Vouching. My thoughts.

[Mykhol 1]

I look through member submissions, member protests, ban protests, mod submissions, ban requests

and all I see is people choosing sides. People +1'ing and -1'ing with reasons like "I LIKE HIM" or "NO HES FAT". Can we make Aegean's life worse (:D) and make a new rule about vouching, yes I know about the new vouching team thing; but can we have it so

 

 

Acceptable:

"+1 to mod; Good player, know's rules thoroughly, enforces rules even without power, active member on TS3 and servers."

 

Not Acceptable:

"+1 he gives me cupcakes"

 

Not Acceptable:

"-1 to mod; hes fat"

 

Not acceptable:

"-1 to member submission; never see him"

 

Acceptable:

"+1 to member submission; good player, active, knows rules, doesn't flame, doesn't cause problems"

 

Acceptable:

"+1 to removal from clan; Flames a lot, causes problems, disrespects members, troll's, makes xG look bad"

 

Not acceptable:

"-1 to removal from clan; i dont see him rage or flame, why ban him?"

 

What if "Not acceptable" was not even COUNTED as a vote? and "acceptable' was? Wouldn't things be even slightly better?

Obviously thing's would be judged acceptable or not acceptable by the forum admin currently on. Just a way to get more mature reactions and responses.

 

Thought's?

[Otherworldly 2]

Vouching committee is going into effect soon.

[Heisenberg 1]

I still have no clue why we're getting a vouching committee

[NotKevinShady 1]

-1 to removal from clan; i dont see him rage or flame, why ban him?"

 

DOnt know why this is a non acceptable..

[ShakeNBake 0]

-1 to removal from clan; i dont see him rage or flame, why ban him?"

 

DOnt know why this is a non acceptable..

 

It's because just because you see someone for yourself doesn't justify not kicking. Unless you've been online literally every second they have been.

[Mykhol 1]

Kevin, if there was massive amounts of proof of flaming and trolling, and someone said that, you think that would be acceptable?

and I still don't understand the vouching committee either.

[Heisenberg 1]

Kevin, if there was massive amounts of proof of flaming and trolling, and someone said that, you think that would be acceptable?

and I still don't understand the vouching committee either.

 

I think its to create a elitist "inner circle" who thinks only thier voice should be heard. It's turning our true democracy into a repulic, by seizing power like tyrants. Soon they're going to conspire against us and make it so only the vouching committee can play on the servers. Then they're going to work thier way into the congress and revoke SOPA

Just kidding XD

[Mykhol 1]

I think its to create a elitist "inner circle" who thinks only thier voice should be heard. It's turning our true democracy into a repulic, by seizing power like tyrants. Soon they're going to conspire against us and make it so only the vouching committee can play on the servers. Then they're going to work thier way into the congress and revoke SOPA

I'm not kidding.

[Otherworldly 2]

Umm...you have the idea all wrong...

 

It's a protection we are going to SEE IF IT WORKS FIRST by putting it into place.

[serbiansnaga 9]

revoke sopa? but isnt that a good thing? as in, isnt it a good idea to revoke sopa even though it hasnt been passed yet

[HighPlains 0]

-1 Penguin is fat

[Aegean 849]

Why do people never read my threads or announcements? that's exactly how I read the vouches.... I don't count EVERY -1 unless they have a good reason, I count the +1's, but I might change it so only reasonable +1's get counted. WHY DO PEOPLE THINK WE ARE DERPS MY GAWDDDD

[Mykhol 1]

Hey now, it was 4 am when i posted this you think i would notice/remember something like that^?^^?

[Chickenlips 0]

I think when people vouch they should vouch based on proof and like legit reasoning. I mean like in member submissions it's like acceptable to say, oh hey I like him, but in ban requests and member protests I find it extremely stupid when someone says "-1 I like him etc etc". I agree with you.

[ShakeNBake 0]

I dont really see how the committee will change anything. I mean, when you think about it, it's like we cloned aegean several times with slightly different opinions and made the group of them decide if people were going to join or not. As opposed to the one original aegean.

 

If anything it turns our dictatorship that takes into consideration the general public opinion and turns it into an oligarchy that takes into consideration the general public opinion.