two nutters RR'd from /tg/station community by MSO

[BonChoi]

Bottom post of the previous page:

Forum poster newbie makes shitty thread title

[kieth4]

I always enjoyed interacting with sinful in game and on discord, I'm going to miss him in this community. I understand and respect that a lot of private and personal information is involved in this and as such it won't be released. I don't need to see it and I didn't ask him to see it for that reason. However, it is upsetting to see someone whose presence I enjoyed be removed without ever concretely knowing why. Yes, this is something of an empty post. I'm just frustrated with the dialogue surrounding this and that's unfortunately the only thing in regards to this ban that I can affect.

Agreed. I've known Sinful to be a positive member of the community, just sometimes he could be insufferable in-game. But I've never personally had issues with him, and this entire thing is just very odd. I'm going to miss my friend and his yellow hair.



OIG.DdQ.jpg



Overall I think the collective worry among people is that this was a personal hitjob on Sinful by the admins/MSO. But I don't really know MSO, and I don't think Sinful did either. I do know from reading the appeal, and talking to Sinful on discord, it looks like Sinful was actively seeking out MSO's help to resolve an issue. So it's just incredibly weird that admins/MSO would comb through so many logs of text just to vaporize 2 people like that. I don't think it was handled as well as it could have been, I always expected Sinful to eventually get QC banned, and I wouldn't have been surprised if I saw it, not this...

But there is nothing we can do except either hope MSO becomes merciful, or gives us better understanding of what happened.

Adding my own Sinful fan post to this chain, I really enjoyed Sinful's shennanigans in all the spaces he inhabited and I really will miss him. And this is coming from a forum mod who butted heads with sinful's posts often.

Adding my own 2 cents, every lost hos high hour hos player is 1 more to fight in policy with. you will be missed fr

[dendydoom]

ye i never had any personal issues with sinful as someone who regularly did the player's club shuffle with him. when he wasn't doomposting he was genuinely funny and cool to talk to. i don't see anything to celebrate about here, it was difficult administrative action that needed to be done and that's more or less it.

[kinnebian]

301st

[mrmelbert]

Shall we talk about the ethics of whistle-blowing now for no particular reason?

[kinnebian]

Shall we talk about the ethics of whistle-blowing now for no particular reason?

How about white horse philosophy? I'm quite passionate about it.

[TheBibleMelts]

i enjoyed having him around for discussing policy and thought he was a pretty funny, charismatic guy. i would have loved if he'd taken any of the chances he's been given in the past to improve on the weaker aspects of his personality and worked to be a positive influence on the community, as opposed to wanting to drag it down into petty squabbling for his own entertainment/sense or 'getting back' at the people who tried to nudge him in a positive direction.

his appeal, while still visible in this thread by intention, was moved to hidden trash because it painted a very obviously biased and likely intentionally crafted take to try and incite the same sorts of flare-ups in drama with the community that got him here in the first place - knowing that we've stated that we're not going to offer explicit proof against his points to the peanut threads out of privacy concerns.

again folks, if you feel like you're being swayed by either his appeal or the people involved in this thread itself, know that this sort of reaction was an explicit goal of theirs to invoke in people for the purpose of exploiting outrage their own ends.

you're always free to form your own opinions, but make sure you take into account where the seeds, nutrients, and fertilizer for those opinions are being sourced. this group created boogeymen, inflated them beyond reasonable proportion in their own minds, and then used that image to justify some pretty reprehensible actions and goals to attack those boogeymen.

a lot of the people involved with this, once separated from the echo chamber that facilitated this caustic groupthink have come forward and recognized this. don't fall into the same pit of negativity that warped the involved people into doing things worthy of being booted out of the gamestore.

[BonChoi]

Shall we talk about the ethics of whistle-blowing now for no particular reason?

In my honest opinion, if people aren't treating other people (let's face it, at the end of the day there is a brain behind each and every one of these screen names and profile pictures) with some sort of dignity we all should strive to act upon with our fellow human beings, I see no issue in their removal from the community and I would see no issue in helping to do so if I was in the situation. It's obvious to me that this community can really shape how someone acts and as a result it would probably be for the best for them to take a break for a little while and think about what they do and say in an online space.

[iwishforducks]

his appeal, while still visible in this thread by intention, was moved to hidden trash because it painted a very obviously biased and likely intentionally crafted take to try and incite the same sorts of flare-ups in drama with the community that got him here in the first place - knowing that we've stated that we're not going to offer explicit proof against his points to the peanut threads out of privacy concerns.

again folks, if you feel like you're being swayed by either his appeal or the people involved in this thread itself, know that this sort of reaction was an explicit goal of theirs to invoke in people for the purpose of exploiting to their own ends.

you're always free to form your own opinions, but make sure you take into account where the seeds, nutrients, and fertilizer for those opinions are being sourced. this group created boogeymen, inflated them beyond reasonable proportion in their own minds, and then used that image to justify some pretty reprehensible actions and goals to attack those boogeymen.

how is literally none of this also applicable to the administration? it's no secret that sinfulbliss was not liked among the admins- there is no argument there. to me the prospect of the administration making a boogeyman out of sinful and then using said image to justify scraping through people's- who are most likely completely uninvolved- messages is totally not unlikely. it's something i would prefer to make sure is not happening.

exploiting to their own needs of what? they're blacklisted. gone. they cannot interact with this community at all anymore.

a lot of the people involved with this, once separated from the echo chamber that facilitated this caustic groupthink have come forward and recognized this. don't fall into the same pit of negativity that warped the involved people into doing things worthy of being booted out of the gamestore.

from all of the folks i have spoken to about this, i have literally not heard of this once. i would love to hear this if this is the case. but i'm also not convinced that these people have come forward saying this in an attempt to save their own skin. so catch 22 on that part i guess? i dont know that kinda pisses me off that there's a catch 22 there.

i'd just, really, really like to not see this entire situation in such a horrible light. from what i have gathered from talking to folks both directly and indirectly involved, and reading throw away messages on the tg discord, none of it paints a very good light on the situation. and that is simply deeply frustrating.

[Itseasytosee2me]

I always enjoyed interacting with sinful in game and on discord, I'm going to miss him in this community. I understand and respect that a lot of private and personal information is involved in this and as such it won't be released. I don't need to see it and I didn't ask him to see it for that reason. However, it is upsetting to see someone whose presence I enjoyed be removed without ever concretely knowing why. Yes, this is something of an empty post. I'm just frustrated with the dialogue surrounding this and that's unfortunately the only thing in regards to this ban that I can affect.

Agreed. I've known Sinful to be a positive member of the community, just sometimes he could be insufferable in-game. But I've never personally had issues with him, and this entire thing is just very odd. I'm going to miss my friend and his yellow hair.



OIG.DdQ.jpg



Overall I think the collective worry among people is that this was a personal hitjob on Sinful by the admins/MSO. But I don't really know MSO, and I don't think Sinful did either. I do know from reading the appeal, and talking to Sinful on discord, it looks like Sinful was actively seeking out MSO's help to resolve an issue. So it's just incredibly weird that admins/MSO would comb through so many logs of text just to vaporize 2 people like that. I don't think it was handled as well as it could have been, I always expected Sinful to eventually get QC banned, and I wouldn't have been surprised if I saw it, not this...

But there is nothing we can do except either hope MSO becomes merciful, or gives us better understanding of what happened.

Adding my own Sinful fan post to this chain, I really enjoyed Sinful's shennanigans in all the spaces he inhabited and I really will miss him. And this is coming from a forum mod who butted heads with sinful's posts often.

Adding my own 2 cents, every lost hos high hour hos player is 1 more to fight in policy with. you will be missed fr

I'll say I'll miss sinful too, his forum takes were mostly stupid, but always interesting.
I'll pour out a quadruple sec for him.

[LEDDDriver]

Damn guys, you know you can host a local server and play all together right? Or go play together in the myriad of other public servers together.

It's not like he fucking died.

[dendydoom]

post

it's MSO's blacklist so like timber said either he oversaw the investigation and deemed it serious enough to escalate it to a blacklist or because he's in on the infamous sinful hate train and did it to be funny.

whichever you think it might be is ultimately fruitless. no one can overturn it. player or admin or headmin we can only peanut.

people are free to express their shock, disappointment, sadness, disagreement, whatever it may be. that's really all anyone can do.

[iwishforducks]

mso is also the same person that banned me from the forums for saying "white privilege" so i dont think his blacklist holds any weight on my opinions, is the thing. in fact none of mso's opinions have ever held weight to any of my opinions

[dendydoom]

you're still here is the difference worth considering.

[Capsandi]

I always regarded sinful as short sighted and impulsive, often pursuing ends he could not articulate his motivation to achieve. He often showed profound misunderstanding of the environment of the forum and what someone in the positions he found himself in. That instance of requesting MSO take time out of his day to look into Rave's assmad ban despite having no real justification exceeding "Headadmins banned me and I think its bs" springs to mind. I suppose he charted just how far you can push your luck when you post frequently on the forums or whatever, so I'll put that information to good use.
I remember on some occasion maybe mid way through 2020 he grouped me with some list of players or forum posters in a way which >implied some relationship that wasn't there. I gave him some advice which has served me well that day. That advice is to act like a dick intermittently to all as to keep distance and to not be dragged under by some assmad metafriend.
I don't give nearly as much credit to tales of his psychotic manipulation of admins and players or whatever the fuck TBM is going on about, like dude get your head out of your ass haha. I do, on principle, agree with MSO's handling of this situation. Metacoords are for MRP LOSERS HAHAHA TOXIC TERRY ELITISM F T W!!! yea but its like bye lol i mean i wont miss him but i dont really miss anyone who has left.

[Timonk]

white privilege

[Itseasytosee2me]

come for the sinful, stay for the bliss

[oranges]

all these people complaining about headadmin bias have a reading comprehension issue since sinfulbliss's appeal said they asked mso to look into it so mso did and then blacklisted them.

[Hulkamania]

Damn guys, you know you can host a local server and play all together right? Or go play together in the myriad of other public servers together.

It's not like he fucking died.

I once had enough evidence to lock away a prominent niche micro e-celebrity player and was blocked by the other admins because "they won't be able to play with their friends anymore "

I still posit that if the only place you interact with your "friends" is the tg community you aren't really friends.

[datorangebottle]

all these people complaining about headadmin bias have a reading comprehension issue since sinfulbliss's appeal said they asked mso to look into it so mso did and then blacklisted them.

I think the issue's on your part, Oranges. MSO did nothing to combat headmin bias the last time Sinful was a target of it.

[oranges]

all these people complaining about headadmin bias have a reading comprehension issue since sinfulbliss's appeal said they asked mso to look into it so mso did and then blacklisted them.

I think the issue's on your part, Oranges. MSO did nothing to combat headmin bias the last time Sinful was a target of it.

so now you're suggesting mso is biased?

[oranges]

the fact that they batcaved 3 admins to try to get them to send over the ENTIRE TRANSCRIPTION of the ENTIRE SERVER. on what fucking hunch?

they batcaved three admins for leaking player information, they already had information on them doing that, that one of them rolled over on their friends to attempt to save the group is their own problem.

[iwishforducks]

the fact that they batcaved 3 admins to try to get them to send over the ENTIRE TRANSCRIPTION of the ENTIRE SERVER. on what fucking hunch?

they batcaved three admins for leaking player information, they already had information on them doing that, that one of them rolled over on their friends to attempt to save the group is their own problem.

making much more sense now

[datorangebottle]

so now you're suggesting mso is biased?

I could be suggesting any number of things with that one line of text.
My intent was to suggest that he doesn't seem to care about bias; in that case, headmins trying to get him to blacklist someone wouldn't find that particularly difficult.
The last time the two were involved, MSO washed his hands of it and let the ban stick despite the bias because he was simply tired of the drama.
A less charitable viewpoint(yours) could see that as me saying he himself is biased against Sinful. Which isn't impossible, but I see no good evidence for that either way.

[RaveRadbury]

I think the issue's on your part, Oranges. MSO did nothing to combat headmin bias the last time Sinful was a target of it.

Because there wasn't bias, no matter how much you go on about it. I hardly interacted with sinful before the ban and I looked the other way a lot with him and other forum posters. But then he crossed a major line, so I had to ban him (only from the player's club, pretty small ban in the great scheme of things.) Evidence was asked for so I provided it because I'm on their forums all the time and remembered times that were worth bringing up. Knowing what I know now I would have handed out more warnings in the first place

Ultimately Sinful appealed and got the ban lifted (by me) but didn't dispute that what he had done was over the line and Timber points out in the appeal that it didn't erase his established history. Then he continued on like he did for the rest of the term and was eventually warned and banned by other staff.

If your evidence of my bias is "you put work into looking up things you remember and then laying them out", idk what to tell you man that's investigation work and its part of the job.

It's been a whole year since the original incident and nothing has happened. If you have evidence of my bias why didn't you pass it on to headmins or MSO? Where's the proof?

[datorangebottle]

I think the issue's on your part, Oranges. MSO did nothing to combat headmin bias the last time Sinful was a target of it.

Because there wasn't bias, no matter how much you go on about it.

This is the only part I'm going to respond to, because it's the only part I care about addressing.
What you did with that ban was far and beyond what an unbiased individual should have been doing, and has already been heavily discussed. I'm pretty sure we have an archive on the forums if you really want to relive the discussion that badly.
Regardless, my statement was not factually incorrect. The idea that you felt the need to defend yourself despite not being explicitly called out is pretty revealing.

my bias clouds me. i am a biased person against you.

[Higgin]

if you're plotting invidious harassment and how to burn people out over this shit because you disagree on policy issues or butt heads and get rolled up on it, and your sum defense isn't "I was framed, this is a setup," it's probably healthiest both for you and the community you were in to separate or be forcibly separated

it's okay to disagree with feeling, but it should stand up to publicity if it's something worth disagreeing about. it's not okay to be a dick and personally attack folks even if ultimately the source of your disagreement comes from a personal place, because if you're in the right, then it's not really the other person's fault, and it's probably going to only harden them in their positions while making them more miserable (something you wouldn't want in their shoes,) and if you're not in the right, then another wrong isn't going to get you anywhere except further ahead in line to be (fairly) shown the door.

[Jacquerel]

My intent was to suggest that he doesn't seem to care about bias; in that case, headmins trying to get him to blacklist someone wouldn't find that particularly difficult.

as far as I am aware headmins don't have any power to blacklist someone, that's entirely mso's power
and maybe you don't know mso very well but he's about as persuadable as a large boulder, no matter what other position of community power you might hold

[LEDDDriver]

Damn guys, you know you can host a local server and play all together right? Or go play together in the myriad of other public servers together.

It's not like he fucking died.

I once had enough evidence to lock away a prominent niche micro e-celebrity player and was blocked by the other admins because "they won't be able to play with their friends anymore "

I still posit that if the only place you interact with your "friends" is the tg community you aren't really friends.

Being an e-celeb has its perks. Just look at this thread, or the other major one some weeks ago. The amount of peer pressure ""friends"" are able to generate is baffling.
Even if you break the rules, you have a better chance of getting unbanned if you have enough social momentum, to get people talking.

"I believe the ban reason is stupid" vs "I believe the ban reason is stupid" x 100. Guess which one is usually more probable to get the ban lifted. Now, how do we get the x100 thing to happen?

[RaveRadbury]

I think the issue's on your part, Oranges. MSO did nothing to combat headmin bias the last time Sinful was a target of it.

Because there wasn't bias, no matter how much you go on about it.

This is the only part I'm going to respond to, because it's the only part I care about addressing.
What you did with that ban was far and beyond what an unbiased individual should have been doing, and has already been heavily discussed. I'm pretty sure we have an archive on the forums if you really want to relive the discussion that badly.
Regardless, my statement was not factually incorrect. The idea that you felt the need to defend yourself despite not being explicitly called out is pretty revealing.

Buddy, you can't do the rhetorical equivalent of "I'm not touching you" when "headmins" refers to three people in a group and it's easy to deduce who you're talking about, especially with your demonstrable history of dislike in regards to my headmin work. If we pull up that thread you're mentioning it will powerfully clarify. Unfortunately, getting the vibe that I was a tryhard sweatlord doesn't really prove anything.

my bias clouds me. i am a biased person against you.

People came to their own conclusions about the emotional sansplanation after reading the full text and even if you recuse San from it there was still a unanimous 2-0 vote and MSO elected not to engage.

You've let everything else I've said stand without challenge, so I'm satisfied that you're not here to fight out what the truth is. I think that you're actually a pretty decent guy and I wish that we got along better, not the first time I've said this.

I get that Sinful is your friend and you're upset about bad things happening to him that you feel are unfair. I hope that you find peace about this in the coming days and that it doesn't cast a pall over your holiday season.

[Timberpoes]

This is the only part I'm going to respond to, because it's the only part I care about addressing.
What you did with that ban was far and beyond what an unbiased individual should have been doing, and has already been heavily discussed. I'm pretty sure we have an archive on the forums if you really want to relive the discussion that badly.
Regardless, my statement was not factually incorrect. The idea that you felt the need to defend yourself despite not being explicitly called out is pretty revealing.

my bias clouds me. i am a biased person against you.

San's reponse was unacceptable and if I was in Rave's position I would have immediately overturned the ban the second one of my co-headmins comes out with how biased they were. And it's not San's bias that pissed me off, everyone has biases. It's that San didn't set those biases aside and make sure the ban was appropriately and justifiably placed - which wouldn't have been a monumental task, it's what headmins have to do occasionally. San instead just leaned into his biases and threw his hands in the air as if there was no way he could possibly give a fair shake against someone whose heinous crimes from the appeal were... Intentionally stoking drama and being rules lawyery.

But the level of effort Rave put into the investigation is nothing new. It tends to happen when a player is allowed to do lots of borderline stuff, a QC-style issue gets raised in the admin channels, and someone has to go back and document all the historic issues so they're making the most informed decisions. Especially as a headmin. You're usually the last line of defense against a poor admin decision, so you have to over-investigate to make sure whatever decision was taken is correct.

As far as that ban went - and it was overturned during my last term - I genuinely believe it was justified but there were procedural issues in how it was placed that made is unfair. Sinful was given like 3 forum warnings for various posts in a single batch, then banned due to those warnings. Those warned posts were being discussed in the admin channels prior and it was eventually decided to warn him for them all once there was some minor form of consensus reached. But it didn't give him time to react to those warnings and modify his behaviour when he was instantly banned.

Of course I laid out the reality of Sinful's position after Rave offered to unban him too. But I get the feeling he didn't take a certain piece of advice on board.

I think there's some level of dramatic irony in this whole blacklisting by MSO though. From the OG first Rave player's club ban appeal:

...

Speaking from experience? When summoning MSO into something your cause better be objectively righteous. I'd exercise restraint when calling MSO into relatively minor topics that basically fall under headmin discretion. One finger on the Monkey's Paw curls.

...

From sinful's now-hidden appeal.

... So I reached out to MSO with the concern. He said he'd look into it. This is probably what led to his involvement and (somehow) my blacklist so I regret doing that, but that's neither here nor there.

[datorangebottle]

"headmins" refers to three people in a group and it's easy to deduce who you're talking about

MSO did nothing to combat headmin bias the last time Sinful was a target of it.

Headmin singular refers to one person of those three. But you clearly thought I was referring to you, here. If you remember my post history and the thread, you would know that only one headmin admitted their bias. Apologies if that was unclear to you.

I didn't engage with most of your posts because this isn't the appropriate place to do so.

gigantic post

I know you put a decent amount of effort into this, but I'd like to bring us back on-topic. This isn't meant out of disrespect for you- I'm worried I may fall victim to the same rules discussed in that appeal, and I'd rather not.

I think there's some level of dramatic irony in this whole blacklisting by MSO though.

Totally agree with you here; if MSO didn't become involved here until Sinful involved him, then it's extremely ironic.

[saprasam]

[Timberpoes]

...

gigantic post

I know you put a decent amount of effort into this, but I'd like to bring us back on-topic. This isn't meant out of disrespect for you- I'm worried I may fall victim to the same rules discussed in that appeal, and I'd rather not.

It's cool, you're not posting in bad faith specifically to stir up drama like Sinful was in those appeals. You're nowhere near breaking the rules; mere genuine and good-faith disagreement is fine and even being incorrect is fine as long as you're not doing it to intentionally stoke up drama in bad faith.

Even Ekaterina didn't get banned and it was often difficult to figure out if they were being sincere or just a professional troll.

And the the very least you'd be warned first. Probably.

[RaveRadbury]

"headmins" refers to three people in a group and it's easy to deduce who you're talking about

MSO did nothing to combat headmin bias the last time Sinful was a target of it.

Headmin singular refers to one person of those three. But you clearly thought I was referring to you, here. If you remember my post history and the thread, you would know that only one headmin admitted their bias. Apologies if that was unclear to you.

Remember when a headmin was so biased against Sinfulbliss that he combed through his entire player's club logs just to clutch at straws for reasons to ban him?

Who were you referring to when you said this?

[Capsandi]

Rave stop posting ur embarrassing yourself also something something empty post

[RaveRadbury]

Rave stop posting ur embarrassing yourself also something something empty post

[datorangebottle]

It's cool, you're not posting in bad faith specifically to stir up drama like Sinful was in those appeals. You're nowhere near breaking the rules; mere genuine and good-faith disagreement is fine and even being incorrect is fine as long as you're not doing it to intentionally stoke up drama in bad faith.

Even Ekaterina didn't get banned and it was often difficult to figure out if they were being sincere or just a professional troll.

It's nice of you to say that, but all it takes is one forum admin disagreeing with your opinion to earn me a warning, and those add up, no matter how slowly.

And the the very least you'd be warned first. Probably.

Remember when a headmin was so biased against Sinfulbliss that he combed through his entire player's club logs just to clutch at straws for reasons to ban him?

Who were you referring to when you said this?

You, obviously. That's on me; I forgot I made this post until after I'd gone and posted the other one. BRB, kicking my own ass until my memory stops being kind of shit.

[RaveRadbury]

Who were you referring to when you said this?

You, obviously. That's on me; I forgot I made this post until after I'd gone and posted the other one. BRB, kicking my own ass until my memory stops being kind of shit.

I misread one of your earlier posts and on review it was way different from what I initially understood and I conflated it with the other post so I had a hand in the confusion here as well.

I seriously genuinely wish you well and I hope somewhere down the road we can find ourselves having a good time posting in better threads.

[Timberpoes]

This is the best thread. Don't believe Rave's propaganda.

[saprasam]

i'd be worried too if the headmin team were to comb through an entire discord server's messages just to find dirt, & then when you try to appeal it, the appeal is instantly hidden from the public eye & they say it is all disinformation & lies & don't say anything about why that is
granted it IS a blacklist, but it's just baffling to me the way this is handled

[Constellado]

That's how this headmin team runs I guess.
Bans, hides info, locking ban appeals after the first response, closing peanuts right after a first response and no other reason to close the peanut... Rarely addresses concerns directly... (Or that's how it feels like) Fully hides a blacklist appeal.
Atleast they listened to people complaining about them closing peanuts and bans earlier and rectified this. Heck, as a result a person got a shorter ban term.

This is how they run, of course they hid a blacklist appeal because they love stopping communications like this as per their history. No bias, it's how they run.

Atleast they didn't close the peanut thread this time. (And It hasn't gone to shit yay) Even with the supposed bad info around.

Unhiding the appeal will likely not happen because it's a blacklist and MSO has power over that, not them.

Gotta get used to it I guess. Do I like it? No. But I don't think we can change that till next term.

[RedBaronFlyer]

i'd be worried too if the headmin team were to comb through an entire discord server's messages just to find dirt, & then when you try to appeal it, the appeal is instantly hidden from the public eye & they say it is all disinformation & lies & don't say anything about why that is
granted it IS a blacklist, but it's just baffling to me the way this is handled

One of the largest recurring issues of this headmin term is that they do not know how to do something without it looking suspicious as fuck, even if it's benign. It would be funny if this didn't happen almost every week.

[dirk_mcblade]

Shall we talk about the ethics of whistle-blowing now for no particular reason?

Unless you're a lawyer snitching on your client or something similar there are no ethics in whistle blowing; whatever you feel like doing goes.

[TheBibleMelts]

i'd be worried too if the headmin team were to comb through an entire discord server's messages just to find dirt, & then when you try to appeal it, the appeal is instantly hidden from the public eye & they say it is all disinformation & lies & don't say anything about why that is
granted it IS a blacklist, but it's just baffling to me the way this is handled

One of the largest recurring issues of this headmin term is that they do not know how to do something without it looking suspicious as fuck, even if it's benign. It would be funny if this didn't happen almost every week.

this is probably a fault of my own for the most part - the moment that i'm not able to be as transparent about something as i'd like to be, i end up vagueposting in an attempt to convey my thoughts and what i'm doing to the best of my ability without crossing the line. it's a balancing act that i pretty greatly admire some of the other administrators in having honed as a skill, and one i'm still practicing.

[Blacklist897]

can we get timber back as a pr consultant

[TheBibleMelts]

can we get timber back as a pr consultant

we'd have to pay him more if we did that.

[stairmaster]

the admins are out of line but also axle brady one time called willem dafriend a sperglord so i dont know which side to take

[Timberpoes]

i'd be worried too if the headmin team were to comb through an entire discord server's messages just to find dirt, & then when you try to appeal it, the appeal is instantly hidden from the public eye & they say it is all disinformation & lies & don't say anything about why that is
granted it IS a blacklist, but it's just baffling to me the way this is handled

One of the largest recurring issues of this headmin term is that they do not know how to do something without it looking suspicious as fuck, even if it's benign. It would be funny if this didn't happen almost every week.

this is probably a fault of my own for the most part - the moment that i'm not able to be as transparent about something as i'd like to be, i end up vagueposting in an attempt to convey my thoughts and what i'm doing to the best of my ability without crossing the line. it's a balancing act that i pretty greatly admire some of the other administrators in having honed as a skill, and one i'm still practicing.

There's a technique I use to balance transparency needs, thinking of a triangle of:
1. How a thing was done.
2: Why a thing was done.
3: What evidence supported doing the thing.

If I want to reduce one side of the triangle, I need to promote the others. And promoting one side can reduce the need for others.

A flat out showcase of irrefutable evidence can provide enough transparency that you don't need to explain how or why that evidence led to the final decision.

And being able to explain how and why a decision was made can make up for not revealing evidence. Even though you can't show the evidence itself you can still show that time, effort and care went into it and that such a decision would have been impossible to make without considering all the relevant facts.

This does sometimes mean vagueposting about the specifics of the evidence, but to take an example of how it could be approached from the Manuel catcord drama that was during handover - it would be like saying "there were clear examples of players discussing their rounds - to get a better idea of if this was metacomms we tried to match up the message timestamps to game logs; although we aren't sure what timezone the message snippets were sent to us from, when we checked the minute markers of the messages, they correlated to within close proximity of some matching events in the game logs - when we used this to approximate the timezone, we found other multiple examples of metacomms backed up by game logs scattered around what we were sent".

That kind of approach can explain that the investigation wasn't half-assed, genuine effort was taken to verify basic facts and that certain evidence itself exists even if the specifics aren't revealed.

viewtopic.php?p=698022#p698022
For example in this post I went over all the hows and the whys of Rule 8.

viewtopic.php?p=698150#p698150
Then later on in the same appeal in this post I went over the hows and the whys of how the admin team tends to operate when presented with "it was just a joke, bro" responses from players.

viewtopic.php?p=695956#p695956
Hows and whys of the ban in more detail than the player really deserved.

viewtopic.php?p=695756#p695756
Focus on the hows and whys of how admins place bans and how a mistake occurred.

viewtopic.php?p=695754#p695754
When explaining a headmin decision to uphold a ban, I go into the whys for it being upheld and the hows for getting it overturned in the future.

[Prussen]

Good riddance.

[Turbonerd]

Good riddance.

[dendydoom]

It's cool, you're not posting in bad faith specifically to stir up drama like Sinful was in those appeals. You're nowhere near breaking the rules; mere genuine and good-faith disagreement is fine and even being incorrect is fine as long as you're not doing it to intentionally stoke up drama in bad faith.

Even Ekaterina didn't get banned and it was often difficult to figure out if they were being sincere or just a professional troll.

It's nice of you to say that, but all it takes is one forum admin disagreeing with your opinion to earn me a warning, and those add up, no matter how slowly.

i'm not gonna give you a warning for disagreeing and defending your stance you are allowed to do this.

people get warnings for being shitheads. you are being very sincere and you should be able to speak your mind about what you believe without worrying that we've got jannie shooters deployed on the rooftops, you're good dude.