+- Fearless Forums (https://fearlessrp.net)
+-- Forum: General Discussion (https://fearlessrp.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Forum: Discussions (https://fearlessrp.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+---- Forum: Archive (https://fearlessrp.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=481)
+---- Thread: New Rule? (/showthread.php?tid=65894)
New Rule? - DVN - 11-05-2015
I would like to discuss this:
[Image: KJsiNfD.png]
Mike has 3 bans, the two before the current one are what I would deem as 'minor'. The current ban he has now was a joke, taken in the wrong context, but was obviously bannable for what he did. What concerns me is how it seems he's been targeted for a permanent ban if he breaks another rule.
Is this a new rule now? Staff members can just decide when someone gets a permanent ban after one large punishment? I thought it was after 11 bans?
:at:
RE: New Rule? - FEaRIeZz - 11-05-2015
I banned a player, which has 14 bans and 19 seperate blacklists in 188 hours, guy should have been permed like 3 bans ago.
RE: New Rule? - Prosto - 11-05-2015
Dear Mr.DVN would you please be so kind, and not discuss such topics. Everything that involves blacklists/bans/abuses shall not be discussed in public. I'd recommend you to throw a Pee Em at Suarez and ask him about the ban.
RE: New Rule? - DVN - 11-05-2015
(11-05-2015, 10:27 AM)Borovichok Wrote: Dear Mr.DVN would you please be so kind, and not discuss such topics. Everything that involves blacklists/bans/abuses shall not be discussed in public. I'd recommend you to throw a Pee Em at Suarez and ask him about the ban.
This is nothing about the ban itself, I even said this is technically a bannable offence. What I'm saying is, why is it that he chooses when a player is on their last chance or not?
RE: New Rule? - Suarez - 11-05-2015
A democratic team of 9+ staff members decided this. It was not a decision made by myself, but one myself and other members agreed to.
RE: New Rule? - Holdem - 11-05-2015
Seeing as how the server is owned by a private individual who has sole rights to decide who comes in and who goes out yes, they can decide when, what and how they punish an individual. In fact, Soul could just ban me from the server and forums right now without any reason and I couldn't do anything. What am I going to do, call the internet police? x)
RE: New Rule? - DVN - 11-05-2015
(11-05-2015, 11:04 AM)Suarez Wrote: A democratic team of 9+ staff members decided this. It was not a decision made by myself, but one myself and other members agreed to.
On what grounds did you all agree on this? He has not been constantly breaking rules or proven to be a threat, because if that was a threat no doubt he would have attacked you by now? Mike is no threat to the server, nor is he a threat to you. The 9+ staff members that decided to rule this must not be aware of what happened? It was a joke, taken in the wrong context/perspective and then he was punished. He's not made threats to the community, and didn't intentionally threaten you as he jokes about DDoS even when we speak on a friend to friend bases, for example 'I'll DDoS your nan' and we laugh about it.
Can I ask which staff members agreed/approved this final punishment rule on Mike?
(11-05-2015, 12:51 PM)Holdem Wrote: Seeing as how the server is owned by a private individual who has sole rights to decide who comes in and who goes out yes, they can decide when, what and how they punish an individual. In fact, Soul could just ban me from the server and forums right now without any reason and I couldn't do anything. What am I going to do, call the internet police? x)
So where are you getting this information from? Suarez just explained it was a decision of 9+ staff members, not Soul himself. Just because he can do what he wants doesn't mean others can decide what happens to community members willy nilly. It needs to be done professionally and through the chain of command, which Suarez has obviously done.
RE: New Rule? - Prosto - 11-05-2015
(11-05-2015, 12:51 PM)Holdem Wrote: Seeing as how the server is owned by a private individual who has sole rights to decide who comes in and who goes out yes, they can decide when, what and how they punish an individual. In fact, Soul could just ban me from the server and forums right now without any reason and I couldn't do anything. What am I going to do, call the internet police? x)
Technically, you are right, but through all these years FL grown into something bigger than just a server where Owner can just mess around and do what ever he want. Same with admins.
Even this story with LemonLight(name changed) where group of admins wanted Soul to resign. Would you ever ser something like that on any other gmod server?
RE: New Rule? - Reebs - 11-05-2015
Ok: so I've always heard that threatening to DDoS anyone, and I mean anyone is a major offense in not just our community, but many others as well. Said Democratic Staff Team mentioned by Suarez had decided that they should have that punishment, so it was issued to them. A major offense such as that is not taken lightly anywhere, especially towards a Staff Member
RE: New Rule? - DVN - 11-05-2015
(11-05-2015, 03:15 PM)Reebs Wrote: Ok: so I've always heard that threatening to DDoS anyone, and I mean anyone is a major offense in not just our community, but many others as well. Said Democratic Staff Team mentioned by Suarez had decided that they should have that punishment, so it was issued to them. A major offense such as that is not taken lightly anywhere, especially towards a Staff Member
Is nobody reading my post?
The thing is, if this was such a huge threat and was going to drastically effect the communities safety he'd be perm banned, just like GreeD^ used to be permed for attacking community members/staff. The ban can be justified, what I'm saying is the 'Last chance' bullshit cannot be justified in my opinion, so I wanted everyone to discuss it.
THIS POST IS NOT ABOUT THE BAN, IT'S ABOUT THE LAST CHANCE
just in case anyone else finds it hard to understand