Vote of No Confidence
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-01-2013, 10:30 PM
RE: Vote of No Confidence
For the record: Stark did not step down because the Forum Team did not want to ban anyone. Stark personally did not want to ban Fuzzy or anyone else, but he got tired of the fuckers who wouldn't drop the issue. Fuzzy didn't make Stark leave. People complaining about Fuzzy was the last straw of several months of bitching and complaining.

So what some people want to blame the Forum Team for was really caused by those same complainers.

With Stark on the sidelines, the Team is now working on the structure that will be needed to govern our ever-changing Forum moving forward.

You should be seeing more about this in the coming days.

Happy New Year, TTA. Let's make it the best one we've had yet!

"All that is necessary for the triumph of Calvinism is that good Atheists do nothing." ~Eric Oh My
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Erxomai's post
01-01-2013, 10:36 PM (This post was last modified: 01-01-2013 10:47 PM by Near.)
RE: Vote of No Confidence
Well, I guess that's where we part ways.

I got my knickers all in a twist at first, but luckily I was at work when all this shit went down, and it's not even worth trying to type out a response on a cellphone with the stupid auto-correct.

That gave me the chance to just read through what everyone was saying and vent my rage that way. I found myself agreeing with people on both sides. The result being, no whining for the members who have decided to leave to come back(I would love it if they were still here, but they are grown people who have made their choices. They are always welcome back of course.), no bitching at the mods and telling them to sack up, and no pointing fingers every which way.

No need to resort to name calling, or accusation hurling. It all boils down to "could have, should have, would have." What's done is done, so let's let that lie. The past has
passed.

Now is the time to focus on the future. We don't need aforum wide revolt, making this place shitty for the established members, and scary for the new or prospective members. We have enough people who join and make one or two posts and then never come back. We don't need more drama to give people a reason not to come back.


There'sa lot to be said about keeping a level head in all of this. A lot of us want change. Maybe three people I have seen don't want change. It'sa pretty safe bet that we will see some change.

One of the issues about getting it done, was brought up by KC (I think). It's the holidays. Most people are hanging out with friends and family, and
getting black out drunk. The mods aren't robots, they are people. People with lives. They aren't getting paid for this, this is a donation of their time. Don't expect things to change at the snap of the fingers. Give it a week or two, for people to get into the swing of the new year. Drinking Beverage



If the mods want our input (and I sincerely hope they do), they'll get back to us with a plan shortly. (Like, a week or two, tops.)


*You moderators better not make me a liar, you every-other-colour-except-blue-and-red username bastards Dodgy * Tongue

Contribute to the Community Resource!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Near's post
02-01-2013, 12:19 AM (This post was last modified: 02-01-2013 12:32 AM by Logica Humano.)
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(01-01-2013 10:30 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  For the record: Stark did not step down because the Forum Team did not want to ban anyone. Stark personally did not want to ban Fuzzy or anyone else, but he got tired of the fuckers who wouldn't drop the issue. Fuzzy didn't make Stark leave. People complaining about Fuzzy was the last straw of several months of bitching and complaining.

So what some people want to blame the Forum Team for was really caused by those same complainers.

With Stark on the sidelines, the Team is now working on the structure that will be needed to govern our ever-changing Forum moving forward.

You should be seeing more about this in the coming days.

Happy New Year, TTA. Let's make it the best one we've had yet!
Ah, so instead of actually taking care of his responsibility, he left? Nice. This shouldn't have even been a debate at all. There shouldn't have been an extensive thread convincing you why the rules needed to be revised, and why Dick Fart should have been banned. It was your utter reluctance to do something about it, not the majority of the forum who had been pointing this fucker out for the past several days.

None of this shouldn't have happened because it is you people who are supposed to take care of it, not stand idly by whilst members are trying to draw your attention to something.

The staff seems totally incapable of handling destructive, offensive, and actively aggressive members. I am glad you are finally getting around to addressing the rules (or, rather, the lack thereof), but frankly I am extremely upset at your constant delay, excuses, and indecisiveness on the matter.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2013, 12:30 AM
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(01-01-2013 10:36 PM)Near Wrote:  If the mods want our input (and I sincerely hope they do), they'll get back to us with a plan shortly. (Like, a week or two, tops.)
I really hope they do, but I will believe it when I see it. When, in the past, have they ever cared about a matter like this? I require evidence.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2013, 05:43 AM
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 12:19 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Ah, so instead of actually taking care of his responsibility, he left? Nice. This shouldn't have even been a debate at all. There shouldn't have been an extensive thread convincing you why the rules needed to be revised, and why Dick Fart should have been banned. It was your utter reluctance to do something about it, not the majority of the forum who had been pointing this fucker out for the past several days.

Just to clarify, I pretty sure less than 10 people called for FZU to be banned, and that didn't even included Anjele. That's a weird majority you have there. I, personally, suspect that there were quite a few people against it but who didn't wanna say it publicly for fear of being attacked for it, that's just my opinion though.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2013, 07:54 AM
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 05:43 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  
(02-01-2013 12:19 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Ah, so instead of actually taking care of his responsibility, he left? Nice. This shouldn't have even been a debate at all. There shouldn't have been an extensive thread convincing you why the rules needed to be revised, and why Dick Fart should have been banned. It was your utter reluctance to do something about it, not the majority of the forum who had been pointing this fucker out for the past several days.

Just to clarify, I pretty sure less than 10 people called for FZU to be banned, and that didn't even included Anjele. That's a weird majority you have there. I, personally, suspect that there were quite a few people against it but who didn't wanna say it publicly for fear of being attacked for it, that's just my opinion though.
Why would they be afraid to say it when, in reality, the people who did mention banning were the ones attacked?

I am well aware Anjele did not publicly say she wanted the fuck banned. I would also invite you to actually look at that thread, posts in favor of removing the problem or that suggested more rules had far more likes than any of the staff's bumbling defense.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2013, 08:02 AM
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 07:54 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Why would they be afraid to say it when, in reality, the people who did mention banning were the ones attacked?

I am well aware Anjele did not publicly say she wanted the fuck banned. I would also invite you to actually look at that thread, posts in favor of removing the problem or that suggested more rules had far more likes than any of the staff's bumbling defense.

If you have any ideas for objective rules feel free to start a thread in FTM suggesting them. Saying completely subjective things like "ban all assholes" though doesn't really help.

No one was attacked for asking for a banning. People were attacked for demanding someone be banned, and then throwing their toys out of the pram when they didn't immediately get their own way. Plus, the attacks were both ways, the FT were accused of not caring, being lazy, being incompetent, and being assholes, for not immediately submitting to a few people's demand and banning FZU. It's the FT's role to put their heads above the parapet and accept they risk those sort of attacks, I'm not convinced regular members would want to take that risk though.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Hughsie's post
02-01-2013, 08:09 AM
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 12:30 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(01-01-2013 10:36 PM)Near Wrote:  If the mods want our input (and I sincerely hope they do), they'll get back to us with a plan shortly. (Like, a week or two, tops.)
I really hope they do, but I will believe it when I see it. When, in the past, have they ever cared about a matter like this? I require evidence.


Evidence will be provided. Drinking Beverage

And lay off Stark, please. He has a serious health issue to deal with.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
02-01-2013, 08:10 AM
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 08:02 AM)Hughsie Wrote:  
(02-01-2013 07:54 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Why would they be afraid to say it when, in reality, the people who did mention banning were the ones attacked?

I am well aware Anjele did not publicly say she wanted the fuck banned. I would also invite you to actually look at that thread, posts in favor of removing the problem or that suggested more rules had far more likes than any of the staff's bumbling defense.

If you have any ideas for objective rules feel free to start a thread in FTM suggesting them. Saying completely subjective things like "ban all assholes" though doesn't really help.

No one was attacked for asking for a banning. People were attacked for demanding someone be banned, and then throwing their toys out of the pram when they didn't immediately get their own way. Plus, the attacks were both ways, the FT were accused of not caring, being lazy, being incompetent, and being assholes, for not immediately submitting to a few people's demand and banning FZU. It's the FT's role to put their heads above the parapet and accept they risk those sort of attacks, I'm not convinced regular members would want to take that risk though.
I am not a fool, Hugshie.

Yes, they were. Hell, several members were attacking Anjele's position under the assumption that she did want FZU banned. But, again, you can look at the thread and see the numbers that wanted some form of action against FZU. I am not saying banning is the absolute solution, nor have I ever said that. I, several times, suggested that rules be added.

But see, the problem with suggesting rules is that the majority of this forum views regulation in this idiotic dichotomy of anarchy and totalitarianism, with no reasonable middle ground. Ah, anarcho-capitalism masquerading as Libertarianism. Got to love it.

[Image: 4833fa13.jpg]
Poonjab
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2013, 08:13 AM
RE: Vote of No Confidence
(02-01-2013 08:10 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  I am not a fool, Hugshie.

Yes, they were. Hell, several members were attacking Anjele's position under the assumption that she did want FZU banned. But, again, you can look at the thread and see the numbers that wanted some form of action against FZU. I am not saying banning is the absolute solution, nor have I ever said that. I, several times, suggested that rules be added.

But see, the problem with suggesting rules is that the majority of this forum views regulation in this idiotic dichotomy of anarchy and totalitarianism, with no reasonable middle ground. Ah, anarcho-capitalism masquerading as Libertarianism. Got to love it.

We're gonna have to accept the we disagree then. You think the attacks were aimed at people for asking for a ban, I think they were aimed at people who demanded a ban and then flipped out that they didn't get it. I like you and it's not worth us having a falling out over.

Best and worst of Ferdinand .....
Best
Ferdinand: We don't really say 'theist' in Alabama. Here, you're either a Christian, or you're from Afghanistan and we fucking hate you.
Worst
Ferdinand: Everyone from British is so, like, fucking retarded.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Banner Vote Jagare 51 915 25-07-2014 07:08 AM
Last Post: kingschosen
  Vote on Natal Charts Full Circle 56 1,243 28-05-2013 05:51 PM
Last Post: Dom
Forum Jump: