Author Topic: Admin meeting February 28th  (Read 16291 times)

alexandred3

  • Farewell SS Anne
  • **
  • Posts: 315
  • Friendliness: 9
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #15 on: March 01, 2013, 03:07:54 pm »
Backpack would still come online, he just ensured that I wasn't online when he did. And its clear as fuck that Stng was telling him to avoid me.
Admins would've decided on a deadline and Backpack would've been demoted I don't see why Stng is concerned with all of this.

Ad...

oddy

  • Professor
  • Raiding Silph Co.
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Friendliness: 32
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #16 on: March 01, 2013, 03:19:50 pm »
Admins would've decided on a deadline and Backpack would've been demoted I don't see why Stng is concerned with all of this.
stng was in control of everything tell backpack when and when not to log in collecting payments setting prices, and with stng being a player who's been testing his limits of what he can get away with for as long as he has been on the server he doesn't get leniency. Has he been banned? No, just stripped of rank so I don't see why you are so upset about punishment given to him given his circumstances
Where's the fire? What's the hurry about? You better cool it off before you burn it out.

Stnglkabee

  • Fighting Brock
  • *
  • Posts: 92
  • Friendliness: -6
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #17 on: March 01, 2013, 04:01:32 pm »
stng was in control of everything tell backpack when and when not to log in collecting payments setting prices, and with stng being a player who's been testing his limits of what he can get away with for as long as he has been on the server he doesn't get leniency. Has he been banned? No, just stripped of rank so I don't see why you are so upset about punishment given to him given his circumstances


You cant prove i did or didnt tell him to get on. Plus i got double punished because i got punished for the other stuff and then this was cause of that plus this.
Mr. Incredible

alexandred3

  • Farewell SS Anne
  • **
  • Posts: 315
  • Friendliness: 9
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #18 on: March 01, 2013, 04:04:40 pm »
stng was in control of everything tell backpack when and when not to log in collecting payments setting prices, and with stng being a player who's been testing his limits of what he can get away with for as long as he has been on the server he doesn't get leniency. Has he been banned? No, just stripped of rank so I don't see why you are so upset about punishment given to him given his circumstances
Did he actually break any rule with this tho? I don't think so. So why did he get punished?

1cec0ld

  • Frozen Hearted Admin
  • Professor
  • Fighting Blaine
  • *****
  • Posts: 3084
  • Friendliness: 94
  • Who am I to judge others?
  • Pokemon Team: Typhlosion, Espeon, Aerodactyl, Glalie, Jolteon, Mew the HM Slave
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #19 on: March 01, 2013, 04:27:19 pm »
1. This isn't a democracy, its a Republic. Led by a small group of people who make decisions as equals.

2. It wasn't abuse, we all agreed on it after logically coming to that conclusion based on given information.

3. Stng was called to be judged due to his 'extortion' but the judgement was passed due to the sum of all his acts, whether they broke rules or not. They were without doubt a negative influence on this server, and I personally think he's lucky he's not banned. The champion shouldn't be the record holder for asshole.

And yet 2 of our champions have now held that title... Stng, and ZangetsuMC. Zangetsu was banned.


Also, admin meting recordings have been made smaller, and are in upload at this moment of posting. Omastar's recordings have also been made available at the website I'm saving them, http://www.pokemonserver.net/adminmeetings
« Last Edit: March 01, 2013, 04:29:43 pm by 1cec0ld »

alexandred3

  • Farewell SS Anne
  • **
  • Posts: 315
  • Friendliness: 9
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #20 on: March 01, 2013, 04:45:37 pm »
1. This isn't a democracy, its a Republic. Led by a small group of people who make decisions as equals.

2. It wasn't abuse, we all agreed on it after logically coming to that conclusion based on given information.

3. Stng was called to be judged due to his 'extortion' but the judgement was passed due to the sum of all his acts, whether they broke rules or not. They were without doubt a negative influence on this server, and I personally think he's lucky he's not banned. The champion shouldn't be the record holder for asshole.

 


1. That picture about fuck democracy was more a satire about this servers being a dictature suppressing chosen members. You'll probably want examples for this so let me hook you up. A few months ago, gym leaders charged moneys for letting people nerf their impossible courses. You guys had an admin meeting about this and prohibited gym leaders from making money with their gym. Gym Leaders 'exploit[ed] the server mechanics' and nothing happens to them. Stng and Backpack 'exploit server mechanics'. They get their title removed. 'All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.' - Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yet Stng gets punished differently than other people did, simply because he's Stng. Know what this reminds me of? Yeah, a dictature.

2. I'm still 99.9999% sure that Stng and Backpack did not break a single rule charging money for Elite Fights.

3. So champions have to pass 'I'm totally not an asshole tests' nowadays?

Tactic

  • Ninja
  • Professor Assistant
  • Underground Passage-Vertical
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
  • Friendliness: 14
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #21 on: March 01, 2013, 05:04:40 pm »
When 1ce brought up Stng in the mod thread, I'm pretty sure we let him off on his last chance after Prod had a talk with him. So he wasn't punished for that at all. Now maybe this didn't break any rules but it wasnt a good move and it doesn't require a breaking of a rule to trigger a vote of the Admins on someone's previous offenses and decide what must done, which in this case, is what the Admins did.

oddy

  • Professor
  • Raiding Silph Co.
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Friendliness: 32
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #22 on: March 01, 2013, 05:11:33 pm »
I'm not sure when you became someone who deserved all these answers for something that, frankly, is none of your fucking business, but yes stng is judged differently due to his personal history just as anyone's personal history can be brought up into consideration whenever dealing with an issue, that's how shits handled, if you recall the nether incident way back different people had different punishments due to their own personal history, just am example to show this isn't new. Further more you don't like it than you can fucking leave I really don't give a single fuck about your opinion because to me it's clear you are doing 1 of 2 things right now, either being a stng fan boy, or just trying to stir up controversy about the administration and I expect more from an ex mod, so ill end this nicely with a fuck you I don't care what you think have a nice day, you don't deserve as much explanation as you received bbe grateful and drop the subject before I get annoyed 
Where's the fire? What's the hurry about? You better cool it off before you burn it out.

alexandred3

  • Farewell SS Anne
  • **
  • Posts: 315
  • Friendliness: 9
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #23 on: March 01, 2013, 05:13:01 pm »
He wasn't punished for that at all. Now maybe this didn't break any rules but it wasnt a good move and it doesn't require a breaking of a rule to trigger a vote of the Admins on someone's previous offenses and decide what must done, which in this case, is what the Admins did.
First of all Stng has been punished for most of his actions. Tempbans, not being able to use lava buckets, not being able to go to Pewter and some mutes.
Secondly every post I've seen in the Mod Thread, where there was a vote whether to ban someone or not, have been posted for that person breaking a rule (mostly rule 1). Yet, as you've stated yourself, Stng and Backpack most likely didn't break a rule. This is like a thief finding 50$ on the street and going to jail for it, only because he has stolen something before.

1cec0ld

  • Frozen Hearted Admin
  • Professor
  • Fighting Blaine
  • *****
  • Posts: 3084
  • Friendliness: 94
  • Who am I to judge others?
  • Pokemon Team: Typhlosion, Espeon, Aerodactyl, Glalie, Jolteon, Mew the HM Slave
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #24 on: March 01, 2013, 05:13:43 pm »
 


1. That picture about fuck democracy was more a satire about this servers being a dictature suppressing chosen members. You'll probably want examples for this so let me hook you up. A few months ago, gym leaders charged moneys for letting people nerf their impossible courses. You guys had an admin meeting about this and prohibited gym leaders from making money with their gym. Gym Leaders 'exploit[ed] the server mechanics' and nothing happens to them. Stng and Backpack 'exploit server mechanics'. They get their title removed. 'All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.' - Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yet Stng gets punished differently than other people did, simply because he's Stng. Know what this reminds me of? Yeah, a dictature.

2. I'm still 99.9999% sure that Stng and Backpack did not break a single rule charging money for Elite Fights.

3. So champions have to pass 'I'm totally not an asshole tests' nowadays?

1 Stng is punished by his record. The reason he was judged was because of his charging.

2 HE DID NOT BREAK A RULE BY CHARGING MONEY FFS HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THIS

3 Everyone does. Welcome to Naruto, Agent, ImJustBauss, and Rewas. All banned for what? Oh. Being assholes, and making the server look bad.

alexandred3

  • Farewell SS Anne
  • **
  • Posts: 315
  • Friendliness: 9
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #25 on: March 01, 2013, 05:31:40 pm »
1 Stng is punished by his record. The reason he was judged was because of his charging.

2 HE DID NOT BREAK A RULE BY CHARGING MONEY FFS HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THIS

3 Everyone does. Welcome to Naruto, Agent, ImJustBauss, and Rewas. All banned for what? Oh. Being assholes, and making the server look bad.
If stng was punished by his record, why was Backpack punished again?
As for Naruto, Agent, ImJustBauss and Rewas, I recall them being banned for breaking rule 1 numerous times.
Oddy, first of all thanks for breaking rule 1 on me (gotta give people a good example, eh?). I am doing this because I feel that members of this server have been poorly treated and I want to know why.

Paradox

  • Professor
  • Fighting Giovanni
  • *****
  • Posts: 966
  • Friendliness: 39
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #26 on: March 01, 2013, 05:50:26 pm »
Alex, let me try to logically lead you through this.


Before you try to be self-righteous by saying that the admin team should be looking out for the interests of the people, you're wrong. I am not looking for what is fair for each individual, I am looking for what is best for the server. If I wanted to please the masses, I'd give them all OP. But by doing that, I'm neglecting the good of the server. Our interests are with making the overall best game play experience, not pleasing each individual. Good game play promotes people being happy. Being happy does not necessarily make good game play.


Now, let me examine your concerns. You say this rule is "Overpowered" and seems unfair. And it could be. If we ever used it. How often have we used that rule. Let me tell you, almost never. That's because we only use it as a safe-net. The admin team is not a power-hungry grouo of people. If we wanted to screw you all over, we'd close the server and split the paypal money between us and call it a day. You TRUST us with your donations and you TRUST us with the power of OP to make the server a good experience. That is why rule 8 exists. The populus trusts us enough to not look our for our own personal interests but rather the interests of the server. Rule 8 exists so if someone is making bad-game play but is not breaking a rule, we can properly exercise some sort of punishment.


Stng and Backpack were promoting back game play  Stng and backpack worked together to scam people. Backpack would log on for a minute or two to keep his title without timing out but not staying on long enough to be challenged. He worked with Stng to make it so Stng would scam people of money to "summon" Backpack so they could accumulate innocent people's money. This is not how the game-play should be. That is why it's bad-game play. If they did not know that scamming people is bad, then that is their malfunction, not ours. That is why we are using Rule 8. Are they breaking a rule? No. Are they promoting bad game play? Yes.


You also brought up the old-gymleader thing. I agree, that could of been more properly addressed. But at that time our team was smaller and it was harder to regulate over 16 gym leaders and make a full-blown investigation. People were punished, but it's possible some may not of been. We can't ever be 100% of anything but we can try our hardest. But just because we could not properly investigate previous issues does not mean we should allow obvious abuse of mechanics to fly by. What stng and backpack did was not okay.


I hope I addressed all of your questions and concerns.

alexandred3

  • Farewell SS Anne
  • **
  • Posts: 315
  • Friendliness: 9
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #27 on: March 01, 2013, 05:58:21 pm »
Alex, let me try to logically lead you through this.


Before you try to be self-righteous by saying that the admin team should be looking out for the interests of the people, you're wrong. I am not looking for what is fair for each individual, I am looking for what is best for the server. If I wanted to please the masses, I'd give them all OP. But by doing that, I'm neglecting the good of the server. Our interests are with making the overall best game play experience, not pleasing each individual. Good game play promotes people being happy. Being happy does not necessarily make good game play.


Now, let me examine your concerns. You say this rule is "Overpowered" and seems unfair. And it could be. If we ever used it. How often have we used that rule. Let me tell you, almost never. That's because we only use it as a safe-net. The admin team is not a power-hungry grouo of people. If we wanted to screw you all over, we'd close the server and split the paypal money between us and call it a day. You TRUST us with your donations and you TRUST us with the power of OP to make the server a good experience. That is why rule 8 exists. The populus trusts us enough to not look our for our own personal interests but rather the interests of the server. Rule 8 exists so if someone is making bad-game play but is not breaking a rule, we can properly exercise some sort of punishment.


Stng and Backpack were promoting back game play  Stng and backpack worked together to scam people. Backpack would log on for a minute or two to keep his title without timing out but not staying on long enough to be challenged. He worked with Stng to make it so Stng would scam people of money to "summon" Backpack so they could accumulate innocent people's money. This is not how the game-play should be. That is why it's bad-game play. If they did not know that scamming people is bad, then that is their malfunction, not ours. That is why we are using Rule 8. Are they breaking a rule? No. Are they promoting bad game play? Yes.


You also brought up the old-gymleader thing. I agree, that could of been more properly addressed. But at that time our team was smaller and it was harder to regulate over 16 gym leaders and make a full-blown investigation. People were punished, but it's possible some may not of been. We can't ever be 100% of anything but we can try our hardest. But just because we could not properly investigate previous issues does not mean we should allow obvious abuse of mechanics to fly by. What stng and backpack did was not okay.


I hope I addressed all of your questions and concerns.
Thank you for actually giving me a clear answer to my questions and not just label me as a Stng fanboy because I thought he was unfairly punished.

Paradox

  • Professor
  • Fighting Giovanni
  • *****
  • Posts: 966
  • Friendliness: 39
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #28 on: March 01, 2013, 06:00:51 pm »
Thank you for actually giving me a clear answer to my questions and not just label me as a Stng fanboy because I thought he was unfairly punished.


No problem, everyone is entitled to knowing the reasons for admin actions. I'm not here to judge you; we all have opinions. I'll happily discuss anything with you and if you present a good enough argument, I would have no problem reversing the actions we did. But I stand strong on my opinion as of now.

oddy

  • Professor
  • Raiding Silph Co.
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Friendliness: 32
  • Registered User
Re: Admin meeting February 28th
« Reply #29 on: March 01, 2013, 06:01:26 pm »
Thank you for actually giving me a clear answer to my questions and not just label me as a Stng fanboy because I thought he was unfairly punished.
thats cute
Where's the fire? What's the hurry about? You better cool it off before you burn it out.