Quote
I am going to be alive for an indefinite amount of time. That does not mean I am immortal, it just means I am unsure of when my time is up. Could be in a year, I could be the oldest living person. Since I don't know, I say indefinite. It is an unspecified amount of time.
The self requested indefinite ban is a good idea. It allows players to take breaks from the server for mental health reasons if they really feel like they need to take some time away from the server. I like the concept and I do not want to drastically change it.
However, a recent self requested indefinite ban lasted for just 5 days, and a player who was banned by their own request 6 days ago has now announced they will be returning to the server. I believe the lengths of these two indefinite bans are concerningly short, and the situations that the players in question were in should not have utilised a self request if they felt ready to return in just a few days.
I'm only suggesting that the ban must last longer than 2 weeks, however I'm open for discussion if people feel this number is too harsh or the idea in general is too harsh.
Edit:
Okay so when this suggestion is being reviewed, I'd like it to be taken into account that obviously some disagree entirely but some people feel different lengths should be the minimum. Just asking for more than the original suggestion to be taken into account.
I brought this up in May so it's been known since then but nothings really been done.
If this is an actual reinstatement, object due to inactivity. Have to wonder how the hell this has lasted so long though, lmfao.
QuoteDisplay More↩ Shdwo Take this scenario for example:
(The first user is represented by A (the one applying), the second by B (the one objecting))
user A spams user B’s messages with racist remarks, then proceeds to delete them. user B has no evidence as the messages were deleted, yet they know it happened.
user B holds a grudge against user A as they now know that they broke the rules without a way of proving it
user A applies for admin and gets an overwhelming majority of vouches
user B objects for their own reasoning…
Why should user B’s vote get disregarded because of the grudge held against user A.
Out of interest.. is this a hypothetical situation or something else..?
↩ videogamesm12 the first TheSense guild was disbanded by Fleek due to DoctorZene's indefinite ban, but this was just one started by Luke as a joke.
Quote↩ FromTimeToTime Implementation of the ZTP (Apr 2020)” - this has been merged into another policy since then
To my knowledge, the ZTP was a policy in which using a slur was a section 2 offence. That was abolished several months ago, and we now just sanction them as a section 3.
It seemed unpopular from what I saw, I remember staff members being annoyed that they had to dayban someone who dropped one slur, and I know a few trolls intended on annoying someone into calling them a slur so the person would get banned.
It's now abolished tho, as of quite a few months ago.
I definitely feel me joining was a super significant event !
Jokes aside, the acquisition of the skyblock server and possibly the closing of freedom-02 could make it onto the 2021 list, and we may not know the fate of the server but the potential 15th October closing down was enough of a blip in the history of this place.
I don't know because I wouldn't exist to know.
To reask Lyicx's question since it was actually a good one and deserves an actually good answer, what kind of movie would you want to star in and why?
Object, personally. Stoplag is meant to.. stop lag. When /ew and /mp doesn't work, you use stoplag. It's purpose is to stop the server lagging, and as much as it sucks that people lose their pets, when ignoring pets with /mp didn't stop the lag, it's worth a shot.
I don't want to send mine...
If I'm reading the events correctly, you were a bit silly to get impatient and try and use the command because nobody replied to you. That being said, this isn't the indefinite ban request. This is your ban appeal and you were banned for 9 months. Due to your apparent honesty and the length of time, I'm going to vouch for release.
Quote
And? He reinstated after the server was given at least three months to live. That shows to me that he likely wants to help the server out using his skills and make sure it is not shut down. What else can you be taking from that?
Quote
It's a valid reason to object in some cases maybe, but there's not much behind it. First of all, you failed to cast a vote on a recently approved application and you have yet to cast a vote on a currently opened application. Both of these are points I made in my first post, which were not addressed.
Quote
You're in very little of a position to be doubling down here.
Quote
Thank you for making my point easier to write. A recent new admin application was accepted before this vote, and you made no attempt to cast any kind of vote or air your concerns on that application. You simply waited until it went through, and then objected here.
There is also, and I have said this about three times, an active admin application which you have not casted a vote on. Now, I do not doubt that the applicant is worthy of becoming admin and the votes by others and the way the applicant has behaved indicate that the application will likely go favourably. But the application was written mere hours after the announcement the server was closing and under the guise there were just weeks left.
It makes absolutely zero sense that, if having too many admins was an issue, that you are fine to let the application get approved but not fine to have the reinstatement approved. It's logical that someone who is reinstating to a senior admin position should take priority over a new applicant in this event, however I feel both should be approved. You also failed to address this point around my first time of asking. So I am asking you again to please explain why this should get denied in your opinion, but new admins are fine to come in.
Quote
No, no, no you just haven't voted fairly. Just because it's a technically valid reason to cast an objection doesn't mean you can just toss it into one reinstatement. One player still has senior admin status on this server despite not logging in since July 24th. We haven't had an activity removal in quite some time and therefore the number is inflated by inactive players.
Instead of asking the EAO for a straw you could grasp at, could you not enquire about an activity removal instead if you're so concerned about the inflated saconfig list? You prioritised keeping a player who hasn't logged in since July on the admin list in favour of an active player wanting to reinstate.
Quote
I expect you to give and have given an objection with the same reasoning on all of the recent admin applications that have been written in these past few weeks, then.
I mean no disrespect to the recent candidates, I'm just pointing out a logical flaw. Why haven't you objected on any of the applications in recent weeks with the same logic? Why are you sitting here and letting new admins apply and get (deservedly) approved while deciding that a seasoned veteran admin of the server shouldn't be allowed because we have too many? There's a current active admin application which you didn't add a vote to and one approved within the last week - you seemed fine to let new people apply (even recommending one) but you're blocking this one?
And again, I mean no disrespect to any of the new admins or people who have applied for admin. This is a way of thinking I'm criticising.
I don't believe this vote was made in good faith at all.
↩ CoolestGuy94 playing dumb isn't really going to work here, you admitted to bypassing your self requested indefinite ban on multiple occasions and I can definitively link at least one of those cases directly to your IP.
Thank you, I didn't see the first 10 times that made it very clear on every platform that youve left.
