03-03-2023, 04:22 PM
Regarding the fact they know what discord this is, I can only presume it would be a discord centered around the Yakuza, which to my knowledge operates specifically under the Donna. I don't think when a discord was made it would have ever been under the pretense, "oh, who do we NOT invite?" but rather "who's part of the Yakuza by affliation?"
Once again, in telling others not to make assumptions, I believe you are making assumptions of your own about the context in the situation. For all we know, the absence of someone in this discord was no concerted effort to keep them out. Perhaps they never actually asked for an invite. Or perhaps they asked one person from the group, and only that one person told them no. When you get into this degree of speculation, it becomes unhealthy to start looking at ways to discredit other people's concerns while remaining speculative when saying "looks clear-cut to me". I don't really feel like it is. Just right here I've thrown out alternate assumptions of my own that in themselves are no less valid based on the same pretense of none of us having a clue of anything.
To come through and tell people not to call these people innocent while also offering an opinion of "I think they should be banned longer" feels like a can of worms, to me. To tell people thinking that way is not okay while also taking to the other extreme openly. I'd respectfully say that it's kind of biased. And this is coming from someone who hasn't deemed the people innocent in this thread, just mentioned of communication issues that have been rampant through ban after ban, regardless of innocence factor. And the innocence or guilt of the players involved doesn't suddenly make bad communication good.
Once again, in telling others not to make assumptions, I believe you are making assumptions of your own about the context in the situation. For all we know, the absence of someone in this discord was no concerted effort to keep them out. Perhaps they never actually asked for an invite. Or perhaps they asked one person from the group, and only that one person told them no. When you get into this degree of speculation, it becomes unhealthy to start looking at ways to discredit other people's concerns while remaining speculative when saying "looks clear-cut to me". I don't really feel like it is. Just right here I've thrown out alternate assumptions of my own that in themselves are no less valid based on the same pretense of none of us having a clue of anything.
To come through and tell people not to call these people innocent while also offering an opinion of "I think they should be banned longer" feels like a can of worms, to me. To tell people thinking that way is not okay while also taking to the other extreme openly. I'd respectfully say that it's kind of biased. And this is coming from someone who hasn't deemed the people innocent in this thread, just mentioned of communication issues that have been rampant through ban after ban, regardless of innocence factor. And the innocence or guilt of the players involved doesn't suddenly make bad communication good.
Ending 145: Disappointed in Humanity