A little illumination, gentlemen!
This one’s going to be perhaps not short, but to the point.
I am not responsible for Melkor not roleplaying.
I am not responsible for Melkor’s inactivity.
I am not responsible for Melkor choosing not to be in the #nationstates channel anymore.
These are all his own choices, his own decisions, and he is quite capable of doing any one of them regardless of what I may or may not think about him at any given time. As it should be.
Please understand these points. If you cannot grasp that I am not responsible for other people’s actions or inactions, I don't know what to tell you. I would imagine it is going to leave you rather unanswered and disappointed.
What’s done is done, I moved on months ago, it’s high time some of the rest of you quit your fussing, second-guessing, accusing, and move on as well.
I made my explanation quite clearly, in response to his post here. What you may not know is the additional slandering that went on before, which made it more difficult to continue dealing with Melkor – that he did attempt to apologize for, and I accepted. Or perhaps you are unaware of, after it seemed things had gone quiet, his behind-the-scenes campaign to have me banned for my audacity.
That’s right, boys and girls – banned, without prior official warnings from the staff, for having responded to his taking a private dispute public, which never should have been done to begin with. I’d call that a clear abuse of power right there, and pretty dirty to boot, as I found out only after the fact, while he carried on in forums neither myself, nor any of the rest of you have access to. A bit hard to get justice when there's only one side being heard, one would think.
Won't even get into all the outright slander and nastiness that’s gone on behind my back. Something to remember - if you're going to snipe loudly about someone in public, it will eventually get back to them. Don't be surprised if now and then it ends up biting you on the ass.
Now. Clearing some things up:
Um, no – wrong. Let me illustrate. Melkor’s last words to me were as follows, direct from the last log I have of any interaction between us, dated October 15, 2005. And no, I don’t really care if some of you think I’ve doctored them, because I haven’t. Not going to play that stupid game.
[16:02] [Melkor] Good bye.
[16:02] [Melkor] And fuck off.
[16:02] [Nathi|justdrugged] Thanks, Melk, No, really.
[16:02] [Melkor] Did you not hear me the first time?
[16:02] [Melkor] Go fuck yourself.
Yes, he did, and as stated earlier, I accepted that apology – but said apology was not for any of that. Like I said, that was my last interaction with him. I say ‘interaction’ meaning ‘discussion passing between us both’ not being in the same channel. Next thing I saw was nastiness on the board, taking it all public. I responded. No, was not in perhaps the best way I could, but there you have it.
Bullshit, to put it bluntly. The rules are for everyone, plain and simple. I made several statements to mods and admins after things went horribly awry thanks to Melkor’s personal vendetta, saying I was fully prepared to accept a warning or temp ban or what have you if my one post warranted such. Without a fuss, mind. I felt his accusations needed answering. I realized that I was pushing the line with some of it, given how testy he can get. I left it up to the powers that be when it became more of an issue than I had ever expected it to. In any case, so much for that crap.
No. I don’t see why, especially after the character assassination that’s gone on, and the continued attacks, and the ridiculous vendetta – none of which I engaged in, thank you – that I should be the one to make any move. He chose to cut ties. It was not what I had hoped for or intended. I honored his choice and moved on. I’m afraid that at this point it would take much more than a simple apology to ‘patch things up’. And given his past performance and continued denial that he has done anything ‘wrong’, I really don’t see it happening.
Regardless, it is over and done, and I’m tired of hearing it over and over again from his apologists, or even well-meaning but misinformed people who would just like everyone to ‘just get along’. Nice pipe dream that – best of luck keeping those rose-colored glasses. Afraid I've put mine aside, in this respect at least.
In any case, clarity achieved? I bloody well hope so, because frankly, I have better things to do than worry about someone who has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have absolutely no respect for me, no desire to associate with me, and holds the value of whatever friendship we had as exactly nil in favor of soothing his bruised ego. Because folks, that's about all I can come up with given the circumstances.
Thought for the day:
I am not responsible for Melkor not roleplaying.
I am not responsible for Melkor’s inactivity.
I am not responsible for Melkor choosing not to be in the #nationstates channel anymore.
These are all his own choices, his own decisions, and he is quite capable of doing any one of them regardless of what I may or may not think about him at any given time. As it should be.
Please understand these points. If you cannot grasp that I am not responsible for other people’s actions or inactions, I don't know what to tell you. I would imagine it is going to leave you rather unanswered and disappointed.
What’s done is done, I moved on months ago, it’s high time some of the rest of you quit your fussing, second-guessing, accusing, and move on as well.
I made my explanation quite clearly, in response to his post here. What you may not know is the additional slandering that went on before, which made it more difficult to continue dealing with Melkor – that he did attempt to apologize for, and I accepted. Or perhaps you are unaware of, after it seemed things had gone quiet, his behind-the-scenes campaign to have me banned for my audacity.
That’s right, boys and girls – banned, without prior official warnings from the staff, for having responded to his taking a private dispute public, which never should have been done to begin with. I’d call that a clear abuse of power right there, and pretty dirty to boot, as I found out only after the fact, while he carried on in forums neither myself, nor any of the rest of you have access to. A bit hard to get justice when there's only one side being heard, one would think.
Won't even get into all the outright slander and nastiness that’s gone on behind my back. Something to remember - if you're going to snipe loudly about someone in public, it will eventually get back to them. Don't be surprised if now and then it ends up biting you on the ass.
Now. Clearing some things up:
[17:52] [Weyr|Ragnarok ] Nathi, for the record according to Melk it was you who told him to sod off because he misphrased his statements
Um, no – wrong. Let me illustrate. Melkor’s last words to me were as follows, direct from the last log I have of any interaction between us, dated October 15, 2005. And no, I don’t really care if some of you think I’ve doctored them, because I haven’t. Not going to play that stupid game.
[16:02] [Melkor] Good bye.
[16:02] [Melkor] And fuck off.
[16:02] [Nathi|justdrugged] Thanks, Melk, No, really.
[16:02] [Melkor] Did you not hear me the first time?
[16:02] [Melkor] Go fuck yourself.
But ... but ... he apologized!
Yes, he did, and as stated earlier, I accepted that apology – but said apology was not for any of that. Like I said, that was my last interaction with him. I say ‘interaction’ meaning ‘discussion passing between us both’ not being in the same channel. Next thing I saw was nastiness on the board, taking it all public. I responded. No, was not in perhaps the best way I could, but there you have it.
Nathi would just pitch a fit if she got in trouble over this, so people are just covering for her. Rules don't apply to her.
Bullshit, to put it bluntly. The rules are for everyone, plain and simple. I made several statements to mods and admins after things went horribly awry thanks to Melkor’s personal vendetta, saying I was fully prepared to accept a warning or temp ban or what have you if my one post warranted such. Without a fuss, mind. I felt his accusations needed answering. I realized that I was pushing the line with some of it, given how testy he can get. I left it up to the powers that be when it became more of an issue than I had ever expected it to. In any case, so much for that crap.
Well, someone needs to make the first move – you do it.
No. I don’t see why, especially after the character assassination that’s gone on, and the continued attacks, and the ridiculous vendetta – none of which I engaged in, thank you – that I should be the one to make any move. He chose to cut ties. It was not what I had hoped for or intended. I honored his choice and moved on. I’m afraid that at this point it would take much more than a simple apology to ‘patch things up’. And given his past performance and continued denial that he has done anything ‘wrong’, I really don’t see it happening.
Regardless, it is over and done, and I’m tired of hearing it over and over again from his apologists, or even well-meaning but misinformed people who would just like everyone to ‘just get along’. Nice pipe dream that – best of luck keeping those rose-colored glasses. Afraid I've put mine aside, in this respect at least.
In any case, clarity achieved? I bloody well hope so, because frankly, I have better things to do than worry about someone who has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have absolutely no respect for me, no desire to associate with me, and holds the value of whatever friendship we had as exactly nil in favor of soothing his bruised ego. Because folks, that's about all I can come up with given the circumstances.
Thought for the day:
posted by Nathicana at 10:54 PM
16 Comments:
Image tags aren't allowed, so...
Guess what, the slandered party in this found out. I've got a product recommendation here.
I have to admit I find it somewhat amusing that you hit the roof when I posted allusions to our previous arguments on NS, upset with my having aired the proverbial dirty laundry; yet is perfectly okay to post direct transcripts of our [and others'] private conversations, a tactic I was dolerously chastised for mentioning on NS. Granted, this isn't NS, but the principle remains essentially identical: you're siring 'dirty laundry' that [two months ago, at least] was inappropriate to be aired.
But I digress. I had prepared, in my mind, a lengthy discourse designed to offer my side of the story [and in so doing, attempt to exonerate myself from a number of accusations], but it occured to me on the way home from the bank just now that such an essay would be precisely as worthless as the one that preceded it [i.e. this blog] and it would probably be just as distorted an inaccurate, since it can sometimes be hard to understand just how other people will interpret things.
I submit now, for your reading pleasure, the entirety of my final communications with Nathi, so as to alllow the reader to come to his own conclusions about what happened and why. No editorial, no missing or altered lines, just lots of private conversation goodness, since that's apparently OK to post.
For the sake of keeping this comment within about a page or so I've condensed our final logs into an uploaded text file [not that I actually expect anyone to read all of it-- but if you'd like to immerse yourself in the minutiae of this case, feel free, since apparently our private conversations are now a matter of public record]. You may view it at http://files.upl.silentwhisper.net/upload1/aneraends.txt
Given the format, you might want to just "select all" and copy the relevant text to notepad or word since silentwhisper doesn't bother to wordwrap text.
Hilarious stuff with the baby shampoo there Scolo; you should join the debate team. Do you honestly expect me to accept this in good cheer [since clearly anything that comes out of my mouth is "crying"]?
Logged conversation, in it's entirety, when your first statement on your link is "THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNT MAY BE MISSING A FEW INTERACTIONS"? Tsk. That's just bad form.
The only 'direct transcripts' were those few lines of 'go fuck yourself', dear. The other was public convo in channel that anyone could see. It's good to see you're still unable to grasp the finer points or keep up in a discussion.
I didn't just dredge this up - this was in response to your supporters continually dredging it up with me, in public, and getting right down abusive with it. I got tired of it, and I answered it. Simple as that.
You can claim it's as 'distorted and inaccurate' as you like, the statement stands. Perhaps you'd like me to provide the rest of the logs you seem to be missing? Would that be in any way helpful? Because I'd previously chosen not to go that route, but hey - if that's what you'd like, I'm sure I could manage it.
Besides which, a good deal of our conversation went on in channel as well, if you recall - and have posted as such. Please learn to differentiate between the two forms of communication - it might help you in your arguments.
In closing, a golf clap for the effort. I think I would have preferred an actual answering directly to challenges made rather than 'lookie here, we both acted like idiots (which I think has already been clearly illustrated) but I'm not the bad guy'. I still don't see any admission that you did anything whatsoever 'wrong' in any of this. Lord knows I've had my share, but hey - I thought that had been addressed.
If we're going to get into minutae and finer points, you don't see me screaming for your removal after clear abuse of your position, for example. Care to answer that lil challenge, or are you going to deny that you went above and beyond in trying to get me banned for 'insolence' when I have a clean record on the site?
Perhaps while you're pondering this, you might consider cutting the martyr bit, and perhaps, just perhaps, the crying jokes will stop. It won't be the first time this sort of behaviour has been observed by several out there, and it really isn't becoming.
An addendum - I never saw the last lines of your 'response' as I got tired of the abuse and used the 'ignore' function for a couple hours. Everything after [17:00] on your transcripts never went through - I think after reading your responses previously, anyone can understand why I chose that route. As far as I know, that part is modified, as I've no way of proving one way or the other - and neither do you. It certainly has a different tone from the previous bit, neh?
You obviously didn't read past the [intentionally] capitalized line, so accentuated as to point out that I am in fact fallible and have 310 megs of chat logs to wade through. If you bothered to continue, you'd notice that I already encouraged you to post missing logs, as I have readily admitted I may be missing some.
Also, I sought a [brief] forumban because you had an outstanding, 'unofficial' warning for some earlier statements in Moderation [you dpn't have a 'clean record' and didn't, whether you remember it or not]. Your reply to my post was quite clearly flamebait, and no one on staff or otherwise is [or ever will be] in any position to disagree. I was cited for flamebaiting you "between the lines," an offense which has never in the history of NS been issued to a player and likely never will be again. I sought a standard punishment for standard flamebait. Players have been banned on the spot for less. An abuse of my position would have constituted, say, deleting your nation or forumbanning you on the spot. Such as it was, I follwed the protocol laid out for such situations TO THE LETTER, in that I did not self-moderate at all. Before you accuse people of corruption, you might want to familiarize yourself with just what consistutes "corruption" in a specific instance. Did I lobby that you be banned? Sure, but that wasn't what ended up happening and it wasn't my decision to make in the first place, a fact which I recognized [and also exonerates me from your erroneous claims of "abusing" my position].
Wanting a player to be punished for breaking the rules is not an "abuse" of my "power," a habit which I'm sure you've deluded yourself into believing I engage in regularly, now that I've dared to disagree with you on something so small as a #ns ban 2 months ago.
Also, if "my people" are bugging you, I can assure you it's through no decree of mine; I had kind of hoped I could live the rest of my natural life without thinking of [or speaking to] you again. This blog, however, sort of compelled me to break that promise.
Furthermore, #nationstates_2 isn't what I would call a popular channel; the conversations that took place there deserve to be recounted because a number of people who weren't present have since expressed an intereste in the situation. I can't for the life of me understand how I'm "unable to grasp the finer points" on account of citing a conversation that a number of people didn't see. I can hear your fingers clutching for straws from here.
I obviously have no way of knowing if I'm on ignore or not, being that Esper isn't in the habit of notifying users when it happens [and I'm sure it happens frequently]. If everything else is exactly as it appeared to begin with, how would I just so happen to know where you ignored me and what lines to doctor up on account?
Melk, honey - a clean record means 'no offical warnings' - which I maintain to this day, and have been careful of. Please see repeated public comments by moderators on the various forums for an illustration of such in other cases where 'unofficial' suggestions/warnings/etc have been made. Then again, as a Moderator, you should know this, yes?
The abuse of your position is in reference to public statements you made in another channel concerning 'taking your appeal to a forum where you don't have to deal with other people weighing in'. That includes myself. One would think that were your intentions so honorable and in the clear, you wouldn't need to keep them hidden from view. I call it as I see it - call it what you will, it stinks. When someone is 'on trial' so to speak, said person ought to have the same avenues to defend oneself or at least answer accusations as their accuser, rather than have to find out about it after all is said and done, without any prior notification or effort to get the other side of things. I remain unimpressed with how the entire thing was handled.
As for your claims of 'being banned for less', please provide proof and examples of this, or let that argument go, because I think we have all see the sorts of flame wars and blatant insults that have gone with barely a tap on the wrist on the various forums. Your argument rings a bit hollow, especially when it was yourself who first posted and chose to bring this all out like you did in your post - which was entirely uneccessary.
For the record, it wasn't your disagreement on a ban that was the problem. It was your insults and character attacks that were. Anyone is free to disagree. No one ought to be punished for having a differing opinion. You chose to get abusive with it, then pretend like you hadn't. Yes, I take offense to that. And yes, we discussed and put it behind us. Or at least, I had. It's obvious you can't let that bit go the way you keep harping on it.
Please, do try again with the public vs private there - the fact is, the channel was public - ie, open to anyone. There is no key, there is no password, there is nothing stopping anyone from going in there, and there were more than a few people present when you chose to take a private issue public in an extremely abusive and disrespectful way. No, I didn't respond well - no better than you have when challenged with things you don't like. It still doesn't make it a 'private' conversation.
I see you still haven't answered any of the initial points in the original post - is there a problem with that, or are you reluctant to admit you've made your own choices there?
As for the 'never have to speak or deal with again', it's a pity. I really did have fun playing with you, I looked forward to continuing once things settled a bit on this end, and had hoped to see this war thing play out as it had been previously discussed, whether I personally wrote in my part or no. We'd already talked about how it was going to pan, so why should I think you incapable of going forward with it? It isn't as though I was pulling the plug on interaction - you chose that with your post.
Now that we're clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that the fun things we had once talked about are as dead as dead can be, and the current arrangements will stand, I suppose the original intent of my blog entry has been satisfied - you've answered yourself that you've no desire to go on, I've stated that if I didn't hear anything to the contrary, I was prepared to let things stand as they are ... Should mean no more 'kiss and make up' from folks.
Percieved problem by others solved.
After your post, I resolved myself to living with it and making whatever adjustments I'd need to - and there are many - to keep rp'ing and enjoying the game. I take it you're there too.
You were free to make a thread about it in Moderation, Nathi. You didn't even attempt to do so. Moderator decisions can be appealed even if their case is not discussed by us in public--you know this.
You're definately not the first [or last] player whos issues we dealt with primarily in Mod/Admin: we do it on a daily basis simply because we're not obligated to post in Moderation describing our every move. You were perfectly capable of initiating a discussion on the issue as soon as your thread was locked by Tsaraine.
As to my issues with the original post, most of them stem from these accusations of "insults" and "character assasinations" where I have clearly done nothing of the sort. "Knoot's ban is fucking ridiculous" isn't a character assasination or an insult, it's a statement of disagreement with a previous decision. As I maintained in our previous conversations, my disagreement with one decision does not consitute a disagreement with all of them, nor is it an endictment of your reasoning ability as a whole. The logs clearly show that this is how you chose to interpret things anyway, a difficulty which I was never able to work around, hence my parting nastiness. I also was exasperated that you attempted I'm maintaining some sort of facade as to my infallibility, citing a "refusal" on my part to admit that I had done anything wrong. If I hadn't done anything wrong, why would I have been apologising for it?
Parts of your post are accurate, just as parts of mine would have been as well; I agree with you implicitly for about the first and last few paragraphs, but it started to wear a little thin when I was accused of abusing my authority.
I dealt with the situation to the extent of my perhaps limited capacity [at times I have something of a short fuse], and when that capacity expired I picked up my ball and went home. Am I sorry for that? Can I be? It's part of who I am, so I guess my condoloences as to that will be empty at best. The last straw was when you attempted to suggest that my time in General had somehow poisoned my mind [or, as you put it, my ability to conduct a conversation], at which point it as utterly obvious that any attempts to continue would be in vain. In all the time I knew you, you'd never bothered to hide your disdain for General [and neither did I, typically], and once I perceived that I had been subsumed into this disdain [presumably irreversably], I took my leave.
And yes, I am there too; to be honest engaging in another sniping war on here wasn't actually my intent, although I admit that its hard to believe otherwise on account of my having gotten involved here in the first place. Blame my temperment if you should so choose, but my mind refuses to allow such a post to go unanswered, if it can help it.
Of course I was free to go to the Moderation forum, however, as I didn't find out about things til after the fact, there really wasn't much point pitching a fit in there now, was there?
You chose to take a personal disagreement public, I chose to answer it in public as well - frankly, I had thought it would either end at that, or we would have some discussion on it. You chose not to avail yourself of that option as we can see, and instead, decided that upping the ante was appropriate. After admissions of not thinking clearly and having a rotten temper you've made before, I guess I should have seen that one coming. Silly me.
I'm quite certain I'm not the only player who has been discussed in moderation - I'm not that special, sorry. The difference here is that this was a disagreement involving you, a Moderator, and myself, a player, rather than simple Moderator discussion on an in-game problem. Surely you can see the discrepancy there. In addition, I was unaware all this was going on til the very end. I figured the thread itself was being discussed, not that I was in any danger of bannination or the like. There wasn't any precident for it, nor was anything said there solid grounds for such action - as has since been validated by the resulting decision that came of whatever discussion went on behind closed doors.
As for your claim of a lack of character assasination and insults, we've been over this before, and it had been, I thought, dealt with. You have outright stated you cannot understand how a statement of 'you are incapable of making unbiased decisions' is an insult. I disagree. I haven't claimed that the statement of 'fucking ridiculous' is an insult - it isn't. It's an observation. I'm trying to find the logs I have on all of that. Yes, you did state with how you phrased it that you disagreed with 'all', given the 'incapable of unbiased decisions' you tossed out.
Lets be clear - you apologized for being shitty, and so did I, and we accepted. It all blew up after that, and there has been no apologies on either side since to my knowledge.
My observations on your methods of attack and correlation between your methods in General debate were accurate - you do go for the hard shots, rightly so or not, and you do it without a care on how they may affect others. Since you have been spending more time in General, your attitude and your demeanor has changed. I'm sorry you can't see it. Do I blame General for it? No. I blame you for letting yourself get sloppy and mean, and not giving a damn about the fallout.
Lots of people mock the General forum and some of the ridiculousness that goes on there. Even regular posters joke about it. I don't see how that makes me wrong, or singles me out as an 'enemy of the state' that way. After all, I've posted, and still do on occasion, in General as well.
I don't expect any commentary here to go unanswered - you've every right to post your rebuttal/opinion/what have you - I'm seeing a distinct lack of censorship here, even to the point of allowing anonymous posts - something many don't do. If this resolves anything, great - the initial intent was not to piss you off, it was to put a stop to the bullshit and abusive crap I have to keep dealing with because of you. Like I said, tired of it, tired of people saying I need to be the one 'quit picking on you' when I haven't been doing a damn thing - INCLUDING taking this all to moderation when I could have and really making a fuss, which wouldn't have been good for anyone.
We can all sit back and take advantage of hindsight now, not that it'll do us much good. Question remains, one would think, where does it go from here, if anywhere?
I'm going to make this short since I have to leave for South Carolina soon, and I don't have this url saved anywhere where I can view it from there.
First of all, my decision to handle this in private was a perfectly justified one, as an immediate public discourse on the situation wouldn't have been very productive at all. Since you seem to be acquainted with the rules of the site, perhaps I am remiss in informing you that the APPEALS process takes place AFTER a ruling in the first place, rendering your first argument about how there "wasn't much point" to an appeal completely erroneous. As I have said numerous times, we are not required to report our every step to the players and you were certainly more than capable of deducing what was going on as soon as your thread was locked.
Furthermore, I happen to know you are in regular contact with Scolo and have been for some time; I find the notion that you "didn't find out about things til after the fact" laughable at best. You knew what was going on when it was going on, and were more than welcome to say something about it at any time. It sounds to me like you're trying to complain about your own oversights.
Finally, I agree that "you are incapable of making unbiased decisions" is an insult, but if you should care to read the logs again, you'll notice that not only do I not say that, but I take pains to point out that wasn't what I was trying to insinuate. "You are incapable of making unbiased decisions" was an inference YOU chose to make as a result of my statements, despite my exhortations to the contrary. I have pointed out numerous times [and several times already in the course of this back-and-forth as well] that my disagreement with one decision does not imply a lack of faith in ALL of them; and any possible insinuation that it WAS was one of the things I was trying to apologise for.
As for where it goes from here? I don't know, the ball's not in my court as far as I'm concerned. I'll apologise for telling you to go fuck yourself if you'll apologise for being impossibly difficult and refusing to accept my own explanations of my own statements.
Um ... whatever is there to appeal again? Our 'disagreement' doesn't have a damn thing to do with the management of the site. As stated previously - since your own oversight seems to have missed it - after things were said and done, there was nothing to appeal, and unless a dialogue were desired, which is obviously not the case, there was nothing more to go forward with.
I asked if I could post an ic thread moving things forward while the other was being reviewed, and was told that would be fine, so I did. While it was probably foolish to make such a big deal over it, and in doing so lock the thread, draw attention to it with the lock and 'pending review', and then leave it locked rather than allowing me to remove it and just go forward, that's what happened, and I didn't suffer anything for it.
Like I said - nothing to appeal. I wasn't treated unfairly by the administration.
Or is that too difficult to wrap your head around? Nothing erroneous in my argument at all. Knowing there was a problem with the thread was obvious yes - and if you read, you'll note I mentioned that. What wasn't apparent was your overreation and baseless assertions.
As for your insinuation that Scolo of all people, would spoon-feed me information on what's going on behind the scenes as it happened, or that I would pump him for information like that, I have two words for you:
Get Stuffed.
No, I didn't find out about your personal vendetta you were carrying on from Scolo or any other Moderator.
I found out from you.
You were mouthing off in #nationstates_general about it, bragging about how I was going to get what I deserved, how I had best 'watch my step' and other such threatening talk, and how you had taken it to private forums so you wouldn't have to deal with everyone else putting in their two cents over it.
So much for your conspiracy theory. Thank you for once again proving how little honor you have yourself, which explains how it is that you expect similar behaviour in others. Bravo, Melkor. Bravo.
As for your next point, we've already established you lack all the logs, and I currently don't have everything all together as well, especially given how I don't make a habit of logging every little conversation for later use. I recall clearly you saying I was incapable of making unbiased decisions. Again, as this has already been dealt with and apologized for on all sides, why is this the point you continue to harp on and go on about? this isn't why things fell apart in the end, though it did contribute to a decided lack of enthusiasm about intensive interaction.
I'd ask that you please try to keep up if you're going to continue here, but your final statement is again, an illustration of why things finally fell apart - conditional apologies and implied threats.
No worries, boyo. I prefer apologies to be sincere. There really isn't any point otherwise. That being the case, don't worry yourself about it. Asking insincerity of others is about as bad as engaging in it yourself, and I just couldn't sleep if I'd have to ask that of you just to move forward.
No, you don't "clearly remember me" saying that you are uncapable of making unbiased decisions not just because you don't have the logs, but because I never said it to begin with.
Seriously, how can you tell me--presumably with a straight face--that it's "bad form" to not include all of the logs, while turning around in your next post here admitting that you don't either and just can't find the conversation where I supposedly declared your reasoning ability completely defunct? Could it be that such logs don't exist? Last I chcked, IRC does not have a "log every other chat" function--if you want to check our conversations, you're every bit as capable of doing so as I am--and have. IRC doesn't selectively log conversations, and it's already been established that our dispute occured in the first two weeks of October--it shouldn't be too hard to sort by date and go from there. If you can't find the log, chances are it doesn't exist simply because I never said anything of the sort. I'm not going to be shy about telling you that such insinuations were a fabrication of your own psyche--not mine.
If you already have looked into this [and obviously since you have failed to produce the logs where I said that, even going so far as to admit that you can't], your choices are twofold: you can keep pretending that I said that and maintain your facade, or you can fess up to the fact that I never fucking said it to begin with, and not only that but I went out of my way to explain to you that that wasn't my point.
Also, your hostility when I mentioned Scolo speaks for itself. I'm not saying there's any kind of "consipracy" going on here--only friendship. I don't fault either of you for that, but friends generally don't keep each other in the dark about goings-on such as this. I'm not levelling any accusations against Scolo to the effect that he told you anything you shouldn't have known: I'm not suggesting that he divulged ZOMG UBER SECRETS to you or anything, I'm simply pointing out that our fight was something of an oft-discussed topic when it happened, and I highly doubt that the full scope of it evaded you at the time.
You're forgetting that I've known you both for over two years: while I'm not privy to the finer points of your relationship I do know for a fact that Scolo is remarkably loyal to and protective of those who earn status as his friends: given this personality trait I find it highly doubtful that he would be silent on such an issue, especially given his opinions of me [a cursory synopsis of which can be found in the very first comment on this blog, no less]. I don't believe for a second that you "didn't know about this" until after everything was said and done, and I'm quite amused by your attempts to get me to believe this nonsense.
Still, I find it a bit puzzling that you conceded that I had apologised for such a damning indictment of your decision-making abilities, while just half a page earlier [on this very page even] that these very "insults and character attacks" are the reason for our continued animosity.
I'm not the one that's "harping" on this--I believe that particular angle was brought up by you when you said "For the record, it wasn't your disagreement on a ban that was the problem. It was your insults and character attacks that were."
I apologised for any possible character attacks that could have been inferred from my statements: you even admit as much yourself ["...Again, as this has already been dealt with and apologized for on all sides..."]. You are so quick to level these "character assasination" charges against me, all the while failing to account for your own statements about my powers of deduction and conversation ability--statements of yours which were not only direct and unmistakable but also easy to find [unlike my alleged comment "You are uncapable of making unbiased decisions"].
Yes, I was remarkably rude and vulgar to you in my parting statements, and no I don't particularly regret it, given the hypocrisy that you seem interested in perpetuating. It's perfectly okay for you to say that General has rendered me incabable of holding a conversation and has removed me from the 'real world,' but the second I contest a decision you made you create all of these new facets to my malcontent which had never previously existed. You've created statements out of thin air and attributed them to me, a feat which requires an apology from you, not me.
My attitude and demeanor have not changed a bit: you've just learned that they exist in a capacity which you had never seen before. In all of the time we knew each other previously, you had never seen me get into long-winded political discussions on account of the fact that chat rooms aren't exactly the best format for it. I contend that my attitudes are as they have always been; merely that they were excersized in a different capacity on the General forums as opposed to #nationstates, where such issues are generally avoided. God knows I've seen a number of political discussions shut down [and perhaps rightly so] in #ns there for that very reason--people get nasty when they talk politics sometimes. Why should I pretend to be an exception?
It could be that as you say, I don't have the logs, but then again, perhaps I haven't compiled them all because I'm getting ready for a week's trip to Utah, and have more important things to do than wade through reams of logs and files on two different computers, and track down folks who have logs of things that I don't on my computer because they too are getting ready for the holiday? Sure I have the time to type out some responses here, but given my convictions, that really doesn't take much time to do.
Tell you what though - once I do have time to get it all together, I'll apologize if I'm wrong. If not, guess we'll see how you choose to handle things, neh?
Perhaps I also ought to point out that for the duration of this disagreement in question I had been on medication - codeine, in fact - and was, as I think everyone can see, more than a little surly and lacking a lot of tact. Something I believe you were aware of, but insisted on continuing to press even when told 'it really isn't a great time to get into things' later. No great excuse, no, and I'm still responsible regardless, but it does help offer a bit of explanation for not being more clear in some of my comments, and getting more snippy than I usually would with things.
No, IRC doesn't selectively log. I however do, as I've already stated, I believe. I don't see a point in hording every word ever uttered on the channels, after all. And truth, I tend to use the 'save as' function rather than auto-log for those conversations that need saving - usually dealing with rp details, story ideas, or in the case of this mess, 'for the record' information.
As for your continued insistence that I am incapable of separating 'friendship' from things that have nothing to do with it, such as the moderation of this site, I'm really not surprised you don't understand how two friends could possibly not divulge every little thing that goes on. You're free to keep on believing what you like - the fact of the matter is, it's my friend's sense of honor, and my own, that allows us to keep such things separate - as they should be.
My friends do not 'owe' me any explanation or inside information as to what goes on, they never have, and they never will. I've gone out of my way to be careful about it so that I -can- honestly say I don't abuse my friendships that way.
The fact of the matter is, it got back to me that you were bragging about things in #nsg, as noted earlier - something I note you chose not to address. This was well into your behind the scenes discussions and whatever crusade you were carrying out on the private forums. After that all came to light, I waited a bit, and remember being more than a little put out that no one had said anything to me, then settled down before saying anything because as stated - my friends don't owe me play-by-play info, and I had to take a moment to get over my irritation and remember that.
That's when I decided to ask. And no, it wasn't Scolo I went to, because I do know just how loyal a friend he is, and did not want to put him 'in the middle' of things so to speak. I have more respect for him than that.
What did I ask about? Only 'is this really going on' and 'does it look like it will be resolved soon'. Again, as I've already stated, there really wasn't a point to starting a big fuss in Moderation over it, as I didn't see that accomplishing anything, and figured our statements were enough of a public mess without adding to it with more.
You have changed, Nick. I'm just sorry you can't see it. Like I said, not blaming General because that would be silly - in spite of snippy comments I made when angry.
I recall a conversation before way, way back when you had been hitting the pot pretty heavy, then sobered up for a good long while. You were less an asshole, more fun to play with, and pulled off some of the best writing I've seen from you. You didn't believe it then either, til several people voiced their agreement on it. While I don't recall you admitting anything, I do remember you getting a bit thoughtful concerning it. Sorry if this whole convo here seems a bit deja-vu on account.
The difference I've been trying to illustrate is how you've chosen previous to now to go on at length in public with everyone on what was a personal disagreement - most often behind my back. This is something I worked very hard not to do, because it served no point. Notice you got right quiet about things once I came back to the #ns channel. Yeah, I got word about the crap you'd been spewing in there too. Obviously I don't have the logs as I wasn't there, but I suppose I could ask around for folks who do. Again, more time and effort that I just don't have right now. If you can't grasp how that all works, and why it makes a difference, can't help you.
Seems we're at an impasse, all things considered. You've already said you don't regret things, and without regret, there's no point to you apologizing for anything. so much for the idea that laying things out here in the clear might, in spite of the unpleasantness of the whole thing, yield any positive results.
Once we're back from vacation, I'll get the links and logs I have access to, and pull things together. As stated, if I'm wrong, or the information is missing and I can't prove it, you'll get your apology for that, and rightly so.
As for the rest, looks like we're done. Glad to see you're happy with severing ties - in spite of how you keep going on about it elsewhere like you're suffering or being unfairly pegged with ending things.
I'm not really happy with "severing ties," as you phrased it: I merely have little or no choice given the situation I was faced with. Yes,I was aware of your rather tenuous situation at the time and even went out of my way to mention that as well; apologising for my piss-poor timing only to have you turn right around and tell me that had nothing to do with it.
I didn't just wake up one morning and decide "I'm going to hate Nathi today," and I certainly didn't mean for things to get quite as ridiculous as they did, I just handled the situation, like I said, to the best of my rather limited capacity. I've never had major arguments with my friends before--on the internet or in real life: pretty much everyone I've met so far that earned such status has stayed there. I don't really know how to handle situations like this and given how things transpired with you, I'll venture to guess I still don't.
Also, I think you may be misrepresenting my opinions of what may have gone on between you and Scolo [or anyone else for that matter; he's simply a conveinent example]; as I mentioned in my previous post I'm not trying to suggest he told you anything you had no business knowing, I'm not suggesting that he was obligated to fill you in on the details of the case, and I'm definately not suggesting you pressed him for details. I am suggesting that the issue was discussed, at one time or another, because pretty much everyone was talking about this when it happened, in every nationstates-related chat room I visited at the time. It seems something of a stretch that one party [me] would receive such a torrent of inquiries and rumormongering, while the other party [you] received no word of it at all.
Also, I didn't answer your claims about 'bragging' on #nsg because they're probably true. I wasn't shy about hiding how displeased I was as a result of your post, and the chances are fairly healthy that I engaged in some speculation as well. I quieted down when you returned to #ns because I was going out of my way not to speak when you were active in the channel in the first place: I didn't want to make things worse [I shudder at the thought] and I generally had other things to do anyway.
I eventually left #ns on account of the nature of Karma's "management" of the chat, allowing ops to clear the banlist and resign [leaving the room ostensibly open for a flood of serial-spammers and jackasses for several hours], while de-opping them for something so trivial as talking about getting high. For all the things that are discussed on the internet, drugs are not likely to be something worth getting your panties in a knot over; the move struck me as something of a political one, and I found the timing [and a few other circumstances] to be a bit too convenient. When that happened, the writing was on the wall, as far as I'm concerned.
At any rate, I'm glad to see this is finally getting somewhere. I understand you have other things going on and can't dredge everything up right now: God knows I was hesitant to do just that even when I had the time; IRC logs can be a bit tricky to navigate, and it's certainly not fun anyway. Have fun in Utah.
First for your points in the previous post:
a) You always have a choice. The fact is, this time you chose poorly, then bitched about not liking the outcome you chose. I never said 'I will not rp with you ever again'. You're the one who went with the 'fuck off - no, really' bit. So, I 'fucked off'. I suppose I am a bit surprised you're not pleased you got your way, all things considered. And here I thought respecting your wishes was a good thing. Ah well.
This timing thing you keep bringing up isn't the point either - it was your approach and your words that I found offensive, and would have found them so regardless of what state of mind I was in - codeine or no.
b) You admit you have a 'limited capacity' in dealing with unpleasantness, yet you insist on escalating and making things just as miserable as you can rather than try to patch anything up. I think that speaks volumes right there. In all the time you were going around talking smack about me, I wasn't saying a damn thing about you to the best of my ability. I tried to limit responses to questions with brief, to the point, non-insulting answers. I've seen ample proof you can't say the same for yourself. Not once during all of this, until you posted on my blog here, have you tried to say anything more about any of it. What else am I supposed to think but that this is how you want things? And who am I to try and change your mind in any case?
Why didn't I make a move and try and talk? I think the answer's obvious given the last things I saw you say to me. As stated before - you wanted ties severed, you got what you wanted. Your choice.
c) I don't believe I've 'misrepresented' anything you've stated here on this lil blog. You've been quite clear in what you've said. If you now regret some of it, or feel you may not have stated things quite the way you may have meant them, alas. You 'suggested' that Scolo would behave in a dishonorable way. I contest that, rather strongly. You seem to forget, I wasn't in said 'channels where things were being discussed'. And I had made it as clear as I could that I did not want to get into it when questions had arisen - again, so much for your 'suppositions'. You are mistaken in your conclusions on this point.
d) At least you admit to the nastiness going on in at least one channel behind my back. I suppose that's something. You can claim what you like about the quietness in #nationstates. It remains an interesting point nonetheless. I'm afraid I have a hard time buying it given the comments made previous to my showing back up again.
e) As for your claim of leaving the channel open, bullshit to put it bluntly. I made sure you were active. You apparently, in your wisdom on how to run a channel, didn't do a damn thing. So much for claims of 'I can run this place better'.
I don't recall Karma de-opping you for talking about drugs. I do recall you making a statement along the lines of 'I'll probably ignore or forget your ruling on this so whatever'. I believe it was the flippant disregard for how he preferred to have his channel run that did the trick. You can play the martyr all you like on that one - afraid it doesn't fly.
Besides, didn't you get opped initially because you complained long enough about it not being 'fair' that Siri was an op there and you weren't? Gadfrey, she lost @ in there ages ago and we didn't see the shitstorm over her de-opping when it became aparent she couldn't uphold properly that we have from you. Can't use the 'inactive' argument on this one, though - at the time it happened, she was. Still there. Go fig.
As for my being opped again, well it wasn't due to any machinations or manipulations. I made some poor choices myself when angry, hurt, and rather drugged up. It's been dealt with and discussed privately, and I accept the fact that I could have handled myself better.
If you hadn't blown it, and if there hadn't been a need, I'd still not be opped. Frankly, there were a lot of complaints about no one being around to help when help was needed. I chose to offer to try and assist again - this time with trying some things differently. If you feel you deserve answers on that, talk to Karma. For myself, I'm trying to make sure a second chance isn't abused.
Now for the answers I'd hoped to provide:
Well, I've dug and I've looked, and I've compared, and I have come to the conclusion that until someone can provide a complete log of the #nationstates_2 channel from October 9, we are at an impasse. Both your logs and mine start mid conversation, and thus, being incomplete, with the possibility of containing pertinent points of contention, cannot be quoted 'as gospel' nor used as such. We remain unanswered.
I'm still trying to find someone who has logs from that day that show the beginning of the convo, not just the part starting here:
[Melkor] Nathi, I've been in #ns since March of 2003. He used to be there regularly; he's goofy but not stupid and he didn't troll, as a general rule. You may not have liked him but that doesnt make him objectively obnoxious.
You say yourself in your posted .txt file that you are missing info and that previous convo lead up to the bits that have been now posted publicly. You also start right off with assumptions.
Until we get the full thing, and perhaps all the logs of the missing days in #nationstates, and perhaps logs over that span in #nationstates_general as well for any pertinent info, if one really wishes to be absolutely and entirely anally thorough, or hey, maybe even transcripts of what really went on behind the scenes since I'm still mildly curious about what all went down- pity that'll never happen - ain't much more to discuss. Boils down to your claims and mine, and folks are free to come to their own conclusions on that - as they always do, logs or no.
Since the information at hand is incomplete, I can't rightfully say I owe you any such apology for 'putting words in your mouth'. Nor can you claim with any more certainty than I can make my claims that you didn't make the statements I remember you making. Granted, I've admitted I was on medication at the time, but I don't think I would have reacted quite so badly if such statements hadn't been actually made. In any case, no proof, no deal, on either side of this.
Now, having wasted more time than I care to think about on making sure I haven't spoken out of turn, in an honest effort to own up if I was proven wrong, I'm going to call this 'closed until further information is forthcoming' on my end. Because given the statements we've both made, can't see any good coming of batting this back and forth with 'I remember you saying this' and 'I remember that quite differently'.
And yus, the trip was great, and I was sad to leave. I'm not terribly impressed with the SLC airport. Still. Again. No surprise there.
Post a Comment
<< Home