Poply

I'm glad you brought that up. You can ask any of our special moderators that only have jurisdiction over a small area and most of them will tell you that they're unsatisfied with it. Now is it their fault since they chose that position? I suppose so. But I think it would be better if we could work as a collective and took responsibility as a whole instead of pushing blame on a certain person for not reviving a section or blaming the person who made that person a mod. Those aren't assumptions. This is really bad now. You're saying we shouldn't do this because of the bad first impressions given to new members during 1 or 2 hours that might occur when the forums are offline, or being repaired. What does technical security have to do with this at all? It's completely irrelevant. If we get hacked through a security hole that has nothing to do with whether or not we let someone moderate the forums.

You're whole argument rides on the basis of "What if some one deletes all the forums". "what if some one gets angry?" "what if some one gets hacked?" Very unlikely it'll happen. "ok, it's unlikely, but it's still bound to happen!" If it does, we can recover in very short amount of time. Edit: Plus, that can still happen right now. The only difference is how much we have to recover which is minuscule in difference. "Not if they delete the back ups" If some one deletes back ups, then they were more than a moderator (I believe only admins can. I don't think any moderators right now have access to that kind of stuff.) and therefore that argument isn't related to my idea because this only affect moderators. The current system doesn't work. We have moderators stuck with dead sections that have very little chance of ever becoming active.

The only difference in recovering one section and the whole forum is scale. Edit: It's not that hard to undelete topics.

1. I trust our moderators wouldn't do that. Plus, that can happen now. I haven't really discussed ACP access alot (for IP banning people) but moderators generally won't get ACP access. 2. Again, same thing can happen now. 3. AGAIN same thing can happen now. 4. As I said before, repairing one deleted forum is nearly identical to repairing all of the forums.

Repairing one forum that's been deleted and repairing ALL the forums is nearly identical. I give it two week before its reverted to the old system. Main problem i see with this kind of move is trust issues as me and other old member's more power comes more bullshit out of the people with it. Meaning no offense to the person im fixing to point out. Xthar has shown in the past abuse of such power i think only one example is need for this and im going to leave it as such. And such for pushing the issue of trust on those running the site. Good idea thou has its major flaws like most plans usely do fortunately the margin for error with this is big so we will see how it goes i think. I don't understand. What do you think will go wrong? It seems like you're just saying there will be drama. Which I don't even understand that.

I thought it was interesting that you said it would be more difficult for members to become moderators as if we needed more moderators. The point of Ghoztcraft isn't to eventually become a moderator. I don't like the idea of trial moderators. It just seems unneeded.

So is trying to make outdated memes funny.

Well... My feedback: I think you've laid out a fairly good revamp plan. But I do have several issues. Some not related to your plan exclusively, but staff in general. Position like Valve mod, WoW mod, SC mod, and GFX mod aren't detailed in what they're supposed to do. If a Valve mod is supposed to just moderate the Valve section, that's something that is unneeded since any of our current staff members are more than capable of moderating any section. But if a valve mod is supposed to contribute by adding content, then I think that should be elaborated. I disagree with the quotas. I think we'll have similar effects as when we required people to make 5 posts in order to download. I may give more feedback later.

Huh? You're saying I shouldn't be an admin?

We don't even have that many active members.

Did I do something wrong or rude? :( I don't think he's ever been a mod. Yea, you're in direct violation of being a complete fgt. lol I'm in violation of being a faggot? So you're saying I'm not a faggot.

Did I do something wrong or rude? :( I don't think he's ever been a mod.

Member No.: 50

No.

It should be fine.

I can't wait to see how this train wreck turns out.

I don't think the problem with GC is with the staff (Not inherently anyways).

Postal Law Enforcement Emergency Medical Investigators Education Municipal Penal system Legal system Waste Collection Libraries Medicare Social security Disability Welfare Just a very short list of socialized services where you are forced to take care of others through financial means. Does that mean I'm advocating socialism or a socialized government? Of course not. Now surely there are arguments against some socialized services that wouldn't apply to others that makes them much more plausible as an option but you seem to have a vendetta against all socialized services. I didn't think you would play the "communist card" so quickly. But you're not even making sense. Strange how Obama is stripping away all these vital rights. I seem to recall something called the Patriot Act. What is the Obama equivalent? What freedoms and liberties were sacrificed during Obamas short several months as president? I have no clue where this whole "winning the war" thing came from. I'm absolutely clueless (Granted, I admit to be clueless regarding all politics and world affairs). I won't even bother addressing the poorly constructed analogy. If you want to have an intelligent debate, let me know. If you want to continue this "Democrats vs Republicans" juvenile side picking argument, I won't participate.

I didn't realize I had already stated my preferred political party (assuming I have one) and all of the policies I'm for and against. You must be quite the detective to have figured that out already. It seems like I was just pointing out your obvious bias and the hypocrisy in bashing a party while simultaneously using an argument against said party that you probably wouldn't accept as a suitable argument for the previous administration or opposing party (That being the party I'm assuming you're backing up).

I can tell you're unbiased and highly educated when it comes to politics. Please elaborate more on your bulletproof one-sided fallacious arguments. Complaining about approval ratings only after Bush. lol Thank you because I actually am very educated in Politics. I like the part where you shamelessly took the compliment but chose to not elaborate.

I can tell you're unbiased and highly educated when it comes to politics. Please elaborate more on your bulletproof one-sided fallacious arguments. Complaining about approval ratings only after Bush. lol

I heard it was actually good. It got really great reviews last time I checked. Although I haven't seen it and am not interested in Harry Potter.

If you have any suggestions, please post them.

OMG! I love new members!!!

1. Pick a map that is fairly used in real Starcraft tournaments (Lost Temple). 2. I think it was a bad idea. You need to remake the game for the sake of upgrades. Three rounds for the purpose of making the tournament longer isn't such a bad idea. Though to some it might seem to be unnecessary. Only use rounds if we're actually trying to elongate the tournament. 3. Spectators should not be allowed to participate. It's just plain unfair. 4. If by play first you mean they were the first ones set up for matches, that was perfectly acceptable and a great idea. 5. Having units already upgraded is a terrible idea.