More promotions

[cosrob97]

If anyone steals after I endorse them, I'll (grudgingly) admit that I was wrong.

Pm'ed why I'm so un-intelligent.

 

[Dingo212]

Congrats to all of ya! Good luck and have fun while at it

 

[FireZ]

You guys voted to start a community vote. Isn't that biased in a way? Did I get any vote when I was banned for supposedly 'trolling'? Were there any votes for all the others that were banned when Sythe was in a bad mood?

Giving the community more power is what they want, how is that biased?

Thats called making a change that sythe users wanted....

 

[FaTaL Sh0t X]

if you're that unhappy about the promotions, just wait till they scam/self vouch again. if you're so sure it'll happen.

 

[blindkilla]

if you're that unhappy about the promotions, just wait till they scam/self vouch again. if you're so sure it'll happen.

I don't think they're worried about that. I think they're disputing the principle of the matter.

 

[Gurtaton]

You're not getting my point. You guys started a vote for only one person, all because he's an OMM, UE, a friend and a overall trusted guy.

A change, you say? A change that only happens to specific people that the staff likes? I remember you guys continuously saying 'Once a scammer, always a scammer.' I guess it's changed to, 'Once he's pardoned, never a scammer.'

Why do you think I protest? If you had been banned for something that was not stated in the rules, you'd be pretty angry too.

 

[Classics]

Giving the community more power is what they want, how is that biased?

Thats called making a change that sythe users wanted....

I was not around when this all took place but Nate seems like a pretty well known guy on these forums. I would imagine giving the community the choice would just make it seem as if the staff did not wan't to actually be the ones to bend the rules and give him a second chance but rather put it on the community. Now I don't know how trusted or respected Nate was at the time but I could see it being biased because of his stature on the forums and not based on the offence he had committed.

This is just my opinion witch probably does not mean much but I figured I would post it. I have nothing against Nate.

 

[FaTaL Sh0t X]

You're not getting my point. You guys started a vote for only one person, all because he's an OMM, UE, a friend and a overall trusted guy.

the fucked up thing about this is he was already banned n then they made the changes and he was aloud back. am i correct? most of them are enforced from a here on out type thing.

 

[FireZ]

He was allowed back due to HUGE contributions to the website, which none of you can deny.

 

[Ri¢h]

O congrats

 

[Gurtaton]

Now we're looking at contributions rather than the offense he committed? Classics brings up a very good point. What about other users? A lot of them have contributed a lot, but when they've committed one single mistake, they were denied a second chance. Sorry, but you can't hide the truth. Even those who weren't present during that time can work it out.

Also, you're not answering any of my other questions. Don't think you'll get off that easy.

 

It honestly comes down to politics, whether they like to admit it or not. If you're well-liked you get second chances (sometimes even staff). There's no point in trying to pass it off as their "contributions".

 

[FireZ]

It honestly comes down to politics, whether they like to admit it or not. If you're well-liked you get second chances (sometimes even staff). There's no point in trying to pass it off as their "contributions".

I dont vote for my friends just because they are my friends, I dont vote against my enemies just because they are my enemies ether.

I like to take everything into consideration and make a rational and logical decision to the best of my ability.

NEVER let your feelings get in the way of logical and rational decisions. I will be the first to banhammer any of my friends if they screw up and NOBODY on this website is close enough to me that I wouldn't hesitate to ban them if they messed up.

 

[Classics]

Untrue. In many cases, I've had to vote against those that I like and for those I dislike. I considered you a friend at one point, but had to vote against you because I thought you'd committed fraud. I don't consider Brendan or Nate friends, but I voted to promote them because I think that they've changed.

But that's you and not the community. If you give a well known and liked member a poll for the community to vote on, the chances are 95% of them are not going to vote based on the offence he committed but based on the fact that they like him or are friends with him. You can't rely on the community to make the better judgement in a case like that. Now if you had the community vote on a rule that had nothing to do with anyone at that time you could get a honest vote.

Again not saying Nate should be banned but I do think it should have been the staffs decision not the communities.

 

[Gurtaton]

http://sythe.org/showpost.php?p=7664198&postcount=114

You have a point there, but is it too difficult to take a second look at some cases?

Untrue. In many cases, I've had to vote against those that I like and for those I dislike. I considered you a friend at one point, but had to vote against you because I thought you'd committed fraud. I don't consider Brendan or Nate friends, but I support their promotions because I think that they've changed.

Did you guys have undeniable proof that Farcast did indeed commit fraud? It seems to me you were a bit hasty in your judgement. Sorry if I'm missing something.

I dont vote for my friends just because they are my friends, I dont vote against my enemies just because they are my enemies ether.

I like to take everything into consideration and make a rational and logical decision to the best of my ability.

NEVER let your feelings get in the way of logical and rational decisions. I will be the first to banhammer any of my friends if they screw up and NOBODY on this website is close enough to me that I wouldn't hesitate to ban them if they messed up.

Props to the speech, but if you think you've convinced anyone that you're intelligent, you're wrong. You banned some people based on predictions, possibilities and guesses. I don't need your fortune telling.

Sorry, but I don't think giving a second chance is one of your abilities. You hammer them for the most ridiculous reasons, and when people questioned you about it, you shrugged it all off and refused to accept the fact that you were wrong.

You can't please everyone. You're saying that it should be the staff's decision because we're less likely to harbor bias, but in the same post you're questioning the staff's decision-making. It's a paradox. We won't always make the most popular decisions, but I have confidence in our staff members' good intentions and intelligence.

The first sentence, I can agree with. But however, why did you give the fate of a member to the community, when the staff themselves said that not many people have the ability to think without any bias. Obviously, everyone who has traded with Nate would support him. Would you rather not give justice than attempt to please everyone?

Why stretch the rules to save one person? You also stretched it to keep me banned (by adding trolling to the rules). How do you justify that?

 

[Gurtaton]

Some, no. Hundreds, yes. Sythe.org has two general administrators and, up until the recent change, we were the only ones involved in high pardons. For a website with over 250,000 registered accounts, that's rather overwhelming, and it is very difficult to process each proclamation of change of heart.

230,873, to be precise. You mustn't forget that A LOT of members are banned so if I had to make a guess, I think about a 100K aren't hammered. And there's probably 10K people that are actually active. And then the number is further reduced because not everyone gets banned or posts disputes and pardon requests.

I know it's hard, and I appreciate all that you've done so far, but there are some issues that are dismissed frequently.

Long, convoluted story short: yes, in a less serious form than typical connotation of the word "fraud." I've never made a hasty decision. If you'd like more information, feel free to PM me.

I think I'll save you the trouble of having to do that. It's none of my business anyway.

I'd rather run a safe market, which is what Sythe.org is intended to be. I'll ban or promote a person if the action will facilitate that.

I'll stop cussing over it for now. The promotions might turn out to be good, but I'm not letting my hopes get too high.

Refer above for the first part. As for your ban, I honestly don't remember this. I have nothing against you and I believe Sythe requested the rule be added while I was revamping them; as I recall I was a global at the time and in no place to add rules unless requested by an admin.

I know. I was simply testing you to see what your answer would be. I still feel my ban was unjust, because unlike Chriscross, I did not cause so much drama at the time and kept a low profile. His actions got me banned along with him.

 

[FireZ]

Props to the speech, but if you think you've convinced anyone that you're intelligent, you're wrong. You banned some people based on predictions, possibilities and guesses. I don't need your fortune telling.

Feel free to point out specific users.

Sorry, but I don't think giving a second chance is one of your abilities. You hammer them for the most ridiculous reasons, and when people questioned you about it, you shrugged it all off and refused to accept the fact that you were wrong.

I enforce the rules, sorry you dont think anyone in the entire world should ever be banned.

 

[RsProd]

Finn --> Administrator & Staff Adviser ---> Great to see you back, you did a great job before, and I know you will again.

Pureown --> WoW Moderator ---> Haven't ever been in the WoW section, but congratz.

nonamekiller --> Runescape Moderator ---> Never dealt with you, congratz
Louis --> Runescape Moderator ---> Never had much to do with you, Gratz

plznate --> Market Moderator
Brendan W --> Community Moderator

Great choice, two of the nicest guys on Sythe, both are assets, and both I would trust with my money. Great promotions, they will both do an awesome job.

 

[Determinate]

Feel free to point out specific users.

I don't really want to pick sides, but a while ago in Rs2 General someone posted about the upcoming second vote for wildy which would be a 'no' vote. In his post, he stated something along the lines of "we should all DDoS the site so that people cannot vote 'no'".

I thought it was pretty obvious he was kidding, but you seemed to have banned him for 30 days anyway (if I remember correctly). I think that counts as a ban based on prediction, and I would argue it was an unfair ban. A simple mention of the possiblity of DDoSing shouldn't require such extreme action, be it precautionary or not.

I looked for the thread but couldn't find it anymore.

 

[Gurtaton]

Feel free to point out specific users.

http://www.sythe.org/showthread.php?t=926281

User was banned for writing a guide on how to steal. Although it's possible he might scam one day, nothing is said about this in the rules. If you don't even state it there, how are the members supposed to know what they aren't supposed to do? A temporary ban, even if it's a few months, would have been far more appropriate.

I don't really want to pick sides, but a while ago in Rs2 General someone posted about the upcoming second vote for wildy which would be a 'no' vote. In his post, he stated something along the lines of "we should all DDoS the site so that people cannot vote 'no'".

I thought it was pretty obvious he was kidding, but you seemed to have banned him for 30 days anyway (if I remember correctly). I think that counts as a ban based on prediction, and I would argue it was an unfair ban. A simple mention of the possiblity of DDoSing shouldn't require such extreme action, be it precautionary or not.

I looked for the thread but couldn't find it anymore.

This. Thank you, Determinate. It's pretty hard looking for old threads.

Will update if I find more...

I enforce the rules, sorry you dont think anyone in the entire world should ever be banned.

You don't enforce the rules, you make your own rules. And I'm also sorry that you don't even seem to understand me in the least.