| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/16/2005 01:55:37 PM · #101 |
1) I am curious, how does one become a site council member?
2) Okay, anyway to buy a custom personality icon?
:)
|
|
|
|
12/16/2005 01:57:17 PM · #102 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
I gave up this dream and I will never apply again. I realize my type is not wanted because I fight hard for what I believe is right. Besides why invite somebosy who may want to rock the boat.
|
Dan, that's just plain silly. You're not wanted because you fight hard for what you believe is right? I think many of us do that, in many ways, in SC and elsewhere. I know I do, very much so, and as far as I can tell so do pretty much all the other SC members. They have strong, solid views, and fight hard for them. That doesn't make you unwanted.
About your original post, that the Rant forum should be unmoderated, I agree. I also think it should be kept civil. Remember though that (even) SC members make mistakes, or do thinks a bit too hastily - it's the way things are, and sometimes a person reacts, especially when repeatedly provoked, and it isn't all bad. |
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You are a sweetheart. But consider the following: first I am led to believe that the S/C has no head figure. While each active member performs functions that are interchangable there is someone that receives the new members and spell out the rules of play and then report to the Administrators. Since the S/C vote in new members then the place has a tendency to hand pick what they feel will advance the cause according to their views. Look outside at the members and we can see at once that some do not have the temperement while others are too controversial. I know where I fit and I do not kid myself. Nor do I feel "unwanted" as a personal strife. What I mean is that people who rock the boat are avoided. This is okay. You have s/c members who are terrific diplomats and some who are just plain brilliant. You also have some top notch talent amongst you. I am sure that you all have ideas but ideas are relegated a tad to the side to attend to performing the laundry list of chores. People outside see only the final outcome and some think of making it better. Who knows, once you join, you see the politics and opinions and ideas get pushed back. |
REACTION before even reading the whole post. I wish people would stop calling me stuff like "you are a sweatheart" (except for Slippy, I wish he would start calling me something nice).
OK, on to read the post. |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 01:59:36 PM · #103 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
1) I am curious, how does one become a site council member?
2) Okay, anyway to buy a custom personality icon?
:) |
1) You bribe ursula with lots of chocolate
2) No |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:00:57 PM · #104 |
Well, it's sure better than being called an "old salty tart" ....
*lol*
Or a butterball ham...(in my case) |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:01:32 PM · #105 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
I gave up this dream and I will never apply again. I realize my type is not wanted because I fight hard for what I believe is right. Besides why invite somebosy who may want to rock the boat.
|
Dan, that's just plain silly. You're not wanted because you fight hard for what you believe is right? I think many of us do that, in many ways, in SC and elsewhere. I know I do, very much so, and as far as I can tell so do pretty much all the other SC members. They have strong, solid views, and fight hard for them. That doesn't make you unwanted.
About your original post, that the Rant forum should be unmoderated, I agree. I also think it should be kept civil. Remember though that (even) SC members make mistakes, or do thinks a bit too hastily - it's the way things are, and sometimes a person reacts, especially when repeatedly provoked, and it isn't all bad. |
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You are a sweetheart. But consider the following: first I am led to believe that the S/C has no head figure. While each active member performs functions that are interchangable there is someone that receives the new members and spell out the rules of play and then report to the Administrators. Since the S/C vote in new members then the place has a tendency to hand pick what they feel will advance the cause according to their views. Look outside at the members and we can see at once that some do not have the temperement while others are too controversial. I know where I fit and I do not kid myself. Nor do I feel "unwanted" as a personal strife. What I mean is that people who rock the boat are avoided. This is okay. You have s/c members who are terrific diplomats and some who are just plain brilliant. You also have some top notch talent amongst you. I am sure that you all have ideas but ideas are relegated a tad to the side to attend to performing the laundry list of chores. People outside see only the final outcome and some think of making it better. Who knows, once you join, you see the politics and opinions and ideas get pushed back. |
REACTION before even reading the whole post. I wish people would stop calling me stuff like "you are a sweatheart" (except for Slippy, I wish he would start calling me something nice).
OK, on to read the post. |
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My sincere apologies. Consider it done. I derived this sentiment from watching your loving approach to your art. I will refile the sentiment strictly with your name. Again, I am sorry. |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:01:42 PM · #106 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Well, it's sure better than being called an "old salty tart" ....
*lol*
Or a butterball ham...(in my case) |
I thought butterball did turkey? :P |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:11:31 PM · #107 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
.... But consider the following: first I am led to believe that the S/C has no head figure. While each active member performs functions that are interchangable there is someone that receives the new members and spell out the rules of play and then report to the Administrators. Since the S/C vote in new members then the place has a tendency to hand pick what they feel will advance the cause according to their views. Look outside at the members and we can see at once that some do not have the temperement while others are too controversial. I know where I fit and I do not kid myself. Nor do I feel "unwanted" as a personal strife. What I mean is that people who rock the boat are avoided. This is okay. You have s/c members who are terrific diplomats and some who are just plain brilliant. You also have some top notch talent amongst you. I am sure that you all have ideas but ideas are relegated a tad to the side to attend to performing the laundry list of chores. People outside see only the final outcome and some think of making it better. Who knows, once you join, you see the politics and opinions and ideas get pushed back. |
All right, so you're saying that SC tends to choose members that would tend to perpetuate what's there already. I am part of the last group, so I haven't had the privilege of being part of choosing new SC members, but I think, for myself, I would look for people with interesting ideas who are also able to get along with other people. I don't think it's a bad thing to continue with something when it's good. That doesn't mean it can't be changed, but "rocking the boat" is a tricky proposition - rocking the boat for what?
When I joined the SC in May, it was a surprise to me. I wanted to be part of SC, but I didn't think I had a chance. But after joining, nobody spelled out any rules or guidelines. The four new members were encouraged to read up on past SC discussions (SC has their own discussions) to get to know issues and so on. I did that (it was rather boring - it's more fun to do current stuff).
As far as functions goes, I guess every SC member does what he/she thinks they're good at. At least that's the way it seems to me. For example, I am not good at writing up letters to people, so I don't do that. I am good at helping people sometimes, so I try to do that.
As far as ideas being put aside for the general good, you're probably right that it happens somewhat. I think that happens in any group/situation similar to this one. But remember that ideas and changes take time to discuss and implement.
|
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:14:40 PM · #108 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Well, it's sure better than being called an "old salty tart" ....
*lol*
Or a butterball ham...(in my case) |
:))))))))
LOL
I have to remember "old salty tart". |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:17:04 PM · #109 |
Originally posted by ursula:
(except for Slippy, I wish he would start calling me something nice). |
OK Sugarsmax. I just can't resist giving the SC a hard time this week, I guess.
;-)
|
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:19:29 PM · #110 |
Originally posted by Strikeslip:
Originally posted by ursula:
(except for Slippy, I wish he would start calling me something nice). |
OK Sugarsmax. I just can't resist giving the SC a hard time this week, I guess.
;-) |
Ohhhhhhhh - thank you Slippy! :) |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:20:42 PM · #111 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
I gave up this dream and I will never apply again. I realize my type is not wanted because I fight hard for what I believe is right. Besides why invite somebosy who may want to rock the boat.
|
Dan, that's just plain silly. You're not wanted because you fight hard for what you believe is right? I think many of us do that, in many ways, in SC and elsewhere. I know I do, very much so, and as far as I can tell so do pretty much all the other SC members. They have strong, solid views, and fight hard for them. That doesn't make you unwanted.
About your original post, that the Rant forum should be unmoderated, I agree. I also think it should be kept civil. Remember though that (even) SC members make mistakes, or do thinks a bit too hastily - it's the way things are, and sometimes a person reacts, especially when repeatedly provoked, and it isn't all bad. |
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You are a sweetheart. But consider the following: first I am led to believe that the S/C has no head figure. While each active member performs functions that are interchangable there is someone that receives the new members and spell out the rules of play and then report to the Administrators. Since the S/C vote in new members then the place has a tendency to hand pick what they feel will advance the cause according to their views. Look outside at the members and we can see at once that some do not have the temperement while others are too controversial. I know where I fit and I do not kid myself. Nor do I feel "unwanted" as a personal strife. What I mean is that people who rock the boat are avoided. This is okay. You have s/c members who are terrific diplomats and some who are just plain brilliant. You also have some top notch talent amongst you. I am sure that you all have ideas but ideas are relegated a tad to the side to attend to performing the laundry list of chores. People outside see only the final outcome and some think of making it better. Who knows, once you join, you see the politics and opinions and ideas get pushed back. |
REACTION before even reading the whole post. I wish people would stop calling me stuff like "you are a sweatheart" (except for Slippy, I wish he would start calling me something nice).
OK, on to read the post. |
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
My sincere apologies. Consider it done. I derived this sentiment from watching your loving approach to your art. I will refile the sentiment strictly with your name. Again, I am sorry. |
NO! I was just sort of trying to give an example of quick reactions that get me in trouble!!!!!
|
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:24:03 PM · #112 |
Ursula,
For what it's worth I think there's a HUGE difference between addressing someone as "sweetheart" ("Sweetheart, you're full of beans...") and saying to them "You are a sweetheart"; that's called a compliment. It's like saying "you're very kind" and I don't think it's in the same dismissive league at all. Daniel was thanking you (very nicely, I thought) for the kind words you had directed his way.
Maybe you see it differently...
R. |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:24:04 PM · #113 |
Originally posted by muckpond:
woo. lots to respond to here. let's hope i don't intimidate anybody.
kevin -- it's been obvious for a long time that you've had a chip on your shoulder about the SC. i don't know what the source of your original frustration is (i honestly don't remember, or know if i was even an sc at the time), but your signature line doesn't inspire much even-handedness. the SCs primary purpose is to moderate the forums. we put in warnings and re-direct conversations most of the time, but there are very valid times where posts are edited or locked or hidden.
we wouldn't have the ability to do those things if there hadn't ever been a need for them.Originally posted by muckpond:
woo. lots to respond to here. let's hope i don't intimidate anybody.
[quote=notonline]I would like muckpond to answer my original question even if its in a PM. |
kevin -- it's been obvious for a long time that you've had a chip on your shoulder about the SC. i don't know what the source of your original frustration is (i honestly don't remember, or know if i was even an sc at the time), but your signature line doesn't inspire much even-handedness. the SCs primary purpose is to moderate the forums. we put in warnings and re-direct conversations most of the time, but there are very valid times where posts are edited or locked or hidden.
we wouldn't have the ability to do those things if there hadn't ever been a need for them. |
Please don't use the name attached to this account as this is not the first time I have requested this. Thx.
I aggree with Graphic on this topic and would rather discuss this in PM as it really doesn't fit this thread. If you really want to know why I'm upset or pissed off at SC then believe me it fits this thread but it will turn it into a rant therefore I am not posting the links to the older threads. If a person is NOT done talking about a topic (even this one) when SC has had enough they WILL lock it which is IMO abuse of power. I will provide examples after my poker game as long as it doesn't put this into the rant and will remain on topic.
|
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:30:04 PM · #114 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
Ursula,
For what it's worth I think there's a HUGE difference between addressing someone as "sweetheart" ("Sweetheart, you're full of beans...") and saying to them "You are a sweetheart"; that's called a compliment. It's like saying "you're very kind" and I don't think it's in the same dismissive league at all. Daniel was thanking you (very nicely, I thought) for the kind words you had directed his way.
Maybe you see it differently...
R. |
I'm sorry. You're completely right, and I apologize for reacting that way. Please accept my apologies, Dan.
|
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:58:38 PM · #115 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Originally posted by bear_music:
Ursula,
For what it's worth I think there's a HUGE difference between addressing someone as "sweetheart" ("Sweetheart, you're full of beans...") and saying to them "You are a sweetheart"; that's called a compliment. It's like saying "you're very kind" and I don't think it's in the same dismissive league at all. Daniel was thanking you (very nicely, I thought) for the kind words you had directed his way.
Maybe you see it differently...
R. |
I'm sorry. You're completely right, and I apologize for reacting that way. Please accept my apologies, Dan. |
{{{{{{{{{{{{{ GROUP HUG! }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
Thanks, Ursula, that was rankling at me a little bit :-)
R. |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:59:18 PM · #116 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Originally posted by theSaj:
Well, it's sure better than being called an "old salty tart" ....
*lol*
Or a butterball ham...(in my case) |
I thought butterball did turkey? :P |
I'm that often enough too.... ;) |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 02:59:44 PM · #117 |
| Sugarsmax is still better. |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 03:02:07 PM · #118 |
| Wait a minute, what is "sugarsmax"? |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 03:02:49 PM · #119 |
Originally posted by ursula:
Wait a minute, what is "sugarsmax"? |
Breakfast cereal? jejeje�
R. |
|
|
|
12/16/2005 03:14:40 PM · #120 |
Sorry to place a retort here. This is a posting from another thread but it illustrates the viewpoint of one S/C member. I post it here because if you read back in this thread you will find a similar vein expressed by the same S/C. I do not wish to be the recipent of charity.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Originally posted by muckpond:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ok, i'm really frustrated here. please note that i'm not threatening to lock this thread or any b.s. like that.
if i were an admin of this site and saw how much people BITCH about it, i would have pulled the plug on the forums long ago, and i'd be booting people left and right. you have to admit that you get an awful lot for $2 per month, and you still get an amazing amount ABSOLUTELY FREE if you don't want to pay. plenty of people are reading this thread right now without ever having invested a dime into dpc.
when the sc refers to the amount of money this site costs (which it does, no matter what you may think) or the amount of time and effort put into it (which it does, no matter what you may think), it's to get people to keep this site in perspective. a LOT of people have lost their perspective around here and think that participating in dpc is some kind of right granted to them that cannot be revoked.
it's not.
it's a favor done for you by d&l. the paid memberships were to provide enhanced benefits for everyone, but with some special perks to encourage you to pay.
whether or not you think we're lying to you is irrelevant. the point is, we read every single website suggestion. we debate those that have the greatest merit. the admins constantly make improvements to the site as they see fit.
i fail to understand why people bitch about this site so frequently. seems to me that we've all got it pretty good.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Graphicfunk replies.
This place is by far the best bargain on the internet. No exceptions.
However, your presentation does little justice. I like to pay for what I get and so do most people. It does not advance the cause of the site to be told that we have no benefits but only favors that radiate from a philantrophic heart. You are presenting your argument by insulting the members. Why not raise the price cut and out the such called charity because charity is usually followed by the division of giver and receiver. You imply that we are ingrates who never had it so good. I do not want charity. I rather pay the fee and be treated as a member rather than ingrate.
|
|
|
|
12/16/2005 03:22:29 PM · #121 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
This place is by far the best bargain on the internet. No exceptions.
I rather pay the fee and be treated as a member rather than ingrate. |
Just plese do not raies it too much. This is the first addiction I've ever been able to afford ;-] |
|
|
|
12/17/2005 03:05:53 AM · #122 |
Originally posted by graphicfunk:
Sorry to place a retort here. This is a posting from another thread but it illustrates the viewpoint of one S/C member. I post it here because if you read back in this thread you will find a similar vein expressed by the same S/C. I do not wish to be the recipent of charity.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Originally posted by muckpond:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ok, i'm really frustrated here. please note that i'm not threatening to lock this thread or any b.s. like that.
if i were an admin of this site and saw how much people BITCH about it, i would have pulled the plug on the forums long ago, and i'd be booting people left and right. you have to admit that you get an awful lot for $2 per month, and you still get an amazing amount ABSOLUTELY FREE if you don't want to pay. plenty of people are reading this thread right now without ever having invested a dime into dpc.
when the sc refers to the amount of money this site costs (which it does, no matter what you may think) or the amount of time and effort put into it (which it does, no matter what you may think), it's to get people to keep this site in perspective. a LOT of people have lost their perspective around here and think that participating in dpc is some kind of right granted to them that cannot be revoked.
it's not.
it's a favor done for you by d&l. the paid memberships were to provide enhanced benefits for everyone, but with some special perks to encourage you to pay.
whether or not you think we're lying to you is irrelevant. the point is, we read every single website suggestion. we debate those that have the greatest merit. the admins constantly make improvements to the site as they see fit.
i fail to understand why people bitch about this site so frequently. seems to me that we've all got it pretty good.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Graphicfunk replies.
This place is by far the best bargain on the internet. No exceptions.
However, your presentation does little justice. I like to pay for what I get and so do most people. It does not advance the cause of the site to be told that we have no benefits but only favors that radiate from a philantrophic heart. You are presenting your argument by insulting the members. Why not raise the price cut and out the such called charity because charity is usually followed by the division of giver and receiver. You imply that we are ingrates who never had it so good. I do not want charity. I rather pay the fee and be treated as a member rather than ingrate. |
Wise words from a wise voice and I couldn't agree more.
I felt deeply insulted to be told it was a privilege to use the rant forum. When you pay for something it is not a privilege it is a service rendered for that payment. |
|
|
|
12/17/2005 04:21:16 AM · #123 |
Originally posted by keegbow:
I felt deeply insulted to be told it was a privilege to use the rant forum. When you pay for something it is not a privilege it is a service rendered for that payment. |
I agree with what your saying except that the rant forums are open to non-paying people as well.
Perhaps they D&L should be looking at whats free and what you pay for and perhaps start limiting the free stuff. ie 1 open challenges instead of 2. Rant forums for members only etc.
|
|
|
|
12/17/2005 04:25:02 AM · #124 |
Originally posted by notonline:
Originally posted by keegbow:
I felt deeply insulted to be told it was a privilege to use the rant forum. When you pay for something it is not a privilege it is a service rendered for that payment. |
I agree with what your saying except that the rant forums are open to non-paying people as well.
Perhaps they D&L should be looking at whats free and what you pay for and perhaps start limiting the free stuff. ie 1 open challenges instead of 2. Rant forums for members only etc. |
Technically, there really is only one open challenge. Registered users can only enter one. The reason for the two options is to reduce the number of entries. Pretty soon the same may have to be applied to the member challenges. |
|
|
|
12/17/2005 04:45:18 AM · #125 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
Technically, there really is only one open challenge. Registered users can only enter one. The reason for the two options is to reduce the number of entries. Pretty soon the same may have to be applied to the member challenges. |
I know and I understand but what I don't understand is why they did this instead of pushing for new paying members. If nothing changes for the people that pay(not that I'm complaining about the costs) including more or different challenges etc. (including the forums) then why pay??? This example set first in this thread is one thing I feel they should change. The other is to combine the open challenges to 1 and suggest that people should become members if they would like more or feel that there is too many entries.
Has anything really changed for the "paying customer"???
|
|
