Vexx

Should just give this guy a warning, no point in jumping straight to ban even though his behavior is quite awful.

the ban
 
Seems like a misunderstanding to me +1 for unban for now until we hear krampus's side of the story.
 
Tags: @Krampus @Vexx @Sesh @Bello

@Sesh seemed to be the only one giving input on this topic. if no one else has anything to say ill change the rules so that you can colorize yourself anything other than normal in friendly (only if @Sesh agrees too)

User will not be unbanned.
@Bello @mrnutty12 @Sesh Feel free to re-open if you disagree.
-Closed.

What does that have to do with micspamming?

Should just give this guy a warning, no point in jumping straight to ban even though his behavior is quite awful.

Should just give this guy a warning, no point in jumping straight to ban even though his behavior is quite awful.

Considering the ban is almost over anyway, I'd say we unban. @Bello, @mrnutty12, @Sesh thoughts?

Should just give this guy a warning, no point in jumping straight to ban even though his behavior is quite awful.

Considering the ban is almost over anyway, I'd say we unban. @Bello, @mrnutty12, @Sesh thoughts?

Considering the ban is almost over anyway, I'd say we unban. @Bello, @mrnutty12, @Sesh thoughts?

Considering the ban is almost over anyway, I'd say we unban. @Bello, @mrnutty12, @Sesh thoughts?

Is this...real?
Saying you have autism is not excuse for acting like that, @ThunderLimes what is your reasoning?

Okay if no one else has an opinion on this, we should come to a conclusion on how to deal with Donator abuse.
IMO it should be like this:
Two warnings (only applies for purposely abusing, not if someone like accidentally bumps into someone with /kartme)
First offense:
Warn -> Kick -> Day ban
Second offense: Week ban
Kick -> Week ban
I don't think you need another warning through chat if you've been banned before so I'd go straight to a kick.
Also you shouldn't need to re-warn someone when it comes to this stuff, so if someone has been warned in the past, you could jump straight to a kick. Or if someone has already been kicked, you could jump straight to a ban.
Third offense: Removal of powers
What do you think @Sesh?

I honestly don't even remember banning you, so I'd be 100% fine with you being unbanned. +1

I honestly don't even remember banning you, so I'd be 100% fine with you being unbanned. +1

Well you are right, I should have gotten more to the story before putting in the ban, but I figured I'd do it because sourcebans wasn't working anyway, and @Kypari is one of my staff which of course I will trust him in most situations. As for @Brian's ban, I will propose we drop the ban down to a much lower time, as sure, a month ban may seem a bit much in the event he did not see his warnings. In the future though, please try to pay attention to chat in the event this comes up again. There's really no middle ground when it comes to warnings, we can't do voice because someone may have their sound muted, and we can only count on the user paying attention to the chat when it does come to warnings. When it comes to the time we should lower it to, I will propose we lower it to a week. The user in question still had the intention and a history of instigating our staff on the server, and I feel it would be completely unfair for us to drop the ban completely.

That is the words of players Aegean, Kypari is one of my staff. He knows what he's doing usually, and in the event sourcebans was working, he would've made the ban instead of me and nothing would have been changed. If I can't go on the word of my staff on the servers, how am I supposed to make an unbiased decision on most of what I am doing? I already said you were right, I should have gotten the other side of the story, but I will still in the end trust my admins with these sort of situations.

It doesn't matter if someone was once a great staff member, they should still be punished like a normal user nonetheless. I'll agree that yeah, a bit of criticism isn't bad, but if your entire intention for being on is just to start a shitstorm with the current staff online, why have that user around? As has been stated many times, Brian has had a history of insulting users and staff and has been quite toxic as of late.

Well you are right, I should have gotten more to the story before putting in the ban, but I figured I'd do it because sourcebans wasn't working anyway, and @Kypari is one of my staff which of course I will trust him in most situations. As for @Brian's ban, I will propose we drop the ban down to a much lower time, as sure, a month ban may seem a bit much in the event he did not see his warnings. In the future though, please try to pay attention to chat in the event this comes up again. There's really no middle ground when it comes to warnings, we can't do voice because someone may have their sound muted, and we can only count on the user paying attention to the chat when it does come to warnings. When it comes to the time we should lower it to, I will propose we lower it to a week. The user in question still had the intention and a history of instigating our staff on the server, and I feel it would be completely unfair for us to drop the ban completely.

While I did not research the original ban as I should have, I did talk with a lot of my staff about how brian has been in the server, and have even witnessed some of it myself. Rejects was cut no slack, he was demoted all the way to member, though there was talk about just dropping to probationary mod for a bit there, in the end it was a full demotion so that no bias was shown. Once again, just because he was staff previously does not mean he should be "cut come slack". Brian has never personally insulted me, nor do I dislike the guy. Fairness is what I'm going for here, and sure I already admitted I did make a mistake by not investigating properly before hand. A two week silence was proposed in terms of a punishment, due to his behavior.

While I did not research the original ban as I should have, I did talk with a lot of my staff about how brian has been in the server, and have even witnessed some of it myself. Rejects was cut no slack, he was demoted all the way to member, though there was talk about just dropping to probationary mod for a bit there, in the end it was a full demotion so that no bias was shown. Once again, just because he was staff previously does not mean he should be "cut come slack". Brian has never personally insulted me, nor do I dislike the guy. Fairness is what I'm going for here, and sure I already admitted I did make a mistake by not investigating properly before hand. A two week silence was proposed in terms of a punishment, due to his behavior.

While I did not research the original ban as I should have, I did talk with a lot of my staff about how brian has been in the server, and have even witnessed some of it myself. Rejects was cut no slack, he was demoted all the way to member, though there was talk about just dropping to probationary mod for a bit there, in the end it was a full demotion so that no bias was shown. Once again, just because he was staff previously does not mean he should be "cut come slack". Brian has never personally insulted me, nor do I dislike the guy. Fairness is what I'm going for here, and sure I already admitted I did make a mistake by not investigating properly before hand. A two week silence was proposed in terms of a punishment, due to his behavior.

While I did not research the original ban as I should have, I did talk with a lot of my staff about how brian has been in the server, and have even witnessed some of it myself. Rejects was cut no slack, he was demoted all the way to member, though there was talk about just dropping to probationary mod for a bit there, in the end it was a full demotion so that no bias was shown. Once again, just because he was staff previously does not mean he should be "cut come slack". Brian has never personally insulted me, nor do I dislike the guy. Fairness is what I'm going for here, and sure I already admitted I did make a mistake by not investigating properly before hand. A two week silence was proposed in terms of a punishment, due to his behavior.

That is the words of players Aegean, Kypari is one of my staff. He knows what he's doing usually, and in the event sourcebans was working, he would've made the ban instead of me and nothing would have been changed. If I can't go on the word of my staff on the servers, how am I supposed to make an unbiased decision on most of what I am doing? I already said you were right, I should have gotten the other side of the story, but I will still in the end trust my admins with these sort of situations.

It doesn't matter if someone was once a great staff member, they should still be punished like a normal user nonetheless. I'll agree that yeah, a bit of criticism isn't bad, but if your entire intention for being on is just to start a shitstorm with the current staff online, why have that user around? As has been stated many times, Brian has had a history of insulting users and staff and has been quite toxic as of late.

That is the words of players Aegean, Kypari is one of my staff. He knows what he's doing usually, and in the event sourcebans was working, he would've made the ban instead of me and nothing would have been changed. If I can't go on the word of my staff on the servers, how am I supposed to make an unbiased decision on most of what I am doing? I already said you were right, I should have gotten the other side of the story, but I will still in the end trust my admins with these sort of situations.

It doesn't matter if someone was once a great staff member, they should still be punished like a normal user nonetheless. I'll agree that yeah, a bit of criticism isn't bad, but if your entire intention for being on is just to start a shitstorm with the current staff online, why have that user around? As has been stated many times, Brian has had a history of insulting users and staff and has been quite toxic as of late.