Jump to content

Removal of WeaponX  

67 members have voted

  1. 1. Removal of WeaponX

    • Yes
      13
    • No
      54


Recommended Posts

That's all great. Does any of that really matter until he posts his intentions in regards to the community?

Edited by Rein

Share this post


Link to post

I have had a number of interactions with weapon, both before and after I became a reg.  Every time I have dealt with him, I have always felt that he has attempted to improve the server and the community, with scripts, advice, and attitude.  While I might not believe that he is the second coming of flying spaghetti jesus like some here do, I believe that weapon's approach to UO just screams "regular".  Furthermore, I believe that weapon x is the picture of someone who has a very busy life, and still makes every attempt to help the community. 

 

Voted no here and for mike, yes on all the rest.

 

Anyone who had talked with me about this on TS has heard my opinions on the removal of dead weight, and I do not have the time currently to transcribe them here.  Despite my overall opinion, I urge all regulars to look at these polls on a case by case basis, and use your best professional judgement.

Edited by Dr Aquafresh

Share this post


Link to post

That's all great. Does any of that really matter until he posts his intentions in regards to the community?

Yes it does.  You're not his mother and he isn't accountable to you.

 

 

5.2.1 - Regulars represent the core of the community. Regulars are players who wish to take part in the organization and administration of the community

Nowhere in that statement does the context of accountability by direct address present itself, because it's not there.

 

Activity and accountability in regards to Regularship and requisite participation is detailed in 5.2.9

 

5.2.9 - Regulars who have not logged into their forum account within ninety (90) days will be removed as Regulars.

One does not need to participate in dicussions on the forums to maintain nor fulfill Regularship duties, they just have to log in once every 90 days at the least.

 

To which if you check Weapons profile, he last logged in 11 days ago, 79 days shy of not fulfilling his duties as a Regular.

Share this post


Link to post

I think you got it all wrong, and I strongly urge you to refrain from using that personal tone. Everyone is vouching in for him, which is fine. However, until he actually shows up and conveys his stance, my vote will remain a yes. Moreover, there is no reason for one to be a Regular if he does not participate in the administration of the community.

 

 

 

 Regulars are players who wish to take part in the organization and administration of the community
Edited by Rein

Share this post


Link to post

I think you got it all wrong, and I strongly urge you to refrain from using that personal tone. Everyone is vouching in for him, which is fine. However, until he actually shows up and to convey his stance, my vote will remain a yes. Moreover, there is no reason for one to be a Regular if he does not participate in the administration of the community.

Look chiefo, you can think what you want.  All members here are entitled to an opinion, Regulars well included.  You can think the opinions of others are wrong, as we can thnk your opinion is wrong.

 

Not everyone, but the plurality of those whom have posted in this thread support and vouch for him.  You've stated that you think I got it all wrong; yet you strongly urged myself after stating I had things wrong to avoid personal tone.  That's quite hypocritical of you, and proximally so.

 

What I'm doing is providing for you a lesson in accountability as the words and statements you've posted are yours.  You are accountable for the things you state and the ideas you both share and express.

 

You can cry a foul of personal tone while dancing around it yourself, but your posts essentially are heralding an opinion that believes a Regular is accountable to respond to accusations put upon them in defense of their own Regularship publically for the community at-large to view which can only be construed as a demand for accountability publically.

 

Regulars are not accountability to justify their Regularship at all; including on the forum and it's sub-forums, the server, nor in TS.  One can even add Skype into that mix.  They volunteer or are nominated to participate and are expected to by their own means, not by the demands of other Regulars.

 

If you want to know for yourself how he contributes and what his stance is in regards to the community send him a PM and ask him.  Have a discussion with the man, because he won't engage with you here. 

 

If you want him to publically state his contributions, let it rest; he doesn't have to nor will he as Weapon is not one to participate and contribute within and towards the community on the forums.  It is foolish to assume he will.

 

In regards to your last comment, that's a double-edged blade you're licking.

 

What is it that you do to aid in the administration of the community?  File the occasional ban thread when a violation of our server rules and SOPs occurs at a time when you are present to witness it or admin'ing on the server?  Big deal, members do that as well.

 

Weapon has actively participated in teaching the community useful knowledge and skillsets that direclty reflect our style of play while aiding in the administration and organization of large-scale events over the years.

 

Your manifestations of requisite behaviors and aspects of participations are just that, your manifestations, your opinions.

 

The Charter is spartan in it's simplicity towards the requirements of Regularship.  As I stated earlier, Regulars at the individual level throughout the almost three years of this communities' existence have developed their own standards for Regularship that are not reflected by the Charter; making them moot and not warrant in justifying a Regular's removal.

Edited by _jackal

Share this post


Link to post

Lastly, respond as you will if you wish to.  I've stated what I've had to state and am no longer one to ring around the roses of argumentation on these forums.

 

What I've presented is food for thought, so think about it. 

 

Your further actions and decisions are yours to make, but any further statements in regards to what I've said will fall upon blind eyes.

Share this post


Link to post

Your post makes no sense, for you are stretching this way beyond the subject at hand. I'd tell you to quit being so melodramatic, but what would you know? You were one of the few active Regulars who got actually managed to get voted out. Oh the irony.

 

My conversation with you is over. It is clear that you're desperately looking for a soap box trying to make this about yourself.

Edited by Rein

Share this post


Link to post

no matter how much person done in past. everyone should be measured by present. time now.
unless you are really in favour of double standarts and "exceptional people" what is quite disgusting to be honest.

you don't need to be a regular to be a cool guy. if regularship in your opinion is somewhat "honor badge" then you should eather think again and read the chapter to avoid double standarts situation or change the chapter to allow such bullshit but in this case it will be legit.

anyway, if you bring "feelings" into quite objective administrative procedure - you are corrupted and therefor can't operate effective.

all these excuses already gave me quite an impression what kind of people govern UO, and the level of their confidence, their assumptions and willing to ignore parts of codex in favour of personal (may be indirect) benefit.

in short: eather change charter to fit corrupted assumprions or get shit straight and do your job without bringing personal stuff in. you are supposed to maintain/shape community if you have no guts then what are you doing here? again, what do you care for? community in it's constand shaping or long gone inactive people for the sake of memories?

if you want to "look good" and "operate" in same time, there is a way. just make a list of people who were regulars somewhere on forum and add in chapter that if person is inactive for some period on time he will be removed, but he will be welcome later when he will be up to duty again. and make a template PM that you will send to regs who gone inactive.

is it so fucking difficult to figure out?

used to run clan by this system around 4 years and no fucking problems whatsoever. all it takes is having balls to take responsibility and send a pm with explanation why and what and it's a normal procedure. and in case of UO it's also completely harmless, since you can still play here etc. if i managed to resolve situations of removing clan tags due inactivity without being a dick and having an understanding and no grunges with people by explaining whats going on, then i'm sure you can too. all it takes is to be responsible.

if you can't explain person that all it's done for the sake of community and there is nothing personal but rules are rules in informal style i wounder how you communicate at work?

punch line: if you have no balls to enforce rules you created why you create rules in first place?


offtop: anonymous polls and overall collective polls remove such thing as responibility for actions and encourage "it will be solved" additude when nobody is responsible for anything. just some food or thoughts.

Edited by n2-

Share this post


Link to post

I think you got it all wrong, and I strongly urge you to refrain from using that personal tone. Everyone is vouching in for him, which is fine. However, until he actually shows up and conveys his stance, my vote will remain a yes. Moreover, there is no reason for one to be a Regular if he does not participate in the administration of the community.

But you have JUST been told by a PR Officer that he is helping throw out ideas to create an event.

 

What have you done for the community lately?

Share this post


Link to post

Yes it does.  You're not his mother and he isn't accountable to you.

 

Nowhere in that statement does the context of accountability by direct address present itself, because it's not there.

 

Activity and accountability in regards to Regularship and requisite participation is detailed in 5.2.9

One does not need to participate in dicussions on the forums to maintain nor fulfill Regularship duties, they just have to log in once every 90 days at the least.

 

To which if you check Weapons profile, he last logged in 11 days ago, 79 days shy of not fulfilling his duties as a Regular.

All the 90 day removal sop is there to do is remove people that out right leave without telling anyone.

 

 

 

 

Look chiefo (cut)           

As you may be correct along the lines of a charter, a reguler that is not active in trying to improve the community, is a pointless regular. 

 

while your opinion may be that our opinion of the current standards we hold regulers to is moot, they are the standards we hold them to, so deal with it. 

 

 

Theres no need to be quite so rude as no one will take you seriously. 

Edited by Haribo

Share this post


Link to post

But you have JUST been told by a PR Officer that he is helping throw out ideas to create an event.

 

What have you done for the community lately?

Exactly.  If we're asking him to justify what he's done for the community lately to ensure his place a regular, why don't we just ask all regulars to do the same? Then, on a case by case basis we can see exactly what deserve to still be regulars.

 

Rein, if I'm reading this right, you're saying that you only need to be a regular if you want to take part in administrative duties.  Are you actively taking part in administrative duties? Do you have some active role as a delegate of a Officer or similar?  Should a poll be put up for every regular who plays but doesn't have an active role in 'administering' the community, either through being an Officer or a Delegate of some sort?  I can think of any number of regulars who don't 'contribute' to these policy discussions as a matter of course - more like as a occasional thing rather than debating the finer points.

 

If people are doing this purge to prevent pubbies seeing regulars as 'elitist' - this makes it worse for me.  The justifications you have for removing people should be applied across the board to all regulars rather than just to certain cherry picked people if you want to appear transparent.  Shouldn't they? Or, isn't that just a massive waste of everyone's time and effort?

 

Basically Rein, I'd like you to define 'active' as you see it.  What, in your mind, does being an active member of the community involve?  Please, by all means, define for us all what your impression of a regular is?  

Share this post


Link to post

Enough.

 

 

Make your points without personal attacks.

 

 

The tone must change. Everyone can express their ideas, as a community we should encourage a thoughtful dialog but personal attacks or quips will not be tolerated.

Share this post


Link to post

Big ass tip for whoever is making the witch hunting threads around, instead of going around after every single regular that`s inactive, try and just do one poll to fix the system, the system in order atm states that regular may stay inactive up to 90 days, a simple solution is changing it to something like this :

 

"Regulars may stay inactive for a period of 30 days, anything longer than that requires a LOA topic to be made in the respective forum, stating reasons ( no need to go personal on it, just a simple, somethings going on can`t quite play atm) to why the need to go away, this would therefore allow the user to stay away for the duration he needs to in his LOA post, after the end date stablished by the user itself has passed, he`ll be given an extra 15 days to come back and be an active part of this community, if not, the user will be removed from his Regular position, and may reapply after 30 days, proving his activity."

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...