Posts by jwmphall

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' The decision has been pretty consistently reviewed behind the scenes, the bottom line is that action bought in more players to the network than pretty much anything else we tried… It was a net benefit.

The issue is that players clearly didn't want it - regardless of what went on behind the scenes. Even if you say its was a net benefit, greater benefits would've been gained focusing development of a project approved of by the community This, for the record, is partially what people mean when we say TF is becoming corporatized.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' There was demand for anarchy, everyone assumed creative anarchy, I wanted to try something different to make our server unique

The thing is, survival anarchy isn't unique. While I think creative anarchy is a terrible idea, it is actually unique. Again, the players are usually right when it comes to predicting the success of an addition.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' Skyblock was bringing us players at the start,

Yes but after a large volume of backlash no decision to rethink the addition was ever brought up.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' Anarchy is something people have begged for for quite some time.

There was definitely some demand when Panther was EMM for a creative anarchy server, but I saw little to nobody asking for a survival anarchy.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' Nobody was left to run it

I assume this was prior to your appointment of owners of individual servers? Because I've seen countless requests to bring it back, and I believe we have the means to do so - but none have bore fruit

also @"simplynick"#11 please dont power post

↩  Miwojedk Addition of skyblock and anarchy and removal of SMP. Transformation of TF into a network partnered with AMG. . Certain inconsistent applications of category 0 offenses with players that Ryan holds grudges against. And of course the whole October incident.

Given more time I could think of more but it really shouldn't be necessary

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' No this is more akin to you getting 20 speeding tickets, then getting executed for running a child over doing 90 in a 20.

I removed this analogy before you even posted because I knew you'd hyperbolize it lol. My point is nobody had ever been punished for what either of the players were doing, to enforce it swiftly and without warning is disingenuous.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' Which was exactly what I stated I would do when I put my name forward to be owner… And is exactly what I have done. I don’t see how that is a surprise?

I would've protested if I were active and I'm certain other would too if they knew what the partnership would develop into

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' I absolutely care what the community thinks

"I’m the owner of the network and can frankly ban whoever I want for whatever reason I want" In response to my thread that had immense support

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' I don’t care to be blackmailed into doing what you and a handful of others want just because you’re more interested in the power.

Blackmail implies you're being threatened with information. Literally no idea how this relates. A large body of support asking for something isn't blackmail

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' You mean the one server that was actually really active until our community with your type of toxic behaviour alienated them and made them all leave?

How is what I'm doing toxic in any way? And how can you cite the sole reason for the server declining as "toxic behavior." Maybe it was initially popular… because it was new, and when people got bored of it; they simply left.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' Because people don’t like that I tell them to go fuck themselves…

No shit. Not exactly premium owner behavior to be stubborn and unwilling to compromise

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' I’ve also tried to make things simpler

By making the server a network with multiple servers that literally nobody plays on? And I guess removing policies that would restrict your power is technically making things more simple, but not in a good way

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' I also want to clarify, I have no desire to “Corporatise” TF

And yet you partner us with your company and make rules around not bringing it into disrepute? You make the server into a network against player's wishes? As for development, don't even try to pretend development now is more organized than previous owners. I can recall countless examples of poor management of developers: whether that be high workload, confusing prohibitive decisions regarding fixes, or even the wasted effort put into additions that failed immediately.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' I don’t have to operate under the fear the previous two owners had where the ownership policy could (And on more than one occasion very nearly did) get abused to remove an owner

You should have no fear of a vote off if you do your job effectively. Your admittance that you can ignore this fear shows you couldn't care less what the community thinks.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' I’m doing my best here, Ivan and Flobbier (Which is what this comes down to) had a LOT of warnings prior to their respective bans

Even if they received warnings for other things, their ban reasons were hitherto unprecedented - so the warnings are moot.

Quote

↩  @SaturnRayo and you cannot always acknoweldge that only one side (as it seemed to me that part of the community/posters here do so)

This is usually called a negativity bias, present in basically all humans. This is not a problem with dissenters, but with the lack of fanfare when something desirable happens. Though I'd argue bad things seem to happen here more than good things in relation to management.

Quote

↩  @SaturnRayo Tempted to ask who are willing to

I won't pretend to offer an alternative. As for your original point, I stated "but he doesn't have to be" because being owner should not be a defense that excuses you from certain scrutiny. You can't use "essentially keeping the server alive" as a positive because that is literally the job of an owner.

↩  RedEastWood If he didn't actively plant evidence and speak to the guilt of another player I don't think it is framing. Or is that what you're investigating?

Quote

↩  RedEastWood We are currently furthering the investigation into whether or not Ginlang watched Anti take the fall

To be honest, what difference does it make? Seems like double jeopardy if you ask me. Not admitting to a crime is just part of the crime, so to speak. Any additional punishment seems like overkill considering its already an indefinite suspension.

Quote

↩  burger Under Seth people complained about his chaotic ownership, now under Ryan people complain about his no bullshit approach

"It's so weird the moderates complain about both anarchy and totalitarianism! C'mon pick one!"

Quote

↩  @SaturnRayo but atleast appreciate that the server which had already died is now ok thanks to him

Nobody is calling into question Ryan's contributions to the server.

Quote

↩  @SaturnRayo Ryan is the owner, essentially the person keeping this server alive.

But he doesn't have to be. There are others that would be willing to do it if Ryan stepped down. The only reason somebody didn't assume the position in October was Ryan was going to discontinue the server instead of hand over ownership.

Quote

↩  RedEastWood i doubt you can go into any store’s shop and demand the owner makes changes, or that the owner sympathises with you

But TF shouldn't be a store, or a product; like how Ryan's vision frames it. If anything TF is like a daycare or a community park. It would be totally reasonable to have complaints with the owners of said institutions if malpractice was taking place, and they would be inclined to listen.

Quote

↩ @'phrman' i swear the same fuckers wanting to ban and vote out ryan are the same fuckers who wanted to get rid of seth. almost as if theyre never happy?

You're telling me the same people that couldn't stand a ruthless owner and censorship are the same people that can't stand a ruthless owner and censorship? What a bunch of fuckers.

Quote

↩  Alco_Rs11 This whole ‘discussion’ likely wouldn’t happen if a complete nobody was banned for the same reasons.

Well if it had been a complete nobody, it's likely an IBR would've been filed instead of it being processed solely by the owner - allowing time for admins to discuss. Needless to say I doubt a 'complete nobody' would even ever be punished for something like this regardless.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' If you want to open that can of worms, I’m more than happy to go down that path. I’m not sure many will appreciate it.

Lets open it. Maybe start with admins with superhero pfps maybe. Or maybe like characters from popular tv shows like spongebob (TM).

↩  Ivan yeah the average player does not know the entirety of uk law down to specific copyright laws. weird that on a global platform like youtube, a punishment for a similar act would be a warning or a removal of the video in question; yet in this tiny community its enough to ban somebody for months. ass backwards

i bet all of you have jaywalked at some point so that's indefinite bans across the board. sorry guys just the rules.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' I at no point have hidden behind anything

↩ @'Ryan' can frankly ban whoever I want for whatever reason I want

Contradictory.

Quote

↩ @'Ryan' They mislead individuals into believing they were donating to support total freedom.

They explicitly stated that the money would go to themselves. And nobody was "mislead" as the fundraiser never received any donations.

For those of you who don't know, on the 21st of February, Flobbier was indefinitely banned for a Gofundme titled "Help Flobbier save TotalFreedom," with a caption written in an obviously joking tone. The Gofundme requests 1$ under Flobbier's name. Flobbier was banned by Ryan without any voting on the IBR he posted. The reason for the ban, in Ryan's words are as follows: "Violating UK Law (Fraud Act 2006) - Impersonating the server to try to get donations."

This reason initially seems valid because putting a random law is enough for most people to look the other way. Not everybody, though. On fraudulent GFM fundraisers, GFM states "Lying or being misleading about your identity as an organizer or your relationship to the ultimate recipient of the funds" to be expressly forbidden. Nowhere in the fundraiser Flobbier posted did they state that the money would be going to TotalFreedom in any way. In fact, Flobbier's statement "Im cool pay me plz" clearly indicates that there is no intent of misleading others that they are donating to TotalFreedom.

Furthermore, upon inspection of UK Fraud Act 2006 (Section 2 - Fraud by false representation) : the law in question clearly states

"A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a)dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b)intends, by making the representation—

(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

"

Again, Flobbier did not make any false representation of TotalFreedom in his fundraiser - distinctly stating that the funds would go to himself, NOT TOTALFREEDOM.

The fact that he - a minor; clearly making a joke at nobody's expense - was banned and disallowed appeal for 18 months for this is admonishable and honestly sad. Even more so when you consider the circumstances of the ban: without voting or transparency in the slightest. It's evident Flobbier's past actions weighed on Ryan and that Ryan is out to get him - so to speak. This level of pettiness is hitherto truly unmatched. For anybody besides the owner this would be roguish behavior, but Ryan hides behind his position of authority to literally punish children for no reason and without consequence. How is it that a grown man sees someone asking for a dollar as a joke and immediately jumps to "he must be trying to defraud me!" That kind of person should not be an authority figure anywhere, especially here.

I'd ask for a re-evaluation of Flobbier's ban, this time with proper information and voting; but I know we wont get that. That would require Ryan to admit he's wrong.

found tatsucraft by osmosis or something. joined tf once or twice cause people on tcf always talked about it, but didnt really play tf until tatsu shut down.

vicki

Quote

↩  Feueristic didn’t randomize

what does that mean

vouch

↩  Rex2LostOldAccount

dont make jokes about the ira, they're terrorists and joking about them can get you suspended for 2 weeks

anyway. did u and flobbier meet ? : D @B0bP0p

Quote

↩  simplynick Ladies and gentlemen, let’s not be those who witness WW3 and tell our children about it.

first off, if we witnessed ww3 we wouldn't be able to tell our children about it

secondly, this is tf - nobody here will ever have kids.