Threats to ban, have baned before, using untrue "retaliation" loop, for reveiws?

[Coco Crunch]

Because I was rejected a suggestion, and I posted a RMS review a while after, the GM of DivinityRO requested I remove it or I will be banned. He is using the fact I got rejected a suggestion that I was retaliating using RMS. which is untrue i have explained ALL the reasons for my reveiw and i feel that i was forced to change it under threat of ban

First I would like to state it was not retaliation, I have had many silly responses from GMs and this one just happened to push me to review as I have been there long enough.


I was simply confirming previous reviews with my own experience, and opinion, which is the basics of a review. And Im unsure if this is ok for an admin to threat banning on a review for legitimate reasons.

the reason i am explaining all this bla bla, is because i dont know if it is ok for a GM to use Apparent retaliation as a way of making people remove negitive reviews by threatening people with bans/punishments, with assumptions of retaliation and putting it as "rules". as you know this can be used on ANY negative statement, regardless.

My example is a good one because im true to my word! I dint give them a 0 – 20 my rating was an acceptable 52!

this dosnt matter to much anyway the main point is this isnt the first time,
And they have done it to others? Yeah screened that to, an admin actually stating they have done it to others.

this loop of "retaliation" is being miss used, even if it seems it is, i explained and told them it wasnt, rather than disputing all my point they constantly refer back to the suggestion..... yes i was annoyed about the responce given, but my reveiw was honest and true.

should they be exploting this loop to prevent bad reviews on threat of bans?

[Usagimimi]

lolololol banning for bad reviews is incredibly childish. This is really sad on their behalf... and just when most of us thought the worst was over. Probably not the only server to do this, though that's irrelevant. No one's account / state should be compromised for a review regardless how the administration feels. Even if they think it's retaliation or bullying or some crap, maybe try harder to prevent it from happening and actually consider what's being said and if it actually is pertinent. Is that not what that little reply box for administration is for anyway? And if they think it's unfair, there's the Report section to request a review be removed, if the rating is too high to respond. 'Could even respond in Server Discussion or something and it'd be acceptable.

Something wrong if they don't think that's effed up. Other anologies include killing moving critics for bad comments, beating the crap out of people who don't like what you've published, or just simply spitting on someone because they tell you that you don't like their new haircut. So childish. In all honesty, I didn't think the staff had stooped that low; I still considered them to have enough integrity and professionalism to not retaliate on clients for critiques.

Banning for bad reviews should be considered the same as rewarding for good reviews because it is still an attempt to manipulate the system and exploit a potential loophole. yC might want to look into this.

[Coco Crunch]

Exactly that's the reason why I posted here as I didn't feel I was "retaliating"

I explained everything and rather than say "im sorry you feel that way, can you understand why we felt this way, we will try to improve" it was ban threats, apparent rule violations. with no apparent acknowlagement of the reasoning (you shouldnt have to reason a reveiw anyway)

In my own words I say I was FORCED to change my review O_O, which is not right and I believe it is trying to sneak around RMS, and unlike the others that bowed down, (ill probs get banned for bringing this up) I chose to bring light to this, reviews are for opinions and gives players a voice, and by doing this I felt it was disrespectful to the rules of and idea of RMS.

[yC]

So something like this just happened few days ago on Rival RO and it costed their listing.

Given the screenshots showing those two claims made by the Executive Vice President of Player Relation, namely that they have banned people who wrote bad reviews on their RMS listing and the threat made toward the poster that all her accounts will be banned if she don't remove her review on RMS.  There is no excuse to such serious violation to our terms of services. 

I was just saying on the other thread that RMS review should not cause trouble to players.  Servers should expect reviews with different opinions to come together because a review don't have to be the same as how the admin sees his own server.  It is how the player sees the server.

Like Yusifer said there is the "owner's reply" box and for any review that is breaking the review guidelines it could be brought to our staff's attention in email.  The owner's reply to the review is "Thank you for the review! We'll surely work on these issues listed.".  Who would've expect behind the scene there is this threat made to the reviewer in an attempt to remove the review.  It is disappointing to witness this underhand tactics.

I was going to wait for a reply of some sort from the server (if they sees this) before I make my move.  Maybe it's a quiet weekend as always? Given the seriousness of this case, I'll lock their listing now.

[Cawliflower]

There is nothing specifically on the Terms of Service that clearly states that this is a violation. I didn't act upon or ban her for this yC. I clearly asked for a re-review about the whole server and not one incident.

Not only that, we didn't ban her. My ToS says "Using third-party web sites to retaliate a punishment is not tolerated." And not only that, Deviluke is a new staff member. I clearly said to her in PM she can re-make the review with it fitting under the pretenses of a real review. She made the first review regarding one situation about "MVP graves" and why we wouldn't implement them. That clearly is a violation of the RMS ToS. Therefore, I asked for a SECOND review to replace the existing review WHETHER it was good or not (it's clearly embedded in the PM).

I find it funny she left out my paragraphs. But let me include those.

Where is that original PM did I say I would ban her? Post the whole conversation Coco. That's VERY unfair.

http://i.imgur.com/F3uHt.png - Full PM. We ASKED to remove the review or re-create whether it was negative or positive. Her position on the server was centered around one isolated incident regarding a denied suggestion. That's clearly not a server review in any event. Do you think I hunt down every player to get them to re-review the server in a positive light? We've got enough negative reviews as is.

This issue started by us rejecting a suggestion on our Suggestion Tracker. We have to reject a lot of player suggestions due to not fitting in with the server and the grand scheme of things. That, however, doesn't constitute a negative review each time bashing and defaming the staff team not really reviewing the server. Reaching out to a player was bringing resolve as she was "quitting" and making it publicly known. Deviluke is a new Game Master and I represent the server as a whole. Therefore, I ask that the listing is restored and we'll ensure this kind of issue doesn't happen again. DivinityRO has never had any ToS infractions and we've never banned someone over a RMS review. -.- Either way, our players have contributed a lot of positive and negative reviews to the server. I just don't feel it's completely fair to delist us over an issue that was misconstrued/miscommunicated. I'd also appreciate if the rules weren't so loosely stated on the Server Owner ToS because I frequently educate new GMs and players to view the rules as I'm responsible for the server's page.

Here's another screenshot telling her to REVIEW IT how she'd like: http://i.imgur.com/YEZN7.png

Why the hell would I say that if I wanted a perfect review? o.o Again, we have a mixture of negative and positive. It doesn't matter. But reviewing us about something that is irrelevant to the server isn't really fair when you're scoring a bunch of 1s on things you don't even comment on. Just because I ask for a more detailed review instead of a staff-bashing review isn't against ToS.

Another screenshot: http://i.imgur.com/A4zMl.png

Again, where did I tell her to make a perfect review, or she would be banned? She's still unbanned. I also told her to make a review that is about the entire server and not about one isolated incident which was my original intention for PMing her. There clearly was miscommunication or she was trying to bait the server into some sort of trouble as she kept PMing. I, the server owner, didn't violate any ToS nor did I FORCE her into changing her review. I allowed her to re-review negatively as she did before. I clearly asked for a more concise review as I knew who she was being she started trouble over a rejected suggestion hours before.

[yC]

We cannot and will not get involved with the complicated staff structure of other servers. 

As with any previous case we had with server suspension.  A server staff represents a server.  It doesn't matter if a staff left a message in the server's facebook page that says "get xx for review" or if it's the admin that does it.  We give no excuse to such a long time ago.

If we accept your explanation, it will simply open up a whole new way to cheat.  How convenience is it to have a staff violate our terms to gain (good) reviews and then claim the staff is not counted because the admin represent the server as a whole when caught in a bad situation.  I can't explain common sense any more clear than this ...

[Cawliflower]

We cannot and will not get involved with the complicated staff structure of other servers. 

As with any previous case we had with server suspension.  A server staff represents a server.  It doesn't matter if a staff left a message in the server's facebook page that says "get xx for review" or if it's the admin that does it.  We give no excuse to such a long time ago.

If we accept your explanation, it will simply open up a whole new way to cheat.  How convenience is it to have a staff violate our terms to gain (good) reviews and then claim the staff is not counted because the admin represent the server as a whole when caught in a bad situation.  I can't explain common sense any more clear than this ...

Please read all of the screenshots I included. I never once banned, threatened to ban or even thought to do so. So, why am I delisted? I never asked for you to change the RMS ToS, I never violated it and haven't had issues with following ToS in the last year my server has been up.

[yC]

I don't know which part you don't understand.  Your staff which we see it as a legit person to represents your server, violated our terms and you believe your server should be excluded from the terms?

[Jenova]

I think what yC is trying to get across is that you (DivinityRO) should never threaten to ban somebody for writing a review, even if it was just petty server bashing. What should have been done is to just report the review. This is from what I gather, anyways.

[Cawliflower]

I don't know which part you don't understand.  Your staff which we see it as a legit person to represents your server, violated our terms and you believe your server should be excluded from the terms?

Nope, completely understand! I'll surely get Deviluke on the same page and make sure the staff stays out of third party site relations.

-Cookie

P.S. I'm assuming this allows us to, "Server who have broken the Terms of Services and were suspended the first time will be allowed to create a new listing no less than two weeks after the date of suspension. Server who have broken the Terms of Services more than once may have their server listing suspended with or without notice and receive a permanent banishment from our listing. "

So, I'll wait the entire two weeks and then we'll go from there. Sorry for the troubles.

@Jenova: Understood.

[yC]

Yes, you are correct.  A new listing is allowed in 2 weeks.  Thank you for your understanding.

[scio]

I like how Cookie's screenshot:

http://forum.ratemyserver.net/rant-and-rave/threats-to-ban-have-baned-before-using-untrue-'retaliation'-loop-for-reveiws/?action=dlattach;attach=4096;image

..basically provides more evidence against him.

"it is against our rules to take any punishment/staff related decisions and review us negatively on Rate My Server. Therefore, we ask that you remove the review."

Isn't having a rule against posting negative reviews on RMS exactly why you were delisted?  Digging your own grave much?

[tomosuke]

I like how Cookie's screenshot:

http://forum.ratemyserver.net/rant-and-rave/threats-to-ban-have-baned-before-using-untrue-'retaliation'-loop-for-reveiws/?action=dlattach;attach=4096;image

..basically provides more evidence against him.

"it is against our rules to take any punishment/staff related decisions and review us negatively on Rate My Server. Therefore, we ask that you remove the review."

Isn't having a rule against posting negative reviews on RMS exactly why you were delisted?  Digging your own grave much?

You can rate the server badly if you feel like it, the "rules" dictate that it's against the rules to review a server based on receiving a punishment(This is too much of a grey area for me to agree with, if it was specified that it involved getting banned from botting or other noticably illegal activity, I might be willing to agree with this.) and staff related decisions (So if your suggestion wasn't accepted, does that mean that your entire review should be hinged upon that.)

I didn't see any mention of banning or even punishment mentioned in that PM. It was against the rules, whatever the hell they mean by that.

I don't agree with everything, but that doesn't mean you can badly generalise the PM and misrepresent what he/she's saying. Though I agree that a ban shouldn't be used in the earlier screenshots presented by the thread creator.

[Yukino]

Didn't want to post, but here's to clarify some stuff:

First off, refer to the ToS point: "Servers caught allowing third party (including but not limited to: player, GM) sponsored actions or events to affect their server review results will have their servers suspended from the listing."

Emphasis on the term "GM". yC was focusing on this ToS point under the ToS Owner Page: http://ratemyserver.net/TOS_owner.html

It isn't really strictly on Cookie's PM. It was more like Deviluke's PM, especially the third posted screenshot by Coco Crunch. The mentioning of a ban is there.
However, the server rule problem may also be a factor as well seeing how server rules still don't affect RMS rules regardless. I guess this rule should be edited by the DivRO team >< to avoid confusion for their players I suppose.

But anyways, Cookie was fine with what yC said, and both sides are fine with a new upcoming listing.

[Sovereign]

Cawliflower pretty much said he understands why he was delisted and accepts it.

Don't see why people are still posting; there's no need to draw anymore attention to this issue.

[yC]

I'll take what Sovereign said and move this to the report section for archive.