Perhaps posting in the drunk thread?:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
Printable View
Perhaps posting in the drunk thread?:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
My opinion has not changed from what i had to say back then when this was an issue, both at public forum and staff forum. I think Louis was going through a tough period in his life because of some things that happened in his personal life and that projected into his behavior also here in Org. At that point some people did not give him any leeway he deserved and many of us including myself have got in the past from the Org Administration and the rest is history.
The whole affair can be seen from several point of views, but the end result remains. We lost a good patron and his contributions and to me that is bad thing for all of us who populate this forum.
It didn't have anything to do directly, but they both left for the same reason. And Adrian then left because Banquo informed him why he left.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
Both suffered abuse from other moderators and administrators, mostly from those rarely involved in off-topic part of the forum, and both decided they had enough. Some of it was public, some of it happened in the moderator's forum, and some through PM's.
I asked to allow us plebs to see the relevant discussion(s) that went on in the moderator private forum. I didn't ask to see private messages.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
"I am confident enough in my knowledge of what happened in discussions I was not privy to to publicly recount them"Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
"I want to see transcripts of what happened in staff discussion so as to better understand what happened"
Pick one.
From what Louis told me at the time, I understand that Banquo stepped down as a mod for related reasons. My previous post was mostly directed at Kadagar's theory that Banquo was somehow responsible for Louis' departure.Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
I've never heard about Adrian's departure being related.
I'm confident enough in my knowledge of what happened. I'm also tired of the mantra how everything was fine and dandy and those two inexplicably decided to leave, leaving the rest of the staff aghast and surprised because of the unprovoked move. And now everyone wants them back.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief
Then your confidence is misplaced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I'm going to make an assumption, and please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, that your perceived knowledge of what happened came directly from private messaging with Louis.
I know this is difficult to do considering the party involved and his relationship to you and this forum, but if you examine the source from a nonbiased perspective, as a historian would do, then it doesn't quite hold up to increased scrutiny.
Assuming your best source is Louis, you're getting a primary source, which is obviously very valuable when examining the greater picture, but only as a part of the whole and not as a standalone. Assuming Louis was contacting you as the entire thing was reaching its later stages, or even somewhat after that, you have to take into account the fact that he wouldn't have any incentive to provide a detached, dispassionate account of what was going on. He would be venting to his friends. As would all of us.
It's why I'm getting a little twigged at all these cries of "slander" from all of those whose sources are presumably Louis and what happened in the Watchtower threads at the time; they're presumably all originating from one single source. From someone else's point of view, it could easily be turned around and I could say the same thing to those who are directing it as a kind of dolchstoßlegende against staff at the time. Slander is a matter of perception.
The alternative to this is that you and others received leaks of what was discussed in staff forums directly from Louis or someone else, in which case the leaker would be in gross violation of the moderator code of conduct we all agreed to and which Beskar posted earlier in the thread.
"I've never heard about Adrian's departure being related." As much I remember Adrian never intend to stay. He was a journalist making inquiries about forums.
As Louis is concerned, I don#'t remember a thing. Was there, then gone, as the other French I don't remember his avatar... Yes, he was a good opponent/ally and I regret him. But life sometimes takes path which leads out of internet.
I was just killed on line because my wife insisted I had to empty the bin... And it couldn't WAIT!!!!
This is exactly the bullshit I'm sick of. For the record, I didn't exchange a single PM with Louis. I've learned about from PM with those who were in contact with Louis. So, I don't even have a single primary source. Several secondary sources at best. Also, I didn't have a bromance with Louis like Strike did. We exchanged a few jokes over the years, but by and large, we were talking only in the backroom and monastery. I didn't even know what was going on until I noticed that Louis simply isn't posting anymore, and I found out only recently that it's all related to BG and Adrian leaving.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief
BUT, I don't really need any of that to understand what was going on. Two years later, one of the guys who trolled Louis and demanded a public punishment, ACIN, called another member "slut" in jest. You could try and look for a lifetime for such a perfect equivalence. No one batted an eye. When I pointed it out, Andres' explanation was "well, we're not as strict now".
There are dozens of examples before and since, and it appears we became "strict" for just a short period of time, to demand of Louis to repent his wicked ways and apologize, and after he was gone, we returned to "not so strict" ways. Screw that.
And now everyone is going "ooh, we miss him" and "we maybe shouldn't have done that", even those who actively trolled him, together with those who refused to get involved or simply just joined the majority.
I dare say, the loss of those three members is the primary reason why the backroom deteriorated so much.
That's an emergency. The trash, if left unchecked, can threaten Gotham City.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
Further we look in the past, stricter things were.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
For example, you used to post at least 10 times in the Entrance Hall before you could post anywhere else, after you have been 'approved'.
Then there was the Junior Member system where you couldn't edit your posts and restricted in where you could post. The edit part was a little painful for me, as I am a sucker for constantly tweaking posts, that whole 'oh, I should include this, or reword that' once you left the room sensation.
The Backroom used to be a sealed off fortress where you had to be vetted before you could even read it.
I acquired infractions for using the term 'Damn', I got a warning for calling another member 'sillybilly' when it was said in jest, as it was classed as a personal attack.
This is how strict it was, thus, by comparison, Louis's not even getting a post edit for saying 'muslim fag' was used as an argument of hypocrisy.
Suggesting it was strict for a few minutes to somehow bump Louis off is fantasy.
I have memories of getting a warning for saying "hell", apparantly it was too close to an abbreviation of Helvete, a swedish swearword.
That was done for practical reasons, backroom being trolled by some activist group or other, and the practice was discontinued as soon as the reason for its implementation ceased to exist.
I'm suggesting that good natured jesting was never a cause for persecution, and that there were many worse examples left unsanctioned. ACIN and Drunken Clown played into hands of some of the staff members who disliked Louis and Banquo, who then pulled a dusty rule book and said look, insulting other members ist verboten, calling someone a fag is an insult, so let's get them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Don't make me go look for examples.
Wow, okay, the misconceptions are starting to pile up here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Firstly, in the year between Louis's departure and you receiving your apparently unsatisfying response from Andres, the forum had gone through several different administrators. At the time of Louis's departure, Ser Clegane was the sole admin, having ascended to the post in light of Tosa's passing. By that time the following year, Ser Clegane had stepped down with Andres, frogbeastegg, and Secura having taken his place. There was lots of other restructuring behind the scenes that followed, but I think it's safe to say that there's a fairly obvious connection between the change in administrators and the change in policies.
Second of all, if there was any inconsistency in how people are treated beyond the concept of policies changing with time and people being human, it is because moderators were and are expected to uphold a higher standard of conduct.
Thirdly, I'm sure you're aware of how closely your argument is starting to lean towards "but Truthiness!" so I won't elaborate on the matter.
:bow:
Someone is taking this too seriously.
Sorry Beskar but with all due respect, i have to call BS to that. You are talking about trees not the forest here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
To be honest. I would not go commenting something as an Admin you have little experience of the matter itself. This discussion is not about forum rules or how those are being maintained per se, but administrative issues and personal chemistries.
You obviously didn't notice my clever use of "ist verboten". Or maybe it wasn't as clever as I thought it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief
I'm aware of that. I blame quite a few of those people you mentioned. And I blame some others for not standing up for BG and Louis. Beskar's post in that very thread...
... also proves I'm right. Although that new start never materialized, cavalry came only after the Indians killed John Wayne and Garry Cooper.Quote:
This post was so tempting to go off-topic, but to condense what I want to write, the Org staff from back then was a powderkeg waiting to explode and it erupted into Fag-gate. This erupted resulted into a brand new era and direction for the Org as innovation and reform was stifled heavily by the 'Unwritten Code' which some staff members fought tooth and nail to keep, to the detriment to the Org. This 'code' was finally broken as Fag-gate caused what was perceived to be the 'Unthinkable' to be done. In one light, you could think of Louis as a matyr, ushering a new start for the Org, in the other, he was a man just like everyone else who has their flaws caught up in an untenable situation.
Don't give me that. No one was insulted, but apparently, some of the staff took the effort to bleed on Fragony's behalf.Quote:
Second of all, if there was any inconsistency in how people are treated beyond the concept of policies changing with time and people being human, it is because moderators were and are expected to uphold a higher standard of conduct.
No I'm not. You're entitled to your opinion, I'm entitled to not give a rat's ass about it.Quote:
Thirdly, I'm sure you're aware of how closely your argument is starting to lean towards "but Truthiness!" so I won't elaborate on the matter.
:bow:
The warning system was never implemented with an even hand. Which is fine, moderators are people and they do this for free. I just can't get behind the idea that we were so much stricter back then. I was constantly gettitng away with bullying other members, it was fantastic. Then those other memebers complained and they got banned. The good old days were good indeed.
louis was railroaded, banqou left because of the children, and now finding a member who can interact in a social suiuation is a cause for celebration.
Beskar also corrected himself about his previous perceptions earlier in this thread, so the post of his you quoted is not accurate. (-edit- post directed towards Sarmation, I started writing before SFTS replied)
Anyway, congrats again Strike. :medievalcheers:
I'm pretty sure he didn't mean that post.Quote:
Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief
That post was done a couple of years back, but some elements are correct. As I said earlier on which Kagemusha quoted, the Org used to be a lot stricter place and it was through a period of transition due to the unfortunate departure of TosaInu. Kagemusha is also correct in reply that it wasn't solely the rules themselves but the personal behind its enforcement occurring at different standards which led to issues in itself as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
On of the consequences of the event, the Org experienced a liberalisation in the standards of the moderation. This is something which some members welcomed, whilst others have been critical of. So instead of moderation being more pro-active, moderation became more reactive to the members. The concept of pro-active moderation with the shifts in the expectation of wider internet society can be seen as a powderkeg which was waiting to explode, as should moderators be beat cops ensuring everyone in compliance, or are they the facilitators?
Personally, I like to think even though I may disagree with some patrons in the backroom with my opinions on some subject matters, they also know I don't 'abuse' my powers and trust me not to do so, and in any situation I felt my integrity has been compromised, I have always referred the matter to someone else to handle.
In the post you quoted, I was erroneous on the assumption at that time about Louis as it was the de facto belief that the reason was solely because of Louis-gate. I believe this is what GH was meaning.
The 'Unthinkable' mentioned in the post was the idea of a moderator ever being 'stripped off' the green as it was (I believe) the first time it had ever occurred and was a very reluctant action for that very same reason.
You guys are funny.
The Dolchstoßlegende is big in this one.
Also, what about Hosakawa Tito?
Not on my behalf, I didn't even know about that post, and I certainly wouldn't have complained if I had.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I don't know why people keep mentioning you, maybe it is based on what Louis told some but it makes little sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Louis was not suitable or bearable as a moderator anymore IMO and I personally asked Ser Clegane to demote him. Whether that was the deciding factor I do not know as there may as well have been others and I was not involved in the decision.
If he told someone that I held a grudge against him anyway or that I backstabbed him, that wouldn't be the only stuff he made up at the time to avoid admitting a mistake...
So much for my version.
And now you can easily make a chauvinistic and humiliating comment about another nation and get away with it. Cheers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Nations don't have feelings, they only exist in our heads.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
You guys have explained yourself well enough, I know it isn't about me, I just don't want people to get the idea that I got a hand in this as I was oblivious about this whole affair, I never knew why these guys left. I don't think the moderators did anything wrong, rules are rules. I also got warning-points I thought were unfair but I never took it personal. Some newer posters seem to think some are privileged, all of this couldn't make it clearer that that assumption is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
"And now you can easily make a chauvinistic and humiliating comment about another nation and get away with it." Were you in the org during the period of "cheese eater surrendering monkeys" period?
The org is still one forum largely above other sites for the good behiavour and conduct in debate. Not perfect, but at least no insult. Sometimes it is borderlines, but it is within an acceptable fringe.
Thank you. That wasn't so hard, now was it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
He often lied to cover up his mistakes. I didn't want him to be moderator and I wanted him removed, and I personally intervened to have him stripped of it. It had nothing to do with him calling Fragony a muslim fag in jest.
This is what I've been saying, all along. Fag was just a convenient excuse by people who wanted him removed.
And this is infinitely more fair than the company line we've been fed for 4 years now. But, you're not the biggest fish that needs to be fried here...
I know, that's why I said it. You weren't even aware and wouldn't have been insulted even if you were, but some staff members were insulted on your behalf and used it to remove Louis, as a part of a bigger, hidden feud going on in the moderators private forum, which was also the real reason why BG and Louis left.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
More the rules don't allow a lot of communication on the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
You haven't actually been fed a company line, it was more that we cannot talk about infractions and personal issues without the persons consent and Louis is a consenting adult. So if he came in here and discussed it, then it is clear he is giving his permission, thus we could.
This is different to 'company line' as I believe that is where you are forcing a version of events, which isn't the case or not the intention. The quoted Husar post is just him simply saying about what he felt/did at the time as a role of a member.
So apologies for any impression that I might have given which appears I am trying to be deceitful. :bow:
Leaving of Louis and Banquo were completely separate incidents and as far as i can recall Banquo´s leaving had no drama connected to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Ever since Tosa passed away trough the point i gave away my Mod ropes, to the point i asked my Keep access to be terminated. I had hard time agreeing with most of Administrations line of thinking, while certainly my own attitude was far from being very constructive. In any case i dont agree that there was some sort of systematical "cleansing" going on in the staff, like some seem to think. Rather just bunch of worn out and worried people trying to achieve what they thought was best for the site.
Not according to Louis and Banquo. Banquo just stepped down quietly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
It wasn't a systematic cleansing, it was a part of staff coming down on those they disagreed with.Quote:
Ever since Tosa passed away trough the point i gave away my Mod ropes, to the point i asked my Keep access to be terminated. I had hard time agreeing with most of Administrations line of thinking, while certainly my own attitude was far from being very constructive. In any case i dont agree that there was some sort of systematical "cleansing" going on in the staff, like some seem to think. Rather just bunch of worn out and worried people trying to achieve what they thought was best for the site.
And Adrian leaving because of that. No one thinks there's something odd about Adrian starting a thread thanking Banquo after he stepped down, expressing pleasure that Banquo will stay as a member and then immediately leaving without a single word? Between starting that thread and leaving, Adrian received a pm from BG explaining to him that it wasn't voluntary but that he and Louis were basically forced out. Yes, in the end they stepped down "voluntarily" but only because they didn't want to take the abuse any more. Some of it happened in the moderators forum, but both of them also received quite a few abusive pm's.
In the end, those "worn out" people basically destroyed the backroom/tavern/off topic part of the forum, and most of them had little to no contact with it. Members of the staff who did, instead of telling them to f*** off, joined them or stood idly by.
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
The org is a very civilised place, even when people completily disagree it always stays classy.
In this case nation=country=population of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Not from those who are supposed to see to it that the rules are kept.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brenus
Don't turn into a Drunken Clown. It was a joke. Get over it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
There are no rules against nation-bashing as far as I know, I would be a very sad puppy if there were. Just don't take it personal, it's of no use. You are going to get offended here, just get over it and don't act like a Disney princess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilrandir
edit, too hilarious to not post https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSz0iVhvqog
And you have any first hand information concerning any of this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Let it rest imho, they aren't comming back as it seems, no need for a maelström for those involved. I for one never expected such a thing happening here, I thought the staff were all friendly with eachother. Must say I am a bit shocked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
You are right. I leave it to that.:bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
For some, yes. For others, secondhand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
Most importantly, all the pieces fit perfectly together.
Nah. I like exposing hypocrites and cowards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
More importantly, I think it is one of the main reasons why my favourite political discussion board declined in quality so much.
See, this is complete BS again because you insinuate that:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
1) I wanted him removed even before or during the first part of the affair, that is NOT true.
2) his public comments were somehow the official or inofficial reason given for his removal when in fact Ser Clegane never gave one single reason IIRC.
3) that he was somehow blameless or made only a minor mistake when in fact he backstabbed me several times, tried to discredit me with the other moderators because I voiced my opinion and treated me like a silly child while I repeatedly told him that this made me angry before I asked for him to be removed.
Or are ou saying that because he was funnier than me he had the right to bully me and I should have shut up and taken it?
Tell me why I should be fried at all.
And noone has commented on Hosakawa Tito yet.
As I was an involuntary subject that got drawn into this I kindly request that we should just leave it at this. I got hauled in so I deserve a say at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
@Sarmatian @Strike For The South
1) Banquo: yes, I feel personnally responsible for his departure. I had my opinion and stood up for it. Along the line, I disregarded the person Banquo and his feelings. I was very harsh and my words were the drop that spilled the bucket for him. He stepped down. I pm'ed him, I apologised to him, he was very gentlemany, as he always was, and he sticked to his decision. But with no hard feelings. He actually stayed around for a very short time after it and then left.
Allthough he assured me that there were no hard feelings and that our friendship was still intact, all those years later, I still feel terrible about it. And rightly so :shame:
2) Louis. He only has himself to blame. Not only because of his behaviour in public, but also because of incidents that occurred in private. Incidents that I witnessed. I wasn't involved in those incidents, they happened between him and other staff members. It was impossible to keep him staff. I stood and am still standing 100 % after the decision made at the time. And allthough it was Ser's decision, I'm not going to be a coward and hide behind his back. He has my full support and if you want to verbally abuse Ser for it, then I'm standing next to him. My predecessor made the right decision. And nothing you say will change that.
If you think atmosphere among staff is/was so rotten that we/they amused/amuse ourselves/themselves with intrigues and forum politics including backstabbing and getting colleagues expelled and other petty games, well, I guess you believe what you want to believe.
:shrug:
Nothing I can change about that.
Food for thought: since Tosa's passing, only 1 staff member ever got himself expelled. 1.
As I said in the Watchtower, Louis is more than welcome to return as a member.
If he decides to start a drama thread in the Watchtower about this, then I'll most probably completely ignore it. Or spank his behind.
If you want to see me rot in a cage, then let me rot in a cage over Banquo, not Louis.
:bow:
And those statements contradict one another. You say that there was absolutely no other reason you wanted Louis removed but the fag word, and then you mention how he bullied you and ignored your warnings before you asked him to be removed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
If he indeed bullied you, you should have stood up to him, not go tell on him to the teacher.Quote:
Or are ou saying that because he was funnier than me he had the right to bully me and I should have shut up and taken it?
Because if you and some others had little more spunk, we could have still had BG, Adrian and Louis.Quote:
Tell me why I should be fried at all.
But you fail to see how those two cases are connected, and you're rationalizing now how you were wrong in one instance but right in the other. 50%/50% is better than 100% wrong. Actually, there was just one case and you were wrong. Also, you weren't an innocent bystander, but were actively involved. So, no, I don't buy your explanation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres
You've done enough already. Save yourself the burden.Quote:
:shrug:
Nothing I can change about that.
Because the examples like Banquo, those were bullied into resignation don't count, right? Anyway, I don't care about any others. I care about the backroom that I love. Yes, I'm totally self serving with this, and I'm annoyed that we lost three of our best contributors because people were childish and petty.Quote:
Food for thought: since Tosa's passing, only 1 staff member ever got himself expelled. 1.
He's not coming back, but why are you thinking you have the right to decide his status if he did?Quote:
As I said in the Watchtower, Louis is more than welcome to return as a member.
Funnily enough, at this point I'd just like for some people to come clean, like Prole did. Or, in your case, to admit that it didn't have anything to do with the word fag, that you disliked him (and BG), and wanted him (them) gone.Quote:
If he decides to start a drama thread in the Watchtower about this, then I'll most probably completely ignore it. Or spank his behind.
If you want to see me rot in a cage, then let me rot in a cage over Banquo, not Louis.
:bow:
I'm blaming you (plural) for Adrian, too, but in that case you didn't do anything directly. You just f***** things up enough so that he left on his own.
No, I never said that, where did you read this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
What I've been saying or trying to say the entire time was that this was a minor reason at best regarding the final decision but was never the single reason he got demoted.
It was completely useless, I had already debated with him and he kept calling others names and the staff became more and more divided until Ser Clegane pulled the plug before it became even worse. Louis was not going to give in and neither was I. The attempts of mine to get to an agreement with him were torpedoed by Louis repeatedly. Whether my PM to Ser Clegane changed anything about the end result I do not know, I was just saying that I did send it and wanted it, but only when it became obvious to me that Louis was lying and manipulating like crazy and blamed others of doing such things. And this was never the behavior that was wanted here by a staff member as far as I can tell. Keeping him around just because he was still funny to you is a ludicrous idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Oh and the reason we did not make this public earlier was that we did want him to stay as a member despite the things he did in private. He chose not to.
And if Louis had had a little more decency or honesty, he could still be a Moderator here. He is still free to come back as a member and I wouldn't even hold a grudge, the things above happened in the past and I'm willing to forgive to a degree as I was back then when he refused all solutions but that we would give him free reign of sorts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I wouldn't say Bnquo was bullied into resignation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I for one had no idea how he felt until he resigned and by then his decision was already final and he refused to change it.
People voiced their opinions and he did not feel well with that, it's regrettable but I could only accept it.
Louis was childish and petty. He was told that he was wrong and instead of trying to deal with it, he tried to deflect, lie and manipulate his way out because his ego was too big to just say he made a mistake nd defuse the situation. He played with fire and got burnt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
That was more or less the staff agreement when he got demoted, that he could stay or come back as a member whenever he wanted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
Pretty much everyone had some kind of regret for having to demote him, even the ones who were in favor of the decision because it simply was not a nice affair and should not have happened. That it did happen was due to how Louis behaved though and we could not influence that a lot. As I said, he refused every solution other than full surrender of everyone who thought he made a mistake and that was not an option for me since he was wrong, plain and simple.
I think at this point, the conversation has reached its natural conclusion. :bow:
Addendum:
Look, I know people are aggrieved and feel like an injustice has been done, and there are those on different sides who haven't had their voices heard, but this is simply going to get worse and I don't feel the argument will be healthy. I would prefer not to get embroiled in moderating members (regular, ex-staff, staff, etc) over this issue for obvious reasons.