Regarding recent Situations on Toxicity - Important

Beth

Manager
Feb 24, 2019
20
102
28
21
Hello! This is going to be a very lengthy thread, not an exciting one but a much needed one. Over the past few days there has been quite a lot of issues within the community due to decisions we have made as a staff team. I am going to be as open as I can here.

The decisions, that I am aware of, that has caused this, are as followed;

1. Us not picking a player called Estepanpm for Aplha tester. - Which upset two members of our community (That were very vocal about this therefore we know).

1a.. This caused us to punish a player called Vyrewatch on Discord for creating/starting drama. Accusing of bias and unfair decision making.
2. Punishing Vyrewatch for General Rudeness on the Discord. This moved him to 5 strikes = 12 hour mute.


To my knowledge these are the issues that have happened. If there are any major issues that are not here, which have not already been addressed, please message me and I'll be happy to talk to you about it.
Alpha testers
From the start it was clear that Only2Feet was the head for Alpha testers. He would design the application and then chose and pick the players who he thought would be best for the role. 2Feet marked each application based on their suggestions, so how detailed they were along with his opinion of the quality of the idea. For details, each question was scored as such - Every single application got marked like this, which was 57 applications. 2feet did a great job at doing that, that's a lot to read in such a short space of time.

5 - Good suggestion with an excellent attempt at providing in depth detail and reasoning as well as critical analysis

4 - Good suggestion with a good attempt at providing thorough detail and reasoning - some critical analysis

3 - Suggestion with good attempt at providing good detail and reasoning - little or no critical analysis

2 - Suggestion with attempt at basic explanation and reasoning - no critical analysis

1 - Basic suggestion with no attempt at providing detail or reasoning for the suggestion and no critical analysis.

0 - No suggestion

Now, 2Feet came to myself and David, but David wasn't around to help with the decisions, with the list of 'yes' and 'maybe'. I then read over the yes list and agreed with each choice. I then went to the 'maybe' and gave my own opinions on each application. For specifics there were 8 applications and I had a quota of 4. I decided to put the people through that I thought would be suitable. I wanted from the alpha testers a wide variety of players so we could have a good spread of opinions and insights, which I believe we have done a pretty good job at! Estebanpm was a player who didn't get through to the alpha stage. His application scored well, as it was in the list of 'maybe' but I decided not to add him over others. Each application that was denied had the same response message. Now I admit that there was error here by us. When choosing from the 'maybe' list I looked at more than just the application, my opinion on their behaviour, activity and punishment history (from when the dc was officially ours). This was not the case for every application on this list, however for those that were (denied for punishment history etc), we should have gave a specific response for the reasoning. This was the case for estebanpm.

There was backlash from this decision by estebans friend Vyrewatch. This caused him to start/encourage drama about us being biased on who we had chose. The decision was explained to him (vyrewatch) in a PM as to why we didn't chose esteban as he was punished for starting drama in the public DC.

2. Vyrewatch being punished for general rudeness.

The punishment system on DC is as followed -

You receive x number of strikes depending on your action and its severity. Strikes accumulate over time. If you receive 4 strikes for one offence and then a day later you receive 1 for another offence you will have a total of 5 strikes, which will give you that punishment time. Strikes do not stack per specific punishment. This may seem harsh but it is the best way to keep track of punishments on Discord and provide sufficient punishments for players who keep breaking the rules over and over.

Onto the decision - He was warned and punished after continuing to be rude. The problem that occurred from this was that, that 1 strike was added to his previous 4 strikes which gave a mute of 12hours. This was explained via PM again by multiple team members, as this is a new system that is unfamiliar.

Since then nothing has happened in the public Discord or the forums to warrant any further backlash. There has however been private discussions between management and him. Explaining situations, reasoning and consequences etc.

However yesterday a private discord server was created, by vyrewatch, originally named "IC - Toxicity" (we could imply that this was an acronym for island clash as they mentioned several staff members by name and our forums in the dc as also being advertised for IslandClash members to join). The discord was and is being advertised to players. We do not condone this behaviour at all. Supporting a server which its purpose is to promote toxic behaviour. Anyone who joins in and anyone who promotes this will risk punishment, risk being automatically denied for moderator if they apply and for alpha testers, risk losing their position.


To conclude
IslandClash is a minecraft server, that is being redeveloped. It was bought as the owners see so much potential in it's gameplay and can see it has a dedicated community behind it who love and enjoy the gamemode. We as management have said before and we will continue to say how much we are going to listen to the community and adapt the game how the community want it to be adapted. We realise this is extremely important and we ensure you all that we will be doing this. Supporting toxic behaviour targeted towards the server, before it is even launched is an attack on the management team, which we don't appreciate. We understand that not everyone will be happy with the decisions we make but attacking people who are working hard on IC, a server which you support, just doesn't make sense. This is not going to help in any situation, being toxic isn't mature and won't get us to change any decision. I'm here to create a community for you as individuals to enjoy and when people go against that, I don't believe you should support them. This is not good for the servers success. Either you want the server to succeed or you don't. If you don't, please don't ruin it for others who do. Any negativity is against us the management, not the server, so please, don't ruin the server for others when the issue is with us.

It's a game, there's no need for this. Thank you - The IslandClash team.
 

AquaWolf

New Recruit
Apr 2, 2019
2
0
1
So does this mean you are going to start sending out denial responses that are specific to each person, or do you plan to just start doing this from here on out?

I do find it dumb, how people just automatically assume that since they didn't get in or that their friend didn't get in, that the system is automatically rigged, or biased. Its just ridiculous, I am glad though that very few people actually ended up acting this way and most (Myself included) just said welp, got to wait till beta to get another shot at it
 

Beth

Manager
Feb 24, 2019
20
102
28
21
So does this mean you are going to start sending out denial responses that are specific to each person, or do you plan to just start doing this from here on out?

I do find it dumb, how people just automatically assume that since they didn't get in or that their friend didn't get in, that the system is automatically rigged, or biased. Its just ridiculous, I am glad though that very few people actually ended up acting this way and most (Myself included) just said welp, got to wait till beta to get another shot at it
Alpha applications are/were a one time thing. If we were to do them again then yes we would as we have realised the mistake with not doing this for those who were denied not based off of the app. As for Moderator applications, I have always (on past IC) and will continue (when they are open) to give specific responses to each application based off of why they were denied :)
 

Vyrewatch

Experienced Clasher
Mar 24, 2019
49
119
33
Morytania
I had a productive conversation with the Owners. Some of my issues were addressed and will be looked at positively in consideration for the future. This discussion needed to happen to extend free speech. This was necessary and positive for the community. It was incredibly important for us to discuss how things are portrayed to the public, how discussions can happen in the future, and how the community should be the center of importance. Though there are some negative perceptions about myself, I am okay with losing Alpha Tester for the sake of providing better conversations in the future.

Thank you to the supporters in this community who realized this topic was important. Thank you to the administration for allowing us an opportunity to speak and bring this issue to light.