+- Fearless Forums (https://fearlessrp.net)
+-- Forum: General Discussion (https://fearlessrp.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Forum: Discussions (https://fearlessrp.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+---- Forum: Archive (https://fearlessrp.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=481)
+---- Thread: FearRP Explanation (/showthread.php?tid=64779)
RE: FearRP Explanation - goigle! - 09-22-2015
(09-22-2015, 06:32 PM)Zerdrick Wrote: Not sure which issue I was repeating.
Thanks for your observations, but please try not to derail the discussion by attacking my post.
I was responding to both of your posts. You are derailing this discussion by posting pictures of posts (which isn't needed and just takes up space - just say the post number) and asking why you were warned when there are better places for that. Sure, you may be allowed to ask in the rules, but this is not the place. You also started off your "discussion" in this thread bringing up irrelevant past issues.
Your first post also looked like you were trying to start an argument with admins or at the very least vent your anger, in either case this is the wrong thread.
RE: FearRP Explanation - Audacter - 09-22-2015
Message to everyone regarding the 'discussion' of "Why was I warned?" and all that other irrelevant stuff.
Keep it off the post, By all means contact the Staff member who warned you privately about it. This thread is not the place.
Final warning for everyone, end of discussion. Warning will be handed out to anyone who continues with them.
RE: FearRP Explanation - User 12049 - 09-22-2015
I would like to draw attention to a certain part of this, which is really irritating me. That is, why was he not banned for this? Now, we can all clearly see that it was FearRP breakage and we all know that if we were to do that we an admin around we would definitely get banned for it.
I mean look :
![[Image: 9ba65649872861168b8b2df5b0a63f47.png]](https://wsrv.nl/?url=i.gyazo.com/9ba65649872861168b8b2df5b0a63f47.png&w=1920&h=1080&fit=inside&n=-1&we)
![[Image: a1b44a0b6d8253b5e2cfe3df9bd99ba0.png]](https://wsrv.nl/?url=i.gyazo.com/a1b44a0b6d8253b5e2cfe3df9bd99ba0.png&w=1920&h=1080&fit=inside&n=-1&we)
![[Image: e924ade81ffac7533b26332447b9a4eb.png]](https://wsrv.nl/?url=i.gyazo.com/e924ade81ffac7533b26332447b9a4eb.png&w=1920&h=1080&fit=inside&n=-1&we)
That is three members of staff that have agreed that this was FearRP. THis leads me to the question does this :
![[Image: b5647f967a153e385e4c7ba954f81fc2.png]](https://wsrv.nl/?url=i.gyazo.com/b5647f967a153e385e4c7ba954f81fc2.png&w=1920&h=1080&fit=inside&n=-1&we)
have anything to do with why he wasn't banned? This situation definitely needs to be looked as it's quite clear that NightHawk is hiding behind the 'gray' area of it not being FearRP.
-Ghost
RE: FearRP Explanation - NightHawkd - 09-22-2015
I am not hiding behind anything. Yes I have people on my friends list so what? None of you know the entire situation. You are basing your opinions off what little is shown in the video. You were not there to see what all had been happening before the incident. So you can stop making assumptions.
RE: FearRP Explanation - User 12049 - 09-22-2015
(09-22-2015, 09:23 PM)NightHawkd Wrote: I am not hiding behind anything. Yes I have people on my friends list so what? None of you know the entire situation. You are basing your opinions off what little is shown in the video. You were not there to see what all had been happening before the incident. So you can stop making assumptions.
Well three of these people 'basing your opinions' are moderators. What did you see that none of us saw then?
Want to explain it then NightHawk?
RE: FearRP Explanation - NightHawkd - 09-22-2015
I have tried to explain myself before and I have explained it to Dan.
RE: FearRP Explanation - Audacter - 09-22-2015
Yes different Staff members have different views, it's inevitable we're not clones.
However as staff members we can have our own opinions but we also need to respect other peoples opinions. Recently we have been working towards validating these grey areas.
Note: As Nighthawk has said and as I have said in my response, the opinion was from the video provided. As we all should know, that short video will not provide the whole story. Also I wasn't there, Nighthawk was, I can't and will not say he was wrong, as I do not know all of it. But from my own opinions I won't say he was right. It is a massive grey area when regarding to the rules. I do not believe there is anyone to blame, and we shouldn't point the finger or blame anyone. We just need to get FearRP as a whole looked at professionally and get it validated.
RE: FearRP Explanation - RIC0H - 09-22-2015
(09-22-2015, 09:28 PM)Audacter Wrote: We just need to get FearRP as a whole looked at professionally and validated.
All we can do at this time is go off the current written rules (as they are the rules we must follow), and going by these rules FearRP in this instance was broken.
The "grey area" comes in when you try to apply unwritten rules, which do not apply and should not be taken as actual rules (since they're not).
RE: FearRP Explanation - Coded Brain - 09-22-2015
(09-22-2015, 09:38 PM)RIC0H Wrote:(09-22-2015, 09:28 PM)Audacter Wrote: We just need to get FearRP as a whole looked at professionally and validated.
All we can do at this time is go off the current written rules (as they are the rules we must follow), and going by these rules FearRP in this instance was broken.
The "grey area" comes in when you try to apply unwritten rules, which do not apply and should not be taken as actual rules (since they're not).
So does that mean that nighthawk either was denying it to keep his bud from getting banned and an abuse case should be put in place or he just doesn't know the rules?
RE: FearRP Explanation - RIC0H - 09-22-2015
(09-22-2015, 09:44 PM)DanManC Wrote: So does that mean that nighthawk either was denying it to keep his bud from getting banned and an abuse case should be put in place or he just doesn't know the rules?
That's not down to me to decide or speculate.
This would fall back on the community owner to deal with/investigate.