3rd administrator

**Liche** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 5:24 am

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Liche wrote:

Again I can use Jesus as a reference. I can till you he is the Messiah, and show you proof, but you will probably just say its BS.

What you are employing here and in other discussions is an argumentative phallacy known as "parallelism". It doesn't work Liche.

I demonstrated you were slanderous. What did you do? Just avoided to refute my possition. And now you engage in a bunch of phallacies.

umh... what is 'phallacy'? it is not a word in english.

calinis · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 5:25 am

Quote:

You know what's the problem with this site's "democracy"? That those that comment and make opinions often do so without knowing what the hell they're excerting an opinion about. And they don't even bother to get informed in the first place.

Wait, so everyone who votes for the ban obviously knows what they're talking about, but everyone who voted against it didn't know what they were talking about? Stop being a hypocrite.
god you're such a hypocrite it's not even funny

Quote:

Want democracy? Earn it. You have all the fucking means to do so. As soon as I began stablishing a democratic structure in this site you all the "opposition" startled an opportunistic movement just to put a 3rd admin from within your "wr buddies" list, with complete disregard for the forum or intelligent discussions. That's all you are: a bunch of opportunists (with the notable exceptions of Tyrong Kojy, Hutin, Lilith, Diogritor, Sungri, Mighty Observer and to a lesser extent Rename).

I didn't even vote for liche because he was within my "wr buddies" list. Yeah we should just have black cross be the 3rd admin so he can plague this forum with how badass he is. you know, he can make a thread about how cool he is that he causes harm to people!!!!!!

Quote:

You keep engaging in slanderous accusations like accusing me of being biased towards communists with absolutely no proof to back up the accusation.

This is slander because I never said that

**Liche** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 5:28 am

calinis wrote:

Quote:

You keep engaging in slanderous accusations like accusing me of being biased towards communists with absolutely no proof to back up the accusation.

This is slander because I never said that

no,no, he was addressing me there.

**Zealot_Kommunizma** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:04 am

Liche wrote:

umh... what is 'phallacy'? it is not a word in english.

Oh, and now you just dodge the whole arguement... "ph" sounds like "f" resulting in the word "fallacy".

And, avoiding your dogde:

I demonstrated you were slanderous. What did you do? Just avoided to refute my possition. And now you engage in a bunch of fallacies.

calinis wrote:

Wait, so everyone who votes for the ban obviously knows what they're talking about, but everyone who voted against it didn't know what they were talking about? Stop being a hypocrite.
god you're such a hypocrite it's not even funny

No, it's not like that unless they're the hypocrites since they claim to defend righteousness but in practice they'd be deffending the oposite. Many haven't got enough information to judge, but well you never stop giving evidence, I'll point it out later.

calinis wrote:

I didn't even vote for liche because he was within my "wr buddies" list.

You're logically voting for Liche because he is the "opposition"'s strong man.

calinis wrote:

Yeah we should just have black cross be the 3rd admin so he can plague this forum with how badass he is.

Seconded. Also because he's by far one of the best options this site could have for a 3rd admin.

calinis wrote:

you know, he can make a thread about how cool he is that he causes harm to people!!!!!!

Calinis bringing it on. This is clear trolling.

_________________

**Liche** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 1:55 pm

umgh no.

there is a difference between dodging and not understanding the question. I'm still not quite clear on what you mean.

and its offensive how you all ways say I'm dodging, when most of the time I don't know what your talking about.

**Zealot_Kommunizma** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:09 pm

Liche wrote:

umgh no.

there is a difference between dodging and not understanding the question. I'm still not quite clear on what you mean.

It's called dodging when instead of trying to clear things out you simply avoid the arguement.

Liche wrote:

and its offensive how you all ways say I'm dodging, when most of the time I don't know what your talking about.

As I said, you dodge when you avoid the arguement instead of trying to clear things out.

And it's not a very complex arguement. It's been explained a good ammount of times.

You made a false accusation, it was proven false. Instead of trying to defend your position you just avoid the rebuttal and later you try to defend yourself with fallacies. What's so complex about that?

_________________

**Liche** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:21 pm

nothing it just implies that I don't care much about how you think what I'm saying is false.

**Zealot_Kommunizma** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:29 pm

Liche wrote:

nothing it just implies that I don't care much about how you think what I'm saying is false.

The problem is precisely that. You think you can actualy have the opinion that something true is false. I showed evidence of your slander twice. If you don't care, fine I'm just demonstrating that you're slanderous.

Since you're slanderous and don't even have a clear idea on how to lead an objective discussion, you're completely unfit for either moderator or administrator positions.

_________________

**Black_Cross** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:31 pm

Quote:

@Zealot
In that case Liche can't be a moderator if you disagree.

I honestly don't think that's what anyone, even Zealot, wants.

Personally, i'd oppose Liche being an admin as well, but that doens't mean i wanna shove him off the ballot. If he's got significant backing, then shove off Kenzu. Let him run.

_________________
"A market economy must comprise all elements of industry including labor, land and money [...] But labor and land are no other than the human beings themselves of which every society consists and the natural surroundings in which it exists. To include them in the market mechanism means to subordinate the substance of society itself."
--Karl Polanyi--

**Kenzu** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:24 pm

Black_Cross wrote:

Quote:

@Zealot
In that case Liche can't be a moderator if you disagree.

I honestly don't think that's what anyone, even Zealot, wants.

Personally, i'd oppose Liche being an admin as well, but that doens't mean i wanna shove him off the ballot. If he's got significant backing, then shove off Kenzu. Let him run.

EVERYONE who is backed by one member other than himself\herself can be a candidate and run for adminship.

The final decision however lies, where me and Zealot choose one of the members favored by the people who we both trust. It makes no sense to appoint someone as a new admin if the other admin doesn't like that person and would constantly battle against that person.

Afterall, an admin should never be deposed, because in the risk of being deposed he\she might deal damage to the forum.

_________________
World Republic will prevail!

**Zealot_Kommunizma** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:28 pm

Black_Cross wrote:

I honestly don't think that's what anyone, even Zealot, wants.

I'm all for democracy, but I would definitely like people to make informed decisions.

It's absolutely not democratic for Kenzu and me to determine who the 3rd admin will be. I'm just presenting arguements against Liche, in a democratic fashion.

I'm opposed to him, and I'd be glad to veto him but it's just not democratic.

Black_Cross wrote:

Personally, i'd oppose Liche being an admin as well, but that doens't mean i wanna shove him off the ballot. If he's got significant backing, then shove off Kenzu. Let him run.

Let him run. I'll just present arguements against him and let people decide themselves wether they want someone who is objectively unable to be administrator to become administrator or not.

However, I do think that people supporting Liche should demonstrate that they are informed on Liche's characteristics and justify why they want him as administrator. Otherwise I don't think that would be democratic either.

_________________

**Kenzu** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Fri Dec 05, 2008 8:14 pm

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Black_Cross wrote:

I honestly don't think that's what anyone, even Zealot, wants.

I'm all for democracy, but I would definitely like people to make informed decisions.

It's absolutely not democratic for Kenzu and me to determine who the 3rd admin will be. I'm just presenting arguements against Liche, in a democratic fashion.

I'm opposed to him, and I'd be glad to veto him but it's just not democratic.

Black_Cross wrote:

Personally, i'd oppose Liche being an admin as well, but that doens't mean i wanna shove him off the ballot. If he's got significant backing, then shove off Kenzu. Let him run.

Let him run. I'll just present arguements against him and let people decide themselves wether they want someone who IN MY OPINION is objectively unable to be administrator to become administrator or not.

However, I do think that people supporting Liche should demonstrate that they are informed on Liche's characteristics and justify why they want him as administrator. Otherwise I don't think that would be democratic either.

I have added some yellow text, which you should have written when showing your opinion about other people.

And I know myself that it's not democratic to prevent the most popular candidate to be elected as an admin, but since we are more experienced admins than average members, we have the moral responsibility to let people become admins, who NOT ONLY are liked by our members, but also, who would make able and honest admins.

_________________
World Republic will prevail!

**Zealot_Kommunizma** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:24 pm

Kenzu wrote:

I have added some yellow text, which you should have written when showing your opinion about other people.

He's slanderous and doesn't read posts to which he replies to showing total indiference for the point of who he adresss and being objectively unable to adress said point thus showing no interest in objective debate. How is that a good candidate for administrator of a discussion forum?

Objective vs. Subjective. Opinion is subjective, argumentation is objective and I'm excering an objective arguement, not an opinion.

Kenzu wrote:

And I know myself that it's not democratic to prevent the most popular candidate to be elected as an admin, but since we are more experienced admins than average members, we have the moral responsibility to let people become admins, who NOT ONLY are liked by our members, but also, who would make able and honest admins.

I think the most important is that they're objectively able to perform that task. And to get to that conclusion in a democratic fashion we should debate about it, which is what we're doing now.

I oppose the possibility of vetoing popular decisions, but I request that said decisions be well founded, conscious and well thought given the relevance of the administrator possition.

I think the administrator to be chosen must have proved a history of fairness, impartiality and compromise with the forum.

I also think that we should create an "administrator's oath" or something like that if we're going to give seriousness to this decision.

We should prepare a code that binds the faculties of all administrators.

And I conmine people to really participate democratically if they really want dmeocracy in this forum:

You have places where you can make proposals, suggestions. There is the relatively abandoned project of a constituion that would rule over WR. Participate on that too, people. Be really democratic, not half assed democrats that just shout "Y'know, we want moar adminz! Preferably our color. LOL" or "Can I haz new admin plz?".

Do well founded proposals, express your voice on the rules, propose modifications; complain, point out and insist when said proposals are dismissed, engage in democratic and objective debate, use arguements to make your ideas prevail. The tools have existed here for long, do it. Don't limit yourselfs to just put a new admin you like, push for changes yourselves, organized.

_________________

**Black_Cross** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Sat Dec 06, 2008 12:18 am

Kenzu wrote:

And I know myself that it's not democratic to prevent the most popular candidate to be elected as an admin, but since we are more experienced admins than average members, we have the moral responsibility to let people become admins, who NOT ONLY are liked by our members, but also, who would make able and honest admins.[/color]

Elitism... there are other ways to solve this in democratic (and informed) way. Even if the admin did poorly, they could be removed democratically as well. People don't need your benevolent wisdom Kenzu.

_________________
"A market economy must comprise all elements of industry including labor, land and money [...] But labor and land are no other than the human beings themselves of which every society consists and the natural surroundings in which it exists. To include them in the market mechanism means to subordinate the substance of society itself."
--Karl Polanyi--

**Liche** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Sat Dec 06, 2008 12:20 am

Black_Cross wrote:

eople don't need your benevolent wisdom Kenzu.

but its still nice to have.

**Black_Cross** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Sat Dec 06, 2008 12:52 am

Liche wrote:

Black_Cross wrote:

eople don't need your benevolent wisdom Kenzu.

but its still nice to have.

I disagree entirely.

_________________
"A market economy must comprise all elements of industry including labor, land and money [...] But labor and land are no other than the human beings themselves of which every society consists and the natural surroundings in which it exists. To include them in the market mechanism means to subordinate the substance of society itself."
--Karl Polanyi--

**Liche** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Sat Dec 06, 2008 12:53 am

k, well thats your opinion Smile

I for one like to hear every ones opinion, including Kenzu.

**Black_Cross** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Sat Dec 06, 2008 12:55 am

Liche wrote:

k, well thats your opinion Smile

I for one like to hear every ones opinion, including Kenzu.

Okay, but explain to me why his opinion should be regarded more highly than anyone elses? That, specifically, is what i'm addressing.

_________________
"A market economy must comprise all elements of industry including labor, land and money [...] But labor and land are no other than the human beings themselves of which every society consists and the natural surroundings in which it exists. To include them in the market mechanism means to subordinate the substance of society itself."
--Karl Polanyi--

**Liche** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Sat Dec 06, 2008 3:38 am

Black_Cross wrote:

Liche wrote:

k, well thats your opinion Smile

I for one like to hear every ones opinion, including Kenzu.

Okay, but explain to me why his opinion should be regarded more highly than anyone elses? That, specifically, is what i'm addressing.

oh oh, its not, I was just expressing that I like to here his opinion. I don't take it higher than anyone else (well except for maybe Calinis and Watermelon).

**enviro** · Subject: Re: 3rd administrator Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:00 am

i am still pushing for my democratic aproach to this

_________________
why do i need a sig