waka warning

[12:48 AM] PTM: Hi wakarimasensei. After reviewing the issues in #server-feedback last night, staff have decided to issue with a warning under rule 4. When finding there to be a potentially-volatile disagreement, you threw gas on the fire rather than alerting any members of staff. If you want staff to intercede, we need to first be aware of the problem, and unfortunately cannot always be at our keyboards to respond. In future, please alert an appropriate member of staff in the first instance.
[12:49 AM] wakarimasensei: Wait, for what exactly?
[12:55 AM] PTM: Apologies, I was juggling some things and couldn't respond immediately.
[12:55 AM] PTM: Rule 4 is as follows:
4. If someone is breaking a rule or you believe should be considered as breaking a rule, please contact a staff member. Do not provoke others.
[12:56 AM] wakarimasensei: Yes.
[12:57 AM] wakarimasensei: I assume I'm being issued a warning for provoking people... but when?
[12:57 AM] wakarimasensei: Shouldn't we assume that anything in #server-feedback is being seen by mods, and that alerting them is unnecessary? Especially since (as far as I can remember) at least one was already involved in the conversation.
[1:02 AM] PTM: From here onwards, essentially. https://discordapp.com/channels/205457071380889601/423397883405139969/609143349806497885
[1:03 AM] PTM: And to answer your other question, no. We are not always looking at server-feedback, and even being involved briefly does not mean we're still looking. Particularly if you feel that the issue has not been addressed by a mod, the procedure would be asking that mod or another mod to intercede, not taking it upon yourself (per rule 4).
[1:03 AM] PTM: We'll be issuing a statement about notifying mods in a short while, which will add further clarity.
[1:03 AM] wakarimasensei: I'm unsure of which of my comments are "provoking others."
[1:04 AM] wakarimasensei: I called out inappropriate behavior, which should be perfectly acceptable, especially since I was under the assumption mods were there.
[1:04 AM] wakarimasensei: Like, when should I have alerted a mod?
[1:04 AM] wakarimasensei: There was one present. Why would I have reason to believe they've left?
[1:05 AM] wakarimasensei: Mods were online, and we were talking in the one channel designed to have an open line to the staff.
[1:05 AM] wakarimasensei: Are we at the point where saying "hey, that isn't OK" is provoking people?
[1:09 AM] PTM: Immediately would have been for the best. It was not the only time you took it upon yourself to call out negative behaviours (https://discordapp.com/channels/205457071380889601/423397883405139969/609143349806497885) on that particular subject.
[1:10 AM] PTM: There were multiple points where, if you didn't think a member of staff was doing enough, you had ample opportunity to escalate things to them or to another member of staff.
[1:11 AM] wakarimasensei: The point at which I think it's necessary to escalate things beyond staff that I think aren't doing enough to stop something is different than the point at which I feel comfortable saying "stay polite."
[1:11 AM] wakarimasensei: I didn't view it as serious enough to merit escalation, especially since the monitors present apparently found it acceptable.
[1:11 AM] PTM: And the rule specifically and explicitly outlines that you should escalate it to monitors if you believe something should be considered breaking a rule.
[1:12 AM] wakarimasensei: Honestly, what constitutes breaking a rule has been pretty nebulous recently.
[1:12 AM] wakarimasensei: I assumed TEST's behavior wasn't rule-breaking because the line is even more hazy than usual nowadays, and no one present was doing anything.
[1:12 AM] PTM: That is something that I am personally driving for greater clarity on, and we are working on as a team. The lag in taking action is something of a personal frustration for me.
[1:13 AM] PTM: So, we're working to resolve it.
[1:13 AM] wakarimasensei: You'll excuse me if I don't have a terrible amount of faith in the staff at this point.
[1:13 AM] PTM: I've outlined the rule, and we've both agreed that the action you took was not in line with that rule.
[1:13 AM] wakarimasensei: No, we haven't agreed on that at all.
[1:14 AM] PTM: Did you believe TEST did something that should be considered breaking a rule?
[1:14 AM] wakarimasensei: My view at the time, and now, is that what TEST did didn't break any rules, but that that's more indicative of the server's lax policies rather than TEST's behavior.
[1:14 AM] PTM: But you thought that it should have been considered breaking a rule.
[1:15 AM] wakarimasensei: In an ideal world, yes, but I didn't think it broke the server's rules.
[1:15 AM] wakarimasensei: There's a difference between "what you're doing is dickish" and "what you're doing is illegal."
[1:15 AM] PTM: We have a common sense rule for the things that aren't quite caught by the others, for edge cases like you've described.
[1:16 AM] PTM: Whether it was a rule or not, if you thought it should be considered breaking a rule, it should have been escalated to staff, per rule 4 - not addressed by you personally.
[1:16 AM] PTM: For this reason, you have been issued with a warning.
[1:16 AM] wakarimasensei: You don't call the cops because someone was rude to you.
[1:16 AM] wakarimasensei: TEST didn't break any rules.
[1:16 AM] wakarimasensei: The authorities were already present and watching.
[1:16 AM] wakarimasensei: There was zero reason to report it to staff.
[1:19 AM] wakarimasensei: Let me get this straight. TEST made statements which I said were inappropriate. Staff were present and engaging in the conversation without making any move towards doing something about TEST, which heavily implies his actions were acceptable. I didn't think TEST broke any rules, just that his behavior wasn't helpful. I'm being warned because instead of assuming TEST's behavior, which is becoming increasingly frequent without any kind of staff intervention on this server, was against the rules AND that it hadn't already been seen?
[1:20 AM] wakarimasensei: "Well, people doing this thing haven't been punished before, and staff are present and aren't making a fuss about it, so therefore it probably isn't against the rules."
[1:20 AM] wakarimasensei: That's a very reasonable assumption.
[1:21 AM] wakarimasensei: I don't assume that I know the rules better than staff does.
[1:23 AM] PTM: Whether or not other users have received warnings for their conduct isn't something I PMed you to discuss.
[1:23 AM] PTM: As it happens, I was also not PMing you to discuss whether you would receive a warning - I was PMing you to let you know that it has happened.
[1:23 AM] wakarimasensei: Yes, and I believe I did nothing wrong or against the rules.
[1:24 AM] wakarimasensei: I mean, there's also the fact that what you're doing is encouraging people to, instead of calling someone out, just wish them horrible grievous harm, since it gets the same punishment and is more cathartic.
[1:26 AM] wakarimasensei: I've had a strong suspicion that the staff has had, consciously or unconsciously, an attitude of "we have to get him on something" towards me. Surely, with all the shit I've done, there has to be something to give me a warning for? I mean, I almost got a warning for being threatened. And now I'm getting a warning for not assuming the staff were incompetent.
[1:26 AM] wakarimasensei: Warning people for not doing something is sketchy to begin with.
[1:26 AM] wakarimasensei: This is ridiculous.
[1:27 AM] PTM: Just so that you know, there was discussion for warning you about your approach to the thing with Simon. I spent literally several hours of my time defending you, because you were doing a positive thing and trying to motivate staff to be more active in how they moderate.
[1:27 AM] wakarimasensei: I'm not blaming you, PTM. You're just the face of the staff at the moment.
[1:28 AM] PTM: There has been no desire to "get" you, but your engagement with people and issues has been skirting the edge of vigilantism for some time. We were paying attention. Last night, in server-feedback, things came to a head, and I (and the rest of staff) unanimously felt like you had crossed a line into provocation - provocation which, despite your claims to want staff to be more active, specifically did not involve escalating your concerns to anybody to take action on.
[1:28 AM] PTM: For this reason, we have issued you with a warning.
[1:30 AM] wakarimasensei: To be fair, literally every other time I've escalated something to staff it's gone horribly.
[1:30 AM] PTM: I am genuinely sorry that has happened.
[1:30 AM] wakarimasensei: People should be encouraged to apply social pressure to get behavior to change.
[1:30 AM] wakarimasensei: That isn't vigilantism, that's just setting boundaries.
[1:30 AM] PTM: I think that it depends on your presentation.
[1:30 AM] PTM: Your presentation with Simon? Calm, reasoned, non-inflammatory.
[1:31 AM] PTM: Your presentation last night? Not that.
[1:31 AM] wakarimasensei: There was the meltdown comment.
[1:31 AM] PTM: I understand your intent - Hell, I value your intent.
[1:31 AM] PTM: I'm glad that you're telling us when you're unhappy with things.
[1:31 AM] PTM: But you need to be constructive, or we wind up here.
[1:32 AM] wakarimasensei: I'm not telling you when I'm unhappy with things. I'm unhappy with a lot of things about the server, and most of them I don't bring up, because they're not that important. I bring up issues when they make the server intolerable.
[1:32 AM] PTM: If someone's trying to help us make the place better, I'll fight in their corner.
[1:32 AM] PTM: So please make my life easier and do it constructively.
[1:32 AM] wakarimasensei: What did I say that wasn't constructive?
[1:33 AM] PTM: You mentioned it yourself - the meltdown comment was in inauspicious start.
[1:34 AM] PTM: From there, pretty much every message was just... contradicting someone.
[1:35 AM] wakarimasensei: Mainly because people were saying "this is a fine conversation" and this server needs to learn that personal attacks are not acceptable.
[1:35 AM] PTM: I agree with you.
[1:35 AM] PTM: As was mentioned in the announcement we made, multiple warnings are being issued.
[1:36 AM] wakarimasensei: Right. You're punishing the people who made personal attacks just as much as someone who didn't.
[1:36 AM] PTM: No. We're punishing people who made a bad situation worse.
[1:37 AM] wakarimasensei: Calling people out for their behavior is never making a situation worse.
[1:37 AM] wakarimasensei: Someone has to say something, or they think their behavior is acceptable.
[1:37 AM] PTM: Which brings us back to rule 4, and doing things constructively.
[1:37 AM] PTM: We have now demonstrated a loop.
[1:37 AM] wakarimasensei: The staff was already alerted.
[1:38 AM] wakarimasensei: I don't know how you can expect someone who doesn't think a rule is being broken and thinks that staff is already present to then alert... the monitors that are already there taking part in the conversation.
[1:38 AM] wakarimasensei: If they were going to do something, they would've.
[1:39 AM] PTM: >4. If someone is breaking a rule or **you believe should be considered as breaking a rule**, please contact a staff member. Do not provoke others.
[1:39 AM] PTM: The semantics are not on your side, and I'm not particularly interested in delving into them.
[1:39 AM] PTM: We've gone round in a circle once, and I'm not planning on going around it again.
[1:42 AM] wakarimasensei: The only thing you're encouraging here is ignoring the problem.
[1:43 AM] PTM: waka, honestly, I'm not interested in arguing with you - so I'm going to stop engaging. Thank you, genuinely, for your passion for the server. Please bear in mind what we've talked about.
[1:44 AM] wakarimasensei: Yes, I could've alerted the staff. But what then? Say nothing, do nothing? The staff certainly wouldn't've done something, since they were already alerted because a post in #server-feedback is already a call for staff attention -- one that they responded to. I don't call the cops if the cops are already there and doing nothing.
[1:47 AM] wakarimasensei: I understand that you're not interested in arguing. I'm not particularly interested in it either, given the circumstances, but I have to in order to make the server less miserable. Unfortunately, you don't get to decide when I stop raising issues, and I mean that without sarcasm, because being staff is signing yourself up for a very specific brand of hell. I'd like to like the server, and I'd hate to leave it. But the staff make it very, very hard to tolerate the constant parade of debacles. So, while you may not be interested in engaging further, I can't just stay quiet.