Quote:
Originally Posted by learningdisease
A.) The decision was not OVERTURNED, it was MODIFIED. ZERO TOLERANCE is still in effect for those who do not report their findings.
B.) The term "LESS" is subjective, as it was in essence, a continuation of a discussion that began with the original Policy, there was just input from MORE STAFF members than the when the original policy was announced, thus the policy was modified due to this new input and perspective.
C.) Would you rather he never reported the bugs/exploits at all? Old addage: "Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer."
D.) I apologize to the community on behalf of STAFF for ANY miscommunication or unclear explanation of the modified policy. I hope you can agree to understand the actuality of the situation, which is that the exploit finding volunteers ARE NOT ON STAFF.
|
It was overturned in the sense that Ashur was unbanned because he's "useful" to their ends, and not because he broke the rules. That in itself is the very definition of overturned sir.
A "continued" discussion can ONLY be "continued" with ALL the staff present, at the time of the original decision, and with the additional staff for the second "continuation". The term LESS is highly objective and NOT subjective in this case.
I'll agree to a point for this entire situation, to the extent that I'm not privy to the ACTUAL discussions. Merely 2nd hand accounts from staff themselves.
I'll agree that without complete first hand knowledge I cannot provide a definitive answer towards the entire situation upon whom is to blame or whom to hate at this point.
I'll also agree that the staff as a whole, of whom I was "informed" yet again were opposed to the modification, are not responsible, and merely a select few whom are causing this community hemorrhaging.
Finally, I cannot accept an apology from someone who did nothing wrong. We don't want you to scapegoat yourself for errors on your higher ups part.
