What rules govern admins?

The recent decision was supported by all three admins, me, Maik, and Soak, who I was in contact with during the decision making process. I wouldn't have done it if they disagreed with me.

Now...the thing is, since I own the forum technically speaking, nothing can actually be done to me specifically if I wake up one day and decide to go crazy. That's just the fact of the matter. What prevents this from being a problem is my own character, which sure, you may be doubting, but considering how much worrying I've done for the majority of the last 24 hours, I'd like to go out on a limb and say you're not in for Mr. MDK 2.

As for my punishment? I don't think I did anything wrong by banning him, neither does the man himself, who was leaving anyway. I do think I handled it poorly, thus, I've decided I'm going to leave the thread up as an announcement for an extended period of time, so that my shame can be seen far and wide. It's my penance, I suppose.

At the risk of pissing people off again let me just state that regardless of who owns this place legally it was presented as a new home for the community.

Phil said he owned the Domain but I'm guessing Brick owns the proboard.

That being said we really don't have to go down the same old route as always, anyone here old enough to recall how MDK ran things? (I know Brick and Wondy do) If you where one of his friends you could get away with murder (well porn, trolling, harassment, but you get the idea.) and I get it, their will always be the outside looking in and cliques form in every community. Hell I've seen two admins more or less have a civil war until a board split.


At any rate everyone feels partial ownership of this overall community to some extent, so while the people who actually own this place legally can do as they please it doesn't mean this forum has to be ran like every forum before it.

It's not impossible to set iron clad rules, that admins and mods are even subject to. A open discussion could be held where everyone has access (FB,Discord, Forum) and set/draft more or less a constitution of what your actual rights as a member are and aren't (leaving little gray room.)

There could even be a elected position that would oversee complaints against other admins/mods. That might be difficult, even checking IP's to prove a member is real, which members get a vote? Some random single post member could pop up and cast the deciding vote. 

Or hell have a Higher Power admin that can oversee the rules without fear of favoritism, but that only works if said person uses this ability to be un-bias and as a way to hold friends to the same standard.


Point is, as much as it'd suck to go through there could be a more overall community participation into the governing. However the obvious downside to this is people usually dont want to take the time to obtain this and usually keep quite until their mad or just leave the community. Meaning that you'll always hear a lot more bitching and a lot less constructive criticism.

I thought he was talking about it in private communications which were "leaked". The rules say you can't discuss them in public. No public communication and therefore bannable offense was pointed to in the ban post. Or if it was, I must have missed it.

Discussing pirating the game, and advocating pirating has been an instant ban on this board since the inception. While Carlzilla had cranked up his curmudgeon levels to 11 since the NJPW DLC had been delayed, his discussion supporting it ultimately got him banned. From my point of view, this wasn't an abuse of power, but more or less banning a member for discussing piracy as Carlzilla and others have banned people on this forum for doing in the past. The thread announcing his ban just took a negative turn, which seemed to distract from the point.

I dont know if Proboards does that or not.

What I'm saying, is that Carl did it in a message that an Admin was directly tied into; Maikeru was one of the recipients of the original message (which was Level asking for people to partake in an upcoming event he was going to run). An Admin didnt government their way into the message, they were present from the start.

Hey all, Scott other admin Maikeru here.

I can't read PMs unless I'm a part of them, but they're still on site communications, so if something is discussed in a group PM, and it's brought to my attention I'll have to take action. I saw it because I was part of said PM chain, I said, "don't do this" and he went ahead and said to ban him if necessary. I didn't pull the trigger so to speak, but piracy discussion, even as a means of backing up older versions of games, is not really something I can condone given that we have a zero tolerance policy on the site rules themselves. I couldn't care less if it's discussed elsewhere, but I can't let it be discussed here, period, regardless of my feelings of the ethics of doing so.

As someone who had his own unfortunate child-reaction lately, yeah, we're not handling things well on an overarching level.

But, I do think everyone is looking at this as 'We banned Carl because he was leaving.' and not 'Carl openly announced 'Pirates vs DLC' on his way out, so the door was closed instead of being left ajar.' and they're reacting to Brick's reactions more than the announcement itself.