| Fish Tank Clan :: Forums :: Fish Tank Clan :: FT Community Clan |
|
« Previous topic | Next topic » |
| [moved] Resignation from [FT] clan | ||
| This topic is now closed |
| Author | Post | ||
| Wu-banga |
|
||
Registered Member #49
Joined: Tue Dec 06 2005, 01:37AMPosts: 1561 |
Jesus[tzahal wrote ... ] Err.. Ok um, those two PMs seemed rather related in my opinion. If Alex took the second PM the wrong way then instead of flipping shit and resigning how about giving him a heads up basically clearing up what you said (that it wasn't an insult.) If you can detect some hostility or foresee the fact that he won't give you admin for whatever reason, there is no need to beg for it or piss him off further -- it's not going to help your case. Cheers I tried to, via other PM's which he ignored, which you would have probably figured out if you read the whole thread. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| O_Mega |
|
||
Inconsistant Ownage Device
Registered Member #59
Joined: Sat Dec 10 2005, 06:12PMPosts: 1058 |
Wu, you should know by now that sarcasm, hints, or jokes do not fly with Alex. Seems you found out the hard way. It happens, but resigning was probably a good idea, you wernt going to win this one. And rofl at you and Omni 
|
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| alcosatz |
|
||
FT Classic Op
Registered Member #39
Joined: Fri Dec 02 2005, 10:30PMPosts: 1545 |
Wu-banga wrote ... I understand, and I agree with you about the Eric situation, and what I said to you on FTC was both stupid and immature, I whole-heartedly admit. There's nothing wrong with admitting a wrongdoing, but Alex, you always have to have the last word, whether wrong or right. Even if it's telling someone to "piss off" for no apparent reason. Ah, we're dealing in absolutes now. Omni--who deals in absolutes?  Clearly I "always" have to have the last word and the implication is that I never admit that I am wrong. The problem I find with your argument is that I let you have the "last word" after I told you to "piss off" but that wasn't good enough for you. You started this thread after... you had the last word, and now I'm guilty of not letting you have the last word. Remember those last two PM's you sent to me that I ignored?If I ignore you then I am wrong (see your first post), and if I argue with you here about why I responded (clearly for no apparent reason...) then I'm trying to have the last word. You've really painted me into a corner on this one! How can I possibly justify my actions when not responding to you is wrong, and responding to you is getting the last word (read as: "wrong")? Wu-banga wrote ... Now this thread was about my resignation, but you are the one who dragged in the topic of admin privilages, making our conversation a public affair. Well, I guess I can go a step further and pull out the actual quotes In this thread you named me, and more specifically a private conversation you had with me, as the singular reason for why you are quitting. You have the temerity to state that I am responsible for bringing the issue of your your failed attempt at asking for FTC admin privs to light? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that the burden of responsibility falls much more on your shoulders than mine--you started the thread, made a false claim of wanting to preserve the details of why, and yet you are all too happy to discuss the singular issue that you voluntarily provided as to why you are a quitter. The pieces don't quite fit to me because you being rejected, for whatever reason, from an FTC admin spot has very little to do with your participation in the FT community. Clearly your friends still want you here--do you need to be an FTC admin to have fun with your friends, or could you quietly be sour grapes about not getting something you wanted? So yeah, I guess you are going one step further to realize that you are falling back on your duplicitous concern over keeping the details of our private conversation just that, private! A quick glance at the details shows, to me at least, that this is exactly what you wanted. You just have to have the last word by making this public, right? Wu-banga wrote ... In the first PM, you didn't deny me the right to admin, but instead you proclaimed: Alcohol-Powered: "It's possible. How often do you plan on playing in the near future? Forgive me if I haven't paid attention, but you recently started playing FTC again, right?" Anyone else see him blatantly denying me admin? I sure don't You're right! And how, exactly, is this relevant to your argument? Anyway, I asked you to indicate what sort of level of involvement you had in mind, and you responded with: Wu-banga wrote ... correct, i've been playing quite a decent amount recently. I was also admin on the Fish Tank Rotation server when it existed, and Surf Wu-banga wrote ... Now, when I PM'd you the second time, I said Wu-Banga said: "by the way, the lack of you and fetus on FTC is...disturbing..." Implying that I enjoy playing with you guys in FTC, but you obviously aren't too quick to pick up on hints, and instead took what I said as an insult because you responded to me with this: Hooking a wah-wah pedal to a spastic colon stands more of a chance at making sense to me compared to your far-fetched implication. This is the core of our disagreement. I ask you how involved you plan to be, and you let me know that you you've been playing a lot recently. Sounds good right? This is where you fail to understand that you got a pass for being a disrespectful deadbeat. Keep that in mind. Unfortunately you then decide to send a follow up PM a few minutes later indicating your perception that my (and fetus') lack of involvement is "disturbing..." I see that as much less than an earnest proclamation of your undying desire to play on FTC with me (and fetus). But yeah, I'm the one that is slow on the uptake, right? You have to keep in mind that you were asking me for something. If you were asking for a job and queried with, "what kind of hours are you willing to work?" and your response was "I can work lots of hours, but what kind of hours are YOU working?" it may come across as, dare I say, insulting? Drop any kind of predisposition of friendship between you and I because the first words uttered between us after you abandoned CS:S for several months were you trying to insult me. Can you you tweak your perspective at all and possibly drop this idea that I insulted you for "for no reason?" You got my response of:
Wu-banga wrote ... You are way too defensive, and seem to always assume people are out to get you, but I guess if you want to live your life like that, it's none of my business. Now Alex, you're trying to make it sound as if the second PM I sent you had anything to do with the first. Did the second PM you sent me NOT have anything to do with the first? Frack me! I thought since "Re:" preceded the subject on all of them was a reasonable indication that they were, coincidentally enough, related! Where are you going with this? I acknowledge that I am defensive, no doubt. I have mentioned this in many threads and even a casual observer of our forums can realize this. Knowing this are you honestly suggesting that you can insult me, wait five weeks so, and I should be falling over myself to give you admin? Wu-banga wrote ... You acted totally cool the first time you PM'd me back, but when I pm'd you a second time about something totally unrelated, you blew your top. And now you're saying you retorted because of a "half-assed approach" to getting what I want? Well, that's obviously not the case. Hope I made it clear  Actually I was equivocating in my initial response. I saw little benefit in having you as an FTC admin for a few factors. The most prominent being your "one nut" greeting, and the secondary being that the last time I considered you an active FT and FTC regular for many months I never saw much wisdom in having you as an admin. I'll be honest and say that I had very little intention of even asking other FTC leads/ops of their opinon about you. You're pretty dense to not see a correlation between me asking you about your level of involvement, and the negative consequences of you countering with a question about MY participation in FTC. Since you're such a precocious youth and know how defensive I am you should have had an advantage. Consider that advantage grossly squandered. I've gone along with this thread for a few reasons but the most influential is that you have called my credibility and reputation into question. Hopefully people realize that this was a petty attempt by you publicize a private, and impolite disagreement about your merits and value as an FTC admin. It's purple ponies from here on out. 
|
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Wu-banga |
|
||
|
Registered Member #49
Joined: Tue Dec 06 2005, 01:37AM Posts: 1561 |
Alcohol-Powered wrote ...
Edited Tue Nov 06 2007, 09:16AM
Ah, we're dealing in absolutes now. Omni--who deals in absolutes? Clearly I "always" have to have the last word and the implication is that I never admit that I am wrong. The problem I find with your argument is that I let you have the "last word" after I told you to "piss off" but that wasn't good enough for you. You started this thread after... you had the last word, and now I'm guilty of not letting you have the last word. Remember those last two PM's you sent to me that I ignored?I started this thread to proclaim one thing, my resignation. You didn't have to respond to my thread, yet you chose to. And reveal all the details of the situation while at it. Naturally, I responded back. Obviously it isn't so natural to you, as you ignore PM's, but if someone calls you out publicly, watch out. Lacking common decency FTW! Apparently you took this thread as insulting. If I ignore you then I am wrong (see your first post), and if I argue with you here about why I responded (clearly for no apparent reason...) then I'm trying to have the last word. You've really painted me into a corner on this one! How can I possibly justify my actions when not responding to you is wrong, and responding to you is getting the last word (read as: "wrong")? Apparently God forgot to bless you with the ability to make moral decisions. In this thread you named me, and more specifically a private conversation you had with me, as the singular reason for why you are quitting. Sure did, but I didn't divulge into the actual conversation like you have (although I easily could have). I kept it pretty general, something you failed to do. You have the temerity to state that I am responsible for bringing the issue of your your failed attempt at asking for FTC admin privs to light? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that the burden of responsibility falls much more on your shoulders than mine--you started the thread, made a false claim of wanting to preserve the details of why It was a very true claim, until you decided you felt like revealing the situation to everyone The pieces don't quite fit to me because you being rejected, for whatever reason, from an FTC admin spot has very little to do with your participation in the FT community. Clearly your friends still want you here--do you need to be an FTC admin to have fun with your friends, or could you quietly be sour grapes about not getting something you wanted? Well, apparently you forgot the last time I asked you for admin on FTC. It was before I was admin on the Rotation server. You said you would have to discuss it with Omni, who said no. That was over a year ago, and obviously I still wore the [FT] tag. I wouldn't play in FTC to this day if I didn't have fun, so why would being denied admin stop me now? (it didn't in the past). So yeah, I guess you are going one step further to realize that you are falling back on your duplicitous concern over keeping the details of our private conversation just that, private! Why not? I mean you revealed it. You already let the cat out of the bag. A quick glance at the details shows, to me at least, that this is exactly what you wanted. You just have to have the last word by making this public, right? What details? Again, you were the first to reveal the contents of the conversation. Wu-banga wrote ... In the first PM, you didn't deny me the right to admin, but instead you proclaimed: Alcohol-Powered: "It's possible. How often do you plan on playing in the near future? Forgive me if I haven't paid attention, but you recently started playing FTC again, right?" Anyone else see him blatantly denying me admin? I sure don't You're right! And how, exactly, is this relevant to your argument? Alcohol-Powered said: "I can easily make the argument that you are wrong for the obvious distress you are causing your (former) clanmates as you attempt to make me feel guilty about rejecting your interest in an FTC admin position." Anyway, I asked you to indicate what sort of level of involvement you had in mind, and you responded with: Wu-banga wrote ... correct, i've been playing quite a decent amount recently. I was also admin on the Fish Tank Rotation server when it existed, and Surf Wu-banga wrote ... Now, when I PM'd you the second time, I said Wu-Banga said: "by the way, the lack of you and fetus on FTC is...disturbing..." Implying that I enjoy playing with you guys in FTC, but you obviously aren't too quick to pick up on hints, and instead took what I said as an insult because you responded to me with this: Hooking a wah-wah pedal to a spastic colon stands more of a chance at making sense to me compared to your far-fetched implication. This is the core of our disagreement. I ask you how involved you plan to be, and you let me know that you you've been playing a lot recently. Sounds good right? This is where you fail to understand that you got a pass for being a disrespectful deadbeat. Keep that in mind. Unfortunately you then decide to send a follow up PM a few minutes later indicating your perception that my (and fetus') lack of involvement is "disturbing..." I see that as much less than an earnest proclamation of your undying desire to play on FTC with me (and fetus). But yeah, I'm the one that is slow on the uptake, right? Admittedly, I was wrong. You still failed to inform me that my comment on FTC made you into a whiny bitch. You're obviously one to hold grudges. You have to keep in mind that you were asking me for something. If you were asking for a job and queried with, "what kind of hours are you willing to work?" and your response was "I can work lots of hours, but what kind of hours are YOU working?" it may come across as, dare I say, insulting? Drop any kind of predisposition of friendship between you and I because the first words uttered between us after you abandoned CS:S for several months were you trying to insult me. Asking for admin and applying for a job are now interchangeable? I must have missed that when I took a break. Can you you tweak your perspective at all and possibly drop this idea that I insulted you for "for no reason?" You got my response of:
Well, when I initially saw you was when I insulted you. You decided to randomly attack me after a supposedly friendly conversation. I'm sorry that you took my PM the wrong way, but blame myself? Negative. There are two sides to every story. Wu-banga wrote ... You are way too defensive, and seem to always assume people are out to get you, but I guess if you want to live your life like that, it's none of my business. Now Alex, you're trying to make it sound as if the second PM I sent you had anything to do with the first. Did the second PM you sent me NOT have anything to do with the first? Frack me! I thought since "Re:" preceded the subject on all of them was a reasonable indication that they were, coincidentally enough, related! Where are you going with this? Oh noes! If I didn't change the header, it obviously means we HAVE to stick to the same subject! I'm too blind to see when someone is referring to something else. Then again, it really shouldn't have mattered as the Re: was titled FTC. The first pm was an admin request on the FTC server. Was the second PM not about the lack of you and fetus on FTC? This seems totally legit to me. I acknowledge that I am defensive, no doubt. I have mentioned this in many threads and even a casual observer of our forums can realize this. Knowing this are you honestly suggesting that you can insult me, wait five weeks so, and I should be falling over myself to give you admin? Apparently joking around with fellow clanmates is looked down upon here. You've made your point loud and clear, Hitler. Wu-banga wrote ... You acted totally cool the first time you PM'd me back, but when I pm'd you a second time about something totally unrelated, you blew your top. And now you're saying you retorted because of a "half-assed approach" to getting what I want? Well, that's obviously not the case. Hope I made it clear Actually I was equivocating in my initial response. It must be opposite day then, because you showed no sign. Not even a slight tough of sarcasm. Perhaps you are just attempting to change your story. I saw little benefit in having you as an FTC admin for a few factors. The most prominent being your "one nut" greeting, It was intended to be a joke, but now I see why someone would take that remark in a negative way, and it was foolish of me. and the secondary being that the last time I considered you an active FT and FTC regular for many months I never saw much wisdom in having you as an admin. Opinions are like assholes, but like they say, no point in arguing with the boss. I'll be honest and say that I had very little intention of even asking other FTC leads/ops of their opinon about you. Then don't pussyfoot around next time, and maybe we can avoid future arguments. You're pretty dense to not see a correlation between me asking you about your level of involvement and the negative consequences of you countering with a question about MY participation in FTC. There is where your point fails to be upheld. In the second PM, I was making idle chitchat . Being the defensive person you are, you apparently thought "This guy can take a break, but i cant? What's up with that?" Instead of continuing the conversation like a normal human being, you let your emotions get the best of you and made a quick decision based on your first reaction. Like a deer staring into headlights, you apparently don't know how to avoid bad situations I've gone along with this thread for a few reasons but the most influential is that you have called my credibility and reputation into question. Hopefully people realize that this was a petty attempt by you publicize a private, and impolite disagreement about your merits and value as an FTC admin. It's purple ponies from here on out. It's funny how you consider me at fault for publicizing the situation when you brought it into detail in the first place, as I just briefly explained why I was leaving. My value as an admin is in question, yet you started a rotation server and appointed me admin status. The interesting thing is, i've been playing on your FTC server for years without admin status, even after being denied but I was quick to become one on FTR. It's obviously hard to clear up a situation when the leader of a clan ignores members and fails to recognize how to continue typical conversation. Hopefully this made it crystal clear |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Wildcard23 |
|
||
Registered Member #514
Joined: Wed Dec 20 2006, 06:33AMPosts: 1067 |
Ok. Enough. This has become nothing more than a shit throwing fest so both sides need to chill. Wu, I talked to you on FTC tonight and I'm sorry that you are staying by your decision to resign from FT but the decision is solely yours and you have chosen to resign from FT at this point in time. Locking this thread, removing you from the clan roster, and removing your access. Maybe one day you'll decide to want to be back in the clan with us. Until then, I wish you the best with whatever you are going to do.
Edited Tue Nov 06 2007, 11:35AM
|
||
| Back to top |
|
||
Powered by e107 Forum System
|
|