Infractions deemed 'Private'.

Okay, so it was a mistake. Incompetence in the truest sense. No offense, im not trying to burn bridges... but this was what i was trying to establish all along- nothing more nothing less.

Mistakes are not an indication of incompetence.

 

[criterion]

Mistakes are not an indication of incompetence.

Given the nature of my past infraction(s) - swallow your own words.

Perhaps you're the incomptent one for failing to comply with the rules of the website in the first place.

No offense.

 

Given the nature of my past infraction(s) - swallow your own words.




No offense.

Disobeying the rules is not a mistake.

 

[criterion]

Disobeying the rules is not a mistake.

Come on now, you have the upper hand here being that my infractions are not accessible to the public for review. You and i both know that half of my flagged posts are not rebellious but rather ignorant... or without enough substance to suffice, for example;

I hate puzzles.

In a puzzle oriented thread- this seems relevant enough? It was my mistake not to include a few embellishments like

I very much dislike this 'puzzle' update Jagex has bestowed upon us. They are rather trivial and ultimately a nuisance i am fortunate enough to be able to avoid.

Human error- that is your justification correct? I am no more incompetent then any staff member- so if i am without the qualifications for such duties, what makes anyone else adequate?

 

Come on now, you have the upper hand here being that my infractions are not accessible to the public for review. You and i both know that half of my flagged posts are not rebellious but rather ignorant... or without enough substance to suffice, for example;



In a puzzle oriented thread- this seems relevant enough? It was my mistake not to include a few embellishments like



Human error- that is your justification correct? I am no more incompetent then any staff member- so if i am without the qualifications for such duties, what makes anyone else adequate?

Your second example gives adequate justification as to why the person in question would happen to dislike puzzles, whereas the first one is simply a statement of opinion with no real input to the thread.

It's not down to human error. Not one iota.

 

[criterion]

Your second example gives adequate justification as to why the person in question would happen to dislike puzzles, whereas the first one is simply a statement of opinion with no real input to the thread.

It's not down to human error. Not one iota.

Yes- it was a mistake not to thoroughly express myself. This mistake lead to my infraction.

It was a mistake that a staff member deleted my posts detesting against an extremely offensive post- while leaving the offensive post untouched.

You call me incompetent for mistake(s) yet staff have immunity to such accusations? Im a human too, not a robot.

 

[OldFinn]

Infractions generally seem to be given out carelessly- almost out of boredom as opposed to a true sense of duty it seems. This is not what my topic is based upon.

Your deontological outlook leaves little to be desired. I frankly do not care the emotional basis for an infraction provided the infraction given is in accordance with the Sythe.org rules.

Over the course of these few months here as a part of this community i have had many questionable infractions inflicted on my account- few of them simply, impudently labeled 'Private'. When i have an outstanding problem with an authoritative figure i almost always confront them- and i always receive a commendable response. Until recently i had always felt strongly about the majority of our staff- and respected most of their decisions.

About a week or so ago i received another one of few 'private' infractions. This one made absolutely no sense and lingered with me as i was bewildered by it. Moderator 'Rawr Im Phat' had dispensed this particular infraction and i questioned him about it hours upon receiving it- with a lack of response to this very day.

You are entitled to know what your private infraction is for given that you ask, so you are right in saying that you are entitled to a response. However, I doubt he deliberately ignored you.

I believe that if 'private' infractions are administered the moderator should personally provide proof accordingly- otherwise it seems as though they are just trying to meet their daily quota.. and this is not fair.

I would agree were there such a quota -- there is not. Whilst there is a monthly Moderator log quota, infractions are not a part of it, as such an inclusion would be evocative of slapdash moderating and flagrant infracting in order to garner Moderator logs.

Lastly, although this is not particularly relevant to the topic suggested.. i'd like to throw in that moderator Louis seems to be way out of his element. He is young, with an elementary conception of these forums. I feel that his power was granted solely from popularity amongst other staff members whether it be from his trivial 'tinychat' channel or his pseudo-contribution(s). This is the feedback forum, this is my feedback.

You're perfectly welcome to express feedback - I encourage it. However, when a staff member is chosen, popularity is and never has been an acceptable basis. Upon voting on a new staff member, all participants must give satisfactory justification for their vote. There is generally thorough debate within voting threads also, which ensures a high calibre of staff on Sythe.org. Louis' modlogs are generally pretty good, he is seemingly polite, etc. Is there a particular on-site issue that has culminated in your reactionary response to his holding of a staff position?

 

Yes- it was a mistake not to thoroughly express myself. This mistake lead to my infraction.

It was a mistake that a staff member deleted my posts detesting against an extremely offensive post- while leaving the offensive post untouched.

You call me incompetent for mistake(s) yet staff have immunity to such accusations? Im a human too, not a robot.

If you're just going to contradict everything I say, I'm not going to bother posting on this thread anymore. At the end of the day, you signed up to Sythe. When you did so, you agreed that you could be punished if you were to break the rules. Clearly, you broke the rules and have been punished for it.

 

[OldFinn]

Your private infraction was for this post:

I Mooman I is the absolute worst member of this community, that being said- be careful what you say if anything in his petty threads as he will report for practically anything he deems to be spam. His statements are ironic, contradicting, and above all totally worthless.

I think that my blatant disregard for his pseudo authority and the obvious ill intent in this post shows my hatred for this user, forgive me for speaking freely.

 

[criterion]

You're perfectly welcome to express feedback - I encourage it. However, when a staff member is chosen, popularity is and never has been an acceptable basis. Upon voting on a new staff member, all participants must give satisfactory justification for their vote. There is generally thorough debate within voting threads also, which ensures a high calibre of staff on Sythe.org. Louis' modlogs are generally pretty good, he is seemingly polite, etc. Is there a particular on-site issue that has culminated in your reactionary response to his holding of a staff position?

My animosity for Louis is partially biased. His infractions given out seem all the more imprudent when coming across his own posts in this community. Hes clearly an avid fan of the spam forum, and carries this rebel mentality i can't respect in any way. He is very active in his duties- this is certain.. but i don't respect his judgment.

Posts like

Vouch for LxPAYTON, trust this nigger.

bewilder me. is this someone you want representing the staff of this community? The marijuana avatar gives him away for me personally.. maybe my contempt for the user as an entity itself is in no way a reason to consider him for demotion, take what you will. I could go on and on but this is my presentation, this is all i care to say about him.

 

[OldFinn]

Given that you haven't responded to the answer I wrote to your query, I assume that your questions expressed in this thread have been addressed. If you want to make a thread welcoming feedback about Louis personally, you can go ahead and do so.