REGULAR Graham1988

[VPope]

 

Hi. My name is Graham, I'm 30 years old and I'm a teacher from Spain.

 

 

I have been a member of United Operations for two years now, and am quite regular on the Primary. Although I have not been rather active as of late due to PC technical issues and marriage, now my new machine is arriving I can see myself playing more than ever. 

 

Over the past few years I feel that I have personally grown at UO and have been able to help out at UOTC. I have learnt how to make missions, several of them making it on the primary. I do not consider myself a mission maker but would like to make more in the near future. I take up leadership positions on the server from time to time. I know I'm far from the best but always willing to accept input and learn. 

 

As a regular I hope to expand my abilities to help with mission creation and continue helping out at UOTC. I would also like to be able to participate in voting and become a core member of this community. 

 

Thankyou for your consideration.

 

Graham1988

 

This poll requires a 2/3 vote lasting 1 week, ending on 2018/12/04.

This poll was put up at members request

[kail]

Yes.

[Nathan]

Quick question, you seem to have a history of preferring TVT missions and leaving the server or arguing with the admin in regards to slotting. This was reported just under a year ago. Is this something you are trying to work on seeing as you will be some users may look to you for guidance?

 

I enjoy your presence on the server and I want to make sure you are aware of this issue and are working to address this.

[Graham1988]

Nathan, it is true that I have a history of preferring TVT missions to CO, in some cases I have left missions because I have played them many times. Nonetheless I would like to think of myself as a player who seeds the server. I love playing seeder missions which in turn are co-op.

I would also like to state that the large majority of missions I have made have been CO. 

In regards to the arguing with the admin about slotting, I hope this is an isolated case which happened just under a year ago. I do not like to consider myself an argumentative person but if more than one case can be pointed out, I will work towards improving my behaviour in the future. 

[ThePieSpy]

Graham has been very helpful in UOTC, and often volunteers for leadership on the primary. Yes.

[James]

User has a history of behaving immaturely at slotting/mission selection, often opting to childishly express his preference/dislike of certain mission types.

Further to this, I am reminded of an event in which said user blew off a UOTC course he was meant to teach, with no fore warning/apology, and when confronted by a UOTC officer, got very unnecessarily defensive.

Voted no.

 

Abstaining.

Edited November 27, 2018 by James27

[PaxJaromeMalues]

Further to this, I am reminded of an event in which said user blew off a UOTC course he was meant to teach, with no fore warning/apology, and when confronted by a UOTC officer, got very unnecessarily defensive.

To clarify this incident took place in July 2018. Graham was at the beach and intended to perform the course as planned. IRL forced him to contact us over discord to notify us that he would not be making it home until the course. Cath engaged a heated discussion which sort of derailed within a few sentences.

Graham did reschedule the course for 3 hours later while still on his way home. He finished the course with one of the attendees. I see no reason to point this as negative nor has the user said or done anything that would require an apology.

[James]

To clarify this incident took place in July 2018. Graham was at the beach and intended to perform the course as planned. IRL forced him to contact us over discord to notify us that he would not be making it home until the course. Cath engaged a heated discussion which sort of derailed within a few sentences.

Graham did reschedule the course for 3 hours later while still on his way home. He finished the course with one of the attendees. I see no reason to point this as negative nor has the user said or done anything that would require an apology.

Oh I am completely aware of what happened, a few regulars were with Cath at the time of this happening. RL takes priority over internet events 100% of the time. I am sympathetic to Graham's reasons for missing the scheduled time and accept that Cath could be quite abrasive at times, however my issue was with his conduct and specifically the reply, when caught out he could have simply accepted that he had committed himself to attending and simply apologise for not being able to, instead the response left much to be desired.

 

I am however choosing to now abstain after talking to Graham, but I will not vote yes at this time.

Edited November 27, 2018 by James27

[Graham1988]

Thankyou Pax for stating events. IRL situation has been explained to James as why I had to reschedule the course. I do not wish to discuss it openly as it was a personal matter. I apologized later to the atendees. 

 

If I did not apologize to Cath for the heated discussion we had, I do so now openly.

 

As for my behaviour during mission slotting and selection I admit to rarely referencing out loud which missions I would like to play next. However I do not agree to doing this in a childish manner and this voicing shall not occur from here on out. If it was bothering I wish it had been pointed out to me earlier to be able to correct it. 

 

I'm looking forward to getting back on the server after a month hiatus, due to honeymoon, and playing all type of missions. 

[Best2nd]

User has a history of behaving immaturely at slotting/mission selection, often opting to childishly express his preference/dislike of certain mission types.

 

If this is the case you should put up a removal poll for j0zh94:

 

 

User received a warning point for this post.

 

Edited November 30, 2018 by kalohepirate
3.4 - Zero Content, Uninformative, Unhelpful, and Off Topic posting.

[RedCrown]

Best2nd's post aside, User isn't a problem, plays on the server and pays his due.

 

Yes

[Syntax Error]

Would vote yes if I could, Graham's a stand-up guy.

[Best2nd]

Alot of bad things that I heard about him are things that us regulars do.

 

He does UOTC stuff and used to make British missions. They might not have been of high quality but he acknowledged that and is willing to improve.

 

 

Voting yes.

[azzwort]

Good member of the community, have had few if any negative interactions, works with me in UOTC.

 

Yes.

Edited November 27, 2018 by azzwort

[Sovietpolarbear]

Voting yes, he good people. 

[Reddish_Red]

Voting yes, from my own experience I haven't seen anything bad from Graham.

Edited November 27, 2018 by Reddish_Red

[j0zh94]

If this is the case you should put up a removal poll for j0zh94:

 

 

Removal of context is a relatively lazy way to push an agenda, anyone can edit something to make someone look bad. 

 

The admin at the time was frustrated that users left when a mission they didn't want to play was selected, afterwards he didn't take into account those users who were now in the waiting room (mission was a 45 and there were half a dozen in the waiting room). 

I went to clarify and after a small argument called the admins bluff, fortunately the mission broke. 

After a brief discussion afterwards with both Gkenny and Blue we reconciled our differences and agreed to prioritise what is best for the server. 

 

Nevertheless it was improper to do such a thing as a Regular and was rectified with the admin immediately after.

Any further discussion of this incident however should be handled in my personal review thread and not on this poll.

[Kingslayer]

Voting no.

 

Having been shown the conversation regarding the UOTC course by Cath, I felt that while real life can get in the way, a fact I am very sympathetic to due to my own circumstances, the way that you handled it was very immature.

 

Further in general I have found your attitude in general to be poor, particularly when you play on the server. I think that given time you may be suitable to be a regular, but you need to improve your attitude in the meantime.

[Sylong]

Yes for me,

[azzwort]

Voting no.

 

Having been shown the conversation regarding the UOTC course by Cath, I felt that while real life can get in the way, a fact I am very sympathetic to due to my own circumstances, the way that you handled it was very immature.

 

Further in general I have found your attitude in general to be poor, particularly when you play on the server. I think that given time you may be suitable to be a regular, but you need to improve your attitude in the meantime.

 

The incident in question happened in July, and Graham ended up running the course he was having trouble scheduling, albeit a few hours later than planned, in spite of the personal scheduling conflict and the disagreement with Cath. He spoke his mind in response to Cath and I'm unsure how what he did and said is any different than the behavior of many regs, including myself and yourself in similar situations.

Edited November 28, 2018 by azzwort

[Force_Majeure]

Yes.

 

Force

[Huntersaurus]

Yes from me

[kalohepirate]

Based on all I have read in member reviews and here I am voting No.

[azzwort]

Based on all I have read in member reviews and here I am voting No.

 

The last post in the internal thread is nearly a year old, and the last post in the personal review thread is just quoting the posts from the internal thread, the most recent of which is nearly a year old. I feel as though you're giving Graham an unfair shake.

[Sovietpolarbear]

In regards to past UOTC issues that Graham has had, as of now Graham has the support of two UOTC officers for his poll. If Azzwort and Piespy can vote yes then surely the rest who have voted no because of past UOTC issues can look the other way.