Yes, it is a little historical revisionism. But let's spell it out. I CAN confirm this all in another two threads on here.
Many years ago on AFF Amy and Gareth got busy in real life stuff and left the forum. They left the place to the rest of us on the forum. The mods like Evil Zakkie and our beloved CBC had limited powers and were not Admins. They could not ban but as I remember could delete and edit posts.
There were a few people who generally countered trolls and people that would seek to harm the people or culture there whilst the Admins were asleep at the wheel. Max the Bear was one and so was yours truly.
The forum built up and went from strength to strength over the next couple of years it became a hub of activism and support and had a layered culture. Sounds great right?
Then Amy and Gareth barged in and Amy insinuated herself in the thick of things and start pushing her odious personality on things. She insulted people and what they were up to and told us what to stop and what to concentrate on and had no clue who was who and what. She started barking orders and giving warnings. The people revolted.
Some organised very indirect protests such as logging off for a day or so and some changed their avatar to one with a gag on it. (We are looking at about 50 members to give you an indication of the size of this). I was asked but decided to do what I normally do and go to the source and did. I went in hard on her for all the shit she was causing.
She banned me and about 7 others and that 50 left. Then she went through and "sanitised the board" and edited it and for her coup de grace she publicly blamed me for organising the protests.
One banned member came back onto the board soon afterwards and through no little work and generousity of spirit graduated his standing. He became an Admin and was well regarded by Gareth. Amy treated him in general with disdain and sometimes actively worked against him. The work Pikajedi did on the forum was solid and his ability to dance and sidestep around Amy's bullshit was masterful.
He recognised pretty quickly who I was when I came back and realising too that it was bullshit for me getting shitcanned, allowed me on as he had been allowed on by Gareth.
Amy had been off and Pikajedi was mainly running the show and with Gareth piping in occasionally. Amy did frequent the chat but was not that interested interacting. Things were pretty okay. The once great AFF had never really recovered from the heights of maybe 60-65 active and contributing members before the purge, but it had built up a little and such.
Then in comes Amy. She starts throwing her weight around and doing the same sort of shit she did years before. Most people (unlike previously) were cowed, I was not. I pointed out every instance of her stupidity and dishonesty and why it was so. She did not like that. She banned me.
The next day everyone revolted and asked why she banned me and demanded me back. She threw a hissy fit and closed the forum.
THAT is the historical truth behind it and it is evidenced on here.
http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,19145.0.htmlhttp://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,21384.0.htmlSo Odeon was misrepresenting the situation but that is Odeon all over.
However, there are some similarities. I have mentioned already the Odeon and Amy similarity and the Pyraxis and Pikajedi similarity BUT the big one for me I think really needs unscoring:
If you are going to be an Admin then be an Admin. If you are going to be a member, be a member. If you are wanting to be an Admin but behave as a member, you do not get to leverage your Admin power over your member behavior. If you interact as a member and run into a member issue or member personality clash you do not then deal with that issue through the Admin panel.
We recognise this kind of behaviour in other situations and it is abhorrent.
For example:
a) If you are hired as a worker BUT you use the authority that your parent owns the workplace or is the workplace's funding source to slack off or do a subpar job because you can threat the wrath of your parent on the work if they give you a hard time.
b) Engaging in a game of skill or sporting endevour with your friend BUT with the implicit threat that IF they beat you, you will pack up your toys and go home.
c) Any standover tactic where a beating will apply if you do not contain your results.
We know that behaviour. It is slimy.
I am unmoved by Odeon's authoratative demands and happy to respond on this thread. I will not seek him out elsewhere but happy to reply to his obnoxious, pompous, dishonest, authorative, self-righteous, bloviating, indignation here. I do not do meek well and I will be damned if I will put up with his dishonesty and insults.
Odeon says "Al has a choice". Odeon has choices and hiatus or not, he was never the victim in our feud, any more than I was. He elevates my conduct well above its station to say it is all on me.
was it something I said?