(OLD) Contest Unfair Infractions Here

[Jamie]

I actually don't know the situation myself. The banners aren't split anymore, I had nothing to do with that. We haven't even talked a about that for ages.

 

[Fraxinus]

They should be split back up given this incident. The defacto distinction should be made official.

ZD needs branches of government, paired with an infallible checks and balances system.

 

[Seth]

DM has a history of this, it isn't new. He isn't a bad person but he makes people uncomfortable like this often, and has a way of baiting people as described above. Maybe it was too much but he deserved a warning at least. The fact is, for a long time trollish and rude behavior has been tolerated from certain members and mods have looked the other way, Kitsu is at least trying to do something about it and I wish other mods would grow some spines and decide how to properly handle this. Maybe Kitsu's infraction was too high but there is a reason behind all this in the first place.

I also saying this, fully admitting, there were times I did stuff like this and deserved infractions/warnings. While I don't think I ever directed sexual comments at anyone, I made some statements that undoubtedly would make people uncomfortable.

Either way, and I realize I probably come of as a hypocrite for this, but several people get away with too damn much. They attack, provoke etc and nothing happens.

It's time to take a look at the rules again and decide how the hell you are going to enforce it instead of this muddled confusing mess as it stands now.

 

[Mellow Ezlo]

Why did this become such a big deal in the first place? It's such a minor issue. An admin made a small slip-up, alright, fine. Do we really need 3+ pages of arguments that are simply restatements of everything that had already been said when the issue could very easily have been resolved in justac0uple posts?

 

[Seth]

They should be split back up given this incident. The defacto distinction should be made official.

It's impossible to do. There is no practical way to do it, if you have access to the entire tech side of the site the distinction them becomes nothing but a formality that can't be put into practice. Rep and Kitsu could literally delete the site if they wanted, let alone give themselves mod powers.

 

[Jamie]

Do we really need 3+ pages of arguments that are simply restatements of everything that had already been said when the issue could very easily have been resolved in justac0uple posts?

No.

 

[Justac00lguy]

The actual infraction was resolved ages ago, which is what this thread, technically, is for.

 

[Fraxinus]

The actual infraction was resolved ages ago, which is what this thread, technically, is for.

Off to the suggestions thread, guys!

 

[Emma]

DM has a history of this, it isn't new. He isn't a bad person but he makes people uncomfortable like this often, and has a way of baiting people as described above. Maybe it was too much but he deserved a warning at least. The fact is, for a long time trollish and rude behavior has been tolerated from certain members and mods have looked the other way, Kitsu is at least trying to do something about it and I wish other mods would grow some spines and decide how to properly handle this. Maybe Kitsu's infraction was too high but there is a reason behind all this in the first place.

Where are you getting this? He did do this a million years ago. But not at all in the last two years. Ancient history isn't relevant to what happened NOW. And nothing he's done on the forums in the last few months back up this claim on "baiting". Kitsu HAD no reason to do this. The conversation in question does not back up the claims against DM. Neither does anything else he's posted in months. You need to have evidence to say there is a "reason" to it. And there is no evidence. The evidence that there is, contradicts that claim.

 

[Shroom]

I think Kitsu handled the situation rather fine actually. Looking from just SQ's point of view, DM was asking some seriously personal questions, and to me, looked like she was trying to change the subject while DM kept pushing these awkward questions. You can't look at that and tell me that someone unfamiliar with DM would be comfortable with sort of questions he's asking, especially when you factor in age and all of that.

Lemmy asked for a subject change, SQ seemed to be hinting at one, and Kitsu called him out; perhaps not in the best way, but never the less saw it as inappropriate, and thought an action should be taken. You can disagree with his methods, but I don't think his intentions were in the wrong place.

 

[CynicalSquid]

I still feel like a split should be made though. Jamie and Kitsu were (correct me if I'm wrong, but this feels like a pretty safe assumption) hired just for their tech skills and I honestly don't feel like they should be moderating (no offense). I even completely disagree with Mellow Elzo's stance of "should they mod or not". If they sees troublesome members they can report it to the mods like every other non-moderator on any forum in existence. Iirc, Keith has Admin privileges. Just because he has the powers does that mean he can moderate if there aren't any Moderators on? Can he Admin the site because he has the power to? Just because you have the privileges doesn't mean you should use them. That's abuse of power and a clear sign that individual shouldn't have such privileges.

EDIT: Mega-ninja'd >.> Forgive me, I didn't mean to go off topic.

 

[Seth]

It is physically impossible for there to be a distinction. I don't understand how this isn't an accepted fact.

 

[Emma]

It is physically impossible for there to be a distinction. I don't understand how this isn't an accepted fact.

Because if there was a distinction, we wouldn't get these excuses to justify the action because it'd be explicitly out of their bounds and there'd be no question about what to do.

 

[Mellow Ezlo]

Because if there was a distinction, we wouldn't get these excuses to justify the action because it'd be explicitly out of their bounds and there'd be no question about what to do.

That... completely ignores the first part of Seth's post.

 

[Seth]

Because if there was a distinction, we wouldn't get these excuses to justify the action because it'd be explicitly out of their bounds and there'd be no question about what to do.

He can give himself mod powers if he wanted too.

He could literally delete the entire site in 5 minutes or less.

There is no way to make a distinction in any practical matter. You are all asking for a completely empty gesture that is literally meaningless from the tech side of things.