Still Unresolved

[Arani]

Now that I can agree with. I think it might be a little late for this topic, but for future ones, I can agree with you on that 100% ^_^

[SnowyCheetah]

@Flip: We should be thanking Silly for bringing it to our attention. Nice try trying to make that seem like a bad thing so we can continue thinking that speaking our minds is a bad thing. We all know dictatorships thrive when people are afraid to say what they think.

[xLilacVixenx]

[quote="SnowyCheetah"] We all know dictatorships thrive when people are afraid to say what they think.[/quote]

How on earth are they dictators? Lol.

[FlipMode]

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]@Flip: We should be thanking Silly for bringing it to our attention. Nice try trying to make that seem like a bad thing so we can continue thinking that speaking our minds is a bad thing. We all know dictatorships thrive when people are afraid to say what they think.[/quote]

How exactly was I doing that? If that is what I thought, that is what I would have said, I have said at least three times "thanks for bringing this up." I said it was a different subject but I did not even imply it was a bad thing, nice try trying to read before posting.

[Arani]

[quote="xLilacVixenx"][quote="SnowyCheetah"] We all know dictatorships thrive when people are afraid to say what they think.[/quote]

How on earth are they dictators? Lol.[/quote]

Wut she said.

[Maaaaaaaaaan]

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]@Flip: We should be thanking Silly for bringing it to our attention. Nice try trying to make that seem like a bad thing so we can continue thinking that speaking our minds is a bad thing. We all know dictatorships thrive when people are afraid to say what they think.[/quote]

I'm sorry, I just don't quite understand this at all...


And really, the issue seems kind of... non-existent.

The basic premise of a person getting a warning is because a member did something wrong in the first place, no?

Now, there is only 2 possible explanations if that happens.
1: The member actually did something wrong. In that case, there's no problem, the warning is fair.
2: The member was wrongfully warned. In that case, somebody who is a mod will be able to correct it.

The simplest way to solve this problem is to just not do something that will earn a warning. That should be simple enough, but sometimes a person may not know when they've crossed a line. That's understandable, and it's bound to happen.

Now, as far as I've seen, mods are pretty trustworthy. If you get a warning that you don't understand or feel you don't deserve, then the first step should be to talk about it with the mod who issued it. This is the most adult course of action for both parties, and it's more respectful to discuss it with your accuser.

It's common courtesy to do this in a respectful manner. If you honestly want an explanation for the warning, I would think it's wiser to ask them in a serious and honest manner. Communication is really only limited by the words being said. If you didn't want an explanation... well I can't see what the aim is in the first place, and it's not what's being discussed in this topic.

In the unlikely event that this does not work, and you still feel like you've been slighted, why not just PM another mod? I see no reason why a second moderator can't look into what would be an injustice at that point. Do not abuse that by going around a moderator you just don't agree with. If you wish to be treated fairly, you have to do the same.


But that's all fairly off-topic and I apologize. I'm pretty sure almost everyone here felt that way to begin with anyways. XD

As for the actual question of whether or not members should be allowed to discuss their warnings openly: I'm a fan of people being able to casually bring it up without punishment. Amanda made an excellent point about the difference between two people maturely discussing it, and doing so immaturely. The spirit of the recent rule change about religious discussions should naturally apply here too, like Flip had mentioned.

On the other side of that however, is the argument about whether or not it's fair to bring someone else's business to the public.(I apologize in advance since I'm new here, but I cannot remember the mod who brought this up. Was it Ivan? XD)
Of course it's unfair for a mod to mention discipline to other members, and I doubt a mod would even attempt it. That would be incredibly disrespectful to a member's privacy. However, this principle goes both ways. If a member constantly brings attention to the community about warnings a particular moderator gives out, people will remember this. If I hear about a member being unfairly punished, and then the same thing from the same mod happens to me, I will definitely sense a pattern. That's not fair to the mod. If you feel you've been slighted in that way, then you should of course explain the issue to the mod in question, or another one of them. Not the public. Fair's fair.

Honestly, from a personal standpoint, I think the rule should exist. I cannot for the life of me see a reason why making an private issue public is useful. If you just want to complain about it after a fair discussion has taken place, why not do so outside of MLK? If you're talking to friends about it, why not just use a place outside of MLK that you more than likely already use?



Basically, the issue involves being warned in the first place. The first line of defense, is to not do something wrong. Second, communicate your grievance. Third, seek assistance from people who can help you. Fourth... well, I don't see it getting that far.

This whole issue seems predicated on a mod being unfair with their powers. If that happens, the issue is far more serious than a simple "omg this sux".

Hopefully this wall of text will help somebody.

[Annie]

[quote="SnowyCheetah"]@Flip: We should be thanking Silly for bringing it to our attention. Nice try trying to make that seem like a bad thing so we can continue thinking that speaking our minds is a bad thing. We all know dictatorships thrive when people are afraid to say what they think.[/quote]


I feel I can say what I like, without being scared of being warned or banned.
I think you're making it out to be worse than it is...and you're clearing not afraid to speak you mind.

About the Gif. I would have been offended too! You guys must remember that not everyone finds those things funny! If I'm completely honest, I find the childish and silly, not humourous! I probably would have taken it as a personal insult, if it was indeed sent via PM, but I would have been less hurt if it was in public. Now, that doesn't mean I don't have a sence of humour. People find different things funny.

I'm still confused about the issue.

[SnowyCheetah]

Things aren't always as simple as they seem. Besides that, not everyone has much or any trust in the integrity or trustworthiness of MLK's staff. Sad, but true.

[Annie]

I trust them! I think they're very good staff and they work hard to make sure we're all happy.

[SilverSimba01]

it seen that those people aren't even willing to cooperate to try some of the solution that other member has given, but rather, continue saying that MLK staff are some kind of dictators so everyone stop having trust on them just because of the afraid of someone, I know that some might going to say that I'm wrong, but that's what this whole thing looks like