Character
Rules
Events
Map
RP Points
Proplimits
Statistics
Steam Group
Members
Hall of Fame
Team
Bans
Blacklists
Warnings
Changelog
Content
11-05-2015, 09:50 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-01-2022, 01:04 AM by Fearless Community.
Edit Reason: Checked Encoding
)
Alright let me sum it up for everyone who is saying "He meant it as a joke".
So, most of the Fearless Moderation was involved in this case, Mike made the statement and we all discussed for some time. We talked about the ToS and Mike himself, we came to the conclusion that it was likely to be a joke due to Mike's profession and personality. So as Suarez said, we did a diplomatic vote with a couple of options, and obviously staff members had an option to abstain. Beforehand we talked to Turtle and SoulRipper, we had could've went to a permanent suspension. Instead we gave Mike a choice, he could be banned for a week and be on his last chance, or he could be banned permanently. The last chance statement was given due to the nature of the rule violation as it was against Fearless Terms of Service.
However my question is DVN, why do you believe it necessary to bring such matters up, isn't it staff members or the people directly involved who should worry about bans am I not correct? I'm sure Mike doesn't want too much attention brought to it, I'm sure he is more than capable than dealing with it himself. I am confused on how you think you make a difference in such matters. Put it this way, we could've permanently banned him, this was the next best thing.
So, most of the Fearless Moderation was involved in this case, Mike made the statement and we all discussed for some time. We talked about the ToS and Mike himself, we came to the conclusion that it was likely to be a joke due to Mike's profession and personality. So as Suarez said, we did a diplomatic vote with a couple of options, and obviously staff members had an option to abstain. Beforehand we talked to Turtle and SoulRipper, we had could've went to a permanent suspension. Instead we gave Mike a choice, he could be banned for a week and be on his last chance, or he could be banned permanently. The last chance statement was given due to the nature of the rule violation as it was against Fearless Terms of Service.
However my question is DVN, why do you believe it necessary to bring such matters up, isn't it staff members or the people directly involved who should worry about bans am I not correct? I'm sure Mike doesn't want too much attention brought to it, I'm sure he is more than capable than dealing with it himself. I am confused on how you think you make a difference in such matters. Put it this way, we could've permanently banned him, this was the next best thing.
What are you doing on the roof? Oh wait that's an air conditioning unit. - Suarez 2k15