Post by antrizar on Jan 15, 2017 3:56:33 GMT
I personally don't actually like the apology that was given.
It seemed to be too focused on what he [Bona] has "done" for the server, rather than an attempt to make amends for the harm he's caused others.
That's just the vibe I get from it. All that to say, If someone was standing in front of me in person and gave me that apology, I'd assume they were bull shitting. (It's a harsh assessment, but it's the way it came across)
However, I don't necessarily (from the evidence that I have seen... clearly, I wasn't there) think the punishment fits the crime.
[This is going to be long, readers be aware]
As I understand it, there were some arrows fired at some people which caused some damage, but no death.
If anyone remembers, I myself did this to people. We were all gathered to take on the Ender Dragon and I climbed to the top of Town Hall and rained arrows down on everyone. When I did it, it was funny. I don't know the differences between what I did and what Bora did... so, until I have more evidence for that, I'm going to rule that out.
As far as pushing an AFK player off a tall structure... I can only presume that this was done with the intent of death, irregardless of an actual death occurring.
That's kinda messed up. What was the plan after that certain player's death? Gather all their stuff and put it in a chest where they died? If the player was legit AFK, say even AFK for the night, they'd never have know that they were killed until many hours later.
I personally don't want to play on a server where I need to worry about getting merked while AFK... it just doesn't seem fun to me, otherwise I'd play on a factions server or something.
The rest I'm still foggy on.
It seems there was a confrontation and ultimately an altercation between a certain player and the accused in which that certain player instructed the accused to cease and desist to which the accused disregarded until both verbal and physical violence escalated.
To make a complete judgment on this, I'd need to see larger section of recorded chat to establish intent.
When someone threatens to "ban" someone, it can be taken in two ways; As a joke, or as a legit warning.
If taken as a legit warning, activity should stop, otherwise the intent is to be a pain in the ass.
If the threat is taken as a joke, then a second warning should be given.
A second warning can only be taken as a legit warning as it should reaffirm the first warning.
Clearly, after a second warning the activity should stop. If it doesn't, then again, we've established the intent.
As I understand it, and as I see it as a person, the only time the phrase "Ban me Bitch" is acceptable is under the very first scenario in which the warning can be interpreted as a joke or as a legit warning. At any other phase of this progression, a phrase like this clearly establishes an intent to be an ass.
As I myself am still unsure to the exact details, I am going to also rule this out. (someone please fill me in on this)
With all that said, I would vote based on the one certainty I have. Which is the intent to kill an AFK player. An argument can be made that this sort of activity, in the eyes of certain players, is funny or part of the game. For this reason, I believe the actions of the accused warrants, at most, a temporary ban.
I support what seems to be the majority.
However, if one could establish an "intent to be an ass" in the above mentioned scenarios, then I'd be forced to amend my vote. A player who, disturbed the peace, engaged in harassment, conspired to kill an AFK player, and was without question, an ass about it when confronted; in my view has no place on this server.
This has yet to be established, therefor I will withhold my tally.
It seemed to be too focused on what he [Bona] has "done" for the server, rather than an attempt to make amends for the harm he's caused others.
That's just the vibe I get from it. All that to say, If someone was standing in front of me in person and gave me that apology, I'd assume they were bull shitting. (It's a harsh assessment, but it's the way it came across)
However, I don't necessarily (from the evidence that I have seen... clearly, I wasn't there) think the punishment fits the crime.
[This is going to be long, readers be aware]
As I understand it, there were some arrows fired at some people which caused some damage, but no death.
If anyone remembers, I myself did this to people. We were all gathered to take on the Ender Dragon and I climbed to the top of Town Hall and rained arrows down on everyone. When I did it, it was funny. I don't know the differences between what I did and what Bora did... so, until I have more evidence for that, I'm going to rule that out.
As far as pushing an AFK player off a tall structure... I can only presume that this was done with the intent of death, irregardless of an actual death occurring.
That's kinda messed up. What was the plan after that certain player's death? Gather all their stuff and put it in a chest where they died? If the player was legit AFK, say even AFK for the night, they'd never have know that they were killed until many hours later.
I personally don't want to play on a server where I need to worry about getting merked while AFK... it just doesn't seem fun to me, otherwise I'd play on a factions server or something.
The rest I'm still foggy on.
It seems there was a confrontation and ultimately an altercation between a certain player and the accused in which that certain player instructed the accused to cease and desist to which the accused disregarded until both verbal and physical violence escalated.
To make a complete judgment on this, I'd need to see larger section of recorded chat to establish intent.
When someone threatens to "ban" someone, it can be taken in two ways; As a joke, or as a legit warning.
If taken as a legit warning, activity should stop, otherwise the intent is to be a pain in the ass.
If the threat is taken as a joke, then a second warning should be given.
A second warning can only be taken as a legit warning as it should reaffirm the first warning.
Clearly, after a second warning the activity should stop. If it doesn't, then again, we've established the intent.
As I understand it, and as I see it as a person, the only time the phrase "Ban me Bitch" is acceptable is under the very first scenario in which the warning can be interpreted as a joke or as a legit warning. At any other phase of this progression, a phrase like this clearly establishes an intent to be an ass.
As I myself am still unsure to the exact details, I am going to also rule this out. (someone please fill me in on this)
With all that said, I would vote based on the one certainty I have. Which is the intent to kill an AFK player. An argument can be made that this sort of activity, in the eyes of certain players, is funny or part of the game. For this reason, I believe the actions of the accused warrants, at most, a temporary ban.
I support what seems to be the majority.
However, if one could establish an "intent to be an ass" in the above mentioned scenarios, then I'd be forced to amend my vote. A player who, disturbed the peace, engaged in harassment, conspired to kill an AFK player, and was without question, an ass about it when confronted; in my view has no place on this server.
This has yet to be established, therefor I will withhold my tally.