Enkindle : Since a four lines paragraph of emphasis was not enough (or perhaps my poor communication skills as a non-native speaker are the reason, it wouldn't be the first time) : I DO NOT imply that you have modified his wack stats directly in the database or in an other way, or anything else from anyone else, behind the scene (this is really not my style...). And no, I was not referring to the godfather boost either, even though that's just strengthening my point in a way.

I ONLY note that people like to extrapolate a lot, especially when it's about being paranoid (I suppose you have dealt with enough of this throughout the years to agree), and having special pieces of code for special occasions that mess with a person's experience and rank is quite a bad idea to me. It is at the very least a poor communication process which will inevitably lead some people to somehow think the administration punishments are clearly not the same depending on who is punished, because of the partiality of the process in itself. Not really the panacea, may you think it is justified or not.

ANYWAY.

What's mentioned above was kind of the introduction though, not the main point, which I'm not sure was really heard. 

So, again, what's the point in taking extra efforts and pushing the consequences of a punishment one big step further, impacting a whole lot more of aspects and people, creating a whole lot more reactions too on many levels, especially when the culprit is already punished anyway ?

I really don't understand your thought process in that. You have very modular solutions for punishments, many tools at your disposal already (warnings, jailing, etc), with a large variety of choices, and among these choices, the possibility to tweak some of them very precisely (such as the number of days someone can be jailed), but... no.

In these times where many people, and especially Squishy/IzzyCreamCheese himself, have expressed several times that the communication between the administration team and the user base is unfortunately sometimes difficult, especially when player punishments is involved (look at Anna's case for example, or the CL-RH relationship when the RH needs to be punished and the recent changes about it), and that he (Izzy, to be clear) emphasized his wish to make things clear and neat, and in particular, to avoid digging too heavily in each case by making things systematic, so that the whole lot of critics that often follow can be avoided and that less problems arises from poor communication or case by case problems...

You feel the need to add this extra, unnecessary, case by case, heavily-impacting measure, which is not even a necessary tool at the end of the day... Why on earth would you think this is a good idea ? 

I don't understand your point of view, really. Especially in the current context.

i think we can agree that spikes should be able to seperate HD convo's from friend convo's

kinda begs the question can spikes actively play dual roles on the game

Aaaaaand now we've reached the SUPER gross portion of the festivities, where we throw blame on someone for not liking that they were told to do something, or they'll be shot.

why not admin jail spikes until this issue gets cleared up? there is clearly 2 sides to the story that need to be told

Vodquila, I don't think anyone is really blaming Spike for not liking that they were told to do something, or they'll be shot. It's more like it's a tad dissapointing you don't know your Godfather - who considers you a friend - enough to know that he's joking. Honestly, how anyone could've seen that as a REAL threat I wonder. Maybe I live in a warped reality or something though, that might be it.

Name one enemy that JohnnyNoName shot that he told he was going to shoot ahead of time?

 me but it was a joke on skype lol

Iocaste- you are acting like this is the first time someone has been admin demoted or admin jailed. This isn't a new punishment I've seen it before and I know you have to, so why are you acting like it's this new radical method of punishment? 

Admins shouldn't have the ability to alter stats?

Okay say goodbye to competition prizes involving stat boosts or bodyguards (cause that's your 'defense stat')

You are going off about something that's a non-issue. 

I was going to joke with you, Chris.

But now I'm scurrrrrrred :<

ChrisPalko : Why ? Because I'm quite fed up to see case by case decisions that are far from being a good thing in my cases, and that it should stop to me. It's exactly like the multiple DD-revival syndrome for me. Something that somehow ended up in the MR culture, but which is clearly detrimental and should be replaced by something fucking obvious when you think about it. That is : simply and only use the systematic, well advertised and "normal" punishments.

Note that I never mentioned that administration should never give bonuses in a competition. The major difference in that is : these changes are given after a well-advertised competition, everyone can get them, it's related to users hard work and result in sure bonuses as long as you meet the requirements (being the winner, whatever). We are in a completely other picture than moving a 365 days old 65 units godfather back to a mere 40 days old don, on a special case by case punishment, because, hey, this time, it was worth it, but maybe not the next. 

But no, you're right, nobody's blaming Spike at all. 

This is not up for debate. Spike should not be punished for reporting what Ace had said. We were given the full logs and not part like some have said.  

im not doing this with the intetion of to stir shit up i am simply asking "where is spike in this whole situation? why isnt he explaining what happened?"

Okay...

Since I first posted on this thread, I've seen the logs that apparently lead to this.

To give a little background, the post that Ace asked to be removed, was a post aimed at myself, by one of Ace's members, which in fairness, was pretty sexist and inappropriate. I wanted this post to be dealt with in an in game context, and was intending to speak to Mako about it. While waiting to speak to Mako, my curiosity got the better of me and I decided to ask the CL/HDer in question if he knew who this person was, because I consider that person to be a friend of mine in addition to his ingame roles. That was the way in which I approached that conversation, and I also, in that conversation, asked that person to NOT speak with Ace about it because I was wanting to speak to Mako about it. I'm Mako's member, this guy was Ace's member, it should've been resolved between the two Godfathers.

So I'm not 100% how it came to the point where these two were speaking about things or the comments that lead to this were made, because as far as I was aware, we were all speaking as players/friends.

Now, I'm not here speaking now because me and Ace are bffs. Please feel free to ask Mako or Firenza, Ace and I spent a good 15 minutes yelling at each other last night over that bloody post.

When this all came out today, I thought, "Oh, well Ace was definitely angry last night so maybe that's how this went down, maybe he was yelling at Spike the way he and I were yelling at each other. I mean, he must've clearly been pretty angry over things for it to go this far. And if he was, why was it not a DD?"

And I hold with that. This probably should've been a straight up DD if it was being taken as that kind of threat, because that kind of threat isn't okay. 

And I very much respect what enkindle has already said... even joking about this kind of thing isn't appropriate, is a stupid thing to do. Totally agree with that. So I'm not saying that Ace should get away with things either.

I do think that having seen the logs and knowing both Ace and Spike, that there was a mis-communication between the two of them where Ace was going about things in the way he tends to deal with them, which is pretty joking with threats to kill everything that moves (he's threatened to kill me about 3 times in the last week and I'm still standing), which is a style that Spike as one of Ace's CL's realistically HAS to be used to, and Spike is viewing things from a HD perspective which is fair enough because in his mind he's dealing with a HD issue.

Now, I do totally agree that even joking about killing admin accounts being unacceptable and I would agree with some form of punishment for it - I'd say definitely the jailtime would be fair for that.

But I feel like, given the context of what has happened, perhaps taking away his hard work on units and days might've been a little too much? It seems messy, so to speak. Surely if we do have 0 tolerance to this kind of thing on any level, a DD would've made more sense, but on the other hand, if we take the context into account, to remove 15 units and 290 days from an account as well as 2 weeks admin jail... that seems a little messy to me. 

It's just one persons opinion and at the end of the day, the admin team has to feel comfortable to do what they do without it impacting on their right to play the game, but I don't know if it's worth also considering that if people feel they're losing so much over a joke, they might feel less inclined to want to play the game with anybody with a staff account? 

It's a tough one to handle, certainly, and I'm sure whatever choices are made are made for the right reasons, but since I already commented earlier when I thought that the situation was a little different, I thought I should say a few words now too.