Request to Reopen Megatron's Account

Tamar Garish, instead of getting mired in a petty exchange worthy of the Red Room let's keep it simple.

Here's my take -

• DNR threads are a no go
• A staff member is again violating a well established privacy rule
• Racism in the Red Room has always been allowed

The staff member I am referring to is you.

And I know you don't share my opinion.


Where do we go from here?

Thunderdome?

I don't understand where you're getting the "DNR threads are a no go" thing. We have the DNR icon for a reason.

And Tamar, you are sort of dancing on the edge of the privacy thing.

The privacy rule is well established, but this doesn't fall under it. You're arguing letter of the law, and not spirit. The intent of the rule is to prevent people from abusing confidential information and private communications. However, in this case, it is not remotely an abuse. The message in question was directly related to Tamar's official capacity as a staff member, should be treated no differently than had it been e-mailed to her official Wordforge e-mail account, and was only posted because of its relevance to the discussion at hand.

To use a business comparison, imagine for a second that we were running a store. Every once in a while, there's a customer who comes in, smears shit all over the bathroom walls, gets kicked out by store security and banned from entering again, apologizes profusely to store security or the store owner, and then gets let back in and repeats the process all over again. Now, on one occasion, this customer sent a letter to a specific member of store security, not as a friend, but as someone who is a representative of that business and has the power to decide whether they get back in or not. Years later, after multiple bans, the question comes up again whether or not to let the customer back in, and the store security officer reproduces this letter from years past as evidence to the customers repeated bad behavior. Would you argue that such an action would be evidence of abuse, or would you agree that the officer was only producing evidence that they received while acting in an official capacity? Because to me it seems like the latter, and I think we all know that historically I have had a pretty negative bias towards Tamar, so it's not like I'm acting out of protectionism or favoritism.

I understand your opinion yet I disagree.

Are you going to state any reasoning or logic for that position? I mean, the logical extension of that position is that staff members can't share information with other staff members if it was sent to them over a private communications channel, regardless of what capacity they were acting in when they received the message or it's relevance to board policy.

The Coliseum?

Actually, I was saying that Tamar Garish and I had reached the end of our discussion. We flat out disagree, there is no point in repeating our opinions ad nauseam.

In an effort to be more transparent we agreed to stop creating DNR threads.

I remember it being an issue when we intended to release DNR threads made before the change in policy. I was against the release as it was unfair to folks participating in those threads because they participated with the understanding that the threads wouldn't be released.

Many of those DNR threads remain unreleased.

I've made my opinion clear The Defender. You disagree. Fair enough. Not a lot more to say.

Yes, you've made your opinion very clear, you think Tamar is in the wrong. What you haven't done is make your reasoning clear, why is Tamar wrong? Pointing to the rules isn't very helpful, we know them all by heart, and half of us are responsible for writing them. What I want to know from you is why you think those rules are applicable to this situation, because it seems to me that followed to the letter it would make administering this board nearly impossible. Yet, it seems to agitate you, so it seems to be something worth discussing, lest resentment build up.

Just realized it's from a thread in this very forum.


And here's the announcement -

C'mon, am I the only one who remembers 2007?!

Ah. That was Elwood's policy. It's not mine. Sorry for the resultant confusion.

Let's save that can of worms for another thread.

This thread is wrapped up as far as I'm concerned. I've made my complaints about privacy abuses and policy discrepancies clear. You've responded. And Megatron's account will not be reopened.

It seems rather pointless to have a "Report PM" button if we're not to discuss the contents of PM's.

That said, it's pretty well-established for the past couple years or so that DNR is only to mark threads which need special pruning of personal info before release. Pretty sure that was one of the big policy changes when we started releasing everything on a more timely basis.

As for Tasvir, why was Atrocitus banned? Or to put it another way, if he'd asked for his account unlocked before creating the dual, would we have banned him for posting everything Atrocitus did? If not, distasteful as it is, I have to come down in favor of unlocking.

That said, it does sound like Megatron would have been banned for doing what Atrocitus did, so I'm comfortable with leaving his account locked.

How?

I posted the PM in here, for the purposed of board business and properly marked for editing before public release. That is the proper way to discuss PMs in here I thought.

A PM that has been publicly disseminated before if I remember correctly and Faceman's ability to quote it illustrates.

I posted it to make it very clear that whatever Tasvir is promising and claiming he would do to come back can only be taken with a grain of salt. I don't give a fig whether he comes back or not, just be prepared despite anything he says to expect what we always get from him.

Err, why is his account unlocked?

Hey look, not even back for an hour and he's already obnoxious.

It looks like he was let back in a couple weeks ago before most of us changed our vote against him. I am going to put him back under lock and key til we decide.

As far as I could tell he was locked a week ago when I removed his blue room access. I checked multiple times since I didn't want to make a mistake before Lanzman decided for sure.

Is there any way to find out when and who unlocked him for certain?

Unfortunately the admin log only shows which section of the control panel was accessed, by whom, and on what user. It doesn't say what actual changes were made. As near as I can tell it was either you or Paladin, but I can't be any more specific.

Clyde, you know I hate DNR stuff and continually fight against it but you are getting way too caught up in the technicality of this. That pm wasn't a personal one to Tamar the person, but Tamar the admin.

That, and apparently it was already posted on the board by Faceman years ago.

I unlocked his account when it seemed we were going to let him back in.

Can we edit post 16 and release this thread, or is there a reason we're keeping it around?

Heh. Interesting question about post 16, re-reading the thread, I'm not clear as to whether it should be edited or not.

As I pointed out in post #30, that letter has been posted in public multiple times already.

Face did in the Red Room here:

http://www.wordforge.net/showthread.php?t=81966

So you probably can release it if you want to.