VillageCraft Boards > Reports & Grievances

My experience joining the server

<< < (6/6)

Cbddallas:
Staff agree there is no rule violation. This thread will be locked later today unless there is any new, relevant information added.

Wyatt408:
Seems like you've been kind of biased toward CRH this entire time. Is this how you treat every dispute? Making a decision in favor of the person who did the actual harm, twisting the rules to benefit them, and ultimately ignoring anyone who has a different opinion? Information was provided that clearly shows rules being broken and you brushed it off.
Human resources here needs some work.

Wyatt408:
Sorry, I don't want to start a problem here, but come on. "Regardless of the technical wording", as if the words in the literal rulebook don't count for people the staff are trying to defend. I don't see how this is fair treatment whatsoever.

luisc99:

--- Quote from: Wyatt408 on 11 August 2022, 01:18:49 PM ---Seems like you've been kind of biased toward CRH this entire time.

--- End quote ---
First off, the person you're suggesting is kind of biased has been a practising lawyer for decades, and has been treating this very objectively, as she does with all these reports she provides input on. There has been no bias towards CRH, by Dallas, or by the staff as a whole. At the end of the day, VC is a survival server, and PvP is a quintessential part of survival Minecraft in multiplayer, and while we've implemented some rules to help protect people from PvP, we cannot and will not ban it entirely.

Secondly, there has been discussion about this case within staff, and the overall outcome of that is such that the staff as a collective agree there has been no rule broken. Similar situations have happened in the past, and those were also ruled as no rules being broken. This isn't a new decision, it's based on historical precedent.

Thirdly, if you feel the rules are not correct, you are welcome to work with Parliament to change them. However that will require more specific suggestions as to how they can be changed, rather than simply asking us to list stuff that's against the rules, because that would open up a whole barrel of opportunities for people to argue they're innocent because we didn't include their specific circumstance as one of our examples. The rules are written in such a way that they are able to be interpreted on a case-by-case basis, which the staff does by discussing every report and punishment we make. They intentionally allow for flexibility to allow us to take this case-by-case approach, and discuss things contextually.

I'm going to lock this thread now, before it gets out of hand. If anyone wants to propose some specific changes to the rules, they are welcome to propose it in Parliament. Similarly, if anyone has any further evidence of a specific rule being broken, you may discuss it with with staff or post about it here.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page