Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lithium Flower]

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).

[Bayushi Tamago]

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.

[kalaratiri]

I'm pretty sure Lithium is Diana, Bayushi 

[Lithium Flower]

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.

[PracticalTechnicality]

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.

[Desiderya]

It's a conspiracy.

[Charles Cambridge Schmidt]

-snip-

[Lithium Flower]

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 

Fun fact: those, who were saying direct insults are still not banned.

[Katrina Oniseki]

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.

[Lithium Flower]

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?

[Desiderya]

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.

[Katrina Oniseki]

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.

[Lithium Flower]

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".

[Katrina Oniseki]

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.

[V. Gesakaarin]

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.