[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.