[Avi]

-snip-

[quote pid="140288" dateline="1672876037"]
-snip-
I messed up the snip but my responses are in black.

I wouldn't characterize it as it being "shutdown" moreso the thread being open past it's usefulness. There was meaningful feedback for the rule rewording, which was a work in progress when it was initally posted. I kept it open for those reasons. Once we finished the changes, I always intended to close it out and any further feedback, suggestions, etc could be made in seperate threads. After Battons' snarky comment was rightfully removed, it just made sense to close it out then. 

What determines the usefulness of a thread? Then why not close all threads after a certain period of time? Your response and what typically happens contradicts one another.


As I said, it was taken into consideration and discussed. I also went back and did some research of my own in case I was forgetting anything. Anyone that knows me knows that I don't make rash decisions and that I try to do things as thorougly as possible.

Yes, I said in my initial post that I expected there to be some opposition and a lack of trust initially. That is what I'm hoping to build over time. I think some people(this is a general statement) are stuck in the past and can't rationalize that someone can change and grow over time. some think that people should forever be judged on their past and their past actions. I wanted to give Laced an opportunity after all this time to prove that he's changed and this is frankly a good first step in doing that. I've seen that he's changed. Again, I've seen him at his "worst" in this community versus now. He's genuinely tried to better himself and has done that in my eyes.

Some people are stuck in echo chambers, preconcieved views and opinions, and trying to hold onto issues/drama that have already been resolved, addressed, or fixed. The only way forward is to build trust and try to break out of these past bubbles. 

I already addressed the shitposting aspects. For arguments, I've seen them as still being civil. Intent and context matters. If you have any specific recent examples, I'd be glad to see them. He said "i love u guys but stop being stupid lmfao". Which to me comes across as a lighthearted way of saying to stupid, espesically since he knows some of the people that are shitposting. He's still being objective too there. He gave a tame response, all things considered, to this thread. 

Clearly the issues with trusting certain people in this community are not fixed.  When there's a repeated cycle of gaining and breaking trust, you can't expect people to forget the past. Hence sayings like forgive but never forget.  Those past actions may have been forgiven, but they will never be forgotten, which is why it's critical to have those actions accounted for when doing a closed off promotion like this. There was no reason given as to why people should trust Laced again, and no amount of staffing can change that. Anyone can put on a face and pretend to be something they're not, and act completely different when staff aren't watching. I've seen in myself in game, and that's why I feel as strong as I do about what I say. That's why I've always said, community feedback is and will always be vital when making decisions like this. Now you have more broken trust, not just between the community and Laced, but the community and the admin team responsible for this decision.
You're also missing a keyword in your argument. A person CAN change, doesn't mean they HAVE changed.
In the context of calling people stupid, light hearted or not, that just adds to an already unprofessional feel for the community. Regardless of what the intention behind the comment was and whether you think  it was harmless, a position like that is meant to represent the overall community and should be professional when discussing matters like this with members of the community. This comment comes off as rude and ignoring people's thoughts on the matter, which puts this community and the staff in a bad light.

[/quote]
Since this was missed, I'll ask again:
Since when could someone close out their own ban request without any admin oversight on the thread and archive it (since a Web mod does that but isn't a high enough ttt staff to archive ban requests unless that changed)? Feels like a step was missed in that whole process too.