Forest

I remember @Rhododendron said, never, ever again, because of his depressive state and his threatens of suicide as well as other problem. He was warned multiple times and is the reason we have this rule in place now. He has had a lot of support over the years as evident in threads but many are just unsure of the decision. For some reason with this new search feature i can't find the ban protests. This decision isn't up to anyone but silence. I'm not sure if i support him getting unbanned or not but i do believe he deserves his voice be heard and it has been a long ass time. If i had issues with Duckii jr, i honestly can't remember them at this point. This clan has changed dramatically and has shifted over to mainly being full of people from the TF2 divison so the only people who can really give a good perspective are @Chrono @Aegean @Forest and @Rhododendron but the decision ultimately falls onto Silence. I'm not sure minecrack really gives a damn but it doesn't hurt to tag him
 
@Forest also is here too.
 
About Duckii Jr | Xeno Gamers
Denied - Duckii Jr | Xeno Gamers

Where the boys at?

peace out fam

My +1 for unban was strictly on the basis that screenshots of walling is not enough evidence, unless of course it's Oscar showing that he personally has walls when protesting ducki. (Shoutout to the old boys who know that @Owl @Rabid @Klure)

Is there really that much to discuss here? While screenshots can provide context, by no means should they alone be substantiated enough to warrant a permanent ban for hacking, especially when the screenshots aren't even that credible provided the following facts:

It's common to camp a corner
Audio cues from behind the wall
Tendency for a Player to be behind said-wall
Facing the direction that the user will be shooting

I'm sorry, but screenshots of someone facing a wall when it just so happens that someone is behind it does not equate to a permanent ban for wall-hacking. With that said, while not relevant, the accused even has 1,811 hours recorded for TF2 on top of 382/520 achievements which is something to consider; anyone hacking could just as easily create a new Steam account and play TF2 as it is F2P without worrying about their main account facing any sort of ban/suspension.
 
Now I'm not saying that the Moderator wrongly accused the Player, nor am I saying that the Player 100% did not hack. All I'm saying is that there just is not enough given here to warrant a permanent ban for hacking, which is why I'm going to +1 for an unban.
 
TL;DR - Players should be treated as innocent until proven guilty; not the other way around. Evidence is not clear enough to warrant a permanent ban for hacking.

Is there really that much to discuss here? While screenshots can provide context, by no means should they alone be substantiated enough to warrant a permanent ban for hacking, especially when the screenshots aren't even that credible provided the following facts:

It's common to camp a corner
Audio cues from behind the wall
Tendency for a Player to be behind said-wall
Facing the direction that the user will be shooting

I'm sorry, but screenshots of someone facing a wall when it just so happens that someone is behind it does not equate to a permanent ban for wall-hacking. With that said, while not relevant, the accused even has 1,811 hours recorded for TF2 on top of 382/520 achievements which is something to consider; anyone hacking could just as easily create a new Steam account and play TF2 as it is F2P without worrying about their main account facing any sort of ban/suspension.
 
Now I'm not saying that the Moderator wrongly accused the Player, nor am I saying that the Player 100% did not hack. All I'm saying is that there just is not enough given here to warrant a permanent ban for hacking, which is why I'm going to +1 for an unban.
 
TL;DR - Players should be treated as innocent until proven guilty; not the other way around. Evidence is not clear enough to warrant a permanent ban for hacking.

Is there really that much to discuss here? While screenshots can provide context, by no means should they alone be substantiated enough to warrant a permanent ban for hacking, especially when the screenshots aren't even that credible provided the following facts:

It's common to camp a corner
Audio cues from behind the wall
Tendency for a Player to be behind said-wall
Facing the direction that the user will be shooting

I'm sorry, but screenshots of someone facing a wall when it just so happens that someone is behind it does not equate to a permanent ban for wall-hacking. With that said, while not relevant, the accused even has 1,811 hours recorded for TF2 on top of 382/520 achievements which is something to consider; anyone hacking could just as easily create a new Steam account and play TF2 as it is F2P without worrying about their main account facing any sort of ban/suspension.
 
Now I'm not saying that the Moderator wrongly accused the Player, nor am I saying that the Player 100% did not hack. All I'm saying is that there just is not enough given here to warrant a permanent ban for hacking, which is why I'm going to +1 for an unban.
 
TL;DR - Players should be treated as innocent until proven guilty; not the other way around. Evidence is not clear enough to warrant a permanent ban for hacking.

Unfortunately without a demo I will +1 for unban. I have no doubt Spoopy does believe it's walls, but regardless we have rules in place for situations like this. Unless another staff can verify that he saw his walls, I will +1 his unban

Or this can remain buried in the deepest, darkest corners of Xeno Gamers, to never be seen by the light of day and to only traumatize those who actually took the time to read it during its reveal and conception.
 
Lets be real here, they want to be unbanned; not scarred for life from a graphic fanfic (even though the poor saps have an option to review 'The Buttercream Gang').
 
Remember guys, we're a "PG13" community!
 
as I am obliged to remind people :coffee:

Or this can remain buried in the deepest, darkest corners of Xeno Gamers, to never be seen by the light of day and to only traumatize those who actually took the time to read it during its reveal and conception.
 
Lets be real here, they want to be unbanned; not scarred for life from a graphic fanfic (even though the poor saps have an option to review 'The Buttercream Gang').
 
Remember guys, we're a "PG13" community!
 
as I am obliged to remind people :coffee:

Thanks @Forest!
 
~Closed due to ban protest being for the wrong community.

Is there any chance that the "Sticky Threads" and "Normal Threads" Headings could be formatted in a different way? It might just be me, but they appear to be too subtle to really notice or distinguish between one or the other. They sort of just blend into the background as they currently are.
 

@Rhododendron

Here I have the updated version of Old Goku in SSGSS form. I did this on stream, for about 3-4 hours.

Post your go-to song that you just cannot stop listening to.
 
I've been listening to this song since its release and I believe I have a problem. Send help.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3xcybdis1k
 
Challenge: Infect as many people as you can with some contagious tunes

Post your go-to song that you just cannot stop listening to.
 
I've been listening to this song since its release and I believe I have a problem. Send help.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3xcybdis1k
 
Challenge: Infect as many people as you can with some contagious tunes

Also feel like it shouldn't appear for anyone who has an identity linked to the TS3 Server; though I don't know if that's possible :coffee:

The "here" should be another color i.e. blue so it's obvious that people can click it.

If you feel that you are being targeted on our Servers or within our community please do not hesitate to contact a Higher-Up. Unfortunately, they cannot be monitoring everything 24/7 and rely heavily on the community to provide feedback and input.
 
To put it simply, as a part of the community we all need to do our part in reporting any issues or situations to foster a healthy and friendly environment for our Players. We're the eyes and ears of the Higher-Ups, and without us it is virtually impossible for them to do their job.
 
That being said, although it's unfortunate that it has come to this, I imagine your feedback is still greatly appreciated :coffee:

If you feel that you are being targeted on our Servers or within our community please do not hesitate to contact a Higher-Up. Unfortunately, they cannot be monitoring everything 24/7 and rely heavily on the community to provide feedback and input.
 
To put it simply, as a part of the community we all need to do our part in reporting any issues or situations to foster a healthy and friendly environment for our Players. We're the eyes and ears of the Higher-Ups, and without us it is virtually impossible for them to do their job.
 
That being said, although it's unfortunate that it has come to this, I imagine your feedback is still greatly appreciated :coffee:

[attach=full]29750[/attach]

[MEDIA=steamstore]218620[/MEDIA]

Ehhhhhhhh..
 
Not going to spend time digging too deep into it, just going to throw in my 2-cents. Though first and foremost, this is based off of assumptions and is to be treated as a general response to any situation like this so, you know.. Please refrain from biting my head off, kthnx :coffee:
 
I just want to toss a [very] relevant comment in here that I made in another thread (one that I can't be bothered to find) in that Staff positions should not be treated as some sort of welcome basket to those who have consistently stepped-down. While I'm sure many people may dish out the "we can just demote 'em" defense if things go awry, I'm simply appealing to the integrity of Xeno Gamers as a whole. However, this isn't to say that someone should not be welcomed back with an immediate promotion from Member to Administrator [for example] because, as others have previously mentioned, it is a case-by-case situation. If the user has demonstrated qualities that shine in that position, or if they do not have a bad-track record, then I see no reason not to give them that promotion.
 
With that said, there are two sides to this coin:
 
1. There is little to no harm in promoting someone with a high turn-over rate who has an extraordinary track record, aside from having to assign powers once more. Because we run on a system of voluntary Staff, it doesn't [detrimentally] hurt us to allow someone to moderate for xG if we know they will do a stellar job, even if they consistently step down. While this may seem 'unfair' to those who are applying and are denied, keep in mind that Staff are measured by their qualities and work ethics (or at least should be; strongly recommend castrating any Higher-Up who is acting on bias) so it is to be expected that varying Staff will not be on the same level (eg. Someone who already has experience in the position will always receive [or be considered first for] the position before a new-hire).
 
The only foreseeable problem area here is that if this trend continues, we'll see an influx in Staff who do not feel obligated to perform their duties and therefore feel free to step-down and then re-apply when it is most convenient for them if they are a model Staff Member. In other words, this may only be a problem depending on what the standards are for Staff here in terms of the short or long run. With the way we currently have things set up in terms of activity, we're set up to keep Staff in the long run, and so this should be considered before promoting someone from Member to Administrator (enacting a new policy that those applying from Member to a position that is greater than Moderator be monitored for X amount of days before promotion would also be beneficial). Activity [from at least one week prior to the submission of the application] is the gold-standard here at xG, so before promoting anyone into a position beyond Moderator, it really ought to be considered.
 
2. Arguably, and structurally less important, is the harm done to the integrity of our Staff. To promote anyone [who has consistently stepped down due to loss of interest, etc] from Member to anything greater than Moderator demonstrates that they don't really have to invest as much time as they can into moderating. And before an argument is made about this, consider that to say otherwise would mean to dismiss any previous notions that the user has stepped down for frivolous reasons that do not include their personal life in some shape or form. Personally and honestly, this would have a sway in my decision on whether someone deserves that position, or if they need to prove themselves by working for it from a Moderator position.
 
Needless to say that all of this is subjective and varies from person to person. As always, take this with a grain of salt.
 
TL;DR - Don't hand out promotions from Member to above-Moderator to those who consistently step down (due to lack of interest, etc) unless you want to make a change to how activity works. Otherwise, you're practically creating a new position for inactive Staff.

"TL;DR - Don't hand out promotions from Member to above-Moderator to those who consistently step down (due to lack of interest, etc) unless you want to make a change to how activity works. Otherwise, you're practically creating a new position for inactive Staff."

-@Forest (backspaced too far for formatting, too lazy to redo)
 
 
 
This thread has obviously moved past my mostly joking statement, so I just want to say that
1. My vouch still stands for whichever position, mod/admin/no promotion(rekt boio) the higher ups decide most fit.
 
2. My specific exit from DM was a situation whefe I was told by my DL that I was being demoted to admin, and since my activity issues and life stuff that made it hard to DM were still there, I just stepped down all the way. Not sure if this would affect my re-application differently than @Egossi 's situation, I just wanted to point out for the purpose of full disclosure that our situations were different.
 
 
3. As to what forest said, I've long thought a separate admin-adjacent position (vote powers, though most that would qualify are uber donators so probably a non issue) for longtime staff that either step down/reapply alot, or might not be very active but are 100% trustworthy of the position. This position would be outside of the normal ladder and could only be added/removed/vouched for by Dm/DL/CM's. It would be harder to gain, with much laxer standards to maintain the position(besides abuse rules still applying equally obviously) just a thought, some variation could work.

Ehhhhhhhh..
 
Not going to spend time digging too deep into it, just going to throw in my 2-cents. Though first and foremost, this is based off of assumptions and is to be treated as a general response to any situation like this so, you know.. Please refrain from biting my head off, kthnx :coffee:
 
I just want to toss a [very] relevant comment in here that I made in another thread (one that I can't be bothered to find) in that Staff positions should not be treated as some sort of welcome basket to those who have consistently stepped-down. While I'm sure many people may dish out the "we can just demote 'em" defense if things go awry, I'm simply appealing to the integrity of Xeno Gamers as a whole. However, this isn't to say that someone should not be welcomed back with an immediate promotion from Member to Administrator [for example] because, as others have previously mentioned, it is a case-by-case situation. If the user has demonstrated qualities that shine in that position, or if they do not have a bad-track record, then I see no reason not to give them that promotion.
 
With that said, there are two sides to this coin:
 
1. There is little to no harm in promoting someone with a high turn-over rate who has an extraordinary track record, aside from having to assign powers once more. Because we run on a system of voluntary Staff, it doesn't [detrimentally] hurt us to allow someone to moderate for xG if we know they will do a stellar job, even if they consistently step down. While this may seem 'unfair' to those who are applying and are denied, keep in mind that Staff are measured by their qualities and work ethics (or at least should be; strongly recommend castrating any Higher-Up who is acting on bias) so it is to be expected that varying Staff will not be on the same level (eg. Someone who already has experience in the position will always receive [or be considered first for] the position before a new-hire).
 
The only foreseeable problem area here is that if this trend continues, we'll see an influx in Staff who do not feel obligated to perform their duties and therefore feel free to step-down and then re-apply when it is most convenient for them if they are a model Staff Member. In other words, this may only be a problem depending on what the standards are for Staff here in terms of the short or long run. With the way we currently have things set up in terms of activity, we're set up to keep Staff in the long run, and so this should be considered before promoting someone from Member to Administrator (enacting a new policy that those applying from Member to a position that is greater than Moderator be monitored for X amount of days before promotion would also be beneficial). Activity [from at least one week prior to the submission of the application] is the gold-standard here at xG, so before promoting anyone into a position beyond Moderator, it really ought to be considered.
 
2. Arguably, and structurally less important, is the harm done to the integrity of our Staff. To promote anyone [who has consistently stepped down due to loss of interest, etc] from Member to anything greater than Moderator demonstrates that they don't really have to invest as much time as they can into moderating. And before an argument is made about this, consider that to say otherwise would mean to dismiss any previous notions that the user has stepped down for frivolous reasons that do not include their personal life in some shape or form. Personally and honestly, this would have a sway in my decision on whether someone deserves that position, or if they need to prove themselves by working for it from a Moderator position.
 
Needless to say that all of this is subjective and varies from person to person. As always, take this with a grain of salt.
 
TL;DR - Don't hand out promotions from Member to above-Moderator to those who consistently step down (due to lack of interest, etc) unless you want to make a change to how activity works. Otherwise, you're practically creating a new position for inactive Staff.

Ehhhhhhhh..
 
Not going to spend time digging too deep into it, just going to throw in my 2-cents. Though first and foremost, this is based off of assumptions and is to be treated as a general response to any situation like this so, you know.. Please refrain from biting my head off, kthnx :coffee:
 
I just want to toss a [very] relevant comment in here that I made in another thread (one that I can't be bothered to find) in that Staff positions should not be treated as some sort of welcome basket to those who have consistently stepped-down. While I'm sure many people may dish out the "we can just demote 'em" defense if things go awry, I'm simply appealing to the integrity of Xeno Gamers as a whole. However, this isn't to say that someone should not be welcomed back with an immediate promotion from Member to Administrator [for example] because, as others have previously mentioned, it is a case-by-case situation. If the user has demonstrated qualities that shine in that position, or if they do not have a bad-track record, then I see no reason not to give them that promotion.
 
With that said, there are two sides to this coin:
 
1. There is little to no harm in promoting someone with a high turn-over rate who has an extraordinary track record, aside from having to assign powers once more. Because we run on a system of voluntary Staff, it doesn't [detrimentally] hurt us to allow someone to moderate for xG if we know they will do a stellar job, even if they consistently step down. While this may seem 'unfair' to those who are applying and are denied, keep in mind that Staff are measured by their qualities and work ethics (or at least should be; strongly recommend castrating any Higher-Up who is acting on bias) so it is to be expected that varying Staff will not be on the same level (eg. Someone who already has experience in the position will always receive [or be considered first for] the position before a new-hire).
 
The only foreseeable problem area here is that if this trend continues, we'll see an influx in Staff who do not feel obligated to perform their duties and therefore feel free to step-down and then re-apply when it is most convenient for them if they are a model Staff Member. In other words, this may only be a problem depending on what the standards are for Staff here in terms of the short or long run. With the way we currently have things set up in terms of activity, we're set up to keep Staff in the long run, and so this should be considered before promoting someone from Member to Administrator (enacting a new policy that those applying from Member to a position that is greater than Moderator be monitored for X amount of days before promotion would also be beneficial). Activity [from at least one week prior to the submission of the application] is the gold-standard here at xG, so before promoting anyone into a position beyond Moderator, it really ought to be considered.
 
2. Arguably, and structurally less important, is the harm done to the integrity of our Staff. To promote anyone [who has consistently stepped down due to loss of interest, etc] from Member to anything greater than Moderator demonstrates that they don't really have to invest as much time as they can into moderating. And before an argument is made about this, consider that to say otherwise would mean to dismiss any previous notions that the user has stepped down for frivolous reasons that do not include their personal life in some shape or form. Personally and honestly, this would have a sway in my decision on whether someone deserves that position, or if they need to prove themselves by working for it from a Moderator position.
 
Needless to say that all of this is subjective and varies from person to person. As always, take this with a grain of salt.
 
TL;DR - Don't hand out promotions from Member to above-Moderator to those who consistently step down (due to lack of interest, etc) unless you want to make a change to how activity works. Otherwise, you're practically creating a new position for inactive Staff.