Forum

Login to ZARP

Forum

[SSRP] Micky's Punishment Appeal

View BBCode Back »

Clarky wrote:

Micky wrote:

Clarky wrote:

Warning: Spoiler! [ Click to expand ]

Micky wrote:

Clarky wrote:

Micky wrote:

Clarky wrote:

Markus Chellwigg wrote:

Clarky wrote:

Markus Chellwigg wrote:

Clarky wrote:

I shouldn't have to repeat myself but I'll say it again, the staff's word is final because things was getting way out of hand and you disregarded what I said completely

The staff word may be final, but when what the staff member is saying is a bullshit message that has no grounds normally, they should be able to speak up against it. The fact you all use "staff word is final" as an excuse shows that your argument is flawed and you're using it to save face.

Even if my argument was flawed, the matter of the fact is that i requested for what was being said to be stopped but it wasn’t stopped so what could I realistically do at that point? I’ve been told this was the right thing to do as well so I’m not in the wrong for this according to others including myself but you can think otherwise which is fine

So you are admitting that even when staff members are wrong, theyre right because their word is final? Okay buddy.
Not only this, what about that whole incident a while ago involving morgan where it was AGREED that simply mentioning cm banned members names is fine. Care to explain?

I'm fine when it comes to mentioning a CM banned member normally but there's an extent to where it becomes out of control and that is why I asked twice for it to be stopped but was ignored
Besides Micky can give me a message on TS and I'll be more than happy to discuss it on there with him so it will give him a better understanding since this situation can be resolved within minutes rather than rambling on the forums on who is right and wrong.

I'd rather this be public, it is not only I that requires a good reasoning behind these issues. Think of it as a more practical way of spreading the message to everyone affected and not just me.

I understand that, I meant actually having a voice discussion because it's so much better to get your reasoning across and in the outcome we will of course mention everything that was spoken about. Anyhow, I have been in touch with Richard and left him a message.

It's much easier to remember what you're saying as well as having a point of reference in written form, but to be fair I can see how the rule works for and against you due to how it was written.

The main concern for me was that you ignored two of my verbal warnings in OOC to those who kept the discussion going on because it was starting to get out of hand IMO, which in the SSRP rules you should listen to the staff's final word. Sure you might've missed those messages or ignored them, but that is mainly why I handed out the punishment because I don't really punish people for this sort of stuff at all and always tried to defuse the discussion or whatever is going on before handing out mutes and what not.

But from reading the TOU, there was no need to intervene. I explained what I mean by the TOU is poorly worded to Sally. Read that post and hopefully you'll see our side to why we believe TOU was not broken and intervention was not needed.

I did read every post and I am partially at fault since all I did was say "Read TOU" without properly directing you but I felt as if the discussion was just getting way out of control regardless. If you had a problem with me interfering you could of informed a different member of the Community Team about this and it would've gone on from there but I instead punished you because of my two warnings not being followed by you which has now caused some controversy.

Can you actually tell us at what point it got out of hand?

BBCode

[quote="Clarky" post=1196911][quote="Micky" post=1196910][quote="Clarky" post=1196904][spoiler][quote="Micky" post=1196902][quote="Clarky" post=1196900][quote="Micky" post=1196876][quote="Clarky" post=1196794][quote="Markus Chellwigg" post=1196789][quote="Clarky" post=1196788][quote="Markus Chellwigg" post=1196786][quote="Clarky" post=1196784]I shouldn't have to repeat myself but I'll say it again, the staff's word is final because things was getting way out of hand and you disregarded what I said completely[/quote]
The staff word may be final, but when what the staff member is saying is a bullshit message that has no grounds normally, they should be able to speak up against it. The fact you all use "staff word is final" as an excuse shows that your argument is flawed and you're using it to save face.[/quote]
Even if my argument was flawed, the matter of the fact is that i requested for what was being said to be stopped but it wasn’t stopped so what could I realistically do at that point? I’ve been told this was the right thing to do as well so I’m not in the wrong for this according to others including myself but you can think otherwise which is fine[/quote]
So you are admitting that even when staff members are wrong, theyre right because their word is final? Okay buddy.
Not only this, what about that whole incident a while ago involving morgan where it was AGREED that simply mentioning cm banned members names is fine. Care to explain?[/quote]
I'm fine when it comes to mentioning a CM banned member normally but there's an extent to where it becomes out of control and that is why I asked twice for it to be stopped but was ignored
Besides Micky can give me a message on TS and I'll be more than happy to discuss it on there with him so it will give him a better understanding since this situation can be resolved within minutes rather than rambling on the forums on who is right and wrong.[/quote]
I'd rather this be public, it is not only I that requires a good reasoning behind these issues. Think of it as a more practical way of spreading the message to everyone affected and not just me.[/quote]
I understand that, I meant actually having a voice discussion because it's so much better to get your reasoning across and in the outcome we will of course mention everything that was spoken about. Anyhow, I have been in touch with Richard and left him a message.[/quote]
It's much easier to remember what you're saying as well as having a point of reference in written form, but to be fair I can see how the rule works for and against you due to how it was written.[/quote][/spoiler]
The main concern for me was that you ignored two of my verbal warnings in OOC to those who kept the discussion going on because it was starting to get out of hand IMO, which in the SSRP rules you should listen to the staff's final word. Sure you might've missed those messages or ignored them, but that is mainly why I handed out the punishment because I don't really punish people for this sort of stuff at all and always tried to defuse the discussion or whatever is going on before handing out mutes and what not.[/quote]
But from reading the TOU, there was no need to intervene. I explained what I mean by the TOU is poorly worded to Sally. Read that post and hopefully you'll see our side to why we believe TOU was not broken and intervention was not needed.[/quote]
I did read every post and I am partially at fault since all I did was say "Read TOU" without properly directing you but I felt as if the discussion was just getting way out of control regardless. If you had a problem with me interfering you could of informed a different member of the Community Team about this and it would've gone on from there but I instead punished you because of my two warnings not being followed by you which has now caused some controversy.[/quote]
Can you actually tell us at what point it got out of hand?

Forum

[SSRP] Micky's Punishment Appeal

Time to create page: 0.077 seconds