@Ghost said in Armageddon MUD:
@Jeshin said in Armageddon MUD:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/619345329619206173/652699205378506752/20191206_211900.jpg
Last one I promise. No need to worry even if complaint that necro'd this thread is fake here's a real one from a phone (harder to fake) and from a long time player with a history!
PS - Sorry for bringing the MUD stuff over here but... Woof this guy.
Is it weird that the first time I read that I thought "Duh, I'd be screaming with a knife in me, too"?
If taken out of context and placed in a vacuum, I promise you that me and my staffers have made way worse comments than that. This doesn't actually prove anything, really. Most of ours are made for rimshot humor effects.
ETA: If I were the staffer investigating this, and I was provided the evidence that they claim to have seen, I would rule against the accuser too. The IP thing is pretty damning. As someone said, it's a small world, but not that small, and as mentioned, the Discord stuff is pretty easy to fake.
I would also take into account my personal history with the staffer in question, because yes, I am going to do a gut check to see if the pattern of behavior they are accused of matches anything that I have seen from them, the language that I know they're prone to using, etc.
And no, I would not suspend them from staff while the investigation is ongoing, because a) no matter what your intentions with it are, that paints them with a scarlet letter in the court of public opinion, even if you come back later and clear them of it. And b) staff is already hard to find, and harder to keep, so I'm not going to start locking the people that are working for me and helping me keep the plates in the air in a cage until I can figure out if someone is telling the truth or not.
If I determine that they are telling the truth, then the staffer will be gone. I've done it before. At least three times now. But until that point, no, I'm not going to take an action against them, because frankly, I hired them because I trust them, and as far as I'm concerned, they're innocent until proven guilty.
So, when presented with the evidence listed here, and the concerns that they brought back? I would uphold the finding. I don't think that the staff here were out of bounds on that. If other evidence gets presented, it might change my mind, but so far all we have are one comment taken out of context and a log provided from someone that had already been banned from the game, and that does not rise to the level of evidence necessary to be actionable.