Precious

I'm honestly kinda torn on this. From what I've seen of you, I think you're pretty friendly, funny, chill, and nice to have around. You're active, you follow the rules, and I don't believe I've ever had a problem with you. However, I also believe you could have been a tad more mature in how you've handled certain situations in the past. 
BUT, the past is the past, and I do believe you are improving! A good example would be your recent post about immature voices. Compared to past events, I think this was a very mature way to bring up a serious topic, and I feel like it prevented any pointless drama that could have broken out had this been brought up on the server. To me, that was very mature and professional of you, and I thank you for that. If you keep that up, there's no doubt in my mind that you'll join the ranks of staff again.
I still think you're a chill person, and I believe you have the potential to be a great staff member just as you once were. My vote will remain neutral for now, but I wish you the best of luck! ?

I'm honestly kinda torn on this. From what I've seen of you, I think you're pretty friendly, funny, chill, and nice to have around. You're active, you follow the rules, and I don't believe I've ever had a problem with you. However, I also believe you could have been a tad more mature in how you've handled certain situations in the past. 
BUT, the past is the past, and I do believe you are improving! A good example would be your recent post about immature voices. Compared to past events, I think this was a very mature way to bring up a serious topic, and I feel like it prevented any pointless drama that could have broken out had this been brought up on the server. To me, that was very mature and professional of you, and I thank you for that. If you keep that up, there's no doubt in my mind that you'll join the ranks of staff again.
I still think you're a chill person, and I believe you have the potential to be a great staff member just as you once were. My vote will remain neutral for now, but I wish you the best of luck! ?

I'm honestly kinda torn on this. From what I've seen of you, I think you're pretty friendly, funny, chill, and nice to have around. You're active, you follow the rules, and I don't believe I've ever had a problem with you. However, I also believe you could have been a tad more mature in how you've handled certain situations in the past. 
BUT, the past is the past, and I do believe you are improving! A good example would be your recent post about immature voices. Compared to past events, I think this was a very mature way to bring up a serious topic, and I feel like it prevented any pointless drama that could have broken out had this been brought up on the server. To me, that was very mature and professional of you, and I thank you for that. If you keep that up, there's no doubt in my mind that you'll join the ranks of staff again.
I still think you're a chill person, and I believe you have the potential to be a great staff member just as you once were. My vote will remain neutral for now, but I wish you the best of luck! ?

Rosalina+Luma, Bayonetta, and Wolf are probably going to be my mains. Also I hope they make Kass a dlc character... because he is my birb dad

Didn't know you very well but you'll always be welcome back at xG :3
Best of luck to you man ❤️

First of all, we shouldn't be starting a full-scale argument on whether Krampus was biased or anything of the sort. 
This post brings up an issue that truly does need to be resolved. Our spray rule is not specific enough. We have players coming on the server and working around our rule as much as possible. Our current spray rule is as follows; "all sprays cannot contain nudity or derogatory content. This includes any spray that depicts sexual content or anything else that may be deemed inappropriate by Staff."
Now, this spray rule depends greatly on one's opinion. Nudity can be defined differently by many different people. Some may think it is an exposed nipple, while others may see it as a breast or butt itself. Considering many of our server's questionable sprays are a staff member's spray, this rule shouldn't come down to staff discretion. It is too inconsistent and causes discussions like this one to be happening. Frankly, I can't blame Krampus for bias when the rule is so lacking in consistency.
What should be done?
This rule needs to be consistent. It needs to clearly state what can not be shown. It comes down to what the TF2 higher-up division decides. It could be anything as simple as "Sprays may not contain any form of racism or inappropriate content (including the butt, breasts, penis, or anything meant to look of the sort)." The actual wording would of course be up to the higher-ups of course. 
-1 for punishment
+1 for reword

I don't agree with this at all in fact.. people are throwing out the word like its nothing just as a blanket to cover almost anything and everything that happened. There's a difference between staff discretion and bias.  Bias is making a decision in favor or against a certain person really no matter the conditions.. so let's say I was playing with one of my best friends and he had a porn spray, and I allowed it even though its CLEARLY against the rules, that would be bias.  Discretion on the other hand would be somebody bringing a certain spray that they are unsure to a staff members attention,  and that staff decides whether or not it should be allowed or not, in HOPEFULLY an unbiased manner. And I know you can say that it may have been one of their friends who sprayed it, and that's true, and that's where bias would come in if that rose to the case. 
 
We don't allow porn sprays anyways, and we punish accordingly if someone is found to have one.  It's moreso a matter of how a spray is cropped that causes a discrepancy between people like has been stated.  The rule says no explicit nudity, meaning if a spray was cropped in such a way that may be suggestive but didn't actually show anything, it would be fine.. but that's where the problem is, people can GUESS what is cropped out, and that's the only argument anybody can have when they don't actually know for sure what it is, and think that it shouldn't be allowed because they "know" what is cropped.
 
If there are as many staff members or anybody in general that have inappropriate sprays, why wasn't it brought up before now?  I'm not saying there aren't problems with peoples sprays because there definitely are, but again why wasn't it brought to anybody's attention before now? Or at least I myself haven't heard anything of it, so I could be wrong. But I feel like a picture is being painted here that is way bigger than it needs to be.
 
I think an easy solution would be to ask some players and staff members what THEY think of when you say something like an inappropriate spray, so we can get an idea of what other people think and then *somewhat* base the new rule on how people actually think of it, or at least that's my two cents.

So while this definitely brings up a good discussion on spray regulation, I do no think Krampus is in the wrong at all. Poorly censored porn is not the same as cut off porn. You took two shots with direct nudity and covered it. The other spray has it cut out. On the topic of bias, everyone has a bias but I do not think in this case it is affecting anything. Krampus is a damn good admin and frankly does not deserve this
-1

Might I just say, that Kass spray wasn't cropped like you believe, at least not much. I only cut a tiny bit off the bottom so I could remove an iFunny watermark and make the spray work for the spray format. What you see there is basically the full spray, no exposed donut hole or genitalia. However, I myself was confused by Krampus's decision to condemn your previous sprays and not mine. I was told by other staff that as long as a spray does not show exposed genitalia or exposed breasts, or properly censors those things, then it was allowed. That's why when Krampus told me no explicit nudity was allowed, I changed my spray immediately.
While there probably was some bias and confusion in this situation, I think there's a bigger problem at large here. What really counts as an 'explicit spray'? Like I said, when I first became staff, I was told that as long as a suggestive spray was properly cropped and censored, it was allowed, but I've also been told by others, not just Krampus, that explicit nudity of any kind is not allowed, which is why I changed my spray. Frosty says your sprays were okay, and I didn't really have a problem with them (though your first spray is definitely pushing it), but Krampus said they weren't okay. I don't think bias is the only problem here, I think there needs to be more clarification on what kind of nudity can be allowed. 
If someone takes a pornographic image that normally would not be allowed and properly censors it, is it still against the rules or not? I don't think this is something we can just leave up to staff discretion anymore, because that's how confusion like this happens. 

Might I just say, that Kass spray wasn't cropped like you believe, at least not much. I only cut a tiny bit off the bottom so I could remove an iFunny watermark and make the spray work for the spray format. What you see there is basically the full spray, no exposed donut hole or genitalia. However, I myself was confused by Krampus's decision to condemn your previous sprays and not mine. I was told by other staff that as long as a spray does not show exposed genitalia or exposed breasts, or properly censors those things, then it was allowed. That's why when Krampus told me no explicit nudity was allowed, I changed my spray immediately.
While there probably was some bias and confusion in this situation, I think there's a bigger problem at large here. What really counts as an 'explicit spray'? Like I said, when I first became staff, I was told that as long as a suggestive spray was properly cropped and censored, it was allowed, but I've also been told by others, not just Krampus, that explicit nudity of any kind is not allowed, which is why I changed my spray. Frosty says your sprays were okay, and I didn't really have a problem with them (though your first spray is definitely pushing it), but Krampus said they weren't okay. I don't think bias is the only problem here, I think there needs to be more clarification on what kind of nudity can be allowed. 
If someone takes a pornographic image that normally would not be allowed and properly censors it, is it still against the rules or not? I don't think this is something we can just leave up to staff discretion anymore, because that's how confusion like this happens. 

Might I just say, that Kass spray wasn't cropped like you believe, at least not much. I only cut a tiny bit off the bottom so I could remove an iFunny watermark and make the spray work for the spray format. What you see there is basically the full spray, no exposed donut hole or genitalia. However, I myself was confused by Krampus's decision to condemn your previous sprays and not mine. I was told by other staff that as long as a spray does not show exposed genitalia or exposed breasts, or properly censors those things, then it was allowed. That's why when Krampus told me no explicit nudity was allowed, I changed my spray immediately.
While there probably was some bias and confusion in this situation, I think there's a bigger problem at large here. What really counts as an 'explicit spray'? Like I said, when I first became staff, I was told that as long as a suggestive spray was properly cropped and censored, it was allowed, but I've also been told by others, not just Krampus, that explicit nudity of any kind is not allowed, which is why I changed my spray. Frosty says your sprays were okay, and I didn't really have a problem with them (though your first spray is definitely pushing it), but Krampus said they weren't okay. I don't think bias is the only problem here, I think there needs to be more clarification on what kind of nudity can be allowed. 
If someone takes a pornographic image that normally would not be allowed and properly censors it, is it still against the rules or not? I don't think this is something we can just leave up to staff discretion anymore, because that's how confusion like this happens. 

Might I just say, that Kass spray wasn't cropped like you believe, at least not much. I only cut a tiny bit off the bottom so I could remove an iFunny watermark and make the spray work for the spray format. What you see there is basically the full spray, no exposed donut hole or genitalia. However, I myself was confused by Krampus's decision to condemn your previous sprays and not mine. I was told by other staff that as long as a spray does not show exposed genitalia or exposed breasts, or properly censors those things, then it was allowed. That's why when Krampus told me no explicit nudity was allowed, I changed my spray immediately.
While there probably was some bias and confusion in this situation, I think there's a bigger problem at large here. What really counts as an 'explicit spray'? Like I said, when I first became staff, I was told that as long as a suggestive spray was properly cropped and censored, it was allowed, but I've also been told by others, not just Krampus, that explicit nudity of any kind is not allowed, which is why I changed my spray. Frosty says your sprays were okay, and I didn't really have a problem with them (though your first spray is definitely pushing it), but Krampus said they weren't okay. I don't think bias is the only problem here, I think there needs to be more clarification on what kind of nudity can be allowed. 
If someone takes a pornographic image that normally would not be allowed and properly censors it, is it still against the rules or not? I don't think this is something we can just leave up to staff discretion anymore, because that's how confusion like this happens. 

+1 he's a pretty chill dude, thought he was already a part of xG. I'd say he's pretty mature, friendly, and follows all the rules. I think he'd make a great addition to the community ?
A: 8
M: 9

AHHHH WHY DID IT CENSOR MY NAME

AHHHH WHY DID IT CENSOR MY NAME