All I'll say is, I went on a alt account with no donor and messaged 2 mods, and no answer. 2nd, I went on my main account with donor, and they said "Yes?" Bais~!@#$%^&*O(P
idk man i mean whenever i shout in chat on my greenie alts mods respond but then for some reason no mods like my main acconut
okok so tbh im not going to lie, i do think there is a little bit of mods being biased toward donors, a lot of this is often because mods are often friends with donors, or see them around more often therefore being overall friendlier toward them. it's not just mods though. I've seen this with like everyone lol. when i was a greenie, i was always like "omg donors get everything better omg its not fair" the thing is, hate to say it kid, but people are going to be biased toward donors. maybe it's cause they're more active, maybe because they talk in chat more and are well-known, i don't know exactly why. but the truth is, people are going to be biased. (I'm not necessarily talking specifically about mods by the way. mainly, i think mods are pretty fair) life isnt fair, especially on the internet and games. making a post about it isn't going to change anything. also theres like 7167861476196149086`890 posts saying the exact same thing.
We are disagreeing because what you said is not true. We treat everyone equal. But you probably think this because you don't know the people's reputations. We gotta do what we gotta do.
dude, stop. anyone from the actual skyblock community that reads this won't care. they don't listen to this lol.
Bias in punishment, or anything else for that matter, isn't based on a player's monetary value. It's based on how much they are liked/disliked. A person who is well-liked, and friends with many staff, will have a likely positive bias, ergo less likely to be punished. A person who is widely disliked, especially by staff, will be negatively influenced by bias. People who are relatively unknown would be treated with comparatively unbiased attitudes. There is a correlation between likeability and donor status, but correlation≠causation.
I don't think there is an issue here. They aren't more biased than any other human being. Well this is probably the best contra-argument used the wrong way. If a non-donor would have behaved half as bad as Stel, he would be perm-erased ingame and on forums without any possibility to appeal. But this ain't bias from the mods, but from the owner(s). "Don't bite the hand that feeds you"
I love where you said also the unwritten ones. Just proves that mods are making up rules as they go lol. Cheesy wasn't even banned beforehand yet they banned him for two weeks after Voy for ban evading
Eleanora was fine as greenie she was happy with it all the time. Idk where these people get their perceptions.
You can't expect to just start a discussion and not expect mods to disagree with you, considering that the people in question are mods. Mods are humans as well, and they have their own views as well. I used to think the same way as you, until I got to know more about mods. I learned it's best not to assume things that you don't know. I learned that there is so much that goes on behind the scenes that others don't see. Just because there appears to be a bias doesn't make it a fact, that is merely what you see in your eyes. you don't see what is going on in the background, or possibly in private messages. Our mods deal with a lot of stress, and I am sure that at least most of them try their best to do their job. I would just suggest trying to view this from a mod's perspective and see if you would disagree as well.
But mods just do this job to get power and when they say "Nuh uh we do this for the COMMUNITY" it's just a bunch of baloney.
I know some mods, and mod applicants on a personal level. I can tell you that some really do care about the community. That's exactly why I would apply for mod. I mean hey, it's a tough voluntary job. it's not like they are doing it for-profit.
