Sadistic's Unban Appeal

[Sadistic]

.

Edited October 27, 2015 by Guest

[Xelnagahunter]

I was online durring all of this and started paying minor attention when Tain poked you. While I don't recall all of the conversations I can attest that Tain was seeking and, in small part, receiving help and opinions regarding this event. Emotion was not something that was considered, at least not openly or heavily, during this. In fact, the only motivating emotion was perhaps frustration that we had to stop being productive in our round and RP to monitor this. The length of time between PMs from Tain were spent conversating with other staff for opinions and thoughts.

That said, due to it being Tain's thing to handle, I didn't commit most of what was said to memory. So I won't be useful anymore as far as this appeal is concerned.

[Skull132]

Gonna get to this tomorrow, weee~

Although, I would like to see if Tainavaa has anything else to say on the matter before I move in?

[Tainavaa]

It's clear you have and had no faith in me as a staffmember before and during my dealing with you, especially in your evident conviction in my inability to control my emotions. Moreover I'm a person of principle, not emotion. Me liking you or not has nothing to do with this decision and my emotions had nothing to do with this decision because I'm going to say it outright; I don't give a fuck. I like certain people and have a particular distaste for certain people but I would never go so far as to judge someone's worthiness to play on the server over a personal difference. That's petty and childish. And like last night both in OOC and in PM's you continue to try and assert yourself on a level above the people you're opposing. In this particular case it's me, it's fairly obvious ad hominem is coming into play even here.

Your past had nothing to do with this decision because: One; I don't know it beyond what little details I've been told about the gambit. And two; As far as it seems to me, it's irrelevant. The only relevance it has in this situation is that it acted as a catalyst for this whole dilemma. So to Delta and Frances (whose post I will admit I didn't read), their past has very little to do with this other than to provide context. It's a completely different situation conceptually, this appeal is disputing the validity of my ban in the first place. If that had any relevance, chances are he would have already been banned by now.

Alright, so let's get down to it.

The Problem

• Sadistic Nightmare sends Meowy an ominous and foreboding message over BYOND pager.
  
  
  • The message is sent after a dispute with Meowy, and I said that we've had enough of the topic. The discussion promptly ends in OOC.
  • Sadistic Nightmare even instructs Meowykins to work on getting rid of as much of their digital footprint as they can.

 

Issues with the claim of innocence

• The claim is informing Meowy of vague and nondescript people who will dox Meowy.
  
  • Why would they dox him?
    
    • The only dispute here was with Sadistic Nightmare and his past. From this, I can deduce that who would dox Meowy regarding this particular situation is a specific person or a particular group; that is Sadistic Nightmare himself, or anyone willing to protect Sadistic Nightmare.

• It's very ambiguous.
  
  • CINEMATIC SITUATION #1
    
    Two mafiolios walk into a market to collect protection money. Market guy says, "No. Fuck you." One mafioso says to the market guy, "Well we won't be protectin' ya from no accident. Which without protection I imagine might just happen." The other mafioso snickers moronically and says, "Heh. Yeah. Accident. Right, boss?"
    
    
    
    Did these two make a threat to the market guy? Yes. Was it a direct threat? No. It was a warning. But it's very obvious what they mean. Not difficult to see.

 

The Principles

• We should not have players on the server blackmailing other players.
• We should not have players fearing retaliation from other players.
  
  • It does not matter if another tells you to gather information on them or not. What matters is that you are essentially attempting to terrorize the player, regardless of whether you've carried out their requests or not.

[*]It does not matter what personal information people have left available on the internet about themselves.

• It has nothing to do with you being able to find this information. It has to do with you feeling the need to tell this particular person that there will be people seeking to release their personal information.

 

The Discussion

During it, Sadistic Nightmare questioned the validity of considering the ban for something that happened off server. I let him know, yes, I am very seriously considering this ban and I have precedent to do so. See: Cassie incident, dick picks incident. I said something very closely along those lines and I thought it was clear that they were only brought up to validate my considerations. I've asked him to judge my assessment and he danced around it, focusing on my bringing up the cassie and dick picks incident. I've told him several times to not regard that when judging my assessment but he was pretty adamant in making them all too relevant in this particular situation. Unless there was some profound miscommunication over my several attempts at explaining that they are not related to the details I was asking to be judged, I can only judge that he is either avoiding answering it or seeking any way to put me in a bad light. Or both, as he was constantly asking how it was relevant to him; trying to make a point that they have nothing to do with him. It was a pretty fruitless discussion to be honest.

Itching for the Banhammer

If I am itching for the banhammer, it is because I believe wholeheartedly that what is being done is wrong and against the rules. Not because of some ultimately petty disagreement. Why it took a while for me to respond is trying to articulate and refactor my sentences so you could better understand as I'm sure you remember, I've had to repeat myself several times. You can not use the time I've spent trying to think of how I could reword my messages to make more sense to you, then claim it as evidence I'm angry. Not only that, but two particularly long pauses were waiting to get a response from any admin on the staff skype chat. Seen below.

 

 

That message alone, in my opinion, was enough for me to make a call on permabanning. In fact, when I told the mod/admin chat, I didn't even mention you being a dick to me or undermining me. As seen in the previous image above. A threat to dox directly or by proxy I think is enough for a permaban. Those additional charges were supplementary.

I even told Scopes personally not long after the banning (by copying and pasting what I posted in the staff chat even though he's in it by recommendation of another admin). I had a short discussion with him the next day (today) about it, and I only included the details relevant to the charge that led to the decision of a permaban. I did not mention you being a dick, I did not mention undermining me, I did not mention any of that. Proof below. I decided I needed advice and confirmation because you had me questioning the validity myself but in lieu of an available admin for guidance, I went with my gut and asked Scopes about it when I could.

 

 

Finally,

I've discussed it with Scopes a bit after he's read the logs and I've accepted the possibility of the ban being invalid for the sole reason of Sadistic Nightmare not actually doxing Meowykins. Which is a different reason altogether than the reason Sadistic Nightmare has given. And that's fine if that's found to be the case to the extent that them's just the breaks and I've gotta deal with you pulling these stunts. Either way, I can only see it as attempting to terrorize another player. Which is zero tolerance in my eyes. We'll see what Skull has to say.

[Sadistic]

.

Edited October 27, 2015 by Guest

[Tainavaa]

Please refer to cinematic situation #1. It doesn't matter if we're all human. Emotion had nothing to do with my decision or any of my convictions.

We'll see what Skull has to say.

[Sadistic]

Not home again, but I have a request. Please delete this thread and forumPM me the verdict when you decide, Skull. So I don't have to deal with people like 1138 bringing up shit from years before their time.

[Skull132]

You won't have to deal with them: their posts will be removed. As they have been already. And if they persist, further action will be taken.

Beyond that, though. I read over the OOC logs that sparked the pagerPM, and I'm just slightly "Blaaa?" about it all. Basically, an OOC spat should under no circumstance escalate into an ambiguous as hell message, namely, one that can potentially be perceived as a threat, being sent to one party over a more private means of communication. If you can agree to not repeat it [the pulling people aside and sending them ambiguous messages that can be perceived as threats], then we'll be fine, and I'll lift the ban. Otherwise, going around and pagering people with, "You know, you've got a bigger digital footprint than I, maybe you should work on it?" will pretty much net you a ban for continued harassment. At least from this establishment.

Sound reasonable enough?

[Sadistic]

Reasonable. But you don't seem to realize, skull, that I am just going to get inevitably banned again and when I do, whether it's this server or not, people will look my name up and find this, and likely bring this up. It's a guarantee at this poiny. Even before 1138, you brought up the character whose name I don't remember. It's a nwverending cycle until the info is deleted.

[Skull132]

And people are free to gawk at all of my beautiful failures that I've made over the past one and a half years while here. There is a line I draw here, and that you saw enforced. Personal, real life information is something we outright scrub and delete. But online personas we consider disposable. You make the conscious decision of playing here as Sadistic (Nightmare), thus, you make the conscious decision of being recognized as Sadistic (Nightmare), if that makes sense.

Though, if you feel like continuing this debate, fetch me via pager or PMs or something, as I'm archiving this thread until further notice.

Plus, look at it this way: if they do look, and only see one ban appeal, as opposed to two, it is more reasonable that they assume you weren't banned again. As such, it is easy to assume that you didn't repeat the offence, and held onto the deal.

Ban lifted.