BBG wrote:

It IS broken. Creating a new website would be stupid and unnecessary. I don't see anything wrong with a productive discussion like this at all, and the reasoning behind this discussion is very reasonable in terms with running an effective forum and maintaining the modus operandi of Anonymous.

So what is the exact problem?

Right, I don't see how Coup de grâce works, but cool.

The problem that we have is that we have no active admins. The problems with this have been well stated in this thread.

You and I have personally discussed the doombox. You bringing it up clearly shows that you still haven't got the closure on that that we were aiming for. You're welcome to message me again about it if you still have outstanding issues there.

When I said the "collective" I was referring to all current members. I think that including people who have long-since left in there is quite nonsensical.

Perhaps I should change "many" to "multiple" but the point still stands. Why have a discussion forum if people who would like to raise an issue that they see shouldn't do that?

And your point about minorities causing detriment to the collective; the aim here is to institute a team of admins with different points-of-view and ideas, much in the way that a jury is supposed to be made up of a cross-section of society, so that the collective isn't just run by a minority with a minority mindset, but yet run in a way that appeals to the entire group. Many (or should I say multiple, here) people had problems with the way that the site has been run in the past couple of months for that reason and that can't have been good for the collective's numbers.

Hi! I'm new here too!

Jeronimo wrote:

Right, I don't see how Coup de grâce works, but cool.

The problem that we have is that we have no active admins.

So , Admin;'s should be posting moar and raiding? Where's the actual domain name owner again?

Jeronimo wrote:

The problems with this have been well stated in this thread.

Orly?

YPG has this to offer at the outset in post# 1...

"Pyro has bumped the priority of the site down to minimise cost. Because of this, things have been running slow and sometime rendering it inaccessible."

How many people in the thread have made the same summation according to what YPG is stating as a fact?

Jeronimo wrote:

You and I have personally discussed the doombox. You bringing it up clearly shows that you still haven't got the closure on that that we were aiming for.

Dude, if you get past your partisan perspective, you will see your statement  of "Another fact is that this site is Asyd's, not Pyro's, and should be run as such." applies to the doombox.

These resposnes aren't about the latter, it is about the obvious attempts to take control of something that isn't broken by a few people, some of which constantly demomnstrate idiocy, and others rack off or ragequit and come back and want people to hand them the controls

Jeronimo wrote:

You're welcome to message me again about it if you still have outstanding issues there.

I'm not into secret tree-houses. I'm all about transparency. I don't feel the need to have secret discussions or IRL discussions that don't involve the absolute majority(exception to the rule being what is coming done the pipeline toward CSA Inc)

Jeronimo wrote:

When I said the "collective" I was referring to all current members.

And how many of current members have posted in this thread in favour of Pyro being ousted as Admin in favour of you?
After all, you've been nominated as someone that should be admin.
What's to say there won't be a repeat performance and the site goes down completely?

Jeronimo wrote:

I think that including people who have long-since left in there is quite nonsensical.

So then, why should precedence be given to someone whom racked off for months after drama ensued , then comes back later and overtly demonstrates they are wanting to leaderfag?

Jeronimo wrote:

Perhaps I should change "many" to "multiple" but the point still stands.

So do my points, especially if one goes back to page 1 and reads the entire thread.

Point out the "multiple" you speak of. Of course, you cannot include flatmates or monkeys that dance to the tune from your organ-grinding

Jeronimo wrote:

Why have a discussion forum if people who would like to raise an issue that they see shouldn't do that?

You cannot have your cake and eat it too. You're either about transparency on any issue or your not. You are either willing to openly discuss any and all matters or you are not.
You show that you don't want to discuss a certain issue out in the open forum

Jeronimo wrote:

And your point about minorities causing detriment to the collective; the aim here is to institute a team of admins with different points-of-view and ideas,

Ahhh, no...it should be about insulate the site from the previous faggotry that has seen the site hijacked and fucked over.
YPG made claims in his first post and presented them as facts.
Claims that just don't fit

You and a few are trying to dictate, and it's obvious when the thread is read from go-to-woah

Jeronimo wrote:

Many (or should I say multiple, here) people had problems with the way that the site has been run in the past couple of months for that reason and that can't have been good for the collective's numbers.

What "reason"?
Pyro supposedly dropped the sites priority/something about the server according to YPG in his first post?
Pyro isnt here enough?

You are obviously on a mission here Jeri.

Here's a wacky idea. How about letting me be an Admin? Owing to recent health issues, I now have a lot of free time at home and the Internet.
Or does a new/extra Admin only have to be someone that mirrors your own perspective and the perspective or a few of your followers?

You keep saying it's about getting things to run better...but yet it cannot be shown what the exact problem is suppose to be

How about we put it to a vote.

1 Do users of this forum want a change in administration?
2 If so do they want different Admins or simply more admins?
3 If so, whose candidacy would they offer for this post?

Also GRID what would they provide? and is there really a point?

Mods have the same real amount of power an Admin has, the only thing an admin has over a mod is the ability to change the settings. Like the Announcement that has changed once in 1 year. Or maybe even a link of the front page that changed once.
They can also change user profiles, again no point for this requirement.

An additional admin has no purpose.

Want mods, vote for them if you want, I am sure the Voting will be a legit as the Georgian elections. BBG and fatman make fine mods because they conflict and don't have the same ways of seeing things, SBW is currently a mod until fatman returns. there is no need for more on this site nor is there a need for more admins for things that change once in a blue moon.

Trust me administrating a Static page is ever so exciting! :D

Lots of Love,
Pyro

Last edited by Pyro (08-02-2010 20:23:06)

For an admin thats not active, I am sure coming here a lot

Lots of Love,
Pyro

Also it does matter if YPG lied,
I seem to think YPG lied? I know the little shit did.

Difference between think and know there. The content is on my server, So I think it know what was going on.

Its is also an entirely irrelevant topic.

What is the point of another admin?

Sounds more like you want more people to Moderate to me.
I am no longer moderating,  Just backups and ensuring the server is up.

Last edited by Pyro (08-02-2010 20:48:28)

Jeronimo wrote:

Goldmask, you seem to think that I want the site handed to me so that I can run it. I don't want this. I've already said that I don't think I'd make a good admin.

It was a suggestion by another, yes. But on what basis did that person make the suggestion RE you?
I like objectivity

Jeronimo wrote:

I want it given to people that we know are trustworthy, know could do a good job and are levelheaded. The suggestion earlier for an election was a great one. If you'd like to put your name forward and people vote for you, then cool, you can be an admin, as could anyone. I'm not trying to leaderfag here, I just feel that the way things are currently organised make no sense.

Yet, I still have not seen what the quintessential problem with the current Admin is

Jeronimo wrote:

I don't think that whether or not YPG's assertion was factual is relevant.

LOL!!
Of course it is, because it is the reason he started this thread

Jeronimo wrote:

Did he lie?

Well, my experience of access to the site and it's speed has been the same (no problem) for many months now. So, I guess he is either mistaken, lied or defunct of how slow speed isnt always the target that is the problem of said slowness

Jeronimo wrote:

Pyro seems to think so.

I maybe tend to agree with Pyro  when reading YPG's first post

Jeronimo wrote:

Who cares?

Oh, you'd be surprised "who cares"

YPG starts a thread based on lies, then another quickly comes in to further an agenda based on lies.
You mention the word "trust".
You see what I am saying, right?

Jeronimo wrote:

The conversation moved on from there.

Ahh, but if the "conversation" was instigated by lies and misrepresentations, then all that follows could be considered void .
Especially if you factor in the variable of a few wanting to rule the many

Jeronimo wrote:

If Pyro wants to keep Admin status and keep hosting the site on his server then fine, but he should at least appoint some other people so that it's not just him that's the admin and we actually have some active administration.

You are dictating again here man. I again ask you for the quintessential problem with the current Admin

Jeronimo wrote:

The issues of hijacking in the past came from people giving out passwords and access to all kinds of things that they shouldn't have to anybody who would listen. This is why the people that got Admin would have to be trustworthy enough not to run around giving out their password.

It's obvious that Pyro can be trusted then, yes?
Why should he surrender access because he isnt here on a daily basis.

Again, what is the actual problem with the site?

Jeronimo wrote:

The issue that I and others have noted and are attempting to address are, mainly; 1) Pyro is the only admin and he's not active (no, that doesn't mean IRL, how would that at all matter? Obviously I'm talking about online, on the site that they admin) and; 2) I, personally, (and I know others, too) had problems with the leaderfaggy way that he ran things, so, again I think, that multiple admis would hamper that whole pitfall.

Once again, what is the acytual problem with the site?
Should I bold tect that for you

Jeronimo wrote:

And from the discussion that you and I had, Goldmask, you know that your doombox comments are irrelevant.

Dude, how can they be irrelevant when you tell Pyro the site belongs to the collective.?

Jeronimo wrote:

Ask ABG if you really think that we hadn't sorted out a way that Asyd could hang on to that whilst I could take my leave. It wasn't without trying.

Man, I was here before, during and after the whole affair....So I need not ask anyone about it.

To be honest, I would think that just because I had an issue with another, I wouldn't run-off and take my bat and ball with me.

People can think that this fight is fun and lulzy and yadda yadda yadda, but it just aint.

PEOPLE DIE both directly and indirectly because of the cult of scientology.

Jeronimo wrote:

Lastly, just because people seem to keep missing it, I'll reiterate - I DON'T WANT ADMIN, I'D BE A POOR ADMIN. I SEE AN ISSUE AND SO I'M RAISING IT FOR DISCUSSION.

Ah, but you want to skip past the discussion starting on the basis of apparent lies and misrepresentations RE something is very wrong with the site and only a surrendering of Admin access will fix supposed problem

Last edited by TubedYou (08-02-2010 20:52:17)

GRID valid points, but I hate to say it, It wont stop the bickering. :(

If people want to vote, fine, I'll give a person Admin to the Forums.
They can see how thrilling the Admin work is, doing absolutely nothing and fixing things when they need to be fixed, oh the thrilling nature of administration.

I would only want to give access to back end servers only to people that can be trusted and have current Qualifications, I would make a note to people who have been active over the last few months and Know their shit. You can screw up a lot on a server just by guessing or being an outright cock.

I only have ASYD's best in mind. Moderation work is for the birds is does my head in. I'll just work on the servers.

Last edited by Pyro (08-02-2010 21:00:52)

I shan't quote Goldmask's post because he and I have a tendency to compose rather large posts and I think that combining two would make a wall to rival the Great one in China.

If the issue of the OP is really that large, then shall we create a new thread? The discussion that we are now having was started after Pyro called YPG out for lying, and was started not for the alleged lies.

I've mentioned my problems with the current admin. Putting the word "quintessential" in front of the question now doesn't alter my answer.

Perhaps my using the word "irrelevant" re Doombox was incorrect. The two scenarios are vastly different though. Also, you know your bat and ball analogy to be erroneous.

Lastly, you even use the phrase "surrendering of admin access" Is it that he's keeping it hostage? A few weeks ago he was walking out and was having nothing to do with Asyd anymore, after he raged at people saying that they didn't agree with his approach to the site, and then he changed his mind and decided to hang on to the reigns. This after the multiple outbursts that I'm sure you remember wherein he remarked "I pay for the server so Asyd will behave as I want it to" (not verbatim, but to that affect) and then when I suggest that other people be given admin then I'm dictating?

Quick response to jebb; Pyro was being facetious and countering the remarks that he is inactive. He was pointing out the irony that he's apparently inactive and yet he was online at the time, not saying he was coming back.

EDIT: Further response to Jebb: It is clear that some people do think it is broke, hence this discussion.

Last edited by Jeronimo (08-02-2010 21:19:07)