Well, the whole thing has deficated in the fan, and of course landed in my face, since I'm the only conveinent target. - Read below, it's funny.
-----------
It appears to me that Gline failed to put your address in the send to
line. I will speak to him on that matter.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Imc-hosts] Bah: re: your removal from Bushido @ IMC
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 19:21:11 -0500
From: "Serdar Yegulalp"
Reply-To: Imc-hosts@thegline.com
Organization: Yo' Mama!
To: "IMC Hosts"
Bah:
After considerable deliberation with the rest of the staff and hosts of
Bushido, we have decided to remove you from the room for a period of one
month.
This ban is for various reasons, but it is primarily a reflection of the
staff's impatience with your behavior, which has been observed over a
fair period of time, and which has become extremely problematic abruptly
in the past few days.
First and foremost there is your behavior regarding Meg. Your point of
view was that you and Meg had agreed not to involve your Cs with each
other any more than was needed, and that this was a mutual agreement.
However, things deteriorated between you and Meg to the point where she
blocked you, and you then felt that she was interfering with the
development of one of your plots. The other person involved in this was
one of our staffers, Hai Bara, and after speaking with her I determined
that at no time did you make it clear to her that you did not want Meg
involved in any plotting involving her Cs, or Cs of HBs that were also
involved with yours (as was the case in this particular instance.)
Rather than ask HB to recommend that this practice be discontinued (as
would be the sensible thing to do), you chose instead to harass HB in
AIM and lay a guilt-trip on her about what were essentially your
mistakes. Whether or not Meg was interfering with anything is something
I will determine separately and has little to do with your general
behavior.
There are several other examples of this sort of thing I could cite.
For instance: accusing Michael of being a liar in public, regarding his
running (you publicly accused him of exaggerating or lying about how
much running he did in a day; I was there for this incident.). It is
not your place in the room to call someone a liar in front of other
people, especially for something which is essentially trivial.
It's incidents like this, added up and compounded, which have compelled
us to enact this ban. As far as the above-outlined incident involving
Meg and HB goes, I will deal with the consequences of that as I have
stated above.
During this time do -not- contact me or any member of our staff,
especially not Hai Bara, as you have already caused her enough problems.
If you wish to appeal this decision, take it up with IMC's Conflict
Mediation and Damage Control department (complaints@im-chat.com), not
us. This is standard procedure for a room ban, just so you know.
CCed to the hosts list for archiving.
-- Gline, Host of Bushido @ IMC
[This is a copy of the original message, resent]
_______________________________________________
Emails from the IMC Host List are private and confidential, and are not
to be shared or discussed with anyone outside of this list who is not
either IMC Site Staff or another IMC Host, unless specifically stated in
the body of the email that they may be shared with room staff and other
users.
_______________________________________________
Imc-hosts mailing list
Imc-hosts@thegline.com
http://aquarius.hstdns.com/mailman/listinfo/imc-hosts_thegline.com
**************************
Bah, you sent me the email - it's mine now and I'll do what I want with it. Moving on.
**************************
----- Original Message -----
From: Will Gray
To: complaints@im-chat.com
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 9:31 PM
Subject: Bushido Room Ban Appeal
To Whom It May Concern,
I'll try to keep this as concise and too the point as possible but it's bound to be lengthy. The ban appears to be pretty open ended and vauge, so I will try to outline it as best I can, clearing up some of the inaccuracies as I go along.
This more orless amounts to plea-bargining, so here we go. Using quotes from the banishment email I received:
"This ban is for various reasons, but it is primarily a reflection of the
staff's impatience with your behavior, which has been observed over a
fair period of time, and which has become extremely problematic abruptly
in the past few days."
This is probably an accurate statement, but it's too vauge. What in specific was found to be so disruptive? I don't mind thinking about what I've done, but what in specific am I to address while I mull this over? I can appreciate the attitude that if I don't know what I did wrong then I shouldn't be allowed back untill someone thinks I'm ready may be the method employed here, but thats a pretty stern exam - everyone views what right and wrong are just a little bit different.
Next:
"There are several other examples of this sort of thing I could cite.
For instance: accusing Michael of being a liar in public, regarding his
running (you publicly accused him of exaggerating or lying about how
much running he did in a day; I was there for this incident.). It is
not your place in the room to call someone a liar in front of other
people, especially for something which is essentially trivial."
Lets cut to the chase - if it's trivial why bring it up. Rather than dazzle you with the math regarding that particular discussion I'll leave it be only to say this. I didn't call Michael a liar, I just told him i didn't believe him. I'm entitled to my opinion, just like he is. We all have our own opinions, and just because I publicly disagreed with him doesn't mean I called him a liar, or accused him of anything. - This amounts to two people arguing over what the best lineup on a football team is.
Next:
"It's incidents like this, added up and compounded, which have compelled
us to enact this ban. "
None of these incidents have been brought to my attention prior to my being banned. I wasn't emailed, IM'ed or PM'ed anything reguarding anyones complaint be it chatter complaints or staff complaints. The only things that even came close was a disagreement between Gline and myself with regard to the imposing of an inbound XP cap placed on characters to limit growth, and my concept of how a throw is to be used. The concept of a throw also wound up bein defined exactly as I had used it in an experimental RP. As far as I know those indidents should be dealt with and finalized.
Apart from that, none of the staff, Gline, Malfis, Mike, or Hai Bara have addressed me with anything remotely harmful or controversial. I feels like I'm being set-up here because I don't constantly agree with the room staff regarding thier decisions.You'll notice ont he Message board for the room Meg agrees with everything Gline says, and doesn't appear to have been banned due to this indient. I've adopted that partiuclar frame of mind based on my prior complaint with regard to being reminded by the IMC site level staff that for Americans, voting day was the following day. I've taken that civic warning to heart, and I make sure that I poste my point of view and opinion with regard to anything room based. I'm following your example, and taking part in the decision making process.
I get the feeling that my lack of complete coersion with the current system is what got me banned, and not anyones dislike for me apart from room staff, who will obviously see me as combative simply because I disagree with them, in short, I'm taking the advice as we given, and I'm not taking a submissive role about it. I'm being pro-active.
Both the XP issue, and the Meg issue were handled completely out of the room and in completely reasonable contexts. No profanity or insults were used in either case were used. The Throwing issue was resolved on the MB, towhich I went through a great deal of detail so no one could say the propsed rules weren't clearly spelled out. I even gave a brief history lesson.
Next:
"The other person involved in this was
one of our staffers, Hai Bara, and after speaking with her I determined
that at no time did you make it clear to her that you did not want Meg
involved in any plotting involving her Cs, or Cs of HBs that were also
involved with yours (as was the case in this particular instance.)
Rather than ask HB to recommend that this practice be discontinued (as
would be the sensible thing to do), you chose instead to harass HB in
AIM and lay a guilt-trip on her about what were essentially your
mistakes."
The manner in which my character is assessed here is innaccurate, and the events refered to here may not be fairly portrayed. Earlier in this paragraph Gline mentions that Meg and I had a working agreement (which is explained below, and was reached on the MB) to keep our C's seperate from eachother interms of story line involvement. Gline then goes on to say the agreement deteriorated to the point where Meg had placed me on block.was my fault, and reiterates that again at the bottom saying it was all essetially my fault.
What I find odd about this is I was blocked before I had said a word to anyone, including meg about this. The first thing I did actually was PM meg say that we needed to talk. I then tried her AIM sign on, to found out she was "unavailable" to my SN - but using a duplicate buddy list from my regular SN on a different SN I found her, as well as all of the staff were online, and simply had me on block. My question here is how can the Staff be fair and unbiased if they aren't able to be reached? Thats an issue in an of itself to be addressed, but it's not my choice on who's staff and who isn't. I didn't get to vote for that.
My point here is, I hadn't even begun to be upset about the issue untill I wasn't able to confront the source of the problem and find out what was going on. I wasn't given the ability to mediate, thats when I got upset. I then IM'd Bara and asked what was going on. That conversation is included with explainations below.
For Gline to say that I started the "guilt tripping" and "harassing" is grossly inaccurate. BOTH of us guilt tripped the other, and at the end it appeared to have ended civily between Bara and I.
Heres the beginning of the convesation.
Sir Ukyo: So what the hecks up with Junmai.
Sir Ukyo: I'm not here during the day usually. I can't really Rp with her much.
Hai Bara 1948: And when you are here, Bah? You would much rather enter into a dice rolling competition than have Ukyo RP with his wife.
Sir Ukyo: Bara - I was under the impression that the time of day functions the same way. I figured she wouldn't be asleep.
Hai Bara 1948: No. RP time of day can be whatever one wants it to be, Bah.
Sir Ukyo: Well bloody hell.
Hai Bara 1948: yeah.
Sir Ukyo: ¬_¬ And why have you never volenteered her for a scene when I've begged for scenes at night? You just made a scene planting fool notions about what kind of person Ukyo is in Megs head, of all people.
Sir Ukyo: Thanks. Appreciate that, Now I have hear to deal with all over again, and I had done my level best to NOT have my C's interact with hers because she and I don't get along.
Hai Bara 1948: Because you were already setting up a scene with others, Bah. I am NOT Bunni. I do NOT interfere with others' scenes nor do I literally BEG for RP because I am NOT a good multi-tasker and I have repeatedly admitted that fact!
Sir Ukyo: Bloody hell.
Sir Ukyo: Look, sorry for snappin at ya.
Sir Ukyo: Tomorrow you and I need to do a scene.
Sir Ukyo: And I have to hammer out a few things with Meg.
Hai Bara 1948: Apology accepted, Bah. And a scene tomorrow will be welcome. *nods, hugs*
The point here is this: Venting and guilt tripping are two different things. Both of us picked our tar baby and let mud fly - Meg and Bunni respectively. And you'll noticed I apologised, and I even went so far as to schedule a possible remedy for the situation. As you can see I was operating on some misinfo about the time of day, and I had the same valid point about availability for RP as she did. So now lets continue.
Sir Ukyo: No offence, but I'm not in the hugging mood hun. I did my best to avoid this kind of stuff, and now I have to find away out of it again, it's not something I hug over.
Hai Bara 1948: You want the truth, Bah? Really?
Sir Ukyo: Lay it on me hun.
Hai Bara 1948: I'm like the cat that purrs even when it's hurting. I hug. Period. As for the RPs? Well, like I stated earlier, you seemed to prefer other RPs to RPing out a story with Ukyo and Junmai and I respected your decision.
Sir Ukyo: It was never a decision. Don't put words in my mouth. I never said didn't want to RP with you.
Sir Ukyo: I hardly ever RP with staff except for Gline in the zen stuff. Thats because staff is always being asked for something, I don't want to take up their tim.
Sir Ukyo: The reason I do all the other ones is to keep him ready for spring, because he's got a whole slew of things to do for Junmai and their kid. He's not ignoring Junmai, he's working for her.
Hai Bara 1948: I am NOT putting words in your mouth, Bah. To me the fact that you, or anyone else for that matter, has set up an RP with someone else is a decision, Bah!
Sir Ukyo: That doesn't mean you can't ask me for a scene once in a while you know.
Sir Ukyo: It's a marriage - thats a 50%50 thing between to players.
At this point we circled around who's liability/responsiblity/duty it was to have the two characters interact, and I got my feathers ruffled again - it happens we're all human. A few spelling errors, a dash of ego and a little foreshadowing and we come to:
Hai Bara 1948: Bah... you just don't GET it, do you? I don't interfere! Once something has been set up between others, I stand back and watch, and enjoy, and, hopefully, learn more about dice stuff.
Sir Ukyo: That doesn't mean you can't say "hey, we should do a scene". Does it ahve to be completely my responsibility to seek out RP with Junmai?
Sir Ukyo: Why should you be immune to asking to see him? Why does he have to come to you?
Sir Ukyo: Thats not exactly fair.
Sir Ukyo: Junmai might think he doesn't see - fine. You think maybe Ukyo wonders why his wife never has anything to say to him when he's at the dojo sweeping up or restocking bandage shelves?
Sir Ukyo: You're just as guilty of neglect as I am. - The difference here is I didn't drag other people into their marraige.
Hai Bara 1948: No, it doesn't Bah. As you have stated before, lots of times our RP schedules don't agree. And when they DO agree, you are already involved. Or I am. And as -I- have stated, I am NO good at MTing.
Sir Ukyo: Your MT-ing skill is something that can only get better with practice.
Sir Ukyo: And I don't mind spacing someone else everyonce in a while to Rp with you.
Hai Bara 1948: Sorry... IMed to death there for a moment.
Sir Ukyo: Undertandable.
Here we both came to the same agreement that scheduling is hard. I work overnight and spend the majority of my online time between 10 pm and 6 am MST - it's hard for me playing the husband to her C to fit in RP time, and I was under the impression I was just filling in breif little outlets of my characters life as he came to and fromt he villiage each day, be it personal training, or errands of one kind or another. I've configured this character as a blind swordsman - he's rather unorthodox, which allows me to place him where he's needed or wanted rather easily. Being blind one constantly questions ones surroundings and there for the side bar of possible out comes one thinks of in such a state is only natrual to spark other questions - this allows me to place him just about anywhere, when ever needed, which is why I RP him in the dusking hours to late night - after all, how does he know what time of day it is? He can count, but be realistic, not that precisely, not yet anyhow. - Thats why I just figured the time of day thing was set and un movable - thus making my RP selection biased against her C - which may have caused some of the problem.
I probably shouldn't have gotten into the MT'ing thing - but I don't like excuses, and I jumped on it like white on rice. Naughty me. Moving on:
Hai Bara 1948: yeah. sometimes? I wish I did not have AIM and the like.
Sir Ukyo: I know the feeling.
Hai Bara 1948: As for MTing, well, I have tried, several times. The quality of my RP goes down as a whole. Personally? I prefer quality over quantity.
Sir Ukyo: I can understand that, but with practice you get better. YOu never can get better if you don't try though.
Hai Bara 1948: Perhaps. I find myself just not enjoying the RP experience as much when I MT though, Bah. And the whole point is to have FUN.
Sir Ukyo: Bara - You don't enjoy anything untill you're good at it in most cases, be it knitting, sewing, karata, kyacking, or crossword puzzles. IF you give up on it though, something that could be fun, never will be. It's a defeatest attitude.
Hai Bara 1948: Bah: I suck at knitting and crocheting, yet I enjoy doing them immensely and knit and crochet whenever I have the materials. Agreed, practice makes perfect. Yet I could be better at MTing than Gline and still not enjoy it because my attention would be scattered.
Sir Ukyo: Thats a function of mental discipline, and again, it's dependant upon practice.
Hai Bara 1948: Bah? I have been a secretary since 1983. In that time, I have MTed my arse off. Quite well, as a matter of fact. The last thing I need is to be informed that I lack practice and mental discipline in such!
Sir Ukyo: Then why is it so hard for you?
Sir Ukyo: I can understand the quality over quantity, but your angle isn't being played very straight.
Hai Bara 1948: Because I have my preferences, Bah. Also, MTing handling more than 14 secretarial tasks as completely different than handling RP interaction. Even my bosses never interacted with more than one customer at a time, Bah.
Sir Ukyo: Well bara, I'm a manager at work, and I deal with about 10 different things at once through out the course of the night, including customers, be it via email, chat or phone.
Sir Ukyo: But lets leave the MT'ing out of this.
Sir Ukyo: Your whole accusation that I'm never available. Why does this seem a little odd?
Sir Ukyo: After all, I haven't seen your other Married C out of the box with her spouse in just as long a time as it's been with Ukyo and Junmai
Hai Bara 1948: Yes, let's. I understand, though, that your line of work is quite different from mine.
Because Jason had other RPs going on and, again, I don't interfere.
Sir Ukyo: So why isn't Hasuko breaking down like Junmai and making Jasons life a living hell?
Hai Bara 1948: Because Hasuko is quite different from Junmai, Bah. I do NOT have cookie cutter Cs like some muns I could mention.
Sir Ukyo: Good.
Sir Ukyo: So why then is it okay for meg to play teenage homewrecker?
Hai Bara 1948: *nods*
Hai Bara 1948: So who's saying she's succeeding, Bah?
Alright - now this area I can see as guilt tripping, but most of this come from the fact that I'm used to being fed excuses from employees or students (I'm an avid guitarist and musician, with a working facility of both music theory and guitar technique - I've had students from time to time who want to learn how to "shred" - which amounts to playing as intricately as possible) - students who study hard, but burn out, or make some of the most rediculously lame excuses for not practicing, and I've gotten used to cutting through the excuses and getting down to the issue. I used this frame of mind here with bara, and shouldn't have. I also made the point that she has another C thats married int he same room which is even less active than my the one married to my C. Again, the same excuse, but with an explaination when I asked why the same reaction hadn't occured, which is valid only to a point with me, but I let it slide and just compliemnted Hasuko on being more stout hearted than her counter part Junmai - my C's wife.
I then changed subjects back to my original beef, and was handed a firm grow up, which I had comming. As you can see, we're keeping on even ground, neither of us is dominating or guilt tripping the other person at this point, we're debating and trying our level best maintain our positions and have the other take our point of view. Debate 101 - nothing extrodinary or harmful here - in fact they teach this in highschool. Moving on:
Sir Ukyo: Even if you weren't aware that Meg was supposed to keep her Sl's seperate from mine SHE WAS AWARE.
Sir Ukyo: Now I have to deal with your reaction to her breaking her own promises.
Sir Ukyo: I had a plan for Junmai, but it still needs more time. Now I have to chose to either A - keep on that line of play, or B - change it and hope it all works out despite someone meddling in affairs that they have no reasn or right to meddle in.
Hai Bara 1948: I was NOT aware of that fact, Bah. Truth. As for dealing with reactions, well, I AM fully aware of how pregnant women react to situations. aFter all, I have three RL pregnanceis to draw on. Hormones and all.
Sir Ukyo: nearly 3 months of very CAREFULL PLANNING - things I've written solos for, may very well go to waste because of meg.
Sir Ukyo: The entire thing isn't going to have anywhere near the same effect I was hoping for. And I didn't do anything to make that happen. Meg put herself where she wasn't wanted and now I'm screwed out of a lot of planning.
Whine whine whine, nag nag nag. Yeah I'm complaining. But I'm not guilt tripping bara, I'm complaining about meg. This isn't what I'd call adult behavior, but it's not harmful or damaging to Baraand certainly not harassment, and certainly isn't what gline described. As for how a pregnant woman reacts to emotional stimulus in pregnancy. Well, I didn't even respond to that - I'll be damned before I go telling someone with three kids that they don't know all the ins and outs of pregnancy. And as you can I was too busy whining to even respond anyhow. Moving on:
Hai Bara 1948: Bah: All Meg's C did was offer a shoulder to cry on. That's all -I- saw. That's all I RPed to - that shoulder to cry on.
Sir Ukyo: Thats my point. She KNEW she wasn't supposed to get involved in Ukyo and JUnmai's marriage, but she did it anynow.
Sir Ukyo: Even if you had asked for a shoulder to cry on to Aoi, Meg is SUPPOSED to decline.
Sir Ukyo: Just like I don't butt in on Shanao and Kasane's issues,
Hai Bara 1948: *nod*
Sir Ukyo: Thats why I'm upset.
Sir Ukyo: I don't like plans of mine being ruined when I've worked so hard to build a certain mood for the C's involved.
Sir Ukyo: Now I've got an unwanted streak of black in there and it's going to take away from what I've been building towards.
Sir Ukyo: And I don't know how to fix it. Thats why I'm upset, because Someone came in and started rewriting my story with out talking to me about it first.
Here I tried to outline the nature of the agreement i made with meg and cited an example - a relationship just like the one Meg intruded into. I keep my nose clean from stuff like that. - I look at Junmai reacting emotionall while pregnant as something that needs to be plotted out with all parties concerned before it's played out - because the first experiance you have is the yard stick you judge the next one like it buy, and it was irritating to me to have been left out of that decision making process. If I ever can get back in the room in a timely manner to patch things up with Junmai - I've not got a serious IC relationship hurtle to jump over, and it wasn't something I'd planned for.
Hai Bara 1948: Perhaps you shouldn't have been so closed-mouthed about it, Bah. Even if you just e-mailed me your solos to read, it would have given me a better understanding. Sure, I'm not Gline and I don't have any official standing other than keeping the dust down in teh Room, yet it would have helped me understand the directin you were trying for.
Sir Ukyo: Thats the POINT
Sir Ukyo: I needed you both as a player and a C to feel a certain way.
Sir Ukyo: Now all of that is wasted, I can't have it back again
Sir Ukyo: Thats why I had to keep it a complete secrect.
Hai Bara 1948: Hon... you'd be surprised what I can keep under my hat. And completely forget about because my C wouldn't know about it.
Sir Ukyo: I was trying to create something romantic and subtle - something with some real magic to it.
Sir Ukyo: Bara, it wouldn't have worked in this case.
Sir Ukyo: And you aren't supposed to know when someones gonna throw you a supprize birthday party, thats WHY it's so special.
Hai Bara 1948: You would be surprised, Bah. Just ask Mike sometimes.
Sir Ukyo: Because it appears like no one cares, and all of the sudden, youre given the world.
Sir Ukyo: No - I wouldn't be. And we'll never know now because I CAN"T GET THE EFFECT BACK.
Hai Bara 1948: I am truly sorry for that, Bah.
Sir Ukyo: Yeah Me to.
Sir Ukyo: But I know someone who isn't, and thats why I'm incredibly pissed off.
Hai Bara 1948: *nods* I understand.
Here we get into my motives for secrecy. The reason i was playing it safe was because I know that even though a player might know, the C doesn't, but I've noticed most players can't keep that tint of knowledge out of their RP, or if they actually can, the resulting play is a bit try and tasteless. I like vivid detail and epic proportion when I go through the trouble to plot things out. Bara Insisted that I would be supprized - and my instincts tell me this is false. But as you can see, there were apologies and a civil, albeit emotional conversation was had. That was the end of the conversation I had with Bara. Anything passed that deemed as "harrassment" or " guilt tripping" - well, thats innacruate, distorted, worped, deluted or poluted information. No where was anyone guilt tripped as Glines statement which I've relocated down here as gline acused me of doing:
"The other person involved in this was
one of our staffers, Hai Bara, and after speaking with her I determined
that at no time did you make it clear to her that you did not want Meg
involved in any plotting involving her Cs, or Cs of HBs that were also
involved with yours (as was the case in this particular instance.)
Rather than ask HB to recommend that this practice be discontinued (as
would be the sensible thing to do), you chose instead to harass HB in
AIM and lay a guilt-trip on her about what were essentially your
mistakes."
So as to my character and actions towards Hai Bara, the above is innacurate, and possibly not made out of the most sound of judgement - everyone was angry. As for what were essentially my mistakes. I take this to mean my planning. I can see his justification here, but at the same time I don't think he took mine into account. Junmais been pregnant for 3 months, and for 3 months my plan has worked rather nicely. I explained to gline just like I did to bara about why I was keeping it a secret. I had planned to keep the solos between me myself and I untill they were published two days apart from eachother so people could vote and surmize, as well as allow some interplay between bara and myself IC to the solos as posted. It might still work - but it's never going to have the volume and proportion it once might have had if allowed to go undiscovered, and now we'll never know.
Next:
That brings us back to the heart of what set tonights little events into motion. The agreement I made with meg. Some months ago I held a pole in which I blatantly asked if I was wanted in the room - as a direct result of Meg jumping down my back for something I did IC that she felt was unharmonious to her being and essence as a person - I have no clue what happened, i don't even rememner, I don't hold grudges if I can help it - if you can't leave the past in the past you never really put your feet in the future, or so I belive. After agood 20 lines of discussion it was decided that I would say, and I let meg know that I was pu tting her in ignore indeffinately on all messaging programs and in the room, simply because we didn't mesh well. - Why I still don't know.
At some point Meg and Gline fashioned a psuedo daughter for Glines character Ogata Sensei - who happens to be my C's employer (largely, my C does some "contract work" here and there, most of which is for the service of Iiga as a whole towhich he's not directly compensated with money, but rather a unique reputation for being arrogant and deadly, when in fact, he's a complete idiot, and quite the softy to his wife when they have time alone). - Because of this new C my C was somewhat obligated to be involved with Megs, so I unblocked Meg so I could keep tabs on what happened at the dojo with regard to Ogata, but I made it very clear that we needed to keep seperate story lines, just so we didn't interact since we already knew this was not a good Idea. Meg agreed to this and it's been flaw free up untill toniight when she began to interact with Junmai on a plane that he would be involved in - specifically Junmais missing him because he's been so distant as of late.
And so there you have it - the whole story. I'll admit I gave room staff a hard time about it. I can completely understand this. Room staff in generral is kinda off balance to me I think. I've noticed the same kind of personality with a slight tinge is always room staff. Most tend to worry alot about what people think of them. Jason is what seems to be on a perpetual LOA - which irks me, him being a co-host and all, seems a little odd, I'd expect more activity from him.
One of my greatest pet peeves about the Staff, is they always appear to me to be under the impression that I owe them respect. Anyone who's familiar with leadership understands that the leaders have to earn that respect. Whent he masses respect the leaders enough to trust them, then they can lead effectively. Jason and Gline both have a very condecending air about them that I've noticed, unlike Mike, who's warm hearted and playfull, and Bara who's a bout a charming a gall as mother nature has devised so far. She laughes at things my own mother doesn't understand, and thats saying alot.
So with regard to Bara, she is a wonderfal warm hearted gal, but she's getting old, and her energy fades a bit more each day - everyone worries about her health including me - which is why the next quote in Glines email seemed very off base:
"During this time do -not- contact me or any member of our staff,
especially not Hai Bara, as you have already caused her enough problems."
As you've already read Bara wasn't what I'd consider to be any more offended about the whole thing than I was, and she's not made of glass. If Glines refereing to anything else, I'd very much like to know what it is.
The over all tone of this letter from Gline appears to have been largely his decision. I think Bara was upset and confused about megs involvement. Natrually, Staff behaving like management of some kind or another, there is public knoledge and confidential knowledge. The function of Staff is to uphold the room purpuse function and focus. The person who sets those varibles is the room host, in this case Gline. If anything sent bara offline with mysty eyes it wasn't what I said to her - I never insulted her or slighted her judgement - what ever it was that glines refering too didn't come directly from me, and she chose to feel the way she does about it of her own volition - as you've read, I appologized, and if that isn't reiterated enough, I'll say it again from the bottom of my heart - I'm sorry Hai Bara, I didn't mean to make you feel bad.
It's because I'm an intelligent person that I can see the abstract, read between the lines, and walk and chew gum at the same time and that is why I'm requesting the banishment last only 7 days - and not 31. There have been instances like this before that didn't involve me where someone was banned for a week - to name names. Bunni and Meg. This is my first banning that I'm aware of, and given the precident, I don't see why I should have to endure a month of banishment when a similar siutuation invovling the same chatter who's just as disruptive as I appear to be, and staffer (Meg and Bara who apprearently mediated the in-room problem with that incident) - has already been documented under near similar cirumstances with a punishment thats 1/4th of what I'm being delt.
I respectfully await your deision for appeal with regard to banishment and ask that you read or re-read the email in it's entirety before reaching a decision.
Sincerely,
Bah
IMC Chatter
***************************
Hey, I had beef, gimme some credit - devious and malicious women are a dime a dozen, why defend them? Just because you were bullied in highschool doesn't mean you can treat everyone who disagrees with you like a criminal or bully. Simply fact is people disagree, it's nothing to BANNISH someone over. Jesus H Jelly Beans, WTF's up with that?
**************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lesa"
To:
Cc: "Gline"; "IMC CMDC"
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 9:06 PM
Subject: Re: Bushido Room Ban Appeal
Bah,
Below are the points of your appeal (sections edited for brevity's
sake).
Point 1
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From the original banning letter: "This ban is for various reasons, but
it is primarily a reflection of the staff's impatience with your
behavior, which has been observed over a fair period of time, and which
has become extremely problematic abruptly in the past few days."
>From your appeal: "This is probably an accurate statement, but it's too
vauge. What in specific was found to be so disruptive?"
Since you acknowledge that the statement was accurate, that would seem
to indicate that you were already aware that your behavior was being
disruptive. Besides which, two of the incidents that were found
disruptive are mentioned in the letter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Point 2
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From the original banning letter: "There are several other examples of
this sort of thing I could cite. For instance: accusing Michael of
being a liar in public, regarding his running (you publicly accused him
of exaggerating or lying about how much running he did in a day; I was
there for this incident.). It is not your place in the room to call
someone a liar in front of other people, especially for something which
is essentially trivial."
>From your appeal: Lets cut to the chase - if it's trivial why bring it
up. Rather than dazzle you with the math regarding that particular
discussion I'll leave it be only to say this. I didn't call Michael a
liar, I just told him i didn't believe him. I'm entitled to my opinion,
just like he is. We all have our own opinions, and just because I
publicly disagreed with him doesn't mean I called him a liar, or accused
him of anything. - This amounts to two people arguing over what the best
lineup on a football team is."
Excerpts from the Bushido Logs in question:
Michael Yungbluth
((I use to run 8-15 miles every morning, sadly now I run like 5 miles at
the most if I do every so often.))
bah
((8-15 miles every morning? ¬.¬ Michael - I'm gonna call BS on that.
Even 5 miles a morning is a good solid two hours even for an olympic
calbure athlete in off season training.))
Not believing Michael was trivial - calling him a liar (and yes, from
reading the logs, that is exactly what you did) was not trivial. He did
not express an opinion, he was talking about his former daily workout.
This is nothing like a difference of opinion on the starting line up of
a football team.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Point 3
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From your appeal: "I feels like I'm being set-up here because I don't
constantly agree with the room staff regarding thier decisions.You'll
notice ont he Message board for the room Meg agrees with everything
Gline says, and doesn't appear to have been banned due to this indient."
Other than the fact that you took offense to the fact that Meg was RPing
with someone else, there is nothing to tie her to this incident and I do
not see where bringing her up is relevant to anything regarding your
behavior.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Point 4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From your appeal: "The first thing I did actually was PM meg say that we
needed to talk. I then tried her AIM sign on, to found out she was
"unavailable" to my SN - but using a duplicate buddy list from my
regular SN on a different SN I found her, as well as all of the staff
were online, and simply had me on block. My question here is how can
the Staff be fair and unbiased if they aren't able to be reached? Thats
an issue in an of itself to be addressed, but it's not my choice on
who's staff and who isn't. I didn't get to vote for that."
No staff member of any room is required by IMC to be at the immediate
beck and call of every chatter. All are reachable by email -- which is
where business belongs. AIM's are for personal conversations and
convenience, not room/site business.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Point 5
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From your appeal: "I then IM'd Bara and asked what was going on. That
conversation is included with explainations below. For Gline to say that
I started the "guilt tripping" and "harassing" is grossly inaccurate.
BOTH of us guilt tripped the other, and at the end it appeared to have
ended civily between Bara and I."
The log you attached seems to have gaps - and sections of it, you
omitted entirely and paraphrased what was said. Even so, from what you
sent, you were being verbally abusive toward Bara and you admit yourself
to having jumped on her statement about multi-tasking.
Regarding that whole incident, I'll break down the harassing elements:
1 - Multi-tasking: Even after she plainly states that she does not enjoy
multi-tasking, you continue to argue that she needs to keep at it until
she's good at it. As Bara herself said, the point of RPing is to have
fun. If she does not enjoy multi-tasking, she is certainly not required
to do it.
2 - Meg RPing to Bara: If you don't want to RP to/with Meg, that is, of
course, your choice. Getting furious at Bara for RPing to her is
unfounded. She was not forcing your character into the scene. After
several rounds of talking about why you and Bara's C weren't RPing
together, you ranted quite a bit about her RP ruining your planned
solos. Solo implies you weren't going to have interaction with anyone
anyway, so I fail to see where it would affect that. Even so, if there
were points that you needed to work out with Bara, that need apparently
was not conveyed to her. RP is a two-way street at the very least. You
cannot sit back and write a script under the table without telling
anyone then expect them to follow along as if they knew all about it.
In a nutshell - you can state who you will or won't RP to (if done in
non flaming fashion), but you cannot dictate who anyone else can or
cannot RP to.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Point 6
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From your appeal: "One of my greatest pet peeves about the Staff, is
they always appear to me to be under the impression that I owe them
respect. Anyone who's familiar with leadership understands that the
leaders have to earn that respect."
Whether you feel respect or not, IMC does require that you treat room
hosts and staff with respect. They should not have to 'earn' you
treating them that way. If you think the same does not apply offline,
try telling a police officer that you aren't going to speak respectfully
to him until he earns it.
When you signed up for service with IMC, you agreed to the following
from the Terms of Service: "Chatters are expected to behave respectfully
towards each other and towards IMC site administrators, regardless of
the room or community to which they belong. (This includes but is not
limited to: accepting and complying with the room's expectations for
behavior; following the room rating; not taking part in any sort of
impersonation or attempts to defraud) "Chatter" is defined as anyone who
is using IMC services in any manner. IMC administration standards of
behavior will supersede room standards of behavior for IMC
administrative actions."
If you still feel that the staff and hosts of IMC rooms are not
deserving of respectful treatment, then IMC is not the chat site suited
to your role-playing needs and you should look for a more compatiable
site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have both read and re-read your appeal, the logs from Bushido and AIM
logs. You refer to the appeal at the beginning of your email as
'plea-bargaining'. Appeals on IMC are not bargaining - they are reviews
to see if the actions being punished occurred.
>From what I have read, not only did the actions occur, but you
apparently do not see where you are at fault in any of this. You seem
to feel that your harassment of Bara was justified and, even with
sections of the logs missing, I would have found what you were saying to
her to be highly insulting as well as condescending.
I see no reason to lessen the time of your banishment from Bushido. The
ban stands as originally stated.
Lesa
IMC Site Staff
*************************************
I'm going to base my decision of this response on two things. One, she's emotionally driven, and two, she's just a difficult person to work with.
*************************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Will Gray"
To: "Lesa"
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 10:20 PM
Subject: Re: Bushido Room Ban Appeal
> Lesa,
>
>
> With regard to your points. I'll address them as pesented giving further
> clarification.
>
> 1: "Probably accurate" does not mean "is accurate". If I felt the reason
for
> the ban was completely justified, I wouldn't have bothered appealing. This
> interpitation of my wording is innacurate and quoted out of character and
> context from it's original text, which was supported with more supporting
> arguement.
>
> >From my appeal: "everyone views what right and wrong are just a little
bit
> different." - That is why I used the phrase "probably accurate" but not
"is
> accurate". Also - "accurate" is largely based on what you judge something
> too or compare it with. Compared to several other players in the room,
with
> similar opinions like my own towards the room environment as a whole, I
> haven't done much of anything. I'm being compared to the absolute
negative,
> as opposed to the norm. Knowing this, I said "probably".
>
> 2: Calling BS means I don't belive him. That does not mean I called him a
> liar. Your interpertation of my statement is not correct to what was meant
> or said. This is a moot point.
>
> 3: This isn't even pertinent to the issue at hand, this was my opinion on
> the result of the issue at hand. This is a moot point.
>
> 4: Again, this is not pertinent. Gline has used AIM and email to discuess
> room buisness, as well as the rest of the staff. AIM is a communications
> tool used by everythign from 8 year olds with friends living in a
different
> state, to families, to buisnesses, to private coomunities such as IMC.
This
> is a moot point.
>
> 5: There are no gaps in that conversation. All I did was insert an
> explaination of what was said, and why I said it. With regard to Bara and
> multi-tasking - this is a moot point - the whole conversation is there and
> is cited so you knew what happened. Gline acused me of harassment, which
is
> explained below as to why it's a false acusation. This is a moot point.
>
>
> 6: With regard to respect. No one was respectful, through out the whole
> thing. Respect is a widely misunderstood concept and often used as a
sheild
> for those who aren't able to understand that not everything said is meant
> the way it comes across. If I say something that you view offensively it
is
> your choice to be offended. I cannot be held responsible for someone who
> doesn't understand me, all I can do is work towards helping them
understand
> what I mean when I say something - that's all anyone can do.
>
> --------
>
> As far as how you would react - again that has nothing to do with it. Your
> reaction is not being asessed here. As for my supposed harrassment of Hai
> Bara. This is not harrassment - it's disagreement. With out disagreement
> progress is never made. And as you read, the entire conversation between
> Bara and I ended on a civil note - meaning the disagreement was resolved.
If
> there was harrassment, which there wasn't, it was apologized for and
> accepted. All I was doing with regard to her mt-ing skill was arguing. She
> argued right back. Lets have a look at the deffinitions:
>
> Harassment: To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids
>
> I'm not attacking anyone here. All I'm doing is making my point. If
someone
> feels like they are being harassed it's their choice, and all they have to
> do to stop it is ignore the source - which she did not do. Also - I don't
> know that she has claimed she was indeed harassed, this appears to be a
> citation, and not one made via complaint of the recipiant (Bara) - but
> rather a comment from a 3rd party. (Yourself, Gline) - Also I could have
> found her arguing just as harassing in that she is room staff and I am
not.
> I chose not to be offended by this, and as near as I can tell - neither
did
> she.
>
> Disagreement: A conflict or difference of opinion
>
> This is self evident, and it happens daily in every room.
>
> Argue: To put forth reasons for or against; debate
>
> This is what was happening, which is nither possitave or negative, it's
> simply a function of communication and nothing more. I wasn't harrasing
> anyone, I was arguing.
>
> Given the clarifications, I would again submit that the month long ban be
> lessened.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bah
**************************
Basically i don't take sass from whiney people. They call these people SysOps? Of What? the Bitch moan dept? - C'MON!!!! A Systems Operator maintains a system. Bitching me out because you don't like me is NOT OPERATING A SYSTEM - IT"S BITCH MOANING JUST LIKE I"M DOING NOW!!! - This is the mediation dept? Lets look up "mediation" at dictionary.com shall we?
Mediation:
1 The act of mediating; intervention.
2 The state of being mediated.
3 Law. An attempt to bring about a peaceful settlement or compromise between disputants through the objective intervention of a neutral party.
And the root word:
Mediate
1 To resolve or settle (differences) by working with all the conflicting parties: mediate a labor-management dispute.
2 To bring about (a settlement, for example) by working with all the conflicting parties.
3 To effect or convey as an intermediate agent or mechanism.
-- Now lets examnine something here: "3 Law. An attempt to bring about a peaceful settlement or compromise between disputants through the objective intervention of a neutral party. "
What the bloody hell is nuetral about any of the SysOps? NOTHING. Moving on...
**********************************************
> Bah,
>
> Let me start by saying that we use a system of checks a balances between
the
> sysops / site staff in the Conflict Mediation department. I've been given
> this 'case' - if you will - to bring the point across a bit more directly.
> Lesa is a diplomat of sorts. I am not. Your ban is not being lessened or
> turned over. I would hope that this is perfectly clear by now. Your points
> are well made but none of us perceive the one month ban as being
excessive.
> In short and the final say on this matter: You are and will be banned from
> Bushido for the remainder of your thirty days. Do not contact IMC, the
> Bushido Staff or host, or any other IMC Site level personnel on this
matter.
> It is no longer up for discussion.
>
> Dale
> IMC Site Staff
> CMDC
>
>
>
*****************************************
Well, Dale atleast knows what he's doing. Lesa is not a diploat, she's something altogether, and I don't know if I can say it politely, so I'm not going to.
If they'd handed Dale the case from the beginning we've have been faaaaaaar better off - the man is clear, concise, and doesn't take shit. I'd have still made my case to him - but atleast this guy gave me credit for being able to hold my own. He said "Your points are well made but none of us perceive the one month ban as being excessive."
I'll take that for what it's worth, it's not much, but a guy's gotta have his dignity. I don't blame him really, he's a cop in real life, he deals with far worse than differences of opinion. He probably looks at this and says "well, atleast he's not some retard who's taking a hand grenade into a 7-11 because some dick head cashier jipped him on his change" and dismissed it there. Way to go Dale. You get the boobie prize for a job well done. Now if the REST of you dept was as level headed we might have been able to attempt "mediation" instead of "dictation".
But as you can clearly see, in the small, peasant like minds of the IMC CMDC Dept, there is one predominant frame of mind. "I"VE GOT A RED GUMMI - FUCK OFF!"
And so, I've been fucked. Didn't do Shit, but bot the shaft anyways, got insulted by SysOp's with built in Bitch-Moan Action. What way to start a year. Bloody peasants.
-----------
It appears to me that Gline failed to put your address in the send to
line. I will speak to him on that matter.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Imc-hosts] Bah: re: your removal from Bushido @ IMC
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 19:21:11 -0500
From: "Serdar Yegulalp"
Reply-To: Imc-hosts@thegline.com
Organization: Yo' Mama!
To: "IMC Hosts"
Bah:
After considerable deliberation with the rest of the staff and hosts of
Bushido, we have decided to remove you from the room for a period of one
month.
This ban is for various reasons, but it is primarily a reflection of the
staff's impatience with your behavior, which has been observed over a
fair period of time, and which has become extremely problematic abruptly
in the past few days.
First and foremost there is your behavior regarding Meg. Your point of
view was that you and Meg had agreed not to involve your Cs with each
other any more than was needed, and that this was a mutual agreement.
However, things deteriorated between you and Meg to the point where she
blocked you, and you then felt that she was interfering with the
development of one of your plots. The other person involved in this was
one of our staffers, Hai Bara, and after speaking with her I determined
that at no time did you make it clear to her that you did not want Meg
involved in any plotting involving her Cs, or Cs of HBs that were also
involved with yours (as was the case in this particular instance.)
Rather than ask HB to recommend that this practice be discontinued (as
would be the sensible thing to do), you chose instead to harass HB in
AIM and lay a guilt-trip on her about what were essentially your
mistakes. Whether or not Meg was interfering with anything is something
I will determine separately and has little to do with your general
behavior.
There are several other examples of this sort of thing I could cite.
For instance: accusing Michael of being a liar in public, regarding his
running (you publicly accused him of exaggerating or lying about how
much running he did in a day; I was there for this incident.). It is
not your place in the room to call someone a liar in front of other
people, especially for something which is essentially trivial.
It's incidents like this, added up and compounded, which have compelled
us to enact this ban. As far as the above-outlined incident involving
Meg and HB goes, I will deal with the consequences of that as I have
stated above.
During this time do -not- contact me or any member of our staff,
especially not Hai Bara, as you have already caused her enough problems.
If you wish to appeal this decision, take it up with IMC's Conflict
Mediation and Damage Control department (complaints@im-chat.com), not
us. This is standard procedure for a room ban, just so you know.
CCed to the hosts list for archiving.
-- Gline, Host of Bushido @ IMC
[This is a copy of the original message, resent]
_______________________________________________
Emails from the IMC Host List are private and confidential, and are not
to be shared or discussed with anyone outside of this list who is not
either IMC Site Staff or another IMC Host, unless specifically stated in
the body of the email that they may be shared with room staff and other
users.
_______________________________________________
Imc-hosts mailing list
Imc-hosts@thegline.com
http://aquarius.hstdns.com/mailman/listinfo/imc-hosts_thegline.com
**************************
Bah, you sent me the email - it's mine now and I'll do what I want with it. Moving on.
**************************
----- Original Message -----
From: Will Gray
To: complaints@im-chat.com
Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 9:31 PM
Subject: Bushido Room Ban Appeal
To Whom It May Concern,
I'll try to keep this as concise and too the point as possible but it's bound to be lengthy. The ban appears to be pretty open ended and vauge, so I will try to outline it as best I can, clearing up some of the inaccuracies as I go along.
This more orless amounts to plea-bargining, so here we go. Using quotes from the banishment email I received:
"This ban is for various reasons, but it is primarily a reflection of the
staff's impatience with your behavior, which has been observed over a
fair period of time, and which has become extremely problematic abruptly
in the past few days."
This is probably an accurate statement, but it's too vauge. What in specific was found to be so disruptive? I don't mind thinking about what I've done, but what in specific am I to address while I mull this over? I can appreciate the attitude that if I don't know what I did wrong then I shouldn't be allowed back untill someone thinks I'm ready may be the method employed here, but thats a pretty stern exam - everyone views what right and wrong are just a little bit different.
Next:
"There are several other examples of this sort of thing I could cite.
For instance: accusing Michael of being a liar in public, regarding his
running (you publicly accused him of exaggerating or lying about how
much running he did in a day; I was there for this incident.). It is
not your place in the room to call someone a liar in front of other
people, especially for something which is essentially trivial."
Lets cut to the chase - if it's trivial why bring it up. Rather than dazzle you with the math regarding that particular discussion I'll leave it be only to say this. I didn't call Michael a liar, I just told him i didn't believe him. I'm entitled to my opinion, just like he is. We all have our own opinions, and just because I publicly disagreed with him doesn't mean I called him a liar, or accused him of anything. - This amounts to two people arguing over what the best lineup on a football team is.
Next:
"It's incidents like this, added up and compounded, which have compelled
us to enact this ban. "
None of these incidents have been brought to my attention prior to my being banned. I wasn't emailed, IM'ed or PM'ed anything reguarding anyones complaint be it chatter complaints or staff complaints. The only things that even came close was a disagreement between Gline and myself with regard to the imposing of an inbound XP cap placed on characters to limit growth, and my concept of how a throw is to be used. The concept of a throw also wound up bein defined exactly as I had used it in an experimental RP. As far as I know those indidents should be dealt with and finalized.
Apart from that, none of the staff, Gline, Malfis, Mike, or Hai Bara have addressed me with anything remotely harmful or controversial. I feels like I'm being set-up here because I don't constantly agree with the room staff regarding thier decisions.You'll notice ont he Message board for the room Meg agrees with everything Gline says, and doesn't appear to have been banned due to this indient. I've adopted that partiuclar frame of mind based on my prior complaint with regard to being reminded by the IMC site level staff that for Americans, voting day was the following day. I've taken that civic warning to heart, and I make sure that I poste my point of view and opinion with regard to anything room based. I'm following your example, and taking part in the decision making process.
I get the feeling that my lack of complete coersion with the current system is what got me banned, and not anyones dislike for me apart from room staff, who will obviously see me as combative simply because I disagree with them, in short, I'm taking the advice as we given, and I'm not taking a submissive role about it. I'm being pro-active.
Both the XP issue, and the Meg issue were handled completely out of the room and in completely reasonable contexts. No profanity or insults were used in either case were used. The Throwing issue was resolved on the MB, towhich I went through a great deal of detail so no one could say the propsed rules weren't clearly spelled out. I even gave a brief history lesson.
Next:
"The other person involved in this was
one of our staffers, Hai Bara, and after speaking with her I determined
that at no time did you make it clear to her that you did not want Meg
involved in any plotting involving her Cs, or Cs of HBs that were also
involved with yours (as was the case in this particular instance.)
Rather than ask HB to recommend that this practice be discontinued (as
would be the sensible thing to do), you chose instead to harass HB in
AIM and lay a guilt-trip on her about what were essentially your
mistakes."
The manner in which my character is assessed here is innaccurate, and the events refered to here may not be fairly portrayed. Earlier in this paragraph Gline mentions that Meg and I had a working agreement (which is explained below, and was reached on the MB) to keep our C's seperate from eachother interms of story line involvement. Gline then goes on to say the agreement deteriorated to the point where Meg had placed me on block.was my fault, and reiterates that again at the bottom saying it was all essetially my fault.
What I find odd about this is I was blocked before I had said a word to anyone, including meg about this. The first thing I did actually was PM meg say that we needed to talk. I then tried her AIM sign on, to found out she was "unavailable" to my SN - but using a duplicate buddy list from my regular SN on a different SN I found her, as well as all of the staff were online, and simply had me on block. My question here is how can the Staff be fair and unbiased if they aren't able to be reached? Thats an issue in an of itself to be addressed, but it's not my choice on who's staff and who isn't. I didn't get to vote for that.
My point here is, I hadn't even begun to be upset about the issue untill I wasn't able to confront the source of the problem and find out what was going on. I wasn't given the ability to mediate, thats when I got upset. I then IM'd Bara and asked what was going on. That conversation is included with explainations below.
For Gline to say that I started the "guilt tripping" and "harassing" is grossly inaccurate. BOTH of us guilt tripped the other, and at the end it appeared to have ended civily between Bara and I.
Heres the beginning of the convesation.
Sir Ukyo: So what the hecks up with Junmai.
Sir Ukyo: I'm not here during the day usually. I can't really Rp with her much.
Hai Bara 1948: And when you are here, Bah? You would much rather enter into a dice rolling competition than have Ukyo RP with his wife.
Sir Ukyo: Bara - I was under the impression that the time of day functions the same way. I figured she wouldn't be asleep.
Hai Bara 1948: No. RP time of day can be whatever one wants it to be, Bah.
Sir Ukyo: Well bloody hell.
Hai Bara 1948: yeah.
Sir Ukyo: ¬_¬ And why have you never volenteered her for a scene when I've begged for scenes at night? You just made a scene planting fool notions about what kind of person Ukyo is in Megs head, of all people.
Sir Ukyo: Thanks. Appreciate that, Now I have hear to deal with all over again, and I had done my level best to NOT have my C's interact with hers because she and I don't get along.
Hai Bara 1948: Because you were already setting up a scene with others, Bah. I am NOT Bunni. I do NOT interfere with others' scenes nor do I literally BEG for RP because I am NOT a good multi-tasker and I have repeatedly admitted that fact!
Sir Ukyo: Bloody hell.
Sir Ukyo: Look, sorry for snappin at ya.
Sir Ukyo: Tomorrow you and I need to do a scene.
Sir Ukyo: And I have to hammer out a few things with Meg.
Hai Bara 1948: Apology accepted, Bah. And a scene tomorrow will be welcome. *nods, hugs*
The point here is this: Venting and guilt tripping are two different things. Both of us picked our tar baby and let mud fly - Meg and Bunni respectively. And you'll noticed I apologised, and I even went so far as to schedule a possible remedy for the situation. As you can see I was operating on some misinfo about the time of day, and I had the same valid point about availability for RP as she did. So now lets continue.
Sir Ukyo: No offence, but I'm not in the hugging mood hun. I did my best to avoid this kind of stuff, and now I have to find away out of it again, it's not something I hug over.
Hai Bara 1948: You want the truth, Bah? Really?
Sir Ukyo: Lay it on me hun.
Hai Bara 1948: I'm like the cat that purrs even when it's hurting. I hug. Period. As for the RPs? Well, like I stated earlier, you seemed to prefer other RPs to RPing out a story with Ukyo and Junmai and I respected your decision.
Sir Ukyo: It was never a decision. Don't put words in my mouth. I never said didn't want to RP with you.
Sir Ukyo: I hardly ever RP with staff except for Gline in the zen stuff. Thats because staff is always being asked for something, I don't want to take up their tim.
Sir Ukyo: The reason I do all the other ones is to keep him ready for spring, because he's got a whole slew of things to do for Junmai and their kid. He's not ignoring Junmai, he's working for her.
Hai Bara 1948: I am NOT putting words in your mouth, Bah. To me the fact that you, or anyone else for that matter, has set up an RP with someone else is a decision, Bah!
Sir Ukyo: That doesn't mean you can't ask me for a scene once in a while you know.
Sir Ukyo: It's a marriage - thats a 50%50 thing between to players.
At this point we circled around who's liability/responsiblity/duty it was to have the two characters interact, and I got my feathers ruffled again - it happens we're all human. A few spelling errors, a dash of ego and a little foreshadowing and we come to:
Hai Bara 1948: Bah... you just don't GET it, do you? I don't interfere! Once something has been set up between others, I stand back and watch, and enjoy, and, hopefully, learn more about dice stuff.
Sir Ukyo: That doesn't mean you can't say "hey, we should do a scene". Does it ahve to be completely my responsibility to seek out RP with Junmai?
Sir Ukyo: Why should you be immune to asking to see him? Why does he have to come to you?
Sir Ukyo: Thats not exactly fair.
Sir Ukyo: Junmai might think he doesn't see - fine. You think maybe Ukyo wonders why his wife never has anything to say to him when he's at the dojo sweeping up or restocking bandage shelves?
Sir Ukyo: You're just as guilty of neglect as I am. - The difference here is I didn't drag other people into their marraige.
Hai Bara 1948: No, it doesn't Bah. As you have stated before, lots of times our RP schedules don't agree. And when they DO agree, you are already involved. Or I am. And as -I- have stated, I am NO good at MTing.
Sir Ukyo: Your MT-ing skill is something that can only get better with practice.
Sir Ukyo: And I don't mind spacing someone else everyonce in a while to Rp with you.
Hai Bara 1948: Sorry... IMed to death there for a moment.
Sir Ukyo: Undertandable.
Here we both came to the same agreement that scheduling is hard. I work overnight and spend the majority of my online time between 10 pm and 6 am MST - it's hard for me playing the husband to her C to fit in RP time, and I was under the impression I was just filling in breif little outlets of my characters life as he came to and fromt he villiage each day, be it personal training, or errands of one kind or another. I've configured this character as a blind swordsman - he's rather unorthodox, which allows me to place him where he's needed or wanted rather easily. Being blind one constantly questions ones surroundings and there for the side bar of possible out comes one thinks of in such a state is only natrual to spark other questions - this allows me to place him just about anywhere, when ever needed, which is why I RP him in the dusking hours to late night - after all, how does he know what time of day it is? He can count, but be realistic, not that precisely, not yet anyhow. - Thats why I just figured the time of day thing was set and un movable - thus making my RP selection biased against her C - which may have caused some of the problem.
I probably shouldn't have gotten into the MT'ing thing - but I don't like excuses, and I jumped on it like white on rice. Naughty me. Moving on:
Hai Bara 1948: yeah. sometimes? I wish I did not have AIM and the like.
Sir Ukyo: I know the feeling.
Hai Bara 1948: As for MTing, well, I have tried, several times. The quality of my RP goes down as a whole. Personally? I prefer quality over quantity.
Sir Ukyo: I can understand that, but with practice you get better. YOu never can get better if you don't try though.
Hai Bara 1948: Perhaps. I find myself just not enjoying the RP experience as much when I MT though, Bah. And the whole point is to have FUN.
Sir Ukyo: Bara - You don't enjoy anything untill you're good at it in most cases, be it knitting, sewing, karata, kyacking, or crossword puzzles. IF you give up on it though, something that could be fun, never will be. It's a defeatest attitude.
Hai Bara 1948: Bah: I suck at knitting and crocheting, yet I enjoy doing them immensely and knit and crochet whenever I have the materials. Agreed, practice makes perfect. Yet I could be better at MTing than Gline and still not enjoy it because my attention would be scattered.
Sir Ukyo: Thats a function of mental discipline, and again, it's dependant upon practice.
Hai Bara 1948: Bah? I have been a secretary since 1983. In that time, I have MTed my arse off. Quite well, as a matter of fact. The last thing I need is to be informed that I lack practice and mental discipline in such!
Sir Ukyo: Then why is it so hard for you?
Sir Ukyo: I can understand the quality over quantity, but your angle isn't being played very straight.
Hai Bara 1948: Because I have my preferences, Bah. Also, MTing handling more than 14 secretarial tasks as completely different than handling RP interaction. Even my bosses never interacted with more than one customer at a time, Bah.
Sir Ukyo: Well bara, I'm a manager at work, and I deal with about 10 different things at once through out the course of the night, including customers, be it via email, chat or phone.
Sir Ukyo: But lets leave the MT'ing out of this.
Sir Ukyo: Your whole accusation that I'm never available. Why does this seem a little odd?
Sir Ukyo: After all, I haven't seen your other Married C out of the box with her spouse in just as long a time as it's been with Ukyo and Junmai
Hai Bara 1948: Yes, let's. I understand, though, that your line of work is quite different from mine.
Because Jason had other RPs going on and, again, I don't interfere.
Sir Ukyo: So why isn't Hasuko breaking down like Junmai and making Jasons life a living hell?
Hai Bara 1948: Because Hasuko is quite different from Junmai, Bah. I do NOT have cookie cutter Cs like some muns I could mention.
Sir Ukyo: Good.
Sir Ukyo: So why then is it okay for meg to play teenage homewrecker?
Hai Bara 1948: *nods*
Hai Bara 1948: So who's saying she's succeeding, Bah?
Alright - now this area I can see as guilt tripping, but most of this come from the fact that I'm used to being fed excuses from employees or students (I'm an avid guitarist and musician, with a working facility of both music theory and guitar technique - I've had students from time to time who want to learn how to "shred" - which amounts to playing as intricately as possible) - students who study hard, but burn out, or make some of the most rediculously lame excuses for not practicing, and I've gotten used to cutting through the excuses and getting down to the issue. I used this frame of mind here with bara, and shouldn't have. I also made the point that she has another C thats married int he same room which is even less active than my the one married to my C. Again, the same excuse, but with an explaination when I asked why the same reaction hadn't occured, which is valid only to a point with me, but I let it slide and just compliemnted Hasuko on being more stout hearted than her counter part Junmai - my C's wife.
I then changed subjects back to my original beef, and was handed a firm grow up, which I had comming. As you can see, we're keeping on even ground, neither of us is dominating or guilt tripping the other person at this point, we're debating and trying our level best maintain our positions and have the other take our point of view. Debate 101 - nothing extrodinary or harmful here - in fact they teach this in highschool. Moving on:
Sir Ukyo: Even if you weren't aware that Meg was supposed to keep her Sl's seperate from mine SHE WAS AWARE.
Sir Ukyo: Now I have to deal with your reaction to her breaking her own promises.
Sir Ukyo: I had a plan for Junmai, but it still needs more time. Now I have to chose to either A - keep on that line of play, or B - change it and hope it all works out despite someone meddling in affairs that they have no reasn or right to meddle in.
Hai Bara 1948: I was NOT aware of that fact, Bah. Truth. As for dealing with reactions, well, I AM fully aware of how pregnant women react to situations. aFter all, I have three RL pregnanceis to draw on. Hormones and all.
Sir Ukyo: nearly 3 months of very CAREFULL PLANNING - things I've written solos for, may very well go to waste because of meg.
Sir Ukyo: The entire thing isn't going to have anywhere near the same effect I was hoping for. And I didn't do anything to make that happen. Meg put herself where she wasn't wanted and now I'm screwed out of a lot of planning.
Whine whine whine, nag nag nag. Yeah I'm complaining. But I'm not guilt tripping bara, I'm complaining about meg. This isn't what I'd call adult behavior, but it's not harmful or damaging to Baraand certainly not harassment, and certainly isn't what gline described. As for how a pregnant woman reacts to emotional stimulus in pregnancy. Well, I didn't even respond to that - I'll be damned before I go telling someone with three kids that they don't know all the ins and outs of pregnancy. And as you can I was too busy whining to even respond anyhow. Moving on:
Hai Bara 1948: Bah: All Meg's C did was offer a shoulder to cry on. That's all -I- saw. That's all I RPed to - that shoulder to cry on.
Sir Ukyo: Thats my point. She KNEW she wasn't supposed to get involved in Ukyo and JUnmai's marriage, but she did it anynow.
Sir Ukyo: Even if you had asked for a shoulder to cry on to Aoi, Meg is SUPPOSED to decline.
Sir Ukyo: Just like I don't butt in on Shanao and Kasane's issues,
Hai Bara 1948: *nod*
Sir Ukyo: Thats why I'm upset.
Sir Ukyo: I don't like plans of mine being ruined when I've worked so hard to build a certain mood for the C's involved.
Sir Ukyo: Now I've got an unwanted streak of black in there and it's going to take away from what I've been building towards.
Sir Ukyo: And I don't know how to fix it. Thats why I'm upset, because Someone came in and started rewriting my story with out talking to me about it first.
Here I tried to outline the nature of the agreement i made with meg and cited an example - a relationship just like the one Meg intruded into. I keep my nose clean from stuff like that. - I look at Junmai reacting emotionall while pregnant as something that needs to be plotted out with all parties concerned before it's played out - because the first experiance you have is the yard stick you judge the next one like it buy, and it was irritating to me to have been left out of that decision making process. If I ever can get back in the room in a timely manner to patch things up with Junmai - I've not got a serious IC relationship hurtle to jump over, and it wasn't something I'd planned for.
Hai Bara 1948: Perhaps you shouldn't have been so closed-mouthed about it, Bah. Even if you just e-mailed me your solos to read, it would have given me a better understanding. Sure, I'm not Gline and I don't have any official standing other than keeping the dust down in teh Room, yet it would have helped me understand the directin you were trying for.
Sir Ukyo: Thats the POINT
Sir Ukyo: I needed you both as a player and a C to feel a certain way.
Sir Ukyo: Now all of that is wasted, I can't have it back again
Sir Ukyo: Thats why I had to keep it a complete secrect.
Hai Bara 1948: Hon... you'd be surprised what I can keep under my hat. And completely forget about because my C wouldn't know about it.
Sir Ukyo: I was trying to create something romantic and subtle - something with some real magic to it.
Sir Ukyo: Bara, it wouldn't have worked in this case.
Sir Ukyo: And you aren't supposed to know when someones gonna throw you a supprize birthday party, thats WHY it's so special.
Hai Bara 1948: You would be surprised, Bah. Just ask Mike sometimes.
Sir Ukyo: Because it appears like no one cares, and all of the sudden, youre given the world.
Sir Ukyo: No - I wouldn't be. And we'll never know now because I CAN"T GET THE EFFECT BACK.
Hai Bara 1948: I am truly sorry for that, Bah.
Sir Ukyo: Yeah Me to.
Sir Ukyo: But I know someone who isn't, and thats why I'm incredibly pissed off.
Hai Bara 1948: *nods* I understand.
Here we get into my motives for secrecy. The reason i was playing it safe was because I know that even though a player might know, the C doesn't, but I've noticed most players can't keep that tint of knowledge out of their RP, or if they actually can, the resulting play is a bit try and tasteless. I like vivid detail and epic proportion when I go through the trouble to plot things out. Bara Insisted that I would be supprized - and my instincts tell me this is false. But as you can see, there were apologies and a civil, albeit emotional conversation was had. That was the end of the conversation I had with Bara. Anything passed that deemed as "harrassment" or " guilt tripping" - well, thats innacruate, distorted, worped, deluted or poluted information. No where was anyone guilt tripped as Glines statement which I've relocated down here as gline acused me of doing:
"The other person involved in this was
one of our staffers, Hai Bara, and after speaking with her I determined
that at no time did you make it clear to her that you did not want Meg
involved in any plotting involving her Cs, or Cs of HBs that were also
involved with yours (as was the case in this particular instance.)
Rather than ask HB to recommend that this practice be discontinued (as
would be the sensible thing to do), you chose instead to harass HB in
AIM and lay a guilt-trip on her about what were essentially your
mistakes."
So as to my character and actions towards Hai Bara, the above is innacurate, and possibly not made out of the most sound of judgement - everyone was angry. As for what were essentially my mistakes. I take this to mean my planning. I can see his justification here, but at the same time I don't think he took mine into account. Junmais been pregnant for 3 months, and for 3 months my plan has worked rather nicely. I explained to gline just like I did to bara about why I was keeping it a secret. I had planned to keep the solos between me myself and I untill they were published two days apart from eachother so people could vote and surmize, as well as allow some interplay between bara and myself IC to the solos as posted. It might still work - but it's never going to have the volume and proportion it once might have had if allowed to go undiscovered, and now we'll never know.
Next:
That brings us back to the heart of what set tonights little events into motion. The agreement I made with meg. Some months ago I held a pole in which I blatantly asked if I was wanted in the room - as a direct result of Meg jumping down my back for something I did IC that she felt was unharmonious to her being and essence as a person - I have no clue what happened, i don't even rememner, I don't hold grudges if I can help it - if you can't leave the past in the past you never really put your feet in the future, or so I belive. After agood 20 lines of discussion it was decided that I would say, and I let meg know that I was pu tting her in ignore indeffinately on all messaging programs and in the room, simply because we didn't mesh well. - Why I still don't know.
At some point Meg and Gline fashioned a psuedo daughter for Glines character Ogata Sensei - who happens to be my C's employer (largely, my C does some "contract work" here and there, most of which is for the service of Iiga as a whole towhich he's not directly compensated with money, but rather a unique reputation for being arrogant and deadly, when in fact, he's a complete idiot, and quite the softy to his wife when they have time alone). - Because of this new C my C was somewhat obligated to be involved with Megs, so I unblocked Meg so I could keep tabs on what happened at the dojo with regard to Ogata, but I made it very clear that we needed to keep seperate story lines, just so we didn't interact since we already knew this was not a good Idea. Meg agreed to this and it's been flaw free up untill toniight when she began to interact with Junmai on a plane that he would be involved in - specifically Junmais missing him because he's been so distant as of late.
And so there you have it - the whole story. I'll admit I gave room staff a hard time about it. I can completely understand this. Room staff in generral is kinda off balance to me I think. I've noticed the same kind of personality with a slight tinge is always room staff. Most tend to worry alot about what people think of them. Jason is what seems to be on a perpetual LOA - which irks me, him being a co-host and all, seems a little odd, I'd expect more activity from him.
One of my greatest pet peeves about the Staff, is they always appear to me to be under the impression that I owe them respect. Anyone who's familiar with leadership understands that the leaders have to earn that respect. Whent he masses respect the leaders enough to trust them, then they can lead effectively. Jason and Gline both have a very condecending air about them that I've noticed, unlike Mike, who's warm hearted and playfull, and Bara who's a bout a charming a gall as mother nature has devised so far. She laughes at things my own mother doesn't understand, and thats saying alot.
So with regard to Bara, she is a wonderfal warm hearted gal, but she's getting old, and her energy fades a bit more each day - everyone worries about her health including me - which is why the next quote in Glines email seemed very off base:
"During this time do -not- contact me or any member of our staff,
especially not Hai Bara, as you have already caused her enough problems."
As you've already read Bara wasn't what I'd consider to be any more offended about the whole thing than I was, and she's not made of glass. If Glines refereing to anything else, I'd very much like to know what it is.
The over all tone of this letter from Gline appears to have been largely his decision. I think Bara was upset and confused about megs involvement. Natrually, Staff behaving like management of some kind or another, there is public knoledge and confidential knowledge. The function of Staff is to uphold the room purpuse function and focus. The person who sets those varibles is the room host, in this case Gline. If anything sent bara offline with mysty eyes it wasn't what I said to her - I never insulted her or slighted her judgement - what ever it was that glines refering too didn't come directly from me, and she chose to feel the way she does about it of her own volition - as you've read, I appologized, and if that isn't reiterated enough, I'll say it again from the bottom of my heart - I'm sorry Hai Bara, I didn't mean to make you feel bad.
It's because I'm an intelligent person that I can see the abstract, read between the lines, and walk and chew gum at the same time and that is why I'm requesting the banishment last only 7 days - and not 31. There have been instances like this before that didn't involve me where someone was banned for a week - to name names. Bunni and Meg. This is my first banning that I'm aware of, and given the precident, I don't see why I should have to endure a month of banishment when a similar siutuation invovling the same chatter who's just as disruptive as I appear to be, and staffer (Meg and Bara who apprearently mediated the in-room problem with that incident) - has already been documented under near similar cirumstances with a punishment thats 1/4th of what I'm being delt.
I respectfully await your deision for appeal with regard to banishment and ask that you read or re-read the email in it's entirety before reaching a decision.
Sincerely,
Bah
IMC Chatter
***************************
Hey, I had beef, gimme some credit - devious and malicious women are a dime a dozen, why defend them? Just because you were bullied in highschool doesn't mean you can treat everyone who disagrees with you like a criminal or bully. Simply fact is people disagree, it's nothing to BANNISH someone over. Jesus H Jelly Beans, WTF's up with that?
**************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lesa"
To:
Cc: "Gline"
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 9:06 PM
Subject: Re: Bushido Room Ban Appeal
Bah,
Below are the points of your appeal (sections edited for brevity's
sake).
Point 1
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From the original banning letter: "This ban is for various reasons, but
it is primarily a reflection of the staff's impatience with your
behavior, which has been observed over a fair period of time, and which
has become extremely problematic abruptly in the past few days."
>From your appeal: "This is probably an accurate statement, but it's too
vauge. What in specific was found to be so disruptive?"
Since you acknowledge that the statement was accurate, that would seem
to indicate that you were already aware that your behavior was being
disruptive. Besides which, two of the incidents that were found
disruptive are mentioned in the letter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Point 2
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From the original banning letter: "There are several other examples of
this sort of thing I could cite. For instance: accusing Michael of
being a liar in public, regarding his running (you publicly accused him
of exaggerating or lying about how much running he did in a day; I was
there for this incident.). It is not your place in the room to call
someone a liar in front of other people, especially for something which
is essentially trivial."
>From your appeal: Lets cut to the chase - if it's trivial why bring it
up. Rather than dazzle you with the math regarding that particular
discussion I'll leave it be only to say this. I didn't call Michael a
liar, I just told him i didn't believe him. I'm entitled to my opinion,
just like he is. We all have our own opinions, and just because I
publicly disagreed with him doesn't mean I called him a liar, or accused
him of anything. - This amounts to two people arguing over what the best
lineup on a football team is."
Excerpts from the Bushido Logs in question:
Michael Yungbluth
((I use to run 8-15 miles every morning, sadly now I run like 5 miles at
the most if I do every so often.))
bah
((8-15 miles every morning? ¬.¬ Michael - I'm gonna call BS on that.
Even 5 miles a morning is a good solid two hours even for an olympic
calbure athlete in off season training.))
Not believing Michael was trivial - calling him a liar (and yes, from
reading the logs, that is exactly what you did) was not trivial. He did
not express an opinion, he was talking about his former daily workout.
This is nothing like a difference of opinion on the starting line up of
a football team.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Point 3
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From your appeal: "I feels like I'm being set-up here because I don't
constantly agree with the room staff regarding thier decisions.You'll
notice ont he Message board for the room Meg agrees with everything
Gline says, and doesn't appear to have been banned due to this indient."
Other than the fact that you took offense to the fact that Meg was RPing
with someone else, there is nothing to tie her to this incident and I do
not see where bringing her up is relevant to anything regarding your
behavior.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Point 4
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From your appeal: "The first thing I did actually was PM meg say that we
needed to talk. I then tried her AIM sign on, to found out she was
"unavailable" to my SN - but using a duplicate buddy list from my
regular SN on a different SN I found her, as well as all of the staff
were online, and simply had me on block. My question here is how can
the Staff be fair and unbiased if they aren't able to be reached? Thats
an issue in an of itself to be addressed, but it's not my choice on
who's staff and who isn't. I didn't get to vote for that."
No staff member of any room is required by IMC to be at the immediate
beck and call of every chatter. All are reachable by email -- which is
where business belongs. AIM's are for personal conversations and
convenience, not room/site business.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Point 5
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From your appeal: "I then IM'd Bara and asked what was going on. That
conversation is included with explainations below. For Gline to say that
I started the "guilt tripping" and "harassing" is grossly inaccurate.
BOTH of us guilt tripped the other, and at the end it appeared to have
ended civily between Bara and I."
The log you attached seems to have gaps - and sections of it, you
omitted entirely and paraphrased what was said. Even so, from what you
sent, you were being verbally abusive toward Bara and you admit yourself
to having jumped on her statement about multi-tasking.
Regarding that whole incident, I'll break down the harassing elements:
1 - Multi-tasking: Even after she plainly states that she does not enjoy
multi-tasking, you continue to argue that she needs to keep at it until
she's good at it. As Bara herself said, the point of RPing is to have
fun. If she does not enjoy multi-tasking, she is certainly not required
to do it.
2 - Meg RPing to Bara: If you don't want to RP to/with Meg, that is, of
course, your choice. Getting furious at Bara for RPing to her is
unfounded. She was not forcing your character into the scene. After
several rounds of talking about why you and Bara's C weren't RPing
together, you ranted quite a bit about her RP ruining your planned
solos. Solo implies you weren't going to have interaction with anyone
anyway, so I fail to see where it would affect that. Even so, if there
were points that you needed to work out with Bara, that need apparently
was not conveyed to her. RP is a two-way street at the very least. You
cannot sit back and write a script under the table without telling
anyone then expect them to follow along as if they knew all about it.
In a nutshell - you can state who you will or won't RP to (if done in
non flaming fashion), but you cannot dictate who anyone else can or
cannot RP to.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Point 6
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From your appeal: "One of my greatest pet peeves about the Staff, is
they always appear to me to be under the impression that I owe them
respect. Anyone who's familiar with leadership understands that the
leaders have to earn that respect."
Whether you feel respect or not, IMC does require that you treat room
hosts and staff with respect. They should not have to 'earn' you
treating them that way. If you think the same does not apply offline,
try telling a police officer that you aren't going to speak respectfully
to him until he earns it.
When you signed up for service with IMC, you agreed to the following
from the Terms of Service: "Chatters are expected to behave respectfully
towards each other and towards IMC site administrators, regardless of
the room or community to which they belong. (This includes but is not
limited to: accepting and complying with the room's expectations for
behavior; following the room rating; not taking part in any sort of
impersonation or attempts to defraud) "Chatter" is defined as anyone who
is using IMC services in any manner. IMC administration standards of
behavior will supersede room standards of behavior for IMC
administrative actions."
If you still feel that the staff and hosts of IMC rooms are not
deserving of respectful treatment, then IMC is not the chat site suited
to your role-playing needs and you should look for a more compatiable
site.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have both read and re-read your appeal, the logs from Bushido and AIM
logs. You refer to the appeal at the beginning of your email as
'plea-bargaining'. Appeals on IMC are not bargaining - they are reviews
to see if the actions being punished occurred.
>From what I have read, not only did the actions occur, but you
apparently do not see where you are at fault in any of this. You seem
to feel that your harassment of Bara was justified and, even with
sections of the logs missing, I would have found what you were saying to
her to be highly insulting as well as condescending.
I see no reason to lessen the time of your banishment from Bushido. The
ban stands as originally stated.
Lesa
IMC Site Staff
*************************************
I'm going to base my decision of this response on two things. One, she's emotionally driven, and two, she's just a difficult person to work with.
*************************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Will Gray"
To: "Lesa"
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 10:20 PM
Subject: Re: Bushido Room Ban Appeal
> Lesa,
>
>
> With regard to your points. I'll address them as pesented giving further
> clarification.
>
> 1: "Probably accurate" does not mean "is accurate". If I felt the reason
for
> the ban was completely justified, I wouldn't have bothered appealing. This
> interpitation of my wording is innacurate and quoted out of character and
> context from it's original text, which was supported with more supporting
> arguement.
>
> >From my appeal: "everyone views what right and wrong are just a little
bit
> different." - That is why I used the phrase "probably accurate" but not
"is
> accurate". Also - "accurate" is largely based on what you judge something
> too or compare it with. Compared to several other players in the room,
with
> similar opinions like my own towards the room environment as a whole, I
> haven't done much of anything. I'm being compared to the absolute
negative,
> as opposed to the norm. Knowing this, I said "probably".
>
> 2: Calling BS means I don't belive him. That does not mean I called him a
> liar. Your interpertation of my statement is not correct to what was meant
> or said. This is a moot point.
>
> 3: This isn't even pertinent to the issue at hand, this was my opinion on
> the result of the issue at hand. This is a moot point.
>
> 4: Again, this is not pertinent. Gline has used AIM and email to discuess
> room buisness, as well as the rest of the staff. AIM is a communications
> tool used by everythign from 8 year olds with friends living in a
different
> state, to families, to buisnesses, to private coomunities such as IMC.
This
> is a moot point.
>
> 5: There are no gaps in that conversation. All I did was insert an
> explaination of what was said, and why I said it. With regard to Bara and
> multi-tasking - this is a moot point - the whole conversation is there and
> is cited so you knew what happened. Gline acused me of harassment, which
is
> explained below as to why it's a false acusation. This is a moot point.
>
>
> 6: With regard to respect. No one was respectful, through out the whole
> thing. Respect is a widely misunderstood concept and often used as a
sheild
> for those who aren't able to understand that not everything said is meant
> the way it comes across. If I say something that you view offensively it
is
> your choice to be offended. I cannot be held responsible for someone who
> doesn't understand me, all I can do is work towards helping them
understand
> what I mean when I say something - that's all anyone can do.
>
> --------
>
> As far as how you would react - again that has nothing to do with it. Your
> reaction is not being asessed here. As for my supposed harrassment of Hai
> Bara. This is not harrassment - it's disagreement. With out disagreement
> progress is never made. And as you read, the entire conversation between
> Bara and I ended on a civil note - meaning the disagreement was resolved.
If
> there was harrassment, which there wasn't, it was apologized for and
> accepted. All I was doing with regard to her mt-ing skill was arguing. She
> argued right back. Lets have a look at the deffinitions:
>
> Harassment: To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids
>
> I'm not attacking anyone here. All I'm doing is making my point. If
someone
> feels like they are being harassed it's their choice, and all they have to
> do to stop it is ignore the source - which she did not do. Also - I don't
> know that she has claimed she was indeed harassed, this appears to be a
> citation, and not one made via complaint of the recipiant (Bara) - but
> rather a comment from a 3rd party. (Yourself, Gline) - Also I could have
> found her arguing just as harassing in that she is room staff and I am
not.
> I chose not to be offended by this, and as near as I can tell - neither
did
> she.
>
> Disagreement: A conflict or difference of opinion
>
> This is self evident, and it happens daily in every room.
>
> Argue: To put forth reasons for or against; debate
>
> This is what was happening, which is nither possitave or negative, it's
> simply a function of communication and nothing more. I wasn't harrasing
> anyone, I was arguing.
>
> Given the clarifications, I would again submit that the month long ban be
> lessened.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bah
**************************
Basically i don't take sass from whiney people. They call these people SysOps? Of What? the Bitch moan dept? - C'MON!!!! A Systems Operator maintains a system. Bitching me out because you don't like me is NOT OPERATING A SYSTEM - IT"S BITCH MOANING JUST LIKE I"M DOING NOW!!! - This is the mediation dept? Lets look up "mediation" at dictionary.com shall we?
Mediation:
1 The act of mediating; intervention.
2 The state of being mediated.
3 Law. An attempt to bring about a peaceful settlement or compromise between disputants through the objective intervention of a neutral party.
And the root word:
Mediate
1 To resolve or settle (differences) by working with all the conflicting parties: mediate a labor-management dispute.
2 To bring about (a settlement, for example) by working with all the conflicting parties.
3 To effect or convey as an intermediate agent or mechanism.
-- Now lets examnine something here: "3 Law. An attempt to bring about a peaceful settlement or compromise between disputants through the objective intervention of a neutral party. "
What the bloody hell is nuetral about any of the SysOps? NOTHING. Moving on...
**********************************************
> Bah,
>
> Let me start by saying that we use a system of checks a balances between
the
> sysops / site staff in the Conflict Mediation department. I've been given
> this 'case' - if you will - to bring the point across a bit more directly.
> Lesa is a diplomat of sorts. I am not. Your ban is not being lessened or
> turned over. I would hope that this is perfectly clear by now. Your points
> are well made but none of us perceive the one month ban as being
excessive.
> In short and the final say on this matter: You are and will be banned from
> Bushido for the remainder of your thirty days. Do not contact IMC, the
> Bushido Staff or host, or any other IMC Site level personnel on this
matter.
> It is no longer up for discussion.
>
> Dale
> IMC Site Staff
> CMDC
>
>
>
*****************************************
Well, Dale atleast knows what he's doing. Lesa is not a diploat, she's something altogether, and I don't know if I can say it politely, so I'm not going to.
If they'd handed Dale the case from the beginning we've have been faaaaaaar better off - the man is clear, concise, and doesn't take shit. I'd have still made my case to him - but atleast this guy gave me credit for being able to hold my own. He said "Your points are well made but none of us perceive the one month ban as being excessive."
I'll take that for what it's worth, it's not much, but a guy's gotta have his dignity. I don't blame him really, he's a cop in real life, he deals with far worse than differences of opinion. He probably looks at this and says "well, atleast he's not some retard who's taking a hand grenade into a 7-11 because some dick head cashier jipped him on his change" and dismissed it there. Way to go Dale. You get the boobie prize for a job well done. Now if the REST of you dept was as level headed we might have been able to attempt "mediation" instead of "dictation".
But as you can clearly see, in the small, peasant like minds of the IMC CMDC Dept, there is one predominant frame of mind. "I"VE GOT A RED GUMMI - FUCK OFF!"
And so, I've been fucked. Didn't do Shit, but bot the shaft anyways, got insulted by SysOp's with built in Bitch-Moan Action. What way to start a year. Bloody peasants.
posted by Renge at 1/06/2003 11:57:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home