I'll confess I don't exactly understand your stance, Harkius. You say with one breath that you were the first to point out a problem, and then you say that everyone is overblowing things and taking facts out of context. Are you also harboring resentment because your attempted crusade didn't take? Or have you legitimately changed your mind on the situation?
I think what Harkius is trying to do is argue for is a correct process - good logic, good evidence, good argumentation - and he tends to care more about these things than the actual substance of the debate.
Which is a little odd, but not something I've got a problem with. What's frustrating is knowing that there are more people on the inside with perspectives and evidence regarding this that are choosing not to speak in the open. Some of them with some pretty key bits of information that haven't gone public. Maybe there's more going on inside the lounge than I know about, but that's a question for Nai.
I intend to respect the confidence of what I've been told, but I'm disappointed that one person in particular hasn't come forward to share their experience outside of PMs. Not really surprised, I suppose, but disappointed.
I can't say whether a defense would suffice or not before he's made it. I can say I'm not waiting for Hannes. I'm waiting for ria to defend/explain himself.
I've tried to avoid saying this Azrael. I really have. Stop talking about me in your condescending, third-person, "I understand everyone's flaws, because I don't have any" attitude. Really. It grates. Terribly. I'm more than aware of my flaws. I don't need you pointing them out for my benefit.
Azrael's never acted as if he has no flaws or is perfect. Quite the opposite, he's actually a very humble guy.
I do care about this issue. But I also think that your strident cries for "understanding", "patience", and etc. when it comes to the Gutter have rather quickly evaporated. I honestly think that such an attitude is quite valuable to these sorts of discussions. And if you're not willing to step up this time, if you're tired of rolling that rock up the hill, I'll take your place this time.
What are you even talking about here? You're making no sense.
For a "totally disinterested third party with no investment," this post reeks of interest and investment.
I'm interested in Rian and Azrael. I have an investment in Rian and Azrael. I don't have the slightest interest in the health and well-being of this website.
I would expect anyone with the reading comprehension of a 5th grader to see that distinction in my post.
Is that expecting too much of you? If so, let me know and I'll try to use smaller words or otherwise rephrase so you can understand.
Is there a defense that will suffice? Aren't we just waiting for Hannes at this point?
I'm not ready to stop listening to what Rian has to say. There's always something more you can learn about the other side.
So far, Nai and Sene have shown me that I was wrong about thinking Rian was steepling his fingers and twirling his mustaches back in June, plotting how to keep me from rejoining the staff. It helps me understand Rian a little better.
That maybe instead of saying that Rian makes decisions unilaterally, it's more accurate to say that certain opinions Rian gravitates towards far more readily than others, especially if they're part of a group that he works besides closely. That he trusts the opinions of those he works with an awful lot, and when he says things like "it was a decision that the entire global and admin staff agreed upon X", he's signalling that he has confidence in their decision-making, and he doesn't understand why other people might not have as much as he does.
So when things like the global group viewing my unintentional gutter leak happen, he takes the group's opinion and runs with it. And then, I came in here and shot the messenger a bit. Rather than Rian having too much influence behind the scenes, there might be more truth to the idea that Rian puts too much unwavering trust in his peer's ideas, and then runs with them uncritically.
It's important to try to figure out things like that, where you're wrong, or missing information. But we need staff engagement to do it - which is what we're waiting on more than anything else, I'd say.
I think they wouldn't mind my sharing that ER has suggested a plan to discuss this thread in an AIM chat with a limited number of participants, with the contents to be posted here later, to help speed up that process without the awkward walls of texts. I'm supportive of this, as anything that increases dialogue should help resolve this situation.
I've tried to avoid saying this Azrael. I really have. Stop talking about me in your condescending, third-person, "I understand everyone's flaws, because I don't have any" attitude. Really. It grates. Terribly. I'm more than aware of my flaws. I don't need you pointing them out for my benefit.
I'm sorry you interpret it that way. I happen to think that it's unusual, but not a flaw. Unless caring about the truth is a flaw. Process matters.
I don't mean to be condescending, and I certainly have my flaws. You can read about one of my mistakes higher up in this post. This is simply how I go about trying to understand other people, and sharing those thoughts with others.
I do care about this issue. But I also think that your strident cries for "understanding", "patience", and etc. when it comes to the Gutter have rather quickly evaporated. I honestly think that such an attitude is quite valuable to these sorts of discussions. And if you're not willing to step up this time, if you're tired of rolling that rock up the hill, I'll take your place this time.
Harkius
I think that that would be a valuable function. For myself, I tend not to try to take on the role of the debate policeman unless there's something particularly egregious and unusual going on, as I find that that can be easily taken the wrong way.
I'm interested in Rian and Azrael. I have an investment in Rian and Azrael. I don't have the slightest interest in the health and well-being of this website.
I would expect anyone with the reading comprehension of a 5th grader to see that distinction in my post.
Is that expecting too much of you? If so, let me know and I'll try to use smaller words or otherwise rephrase so you can understand.
I'm not ready to stop listening to what Rian has to say. There's always something more you can learn about the other side.
Sure. I didn't mean to imply that. But the charges are pretty damning. And there are quite a few of them. And there is also a low-level dislike for ria from a large number of people based on things that aren't really defendable (miscommunications, attitudes, etc...). And you've already said that you would continue if Hannes steps in and says Ria stays. Hasn't the balloon been popped?
I'm interested in Rian and Azrael. I have an investment in Rian and Azrael. I don't have the slightest interest in the health and well-being of this website.
I think that could be a limiting factor in having a full and complete perspective on the situation.
If Rian were an admin on MT or GG, I wouldn't bat an eyelash at any of this either. I'd laugh the complaint off the forum.
Salvation has different standards for its leadership, though. Much more demanding standards. There's plusses and minuses to that, but if we'd had this kind of backlash and structure on MT (as implausible as that would be), maybe that site would still be around, with a better admin team.
Salvation admins aren't supposed to use profanity against their subordinates. They're supposed to be scrupulously fair in their dealings, to worry about transparency, and process, and participate in public debate, etc. & etc. When things don't go according to that plan, you start having serious problems, because this is a community of 90,000 members. If you don't watch your step, you're going to have a much wider impact than you could possibly have as leadership on GG.
To you, all this probably seems de minimis, because you're outside the culture of accountability, here. But grading on a salvation rubric, the wheels are coming off this train.
That maybe instead of saying that Rian makes decisions unilaterally, it's more accurate to say that certain opinions Rian gravitates towards far more readily than others, especially if they're part of a group that he works besides closely. That he trusts the opinions of those he works with an awful lot, and when he says things like "it was a decision that the entire global and admin staff agreed upon X", he's signalling that he has confidence in their decision-making, and he doesn't understand why other people might not have as much as he does.
So when things like the global group viewing my unintentional gutter leak happen, he takes the group's opinion and runs with it. And then, I came in here and shot the messenger a bit. Rather than Rian having too much influence behind the scenes, there might be more truth to the idea that Rian puts too much unwavering trust in his peer's ideas, and then runs with them uncritically.
I don't know about anyone else, but I still find this disturbing (not so much directed at Rian, just in general). Whether or not Rian is directly responsible or not, there are still an awful lot of questionable decisions being made. And I still think that the argument (supported with evidence) of Rian's overly emotional responses when in a figurehead position bears weight.
I would still be very interested in hearing Rian's defense, and it might well sway my opinion. I don't have a problem with Rian personally so much as I have a problem with the rules, regulations, and taboos of this community that have allowed this situation to arise.
I'm also intrigued by what we haven't heard yet, as Azrael has insinuated. Azrael: can you clarify whether what you're hinting at deals with Rian personally, someone within the staff, or the entity known as the staff as a whole?
I'm also intrigued by what we haven't heard yet, as Azrael has insinuated. Azrael: can you clarify whether what you're hinting at deals with Rian personally, someone within the staff, or the entity known as the staff as a whole?
I'm waiting to hear back on that point at the moment.
I think that could be a limiting factor in having a full and complete perspective on the situation.
If Rian were an admin on MT or GG, I wouldn't bat an eyelash at any of this either. I'd laugh the complaint off the forum.
Salvation has different standards for its leadership, though. Much more demanding standards. There's plusses and minuses to that, but if we'd had this kind of backlash and structure on MT (as implausible as that would be), maybe that site would still be around, with a better admin team.
Salvation admins aren't supposed to use profanity against their subordinates. They're supposed to be scrupulously fair in their dealings, to worry about transparency, and process, and participate in public debate, etc. & etc. When things don't go according to that plan, you start having serious problems, because this is a community of 90,000 members. If you don't watch your step, you're going to have a much wider impact than you could possibly have as leadership on GG.
To you, all this probably seems de minimis, because you're outside the culture of accountability, here. But grading on a salvation rubric, the wheels are coming off this train.
Cussing at someone is not accountability, nor is it unfair. It's just kinda mean. Cultures change. Maybe the old admin staff didn't think it was acceptable to cuss when arguing with another admin but the new admin staff does? How does that make the old admin staff right and the new admin staff wrong? It just makes them different.
This is roughly like the congress from the 90's coming back and yelling at the current congress for the tone of their rhetoric and then demanding their old posts back because they don't like how things work now.
That's not how the world works, Az. The new leadership sets the tone for how things work. "it used to work like this" is not a reason why it SHOULD work like this. It's just wishing for a bygone era to return.
Rian would be absolutely correct to refuse to voluntarily return to the old ways, because apparently Rian thinks the old ways are WRONG. And if the existing admin staff disagree with Rian, they have the mechanisms in their hands to deal with it.
Having an old admin come back and try to recapture the reigns on claims of "it should work like it used to work when I was here" is gibberish. Your complaints need to have more substance than that. It sounds like sour grapes that people didn't carry on your legacy, as you imagine it.
You need to explain why the way it is now is "wrong" before you get to claim the high ground. And you absolutely have not done that.
You need to explain why the way it is now is "wrong" before you get to claim the high ground. And you absolutely have not done that.
Actually it's always been viewed as inappropriate. And still is. In fact, the staff have recently been pushing for an even greater crackdown than ever before on inappropriate language throughout other areas of the site, in an effort to make the site more "family-friendly."
It is still understood that Staff will treat each other with respect and dignity. We're allowed to disagree (obviously), but we must do so courteously.
Cussing at someone is not accountability, nor is it unfair. It's just kinda mean. Cultures change. Maybe the old admin staff didn't think it was acceptable to cuss when arguing with another admin but the new admin staff does? How does that make the old admin staff right and the new admin staff wrong? It just makes them different.
This is roughly like the congress from the 90's coming back and yelling at the current congress for the tone of their rhetoric and then demanding their old posts back because they don't like how things work now.
That's not how the world works, Az. The new leadership sets the tone for how things work. "it used to work like this" is not a reason why it SHOULD work like this. It's just wishing for a bygone era to return.
Rian would be absolutely correct to refuse to voluntarily return to the old ways, because apparently Rian thinks the old ways are WRONG. And if the existing admin staff disagree with Rian, they have the mechanisms in their hands to deal with it.
Having an old admin come back and try to recapture the reigns on claims of "it should work like it used to work when I was here" is gibberish. Your complaints need to have more substance than that. It sounds like sour grapes that people didn't carry on your legacy, as you imagine it.
You need to explain why the way it is now is "wrong" before you get to claim the high ground. And you absolutely have not done that.
I have a whole lot of problems with this, and I'm sure Azrael does as well.
As Magic players (mostly), we are used to environments with a lot of questionable activity going on. We're used to language that I can't really type when I'm at work. We're used to racial slurs, we're used to rape analogies. We're used to a lot of things that are very inappropriate.
Now, when you have a web community like Salvation, with its tens of thousands of users, well, that's a pretty significant thing. It's a major website, and while it's dwarfed by things like Reddit and Twitter, Salvation has a certain level of respect from people within its own community and from without. As I stated much earlier in the thread, I'm a Sourcer. That doesn't mean that I don't respect Salvation for what it is (and that's one of the reasons I'm in this thread at all). That respect must be earned and maintained to exist, and that respect is also a primary reason why this site is as large and popular as it is.
Think of Salvation like a corporation. If your CIO has to give a report before the whole company about whatever, and promptly starts cussing, he's gonna lose his job within the hour! There's a reason the term "Not Safe for Work" EXISTS. These things must be treated with a certain amount of decorum. Let's look at politics, as wretched of an example as that is. They don't show up to Congress in jeans and an ironic tee-shirt. They don't (often) swear, and those that do are usually publicly ridiculed for it. Is it a double-standard? Hell yes. But it's a classically important one. Azrael is spot-on here: we hold our leaders to higher standards than we do ourselves. We expect better of them because they're supposed to BE better. They aren't supposed to swear after a long day at work. They aren't supposed to lose their cool when talking to a subordinate. There is a certain nobility that has historically been and must be associated with those in charge. That doesn't mean they have to be dicks, although a lot of leaders and bosses take it as an excuse to be. They're supposed to be noble.
Stating that cultures change is an unacceptable answer. Cultures do change, any turd can see that. That's obvious. But you consider the long history of man, the general style with which our leaders lead has not changed, and IMO should not change. Infantile raging and cussing is not appropriate for one in a position of power...instead, dignity is the weapon of the just leader. If "cultures change" means that the President of the United States should stand at the podium and start off his State of the Union with "man, this year....**** this ****," well, I don't want to live in that world, and despite what you're saying, neither do you. Without a belief that our leaders are capable, in ANY community, real-world, virtual, guild-based, family unit, whatever....that community inevitably collapses and the constituents drift apart.
The personal attack you are directing at Azrael, Grakthis, is completely unnecessary and does not contribute meaningfully to this discussion. Even if you're right, and some of this is spurred on by the fact that Rian's leadership is subpar compared to how Azrael did things, I don't see a problem with that. This "old ways vs new ways" bull doesn't hold water. When it comes to leadership, there is only one way: Correct. Poor leadership is judged in the harshest of terms by the masses the would-be leader tried, and failed, to guide -- something that we're seeing right now. I feel like your "Old Way vs New Way" is trying to hint at the Gutter closing, which is something that this thread has largely moved beyond successfully. That is an Old Way vs New Way decision. The Old Way is the Gutter. The New Way is not the Gutter. I mean yeah it caused a scandal but that's only natural. This isn't Old Way vs New Way. I don't give two ****s about the Gutter. This isn't about the Gutter. This is about Rian and his leadership or lack thereof. Cut the ad hominem.
I'd just like to suggest that we all keep in mind that the moderation staff is here on a volunteer basis. They work for nothing except the knowledge that they're trying to make the site better, and they take an awful lot of crap for it, and the idea that they should also "just take it" from their superiors as well is... horrendous. When I worked at the suicide prevention center, the administration team did little else except bring us cookies and listen to our problems (they were mostly retired old ladies, to provide a better picture), and the very idea of one of them yelling at us would have been enough to have half the staff walk out the door. They could be frank, sure, sometimes they had to be, but they always treated us with respect, it was often the only thing that held us together when **** hit the fan.
Even part of this would have led to anyone else's demotion in a heartbeat.
Yet rianalnn still clings to power. Why is that?
I think a number of these points are worth paying attention to, but there's enough hyperbole there that I'm not entirely comfortable linking that in the OP.
For example, forcing honest staff members to resign. No one has been forced out. Made uncomfortable, yes, but no one's been lined up in front of a firing squad. The staff members that left, left by choice.
Or leaking a mod lounge post "to gain the upper hand in an argument". I think that could be an example of Rian twisting the facts to his benefit, but I'd take him at his word that he didn't realize where it was from. That's just an honest mistake.
Actually it's always been viewed as inappropriate. And still is. In fact, the staff have recently been pushing for an even greater crackdown than ever before on inappropriate language throughout other areas of the site, in an effort to make the site more "family-friendly."
You don't think there's a difference between staff talking to each other in a security protected forum or people talking to each other on the public portion of the website?
if i called you names in a PM, would that be censurable by a mod who felt like eaves dropping on our PMs?
If I picked up my phone, called you, and called you names, would that be cause for a warning on this forum?
Do you see where a policy for the regular members posting in a public forum doesn't inherently apply to all communications between members everywhere?
You don't think there's a difference between staff talking to each other in a security protected forum or people talking to each other on the public portion of the website?
if i called you names in a PM, would that be censurable by a mod who felt like eaves dropping on our PMs?
If I picked up my phone, called you, and called you names, would that be cause for a warning on this forum?
Do you see where a policy for the regular members posting in a public forum doesn't inherently apply to all communications between members everywhere?
I think what Harkius is trying to do is argue for is a correct process - good logic, good evidence, good argumentation - and he tends to care more about these things than the actual substance of the debate.
Which is a little odd, but not something I've got a problem with. What's frustrating is knowing that there are more people on the inside with perspectives and evidence regarding this that are choosing not to speak in the open. Some of them with some pretty key bits of information that haven't gone public. Maybe there's more going on inside the lounge than I know about, but that's a question for Nai.
I intend to respect the confidence of what I've been told, but I'm disappointed that one person in particular hasn't come forward to share their experience outside of PMs. Not really surprised, I suppose, but disappointed.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Is there a defense that will suffice? Aren't we just waiting for Hannes at this point?
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
Azrael's never acted as if he has no flaws or is perfect. Quite the opposite, he's actually a very humble guy.
What are you even talking about here? You're making no sense.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
I'm interested in Rian and Azrael. I have an investment in Rian and Azrael. I don't have the slightest interest in the health and well-being of this website.
I would expect anyone with the reading comprehension of a 5th grader to see that distinction in my post.
Is that expecting too much of you? If so, let me know and I'll try to use smaller words or otherwise rephrase so you can understand.
Flaming/trolling infraction issued.
-Sene
I'm not ready to stop listening to what Rian has to say. There's always something more you can learn about the other side.
So far, Nai and Sene have shown me that I was wrong about thinking Rian was steepling his fingers and twirling his mustaches back in June, plotting how to keep me from rejoining the staff. It helps me understand Rian a little better.
That maybe instead of saying that Rian makes decisions unilaterally, it's more accurate to say that certain opinions Rian gravitates towards far more readily than others, especially if they're part of a group that he works besides closely. That he trusts the opinions of those he works with an awful lot, and when he says things like "it was a decision that the entire global and admin staff agreed upon X", he's signalling that he has confidence in their decision-making, and he doesn't understand why other people might not have as much as he does.
So when things like the global group viewing my unintentional gutter leak happen, he takes the group's opinion and runs with it. And then, I came in here and shot the messenger a bit. Rather than Rian having too much influence behind the scenes, there might be more truth to the idea that Rian puts too much unwavering trust in his peer's ideas, and then runs with them uncritically.
It's important to try to figure out things like that, where you're wrong, or missing information. But we need staff engagement to do it - which is what we're waiting on more than anything else, I'd say.
I think they wouldn't mind my sharing that ER has suggested a plan to discuss this thread in an AIM chat with a limited number of participants, with the contents to be posted here later, to help speed up that process without the awkward walls of texts. I'm supportive of this, as anything that increases dialogue should help resolve this situation.
I'm sorry you interpret it that way. I happen to think that it's unusual, but not a flaw. Unless caring about the truth is a flaw. Process matters.
I don't mean to be condescending, and I certainly have my flaws. You can read about one of my mistakes higher up in this post. This is simply how I go about trying to understand other people, and sharing those thoughts with others.
I think that that would be a valuable function. For myself, I tend not to try to take on the role of the debate policeman unless there's something particularly egregious and unusual going on, as I find that that can be easily taken the wrong way.
So much disrespect and so little contribution.
My YouTube Channel
You reap what you sow. If you don't like the harvest, maybe plant something different next time.
Wait, what did I plant? When?EDIT: Never mind, please don't answer to this post.
My YouTube Channel
Sure. I didn't mean to imply that. But the charges are pretty damning. And there are quite a few of them. And there is also a low-level dislike for ria from a large number of people based on things that aren't really defendable (miscommunications, attitudes, etc...). And you've already said that you would continue if Hannes steps in and says Ria stays. Hasn't the balloon been popped?
I think that could be a limiting factor in having a full and complete perspective on the situation.
If Rian were an admin on MT or GG, I wouldn't bat an eyelash at any of this either. I'd laugh the complaint off the forum.
Salvation has different standards for its leadership, though. Much more demanding standards. There's plusses and minuses to that, but if we'd had this kind of backlash and structure on MT (as implausible as that would be), maybe that site would still be around, with a better admin team.
Salvation admins aren't supposed to use profanity against their subordinates. They're supposed to be scrupulously fair in their dealings, to worry about transparency, and process, and participate in public debate, etc. & etc. When things don't go according to that plan, you start having serious problems, because this is a community of 90,000 members. If you don't watch your step, you're going to have a much wider impact than you could possibly have as leadership on GG.
To you, all this probably seems de minimis, because you're outside the culture of accountability, here. But grading on a salvation rubric, the wheels are coming off this train.
I don't know about anyone else, but I still find this disturbing (not so much directed at Rian, just in general). Whether or not Rian is directly responsible or not, there are still an awful lot of questionable decisions being made. And I still think that the argument (supported with evidence) of Rian's overly emotional responses when in a figurehead position bears weight.
I would still be very interested in hearing Rian's defense, and it might well sway my opinion. I don't have a problem with Rian personally so much as I have a problem with the rules, regulations, and taboos of this community that have allowed this situation to arise.
I'm also intrigued by what we haven't heard yet, as Azrael has insinuated. Azrael: can you clarify whether what you're hinting at deals with Rian personally, someone within the staff, or the entity known as the staff as a whole?
I'm waiting to hear back on that point at the moment.
Cussing at someone is not accountability, nor is it unfair. It's just kinda mean. Cultures change. Maybe the old admin staff didn't think it was acceptable to cuss when arguing with another admin but the new admin staff does? How does that make the old admin staff right and the new admin staff wrong? It just makes them different.
This is roughly like the congress from the 90's coming back and yelling at the current congress for the tone of their rhetoric and then demanding their old posts back because they don't like how things work now.
That's not how the world works, Az. The new leadership sets the tone for how things work. "it used to work like this" is not a reason why it SHOULD work like this. It's just wishing for a bygone era to return.
Rian would be absolutely correct to refuse to voluntarily return to the old ways, because apparently Rian thinks the old ways are WRONG. And if the existing admin staff disagree with Rian, they have the mechanisms in their hands to deal with it.
Having an old admin come back and try to recapture the reigns on claims of "it should work like it used to work when I was here" is gibberish. Your complaints need to have more substance than that. It sounds like sour grapes that people didn't carry on your legacy, as you imagine it.
You need to explain why the way it is now is "wrong" before you get to claim the high ground. And you absolutely have not done that.
My YouTube Channel
Actually it's always been viewed as inappropriate. And still is. In fact, the staff have recently been pushing for an even greater crackdown than ever before on inappropriate language throughout other areas of the site, in an effort to make the site more "family-friendly."
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=425731
Meanwhile, behind closed doors...
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
I have a whole lot of problems with this, and I'm sure Azrael does as well.
As Magic players (mostly), we are used to environments with a lot of questionable activity going on. We're used to language that I can't really type when I'm at work. We're used to racial slurs, we're used to rape analogies. We're used to a lot of things that are very inappropriate.
Now, when you have a web community like Salvation, with its tens of thousands of users, well, that's a pretty significant thing. It's a major website, and while it's dwarfed by things like Reddit and Twitter, Salvation has a certain level of respect from people within its own community and from without. As I stated much earlier in the thread, I'm a Sourcer. That doesn't mean that I don't respect Salvation for what it is (and that's one of the reasons I'm in this thread at all). That respect must be earned and maintained to exist, and that respect is also a primary reason why this site is as large and popular as it is.
Think of Salvation like a corporation. If your CIO has to give a report before the whole company about whatever, and promptly starts cussing, he's gonna lose his job within the hour! There's a reason the term "Not Safe for Work" EXISTS. These things must be treated with a certain amount of decorum. Let's look at politics, as wretched of an example as that is. They don't show up to Congress in jeans and an ironic tee-shirt. They don't (often) swear, and those that do are usually publicly ridiculed for it. Is it a double-standard? Hell yes. But it's a classically important one. Azrael is spot-on here: we hold our leaders to higher standards than we do ourselves. We expect better of them because they're supposed to BE better. They aren't supposed to swear after a long day at work. They aren't supposed to lose their cool when talking to a subordinate. There is a certain nobility that has historically been and must be associated with those in charge. That doesn't mean they have to be dicks, although a lot of leaders and bosses take it as an excuse to be. They're supposed to be noble.
Stating that cultures change is an unacceptable answer. Cultures do change, any turd can see that. That's obvious. But you consider the long history of man, the general style with which our leaders lead has not changed, and IMO should not change. Infantile raging and cussing is not appropriate for one in a position of power...instead, dignity is the weapon of the just leader. If "cultures change" means that the President of the United States should stand at the podium and start off his State of the Union with "man, this year....**** this ****," well, I don't want to live in that world, and despite what you're saying, neither do you. Without a belief that our leaders are capable, in ANY community, real-world, virtual, guild-based, family unit, whatever....that community inevitably collapses and the constituents drift apart.
The personal attack you are directing at Azrael, Grakthis, is completely unnecessary and does not contribute meaningfully to this discussion. Even if you're right, and some of this is spurred on by the fact that Rian's leadership is subpar compared to how Azrael did things, I don't see a problem with that. This "old ways vs new ways" bull doesn't hold water. When it comes to leadership, there is only one way: Correct. Poor leadership is judged in the harshest of terms by the masses the would-be leader tried, and failed, to guide -- something that we're seeing right now. I feel like your "Old Way vs New Way" is trying to hint at the Gutter closing, which is something that this thread has largely moved beyond successfully. That is an Old Way vs New Way decision. The Old Way is the Gutter. The New Way is not the Gutter. I mean yeah it caused a scandal but that's only natural. This isn't Old Way vs New Way. I don't give two ****s about the Gutter. This isn't about the Gutter. This is about Rian and his leadership or lack thereof. Cut the ad hominem.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=8587651&postcount=1041
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=8587729&postcount=1047
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=8587900&postcount=1059
I think a number of these points are worth paying attention to, but there's enough hyperbole there that I'm not entirely comfortable linking that in the OP.
For example, forcing honest staff members to resign. No one has been forced out. Made uncomfortable, yes, but no one's been lined up in front of a firing squad. The staff members that left, left by choice.
Or leaking a mod lounge post "to gain the upper hand in an argument". I think that could be an example of Rian twisting the facts to his benefit, but I'd take him at his word that he didn't realize where it was from. That's just an honest mistake.
You don't think there's a difference between staff talking to each other in a security protected forum or people talking to each other on the public portion of the website?
if i called you names in a PM, would that be censurable by a mod who felt like eaves dropping on our PMs?
If I picked up my phone, called you, and called you names, would that be cause for a warning on this forum?
Do you see where a policy for the regular members posting in a public forum doesn't inherently apply to all communications between members everywhere?
Code of Conduct.
My YouTube Channel