Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Soren

Debating the interpretation of rules.

5 posts in this topic

  1. Jesus, dude, can you BE more condescending?
  2.  
  3. Let's tackle your points, one at a time:
  4.  
  5. "You can't decide if it's against the rules! You're just a moderator!" Dude, I was made a mod because, for reasons known only to Raini and God, she felt she could trust me with enough responsibility to enforce the rules that she laid down. I would say that I can make such a decision on the fly BECAUSE of my position, not in spite of it.
  6.  

 

For the sake of convience, I will just quote your post and work here. It's much easier for me to work with all of this piece by piece. And I presume it's okay if we put this is the spam section. If it belongs to another section you can feel free to move it.

 

 

 

 

 

 
  1. You don't mock the cop who is telling you to stop doing stupid crap because HE didn't write the law, do you? If you object to a mod's decision on the matter, you are always welcome to dispute it, but don't you freaking tell me that I can't do my job because I'm not an admin, skippy.
  2.  

 

I'm saying you are interpreting the law entirely wrong from my point of the view. You are interpreting the law to such a point that I am arguing you are changing the law, not interpreting it. You used the analogy that you are a cop. So I'll go along with it. You are supposed to enforce the law. You are not the judge, or the jury. You are a moderator, which I am lead to believe moderators only enforces the law, and do not change it or interpret the law in any way they see fit. I did not mean any offense when I said you are "only a moderator: earlier. I meant that this matter isn't within your job description, not that you are inadequate for it. 

 

This decision reflects on the law as a whole. The judge's decision on a case is often referenced in future cases because this is how the government now interprets the law. Your decision effects all future cases, as such only someone of the highest authority should make the decision. Because the decision is basically rewriting the law, right here, right now. In short, plenty of other people could be banned by moderators because you decided this or that is not allowed now. 

 

If you are arguing because you have Raini's trust that means you can't be wrong and you have the authority to change the rules then I believe you are wrong. Rainidear wrote the rules. They have changed over time to fit certain situations, and Rainidear may not have necessarily always made the decisions herself of changing this or that rule. But no where did I see that these rules are subject to change at the discretion of any one moderator.

 

 

 

 
 
  1. "People could try to get other people banned!"  ...do you really think that the mods and admins are such dim, soulless automatons that we just ban on the first report of something like this?  I can't attest for your previous dealings with the mod team, but unless you're engaging in something blatantly against the rules, I'm gonna give you proper warning before action comes down from on high.
  2.  

 

I guess this one was my fault here. I wasn't clear enough. Something as trivial as spraying over someone else's spray is just too hard to moderate effectively. A moderator may not be able to watch two people simultaneously at every living second. It takes only a moment to spray under someone else's spray and then blame it on them. A moderator is only able to see that one spray is sprayed over the other. Not WHICH spray was actually sprayed there first. He has no way of knowing if someone is telling the truth when they say someone else sprayed over their spray. In fact, a moderator has to be WATCHING both parties just to be absolutely sure. That is how impossible of a task it is for someone to moderate spraying over someone else's spray.

 

Take for example when you were online earlier today. Did you personally observe Biomatrix spray over Zari's spray? Did you see the supposed 1 second crime happen right before your eyes? Then see Zari ask her to stop, and then she did it again? Or did you just see the result? You only saw the result and heard Zari's word. You never saw the crime being committed in the act as it is impossible to watch the two parties all by yourself. I'm not saying Zari framed Bio. I'm sure that wasn't the case as I was there for the whole ordeal. But I was not capable of watching both parties at the same time, I was only capable of watching a single wall at a time which I didn't see you watching these walls with me. And these walls only provided me with circumstantial proof. I would only have circumstantial proof to act on. Like you did earlier this day. So yes, if you are capable of acting without absolute proof, I would say other moderators would also be capable of doing what you did if they are forced to moderate against a nearly impossible to fully moderate situation. Unless you are suggesting a team of two moderators. Which is the only way this could be done.

 

 

 

 
  1. Let's cite your examples: if someone complains about Crazy or you spraying over their sprays, I'm typically gonna talk to you about it.  If you tell me that you're doing it on the grounds that you find the other spray offensive, I'm gonna look at this other spray.  If it is deemed to be offensive, then I'm gonna tell the complainer to change their spray.  If not, I'm gonna tell you that you're harassing this person, and you need to cut it out.  No ban, just a warning against further action.  If you push your luck, and continue to be a dickbag about it, then you have it coming.

 

I see the problem here. It is your interpretation of the word harassment itself. Let me ask you something. If someone talks about Cream Gravy in the Funbox server, and I ask them to stop, and they refuse to stop. Is that harassment? If someone does the sniper thrust and I ask them to stop, is that harassment if they don't comply? What if asking someone asks you to stop spraying over their spray and you ask them to stop asking that. Is THAT harassment? Are both people harassing each other at that point? Harass paradox? No. Anyone could be offended by literally anything. You can't just dictate any action you like as harassment just because it offends someone and the person doesn't want to stop at the request of someone else. People ask the hale not to kill them all the time. As such, the only real way something can pass as harassment is if the action itself is deemed offensive by a general authority. Is spraying over someone else's spray deems as an offensive action now because you've said so?

 

Members have been banned in the past for interfering with other members' ability to play. Examples are getting in their way of placing down buildings or even trying to block that person's view purposely or block their shots purposely. People have also been banned for verbal harassment. Assaulting the person verbally in the chat, or even with sprays personally attacking them. But spraying over someone else's spray is not a hostile action.  Spraying over someone else's spray is not a hostile action. It does not interfere with that person's ability to play the game or talk to others. It's an action that is literally done mountains of times every hour on every server. Intentionally and not so intentionally. It's done so much to the point where people have sprays that only have one purpose, and that purpose is covering someone else's spray. That was the point I was trying to make with Krazy's spray. 

 

 

 

 
  1. "This isn't harassment!  This is spray harassment!"  ...I've got no words for this one, I'm just gonna leave it out ad you said it.
  2.  
  3. ...actually, no, I do have something to say about this.  There seems to be an awful big hangup about the sprays in this case.
  4.  
  5. I don't care about sprays.  I really couldn't care if you guys spray over one another.

 

I should have chosen my words more carefully here. You aren't harassing an individual. As I've already explained this can't possibly be counted as harassing an individual. As then your definition of harassment is open to anything is harassing. You are apparently harassing a spray? Should we hand out restraining orders to keep sprays away from each other? What are we gonna moderate next? If weapon's name is harassing people? If I name my weapon "Mr.Kenyon Bane" will I need to change it? This would just be ridiculous. You are really suggesting acting against someone for an action as frivolous as this? It's against the rules to have sprayed over someone else's spray if they don't like it? Can you say that with a straight face? It's just unheard on any TF2 server to act against something something this trivial. Are you seriously suggesting that sprays are their own people now with their own personal space? And other's aren't "allowed" to violate that personal space? 

 

 

 

  1. This is about harassment, plain and simple.  This is about someone being rude to another person, despite requests to stop.  I don't care if it's spraying, voice communication, text messaging, etc, if you feel that your entertainment is more important than the feelings of another human being on the server, you are being a dickbag, and will be removed from the server.
  2.  
  3. TL;DR: Respect your moderators, and don't be a dickbag.

 

So you've defined that spraying over someone else's spray is rude and that's why it's harassment? At least that's what I think you are saying. I've already explained above that spraying over someone else's spray is a neutral action. I'll say this again. Spraying over someone else's spray could only be interpreted as an offensive thing by the individual as there is not necessarily any hostility in the action itself. What you seem to be suggesting nominates not just spraying over someone else's spray as a potential capital offense, but everything as a potentially capital offense. Because anyone can be offended by anything. That is why I am against it. That is why I'm making this post. I could cite endless examples of why just because someone tells you to stop doing anything they don't want you to do and you not complying can apply to everything you can possibly do on the server, but I feel as though that would start to get redundant.  

 

These were the points I was trying to make. The way you have currently "interpreted the law" is far too loose and vague, which means everything and anything could pass as harassment. So if you are correct, every moderator will be forced to moderate by your definition of harassment just to back your decision, or else your decision here would be invalid. Which is why Raini should handle this decision, since it carries so much potential weight. Because by saying this against the rules, it is also making a huge commitment for the entire network of these pony servers and it will effect everyone, vastly. I just don't believe anyone but Raini should be in that position. No matter how much she trusts all of her moderators and admins. I'm not trying to be disrespectful when I say you shouldn't make the decision. I'm not saying you aren't fit to make such a decision, I'm saying no one except that Raini should make the decision. Maybe Simple too, because I'm not sure of his exact position. Maybe he counts as a co-owner or something. I am unsure of the entire affair.

 

TL;DR: You're syllogism that this is harassment just because someone requests you to stop doing anything they dislike and you don't comply is a flawed on in my opinion. Anything could be justified as harassment then. I disagree with it in fine detail above. But perhaps if you are willing to come to a new syllogism which broadens your view of harassment, I would be happy to hear it and continue debating with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to argue this point any further, Soren. Your argument as a whole through this thing is "Your interpretation of the rules is not the same as mine, thus you are wrong."

I made a decision based on the information provided for me, and the context if the situation at hand. That's how I tackle any complaint, and will continue to do so. I have no plans to go all "NO FUN ALLOWED" as your slippery slope scenario seems to imply, and if someone tries to game the rules to get someone banned for something stupid, I'm not so dense that I'm not gonna see that.

If the admins have an objection with the way I confront these complaints, I'm certain they will let me know. Until then, I will continue to handle complaints in a similar fashion.

I want to stress that I have not banned, muted, or gagged anyone in my stint as mod so far. The worst thing I've done is yell at someone (who admitted to doing the deed, no less,) to knock it off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to argue this point any further, Soren. Your argument as a whole through this thing is "Your interpretation of the rules is not the same as mine, thus you are wrong."

I made a decision based on the information provided for me, and the context if the situation at hand. That's how I tackle any complaint, and will continue to do so. I have no plans to go all "NO FUN ALLOWED" as your slippery slope scenario seems to imply, and if someone tries to game the rules to get someone banned for something stupid, I'm not so dense that I'm not gonna see that.

If the admins have an objection with the way I confront these complaints, I'm certain they will let me know. Until then, I will continue to handle complaints in a similar fashion.

I want to stress that I have not banned, muted, or gagged anyone in my stint as mod so far. The worst thing I've done is yell at someone (who admitted to doing the deed, no less,) to knock it off.

My argument is that you are interpreting the rules to your own end to fit the situation. Which is a biased move. What's worse is you acted on only "the information that was provided to you", You acted on circumstantial evidence even though I said frivolous actions like these ones would be subject to people acting on circumstantial evidence. You also made the decision that an action that can't possibly be seen as harassment IS harassment simply because you said so. And then you are saying okay because it's under the rules when I'm arguing it's not under the rules at all. You haven't explained in the slightest why this action is actually harassment, why it is actually against the rules, even though I have explained and even cited examples why it isn't harassment, and isn't against the rules. You haven't disputed my point is wrong at all, rather you just ignore it and say you are just enforcing the rules, when clearly my entire point is that you aren't because this isn't a rule. Heck, you haven't tried to enlighten me why I am wrong in the slightest for any of the other points I've made.

 

All you've basically said is 'This action is harassment because I say so, end of story. I am law!'. I thought you served the law, not that you are the law. There is a difference between the two after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO BELLIGERENCE TOWARDS STAFF

Moderators ("Royal Guard") and Administrators ("Sea Pony") have the authority to exercise their own discretion when enforcing the rules. Their warnings and decisions are final and not open to debate outside of a Ponitentiary Appeal.

I have no idea what the context is here because there is no account of the incident at issue within this thread. All I know is that a Moderator asked for a behavior to stop and that the discussion should have ended there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, sorry to cause all the commotion.  The incident that happened was caused by me and my sprays toward ZariPuff.  I'm not trying to start anything, but just so everyone knows exactly what's happened, I will explain. 

 

A summery for you all: I was playing engie while zari was medic.  The map was crevice and I set up an engie nest on the bridge.  I placed my spray and everyone was commenting on it, having some laughs and such.  I walked from my dispenser to turret and each time I crossed the bridge.  I kept throwing my sprays around, covering various sprays in the lane, one happened to be zari's spray.  She was still on the bridge and moved it because I covered it. Not sure what she was still doing there, but I was walking past again and covered it because she was so bent on having it whipped out and showing.  Soon I noticed that's all she did, and every time I walked by, I covered it and she moved it.  I actually found it quite funny that she was so bent on it being on the bridge, and that it needed to show.  It followed on for a few more rounds, but she started calling me stalker and such. Not only was I nowhere near her, but I was just staying on my engie bridge every match, so I took slight offence.  No biggie though, I kept playing and said I was indeed, not a stalker. Bananable was on at the time and he just sprayed over both our sprays.  At that time I was just laughing so hard because his spray was absolutely perfect in such an instance. "This is a bananable offence".  Well, she kept hiding it, I believe she said something like "there, now you won't find it."  It was on the rock over, so I covered it there too.  I don't remember, but apparently she asked me to stop, but I don't remember seeing anything in the chat, so I'm betting it was in voice chat.  I, however, have her muted and didn't hear her.   Bananable never told anyone to stop, and I believe zari too great offence to my actions.  Though I did not know it at the time.  

 

Next map began, and I did not spray over hers again.  She worked her way up to hale and asked everyone to be friendly so she could specifically hunt me down. (She also asked that everyone else try to kill me as well.)  I couldn't hear her because of the mute, but she picked cheesesandwich for engineers classes. (I was one) She went to my regular engie nest but I wasn't there, I had hid because I had a feeling she wanted to go after me.  Indeed, she killed no one, and after red's victory, she said something like "I hope you don't continue to harass everyone in the future".  I told her, I only ever sprayed over her sprays, and it was indeed the act to specifically spray over hers, but that I did not do it to anyone else.  The day was over and we didn't play again for a day or two, I can't remember.  

 

We're playing the minecraft map and I happen to see where she was putting her engie nest.  Seeing as how she wanted the server to kill me for some sprays, I moved in there and put my own spray beside hers. (It partly covered it, since the wall was too small to fit 2 at once.  I stayed there, but she came and we both started building in the same place, it was packed.  She started telling kenyon I was spraying over her sprays.  I partly was, but was trying to spray by it.  Kenyon told me to stop, which I did.  Next map rolls by.  Everything is fine.  Later in the match it really struck a nerve when someone was asking people for items because it was their birthday.  Zari called them rude, and I called Zari rude.  In the previous months of my joining, I saw someone of the account "Zaripuff" asking in voice chat if anyone had a certain item, because she needed it.  I just only freshly joined at the time, I have no idea what she was asking for, maybe it was even a dispenser, but I'll never know if it's legitimately her.  Kenyon said to stop, so I did.  Zari claims I was spreading lies about her(This girl was asking for something if anyone had some, I was saying that in such an account, she has asked others for items too), which in fact she was trying to lie to people I was a stalker and liked to torment players.  While I acknowledge my petty sprays were annoying, she was trying to ruin my playing and reputation. I have apologized to her and we are far past it. And that's my side of the account.

 

 

As for soren, he was there while I was playing and saw most of the exchanges.  I believe he is arguing that if zari was right about harassment, then any other player may follow suit and use it against who they dislike and try to get them muted/kicked. Which in turn might spark future flames.  I believe he was trying to save you from future discussions of such cases, but I don't want anyone to get mad I'm bringing this up again.  Just leaving my account of what happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0