BANNED AT LIBERTYPOST
See other BANNED AT LIBERTYPOST Articles
| Goldi banned censored delete elpee |
Title: Clarification requested if needed
Source:
libertypost
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jan 12, 2015
Author: sysadmin LP
Post Date: 2015-01-12 10:44:49 by tpaine
Keywords: None
Views: 36410
Comments: 61
To: tpaine
Subject: Clarification requested if needed
>> sysadmin-LP -- It has come to light that I may have misinterpreted some part of your offer. If so this was not intentional on my part, I was piecing together parts of several emails to arrive at a cogent description of the entire package.
----- I asked you in my 'offer' emails to post them at LP, because you refused to allow me to comment there. --- Instead, you pieced together parts, which in my opinion led to an non cogent description of the entire email exchange.
>> Information short, what I gathered from your emails and what I have attempted to represent: --- Your accepting ownership of LP is contingent on the following conditions: --- 1. If 25% or more of LP active users indicate they do not want you as owner, (that is, do not vote for you) the offer is withdrawn and you do not accept ownership. (This logically translates to 75% approval. A vote for another option is counted toward the 25% figure.) ---- 2. You will not take ownership until a suitable moderator is selected with a 75% approval rate from LP members. --- (If you have been following the discussion thread on LP of course you already know this but I wanted to put it on the table as accurately as possible.)
------- I have been attempting (like others) to follow your comments on those threads, and and like the others, I find them confusing. Why don't you just post our original email exchange, in its entirety, and then try to explain why you decided to make this a complicated four choice election instead of simply asking the members if they wanted me as an owner? ----- If 25 individuals had voted no, that would have been the end of it for me.
>> If I am mistaken in any of this please provide a precise statement of the contingencies which I will post in its entirety on your behalf. If there are any significant errors in my reporting of your offer I will publicly apologize for my error in interpretation and take whatever action is necessary to insure a fair vote, including invalidation of current votes and starting the process over if it comes to that. Despite our differences you made a bona fide offer and it is my desire to give you a fair shake. ------ sysadmin posted on 2015-01-12 9:11:42 ET
-------- The way you put on a four part 'election' did not make it a fair shake for anyone, imho. --- But it did indicate that my ownership of the site was not acceptable for at least 25 out of the 100 or so active members. So be it...
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Please, if someone would post this over at LP and ping the sysadmin, I'd appreciate it.
#2. To: tpaine, TooConservative, redleghunter (#0)
Ping to tpaine's request in reply #1.
#3. To: tpaine (#0)
sysadmin is wilting under the intense pressure of the poll he constructed.
Oh, it's killing him!
#4. To: Fred Mertz (#3) (Edited)
Yeah ... who gets to bury step mother --- towel boy on the titanic cleaning chairs !
A few normal overworked volunteers babysitting FR reject mutant savage crazies !
tpaine - mrmagoo will be their pole - war god totem !
If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !
#5. To: Fred Mertz, Y'ALL, tooconservative (#3)
sysadmin LP --- I understand what you are saying, but this process has all taken place in the open and tpaine has not complained.
Bull, I've complained about his procedure since I've been posting here. And most if not all of those posts have been reposted at LP.
TooConservative--- That's harder to do when he's banned here. You could at least let him comment but not post articles. --- And regardless of whether he complains, he made one proposal only. A single vote for him and for his moderator (assuming he can find one). Not tossing in Pericles, you or shutting LP down.
Obviously, sysadmin, will not hear any criticism of his methods.
Obviously, he is winning hands down already. Only votes for you or for shutdown can exclude him in any fair assessment of the votes cast. ---- Are you really content to hand the forum over to a retread who Goldi banned instead of someone who posted steady for 10 years at TOS and then posted for 8 years here at LP without getting banned? Maybe the record should be allowed to speak somewhat for itself. ---- tpaine should have apologized for posting Volokh. But not everyone knows that WaPo purchased Volokh. I always oppose posting LAT/WaPo articles due to their litigation against TOS. But LP is a non-profit and a very tine forum, not even visible on Google/Yahoo/Bing. So the risk really is quite minimal. There are far better targets for packs of media lawyers to sue than to pick on LP. For instance, the known for-profit aggregators over at TOS. And they get away with excerpts and reach a far larger audience.
Your kicking a dead sysadmin's horse. He's convinced I did something, gasp, illegal...
The point remains: tpaine never proposed taking a vote on anything other than him and his choice of moderator and that alone. So when you keep trying to say these are tpaine's conditions, that isn't true. He never proposed a vote between him and Destro. Or between him and you. Or between him and shutting down LP. tpaine proposed none of that. You can't seriously pretend that he did. If you think he did, post his email here where he suggests anything other than a straight up-down vote on him and a moderator.
Thank you for calling his bluff.
Of course, I'm not even sure that tpaine is still interested. --- TooConservative
Frankly, I'm not. Even with you as a moderator/techie, I can see that it just wouldn't work. -- I hate to see LP go under, but as someone mentioned, LF is an option, among with thousands of others.
#6. To: tpaine (#1)
Now, Neil is counting votes in a way I've never seen.
What a goat rope!
#7. To: tpaine, RIP elPee (#5)
#379. To: Neil McIver (#377)
By way of further discussion, my own opinion, again, is the site should be shut down.
I agree. I have made the executive decision. LP will be shut down. I apologize to people for putting them through all this, it just took me way too long to understand that the "right thing" all along was for LP to end when Goldi passed away. I was too focused on trying to keep her "baby" going when in fact LP was a part of her and should have been turned off after people were informed of what happened. Add this to all of the personal hassle and aggravation it has caused and there is really no reason for me to continue this.
What needs to be done to enable site email and can you give a short description of how it works? I don't want to just cut people off from each other.
sysadmin posted on 2015-01-12 11:22:25 ET
#8. To: Fred Mertz (#7)
all along was for LP to end when Goldi passed away.
I would think that Goldi would want her words and opinions to live on.
#9. To: A K A Stone (#8)
What we think doesn't matter now. I agree, it's a shame.
You need to clean up your act if you get elPee members posting here. I expect you'll get more than a few.
#10. To: Fred Mertz, Y'ALL (#7)
I have made the executive decision. LP will be shut down.
His bluff was called, and our anonymous sysadmin shut it down.
Call me cynical, again, --- but I'd bet the sysadmin has some connection to the gatlin faction, and seeing that they were rebuffed by the vote (in effect if not in fact) the plug will be pulled.
#11. To: tpaine (#5)
My guesstimate:
- 90 percent want elPee to carry on [Options 1, 2 or 3]
- 10 percent want to shut it down [Option 4]
So, what do they do? They shut it down.
They've chosen the easier wrong.
#12. To: tpaine (#10)
sysadmin has been there from the start...of elPee
#402. To: Willie Green (#391)
I'd really hate to lose access to those old discussions/debates (some friendly, some not) that we had once upon a time.
We could consider providing read-only access to LPs articles as part of Goldi's memorial, but I'm not sure she would want to be remembered for some of the goings-on here in recent years. I'll discuss that possibility with Neil. But LP's time is over. Neil helped create it and he realized that when Goldi's death was first discovered. I was also involved in LP's birth (hardware and operating system support) and have finally come around to realizing the wisdom of Neil's position. My main regret is having prolonged the agony here, I should not have done that, it was a fool's mission to try to keep this site going after Goldi's demise.
sysadmin posted on 2015-01-12 11:54:26 ET
#13. To: Fred Mertz, *Yukon neo-Progressive Vermin* (#11)
The phony election wasn't going his way, so sysy pulled the plug.
There could be a big rush of new users here. Invasion of the neocons!
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#14. To: hondo68 (#13)
The phony election wasn't going his way, so sysy pulled the plug.
The guy has the patience of a circus monkey.
He wilted under the pressure of his own election process!
#15. To: Fred Mertz (#6)
It's called the Approval Method. You can visit the link I posted on the thread.
If you're not used to it, and only used to the simple plurality system that allows you to only express an opinion about one option, it can seem odd. But AV allows voters to express their preferences to a much greater degree. And having had the opportunity to educate people about it, I decided to take it.
AV voting is vastly superior to the commonly used system. 3rd parties would be elected with it. Only reason it's not used is people don't know about it.
#16. To: tpaine (#10)
Call me cynical, again, --- but I'd bet the sysadmin has some connection to the gatlin faction, and seeing that they were rebuffed by the vote (in effect if not in fact) the plug will be pulled.
Okay, you are cynical, and you'd lose the bet.
The connections he has are not to Gatlin, but to his own life and family. He's not accustomed to all the pain and trouble that comes with running a forum, including the issues of handing it off to someone else. He tried to work with your conditions for taking over, but the extra complications were ultimately a turn-off.
#17. To: Pinguinite (#16)
Call me cynical, again, --- but I'd bet the sysadmin has some connection to the gatlin faction, and seeing that they were rebuffed by the vote (in effect if not in fact) the plug will be pulled.
Okay, you are cynical, and you'd lose the bet.
Then why did he have such an obvious bias for gatlin and crew, and against me, to the extent that he banned me at his earliest opportunity, over some 'legal' bull?
The connections he has are not to Gatlin, but to his own life and family. He's not accustomed to all the pain and trouble that comes with running a forum, including the issues of handing it off to someone else.
He quite eagerly banned me, then set things up so that he thought he could easily win control of LP. -- When that 4 vote ploy blew up in his face, he blew up LP.
He tried to work with your conditions for taking over,
My conditions were fairly uncomplicated. -- His were, --- unnecessarily so.
but the extra complications were ultimately a turn-off.
Yep, he didn't realize the complications inherent in an anonymous takeover.
#18. To: tpaine (#0)
Good Lord. For being such a massive windbag, you can't effectively communicate a simple point.
Try paring down your novel by about 10,000 characters. Simplicity can be your friend.
LP is dead anyway. All of your goofball pals will be over here soon laying this place to waste.
Kind of funny that you were such a poor choice the place votes to commit Hari-Kari rather than have you in charge.
#19. To: Nexus6 (#18)
Kind of funny that you were such a poor choice the place votes to commit Hari-Kari rather than have you in charge.
Quit lying, liar.
#20. To: Nexus6 (#18)
Good Lord. ----- you can't effectively communicate a simple point.
Which point is that?
#21. To: Fred Mertz (#19)
Neil --- With 83 comments posted, I count 43 voters with the following breakdown.
TPaine: 23
Perciles: 6
Status Quo: 24
Shutdown: 11
With supposedly 64? votes counted, 11 were for Hari-Kari.
Hardly a consensus.
#22. To: Fred Mertz (#19)
How am I lying?
He was a terrible choice. He couldn't get 25% of members to vote for him.
The sysadmin chose, along with many members, to shut it down.
#23. To: tpaine (#21)
Status quo was a no vote for you and a yes vote for sysadmin who expressed his desire pre and during the vote to close the place.
You and Pericles combined couldn't get a bigger majority than shut it down.
Apparently Americans don't like to be controlled by a foreign agitator in Pericles or a know it all windbag like you.
Don't worry. You are here now and you can pontificate as much as you want. You will be liked and respected as much as you were over there.
#24. To: tpaine (#21)
With supposedly 64? votes counted, 11 were for Hari-Kari.
I just went through that thread and counted 4 for Hari-Kari/first choice.
One person voted 3 or 4, so you could make it five votes.
I stand by my guesstimate above - 90/10 or 80/20 to keep the place alive.
sysadmin and his family couldn't take the intense pressure involved.
#25. To: Nexus6 (#22)
He was a terrible choice. He couldn't get 25% of members to vote for him.
No one made me a 'choice'. -- I told the sysadmin I would play at being the owner, -- unless 25% of the members vetoed me. -- And frankly, I'm glad they did.
The sysadmin chose, along with many members, to shut it down.
The sysadmin made one of the 11 votes to shut it down.
#26. To: Nexus6, know it all windbag (#23)
The ballot was rigged, and the counting was communist approval style.
One voter could vote for three choices. The whole process is as crooked as the Willard M. Romney nomination in Tampa.
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#27. To: Fred Mertz (#24)
sysadmin and his family couldn't take the intense pressure involved.
That's his story, and he's sticking to it.
#28. To: tpaine (#27)
In case you are upset and want to learn something from this experience, don't talk behind someone's back, especially when you know it's going to get right back to them.
#29. To: tpaine, sneakypete, meguro (#27)
sneakypete didn't get the message yet. He posted here in the past until he got fed up with A K A Stone's antics.
meguro did too until Stone banned him.
#30. To: Fred Mertz (#29)
#436. To: redleghunter (#386)Where can we meet if LP goes down?
LF.
Is Stone back on his meds? If not,that place is nothing but a lunatic asylum.
sneakypete posted on 2015-01-12
LOL
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#31. To: hondo68 (#30)
Well, sneakypete is one poster whose stuff I usually enjoy reading.
He's on www.rights-right.com/ and I am registered there too. Like many sites these days, its not very active.
Too bad Stone pissed off petey so much.
#32. To: Fred Mertz, tpaine (#11)
My guesstimate:- 90 percent want elPee to carry on [Options 1, 2 or 3]
- 10 percent want to shut it down [Option 4]
So, what do they do? They shut it down.
They've chosen the easier wrong.
Please help me out here. You claim that 90% want LP to continue and 10% wanted shut down - that's 100%. And you are claiming that both positions are wrong with one being easier than the other? I can't wait to hear you logic on this.
#33. To: tpaine (#17)
Then why did he have such an obvious bias ....
He quite eagerly banned me, then set things up so that he thought he could easily win control of LP. -- When that 4 vote ploy blew up in his face, he blew up LP.....
You are entitled to your opinions.
Best....
#34. To: tpaine (#21)
With supposedly 64? votes counted, 11 were for Hari-Kari.
Hardly a consensus.
11 of 43 voters selected a shutdown as acceptable. The 64 figure is not significant.
#35. To: Fred Mertz (#24)
sysadmin and his family couldn't take the intense pressure involved.
More of a choice not to deal with it, rather than an inability to deal with it.
But it is the best & most appropriate decision. To anyone who disagrees.... fine.... start a new forum. Problem solved.
#36. To: hondo68 (#26)
The ballot was rigged, and the counting was communist approval style.
One voter could vote for three choices. The whole process is as crooked as the Willard M. Romney nomination in Tampa.
Approval voting, if adopted nationwide, would be the single best thing that could ever happen to break up the 2 party monopoly. It's not a new thing either.
www.electology.org/#!approval-voting/cc04
The current system, billed as a great thing for democracy, is far inferior.
#37. To: Pinguinite (#34) (Edited)
With supposedly 64? votes counted, 11 were for Hari-Kari. Hardly a consensus.
11 of 43 voters selected a shutdown as acceptable.
Still, hardly a consensus.
The 64 figure is not significant.
You're entitled to your opinion, and my best to you sir.
#38. To: Pinguinite (#36) (Edited)
One of my objections is to not defining the vote counting method prior to the vote. If the method were known, some folks would likely have voted differently.
Note that some people started changing their votes, once the election rules became known.
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#39. To: Pinguinite, Fred Mertz (#35)
sysadmin and his family couldn't take the intense pressure involved. More of a choice not to deal with it, rather than an inability to deal with it.But it is the best & most appropriate decision. To anyone who disagrees.... fine.... start a new forum. Problem solved.
Excellent accessment of the situtaion.
#40. To: Fred Mertz, sneakypete (#31)
Too bad Stone pissed off petey so much.
Pete is a militant atheist who regularly attacks my faith.
He is also welcome here. He is also right on a lot of issues. Maybe most. He is willingly ignorant about matters of God.
#41. To: hondo68 (#38)
One of my objections is to not defining the vote counting method prior to the vote. If the method were known, some folks would likely have voted differently.
I'll concede that, yes. SysAdmin had initiated the vote a bit ahead of me. One could re-tally the votes in instant run-off fashion if interested. I doubt it would have made any difference, particularly since Tpaine wanted 75%.
I won't bother though. I've other things to do, and the decision is made.
.
.
.
Comments (42 - 61) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]