Regarding Impersonation of a Staff Member

Hey--I just had a quick question, which may or may not be relevant to recent events

As we all know, impersonation of a staff member is a bannable offense. However, what constitutes impersonation?

I just wanted to make the rules 100% clear so nobody gets banned again, because, as everyone knows, getting banned isn't fun, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Obviously, impersonating a staff member in order to look like a staff member isn't allowed--Fuzzlr2, Supermod, etc. would be examples.

It also seems as if names containing that of a staff member also are illegal. For example, the recent ban of I_Hear_A_Klitch fits this category, as well as several other bans I won't bother to recall.

It would also seem that having a similar name to a staff member is acceptable with the permission of the staff member (Klutchdickles).

So here's a question: what if two players have similar names, and one of them becomes staff? Would the non-staff player be forced to change his name?

For example, if we have two players names Antiacus and Antiacus_, and Antiacus becomes staff, what happens? Or if we have two players names, say, Notchbeard and Notchsbeard, and Notchsbeard (obviously the newer of the two players) becomes staff, what happens?

Thanks for any insights!

 

Well, /history tells you when they've had the name. If they've had it before the other person becomes staff, they shouldn't be banned or forced to name change.

 

I see no basic reason why Matt was banned for "Staff Impersonation". I understand that he had a staff member's username in his new name, but I don't see that as impersonation. He used two different usernames and combined them. He doesn't have a mod rank and his name isn't "Klitch" reworded. Players can easily know the difference between a player with a rank and a player with a staff rank.

Klitch's name isn't "I_Hear_A_Klitch" nor was it ever his username. There was no way that was staff impersonation. He could've had his username approved by Klitch himself, though.

 

Having your name contain another's should not be bannable. There is nobody on this server that legitimately cannot tell the difference between Klitch's name and Matt's.

 

Part of the problem with ''I_hear_A_Klitch'' is that if someone does /msg klitch it can go to the wrong klitch. Meaning IHAK may get the staff klitch's messages. And some of those could be important, could be staff information, etc.

 

This is a clear rule in the "Acts Against the Server" category:

Using usernames similar in nature to a staff member's username or a staff member's rank

That should be the only explanation for why you shouldn't do it. Other than that, I'm sure if there were a confusion where one of the two became staff then we could work something out, but until that happens we're fine.

 

If something is that important to a player, they can /mail or /modreq if necessary if they want to be sure it's seen. If it's vital staff information, you can, again, /mail or use the staff chat channel (that tbh I can't remember if it exists or not anymore)

 

the basic point is is that it's completely unnecessary to blatantly change your name to something similar to a staff's just for kick's. It's one think to be the same as a player (gosh all those jip's) but it's another to hurt and to cause problems for the staff.

And also, it's in the rules. So yeah, ''I said so.'' works here.

 

Hm. I see, thanks for clarifying. I suppose it just comes down to a judgment call, right?

--- Double Post Merged, May 14, 2016, Original Post Date: May 14, 2016 ---

I mean, this can be a problem with anything, right? If you're sending sensitive information, it's probably best to do it over Slack. If you're doing it over /msg, you just have to make sure you've got the right Klitch. (if you /msg Klitch, as opposed to /msg klitch, it'll go to the correct person).

Though I'll admit I do see your perspective. Again, thanks for the clarification.

 

eventually breathing is gonna be illegal

 

I used to get so many messages for cass

What do you mean, it IS illegal (kidding, kidding)

 

I asked @junelawnchair about this topic and she said that the problem with impersonating a staff member is that people can mistake you for a staff member, and then there's alot of confusion and side effects that come after it. While its debatable what makes a name similar to a staff member's, having a staff member's name in their name could still make it be different. Not to mention I and a few others have been banned for this and just waited out the thirty days. Matt's name is still different from Klitch's, and it comes down to if there is confusion between who is who, and if that name complicates communication between staff members and players.

 

I say for the most part it depends on whether that staff member is bothered by it or not.

 

Jipdos, Jipdos6, Jipdos101, Jipuno. I get it.

 

My soon to be username jiplip

 

I think it could have been enforced a bit differently in this situation.

The argument "it could go to the wrong person" is pretty invalid in this situation since someones was allowed to name their person 'KlutchDickles.'

The reason of it being bannable because of confusion of if Matt was Klitch or whomever he was impersonating could stand, but it's not too solid. Specially considering the fact of /history and a tag of what position of staff they would be in, which they wouldn't have. Assuming these things could not be used or didn't exist, then yes, it'd be perfectly fine to ban a player for such a thing.

He probably should have asked them if he could change his name with it involving their own username, and by probably I mean should have 100%, but banning them for this? Even if it's for 30 days, come on. Matt isn't detrimental to the server that I know of, and obviously did not mean harm in any way.

How about letting him stay on until he could change his name, then ban him if he refused if the said staff member did not particularly care for his username because of its involvement of their own username.

It's definitely up to staff in the end, rules are rules, though I do see how Matt would be justified with his resoning to not get banned. Who knows, I probably don't know all the details? They have a right to do what was done even if a lot of people don't care for the decision that was made. Not sure when this happened or if it's over or not; I've not been active for a while but will be very soon, hopefully.

Hope everyone's having a good time on MeepCraft!

(I addressed a different issue than was wanted, but it's still related to this thread)

 

This rule is one of the most asinine rules I've ever seen here, and I actively fought against it while staff. To the point where someone did log in with a copy of my name, and I threatened to quit if anything happened to them. The only thing I dislike more than this rule are people who feel the need to issue a ban over it.

As someone who has been admin twice, and other ranks numerous times; this has never ever once happened. Nobody is confused. The true reason a ban was issues was because there was letters on a forum page saying to ban for it. Nobody actually did a damage assessment on it, because if anyone had used common sense in the matter you would know this isn't a big deal, and it's not worth banning a customer off your server and persuades him further to no longer spend money here.

 

I own it ha

 

1 perk of being staff is that we get to protect our name. If someone makes a name change directed towards a staff member, it may not be "impersonation" however its more or less harassment. KlutchDickles was my account, therefore, its fine.

If someone made Klutchawesome, and I didnt want it. Yes i can make them change it, Same goes for all staff.
Before all the "but thats not fairrrr blah blah blah comes in, Just keep in mind we dont get paid here. Keeping our names and reputation safe is one of the perks.