Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => The Summit (IG Channel Discussion) => Topic started by: Lithium Flower on 30 May 2014, 05:43
-
The problems are :
1. Moderators troll and insult players, and when they reply back - they mute. If they put moderators on ignore - they ban them.
2. Moderators ban and mute without warning for rules that were not explained or written anywhere and without warning that this activity is against the rules.
3. Moderators ban without reasons.
Example: 16.05 this year character Diana Kim was found banned from both The Summit and OOC channels.
Reasons of the ban were not given. Character was evading any violation of known rules in the channel.
When Graelyn was confronted to give exact violation, instead of facts, he provided only insults as reply.
Here is a log from public "Out Of Character" channel
[15:16:10] Diana Kim > oh, you!
[15:16:23] Diana Kim > <url=showinfo:1373//1151998939>Graelyn</url> Accept convo!
[15:16:38] Graelyn > No. Go away.
[15:17:12] Diana Kim > <url=showinfo:1373//1151998939>Graelyn</url> Can you tell us, why you ban people in summit mabe?
[15:17:20] Avio Yaken > .-.
[15:18:09] Diana Kim > <url=showinfo:1373//1151998939>Graelyn</url> Just, you know, at least, name date and time of violation, what it violated, and why it is prohibited. Eh?
[15:18:14] Graelyn > nah.
[15:18:16] Graelyn > effort.
[15:18:20] Graelyn > wasted on ya.
[15:18:27] Graelyn > Tired.
[15:18:30] Avio Yaken > Effort is for causals
[15:18:38] Diana Kim > Or maybe because there is no such violation?
[15:18:53] Diana Kim > Or maybe because someone simply lied about me, and you cover them?
[15:19:00] Diana Kim > I have all logs, you know.
[15:19:12] Graelyn > Morwen and Kat actually argued for you.
[15:19:26] Diana Kim > Argued about what? About what violation?
[15:19:32] Graelyn > I overruled them with a "I can't be bothered with more DK issues".
[15:19:40] Diana Kim > WHAT issue?
[15:19:42] Graelyn > You're just too much trouble.
[15:19:47] Diana Kim > Give me facts, no insults.
[15:19:57] Graelyn > /emote shrugs "No."
[15:20:01] Diana Kim > What <i>exact</i> trouble
[15:20:09] Avio Yaken > Diana jsut let it go, no point it argueing anymore
[15:20:10] Diana Kim > Because, you know, that's just slander and insult.
[15:20:14] Graelyn > ok.
[15:20:33] Avio Yaken > Besides, thsi summit is better anyway...i still love you graelyn ._.
[15:20:33] Diana Kim > So, you admit, that you have banned me without me violating anything?
[15:21:02] Graelyn > I'm admitting that I'm content with you being in the dark.
[15:21:40] Graelyn > Enlightening you is a sysiphian effort I'm unwilling to undertake.
[15:21:47] Diana Kim > Can you be a professional at least for one minute and either give professional answer or admit and fix your mistake?
[15:21:52] Graelyn > nah.
I would like to hear your opinions, since I think this is the best place for this channel discussion (as the name of the forum suggests).
-
You missed the previous incident involving her. I have no idea what she's done this time, but the previous issue created a lot of problems, and considering the sheer number of issues Summit has had with her even since I popped up, I'm not really surprised that Graelyn is tired of having to deal with issues she causes.
-
I'm pretty sure Lithium is Diana, Bayushi :D
-
You missed the previous incident involving her. I have no idea what she's done this time, but the previous issue created a lot of problems, and considering the sheer number of issues Summit has had with her even since I popped up, I'm not really surprised that Graelyn is tired of having to deal with issues she causes.
Oh, the previous incident would go under #2.
Incident happened, when Diana and Anyanka were having private RP, that was moved to Summit, since they activated "camera drone" in quarters and it became violent. Both were modded for 10 hours without warning or explicit rule against this, and later both were banned for 1 month in both OOC and Summit channels.
"Reason" of the ban was presumed "enormous" amount of "mails", although not a single one of rule violations in these mails were provided.
-
The Summit and OOC are private channels, even the mods serve at the sufferance of the operator. Some may not like it, some might, and to be honest I do not expect the operator or moderators to spare too much thought on the issue.
CCP has provided channels for individuals who feel the moderation/operation of the two aforementioned channels to be not to their liking. The fact that the player operated channel remains popular, no doubt the driving force behind certain people's constant and tiresome efforts to have the most pathetic coup d'etat in MMO history, is not reason to demand change of operating characteristics or ownership.
It is a private channel that is open to us to use. There are channels where the EULA is the only code enforced. I sympathise that something may not be to your liking, lord knows there are many things I could and would change, but you must recognise that feeling offended or wronged, is not actual indication of wrong doing on the part of whomever or whatever offends you. Especially when the 'enforcement' system of a private channel is 'so long as you are not breaking EULA, you can ban, kick or shout at whoever you like'.
I strongly suggest you drop the issue, but expect you will not.
-
It's a conspiracy.
-
-snip-
-
It is a private channel that is open to us to use. There are channels where the EULA is the only code enforced. I sympathise that something may not be to your liking, lord knows there are many things I could and would change, but you must recognise that feeling offended or wronged, is not actual indication of wrong doing on the part of whomever or whatever offends you. Especially when the 'enforcement' system of a private channel is 'so long as you are not breaking EULA, you can ban, kick or shout at whoever you like'.
I strongly suggest you drop the issue, but expect you will not.
This is a problem, that it is not open to use.
Maybe there could be rules, that I don't like, and maybe I can even violate some rules, and some even purposeful, but then I would know for what I was modded and accept it, since I was going for it knowing consequences (for example - this violation will get me muted 10 minutes, but I must do it to play character behavior correctly, so here it goes; or - this violation gets you banned both by EULA and channel rules, I shouldn't do it!)
In this case they even fail to say, what exactly wrong was said and when. Or, in other words "what to do to not get banned". Someone can simply lie to moderator, and they can ban you without even letting you prove you didn't do anything wrong. Because so far they never said what was said incorrect, when and why it was incorrect.
You try to follow rules, you try to behave and even don't insult trolls, who give you direct insults and use obscene words, and yet you get banned :bash:
Fun fact: those, who were saying direct insults are still not banned.
-
The problems are :
1. Moderators troll and insult players, and when they reply back - they mute. If they put moderators on ignore - they ban them.
Moderators are volunteers. Unlike CCP GM's, we don't get paid for it, and we frankly don't have to be respectful or kind to you. We don't even have to play fair with you. That's what you get when you use a free service with volunteer staff. If you work to piss us off, we're going to slap you upside the back of the head, feel fucking great about it, and not receive an ounce of punishment for it. We're not professionals.
We have real lives, jobs, children, spouses, expenses, and stressors in our real lives that we spend our efforts and sanity on. We will not spare our sanity for your sake any more than we have already volunteered to do. You aren't that important. None of you are. Most of us try to be respectful. Some try less than others. For any number of reasons, we log into EVE ill prepared for the deluge of inconsequential drama of Summit users, and we find ourselves quickly deprived of any sense of enjoyment for our gaming session.
Most of the time, we grab a nearby fellow mod and throw them at the channel instead of going off the deep end at the problem of the moment. Sometimes, we can't because we're alone, or don't have the patience to do anything but snap at you. So we throw insults, or troll you a bit, or say something that otherwise would be considered unprofessional. This goes back to the whole volunteer thing.
If you want us to be held accountable for everything we do and answer to more defined and restrictive standard of operation, you can be the first to start sending ISK to us (along with every other user) to make this a paid service. Until then, you get exactly what you pay for.*
2. Moderators ban and mute without warning for rules that were not explained or written anywhere and without warning that this activity is against the rules.
As has been explained on multiple occasions, we do not and will not write a constitution of rights and rules for the Summit. We will not write down the rules (again), because to be completely frank - people start "internet lawyering" the mods and begin seeking loopholes.
Furthermore, by writing down the rules, we would not only subject ourselves to even more scrutiny by users, but we would be banning players more often. The thing about writing down contracts of agreement is that they're by nature inflexible. We would have to enforce every single instance according to the contract, regardless of if we thought the user knew about the rules or not - because it's already written down.
The biggest reason we use internally to not ban users is that we know there is no easy way for the users to know if something is against the rules or not. So we issue warnings, chats, or temporary moderation, to teach users where the line of reason is and how to avoid crossing it. This is of course the intended goal, and all cases may not fall in line with it as stated in #1.
In your specific case Diana - you would have been banned over a year ago. Permanently. You had been given near countless opportunities, warnings, and temporaries in order to adjust your behaviors. You did not, and now you're been removed from the channel for good.
3. Moderators ban without reasons.
We always have a reason. It may be a reason you disagree with or find invalid, but it is still a reason. In your specific case, you have a habit of declaring any moderator who disagrees with you or takes action against you is "not a moderator". You're welcome to ignore us... you just aren't welcome to use the channels if you do. You do not get to selectively choose who is a moderator and who isn't, what is a ban reason and what isn't, and what is allowed and what isn't.
You were banned for plenty of reasons which I personally will not elaborate on or hint at any further than I already have. You made this bed, Diana Kim. We hope you enjoy sleeping in it.
* ISK sent will be considered unrelated charitable donations without the presence of a formal subscription fee system (which will never happen), and will NOT grant preferential treatment. So don't bother. The whole idea was facetious.
-
The problems are :
1. Moderators troll and insult players, and when they reply back - they mute. If they put moderators on ignore - they ban them.
Moderators are volunteers. Unlike CCP GM's, we don't get paid for it, and we frankly don't have to be respectful or kind to you. We don't even have to play fair with you. That's what you get when you use a free service with volunteer staff. If you work to piss us off, we're going to slap you upside the back of the head, feel fucking great about it, and not receive an ounce of punishment for it. We're not professionals.
We have real lives, jobs, children, spouses, expenses, and stressors in our real lives that we spend our efforts and sanity on. We will not spare our sanity for your sake any more than we have already volunteered to do. You aren't that important. None of you are. Most of us try to be respectful. Some try less than others. For any number of reasons, we log into EVE ill prepared for the deluge of inconsequential drama of Summit users, and we find ourselves quickly deprived of any sense of enjoyment for our gaming session.
Most of the time, we grab a nearby fellow mod and throw them at the channel instead of going off the deep end at the problem of the moment. Sometimes, we can't because we're alone, or don't have the patience to do anything but snap at you. So we throw insults, or troll you a bit, or say something that otherwise would be considered unprofessional. This goes back to the whole volunteer thing.
If you want us to be held accountable for everything we do and answer to more defined and restrictive standard of operation, you can be the first to start sending ISK to us (along with every other user) to make this a paid service. Until then, you get exactly what you pay for.*
Not only mods can have stresses and snap on peoples. By doing this you provoke snapping back, and, I don't know, either accept that snapping, or just mod both parties.
Otherwise you just use mod button for your own needs as an argument in conversation.
2. Moderators ban and mute without warning for rules that were not explained or written anywhere and without warning that this activity is against the rules.
As has been explained on multiple occasions, we do not and will not write a constitution of rights and rules for the Summit. We will not write down the rules (again), because to be completely frank - people start "internet lawyering" the mods and begin seeking loopholes.
Furthermore, by writing down the rules, we would not only subject ourselves to even more scrutiny by users, but we would be banning players more often. The thing about writing down contracts of agreement is that they're by nature inflexible. We would have to enforce every single instance according to the contract, regardless of if we thought the user knew about the rules or not - because it's already written down.
The biggest reason we use internally to not ban users is that we know there is no easy way for the users to know if something is against the rules or not. So we issue warnings, chats, or temporary moderation, to teach users where the line of reason is and how to avoid crossing it. This is of course the intended goal, and all cases may not fall in line with it as stated in #1.
In your specific case Diana - you would have been banned over a year ago. Permanently. You had been given near countless opportunities, warnings, and temporaries in order to adjust your behaviors. You did not, and now you're been removed from the channel for good.
That's what I am saying: there were no warnings or teaching, where is the line.
Just ban.
Where was teaching or warning about that fight in the summit? Or any chat?
And last case?
Not just warning, or teaching, there wasn't any violation at all! I have reviewed logs for that day: several peoples said way worse things than Diana ever did. In fact, I never found a thing in this log even for smallest mute for Diana.
How to avoid THIS?.. Teach us maybe?
3. Moderators ban without reasons.
We always have a reason. It may be a reason you disagree with or find invalid, but it is still a reason. In your specific case, you have a habit of declaring any moderator who disagrees with you or takes action against you is "not a moderator". You're welcome to ignore us... you just aren't welcome to use the channels if you do. You do not get to selectively choose who is a moderator and who isn't, what is a ban reason and what isn't, and what is allowed and what isn't.
You were banned for plenty of reasons which I personally will not elaborate on or hint at any further than I already have. You made this bed, Diana Kim. We hope you enjoy sleeping in it.
Saying that certain moderator was not a moderator was over a month ago (or two months) with a ban, of course.
Ban for ignoring moderator was even longest ago.
For ban 16.05 reason is still not provided.
So, where are these warnings, teaching, etc etc?
-
And this is why the Summit must be destroyed. You, Katrina, are not a moderator and a traitor! ;)
Now, with a bit less tongue-in-cheek:
It was a good response, Katrina.
As far as 'teaching people' goes: A plethora of warnings and timeouts should be enough for your typical person to analyze and adjust behaviour. Also, you may file this under "Diplomacy 101", if your starting position is terribly bad (you've been kicked out of a private channel), even if you think you're in the right, best not go in guns blazing, as this is unlikely to have the other party do you the favour of restoring your channel status. You have no right to get access to this channel, not by paying your sub, not by virtue of being a roleplayer. This sums this attempt up (http://z0r.de/3100).
-
Not only mods can have stresses and snap on peoples. By doing this you provoke snapping back, and, I don't know, either accept that snapping, or just mod both parties.
Otherwise you just use mod button for your own needs as an argument in conversation.
Fair enough response, but that simply isn't the reality of it. I know it's not fair, but when an authority figure snaps at you - snapping back is not a good idea. Trying that at work will get you fired. Trying that in school will get you detention. Trying that will the police will get you arrested. Trying that with mods will get you banned. In each respective scenario, you can contact the next authority tier: Human Resources (work), The Principal (school), A Lawyer (police), or Graelyn (mods).
Unfortunately for you, you managed to find yourself in poor relations with Graelyn too. You no longer have a next tier of authority available to support you. So, you're out of options.
That's what I am saying: there were no warnings or teaching, where is the line.
Just ban.
Where was teaching or warning about that fight in the summit? Or any chat?
And last case?
Not just warning, or teaching, there wasn't any violation at all! I have reviewed logs for that day: several peoples said way worse things than Diana ever did. In fact, I never found a thing in this log even for smallest mute for Diana.
How to avoid THIS?.. Teach us maybe?
If you're going to say nobody tried to help, you should probably avoid saying it in front of me. I personally pulled you aside and chatted with you. Since the first day I became a moderator, I've tried to help you. I've talked to the other mods, I've talked to you, I've done it IC and OOC, in public and private. I've really tried to help you, and show you where the line should be drawn. I know others have done so as well, both moderators and regular users.
If you have somehow forgotten all our attempts to help you, or if you honestly believe that we did not try or do a good enough job - then our choice to give up on you is mostly validated. What we could do to help you wasn't working, so we stopped and banned you.
Saying that certain moderator was not a moderator was over a month ago (or two months) with a ban, of course.
Ban for ignoring moderator was even longest ago.
For ban 16.05 reason is still not provided.
So, where are these warnings, teaching, etc etc?
All bans and actions are cumulative. Serving the length of a temporary ban or mute does not make the previous violation forgotten or waived. It will stack on top of any new ones.
In other words, all those things you were banned for months ago, they all were counted in total towards this permanent one, because they are part of a pattern of misbehavior.
-
Not only mods can have stresses and snap on peoples. By doing this you provoke snapping back, and, I don't know, either accept that snapping, or just mod both parties.
Otherwise you just use mod button for your own needs as an argument in conversation.
Fair enough response, but that simply isn't the reality of it. I know it's not fair, but when an authority figure snaps at you - snapping back is not a good idea. Trying that at work will get you fired. Trying that in school will get you detention. Trying that will the police will get you arrested. Trying that with mods will get you banned. In each respective scenario, you can contact the next authority tier: Human Resources (work), The Principal (school), A Lawyer (police), or Graelyn (mods).
Unfortunately for you, you managed to find yourself in poor relations with Graelyn too. You no longer have a next tier of authority available to support you. So, you're out of options.
I treat people, like they treat me.
If I do something wrong, well, I accept their snapping at me.
But if they do it without reason, I simply reply them with same.
When a moderator appears in conversation just to insult you, it is not healthy, and you simply can't ask me to be respectful to this person.
That's what I am saying: there were no warnings or teaching, where is the line.
Just ban.
Where was teaching or warning about that fight in the summit? Or any chat?
And last case?
Not just warning, or teaching, there wasn't any violation at all! I have reviewed logs for that day: several peoples said way worse things than Diana ever did. In fact, I never found a thing in this log even for smallest mute for Diana.
How to avoid THIS?.. Teach us maybe?
If you're going to say nobody tried to help, you should probably avoid saying it in front of me. I personally pulled you aside and chatted with you. Since the first day I became a moderator, I've tried to help you. I've talked to the other mods, I've talked to you, I've done it IC and OOC, in public and private. I've really tried to help you, and show you where the line should be drawn. I know others have done so as well, both moderators and regular users.
If you have somehow forgotten all our attempts to help you, or if you honestly believe that we did not try or do a good enough job - then our choice to give up on you is mostly validated. What we could do to help you wasn't working, so we stopped and banned you.
I was telling about exact event happened ~2 months ago.
Neither you, nor anyone else did this.
You was contacting me, but about other things, like "genocidal behavior", that was waaay ago.
So, my claim remains in power, since I couldn't find where you was warning me about this rule. Maybe I am just stupid and forgot, but I couldn't find it in logs. If I am mistaken, please show where it was, and I will apologize for this.
Saying that certain moderator was not a moderator was over a month ago (or two months) with a ban, of course.
Ban for ignoring moderator was even longest ago.
For ban 16.05 reason is still not provided.
So, where are these warnings, teaching, etc etc?
All bans and actions are cumulative. Serving the length of a temporary ban or mute does not make the previous violation forgotten or waived. It will stack on top of any new ones.
In other words, all those things you were banned for months ago, they all were counted in total towards this permanent one, because they are part of a pattern of misbehavior.
You still haven't answered, what exact was said incorrect for ban 16.05.
For sure, there wasn't any genocidal behavior!
Where was that violation, that I was asked not to do, or rule that was stated anywhere?
Date, time, exact phrase, and rule that it violated or when I was asked not to do this?
Eh?..
Besides, since you started about "pattern" of misbehavior, maybe you could list exact dates and times of each violation maybe? Because I don't remember much of misbehavior in this channel, while many others were misbehaving way more often. Do you want to start looking through all logs? We could do this.
Of course, just for start the violation for ban 16.05 would do, after that we could talk more about... "patterns".
-
As far as I know, the final ban was triggered because Graelyn was, quite literally and quite simply, tired of hearing your name come up again and again. He banned you because he doesn't want you in the channels anymore, and doesn't want to hear about or from you, or any of your alts.
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the reason is that the channel owner actually dislikes you now. In that case, there isn't anything else we have to explain to you - because it's not even in our hands anymore.
In other words, talking about it any further is pointless. I've said my piece. If others want to continue the discussion, they can... but even if you were completely satisfied with my answers (highly unlikely), nothing will change.
You're pretty much never coming back until Graelyn decides otherwise.
-
I think there's something to be said about either antagonizing some of the people all of the time or antagonizing all of the people some of the time in RP. Choosing to actively antagonize all of the people all of the time will probably lead to: a) non-engagement/hostility/ambivalence/apathy, and/or b) frustration/annoyance/complaints being made to Summit mods. I can see why Diana Kim as a character would have been banned from the Summit because from what I've seen they probably antagonize a lot of people by turning the channel into a toxic environment that makes discussion between others difficult or impossible due to continued in-character bigotry and vilification.
While there's nothing wrong with having a prejudiced or bigoted character in principle, that doesn't mean a degree of common-sense or judgement should not be exercised in trying to balance that in-character antagonism with the expectations of fellow users of a channel who likely have little desire to be exposed to in-character hate speech day in and day out by someone else.
You asked for what rules were violated and at the top of Summit MOTD in bold red font it says, "Be Tactful". Seems a pretty simple rule to follow in-character.
-
One should be cautious when comparing an amateur player channel with public institutions, me thinks.
-
One should be cautious when comparing an amateur player channel with public institutions, me thinks.
Seconded. Not to mention that it is effectively a 'story time in the land of fiction channel. The game itself is fiction and some rp even pushes the realms of being a fiction within the fiction. This isn't a massive loss. Use the public channels and forget about OOC/The Summit if you are unwilling to deal with the fact that they are owned by a man who is very much tired of this particular series of events.
-
For my part in this, LF, at one point I had to be asked by a channel moderator - not instructed, not ordered, but asked, as a personal favour - to stop mentioning you in The Summit. This was because this moderator was being innundated by you with complaints about things that I was saying - in character - about Diana in the channel. I complied, for the time specified by the moderator, not because I particularly care about offending you or Diana, but because the moderator in question asked politely that I stop doing it.
This tells me two things: firstly, you were aware of what was going on in a channel you were banned from, which by all rights you probably shouldn't have been. Secondly, you were complaining to a person with authority in that channel profusely and consistently enough about those things that they felt it was more effective to ask me to stop doing them (despite the fact that I had not violated the channel's rules) than to tell you to stop complaining. You were banned from the channel at this point - you didn't really have a right to complain about what was going on in it, and yet you were, at such a volume (and apparently, despite the moderator repeatedly telling you it was not their problem) that they felt compelled to ask me to stop just so you'd stop badgering them about it.
I'm not going to name the moderator in question because I feel they were already needlessly put upon by this situation and don't want to drag them into this further, but since you've repeatedly asked for examples in this thread, I'm bringing this up as an example of behaviour that really should be avoided.
-
As far as I know, the final ban was triggered because Graelyn was, quite literally and quite simply, tired of hearing your name come up again and again. He banned you because he doesn't want you in the channels anymore, and doesn't want to hear about or from you, or any of your alts.
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the reason is that the channel owner actually dislikes you now. In that case, there isn't anything else we have to explain to you - because it's not even in our hands anymore.
In other words, talking about it any further is pointless. I've said my piece. If others want to continue the discussion, they can... but even if you were completely satisfied with my answers (highly unlikely), nothing will change.
You're pretty much never coming back until Graelyn decides otherwise.
In fact, I am satisfied. Thank you.
Exactly my point: ban was without reason.
Why I needed this is rather simple, some peoples were claiming that I was banned for something "wrong" I did. Obviously now, it isn't.
-
When a man logs in to a game and sees his inbox full, and going through the evemails he sees that 90% of them are either from you or about you, it becomes very tempting and right to solve all those problems with the click of a single button.
-
firstly, you were aware of what was going on in a channel you were banned from, which by all rights you probably shouldn't have been.
People talk. It would be simple enough for someone to tell DK in another channel what Andreus kept saying about DK.
Secondly, you were complaining to a person with authority in that channel profusely and consistently enough about those things that they felt it was more effective to ask me to stop doing them (despite the fact that I had not violated the channel's rules) than to tell you to stop complaining.
What would you do if someone was talking about you (presumably in a negative light) in a semi-public forum in which you were banned? Sit on your hands and just accept that any potential first impressions with others you might engage are already tainted by what another individual (who is essentially your enemy) says?
-
What would you do if someone was talking about you (presumably in a negative light) in a semi-public forum in which you were banned? Sit on your hands and just accept that any potential first impressions with others you might engage are already tainted by what another individual (who is essentially your enemy) says?
That pretty much entirely describes what I had to do for the year my EVE Online forum account was banned, and the three months I was banned from The Summit.
So yeah.
That's precisely what I did.
-
In fact, I am satisfied. Thank you.
Exactly my point: ban was without reason.
Why I needed this is rather simple, some peoples were claiming that I was banned for something "wrong" I did. Obviously now, it isn't.
I'm not entirely certain exactly how you read "you were banned without reason" from the statement Katrina made, because that's pretty much the exact opposite of what she said.
I have a theory on what the problem is, but it'd take a fairly long explanation. Would you like me to go into more detail?
-
What would you do if someone was talking about you (presumably in a negative light) in a semi-public forum in which you were banned? Sit on your hands and just accept that any potential first impressions with others you might engage are already tainted by what another individual (who is essentially your enemy) says?
That pretty much entirely describes what I had to do for the year my EVE Online forum account was banned, and the three months I was banned from The Summit.
So yeah.
That's precisely what I did.
Had a different impression based on the creation of the Andreus LaHane (http://www.eve-chatsubo.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=5229&sid=84b72818f8474cf85ce47d6c01dc6628&view=print) character. vOv
As far as I know, the final ban was triggered because Graelyn was, quite literally and quite simply, tired of hearing your name come up again and again. He banned you because he doesn't want you in the channels anymore, and doesn't want to hear about or from you, or any of your alts.
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the reason is that the channel owner actually dislikes you now. In that case, there isn't anything else we have to explain to you - because it's not even in our hands anymore.
In other words, talking about it any further is pointless. I've said my piece. If others want to continue the discussion, they can... but even if you were completely satisfied with my answers (highly unlikely), nothing will change.
You're pretty much never coming back until Graelyn decides otherwise.
In fact, I am satisfied. Thank you.
Exactly my point: ban was without reason.
Why I needed this is rather simple, some peoples were claiming that I was banned for something "wrong" I did. Obviously now, it isn't.
Lithium, you were banned for causing the management a headache (a reason). While you may not have broken a rule, the reason is fairly clear. Diane Kim created entirely too much drama within the player-run channels.
You are clearly concerned that this impedes your RP - sorry find another channel. Public debates will have to be held elsewhere.
Also, do what many a Caldari and Amarr character has done before you - ignore the jagii/infidel Andreus Ixiris.
-
For my part in this, LF, at one point I had to be asked by a channel moderator - not instructed, not ordered, but asked, as a personal favour - to stop mentioning you in The Summit. This was because this moderator was being innundated by you with complaints about things that I was saying - in character - about Diana in the channel. I complied, for the time specified by the moderator, not because I particularly care about offending you or Diana, but because the moderator in question asked politely that I stop doing it.
This tells me two things: firstly, you were aware of what was going on in a channel you were banned from, which by all rights you probably shouldn't have been. Secondly, you were complaining to a person with authority in that channel profusely and consistently enough about those things that they felt it was more effective to ask me to stop doing them (despite the fact that I had not violated the channel's rules) than to tell you to stop complaining. You were banned from the channel at this point - you didn't really have a right to complain about what was going on in it, and yet you were, at such a volume (and apparently, despite the moderator repeatedly telling you it was not their problem) that they felt compelled to ask me to stop just so you'd stop badgering them about it.
I'm not going to name the moderator in question because I feel they were already needlessly put upon by this situation and don't want to drag them into this further, but since you've repeatedly asked for examples in this thread, I'm bringing this up as an example of behaviour that really should be avoided.
About "innundating", complaining "profusely and consistently", I would like you to not speak of such matters, since for all my time when I was in the channel, I wrote to moderators only 9 times, and only 5 or 6 of them were original complaints.
-
Well, I have only your word against the moderator's here. Given that it's been stated by others in this thread that you have a tendency to declare people whose judgement you disagree with "not moderators:"
In your specific case, you have a habit of declaring any moderator who disagrees with you or takes action against you is "not a moderator". You're welcome to ignore us... you just aren't welcome to use the channels if you do. You do not get to selectively choose who is a moderator and who isn't, what is a ban reason and what isn't, and what is allowed and what isn't.
... I have to ask whether you're going by your definition of who is and isn't a moderator or the channel's?
-
(http://www.alottasigns.com/components/com_virtuemart/shop_image/product/WE_RESERVE_THE_R_4c53be457cbd4.jpg)
Take note.
-
Lithium, you were banned for causing the management a headache (a reason). While you may not have broken a rule, the reason is fairly clear. Diane Kim created entirely too much drama within the player-run channels.
You are clearly concerned that this impedes your RP - sorry find another channel. Public debates will have to be held elsewhere.
Also, do what many a Caldari and Amarr character has done before you - ignore the jagii/infidel Andreus Ixiris.
Well, haha, I wasn't causing any troubles since last ban, avoiding any "headache", still, banned :lol:
-
It is irresponsible modding to ban people just because you "can't be bothered". Being a volunteer doesn't excuse it IMO. Especially in a game where you are basically denying the player access to the primary public RP outlet. Temporary mutes when a situation is super tense, disruptive, and toxic, sure, but bans I really, really don't understand.
What would you do if someone was talking about you (presumably in a negative light) in a semi-public forum in which you were banned? Sit on your hands and just accept that any potential first impressions with others you might engage are already tainted by what another individual (who is essentially your enemy) says?
If it's IC, who gives a crap?
-
It is irresponsible modding to ban people just because you "can't be bothered". Being a volunteer doesn't excuse it IMO. Especially in a game where you are basically denying the player access to the primary public RP outlet.
Graelyn is not a volunteer moderator. Graelyn is the owner. If you shit in his house constantly right in front of him, he's going to kick you out. Very simple concept.
-
You know what, I'm going to go ahead and write this out anyway. You're pretty much free to read every word of it or completely ignore it, but take in mind I'm writing this pretty much exclusively for your benefit. The only thing I get out of this is finally getting this off my chest. I'm going to try and write this out in as level-headed a manner as possible, but if it gets Catacomb'd, oh well - at least I made an effort.
So there's a lot of stuff in here that you probably already know, but I feel the need to illustrate my thought processes, so if any of this is old news to you, forgive me.
Let's start at the root of it - Diana Kim, the in-universe character in EVE Online. Diana Kim is not a nice person by any possible stretch of the imagination. She's rude, arrogant, disrepsectful, abrasive, antisocial, violent, spiteful, deceptive, mean-spirited, racist, bigoted, emotionally manipulative, short-sighted, close-minded, mentally unstable, wilfully ignorant, chronically hypocritical and completely irrational - she's essentially a walking collection of personality flaws. Now, this in and of itself is not a bad thing - in fact, observing her from an outside perspective is very compelling given that she's a woman helplessly ensnared by Provist propaganda, clutching desperately to the illusions she has of how the world should be as she slowly watches them become more and more removed from the actual reality of the situation. That's good roleplay material right there.
Where the problem starts is when Diana Kim interacts with other capsuleers. An extremely abrasive, strongly opinionated character like Diana Kim doesn't react well to being told she's wrong and reacts even worse to being shown she's wrong. When people call Diana Kim out on the outrageous things she says, she tends to react with either flat denial or insults - accusations of treason if the relevant character is Caldari, "dirty jaijii" etc. if they aren't. Even at her most polite she isn't willing to consider other people's points of views. This leads to an increasingly limited amount of interaction people who don't agree with her can actually engage in without her either insulting or ignoring them. This eventually leads them to either insult her or ignore her, which in turn further limits the people she can meaningfully interact with.
There is, again, nothing wrong with this in and of itself.
So we get to a point where, eventually, Diana Kim's behaviour becomes so abrasive and insufferable that, in-character, people are no longer willing to tolerate it. Remember that in-universe The Summit is an actual communications channel run by actual capsuleers, and they have feelings and limited patience just like real human beings do. In at least one instance, eventually one the moderators, in-character, got so tired of being called names by Kim that they lodged a ban. Now, again, there's nothing specifically wrong with this.
The problem comes when you, Lithium Flower, the player, become unable to separate Diana Kim's behaviour and ego from your own.
I have noticed, in certain ways, that you act a lot like your in-game avatar. I'm not going to guilt-trip you for this because I do the same. Andreus Ixiris is almost an extension and exaggeration of my own personality to the extent where if this were a slightly less serious setting he'd probably have at least some awareness of it. I have in the past had - and, as a matter of fact still do have - trouble distancing myself from the challenges to Andreus' ego. Emotional investment in your character is not neccessarily a bad thing - in fact, I think some amount of emotional investment in your character is neccessary. However, at this point, your investment in your character is leading to behaviour that is damaging your ability to interact with the roleplay community (i.e. it's getting you banned from The Summit and OOC). Either you have to step back from your character and not take attacks against them so personally, or you need to tone down your character's behaviour and make them more reasonable.
Honestly at this point I think you may have gone as far as you can go with Diana Kim's current line of behaviour. It might be time to have her reconsider her life.
-
Well said.
-
What would you do if someone was talking about you (presumably in a negative light) in a semi-public forum in which you were banned? Sit on your hands and just accept that any potential first impressions with others you might engage are already tainted by what another individual (who is essentially your enemy) says?
If it's IC, who gives a crap?
Plenty of people care. If only one side of a story is ever presented, it becomes the truth.
If your character/corporation is constantly disparaged, its actions placed in a negative light, in a semi-public, large attendance forum by your IC enemy in which potential recruits, potential allies take part and you have no opportunity to respond, you have likely lost those potential recruits or potential allies - the truth becomes what your IC enemy declares it to be.
There isn't much of a difference between IC/OOC when you get down to it.
In addition, alts are agents/jackclones/etc of mains, but we still tend to associate the characters with a person behind the keyboard. If a newish, relatively unknown character suddenly started defending a banned main in the Summit, what would happen? The character would likely be banned as an alt of the banned main (whether or not it is).
-
What would you do if someone was talking about you (presumably in a negative light) in a semi-public forum in which you were banned? Sit on your hands and just accept that any potential first impressions with others you might engage are already tainted by what another individual (who is essentially your enemy) says?
If it's IC, who gives a crap?
Plenty of people care. If only one side of a story is ever presented, it becomes the truth.
If your character/corporation is constantly disparaged, its actions placed in a negative light, in a semi-public, large attendance forum by your IC enemy in which potential recruits, potential allies take part and you have no opportunity to respond, you have likely lost those potential recruits or potential allies - the truth becomes what your IC enemy declares it to be.
Characters should care about it, IC. Players, however, should not care, because it's RP, it's fiction, and there's nothing wrong with having IC enemies or being attacked ICly. The only time a player should care is if the attacks are OOC motivated and made to be intentionally hurtful on an OOC level rather than an IC one. But IC attacks against an IC character are not something to get up in arms OOC about.
The player can be justifiably mad about the ban (because it's preventing them from participating in the RP), but not about the fact that other characters might be saying bad things IC about their character.
There isn't much of a difference between IC/OOC when you get down to it.
If there isn't, then that's a failure to uphold proper IC/OOC separation. Not upholding that is a bad thing.
In addition, alts are agents/jackclones/etc of mains, but we still tend to associate the characters with a person behind the keyboard. If a newish, relatively unknown character suddenly started defending a banned main in the Summit, what would happen? The character would likely be banned as an alt of the banned main (whether or not it is).
Which would be nonsense. If a character is going to be banned from an IC RP channel it should be on their own merits, not based on the player behind the character.
-
Actually the only time you end up permabanned on all characters is exactly when you are an awful human being IRL. Basically, if you get yourself perma'd from OOC you can expect to get yourself perma'd from all of the IC channels associated with it as well because it means that you have done something to make the majority of the mods go "It is legitimately better to not have this player around".
-
Actually the only time you end up permabanned on all characters is exactly when you are an awful human being IRL. Basically, if you get yourself perma'd from OOC you can expect to get yourself perma'd from all of the IC channels associated with it as well because it means that you have done something to make the majority of the mods go "It is legitimately better to not have this player around".
This is basically an insult, and simply misses what exactly character said wrong again.
Being "awful IRL", okay, what was said in OOC then? I mean, something terrible terrible for ban? Do you have facts, maybe show us?
-
I'm kind of out of the loop in terms of what may or may not have actually happened in the Summit to get Diana banned, bit I do feel that some of the language coming from all sides here is unnecessarily antagonistic. We've not reached ad hominem yet, but we're certainly getting there.
I've seen situations like this before, and the end result is usually someone leaving the RP community jaded and bitter (More so, at any rate). Can we please start being a tad nicer to each other OOC before we cause this already small community to shrink even further? :|
-
I'm kind of out of the loop in terms of what may or may not have actually happened in the Summit to get Diana banned, bit I do feel that some of the language coming from all sides here is unnecessarily antagonistic. We've not reached ad hominem yet, but we're certainly getting there.
I've seen situations like this before, and the end result is usually someone leaving the RP community jaded and bitter (More so, at any rate). Can we please start being a tad nicer to each other OOC before we cause this already small community to shrink even further? :|
No we cannot. Welcome to EVE.
-
Actually the only time you end up permabanned on all characters is exactly when you are an awful human being IRL. Basically, if you get yourself perma'd from OOC you can expect to get yourself perma'd from all of the IC channels associated with it as well because it means that you have done something to make the majority of the mods go "It is legitimately better to not have this player around".
This is basically an insult, and simply misses what exactly character said wrong again.
Being "awful IRL", okay, what was said in OOC then? I mean, something terrible terrible for ban? Do you have facts, maybe show us?
'
In your case it's certainly less serious than, say, "Stalking someone OOC" which is something that got someone banned much much faster than you were. In your case it was simply "You have this awful tendency to create drama" and you spent the vast majority of your time either doing things that would get you banned for a short period of time and then every time it happened you would immediately start antagonizing and sending evemails all over the place, and when 90% of the evemails are about you or are from you, it becomes pretty clear where the common denominator is and where the problem lies.
You want to be unbanned, you're going to need to talk to Graelyn, but good luck with that because you pushed so hard you made him sick of having to deal with you.
-
I'm kind of out of the loop in terms of what may or may not have actually happened in the Summit to get Diana banned, bit I do feel that some of the language coming from all sides here is unnecessarily antagonistic. We've not reached ad hominem yet, but we're certainly getting there.
I've seen situations like this before, and the end result is usually someone leaving the RP community jaded and bitter (More so, at any rate). Can we please start being a tad nicer to each other OOC before we cause this already small community to shrink even further? :|
I don't think I have, but if I've crossed the line, I apologize.
-
Maybe I wasn't succinct enough in my last post.
The core of the problem lies in the fact that Diana Kim is a horrible person who treats almost everyone with contemptuous disrespect. This isn't neccessarily a problem in and of itself, but it leads people to react poorly towards her. When she steps up her game in response, this inevitably leads people - moderators included - to eventually get tired of dealing with her. This leads to her getting ostracised or banned from social gatherings. You, as a player, then begin taking offence to this, and start acting in the same way out of character. This inevitably leads to people becoming tired of dealing with you.
My honest suggestion at this point? If you cannot seperate the ego of Diana Kim from your own ego, have Diana Kim stop hating the Federation. No, I'm not kidding: actually have her experience a change of heart and apologise for the way in which she's behaved towards everyone.
-
Public <-> Private
There's the difference. Not everything you say, especially how it is said, is working in a public setting. Doesn't matter if you're right or not. Especially not if you're a bit far out like DK, when it comes to her world view. (This is the point where you technically can't blame the character, but supposedly there's someone with a working pair of lobes behind the keyboard steering it).
So, interaction creates drama. Drama can be good. 98.977% of the Drama that is good is happening in a private setting, later discussed/dribbling into public ones. Also 85.776% of the drama that is good is actually creating content (pewpew?), character development or moves at least a plotline forwards. I dare say we've seen neither of that, or at least in homeopathic doses (literally nothing, drowned in a lot of alcohol).
edit: It's also representative how this thread is named and what the three core theses of it are when you think about self-reflection.
-
So, interaction creates drama. Drama can be good. 98.977% of the Drama that is good is happening in a private setting, later discussed/dribbling into public ones. Also 85.776% of the drama that is good is actually creating content (pewpew?), character development or moves at least a plotline forwards.
100% of stastics on the internet are made up.
I'm kind of out of the loop in terms of what may or may not have actually happened in the Summit to get Diana banned, bit I do feel that some of the language coming from all sides here is unnecessarily antagonistic. We've not reached ad hominem yet, but we're certainly getting there.
I've seen situations like this before, and the end result is usually someone leaving the RP community jaded and bitter (More so, at any rate). Can we please start being a tad nicer to each other OOC before we cause this already small community to shrink even further? :|
No we cannot. Welcome to EVE.
Democracy in action \o/
Semi-seriously:
Obviously I am not currently active in-game so have no direct input into the mentioned situation. However, as someone who is in semi-to-regular contact with at least three of the Summit mods, more on occasion, I have noticed that their problems always seem to stem from a certain kind of person. It's always people who think they're doing nothing wrong and are positively outraged to be told they are out of line. This then leads to the development of a victim complex, and inevitably results in the aggrieved party mail spamming the mods until Graelyn smacks them with a ban. I've seen this cycle repeat with at least three people I can bring to mind immediately, and probably more if I think about it.
I think CCP give some pretty good advice for those who get modded: htfu.
And while you're htfu'ing, think about what you did wrong and how you might be able to take some of the perfectly reasonable advice from those moderators such as Kat who are actually willing to help people who get modded rather than just ignoring them till they go away.
/rant.
-
tl;dr for those late to thread
Diana Kim:
(https://i.imgur.com/9qQiFLx.gif)
Majority of Backstage:
(http://i.imgur.com/UIdnRsH.gif)
Me:
(http://i.imgur.com/68Y26dH.gif)
-
Maybe I wasn't succinct enough in my last post.
The core of the problem lies in the fact that Diana Kim is a horrible person who treats almost everyone with contemptuous disrespect.
And this is obvious lie about the character.
Diana Kim is rather respectful and polite character, but harsh and ruthless to her enemies. To make easier her RP, for her (and for couple others) I have charts with characters, towards whom she is harsh. For Diana personally, there are two lists: first list, for those who were continuously trolling and insulting her without reason. She tends to avoid these peoples, don't pay attention to their words, and only against them she is allowed sometimes to make first insults, since they were doing it multiple times earlier. Luckily - this list is incredibly short and getting into it rather hard.
Second list is rather large - it is obvious enemies (all members of FDU/TDF) and characters, who has shown hostile behaviour - insults of her out of nothing, minor trolling, insults of Tibus Heth (not constant, though, just single), those, who she just considers enemies and prefers to shoot at than talk with. It is rather easy to get into this list, and easy to get out :D To this peoples Diana simply doesn't pay proper respect and maintains very cold and harsh stance. She is allowed to insult them only when they insult her. She might show respect to them, but they should work rather hard for this :)
For all other peoples, she is polite and respectful, and you can easily see it for yourself, if you peek into "Intergalactic Summit" and just hear how she speaks with others. Of course, just hear, don't try to talk with her. You should know why.
-
I'm kind of out of the loop in terms of what may or may not have actually happened in the Summit to get Diana banned, bit I do feel that some of the language coming from all sides here is unnecessarily antagonistic. We've not reached ad hominem yet, but we're certainly getting there.
That's the problem, nothing happened. She was just banned.
-
And this is obvious lie about the character.
Fair warning: do not try the "this is an obvious lie" thing with me. I have no patience for it. I'm trying to explain all of this to you for your benefit - I don't get anything out of this. It's taking up time in my day.
Diana Kim is rather respectful and polite character but harsh and ruthless to her enemies.
No, that actually makes it worse. It demonstrates she's perfectly capable of being polite when she wants to be, so she's intentionally acting disrespectful and contemptuous to people she doesn't agree with - and, in case you didn't realise, the majority of the characters in the EVE roleplay community don't agree with her because she calls an entire race of people subhuman, advocates for the destruction of an entire nation, repeatedly makes outrageous claims about things that are demonstrably untrue, accuses people who don't believe in her narrow-minded viewpoint of how the State should be "traitors" and repeatedly calls other women "whores."
To make easier her RP, for her (and for couple others) I have charts with characters, towards whom she is harsh. For Diana personally, there are two lists: first list, for those who were continuously trolling and insulting her without reason. She tends to avoid these peoples, don't pay attention to their words, and only against them she is allowed sometimes to make first insults, since they were doing it multiple times earlier. Luckily - this list is incredibly short and getting into it rather hard.
Second list is rather large - it is obvious enemies (all members of FDU/TDF) and characters, who has shown hostile behaviour - insults of her out of nothing, minor trolling, insults of Tibus Heth (not constant, though, just single), those, who she just considers enemies and prefers to shoot at than talk with. It is rather easy to get into this list, and easy to get out :D To this peoples Diana simply doesn't pay proper respect and maintains very cold and harsh stance. She is allowed to insult them only when they insult her. She might show respect to them, but they should work rather hard for this :)
You keep using this phrase "without reason." A lot of people insult Diana Kim but it's never without reason - for instance, she advocates the destruction of an entire nation. She wants to destroy the Federation. She makes outrageous claims about things that a casual glance at the state of the world should tell her simply are not true. She insults other Caldari while not even understanding how the legal processes of her own country work. She supports a character (Tibus Heth) who flat out should not be supported by loyal Caldari because he's a traitor and a terrorist, yet accuses other Caldari who point this out to her of being traitors and terrorists. She makes deeply racist statements against Federal ("dirty kakku jaijji") and Republican ("go back to your slave pen idiot") individuals while in the same breath accuses Federals and Republicans of not affording her proper respect. She demands to be called by her military title while refusing to address others with theirs. She demands that people respect their elders even when they're not remotely worthy of respect (i.e. Vaari, Nauplius) and yet refuses to afford respect to her own elders (i.e. Stitcher, Toushi Kimura, Andreus Ixiris, Saede Riordan, Ava Starfire, etc.). A lot of people aren't even subjected to this treatement directly - they see her doing it to their friends, and get upset on their behalf.
In short, a huge number of people insult Diana Kim. Very, very few do it "for no reason."
For all other peoples, she is polite and respectful, and you can easily see it for yourself, if you peek into "Intergalactic Summit" and just hear how she speaks with others.
I've seen Diana Kim act with patent disrespect to people without any provocation whatsoever, and even when she's not acting disrespectful she often takes any excuse to direct the topic of conversation to how much she hates Gallenteans.
Of course, just hear, don't try to talk with her. You should know why.
Because Andreus Ixiris is one of the very, very few people who's still willing to even try and get through to her that the things she believes are false and that the things she wants to do are immoral and impossible?
-
Actually the only time you end up permabanned on all characters is exactly when you are an awful human being IRL. Basically, if you get yourself perma'd from OOC you can expect to get yourself perma'd from all of the IC channels associated with it as well because it means that you have done something to make the majority of the mods go "It is legitimately better to not have this player around".
This is basically an insult, and simply misses what exactly character said wrong again.
Being "awful IRL", okay, what was said in OOC then? I mean, something terrible terrible for ban? Do you have facts, maybe show us?
'
In your case it's certainly less serious than, say, "Stalking someone OOC" which is something that got someone banned much much faster than you were. In your case it was simply "You have this awful tendency to create drama" and you spent the vast majority of your time either doing things that would get you banned for a short period of time and then every time it happened you would immediately start antagonizing and sending evemails all over the place, and when 90% of the evemails are about you or are from you, it becomes pretty clear where the common denominator is and where the problem lies.
You want to be unbanned, you're going to need to talk to Graelyn, but good luck with that because you pushed so hard you made him sick of having to deal with you.
Where are these evemails?
Where are these bad things, that got her banned?..
I have asked facts and you give me what? Just insults again?
What exactly and when was said between last and current ban, that was so awful?
Show us this drama and compare what she was doing with what others were doing during this period.
As for asking him unbanned - No. I won't. I asked several times, I asked for reason - none was provided. I asked for term - he replied "it's all very nebulous".
Let him unban her when he will wish, I don't care about it. With current situation, when you return to the channel and try to avoid any rules violation, try to behave and even don't insult really bad peoples, who attack you personally, and you get banned regardless, there is no real reason to return there, until the situation with moderation will become professional and peoples stop giving bans because someone scratches left heel.
Which, I hope, will happen someday.
-
You screamed obsenities (sp) at Morwen for HOURS in local. You received literally dozens of warnings, many of which were from me personally, to dial it down a notch. You were asked, told, begged, pleaded with, for over a year.
And for what it is worth, I STILL argued against the permanent ban, but it is not my channel.
You know, if you put as much effort into patching up the bridges youve burned, and maybe trying to get along a bit with the rest of the kids in the sandbox, even a teensy bit, as you did into this whole thread? You'd be way ahead.
-
Maybe I wasn't succinct enough in my last post.
The core of the problem lies in the fact that Diana Kim is a horrible person who treats almost everyone with contemptuous disrespect.
And this is obvious lie about the character.
Diana Kim is rather respectful and polite character, but harsh and ruthless to her enemies. To make easier her RP, for her (and for couple others) I have charts with characters, towards whom she is harsh. For Diana personally, there are two lists: first list, for those who were continuously trolling and insulting her without reason. She tends to avoid these peoples, don't pay attention to their words, and only against them she is allowed sometimes to make first insults, since they were doing it multiple times earlier. Luckily - this list is incredibly short and getting into it rather hard.
Second list is rather large - it is obvious enemies (all members of FDU/TDF) and characters, who has shown hostile behaviour - insults of her out of nothing, minor trolling, insults of Tibus Heth (not constant, though, just single), those, who she just considers enemies and prefers to shoot at than talk with. It is rather easy to get into this list, and easy to get out :D To this peoples Diana simply doesn't pay proper respect and maintains very cold and harsh stance. She is allowed to insult them only when they insult her. She might show respect to them, but they should work rather hard for this :)
For all other peoples, she is polite and respectful, and you can easily see it for yourself, if you peek into "Intergalactic Summit" and just hear how she speaks with others. Of course, just hear, don't try to talk with her. You should know why.
NO.
Until YOU GO AWAY from our space and our planet, federal scum will be hunted everywhere, as criminals who serve criminal gallentean hegemony, and all of you will be destroyed without mercy.
Maybe when Caldari boots will stomp your door down, and your family will be shot down on your own eyes, when your planets will be bombarded from the orbit, you will understand us.
Until then... see you soon!
Oh, and almost forgot, gallentean, can you tell us where you live, so I could send you those mounds of gallentean bodies, I make daily in Villore and collect them from wrecks?
Don't worry, I don't kill PoWs though, I kill them before capture Big smile So, yea. No POWs. Sorry.
All enemies of the State simply die.
I know you will include this example of your posting as directed towards Diana's enemies. But surely you can see how this quality of vitriol will make other characters less likely to want to have anything to do with Diana? It's not exactly showing a "polite and respectful" kind of character.
-
Let him unban her when he will wish, I don't care about it.
So stop posting about it.
No, seriously. Don't start this shitstorm of a thread and then feign like you don't care. You care, a lot, which is why you've chosen to throw down in public. This isn't some altruistic 'lets improve the moderation methods' thread. It's not even an anarchistic 'fight the power' rant. This is a temper tantrum, because you're not allowed back in the Summit, you don't agree with the reasons why (and are summarily ignoring them), and demand different and 'better' reasons.
You definitely care. This whole thread is you caring.
-
Maybe I wasn't succinct enough in my last post.
The core of the problem lies in the fact that Diana Kim is a horrible person who treats almost everyone with contemptuous disrespect.
And this is obvious lie about the character.
Diana Kim is rather respectful and polite character
I'm sorry, DK, but it's not a lie, because a lie implies intentional misrepresentation for the purpose of attack. Andreus was actually being very polite in his posts there and trying to help. You can view it as him misunderstanding your character and so you can choose not to agree with his assessment, but it certainly wasn't a lie because it wasn't an intentionally malicious misrepresentation.
Secondly, no, DK is not respectful and polite. This is not a lie, it's the truth. Just because you are unwilling to believe it doesn't make it a lie. Does she try to be respectful and polite towards a small minority of people? Sure. But that doesn't make her respectful or polite as a general character trait. She is quite probably the most hostile and abrasive character that I have seen in EVE RP, and considering the general demeanor of most other capsuleers that's saying something.
Can you blame other characters for "starting it"? I suppose. I can't speak from personal experience since I wasn't around when DK was new and still establishing herself. But the key to being an actually respectful and polite character is that they are able to ignore attacks against them in favor of maintaining that respectability; it means they don't fight fire with fire. Diana does not do this. She takes every attack personally, and responds with equal and often superior force. This in turn prompts other characters to up their game, and so on and so forth it becomes a vicious cycle. If DK wants that hostility to end, then she's going to have to be the one to take the high road and learn to let attacks roll off her shoulders and refuse to respond with insults of her own. She's going to have to treat even the people who are opposed to her with respect if she wants to get anywhere.
Now, I will say that this is not a requirement for RP, since as I've said before IC conflict is a good thing and it's okay if characters don't like each other and are hostile with each other. But this is a lesson that is just as important for OOC relations, too. Far more important there, actually. Maybe you consider yourself the victim here, but that doesn't matter. Responding with hostility won't help your case and won't make people vouch for you. More often, it will make those of us who do try to stand up for you throw up our hands in frustration because you just go and run back into the fire. I don't support the ban, but if you want anything to get resolved you need to recognize that it's a two-way-street and that there needs to be some give-and-take. Don't dismiss criticism and advice out of hand.
-
This Diana Kim character sounds like a pretty good roleplayer :)
-
Secondly, no, DK is not respectful and polite. This is not a lie, it's the truth. Just because you are unwilling to believe it doesn't make it a lie. Does she try to be respectful and polite towards a small minority of people? Sure. But that doesn't make her respectful or polite as a general character trait. She is quite probably the most hostile and abrasive character that I have seen in EVE RP, and considering the general demeanor of most other capsuleers that's saying something.
Can you blame other characters for "starting it"? I suppose. I can't speak from personal experience since I wasn't around when DK was new and still establishing herself. But the key to being an actually respectful and polite character is that they are able to ignore attacks against them in favor of maintaining that respectability; it means they don't fight fire with fire. Diana does not do this. She takes every attack personally, and responds with equal and often superior force. This in turn prompts other characters to up their game, and so on and so forth it becomes a vicious cycle. If DK wants that hostility to end, then she's going to have to be the one to take the high road and learn to let attacks roll off her shoulders and refuse to respond with insults of her own. She's going to have to treat even the people who are opposed to her with respect if she wants to get anywhere.
She is indeed very aggressive character, and as for being polite towards small minority - it is generally everyone she meets, before they start attack her :P
As for blaming about starting it.. well, it isn't actual blame. It is DK's trait. She is very conflict-inspiring character, although she never starts conflict herself. But when someone starts it against her, she willingly accepts it and... escalates :twisted:
It is a character to fight, to conflict, to make enemies and wreak havoc, and sometimes I am rather disappointed, when instead of a violence character gets... rather unusual interaction :P
She is also rather flexible character and can cease conflict, if other party wishes so. Otherwise, she will never do it herself and will just continue escalating.
In short, I could describe her best as "She is looking for trouble".
Now, I will say that this is not a requirement for RP, since as I've said before IC conflict is a good thing and it's okay if characters don't like each other and are hostile with each other. But this is a lesson that is just as important for OOC relations, too. Far more important there, actually. Maybe you consider yourself the victim here, but that doesn't matter. Responding with hostility won't help your case and won't make people vouch for you. More often, it will make those of us who do try to stand up for you throw up our hands in frustration because you just go and run back into the fire. I don't support the ban, but if you want anything to get resolved you need to recognize that it's a two-way-street and that there needs to be some give-and-take. Don't dismiss criticism and advice out of hand.
Well, character traits aside, the topic was about the ban without reason.
There is a thing, that can be considered as criticism and advice.
For example, when people say "Diana, calling gallentes filth is bad, stop it, or you be muted".
Diana: But gallentes are filth!
Mod: MUTED.
This is pretty much Diana's behavior. She asks for trouble - she gets it. She knows she is doing something wrong, she knows consequences, yet she continues knowing the result.
What happened now:
Diana talks in summit, Diana gets banned. Diana has no idea what she said wrong.
She wasn't asked to stop doing something. She wasn't even notified what she said wrong.
She just was banned.
For criticism, you say something like, this is bad, you should not do this (maybe tell why, but it is not really necessary - just at least to know how to behave to not get banned).
Advice? There was none.
Just people saying Diana is bad, Diana is awful, Diana is terrible.. How is this criticism?
Nobody said yet what exactly she said wrong for the ban.
And that's the problem.
-
You screamed obsenities (sp) at Morwen for HOURS in local.
This was outside of the channel, and for what Morwen was doing for WEEKS in channel. Diana will never admit it IC, but it was just a revenge for lies and insults for all that time.
You received literally dozens of warnings, many of which were from me personally, to dial it down a notch. You were asked, told, begged, pleaded with, for over a year.
Yet nothing was recieved for last two bans, except bans themselves.
And, although, there was kinda violation that triggered the first ban (I still will never agree it was enough for ban), there was none for second.
And for what it is worth, I STILL argued against the permanent ban, but it is not my channel.
And I still don't understand what was said wrong for that ban...
I browsed logs for several days, there was nothing terribly wrong, many peoples were saying things way worse than I have ever said...
You know, if you put as much effort into patching up the bridges youve burned, and maybe trying to get along a bit with the rest of the kids in the sandbox, even a teensy bit, as you did into this whole thread? You'd be way ahead.
I tried... but Im tired of this.
How I can do what to do, if peoples don't even say what exactly was wrong?
I tried to be polite, I tried to be professional, I simply tired of that *censored*
If I need to do something... then, what exactly? :|
-
What happened now:
Diana talks in summit, Diana gets banned. Diana has no idea what she said wrong.
She wasn't asked to stop doing something. She wasn't even notified what she said wrong.
She just was banned.
On at least one occasion you were hurling insults at a moderator for several hours before a ban was given. It doesn't matter whether it was in-character or not.
For criticism, you say something like, this is bad, you should not do this (maybe tell why, but it is not really necessary - just at least to know how to behave to not get banned).
Advice? There was none.
This thread is full of people trying to give you advice on how to moderate your behaviour. You keep casually disregarding us and telling us that we're wrong without backing up your statements.
You want me to put it simply? Moderate your portrayal of Diana Kim's ego and behaviour with knowledge of the out-of-character implications of that behaviour. For instance, you give us a good example of that here:
For example, when people say "Diana, calling gallentes filth is bad, stop it, or you be muted".
Diana: But gallentes are filth!
Mod: MUTED.
If a moderator tells Diana to stop calling Gallenteans filth, have Diana stop calling Gallenteans filth. And if you literally cannot bring yourself to do that, then I can only suggest that you alter your portrayal of Diana Kim so she doesn't hate Gallenteans or the Federation. That would resolve a lot of the issues you're currently having.
Just people saying Diana is bad, Diana is awful, Diana is terrible.. How is this criticism?
What's actually happening is we're giving you reasons why Diana Kim's behaviour is received so negatively, and lots and lots of advice on how you might change that. From my perspective it seems very much like you're flat out ignoring it or pretending that it isn't being given to you.
-
Oh, and more, yesterday someone banned Mika.
What she did? Just posted link to this discussion.
Good job, good job.
-
So, DK, two concise questions:
Why do you think you got (multiple) modded?
Why did the mod actions have no impact on your behaviour?
-
This is pretty much Diana's behavior. She asks for trouble - she gets it. She knows she is doing something wrong, she knows consequences, yet she continues knowing the result.
In that case I see no issue with her. If that's the kind of character she is intended to be then have at it. Hostile characters are not a bad thing, provided you are willing to accept the consequences for that hostility.
What happened now:
Diana talks in summit, Diana gets banned. Diana has no idea what she said wrong.
She wasn't asked to stop doing something. She wasn't even notified what she said wrong.
She just was banned.
For criticism, you say something like, this is bad, you should not do this (maybe tell why, but it is not really necessary - just at least to know how to behave to not get banned).
Advice? There was none.
Just people saying Diana is bad, Diana is awful, Diana is terrible.. How is this criticism?
Nobody said yet what exactly she said wrong for the ban.
And that's the problem.
And if that is the case, then that is a problem, yes. The moderator has a responsibility to give the person the reason for the ban, and if that reason is, "can't be bothered," or personal annoyance, or dislike of the character, rather than a specific case of rules-breaking (and there really, really needs to be a codified rule-list of what is and is not acceptable), then the ban is irresponsible and inappropriate. Now, as I personally am not a member of the moderator staff nor do I have all the private details, I can't say if there were or were not appropriate reasons. Whatever those reasons are and whether or not they are appropriate though is really something that should be discussed between the moderators and the aggrieved party in private conversation/PMs rather than in public.
-
It is irresponsible modding to ban people just because you "can't be bothered". Being a volunteer doesn't excuse it IMO. Especially in a game where you are basically denying the player access to the primary public RP outlet. Temporary mutes when a situation is super tense, disruptive, and toxic, sure, but bans I really, really don't understand.
What would you do if someone was talking about you (presumably in a negative light) in a semi-public forum in which you were banned? Sit on your hands and just accept that any potential first impressions with others you might engage are already tainted by what another individual (who is essentially your enemy) says?
If it's IC, who gives a crap?
I was afraid to say it at first myself considering my track record.
It wouldn't be an issue if the channel never became the cornerstone of RP. If you have to infiltrate alts after your own ban to continue being able to be in a one way only relationship with the people the channel kept you in liaison with, that's pretty insane. It gets even worse when you take into account the issues mentioned by Orange previously.
Basically the owners of the channel never really managed to evolve with their channel popularity that skyrocketed that well and now embraces a huge part of this community. Being barred from OOC basically means choking to death on the RP scene. You can still survive through other channels with your RP friends, but you lose every connection to the outside, it's more or less like going suddenly blind, and unable to continue waging the PR war that rages all over IC and OOC interactions. How many times have I seen on the OOC channel new players suddenly spitting on players they have actually never met, but just only heard of ? They were told so many times how awful some players were by an echo chamber or another that they suddenly start to treat the player in question that way, where the player is not even here. That's pretty much how you create pariahs the most efficiently. Human interaction at its finest.
The owners continue to administrate it like a private intimate channel, where it is certainly not anymore. That's a complicated matter to my eyes, to draw a line between where a simple channel becomes more than a private channels gathering people sharing the same ideal : a general, unavoidable channel for all this RP community. And one thing most people don't like, either in backstage or ingame like OOC/summit, it's to be told they made mistakes. It's an unconditional truth I have witnessed on every player community. It's too much to acknowledge most of the time, which is a shame. Most of the time people complaining about things just get told to stfu or get snark degrading remarks somehow justified because 95% of players deserved it (whether they do or not, I will be the first one to acknowledge that most people indeed deserve what they get). Mods perfectly know that their position in the community protects them of anything by the law of popularity as long as they act in accordance to public opinion.
It would make the channel atmosphere a lot more breathable if the team was a bit more... open and calm. Keep the smug away, and the authority complex leading players to only see abuse of authority everywhere (some of your mods already do it perfectly, cf Ava or Silas before he left, that's mod material). If a mod has to take vacations and breath before burning a fuse in public, then it's probably the best thing on earth to do. The main issue is hypocrisy at its finest, even if it's not intended at all : rules of channels ask for people to behave, and be respectful. It's the case for most channels, it's the case on backstage more than everywhere else, but anywhere I have been, (some) mods are no better than players at times, and do not actually give people reasons to behave otherwise. Always a few bad apples in every mod team, that's an universal constant. The only thing you can hope is that this number will prove to be the smallest possible, which like everything can be depressing.
When I read a topic like that when the player actually has to wait for non mods replies to actually get an answer, it's pretty telling. Imo, if mods have to resort to the usual very convenient excuse of "we are only amateurs so that we behave as we like", the mod is not deemed to be a mod. That's the worst thing to say and only lessens the image people have of moderation. It only entertains a standard for mediocrity.
-
Lyn,
The problem becomes when a mod has tried to respond and then told that the aggrieved party does not consider them a mod and will not listen to them and demands to speak to a mod, what then?
-
Let's try to remember that I'm damn awesome.
-
Let's try to remember that I'm damn awesome.
ಠ_à²
-
I would feel very uncomfortable if that had happened to me. In a rough universe like EVE, one should stay polite—especially in the small RP community. A little mail stating a reason should do, shouldn’t it? (Whatever one mod has done, it doesn’t justify or explain what another does, unless we all become mind readers, which we still have not.)
The owners of the channel can do whatever they want and stuff is neither an argument nor a justification. It is the logic of a six year old child who doesn’t want to play with other children because it is his sandbox.
-
I still fail to see why people keep coming back to the Summit if they hate the moderation so much. There already exists another channel. There already exists the opportunity to make your own. Attempts have been made before to make their own. CCP stepped down from the fucking heavens and MADE A CLONE OF THE SUMMIT AND OOC just for you. Just for all of you, who don't like the way we moderate.
You don't want to go anywhere else, for whatever reason. You want to sit your pretty butts down right where you are, point fingers, and complain about us. You demand professional moderation, from amateurs, from volunteers spending our game time to moderate a bunch of roleplayers. I signed up for this job because I wanted to help you all. I wanted to be something better for the community. I saw all the older threads just like this, and said I could do better. I looked at the mod team, and it's true... I thought I could do better than all of them.
Maybe I'm not cut out to be a moderator. God knows I've tried to be respectful to most of you when acting as a moderator. I've tried to be fair. I've done my best. Some of you, yes, I crossed a line. Most of the time, as far as I know, I've apologized when it's been pointed out. Maybe I just didn't do a good enough job. Maybe I'm not a perfect fucking snowflake like Lyn over there. Maybe we should all aspire to be as fair and balanced as he is.
I know one thing for sure. For all the efforts I've spent trying to be a friend to most of you, I've been called more names after becoming a moderator than I ever was before. Maybe it's the anti-authority streak you all have. Maybe I was just that much of a bitch. Whatever the case, I certainly did not sign up to be treated like a minimum wage bar wench without being paid, and grin and take it.
Well, from the bottom of my heart: Fuck. That.
I don't give a flying fuck in February what Diana thinks at this point. I tried to help. I talked to him about it repeatedly. Towards the end, yes, I was sick of hearing about how horrible Morwen is, or how horrible Ava is, or (via other parties), hearing about how horrible I am, or Graelyn, or Tiberious... or who the fuck ever else managed to get in Diana's panties at the moment. We sent multiple mails. We sent multiple warnings. She ignored them, or was too thickheaded to follow through with them.
If Diana Kim agrees to airing the mails I've sent to her in public, I'll post them here unadulterated. Because I actually like my account and don't want it banned, I will only be including what I typed to Diana. This is only if Diana explicitly grants permission (by saying so here) to post them here in front of everybody.
-
Lyn,
The problem becomes when a mod has tried to respond and then told that the aggrieved party does not consider them a mod and will not listen to them and demands to speak to a mod, what then?
The problem becomes when someone starts talking about situation, where they weren't there, didn't managed to ask or even read what happened and talk about situation that happened about 2 months ago, like it was the current problem. While it was related to one of situations, it isn't the current one. I could provide with reason why I did this, of course if you will show your desire to know it, and not just post misinformation.
Thus I ask you to stop doing it and do not mislead readers further by feeding them with outdated information. Thanks in advance.
-
I still fail to see why people keep coming back to the Summit if they hate the moderation so much.
[spoiler](http://i.imgur.com/bjZjHxJ.jpg)[/spoiler] :?:
-
Why does this subforum even exist? It seems to only perform the function of hosting edgecase threads about the moderation of a channel in game. I mean, I guess there is the "good RP" logs thread but thats about it for actual content. Otherwise it's just complaining.
-
Why does this subforum even exist?
People wanted it.
Also, it is used to discuss ideas for events and things.
I guess people are all out of ideas. :|
-
Lyn,
The problem becomes when a mod has tried to respond and then told that the aggrieved party does not consider them a mod and will not listen to them and demands to speak to a mod, what then?
The problem becomes when someone starts talking about situation, where they weren't there, didn't managed to ask or even read what happened and talk about situation that happened about 2 months ago, like it was the current problem. While it was related to one of situations, it isn't the current one. I could provide with reason why I did this, of course if you will show your desire to know it, and not just post misinformation.
Thus I ask you to stop doing it and do not mislead readers further by feeding them with outdated information. Thanks in advance.
You know...it is not worth the stress to get into this with you. I am sick and tired of you labeling me falsely a liar.
I have witnessed you in OOC on several different occasions declare quite openly that a mod was in fact not a mod and you wanted to speak to a moderator. And this happened at least three different times over the last five months.
There was a time where I tried to be nice IC to Kim, I really did. You burned that bridge. And now you've burned it OOC as well.
-
I still fail to see why people keep coming back to the Summit if they hate the moderation so much. There already exists another channel. There already exists the opportunity to make your own. Attempts have been made before to make their own. CCP stepped down from the fucking heavens and MADE A CLONE OF THE SUMMIT AND OOC just for you. Just for all of you, who don't like the way we moderate.
You don't want to go anywhere else, for whatever reason. You want to sit your pretty butts down right where you are, point fingers, and complain about us. You demand professional moderation, from amateurs, from volunteers spending our game time to moderate a bunch of roleplayers. I signed up for this job because I wanted to help you all. I wanted to be something better for the community. I saw all the older threads just like this, and said I could do better. I looked at the mod team, and it's true... I thought I could do better than all of them.
Maybe I'm not cut out to be a moderator. God knows I've tried to be respectful to most of you when acting as a moderator. I've tried to be fair. I've done my best. Some of you, yes, I crossed a line. Most of the time, as far as I know, I've apologized when it's been pointed out. Maybe I just didn't do a good enough job. Maybe I'm not a perfect fucking snowflake like Lyn over there. Maybe we should all aspire to be as fair and balanced as he is.
I know one thing for sure. For all the efforts I've spent trying to be a friend to most of you, I've been called more names after becoming a moderator than I ever was before. Maybe it's the anti-authority streak you all have. Maybe I was just that much of a bitch. Whatever the case, I certainly did not sign up to be treated like a minimum wage bar wench without being paid, and grin and take it.
Well, from the bottom of my heart: Fuck. That.
I don't give a flying fuck in February what Diana thinks at this point. I tried to help. I talked to him about it repeatedly. Towards the end, yes, I was sick of hearing about how horrible Morwen is, or how horrible Ava is, or (via other parties), hearing about how horrible I am, or Graelyn, or Tiberious... or who the fuck ever else managed to get in Diana's panties at the moment. We sent multiple mails. We sent multiple warnings. She ignored them, or was too thickheaded to follow through with them.
If Diana Kim agrees to airing the mails I've sent to her in public, I'll post them here unadulterated. Because I actually like my account and don't want it banned, I will only be including what I typed to Diana. This is only if Diana explicitly grants permission (by saying so here) to post them here in front of everybody.
People don't stay amateurs all their life. People learn by doing their job.
Unlike many peoples who replied here, I don't tell things like "you are horrible".
I point exactly what was wrong, and my demands to moderators are rather definite and clear:
- to provide warning/information about rules before banning for them
(like Ava was saying, to tone down a notch, which wasn't done in neither of two previous bans)
- to explain which behavior is strictly forbidden (will be banned), and which is not encouraged, that I still can do, but will be modded for short term for this
- for the modding provide exact date, time and violation, and if it won't be obvious:
- tell what exactly it violated and why i should avoid it
I don't think it is really that hard, and on these terms a constructive dialogue can be made.
And in your turn I ask you to help me actually. Instead I get just insults as reply. Where was warning for previous two bans, really? I have asked this question before, you didn't answer, and you again are saying that I was warned. I am asking second time, just tell when if you don't wish to copypaste text, I still have myself all the logs, and if such warning was, I will apologize, of course... of course, if it was. You warned me about other things. And I am asking about stated incidents.
And why would you bring Morwen, Ava, Tiberious to this? To them as moderators I had complaints more than two months ago, so I don't know how you got sick from it, unless someone else was telling you about it. Then why do you come to me with it? Their cases aside, for the situation around the last ban, I have a case only to Katrina Oniseki as a moderator for not professional behavior.
And I will explain how and why.
There was a combined complaint to moderators on two characters in one, first complaint - just funny for RP reasons, while second one was against quite disruptive behavior and direct insults.
Moderator Katrina Oniseki replied to this complaint with reject in rude form to act, claiming that Diana Kim "was still banned". After that, Diana Kim indeed was banned, however, both complaint and what was said to her, was filled before the ban, and even Graelyn himself before that was saying that Diana Kim was unbanned after previous ban.
If you wish to post this mail - go ahead.
-
Wait, seriously? This is what you're upset about? My pun?
Re: Ayallah; Ava Starfire
From: Katrina Oniseki
Sent: 2014.05.16 17:27
To: Ava Starfire, Diana Kim, Esna Pitoojee, Graelyn, Inara Subaka, Jekaterine, Tiberious Thessalonia,
You're still banned. Your reports are automatically null and void.
That means they are blasted away into the trash bin, and ignored.
Get it? Blasted?! Because Null (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Null_L) and Void (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Void_L)? HONHONHON, I crack me up!
... wow. Well if that honestly offended you, I'm sorry.
Also, I didn't know at the time that you were unbanned. The last time I had spoken with the mods about you, you had been placed on permaban, so I didn't expect you'd be allowed back. I also thought I checked the list to make sure you were before sending it? I certainly didn't ban you again after sending the mail.
Seems to be some sort of confusion here.
-
Lyn,
The problem becomes when a mod has tried to respond and then told that the aggrieved party does not consider them a mod and will not listen to them and demands to speak to a mod, what then?
The problem becomes when someone starts talking about situation, where they weren't there, didn't managed to ask or even read what happened and talk about situation that happened about 2 months ago, like it was the current problem. While it was related to one of situations, it isn't the current one. I could provide with reason why I did this, of course if you will show your desire to know it, and not just post misinformation.
Thus I ask you to stop doing it and do not mislead readers further by feeding them with outdated information. Thanks in advance.
You know...it is not worth the stress to get into this with you. I am sick and tired of you labeling me falsely a liar.
I have witnessed you in OOC on several different occasions declare quite openly that a mod was in fact not a mod and you wanted to speak to a moderator. And this happened at least three different times over the last five months.
Umm... what.
First, it happened once.
Second, I was telling about the ban, that was issued without reason, while you came up with it as a reason, when difference between events was about a month, or more.
Third, this is a misunderstanding, that you are using to escalate situation between me and moderators.
I am asking you second time to cease it.
There was a time where I tried to be nice IC to Kim, I really did. You burned that bridge. And now you've burned it OOC as well.
IC character Steffanie Saissore was publicly claiming that Diana Kim was flying a dominix, thus labeling character Steffanie Saissore a liar was not false and was caused by her actions.
If you have more questions about this, please use my email, because your and Diana relations are absolutely not relevant in this discussion.
-
Wait, seriously? This is what you're upset about? My pun?
Re: Ayallah; Ava Starfire
From: Katrina Oniseki
Sent: 2014.05.16 17:27
To: Ava Starfire, Diana Kim, Esna Pitoojee, Graelyn, Inara Subaka, Jekaterine, Tiberious Thessalonia,
You're still banned. Your reports are automatically null and void.
That means they are blasted away into the trash bin, and ignored.
Get it? Blasted?! Because Null (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Null_L) and Void (https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Void_L)? HONHONHON, I crack me up!
... wow. Well if that honestly offended you, I'm sorry.
Also, I didn't know at the time that you were unbanned. The last time I had spoken with the mods about you, you had been placed on permaban, so I didn't expect you'd be allowed back. I also thought I checked the list to make sure you were before sending it? I certainly didn't ban you again after sending the mail.
Seems to be some sort of confusion here.
Yes, indeed.
I am sorry, I really thought at first you just banned me just to ignore this complaint.
Obviously there was something before that, which still remains mystery.
And I am sorry, I think I should have stated clearly in complaint that I was present at that time in the channel, for example, by adding a couple of my own replies. :ugh:
-
And I am sorry, I think I should have stated clearly in complaint that I was present at that time in the channel, for example, by adding a couple of my own replies. :ugh:
On second look, the fact that Ayallah was talking directly to you should have been more of a clue, but - I did ignore the complaint mostly out of hand because there had been previous complaints being made while you were banned months ago. I figured it was just a continuation of the very same. Bah. Mistakes made.
Also, did anybody else in this thread know Diana was talking about me until now? Because I completely missed it.
-
K, time for me to weigh in on this because apparently I am the Super Big Bad Evil Person of Terribleness.
Starting at the top:
The problems are :
1. Moderators troll and insult players, and when they reply back - they mute. If they put moderators on ignore - they ban them.
2. Moderators ban and mute without warning for rules that were not explained or written anywhere and without warning that this activity is against the rules.
3. Moderators ban without reasons.
Example: 16.05 this year character Diana Kim was found banned from both The Summit and OOC channels.
Reasons of the ban were not given. Character was evading any violation of known rules in the channel.
When Graelyn was confronted to give exact violation, instead of facts, he provided only insults as reply.
1. There's a fundamental disconnect here. First, your definition of trolling apparently works along the lines of "they disagree with me", because to troll I would generally have to not be serious about things I say. Kindly note that when it comes to warning your character she is out of line or acting inappropriately in the Summit, Morwen is being completely serious. Likewise the same between you (the player) and me (the player) when in OOC.
Just because you do not think a moderator who disagrees with you or your character is a "real mod" does not mean that their warning is not serious, or is trolling. It is completely serious, and your refusal to acknowledge those warnings and act on them by continuing the behavior that got the warning issued in the first place, is what results in those mutes and bans. As for ignoring/blocking moderators, that's been a long-standing thing and is common sense. If you've got the mods blocked, you can't see their warnings when there's a problem; if they block you, they can't verify complaints from other users. Both result in the moderators not being able to do their jobs.
2. The vast majority of these rules are common sense and have been in place for a long while. In your case, you were muted/banned (initially, a long while ago) for extended series of direct personal attacks towards other users that did not cease when you were asked to by moderators. Your recent one-month ban was handed out as a result of cumulative poor behavior and an overwhelming number of mails - NOT JUST FROM YOU - flooding Graelyn's inbox, suggesting that the common thread factor was you. I will quote some of his words on the subject, as he made a copy of the email he sent to you and the other moderators available to the public on Pastebin at the same time he sent it:
I'm sitting here looking at my NINETY-SEVEN emails on Diana Kim-related complaints. That's including all DK-related moderations, complaints by DK and people speaking on behalf of DK (all against one mod, though all the mods are unanimous so far on each judgement, an amazing achievement in and of itself), and my personal favorites, lots of our most repected channel users saying that all of this drama seriously impacts the enjoyment they get from the channel.
In the same time span, we have....4 emails on any other party.
That's just unheard of.
That sort of divergence indicates something to me;
One, that on the whole, damn near every person using our channels is doing so properly and productively. Moderator actions are at an All-Time low, and that's a good thing.
Second, that we have a problem that is affecting everything we do, coming from a single source.
Just prior to that, you were given a ten-hour mute, by me, for breaking one of our common-sense rules: No violence directed at other people on camera, whether player or NPC. Period. We don't allow it.
Technically, at the time, I was supposed to ban you for a month for that, according to instructions from Graelyn to the rest of the moderators. I decided to ignore those instructions and gave you a mute rather than a ban partly because I had work to get back to - that whole incident sucked up a fucking hour of my time at my real-life job, dealing with your bitching and pissing and moaning in OOC afterward - but also because I wanted to make sure that the other moderators had an opportunity to weigh in and say whether Graelyn's original instructions were appropriate for the incident.
3. Reasons for all of your mutes and bans have been given, shortly after they have been enacted, either by mail or publicly in the channels when you've started bitching about it there. Just because you don't consider a moderator a "real mod" does not mean that the reasons were not given, or are not valid. It just means you're sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming "LA LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" at the top of your lungs.
- Your 10-hour mute was, as I explained when I gave it to you, for violating the "no violence on camera" rule which had been around for years; we've warned people for it before in the year or so you've been using the channel (Foley's been warned a few times for it, in fact, back when he was doing all his crazy antics).
- Your month-long ban was, as explained to you in the mail Graelyn sent (and I've partially quoted above), what I was supposed to have done instead of muting you, in response to an overwhelming amount of complaints and reports coming in suggesting that removing YOU from the equation would solve the problem.
- Your current (indefinite) ban, according to Graelyn, was because the FIRST THING YOU DID after not even having been back from your previous ban for a week, was to fire off a complaint about two people, one of whom was insulting an NPC character, not you. You were continuing a pattern that we had identified - and, in fact, drawn attention to - before your previous ban. It was mentioned in the mail he sent, in the first paragraph quoted above, in fact. Rather than try to continue what was rightly determined to be a pointless effort, he cut his losses (few as they were) and just banned you. If you want a short and sweet answer for the reason, it is this; you were (and are still, in many respects) wasting a wholly inappropriate amount of the moderation volunteers' time.
Aelisha makes some good points.
Kat also makes some good points in his first post. More or less what I've said already.
Desiderya nails it on the head and gives you some pretty good advice.
Again, Kat makes more good points. If you want to come back, you're going to have to show Graelyn that you're not going to immediately become a drain on our time and energy.
Veik also makes a pretty good point, and being someone whose character often trolls or is antagonistic towards other characters, he'd know what he's talking about.
Andreus: Your decision to do as requested (it wasn't me making the request, let's clear that up first) was appreciated. So thanks for that. That said, the expectation on Diana's part that people shouldn't be allowed to make any sort of reference to her character is both unreasonable and unrealistic. Sorry, but the notion that someone can't be mentioned just because they're not there or can't respond is ridiculous, and can not, should not, and will not be enforced. If your character makes an impression, people are going to talk about them. Whether you're there or not, whether you (or your character) like it or not. That's what happens in real life.
Tib also nails it on the head.
orange: In this particular case, there are an excessively large number of forum posts that could just as easily provide the exact same "first impression" as some people venting about another person would. People make their beds and should have to lie in them.
Lithium, you were banned for causing the management a headache (a reason). While you may not have broken a rule, the reason is fairly clear. Diane Kim created entirely too much drama within the player-run channels.
Well, haha, I wasn't causing any troubles since last ban, avoiding any "headache", still, banned :lol:
You were causing trouble, in exactly the manner I described above. You were continuing a pattern of behavior that suggested that your ban had had no effect whatsoever and that you intended to continue along the same exact path that had gotten you banned before. Graelyn decided not to waste his time with further futile attempts to get you to adjust that path.
It is irresponsible modding to ban people just because you "can't be bothered". Being a volunteer doesn't excuse it IMO. Especially in a game where you are basically denying the player access to the primary public RP outlet. Temporary mutes when a situation is super tense, disruptive, and toxic, sure, but bans I really, really don't understand.
What would you do if someone was talking about you (presumably in a negative light) in a semi-public forum in which you were banned? Sit on your hands and just accept that any potential first impressions with others you might engage are already tainted by what another individual (who is essentially your enemy) says?
If it's IC, who gives a crap?
A lot of places have "three strike" rules. Fuck up three times and you're out. We gave plenty more strikes than that over the course of a year - there comes a point where the amount of effort being put in is no longer worth it, and when it's members of the community who are sending us mails or contacting us on skype/steam/etc. to complain about it, a judgement call is going to be made in one direction or another. In this case it was decided that Diana was not worth the trouble of continued attempts on our part to communicate if we were going to be ignored just because we disagreed with her.
As for the "if it's IC..." I would agree. The people who do give a crap need to back off and remember they're talking about a character in that instance, not the player.
Andy's next post is spot-on, except for a few details that I have bolded and am going to clarify.
You know what, I'm going to go ahead and write this out anyway. You're pretty much free to read every word of it or completely ignore it, but take in mind I'm writing this pretty much exclusively for your benefit. The only thing I get out of this is finally getting this off my chest. I'm going to try and write this out in as level-headed a manner as possible, but if it gets Catacomb'd, oh well - at least I made an effort.
So there's a lot of stuff in here that you probably already know, but I feel the need to illustrate my thought processes, so if any of this is old news to you, forgive me.
Let's start at the root of it - Diana Kim, the in-universe character in EVE Online. Diana Kim is not a nice person by any possible stretch of the imagination. She's rude, arrogant, disrepsectful, abrasive, antisocial, violent, spiteful, deceptive, mean-spirited, racist, bigoted, emotionally manipulative, short-sighted, close-minded, mentally unstable, wilfully ignorant, chronically hypocritical and completely irrational - she's essentially a walking collection of personality flaws. Now, this in and of itself is not a bad thing - in fact, observing her from an outside perspective is very compelling given that she's a woman helplessly ensnared by Provist propaganda, clutching desperately to the illusions she has of how the world should be as she slowly watches them become more and more removed from the actual reality of the situation. That's good roleplay material right there.
Where the problem starts is when Diana Kim interacts with other capsuleers. An extremely abrasive, strongly opinionated character like Diana Kim doesn't react well to being told she's wrong and reacts even worse to being shown she's wrong. When people call Diana Kim out on the outrageous things she says, she tends to react with either flat denial or insults - accusations of treason if the relevant character is Caldari, "dirty jaijii" etc. if they aren't. Even at her most polite she isn't willing to consider other people's points of views. This leads to an increasingly limited amount of interaction people who don't agree with her can actually engage in without her either insulting or ignoring them. This eventually leads them to either insult her or ignore her, which in turn further limits the people she can meaningfully interact with.
There is, again, nothing wrong with this in and of itself.
So we get to a point where, eventually, Diana Kim's behaviour becomes so abrasive and insufferable that, in-character, people are no longer willing to tolerate it. Remember that in-universe The Summit is an actual communications channel run by actual capsuleers, and they have feelings and limited patience just like real human beings do. In at least one instance, eventually one the moderators, in-character, got so tired of being called names by Kim that they lodged a ban.1 Now, again, there's nothing specifically wrong with this.
The problem comes when you, Lithium Flower, the player, become unable to separate Diana Kim's behaviour and ego from your own.
I have noticed, in certain ways, that you act a lot like your in-game avatar. I'm not going to guilt-trip you for this because I do the same. Andreus Ixiris is almost an extension and exaggeration of my own personality to the extent where if this were a slightly less serious setting he'd probably have at least some awareness of it. I have in the past had - and, as a matter of fact still do have - trouble distancing myself from the challenges to Andreus' ego. Emotional investment in your character is not neccessarily a bad thing - in fact, I think some amount of emotional investment in your character is neccessary. However, at this point, your investment in your character is leading to behaviour that is damaging your ability to interact with the roleplay community (i.e. it's getting you banned from The Summit and OOC). Either you have to step back from your character and not take attacks against them so personally, or you need to tone down your character's behaviour and make them more reasonable.
Honestly at this point I think you may have gone as far as you can go with Diana Kim's current line of behaviour. It might be time to have her reconsider her life.2
1- Morwen was the recipient of this abusive behavior. However, Diana was never banned for calling Morwen a whore in local for four hours, to my knowledge. If she was banned for it, it wasn't by me.
2- I disagree. It's not so much her life that needs reconsidering, it's the behavior and way she interacts with others. Separate issues.
Samira's response to Orange is pretty much how I'm seeing things. As Tib points out in his post, the only time we're going to ban alts of a single player is when it is clearly the player, OOC, that is the issue. The one and only exception to this is if we have to mute/ban someone in OOC for something not justifying a perma but still meriting instant moderator response and they use their alts to get around it. (As an example of the kind of behavior that would merit this sort of response - calling someone else a fag in the channel. It isn't tolerated there, just like it isn't tolerated on Backstage.)
Tib's next post again states the same thing other people said and that I stated above, regarding the current ban situation.
Andreus' post is a little on the harsh side, but I would not call it an inaccurate assessment. Not so sure about the suggestion at the end.
Desiderya's post, "statistics" aside, is pretty accurate.
Kala is correct in his assessment regarding problems and their sources.
Passing on Vince's post...
Diana's next post. Hoboy.
Maybe I wasn't succinct enough in my last post.
The core of the problem lies in the fact that Diana Kim is a horrible person who treats almost everyone with contemptuous disrespect.
And this is obvious lie about the character.
Diana Kim is rather respectful and polite character, but harsh and ruthless to her enemies. To make easier her RP, for her (and for couple others) I have charts with characters, towards whom she is harsh. For Diana personally, there are two lists: first list, for those who were continuously trolling and insulting her without reason. She tends to avoid these peoples, don't pay attention to their words, and only against them she is allowed sometimes to make first insults, since they were doing it multiple times earlier. Luckily - this list is incredibly short and getting into it rather hard.
Second list is rather large - it is obvious enemies (all members of FDU/TDF) and characters, who has shown hostile behaviour - insults of her out of nothing, minor trolling, insults of Tibus Heth (not constant, though, just single), those, who she just considers enemies and prefers to shoot at than talk with. It is rather easy to get into this list, and easy to get out :D To this peoples Diana simply doesn't pay proper respect and maintains very cold and harsh stance. She is allowed to insult them only when they insult her. She might show respect to them, but they should work rather hard for this :)
For all other peoples, she is polite and respectful, and you can easily see it for yourself, if you peek into "Intergalactic Summit" and just hear how she speaks with others. Of course, just hear, don't try to talk with her. You should know why.
I'm going to burst your bubble here: When you advocate the destruction of an entire people, and scream about killing them on the IGS (as Kala provides an example of a few posts later), that counts as provocation for ANYONE who belongs to that people. Diana fired the first shot as far as our characters are concerned. It might not have been personally directed at specific individuals, but it is the reason those people are responding to her harshly, so you DO NOT get to say that people are attacking Diana without provocation. Diana's IGS posts are the provocation. Her words attacking the Federation and its people are the provocation. Her actions in space are the provocation. Take responsibility for what you do and say.
Andreus also says much of that in his next post.
And again, since you bring it up again, just because you don't like a reason doesn't mean it isn't one. I don't think Graelyn's reason is a great one but I cannot fault him for making it. It's no different than those two lists you have for the character. After enough crap, you throw someone onto the first list. Well, after enough crap, he gave up trying.
What Ava said, all of it. Morwen tried being nice to Diana for a while, especially when Heth disappeared and she (Diana) started visibly breaking down. Fuck, she offered to cook something and bring it to her, and that is not an offer she makes to just anyone. She's proud of her cooking but doesn't usually make the effort to make something and then bring it to someone. But Diana's behavior (and posting) regressed and she stopped trying. I (and Morwen) tried warning you multiple times when you're pushing the line, but you've ignored it out of hand or just attacked back.
And I, too, argued against your current ban. I'll quote portions of the mail I sent to Graelyn and the mailing list, with some minor toning down of language:
Re: Re: DK
From: Morwen Lagann
Sent: 2014.05.16 22:02
To: summitmods,
I'm going to have to take the unexpected stance and say I don't think jumping immediately to a ban was necessary in this case.
Yes, Diana has shown him/herself to be [someone who is incredibly frustrating to deal with and get across to].
He/she isn't alone in this. Pretty much anyone who we have to warn more than once or twice about shit falls into this category - the people who get it don't need more than that, and the people who do need more than that, by and large become a chronic issue.
Yes, Diana has demonstrated a tendency to resort to [what comes across as] the childish "if one moderator/parent says no, maybe the others will say yes" tactic by pretending any moderator that disagrees with him/her "isn't a real moderator" and then emailing every mod except those moderators.
Diana isn't the only one who does this sort of thing (except the "real moderator" [thing, only DK does that]) - a number of other people won't mail the entire moderation staff with issues and will only mail one or two of us at a time if they have an issue. I can understand and tolerate this to some extent when it's just an issue of "these people aren't around much so I'm not going to bother" (like, for example, Silas or Jek), but when people start doing it because they think it will get them what they want, that's when there's a problem. Surely I'm not the only person who has received complaints from people because they think I'm more likely to do something about their particular complaint than someone else on the team?
And yes, Diana has a tendency to report [non-issues].
(I would be extremely surprised to hear that Diana is the only person who has done this over the last couple of years, especially because I know I've responded to similar complaints and forwarded my responses and thoughts to the mailing list.)
But back to the main point here - did anyone aside from Ava, Esna or I (the mods who were ingame [at the time]) actually see the logs from last night?
All three of them were going at each other, and while I [am not typically the one] defending Diana, her complaint really is only spurious at worst: Aya and Ava were both being pretty aggressive, pretty much in the same way(s) I have been in the past when dealing with Diana's bullshit. Not necessarily aggressive enough to really warrant a complaint being made, but enough that it wouldn't have been entirely unreasonable to ask people to rein themselves in a little.
So yeah, tl;dr, I disagree with the decision to apply a ban here. I wouldn't have sent the mail I sent to the list last night if I had felt a ban was appropriate or necessary - I would have just said "banhammer plx" and left it at that.
-M
Passing on Kala's post.
Katrina again nails it - if you really didn't care as you claim you wouldn't spend so much time and effort throwing what comes off as a temper tantrum. As Kat closes his post, this whole thread is you caring.
I'd emptyquote Samira's post with a +1 but this is already getting long enough.
Your next response - again, as I said above, your IGS posting is often the first shot, and people respond to you based on that. Pretty much most of the older folks who use the Summit for starters - you only started using the channels last year around the time of the Caldari Prime event - we had nothing to go on but your IGS posting, and I guarantee you would not have been met with such the responses you have been, had you not been regularly posting such aggressive and hostile vitriol on the IGS.
I would disagree that you tried to fix things. If every time you ask us you just say we're wrong or lying when we give you an answer you don't like, you're not trying. You're just shaking a Magic 8-Ball repeatedly, asking the same question over and over, hoping to get the one side of the bobble that you want so you can call that your answer.
As for why Mika was banned, that's because the mods were told to ban all of your alts by Graelyn. He's senile and missed one.
Samira is right in the first part of her next post, and it's a repetition of something people have told you over and over, not just in this thread: if you want to have a hostile and aggressive character, that's great, but if you can't deal with or accept the consequences of that character's interactions with others you really should reconsider that decision.
Odelya: When one does not treat others with respect or politeness, those two things are often the first to go out the window when it comes to others interacting with that person. In this case, that is what happened. Graelyn could've been far ruder than he was and would have been quite justified in doing so.
Lyn,
The problem becomes when a mod has tried to respond and then told that the aggrieved party does not consider them a mod and will not listen to them and demands to speak to a mod, what then?
The problem becomes when someone starts talking about situation, where they weren't there, didn't managed to ask or even read what happened and talk about situation that happened about 2 months ago, like it was the current problem. While it was related to one of situations, it isn't the current one. I could provide with reason why I did this, of course if you will show your desire to know it, and not just post misinformation.
Thus I ask you to stop doing it and do not mislead readers further by feeding them with outdated information. Thanks in advance.
If you're going to start accusing people of lying, back your accusations up with proof. And if you are going to falsely accuse people of lying, you're going to be called a liar, yourself. (By the way, you're lying, in this post. Steff was there, pretty much every time I had to go through that scenario with you. And frequently said things to you in the process.) Every time you caused shit and had to be dealt with (whether it was by me or someone else) and didn't like the response, you whined in OOC asking for a mod. Generally, this was responded to by other people in the channel telling you that there were mods online or to mail Graelyn. You didn't care. If I, or any of the other moderators who actually had to take action responded, we were instantly dismissed with "I want to talk to a real mod, you aren't a real mod". Well, guess what, cupcake: just because you say we're not real mods doesn't mean it's true. So we had our responses ignored, and you instead shat up the channel repeatedly. It took a lot of restraint, not just on my part, but on the part of every other moderator, not to just mute you when you did that. In fact, apparently Katrina ALSO stood up for you as I did when Graelyn banned you this time.
And in case it hasn't become apparent to you yet, we do not consider individual incidents as wholly separate when they share a common factor - namely the person causing the incident. If someone causes the same kinds of problems over and over again, we are not going to treat repeated incidents as if it is the first time it's happened, every time.
People don't stay amateurs all their life. People learn by doing their job.
Unlike many peoples who replied here, I don't tell things like "you are horrible".
I point exactly what was wrong, and my demands to moderators are rather definite and clear:
- to provide warning/information about rules before banning for them
(like Ava was saying, to tone down a notch, which wasn't done in neither of two previous bans)
- to explain which behavior is strictly forbidden (will be banned), and which is not encouraged, that I still can do, but will be modded for short term for this
- for the modding provide exact date, time and violation, and if it won't be obvious:
- tell what exactly it violated and why i should avoid it
I don't think it is really that hard, and on these terms a constructive dialogue can be made.
And in your turn I ask you to help me actually. Instead I get just insults as reply. Where was warning for previous two bans, really? I have asked this question before, you didn't answer, and you again are saying that I was warned. I am asking second time, just tell when if you don't wish to copypaste text, I still have myself all the logs, and if such warning was, I will apologize, of course... of course, if it was. You warned me about other things. And I am asking about stated incidents.
And why would you bring Morwen, Ava, Tiberious to this? To them as moderators I had complaints more than two months ago, so I don't know how you got sick from it, unless someone else was telling you about it. Then why do you come to me with it? Their cases aside, for the situation around the last ban, I have a case only to Katrina Oniseki as a moderator for not professional behavior.
And I will explain how and why.
There was a combined complaint to moderators on two characters in one, first complaint - just funny for RP reasons, while second one was against quite disruptive behavior and direct insults.
Moderator Katrina Oniseki replied to this complaint with reject in rude form to act, claiming that Diana Kim "was still banned". After that, Diana Kim indeed was banned, however, both complaint and what was said to her, was filled before the ban, and even Graelyn himself before that was saying that Diana Kim was unbanned after previous ban.
Going point by point here, again:
- Personally speaking, whenever I have had to take action against you, you have always been given a reason, whether that reason came afterward (in the case of the 10-hour mute) or if it preceded the action and was ignored by you.
- As stated before, you were, technically, given a warning when Graelyn sent out that long mail the first time you were banned. Your ban was because of the thing I had to mute you for (the fact that there was an extremely rare alignment of literally the entire moderation team on the issue only served to strengthen that) - I was supposed to have banned you outright, then and there, but chose not to to make absolutely sure with the rest of the moderators that that was the decision we were going to make. I still had to do something because it was unacceptable for that fight to continue in the Summit, so I muted the people responsible. That you didn't like my explanation in OOC is your problem and not mine - it was still the reason and you weren't going to get it reversed by arguing about it.
- If we warn you for it, don't do it and you'll generally be fine. It is as simple as that. Unless it is particularly egregious or the person in question is causing trouble with frequency, first-time offenses for individual policies or rules typically will not get you a mute or ban. (tl;dr is what Veik said - the top of the MOTD says "BE TACTFUL." Try that.)
- We aren't going to moderate days later unless we need that much time to make a decision with the entire team. Or if someone is away and cant' respond in a timely fashion. It's not unheard of but it does happen. People who get moderated harshly in response to serious trouble-making are informed by someone, usually by the person putting in the ban.
So, at this point I think I'm caught up.
To sum it up:
- You are currently banned (against the personal wishes of at least two or three moderators, two of which went to the trouble of mailing their dissatisfaction with Graelyn's decision to him and the other moderators), because you pushed us to the point that Graelyn decided continued interaction with you was simply not worth the stress it was causing. This I am sorry for, because as I said in my pasted mail above, I do not think it was the right decision.
- You have been warned and given reasons when you have been muted or banned in the past. That you sometimes don't like them, or don't like the moderator who's given them, doesn't matter.
- You have been given an apology from Kat for a misunderstanding regarding a mail conversation you had a couple weeks ago.
- You have been given numerous explanations for why people treat your character the way they do, as well as explanations for why that treatment sometimes carries over to you, the player.
- You have been given ample suggestions on how to fix the ongoing problem you are having with your character and the community.
What you do with all of that is up to you.
Personally I'd rather have you around and RPing. If you want help, ask, but you're going to have to stop dismissing everything we say out of hand just because you don't like it or the person saying it. Unless you make some effort on your part that can't happen, because in the end, we have to convince Graelyn now that you've annoyed him enough that he doesn't want to talk to you about it.
-
Apparently the forums ate my first post, so here goes again:
For the record, we used to have clearly stated rules in the Summit about what was and was not allowed. These were removed by popular request because A, rules lawyering everywhere, and B, people actually thought they were to limiting for the channel to function well. Returning to a more by-the-individual method of judgement, in which track records of people were considered rather than by-the-absolute-laws methods of ruling was the requested method. If people do not like this, then the discussion we need to be having is if we should switch back to having clearly stated, absolute rules.
That said: We have 'commonsense guidelines' which serve as red flags when dealing with a given situation, clear signs that something is disruptive and may warrant an intervention. Common ones include violence/gore, nudity, doing anything to outright provoke another faction into pointless rage, etc...
It's the last one that gets the most questions - if my character can't provoke hostile factions, how can we have hostile RP? The answer is very simple question you can ask yourself: Does my character's action offer a chance for a hostile character to meaningfully respond? Conversely, does my character's action serve no purpose in a conversation except to provoke, anger, or upset members of a hostile faction? If the answers are (in order) "Yes, no" then you're on safe ground. If the answers are "No, yes" then you're on shaky ground.
Unsure? Confused? Were you warned and want to know why? Evemail or convo myself or any other mod. I will answer questions about rules, provide clarification, and tell you if something you want to do is a good idea or not. Contrary to popular belief, we are not stern judges issuing decrees from on high; we are just players looking to have a bit of fun and will happily sit down to help you enjoy your experience.
-
Morwen drops the mic.
-
Morwen drops the mic.
It was pretty heavy. And needed a fresh set of batteries anyway.
-
Warning, I have only read the first page of this topic, and might read the rest after I post this. Fuck off if you feel like I'm repeating people or saying something counter to the other mods, we don't always agree on shit and if we are in agreement then it's worth repeating.
The problems are :
1. Moderators trolla and insult playersb, and when they reply back - they mutec. If they put moderators on ignore - they ban them.
aYes, we are trolls (at least I am) and we've never claimed to be otherwise.
bNo, we don't insult people in OOC, though it is highly tempting sometimes, and we sometimes skirt that line very very closely... deal with it.
cNo, we don't mute people for replying back in kind, we mute people for going above and beyond. (ex: I call you annoying, you call me a fucking cock-gobbler... you will get muted/banned.)
2. Moderators ban and mute without warning for rules that were not explained or written anywherea and without warningb that this activity is against the rules.
aWe don't have written rules, aside from "DON'T BE A DICK" (yes, that's in our MOTD in bold letters, right under "OOC HOWTO:").
bLolwat? You're smoking seriously good(maybe bad) shit if you think you've ever gotten a mute/ban for something without a warning unless you were being a blatant assmunch. If you were being an assmunch, well you deserve the mute/ban.
3. Moderators ban without reasons.a
Example: 16.05 this year character Diana Kim was found banned from both The Summit and OOC channels.
Reasons of the ban were not givenb. Character was evading any violation of known rules in the channelc.
When Graelyn was confronted to give exact violation, instead of facts, he provided only insults as replyd.
<snip>Graelyn logs</snip>
aNo, no we don't. There are reasons, and I have the eve-mails/logs to accompany those reasons for every ban (not mute) that takes place.
bPlease see the only written rule we have.
cEvading violation of the rules? Even Inara(IC) while drunk is more subtle than that, you were trying to push the limits of the known rules to see how far you could go without getting a warning... well surprise, you had gotten enough warnings that The Baws (aka Graelyn) had enough.
dWell, Graelyn can do/say whatever he wants, he's an adult. Also, "Out Of Character" is not a channel in which we are moderators, and therefore this is relevant (http://i.imgur.com/oT6BE8V.jpg).
All of that said, I try my best to keep OOC a place that people want to go to. I'm a "troll" (or so I'm told), but I know when to stop (at least, according to the other mods and the people that levy complaints against mods regularly). Some people keep pushing and pushing and pushing till we, as a team, decide to say "fuck it, we're done." This has happened twice since I've been a mod, once due to RL bullshit and it was fully deserved, and once due to consistent pushing of the boundaries (and this one has been lifted after careful consideration, that individual has not been a problem since being allowed back).
I'm glad that our channel is good enough that it's encouraged you to spawn a micro-threadnaught in attempts to use public opinion to sway the decision, that means we're doing our job right. If it was a shitty channel, you wouldn't care that you were given the boot. In the future, if you feel you can interact with the members of the channel without pushing the rules, feel free to contact me and we can discuss it then. Unfortunately for you, being a mod gives an individual thick skin, and public opinion means a grand total of jack and shit to how we do our unpaid job.
-
Lyn,
The problem becomes when a mod has tried to respond and then told that the aggrieved party does not consider them a mod and will not listen to them and demands to speak to a mod, what then?
You don't lower yourself to his level. That's pretty obvious to me, but apparently, not to everyone. By doing so, it's like handing free ammo to the people your are moderating.
And no, i'm not christian. That's just common sense...
I still fail to see why people keep coming back to the Summit if they hate the moderation so much. There already exists another channel. There already exists the opportunity to make your own. Attempts have been made before to make their own. CCP stepped down from the fucking heavens and MADE A CLONE OF THE SUMMIT AND OOC just for you. Just for all of you, who don't like the way we moderate.
The Summit/OOC was THE cornerstone channel when I was still there. The CCP channels (IGS and the other one for OOC I don't even remember the name) were nothing. Has it changed so much now ? No matter how you dislike some things in those channels, you still come to them because you have to, not because you like to.
Countless attempts of alternatives have been tried (The Sphere, etc). None succeeded so far. It's a question of convenience and habits hard to break. It is best to remember that OOC and the Summit still serve the majority, and that the majority is perfectly happy with them (which also means that no, those channels are definitely not a failure !). Democratically, it's a perfect success, or else it wouldn't work like it does.
Sometimes it just seems that the shitloads of idiotic stuff that the mods have to deal with turned them bitter over time.
I signed up for this job because I wanted to help you all. I wanted to be something better for the community. I saw all the older threads just like this, and said I could do better. I looked at the mod team, and it's true... I thought I could do better than all of them.
Well you did no ? I remember that you were doing pretty good when I was still there. :)
Now then, I'm a rather shocked to read your replies in this thread, I have to admit. :ugh:
Maybe I'm not a perfect fucking snowflake like Lyn over there. Maybe we should all aspire to be as fair and balanced as he is.
As far as Lyn is pretty sure to do a decent job as a mod, Lyn has never been a mod anywhere in the eve RP community and never had to deal with the mod side of things, thus Lyn could be considered a bit onesided and hypocritical.
I am merely forwarding feedback on what looks very wrong from the outside. I am also probably not doing it perfectly right, thus why the outrage every time. I also can be totally deluded or wrong. That is merely me speaking out of my years of experiences in that community, which I have to remind that is probably the best one I have seen in MMOs.
Heed it or not, that's your choice eventually.
-
Morwen:
(http://i.imgur.com/6CTXQD7.gif)
Katrina:
(http://i.imgur.com/4mOAoYW.gif)
This thread in general:
(http://i.imgur.com/4l4px0l.gif)
-
K, time for me to weigh in on this because apparently I am the Super Big Bad Evil Person of Terribleness.
Hyperboles will get you nowhere and doesn't prove one's point.
2. The vast majority of these rules are common sense and have been in place for a long while. In your case, you were muted/banned (initially, a long while ago) for extended series of direct personal attacks towards other users that did not cease when you were asked to by moderators. Your recent one-month ban was handed out as a result of cumulative poor behavior and an overwhelming number of mails - NOT JUST FROM YOU - flooding Graelyn's inbox, suggesting that the common thread factor was you. I will quote some of his words on the subject, as he made a copy of the email he sent to you and the other moderators available to the public on Pastebin at the same time he sent it:
I'm sitting here looking at my NINETY-SEVEN emails on Diana Kim-related complaints. That's including all DK-related moderations, complaints by DK and people speaking on behalf of DK (all against one mod, though all the mods are unanimous so far on each judgement, an amazing achievement in and of itself), and my personal favorites, lots of our most repected channel users saying that all of this drama seriously impacts the enjoyment they get from the channel.
In the same time span, we have....4 emails on any other party.
That's just unheard of.
That sort of divergence indicates something to me;
One, that on the whole, damn near every person using our channels is doing so properly and productively. Moderator actions are at an All-Time low, and that's a good thing.
Second, that we have a problem that is affecting everything we do, coming from a single source.
Just prior to that, you were given a ten-hour mute, by me, for breaking one of our common-sense rules: No violence directed at other people on camera, whether player or NPC. Period. We don't allow it.
Technically, at the time, I was supposed to ban you for a month for that, according to instructions from Graelyn to the rest of the moderators. I decided to ignore those instructions and gave you a mute rather than a ban partly because I had work to get back to - that whole incident sucked up a fucking hour of my time at my real-life job, dealing with your bitching and pissing and moaning in OOC afterward - but also because I wanted to make sure that the other moderators had an opportunity to weigh in and say whether Graelyn's original instructions were appropriate for the incident.
So, first : you complain that it ate one hour of your IRL job. Why the hell are you doing that at work if you have other things to do ? :insert jackiechan meme:
Second, you are actually not banning people for deeds that they did, but based on the amount of complaints they generate ? Not saying that DK has done nothing, was not guilty, or is guilty, as I don't even know all the details obviously. Saying that the excuses given are just mind boggling.
If you want a short and sweet answer for the reason, it is this; you were (and are still, in many respects) wasting a wholly inappropriate amount of the moderation volunteers' time.
So, moderators willing to remain moderators, but unwilling to take time to do what their job implies ? Isn't it a bit wanting one's cake and eating it ?
orange: In this particular case, there are an excessively large number of forum posts that could just as easily provide the exact same "first impression" as some people venting about another person would. People make their beds and should have to lie in them.
Or people get their beds made for them and should have to lie in them. Matter of perspective. vOv
To sum it up:
- You are currently banned (against the personal wishes of at least two or three moderators, two of which went to the trouble of mailing their dissatisfaction with Graelyn's decision to him and the other moderators), because you pushed us to the point that Graelyn decided continued interaction with you was simply not worth the stress it was causing. This I am sorry for, because as I said in my pasted mail above, I do not think it was the right decision.
- You have been warned and given reasons when you have been muted or banned in the past. That you sometimes don't like them, or don't like the moderator who's given them, doesn't matter.
- You have been given an apology from Kat for a misunderstanding regarding a mail conversation you had a couple weeks ago.
- You have been given numerous explanations for why people treat your character the way they do, as well as explanations for why that treatment sometimes carries over to you, the player.
- You have been given ample suggestions on how to fix the ongoing problem you are having with your character and the community.
What you do with all of that is up to you.
Personally I'd rather have you around and RPing. If you want help, ask, but you're going to have to stop dismissing everything we say out of hand just because you don't like it or the person saying it. Unless you make some effort on your part that can't happen, because in the end, we have to convince Graelyn now that you've annoyed him enough that he doesn't want to talk to you about it.
I have trouble to reconcile it with the rest of the post, but it really seems actually like a good way to go. Props for adding that part.
-
1. There's a fundamental disconnect here. First, your definition of trolling apparently works along the lines of "they disagree with me", because to troll I would generally have to not be serious about things I say. Kindly note that when it comes to warning your character she is out of line or acting inappropriately in the Summit, Morwen is being completely serious. Likewise the same between you (the player) and me (the player) when in OOC.
Okay, speaking about disconnection, I will just list here how moderators "disagree with me":
2013.12.02 23:35:56 "Diana, you are pretty dumb, much of the time"
2014.02.13 17:21:05 "No, air this out in public so you can continue to make a fool of yourself, Diana."
Diana: - Where would I make a fool of myself?
Moderator: - Everywhere you open your damn mouth.
2014.02.13 14:34:23 "I don't care what your closeted little mind callss it to keep your ego intact, Diana, <redacted>"
2014.02.13 17:27:53 " You are the one going on racist diatribes or calling for genocide on a regular basis in this channel."
2014.02.13 17:57:38 " Then fucking get in a ship and go do it rather than making an idiot of yourself in here."
2014.03.16 13:50:21 "Yes, you're definitely the bigger and better-trained idiot here."
Could find more, if you wish, but I think it is enough to get a view of that.
Pretty much sums it up, why I don't want to talk to Morwen or reply further.
-
Apparently the forums ate my first post, so here goes again:
For the record, we used to have clearly stated rules in the Summit about what was and was not allowed. These were removed by popular request because A, rules lawyering everywhere, and B, people actually thought they were to limiting for the channel to function well. Returning to a more by-the-individual method of judgement, in which track records of people were considered rather than by-the-absolute-laws methods of ruling was the requested method. If people do not like this, then the discussion we need to be having is if we should switch back to having clearly stated, absolute rules.
That said: We have 'commonsense guidelines' which serve as red flags when dealing with a given situation, clear signs that something is disruptive and may warrant an intervention. Common ones include violence/gore, nudity, doing anything to outright provoke another faction into pointless rage, etc...
Good, but my point was, that for first ban there were no warning to stop/cease activity, that was disrupting. Peoples were rather enjoying and even asking for "shooting", that character was trying to evade.
It was a hard situation, that I was forced into. Just a word from a mod could have stopped it. Or small mute to cool down and think what was going on. Instead it was 10 hour mute with consequent 1 month ban.
For the second ban. Character was behaving and practically didn't do anything wrong. What exactly disruptive there was?
It's the last one that gets the most questions - if my character can't provoke hostile factions, how can we have hostile RP? The answer is very simple question you can ask yourself: Does my character's action offer a chance for a hostile character to meaningfully respond? Conversely, does my character's action serve no purpose in a conversation except to provoke, anger, or upset members of a hostile faction? If the answers are (in order) "Yes, no" then you're on safe ground. If the answers are "No, yes" then you're on shaky ground.
Unsure? Confused? Were you warned and want to know why? Evemail or convo myself or any other mod. I will answer questions about rules, provide clarification, and tell you if something you want to do is a good idea or not. Contrary to popular belief, we are not stern judges issuing decrees from on high; we are just players looking to have a bit of fun and will happily sit down to help you enjoy your experience.
I sent mail to moderators, you should have it as well. I tried to talk privately, but only managed to talk with Graelyn in public channel, results you can see.
Okay, if it is so easy, lets try it again.
Could you please tell me:
- When character Diana Kim commited a violation for ban 16.05
- What exactly was said wrong.
- Why it is was wrong or which rule it violated.
-
bLolwat? You're smoking seriously good(maybe bad) shit if you think you've ever gotten a mute/ban for something without a warning unless you were being a blatant assmunch. If you were being an assmunch, well you deserve the mute/ban.
Then provide, where exactly were warnings for:
- 10-hour mute 10.04
- ban 10.04
- ban 16.05
Maybe I am stupid, maybe I just forgot, maybe I fail at search, but I couldn't find them. WHERE ARE THEY?
No, no we don't. There are reasons, and I have the eve-mails/logs to accompany those reasons for every ban (not mute) that takes place.
Okay. Ban 16.05?
Evading violation of the rules? Even Inara(IC) while drunk is more subtle than that, you were trying to push the limits of the known rules to see how far you could go without getting a warning... well surprise, you had gotten enough warnings that The Baws (aka Graelyn) had enough.
No. Trying to talk and express character views without hitting another unwritten rule and getting banned for no apparent reason.
-
Here Lithium have a relevant picture:
(http://37.media.tumblr.com/4338ada0bd323443a685b55e39c3fe89/tumblr_n2a30efA6N1rhb9f5o2_r1_1280.jpg)
-
You know the simplest explanation is that Diana Kim as a character behaves no differently in thought or opinion to either a modern Neo-Nazi or violent Jihadist. Hatred and intolerance are what defines them and if you want to play that sort of character there's nothing wrong with that, it's fiction and make believe after all. However, roleplay often also means you have to interact with other human beings both in-character and to an extent, out of character. It's a mutually constructive process and the intent of the Summit has always been to try and provide some sort of neutral ground for anyone to use for RP discussion. It's not a right, and it's not a privilege and it's moderated mostly to prevent it descending into an unusable and pointless mess of insults and drama that almost every non-moderated RP channel has so far ended up as.
Diana Kim is a locus of pointless insults that cause drama because their player seems to think they have every right to play a violent extremist character (which they do) but where the Summit is concerned, that right ends at the point it affects enough fellow users who just don't want to participate in a venue where the fictional neo-nazi type character spends most of the time flinging racial slurs and abuse at others because that's what extremists do. So given a choice between the enjoyment of one player who seems to enjoy playing their neo-nazi type Caldari character and a majority of others who for one reason or another probably can't be fucked either being the target of or reading fictional insults and abuse written in the style of the most base type of racial prejudice, vilification, and intolerance towards other characters, the mods seem to have chosen the majority over Diana Kim.
Honestly is it really that hard to grasp that it isn't "conflict rp" if all that it engenders is basically:
"Fuck you."
"No you."
"No you, fuck you."
Ad nauseum? Because that is basically all that Diana Kim has provided being an extremist in the Summit. It also seems to fall in the same categories as say, whipping slaves on camera in the summit: pointless drama and aggravating bullshit no one wants to participate in or be involved with, that neither provides content nor is constructive.
To then come on backstage trying to play the victim asking what rules you've broken then seems particularly disingenuous given that you the player deliberately play a character to justify insulting other characters on the summit continuously in order to get a reaction for "conflict RP". You know what it's usually called on the internet when you deliberately insult others just to get a reaction from them so you can, "create conflict"? Trolling. Diana Kim was banned from the summit because they and their player have, for the past year, continuously trolled other users thus impacting their enjoyment and participation in the Summit channel.
But hey, I guess there's always the IGS and the in-game Intergalactic Summit where Diana Kim as a character can be played as the extremist their player wants to be, right?
-
pres butan nose
I like you. It's worth noting all that. I do kinda snap sometimes because of reasons mentioned. So, despite your posts sometimes, I don't want you to think I'm hating or anything. My posts in this thread are a result of being irritated with the situation and not being entirely interested in patient replies. If someone talks to me in private about something, I tend to be more reasonable than if they drag me through the mud in public.
THAT BEING SAID:
Lithium...
Ban 16.05 was, as stated, because Graelyn is tired of hearing about you as a focal point for constant issues. You're welcome to show me the logs personally, but I'd be willing to bet the final ban was not about something you did, but rather a final choice to get rid of you completely because of everything you did. All your former choices, issues, problems, all rolled up into one.
Think of it this way: Parole violation.
You're two weeks out of prison, and you go to the gas station to buy some sweeties. You're just minding your own business, but you're wearing a shirt that says "Tibus Heth is my waifu". Somebody at the gas station doesn't like that, and shoves you in the shoulder, calling you a Provist loving piece of crap.
You back off and raise your arms saying, "Woah, woah... chill out dude..." If you get into a fight, you'll go back to prison, so you don't want to fight. Well, too late. The person attacks, and you are forced to defend yourself.
Police show up, and your name shows up on the squad car's laptop as a parolee. You immediately get thrown in cuffs and tossed in the back of the squad car. A few swear words and insistent words that it wasn't your fault later, you realize the officer who cuffed you is the same one you kicked in the balls 2 years ago before you went to prison. Oops.
He doesn't care if it wasn't your fault, he books you for disorderly conduct, and you're shipped back to the lockhouse.
Is it unfair? Yeah. It is.
Like Morwen said, we can't do anything about it anymore. It's Graelyn's call, and we'd have to convince him to let you back in.... at this point, after this thread, I'm personally not inclined to try.
-
It's Graelyn's call, and we'd have to convince him to let you back in.... at this point, after this thread, I'm personally not inclined to try.
I think we'll end on that note.