Good afternoon,
I logged on the other day to find that several of my map arts had been completely removed with no warning, no message, and no explanation. Just gone after a significant amount of time and effort.
This isn’t just frustrating, it exposes a serious problem with how staff operate.
Direct Staff Contradiction
A few days ago, we explicitly asked Kaph about one of these map arts (a Sabrina Carpenter image) and was told it was allowed. That should have been the end of it.
Instead, today Skuhoo logs on for the first time in 2 years and removed that same map art anyway.
So which staff member are players supposed to listen to?
Does staff approval actually mean anything, or can it just be overridden whenever someone else feels like it?
The Rule Being Cited Does Not Apply
The only rule being referenced is Rule 5.3: Offensive Visual Expressions.
None of my map arts meet that definition.
Offensive Visual Expression: "Any image, object, symbol, gesture, or artwork that causes strong annoyance, outrage, disgust, or moral repugnance in the observer. It is a form of communication that deviates from societal boundaries, often targeting individuals or groups based on race, religion, sex, or ethnicity."
You can walk into any grocery store, open a magazine, or go to a public beach and see far more revealing or "edgy" content than what was displayed.
Mapart That Was Removed
What This Actually Comes Down To
From conversations with staff:
No. It isn’t.
Stop sexualizing women and then using that as justification to remove completely normal content. A swimsuit, a crop top, or standard model imagery is not automatically sexual, and it does not meet your own definition of “offensive.”
But my map arts get silently removed?
This is not about maintaining a standard.
This is selective enforcement.
Public Behavior vs Enforcement
There is also a clear contradiction between what is enforced and what is openly tolerated.
In another forum post, a player was muted for making a joke about “Loka-chan R34,” while at the same time describing a situation where a player publicly shared pixel art lore depicting a naked character (“Berry Wood”) in chat, even directly referencing staff while doing so.
According to that post, this happened in full view of staff and Cryptite, and instead of immediate enforcement, it was treated casually.
So on one hand:
Calling this a “gray area” is not accurate.
The rules are written. I followed them.
The enforcement is what’s inconsistent.
Questions That Need Answers
Final Point
Right now, this does not look like rule enforcement.
It looks like staff making impulsive decisions and justifying them afterward, while ignoring their own rules when it benefits them.
I logged on the other day to find that several of my map arts had been completely removed with no warning, no message, and no explanation. Just gone after a significant amount of time and effort.
This isn’t just frustrating, it exposes a serious problem with how staff operate.
Direct Staff Contradiction
A few days ago, we explicitly asked Kaph about one of these map arts (a Sabrina Carpenter image) and was told it was allowed. That should have been the end of it.
Instead, today Skuhoo logs on for the first time in 2 years and removed that same map art anyway.
So which staff member are players supposed to listen to?
Does staff approval actually mean anything, or can it just be overridden whenever someone else feels like it?
The Rule Being Cited Does Not Apply
The only rule being referenced is Rule 5.3: Offensive Visual Expressions.
None of my map arts meet that definition.
- They do not target any individual or group
- They are not explicit
- They are not pornographic
Definitions:
Offensive Speech: "Language that insults, causes resentment, or humiliates individuals based on characteristics like race, religion, or gender, often overlapping with hate speech."Offensive Visual Expression: "Any image, object, symbol, gesture, or artwork that causes strong annoyance, outrage, disgust, or moral repugnance in the observer. It is a form of communication that deviates from societal boundaries, often targeting individuals or groups based on race, religion, sex, or ethnicity."
You can walk into any grocery store, open a magazine, or go to a public beach and see far more revealing or "edgy" content than what was displayed.
Mapart That Was Removed
What This Actually Comes Down To
From conversations with staff:
- Kaph stated this was a “judgment call”
- Cryptite doubled down and implied content like this is inherently sexual
No. It isn’t.
Stop sexualizing women and then using that as justification to remove completely normal content. A swimsuit, a crop top, or standard model imagery is not automatically sexual, and it does not meet your own definition of “offensive.”
Blatant Inconsistency
Meanwhile, the server still contains:- Anime map arts depicting underage characters
- Player-written books with explicit fanfiction (smut)
- Builds and quests with crude or suggestive humor
- Lores that have literal porn on them
But my map arts get silently removed?
This is not about maintaining a standard.
This is selective enforcement.
Public Behavior vs Enforcement
There is also a clear contradiction between what is enforced and what is openly tolerated.
In another forum post, a player was muted for making a joke about “Loka-chan R34,” while at the same time describing a situation where a player publicly shared pixel art lore depicting a naked character (“Berry Wood”) in chat, even directly referencing staff while doing so.
According to that post, this happened in full view of staff and Cryptite, and instead of immediate enforcement, it was treated casually.
So on one hand:
- A joke or reference results in punishment
- Explicit or suggestive content is shared publicly and tolerated
The Actual Problem
Right now, the reality is:- Kaph can approve something, and Skuhoo can remove it anyway
- Cryptite can redefine what the word “sexual” means on the spot
- The written rules are ignored whenever they are inconvenient for staff
Calling this a “gray area” is not accurate.
The rules are written. I followed them.
The enforcement is what’s inconsistent.
Questions That Need Answers
- How does this specifically violate the written definition of Rule 5.3?
- What does “NSFW” actually mean on this server, since it is not defined anywhere?
- Why does staff approval not hold any weight if another staff member can override it without explanation?
Final Point
Right now, this does not look like rule enforcement.
It looks like staff making impulsive decisions and justifying them afterward, while ignoring their own rules when it benefits them.
. HOWEVER, if you make a mapart that features a singer's cover art, that is ATROCIOUS and HANEOUS and needs to be terminated IMMEDIATELY as skuhoo's first action as a staff member in MONTHS (
)
