Board Thread:User Rights Requests/@comment-477304-20170417190140/@comment-4533965-20170418023056

Genesjs wrote: BlueSpeeder wrote: Genesjs wrote:

BlueSpeeder wrote: Y'all are unbearable.

Journalistic has already stated the works that he has done on the wiki, and I personally agree wholeheartedly on his sentiment. Without him, the SNN Twitter account would be dead. Without him, sysop users wouldn't have bold names (that was a problem that, oh wait, no other administrator thought to fix?! Wow! That's astonishing!). Without him, we would have a filthy wiki full of pointless and childish threads. Consider yourselves very lucky to have an administrator like Journalistic and you better hope he doesn't consider leaving because of all of you guy's ramblings and complaints. Y'all should be ashamed of yourselves.

Also, let's make something very, very clear. Journalistic has only been contacted about this issue very few times. The first time anyone had an issue with him was in a thread about "my monobook skin, oh my gawd" as seen here. Let's also not forget that both Ultra and Luma.dash were caught gossiping about Journalistic's "intolerable actions." Two administrators, talking crap about another administrator, in the main chatroom and not in a private discussion.

Also, Myself, let's make something clear with you as well. You have provided literally no references, no proof, no sources to backup your claims that Journalistic has been closing threads, that drops your letter grade to a B. Also, you failed to contact Journalistic about this, when I'm quite sure he could have easily answered your concerns, instead of, oh I don't know, making a demotion thread without even alarming him. Without even messaging him about it. Your letter grade is an F now, congratulations. Try next time. I'm going to address this one bit at a time: "Y'all are unbearable. Journalistic has already stated the works that he has done on the wiki, and I personally agree wholeheartedly on his sentiment." No one is denying whatever work he does around the Wiki. "Without him, the SNN Twitter account would be dead." If the worst-case scenario -- for him -- were to occur and he ends up no longer managing the SNN Twitter account, we can always find someone to replace him, no matter how long it takes for us to find one. It wouldn't be the end of the Twitter account unless enough of us feel the need to make the Twitter account die with Journalistic's losing of it. Furthermore, I'd like to point out that this thread is about seeking to have Journalistic's Admin rights revoked. I see nothing about removing him from managing the Twitter account. Moving on. "Without him, sysop users wouldn't have bold names (that was a problem that, oh wait, no other administrator thought to fix?! Wow! That's astonishing!)." Again, no one trying to erase his contributions to the Wiki, big or small. You seem to be treating this as though we want to destroy everything he's ever worked for on here. "Without him, we would have a filthy wiki full of pointless and childish threads." Refer to my response to DeCool99 about the forums. "Consider yourselves very lucky to have an administrator like Journalistic and you better hope he doesn't consider leaving because of all of you guy's ramblings and complaints. Y'all should be ashamed of yourselves." The only thing I feel compelled to feel is annoyance and contempt for Journalistic's recent actions, regardless of whatever he's accomplished in the past, because Journalist'cs past accomplishments aren't the main focus of his thread and the criticisms being levied at him. And are you actually trying to shame people for daring to take issue with Journalistic's recent behavior? Because let me let you in on a little secret: shaming people for holding certain positions does not negate these people's arguments. Furthermore, as I just stated, I feel compelled to feel nothing but annoyance and contempt for Journalistic's actions and behavior -- you are not going to shame me into changing my mind on anything I have previously said. The only thing that's going to move me is compelling arguments, and I have yet to see anyone on Journalistic's side make a compelling enough argument to get me to consider changing my mind on anything. If you want me to change my stance on this issue, try harder than using shaming language and appeals to consequence. "Also, let's make something very, very clear. Journalistic has only been contacted about this issue very few times. The first time anyone had an issue with him was in a thread about "my monobook skin, oh my gawd" as seen here." Myself 123 has already addressed this. Moving on. "Let's also not forget that both Ultra and Luma.dash were caught gossiping about Journalistic's "intolerable actions." Two administrators, talking crap about another administrator, in the main chatroom and not in a private discussion."' Again, trying to shame people rather than addressing their arguments directly. Also, an Admin committing actions that could be seen as abuses of power is something that I think is very much in the public interest of this Wiki, since the last thing we want is to have an Administrator being able to abuse their power and not be addressed/dealt with to come capacity. Furthermore, dismissing Luma.dash and Ultra's conversations as "gossip" does not negate the substance of what they were discussing: An Administrator seemingly going out of his way to abuse his power while acting completely unapologetic and sarcastic towards anyone who takes issue with it. Call their discussion whatever you want, but it doesn't change the reality of what they were discussing. "Also, Myself, let's make something clear with you as well. You have provided literally no references, no proof, no sources to backup your claims that Journalistic has been closing threads, that drops your letter grade to a B." Myself has responded to this, moving on. "Also, you failed to contact Journalistic about this, when I'm quite sure he could have easily answered your concerns, instead of, oh I don't know, making a demotion thread without even alarming him. Without even messaging him about it. Your letter grade is an F now, congratulations. Try next time." You mean like how he oh-so-easily addressed Distant Shadow's concerns about Journalistic's actions, to the man himself, in this very thread? Not even gonna read all of this because you always type like you're J. R. R. Tolkien writing a novel. Do me a favor next time and type like a normal human being instead of paragraphs among paragraphs among paragraphs. No one reads what you say because it's so excruciatingly long and quite frankly, it's distracting, annoying, and nothing more than a big ol' wall of text.

If Ryan leaves, I'm leaving too. SNN politics is being pulled back by users that still think a community consensus is possible. Do yourselves a favor and be active more and try to get with the times like you were trying to do when you wanted to speak with me in the chatroom the other day. If you're not going to address my arguments on your position, what reason should I, or anyone else who has the exact same criticisms towards Journalistic as I do, listen to anything else you have to say? I'll tell you: None. You're wasting my time, and if you're not going to take anything I have to say to you seriously then I'm going to just ignore you, and suggest to everyone else that they ignore you too, because to support a position that a person is making when that very same person who made that position is unable or unwilling to defend it against criticism that's being levied at it is nothing short of asinine. Absolutely indefensible. Stop wasting your opponents' time and actually address what they're saying to you if you're unwilling to listen to them and change your mind on anything they're addressing, or do me and everyone else a favor and keep your mouth shut. Gonna pull a Genesjs and pick at this one piece at a time, only instead of a large text wall, I'm gonna make it convenient for anyone who actually wants to read these comments.


 * "If you're not going to address my arguments on your position, what reason should I, or anyone else who has the exact same criticisms towards Journalistic as I do, listen to anything else you have to say?"
 * I refuse to address anything you say because you write in a such a ludicrous amount of sentences that it's like reading the United States Constitution: it's long and boring. Also, I'm gonna correct you and say that Myself is the only person who actually agrees with you, and coincidentally both of you are out-of-the-loop users who've been on this wiki during an era unlike this one. Perhaps it's just me thinking this, or are both of you unwilling and non-accepting to change? It wouldn't surprise me.
 * "I'll tell you: None. You're wasting my time, and if you're not going to take anything I have to say to you seriously then I'm going to just ignore you, and suggest to everyone else that they ignore you too, because to support a position that a person is making when that very same person who made that position is unable or unwilling to defend it against criticism that's being levied at it is nothing short of asinine."
 * If I'm wasting your time, then why are you here? Don't you have a life outside of this wiki? Go live it and leave this wiki if you have so many issues with a user closing threads. So unbelievable that all of this is because you guys think this is a problem when it's not. Also, you're suggesting that other users should ignore me, a bureaucrat, one that is actually active and been around and knows the users and isn't out of the loop, when they should listen to you, someone who had to ask me what's been up with Journalistic lately not even a week ago. That's remarkably baffling that you're suggesting to other users not to listen to a bureaucrat when they should listen to someone who doesn't even know half of these users who voted. I'm chuckling over this. If anything's asinine, it's that suggestion.
 * "Absolutely indefensible. Stop wasting your opponents' time and actually address what they're saying to you if you're unwilling to listen to them and change your mind on anything they're addressing, or do me and everyone else a favor and keep your mouth shut."
 * Here we go, this was the part I was waiting to dissect. I refuse to address to you once more because I don't want to read an excerpt of a Stephen King novella. Learn how to speak in sentences, not paragraphs. Also, what opponents? It's just you and Myself, and I've already stated my reasons why I think you guys are opposing and it's just gonna keep circulating back and forth until one of us gets sick of hearing the same thing repeatedly. I will not keep my mouth shut because "oh man, that bureaucrat Genesjs might ban me." Yeah, no, we're both bureaucrats, don't even try to threaten me. Also, in all bold and italics, telling me to keep your mouth shut is such a hostile and immature way of handling an argument. It's to be expected from someone who hasn't even been a bureaucrat for a year, but for you, a bureaucrat who's been one for years now? Intolerable. Unacceptable. Immature. Hostile. Aggressive. You see my point, correct? About time we're on the same page.

Everything you have against Journalistic is over a damn issue of him closing threads and that's a glorified overreaction. Quit whining.