Makeris

Blacklisted
  • Content Count

    1328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Makeris

  • Rank
    absolutely part of the problem at this point

Basic Information

  • Sex
    Male
  • Characters
    Drachmore, Royston

Recent Profile Visitors

5154 profile views
  1. I've found just doing it Friday/Saturday night works perfectly fine tbh. Does anyone here actually (Including myself) do anything weekend nights? And before you answer the rhetorical question, the last two events I had held at like 7-9 PM EST had almost 2 fullraid groups.
  2. Name of Character (Full): Sir Alek Hamilton Name of Character (Ingame) Hamilton Affiliation: House Stahlbrad, Alliance Number of Troops/Type: 50 Knights of the Order of Citrine Raven (Will be reduced to whatever the maximum number allowed is.) Force Placement: Hidden onboard the S.S Tiber
  3. "The conclusion of the investigation has led to Smeg being demoted from the DM Manager role. This is in order to ensure that he cannot use the role of DM Manager to justify inactivity as a staff member - reviewing Player Reports, responding to Contact Staff threads, discussing Punishments in the staff chat and voting on Character Applications. As such, we will be monitoring his activity in those four forums. Should he prove to fix his activity issues in that regard then there won't be much preventing us from returning him to his DM Manager role. All of the work currently handled by Smeg as a DM Manager would have been delegated to Dusk, but his computer issues as well as suggested implications of disinterest in doing any DM Manager work suggest this will be a bad idea. Therefore, Razmataz will be in charge of reviewing activity for DMs, ensuring that the DM Team is content and happy, answering questions, and handling the DM Trials. We apologise for any inconvenience or disturbance this causes, and hope for a speedy turn-around in Smeg's activity. " It completely ignores the 95% of other complaints, but yeah. I guess it's closed. I don't know why that took 7+ months.
  4. Might as well convert this thread into it, with the original posters permission.
  5. If the Staff team is opposed to having their infractions actually written down, acknowledged, and archived - Well, then I guess that's a good indication. Edit: If a poll is made, it should be made public. Everyone has the right to know who doesn't want someone to keep track of their deeds/misdeeds. I wouldn't be opposed. That being said, you don't have the right to know. I'll bring it to the rest of the team and we'll discuss it as a possibility. We don't have the right to know that a Staff Member does not want their infractions kept track of? Isn't that a pretty clear indication they are hiding something? Sure, I agree, it could be seen as a clear indication - But that doesn't mean you have a right to see it. You're not entitled to see it. I guess that is a different matter in its entirety. If you want to throw on the facade of transparency, you have to at least chuck the dog a bone. Frankly, it should be a community vote not a Staff one. Otherwise, that's what we call in America: A conflict of Interest. Edit: I'll add an example. If Staff Member A, who is known to bend the rules, decides to vote against this in a private poll, how is that fair and or just? Unless the other Staff Members are going to call out Staff Member A, what he has done is essentially support a don't ask don't tell system. He believes that he is above the rules, and we will never know that as a community. If I asked to make a poll for Staff if they support abortion? Sure that can be private. If I made a poll asking Staff whether or not they believe human rights, shouldn't that be open?
  6. If the Staff team is opposed to having their infractions actually written down, acknowledged, and archived - Well, then I guess that's a good indication. Edit: If a poll is made, it should be made public. Everyone has the right to know who doesn't want someone to keep track of their deeds/misdeeds. I wouldn't be opposed. That being said, you don't have the right to know. I'll bring it to the rest of the team and we'll discuss it as a possibility. We don't have the right to know that a Staff Member does not want their infractions kept track of? Isn't that a pretty clear indication they are hiding something?
  7. If the Staff team is opposed to having their infractions actually written down, acknowledged, and archived - Well, then I guess that's a good indication. Edit: If a poll is made, it should be made public. Everyone has the right to know who doesn't want someone to keep track of their deeds/misdeeds.
  8. And just to rebutt the argument, "Shouldn't Staff have some leeway when it comes to what they can or can't say? I mean they're trusted members of the community right?" No, you can't pick and choose who can say what. If it's against the rules it's against the rules. If someone says N**** in worldchat and is banned, and a Staff Member does it, they should also be, I don't know? Banned too? Use your powers to set an example, if we start picking and choosing who gets punished or reprimanded because of someones 'worth' to the community', well that's just sad.
  9. We'll run out of staffers or we'll actually break the gridlock some people have on their positions. Maybe it's not as needed now as a lot of those aforementioned have already resigned, but I cam see it relieving some people from their duty (If they deserve it), while also allowing fresh blood into the Staff team. If someone is being banned for something a Staff Member can do and get a slap on the wrist for, that's wrong. If you hound every staff member's infractions, I'm sure you'd find that they don't deserve to be on the team. Nothing wrong with that.
  10. Better? Sorry, but I don't have a clique. Baseless claims. As for Makeris' point. Oh, if only we had something like that. Why don't we? Who knows. I'm speaking only for myself here: There are a few reasons why we don't have one, although I don't oppose. 1. There are very few reports against Staff as is. 2. Staff can't review staff reports - Meaning Granodd has to do them. I think that if this should become a reality, there should be a different list of "punishments", rather than the one players face for a number of reasons. That's just off the top of my head. Sounds like what Granodd should be doing as the Staff Administrator anyways. This will have to come from both his supervision, from what he see's as an infractions, and what the community deems are infractions. Ultimately, I think the Staff warning sheet should be public, (IDK could be a bad idea but w/e). This is to prevent another x amount of months/years investigations, because if the person in question has broken the rules, it will be there on their sheet. Slaps on the wrist are childish and unproductive. If we're trying to avoid a caste based society, I see no reason why Staff shouldn't have their infractions written down in a check sheet. If a player says the n-word, and so does a GM, who gets what written down on them?
  11. Better? Sorry, but I don't have a clique. Baseless claims. As for Makeris' point. Oh, if only we had something like that. Why don't we? Who knows. spread the staff warning sheet idea everywhere.....
  12. What about firing people that a majority agree to remove? Shamefully plugging in the Staff Warning Sheet List: If players get their infractions tracked for easier filing and retrieval, why don't staff? Edit: (This will make petitions for removal a lot cleaner because there will be a written down track record of any staff members misdoings.) ie : no more 1 year investigations??)
  13. Makeris

    IRL Pic Thread

    only taron would appreciate this.... f https://s1.webmshare.com/jQv46.webm https://s1.webmshare.com/3wjVX.webm