# Furaffinity Admins



## Calorath (Jan 20, 2007)

I've been noticing a trend, a very disturbing one.  The Furaffinity administrators have been selectively removing threads and single posts.  In some instances I can understand, but lately, it seems they're removing anything that they don't like to see.

In particular one user was merely describing the functionality of the way this site and others like it behave. If anything I thought it might be informative to the rest of us in gaining an understanding of recent setbacks, slowdowns and bottleneckings. 

I wish I had a copy of the post. I'm beginning to become rather.... worried, about motives, procedures and intentions.  I don't like seeing those in a position of power 'hide' or selectively remove things... It's dirty.

I'm not trying to insight a fight, nor gain a ban myself. But I think answers are deserved.

I'm cross posting this to the forums, my live journal, and the site.


----------



## yak (Jan 20, 2007)

Probably for the first time in forever, i agree with you, Calorath.


----------



## Pinkuh (Jan 20, 2007)

It was me that removed the post... go ahead, make a big stink about it, I knew someone would.

I removed that post because the user in question was hard banned from the site. His words have no power here. You can fuss over it all you want, but a banned user has no say over were Furaffinity is going.


----------



## Alchera (Jan 20, 2007)

First Calorath, and now Yak is concerned too. I saw this on your FA Journal, Cal and came here to see what else has been said. Like you both, now I want to know what's going on since two people now confirm this is happening. From what I'm hearing this is affecting more than just banned users.


----------



## dave hyena (Jan 20, 2007)

I can see the logic behind deleting nrr's post in that thread and banning him from the forums.

On the other hand, Could it be that he doesn't have a say in the same way that another user might have, since the FA staff all know his history and will look at what he says and does with that in mind? 

The post itself, from what I saw didn't seem to be that bad and I actually found it informative about how websites like this work.

If it was misleading, I think it would be better for someone to just say: "no it's wrong because..." and thus defuse it.

On the other hand, If it was useful, Is allowing him to stay around on the forums and thus potentially be of some use thereby a bad thing?

He is banned from the main site, and there is no reason why allowing him on the forums should change that is there? 

Of course, I will temper what I say here with the fact that I am only commenting on what I personally know about this issue and might not know the full story behind: If there are security issues etc.


----------



## Surgat (Jan 20, 2007)

Pinkuh said:
			
		

> It was me that removed the post... go ahead, make a big stink about it, I knew someone would.
> 
> I removed that post because the user in question was hard banned from the site. His words have no power here. You can fuss over it all you want, but a banned user has no say over were Furaffinity is going.



So what if he was banned? It still makes no sense to delete a post that "might be informative to the rest of us in gaining an understanding of recent setbacks, slowdowns and bottleneckings." Posts like that are _good things_.


----------



## ArrowTibbs (Jan 20, 2007)

If he was banned from the site universally he ought not to have been able to post period. As it was, his username did not, at the time, show up in red to indicate a ban. 

Either be consistant and follow through with a sitewide ban by actually banning everywhere or leave it alone. And Jesus, consult your fellows once in a while, because it looks like you've been neglecting to do that. Just because you have the almighty power of deletion and banning doesn't mean you must use it at every instance where someone you don't like posts. 

Did you ever think that maybe someone on the tech team would find it useful, despite whose words they were? No. You just got passionately angry and did it out of spite. Take some of my advice and go take a walk if you are that fired up, you will make more level headed decisions and people won't try to jump up your ass as much. Or take a break from administratorship. I know it did me a lot of good, I don't feel pressured to do things or stay quiet when I don't like what's going on. It's kind of nice.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 20, 2007)

I'm really really, REALLY getting tired of this. It's like I want to help the site, but then the admins behave in such a manner I get turned off. 

Even DA separates forum bans from site ones.

He had an informative post, and you know what is worse? As a user that's probably THE MOST information someone had to give on the status of the site that wasn't lip service, it was honest and forthcoming. The guy doesn't even work on your site and delivered a better answer.

Nrr is in no way perfect and there were some actions he did that I disagreed with, but I hardly see how someone who uses another language deserves continual punishment over a minor issue.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 20, 2007)

(just back forum-side... had to dash away IRL for a bit)

Heyas, qgr,



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> I've been noticing a trend, a very disturbing one.  The Furaffinity administrators have been selectively removing threads and single posts.  In some instances I can understand, but lately, it seems they're removing anything that they don't like to see.



"Anything"? Definitely not so... Neither on a community basis, nor from an individual p.o.v.

Anyhow; threads degenerating into community members bashing others pointlessly are far more likely to be deported than any comments on site performance which require explanation.



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> In particular one user was merely describing the functionality of the way this site and others like it behave. If anything I thought it might be informative to the rest of us in gaining an understanding of recent setbacks, slowdowns and bottleneckings.



I don't have a copy of the original post, either. (ed. Since I take 45 minutes to finish typing a note/catch up with stuff, that's a nod to Surgat).

Had flagged that before heading off to work yesterday, since I did not have time to pick that up and it would have benefited from a tech-side response (there were good points, regardless of any suppositions being made), plus a query to see whether the understanding was that nrr had been banned from the entire site, or not. Personally, I thought that he was owing to previous attacks on community members, and thus the forum ban would have been an administrative oversight.



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> I'm not trying to insight a fight, nor gain a ban myself. But I think answers are deserved.
> 
> I'm cross posting this to the forums, my live journal, and the site.



Heh. You're about as likely to get banned as Strider (i.e. approximately zero chance if constructive discussion > drama).

If you have any other observations re. specific instances in that "disturbing trend", please fire them over. I'm well aware that inevitably we aren't perfect in all regards, both on an individual basis and as a group, and it helps to keep such discussion in the open without drama or egos.

Thanks for the post,
David.


----------



## Calorath (Jan 20, 2007)

Pinkuh said:
			
		

> It was me that removed the post... go ahead, make a big stink about it, I knew someone would.
> 
> I removed that post because the user in question was hard banned from the site. His words have no power here. You can fuss over it all you want, but a banned user has no say over were Furaffinity is going.



And this is the tone/platform that is setting the pace for the site's future development?


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 20, 2007)

(posted at 14.03 EST, above #9, then deleted by Surgat, not administration... I caught a copy whilst previewing my reply)

Have added in a "quote" for the original text from Nathaniel. That's pretty much as I remember and stated to be cut-paste...

d.



			
				surgat said:
			
		

> Well, since I'm not Nrr, maybe I can get away with saying it:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 20, 2007)

Pomander said:
			
		

> So that informative post is what resulted in a forums ban for nrr?



Not as far as I'm aware.
Per my reply, I queried whether he was actually banned from the entire site for his previous actions against community members. No "vendetta", afaik.



			
				Pomander said:
			
		

> As for his behavior on the forums, though it isn't the easiest pill for more sensitive users to swallow, I think there are far more offensive people that are either managing to hang around still or decided to be done with this place. I like to think of nrr as a stumpy code veteran -- he's sitting here on the side of FA, and inbetween war flashbacks, he's waving his stump at us young'uns and giving advice that won't make sense until some distant time in the future. >:V



Regrettably any insight that someone might have is going to be lost if they choose to be banned for sustained attacks on the community and refusing to back down on those. (The key item in this case being on the mainsite, not the forums or IRC).


----------



## dave hyena (Jan 20, 2007)

Pomander said:
			
		

> Haha, oh yeah, I forgot about the mainsite adventures. :V



I distinctively remember a thread where he demanded to be banned (or perhaps dared people to ban him), I think it was just after or concurrently with his attacks on the main site.

I suppose his wish has now been granted.

I can't find the thread now, or else it's been deleted though.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 20, 2007)

Pomander said:
			
		

> I don't recall it being of that malicious of a nature, though a bot was involved, IIRC. As for the thread you've mentioned, it sounds quite familiar.



The entire site performance was degraded slightly for two hours, considerably for four hours, then a total outage of 4 1/2 hours.





All of that will be wrapped-up in the community mindset as "poor performance from FA" and contribute to any negative outlook on that score, regardless of what/who the root cause actually was.

Add to that the est. 40-100 hours admin/tech side which would have been better dealing with /positive/ matters, albeit some of those relate to measures that are of benefit longer-term. The admin effort and impact to the community would have been considerably less had we simply banned him asap at the start of that episode rather than trying to appeal to "common sense"; but that would, of course, have left us open to charges of victimising users. No win?
As it was, no-one supported the position that his eventual ban was not justified and any current action does not rewrite that history.



			
				Pomander said:
			
		

> It doesn't negate the fact, though, that a rather informative post was removed for no real good reason that I can discern. Are ALL his comments on the forums going to be removed just because he is? Doubtful.



Correct. Nathaniel is not "erased" and there's nothing we can do to stop him reading these posts and being a further thorn in the community's flesh _if_ he wishes to be so. nrr's post that was deleted twice (once by Pinkuh, once by Surgat) has now been re-posted by myself, above.

I'd've been a lot happier if he'd been able to contribute more, but the impression is certainly that he chose to destroy rather than have to live with the frustration of not being able to get his hands personally on the code/server. Regardless of any "justification", that is not the action of someone who is "trustworthy".
If Nathaniel disagrees with that, he will ask someone to post otherwise.

All comments 02c only, as usual,
David.


----------



## Calorath (Jan 20, 2007)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> (posted at 14.03 EST, above #9, then deleted by Surgat, not administration... I caught a copy whilst previewing my reply)
> 
> Have added in a "quote" for the original text from Nathaniel. That's pretty much as I remember and stated to be cut-paste...
> 
> ...



David, it is being relayed to me, by nrr, that he'd appreciate you removing a copy of his words in this thread. I believe that he feels if the words aren't good enough coming from him, then it's not right that someone else should be able to re-post it and gain from his knowledge without him directly being able to contribute.

Thanks.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 20, 2007)

Yes, I remember him asking to be banned and the response was "you are more useful to us unbanned" meaning that he was actually showing exploits that could be fixed. I suppose a non scripter doesn't understand this, but many coders and programmers get upset at hacks because upper management bitches about it. The coders see it as a challenge, until it proves to be a pain in the neck in their personal lives.

So if you weren't going to ban him back then, then suddenly ban him now for posting something informative, it does look nothing short than a personal vendetta.

Have fun with damage control again.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 20, 2007)

Calorath said:
			
		

> David, it is being relayed to me, by nrr, that he'd appreciate you removing a copy of his words in this thread. I believe that he feels if the words aren't good enough coming from him, then it's not right that someone else should be able to re-post it and gain from his knowledge without him directly being able to contribute.
> 
> Thanks.



Thanks for the relayed message.

At any point before Surgat and I reposted his words, Nathaniel could easily have dropped a message to say "fine, if they want to delete my post, I'll have nothing more to do with them (after all, I asked to be banned in the first place and was banned/IP blocked from the rest of the site)".
Instead, the presumption was allowed to continue that the content of his post was what was objectionable and that deleting such "objectionable posts" was a "big issue". Not so: hence my repost as soon as Surgat provided the text, then deleted it without notice (potentially causing further drama if it appeared as though someone from admin side had removed that again).

To repeat, there was no ban whatsoever simply for "posting something informative" and such speculation is unfounded.

He has been free to ask anyone else to make a post on his behalf to query FA's performance constructively, but appears only to be happy when he can have his "name in lights" for doing so rather than acting in the best interests of the community as a whole in a selfless manner.
Hence his request to delete his own words, I presume, since he can no longer reply "personally". No problem. Removed, above, although such constructive discussion is still welcome, even if time to reply is often lacking.

Nathaniel has my contact details yet, as usual (and as was the case toward the end of his attack on the community), has point-blank refused to contact further to discuss this.

Best wishes,
David.


----------



## lolcox (Jan 20, 2007)

<insert hateboner here>


:-/
And of course, I find it odd that I also agree with Calorath.

But I won't go into it here.


----------



## Infinity (Jan 20, 2007)

Furry drama, serious business.

Seriously though. Why are getting all bent out of shape for one decision of a banning of this user? We know it's a mistake, so why dwell upon it?

There are numerous times that one could easily criticize the admins. I am certainly most displeased with some of the decisions here. I know we have to suck it up a bit, but let me know when a leader pleases everyone and offends no one. It's just impossible to not make a mistake here and there, it's human nature (lol, mundane).


----------



## Calorath (Jan 20, 2007)

lolcox said:
			
		

> <insert hateboner here>
> 
> 
> :-/
> ...



What the hell is so wrong with agreeing with me?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 20, 2007)

He was banned when he was posting again. Unfounded is rather silly.


----------



## WHPellic (Jan 20, 2007)

And the vicious cycle continues....


----------



## Litre (Jan 21, 2007)

who wants to join me for some drinks and fun in the local bar?!


----------



## Caution_Cat (Jan 21, 2007)

Lulz           :B


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 21, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> So if you weren't going to ban him back then, then *suddenly* ban him now *for posting something informative*, it does look nothing short than a personal vendetta.


_(emphasis mine; and as replied to)_



			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> He was banned when he was posting again. Unfounded is rather silly.



Feel free to continue to be argumentative and change your words to suit your needs, Arshes.

Just because Nathaniel was banned when he was posting again does not mean that he was banned because he was "posting something informative". 
He could have posted *anything* and he would still have been banned because the act of posting would have uncovered that an administrative error had been made in what was understood to have been a comprehensive ban.

Your "personal vendetta" theory appears to appeal to the apparently disproportionate response to a "helpful" note from him. If that's not the case, please state how you are making such an implication because that is a serious accusation and requires to be addressed in a serious manner.

Thanks,
David.


----------



## Litre (Jan 21, 2007)

And I bet that post was also just your personal two cents, eh?


----------



## wut (Jan 21, 2007)

Calorath said:
			
		

> lolcox said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It is not generally a doog idea to agree with you.


----------



## Litre (Jan 21, 2007)

wut said:
			
		

> Calorath said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



8)


----------



## dave hyena (Jan 21, 2007)

I do not know everything involved, so what I say may be inaccurate in some respects blah blah etc.

But from what I remember and saw of the incident, nrr wrote a comment bot. He was asked to keep it under his hat for the moment since the current version of FA is/was maintence only. 

However, he then posted (what I assume was) the comment bot code on his journal and on the forums (http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/66639/). He was asked to remove them and did. But then he went away and started running the comment bot thereby causing severe slowdown and eventually bringing down FA for several hours. 

Some of the staff tried to communicate with him to ask him to stop the attacks, but he either did not respond or refused to stop. About the same time as the attack, he also posted on the forum and demanded to be banned. 

He was banned from the main site for attacking it and presumably his forums account was forgotten in all the problems he caused, only to be remembered when he started posting again. (and if you look at his posting history, he stopped posting on dec. 21st: http://www.furaffinityforums.net/search.php?action=results&sid=b0fe05376ee7647191ddff893cdadcad)

Marry, 'tis a wicked thing he did: He had alerted the staff to the problem, so they did know and if anyone did try anything (as nrr then did) they could close it. But otherwise it would make more sense to put the time and effort into the ferrox upgrade (e.g to plug the hole in that, or maybe it wasn't in it in the first place).

However by attacking FA with the comment bot, nrr blew up an issue that the staff were aware of into something which brought down FA for a few hours and required a lot of time and effort which could have been devoted to the upgrade. 

If anyone had a vendetta going, 'twas surely him. 

So maybe he got frustrated with FA, but then attacking it is the action of the man who smashes and breaks his rubiks cube instead of trying to solve it.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 21, 2007)

Selective memory from admins: key words being "unbanned"

http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=5278


I do find it ironic that you've let Rouge2 have a ton of warnings, yet want to try to play "administrative error" in nrr's case when posts reveal something different.

Like I said, keep playing damage control, because the users who were watching were more aware of what happened.

The fact remains, if you wanted him banned, fine you should have done it right then. You had someone publicly state that he was more useful UNBANNED even with the posting of that script.

You also didn't just ban the user, you deleted his post, making it look a lot worse, than the claim of "we forgot to ban him here".

If you want to keep stating stuff like this and offer excuses for less knowledgeable users, I suppose that is fine, but you are actually just making me more disgusted with you guys.


----------



## dave hyena (Jan 21, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> You had someone publicly state that he was more useful UNBANNED even with the posting of that script.



Perhaps people changed their minds after he brought down the site by *running* the script.

Also, How do we know that it was "the admins" who said to say that nrr was more useful unbanned? One person said that, but they did not say that they spoke for the whole team so maybe other members had different opinions.

Also also, nrr says in the thread you linked to: "if you'd truly like me to stop, I would suggest banning these subnets:" Therefore it is possible that the attacks were ongoing at that point and the staff were trying to communicate with him so he was not banned immediately and banning his forum account got forgotten.

Also also also, in that thread you linked to nrr says: "fix please" and then U2K responds with:

"We can take the entire community offline until there's a (relatively) comprehensive fix, or else we can expect community members to act responsibly, discuss issues and put in some less rigorous fixes.

As you're well aware everything's being done on a "time/priority permitting" basis since the current release is maintenance-only and the majority of coding resources are focused on Ferrox.
Yes, anti-flooding measures can be recycled, but resources are still limited."

& then nrr ran (was running?) his script, despite being asked to discuss matters.

So it seems to me that it is a case of smashing the rubiks cube.


----------



## Calorath (Jan 21, 2007)

Dave Hyena said:
			
		

> Arshes Nei said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think this is the site's biggest issue. They (the admins) are unable to function as a team. They lack a coordination, or any semblance of leadership necessary for this site's functionality.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 21, 2007)

I agree, and this is why it's frustrating. One admin says one thing the other admin says no it's another issue.

Combine that with the admin's personal issues, it becomes a very volatile mix.


----------



## Damaratus (Jan 21, 2007)

Calorath said:
			
		

> I think this is the site's biggest issue. They (the admins) are unable to function as a team. They lack a coordination, or any semblance of leadership necessary for this site's functionality.



I think that it doesn't help when people start propagating rumor on the forums.  Take a good look at this thread.  There has been a starting rumor that for some reason the administration are going willy-nilly in terms of removing posts on the the forum.  Amazingly enough, this isn't the case.

As has been explained, the threads and posts that have been removed, were done so because they had either degraded into insults toward users,   had a better answer on the site, were redundant to other threads actually started, or were not supposed to be there in the first place (regardless of their "informative" nature).

The next is the handling of Nrr.  Once again, it has been explained that the initial comments of him "being more useful around" were not the overall opinions of the administration, nor was it a statement on behalf of the administration.  He has been dealt with, it was the ISP who contacted Uncia in terms of dealing with him on that level, and it was a collective decision on the part of the administration to have such a strong level of action taken against him, he made it clear he didn't want to be around.  Since he decided to once again show up briefly on the forums,  again he was removed, as was the overall decision of the administration and apparently what he had asked for in the first place (coordinated decision on the part of the administration, again).

Yes, there are still some bugs in coordination, but not nearly the size that is suggested.  It takes time to become cohesive, especially with various members of the staff in various parts of the world.  There will always be a small amount of disparity, but that is the same on most every site.  People have differing opinions, sometimes decisions take a little longer to make because things have to be considered in full. I can't always think of every possible situation that another administrator can decide, nor can they read my mind.  I would rather it take a slightly extended period of time to render a decision properly than make a hasty decision and have it backfire on me later.

As things stand here, it would seem that there are those who want an immediate decision and would then complain that it was made in haste and wasn't a fair decision; only to then raise a fuss when an immediate decision isn't made on something else.  It's a no-win situation when that occurs.

I would suggest that things move on, continually bringing up certain things that have happened on the forum can be helpful in terms of helping us realize what has not been explained properly, but it can also become exhaustive and not conducive to the progression of the site and discussions.  You do have the capability of asking members of the administration questions before posting up heavily opinionated content as pure fact.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 21, 2007)

Damaratus said:
			
		

> The next is the handling of Nrr.  Once again, it has been explained that the initial comments of him "being more useful around" were not the overall opinions of the administration, nor was it a statement on behalf of the administration.  *He has been dealt with, it was the ISP who contacted Uncia in terms of dealing with him on that level, and it was a collective decision on the part of the administration to have such a strong level of action taken against him, he made it clear he didn't want to be around.  Since he decided to once again show up briefly on the forums again he was removed again, as* was the overall decision of the administration and apparently what he had asked for in the first place (coordinated decision on the part of the administration, again).



I like to bold that particular statement. I like the fact the story of the ISP would contact essentially a "nobody" first. Please do not take us for idiots.

No ISP would go out and contact a person first, the rare exception is maybe some activity level on a website. However, what is the contact information for FA? A whois shows Alkora/Jheryn. Why would they contact Uncia first?

The only way this would happen is if Uncia put an inquiry or made contact with the ISP FIRST, not the other way around.

Having said that, you ban him, fine, he's banned on the website. You want to make a statement he earned a global ban from FA that's also fine. The fact is, you didn't ban him on the forums and now want to cry foul when he posts something informative AND remove the post. It still makes the administration look really bad.

The other thing is, the whole reason for his actions is actually the admins non actions on another user. This user has been reported too many times and you keep giving him warnings. I'm not going to bother justifying  nrr's actions because even I felt that was taking it too far. I will not deny a certain sense of glee however that that user got trolled when no one really does anything but treat a *23 year old MAN* with the reservations of a 12 year old.

Considering the person you banned is YOUNGER and can obviously communicate better I'm just astounded at the entire issue.


----------



## Damaratus (Jan 21, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> I like to bold that particular statement. I like the fact the story of the ISP would contact essentially a "nobody" first. Please do not take us for idiots.
> 
> No ISP would go out and contact a person first, the rare exception is maybe some activity level on a website. However, what is the contact information for FA? A whois shows Alkora/Jheryn. Why would they contact Uncia first?
> 
> The only way this would happen is if Uncia put an inquiry or made contact with the ISP FIRST, not the other way around.



Arshes, that's rumor mongering, I would suspect you know better than that.  You may jump to your own conclusions and choose not to believe the statement I made, but that means that it doesn't matter what the administration says, the result will be the same.



			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Having said that, you ban him, fine, he's banned on the website. You want to make a statement he earned a global ban from FA that's also fine. The fact is, you didn't ban him on the forums and now want to cry foul when he posts something informative AND remove the post. It still makes the administration look really bad.



As I mentioned, it wasn't the fact that the post was "informative", it shouldn't have been there and was therefore removed.  The mistake was realized, rectified and the ban was placed in full.  I don't see why you have a problem with that.



			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> The other thing is, the whole reason for his actions is actually the admins non actions on another user. This user has been reported too many times and you keep giving him warnings. I'm not going to bother justifying  nrr's actions because even I felt that was taking it too far. I will not deny a certain sense of glee however that that user got trolled when no one really does anything but treat a *23 year old MAN* with the reservations of a 12 year old.
> 
> Considering the person you banned is YOUNGER and can obviously communicate better I'm just astounded at the entire issue.



It has nothing to do with this, you seem to be creating something that has nothing to do with the thread at all.  This member you're referencing has also not committed acts against the site that have completely debilitated it.  I think that the magnitude of things are being blown out of proportion.


----------



## yak (Jan 21, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> .................
> The other thing is, the whole reason for his actions is actually the admins non actions on another user.
> .................


Excuse me, what?
Reports mean nothing if they do not have any sort of proof to back up the claim. And i remember a number of times when other admins specifically told that if these claims /were/ proven, then immediate action would follow. 
Yet nobody provided one. No proof - no action.

nrr could have used his leet internet skillz to dig up relevant information that could have been used a s proof, if he really was concearned that much, instead of deliberately choosing to be disruptive to the website and deaf to polite requests to stop this insanity.. 
An honorable thing to do, that..

With that mentality, what will stop someone, say myself under different alias, from calling /you/ *insert an ugly thing here*, then reporting you, requesting your ban?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 21, 2007)

The thread had a link of him RPing several times sexually with another underaged user. But ok, whatever. Said user replied on that thread. I guess that's not enough anymore. I give up.


----------



## yak (Jan 21, 2007)

Can you please point me to the thread that had the information you speak of? I would be interested in seeing it. 

And don't take it personal, this is just an investigation.


----------



## R5K (Jan 21, 2007)

Excuse my lack of arguments in this post, but does this discussion have anything more to do with the topic? I mean every third post is drifting more and more away, and even while discussing R2 and others is great for some major lulz from time to time, I'm unable (or maybe unwilling) to see any connections. (conspiracy, vendetta, lack of competence, lack of coordination, lack of communication, lies, others not b&... where will this stop? :lol


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 21, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> The thread had a link of him RPing several times sexually with another underaged user. But ok, whatever. Said user replied on that thread. I guess that's not enough anymore. I give up.



Erm, where?
(And no, don't say that was deleted too because every single other post in the past few days that "vanished" was deleted by the users themselves, not admin... including shadowfur's and one of your own. Any of that could have been - and was - considered by some to be part of the administrative "censoring", but it would appear that no-one bothered to check the users in question).

re. nrr: I asked explicitly for an example;
http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=5278&pid=83580#pid83580


> I'm not sure why acting as a vigilante and failing to reply to queries is deemed to be a "good idea" rather than flagging an issue with evidence.
> Or were you _presuming_ that the staff was fully aware of everything you know and choosing to ignore that?



No reply was forthcoming, either from Nathaniel directly or from the attempted contacts relayed via yourself.

-
Anyhow; aside from you "giving up" at a point when you feel you are justified, I'm still willing to list why a large number - if not the majority - of the points made above is supposition and rumor. You are still free to hype those as you wish, but sticking to facts is obviously preferred. Many other sites would have given a formal warning for far less disruption, however.
*
(And, for the record, both yourself and Calorath immediately spread the false rumor about the RAID card being incompatible with the new server without the single courtesy of checking anyone who might actually know first. 
I think that adequately encapsulates the consistently negative, negative, negative approach you are adopting - I can see barely (if at all?) a single word of "thanks for the reply" or acceptance of a positive response, merely a constant shifting to more negativity and bashing).

By all means, feedback/discussion re. any improvements that might be required/beneficial admin-side is _most_ welcome if done in a constructive manner. The thread thus far has generally failed at that, although I personally know that I'm listening to valid points, discussing those with others and giving truthful replies. 
This process should primarily be for the benefit of the community rather than airing an individual grievance, however.

=

aside: Personally (and agreed with R5K), I have no idea why this boiled down to Rouge2.
It has been repeatedly stated that if a user is causing trouble to raise the issue, actively leave them alone, reduce the drama and leave the matter to admin to deal with that rather than feeling obliged to jab at them as if that was some sort of unhealthy obsession that "justified" everything else that Nathaniel did and thus everything that occurred thereafter.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 21, 2007)

yak said:
			
		

> Can you please point me to the thread that had the information you speak of? I would be interested in seeing it.
> 
> And don't take it personal, this is just an investigation.



Sure yak, give me some time. It's a bit more difficult on a low speed connection that drops constantly. I had posted a thread that had the ED article, though I am trying to look for the one where the minor spoke up.

I was hoping the admins would have read the ED article and realized he was RPing with minors, I see this is not the case.

Nor am I taking it personally. I haven't really taken this thread personally. I'm just pointing out inconsistencies, and why I find things frustrating.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 21, 2007)

R5K said:
			
		

> Excuse my lack of arguments in this post, but does this discussion have anything more to do with the topic? I mean every third post is drifting more and more away, and even while discussing R2 and others is great for some major lulz from time to time, I'm unable (or maybe unwilling) to see any connections. (conspiracy, vendetta, lack of competence, lack of coordination, lack of communication, lies, others not b&... where will this stop? :lol



Short rundown. R2 was the page he trolled most users got tired of R2's antics, so nrr spammed the page. 
nrr was also banned from IRC for not speaking English, then he got around it, so Pinkuh kept banning him.

Pinkuh is the same admin that removed the post and banned him on the forum months later which spurned this topic.

So, it's a bit of back history why there are other points being brought up surrounding the event.

As I said in this thread if they wanted to ban him they should have kept it consistent then, not  cry about it now and especially not on the post that nrr submitted.


----------



## Pinkuh (Jan 21, 2007)

Lets not forget that nrr also spammed my page... he spammed it worse the Rouge2's which was funny... at least IMHO.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 21, 2007)

(OT)


			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> I was hoping the admins would have read the ED article and realized he was RPing with minors, I see this is not the case.



Again, _please_ state up-front what you're referring to rather than having us guess (with all the possibilities of guessing wrong). It's difficult enough to work out the bigger picture as it is...
No link there and I'd be loathe to take ED as being a definitive source of gospel truth, anyhow. _(*points to FA entry, for example*)_

http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php/DannyRose , since I still have to go-find.
Digging around, there's still a link to http://community.livejournal.com/kick_the_freak/12656.html - mariechan having a DOB stated of 1990-04-18 and thus being over 16 at that time with no indication where they live. Anything else?



			
				nrr ; per http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=5278&pid=83580#pid83580 said:
			
		

> I and several other people are very, very tired of this little pedophile running around, and he's been banned from f*cking everywhere else.  Why should FA be different and grant him a safe haven?



Independent, actual, verifiable information was what was being called for re. accusations of them being a RL pedophile. None was forthcoming despite the fact that should've been a cinch if "everyone" already knew and had banned them.


----------



## Calorath (Jan 21, 2007)

Damaratus said:
			
		

> Calorath said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Make no mistake, the purpose of this thread was not to start drama, or rumor mongering. I do believe it is time to hold the admins accountable for the deplorable condition of this site. *I'm* tired of seeing excuses, long winded explanations aimed to put out the current fire and diffuse whatever this week's situation is.

It's time to put up, or shut up guys As I told Unciaa in a private message, every 'side' is responsible at this point, you're *all* to blame.

This thread was established to put the admins under a magnifying glass. Something that I don't think many users do. In this site's case thousands of dollars have been donated in order to maintain it's (poor) functionality. I think it's time we all begin to pay more attention you *YOU* guys, and not so much attention to those who would be labeled 'troublemakers'.

Once again, I feel I must re-iterate. I am -not- trying to start drama. But I am not afraid to stand up and say the things that have been whispered outside of this public forum. (And my god, has there been a lot of it.) As I stated to Unciaa, my advice and offerings have fallen on deaf ears, and I'm not going to sit here and play the point/counterpoint game that tends to go on oh so much in threads like this. It tends to just degrade into hot tempers and hurt feelings.

I think it's time that this site's users demand to see progress, by leaps and bounds. Especially those who's wallets opened up to you all.


----------



## Calorath (Jan 21, 2007)

R5K said:
			
		

> Excuse my lack of arguments in this post, but does this discussion have anything more to do with the topic? I mean every third post is drifting more and more away, and even while discussing R2 and others is great for some major lulz from time to time, I'm unable (or maybe unwilling) to see any connections. (conspiracy, vendetta, lack of competence, lack of coordination, lack of communication, lies, others not b&... where will this stop? :lol



I couldn't agree more. This thread is about the admins, not nrr. I dislike that it is deviating from it's initial intentions.


----------



## blueroo (Jan 21, 2007)

Calorath said:
			
		

> Make no mistake, the purpose of this thread was not to start drama, or rumor mongering. I do believe it is time to hold the admins accountable for the deplorable condition of this site.



You started a thread for the explicit purpose of sucking the admins' time, and you think this will help them improve the site? I suppose it could work, but this would be the first time I've ever seen people become more productive because they were distracted from their task at hand...


----------



## AlexanderMorou (Jan 21, 2007)

Arshes Nei almost seems as if she's grasping at straws here, as if she wants something to be admitted wrong just for the sake of argument.

I wasn't around for the whole incident with nrr, but here's my opinion on what happened, based upon the scattered, highly opinionated comments throughout this topic.

The administrators, you screwed up in not banning him universally, that's your fault.  When he posted, regardless of the content, you deleted the information, in effect covering up your mistake (not saying that's the intent, but to the passive observer, it _looks_ that way.)

That's the only error I see happening here.  Granted, he wasn't supposed to be able to post, but that's your fault, not his.  Rather then deleting the message, perhaps the pertinent action would have been to 'lock' the associated topic, leaving the message intact, stating as a reply to the topic the reason for the situation as it stands.  Granted, it shows that you made a mistake, but it also prevents crap like this where people flip out because of deleted data.  

In my personal opinion, deletion is a power that should only be used in archiving, many sites I've visited often deny normal users the right to delete their posts, because it's just too powerful and rarely used as its intended to be.  For the preservation of data integrity, Administrators shouldn't delete things that might be considered an eyesore.  There are often many options that can be taken as an alternative, warnings leading to banishment, splitting the thread, taking the parts that aren't pertinent or helpful to the topic and placing them elsewhere (if the forum software supports it), or locking the topic in question if it ends up being a problem.

The alternatives keeps people from saying that you're hiding things, because deletion in most cases removes the ability to undo, other actions that can be performed usually have inverse functions that compliment them.

To close, it looks like Arshes Nei is grasping at straws, because she only now brought this up, when her previous statements were countered.  Come on, if you have a point, make it first, dragging it out and trying to make others look bad, only shows you're immature.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 21, 2007)

Calorath said:
			
		

> Make no mistake, the purpose of this thread was not to start drama, or rumor mongering. I do believe it is time to hold the admins accountable for the deplorable condition of this site.



You could have added some sort of feedback to your post or in private less than two weeks ago in that case, rather than sitting on those personal viewpoints and letting them fester. None of us is the "community", after all.
From what you stated in your PM, your contact admin-side was with Dragoneer since I have never heard from you on such matters. Just seen the odd post such as;

http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=5629&pid=94301#pid94301


			
				Calorath ; 7th January said:
			
		

> On behalf of everyone's that donated and everyone else that uses this site reguarly, I'm looking forward to seeing progress and improvement!
> 
> Godspeed.
> 
> 8)



_*nods and agreed*_



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> Once again, I feel I must re-iterate. I am -not- trying to start drama. But I am not afraid to stand up and say the things that have been whispered outside of this public forum. (And my god, has there been a lot of it.)



Whispering is hardly "good practice", either. And neither is combining that with blatent rumormongering of false information and posting that in public such as that regarding the hardware for the server (as mentioned above, to which you did not reply).



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> As I stated to Unciaa, my advice and offerings have fallen on deaf ears, and I'm not going to sit here and play the point/counterpoint game that tends to go on oh so much in threads like this. It tends to just degrade into hot tempers and hurt feelings.
> 
> I think it's time that this site's users demand to see progress, by leaps and bounds. Especially those who's wallets opened up to you all.



Agreed again re. progress - rather than playing host to drama-_worthy_, time-consuming threads and cross-posting those everywhere before there's any chance to address particular issues that may be only part-factual (such as other users actually deleting their own posts rather than admins censoring those).
The only other thread you noted (re. the domain name renewal) was merely tidied up and filed for reference after that was fully resolved. There was no long-term issue there nor anything personal in that and apologies if you took it that way.

No, I don't think that those who have opened up their wallets should be able to demand special treatment. Nor, having funded FA to the tune of over $2,000 since it started, would I expect any such.
The best interests of the community _as a whole_ are the focus and there are a large number of people currently on the mainsite happy enough to use what we have at present. The situation is still not ideal and I am not blind to that.

Best wishes,
David.

p.s. I'm not Unciaa, btw.


----------



## yak (Jan 21, 2007)

blueroo said:
			
		

> Calorath said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Calorath (Jan 21, 2007)

blueroo said:
			
		

> Calorath said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Nyet. I started this thread because I chose to speak my mind. This is a forum, the fact that the admins feel they must constantly monitor and do 'crowd control' here rather than focusing on their main objective is a gross mistake in my opinion. This is a place to *talk* for the users to convey points, ideas and concerns. The sheer fact that my post alone seems to have gained the attention of no less than 4 admins in the past couple days seems to lend to that speculation. Shouldn't your main priority be the site, and not this stupid forum?

I have every right to address my concerns in public. And I have, and I shall continue to do so. That's fine if you disagree with me. But don't get your feelings hurt... it's nothing personal.


----------



## Litre (Jan 21, 2007)

Hey about you all of you shut up, k?

jesus.


----------



## Lt_Havoc (Jan 21, 2007)

I guess we need better admins, I think I know the right person for that job:Â Â


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 21, 2007)

AlexanderMorou said:
			
		

> The administrators, you screwed up in not banning him universally, that's your fault.  When he posted, regardless of the content, you deleted the information, in effect covering up your mistake (not saying that's the intent, but to the passive observer, it _looks_ that way.)



Yes, and yes again. No problems with that.

As I wrote on my first reply;


			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Had flagged that before heading off to work yesterday, since I did not have time to pick that up and it would have benefited from a tech-side response (there were good points, regardless of any suppositions being made), plus a query to see whether the understanding was that nrr had been banned from the entire site, or not. Personally, I thought that he was owing to previous attacks on community members, and thus the forum ban would have been an administrative oversight.





			
				AlexanderMorou said:
			
		

> That's the only error I see happening here.  Granted, he wasn't supposed to be able to post, but that's your fault, not his. Rather then deleting the message, perhaps the pertinent action would have been to 'lock' the associated topic, leaving the message intact, stating as a reply to the topic the reason for the situation as it stands.


_*nods*_. Even if not a lock...

Ideally, since there was no "imminent danger to the site" (i.e. not a code segment that could be used to bring down FA as that user had previously posted), the post could have been left as-was and dealt with in public whilst banning issues were discussed.
There would almost inevitably still been drama about why a user was "banned for merely making an informative post", of course, but that _should_ have been lessened.

The handling in this case was not ideal, but like any such one-off that cannot be "undone" owing to the limitations of the forum software.
I wished to make it clear that there was no censoring of the information that was posted by reposting that on the thread as soon as it was available, but the original poster requested its removal.



			
				AlexanderMorou said:
			
		

> In my personal opinion, deletion is a power that should only be used in archiving, many sites I've visited often deny normal users the right to delete their posts, because it's just too powerful and rarely used as its intended to be.



I made that suggestion to Calorath in my most recent PM.
i.e. That the perception of other people's posts "vanishing" was largely due to the users themselves deleting those posts and not administrative "censoring". From a list of names I checked following suggestions (most notably shadowfur) for the past few days, every other post (of several dozen) barring nrr's was deleted by the original poster at their own volition.

Anyhow, agreed; there might be no option but to remove the ability to delete posts regardless of the messiness of "blank" re-edits.

Thanks,
d.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 21, 2007)

Lt.Havoc said:
			
		

> I guess we need better admins, I think I know the right person for that job:





You have a point or ten there... Thanks.

I can empathise with those communities that feel obliged to wield the banhammer at all "troublemakers", regardless of whether they speak the truth or not. 
That is _not_ the intention over here, where possible to avoid, but there are still limits to "being nice"/"inclusive" since that is much more time consuming to keep on a level keel when other matters regarding the community development require to be tended to.


----------



## Damaratus (Jan 21, 2007)

Calorath said:
			
		

> Nyet. I started this thread because I chose to speak my mind. This is a forum, the fact that the admins feel they must constantly monitor and do 'crowd control' here rather than focusing on their main objective is a gross mistake in my opinion. This is a place to *talk* for the users to convey points, ideas and concerns. The sheer fact that my post alone seems to have gained the attention of no less than 4 admins in the past couple days seems to lend to that speculation. Shouldn't your main priority be the site, and not this stupid forum?
> 
> I have every right to address my concerns in public. And I have, and I shall continue to do so. That's fine if you disagree with me. But don't get your feelings hurt... it's nothing personal.



Your changes in stance are rather interesting.  This started as wanting to get an answer to a question, which requires a response, turned into wanting to have the administration responding to why they do other things (which also requires a response, does it not?) and is now something that should have been ignored to begin with.

If the administration had left your initial start of this thread alone, there would have been a lot more rumor spreading from your speculation.  So the decision was to try and answer your question, and eventually run the course of the thread.

That's rather amazing.  I think the lines of thought have been exhausted.  Your opinion has been made and I think it's time to move on, don't you?


----------



## Surgat (Jan 21, 2007)

blueroo said:
			
		

> Calorath said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Isn't this just wonderful? Any criticism is met with accusations of harming the site (they've done this to me too).


----------



## Calorath (Jan 21, 2007)

Damaratus said:
			
		

> Calorath said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're spitting hairs here, of course my post intended to get a response from the admins.  A response, not a full firefighter suit-up to sit here and quell the flames of drama. Regardless, I digress.

However, as far as letting it go, that's not going to happen. This site's administration team *works* for the community. You're here on a voluntary basis to produce, maintain, and expand this site and it's community. You are not here to 'oversee' it. As I said, I think it's time this community holds you all accountable. I don't care if you don't like that idea. It's the stone cold ugly truth.


----------



## Calorath (Jan 21, 2007)

Surgat said:
			
		

> Isn't this just wonderful? Any criticism is met with accusations of harming the site (they've done this to me too).



I don't care, I'm not out to win a popularity contest.  But I think it's time us 'regular folks' demand some accountability.


----------



## AlexanderMorou (Jan 21, 2007)

I would rather agree that this entire thread has more then served its purpose, beyond that, everything else is just spam.

[OT] On a side note, I posted a bug in your related forum about Anomalous Password Request functionality, to add to that, Firefox has new feature that allows spell-checking to occur on any input fields.  That being said, I submitted a new image, and found it curious to see tagv=1; on the page, underlined in red dots.  I right-clicked it because it seemed similar to the aforementioned feature and it suggested 'tag v', I clicked it thinking nothing of it, and I couldn't change it after that ;]

After that happened, once I posted it, the new submission says 'Tag version invalid!'  While this isn't necessarily a problem with your code, but rather Firefox's ability to allow you spell-check and change disabled fields (I'm assuming you used a disabled input field to define the tags.)  Perhaps instead of altering the value of that input box, you should store the tags in an client-side variable, and alter the innerHTML of an element on the page.


----------



## yak (Jan 21, 2007)

Okay, Calorath, i appreciate your concern about the inner-workings of the  staff here at FurAffinity.
But i also find it that you are contradicting yourself a lot, even in your replies on this thread alone, not to mention the cases that happened in the past.

So,  one thing i'd like to point out is the fact that you find enough insolence to try and decide how we, as a team, should work together. No problems in doing that, of course, but it all depends on the manner of your approach to this process. And by my personal standarts, you're not advancing one tiny bit.

I hate to having to resort to things long forgotten, but in the past you had your chance of being a part of the team you're so concerned with now, and frankly, your performance was below even the worst expectations, in terms of handing out bans without any consideration

And you may sweet-talk yourself out this situation all you want, but to be frank, you are the last person i'd ever listen to advices from on community management and responsibility.


----------



## Calorath (Jan 21, 2007)

yak said:
			
		

> -snip-
> 
> I hate to having to resort to things long forgotten, but in the past you had your chance of being a part of the team you're so concerned with now, and frankly, your performance was below even the worst expectations, in terms of handing out bans without any consideration
> -snip-



I suppose once more I need to clarify that situation, just as Dragoneer had later on in that thread (I believe) 

I *never* was an admin here, or on the mainsite, *ever*, it was *never* offered to me either. That thread concerns IRC operations. That's it. I sat in an IRC channel and attempted to help out that specific forum and only that forum. As it stands I have years of longterm success with IRC channel operation.

As far as contradicting myself. Interpret things as you will, I'm not going to even begin to sit here and clarify my points and ensure every word and though is interpreted as I intended it to be. If the admins feel the need to undermine my credibility, so be it. But I stand firm in my obeservations, (which so happen to align with the majority of this community's opinion). This team has failed time and time again to perform adequately. It is mine and anyone else's right to stand up and say so.  

Anywho, at this point, the song and dance is getting old. And well I'm watching football.


----------



## yak (Jan 21, 2007)

*chuckles* Are you deliberately trying to miss the point of my post here?

Neither did i say you were an admin, ever. That kind of reaction to my words is honestly surprising. 
However you did have a chance to be 'a part of th theam', even if briefly, even in a single level on involvement as moderating a channel - had your chance to show how 'adequately' you can act in certain situations. And you had a blazing fiasco you now have the nerve to call a 'longterm success'. Please....

Having you say that makes me wonder would FA's administration act in the future if somehow you had your way.. The occations of which, infact, you /are/ criticizing in us now. You're contradicting yourself in every thread, changing sides and oppinions - which makes me wonder of your true intent on these forums.

Now i don't feel the need to undermine your credibility, nor i wish for this whole thing to get personal. Frankly i find this thole issue overblown to incredible proportions and overall too silly to waste any more time on. 
I'm just here to make sure the administration is not being highlighted in the wrong light and at the wrong angle, that's all. I know that there are people out there who are incredibly opinionated and continuously wish to see but one side of the coin, which, infact, has three. And realize thay are being very loud at times..


[edit]: oh, and i'm playing Call of Duty: United Offence myself, so no worries


----------



## AlexanderMorou (Jan 21, 2007)

Stupid question, if the purpose of the thread is fulfilled, and devoting any more time on anyone's side is deemed silly or a waste of time, why hasn't the thread been locked yet?

Also, Yak, is the Bug Reports and Code Discussion board the area I was supposed to post information about the bug in the main site code?


----------



## yak (Jan 21, 2007)

AlexanderMorou, yeah, that's the place. thanks in advance for the report.


----------



## Calorath (Jan 21, 2007)

yak said:
			
		

> *chuckles* Are you deliberately trying to miss the point of my post here?
> 
> Neither did i say you were an admin, ever. That kind of reaction to my words is honestly surprising.
> However you did have a chance to be 'a part of th theam', even if briefly, even in a single level on involvement as moderating a channel - had your chance to show how 'adequately' you can act in certain situations. And you had a blazing fiasco you now have the nerve to call a 'longterm success'. Please....
> ...



Eh I won't lie, what I've done in IRC sure did stir up the dust. That's what I do.  To borrow (paraphrase) Bruce Willis's line from the Siege I am not  delicate scalpel, I am more like a broadsword. As far as years of success goes, it's within my own channels. I didn't have much of a chance in #furaffinity I think what, after a day of complaints that was it?  Regardless, it's neither here nor there. That situation is long gone and what has been decided, has been decided. I respect that.

As far as contradicting myself. I don't know what to tell you, I speak how I feel at the time, a week ago I felt one way, today I feel differently. I think it is ludicrous to suggest that I maintain a solid opinion from start to finish. I am a human being as as things change and time progresses, so do my feelings.  If my statements (or perhaps, one's interpretation of them) contradict one another, well then, I don't know what to tell you. I don't claim to be consistent. However, today, in the here and in the now. This is what I feel and this is what I believe.

I'm only human, and I know you are all too. But I *do* know that you can all do better. Today, I point that out. That's all.

Anywho, I think that at this point it's best to let things simmer down. I don't think this thread should be locked. I think you (as an administrative team) would greatly benefit from a mature and disciplined thread aimed to vent concerns about you and your performance. That's what I want to see. Rather than the whispers of concern and fear of retaliation. (Perhaps I'm just the only asshole who's stupid enough to open his big dumb mouth) when it comes to any administrative team.

And damnit.. this (football) game is pissing me off. >:


----------



## Xax (Jan 21, 2007)

For the record, I think this whole situation is bizarre and vexing.

FA admins: you would think after the half-dozen times this issue has come up in the past, you would bother to talk to each other before deleting data and banning users. I really want to give the C.S. Lewis based lecture in regards to servitude, but I know that would go over _wonderfully_.

Arshes: Nrr has been trolling for a banning for ages and you know it. I mean, the FA admins are acting irrationally at all times, but nrr was (literally!) asking for it. Clearly they could have done things better, but ultimately nrr did break the site and then refuse to stop until he was banned. (or so I hear)

Calorath: If you are vexated in regards to people not understanding your point (or point of view) the correct answer is not to say "Well, I'm not going to explain further". I think at this point most people agree that the FA adminship is not exactly in the most competent hands. Try to specifically address your issues (lack of moderator transparency, it seems) and figure out how to resolve them. I hear Nobuyuki is also a big fan of the whole user-transparency thing, you could try bouncing concepts off of him.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 21, 2007)

Calorath said:
			
		

> I *never* was an admin here, or on the mainsite, *ever*, it was *never* offered to me either. That thread concerns IRC operations. That's it.



Yak never said you were an admin, but you were a "member of the team" with a duty to uphold the high standards you would insist other members of the "team" be held accountable to.
I gather your venture was not a success? (I missed out mostly on that, I think, and won't bother rechecking since that's in the past, like you say... Large furry communities can be rather stressful at the best of times, of course).

Anyhow;


			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> Interpret things as you will, I'm not going to even begin to sit here and clarify my points and ensure every word and though is interpreted as I intended it to be. If the admins feel the need to undermine my credibility, so be it.



Making no judgments whatsoever on personal credibility since I'm not particularly keen on any such ego measure, I would still have appreciated that you extend similar courtesies to those who take a considerable time to address your points knowing that this is a drama-_worthy_ topic, even though that was not your stated _intention_.

Thus far, I have responded with at least three lengthy messages on this thread on the topics you addressed and subsequent points. In return, I have received precisely zero replies in public (+ one PM and a somewhat dismissive one liner in response to two PMs).

You would appear neither to wish to engage in constructive discussion, nor admit that both yourself and pretty much everyone else here falls short of the degree of perfection that you would insist administration displays (100% of the time?).



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> Anywho, at this point, the song and dance is getting old. And well I'm watching football.



Enjoy the match, qgr. We'll keep on trying to help the community run smoothly and make up for "lost time" on non-constructive discussions. (Not that there weren't points that required to be addressed/responded to, of course).

Best wishes,
David.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 21, 2007)

AlexanderMorou said:
			
		

> Stupid question, if the purpose of the thread is fulfilled, and devoting any more time on anyone's side is deemed silly or a waste of time, why hasn't the thread been locked yet?



Under "normal circumstances" I'd agree, since there is a serious lack of engagement from the OP, etc., and the points have been addressed anyhow as far as is being permitted.

However, it's fairly certain that there would be "drama" at such a locking, even if it was clearly stated that the thread would be re-opened if a contribution that actually showed engagement in a non-negative/dismissive manner was requested to be posted.

Will let this run for a bit longer, but nothing much further to add myself, for now.
(Shall continue to read anything else that's posted, of course. _*nods to Xax*_).

d.


----------



## Calorath (Jan 21, 2007)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> -snip-
> You would appear neither to wish to engage in constructive discussion, nor admit that both yourself and pretty much everyone else here falls short of the degree of perfection that you would insist administration displays (100% of the time?)
> 
> -snip



Nahh I told you. I don't play the point/counterpoint game. I said my peace and that's that. You're welcome to refute/analyze it and have the last word in. There just aren't enough hours in the day, and well, regardless of how and why the situations are broken down, the initial concern remains. 

And I do not expect perfection. I know better than that, I do however, expect better performance. 

As far as my behavior in IRC, I operate much differently than your 'typical' admin, that's no secret. And well, my actions were the beginnings of a process set to remove those (at the time) who would be called the troublemakers. A process that not only has worked for me in the past, but to this day continues to work well.  

And this game sucks... the Bears are going to the superbowl :


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 21, 2007)

Xax said:
			
		

> Arshes: Nrr has been trolling for a banning for ages and you know it. I mean, the FA admins are acting irrationally at all times, but nrr was (literally!) asking for it. Clearly they could have done things better, but ultimately nrr did break the site and then refuse to stop until he was banned. (or so I hear)



Err xax I never disagreed with the fact he should have been banned. I'm just showing how "consistent" FA has been with handling them. So that's a non issue. If they want to ban him and globally, do so. If they don't then don't. Cherry picking bans just looks outright moronic. I don't care if it was on DA, FA or FAP same thing.


----------



## WHPellic (Jan 21, 2007)

R5K said:
			
		

> (conspiracy, vendetta, lack of competence, lack of coordination, lack of communication, lies, others not b&... where will this stop? :lol



It won't. It's a vicious cycle. Lather, rinse, repeat.


----------



## blueroo (Jan 21, 2007)

Surgat said:
			
		

> blueroo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Engaging the admins in conversation (I'm being nice, this is really just drama) is not harmful to the site. But it does draw us away from other duties we could be doing. I am not accusing Cal of harming the site, so please leave the lamentations about your martyrdom at home. Nobody is trying to crucify you here.


----------



## blueroo (Jan 21, 2007)

Calorath said:
			
		

> Nahh I told you. I don't play the point/counterpoint game. I said my peace and that's that. You're welcome to refute/analyze it and have the last word in. There just aren't enough hours in the day, and well, regardless of how and why the situations are broken down, the initial concern remains.



Calorath, I agree with your original point. I am not pleased when I see posts "disappeared" from the forum. I am trying to encourage more transparent actions on the admin staff, and feedback from the user community is not only appreciated but sought. That said...

You engaged the admins in this conversation. If you are not willing to follow through, then drop the issue. If you continue to start stirring drama with the admins and then saying you aren't interested in conversation, you'll be walking on a fine line of troublemaking. You do not get to start rumours, stir drama, and then walk away. If you're truly and honestly interested in helping the site and the admin staff, I encourage you to do so. If you're only interested in rumour-mongering and casually throwing about accusations of impropriety, expect consequences for your actions.


----------



## Rhainor (Jan 21, 2007)

Calorath said:
			
		

> This site's administration team *works* for the community. You're here on a voluntary basis to produce, maintain, and expand this site and it's community. You are not here to 'oversee' it. As I said, I think it's time this community holds you all accountable. I don't care if you don't like that idea. It's the stone cold ugly truth.



I call BS.

The staff team created this website, *of their own free will*, with their *own free time and resources*.  They didn't have to do that; not by a long shot.  Now, they're not only maintaining it and overseeing it--again, *of their own free will*, with their *own free time and resources*--but also working to improve it for the rest of the community.  We don't work for them, but *neither do they work for us*.  They've put a whole hell of a lot more time, money, effort, blood, sweat, and tears (to borrow an old axiom) into making sure we can come here and enjoy it.

Show a little gratitude, eh?


----------



## Calorath (Jan 22, 2007)

blueroo said:
			
		

> -snip-
> You engaged the admins in this conversation. If you are not willing to follow through, then drop the issue. If you continue to start stirring drama with the admins and then saying you aren't interested in conversation, you'll be walking on a fine line of troublemaking. You do not get to start rumours, stir drama, and then walk away. If you're truly and honestly interested in helping the site and the admin staff, I encourage you to do so. If you're only interested in rumour-mongering and casually throwing about accusations of impropriety, expect consequences for your actions.



No, you involved yourselves. This thread is under the 'discussion' affinity. (I can't believe you got me here arguing semantics) The initial topic of this thread was the deleted post. Now that that has been address, this thread is dedicated to you guys. I'm putting *you* all under the magnifying glass. 

Conversation, I am interested in, As I've _BEEN DOING JUST THAT_, throughout this entire thread. I am, however, not going to sit there and play the point/counterpoint/counterpoint/counterpoint/banned game. I've said my peace, you (or anyone else) is allowed to refute it, my position still holds. I do not think you guys are performing acceptably.

When this community donated thousands of dollars to this site's cause, they gained a vested interest in it's progression. If you want to say that my demands for accountability is drama mongering, and trouble making,  well then go for it. After all, who's going to stop you?

My intentions are not so much to help the administration team, sorry guys, you've had multiple offers, multiple times, from multiple sources. However, I intend to stand up for the little guy, the one who donated $100 for a server that's not even in the rack yet. I understand setbacks, problems and that sometimes, things just never go right. Think of this as.... motivation. 

2005 has been a year of empty promises, TOS revisions, Code upgrades, server upgrades, and more. It hasn't happened. I'm tired of it, and so is the majority of your users. (The ones that are still remaining, anyways.) 

I don't care if you don't like what I'm saying, I just happen to be the moron who decided to say it to your face.

[Addendum]

I'm 27 years old guys, I have work to do now (and I suspect you all do as well). I'm not going to sit here and argue anymore. I've said my peace, lets stop the word-slinging (before things get nasty and feelings are hurt). You know how I feel, if you wish to attempt to undermine my credibility in an effort to make yourself feel better, so be it.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 22, 2007)

Calorath said:
			
		

> uncia2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> No, you involved yourselves. This thread is under the 'discussion' affinity. (I can't believe you got me here arguing semantics) The initial topic of this thread was the deleted post. Now that that has been address, this thread is dedicated to you guys. I'm putting *you* all under the magnifying glass.
> 
> Conversation, I am interested in, As I've _BEEN DOING JUST THAT_, throughout this entire thread. I am, however, not going to sit there and play the point/counterpoint/counterpoint/counterpoint/banned game. I've said my peace, you (or anyone else) is allowed to refute it, my position still holds. I do not think you guys are performing acceptably.



Let's get this straight; your idea of "conversation" (well, the "conversation" you are interested in, anyhow) is to throw whatever negative comments you wish and then ignore the reply or show any chance of even remotely engaging in discussion on those points?
And you refuse point-blank to change your position regardless of what's said.
Fair enough, but there are another 20,000+ community members who could benefit from my time and I've expended a good amount of that on this thread, already. (n.b. That does /not/ mean this has been ignored, at all).



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> When this community donated thousands of dollars to this site's cause, they gained a vested interest in it's progression.



The majority of the monies expended thus far have been on day-to-day running costs not future enhancements. Staff members plus one friend of a staff member have contributed pretty close to 50% of that funding.
Everyone has a vested interested in the community's progression but that is not solely because they have donated financially.



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> I'm tired of it, and so is the majority of your users. (The ones that are still remaining, anyways.)



fyi, site traffic is now around 20% higher than it was just after the cub incident back in November. Comments such as "the ones that are still remaining" (implying a mass desertion?) without any hard evidence to back that up are high drama coming from someone who is not "trying to insight (sic.) a fight".
If you are just guessing that, you are probably also guessing that the majority of the community are not content to focus positively on what there is, use that framework and anything available beyond that at a later date.

You know I know things could be better and we both know various approaches to that. Point made.



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> I don't care if you don't like what I'm saying, I just happen to be the moron who decided to say it to your face.



Still listening, of course, despite the way you phrase that confrontationally. I'm perfectly capable of not taking this as some sort of fight that you seem to insist is occuring.



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> [Addendum]
> I'm 27 years old guys, I have work to do now (and I suspect you all do as well). I'm not going to sit here and argue anymore.



Good: thank you. (Regardless of age or employment status).



			
				Calorath said:
			
		

> I've said my peace, lets stop the word-slinging (before things get nasty and feelings are hurt). You know how I feel, if you wish to attempt to undermine my credibility in an effort to make yourself feel better, so be it.



To repeat, I'm not interested in "personal credibility" or any such ego measure. The value people bring constructively to help the community both on a day-to-day basis and for future growth/improvement is much more important. Constructive feedback _is_ a part of that.

If you personally have given up and refuse to do anything more now other than throw negative comments and refuse to change your mind regardless of what's said, there's not much I can do about that, I'm afraid.
Say your piece, then, but please respect the rest of the community, too.

Kindest regards,
David.


----------



## uncia2000 (Jan 22, 2007)

Rhainor said:
			
		

> Calorath said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A _little_ bit blunt, perhaps, Rhainor, but thank you nonetheless for that. 

And, as ever, likewise to all those who have contributed content (not _just_ $) to what would otherwise be merely a "shell" of a "community". Has been an interesting couple of years with y'all to watch things grow... even fun, too, sometimes. 
Thanks for that.

d.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 22, 2007)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> A _little_ bit blunt, perhaps, Rhainor, but thank you nonetheless for that.
> 
> And, as ever, likewise to all those who have contributed content (not _just_ $) to what would otherwise be merely a "shell" of a "community". Has been an interesting couple of years with y'all to watch things grow... even fun, too, sometimes.
> Thanks for that.
> ...



I agree with you on this statement. I often become irritated when people polarize arguments and don't realize running a website is a two way street. While no one asked one to create such a website running such a website is a responsibility. While a group who is involved in such a project doesn't have to answer to anyone, it's probably not within their best interests to display such behavior.

Without a community there is a waste of a website.

This is coming from someone who helps maintain a large website.


----------



## Xax (Jan 22, 2007)

Rhainor said:
			
		

> The staff team created this website, *of their own free will*, with their *own free time and resources*.Â Â They didn't have to do that; not by a long shot.Â Â Now, they're not only maintaining it and overseeing it--again, *of their own free will*, with their *own free time and resources*--but also working to improve it for the rest of the community.Â Â We don't work for them, but *neither do they work for us*.Â Â They've put a whole hell of a lot more time, money, effort, blood, sweat, and tears (to borrow an old axiom) into making sure we can come here and enjoy it.
> 
> Show a little gratitude, eh?



Rhainor: No, you're wrong, and here's why:

When I think of the furry fandom, I think of it as some kind of vast conglomeration of people, with sometimes disparate motivations and interests. As a whole it has grown and congealed for decades. FurAffinity is an aid to the fandom as a whole, and it's something for it to grow up, but it could also be an impediment. Yes, the administration created and maintain FA, but they're really just making a product for a demanding populace. If the product tends to explode sometimes and kill people, it's not a valid argument to say "Well, they put a lot of effort into that exploding deathtrap, so you should be thankful! also, stop bleeding on me." If FurAffinity vanished forever tomorrow, the fandom would be sad, but then it would move on.

If anything, the FA admins are _stewards_ of a portion of the fandom, not the rulers of their own domain. This means they do, in fact, have responsibilities to the userbase, and I speak alongside, uh, pretty much everyone in this thread when I say they should maybe get this act together and stop appointing mods that suck. To the mods that don't suck: uh, sorry, but your co-admins kind of suck.

Basically, I could suggest a lot of technical solutions to the problem-- for any significant mod action like a ban, force admins to arm and insert their admin keys in unison instead of just going by a social contract that doesn't appear to work; link the forum together with the site completely or completely disassociate them so that this particular type of incident doesn't happen again, etc-- but ultimately none of those will work unless the admins accept that they aren't dictators on a balcony lording over the oppressed mobs of peasants. I don't really want to say something as shlocky as "They have to _respect_ other people", especially in regards to this furry porn distribution center, but uh, they have to respect other people and accept that there are certain actions that they could take in terms of potential (like banning users that they personally don't like!) that are nevertheless not acceptable, uh, morally speaking.

In short:

Darling fascist bully boys:
 STOP BEING JERKS.
Â Â Boom shanka,
Â Â  xax


----------



## Damaratus (Jan 22, 2007)

Xax said:
			
		

> If anything, the FA admins are _stewards_ of a portion of the fandom, not the rulers of their own domain. This means they do, in fact, have responsibilities to the userbase, and I speak alongside, uh, pretty much everyone in this thread when I say they should maybe get this act together and stop appointing mods that suck. To the mods that don't suck: uh, sorry, but your co-admins kind of suck.



You make a sound point.  It is recognized that we play stewards to the userbase, and naturally there are responsibilities that come with that, but it ends up as some kind of strange attempt to make everyone happy.  As I had mentioned before, there are those who demand action and become unhappy when things take too long, but are just as quick to complain if something was done in too hasty a fashion.

There is forward progress occurring in terms of getting a greater cohesion of the administration.  At the same time, there still needs to be room for individual opinion.  Keep in mind that things got rather shaken up back in November and many changes have happened even in the most recent months. There will be points where poor decisions are made, and hopefully rectified.  Whether a particular mod "sucks" will come down to userbase opinion.  I'm sure that such opinions differ amongst the crowd.



			
				Xax said:
			
		

> Basically, I could suggest a lot of technical solutions to the problem-- for any significant mod action like a ban, force admins to arm and insert their admin keys in unison instead of just going by a social contract that doesn't appear to work;



This seems like a good idea in concept, but rarely does it ever work in practice.  Unison would require the administration being available at any given time to discuss any given situation.  Not only that, but some actions are rather time dependent in their execution.  It would not look good for some infractions to go uninhibited simply because you're waiting on someone who is in another country and asleep.  The current set up does need some tuning, and that will be taken care of, but as with most things, it still takes some time, especially when new people are being introduced into moderation positions.



			
				Xax said:
			
		

> link the forum together with the site completely or completely disassociate them so that this particular type of incident doesn't happen again, etc-- but ultimately none of those will work unless the admins accept that they aren't dictators on a balcony lording over the oppressed mobs of peasants. I don't really want to say something as shlocky as "They have to _respect_ other people", especially in regards to this furry porn distribution center, but uh, they have to respect other people and accept that there are certain actions that they could take in terms of potential (like banning users that they personally don't like!) that are nevertheless not acceptable, uh, morally speaking.
> 
> In short:
> 
> ...



The forum, main site, and IRC are essentially separate entities.  This only changes if someone has been seriously aggressive toward an area of the site.  The number of permanent suspensions on the main site are few in number, and all were discussed and voted (at least during my time as an actual administrator).  Global suspensions are even fewer in number.  There comes a time where someone has caused enough trouble and their chance to make amends has passed.

Additionally, we really don't look at the users as peasants, I don't think we ever have.  Showing respect is something that needs to be mutual among the users and the administration.  As stewards we (the administration) do want to make sure that everyone has a good time on the site, which means that heavy-handedness will probably occur at some point to try and maintain things.  When such things happen, it is nice to have a reciprocation of the courtesies that we attempt to give.  There have been several times in the past where we have tried to be more than accommodating to a situation only to have things thrown back at us, or completely ignored.  It is part of the monster of a site with such a vast number of lifestyles and opinions.  This is not to say that everything that the administration has done has been absolutely and one hundred percent infallible.  Mistakes can (and will) still occur, that's the way life tends to work, but at the same time there are things that we are doing right, and there are members of the site that would vouch for that fact.

In Short:

The site is still growing, in numbers, opinions, lifestyles and personalities.  There is bound to be a point where someone doesn't like something and just as likely to be a point where they find something they love.  So respect those around you, whether you are the user or the authority.


----------



## AlexanderMorou (Jan 22, 2007)

I'm not sure if you already do, due to my lack of familiarity with your forum software, it might hide based upon permissions.

However, perhaps an administrative board that's strictly meant for your administrative staff.  Bans, warnings, and other things related would be discussed here exclusively.  Create a system of conduct, bad user tracking, and so forth.  If a user is warned x many times, he's banned for so long, depending on the severity of the violation.  Each ban is marked on their 'record' and after so any temporary bans, they earn a larger ban that would yield a permanent ban.  Ban evaders would override and fall immediately into permanent bans and further action would be taken to ensure they don't come back, new handle or no (I.P. banning, mask banning, what  have you.)

There's many things that can be done, but before anything is done you have to admit as an administrative staff, that there is enough need for concern to take action.

Edit:
Naturally the forum in question would be protected via a password.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 22, 2007)

The reason I suggested the MYBB is so they'd have better tools in banning and so forth. FYI. I also recommended another forum because I recognize limitations with this one, like the simple machines one. I do not know however how well a port script would work to migrate the mybb to another one. I did know that you could migrate from their first one, a PHPBB.


----------



## ArrowTibbs (Jan 22, 2007)

AlexanderMorou said:
			
		

> However, perhaps an administrative board that's strictly meant for your administrative staff.Â



This is already done.


----------



## kitetsu (Jan 22, 2007)

I thought part of what an admin should do is to avoid getting personal? I must be going blind.

And with that, i can only say:

*Why the fuck am i reading this shit?*


----------



## imnohbody (Jan 23, 2007)

yak said:
			
		

> overblown to incredible proportions and overall too silly



Welcome to the internet.


----------

