[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
BANNED AT LIBERTYPOST
Title: Clarification requested if needed
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 If 25% or more of LP active users indicate they do not want you as owner, (that is, do not vote for you) the offer is withdrawn and you do not accept ownership.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 Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 33. sysadmin is wilting under the intense pressure of the poll he constructed. Oh, it's killing him!
#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.
#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
#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.
#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.
#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....
Replies to Comment # 33. There are no replies to Comment # 33.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 33. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|