An e-mail to admin concerning "Herod"

Uberdude · **#21**

Bill Spight wrote:

But I would also have a talk with the admin, along these lines. Your purpose is not to be a policeman or class monitor. Your role is more that of a host, and your purpose is to help people have a good time, to promote a friendly and welcoming atmosphere. Issuing bans and warnings may be part of that, just as a host might eject a guest who is making things unpleasant for other guests. But such measures are not to be taken lightly. They are last resorts, to be avoided if possible. In this case your actions engendered resentment. No matter who might have been right or wrong, that is an undesirable result, something to be avoided if possible.

Bill Spight for head admin!

Magicwand · **#22**

what is the job of Admin?
talking about ppl's rank is disrespectful?
i will callout any professional player if he dont see atari and kills his group.

they suck <--- this might be inapporpriate but can be true.
he is 1 dan <--- this is appropriate and can be true.

admin should let ppl enjoy as long as they play on a borderline gray area. IMO

speedchase · **#23**

If a police officer came up to me and said "your on watch" I would very shorty be on the phone with the local police department in the area, and very shortly after that he wouldn't be a police officer.

Horibe · **#24**

palapiku wrote:

KGS has a reputation for having rude admins. This has been the case for as long as I can remember, almost 10 years.
KGS also has a reputation for nothing ever changing. This has been the case for as long as I can remember, almost 10 years.

So, complaining will get you nowhere. If you are really bothered by this, why not help get Kaya or Nova off the ground by playing there instead. Personally, I find it easier to just self-censor myself more than I usually do.

I go back further, to where people had been banned by IGS, and came to KGS.

KGS has a reputation for being a place that is more social than other go servers. For people who enjoy playing go competively, learning and teaching, and talking about go in a pleasant non competitive way, KGS has a fantastic reputation, and the admins are respected and appreciated for their help.

Amongst those who are perfect, enjoy chatting competively and enjoy testing boundaires they do not care for in their perfection, it is hardly surprising that KGS administrators have a reputation for being less than perfect.

The fact that they are less than perfect does not prevent those of us who are also less than perfect from appreciating their efforts.

BigDoug · **#25**

mw42 wrote:

I've had issues with KGS admins before. I perceived Herod's warning as an insult so I was rude in kind. I'm not going to be nice to someone trying to unjustly pressure me even if he is operating in some kind of official capacity. "You're on notice" is rude. Many other admins might have said "please, don't make religious references." Even though calling "the power of christ compels you" a religious reference is absurd, I wouldn't have been rude to an admin if warned in such a manner.

To be honest, your expectations appear to be rather inconsistent and entirely in your favour.

Situation 1:
You believe that the KGS admin has been rude to you. You can either ignore it or react to it. You choose to react to it. You approve of this reaction.

Situation 2:
The admin believes that you have been rude to him (and you agree above that this was your intention). He can either ignore it or react to it. He chose to react to it. You disapprove of this reaction.

If you don't like perceived rudeness, why are you surprised when the admin doesn't like your intended rudeness? Are there different standards for you and for other people?

BigDoug · **#26**

speedchase wrote:

If a police officer came up to me and said "your on watch" I would very shorty be on the phone with the local police department in the area, and very shortly after that he wouldn't be a police officer.

When you put this plan of action into effect, can you please let us know the result? I'm interested to know if this theory is true.

mw42 · **#27**

BigDoug wrote:

mw42 wrote:

I've had issues with KGS admins before. I perceived Herod's warning as an insult so I was rude in kind. I'm not going to be nice to someone trying to unjustly pressure me even if he is operating in some kind of official capacity. "You're on notice" is rude. Many other admins might have said "please, don't make religious references." Even though calling "the power of christ compels you" a religious reference is absurd, I wouldn't have been rude to an admin if warned in such a manner.

To be honest, your expectations appear to be rather inconsistent and entirely in your favour.

Situation 1:
You believe that the KGS admin has been rude to you. You can either ignore it or react to it. You choose to react to it. You approve of this reaction.

Situation 2:
The admin believes that you have been rude to him (and you agree above that this was your intention). He can either ignore it or react to it. He chose to react to it. You disapprove of this reaction.

If you don't like perceived rudeness, why are you surprised when the admin doesn't like your intended rudeness? Are there different standards for you and for other people?

The problem is the reactions aren't equal. My reaction was to be grumbly and give an irritated slightly offensive reply. His reaction was a 24 hour ban. Okay, should people be banned for such a minor offensive remark as "blah blah"? However, my issue is not really with the bans (to be honest, I don't really care if I get banned on KGS, if I did I would have left the server a while ago). My issue with Herod are the three warnings I received (especially the last two) were completely uncalled for. I'd even characterize the last two as an attempt to provoke me.

Javaness2 · **#28**

mw42 wrote:

The problem is the reactions aren't equal. My reaction was to be grumbly and give an irritated slightly offensive reply. His reaction was a 24 hour ban.

Unless you have some proof to convince me otherwise, I don't think that's factually accurate ...

What popular film contains the line "the power of Christ compelled ..." - is it the Exorcist?

mw42 · **#29**

Javaness2 wrote:

mw42 wrote:

The problem is the reactions aren't equal. My reaction was to be grumbly and give an irritated slightly offensive reply. His reaction was a 24 hour ban.

Unless you have some proof to convince me otherwise, I don't think that's factually accurate ...

What popular film contains the line "the power of Christ compelled ..." - is it the Exorcist?

Are you saying it wasn't a 24 hour ban? I have no way of knowing, but I didn't try to log back on until the following day. You're right, that was just an assumption.

Yes, it is from The Exorcist and was parodied and copied in many other movies and shows. Apparently not as many as I thought.

I received a follow-up e-mail from BigDoug. I thought I'd share it

Quote:

Hello,

You have a choice at the moment.

First, you can continue to feel sorry for yourself and try to justify
your previous behaviour. In this instance, you'll probably repeat the
previous behaviour and experience the same consequences.

Second, you can learn from this and modify your behaviour accordingly.

Regards,
Doug

Javaness2 · **#30**

mw42 wrote:

Javaness2 wrote:

mw42 wrote:

The problem is the reactions aren't equal. My reaction was to be grumbly and give an irritated slightly offensive reply. His reaction was a 24 hour ban.

Unless you have some proof to convince me otherwise, I don't think that's factually accurate

Are you saying it wasn't a 24 hour ban? I have no way of knowing, but I didn't try to log back on until the following day. You're right, that was just an assumption.

If you don't know how long you were banned for, and just pick a high number to make it look bad, that's pretty false :p

TheBigH · **#31**

A guy called Herod flips his lid over "the power of Christ". That's no surprise, it's a tradition going back 2,000 years.

Uberdude · **#32**

If mentioning Christ is not allowed on KGS because it is a religious reference, I do find it rather amusing that there is an admin called Herod ;-)

. Users with names deemed inappropriate have been told to get a new account before, maybe Herod should ban himself...

mw42 · **#33**

Javaness2 wrote:

If you don't know how long you were banned for, and just pick a high number to make it look bad, that's pretty false :p

Well, Java, since no information is given to the banned user about the ban even a fifteen minute ban could effectively be a 24 hour ban unless the person checks after fifteen minutes, or an hour, or 12 hours, or however many denominations there are.
Are you advocating more transparency when it comes to bans? I agree with you.

badukJr · **#34**

BigDoug wrote:

speedchase wrote:

If a police officer came up to me and said "your on watch" I would very shorty be on the phone with the local police department in the area, and very shortly after that he wouldn't be a police officer.

When you put this plan of action into effect, can you please let us know the result? I'm interested to know if this theory is true.

I was once stopped without due cause, and ended up being roughly placed into the back of a patrol car and my car torn apart, looking for something.

I settled out of court for quite a bit of money.

tchan001 · **#35**

Obviously the power of Herod compelled him to receive a ban.

BigDoug · **#36**

badukJr wrote:

I was once stopped without due cause, and ended up being roughly placed into the back of a patrol car and my car torn apart, looking for something.

I settled out of court for quite a bit of money.

Anything is possible, I suppose, even if it appears unlikely at first glance. My original request was whether a policeman would be sacked because he verbally cautioned someone. I find the likelihood of this taking place to be remote, but am open to a real life example contradicting this.

BigDoug · **#37**

mw42 wrote:

Javaness2 wrote:

If you don't know how long you were banned for, and just pick a high number to make it look bad, that's pretty false :p

Well, Java, since no information is given to the banned user about the ban even a fifteen minute ban could effectively be a 24 hour ban unless the person checks after fifteen minutes, or an hour, or 12 hours, or however many denominations there are.
Are you advocating more transparency when it comes to bans? I agree with you.

In quite a few e-mails to the admin mailbox, I find that further investigation demonstrates that the original e-mail inadvertently misstated the situation or omitted one or more crucial facts.

In this instance, you stated an assumption as fact. You do not know the length of the ban, but stated that it was 24 hours. Having been caught out, I suggest that you simply admit your mistake. By attempting to defend an obvious misrepresentation, you're simply magnifying the effect of the original mistake.

As an admin, I make decisions on KGS regularly. Most are correct, but some are wrong. When a mistake is brought to my attention, I apologise and try to correct it. People are generally quite understanding and forgiving of mistakes if there is genuine remorse and an attempt to fix any disruptions. Very few people expect perfection.

Bantari · **#38**

palapiku wrote:

KGS has a reputation for having rude admins. This has been the case for as long as I can remember, almost 10 years.
KGS also has a reputation for nothing ever changing. This has been the case for as long as I can remember, almost 10 years.

So, complaining will get you nowhere. If you are really bothered by this, why not help get Kaya or Nova off the ground by playing there instead. Personally, I find it easier to just self-censor myself more than I usually do.

Sweet...
And what is the guarantee that Kaya or Nova won't be in the same place KGS is now in next to no time? They will also need admins, and I assume they will be a ragtag group of volunteers as well, no? Or will they be paid as employees and thus held to different standards?

Which brings me to the question I already asked before, but it was simply brushed off then. Namely:
What is the actual business model of Kaya? From what I understand, two people (at least) left their jobs to work on Kaya - and they are doing an excellent (full time?) job - so it stands to reason they expect Kaya to support them at some point. How?

Same goes for Nova, although I know/care less about it.

Anybody has any idea about all that?!?

Kirby · **#39**

BigDoug wrote:

...
As an admin, I make decisions on KGS regularly. Most are correct, but some are wrong...

It's nice that you are able to ascertain which of your decisions are correct and which are wrong. Are you sure they were not all entirely correct? Under what basis do you determine that one of your decisions are correct? Is it based on the vaguely written TOS? Is it based on your personal values as a person?

My questions are rhetorical, of course. That's because the decisions on KGS are made by admins, so what is "correct" is defined by what the admins decide is correct.

By most other metrics, I'm sure that an evaluation of your decisions on KGS would be weighed differently.

Kirby · **#40**

I would also like to reiterate Uberdude's point that Bill Spight's stance on this issue is awesome. I wonder what position he is in which makes him knowledgeable about this sort of thing (he said he has experience with this sort of thing).

An e-mail to admin concerning "Herod"

Who is online