Andy Situation

Can we get clarification on why Andy doesn't have to pardon and just gets to keep his staff title after having proven to be a scammer in the past?

Seems biased, especially given the fact that Andy also fooled every staff member when he applied for his staff position claiming he had no scamming past. Being an admin & having a pattern of deception seems like a risky thing.

To be fair, Andy has been nothing but helpful in the past for me but I feel as staff should be transparent regarding this situation.

Thanks

 

Definitely agree, Andy still has access to very sensitive user information and staff tools that could be very damaging to the site. Why is he still admin?

 

What's even worse is the fact that they have hid the evidence of the 'scam' that andy apparently sent to the repayment fund from the public view, admins are suppose to be people we can trust, yet we can't even verify ourselves what it is that got him in this predicament to begin with.

 

I never understood the reasoning behind mods being able to hide everything and leave all the members in the "dark" with such things. Like the whole Runemetrix situation they only told us "he has a legit reason for not being around" but yet there is a STICKY in the report a scammer section that LITERALLY says -

"Going forward we will not be allowing private reports. Staff will not adjudicate cases in private. If there is sensitive information such as RSNs/Names/ID's/Etc you can reply to your thread with the information and delete the post to hide them."

Do not make edit history/private reports

I guess they get to pick and choose which reports stay hidden and what the public are able to view?

 

Richard let me quote some of the OG vets on this site responding to my confession of scamming/vading many years before earning a staff rank. Following my drama-filled post in 08, it was determined that I will be banned for causing an unfair treatment bitchathon. Honestly, it was the right move, and the site moved to the pardon system around three years later. I went through that and was allowed back following a staff vote.

Therefore, I have to ask did staff already know about Andy past actions? Did staff vote on this matter or was it a purely executive decision? And do you believe that any changes need to be made to improve the vetting process for staff?

Personally, I am one of the biggest supports of a second chance, but we need to ensure we remain fair for all users on the site therefore in your eyes what makes this situation different for the rest?

"Didn't know you very well if at all, but the fairest thing in my opinion would be for you to be de-modded and get a TWC." It's nice to see it confirmed now but I don't think you should be allowed to stay. If you'd gotten the original ban you deserved in the first place (just as every other scammer does), you would never have earned all that trust/respect and you wouldn't be here today in the middle of this conflict of interest. --Nullware

Hey man, you did come forward and admit it, but you gotta realize that the consequences for scamming are the same for everyone. This community relies heavily on trust, and when anyone (especially someone in a position of power) breaks that trust, they have to go. You're a good guy from what I know, but there can't be an exception for ya. -- R2Pleasent

TLDR: Ban Him, Make him go through a pardon, accept the pardon and move on like every other user.

 

Remove Andy from any staff position immediately

No one is going to REPAY a debt that they're not guilty of
Andy you've deceived this community as long as possible until proven guilty for something you did

Staff need people like @Wortel that will actually take the time out of their day to investigate each and every staff member to make sure they are not POS scamming loot goblins that lie to the whole community.

 

I don't know what the fuck is up, but i did read that it's 10 years old. Take a chill pill and calm the fuck down.

Ya all whine about every little thing. Stop whining and go do what youre all here for, business.

When shit hits the fan youre all screaming for Andy to come tell you his 10 cents or handle your report.

 

Now I know that by posting this, it's more than likely going to be held against me in future pardons but I agreed with some other users who encouraged me to do so.

I made some huge mistakes, that I regret wholeheartedly, and from doing so I lost everything. I lost my CDT position, I received a DNT, and I've been denied on both of my pardons thus far due to "only admitting once caught." Meanwhile, Andy only admitted to his wrongdoings once being caught as well.

Andy stripping me of my position on CDT:



President's explanation on why it's hard to trust me in rejoining the Sythe community:



I completely understand that my actions have consequences and with that being said, I completely understand that I have to endure said consequences. My concern is that Andy fits a similar (if not the same) situation and is allowed to repay with zero consequences. That just doesn't make sense, especially considering he's held to a higher standard than any other user.

The report was quickly redacted due to "sensitive information" which is understandable to some degree, but then how come when I requested numerous times for my sensitive information to be redacted, it still, to this day, is public?

The question I've been asked by numerous users: how is this fair, or just, in any capacity?

 

Ban him.

Make him pardon just like everyone else.

Make him apply for a pardon every 3 months for the next 2 years like everyone else.

That whole section of the forums has been a mess over the past week or two, who's next?

 

TL;DR - this website has lost all of its transparency which has led to a complete lack of trust in most staff members and the integrity of the website as a whole.




@BlackBlasses for admin. Joking, but serious

I'm outspoken when I need to be but also tend to stay out of situations like this as to not stir up any unnecessary drama. I know I'm going to have "posters remorse" as soon as I post this, but I feel like it needs to be said.


This would be a no-brainer demote and ban if the instance were recent. However, we've been told it was ten years ago (is that true? I’m supposed to just trust you at this point?) which makes handling it very challenging.


What is going on here? What has happened to this website, and its integrity and transparency [or obvious lack thereof]?

• A private scam report was made [that apparently was 100% legitimate], on someone who has the most authority on this website aside from the founder, and it was literally swept under the rug as if nothing happened. No details were shared, at all. Similar to the Gladiator situation, the public was left completely in the dark. However this time, no punishment occurred. Heck, the title of Andy's report was changed to "resolved" before you could even spell Andy.

Why was the title changed to resolved on a valid scam report?

• As he noted above, @tbh was banned in 2022 for scamming. He received a three month ban and has now had two of his DNT appeals declined, primarily because he only admitted to scamming when he got caught. Staff members, particularly as the highest ranking staff position on Sythe, are held to a special set of standards. TBH was a regular Sythe user and received the level of punishment that he did, yet an admin does the exact same thing, and subsequently receives a hall-pass while given the right to maintain his position?

• I'm not trying to air dirty laundry, but I've been on Sythe for 16+ years. Most of you were still eating baby food when my old ass joined the community. In that time, I've only ever had one RaS post made against me. Four years ago, I didn't return an account to a buyer who effectively attempted to paypal scam me. I ultimately made him whole, but received a 3 month "black hat" ban for it. I've since applied for mod and was declined because I "can't be trusted with mod tools." Frankly, I understood the decision and am not bitter about it. I’m just unsure how this decision can be justified without acknowledgement of extreme bias.

Why does Andy deserve different? He has ultimate ruling authority on RaS, he has access to every personal staff tool that exists. How can his judgement be trusted? How is he any different?

• Truthfully, I have nothing against Andy personally. I think he's been a phenomenal asset to the site since the day he took a staff position. All of our interactions have been pleasant and he's always been helpful in making my role as CDT Leader smooth when something is needed. I do think he's a good guy at the core, and don't necessarily think he's a risk as a staff member. However, plenty of people have received punishment on this website for having a lapse in judgement that did not define their character or moral compass, myself included.

It's as much about the principle as it is the way the report was handled.

The way this was handled just creates distrust in the community. It feels very biased, political, unfair, and displays tremendous favoritism.

If this were ANYONE else, they'd be banned/DNT'd. Case in point, IMO.


Note: Whether admitted or not, I'm sure that if I ever re-apply for a staff position that this will be used against me by some.
I'm here voicing my perspective, and that's all it is. Whether it is right or wrong is subject to interpretation, and we all have different views and moral compasses.

 

"Rules for thee but not for me" is a phrase used to describe a situation where someone insists on strict adherence to rules for others, but exempts themselves from having to follow those same rules. This type of behavior is often viewed as hypocritical and undermines the credibility of the person who engages in it.

When people in positions of power or authority engage in this behavior, it can lead to a loss of trust and respect among those they lead. It is important for individuals and organizations to hold themselves to the same standards that they expect from others, and to be consistent and fair in their application of rules and regulations.

It is true that some organizations and communities have strict policies and rules that they enforce consistently across all members. When these rules are violated, the consequences can be severe, such as being banned or having access to certain privileges revoked. However, it is important to recognize that different people can have different levels of power, influence, and privilege, and these factors can sometimes impact how rules are enforced and what consequences are imposed.

In some cases, those who hold positions of power or influence may receive more lenient treatment, while ordinary individuals may face more severe consequences for the same behavior. This can create a perception of unequal treatment and erode trust in the rules and the institutions that enforce them. It is important for organizations and communities to strive for fairness, impartiality, and consistency in their enforcement of rules, regardless of the status or background of those who violate them.

 

I was under the impression that this website viewed scamming as a cardinal sin.

"Well... if the murder was recent then a demotion would be warranted, but since it happened 10 years ago..."

At this point I'm not sure if rules really mean anything on this website any more. There appears to be a consistent pattern of... inconsistency. Contradictory rulings in particular are plaguing the integrity of this community.

 

You guys are seeing this from wrong POV. Mods just wanna tell you nice way that if you scammed 10+ years ago you can come clean and all you have to do is refund that money without DNT BAN or TWC also you can keep MOD/ADMIN status if you have one alredy ofc !!!. One and only golden ticket.

 

The staff on this website literally scam more than the users - i've seen 3 staff scam on reports in like 2 weeks

 

Well said, to me the ruling on this website has a lot of favoritism involved in it.

Let me present a scenario, lets say currently Andy was liked by most of the staff, maybe they are good friends and all get along.

Now imagine if instead of this, Andy was someone they didn't like that much, he instead earned his staff position from proving he makes a difference and is a good part of the website, I'm sure in this instance, the ruling may of been far different.

Where is the consistency? If another admin were to get caught for the same thing the verdict may of been far different. Not to mention, why are admins not being held to a higher standard?

 

Not up to speed on this situation but from what I've read it's not too surprising

Even in real life people in authority tend to bend the rules a bit for their friends or other people in power as we've seen from multiple other examples

We can just be glad Andy hasn't really done any other shifty things and has been overall helpful and positive since becoming staff

Also maybe there's a good reason Andy hasn't been demoted/banned aside from corruption. If you remember Gladiator, he got nuked like 3 days after becoming an admin so it's not like staff are partial towards admins.

Yeah it does suck that someone isn't getting punished for their wrongdoings in the past, but hey, what ya gonna do?

 

A judge, admin, police officer, etc etc are held legally to a far higher standard. Although criminal proceedings wouldn't take place, a judge would most certainly be stricken off if it was found he had previous criminal convictions.

Andy should not be an admin on this website, far too much money is at stake and you allowing this should be you presuming responsibility for the inevitable debt you'll place people in - in the long run.

 

When it comes to criminal liability, maybe. But when it comes to tort and contract law, in principle, statutes of limitations apply the same to everyone

 

We're not talking about criminal liability, we're talking about a person in a position of power who shouldn't be. Despite him not being *criminally liable* for the crime/scam, he should be stricken off as an occupational hazard - what makes this even more insane, is that @Sythe wouldn't take responsibility for @Andy in the long run, he's just keeping him in post on the premise it was 10 years ago.

I'll leave this with a quote I live by.
"A leopard never changes its spots, it just learns to adapt"