(06-25-2021, 05:59 AM)Eclipse Wrote: sure you could just reban him again but then you just make yourself look like fools for having to do it again after unbanning him.I couldn't care less about that. If someone waits 2 years and gets rebanned immediately after an unban, I wouldn't say we're the ones who look like fools. Takes 5 seconds to re-ban someone. If someone gets that offended about an unbanned person getting rebanned after doing something dumb, they need to re-evaluate how serious they're taking things in the online community.
(06-25-2021, 05:59 AM)Eclipse Wrote: just because you are helpful, doesnt mean you get a free pass to do stupid shit.
Of course it doesn't give them a free pass, but it shouldn't be totally disregarded. He was helpful well after he did stupid shit, not during. What his motives were though I think are pretty clear. So take that however you wish. I was merely providing info.
I think it's pretty clear that some people can never let go of petty grudges. This poll was more of an experiment than anything, personally I believe if rick were unbanned, it would be problematic, however, not exactly for the reasons you think. I think he could and probably would potentially cause issues on his own over time, but I think the immediate issues would be involving a select group of people who would be butthurt about him and do everything they can to bait him into doing something, be passive aggressive at him, etc. Much like how a certain group allegedly tried to frame him for shit in a minecraft server.
I also think there's also more problematic players that exist right now, in a completely different context though. (Not just toxicity, it goes deeper than that)
To be clear, I voted no on unbanning him as well, super early on. I never really expected this to pass the 20% margin, but I think it highlights some core issues with things like this. Some people act like it's the end of the world, others just bandwagon with what others think, new players don't give two shits (rightfully so), and old players, some that barely play are seemingly still holding some kind of grudge, getting their friends that literally haven't played in years to vote on this, straight up inventing problems that don't exist, or just not really understanding that perma bans have always been fluid and not 'set in stone' when it's not related to major things like hacking ,chargebacks, etc
Perma bans have always been more so "Indefinite" bans for things unrelated to the set in stone extreme offenses. Ban appeals ultimately would determine what would come of it. I did say his one ban would be his 'final perma ban with no chance of appeal' years ago. I also said the same thing with McNuggies ban, and what nuggie did was a lot more serious than what rick did, nuggie got unbanned and was supported by most of you after many ban appeals.. Things change, opinions change, and the majority of the active playerbase changes as time goes on. The way I saw it: If the majority of the player base are people that have never even interacted with him, most of his offenses were relatively minor, years have passed, we've become more lax, and he's not entirely batshit crazy like some other people that try to appeal, does it really matter?
shrug
x3