Initiative to make any changes to the rules and charter a matter of full public vote

[AbsintheClock]

I'ma go ahead and let you argue this til you're blue in the face. Seems like most members have the right idea. And one of the yes votes on there was an accident, although I'ma let you have it cuz I'm such a sport.

[miracle fruit]

I'ma go ahead and let you argue this til you're blue in the face. Seems like most members have the right idea. And one of the yes votes on there was an accident, although I'ma let you have it cuz I'm such a sport.

nice counterpoint

just get out already

[AbsintheClock]

Make me cutie pie.

[miracle fruit]

quit misusing the initiatives forum dickHEAD

[AbsintheClock]

Quit misusing your brain honey.

[clockradioclock]

Blind Miraclefruit, are you seriously rage-posting because I don't agree with your skewed interpretation of a new rule?

If you want to vilify the staff, go for it. Be prepared, however, to face the consequences of your actions against them and their rules. More importantly, brave Miraclefruit, don't expect anyone to be on your side for it.

really if you believe this is the case then exactly how was i banned for flaming and insults multiple times when what's written on the page says "Flames and insults do not constitute harassment."

so what you're implying is that there is no longer moderator discretion for the rules? what the fuck are you even talking about

Either, proud Miraclefruit, you expect moderator discretion with this statement, or you're against it. In whatever case, your argument falls apart.

an example of "the staffs interpretation of the rules" vs "the rules" would be when blob clock stole a clockname, directly defied rule 6 as it was written at the time, and was caught for it, and then certain members of the staff made up a bunch of bullshit that was NOT written in the rules, something about a "statute of limitations" and then a week later changed the rule officially

Blobclock was banned for breaking the rules, fair and simple. The Rule 6 amendment came about after his ban. You have misplaced your anger if you think he got away with it scot-free. Are you upset that the rule was changed? If so, expect a torrent agitation in your future, good Miraclefruit, because things change.

[miracle fruit]

quit coming on to me you fuckin pooftah

[AbsintheClock]

quit coming on to me you fuckin pooftah

You're the one looking at my butt.

[miracle fruit]

Either, proud Miraclefruit, you expect moderator discretion with this statement, or you're against it. In whatever case, your argument falls apart.

i am pointing out the obvious flaws in the system
you, however, have no argument at all

Blobclock was banned for breaking the rules, fair and simple. The Rule 6 amendment came about after his ban. You have misplaced your anger if you think he got away with it scot-free. Are you upset that the rule was changed? If so, expect a torrent agitation in your future, good Miraclefruit, because things change.

yes he was banned for a week for breaking the rules. only *after* several members (including me) crusaded to get him banned and it was only done after i presented the "ClockOfBlob" situation to ribs, regardless of what the rule stated. even then "blob" was not forced to take another name. hell he could still be blob clock if he really wanted to and was willing to face the constant torment

either way the point that you clearly missed is how the staff handled the situation. immediately after "blob" was proven to have broken the rules as they were written the staff fabricated random bullshit such as the "statute of limitations," and then stalled the entire situation until they came up with a way to modify rule 6 in order to protect him from that very same rule

so blind clockradio, i dont see how you can possibly stick with your "there is only 1 interpretation of the rule" theory because it is clearly false

[clockradioclock]

i am pointing out the obvious flaws in the system
you, however, have no argument at all


 
yes he was banned for a week for breaking the rules. only *after* several members (including me) crusaded to get him banned and it was only done after i presented the "ClockOfBlob" situation to ribs, regardless of what the rule stated. even then "blob" was not forced to take another name. hell he could still be blob clock if he really wanted to and was willing to face the constant torment

either way the point that you clearly missed is how the staff handled the situation. immediately after "blob" was proven to have broken the rules as they were written the staff fabricated random bullshit such as the "statute of limitations," and then stalled the entire situation until they came up with a way to modify rule 6 in order to protect him from that very same rule

so blind clockradio, i dont see how you can possibly stick with your "there is only 1 interpretation of the rule" theory because it is clearly false

The logical fallacy, uncouth Miraclefruit, is yours not mine: "they changed the rules that one time, so your argument for '1 interpretation of the rule' is false". Amending a rule does not constitute a shift in its interpretation. The interpretation remains the same all around, so a proposal is made to change the obvious '1 interpretation' for the better.

Rule 6 was amended because a whole bunch of other users currently have stolen names and it'd be a hassle to enforce a name change everywhere. They weren't trying to protect Blob, forget Blob, they were trying to protect a handful of other members. The rule was amended so that users wouldn't be banned. What kind of a moron takes issue with an administration who is constantly working to find ways through which they can avoid banning members?

You have absolutely no argument, Miraclefruit, and I'm not saying that the way you say it. Your posts are, by and large, "the staff is a big bad wolf!" and when asked why, you fail to provide solid evidence. Get over your vendetta. Stop crying wolf.

[miracle fruit]

what amazing timing i just happen to have a very recent example

<&clammo> http://www.clockcrew.cc/talk/showthread.php?99796-Revision-of-Rule-1-The-public-domain-torrent-issue
<&clammo> theres the repost
repost that shouldnt even be reposted because the first one was fine
<&clammo> yep
yet again we are subject to the staffs twisted interpretation of the rules
despite them crying "there is only 1 interpretation"
what a joke
<&clammo> post that in the thread
no see that's not going to help
it helps me
hammer my point
into your thick fucking skulls
<&clammo> well
Right now everyone is being aggressive towards each other all the time instead of actually talking about the issues that need to be resolved reasonably
I'm aware some staff members have not been personable lately
<&clammo> the thread was closed because it didnt agree with something that wasnt even in the rules
<&clammo> thats a valid point

said thread was closed for having a public poll

the charter reads:

VIII. Elections - Initiatives.

Initiatives may be submitted to the Election Coordinator to appear on the ballot. To be added, the initiative must been openly proposed and discussed in the Initiatives sub-forum of the Policy forum using the polling feature, with over 55% approval and at least 20 voters, and been open for polling for more than 2 weeks. If there are a large number of initiatives mid-year, a special election may be called for.

Initiatives may modify the ClockCrew charter and/or clockification policy, including the removal of any staff position.

can anyone point out to me the part where it says that public polls are not valid?

[miracle fruit]

"don't break the imaginary rules and don't minimod"

[AbsintheClock]

There is none. But by the same stretch of rule you'd have to wait til the next election for any of your initiatives to pass as well. The anonymous vote system is being put in for now as an emergency measure so as not to negatively influence people's vote under the scrutiny of public pressure.

God forbid people would want to voice their opinion without being targeted.

But thanks for pointing out the inconsistencies, it saves me a whole lot of trouble to find them myself.

[miracle fruit]

But thanks for pointing out the inconsistencies, it saves me a whole lot of trouble to find them myself.

just being a good clock as usual
i only ever do what is right

btw i just owned you and your fuckin bullshit rules how do you feel about that

[AbsintheClock]

I feel like you need to step off my dick before I make another emergency measure out of you. You can either keep on topic about your own thread, and talk to me like a gentlemen, or I can break my digital foot up in your ass.

[DWARFINATORclock]

so everyones a scared lil baby that is afraid to publicly stand by their vote

[AbsintheClock]

Deleting all posts irrelevant to this specific topic. If it keeps getting derailed, I'm closing the thread.

[miracle fruit]

Deleting all posts irrelevant to this specific topic. If it keeps getting derailed, I'm closing the thread.

what the fuck are you serious

you just deleted my highly-relevant post about the charter and my proof that you specifically are enforcing rules that do not exist (its the one with the chatlog in it)

if you would kindly undelete it so my argument may be viewed publicly

User was banned for this post - Flooding the initiatives thread with reposted deleted material.

[clockradioclock]

Deleting all posts irrelevant to this specific topic. If it keeps getting derailed, I'm closing the thread.

There isn't a post relevant to this topic. Miraclefruit has taken us on an adventure.

Nowhere in the thread does he specifically and clearly explain why we should consider making rule changes public. Instead, he tries to dismantle another rule in the wrong thread. In doing so, he contradicts himself and suggests that the rules should both be up to moderator discretion as well as rigidly defined and inflexible. Bouncing off of this we digress to the past, where Miraclefruit tries to explain that moderator discretion was actually a bad thing because it affected him negatively. We eventually get into a discussion about the consistency of bans among the staff, their unwillingness to ban as many people as possible with the help of dangerously miswritten rules, and their decision to change the rules to protect as many as possible. I would venture to describe how much further away from the thread's title we could go, but I'm afraid I'd lose myself along the way.

[miracle fruit]

clockradio i really really would like to write up another long post disproving you again but babsinthe is just going to delete it in a blind rage because it incriminates him