Bobby wrote: ↑Fri Jun 18, 2021 1:28 pm
I would have started this Thread in the Dungeon,
but there is no button which allows a new thread there.
(Who did that? You bobby...or one of your GMods?)
I tried various means to fix that.
It seems that The Dungeon forum has lost the normal functionality
from normal folders and the functionality of threads has changed to.
I think this is because they were transferred from an Archive type format.
I will ask others about this.
I didn't really want threads in The Dungeon anyway.
Fine....that means you are happy to see Threads like this open to all. Great. No problem.
Who is a 'probationary Member?' Where is that described in the Constitution which Bobby said he would comply with?
Further, I have seen, NOWHERE, any proclamation by ANY Member of their intention to oust you. This is a serious allegation and it seemed that these impositions are a direct result of that assertion being fact. I want to see that proclamation Bobby.
You and Monk are probationary members right now.
Stop this crap, bundling me in with anyone of your choosing! The ONLY 'probation' you included in your election platform and the ONLY probation I accepted was a three month wait for access to Sparta.
DO NOT LIE and TOTALLY MISREPRESENT WHAT YOU OFFERED AND WHAT I AGREED TO.
Monk has already made his signature to read:
The last election was NOT valid with a sock vote counted.
Another election must be called soon!
As Monk is your close mate and you have written at least a dozen posts in the Archives thread
heavily criticising me I have to assume that you agree with him.
Then truly Bobby,
you are the paranoid one.
You 'assume.' I am my own man. Monk is his own man. Neither of us work or need to work implicitly together on the basis that some idiot would impute a motive to me or to him, based on whatever the other said. Come on. Really?
Outrageous!!!!!! This is an attempt at dictatorship, and is a blatant move to backdoor FD's Constitution. If that is not enough, Bobby was elected on the vote of Stokerjim...someone who had made exactly TWO posts before the recent election. Hypocrisy much? That is...he was elected on the vote of someone he would now assert (post election after enjoying the benefit of that vote) is a 'probationary Member.'
If you ever patronise me in that way ever again while you are EL.......I will leave, others will follow and those sitting watching will stay away. I am not your 'good boy" and if you recall what you said to me elsewhere, you did not expect me to be anything other than myself. I told you I would not be a wilting violet. Check your PM response to that, sent to me.
Bobby...please show me where the Constitution talks about 'enfranchished members.'
I will wait for your reply before discussing this point further.
21 lines down it says
Elections
All candidate nominations must be made on the forum by an enfranchised member.
Yes it does, but that has to be read in terms of what preceded it....read the document properly and not according to your own convenience or whim.
Do what your said you would do in your 'manisfesto.' Go beyond that...expect due hostility from those who expect you to be a 'man of your word.'
Here we go. An EL being elected on a platform and as soon as they get their hands on The Precious, they seek to expand their own personal power, and go way beyond that platform. I have already pointed out, and FD came along to agree, that one of the most important lynch pins in that Constitution is a deliberate clear intent to ensure the power of EL is strictly limited, and it is designed to prevent this very attempt at a Constitutional coup via the back door.
Bobby....you told me and us all that your are a man of your word.
There would be no point in anyone taking the reigns here as EL if they
could be ousted in the first week after being
kind enough to let hostile former members return.
Bobby, really. You are not being kind....you are doing what you said you would do and on that basis, people voted for you. Keeping to your word is not...'being kind.'
There will first be a 3 month chance for the new EL to prove that they are
making valuable changes and improving the forum -
and increasing its activity/traffic.
All you have to do is what you said you would do prior to the election. Sure, while I and other formerly banned Members of long standing are here now, there
will be increased activity. That will evaporate the instant we leave, voluntarily or otherwise. This place was dead......the ONLY chance it has of regeneration is if I and people like me...stay here. Now 'be a good boy' and come to terms with that...FACT. You were handed a hospital pass, and I can see you are trying...but....there are limits. Do what you said you would you would do.....no more, no less, and you will have been successful. You saw the need, you acted...(good) and now, you are diluting what you promised to shore up your own position (very bad.)
Full members can still oust me if they form a petition -
I don't have absolute power.
Of course.........and that is the very point FD was making when he posted this:
Re: Proposed Amendment to the PA Constitution
Post by freediver » Tue Jun 15, 2021 5:45 pm
I think it's a bad idea. It defeats the purpose of petitions as a way of getting around a bad moderator. All they have to do is rotate the bans on people who do not like them.
Your new "Rule" seeks to achieve exactly that. All you have to do to stay on as EL is ban people you think might seek to replace you, and then, because of your corrupt and so obvious attempt to backdoor what FD wanted, you can defeat the Members because your 'Rule' says they cannot touch you......because you banned them. Bobby.....this is so obvious, so blatant, so corrupt, even FD will agree with me, and he hates doing that.
I have opened up The Dungeon forum for Archives and you did not even thank me.
I think you doth protest too much.
First, stop imputing false motive to people, and then, stop expecting to be thanked for simply being a man of your word.
