NationStates

Xoriet wrote:

Ever-Wandering Souls wrote:Also, what’s with offering evidence to other GCR leaders while refusing to let the accused see detail/evidence of what they’re accused of?

That's not entirely an uncommon practice though. Trading information on problematic members with close allies for them to be able to decide if they want said members in their region isn't unheard of. It's not exactly a good practice and can lead to trouble (see: Imki and TNP) but it's nothing new or extraordinary. I think it's fair to do so in cases of legitimate OOC harassment, but only if the evidence can legitimately endanger victims who reported it. Usually this is the standard by which this policy operates among regional leaders and admin teams. It can be justified sometimes, but it can also lead to serious consequences.

If there were serious endangerment going on, I doubt the ban would've been anything other than a permanent one, rather than the 8 months Tim and Escade got.

Devi Vytherin wrote:If there were serious endangerment going on, I doubt the ban would've been anything other than a permanent one, rather than the 8 months Tim and Escade got.

I know what happened, and it wasn't equivalent to that kind of thing. I just wanted to make sure that people who don't generally know how this stuff works in GCRs knew that not sharing evidence isn't anything that hasn't happened before.

Cormactopia Prime wrote:It's absurd but unsurprising to see that Escade and Tim were banned, but those on the other side of the conflict were left in place.

It's unsurprising because the same administrators who decided to ban Escade and Tim were the other side of the conflict. This is a complete sham, and while I'm not surprised to see Tsunamy and Glen-Rhodes engaged in it, I'm genuinely surprised and disappointed to see Roavin engaged in it and some others I thought I respected supporting it. Banning one side of a conflict while the other people get to continue being awful to whomever they feel like, as Glen has consistently done for years, isn't going to cure TSP's toxicity. You've swept toxicity under the rug by banning one faction. You haven't fixed it.

Today I really wish we had a like button on here. As Aerosmith once sang to me, "Same old song and dance"

Everyone has the right to be made aware of charges presented against them. It's a fundamental democratic freedom, and I expected better from the South Pacific.

United Massachusetts wrote:Everyone has the right to be made aware of charges presented against them. It's a fundamental democratic freedom, and I expected better from the South Pacific.

In fact, I’d say they even explicitly have that right. Let’s look at TSP’s forum moderation rules/policy page.

8. Do not make false accusations in order to tarnish the reputations of other people. If you make an accusation, it is your responsibility to provide sufficient proof.

It's also important to mention that moderators and administrators are not above the rules. They are expected to abide by them, and can be given the same punishments as a regular user.

All forum staff members are expected to act professionally and fairly in undertaking their duties. This means they are patient and reserved, instead of acting rashly and emotionally when taking any action. They are objective in applying the rules, and tolerant of users they may not like very much. All administrators and moderators are responsive to reports and helpful to new players. They are not “the law” and do not wield their authority to intimidate users into submission.

....

In reverse order: I believe Escade has said that she was told by admins that her “issues” were “minor” if she “responded the right way” when asked by a different body about Tim. Sounds like wielding authority to intimidate her into submission. Well, whoever they are, they aren’t above the rules. Please, let’s have sufficient proof of both these accusations and the ones against the banned players.

United Massachusetts wrote:Everyone has the right to be made aware of charges presented against them. It's a fundamental democratic freedom, and I expected better from the South Pacific.

Well, Tim and Escade definetly knew what they were doing, and they knew that they were being banned for. Not only that, the Admin team did describe the charges in their post. So yeah, they are aware.

North Prarie wrote:

United Massachusetts wrote:Everyone has the right to be made aware of charges presented against them. It's a fundamental democratic freedom, and I expected better from the South Pacific.

Well, Tim and Escade definetly knew what they were doing, and they knew that they were being banned for. Not only that, the Admin team did describe the charges in their post. So yeah, they are aware.

After multiple reports from players, we found that there is clear and ongoing harassment of a specific group and a willingness to twist words and language made in good faith towards other purposes.

...exceedingly generally. I’m not sure “described” can even be said. Who? What? Since when? Examples? They “tried unsuccessfully to mediate” according to them, and according to Tim they didn’t try very hard - how about some detail on what was tried? As quoted above - “If you make an accusation, it is your responsibility to provide sufficient proof.”

If this is so clear, why all the requests in that same announcement thread for details and proof?

Meanwhile, to step back into my own limelight, hey, I still haven’t had any detail on how I’m apparently actively acting to coup TSP given, at all. I’m not aware of exactly what I’m being accused of, when it supposedly took place, what I’ve allegedly specifically done.

This same back and forth that is now going on in this thread has been going on in TSP, over various channels and forums, now for years. I wasn’t sure if I should even engage in this discussion because the potential solutions, some that I have suggested several times now publicly and privately, are ignored. I had wanted a clear response from TSP administration but do not think I will get one. We were told “Apologize and you are fine to stay” to “You did apologize but we’re going to interpret it as not good enough and now you’re banned for eight months which is conveniently two elections cycles” in four days. It also prevents any counter filing, defense, or anything really. No actual attempts to mediate or control the situation were possible because three of the four admin were entrenched in the battle themselves.

Anyone who follows NSGP knows that I am capable of being a fighter. The words “Be your upbeat and positive self” have been thrown at me by admin and others in this situation. As much as I am capable of being “upbeat and positive,” I’m perfectly capable of being blunt, sassy, or even harsh. That is no secret.

TSP has a cyclical discussion about toxicity. In the Legislator Lounge - I had been looking at the history of toxicity and discussions around appropriate political behavior before being banned without notice. The discussion was going on in October 2017 when the point of conflict was between Roavin and Farengeto, before that it seems it was between Glenn and Cormac, Glenn and Belschaft, Glenn and Wolf, Kris and Imki, Glenn and Imki, and on and on and on as far back as you go.We have three players (Lady Hopolis, Tac, and Apad) leave the region because Kris chose to (as admin) go against admin protocols and report on the IC forums actions of the Court and try to make it an OOC issue. These three players felt bullied and left the region. No one did anything even though someone suggested that maybe admin should also be held accountable. Now Kris is the Chief Justice and Glenn is a Court Justice - having effectively replaced the players they pushed out. There are a number of other players who have left or been pushed out through the actions of different admin members. Tim and I were targeted for removal since May of 2018. I was told at that point that the issues with me weren't major if I towed the party line. That is not my style.

We don’t need DMs to trace these behaviors, they are available to be tracked in TSP Discord channels. The DMs I shared with a player were publicized or perhaps weaponized by the former FA Minister without my permission. There are plenty of public behaviors that are trackable. What are acceptable standards? Those in power who engage in these behaviors and reward them also set them. Why it that these same admin utterly refuse to make a list of 10 points that aren’t acceptable beginning with 1. Don’t ping a player to try to force them to answer your questions, 2. Keep criticism related to actions, Etc. I started making a list in the Legislator Lounge in Discord before being told that was not going to happen and was summarily banned without notice. The reason they don’t make a clear list is because they they would have to follow these rules as well and it would be transparent that no one, regardless of clique, could engage in these behaviors.

Players use tactics that have been deemed acceptable if the players who engage in these tactics are in power. All of the admin, at some point, have either engaged in these tactics, encouraged them, or sent me thumbs up for fighting their enemies or on their behalf in these ways. Of the players who have left and are publically known, all engaged in political power plays and have had political ambitions that they tried to effect in the region. What is new has been a trend to cite “mental health issues” as reasons they should not face criticism (but they are allowed to criticize or make political moves). These same players do not call out their friend\social groups for engaging in behaviors that they do call out other people for. They also dogpile when they can or think they have an easy target. If there were innocent players in this conflict, it is not the players who left or threatened to leave - its the players who have stayed behind to try to mediate but were powerless to do so.

We had a forum system where people got points and then warnings for behavior. At no point has any admin spoke to either Tim or I about specific behaviors or events or actions. There were no moderation steps. Any attempt to point out the behaviors that admin engaged in (on the same day nonetheless) were ignored. The public things that have come out include pinging a player to call them out (a tactic used widely and against me that same day) and Tim creating the thread about Roavin, Kris, Glenn, and Farengeto sharing a private server with Unibot was cited as OOC toxic publicly by admin.

Tim and I were targeted to be shut out of the TSP politics in May of this year. Since then the in-fighting has been bad, on all sides. I actually did complain about some behaviors that admin engaged in during the time and was told, “That’s nasty but its politics.” When I first entered TSP Assembly in 2013, I made a forum post then about how we should hold each other to higher standards, then as in recently I was told “If you can’t stand the fire, don’t get in the kitchen.” Either TSP wants to be more polite and courteous community for all members or “It’s nasty but it’s politics” applies to everyone.

Finally the timing of this purge is interesting as well since it is politically motivated. The stated goals of at least two admin members have been to keep me and Tim out of politics for at least six months (publicly stated). Recently, a new FA Minister was appointed and a new RA Minister elected (who I backed against the establishment and who won over North Prarie - a player who supported Tim when Tim was attacking his enemy for example). The FA Minister had to “fight” with the cabinet (Farengeto, the PM who gleefully “burned” our lampshades when we were banned) to be given permission to let me and Tim help plan a TSP\TEP event. The RA Minister also asked me to help with RA. Conveniently, the same day as the FA Minister sent me a DM to let me know they wanted me to help - I and Tim were purged.

It is highly unfortunate to be shut out of a region that I have loved for a long time. I don't see any changes happening unless the admin are held accountable and I was banned only four days after proposing that change so I doubt it will happen. It has been implied that I am the new Imki and history is repeating itself. I'll take being compared to Imki as a compliment.

M a m a M i a .

This is honestly some of the most inane shit that I've read in a while. None of this needed to escalate to this level, and nobody even benefits from it.

Damn this place is on fire too...

Midand wrote:Damn this place is on fire too...

That's what happens when TSP Administration protects their own, hangs out with individuals widely banned from GP, applies questionable moderation standards, and clearly isn't acting in any sort of good faith.

Tim Stark wrote:

Midand wrote:Damn this place is on fire too...

That's what happens when TSP Administration protects their own, hangs out with individuals widely banned from GP, applies questionable moderation standards, and clearly isn't acting in any sort of good faith.

Hey, Tim, and Escade too - Glen just posted in the ban thread again, and stated core facts about recent events differently from you two. Things like whether or not apologies were given, so forth. Ignoring, for the moment, other holes in his post that others may seize on (like not specifying much further, minimizing his own role, ignoring his bias in the situation, and basically admitting to a less than perfect escalation process), can either y'all or Glen prove some of these basic facts you can't seem to agree on? Can someone start to prove who is lying vs telling the truth on very basic and easy to prove things?

Thanks.

Well, this is odd. Hmmm... is this the same Tim and Escapade that mocked Balder for PNGing them, and touted TSP as the pinnacle of democracy and civilisation in NS?

le gasp

I think I've got a longer history of butting heads with Glen than anyone else in TSP, and would generally speaking be the last person to defend him.

That said, in regards to recent events it hasn't been a case of "six of one and half a dozen of the other". I can't speak of what may have occurred privately (and had no part in this admin decision) but in our public areas Tim and Escade have been primarily responsible for the unpleasantness. Roavin and Glen both crossed the line on occasion, which is why they were among the players subject to a 48 hour timeout on our Discord.

Kris has had no involvement in any of the public incidents I've seen, and I have no idea how he has supposedly become involved in this aside from being an Admin.

Regardless of all that, if Tim or Escade feel this moderation action was unfounded and represents criminal abuse of administration for political reasons - as suggested - they should feel free to bring the matter to the Court. I can certainly guarantee them a fair hearing.

North East Somerset wrote:Well, this is odd. Hmmm... is this the same Tim and Escapade that mocked Balder for PNGing them, and touted TSP as the pinnacle of democracy and civilisation in NS?

le gasp

You and I both know part of the FA job is dealing out your regime's rhetoric, even if some of the rhetoric and ideals are in your opinion stupid as all shit.

Belschaft wrote:I can certainly guarantee them a fair hearing.

You mean like the absolute sham of a hearing you're giving Souls, where you're refusing to let Defense Counsel see the evidence and haven't actually informed the accused what specifically he's being accused of? Given that the current situation with the Admin Ban is highlighted by a refusal to inform the accused what they're actually being accused of, and a refusal to distribute the evidence, I don't have much faith in TSP's joke of a kangaroo court to do any better than its joke of an Administrative Team. If you want to claim that you can give fair hearings, why don't y'all step it up and start demonstrating that standard in the current case instead of making false guarantees you've been failing to follow through on.

Lord Dominator wrote:Riddle me this: I understand that a few weeks ago, Glen, Roavin, Escade, Tim, and Ian all gained a 48 hour (TSP) Discord ban, which strangely, does not suggest to me that only Tim/Escade were at fault here.
shrugs

The 48 hour Discord ban was after a particularly heated argument between both sides; the forum ban is for long-term behaviour from those two individuals in particular. Also, although there is some overlap, Discord admin team =/= forum admin team (not saying your post implied the were the same; just clarifying).

Pencil Sharpeners 2 wrote:

Lord Dominator wrote:Riddle me this: I understand that a few weeks ago, Glen, Roavin, Escade, Tim, and Ian all gained a 48 hour (TSP) Discord ban, which strangely, does not suggest to me that only Tim/Escade were at fault here.
shrugs

The 48 hour Discord ban was after a particularly heated argument between both sides; the forum ban is for long-term behaviour from those two individuals in particular. Also, although there is some overlap, Discord admin team =/= forum admin team (not saying your post implied the were the same; just clarifying).

Got it

Belschaft wrote:I think I've got a longer history of butting heads with Glen than anyone else in TSP, and would generally speaking be the last person to defend him.

That said, in regards to recent events it hasn't been a case of "six of one and half a dozen of the other". I can't speak of what may have occurred privately (and had no part in this admin decision) but in our public areas Tim and Escade have been primarily responsible for the unpleasantness. Roavin and Glen both crossed the line on occasion, which is why they were among the players subject to a 48 hour timeout on our Discord.

Kris has had no involvement in any of the public incidents I've seen, and I have no idea how he has supposedly become involved in this aside from being an Admin.

Regardless of all that, if Tim or Escade feel this moderation action was unfounded and represents criminal abuse of administration for political reasons - as suggested - they should feel free to bring the matter to the Court. I can certainly guarantee them a fair hearing.

>>Tim and Escade have made clear the reasons why they think Kris and Glen are biased in this case
>>Third, non-admin member of the court gives opinion that Tim and Escade were absolutely in the wrong and deserved their ban
>>"I can certainly guarantee them a fair hearing."

So who's going to give the fair hearing once all three justices recuse themselves?

---

Meanwhile, with a bit more time, let me go back and actually point out some of the worst bits of GR's update to the bans.

We received complaints and testimonies from a diverse group of TSPers. In general, individual complaints and testimonies won't be shared publicly, because those people deserve and reasonably expect a level of anonymity. The admins aren't going to do anything that will just give Tim and Escade ammo from wherever they plant their feet after TSP. Despite addressing the horrible behavior in TSP, NationStates is a very... porous and networked game, and it's the unfortunate case that they can continue attacking from afar, with plenty of regions that will gleefully offer them the platform to do so.

So we've got basically "people said they were mean," with no wording mentioning evidence, rather testimony, a a vague "diverse group of sources." I particularly like the concept that somehow giving them access to what they're being accused of would give *them* "ammunition" to use *against the admin team.* If the admin team has done this all right, what "ammunition" would there be?

There isn't one single event that led to these bans, though there were some significant incidents over the past several months. It's a behavioral problem overall, not a flame that happened on this day or a troll that happened on that day. Trying to provide a litany of quotes would likely lack the context that many in TSP already know. "Death by a thousand cuts" is the apt metaphor-- each individual cut doesn't seem that serious, but combined together it's deadly. As Tsu's OP says, the bans are in response to several months' worth of behavior problems, fighting, personal attacks, targeted bullying, a general (OOC/person-behind-the-nation) hostility that goes well beyond what the community is willing to put up with. People can fight and dislike each other in our open community, but there's a line. Is it clearly defined? I'm not sure that's possible, and part of our job as a community is to really talk about that moving forward, but the number of people who filed complaints speaks to the line.

This is all silly. If there were plenty of events, then there's a shitload of evidence out there! Sum up the context! Is TSP knows, why are half the posts in the thread asking about it? By all accounts, warning were given to both sides for behavior - explain why one side is now banned and the other is doing the banning, and how objectivity has been retained!

Warnings were indeed given many times, both formally and informally. First, though it wasn't given by any admins, the motion of no confidence was the original "warning," but being an inherently political IC act, it wasn't treated with the level of seriousness it deserved. That was a pretty in-depth look at the start of the behavioral issues. There were many private conversations between forum/Discord admins and private players, all that failed to result in any change. On the Discord side, there was a 48-hour posting ban (called a "timeout") that was applied to everybody involved in the specific argument that occurred at the time, but was issued broadly addressing the long-term problems. That didn't work very long, clearly.

"Warnings were given. But not by the people who give warnings. By some political stuff against them. Because for some reason that's the same thing as a moderation warning. Also both sides got a time out as the most recent escalation. After that was applied to both them and myself, next time there was an issue, I banned them."

Both Tim and Escade were given the opportunity to apologize for their behavior and alter their courses, and in return avoid hard consequences, but they both declined. Escade sent back a long response essentially saying she was justified. Tim feigned ignorance, saying he didn't know what problems we were even talking about. They were originally given 3 days to respond, but ended up getting 5. The ban was issued on the 5th day.

They both adamantly state they did apologize, and I love that "they're faking ignorance" is an excuse for not giving them reasons for their ban.

But wait, there's Tsu too -

I both want to support and contest what Glen said here. Regardless of "giving anyone ammo," it's simply impossible to lay this out in any way that's going to be effective. It was a continually build up of things and hostility. For two of the more recent examples, we have the continued smearing of Glen through his friend with Unibot and the assertion that Roavin was purposefully delaying votes.

While both questioning the admin relationship with Unibot and questioning Roavin's job as fine, in of itself, it just so happened to grave dig the Glen-Unibot thread after admins reached out and asked the users to apologize/clam down, which clearly speaks to the bad faith that thread was created in.

If it's impossible to make an effective case, maybe you should think about if you have an actually good case?

...

...

And then two examples. Saying "hanging out with Unibot and giving him acceptance is bad" is smearing now? I thought that was pretty widely accepted as the right thing to say.. Also, accusing someone of delaying votes for political reasons is ban-worthy? Or wait, it isn't, it's "fine," but, to paraphrase, because "admin asked them to calm down" it's "in bad faith." (?????) Color me confused about what is even being *said.*

Regarding sharing the evidence with the region at large, while I would love to, I do think it's best we don't air the complaints in the open with permission. However, I will say various high ranking and highly respected players made complaints and, I think the responses of to this thread support the decision.

The responses, of which about half ask for proof? Those responses? Could you at least air them to the accused?

Finally, the parties were warned and invited to essentially apologize and just come to some semblance of civility. I'm not going to claim to know anyone's motives, but the response the admins were given from Escade included a defense of Discord posts from more than a year ago and Tim said he would be busy all week with IRL (which, certainly is understandable), only to post frequently in the FA forum.

So an apology with a bit of defensiveness and someone being busy are also ban worthy? Or is this more "fine" stuff, that's being described...to....can someone help me here?

Regardingless of the warnings, I think its important to note that this is a historical anomaly. The only other thing I can think of is when Fudge banned LR ... 12 ... 13 ... 14 years ago?

The bans? Or people who oppose GR and call him on his shit being driven out? Because idk about the former, but the latter happens a lot more often than a dozen years ago.

I also want to reiterate this is a gut-wrenching decision. Admins discussed it, decided on a course of action ... and, to be honest, I was still quite hesitant to do it. However, after us trying to reach out and smooth things over, we received another, unsolicited complaint from an long-time, well-respected and thoroughly unbiased member of the region. And that point, it was clear to me that something had to be done.

If it was so thought about, discussed, and and decided, why is it so hard to provide clear claims and proof of specific issues that are "not fine?" Is part of said discussion not clearly listing what claims are being made, with proof? That's kinda something that should definitely be a part of an admin investigation...

At this point this argument, from both sides, is sounding a lot like inane babbling. People's minds are already made up, from what it sounds like, and one side is not going to get what it wants because the other conveniently holds all of the cards, and the deck is stacked moreover.

Jar Wattinree wrote:At this point this argument, from both sides, is sounding a lot like inane babbling. People's minds are already made up, from what it sounds like, and one side is not going to get what it wants because the other conveniently holds all of the cards, and the deck is stacked moreover.

(Image)

But we'll make our grievances known, which is nearly as good!

Lord Dominator wrote:

Jar Wattinree wrote:At this point this argument, from both sides, is sounding a lot like inane babbling. People's minds are already made up, from what it sounds like, and one side is not going to get what it wants because the other conveniently holds all of the cards, and the deck is stacked moreover.

(Image)

But we'll make our grievances known, which is nearly as good!

All righty then.

I find it fucking hilarious that Tsunamy is claiming I went radio silent on him when I approached him with replies multiple times in the multi-day period following the initial notification. Rather than demonstrating any integrity or cooperativeness in this case, he chose to ignore me completely despite being online and active during multiple times in the following period. I was not able to make any apology, as requested from me, as I did not think I would be able to do so in good faith without even knowing what specifically I was accused of. At one point in the message, I'm told I must retract a statement I made about Glen that constituted as a false accusation of OOC Misconduct, but they would not even tell me what I said. How can I retract a statement when I don't know what I'm referring to? It would sound fake and non-genuine.

Despite Glen-Rhodes' best efforts to claim I'm being willfully ignorant, or pretending not to know what they're talking about, I really don't know what they're talking about in most of this case.

If there's one thing boldly clear in this circumstance, it's that the the forum administration of The South Pacific did not execute any of this in good faith, lack the ability to actually present to either the accused or to the GP community any evidence or explanation of the crime committed, willfully ignored communications with the accused parties and then claimed the accused did not reply to them, and made several bold-faced lies within their statement on the topics of warnings being given, mediation being attempted, and communication being as present as they claim it was with the accused parties.

*sits among the dumpster fire this thread is now*
I'm just gonna watch...

Jar Wattinree wrote:

Lord Dominator wrote:But we'll make our grievances known, which is nearly as good!

All righty then.

Works for me

In addition, I think it's interesting that Tsunamy, the TSP Root Admin and Delegate, has now announced a month-long LOA.

Convenient timing, that.