http://royals.ms/forum/showthread.php?t=10402 First off, not to be a dick but, I don't know these people and I don't care about them nor do I seek to alter any decisions made by the GMs in this particular matter. I just wanted to say that I feel this situation was constructed for the sole reason to get someone banned and I feel this is wrong. And the way it happen (according to the SS alone) the whole thing is a harassment it self. From those two screen shots alone, I can't see how EpicKiwi is harassing them. In my opinion admitting to those two phrases off context and under pressure isn't proof of harassment. Most people will admit to anything under pressure just to be left alone. Also if that was harassment then what about "SaggyAss: Little Wimp"? Isn't that harassment too? Or what about PerkyAss shushing SaggyAss when he/she asked for an apology? It is clear that these people constructed a situation where they tried to get this other dude banned which I feel is bad. I don't want to be part of a community of dicks, but I don't want to be part of a community where people seek out reasons or make it their mission to report others either. Just wanted to get this off my chest. Don't hate if we have different opinions. :nyan:
When i first read that thread i found it odd that they didnt SS the original argument, if you were being harrased so badly why didnt you screenshot it to begin with? Why did you have to act like assholes to get an asshole to admit what he did? I found the whole thread stupid, they may not have called him as bad of names as he called them but i found they harassed him as well while trying to get him to admit what he did. Both parties were wrong.
If you look at the SS, the GM responded by saying that's when they had to SS in order for the staff to do anything. That implies that they didn't SS it earlier on since they probably weren't aware of the procedure. And because they didn't SS it, they obviously had to seek out proof that he did call them those names, by asking him to admit it so that they can SS it. How else do you suggest they go about it? Please don't jump to hasty conclusions especially when it concerns the reputation of certain players.
I would like to know what led to kiwi's strong language. I seriously doubt that he simply chose somebody to harass and would not allow saggy and perky to remove themselves from the situation. Perhaps the rules of the server and my personal views do not entirely overlap, but it seems that if the responsibility lies with both parties not to engage in a negative exchange, then it would require both parties to fail in that for one to occur. Perhaps this is a situation in which saggy and perky were entirely blameless and kiwi would not allow them to remove themselves from what he was doing that offended them, but that seems quite unlikely.
Err...seeing how I was a witness to 2 situations related to EpicKiwi, perhaps I can shed some light here. 2 days ago, EpicKiwi harassed my friend in the FM after she was telling someone "what is a cheap price for selling tele rocks". Kiwi threw swears such as "shut the fuck up" and followed her around with more hate. I was at her house at the time and she recently bought a new computer, but no matter how much she pushed scroll lock, we couldn't find the Folder that held the SSs. The harassment was then washed away from FM spam :/ Later that day when I went home, I was on my Spearman and wanted to do some grinding. I came upon Perky, Saggy and Kiwi in a heated conversation and realized something must've happened too. They explained to me that the when they decided it would be best to report him, the convo was lost because of their tolerance. I find that to be perfectly reasonable, since everyone DOES have a limit, especially them since there are still people out there who find gay marriage to be a satan summoning ritual. Sure, they used methods that DO seem like harassment, but think about it. Even if haters hate, the hate comments can really make you snap. That's what happened here. They snapped, wanted to get the guy, but their proof was gone. It's just a matter of how you see it. Again, they just wanted him to admit to his crime. Also if you notice in the SS I posted in the thread, I captured it the moment he said "Fuck off" to Perky. It's not because I have insane reflexes or whatever, it's because I knew it was coming.
I don't have proof of Perky/Saggy's situation but from being a witness of a close friend, anything sets him off. No idea why. My friend just offered advice to a seller spamming in FM, he comes along and says "STFU" twice, and tells her off saying he sold it for more(tele rocks are seriously 1m each no room for discussion). From what Perky told me, he came into the map cheering for Holland, Perky cheered too, Kiwi says girls can't like sports/ calls them "D suckers", they correct him that they're lesbians but in a jokingly manner, Kiwi changes it to "(Another word for cat) lickers", and then it just all fell from there.
Well, it sounds like a 3 day ban is not at all adequate for such an unstable individual. That being said, I still entirely agree with the thread starter. Saggy and perky were harassing kiwi. A clever and potentially thought provoking edit: To accommodate situations like these I suggest the following change to the T&C: Don't hack or abuse bugs/glitches. Don't abuse voting for NX. Don't pretend to be a member of staff. Don't smega in languages other than English. Don't post ban appeals or other support threads/guides/etc on the forum in languages other than English. Don't scam other players. Don't harrass other players.(unless you were offended by something another player said) Don't spam. Don't use racial or homophobic slurs in all chat or smegas. Don't advertise or recruit for other servers. Don't share your account. And last, but not least--as Will Wheaton says: Don't be a dick.
(For what it's worth I have seen and bought tele rocks for 1.5mil. Unrelated, but just putting it out there. XD)
I can't blame them for what they did. He harrassed them and then they found out that they needed proof that he had said it. So they got that proof. Maybe when he returns in 2 - 3 days, he'll make less sexist stereotyping/ homophobic jokes to people he doesn't know.
Nothing he said was the least bit homophobic or sexist. You could argue that it was harassment, but absolutely NOTHING in there was homophobic or sexist. "Dick sucker" and "Pussy licker" are vulgar, but that is all. Also it seems like the two who ganged up on him harassed him too. He asked to be left alone, and they did not comply. Hardly seems like they should be acting entirely innocent.
Actually "D/P suck/lickers" weren't all, if you refer back to the SS Perky posted, she asked the question "Do you think we should be legal", which refers to gay marriage/couples in general. Since she asked this, doesn't that imply he gave them a different answer than before?
TIL "shut the fuck up" and "fuck off" are bannable offenses. This is middle school shit. Also, lol @ not finding the SS folder. Edit: So now if you're against gay marriage means you're a homophobic satanist which means you get auto banned? Freedom of thought works both ways, you know.
If you are getting harrased and call a gm about it you should be smart enough to ss it. I understand that they were probably really angry and trying hard to get him to admit it it happends but they are reporting someone for harrasment that they just harassed. In the screenshots they posted both parties are wrong:S
Freedom of thought and opinion is the freedom to believe, state, and advocate an attitude or perspective without infringing on the rights of others. By being a discriminatory asshat, you are infringing on the rights of others and therefore not entitled to your opinion. Is this such a difficult concept to understand? Here's an example of an opinion I do not agree with, but does not infringe my personal rights and freedoms: sweetcorn on pizza is good. Here's an example of an opinion I do not agree with, AND infringes someone else's personal rights and freedoms, hence invalidating the opinion in its entirety: black people should not be allowed to hold public office. ANYWAY, in direct response to OP, while I too am tired of seeing reports such as these (this was a report filed against someone whose only "offense" in said report was broadcasting a smega that was not in English), and while this report was poorly crafted, let me say this: you can do absolutely nothing wrong by believing and trusting the victim of abuse. When you want to "stand back" and "act neutral" to "hear both sides of the story", you are playing directly into the abuser's hands. That is not to say that we as a community should start playing whack-a-mole with the banhammer, but that we need to make it clear that the behavior that the abuser in the report you mentioned is NOT to be tolerated in our community, and the burden of proof (or disproof, if you will) should be on the accused, not the accusers, particularly when dealing with issues of blatant prejudice against a certain group of people.
You don't understand what freedom of speech is. Freedom of speech is the notion that you're allowed to have any opinion and you're allowed to voice that opinion without fear of the state persecuting you or authority-condoned vigilante action. That being said, people may form a negative opinion of you and freely discriminate against you within the bounds of the law. There are exceptions in many countries limiting freedom of speech however. And regarding your example, acting on any beliefs which go against laws against the state is not a part of the notion of "freedom of speech".
| v Whether it infringes the rights of others or not, it's still an opinion and part of freedom of speech. Not saying it should be applied as a norm, nor taken into law, but your personal disagreements don't "invalidate" others' beliefs.
