Jump to content

The website is under maintenance - To keep up to date of the current status, please read more here. Normal forum functions should resume over the next few weeks.

Sign in to follow this  
VPope

UOTC Removal - Azzwort

Remove Azzwort as TO/UOTC Officer  

27 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Remove Azzwort as TO/UOTC Officer

    • Yes
      17
    • No
      10

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 09/24/19 at 07:45 PM

Recommended Posts

Quote

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

  1. Inactivity, The office's output appears to be sporadic.

    Last training session was 2018-11-02
  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.

     

It is my opinion failure to organise training sessions is effectively the same as not having anyone in UOTC and that bein antagonisitic towards other members regardless of their behaviour is not something we should be teaching to new members.

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

I find it insulting that whoever requested this actually had to draw in behavioural delicts into this request as if Azzworts inactivity alone wouldn't have made the removal request valid. Thats fucking shit smearing of a regular that tried to keep the UOTC going for years after a gap of 0 courses for years and noone wanting to take the office, had to take up with a metric ton of bullshit being thrown into his direction and actually got some of the materials back together that were widely considered lost, including running SOME stable courses.
Thats infuriating!
Shame on you!

Share this post


Link to post

A few concerns here.

1. Inactivity of the office. I'm assuming azzwort has passed some sort of threshold for inactivity. Not sure why the office as a whole is being used as justification when he is neither the sole officer in either office, nor does he have significantly more inactivity than can be measured by any metric than any of his other peers. However if this threshold has been passed, I assume similar removal polls will soon follow for the other officers who meet this criteria, to ensure this isn't for solely interpersonal conflicts.

2. Antagonistic behavior unbecoming of an officer. Being that officers are now held to a different standard of personal conduct and not simply for their expertise/responsibilities when compared to regulars I assume this will be reflected in the charter. I am also unclear on how azzwort has managed to "cool" the entire involvement of the regular base, especially considering his primary fault appears to be a lack of involvement in the community at all.

 

I am not saying this poll/criticism is unwarranted. I simply wish for clarification on the standards violated to ensure this level of standard is applied equally and objectively across the offices and delegates.

Edited by ThePieSpy

Share this post


Link to post

Voting yes on this on inactivity alone, however I will state this: Bringing up his personal review thread is invalid to me as most of the complaints are a year old or even more. Where I do think officers should be held up to a different standard much like Pie above I don't really know what was brought up as valid. Now, there is a minor foible about inactivity yes I agree azzwort is inactive on the forums but I have actually seen him online on the server within the last year.

I will also state, that azzwort has done a lot of good for UOTC in his active time and if we remove him and fail to provide or promote a valid UOTC officer who is committed to reviving the position then I believe we fail the very reason we are removing azzwort in the first place.

Edited by Reddish_Red

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Reddish_Red said:

I will also state, that azzwort has done a lot of good for UOTC in his active time and if we remove him and fail to provide or promote a valid UOTC officer who is committed to reviving the position then I believe we fail the very reason we are removing azzwort in the first place.

He's not the only UOTC officer....

 

Regardless though, agree with the others, yes for inactivity, don't see the relevance of years old review posts.

Edited by James

Share this post


Link to post

Gonna abstain until I hear from Azzwort.  Since we are not privilege to whats being done in the departments behind closed doors.  He may be active without our knowledge. 

His review thread is old and should have been addressed at the time.  Doing so now feels petty.

I also agree with Pie's observation of an imposed threshold and would like to know what that is.

Share this post


Link to post

Meh this is fair. I dislike the use of my personal review thread as a reason considering that I've actively encouraged people to post in there instead of just trying to hide behind "hurr durr no review threads". I got busy with life and work, and it never really chilled out. But I'm not active, I literally didn't notice this until just now so what's being said is valid. Wish whoever put this up would talk to me though. But whatever.

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...