Let's fix this

[Jack_Henderson]

[...]but did all the players you banned deserve the same punishment?

This is the main question for me here, too.
And the answer for myself and seemingly many in the community is: no.

There are leagues between the people banned there and this needs to be taken into account when the punishments are handed out. Especially not without a proper warning.

If the only "crime" is to go overboard in criticism against staff decisions, and there is no real "criminal history", a 6 month ban is not the tool to use.

Looking at @Karst, who has been a very productive member of the community, who I know never wishes ill to any other player of the community, and who is neither troll nor bitter vet nor rule-skirter, he is one of those who should definitely not have been banned.

By banning him, you pretty much threaten everybody with "you can be banned just for being a vocal critic".

I do hope that the staff listens to what Garret has to say because he is right.

Jack

[Ninja]

I'm going to try and ease that a bit by telling you all my personal thoughts which will include some information that I believe is less sensitive and is "okay" to share.

...

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.

Well, that part certainly didn't help.

So when are you gonna divulge your secret reasons? Never? I agree that at least 2 of them had to be stopped because of the way they behavior, but seriously, not clearly saying what they did wrong and wrapping it in a shroud of mystery is just... fail.

---

User was banned for: Karlotta alt.
Time left: (Permanent)

[Tarator]

I'm sure, most people would be happy with how Cashew has explained things, and I agree with most of the points, however, there is still one little problem:

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.

This, renders your entire point on "punishment" null, since if the staff would like to retain their credibility and transparency in the eyes of the community, they ought to present solid reasons for all of their actions that impact the said community. You cannot expect to be taken as trustworthy, if you back such major decisions with such minimal reasoning and statements like "secret reasons" or something similar.

If for example, the reason lies within certain actions and circumstances that are linked to future plans, updates, RP or something along those lines, you could still present a reason, but avoid illuminating the content of said plans or whatever. Like that case which happened a year or so ago, when one of the members tried to leak information about future updates. So he was banned (if I remember correctly), and the reason was obvious - leaking information, so there was an end to it.

Like I said, the bans might have been justified, but at the end, we cannot know, thus they aren't legit. No sanction notices, no solid reasoning, no warnings, nothing. And that's not how it should work, if you ask me.

---

O'Rhu Cell Database|||O'Rhu Cell Feedback|||Join O'Rhu Cell|||Jump

[Jayce]

@Xenon
@"Mark Hamann"

DDoS:
@Alley already said it wasn't the banned players so I thought that I'd just reiterate that to make sure that everyone knew that. If you watch Spazzy's stream on his YouTube channel, they mention the DDoS attacks. I quote Lyth "We condemn the DDoS attacks", so all of you that are tarnishing them with that brush - you're incorrect. Sorry.

Nice to know. Thanks for the clarification, Cashew.

[Haste]

I would have preferred not posting in any of these discussion threads, but felt that a chance at actual discussion with an administrator was a little too good to pass up. I'll keep it short and to the point.

Staff:
- We need to be more consistent. I am echoing Garret here, it's a good point to raise.

There are no plans at the moment to re-vote on the recently banned members.

You agree here that - in the past - the administration team was inconsistent in its judgement. Does this inconsistency apply to the six bans this thread is about? If so, it seems somewhat strange that, while pushing for greater consistency, these bans are not looked at, whatsoever, again.

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.

Sanction evidence is generally supplied to sanctioned players. The few banned players I have spoken to have said to have received little to no evidence despite attempting to get it from multiple admins. Are these players simply lying to me? If not, why are they left in the dark? I don't think "the public" should see any evidence - this has never been the case anyways - but I do believe the banned players should know what exactly they did wrong. If they wish to share it with others, that's up to them.

I'd also like to note that the admin team has proven time and time again that they're in fact human beings and are not infallible. I've seen at least a dozen sanctions - ranging from slaps on the wrist to serious punishments - get reverted after the sanctioned players pointed out severe flaws in the evidence. Without seeing the evidence, "the six" are not given the same chance to defend themselves that others have had. This seems somewhat unfair and, to use your words, inconsistent.

Future:
What happens next?

About half of your post is about all the nice and lovely things you wish to please the community with. While this is of course great news, it honestly reads as an attempt to divert attention away from the recent bans. This is somewhat strange, if you consider that the admin team seems to have deliberately posted the bans in the news section to attract attention to them in the first place. This, once again, is likely best described as inconsistent.

Anyways, I do believe that, rather than ignore the situation and attempt to change the subject to the server's "bright future", the current situation should be addressed properly first.

[Omi]

I haven't the patience to go through Cashew's wall bit by bit and dissect exactly why I hate it so much, so all I will do is echo Haste and add the following:

We don't need empty, meaningless platitudes and assurances that everything will be fine from now on. There is no reason that you cannot provide evidence other than that you are refusing to; there is no magical block in place that stops you from posting it here. The fact is you're too spineless to dole it out, presumably because if you do your position as a green will be compromised. That's fair enough, but please don't pretend that you "can't".

Your revitalisation strategy appears to be sending e-mails to old players to replace the one's we've lost. I'm not actually sure if this is a joke or not, and I don't want to comment on something that pretty much has to be satire.

Lastly, despite being a recent returner, you are not a unique face among the admins as far as my belief in you holds weight. In fact, you are up there with @Hannibal as one of the admins who should have had the least say in these votes - I am entirely unconvinced that your stance on @Swifty in particular was unbiased, considering I remember you and him spewing hate for each other all over my faction chat in the past twelve months or so. Furthermore, you've just come back and couldn't possibly have any meaningful input on the votes considering the timespan in which they were supposed to relate to. That goes for @Hannibal as well, but you have points over him because you're capable of basic English comprehension.

All in all, I feel that the staff have wholly, utterly, and irreparably betrayed my trust with this decision and numerous other serious decisions that have come in the months and years prior to this. I don't feel that any of you, bar maybe @Alley and @Garrett Jax (who isn't even an admin any more) are capable of ever regaining my trust, and I can only reiterate my previous belief that all of you should follow in @Arioch's footsteps and walk out the door to make way for a new crop that is actually voted on by the community.

---

[Stoner_Steve]

footsteps and walk out the door to make way for a new crop that is actually voted on by the community.

There was already popularity contest for mod's and that wasn't exactly the best idea

[Omi]

I don't think you can say that one way or another, since none of the popular candidates ended up taking the orange in the end - with the exception of @Stefz, who was at least in the top 10 and, to my knowledge, hasn't done anything worth getting concerned about since his appointment. For the rest, it's very hard to say whether they would have done a good job or not considering they were never afforded the chance.

---

[Ninja]

We shouldn't vote for who gets to be the do-whatever-I-like admin, we should vote for rules that apply to all admins.

Such as rules that make the sanction and decision-making process transparent to everyone.

I don't care who is admin, as long as they can be made accountable for what they do, just like everyone else.

---

User was banned for: Karlotta alt.
Time left: (Permanent)

[Omi]

I am not advocating that the system should stay how it is. In that sense, you are right - I would be in support of an entirely new ruleset holding staff accountable as well, particularly in relation to transparency in the matters you've mentioned.

That said, as I've previously said elsewhere, I do not believe that the current staff are capable of upholding any system - new or otherwise - in a manner that would satisfy my trust. They have repeatedly proven that they have no interest in serving the community in an open and responsible manner, at least as far as I see it.

---