My mistake. Replace "Make evidence public" with "provide evidence to relevant parties", and it's much the same. If you can't tell someone why they were banned, it's a tacit admission that they were banned for no reason. I thought I left "Admins banning people for no reason" behind on 4chan.
It's quite nice that now there's posted warnings about being banned for arbitrary reasons, but the entire concept is still not at all okay.
Howard Williams - CEO, Williams-Mordhauser Distributing - "Just try and stop us"
Caroline Convair - General Secretary, Williams-Mordhauser Distributing - "Please excuse the CEO"
(07-25-2016, 02:27 PM)xiphos Wrote: In Karst's case i was able to see some really destructive things in various chat's he was involved in. With a really bad behavior. Atleast from my point of view.
So you arbitrarily consider some of the things he says in various chats destructive? And with "various chats" being random Skype chats you happen to be in with him. Of which discussed topics could be completely unrelated to Discovery in the first place.
First of all. Please stop quoting something out of context. He was a not so nice person in these chat's with some words i would never use. Over and over again in a destructive manner. So please. Get your facts straight. He clearly deserves a ban. Not a permanent one though. if you ask me. So. Please read the whole post again
Then go complain to Skype support about it.
If you're saying that anyone on Discovery should be sanctioned on the basis of actions done in a completely different online environment, then I don't think you understand common sense sir. You cannot enforce one community's rules in another and sanction the breach of those rules in the latter.
If I'm an administrator of a game server/forum, and a player who I chat with on skype insults me on skype, I don't ban them the next time I see them on the game server/forum.
This doesn't happen, and in fact, it's utterly ridiculous, and quite frankly, I can't believe I actually have to explain it.
Sorry "Sir". Someone who is telling me how ridiclious my opinion is, is really not important enough for me to discuss anything on that matter. Especially when the whole thing is already solved between Zynth and me. So please. Go away and play the cool badass with this cool 'sir' blablabla and hidden insults somewhere else. Have a nice one. "Sir". @Tarator
A long time ago, an old admin team had the policy that you couldn't be sanctioned for actions that didn't take place on the forums or ingame. That was a good policy. Unless you wanna start banning people for what they post on Facebook, too.
User was banned for: Unacceptable behavior
Time left: (Permanent)
(07-26-2016, 03:11 PM)Irwin Wrote: A long time ago, an old admin team had the policy that you couldn't be sanctioned for actions that didn't take place on the forums or ingame. That was a good policy. Unless you wanna start banning people for what they post on Facebook, too.
I kinda agree with you. But what to do with peeps constantly beeing a d*** in both private skype chats and discovery skype chats? Especially government chats where people normally have to work together. I know it's hard sometimes. I was in Kusari government chats for a few years. It was not nice over there sometimes. But hell. We worked toghether. But when you don't want to work with other peeps as a faction leader in chats heavily related to disco like the mentioned government chats it is a problem for this community as a whole if you ask me. @Irwin
(07-26-2016, 02:30 AM)Tarator Wrote: If I'm an administrator of a game server/forum, and a player who I chat with on skype insults me on skype, I don't ban them the next time I see them on the game server/forum.
This doesn't happen, and in fact, it's utterly ridiculous, and quite frankly, I can't believe I actually have to explain it.
I'm not sure how much online community experience you have, but this happens plenty.
Take gmod for instance. Insult an admin on steam, you get banned from the game server and forums. Same stuff on CS, etc.
(07-26-2016, 02:30 AM)Tarator Wrote: If I'm an administrator of a game server/forum, and a player who I chat with on skype insults me on skype, I don't ban them the next time I see them on the game server/forum.
This doesn't happen, and in fact, it's utterly ridiculous, and quite frankly, I can't believe I actually have to explain it.
I'm not sure how much online community experience you have, but this happens plenty.
Take gmod for instance. Insult an admin on steam, you get banned from the game server and forums. Same stuff on CS, etc.
Indeed it does, when the two "environments" are related to each other, exist under the same rules, terms of agreement or whatever, and what's more - they are both owned/administrated by a single party (because you bought your game off steam, right?). Therefore they are considered a single community. Just the same as you consider the Discovery Freelancer game as one environment, and it's forum as another, but they both share the staff and rules and exist mutually, being relevant to each other, because obviously, they are dependent on each other.
(07-26-2016, 03:48 PM)Alley Wrote: Take gmod for instance. Insult an admin on steam, you get banned from the game server and forums. Same stuff on CS, etc.
Just taking that example, if you for instance would go to that steam admin on skype, and outright insult them, do you think they're in any way entitled to bring any admin action upon you in another community which has nothing to do with skype (that being steam)? Of course not, and that's what my point is about. It can't happen, unless of course, the admin you are dealing with is a biased teenager, because that's what such an action is normally called in normal communities that I've been - bias.
However, I'm not aware of the specifics how and what evidence is considered valid for sanction processing on Discovery. I don't know how admins here handle evidence, but what I would assume, is that they do not consider evidence obtained from completely irrelevant online environments as valid.
(07-26-2016, 03:01 PM)xiphos Wrote: Sorry "Sir". Someone who is telling me how ridiclious my opinion is, is really not important enough for me to discuss anything on that matter. Especially when the whole thing is already solved between Zynth and me. So please. Go away and play the cool badass with this cool 'sir' blablabla and hidden insults somewhere else. Have a nice one. "Sir". @Tarator
I'm sorry if my post sounded too direct, it wasn't meant as an insult or something.
(07-26-2016, 03:01 PM)xiphos Wrote: Sorry "Sir". Someone who is telling me how ridiclious my opinion is, is really not important enough for me to discuss anything on that matter. Especially when the whole thing is already solved between Zynth and me. So please. Go away and play the cool badass with this cool 'sir' blablabla and hidden insults somewhere else. Have a nice one. "Sir". @Tarator
I'm sorry if my post was too direct, it wasn't meant as an insult or something.
Ok. A sorry from me too. Problem solved i think. Let's move on with our lives then. @Tarator
(07-26-2016, 04:46 PM)Tarator Wrote: Just taking that example, if you for instance would go to that steam admin on skype, and outright insult them, do you think they're in any way entitled to bring any action upon you in another "community" which has nothing to do with skype (that being steam)? Of course not, and that's what my point is about. It can't happen, unless of course, the admin you are dealing with is a biased teenager, because that's what such an action is normally called in normal communities that I've been - bias.
I don't understand what you're trying to point out. Skype is an instant messaging service, it's not a community.
If I say something really abrasive to a person working in a company next door to ours and I upset that person to the point he/she wants to beat the hell out of me I don't think I'm going to get out of it if I say "oh no sorry we're not in the same company you can't do that".
It's a point by point application of action and consequences, there is no magical barrier.
(07-26-2016, 04:46 PM)Tarator Wrote: Just taking that example, if you for instance would go to that steam admin on skype, and outright insult them, do you think they're in any way entitled to bring any action upon you in another "community" which has nothing to do with skype (that being steam)? Of course not, and that's what my point is about. It can't happen, unless of course, the admin you are dealing with is a biased teenager, because that's what such an action is normally called in normal communities that I've been - bias.
I don't understand what you're trying to point out. Skype is an instant messaging service, it's not a community.
If I say something really abrasive to a person working in a company next door to ours and I upset that person to the point he/she wants to beat the hell out of me I don't think I'm going to get out of it if I say "oh no sorry we're not in the same company you can't do that".
It's a point by point application of action and consequences, there is no magical barrier.
I don't think there's any room for comparing it to real life experiences like, at all.
It's very simple - you have the environments X and Y, with their respective rules, terms of usage, staff and so on, and they are completely irrelevant to each other.
You cannot enforce the rules of environment X into environment Y even with regards to X, it's invalid and doesn't even make sense. Now let's say you administrate both environments, and they share the same rules and relevance, now that's a different story, but they do not. In the case of skype-steam, it's totally invalid and it would in fact be considered an abuse if they practice such a thing.
I'll bring that back once again - you go on skype and insult a steam admin there. They can't ban you on steam for what you did on skype, but if they do, then that's unfortunate, because it would mean them breaking steam terms of usage, or admin rules or whatever tool in the form of norms they have there to regulate steam administration.
Or let's flip it around - let's say you have a mate on steam with whom you play CS, and that mate happens to be a MS employee who in fact works in Skype support. Let's assume you break steam's rules, or something, and you get banned. Your mate gets to know about it, and terminates your skype account based on steam rules. I don't suppose you'd find this logical, right?
I don't think I can make it more simple than that. My English isn't fluent enough anyway.
The problem is that no one ever explained that all of a sudden Skype is now a reason to be prosecuted.
Also material there is not only used as backup evidence, but it seems very much as if Karst's ban was almost entirely built on a Skype controversy that went very bad, at a time when no one expected that Skype evidence would count at all.
I am not against using Skype in sanctions because it will result in conversations hopefully becoming more respectful, less trolly and more constructive in general. There are definitely potential benefits there, however: We need to know this! We need to know this before Skype evidence is used in sanctions!
To make it fair - at least for coming generations - put it into the rules! Warn people!
For 6 years, Skype evidence was not permitted, was never taken into account. Even DSAce was not permitted. Only on server unedited screenies and forum links/screenies.
Now, all of a sudden without any announcement, Skype is not only a valid source of evidence, but can be the main source to go for the highest punishment without much else in the sense of "traditional" evidence.
Such massive policy changes need to be announced. Again, I am not against it, I actually welcome it, but players need to know so they can adjust their behaviour accordingly.
Skype used to be hate-filled, rough-talk, trolling to the max, teasing, bullying... forever.
And it never counted.
The staff needs to understand that punishing people on that basis is a massive (surprising) change.
A change that players need to adjust to, and they can only do so when they know about the change.
@
![[Image: giphy.gif]](https://media.giphy.com/media/3o6Zt2mWkSpShhmxlC/giphy.gif)
