Adding fuel to a flamewar.

[JMR]

Name of Administrators: Aviator, Fultz

Time/Date: Today, around 2:33 PM

Steam ID: ([FL] Aviator STEAM_0:1:48558317) (Fultz: unavailable, couldn't find it on steamid)

Name of Administrators: Aviator, Fultz

Evidence:
This evidence has not been twisted in any way. This is not an opinion but fact. A thread was closed due to a so-called "flamewar" occurring.

A purpose of a goodbye thread is to say your goodbyes and leave it at that

I feel two admins did not follow Enzyme's instructions. The thread was closed due to the "flamewar" continuing, yet two admins had taken part in "it."

Thread: http://www.fearlessrp.net/showthread.php?tid=47947&pid=371725

One rule for one? One rule for another? Take a look at the replies made by Aviator and Fultz.

[Image: r5t8oHG.jpg]
[Image: f3bJhWh.jpg]
[Image: T7rSIri.jpg]

They said "goodbye." But the comments made, just fueled the so called "flamewar" further.

As far as I know, Admins should work as a team, professionally. I do not wish for Aviator or Fultz to be demoted, but a warning given to them like it was to other users in the thread.

Regards,
-JMR

---

What a bullshit, everyone has the right to express their opinions, and if you can't handle that please leave.

Yes I posted in the thread too so therefore I am also "involved".

Please do not use that tone in the courthouse.

Let me just clarify.

- I can handle people's opinions, thank you very much. (I am handling yours right now.)
- This thread was made because specific users were given a warning for flaming and Eisenhorn's thread was closed because of this so-called "flamewar". People tend to take influence from admins, so it is important that they are all on the same page.
- I like Aviator and Fultz, both great admins, I just don't want them to go off on the wrong track by making comments that add fuel to a "flamewar".

[Fultz]

I really do not understand how this is abuse. No one was issued a warning, no one was banned, and all that happened was the thread was closed because a couple of you went off the topic of the thread talking about what Zaeed said instead of saying goodbye.

[JMR]

I really do not understand how this is abuse. No one was issued a warning, no one was banned,

That is not what Enzyme told me.

This thread was bound to get out of hand and I issued two warnings where I requested people to keep flaming and conspiracies away and that people could take that to PM instead.

If members are going to be warned in a thread to stop flaming, but other admins are making comments that are unrelated to "goodbye", I'd say this is abuse. One rule for admins, another for members.


I feel all admins should be on the same page. It's no good one admin posting warnings, whilst others make comments. (Although it may be funny to make one, it isn't going to help the thread.)

EDIT:

and all that happened was the thread was closed because a couple of you went off the topic of the thread talking about what Zaeed said instead of saying goodbye.

Also, fultz, making a joke about what Zaeed said is indeed, going off-topic. As seen in my evidence.

[Rain]

As I recall its not against the rules to "fuel" a flamewar as you seem to put it. In the "read before posting" thread it says:

"Please don't start a flame war in goodbye threads, if people decide to leave the community, it's their good right to leave."

Seems more like a request than a rule.

[Fultz]

I just looked through it and there was not one. Unless I missed them or they were not issued yet.

[Enzyme]

I really do not understand how this is abuse. No one was issued a warning, no one was banned, and all that happened was the thread was closed because a couple of you went off the topic of the thread talking about what Zaeed said instead of saying goodbye.

That is not what Enzyme told me.

This thread was bound to get out of hand and I issued two warnings where I requested people to keep flaming and conspiracies away and that people could take that to PM instead.

If members are going to be warned in a thread to stop flaming, but other admins are making comments that are unrelated to "goodbye", I'd say this is abuse. One rule for admins, another for members.


I feel all admins should be on the same page. It's no good one admin posting warnings, whilst others make comments. (Although it may be funny to make one, it isn't going to help the thread.)

By warnings, I didn't mean a forum-warning, but warnings in form of posts:

I will remind people that this was posted in the goodbye-section and will be treated as a goodbye-thread.

Keep flaming and bashing away. If you guys want to argue and spread conspiracies then please take it to PM.


Goodbye, Zaeed.

Again, I will ask for people not to have a flame war on this thread. Take it elsewhere. Please say your goodbyes and leave it at that.

[Jan]

Also who are you to tell me to change my tone, JMR?

[JMR]

-snip-

That is what I was referring to also.

If members are going to be warned in a thread to stop flaming, but other admins are making comments that are unrelated to "goodbye", I'd say this is abuse. One rule for admins, another for members.


I feel all admins should be on the same page. It's no good one admin posting warnings, whilst others make comments. (Although it may be funny to make one, it isn't going to help the thread.)

---

Also who are you to tell me to change my tone, JMR?

A member of this community and I should be given just as much respect as any admin, just as I respect you.

---

As I recall its not against the rules to "fuel" a flamewar as you seem to put it. In the "read before posting" thread it says:

"Please don't start a flame war in goodbye threads, if people decide to leave the community, it's their good right to leave."

Seems more like a request than a rule.

Not every rule is noted down inside a thread, Rain.

Admins should set an example for the users. Especially on a sensitive topic like the one I linked to.

[Enzyme]

How is this case about power-abuse?

If one are to make an admin abuse case, then an admin have had to abused his powers in one way or another, yes?

[JMR]

How is this case about power-abuse?

If one are to make an admin abuse case, then an admin have had to abused his powers in one way or another, yes?

I was under the impression that abuse isn't always ingame. By being an administrator, you understand that users will look at your posts for influence and direction.

This abuse case: Posting off-topic "flamewar" content, as an admin, in a thread to which then became closed for a "flamewar."