Proving Calis right (and responding to DU)...

[Calis]

PS. Why vrok is still dumbfucked? To honor my memory? If I was so wrong and out of line and completely fucking crazy, why hasn't it been fixed yet? Don't tell me you are still deciding it.

We haven't talked about it yet. At all. If you're suggesting speed is essential (or even a relevant factor) in this case, then I think your assessment of never seeing eye-to-eye on forum policy is correct. I will say that I think under the proposed ruleset he should be un-dumbfucked, but I think that having Ze Rules annouced, Ze Moderators appointed (judges are still out - DU seems somewhat of a KC-doubter, but is somewhat amenable to the argumentation I presented in my first post in this thread) takes precedence and should, in fact, be done first. If you think vrok needs priority or that the undumbfucking / unbanning of people who would (probably) not have been dumbfucked or banned under Ze New Rules should take precedence or should be done swiftly because doing otherwise is bureaucratic or impotent... well, I disagree.

 

[Vault Dweller]

That illustrates my point about the new system perfectly.

 

[Calis]

Had it ever occured to you that the fact it never crossed your mind you felt entitled to dictate terms to VD and even strip him of his privileges might possibly be part of the problem?

Yes, it had, but that, once again, does not affect my assessment of where to go from here. I'll be the first to admit that the steps I personally took in this trainwreck added to the escalation, and that the way this thread and the other one devolved didn't help either. I refuse to go into any more specifics than that.

 

[Shagnak]

Having read my post, can we say that:

(a) You are not interested in working with us without having full forum admin powers.
(even though you would still be a site admin/ "editor-in-chief" with all that entails, and a forum moderator, and this partitioning of responsibilities would apply to anyone else in charge of a site, like baby arm).

... That would have been a good compromise, at least something to play with and see how things would work out

Oh well, that's good to know. But of little consolation because...

Too late for that ... Basically, at this point, you are asking me if I'm interested in being part of a team that threw me out without giving me a chance to explain my position, argue and compromise if necessary.

Yes, things have not occured as I envisaged on that front. And every time I check in things seem to get shittier.

Anyway, essentially you've chosen option (d).

We fucking wanted you back on staff and I would dearly love to be able to "fast forward to the make-up sex" as Ismaul so eloquently put it, but you're not (or didn't appear to be) willing to meet in the middle at all. We can admit fault, say "shit we could have handled this crap better" why can't we all just fucking bury the hatchet and get on with business? Try to get over this piece of nastiness? Because we're all a bunch of angry cunts, right?

Oh well.

Shagnak is afraid that without the lulzers the site will be boring.

Christ, that's a gross simplification.

A lot of things seem to get lost between deliberately polarising polls and shit-fights that spawn from such antics, but I think there are plenty of people that are happy with a middle road. If you don't think that the Codex can be both a place of interesting discussion ( a place where game developers can come and chew the fat) and a place where people can be occasionally on the "sharp edge" of humour, then you're either lacking imagination or have been wearing blinkers for a while.

It's not about letting "lulzers" running rampant. I notice you really didn't reply properly to (c), but you quoted it so I assume you read it and therefore you are deliberate in your misrepresentation of my stance.

I'm not sure what exactly Calis thinks, but with two lulz-supporting members the stalemate is guaranteed.

The main thing we have in common is that we want the Codex (black humour and all) that we know and love, not some place where every dissenting voice is jack-booted on for something relatively minor (everything else varies a little, but we've met in the middle).

There are other posters that want this too. Read the posts by undisputably intelligent posters like Ismaul, Rulion, and Obediah (amongst others) for example. You can't say they are "lulzers", yet they can appreciate a bit of black humour along with the intelligent discussions that go on. This does not mean we want this place to turn into a lulz factory.

Okay, that's it then for me. If you're absolutely, totally, finally unwilling to get back aboard (chagrinned team members and all), then I'm not going to argue the point any further.

I wouldn't be surprised if the door stays open oh so very slightly, with a candle lit table inside and a goatse-embossed note saying "how about we get on with shit and work things out?". But you're never going to walk in that door because you don't trust that we haven't poised tubgirl in an unlikely position above it's door frame (we haven't), and you are incapable of finding goatse-embossed paper the least bit amusing.

 

[sqeecoo]

No, it's not about my feelings. Not at all. The way it was handled casts some serious doubt on the proposed cooperative forums management mode simply because the first thing that was done demonstrated a completely opposite (from what being publicly stated) , very irrational way of doing things. In other words, the newly proposed system has failed immediately. Why should I believe that it's the best and the most fair solution? I suppose I can give it a try and see what happens, but what if god forbid we disagree again? I mean, being thrown out is not a very pleasant experience and I'm not dying to repeat that.

So, to give you a direct answer. I don't really care about managing the forums and will be more than happy to leave this part to someone else, as long as something is being done. I hate to sound like a dick, but at this point I have 0 confidence in the newly formed management body, partly because of how they handled things, partly because they've chosen the least effective, incredibly slow method, and partly because I'm not sure about they feel needs to be changed.

I mean, DU thinks that the revolution was funny and I guess he doesn't have a problem with lulzers at all. Shagnak is afraid that without the lulzers the site will be boring. I'm not sure what exactly Calis thinks, but with two lulz-supporting members the stalemate is guaranteed. So, it seems to me that joining now will result in two things - I'll have to leave in frustration a month later or I'll be thrown out again.

PS. Why vrok is still dumbfucked? To honor my memory? If I was so wrong and out of line and completely fucking crazy, why hasn't it been fixed yet? Don't tell me you are still deciding it.

You didn't answer why you can't stay on as a news-and-review poster without being a forum admin.

 

[Vault Dweller]

...but you're not willing to meet in the middle at all.

What middle? From where I'm sitting it looks like DU & Co dismissed my suggestion, came up with something else, called it The Great Compromise of 2007 and offered it me. That's not meeting in the middle. That's "I don't want to do what you say, let's do what I say or you're out" stuff. Now, do you still want to discuss meeting in the middle?

We can admit fault, say "shit we could have handled this crap better" why can't we all just fucking bury the hatchet and get on with business? Because we're all a bunch of angry cunts, right?

That we are, brother.

Shagnak is afraid that without the lulzers the site will be boring.

Christ, that's a gross simplification.

Shagnak: ...I (we) never envisaged the forums for that site becoming some dry piece of boredom without a decent lick of dark humour and some occasional absurdity.

If you don't think that the Codex can be both a place of interesting discussion ( a place where game developers can come and chew the fat) and a place where people can be occasionally on the "sharp edge" of humour, then you're either lacking imagination or have been wearing blinkers for a while.

"Christ, that's a gross simplification".

Do you agree that Spacemoose shouldn't have interrupted a serious discussion about rather dramatic events and kids being dead with his "only 8? weak!" lulz comment? If you see nothing wrong with it, then yes, I'm lacking alotta imagination. If you agree with me, then we are on the same page.

There are other posters that want this too. Read the posts by undisputably intelligent posters like Ismaul, Rulion, and Obediah (amongst others) for example.

I see your Ismaul, Rulion, and Obediah and raise you with Walks with the Snails, Hazelnut, and Mountain West.

Okay, that's it then for me. If you're absolutely, totally, finally unwilling to get back aboard (chagrinned team members and all), then I'm not going to argue the point any further.

I'm willing to discuss things. Good enough?

...and you are incapable of finding goatse-embossed paper amusing.

I tubgirled many a noob in my time, Shagnak.

 

[Vault Dweller]

You didn't answer why you can't stay on as a news-and-review poster without being a forum admin.

The forums are an integrate part of the site. In fact, I always saw the Codex as more of an analytical, discussion site than a news/reviews site. The forums must be fixed. If someone else can do it, that's fine with me. So far I haven't seen any indications that what needs to be done will be done.

 

[Amasius]

I gave Spacemoose a warning and made that thread in the staff forums, expecting to have a discussion. Spacemoose was absolutely safe for the time-being, but then he decided to post those pictures, leaving me absolutely no choice, but to ban him on the spot.

Yeah, you was forced to ban him and thats the problem - you have cornered yourself here and Spacemoose was at this point controlling the situation because he wasn't afraid of a ban; I guess he enjoyed the drama. Once you have left yourself no choices you have handled it wrong. Same with Calis and DU - first acting and then discussing this shit in public? I can't think of a worse way to do it. Probably the only thing that could save this entirly fucked up situation is Daddy Saint showing up and giving the whole staff a proper and well deserved tongue-lashing. In the staff forum and not here, mind you.

 

[elander_]

The sooner this thread ends and this issue is taken to private forums the better for the Codex.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I gave Spacemoose a warning and made that thread in the staff forums, expecting to have a discussion. Spacemoose was absolutely safe for the time-being, but then he decided to post those pictures, leaving me absolutely no choice, but to ban him on the spot.

Yeah, you was forced to ban him and thats the problem - you have cornered yourself here and Spacemoose was at this point controlling the situation because he wasn't afraid of a ban; I guess he enjoyed the drama. Once you have left yourself no choices you have handled it wrong.

In other words, an admin should never, ever warn people because in case they refuse to stop, he/she would have no choice but to ban and that's bad. Did I get that right?

 

[Naked Ninja]

Oh lord. This...is really tedious now.

I know people here make it a point of pride to be angry cunts but could we please climb down from our trees and just apologize to each other? Preferably via PM so we don't have to see the dirty laundry. The problem is none of you are willing to lose the battle to win the war.

Seriously, what is this achieving? For either side? The admins are losing one of the major contributors and workhorses of the site. VD, you want to make this place into an RPG hub? How is stepping back going to help turn it into that vision? It won't.

Personally, I can't stand that shit Moose posted. I feel...lessened, having looked at those pictures. And in my perfect world whenever some immature tosser thought he was being "darkly humorous" or "edgy" by mocking tragedy a squad of burly men would burst into his house and beat the stupid out of him. I'm fine with banning him. But his shitheadedness isn't worth this. The cost is too high. Everyone loses. Even he feels bad about how this turned out.

Why not just ALL go "sorry, we overreacted, lets calm down and put humpty dumpty back together again". Compromise a bit, VD agree to calm down on the banning (not because you're compromising on your beliefs but because you want to sort things out and are offering a laurel branch), the other admins consider how to handle the problem of the dumbasses (like locking threads or removing offensive pics), and everyone else just go talk about new RPGs.

Seriously, I used to talk about the Codex as if it was almost a badge of honour, but this shit has me feeling kinda embarrassed. Don't point fingers, don't quote each other in an endless back and forth, just be adults, put aside your egos and let this go. It's a fucking internet forum, shit happens, move past it now. For the greater good.

 

[Shagnak]

Sorry, VD. I edited some stuff. I'm bad at that.

Shagnak is afraid that without the lulzers the site will be boring.

Christ, that's a gross simplification.

Shagnak: ...I (we) never envisaged the forums for that site becoming some dry piece of boredom without a decent lick of dark humour and some occasional absurdity.

You don't think you've simplified things? You are, as usual, good at singling out individual shit and avoiding the whole effect of what someone is trying to say, like some sort of context-free zone.
You make it sound like we want the "lulzers" to be able to run rampant. We dont.
You seem to be completely against "a decent lick of dark humour and some occasional absurdity". Somehow you think these two things are the same? I don't see it that way.

Do you agree that Spacemoose shouldn't have interrupted a serious discussion about rather dramatic events and kids being dead with his "only 8? weak!" lulz comment? If you see nothing wrong with it, then yes, I'm lacking alotta imagination. If you agree with me, then we are on the same page.

It's distasteful, but not out of character with the history of this place. I can imagine certain venerable members (even some staff) coming up with that. People always have the option of telling him he is a twat.

There are other posters that want this too. Read the posts by undisputably intelligent posters like Ismaul, Rulion, and Obediah (amongst others) for example.

I see your Ismaul, Rulion, and Obediah and raise you with Walks with the Snails, Hazelnut, and Mountain West.

Actually, I can imagine Walks with the Snails being a "moderate" as well. Not certain about the others. This is what I mean about "polarising" shenanigans. I wouldn't at all be surprised if all of those guys were comfortable with "moderate" moderation. (Maybe "moderate" is the wrong word? I could be wrong but I'm getting the impression you think that is more hands off than I mean. We even have some rulz dammit, no I'm not kidding)

Okay, that's it then for me. If you're absolutely, totally, finally unwilling to get back aboard (chagrinned team members and all), then I'm not going to argue the point any further.

I'm willing to discuss things. Good enough?

You are? Because everything seems to indicate that you're not willing to budge. It confuses me. But after all, I'm a simple, naive, old hippy.

About "not willing to meet in the middle", I should have really said "refuse to compromise". And then you're going to say "you fuckers haven't compromised either". Which isn't true - hence me trying to communicate to you that we are relinquishing a bit and want you to be full staff, site admin, equal say yadda yadda yadda. And for us to "meet in the middle" you would simply have to accept we get equal say in shit. Since that would mean you don't get to do your almighty purge that "must" happen (i.e. you know we would vote against it), well, that's the real sticking point now isn't it? You want unilateral powers and we won't agree to it. You're not willing to relinquish that. How do we get around this?

...and you are incapable of finding goatse-embossed paper amusing.

I tubgirled many a noob in my time, Shagnak.

Fitting or not, did you like my analogy? I worked hard on that one.

 

[Amasius]

In other words, an admin should never, ever warn people because in case they refuse to stop, he/she would have no choice but to ban and that's bad. Did I get that right?

Of course you didn't, that would be surprising.

Heh, I would support a stricter forums policy but my opinion doesn't matter; it's only important that the staff agrees about a certain course. You have warned Spacemoose about some questionable issues and only that provoked him to post the NSFW pics; he wouldn't have done it else. Sure - it's not your fault that he acts that childish, but it came hardly as a surprise, what do you expect from the lulz-kids?

You was forced to ban him and that wouldn't be a problem if you could be sure that you have the support of the other admins but as the events have shown you hadn't and it seems that you weren't aware of that. So we have here two significant misjudgements from your side.

A place like the Codex can only flourish is there is consensus in the staff about the important issues, else it goes down the gutter. So boys I hope you can settle this down.

 

[Calis]

(stuff)

I think I've offered enough of a mea culpa for my part in this, but I'd be happy to offer more if it helps.
As for the rest, agree for the most part, but seeing how this has been unfolding, I doubt that'll happen (the "take bitchfest to private, then kiss and make up if at all possible"). Maybe I should just make a private "bitchfest" forum, give those involved access, and move this thread there. No, wait, I'd need a time machine to do that soon enough. Guess I'm kind of proving VD's point that in some cases, quick action is needed.

 

[Shagnak]

Maybe I should just make a private "bitchfest" forum, give those involved access, and move this thread there.

That might be good. Everything seems to have moved to being so "final" sounding so quickly, through the fault of whoever (I don't care). Let's talk turkey privately.

 

[Vault Dweller]

No, we're going to do it openly.

To avoid endless quoting and other crap: Shagnak, you want us to meet in the middle? You agree that things were mishandled? Fine. Let's try that again. We're going to start a new thread and discuss everything in the open. Since we are discussing what concerns everyone, people have the right to know what's being discussed and what each admin's position is. That's my requirement. Not good enough? We're done talking then.

If it's acceptable, start a new thread and post your position and your opinion on what needs to be done and how. Each admin will do the same. Then we'll start comparing positions and discussing things. Everyone will be welcome to participate and offer well thought-through opinions. The admins will delete stupid posts and spam.

 

[sqeecoo]

You didn't answer why you can't stay on as a news-and-review poster without being a forum admin.

The forums are an integrate part of the site. In fact, I always saw the Codex as more of an analytical, discussion site than a news/reviews site. The forums must be fixed. If someone else can do it, that's fine with me. So far I haven't seen any indications that what needs to be done will be done.

I'm sorry, but I don't get this.

Are you saying that you can't newspost because the forums are broken *now*? I'd agree that the forums might use a bit of tidying up (although I personally would not call it *necessary*). But you seem to be implying that the forums are absolutely useless and broken, and they must be fixed before you would become a newsposter.

Is this what you are saying? Please clarify your position.

I think this is a nice, compromising but clear and crisp passage that bears repeating:

Okay, that's it then for me. If you're absolutely, totally, finally unwilling to get back aboard (chagrinned team members and all), then I'm not going to argue the point any further.

I'm willing to discuss things. Good enough?

You are? Because everything seems to indicate that you're not willing to budge. It confuses me. But after all, I'm a simple, naive, old hippy.

About "not willing to meet in the middle", I should have really said "refuse to compromise". And then you're going to say "you fuckers haven't compromised either". Which isn't true - hence me trying to communicate to you that we are relinquishing a bit and want you to be full staff, site admin, equal say yadda yadda yadda. And for us to "meet in the middle" you would simply have to accept we get equal say in shit. Since that would mean you don't get to do your almighty purge that "must" happen (i.e. you know we would vote against it), well, that's the real sticking point now isn't it? You want unilateral powers and we won't agree to it. You're not willing to relinquish that. How do we get around this?.

 

[Calis]

No, we're going to do it openly.

To avoid endless quoting and other crap: Shagnak, you want us to meet in the middle? You agree that things were mishandled? Fine. Let's try that again. We're going to start a new thread and discuss everything in the open. Since we are discussing what concerns everyone, people have the right to know what's being discussed and what each admin's position is. That's my requirement. Not good enough? We're done talking then.

If it's acceptable, start a new thread and post your position and your opinion on what needs to be done and how. Each admin will do the same. Then we'll start comparing positions and discussing things. Everyone will be welcome to participate and offer well thought-through opinions. The admins will delete stupid posts and spam.

I kinda thought the public outcry on what everyone wanted, is that we don't do it in the open? Anyway, it's all good with me, but I don't really want to keep making this "lock thread, hope for new thread to be better" mistake. I'd like to add one rule to what you suggested. That is that quoting other forum threads or referencing specific actions to win the debate is outlawed in this new thread. Further chewing of the past days required? Fine, do it in this trainwreck of a thread. We're going "open analysis of problems & policy", we set boundary conditions to keep it that way. I don't think any of us are going to be able to stick with this rule, but I'm demanding everybody agree to it anyway. Also, I doubt there'll be consensus on what the stupid posts to be deleted are, so let's make the rule: "Admins edit posts and save old versions". And then have another thread to scrutinize everybody's decisions with a microscope. :D

 

[Vault Dweller]

I'm sorry, but I don't get this.

WwtS: "I think VD's contributions actually do count for something. He who pays the piper calls the tunes. Giving him "permission" to post news but no admin duties is akin to the ex-wife who magnanimously tells her ex he's more than welcome to pay child support but needs to kindly shut the fuck up when it comes to how the kids are raised. Sorry, bitch, it doesn't work that way and most decent people know it."

Hope that helps. I've always like WwtS's way with words.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I kinda thought the public outcry on what everyone wanted, is that we don't do it in the open?

That was in regard to throwing shit at each other and posting "I win" pictures. I suggest to move forward and have a constructive discussion.

Anyway, it's all good with me, but I don't really want to keep making this "lock thread, hope for new thread to be better" mistake. I'd like to add one rule to what you suggested. That is that quoting other forum threads or referencing specific actions to win the debate is outlawed in this new thread.

My sentiments exactly (so you may want to put a leash on Dark Underlord).

Further chewing of the past days required?

Nope. I think we're done.

 

[Shagnak]

I'm for anything that moves this forward in a sensible fashion. If we can actually make something work out of this...well, that would be double plus great, especially given where we seemed to be not so long ago.

 

[kingcomrade]

Serioze Business

 

[roshan]

I kinda thought the public outcry on what everyone wanted, is that we don't do it in the open?

I think that's just the vocal minority. I think that this process may be better done in the open - after all, who knows, someone might come up with some useful suggestions.

 

[sqeecoo]

I'm sorry, but I don't get this.

WwtS: "I think VD's contributions actually do count for something. He who pays the piper calls the tunes. Giving him "permission" to post news but no admin duties is akin to the ex-wife who magnanimously tells her ex he's more than welcome to pay child support but needs to kindly shut the fuck up when it comes to how the kids are raised. Sorry, bitch, it doesn't work that way and most decent people know it."

Hope that helps. I've always like WwtS's way with words.

Ah, there we have it then. It's about pride! That's understandable, but all the wiggling about was unnecessary (well, maybe not).

Your pride is hurt by the way you were kicked out, and rightfully so: it was rude. However, so were your unilateral decisions. So I think you admins have good grounds for kissing and making up.

Also note that the current admin crew are prepared (as far as I can see) to reinstate you as moderator, but not admin (I don't get the distinction very well, but the reason is that you have a tendency for making unilateral decisions). Your proposed policy can also be discussed, but it will be just that, a proposal, and in it's current version not likely to be accepted. Some of the ideas could be used, of course.

That is what I would like to see: a Codex with VD, not as supreme ruler but as honored contributor.

On a completely unrelated note, now about implementing a "retardedness police" headed by VD (or not)? They would attack retardedness (for instance stuff like spacemoose's "joke) in any form with rude but brilliant arguments. The more active posters could report cases of retardedness, and then a police officer would be called in to take care of the idiot in the Saint Proverbius way. He would not relent until the retard is shown the error of his ways or flees, or both. If the retard responds with spam or non-arguments it would be obvious to all he is prime dumbfuck material.

Obviously, this is more than a single person can handle, so why not make giving a rope to trolls to hangs themselves official? Form a kind of moderator militia?

 

[kingcomrade]

It wasn't a joke it was a Statement.