[Boffo97]

It was a little known, seldom used reserve activation clause!

[Fritzinger]

My group has also decided to make its own cards. We get them from a site called trekcc.org.

[tjark]

You already had a meeting, you already put Tjark in charge. All of that is fine. I don't know why you people act shady all the time.

Hi John your ability to boil up things is fascinating - you are constantly a stick in my ass.
I hardly advice you not to do so any longer otherwise you are in big trouble - My wife insisted thats her job. And - no disrespect - shes working on a higher level than you do and I fear her more. I also feel more comfortable when she does.

But you pointed out some things.
So I ll give some facts - everybody can make their own mind - I ll not go in detail - thats not my job:
1: There was a meeting last week - I participated -
This was not a secret meeting - it was an emergency meeting.
2: During that meeting it was decided to make the decissions public.
(I wanted that done immeadiatly but I thought it was not a big deal to wait a week - You proved me wrong John - but so it is)
3: Covid 19 once again proved that U.S. and UK health system is totally overrated -
and their Leaders don`t deserve that title.(Donald is my favorite guy - but maybe Bolsonaro can outrank him)
As a result Nick was hit hard by Corona and realised he had to act - and he did.
That was main topic of the meeting
4: Nick is in charge and I consider him beeing my Commanding Officer until I m told otherwise. So he has my full support.

Tj

[Ashbey]

It is really nice to see that you all get along so well after I was permanently banned, there are no more conflicts and only peace in the valleys forever...

I am also really pleased to see that saint Hepperdt is now a capable leader, who can into transparency... I am so relieved!

[OKCoyote]

So you’re director of operations and the chairman? Is this a temp thing?

TK

Yes, I fill both roles. Chair is temporary in so far as it's a maximum of 1 year. It'll be not me next year.

I can't say I fully understood last year how it rotated, so don't feel bad.

That said, Maggie is still Executive Officer, as she was holding two roles in 2019. The Chair position rotates among the board members, Executive Officer does not.

[Nerdopolis Prime]

And also, no need for the

cunty*

attitude.

*Go ahead mods, but I'm disparaging the attitude, not the person.

What the heck??? Dude, are you serious???

Thats like saying "Lets discuss Johns tiny dick. But noooooo, we are not disparaging him as a person. No, we are just talking about his laughable genitalia."

That is absolutely delusional. Its absurd. Its insane. I hope the sentence above makes you see what you are actually trying to sell here. I´m pretty sure you already know it. So this is not only disrespectful to Maggie, but also to the mods and every other forum user.

While "people who know you personally respect you as a nice person", I will tell you that your online behaviour is very poor. You show no respect for rules nor for people. And that, buddy, is disgusting. With actions like this you are falling very low ... well ... you know what? If you wouldn´t bring troubles into the STCCG hobby, i wouldn´t even waste a second thought on you.

So I want to tell this: Shame on the Continuing Committee for allowing such a character having such an impact on our community. I´m very disappointed of the CC leadership.

Btw. i haven´t played HoF yet, but it really sounds fun.

[Armus]

And also, no need for the

cunty*

attitude.

*Go ahead mods, but I'm disparaging the attitude, not the person.

What the heck??? Dude, are you serious???

Thats like saying "Lets discuss Johns tiny dick. But noooooo, we are not disparaging him as a person. No, we are just talking about his laughable genitalia."

That is absolutely delusional. Its absurd. Its insane. I hope the sentence above makes you see what you are actually trying to sell here. I´m pretty sure you already know it. So this is not only disrespectful to Maggie, but also to the mods and every other forum user.

While "people who know you personally respect you as a nice person", I will tell you that your online behaviour is very poor. You show no respect for rules nor for people. And that, buddy, is disgusting. With actions like this you are falling very low ... well ... you know what? If you wouldn´t bring troubles into the STCCG hobby, i wouldn´t even waste a second thought on you.

So I want to tell this: Shame on the Continuing Committee for allowing such a character having such an impact on our community. I´m very disappointed of the CC leadership.

Btw. i haven´t played HoF yet, but it really sounds fun.

Ummm... I'm pretty sure he got rung up for that post. What else you want?

[Ashbey]

What the heck??? Dude, are you serious???

"Clueless" = 3 days ban; "cunt" = also 3 days ban.

This is all you need to know about hateful Hines and C-words in Canadian English.

[nobthehobbit]

What the heck??? Dude, are you serious???

"Clueless" = 3 days ban; "cunt" = also 3 days ban.

This is all you need to know about hateful Hines and C-words in Canadian English.

"Clueless" = warning. "c**t" = warning.

In both cases the user in question had received one warning in the last six months; therefore, the mandated sanction was a three-day ban.

[The Prefect]

Ummm... I'm pretty sure he got rung up for that post. What else you want?

In no particular order:

1) For otherwise good people to stop being apologists for clearly inexcusable behavior.
2) For people to stop engaging in clearly inexcusable behavior.
3) For the community as an institution to have less tolerance for clearly inexcusable behavior.

[Armus]

Ummm... I'm pretty sure he got rung up for that post. What else you want?

In no particular order:

1) For otherwise good people to stop being apologists for clearly inexcusable behavior.
2) For people to stop engaging in clearly inexcusable behavior.
3) For the community as an institution to have less tolerance for clearly inexcusable behavior.

Who's being an apologist?

Corbett ran his mouth. Corbett got rung up. Case closed. Nobody I've seen is endorsing his actions.

Does the public shaming attempt add anything? Maybe, I dunno. But one of the biggest complaints for the Mods to try to deal with is hostility on the boards. Does Nerdo's post add to or detract from the hostility?

You and i are both Mod emeriti, so we both have been there.

I think the quick mod action was the right one. No need for vigilantism that only draws out the drama.

[bosskamiura]

I’m surprised this thread is still open.

TK

[The Guardian]

Ummm... I'm pretty sure he got rung up for that post. What else you want?

In no particular order:

1) For otherwise good people to stop being apologists for clearly inexcusable behavior.
2) For people to stop engaging in clearly inexcusable behavior.
3) For the community as an institution to have less tolerance for clearly inexcusable behavior.

This seems to be one of the few small internet communities that has not learned that in order to prevent a few from degenerating the experience of the many, those few must be removed. No amount of rules, consequences, or appeasement will ever convince them to act as grown ups. They will circumvent or argue the letter of the law with rules, they will claim persecution with consequences, and appeasement does not foster responsibility, but emboldens worse behavior. Worse yet, their behavior, when seen by some others, acts as a standard. Removing the cancer, prevents healthy cells from going bad.

[Naetor]

I know people hate Corbett, but he actually gave people some information that no one else thought was worth telling people. I thought 2e was being ran by Nick who was basically corona AWOL - but I guess that's not the case? Still uncertain - but I guess it's good to know that at least someone is kinda behind the wheel, I suppose?

The lack of transparency is always super annoying. Not sure why the leaders can't just be honest with the rest of us. No one here expects perfection.

[Nerdopolis Prime]

Ummm... I'm pretty sure he got rung up for that post. What else you want?

In no particular order:

1) For otherwise good people to stop being apologists for clearly inexcusable behavior.
2) For people to stop engaging in clearly inexcusable behavior.
3) For the community as an institution to have less tolerance for clearly inexcusable behavior.

This seems to be one of the few small internet communities that has not learned that in order to prevent a few from degenerating the experience of the many, those few must be removed. No amount of rules, consequences, or appeasement will ever convince them to act as grown ups. They will circumvent or argue the letter of the law with rules, they will claim persecution with consequences, and appeasement does not foster responsibility, but emboldens worse behavior. Worse yet, their behavior, when seen by some others, acts as a standard. Removing the cancer, prevents healthy cells from going bad.

You both guys are speaking out of my soul