Drippy Staff Report- Accepted

[Noah REmiX]

18 minutes ago, Mag1c said:

+Support

You aren't really supposed to take family members or friends sits

I am also pretty sure for the crimes they do after being revived can be added to the 8 years

 

 

 

 

[SupremeChow]

+Support

• Bias
• You're supposed to un-jail once it reaches 2 additional years not immediately after they are jailed
• Also member of question wasn't brought to a sit (Duncan)
• I was online during this incident and could've been asked for a double opinion

Edited November 19, 2020 by SupremeChow

[ICE]

+/- Support

My Side of The Story I Was There!

I was there the whole time so what had happened me and Soul robbed a bank then we died in the process of getting out of bank we were then tooken to jail and me and Soul decide let go to court so then we go to court and the judge was "Mike" tells them to put us in for 8 years then me and Soul start acting like were spitting at the judge and the judge says put them in for 10 years to my concerns the judge can't put us in for jail more then 8 years after being revived like it states in the MOTD "You may arrest criminals after they are revived if they were involved in a criminal situation (Maximum jail time is 8 years)." but luckily Deathstriker knew he can only put me in for 8 years so i get 8 years but Duncan puts Soul in for 10 years not knowing that the judge has no control over that. So in this case Duncan is in the wrong putting him in for more then 8 years and listening to the judge when he should know the rules and Judge Mike is in the wrong for not knowing the rules and adding years for something that was not needed but Drippy is also in the wrong for taking the sit but handled the sit correctly.

In my opinion Drippy shouldn't be striked/removed/punished for this if anything SMT should just talk to him (SMT+ Decision Though)

In my opinion just let Drippy know he can't take family sits next time (He is new to staff i told him he couldn't take family sits after this happened he didn't know)

Please read thoroughly!

Edited November 19, 2020 by OG ICE

[Solomon]

22 minutes ago, SupremeChow said:

+Support

• Bias
• You're supposed to un-jail once it reaches 2 additional years not immediately after they are jailed
• Also member of question wasn't brought to a sit (Duncan)
• I was online during this incident and could've been asked for a double opinion

 

[Frog]

2 hours ago, SupremeChow said:

+Support

• Bias
• You're supposed to un-jail once it reaches 2 additional years not immediately after they are jailed
• Also member of question wasn't brought to a sit (Duncan)
• I was online during this incident and could've been asked for a double opinion

 

[Carrots]

4 hours ago, SupremeChow said:

+Support

• Bias
• You're supposed to un-jail once it reaches 2 additional years not immediately after they are jailed
• Also member of question wasn't brought to a sit (Duncan)
• I was online during this incident and could've been asked for a double opinion

I think you should've gotten another staff member to deal with this situation especially since Duncan had asked for another Staff Member and there were other staff member available. Even if they weren't on the administration job you could've asked in admin chat for some help or asked for someone else to get on.

[Alex Raddish]

9 hours ago, SupremeChow said:

+Support

• Bias
• You're supposed to un-jail once it reaches 2 additional years not immediately after they are jailed
• Also member of question wasn't brought to a sit (Duncan)
• I was online during this incident and could've been asked for a double opinion

 

[deathstriker124]

+Support

As Duncan says Soul spit the in face of the judge and the judge ruled another 2 years and this was after he got revived by EMS and Duncan puts him in for 10 years then soul calls staff and I walk out of Jailer area and I come back in and Soul is gone from The holding cell and the only thing I remember is drippy coming in and just releasing him and Duncan said something along the lines of drippy bring me to a roof if this turns into a admin sit or something like that Which he never did(Drippy might have said more but like I said I walked out of the jailer area) and Both are in OG

Edited November 19, 2020 by deathstriker124

[MiniEpic]

 

10 hours ago, SupremeChow said:

+Support

• Bias
• You're supposed to un-jail once it reaches 2 additional years not immediately after they are jailed
• Also member of question wasn't brought to a sit (Duncan)
• I was online during this incident and could've been asked for a double opinion

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by MiniEpic

[Blitz]

13 hours ago, SupremeChow said:

+Support

• Bias
• You're supposed to un-jail once it reaches 2 additional years not immediately after they are jailed
• Also member of question wasn't brought to a sit (Duncan)
• I was online during this incident and could've been asked for a double opinion

 

[Will]

+Support

(tl;dr: Drippy seems to have gone against the whole "don't take your friends sit" rule in the staff handbook and should speak with SMT about it.)

 

Says pretty clearly in the staff handbook that you should not take sits called on family members or friends for the possibility of bias between the staff member and player(s) involved. While there have been instances of staff doing this in the past, some of these staff members holding the rank of admin or higher, which at their ranks, I think it is somewhat safe to assume that they do their best not to hold any bias towards someone purely based off of their relationship with that player. Again, staff members should do their best to find another administrator to handle the sit if one is available to try and reduce the possibility of any bias decisions being made. 
I think it should also be apparent that if a player requests a higher up, one should be brought to the sit if one is online or available. I was not there at the sit, so I'm not sure if Drippy ignored or didn't hear the request, though myself and other staff members were online and available at the time so it confuses me as to why this request went unanswered.

19 hours ago, Duncan McOkiner said:

Upon Drippy teleporting to the staff sit, I immediately asked for a higher-up staff member if this was going to go to a sit roof.

I feel a verbal warning should suffice unless Eternity deems otherwise, just so long as Drippy understands his mistake and doesn't do this again.

Edited November 19, 2020 by Will

[Drippy]

Lookie what I found this morning.

 

Now lets go over a few things since you decided to lie in your staff report about the incidents that took place during the sit. (Very un-gamer of you.)

1. You never requested a higher up, or a different staff member to handle this situation for possible bias, but yet you claim you did just to put a bad image on me.
2. Me & Soul got into TS AFTER the sit had concluded.
3. You said, and I quote "ight, bring me if you need me." You never asked if it was being brought to a roof.

Let's start from the top.

You made this statement here:

19 hours ago, Duncan McOkiner said:

Upon Drippy teleporting to the staff sit, I immediately asked for a higher-up staff member if this was going to go to a sit roof.

But clearly in the video it was proven to be a blatant lie. You never said such things, the only thing you said pertaining to a sit was "ight, bring me if I'm needed" which you were not needed. I had already gotten your side of the situation from the Judge, and yourself.

 

Making such statements, and then having them be proven false kind of makes it hard for me to believe anything that comes out of your mouth at this point.

 

Reaching for evidence:

You still have yet to accept the literal photo evidence that we were not in TS together, but I went ahead and added some video evidence of it for your viewing pleasure

It's no secret that me and Soul are both in OG, but this does not cloud my judgement whatsoever. It does state in the Staff Handbook:

On 2/12/2018 at 5:00 PM, Zeeptin said:

5). Do not deal with sits involving yourself or your friends to avoid potential bias issue. In these instances you are required to have an uninvolved staff member take the sit, or file a player report.

I would like to highlight this cool word called "potential." I'll provide a definition incase you don't fully understand what that word means.

Now lets look at the rest of the rule. "Do not deal with sits involving yourself or your friends." Now clearly I wasn't involved, but Soul was. A lot of you claim its bias since I am friends with Soul, but if that's the case, I wouldn't be able to take majority of the sits I take due to "being friends with them." It's no secret that I try to speak, and make friendships with everyone on the server, and I try to greet new players, and form friendships. Although some may be closer then others, I still will never allow relations with someone to cloud my judgement while working as staff. 

 

Now let's look at the definition of "potential." "having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future."

Now let's look at the definition of "bias." "prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair."

Now if we combine those, we have something along the lines of "Having, or showing the capacity to become or develop prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair."

 

Have I shown that capacity? No.

Do I have the capacity? Everyone does, it is human nature.

 

Now, let's look at the end of the that. "usually in a way considered to be unfair." Now how was this unfair? Soul spent nearly his entire sentence in jail, you left after giving your side, and you were no longer needed so you were not pulled. The only other Staff member on duty was Valentino which he was in another sit (shown at the beginning of the video.) Now to my knowledge, Soul & Valentino/Jager used to always play the game together, and were constantly in TS.  Could be argued they had a friendship. There's "potential bias" there. What about other staff members on the server? Much like myself, Soul is social with the other players on the server. We try and get to know people, and form friendships, so no matter who took the sit, there would always remain "potential bias." I considered you to be a friend Duncan, as well as Soul, but I do not allow my relationship with someone to cloud my judgement.

Everyone has opinions of other players on the server, and there will always remain "potential bias" no matter who takes the sit. It is human nature to form opinions of other people, and you'll either like, or dislike them. It's our job as a staff member to be able to handle said situations without bias, and act professionally and mature at all times. I respect you made this report because you felt there was bias, but in reality, you couldn't have been more wrong.

 

Thanks for reading

 

TLDR: There will always be "potential bias" no matter who takes the sit, its our job to be able to handle it without bias (which I did.) 

 

Edit: I just want to add on what Will said because I feel this is extremely important not to just this staff report, but to staff as a whole.

  

23 minutes ago, Will said:

I think it should also be apparent that if a player requests a higher up, one should be brought to the sit if one is online or available. I was not there at the sit, so I'm not sure if Drippy ignored or didn't hear the request, though myself and other staff members were online and available at the time so it confuses me as to why this request went unanswered.

I agree with this entirely, and had Duncan requested a higher up I would have gotten one there ASAP. As SupremeChow stated, he was online at the time, but no higher up was requested (proven through the video.) The only thing that I'm confused about in this entire situation, is why Duncan felt the need to lie about something as important as this, and why so many people believe him without any evidence being provided. Had I not gotten that video, you all would have gone strictly off of his word.

 

Edit 2: Just want to clarify, because I still feel like I'm not fully getting my point across and I just want it to be known.

If you HAD asked for a higher up, or mentioned bias at all during this situation, I would have immediately requested someone else come there to deal with the sit. The whole reason I hadn't asked Valentino is because he just took the sit on RDM I was about to take (at the beginning of the video.)

 

 

Edited November 19, 2020 by Drippy

[Duncan McOkiner]

11 minutes ago, Drippy said:

Lookie what I found this morning.

 

Now lets go over a few things since you decided to lie in your staff report about the incidents that took place during the sit. (Very un-gamer of you.)

1. You never requested a higher up, or a different staff member to handle this situation for possible bias, but yet you claim you did just to put a bad image on me.
2. Me & Soul got into TS AFTER the sit had concluded.
3. You said, and I quote "ight, bring me if you need me." You never asked if it was being brought to a roof.

Let's start from the top.

You made this statement here:

But clearly in the video it was proven to be a blatant lie. You never said such things, the only thing you said pertaining to a sit was "ight, bring me if I'm needed" which you were not needed. I had already gotten your side of the situation from the Judge, and yourself.

 

Making such statements, and then having them be proven false kind of makes it hard for me to believe anything that comes out of your mouth at this point.

 

Reaching for evidence:

You still have yet to accept the literal photo evidence that we were not in TS together, but I went ahead and added some video evidence of it for your viewing pleasure

It's no secret that me and Soul are both in OG, but this does not cloud my judgement whatsoever. It does state in the Staff Handbook:

I would like to highlight this cool word called "potential." I'll provide a definition incase you don't fully understand what that word means.

Now lets look at the rest of the rule. "Do not deal with sits involving yourself or your friends." Now clearly I wasn't involved, but Soul was. A lot of you claim its bias since I am friends with Soul, but if that's the case, I wouldn't be able to take majority of the sits I take due to "being friends with them." It's no secret that I try to speak, and make friendships with everyone on the server, and I try to greet new players, and form friendships. Although some may be closer then others, I still will never allow relations with someone to cloud my judgement while working as staff. 

 

Now let's look at the definition of "potential." "having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future."

Now let's look at the definition of "bias." "prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair."

Now if we combine those, we have something along the lines of "Having, or showing the capacity to become or develop prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair."

 

Have I shown that capacity? No.

Do I have the capacity? Everyone does, it is human nature.

 

Now, let's look at the end of the that. "usually in a way considered to be unfair." Now how was this unfair? Soul spent nearly his entire sentence in jail, you left after giving your side, and you were no longer needed so you were not pulled. The only other Staff member on duty was Valentino which he was in another sit (shown at the beginning of the video.) Now to my knowledge, Soul & Valentino/Jager used to always play the game together, and were constantly in TS.  Could be argued they had a friendship. There's "potential bias" there. What about other staff members on the server? Much like myself, Soul is social with the other players on the server. We try and get to know people, and form friendships, so no matter who took the sit, there would always remain "potential bias." I considered you to be a friend Duncan, as well as Soul, but I do not allow my relationship with someone to cloud my judgement.

Everyone has opinions of other players on the server, and there will always remain "potential bias" no matter who takes the sit. It is human nature to form opinions of other people, and you'll either like, or dislike them. It's our job as a staff member to be able to handle said situations without bias, and act professionally and mature at all times. I respect you made this report because you felt there was bias, but in reality, you couldn't have been more wrong.

 

Thanks for reading

 

TLDR: There will always be "potential bias" no matter who takes the sit, its our job to be able to handle it without bias (which I did.) 

 

Edit: I just want to add on what Will said because I feel this is extremely important not to just this staff report, but to staff as a whole.

  

I agree with this entirely, and had Duncan requested a higher up I would have gotten one there ASAP. As SupremeChow stated, he was online at the time, but no higher up was requested (proven through the video.) The only thing that I'm confused about in this entire situation, is why Duncan felt the need to lie about something as important as this, and why so many people believe him without any evidence being provided. Had I not gotten that video, you all would have gone strictly off of his word.

 

Edit 2: Just want to clarify, because I still feel like I'm not fully getting my point across and I just want it to be known.

If you HAD asked for a higher up, or mentioned bias at all during this situation, I would have immediately requested someone else come there to deal with the sit. The whole reason I hadn't asked Valentino is because he just took the sit on RDM I was about to take (at the beginning of the video.)

 

 

Can you post the unedited version of the entire situation?

My request for a higher-up was sent in Team Chat right after I exited the DOC. I sent it this way because you were on-duty so I know you could see it, whereas the others inside DOC could not (the crims). 

Please post the unedited footage of the entire situation, so we can see my Team Chat messages (unless logs go back this far).

[Drippy]

4 minutes ago, Duncan McOkiner said:

Can you post the unedited version of the entire situation?

My request for a higher-up was sent in Team Chat right after I exited the DOC. I sent it this way because you were on-duty so I know you could see it, whereas the others inside DOC could not (the crims). 

Please post the unedited footage of the entire situation, so we can see my Team Chat messages (unless logs go back this far).

You mean this? About the situation where I did not need you further? I felt I had all the information I needed from you to continue without you. You left on your own behalf, YOU were not being reported, Soul was calling staff for receiving the incorrect amount of time in jail.

Had I needed you, I would have stopped you from leaving.

 

Oh here is the only other message you sent in the chat.

 

But once again, you stated "Drippy just bring me if you need me." which I did not need you.

Edited November 19, 2020 by Drippy

[Duncan McOkiner]

7 minutes ago, Drippy said:

You mean this? About the situation where I did not need you further?

Indeed! As this should have been a staff sit (given that administrative action was taken against someone I put into the DOC), I would have expected a higher-up to have been consulted. You should have "needed" me, given that this sit should have involved me as you never got my side of the story.

You can see between the Judge, OG Soul, and yourself (using the mic activation on the left side of the screen) that you were all constantly talking. I had assumed that you would take control of the sit via a roof (therefore needed me in the form of a sit). You failed to properly maintain a sit, and instead dealt with everything inside of a DOC holding cell where I could not hear anyone other than OG Soul celebrating on the mic. 

I expected this sit to either get thrown out entirely or this to go to a roof if you needed to take administrative action. Neither of these happened, a higher-up was never consulted, and any other staff of any rank was never consulted.

 

EDIT (as you edited yours, and I find it necessary for me to respond for SMT Review): I was indeed answered by Valentino, another active on-duty staff member, on the topic of if I could arrest for the extra 2 years. An equal rank on-duty staff member answered that it would be okay, so I stated a reason that I would need a higher-up if the sit were to go further or administrative action were to be taken. As can see, someone was forcefully unarrested, meaning that admistrative action was taken.

I will not be responding to further messages unless it is necessary for SMT Review, such as in the form of newly-entered evidence. Thank you for understanding.

Edited November 19, 2020 by Duncan McOkiner

[~𝓢𝓞𝓤𝓛~]

Just now, Duncan McOkiner said:

Indeed! As this should have been a staff sit (given that administrative action was taken against someone I put into the DOC), I would have expected a higher-up to have been consulted. You should have "needed" me, given that this sit should have involved me as you never got my side of the story.

You can see between the Judge, OG Soul, and yourself (using the mic activation on the left side of the screen) that you were all constantly talking. I had assumed that you would take control of the sit via a roof (therefore needed me in the form of a sit). You failed to properly maintain a sit, and instead dealt with everything inside of a DOC holding cell where I could not hear anyone other than OG Soul celebrating on the mic. 

I expected this sit to either get thrown out entirely or this to go to a roof if you needed to take administrative action. Neither of these happened, a higher-up was never consulted, and any other staff of any rank was never consulted.

did you watch the video he got your side of the story then you willingly left

[Noah REmiX]

After watching and reading responses a second time I have made the decision to change my + Support to a - Support.

Thanks for the video evidence Drippy.

[Jimmy James]

This post has been locked and SMT will make a final decision at a later time

[Eternity]

Accepted

Thank you for the report. Appropriate action against the staff member will be taken to ensure that they receive the correct punishment.

 

@Drippy come talk to me in TS