chevron_left Secret World Legends

This is to explain why I left ODO

  • link
    Retired 73 posts
    Jan. 12, 2018, 4:54 p.m.
    link

    This is to explain why I left ODO :

    Many months ago a cabal member gloated about doing something to me on ODO discord. I decided to just ignore him, a choice I very much regret. About two months later or so this cabal member did the same thing to a second cabal member. This second cabal member decided to quit ODO in disgust that such behavior was tolerated at ODO. The second cabal member and I talked before she quit so she could explain why. She was very "disappointed" in me that I knew about this and had chosen to ignore it.

    I decided to send a letter to this first cabal member. It was a strong letter, but I used no ad homs and made no threats. I just wanted him to promise that he would stop this behavior in the future.

    Before sending this letter AWOL, Bri, and I talked about this. AWOL wanted to do nothing. Bri wanted me to wait. I wanted to write a letter ASAP in part to try to get this second cabal member to come back to ODO. I went against both AWOL's and Bri's wishes and sent the letter. For what it worth, upon Bri's recommendation (a very good recommendation) I did include at the very top of this letter that I was speaking just for myself and NOT the officers of ODO in general.

    Because I sent this letter, AWOL wanted me kicked from the cabal or demoted. The other officers at the time agreed to do nothing to me. AWOL left ODO in protest over this. AWOL did come back later on but refused to be a leader again at ODO until I was punished.

    For what it worth, I did make the offer that I would leave ODO if that would get AWOL to come back as a leader of ODO. My offer was declined.

    The one thing I could not accept was demotion. My personal code of ethics means I cannot accept a demotion for doing something I think was right.

    So that brings things to last Sunday (Jan7). TS13 as the new MC of ODO made the decision to reopen this and have a vote on my demotion for writing this letter. He also made the condition that only new officers could vote, only those officers that were not officers when I wrote this letter. The vote would happen three days later. I only learned about this vote late on the second day, Tuesday night. So that gave me Tuesday night and Wednesday to defend myself to the new officers. Alas, I failed in this.

    The majority of the new officers voted to demote me.

    I did think at the time I could probably demote all the new officers to SBer so no one could demote me and that would give me time to talk about this to the old officers. Not sure I could demote TS13, given he was one level higher then me. In any case I decide against this.. because in the end this really does accomplish what I had originally offered if AWOL would come back to lead ODO. Besides I am extremely busy in the real world, and I really do not have time or patience for this. There is also that TS13 leads the e5 NYR and AWOL does the behind the scenes work of the cabal.. both jobs I am not well suited for. There is also that AWOL has been a member of ODO far longer then me. If anyone is to go, it should be me.

    SIDE NOTE : Still.. only three days out the blue like that...I only had a night and a day to respond, in the middle of the week. I wish TS13, you had decided to go a different way. Patience is not one of your strengths 🙂

    So the new officers voted.. the majority decided to demote me and I was demoted. I would rather leave ODO if demoted for doing something I think was right. So I left ODO.

    It was grand playing with you all. Thank you for the good times. Goodbye you all 😀

  • link
    Knight
    Jan. 13, 2018, 10:31 a.m.
    link

    @TS
    According to http://omnedatumoptimum.red/Cabinfo/Community-standards/?s=751e5d3147acfd9c688eaabf3c3d6f0928f91ce7
    Members are encouraged to:
    1,Get involved with the cabal, post and share any ideas and suggestions regarding any in-game content or the Cabal. We will do our best to consider all ideas and, if possible, make it happen.
    4,Express any concerns they may have to the officers of the cabal, so we could tackle problems head-on.
    Members are asked to:
    3,Be honest and forthcoming about any problems they may encounter in the Cabal.

    So, I am going to post my concern here.(It's also because I am on my way to get a lawyer licence 😝 )

    According to Community standards
    If the first cabal members action violate the refrain from:
    1,Knowingly exploiting the game. (An illuminati friend tells me it may be related.)
    3,Conversational debates on topics that might cause friction in in-game chat or Discord, unless agreed to by everyone present. Members are encouraged to chat on any and all topics they are interested in and to get to know each other better, but keep in mind that views on certain topics, such as politics or religion, might cause offence, even if unintentionally.
    The first cabal member will result in disciplinary action. (The word "will" means no exception, is that correct? @Cayr)

    Thus, if the first cabal member's action is not responded by any other actions from any of the officers. Then all the officers except Quino are violating the community standard by simply doing nothing to people violating the community standard. Therefore the demote vote may also be violating the community standard. Thus, the result is illegal.

    However, as the community standards also indicates "Members are asked to: 5, Concede to the rulings and decisions of the Grand Master and the Master Commanders of ODO." I am not going to argue with your decision.
    But, I think you will also need to make regulations of officer standards to clearly indicates:
    1, What's the reasons to demote an officer. (Substantive law. Much like a community standards, list the actions that may cause an officer to be demoted.)
    2, What's the process to demote an officer(Procedural Law), that shall include the facts that can cause a demote and how to carry out the vote, defense and how much time for prepare the defense. (Normally, laws in western give about a week to prepare the defense, including hire a lawyer and something...)
    3, Who are required to avoid in the process.
    4, As this case is closed, this case itself shall also become a standard to all future similar cases. If a similar case is judged and comes out with a huge different result. It shall be considered injustice.

    I cannot say I am not emotional involved in this post. Quino is a friend to me since I join the cabal after all.

  • link
    Master Commander
    Jan. 13, 2018, 12:09 p.m.
    link

    Keeper, since Pyre said he is preparing a more thorough reply to what Q wrote (the other side of the story, so to speak), I'll keep it brief and only comment on some of what you mentioned. I'll also try to comment on what TS said, since he will be away until Tuesday.

    1. Even if "knowingly exploiting the game" had been a part of CS back then (it was not, it was added during revising the Community Standards), the other officers did not agree that this is what had happened - the person was bug hunting for FC, they were honest about it, turned over their data, FC was aware. Even so - officers are expected to discuss and decide on necessary action together, addressing any issues calmly and politely. The breach of "not discussing stuff people don't agree to" with this first person had been addressed by another officer.

    2. Answering for TS, as he will be gone until Tuesday. As for allegedly leaving Q only a day and a half to make his case - that is untrue. Yes, upon first rehashing this matter, TS initially gave the new Marshals a guideline of 3 days to give their opinions, as to not drag it out and just have it die down again. However, he clearly said, when Q first answered, that as long as people are talking, take all the time you need.

    3. You raise valid points, we have no such fixed rules for disciplinary actions against an officer. Perhaps we should. As for reasoning for this particular matter, I can only speak for myself, but out of respect for Q, I would rather not give the details of those reasons publicly at this time. I wasn't close friends with Q, but we talked frequently. I maintain that he is an awesome, helpful guy, but I, much as Q, have to stand by what I think is right, despite personal loyalties.

  • link
    Knight
    Jan. 13, 2018, 12:30 p.m.
    link
    1. The justification sounds like something out of the good ol' Soviet Union days.
    2. And bug-hunting excuse for exploiting, in a Funcom game? Where progress-breaking bug like Ancile crafting stations are dismissed by Funcom devs with "we should have removed crafting from the game altogether" comments? Community Manager acting on Reddit as if the Eruption bug is something newly discovered? Energy not regenerating on rezz still proudly there.
    3. ODO members deserve to know whether the "bug-hunter" is still in the cabal.
  • link
    Master Commander
    Jan. 13, 2018, 12:36 p.m.
    link

    Kestri, with all due respect, please don't use this thread to bring up your dislike of Funcom. Them doing anything with other bug information or not it is not relevant. This person was working with them, found a bug, was honest about it, turned their logs over, Funcom fixed it, they were aware, did not remove the stuff the person got from his account - therefore, not a knowing, deliberate exploit of the game.

  • link
    Tester of things that need testing
    Jan. 13, 2018, 1 p.m.
    link

    The imporant part here is not about who is right or wrong. What is important is that we should be able to talk about disagreemenets (especially if you are an officer) in a calm and rational way. What matters even more to me is the game, the community and those we call our friends.

    We can probably spend 1000 pages discussing all the details about this drama and bicker about who is right and wrong. It's a very complicated case as it entangled with 3-4 other cabal members leaving in the past. It's a complex clusterfuck with egos and emotions one would have to spend a long time to even grasp.

    My side of the story (as Q already shared some info):

    The case was picked up again by TS as the matter was not seen as resolved by the old or new officers. You got your chance to respond before the vote. This response was extremely important for the outcome of the poll. I even spent time with you explaining things and giving you some advice and pointer on what to cover (it was complicated). Still you decided to be extremely defensive and irrational. If you had managed to put together something calm and somewhat rational, the vote would have swinged the other way for you without any doubts. I had my finger ready voting in your favor from the start, but got a bit shocked when reading the response. This changed my mind entirely. You gave us an ultimatum insead of trying to reason.

    The final outcome was that all officers that caused unnecessary drama around this case are no longer officers.

    The outcome of this sutiation could have gone in so many other directions than it did. That was and is entirely up to Quinotaur himself. This includes how he decided to handle this case and his decision to leave the cabal. I know Quinotaur knew and probably still knows what was the right thing to do. His emotions got hold of him. The demotion was from MC to StB as we did see Q as a very good cabal member, but not a good MC.

    I still consider you a good friend Q, and I hope you will consider coming back in the future, still.

    There's a lot details I can could have gotten into here, but that wouldnot be productive in any shape or form. I want to look forward spending my energy on positive things and impovements for the cabal.

    If anyone have any input on this case, please be calm and rational about it. I think a lot of people highly appriciate the amount of time he spent on the cabal in the past. He was an outstanding member. He was even the person who recruited me.

  • link
    Retired 87 posts
    Jan. 13, 2018, 4:18 p.m.
    link

    Hello there, long time no see.

    I feel partially called to answer here, so I shall. Mind you, I may not have been active in the game a lot in the past months, but I am active on the forums, so it's not a 'hello from the Otherside'.

    As one of those MCs active back then, I would like to say that while we let the issue be swept under the rug, we did not agree upon ignoring it and moving on. We simply run out of ideas that would bring a different result than Q leaving the cabal with feeling that we did the right thing. TS as the new GM decided it was time to deal with the elephant in the room. I am grateful he did.

    What the other officers have written above this post is what I'd write as well, as I agree with raised points. The matter started from a disturbing issue that needed to be tackled and went to a full-blown dramatic shitstorm. We didn't really want to revisit it or pour it out and have a 1000post thread of bickering.

    I stand by my stance, that Q's actions in this matter were and are emotional, rash and stubborn. Nowhere in the discussions we had have I found the signs of wanting to see different perspectives, while I do remember quite the opposite stance and ultimatums. I find this kind of discussion - one filled with emotion, not reason and closed to alternative perspectives - unbecomming of an officer.

    This said, I truly enjoy Q's company and his actions in the cabal - he was always helpful and friendly. He tended to get out of his way to help others. That is admirable.

    I wish all the talks we (all of those involved) had here, on Discord, in game (trust me, it was more days than hours if you count it) resulted in you staying with us Q and continuing your good work as Standard Bearer for ODO. Alas, a different decision was made.

    If anyone wishes to contact me on the matter, just catch me on Discord. I'll do my best to explain what I'm able to.

  • link
    Standard Bearer
    Jan. 14, 2018, 1:58 a.m.
    link

    I initially intended on taking time to write, rewrite, and fine tune exactly what I wanted to say regarding this situation, but seems like that option is out of my hands at the moment, so, forgive me if I jump around and edit on the fly as I go. Especially in longer form, I tend to be extremely digressionary, as the response to one point winds into something previous or something later, so, bear with me 🙂

    Regarding the issues Q raised, as I saw them:

    AWOL did not want to do nothing-- he wanted to dispassionately view the situation, figuring out all the facts involved, before any steps were taken. This is part of why, as per what Cayr said, the issue wasn't necessarily viewed of as an exploit in the end, because of finding out the facts of the situation. He wished for the full facts of the situation to be known, and then for the officers, as a group, to address the situation with all available facts.

    However, the issue was, then, one of not allowing this process to go forward, and instead jumping the gun. That was the nature of the disagreement. Especially in matters where there are potential biases and such, it's, in my opinion, very important to try to ensure that such biases do not impact a decision- both in game, and in real life. I myself am admittedly a biased individual, and I have biases I am aware of, and ones that I'm probably not aware of. This is why there is a Corps of officers who leads, and a rotational system of equals in terms of the titular leader, and not simply one Leader. This is the reason behind the system as it exists-- it is, to a larger extent, the reason it works. However, for such a system to work, there is required a mutual respect and trust- even in disagreement, at least respecting the point of view of the other person involved, and not jumping head first into a situation. Often, that results in worse situations.

    All that said, it wasn't a demote or kick situation. No one thought it'd be appropriate to kick you, Quin, but the disagreement on what to do (demote or not) was what caused the problem. That said, a nay vote on demotion does not necessarily mean, "do nothing [about it]." I did not, and do not, think the message was appropriate, especially after the situation was already well in hand and being taken care of. I simply did not feel that it amounted to severe enough for such-- however, in a sort of mental calculus, it would be added to any future tally in terms of whether or not it was a pattern or became a pattern, and in the presence of a pattern, however, that would change the equation, and it would be enough. Which is not a disparagement towards anyone, as a note. Everyone makes a mistake, I've made far more than my own fair share of them.

    The only problem I have, however, is the idea that the "New" Officers should have less of a say/should be overridden by the "Old" Officers. That, in my opinion, flies face-first into the idea of the Officers and Grandmaster as equals-- including Marshals. Marshals have the same privileges, and responsibilities, as a Master Commander, with the exception that, because they are in a trial period to see both if they are a good fit, and if they are interested in the sausage making process that leadership positions can entail, they are not included in the Grandmaster rotation for a 3 month period. Other that that, that is the only difference between a 'New' and an 'Old' Officer. Furthermore, in the case of Officers, and the voting thereon, it has to be a consensus-- promotion to Marshal/Master Commander is with the unanimous approval of the existing Officers.

    If you thought their judgement was suspect or an opinion you couldn't abide with even if it went against you: you had a veto on it, when we voted. You did not use said veto.

    Regarding Keepers issues raised:

    It was not an issue of no one wanting to do anything, however, it was of allowing the process to go through and do a full fact-finding, getting all sides and information available. Even if it had turned out to be a cut-and-dry, egregious case of exploiting, responding first before that information is found out would still be in the wrong, regardless.

    Going forward, I think this situation, and how it snowballed to what we have now, a official procedure or something similar will probably be useful.

    All of that said, I have no ill will or animosity personally- I wish you had chosen to remain, but I respect your decision and wish you the best. You've always been extremely helpful, going more than out of your way to assist others.

  • link
    Knight
    Jan. 14, 2018, 3:51 a.m.
    link

    OK, I am convinced. :>
    I was trying to get Quino back
    one way (trying to find out if the demote decision itself is flawed and can be revoked)
    or
    another (trying to make other officers to provide their reasons for Quino to reconsider his quit)

    Now I guess it's ultimately on Quino to calm down and think.
    My thoughts, it's good that an officer has a heart of justice. However, you cannot just go out and shoot any criminals on sight unless there is really no other ways.