Proposal to dismiss BAN sharing agreement

Aurora

If 1945 is not going to remove those Staffs either leave the system, then better we should reject the ban sharing agreement.

@kuilin

kuilin

kuilin People are upset at 1945 admins publicly supporting sync stalking in their personal activities, sometime in the past. This would be the case even if those 1945 admins are not banned, or if we didn't have ban sharing.

^ this point is what I want to stress. Is this true. If ban sharing was not an issue, would everyone here be okay with 1945 having people publicly in favor of sync stalking in their staff list?

kuilin

kuilin I'm not saying this to be contrarian, I genuinely believe that the ban sharing agreement has come under fire only because it is being used to justify 1945 not removing staff members who are banned but people are unhappy about that not solely because of ban sharing. If this is the case, then 1945's banned admins should have nothing to do with this proposal

MaMere

In the future, each alliance can issue bans that pertain to their own alliance, but can be seen by all the other alliances. This will allow the others to either honor the ban, or proceed with due caution, by never allowing that player to have access to sync info, for instance, or to hold a leadership position where they could kick a whole clan.

With the dwindling of coc player numbers, this is a wise move, I believe. We can allow those who are reformed a chance to prove that, where they have no power at all, while helping clans who desperately need players.

Perhaps after a year or more of perfect behavior, the ban can be revisited.

kuilin

I'm not sure how you found a consensus here without any response to my concerns above

Anubhav

kuilin

Our side has been clear. Ban people shouldn't be allowed as staff if we don't allow BAN players in the clan. We had discussion but there was no outcome, 1945 said they will keep those people as staffs and you ignored whole discussion.

Of someone isn't ready to remove the staff, we can't force them. You as CC creator should be the one to do that…We as league admins have to think about maintaining understanding to have peace talks for future matches.

If there is BAN sharing, BAN staffs must not be allowed otherwise the BAN SHARING agreement should be terminated.

Everyone is ready to terminate BAN SHARING agreement and apparently your vote doesn't count in any discussion. So since everyone was ready about terminating BAN SHARING, the discussion was locked.

Either you should ask EVERYONE to properly follow BAN SHARING or just let BAN SHARING be dismissed, as decided mutually by all leagues here….. Having discussion has no point because we have said what we wanted and 1945 said what they wanted to.

All that requires is decision.

Someoneclean765

Kuilin this message verifies I'm the owner of this account. I want my account deleted and gone

kuilin

Anubhav Ban people shouldn't be allowed as staff if we don't allow BAN players in the clan.

I really think this doesn't make any sense. What do the two have to do with each other at all? People are upset at 1945 for having sync stalkers as admins because sync stalking is bad not because of the ban sharing agreement.

Any one person can prevent a consensus, and I'm doing so, because I think this reasoning is nonsensical. If you would like to call a vote and override me, go ahead, but currently, I still believe this will not solve the greater issue, and 1945 will come under fire again for something else, and threaten to leave again, and we will be back at square one. The root problem, after all, is unresolved - that 1945 has past sync stalkers in its administration, and that people dislike that.

Also, consider carefully when I say that most of my motivation for working on the tech stuff is unity between leagues against sync stalkers and people of bad repute. If this motion passes, then what else will be shared between us? Just a technical problem where there is only one system, retrofitted to divide information on league lines?

Anubhav

kuilin

Your argument is nonsensical.

I vote for dismissing Ban sharing agreement

Aurora

kuilin If 1945 is not going to remove those STAFFS either leave the system,

then better we should REJECT THE BAN SHARING AGREEMENT.

ShiningKnight

I agree with Anubhav .

Ban sharing agreement should be removed.

Tarek

I also vote for removal of ban sharing agreement

Shavy

1945 will stay out from voting as the league name has been taken a lot of times in a bad way.

Villain

Interesting.

There is going to be 5 votes in total since 1945 decided to abstain. 4 out of 5 decided to reject BAN SHARING, it's clear majority?

SMShamim

I agree with majority to dismiss BAN sharing agreement………..

Anubhav

As kuilin opposition stopped from making a consensus so a voting was needed

5 votes were in favour of dismissing BAN SHARING agreement and 1945 decided to abstain (Though they voted for BAN SHARING dismissal in start of discussion)

So with clear majority, BAN SHARING is dismissed