[Avi]

Essentially the staff were unsure how a rule worked on server, Foxka (not staff at the time) was explaining the rule (which he was correct per the MOTD), and the staff went to Tiefling for guidance outside of the server.  Tiefling incorrectly informed them of the rule and the situation was mishandled on server.

Multiple staff were complaining to me that foxka was arguing with their ruling for 15-20 minutes. I told them what I've always said on this topic: I don't believe players should be expected to have telepathic abilities or have to believe everything someone says; part of social deduction games is the chance that you won't be believed. If you can negate DNA by just saying you were RDMed without the other person having seen it or any other way to confirm that, then there's nothing stopping traitors from just saying they were RDMed after every kill and validly reporting anyone who kills them off of DNA, making the entire mechanic a pointless RDM trap (not saying that's what foxka did, but that is what it would entail).

My main issue isn't this however, rather my experience playing with Tiefling on the server.  I was gone from the community for a couple of years, so I really know nothing of Tiefling before coming back earlier this year.  One of my first interactions with Tiefling felt off.  It probably won't mean a lot to most, but it came off as uncomfortable to me when it happened.
I was just playing TTT as it was, as a traitor, and killed Tiefling as an innocent.  I immediately received this pm on server:

At this point I knew nothing about Tiefling, had only played on server a couple of times with her, and it came off more mad that I shot her than anything.  I wouldn't think too much about it, but I've come to find out that others have felt the same way with comments like that on server (that's on them to share, I'm only going to share my experiences here).

There were other things I noticed, but I've discussed those with other admins, and if they think it's necessary, they can have a conversation about it.

This was indeed a joke. You were the only other female TTT admin I knew about at the time (sorry hani) and I just thought it was a funny way to essentially say "hey look, we got another one on the board" in the moment. I took your silence as a sign that you weren't receptive to that kind of thing and refrained from joking like that afterwards. I apologize for conveying a different meaning than intended.

With Foxka's situation, multiple people were able to confirm the person was rdming during the round, so it shouldn't have caused issue of if he was being honest or deceptive in the round.  He should have been able to continue on during the round without being killed over DNA.  I do agree though with your overall reasoning, people shouldn't be able to just claim RDM on every single kill they do (I vaguely remember someone trying this before while also false kosing people constantly, which they were told to stop doing).  Also, if someone claims it's RDM in a report because they said the person was rdming, but that person wasn't rdming, then I don't think it's fair to punish anyone with a slay.  I think the rule's interpretation could be reworked to prevent things like falsely claiming over and over that you're being "rdmed."  

As for the joke thing, I appreciate you sharing your perspective on it and I can understand your point of view on it better now.  Like I said at the time and up until now, it felt off to me, but I can see what your intentions were, so I have no bad thoughts or hard feelings on that.

[EpicGuy]

i think you should be very careful with using the civil war to say that emancipation was done for moral reasons, it was done purely for political reasons

also what followed emancipation was Jim Crow

again, this reflects back on my comments that while you can be well educated on general topics regarding oppression, your knowledge will always be limited compared to those who exist in those spaces and have lived through those experiences (and the consequences of the past)

My original thought in my post wasn't emancipation. It was more the help that black Americans received from white Americans in the Underground Railroad during the time of abolition. I was also thinking about good ol' American hero (and abolitionist) John Brown who helped (or at least attempted to help) the slaves at Harper's Ferry. And I don't think that emancipation was done solely for moral reasons. Of course there were other factors like politics (Lincoln was running for reelection the year after the Emancipation Proclamation went into effect, and I'm sure there were other factors at play). There were also a few fun years of Reconstruction before James came to town.

I don't even know how we got here. Anyway, my point is that people of all creeds, backgrounds, beliefs, whatever can come together and create safe spaces. We don't need safe spaces that consist of people of only one group. That's not a safe space, that's an isolation chamber. People who aren't in the minority can still help those who are in the minority with the resources they have. That was my point. Will they know the entire story or situation? No. Can they still empathize and help? Yes.

American history aside (I love American history), I do understand that my knowledge will be limited compared to those who lived through horrific experiences. If I ever need a reminder of a small portion of history, or want to know what things were like before I began to exist on God's green Earth, I think I'll pick up the phone and call one of my many black relatives and get their story :)

[tiefling lesbian]

Is Foxka obligated to answer your question? This is a legitimate question, I'm not defending Foxka. He was not staff at the time of the incident so he, in my opinion, did not need to tell you, or any other admin, what was going on. Would it have been helpful? Yes. Would that be the right thing to do? Sure. But was he obligated to do so? I don't believe so.

Foxka could have stopped responding at any time. They have no "obligation" to respond or tell the truth. Likewise, I have no obligation to ignore them lying and concealing information, and I have no obligation to support them getting staff in spite of it.

Not at all what I am saying. Foxka happened to be a traitor in this specific scenario, but the principle of the matter still stands. If Player A says that they killed an RDMer (and was actually RDMed by the RDMer), and player B doesn't believe Player A and kills Player A, Player B is getting slain for RDM. It doesn't matter if Player A is a traitor or not. No one is enabling traitors to immunize themselves. No one is stopping someone from mowing down a person they don't believe. If anything, everyone is receiving the same amount of immunization. If Player B didn't see Player A kill the RDMer, and can't verify that Player A was being RDMed, they have to either believe Player A or put suspicion on Player A. This is no different than having the same weapon that was used to kill someone. You have circumstantial evidence that has yet to be proven. So you either take the situation at face value and believe what Player A has said, be skeptical and put suspicion on Player A, or shoot Player A and RDM them. Those are the only options. And if you RDM Player A, the logs should be able to very clearly tell if Player A was RDMed or not.

But that is what you're saying indirectly. If simply saying you were RDMed is enough to nullify DNA, then you can say you were RDMed even if you weren't and reporting someone for killing you will still be valid, as they had no way of knowing whether or not you were lying and, according to you, were not allowed to kill you for it.

If we can only treat everyone so fairly when only one perspective is represented in staff, then you would agree that we need more diverse staff, which includes black people, Hispanic people, Asian people, etc. Regardless, we don't need to have a representative from every possible permutation of a human being on staff if the goal of the staff is for every player to be treated fairly and respectfully. Does it help to have representatives of these different races and creeds on the admin team? Of course. I am not arguing against that. But I don't believe that I am misrepresenting what has been said on the matter when someone of their own volition said, "[tiefling] is the only ttt admin that truly can [create a safe space for feminine presenting or lgbtq/queer people] since she's the only one with the proper insight and experience to do so." Can white people not create a safe space for minorities because they aren't a minority? I'd disagree with that statement. Look at abolitionists during the Civil War. All I am saying (because I failed to explicitly say this last night) is that it shouldn't matter what gender you are, what race you are, whatever. All that should matter is that the staff members of the server are doing their best to make everyone feel safe, welcomed, and entertained. The mark of a good admin shouldn't be who the admin is speaking for. The mark of a good admin should be if they are administrating fairly, justly, and equally.

I agree, more diversity in staff would be great. Of course it's not realistic to have every single demographic represented in a gmod server staff team, but that's not what anyone is saying. The point is that being part of a marginalized group gives you a better perspective to identify issues that affect that group. There have been numerous times where I've had to explain dog whistles and bigoted attacks to other admins who did not have the personal experiences to recognize them themselves.

Regardless, this is once again besides the point. This has only ever been a supporting factor in me being admin, not the sole or main reason.

We don't need safe spaces that consist of people of only one group.

Literally no one has said that.

---

Its not that we think it should be this way. Its that it is how the rules are written. I've had this conversation with you before, but you are an admin and if you disagree with a rule there is literally nobody in a better position to make a change to the rule.

Please. I hate the rule just as much as you, but that doesnt mean that we can just choose not to follow it without changing the scripture.

Believe me, I would love to be able to spend my time and energy actually improving things rather than having to shut down 18 pages of half baked accusations.

You have spoken before about respecting the spirit of a rule. To me, the "unless they were RDMing" clause only makes sense if you saw the RDM take place or otherwise have reasonable ability to confirm that it happened. It doesn't make sense to me for it to be a blanket clause that applies even if you have no way of knowing an RDM took place or making you beholden to a traitor's lie.

In regards to the foxka situation specifically, this is exactly what I said. I gave my opinion, and I trust staff to make decisions. If Foxka had that much of an issue with someone not getting slain, it would have been more appropriate to reach out to an admin themself instead of continuing to argue with staff about it even after the map had changed.

[moocow]

i think you should be very careful with using the civil war to say that emancipation was done for moral reasons, it was done purely for political reasons

also what followed emancipation was Jim Crow

again, this reflects back on my comments that while you can be well educated on general topics regarding oppression, your knowledge will always be limited compared to those who exist in those spaces and have lived through those experiences (and the consequences of the past)

My original thought in my post wasn't emancipation. It was more the help that black Americans received from white Americans in the Underground Railroad during the time of abolition. I was also thinking about good ol' American hero (and abolitionist) John Brown who helped (or at least attempted to help) the slaves at Harper's Ferry. And I don't think that emancipation was done solely for moral reasons. Of course there were other factors like politics (Lincoln was running for reelection the year after the Emancipation Proclamation went into effect, and I'm sure there were other factors at play). There were also a few fun years of Reconstruction before James came to town.

I don't even know how we got here. Anyway, my point is that people of all creeds, backgrounds, beliefs, whatever can come together and create safe spaces. We don't need safe spaces that consist of people of only one group. That's not a safe space, that's an isolation chamber. People who aren't in the minority can still help those who are in the minority with the resources they have. That was my point. Will they know the entire story or situation? No. Can they still empathize and help? Yes.

American history aside (I love American history), I do understand that my knowledge will be limited compared to those who lived through horrific experiences. If I ever need a reminder of a small portion of history, or want to know what things were like before I began to exist on God's green Earth, I think I'll pick up the phone and call one of my many black relatives and get their story :)

yes, its true that there were white people who helped aid in the liberation of slaves, im not denying that and they were vital pillars of the underground railroad, but in reality that was an extremely small portion of the population, and unfortunately not always as effective as i wished they could be, slave recaptures were extremely common, but thats no fault to them, just that they were battling against a much bigger and stronger force

we got here because in the calling for tiefling's demotion, the demographics of the admin team were brought into concern because if she's removed then the TTT admin team, as far as i am aware, becomes a space of only one group. while this certainly isn't going to cause the destruction of the server, it does pose concerns of how effective they would be at catching bigotry that may not be overtly obvious to people outside of the demographic.  

this is why in my original comment regarding this i mentioned that there was an incident where an admin was using a derogatory term to refer to black people, again he probably just didnt know as it is one of those covert uses of bigotry that worked its way into society over the decades, but again thats exactly why the representation is important, because he didnt know, but a person who is in or is closely adjacent to the marginalized group would know.  i bring this up specifically because i have had that same term used maliciously against me in the past, so i am able to speak on personal experience, had there been a staff member there who knows of those experiences, the concern of these groups being effectively protected wouldnt be in the question 

i love american history!! history is the only topic i've never struggled on, but unfortunately because of that i know exactly how much depth that history lacks when taught at most education levels, im glad that you have relatives that are able to offer their perspective for you, being open minded to learning new things is not only important but exciting!! we should want to learn about experiences around us past what we already know, its how we become well rounded people! but im just rambling at this point

**i hope its obvious but considering how much fighting has been happening lately i want to clarify, i dont mean for this to be an argument or trying to throw anyone under any buses or such, im just hoping to give perspective on the concerns people are bringing up regarding representation and hoping to provide a tangible example of how this has presented itself in the staff team, i dont mean for this to be a personal attack on anyone because it is not, but i just want to clarify

[EpicGuy]

Foxka could have stopped responding at any time. They have no "obligation" to respond or tell the truth. Likewise, I have no obligation to ignore them lying and concealing information, and I have no obligation to support them getting staff in spite of it.

You are correct, Foxka had no obligation to respond or tell the truth. But would you have appreciated that? Especially considering that you said, "...it would take 5 seconds to message an admin 'hey this is happening' after being told about it." Foxka responded, "We were in the middle of a left for dead game???" And you responded to that with, "there were hours afterwards" (page 8 of Google Doc). If Foxka had/has no obligation to respond, you would not have used this line of reasoning.

Citizens of the United States have the right to remain silent during questioning with law enforcement. Does that mean everyone stays quiet? No. Why? Because people who are trying to defend and explain themselves usually don't stay quiet because they want to explain their innocence and point of view. Am I comparing you to law enforcement? Not necessarily. But I am saying that you are in a position of power over Foxka and it isn't hard to imagine why he continued engaging in a conversation with you and explaining himself.

Also, you keep saying that Foxka is lying. What is he lying/what did he lie about? I'm not sure if I missed something during all of the screenshots and posts that have been made.

But that is what you're saying indirectly. If simply saying you were RDMed is enough to nullify DNA, then you can say you were RDMed even if you weren't and reporting someone for killing you will still be valid, as they had no way of knowing whether or not you were lying and, according to you, were not allowed to kill you for it.

Nothing is currently stopping anyone from saying that they were RDMed when they weren't. I know that I've done it: when I was innocent, when I was a traitor and legitimately RDMed, and when I was a traitor in a firefight and was damaged but survived. As you said, this is a social deduction game; a large part of the game is lying and tricking people. But if you are going to take a risk and kill Player A who said that they were RDMed because they had DNA on an innocent body, if they were actually RDMed, you should be slain. That is RDM. You have no proof if Player A is lying or not. Just like if someone has the same gun used to kill another player. Or like if someone has the same player model as someone who killed someone else. If you didn't see the events transpire, or you are not 100% sure of the events that transpired, you should put suspicion on the person.

Reporting someone for killing you will still be valid. People do that all the time. The good news is that we have an RDM manager, that has damage logs and a death scene, that should allow staff members to piece together the events that occurred and allow for a just, fair, and correct decision to be made. If Player A reports Player B, Player A was telling the truth and was RDMed, and Player B killed Player A because Player B didn't believe Player A, slay Player B. If Player A was lying to avoid suspicion and death, then don't slay Player B. It is really that simple. If there is a dispute or confusion between two players, let the logs decide (as best they can. Sometimes they're wonky).

I agree, more diversity in staff would be great. Of course it's not realistic to have every single demographic represented in a gmod server staff team, but that's not what anyone is saying. The point is that being part of a marginalized group gives you a better perspective to identify issues that affect that group. There have been numerous times where I've had to explain dog whistles and bigoted attacks to other admins who did not have the personal experiences to recognize them themselves.
Regardless, this is once again besides the point. This has only ever been a supporting factor in me being admin, not the sole or main reason.

Yes, being a part of a marginalized group does give you a better perspective on the issues affecting that group. I can keep saying that we can have the Skittles of staff, but I'm not going to. My main points are that even those who aren't in marginalized groups can help those who are marginalized feel welcome as well, and that the mark of a good admin should be if they are administrating fairly, justly, and equally.

Literally no one has said that.

That is true. Literally no one has said that. I was thinking of a narrow definition of safe space where only those of the same attributes would be in the safe space. Nevertheless, safe spaces can be made with the resources and help of those who are marginalized and who are not.

we got here because in the calling for tiefling's demotion, the demographics of the admin team were brought into concern because if she's removed then the TTT admin team, as far as i am aware, becomes a space of only one group. while this certainly isn't going to cause the destruction of the server, it does pose concerns of how effective they would be at catching bigotry that may not be overtly obvious to people outside of the demographic.  
this is why in my original comment regarding this i mentioned that there was an incident where an admin was using a derogatory term to refer to black people, again he probably just didnt know as it is one of those covert uses of bigotry that worked its way into society over the decades, but again thats exactly why the representation is important, because he didnt know, but a person who is in or is closely adjacent to the marginalized group would know.  i bring this up specifically because i have had that same term used maliciously against me in the past, so i am able to speak on personal experience, had there been a staff member there who knows of those experiences, the concern of these groups being effectively protected wouldnt be in the question 

Well this is my point. How many Black admins have there been? How many Hispanic admins have there been? How many Asian, Latino, Native American admins have there been? I have not spent one iota thinking about the creed, gender, race, or ethnicity of our admins (well, until recently I guess). And you can say that is because I am not a part of a marginalized group of people (you'd be wrong, by the way), but it's because what someone is should have zero bearing on the performance and perception of an admin. Someone's work as an admin shouldn't be asterisked because of the way they are. I can't use employment as an example because none of us are getting a paycheck, but imagine you were working with a volunteer organization and one of the lead volunteers is doing something that raises some concerns. A group of people bring up their concerns and one of the rebuttals to the concerns is "but Lead Volunteer can't be removed. They're helping to create a safe space!" I'm sure people would be looking around wondering if they just got off a plane from Looneyville. Because the way someone is should have zero bearing in determining if they are fit and capable to hold a position. 

Very quickly, communication is important. You had a problem with what somebody was saying. You did the responsible and correct thing and took your concern to someone. That's all that needs to happen. Someone is going to feel a certain way about something. That's life. If that person feels it is a big enough concern that needs to be addressed, the person should take it up to someone they feel comfortable with. I find it hard to believe that there is no one that someone can go to with their concerns. Surely, with all of the staff we have, somebody, anybody, has to be reasonable enough to be reached out to with a concern. Example, you felt comfortable enough going to someone who probably wasn't Black and telling them that you felt uncomfortable. That is how safe spaces are created.

If creating safe spaces is something that the community cares about deeply and dearly, then let's start a board or a coalition composed of people of the community from marginalized groups that meets regularly with the admins, and presents their thoughts, concerns, questions, whatever. I will say it again so there is no misinterpretation: I do not care what color, race, ethnicity, gender, creed, blood type, whatever you are if you are an admin or staff member of this server. My concern is if you are able to administrate and staff fairly, respectfully, and justly. And I hope, and would like to think, that is everyone else's concern as well.

**i hope its obvious but considering how much fighting has been happening lately i want to clarify, i dont mean for this to be an argument or trying to throw anyone under any buses or such, im just hoping to give perspective on the concerns people are bringing up regarding representation and hoping to provide a tangible example of how this has presented itself in the staff team, i dont mean for this to be a personal attack on anyone because it is not, but i just want to clarify

It's very obvious that you aren't arguing or throwing anyone under the bus :) This is what open and honest discussion is; people bringing their concerns up and healthy conversations flowing. I've said it before and I'll keep saying it until the cows come home: the forums should be an open place where tough, honest conversations, debates, and challenges happen. Where minds are changed and eyes are opened. There is no better place for these things to happen than on these forums. Another thank you to the web staff, and all of you, for keeping this thread open to conversation and debate.

P.S. I'm sorry for the late reply. I was touching grass and spending time with friends last night, something that some of you suggested be done.

[RyanHighman]

Its time to lay this thread to rest until the admins can deliberate. 17 pages of opinions is more than enough to keep the admin team busy for a few weeks. At this point the arguments are moving in circles.

[moocow]

Yes, being a part of a marginalized group does give you a better perspective on the issues affecting that group. I can keep saying that we can have the Skittles of staff, but I'm not going to. My main points are that even those who aren't in marginalized groups can help those who are marginalized feel welcome as well, and that the mark of a good admin should be if they are administrating fairly, justly, and equally.

we got here because in the calling for tiefling's demotion, the demographics of the admin team were brought into concern because if she's removed then the TTT admin team, as far as i am aware, becomes a space of only one group. while this certainly isn't going to cause the destruction of the server, it does pose concerns of how effective they would be at catching bigotry that may not be overtly obvious to people outside of the demographic.  
this is why in my original comment regarding this i mentioned that there was an incident where an admin was using a derogatory term to refer to black people, again he probably just didnt know as it is one of those covert uses of bigotry that worked its way into society over the decades, but again thats exactly why the representation is important, because he didnt know, but a person who is in or is closely adjacent to the marginalized group would know.  i bring this up specifically because i have had that same term used maliciously against me in the past, so i am able to speak on personal experience, had there been a staff member there who knows of those experiences, the concern of these groups being effectively protected wouldnt be in the question 

Very quickly, communication is important. You had a problem with what somebody was saying. You did the responsible and correct thing and took your concern to someone. That's all that needs to happen. Someone is going to feel a certain way about something. That's life. If that person feels it is a big enough concern that needs to be addressed, the person should take it up to someone they feel comfortable with. I find it hard to believe that there is no one that someone can go to with their concerns. Surely, with all of the staff we have, somebody, anybody, has to be reasonable enough to be reached out to with a concern. Example, you felt comfortable enough going to someone who probably wasn't Black and telling them that you felt uncomfortable. That is how safe spaces are created.


P.S. I'm sorry for the late reply. I was touching grass and spending time with friends last night, something that some of you suggested be done.

 

sorry this snip is a nightmare i am on mobile 

i want to touch on these points specifically.  yes, absolutely people in non-marginalized spaces can be and are an important asset to advocating for those who do exist in those spaces, you are right, but an important part of being that advocate is being able to accept that you may not know everything about what can or needs to be done, and when you have people who exist in those spaces telling you that there are improvements that can be made, its not productive and helpful to plug your ears and throw out how you’re already knowledgeable enough on the topics

yes, non-marginalized people are completely capable of protecting and advocating for minority groups, but that is only if they’re open and willing to learn and listen to perspectives outside of their own. bigotry and oppression towards marginalized groups is constantly changing and evolving with time and not every single bit of bigotry is going to be written down, defined and outlined in the books you consume, there are genuinely only things that come with the experience of existing in those space,  and it’s important to have an open mind to those experiences and not be satisfied with just the knowledge you have

[tiefling lesbian]

You are correct, Foxka had no obligation to respond or tell the truth. But would you have appreciated that? Especially considering that you said, "...it would take 5 seconds to message an admin 'hey this is happening' after being told about it." Foxka responded, "We were in the middle of a left for dead game???" And you responded to that with, "there were hours afterwards" (page 8 of Google Doc). If Foxka had/has no obligation to respond, you would not have used this line of reasoning.

Once again, foxka approached ME for my opinion on their future staff app, and it's my opinion that concealing information about your friends breaking the rules after being directly informed about it is not a good quality for prospective staff.

Also, you keep saying that Foxka is lying. What is he lying/what did he lie about? I'm not sure if I missed something during all of the screenshots and posts that have been made.

Once again, they lied in their initial interactions with me that they didn't know about the guidelines incident until the day after. It was later confirmed by themself and now chapman as well that they were in fact directly told about it while it was happening.

I want to clarify something about the LFD2 tourney and the staff guidelines really quickly. I told Foxka about it during the tournament and caribou had taken my spot on that team after myself and a few others were having a bit of fun with the guidelines' being editable. 

[Foxka]

You are correct, Foxka had no obligation to respond or tell the truth. But would you have appreciated that? Especially considering that you said, "...it would take 5 seconds to message an admin 'hey this is happening' after being told about it." Foxka responded, "We were in the middle of a left for dead game???" And you responded to that with, "there were hours afterwards" (page 8 of Google Doc). If Foxka had/has no obligation to respond, you would not have used this line of reasoning.

Once again, foxka approached ME for my opinion on their future staff app, and it's my opinion that concealing information about your friends breaking the rules after being directly informed about it is not a good quality for prospective staff.

Also, you keep saying that Foxka is lying. What is he lying/what did he lie about? I'm not sure if I missed something during all of the screenshots and posts that have been made.

Once again, they lied in their initial interactions with me that they didn't know about the guidelines incident until the day after. It was later confirmed by themself and now chapman as well that they were in fact directly told about it while it was happening.

I want to clarify something about the LFD2 tourney and the staff guidelines really quickly. I told Foxka about it during the tournament and caribou had taken my spot on that team after myself and a few others were having a bit of fun with the guidelines' being editable. 

Are you seriously this obtuse? When I said "i only found out about everything today" that was referring to WHO did WHAT. Not "oh i didn't know about it happening at all until the day after". I was told by David DURING THE TOURNAMENT AFTER The people who messed with it messed with it. For you to continue to claim that I knew about it while it was happening is not only dishonest on your part but continuing to call me a liar is straight up harassment. You are wrong here, and are once again purposefully misconstruing my words.

once again, for clarity since you are not as good at snooping as you think you are, here are the order of events to my knowledge

L4D2 tournament starts
Kessler/fasda/whoever else discover that the guidelines are set to edit not view
Pranking ensues and they mess with it
David comes in to tell me about "something crazy" so I ask him what the hell he's talking about and he's vague about it and tells me to join another discord call while we are waiting for our next l4d2 game
I go in and see the pranked version of the guidelines, come back and say 'wow that's crazy'
we finish the tournament and then I go to bed or whatever

Oh and here's the full screenshot of our conversation there since you like to snip out the full context, where you can see I was in fact telling you what i know about the events that happened.



Why stop there? Here's the full second account of you pressing me about something I clearly didn't know enough about for you

Please note, I made it very clear I didn't do anything with the guidelines vandalism and asked you to leave it at that.

But guess what? You just kept harassing me about it for a 3rd time!


You even revealed to me you saw who was in the call (guess who isn't in the call, it's me!) as well as knowing about kessler using the !p command to talk about it to other people on server.

So, I am once again stating that you are making personal attacks against me with your claims, and you are clearly not taking your position as admin as someone who is unbiased and not fueled by your own personal vendettas.  You have fully blown this prank completely out of proportion considering that you literally fixed it with a single click. I would also like to input here that the other admins who were made aware of it didn't think it was a big deal and even found it funny. Yes, this includes chibill who I touched base with in the dinklebergs discord voice chat.

Shame on you for spinning things the way you have.

[Misstie6731]

He had no obligation to tell you about it, he was NOT STAFF. He had no obligation to say anything about it. It wasn't his fault the guidelines were left open to edits (Which tbh the edits were fire don't deny it). This isn't even that big of a deal, it was a little prank, the rules were easily restored once people knew what was going on. Mountains out of molehills or whatever the saying is.