Why are some NC players just now getting banned from AOSC events?

[Doublewolf]

I was there. He was told by a mod that he was captured, yet he ran away. Gypsy did break the rules, and he did disrespect the mod that was there.

[GrimWulf]

For those who don't know me, my name is Adrian Martin, and I am a Rep with the AOSC. I know I haven't been around much lately in the public forums but, I feel that this needs to be explained as clearly as possible. If one of the guys from NC would like to copy this message in the threads on the NC forums discussing this issue, I would greatly appreciate it (My only request is that it be copied in it's entirety).

1st question, Why was this ban not made public?
When the AOSC was formed, the founding members agreed, and every current Rep agrees, that it is NOT our job to embarrass ANYONE, no matter how many rules are broken, no matter how much trouble is caused. You will notice, that unlike the SCAA, there is no Hall of Shame. We have no intention of calling anyone out publicly, nor do want to. This is embarrassing to the player/players in question and it makes new players feel like they have to walk on eggshells to avoid incurring the wrath of the wrong people. We are trying very hard to make to make this club a family-friendly, comfortable environment for everyone. The reason that NONE of our bans have been made public (and since the formation of the AOSC there have been a grand total of 2) is that we feel, as stated before, that this is a private matter between the player/players and the Reps of this club. We have no intention of embarrassing ANYONE, no matter how severe the incident. This has the unfortunate consequence of making some members feel like things are being done behind closed doors and that there is some nefarious purpose for keep things "Hushed-Up." I assure you, that this is not the case, and we simply do not make it public knowledge, in the interest of the player/players in question. When a player is banned, we hope that they will take the ban as a learning experience, not a slap in the face, and will come back to play with us, and understand that the rules are there for a reason. We do understand that sometimes, feelings will get hurt, and that will be the last time we see the player/players in question. This is a very unfortunate situation. I would like to draw everyone's attention to one more fact before I move on. That fact is that this thread is still here. We are trying to be as open and honest about these situations as we can be. Would anyone care to guess how long this thread would have lasted in the SCAA, especially one where the Reps judgement is being called into question? The next question will also help to answer some things about the first.

2nd question, Why has it taken this long for the ban to be put into place?
When a Rep suggests a ban for a single player or a group of players, there is a mountain of bureaucracy that we as the Reps, must go through, before a ban is put into place. The insane amount of "red-tape" that we must go through, was not imposed on us by someone or something outside of this organization, instead, WE placed this level of bureaucracy on OURSELVES, because we understand that even though we are Reps, we are still human, and are affected by emotion and feelings just as much as anyone else. We designed our system to allow everyone a "cool-down" period. This is so that we do not make a rash, spur-of-the-moment decision. We also designed this system in such a way that no one Rep can ban someone from our organization (Our Reps only have the ability to ban someone from the forums for a period of 24 hours on only their authority). For this particular incident, there were 3 different threads started in the admin forum, to discuss this incident, and the repercussions of it, and countless phone calls, Pm's and emails, so please do not think that the actions taken by the Reps of the AOSC, were taken lightly, or were taken by only one Rep.

We ask only that you respect the fact that we:
A: Did not make a snap-judgment
B: Did not make this decision lightly
C: Did not set out to embarrass ANYONE
D: Did consider all of the facts from multiple eyewitnesses

I hope that this will clear some things up. I can understand someone wanting to defend their friend, but I will ask that in the future, please contact myself or any other Rep and we will be happy to explain to you what took place, why a decision was made, or anything else you would like to know, as long as it is OK with the player/players in question.

Thanks,
Adrian Martin

[GrimWulf]

One more thing I forgot to mention. This has nothing to do with the player in question being from NC. We see no distiction in regards to where you are from. We treat all players equally, regardless of what state you call home. We want this club to be just as much for NC and GA players, as it is for SC players. BTW, I edited for clarity a little bit in my original post in this thread.

[Dominum]

Grimwulf and Gambler have answered most of the questions thus far, and I agree with them entirely. Seeing as I was the CO and Rep involved directly in the incident, I intend to give you the full story from my side, and if you would like as well, I can ask the several other players present to post their account of the incident. However, I am very pressed for time at the moment, and can not give a full recount until tomorrow evening, but I promise to do so ASAP. One thing that perplexes me is that a number of you have implied that being an NC player yourself and the fact that the player in question is from NC somehow has something to do with our decision, or that it affected our judgement, or that it will in the future. AOSC rules apply equally to everyone, and we were not about to decline giving someone a ban on the grounds of not alienating people from a certain group. If someone I knew went to an NCAO game and got banned for the same thing, what would you say to me if I stated I'd never go to another NCAO game because he was from SC? Oh, and as always, feel free to call my cell at 803-609-7681 and I will answer any questions in person.

[Lefty]

I will try to repost to the best of my ability. Waxhaw/Recondo/Valhalla came to OP-24 as a meet and greet unit to find teams that shared our values. The number one rule of airsoft is "call your hit". If a member of either of these teams got caught not following this simple rule, that player would catch hell from our own and not be allowed to represent. I was told the AOSC split from SCAA to get better players and move away from paintsoft. I would like to play again with some of the teams I met at OP-24 and hope a never see some others who cant follow this basic rule, especially if you end up on my side. I hope this act of banning a respected player is resolved soon. The game changed for me throughout the 1st day and a delay was enacted because rumors were circulating that NC was going to leave the game. This was not true but once word got back to me it made me question our goal. Our goal was to find teams with honest players. We found some and I hope they found us honorable even though some of the rules were not clear to us. Aircross, I hope to see you again soon.    

[Doublewolf]

This is what I believe happened:

Gypsy read the rules. In the middle of the game he was hit, and healed by GARRETT who was a villager. Villagers are different from "Enemies". I guess at that point the villagers were helping Bravo. He thought an enemy healed him and he wasn't captured. When he was captured at our base, he thought he could run away when an enemy medic healed him. The rules were not as specific as they may have needed to be. However, he did not come back when we yelled at him and chased after him. He also pretty much told Dom "F you" when Dom was explaining what happened. There may have been a misunderstanding, but Gypsy was also being a complete idiot. Plus, he was seen on the field after being asked to leave. I can see both sides of the story, but I do agree that he should have been banned.

[Diesel]

I have read thru all of the post. I feel I need to put my thoughts in.
1. This, in my opinion, is a AOSC rep. matter.
2. I understand, and don't agree entirely with the ban, but I am not a rep so I have no say in the matter.
3. This should be discussed between the banned person and the reps only. I know that the AOSC does not and will not post the names. That is the difference between the AOSC and SCAA. There should be no discussion about this in public.
These are just my thoughts. A note to the AOSC reps. The AOSC is new and will have trying times while learning. I hope that this as well as OP24 are used to learn what not to do, and how to handle the problems in the future.

[Tzer1993]

In "The Banned One's" defense, the Villager rules were not clearly explained during briefing....you can say "Well, everyone should read the rules online!"...that doesn't always happen. I'm not even sure specific Villager rules were posted on here....I don't remember any being posted and I was a Villager! Not saying what he did was right...but I can see how he got confused on the rules

[SteevoLS]

In the light of the fact that privacy is our policy, I'm going to lock this thread. Anyone who really has anything to say can take it to PMs, but this thread really isn't going anywhere. I'll delete the whole thing in a day or two.

[Gambler]

In "The Banned One's" defense, the Villager rules were not clearly explained during briefing....you can say "Well, everyone should read the rules online!"...that doesn't always happen. I'm not even sure specific Villager rules were posted on here....I don't remember any being posted and I was a Villager! Not saying what he did was right...but I can see how he got confused on the rules

The thing you are missing Tzer is that it was explained to him by a Mod on the field and he ignored what he was told.  His teammate understood he situation and returned to Alpha's base as a prisoner, he ignored the Mod and refused to return as a prisoner even AFTER the ruels were explained to him.  This is unacceptable.

Sorry Steevo, but I had to get that in.  Thread locked once again.

[Dominum]

Gambler is absolutely correct. Let me be very clear, the problem was NOT that he broke rules initially, everyone misunderstands the rules at some point and has to be informed by other players. No player ever understands all rules at all games perfectly. He and the other player with him BOTH broke the SAME rules, and I caught up to them, explained what rules they broke, and asked them to comply with them. The other player in question that was with him did so, and no disciplinary action was taken because it wasn't necessary. The banned player, however, after being told the rules, refused to comply. I then identified myself as a Rep, and informed him that if he did not believe what I was telling him, I had a hard copy of all the rules in my command tent, and that we could both don our dead rags and take a look. As DW said (he was a witness) the banned player essentially told me to screw off, and that he would absolutely not follow the rules, nor would he even bother to look at my copy of them for verification. He was then removed from the game, and reentered play. Note that his friend complied after breaking the rules, and that was fine, it was a misunderstanding. The reason the ban was instituted was that the other player first broke the rules, and then told a Rep he would not only NOT follow them, but would not even allow the Rep to show him proof. THAT is the problem, and that is the reason for the ban. If we are going to start allowing players to tell us to go screw ourselves whenever we call them on a gross rule violation, then we may as well pack it all in. Let me be clear, I am in no way implying that he intentionally broke the rules to begin with, but what I AM saying, as are the half a dozen or more players in good standing that witnessed the entire ordeal, is that he completely ignored me and the other players when we called him on it, and, unlike his friend, would not comply when informed of the rules by an identified Rep. Are those of you that are up in arms saying that someone should NOT be banned for doing so?

[Dominum]

[mod]Though it is correct that our usual policy at the AOSC is to not bring this sort of thing to the publics attention, as it is a private matter between the Reps and the player in question, it is obvious that he wants it to be brought up and discussed in public. If his intention is to have the entire incident discussed and brought up for public discussion, I have no right to deny him that. Therefore, as long as this thread remains level headed and without personal attacks or anything else, I will unlock it in order to allow for everyone to have their say. I do not want this locked, as that just makes it appear as though we (the AOSC Reps) intend to silence the voice of opposition or dissension. Anyone who was present during the incident, please feel free to post your account, and those of you that have reason to believe that we did not act appropriately or have differing accounts of the incident, please post it so that we can resolve this issue and establish the facts.[/mod]

[Dominum]

It seems that the player in question is attempting to paint this as some kind of power trip or egomaniacal ploy on my part, as I was the Rep in the incident. This doesn't hold water for a number of reasons:

1: I have never met the player in question in any capacity, even forums, and had/have no reason to dislike him or hold a grudge. I've never had any dealings with him, and other than the incident in question, I don't know the guy from Adam.

2: It couldn't have been something against his team, as I have played with them at multiple games and have had nothing but good experiences with the rest of his teamates, and have no reason to dislike them or believe that they are anything other than a stand up group of players, which I still do.

3: It couldn't have been a matter of winning or losing (being I was his enemy CO), as regardless of his actions and whether or not he was breaking rules, I never could have or would have lost any points. I had nothing to gain or lose by taking the action that I did.

4: If this was the case, then why do none of the other people present share his perspective on the incident?

5: Also, if this was the case, than why the hell have the other six Reps of this organization not only passed this ban, but why in the world would they allow me to hold executive office? Think about it, if you follow his logic through, I am by consequence an egotistical liar that makes up a ton of BS for no good reason whatsoever, and if that's true, than all six of the other Reps of this organization that allow me to hold high office, and remain a Rep for that matter, are either the same scumbag personality, or are completely incompetent with no judge of character whatsoever.

Therefore, either his account is entirely correct and the entire leadership, without exception, of the AOSC and the several members that witnessed the incident are liars, cheats, scumbags, and generally ***holes, or his reasoning is not completely sound.

[Trig]

Thanks for unlocking this Dom.  As I am currently pressed with time, I'll post my account later on tonight.

[splatmaster]

Alright, I like hearing y'alls side as well. Right now, I would like to chalk this up to two different things.

1: Emotions. Heat of the moment, Gypsy obviously didn't grasp the severity of the situation, part of which is in #2.

2: Two different organization styles. In NC there are two types of games, Milsim and Real Mil. Gypsy plays both. In a Milsim, the field owner/organizer has all the power on the field, along with non playing ref's. Any problems goes to them, as they are in charge. The NCAO doesn't run the games. In a Real Mil, same thing. The organizer is in charge and any problems go through him. The whole "Rep" mentality doesn't exist in NC, if a player is on a recognized team then it goes through their team leader. No player on the field is "in charge" per se. Gypsy obviously fraglantly disobeyed Dom's orders, but he immediately went to turn himself into the game organizer(garrett) who he percieved to be in charge, not Dom. Did Dom have the right to stop the game and take Gypsy out of the game? Yes, it was an AOSC game. Did Gypsy know that Dom had that power? Nope, obviously not.

So, from the 3rd person point of view, thats my opinion of what happened and why. Its why both parties are offended at the other, and both feel justified in their actions. Does this kinda make sense, or am I just blowing hot air?