Disingenuous assertions by Tuba re status restoration

TubaDiva got permission from the OP to evade responsibility for the disingenuous language Tuba has repeatedly used to deny any and all ability to make status changes. Note that my post there and this thread here is not a request to restore my status; it is instead a criticism of Tuba’s disingenuous word choice.

I will repeat it (from here):

I’ve received the same ill-considered reply from a much stronger argument involving the fact that at the time my posts showed a change from “Charter Member” to “Guest”, the board tech person reported that people were being misreported as “Guests” who were actually still “Charter Members” (and that people should be patient and wait to see if the matter resolved itself). Thus, having not received the renewal email, I let the matter slide until I later learned I had missed the deadline.

I also emphasized that I was not asking for the reduced price but simply that my status be restored because the loss was a consequence of board tech problems and/or the confusion that resulted.

So what do I consider to be “ill-considered” about these replies? That word “cannot”. When these issues were most prominent, here in this forum Dex came right out and admitted that they certainly could restore someone’s status (technically and procedurally), and do it easily, but there might well be difficulties in verifying that someone actually was a Charter Member. So I spent weeks scouring my old hard drives and old Internet archives for such proof, but after all that effort, when I presented this evidence along with my request to repair my status, you, Tuba, again relied exclusively on the word “cannot”.

At this point, I just want to call you, Tuba, on your insistent use of the word “cannot” in this context. It’s not the honest word choice. I suggest telling people the truth by using the only appropriate and candid word: “won’t”.

That’s all I had to say.

How do you know it’s not the “honest word choice”? My interpretation is that when this first came up, there were behind-the-scenes discussions wherein it was decided that there would not be changes allowed, and to do so for one person would stir a hornets’ next. While changing a status is technically possible, doing so would be breaking an agreed-upon standard, something Tuba cannot do according to her own code of ethics.

Really, can we give this pedantic crap a rest? Is there nothing more interesting to gripe about?

As in “we cannot for commercial reasons”.

(IMO, without prejudice, BFD, get over it.)

Damn. I need to learn to say it in a sentence or less. But then if I did that, I wouldn’t really be conveying the person you’ve all never grown to know or love. Therefore, I shall henceforth continue to use extraneous sentences to say what jjimm does in five words.

I cannot believe how petty some complaints are.
(Emphasis added by Shodan.)


You have got to be kidding.

Cannot doesn’t have to mean there’s a technical prohibition. It can easily mean there is a procedural or policy prohibition.

This is what I don’t understand. Why were you waiting for the “renewal email?” You can renew at any time before the deadline.

Yes you can, you just don’t want to, you disingenuous guy!!!

Ambushed, I don’t set the rules for Charter Membership around here.

No one on the staff does. We do what management dictates.

Management sets the rules on Charter Membership criteria. We enforce it.

In past versions of the vB software administrators couldn’t move any registration back into the Charter Membership database – the system would not allow it.

In the current version of the vB software apparently administrators CAN make this move – but we are not allowed to unless Ed Zotti or Jerry Davis approves it. So far I think I’ve seen ONE instance where this happened – and IIRC we allowed it because the user was serving in Iraq and had no internet access. That’s one exception and a worthy one. Otherwise management has denied all requests.

Ed and Jerry have always said that if you allow Charter Membership to expire, the deal is off and the game is over. The tail does not wag the dog here – like every other staffer I work here, I don’t set policy.

I’d take this rant more seriously if it was from an actual Charter Member, because we all know how important that is.

When is resubscribe time, anyhow? Spring, right?

Is it *really *that important? To you?

To anyone?

One fast visit to the 'Raffe and a check on the custom titles several members are sporting (there’s actually a game going on where we pass custom titles to each other, among other things) would let anyone with a lick of sense know that yes, the titles CAN be changed. Anyone with administrator privs can do it. Why TPTB around here don’t want to do it is a mystery for the ages.

Sometime in spring. I usually re-up at the beginning of March.

Here is a post in which TubaDiva explained in detail why once a charter membership is gone, it can’t be easily restored.

Yes, I was originally under the impression that the SDMB was using only the built-in vB subscription system, in which case restoring charter status would be trivial, but it appears things are set up whereby a script overrules any changes made by the vB admins in terms of title and usergroup based on payment status. So, they could give you a Charter Member title, but it wouldn’t last out the day.

Also, I think the OP’s complaint about the staff’s language with respect to charter status is ridiculous.

You can resubscribe at any time, you don’t have to wait for anything.

The date a subscription expires can be checked in the user control panel.

Click “User CP” and then "Miscellaneous’ and then “Paid Subscriptions.”

You can renew from that page as well. The system uses PayPal to process the transaction but you do not need a PayPal account, you can use your credit card.



Are you accusing the OP of lying?

I remember one other time it got allowed: a guy sent in his registration on time, but, due to some flaw in the system, did not get credited. I believe the problem was on PayPal’s end.

I take it you already tried to get Ambushed approved, since he is alleging the problem was also software based.

Anyways, if I remember correctly, management would rather us not have any charter members. They are participating in something akin to a white mutiny (thanks E-sabbath), only honoring the original agreement to the letter.