Pokemon Server Archive

PvP Server => Server News => Topic started by: 1cec0ld on February 28, 2013, 11:40:37 pm

Title: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: 1cec0ld on February 28, 2013, 11:40:37 pm
The Option to use Pokemon Online as a gym challenge (not obstacle) has been relocated to Viridian Gym. This is an option, and can't be used as a requirement to gain the badge. The challenger must opt into it.


For Elite 4 fights, there is no longer a wait period between one consecutive challenge and another, from any region to any region.
However, badges will be taken When Your Challenge Is Over. Win or lose.


Flying is disallowed in Elite 4 fights. (Good bye void fall advantage)


Flying over a height of 25 blocks from the ground is disallowed. This height limit is subject to possible change. Beware the void, because it would suck you in like a vacuum cleaner.


Stnglkabee and Backpackcat have both been demoted from their Champion and Elite ranks, respectively.
For exploiting the server mechanics (charging for elite battles, witness of holding out on a challenge for no reason other than to troll a moderator of all people, coordinating these efforts together, overcharging for a bs service due to personal bias and a feeling of superiority) we have called Rule 8 from http://www.pokemonserver.net/rules.php (http://www.pokemonserver.net/rules.php) and voted as a group to demote the two of them from their Champion and Elite ranks.
They are both on their last warnings. Any farther issues will result in permanent (IP) ban.

In consequence, Backpackcat and Stnglkabee forfeit their matches as they would had they timed out, and Archiesalt, the current elite 4 challenger, wins those 2 fights by default.
Current Rankings:
Champion: ArchieSalt
4th: Kingandre18
3rd: Omastar
2nd: LilWaffles
1st: _________


Holy Heaven, let the drama begin.


The FaceBook Page will get more active soon. Keep your eyes peeled.

Jotr123 is demoted from Moderator position. This was a group decision.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Tenebrae on February 28, 2013, 11:45:04 pm
Hooray for Facebook. That was why I was able to find the server again in early January 2012 :D
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: AxZeroCrypt on February 28, 2013, 11:49:20 pm
Stng got demoted :O
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Z4X3R on March 01, 2013, 12:04:33 am
Shit just got real.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Omastar on March 01, 2013, 12:24:00 am
Recording is available to download here (http://www.mediafire.com/?yh33k2pu45ome6s)
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Stnglkabee on March 01, 2013, 02:43:40 am
1ce you told me extortion was fine.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: hobo4chompy on March 01, 2013, 06:17:35 am
Was my Ban Talked about in the Disscussion ???
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Prodigy39 on March 01, 2013, 07:21:23 am
Shit just got real.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Frenzy_Monkey47 on March 01, 2013, 07:46:06 am
Reading this Admin Meeting made me lose my appetite.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Frenzy_Monkey47 on March 01, 2013, 07:47:23 am
1ce you told me extortion was fine.
Gym leaders can't do it so what makes you special?
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Jotr123 on March 01, 2013, 09:59:18 am
I deserve what I got.
And what I got was a demotion. I deserved it.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: AxZeroCrypt on March 01, 2013, 10:02:25 am
why did you get demoted?
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: alexandred3 on March 01, 2013, 12:54:08 pm

Stnglkabee and Backpackcat have both been demoted from their Champion and Elite ranks, respectively.
For exploiting the server mechanics (charging for elite battles, witness of holding out on a challenge for no reason other than to troll a moderator of all people, coordinating these efforts together, overcharging for a bs service due to personal bias and a feeling of superiority) we have called Rule 8 from [url]http://www.pokemonserver.net/rules.php[/url] ([url]http://www.pokemonserver.net/rules.php[/url]) and voted as a group to demote the two of them from their Champion and Elite ranks.
They are both on their last warnings. Any farther issues will result in permanent (IP) ban.





I love how rule 8 just lets you guys abuse your admin powers because I honestly don't see what rule Stng exactly broke. Challengers don't have to pay for Backpack to come on because he's eventually going to time out. If Backpack doesn't want to come on more, that's his choice and I don't see why Stng would be punished for this, only for collecting the money Backpack charges.


(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6590598912/)
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: ArchieSalt on March 01, 2013, 02:49:33 pm
Backpack would still come online, he just ensured that I wasn't online when he did. And its clear as fuck that Stng was telling him to avoid me.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Prodigy39 on March 01, 2013, 02:57:34 pm
You both make good points, but I see it as Stng showed clear evidence that he was telling BPC when to log on since his payment demands were never met. No way it was a coincedance. They both deserved this.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: alexandred3 on March 01, 2013, 03:07:54 pm
Backpack would still come online, he just ensured that I wasn't online when he did. And its clear as fuck that Stng was telling him to avoid me.
Admins would've decided on a deadline and Backpack would've been demoted I don't see why Stng is concerned with all of this.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: oddy on March 01, 2013, 03:19:50 pm
Admins would've decided on a deadline and Backpack would've been demoted I don't see why Stng is concerned with all of this.
stng was in control of everything tell backpack when and when not to log in collecting payments setting prices, and with stng being a player who's been testing his limits of what he can get away with for as long as he has been on the server he doesn't get leniency. Has he been banned? No, just stripped of rank so I don't see why you are so upset about punishment given to him given his circumstances
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Stnglkabee on March 01, 2013, 04:01:32 pm
stng was in control of everything tell backpack when and when not to log in collecting payments setting prices, and with stng being a player who's been testing his limits of what he can get away with for as long as he has been on the server he doesn't get leniency. Has he been banned? No, just stripped of rank so I don't see why you are so upset about punishment given to him given his circumstances


You cant prove i did or didnt tell him to get on. Plus i got double punished because i got punished for the other stuff and then this was cause of that plus this.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: alexandred3 on March 01, 2013, 04:04:40 pm
stng was in control of everything tell backpack when and when not to log in collecting payments setting prices, and with stng being a player who's been testing his limits of what he can get away with for as long as he has been on the server he doesn't get leniency. Has he been banned? No, just stripped of rank so I don't see why you are so upset about punishment given to him given his circumstances
Did he actually break any rule with this tho? I don't think so. So why did he get punished?
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: 1cec0ld on March 01, 2013, 04:27:19 pm
1. This isn't a democracy, its a Republic. Led by a small group of people who make decisions as equals.

2. It wasn't abuse, we all agreed on it after logically coming to that conclusion based on given information.

3. Stng was called to be judged due to his 'extortion' but the judgement was passed due to the sum of all his acts, whether they broke rules or not. They were without doubt a negative influence on this server, and I personally think he's lucky he's not banned. The champion shouldn't be the record holder for asshole.

And yet 2 of our champions have now held that title... Stng, and ZangetsuMC. Zangetsu was banned.


Also, admin meting recordings have been made smaller, and are in upload at this moment of posting. Omastar's recordings have also been made available at the website I'm saving them, http://www.pokemonserver.net/adminmeetings (http://www.pokemonserver.net/adminmeetings)
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: alexandred3 on March 01, 2013, 04:45:37 pm
1. This isn't a democracy, its a Republic. Led by a small group of people who make decisions as equals.

2. It wasn't abuse, we all agreed on it after logically coming to that conclusion based on given information.

3. Stng was called to be judged due to his 'extortion' but the judgement was passed due to the sum of all his acts, whether they broke rules or not. They were without doubt a negative influence on this server, and I personally think he's lucky he's not banned. The champion shouldn't be the record holder for asshole.

 


1. That picture about fuck democracy was more a satire about this servers being a dictature suppressing chosen members. You'll probably want examples for this so let me hook you up. A few months ago, gym leaders charged moneys for letting people nerf their impossible courses. You guys had an admin meeting about this and prohibited gym leaders from making money with their gym. Gym Leaders 'exploit[ed] the server mechanics' and nothing happens to them. Stng and Backpack 'exploit server mechanics'. They get their title removed. 'All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.' - Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yet Stng gets punished differently than other people did, simply because he's Stng. Know what this reminds me of? Yeah, a dictature.

2. I'm still 99.9999% sure that Stng and Backpack did not break a single rule charging money for Elite Fights.

3. So champions have to pass 'I'm totally not an asshole tests' nowadays?
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Tactic on March 01, 2013, 05:04:40 pm
When 1ce brought up Stng in the mod thread, I'm pretty sure we let him off on his last chance after Prod had a talk with him. So he wasn't punished for that at all. Now maybe this didn't break any rules but it wasnt a good move and it doesn't require a breaking of a rule to trigger a vote of the Admins on someone's previous offenses and decide what must done, which in this case, is what the Admins did.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: oddy on March 01, 2013, 05:11:33 pm
I'm not sure when you became someone who deserved all these answers for something that, frankly, is none of your fucking business, but yes stng is judged differently due to his personal history just as anyone's personal history can be brought up into consideration whenever dealing with an issue, that's how shits handled, if you recall the nether incident way back different people had different punishments due to their own personal history, just am example to show this isn't new. Further more you don't like it than you can fucking leave I really don't give a single fuck about your opinion because to me it's clear you are doing 1 of 2 things right now, either being a stng fan boy, or just trying to stir up controversy about the administration and I expect more from an ex mod, so ill end this nicely with a fuck you I don't care what you think have a nice day, you don't deserve as much explanation as you received bbe grateful and drop the subject before I get annoyed 
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: alexandred3 on March 01, 2013, 05:13:01 pm
He wasn't punished for that at all. Now maybe this didn't break any rules but it wasnt a good move and it doesn't require a breaking of a rule to trigger a vote of the Admins on someone's previous offenses and decide what must done, which in this case, is what the Admins did.
First of all Stng has been punished for most of his actions. Tempbans, not being able to use lava buckets, not being able to go to Pewter and some mutes.
Secondly every post I've seen in the Mod Thread, where there was a vote whether to ban someone or not, have been posted for that person breaking a rule (mostly rule 1). Yet, as you've stated yourself, Stng and Backpack most likely didn't break a rule. This is like a thief finding 50$ on the street and going to jail for it, only because he has stolen something before.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: 1cec0ld on March 01, 2013, 05:13:43 pm
 


1. That picture about fuck democracy was more a satire about this servers being a dictature suppressing chosen members. You'll probably want examples for this so let me hook you up. A few months ago, gym leaders charged moneys for letting people nerf their impossible courses. You guys had an admin meeting about this and prohibited gym leaders from making money with their gym. Gym Leaders 'exploit[ed] the server mechanics' and nothing happens to them. Stng and Backpack 'exploit server mechanics'. They get their title removed. 'All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.' - Article 1 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yet Stng gets punished differently than other people did, simply because he's Stng. Know what this reminds me of? Yeah, a dictature.

2. I'm still 99.9999% sure that Stng and Backpack did not break a single rule charging money for Elite Fights.

3. So champions have to pass 'I'm totally not an asshole tests' nowadays?

1 Stng is punished by his record. The reason he was judged was because of his charging.

2 HE DID NOT BREAK A RULE BY CHARGING MONEY FFS HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THIS

3 Everyone does. Welcome to Naruto, Agent, ImJustBauss, and Rewas. All banned for what? Oh. Being assholes, and making the server look bad.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: alexandred3 on March 01, 2013, 05:31:40 pm
1 Stng is punished by his record. The reason he was judged was because of his charging.

2 HE DID NOT BREAK A RULE BY CHARGING MONEY FFS HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THIS

3 Everyone does. Welcome to Naruto, Agent, ImJustBauss, and Rewas. All banned for what? Oh. Being assholes, and making the server look bad.
If stng was punished by his record, why was Backpack punished again?
As for Naruto, Agent, ImJustBauss and Rewas, I recall them being banned for breaking rule 1 numerous times.
Oddy, first of all thanks for breaking rule 1 on me (gotta give people a good example, eh?). I am doing this because I feel that members of this server have been poorly treated and I want to know why.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Paradox on March 01, 2013, 05:50:26 pm
Alex, let me try to logically lead you through this.


Before you try to be self-righteous by saying that the admin team should be looking out for the interests of the people, you're wrong. I am not looking for what is fair for each individual, I am looking for what is best for the server. If I wanted to please the masses, I'd give them all OP. But by doing that, I'm neglecting the good of the server. Our interests are with making the overall best game play experience, not pleasing each individual. Good game play promotes people being happy. Being happy does not necessarily make good game play.


Now, let me examine your concerns. You say this rule is "Overpowered" and seems unfair. And it could be. If we ever used it. How often have we used that rule. Let me tell you, almost never. That's because we only use it as a safe-net. The admin team is not a power-hungry grouo of people. If we wanted to screw you all over, we'd close the server and split the paypal money between us and call it a day. You TRUST us with your donations and you TRUST us with the power of OP to make the server a good experience. That is why rule 8 exists. The populus trusts us enough to not look our for our own personal interests but rather the interests of the server. Rule 8 exists so if someone is making bad-game play but is not breaking a rule, we can properly exercise some sort of punishment.


Stng and Backpack were promoting back game play  Stng and backpack worked together to scam people. Backpack would log on for a minute or two to keep his title without timing out but not staying on long enough to be challenged. He worked with Stng to make it so Stng would scam people of money to "summon" Backpack so they could accumulate innocent people's money. This is not how the game-play should be. That is why it's bad-game play. If they did not know that scamming people is bad, then that is their malfunction, not ours. That is why we are using Rule 8. Are they breaking a rule? No. Are they promoting bad game play? Yes.


You also brought up the old-gymleader thing. I agree, that could of been more properly addressed. But at that time our team was smaller and it was harder to regulate over 16 gym leaders and make a full-blown investigation. People were punished, but it's possible some may not of been. We can't ever be 100% of anything but we can try our hardest. But just because we could not properly investigate previous issues does not mean we should allow obvious abuse of mechanics to fly by. What stng and backpack did was not okay.


I hope I addressed all of your questions and concerns.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: alexandred3 on March 01, 2013, 05:58:21 pm
Alex, let me try to logically lead you through this.


Before you try to be self-righteous by saying that the admin team should be looking out for the interests of the people, you're wrong. I am not looking for what is fair for each individual, I am looking for what is best for the server. If I wanted to please the masses, I'd give them all OP. But by doing that, I'm neglecting the good of the server. Our interests are with making the overall best game play experience, not pleasing each individual. Good game play promotes people being happy. Being happy does not necessarily make good game play.


Now, let me examine your concerns. You say this rule is "Overpowered" and seems unfair. And it could be. If we ever used it. How often have we used that rule. Let me tell you, almost never. That's because we only use it as a safe-net. The admin team is not a power-hungry grouo of people. If we wanted to screw you all over, we'd close the server and split the paypal money between us and call it a day. You TRUST us with your donations and you TRUST us with the power of OP to make the server a good experience. That is why rule 8 exists. The populus trusts us enough to not look our for our own personal interests but rather the interests of the server. Rule 8 exists so if someone is making bad-game play but is not breaking a rule, we can properly exercise some sort of punishment.


Stng and Backpack were promoting back game play  Stng and backpack worked together to scam people. Backpack would log on for a minute or two to keep his title without timing out but not staying on long enough to be challenged. He worked with Stng to make it so Stng would scam people of money to "summon" Backpack so they could accumulate innocent people's money. This is not how the game-play should be. That is why it's bad-game play. If they did not know that scamming people is bad, then that is their malfunction, not ours. That is why we are using Rule 8. Are they breaking a rule? No. Are they promoting bad game play? Yes.


You also brought up the old-gymleader thing. I agree, that could of been more properly addressed. But at that time our team was smaller and it was harder to regulate over 16 gym leaders and make a full-blown investigation. People were punished, but it's possible some may not of been. We can't ever be 100% of anything but we can try our hardest. But just because we could not properly investigate previous issues does not mean we should allow obvious abuse of mechanics to fly by. What stng and backpack did was not okay.


I hope I addressed all of your questions and concerns.
Thank you for actually giving me a clear answer to my questions and not just label me as a Stng fanboy because I thought he was unfairly punished.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Paradox on March 01, 2013, 06:00:51 pm
Thank you for actually giving me a clear answer to my questions and not just label me as a Stng fanboy because I thought he was unfairly punished.


No problem, everyone is entitled to knowing the reasons for admin actions. I'm not here to judge you; we all have opinions. I'll happily discuss anything with you and if you present a good enough argument, I would have no problem reversing the actions we did. But I stand strong on my opinion as of now.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: oddy on March 01, 2013, 06:01:26 pm
Thank you for actually giving me a clear answer to my questions and not just label me as a Stng fanboy because I thought he was unfairly punished.
thats cute
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Stnglkabee on March 01, 2013, 06:02:34 pm
Stng and Backpack were promoting back game play  Stng and backpack worked together to scam people. Backpack would log on for a minute or two to keep his title without timing out but not staying on long enough to be challenged. He worked with Stng to make it so Stng would scam people of money to "summon" Backpack so they could accumulate innocent people's money. This is not how the game-play should be. That is why it's bad-game play. If they did not know that scamming people is bad, then that is their malfunction, not ours. That is why we are using Rule 8. Are they breaking a rule? No. Are they promoting bad game play? Yes.



2 HE DID NOT BREAK A RULE BY CHARGING MONEY FFS HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THIS



It wasnt a scam if you take your car in to get repaired and you dont pay, you dont get your car back. I had a legit service i was offering.


Also bpc has no issues before this so why is he punished the same as me with no previous problems?
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: alexandred3 on March 01, 2013, 06:04:13 pm
thats cute


Back to you:
I'm not sure when you became someone who deserved all these answers for something that


Everyone is entitled to knowing the reasons for admin actions.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: oddy on March 01, 2013, 06:08:49 pm

No problem, everyone is entitled to knowing the reasons for admin actions. I'm not here to judge you; we all have opinions. I'll happily discuss anything with you and if you present a good enough argument, I would have no problem reversing the actions we did. But I stand strong on my opinion as of now.
this is where you and I differ, I feel something that affects 1 or 2 players only needs to be explained to those people who are affected by it, a server wide affect I agree everyone has the right to know, but I'm a believer in people minding their own damn business
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Paradox on March 01, 2013, 06:11:31 pm


It wasnt a scam if you take your car in to get repaired and you dont pay, you dont get your car back. I had a legit service i was offering.


Also bpc has no issues before this so why is he punished the same as me with no previous problems?


Making analogies does not act as an argument. I make an analogy to support my side. You were offering a service that forced bad gameplay. That's bad.


The punishments seemed the most reasonable for both sides. In my opinion, it wasn't based on previous reasoning. Admins have different reasoning.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Stnglkabee on March 01, 2013, 06:14:29 pm
One more thing, what proves anything about when i told bpc when to get on what says i even did?
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Mariofighter3 on March 01, 2013, 06:15:38 pm
 


1. That picture about fuck democracy was more a satire about this servers being a dictature suppressing chosen members.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Pichu on March 01, 2013, 06:30:42 pm
shut the fuck up
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Pichu on March 01, 2013, 06:30:56 pm
every single one of you
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Tenebrae on March 01, 2013, 06:52:32 pm
Holy Heaven, let the drama begin.

Was waiting for this to happen...
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Stnglkabee on March 01, 2013, 07:48:16 pm
What proves anything about when i told bpc when to get on what says i even did?
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: hobo4chompy on March 01, 2013, 08:08:08 pm
If i may step in i did see plenty of times when Archie logged in Backpack Always Logged out
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Frenzy_Monkey47 on March 01, 2013, 08:18:44 pm
Why was jotr banned >:I
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: 1cec0ld on March 01, 2013, 08:49:14 pm
Why was jotr banned >:I

Reread the post, he was demoted, not banned.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Paradox on March 01, 2013, 09:57:41 pm
One more thing, what proves anything about when i told bpc when to get on what says i even did?


We have multiple members, moderators and admins and, as far as I am aware, logchats of you doing this. You also literally just stated a few posts ago:
I had a legit service i was offering.
 


Not only can multiple people attest to this but you admitted to it. Stop wasting my time.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Mariofighter3 on March 01, 2013, 10:45:20 pm
Not only can multiple people attest to this but you admitted to it. Stop wasting my time.


If you want him to stop wasting your time, ban the man already. There's no benefit to keeping him around. Why bother when you know he'll just screw up again and end up in a spot like this again?
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Z4X3R on March 02, 2013, 02:56:45 am
^^^
There's a lot of bias on this thread.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Mariofighter3 on March 02, 2013, 11:11:00 am
^^^
There's a lot of bias on this thread.


I'm not trying to be biased here. I'm just stating the facts. The reason why he wasn't punished for harassing Archie was because most of the administration thought he could "change." Giving him that one shot obviously didn't help for he got himself into trouble yet again. And once again they are letting him walk away, almost punish free. He can get champion back if he really wanted to, and Backpack could get elite again too. There's really no punishment towards either of them because the two of them could as easily get their spots back as they did before. So in all honesty, what the administration tried to do means nothing in the long run if the two of them can (and just a hunch, but they probably will) undo the effects of the punishment given to them.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Paradox on March 02, 2013, 01:55:49 pm

I'm not trying to be biased here. I'm just stating the facts. The reason why he wasn't punished for harassing Archie was because most of the administration thought he could "change." Giving him that one shot obviously didn't help for he got himself into trouble yet again. And once again they are letting him walk away, almost punish free. He can get champion back if he really wanted to, and Backpack could get elite again too. There's really no punishment towards either of them because the two of them could as easily get their spots back as they did before. So in all honesty, what the administration tried to do means nothing in the long run if the two of them can (and just a hunch, but they probably will) undo the effects of the punishment given to them.


As long as I have been admin, this is Stng's first offense. Whether he has been doing stuff in the past while I was not here, I don't know. I'm toldhe has had mishaps but according to the other admins, this is his third strike. We like to give a few chances, not just one. I said it in the admin meeting if you cared to listen rather than make assumptions: This is his last chance. If I ever hear one more thing about either one of them, they're done. Banned. Or atleast Stng. I'm not sure about the previous accusations on Cat.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Mariofighter3 on March 02, 2013, 02:26:33 pm
rather than make assumptions


It's not an assumption when both an admin and moderator (names disclosed) confirmed that it happened behind the scenes.


And also: do Stng and Backpack have the ability to earn their spots back?
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Paradox on March 02, 2013, 03:16:58 pm

It's not an assumption when both an admin and moderator (names disclosed) confirmed that it happened behind the scenes.


And also: do Stng and Backpack have the ability to earn their spots back?


It is an assumption because news flash: I'm telling you this is their last chance. I'm the one who suggested their demotion, I'm the own who suggested they get banned next time they fuck up. There is no "behind-the-scenes". We talked about this in the public admin meeting. Everyone heard it. No secrets. This is their last chance.


I don't see why not. If they do something like this again, they're banned. So what's the problem with allowing them back. If they go back, they'll be on top behavior or else.
Title: Re: Admin meeting February 28th
Post by: Mariofighter3 on March 02, 2013, 04:51:48 pm

It is an assumption because news flash: I'm telling you this is their last chance. I'm the one who suggested their demotion, I'm the own who suggested they get banned next time they fuck up. There is no "behind-the-scenes". We talked about this in the public admin meeting. Everyone heard it. No secrets. This is their last chance.


I don't see why not. If they do something like this again, they're banned. So what's the problem with allowing them back. If they go back, they'll be on top behavior or else.


Oh. By assumption, I thought you meant:

The reason why he wasn't punished for harassing Archie was because most of the administration thought he could "change."
 


And alright, I see where you are coming from.