Super Mario Bros. X Forums

Mivixion wrote:As a user, and not a moderator, can you guys go a full month without finding some tiny thing that was never significant before to randomly start whining about?

Oh pls i wanna see that too. It would be the most exciting moment ever.

But you right literally every month someone whines about something.

I like how this is how the voting went, with 38 users voting on not really archiving the threads and one voting on leaving the system as-is (that one person probably being Joey).
And this is the response we get.
Ignoritus Augma: shoutout to joey
Ignoritus Augma: for totally ignoring the clear community feedback on topic archiving
Ignoritus Augma: because
Ignoritus Augma: "I like it this way"

Joey's ideology on archiving threads is actually really, really moronic. Treating threads on an internet forum like chapters of a book is actually dumb, and the discussion does not actually flow just fine between topics, Deoxys actually gave a pretty clear point about that earlier. The practice makes absolutely no sense at all as there are several ways to search for a specific post in a thread should you need one. You don't need to treat an internet forum like a fucking book, and giving the excuse that that is your ideology, you must have really dumb ideologies.

He also ignored what the mass majority wanted. Can we have something done that we want done without being ignored? Literally 98% of those votes were all for stopping the archiving to a point, that's what the community wanted, and it's completely ignored because of some borderline idiotic ideologies about books and how an internet forum of all damn things needs to be treated like one.

I can't say that I really agree with the book analogy. I doubt many people who haven't been following a thread since its creation will bother to read much of its content. When approaching a long thread (even just 10 pages), they probably just read the first several pages and/or the most recent pages.

You can't search an individual topic for a post when the topic is split into 100 page increments for no reason other than to achieve some shallow aesthetic. It's either causing more clicks to be necessary to find a post, or causing people to be very specific with the forum's search engine in order to command it to compile results from all threads pertaining to the same topic. In that sense, it's unintuitive.

Not that the same argument could be made for the screenshot thread. If your image isn't tagged in any way, good luck finding it. Hypothetically you're looking for a screenshot and you remember almost no information about it or the posts surrounding it, which is what suddenly makes it relevant how many pages the topic is split by. Sifting through 100 page threads to find a screenshot is easier if you remember which numbered iteration of the thread it was, and thus strictly speaking it's far easier than sifting through 1000 page threads. But that's a problem specifically pertaining to the screenshot thread and that's why archiving them after 100 pages work. This is not a standard that applies to text based threads, and most of the rest of the posts in the forum are text-based. Not to mention (though I do) the fact that you can't quote posts from locked topics, so it's harder to quote a post from an earlier iteration of the same topic just because "chapters".

These things are disincentives from continuing a conversation during the brief cutoffs in each iteration of a thread, and precisely why it shouldn't be that way, but this is really not the thing that I'd jump to calling a person every permutation of "stupid" in the thesaurus for. And this is a perpetuating thing. It's really not that big of an issue, and the fact that we are overreacting is what invokes (even though it admittedly doesn't justify) the excuse not to change it. Also, it should be changed because it's a poor idea for functional reasons, not because the "mass majority" want it—besides, that's not even something necessarily true.

And I'm sorry for posting about it in this thread but I didn't really get the chance to in the other thread and besides, how we (on both sides) handle issues like this in general seems to pertain to this thread.

Anyway, Ignoritus, I'm sorry to see you go.

I don't give a shit what's actually being argued, or the finer details of said argument. I care that the same shitty way to get things solved is being done AGAIN, and this argument is literally a carbon copy of the last whinefest that drove another one of our members out. Well, two actually, because technically, I have stopped actively trying to fix your problems and have just taken to berating you over your failure to function. I don't give a shit because I can answer the hundreds, nay, the thousands of words of bitching and moaning about that 100 page bullshit with a dozen:

Hey, pro tip: try reading the topic. Maybe then you'll find it.

I cannot believe so many tears have been shed because children cannot do something as simple as take more than a minute browsing a topic of things VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT THEY WANT. This plays back into NameUser's point that the community does not give a shit about anything UNLESS it's cool to them. Do you seriously care about nothing other than what you want, because then that plays into my point that you all don't give a shit about anything other than what you care about. i.e. You are a shitty person who is a shitty member of a community you shouldn't act like you're part of.

It's like priority #1 to some problem users is to first, have it their way. Please, if you're throwing this much of a fit because your world's not perfect, kindly jump off it so that the rest doesn't have to lament over how shitty you make it out to be, when that's hardly the case. I know some of you don't know the first thing about empathy, so could you please not expect it out of others when you don't even know what it is?

---

If that post was a bit too mean, here's an alternative question to you all:
If mods start banning people because they have believed and researched why they shouldn't be part of their community and even go so far as to discuss it with the rest of the staff and reach a consensus, are you going to throw a tantrum about long hard work to prove a user is destructive to a community?

Oh believe me, I understand why it comes off as whining. However, that doesn't make what some of them were saying incorrect. In that sense, I see both sides.

But still. I find it sad that, like, a forum's natural proper state of solving problems is by discussing them and we are forced to inhibit that. It's one thing to have the view that all SMBX users needed to be unified in a single forum to be forced to settle their differences and that that's an inherently good thing. But hypothetically if you have that attitude, and yet also stand there with your hands on your hips over locked topics containing unsolved differences, I don't get how you would fail to see the contradiction in that.

On the other hand if we can't be trusted to discuss things maturely, I guess that won't change.

8bitmushroom wrote:I like how this is how the voting went, with 38 users voting on not really archiving the threads and one voting on leaving the system as-is (that one person probably being Joey).

Spoiler: show

And this is the response we get.

Spoiler: show

Ignoritus Augma: shoutout to joey
Ignoritus Augma: for totally ignoring the clear community feedback on topic archiving
Ignoritus Augma: because
Ignoritus Augma: "I like it this way"

Joey's ideology on archiving threads is actually really, really moronic. Treating threads on an internet forum like chapters of a book is actually dumb, and the discussion does not actually flow just fine between topics, Deoxys actually gave a pretty clear point about that earlier. The practice makes absolutely no sense at all as there are several ways to search for a specific post in a thread should you need one. You don't need to treat an internet forum like a fucking book, and giving the excuse that that is your ideology, you must have really dumb ideologies.

He also ignored what the mass majority wanted. Can we have something done that we want done without being ignored? Literally 98% of those votes were all for stopping the archiving to a point, that's what the community wanted, and it's completely ignored because of some borderline idiotic ideologies about books and how an internet forum of all damn things needs to be treated like one.

Here comes a snarky response:
While I agree with you politically, the manner in which you all are taking and have taken this subject, did you really expect us to listen to you in the first place? When first brought up, you guys were real uncivilized about it. It would have been better to just mention it politely and we may have taken it into more consideration.

Next, we as staff aren't here to try and please everybody. We are here to do what we think is best for the community. Not everything we may do or put in place you will agree with, but the most we ask is to at least respect our opinions and actions and we will respect yours in return. Really, if you have a petty boss later on and he makes or says something you can't stand, I suggest you don't complain then! What my point is, no matter how silly our actions may be to you, just remember we're humans too and we're trying to do something you may not like, you can 1. Just suck it up 2. Try to readh a compromise instead of get what YOU want and what your friends want 3. Leave. No one's forcing you to stay here where you don't like it.

No more discussion about 100-page topics. That topic was locked for a reason.

I have no idea what is going on but I thought one of the posts above was really wrong.

Really, if you have a petty boss later on and he makes or says something you can't stand, I suggest you don't complain then!

I think the problem is that you don't understand that a staff position should not be a position of privilege. Your job is to make this place run smoothly in concordance to user input. You're not our boss or anything, you're just here to make this place better for us and we don't really owe you anything.

Joey wrote:No more discussion about 100-page topics. That topic was locked for a reason.

What reason was it? Please elaborate.

Joey wrote:No more discussion about 100-page topics. That topic was locked for a reason.

You know that's not really a fair response to people, right? They couldn't tell you the same.

Joey wrote:No more discussion about 100-page topics. That topic was locked for a reason.

Its as if you haven't learned anything from these problems over the past few days.

And while I'm here, I get that everybody is trying to trust one another no matter their misdeeds, but accepting Knux into Privana is not going to help that cause. I personally do not hate Knux, but just because I hate him doesn't mean I trust him. I have no reasons or purpose to trust him. You can take the bad out of the things he has done, but that doesn't justify that he did them, not to mention that what he's done is effectively worse than what a lot of us have done. Lets not forget the mistakes Knux made when he was the so called "head honcho" of this community. We are better off now than where we were with him. He made even more errors than these staff(so you claim) ever did. I'm absolutely sure that he made many decisions by himself, and many of those surely put us in bad spots, worse so than this to be fair. Then you have his list of grievances, oh how these should not be forgiven:

[*]Disrespect to multiple users across the community, whether if its just to make fun of them(remember the bossedit8 incident? Knux started that.), insult them, make them look bad(most if not all for his own personal gain *see earlier post of mine in this topic*), and lets not forget that dreaded TAOK which was filled with all of the above(I'll also bring up Sammy, A.K.A. The picture of Sam which he specifically told Knux NOT to put in TAOK).

[*]In the past he constantly has constantly tried to have a voice in this community again, and for those who don't know, contact with him has mostly been cutoff because in the end he either tries to make Joey look bad, or in some cases, delete an entire forum, AGAIN for his own personal gain.

[*]An admin that trolled throughout the course of his run? Are you kidding me? Lets not forget the several raids he made on smaller SMBX forums either just for fun or FOR HIS OWN PERSONAL GAIN. I can't say he always did it alone, but being the head of the operation is never a good image on you. Remember when I became an admin at FNC's for a time? Do you remember how the whole community turned against me because I wouldn't allow them access to troll and/or destroy it? Knux was one of those people.

[*]Being just outright disgusting. Nobody wants to see pictures of absolute mutilation, and not on your on irc channel at that. There are children in these communities. More often than not he didn't even mention what was in the links. Oh, and its not funny to tell a kid to go search blue waffle. That's just outright terrible and irresponsible on all levels.

[*]Occasional use or Insulting terms of Special Handicaps or Disorders. The reason why I even bring this up is because of how people were treating autism while FNC was notable.

[*]The point where most people began to notice any problems in the first place. When Knux lashed at NSMBX(specifically reghrhre) for not merging with him the first time. Don't give me that "Kyasarin did it first" junk. Many people left around this point, and when reghrhre refused to merge with Knux a second time, the community broke apart, and when we did gather back together, he deleted the forum. Sure it was minor, but it still is not acceptable. If you want people to trust you and accept you, you don't keep making mistakes, and some on purpose, no less.

[*]The things he has done in recent months. While he has been in and out, he still continued to cause problems, which led to his eventual ban here.

In conclusion, Knux is the type of person you should NEVER immediately forgive. In depth he is a person who really has to work in order to have any true notoriety in this community. Trusting Knux so easily is like trying to trust Harley, who last I checked still hates us and wouldn't mind taking us out if he wanted to.

I'll restate it: I don't hate Knux, but I don't trust him, and neither should you. Not until he has earned it.

The community has spoken (just look at the amount of those goddamn votes) to deaf ears. Such a shame.

Electra wrote:I have no idea what is going on but I thought one of the posts above was really wrong.

Really, if you have a petty boss later on and he makes or says something you can't stand, I suggest you don't complain then!

I think the problem is that you don't understand that a staff position should not be a position of privilege. Your job is to make this place run smoothly in concordance to user input. You're not our boss or anything, you're just here to make this place better for us and we don't really owe you anything.

This is completely wrong.

You owe us the same respect that we owe you. We may not be your "boss", as you don't work for us and that's definitely not the dynamic I would like to have between the staff and the other users, but the staff is not a utility. We're members of this community as well and we do the things we do for the community's benefit. To say that "the staff is there to make things good for us and we don't owe them anything" is incredibly inconsiderate, and if you take that attitude here (or anywhere else) you're not going to be happy.

I can't tell if I'm stupid for even involving myself in these things. But whatever, just a few more points and I wash my hands of this thread. (Unless anyone has anything specific to address me with.)

Hypothetically if you agree that something is wrong, it's wrong. It's petty not to change something that's wrong just because of how the issue was approached, or how relatively important it is. And no I'm not trying to bring us back into that topic—I'm just speaking generally. And anyway "compromise" should come up as an opportunity a little more often. I'm just putting that out there.

The users shouldn't have to always be conciliatory and supplicating in order to be granted the "privilege" of a reasonable dialogue if not an outright solution or compromise. (I'm not targeting that at any particular person; it just comes off as something needing to be said.)

Electra wrote:I have no idea what is going on but I thought one of the posts above was really wrong.

Really, if you have a petty boss later on and he makes or says something you can't stand, I suggest you don't complain then!

I think the problem is that you don't understand that a staff position should not be a position of privilege. Your job is to make this place run smoothly in concordance to user input. You're not our boss or anything, you're just here to make this place better for us and we don't really owe you anything.

The problem with "you're just here to make this place better for us" is that it's the same attitude, but on the other side of the coin. It puts the users in the position of privilege at the expense of the staff's work, and that can be equally unfair if the users feel particularly entitled.
The staff don't govern the users. Users don't govern the staff either, though. What I see to be the issue is that when so much as one side consistently refuses to compromise, there is not a sustainable relationship and people get fed up with each other. This is how friends stop being friends.

As Ignoritus said there shouldn't even really BE an "us and them" to this. Status should have nothing to do with anything. I could be Pope Francis and think God is a shoe.

Anyway here's a pic of blue waffle (It's literally a waffle that's blue, guys. Don't freak out.)

I'll let this be the last word. This topic breaking the new rules as it is, so this will be it.

Weren't you going to lock this Ghosthawk?

lighthouse64 wrote:Weren't you going to lock this Ghosthawk?

Yeah sorry. I can only remember things for like 3 seconds before listening to some great tunes.

Locked.