Dubinzi

[Ashli]

Intro
I've made multiple posts in the past about my problems with the server staff. This post is specifically about Dubinzi and his crimes against the server and its players. Let me say this now. Dubinzi is not a good admin. He is a liar and punishment-hungry. There are multiple accounts of him being biased towards staff members, several cases of him being corrupt, and many instances of him downright being evil.

I'm going to list a couple of the deplorable actions Dubinzi has done to the server members.
This list is, for the most part, from least severe to most severe. Some things early on in the list won't seem like too much of a cause for concern, but are still worth mentioning.

Spoiler: Promotional Plots

This is the most recent incident.
Context: Dubinzi was going around gathering videos from various plots for something.

The plots, in order, are:
- [22:59:57] Blockparty (Staff - Ryanland)
- [23:06:56] Puffer Kart
- [23:14:04] Turf Wars (Staff - TheFoxPlush
- [23:20:50] Assassins (Staff - Ryanland)
- [23:21:37] Blast Off
- [23:33:37] Sky Wars
- [23:37:15] PushTuff (Staff - TheMaxs)

Alright so there's a bit to dissect here, over half of the plots are from staff members. The amount of staff-made plots
selected raises suspicion in me already, but whatever. What really bothers me is this chatlog (grabbed while the next incident was happening):
[23:23:19] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] [Admin]Dubinzi: I'm open to suggestions for plots to record on, yall [23:23:21] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] quincy2015 left. [23:23:22] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]SuperGamersGames: GG Satate [23:23:23] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: Isle [23:23:23] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] [Admin]Dubinzi: as long as it's multiplayer
Notice the statement "as long as it's multiplayer" (likely referring to his message from seconds before)
Now also look at the very final plot on his catalogue of promotional plots. PushTuff.
If you've played PushTuff before, you know very well that it is not a multiplayer game by any means. (Not to mention the game is relatively old compared to all the other games he chose.)
Make of that what you will.

(Summary) Dubinzi was picking plots to show what DF can do, and imposes a rule after allowing people to vote saying that the plot must be multiplayer, and then goes on to pick a non-multiplayer plot because it was owned by staff. (Over half of the chosen plots were staff-made)

Spoiler: Isle (Promotional Plots)

Tying into the previous incident, this one takes place during the promotional plot raids.
Midway through he asked what players want to play next:

[23:23:19] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] [Admin]Dubinzi: I'm open to suggestions for plots to record on, yall
[23:23:21] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] quincy2015 left.
[23:23:22] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]SuperGamersGames: GG Satate
[23:23:23] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: Isle
[23:23:23] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] [Admin]Dubinzi: as long as it's multiplayer
[23:23:24] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]TighterRIP: Dubinzi
[23:23:25] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: Join isle
[23:23:25] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]SuperGamersGames: uh
[23:23:26] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]xprogam3rx: bro isle
[23:23:26] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?]? [Emperor]HyperBeast43: Isle
[23:23:28] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]TighterRIP: do Blast Off
[23:23:28] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: Isle
[23:23:29] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]SuperGamersGames: Isle
[23:23:30] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?10?]? [?Overlord?][R]daddychill: Isle
[23:23:31] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]trashoflevillage: ISLE
[23:23:31] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: Do Isle
[23:23:35] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: ISLE
[23:23:35] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]TighterRIP: isle is awful
[23:23:36] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]trashoflevillage: Do Isle it's good promise
[23:23:36] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]xprogam3rx: isle rn or am going to beat up
[23:23:37] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]Tjthegamerking: no
[23:23:40] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: Isle is so g ood
[23:23:47] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]TighterRIP: do Blast Off
[23:23:49] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: Do Isle
[23:23:53] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]Tjthegamerking: insert obama giving himself medal meme here
[23:23:54] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: Everyone is saying Isle
[23:24:05] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: You asked
[23:24:05] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]Yudodiss: Dubinzi
[23:24:07] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]KingChak: rebix get down here
[23:24:08] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: and most people just said Isle
[23:24:09] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?]? [?Overlord?]ToastyToes22: whats isle
[23:24:10] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]Yudodiss: record on milwer
[23:24:12] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?10?]? [?Overlord?][R]daddychill: c'mon dubinzi do a community requested plot
[23:24:15] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: ^
[23:24:15] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]SuperGamersGames: oh
[23:24:16] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?10?]? [?Overlord?][R]daddychill: don't be bias
[23:24:16] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]SuperGamersGames: k
[23:24:17] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] MuddyLord joined.
[23:24:18] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]xprogam3rx: i expect to be seeing isle on on top of trending instead of milwer
[23:24:18] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: Isle
[23:24:21] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: We want Isle
[23:24:25] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]SuperGamersGames: Which plot Satate
[23:24:26] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?]? [Emperor]HyperBeast43: conme on
[23:24:27] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: Like 6 of us want Isle
[23:24:29] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?9?]? [?Overlord?]Satate: do it
[23:24:33] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?]? [Emperor]HyperBeast43: tightyer was my target
[23:24:35] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [?Overlord?]SuperGamersGames: Record footage of Isle

5 unique people wanted Isle; 1 wanted Milwer Kitpvp; 1 wanted Blast Off.
Guess what was chosen? Blast Off.
A very fair and balanced vote.
I was pestering him a bit before for doing mostly staff-made plots, which is why I believe he disregarded the majority vote for my plot.
It's not insanely disappointing but it's clear bias.

(Summary) Dubinzi, while holding the promotional plot vote, went against the overwhelming majority vote because he was annoyed with me, the owner of said voted plot. Bias.

Spoiler: /join warns

Context: Me and daddychill were spamming /play on plots Dubinzi called attention to. We ended up getting kicked for spam and created ghost players.
Obviously spamming /play is irritating. The entire time Dubinzi didn't say a word. He didn't ask us to stop.
After everything was done, he warns us both for rule 5.4 infringement, Yeah, whatever, it was deserved even if him not asking us to stop is extremely bad moderating.

daddychill then messages Dubinzi "luv u bb"
What would a sensible mod do? Have a slight chuckle and ignore it.
What does Dubinzi do? Take the opportunity to call it "provocation" or whatever and tempban daddychill.
Actually, no. He didn't even have a reason. There was no reason given on the ban, not provocation, nothing. Just a flat out reasonless ban.

Here are some images from the ensuing argument:




If you somehow care enough to read through the whole argument, here is a link to it in #dfchat: https://discord.com/channels/180793115223916544/180793115223916544/802413681669439538

(Summary) After warning both me and daddychill for spamming /play on plots, he revokes daddychill's warn and replaces it with a tempban for messaging him "luv u bb". This shows how quickly he is willing to warn someone.



Default Situation:
Alright. The previous ones are annoying and show how warn-hungry and biased Dubinzi is.
But this one, I'm not spoilering this. This is the situation I refer to when I call him evil.
I am not directly involved in this situation, the people who are want to remain anonymous, and I will respect that.

All of the screenshots take place after the incident happened.
We have 2 people, Person A and Person B.
- They are friends, and are jokingly insulting eachother in chat, nothing harmful.
- Dubinzi (Who is an admin at this point in time) gets on and warns one of them (Not sure which).
- The two say that they were joking around and were okay with the insults, and ask for the warn to be revoked.

This is Dubinzi, so it can't be as simple as revoking a warn.
(Going to note that this isn't even the half of it, it gets much worse)

Screenshot 1:

Wow, okay. let's dissect this.
"Dubs disrespecting two ppl is tottaly normal." - Dubinzi disrespected them during the incident. Something an admin clearly shouldn't be doing.
"I was not notified of this in the logs dub sent." - This implies that Dubinzi modified the logs that they sent to the other admins about the situation.

Re-read that. Dubinzi modified the logs that they sent to the other admins about the situation.
I'm sorry? What? Are you kidding me?

Continuing, the final block of text is what kills me.
Dubinzi says: "terrified that two nons with bad reputations will ruin me."
...
Dubinzi, what the actual Hell. Keep in mind that he is an Admin. And he is behaving like this. This is entirely unacceptable on every level imaginable.



Screenshot 2:
Continuing through the screenshots,

There's not as much to say about this screenshot.
Obviously Person A argued against the warn, and they were trollmuted because of that.
Not only that, but Person A claims that dubinzi is "straight up disrespecting me and making me look like a liar"
Which I believe entirely based on the previous logs and messages.


Screenshot 3:
Bit of a longer one.

Reading this, we can see that Person A claims that Dubinzi is insulting a bunch of people, and claim that the rules don't apply to him because he is admin.
Time and time again, staff get by on things that would be punished in a heartbeat by mods. It's ridiculous. I have no clue how Dubinzi wasn't instantly demoted after this incident considering his reputation beforehand and the fact that this happened very recently after his promotion.
Besides that, we can see Person A mention "last time" also involving Dubinzi.
Dubinzi has done this multiple times.
Wow. Not only has he done this sort of crap multiple times, but Person A has received genuine hate because of Dub.



Screenshot 4:

Here we see Person A talking with Dubinzi. I don't think there's really much to say here. The log speaks for itself.
We know from previous logs that they were warned for disrespect and trollmuted for spam.
Person A said multiple times that Person B was their friend, and wasn't muted, but trollmuted for spam. Nice one, Dubinzi.
Dubinzi ignores people very tactically, refer to the first two incidents where Dubinzi barely said a word to me until after the incidents happened.
This image is really depressing to read.




Conclusion:
As we've seen a bit from Incidents 1-3, Dubinzi has a bias towards other staff and staff-made plots, and intentionally ignores people until he can warn them for as much as possible. I mainly want to talk about Incident 4, though.
After his abhorrent behavior near instantly after he got admin, I am in complete shock as to how he kept his position as admin after the things he said and his clear abuse of power on some members of this community.
This is not a person who should have the power to trollmute, silent warn, ban, etc.
This is not a person who should even be staff after their actions.


I want to end this post off with my favorite quote of all time, by the one and only Dubinzi:

"Terrified that two nons with bad reputations will ruin me."
- Dubinzi, 2020

 

[Vulcano]

He's a good admin, the warn could've likely been appealed if it wasn't legit except whoever it was decided to argue and cause more problems. The plots picked being overwhelmingly staff could be because staff tend to make better plots. Some of the best coders on the server are staff, so it makes sense. Not picking your plot, I see bias, but it doesn't look good to feature someone who consistently posts stuff like this.

EDIT: chill should've been banned, the ghost players glitch is gamebreaking, he abused it and deserved the ban.

 

[RolandMC123]

I mean as an admin/mod you're allowed to dislike people, you just shouldn't have a bias against them when dealing out punishments. Anyway, idk about most of the stuff in this thread so I'm just not gonna comment on it.

 

[LooserRIP]

I genuinely don't know what to say about this. I believe there's more depth to this rather than just "Dubinzi is biased because he didn't choose my plot", and i'd like to see dub's take on this.

I honestly believe dubinzi is a great admin & person but this is interesting.

 

[Wobber]

I can clearly tell that this will be a situation that will be easily blown out of proportion, like frog bog, and just like that ordeal, I don't have enough experience to comment on this in any transformative way. Let's see where this goes.

 

[LooserRIP]

I can clearly tell that this will be a situation that will be easily blown out of proportion, like frog bog, and just like that ordeal, I don't have enough experience to comment on this in any transformative way. Let's see where this goes.

exactly. this is overexaggeration and unnecessary drama at its peak.

 

[Max]

There were a couple reasons we decided not to do isles, First of all, dub asked for multiplayer games (Yes I know he said it after, but both messages were typed within one second, and you can't type that message in one second, no matter how fast you can type.) Second of all, we were looking for fast-paced games for b-roll.
But what about pushtuff? Well, we had written a script beforehand and pushtuff was written in it. Your plot simply did not fit the requirements for the open slots for footage we had left.

As for daddychill and his ban, he was abusing a gamebreaking glitch while we were trying to record footage. It was out-right disruptive. And here I agree with dub, he is not obligated to tell you how to follow the rules. Yes, there are some moderators that will, but they are not obligated to tell you not to abuse a game breaking bug.

 

[Wobber]

First of all, dub asked for multiplayer games

but isle IS a multiplayer game. it can be played single player, sure, but i see most gameplay of it in multiplayer. i don't really see how this is a valid counterpoint tbh. it is much more of a multiplayer game than pushtuff, though i do get why it was added in.

 

[Maxs]

look idc much about your rant but just letting you know, dub wasn't the only one who scripted the plots that were going to be played, many other people including Jere and some I won't name were part of this choice and maybe there's something in common between staff having good quality plots? Haven't you thought that they were included because they were considered good games in the first place? Generally if you make good games and apply for staff you would likely get into the support team so. Like it's just pure logic my guy. This is just nonsensical and I don't want to discuss with someone who doesn't listen to reasons so Imma just leave this here for you to think about. :)

 

[Max]

but isle IS a multiplayer game. it can be played single player, sure, but i see most gameplay of it in multiplayer. i don't really see how this is a valid counterpoint tbh. it is much more of a multiplayer game than pushtuff, though i do get why it was added in.

I did check the plot out, and I know it can be played multiplayer, so yeah you were right, my bad. However, my point still stands that we wanted fast paced footage for b-roll. pushtuff was added as a-roll.

Edit: I meant that the decision to not include isle and the decision to include pushtuff were completely seperate and independent of each other. The footage would have been used for a completely different purpose. (If this wasn't already clear from my prior message)

 

[ryanroo2]

I do believe that this is very exaggerated. Calling Dub evil is definitely too far, and not even true with these examples. But let's break down the argument.

"Alright so there's a bit to dissect here, over half of the plots are from staff members."
TheFoxPlush is not staff anymore, and hasn't been for a while. More importantly, however, is that you make the implication that these plots were chosen solely because they were made by staff. They were chosen for their quality. I'd go so far as to say that would be expected. The staff team spends a lot of time on the server, so they have more time to not only make a great game, but also polish it, as well as have the expertise to do so. We have many people not on the staff team who also put in a lot of time, and are capable of this, as we see from the other three plots.

"Now also look at the very final plot on his catalogue of promotional plots. PushTuff. If you've played PushTuff before, you know very well that it is not a multiplayer game by any means."
I can't say I know all the context here, but I might assume that he was looking for plots to add to a list he already had, and he wanted more multiplayer on that list, which is why he asked people. I hope that we can agree that PushTuff is a quality plot, and so it would make great recorded content, even in singleplayer. If Dub was being biased toward staff plots, then why not just ask only the staff team what plots to play? He didn't. I would also refer to Maximization's comment regarding this as he has more information than I do.

"A very fair and balanced vote. I was pestering him a bit before for doing mostly staff-made plots, which is why I believe he disregarded the majority vote for my plot. It's not insanely disappointing but it's clear bias."
All I can do here is propose an alternate perspective, as I do not know of Isle and its quality (EDIT: I am being told it is of very high quality, but not a good fit for the footage). First off, he never said it was a majority vote, it was a list of suggestions. Secondly, he may also think that Isle is not up to the standard of what he was looking for, but again, I don't know that for sure. He was trying to make the best decisions he could for the promotional content. It also seems, as I read the log, that some people were suggesting it almost as a joke? I could be misinterpreting it, after all, it is text. Anyways, Blast Off is made by mudkip898, who is not a staff member, so I'm not sure where the bias towards staff comes in? If you are claiming he has bias against you, then wouldn't that be somewhat understandable considering you were pestering him, as you said? It isn't a good idea to annoy someone before making a request of them.

"it was deserved even if him not asking us to stop is extremely bad moderating."
I do not know the severity of the spam that was being produced, but only small cases receive a verbal warning. Bigger cases are straight to a logged warning.

"daddychill then messages Dubinzi "luv u bb" What would a sensible mod do? Have a slight chuckle and ignore it. What does Dubinzi do? Take the opportunity to call it "provocation" or whatever and tempban daddychill."
It should be noted that the tempban was only an hour if I recall correctly. Either way, taunting (as I would consider that a taunt considering the context) is never a good idea right after receiving a warning. It shows that the player has not gotten the message that they need to stop, might push the situation to a flame war, and show no signs of changing their actions in the future. Therefore, a longer, more severe, punishment may be employed.

"Actually, no. He didn't even have a reason. There was no reason given on the ban, not provocation, nothing. Just a flat out reasonless ban."
I checked the history, and the ban reason is "4.2 Content Exploit." That isn't a reasonless ban. So your statement here is just completely false.

Before I break down incident 4, I should give some context here myself. After the incident, the player who was punished came to me with a complaint regarding Dub's actions after he talked to MrA. It took a little bit of communication between parties, but it was eventually resolved. I will go further into detail about that as we go.

"The two say that they were joking around and were okay with the insults, and ask for the warn to be revoked."
This is extremely important here. They did say they were friends, but in the chaos of chat, Dub missed the message. That can happen to anyone, and it led to a lot of misunderstanding.

""I was not notified of this in the logs dub sent." - This implies that Dubinzi modified the logs that they sent to the other admins about the situation."
There were not modified logs. MrA had asked Dubinzi for what the player (who it looks like we are keeping anonymous, so I will do the same) said. The log given was right before Dub had even gotten involved, just showing the insults that were used. No other logs were sent.

The log without the names: ([redacted] stands in place of names, and bolded redacted are the messages of the warned individual)
[10:15:35] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: [redacted] yeah thats how narrators work, because text-to-speech still has to check if there are silent letters, the combination letter thing and stuff
[10:15:38] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: [redacted] shut up "(
[10:15:38] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: :(
[10:15:42] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: jk
[10:15:43] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: I thought we were cool
[10:15:47] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?]? [redacted]: thanks nerd [redacted]
[10:15:48] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?]? [redacted]: never asked

"Continuing, the final block of text is what kills me. Dubinzi says: "terrified that two nons with bad reputations will ruin me.""
I agree that this should never have been said. I will not excuse it. We will come back to this though.

"we can see that Person A claims that Dubinzi is insulting a bunch of people"
That claim is made, but with only the statement pointed out previously to back it up. There just simply isn't any evidence to back this up further.

"I have no clue how Dubinzi wasn't instantly demoted after this incident considering his reputation beforehand"
I'm not sure what you mean by his reputation beforehand. This is just confusing to me.

"Person A said multiple times that Person B was their friend, and wasn't muted, but trollmuted for spam. Nice one, Dubinzi."
This is only one person's word against another's at this point, and both you and I don't have any proof to back up either party.

I do find it interesting that you left out all the DMs between this person and me, explaining how it was all a big misunderstanding. You make a big case about bias, then leave out parts of the evidence so that your claim is more against Dubinzi. That is called a biased argument. It should also be noted that he did apologize for what he said. Like I said, I don't excuse or endorse that kind of behavior, but it should mean something that he did apologize later, and the warning was removed.

So to sum up, you believe that Dubinzi should be demoted for tempbanning someone for one hour because of his taunting on top of his previous punishment, not selecting your plot for the promotional footage, selecting a lot of staff plots for that footage, and a mistake that led to a misunderstanding? That seems quite harsh to me, even after you made the case that Dub was harsh with daddychill. I believe this argument is being exaggerated by calling Dub evil, or calling these acts, some of them very minor as you put it, as deplorable. This argument you make is skewed and biased, which is ironic considering your claim.

 

[whatsdusty]

I do believe that this is very exaggerated. Calling Dub evil is definitely too far, and not even true with these examples. But let's break down the argument.

"Alright so there's a bit to dissect here, over half of the plots are from staff members."
TheFoxPlush is not staff anymore, and hasn't been for a while. More importantly, however, is that you make the implication that these plots were chosen solely because they were made by staff. They were chosen for their quality. I'd go so far as to say that would be expected. The staff team spends a lot of time on the server, so they have more time to not only make a great game, but also polish it, as well as have the expertise to do so. We have many people not on the staff team who also put in a lot of time, and are capable of this, as we see from the other three plots.

"Now also look at the very final plot on his catalogue of promotional plots. PushTuff. If you've played PushTuff before, you know very well that it is not a multiplayer game by any means."
I can't say I know all the context here, but I might assume that he was looking for plots to add to a list he already had, and he wanted more multiplayer on that list, which is why he asked people. I hope that we can agree that PushTuff is a quality plot, and so it would make great recorded content, even in singleplayer. If Dub was being biased toward staff plots, then why not just ask only the staff team what plots to play? He didn't. I would also refer to Maximization's comment regarding this as he has more information than I do.

"A very fair and balanced vote. I was pestering him a bit before for doing mostly staff-made plots, which is why I believe he disregarded the majority vote for my plot. It's not insanely disappointing but it's clear bias."
All I can do here is propose an alternate perspective, as I do not know of Isle and its quality. First off, he never said it was a majority vote, it was a list of suggestions. Secondly, he may also think that Isle is not up to the standard of what he was looking for, but again, I don't know that for sure. He was trying to make the best decisions he could for the promotional content. It also seems, as I read the log, that some people were suggesting it almost as a joke? I could be misinterpreting it, after all, it is text. Anyways, Blast Off is made by mudkip898, who is not a staff member, so I'm not sure where the bias towards staff comes in? If you are claiming he has bias against you, then wouldn't that be somewhat understandable considering you were pestering him, as you said? It isn't a good idea to annoy someone before making a request of them.

"it was deserved even if him not asking us to stop is extremely bad moderating."
I do not know the severity of the spam that was being produced, but only small cases receive a verbal warning. Bigger cases are straight to a logged warning.

"daddychill then messages Dubinzi "luv u bb" What would a sensible mod do? Have a slight chuckle and ignore it. What does Dubinzi do? Take the opportunity to call it "provocation" or whatever and tempban daddychill."
It should be noted that the tempban was only an hour if I recall correctly. Either way, taunting (as I would consider that a taunt considering the context) is never a good idea right after receiving a warning. It shows that the player has not gotten the message that they need to stop, might push the situation to a flame war, and show no signs of changing their actions in the future. Therefore, a longer, more severe, punishment may be employed.

"Actually, no. He didn't even have a reason. There was no reason given on the ban, not provocation, nothing. Just a flat out reasonless ban."
I checked the history, and the ban reason is "4.2 Content Exploit." That isn't a reasonless ban. So your statement here is just completely false.

Before I break down incident 4, I should give some context here myself. After the incident, the player who was punished came to me with a complaint regarding Dub's actions after he talked to MrA. It took a little bit of communication between parties, but it was eventually resolved. I will go further into detail about that as we go.

"The two say that they were joking around and were okay with the insults, and ask for the warn to be revoked."
This is extremely important here. They did say they were friends, but in the chaos of chat, Dub missed the message. That can happen to anyone, and it led to a lot of misunderstanding.

""I was not notified of this in the logs dub sent." - This implies that Dubinzi modified the logs that they sent to the other admins about the situation."
There were not modified logs. MrA had asked Dubinzi for what the player (who it looks like we are keeping anonymous, so I will do the same) said. The log given was right before Dub had even gotten involved, just showing the insults that were used. No other logs were sent.

The log without the names: ([redacted] stands in place of names, and bolded redacted are the messages of the warned individual)
[10:15:35] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: [redacted] yeah thats how narrators work, because text-to-speech still has to check if there are silent letters, the combination letter thing and stuff
[10:15:38] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: [redacted] shut up "(
[10:15:38] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: :(
[10:15:42] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: jk
[10:15:43] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: I thought we were cool
[10:15:47] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?]? [redacted]: thanks nerd [redacted]
[10:15:48] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?]? [redacted]: never asked

"Continuing, the final block of text is what kills me. Dubinzi says: "terrified that two nons with bad reputations will ruin me.""
I agree that this should never have been said. I will not excuse it. We will come back to this though.

"we can see that Person A claims that Dubinzi is insulting a bunch of people"
That claim is made, but with only the statement pointed out previously to back it up. There just simply isn't any evidence to back this up further.

"I have no clue how Dubinzi wasn't instantly demoted after this incident considering his reputation beforehand"
I'm not sure what you mean by his reputation beforehand. This is just confusing to me.

"Person A said multiple times that Person B was their friend, and wasn't muted, but trollmuted for spam. Nice one, Dubinzi."
This is only one person's word against another's at this point, and both you and I don't have any proof to back up either party.

I do find it interesting that you left out all the DMs between this person and me, explaining how it was all a big misunderstanding. You make a big case about bias, then leave out parts of the evidence so that your claim is more against Dubinzi. That is called a biased argument. It should also be noted that he did apologize for what he said. Like I said, I don't excuse or endorse that kind of behavior, but it should mean something that he did apologize later, and the warning was removed.

So to sum up, you believe that Dubinzi should be demoted for tempbanning someone for one hour because of his taunting on top of his previous punishment, not selecting your plot for the promotional footage, selecting a lot of staff plots for that footage, and a mistake that led to a misunderstanding? That seems quite harsh to me, even after you made the case that Dub was harsh with daddychill. I believe this argument is being exaggerated by calling Dub evil, or calling these acts, some of them very minor as you put it, as deplorable. This argument is skewed and biased, which is ironic considering your argument.

damn

thats all i have to say

 

[sbot50]

DuB Is EvIl?!?!?!
meanwhile dub:

 

[happyNight]

I do believe that this is very exaggerated. Calling Dub evil is definitely too far, and not even true with these examples. But let's break down the argument.

"Alright so there's a bit to dissect here, over half of the plots are from staff members."
TheFoxPlush is not staff anymore, and hasn't been for a while. More importantly, however, is that you make the implication that these plots were chosen solely because they were made by staff. They were chosen for their quality. I'd go so far as to say that would be expected. The staff team spends a lot of time on the server, so they have more time to not only make a great game, but also polish it, as well as have the expertise to do so. We have many people not on the staff team who also put in a lot of time, and are capable of this, as we see from the other three plots.

"Now also look at the very final plot on his catalogue of promotional plots. PushTuff. If you've played PushTuff before, you know very well that it is not a multiplayer game by any means."
I can't say I know all the context here, but I might assume that he was looking for plots to add to a list he already had, and he wanted more multiplayer on that list, which is why he asked people. I hope that we can agree that PushTuff is a quality plot, and so it would make great recorded content, even in singleplayer. If Dub was being biased toward staff plots, then why not just ask only the staff team what plots to play? He didn't. I would also refer to Maximization's comment regarding this as he has more information than I do.

"A very fair and balanced vote. I was pestering him a bit before for doing mostly staff-made plots, which is why I believe he disregarded the majority vote for my plot. It's not insanely disappointing but it's clear bias."
All I can do here is propose an alternate perspective, as I do not know of Isle and its quality. First off, he never said it was a majority vote, it was a list of suggestions. Secondly, he may also think that Isle is not up to the standard of what he was looking for, but again, I don't know that for sure. He was trying to make the best decisions he could for the promotional content. It also seems, as I read the log, that some people were suggesting it almost as a joke? I could be misinterpreting it, after all, it is text. Anyways, Blast Off is made by mudkip898, who is not a staff member, so I'm not sure where the bias towards staff comes in? If you are claiming he has bias against you, then wouldn't that be somewhat understandable considering you were pestering him, as you said? It isn't a good idea to annoy someone before making a request of them.

"it was deserved even if him not asking us to stop is extremely bad moderating."
I do not know the severity of the spam that was being produced, but only small cases receive a verbal warning. Bigger cases are straight to a logged warning.

"daddychill then messages Dubinzi "luv u bb" What would a sensible mod do? Have a slight chuckle and ignore it. What does Dubinzi do? Take the opportunity to call it "provocation" or whatever and tempban daddychill."
It should be noted that the tempban was only an hour if I recall correctly. Either way, taunting (as I would consider that a taunt considering the context) is never a good idea right after receiving a warning. It shows that the player has not gotten the message that they need to stop, might push the situation to a flame war, and show no signs of changing their actions in the future. Therefore, a longer, more severe, punishment may be employed.

"Actually, no. He didn't even have a reason. There was no reason given on the ban, not provocation, nothing. Just a flat out reasonless ban."
I checked the history, and the ban reason is "4.2 Content Exploit." That isn't a reasonless ban. So your statement here is just completely false.

Before I break down incident 4, I should give some context here myself. After the incident, the player who was punished came to me with a complaint regarding Dub's actions after he talked to MrA. It took a little bit of communication between parties, but it was eventually resolved. I will go further into detail about that as we go.

"The two say that they were joking around and were okay with the insults, and ask for the warn to be revoked."
This is extremely important here. They did say they were friends, but in the chaos of chat, Dub missed the message. That can happen to anyone, and it led to a lot of misunderstanding.

""I was not notified of this in the logs dub sent." - This implies that Dubinzi modified the logs that they sent to the other admins about the situation."
There were not modified logs. MrA had asked Dubinzi for what the player (who it looks like we are keeping anonymous, so I will do the same) said. The log given was right before Dub had even gotten involved, just showing the insults that were used. No other logs were sent.

The log without the names: ([redacted] stands in place of names, and bolded redacted are the messages of the warned individual)
[10:15:35] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: [redacted] yeah thats how narrators work, because text-to-speech still has to check if there are silent letters, the combination letter thing and stuff
[10:15:38] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: [redacted] shut up "(
[10:15:38] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: :(
[10:15:42] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: jk
[10:15:43] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[???]? [redacted]: I thought we were cool
[10:15:47] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?]? [redacted]: thanks nerd [redacted]
[10:15:48] [main/INFO]: [CHAT] ?[?]? [redacted]: never asked

"Continuing, the final block of text is what kills me. Dubinzi says: "terrified that two nons with bad reputations will ruin me.""
I agree that this should never have been said. I will not excuse it. We will come back to this though.

"we can see that Person A claims that Dubinzi is insulting a bunch of people"
That claim is made, but with only the statement pointed out previously to back it up. There just simply isn't any evidence to back this up further.

"I have no clue how Dubinzi wasn't instantly demoted after this incident considering his reputation beforehand"
I'm not sure what you mean by his reputation beforehand. This is just confusing to me.

"Person A said multiple times that Person B was their friend, and wasn't muted, but trollmuted for spam. Nice one, Dubinzi."
This is only one person's word against another's at this point, and both you and I don't have any proof to back up either party.

I do find it interesting that you left out all the DMs between this person and me, explaining how it was all a big misunderstanding. You make a big case about bias, then leave out parts of the evidence so that your claim is more against Dubinzi. That is called a biased argument. It should also be noted that he did apologize for what he said. Like I said, I don't excuse or endorse that kind of behavior, but it should mean something that he did apologize later, and the warning was removed.

So to sum up, you believe that Dubinzi should be demoted for tempbanning someone for one hour because of his taunting on top of his previous punishment, not selecting your plot for the promotional footage, selecting a lot of staff plots for that footage, and a mistake that led to a misunderstanding? That seems quite harsh to me, even after you made the case that Dub was harsh with daddychill. I believe this argument is being exaggerated by calling Dub evil, or calling these acts, some of them very minor as you put it, as deplorable. This argument you make is skewed and biased, which is ironic considering your claim.

very minimal conclusion: dub is not evil

 

[Dubinzi]

I'm open to criticism, and I'll try to answer this the best that I can. There's a lot here, and without context, all of the events listed are true, but the reasoning behind them is incorrect. I'll do my best to clarify these scenarios now. If there are any more questions of me, I'm willing to have a discussion.

Last Night's Promotional Content Filming

Alright so there's a bit to dissect here, over half of the plots are from staff members.

The reason these players are staff members is because they have shown to have an extensive understanding of the coding system. Because of their increased adeptness at using the server, I don't think it's a far reach to assume that most high-quality games are made by support members. To add on to this, most non-support members who make high quality games, in most cases, become support in the future. Because these plots have an extra level of polish, mostly in their builds, they were simply the best plots to choose to film.

Now also look at the very final plot on his catalogue of promotional plots. PushTuff.
If you've played PushTuff before, you know very well that it is not a multiplayer game by any means. (Not to mention the game is relatively old compared to all the other games he chose.)

We were having trouble filming single-player experiences (We had previously tried with ID2), but it wasn't working well because I didn't have an alt that I could play with while third-person footage was collected. This is why I specified that I only wanted multiplayer games to be suggested.
PushTuff was chosen as the only single-player game we've filmed so far because of its grid of players, where you are able to view multiple people in multiple single-player experiences at once. I thought that would look cool.

Tying into the previous incident, this one takes place during the promotional plot raids.
Midway through he asked what players want to play next:

5 unique people wanted Isle; 1 wanted Milwer Kitpvp; 1 wanted Blast Off.
Guess what was chosen? Blast Off.
A very fair and balanced vote.

While I understand your frustration from your perspective, this is due to a couple of misunderstandings.
When asking for more games to be suggested, I was focusing on plots that I hadn't thought of that would be good to represent Diamondfire in promotional material. Say, for example, if someone suggested Deathrun, I would've added to the list. This is what happened with Blast Off

And so now the question you asked: Why did Blast Off get chosen to be filmed, but not Isle? For two reasons:
Firstly, my asking for suggestions was never intended to be a majority vote, and was also never specified as a vote of any kind (as seen in the logs you provided). It was simply to receive a list of games to consider.
Secondly, the reason I didn't inevitably choose Isle: because I've never played it before. When it was suggested, I actually joined Isle while the filming of another plot was happening, and I tried to quickly get a feel for it, but I was too busy to sit and wait through dialogue. I decided to check it out another day and film it if it was promotional-material material. This sentiment is still the case.

End of response to promotional content related accusations

daddychill and Satate abusing /play

Me and daddychill were spamming /play on plots Dubinzi called attention to. We ended up getting kicked for spam and created ghost players.

I will reference this screenshot in a bit:

Obviously spamming /play is irritating. The entire time Dubinzi didn't say a word. He didn't ask us to stop.

As I said during the argument on Discord last night, I am in no way required to remind you of the rules, regardless of what your misconceptions of the roles of staff members are. Moderators verbally warn players for very minor infractions, as well as rules that the player might not know about. You and daddychill both have played Diamondfire for a long time, and should have an understanding of the rules, including rule 4.2 regarding abusing glitches.
I initially had no intention of punishing you for your behavior, which is why I simply ignored it. It was only when I found out that your actions caused three separate plots to be glitched (a glitch that you later admitted to being aware of, as seen in the above screenshot), requiring three node restarts, when I decided to act.

daddychill then messages Dubinzi "luv u bb"
What would a sensible mod do? Have a slight chuckle and ignore it.
What does Dubinzi do? Take the opportunity to call it "provocation" or whatever and tempban daddychill.

I will not tolerate words being put in my mouth. I never took the opportunity to call it "provocation". I never called it anything close to provocation. Here's a screenshot of what I said:

This reasoning was agreed with by every admin who has so far spoken to me about the situation.

"Default Situation"
This entire scenario hinges on the fact that I simply didn't see where person A told me that person B was their friend. Ryan phrased this very well:

They did say they were friends, but in the chaos of chat, Dub missed the message. That can happen to anyone, and it led to a lot of misunderstanding.

I also reiterated this in my apology I sent to person A. Quote, "I missed the message where you said (B) was your friend".

Besides that, we can see Person A mention "last time" also involving Dubinzi.
Dubinzi has done this multiple times.
Wow. Not only has he done this sort of crap multiple times, but Person A has received genuine hate because of Dub.

This is where the nuance in this situation comes in. To fully grasp what person A is saying (and why they are incorrect), you need to know the full and personal story of our relationship. It is not nearly as simple as A is making it out to be. But, as I have said before, I am no longer willing to talk about this relationship, because I have told it so many times, and because:

"terrified that two nons with bad reputations will ruin me."
This is the only accusation in this thread that is correct. I did, in fact, say this to person A and someone else (Possibly person B, I don't remember anymore). While, once again, there is context that is left out of this thread, I believe that no amount of context could excuse my saying of this sentence. This sentence represents a moment when my anger came out and overcame diplomacy: a moment that has stuck in my mind and has shaped how I have acted since then.

Here is a screenshot from not long after the incident happened, showing that I greatly regretted, and still do regret, saying this.

As you can see, this situation was a breaking point for me, which is why I am no longer willing to talk about my relationship with person A.

Ottelino

We have both been players on Diamondfire for a long time. I've known Ottelino long enough to form an opinion on him. Just as you form opinions on anyone that you are exposed to frequently, I formed this opinion about Ottelino. I am human, and I am allowed to dislike people. I don't hate Ottelino, I just don't want to interact with him. When I was repeatedly added to a group chat with the player who took this screenshot and Ottelino, I left it. One of the reasons I decided to leave was because I didn't want to talk to Ottelino, and I didn't have to.

This was the full conversation with the player who took this screenshot.



Conclusion
I believe in following a moral code and owning up to your mistakes, which is one of the main reasons why I responded to this thread. My toxic act of calling two players "nons" was, is, and will forever be unacceptable. If I don't take responsibility for my actions, it only goes to show that I have learned nothing from the experience.
This situation is another experience that I can grow from and become better from. I admit that during the argument last night, a few of my messages were sent out of anger and not out of logic. When I sarcastically said "Hilarious" and "Oh No!", that did not contribute to our discussion and only increased the animosity between us. When having a discussion, it's effective to attack the issue, not the person. These two snide comments attacked you personally, and for that I am sorry.
I hope that I'm not the only one that is self-reflecting and trying to improve from last night's events.

 

[daddyp]

As for daddychill and his ban, he was abusing a gamebreaking glitch while we were trying to record footage. It was out-right disruptive.

That is only if he knew it was a glitch at the time, finding a glitch shouldn't result in a ban, only if it was intentional, which I doubt he did know at the time. That's to say all he did was spam /play, as people spamming /play would think that there are no bugs revolving around it because of how simple it is unless you're saying /play is a game-breaking glitch.

 

[DogWithHats]

can we not argue please <3

 

[DiamondWolf]

*silently munching popcorn*

 

[stinkey]

I mean, yeah, Dub has not always made the best decisions when it comes to punishments, but the plot showcase thing isn't really a problem imo. They're not obligated to show your plot. Also, there are many staff games because staff usually make good games lmao

 

[General_Mudkip]

Hey, just reminding everyone to try and keep this thread on topic.