Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Terra

Ask the Leaders

Recommended Posts

So, there's been a bit of an indication lately that some people have had some questions about the Clan, or the activities of people helping to run the Clan, and for a short while some of these questions surfaced a bit in some of the more passionate circumstances lately. Unfortunately the topics they were brought up in were a bit too embroiled in tension that it made productive discussion a little difficult.

 

But I still want people to have that opportunity to ask us things if there is genuinely some stuff they want to know, and I'd rather people didn't feel like they had to wait until their resignation topics before finally asking about them. As the administrators of the community we do actually try to be open about our actions and our reasons, and I want people to feel like they can come to us and ask us anything if there are things they want to know. And I think that kind of open communication is also very important so that things don't lead to awful misunderstandings or misconceptions, which I think has led to some of the recent misgivings that have been expressed.

 

So this topic is your chance to clear the air. Anyone and everyone, doesn't matter your rank. If you want to know what kind of changes have taken place in the Clan the last while, you can ask. If you want to know what kinds of things I've been doing lately, you can ask. I'll answer all questions as best I can, and I've no doubt all of our other Generals will add in the answers they can provide as well for any questions they can relate to.

And as long as the questions are asked honestly and with appropriate civility then no one will ever be reprimanded for asking a question, in fact I would applaud anyone who took the initiative to ask and learn about the things they have doubts about. Hopefully this topic can provide that chance, and can continue to be available for people to ask whatever they want, whenever they want.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ms. Terra:

 

Greetings. I have been following the current situation with some amusement, satisfaction with complaints that I have PM before have come to a head with others. Especially when told that 'negative votes are a chance to learn not anything personal, yet some people who claimed this have left in a disgruntled state, taking it personal (watch by the river and everything eventually comes around again.)

 

A few questions I have asked before.

 

Why cannot all forums, in the interests of transparency, be open to everyone to read and see, but not necessarily to post <certain ranks are read only> ? This would cause those who beleive that management is too distant and secretive (I beleive this I am sure others do who fear to speak up) to know what is actually going on>. Also reduces paranoia and feelings of persecution., when there is only a few who get information to make a decision this encourages virtue signaling and group think. If someone was lying about someone (as this was accused, at least people know what is being said (though their is verbal and discussions in discord, so there will always be "whisper campaigns" (a natural byproduct of any organization.) By the way, saying "we have to keep some things secret" in a gamer guild is not a good reason. Executive privilege may apply in lying governments, I had hoped it did not apply here.

 

Why can their not be  a vote for demotion ? If someone is doing a terrible job, why can the community not demote them? If people cannot be voted out it would make Venezuela smile. It seems that many reach a rank and sit back and are never heard from again and  people fear to complain. 

 

Why is a disablement allowed without first asking about the situation the person who was disabled? Nothing like "instantaneous justice" with no appeal or due process (we believe accusers is here to? I was hoping to escape such nonsense here). Taking the word of someone who may be an unfriend without having the decency or competence to check is incompetent misuse of power.

 

Why are there restricted channels in team speak ? I could understand one for private discussions, but cliques have formed, voting blocks, etc.

 

Why has the voting system not been scrapped anyway ? Giving ten to fifteen votes to one person is ridiculous and makes a sham of any type of "democratic process". especially when the voting is open and many base their votes on what others have voted for. Also note purples recent promotion *well deserved by the way, well done purple> a lie was put up by someone yet if a lie is posted sometimes it is impossible to confirm the veracity. Innocent until proven guilty has no place here does it? If people are going to get that many votes in encourages sucking up to a few and ignoring the "flyover states", just campaign to the big cities (a sly defense of the electoral college put in there.)

 

Why was one of the resignation comments by someone who was not the poster? I was told that all comments stand on their own and are not deleted. 

 

As was said before in the resignation topics (I laughed at some and cried at others <always internally, never show weakness> , does no one not know how to quietly leave anymore, I blushed at some of the expletives used by persons who do not respect their elders or even the chain of command. I laugh at them as there will come a time when they wish they had given that respect ( I have none for the crude spoken.) I was amazed at the comments directed and lack of directed at those who resigned and the inconsistency by some with their comments made me laugh.

 

I hope with these comments and questions that I have been polite enough not to be disabled without being spoken to beforehand (thank you for the lesson Townkill that reminds me that the world is not a fair place and thank you beer for reminding me that when you put someone on ignore you should trust your first instincts and just never speak to them) I have been foolish sometimes and wished to see the best in people but have been disappointed  with few exceptions ( congratulations to purple).

 

I hope there is not another slew of "I don't like the drama you are causing", I found that comment ill informed,  not paying attention, lacking reason and any semblance  of critical thinking.' People want peace almost always at the cost of lost justice. 

 

Now let the virtue signaling begin or let us see if their is honest answers and no repercussions as Ms. Terra implied.

 

Thank you Ms. Terra for asking for these comments, I have spoken to you enough to realize this is probably not virtue signaling on your part. I hope you are not upset now that you asked for comments such as these but if you do not want to know, do not ask.

 

This  is why I have been unseen, some  here (there are exceptions) are not the type of  people I want to associate with, it is hard to judge the character of someone in text or a game. I PM those I am still friendly with but do not want to deal with the vitriol that has appeared and intensified.

 

Regards

 

Ghostdog

 

PS I will not debate this post here with anyone (some of the venom and anger in the resignations was a tremendous loss of face for people.) I just want answers to questions and comments that I think I should have raised but did not have the time to get into this type of discussion. PM if you wish , but like unwanted phone calls or texts, I can ignore and delete those.

 

PSS God how I miss Wichita, reasonable and intelligent with his opinions, but went a little off the rails because of his substance abuse.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll answer some of these but I only have enough time for a couple before I have to get ready for work.

5 hours ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Why are there restricted channels in team speak ? I could understand one for private discussions, but cliques have formed, voting blocks, etc

The only passworded channels in Teamspeak are Donator Channels, Meeting Channels, and Offices.

 

Offices are used to discuss things about the division, a private space for people to speak with members for investigation purposes, or as a place for the division leaders of a division to discuss something in private. That's the only purpose for an Office, and as such, it's locked to grant that privacy.

 

Meeting channels are only used during Admin and General meetings. These meetings are only open to Division Leaders and Officer+. General meetings, such as when we do evaluation meetings, are only eligible for Brigadier General+. These meetings are some of the places we discuss issues in the community and make changes to how the Community is run. Given they're only used once a month and for only specific ranks or members at the time they are used, it has a password on them.

 

But the one you're probably more likely referring to, Donator channels. When a member donates, they're provided with a donator channel as a privilege (not a right) as a thank you from the Community. This donator channel has been provided to them as a channel to do with what they will, as long as they don't break rules of the community. Over time, they've developed into popular hangout locations, specifically in the D2 division, and I can't deny there's been cliques form because of it. There's always been different way's that cliques have formed in this community, but this is one of the most recent ways they form, and perhaps the hardest one to discourage. Being that they're donator channels though, that's why they can have passwords as not all do or will in the future. 

 

5 hours ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Why can their not be  a vote for demotion ? If someone is doing a terrible job, why can the community not demote them? If people cannot be voted out it would make Venezuela smile. It seems that many reach a rank and sit back and are never heard from again and  people fear to complain. 

Demotions are a form of punishment for the member, and as such, punishment is reserved for at the minimum Officer rank. That said, in the case of Brigadier Generals and higher, if members feel a General is incompetent and not upholding their duties, they can request an evaluation through one of the other generals and provide a reason for why they feel the member is not fulfilling their duties.

 

On 4/16/2014 at 4:38 PM, Badboi(OD) said:

If at anytime 5 members including an officer (or from a top 3 Warrant Officer) believe that their division General is no longer doing their job. They can request an evaluation.

These can be submitted to any other General or a Commander. They will then be nominated for an evaluation for which they must submit or be demoted by default.

 

5 hours ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Why was one of the resignation comments by someone who was not the poster? I was told that all comments stand on their own and are not deleted.

Perhaps I'm not aware of this instance? Or I'm misunderstanding your question. Could you elaborate further? I'm unsure how to answer this question.

 

Anyone can comment on a resignation post and provide well wishes to the member resigning, so I'm not sure what you mean by 'not the poster'.

 

5 hours ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Why is a disablement allowed without first asking about the situation the person who was disabled? Nothing like "instantaneous justice" with no appeal or due process (we believe accusers is here to? I was hoping to escape such nonsense here). Taking the word of someone who may be an unfriend without having the decency or competence to check is incompetent misuse of power.

Disablement is and should be a last resort for any punishment. And there should never be a punishment of any kind before speaking with the individual who is about to be punished. There are always two sides of a story, failure to not get that information leads to uninformed decisions. Bottom line, there should never be a punishment dished out that is not first explained to the member. Everyone deserves their chance to defend themselves from an accusation. Do you have specific situations where this has or is happening?

 

5 hours ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

As was said before in the resignation topics (I laughed at some and cried at others <always internally, never show weakness> , does no one not know how to quietly leave anymore, I blushed at some of the expletives used by persons who do not respect their elders or even the chain of command. I laugh at them as there will come a time when they wish they had given that respect ( I have none for the crude spoken.) I was amazed at the comments directed and lack of directed at those who resigned and the inconsistency by some with their comments made me laugh.

Some people leave for different reasons, some to pursue things in their life, some because they wish to do something different, and some leave because they're unhappy about a circumstance. There are multiple reasons why someone wishes to leave. The latter usually has a lot of emotions tied to a resignation, some are spiteful and resentful. But one thing is true, generally speaking, there's a lot of passion here in Overdosed Gaming. And passion can create a lot of tension when opinions don't match up with those around you. I can't give you an answer as to why 'someone can't leave quietly' because resignation is far to broad to give a single answer. There are many things that factor into a resignation potentially becoming heated such as the individual, the circumstance, or someone else (or multiple people) in the community. Perhaps another General could have a different approach to this question.

 

I for one think this topic is an excellent idea.. because I think for a while now, there's been some malcontent, especially focused at leadership (Brigadier General and up) here in the community. I've wanted to address this multiple times.. to remind everyone that we're here to ensure the continuity of the community.. a place we all love for different reasons. Not everything is smooth and happy. Not every decision is easy. Not every suggestion for a future is clear enough or a good fit for the community. Our primary focus, especially among the Commanders, is the continuity of Overdosed Gaming. We want as much as everyone else in this community for it to be around for 20 more years or longer. As we branch out, grow, and evolve to things we haven't done in our 20 years of existence, there's bound to be growing pains, disagreements, and hurt feelings. Evolution is critical and essential to the future, make no mistake. But we must also deter paths that are unclear and have too much risk involved. We as Commanders are caretakers of the community, and it's our job to keep us around and moving forward.

 

I apologize for the long winded response, and not addressing your question about transparency as I feel that could be just as long winded, and I didn't have time this morning to attempt to tackle them. Other Generals/Commanders are free to offer their take on any of these question as well. One of the benefits to having different people in leadership, is different opinions and perspectives on every occurrence here in the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I can't say I'm surprised to see you taking advantage of this, Ghostdog. You've always had a keen interest in the workings of the Clan. However we're not really on a time limit so to keep things a bit clearer and easier to read/reply to, rather than posting all your questions at once why don't you pick three you want replies to first and we can get to the others after. This way we can work through them at a comfortable pace.

 

Of the questions you still had, which ones would you like to start with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The Powers That Be:

 

This post was edited but not by the poster. I thought this was not allowed, it smacks of censorship. (I missed the word "edited" in my question which made the question unintelligible, thank you for catching the error Triny edited a post not hers.)

 

Also people have been instantly disabled  (yes myself, also Wichita but I agree witht hat BUT as a matter of process someone should have talked to him first <even serial killers get due process>f) and had to prove innocence without first talking to me. Instant judgement without process is tyranny (Admit this is how the CSSP works and I will never mention it, I don't want to be observed by the secret police or whatever whisperers function.

 

Also reserved at the minimum officer rank, that is incorrect, that happened to a WO and an enlisted that I am aware of I am sure there are other examples or did I misunderstand your comment?

 

Regards 

 GD

Edited by GhostDog(OD)
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

 

This post was edited but not by the poster. I thought this was not allowed, it smacks of censorship. (I missed the word "edited" in my question which made the question unintelligible, thank you for catching the error Triny edited a post not hers.)

I have no idea why this post was edited unless there was a clear rule violation, such as nudity, which i doubt mind you. Perhaps @Triny(OD) could explain her edit for us?

 

Ill respond to the rest after work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ms Terra:

 

Pick any three you like, I want everything answered (I like order.) Hopefully this will not be used to make another example, as I wonder how many will comment on anything (other than those who have nothing to lose.) Remember a good example does stabilize things, for a while anyway.

 

Silence may indicate contentment but it also can indicate fear. "Terror must be maintained or the Empire will fall "--Nimoy

 

Regards

GD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

This post was edited but not by the poster. I thought this was not allowed, it smacks of censorship. (I missed the word "edited" in my question which made the question unintelligible, thank you for catching the error Triny edited a post not hers.)

 

A post can be edited by a Moderator or Administrator if the post contains something inappropriate or against the rules. In this case, based on the comment left at the bottom, it looks like he was using his post to try and recruit OD members over to his new Clan, and we don't allow other Clans to use our platforms (forum, teamspeak, etc) to recruit for their communities, so Triny edited that part out. That is the conclusion I'm getting from it, but I'll let @Triny(OD) speak for herself on it.

 

20 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Also people have been instantly disabled  (yes myself) and had to prove innocence without first talking to me. Instant judgement without process is tyranny (Admit this is how the CSSP works and I will never mention it, I don't want to be observed by the secret police or whatever whisperers function.

 

The standard protocol is to give a person the chance to explain and defend their actions before rendering judgement, and in the majority of cases this protocol is followed. However there is an exception if there is reasonable grounds to believe that the person in question poses an existing risk to the community or to people in it, and under those circumstances it is permissible to remove them first in order to safeguard the community.

 

The person that disabled you, Townkill, felt at the time that you were trying to rile people up into creating a big confrontation in the community, and believed this posed a risk to the community. So he disabled you ahead of time. After reviewing his reasons, however, we did not feel there was sufficient grounds to justify that disablement, and your disablement was ultimately overturned. As for the instant disablement of others, it depends on their circumstances too. If you want to ask about the disablement of a specific person then I'll answer it as best I can.

 

2 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Pick any three you like, I want everything answered (I like order.) Hopefully this will not be used to make another example, as I wonder how many will comment on anything (other than those who have nothing to lose.) Remember a good example does stabilize things, for a while anyway.

 

You can have everything answered, but it doesn't all have to be at once, does it? =P

I'd rather make sure I have answered your first questions thoroughly, and give you the opportunity to follow-up on them to your satisfaction, (or others) rather than trying to answer everything at once. It's easier for other people to follow along this way if they had similar concerns as well and are interested in the answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Aerineth(OD) said:

I have no idea why this post was edited unless there was a clear rule violation, such as nudity, which i doubt mind you. Perhaps @Triny(OD) could explain her edit for us?

 

Ill respond to the rest after work.

 

I saw the original post prior to editing.  Triny removed advertising that Hectic had put into his resignation.  The advertising was to the effect of trying to pull members from OD to another gaming community.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Aerineth:

 

Perhaps before such an edit the person doing a edit not their post should put a reason, else it looks … unusual ?

 

Regards

GD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Mr Aerineth:

 

Perhaps before such an edit the person doing a edit not their post should put a reason, else it looks … unusual ?

 

Regards

GD

 

"Edited 20 hours ago by Triny(OD) 
Do not recruit here"

 

There is a reason given just below the byline for the edit on Hectic's post.

Edited by Altros(OD)
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Mr Aerineth:

 

Perhaps before such an edit the person doing a edit not their post should put a reason, else it looks … unusual ?

 

Regards

GD

She did: 

21 hours ago, Hectic(OD) said:

Edited 20 hours ago by Triny(OD)
Do not recruit here

Edit: Sorry @Altros(OD), I guess you beat me to it! hahaha

Edited by CompFreak(OD)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

This post was edited but not by the poster. I thought this was not allowed, it smacks of censorship. (I missed the word "edited" in my question which made the question unintelligible, thank you for catching the error Triny edited a post not hers.)

From what i was told....this was edited to remove  an attempt to recruit people into a newly formed clan, A recruit pitch to a non OD clan

Edited by PoPs(OD)
Nevermind lol i see this has been answered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Mr Altros:

 

Should not a  guild be strong enough to maintain it's membership? Or are you saying you fear people might "leave the ship" if they have a choice ? I had a C sharp program I wrote that dumped my resume to several job sites when even rumor of layoffs was whispered.

 

As much of the resignation bruhaha is winding down, maybe management should concentrate on unhappiness that policing such a post (though I think the owner of a site has the right to censor anything, this is why faceBook is in such trouble, censoring opinions it disagrees with. (Also I notice only upper management has posted, I eagerly await the input and ideas of the ranks.)

 

regards

GD

Edited by GhostDog(OD)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Altros(OD) said:

 

I saw the original post prior to editing.  Triny removed advertising that Hectic had put into his resignation.  The advertising was to the effect of trying to pull members from OD to another gaming community.

Thank you Altros this is indeed correct.  He was trying to recruit members, i removed only that part as it violates our rules.

6 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Mr Aerineth:

 

Perhaps before such an edit the person doing a edit not their post should put a reason, else it looks … unusual ?

 

Regards

GD

Under where it says i edited it does give a reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Ms  Triny

 

Must have missed that. I did not know  that others could edit a post, as I was told that nothing was ever deleted. Interesting.Thank you for the clarification

 

GD

Edited by GhostDog(OD)
spelling softened tone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Mr Altros:

 

Should not a  guild be strong enough to maintain it's membership? Or are you saying you fear people might "leave the ship" if they have a choice ? I had a C sharp program I wrote that dumped my resume to several job sites when even rumor of layoffs was whispered.

 

As much of the resignation bruhaha is winding down, maybe management should concentrate on unhappiness that policing such a post (though I think the owner of a site has the right to censor anything, this is why faceBook is in such trouble, censoring opinions it disagrees with. (Also I notice only upper management has posted, I eagerly await the input and ideas of the ranks.)

 

regards

GD

It would be problematic to allow anyone to recruit for their clans on our websites and forums, especially since most of our divisions have rules against being in multiple clans for that game.  

In all my years of gaming i have never seen a gaming clan allow other clans to recruit on platforms they pay for and maintain, and that are related to their clan only.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to that, we provide platforms like the forum, teamspeak, discord, channels and custom bots, paid for them out of our own pockets and spend time out of our own schedules to create and maintain them, for the benefit of OD. Not for the benefit of other communities. Other Clans should be taking it upon themselves to put together their own resources and platforms to fulfill their needs, not taking advantage of ours. The things we create for OD are for OD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Ms  Triny

 

Must have missed that. I did not know  that others could edit a post, as I was told that nothing was ever deleted. Interesting.Thank you for the clarification

 

GD

Good Afternoon Ghost Dog,

 

Thank you for sparking this conversation. I know there may be some (the ranks) that are shy at posting that have the same questions. Keep ‘em coming. 

 

Full transparency: All Generals have the power to edit posts and Admin CP users can edit them incognito. While Admin CP users don’t use this power on purpose, it’s the default and we try our best to leave reasoning for edits. While there are a variety of reasons we edit a post, we typically rarely have to do so. One reason that has not been mentioned is to consolidate a thread. For example, we will most likely edit Terra’s original post to accumulate all of the Q&A to the OP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
42 minutes ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Mr Altros:

 

Should not a  guild be strong enough to maintain it's membership? Or are you saying you fear people might "leave the ship" if they have a choice ? I had a C sharp program I wrote that dumped my resume to several job sites when even rumor of layoffs was whispered.

 

As much of the resignation bruhaha is winding down, maybe management should concentrate on unhappiness that policing such a post (though I think the owner of a site has the right to censor anything, this is why faceBook is in such trouble, censoring opinions it disagrees with. (Also I notice only upper management has posted, I eagerly await the input and ideas of the ranks.)

 

regards

GD

 

You make it sounds as if we have some power of coercion that forces people that have joined ODG to stay in ODG.  People are more than welcome to come and go as they please.  However, the platforms of ODG are maintained, and where applicable are paid for, by administration for the benefit of ODG and not other communities.  For that reason, we do not allow advertising of other communities on our platforms that are explicitly trying to pull members away from ODG.

 

I would argue that comparing ODG membership to job employment is false equivalency.  A job does have a power of coercion that keeps you there.  This power is called a wage--money.  If whispers of layoffs is spreading, it weakens that power of coercion and therefore employees begin seeking other opportunities.  (The same happens if an employee is approached by a recruiter promising higher wages.)  ODG has no such power.  We are a community that you join to socialize and spend leisure time.

Edited by Altros(OD)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, GhostDog(OD) said:

Why cannot all forums, in the interests of transparency, be open to everyone to read and see, but not necessarily to post <certain ranks are read only> ? This would cause those who beleive that management is too distant and secretive (I beleive this I am sure others do who fear to speak up) to know what is actually going on>. Also reduces paranoia and feelings of persecution., when there is only a few who get information to make a decision this encourages virtue signaling and group think. If someone was lying about someone (as this was accused, at least people know what is being said (though their is verbal and discussions in discord, so there will always be "whisper campaigns" (a natural byproduct of any organization.) By the way, saying "we have to keep some things secret" in a gamer guild is not a good reason. Executive privilege may apply in lying governments, I had hoped it did not apply here.

 

I have tried to push this change over the years to my peers, both as a General and as a Commander myself. I also tried at some point to develop an history record on the main site, with all your vote comments, including failed promotions and negative votes.

 

Both of them were not accepted by the majority, for the exact same reason that Ray(OD) was fearing. One incident may be held against you for a lot of time and will be detrimental for your advancement. While I believe, it should, because you did it, and it should be public for everyone to see, the majority is still not at a state to accept this change, and we look for the benefit of the most.

 

Same thing happens with the private forums, we get a lot of incidents, false accusations, and we deal with private information that was not allowed to be shared by the parties in question to anyone but the administration. And for the contrary, by keeping all this incidents public, you end up publicly exposing innocent members when the accusation is deemed to be false. If someone made a false accusation privately to us, there's no need to publicly shame both parties until the matter is resolved.

 

Sure, doing things privately may cause discomfort and paranoia to some of the parties, but this alone does not weight more that the pros that it presents.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it is also important that those who are responsible for making decisions in the Clan have the freedom to discuss those changes, and share their views, without having to worry about the way the rest of the Clan will treat them for it. If there is a particular change that some members feel strongly about, then there is a risk of members pressuring Officers or Generals to make certain decisions, or blame those people for making decisions they didn't like. Even as things are right now, it isn't particularly unusual for individual members to express animosity towards leaders who did things they don't agree with. And I think making private boards transparent, especially the Generals board, could really compound this problem further.

 

Changes to the Clan and our systems need to be weighed carefully, and considered thoroughly. Outside influence would only serve to hamper that process, and leaders who can't make decisions without being persecuted for them will inevitably stop making decisions altogether. Anyone who has written an evaluation will tell you that being judged before the Clan as a whole is often a stressful experience, and it isn't something we should put people through more often than is necessary.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. R.agnarok(OD)

 

Thank you for your reply. Accusations may be made that remain unseen and harm the innocent. Should not a closed post that specifically mentions  a member be read by the member that is mentioned? I was taught that sealed indictments were rare in law and the person that was indicted was always informed of the indictment. How can someone defend themselves or their actions when they do not know the complaint or even who lodged the complaint? (perhaps it is the same person that harbors a personal grudge? Currently there is no legitimate way to know <of course there are always illegitimate sources of information, it is human nature to have a friend that may disclose "secret" information, it is the nature of bureaucracy to "leak" .>

 

if the accusation was false the person does not know they have a secret enemy working against their best interests. Thank goodness that a false vote was discovered against purple, but many such events may not be a blatant and when the person is exposed may make up a reason such as "trying to rile people up." I used to only show up late at night and did not care what others thought or who might be influenced by my words. When I decide to resign it will be done with a post of two words declaring the resignation (the end is part of the journey.)

 

And to be honest I eagerly await next evaluation, I do not beleive people should have such power, but when I do not know what is said, I cannot judge rightly and must therefore go by how I was treated as an example.  Alas for Ray, I did not agree with his methods but understand his angst and feelings after putting so much time into OD.

 

A secret indictment is what I am trying to prevent and if people can not stand the light of day on what they say about someone perhaps they should not say it.

 

Regards

 

GD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won't say there aren't cases where a person has made false claims or accusations against someone because they are targeting that person specifically for some reason, but there are also people who have made claims and accusations that were perfectly legitimate and were from honest concern, and yet the accused have taken it personally and acted like that person is targeting them specifically when they are not. And in my experience the latter is actually a lot more common, it is difficult for most people to be accused of something and not take it personally.

 

If we start sharing the names of people who reported someone to the accused, the only thing that will end up happening is people will stop reporting things altogether, and then any chance at all of resolving the problems are gone completely. If we want people to come forward about concerns they have involving others then their anonymity must be protected. In this case it falls to the leadership to handle these reports responsibly and determine which claims have merit and which don't, and identify which members have legitimate concerns and which are targeting others. And this is why we select leaders we are confident have enough experience with people and disputes to be able to investigate matters like that properly.

 

I can definitely understand the desire to want to be able to defend yourself in front of your accusers, and the frustration of not being able to. The reality is we all have to deal with that, because the truth is people will rarely go to the person they have an issue with and work it out with them personally. (And sometimes there is a good reason for that too)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. R.agnarok(OD)

 

A quick comment on your comment on looking for the benefit of the most. Sometimes the majority is wrong and a leader does what they beleive is right, not what fifty one percent of the people want. I know this is hard, but the "tyranny of the majority" is a real issue.

 

Regards

GD

 

 

Ms Terra:

 

We will have to agree to disagree. I beleive that if a person does not have the strength to support a decision they should not make any decision and should not be in a position to make such decisions.  Caving to public opinion shows  you were never sure about your decision .

 

As Ray said in his "negative votes post" nothing should be taken personally, a negative is a chance for the person to grow. Being upset and leaving in a huff when things do not go your way is not the way to go. I was prepared to leave quietly when I had two huge votes from division heads dropped on me (may god reward moo-moo for his sense of justice, I pray that his morality applies in his entire life and is not snuffed out by how the world really works) and that was acceptable. What was astonishing was that one caved and one insisted their vote was correct. What is annoying is that any vote that is public will cause others to virtue signal. I have respect for the person who refused to change their vote, good for her. I notice that I got demoted again as soon as the opportunity presented itself, one cannot fight city hall.

 

Being criticized for expressing an opinion, being told "I don't like you causing drama " says to me "be quiet and accept" This is anathema to a free exchange of ideas but some groups approve of the "be silent and obey" doctrine. If you don't want the answers do not ask the questions. People almost never want justice, they just want peace.

 

Things that are said in secret that cannot be rebuffed make it nearly impossible to refute as you do not even know the accusation. Accusations are frequently made in the officers and general's boards (I was told this was true, but to expose the source(s) would expose them as a leaker or if they denied it I would look like a liar. No security is perfect.) Wouldn't it be better to see what was said directly then get it second or third hand and it may be untrue? And to deny that such accusations exist  says that town kill just one day said "let me get Beer (OD) to trap ghost dog into saying something he shouldn't. " I wonder if it was the Russian dossier that was the initial cause of his action. I had beer on ignore, I should have never accepted his false apology and assumed the best in him. my error, my foolishness (I also make errors and speak when I should remain silent <like these recent posts most likely>)

 

I do not expect anything to change (bureaucracy has a huge inertia) . I thought at one time I could help change it but after my "slapping down" I realize that was a fantasy , the effort would be tremendous and working against the social inertia is tiring.

 

Regards and thank you for your always polite replies as "I find discourtesy unspeakably ugly"

GD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...