miwo
Veteran Member
Posts: 597
| Likes: 585
|
Post by miwo on Jul 18, 2020 22:45:56 GMT
operator has been used as the default member rank on the server. if you join the server and nobody ops you, its okay for them to be doxed? No. Stop being ridiculous lol. I never claimed that it would be ethically okay for one to be doxed under those circumstances, however what I was saying is that according to your own wording, yes, it would techincally not be against the conduct policy if you were to dox a permbanned member, considering they are no longer an op, nor are they a part of the community that they have now been excluded from. I am literally just citing your own policy to you and you keep saying that it doesn’t matter. Well it clearly matters, because you wouldn’t have several people in this thread saying that it indeed matters. Nathan is not a part of the community, because you cannot be a member of a community that you are literally excluded from, OXFORD DEFINITION: “A person, animal, or plant belonging to a particular group”. The rest of your post has been clearly poked through by Wild and Mibbzz, so I don’t see the reasoning in expanding upon it further. Amend the conduct policy and he wont - did you read the thread? No one should be doxing members of this community (which he was) regardless of the rules... It's common fucking decency. No one should have to be worried about being doxed by someone here because it's technically okay (which it's still not). Fucking ridiculous. You seem to have a habit of glossing over this entire thread. Countless times has it been stated that Nathaniel was no longer a member of the server because he was permbanned. Fucking ridiculous. I don’t care that it is fucking decency not to DOX some rando on an MC server – if you are going to act as though our conduct policy matters, then follow it instead of trying to stretch it to fit your narrative. I tell you this again, if you want this to not happen in the future, you need to make a suggestion for an amendment to the conduct policy – and no, the onus is not on me, because I am not the one trying to get a player permbanned for a rule that does not exist. You're overreaching in your power... It's really as simple as that. This had not occurred on any of our platforms, it therefore is not subject to our rules. I don't understand why that's so hard to grasp...? First of all I didn't do anything. Secondly, the rule states that any doxing is subject to our rules. Of course they're not going to publish their dox onto one of or platforms, don't be ridiculous. Wilee and Video did break the rules. Punishing people who break our rules is not an overreach of power. If you want this to change, suggest that the rules be changed. Do you personally want to keep Wilee banned, and if so, for how long? Except the individual in question is not a fucking member, how can you not understand that? Fucking riduculous. He was a member of the discord, and the executive admin considers him to have been one, so that is what I base my statement off of. If you disagree with the executive admin, the person who interprets policy, and wrote said policy, that is on you. There we go again with the far-reaching. I don't care if he was a member on the discord. The conduct policy LITERALLY said "OP, ADMIN OR OWNER". You are not an OP if you cannot join the server. Period. Saying you base your opinion mindlessly on what your superiors tell you to believe only tells me something about you, and not the other way around. At least I am going by a literal, plain-reading of the conduct policy, whereas you are going by a far-stretched-asshole-version of the conduct policy, that it is more than apparent that you know doesn’t hold. Void arguments by people in high places are just that: void. |
|
|
|
Post by zekurt on Jul 18, 2020 22:53:05 GMT
You seem to have a habit of glossing over this entire thread. Countless times has it been stated that Nathaniel was no longer a member of the server because he was permbanned. Fucking ridiculous. To be blunt, your opinion on nathans stance as a member is less than worthless to me. The executive admin, god forbid the fucking owner, are the ones who decide this. Do you personally want to keep Wilee banned, and if so, for how long? Until he's willing to own up to his actions like Video. I don't have to change that stance and you shouldn't even try to change it. There we go again with the far-reaching. I don't care if he was a member on the discord. The conduct policy LITERALLY said "OP, ADMIN OR OWNER". You are not an OP if you cannot join the server As has been stated a million times, both Wilee and Nathan were members of the discord server, and as such are held to the discords rules as well.  |
|
miwo
Veteran Member
Posts: 597
| Likes: 585
|
Post by miwo on Jul 18, 2020 23:00:47 GMT
You seem to have a habit of glossing over this entire thread. Countless times has it been stated that Nathaniel was no longer a member of the server because he was permbanned. Fucking ridiculous. To be blunt, your opinion on nathans stance as a member is less than worthless to me. The executive admin, god forbid the fucking owner, are the ones who decide this. Cool, then don’t participate in the discussion if you can’t argue for your cause. Easy as that. It’s funny how you were so quick before to point out corruption and useless Admins, however now you seem to have found a new philosophical stand point? How convenient. There we go again with the far-reaching. I don't care if he was a member on the discord. The conduct policy LITERALLY said "OP, ADMIN OR OWNER". You are not an OP if you cannot join the server As has been stated a million times, both Wilee and Nathan were members of the discord server, and as such are held to the discords rules as well. And as has been said countless times over in this thread – the Discord rules were contradictory to the server’s conduct policy. Now do you honestly believe that we in this instance should weigh the Discord rule set above the server’s? |
|
|
|
Post by zekurt on Jul 18, 2020 23:03:37 GMT
Cool, then don’t participate in the discussion if you can’t argue for your cause. Easy as that. It’s funny how you were so quick before to point out corruption and useless Admins, however now you seem to have found a new philosophical stand point? How convenient. I am against corruption and useless admins, however I do not see how this is a situation where either is occurring? You'll have to elaborate. Obviously you understand if I agree with the rules I don't consider enforcing them to be corruption. And as has been said countless times over in this thread – the Discord rules were contradictory to the server’s conduct policy. Now do you honestly believe that we in this instance should weigh the Discord rule set above the server’s? They are not contradictory, they are overlapping. As wilee was a member of the discord, and like a good boy should have read the rules, he should have realized the rules were very clear regarding his actions. Considering everything regarding the doxing went down on our discord side of the community, and not the servers, yes I think it overrules the servers conduct. |
|
miwo
Veteran Member
Posts: 597
| Likes: 585
|
Post by miwo on Jul 18, 2020 23:11:02 GMT
Cool, then don’t participate in the discussion if you can’t argue for your cause. Easy as that. It’s funny how you were so quick before to point out corruption and useless Admins, however now you seem to have found a new philosophical stand point? How convenient. I am against corruption and useless admins, however I do not see how this is a situation where either is occurring? You'll have to elaborate. Obviously you understand if I agree with the rules I don't consider enforcing them to be corruption. I think this is a clear-cut case of Admin abuse by bending the rules to an utmost degree to fit their agenda. You saying that you merely agree that the executives should be the sole arbiters of punishment, and not the conduct policy, further exemplifies this. And as has been said countless times over in this thread – the Discord rules were contradictory to the server’s conduct policy. Now do you honestly believe that we in this instance should weigh the Discord rule set above the server’s? They are not contradictory, they are overlapping. As wilee was a member of the discord, and like a good boy should have read the rules, he should have realized the rules were very clear regarding his actions. Considering everything regarding the doxing went down on our discord side of the community, and not the servers, yes I think it overrules the servers conduct. The doxing went down on a private Discord chat, not the Total Freedom Discord, so I don’t get why you’re pointing this out? So if I were to use MSN to convey the DOX that would somehow change the circumstances? It's no good excuse to say that they are overlapping: either they convey the same message or they are contradictory. You cannot have one rule in one place and not the same in the other in this context. |
|
|
|
Post by zekurt on Jul 18, 2020 23:20:25 GMT
I think this is a clear-cut case of Admin abuse by bending the rules to an utmost degree to fit their agenda. You saying that you merely agree that the executives should be the sole arbiters of punishment, and not the conduct policy, further exemplifies this. I do not see the rules being bended in the way you are imagining. You are free to argue if you think a rule is incorrect and shouldn't exist, but my stance has always been that enforcing a current rule is not abuse. In the past when I was banned for resigning, that was not abusive actions from mark, that was him enforcing a really bad rule. If you consider this to be a really bad rule, make a suggestion. Personally, I do not. If you dox a member of our community, get the fuck out. The doxing went down on a private Discord chat, not the Total Freedom Discord, so I don’t get why you’re pointing this out? So if I were to use MSN to convey the DOX that would somehow change the circumstances? It's no good excuse to say that they are overlapping: either they convey the same message or they are contradictory. You cannot have one rule in one place and not the same in the other in this context. It was a private discussion, but that is not an accepted clause in either of our doxing rules. I think if he actually read the discord rules he wouldn't have did any of this in the first place. If the rules are contradictory, which I still do not consider them to be, then just follow them both. It's not difficult to not dox anyone in this community. |
|
miwo
Veteran Member
Posts: 597
| Likes: 585
|
Post by miwo on Jul 18, 2020 23:24:17 GMT
I think this is a clear-cut case of Admin abuse by bending the rules to an utmost degree to fit their agenda. You saying that you merely agree that the executives should be the sole arbiters of punishment, and not the conduct policy, further exemplifies this. I do not see the rules being bended in the way you are imagining. You are free to argue if you think a rule is incorrect and shouldn't exist, but my stance has always been that enforcing a current rule is not abuse. In the past when I was banned for resigning, that was not abusive actions from mark, that was him enforcing a really bad rule. If you consider this to be a really bad rule, make a suggestion. Personally, I do not. Again, I don't condone, nor believe the current rule in place is wrong. To argue this point is dishonest. You are the ones who want to punish a user for a rule that which the victim in this scenario is not protected under. I am arguing for following the literal constituion of the server (conduct policy), whereas you're arguing for following a contradictory side-rule from the Discord. The doxing went down on a private Discord chat, not the Total Freedom Discord, so I don’t get why you’re pointing this out? So if I were to use MSN to convey the DOX that would somehow change the circumstances? It's no good excuse to say that they are overlapping: either they convey the same message or they are contradictory. You cannot have one rule in one place and not the same in the other in this context. It was a private discussion, but that is not an accepted clause in either of our doxing rules. I think if he actually read the discord rules he wouldn't have did any of this in the first place. If the rules are contradictory, which I still do not consider them to be, then just follow them both. It's not difficult to not dox anyone in this community. [/quote] Then perhaps instead you should make it more intuitive by listing the Discord rules on the conduct policy as well, so you don't wind up in this mess. If I was not aware of this clear distinction on DOXing when speaking of the Discord and game server, then why would Wilee and many others? You are not required to even use the Discord, so by your own logic, you could be banned from the server, because you violationg a rule you could not see. |
|
|
|
Post by zekurt on Jul 18, 2020 23:31:16 GMT
Again, I don't condone, nor believe the current rule in place is wrong. To argue this point is dishonest. You are the ones who want to punish a user for a rule that which the victim in this scenario is not protected under. I am arguing for following the literal constituion of the server (conduct policy), whereas you're arguing for following a contradictory side-rule from the Discord. You disagree with the current rule if you disagree with the majority of this servers interpretation of it. Your constitutional literalism is quite silly to me. Then perhaps instead you should make it more intuitive by listing the Discord rules on the conduct policy as well, so you don't wind up in this mess. If I was not aware of this clear distinction on DOXing when speaking of the Discord and game server, then why would Wilee and many others? You are not required to even use the Discord, so by your own logic, you could be banned from the server, because you violationg a rule you could not see. You're not forced to be a member of the discord server, but if you're a member of it, you're required to read and follow its rules. If you are unaware of the rules in place, all I can do is say you're uninformed and have very little leg in this discussion. Wilee was a member, and him not being aware of it is not a defense. Ignorance of law (or rules) has never been a defense. |
|
miwo
Veteran Member
Posts: 597
| Likes: 585
|
Post by miwo on Jul 18, 2020 23:34:33 GMT
Again, I don't condone, nor believe the current rule in place is wrong. To argue this point is dishonest. You are the ones who want to punish a user for a rule that which the victim in this scenario is not protected under. I am arguing for following the literal constituion of the server (conduct policy), whereas you're arguing for following a contradictory side-rule from the Discord. You disagree with the current rule if you disagree with the majority of this servers interpretation of it. Your constitutional literalism is quite silly to me. I could say the same about your herd mentality. I disagree with the majority opinion if they have to lie in order to get a member of our community wrongfully permbanned. Then perhaps instead you should make it more intuitive by listing the Discord rules on the conduct policy as well, so you don't wind up in this mess. If I was not aware of this clear distinction on DOXing when speaking of the Discord and game server, then why would Wilee and many others? You are not required to even use the Discord, so by your own logic, you could be banned from the server, because you violationg a rule you could not see. You're not forced to be a member of the discord server, but if you're a member of it, you're required to read and follow its rules. If you and Wild are unaware of the rules in place, all I can do is say you're both uninformed and have very little leg in this discussion. So if a member was to do something against the Discord server guidelines, but in agreement with the conduct policy, you would want them banned? Good to see you have finally exposed yourself for not caring about ops rights after all |
|
neroblackcat
Veteran Member
rip sig.grumpybumpers
Posts: 3,300
| Likes: 2,071
|
Post by neroblackcat on Jul 18, 2020 23:37:47 GMT
Anyways....
I object for the reasons above.
|
|
Taze
Veteran Member
On vacation/holidays till August 11th
Posts: 315
| Likes: 233
|
Post by Taze on Jul 18, 2020 23:40:58 GMT
Object
|
|
|
|
Post by zekurt on Jul 18, 2020 23:43:40 GMT
I could say the same about your herd mentality. I disagree with the majority opinion if they have to lie in order to get a member of our community wrongfully permbanned. You're accusing everyone who disagrees with you as being a sheep or being corrupt. Arguing is pointless if you just assume everyone has sinister intentions. The fact is you have an interpretation different from the majority of this server, that doesn't mean the majority of this server are sheep. So if a member was to do something against the Discord server guidelines, but in agreement with the conduct policy, you would want them banned? Good to know you don’t care about ops after all. Funny how you turn every point into an ad hom against me. Yes I care about the ops, and no your example does not exist. Yes, if an op dox's a member of this community because their interpretation of the policy says it's ok, they can go fuck themselves. |
|
miwo
Veteran Member
Posts: 597
| Likes: 585
|
Post by miwo on Jul 18, 2020 23:48:02 GMT
I could say the same about your herd mentality. I disagree with the majority opinion if they have to lie in order to get a member of our community wrongfully permbanned. You're accusing everyone who disagrees with you as being a sheep or being corrupt. Arguing is pointless if you just assume everyone has sinister intentions. The fact is you have an interpretation different from the majority of this server, that doesn't mean the majority of this server are sheep. I would indeed argue that it is sinister to permban a player for a rule that is non-existent. And no, I never claimed the majority of the server are sheep, I said that you, personally, display a clear example of herd mentality in that you refer to the popular consensus instead of the actual rules. You have yet to actually argue from any rule-based viewpoint instead of popular opinion. So if a member was to do something against the Discord server guidelines, but in agreement with the conduct policy, you would want them banned? Good to know you don’t care about ops after all. Funny how you turn every point into an ad hom against me. Yes I care about the ops, and no your example does not exist. Yes, if an op dox's a member of this community because their interpretation of the policy says it's ok, they can go fuck themselves. I can find countless examples of you doing the very same thing to me on this thread and others. Sure they can go fuck themselves, but they shouldn’t be banned because that is an abuse of power, and you clearly don’t care because if you did, you wouldn’t indeed suggested to amend the rules, but you haven’t. You are still conveying the image of me somehow condoning the DOX, when I have already made this very apparent is not the fact. It's not a matter of whether their interpretation of the policy says it's ok, it's whether or not it literally is stated in the policy, no interpretation needed: it's clear as day, "Op, admin, owner". And the good thing about having a concise conduct policy is that you get to avoid these meandering accusations of " fucking ridiculous" interpretations. |
|
|
|
Post by zekurt on Jul 18, 2020 23:56:53 GMT
I would indeed argue that it is sinister to permban a player for a rule that is non-existent. And no, I never claimed the majority of the server are sheep, I said that you, personally, display a clear example of herd mentality in that you refer to the popular consensus instead of the actual rules. You have yet to actually argue from any rule-based viewpoint instead of popular opinion. I argued in favor of wilees ban under the rules before it was established that I held a popular opinion. I have argued from the basis of rules, that being the discord rules, and the conduct policy under my interpretation of them. Luckily, my interpretation just so happened to be the majorities. That doesn't make me a sheep, it makes me have common fucking sense. Since you're continuing with the ad homs, I'd say you have a tendency to be a needless contrarian, always acting like you're an intellectual for going against the grain. Sometimes an opinion is the majority for a reason, because it's correct. I can find countless examples of you doing the very same thing to me on this thread and others. Sure they can go fuck themselves, but they shouldn’t be banned because that is an abuse of power, and you clearly don’t care because if you did, you wouldn’t indeed suggested to amend the rules, but you haven’t. Please do post some examples of me ad homming you in this thread. I do think they should be banned, and I don't think it's an abuse of power, that's where our differences lie. I think it's okay to disagree on this. I won't make a thread because I don't think anything needs to change. |
|
miwo
Veteran Member
Posts: 597
| Likes: 585
|
Post by miwo on Jul 19, 2020 0:11:51 GMT
I would indeed argue that it is sinister to permban a player for a rule that is non-existent. And no, I never claimed the majority of the server are sheep, I said that you, personally, display a clear example of herd mentality in that you refer to the popular consensus instead of the actual rules. You have yet to actually argue from any rule-based viewpoint instead of popular opinion. I argued in favor of wilees ban under the rules before it was established that I held a popular opinion. I have argued from the basis of rules, that being the discord rules, and the conduct policy under my interpretation of them. Luckily, my interpretation just so happened to be the majorities. That doesn't make me a sheep, it makes me have common fucking sense. Since you're continuing with the ad homs, I'd say you have a tendency to be a needless contrarian, always acting like you're an intellectual for going against the grain. Sometimes an opinion is the majority for a reason, because it's correct. No, what makes you display herd mentality is the fact that you constantly used your superiors as an argument in favour of your case, and not the actual rules. You were the one accusing me of having a fallacious argument, well perhaps you should take a look at your own - No I am not a needless contrarian just because I happen to disagree with the majority opinion on this single case. I merely callled you out on your previous tagline "ops' rights activist" by saying you are clearly not embodying the behaviour of one. I can find countless examples of you doing the very same thing to me on this thread and others. Sure they can go fuck themselves, but they shouldn’t be banned because that is an abuse of power, and you clearly don’t care because if you did, you wouldn’t indeed suggested to amend the rules, but you haven’t. Please do post some examples of me ad homming you in this thread. I do think they should be banned, and I don't think it's an abuse of power, that's where our differences lie. I think it's okay to disagree on this. I won't make a thread because I don't think anything needs to change. I literally just did in the last response. Here's one more, “To be blunt, your opinion on nathans stance as a member is less than worthless to me”. - would I call this a “direct” ad hom? No, nor would I call what I accused you of an ad hom, because that was just what it was: an accusation. You may also refer to your above paragraph. I can find more clear examples in related threads if you want, but then we’d only be further derailing this thread. If you don’t think anything should change, then you’re apparently fine with having this 10-page discussion again once this issue comes up again. |
|
- March 2nd 2018 - July 22nd 2019
- July 22nd 2019 - Present