Anonymity of Rule Violation Reports

[chovynz]

Bacon. Good idea i think.

---

Seek fun and you shall find it. Seek stuff to Q_Q about and you'll find that, too. I choose to have fun.

[n00bl3t]

Akumabito, you have been warned already sir, please don't push your luck any further ...

Err. What is wrong with stating how he thinks the process should be?

Edit: Apologies for my two dot post earlier. I blanked it.

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[BaconSoda]

Alright, ladies and gentlemen, lets just keep it down. I didn't make a post about how opinions may or may not be expressed or on the entire sanction process, but rather how to reform a very specific part of the current one. I would like to request that all posts from here on out be directly related to the subject of my proposal, or be expressed elsewhere. Sound reasonable? Thought so.

---

[8:32:45 PM] Dusty Lens: Oh no, let me get that. Hello? Oh it's my grandma. She says to be roleplay.
[12:49:19 AM] Elgatodiablo: You know its nice that you have all that proof and all, Bacon... but I just don't believe you.

[Fellow Hoodlum]

Akumabito, if you wish to join in the thread with reasonable debate, fine, but if it slides off into more name
calling and insinuations, the consequences have been clearly defined already.

---

Some say he is a proud member of: "The most paranoid group of people in the Community."

[n00bl3t]

Only cowards hide behind anonymity anyway. The whole process should be open, that's the only way it can be fair.

Name calling and insinuations at it's finest.:nono:

(:lol:We shall talk on "Scype" Akumabito.)

---

Anything I say is not intended as offensive, and to try and deliberately misinterpret it as such would be an attempt at trolling via misrepresentation.

It's not a conspiracy, it's localised bias. They're not intelligent enough to form a conspiracy.

[tfmachad]

@Akumabito:

What Baconsoda is questioning here is not the transparency of the process. While the process isn't open to the public (and any discussion about it is far beyond the point of the thread, I trust you to understand that), the accusation in the form of title and subtitle on the report topic, that many times include the name of the alleged perpetrator and the associated infraction, are.

The accusation can be half the punishment. It is not a prerogative of this community, but there are people who will pass judgement to others solely based on the fact that they've seen their names cited as involved in a marginal activity, regardless of the final sentence. I'm quite sure this isn't too fantastic a concept for you to relate with.

Of course I'd like to think that we (this community) is above that, but perhaps we aren't. Perhaps there are people here that will treat people differently in game because they saw their names in a sanction report. Perhaps they will believe, even before the case has been judged, that the person is indeed a rule breaker. That can hurt people.

I'm not afraid to put a sanction report on anyone openly, because there's nothing to be afraid of.

And what's the reason you'd have to fear pointing your finger at someone? It's not your reputation that you are hurting in the process, it's theirs.

Is this a more tangible explanation of what's being said here?

---

Meet the Kriegers - The story of a family and of two men that shared more than just a name
Fantasmas de la Nube Siniestra
I Mon'Star: The Strange Case of Elizabeth Wallace

[bluntpencil2001]

Open accusations would lead to trial by forum.

For instance, this may hit close to home: Many people on the forum have suggested that certain members which they find annoying should be banned. The administrators haven't seen this as necessary (yet). If such trials by forum were allowed, certain individuals may be banned now.

---

[Akumabito]

And what's the reason you'd have to fear pointing your finger at someone? It's not your reputation that you are hurting in the process, it's theirs.

Is this a more tangible explanation of what's being said here?

I know the points, but the fact is that if the process is open there will be no shame because everyone will see the evidence against you, see the screenies, hear both sides and there will be no real doubt, either it is a bogus or sketcky report, or you are guilty.

Openness is better than doubt, and right now there is doubt, doubt that some sanctions aren't wrong, doubt that some sanctions are not applied when they should be.
The current process hurts the innocent who receive sanctions and protects the guilty who don't get them, and the ones that are deserved are in the open at the end anyway.

And that is why no civilized court has secret trials and hidden evidence except in extreme cases involving minors or national security. Otherwise open trial is the only route to real justice.

[Srkad]

Its part of the punishment...how about you just dont get the sanction in the first place?

---

[Zelot]

Bacon, Great idea. How did you get so smart only eating bacon and drinking soda?

---