+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Rules (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Request for Rules Clarification (/showthread.php?tid=116262)
Request for Rules Clarification - Gytrash - 06-05-2014
I'm just posting this in response to the sanction on Divine
THIS IS NOT A DISPUTATION OF THE SANCTION OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT BUT A REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION ON THE RULES
The rules for discovery forums as I read them are as follows, at least where it affects this case
Code:
Community Rules
Not allowed on Discovery forums or server:
1.1 Use of abusive, vulgar, obscene or racist materials
1.2 Trolling or harassing other members of the community
1.3 Advertising, especially commercial advertising, except advertising your own gaming websites or servers
1.4 Adult content or links to it; This also includes any anime that is in any way graphic or pornographic
1.5 Libel, defamatory, threatening materials and any law-violating materials
1.6 Use of copyrighted material without the owner's permission
1.7 Metagaming* and/or powergaming** to gain a roleplay benefit for factions, groups or individuals
Server Rules
-- Administrators are obliged:
To ensure work of Discovery Freelancer server.
To be fair and treat all players equally, independent of their level and faction alignment.
Not to mix server roleplaying with server administration in any way.
Not to ignore any cases of server rules violations that are reported.Now, Vrab pointed out that this was based on skype. I can't see anything in the rules about Skype or other methods of communication being within the rules of the server.
Can I get, in admin green, a statement on whether or not skype chats are considered within the scope of the administrators of Discovery freelancer?
Because if they are I'll need to censor a lot of what I type.
RE: Request for Rules Clarification - Lythrilux - 06-05-2014
Knowing Divine, it was probably justified. So I'd say it was a special case.
Otherwise, I'd say that, unless the offending individual has been extremely abusive towards the administrator in a disco related context, Skype does not apply.
Someone isn't justified in saying staff should've used the block feature, as the offender should've wised up and thought to stop before the offended needs to consider blocking them.
RE: Request for Rules Clarification - SnakThree - 06-05-2014
Who cares? Behave properly everywhere.
RE: Request for Rules Clarification - Gytrash - 06-05-2014
(06-05-2014, 10:05 AM)Snak3 Wrote: Who cares? Behave properly everywhere.
As an Australian insulting the hell out of someone is me telling them that I like them.
Some people might misconstrue that due to them not being Australians.
This may cause a problem.
RE: Request for Rules Clarification - Vendetta - 06-05-2014
If this is about the whole Divine thing, then allow me to say that he himself had been harassing certain members of the admin team. This continued for quite some time, and he didn't let up. He got what he deserved.
In other words, why can't anyone get along anywhere?
RE: Request for Rules Clarification - Jinx - 06-05-2014
there are precidents about it - but they are a case to case thing
i think it went a bit like that - skype is NOT a medium which counts towards a sanction - unless what is said there is directly and/or a continuation of the forum. - so if a skype rant is directly related to the disco community and forum - it can - under circumstances be used for a sanction. ( i do believe that is what cannon once said ( over 2 years ago ) - but thats not a direct quote, just an interpretation of what he commented a long time ago. key points are "continuation of a forum rant/insult" and it was not to be used "on its own" )
but there has never been a 100% clear rule about it. - in the past there had been admins and mods trolling/abusing/insulting other members of the community in skype, too - as well as there are countless members who insult or scheme against other members of the community in skype or other media.
skye cannot be patrolled - skype can also be edited easily. it is also very easy to put conversations well out of context - so it may probably just support a violation that has already occured.
so it is circumstancial/situational i guess - entirely depending on who makes the judgement.
RE: Request for Rules Clarification - sindroms - 06-05-2014
Imho it wasn't so much skype as the overall attitude.
If the member proves himself to be undesirable to the community as a whole, the admins have every right to remove them on any justification.
RE: Request for Rules Clarification - Highland Laddie - 06-05-2014
As we already had a nice, long discussion about this on the OF leaders chat, all the public opinion is irrelevant. I'd like to see some official position from the green team.
RE: Request for Rules Clarification - Garrett Jax - 06-05-2014
(06-05-2014, 10:12 AM)Jinx Wrote: there are precidents about it - but they are a case to case thing
i think it went a bit like that - skype is NOT a medium which counts towards a sanction - unless what is said there is directly and/or a continuation of the forum. - so if a skype rant is directly related to the disco community and forum - it can - under circumstances be used for a sanction. ( i do believe that is what cannon once said ( over 2 years ago ) - but thats not a direct quote, just an interpretation of what he commented a long time ago. key points are "continuation of a forum rant/insult" and it was not to be used "on its own" )
but there has never been a 100% clear rule about it. - in the past there had been admins and mods trolling/abusing/insulting other members of the community in skype, too - as well as there are countless members who insult or scheme against other members of the community in skype or other media.
skye cannot be patrolled - skype can also be edited easily. it is also very easy to put conversations well out of context - so it may probably just support a violation that has already occured.
so it is circumstancial/situational i guess - entirely depending on who makes the judgement.
Jinx has the right of it. The player in question posted in the sanction thread twice after being instructed not to. When the thread was locked, he immediately went into abuse mode on skype. This was not a random f-bomb directed at a staff member. This was a direct continuation of the conversation on the forum, with profanities added.
How we dealt with it? I shared the skype chat with the staff, left the chat the next morning, while it was discussed. A vote was taken on disciplinary measures, of which I, and a couple other Admins, abstained due to bias. The decision was to permaban the individual as a result of his conduct that day..
To be fair, the individual has since apologized, both to the staff, and to me personally. I appreciate the apology and I hold no grudge toward him. It's all forgotten. I'm sure his apology will be taken into consideration by the staff, however I will not be involved in any vote toward reinstatement for obvious reasons.
In most cases, skype conversations are not permissible as evidence, or something we ban people over. This, however, was an exceptional case where the player used skype as a cover to heave abuses on an admin based on a decision he didn't approve. Ironically, the decision that led to this situation was reversed, however, it was despite the tirade, not because of it. We try to be reasonable, and if there is doubt cast on any decision we make, we will take another look at it.
RE: Request for Rules Clarification - Jack_Henderson - 06-05-2014
(06-05-2014, 10:05 AM)Snak3 Wrote: Who cares? Behave properly everywhere.
This.
I mean, how hard can it be to stay inside an framework of acceptable behaviour? Even on Skype?