New ops? Plus other stuff.

There's an inevitable segue that each Boloer must face which requires them to transition their time from the game into more productive activities in life. Some players have immediate issues that force them to retire indefinitely while others just up and leave and don't look back.

My situation isn't really anything to be interested in - I've been slowly stepping away from playing the game for a few months and now I'm looking to reduce my time spent in IRC each day. While I'll still be doing things behind the scenes (minute irc administrative stuff), that leaves a (possible) daily operator position available..

Keeping in mind that LRL has the final say over who's place on the chanserv aop (auto-op) list, please suggest a list of a few players who you'd think could not only handle the privilege, but also raise the bar and set a new standard.

I'll start the ball rolling with my suggestions:

Kat
Derami
Lancelot

There's others I'd recommend, but those three are very active in addition to having the ability to enforce the policy and Fi an LRL put forth.

I'd also like to reiterate that these are only suggestions and LRL might not choose to have someone replace me.

Sticks? For the win?

jhood wrote:

Kat
Lancelot

KAT, by far, her contributions to the comunity (bot and scriptes for it) plus her amazing ability to remain neutral and calm around every player. the only choice.

I vote Kat

This whole post just makes me laugh.

Min

i would say kat

and if it ends up in a tie, we should all agreee for me :p

Haha, just imagine giving MaddMaxx chanops and that's pretty much what it'd be like with Der. And I wasn't aware that there could only be x-number of chanops on #winbolo.

I suggest putting a monkey in charge.

definately kat. really dont see anyone else suitable atm

Sticks wrote:

Haha, just imagine giving MaddMaxx chanops and that's pretty much what it'd be like with Der. And I wasn't aware that there could only be x-number of chanops on #winbolo.

QFT

everytime we exceed X, the server ops blowup a baby panda

jhood wrote:

Some players just up and leave and don't look back.

I'd always hoped that you'd be be one of those players.

Acro wrote:

I suggest putting a monkey in charge.

I believe that was the rationale behind giving Jhood ops in the first place.

CF

I vote Kat.

I basically agree that Kat is a good choice because she is intelligent, level-headed, and interested in everyone having a shot at playing so long as they don't cheat or otherwise undermine games (Packer). That being said, this clearly hasn't been the criteria for selecting ops in the past (see: Underdog, DS, etc...) though it would set a good precedent for the future.

Though to Sticks and anyone else who specifically thinks I shouldn't be an op: don't confuse my rants and raves with a lack of judgement. If you took your heads out of your asses and looked at the content rather than the tone of my posts, you'd realize pretty quickly that I am precisely concerned with the content and execution of policy, which, to my mind, should be the basis for choosing ops - not the contribution of technical resources (though I think in Kat's case that reflects not only her abilities but her interest in making the game better for everyone). Have you ever seen me ask for a ban without cause? Ruin games out of spite (like DS) or kick people out for no reason (like UD)? If not, then you have no cause to think I wouldn't be a good op - you're just letting emotions cloud your judgement. That said, I'm still voting for Kat :)

I may speak out when i disagree with something a player or an op does, but that doesn't mean I think my or anyone's emotions should dictate policy. When an op/player undermines a game or executes policy in a questionable manner, I bring it up, and I think that discussion about such cases is healthy if we want to avoid tyranny. If you all would rather that no one questioned authority, stick to open games and vote for Bush.

Hopefully, with new and improved functions in both irc and bolo itself the need for op interventions will be reduced, rendering the whole concept of an op relatively moot except in cases of flooding, etc... Meanwhile, I think Kat would be great to balance out the somewhat hot-headed ops who themselves set bad examples for other players.

-= Dersux

P.S. Ud, the fact that you would agree with Sticks and speculate about what I would be like as an op based on your dislike is *precisely* why you are a shitty op - your judgement of my objective ability to execute and suggest changes to policy should have nothing to do with your personal distaste for me as a person. Take your head out of your ass - separate feeling from judgement.

derami wrote:

I vote Kat.

I basically agree that Kat is a good choice because she is intelligent, level-headed, and interested in everyone having a shot at playing so long as they don't cheat or otherwise undermine games (Packer). That being said, this clearly hasn't been the criteria for selecting ops in the past (see: Underdog, DS, etc...) though it would set a good precedent for the future.

Though to Sticks and anyone else who specifically thinks I shouldn't be an op: don't confuse my rants and raves with a lack of judgement. If you took your heads out of your asses and looked at the content rather than the tone of my posts, you'd realize pretty quickly that I am precisely concerned with the content and execution of policy, which, to my mind, should be the basis for choosing ops - not the contribution of technical resources (though I think in Kat's case that reflects not only her abilities but her interest in making the game better for everyone). Have you ever seen me ask for a ban without cause? Ruin games out of spite (like DS) or kick people out for no reason (like UD)? If not, then you have no cause to think I wouldn't be a good op - you're just letting emotions cloud your judgement. That said, I'm still voting for Kat :)

I may speak out when i disagree with something a player or an op does, but that doesn't mean I think my or anyone's emotions should dictate policy. When an op/player undermines a game or executes policy in a questionable manner, I bring it up, and I think that discussion about such cases is healthy if we want to avoid tyranny. If you all would rather that no one questioned authority, stick to open games and vote for Bush.

Hopefully, with new and improved functions in both irc and bolo itself the need for op interventions will be reduced, rendering the whole concept of an op relatively moot except in cases of flooding, etc... Meanwhile, I think Kat would be great to balance out the somewhat hot-headed ops who themselves set bad examples for other players.

-= Dersux

P.S. Ud, the fact that you would agree with Sticks and speculate about what I would be like as an op based on your dislike is *precisely* why you are a shitty op - your judgement of my objective ability to execute and suggest changes to policy should have nothing to do with your personal distaste for me as a person. Take your head out of your ass - separate feeling from judgement.

I'm the only one that likes you, and I only like you because so many people hate you... troll.

<3
Killjoy

jhood wrote:

Kat
Derami
Lancelot

derami wrote:

I vote Kat.

I basically agree that Kat is a good choice because she is intelligent, level-headed, and interested in everyone having a shot at playing so long as they don't cheat or otherwise undermine games (Packer). That being said, this clearly hasn't been the criteria for selecting ops in the past (see: Underdog, DS, etc...) though it would set a good precedent for the future.

Though to Sticks and anyone else who specifically thinks I shouldn't be an op: don't confuse my rants and raves with a lack of judgement. If you took your heads out of your asses and looked at the content rather than the tone of my posts, you'd realize pretty quickly that I am precisely concerned with the content and execution of policy, which, to my mind, should be the basis for choosing ops - not the contribution of technical resources (though I think in Kat's case that reflects not only her abilities but her interest in making the game better for everyone). Have you ever seen me ask for a ban without cause? Ruin games out of spite (like DS) or kick people out for no reason (like UD)? If not, then you have no cause to think I wouldn't be a good op - you're just letting emotions cloud your judgement. That said, I'm still voting for Kat :)

I may speak out when i disagree with something a player or an op does, but that doesn't mean I think my or anyone's emotions should dictate policy. When an op/player undermines a game or executes policy in a questionable manner, I bring it up, and I think that discussion about such cases is healthy if we want to avoid tyranny. If you all would rather that no one questioned authority, stick to open games and vote for Bush.

Hopefully, with new and improved functions in both irc and bolo itself the need for op interventions will be reduced, rendering the whole concept of an op relatively moot except in cases of flooding, etc... Meanwhile, I think Kat would be great to balance out the somewhat hot-headed ops who themselves set bad examples for other players.

-= Dersux

P.S. Ud, the fact that you would agree with Sticks and speculate about what I would be like as an op based on your dislike is *precisely* why you are a shitty op - your judgement of my objective ability to execute and suggest changes to policy should have nothing to do with your personal distaste for me as a person. Take your head out of your ass - separate feeling from judgement.

1) ...That being said, this clearly hasn't been the criteria for selecting ops in the past (see: Underdog, DS, etc...) though it would set a good precedent for the future...

Do you even know how long I've been an op? Way way way before you emerged in winbolo, young grasshopper. So I wonder how you could possibley know on what basis I became an op? I really don't appreciate you smearing LRL's judgement and reputation like that.

2) Have you ever seen me ask for a ban without cause? Ruin games out of spite (like DS) or kick people out for no reason (like UD)?

I started the game and I wanted to play with specific people. I asked you politely to leave after you joined. The reason was 'I do not want to play with you, I want to play with these other people'. It doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with my reason. You really have no case here, and I only see this comment as a thinly veiled attempt at slandering me.

3) P.S. Ud, the fact that you would agree with Sticks and speculate about what I would be like as an op based on your dislike is *precisely* why you are a shitty op - your judgement of my objective ability to execute and suggest changes to policy should have nothing to do with your personal distaste for me as a person. Take your head out of your ass - separate feeling from judgement.

My "personal distaste" for any individual is neither relevant nor applicable in respect to the OP behavior on irc. My judgement for opping someone is based on a few things. Passion for winbolo and character. And in all honesty, your insults towards the current ops is not a great show of character.

Also, you claim I am hot-headed. When you broke policy by not leaving a strict passworded game started from irc after being asked, I politely informed you that it is actually a rule. I took no rash actions. I treated you respectfully as I would treat anyone else.

since when did we need a other a op in the chatroom? just because jhood is no longer going to be on as much mean we need a op? i really don't think we need anymore. if we do, it really up to lrl to make it happen.
IF so happen we need a op in the chatroom. i rather go with some one who comes on often. and willing to put aside their personal feeling for other winbolo players and treat everyone the same with the rules. we can't have some bum going around kicking people just because they don't like them.
and base on the list of people who haved named. i can't really see any of them becoming a op. lance prolly doesn't want to be. *if he does, luck good* Kat i don't see her on enough.

if im going to pick, either spartacus or acro would make a decent op.

Thanks for your comment, Indiana.

1) You've reiterated everything I fucking said, yet you think I'm wrong.
2) Acro is already an op.
3) There is no number 3.

Merry Christmas.

Sorry, that rant came out of nowhere.

Umm ... Ud, you asked me to leave, and I left. I didn't break policy. Look at the game log, moron. Talk about slander, you just accused me of breaking policy without proof (because there is no proof - I left).

What kind of 'character' does your lying publicly about me about a bannable offense show? This is precisely why you shouldn't be an op - on your own argument, which cites 'character' as a core reason.

You accuse me of trying to 'slander' you when I am telling the truth, then go ahead and ACTUALLY slander me. Slander doesn't mean 'talking smack,' it means 'telling lies' - like you just did about me not leaving.

Look it up.

-= Der

derami wrote:
Umm ... Ud, you asked me to leave, and I left.

No, you did not. You made an excuse not to leave. I then informed you that not leaving is against policy

derami wrote:
I didn't break policy.

Not leaving when asked is breaking policy. The fact you left after I informed you you were breaking policy does not mean you did not break it.

derami wrote:
Look at the game log, moron. Talk about slander, you just accused me of breaking policy without proof (because there is no proof - I left).

You say 'look at the game log'. How about YOU look at the game log? (the game was never played out and I believe was killed so I'm pretty sure that game log doesnt exist. If it does I DARE you to show it to me as all the messages and time stamps will be there to show you I am saying the truth. How convenient that you cite the game log that would incriminate you and expose your lies when it cant be found) The irc logs however should exist under anyone who logs them (kat. lrll, jhood maybe) and if they cared, which most likely they dont, the conversation there would expose you also. Your lucky i cut my logs down to 1 meg and it cuts older stuff.


So yet another post from derami of playground insults, out right lies and deception. If only you were more eloquent you would have made a fine political campaigner.

This whole thing is hilarious. No other chat room on the internet has to worry about shitty little decisions like this, the admin of the room just makes op's. Pretty simple. Why are you guys bitching about something that is and will be entirely decided by lrl in this case, and your input will have little or no effect on that process? ... Nowhere else on the net that I'm aware of is some sort of whiny bullshit attempt at democracy even considered in a chat room enviroment.

Min

Ud, you asked, I left. Period. Stop lying. If you mean there was a delay (of a few seconds) between when you asked and when I left, or if I made one more comment and left after making it, so what? Talk about 'grey area' ... christ, man, you expect there not to be a delay while I finish sending what I'm saying, read what you said, and leave? It was a few seconds *at most.* Ask Redrum. Christ. You know and I know you're lying, and you know why? Because you didn't ban me at the time - you only bring it up now because you wanted fuel for your rant. You were pissed at me, and if you had caught me in a bannable offense you wouldn't have hesitated to enact a ban. Duh. It is also such a weird coincidence, isn't it, that I've never been accused of (let alone banned for) not leaving games when asked, yet suddenly not only do I supposedly refuse to leave, I do it when asked *by an op?* I wonder if you have some hidden dislike for me coming into play :?

If they wanna fight, min, I say let 'em. It's mildly entertaining anyway. :)