fa I am with spyrella in that I think there is a disconnect here. I have been kind of seeing this as part of language barrier combined with a naturally defensive personality and I am not judging you for either.In post 123, Frozen Angel wrote:That what happens in human societies when you sentence someone. To avoid that you may have general rules for further (more crucial) punishments.In post 122, Accountant wrote:Because it gives them something to latch on and argue and drama llama aboutIn post 121, Frozen Angel wrote:This is a form of human societies.
If they know that already, what is the harm in telling them again? beside showing your not extremely rude and coward.
so lets work from the premise that there is a miscommunication somewhere and break this down. you cannot expect other pple to go back and read your posts in order to wade through and glean what you are trying to say if you are unwilling to do the same courtesy. I keep getting the feeling you are reading a different thread than I am cos I am not seeing where you are insulted or ignored in any way; I am seeing pple keep trying to explain things and you seem unable or unwilling to parse what is actually being said to you. what I am saying is, there really needs to be some level of reciprocity here. okay?
so lets break this down:
1. this forum is not a democracy it is modocracy. we as a userbase have no control over who the mods are or how they enforce the rules. and this extends to the game mods altho the userbase does have some control over which mod's games they chose to join.
2. zito is correct in that this is not a court of law. this isn't a "human rights" issue. I wonder if the is the keystone of the breakdown in communication, the "disconnection" if you will is cos I think we have the same understanding of what human rights actually are. I am not quite sure how to fix this tho.
3. I thin the reason no1 is readily providing you with a list of successful, private, anonymously done wotc-ing is that pple likely wanted to keep it private for a reason and don't want to bring it light, most likely including the pple who were wotc-ed. pple who are getting wotc-ed have likely been told what behaviour that other players find unacceptable in previous games. show me an example of where some1 was wotc-ed and it came out of nowhere.
4. lets look at 3 examples of members who were either wotc-ed or threatened to in the queue.
marquis - I remember when marquis first opened that particular account pple started making noises about her joining games because was laying a steady trail of lol-hammering that was costing players to lose games. I can't remember how it got resolved but regardless marquis stopped lol-hammering. and became a super duper strong player that was mostly universally enjoyed.
bert - when bert was new he wld get steadily run up in games and he wld freak and either self-vote or self-hammer. some players reached out extra hard to him and he listened to the feedback and soon became a lot of pple's most favourite player. I MISS HIM. again it was brought up in the queue but I can't remember if he was actually wotc-ed.
now lets look at jeanne/yume (who incidentally is this thread about). under the jeanne account jeanne was given feedback on her play by getting wotc-ed and when it was made public she started a thread in md about her getting wotc-ed. she was given feedback as to why, she got defensive and was told to "create and alt". I think the yume account came first (I can't remember exactly), she started joining games under yume and never corrected the behaviour and sure enough, is getting wotc-ed again.
so why is it the responsibility of the other players to repeat themselves and keep giving her chances when she is not accepting the feedback or correcting the questionable behaviour and not jeanne's to correct it? I mean how many chances shld she be given at the expense of games when she has a pattern of not correcting it?
and 5. I am really confused how on 1 hand you are saying that you think the reasons ought to be made public along with the accuser's name and then say that you are not naming and shaming. cos to me it seems like the latter is what you are advocating.
I hope that I am making myself clear, I know I am simply not the most articulate person and struggle with communication myself.
I don't know, mebbe if you cld put aside the filter of perceiving that pple are attacking you instead of trying to communicate that they disagree with you things might go better. wis made some fantastic points and I think he has an easier way of communicating with you as in, you don't seem to get quite so reactive with him. but I don't see you considering his very valid points either but mebbe I am wrong.
anyway I hope this helps in some small way. I like you, even tho I frequently find myself disagreeing with your perspective on things. I think you are at heart, a good egg
![:]](./images/smilies/icon_smiling.png "Cheerful Smile"){kind=icon}