- Joined
- May 8, 2026
- Messages
- 26
- Your ID
- 14
- Admin's Name
- Avi
- Date of violation
- Jul 16, 2026
- Time of violation
- 20:10 BST
- Proofs
- https://discord.gg/4mdBCSu5A
Hi All,
I'm writing this on behalf of Zak, so apologies if this isn't the usual way of doing things, but I genuinely feel the need to raise some concerns regarding the recent Discord punishment he received.
Before I get into it, I just want to make something clear. I'm not writing this because it's Zak. If Zak is being a little shit, then I'm the first person to say he deserves punishing. I don't have an issue with staff taking action when someone genuinely crosses the line. This complaint isn't about defending bad behaviour, it's about whether this particular punishment was actually justified.
The latest punishment Zak received was a week long Discord mute based on the two messages attached below, which he posted shortly after another 24-hour mute had expired.
From my understanding and perspective... toxicity is behaviour that creates a hostile, insulting or intimidating environment for other members through harassment, personal attacks or repeated inflammatory behaviour. Looking at these two messages objectively, I just don't think they meet that threshold. Were they immature? Yes. Were they cheeky? Absolutely. Were they slightly provocative? Probably. But were they toxic? I honestly don't think so.
A week long mute for those messages feels completely disproportionate. My bigger concern is how Discord moderation is currently being handled. I've seen staff argue with members in general chat, joke around before banning people, post reaction gifs to drama kicking off and generally engage with members in ways that aren't exactly professional. Yet somehow these two messages are considered worthy of a week-long mute. That doesn't feel consistent.
What I also struggle to understand is how members are expected to know they've crossed a line when there aren't any published Discord rules explaining what behaviour is or isn't punishable. You can't expect people to follow rules that haven't actually been written down. I know full well Zak has been verbally (and in writing) been warned about being a twat in Discord. If making jokes like this isn't acceptable in the Discord, then fair enough, but where is that written? If someone can point me towards a Discord rule that clearly says behaviour like this isn't allowed, then I'll happily stand corrected. On top of that, Zak wasn't even told why he was punished. There was no explanation, no warning, and the messages themselves weren't even removed. Surely the minimum expectation when issuing a punishment is telling someone exactly what they've done wrong so they understand it and don't repeat it.
This is also the second punishment Zak has received this week that raises concerns around consistency. Earlier in the week he was muted for making a joke about another player, despite another member of staff joining in with the same joke. That punishment was later overturned by the very same person this complaint relates to. If that punishment was deemed incorrect and reversed, despite actually involving another person, then I'm struggling to understand how these latest messages suddenly justify a week-long mute.
Finally, I'd like to question why this type of punishment is being dealt with in the first place without any clear moderation framework. Trey (sorry for dragging you into this mate, all love
) explained that whether something is offensive comes down to the individual member of staff's judgement. I completely appreciate that staff will always involve some level of discretion, but discretion should sit alongside clear rules, not replace them. Otherwise, two different admins can look at exactly the same message and come to completely different conclusions, and members are left guessing where the line actually is.
At the end of the day, I'm not asking for staff to stop moderating Discord. If someone is genuinely toxic, abusive or making the community worse, then absolutely deal with it. I'm simply asking for moderation and punishment to be fair, proportionate and consistent. Right now it feels like people can be punished based on subjective interpretation rather than any written standard, and I don't think that's good for the community or for the staff team themselves.
I'd appreciate this being reviewed, not just because it's Zak, but because I think it highlights a much wider issue with how Discord moderation is currently handled.
I'm writing this on behalf of Zak, so apologies if this isn't the usual way of doing things, but I genuinely feel the need to raise some concerns regarding the recent Discord punishment he received.
Before I get into it, I just want to make something clear. I'm not writing this because it's Zak. If Zak is being a little shit, then I'm the first person to say he deserves punishing. I don't have an issue with staff taking action when someone genuinely crosses the line. This complaint isn't about defending bad behaviour, it's about whether this particular punishment was actually justified.
The latest punishment Zak received was a week long Discord mute based on the two messages attached below, which he posted shortly after another 24-hour mute had expired.
From my understanding and perspective... toxicity is behaviour that creates a hostile, insulting or intimidating environment for other members through harassment, personal attacks or repeated inflammatory behaviour. Looking at these two messages objectively, I just don't think they meet that threshold. Were they immature? Yes. Were they cheeky? Absolutely. Were they slightly provocative? Probably. But were they toxic? I honestly don't think so.
A week long mute for those messages feels completely disproportionate. My bigger concern is how Discord moderation is currently being handled. I've seen staff argue with members in general chat, joke around before banning people, post reaction gifs to drama kicking off and generally engage with members in ways that aren't exactly professional. Yet somehow these two messages are considered worthy of a week-long mute. That doesn't feel consistent.
What I also struggle to understand is how members are expected to know they've crossed a line when there aren't any published Discord rules explaining what behaviour is or isn't punishable. You can't expect people to follow rules that haven't actually been written down. I know full well Zak has been verbally (and in writing) been warned about being a twat in Discord. If making jokes like this isn't acceptable in the Discord, then fair enough, but where is that written? If someone can point me towards a Discord rule that clearly says behaviour like this isn't allowed, then I'll happily stand corrected. On top of that, Zak wasn't even told why he was punished. There was no explanation, no warning, and the messages themselves weren't even removed. Surely the minimum expectation when issuing a punishment is telling someone exactly what they've done wrong so they understand it and don't repeat it.
This is also the second punishment Zak has received this week that raises concerns around consistency. Earlier in the week he was muted for making a joke about another player, despite another member of staff joining in with the same joke. That punishment was later overturned by the very same person this complaint relates to. If that punishment was deemed incorrect and reversed, despite actually involving another person, then I'm struggling to understand how these latest messages suddenly justify a week-long mute.
Finally, I'd like to question why this type of punishment is being dealt with in the first place without any clear moderation framework. Trey (sorry for dragging you into this mate, all love
) explained that whether something is offensive comes down to the individual member of staff's judgement. I completely appreciate that staff will always involve some level of discretion, but discretion should sit alongside clear rules, not replace them. Otherwise, two different admins can look at exactly the same message and come to completely different conclusions, and members are left guessing where the line actually is.At the end of the day, I'm not asking for staff to stop moderating Discord. If someone is genuinely toxic, abusive or making the community worse, then absolutely deal with it. I'm simply asking for moderation and punishment to be fair, proportionate and consistent. Right now it feels like people can be punished based on subjective interpretation rather than any written standard, and I don't think that's good for the community or for the staff team themselves.
I'd appreciate this being reviewed, not just because it's Zak, but because I think it highlights a much wider issue with how Discord moderation is currently handled.
