@Zeke said in Challenge mode Decision wallclip exploit - TA exploit - PvP exploit:
That accusation didn't come from thin air and acting like it was AFTER said SS was posted really does say which side you're on.
Before this goes any further, I would like you to tell me what side am I on?
If the evidence brought to the GMs proves to be substantial enough to warrant punishment for the persons accused, I support their decision and would be happy to see the right things done on the matter.
If the accused player's relationship with the GM they named can be proven to be a factor in less-than-professional handling of misconduct, then I expect both the player and GM to be held accountable for their wrongdoings, and would hold no further negativity toward them if the matter is handled properly.
If I see an attempt to pander to the masses and stir up a concern that is unfounded or unsupported by something factual - beyond heresay - yes, I have an issue with that, and will call it out for what it is. Personal opinion of doing so does not change the truth of what it is, however.
If players uninvolved are specifically named and implied to be doing something wrong that they are innocent of doing, then yes, I would have a huge issue with that, and want it to stop, as it can potentially result in someone facing a punishment they don't deserve for a wrongdoing they didn't do. And that is not an unreasonable sentiment to have.
So with all that, what side am I on here, to caution against conjecture being taken as factual evidence and uninvolved people being named publicly in an attempt at guilt-by-association, and "end justifies the means" mentalities being a driving force behind what's clearly a witch hunt and not simply a greater appeal to the GMs to handle a matter they are already investigating? All this, while I personally have little to do with it beyond recognizing names of people implicated, but also similarly uninvolved in the original accusations; what side then am I on?