So once we've actually seen members of a shell being informed in /say about the scheduling forum only for them to say that said informant is QQ'ing and should "get over it" while members of the shell stand there mute, are we cool at that point to assume it's a shell full of asshats that is deserving of a little social ostracism? After all, silence assumes consent, does it not?
OK fine. You have a shell that openly flies in the face of the scheduling system. You know they are aware of it, there was a conversation in say around the trail marking for example, and one or more of the members/leaders openly mocked or refused to use the system. Those people get listed on here, "blackballed", whatever. That's fine, those people are jerks and deserve it. But also, any other member of that shell that was unfortunate enough to be present for the conversation, that didn't say anything for fear of getting kicked from their shell, or who didn't immediately up and drop their pearl, also gets their name posted on here and labeled a "douchebag" and gets blackballed.
You actually expect all of those people to say, "Oh gosh, this shell I've been in for the past 3 years, and has gotten me a lot of relic, doesn't play by the arbitrary 'rules' of this new server (that our old server never had). A lot of people on this server are mad at us. I should totally leave this shell, even though I'm next in line for my Duelist's Chapeau and try to find another shell where I can start all my points from scratch."
See, that's the thing. I try to put myself into the shoes of others. I try to find reasons to not immediately hate on people unless they give me a good reason to. Yes, silence assumes consent, but I'm a lot more forgiving of someone reluctantly consenting to something they aren't comfortable with given their circumstances than I'd be of the person or people actually causing the problem. Most people in this thread have thus far made no distinction between those two, and that's the part I personally feel is unfair.
If you want to warn people of the rogue shells, that's fine. If I knew which shell jacked our Bastok a few weekes ago, I'd have posted which one it was on here too (when questioned, they admitted to knowing of the QCDN scheduling and mocked it). If you want to list names of the people who act like jerks in game, that's fine. That's the whole point of this board, and I think it's great. And hell, if you want to personally inform every member of a shell lead by jerks that their shell is lead by jerks, that's fine too.
But as soon as you start telling people, "Hey, the shell you are in is lead by jerks, and even though you never did anything personally jerkish, if you don't quit the shell, then you are going to automatically be considered a jerk too, and I'm going to post your name on the QCDN boards, and everyone that reads them is going to ostracize you," that's the point where I think you've become the jerk.
When people on here start doing stuff like that (and in general start acting like the schedule police), I really think it makes the QCDN sheduling system appear to be "run by jerks" to people in the game (it's not, but it gives that impression). And (as I've said before) all you end up doing at that point is risking giving justification to the rogue shells to continue to ignore the system.