Let's fix this

[Jack_Henderson]

I realise that there is a lot of anger due to the lack of communication between Staff and the Community. I'm going to try and ease that a bit [...]

I think you misjudge the things you started here, and the consequences. There is no anger over "lack of communication". There is anger about the decision. There is anger about you, as in: the staff.

Paranoia:
I spoke to Wesker earlier and he was asking me some questions, I told him I was writing this post and that he should seek answers in there. One of the things he highlighted was that he was paranoid that he or anyone could be banned at any moment. This was a very large exception and no one should be afraid to express their opinions on the forums about how things are done. Having the public criticise the body in charge contributes to a healthier relationship to make sure that the body in power doesn't throw the interests of the public out of the window. Now, a lot of you have just read that and are already scrolling down to reply to it saying: "But Cashew, you just banned 6 people for expressing their opinions!" or something along those lines. No, we had many reasons for the decision that was collectively made. Unfortunately I can't share those reasons because this is Cashew posting not Admin Cashew posting, if that makes sense.

Then explain why you banned @Karst. I know for sure that his criminal folder is small, especially for a player who has been in the center of it by leading factions, by being in absolutely toxic environments (like OFL chat) or the Bundestag, where infights go right to the rl level, for a long time. He is not a bittervet, he is not a bully, he is not a rule-skirter, he is not a bit of what I would describe as a malicious player who should be removed for the good of the community. If ranting in OFL chat about bad decisions, and if making critical forum posts on flawed dev work is enough to ban someone like @Karst, pretty much EVERYBODY can be banned.

Literally: everybody can be banned.
That's the atmosphere at the moment.
That's my feeling.


So, whatever you assure: I feel threatened.
My negative footprint on Disco is low, and I still feel threatened.
This is no joke, I do feel threatened by the decision.
I can only imagine how people with a long "criminal file" feel now.

And: Yes, your decision had a massive impact.
And: I do not want to play this game in this atmosphere.

Future:
What happens next? Well, this was the first step in our attempt to re-invigorate Discovery, which I understand is slightly strange and ironic.

You know that you banned 5 faction leaders? I am not saying all of them are innocent, but near future will prove that you killed off factions that way. Yes, it really is "ironic", and to be honest, it sounds cynical.

We're looking at bringing a swathe of new old players back to Discovery. There are several ways we can do this [...]

Before you even try, you need to fix the damage that has been done. In an environment like this, in which you even angered and demotivated those in the veteran league that normally support your decisions and prefer some kind of order over infighting and chaos, no new impulses will work. If you dream of exchanging the old bitter vets and the 'now demotivated non-bitter vets' by new blood, you are sadly mistaken. This is not going to happen.

You hopefully realize that your decision mainly affects those who were the pillars of faction activity (not talking about the banned, but all those who also lead, have an opinion, have the networks to make a powerful argument and have their voices heard). Those who can look back and judge the history, compare with the past, and who know the amount of damage that has been done needlessly. Mind me, I am not saying all bans are bad. But I have made it clear that I think your "target definition" is off, and that your punishments are off in this case.

What I think is very hard to see in this decision is that it was done in the best interest of the future of Discovery.

No. It was not.
If this is "for the future of Disco", I seriously have to question your / the staff's judgement.
You are there to safeguard Discovery. Not your own interests. And - sorry - at the moment, it looks as if you were doing exactly that, with a total disregard for the consequences.

[we want to] assist these affected factions and I personally encourage the high commands or leading members of those factions to either contact myself or another Admin to make it known how we can specifically help you.

You realize that all I talked to are not interested in your help?

Why ask the executioner for help after he ruined your work? Why would you turn to the one that you feel did great injustice to you? Do you think the influence of those who were banned now ends with their execution? Do you even know, or can you even imagine what is going on where you cannot look?

I can only say: you completely misjudge the amount of damage this "indiscriminate blanket ban" caused because you hit some of the wrong people and because you did it the wrong way and you keep doing it the wrong way.

No confidence in the Administration:
I can clearly see that there is a lack of trust in the Administration. I'm not going to sit here and start yelling you should trust us, I hope to gain your trust through the actions that we will take as a team in the future.

Start by stepping one step backwards, and looking at what happened. Then look at the mess. Then look at whether you were right there. Realize your mistakes. Then work to fix the damage.

That would be a method of regaining trust.

What you wrote is the exact opposite:

There are no plans at the moment to re-vote on the recently banned members. So there is no point in appealing for your buddies, they will all be able to appeal after 6 months like anyone else. I say that because I would like to re-build the relationship between us, that unfortunately means moving on from these bans. How can we re-build this trust-less relationship?

This is wrong.
There are rights that factions have.
For example, if a faction leader requests evidence on a member of his faction who was sanctioned, it has to be provided.
If you do not provide evidence, and if you cannot justify to the community (whom you serve) that the persons deserved the maximum punishment, you fail at keeping your own rules. And what would that do to "trust" that you want to regain?

Sticking to your own rules would create trust.
Showing a consequent line of action would create trust.
Showing that you understand the difference between people doing the same crime would create trust.
Judging situations correctly would create trust.

Telling us: "They are dead. Move on." is not creating trust.
Yes, it is a "trust-less relationship".

And this very announcement in this very paragraph made it clear that the staff does not understand what "trust" implies.

Staff:
- Us as staff need to be much more efficient in processing requests/reports/SRPs/appeals etc
- We need to have a much bigger presence on the forums, engaging in discussion
- We need to be more consistent. I am echoing Garret here, it's a good point to raise.

You need to talk to the people!

Not in angry forum debates that are there to vent. You will always lose.

Not in toxic OFL chats where everybody burns out in record time. You will burn out and leave. The best Admins we ever had did not survive in there.

Talk 1 on 1.
Before it is too late.
Before executions are done and suddenly Disco finds itself in a huge chaos at the possibly worst time of the year. At a time when activity is so low that it is in danger of creating a negative vicious circle.

You needlessly forced a situation that is considered wrong by a majority of the community at a time where the damage is amplified by the already difficult circumstances.

I'll end by saying: This cannot be in the best interest of Disco, and preserving this mod is your job.

Jack

P.S: I am taking a break from playing Disco. Not to put pressure on the staff, but because this situation is affecting my rl by creating an amount of negative feelings and frustration that I do not feel a game should be having on me.