The Protean Knights

Salk · Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 16:10 Post subject: Teamspeak behaviour

The behaviour by many the last two nights is unacceptable and will not be tolerated again. Anyone who is purposely offensive, or acts in an aggressivley bullying behaviour will be requested to be silenced on Teamspeak. This type of unsocial behavior should not be a part of a game. The time of last nights outburst put it squarely within the child hearing time zone, and as a parent I demand that people who find themselves unable to speak in a sociable manner be either silent within Teamspeak or be ejected until they can calm down enough to act civiliy.

The PK and TS officers have discussed this type of behaviour before, and I would request that the Teamspeak administrators deal with this type of behaviour. I have posted this on both PK and TS forums. Teamspeak is mandatory for raids, and as such should not be used to abuse, bully, or swear at people.

Salk, PK Officer
_________________
Salk (Warlock[60] Pally[60] Hunter[60] Druid[60] Mage[44] Rogue[20s]+Alts)

kungfuelf · Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 19:33 Post subject:

i agree

Whizzle · Quiet as a mouse Joined: 02 Dec 2005 Posts: 5

I feel that in reponse to this I have to ask exactly who are you citing as being bullying or aggressive on teamspeak. I admit that in raid chat there were some things said that should not have been said, personal insults should play no part in our raids.

But I was there and I heard no swearing on TS, and nothing that I would consider to be purposefully aggressive nor bullying beyond the call of duty that is required to try and restore order to the situation which was becoming a little out of control.

At the end of the day the raid leader made clear his stance and regardless of the manner in which that decision had been reached it *was* in accordance with the rules laid down.

If you have any problems with particular persons please make them known to us in order that we can sort it out in a fair and just manner.

However broad accusations are neither wanted, useful or tolerated so please make your issues clear or keep them to yourself.

Whizzle.

Salk · Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2006 15:23 Post subject:

Whizzle I am 40% deaf due to hearing defects I was born with, and I hope by now people on TS should be aware that I am actually unable to tell most of you apart. I have stated this several times, and though I am sure many suspected it was a joke, its not, I couldnt tell you who swore, but I can tell you Someone DID swear, and their tone was very agressive.

I am surprised you didn't concider the episode on teamspeak to be at all "purposely agressive nor bully", as not only I did, but several others who have talked with me ingame did. Maybe my background is more genteel, and I offend easier, but I know I am not alone.

I for one do not feel that Alliance Teamspeak which is mandatory should be inline with the Saturady and Sunday nights Teamspeak. From your statement you genuinely feel that it is fine for teamspeak to continue in that bent. However the two guilds had discussed the use of Teamspeak before, and I believe that if teamspeak is going to sound like that every raid, it should not be mandatory. I would welcome an offical TS response, as it may be that our Guild views on the Teamspaek rules differ substantially.
_________________
Salk (Warlock[60] Pally[60] Hunter[60] Druid[60] Mage[44] Rogue[20s]+Alts)

Malasorte · Too chatty by half Joined: 03 Dec 2005 Posts: 148

If we do Onyxia i roll on viskag i dont care about what officiers gonna say dkp is the rule sword=swrod its not a class sword like quel serra class:warrior i dont see that on vis'kag class:rogue so should go to dps warriors and rogues it isnt hardt at all
_________________

warrior dps

Malasorte · Too chatty by half Joined: 03 Dec 2005 Posts: 148

sorry to say but just the trueth
_________________

warrior dps

Whizzle · Quiet as a mouse Joined: 02 Dec 2005 Posts: 5

Thats fair enough, however you said that others in game have talked to you about this matter and they also think it was aggressive and bullying and and so they could know who it was and relay that information in order that it can be dealt with.

After all *somebody* must know who the bullying and aggressive ones were and that sort of behaviour can be dealt with appropriately. However I stand by my statement that sweeping generalisations don't get anything fixed, only pinpointing the problem and tackling it directly will.

Whizzle