|
Vote of No Confidence
|
|
|
|
|
02-01-2013, 08:16 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 08:13 AM)Hughsie Wrote:You are right, and as long as the team is working on modifying the rules, I will throw in my two-cents in the next few days to come.(02-01-2013 08:10 AM)Logica Humano Wrote: I am not a fool, Hugshie.
|
||||
|
02-01-2013, 08:56 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
RE: Vote of No Confidence
For the record, action was taken and he ignored our request. Future action was going to be taken, but BC pulled the trigger before we could discuss what to do.
And don't give me that crap about it taking too long... for crying out loud, it was Christmas and New Years and people have lives.
|
||||
2 users Like kingschosen's post |
|
02-01-2013, 09:06 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 08:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote: For the record, action was taken and he ignored our request. Future action was going to be taken, but BC pulled the trigger before we could discuss what to do. Hot damn, you mean you are not just game avatars on my PC? ![]() Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man |
||||
1 user Likes Dom's post |
|
02-01-2013, 09:11 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 09:06 AM)Dom Wrote:Well, no.(02-01-2013 08:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote: For the record, action was taken and he ignored our request. Future action was going to be taken, but BC pulled the trigger before we could discuss what to do. I'm actually an upside down dog vying for atheistic world dominance parading around as a Christian.
|
||||
2 users Like kingschosen's post |
|
02-01-2013, 09:13 AM
|
||||
|
||||
AW: RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 09:06 AM)Dom Wrote:I too was quite surprised when I found out that the different users on TTA aren't actually Erxomai's sock-puppet accounts.(02-01-2013 08:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote: For the record, action was taken and he ignored our request. Future action was going to be taken, but BC pulled the trigger before we could discuss what to do. Or are they?
|
||||
1 user Likes Vosur's post |
|
02-01-2013, 09:15 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 09:11 AM)kingschosen Wrote:(02-01-2013 09:06 AM)Dom Wrote: Hot damn, you mean you are not just game avatars on my PC?Well, no. Well, that pretty much explains everything. Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims. Science is not a subject, but a method. "We all got holes to fill, and them holes are all that's real; Some fall on you like a storm, sometimes you dig your own." |
||||
|
02-01-2013, 09:15 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 08:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote: For the record, action was taken and he ignored our request. Future action was going to be taken, but BC pulled the trigger before we could discuss what to do.You seemed to have ample time to comment on the thread of which the issue was brought up.
|
||||
|
02-01-2013, 09:21 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 09:15 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:I wasn't talking about me... plus I'm one person. And, I'm not a rogue mod.(02-01-2013 08:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote: For the record, action was taken and he ignored our request. Future action was going to be taken, but BC pulled the trigger before we could discuss what to do.You seemed to have ample time to comment on the thread of which the issue was brought up. I can't have a discussion with myself, LH.
|
||||
1 user Likes kingschosen's post |
|
02-01-2013, 10:33 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
RE: Vote of No Confidence
LH, I also find it peculiar that you're condemning the laissez faire attitude towards rules, while condemning the FT for upholding the rules that we do have and condemning us on the amount of time it takes us to make sure we uphold the integrity of those rules.
No matter what we do, we're wrong. Your comments are evidence of this. And, don't even start with "changing the rules". We're working on that, but the violation fell under the current rule set. We have to abide by that. Don't really see why that is so hard to understand. Yes, the rules were insufficient to handle the FZU situation. It was the perfect storm. But, the FT is in tune enough to realize this and is restructuring and rewriting as to not have this situation repeat itself. Complaining and insulting the FT doesn't help... it's expected... but doesn't help. You couldn't have done a better job, LH. No one could. We did the best job we could. We made the most efficient compromises we could regarding forum rules. The forum's complaints have been heard. And, we are listening to them. Stop being so negative. Despite what you may think, we care about this place and we're not just power hungry pissers that want to run things the way we want to run it. This is our forum (everyone's), and we want it to be the best for everyone. Unfortunately, that's not achievable, but we can come as close as possible. Stop being so negatively critical, and start suggesting ways that can make this place better. We're listening.
|
||||
2 users Like kingschosen's post |
|
02-01-2013, 10:37 AM
|
||||
|
||||
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 10:33 AM)kingschosen Wrote: LH, I also find it peculiar that you're condemning the laissez faire attitude towards rules, while condemning the FT for upholding the rules that we do have and condemning us on the amount of time it takes us to make sure we uphold the integrity of those rules. So what are the current rules regarding posting advertisements for paid services? ![]() Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man |
||||
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)





![[+]](images/night/collapse_collapsed.gif)


![[Image: dobie.png]](http://i1064.photobucket.com/albums/u369/mopsty/dobie.png)
