Jump to content

Add StatusRed as a Regular?  

68 members have voted

  1. 1. Add StatusRed as a Regular?

    • Yes
      9
    • No
      59


Recommended Posts

I still think you regulars have done Status a injustice here and I'm not surprised at his posts which you seem to get so much pleasure from . You are as much to blame for his behaviour as he is .I find most of the post's and insults you show to a fellow member in a regulars poll beyond belief. I expect better from UO and it's members .That is my option and respect yours

Share this post


Link to post

I still think you regulars have done Status a injustice here and I'm not surprised at his posts which you seem to get so much pleasure from . You are as much to blame for his behaviour as he is .I find most of the post's and insults you show to a fellow member in a regulars poll beyond belief. I expect better from UO and it's members .That is my option and respect yours

 

Your opinion is of course yours, and that i cant change, but i gotta disagree in this. many felt his post was rushed and the criticism given was not handled in the period. when this was taken up, it was meet with a non constructive response (sure not all regs did the best response either, but when you choice to get poll'd for anything you should be ready to get criticism), instead of taking the approach of trying to find what people find lacking. Heck i was one who voted no last because i just felt he didnt give me a strong enough impression, and i know i havent been on as much, but sending me a PM or asking into the issues i saw. would have given me a picture of a guy wanting to improve.

 

I have to agree with J.B. that the system worked if a poll post can pull a tantrum like this. Heck i would fear how you would feel when you get voted against in community changes then.

Share this post


Link to post

I've abstained.

 

Personally, I do feel that Status dug himself a hole here/provided the fuel. But, I also do feel that the Regs are responsible for actually starting the fire.

 

Hopefully you all understand the metaphor. I've come to realise I convey myself poorly over text.

Share this post


Link to post

For StatusRed:

 

1. - Tvt60 Sunday Bloody Sunday V2.3, poor idea involving requirement of roleplaying as civilians and a poor victory condition

- Co101 Chechens Again Hc V1.2, poor design requiring a lot of tedious and somewhat boring gameplay involving looking for one enemy hiding in a large area around a city, then repeat

- Co19 The Show Must Go On V1.2, poor concept involving 19 people attacking ~20 enemy in a town with a counter-attack afterwards with no support

These are in particular the issues I had with missions you have made, your previous response to criticism with Sunday Bloody Sunday made me think better of trying to offer criticism of the others.

 

2. Yes, the jargon explained guide contained inaccuracies corrected by others with examples that are not useful in describing the use. It is basically a dictionary the doesn't explain the words in it, for a lot of the definitions. Even if 50% of the definitions are not yours, the idea is, and the original version still had these issues.

 

3, 4. Sorry I don't have video or photographic evidence. The times I had interacted with you I remember getting a bad impression on both of these subjects. Your personal skill and focus in missions was a problem; you would not effectively create section/squad level plans and execute them and you would lose focus on the mission and screw around, these are the two main points I noticed in the few times I interacted with you.

 

The reason I am so critical of these things is because you have used them as a reason for regularship.

 

Firstly, if there's a problem with those missions they should be removed; do not moan at me for coming up with concepts that are not the norm. The problem with Bloody Sunday is that people are incapable of roleplaying, which is fair enough I have stated multiple times that I would not be offended if it was removed. I fail to see why it's even an issue. Chechens Again, I haven't seen it played since 1.0 (after which I made a lot of changes) and I haven't seen an AAR thread or had any PMs concerning subsequent versions, I find it bizarre that you expect all missions to be perfectly balanced in the first why and if you have played subsequent versions I'd question why you failed to bring it to the attention of the mission maker then feel it's appropriate to moan about it.. The Show Must Go On, I agree is a bizarre ORBAT but it is intended to fill the void of under 20 player missions that we have, which were specifically requested. I had received no complaints about the overall mission concept and made several updates in response to some recommendations from players. And the counter attack does have armoured support, which you'd know had you played the mission or bothered paying attention.

 

The guide was always intended to be simply a dictionary, when did I ever claim it was meant to cover everything? If you're so critical why don't you make an improved version which encompasses everything you think it should? No, eh? And as said I've been constantly working to improve it, but it doesn't matter because it all counts for nothing anyway.

 

Your last point about screwing around is absolute unfounded bollocks, which is not backed up. Have some proof before you make allegations please, it makes you look pathetic.

 

I still think you regulars have done Status a injustice here and I'm not surprised at his posts which you seem to get so much pleasure from . You are as much to blame for his behaviour as he is .I find most of the post's and insults you show to a fellow member in a regulars poll beyond belief. I expect better from UO and it's members .That is my option and respect yours

 

Cheers Jones.

Share this post


Link to post

Your opinion is of course yours, and that i cant change, but i gotta disagree in this. many felt his post was rushed and the criticism given was not handled in the period. when this was taken up, it was meet with a non constructive response (sure not all regs did the best response either, but when you choice to get poll'd for anything you should be ready to get criticism), instead of taking the approach of trying to find what people find lacking. Heck i was one who voted no last because i just felt he didnt give me a strong enough impression, and i know i havent been on as much, but sending me a PM or asking into the issues i saw. would have given me a picture of a guy wanting to improve.

 

I have to agree with J.B. that the system worked if a poll post can pull a tantrum like this. Heck i would fear how you would feel when you get voted against in community changes then.

 

This shows your total lack of understanding mr2. Again thinking that this is a tantrum and having the attitude of why would people not want to be like you. Please, get it into your head that I do not wish to become a regular. I was totally prepared for criticism, what I disliked was the silence of the vast majority of the no voters and then the realisation of how the system truly works. Which made me come to the conclusion that I do not want to be a part of this and how the system really works needs to be let known to the community. That's all there is to it. J.B.'s stupid sounding comment at the end of one of his posts references only what happened post my decision to no longer want to be a regular; in which I declared I no longer cared about what you lot thought of me and I stated some facts that not a lot of you like to hear and that's why he believes "I'm not a good character". It honestly makes me laugh.

 

I've abstained.

 

Personally, I do feel that Status dug himself a hole here/provided the fuel. But, I also do feel that the Regs are responsible for actually starting the fire.

 

Hopefully you all understand the metaphor. I've come to realise I convey myself poorly over text.

 

Of course I've dug my self a hole Thawk, and you know I don't care. That's why, I genuinely want people to vote no so that's part of the reason. Thank you for acknowledging that the regulars are to blame for "starting the fire" as you put it.

 

I'd also like to say that I do also appreciate what I've seen from you in other threads, where you've stated that it's now insanely hard to become a regular and what is wanted simply isn't clear. You're one of the good guys. :)

Share this post


Link to post

nr 1 rule of the internet. if you keep responding, you care. no matter what you say :wink: .

 

If it was no matter for you, why not take it the silent way, let it flow free instead of keep stating "i dont care" when obvious you do when you want to debate it. we state our perspective after this went over the board.

 

Heck i understanding it fine. i just dont understand why someone who dont care keeps pushing out new replies.

 

ps. i was the silent abstain till i saw where the post went. Funny enough it went into popcorn drama.

Edited by mr2

Share this post


Link to post

I was referring to the friendly infantry platoon minus attacking without support, not the enemy forces. Did not offer criticism, until now when you asked why I thought your missions were sub-par, because of your argumentative nature in the past - which is seen here.

 

My memory is not perfect and I cannot recall the exact situations where I thought your attitude/skills were lacking. My standards are generally very high with regards to ingame stuff, so something as simple as not watching your sector while halted on a march, needless talking, poor bounds, bad decisions for small unit tactics, etc. are what I notice immediately. This is not an immediate "no, never", however when you pride yourself in being a good example to players, you must be prepared for extreme scrutiny. Really, if I came away from play experience with a person and thought "huh, they know what they are doing", it would be a very atypical experience. Not many people have the knowledge and experience to execute tasks correctly and well in an infantry setting, so I do not expect it. However, I will still note the problem and weight it accordingly if it is brought up as being a strong point.

 

I will take some time in the coming days to go over the AAR threads your responded to in order to jog my memory of any play experiences I may have had to try and give you some more concrete examples, but it has been a decent amount of time since then.

Share this post


Link to post

nr 1 rule of the internet. if you keep responding, you care. no matter what you say :wink: .

 

If it was no matter for you, why not take it the silent way, let it flow free instead of keep stating "i dont care" when obvious you do when you want to debate it. we state our perspective after this went over the board.

 

Heck i understanding it fine. i just dont understand why someone who dont care keeps pushing out new replies.

 

ps. i was the silent abstain till i saw where the post went. Funny enough it went into popcorn drama.

 

Again mr2, you clearly haven't been reading what I'm posting or struggle to understand English properly. I do not care about becoming a regular; however that does not necessarily mean that I do not care about this thread. That is why I'm responding. As explained multiple times previously I am just making sure that people are aware of the real picture.

 

I was referring to the friendly infantry platoon minus attacking without support, not the enemy forces. Did not offer criticism, until now when you asked why I thought your missions were sub-par, because of your argumentative nature in the past - which is seen here.

 

My memory is not perfect and I cannot recall the exact situations where I thought your attitude/skills were lacking. My standards are generally very high with regards to ingame stuff, so something as simple as not watching your sector while halted on a march, needless talking, poor bounds, bad decisions for small unit tactics, etc. are what I notice immediately. This is not an immediate "no, never", however when you pride yourself in being a good example to players, you must be prepared for extreme scrutiny. Really, if I came away from play experience with a person and thought "huh, they know what they are doing", it would be a very atypical experience. Not many people have the knowledge and experience to execute tasks correctly and well in an infantry setting, so I do not expect it. However, I will still note the problem and weight it accordingly if it is brought up as being a strong point.

 

I will take some time in the coming days to go over the AAR threads your responded to in order to jog my memory of any play experiences I may have had to try and give you some more concrete examples, but it has been a decent amount of time since then.

 

beta, how you've come up with this impression of me I will never no. I have only ever seen you on the server and I don't believe I've ever actually seen your character while in game. You must be thinking of someone else or you're totally delusional.

Share this post


Link to post

The guide was always intended to be simply a dictionary, when did I ever claim it was meant to cover everything?

 

Dictionaries tend to have definitions.

 

It's quite vital really.

 

*edit*

Also:

The guide was always intended to be simply a dictionary, when did I ever claim it was meant to cover everything? If you're so critical why don't you make an improved version which encompasses everything you think it should? No, eh? And as said I've been constantly working to improve it, but it doesn't matter because it all counts for nothing anyway.

 

Get your head out of your arse:

http://forums.unitedoperations.net/index.php/topic/13837-section-operations-course-notes/

http://forums.unitedoperations.net/index.php/topic/9519-platoon-operations-course-notes/

 

Beta has done far more than you for this community, he has made more guides, better missions and is generally not a prick.

Edited by Herbiie

Share this post


Link to post

Well, now that it's down to just that, I have noticed you when you were playing. I also have heard others speaking of their experiences with you in various outlets, TS, the forums, skype, etc. But sure, I am delusional.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, now that it's down to just that, I have noticed you when you were playing. I also have heard others speaking of their experiences with you in various outlets, TS, the forums, skype, etc. But sure, I am delusional.

I only had good experiences when he lead the squad i was in.

Edited by Sacher

Share this post


Link to post

Well, now that it's down to just that, I have noticed you when you were playing. I also have heard others speaking of their experiences with you in various outlets, TS, the forums, skype, etc. But sure, I am delusional.

 

So, who are all of these people, and why did no one ever raise this with me? Cowardice?

 

I only had good experiences when he lead the squad i was in.

 

Thank you Sacher.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe they don't want to take part in your little tantrum.

 

So, there's people who have a problem with my conduct in game but they won't even confront me and tell me what the problem is? It truly is pathetic.

Share this post


Link to post

There's 9 pages of "what the problem is" right here, no need to add.

 

Wow, so you're entirely ignoring what I'm saying. Could you sound much more moronic? I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post

Status, I always had good experiences with you. I don't know where this attitude towards Regulars has come from, but if you continue down this path I'm afraid that you'll have a short future with us. I hate that because you seemed like an ok guy....

Edited by The BrentP

Share this post


Link to post

Status,

Some of the content in this thread is rude and is not constructive. That is unfortunate.

 

Beta provided a great explanation for you. He made the effort to explain why. Perhaps he thought you could benefit and perhaps he thought others might gain some insight also. Often we keep criticism to ourselves because if we explain the rational for a no vote we open ourselves up to counter attacks. He provided you with a clear reason for his no vote. I see no disrespect in his posts. Because he didn’t give you feedback previously doesn’t make the offer insincere. He and others would be continually criticizing many players if they pointed out every example of poor teamwork.

 

There are players who think you do a good job (you serve as a positive example). There are others who think you don’t do a very good job. Perhaps the former have lower expectations. Positive/negative opinions don’t mean you are doing a good/poor job. Simply means that you are supported/opposed by a likeminded/dissenting players.

 

Regulars are NOT voted in because of their ability, contributions or commitment. They are voted in because other regulars approve of them. We have no objective way of testing or measuring a member for regularship. We don’t even have a standard. So ultimately, votes for officers or regulars (to elect or to remove) are popularity contests.

 

The results of the polls are a reflection of they who cast their votes, not necessarily of the candidate. If all of the current regulars were skilled, involved and committed we would more often elect similar type players to new regular/officer positions. But we have the current system. We make the best of it.

Share this post


Link to post

Status, you should've backed off a while back. Viking, there is no conspiracy. We can only go with what we've experienced and seen, and if what we see isn't acceptable to becoming a regular, we have to operate off of that. Shame that this escalated like it did.

Share this post


Link to post

Status I like you and it's a shame to see you fall to such petty bickering about this topic. I fail to see how it's anything but... petty.

 

For starters, every election is a popularity contest - from voting a politician to the new head of the PTA. If you're a nobody, nobody will vote for you. Sure, you might have done great things for the community - but if you're not liked you're not liked and that's the end of the story. It's hardly some great conspiracy that is specific to UO that needed to be exposed - it's the realities of life.

 

If you read back on the responses in this thread, you'll see that you're argumentative, and your accusations are somewhat wild. While perhaps founded in truth they're ultimately discounted because people see you as immature and you come across as a conspiracy theorist instead of a whistle blower. This means that all your arguments are dismissed outright simply because of your reputation, regardless of the truth of them, which is sad because I think you have some valid points. I hope that you come to see that a calm, measured response will gain more respect and traction even with those who oppose you.

 

Good luck!

Edited by zenjamin

Share this post


Link to post

I personally don't see it as petty. Statusred only started responding carelessly AFTER the 30+ no votes with NOONE saying why were already up. Same thing happened in my regular thread which is why i see UOs "democracy" as laughable as the real thing.

 

Instead of being ignorant and complacent with someone holding your hand, why not SAY why you voted no. If he really isnt regular material and UO really has the democratic system that it purports it has then giving him advice as to why not so he can not only better himself but the community benefits too.

 

If you read back on the responses in this thread, you'll see that you're argumentative, and your accusations are somewhat wild. While perhaps founded in truth they're ultimately discounted because people see you as immature and you come across as a conspiracy theorist instead of a whistle blower. This means that all your arguments are dismissed outright simply because of your reputation, regardless of the truth of them, which is sad because I think you have some valid points. I hope that you come to see that a calm, measured response will gain more respect and traction even with those who oppose you.

 

Statusred is not throwing up a huge conspiracy theory, merely getting pissed off at the utter disregard regulars have for the voting practices in place.

 

As previously stated, stop being ignorant and TELL people why they are not regular material. You might be surprised at the results.

 

Anyways. sad to see such a simple thing turn sour but whatever. loss for uo and loss for statusred.

 

PS: Probably full of grammar issues but w/e lolz engrish. oh, and spelling.!...:

Edited by Izumi

Share this post


Link to post

Izumi, even though there are problems in the community, this is no excuse to lose posture in debates. Some of us are trying to solve the known problems instead of adding to them. With that said, I don't see how StatusRed's behavior would in any way be beneficial to the community as a whole considering his inability to deal with the very problems that he is bringing to light. This denotes a huge diplomatic failure on his part, which is imperative to the role of any member aspiring to become a Regular.

 

In my opinion, the main problem is that many members of the general player base seek to become Regulars merely for the status that comes attached to this position. However, they fail to acknowledge the fact that the role of a Regular goes beyond promoting and engaging tactical play, for this is expected from any member of this community (whether a Regular or not) - it's not just about being active on the Primary. The only difference is that a Regular will have a say in the administration of the community as a whole, and a Regular will promote its Charter. If one is not willing to engage in constructive debate, brainstorming new ideas, participating in discussions, casting votes, etc. then he really has no place in becoming a Regular.

 

Thus, as aforementioned, StatusRed is currently in a predicament by being unable to deal with the situation that was (unfortunately) imposed on him. The consequence of his actions is aggravated by the countless cases of immaturity that are dealt with by Regulars and Officers on a daily basis. So basically, everyone is busy with their lives and they want to come here to have a good time and not deal with the shit storm that some goofballs like to create. The down side of this aspect is that it is much easier for one to tarnish his own reputation than to build a good one (just like anything in life), which will undoubtedly make things extremely harder for those trying to rectify the wrongdoings in their past. Individuals who are in this situation are victims of their own frustration when they realize how discredited they are (and fueled by their own immaturity), often find themselves in a condition that is rather detrimental to their public image (voiding them from any small chances that may be left to become Regulars).

 

I might be wrong, but this blurb I just wrote happens more often than one may think, and it may be pertinent to not only StatusRed, but to all goofballs aspiring to become Regulars of this community.

Edited by Rein

Share this post


Link to post

Status, just quit trying to became a regular. It aint worth it....

Share this post


Link to post

AFTER the 30+ no votes

 

My poll passed by maybe 3 votes....not a single person explained why they voted no. I never once complained or became angered and went on a rant about it. Same thing with my removal poll, no one stated why they voted yes. It's nothing to get pissed over and burn all of your bridges.

Share this post


Link to post

Izumi, even though there are problems in the community, this is no excuse to lose posture in debates. Some of us are trying to solve the known problems instead of adding to them. With that said, I don't see how StatusRed's behavior would in any way be beneficial to the community as a whole considering his inability to deal with the very problems that he is bringing to light. This denotes a huge diplomatic failure on his part, which is imperative to the role of any member aspiring to become a Regular.

 

Problems in this community that to date since my regular thread (years if my terrible grasp on time is true) and even before that have had no action taken to rectify the mistakes. I dont know about you but thats a pretty piss poor effort to solve the problems.

 

 

My poll passed by maybe 3 votes....not a single person explained why they voted no. I never once complained or became angered and went on a rant about it. Same thing with my removal poll, no one stated why they voted yes. It's nothing to get pissed over and burn all of your bridges.

 

Did you vote yes/no on his thread and not give a small text on why? Since I am too lazy to look through if so then disregard, if not then you have no place to say that.

Edited by Izumi

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...