- Location
- Northern Ireland
slander
ˈslɑːndə/
noun
LAW
1.
the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.
Roleplay UK
Join the UK's biggest roleplay community on FiveM and experience endless new roleplay opportunities!
Recent Events
- Thread starter Vladic Ka
- Start date
- Status
ˈslɑːndə/
noun
LAW
Jhonny Franklin
Banned
- Location
- at mi dad's
TinyBigJacko
Management
Management
Dev Team
Los Santos Police Command
Los Santos NHS
Los Santos Firefighter
Gruppe 6
Judge
- Location
- Vinewood Casino Management Office
You can tell when a good man has just had a bad day. He accepts some blame, makes amends, makes peace, protects friendships and settles accounts with honour and grace. It is the mark of a decent, normal, non-perfect human being.
You can tell when man is really a bad man - they never make peace; they will attempt to shift the blame; they will never, ever accept that they even did the tiniest thing wrong; and they will use threats, subterfuge, deceit and abuse as a means to try and make the other party (who may already have admitted their own mistakes and be looking to make peace) look like everything was entirely the other party's fault. A bad person will repeatedly try to regain access to places they have been told they're unwelcome in, so that they can continue to spill their venom, continue fights, and make out they are blameless. A truly bad person continues this behaviour indefinitely until they are either stopped, or they change themselves and become good people again - if that is even possible for them.
For the record, there are very few people who fall into that second category above, here in this community - either now, or in the past. But there were some, and we do our best to keep them out, because they consume far too many resources and make nothing but stress and pain for all members of the community they come into contact with, whether they are players, managers, admins or supporters.
There are many people who have been banned from here in the past for being various shades of 'dick'. Oftentimes, if they've grown up, or thought about their actions long enough, they'll admit (even if only privately to themselves) that the reaction (and ban) they received from the community managers was to be expected, and was generally done in the best interests of protecting the wider community from a loose cannon on deck. The ones who have the balls to admit publicly the conduct that got them into trouble, or even just privately to the staff/management, will usually find themselves with a way back in after the dust has settled and a suitable 'grace period' has been satisfied. We're all human here, after all, and life's too short to maintain any fight for long. There are more important things to be doing. Like having fun, and RPing everything, for starters...
But a few - just a tiny few - are really quite scarily horrendous. They will (and do) attack our servers, DDOSing us out of sheer resentment. They swear, fight, and abuse the volunteer teams who are, after all, really only just trying to keep order. Tempers do flare, sometimes - and sometimes on both sides - but the grown up way is to calm down after a while, and bury hatchets, make amends, apologise, find a halfway-house and carry on with happy lives. Sometimes the only way is to stay apart, but many times, it's back together again, which is great. Either way, the war ends. The dispute ceases. Life goes on, with or without.
Unfortunately, some people just do not have any 'off-switch', and cannot ever bring themselves to do this. Instead of cooling off once they're isolated, they will lurk, waiting like vultures, to strike again. And again. They will escalate. They will make death threats. They steal private information if they can, and publish it in order to cause mayhem. They will post doctored photos of volunteers' family members with horrid captions or foul comments. They make public comments about wishing that our family members die or catch cancer. They repeatedly attempt to return to a place they've already scorched and burned, to scorch it and burn it some more, like a sick dog returning to its own vomit. The fact is, I think most times, the person they are angriest at most of all, is themselves... because they had a good thing, and they blew it, and it really, really burns them to have lost it. They burned their bridges so badly, that it would take a saint to forgive them - and none of us are saints with that much patience! So they know that while they are still 'in high mood' there is no return for them, but they cannot calm down, and still miss what they lost, what they threw away. So they rail against the moon, howl into the wind, and constantly throw themselves back into the fray in order to keep the fight alive, to make a point when there is none to make, nothing more to be said, and simply end up showing the world what futility and unbounded anger look like. This is the strategy of either a very sick person, or a fool - or both.
It's been oft-commented that either Einstein or Benjamin Franklin once said "The definition of insanity is repeating the same behaviour endlessly and expecting a different result." Personally, I don't believe either of them said it, but it's a decent enough quote, so I'll post it here anyway. But I will change it to this, and re-attribute it to me:
"The definition of insanity is repeating the same combative and abusive behaviour and expecting people to believe that you are NOT toxic."
Ask yourself. Is it really wrong of us to wish away the people who behave like this, who attack us, you, our servers, our friends, our innocent families? If someone has sullied their reputation to the point that no matter how you approach a possible solution with them, they will always just fight more, sling more manure, escalate the fight and pile more anger and abuse onto an already significant heap of the same?
In my view, no, it's not wrong to bar them indefinitely. Some people are, sadly, either beyond redemption, or at the very least, not at a state-of-mind currently where they can be redeemed, at least not without significant risk to personal or community safety. Maybe one day they will calm down and discuss their problems like rational human beings, and maybe one day, trust may be regained, hugs exchanged, and doors may be reopened. Maybe not. I'm a realist with a slightly optimistic twist... but I'm not a bloody fool.
TL;DR
If you have shat on my doorstep yesterday, and you shit on it again today, I'm going to believe that you have every intention of shitting on it again tomorrow. And I will stop you at the end of my street, if I have to, until I know you have made amends for this defacatory behaviour. Then - and only then - can we begin to talk about WHY you may have felt the need to shit on my doorstep in the first place, and if I am partly to blame for motivating you that way, then I will attempt to make amends for that. But first, you must stop shitting on my doorstep!
You can tell when man is really a bad man - they never make peace; they will attempt to shift the blame; they will never, ever accept that they even did the tiniest thing wrong; and they will use threats, subterfuge, deceit and abuse as a means to try and make the other party (who may already have admitted their own mistakes and be looking to make peace) look like everything was entirely the other party's fault. A bad person will repeatedly try to regain access to places they have been told they're unwelcome in, so that they can continue to spill their venom, continue fights, and make out they are blameless. A truly bad person continues this behaviour indefinitely until they are either stopped, or they change themselves and become good people again - if that is even possible for them.
For the record, there are very few people who fall into that second category above, here in this community - either now, or in the past. But there were some, and we do our best to keep them out, because they consume far too many resources and make nothing but stress and pain for all members of the community they come into contact with, whether they are players, managers, admins or supporters.
There are many people who have been banned from here in the past for being various shades of 'dick'. Oftentimes, if they've grown up, or thought about their actions long enough, they'll admit (even if only privately to themselves) that the reaction (and ban) they received from the community managers was to be expected, and was generally done in the best interests of protecting the wider community from a loose cannon on deck. The ones who have the balls to admit publicly the conduct that got them into trouble, or even just privately to the staff/management, will usually find themselves with a way back in after the dust has settled and a suitable 'grace period' has been satisfied. We're all human here, after all, and life's too short to maintain any fight for long. There are more important things to be doing. Like having fun, and RPing everything, for starters...
But a few - just a tiny few - are really quite scarily horrendous. They will (and do) attack our servers, DDOSing us out of sheer resentment. They swear, fight, and abuse the volunteer teams who are, after all, really only just trying to keep order. Tempers do flare, sometimes - and sometimes on both sides - but the grown up way is to calm down after a while, and bury hatchets, make amends, apologise, find a halfway-house and carry on with happy lives. Sometimes the only way is to stay apart, but many times, it's back together again, which is great. Either way, the war ends. The dispute ceases. Life goes on, with or without.
Unfortunately, some people just do not have any 'off-switch', and cannot ever bring themselves to do this. Instead of cooling off once they're isolated, they will lurk, waiting like vultures, to strike again. And again. They will escalate. They will make death threats. They steal private information if they can, and publish it in order to cause mayhem. They will post doctored photos of volunteers' family members with horrid captions or foul comments. They make public comments about wishing that our family members die or catch cancer. They repeatedly attempt to return to a place they've already scorched and burned, to scorch it and burn it some more, like a sick dog returning to its own vomit. The fact is, I think most times, the person they are angriest at most of all, is themselves... because they had a good thing, and they blew it, and it really, really burns them to have lost it. They burned their bridges so badly, that it would take a saint to forgive them - and none of us are saints with that much patience! So they know that while they are still 'in high mood' there is no return for them, but they cannot calm down, and still miss what they lost, what they threw away. So they rail against the moon, howl into the wind, and constantly throw themselves back into the fray in order to keep the fight alive, to make a point when there is none to make, nothing more to be said, and simply end up showing the world what futility and unbounded anger look like. This is the strategy of either a very sick person, or a fool - or both.
It's been oft-commented that either Einstein or Benjamin Franklin once said "The definition of insanity is repeating the same behaviour endlessly and expecting a different result." Personally, I don't believe either of them said it, but it's a decent enough quote, so I'll post it here anyway. But I will change it to this, and re-attribute it to me:
"The definition of insanity is repeating the same combative and abusive behaviour and expecting people to believe that you are NOT toxic."
Ask yourself. Is it really wrong of us to wish away the people who behave like this, who attack us, you, our servers, our friends, our innocent families? If someone has sullied their reputation to the point that no matter how you approach a possible solution with them, they will always just fight more, sling more manure, escalate the fight and pile more anger and abuse onto an already significant heap of the same?
In my view, no, it's not wrong to bar them indefinitely. Some people are, sadly, either beyond redemption, or at the very least, not at a state-of-mind currently where they can be redeemed, at least not without significant risk to personal or community safety. Maybe one day they will calm down and discuss their problems like rational human beings, and maybe one day, trust may be regained, hugs exchanged, and doors may be reopened. Maybe not. I'm a realist with a slightly optimistic twist... but I'm not a bloody fool.
TL;DR
If you have shat on my doorstep yesterday, and you shit on it again today, I'm going to believe that you have every intention of shitting on it again tomorrow. And I will stop you at the end of my street, if I have to, until I know you have made amends for this defacatory behaviour. Then - and only then - can we begin to talk about WHY you may have felt the need to shit on my doorstep in the first place, and if I am partly to blame for motivating you that way, then I will attempt to make amends for that. But first, you must stop shitting on my doorstep!
Last edited by a moderator:
- Location
- Newcastle
- Location
- Newcastle
Colin Mcjay
Member
When i see thoose post, i must say that i dislike the way you're bringing out the messages or news, once for fact i do not know the full story from your POV yet, but i know it from my own POV, every single person making a statement about what they dislike about the community, is being hidden or deleted, i read for an example fuels departure, but unable to track it down anymore, i am unable to find my own, 2 page long departure message aswell, from my POV the only thing i can agree in, is that you are hiding alot of information, and side stories, to strengthen your own story.
I do wonder why i was not banned, actually i do not care anymore, this has shown me what this community has been made into over the two years i've been here.
I was not here to cause drama by posting that bye post, i did this to make people open their eyes, players, staff, whoever read it, and then choose what they want to believe themselves.
- Fabrizio Rizzo Rodrigues Henandez
(Yea you can post restrict this account aswell, ban both account and hide the post again, just to supply my statement)
I do wonder why i was not banned, actually i do not care anymore, this has shown me what this community has been made into over the two years i've been here.
I was not here to cause drama by posting that bye post, i did this to make people open their eyes, players, staff, whoever read it, and then choose what they want to believe themselves.
- Fabrizio Rizzo Rodrigues Henandez
(Yea you can post restrict this account aswell, ban both account and hide the post again, just to supply my statement)
TinyBigJacko
Management
Management
Dev Team
Los Santos Police Command
Los Santos NHS
Los Santos Firefighter
Gruppe 6
Judge
- Location
- Vinewood Casino Management Office
You received a warning point not a ban. Fuel posted nothing constructive and just basically cried. However, some points you was saying was constructive but others was not. You was posting stupid stuff from the past about Fishers story all irrelevant stuff. Comments like this is what got it hidden " [SIZE=14.666666666666666px]“[/SIZE][SIZE=14.6667px]i’m taking 1.6 - just like the rest[/SIZE] " not constructive is it?
Many people left the community on good terms, gave their concerns and left with no inappropriate comments or hate speech. There is a difference.
TinyBigJacko
Management
Management
Dev Team
Los Santos Police Command
Los Santos NHS
Los Santos Firefighter
Gruppe 6
Judge
- Location
- Vinewood Casino Management Office
Some posts have been hidden/deleted, this is true. Some by staff, some by management - so far none by me though, I will honestly say. However, I have access to the ones that have been hidden and the majority (I will not lie and say *all*) have been hidden not because they simply disagree, but because they have disagreed in an explosive, abusive, foul or really unpleasant way.
That, I think, is quite reasonable, in the circumstances. It's kinda what I meant in my TL;DR about first the doorstep-shitting having to stop, then people can talk rationally.
It's perfectly possible for people to say goodbye without slinging mud or being horrible. Similarly, it's perfectly possible for people to disagree with a standpoint, without attacking the person making that standpoint, or his family, or wishing them all to get cancer. These are the sorts of things that have been said in some - not all - of the posts that have been hidden.
Personally, I'd leave them all up there for public viewing, because I think in many cases, there is no need for us to try and demonstrate how horrid some people can be, when they do such a bang-up job all by themselves. But we don't always agree on the approaches to this, within management, and within the staff team, so it comes down to discretion, discussion, rational conversations, and sometimes, it's a case of going along with the majority opinion because I am just one cog in a big machine. And that is fine. It's what communities are all about.
But really, honestly, not everything that has been removed is 100% vitriol. Sometimes, some good points are made... and then spoilt at the end because the person making the point has then ran amok and finished up with a ton of spite or hate, possibly because they think it's going to get deleted anyway. Well, they just made sure, didn't they? So how serious were they, really, about making a sentient point in the first place? If they didn't want to have their otherwise possibly rational comments pulled, why did they take a shit on the doorstep as a parting shot?
It's so pointless. It's not how grownups solve disputes.
And I'm not saying we're perfect here - management or staff. But we are TRYING to put the past behind us, resolve a few heated exchanges in amicable ways, let the good guys know that they are still welcome here. But yes, one or two turds (and they know who they are) still need to know they have a helluva lot of work left to do before they'd ever make amends. But it'd be nice to see them start trying, though. I live in hope.
Last edited by a moderator:
Axolotl
Well-known member
- Location
- Amsterdam
All nice and wise words from mr. Jacko, reasonable as always.
But I think what management has to understand is that many bans issued in the past were simply too harsh. It has created an atmosphere of fear and hate mongering. Many of these banned people feel hard done by, by simply choosing to play with their friends. It has made people angry and since their bans are irreversible they've got nothing to lose by trolling and such. (Im obviously not referring to people banned that burned bridges).
I myself felt forced to leave simply because my friends were banned. And I wouldve understood those bans if it was for serious rules broken, but most were banned simply for sitting on another TS speaking to banned members. They themselves never did anything toxic. Which makes me question why the hell Im not banned.
It's time to realise people will always talk shit, especially about the things we care about. Let them talk as long as they play and dont openly ruin fun for others, who cares if they whine that theres no framework, or gossip or whatever else people like to whine about. It's the same as people always complaining about the government. You cant make everyone happy, doesnt mean you should exclude unhappy people from society. (Or in this case, the community)
For me, personally, Im sticking with my friends. If possible, Ill still roam about in an ifrit from time to time with some of the other friends I made here. Just wanted to post as its a shame to see whats happened.
But I think what management has to understand is that many bans issued in the past were simply too harsh. It has created an atmosphere of fear and hate mongering. Many of these banned people feel hard done by, by simply choosing to play with their friends. It has made people angry and since their bans are irreversible they've got nothing to lose by trolling and such. (Im obviously not referring to people banned that burned bridges).
I myself felt forced to leave simply because my friends were banned. And I wouldve understood those bans if it was for serious rules broken, but most were banned simply for sitting on another TS speaking to banned members. They themselves never did anything toxic. Which makes me question why the hell Im not banned.
It's time to realise people will always talk shit, especially about the things we care about. Let them talk as long as they play and dont openly ruin fun for others, who cares if they whine that theres no framework, or gossip or whatever else people like to whine about. It's the same as people always complaining about the government. You cant make everyone happy, doesnt mean you should exclude unhappy people from society. (Or in this case, the community)
For me, personally, Im sticking with my friends. If possible, Ill still roam about in an ifrit from time to time with some of the other friends I made here. Just wanted to post as its a shame to see whats happened.
Mountain
Well-known member
- Location
- Netherlands
Before I leave, I just want to say. @Vladic Ka
Dear Vladic ka I personally always had loads of respect for you and still have. BUT in this post I have to disagree on one name PaulS. He didn't do that much wrong as he even did something wrong to put him on this list. In my opinion this is disgusting putting him on this list! He didn't do anything against this community to bring it down. if you put him on this list you should post everybody who got banned in here.
Mountain.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Location
- England
- Location
- London
I personally think not, I don't know if you remember how I left, I left like a toxic piece of shit. So did a lot of the people who are involved in this new group. It's like the whole ScottMcdotter or whatever the fuck his name is, situation, people who are involved with him got banned. These bans (many of which have been overturned I believe when people haven't acted like children) have been put up to show that RPUK isn't gonna deal with this kind of crap. I remember playing with quite a few of the people who got banned and defected. They weren't fun to play with, people like Fetty Wap(who constantly metagamed) and GenuineAF who broke RP all the time. If I was RPUK I wouldn't want these kind of people inside the community, and I wouldn't want people who enjoy playing with their playstyles inside my server either.
Last edited by a moderator:
You call Fetty Wap vile, you get likes on your post. I call Fetty Wap a snake. I get a community ban. How does that work? Like, I have no intention of coming back to the community but when we talk about unfair bans, how does mine work?
- Location
- London
Because Fetty used to be a decent member of the community, I'd assume you got banned from him reporting who when you did something you shouldn't and got salty about it. If you have no intention of coming back, leave.
TinyBigJacko
Management
Management
Dev Team
Los Santos Police Command
Los Santos NHS
Los Santos Firefighter
Gruppe 6
Judge
- Location
- Vinewood Casino Management Office
Thank you Axolotl.
Let me see if I can respond reasonably to your comments, too.
Management (as in the group of us) generally are aware that some (not all) bans have been very black-and-white in the past. This was our policy then. A lot of the time, it actually did work out to be the safest approach. Someone's busy blowing up a bomb, you take them out of the equation. You limit the damage to the masses in the short-term, and you protect the wider community. Then you set about seeing whether the perpetrator values their position in the community enough to want to sue for peace and come back. And that will depend largely on how they behave right off the bat, and thereafter - and how many times they have been warned already, and how serious the offence is (in terms of its effects on the wider community, the servers, the staff, etc).
The problem comes when previously good people go rogue. And what they do when they leave. This is sometimes when things go awry, and the whole issue of covert advertising, trolling, lurking, luring away friends, and suchlike, can (but not always) have a dramatic effect on the community. In the past, the decision has always been to 1.6 anyone destabilising the community, or thought to present a risk (and here, I agree, sometimes this will be perceived as harsh or unfair, or sometimes as the correct judgement call... it's impossible to tell in advance). This is what makes it so horrible when bad things happen to good people, they go rogue, and they try and split our community. The longer our community survives, the greater the depth and quantity of friendship bonds that are formed, and the harder it is to not do things that break those bonds, if one side goes rogue (for whatever reason). There is no easy answer. We will not, and very likely have not, always got the judgement calls spot-on, and sometimes people will have been banned 'on suspicision' of being dangerous (in a limited way) to the community given their friendships with people on the outside who may be trolling, luring people away, advertising, using people 'inside' to spy, or steal ideas, and so on.
It may sound very paranoid to think this way, but in the past, all these things HAVE happened. It's sad to think that anyone good might want to leave, but arguments do happen from time to time, and some people choose leaving as their way out. That's fine, I guess, if peace can't be made. Similarly, it's fine if they set up a community that isn't in any way a rival or likely to drain our members, or cause drama here. Many people have done this quite successfully and there aren't any problems. The problems come when people are salty about something, and do stuff out of spite. In return, they are perceived as hostile to the community by management/staff, and thereafter, everyone they are in contact with is potentially a risk (albeit to a lower degree, we hope). It's a truly horrible situation. But sometimes, it does pan out that way. Depending on how 'adultly' the initial problem is dealt with, people start dividing down lines of trust and friendship. Sometimes they start doing things for their 'departed friend' that harm the community, sometimes they don't. Sometimes in the past management have taken the view 'don't give them a chance to go rogue', if a situation looks like snowballing; other times a clampdown happens in order to stop something snowballing. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes it blows up in your face.
This is life. Altis Life or Tanoa Life or Real Life, it's all the fricking same. When people - on any side - start behaving badly out of emotion or fear, bad shit happens, and lots more people get hurt, or have to make tough choices. All of us have cringed and facepalmed when things like this go down, sometimes because of what a departing person has done, sometimes because what a fellow staffer or manager may have done. But that is unfortunately an aspect of grownup life. Sometimes we have to present a united front, even if we may disagree with a specific decision that was made by a colleague. We support each other and are loyal, because we know each others' hearts are in the right places, even if the execution may not be perfect every time, or what we would've done, necessarily. If the 'thing' dissolves and goes away, and the community continues along without much effect, we know it was the right call; conversely, if things get really noisy, really bad, and if the internal discussions within staff or management teams, and players, of course, gets to a certain level, we know it was a bad call, and we must do something.
Something has been done. That is why Vlad started this thread. This thread, as I said in my first post, is about the future. About clemency, understanding and forgiveness for some of the people that we believe may have been treated just a bit too harshly, and been 'babies thrown out with the bathwater', so to speak. Not everyone was guilty, many were only guilty by association and ostracised in a bid to ensure that nothing bad happened to the community; meanwhile, some where guilty. In some cases, some individuals were very, very guilty, and even lied to their friends about what they had said or done to staff, management and especially Wilco. Unfortunately, we know where some of the bodies are buried, and I have seen some of the posts that nobody else will have seen, and some are truly disgusting. It pains me to know that those people still routinely sit down with other, really nice people, who don't realise quite what scumbags they are. Perhaps they will find out the hard way one day, if ever they cross them, perhaps not. It's not our concern. We don't want to make people choose their friends, but sometimes - just sometimes - if a friend of a really, really bad person shows signs of dissent and discontent, it is a valid reason for us to be at least slightly worried about their intentions towards the wider community.
On the other hand, yes, some people get nailed simply because they were in a gang and made friends with some dodgy people and are innocent dupes themselves. Going forward, we intend to try and minimise the number of times these sorts of people get banned, but the measure of success will come clear when we let a few back in. If they immediately start trolling, trying to spirit people away to other communities, or misbehaving, causing drama, whining about things and causing a million forum-reports and complaints from other users (which is usually what happens - the management generally only RESPOND to calls from the community-at-large... we don't have TIME to go hunting for trouble, because there's plenty enough work out there to do already, without that!)... well, if those sorts of bad things start happening, we'll know that the hardliners in the management team, whose call is to shut down the bad-guys, and their pals, pronto, will have been right.
Just because I am reasonable, doesn't mean I am right to trust my enemy's friend. I guess we'll find out one way or another. But I remain hopeful.
The point is, if you've left, or been banned for reasons of an association, and you're basically a normal, kind human being, then I really don't see a problem with reapplying, if you're interested. Same for some of your friends, if they are not being twats, trolls, or attempting to smash things up. We don't have TIME for hating, or haters. We don't want people to feel pressured to leave, nor do we want people to feel they have to burn bridges if they leave. Likewise, we DO want to hear people's considered opinions and grievances, providing they are given in reasonable ways, and don't take up every spare moment of the whole team's time to deal with (I'm guessing people do want some game-updates made at some point, and all this is a considerable strain on our limited resources, after all).
So. There you have it. I hope that's answered some of your comments satisfactorily. We've drawn a line against the hardest cases and won't go back unless there are significant changes in rapport, but we've taken the view that 'hangers-on and friends' maybe deserve a second chance. We've admitted we're not perfect, prone to human failings, extremely busy, not omnipotent, struggling to keep as many people happy as possible, and generally doing our best. What more can we do? The rest is down to other people to decide whether they want to be a part of a great future, or dwell on a wasted past. Let's see which they choose, I guess.
TinyBigJacko
Management
Management
Dev Team
Los Santos Police Command
Los Santos NHS
Los Santos Firefighter
Gruppe 6
Judge
- Location
- Vinewood Casino Management Office
Firstly, @Vladic Kadid not call FW 'vile'. He alluded to that, yes. But he never said it. He actually said:
"
Here is a list of names of the players that did some really nasty shit when they got banned from here and are part of the rip off community:
Fetty Wap
"
and that is true. FW did do some really nasty shit.
Vladic is also part of the management team, and as such, was trying to be open, honest and transparent about why SOME people are unlikely to be made welcome again any time soon, and doing so from a slightly different perspective than any other member of the community. He's explaining an official position. He's responding to calls from people to BE transparent. With respect to everyone else in the community that has to follow the rules, in this situation it would not be entirely unreasonable for Vlad to have ACTUALLY called FW vile... even though he didn't. You put those two sentences together in your head, and reached a conclusion (perfectly logically, maybe). But the point is, Vlad CAN say that.
You, on the other hand, as a community member who is/was here under the agreement that you abide by the rules, CANNOT make such accusations in public about another player out of hand. There are processes for reporting bad behaviour, people to talk to, ways to behave. I don't know the specifics of your case, but evidently you didn't follow them, and someone felt sufficiently aggrieved by your rule-break to report it and have it acted upon. That's called being part of the community.
Now, I know some people spoiling for a fight might turn around and say 'well it's one rule for management and another for the community' - and that would be a reasonable point, IF it was a case of a manager being spiteful about someone in regards to a private encounter, a personal dispute, a situation where the manager (or staff) was not 'acting for the community' but was involved for himself. In situations like that, a manager's conduct would be expected to be the same as everyone else's. Reports do sometimes get made, and managers HAVE been known to make amends, apologies (publicly or privately) for situations where they have been overly harsh, borderline rude, or whatnot. Yes, there is some clemency for staff, given the amount of abuse they suffer daily, and the sheer stress of volunteering to try and keep this community ticking along 24/7, but it's not playing favourites or any such nonsense like that. It's to stop our staff and managers from burning out, leaving, and going to farm sheep in the highlands in order to get some peace back in their lives!
So... hopefully you can see the difference now? For one, Vlad DIDN'T actually say what you thought he said, and for two, was acting in a managerial position giving an official standpoint, and the rules of conduct there are, as you'd expect, different. Thirdly, he was telling the truth about something that is factual. In your case, it may well have been true, but it was simply a breach of the rules to have said it publicly, in the way you did. QED.
If you do wish to come back, and assuming you've not already burned through a long bansheet already, please feel free to apply in the appropriate place. We have nothing to hide.
PC Harvey
"Armed Gun, Drop the Police!"
- Location
- London, UK
- Status