"Rebellion" - Please read fully.

[iDufferz]

It's been outlined in MCGamer's rules for at least the past year that joking about cheating will result in a ban. This isn't something that's just suddenly started happening.

Why would that result in a ban if someone is joking around about cheating, and it shouldn't get you banned for a week or permanently.

 

[JoelJCE]

Why would that result in a ban if someone is joking around about cheating, and it shouldn't get you banned for a week or permanently.

I never said that I agreed with the concept. I only aimed to point out that this isn't something that just recently started happening.

The following is quoted directly from the rules:

• Admitting to using a modded/hacked client, even jokingly, will result in a ban

 

[BaccaBoy1999]

Why would that result in a ban if someone is joking around about cheating, and it shouldn't get you banned for a week or permanently.

I am surprised you are an active member and don't know that. It wouldn't happen if people actually read the rules. People have gotten in trouble for this farther back than just a month/recently.

 

[iDufferz]

I am surprised you are an active member and don't know that. It wouldn't happen if people actually read the rules. People have gotten in trouble for this farther back than just a month/recently.

I knew about the rule, I have never agreed with it or understood why someone would get permanently banned for joking around saying they hack.

 

[BaccaBoy1999]

I knew about the rule, I have never agreed with it or understood why someone would get permanently banned for joking around saying they hack.

On the internet, it is tough to tell whether people are lying or not, as if they say "I'm hacking" and immediately after a guy takes a screenshot, he wouldn't catch the "jk" or "not really" either way, we take it seriously, because admitting to hackingcould be serious.

 

[iDufferz]

On the internet, it is tough to tell whether people are lying or not, as if they say "I'm hacking" and immediately after a guy takes a screenshot, he wouldn't catch the "jk" or "not really" either way, we take it seriously, because admitting to hackingcould be serious.

REALLY? So mods are allowed to assume that someone is hacking... from TEXT, wow.

 

[mr_pendle]

This is not a server run by a dictator. Speak freely c:

lol

 

[Mooclan]

JoelJCE I would go back and quote your posts but I lost track of where they were.

Unfortunately I don't have time to write a massive essay, even though I want to.
People started disagreeing with staff ever since the community opened. It's part of what people do, they bicker and argue.
However, the term "Corruption" started a bit before you joined the forums. Or at least, I started hearing it more around March or late February of 2013.
Have you ever heard the term, "The Summit"?
I don't know exactly what happened during The Summit, or when it happened, but from what I've gathered in all my attempts to further understand it, Col_StaR and some others wanted to try and eliminate what people called staff corruption in a series of peaceful meetings. People who attended were directly told that they would not face consequences for anything they said during those meetings. I don't know who said that, but people believed it right away - which leads me to assume that it was a staff member who said that.
So naturally, they believed they had utter freedom of speech without worrying about getting banned. So people talked, and from what I heard, chaos ensued. But they wouldn't get banned, right? Ehh.. not so much. There were in fact several bans that went down, and some staff members resigned because of that.
After that meeting, players started doubting the staff a lot more. Within various clan chats, rumors spread about certain individual staff members and the staff as a whole, Admins were doubted, and overall discontent spread throughout the community.

It really didn't help that staff members stuck to the whole, "We will not discuss bans" rule. Yes, I understand that it's between the person and the Staff... but personally, I think there should be a point at which MCG decides, "Heck, fine. We'll give you what you want, and talk about the bans." Because by not discussing them and saying, "Hey, look, this person did something wrong - we were completely justified in our actions," things just get out of hand, and you come to what we have today - people trying to get other people demoted, and other people revolting like serfs from way back when.

 

[JoelJCE]

REALLY? So mods are allowed to assume that someone is hacking... from TEXT, wow.

That's not really a legitimate argument. A Moderator also assumes that someone is abusive, racist or inappropriate from messages that they send in chat; why should cheating be given an exception if there's sufficient evidence to prove that they're breaking the rules? Though I understand what you're saying.

Personally, I (and presumably you as well) don't agree with people being punished for joking about cheating. But in that same respect, I wouldn't want people to playfully encourage others to cheat, essentially giving the impression that "everyone does it, even me" and later claim that they were only joking when a Staff member says something.

EDIT: Mooclan, it's important to note that I personally don't agree with some actions taken by the Staff. And I'm certain that the word "corruption" has been used in the past; but this really isn't about when a word was first used, but how it's being used. What I meant in my original post was that "corruption" seems to have become the key word used in demonstrations against the Staff when people have little understanding as to why certain members of the community feel that they are corrupt to begin with (for reasons like The Summit). The Staff have been called corrupt so frequently that people are beginning to substitute it into their posts as a generally unpleasant word when their situation has nothing to do with corruption. I should have clarified.

 

[CrystalKnowledge]

I think I have a fairly solid solution to this whole problem. Now before we begin, i'm not entirely familiar with the staff and all their policies, but having read through this thread and how it doesn't sound like the first time there's been a "rebellion", I can't help but feel that if there have been several rebellions against the staff in specific (Not anything else on this server) then something's not right here. Now, let me just say that I'm not trying to bad-mouth the staff here, but we can't hide the facts that there's some kind of problem, whether it be community or the staff.

So, here's the solution: I would advise the staff to try and talk to ANY member in this rebellion or past rebellion. Ask them what it is that they feel the need to make a whole rebellion for and get their reasoning. It's funny that they're so adamant to have a rebellion against the staff and yet they seem to have forgotten the basic necessity, a reason for having the damn thing in the first place. (Pardon the D-word, it was for emphasis ). Once we have that all figured out all the staff has to do is start fixing any errors the users might state. Now the one exception might be if they say "I hate this staff member! I want him gone!". If they do that, further question them: Ask them why they want them gone and if they have evidence. Be sure to be civil the whole time when talking to them.

Remind them that any staff member can be demoted and that it has been done in the past if the evidence was sufficient enough. The best thing to be able to do is to get the staff member being questioned into that conversation so they can try and back up their actions so we're not only hearing one side of the story (Because we know how warped these things can get).

All in all, the rebellion that seems to be going on now seems completely pointless and it doesn't even seem to have a reason: so I don't know if I can even call it a rebellion. It more sounds like a couple kids that are just trying to be funny and cause some trouble while doing it.

 

[BaccaBoy1999]

I have an answer for the whole problem.
To Staff: Try to be lenient when dealing with a person and remind them that arguing with staff isn't allowed, and they can report/complain about a staff member on the forums.
To Community: Focus a bit more on the game, and a bit less on the drama. We don't say everything that goes on in a staff meeting, well, because it is a staff meeting, and if we say 1 thing, it will get twisted and turned until it is the complete opposite of the point we are trying to convey. If you don't test staff when we are trying to deal with other people, you won't get in trouble.

I know the community is a reason for a lot of you guys are around, but if some of you guys actually playing the game a bit more and not pile up in hub 8 and complain about staff, you might have more fun.

 

[HalfSquirrel]

I don't agree with getting banned for 'admitting' to hax, because that's like arresting someone because they said "I killed someone". You can say it's an unfair comparison all you want, but people making similar comparisons all the time. Do you believe someone when they say they're murderers? Chances are you won't. Do you believe someone when they say they're hacking? Chances are you still don't, but you decided to ban them anyways. That really doesn't make much sense to me. I understand that you don't want to take the risk, but is it really worth banning people for joking around and trying to have fun?