Got a "real-life hypothetical" question for you guys and I was curious to what you thought. If you feel like replying, please read the entire post and the rules at the bottom.

Situation:
Lets say you're a guild officer in a family-type guild (ie: non-hardcore). You have a friend in real life who is app'ing to the guild. The app shows up and seems to get along well and do their job well. As you are a guild officer, you have access to the guild's private Officer's forum where apps are discussed.

After two weeks or so after the app has been actively raiding with the guild and seemingly doing well, another officer posts a concern about the person. The concern states that he/she feels that the app is not trustworthy, thinks that they have done some shady things in the past, and gets a "bad vibe" about the person. Take into consideration that this particular officer has been chatting in a friendly manner to the app in question, and often goes to xp with him/her after raids and "hangs out" together. All the while harboring these "bad vibes" but never confronting the person directly about them.

A few other officers reply, one or two saying the same thing with the same vagueness about "bad vibes" and some nebulous descriptions about things in the past.

Two of the other officers know the person in real life. As the thread has derailed into somewhat of a "bash" about the app's character, one of the officers decides to take matters into their own hands and lets the app know that these things are being spoken about. Furthermore, the entire thread, names and complete posts included, are emailed to that app.

On the messageboard, the two officers who know the app in real life, and a few others, start defending the app in question. The two who know the app in real life are not hiding that fact, they state that they know the person in real life and volunteer facts about that person, mostly refuting the shady past deeds as misconstrued and incorrect. It turns out that the "shady deeds" are actually nonexistent. However, the app is rejected because of the "conflict" in the officer thread. The app is "released," but invited to join in any raids if they're online.

The app emails the guild leader letting them know that they had heard about a thread in the officer forum where they were being discussed and felt that it was unfair that the person was not allowed to defend himself, or that any of the officers had directly confronted him/her about the concerns. This troubles the guild leader, but not because that they felt that the app should have been able to defend them self, but because the sanctity of their officer forum had been breeched.

The Guild leader posts in the officer forum letting the other officers know that someone had been "leaking" information to the app, and possibly paraphrasing the contents of the threads so that it seemed that the officers were on a "witch hunt" against the app. (Note this is untrue because the entire thread was posted, not just bits - but this was a later fact.) The app is "pressured" for more information about the leak while feigning interest in their concerns about the character bashing. The app does not give any more information, but instead the officer who "leaked" the information comes forth willingly and is confident in their righteousness in the matter.

Guild Side: The officer should not have let the app know what was going on. Any information on the officer board is held in strict confidentiality and it is considered a "safe place" where the officers can "let off some steam." Violating this trust was like desecrating the sanctity of the forum.

Officer Side: The officer forum should not be used for character assassination and any problem about a person should be voiced to that person in a manner where the other person can defend them self or at least reply to the criticisms. The choice between holding "guild trust" and a "real life friendship" was an easy and obvious one.

The Question:
So do you believe that this is a question of ethics as the Guild Leader sees it, or as a question of morals as the Guild Officer sees it?

The Rules:
This is not a "what if they did this...?" scenario. The facts presented are the case and cannot be changed. This is not a "they should have handled it different" situation.

Further clarification of the events posted can be requested if needed, but the actions of the guild officers, app or leader cannot be changed.



...So? What do you guys think?

Both were right. The one who leaked the information had the right impulse, because by your description those two officers sound like two-faced jerks. I would have been incensed too in that situation. However, the leader was partly right in that he should not have leaked the private messages but rather should have talked to the applicant directly.

Personally I'm surprised the applicant still has any interest at all in joining a supposed "family" guild where the leaders have no qualms about stabbing you in the back. I'd run screaming from that guild and never look back.

My opinion on this is that it's just a tough situation.

I agree that leaking the post was a bad idea--I'm not past telling the app "Hey, things are going slowly with your application," but more than that should wait until AFTER the app is accepted/denied.

The ones that had "bad vibes" needed to be more specific in order to deny the app. Without any actual occasions of shady deals, or any "proof," so to speak, there are no grounds for denial.

In other words, I pretty much agree with Tudamorf.

Information leaker was in the wrong. They went about things in an underhanded manner and thus were being just as bad as the character assasination folks that didn't have the balls to confront the app directly.(they were ALSO in the wrong)

y two cents, it could have been handled better.

I must admit to being confused to how your admission process works though, maybe I'm missing something.

I'm not fond of how the whole guild application thing goes. There's a lot of back room stuff like someone voting against someone because they don't like someone who sponsered the person. Real stinky political bull**** that goes on all the time. Then, despite your best efforts, people are on their best behavior when they apply and can turn into maroons after they get in. It's such a crap-shoot. That's why I like family guilds, people don't really apply, they are just integrated into the family. They've got nothing to gain really from joining, except more friends. Won't be uber loots or any of that other crap that makes people join guilds.

It sounds to me like everyone had a bit of blame to share. Officer stuff is supposed to be confidential, but it sounds like the officers weren't acting very maturely. I would've probably handled it by talking privately to each officer/leader and confronting them on their two-facedness, privately in chat or on the telephone.

Hindsight is always 20/20, but I remind you guys of the rules :)

This is not a "what if they did this...?" scenario. The facts presented are the case and cannot be changed. This is not a "they should have handled it different" situation.

Morals or ethics? Well, everything can't be broken down into wrong and right quite so easily. The leaker did probably violate an ethic by leaking information. The other officers were probably a little on the moral low ground by slandering someone. But then again, I think real life friends need to take priority over a bloody game.

So there is no clear wrong or right just judgements and actions and now consequences.