Open Letter To Community & Staff

[ultima]

You believe what who said 'was not good'? Just clarify for the thread please.

what u said and the reason why you were banned in the first place

 

[dusty]

what u said and the reason why you were banned in the first place

I did not say it. You misunderstand. My character said it. This is the problem is it not? The whole discussion revolving this thread is whether or not you should be allowed to say something IC so long as it is a part of your character development or not.

Something said in-character, remains in-character. This is a serious RP server, how can you unironically call this community serious when you're banning actual role-players for something they are accurately portraying. This is the unfair part, the rules at the time of my ban did not mention any form of homophobia. IF they were supposed to, which is why they were clarified, that adds to a more glaring problem with 'why was I banned in the first place' if the staff were already aware that the rules were vague?

I appreciate downgrading my ban to a warning, but it still begs the question, what rule did I break? Go back to January 27th when my character said it. And read the rules from that date. Show me what rule I broke. (You don't have to because I have the screenshot)

 

[dusty]

I also think it should be noted that RP is always 'in-the-moment' while logs are eternal (or however long they last before being deleted). You cannot expect every player on the server to predict how the rules will change in the future to avoid being banned like I was.

 

[Neonity]

I also think it should be noted that RP is always 'in-the-moment' while logs are eternal (or however long they last before being deleted). You cannot expect every player on the server to predict how the rules will change in the future to avoid being banned like I was.

Again (and this has already been explained to you), you were NOT banned because the rules changed. Please stop using this as some sort of scapegoat, because it did not happen. Under both rulesets, you would've been banned.

You were banned BEFORE the rule changed, even.

 

[JustWats]

Again (and this has already been explained to you), you were NOT banned because the rules changed. Please stop using this as some sort of scapegoat, because it did not happen. Under both rulesets, you would've been banned.

You were banned BEFORE the rule changed, even.

under both rule sets you’re allowed to conduct offensive roleplay. The protections players have been given have changed. relatively little has changed if we’re being honest. i don’t understand how you’re interpreting that it’s a condemned action to ban someone over. The only thing stated in the previous rules was that it was allowed and moderated by players having the right to remove themselves or stop the roleplay on demand. The major difference now is that it’s prohibited outside the means of isolated commands. /mev, /mec, /w… All it literally takes is like three minutes to read the section and understand. Most punishments for breaks of grotesque/offensive roleplay are warnings on the server. I don’t see how this should have ever elevated to a ban. Especially when no moderation was taken place by any party until the administration of a ban.

 

[dusty]

Again (and this has already been explained to you), you were NOT banned because the rules changed. Please stop using this as some sort of scapegoat, because it did not happen. Under both rulesets, you would've been banned.

You were banned BEFORE the rule changed, even.

Please read my other posts, I already explained the whole point to you. But I'll post it again in case you missed it.



Follow the rules as per they are written. M!NT already stated on my ban appeal that the rules were:

The rules have been modified to clarify this.

So it was aware to you all before my ban. Then, Fedora posted this bit of information:

a server council member and staff member who shifted through logs of people saying the word and then banning them which sparked a whole discussion on saying the slurs IC, which then lead to the rule change as you saw implemented yesterday.

Which directly contradicts what you say. You're stating how I was not banned because of a rule change, fine. But based on what Fedora said? The rules were edited to futher clarify why I was banned retrospectively. THIS is the point behind this post. My problem is how, instead of contacting me and saying "Hey, that thing you said in the past is now against the rules, so please don't say it again, even in-character." Instead of doing that, we've got this whole shit show. Now hey, I understand how stressfull administrating a server can be, we've all been there. But in what right mind can you say that this is fair treatment?

 

[JustWats]

Please read my other posts, I already explained the whole point to you. But I'll post it again in case you missed it.

View attachment 30819

Follow the rules as per they are written. M!NT already stated on my ban appeal that the rules were:


So it was aware to you all before my ban. Then, Fedora posted this bit of information:


Which directly contradicts what you say. You're stating how I was not banned because of a rule change, fine. But based on what Fedora said? The rules were edited to futher clarify why I was banned retrospectively. THIS is the point behind this post. My problem is how, instead of contacting me and saying "Hey, that thing you said in the past is now against the rules, so please don't say it again, even in-character." Instead of doing that, we've got this whole shit show. Now hey, I understand how stressfull administrating a server can be, we've all been there. But in what right mind can you say that this is fair treatment?

You would’ve loved the chip looping bans

 

[Zebra]

No. The logs system is implemented in a way that allows and encourages members of staff to monitor and check incidents from days, weeks, and months past. A lot of members of staff use it in this way, and they're supposed to. Not every rule break or infraction gets reported, which can be for a variety of reasons. That's understandable, as players can see even less than staff can.

A rulebreak happening with not enough people to see it does not suddenly make it no longer against the rules. Staff monitors logs, looks for common keywords, and takes action on various situations as they can see they hadn't been handled before. It's pretty common for a variety of staff members to do this for stuff like the n-word for instance, and ban a user for saying it. Even if it happened days ago. This isn't a misuse of administrative systems, it's what they were literally designed for.

I don’t have a problem with the use of this system by staff, except for a developer, to ban highly toxic variations of slurs.

My problem is there was no case, no warning, no questioning.

It was already explained that two high-seated staff were ‘blowing off steam’ and he had to grab the reigns and buckle in for a PR fiasco. So unless Rad is wrong, this seems like a misuse. Banning for the sake of it without giving the person any warnings or questions about it.

@dustymetso were you approached beforehand / warned?

 

[dusty]

@@dustymetso were you approached beforehand / warned?

I was not given any form of warning or approached either before or after the rule change.

 

[Zebra]

I was not given any form of warning or approached either before or after the rule change.

Ah. So here we have another case of not using the warn system and just resorting to bans.

Which isn’t wrong, if it’s a reason to illicit a ban without warning.

I remember Maroon would join an old server, after seeing logs of item transfer, then ban the person and leave. This is fine as it is a ‘permanent ban’ rule break.

You didnt even qualify for this type of treatment.

 

[Zebra]

I assume there is going to be a seating change, or rule change after seeing all but a minority of views collectively agree on the subject. It’s best to wait and see further.

 

[Orphan]

Yeah I don't think people should use slurs period but I also hate most of the staff team.

 

[Sync]

How long is the ban?

 

[dusty]

How long is the ban?

It was three days, and the ban was overturned to a warning. I wonder what the warning says. But this thread wasn't entirely about the ban, it was about bringing to light a very frightening issue regarding the way rules are enforced.

 

[Neonity]

It was three days, and the ban was overturned to a warning. I wonder what the warning says. But this thread wasn't entirely about the ban, it was about bringing to light a very frightening issue regarding the way rules are enforced.

Note it was three days because it had to include the two-day downtime. In reality, it was originally 24 hours (but doing a 24 hour ban during downtime does nothing).

 

[JustWats]

Note it was three days because it had to include the two-day downtime. In reality, it was originally 24 hours (but doing a 24 hour ban during downtime does nothing).

The length of time matters little. It's the reality that you're convicting a player over behaviors that are molehills instead of mountains. Rather than just talking to them or warning them.

 

[Imperator RAD-X]

A good conversation, and one that's needed.

I was going to have a full reformation of a few sections of the rules for the server regarding this, but then my Windows cascade-crashed and I lost it all. I'm not here to please everyone, but I am going to say that what work I am working on being put in will be worth it for the playerbase, staff, or generally anyone involved with Serious RP in general.

 

[vilhjalmrf]

I assume there is going to be a seating change, or rule change after seeing all but a minority of views collectively agree on the subject. It’s best to wait and see further.

What are you on about? There will be no 'seating change'. Rule changes I do not know but if so, I doubt it's for whatever reason you think it is. Only a minority agree? Out of how many people in this community that interacted and actually said anything on this post?

 

[dusty]

Only a minority agree? Out of how many people in this community that interacted and actually said anything on this post?

Out of everyone who has interacted with this post, I would say the majority agree.

And regarding a minority of the community actually interacting with this post, I can say that I'd feel comfortable if this post was moved to a less obscure part of the forum, maybe general discussions. I feel like you're trying to undermine what we've discussed with the way you've worded everything in this post.

 

[rocks]

Anything IC really shouldn't be taken as offensive OOCly. Other games have something called OOC bleed and this is exactly what this is- using IC interactions to become offended OOCly. Either way, racism and all that good stuff was still live and well before the Combine's regime. Don't like it? Take it up IC!