[voidzz]

I agree. Stuff said or done outside of sinks discord, even if its rude or hurts someone feelings, shouldn't really be considered, unless he was harassing MULTIPLE community members in their dms instead of making jokes about one in a private discord. I'm surprised this ban or the forum ban stuck, considering they're something that happened outside the community and wasn't even leaked to the community, but to the admins directly.
+1 unban, he's fine and you guys will see that

[Ryzif]

After talking this through my only exception to supporting the unban was the resolution between both parties involved. Considering that is done too my knowledge I think an unban would be fine. I won't really talk about it because I really don't agree with it but just try to use your brain moving forward please. It was fucked, still is fucked and won't ever not be fucked. 

+1 for unban.

[TheUltraFish]

If both parties are fine and have come to a resolution, then the issue that caused the ban has passed. The only reason the bans happened on forums and discord was that it was not the first time the "meme" had been shown. Initially it was asked if it could be posted on the forums on two separate occasions, if I remember correctly. What you did was wrong and fucked up and you were banned to keep the image from popping up on any of the Dinkleberg's official pages as well as to make it clear that such things were not okay.

The meme was about a community member, comparing them to a community member, made by a community member(s) and posted in a discord with mainly Dinkleberg community members. If things happening in other discords are magically not punishable in Dinks because they didn't happen in an "official" Dinks server where the talking, imagery etc happened, then ya'll have to go unban Abdel, Ginger, and extreme swarm of other people who were also caught doing fucked up things in other discords, servers and media.

I hope to never see you in a thread asking for an unban ever again Rand. Your history does suggest otherwise so I hope you prove the community wrong. Best of luck to you, Rand, with whatever choice the powers at be make on this unban request.

[chelllman]

Let's straighten out a few things that some people seem to be missing.

1. The admins reserve the right to ban people for actions outside the Dinks community in order to protect the Dinks community and its members.
The admins routinely ban people who have never even touched Dinks simply because their actions in other communities make them a liability.  These people aren't given the chance to cause issues.  The admins have banned individuals in the Dinks community for their actions outside the community before in order to protect the members here. 

2. The question is "Is putting the face of a Dinks member next to the face of a known pedo worthy of a ban?", not "Can we ban people for actions outside the community?".
Regardless of NotRand's intentions when he made the picture, the picture made it's way to the victim.  Let me be explicitly clear: it does not matter how the picture made its way to the victim, all the matters is that it did make it there.  Even if NotRand intended for the image to only be shared between a select group of people, it got out and thus he shares some blame.  If I made a computer virus, gave it to some friends saying "Don't share this", and someone shared it, I would certainly hope I would be punished.
I certainly think what he did was worth some punishment.  It wasn't a "meme", it was a malicious attack on someone's character.  Intentions matter little; outcomes are really what matter.

3. Assuming what NotRand did was worth a ban, should he be unbanned after this amount of time?
I don't know the answer to this.  What I do know is that this should be NotRand's last chance if he is unbanned.

4. The broader implications of not punishing what NotRand did are really unpleasant.
Some people don't think he should have been punished at all.  This is what that would have allowed:
Person A could make malicious pictures about someone and hide behind the excuse "I didn't intend for them to see it!".  Deep down, we will never know if that excuse is exactly true.  All it shows is that person A can't directly send it to someone, but it can be sent by proxy.

5. My personal message to NotRand.
You're at a crossroad whether you like it or not. I hope you sincerely choose the right path.

[August]

The argument that “a person’s actions outside Dinks should have no weight” is absolutely ridiculous. Time and time again we keep people banned who are caught hacking on other servers unrelated to this community. Why do their actions matter when others don’t? I’m not voting at all here as I don’t kave the knowledge of Rand, nor do I know all the nitty gritty details of what happened in the current situation. I just needed to share this double-standard. What you did though was disgusting. The meme, regardless of who was supposed to see it, was disgusting and never should have been created. The question is does the crime fit the punishment? I’ll leave that to the admins to figure out.

[Salty]

"The argument that “a person’s actions outside Dinks should have no weight” is absolutely ridiculous. " ~August


Wanted to give some more input on this: I won't speak for anyone else on this so these are my own words on it. 



We have used evidence from other servers to ban individuals before in cases of egregious issues such as hacking as August said, or pedophilia as Fish stated. 


The issue is whether or not you want to view this as an acceptable situation of that jurisdiction, as chellman stated; personally, I thought it was excessive, which is why I gave a +1. 

I was not trying to suggest that we should never use evidence outside of our community because when it starts affecting our community, it becomes OUR responsibility to clean it up. What Rand did ultimately had an effect on the community but I think it has been enough time for him to be given ONE FINAL CHANCE. 


If Rand decides to be a fuckup and make another mistake, he's gone completely with no chance of return. That's the only way I will keep my vote as a +1, which I had said in a discussion about this unban with others. 


I just wanted to clear that up because I can understand why you might've thought that was what I was trying to say, so I felt like I should explain my logic a little bit better.


Thanks for your time.

[jax]

It's always been so cringe to me to ask for people to "change". What does that even mean? You're asking people to fundamentally change their dispositions for a 15 year old video game? The demand for repentance has always been something that I think should be unnecessary during the unappealing process.

[August]

It's always been so cringe to me to ask for people to "change". What does that even mean? You're asking people to fundamentally change their dispositions for a 15 year old video game? The demand for repentance has always been something that I think should be unnecessary during the unappealing process.

"Change" is intended to mean "Are you the same type of person you were when we had to ban you?" We're basically making sure that the person that the person they were at the time is not who they are now in front of us. Now it's not the easiest question to answer, I get that, but yes people can very much change. If you look at me for example, I am a VERY different person than I was say 5 years ago. My life, disposition, way of thinking, etc have all changed. As you go through life, you will change. Anyone who has grown up from a toddler to an adult has changed. You don't still say "goo goo ga ga" and poop in your pants, right? That means you have, at one point, changed. As long as the person who is ASKING us to be unbanned has shown growth, has shown they can change and that we can trust them that they won't do what they did again, then that shows us they have indeed changed. You may think it's silly, but do we want one of our members to be called a pedophile and have rumors thrown around them for no good reason? No we don't, so continue to expect this question.

[jax]

It's always been so cringe to me to ask for people to "change". What does that even mean? You're asking people to fundamentally change their dispositions for a 15 year old video game? The demand for repentance has always been something that I think should be unnecessary during the unappealing process.

"Change" is intended to mean "Are you the same type of person you were when we had to ban you?" We're basically making sure that the person that the person they were at the time is not who they are now in front of us. Now it's not the easiest question to answer, I get that, but yes people can very much change. If you look at me for example, I am a VERY different person than I was say 5 years ago. My life, disposition, way of thinking, etc have all changed. As you go through life, you will change. Anyone who has grown up from a toddler to an adult has changed. You don't still say "goo goo ga ga" and poop in your pants, right? That means you have, at one point, changed. As long as the person who is ASKING us to be unbanned has shown growth, has shown they can change and that we can trust them that they won't do what they did again, then that shows us they have indeed changed. You may think it's silly, but do we want one of our members to be called a pedophile and have rumors thrown around them for no good reason? No we don't, so continue to expect this question.

Naturally changing over time is not what I am talking about. I am specifically speaking to the "You need to change" replies which is why I said "asking people to 'change'". I guess the nuance I am trying to explain is there is a difference between "Hey if you do X and Y again, you will be banned" vs "Do you think you changed as a person as for this problem to not arise again"

If I got banned and was asked "Are you going change your disposition and stop trolling?" The answer would be a hard "no." I'm not going to fundamentally change my personality to get unbanned. However, if posed with the question "If you keep trolling and are caught, you will be banned." I'll acknowledge that. Both ultimately achieve the same outcome, but there is a nuance there.

[bunniey]

Not to derail it about the change thing too much, but I think they just want more assurance that something that could be very negative for a member/members won't happen again, that's what the question about change versus "don't do it again, have an unban" is about.

But like I'd said, I don't feel like a change of perspective or something is a change of who one is as a person