Posts: 4361 Topic: AE Code of Conduct & Terms of Use
Posts: 7940 Posted: 31-Aug-2012 at 19:20
*Rudeness and personal attacks on other members WILL NOT BE TOLERATED: it just makes you look like an immature jerk and contributes nothing to the debate
*If you have an issue with a moderator or another member, AVOID CONFRONTATION AND INFORM THE ADMINS of your concerns
*Creating a second profile (sock puppet) without the knowledge of the moderating team is STRICTLY PROHIBITED and may result in a permanent ban
*There's no such thing as a stupid question, but please back up your more outlandish theories (basically anything involving flying saucers, secret societies or a global conspiracy) with credible evidence if you want to be taken seriously
Edited by Nick1986 - 31-Aug-2012 at 19:21
Posts: 4735 Posted: 01-Sep-2012 at 01:31
Good and reasonable additions and clarifications to the rules, thank you, Nick.
Posts: 7940 Posted: 04-Sep-2012 at 21:58
The ban on sock puppets doesn't affect current members who have lost the password to their original profile and created a new account, as this is non-malicious and does not undermine the staff's authority. However, to avoid confusion it's important that they inform the admins as soon as possible by posting a short explanation in the technical support section
Edited by Nick1986 - 05-Sep-2012 at 10:47
Posts: 7392 Posted: 04-Sep-2012 at 22:18
The ban on sock puppets doesn't affect current members who have lost the password to their original profile and created a new account, as this is non-malicious and does not undermine the staff's authority. However, to avoid confusion it's important that they inform the admins immediately by posting a short explanation in the technical support section
That certainly is acceptable if they can be notified. As there is no guarantee they will note this update...as we both know most don't even bother to read the Coc in the first place. And until they have 10 or more posts they can not respond to a PM. So I would recommend you substitute 'as soon as possible' for 'immediately'. Or that a Moderator does it for them as soon as it becomes knowledge. Either way confusion and misrepresentation will be avoided. And we will be ensuring the security of the site and the position of the member as a non-sock puppet.
Posts: 7940 Posted: 11-Sep-2012 at 09:00
Regarding plagiarism: Anyone who tries to pass of other members' answers as their own (for example, by copying and pasting older posts in this forum) will be PERMANENTLY BANNED and their IP blocked. Extracts of text copied from other websites must always have a link to the original work.
Much as i dislike using wikipedia, here's an example of how it should be done:
After Stalin's stroke, Beria claimed to have killed him. This aborted a final purge of Old Bolsheviks Anastas Mikoyan and Vyacheslav Molotov for which Stalin had been laying the groundwork in the year prior to his death. Shortly after Stalin's death, he announced triumphantly to the Politburo that he had "done [Stalin] in" and "saved [us] all", according to Molotov's memoirs. Notably, Beria never explicitly stated whether he had initiated Stalin's stroke or had merely delayed his treatment in the hope he would die (as argued by Sebag-Montefiore and consistent with evidence).[22] Support for the assertion that Stalin was poisoned by Beria's associates has been presented from several sources, including Edvard Radzinsky in his biography Stalin and a recent study by Miguel A. Faria in the journal Surgical Neurology International. Warfarin (4-Hydroxycoumarins) is cited as the likely agent; it would have produced the symptoms reported, and administering it into Stalin's food or drink was well within the operational abilities of Beria's NKVD.[23][24][25] Sebag-Montefiore does not dispute the possibility of an assassination by poison masterminded by Beria, whose hatred for Stalin was palpable by this point, but also notes that Beria never made mention of poison or confessed to using it, even during his later interrogations, and was never alone with Stalin during the period prior to his stroke (he always went with Malenkov to defer suspicion).[21]
After Stalin's death from pulmonary edema brought on by the stroke, Beria's ambitions sprang into full force. In the uneasy silence following the cessation of Stalin's last agonies, Beria was the first to dart forward to kiss his lifeless form (a move likened by Sebag-Montefiore to "wrenching a dead King's ring off his finger"[26]). While the rest of Stalin's inner circle (even Molotov, saved from certain liquidation) stood sobbing unashamedly over the body, Beria reportedly appeared "radiant", "regenerated", and "glistening with ill-concealed relish."[26] When Beria left the room, he broke the somber atmosphere by shouting loudly for his driver, his voice echoing with what Stalin's daughter Svetlana Alliluyeva called "the ring of triumph unconcealed."[18] Alliluyeva noticed how the Politburo seemed openly frightened of Beria and unnerved by his bold display of ambition. "He's off to take power," Mikoyan recalled muttering to Khrushchev. That prompting a "frantic" dash for their own limousines to intercept him at the Kremlin.[18]
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavrentiy_Beria
Edited by Nick1986 - 11-Sep-2012 at 09:02
Posts: 7940 Posted: 20-Sep-2012 at 21:30
Knowingly posting a duplicate of an existing thread is forbidden, especially if the member involved started discussion of a similar subject in another section of the forum. Such behavior is a type of spam, and will result in the thread being locked or deleted. This rule does not apply if the original topic is over four pages long and has not been commented on for a year or more
Posts: 7392 Posted: 08-Dec-2012 at 06:43
I've brought this here...in an effort to clarify certain comments and questions concerning staff action. Any and all would do well to read it and understand the intent behind the clarification.
First i must state that i genuinely despise all religion and all the suffering and justification for inflicting it. so please , no Islamist apologist accusations.
But as too "terrorist groups" can i ask how members think Lehi and Haganah would best be described?
Azita.
PS: I have seen that arguing with those that run this forum isn't tolerated, so can i make clear i'm Not arguing against comments, I'm seeking to expand the discussion.
It isn't a question of 'arguing' with those who 'run' the forum. It's a question of reading and adhering to the Coc. Challenger2 was in violation. For the reasons cited. He was suspended for the same. Period. To many people come here and either play lip service to it or don't bother at all to read it believing past experience elsewhere will always be synonymous.
And while I am not going to cite you as a reason for my next statements. You ntl, give me an opportunity to expand on your comment.
So to the forum at large:
A. forums contrary to popular belief are not democracies. The better ones and that certainly includes this one, give a great deal of leeway in opposing or counter argumentation. This has been done many, many times here by all staff and ownership. believe it or not. It's the owner's wish-directive they we as a staff, go out of our way to do it. We as Moderators, then enforce his desires and the Coc. My associate Nick, has also clarified that for example, reference anti-semitism in his latest directive found here.
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32774&PID=686529#686529
B. It's not up to members at large, whether they like a decision or not, to make moderating decisions and take necessary punitive actions. So my advice is live with it. Can they comment on it? Most assuredly. As per the Coc. That is their only prerogative. Any other option is not theirs until such time as the owner decides it.
This is well known. Some choose to do other and if necessary they will then suffer the consequences of violating the Coc as determined by the staff...if at all. For in general that's a case by case decision.
C. Any staff member may, if he or she feels a violation has occurred, has been given the independent authority by the owner to take necessary action. And certainly if the offense is egregious. They as per the Coc, are not required to give the forum at large any reason or justification. I repeat, this also is in the Coc. Normally this is done with an informal warning, followed by a formal warning, followed as necessary with suspension. But it's not a requirement to necessarily follow that policy...it may be that immediate action is required. It may also mean that informal warnings, formal warnings will not produce the results necessary based on the offending poster's previous or ongoing comments or conduct. Nor is it, unless changed by the owner, an option for criticism, unless they abide by procedure found in the Coc.
Iow. the justification for staff action is based on that same staff member's consideration and examination of a poster's conduct in question. And his-her interpretation of the Coc as to whether a violation has occurred or is occurring. It is not necessary nor required for the membership to approve.
Ntl, this is not an individual arbitrary final action on that staff member's part.
As the owner always retains the right to review and amend any action by his moderator staff. And such is the case here. It has been done before and as red clay feels necessary, no doubt, he will do it again.
As for respect due the staff.
The respect due them ie. the staff, is not based on their opinions or comments as a member.
Iow. disregard or disagree and comment all you like with their opinions and comments. ntl due it accordance with Coc guidelines.
But if you disagree with a staff action your remedies and options are only that listed in the Coc.
Respect due them: is due to their appointment as a member of the staff enjoined to moderate, comment and conduct and, take necessary action on this forum.
For the final time, whether that is agreeable or not to members at large is by the nature of the authority immaterial. Bottom line you don't have to like the individual; but you had better recognise and respect the authority-title, he or she has been given.
That appointment, whether any member here or not believes otherwise, was based on the owner's evaluation of their objectivity and fairness and experience as a member first; here or elsewhere. And whether the owner believed that individual would be a competent moderator. Or had been one elsewhere. And several current staff members have done just that.
A failure to render that respect might also lead to punitive action as the owner deems appropriate.
So in conclusion. Staff actions if challenged, will be done in the prescribed manner. Respect due them will be maintained. Not because anyone likes, dislikes, approves or disapproves, their staff decisions.
But it will be rendered because of the position they have been given. By the owner.
If anyone here has a problem with that.. my advice? Move on to another forum.
But in the end, you will almost assuredly find the same policy there as well.
And while I am not necessarily speaking for the entire staff with these comments. They and especially the owner, again always have the right to amend or further clarify their personal interpretations or render guidance and comment as they-he feels is appropriate.
Comments concerning this or reference this, by members, may be submitted by Pm to either myself, other staff or the owner red clay.
Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 08-Dec-2012 at 08:54
Posts: 7940 Posted: 09-Dec-2012 at 09:31
A few more clarifications for new members:
Personal attacks on a moderator or ordinary member will be punished with a three-day suspension for each offence. Moderators were chosen by Red, so if you insult them you are insulting the admin. If you believe there is a legitimate problem, avoid confrontation and refer it to the admin by private message.
Racism, hate speech or discrimination of any kind is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN and will be punished with a permanent ban, or (depending on its severity) any other punishment as the admin sees fit. This includes denial of the right to self-rule of a nation recognised by the UN (including Israel and Palestine).
Further information on our position towards antisemitism (defined as discrimination against both Jews and Arabs) can be found here:
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32774
Posts: 7940 Posted: 10-Jan-2013 at 22:20
New users are reminded not to register profile names consisting solely of numbers. Profiles like this one will be permanently banned as spambots:
http://www.allempires.com/forum/member_profile.asp?PF=34292
Posts: 6074 Posted: 15-Aug-2014 at 18:29
Code of Conduct & Terms of Use Addendum
From time to time the issue of red highlighted writing is raised on the forum. The use of red highlighted writing is strictly a tool for use by admin & moderators. Violation by members may lead to suspension, as with any other violation of the code of conduct & terms of use.
Edited by TheAlaniDragonRising - 15-Aug-2014 at 18:58
Posts: 7392 Posted: 04-Jul-2015 at 00:29
''AE members are obliged to follow any instructions or decisions by AE staff with immediate effect. This includes suggestions by private message, in which, noncompliance may result in a warning.''
amended to read warning or ban/suspension.
Posts: 7392 Posted: 10-Jul-2015 at 11:06
New users are reminded not to register profile names consisting solely of numbers. Profiles like this one will be permanently banned as spambots:http://www.allempires.com/forum/member_profile.asp?PF=34292
Amended: ''to include single word-names and numbers or letters. Or a variation of the same.''
eg. Mary123.
As most of these combinations are also well known search engine bots; origination from known hazardous IP locations..or also well known for spambots-trolling and id theft.
These include IP's being used by violators of the Coc ref above...from the PRC and or UK..and elsewhere.
Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 11-Jul-2015 at 01:12
Posts: 7392 Posted: 23-Oct-2015 at 11:53
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=35858&PID=711379
See: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=35858&PID=711379
Edited by medenaywe - 23-Oct-2015 at 14:29
Posts: 7392 Posted: 09-Feb-2016 at 18:30
2016 and yet ...once again re emphasis of the above proves necessary.
Reed... heed...or be gone.
I am the last, of a few, afaic, of great friends of the admin owner... who gave me this job and continues to entrust my value, in it, as such. He oth, didn't give it to me and other staff,solely, because of friendship. But because of his belief in our ability. And I thank him for that.
Iow. Don't challenge me or other staff arbitrarly..simply because you believe you have merit..you don't decide that. FOR IN THE END... NO THREAD.. NO SUBJECT... NO MEMBER... NO STAFF... IS CRITICAL HERE.
And for those who would continue other venue arguments and non objectivity to those who oppose them in any capacity. Remember, I don't need your approval nor commendation nor give a good damn. I JUDGE ON THE COC. PERIOD.
IOW...I already have earned enough of those from the US DOD and the United States Army.
You will adhere or I'll see you gone.
You will respect my boss and his appointments to his staff.
You don't..you gone.
I am his watch dog and his enforcer...only he can reign me back...
You play by his Coc; you're fine..you don't..you suffer the consequences.
Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 09-Feb-2016 at 19:14
Posts: 4361 Topic: AE Code of Conduct & Terms of Use
Posts: 7940 Posted: 31-Aug-2012 at 19:20
*Rudeness and personal attacks on other members WILL NOT BE TOLERATED: it just makes you look like an immature jerk and contributes nothing to the debate
*If you have an issue with a moderator or another member, AVOID CONFRONTATION AND INFORM THE ADMINS of your concerns
*Creating a second profile (sock puppet) without the knowledge of the moderating team is STRICTLY PROHIBITED and may result in a permanent ban
*There's no such thing as a stupid question, but please back up your more outlandish theories (basically anything involving flying saucers, secret societies or a global conspiracy) with credible evidence if you want to be taken seriously
Edited by Nick1986 - 31-Aug-2012 at 19:21
Posts: 4735 Posted: 01-Sep-2012 at 01:31
Good and reasonable additions and clarifications to the rules, thank you, Nick.
Posts: 7940 Posted: 04-Sep-2012 at 21:58
The ban on sock puppets doesn't affect current members who have lost the password to their original profile and created a new account, as this is non-malicious and does not undermine the staff's authority. However, to avoid confusion it's important that they inform the admins as soon as possible by posting a short explanation in the technical support section
Edited by Nick1986 - 05-Sep-2012 at 10:47
Posts: 7392 Posted: 04-Sep-2012 at 22:18
The ban on sock puppets doesn't affect current members who have lost the password to their original profile and created a new account, as this is non-malicious and does not undermine the staff's authority. However, to avoid confusion it's important that they inform the admins immediately by posting a short explanation in the technical support section
That certainly is acceptable if they can be notified. As there is no guarantee they will note this update...as we both know most don't even bother to read the Coc in the first place. And until they have 10 or more posts they can not respond to a PM. So I would recommend you substitute 'as soon as possible' for 'immediately'. Or that a Moderator does it for them as soon as it becomes knowledge. Either way confusion and misrepresentation will be avoided. And we will be ensuring the security of the site and the position of the member as a non-sock puppet.
Posts: 7940 Posted: 11-Sep-2012 at 09:00
Regarding plagiarism: Anyone who tries to pass of other members' answers as their own (for example, by copying and pasting older posts in this forum) will be PERMANENTLY BANNED and their IP blocked. Extracts of text copied from other websites must always have a link to the original work.
Much as i dislike using wikipedia, here's an example of how it should be done:
After Stalin's stroke, Beria claimed to have killed him. This aborted a final purge of Old Bolsheviks Anastas Mikoyan and Vyacheslav Molotov for which Stalin had been laying the groundwork in the year prior to his death. Shortly after Stalin's death, he announced triumphantly to the Politburo that he had "done [Stalin] in" and "saved [us] all", according to Molotov's memoirs. Notably, Beria never explicitly stated whether he had initiated Stalin's stroke or had merely delayed his treatment in the hope he would die (as argued by Sebag-Montefiore and consistent with evidence).[22] Support for the assertion that Stalin was poisoned by Beria's associates has been presented from several sources, including Edvard Radzinsky in his biography Stalin and a recent study by Miguel A. Faria in the journal Surgical Neurology International. Warfarin (4-Hydroxycoumarins) is cited as the likely agent; it would have produced the symptoms reported, and administering it into Stalin's food or drink was well within the operational abilities of Beria's NKVD.[23][24][25] Sebag-Montefiore does not dispute the possibility of an assassination by poison masterminded by Beria, whose hatred for Stalin was palpable by this point, but also notes that Beria never made mention of poison or confessed to using it, even during his later interrogations, and was never alone with Stalin during the period prior to his stroke (he always went with Malenkov to defer suspicion).[21]
After Stalin's death from pulmonary edema brought on by the stroke, Beria's ambitions sprang into full force. In the uneasy silence following the cessation of Stalin's last agonies, Beria was the first to dart forward to kiss his lifeless form (a move likened by Sebag-Montefiore to "wrenching a dead King's ring off his finger"[26]). While the rest of Stalin's inner circle (even Molotov, saved from certain liquidation) stood sobbing unashamedly over the body, Beria reportedly appeared "radiant", "regenerated", and "glistening with ill-concealed relish."[26] When Beria left the room, he broke the somber atmosphere by shouting loudly for his driver, his voice echoing with what Stalin's daughter Svetlana Alliluyeva called "the ring of triumph unconcealed."[18] Alliluyeva noticed how the Politburo seemed openly frightened of Beria and unnerved by his bold display of ambition. "He's off to take power," Mikoyan recalled muttering to Khrushchev. That prompting a "frantic" dash for their own limousines to intercept him at the Kremlin.[18]
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavrentiy_Beria
Edited by Nick1986 - 11-Sep-2012 at 09:02
Posts: 7940 Posted: 20-Sep-2012 at 21:30
Knowingly posting a duplicate of an existing thread is forbidden, especially if the member involved started discussion of a similar subject in another section of the forum. Such behavior is a type of spam, and will result in the thread being locked or deleted. This rule does not apply if the original topic is over four pages long and has not been commented on for a year or more
Posts: 7392 Posted: 08-Dec-2012 at 06:43
I've brought this here...in an effort to clarify certain comments and questions concerning staff action. Any and all would do well to read it and understand the intent behind the clarification.
First i must state that i genuinely despise all religion and all the suffering and justification for inflicting it. so please , no Islamist apologist accusations.
But as too "terrorist groups" can i ask how members think Lehi and Haganah would best be described?
Azita.
PS: I have seen that arguing with those that run this forum isn't tolerated, so can i make clear i'm Not arguing against comments, I'm seeking to expand the discussion.
It isn't a question of 'arguing' with those who 'run' the forum. It's a question of reading and adhering to the Coc. Challenger2 was in violation. For the reasons cited. He was suspended for the same. Period. To many people come here and either play lip service to it or don't bother at all to read it believing past experience elsewhere will always be synonymous.
And while I am not going to cite you as a reason for my next statements. You ntl, give me an opportunity to expand on your comment.
So to the forum at large:
A. forums contrary to popular belief are not democracies. The better ones and that certainly includes this one, give a great deal of leeway in opposing or counter argumentation. This has been done many, many times here by all staff and ownership. believe it or not. It's the owner's wish-directive they we as a staff, go out of our way to do it. We as Moderators, then enforce his desires and the Coc. My associate Nick, has also clarified that for example, reference anti-semitism in his latest directive found here.
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32774&PID=686529#686529
B. It's not up to members at large, whether they like a decision or not, to make moderating decisions and take necessary punitive actions. So my advice is live with it. Can they comment on it? Most assuredly. As per the Coc. That is their only prerogative. 
Any other option is not theirs until such time as the owner decides it.
This is well known. Some choose to do other and if necessary they will then suffer the consequences of violating the Coc as determined by the staff...if at all. For in general that's a case by case decision.
C. Any staff member may, if he or she feels a violation has occurred, has been given the independent authority by the owner to take necessary action. And certainly if the offense is egregious. They as per the Coc, are not required to give the forum at large any reason or justification. I repeat, this also is in the Coc. Normally this is done with an informal warning, followed by a formal warning, followed as necessary with suspension. But it's not a requirement to necessarily follow that policy...it may be that immediate action is required. It may also mean that informal warnings, formal warnings will not produce the results necessary based on the offending poster's previous or ongoing comments or conduct. Nor is it, unless changed by the owner, an option for criticism, unless they abide by procedure found in the Coc.
Iow. the justification for staff action is based on that same staff member's consideration and examination of a poster's conduct in question. And his-her interpretation of the Coc as to whether a violation has occurred or is occurring. It is not necessary nor required for the membership to approve.
Ntl, this is not an individual arbitrary final action on that staff member's part.
As the owner always retains the right to review and amend any action by his moderator staff. And such is the case here. It has been done before and as red clay feels necessary, no doubt, he will do it again.
As for respect due the staff.
The respect due them ie. the staff, is not based on their opinions or comments as a member.
Iow. disregard or disagree and comment all you like with their opinions and comments. ntl due it accordance with Coc guidelines.
But if you disagree with a staff action your remedies and options are only that listed in the Coc.
Respect due them: is due to their appointment as a member of the staff enjoined to moderate, comment and conduct and, take necessary action on this forum.
For the final time, whether that is agreeable or not to members at large is by the nature of the authority immaterial. Bottom line you don't have to like the individual; but you had better recognise and respect the authority-title, he or she has been given.
That appointment, whether any member here or not believes otherwise, was based on the owner's evaluation of their objectivity and fairness and experience as a member first; here or elsewhere. And whether the owner believed that individual would be a competent moderator. Or had been one elsewhere. And several current staff members have done just that.
A failure to render that respect might also lead to punitive action as the owner deems appropriate.
So in conclusion. Staff actions if challenged, will be done in the prescribed manner. Respect due them will be maintained. Not because anyone likes, dislikes, approves or disapproves, their staff decisions.
But it will be rendered because of the position they have been given. By the owner.
If anyone here has a problem with that.. my advice? Move on to another forum.
But in the end, you will almost assuredly find the same policy there as well.
And while I am not necessarily speaking for the entire staff with these comments. They and especially the owner, again always have the right to amend or further clarify their personal interpretations or render guidance and comment as they-he feels is appropriate.
Comments concerning this or reference this, by members, may be submitted by Pm to either myself, other staff or the owner red clay.
Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 08-Dec-2012 at 08:54
Posts: 7940 Posted: 09-Dec-2012 at 09:31
A few more clarifications for new members:
Personal attacks on a moderator or ordinary member will be punished with a three-day suspension for each offence. Moderators were chosen by Red, so if you insult them you are insulting the admin. If you believe there is a legitimate problem, avoid confrontation and refer it to the admin by private message.
Racism, hate speech or discrimination of any kind is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN and will be punished with a permanent ban, or (depending on its severity) any other punishment as the admin sees fit. This includes denial of the right to self-rule of a nation recognised by the UN (including Israel and Palestine).
Further information on our position towards antisemitism (defined as discrimination against both Jews and Arabs) can be found here:
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32774
Posts: 7940 Posted: 10-Jan-2013 at 22:20
New users are reminded not to register profile names consisting solely of numbers. Profiles like this one will be permanently banned as spambots:
http://www.allempires.com/forum/member_profile.asp?PF=34292
Posts: 6074 Posted: 15-Aug-2014 at 18:29
Code of Conduct & Terms of Use Addendum
From time to time the issue of red highlighted writing is raised on the forum. The use of red highlighted writing is strictly a tool for use by admin & moderators. Violation by members may lead to suspension, as with any other violation of the code of conduct & terms of use.
Edited by TheAlaniDragonRising - 15-Aug-2014 at 18:58
Posts: 7392 Posted: 04-Jul-2015 at 00:29
''AE members are obliged to follow any instructions or decisions by AE staff with immediate effect. This includes suggestions by private message, in which, noncompliance may result in a warning.''
amended to read warning or ban/suspension.
Posts: 7392 Posted: 10-Jul-2015 at 11:06
New users are reminded not to register profile names consisting solely of numbers. Profiles like this one will be permanently banned as spambots:http://www.allempires.com/forum/member_profile.asp?PF=34292
Amended: ''to include single word-names and numbers or letters. Or a variation of the same.''
eg. Mary123.
As most of these combinations are also well known search engine bots; origination from known hazardous IP locations..or also well known for spambots-trolling and id theft.
These include IP's being used by violators of the Coc ref above...from the PRC and or UK..and elsewhere.
Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 11-Jul-2015 at 01:12
Posts: 7392 Posted: 23-Oct-2015 at 11:53
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=35858&PID=711379
See: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=35858&PID=711379
Edited by medenaywe - 23-Oct-2015 at 14:29
Posts: 7392 Posted: 09-Feb-2016 at 18:30
2016 and yet ...once again re emphasis of the above proves necessary.
Reed... heed...or be gone.
I am the last, of a few, afaic, of great friends of the admin owner... who gave me this job and continues to entrust my value, in it, as such. He oth, didn't give it to me and other staff,solely, because of friendship. But because of his belief in our ability. And I thank him for that.
Iow. Don't challenge me or other staff arbitrarly..simply because you believe you have merit..you don't decide that. FOR IN THE END... NO THREAD.. NO SUBJECT... NO MEMBER... NO STAFF... IS CRITICAL HERE.
And for those who would continue other venue arguments and non objectivity to those who oppose them in any capacity. Remember, I don't need your approval nor commendation nor give a good damn. I JUDGE ON THE COC. PERIOD.
IOW...I already have earned enough of those from the US DOD and the United States Army.
You will adhere or I'll see you gone.
You will respect my boss and his appointments to his staff.
You don't..you gone.
I am his watch dog and his enforcer...only he can reign me back...
You play by his Coc; you're fine..you don't..you suffer the consequences.
Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 09-Feb-2016 at 19:14