Guess what moody jerk we all know got pwned?

[Armin]

...do a search on his recent posts...

The most common flaw in the ideology of voting principles among members within x86 is how people believe someone needs to do a specific deed of wrong doing to deserve to be voted out. Someone with a consistently negative, unproductive attitude, or even ignorance and stupidity can cause much more harm to the health of the community than a person who broke a single rule, no matter how 'important'.

A great example of this would be the voting out of Zorm. Yes, he broke a very necessary forum rule by sharing private member forum information with a non-member. The real question is: did he inflict more harm upon the community's reputation than Ersan, or even Gamesnake? The answer is obviously no. Yet, people are willing to defend Ersan and Gamesnake by saying something such as (not making any direct quote in order to maintain the privacy of the member forum), "He didn't do anything wrong. The issue at hand isn't a good reason for voting him out."

More people need to start looking at the bigger picture.

[Joe]

I didn't say he didn't do anything wrong. The reason we voted him out is because he got in and went inactive and didn't come back for a very long time.

[Armin]

I didn't like him either, but you almost make it sound like he was voted out for doing something wrong.

I didn't say he didn't do anything wrong. The reason we voted him out is because he got in and went inactive and didn't come back for a very long time.

Anyways, I think you need to learn how to read underlying reasons better. The reasons a few people hid behind the whole inactive thing were political. Otherwise, c0ld would've been kicked out too for being far more inactive.

[Blaze]

I didn't like him either, but you almost make it sound like he was voted out for doing something wrong.

I didn't say he didn't do anything wrong. The reason we voted him out is because he got in and went inactive and didn't come back for a very long time.

Anyways, I think you need to learn how to read underlying reasons better. The reasons a few people hid behind the whole inactive thing were political. Otherwise, c0ld would've been kicked out too for being far more inactive.

Actually, if you've been watching lately, c0ld has been online a lot.  Not posting, though.  :P

[Armin]

Actually, if you've been watching lately, c0ld has been online a lot.  Not posting, though.  :P

Not at the time of the vote. Hence the past tense of my statement. :P

[Networks]

...do a search on his recent posts...

The most common flaw in the ideology of voting principles among members within x86 is how people believe someone needs to do a specific deed of wrong doing to deserve to be voted out. Someone with a consistently negative, unproductive attitude, or even ignorance and stupidity can cause much more harm to the health of the community than a person who broke a single rule, no matter how 'important'.

A great example of this would be the voting out of Zorm. Yes, he broke a very necessary forum rule by sharing private member forum information with a non-member. The real question is: did he inflict more harm upon the community's reputation than Ersan, or even Gamesnake? The answer is obviously no. Yet, people are willing to defend Ersan and Gamesnake by saying something such as (not making any direct quote in order to maintain the privacy of the member forum), "He didn't do anything wrong. The issue at hand isn't a good reason for voting him out."

More people need to start looking at the bigger picture.

In reference to the Zorm issue:

Yes he did inflict more harm upon MY reputation as he let TehUser frame me. At the time I was part of the community as well. What's done is done though, I really couldn't careless at this point--we all move on =)

[Falcon]

Eh I didn't think Ersan was a bad guy, he was nice to me at least.

[Warrior]

oh good lord, look at young warrior in that vL thread.

[Sidoh]

I think he was a dick to anyone who was even implicitly threatening to his intelligence or abilities.  That's probably true of a lot of people, but he reacted especially violently in this respect.  Sometimes he was OK, others he just outright tried to start conflicts with me.

I'm not glad this happened to him, but I can't say that it bothers me any. :)

[Blaze]

I think he was a dick to anyone who was even implicitly threatening to his intelligence or abilities.  [..]  Sometimes he was OK, others he just outright tried to start conflicts with me.

I see what you did there!  ;)

[CrAz3D]

I think he was a dick to anyone who was even implicitly threatening to his intelligence or abilities.  [..]  Sometimes he was OK, others he just outright tried to start conflicts with me.

I see what you did there!  ;)

I got confused and thought he was talking about Rule.  Oh well.

[Warrior]

I think he was a dick to anyone who was even implicitly threatening to his intelligence or abilities.  [..]  Sometimes he was OK, others he just outright tried to start conflicts with me.

I see what you did there!  ;)

bahahahaha

[Joe]

I think he was a dick to anyone who was even implicitly threatening to his intelligence or abilities.  [..]  Sometimes he was OK, others he just outright tried to start conflicts with me.

I see what you did there!  ;)

I got confused and thought he was talking about Rule.  Oh well.

And you wonder why he's a dick to you.

[Sidoh]

I got confused and thought he was talking about Rule.  Oh well.

The difference there, though, is that Rule is extremely intelligent.  Ersan was insecure; I don't think Rule is. :P

I think he was a dick to anyone who was even implicitly threatening to his intelligence or abilities.  [..]  Sometimes he was OK, others he just outright tried to start conflicts with me.

I see what you did there!  ;)

It didn't take much, lol.  There were a couple of times that I... let's just say "not implicitly" threatened him, lol.

Ersan has a good mind for business and lots of technical knowledge, but I think his lack of interest in the nature of the subject and his abundance of interest in more materialistic results (ie fame, money, power) made it harder for him to keep up with other people who's allocations were reversed.

[Joe]

So, to build off of what Sidoh is saying, materialistic people suck and will get owned, whereas FSF roxx.