G6_ Admin Application

I object. In personal interactions he is very deceitful and vengeful. His programming ability doesn't mean anything about his character.

Quote from taah

developer requires more trust than admin in my opinion as you have access to the server software and the main core plugins

No. To become a Developer, we screen for an interest in programming. Previously we also screened for talent and experience. We don't screen for character or judgement like we do for admins. Development is slow and we can expect rogue commits to be caught quickly while they sit in limbo. Scope of the role's power should also not be expanded without accounting for how easy it was, behaviorally, for devs to get accepted in the first place.

Quote from img

Indirectly I became aware of an attempted doxing and digital stalking against me.

add me on Discord & DM any proof for this and any other allegation you mentioned

i’m @phrman

i object because almost all of my interactions with this user have been negative. i could provide evidence but i probably won’t unless Luke puts a gun to my head. we shouldn’t be forcing people to present actual evidence, much less people who are/have been admin (img). i don’t understand why this one particular application is being treated as such an exception, maybe i’m missing something.

Quote from RedEastWood

we shouldn’t be forcing people to present actual evidence, much less people who are/have been admin (img)

i was asking so i can investigate the matter lol not so i can confirm/refute his vote

Quote from img

I object. In personal interactions he is very deceitful and vengeful. His programming ability doesn't mean anything about his character.

Quote from taah

developer requires more trust than admin in my opinion as you have access to the server software and the main core plugins

No. To become a Developer, we screen for an interest in programming. Previously we also screened for talent and experience. We don't screen for character or judgement like we do for admins. Development is slow and we can expect rogue commits to be caught quickly while they sit in limbo. Scope of the role's power should also not be expanded without accounting for how easy it was, behaviorally, for devs to get accepted in the first place.

Amongst becoming a developer also makes you uphold a reputation of whether the developer can be trusted or not as well. I've spoken to Allink for months along with many of the other developers to see what kind of character he is and he is someone who has stated that he wouldn't leave until he makes a positive impact on TotalFreedom. It is up to others to see what that turns out to be, but if we hold someone back because of their associations with others, it is unfair. I was friends with Savnith and Cyro while being a Telnet Clan Administrator, others being friends with such individuals as Senior Administrators and friends with Panther and Frequent_User, all four being malicious users at one point with severely negative impacts on the server.

As for the spoiler you posted, I doubt Allink would have any involvement with such crimes because as a developer, not just a TotalFreedom developer, but as someone who wants to keep a reputation for future matters, that would negatively impact him. If you are implying that he has control over such situations because of his friendship status with minimal members of such groups, this is false, because why would they listen to him or anyone? I'm sorry to hear about the targeting from the group, I hope it gets situated, because I also was once in a situation where I was DoX'd by a developer and senior admin who remained with their status for months without consequences, and it was not fun, considering I was in elementary school at the time.

Quote from RedEastWood

i object because almost all of my interactions with this user have been negative. i could provide evidence but i probably won’t unless Luke puts a gun to my head. we shouldn’t be forcing people to present actual evidence, much less people who are/have been admin (img). i don’t understand why this one particular application is being treated as such an exception, maybe i’m missing something.

I do not think just because someone was / is an admin means their word is trustworthy.

I understand all of the comments about Allink's association with a group that's been fucking with the server for months, but once again, do you expect him to just drop their friendship because of their actions? What if outside of the server they're friends? It's not your position or required of Allink to have to drop his friends, especially if he has no involvement and he spends his time with them outside of TotalFreedom matters. And once again, if everyone keeps holding back Allink because of his friendship, he would never have a chance to become admin, and it is not fair, especially if the only thing he's done here is use his position and presence on the server to only positively impact it. He's a good person, and he is trustworthy, and all of you are over his ass for something he didn't do. (This last sentence is not directed to any of the quotes, but a general statement)

object

ive been on holiday for 2 weeks abroad, with no access to a computer. allink claims ive been "inactive" when in reality ive just been abroad, and then used this to further claim my suspension was justified. allink was also involved with the incident a couple weeks back with the botnet incident.

Quote from wild1145

I want to nip the whole "Developer = Trusted" argument in the bud, no it doesn't. Our model fundamentally changed to move away from trusted parties because it's not really needed. There is a minimal amount of damage a developer can do with dev server access. Likewise we aren't screening people for access to the nuclear launch codes, the reason we've historically been more fussy is because removing someone has causes community backlash 99% of the time. If we're going to accept more risk with admins there has to be an understanding that they may get removed quicker than when we take less risk.

Quote from RedEastWood

i could provide evidence but i probably won’t unless Luke puts a gun to my head. we shouldn’t be forcing people to present actual evidence, much less people who are/have been admin (img). i don’t understand why this one particular application is being treated as such an exception, maybe i’m missing something.

I think it's because we're starting to move in a different direction for applications, and more aligned both to how hub mods applications work and how I've wanted applications to be moving for a while, to no vouch / objects and a data based discussion with evidence to back up your stance. This application does not need to be held to such a standard but I suspect it's part of the reason it's happening. I know erin is working on voting changes which I am hoping will encompass this and more changes.

Yes but at the same time we would not want someone like Savnith or Scutix to become a developer on the server I would assume? Or Wilee once again? (If someone is to say yes to these dear god...) Just because we are not screening for trustworthiness does not mean that people don't develop a sense of a developer being trustworthy during the duration of their title, especially those who work(ed) directly with them. Of course I am biased because myself and the other developers, including Paldiu, have worked directly with Allink himself for months and have spoken with him and learned to trust him as a person.

EDIT: I understand your last point about the risk but the issue is there is no possible way to determine the risk that is possible for any individual as an admin unless they have PREVIOUSLY shown it. We are not exactly fortune tellers and Allink hasn't shown any signs whether he would to impose a threat and break rules and go rogue as an administrator. My point is that we can't hold people back because of their friendships with others because we haven't done that in the past and it is unfair.

Quote from wild1145

Quote from taah

Yes but at the same time we would not want someone like Savnith or Scutix to become a developer on the server I would assume? Or Wilee once again? (If someone is to say yes to these dear god...) Just because we are not screening for trustworthiness does not mean that people don't develop a sense of a developer being trustworthy during the duration of their title, especially those who work(ed) directly with them. Of course I am biased because myself and the other developers, including Paldiu, have worked directly with Allink himself for months and have spoken with him and learned to trust him as a person.

EDIT: I understand your last point about the risk but the issue is there is no possible way to determine the risk that is possible for any individual as an admin unless they have PREVIOUSLY shown it. We are not exactly fortune tellers and Allink hasn't shown any signs whether he would to impose a threat and break rules and go rogue as an administrator. My point is that we can't hold people back because of their friendships with others because we haven't done that in the past and it is unfair.

Technically speaking there is nothing stopping any of those people becoming developers, they may not get access to the dev server or similar but it's besides the point.

And on risk, I'm referring to our risk appetite. How much risk are we as a server willing to take, historically it's been nearly 0 when it comes to admins and therefore we have been very picky about peoples histories / potential, but if we're willing to accept more risk with the mitigation that we're happier to remove the bad eggs much quicker then it balances it out if that makes sense.

I'll also say on your last point, we can 100% do that, we're a minecraft server and we care about our own interests only, right now we aren't accepting of great risk, so if we see a risk with someone's associations past or present, we are entirely within our rights to refuse to grant additional accesses.

Regarding the risk portion of all of this since it is what everyone is scared of, I only say it is unfair because there is no evidence or signs that have shown any association with Allink or another group, no evidence or sign that has shown Allink doing malicious intents with another group, and I understand you all 100% can hold back people because of their friendships, it does not mean we should. Do we even know of the associations or friendships everyone is scared about? Is everyone just believing what Video says even though there is no evidence to my knowledge or confirmation showing that Allink is associated with such people? And even if he is, what if he's friends with them outside of TotalFreedom's community and its matters? Once again, I do not think it is fair to judge based off accusations because as a person who was accused of many things, from a weepcraft post containing insults of administrators posted by a person who supposedly would unban players, and to being a savnith insider, all proven wrong meaning the senior administrators who provided information and went against me being retarded and wrong, I am biased.

Quote from Allink

My involvement did not go past providing my IP per the request of maniaplay.

can confirm this 100%. Allink had no role other than providing an ip that he was falsely lead to believe was for something else.

I must have read every post on this application about 10 times. And I've taken the time, too much time to make sure that I'm happy with my decision. And I am.

I feel you've made enough positive contribution to this community to have earned a chance as admin. I won't pretend there aren't concerns, but you've addressed and responded to them calmly and sufficiently.

So without further ado, this application is approved.

Congratulations and welcome to the team.