Jump to content

kalohepirate

Donating Regulars
  • Content Count

    1958
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

United Operations - A Tactical Gaming Community

ArmA 3 Mission List

ArmA 2 Mission List

Forums

Calendar

Store

Everything posted by kalohepirate

  1. for reference here is 1.4, 1.4 - All Regulars have a common influence on the direction and administration of the community. Voting yes
  2. I’d disagree, if the person has truly matured then they have nothing to fear in an appeal. If for some reason one returns and has not reformed, this puts a lot of unnecessary burden on the GMs and FMs to monitor and enforce the rules.
  3. Voting No. There is no wording that this is for game bans only, this would include all bans. There are over 113 people banned on the forums. some have been banned because of game related activities, and some have been banned for other reasons. Its the others I am concerned about. These non game related bans have no reason to be here. There is an appeal process let them use it. By way of appeals this shows that a person has shown first remorse for their actions and second a sign of maturity in that they can ask for forgiveness.
  4. Voting no, first off the personal review thread are meant to be private. Obviously some people have forgotten what that means when they included it in a poll. Next for the actual officer part, I at one time thought too many officers in a office was not good. But the PRO office proved me wrong. So if that's the case what harm is being done with an officer that's inactive because of IRL. Nothing that I can see, we already have other officers inactive and he's done good work.
  5. abstaining for same reasons as in UOTC thread. But here the threshold seems to be smaller, per evidence last activity done as a PRO was 4 months ago for the Steel Beast event. Are there other PRO's that fall within this threshold? Will we see more polls?
  6. Gonna abstain until I hear from Azzwort. Since we are not privilege to whats being done in the departments behind closed doors. He may be active without our knowledge. His review thread is old and should have been addressed at the time. Doing so now feels petty. I also agree with Pie's observation of an imposed threshold and would like to know what that is.
  7. What is wrong with all of you, not one of the classics in the semi-finals? I really don't know what to say to all of you. I blame Disney and their limited releases of the classics.
  8. Everyone is saying its easy to remove him if he's not changed, but historically its not. Time and again we say things like this but do not act for what ever reason. I am not willing to take that chance and vote no.
  9. Ok so AC is not a donating memeber at this time and can not participate in his poll. And through the voice of Soviet is rejecting this poll. Can they people who put up these polls at least check if the person want to be a regular first? Voting no, respecting AC's wishes.
  10. The person who put up the poll missed two bans, one being the one where he finally admitted to bypassing his original ban. Best to get all the information up front and not hide anything, I did not dig deeper into Septemebr https://unitedoperations.net/forums/index.php?/topic/26764-ban-mrpink/ https://unitedoperations.net/forums/index.php?/topic/20114-ban-mrpink/
  11. I'll wait to hear from AC before deciding.
  12. No / Yes Thats to dang early for me and a EU arma server connection is laggy at best for my location.
  13. nice exactly what I was hoping for
  14. Nice, going to look into this. Is the multiplayer only everyone controls their own boat or on the same boat with different roles?
  15. yeah if your not starting at the begining of a wipe and join in the middle its very rough. If I miss a wipes start by a couple of days I tend to stop playing rather quickly.
  16. That maybe so or I may be correct. The thing is there is no positive comments for me to judge back on, only the negative sadly.
  17. Based on all I have read in member reviews and here I am voting No.
  18. He will have my yes upon his acceptance.
  19. Well it appears that this version I might stay static, Bludski is joining RHS and map updates would probably be a group effort. It may even be published under a RHS or it may not. Since this is a vote, how would the GSO's see this if updates are filed under a new name or different Steam workshop? Is the vote going to limit their ability to adapt?
  20. Pretty sure I'll hear a similar statement from Impulse so I'll give you my nod.
  21. It’s is when it is because that’s when he’ll be on. That’s the same as me asking for it to be a little more Pacific Coast friendly. I am not that selfish. If you wish to play earlier get on and play I am sure he’ll appreciate that the server is being populated for him so when he gets on it’s a decent crowd.
  22. Voting No. It’s one thing to be able to debate in a civilized manner and an another thing to be argumentative. The later is how I remember you and is only confirmed by others concerns. I don’t feel that’s changed via your post.
  23. Learning from our last poll I will abstain until hearing from Sacher.
  24. Voting Yes based on character and past experiences. Not based on how a poll is written or his Pizza abilities are because I thought that’s how we do things now.
  25. He is not currently a donating member and probably can not respond directly in this poll.
×
×
  • Create New...