Jump to content
Impulse 9

Removal of Dylan

Remove Dylan as a Regular?  

70 members have voted

  1. 1. Remove Dylan as a Regular?

    • Yes
      35
    • No
      35


Recommended Posts

I am not enforcing anything so yeah... this is a poll, I did not mention you tube nor skype in my reasons for voting yes. Keep reaching though.

I am doing it as basic reply to the accusations against Dylan being removed. Most of the accusations against him involve what I've mentioned. I'm glad you agree that the grounds he is being removed on are bs.

 

At this point I realize you don't want him here because you don't like him. I know I can't change that.

Share this post


Link to post

I am doing it as basic reply to the accusations against Dylan being removed. Most of the accusations against him involve what I've mentioned. I'm glad you agree that the grounds he is being removed on are bs.

 

At this point I realize you don't want him here because you don't like him. I know I can't change that.

No, I stated why I voted yes, has nothing to do with "liking him" and everything to do with my interactions with him in the community. From him over stepping his bounds with UOTC, to having to be told repeatedly not to use copy righted music for EOY UO approved videos. I am not going to vote to retain a person I feel cares more about his own ambition then the good of the community. I came to this conclusion through my experiences with him. The perfect example is his childish reactions after the red effect event. You can try to make this a personal thing as much as you want. I have stated why I voted yes, it is really irrelevant if you don't believe it. He is not a good regular IMO so its a yes vote. 

Share this post


Link to post

you guys argueing about youtube seem to be missing the point of the OP.

 

The point is that he is a bad regular, the vidoes are just examples. He is not the kind of person that i want to reperesent our community, he trivialises the rules to the new people. He tries to downplay the importance of doing things right. He almost never do anything to maintain order on the server, he sometimes lead but his leading is poorly organised and stems in a low level of tactical understanding and often turns into each squad getting and objective and then not interacting with them until its done. I have yet to see him trying to do a single thing on the server that remotely looks like what UOTC has been trying to teach, and he seems to pride himself in it.

 

all in all he just souldn't have been a reg, but that was also the reason that i voted no for his orignal poll.

Share this post


Link to post

you guys argueing about youtube seem to be missing the point of the OP.

 

The point is that he is a bad regular, the vidoes are just examples. He is not the kind of person that i want to reperesent our community, he trivialises the rules to the new people. He tries to downplay the importance of doing things right. He almost never do anything to maintain order on the server, he sometimes lead but his leading is poorly organised and stems in a low level of tactical understanding and often turns into each squad getting and objective and then not interacting with them until its done. I have yet to see him trying to do a single thing on the server that remotely looks like what UOTC has been trying to teach, and he seems to pride himself in it.

 

all in all he just souldn't have been a reg, but that was also the reason that i voted no for his orignal poll.

I'd just like to echo Godhand here. I voted to remove Dylan based on the same reasons. He is a bad regular, he doesn't promote the simulation play UO is built on.

In fact, I was in a conversation with Dylan along with Yugo about TvTs and Dylan straight up said that he doesn't care much for simulation gameplay and is here for fun. Then began bragging to Yugo about kills in commandos he got.

It was then I decided that Dylan obviously isn't regular material, he can be a good member but as a regular he fails to promote our goals as a community and making videos for UOTC and doing the opposite in reality is not contributing in my book.

 

And please note, I am being as objective here as I can. Before this I simply disliked Dylan's approach to ARMA but when he openly went against the charter my opinion moved to bad regular material. We can't have regulars who fail to uphold the basic pillars of UO

Edited by Thawk

Share this post


Link to post

Can you get off the Skype thing. Skype is an unofficial means we use. There is no rules for it and we have no Skype SOPs. If you post something in Skype you better be prepared to treat it as public. We have no rules governing Skype and we will not be making any.

I have never been involved in UO skype (although I have the odd UO member) and don't consider myself to be any less of a Reg because I that.

 

It has always been unofficial. Personally, the place seemed to be the source of a lot of unnecessary drama and back biting (although this was infrequent) and decided I could live without it.

 

The reason we don't have specific SOPs is because it is unofficial. The 3rd party program argument doesn't work. TS is a third party programme. We have a server we can control, in a similar way that a Skype group can be controlled (although the functionality is more limited). It just that TS is deemed official.

 

That said, for me, anything you do that can where you or the content can linked with UO, is something in which you are representing UO, in the same way as if were to slag off my clients on Facebook and someone shared it around, my firm would be less than pleased with me, because I am inextricably linked with them, even though I was acting in a personal capacity. If you put something out there, even to a limited audience, you are primarily responsible for that content, even if others bear some blame for redistribution.

 

But, for reasons others have covered, in this particular case, I am not sure the YouTube point has really influenced my decision one way or another.

Share this post


Link to post

Your chief grievance appears to be what he's posting on his YouTube channel (I could be wrong). I can understand why you'd want him removed as a Regular but, him being a Reg/Non-Reg isn't going to change the content of what he posts, or the impact the videos have on this community.

Share this post


Link to post

What Gohand and Thawk stated sums it up for me. Only after seeing the video(s) did I realize he's not regular material, the video is not the sole reason.

Share this post


Link to post

My removal was about me having forum warning points for posting memes and teabagging in BF3.....let's not confuse the two situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Dylan lacks the simple understanding that his actions as a Regular fall back and represent this community. During his brief time within UOTC Dylan wrote a script for an introduction video, the first line of this script consisted of a few words that, if released to the public as an advertisement, would undermine what we stand for as a community:

 

“In this video we will be going over the basics of Arma 2 and our community, what to expect, and how to play tactically or something”

 

While small in and of itself, this video was to be the first thing new players would see when joining our community, and it was a violation of 1.1 “maturity, professionalism,” our very own core value

 This makes no sense, this was the pre draft of the script.  It was a place holder, if you read the original script you would see it is underlined.  We underlined it to be changed,  We had Krause read it for timing.  The poster Obviously not a member of the media team writing this script.

Share this post


Link to post

As a non-regular, I've met Dylan twice - everytime in waitingroom and in game.

I highly doubt that he's not a regular material, cause he's friendly and always responsive and a good person to play a game with.

Sure, you need to be politicly "active" but as far I see he's as he contribute a lot with materials.

Can't understand the bashing towards him but yet I haven't been around for a while.

 

If it does matter:

Just cause of a script he made (As far as I read, it wasn't even published just under review) I don't see its bad.

And for his youtube video? Give that man a break, he was singing and joking, that's what a community is about being -friendly-.

Put my last cents, please don't bash me for my view of it all. 

Share this post


Link to post

As a non-regular, I've met Dylan twice - everytime in waitingroom and in game.

I highly doubt that he's not a regular material, cause he's friendly and always responsive and a good person to play a game with.

Sure, you need to be politicly "active" but as far I see he's as he contribute a lot with materials.

Can't understand the bashing towards him but yet I haven't been around for a while.

 

If it does matter:

Just cause of a script he made (As far as I read, it wasn't even published just under review) I don't see its bad.

And for his youtube video? Give that man a break, he was singing and joking, that's what a community is about being -friendly-.

Put my last cents, please don't bash me for my view of it all. 

Basically my exact thoughts Alwandy. If someone lets say, acts stupid in a separate game, trolls in Rust, or Garry's mod. Why would that come back to bite them in the ass here? Unless that behavior is evident and is becoming an issue it doesn't really matter. Truth be told not everyone acts 100 percent mature and professional 100 percent of the time. Its a fact of life. If you know this person that does I would love to meet them.

 

Obviously it is hard to look at a subject objectively but in this case, especially when considering a removal, you shouldn't vote based on a single bad conversation you have had with someone; or that you "just don't like them"

Going through and reading this thread I see alot of Circular reasoning. Instead of sharing opinions and conjecture why do we not stick to facts? 

 

Fact- Dylan helps produce material that benefits this community

Fact- Dylan (and Yugo, among others) devote their free time to work on projects for us, its not as if its required of them. They volunteer.

 

Opinion-Every time I have talked with Dylan, I was left with a good impression. Not some idiot who wants to play arcade style ARMA. Not someone who was whiny because we aren't doing this or that. Just someone who can follow the rules and have some fun. 

 

Need I go on? 

Share this post


Link to post

As far as my play experience with Dylan, I've never really had a problem with him, or his methods, as far as his gameplay style and leadership in missions.

 

Despite some harsh (but needed) criticism on my WIP film, he seems like a guy who is genuinely interested in improving the community. His demeanor seems slightly abrasive from the few posts I have seen of his, but I cannot judge a man solely on a few forum posts/ out of context quotes. If I did, I would genuinely hate about half of the regular base and most of the player base in general.

 

I would vote No. But I would recommend that he (Dylan) rethink his tone and demeanor in public forums.

Share this post


Link to post

Basically my exact thoughts Alwandy. If someone lets say, acts stupid in a separate game, trolls in Rust, or Garry's mod. Why would that come back to bite them in the ass here? Unless that behavior is evident and is becoming an issue it doesn't really matter. Truth be told not everyone acts 100 percent mature and professional 100 percent of the time. Its a fact of life. If you know this person that does I would love to meet them.

 

I am just speaking in general terms here not in specific Dylans case

 

If a person is tagged as a member of UO, be it through squad xml, Youtube video names/intros/channels then everything they do reflects on the community as a whole. Is this correct? No, but public perceptions work in mysterious ways

 

E.G If I go onto a Pub server with my UO Reg tag and start shit talking in side, then alot of people will assume that people from UO are shit pumps

 

IRL You see cases all the time of one individual fucking up and entire organisations being branded in a particular way, look at police forces and militaries all over the world for examples of this

Share this post


Link to post

Voting yes.

 

I am writing this from the perspective of a PRO, keep that in mind:

 

1. The end of 2011 was really the first time I encountered dylan in any meaningful capacity, he was asked to create the 2011 year in review video. We asked him to utilize either a non-copywritten piece of music or, preferably, no music and do something more clip-showy. User ignored our requests and made a video with copywritten music that was instantly flagged by youtube when uploaded to our channel. Dylan's solution was to adjust the speed of the music so that it would sound ok but be indistinguishable to the content tracker on youtube. This did not work. User placed the video on his youtube and we lost potential advertising for the community from that video as it was not part of our official youtube channel. This is not a big deal.

 

2. After a particularly disastrous event, dylan hounded the PRO repeatedly for information regarding the PRO's part in the failure of the event. While you might suggest that he did this out of great concern for the community, the way he went about it was frankly very poorly done, the kingwest rapping video spawned from this and it created a wonderful means of showing off some of the more negative aspects of the community, and of course putting up polls without any allowing for us to provide him with the information was not really helpful for the community's reputation. All of these things were potentially harmful to UO. But, again, this is not a big deal.

 

3. Yugoslav and Dylan collaborated, against the suggestion of myself and the PRO, on a training video for the community overseen by the UOTC. Haribo made very clear to me when showing me test scripts and footage that the video's script and footage should not be released. When dylan released some of the unfinished  footage, which I was well aware was in draft at the time and completely aware it was subject to change, I inquired as to weather or not haribo was ok with this footage being shared. The response was both very condescending and rude, and was posted earlier in this thread. I got the last laugh however, apparently this footage was NOT supposed to be shared and dylan was fired. This was still not a big deal...

 

4. ...However, his response to being fired was a big deal. Instead of simply stepping down, dylan claimed all of the footage and script he had worked on from the UOTC video team and denied their use in a UOTC video. He was well within his rights to do this, he had worked on it and it was partially his. But this also brought the UOTC intro video back to essentially square one, and as an outsider looking in, it seems as though he wanted to screw the community and more specifically the UOTC out of spite rather than allowing the UOTC to fix the problems with the draft script and draft footage. Behavior such as this is unbecoming of both a member of this community or at least a regular within this community.

 

If you agree with this, please don't respond with "amen" or some other diminishing agreement, if you disagree, that's fine, but I am only stating what happened from my perspective.

 

Thank you for reading.

Share this post


Link to post

Azzwort, that was a reasonable and well written explanation of your yes vote.  I can understand why the PRO has had some issues with dylan and why some people might take more offense than others. 

 

For me, the last part reads a little false.  UOTC and haribo specifically asked the only person in this community with the ability and interest to create a video.  I am unsure how the non-disclosure thing was communicated, but I have found it very difficult to communicate with haribo on a number of occasions, and I believe that if there is a condition so important that a person working on the project would be removed if they violated it, UOTC should have put it in writing.  Dylan showed a couple intros to the footage on the regular skype on the suggestion of the creator, another person who dylan had convinced to work on the project.  Dylan made the decision to post the links, and haribo immediately removed him from the project.  Instead of talking with dylan or attempting to figure out some way to go forward with the material and dylan in a reduced role, UOTC said he is removed from the project, that is that. 

 

I believe that the loss of progress on the video was the fault of UOTC.  By acting unilaterally, removing the only individual at UO with the ability, and more importantly, drive to create the video, UOTC dug their own grave.  At the time, it seemed like a mistake was made and the parties were too proud to back down from where they had gotten to.

 

The material that had been created was not that substantial- a couple pages of script and some outlines of how the videos would be made.  A number of people at UO could have easily replicated the work there, but none could be found.  One of the more significant losses was the contact that dylan had made with the individual who had actually created the intros, and who had worked for EA on a couple other projects.  All of this could have been avoided if haribo had taken a more lax approach to the project. 

 

It appears that you are attempting to blame dylan for sabotaging a project that he was removed from out of spite.  I believe that UOTC dropped the ball and mismanaged the project, and is attempting to scapegoat dylan for their own mistakes. 

 

 

 

The facts are in this thread.  I have interpreted them in this way, and I am happy to see a reasonable discussion about what has happened here, and I would ask others to examine them as well.

Share this post


Link to post
It appears that you are attempting to blame dylan for sabotaging a project that he was removed from out of spite.  I believe that UOTC dropped the ball and mismanaged the project, and is attempting to scapegoat dylan for their own mistakes. 

 

No? I'm blaming dylan for sabotaging a project he was removed from for breaking the rules. If dylan was unwanted in the video team, he wouldn't have been there in the first place. Haribo wanted Dylan's services, and Dylan broke the rules and was removed. It was dylan who denied the team the materials he had worked on, and again, he was well within his rights to do it. But to suggest that it wasn't a crappy thing to do, and further not his fault, is amazing to me.

Share this post


Link to post

he was well within his rights to do it. But to suggest that it wasn't a crappy thing to do, and further not his fault, is amazing to me.

This isn't grounds for removal by any means, especially if its within his rights.

Share this post


Link to post

Submitting a removal is entirely subjective and everyone can be removed for everything. Then a person can vote based on objective and subjective grounds.
Can we stop discussing what one can or can't be removed for since the charter doesn't mention it at all?

Edited by J.B.

Share this post


Link to post

Submitting a removal is entirely subjective and everyone can be removed for everything. Then a person can vote based on objective and subjective grounds.

Can we stop discussing what one can or can't be removed for since the charter doesn't mention it at all?

Fair enough, you're absolutely right.  My previous post is merely my opinion and interpretation, but is mine alone.

Share this post


Link to post

This isn't grounds for removal by any means, especially if its within his rights.

 

This is one of these "just because you can doesn't mean you should" situations. He was 100% allowed to tell the UOTC that they were not allowed to use his footage. But again, that doesn't mean it was right. He essentially put screwing over the UOTC over the community. Why should a person who feels that screwing over a department in UO over helping them is EVER a reasonable reaction stay a regular?

Share this post


Link to post

This is one of these "just because you can doesn't mean you should" situations. He was 100% allowed to tell the UOTC that they were not allowed to use his footage. But again, that doesn't mean it was right. He essentially put screwing over the UOTC over the community. Why should a person who feels that screwing over a department in UO is EVER a reasonable reaction stay a regular?

In his eyes they had just screwed him over.  Having not been there for the skype conversation or whatever happened, it sounds like as with any argument, both pinned fault on the other.  Both sides seemed to have handled this poorly, but it does not seem fair to remove either if you ask me.

 

And if you really really want my opinion? It was over a potential intro for UOTC videos.  There are much more pressing issues to be addressed.  This is just our monthly UO drama that we've been neglecting for a while.

Share this post


Link to post

In his eyes they had just screwed him over.  Having not been there for the skype conversation or whatever happened, it sounds like as with any argument, both pinned fault on the other.  Both sides seemed to have handled this poorly, but it does not seem fair to remove either if you ask me.

 

And if you really really want my opinion? It was over a potential intro for UOTC videos.  There are much more pressing issues to be addressed.  This is just our monthly UO drama that we've been neglecting for a while.

 

But that isn't what happened, haribo told dylan not to release the footage and he did, he was fired for it. As far as I'm concerned the punishment was carried out. The only thing dylan was prevented from doing was making the video, he wasn't being "screwed over" beyond what he himself did to himself. In that regard there's nothing wrong. His reaction and his behavior was what was wrong. He basically said, "the footage that I made for the community can't be used anymore", instead of helping the community by letting them keep the footage, he chose to be selfish. He has every right to be selfish, but from my perspective, if you're going around talking about how good for the community you are, you're not helping your case by shooting a community project in the foot.

Share this post


Link to post

But that isn't what happened, haribo told dylan not to release the footage and he did, he was fired for it. As far as I'm concerned the punishment was carried out. The only thing dylan was prevented from doing was making the video, he wasn't being "screwed over" beyond what he himself did to himself. In that regard there's nothing wrong. His reaction and his behavior was what was wrong. He basically said, "the footage that I made for the community can't be used anymore", instead of helping the community by letting them keep the footage, he chose to be selfish. He has every right to be selfish, but from my perspective, if you're going around talking about how good for the community you are, you're not helping your case by shooting a community project in the foot.

In my opinion that is not enough basis for voting yes on his removal from as a regular.  I think most people would have similar reactions in similar situations, both here on UO and in the real world.

Edited by HellHound

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...