Entitled people kick from FC harassing after??

[Sated]

How many people here would NOT be upset if that happened to you? That you did something and your friend said "Hey man, look, can you just tone it down a bit? You were kinda acting like an a-hole and it wasn't cool" and both parties agree on that "warning" and everyone is cool. Then you go to your next DnD session and your friend stands in the door and is like "Hey man, look, I talked it over with the crew and their girlfriends and family, and like ... we don't want you in our DnD group anymore so ... bye" and shuts the door on you. No explanation, nothing else. Can you seriously tell me that just that part of the incident wouldn't confuse and anger you?

The only thing in the example you gave that is confusing to me is that they are being turned down at the door, instead of told between visits to not come back.

If I find out my roommate had someone over who was harassing our cat I don't care if that person "got told to stop" or that they're "still on the calendar for next Saturday", they aren't welcome back. It's my space too and I don't want them here. That shouldn't be confusing for them.

[KalinOrthos]

Again, AngelCheese, you're completely ignoring the fact that the offenders here were being complete jerkwads by talking constant crap behind Yakoo and their FC's back, and then, when they got correctly removed for their disrespectful behavior, proceeded to harass the FC and its members after the fact. It does not matter if they feel like they weren't given a fair shake. I said it before: Sh*tty people do not get to play with the rest of the kids if they cannot play nice. You have continually, almost willfully ignored these facts, pushing this idiotic idea that Yakoo is supposed to let anything slide after making a decision, regardless of if it's shown that decision is insufficient for both them and their peers in the FC.

Bottom line: IT IS NOT THAT HARD TO NOT BE A SH*TTY PERSON, AND IF SOMEONE IS UNABLE TO DO EVEN THAT, THEY DON'T GET TO ACT UPSET WHEN PEOPLE DON'T WANT THEM AROUND. That is literally what this entire situation boils down to. Try to gleam what you want from this in order to keep up this "unfairness" narrative you're in love with, I'm done after this.

[Cabalabob]

Well, here's two things:

1) False equivalence. Being in an FC is nothing close to having a job. Being in an FC has nowhere near the level of responsibilities placed on you that being at a job does, nor does it give actual monetary reward for fulfilling those responsibilities. A closer equivalence would be going to a coworker's place to play some D&D with their friends, actively making the game worse by having a good time at their expense, getting pulled aside and told to tone it down, before the rest of the players and the DM decide that they really don't want to play with you in their game, and not inviting you next time. Sure, it can be "bad form" for whatever that's worth, but maybe don't be an asshole in the first place. It's really not that hard.

2) The situation you're describing happens all the time anyways. It's called a probationary period, and your employer can fire you for whatever reason they see fit, or for no reason, for that matter. So. The point you're trying to make is moot. You can be pissed off at it all you like, but they don't need a reason to get rid of you. And that still doesn't mean you can go to your previous employer and harass them for getting rid of you. If anything, that just solidifies their decision and gives you a bad rep for other possible employment opportunities.

Like, for actuals, why are you guys trying to defend the obvious offenders here for being garbage people?

No one is defending them. Harassing the fc after being kicked is absolutely wrong and just proves their point about them being assholes. But as a FC leader if you give a warning stick by your decision or your decisions as a leader will mean less than nothing. If you give someone a warning you can’t then turn around and kick them anyway because “they could do it to other members” that is the point of a warning! If they do it to other members then you kick them!

If you’re gonna kick them then kick them, if you give them a warning then stand by it. Don’t decide to kick them then change your mind and talk to them and give them a warning then change your mind again and kick them.

Again, no one is defending the people being kicked, just pointing out that it’s not good as a fc leader to be wishy washy on your decisions or it will lead to drama like this.

[Yakoo]

No one is defending them. Harassing the fc after being kicked is absolutely wrong and just proves their point about them being assholes. But as a FC leader if you give a warning stick by your decision or your decisions as a leader will mean less than nothing. If you give someone a warning you can’t then turn around and kick them anyway because “they could do it to other members” that is the point of a warning! If they do it to other members then you kick them!

If you’re gonna kick them then kick them, if you give them a warning then stand by it. Don’t decide to kick them then change your mind and talk to them and give them a warning then change your mind again and kick them.

Then doesn't that prove the point then?? Because they were jerks to begin with, so they were removed?? As a FC leader peoples mind can change if its for the benefit of the FC and everyone else in it. If you read all the other posts, then other peoples points are very clear on this. A warning when given sometimes is not enough, so it needs to revert to a dismissal. I've seen things left before which has never gotten better and removed only after its happened again, but that's when it only leaves a bigger problem the second time. Leave something infectious and it will only spread and get even worse.

It actually went like this. I gave them a warning, they made excuses and talked in circles defending their friend because they were biased. After thinking about it again, "is it really worth keeping these kinds of people??" No, it wasn't. So I put up an announcement in the FC, and then removed them.

[Saefinn]

And I think that is the important bit. Your understanding of the situation may change. You're left with the decision to either stick by your verdict or to change it.

It's sounds like it was a question of: do I stick by my verdict even if I perceive it to be a detriment to my FC?

The answer should be: 'no'. Because that'd be letting everybody else down.

If they were apologetic and accepted they screwed up and opted to correct their behaviour, if it was me, I might have stuck by my verdict.

If they persisted to make excuses and showed a poor attitude all around, I too might ask "is it really worth it keeping them?"

[Cabalabob]

Then doesn't that prove the point then?? Because they were jerks to begin with, so they were removed?? As a FC leader peoples mind can change if its for the benefit of the FC and everyone else in it. If you read all the other posts, then other peoples points are very clear on this. A warning when given sometimes is not enough, so it needs to revert to a dismissal. I've seen things left before which has never gotten better and removed only after its happened again, but that's when it only leaves a bigger problem the second time. Leave something infectious and it will only spread and get even worse.

It actually went like this. I gave them a warning, they made excuses and talked in circles defending their friend because they were biased. After thinking about it again, "is it really worth keeping these kinds of people??" No, it wasn't. So I put up an announcement in the FC, and then removed them.

Self fulfilling prophecy, you put them in a situation where they’re going to be assholes then say “see? They were assholes.”

Back to Kalin’s example of a D&D game, it’s like you took them aside and said “don’t be assholes or I’ll ask you to leave” (giving them a CHANCE) then walk back to the table and before they have a CHANCE to do anything, saying “so I’m gonna have to ask you to leave”.

Regardless of if that decision is right or wrong do you think that choice won’t lead to drama?. If you’d given them their chance and they blew it you’d have every right to say “right get out” And they’d have no leg to stand on.

[Saefinn]

I think that's fair if the offending parties endeavour to do better and show a more positive attitude. I think if people are willing to improve, then yes, it's worth giving them a chance.

If going by the story of the OP. If their behaviour is toxic and their handling of it is toxic then why open yourself or your FC members to future toxicity? At least going by what information we have on it.

[Yakoo]

Self fulfilling prophecy, you put them in a situation where they’re going to be assholes then say “see? They were assholes.”

Back to Kalin’s example of a D&D game, it’s like you took them aside and said “don’t be assholes or I’ll ask you to leave” (giving them a CHANCE) then walk back to the table and before they have a CHANCE to do anything, saying “so I’m gonna have to ask you to leave”.

Regardless of if that decision is right or wrong do you think that choice won’t lead to drama?. If you’d given them their chance and they blew it you’d have every right to say “right get out” And they’d have no leg to stand on.

The situation is the situation which I have already stated myself, you only exaggerated it and said I take it from other peoples points, how so?? The thought that they were jerks was evident in my very first post already.

And for the decision at hand whether it was right or wrong, both ways can lead to drama, uninvitedly. It's like you're saying "leave it until they make a bigger mess". Sorry, not going to risk giving them that chance.

[Cabalabob]

The situation is the situation which I have already stated myself, you only exaggerated it and said I take it from other peoples points how so?? The thought that they were jerks was evident in my very first post already.

And for the decision at hand whether it was right or wrong, both ways can lead to drama, uninvitedly. It's like you're saying "leave it until they make a bigger mess" Sorry, not going to risk giving them that chance.

Except you did give them that chance and then changed your mind without giving them that chance. Why did you even offer the warning in the first place when it was a meaningless gesture?

[Yakoo]

Except you did give them that chance and then changed your mind without giving them that chance. Why did you even offer the warning in the first place when it was a meaningless gesture?

I will say and I will say this again and quote; "So I thought they weren't worth keeping around so I decided to remove them from the FC entirely". You need to go back to my very first post and read it carefully.