nabo. Abuse.

[ShadowZz]

Sent: Thu Aug 20, 2015 3:23 pm
From: nabo.
Recipient: ShadowZz

You post a complaint and you pm to ask?

Good steps.

You are banned for continuously trying to start drama with ent staffs. Dont join the ent chat if you aint gonna do anything useful. Greens and reds have been noted.

Your ban from chat is 50 minutes.

I'll leave your complaint to arty since you @ him.

Post the entire chat log. All of it since I logged on. You will see that I was talking to someone who is not staff about him posting a ban against someone for typing !votekick [hisname]. After that F-Train started a discussion with me. He asked me, not the other way round. Then started typing "qq more" over and over again.

Then nabo. posted this:

Postby nabo. » Thu Aug 20, 2015 3:09 pm

Ent pub activity should not matter much when considering someone for vouch in an inhouse league.

What should matter is their skill, recognition from community, and overall behaviour. Whether they will be active or too inactive can be evaluated once accepted. If someone is applying, I would assume they are planning to play some or enough games to be considered part of this league. Note that, not all players who get into playing inhouses play as much pub games and vice versa. I have seen many who rarely play pubs, but play lots ihs. Accepting those who are qualified and build a player base from there hopping players will be active should be the start.

I joined chat and said "nabo." "Do you even read what you type?" Then I got banned.

If you let me finish I was typing > "By your logic someone can come back after 2 years having played 0 games of ID in that time and be instantly accepted to an IH league."

If you are incapable of being questioned when you say something so broad on a post then maybe you shouldn't be an admin @nabo.

You can't seriously look at this and not call it abuse. I didn't flame you. I was merely asking you a question. Also since when do you even go near anything to do with Island Defense and how much irony is it that it happens to be just to disagree with me?

If you don't think what you did is abuse then make the complaint public. Stop hiding your bullshit in the admin only vision and show the public your actions.

Simple request.

[Jiminy_Cricket]

I'll agree with shadow. I dont like to see any admins/mods doing this to community members. Let people talk and voice their opinions. It's ok to have a dissenting opinion.

I recently posted a poll where I asked a question to the community regarding a rule. Nabo. took it down after only being up for one hour cause he wanted the rule to be how he wanted it.

Nabo. is very helpful and knowledgeable but I do see a tendency to powertrip on occasion.

[ShadowZz]

Edited the original post and added quotes so it made more sense. This happened directly before the first pm quoted. So around 3:15pm.

[Lynx]

Ent pub activity should not matter much when considering someone for vouch in an inhouse league.

What should matter is their skill, recognition from community, and overall behaviour. Whether they will be active or too inactive can be evaluated once accepted. If someone is applying, I would assume they are planning to play some or enough games to be considered part of this league. Note that, not all players who get into playing inhouses play as much pub games and vice versa. I have seen many who rarely play pubs, but play lots ihs. Accepting those who are qualified and build a player base from there hopping players will be active should be the start.

This is a solid and a logical argument. ShadowZz, maybe if you wouldn't have insulted nabo with

Do you even read what you type?

he'd give you a chance to argue your point. It's understandable that nabo would ban you if you just recently got unbanned and then instantly join the chat again and insult and him and potentially start drama. You especially have taken part in a lot of drama lately so it is reasonable to think you could start more.

I thought I'd give my thought on this since I myself have been involved with arguing against ShadowZz and it can be bothersome sometimes. I can't really comment on the first chat ban since the chat log isn't public.

[uakf.b]

Thank you for your feedback. We will take it under consideration.

[aRt)Y]

@ShadowZz I would just like to add that you have been continously salty since your retirement. For whatever reason you are mad, stop channeling it towards staff members _OR_ ENT members, in particular the ID ones. - I dont like it, they dont like it. Perhaps you should take some days off and refocus.

@Jiminy_Cricket nabo is an ENT Administrator, thus he can decide whether a rule will be added, adjusted or removed. Suggestions are taken into consideration to know what the community might think about it, however, nabo has his reasons for doing what he did. Perhaps just private message him and ask for an elaboration.

Removing somebody temporarily from chat to avoid a toxic environment is not abuse.