MRS SMITH

[MintnHoney]

Sure, so now with this Shadow Illuminati group. You have evidence to support your claim? Or are you just "supposing"?

I mean what is happening is an obvious result of heavily viewed Race, not some sneaky SE employee twirling their mustache looking for someone to stream Discord to ban them and nO One wILL eVEr know

On the other hand, that is the truth about how SE handles any counter inquiry for wrong doing, apparently. No details, no reasons, no times listed, just... go to the corner, because "we say so."
Which, yeah, it's their game, but I think people should be allowed to know what they actually did, on the offchance that they did something while not actually knowing that it was wrong.

[Valkyrie_Lenneth]

On the other hand, that is the truth about how SE handles any counter inquiry for wrong doing, apparently. No details, no reasons, no times listed, just... go to the corner, because "we say so."
Which, yeah, it's their game, but I think people should be allowed to know what they actually did, on the offchance that they did something while not actually knowing that it was wrong.

They don't just ban for no reason....

There's always a reason and people who get banned know it, they just use the "they won't tell me who I harassed" as "they won't tell me what I did wrong, so obviously I did nothing wrong and have no way to know what it was that set them off to ban me" it's especially fun with streamers who have vods of them harassing people to the point where they don't know which video to take down because they harassed so many people...

Like.. Please.

[MintnHoney]

They don't just ban for no reason....

I'm not saying they are.

I am saying, however, that the player in question should be made aware of what they'd done, which is something that does not seem to happen. It adds credence to the decision, and it ensures that, again, on the off-chance that someone doesn't actually know what they did, that they are made aware that "x" was wrong and that they shouldn't do it again.

[QT_Melon]

I'm not saying they are.

I am saying, however, that the player in question should be made aware of what they'd done, which is something that does not seem to happen. It adds credence to the decision, and it ensures that, again, on the off-chance that someone doesn't actually know what they did, that they are made aware that "x" was wrong and that they shouldn't do it again.

Yeah sure, tell them the player they harassed.

Have you actually been banned? What do you mean vague, and what does that have to do with the current discussion.

HEY YOU BANNED ME FOR EATING CANDY BUT DIDN'T TELL ME WHICH BRAND!

[MintnHoney]

Yeah sure, tell them the player they harassed.

Have you actually been banned? What do you mean vague, and what does that have to do with the current discussion.

HEY YOU BANNED ME FOR EATING CANDY BUT DIDN'T TELL ME WHICH BRAND!

I didn't realize that Squeen would be incapable of having a modicum of discretion in relation to keeping names censored while disclosing the particular rule being broken and how it was broken.
I mean, you might not be able to, and that's fine, but I'd expect a multi-million dollar company to be able to at least hire someone who might be more capable.
On the other hand, smol indie company.

[QT_Melon]

I didn't realize that Squeen would be incapable of having a modicum of discretion in relation to keeping names censored while disclosing the particular rule being broken and how it was broken.
I mean, you might not be able to, and that's fine, but I'd expect a multi-million dollar company to be able to at least hire someone who might be more capable.
On the other hand, smol indie company.

On the other hand Joe Biden Won.


Oh sorry, the way with these ConSPIRAcy conversations were going...let me switch talking points.

You do realize depending on the severity, a majority (I'd venture ALL but playing into your conspiracy I guess wiggle room if you find that one A HA! moment). of players ARE actually given a letter or sent to Mordian Gaol to discuss what happened? I have yet to see something SO vague. They of course don't give out WHO but I've seen them converse with them enough to get the idea why they were banned without it having it specific.

But I mean we can play the "it was only 2 beers" game all day I guess.

[D6Damager]

Jason was raised correctly. Good kid!

[TheMightyMollusk]

When I was in school, the teachers used to say no snacks in class unless you brought enough for everyone. Until I did. Then it became no snacks period.

Then we just got better about hiding it.

[QT_Melon]

When I was in school, the teachers used to say no snacks in class unless you brought enough for everyone. Until I did. Then it became no snacks period.

Then we just got better about hiding it.

Basically MRS Smith telling the kids: "Now, I can't check your bags and see if you brought candy, but if you're going to eat candy - please do not eat it where we can find out"

[MintnHoney]

ishkabibble

There have been many complaints over the many years I've played about GMs not disclosing information, and players not receiving information on what they'd done wrong for their bans. Sometimes, yes, they're looking for names, sometimes not. Of the things I have seen, it has been vague, with the GMs sometimes outright declining to disclose what was actually done. In the end, you can cry about conspiracies all you want, but you don't seem to disagree that these players should be made aware of what they'd done wrong. I just happen to believe it can be done, and should be done better.