SPOOFE, I think it was ill-conceived in the sense that Lib chose the representatives. Sure, it was “voluntary” but what would have happened if there was a flood of volunteers? Who would have made the final decision on who would serve? Lib? Who else?
I think it was ill-conceived that he would be the tie breaker.
I think it was ill-conceived because the voting would have been done out of sight by email that only the “voting members” had access to.
And finally, I think it was ill-conceived because the self-appointed “President” of this fiasco holds the majority of the members here in contempt. Those who don’t see that are simply not paying attention.
Yes, I think you have done so, and that is an understatement.
Well, then your understanding is faulty. I am not even going to GO there with you, because for one thing, **Manda JO ** and Crunchy Frog already said everything I would have said. Probably more succinctly, too. (thank you, dears.) For the other thing, I am angry at the moment and I don’t think I should allow anger to cause me to say something unkind. I am sure you are a very good person who is erroneous in your understanding of this particular situation.
Well, it seems to me that several someones have shown you that you are wrong , and I have yet to see you retract your statement. I am not addressing the situation that made this thread necessary. I have nothing against Lib, and in fact I have a great deal of respect for him. I am addressing the fact that I feel that you owe Euty an apology. Regardless of the fact that he is a moderator, which at this point has no bearing on the situation. Common civility would indicate that you should apologize. IMHO.
Well, I have an uncanny ability to be incredibly blind to such things, but I don’t knw anyone offhand that Lib seems to dislike. I wouldn’t say that I don’t pay attention, but really, I just don’t know what that is about. However, I also don’t really get involved in people’s disputes on the boards, except for some reason I find the esprix & dalovindj spat to be endlessly amusing. I have no idea why since I like them both, as far as message boards go, and given our limited interaction.
Apart from that, having things be held in private email is simply a practical idea. Otherwise it would simply be a meta-message board. Whoopee.
Well, it was pretty much “first come, first serve”.
All right, that makes sense. Then if some sort of award thingy was set up, it would be wise to not have one person in charge of final arbitration.
Mmm… I can see your point, but conversely the point of a confidential voting would be to avoid the possibility of “You voted for him and not me! I feel betrayed!”-type conflicts.
In my experience, Lib’s “contempt” for other posters is fleeting and short-term. But, then again, Attention just sent his brother Guido over to collect last month’s payment…
I salute you. Congratulations on being able to openly admit error, something your fellow moderator manhattan wouldn’t do if you held a loaded pistol to his head.
I re-read the thread this morning and I can now see how it could be insulting to Euty. I therefore retract my statements to this thread and apologize to Eutychus55 for bringing this mess to his apology. Sorry.
I’ve had as many conflicts with Lib as anyone else who comes to mind. IIRC polycarp once speculated that we represented our own personal hells.
But I read through the linked threads and the immediate thought that comes to mind is: what a clusterfuck. I have little use for popularity contests (What? I would if I were popular? Fie on thee, foul miscreant.) I seem to recall expressing disappointment the last time they appeared on this board. So what. Some folks like them and I didn’t have to read the results. I said my piece and let them get on with their game.
If I had seen Lib’s thread in time, I would have done exactly the same. But for those who object specifically, especially, or extra-super-vehemently just because Lib was the initiator–huh? I don’t get it. If you distrust the source then discount the results. BFD.
On the other side, I thought it was sad that Lib allowed the elements of personal rejection to dominate his reaction to those expressing disapproval of his endeavor. Lib, if you read this I hope that your sabbatical is helpful. I just took a little one myself, and I think it did wonders for my (skewed) perspective. [sub]what? it wasn’t supposed to be skewed? Now you tell me.[/sub]
Eerrr…? I certainly meant no offense… I just wanted to give my opinion, since I’d had experience with this in the past, and it hadn’t ended well. I wasn’t criticizing anyone, simply offering my opinion. Heck, if I hadn’t originally thought “hey, awards would be fun!” why would I have done it twice in the past? I think that awards could and should be fun! When I ran mine, I opened a thread asking for award categories and pretty much put up all that were offered, then set up a script to allow people to nominate and vote… and then all hell broke loose. I didn’t want to see that happen to someone else. I like Libertarian… I don’t think he took offense to my thread, and if he did, then I apologize.
I don't (and didn't) think that your thread was offensive in and of itself and my choice of words (i.e. "...entirely out of line...") was not the best way in which to convey my thoughts.
What i meant to get across was that i thought it *inappropriate* that no moderator warned you off and your thread was allowed to remain open when **Libertarian's** was locked. It seems to me that a poster should not be allowed to start a new thread addressing issues that had just resulted in another thread being locked. Fair play and all that.
Of course (foolish me), i didn't realise, at the time, *why* the original thread was closed. I will endeavor in the future to keep my mouth shut and avert the possibility of tasting boot leather.
This was not meant to be an attack on you personally, i would have made mention of this regardless of who the Original Poster were to have been. I also did not mean to infer that **Libertarian** should take offence at you, rather, he would be justified in taking offence at the moderators.
That said, please accept my humblest apologies for any slight i made have made towards you.
We could play this game all day Royal Sampler. I know of occasions where manny apologised and it wasn’t a case of mistaken identity. I’m not going to search for it, because you’d find another ex post reason to distinguish it. And I’d have spent 10 minutes helping you to waste everyone’s time.
Just for the record, I can think of one occasion where three well-respected posters were at each others’ throats over a misunderstanding, and I entered into e-mail with Manny relative to it. His advice was sound, and explicitly included the phrase “I could be wrong, but…”
There’s a fine line between personality questions and objectivity, and IMHO the (volunteer) staff here handle it with grace 99+% of the time. Mayhap those of you who have problems with it need to do something else than complain?
