Repeal of Permanent Title for Darthdavid (discussion)

[Broomstick]

In this thread darthdavid requests that his title "pathetic attention whore" be reconsidered on the basis that over the past three years he has changed his behavior and thus it no longer applies.

I don't recall the titling offense. In fact, I barely recall any posts he's done, given how low-key he's been, which is sort of the antithesis of attention whoring. The posts I saw on searching (I only went back about a year) seemed rather middle of the road to me, and indeed most of them were short in length and frequently only one per thread. The latter is enormous restraint by SD.net standards. Yes, there were some silly posts, but they were in threads appropriate to that (notably fanfics and games). In more fact-based threads his posts seemed to be either mostly questions or limited statements which is in keeping with him being young and not as technically educated as some posters.

All in all I have to say I don't see anything I'd label as "attention whoring" over the past year which makes me say we SHOULD seriously consider removing his title. I anticipate some difficulty in this as he is trying to prove a negative - that is, he is asserting he did NOT do something, as opposed to most title-related threads where proof of something occurring is easily laid out.

What say you all?

[Coyote]

I think that's worth consideration, certainly.

[Bounty]

If he's not an attention whore any more, and hasn't been for over a year, there's no reason he should have to keep the title.

[Edi]

I support removal of the title

[Tiriol]

I concur with above posters: darthdavid hasn't in recent memory done anything worthy of being named as an attention whore. In the light of darthdavid's changed habits and his current, reserved posting style, the title, given to him as a punishment, should be revoked.

[Broomstick]

I say let the discussion run a full day then start a poll to formally vote on this.

[Simplicius]

If he earned his title solely for his terrible AFD 'joke' back in '06 - conveniently cited in his request; thank you D. D. - and has not fucked up since, I would support removal. It seems reasonable to do so in the face of a single-incident offense as opposed to a consistent pattern of behavior.

[Ghost Rider]

Said poster could...*gasp* ask an admin, and we even have a CC function now!!! So it'll reach one of them.

Instead, people make fucking productions out of this, but never ask the public about name changes or other forms of titling. It's a happy little irony of how people fear to present proof of against said transgressions but when asking "Could I get another name change?!" they have no problem with asking personally.

Maybe we should reintroduce the thought of having the Senate/public arena having long winded jabberings about the deserving of promotional titles and name changes, so people will have to wait four to five weeks for this.

[Broomstick]

Well, sure, he could ask an admin... but I don't get my panties in a twist about him asking in the HoC. It's my understanding he can also do it the way he did. His post/request seemed respectful enough and he's not the one that came across to me as a "drama queen" in that thread. He could have sent a senator a PM (he even mentioned he had approached one in the past), PM'd Mike directly...

Well, OK, GR, I respect your opinion but the fact other people agitate for name changes and requested titles is a different issue than DD asking politely to have a punishment reconsidered. DD should be judged on his actions, not those of other people.

If you want to change the procedures so name changes and custom titling needs a different process(es) that what is current then let's discuss that. If it's become a burden on the admins then it's entirely appropriate to look over that - in another thread that isn't about DD's title and whether or not he's reformed.

[Ghost Rider]

Well, sure, he could ask an admin... but I don't get my panties in a twist about him asking in the HoC. It's my understanding he can also do it the way he did. His post/request seemed respectful enough and he's not the one that came across to me as a "drama queen" in that thread. He could have sent a senator a PM (he even mentioned he had approached one in the past), PM'd Mike directly...

Well, OK, GR, I respect your opinion but the fact other people agitate for name changes and requested titles is a different issue than DD asking politely to have a punishment reconsidered. DD should be judged on his actions, not those of other people.

If you want to change the procedures so name changes and custom titling needs a different process(es) that what is current then let's discuss that. If it's become a burden on the admins then it's entirely appropriate to look over that - in another thread that isn't about DD's title and whether or not he's reformed.

No, I don't give a fuck about changing the procedures because they have been...immensely. It used to actually take the board a number of weeks for titles or names. Fine, it's streamlined. Cool, awesome, it's actually better for it. I get pissed because people become whores for a title change of negative to postive, when it could be as easily determined if said poster goes "Here's my proof that I changed from being a fucking idiot, and I want to say I've learned from my transgression.". Hint, the admins and most moderators don't keep track and asking said admin to change said title won't result in a flaming because you asked.

Again, like I said in the DEATH thread...what is the admin going to do? Ban the person for a non transgression? Other then yes or no, it's the same as the Senate going four fucking weeks screeching at each other in one PM. But oh noes...the admin may say no!!! Just like the admin may tell the Senate to go fuck themselves. But apparently this needs to be discussed, dissected, have more people bitch, yabber, protest, agree over something that smacks of navel gazing.

[Broomstick]

Like it or not, there is a perception that the admins and mods on this board are biased against people with negative titles which makes them reluctant to approach those people. Personally, I don't subscribe to that notion but I have on several occasions received PM's from members who wished me to speak on their behalf, or who expressed concern that yes, they WOULD be shot down or even banned for having the audacity to approach the admins/mods/Mike. I'm sorry if it upsets you that the A/M/M are perceived so negatively, I'm sorry if that strikes you as somehow unjust, and I'm really sorry that the "peon posters" feel that way but I'm just reporting it how I see it.

On the other hand, if you perceive DD's post as "attention-whoring" that's your perception. I would be surprised if everyone who drops into this thread was unanimous in their decision. It is, however, the right of any board member to ask a senator to speak on their behalf. It is the right of senator to start a thread on a topic he or she thinks worthy. Although DD did not ask directly, I thought it worthy of discussion. IF you have a problem with this thread or a poll on DD's behalf BLAME ME, NOT DARTHDAVID because I am the one who started this thread and have asked for a poll NOT HIM. Do you get that? Do not blame him for my actions, judge him solely on his actions. You can object to his thread in the HoC and hold that against him, you shouldn't hold this thread against him as he did not start it, I did.

[Ghost Rider]

Apparently you think I am blaming you for a particular I've said was not you but that people with negative titles not having the fucking balls to...ask an admin to remove it.

If you want to continue this line, be my guest. I'll happily continue this tirade. And for titles, he can ask the Senator, but ultimately it's still a request from the Senate to the Administration. Something every other poster requesting a upgrade on their name or title have learned is faster, less drama whoring, and efficent to ask the admin in question. In fact the greatest irony is both should have and do have a look on whether said person deserves a new title, but the people with negative titles become fucking pussies. But getting a name or extra on the title, not one single person turns away or requests a Senate jabber session because they know the answer will take them 4-5 weeks of pointless deliberation.

As for banning? That's even funnier in relation how many ask for an upgrade. What are the two active admins going to ban you over? Having the audacity to ask? Are they really that fucking retarded or that much a fucking pansy? Must be because if that was so, the board would have collective 10 members. But apparently this fact escapes them on asking the admin to note they have IMPROVED themselves. Woe to the member having to show that in their last few months they haven't been the fucking retard that got them the title...oh wait, I'm sorry I'm repeating what I did last time, and why it grates on me this time.

But hey, let's continue this bullshit about having dramas over changes that are ultimately determined in the same manner.

[Broomstick]

Excuse me, who pissed on your cornflakes this morning?

Something every other poster requesting a upgrade on their name or title have learned is faster, less drama whoring, and efficent to ask the admin in question.

Except an "upgrade" is not the same as asking to have a punishment intended to be permanent removed. Perhaps it escapes you that people see a distinction between a permanent title imposed on them vs. a title they request?

As for banning? That's even funnier in relation how many ask for an upgrade. What are the two active admins going to ban you over? Having the audacity to ask? Are they really that fucking retarded or that much a fucking pansy?

Yes, that is PRECISELY what some people on this board are afraid of - that they will be banned for having the audacity to ask. So ask yourself - how did THAT get to be the perception of members towards admins? Gee, it couldn't possibly have anything to do with someone making a polite (if public) request to have a punishment lifted and having someone else vomit all over the thread and accuse them of being a "pansy"? Someone they might be reluctant to respond to because that person DOES have the ability to ban them unilaterally?

Personally, I think standing up in a public forum and saying "Yeah, I fucked up, I was a bad boy, but I've changed my ways can this label around my neck be reconsidered" takes some balls, that is, it pretty much the opposite of "pansy" but hey, that's just my opinion. I haven't got any actual power here other than my ability to sway others with my words. Maybe that's why I'm regarded as more approachable than people who do have the ability to ban.

DD waited three years for anyone to notice his change in conduct - again, that sort of patience is far from typical of a drama queen, spammer, or attention whore. So he says "hey, I've been a good boy". And you launch into some vitriol about other people who annoy the fuck out of you.

If you want to maintain that a polite request to reconsider punishment is attention whoring then by damn you'd BETTER have it written down somewhere in the fucking rules that the ONLY acceptable way (according to Ghost Rider) is to submit the request via PM only to an admin - if that ISN'T in the rules then too fucking bad, DD did nothing wrong in making his request and, after three years of accepting his punishment AND changing his behavior I don't see anything attention-grabbing in what he did.

Clearly, he is correct in that having a negative title DOES impact how people see him, and indeed for some people it seems to give them a license to shit on his head. Either he remains low key - in which case he's not doing enough to demonstrate his change in behavior - or after three years he says something only to be smacked down by someone pissed off by the actions of other people. That's a fucking Catch-22 and it's fucking disgusting. I expect better of this board. You and Marina have put him into a position where nothing he does will ever be good enough. That's bullshit. And it's part of the reason board members are afraid to approach admins directly.

[Ghost Rider]

Apparently, you aren't getting what's grating me. So I'll put in smaller words:

Person request title change!

-Old: A long deliberation by said public on whether said person deserves it. 2-3 weeks later, a new title may happen.

-New: A person request admin. Gets changed, perhaps a bit of proof asked for. 2-3 days...maybe an entire week!

EXCEPTION!!!!

When said person wants an upgrade(because they all are, I don't care how you want to cover it in shiny adjectives), they are asked proof for demonstrating they have improved!

But so far we've had 2 for 2 have been attention whoring for five weeks. But we are having a conversation that those requesting a positive to negative upgrade are so much a fucking pussy that they cannot demonstrate one PM of proof with maybe...2? 3? links that they have improved? Really, I enjoy double standards wherein this happen. I'm guessing the last five title changes should be put towards the same useless deliberation and discussion.

So like I said...he can ask an admin, show a few links and all done. Like every other person.

Or

We can go back the old way and have every single poster thank these two that instant title changes need to be deliberated because the admins are too fucking stupid/busy/annoyed to look at a few links or obviously going to outright BAN!!!! said person for demonstrating improvement.

Really, I'm just not being kind enough to the fucking wuss.

[Kuroneko]

There is indeed quite a bit of irony in making a production of removing such a title. But the particulars of the alternative you describe make me very curious, GR, on what constitutes evidence in this context. A lack of something can only be exhibited by inspecting everything, making any sort of links unnecessary--an admin would need to look at a large chunk of all recent posts. Or is it implicit that those seeking the removal of a title are held to a somewhat higher standard than the rest of the board, in that they should exhibit exceptional contributions instead?

[Ghost Rider]

There is indeed quite a bit of irony in making a production of removing such a title. But the particulars of the alternative you describe make me very curious, GR, on what constitutes evidence in this context. A lack of something can only be exhibited by inspecting everything, making any sort of links unnecessary--an admin would need to look at a large chunk of all recent posts. Or is it implicit that those seeking the removal of a title are held to a somewhat higher standard than the rest of the board, in that they should exhibit exceptional contributions instead?

As for evidence, perhaps nothing more then demonstrating, you haven't trolled. It's is primarily the same standard that admins give in consideration to granting extra titles. Really most people have learned and there are few out there I've been thinking of repealing because the titles are old, and no longer apply. Most do not deserve the title anymore but events take place, move on and ultimately forgotten. It is far less malice and far more neglect. Does not make it better, but merely asking said admin will repeal said title unless there is evidence otherwise.

And those few posters still live up to their title.

For most, the only request I have is don't make it into a double standard of asking for a bonus title, and yet feel the need to make drama over the same thing when it applies to a derogatory title. Just ask. If Mike is too busy, respect that, go over the other admin and wait 3-7 days. A response will come.

[Mr Bean]

Is not going to the Senate better GR because the Senate unlike Admins have nothing better to do and most of the Senates members are willing to dig back through someones posts to determine if they still are to note, an attention seeking whore.

Frankly your responses to date reinforce the idea that it's better to approach the Senate(Via the House of Commons) because the chance for a snap decision is lessened. Considering Darthdavid's title what did you expect him to do? Post a bunch of links to thread he had made posts in and say "Looky here Ghost Rider, see how I'm not being an attention whore in any of these threads?" Would that have worked? I should expect not.

His question was honest, respectful and a genuine question, do you think I(darthdavid) still deserve my negative title. It prompted discussion, it is being discussed. If the Senate decides it is no longer deserved then it would be right in with procedure for an admin to act and remove the title. You however believe and from the responses to date that the mere act of asking how he did was attention whoring.

Fine then say simply you believe he should retain his title, there is no need to go into so much justification on this subject. Darthdavid is following procedure, the poster does have the right to ask the Senate about these kinds of things.

[Ghost Rider]

Is not going to the Senate better GR because the Senate unlike Admins have nothing better to do and most of the Senates members are willing to dig back through someones posts to determine if they still are to note, an attention seeking whore.

Frankly your responses to date reinforce the idea that it's better to approach the Senate(Via the House of Commons) because the chance for a snap decision is lessened. Considering Darthdavid's title what did you expect him to do? Post a bunch of links to thread he had made posts in and say "Looky here Ghost Rider, see how I'm not being an attention whore in any of these threads?" Would that have worked? I should expect not.

His question was honest, respectful and a genuine question, do you think I(darthdavid) still deserve my negative title. It prompted discussion, it is being discussed. If the Senate decides it is no longer deserved then it would be right in with procedure for an admin to act and remove the title. You however believe and from the responses to date that the mere act of asking how he did was attention whoring.

Fine then say simply you believe he should retain his title, there is no need to go into so much justification on this subject. Darthdavid is following procedure, the poster does have the right to ask the Senate about these kinds of things.

I never stated whether he does or doesn't deserve it. I requested...like DEATH/Grim Squeaker ask an admin.

I've said it's a double standard to have every single person for the last ten months request a change in title or name to privately do it when before it wasn't, except in two cases. Both of which are going to again be presented to an admin....but have a 2-5 week delay. Both were a derogatory change to a positive.

So, let me state it this way. An admin gave him the title. We have a CC ability in PMs. Any admin can remove said title. A very minor display of acknowlegement that they have learned. Removal is done in three button clicks. But somehow a request of less drama, a cleaner title change needs rules lawyering that neither admin will give a real fuck about.

[Mr Bean]

So your saying that asking the Senate to remove a negative title is not a valid function of the Senate, and such a thing should be admin only?

*Edit or are you objecting to a member asking a Admin, being told no and then going to the Senate?

[Ghost Rider]

So your saying that asking the Senate to remove a negative title is not a valid function of the Senate, and such a thing should be admin only?

*Edit or are you objecting to a member asking a Admin, being told no and then going to the Senate?

It said he asked a Senator, not an admin. Given that every other title has been, except one ask the admin FIRST? Ask an adminstrator. There's a handful of reason to denial and if you aren't doing what Colfax/Pwnage did, there is no threat of ban. And SC was the only idiot that would've gotten banned for excessive pestering.

Going around the bush, is annoying, and wastes time for no reason EXCEPT if the admin said no for no reason other then to be spiteful. Then present the reasons. Since this has yet to happen, again I don't see the need for the excessive dram whoring that has happened...twice.

[Connor MacLeod]

I would just say that its perfectly okay for a Senator to bring this up publicly, and for discussion, but ultimately its nothing we need to vote on. And even then I'm not sure about discussion, these things are pretty minor matters and I don't really feel its neccesary for the Senate to be involved. If for some reason a mod or Admin or whatever wants further proof before reconsidering this, then it could bring the Senate into involvement in some way (checking back for example.)

Also, the fact we may have little to do doesn't mean we neccesarily HAVE to go find things to do either.. a little peace and quiet is okay. Or preferrably, a little silliness. We've let the corruption and bribery part of the Senate slide rather dramatically, and we have standards to live down to after all.

Plus I want to blow something up.

[Kuroneko]

GR, try to look at it from the point of view of a typical member. You're active in the administration of this board, so you have much more awareness in how things are done, but most members do not have such a clear view of how disciplinary measures are handled. The Senate normally decides to hand out derogatory titles in the first place, and so it is fairly natural to expect the Senate to be responsible for their removal.

Now, I'm not at all saying that the Senate should have this responsibility, mostly for reasons of excessive melodrama. Your preferred procedure that the titlee petitions an admin is very reasonable (particularly since the admins are already responsible non-derogatory custom titles anyway, and, as you say, that is the past precedent). What I can't see as reasonable is metaphorically biting darthdavid's head off for failing to meet those expectations, because frankly they're neither made clear nor obvious to someone who hasn't overseen prior titlings. Probably the best thing to do would be to put an additional sentence under the DA1 rule pertaining to the removal of titles, so that if someone makes a public thread in the future, it would be unambiguously their own fault for not knowing the rules.

[Ghost Rider]

I will agree that I have overdone my part, and will put a said bit just to cover any remaining points about title handling and such not. As for the title itself, he can PM Ozy, and let what will happen, happen.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

If D2 were a more active member with a better record of positive contribution, this would be a non-issue, we can all agree, yes? My basic concern is that his very lack of positive as well as negative participation on the board means that the only thing holding him back from more attention whoring is the shame his current negative title causes him, and if it's removed, he will go straight back to his old behaviour. If he were making regular positive contributions, this would not be an issue.

[Broomstick]

Just what are you looking for? He HAS been posting, and he's been fairly active in some areas. Just not the heavily technical or science areas.

Maybe he's just learned to post less?