# Stepping down.



## Marthaen (Nov 4, 2006)

I'm out guys. Thanks I've had a nice time as being an admin here on the forums and on the main site as well. I had some good times here but apparently my views don't follow along the lines as the rest. So I'm stepping down as admin and letting things go.


----------



## Lt_Havoc (Nov 4, 2006)

Eh, what do you mean? What views? Is that related to the cub-porn thing? I wouldnt give up now man. Your voice is as important then from the others.


----------



## Marthaen (Nov 4, 2006)

Unfortunately my voice was lost amid the screaming going on. And my vote was lost among the loose chads piled upon the floor of debris.


----------



## Damaratus (Nov 4, 2006)

Marthaen said:
			
		

> I'm out guys. Thanks I've had a nice time as being an admin here on the forums and on the main site as well. I had some good times here but apparently my views don't follow along the lines as the rest. So I'm stepping down as admin and letting things go.



Diversified views amongst admins is an important factor Marth.  It makes it so that there isn't a solitary view on how things "should be".  Just because something doesn't end the way that an administrator hopes it will, doesn't mean that the rest of the administration doesn't respect and listen to what you have to say.

I mean look at regular society.  I think that civil unions amongst homosexuals should be allowed, but apparently even if some people within the government believe that should be the case, their views don't "follow the lines" enough and it hasn't been made legal (in most places).  Yet, they don't step down and let things just go the other way.

I really don't think something as trivial as this situation should be causing you to question your state as an administrator, but in the end, your choice is your choice.


----------



## blackdragoon (Nov 4, 2006)

i'm going to agree with damaratus on this one marth but if you must step down then i must ask whether you will still be here as a regular user? or will just leave the site altogether over something as stupid as all this?


----------



## Pinkuh (Nov 4, 2006)

but... who will fingerpaint on me :_:


----------



## Marthaen (Nov 4, 2006)

Civil unions is one thing Pedophilia is another so is "Cub porn". I disagree with the administrative vote and have decided to leave over it because that's my view on the whole thing since I was the lone one out in that vote. I'd rather be a part of something where we can all agree on but I do no agree on this issue and therefore I have decided to move on.


----------



## blackdragoon (Nov 4, 2006)

well then if you must you must. you shall be missed i'm sure.


----------



## InvaderPichu (Nov 4, 2006)

Goodbye.


----------



## ArrowTibbs (Nov 4, 2006)

Heh...


----------



## Hanazawa (Nov 4, 2006)

ArrowTibbs said:
			
		

> Heh...



I know, huh?


----------



## ArrowTibbs (Nov 4, 2006)

You know. There were things I didn't agree with too. Lots of things. But I did them because I was outvoted and apparently it became my fault that things happened. Not that any mistake I made could ever be mentioned to me politely and with the same respect I gave others.

But I guess that's why I resigned too, isn't it?


----------



## Pico (Nov 4, 2006)

bye          :*)


----------



## Beau (Nov 4, 2006)

Good bye. I'm sure you'll be missed.


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 4, 2006)

This doesn't reflect well on the (remaining) FA staff...


----------



## Lt_Havoc (Nov 4, 2006)

Well, I think thats enough protest to say that the whole cub porn this was a total miserable faulire from the begiining on. I said it all the time, this topic never should have been brought up, but some people just cant STFU. I really fear the outcome of the descion that will be made tommorrow.


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 4, 2006)

Very much so. FA - the site and more importantly its community - will suffer badly no matter what the outcome. Sad, really.


----------



## dave hyena (Nov 4, 2006)

Bye bye.


----------



## SageHendrix (Nov 4, 2006)

Damaratus said:
			
		

> Diversified views amongst admins is an important factor Marth.  It makes it so that there isn't a solitary view on how things "should be".  Just because something doesn't end the way that an administrator hopes it will, doesn't mean that the rest of the administration doesn't respect and listen to what you have to say.
> 
> I mean look at regular society.  I think that civil unions amongst homosexuals should be allowed, but apparently even if some people within the government believe that should be the case, their views don't "follow the lines" enough and it hasn't been made legal (in most places).  Yet, they don't step down and let things just go the other way.
> 
> I really don't think something as trivial as this situation should be causing you to question your state as an administrator, but in the end, your choice is your choice.



I got to agree here.  See...I think that the problem with most debates on ANY forum is that the ones that put thier personal beliefs and morals into thier posts far outweigh the posters who are giving unbiased opinions.  In fact, those that cant be unbiased are the ones that usually make the most noise, hence drowning out some of the well written and thought out posts.  It happens, man.  

I havent let it get to me and dont expect to in the future.  My idea is that if all the admins think alike then there is no one there to keep a "think outside of the box" perspective.  There is no diversity of thought pattern which can in turn, create a mono-way of thinking/doing things to the site as a whole.

-Kat


----------



## nobuyuki (Nov 4, 2006)

Marthaen said:
			
		

> I'm out guys. Thanks I've had a nice time as being an admin here on the forums and on the main site as well. I had some good times here but apparently my views don't follow along the lines as the rest. So I'm stepping down as admin and letting things go.



You did the right thing;  I only wished you'd have realized this sooner.


----------



## Janglur (Nov 4, 2006)

Don't let the doorknob hitcha..


If someone just quits to 'teach a lesson' because their whining doesn't get them their way, they never had any point to make in the first place.
Martin Luther King didn't give up the first time he got his ideas turned down.

You want to make a change?  You ain't gonna do it by getting out of the fight.


----------



## Aikon (Nov 4, 2006)

I guess I'll see if I agree with your decision tomorrow when the official annoucement is made.


----------



## uncia2000 (Nov 4, 2006)

Marthaen said:
			
		

> Civil unions is one thing Pedophilia is another so is "Cub porn". I disagree with the administrative vote and have decided to leave over it because that's my view on the whole thing since I was the lone one out in that vote.





			
				Marthaen said:
			
		

> Unfortunately my voice was lost amid the screaming going on.



Eh... You certainly weren't the only person whose voice was "lost", Marthaen, given how things turned out. :?
Pretty sure that I've never stated any personally _preferred_ opinion in public other than requesting a marginally modified status quo (given that the ToS is too vague/potentially all-encompassing at present and has no examples provided) with a continued request for understanding the need for a grey area with input politely obtained from artists, as required, where things appear to be towards the "not permitted" area within that range.

The whole issue was unnecessarily forced by a /very/ small group of people who insisted on clear-cut rules and clear-cut decision-making on a topic where that is clearly impossible. Warning flags have been waved on this matter for months, so it's nothing new... I even posted a comment about "50%+1" voting several months ago. 
Despite that, all of this was eventually rammed down with a polarised "take all" or "take nothing" request, whatever the latter actually meant, and neither of those is a particularly appealing option, to be honest.
*
In fact, out of a two option poll, we've managed to conjure up three outcomes, lose-lose-lose, with people leaving even if nothing happens, because the situation has been hyped and brought to the fore. (Which, of course, also makes things *far* more difficult for any future decision making on "awkward subjects").

Guess I returned a day or two too late on the current situation, anyhow...

Best wishes,
David/u2k


----------



## robomilk (Nov 4, 2006)

Well that goes to show that one fur's opinion is another fur's downfall.

Why can't some people just shut up for once and keep their opinions where we want them, to themselves or possibly LiveJournal. But not on a freaking art website!

Ah well... as Marthaen has now lost admin powers, I hope that to regain them is something that can be done if they choose to return.


----------



## Wolfblade (Nov 5, 2006)

robomilk said:
			
		

> Ah well... as Marthaen has now lost admin powers, I hope that to regain them is something that can be done if they choose to return.



Nothing at all against Marthaen personally, but as a general rule, there shouldn't really be a revolving door for admin status. If a person steps down as an admin, whatever the reason, they shouldn't be allowed to just walk back in whenever. Otherwise, what's to stop someone from stepping down when the responsibility is more than they're willing to commit to, but then trying to come back later on down the road when an issue pops up that they'd like to have a heavier say in.

Again, I'm not talking about Marthaen specifically, just as a general principle. He's only JUST declared he's leaving, and it was over a heated subject and strong personal beliefs. In this situation, it'd be perfectly understandable to just ignore his resignation as just a hasty reaction should he change his mind once he's cooled down. So long as cooling down isn't like, months later or something 

And yeah, as has been said, if every admin who got outvoted walked away, there would very quickly be no staff at all. You shouldn't leave just because people didn't agree with you if you really want to be a part of making this place better for everyone. But you have to do what you have to do.

Best of luck in whatever you find yourself doing in life.


----------



## Micah Coon (Nov 5, 2006)

-=sigh=-
I don't know what it is. Human nature? Furry nature? There's only one thing that I can say about this that can't be argued down:
Predictable.
I saw this one coming a mile away.

Eh, good on ya for sticking to your guns there, Mar.


----------



## Faeon (Nov 5, 2006)

Wow... that's pretty sad. What, praytell, will running away solve? How does stepping down from admin further your objective (which I assume was anti-cub)? I say this not as an insult, but as a fact; you're sounding like a whiney sulking child. I'm pretty sure you were put in admin for good reason, but right now I doubt that reason is valid anymore if you're willing to throw Dragoneer's (or whoever made you admin) trust back in their face just because things didn't go your way. I'm sorry, but that's just pretty sad. -.-


----------



## verix (Nov 5, 2006)

robomilk said:
			
		

> Why can't some people just shut up for once and keep their opinions where we want them, to themselves or possibly LiveJournal. But not on a freaking art website!


Uhhh... do you even know what "art" is? Seriously, this comment is... I don't know where to begin.


----------



## Micah Coon (Nov 5, 2006)

verix said:
			
		

> robomilk said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Art, like many things, is subjective.
Your definition, no matter how close to someone else's definition it is, is unique.


----------



## verix (Nov 5, 2006)

Micah Coon said:
			
		

> Art, like many things, is subjective.
> Your definition, no matter how close to someone else's definition it is, is unique.


While your canned deep and philosophical response is appreciated, it basically ignores my point, which is the fact that all art is an expression of some kind or another. And because of this definition of subjectiveness, one man's art is another man's trash. Regardless, some people express their opinions through their artwork.

So to assume that people should simply keep to themselves, on an art site, is quite possibly one of the most thoughtless statements one could make.


----------



## ShivaeSyke (Nov 5, 2006)

It's a much more mature thing to stay and make comments like:  I'm not enforcing the ban if it is passed.  -- http://www.furaffinity.net/user/pinkuh


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 5, 2006)

ShivaeSyke said:
			
		

> It's a much more mature thing to stay and make comments like:  I'm not enforcing the ban if it is passed.  -- http://www.furaffinity.net/user/pinkuh


Yeah, real mature. Frankly, if they're going to do that they should either be removed from the admin team, or step down.


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

I gotta agree with Uncia2000.
This is a fucked up situation and the All or Nothing mentality just is not going to fly.
It's the admins responisbility to sort through the material to make sure it's not violating that section of the TOS.
But how can you hope to get that accomplished with FEWER than the already small (IMO) number of admins already.
Child / Cub porn SHOULD be banned from here for no more reason that that's what it SAYS in the TOS.

Running away because you got voted out...yeah I gotta go with Faeon on that one.
Are you going to quit being a republican if the republicans lose a vote?Â Â Are you going to quit being an american because a legislature is passed that you don't like?Â Â Are you going to quit a job because they have a policy you don't agree with?
Well you certainly do have the RIGHT to do that.Â Â But it certainly won't fix anything.Â Â You gonna run someplace where EVERYONE thinks the same as you?Â Â Good luck!Â Â If it was put to a vote then majority won.Â Â It doesn't mean your voice wasn't heard so much as the other admins counted for more by superior numbers.Â Â You can't GET anymore FAIR than that so what are you crying about this not getting heard?

Again, like Faeon said, you were probably put in admin status for good reason, so then you jump ship cuz you lost this battle?Â Â Surely you don't think that all decisions need to be made unanimously or that one lost battle means a lost war?

EDIT
Now admittedly, i don't know you, your siuation or what happened, so you'd have every right to tell me shut the fuck up cuz I have no idea what 'm talking about.  But I should also point out that you gave no real details as to what it is you're leaving for or why.  Now admittedly, you don't HAVE to but it seems like a pretty emo attempt at getting attention or sympathy by putting peope on a woe-wis-me guilt trip.


----------



## billysheep (Nov 5, 2006)

I just have to say, comparing a small furry gallery on the internet to the Republican Party or the United States is just hysterical. Thumbs up!


----------



## Hanazawa (Nov 5, 2006)

ShivaeSyke said:
			
		

> It's a much more mature thing to stay and make comments like:  I'm not enforcing the ban if it is passed.  -- http://www.furaffinity.net/user/pinkuh



...this isn't even the first time she's said or done stupid things. Why is she still an admin? It is a mystery.


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 5, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> ShivaeSyke said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Who knows? She sure as hell doesn't deserve to be an admin. If you can't or won't accept that with that responsibility comes the fact you have to do things you don't like, then you don't deserve it.


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

billysheep said:
			
		

> I just have to say, comparing a small furry gallery on the internet to the Republican Party or the United States is just hysterical. Thumbs up!



Well ther eseems to be a LOT going on here lately that's pretty...humorous.
Like this: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/277544/
Aparently SOMEBODY really wanted to be an asshole about the situation.


----------



## uncia2000 (Nov 5, 2006)

Sslaxx said:
			
		

> ShivaeSyke said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hrmm... since there are a few people who seem to be willing to make an "issue" of that, too...

(apologies for the clipped/edited PM)



			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> My take on that journal comment...
> 
> Since it's a comment that a particular admin WON'T /personally/ take action in a given context, that's not a /practical/ issue since other admins will.
> This would have been much more of an issue if they'd personally HAD taken action against something which wasn't against the rules.
> ...



Am I being unreasonable in that response?


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 5, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Sslaxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes. What else will she do, seeing as she is clearly flying in the face of the rest of the admin team? Are you prepared to take the possibility she will undo other admins' decisions behind their backs? Allow art prohibited to either be uploaded or to be on the site, and let the rest of the team be unaware of it?


----------



## Hanazawa (Nov 5, 2006)

Seconding Sslaxx on that last part.


----------



## uncia2000 (Nov 5, 2006)

Sslaxx said:
			
		

> Yes. What else will she do, seeing as she is clearly flying in the face of the rest of the admin team? Are you prepared to take the possibility she will undo other admins' decisions? Allow art prohibited to either be uploaded or to be on the site, and let the rest of the team be unaware of it?



Tell me please that every dA admin agrees with every policy and acts to enforce every one in the same manner?

The unforgivable sin is, presumably, to say that that's not the case, in public?


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 5, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Sslaxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Public or private, it doesn't matter. She is a liability.

It's not necessary for admin to agree on policy - indeed, not even desirable. I would expect admin to enforce policy, however, _even if they disagree with it_.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Nov 5, 2006)

Unfortunately even though this is nothing personal against Pinkuh, there is a legitimate argument about the decorum of the admins here. You don't want to enforce policies or stand for it, consider your position as admin. Even with the small team you have now.


----------



## Trinitykat (Nov 5, 2006)

opinions are like ass holes every one has one, so I suppose I shall throw my two cents in.... you cannot censer art it doesn't matter the context you cannot censer art, like books, like other peoples opinions, you CANNOT CENSER ART ever...now go on and fight some more cause no one is listening to one another so the argument is rather void at this point


----------



## Hanazawa (Nov 5, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> The unforgivable sin is, presumably, to say that that's not the case, in public?



Yes, because it undermines that admin's credibility. I know she won't enforce that rule, and she's PROUD of the fact that she won't; which other rules is she blatantly ignoring? Why should I trust her to handle any of my problems? Ever?


----------



## Wolfblade (Nov 5, 2006)

There is nothing wrong with an admin choosing not to get involved with situations where their personal views conflict with the views agreed upon by the rest of the administration.

In fact, it's kindof better that way. If an admin doesn't support a ban, but is handed a situation regarding the ban, they're likely to be more lenient in their judgement than they would be expected to be.

So if the ban is passed, then Pinkuh can let other admins handle situations regarding the ban. There are plenty of other conflicts and issues that will need to be addressed that she can spend her time on.

Likewise, if Marthaen stays as an admin, but the ban is NOT passed, he can simply choose to remain hands-off with issues involving the lack of ban. 

Better to have an admin completely stand down and step back on an issue where they disagree with the majority of staff than to be there involved and having their conflicting personal opinion get in the way of the rest of the staff running the site the way the majority has decided to run it. Otherwise you just have someone gumming up the works when the majority has already made a decision, and that doesn't help anything or anyone.


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 5, 2006)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> There is nothing wrong with an admin choosing not to get involved with situations where their personal views conflict with the views agreed upon by the rest of the administration.
> 
> In fact, it's kindof better that way. If an admin doesn't support a ban, but is handed a situation regarding the ban, they're likely to be more lenient in their judgement than they would be expected to be.
> 
> ...


Quoting something highly relevant:



			
				Hanazawa said:
			
		

> which other rules is she blatantly ignoring? Why should I trust her to handle any of my problems? Ever?


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

Sslaxx said:
			
		

> uncia2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That much I agree with, if your an admin ou have an obligation to enforce the rules.  if you don't like the rules then try to get them changed at your discretion but while you do, you're still under obligation to do your job.  And if you can't get the rules changed then you have a choice, continue to do your job or quit your job and let someone else take your place.

But do you HONESTLY think one admin is going to go into Guerilla warfare with the other admnis over a MORAL issue?  You'd have to be a pretty fucked up or egotistical individual to make something like THIS so personal.  And if that's the case, they have no PLACE being in a position of authority in the first place!

However, I doubt any RATIONAL person would sit there fighting a battle they don't need to fight.  An irrational person would but they're idiots so who cares what they think.  

I know that if I was woeking in a place where I constantly found myself at odds wiht my coworkers or administrators and UNABLE to reconcile the situation (i stress this part), I would just LEAVE. Which is what's happening here.  
It sure as hell doesn't FIX anything and it leaves the group weaker as a whole but...
hmmm... I seem to find myself contradicting my previous statement now to a degree.  I suppose if it was just my JOB then Yeah i'd pack up and go, but if it's my CAREER or profession or something I really believed in then I suppose I would stick it out as an obligation to my commitments as a professional.  That tells me that perhaps being an admin or even a memeber of FA is not as important to these people as one would think...
Or maybe I'm still contradicting myself and don't quite get it yet...


----------



## N3X15 (Nov 5, 2006)

Insubordination.  

Pinkuh is a unique individual with an equally interesting personality, but that does not change the fact that, in order to be an admin, you have to enforce the rules. Its like a manager refusing to manage his underlings.


----------



## uncia2000 (Nov 5, 2006)

Master_Oki_Akai said:
			
		

> But do you HONESTLY think one admin is going to go into Guerilla warfare with the other admnis over a MORAL issue?



Cool... Where did you pull that from?

Saying that any enforcement on a given issue will be left to another admin is the same as "going into Guerilla warfare"?

So.... again... all admins have to agree on all issues and agree to uphold all of them all of the time with the same methodical approach?
Sorry, not real world.

And pity help us all if the ToS ever changes, because that would mean everyone having to agree to all the changes or else leave.


----------



## Surgat (Nov 5, 2006)

You know, if FA was a business and someone said "I'm not enforcing Policy X" that someone would be *fired*. 




			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> So.... again... all admins have to agree on all issues and agree to uphold all of them all of the time with the same methodical approach?



They don't have to agree, but they ought to uphold them.


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 5, 2006)

That's what I've been trying to say, Surgat. To little avail. At this stage, I'm considering leaving FA - not because of the drama, but because of the admin.


----------



## Hanazawa (Nov 5, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> And pity help us all if the ToS ever changes, because that would mean everyone having to agree to all the changes or else leave.



No. It means pity help us if the ToS changes and someone can't get over their pride issues and enforce the ToS regardless of their personal problems.

Let's say a police officer apprehends a criminal who, if sent for processing and trial, would likely receive the death penalty. Is it okay for the officer to let that person go just because they have a moral objection to the death penalty? Sure, he could pass the criminal over to another officer to handle the issue, but ultimately he's the one responsible for what happens to that offender...

Pinkuh didn't say she'd leave it to another admin. She said she WOULDN'T ENFORCE IT. Which means she won't turn it over, it means she'll ignore it. Turn a blind eye to it. She doesn't want to deal with it, it doesn't get dealt with. I'm still annoyed by this thread because Pinkuh decided SHE didn't want to deal with it, then locked it. My issue is STILL unresolved. Two weeks later. If that's how things get handled here when Pinkuh is involved, what the hell kind of site are you trying to run?


----------



## Lando (Nov 5, 2006)

Sslaxx said:
			
		

> That's what I've been trying to say, Surgat. To little avail. At this stage, I'm considering leaving FA - not because of the drama, but because of the admin.



GOD yes, please leave.


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 5, 2006)

Lando said:
			
		

> Sslaxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm not even interested in the original cause of all this drama, I'm interested in the way the admin 'run' this site. If you haven't noticed the growing dissatisfaction with the way things are going, then more fool you.


----------



## Lando (Nov 5, 2006)

Sslaxx said:
			
		

> Lando said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I haven't noticed anything besides the fact that you whine a lot. Leaving is just fine.


----------



## Xan_vega (Nov 5, 2006)

My god... for once I agree with Lando.

If you don't like how things are ran here, don't like the admins... then don't let the door hit ya where nature split ya. No one is holding a gun to your heads and demanding you stay. You came here of your own free will and you can easily leave. Goodbye.


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> uncia2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



ANd that's going with what I was saying.  If you have the majority of admins in a group giving a ruling and enforcing it, and one admin deliberatly rejects that, then like he said, their ass would be fired.
And again, they may be able to hand off the decision to another admin if they're not comfortable with it, that's cool.  But ignoring it or ruling on it opposed to the groups TOS, THAT is unacceptable.

All admins do not need to AGREE, that's what voting is for, they do not need the same METHODOLOGY, that's why we HAVE multiple admins.  But if it's the groups policy, then it doesn't matter, they are still obligated to ENFORCE the groups policies at all times!  That is the responsibility of a PROFESSIONAL.  So if an admin can't at the very least be professional, then we're better off without them.


----------



## Wolfblade (Nov 5, 2006)

Sslaxx said:
			
		

> Quoting something highly relevant:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Then don't trust her. Go to another admin.

You obviously disagree with her reasoning, and would not want her to handle any issue you have anyways, right? So it is in your best interests if she stays away from an issue where her opinion directly conflicts with your own.

There are many admins. Maybe not enough, maybe too many. Everyone has their own opinion on that as well.

But there are more admins than just Pinkuh, and her saying she will not touch issues involving enforcing a ban she does not approve of is a MUCH more mature response than simply quitting altogether. This stupid issue is not the ONLY issue FA has or ever will have. There's plenty other work for an admin to do, and there are plenty of other admins to address this issue. So long as no more of them quit over it.


----------



## Trinitykat (Nov 5, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> uncia2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



would you still be upset if the issue had gone the other way and one of the admins was going not support the rest of the group? so what if pinkuh locked the thread other admins could have picked it up or responded to you when you created the ticket, it seems like no one delt with your issue, not just Pinkuh.


----------



## Hanazawa (Nov 5, 2006)

Trinitykat said:
			
		

> would you still be upset if the issue had gone the other way and one of the admins was going not support the rest of the group? so what if pinkuh locked the thread other admins could have picked it up or responded to you when you created the ticket, it seems like no one delt with your issue, not just Pinkuh.



My thread being locked means I'm not allowed to talk about the problem publically. The end.


----------



## Xan_vega (Nov 5, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> Trinitykat said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Okay, I will break it down for you. You claimed the picture was a trace, correct? You didn't provide any proof and just wanted the admins to agree with out proof. From what I understand, you were upset about some one using the same pose at most.


----------



## Wolfblade (Nov 5, 2006)

Master_Oki_Akai said:
			
		

> Hanazawa said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're more on the right track here than the others, I think, but still just a little off.

An admin has a responsibility to maturely accept it if the majority of staff makes a ruling to run the site a certain way, even if they disagree.

The admin has a responsibility to accept that, and not >interfere< with it, but they do not have a responsibility to enforce it, unless that is their specific job and only purpose for being there.

Even then, rather than being fired, it is far more professional to simply transfer someone in this situation. She will not enforce a rule she personally disagrees with. Why is her moral conviction so immediately discarded while EVERY argument FOR the ban is based on nothing BUT moral conviction?

She never said she would hinder anyone else from enforcing the ban. Only that she herself would not do it. So without putting words into her mouth, could someone point out how this reaction from her is somehow less mature and less professional than if she just quit and left?

Again, I would much rather have an admin stand back and out of the way when their personal opinion is opposed by the staff majority, rather than have them staying involved with conflicting interest and just getting in the way of everyone else.


----------



## Trinitykat (Nov 5, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> Trinitykat said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


you still created a ticket any admin could have picked that up right? correct me if I'm wrong, and if the issue at hand bothered you that much start a new thread, but it seems to me that you complain A LOT, so I'm not surprised that Pinkuh locked the thread which makes me think that you really have a personal vendetta against her because she doesn't agree with you on so many levels.... also you didn't answer my question,


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> You're more on the right track here than the others, I think, but still just a little off.
> 
> An admin has a responsibility to maturely accept it if the majority of staff makes a ruling to run the site a certain way, even if they disagree.
> 
> ...



I agree and I've said that like 5 times now but maybe not on this thread yet, I can't remember anymore.
You're absolutly right, like i said, if they'd feel more comfortable handing it off to another admin, then do it!  That's a good professional way of dealing with it.  Ignoring it is not, and Countering the TOS for your own reasons is not.  And you're right again, QUITTING while is certainly understandable, isn't going to fix anything but it certainly will weaken the admin group until they're replaced.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Nov 5, 2006)

Well that's the thing, if someone complained and she answered it. It looks like it's handled by an admin. Then then the matter is considered closed, is it not?

Yet if she goes to another admin she's whining? I think people need to step back here just a bit.


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Well that's the thing, if someone complained and she answered it. It looks like it's handled by an admin. Then then the matter is considered closed, is it not?
> 
> Yet if she goes to another admin she's whining? I think people need to step back here just a bit.


Now I don't know about that, but I do know that in this country we do have a little thing called an "appeal".


----------



## Trinitykat (Nov 5, 2006)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Well that's the thing, if someone complained and she answered it. It looks like it's handled by an admin. Then then the matter is considered closed, is it not?
> 
> Yet if she goes to another admin she's whining? I think people need to step back here just a bit.



What? no if she had a problem and no one answered her thats not just one admins fault, but she also started a public thread about something that should have been handled privately because she wanted to start more of the shit thats going on here right now.  im sorry if you think some one is ripping off your art work that sucks, but if its really a problem the admins would have delt with it, but they didn't so it must not be an issue to them as a collective.


----------



## Surgat (Nov 5, 2006)

Sslaxx said:
			
		

> That's what I've been trying to say, Surgat. To little avail. At this stage, I'm considering leaving FA - not because of the drama, but because of the admin.



Heh. 

The only advice I can give is to use small words, simple sentences and analogies, and a very calm, _matter-of-fact_ tone when dealing with them. Above all, you need to be _patient_ when dealing with these kinds of people, and be prepared to explain something a few times before it sinks in. 

Unless Uncia is being obstinate because Pinkuh is her friend or something. Then don't bother. 

Also: If we let administrators get away with not enforcing the rule(s) of their choice _without_ some identification as to what rules they enforce/agree to enforce, then confusion may arise as to which admin is enforcing which rule. Furthermore, without an identification system of this type, what would stop an admin from choosing to uphold a rule in one instance but not another?  

In any case, this still requires that administrators must be held to their agreements.


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

Surgat said:
			
		

> Sslaxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The same as any user would


----------



## Kitch (Nov 5, 2006)

Uhhh... doesn't anybody notice that this whole thing began because NONE OF THE ADMINISTRATORS ENFORCED THE TERMS OF SERVICE?

Cub porn was/is banned by the original (and, currently, in-force) terms of service.  This whole thing started because they didn't enforce that ban from the start.  Now everybody is ripping each other's heads off because NONE of the admins did their job, to enforce the terms of service.


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 5, 2006)

Surgat said:
			
		

> Sslaxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's amazing how persistent Uncia is regarding Pinkuh. But yes, it'd be nice to have identification of what admin will do what, if we do have to get into the realm of admin not enforcing certain rules.


----------



## Trinitykat (Nov 5, 2006)

Kitch said:
			
		

> Uhhh... doesn't anybody notice that this whole thing began because NONE OF THE ADMINISTRATORS ENFORCED THE TERMS OF SERVICE?
> 
> Cub porn was/is banned by the original (and, currently, in-force) terms of service.  This whole thing started because they didn't enforce that ban from the start.  Now everybody is ripping each other's heads off because NONE of the admins did their job, to enforce the terms of service.



your right


----------



## Sslaxx (Nov 5, 2006)

Kitch said:
			
		

> Uhhh... doesn't anybody notice that this whole thing began because NONE OF THE ADMINISTRATORS ENFORCED THE TERMS OF SERVICE?
> 
> Cub porn was/is banned by the original (and, currently, in-force) terms of service.  This whole thing started because they didn't enforce that ban from the start.  Now everybody is ripping each other's heads off because NONE of the admins did their job, to enforce the terms of service.


Oh, yes. It makes you wonder what is the point of having a ToS agreement if none of the admin are willing to enforce it.


----------



## Hanazawa (Nov 5, 2006)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> Then don't trust her. Go to another admin.



I already tried contacting another admin. I got nothing in response. She stepped in and shut me up on the public front. My hands were tied, nothing gets done. THAT is a problem. If it happens once? It will happen again.



			
				Xan_vega said:
			
		

> Okay, I will break it down for you. You claimed the picture was a trace, correct? You didn't provide any proof and just wanted the admins to agree with out proof. From what I understand, you were upset about some one using the same pose at most.





			
				Trinitykat said:
			
		

> What? no if she had a problem and no one answered her thats not just one admins fault, but she also started a public thread about something that should have been handled privately because she wanted to start more of the shit thats going on here right now.  im sorry if you think some one is ripping off your art work that sucks, but if its really a problem the admins would have delt with it, but they didn't so it must not be an issue to them as a collective.



Thanks for the ad hominem there, you also have no clue what that thread is about. GOING INTO DETAIL ABOUT WHY THAT WAS POSTED = DRAMADRAMADRAMADRAMA, WHICH I WAS AVOIDING. YOU'D KNOW THAT IF YOU READ THE THREAD. thanks and shut up.



			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> SMART THINGS



'nuff said (thanks)


----------



## Suule (Nov 5, 2006)

Okay... let me get this right. We're faced with a domino effect then. 

This whole shit started with people uploading stuff against the ToS. 

Then some admins started peeing on the ToS and put Dragoneer in a difficult position, making him do the poll. T

The poll turned into "Censorship" vs "Freedom of Speech" because few people wanted to look it that way and buy some new fans with their "I don't support censorship stance."

Now the ToS is about to change becuase admins (that in any way do not own the site) force Dragoneer to change it.




EXCELLENT.

Seriously though. ToS is ToS - it's the law. And insubordination should be dealt with propely.


----------



## Rapture (Nov 5, 2006)

Eh. One phrase keeps going through my head over and over with this. "United we stand, divided we fall." I'm starting to see BOTH sides of the arguement now because of censorship and incest censorship in 'Holy Books' involving religions like Christianity and Buddhism. My head hurts though so I don't feel like elaborating.

EDIT: If it was in the TOS in the first place, why is there a big fight over it now? This is kinda confusing.


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

Sslaxx said:
			
		

> Kitch said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


See now I'd like to see some proof of that.
Because I'm hearing 2 consistent sides to that one.

A: The admins aren't enforcing the ToS
B: The admins ARE enforcing the ToS but some loudly outspoken members happen to disagree with how the ToS is being enforced

Now, I haven't seen any evidence for either side, but so far what I've noticed, the proponents for option B seem to have the more well thought out arguements and reasoning and experience on their side.


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

Rapture said:
			
		

> Eh. One phrase keeps going through my head over and over with this. "United we stand, divided we fall." I'm starting to see BOTH sides of the arguement now because of censorship and incest censorship in 'Holy Books' involving religions like Christianity and Buddhism. My head hurts though so I don't feel like elaborating.
> 
> EDIT: If it was in the TOS in the first place, why is there a big fight over it now? This is kinda confusing.


That would be the point.  Some of the more intelligent and well informed appraisals pointed out that this started because a particular group of people didn't like the way the ToS was worded and wouldn't shut up about it.


----------



## uncia2000 (Nov 5, 2006)

Suule said:
			
		

> Okay... let me get this right.
> <clip>



Well, I can safely say you managed to get pretty much all of that wrong, Suule.

Wolfblade's post was pretty much spot-on, in terms of what actually happened.


----------



## Suule (Nov 5, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Well, I can safely say you managed to get pretty much all of that wrong, Suule.
> 
> Wolfblade's post was pretty much spot-on, in terms of what actually happened.



I didn't ask you Uncia. You know my opinion on you being an admin.


----------



## Lando (Nov 5, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Suule said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hah! Poor Suule.


----------



## Trinitykat (Nov 5, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> Wolfblade said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



you really are a whiny little bitch arn't you? sorry if the issue you were trying to address was not addressed. I can't argue with your immeasurable logic and caps lock, in my opinion you are a tool, who gets off on shouting about pointless on line crap.  " an on line argument is like the special Olympics, even if you win you are still retarded" good night and good luck with your bitching.


----------



## uncia2000 (Nov 5, 2006)

Suule said:
			
		

> I didn't ask you Uncia. You know my opinion on you being an admin.



Cool; you're entitled to your opinions, Suule, even if you continually mock and denigrate every admin, bar Dragoneer.

The ToS rules about "harassment" don't apply when admins are the "target", of course.


----------



## Hanazawa (Nov 5, 2006)

Trinitykat said:
			
		

> you really are a whiny little bitch arn't you? sorry if the issue you were trying to address was not addressed. I can't argue with your immeasurable logic and caps lock, in my opinion you are a tool, who gets off on shouting about pointless on line crap.  " an on line argument is like the special Olympics, even if you win you are still retarded" good night and good luck with your bitching.



Again, ad hominem. Argue against me with actual logic and I'll listen to what you have to say. If you think I'm a whiny bitch, fine. You still have no idea what the actual issue is, and have yet to prove otherwise. Good luck to _you_.


----------



## Suule (Nov 5, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Cool; you're entitled to your opinions, Suule, even if you continually mock and denigrate every admin, bar Dragoneer.
> 
> The ToS rules about "harassment" don't apply when admins are the "target", of course.



Well since we have freedom of expression, I freely express my feelings about people.


----------



## uncia2000 (Nov 5, 2006)

Suule said:
			
		

> Well since we have freedom of expression...



*nods* And I like to try to keep things running that way, too, online; even if our slogan is no longer there...


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Suule said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Um question, WHY exactly is that?
I mean I'd figure it's to prevent the admins to boot somebody because of personal differences but it doesn't seem to me to make much sense for an admin to have to sit there and take it.


----------



## Hanazawa (Nov 5, 2006)

Master_Oki_Akai said:
			
		

> uncia2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




It's called sarcasm


----------



## Master_Oki_Akai (Nov 5, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> Master_Oki_Akai said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well if that's the case then sorry, I can't tell.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Nov 5, 2006)

Master_Oki_Akai said:
			
		

> A: The admins aren't enforcing the ToS
> B: The admins ARE enforcing the ToS but some loudly outspoken members happen to disagree with how the ToS is being enforced
> 
> Now, I haven't seen any evidence for either side, but so far what I've noticed, the proponents for option B seem to have the more well thought out arguements and reasoning and experience on their side.



I think it would be good to go to the harassment forum, 

http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=3281

http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=2920

How about these?


----------



## N3X15 (Nov 5, 2006)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Master_Oki_Akai said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Congrats on 1,500 posts.

I don't personally have anything against Pinkuh.  However, you just _can't_ ease back in your chair and mumble, "Well, I'm not going to enforce this rule. " and not expect to get your ass handed to you by a superior officer.  

Also, why announce that you won't enforce it, when other admins _will_? Wouldn't it be better to simply silently ignore the cub stuff and let other admins deal with it, than cause public assholery and distrust by voicing your non-enforcement of the regulations?


----------



## Hanazawa (Nov 5, 2006)

N3X15 (or do you prefer Nexis?), where have you been all my life?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Nov 5, 2006)

I'm in agreement with you Nexis.

By the way, does anyone remember the history of the FA incident of POOL's CLOSED.

Maybe you'll see why admins need to learn restraint sometimes.


----------



## uncia2000 (Nov 5, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> Master_Oki_Akai said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A lightly ironic observation, at most.

Two reasons, for a start;
- It's not always clear whether people are "harassing" an admin personally, rather than genuinely seeking resolution over a particular grievance/issue. Far too easy just to catch someone on a bad day, in an emotive frame of mind and say "OK, enough harassment, temp/permban...". As happens on some other communities...
- Any ban for actual harassment that might be deserving is, when the recipient is an admin, a recipe for further strife and discord should the person temp/permbanned start to wave "us against the unjust admin; the whole site is corrupt;etc." banners which can so easily cause grief to totally innocent bystanders in the community. 

All-in-all, it's often far more constructive to bite the lip a bit harder than a mythical "average" user might be expected to endure (with regards to "harassment"), thus those rules as stated don't _really_ apply, IMHO, to the degree as stated when it comes to admins being "on the receiving end".

Just my own p.o.v. on that, anyhow; and having seen enough damage done elsewhere from those admins who've been unable to disengage their ego and chose to see harassment and personal attacks on themselves everywhere. Not pretty to watch...

Is that a bit clearer, then?


----------



## uncia2000 (Nov 5, 2006)

N3X15 said:
			
		

> Also, why announce that you won't enforce it, when other admins _will_? Wouldn't it be better to simply silently ignore the cub stuff and let other admins deal with it, than cause public assholery and distrust by voicing your non-enforcement of the regulations?



Better? Yes, IMO.

(Albeit the "assholery and distrust" is less where people don't deliberately hype that further, or call for a lynchmob to depose said individual, rather than discuss and clarify in a relatively calm manner).


----------



## N3X15 (Nov 5, 2006)

Hanazawa said:
			
		

> N3X15 (or do you prefer Nexis?), where have you been all my life?



On this goddamn squeaky chair in front of a messy computer desk.



(Whichever btw)


			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> I'm in agreement with you Nexis.
> 
> By the way, does anyone remember the history of the FA incident of POOL's CLOSED.
> 
> Maybe you'll see why admins need to learn restraint sometimes.


... Is there a movie of it at blockbuster?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Nov 5, 2006)

Well from what I remember, I don't know what the actual truth is, since none of the admins really clarified what happened. Pinkuh got into a feud with some of the admins at Y! The accusation was that they used her Y! password which was the same as the admin account here to break into FA.

There may have been some coding issues following that because the site was also getting the Pool's Closed image macro as well in later similar hacks.


----------



## N3X15 (Nov 5, 2006)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> Well from what I remember, I don't know what the actual truth is, since none of the admins really clarified what happened. Pinkuh got into a feud with some of the admins at Y! The accusation was that they used her Y! password which was the same as the admin account here to break into FA.
> 
> There may have been some coding issues following that because the site was also getting the Pool's Closed image macro as well in later similar hacks.



First one would be proscecutable by law.

The next few mighta been /b/tards.  (www.4chan.org)


----------



## Marthaen (Nov 6, 2006)

Well to clear things up a bit. I'm stepping down for a multitude of reasons. One being that after this incident I realized that I just don't have the time to deal with it. Secondly I feel that there are others out there that are probably a better choice than myself as an admin. Thirdly while I would've enforced any policy laid down I still am slightly against the current issue and would've probably still fought over it. I am who I am and that's merely a soft bodied human in the end and I know that I cannot influence others by pressing down my beliefs down thier throats. I feel that it's best to just step aside and let the remaining admins deal with the site for what it's worth. I'm not leaving FA but I'm just leaving as an administrative member. That is all.


----------



## Trinitykat (Nov 6, 2006)

ok aparently i commented on this thread without knowing it, my friend was over and on my computer they must have used my screen name I apologise for anything "i" said that mayhave been inapropreate mainly im sorry to Hanazawa aparently you were the target of my friends pent up rage...or whatnot sorry about that....oops


----------



## blueflame (Nov 6, 2006)

Master_Oki_Akai said:
			
		

> Sslaxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Just posting the following to satisfy my curiosity on the matter:


Copied right from the ToS:



> What we do NOT allow:
> 
> Depictions of sexually immature characters in any sexual situation are not permitted on Fur Affinity
> 
> ...



Had it been enforced, wouldn't a lot of images, especially the ones labeled "loli" or "underage" have been pulled before the whole ordeal started?  It currently leaves some liberties as far as what it encompasses to the Administration team, but I don't see how it isn't cut and dry, unless maybe it's being overanalyzed until no one knows what they're reading.  _That, and, you all have some spelling errors in thar._ :wink:

One thing that would concern me, which I hope was considered was that this could lead to FA attracting more of this type of "art".  Probably won't since there are undoubtedly other sites out there which allow the same content, but something to note nonetheless.


----------



## SynjoDeonecros (Nov 6, 2006)

blueflame said:
			
		

> One thing that would concern me, which I hope was considered was that this could lead to FA attracting more of this type of "art".  Probably won't since there are undoubtedly other sites out there which allow the same content, but something to note nonetheless.



Ah, yes, the dreaded double-edged sword of Damocles. On the one hand, this announcement and the sudden swarm of artists leaving because of it could end up opening the door for the site to be converted into another CubCentral and crowding out all the other artists, but on the other, having the ban put into place could have opened up the door for a cluster-fuck witch hunt for any fetish the masses deem too distasteful to stay.

Frankly, I'm surprised that an administrator would actually leave because of this on the same principles that most of the other cut-and-run artists are, but it's not my place to tell him what s/he should or should not do. All I've really got to say, is don't let the door hit you on the way out, and don't come crying back to us after a week or so of moral deliberating; if you're really going to leave, then leave and don't come back, don't turn this site into a revolving door for whiners.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Nov 6, 2006)

blueflame said:
			
		

> Had it been enforced, wouldn't a lot of images, especially the ones labeled "loli" or "underage" have been pulled before the whole ordeal started?  It currently leaves some liberties as far as what it encompasses to the Administration team, but I don't see how it isn't cut and dry, unless maybe it's being overanalyzed until no one knows what they're reading.  _That, and, you all have some spelling errors in thar._ :wink:



Because children can get erections, because there are various style differences that are child like. Sexually underdeveloped is a very broad term. So if a 40ft creature on this site had a 2cm penis, is he sexually underdeveloped? When does ejaculation occur with a child? If someone is flat chested, are they under this rule too?

The assumption that it wasn't pulled is interesting. The problem was that people's interpretation of this rule wasn't so cut and dry, it's not over reading or overanalyzing, it's called "interpretation".

I noticed the irony, the people pushing for enforcement, had this blow up in their faces because they refused to see there was always going to be a grey line. They ran behind the platform "it needs to be enforced" and kept stirring the pot until eventually the question had to be addressed. Now look what happened.

Those screaming for enforcement, could have done a better job of realizing why the TOS had such a loophole and maybe asked for input on trying to define it a bit better or come up with wording that was a bit better. This is impossible for a 100% enforcement, but doesn't mean it wasn't worth looking for solution for less screaming and division.

I had kept making the statement that the most stink seemed to revolve more around commercial characters because of the point of reference people are drawing from. That seemed to get more the ire of people reporting violations. If that was eliminated a lot of the screaming would have gone down quite a bit. I really doubt it would have ever gone away.

So in the end, the people got what they want, for better or for worse, they wanted a more clear cut rule. Now you have it.


----------



## blueflame (Nov 6, 2006)

Well, I donâ€™t entirely agree with you, but I do see your point.  Thank you for clarifying.


----------



## dave hyena (Nov 6, 2006)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> So in the end, the people got what they want, for better or for worse, they wanted a more clear cut rule. Now you have it.



I am reminded of the tale of the Monkeys paw.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Nov 6, 2006)

blueflame said:
			
		

> Well, I donâ€™t entirely agree with you, but I do see your point.  Thank you for clarifying.



I think both sides were just pushing it anyways. This was just bound to happen quite honestly.


----------



## N3X15 (Nov 6, 2006)

Trinitykat said:
			
		

> ok aparently i commented on this thread without knowing it, my friend was over and on my computer they must have used my screen name I apologise for anything "i" said that mayhave been inapropreate mainly im sorry to Hanazawa aparently you were the target of my friends pent up rage...or whatnot sorry about that....oops



Use the logoff button :|


----------



## Arshes Nei (Nov 6, 2006)

Marthaen said:
			
		

> I am who I am and that's merely a soft bodied human in the end and I know that I cannot influence others by pressing down my beliefs down thier throats.



I thought you were a nervous FC ninja.


----------



## uncia2000 (Nov 6, 2006)

You'll have to let me know if that's on-topic, Arshes... I honestly don't know. :?


----------



## Arshes Nei (Nov 6, 2006)

uncia2000 said:
			
		

> You'll have to let me know if that's on-topic, Arshes... I honestly don't know. :?



It is, he is merely stating he's stepping down and stating he's human. I'm giving him my point of reference when I had spotted him from FC.


----------



## Hyenaworks (Nov 6, 2006)

It takes a lot stand up for your principles against all the stones cast your way.


----------



## Trinitykat (Nov 7, 2006)

N3X15 said:
			
		

> Trinitykat said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



i fugred it wasn't a problem Oh well next time I guess ill know better -_-;


----------



## Summercat (Nov 7, 2006)

Hyenaworks said:
			
		

> It takes a lot stand up for your principles against all the stones cast your way.



It's the easiest thing in the world.


----------



## Wolfblade (Nov 7, 2006)

Marthaen said:
			
		

> Well to clear things up a bit. I'm stepping down for a multitude of reasons. One being that after this incident I realized that I just don't have the time to deal with it. Secondly I feel that there are others out there that are probably a better choice than myself as an admin. Thirdly while I would've enforced any policy laid down I still am slightly against the current issue and would've probably still fought over it. I am who I am and that's merely a soft bodied human in the end and I know that I cannot influence others by pressing down my beliefs down thier throats. I feel that it's best to just step aside and let the remaining admins deal with the site for what it's worth. I'm not leaving FA but I'm just leaving as an administrative member. That is all.



Thank you dude for that clarification. This makes a MUCH more reasonable departure as opposed to the image presented before. It had looked like you were leaving JUST because you were outvoted, and that would have been a bit unreasonable.

This sounds a lot better, and I hope people are a bit more understanding of your decision now.


----------



## Summercat (Nov 7, 2006)

Wolfblade said:
			
		

> Marthaen said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm more understanding, but that never changed the fact I accepted it from the begining.


----------

