|
Login to ZARP
|
|
Kyber wrote:
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol |
|
|
Ex. Community Council Member Ex. SSRP Super Administrator Ex. Discord Administrator Ex. TeamSpeak Staff Ex. Forum Staff Rick Townsend
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Used to be a an asshole.
But has greatly improved his attitude over time and is nice guy now, |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires. Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Kyber wrote:
Rick Johnson wrote:
No one ever said that it is being overlooked, we're saying that 2 hours is basically nothing compared to 2 weeks Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
The following user said Thank You: schnitzel nazi
|
|
A Good Guitarist wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Rick Johnson wrote:
No one ever said that it is being overlooked, we're saying that 2 hours is basically nothing compared to 2 weeksKyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol No you are all over looking it apologies now |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
A Good Pianist wrote:
A Good Guitarist wrote:
Imagine being bad at your 1st language Kyber wrote:
Rick Johnson wrote:
No one ever said that it is being overlooked, we're saying that 2 hours is basically nothing compared to 2 weeksKyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol No you are all over looking it apologies now |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
The following users said Thank You: schnitzel nazi, AtomicLegend
|
|
Kyber wrote:
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol I mean my stance on his application is still neutral so I'm clearly not overlooking it. You're right in saying that racism is a serious offence, but given the circumstances, there's hardly any harm done - if any. If you can't differentiate between someone who is actually racist and someone who ignorantly used a racist term in a gang chat I have a hard time understanding why you have a lead team position in the first place. We clearly don't see eye-to-eye on this, but the grounds on which you want to deny him are kind of stupid given the circumstances in my opinion. |
|
|
Ex. Community Council Member Ex. SSRP Super Administrator Ex. Discord Administrator Ex. TeamSpeak Staff Ex. Forum Staff Rick Townsend
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s a reason racism had a zero tolerance tolerance policy, meaning it is strictly forbidden from the servers. We don’t see eye to eye on this issue, but racism should not be overlooked in any way due to the severity of the rule break, it’s recent, and I’d honestly take racism punishments more seriously when it comes to a staff team. Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol I mean my stance on his application is still neutral so I'm clearly not overlooking it. You're right in saying that racism is a serious offence, but given the circumstances, there's hardly any harm done - if any. If you can't differentiate between someone who is actually racist and someone who ignorantly used a racist term in a gang chat I have a hard time understanding why you have a lead team position in the first place. We clearly don't see eye-to-eye on this, but the grounds on which you want to deny him are kind of stupid given the circumstances in my opinion. |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Kyber wrote:
Rick Johnson wrote:
You're saying this as if he'd be going around saying racist shit on the server when he is a staff member when this is just not the case. I am in teamspeak with him more or less most or everyday, and I have only heard Jamie say something racist like once or twice over the past few months. I'll be honest, I am a racist guy but you don't see me going blaring all of that racist shit on the server. I really am a different person when I am staffing comparing to when I am talking with friends. I am pretty sure Jamie is the same as me. Kyber wrote:
There’s a reason racism had a zero tolerance tolerance policy, meaning it is strictly forbidden from the servers. We don’t see eye to eye on this issue, but racism should not be overlooked in any way due to the severity of the rule break, it’s recent, and I’d honestly take racism punishments more seriously when it comes to a staff team.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol I mean my stance on his application is still neutral so I'm clearly not overlooking it. You're right in saying that racism is a serious offence, but given the circumstances, there's hardly any harm done - if any. If you can't differentiate between someone who is actually racist and someone who ignorantly used a racist term in a gang chat I have a hard time understanding why you have a lead team position in the first place. We clearly don't see eye-to-eye on this, but the grounds on which you want to deny him are kind of stupid given the circumstances in my opinion. |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
The following user said Thank You: schnitzel nazi
|
|
Killed me while he was nuking while I was in spawn various times... |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Kyber wrote:
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s a reason racism had a zero tolerance tolerance policy, meaning it is strictly forbidden from the servers. We don’t see eye to eye on this issue, but racism should not be overlooked in any way due to the severity of the rule break, it’s recent, and I’d honestly take racism punishments more seriously when it comes to a staff team.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol I mean my stance on his application is still neutral so I'm clearly not overlooking it. You're right in saying that racism is a serious offence, but given the circumstances, there's hardly any harm done - if any. If you can't differentiate between someone who is actually racist and someone who ignorantly used a racist term in a gang chat I have a hard time understanding why you have a lead team position in the first place. We clearly don't see eye-to-eye on this, but the grounds on which you want to deny him are kind of stupid given the circumstances in my opinion. It is a severe rule break indeed, and that's something I've agreed on throughout this entire argument, however I don't get why you think a (1 week, 6 days and 22 hour(s)) punishment is more valid than a (2 week) punishment to the extent that it makes a difference. That's not how things work. I also disagree with the fact that you are completely ignorant of the difference between actual racist discrimination and a racist term used in a gang chat. |
|
|
Ex. Community Council Member Ex. SSRP Super Administrator Ex. Discord Administrator Ex. TeamSpeak Staff Ex. Forum Staff Rick Townsend
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Stoned wrote:
bad player, can't hit them. Talk about toxic? You blocked me because I hit you with my car and you lost your AWM in pubg and you were telling me to kms.Not 1 person is this community actually fucking likes you just piss off already please. rude, racist and all round toxic. either way, good luck |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s also consistency when it comes to someone’s punishments, I want to make sure someone can follow the rules before they become a staff member, there’s a reason recent punishments are brought up in meetings. That is to show if someone can consistently follow the rules, due to racism being a severe punishment, I would like to see another week in which he would obtain no punishments in to prove he can follow the rules. Who cares whether it’s two hours until it’s no longer recent? It should be accounted for when accepting new staff members Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s a reason racism had a zero tolerance tolerance policy, meaning it is strictly forbidden from the servers. We don’t see eye to eye on this issue, but racism should not be overlooked in any way due to the severity of the rule break, it’s recent, and I’d honestly take racism punishments more seriously when it comes to a staff team.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol I mean my stance on his application is still neutral so I'm clearly not overlooking it. You're right in saying that racism is a serious offence, but given the circumstances, there's hardly any harm done - if any. If you can't differentiate between someone who is actually racist and someone who ignorantly used a racist term in a gang chat I have a hard time understanding why you have a lead team position in the first place. We clearly don't see eye-to-eye on this, but the grounds on which you want to deny him are kind of stupid given the circumstances in my opinion. It is a severe rule break indeed, and that's something I've agreed on throughout this entire argument, however I don't get why you think a (1 week, 6 days and 22 hour(s)) punishment is more valid than a (2 week) punishment to the extent that it makes a difference. That's not how things work. I also disagree with the fact that you are completely ignorant of the difference between actual racist discrimination and a racist term used in a gang chat. |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Kyber wrote:
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s also consistency when it comes to someone’s punishments, I want to make sure someone can follow the rules before they become a staff member, there’s a reason recent punishments are brought up in meetings. That is to show if someone can consistently follow the rules, due to racism being a severe punishment, I would like to see another week in which he would obtain no punishments in to prove he can follow the rules. Who cares whether it’s two hours until it’s no longer recent? It should be accounted for when accepting new staff membersRick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s a reason racism had a zero tolerance tolerance policy, meaning it is strictly forbidden from the servers. We don’t see eye to eye on this issue, but racism should not be overlooked in any way due to the severity of the rule break, it’s recent, and I’d honestly take racism punishments more seriously when it comes to a staff team.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol I mean my stance on his application is still neutral so I'm clearly not overlooking it. You're right in saying that racism is a serious offence, but given the circumstances, there's hardly any harm done - if any. If you can't differentiate between someone who is actually racist and someone who ignorantly used a racist term in a gang chat I have a hard time understanding why you have a lead team position in the first place. We clearly don't see eye-to-eye on this, but the grounds on which you want to deny him are kind of stupid given the circumstances in my opinion. It is a severe rule break indeed, and that's something I've agreed on throughout this entire argument, however I don't get why you think a (1 week, 6 days and 22 hour(s)) punishment is more valid than a (2 week) punishment to the extent that it makes a difference. That's not how things work. I also disagree with the fact that you are completely ignorant of the difference between actual racist discrimination and a racist term used in a gang chat. It will be accounted for, we've accepted people with recent punishments in the past. My point is you don't only look at someone's punishment, one should also take into account the time of the punishment, the circumstances of the punishment, and so forth. I would think you'd know to analyze punishments and situations more in-depth, but I guess not. Looking at it in such a binary way is simply not how I determine a situation and/or the verdict of an application. |
|
|
Ex. Community Council Member Ex. SSRP Super Administrator Ex. Discord Administrator Ex. TeamSpeak Staff Ex. Forum Staff Rick Townsend
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
You don’t seem to understand that racism is a lot more severe of a punishment than the classic RDM punishment, so your first sentence is just unrelated to the context of the situation. And from your second sentence you are now making out that we should accept people with punishments for racism because it’s not a big deal? There was a zero tolerance policy for a reason buddy. And stop with the passive aggressiveness ffs , it doesn’t make you look big nor does it make your point more meaningful, it’s just purely unnecessary Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s also consistency when it comes to someone’s punishments, I want to make sure someone can follow the rules before they become a staff member, there’s a reason recent punishments are brought up in meetings. That is to show if someone can consistently follow the rules, due to racism being a severe punishment, I would like to see another week in which he would obtain no punishments in to prove he can follow the rules. Who cares whether it’s two hours until it’s no longer recent? It should be accounted for when accepting new staff membersRick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s a reason racism had a zero tolerance tolerance policy, meaning it is strictly forbidden from the servers. We don’t see eye to eye on this issue, but racism should not be overlooked in any way due to the severity of the rule break, it’s recent, and I’d honestly take racism punishments more seriously when it comes to a staff team.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol I mean my stance on his application is still neutral so I'm clearly not overlooking it. You're right in saying that racism is a serious offence, but given the circumstances, there's hardly any harm done - if any. If you can't differentiate between someone who is actually racist and someone who ignorantly used a racist term in a gang chat I have a hard time understanding why you have a lead team position in the first place. We clearly don't see eye-to-eye on this, but the grounds on which you want to deny him are kind of stupid given the circumstances in my opinion. It is a severe rule break indeed, and that's something I've agreed on throughout this entire argument, however I don't get why you think a (1 week, 6 days and 22 hour(s)) punishment is more valid than a (2 week) punishment to the extent that it makes a difference. That's not how things work. I also disagree with the fact that you are completely ignorant of the difference between actual racist discrimination and a racist term used in a gang chat. It will be accounted for, we've accepted people with recent punishments in the past. My point is you don't only look at someone's punishment, one should also take into account the time of the punishment, the circumstances of the punishment, and so forth. I would think you'd know to analyze punishments and situations more in-depth, but I guess not. Looking at it in such a binary way is simply not how I determine a situation and/or the verdict of an application. |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Kyber wrote:
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
You don’t seem to understand that racism is a lot more severe of a punishment than the classic RDM punishment, so your first sentence is just unrelated to the context of the situation. And from your second sentence you are now making out that we should accept people with punishments for racism because it’s not a big deal? There was a zero tolerance policy for a reason buddy. And stop with the passive aggressiveness ffs , it doesn’t make you look big nor does it make your point more meaningful, it’s just purely unnecessaryRick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s also consistency when it comes to someone’s punishments, I want to make sure someone can follow the rules before they become a staff member, there’s a reason recent punishments are brought up in meetings. That is to show if someone can consistently follow the rules, due to racism being a severe punishment, I would like to see another week in which he would obtain no punishments in to prove he can follow the rules. Who cares whether it’s two hours until it’s no longer recent? It should be accounted for when accepting new staff membersRick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s a reason racism had a zero tolerance tolerance policy, meaning it is strictly forbidden from the servers. We don’t see eye to eye on this issue, but racism should not be overlooked in any way due to the severity of the rule break, it’s recent, and I’d honestly take racism punishments more seriously when it comes to a staff team.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol I mean my stance on his application is still neutral so I'm clearly not overlooking it. You're right in saying that racism is a serious offence, but given the circumstances, there's hardly any harm done - if any. If you can't differentiate between someone who is actually racist and someone who ignorantly used a racist term in a gang chat I have a hard time understanding why you have a lead team position in the first place. We clearly don't see eye-to-eye on this, but the grounds on which you want to deny him are kind of stupid given the circumstances in my opinion. It is a severe rule break indeed, and that's something I've agreed on throughout this entire argument, however I don't get why you think a (1 week, 6 days and 22 hour(s)) punishment is more valid than a (2 week) punishment to the extent that it makes a difference. That's not how things work. I also disagree with the fact that you are completely ignorant of the difference between actual racist discrimination and a racist term used in a gang chat. It will be accounted for, we've accepted people with recent punishments in the past. My point is you don't only look at someone's punishment, one should also take into account the time of the punishment, the circumstances of the punishment, and so forth. I would think you'd know to analyze punishments and situations more in-depth, but I guess not. Looking at it in such a binary way is simply not how I determine a situation and/or the verdict of an application. No, I'm generally annoyed by your mindset. The fact that you won't consider the circumstances- nor the time of a punishment because of an old policy is stupid in my opinion. Also, I'm very aware of the severity of all the different punishments, and I've already said on multiple occasions that I'm not okay with the use of racist terms at all. However, I simply won't agree to the black and white image that somehow a private conversation within a gang is as serious as you make it out to be; you make it seem like it's somehow as serious as an actual racist person with malicious intent. Especially taking into account that it's literally two hours short of being two weeks old. |
|
|
Ex. Community Council Member Ex. SSRP Super Administrator Ex. Discord Administrator Ex. TeamSpeak Staff Ex. Forum Staff Rick Townsend
The topic has been locked.
The following user said Thank You: Micky
|
|
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
You obviously don’t see my point then or understand it, I’m done with this argument and it’s getting no where, if you actually want to sort this out then contact me on steam, the rest of this should stay off this thread. Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
You don’t seem to understand that racism is a lot more severe of a punishment than the classic RDM punishment, so your first sentence is just unrelated to the context of the situation. And from your second sentence you are now making out that we should accept people with punishments for racism because it’s not a big deal? There was a zero tolerance policy for a reason buddy. And stop with the passive aggressiveness ffs , it doesn’t make you look big nor does it make your point more meaningful, it’s just purely unnecessaryRick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s also consistency when it comes to someone’s punishments, I want to make sure someone can follow the rules before they become a staff member, there’s a reason recent punishments are brought up in meetings. That is to show if someone can consistently follow the rules, due to racism being a severe punishment, I would like to see another week in which he would obtain no punishments in to prove he can follow the rules. Who cares whether it’s two hours until it’s no longer recent? It should be accounted for when accepting new staff membersRick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s a reason racism had a zero tolerance tolerance policy, meaning it is strictly forbidden from the servers. We don’t see eye to eye on this issue, but racism should not be overlooked in any way due to the severity of the rule break, it’s recent, and I’d honestly take racism punishments more seriously when it comes to a staff team.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol I mean my stance on his application is still neutral so I'm clearly not overlooking it. You're right in saying that racism is a serious offence, but given the circumstances, there's hardly any harm done - if any. If you can't differentiate between someone who is actually racist and someone who ignorantly used a racist term in a gang chat I have a hard time understanding why you have a lead team position in the first place. We clearly don't see eye-to-eye on this, but the grounds on which you want to deny him are kind of stupid given the circumstances in my opinion. It is a severe rule break indeed, and that's something I've agreed on throughout this entire argument, however I don't get why you think a (1 week, 6 days and 22 hour(s)) punishment is more valid than a (2 week) punishment to the extent that it makes a difference. That's not how things work. I also disagree with the fact that you are completely ignorant of the difference between actual racist discrimination and a racist term used in a gang chat. It will be accounted for, we've accepted people with recent punishments in the past. My point is you don't only look at someone's punishment, one should also take into account the time of the punishment, the circumstances of the punishment, and so forth. I would think you'd know to analyze punishments and situations more in-depth, but I guess not. Looking at it in such a binary way is simply not how I determine a situation and/or the verdict of an application. No, I'm generally annoyed by your mindset. The fact that you won't consider the circumstances- nor the time of a punishment because of an old policy is stupid in my opinion. Also, I'm very aware of the severity of all the different punishments, and I've already said on multiple occasions that I'm not okay with the use of racist terms at all. However, I simply won't agree to the black and white image that somehow a private conversation within a gang is as serious as you make it out to be; you make it seem like it's somehow as serious as an actual racist person with malicious intent. Especially taking into account that it's literally two hours short of being two weeks old. |
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Kyber wrote:
Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
You obviously don’t see my point then or understand it, I’m done with this argument and it’s getting no where, if you actually want to sort this out then contact me on steam, the rest of this should stay off this thread.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
You don’t seem to understand that racism is a lot more severe of a punishment than the classic RDM punishment, so your first sentence is just unrelated to the context of the situation. And from your second sentence you are now making out that we should accept people with punishments for racism because it’s not a big deal? There was a zero tolerance policy for a reason buddy. And stop with the passive aggressiveness ffs , it doesn’t make you look big nor does it make your point more meaningful, it’s just purely unnecessaryRick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s also consistency when it comes to someone’s punishments, I want to make sure someone can follow the rules before they become a staff member, there’s a reason recent punishments are brought up in meetings. That is to show if someone can consistently follow the rules, due to racism being a severe punishment, I would like to see another week in which he would obtain no punishments in to prove he can follow the rules. Who cares whether it’s two hours until it’s no longer recent? It should be accounted for when accepting new staff membersRick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
There’s a reason racism had a zero tolerance tolerance policy, meaning it is strictly forbidden from the servers. We don’t see eye to eye on this issue, but racism should not be overlooked in any way due to the severity of the rule break, it’s recent, and I’d honestly take racism punishments more seriously when it comes to a staff team.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
A punishment for racism shouldn’t be overlooked, why on earth you want to overlook that is beyond me, regardless of how long after the meeting until it expires.Rick Johnson wrote:
Kyber wrote:
Nah, it’ll still be recent by like 2 hours I’m pretty sureRick Johnson wrote:
I think as long as you don't get any more punishments before the meeting you will have a shot at getting the position. I can't say I've talked or played with you in-game, but basing my opinion on your activity, application, and your recent punishment I'm going with a neutral stance for the time being. I'm open to you getting the position, but because of your recent ban (offline warning?) I can't currently support you fully. I think a warning for racism is a pretty serious punishment thoughGood luck! At the time of the meeting, this punishment won't actually be a recent punishment anymore though I mean that's a pretty binary mindset you have right there if you believe two hours will differ. I wouldn't count it, especially when taking Micky's comments into consideration lol I mean my stance on his application is still neutral so I'm clearly not overlooking it. You're right in saying that racism is a serious offence, but given the circumstances, there's hardly any harm done - if any. If you can't differentiate between someone who is actually racist and someone who ignorantly used a racist term in a gang chat I have a hard time understanding why you have a lead team position in the first place. We clearly don't see eye-to-eye on this, but the grounds on which you want to deny him are kind of stupid given the circumstances in my opinion. It is a severe rule break indeed, and that's something I've agreed on throughout this entire argument, however I don't get why you think a (1 week, 6 days and 22 hour(s)) punishment is more valid than a (2 week) punishment to the extent that it makes a difference. That's not how things work. I also disagree with the fact that you are completely ignorant of the difference between actual racist discrimination and a racist term used in a gang chat. It will be accounted for, we've accepted people with recent punishments in the past. My point is you don't only look at someone's punishment, one should also take into account the time of the punishment, the circumstances of the punishment, and so forth. I would think you'd know to analyze punishments and situations more in-depth, but I guess not. Looking at it in such a binary way is simply not how I determine a situation and/or the verdict of an application. No, I'm generally annoyed by your mindset. The fact that you won't consider the circumstances- nor the time of a punishment because of an old policy is stupid in my opinion. Also, I'm very aware of the severity of all the different punishments, and I've already said on multiple occasions that I'm not okay with the use of racist terms at all. However, I simply won't agree to the black and white image that somehow a private conversation within a gang is as serious as you make it out to be; you make it seem like it's somehow as serious as an actual racist person with malicious intent. Especially taking into account that it's literally two hours short of being two weeks old. Add me on Steam and we can discuss this further then. We can hopefully reach a fair conclusion there. |
|
|
Ex. Community Council Member Ex. SSRP Super Administrator Ex. Discord Administrator Ex. TeamSpeak Staff Ex. Forum Staff Rick Townsend
The topic has been locked.
|
|
You have a really short temper and a bad attitude at times. Fix it, and while you're at it, stop orbing car dealer during rich nukes.
|
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|
|
Heck yea
|
|
|
The topic has been locked.
|


