Wicked Clown
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-08-2014, 05:14 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(30-08-2014 04:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 02:42 PM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  Yes and despite that Hughsie claims that no such capability exists for him. Is he just lying, or is there just a serious misunderstanding here?



They do NOT have the power to override admin decisions though.

They do NOT have the authority just because you think they should. As far as I know, only Deep even has the capacity to do it.


Excuse me? I don't recall stating a dislike for either, just that neither are the case.

Please read my posts more carefully.

The distinction is between can and may, between the ability and the authority to do something.

If the Admins are deadlocked, say on whether or not to ban, the SMs have the ability and the authority to ban that person. Or not ban.

I never claimed they had the authority to override an Admin decision.
However, what happens when an Admin breaks the rules? Let's say aurora bans Revenant, just because.
Is that an irrevocable action with no consequences for aurora?

The SMs have the ability to oust the Admins, they have not clearly been given that authority, though it was discussed when the structure was set up.

There are few (any?) rules of governance set down for the structure of management of this forum - there is no constitution. It is more like tradition and precedent.



It can be changed.

Well in that case you are right, they do actually have the capacity, but not the authority.

How did this conversation start anyway? It seems like a rather drastic offshoot from the original topic (although that is the TTA way, of course).

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 05:14 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(30-08-2014 02:22 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 12:40 PM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  I will add that I think this discussion is important. I, for one, REALLY tire of people saying we're all meanie poo poo heads just because several share the same opinion. Hearing" mob mentality" kinda makes me wanna pull my hair out.
To be fair, this thread didn't disclose the issues until much deeper into the thread, and even then the issues are only eluded to.
There are mention of PMs, mention of driving someone off. But no quotes of what WC has said and no details of how he was able to drive someone off.

Without the details it does appear at first as "mob mentality".

I'm still confussed as to what has gone down.
The worst I have seen in a thread from WC is him posting a link saying "me spooning my girlfriend" but it turned out to be him talking about a spider. And in the same thread him talking about having a video of him cumming and then asking permission to post it, Him getting permission and then him not posting it.
So, from what I have seen, it's a bit off, but not overly shocking or worthy of scaring another valued member off.
And of course I have been told (and I accept) that I haven't really seen the issues that WC has presented.

If the purpose of this thread were to build a case on why WC is to be permabanned, I think this thread is failing because it isn't presenting the evidence. It raises lots of questions about WTF happened however.



To be fair we as members can discuss such things as needed. Anyone who feels out of the loop has the entire forum to read & educate themselves at any time. Finding out who WC has been here and what's gone down isn't hard.
Everyone. ..as far as I'm concerned...can weigh in as they see fit. But not choosing to get the story is anyone's choice.
Some of us had direct contact with him and tried to have reasonable discussion. But to no avail because he's a pain in the ass.
Had he not mentioned or claimed mental defenency he'd have been booted after his third retarded thread. But since he claimed hardship
...he's been given the extra mile and then some.

So....
Whtever. Looks like no majority rule to me.
And I find that sad.

But
That's just me.

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WitchSabrina's post
30-08-2014, 05:22 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(30-08-2014 05:14 PM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 04:04 PM)Chas Wrote:  Please read my posts more carefully.

The distinction is between can and may, between the ability and the authority to do something.

If the Admins are deadlocked, say on whether or not to ban, the SMs have the ability and the authority to ban that person. Or not ban.

I never claimed they had the authority to override an Admin decision.
However, what happens when an Admin breaks the rules? Let's say aurora bans Revenant, just because.
Is that an irrevocable action with no consequences for aurora?

The SMs have the ability to oust the Admins, they have not clearly been given that authority, though it was discussed when the structure was set up.

There are few (any?) rules of governance set down for the structure of management of this forum - there is no constitution. It is more like tradition and precedent.



It can be changed.

Well in that case you are right, they do actually have the capacity, but not the authority.

How did this conversation start anyway? It seems like a rather drastic offshoot from the original topic (although that is the TTA way, of course).

I think it started because hughsie is against banning WC because in his opinion the dude has only bent rules, and not broken them I believe. He doesn't want banning WC to disrupt the power of the forum team. He doesn't want more people to start getting banned for lesser and lesser crimes until it gets out of control. This lead to a discussion on who has what kind of power on the forum team.

I think that's how it started... this has been going back and forth quite a bit.

I hope that the world turns, and things get better. But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that, even though I do not know you, and even though I may never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you, I love you. With all my heart, I love you. - V for Vendetta
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 05:28 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(30-08-2014 05:22 PM)Smercury44 Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 05:14 PM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  Well in that case you are right, they do actually have the capacity, but not the authority.

How did this conversation start anyway? It seems like a rather drastic offshoot from the original topic (although that is the TTA way, of course).

I think it started because hughsie is against banning WC because in his opinion the dude has only bent rules, and not broken them I believe. He doesn't want banning WC to disrupt the power of the forum team. He doesn't want more people to start getting banned for lesser and lesser crimes until it gets out of control. This lead to a discussion on who has what kind of power on the forum team.

I think that's how it started... this has been going back and forth quite a bit.

Don't you just love TTAF's particular brand of bureaucracy?

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Free Thought's post
30-08-2014, 05:34 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(30-08-2014 04:59 PM)Ferdinand Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 04:53 PM)Chas Wrote:  Seth chose exactly one admin - Stark.

Let me rephrase. Seth still approves of the admin(s), and by approving of the new admins (the decision of the admin before them, I'm guessing) he gives them the control and responsibilities if the admin before them. Thus he still somewhat plays a large part in determining who the admin is. Seth wouldn't leave the forum in hands of people he didn't trust as admins, because the forum itself reflects back onto his business and name.

Approval of an admin at a particular time should have nothing to do with the ability to retract that approval if an admin does not perform as expected.

Only the Pope has a lifetime appointment. And as we saw a few months ago - even that can change.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 06:26 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
Quote:They do NOT have the power to override admin decisions though.

Tell Deep that. He seems to think they do...

Quote:Fist yourself. Facepalm

To which part do you object?

Quote:I think it started because hughsie is against banning WC because in his opinion the dude has only bent rules, and not broken them I believe. He doesn't want banning WC to disrupt the power of the forum team. He doesn't want more people to start getting banned for lesser and lesser crimes until it gets out of control. This lead to a discussion on who has what kind of power on the forum team.

I think that's how it started... this has been going back and forth quite a bit.

This isn't about WC, we all agree he's a worthless piece of shit, this whole thread is about Hughsie's and Deep's poor handling of the situation.

[Image: oscar.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 07:22 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(30-08-2014 06:26 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
Quote:They do NOT have the power to override admin decisions though.

Tell Deep that. He seems to think they do...

Quote:Fist yourself. Facepalm

To which part do you object?

Quote:I think it started because hughsie is against banning WC because in his opinion the dude has only bent rules, and not broken them I believe. He doesn't want banning WC to disrupt the power of the forum team. He doesn't want more people to start getting banned for lesser and lesser crimes until it gets out of control. This lead to a discussion on who has what kind of power on the forum team.

I think that's how it started... this has been going back and forth quite a bit.

This isn't about WC, we all agree he's a worthless piece of shit, this whole thread is about Hughsie's and Deep's poor handling of the situation.


Speaking only for myself;
I never said anyone handled anything poorly. I think the admins do the best they can.
What was more interesting to me is the conversation we're in NOW ... here. And to see how regular members are responded to.
Because at the end of the day.... it's the regulars here that make this place roll. Not the occasional fucktard that pops by stirring trouble.

Can I get an Amen?

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like WitchSabrina's post
30-08-2014, 07:24 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(30-08-2014 05:08 PM)Ferdinand Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 05:03 PM)Chas Wrote:  I don't think that has been true. When Stark passed it on, I don't think he sought Seth's approval of his choice. Maybe Stark could confirm or deny this.

The admins themselves speak with Seth about forum policy. I don't know how often, but I know that they do. Several admins had mentioned this before. If Seth were speaking to a newly chosen admin and didn't trust that person with the job, he wouldn't allow the person to be admin anyways. That's just kind of common sense. Thus giving that person approval to be admin. Or at least that's what I would expect because this forum and what goes on here reflect back on his name and business.

You make a great many assumptions. Drinking Beverage

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
30-08-2014, 07:27 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(30-08-2014 07:22 PM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  I think the admins do the best they can.

That seems to be the problem. Drinking Beverage

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
30-08-2014, 07:40 PM
RE: Wicked Clown
(30-08-2014 07:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(30-08-2014 05:08 PM)Ferdinand Wrote:  The admins themselves speak with Seth about forum policy. I don't know how often, but I know that they do. Several admins had mentioned this before. If Seth were speaking to a newly chosen admin and didn't trust that person with the job, he wouldn't allow the person to be admin anyways. That's just kind of common sense. Thus giving that person approval to be admin. Or at least that's what I would expect because this forum and what goes on here reflect back on his name and business.

You make a great many assumptions. Drinking Beverage

I didn't assume anything. Huh

(30-08-2014 06:26 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  
Quote:They do NOT have the power to override admin decisions though.

Tell Deep that. He seems to think they do...

Quote:Fist yourself. Facepalm

To which part do you object?

Quote:I think it started because hughsie is against banning WC because in his opinion the dude has only bent rules, and not broken them I believe. He doesn't want banning WC to disrupt the power of the forum team. He doesn't want more people to start getting banned for lesser and lesser crimes until it gets out of control. This lead to a discussion on who has what kind of power on the forum team.

I think that's how it started... this has been going back and forth quite a bit.

This isn't about WC, we all agree he's a worthless piece of shit, this whole thread is about Hughsie's and Deep's poor handling of the situation.

Quote:I disagree.
Aurora was a poor admin choice. She's a nice lady (when she's not talking shit about you behind your back) but she was never very active.
And Dark Light was a poor admin choice because his personal life situation has changed from the time he became a mod leaving him less active then what he used to be. (though this could change with his new position)

This leaves the forum "weak" because Aurora is never gonna step down because that would mean she'd have to log on, and Dark Light just got the position.

Hughsie and Deep are effectively the admins.
Which is disappointing for the forum considering they're literally the only two on the whole forum who don't want him banned.

Aurora is a good admin, and though she may seem to be an inactive poster, she isn't completely inactive. She's aware of what's going on and is doing her job.
Dark Light has a life outside of the forum, but don't we all? Like aurora, he may seem to be an inactive poster but that doesn't mean he doesn't get on the forum at all. Both admins are aware of what is going on and contemplating how to handle all of this.

Quote:
(29-08-2014 03:39 PM)Anjele Wrote:  Wasn't Ferdi once banned and is now a mod?

WC is unlikely to sleep with the boss so different circumstances.

Opps, almost forgot the ":P"

I'm pretty sure Stark is old enough to be my dad. Dodgy

Quote:This 2 week thing is the Ato Red Celt re-banning situation all over again.
Stupid, pointless and a waste of fucking time and a complete lack of common sense.
Just fucking permaban the cunt.

This, though, I agree with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Ferdinand's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: