[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

President Trump, A Formidable Candidate In 2024 Republican Primaries: Golden/TIPP Poll

The Red Wave Is Not Just Inevitable, It’s Also Conservative

How liberal policies have killed black communities: Clarence Thomas

UPDATE ON JIM ROBINSON

STRANDED!!! Lake Mead's Water Dropped Too Fast!!!

A Supreme win for school choice

The More Americans Decide The System Is Rigged, The More They Will Silently Rebel

How Donald Trump Saved the GOP

Marching in Time

Mortgage Rates Explode and Housing Crash Imminent - With Scott Walters and The Economic Ninja

A Warning From A Farmer

What I Just Learned Will Shock You

Lake Mead Drought Update!!! What's Going On?!!!

"Homosexuals Are Coming For Your Kids Via Disney... They Want Us To Be Just Like Them"

Go read this report about a Google contractor who claims he was fired for calling out cult activity

WAYNE ROOT - My LaTesT Exclusive InTerview wiTh PresidenT Trump ... The RevelaTions - His Shocking Response AbouT Running for House Speaker --- Proof America is Under CommunisT ATTack

EXCLUSIVE: Rubio questions Harvard on Fauci-China cover-up

Can ChrisTian Russia ... save The world --- from globalism?

All in all it's just the groomers on the prowl "Another Brick in the Wall"

North Korean defector: I am terrified of the 'massive indoctrination coming from the left' in public schools

Trump vs DeSantis: Who Should Patriots Support for 2024?

Disney Disaster: United Arab Emirates Bans Pixar’s ‘Lightyear’ over Lesbian Kiss

The entire hood came out to beat this white man and they stole his car. Leftists be like 'stop profiling people'.

The FBI knew RussiaGate was a lie — but hid that truth

The narraTive is shifTing fasT ... Zelensky may soon see his --- 'supersTar' sTaTus in The WesT on The decline

The Eerie Silence Around Kavanaugh Assassination Attempt

FReepers have always supporTed him ... he goT sick --- can’T be There for all of you.

Kayleigh McEnany calls out Harris for failing to condemn threats against Kavanaugh: 'Where is the media?'

Colin Kaepernick Transitions In Order To Make Carolina Panthers Cheer Squad

ABC News: Our Numbers Show Biden Is a 'Serious Drag' on Democrats

Will Boudin Be the First Soros D.A. to Fall This Year?

Woke LA District Attorney strikes out in California court

Media Group Backed By George Soros And Obama Staffer Buys Conservative Latino Radio Stations Ahead of Midterms

Transfaggots want women to spend more time smelling their poop

Trumpology

Parents are still being treated like terrorists

If Schools Don’t Let Boys Into Girls’ Bathrooms, Biden Will Take Their Lunch Money

The Cancer of Election Fraud

California Spills Water into Ocean rather than letting Farmers Grow Rice

Bertrand Russell - Message To Future Generations (1959)

The bodies of those who were killed on the fields of the war in Donbas. A reportage

New bid to spin Hunter BidenÂ’s laptop

Yuma County School Board Member Set To Plead Guilty For 2020 Election Ballot Trafficking Crimes As Exposed In “2000 Mules”

Big Pharma Boss Caught FAKING His COVID Vaccination Status; Injected Himself With Salt Water Instead… Now Facing Criminal Charges

Ricky Gervais - Trans Women

Race-Based Illness at the Best of the Best

Shouldn't Hillary Clinton Be Banned From Twitter Now?

"GoFundMe for Son's Hormone Blockers!" (5 year old)

Charlie Kirk Wrecks Pro-Trans Wet Leftist

Watch the Ugly Cunt Lila Grace Rose tell her baby she could have killed it


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

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: 28807
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  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 54.

#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.

Nexus6  posted on  2015-01-12   12:41:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#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.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   12:44:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#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.

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   12:58:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: tpaine, Fred Mertz, Pinguinite, hondo68, A K A Stone (#21)

http://www2.libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=36973&Disp=21#C21

#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.

tpaine posted on 2015-01-12 12:58:31 ET

With 84 comments and the thread locked, I count 64 votes with only 45 discrete individuals participating. Of those, only 7 stated a first preference of shutting down the site. If status quo/sysadmin were not an actual choice (it seems it was not), then a vastly different choice would have been faced, tpaine, Pericles, or shut down LP.

That breakdown of 36 clear first preferences is:

14 -- tpaine
01 -- Pericles
14 -- status quo/sysadmin
07 -- shut down LP

As for the "approval" vote, some voters cast their approval in order of preference and others did not. Some votes, if they be votes, are unclear. The vote is a mess and the only thing clear is that the voters were not clear about the process.

That "approval" breakdown is:

20 -- tpaine
06 -- Pericles
24 -- status quo/sysadmin
14 -- shutdown

The 14 people who listed a shutdown as one of their choices and the post number.

#4, domer
#5, 22rifle
#7, Fibr Dog
#19, SOD
#24, fallujah nuker

#41, GeorgiaConservative
#55, sysadmin
#57, TooConservative
#64, redleghunter
#68, byeltsin

#73, Neil McIver
#76, listener
#78, medicalmalcontent
#81, Orthodoxa

One instruction for the process, on the VOTING thread was:

Please limit your response to this post to a single line containing one of the following options:

1. tpaine
2. Pericles
3. status quo (sysadmin)
4. shut down LP

If you feel the need to discuss the merits or demerits of these various options please do not post that here, please take it to the existing ownership change discussion.

NOTE ON THE "APPROVAL VOTE" SYSTEM. That was discussed on a different DISCUSSION thread and never mentioned on the VOTING thread.

http://69.164.197.124/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=350039&Disp=167#C167

#167. To: Neil McIver (#164)

There is something very clean about this suggestion.

Yes, there is. My plan is to abide by the wishes of the community. I am going to set up the voting thread momentarily and will put forth 4 choices:

1. tpaine
2. Pericles
3. sysadmin (will continue looking for someone to take over)
4. close down the site.

I agree with the idea of purging all email and IP information from the database should an ownership transfer take place.

sysadmin posted on 2015-01-10 13:15:29 ET

http://69.164.197.124/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=350039&Disp=174#C174

#174. To: sysadmin (#167)

1. tpaine 2. Pericles 3. sysadmin (will continue looking for someone to take over) 4. close down the site.

Won't post this on the vote thread, but might I suggest the "Approval Vote" method?

In this method, people can vote for more than 1 option. I.e. all they approve of, and then the option getting the most votes of approval wins. There's no run-off required.

It's a simple voting technique that, if used in public elections, would actually give 3rd parties much greater standing. Voting for "the lessor of two evils" goes away. Just a thought...

Neil McIver posted on 2015-01-10 13:51:31 ET

http://69.164.197.124/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=350039&Disp=175#C175

#175. To: Neil McIver (#174)

I was planning to vote for my preferences in order, much as you suggest.

TooConservative posted on 2015-01-10 14:02:50 ET

http://69.164.197.124/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=350039&Disp=186#C186

#186. To: Neil McIver (#174)

It's a simple voting technique that, if used in public elections, would actually give 3rd parties much greater standing. Voting for "the lessor of two evils" goes away. Just a thought...

I note some people are putting in more than one choice, so we can tally it up that way at the end.

sysadmin posted on 2015-01-10 18:52:13 ET

People who followed the instruction on the VOTING thread got one vote for one choice. People who chose to adopt what Neil mentioned on another thread cast as many as four choices.

The first vote was recorded at 2015-01-10, 13:48:59 ET. Neil McIver's suggestion to use the "approval" system was recorded at 2015-01-10 13:51:31 ET, shortly after voting had commenced. sysadmin's coment was recorded at 2015-01-10 18:52:13 ET, about five hours after voting commenced and 56 posts were already on what would be an 84 post thread.

Where a voter cast a vote of "1 or 3, in that order," are they counted as equal approval of 1 and 3, or as a preference for 1?

At #17, JTIDSGUY wrote:

So just who decided that these were the only choices? I would rather stick a pin in my eye than have pericles in charge of anything. tpaine is just a bit less annoying. SYSADMIN has been doing an ok job. Raise some money to keep the doors open and look at this matter again later. Maybe the new head cheese can buy an Olive Garden in a couple of years.

JTIDSGUY posted on 2015-01-10 14:30:36 ET

Maybe that equates to #3 status quo, or not.

At #55, sysadmin indicated he inserted a vote by tpaine for tpaine.

I count 64 total "votes" by 45 people, including tpaine.

There are several similar to #76:

3,1,2,4

listener posted on 2015-01-11 11:28:50 ET

All four choices are listed in preference order. Is this a vote of approval for each choice or one vote of disapproval for a shutdown? That counts as four votes if approval is counted. Such counting provides my total of 64. Perhaps it should be counted as approval for 3, 2, and 1.

At #13, AuntB posted:

I haven't been around consistently enough to have a vote, but I hope the place continues.

I did not stretch this non-vote to three votes, one approval each for 1, 2, and 3. I did not construe a desire that the place continues to be an approval of tpaine, Pericles, and/or sysadmin.

At #27, stoner posted:

1. tpaine

or 3. status quo (sysadmin)

sysadmin, you have done a good job. Many thanks to you for your efforts. But since this has become a burden you do not want,

I will vote for tpaine

Is that 1 or 3, or just 1? I counted it as approval of 1 and 3. If counted just for tpaine, then the total is 63 votes and one less for sysadmin.

At #35, JustUsealittleBrainPower stated:

3 without a doubt. Tpaine is okay....

I counted this as approval of 1 and 3.

At #57, TooConservative recorded all four choices.

At #76, listener recorded all four choices.

At #78, medicalmalcontent recorded all four choices.

The last listed choice of #57, 76, 78 was to shut down. Is this three votes to approve shutting down the site?

The 45 voters and the post number of their recorded votes.

01 -- IRTorqued
02 -- A Pole
03 -- Paul CJ
04 -- domer
05 -- 22rifle

07 -- Fibr Dog
11 -- Murron
14 -- Booshbot666
16 -- The Examiner
17 -- JTIDSGUY

19 -- SOD
22 -- Infowarrior
23 -- Dead Culture Watch
24 -- fallujah nuker
25 -- Leopold Stotch

26 -- cranky
27 -- stoner
28 -- Uncle Siggy
29 -- Pericles
32 -- out damned spot

35 -- JustUsealittleBrainPower
36 -- Izthla
37 -- RLKK
39 -- MJS
40 -- Good Ole Boy

41 -- GeorgiaConservative
46 -- Tea Party Reveler
54 -- Mister White
55 -- sysadmin
57 -- TooConservative

62 -- UaDeaghaidh
64 -- redleghunter
67 -- sneakypete
68 -- byeltsin
69 -- Vicompte13

71 -- Molon Labe
72 -- Marguerite
73 -- Neil McIver
76 -- listener
77 -- Sven Golly

78 -- medicalmalcontent
81 -- Orthodoxa
82 -- Willie Green (changed original vote at #12)
84 -- Anon Poster

** -- tpaine (sysadmin at #55 stated he recorded a vote by tpaine for tpaine)

nolu chan  posted on  2015-01-12   20:37:38 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: nolu chan (#49)

#57, TooConservative

I shouldn't have even included shutdown as an option. I never wanted LP to shutdown. Maybe over the long run, it will prove to be for the best but that was not my wish.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-12   20:43:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: TooConservative (#50)

I shouldn't have even included shutdown as an option. I never wanted LP to shutdown.

That is the way I took the intent of these votes. There never should have been an "approval" vote unclearly implemented on another thread hours after voting started. It needed far more explanation, and it needed to be explained on the VOTING thread, prior to voting.

If sysadmin was not a real option, that should not have been offered. I only see seven people come out and say shut it down.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-01-12   21:05:08 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 54.

#55. To: nolu chan, (#54)

I said it was rigged too. Sysadmin might as well have been on the ballot 3 times.

Once for him, once for shut down, once if stale mate.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-01-12 21:18:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: nolu chan (#54)

There never should have been an "approval" vote unclearly implemented on another thread hours after voting started. It needed far more explanation, and it needed to be explained on the VOTING thread, prior to voting.

And the whole Euro voting preference, I think people got confused. I know I did. The election kinda changed over the first 24 hours.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-12 21:20:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 54.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com