Congratulations Coco!
And dragon, I wish you all the best. Whilst you've obviously been busy and shit, you've been a real lad about this whole thing and communicated well when you have been about. Congrats on your assistant position lol
Posts by erin
-
-
-
-
So the actual count came down as follows
10 vouch
20 objectionWith a 75% approval threshold, with 20 objections it would require 50 vouches in a row (more than any application has ever received) in the 10 or so days the application had left. I didn't want the applicant to get continually bombarded with further objections which would not exactly help the situation either. Also want to note that the votes themselves were all counted, even one from a rather sketchy account.
And if you have an issue with my counting - even with the numbers you have provided, it would have required 38 vouches in a row, again all of these coming without a single objection in between, to hit the threshold.
-
The senior admin application window has now opened. Applications can be posted from now until Friday 3rd March, after which, two weeks of voting will take place. The results will be evaluated no earlier than March 17th.
Best of luck to all those applying.
-
Quote
↩ resident_user Why is there a section that can be misconstrued so easily?
I do agree with this - the rule has a sort of loopholability about it, but I just believe it needs a bit of patching up, a bit like how the conduct policy was recently amended to be more clear.
It's easy to know what the rule is trying to prevent, but the wording is a bit of an issue.
-
I do support the idea of a more accurate and thorough ban management process - one which would involve assigning each ban its own proper allocated length and then working from there. This would obviously see many players immediately unbanned anyway, but I wouldn't want us to just clear the indefinite bans list in its entirety the second this suggestion is improved.
I also still believe permanent bans - or at least bans that require appeals, will still have their place, but just be much less common and for maybe more extreme cases of rule breaking that don't quite stretch to unappealable - one simple example is just a player whose been indefinitely banned multiple times.
-
Unfortunately the consensus for this one has not fallen in your favour, and thus this application is going to be denied early as it will not likely hit the approval threshold.
But I do encourage you to keep your head up and continue striving to make positive change to yourself and your behaviours. Don't let this knock you down - take it as an opportunity to learn and let it motivate you to keep going.
-
Quote
↩ resident_user Admins on here make fun of religion all the time
Yes, the last time it happened was notable.
-
Okay, so I see two sides of this. And I understand two sides of this.
On one hand, I personally am not a fan of retroactive punishment or sanctioning people twice for the same offence.
But, on the other hand, I don't believe the ban was carried out in error. Moss was well within their right to ban you on the spot for what you were building - away from spawn or not. Furthermore, you seriously should know better - heck, you told us you now knew better after spending 4 months banned from the server for distasteful jokes.
So I object to the preemptive lifting of the ban. Wait it out.
-
-
Quote
A bigot is someone who has absolutely no respect for other people's opinions - rather, they have an irrational hatred for them.
So you're telling people who respect other people's lives that they have no respect for people's lives.
Wat
-
I don't actually eat pizza due to it not being one of my safe foods (ARFID moment) so this is a funny debate to have
-
-
↩ quack95 I agree, but I will add onto this - we don't expect our staff members an undying loyalty to totalfreedom. We don't want you to take a bullet for this server or anything.
What we do want is for you is not to help out the guy whose ddosing the servers forum. It was that, combined with the fact he was refusing to help us while helping him, that meant suspension was the only reasonable course of action
-
Quote
For context, he told the admin team that he had information on exactly how the attacks were being done, and he also told us he knew how to stop the attacks. He then purposefully withheld that information from everyone who asked despite us asking multiple times over several hours. After being given a last chance by video to come clean, he was indefinitely suspended.
QuoteWhile you weren't involved directly ddosing the server, you not only gave the impression you might've had more involvement, but you also withheld information from us yet passed over our messages onto him, and held back your information until we met both of your demands.
Again, the information did indeed turn out to be useless - but in all of the conversations leading up to that, you made it clear that you had the key to fixing the problem. You used this so called information as leverage to force the executive team into negotiations with the ddoser.
Your general attitude in the entire situation made it impossible for you to have been trusted to continue serving as an administrator on the server.
That is my grounds for the suspension anyway. I cannot comment on your indefinite ban.
All in all, best wishes for the future. You're smart with this computer shite and you'll do well in life.
-
↩ Telesphoreo I was hasty to remove it, yes. I saw it had been flagged by another user and kind of didn't think much else about it.
I do apologise for the inconvenience caused.
-
The vote was removed for being blatantly sarcastic and thus I deemed it to not be written in good faith.
-
-
↩ quack95 show, not tell is my best advice. I would rather see a good amount of time with you not leaving the internet forever or causing needless drama with impulsive decisions. If you've genuinely turned a new leaf today, good on you and I encourage you, but please realise that saying what we wanna hear after months and months and months of erratic behaviours isn't going to fly.
QuoteYeah, yesterday.