Staff Complaint - Lordfowl

[LordFowl]

56 minutes ago, UnknownMurder said:

Regardless if it's disproportionately significant or not, it's a project and it had a bug that you knew of it. You acted on the problem by using software flaw a thus the result was unexpected to your advantage and Arrow was forced to disable it. I do not know why you're trying to pretend it is no big deal nor should you be proud of it. 

To reiterate my main point is that I'm not fond of developers intentionally trying to screw other developers' WIP project whether how small or large it is.  You are brushing off the main point. Take it from a developer approach, instead of reporting and informing Arrow whom is responsible for the project of the bug on a public code base that can be exploited. Ignoring the unwritten rule, you decided to exploit a bug as a developer. I'm very sure that Skull will feel insulted if a developer exploited his big time project that had an unintentional bug on a public codebase. Suppose you work for Amazon as an administrator. You notice an another administrator unintentionally created a bug exploit with a million dollar exclusive product. You think that it's a great idea to exploit that bug because there is an obvious incentive. Had Amazon superiors or whatnot found out about you exploiting the bug, your big time career is over unless you're very fortunate enough.

 

Here's some more screenshots from back then.

  Hide contents

 

 

*timepass*

 

This post builds itself up quite nicely, but it’s built on a few fallacies, assumptions, and logical gaps. I can’t believe I’m still talking about this fuck calendar. At this rate it’s caused me more grief than Arrow.

 

For one this is the second time you’ve tried to communicate with me “on equal grounds, developer to developer”. Please stop doing that. It’s weird.

Starting from the bottom up, even if the calendae incident was predicated on me knowingly exploiting a bug, comparing it to a million dollar Amazon glitcg is just stupid. But let’s circle back to thr more salient nugget - that I knowingly exploited a bug. For the output of “guilt” to be true these two conditions must be true - the calendar system must be a bug, and I must both know this and then wilfully exploit it. Well, we /know/ the calendar system isn’t a bug because it did work perfectly. We /know/ that my access to it was not a bug - I did not exploit any flaw in the system security, did not dupe the forums. I just clicked on the “create event” button. So if anything it’s an oversight, but I genuinely think Arrow believes people should have access to the calendar, as he’s mentioned reintroducing it with stricter moderation. So there is no bug. But let’s pretend there is, and focus on the second part, that I /knowingly exploited/ a bug. Well, I can tell you I didn’t. How the fuck would I be able to tell that the perfectly official fine and dandy “create calendar event” button was a bug? On the very first day of the forums? Maybe I just don’t watch enough anime, but I don’t know how anything about that screams “THIS IS A BUG YOU SHOULD REPORT!”. That’s like banning an AI player for pressing the “door bolt” button because we decided later that AIs shouldn’t have access to that button. It’s nonsensical. What loops do you have to jump through where that starts making sense? So there was no “software flaw”. If there was any flaw it was pure human error.

So if it’s not a bug, and I didn’t wilfully exploit it, then what us it? A silly insignificant non-event, just another roadbump in the birth of a new forums, granted disproportionate importance for gods knows what reason (maybe it’s just easy to dupe people into thinking it is important by throwing around words like “exploit” or “software glitcg). As important as an off-topic post getting deleted.

So why am I trying to pretend its no big deal? I’m not. It’s genuinely not an important event by pretty much any definition of importance. Why am I proud of it? I’m not. I wouldn’t even be thinking about it except it gets brought up so often. It’s just another off-topic post in the sea of posts to me, otherwise. Does that clear up your confusion?

[Scheveningen]

7 minutes ago, LordFowl said:

So why am I trying to pretend its no big deal? I’m not. It’s genuinely not an important event by pretty much any definition of importance. Why am I proud of it? I’m not. I wouldn’t even be thinking about it except it gets brought up so often. It’s just another off-topic post in the sea of posts to me, otherwise. Does that clear up your confusion?

do you believe there should be no consequences as a result of you using your power as a staff member to abuse the calendar and thus be the "lit match" as to why the calendar feature was disabled?

When I mean consequences, I mean reasonable ones. Anywhere between a reprimand to being stripped of forum powers for a month, which is the most appropriate response to curb abusing forum features as a staff member. Keep in mind that were it not for you abusing, it's likely the calendar would've stayed. You understand the implications of that issue, right?

I'd also be really cautious about playing semantics to downplay the severity of using your forum role powers for a deed obviously not intended to be used in such a way, regardless of whether you're 'able to' or not. The expectation is to act in good faith. The issue being addressed is whether you acted in good faith, and it's hard to say you did because such an act is hard to justify happening at all, much less on it being 'with good intentions.'

If no to "I don't think I should be disciplined for acting out of line with the calendar issue", where do you typically draw the line in which you expect other staff members to moderate you?

Edited December 5, 2018 by Scheveningen

[LordFowl]

There have already been consequences - the calendar event was deleted, as all off-topic posts are. Sometimes they’re accompanied with forum warnings, but while I’m no moderator issuing a warning on literally the first day of a feature’s release tends to be rather draconic. As for abusing staff power? I’m not even aware if calendar events were restricted solely to staff. If they were, there was certainly no documentation regarding it, and if there is no documentation, no expectations, then how can it be classified as abuse of power?

Playing semantics? There’s no play at semantics here. UM’s entire argument was that I knowingly exploited a bug - pointing out that I unknowingly “exploited” not-a-bug is not “playing semantics”, it’s rejecting the foundation of his premise entirely.

Do I understand the implications of the calendar system being removed? Is it that we don’t have a calendar? I can only be held responsible for my own actions. I cannot be held responsible also for Arrow’s overreactions. If he is content to throw out the whole calendar for want of a nail, then so be it.

So to answer your question, no I don’t think there should be any further consequences regarding that specific incident, yes I think this is a perfectly reasonable outcome, and if you really want to know where I draw the line regarding moderating anyone, not just staff, I usually start at “important things that actually matter, like, breaking rules” as opposed to “he created a single off-topic post, headdev removed the entire off-topic subforum, better ban him”

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

The calendar event is part of the problem but it's importance as an issue has been met by the length and verbosity of the discussion dedicated to it in this thread. A minor warning would be enough for the minor calender incident. I do not want to see the calendar become a pivotal point against fowl. It is a small piece of the larger issue. Do not focus on a single tree within a large forest.

If anyone else is posting please swerve back to providing testimony on how he has treated you or others, and please provide logs.

The primary issues I have and continue to hold are how Fowl treats other people in his speech and how he uses his position as a developer.

Quote

"My Skrell removal PR was open for a grand total of 5 days (including the one day I opened it as an obvious joke), so already you’re wrong on that one but I’ll go deeper and say that I refuse to consider opening a PR to remove Skrell to be a bad thing considering up until that point the lore team was content to let Skrell rot. If anyone deserves a staff complaint over that fiasco it is you."

This is another example. He makes an insulting remark, or does something egregious, and defends it as a joke. Why am I mad, when it's just a joke? A joke can still be really annoying.

You are also not telling the truth. I don't understand why you are so brazenly making a false statement when I am in immediate contact with Arrow who can direct me to PR's. He had to close your remove skrell PR twice because you kept reopening it. This is not the proper use of your github permissions.

Arrow768 closed this on Oct 14

LordFowl reopened this on Oct 28

LordFowl closed this on Oct 29

LordFowl reopened this on Oct 29

Arrow768 closed this on Oct 29

To swing back to the calendar event, by itself it is worth maybe as much conversation has been had about it. But it's combined with your petty use of your github permissions to try to make a statement targeting the lore team because we were not moving fast enough for you. I moved as fast as I wanted to in getting a new skrell lore developer and it is not your place to repeatedly open a PR to remove a race to try to rush me. If you have a criticism for my conduct then you can use your words like everbody else. Your developer permissions aren't given to you for theatrics. It's a waste of time.

I'm not going to address your criticism of Skrell lacking a dedicated maintainer. You know they were not rotting because I have made repeated announcements about it that when a species loses a maintainer, the responsibilities for that species defaults back to the loremaster. Your PR did little more than ruffle the feathers of players who mistakenly thought you had any say in the fate of Skrell.

There is no other way to interpret his behavior than him trying to get at me, or whoever else he decides he doesn't need to respect. Having this be a representative of staff is not what I want to see.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Marlon Phoenix

[Bygonehero]

Except, it was a legitimate PR. I don't see where you find that its a joke coming from, and while it might be easy to assume so considering its content, its not without precedent as Vaurca were seriously being considered to be removed in less time than it took skrell to once again gain a overseer. Additionally lets not forget what this did, not a few days later several applicatants suddenly appeared applying for skrell dev. Fowl and I had a discussion about the interesting tidbits of skrell lore, which led to himself applying. This entire thread against him is based his words of saying mean things to someone in discord. Actions speak louder than words and tend to also reveal someone's intent a lot clearer than words. Perhaps you should start looking at Fowls actions, because I assure you, I have said mean things to people too, as well as disagree with them when they call my ideas poo. The difference is that there is no difference between what I and other staff and fowl say on discord. But you know what none of us have? Malicious intent. Your entire argument against him is that he's performing these things against people with malicious intent, with silly calender events or volatile posts about a subject. Only positive things have come out of these activities. Better a bad idea be killed before someone wastes time on it, better a calender system be killed before someone abuses it to seriously mess with people. This thread is piling  so much up against fowl with little evidence or unopinionated insight, it is ultimately a hill this thread and case will die on.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Bygonehero

[LordFowl]

9 hours ago, Senpai Jackboot said:

The calendar event is part of the problem but it's importance as an issue has been met by the length and verbosity of the discussion dedicated to it in this thread. A minor warning would be enough for the minor calender incident. I do not want to see the calendar become a pivotal point against fowl. It is a small piece of the larger issue. Do not focus on a single tree within a large forest.

If anyone else is posting please swerve back to providing testimony on how he has treated you or others, and please provide logs.

The primary issues I have and continue to hold are how Fowl treats other people in his speech and how he uses his position as a developer.

This is another example. He makes an insulting remark, or does something egregious, and defends it as a joke. Why am I mad, when it's just a joke? A joke can still be really annoying.

You are also not telling the truth. I don't understand why you are so brazenly making a false statement when I am in immediate contact with Arrow who can direct me to PR's. He had to close your remove skrell PR twice because you kept reopening it. This is not the proper use of your github permissions.

Arrow768 closed this on Oct 14

LordFowl reopened this on Oct 28

LordFowl closed this on Oct 29

LordFowl reopened this on Oct 29

Arrow768 closed this on Oct 29

To swing back to the calendar event, by itself it is worth maybe as much conversation has been had about it. But it's combined with your petty use of your github permissions to try to make a statement targeting the lore team because we were not moving fast enough for you. I moved as fast as I wanted to in getting a new skrell lore developer and it is not your place to repeatedly open a PR to remove a race to try to rush me. If you have a criticism for my conduct then you can use your words like everbody else. Your developer permissions aren't given to you for theatrics. It's a waste of time.

I'm not going to address your criticism of Skrell lacking a dedicated maintainer. You know they were not rotting because I have made repeated announcements about it that when a species loses a maintainer, the responsibilities for that species defaults back to the loremaster. Your PR did little more than ruffle the feathers of players who mistakenly thought you had any say in the fate of Skrell.

There is no other way to interpret his behavior than him trying to get at me, or whoever else he decides he doesn't need to respect. Having this be a representative of staff is not what I want to see.

Egads! He caught my lie! It was actually open for /seven nonsecutive days/, not six! I’m ruined!!!

Oh please, spare me your own theatrics. Bygone hits the nail directly on the head. You read so much malicious intent in every action that I’m honestly worried for your health. Such paranoia must cause a lot of stress. I opened the PR on the 10th (and not as a joke, since you seem confused about that). Arrow then closed it in the 14th, as there were Skrell dev applications by that point. I then re-opened it on the 28, the week leading up to devmerge, “just in case it was needed for the devmerge lol winky face!” Everyone had a good laugh at that one, and then I closed and re-opened it for dramatic effect, to mock the idea that I would be removing Skrell anyways since I wasn’t chosen. Arrow then closed it. He did not “have to keep repeatedly closing it”. Twice is not a trend. Especially when both incidents happen /fifteen days apart/. After I made my statement I had no further need of the PR, and expectedly it has not been touched since. Is re-opening a closed PR as a joke an abuse of my GitHub permissions? No, it’s actually not.

”I moved as fast as I wanted to in getting a new skrell lore developer and it is not your place to repeatedly open a PR to remove a race to try to rush me.”

You can move as fast as you want, but 90 days is unacceptably slow. And I’m not the only one who thought so, hence why I was encouraged to make the PR in the first place.

“If you have a criticism for my conduct then you can use your words like everbody else.”

I did. They just so happened to be part of a github PR. And that’s not an “abuse of my power”. Anyone can create a PR. You might know that if you looked at the GitHub for more thsn gathering spurious evidence.

“I'm not going to address your criticism of Skrell lacking a dedicated maintainer. You know they were not rotting because I have made repeated announcements about it that when a species loses a maintainer, the responsibilities for that species defaults back to the loremaster”

That might mean a little more if the loremaster did anything with the Skrell except let them rot in stasis for 90 days. Maybe he was too busy attending to his own species, acting more as a lore-developer than a lore-master. Maybe he just didn’t care. Isn’t it fun reading active malicious intent into people’s actions?

”Your PR did little more than ruffle the feathers of players who mistakenly thought you had any say in the fate of Skrell.”

And uh, y’know, also serve as a call to action directly leading several people to decide they did indeed care about what happens to the Skrell, inducing them to apply and ultimately leading to a Skrell developer being chosen from those applicants. But I guess that part isn’t really important. Probably would have happened anyways. One day. Maybe?

As I said before, trying to spin the Skrell incident back on me is ridiculous. The only person who could feasibly be indicted for staff misconduct regarding the situation is the same person who let Skrell rot in stasis for 90 days. And that ain’t me, chief.

”There is no other way to interpret his behavior than him trying to get at me, or whoever else he decides he doesn't need to respect.”

It is statements like these that make me worried for your paranoia. I’m not trying to “get at you”. My behavior is problem-orientated - I see a problem, I attempt to resolve it. I don’t have a vendetta against you. I don’t care about you. I’m not out to get you.

Edited December 5, 2018 by LordFowl
Set the text to all the same size since apparently the forum hates mobile users

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

6 hours ago, Bygonehero said:

Except, it was a legitimate PR. I don't see where you find that its a joke coming from, and while it might be easy to assume so considering its content, its not without precedent as Vaurca were seriously being considered to be removed in less time than it took skrell to once again gain a overseer. Additionally lets not forget what this did, not a few days later several applicatants suddenly appeared applying for skrell dev. Fowl and I had a discussion about the interesting tidbits of skrell lore, which led to himself applying. This entire thread against him is based his words of saying mean things to someone in discord. Actions speak louder than words and tend to also reveal someone's intent a lot clearer than words. Perhaps you should start looking at Fowls actions, because I assure you, I have said mean things to people too, as well as disagree with them when they call my ideas poo. The difference is that there is no difference between what I and other staff and fowl say on discord. But you know what none of us have? Malicious intent. Your entire argument against him is that he's performing these things against people with malicious intent, with silly calender events or volatile posts about a subject. Only positive things have come out of these activities. Better a bad idea be killed before someone wastes time on it, better a calender system be killed before someone abuses it to seriously mess with people. This thread is piling  so much up against fowl with little evidence or unopinionated insight, it is ultimately a hill this thread and case will die on.

There are several screenshots of evidence.

 

"If someone is behaving in the manner of an autist, it is not an insult to call them autistic!" -lordfowl

 

My complaint has two problems and solutions:

1) fowl stops calling players (and staff) autists, retards, and stops showing open contempt to create negative experiences. This is either through a tempban from the public discord or something else ideally. He is doing damage. You know as well as i how frustrating it is when someone acts like this. Many people will just away from the server.

 

2) stop misusing github and new forum mechanics for theatrics and let other people misuse them and be punished. 

[Scheveningen]

2 hours ago, LordFowl said:

Oh please, spare me your own theatrics. Bygone hits the nail directly on the head. You read so much malicious intent in every action that I’m honestly worried for your health.

Only thing worth quoting because this is the most obvious example of what we've repeatedly seen so far. You know how Skull was worried about the peanut gallery killing this thread? I'm not so worried about them at this point. Because little statements like these being flung from Fowl to add up to making it seem like Fowl is deliberately trying to make people feel unwelcome in this community. I seriously do not see how you think repeatedly yelling at and insulting your opposition is helping you defend your case against the accusations made against you which simplify down to you yelling at community members and belittling them. You are doing nothing more than proving their point.

I'm starting to have deja vu at this point because there's another developer in Aurora's history that was dismissed over their unprofessional behavior in addition to the abuse of their powers as a staff member.

Edited December 5, 2018 by Scheveningen
clarification

[LordFowl]

So when Jackboot calls me theatrical it is acceptable, but when I turn the same phrase on him it's me deliberately making people feel unwelcome in the community? When Jackboot ascribes so much malicious intent in everything that I do that he believes I specifically am out to get him, it is unfair for me to call that paranoid? So be it, then.

And now I am yelling at and belittling Jackboot? Where? All I see is Jackboot calling me a baldfaced liar because I said the PR was open for five days when in reality it was open for six, and then saying that he reads so much malicious intent into my actions that it borders on paranoia. If this is what you classify as "yelling at and belittling someone", then you and I have a serious misunderstanding on what that phrase means. If you are going to cherrypick my post for the most egregious statement and then discard the rest as worthless drivel, at least choose a statement that is actually egregious.

I've gone over all the posts I've made in this thread and I've not found one instance of me "yelling" at anyone, nor any instances of me "belittling" anyone either except maybe where I said UM should stop speaking me on a developer v. developer basis (Not me trying to implicate he's inferior to me, it's just fucking weird. I don't go up to Alberyk and say, "Hello there, fellow developer".) and apparently ascribing paranoia to Jackboot's insistence on believing everything I do is out to get him, but I don't buy that one. So if this is meant to be a grand statement of my behavior repeating itself, I think the only thing it states is my angelic innocence.

Edited December 5, 2018 by LordFowl
clarifying your clarification

[Skull132]

Point one. Know what the peanut gallery is and stop participating in it. If your post contains no new evidence or facts about given incidents, and you are not directly involved, then your post is contributing to the peanut gallery and is thus unnecessary.

For a detailed, point-by-point analysis of the original complaint, I will provide this:

1. The PR in question is fair for anyone to make. As Fowl himself said, literally anyone has the ability to make a PR to request any change be made to the code base. We do not restrict the developer's to only propose ideas which have been greenlit by the head developers, in fact, the entire decision making process is open to public in the form of pull requests. this means that you are going to see things which will get denied. Anyone who claims to have been misguided by a PR that has yet to be merged has apparently failed to understand the development process which takes place on Github.
2. Regarding the calendar. Any attempt to paint it as something other than a stupid act is, well, stupid. A calendar event creates no damage, it is not a bug that is exploitable. It was an oversight and a stupid joke. It can easily be argued over whether staff should or should not partake in stupid jokes like that, same for him opening and closing the Skrell PR; but attempting to label it as anything more than a joke is facetious and I hope everyone involved has enough empathetic capacity to track the thick sarcasm Fowl laid out in the original post by UM about it.

So thus far, we only really have 2 counts of stupid. And 1 count of using mean words but that was already addressed back when it happened, and has yet to repeat itself if I recall correctly. And a few counts of Fowl being blunt. Specifically Jackboot's 3rd image in the OP: it is not inherently bad or negative to say that, and he has a point. Present any idea and you are effectively obligated to receive criticism for it. Certain ideas being idiotic enough that the immediate response is to, just, call them out as such.

But that does not necessarily address the complaint, I will agree.

The general point seems to be that Fowl's conduct is draining, in general. Which is a fair assessment, it can be and is. While no specific part of it is outright against da wules, the compound effect can be a negative environment to work in. And that is a valid point to address. To begin doing so, I would like to hear what @LordFowl thinks of this view point.

And a current note about stupid. While singular counts of stupid are often meaningless, it would be a good idea to limit the number of stupids you conduct.

[LordFowl]

I don't really know what you expect me to say. Will I try and act better? Sure, but I don't see a concrete effect coming from that unless I know specifically what makes my conduct "draining". It is easy to act upon specific critiques, hence why when I was warned about using slurs I stopped using slurs, hence why when I was warned about arguing in OoC I stopped arguing in OoC, but how does one act upon "when you talk to people in discord you're draining, sometimes." beyond a vague concession of "I agree, I'll try and do better?". While I'm making that concession right now, even I can see that it's not a particularly satisfying conclusion, so I just fear that if this is settled by that alone this will just resurface sometime later down the road.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

The use of PR's for silly reasons is definitely within the lane of Skull and Arrow and if they find it does not bother them or violate the rules then that is fine.

The use of the calendar by itself is a minor piece in a larger picture. I agree that the scope of the fixation on it is perhaps a little extra. It is a tree within the forest. I still disagree that something being a joke completely recuses the prankster from any sort of consequence, but again, this is within the lane of Skull and Arrow.

The marks about his use of words and how he treats other people are mostly on point. I have to disagree that his use of foul language has diminished, since the logs provided are very recent. They may very well have since the posting of this staff complaint but given Fowl's long history on this server and past issues with his general behavior I don't think I want to trust such a change as permanent. He has a history of this sort of conduct.

[LordFowl]

I was talked to regarding using the word "autist" on November 20-21stish (It was ingame so I do not have logs), and since then have not used the word "autist". I was talked to regarding the word "faggot" in early November (4-10th or so), and since then have not used the word "faggot". In fact, in general since November 20th or so I have stopped using slurs entirely. So I have to disagree when you say that my use of "foul language" (*correction, slurs, I can say fuck all I want as far as I'm concerned) hasn't diminished since I was talked to regarding using slurs. Saying "Well, he has a long history of using slurs before we told him not to, so inevitably he'll use them again, so might as well punish him for it now!" should be an obviously misguided statement.

[Skull132]

23 hours ago, LordFowl said:

Sure, but I don't see a concrete effect coming from that unless I know specifically what makes my conduct "draining".

I think that the general premise, outside of word policing, is that you act in an overly dramatic or over-bearing fashion when presenting some of your critique. Which, when someone has to interact with you daily for weeks, months, years; tends to wear people down. This issue has surfaced with you before, I am certain that you remember.

[LordFowl]

I see. I guess I won't do that, then.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

He's still doing it.

 

Quote

Lord FowlYesterday at 7:39 PM

another person who critiques the propositions

but clearly did not fucking read them

thanks lore

Quote

Lord FowlYesterday at 12:49 PM

Lore devs here are either autistically involved in military lore or autistically opposed to it

 

[LordFowl]

Doing what? Neither of those examples match the two issues stated - overbearing/overdramatic critique or use of slurs, nor even really the general catchall of “being a dick”. The first is exasperation at reading a comment that was firmly opposed to something that was never proposed in the first place, the second is a completed untargeted unoffensive observation that most people seemed to agree with me on.

[DaTimeSmog]

Not sure whats up with you as of late, but you really seem to have a massive problem with me, enough to start a 10 minute rant about how I am indeed the most vile person in this community, I mean if you have a problem with me then I highly suggest just blocking me? I mean if you wish to act like a cunt then so be it, but it kinda jumped the border from being somewhat humerous to me wondering if you have serious anger management problems.

Edited January 5, 2019 by DaTimeSmog

[Scheveningen]

Save for the last one, you deliberately engaged him with the same tone of language. Don't quite understand how you can call out his behavior as wrong when you do the exact same thing in the general discord, and his last comment there was a tack-on to me telling you to get lost after continuously trying to backseat police the discord.

Edited January 5, 2019 by Scheveningen

[DaTimeSmog]

1 hour ago, Scheveningen said:

Save for the last one, you deliberately engaged him with the same tone of language. Don't quite understand how you can call out his behavior as wrong when you do the exact same thing in the general discord, and his last comment there was a tack-on to me telling you to get lost after continuously trying to backseat police the discord.

Yeah, indeed I engaged him on the same tone of language. The spoiler might be a bit filled but its quite literally the full rant Fowl did.

Spoiler

With the second bit relating to the last comment Fowl made.

Dont try to pull the moral highground regarding this matter Schev, seriously. If you're comparing the responses to Fowls comments and putting them on the same level then I quite honestly cannot understand your arguement on the matter. Regarding me doing the exact same thing, not to this level dude and certainly not with people I barely have any contact with.

Edited January 5, 2019 by DaTimeSmog

[LorenLuke]

On 16/12/2018 at 09:10, LordFowl said:

the second is a completed untargeted unoffensive observation that most people seemed to agree with me on.Doing what? Neither of those examples match the two issues stated - overbearing/overdramatic critique or use of slurs, nor even really the general catchall of “being a dick”. The first is exasperation at reading a comment that was firmly opposed to something that was never proposed in the first place, the second is a completed untargeted unoffensive observation that most people seemed to agree with me on.

For someone who claims to neither be a dick nor use targeting slurs, I, for one, would love to hear how your persistent use of the words 'Autistic' and 'Retarded' as pejoratives constitute neither.

[Scheveningen]

1 hour ago, DaTimeSmog said:

Yeah, indeed I engaged him on the same tone of language. The spoiler might be a bit filled but its quite literally the full rant Fowl did.

  Reveal hidden contents

With the second bit relating to the last comment Fowl made.

Dont try to pull the moral highground regarding this matter Schev, seriously. If you're comparing the responses to Fowls comments and putting them on the same level then I quite honestly cannot understand your arguement on the matter. Regarding me doing the exact same thing, not to this level dude and certainly not with people I barely have any contact with.

For someone who so kindly requested me to talk to incog to have you unbanned from the relay discord and acted so apologetic for how you behaved (particularly, the racist tirades you went on and generally making gross comments that had to be brought to a server host's attention directly to be sorted out), it's quite an interesting turn-around for you to go back the way you were. I'd call it ungratefulness but I suppose I really cannot be surprised. You did a good job of manipulating me, I guess.

I genuinely do not understand how any of you can throw shit in the general direction of Fowl (or even Burger, really) and get surprised when he does it back. Should he not do it? Oh, absolutely, but how come the same standard doesn't apply when players are consistently harassing developers? 

Respect is a two-way street, or there's no respect to be had at all. Either a standard of respect does get enforced equally on all parties involved without bias, or it doesn't matter at all. I frankly do not care at all about the uber-special "mean words" that people dislike compared to others, because ultimately it is not the specific insults or names that both parties use that actually matters, and vocabulary policing doesn't make the argument any more compelling (in fact, it distracts from the real issue, which is mutual respect and enforcing that mutual respect). Do you care about mutual respect? Then be respectful, even when addressing people who behave grosser than you do. Otherwise, you just stoop to their level and look like the opposite side of the same coin to anyone looking into the situation. 'Same but different', as it were.

If Fowl is to be punished, then so should the rest of us. Because in a multitude of these cases, it's not "totally polite person vs. Fowl". It's usually, "rude person set against rude person", and ultimately if your argument sums up to pearl-clutching over singular words or dogwhistles being used instead of having concern about mutual respect between members of the community, whether staff or player, then your motivations are poorly prioritized and clearly more geared to bringing other people down instead of back up, ultimately.

Edited January 5, 2019 by Scheveningen

[DaTimeSmog]

13 minutes ago, Scheveningen said:

For someone who so kindly requested me to talk to incog to have you unbanned from the relay discord and acted so apologetic for how you behaved (particularly, the racist tirades you went on and generally making gross comments that had to be brought to a server host's attention directly to be sorted out), it's quite an interesting turn-around for you to go back the way you were. I'd call it ungratefulness but I suppose I really cannot be surprised. You did a good job of manipulating me, I guess.

In what part, did I ever go around your back and suddenly behaved ungrateful, because I am very happy that you took your time to forward Incog about the issue that was at hand during the time, so please dont take this a sign of me being hostile even after that act, but it doesnt really help us in any form if you introduce this in an entirely seperate report and I highly suggest we solve this problem privately unless you wish to do it here, Im up for both to be quite honest.

15 minutes ago, Scheveningen said:

I genuinely do not understand how any of you can throw shit in the general direction of Fowl (or even Burger, really) and get surprised when he does it back. Should he not do it? Oh, absolutely, but how come the same standard doesn't apply when players are consistently harassing developers? 

Burger has changed quite a lot and I found some level of respect for the guy as he cleared up his act in a way that I didnt expect him to do so, however Fowl often does these things without even aggrovating him, it can happen even during a regular conversation and quite honestly thats hard to defend. I dont randomly start going on 10 minute rants against specific players simply because and hardly recommend doing so.

 

[Scheveningen]

Fair enough, I apologize for the assumptions I made about you.

Yes, it is true Burger has very much improved, and Fowl insofar has behaved this way for awhile. I don't think there's anything more that can be said about him without essentially just repeating what has been said at this point.

I very much suggest that this discussion be locked because the thread's already a mess in what would be considered 4 pages in the old forums.

[LorenLuke]

53 minutes ago, Scheveningen said:

I genuinely do not understand how any of you can throw shit in the general direction of Fowl (or even Burger, really) and get surprised when he does it back. Should he not do it? Oh, absolutely, but how come the same standard doesn't apply when players are consistently harassing developers? 

[...]

If Fowl is to be punished, then so should the rest of us. Because in a multitude of these cases, it's not "totally polite person vs. Fowl". It's usually, "rude person set against rude person", and ultimately if your argument sums up to pearl-clutching over singular words or dogwhistles being used instead of having concern about mutual respect between members of the community, whether staff or player, then your motivations are poorly prioritized and clearly more geared to bringing other people down instead of back up, ultimately.

A person being banned, engaging in behavior that does not fall within the rules, or having a history of either is not an abdication of their right to lodge or provide testimony in a complaint.

The uneven application of punishment among any two parties engaged in similar or identical behavior is not grounds to eschew deserved punishment for one or both parties.

You may view these as flaws in the system, and they may very well be, but the system is in place and functions according to design as best its enforcers manage as fallible creatures. This thread isn't the place to discuss or propose change these things.

A staff member think there's no issue with their pattern of behavior, not just an isolated incident, by labeling people as 'autistic' and 'retarded' as a insult, and responding, at very least to vitriol with such comments, and at potential worst, polite discourse with these words. This behavior has been demonstrated to be persistent. And had been demonstrated to still persist with evidence of having occurred after the accused's post in this thread that they'd cease such behavior. 

Those are the facts and heart of this complaint, let us stick to those.