(May 11, 2018, 08:02 PM)Cherno Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly, a verbal warning which basically means no punishment whatsoever, not even weapon blacklist. I lagged out and ran into someone and was thus given a permanent warning and a vehicle blacklist for 4 hours, and this guy gets off with a verbal warning? You just proved my point, he got a verbal warning and no real consequences were faced.
You do realize you are still missing a lot of context. Was he complying? Did he understand what he did? Did he understand what he did wrong?
It’s easy to point fingers and say “they’re bias!” when in reality some people just aren’t asshats and don’t deserve harsh punishments.
Everytime someone gets a lesser punishment than their “same situation” they make these arguments and ignore all the context of the situations. The only lropf you have of this being abuse is that he got a lesser warning and MAY have a friendly relationship with the staff member. Of you want to do this to staff members, gather evidence and said it to HR. Don’t mke wild accusations because you feel you weren’t treated fairly.
Ps: Your PR showed limited context to the situation and actually shows you breaking Fearp by walking away from the shooter under gun point. If a staff member didn’t deal with it IG, it may have been denied due to your lack of evidence.
"You do realize you are still missing a lot of context. Was he complying? Did he understand what he did? Did he understand what he did wrong?
It’s easy to point fingers and say “they’re bias!” when in reality some people just aren’t asshats and don’t deserve harsh punishments."
Yeah, because disregarding me telling him that he is breaking the rules and him telling me to such his dick isn't being an asshat. Also, afterwards he didn't care about the fact that what he did was wrong and tried to blame it on me instead. So no, he did not comply, he did not understand what he did and he did not understand what he did wrong. He was "being an asshat" and definitely deserved SOME kind of punishment, which he did not get at all.
(May 11, 2018, 08:46 PM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ] (May 11, 2018, 08:02 PM)Cherno Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly, a verbal warning which basically means no punishment whatsoever, not even weapon blacklist. I lagged out and ran into someone and was thus given a permanent warning and a vehicle blacklist for 4 hours, and this guy gets off with a verbal warning? You just proved my point, he got a verbal warning and no real consequences were faced.
Ps: Your PR showed limited context to the situation and actually shows you breaking Fearp by walking away from the shooter under gun point. If a staff member didn’t deal with it IG, it may have been denied due to your lack of evidence.
It seems like you are trying to make up false arguments to bring down everything on Cherno, and false arguments are pretty wise here because people don't actually look up the things you state.
Cherno walked back because the guy who had the gun pointed at him told him to do so. Simple as. Oh, did I just expose you? Let's just say that you "didn't hear that and now you do".
Nice try mate.
(May 11, 2018, 10:35 AM)Faustin Wrote: [ -> ]Bullshit staff are more lenient towards their friends,
Myself and Rocket were, and still are, very good friends and 3/4 of my punishments were issued by him. Obviously there are some bad cookies who seen guilty of this, but such staff members have been removed from the team.
There's also been staff who left specifically because of the amount of staff bias occuring on this server
(May 11, 2018, 08:46 PM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ] (May 11, 2018, 08:02 PM)Cherno Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly, a verbal warning which basically means no punishment whatsoever, not even weapon blacklist. I lagged out and ran into someone and was thus given a permanent warning and a vehicle blacklist for 4 hours, and this guy gets off with a verbal warning? You just proved my point, he got a verbal warning and no real consequences were faced.
You do realize you are still missing a lot of context. Was he complying? Did he understand what he did? Did he understand what he did wrong?
It’s easy to point fingers and say “they’re bias!” when in reality some people just aren’t asshats and don’t deserve harsh punishments.
Everytime someone gets a lesser punishment than their “same situation” they make these arguments and ignore all the context of the situations. The only lropf you have of this being abuse is that he got a lesser warning and MAY have a friendly relationship with the staff member. Of you want to do this to staff members, gather evidence and said it to HR. Don’t mke wild accusations because you feel you weren’t treated fairly.
Ps: Your PR showed limited context to the situation and actually shows you breaking Fearp by walking away from the shooter under gun point. If a staff member didn’t deal with it IG, it may have been denied due to your lack of evidence.
All this talk about staff not being biased should not be coming from you, a notoriously toxic, biased and abusive staff member who got demoted for these very reasons. You even chose to change your username because you "couldn't take all the hate". We all know you're Soviethooves, who many remember as the staff member who was banning people left and right for no real reason.
Again with this whole bias thing when you simply didn't feel the outcome of your PR wasn't just? Well guess what: what happened, happened. Now instead of making a post and plauging the forums with this exhausted argument, you should contact or and bring this to their attention.
Please note that just because you don't like something, doesn't mean it's bias. You don't get to decide what's appropriate punishment, admins/mods do so know your place and accept reality.
(May 11, 2018, 10:12 PM)Theo Wrote: [ -> ]Again with this whole bias thing when you simply didn't feel the outcome of your PR wasn't just? Well guess what: what happened, happened. Now instead of making a post and plauging the forums with this exhausted argument, you should contact or and bring this to their attention.
Please note that just because you don't like something, doesn't mean it's bias. You don't get to decide what's appropriate punishment, admins/mods do so know your place and accept reality.
You seem to miss the whole point of my post, and frankly if you can't understand what I have been saying there's no point for me to try to explain it to you now. Your arguments are non existent, consisting of only telling me to get over it and that my concerns are not valid. This post was made to spread awareness of this issue, to get people to share their stories and opinons and for me personally to tell my story as well. This isn't an isolated case by any means and thus it is much better to get a discussion going than to make a report or similar and have it ignored. When the time comes and I feel like I want to, I will contact Enzyme and Overlewd. Right now I am only trying to get people's perspectives and to let them share their stories.
(May 11, 2018, 10:12 PM)Theo Wrote: [ -> ]Again with this whole bias thing when you simply didn't feel the outcome of your PR wasn't just? Well guess what: what happened, happened. Now instead of making a post and plauging the forums with this exhausted argument, you should contact or and bring this to their attention.
Please note that just because you don't like something, doesn't mean it's bias. You don't get to decide what's appropriate punishment, admins/mods do so know your place and accept reality.
Also, if this is so pointless, how come you don't have time to be an admin but have time to talk shit about my posts?
Also, here's a former staff member confirming the widespread bias that people like you dismiss as others simply not liking the outcomes of events.
https://limelightgaming.net/forums/thread-19872.html
(May 11, 2018, 06:20 PM)Cherno Wrote: [ -> ]Many have told me that the situation I presented was "vague". When they say this, they are not bringing new stories or perspectives into the discussion, nor do they respond to what I said. How come I make a PR with clear evidence, only to get the response that "This has been dealt with in-game" and have the perpetrator get off without any punishment. The admin who "dealt with it" is also a known friend of the perpetrator, so tell me again how it's fair? If I did what he did, I would not be back on the server for quite some time as I am sadly not friends with any admin and would thus get punished much harsher than the offender in this case.
You might as well just tag me. It was dealt with in-game accordingly, he was told to stop. Now friend or not it had nothing to do with bias. If you pull up his record you'd see that i've personally punished him in the past. I believe your arguments you're bringing up is because you are upset that he wasn't punished harsher, it's a situation based conclusion on each incident that happens in-game.
(May 11, 2018, 09:36 PM)Cherno Wrote: [ -> ] (May 11, 2018, 08:46 PM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ] (May 11, 2018, 08:02 PM)Cherno Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly, a verbal warning which basically means no punishment whatsoever, not even weapon blacklist. I lagged out and ran into someone and was thus given a permanent warning and a vehicle blacklist for 4 hours, and this guy gets off with a verbal warning? You just proved my point, he got a verbal warning and no real consequences were faced.
You do realize you are still missing a lot of context. Was he complying? Did he understand what he did? Did he understand what he did wrong?
It’s easy to point fingers and say “they’re bias!” when in reality some people just aren’t asshats and don’t deserve harsh punishments.
Everytime someone gets a lesser punishment than their “same situation” they make these arguments and ignore all the context of the situations. The only lropf you have of this being abuse is that he got a lesser warning and MAY have a friendly relationship with the staff member. Of you want to do this to staff members, gather evidence and said it to HR. Don’t mke wild accusations because you feel you weren’t treated fairly.
Ps: Your PR showed limited context to the situation and actually shows you breaking Fearp by walking away from the shooter under gun point. If a staff member didn’t deal with it IG, it may have been denied due to your lack of evidence.
All this talk about staff not being biased should not be coming from you, a notoriously toxic, biased and abusive staff member who got demoted for these very reasons. You even chose to change your username because you "couldn't take all the hate". We all know you're Soviethooves, who many remember as the staff member who was banning people left and right for no real reason.
At no point I said I wasn’t in a position where I wasn’t toxic and abusive? I never condone my actions and took the consequences that I was given.
Not to mention this is about picking favorites with staff, which has nothing to do with the warnings I was given.
I need you to stop trying to be rude and inconsiderate and actually start giving good points to your arguments so we can have a beneficial discussion.
Also, where do you hear I changed my name to avoid all the hate? I never at any point made that note and i think you’re just trying to get a rise out of me at this point because your defense in this sitution is crackling due to your lack of evidence to this being a bias confrontation.
(May 11, 2018, 09:27 PM)ZooM Wrote: [ -> ] (May 11, 2018, 08:46 PM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ] (May 11, 2018, 08:02 PM)Cherno Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly, a verbal warning which basically means no punishment whatsoever, not even weapon blacklist. I lagged out and ran into someone and was thus given a permanent warning and a vehicle blacklist for 4 hours, and this guy gets off with a verbal warning? You just proved my point, he got a verbal warning and no real consequences were faced.
Ps: Your PR showed limited context to the situation and actually shows you breaking Fearp by walking away from the shooter under gun point. If a staff member didn’t deal with it IG, it may have been denied due to your lack of evidence.
It seems like you are trying to make up false arguments to bring down everything on Cherno, and false arguments are pretty wise here because people don't actually look up the things you state.
Cherno walked back because the guy who had the gun pointed at him told him to do so. Simple as. Oh, did I just expose you? Let's just say that you "didn't hear that and now you do".
Nice try mate.
I don’t understand the need for being so aggressive? You corrected me and i still hold my position. I see little reason for this situation being abusive or a sitution where staff have been bias, especially when these 26 has actually punished Toro in the pst.
(May 11, 2018, 09:36 PM)Cherno Wrote: [ -> ] (May 11, 2018, 08:46 PM)Gungranny Wrote: [ -> ] (May 11, 2018, 08:02 PM)Cherno Wrote: [ -> ]Exactly, a verbal warning which basically means no punishment whatsoever, not even weapon blacklist. I lagged out and ran into someone and was thus given a permanent warning and a vehicle blacklist for 4 hours, and this guy gets off with a verbal warning? You just proved my point, he got a verbal warning and no real consequences were faced.
You do realize you are still missing a lot of context. Was he complying? Did he understand what he did? Did he understand what he did wrong?
It’s easy to point fingers and say “they’re bias!” when in reality some people just aren’t asshats and don’t deserve harsh punishments.
Everytime someone gets a lesser punishment than their “same situation” they make these arguments and ignore all the context of the situations. The only lropf you have of this being abuse is that he got a lesser warning and MAY have a friendly relationship with the staff member. Of you want to do this to staff members, gather evidence and said it to HR. Don’t mke wild accusations because you feel you weren’t treated fairly.
Ps: Your PR showed limited context to the situation and actually shows you breaking Fearp by walking away from the shooter under gun point. If a staff member didn’t deal with it IG, it may have been denied due to your lack of evidence.
All this talk about staff not being biased should not be coming from you, a notoriously toxic, biased and abusive staff member who got demoted for these very reasons. You even chose to change your username because you "couldn't take all the hate". We all know you're Soviethooves, who many remember as the staff member who was banning people left and right for no real reason.
iirc, the majority of his warnings were for keeping things IC and letting RPs continue, as opposed to banning people. No idea where you got the notion of "banning people left and right for no real reason." from?
(May 12, 2018, 01:40 AM)26 Wrote: [ -> ]"It was dealt with in-game accordingly, he was told to stop."
What a great punishment, why hasn't the criminal justice system adopoted this yet?
Most CJS's have adopted that in some form or another?
Not all infractions require punishment, not all infractions are the same, and never should all infractions be handled identical to each other as each situation is unique.
Bob intentionally runs over 15 people and is punished
Bill accidentally runs over 1 person, does not notice, and keeps driving, Bill is punished as severely as Bob.
Doesn't really line up does it?
In the end accusations of Bias are just that, Accusations.
Until you can prove any of your claims, your claims, as well as anyone elses are basicly without merit until they can back them.
Much like how rules are enforced, it does not matter if 30 people all say Bob did a thing, unless there is evidence to PROVE he did it, no action will be taken, nor should any action be taken unless said evidence can be provided, and be legitimate.
Accusations of bias are not the same as proven bias, of which in my time on LL within the community as a whole, I have only seen cases of true bias crop up on a rare occasion, generaly from the same group of linked people.