Calandale's turn in the spotlight

[Calandale]

I wasn't suggesting that the list should have been made public, but it seems off that its very exsistence was kept secret- I do believe there was no malicious thinking behind keeping it a secret, but the fact that it didn't occur to staff to anounce it to the membership is worrying.  Not least because, as cal points out, how could anyone who didn't happen to be friendly with an admin get their name on the list, but also because it makes you wonder what else it isn't occuring to staff members to mention.  Obviously this isn't much of an issue, being married to a staff member I trust 100%  , but you must see that it may cause concern for other members. Perhaps it was just overlooked because people were tired of all the drama

The list's existence was not kept secret for very long at all, Purposeful Insanity, maybe for a week or two while we were discussing it and figuring out what would happen with people who were on it.  Its existence is public now.   

The ONLY reason it's existence was made public, at all,
was my revealing its existence. Every time I suggested
such, in the secret discussions, it was ignored. And there
STILL is no thread about it. So, new members will only find
out, if we keep bringing it up, in arguments.

[Callaway]

I wasn't suggesting that the list should have been made public, but it seems off that its very exsistence was kept secret- I do believe there was no malicious thinking behind keeping it a secret, but the fact that it didn't occur to staff to anounce it to the membership is worrying.  Not least because, as cal points out, how could anyone who didn't happen to be friendly with an admin get their name on the list, but also because it makes you wonder what else it isn't occuring to staff members to mention.  Obviously this isn't much of an issue, being married to a staff member I trust 100%  , but you must see that it may cause concern for other members. Perhaps it was just overlooked because people were tired of all the drama

The list's existence was not kept secret for very long at all, Purposeful Insanity, maybe for a week or two while we were discussing it and figuring out what would happen with people who were on it.  Its existence is public now.   

The ONLY reason it's existence was made public, at all,
was my revealing its existence. Every time I suggested
such, in the secret discussions, it was ignored. And there
STILL is no thread about it. So, new members will only find
out, if we keep bringing it up, in arguments.

It is still unclear whether future admins would honor such a list, since it was only a gentleman's agreement not to prank the people on the list.  If someone starts such a thread saying that everyone who PMs an admin asking to be placed on the list will not be pranked, they may have only placed their names on a private Kick Me list for certain admins.  Given Hadron's statements about it, I think that he would definitely prank them if he were an admin and he would tell them to go to WP if they didn't like it.

I guess that we could start a poll about it.  However, even if we vote and the majority of members say that they think our staff should honor such a list, it is still a gentleman's agreement.  I can't imagine that the majority would vote that an admin who pranked someone who was on the Admin's Don't Prank list should be de-adminned, which is what I think you suggested.

[Calandale]

It is still unclear whether future admins would honor such a list, since it was only a gentleman's agreement not to prank the people on the list.  If someone starts such a thread saying that everyone who PMs an admin asking to be placed on the list will not be pranked, they may have only placed their names on a private Kick Me list for certain admins.  Given Hadron's statements about it, I think that he would definitely prank them if he were an admin and he would tell them to go to WP if they didn't like it.

Hmm...the list could be hidden, until and unless
the webmonkeys feel that it's a safe thing. I mean,
the list is there anyhow. Any admin who sees it might
well react the same way. Just stating its existence, and
spelling that proviso out, seems the best solution, to me.
The damned thing ONLY serves a purpose for those whom the
admins feel are in danger, as is (well, other than the fact that I
keep bringing it up - like the same old record - but it would be
buried otherwise, no?).

I guess that we could start a poll about it.  However, even if we vote and the majority of members say that they think our staff should honor such a list, it is still a gentleman's agreement.  I can't imagine that the majority would vote that an admin who pranked someone who was on the Admin's Don't Prank list should be de-adminned, which is what I think you suggested.

No point in the poll without such a penalty. Which is why I suggested it.
Doesn't mean that I support the idea (I really don't know about such compromise
solutions), but it seems the only way to ensure that it's heeded.

[odeon]

Excuse me, but this is not what I said. If Hadron had wished to be on the no pranks list, I would have included him, and respected his decision. However, considering his words and actions then, the thought never crossed my mind.

Again, that's exactly what I'm accusing you of. Those who
didn't "cross your mind" knew nothing of it.

Hadron participated in the pranks, and was the one to encourage members (me, for example) to be "good sports" about it. I had no reason to believe he would want to be on that list. What, exactly, are you implying?

Or is this just another case of moving the goalposts a little, in order to keep the discussion alive and to feed your narcissism?

[Calandale]

Excuse me, but this is not what I said. If Hadron had wished to be on the no pranks list, I would have included him, and respected his decision. However, considering his words and actions then, the thought never crossed my mind.

Again, that's exactly what I'm accusing you of. Those who
didn't "cross your mind" knew nothing of it.

Hadron participated in the pranks, and was the one to encourage members (me, for example) to be "good sports" about it. I had no reason to believe he would want to be on that list. What, exactly, are you implying?

Hadron is a good choice because you had no reason to believe
he would want to be on the list. That's exactly the point - your (and
the rest of the staff's) judgment of who should be on the list was
what counted, in the end.

Or is this just another case of moving the goalposts a little, in order to keep the discussion alive and to feed your narcissism?

Cute how you accuse me of making
unsupported statements, but have
come to using things like, "moving the goalposts a little"
as though they were facts, without ever actually
being correct. Same with the "round and round" to
be honest.

Nothing's changed. The goal is STILL to provide equity,
as much as possible. The only great shift came, when
you (and others) decided you couldn't face democracy.

[odeon]

I am VERY troubled by your apparent lack of reading comprehension. I was talking about Hadron, and only Hadron, and Hadron was participating in the pranks, and I therefore assumed that he wouldn't want to be on the list. Furthermore, he had full access to the admin forum at the time, and could easily have added himself to that list, had he wished to do so.

I have not talked about other members in this context. If you claim otherwise, prove it or shut up.

Cute how you attempt to extrapolate things from what I wrote, things that simply aren't there. Face it; you don't have a point, only your narcissism. If you keep on doing this, sooner or later you'll have to start doing your homework, and we know how that will end, don't we?

[Calandale]

I am VERY troubled by your apparent lack of reading comprehension. I was talking about Hadron, and only Hadron, and Hadron was participating in the pranks, and I therefore assumed that he wouldn't want to be on the list. Furthermore, he had full access to the admin forum at the time, and could easily have added himself to that list, had he wished to do so.

The list did not exist, at that time.
Dunc's thread, in the admin forum,
appeared during my tenure.

I have not talked about other members in this context. If you claim otherwise, prove it or shut up.

Hadron was merely an example, one which you showed
the exact trait I was accusing you of. Doesn't really matter
how many others you discriminated against. One is enough.

Cute how you attempt to extrapolate things from what I wrote, things that simply aren't there. Face it; you don't have a point, only your narcissism. If you keep on doing this, sooner or later you'll have to start doing your homework, and we know how that will end, don't we?

Do you intentionally do this to cover up your actions,
or do you really not see them? It takes two to argue,
and you are showing yourself just as unwilling to let this
drop as I am. It's not narcissism, but rather stubbornness,
on both our parts. The more you discuss, the more chance you
have of losing - I have nothing to risk.

[odeon]

I am VERY troubled by your apparent lack of reading comprehension. I was talking about Hadron, and only Hadron, and Hadron was participating in the pranks, and I therefore assumed that he wouldn't want to be on the list. Furthermore, he had full access to the admin forum at the time, and could easily have added himself to that list, had he wished to do so.

The list did not exist, at that time.
Dunc's thread, in the admin forum,
appeared during my tenure.

Looks like you're right. Just checked. Still, it doesn't change the reason to why I saw no reason to consider including Hadron. He approved of the pranks, and participated in them.

I have not talked about other members in this context. If you claim otherwise, prove it or shut up.

Hadron was merely an example, one which you showed
the exact trait I was accusing you of. Doesn't really matter
how many others you discriminated against. One is enough.

Discrimination against a person who approved of the pranks, by not including him on the no pranks list? That's a stretch, even for you. You're full of it, Cal, and you know it. Or should know because I don't consider you THAT stupid.

Cute how you attempt to extrapolate things from what I wrote, things that simply aren't there. Face it; you don't have a point, only your narcissism. If you keep on doing this, sooner or later you'll have to start doing your homework, and we know how that will end, don't we?

Do you intentionally do this to cover up your actions,
or do you really not see them? It takes two to argue,
and you are showing yourself just as unwilling to let this
drop as I am. It's not narcissism, but rather stubbornness,
on both our parts. The more you discuss, the more chance you
have of losing - I have nothing to risk.

Yes, exposing your lies doesn't bother you much since you're fine for as long the focus remains on you.

As for losing, against you and your unwillingness to prove anything? Oh please.

[Calandale]

Looks like you're right. Just checked. Still, it doesn't change the reason to why I saw no reason to consider including Hadron. He approved of the pranks, and participated in them.

I fully understand your reasons. Doesn't mean that
the existence of the list shouldn't be made available,
EVEN to those you couldn't imagine not wanting to
be on it.

Discrimination against a person who approved of the pranks, by not including him on the no pranks list? That's a stretch, even for you. You're full of it, Cal, and you know it. Or should know because I don't consider you THAT stupid.

Not at all. You aren't he. Neither of us can truly understand
what another person's feelings would be. I think I'm going
to start a poll, to see just how many were indeed contacted.
Not that that's conclusive, but more than a couple of no's would
indicate that this is a pretty extensive issue, I think.

Yes, exposing your lies doesn't bother you much since you're fine for as long the focus remains on you.

No lies. And the focus is not just on me,
but also on the issue. I can get attention
in other ways - and more positive attention.
This is not mere narcissism.

As for losing, against you and your unwillingness to prove anything? Oh please.

You'll continue to prove it for me.

[odeon]

You *obviously* don't understand my reasons since you wrote

Hadron was merely an example, one which you showed
the exact trait I was accusing you of. Doesn't really matter
how many others you discriminated against. One is enough.

This just isn't true, and you repeatedly twisting what I say (or what others say) won't make it true.

This is not mere narcissism.

No, it's also about feeding your obsessions.

[Calandale]

You *obviously* don't understand my reasons since you wrote

Hadron was merely an example, one which you showed
the exact trait I was accusing you of. Doesn't really matter
how many others you discriminated against. One is enough.

This just isn't true, and you repeatedly twisting what I say (or what others say) won't make it true.

Not twisting ANYTHING. You just are too close to the issue
to see that not asking one person, while asking others, about
a secret list, is a form of discrimination. Or, is your TOM so good
that you are a mindreader?

This is not mere narcissism.

No, it's also about feeding your obsessions.

Indeed. Fairness is of utmost importance to me.
I'm sorry that it bores and irritates you.

[Soph]

when do you start your new job?

[Calandale]

when do you start your new job?

Officially, on the 25th. Though I am supposed to be
at a meeting on the 22nd. I might blow that off.

[Soph]

that is the day after my mental health assessment thingie

[Calandale]

The 25th is a monday, no?