Goodness gracious. The administration circumvented their own rules and procedures in order to achieve an arbitrary result.
You know, it wouldn't surprise me if people lost all faith in the administration and the rules now. Consider that not only are the admins only bound to their own policies when they feel like it, but also that you don't even need to break any rules to get banned - just act like a big enough tool and you're going to get removed as a problematic element.
Maybe the dev strike had the right idea - I certainly wouldn't want to contribute to a server where whim overrides consistency or where the administration thinks that "best judgement" is a substitute for rules and procedures.
Howard Williams - CEO, Williams-Mordhauser Distributing - "Just try and stop us"
Caroline Convair - General Secretary, Williams-Mordhauser Distributing - "Please excuse the CEO"
Quote:You know, it wouldn't surprise me if people lost all faith in the administration and the rules now.
Only the vocal minority who care to follow the nonsense on the forums perhaps. I'd still say that 90% of our playerbase not only does not care, they probably do not even know that this drama is going on. Instead they are ingame.
That being said, I had the feeling before, one that I've expressed already, that the bans would be explained this way - that they are the result of the administration obligation rule to keep the server healthy, rather than the result in any particular rule breach, thus circumventing the need for any particular moment of misconduct or the use of proof. So technically the admin team did not break their own rules - just that we now have a good example of that the admin-obligation rule to safeguard the server can be used as a failsafe rule. Regardless of who you are or what you've done.
You know what I find hilarious in a way though? That back in the day, the administration team had a much smaller footprint in the community itself. They rarely posted outside of admin-related threads and announcements, they rarely were in skype chats and their contact with individual players or groups - especially cliques was tiny. Nobody could fault them for basing their judgement on personally not liking someone or some group. But you know what? That admin team was exactly what we'd call the Teamspeak Squad today. So basically, at some point the Team and regular players swapped places.
I would, however, blame the situation on a fact that over the years we've tried to make officialdom so very alluring to promote its usage that we have elevated a certain portion of our members to a status that causes seemingly toxic attitude. Especially when it either is or is merely justified as ''for the sake of my group''. The OFL chat was a good example of that, where people would walk over one another or the ''regular'' players on the server to acheive their own ambitions.
And you know what?
Because players want to leave their imprint on Disco. Especially now that it is on its way down. People are hurrying to try and grab hold to positions of influence or power so that when inevitably the people involved get tired of this bull and pull the plug, at least those people can say that they were a part of the core of the community.
The member back in 2008 was a nobody. People mostly felt that they were privilaged to be part of the community and server and that they could be removed at any given point by any reason - rules or not. The fact that the Team were faceless and very harsh - also attributed to this. We had a cool kids club back then as well, but it was a minority. Now every faction feels like a cool kids club.
Basically Disco is turning into the Demes. The Blues and the Greens. Look it up - Nika Riots.
--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------
I'm probably going to get flamed for this post but whatever.
You don't end up in the administration's crosshairs by pure Warframe RNG. I personally was too busy to really care about what was going on when the vote showed up but when I skimmed through the thread and saw the names up for vote there was actually very little names that made me wonder how they ended up there.
The way the thing was done is crap, everybody agrees on that. Permaban is overkill for most as we're not even talking about the same offenses. However is the reasoning that led to this 100% flawed? Not fully I think. Something good will come out of it anyway. It's a reminder to the admins not to rush decisions and a good warning to the cool kids to stop with the "I only care about my fun" attitude that's grown more and more rampant over the years.
(07-15-2016, 08:55 AM)Misfit Wrote: What I'm learning here is that rules don't matter and I can be banned just because some admins don't like the way I play the game.
The Admins also have a set of Rules. These used to be visible to all before the new Rule Set was introduced.
-- Administrators are obliged:
To develop and safeguard the health of the Discovery Freelancer community, official server, and forums.
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.
So, for you to be banned, we have to look at what you do and then have a vote. Within that vote you would have to receive a majority.
Therefore it isn't just going to happen because 'some' Admins don't like you.
'I would like to be half as clever as some people like to believe they are' Life is full of disappointments, it is how we handle them that helps to define us, as a person
1) How do you decide if someone's harming the Community without even asking the members? Where's democracy, which is a lie of course, but still there could be some parody on it. Not to mention the lack of any vital reasons.
2) Oh ye? Ever seen any Wild sanctioned after doing various bs? Right, me too, even though their reputation is by far not good, especially the D9 wing. While some people getting their ships instantly bastilled after doing minor mistakes even outside of RP environment.
(07-15-2016, 03:39 PM)Sanctions Wrote: 1) How do you decide if someone's harming the Community without even asking the members? Where's democracy, which is a lie of course, but still there could be some parody on it. Not to mention the lack of any vital reasons.
Maybe because Members talk to us?
(07-15-2016, 03:39 PM)Sanctions Wrote: 2) Oh ye? Ever seen any Wild sanctioned after doing various bs? Right, me too, even though their reputation is by far not good, especially the D9 wing. While some people getting their ships instantly bastilled after doing minor mistakes even outside of RP environment.
And what has this got to do with this Thread?
'I would like to be half as clever as some people like to believe they are' Life is full of disappointments, it is how we handle them that helps to define us, as a person
Away for a week and this is all the progress that has been made during that time?
Seriously?
What is so hard in checking out the sanction registers of the "banned", check whether they have a fat folder, or a small footprint of negativity, then unban those that you have practcally nothing on, and differentiate the punishment for the others?
Furthermore, the Dev strike is good. And if we do not get a reasonable verdict and a change in the punishment of the few that definitely do not deserve it as they have never harmed the community, there should be a lot more strikes and protests. In contrast to some in here, I am convinced that only an escalation to a certain degree made the Admins rethink, because it made ignoring the issue impossible.
Seriously, hurry up.
You asked for a time frame to discuss.
It was given.
It is still being given.
But... patience is not something that can be asked for indefinitely.
Jack - returning hopefully, ending disappointed quickly again
Posts: 3,168
Threads: 99
Joined: May 2012
Staff roles: Balance Dev
(07-15-2016, 04:13 PM)St.Denis Wrote:
(07-15-2016, 03:39 PM)Sanctions Wrote: 1) How do you decide if someone's harming the Community without even asking the members? Where's democracy, which is a lie of course, but still there could be some parody on it. Not to mention the lack of any vital reasons.
Maybe because Members talk to us?
There is a lot of talk about only a "vocal minority" disagreeing with the bans and speaking up against them. Similarly, however, these "Members" that have come to you complaining/reporting about the players that ended up banned are also a (different) vocal minority.
In the end, the admins would have to weigh one vocal minority's opinion against another's to see whether the presence of certain players has a positive or negative impact on the server as a whole. I can't imagine that being very feasible, and it'd be almost impossible to value each opinion equally and not let bias seep into the admin team's decisionmaking.
Compared to that, it seems simpler and fairer to ban players according to the rules instead.