Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

PRO Removal - Azzwort

Remove Azzwort as PRO  

28 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Remove Azzwort as PRO

    • Yes
    • No

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 09/24/19 at 07:40 PM

Recommended Posts


I wish to request that Azzwort is removed from the postion of PRO due to the following;

  1. Inactivity, The office's output appears to be sporadic and uncoordinated.
    Last post was 2019-05-19 for a Steel Beasts eventLast Arma related post was last year 2018-08-20
    In regards to the lack of coordination in reference to his review thread the user failed to plan ahead leading to only 48 hrs for the creation of the roster for the last Arma event.
  2. Antagnistic and unprofessional behaviour towards specific members which has lead to a cooling effect upon regular involvement and is unbecoming of an officer.

    Regardless of the validity of the critism leveled at the Officer it is my contention that this conduct is below the level the community should expect from someone who is obstensably the public face of the group.
    The Officer has also on numerous occations has added descriptions to members TS profiles this has both been disruptive and an abuse of power and contributed to the removal of said power.


It is my opinion that an inactive PRO is no better than no PRO at all and in the case of Azzwort his antagonistic nature is actively harmful to the community and therefore removal would be the best course of action.

This poll requires a majority vote lasting two weeks, ending on 2019-09-24.

This poll was put up at Regular Request.

Share this post

Link to post

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?

Share this post

Link to post

Gonna say what I said in the UOTC thread, though slightly differantly:

1. I'm not active, got busy with real life, it never really let up. Didn't even notice this until just now. Wish whoever put this up would talk to me.

2. Using my personal review thread is pretty dumb. If officers are not actively encouraging criticism of the things they do, and responding to it actively they're not doing their jobs. 

A few notes: In my time as PRO impulse and I wrote up a series of standards that improved events a great deal when they were followed. Other than just being busy, the second big reason for my inactivity was that the new officers, specifically Max and Headshot (while headshot was an officer, he's not now) did a lot of work towards basically telling our systems to fuck off and it became absolutely exhausting to police them after awhile. At that point I was basically an event overseer and babysitter. Kingslayer did a good job of going back to the actual standards but until recently he's basically been the UO WW2 officer. Fact is, I only try to be curt and "unprofessional" in threads that are not public because I do care about representing the community in public, just because I'm mean to you in private doesn't mean this is how I represent the community and shame on you for thinking so. We've done some great events at UO with other communities and the people I've spoken to have given us very positive feedback in regards to how we communicated and how things were conducted.

In conclusion: I'm not active, I'm a bit of a dick, but I'm not gonna get mad or cause drama, vote yes if you feel I shouldn't be an officer. If I ever decide to be active again, please recognize I've put a lot of time and effort into this community, and I personally feel I've done good work during those active times. If you disagree with this, I'm on teamspeak every day and you've never talked to me about how bad my events are and how bad my organization is, so how am I supposed to improve if I'm getting no feedback?

Share this post

Link to post

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.



Share this post

Link to post
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Create New...