G6_ Admin Application

Quote from Allink

Quote from quack95

you refused to leave given it was on my land and you still wanted to build your dirt bank

I had thought that this incident was settled, however it clearly isn't considering you've mentioned it in my admin application, so I will clarify my side of the story here - A few months ago, me and Quack disagreed about my construction of a dirt bank of what (was to me) empty land that bordered one of his builds. I admit that I was in the wrong with my decision to insist on building this dirt bank, however I would like to point out that the entire concept of building in player-managed cities was to me at the time, a completely new concept. I had no idea about what I should do in order to gain clearance to place my build, or that just starting to build there was in any way a wrong thing. Perhaps there should've been a ratified policy around acceptable city building conduct so I wasn't so confused and so adamant on building my dirt bank. I would also like to point out that I eventually backed off from building my dirt bank. I apologize to all I hurt with my blatant misconduct surrounding my dirt bank.

You left A LOT out. As you've been building it, I told you "gay sex what the hell is this" you had replied that it was a dirt bank. I then said you should remove it because I don't want it here but you politely refused and sent yourself back to building it again. I had to then bring an admin into the question (I wasn't admin at the time) because you kept building it after I told you "this is private land, please don't build here" and you said "but it's public land!! i gotta build here" so then the admin kept telling you to leave, you then left after the 3rd time the admin told you to.

This is fairly recent and you appear to have changed a bit, but I still would give it time given how absolutely recent this is and how impulsive your behavior was. I need to clarify, I do not care about this incident anymore but I feel it needs to be discussed in an important subject like an admin application.

Quote from Allink

Once again, I'd like to point out how clueless I was around the rules around contributing to city build projects.

This makes 0 sense, you should be aware of the griefing rules and how I was not allowing you to build on Vesperia, AKA my build.

Quote from Allink

I mistakenly believed that you were unfairly denying my right to build in what was

Once again, you were told by MULTIPLE Admins (now that I remember) that it was not your place to build, in which you once again denied.

Quote from Allink

I don't think it was unreasonable for me to get slightly defensive in that situation

Sure you could've gotten a bit defensive and asked questions, which a player who knows the rules would stop right away, no smite no warnings. But you KNOW the rules and are aware that it is NOW my build, from your new knowledge, though you still kept wanting to build your dirt bank, then get smitten.

Quote from Allink

city build projects should be open to all who want to contribute

What if the city build projects have an owner, which denied you permission from building? That should be reason enough to not build there.

I don't want this to continue in this thread. If you have any questions or problem with what I said, take it to DMs.

I'm gonna switch to neutral given this isn't too recent like 2 days ago.

Allink A problem I have (I’m actually neutral now i’m not outright objecting depending on this) is currently with your judgement

Everytime we do something against one of your friends you react with the confused reaction sometimes before saying how you disagree with it in the Discord.

How do we know you’ll use proper judgement if you don’t agree with the basics? In some recent cases it’s been more than proved a rule is broken yet you seemingly disagree for whatever reason? How do we trust you’ll fulfil your duties if you see this occurring on the server?

Quote from Allink

As Quack has outlined in his response, I don't particularly find reason to continue the discussion around the dirt bank incident on the forums. If Quack indeed thinks that there are things that need tying up, I encourage him to DM me on Discord so we can clear up anything unresolved. My apologies to Quack if my responses have brought up any uncomfortable memories surrounding my behaviour.

Quote from Allink

I don't think that there is any way for you to trust that I would fulfil my duties if I saw something that was punishable by a currently-accepted interpretation of a rule/guideline that I don't agree with or that I will exercise proper judgement in those situations, besides for you to trust what I'm about to say. If you don't trust what I say, then I won't blame you for objecting precisely for that reason and/or you not trusting my ability to fulfil my administrative responsibilities. If you do trust what I say, then I will ban players for violations of the currently accepted (interpretations of) guideline(s)/rule(s), even if I disagree with them. In a possible position of administrator I hope to incite change with the currently accepted interpretations of rules that I disagree with and/or currently accepted procedures. I will not be wilfully ignorant if my friends decide to break the guidelines. I would ban them just as any admin would.

Also, if you don't mind me asking, can you please define what exactly you mean by the "basics"? I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to here, because from what I gather it could be lots of things. I've tried to word my response as best I can operating on my best guess.

I can't tell if this is just really well written, or something Chat-GPT barfed out.

Regardless, Object with Video and Quacks reasoning.

Quote from Kadalyst

Quote from Allink

As Quack has outlined in his response, I don't particularly find reason to continue the discussion around the dirt bank incident on the forums. If Quack indeed thinks that there are things that need tying up, I encourage him to DM me on Discord so we can clear up anything unresolved. My apologies to Quack if my responses have brought up any uncomfortable memories surrounding my behaviour.

Quote from Allink

I don't think that there is any way for you to trust that I would fulfil my duties if I saw something that was punishable by a currently-accepted interpretation of a rule/guideline that I don't agree with or that I will exercise proper judgement in those situations, besides for you to trust what I'm about to say. If you don't trust what I say, then I won't blame you for objecting precisely for that reason and/or you not trusting my ability to fulfil my administrative responsibilities. If you do trust what I say, then I will ban players for violations of the currently accepted (interpretations of) guideline(s)/rule(s), even if I disagree with them. In a possible position of administrator I hope to incite change with the currently accepted interpretations of rules that I disagree with and/or currently accepted procedures. I will not be wilfully ignorant if my friends decide to break the guidelines. I would ban them just as any admin would.

Also, if you don't mind me asking, can you please define what exactly you mean by the "basics"? I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to here, because from what I gather it could be lots of things. I've tried to word my response as best I can operating on my best guess.

I can't tell if this is just really well written, or something Chat-GPT barfed out.

Regardless, Object with Video and Quacks reasoning.

Display More

It appears to be human text

vouch. i don't think allink's friend groups and his association with people should determine his trustworthiness because who are we to tell others who their friends can be and cannot? if he's not partaking in such activities then i don't think we should be worried. it's not fair to allink if we were to object because of a potential future where he could partake because then that's just bringing his chances down of being an administrator for days and months to come. if a person's solution is that allink drops his friend group, then said person is retarded.

allink has proven time and time again that he is a great developer, a team player, a great communicator, one who's knowledgeable in minecraft servers as well as how they work, and an active member of the community. stop being blinded by past events and events that COULD take place, that's not fair to others, and it's a heavy bias.

as for luke's comment, we can all disagree on things, but when the time comes i believe allink will step up and prove he's trustworthy. if he's trustworthy enough to be allowed to modify the server software, our forks, tfm, etc., i don't understand how the worry of trust doesn't come to there when he could easily pull something in the development area if he wanted.

My vote is remaining neutral.

We all need to take a big step back. I am also guilty of speculating about this in private.

What are we actually doing here?

Are we stopping a potential Granite Castle/smartnt situation or are we alienating a good portion of our userbase?

Is this justified? Why/why not?

Instead of just outright saying ‘they have too much power’ could we curb the abilities of the admin role so that the situations like GC can’t happen again? Or would restricting their powers be a better idea?

This is all rhetorical; nobody needs to reply. Please just think about it privately. The last thing we need rn is more division. I’m not asking all of this because I support Allink or I support the rest, my vote is neutral. Let’s all just think a little clearly. The past few days on TF have not been easy and so tensions are high. Let’s all try and defuse.

I request erin puts this application on hold with Allink’s approval while we calm down and think a bit more clearly.

As per above correspondence, I'm going to put this thread on hold until things cool down. Once resumed I'll allow 6 or 7 days of voting again.

Thanks for your patience.