Ex-admin Marc disputes a staff reinstatement, and Chedburn answers
On 28 Nov 2016 Marc [24377] said a newly named staffer should not have been made staff. Chedburn [1], other staff and players argued over vetting, punishment and disclosure in a thread of 822 archived posts.
Involved: Marc [24377] , Chedburn [1] Admin , bogie [148747] Admin , mug [553318] Committee , Stretch [1846075] Officer and 4 more
A thread about who gets to be staff
Marc [24377] started the thread "Staffing changes" in General Discussion on 28 Nov 2016. It reached 821 replies and 13,749 views at the archive's last fetch, with 174 different players posting and 40 posts from staff, officers or moderators.[1][2]
Marc wrote that one of the newly named staffers should not have been made staff, for reasons Marc called an internal staff matter. Marc said Chedburn [1] had been made personally aware. Participant claim[2]
The reasons, and Chedburn's reply
Marc said they had personally checked each hired player's account history and that a group of secretaries had vetted for multis. Marc asked what minimum checks players thought staff should have, and whether they were happy with a formerly destaffed player becoming staff again. Participant claim[2]
Asked for the reason for the earlier destaffing, Marc replied: "Helping someone gain access to accounts that weren't theirs." Allegation[3]
Chedburn, listed as Torn developer, wrote that the staff member was destaffed 3 months ago based on an accusation. Chedburn said a panel was formed, and that evidence, interviews and discussions showed a "very low probability of foul play". The staff member was reinstated but would not handle recoveries again, which are now handled only by officers.[4]
Marc answered that recoveries had only been handled by secretaries. Marc questioned who on the panel was qualified and said the staff member gave no real response after two days of discussion. Marc wrote: "No idea what's going on in this game, Ched, but it's bad." Participant claim[5][6]
On 30 Nov 2016 Chedburn wrote that they would not get into a public dispute with an ex-admin. Chedburn described over-exaggeration and misinformation in the thread and said they were satisfied the correct action was made. Chedburn also questioned Marc's purposes in creating the thread.[7]
Staff and players take sides
bogie [148747], listed as Torn staff (Admin), wrote that intentional conduct would mean deletion and unintentional conduct gross negligence. bogie referred to giving away 14 accounts to the wrong owner and asked why the person was given a second chance. Participant claim[8][9]
Stretch [1846075], listed as Torn officer/committee, called Marc's post a cheap shot and said Marc should have stayed if they wanted a say in staff decisions. The post drew 14 likes and 14 dislikes.[10]
mug [553318], listed as Torn officer/committee, wrote that Midknight looked set to get committee status back, and later that they were scared for their account and wanted tin foil hats. Joke[11][12][13]
critch [507888] argued that destaffing for the alleged breach was a double standard next to Midknight's deletion. critch alleged that Marc's real agenda was to damage Torn. Allegation[14]
Champion [1927067] mocked critch as trying to kiss Chedburn's backside, and Batman [984129] wrote that critch is a moron. Daisy3 [730750] asked whether staff have access to personal or credit card information.[15][16][17]
Sweeney_Todd [27468] wrote that they stood down as staff because the game was going too corporate, and that one bad apple should not spoil the bunch. The post drew 86 likes. Participant claim[18]
Later
On 01 Dec 2016 bogie told players who believed there was corruption inside staff and committee to apply and push for change.[19]
On 07 Jan 2017 Collete [1389080] linked the thread from another thread, quoting Hank [1732212] as writing that it was up to Ched and probably the player committee, not ex-admins, to set the hoops for new staff.[20]
Timeline
- 28 Nov 2016 Marc opens "Staffing changes"; Chedburn replies that the staffer was reinstated after a panel.[2][4]
- 29 Nov 2016 bogie and critch post opposing views on the punishment.[8][14]
- 30 Nov 2016 Chedburn says they will not have a public dispute with an ex-admin.[7]
- 1 Dec 2016 bogie urges players to apply for staff.[19]
- 7 Jan 2017 Collete links the thread from another thread.[20]
Original sources 20
- Thread "Staffing changes" (General Discussion) ·
- Post by Marc [24377] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Marc [24377] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Chedburn [1] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Marc [24377] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Marc [24377] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Chedburn [1] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by bogie [148747] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by bogie [148747] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Stretch [1846075] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by mug [553318] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by mug [553318] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by mug [553318] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by critch [507888] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Champion [1927067] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Batman [984129] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Daisy3 [730750] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Sweeney_Todd [27468] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by bogie [148747] in "Staffing changes" ·
- Post by Collete [1389080] in "WSSBGate a Kangaroo Court decision by Ched" ·
Forum sources link to TornLife's archive of the thread, shown as the players wrote it; each archived thread links on to the original on torn.com.
How to read a story
Every statement in a Torn Story is checked against the archived posts it cites. Statements without a label are established: the record shows them directly. Everything else is labelled and says who is speaking.
- Established
- The record shows it directly: a post and its date, staff's own words, a thread's figures or TornLife data.
- Participant claim
- What someone involved said about their own actions or experience. Their account, not verified.
- Allegation
- An accusation a player made, attributed to them. Never TornLife's finding.
- Joke
- Banter or trolling, presented as such.
Generated by TornLife from 20 sources · verified · model claude-sonnet-5
Drafted by a language model from the archived posts listed above, then checked three ways before publication: TornLife's validator (every number and citation must match the sources), deterministic statement rules (no unlabelled allegation, no real-world personal details, no claims about why anyone was federally jailed) and a separate critic and fact-checker that read each statement against its sources. It reports what players said; it is not Torn's own statement.