Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7   Go Down
 
Author Topic: Remove Boozy as a mod?  (Read 10974 times)
Zander
Hall of Famer
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18348


« on: August 22, 2009, 08:57:29 am »

Yes or no?

His latest thing was pretending that making a 6 part trade shouldn't have a penalty because it was apparently "never an official rule" despite the fact that we've been following it for nearly 2 months. Everyone has been following this rule this entire time and now that it's happened to him he wants to change it. Or according to him it never happened. His reasoning doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

So please, zunami, joshfarc, Flip, Beatbeast, Dwyane, and even Rye if you feel like it, vote.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2009, 09:32:34 am by Zander » Logged


Sig by bbyao06
Herbal_Tea*
MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10031


love that feel


« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2009, 09:11:26 am »

this back and forth sh*t has got to stop.
Logged

joshfarc
MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7322


aka ThreadKILLA'


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2009, 09:13:11 am »

I just want to say that the trade penalty rule is official.........and has been for like 2 months.

If boozy insists on not following it, then yes i would remove him as mod..................

Mods are meant to set the example......not and try to find loopholes or cheat or whatever.

*(no offense to you boozy, your one of my favorite posters, but sometimes you gotta draw a line)


EDIT:  I guess I say yes, remove him.  Sorry bro, I love you as a GM and psoter here too.  But the whining and cheating have grown to a point to where its hard to want you as a mod.  Boogie..........Mods shouldn't be changing their scree-names every 2 weeks either, a bit confusing...........dwayne, beasely beastlyblg, sizzle(yes thats directed at you Smoove, and all your other names)
« Last Edit: August 22, 2009, 09:16:06 am by joshfarc » Logged

Prime Time
MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6238


Prime Time Productions


« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2009, 09:15:58 am »

I don't believe in demoting people from certain ranks and positions, but I do believe that if he thinks the trade penalty is a new rule and doesn't follow it then we should remove him as a mode.

Just like farcy said, moderators are to set by example and not try to cheat the rules set by themselves and their fellow moderators to benefit themselves.
Logged

Prime Time
MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6238


Prime Time Productions


« Reply #4 on: August 22, 2009, 09:16:13 am »

Does my vote count?
Logged

Zander
Hall of Famer
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18348


« Reply #5 on: August 22, 2009, 09:17:48 am »

I don't believe in demoting people from certain ranks and positions, but I do believe that if he thinks the trade penalty is a new rule and doesn't follow it then we should remove him as a mode.

Just like farcy said, moderators are to set by example and not try to cheat the rules set by themselves and their fellow moderators to benefit themselves.

That's what he keeps doing and that's why I say yes - remove him. He's a horrible example.
Logged


Sig by bbyao06
Herbal_Tea*
MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10031


love that feel


« Reply #6 on: August 22, 2009, 09:18:59 am »

Look. This whole thing was my fault. Before Boozy and I did the Big Ben for Maxiell trade, he asked me what the trade penalty was for trading players back and forth. I told him we couldn't trade those players involved in the back and forth deal for 2 days. Not sure how I cam up with that... but that's what I thought the penalty was and that's what I told him.

Had Boozy known the circumstances of the rule, I'm sure he would have never agreed to that deal. So Boozy, I am sorry for misinforming you and creating this conflict.
Logged

STAT City
a.k.a. Boozy & Ice-O
MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10290



« Reply #7 on: August 22, 2009, 09:19:07 am »

I just want to say that the trade penalty rule is official.........and has been for like 2 months.

If boozy insists on not following it, then yes i would remove him as mod..................

Mods are meant to set the example......not and try to find loopholes or cheat or whatever.

*(no offense to you boozy, your one of my favorite posters, but sometimes you gotta draw a line)

so who is gonna enforce the rule? who is gonna say these rules shouldnt just be tweaked on the fly they should have some conrete ground to them. just to show you there was indifference on the rule, both zunami and zander had different ideas of what the penalty entailed. that right there was my reasoning for standing up and making the rule clarified as opposed to a misunderstood one. a new GM coming into the game could easily be misguided because in the informational thread under the trade rule section it was nowhere to be found.


notice how when i come up with a rule suggestion, i come up with the groundwork and i'd offer to educate everyone on it. i'd make a thread/post explaining the details. but when someone else gets sloppy with a rule they created and i try to make it clear i get the sh.t end of the stick. why?
Logged


Zander
Hall of Famer
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18348


« Reply #8 on: August 22, 2009, 09:21:35 am »

I just want to say that the trade penalty rule is official.........and has been for like 2 months.

If boozy insists on not following it, then yes i would remove him as mod..................

Mods are meant to set the example......not and try to find loopholes or cheat or whatever.

*(no offense to you boozy, your one of my favorite posters, but sometimes you gotta draw a line)

so who is gonna enforce the rule? who is gonna say these rules shouldnt just be tweaked on the fly they should have some conrete ground to them. just to show you there was indifference on the rule, both zunami and zander had different ideas of what the penalty entailed. that right there was my reasoning for standing up and making the rule clarified as opposed to a misunderstood one. a new GM coming into the game could easily be misguided because in the informational thread under the trade rule section it was nowhere to be found.


notice how when i come up with a rule suggestion, i come up with the groundwork and i'd offer to educate everyone on it. i'd make a thread/post explaining the details. but when someone else gets sloppy with a rule they created and i try to make it clear i get the sh.t end of the stick. why?

Because you didn't suggest changing it until you were the first person who was helped by it. If you'd taken issue with this rule, say, 2 months ago when the original thread was made, that would be a completely different situation. Right now it looks like you're challenging the rule because it causes you an inconvenience. And your constant use of the word "tweaked" is a joke because the rule has never been changed.
Logged


Sig by bbyao06
STAT City
a.k.a. Boozy & Ice-O
MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10290



« Reply #9 on: August 22, 2009, 09:25:09 am »

im not the one who created the rule and i was never really paying attention when that "rule" was being used. i thought that if someone else came up with a rule they would take charge and monitor it. that they would post it where all the rules of the game can be found and so no one can misunderstand. thats how i go about things, you go to be thorough.

it was tweaked because it went from 2 days to 5 days just like that. thus the expression "tweaked on the fly" is a perfect example. zunami even thought trades that had more than 2 parts werent even allowed. so where's the consistency?
Logged


ivosucks22
a.k.a. ivoquit22
MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5354



« Reply #10 on: August 22, 2009, 09:25:59 am »

If I was cheating, I would be thrown out of the game. I don't see why the penalty should be stripping him of his mod status, that's really not that important in this game. I'm not saying Boozy should be kicked, he shouldn't, but if he's cheating like you're saying he should be given a warning and if he doesn't stop he should be kicked.

That should be the penalty for everyone who cheats, mods included. If you don't want to play by the rules, then don't play, there's plenty of people that would like to play by the rules.
Logged

Zander
Hall of Famer
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18348


« Reply #11 on: August 22, 2009, 09:26:12 am »

it was tweaked because it went from 2 days to 5 days just like that. thus the expression "tweaked on the fly" is a perfect example.

That's not even true so it's a horrible example.

How many parts = how many days. That's what the rule is and always was. No one ever did more than 2 parts because doing a 6 part trade would mean no trading for almost a week. It effectively stops stupid trades like the one you made 2 days ago.
Logged


Sig by bbyao06
Herbal_Tea*
MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10031


love that feel


« Reply #12 on: August 22, 2009, 09:31:21 am »

it was tweaked because it went from 2 days to 5 days just like that. thus the expression "tweaked on the fly" is a perfect example.

That's not even true so it's a horrible example.

How many parts = how many days. That's what the rule is and always was. No one ever did more than 2 parts because doing a 6 part trade would mean no trading for almost a week. It effectively stops stupid trades like the one you made 2 days ago.

No it was a 2 part trade limit. Initially, our trade wasn't going to work until everyone agreed on the penalty of waiting 6 days to do another trade.
Logged

Zander
Hall of Famer
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 18348


« Reply #13 on: August 22, 2009, 09:32:22 am »

it was tweaked because it went from 2 days to 5 days just like that. thus the expression "tweaked on the fly" is a perfect example.

That's not even true so it's a horrible example.

How many parts = how many days. That's what the rule is and always was. No one ever did more than 2 parts because doing a 6 part trade would mean no trading for almost a week. It effectively stops stupid trades like the one you made 2 days ago.

No it was a 2 part trade limit. Initially, our trade wasn't going to work until everyone agreed on the penalty of waiting 6 days to do another trade.

You're mistaken. Read the thread that's nearly 2 months old and it has the same ruling.
Logged


Sig by bbyao06
STAT City
a.k.a. Boozy & Ice-O
MVP
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10290



« Reply #14 on: August 22, 2009, 09:33:23 am »

that was it tho, it was tweaked. even before that though, the whole thing was shady, ppl here and there had diff ideas. so I took it upon myself to take charge of the rule from whoever initially botched it to make it something everyone can read for them self and understand. take flip making the extensions thread. he made all rules clear. that's how you do it. you got to be thorough. thats all im saying. if you want to have me removed because im all for making rules the right way,  because i dont believe in having some iffy rule then so be it.
Logged


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7   Go Up
 
 
Jump to: