Jump to content

[Resolved] Scheveningen got caught not paying attention to a suggestion post, then locked the thread to everyone


Recommended Posts

BYOND Key: alexpkeaton

Staff BYOND Key: Schevenigen

Game ID: N/A-forum related

Reason for complaint: Staff abuse of forums. He locked a thread just to spite someone who made a valid point (Schev had not paid attention to the content of the suggestion)... in an admittedly rude way

Evidence/logs/etc: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=9335

Additional remarks:


First of all, let me preface this by saying I'm fairly new here. I cannot recall any staff interaction with Scheveningen before today besides being posters to one or two of the same forum threads.


The OP in the link provided made a mild (IMO) comment about Schev's attitude, Schev decides to punish everyone in the forum by locking what was an interesting thread.


I am not the OP that Schev was responding to, and my contribution to the thread was neutral, not really siding with one side or the other. I have no agenda here other than that I think what Schev did was childish and an abuse of his mod authority.


Just because one participant in a thread rubs you the wrong way doesn't mean you lock the thread to everybody. It smacks of somebody that is getting off on power. What's odd is that nothing in the thread was ridiculously insulting. Yes, the OP made a comment directed at Schev. Specifically, "I really wonder what goes through your head sometimes. But at the risk of being as rude as I'd probably enjoy being, I'll let [other poster mentioning that Schev totally didn't pay attention to the topic] comment answer for me." It wasn't nice. But it wasn't a string of profanity nor ridiculously disrespecting. It didn't deserve the overreaction it got.


This isn't the only time I've seen a overreaction by Schev in these forums, I've made a mental note of an unban appeal (Munks) that looked heavy handed (doubling a punishment because someone started off the conversation by saying "BYE" to a ahelp), then rejecting the appeal because it will just expire in a few days - it was a week long ban upgraded from a three day ban. (For the record, I don't know Munks, didn't play in the round. Again, no horse in that race besides basic decency.)


I left the server I played on for two years in part because admins were forgetting themselves sometimes. I've never been banned, temporary or permanent. I just didn't like how the community was being led. And you've decided that Schev should represent this community.


Beyond being childish (as was his veiled threat of admin action against the OP... for what? Pointing out that he blew by the basic point of the thread for a "gotcha" comment?), it closes the door on what at that time had been an active discussion among several individuals. That's not an appropriate use of his authority.

Link to comment

I was going to make a complaint about literally this exact subject, but not only did someone get to it first, but the covered the exact threads I was going to bring up, too.


So I will pitch in my two cents here, as someone involved in part of the content of this complaint, to express that Schevenigenhas repeatedly abused his powers as an administrator and forum moderator to fulfill personal goals and exert his weight to quash when people make him feel embarrassed or upset.


I was going to reference an archived thread I made about being issued a forum warning by Schevenigen for disagreeing with him under the pretense of 'being off topic', but it appears to have mysteriously vanished. Presumably, it was placed in a location I didn't spot and not simply deleted by someone, but the gist of it is that he was told of by Garn for issuing a warning for an issue they were personally involved in.


I will also bring up this bit that happened last month on the 22nd of September.

 

From: Scheveningen

Recipient: Kaed The following is a warning which has been issued to you by an administrator or moderator of this site.

This is a warning regarding the following post made by you: viewtopic.php?f=18&p=84589.


Do not derail the thread.

 

 

I was issued this warning, with a broken link that lead nowhere. I attempted to request more information about this warning, but to date have never received a response. I was under the impression that people are supposed to be given clear information about the reason they were issued warnings, but I might be wrong. Maybe I am not allowed to ask clarification about these sort of things.


Schevenigen and I have a history of abrasive interactions with each other, and I admit I do not rather much like them. I'm sure the feeling is mutual. But neither expressing that I would like to be rude to someone without actually being that rude, nor jabbing him about not reading the actual thread and instead picking apart my question rather actually answering it does not seem worthy of locking the thread. If they really felt personally attacked, they should have issued a warning against me personally, rather than locking the thread in which they embarrassed themselves. I don't really think they had enough to go through with that with what I said to issue a warning, though, so they did this instead. Rather like claiming someone was threatening to assault you by saying "I'd really like to punch you right now, but I'm not going to."


This just seems to be more of Schevenigen fulfilling their personal whims by waving around their administrative powers, much like when they doubled Munks ban for not saying what they wanted while they were issuing said ban, then refused to lift the ban because 'it would expire in several days anyway'. The lock thread function does not exist as a bail out button for when you say something dumb and are called out for it. As much as Schevenigen tells people (me) to stay on topic, I find it interesting that this is his response to my pointing out he did not sufficiently pay attention to the actual topic before replying.


It's also interesting to me that in this thread where Munks appealed his ban, the only one who even responded to the ban was the person that actually issued it. Is it not usually considered reasonable for an unbiased third party to weigh in on this sort of thing? Especially when the individual in question has already demonstrated problems with separating personal bias from their decision-making process.

Link to comment

Alright previous message is lost so let's 2+2=4 - 3 is 1 quick maths this.


Munks banned wasn't due to a single instance, it was due to repeated and continous breaches of the "Don't be a dick" rule and while Schev handled it about as well as Amy Schumer handles stand-up I stand-by with his decision on the weekban.

Furthermore an appeal doesn't require a third party, why we don't mind it and even support it, it is ultimately between the banned and the banning staff as only they know what the ban was truly about, the fact that Munks didn't actually get what the ban was about and just decided to focus on how it was handled is reason enough to have it denied.


On the actual forum topic, yes I agree it was nothing but a powerflex there was no need to lock the entire threat for a single issue.

BUT


On that warning you can't get to because it's broken (moved into the moderator bin so plebians can't view it)

Fig.A 57ed6322bb.png

 


Now such post could be shrugged off as a "Simple joke", yet you decided to post this in the thread of a DEMOTED AND PERMABANNED LORE WRITER FOR VAURCAE.

The thread itself: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=9169


While this instance was mishandled and I agree on that you should stop and consider that maybe not all of them are made out of personal bias but because of your attitude.

Link to comment

It's also interesting to me that in this thread where Munks appealed his ban, the only one who even responded to the ban was the person that actually issued it. Is it not usually considered reasonable for an unbiased third party to weigh in on this sort of thing? Especially when the individual in question has already demonstrated problems with separating personal bias from their decision-making process.

 

Generally speaking, unban appeals are given to the person that gave out the punishment. If they wish for an outside look on it, they can make a staff complaint since it would mean they don't agree with their assessment from their appeal thread, then we will look into it. I admit, this misconception is at this time our fault and we're currently in the progress of bringing the forums up to date with information and such, it's simply tedious and exhausting at times, I'll see about getting this topic sorted and clarified.

Link to comment



On that warning you can't get to because it's broken (moved into the moderator bin so plebians can't view it)

Fig.A 57ed6322bb.png

 


Now such post could be shrugged off as a "Simple joke", yet you decided to post this in the thread of a DEMOTED AND PERMABANNED LORE WRITER FOR VAURCAE.

The thread itself: https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=9169


While this instance was mishandled and I agree on that you should stop and consider that maybe not all of them are made out of personal bias but because of your attitude.

 

Thank you for clarifying that, though I should point that I did not post that in Please enforce Vaurca treatment laws in some manner., a thread made by a banned player named tmmytbbt , but rather Really serious gameplay affecting Vaurca Complaint (https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=9051), a suggestion thread involving vaurca mandibles not spawning equipped by Diggy, which had already been closed and was en-route to archiving at the time of my comment.


This is important context.


The suggestions forum that the thread was in is one of the few places on the forum I regularly visit, and my attention to races and their lore(masters) that aren't unathi is fairly low. So if it was somehow constituted as an attack on someone who was banned and not even involved in the thread rather than the intended 'lol vaurca suck' joke (on a thread that was already resolved, and in the process of being closed out, so by my logic process at the time was not really 'on topic' anymore, since it ended), then there was a serious misunderstanding by both you and delta.


Either way, the main crux of that portion of my complaint was not entirely because I didn't know why I was warned, but also because Schvenigan declined to respond to a respond to a request for more information. It doesn't look like it was hard for you to dig up this information, Coalf. Is there a particular reason you had to do this, rather than Schvenigan answering it a month ago?

 

It's also interesting to me that in this thread where Munks appealed his ban, the only one who even responded to the ban was the person that actually issued it. Is it not usually considered reasonable for an unbiased third party to weigh in on this sort of thing? Especially when the individual in question has already demonstrated problems with separating personal bias from their decision-making process.

 

Generally speaking, unban appeals are given to the person that gave out the punishment. If they wish for an outside look on it, they can make a staff complaint since it would mean they don't agree with their assessment from their appeal thread, then we will look into it. I admit, this misconception is at this time our fault and we're currently in the progress of bringing the forums up to date with information and such, it's simply tedious and exhausting at times, I'll see about getting this topic sorted and clarified.

 

Okie dokie, thanks for clarifying. I should also point out the General Forum Rules thread is STILL missing, and has been for months. Just as an aside.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment

So I will pitch in my two cents here, as someone involved in part of the content of this complaint, to express that Schevenigenhas repeatedly abused his powers as an administrator and forum moderator to fulfill personal goals and exert his weight to quash when people make him feel embarrassed or upset.

 

That's not why I locked the thread. I locked the thread because, once again, you broke forum rules by bringing your own personal levied spite out into the open and throwing out pity ripostes (as you're doing now) because I had a misconception over what your suggestion was about. Considering you do this on a consistent basis on-server and off and overblew a miscommunication and decided to twist it to call me incompetent, I had the thread locked until an administrator decides to handle your awful attitude. This isn't an isolated instance, you parade your ugly attitude out on a persistent basis when it is absolutely unnecessary.


I was cordial and nice in that thread up until you made that response and I had no actual need to tolerate your elitist attitude. You have actually ignored attempts at communication as to what is wrong with your manner of posting and my associated inboxes remain empty from you. You have not "requested" any sort of clarification as to your forum warnings nor have you chosen to attempt to engage me on a more convenient medium such as discord for discussion. If you have sent me a PM, it is likely I ignored it because you were rude and standoffish. If someone fails to understand for the third time in discipline what the issue is about their own attitude, then I do not expect anyone to have to be obligated to beat sense into them.

 

I was going to reference an archived thread I made about being issued a forum warning by Schevenigen for disagreeing with him under the pretense of 'being off topic', but it appears to have mysteriously vanished. Presumably, it was placed in a location I didn't spot and not simply deleted by someone, but the gist of it is that he was told of by Garn for issuing a warning for an issue they were personally involved in.

 

General procedure is to move offending posts to the forum bin. Soft deletes only happen for posts that action is not taken for, especially in the dev-related forums where maintainers just simply prune threads that don't abide by any objective of discussion. Doubling back to the topic, the offending post was indeed off-topic and had no bearing on the actual discussion, and the tone of the post by itself mandated a warning especially since you know better but apparently not? I wonder why rules are enforced in those cases, especially for known repeat offenders and shitposters, strange.

 

Schevenigen and I have a history of abrasive interactions with each other, and I admit I do not rather much like them. I'm sure the feeling is mutual. But neither expressing that I would like to be rude to someone without actually being that rude, nor jabbing him about not reading the actual thread and instead picking apart my question rather actually answering it does not seem worthy of locking the thread. If they really felt personally attacked, they should have issued a warning against me personally, rather than locking the thread in which they embarrassed themselves. I don't really think they had enough to go through with that with what I said to issue a warning, though, so they did this instead. Rather like claiming someone was threatening to assault you by saying "I'd really like to punch you right now, but I'm not going to."

 

Locking a thread because you decided to double down and resort to insults because of my misunderstanding of the intention of a suggestion (without even me being rude, I've no idea how I provoked such a fragile response from you) is hardly equivalent to suggesting passive-aggressively that you would like to assault them. Could you take a minute and check yourself before you make such awful comparisons? I understand if life is very boring for you at home or something and this is how you get your kicks but you have to learn to act like an adult sometime rather than when it suits you, and to perhaps not turn every environment you interact with into a constant high-school drama gagefight. It's funny how you go out on an extreme limb like this on a consistent basis because I don't even have to do anything to you to provoke this, but it doesn't even accomplish anything. What's it all for, man? What do the numbers mean, could you tell me?

 

This just seems to be more of Schevenigen fulfilling their personal whims by waving around their administrative powers, much like when they doubled Munks ban for not saying what they wanted while they were issuing said ban, then refused to lift the ban because 'it would expire in several days anyway'. The lock thread function does not exist as a bail out button for when you say something dumb and are called out for it. As much as Schevenigen tells people (me) to stay on topic, I find it interesting that this is his response to my pointing out he did not sufficiently pay attention to the actual topic before replying.

 

I think unless [mention]Munks[/mention] wants to pitch in, you should probably mind your own business, especially since this has little to do with the actual issue, that being you getting upset because a staff member decided they didn't want to deal with your attitude for an otherwise unprovoked situation.

 

It's also interesting to me that in this thread where Munks appealed his ban, the only one who even responded to the ban was the person that actually issued it. Is it not usually considered reasonable for an unbiased third party to weigh in on this sort of thing? Especially when the individual in question has already demonstrated problems with separating personal bias from their decision-making process.

 

The point of an unban appeal is to take culpability for their actions that led to their initial ban. Munks did not do so and phrased it as if it were a complaint and then stopped replying when I raised multiple rather important concerns about conducting oneself in a mature fashion and suddenly he clammed up, thus it was denied since it was a timed ban anyway.


As a word of advice, it wouldn't hurt to hesitate a little and stop projecting your own labels such as "embarrassed" or whatever your attempts at being insulting are about. I log on to make sure folks are having fun and so on. I don't log on to endure the typical toxic nonsense that comes from the subset of people who leave Aurora because they didn't like how it was managed and for whatever reason comes back, but not to promote positive attitudes or funpost, but to inject their own personal misgivings about the server climate at any opportunity they get. Your mannerisms don't match someone who wants to be productive and contribute to the community they attend and enjoy, your mannerisms match someone holding a heavier grudge against the community than any kind of grudge I could ever hold against any one person. That animosity can make people sick, you should definitely dial down on the constant negativity you have about yourself.


However, I'm perfectly able to forgive and even apologize for my own actions and discuss misgivings over discord, Scheveningen#4745 is my discord key name. I have very few rules about what I discuss with someone in DMs and I will allow someone to chew me out if they like in private. On a public forum we do not allow it because of our rules on flame wars. If I cared so much about my public image I probably would have locked this too.

Link to comment

Most of this was already covered in this thread by other admins, but let's cover this part.

 

You have not "requested" any sort of clarification as to your forum warnings nor have you chosen to attempt to engage me on a more convenient medium such as discord for discussion.

 

ef4470764d80003321a9cb46099d093f.png

 



This reply was an irritable late night reply made 6 minutes after your warning was issued, and while there certainly isn't a question mark in there, it seems pretty clear to me that I'm addressing to you that the link doesn't work. You also read this, because it was moved to my Sent folder, and then chose not to respond to it, even with something as simple as 'The link isn't fucked up, I just linked you the post without realizing you couldn't view something in the moderator forums, here is an image of the post'.


You took no time to explain any of this to me outside of this thread, which has happened a month later, and you are currently reiterating things that Sharp and Coalf has already told me... In an admittedly much more abrasive fashion. "Mind your own business", reallty?


That wasn't a 'pity ripost', it was me being annoyed that you did not actually read the opening post in my thread. I don't know how you can call it a 'misconception' about the thread to tell me that the drug I actually made the name up for in my OP (inhibidone) 'didn't exist' when you replied to my question that involved the word. It's not 'misunderstanding' to miss out on a keyword in a topic. It's just not paying attention. I feel entirely justified in feeling irritation when an exchange like this happens.

 

"Let's make a drug called Inhibidone, it delays reagent processing."


"I assume this is only for ingested-based reagents instead of injected? If it were implemented to injected reagent transferals, it would be really hard to dunk on a lot of people with chlorophoride if it doesn't act instantly."


"I don't really understand why it should be ingested only? Are you suggesting that people would run around injecting themselves with Inhibidone constantly for the sake of being immune to any poisons? I feel like you could treat it like powergaming, much like people who abused hyperzine.


That chemical (Inhibidone) doesn't exist. The only individuals that do this (abuse hyperzine) are ERT. No other character that I have seen "abuses" hyperzine. It is rarely, if ever, prescribed to crewmembers as combat chemicals.

 

None of that, save for your original comment, feels that could be construed as you misunderstanding the topic, but rather that you failed to actually process the information given to you. You also never actually answered the question, instead opting to point out, needlessly, that my imaginary drug did not exist.


I started writing this post before I noticed that someone else had already pointed that out to. At that point, I deleted a large portion of the post that detailed the same thing, that you didn't seem to have read the topic, and replaced with with a nod towards Doc's post instead.


Let me also point out that Coalf has also agreed that you locking the thread was little more than a powerflex. There was absolutely no need for you to lock the thread to resolve an issue between you an a person in the thread.


ShameOnTurtles did recently issue me a warning about reporting off topic posts instead of snarking about them (which is probably what you should have done in the first place, like I said earlier).


But this still leaves the issue of why you felt it was necessary to lock a thread 'for administrative review' after someone snarked at you. The thread hasn't been derailed, nor did it contain anything particularly inflammatory to anyone but you, personally. You could easily have just directed an admin to the thread to allow it to be reviewed without locking it. Your administrative powers do not exist to service your ego, Scheveningen, and I'm having a hard time thinking of any other reason you would do this.


I'd like to address this bit last.

 

As a word of advice, it wouldn't hurt to hesitate a little and stop projecting your own labels such as "embarrassed" or whatever your attempts at being insulting are about.


Your mannerisms don't match someone who wants to be productive and contribute to the community they attend and enjoy, your mannerisms match someone holding a heavier grudge against the community than any kind of grudge I could ever hold against any one person. That animosity can make people sick, you should definitely dial down on the constant negativity you have about yourself.

 

Your desires to (pretend to?) psychoanalyze my motives and place off-handed jabs against me rubs me as nearly as inflammatory as you seem to think I already am. I didn't say 'you embarrassed yourself' because I, myself, am secretly embarrassed about something. I said it because I felt your entire behavior here involving this thread stems from you being embarrassed about your lack of attentiveness, and doing your damnedest to backpedal and call it things like a 'misunderstanding', followed by locking the thread so no one else can comment on it. It's entirely possible you did out out of some noble desire to preserve the community from my 'constant negativity', but I have strong doubts about that.


Your behavior actually seems to fit more into what you mentioned earlier about 'pity ripostes', which is somewhat ironic, because you told me not to do them in the same post. I might have issues with the community at large, and this has been evident from my threads about server policy but in this situation, my beef is with you, personally. Don't try and redirect the issue with a degrading paragraph about how I am sick and clearly hate myself. That is not and will never be a productive way to address a problem.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment


I think unless @Munks wants to pitch in, you should probably mind your own business, especially since this has little to do with the actual issue, that being you getting upset because a staff member decided they didn't want to deal with your attitude for an otherwise unprovoked situation.

 

I think posts made on a public forum are anyone's business and I'm glad it was brought up because it's yet another example of you using your abilities in a questionable manner, once again seeming like you're more interested in ensuring that you receive extra respect (or validation) you feel you deserve for being a staffmember rather than actually improving the quality of the community at large. I'm with Alexpkeaton in wondering why Scheveningen is still a moderator, especially in light of the fact that they're one of the most routinely complained about staffmembers that I've ever seen period.

Link to comment

Being the most complained about /=/ Inadequate for the job. I think it is important to make that distinction.


But beyond that, something kinda funny happened today that I might've deserved in my attitude towards the above posters in recent history. I had to be rushed to the ER for serious hypertension at work today. If I insisted on staying longer to work at my job I probably would've had a heart attack. Apparently my hypertension was a result of the high blood pressure I've had, which is a result of the some of the stress being put on me both on-server, as a result of this complaint I've admittedly been worrying about, some personal stuff in addition to the hectic high-speed low-drag work day I had to deal with. And before I was discharged with a lot of painkillers (probably the largest reason I'm avoiding hostility right now, as I don't want a repeat incident), I was pretty much told by the doctor to avoid high-stress work until a couple weeks when I'm expected to check back in for an appointment.


So basically, any drama I've created as of recent was definitely my fault and I could've gotten seriously hurt more than usual if I had done or said more things that didn't benefit much to other community members I may have acted against. I'm not lobbying for pity because I had a near-death experience, save it. This is just for context so people understand why I've changed my mind and recognized I've done some wrongs here and made some bad judgements. I do not intend to seem manipulative, but I won't admit to bias because my intentions were, are, and will be to uphold server rules, I will insist on saying that I am not a selfish person. I can be bullheaded and a bit of a moral crusader when it's inappropriate but that's my mistake. My overzealousness has effectively become the flaw that defines the crux of the issues being brought before me here. There's little benefit for me to be taking selfish actions because they hurt other people more than they help me and when other people get screwed over it really doesn't help my own goals to be assisting or promoting for the server at large.


I do not really forgive myself for how I acted yet so I am in no position to be asking for forgiveness. I apologize for my conduct and will accept any consequences for my actions.

Link to comment

I'll come out and say it, too...


When I learned that Schev was a moderator and command whitelist responsibilities had fallen to him, I was disheartened. Having been involved in several arguments with him in the past, I knew that he would be an absolutely terrible choice for moderator, and he has definitely proven that to me in recent weeks. Not simply because we disagreed, but his manner of approach to most subjects, which, I'll let you characterize on your own by searching the forums. I'll throw in that I am certainly not perfect, either, but, I am also not a moderator (or even interested in being one, because I prefer to play the game naturally and without the added responsibilities).


That terrible bit of business out of the way, I'll also say that to his credit he's a great part of the community as a player and contributor to many forum topics, and I am glad he is here in that capacity. If any action is taken, I hope that no meta-grudge will form as I enjoy playing SS13 with Schev the player, just not Schev the mod.


I apologize for commenting when I was not involved with this particular incident, I understand that's against the rules and will take no offense if this post is outright deleted, I just saw the posts above and felt like it would make sense to go ahead and posit with others that I don't think Schev should be a moderator - in game - of the forums - and please no not of any whitelists either.

Link to comment

I'll come out and say it, too...


When I learned that Schev was a moderator and command whitelist responsibilities had fallen to him, I was disheartened. Having been involved in several arguments with him in the past, I knew that he would be an absolutely terrible choice for moderator, and he has definitely proven that to me in recent weeks. Not simply because we disagreed, but his manner of approach to most subjects, which, I'll let you characterize on your own by searching the forums. I'll throw in that I am certainly not perfect, either, but, I am also not a moderator (or even interested in being one, because I prefer to play the game naturally and without the added responsibilities).


That terrible bit of business out of the way, I'll also say that to his credit he's a great part of the community as a player and contributor to many forum topics, and I am glad he is here in that capacity. If any action is taken, I hope that no meta-grudge will form as I enjoy playing SS13 with Schev the player, just not Schev the mod.


I apologize for commenting when I was not involved with this particular incident, I understand that's against the rules and will take no offense if this post is outright deleted, I just saw the posts above and felt like it would make sense to go ahead and posit with others that I don't think Schev should be a moderator - in game - of the forums - and please no not of any whitelists either.

 

I would like to say this to you, [mention]JKJudgeX[/mention] in public. You are not the only person who has the same opinion. There are some of us in the shadows who have these same opinions.


As for the thread, I wish to back up this statement and say this. A regular trusted player JKJudgeX is not the only person who thinks. This is also what I think entirely of Schev. I didn't want to be the only person to actually speak out against Schev, which is why I've been actually waiting to see for someone steps up and says this. Like what Judge says, although I will throw some words in what I think; Schev's usual characterization approach is the entirely aggressive in a way to achieve goals which may be either turn-of-the-tide or pointless. As I see, Schev has made plentiful of muck ups and vowed to correct his attitude, but... Did he kept his vow to correct his attitude/behavior? He did kept his vow. And where did that lead us to?"I'll give you one last last last chance to correct this behavior." I believe it is safe to say we have reached an impasse. We have no choice but to rely on Headmin's decision on this.


I hope that Judge and my view on this moderator is not worth just a cent but more than a dollar. Yes, I am aware of the fact that I am not involved in this particular case and is against the rules. I certainly hope this has made the case solid. I will be tolerate if someone would like to use my words posted here in a whole new complaint thread against Schev.


Thank you for hearing us out.

Link to comment

Post Removed


- Aboshehab

 

I'm having trouble recalling any of these cited oaths we supposedly made? Since they never happened. Keep your post factual and true please along with the associated jabs at people removed. The others have posted their cases properly, make an effort to do the same.

Link to comment

Alright, I finally got some time to get around to managing this complaint.


I am not going to address the head of staff thing because it has absolutely nothing to do with the complaint. Along with Abosh, me having been staff longer than he has, I do not recall ANY such "oaths" that Hive is claiming. No evidence, no claim; simple.


That being said, here's what I'm thinking on the complaint: Kaedwulf and Delta are both out of line.


Kaed is out of line for being passive aggressive and trying to justify it on this complaint as "I was irritated, but my irritation was justified". Your irritation might be justified, but that doesn't justify you to be passive aggressive and rude to another person. If you have nothing good to say, then don't say it, and please show further restraint in the future.


Delta is out of line for the obvious reason of locking the thread. I can only describe his use of powers to lock the thread as flagrant and nonsensical. It was absolutely unnecessary to lock the thread as a single off-handed comment should not be grounds for locking a thread that's trying to get discussion rolling. I'll talk with the (head) administrators on this matter to see what would be the best course of action to pursue because I do have some serious reservations as a result of this issue.

Link to comment

Kaed is out of line for being passive aggressive and trying to justify it on this complaint as "I was irritated, but my irritation was justified". Your irritation might be justified, but that doesn't justify you to be passive aggressive and rude to another person. If you have nothing good to say, then don't say it, and please show further restraint in the future.

 

 

Fair enough!

Link to comment

Better late than never. In truth, we've actually discussed this topic at length among the adminstration team and Trish's conclusion is supported among us.


In essense, we've given Schev a probation period of three months wherein he isn't permitted to moderate the forums other than the basics of moving/locking threads when requested or to fix an error. This has been conveyed to him with the understanding that any breach of these conditions will most likely, if not surely resulting in their position of Moderator being revoked.


As this staff complaint has been resolved and necessary action already conducted, I will be locking and archiving.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...