Jump to content

Denevien

Members
  • Posts

    645
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Denevien

  1. As for your warning Andrew yourself, I find that to be new information, as I was told that Kitcatbar was tasked by you to handle the situation, as you were occupied with other matters.

     

    Kitcatbar only issued the mumble ban, because I could not from my phone. The rest was handled by me.

     

     

    If you'll recall, the image of Ron Jeremy, though he is associated with NSFW activities, was not in itself an NSFW image. Tompreuss declined to ask to be left out of the aforementioned circlejerk, remaining present & silent throughout the ordeal. Without asking to be left out, or stating anything on the matter, Andrew & other members of the channel at the time would have no knowledge that Tom was "not interested in seeing" or hearing about the content. Furthermore, it was Tompreuss's decision to open the link containing the image, and to therefore involve himself in the activities at hand. His taking offense to that content is his own choice, and rightly so, but claiming it to be harassment with the aforementioned conditions is out of line. To put it in other words, someone heard something about themselves after involving themselves in a discussion, took offense to the discussion at hand, and asked someone else to handle the situation claiming it to be harassing. You tell me here, on recorded text, that that's alright for someone, anyone, to do. To cry wolf after involving themselves. Tell me, and the rest of Nerd, that that's acceptable behavior for an Administrator.

     

    Seeing the screen shot of mumble, I can rightly tell you that Tom did not "involve himself".

     

    XOGh4xM.png

     

    Notice, this isn't a link that he had to click. This isn't just something sent to the whole channel, that he happened to not like. This was a targeted message, to Tom, with what I can easily consider a NSFW image, that has been photoshopped to have the targeted person's head on it. "You tell me here, on recorded text, that that's alright for someone, anyone, to do."

  2. Andrew was not warned by Tompreuss that he was acting out of line at the time in question. Regardless of knowing what he was doing or not, the issue here is not Andrew's conduct (wrong as it was), which could have been ceased simply with a warning, but the rash action taken by Tompreuss. I've been led to believe that there is a history between the two, which should not hold a bearing on the situation, but based on the presented facts I'm under the impression did in fact come into play.

     

    You, Dray/Den, have noted that Andrew's been warned in the past for his actions, there's no denying that fact. However, I'm fairly certain that Tompreuss did not have the knowledge that another offense would subsequently lead to a ban, as his previous warning would have been his last. Based on that grounded assumption, (as every moderator should) Tompreuss should have warned Andrew that he was crossing a line, especially since he's claiming that he was being harassed. Being spoken to by fellow players verbally, by our own standards in practice, does NOT hold the same weight as a moderator warning a player to cease an activity violating rules/code of conduct, and should NEVER replace a staff member's actions to be taken. No warning was given at the time of the incident, nor in the time leading up to Andrew's ban, by Tom or any other staff member potentially involved. Tompreuss never once asked to be left out of the discussion at hand and never spoke to Andrew at the time in question.Tompreuss's jump to labeling the situation as harassment is simply that, a jump (of the proverbial gun), and has in turn cost Andrew his Mumble privileges.

    I was personally in contact with Tom throughout the whole ordeal. He completely avoided handling the situation himself, to avoid claim of bias and abuse (which did not seem to work at all). I issued the warning in his place, warned Andrew that he was "crossing a line". You said:

     

    Being spoken to by fellow players verbally, by our own standards in practice, does NOT hold the same weight as a moderator warning a player to cease an activity violating rules/code of conduct, and should NEVER replace a staff member's actions to be taken. No warning was given at the time of the incident, nor in the time leading up to Andrew's ban, by Tom or any other staff member potentially involved.

    I stepped in, I was involved. I issued the warning as a staff member, to him and others involved. So, yes. A warning was issued "in the time leading up to Andrew's ban". Andrew knew what he was doing was wrong, given that we discussed the warning in mumble, yet continued on his action.

     

    You claim:

     

    Tom's own history of imposing his own set of parameters on the Mumble rules/code of conduct further supports that he is prone to make judgements not in keeping with Nerd standards.

    From our own set of rules (I'll bold the ones I've personally witnessed Andrew violating):

     

    • No “spamming” in the mumble with loud or generally annoying noises
    • For Mumble you will be asked to put on push to talk, if a player fails to do so they may be moved to the channel “Turn On Push to Talk”. If a player repeatedly joins a channel and causes problems he or she may be kicked or banned.
    • No sexism, racism, homophobia or any type of hate speech, especially targeted at specific users (harassment).
    • Excessive trolling in general will not be tolerated and may result in a ban from the forum, mumble, and/or the nerd.nu servers. This includes trolling with your nickname.
    • No posting of other players' personal information without their explicit permission in any server-associated communication channel (including but not limited to names, photographs, addresses and social networking profiles).
    • Please do not discuss bans in irc or mumble if it has the potential of being disruptive. Persisting in doing so can result in kicks/bans from irc or mumble. Bans can be discussed and resolved on the forums (nerd.nu/appeal).
    • Please mark all NSFW material linked as such, and be aware of who is in the channel. Do not send NSFW material to minors or people who are not interested in seeing it.
  3. This is what's wrong with you people, CLEARLY this post is a joke, yet half of you are commenting about failing to see the practicality of it, IT'S FUNNY AND STUPID.

     

    Just go along with it. It only makes you look silly if you take it seriously.

    But this is where we post about the video entertainment of which we all partake. There is no room for games here!

    • Upvote 2
  4. There has been some questions about getting the steam group up and running again. Looking at it, it looks like something we could do. Here is a picture of the control panel you can use to set up each groups perms: http://imgur.com/MkYEu3d. This is the ideal set up of groups that I'd like to use (not our current set up). Mods would be mods on our staff, and Officers would be admins. No one is required to be set up on perms here, but can if they'd like.

     

    I'd like to also remove power from those who are no longer on staff. I'd like everyone's thoughts on this one.

     

    The event perm was left as officer only, because it wouldn't be the one we want to use. Ideally, we'd just use announcements, because it will pop up a message on their comp, similar to having a friend join a game. It goes away without any interaction, unlike the event that requires you to click OK to dismiss it. I'd suggest using the forum on steam to set up games, and anyone is welcome to grab any online mod to announce their game when it is starting. That will allow people to see that it is happening and allow people to join. Thoughts?

    • Upvote 2
  5. Alright, the time has come to get the voting started. This will be set up so you can vote for more than one submission. Try to narrow it to your top 3-5, so that all entries do not end up tied. In case of a tie, we will randomly choose one of the tied images to be used. We hope to do more ads in the future, and plan to use some of the other submissions then. A collected gallery of all the submissions (with what number they are) can be found here: http://imgur.com/a/ozCm3

    • Upvote 3
  6. I've been under the mindset that if you feel you will regret something, don't say it. The inability to remove threads by users, in my opinion, forces people to think before they post, or be forced to live with it. Admins can remove things if they violate or rules, but many cases we leave threads to be referenced back to if a similar topic arises. What type of threads do you feel should be able to be deleted?

  7.  

    I would like to state that I was not attempting to "pit staff against each other" the plan in question was to find mods who shared my belief that recent moderating has generally declined in quality. I felt this appeal was an example of this because the usual banning protocal wasn't followed.

    As we've been saying, it was followed. You were warned multiple times. We are not required to warn you once a day. When we say don't do something, that doesn't mean don't do it for the rest of the day. It means never. As I asked you in a PM, I don't understand why you would think it would be ok to send pictures to someone who had already warned you not to do that (and he even gave you a note for, which I feel was the start of all of this).

     

    To answer something else you brought up earlier:

     

    I'm not sure if this instance would count as harassment as tompreuss didn't communicate with me in the time from the picture being sent to him, to where I was banned that he wanted me to stop.

    Per our Expectations for Staff page:

     

    Also, keep in mind that you may not always be the best person to moderate a situation. It is best to avoid moderating anything that directly involves you.

     

     

    In the logs, I saw you discussing this topic with some other people:

     

    Additionally another player brought up an issue with moderation including how mostly new moderators tend to insufficently handle players who express homophobia and racism.

    The person you were speaking with was wrong, we do not ALWAYS go straight to a ban for these situations. Many people do, but it is not required. We teach the new mods basic guidelines, but since each situation is different, they are welcome to be more lenient to players if they wish. We are not in the business of trying to ban everyone we can, we do our best to fix behavior without bans if possible (thus the multiple warnings sent to you, and the time I took in mumble to discuss it with you). If you have more questions regarding any of this, let us know. Though regarding your request for a length adjustment, that will be for Draykhar, since he was the one to issue it.

  8. I am against having a trial period. I think the "let's just start it" attitude doesn't work well long term for things like this. It's unlikely that those opposed would care enough to mount a meaningful protest. I'd only be ok with having a trial period if the start and end dates are set in advance, and if a poll is set up immediately afterwards to gauge how the community feels post-trial.

    That is exactly how we did it in the example I gave.

    • Upvote 2
  9. Honestly, the "entities" vs "blocks" argument sounds pretty weak. Going by your reasoning to keep it the way it is we should also be able to loot someone's garden and not replant. Food is food and as you said "S is supposed to be about fighting for what you want, not having it protected by the rules".

    Personally, I think you should leave 2, not because of a rule, but because you want people to accel at the game so you have more people to PVP with.

    The plants in the garden are blocks, not entities. So, by our reasoning, you should NOT be able to take it without replacing the blocks (plants).

  10. The issue with having 5 or lower seconds is how quickly the fights seem. Whenever I fight, the match feels like 1 minute but it ends up being 3. My point is, time flies way to fast to see the difference of pearling every 3 seconds. Just imagining in my head, I can say that 3 seconds is the time it takes for a pearl to land if you pearl far away. There really is no point in setting it to 3 seconds, as the issue that caused this discussion is how people run away too easily. 5 seconds may be the best option, but to really prevent players from pearling to run away, I chose 5+ seconds.

    I'm at work so can't reddit look into the plug in presented, but dies the time start when you throw it, or when it lands? That would change things so you couldn't their another as soon as you land (even if the pearl was in the air for a few seconds)

×
×
  • Create New...