Dear Lotc

[Song Druid 1486]

Quite frankly, I have said my piece, and it is done. Thank you, have a good Sunday.

With all due respect, if you cannot respond to valid points being made against you, then you do not have the capacity nor the ability of somebody who has power over others.  If you believe yourself right you can at least address the points with your rebuttal.  This response is one indicative of the self-entitled, something I know all too well upper staff loathes.

[Jachnun 566]

I don't think effective decisionmaking is based on how many people agree with you.

 

 

Oren has been known to house a lot of trolls and arses but if you banned him for the attitude you shouldn't have banned him for the allegations.

 

 

Being a former FM I understand the principal behind the ban.  Setting an example to those who don't take things seriously.  But at the same time you should not have banned him for what he was being reported for.  Simply warned him to take this stuff seriously in the future.

 

 

If he didn't do it, you shouldn't have banned him for it.  I can't definitively say for certain what he did or didn't do.  But this thread, right here, should be a medium for you to give real answers.  The staff isn't about banning people on a whim.  Charoodler makes very solid points which you do not address but glide over.

 

 

If he was not there, why was he banned for the accusation?

 

 

 

If it was because of his attitude why was it so severe and why weren't warnings given FIRST?

 

 

Thanks for reading.

I completely agree with you, and I would like to express my opinion on this matter in a constructive manner. Knox has only violated minor laws prior to this day (returning to spawn, etc.) Why would you ban him for such a thing, especially during this time? In my opinion bias is extremely evident, Chi. 

 

Not only have you degraded your own integrity as a GM, but you caused extreme madness and backlash from the whole server, ignore the ban reports on you, I am talking about the player reports on Dwarves, Orcs, Humans, and Alrasians. 

 

You have in no way contributed POSITIVELY to the community with your actions, you go gurl! 

[Schneebo 1593]

Here let me put it this way on this whole thing. You may call bias etc etc but I would have done the exact same thing. To be blatantly honest again, I'm the one who recommended the ban time. Not Chikaea. There was no bias involved at all. 

[Z3r05t4r 855]

I quote:

Your concern primarily regarded my first verdict, and not the second one. And quite frankly, i admit i don't like what Oren has become. But judging by the people agreeing with me, I'm thinking my decision was the right one.

Edit: it is GM misconduct to be strict on rulebreaking? Interesting.

This makes me furious. This sheer ignorance and openly admitting bias and hatred towards a part of the community. You chilaea DO NOT deserve to be GM. You are a disgrace with this kind of attitude.

[Song Druid 1486]

If not bias, evidently bad decisionmaking all around.  Bias seems most evident though, seeing as this appears to be an issue perpetrated by both sides and not just one side, nor any one player.

 

 

Now exactly why was Knox banned again?  If he didn't do it?

 

 

I personally don't care who wanted to ban him, bias can form in groups, that's not impossible and I've dealt with it in the past.  I want to know why he was banned and what evidence you have.   There seems to be something coming from Chik that he was banned for bad attitude which is simply foolish to do.  Verbal warnings for that kind of thing first, always.  Especially since he didn't do anything and most especially since you are involved with the side he is opposing.

 

 

The playerbase has EXTREME faults, indeed, but there are many faults being laid down here by GMs themselves and I do not like the smell of it.   Are you self-serving now?

[Bircalin 332]

Everyone repeating the same things in repetition isn't going to speed things up.
Please, everyone, stop posting the same thing worded in a different manner and just wait for the response.

Small note; I'm not an 'Orener' or an 'Orenite' nor am I on any other side, I'm moderating this from a neutral sense. Allow Chi to respond.

[Jachnun 566]

Frottimer, I see what you mean and it is a valid point, but why for a month? What message does that show off? It only caused backlash and chaos so far. As for Chi, I would like her to respond to the point that were previously made since they were valid. If you feel that took part in most of the descision making, you can as well. 

 

I would just like to say that I am utterly ashamed in this process of elimination made by the GM team at its current state, this was a completely corrupted ordeal, with an unjustified ban with an unreasonably long ban time considering the reasoning. 

[Song Druid 1486]

Everyone repeating the same things in repetition isn't going to speed things up.

Please, everyone, stop posting the same thing worded in a different manner and just wait for the response.

Small note; I'm not an 'Orener' or an 'Orenite' nor am I on any other side, I'm moderating this from a neutral sense. Allow Chi to respond.

Now that's not fair.  We've allowed response quite plentifully but they keep ignoring the points made prompting the repetitions.  I would urge Chik to respond, not try and push back the players with legit complaints that are being ignored.

[Chikachu 402]

If not bias, evidently bad decisionmaking all around. Bias seems most evident though, seeing as this appears to be an issue perpetrated by both sides and not just one side, nor any one player.

Now exactly why was Knox banned again? If he didn't do it?

I personally don't care who wanted to ban him, bias can form in groups, that's not impossible and I've dealt with it in the past. I want to know why he was banned and what evidence you have. There seems to be something coming from Chik that he was banned for bad attitude which is simply foolish to do. Verbal warnings for that kind of thing first, always. Especially since he didn't do anything and most especially since you are involved with the side he is opposing.

The playerbase has EXTREME faults, indeed, but there are many faults being laid down here by GMs themselves and I do not like the smell of it. Are you self-serving now?

I sincerely encourage you to read the op as i explain why. As to the other demands, i shall do my best to explain the situation further tomorrow. Continue to spew hate and then get a good night'ssleep.

[Crayfishchris 751]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-diB65scQU&feature=kp

 

This makes everything seem a whole lot nicer, y'know?

[Lago 2572]

However, then I received a message saying that someone had more information, so I reopened the report. Then another person sent me proof, and another. In total i ended up with five people and multiple occasions of various rulebreaking. Not just raid, but meta, powergaming, returning to death point, no-rp and excessive harassment and trolling.

Is all of this evidence from within the last two weeks? Evidence over two weeks old under the BR rules has been inadmissible since the Dusk Incident.

[HappyShackles 886]

This is a joke. Chikea I don't know you and I'm sure you're nice, and I have nothing personal against you. That being said, you have proven to me to be a failure at your current position by the very virtue that you are willing to make a post like this in order to get a group of people who are largely misinformed or biased themselves towards the situation.

Personal bias is fine. I, for example, personally, would like to see you banned for your mistreatment of your position. That being said, many disagree with that sentiment.

I hope you do not see any of your critics as your enemy. Attempt to take out advice to heart if you can, even if is presented abrasively, it has value.

Thanks.

[V0idsoldier 1139]

I sincerely encourage you to read the op as i explain why. As to the other demands, i shall do my best to explain the situation further tomorrow. Continue to spew hate and then get a good night'ssleep.

Uhgg. I hate when people say that lol. "Spew hate" "Haters!" It's so silly. I have literally nothing wrong with you aside from this one ignorant and stubborn situation you are putting yourself in. Just because people are disagreeing with you does not make it hate, and to see it like that is just childish. Plenty of these points are sincere and instead of responding to them you simply leave. Why would you even make this thread if you were just going to ignore the problem until tomorrow. 

[Song Druid 1486]

You realize people "saying" he did something five different times shouldn't be considered as hard evidence? FYI I am not spewing hate, I feel like I am spewing reason if anything.  I will attempt to make any communication with you on this matter purely factual, I have nothing against you and actually I don't even know you or Knox all that well.

 

If you have a hugely disliked nation you can probably come up with more than five people with bad things to say, that is why we base ban reports off of hard evidence, of which you have provided none, just reports of rule breaking which has never been sufficient on this server.

 

I understand the need to be stricter and stop the nonsense. I encourage it!  But in that same hand it is a delicate game because you also have to be harder on yourself.  You cannot be biased and you cannot simply handle matters that you are involved with ICly no matter how many GMs pat you on the back for it.

 

You believe your OP gives sufficient information as to why the ban was neccessary.  It gives no useful information whatsoever I am sorry to say.  And you going to bed when everyone else is still here wanting answers displays to me something of apathy for those who disagree with you. 

[Watyll 1104]

Is all of this evidence from within the last two weeks? Evidence over two weeks old under the BR rules has been inadmissible since the Dusk Incident.

 

This fact was conveniently ignored when Azel was banned by Oceas.