Unban Essay - The difference between fooling around and disrupting/griefing

[Yeldur]

You must be new here.

Just because you've fucked around with the rules enough to get slapped with an unban essay doesn't make me new.

[Bjord]

Well the way I see it, you can be an asshole in game all you want. Seriously even I am an asshole a lot. I honestly do not care if clanmates/friends fuck around, the game is too small to ban people for having fun even if they are tking each other, if they want to waste their time and have fun doing it, be my guest!, but when you start to do it to others that do not want it, and keep doing it, then we have a problem

I don't teamhit randoms, so your presumption is completely false.

This was really nothing, it was just me and Xesta, two known ragers going at it, but Xesta got upset because there was a misunderstanding. Blackbow had never heard the acronym "idgaf" so he asked Xesta who he meant by "idgaf" in which Xesta assumed that he said "I don't give a fuck?", which then prompted him to make the thread in the first place.

I think it's a real shame that there are such volatile and toxic admins like Rico who don't have any problems with exaggerating their role in this community and claim the authority to "rid" the community of players like me.

Really, I'm harmless, but why believe me when so many people are claiming I'm a fucking plague.

[Yeldur]

Dw Bjord, I don't dislike you, to be honest I actually find you quite funny to watch on the server, Xesta and Panos included (Although Panos doesn't insult people as much anymore ;cc) But you gotta realise that although you're not REALLY anything bad for the server because it's just another person raging and insulting, it's still against the rules when it goes too far, and in this case, teamhitting did go too far.

[Molly]

Kinda amusing how you ignore my little report about that "random 1st round, 1st minute of new map, let's tk the annoying archer" incident.

Not commenting on that, huh?
Instead blaming everyone else - especially Rico - for your own doings. Way to man up. 

[Rico]

I think it's a real shame that there are such volatile and toxic admins like Rico who don't have any problems with exaggerating their role in this community and claim the authority to "rid" the community of players like me.

This is fascist me being volatile and toxic, exaggerating my role and claiming the authority to play favorites while colluding with fascist Uther:

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

As you can see, this has been an admin conspiracy against you from the very beginning. Those 16 bans you had are the result of biased fascist admins who spread misinformation and repeatedly went way beyond their area of responsibility just to stigmatize you. In the context of our propaganda machinations, this stigma has been used as the occasion to do the unthinkable: A second essay ban!

The screenshot above clearly shows that we knowingly designed the essay topic in a fashion that gives us no way of finding out what kind of person you are. This fascist system of ours is not meant to give people a second chance. This whole situation teaches the critical observer that oppressive regimes like the one set up by the Donkeys' agents here in cRPG indiscriminately remove any political enemies, regardless of whether they are insidious criminals like myself or warriors of justice like you. I just happen to be born as part of the inner circle that is enslaving the innocent, so I can do as I please.

You made me realize that I was acting against my good conscience all this time. I reflected upon my behavior and understood that I am a despicable abomination that no longer deserves to call itself human. No apology can excuse what I have done to you, yet I humbly beseech you for forgiveness.


To clarify, this post should be labeled "The difference between toxic behavior and playing Devil's Advocate" (note that I put what it is not in the front, and what it is in the back, just like you did in the discussion title). I am assuming your position in pretended agreement to test the quality of your arguments and find out whether my original position may have been wrong. I conclude that your position is top-notch quality bullshit and leave the rest to the community.

[Tristan_of_Erzoth]

I didnt read any threads but i agree with malaclpyse. This was just a shittier in every way version of Spookislands essay

[Vibe]

blaming the authority, great way to write an unban essay

[Bjord]

blaming the authority, great way to write an unban essay

Not blaming, I'm defending my case. I feel the ban was unfair, but it seems people are colour-blind and can only see in chromatic.

Either you apologize and just take it in the ass no matter if it was fair/unfair or you're an idiot for even trying to raise attention on the fact that some admins are just simply unreasonable.

[Vibe]

You appeal bans in the admin or ban thread not in an unbay essay, afaik. Unbay essay is pretty much admitting you were an idiot and taking it up the butt.

[Butan]

You appeal bans in the admin or ban thread not in an unbay essay, afaik. Unbay essay is pretty much admitting you were an idiot and taking it up the butt.

When you're essay banned you cant post anywhere but in Unban Requests section afaik. So Bjord had only one shot and he chose to do this instead of taking it in the butt, as he said. This might be the end of him, or not.

[Rico]

I feel the ban was unfair. [...] Some admins are just simply unreasonable.

Okay Bjord, let me try again. Here is what a Devil's Advocate from your perspective could look like:


Imagine you are a judge. A man enters court and reports that his kitten has been murdered by another man. You remember that the very same offender has been reported three times for murdering kittens this week. On a hunch, you ask the police for the man's record. The nice lady on the phone tells you that the guy has been convicted for murdering kittens 16 times. He has probably killed more kittens than that, because some victims didn't talk about it. You say thank you and ask the lady out for dinner at Alfonso's Pizza next week.

You grab a coffee and think about what to do with the kitten murderer case. You know that legal punishment can ruin a man's career, his family, his very life. You decide to consult with your colleague Giovanni. Both of you conclude that the kitten murderer should get another chance. It is a dark world we live in, and we should bring a candle by displaying humanity, even in such a severe situation.

You ask the kitten murderer to reflect about his actions. You want to know whether there is a chance that he won't kill kittens again. Furthermore, depending on what his reasons for killing kittens are, he may have been misguided by circumstances which are outside of his control. Maybe his mother has rejected him, he has never experienced parental love, and does not understand what it means to love and be loved by one's kin. Perhaps what he needs is not punishment, but someone who listens to his story in psychological rehab.

Remembering the skilled liars you have met in the past, you emphasize that the kitten murderer must reflect about his actions in the essay. There is no value in telling him what you want to hear prior to the essay, for he may fake his critical self-assessment just to remain unpunished.

A few days later, you receive the offender's written statement: He says killing kittens is in his nature, and there is nothing wrong with that. Kittens are not humans, after all. The really bad guys kill people, not kittens. He himself is the victim of an evil system where the perfectly sane and acceptable act of killing a kitten out of fine humor has been illegalized for mysterious reasons.

The shock is strong with this one. You decide it is time for another coffee...

[Patoson]

For me the best part is when Blackbow innocently asks if the player breaking the rules is "idgaf" and Xesta loses his shit. 

[Yeldur]

Okay Bjord, let me try again. Here is what a Devil's Advocate from your perspective could look like:


Imagine you are a judge. A man enters court and reports that his kitten has been murdered by another man. You remember that the very same offender has been reported three times for murdering kittens this week. On a hunch, you ask the police for the man's record. The nice lady on the phone tells you that the guy has been convicted for murdering kittens 16 times. He has probably killed more kittens than that, because some victims didn't talk about it. You say thank you and ask the lady out for dinner at Alfonso's Pizza next week.

You grab a coffee and think about what to do with the kitten murderer case. You know that legal punishment can ruin a man's career, his family, his very life. You decide to consult with your colleague Giovanni. Both of you conclude that the kitten murderer should get another chance. It is a dark world we live in, and we should bring a candle by displaying humanity, even in such a severe situation.

You ask the kitten murderer to reflect about his actions. You want to know whether there is a chance that he won't kill kittens again. Furthermore, depending on what his reasons for killing kittens are, he may have been misguided by circumstances which are outside of his control. Maybe his mother has rejected him, he has never experienced parental love, and does not understand what it means to love and be loved by one's kin. Perhaps what he needs is not punishment, but someone who listens to his story in psychological rehab.

Remembering the skilled liars you have met in the past, you emphasize that the kitten murderer must reflect about his actions in the essay. There is no value in telling him what you want to hear prior to the essay, for he may fake his critical self-assessment just to remain unpunished.

A few days later, you receive the offender's written statement: He says killing kittens is in his nature, and there is nothing wrong with that. Kittens are not humans, after all. The really bad guys kill people, not kittens. He himself is the victim of an evil system where the perfectly sane and acceptable act of killing a kitten out of fine humor has been illegalized for mysterious reasons.

The shock is strong with this one. You decide it is time for another coffee...

Very good analogy!

[Rebelyell]

Bjord if that essay is by any means serious and it is not bait you really should work on your social skills.

[Bjord]

Okay Bjord, let me try again. Here is what a Devil's Advocate from your perspective could look like:


Imagine you are a judge. A man enters court and reports that his kitten has been murdered by another man. You remember that the very same offender has been reported three times for murdering kittens this week. On a hunch, you ask the police for the man's record. The nice lady on the phone tells you that the guy has been convicted for murdering kittens 16 times. He has probably killed more kittens than that, because some victims didn't talk about it. You say thank you and ask the lady out for dinner at Alfonso's Pizza next week.

You grab a coffee and think about what to do with the kitten murderer case. You know that legal punishment can ruin a man's career, his family, his very life. You decide to consult with your colleague Giovanni. Both of you conclude that the kitten murderer should get another chance. It is a dark world we live in, and we should bring a candle by displaying humanity, even in such a severe situation.

You ask the kitten murderer to reflect about his actions. You want to know whether there is a chance that he won't kill kittens again. Furthermore, depending on what his reasons for killing kittens are, he may have been misguided by circumstances which are outside of his control. Maybe his mother has rejected him, he has never experienced parental love, and does not understand what it means to love and be loved by one's kin. Perhaps what he needs is not punishment, but someone who listens to his story in psychological rehab.

Remembering the skilled liars you have met in the past, you emphasize that the kitten murderer must reflect about his actions in the essay. There is no value in telling him what you want to hear prior to the essay, for he may fake his critical self-assessment just to remain unpunished.

A few days later, you receive the offender's written statement: He says killing kittens is in his nature, and there is nothing wrong with that. Kittens are not humans, after all. The really bad guys kill people, not kittens. He himself is the victim of an evil system where the perfectly sane and acceptable act of killing a kitten out of fine humor has been illegalized for mysterious reasons.

The shock is strong with this one. You decide it is time for another coffee...

You're calling me a skilled liar, but in reality you're a sociopath. Not to mention your analogy is fucking off the radar, completely blown out of proportion.

Reflect on your own shit, bro.