Yeah, I have to neg. They wanted to cast an entertaining cast. They cheated and hacked accounts when there were no rules, now that there are mods they've followed the rules and shouldn't be punished for doing things during an era with no moderators.
They are two of the more interesting and entertaining people. They are entertaining and the third biggest duo to me (after the IRL couples). Absolutely deserved to be here (and I'm pretty sure both hate me). But it's just the truth. You may not like them, but casting them was one of the only good choices.
The stars wasn't called "Positive Influence Stars" like imagine only casting people who are "positive influences" it would be worse and more boring than this already is. This doesn't make sense to me.
The overall concept of duos in general was a flop. There are plenty more interesting stars ideas they could have worked with. To be fair moderator Koolness also partook in cheating when there were no mods. By this logic he shouldn’t get to reap benefits of being a moderator on this site.
I agree with what Lemjam6 said. Also it's not like there wasn't already a precedent with Dylan being cast for WAW. Hadn't he also hacked MANY accounts in the past?
Moderators are meant to punish those who break rules even despite statute of limitations AND at the cost of entertainment, your comment makes no sense Lemjam6
christossss honestly not many good duos missed out, i saw the applicants and it was very bland. You need to cast some villains with personalities, it's not a game of positive influence.
Your logic to me in this is flawed. I hold everyone accountable to their actions since becoming a moderator. If I open the door to punish people for their past offences. I am opening that door for everyone. Point blank period. Which we can play that game, but its a dangerous one because than you can easily find yourself waking up to a site where many people are banned, or restricted from participating in special events.
Eilish and Colter have hacked accounts in the past, true. To me personally I rather ban past racist, or homophobia. I would ban Sam_Hamwich for playing competitions for people consistently. Fighterman would have to go as well. I am not rewarding any behavior other than the behavior that I have seen since I was a moderator. Let's us not equivocate them getting casted for an online game, as someone rewarding their behavior. Would you sit face to face with me and tell me that irl? That I had was handing out rewards for people who have broken the rules on this site. By that same logic I could never play in a special stars as well. I should have no place in a game when people used multis for me to win. Anyone that won that way should also be disqualified.
Furthermore, if we make a requirement of the casting process.... be you must have been in good account standing for the past 10 years. Then special stars would cease to exist. Cheating is cheating, breaking rules is breaking rules. Regardless of the infraction. If we are to address the Eilish and Colter situation in hindsight and dish an appropriate punishment. Then in my eyes, I would deem it fair to address each and every infraction that anyone on this site has ever committed.
I personally speaking find destructive language, racism, homophobia, bullying, sexual questionable content. As far more pressing issues on this site than hacking accounts. I know other users may feel different on this. And they are right too, hacking accounts is a privacy situations and spoils the integrity of the site.
The issue is messy, because in theory someone who has done the things they have done should not be allowed to play in a special game. I also think people expressed themselves and jokingly and flippantly thrown around homophobic and racist slurs have no place in a special stars as well.
Where do we draw the line? Is my question to you and I look forward to hear your answer, and the answers of other people who read this long comment
I don't mean to sound condescending in any of this. You asked my opinion and friend to friend this is where I stand on it
I often find that people deal with absolutes. Did 90% of the site cheat as some point ? Yes but the two people I mentioned are not only one of the biggest rule breakers and hackers, their whole “duoship” is built on the fact that they hacked and cheated together. Public perception is anything and when you give those two people who has continuously ruined the site for many you let them know that they can do it and still reap the benefits of a special stars that very few have been able to, up to now.
Also when it comes to racism and homophobia, i agree. People who have shown a pattern of either of those shouldnt be given the platform either
christossss then with your logic anyone and anyone who is used a slur or said anything questionably problematic. Would be disqualified. Now you never answered my question and I answered yours.
Furthermore your logic of they are still doing it is flawed. And you are once again insinuating that somehow since I have been a moderator I have knowingly allowed them to break rules with your last comment.
I don’t appreciate that obviously false narrative.
christossss once again by your logic applied fairly to everyone which I have to do special stars would cease to exist. Which we can definitely make a reality too
koolness234 man what ?? I have never and will never try to paint you in a bad light. I am very confused as to how what i said insinuated that i allowed you to break rules and i am very sorry if i did by accident. You are my dear friend you know i wouldnt. I simply said that people who have a history of extreme cheating and hacking, as well as extreme use of slurs and bad behavior shouldnt be allowed. Of course all of us have cheated in some form but the ones that stand out and were able to not get punished shouldnt get rewarded with this chance
@christosss you're missing Josh's point, it's where is that line drawn at? If someone hacked five accounts should they be DQ'D, what about 2 or 1? Someone said the n word on every blog 7 years ago but haven't since, are they banned? You can't cherry pick which instances you deem as too much without doing them all, 7 hacks is not banned but 8 is?
Yeah ok don’t really care at all but I love the idea of a “positive influence stars” like lemjam6 mentioned ik he was shitposting but I would love to see 16 people whose entire personality is being “nice” in a house together all trying to uphold that reputation through the week
christossss
Public perception is anything and when you give those two people who has continuously ruined the site for many you let them know that they can do it and still reap the benefits of a special stars that very few have been able to, up to now.
You’re rewarding their behavior
Two statements you type accusing us of rewarding their behavior one explicitly states that
Furthermore your asking me not to hold users accountable for some of their actions while simultaneously holding others accountable for their past actions. With providing a clear line or process on how to do this. Leaving highly up to moderators to determine who abs which past actions get punished
