Since posting private history is illegal...

[Lance]

Originally Posted by GoZelda

What would the punishment for staff be if they encouraged someone to post private history?

It most certainly depends on the context. Is the staff asking politely? Demanding? Threatening? Suggesting? What kind of staff member is it? Do they have a history of asking people to break rules? There are a ton of questions that would need to be answered before a response to your question could be given.

Would you think that is a flame post?

It is a bit on the negative side and approaching the limit of tolerated behavior, but it is still within the line.

[Darklux]

Finally someone stops this chaos in this post x-x

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by Lance

It most certainly depends on the context. Is the staff asking politely? Demanding? Threatening? Suggesting? What kind of staff member is it? Do they have a history of asking people to break rules? There are a ton of questions that would need to be answered before a response to your question could be given.

But, all in all, it is a bad thing right?

Originally Posted by Lance

It is a bit on the negative side and approaching the limit of tolerated behavior, but it is still within the line.

And what if staff posted it?

[Lance]

Originally Posted by GoZelda

But, all in all, it is a bad thing right?

Do they know they're encouraging something that's wrong?

And what if staff posted it?

If it's within the line, it's within the line, isn't it?

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by Lance

Do they know they're encouraging something that's wrong?

Aren't they supposed to know as staff?

Originally Posted by Lance

If it's within the line, it's within the line, isn't it?

So, if say, malicious hacking would give the normal player a 3-day ban, the same would happen to staff and they will not get fired?

[Lance]

Originally Posted by GoZelda

Aren't they supposed to know as staff?

Depends on their position, now doesn't it? You can't win with blanket arguments, buddy.

So, if say, malicious hacking would give the normal player a 3-day ban, the same would happen to staff and they will not get fired?

Please elaborate: what do you mean by 'the same would happen to staff'? Also, what does this have to do with what I said?

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by Lance

You can't win with blanket arguments, buddy.

What's there to win, partner?

Originally Posted by Lance

Please elaborate: what do you mean by 'the same would happen to staff'? Also, what does this have to do with what I said?

'The same would happen to staff' -> They would get a 3-day ban too.
It is related to what you said as in this scenario staff do something out of the line. So if staff does something out of line, then receive a punishment, would they keep their position?

Although I don't really see how it depends on the position, if the staff member was something in, say, a PR-branch and used the forum regulary, he should know this, right? Because, just as players are supposed to know the rules, so is staff supposed to know, right?

[Lance]

Originally Posted by GoZelda

What's there to win, partner?

The blanket answer you seek. It's not happening.

'The same would happen to staff' -> They would get a 3-day ban too.
It is related to what you said as in this scenario staff do something out of the line. So if staff does something out of line, then receive a punishment, would they keep their position?

Depends on their position, the thing they did out of line, and the feelings of their superiors.

Although I don't really see how it depends on the position, if the staff member was something in, say, a PR-branch and used the forum regulary, he should know this, right? Because, just as players are supposed to know the rules, so is staff supposed to know, right?

It still depends. You can't honestly expect, for example, a UN events team member who doesn't visit the forums to know and understand the rules of said forum.

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by Lance

The blanket answer you seek. It's not happening.

What's a blanket answer?

Originally Posted by Lance

Depends on their position, the thing they did out of line, and the feelings of their superiors.

So, according to the scenario I gave you earlier...?

Originally Posted by Lance

It still depends. You can't honestly expect, for example, a UN events team member who doesn't visit the forums to know and understand the rules of said forum.

No, which is why I said that said person visits the forums on a regular basis.

[Lance]

Originally Posted by GoZelda

What's a blanket answer?

Look it up.

I'm probably not talking about comfortable woven material.

So, according to the scenario I gave you earlier...?

The PR thing? I would expect regular users of the forums to know the rules, sure. I'd be frequently disappointed, but I'd expect that much.

No, which is why I said that said person visits the forums on a regular basis.

You can't have it both ways. You can't tell me it doesn't depend on something and offer as proof all but those examples supporting the dependence.

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by Lance

Look it up.

I looked up Blanket Answer but it didn't show me anything ;_;

Originally Posted by Lance

The PR thing? I would expect regular users of the forums to know the rules, sure. I'd be frequently disappointed, but I'd expect that much.

No, the other scenario.

Originally Posted by Lance

You can't have it both ways. You can't tell me it doesn't depend on something and offer as proof all but those examples supporting the dependence.

Can't have what both ways? Sorry for not understanding but because of such a long time of exposure to terrible English my English has gone backwards ;_;
That or you just over complicate it.

[Lance]

Originally Posted by GoZelda

No, the other scenario.

The malicious hacking one? That one would depend mostly on the manager. I, for example, would exhibit no tolerance toward my staff and probably would remove them. Other managers might exhibit some more tolerance. I can't speak for them.

Can't have what both ways? Sorry for not understanding but because of such a long time of exposure to terrible English my English has gone backwards ;_;
That or you just over complicate it.

Me: It [the expectation that someone should know something] depends on the staff position.
You: It doesn't depend on the staff position.
Me: *provides example where it would, indeed depend on the staff position*
You: No, it doesn't depend. That's why my specific example/question didn't depend on the staff position.

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by Lance

Me: It [the expectation that someone should know something] depends on the staff position.
You: It doesn't depend on the staff position.
Me: *provides example where it would, indeed depend on the staff position*
You: No, it doesn't depend. That's why my specific example/question didn't depend on the staff position.

So, if someone who knows the forum rules breaks them, it depends on his staff position whether it's bad or not, despite the fact that he should damn well know he broke the rules?

[Darlene159]

Originally Posted by GoZelda

So, if someone who knows the forum rules breaks them, it depends on his staff position whether it's bad or not, despite the fact that he should damn well know he broke the rules?

Err, rules are rules...everyone should be treated equally when it comes to rules.

Posting history is against the forum rules regarless of whether the person was given permission or not (with good reason as you can see by the "I had permission" "No you didnt" scenerio).
The poster is the one that breaks the rules if he/she decides to post something against the rules.

I do, however, think that if a staff member is threatening a person (as in threatening ban, jail, etc...) in order to get the person to post something which breaks the rules, should be punished...but there should be significant proof to do so.

I do not think a staff member should be fired if he/she simply asked someone to post something on the forums which broke the rules. The person should just say "No" and move on, but it would make me question the honesty, and integraty (sp) of said staff member if he did, indeed, know what he asked broke the rules.

About the website comment:
It was a harsh comment that should have been worded better to be constructive, and I would say it is on the line of breaking the rules.

I also feel like this thread was made out of anger in order to discredit a staff member. You should know that this is not the way to handle problems, and does not work.

[GoZelda]

Originally Posted by Darlene159

I also feel like this thread was made out of anger in order to discredit a staff member.

I haven't discredited anyone though, now have I? The only ones that got discredited were the staff-members who felt sore because of this thread. I was interested to know if it was illegal so I could discredit a staff member later on, and it definetely wasn't done out of anger because I'm sure most people would know what the thread would look like if it was so.