Ok...Sculli wtf? - take 2 (was: This wasn't addressed right)

[Tyrath]

Ok...Sculli wtf?

So, since when did QCDN start falling under the category of punishing everyone because of 1 person? I'm referring to the following threads:

http://www.qcdn.org/showthread.php?t=22017

http://www.qcdn.org/showthread.php?t=22015

First of all, let me say I do not agree with what Rhine is doing with the torque, but lets get back to the point of this thread.

I usually agree with the way Sculli handles things on the boards, but I just don't see anything that justifies locking the 2 threads. It wasn't just Rhine doing something, other people had plans going on in that thread. You aren't just punishing Rhine but you are also punishing others involved in those events for choices Rhine has made. I just think it was a very unfair decision influenced by personal opinion rather than anything that concerns the rules on this board. ld:

That is all, I just wanted to take that oppurtunity to make my first flame ever. h34r:

PS. Don't bash my flaming skills cuz I'm a noobie here.:crazy:

 

[Shaunessy]

Well I highly doubt that he would lock a thread that you started on the same subject. I can see his stand point though of not letting someone use this board as a means to get things done in game when he obviously has other issues that need to be worked out first.

 

[Darklion]

Hes shady why let him benifit from QCDN memebers if he could pull somethin on em like the Torque thing. thats what I think Atleast.

 

[Tyrath]

Yeah, but my point is other people are also using that thread to get something done in the game.

If he wants to stop Rhine using this board for things he should look for AH threads to lock or something

 

[Darklion]

Yeah, but my point is other people are also using that thread to get something done in the game.

If he wants to stop Rhine using this board for things he should look for AH threads to lock or something

True strike but it was a temp thing I don't think he plans on keepin it locked, you could also start a new one with a link to the old excluding him on the PT setup.

 

[Tyrath]

A new one was already started, and I'm even doing it anymore. But its the thing that was done that I disagree with. D:

 

[Rinoah]

Well to be fair its not like you couldn't have started a new thread and just lose rhine as a possible party member. I'm sure sculli would have been more than happy to add another post telling people in that thread that it will be continuing in yours.

 

[meeze]

While I don't like rhinegold, there are enough questionable people on here that are allowed threads, and involvment without mods breaking them up. If you're going to block one person you're going to have to block them all.

That can only bring up questions about who decides, obviously Sculli, and how is it determined.

PS just for fun, someone pull up the thread that is linked to some LS on another server. He went into their board and sucked so much dick, then talked shit about how quetzy was never going to stack up.

 

[Rinoah]

While I don't like rhinegold, there are enough questionable people on here that are allowed threads, and involvment without mods breaking them up. If you're going to block one person you're going to have to block them all.

That can only bring up questions about who decides, obviously Sculli, and how is it determined.

PS just for fun, someone pull up the thread that is linked to some LS on another server. He went into their board and sucked so much dick, then talked shit about how quetzy was never going to stack up.

You missed "Then got turned down and a week later was seen in the linkshell recruiting board seeking a god/hnm ls"

 

[Sculli]

Thank you for the compliment on how I usually run the board. :biggrin:

I would like to open my response with a common technique used in counterflames, the Red Herring fallacy (google if needed):

Tyrath, what could you possibly know about QCDN rules if you are not even following them?
The Avatar & Signature Guidelines clearly state that: "QCDN supports signatues up to 550w x 250h pixels and 65000 bytes. This is a cumulative number. You may have up to two signature images as long as their combined dimensions and file sizes do not exceed the above."

Since your sig images exceed these combined dimensions, you yourself have no regard for rules, and thus whatever argument you are trying to make in favor of rules is irrelevant.

---
kk, I am done with my Flameboard 101 demonstration (not to be taken as my real argument Tyrath ), now on to the real thing:

I agree that locking a threads that only share the thread starter with an issue that is discussed elsewhere is a drastic, and quite possibly unpreceeded measure here at QCDN.

I am not sure if I can agree that everyone else is essentially punished, as all the information is still posted, and members can of course contact each other through various ways to decide how they want to proceed. However, I am content to agree to disagree on this.

In many cases the out-of-game reality has very little impact on in-game reality. What I mean is that some reputation earned or lost here at QCDN carries over into the game, but by and large that is the only marginal impact one's board actions have on one's in-game life.

In this particular case I felt that I had the opportunity to change that, and essentially create a measurable impact on the game-world by a forum action. I am sure you would agree that there are countless opportunities like that on QCDN on a daily basis, but none of them are taken, mostly because it's up to the individuals involved to sort things out.

How was this one different?
A man gave his word to do something, and then he seemingly went back on his word. To me that is unacceptable, there is no greater bad deed one could possibly do than to break one's word. Is this a personal opinion? Maybe, though I would hope it isn't, and that many people in general share it.

In the meantime it seems that the situation is going to be resolved as originally agreed upon, and I will open the threads in Event Scheduling and remove the references to the General Discussion post shortly.

I hope this is an acceptable explanation, even if you do not agree.

-----------

On a semi-related note; Would you have gone on a mission with someone of whom you know that they didn't do right by another player? Would you have chosen your own advancement by getting the mission done regardless of who your companions are? Or would you have stepped back and said: Yes, I want this mission badly, really badly, I waited so long for it, god-damit I deserve to finally get it done, ... but no, under these circumstances I will sit out while everyone else gets it done and just try it some other day with a different party?

Edit: For everyone (including Tyrath), don't answer the above question in this thread. Just ask yourself what you would have done in the same situation, think about the answer you gave yourself, explain it to yourself. It can lead to potentially interesting results if you decide to give it some thought.

 

[Tyrath]

You know, I was looking at my sig when I previewed the post. It did look a bit large. Funny you should mention it :|

I'll remove the 2nd pic, its a bit old anyways.

I can take that explanation. I don't necessarily agree with it, but there isn't really much to argue about here. Just a difference of opinion.

I was going to talk to Rhine before this mission took place, but it seems he's willing to pay up...so I guess thats done too :| Too bad I can't do the mission because of timing anyways xD

 

[Legomyeggo]

This thread will end up the same way all of the other "I don't believe in the action (Insert mod's name here) took" threads ended. They'll tell us it's what they thought was best and that they don't want to see crap on their board and that we can always go to another Quetzalcoatl board(Knowing that isn't a viable option). Whether we like it or not, this is the only quetzalcoatl board and it's got us by the balls.

 

[Tyrath]

This thread will end up the same way all of the other "I don't believe in the action (Insert mod's name here) took" threads ended. They'll tell us it's what they thought was best and that they don't want to see crap on their board and that we can always go to another Quetzalcoatl board(Knowing that isn't a viable option). Whether we like it or not, this is the only quetzalcoatl board and it's got us by the balls.

Neosquall's prediciton phails.h34r:

 

[Legomyeggo]

You didn't put up a good fight.

 

[Rinoah]

Just a suggestion, but should you choose to do this again Sculli next time maybe make a link to a new thread you created on the same subject which is <scammers name> free? That would be less of an inconvenience to the other people and should <scammers name> attempt to join the other thread his posts could just be deleted.

Btw i do agree breaking your word is one of the worst things you can do.

 

[Tyrath]

You didn't put up a good fight.

I fail at internet arguments, so sue me:coco:

 

[wolfskymoon]

Scullie sellz gillz

 

[gir]

Thank you for the compliment on how I usually run the board. :biggrin:

I would like to open my response with a common technique used in counterflames, the Red Herring fallacy (google if needed):

Tyrath, what could you possibly know about QCDN rules if you are not even following them?
The Avatar & Signature Guidelines clearly state that: "QCDN supports signatues up to 550w x 250h pixels and 65000 bytes. This is a cumulative number. You may have up to two signature images as long as their combined dimensions and file sizes do not exceed the above."

Since your sig images exceed these combined dimensions, you yourself have no regard for rules, and thus whatever argument you are trying to make in favor of rules is irrelevant.

---
kk, I am done with my Flameboard 101 demonstration (not to be taken as my real argument Tyrath ), now on to the real thing:

I agree that locking a threads that only share the thread starter with an issue that is discussed elsewhere is a drastic, and quite possibly unpreceeded measure here at QCDN.

I am not sure if I can agree that everyone else is essentially punished, as all the information is still posted, and members can of course contact each other through various ways to decide how they want to proceed. However, I am content to agree to disagree on this.

In many cases the out-of-game reality has very little impact on in-game reality. What I mean is that some reputation earned or lost here at QCDN carries over into the game, but by and large that is the only marginal impact one's board actions have on one's in-game life.

In this particular case I felt that I had the opportunity to change that, and essentially create a measurable impact on the game-world by a forum action. I am sure you would agree that there are countless opportunities like that on QCDN on a daily basis, but none of them are taken, mostly because it's up to the individuals involved to sort things out.

How was this one different?
A man gave his word to do something, and then he seemingly went back on his word. To me that is unacceptable, there is no greater bad deed one could possibly do than to break one's word. Is this a personal opinion? Maybe, though I would hope it isn't, and that many people in general share it.

In the meantime it seems that the situation is going to be resolved as originally agreed upon, and I will open the threads in Event Scheduling and remove the references to the General Discussion post shortly.

I hope this is an acceptable explanation, even if you do not agree.

-----------

On a semi-related note; Would you have gone on a mission with someone of whom you know that they didn't do right by another player? Would you have chosen your own advancement by getting the mission done regardless of who your companions are? Or would you have stepped back and said: Yes, I want this mission badly, really badly, I waited so long for it, god-damit I deserve to finally get it done, ... but no, under these circumstances I will sit out while everyone else gets it done and just try it some other day with a different party?

Edit: For everyone (including Tyrath), don't answer the above question in this thread. Just ask yourself what you would have done in the same situation, think about the answer you gave yourself, explain it to yourself. It can lead to potentially interesting results if you decide to give it some thought.

Well, Sculli doesn't need anyone to pat him on the back. He could just say "Screw you guys, I'm going home" and that'd be the end of QCDN. I can't say I agree with decisions that involve singling out people for what could be called personal disputes. However, I can respect the thought that went into it, and how it's not really a matter of "admin/moderator carte blanche" but rather a reflection of his [Sculli's] integrity. Well said, Sculli.

 

[Sculli]

Scullie sellz gillz

Sorry to disappoint, considering the time it would take to accumulate 1M, and what 1M sells for on the open market, it just wouldn't be worth my time to sell gil.

 

[Valoran]

I would like to open my response with a common technique used in counterflames, the Red Herring fallacy (google if needed):

Tyrath, what could you possibly know about QCDN rules if you are not even following them?
The Avatar & Signature Guidelines clearly state that: "QCDN supports signatues up to 550w x 250h pixels and 65000 bytes. This is a cumulative number. You may have up to two signature images as long as their combined dimensions and file sizes do not exceed the above."

Since your sig images exceed these combined dimensions, you yourself have no regard for rules, and thus whatever argument you are trying to make in favor of rules is irrelevant.

---
kk, I am done with my Flameboard 101 demonstration (not to be taken as my real argument Tyrath ), now on to the real thing:

I agree that locking a threads that only share the thread starter with an issue that is discussed elsewhere is a drastic, and quite possibly unpreceeded measure here at QCDN.

I am not sure if I can agree that everyone else is essentially punished, as all the information is still posted, and members can of course contact each other through various ways to decide how they want to proceed. However, I am content to agree to disagree on this.

In many cases the out-of-game reality has very little impact on in-game reality. What I mean is that some reputation earned or lost here at QCDN carries over into the game, but by and large that is the only marginal impact one's board actions have on one's in-game life.

In this particular case I felt that I had the opportunity to change that, and essentially create a measurable impact on the game-world by a forum action. I am sure you would agree that there are countless opportunities like that on QCDN on a daily basis, but none of them are taken, mostly because it's up to the individuals involved to sort things out.

How was this one different?
A man gave his word to do something, and then he seemingly went back on his word. To me that is unacceptable, there is no greater bad deed one could possibly do than to break one's word. Is this a personal opinion? Maybe, though I would hope it isn't, and that many people in general share it.

In the meantime it seems that the situation is going to be resolved as originally agreed upon, and I will open the threads in Event Scheduling and remove the references to the General Discussion post shortly.

I hope this is an acceptable explanation, even if you do not agree.

-----------

On a semi-related note; Would you have gone on a mission with someone of whom you know that they didn't do right by another player? Would you have chosen your own advancement by getting the mission done regardless of who your companions are? Or would you have stepped back and said: Yes, I want this mission badly, really badly, I waited so long for it, god-damit I deserve to finally get it done, ... but no, under these circumstances I will sit out while everyone else gets it done and just try it some other day with a different party?

Edit: For everyone (including Tyrath), don't answer the above question in this thread. Just ask yourself what you would have done in the same situation, think about the answer you gave yourself, explain it to yourself. It can lead to potentially interesting results if you decide to give it some thought.

Ok, so this was in the recent thread about some thing involving Rhinegold trying to schedule an event: http://www.qcdn.org/showthread.php?t=22312&page=3

I just want to say that I found this to be a departure from the usual, fairly professional, QCDN proceedings.

The first bit is not useful; Tyrath can break some rules and still feel others are important. The middle section seems fairly good at first . . . Sculli asserts that people have other means at their disposal than QCDN.

But the crux of the thing is when Sculli says: "To me that is unacceptable." Look at that paragraph specifically. This is about what Sculli wants, not what QCDN wants.

I will pause here and acknowledge freely that it is Sculli's site and it is a privilege and not a right to use it.

My complaint remains that the site is usually more professional. This is the first instance I can recall where Sculli has decided what his moral take is and taken strong action without giving the board populace the opportunity to make a decision on an individual level.

As a final note to that, the flame in which these complaints were brought up was locked at three pages; now, I'm sure that's just a sort of triumphant flourish that Sculli executed, feeling like he'd won the day when nobody disagreed strongly with his response on page 1. But that's just the thing.

I would've liked to respond. And I'm not persuaded by his reasoning. I don't really care what Sculli feels about Rhinegold's character; I want to be able to read what Rhinegold said that was so intense, and make my own decision.

I don't think Sculli's on a powertrip, but I do think this was a slight mistake. Once it got brought up, however, I think not handling it well is a bigger mistake. And I think it would be better handled by allowing discussion to continue (ergo this post). Similarly, Sculli's note (apparently an edit to his flameboard post . . . something which nobody else is allowed to do -- I know, but I've already admitted it's his site ) asks that nobody comment on what he's written, only think about it. This seems like we're being asked to reflect on how true what Sculli is saying must be; it seems to say that if we just think about it long enough, we'll come around. I think that to work through some complaint, you need to be able to have an open discussion of it, and listening needs to be the first step.

I didn't get an impression of listening in Sculli's post. Responding, sure. Even in a precise and critical way. But does Sculli know what was upsetting about that process? I don't think he does. Sculli's defense of his actions explains what he was thinking, but not why it isn't an example of what Tyrath was thinking (hence my question, did he know what Tyrath was thinking?).

Obviously, the board is fairly healthy if people such as Tyrath and myself feel comfortable making "flames" about the moderation, but that doesn't mean it can't be healthier. Just my thoughts.

This may not be the most coherant opening discussion for this topic, but I felt like the topic should be put back on the table.