Staff Complain: Garnascus

[the_furry]

Thank you mirk, I appreciate the feedback from you and japak I’ve conveyed my primary thoughts about this issue and how I believe it should be approached. Although there are other things I could say about this, this is not my fight and I believe my primary thoughts are understood. There is a few last remarks I would like to wrap up.

Alberyk, I am sorry that I am not familiar with all of yinzrs fighting style and so he may have been misrepresented in my comments (I don’t see yinzr fight often, I just end up cloning him after he died). From your comments it appears you feel like you need to defend yinzrs actions and clarify what yinzr would have done. The input is important in understanding who yinzr actually is and I can understand the desire to set that straight. One thing I do want to say is even if I misrepresented him, it was not a criticism. I was trying to convey if yinzr is the kind of lizard that would charge two armed guards then there would be nothing wrong with his actions (given the right context). You don’t have to defend if he actually would charge or not because either way he would be right in doing so. So it was not a criticism in anyway, I hope you don’t feel like I view yinzr as too robusty/bad (he’s one of my favorite lizards).

Japak, it always bothers me that the admins don’t get on the same page when applying rules. The primary reason I don’t like it is it’s steadily caused inconsistencies of how rules are applied and what punishments are used. This creates a difficult atmosphere of playing because one admin will give me a warning with a threat of a ban over an action that another admin will think is funny and approve. This causes confusion as to whether the action is actually bad or not, and frustration over the confusion. I personally have experienced this frustration and confusion on several occasions. I don’t think you have to create a rule for every single possible situation in order for the admins to consistently agree with different forms of punishment. For moderating my servers and pages I teach value models and mindset development to my admins. This acts as a guideline so that when an admin is confronted with a new situation that is not covered in the rules they will be able to act accordingly so long as they keep the value models and mindset as top priority. By following this model my administrators quickly and consistently get on the same page and apply punishments pretty uniformly. There is no reason that head administrator couldn’t apply the same type of value model administration to the server. That is a criticism.

Garnascus, I don’t have much to say to you mostly because this is not my fight. I do want to clear up one thing. I was not claiming that you are

playing favorites. I was trying to convey that when you apply the rules in the manner that you are applying them (the specific action) it appears as favoritism to the player that receives the warning. As you said yourself you were simply not actually present at the time. That was actually a part of my dialog. When you apply a rule for a specific behavior to one person but not another it either shows favoritism, or (as you said) an absents of administration at the time of the incident; Both of which still cause resentment by the player that was punished for the issue. My solution resolves the apparent favoritism and absents of administration at critical times. But I never claimed you were showing favoritism.

[Garnascus]

Thank you mirk, I appreciate the feedback from you and japak I’ve conveyed my primary thoughts about this issue and how I believe it should be approached. Although there are other things I could say about this, this is not my fight and I believe my primary thoughts are understood. There is a few last remarks I would like to wrap up.

Alberyk, I am sorry that I am not familiar with all of yinzrs fighting style and so he may have been misrepresented in my comments (I don’t see yinzr fight often, I just end up cloning him after he died). From your comments it appears you feel like you need to defend yinzrs actions and clarify what yinzr would have done. The input is important in understanding who yinzr actually is and I can understand the desire to set that straight. One thing I do want to say is even if I misrepresented him, it was not a criticism. I was trying to convey if yinzr is the kind of lizard that would charge two armed guards then there would be nothing wrong with his actions (given the right context). You don’t have to defend if he actually would charge or not because either way he would be right in doing so. So it was not a criticism in anyway, I hope you don’t feel like I view yinzr as too robusty/bad (he’s one of my favorite lizards).

Japak, it always bothers me that the admins don’t get on the same page when applying rules. The primary reason I don’t like it is it’s steadily caused inconsistencies of how rules are applied and what punishments are used. This creates a difficult atmosphere of playing because one admin will give me a warning with a threat of a ban over an action that another admin will think is funny and approve. This causes confusion as to whether the action is actually bad or not, and frustration over the confusion. I personally have experienced this frustration and confusion on several occasions. I don’t think you have to create a rule for every single possible situation in order for the admins to consistently agree with different forms of punishment. For moderating my servers and pages I teach value models and mindset development to my admins. This acts as a guideline so that when an admin is confronted with a new situation that is not covered in the rules they will be able to act accordingly so long as they keep the value models and mindset as top priority. By following this model my administrators quickly and consistently get on the same page and apply punishments pretty uniformly. There is no reason that head administrator couldn’t apply the same type of value model administration to the server. That is a criticism.

Garnascus, I don’t have much to say to you mostly because this is not my fight. I do want to clear up one thing. I was not claiming that you are

playing favorites. I was trying to convey that when you apply the rules in the manner that you are applying them (the specific action) it appears as favoritism to the player that receives the warning. As you said yourself you were simply not actually present at the time. That was actually a part of my dialog. When you apply a rule for a specific behavior to one person but not another it either shows favoritism, or (as you said) an absents of administration at the time of the incident; Both of which still cause resentment by the player that was punished for the issue. My solution resolves the apparent favoritism and absents of administration at critical times. But I never claimed you were showing favoritism.

 

being on different pages is not the same as having healthy disagreement. the vast majority of punishments we do or do not dish are in unanimous, we are not each going on separate crusades enforcing our own interpretation of the rules. I get what you're saying about it appearing as favoritism but quite frankly if i cared what people thought about decisions i make to moderate problematic behavior then i shouldn't be a moderator in the first place.

[mirkoloio]

Just fucking close this thread. Going to be banned soon most likely, so I'd not like to do grief to others while I'm still here.

Request Canceled, please lock

[Tenenza]

Okay, can do. Locked and Archived.