimed there was video evidence that would be provided when it was ready but it never showed up.

The first part of her POV is them stealing a bus which doesn't seem trollish to me. 

but I'm getting carried away and this thread isn't the place for the rest of what i have to say. I am heated and I apologize. If you'd like to continue I can bring it to pms, or not. Doesn't matter either way, I was not there.

edit: I am merely mad that ALL of them were banned due to an r4 without a chance to explain themselves. not the fact that the r4 was used inherently.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Peaches

[Nihoolious 1994]

17 minutes ago, Rolle said:

An admin was there, experienced it first hand and made the call to treat it as trolling. That's plenty enough to use rule 4 and to me as good as any evidence, because I trust the admins judgement.

So in your opinion do you think they would have a chance to appeal this ban? Or is it final since, as you said, an admin experienced it first hand and you trust her judgement.

[Roland 7212]

5 minutes ago, Nihoolious said:

So in your opinion do you think they would have a chance to appeal this ban? Or is it final since, as you said, an admin experienced it first hand and you trust her judgement.

Contact email is open 24/7, to everyone. I don't see myself using veto on this one to keep them permad as it is now, but then again I haven't seen any video. If it was really that bad, I would not dismiss that as an option. But an appeal can be created either way.

[Mass 103]

Off-topic for the original post but this has come up proceeding it. I'll save myself typing up an entire post because I'm on mobile:

•Admins are the most trusted members of the community, appointed by the owner himsef.

•Admins have certain responsibilities and privileges that come with their rank.

•R4 is there to be used by admins under admin discretion.

•Admins have earned the right to use this ability at their discretion. 

Been an admin(not here), am an admin (also not here), got the experience, seen and dealt with these situations before. The people who say "it could've been done differently" have a point, but @Rolle's judgement on the matter was final and a discussion is gonna be held anyway, so people have been heard and if your point is right, you will be told so and things will be done differently in the future. 

Edited February 20, 2018 by Mass

[Empress Nino 427]

2 hours ago, Nihoolious said:

I think there is some confusion on what I am against there. To clarify I didn't make this thread to question the use of Rule 4 in general. Its a rule thats been around since I joined the community in 2013 and I saw it exercised soon after joining with the mass ban of SKA. I understand its purpose and why it exists, for important issues that need to be dealt with in a way the traditional process can't do. Why I don't agree with is how it has been used recently with the Aiko report being one of the biggest offenses that can be seen by the public, I'm sure there are some questionable final warnings I don't know about.

Picture this for me:

You believe yourself to be a rule abiding member of the community. You are roleplaying within the rules to your knowledge and behaving on the forums in a similar way. However, the admin team says you made a mistake and you are given a punishment through Rule 4. This could be points, a final warning or permanent ban. You cannot contest this punishment, it is set in stone. You don't think you did anything wrong but the admins exercised their right to deal with you in the way they saw fit. Now imagine this same thing is happening to other people, maybe even your friends for reason you don't agree with. 

Would you still have the same opinion over the Deal With It attitude then?

I was getting ready for work when I saw shit kick off, and only read the report. From the descriptions of what unfolded it seemed troll like... but again since I haven't seen video evidence I'm not confident. My point was more to say that I'm glad that the admins are finally using their power of R4 on things. So much shit had happened in "recent" memory that would result in a perm on the spot during the days of the old admin team. 

I too have had friends who were permed for what I saw at the time as shitty reasons, but things happen. Hell I even had friends in the tendie wave but I'm not upset over them. 

[Grimnir 1541]

This is a hard question, that I am very conflicted about.

On the one hand, I think the way the report was handled wasn't good (I am saying that as a member who has no clue about the stuff going on in admin chat). I think the best option would have been to just wait for the video evidence and then perm then. I don't really doubt that it was trolly rp from what I've heard, but if it was that clear would it hurt to wait another hour and present the evidence for it? I think a lot of problems could have been avoided if that would have been done.

The second issue I have is the fact that @Aiko did it herself, sure now we know that it wasn't her decision alone but it just looks really bad. It really looks like she promoted herself to judge, jury and executioner even if that might not be the case. I think if any other admin would have passed the verdict people would have an easier time accepting it (again with video please). 

At the end of the day, I somewhat agree with the decision though and I am saying that believing Aiko did tell the truth. I never was a fan of Somali pirates in Chernarus and I can indeed see the described actions as trolly, so to some degree, I can appreciate the heavy-handed punishment. My main point of criticism is the fact that no one waited for the video, if it really was that bad they could still get rule 4d after and everyone would be happy, at least as happy as they could be given the circumstances.

[N-Tox 0]

I'm irrelevant but the way I see it, they can do what they want, it's Rolle's community and we don't really make those decisions.
I might not agree with the way it happened but they do have the right to handle things the way they want.

[Undead 653]

Yea I mean to be fair my mAin issue was it was that I thought it was just Aiko doing her own report and taking 4 people out from her own biased opinion by herself. Knowing that it was a rolle decision makes a lot more sense and idk why everyone's so super surprised. Not the first people to get the rolle ban hammer. Overall I think that with discussion, video evidence , and another admin posting it I'm sure it all woulda went over a bit cleaner .

[Oliv 2563]

9 minutes ago, UndeadRP said:

Yea I mean to be fair my mAin issue was it was that I thought it was just Aiko doing her own report and taking 4 people out from her own biased opinion by herself. Knowing that it was a rolle decision makes a lot more sense and idk why everyone's so super surprised. Not the first people to get the rolle ban hammer. Overall I think that with discussion, video evidence , and another admin posting it I'm sure it all woulda went over a bit cleaner .

This is exactly what I was trying to get at. Aiko was the one to post it, which wasn't the best idea, but more or less she was just the messenger. In all fairness, we should have just chosen another carrier pigeon.