Adding fuel to a flamewar.

[Enzyme]

So the two admins abused their powers as administrators on the for?

As I see it, the two admins did nothing else than the other posters did.

The thread was closed to prevent further escalation, as the thread was simply getting out of hand.
Are you going to make a banrequest on every poster in that thread then?

[JMR]

So the two admins abused their powers as administrators on the for?

As I see it, the two admins did nothing else than the other posters did.

The thread was closed to prevent further escalation, as the thread was simply getting out of hand.
Are you going to make a banrequest on every poster in that thread then?

I think you are misunderstanding my point, Enzyme.

The thread was closed, so every user who posted such content should be held accountable and if you think a ban is justifiable, then I'd ban every user who posted off-topic content. Including myself.

You were pointing everyone to just say "goodbye" and leave it as that. Where as Aviator and Fultz' posts implied otherwise.

If I was an admin, I'd be expected to work as a team with other admins, correct? Well, I would not call what I witnessed; "teamwork", at all.

---

Summary:
- Thread was closed.
- Two admins contributed to the reason for the closure.
- Other users contributed to the closure of the thread. But I believe this was due to influence. I myself, only posted what I had to say because of the posts made by Aviator and Flultz. Then I discovered that the thread was closed for a so-called "flamewar."
- Sets the admin standard very low.

[aviator]

My posts were not Off-Topic, nor inciting flame. They were in a harsh tone, but there's nothing against that.

[JMR]

My posts were not Off-Topic, nor inciting flame. They were in a harsh tone, but there's nothing against that.

[Image: f3bJhWh.jpg]

Lol, This just too funny ... I don't think you deserve any respect either...

I'm afraid I cannot agree with you Aviator, that post is just asking for a response. (Leading to further off-topic replies)

[aviator]

That post is my opinion, of which I am entitled to - administrator or not. Why does it affect you? I don't respect him. End of.

[JMR]

That post in my opinion, of which I am entitled to - administrator or not. Why does it affect you? I don't respect him. End of.

You claim that the post was not Off-Topic, nor inciting flame, whether it was your opinion or not, is irrelevant.

EDIT:
Nevertheless, you should keep opinions like "you don't deserve any respect", to yourself. Admin or not. Comments like this just fuel flame.

...say your goodbyes and leave it at that...

[aviator]

Lol. This is just too funny.

This is honesty. I found it funny.

You are entitled to post your own resignation thread. If you want to speak the truth, say all of the truth (who leaked that to you?)

This is evidently on topic. I was commenting about what Eisenhorn posted.

I didn't like your way of moderation. I don't think you deserve any respect either. Anyway, bye bye. Have fun.

This is my opinion, which I am entitled to. Nor is it Off-Topic, since I did state 'goodbye'.

Actually, you are lucky. You are lucky to be un-banned from the forums as well. So then Freezak, if you are so deeply involved with this, why don't you shed some light? Who leaked the pastebin, what do you know? If you don't know anything, then follow your own advise.

This is replying to another user's post in the same topic. This is not Off-Topic for that reason. It was 'harsh', but still not against the rules.

Please provide substantial evidence that there was a demotion. As a matter of fact, Eisenhorn resigned.

Friendly advice to everyone else:
You may post your opinions and state goodbye, but I would refrain from posting regarding anything else unless you have the knowledge to do so.

Again, replying to another member's post on the same thread. This is not Off-Topic. I also offered to friendly advice.

I am failing to see how I was 'Off-Topic' and 'Inciting Flame' when I made my opinions, which (due to the actually quite civil nature of the thread) no-one took the wrong way [I thank member's for that, because usually at Fearless - it does turn quite nasty... but it didn't this time]. I said goodbye. I replied to members.

[JMR]

-snip-

I am failing to see how I was 'Off-Topic' and 'Inciting Flame' when I made my opinions, which (due to the actually quite civil nature of the thread) no-one took the wrong way [I thank member's for that, because usually at Fearless - it does turn quite nasty... but it didn't this time]. I said goodbye. I replied to members.

The thread was closed due to a flamewar occurring. Part of which I believe you and fultz had an influence on.

---

Where was the teamwork? You have to remember, this is an admin case, since the thread was indeed closed.

Please say your goodbyes and leave it at that.

You may post your opinions and state goodbye...

Big difference.

Why was the thread closed? If what you were doing wasn't participating in a flamewar, then, in my opinion the thread should not have been closed in the first place. Other users stated their opinion on what they have observed, related to previous replies from other users. I see no difference between their replies and yours.

EDIT:

...[I thank member's for that, because usually at Fearless - it does turn quite nasty... but it didn't this time]...

Actually, according to Enzyme, the thread had to close because apparently a "flamewar" had occurred and had gotten out of hand.

---

EDIT 2:
Also, as far as "...gossip and lies are spread without any facts to back up anything." Perhaps this may interest some.

"Please provide substantial evidence that there was a demotion. As a matter of fact, Eisenhorn resigned."

[18:47] <+Enzyme> This is obviously for the HR to decide, but should Eisenhorn be demoted for what he has done? Opinions?
[18:47] <+Enzyme> If so; Veteran tag?
[18:47] <Fultz> The last on is Inactivity but that is now voided due to him supplying a reason
[18:47] <Fultz> No Tag
[18:47] <Faustie> Eisenhorn's actions aren't entirely his own I don't think
[18:47] <Fultz> Mods dont get tags
[18:47] <Faustie> From what I remember, KJ/Narc wanted someone to be their attack dog
[18:47] <+Floodify> Veteran Tag, no
[18:47] <Faustie> a la Ruxandra style
[18:47] <+Floodify> Demote , Yes
[18:47] <Fultz> Yes that was his job
[18:47] <+Shadewie> I think that he should be demoted for his actions and no veteran.

[18:54] <Fultz> Alright so who believes Eisenhonr should be demoted? Yes to demotion or no to demotion
[18:54] <+Enzyme> YEs
[18:54] <+Kpred> Yes
[18:54] <+Shadewie> Yes
[18:54] <Fultz> Yes
[18:54] <+Floodify> Yes!
[18:54] <+LukeAviator> Yes.
[18:54] <@Flame223> Yes
01[18:54] <Termin> On the fence

03[19:01] * Faustie changes topic to 'Fearless Administrator Commitee -- CURRENT TOPIC: WHAT TO TELL PUBLIC REGARDING NEW STAFF STRUCTURE'
[19:01] <+LukeAviator> Ah
[19:01] <Faustie> Now we have a new structure, and we've agreed that for now, its all internal
[19:01] <+LukeAviator> I've been thinking of this last night in bed.
[19:01] <Faustie> But we still have people wondering about why there are no SAs
[19:02] <Faustie> So I think we should at least public a message, either saying the situation is resolved, or we've just slightly changed structure for what we believe to be the better
01[19:02] <Termin> Agreed
[19:02] <+Floodify> Agreed
[19:02] <+Enzyme> Inform them that we've made changes, and that we're back and running

Hmm...

[19:10] <+Shadewie> So are we going to grant Fultz and doomdude a rank on the page?
[19:10] <+Shadewie> Or will it stay as it is?
01[19:10] <Termin> Its still internal for now

I do expect an apology.

I am starting to think that the thread was closed to hide the truth.

If admins are going to continue to be bias, I am afraid these may be my last words here, hey, even this thread will probably be closed.

[Baskingner]

As a matter of fact, this is not an admin abuse. But i do see where JMR is coming from, since the admin's are not abusing powers but clearly not telling the truth. In my opinion they are not entitled to tell us everything about their structures/command/ranking or whatever you want to call it but they shouldn't lie about it. So unless you want soulripper to ban the entire admin team for lying in the courthouse i dont see the point of this thread.

I dont care who becomes superadmin, and i don't see why anyone would need to care about that. Same goes for demoting someone. Im sure there is a good reason for it, just dont lie about it.

[JMR]

- Snip -

Courthouse request: Calling all admins, is the IRC chat real, or fake?

Remember, lying in the courthouse can lead to a suspension, correct? Lets see how long it takes for them to admit it.