/register while in-game to register for a forums account.
Low IQ isnt the word I would use. This post is about bringing light to this and hopefully coming to a good resolution regarding how staff treat consequences going forward, not about criticizing them, but about holding them accountable.
False Banning is a product yes, but staff aren't the only people who need to be held accountable due to their lack of transparency; it's up to the player to solve their own problems to better reform themselves.
I just feel like they should give a little more transparency for if I did say a inappropriate joke that I wouldn’t do that again
I will admit that it was wrong of me to call Kylaz a "alleged" pdf because technically since the anime child is 3000 years old its not weird but if I'm getting muted for harassment because I used my first amendment right to express how I felt about the whole Kylaz situation and then I see other people calling Kylaz a pdf and they arent getting muted then something is wrong with the staff and their priorities.
because people are allowed to voice their options on other people that's just human. And also just look at Kylaz LCR forum and look how much people called her a "PDF" when are they getting muted 
The First Amendment rights don't apply to Loka, let alone any Minecraft server, because Loka doesn't receive any federal funding nor is it controlled by any US government entity, making it a private entity; however, I do believe that he shouldn't have been muted for calling Kylaz a Pedophile, since a BUNCH of other people had called her a pedophile for their actions (ifykyk).I will admit that it was wrong of me to call Kylaz a "alleged" pdf because technically since the anime child is 3000 years old its not weird but if I'm getting muted for harassment because I used my first amendment right to express how I felt about the whole Kylaz situation and then I see other people calling Kylaz a pdf and they arent getting muted then something is wrong with the staff and their priorities.
I'd also like to address why me and fa1c are getting muted for harassment. Getting muted for doing 1 thing or action isn't harassment unless the severity of the first offence is horrible, harassment is a cycle for example you log on loka and you are getting msged consistently by player (minecraftPvper123) and he's calling you calling you everything in the book but its consistently. That's harassment but if it happens once yeah a may bother you for a moment but its not harassment.
All I'm trying to say here is that some of these situations of people getting muted for harassment isn't technically harassment unless the first offence creates a hostile environment around the players. But to be fair by definition of harassment if I really harassed Kylaz that bad that it creates a hostile/unsafe environment for her than Kylaz is cooked
View attachment 15490
Neither you nor anybody else should be muted for this if you actually got muted for that, Kylaz is a pedophile. She has confessed in messages (which we know are authentic because she recorded and scrolled through those DMs herself since they paint her in a way that makes it easier to feel bad for her since she is actively complaining about these urges she has and that she needs help, and that is a good first step and I hope she does / is getting help) that she has had a repeated urge to pleasure herself to “art” / drawings meant to resemble and sexualize young children. This absolutely fits the definition of pedophilia and whether she was 17 at the time or not doesn’t change this. The genre of “loli” hentai that she refers to has its name derived from a Japanese word that was itself borrowed from the title of the book Lolita, the story of which is told from the perspective of an unreliable narrator who is depicted as insane and who actively abuses and sexualizes a young girl throughout the book.+1 I got muted for calling Kylaz a pdf in my friend group discord server but if you go to Kylaz's LCR forum you can see other people calling them pdf. https://forums.lokamc.com/threads/kylaz-for-lcr.11722/. I see now that calling Kylaz a pdf was too much but if I got muted for this how are others not
The goal of this thread is to get clarification from staff on how they handle all of the subjects mentioned in this post and finally gain some transparency on how things are actually moderated and how they come to decisions in these situations.
neither of us should have or should still be muted for “harassment”. I don’t think any of what we said could ever constitute as harassment laid out in the rules. And the Kylaz situation is very baffling how no action hasn’t been taken. I guarantee if this was anyone else something would’ve already been done
thats the biggest truth nuke ive seen in a while
Based
wait do tell on what happened
berd is not staff, this is meaningless.
This confusion almost exclusively happens when a player who is prone to common harassment finally gets punished. Because their behavior is so commonplace, they can't think of a specific example of why they might have gotten punished which is usually a bad sign as it is. The reason we cannot (not just simple arbitrarily choose not to) always share with players why they were punished is to protect the victim. This has been our stance for the entirety of Loka's existence.
That's not why you were muted.
Protecting victims and providing transparency are not mutually exclusive. The argument assumes that the only way to explain a punishment is to reveal who reported it, but that's a false choice. Staff can explain what rule was violated, provide relevant evidence with identifying information removed, or summarize the conduct that led to the punishment without exposing the victim's identity.
The answer is that no one is suggesting staff should do that. Protecting a victim does not require withholding every detail of a case, nor does transparency require revealing the victim's identity. Those are two separate issues. Staff can preserve confidentiality while still giving the punished player enough information to understand what rule they broke, what conduct led to the punishment, and why the decision was made. Victim protection and procedural transparency are not opposing goals—they can and should exist together.
