Jump to content


Photo

MT Candidates Discussion


  • Please log in to reply
192 replies to this topic

#141 Nortrom

Nortrom

    Marshal

  • WC Online Team
  • 3,008 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 April 2018 - 06:45 PM

Napoleon,
 
I've stated I'll share my detailed plan once elected/appointed. Unlike DH, I do give general directions of things that I feel have to be improved, though. Let's assume MT does adopt me into the team, I would still hold 20% of the voting power only.
 
- Are you aware of the fact that DH has, on several occasions, jumped to conclusions only to later admit he didn't even bother reading the actual content?
 
- How do you feel about DH's attempt to weasel out of a false accusation towards morx? 
 
- he did not hesitate to defend MT during the "PB clique attack" which shows he is courageous : I feel he was defending his friend, lonello, a lost cause, not the MT. 
 
As for DH being another lonello, 
- He is uninformed
- Jumps to conclusions without checking facts
- Makes incorrect accusations (although, unlike lonello, he does admit it atleast)
- Ignores simple questions when he doesn't like them or/and gives "answers" that don't even remotely address the question asked
 
No, I'm not another lonello. There's a reason he picked me as his main enemy. Exactly that, because I am not a lonello :)

"Rock is overpowered, paper is fine" - scissors

See this thread for live gaming updates

See this thread my blog post

 

Have an ongoing issue with the MT and in need of a "lawyer?" Nortrom Stratego Legal Services offers their services pro deo.

 

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor”


#142 DISLIKE

DISLIKE

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 29 April 2018 - 06:53 PM

Fair enough, dislike.
 
The fact that you criticize the posting because the writer used parenthesis is absurd. The material provided in the parenthetic parameters further illustrates and solidifies their point of view–they are not superfluous sentences, but decidedly essential when making one's point of view clearer for anyone wanting to know better his candidacy platform.
 
The fact that you wrote what you did distinguishes itself as an attack without basis or context to the related complaint–the use of parenthesis. Thus, I conclude you have a personal bias against this person and it makes your remarks less credible.

 
Haha, you are good at twisting stuff around by only referring to the first sentence, I'll give you that. THIS post exactly marks the spot.
 
Well, let me elaborate, because you do not seem to grasp the essence without (parenthesized) explanations, or deem the community unfit to do so themselves. I am going to copy Nortroms message here, and elaborate, though without parenthesis, as they seem to distract you from the actual point made.
 

Judge the following cases/reports:
 
- Language abuse (Just as apparent as here)
- Chasing (Not (yet) enforced here)
- Draw refusal (Same as here, but during a game, we could actually watch & chat so we hardly ever had to retroactively judge a case)
 
Often done by reviewing logs or/and watching the game replay.
 
Community related tasks:
 
- Engage in fruitful discussions regarding improvements and such (does not include demonizing members you may or may not agree with)
A1) Can you state that this statement is not utmost hypocritical, after Nortrom has been demonizing Lonello for weeks if not months? A2) And did Lonello actually demonize someone? A3) And do you really see added value from this statement? Do you really regard the community incapable of deducting this themselves. I for one would've put more trust in your fellow Stratego-maniacs.
- Communicate between AT (Admin Team) and (forum) members (would be MT and (forum) members here)
- Forum management (This forum could use some management ;))
B1) Do you see added value from this statement? B2) Don't you regard this as subjective? Something the community is capable of deciding themselves? B3) Don't you regard this as an offensive sting towards the current MT, he is supposed to be teaming up with? B4) Are you willing to deny that he basically states all of them do a bad job currently, and he is going to teach them a lesson? Do you really think that is a good foundation of future cooperation with existing MT members? 
- Tournaments (We have a TC here, so this wouldn't be applicable)
- Introducing / helping out new members (This 'other site' had one big chat room opposed to 20ish here, so any new members would be spotted immediately. Much harder on here, also, the interface is more intuitive here. "Play game" can't get much simpler than that).
 
Miscellaneous:
 
- Software testing (probably wouldnt be applicable here, but still a useful skill as it can help reproduce bugs/glitches)
- Software improvement suggestions ( :))
C1) What is this smiley supposed to implicate? C2) What is its added value?
- Battling multiple accounts (unless all accounts were registered) (We had more tools at our disposal, also, multi accounts don't seem to be a priority here)
- Resolving technical issues (java, firewalls/connection, installing the software etc) (I've helped several members here with the dreaded bug(s) where a game won't start)
D1) This is something you (KissMyCookie) hold in high regard. However, it does not apply here. Metaforge is driven by a Java Applet, either as browser applet or running within a JVM on a PC. Java Applet's were and are a high security risk, and hence most browsers and/or firewalls blocked them. Although this role was indeed useful there (though an instruction on the website would suffice too), I want to emphasize that it does not apply to Stratego.com as it used more modern and secure technologies. You (KissMyCookie) getting all hyped up over something you probably know was irrelevant (and trying to make a fool of the rest of the community over it) shows your personal bias.
- Training & Introduction of new mods (I don't know the current procedure, but given some recent examples, I suppose this could definitely use some improvements ;)).
E1) Do you see added value from this statement? E2) Don't you regard this as subjective? Something the community is capable of deciding themselves? E3) Don't you regard this as an offensive sting towards the current MT, he is supposed to be teaming up with? E4) Are you willing to deny that he basically states all of them do a bad job currently, and he is going to teach them a lesson? Do you really think that is a good foundation of future cooperation with existing MT members? 

 
So basically, I observed four facts here:

  • This posts contains stingy - unnecessary - remarks. Undesirable for a moderator; as they should remain objective and not attach personal stings over grudges.
  • This posts contains subjectivity in an attempt to desperately convince the community. In my opinion, the community is perfectly capable to judge for themselves, they are (mostly) not imbeciles. Undesirable for a moderator; as they should trust the judgement of those they serve.
  • This post contains a hypocritical remark. Undesirable for a moderator; as they should hold integrity in high regard.
  • This post looks down upon the existing MT. A severe indication of incompatibility, which makes him an undesirable moderator for Stratego.com at this time.

To elaborate further for you, based on these four observations, I replied with with my opinion over those:
 

This post may have been decent if most parenthesized stuff would have been left out. Exactly those unnecessary stingy remarks make you an undesirable moderator in my opinion. You seem to be unable to purely remain objective, without adding your personal stingy stuff triggering others you do not seem to respect. Also, you seem to hold yourself in way too high regard, which is undesirable too. Finally, your remark on "demonization" is hypocritical to say the least.

My vote goes to any other than those involved in the late mess created. You first create a mess and then promote yourself by solving it. Reminds me of Trump and Kim Jong-un.

 
 
Based on purely deductible factual observations from a single post, you manage to claim I have a personal bias? While it is purely based on the contents of a single message I am replying to?
And that makes you also claim my opinion is less credible than those of others?
 
Seriously, you are either trying to fool the community with your fuel (or cheerleading), or your brains must be stuck up your cookie.
 
But one thing gets pretty clear from this all: it does show your (KissMyCookie) personal bias. Reflecting and blaming that trait on others is pathetic, and confirmatory of it. If I were to use your logic now, I'd have to conclude that that makes your remarks less credible.


Edited by DISLIKE, 29 April 2018 - 07:07 PM.

This community is lost. Take a look at my profile to see what is wrong here.


#143 KissMyCookie

KissMyCookie

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,225 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Gold Spy

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:11 PM

@dislike–You wanted me to reply, I did, and thus it is not my problem if you do not like my answer.

 

As for your personal insults, they do give away much about you, and that also is not my problem.



#144 DISLIKE

DISLIKE

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:14 PM

@dislike–You wanted me to reply, I did, and thus it is not my problem if you do not like my answer.

 

As for your personal insults, they do give away much about you, and that also is not my problem.

 

So suddenly you are all dodgy and not so "objective" anymore? I asked you 18 questions, but judging from this reply, you are unable to address them properly. And as for your single hypocritical remark: you were the first to insult either party.

 

You are only detailed and elaborate when it suits you. Personal bias?


Edited by DISLIKE, 29 April 2018 - 07:16 PM.

This community is lost. Take a look at my profile to see what is wrong here.


#145 Fks

Fks

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,303 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:18 PM

So suddenly you are all dodgy and not so "objective" anymore? I asked you 18 questions, but judging from this reply, you are unable to address them properly. And as for your single hypocritical remark: you were the first to insult either party.

 

You are only detailed and elaborate when it suits you. Personal bias?

Why does a member from 1 week ago. Comment on forum drama and actually start to stir up some him self? It is very Shady. 


Proud Member of the North American Stratego Federation (NASF)

#146 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 729 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Sergeant

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:20 PM

Oh I think it is a new incarnation of Mr Alias.



#147 DISLIKE

DISLIKE

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:22 PM

Why does a member from 1 week ago. Comment on forum drama and actually start to stir up some him self? It is very Shady. 

 

 

Oh I think it is a new incarnation of Mr Alias.

 

This does not contribute in any substantive way to the matter at hand: the discussion on MT candidates and their minions. I will therefore not be bothered by it. It actually makes the topic stray off of the substantive post I made, which might actually be your intention Morx; as that is what you have been doing a lot lately.


Edited by DISLIKE, 29 April 2018 - 07:25 PM.

This community is lost. Take a look at my profile to see what is wrong here.


#148 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 729 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Sergeant

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:23 PM

That is why I was calling you out, so everyone knows who was voting for Don_Homer in the not so anonymous poll :)

 

Also that was also a reason why most people preferred the non-anonymous poll, everytime you get exposed, you come back with another one :)



#149 DISLIKE

DISLIKE

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:29 PM

That is why I was calling you out, so everyone knows who was voting for Don_Homer in the not so anonymous poll :)

 

Also that was also a reason why most people preferred the non-anonymous poll, everytime you get exposed, you come back with another one :)

 

You accused Lonello of libel, along with Unladen Swallow and Nortrom. But what's this? Completely unjustified: libel. Please elaborate: who am I?

 

If you are right, I'll give you credit. If you are as wrong as Unladen Swallow and Nortrom, I might as well file a case against you three for libel, which is something I'm seriously considering, as that is your preferred style right?


  • Morx likes this

This community is lost. Take a look at my profile to see what is wrong here.


#150 Fks

Fks

    Major

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,303 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:29 PM

This does not contribute in any substantive way to the matter at hand: the discussion on MT candidates and their minions. I will therefore not be bothered by it. It actually makes the topic stray off of the substantive post I made, which might actually be your intention Morx; as that is what you have been doing a lot lately.

Whether I agree with Kmc or not I know who he is and he stands behinds his words. You are someone hiding and trying to cause trouble. 

 

I suggest to MT if not enforce the rule against Multiple alias on game side play then do so on the forums. I am for having more then one account and I understand why people would want to have that on the game side of Stratego but there is no point for having 2 forum accounts. It lets this user "Dislike" to do exactly as Morx posted above. 


  • Nortrom and KissMyCookie like this
Proud Member of the North American Stratego Federation (NASF)

#151 Unladen Swallow

Unladen Swallow

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 826 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:32 PM

You accused Lonello of libel, along with Unladen Swallow and Nortrom. But what's this? Completely unjustified: libel. Please elaborate: who am I?

 

If you are right, I'll give you credit. If you are as wrong as Unladen Swallow and Nortrom, I might as well file a case against you three for libel, which is something I'm seriously considering, as that is your preferred style right?

 

Nick,

 

Libel is written defamation of character. Having an incorrect guess to who an alias is, does not constitute defamation. Though of course, you are welcome to open a case on it.


  • KissMyCookie and Fks like this
I used to play against a few drunken idiots in College and University. I just recently discovered this game online, playing my first matches against real-world opponents. After 100 games, I'm now one of the top 10 players in the world.

#152 Unladen Swallow

Unladen Swallow

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 826 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:33 PM

.


Edited by Unladen Swallow, 29 April 2018 - 07:36 PM.

I used to play against a few drunken idiots in College and University. I just recently discovered this game online, playing my first matches against real-world opponents. After 100 games, I'm now one of the top 10 players in the world.

#153 DISLIKE

DISLIKE

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:34 PM

Nick,

 

Libel is written defamation of character. Having an incorrect guess to who an alias is, does not constitute defamation. Though of course, you are welcome to open a case on it.

 

So I am going to be called Nick from now on? Fine by me. A Nick-name  :P


This community is lost. Take a look at my profile to see what is wrong here.


#154 Unladen Swallow

Unladen Swallow

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 826 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:35 PM

So I am going to be called Nick from now on? Fine by me. A Nick-name  :P

 

I will Have Fun by calling you that. :D


I used to play against a few drunken idiots in College and University. I just recently discovered this game online, playing my first matches against real-world opponents. After 100 games, I'm now one of the top 10 players in the world.

#155 Unladen Swallow

Unladen Swallow

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 826 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:38 PM

I hope you're not mad that I was the Revealer on your previous accounts, Dislike. 


Edited by Unladen Swallow, 29 April 2018 - 07:39 PM.

I used to play against a few drunken idiots in College and University. I just recently discovered this game online, playing my first matches against real-world opponents. After 100 games, I'm now one of the top 10 players in the world.

#156 DISLIKE

DISLIKE

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:38 PM

I will Have Fun by calling you that. :D

 

So you are implying you relate me to Have Fun too right? Pathetic. If it is not called libel, I do not know the correct term for it, but it sure is abusive behavior in my opinion. Does cyber-bullying fit the bill?


This community is lost. Take a look at my profile to see what is wrong here.


#157 Unladen Swallow

Unladen Swallow

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 826 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 29 April 2018 - 07:41 PM

So you are implying you relate me to Have Fun too right? Pathetic. If it is not called libel, I do not know the correct term for it, but it sure is abusive behavior in my opinion. Does cyber-bullying fit the bill?

 

Where did I imply you were Have Fun? I'm just emboldening certain words.

 

 

I hope that being the brave Challenger! you are, you will rise to the challenge and tell everyone on the forum your alternate accounts. :o


I used to play against a few drunken idiots in College and University. I just recently discovered this game online, playing my first matches against real-world opponents. After 100 games, I'm now one of the top 10 players in the world.

#158 DISLIKE

DISLIKE

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 29 April 2018 - 08:15 PM

After all off-topic mess created by Unladen Swallow, I'd like to return to stuff that actually matters.
 
@KissMyCookie I am requesting a reply, as this message concerns you, and is asking 18 direct questions, in a similar way you request them from others.


--
 

Fair enough, dislike.
 
The fact that you criticize the posting because the writer used parenthesis is absurd. The material provided in the parenthetic parameters further illustrates and solidifies their point of view–they are not superfluous sentences, but decidedly essential when making one's point of view clearer for anyone wanting to know better his candidacy platform.
 
The fact that you wrote what you did distinguishes itself as an attack without basis or context to the related complaint–the use of parenthesis. Thus, I conclude you have a personal bias against this person and it makes your remarks less credible.

 
Haha, you are good at twisting stuff around by only referring to the first sentence, I'll give you that. THIS post exactly marks the spot.
 
Well, let me elaborate, because you do not seem to grasp the essence without (parenthesized) explanations, or deem the community unfit to do so themselves. I am going to copy Nortroms message here, and elaborate, though without parenthesis, as they seem to distract you from the actual point made.
 

Judge the following cases/reports:
 
- Language abuse (Just as apparent as here)
- Chasing (Not (yet) enforced here)
- Draw refusal (Same as here, but during a game, we could actually watch & chat so we hardly ever had to retroactively judge a case)
 
Often done by reviewing logs or/and watching the game replay.
 
Community related tasks:
 
- Engage in fruitful discussions regarding improvements and such (does not include demonizing members you may or may not agree with)
A1) Can you state that this statement is not utmost hypocritical, after Nortrom has been demonizing Lonello for weeks if not months? A2) And did Lonello actually demonize someone? A3) And do you really see added value from this statement? Do you really regard the community incapable of deducting this themselves. I for one would've put more trust in your fellow Stratego-maniacs.
- Communicate between AT (Admin Team) and (forum) members (would be MT and (forum) members here)
- Forum management (This forum could use some management ;))
B1) Do you see added value from this statement? B2) Don't you regard this as subjective? Something the community is capable of deciding themselves? B3) Don't you regard this as an offensive sting towards the current MT, he is supposed to be teaming up with? B4) Are you willing to deny that he basically states all of them do a bad job currently, and he is going to teach them a lesson? Do you really think that is a good foundation of future cooperation with existing MT members? 
- Tournaments (We have a TC here, so this wouldn't be applicable)
- Introducing / helping out new members (This 'other site' had one big chat room opposed to 20ish here, so any new members would be spotted immediately. Much harder on here, also, the interface is more intuitive here. "Play game" can't get much simpler than that).
 
Miscellaneous:
 
- Software testing (probably wouldnt be applicable here, but still a useful skill as it can help reproduce bugs/glitches)
- Software improvement suggestions ( :))
C1) What is this smiley supposed to implicate? C2) What is its added value?
- Battling multiple accounts (unless all accounts were registered) (We had more tools at our disposal, also, multi accounts don't seem to be a priority here)
- Resolving technical issues (java, firewalls/connection, installing the software etc) (I've helped several members here with the dreaded bug(s) where a game won't start)
D1) This is something you (KissMyCookie) hold in high regard. However, it does not apply here. Metaforge is driven by a Java Applet, either as browser applet or running within a JVM on a PC. Java Applet's were and are a high security risk, and hence most browsers and/or firewalls blocked them. Although this role was indeed useful there (though an instruction on the website would suffice too), I want to emphasize that it does not apply to Stratego.com as it used more modern and secure technologies. You (KissMyCookie) getting all hyped up over something you probably know was irrelevant (and trying to make a fool of the rest of the community over it) shows your personal bias.
- Training & Introduction of new mods (I don't know the current procedure, but given some recent examples, I suppose this could definitely use some improvements ;)).
E1) Do you see added value from this statement? E2) Don't you regard this as subjective? Something the community is capable of deciding themselves? E3) Don't you regard this as an offensive sting towards the current MT, he is supposed to be teaming up with? E4) Are you willing to deny that he basically states all of them do a bad job currently, and he is going to teach them a lesson? Do you really think that is a good foundation of future cooperation with existing MT members? 

 
So basically, I observed four facts here:

  • This posts contains stingy - unnecessary - remarks. Undesirable for a moderator; as they should remain objective and not attach personal stings over grudges.
  • This posts contains subjectivity in an attempt to desperately convince the community. In my opinion, the community is perfectly capable to judge for themselves, they are (mostly) not imbeciles. Undesirable for a moderator; as they should trust the judgement of those they serve.
  • This post contains a hypocritical remark. Undesirable for a moderator; as they should hold integrity in high regard.
  • This post looks down upon the existing MT. A severe indication of incompatibility, which makes him an undesirable moderator for Stratego.com at this time.

To elaborate further for you, based on these four observations, I replied with with my opinion over those:
 

This post may have been decent if most parenthesized stuff would have been left out. Exactly those unnecessary stingy remarks make you an undesirable moderator in my opinion. You seem to be unable to purely remain objective, without adding your personal stingy stuff triggering others you do not seem to respect. Also, you seem to hold yourself in way too high regard, which is undesirable too. Finally, your remark on "demonization" is hypocritical to say the least.

My vote goes to any other than those involved in the late mess created. You first create a mess and then promote yourself by solving it. Reminds me of Trump and Kim Jong-un.

 
 
Based on purely deductible factual observations from a single post, you manage to claim I have a personal bias? While it is purely based on the contents of a single message I am replying to?
And that makes you also claim my opinion is less credible than those of others?
 
Seriously, you are either trying to fool the community with your fuel (or cheerleading), or your brains must be stuck up your cookie.
 
But one thing gets pretty clear from this all: it does show your (KissMyCookie) personal bias. Reflecting and blaming that trait on others is pathetic, and confirmatory of it. If I were to use your logic now, I'd have to conclude that that makes your remarks less credible.


Edited by DISLIKE, 29 April 2018 - 08:16 PM.

This community is lost. Take a look at my profile to see what is wrong here.


#159 Morx

Morx

    Lieutenant

  • WC Online Team
  • 729 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Sergeant

Posted 29 April 2018 - 08:16 PM

@MT can you cut out most of the clutter and throw it in a separate thread?

 

Most of it is on page 7 and 8 and involves posts by and responding to DISLIKE.



#160 DISLIKE

DISLIKE

    Spy

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze Spy

Posted 29 April 2018 - 08:19 PM

@MT can you cut out most of the clutter and throw it in a separate thread?

 

Most of it is on page 7 and 8 and involves posts by and responding to DISLIKE Unladen Swallow.

 

Let's just add the fact that you and subsequently Unladen Swallow started that, so I corrected your post. Something you often do like this, right?  ;)


Edited by DISLIKE, 29 April 2018 - 08:21 PM.

This community is lost. Take a look at my profile to see what is wrong here.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users