It's a bit of a cheap shot fired ... if you wanted to be in on the decisions made on who is in or out of the staff team, you should have stayed. The current hiring of staff was done by a team of staffmembers. Feel free to report if you have any doubts about specific staffmembers?
Would you personally have staffed someone who was giving out account details to players who were not the true owners? If a team of staff members decided that this was the best course of action then there it's a lot more than a single person's actions here that are genuinely worrying...
manic[1554958] · #45 · edited
Poor that one might "get into trouble" yet the other who's action was pretty far more serious get a PROMOTION after being sacked.
That said, with the current crop of BS that's happening nothing surprises me...
The MK situation was very cut and dry, Ched quoted him and told him not to send the item and he sent the item. This has been discussed to no end, and I'm sure with these new changes Ched will release him soon, so you'll have what you want.
Re this staff issue, they were being retrained on how to do their job for the fourth time as it was difficult for them to follow instructions. Neither myself or Clansy are able to read people's minds (it would make the job much easier!) so we could not tell whether this was intentional or not.
When at least half of the staff members are from one "Family", that is where the problem lies.
I suggest taking 2 members from each top faction (20?-30?) and having 1 be staff, and 1 be committee. That is something EVERYONE can agree on. Maybe except the current band of staffing brothers.
Now granted, I disagree with a previous decision that was made on a player who is now gone, I can agree this person needs to lose his spot asap. I don't care how long ago it was, he jeopardized the security of someone else for god only knows what...I think someone needs to set rules that cannot be changed by staff so from that point onward, we can go from some various juries to an actual absolute when something occurs...if something like didn't result in a fedding, and the other incident did...well, we as a community shouldn't allow such fluid rules to sort of exist.
With all due respect, but rehiring someone who has given out account details has been a very poor decision by staff in that case, especially if this was included in the staff notes like Marc said earlier. I didn't always fully agree / support Marc as an admin, but he enacted the set of rules that was used when he was. I'm sure he wouldn't just make unfounded accusations like that if there was no truth behind it.
I genuinely have no idea what you've been told, but this is completely wrong and if this is what you've been told then I am seriously disappointed.
There were 14 account that had money/assets transferred out of their account within the space of 30 days, all had been accessed illegally and all were touched by the same staff member. Even if they forgot how to do account verifications, rather than anything more suspicious, then they clearly still shouldn't be staff.