jeez
All this just because your nose was out of joint when you were excluded from nmnm.
Some people. 
Always reverting to the āhaha youāre not invited to our clubhouseā taunts, a paragon of maturity.
Itās true though and we all know it.
Your pettiness and spitefulness know no bounds, but they are possibly the only interesting things about you.
-
a āyesā vote means we are committing to some form of democracy going forward.
-
a ānoā vote means that going forward, we wonāt be using any form of democracy.
Among other things, a ānoā vote would mean that proposing binding community votes like this thread, and the other current binding vote thread re: Commonwealth, would be out-of-order as applications of democracy.
I didnāt vote in this poll because the premise doesnāt make any sense. If this place is not a democracy then the poll is meaningless and if it is the poll wonāt change it.
Iām pretty sure everyone you guys excluded from your tree house has their nose out of joint about it because a lot of the people who left for NMNM were great, thoughtful posters whose loss has left UP worse off.
Paragon of maturity.
Getting rid of RFCs was dumb.
This is because Jal and his friends arenāt allowed to call someone by their real name or an old screen name they requested be stopped. Thatās how petty this is.
Another lie.
NO
ONE
HAS
USED
C*** ROUNDERāS
REAL
NAME
(apart from c*** rounder)
Cite or go away.
Jal is trying to argue that because they made a pun on CWās name, which was easily identifiable what his real name was, there should be no consequences.
Thatās how fucking stupid he thinks everyone else is.
Also, he still is mad because he canāt call someone by their real name, puns of their real name, or old screen name. Heās mad because he truly hates CW because of shit that started nearly 4 years ago now, and heās a fountain of toxicity for all of UP.
How is his real name easily identifiable?
Jal if youāre mistaken if Iām going to, for one minute, treat your obvious sealioning trolling as anything than absurd bullshit. Iāll be happy to explain to other people what the fuck youāre talking about, but weāre not doing that dance together.
If someoneās real name was Tom Thumb and a poster referred to him as Tom Dumb, how would that help anyone identify his real name?
This is what Jalfrezi actually believes.
I am not entirely sure what Iām voting on here.
I donāt generally follow the moderation threads too closely, but I gather that part of the issue is mod powers? E.g. can mods unilaterally hand out bans for stuff that has not been specified?
Given that, I voted ānoā on democracy. My reasoning is: every website needs moderation. Itās not like a site is going to have āpureā modding democracy, where every user votes on every single mod decision.
Itās more like: elect a mod, then let the mod do modding his/her/their way. If the mod goes off the rails, there should be a way to recall him/her them.
This is similar to having a sheriff, I guess. You canāt vote on everything a sheriff does. The sheriff has to be the one to make the charging/jailing (banning/silencing?) decisions. There is discretion inherent in this. Not all cases can follow written rules.
If the sheriff sucks, then vote them out and vote another one in.
So honestly I think the poll is kind of useless as written. I did pick an answer based on what I thought was going on. I think a more specific question would be more useful. Iām not sure what the OP (original pollster) was getting at.
I guess I would say, in general, sure, try a democracy. With regard to modding in particular though, it almost has to be anti-democratic. Or at least have some non-democracy features.
Just my 2 cents without knowing a lot of the background.
Wellā¦
You are reading things in that arenāt there, In this case, the word āpureā. There is no such thing anyways. Again, I canāt imagine why a few folks are imagining all this nonsense.
Itās a political junkee website. I never imagined the unqualified word ādemocracyā would throw some folks for a loop. I guess Iāll try again. To the extent it makes sense on a website, do we want stuff like thisā¦
I guess Iām fine saying āin general the site should be a democracyā (not sure if I would add āwhen possibleā at the end).
However in the specific context of modding there are areas where democracy should be practiced (removing a mod if the community does not like the overall job they are doing), and areas where I would say democracy is not the answer (specific modding decisions).
I thought he poll was prompted more by the latter type of discussion. Like I said though, I could be wrong on that.
Benevolent zikzak Stalin theocracy is preferred choice, but