Geezus christ on his way to hell in a hand basket, and I thought working retail was bad and dealing with those people all day, then I come home and log into GR and WOAH its like a whole new level. Some people make retail look easy as shit. That being said. Marforce was right in closing that discussion. It wasn't a discussion, it was Bucc attempting to attack the staff. I have been watching him do it for a few days now in ways he thought he was being sly, when in reality, we are fully aware of what was going on. The only reason he even opened the thread, is because he got butt hurt over us not taking his idea, then he got involved in a rip case, that quite frankly, doesnt even involve him, so he shouldnt have had jack, diddly, or squat to do with it, or say about it. If members wish to discuss the stuff, in a full on discussion, in a constructive way, and not an attack, please, by all means go for it, and staff will leave it open. However the way he went about it was inappropriate. The entire thread was nothing but an attack. Every poll question was nothing but an attack, every response was nothing but an attack. Then telling us we are not allowed to post in the thread? Grow the **** up, since when do you get to sit up on a high horse, judge us, and then think your so high and mighty that you have the right to tell us we can't respond? Get over yourself, you aint that special. Aside from all that, yeah, we are staff, but we are also humans. We are in no way perfect. We do attempt to follow the same guidelines for punishment, in every situation, however, the fact that we are HUMAN, and we are all different, naturally prevents us from being able to follow everything to a perfect perfection. The fact is though, that we try. We do our best to be as fair, as possible, to make sure everyone recieves the same punishment. If you can't accept the fact that we are human, and because of it, we unfortunately won't be able to do everything exactly like each other, then well, get off my planet and go back to being a robot some where else, because thats how life works. Thats all I have to say about it I think, unless I feel like saying more later.
I've already spoke with Marforce in IRC, and pretty much resolved everything from my perspective. You guys have agreed that within reason and within a constructive environment, the topic can continue to be discussed. I have already agreed that the topic in question was an unfair debate where one side of the arguement wasn't "allowed" to post their views. I clearly dont have as much of a problem with how the staff run the site as what Buccaneer did, I realise that we all are after all, only human. Admitting certain mistakes and attempting to rectify them is what solves the problems, not slating one side of the discussion. I'm done with posting here as, although the topic is still closed, it can be rediscussed if necessary, and I'm happy with the outcome.
I see Marforce hasn't replied. That's too bad. Anyways, I have stuff to do so I won't be able to make responses for a bit. I edited because the problem I had with staff was fixed midway through the thread so I had nothing to complain about. I found it neccessary to edit my posts because of it. Kirbir rocks, pregnant or not.
I suggest that you try talking fully rather then short sentences that get your point no where. I reccomend trying to connect back to your point which was why you closed the thread. You giving "it" doesn't prove anything. "Either way, I made a discretionary decision to lock the thread based upon my belief that it was unnecessary, a rant, and fruitless argument with someone who only wanted to be validated." yet you said it was a rant based on him being angry and wanting to cry. try not to contradict yourself We'll edit polls that contain are about a topic such as "Someone's name being written on a naked kirbir" Ones that aren't 'fun' we tend to leave alone. You just said it was a serious poll. if it was serious, then why did he want validation that the staff were doing a bad job. Furthermore, it was public so there is no way he could of forced validation that the staff were doing a bad job. Try not to guess what his intent and motive was and pretend you're right. Enough with the semantics. It was a public thread where in which he was looking for a group of people who agreed with him. Thus looking to be validated. He wasn't interested in other viewpoints. Then why did you state it as one of the reasons you locked the thread? I already admitted to being wrong, why continue to bring this up. You didn't answer the second part of the statement (You could of just suspended him and kept the topic going.) And just to let you know, know one is arguing that he shouldn't of been suspended. So what, you got flamed. You're staff so you should be used it it by now. Anywho, you could of moved it into the flame section like Kirbir did with this instead of locking it, which I'm surprised you haven't done to this thread by now. And wait... why would you suspend him for -rep'ing you? what, are you immune to -reps? Reping is disabled in General Discussion and given his disregard for other rules, he would've been served a suspension. Generally moving a topic to the flame section results in nonsense and worthless posts. God damnit man. He wanted the ------ing community's opinion, not the god damn staff's because obviously the staff would ALL defend themselves while the community would be split, as the polls (before you locked it) clearly show. Without our input into what went on, all you're getting is his conjecture and ranting into a situation he is upset about. This isn't going to produce a fair or true view of the staff, as anyone who is only reading that thread will be excessively influenced by his extreme bias.
I don't get how your discretionary decision in any way, justifies you locking the thread. That's like a murderer justifying his own action because he made a discretionary decision to do it. A lot of threads are uncessary, fruitless, etc. yet they are not locked. Instead, most other staff members find it more logical to move them here or in the spam section. discretionary: having or using the ability to act or decide according to your own discretion or judgment Now if you're going to use an absurd example it should at least have the proper positioning of the parties. To use something similar to yours, I'd be the CIA murdering someone because it would serve the greater good of my (not quite) country. Thus its perfectly justifiable in the eyes of society. No one knows or cares what type of topics you alter by abusing your power. We aren't omniscient, we don't know what goes in the staffs mind. The topic was negatively centered around the staff so it was logical to take a preemptive stance on asking you not to interfere. Its not hard to figure out what polls we edit, the number of votes never add up correctly. Buccaneer was watching that topic closely enough where it wouldn't have been an issue. Hey dumb----, I'm not mandating the semantics. It's your own contradictory word choice. If it was a public thread then he can't look for a group of people who agreed with him because he can't force people to look at it his way. That's why the poll results before it was locked were split, rather then everything his way. Furthermore, he asked people to debate and contradict him in a rational fashion. He asked people to post what they voted for and why. I know you're a little bit on the slow side so I'll analyze that for you. It means that he in fact was interested in other view points and wasn't looking for a group of people who agreed with him. Next time you want to presume something, try to back it up with some solid reasoning. Your own words "Yea it might not produce a fair or true view of the staff." Public means it was open to the community, that doesn't change the fact that he was seeking those who agreed with him. How was he looking for other viewpoints, he shut down xlink quite readily. Looking for other view points would require him to lose the ability to mandate and thus lose control of the discussion. Because I want to reiterate your stupidity. For someone so keen on debating, personal attacks are a rather pathetic way to go about it. So you thought moving a thread that you perceived as nonsense and worthless into the flame section which "results in nonsense and worthless posts" wasn't logical. Congratulations for contradicting yourself again. Have you not read the threads in Spam / Flame? His long worded sentences of whining made it worthless, Spam/Flame consists of morons posting stupid BS because they're obsessed with 4chan. They're both forms of worthless posts, you just fail to realize it. Yea... everyone is going to be excessively influenced by his extreme bias except the poll were split. So again, you are wrong. Yea it might not produce a fair or true view of the staff. Instead it would produce the community's view of the staff which was the goal of the thread. No one cares if its fair or not in YOUR eyes. Everyone has a different opinion on what is fair or not and we honestly don't care on how the staff thinks of the staff.[/quote] So he wanted a perspective of what the community thought about the staff, yet went about it in a way that wouldn't produce a fair view of it. This will be my last post on this issue. I've given you plenty of information as to why I decided to close the thread. Whether or not this will change your opinion is out of my control, and frankly doesn't matter. As far as I'm concerned the issue is closed, but I'll leave this thread open.
Have you not read the threads in Spam / Flame? His long worded sentences of whining made it worthless, Spam/Flame consists of morons posting stupid BS because they're obsessed with 4chan. They're both forms of worthless posts, you just fail to realize it. ^4chan, the cancer killing GR
I'm back, and I'll go right to what's expected of me. lol 1) The thread was perfectly fine; there was no bias in the topic, poll, or poll answers. 2) Calling someone stupid or insulting their intelligence is no attack; its on the same level as you telling me that I got my butt hurt over the internet. Don't take it seriously if you don't want to. 3) That being said, I have only attacked a staff member once, and that was not without good reason. I'd like you to show me all of my vicious but sly attacks on the staff please. 4) "Then I got involved in the rip case" has nothing to do with this thread. Though, that being said, I had a very good right to do "diddly something." It was I who brought the rip to the attention of CI; it was I who Failen could have gotten the PSD from; it was I who Failen came running up to when the thread was created with his bull explanations (which I posted and explained why he was lieing), and it was I who got him banned in the end. Check my PM's if you want to know more. 1) It was constructive; I don't understand why it is so hard to comprehend its intent. The discussion topic had a variety of polls. The first two could be answered with a firm, "yes", "no", or a "maybe". Thus, the topic and thread was perfectly constructive, and not an attack. Now, I, like others who voted, had my own opinions. The whole point of the topic was to discuss. I discussed and advocated my opinions. How is that an attack? It seems you are actually attacking ME based on my thoughts. Hence, the thread was not an attack. Instead of getting all pissed off, which you have no reason to do so, just do nothing like you usually do. 2) Yes, I did ask you not to post on the thread. Why? Because the community could defend you if they like, they had equal chance in their opinions. The questions didn't all have one answer, in case you didn't realize. I asked you not to interfere in anyway, as I had solely the purpose to recognize the communities' opinions. Of course you would defend yourselves; if you didn't, that would just be weird lol. But the community has the ability and position to attack, defend, or remain neutral to the staff. Thus, in prospect of a fair discussion, the staff could not be allowed to post. Some of you were nice enough to PM me, others were not. 3) I've already explained this, but you're telling me that I can't demand you to do things? I had asked you not to reply; I can't force you to do anything. But if you did, I said I would rightfully give you a neg rep, as you would have been disrespectful and rude in not allowing a fair discussion to occur. 4) There's no need to use that sort of language. I did nothing wrong, and you just do nothing but say no to all of my suggestions. No good reason, no allowance of warrant, or anything else. If anything, I should be flaming you. I never said the staff wasn't human. I realize you are in no way perfect, but that doesn't mean the staff doesn't have potential to improve. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I can't do a better job, but whom better than the community to show how you guys could improve? You guys and gals have the greatest impact on us, the community, and therefore, we have the greatest potential in showing you how that impact fairs. You do your best? No, you say you do your best. One thing I've always been told, though it sounds corny, is that you can always do better. Since perfection has never been achieved, you can continuously strive towards it, and that results in doing better. I'm not asking you're to do everything like each other, I'm finding gaps in each in the staff may or may not do. Locking topics prematurely I have found recently to be one of the largest flaws in the staff (not all, but some). So, why not work to allow discussions to continue a while longer before locking it? I see Marforce has done that here. Kudos. The result is allowing me to have my word and say, otherwise I would not. You try hard, sure, why not. I can't say you don't, I'm not in that position. Though from my perspective, I would say a lot of you try hard. But you can't consciously try harder in an area you haven't realized, and I meant that thread to show you those areas. And again, no need for sarcasm. I'm perfectly aware of, well not life >.>, but how individuality works J That's all I have to say about it I think, unless I feel like saying more later. I welcome responses Logically, as I always have. Now for Marforce. You stated that I was carrying a previously locked discussion into another thread. Well, no, I wasn't. But if I was, it wouldn't matter. Draven and Kirbir both directly said I could. And btw, Logically's post above is dragging locked topics into another thread. Should I start crying and whining for her to be punished? … Locking a thread has to be done by a static or generally inappropriate nature of a thread. Its justice in your eye's, that is, if you are part of the majority, then it is for the greater good. So are you telling me that you believe you did it for the greater good? When has the staff solely stood for the greater good? Sure, I was watching it, but by no means closely. Even if I was, why does it matter? With me watching the topic closely, I couldn't prevent alterations. I might not even recognize alterations if done carefully. What's more is, me watching the topic didn't stop you from locking it. Don't undermine the staff's potential by looking at yourself Marforce. Where if you had wanted to alter the polls, you would have done it drastically, a more intelligent staff, or a lot of staff, would have the brains to alter and change it in measure. (have to keep it real, this is the flame section after all ) So? That statement has no meaning of vital importance. It only means that it won't produce a fair or true view of the staff because nothing can. The community is large, yet the amount that post, are actively discussing, and even care is not enough to best represent the community. But that definitely does not mean that the topic wasn't constructive. Yes of course I didn't want xlink to post, he's part of staff. That said, I don't know the exact abilities of staff, so I had the right to do so. And he of course would defend staff, as I have already mentioned why I didn't want that. I automatically looked for other points of view by making a diverse bank of answers. Do you not understand CI's response? Actually, in that sense, much of staff, including you, are pathetic. I would recommend that you don't hurt the staff further; I have no idea why you would. And I agree with CI's statement. So far, you aren't showing your age in responses. I wasn't whining. All of you are saying I am whining and attacking consistently. Could you quote me on both accounts as many times as you can? I want to see how you would define those terms, and of course I would like to respond. I went about it in a way that would produce the fairest view. There is no such thing as the fairest view, as I have already explained. I have also explained, as has CI, why staff was required to stay out of the topic. It was to ensure a fairer discussion, and you attacking why staff couldn't post just contradicts this statement. It was a fairest discussion possible because the community could only take part of an unbiased polling and topic. And to answer a statement of yours on a previous page, no, I come back in the same mindset as before. Enjoy finding another reason to suspend/ban me (though I would recommend you try after I send the things I owe to everyone, suspending me it seems wasn't for the greatest good. So in your sense Marforce, it wasn't just? lol.)
Holy fucking shit man, EVERY DAMN BOARD IS DOING THE SAME THINGS AS 4CHAN, IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT THEN GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE INTERNET. k thx.
I had a longer one, it was 5 posts long because 1 post couldn't handle it, but then the topic got locked right after I did it <_<
Buccaneer returns and the both pointless and childish discussion continues. You suck at reasoning. Get over it. Today please.
