Shi Musume
New Member
I do not care what you think. All I want is rules to be followed, to help people, and have fun.
Posts: 42 
|
Post by Shi Musume on Mar 18, 2015 21:47:13 GMT
Byond key:
WhenCookiesCry
Server banned from:
Shell
Host/Minihost you were banned by:
Cleavergirl
Reason for ban:
"Harassment"
A person with the detective role in Umineko mode failed to even appear to rp with the witch despite being obviously active and the witch announced where the corpse was. This resulted in players trying to act as the detective and the witch basically revealing the entire truth from having no opposition.
I found the detective and said bluntly in ooc: You are a failure of a detective. You should have just done your damn role. He reported me. Cleaver decided to force me to apologize in chat under threat of ban along with threatening anyone else who claimed that person was not rping their role after spending 30-40 minutes spamming chat with a rage against me.
I also told Cleavergirl I would stand by my claim he did not do his role and should have been spoken to regarding it and that she should have spoken to me in a minihost pm and not violated so blatently the rule she was getting onto me for. In response she muted me for the rest of the day spam raged against at me for an hour, and the next day I try to log in I found I was banned indefinitely.
Why you should be unbanned:
-I was right in claiming he was not doing his role. However, the fact I did say one insult was a bit mean. Even with the most extreme punishment a one sentence insult calling him stupid in ooc and not pushing it further should have warranted a mute and a speaking to in pm regarding not hurting other player's feelings or something.
-Although I have fought/ argued with people in the past over chat in moments of anger, this was not such a case where a fight or argument happened. It was simply me stating they acted like a stupid detective one time, which I apologized for.
-Had Cleavergirl not muted me from reporting and kept it since that day over a month ago I could have sent a simple report regarding the fact a role did not do their job to allow a host to address it without posting it somewhere the player would see and feel offended.
-My ban happened in less than a few hours after a vote, which from what I heard a great deal of the minihosts had not known about until it was over.
-Overall my ban was done in a moment of anger and actions had been taken that was uncalled for. Cleavergirl harassed me over chat after choosing my punishment would be a muting, and never once tried to handle it in a civil/ peaceful manner and the punishment did not fit the crime.
Additional Information (Important):
During the ban time I was advised after speaking to the admin to log onto another account to play and the admin would speak to the minihost Cleavergirl, along with talk to Metafrosty regarding my ban due to the fact they agreed there was unfairness in the ban itself. The main reason for another account was to stop Cleavergirl from overreacting to seeing me log in before they could speak to this minihost.
However, the admin had been busy/forgot.
This is the very reason I write the unban request now instead of a few weeks ago when the ban first occurred, from my knowledge the admin s had been discussing it and both was aware of the circumstance I was being allowed on an alternative account.
|
|
Tanasinn
New Member
Posts: 32
Byond key: Tanasinn
|
Post by Tanasinn on Mar 18, 2015 23:31:33 GMT
For reference, here is my own log of the round in question, as well as Cleaver's responses to cookies in chat. pastebin.com/uxqkwjvHCleaver likes starting up drama, it's a well known fact. Giving them minihost was in itself a thing that shouldn't have happened, as they use their position to stir things up and then immediately use the things they stir up as reason to ban people, which the logs fully exemplify. If it had actually been a problem, cookies should have just been muted for a while. No constant whining in chat from Cleaver and making a huge deal out of it. Decisions and things pushed for by someone who got permabanned from a game for DDoSing it aren't trustworthy. |
|
Veemon
Junior Member
Posts: 56
Byond key: VictoryVeemon
|
Post by Veemon on Mar 19, 2015 2:33:40 GMT
That seems pretty clear cut to me. Cookies shouldn't have been banned for something like this.
|
|
|
|
Post by LockedSum on Mar 19, 2015 2:37:16 GMT
Haha, what? Why was Cookies banned? That was clearly all Soji's fault for not doing their role and then Cleaver *apparently* didn't pay attention to the actual game and only read Soji whining in reports and then got really annoyed when Cookies (and others) brought it up.
So:
1. Soji didn't do their role, breaking rule 4. And they broke a knox rule.
2. People rightfully got annoyed with them for ignoring their role, and Cookies was the most vocal about it, though they barely did anything and didn't break any rules, unlike Soji, who broke rule 4.
3. Cookies takes things into their own hands and decides to meta. Several others chirp in (sunglasses, creepy red) and do a little of the same. It seems to be approved by Kamuna and everyone else lets it go.
4. CleaverGirl stirs up trouble by interpreting people calling out someone for not doing their role as "attacking Soji as per rule 1".
Result:
Cookies gets banned.
Logic? Nope!~
Bias? Yup!~ Plenty!~
Let's go over what Cleaver did! Sounds like fun, right?
As evidenced by the log, they didn't just ignore Soji's rule breaking, they made excuses for it! Wow, if that's not bias I don't know what is. Great, isn't it?
They even forced people into apologizing for .. doing something? What'd they do other than validly complain about someone breaking rule 4? It's hard to tell..
Let's see what Cleaver said.
"You were all ganging up on him."
"To the point he had to send reports."
Let's look at those logs. How were people ganging up on Soji?
"OOC: The Long Pink Haired Girl: I like how the detective isn't doing their job."
"OOC: The Orange Haired Girl: why are we doing the detective's job."
Valid comments about a certain someone and rule 4.
"OOC: The Boy with Sunglasses: should we stay quiet or can we participate. I'm not versed with Umineko mode too well.
OOC: The Long Pink Haired Girl: you can participate.
OOC: The Orange Haired Girl: go ahead, the detective isn't doing their job so
OOC: The Orange Haired Girl: do it for them."
Doesn't look like anyone is being mean here. Sounds more like they just want the round to proceed to me.
"OOC: The Long Pink Haired Girl: detective afk'd until 3 A.M. gg"
Pretty much, other than sending announcements. Yep.
"14:52:06 <WhenCookiesCry> ....Either way... that round needed the detective actually there using blue truth.."
A perfectly valid statement. If you think this is breaking rule 1, you need to check yourself at the door and rethink your own bias.
The only thing Cookies did that infringed on rule 1 was around line 875.
Let's see what Soji did this round to clarify:
1. Get Detective role.
2. Go to announcement and announce they won't be doing their role until there's a murder. (even though there was a murder, the teacher.)
3. Decide to do nothing while the Witch sets up a mystery and the other players join in to attempt to solve it.
4. Whine in reports about people getting mad at them, even though they've been breaking rule 4 by doing nothing for hours.
5. Come in at the end and say they've been doing stuff all along (really, what, other than making useless announcements?), and then the game is endvoted.
Huh.
|
|
Veemon
Junior Member
Posts: 56
Byond key: VictoryVeemon
|
Post by Veemon on Mar 19, 2015 2:42:04 GMT
I wouldn't go that far. It looks like it was mostly Soji's fault to me.
|
|
soji
New Member
Posts: 18 
|
Post by soji on Mar 19, 2015 4:06:47 GMT
The reason I acted this way in this round was to avoid what I believe was a common pittfall of Umineko mode; no real interaction for the other players. Normally, the round ends the moment the witch sets up a scenario involving the teacher's body. The most that other players can do is interact amongst themselves, ignoring the other roles entirely, or attempt to participate in the debate, which in my opinion just clutters the discussion even further. Instead, to ensure that more roleplay and conflict happens for other players, I intended for the witch to kill more people. I also believed that this didn't violate my role as detective. The role doesn't state that you are obligated to debate immediately, or that you should prevent others deaths; in fact, if the detective prevented deaths, there wouldn't be many murders to solve.
However, the witch chose to not take that route. I expected that they would eventually kill the others anyway, but my prediction was wrong. In the end the witch decided to try to recruit another player to debate with.
The reason I made the reports was to verify whether I was in the wrong or not. I have no personal feelings about any of the things anyone ever says to me. That was Cleaver's choice to rule that the other player's words were hurtful and uncalled for, I never indicated I was hurt in my reports. At the time, I believed I was right, and still do. If a higher authority decides that's not the case, I'm fine with that.
However, I definitely think the requirements of the detective and witch roles should be made more clear. I was under the impression that the witch was required to kill all humans anyway, as described by the typical killer role. Given that, why shouldn't I wait until the witch kills the other players? Doing so only creates more mysteries to solve, and me debating them would just delay them from killing. That was my thought process.
Whether I won or lost the round is irrelevant, as losing is not breaking the rules. Breaking a Knox rule is not breaking the rules of the game, only admitting defeat, as far as I know. In the end I reserve judgement for the authorities. This is just my explanation of my actions.
|
|
Tanasinn
New Member
Posts: 32
Byond key: Tanasinn
|
Post by Tanasinn on Mar 19, 2015 5:36:12 GMT
You are the Detective!
You have arrived in this catbox to find its creator and prove the possibility of a human culprit.
Using the Blue Truth and Knox Decalogue, prove that the culprit did not need to use magical means to commit their crimes and shatter the catbox by finding the truth.
You are the Golden Witch!
You possess an interesting power. You're able to perform magic, but only when people who don't believe in magic aren't looking, as they block your magic with an "Anti-Magic Toxin". Thanks to this, long story short, you've killed one of the teachers. This resulted in the school being transformed into a catbox in which every possible truth exists at once until somebody opens it. As you spend time in it, your power will grow and you'll be able to perform it despite the Anti-Magic Toxin. Utilize this to create the truth that best suits you.
While the Witch role isn't the most explicitly stated, the detective role is very clear. You are to prove the culprit did not need magic. Sitting around invisible for roughly 9-10 in-game hours and explicitly refusing to debate the witch is, in my personal worthless opinion, on the same level as starticide. It's a wasted player slot and role.
Of course, there is a very good reason why Umineko is one of the modes up first for an overhaul entirely. Too cerebral for the average player.
|
|
|
|
Post by niiniisatoshi on Mar 19, 2015 6:00:43 GMT
I need to point out, as I've needed in the past, that it is an unwritten rule that you should not be posting in the unban thread of another person. Even if you have anything to contribute towards it, it is up to the person posting the appeal to plead their own case. I will leave a note at the top of the forum from here on as I thought I did when this was an issue in the past.
I have come to speak on this situation. Now, the only person who can shed full light on, and give a full explanation, to CleaverGirl's actions is CleaverGirl. She is currently in the process of moving back to the United States, and thus has no internet access for a prolonged period. In the present, however, I'd like to take the time to clarify a few things in your appeal, Shi.
You were not banned for the 'harassment' in question, Shi. You had been asked for several months to correct disruptive behavior on your part or risk consequences for your actions. Several months had passed, and your behavior did not improve in the slightest. The 'harassment' case was simply the last straw after months of being warned for your behavior. In regards to your muting, I was the one to suggest it, not Cleaver. You and the person you were arguing with were both asked to cease and desist in chat. The other person agreed, and there was a sizable period of silence. Then you posted another message about it, blatantly continuing something you were asked to stop talking about. This is why you were muted.
Now, before I go more into that, I feel it is important to address your alt's banning from today as I played a part in this. The other mini-hosts, including Frosty, had a large suspicion that Bloodgraces was in fact WhenCookiesCry due to Bloodgraces acting just as Cookies had. They brought this to my attention, likely knowing I had the most success talking to you rationally. I came to Bloodgraces asking if they were Cookies. You said yes. For the sake of full disclosure; you said to me that another mini-host had 'ordered' you to go on under the alt, keep tabs on the mini-hosts, and keep your nose clean because they 'were taking a risk by letting you use an alt'.
I am going to say this now, Shi. They did not have the say to do that. They did not have the say to allow you to ban avoid, which is against the rules in of itself. The only time it is okay is if Frosty, the host of the server, gives the okay for you to do so for whatever reason. Frosty was never made aware of the situation to begin with, and thus did not give his blessings to it.
Regardless of being 'ordered' to do so, you still broke a rule in ban avoiding, and thus you DID need to be punished. I have already talked with the others and it was decided to talk to Cleaver when she returns as to what to do in regards to unbanning at least Bloodgraces. (As I myself admitted to them, for all intents you were sort of misled by a mini-host in regards to the legitimacy of your alt)
Contrary to what you would believe, Cleaver was effectively being monitored throughout the entire process. In truth, Cleaver would not act without first consulting other moderators in regards to this. In this situation, it was done via a poll. Contrary to your words, something I can personally confirm, this poll did not happen 'within a matter of hours'. The 'harassment' took place early afternoon EST and your ban was not put in place until the next morning.
It was a poll that was done throughout the night so as to be sure that the majority of the active mini-hosts would have fair say in regards to the fate of your potential ban. Initially Cleaver was just going to go with a majority, but ended up polling the rest of the moderators. There were, at the time, ten mini-hosts on staff (counting admins).
For the interest of full disclosure, I will give you the results of the polling:
-Five people abstained, not wanting their votes to be counted, due to either not having enough personal experience with the situation or simply indifference. All of them said they would agree with whatever was decided. This bumped the total votes, in the end, down to five votes. Of this five...
-Four voted Yes.
-One voted No.
As the majority voted yes in this situation, your ban was instituted.
Now, as Cleaver is the only other person who can give a full explanation on this situation, I am going to leave the rest to her. Until such a time as she is around and capable of responding, I am going to temporarily lock this thread. Please, everyone, do not create another thread to discuss the situation in any of the subforums. Allow Cleaver to return, and converse with Shi in this thread.
Regards,
Satoshi
|
|
|
|
Post by cleaver on Mar 24, 2015 3:55:59 GMT
Basically what Satoshi said, and Cookies, you know exactly why you were banned. You're right though -- the one mistake the minihosts made was not to ban you permanently sooner. That being said. You had a last strike policy and chose to break the rules regardless. I can't say with certainty what happened -- but Frosty didn't allow it and ban avoiding is an extremely serious offense. Your temporary ban -- which -- by the way was about to be lifted -- is now permanent because of the choices you made. I'm going to publicly post every bit of the interactions you and I had while we were going through the banning process. You're lying to everyone, and you know exactly why you were banned. You were extremely rotten and vile through most of the exchange up until you realized I basically was one of the reasons you /weren't/ already permanently banned. puu.sh/glqK7/f3dee512a8.pngpuu.sh/glqKp/40c8683414.png puu.sh/glr44/844cffd98c.pngpuu.sh/glrFV/b66ed9045e.pngpuu.sh/glrIm/9ca6603da9.png puu.sh/glrVe/e2681c7498.pngpuu.sh/gls7o/e7c6dda002.pngpuu.sh/gm4NG/8ead765e8d.pngI hope this clears up what REALLY happened between whencookiescry and myself. Cookies -- from me to you -- when you join your next community -- please treat people with respect and decency and not like half broken toys that you can throw around. You're a good person, but you need to keep your emotions in check. I know you'll make a lot of really good long lasting friends if you stop and take a breather and think before you act. That being said -- I'll leave the thread open so you can reply with whatever closing words you'd like to share. Everyone else -- heed what Satoshi has said, and don't post in this thread. |
|
Tanasinn
New Member
Posts: 32
Byond key: Tanasinn
|
Post by Tanasinn on Mar 24, 2015 4:34:25 GMT
Well, at least cookies didn't DDoS an entire game.
|
|
|
|
Post by cleaver on Mar 24, 2015 5:02:47 GMT
You always asked for a clean slate policy so whether or not your accusations are true are irrelevant to the topic at hand. Please follow the rule Satoshi mentioned earlier in the post or your forum account will be terminated. This is neither relevant to the issue at hand nor is it true. Any further infraction(s) will result in a permanent termination of your forum account.
Again -- I've always been civil with you. I've never discriminated against either of you. Throwing around fictitious ad hominem won't help your already closed cases. If anything it's exposing you for what you really are -- very rude, nasty manipulative players with victim complexes that have had too many chances to change while acting on none of those chances.
Last warning Tana -- this is for Cookies and their appeal.
|
|
|
|
Post by niiniisatoshi on Mar 26, 2015 17:09:51 GMT
Let's play a game called go behind the moderator's backs and try to use a more docile moderator to upend your ban. Alright, Shi. Since you want to go behind backs and try to get a mod in trouble, let's play ball here. Full disclosure. You claim the issue of spam complaints didn't happen until Cleaver came around. This is false. You were always considered a problem player, and you were always very close to being banned. Do you know why you weren't? Me. I mean, I shouldn't have to tell you this since I was working with you before Cleaver was around, trying to keep you from getting into trouble, but I don't think you quite appreciate the situation that occurred. You were basically always looked at as a problem player, Shi. It was a case where you were almost banned countless times, before I would step in and put in a good word for you. I am the sole reason this didn't happen sooner, and at this point I regret giving you as many chances as I did. Since you want to play the 'seniority card' let me bring some things to attention for you, Shi. Both Cleaver and I played Mitadake before you did. As a matter of fact, I do believe Frosty originally started around or before Cleaver and I did. Then again, you did mention 'experience', not seniority.... So let's just base it off that. I won't speak for the others, but Frosty and I were both effectively the head admins of Pyrce High for multiple years. As a matter of fact, Shi, Braska himself refereed to me as his right hand. I was the one actively watching and reporting for him, and I was the one acting to keep the game in check in the owner's place. Shi, I was the one who talked to the man DDOSing Pyrce for weeks on end, and talked him into leaving the players alone. I have seen and experienced more than anyone can understand, especially surviving the behind-the-scenes politicking of that game. So as far as you holding more experience? No. You do not. How long you've played has nothing to do with experience to begin with, so I don't know why you ever brought that up. However, let us actually discuss the screenshot in question here. You are actively trying to convince a single mini-host to undo your ban. Now, I know you have to have been reading your own unban thread, right? You were not banned by a single mini-host, Shi. Your ban was decided on by the majority of the staff, not just Cleaver. In fact, let me remind you of the results; Since the banning, the majority of said five abstaining voters have outright said they see no issue with the ban. So, Shi, you want a single mini-host whom's vote I will not reveal to go against basically every other mini-host and undo your ban. That isn't going to happen. In fact, I'm beginning to suspect you are actively ignoring everything being said. You were indefinitely banned to give you time off, to allow you to grow and correct your behavior. You didn't. You told me that you were ordered by a moderator, who's name I will not mention, to spy on the mini-hosts and they gave you the okay the ban avoid. You lied about their words, and ban avoiding is still ban avoiding. You were permabanned due to seeming refusal to correct your behavior. You tried to go around the ruling, which was agreed upon by the majority of the moderators, and get a moderator in trouble for your sake. I have discussed this situation with Frosty after this latest development to decide upon what to do. The choice was left in my hands and, as of now, I am locking this thread. There is nothing more to discuss in this situation. Your actions have proven to me that you have not warranted an unban. It is my sincere hope that you will take your experiences from Misuterii and past games and learn from your times, use them to grow towards even greater heights. Sincerely, Satoshi.
|
|
