So, by your own admission, his behaviour was sub-par for the norm. If it really wasn't that bad, revoke the ban (I guess it's ended now anyway) and someone from the admin team apologise.
It would be nice to hear some more admin reflections on this whole hullabaloo.
I think, a whole lot of people are freaking out over a 3 day banning of an entire mud, on IMC, for being abusive.
So far most of the 'in his defence' statements I've received are "in this instance he wasn't being nearly as abusive as he normally is". Heh.
There, corrected that for you.
BTW, was the reason he banned an entire mud from IMC because he couldn't work out how to only ban Crat (I notice from the logs there's now only a Cratban)?
… that alone smacks of incompetency if you ask me…
I never understood why people put so much stock in apologies. They don't change anything at all, and I don't think anyone should make one now. Our time is far better spent identifying and addressing the real problem than by playing macho blame-placing and dick-measuring games. Maybe it's still too soon for that.
I never understood why people put so much stock in apologies. They don't change anything at all, and I don't think anyone should make one now. Our time is far better spent identifying and addressing the real problem than by playing macho blame-placing and dick-measuring games. Maybe it's still too soon for that.
Yea, thats the spirit… let them march right on, forget common decency and manners, ignore the lessons that should be learned from this and continue to make the same mistakes again.
That would actually be the exact oppposite of what I just said. Common decency and manners? We will never agree on what exactly those things are, but we can at least agree on how we should treat each other. Thus the identifying the problem bit. But thanks for ignoring that part and just reading the part where you saw something you didn't like. :)
07 Jun, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 10th comment:
Votes: 0
Koron said:
Common decency and manners? We will never agree on what exactly those things are, but we can at least agree on how we should treat each other.
Wait, what? How can we possibly agree on how we should treat each other if we can never agree on manners and decency?
That would actually be the exact oppposite of what I just said. Common decency and manners? We will never agree on what exactly those things are, but we can at least agree on how we should treat each other. Thus the identifying the problem bit. But thanks for ignoring that part and just reading the part where you saw something you didn't like. :)
Well I wasn't disagreeing with the second part, the first part /is/ important however. An apology can often appease an affected party, and smooth the way for further insights in to the exact problem: often talking with the other side can result in a better outcome.
So yes, I chose what part of your comment to respond to, but only because it was the part I disagreed with :P
Well I wasn't disagreeing with the second part, the first part /is/ important however. An apology can often appease an affected party, and smooth the way for further insights in to the exact problem: often talking with the other side can result in a better outcome.
The actual affected party here has been rather civil (if uncharacteristically quiet) about the whole thing. My problem with apologies is the common pigheaded response of "I won't proceed with anything constructive until the other party apologizes to me." This is not constructive. Otherwise, yeah, I agree that they can help, but an apology given in response to the demand for one won't be authentic, so what would it add?
Well I wasn't disagreeing with the second part, the first part /is/ important however. An apology can often appease an affected party, and smooth the way for further insights in to the exact problem: often talking with the other side can result in a better outcome.
The actual affected party here has been rather civil (if uncharacteristically quiet) about the whole thing. My problem with apologies is the common pigheaded response of "I won't proceed with anything constructive until the other party apologizes to me." This is not constructive. Otherwise, yeah, I agree that they can help, but an apology given in response to the demand for one won't be authentic, so what would it add?
A public acknowledgement of a fault recognised and willing to be corrected?
After all, this is a public place, as is IMC, and an apology would send the message out to the community that the admins acted in haste and would not treat others like that. I think one would be very beneficial.
The actual affected party here has been rather civil (if uncharacteristically quiet) about the whole thing.
The IMC2 admininistration has decided that I'm not worth listening to in general, so there's no convincing to do in that direction. This is not an exaggeration, BTW, this is actual documented fact. I can try to dig up the logs of Davion coming right out and saying so, but I'm sure it's not especially hard to believe so I'll just leave it at that.
That being the case, and since I've been a bit busy with RL lately, I've mostly limited myself to sharing the facts as I know them with the log and screencaps.
Evidently this is enough to have most people conclude pretty much what I concluded: the ban was rash and premised on a self-serving arbitrary interpretation of a newly-modified rule that has little practical chance of being enforced consistently.
As intentionally obnoxious as Koron is being, I agree that what makes most sense is to talk about how to prevent this in a future. I suppose the simplest answer is to permaban me, but I suspect this is not the most effective answer, since the administration is now left with a policy and precedent that makes IMC2 even more nannified than MB, which really doesn't make sense.
I'm sorry you feel that I'm being intentionally obnoxious, and I definitely don't think keeping you banned forever is simple, nor is it the right thing to do.
An apology can often appease an affected party, and smooth the way for further insights in to the exact problem: often talking with the other side can result in a better outcome.
An apology you have to ask for (much less demand) is not an apology. More accurately, it's like a bad check. It's still a check, but it's not worth any money. What's the point?
Dialogue can accomplish the things you listed without being forced or false.
An apology can often appease an affected party, and smooth the way for further insights in to the exact problem: often talking with the other side can result in a better outcome.
An apology you have to ask for (much less demand) is not an apology. More accurately, it's like a bad check. It's still a check, but it's not worth any money. What's the point?
Dialogue can accomplish the things you listed without being forced or false.
QFT
It is a sorry state of affairs that one has to even ask :shrug:
I think, a whole lot of people are freaking out over a 3 day banning of a single user, on IMC, for being abusive.
So far most of the 'in his defence' statements I've received are "in this instance he wasn't being nearly as abusive as he normally is". Heh.