![[DEV] ISFL Forums](http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/images/emerald/logo.png "[DEV] ISFL Forums"){kind=logo}
+- [DEV] ISFL Forums (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Community (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Media (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Graded Articles (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=38)
+---- Thread: *Open Letter to Head Office (/showthread.php?tid=6153)
*Open Letter to Head Office - kckolbe - 11-22-2017
Dear Head Office,
In light of the recent decision against @ErMurazor, I made some points in the announcement thread that I genuinely hoped might have enlightened some of you. Unlike some previous public criticisms I've made, this one was constructive, informative, and provided a relevant past ruling since precedents are an important part of any ruling. I called for Er to be fined, a very reasonable call, as the rule REQUIRES the fine be levied (it will be posted below). Following this post, several users voiced agreement. Granted, you as a body have a poor record for reconsidering positions in light of public outcry, but I hoped an issue of this magnitude would warrant an exception.
Very shortly after my post, I was contacted on discord by @AsylumParty, where he asked me (politely) to clarify my concerns. I explained, and again attempted to persuade why this fine, while seemingly meaningless, was actually very important. Here was the thrust of my argument:
Quote:Given Er's bank account, this is an insignificant amount. However, [the] options were a) ignore the fine, making the wealthy above the law, or B) increasing the fine, setting a precedent of punishing by status rather than offense. Neither sat well with [me], so [levy] the default amount.
Again, the conversation was mutually respectful.
Shortly after, the accusations of Er's wealth making him above the law started becoming very prevalent. It was clear that the community, as a whole, did not accept the verdict as fair. Even Er messaged me on discord to let me know that he had argued for harsher punishment, which I believe says a lot about both him as a person (recent failures aside) and your judgment on this matter. Again, I hoped this would be enough. Arguments have failed. Action must be taken.
As of the time of this post, I have deleted the announcement thread for Er's punishment. This would appear to be a violation of the following rule:
Quote:Abuse of Moderation Power
- Any user who abuses moderation powers in order to alter (without permission or valid reasoning) another users post, topic, or reply will be given the follow punishments.
FIRST OFFENSE
- 2 season moderating suspension
- $2,000,000 fine
Now, to be fair, I could argue I am not in violation, as I do have valid reasoning for deleting the thread. It is unacceptable. However, I doubt you will accept this reasoning, and instead interpret it as an attack on your authority, which is far more important to you than whether or not you wield it with any regard to justice.
That would mean that I will be fined 2,000,000 dollars...on paper. In reality, though, I'm pretty fucking loaded. The fine would do nothing to me. Invoking the precedent you've set, that would mean I will not be fined. Part of the reason I am so loaded is that I constantly do things for the site. Whether it's my GMing of a DSFL team and promoting its existence with previews (that hav caught on and are now done by others), my very well-received PBP commentary, or just helping out randomly (like finding the S2 Pro Bowl rosters for @ADwyer87 earlier today), I think there is enough good to warrant leniency. I should also lose moderator access for 2 seasons, but again, that was not done to Er, so it would be quite unfair to receive that punishment.
By precedent, I am restricted from taking over as league owner until Season 6, a punishment which I regretfully accept.
I hope this forces you to re-evaluate your decisions and priorities. I have a great deal of affection for this league and its members (if not its sim engine), and I hope you understand that I genuinely feel a demonstration is necessary to convince you of your errors before it is too late.
*Open Letter to Head Office - daBenchwarmer - 11-22-2017
here we go again
*Open Letter to Head Office - Bwestfield - 11-22-2017
I agree that Er's bank account standing should play no role in whether he is fined or not. If it means nothing and is a drop in the pond then why does that stop you from enforcing it.
*Open Letter to Head Office - 124715 - 11-22-2017
Way to go slm. Raining on our parade already B)
*Open Letter to Head Office - TheWoZy - 11-22-2017
Time to delete everything
*Open Letter to Head Office - iamslm22 - 11-22-2017
OK to respond to this on a couple levels. The decision on whether or not to fine ER was a 3-2 decision. Two of us felt that a fine was necessary for consistency purposes, while the other 3 felt the decision to fine would take away from the more important decision, which was the removal of administrative power.
Now many people have brought up the example of Hendrix. I obviously disagreed with that punishment then as too harsh (I was in fact one of the two comments deleted). But there are two obvious distinctions between Hendrix case and the ER one.
First - Hendrix deleted a post, and ER deleted mod logs. Deleting moderation logs is something that has never been done, and was not explicitly against the rules.
Two - we can't actually prove ER deleted the original post in question. I know that through circumstantial evidence it seems obvious, but due to the deletion of the mod logs we can't prove it. ER has in fact thoroughly denied deleting the post.
Now as far as this post, it was obviously a publicity stunt to get our attention (it worked). I don't have a full cogent response beyond the distinctions I mentioned. 4/5 of the HO is American, so we can't really craft a real response from everyone. But overall please lets not do stuff like this in the future.
*Open Letter to Head Office - ItsJustBarry - 11-22-2017
(11-23-2017, 12:14 AM)iamslm22 Wrote:Deleting moderation logs[...] and was not explicitly against the rules.
How long is HO going to hide behind the "well this was specifically against the rules" excuse?
Hendrix deleted a post, which at the time was something that has never been done and there wasn't a rule against it. He still got punished. I think what everyone wants is fairness and consistency.
*Open Letter to Head Office - iamslm22 - 11-22-2017
(11-23-2017, 12:31 AM)ItsJustBarry Wrote:How long is HO going to hide behind the "well this was specifically against the rules" excuse?
Hendrix deleted a post, which at the time was something that has never been done and there wasn't a rule against it. He still got punished. I think what everyone wants is fairness and consistency.
I don't necessarily disagree. I'm not really explaining my own thought process (again, I voted to fine ER), just rather saying what was done. Deleting Mod Logs on it's own, especially as it seems his own were the ones that were deleted, isn't something that effects anything.
*Open Letter to Head Office - loco - 11-23-2017
Damn kckolbe throwing his weight around!
Like a child in toys r us whose parents didn't buy him the toy