Via Ettin

So let's hope no one tries to edit this again.

"I haven't got the time to say everything I want to say, but this is the summary:

[Lyrai] Are-X
[Lyrai] Link it in here.
[Alex] No.
[Tremolo] Is this some kinda joke from a super secret op channel? Because if it is, none of us regular chatters will find it interesting or funny and I really suggest you take it out of the topic
[Alex] Oh go cry about it. As if there's never been inside jokes in the topic.
[Tremolo] Fuck you Alex
[Alex] No thanks.
[Tremolo] Seriously, you're just lording yourselves over us with this kinda crap

^ Problem.

* ChanServ sets mode: +b *!*@dm-3594.hsd1.co.comcast.net*

^ Problem-solving

[Lyrai] I AM SICK AND TIRED OF ALL THE GODDAMN BICKERING. ETTIN, ARE-X, EVERYONE ELSE WHO BITCHES AT SOMEONE ELSE, CUT. IT. THE. FUCK. OUT. STOP IT. STOP IT STOP WHINING LIKE YOU'RE FUCKING 2 YEARS OLD AND SOMEONE STOLE YOUR GODDAMN BINKY RATTLE. STOP BEING HARDHEADED FUCKNUTTED ASSHOLES AND JUST GET THE HELL ALONG.

^ Denial.

That is all."

Okay, first, I'm all for banning Tremolo. I figure we should get the screamingly obvious out of the way first. Do I need reasons? Probably not. No point explaining them to her, certainly. The world inside her head is divided into Morons and people who are Not Morons, the latter being a very short list and possibly made up of fictional people.

On the topic of screaming, can certain people please stop going into yell mode as soon as drama pops up? I'm not going to name names, because only a jerk would, but then again you'd have to be some kind of Moron (whoops, I mean "person who is bad at reading into what I say and/or wasn't there") to not know I'm talking about Lyrai. Can I be bothered making fun of the irony in all that? No.

Denial is a wonderful thing, experienced by everyone every day. Tremolo denies that she has a severe attitude problem. I am constantly reminded that Tremolo never actually denied anything I said about her in my LJ. (<3) Ian probably lives in denial that he really needs to change the kind of attitude that leads to him propositioning underage girls, and Alex is probably going to deny me when I ask him to post this.

(wut? - Alex)

But then again, the kind of denial that involves putting your fingers in your ears and yelling like a patient whose doctor forgot to put in the anaesthetic before he took out the appendix because, oh shits, some drama spilled out into the channel, that's a little unnecessary. (Although it is amusing, especially when we're apparently the ones whining like we're two years old.)

The best way to solve problems, short of a study wooden plank (which doesn't work on the internet), is getting a rational dialogue going. It's not pulling a Tremolo and flipping out because your perfect imaginary world is starting to get a little frayed at the edges.

Shit happens. People can talk about said shit without pretending to be all mature and articulate and people can say things like "Has anyone ever noticed that Tremolo's time of the month is about thirty days long?" without being incoherent ramblers who should be shut up. I don't have something to prove, so I think I'll pass on the long words, impartial dialogue and patronising smiles, thanks very much."

You have operator priveleges. That doesn't mean we should have to put up with you having a borderline temper tantrum if something happens, it means you should be setting a good (that's the important word) example and showing us how to be mature without pretending to be pretentious.

Now can we please get back to the subject of permament bannings? I mean they were brought up for other people by ops for silly reasons, and now we have a good one and we have to not bring it up while people who do the internet equivalent of running around in circles sideways on the floor while hollering and flinging their favourite teddy bear about it get to talk about it in private?

No sir!

I will continue to be rational: Trem thinks that going off on the ops for stupid reasons(secret op channel means that they're lording secrets over us? Give me a fucking break. Blizzard put an officers-only guild chat mode in WoW for a reason) and shunting all of them into her Morons list is going to get her heard? Yeah, right. She doesn't even have anything to say except deluded ramblings. When she gets going she can barely form a factual sentence.

Sure, some people are still friends with - or at least tolerate - her. But that doesn't mean that the also considerable (ie, big enough to be worthy of consideration) number of people who have a problem with the harpy should be ignored.

Has anyone tried to sit her down and talk to her about it yet? This is a serious question, one which I am posing not just to Alex (who keeps interrupting me because I'm typing this into his PM window) (He's lying. - Alex) but to #megaband - or at least the portion that bothers reading this shit - in general. Seriously, sit her down and say "Hey, you want to be permabanned? No? Well TAKE SOME CHILL PILLS OR SOMETHING, GAWD!" and then hit her with a table.

These are my thoughts, and it would be neat if people could add to them.

In a rational discussion.

In #megaband.

Where 'maturity' isn't gauged by people who throw fits if they don't see enough.

- Ettin

PS: Hint hint.
PSS: This is like, four hours after, so no I'm not mad and no I don't need a lie down.

I saw a response to my last post. I must respond.

"I hate Lyrai."

*shrug*

"...She's been a pain in the ass at all times, and every time I bring up valid points, you pretty much tell me that it doesn't matter, or completely brush it aside."

As far as I know, I've only seen you bring it up twice, once to me, and once in the channel. When you brought it to me, it was in the form of asking "what criteria does Lyrai have to be an op?" And I told you what they were, then.

The second time, it was that she had brushed you off. Nobody could find any evidence of it, because nobody had any logs of it, not even you. Which becomes he-said-she-said affairs, subject to being ignored. The bit you say after that, about her ignoring people, I'll be looking for evidence on that one. You're gonna have to give me a time frame, though, otherwise there's not much point in trying to prove it. Nobody's going to sift through mega-logs looking for that.

"Case in point being Luminar's Itembox script...(description of what happened with that follows)"

As for the script thing...I'm rather indecisive on that. It WAS fun. Though, at the same time, much like any spammy stuff happening at an otherwise quiet time, because nobody's really conversing, or because those that might have had something to say saw it and decided not to say anything because of what was going on. To me, just about all scripts are good, but in small doses.

But that's a side note to what else was going on with it, and really not relevant. In any case, I'm gonna look into that bit too.

As for the whole list of things happening on WoW, I might have something to say to you directly about that. It occurs to me that sort of thing doesn't belong in here, because it's not in my jurisdiction.

And as for the multiple complaints, it's usually personal(non-policy-related) complaints from people who are no slouch at starting stuff themselves. Sai's about the only person on that list of yours who hasn't. Hell, even they know that. Not liking a person personally is not a grounds for any real action.

Which brings me to Feroce.(As to why, I'll leave that silent.) I will say that I wasn't for it at all, and that I knew it wouldn't go very far. I'm glad it didn't, because it would be a very dangerous precedent to set.

"...I assume that shortly after the ops notice this, I'll be banned for speaking against Lyrai again..."

Hey, hey, whoa there, Mr. Martyr, slow down a bit. :P

In reality, this is the kind of thing I would like to see more often; specifically, actual constructive arguments. As opposed to the snide, useless remark that got me to say what I said in the last post. Granted, I had to sift through a lot of personal issues that don't relate, but it still gave me leads I could follow on. Why the hell would I ban you for that? And even better, you didn't start this up while I was asking for ideas on how to change the rules! Excelsior.

*Serious Lack of Creativity Detected.*

So I was moving through the comments on some of the posts, when I came across "Another Fanatic." It struck me that since the comment Ettin made was pretty much the point of that post, that I ought to move the post itself up to the comment. Which I did. And then I looked at the later comments.

Anonymous said...
And then Ettin started getting blowjobs too.

It was posted before I responded, and I'm not entirely sure whether it was an intended burn or not, so I'm going to treat it like it wasnt and say that whoever posted without putting their name in was being pretty cowardly.

In other news, I was around for some of the debate last night, and got records of much of the rest.
I should note that I already said something about this line of conversation, and when I said it, I meant it. That said, I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt and grant a reprieve on the warning I mention there. This is mainly because I understand it's entirely possible I wasn't clear enough in the last post. So I'll make things a little clearer now.

This is about the rules. This is not about the ops.

Just like it has been stated before, if you have a problem with an op, you take it to that op first, and you log the conversation. If you don't have a log, you don't have a case. Failing that, you come to one of the other ops. If it happens to be a personal issue, and not pertaining to that op's actual policy, it will go in the circular file.

The warning is now, as of this post, back in effect. Don't be surprised if you get banned, because you know it's coming if you do it.

...as a side note, I think Ettin's analogy was weird too.