Andy Situation

[MAGZ]

Inb4Sythe Posts.

@Yoshiki time is now.

 

[MAGZ]

We have a statute of limitations of ~10 years on this site (there is precedent for this). If the offences were newer then it would be another matter. After 10 years anything that comes to light can still attract a debt (repayment) but not usually a ban. If we didn't have this rule (as courts also do) you could just dig shit up from forever ago on anyone and hold it over them. I'm sure this will still attract endless drama.

Is there a rule that states this or like is it stated anywhere?

 

[Its all love]

Serious question here.

If somebody scammed in 2013, posted an appeal right now pleading for forgiveness and offered to repay his debts immediately, would you allow him to roam free on the website, apply for staff positions without any form of DNT/TWC/Consequences?

Andy has roamed free for 10 years doing just that, after committing a scam and essentially ban evading.

 

[xKylee]

Serious question here.

If somebody scammed in 2013, posted an appeal right now pleading for forgiveness and offered to repay his debts immediately, would you allow him to roam free on the website, apply for staff positions without any form of DNT/TWC/Consequences?

Andy has roamed free for 10 years doing just that, after committing a scam and essentially ban evading.

joopi scammed in excess of 15k, and repaid it back and was pardoned on request.

sure, he didn’t apply for mod but he is actively allowed to roam sythe again.

I’m sure he could apply for mod and be considered, giving he made amends.

 

[Its all love]

joopi scammed in excess of 15k, and repaid it back and was pardoned on request.

sure, he didn’t apply for mod but he is actively allowed to roam sythe again.

I’m sure he could apply for mod and be considered, giving he made amends.

What did he have to do to make ammends? Did he immediately pay funds back and was immediately released into the community? Or did he need to go through some sort of process?

Surely if he was a staff member (I don't know the guy) then he isn't anymore?

 

[xKylee]

What did he have to do to make ammends? Did he immediately pay funds back and was immediately released into the community? Or did he need to go through some sort of process?

Surely if he was a staff member (I don't know the guy) then he isn't anymore?

he requested a pardon, got told he had outstanding debt of 18k and paid it + interest and was pardoned By staff

edit: you can find his pardon and the unfolding of it here: Joopii - Making things right.

 

[Robiiiiin]

Funny thing is, all of you, almost litterly want to see any staff demoted at any given time, and you all gather up like snakes to dig up, and preasure people to come forward. Andy is elite staff and the guy you all want come save your ass or your friend when it dosn't go your way (Save as in; Second opinion any other staff's decision on a mather).

Let it go.

Get some hobbies.

 

[Laptop65]

Realistically if he was stripped of his rank, banned and given a DNT on return - he would eventually pardon and slowly re-gain his former status over time.

What's more important here? Making someone go through the motions of punishment for a 10+ year old offence or moving on from it?

A decade is a fucking long time for things to change in the world and in someone's life, never mind even in 1 year so much can change.

Andy should have come clean before, this is true. However the entire process of what people are demanding here just seems a waste of time when he would most likely be allowed back in, eventually re-join staff and be back where he is now.

 

[Sythe]

Serious question here.

If somebody scammed in 2013, posted an appeal right now pleading for forgiveness and offered to repay his debts immediately, would you allow him to roam free on the website, apply for staff positions without any form of DNT/TWC/Consequences?

Andy has roamed free for 10 years doing just that, after committing a scam and essentially ban evading.

in most cases yes, it would only attract a debt

 

[Its all love]

in most cases yes, it would only attract a debt

What if it transpired that said person had ban evaded several times over the course of that 10 years, gaining your trust?

 

[ChellBell]

We have a statute of limitations of ~10 years on this site (there is precedent for this). If the offences were newer then it would be another matter. After 10 years anything that comes to light can still attract a debt (repayment) but not usually a ban. If we didn't have this rule (as courts also do) you could just dig shit up from forever ago on anyone and hold it over them. I'm sure this will still attract endless drama.

If the statute of limitations is 10 years,
Why was TopMax banned and required to go through a pardon for scams over 10 years old-
TopMax DNT Pardon
TopMax

(He is banned now for exit scamming, but nonetheless the original ban and pardon were required for scams over 10 years old)

 

[Wellness]

We have a statute of limitations of ~10 years on this site (there is precedent for this). If the offences were newer then it would be another matter. After 10 years anything that comes to light can still attract a debt (repayment) but not usually a ban. If we didn't have this rule (as courts also do) you could just dig shit up from forever ago on anyone and hold it over them. I'm sure this will still attract endless drama.

Fair ruling, although it seems ironic this came to light when the situation benefited a member of staff. I'd assume outside of staff, no one knew this was a rule in place.

That being said, how do we address the lies/deceit on his application for staff? No repercussion there? It clearly asks about past/scamming and he knew about this issue and instead lied to every staff member for his benefit. This was way less than 10 years ago.

 

[Josh0is0here]

We have a statute of limitations of ~10 years on this site (there is precedent for this). If the offences were newer then it would be another matter. After 10 years anything that comes to light can still attract a debt (repayment) but not usually a ban. If we didn't have this rule (as courts also do) you could just dig shit up from forever ago on anyone and hold it over them. I'm sure this will still attract endless drama.

+1, for even posting on this thread. While many may not agree, it frankly doesn't matter as you call the shots. That said does this mean that pardons are only used for situations <10 years?

Also just for understanding, are categories still excluded from the 10yr statute of limation. For example blackhat activities, personal threats, etc. Lastly, do you view this ruling to be normal going forward or is each case simply a case-by-case matter?

 

[President]

I will just leave this here:

Write Your Unwritten Rules

 

[Rune_Dragon]

Funny thing is, all of you, almost litterly want to see any staff demoted at any given time, and you all gather up like snakes to dig up, and preasure people to come forward. Andy is elite staff and the guy you all want come save your ass or your friend when it dosn't go your way (Save as in; Second opinion any other staff's decision on a mather).

Let it go.

Get some hobbies.

Are we reading the same comments? They just want him to make a pardon.

 

[Leptin]

We have a statute of limitations of ~10 years on this site (there is precedent for this). If the offences were newer then it would be another matter. After 10 years anything that comes to light can still attract a debt (repayment) but not usually a ban. If we didn't have this rule (as courts also do) you could just dig shit up from forever ago on anyone and hold it over them. I'm sure this will still attract endless drama.

I’ve not seen a mention of this anywhere, also you are trying to apply real world situations to a forum where the admins work for free and are only incentivized financially from their own labor/services or from the clout they gain from being a part of the staff, meaning Andy (a previous ******* and *** evader) now has another opportunity to commit what he’s already done before. And now he has the ability to do it for possibly even bigger amounts since he is able to keep his staff position….

 

[owned]

We have a statute of limitations of ~10 years on this site (there is precedent for this). If the offences were newer then it would be another matter. After 10 years anything that comes to light can still attract a debt (repayment) but not usually a ban. If we didn't have this rule (as courts also do) you could just dig shit up from forever ago on anyone and hold it over them. I'm sure this will still attract endless drama.

Look, I’m not trying to be petty, and I’m certainly not trying to witch hunt Andy.


I’m addressing the overarching issues at play: the complete lack of transparency, consistency, and accountability that’s transpiring. My problem is more so in the way this is being handled, rather than Andy’s action that (apparently) occurred nine+ years ago.


You’re citing an arbitrary rule, that AFAIK isn’t written anywhere, as the only logic for your decision. Despite being extremely partial, it isn’t even valid based upon the logic you yourself provided.


Techie said and I quote, “considering this situation being nearly 10 years old, Andy will be repaying with no further punishment.”


Again, just using your words; he isn’t outside of the situationally created “statute of limitations” used to justify the situation.



Also - why was the title changed to “resolved” on a valid scam report?


Should every scam report with a repaid debt then also be changed to “resolved?” Why is he receiving preferential treatment; is it because he’s an admin?


The precedent being established here is extremely inequitable. You’re sending the message that someone can scam with no repercussion, and can then have mod tools abused preferentially to bury the report, as long as you’re staff or you wait long enough and don’t get caught.

 

[Laptop65]

Regardless of the outcome of this (although Richard has made his decision clear) it might be good to add something into the official rules about this "10 year statute of limitations rule" as it is the first I've heard of it until today.

 

[Juws]

So does the 10 year statute of limitation have a dollar amount? Or is safe to assume it doesn’t matter?

Andy’s situation was around $200, would the same outcome happen if this was $2000 or $20000?

I think the “rule” is vague.

 

[Laptop65]

So does the 10 year statute of limitation have a dollar amount? Or is safe to assume it doesn’t matter?

Andy’s situation was around $200, would the same outcome happen if this was $2000 or $20000?

I think the “rule” is vague.

Yes, also what if there's a threshold or different punishment for over a certain amount? A bigger punishment for $2000+ but turns out someone scammed (or admits to scamming) over 10+ years ago for $1999?

This sort of rule even with static thresholds being set will make things awkward and still lead to people abusing or loopholing it by maintaining within a certain threshold.