Banning Myself

Aw sug, hate to see you go.... From what I understand, it's not ok to link to your OWN site without permission. I dunno. I guess it keeps people from soliciting here.

It keeps people from soliciting sure, but, I for one have seen her Blog link on here for a while and I remember hearing something previously about it and that it was all hashed out. If that situation changed, I would think a PM or notice of some sort should be made. Its just wrong not to.
Just my humble opinion.
BTW-most of the site traffic from A2K to your blog Sug--was probably me using it to my best abilities to not have to go searching for the address, which I should know by now but, dont. sorry gal but, Ive always know where it was.
I would hate to think that Sug would ban herself but, I find it applaudable in nature anyway.

Sugar, this is overreaction to put it mildly.

If, as you state, your sig link was of such little consequence it should be no big deal that it is not allowed.

No, it was not added to any blacklist and no you were not banned. Yes, you are overreacting in that regard.

And if you want to "ban" yourself because someone had the *audacity* to edit your signature and make it comply with the current rules, well, that's your prerogative. Your link was removed simply because offsite signature links are not allowed without an exception granted. The aim is to avoid promotions. Yourss wasn't necessarily promotional in intent but the rule isn't about divining intent and has equal application for everyone.

I'll miss you, but I think you are being very unreasonable.

If you go, Sugar, I will miss you and your practical advice.

Re: Banning Myself


Actually, upon re-reading this part I think your post is self-centered and downright rude.

I'd still miss you but wouldn't miss this type of melodramatic and sarcastic rant at my expense. Nothing is as easy as for the man who doesn't have to do it himself. The demands for personalized explanations are nothing short of demands that others dedicate more of their time to serving you.

I thought you had already granted an exception to her?

Also anyone who had interacted with Sugar in the past knows that she rants, yes however it is neither self centered or rude but rather sarcastic in nature...tongue firmly planted in cheek and all that. Not to say she doesnt feel seriously or strongly about it however.

Re: Banning Myself


I would think it more of common courtesy but then again, Im just giving an opinion here and I realize its not your opinion and its your site and all that but, still, I find that type of behavior rude, really. I mean, She signs on to find 'edit post removed by moderator' and what-shes supposed to just say...oh okay I know why that happened, or perhaps she should bug the moderators for them to answer what a simple PM from ANYONE about it could have resolved.
Its just interesting.

And...this banner herself is just another silly thing that I think you are taking the wrong way--I find it appluadable as I have said previously.

No, actually there has not been a single exception granted. That's a clause I include when I say this because any inconsistency results in this type of thing. Now Sugar is saying the mods are "whiny gestapo" and this illustrates it perfectly. The drama that results from things like this can make the task insurmountable. Every so often someone demands that we hold their hand and walk them through each rule.

The rule in the past had been that it was fine as long as there was no call to action etc. But with newer members even this was abused and the rule was changed to having no signatures.

I updated the TOS and even made this bold. Traditionally rule changes were updated in the TOS as a policy because it's unweildly to have to keep each member abreast of this.

Sugar may have a good point about us making a better effort to make changes known but individual notices about things like sigs would make the tasks unreasonable.

She showed no inclination to approach anyone before deriding them as "jackasses" and "whiny gestapo" and on this I think she's simply unreasonable. She thinks it's fine for her acts to be impusively delivered as a surprise to others but she wanted advance notice about her sig.

She's now complaining that she'd donated $20 to the site and I want to refund it (though we really weren't supposed to be held hostage to the "I donated" card).

She demands courtesy about something so simple as removing a link when it is against stated rules. But has no qualm with her impulsive derision and insults.

Okay, at this point I think you're both being silly.

I still stand by however that this could have been reasonably dealt with by a simple PM beforehand, or at least calmed.

Quinn,

If you don't think it's rude to call others jackasses and "whiny gestapo" I will simply have to differ with you on that.

I understand that she might be frustrated by having a link removed, but I don't think it's fair to demand that advance notice be given or else she gets to hurl insults.

There are always things that can be done better. I've long been thinking of a way that it would be feasible to have an area of the site with the most current rules.

The part that I consider rude is her insults and her playing of the "donate" card. Things like this make me regret that I'd ever even made that possible and I should ahve found another way to keep the site open because back then I knew people would pull this when they feel differently.

I've contacted her to attempt to return her $20 that she's saying she wishes she had back. I regret very much that I didn't pay more attention to my misgivings about donations. It might have saved the site but still might not have been worth it.

I agree, and I wish I had the time to do it. Heck I wish I had time to communicate with a lot of people. On the unanswered list are a lot of higher priorities like my family members personal friends.

Heck I wish I had time to say hi to dlowan, we haven't talked in ages. I wish I had time to say a friendly word here and there.

As it stands I don't have time to read my PMs and emails, much less respon to them. Some I don't even see because the new ones push the old ones out. It's might seem like a simple task to send a PM to you but with the volume I have to deal with it is not possible (for me).

If the moderators wish to institute a policy where they do the individual notice thing they can do so. This will be entirely their decision because I don't intend to be a part of the moderation team because of time contraints.

But as the site grows I'm not sure that level of personalization can be maintained, even by a larger group of moderators. If they choose to maintain current policy I will understand. Individuals might not like it but they also need to consider the work their desire would add to the task.

Since that information is over on her personal blog, which is quite in the same light as a diary I think she had the right to say whatever she likes over there. She could say whatever she likes at the local as well and you know what-it doesnt matter here.
If she had said that here--that'd be another story all together.
Shes a wise-guy-get over it, its just something in the water I believe and you should simply say you cant take that type of personality...or dont want that type of personailty here, whatever.
The things you continue to quote to prove your point are her personal opinions on her own personal site, I dont think its working well for you in this defense Craven.
Its really about trying to help things come to a better way of notifying people, better communication, isnt it? Its a strong way of getting the message through but you know, its lighting the way I think.
I really dont think she would demand that you let her know prior to do doing something of that nature however, if you do have to do something of that nature I really do think it simply courtesy to PM a short note whenever you do it, not just let it sit and stagnate--that does not good for anyone and simple gets what we have here today
a failure to communicate
and reaction to that failure

Well IS there a way to get to Sugar's blogsite?

Because I liked it when I went there... I was part of that percentage from a2k, I guess!

So was I. It's still listed right under her signature as her favorite site. In effect, removing the link from the sig makes little difference. The link is still found less than a centimeter away.

Here you go: http://www.thelooking-glass.com/blog/shards.html

_________________
I've found Jesus. He was behind the couch the whole time. Edit (Moderator): Link removed

Craven--I dont see it, must be blind.
OH..you mean in her little button profile, yes...thats always been there and for me, well, I knew that.

I agree. She definitely has the right to insult me there just as I have the right to consider it rude.

I'm not trying to "prove a point". I just think the courtesy angle is hypocritical given that she has shown little concern for courtesy in her acts.

Yes, I agree with you that improving communication is a good thing. I disagree with the implication that it is a trivial matter.

Were I to do what you suggest it would take several more hours out of my day on A2K and I'm trying to cut down on the workload and can't possibly increase it.

Like I said, if the mods want to change policy and do it that's fine. It's their time.

Yes I mean the button that's linked to her blog less than one centimeter from the removed link.

It's hard to predict what will be a tempest, this was something I would have thought would be tea cup-ish.

So the alternative is to simply walk each eprson through everything. Something that if the mods want to do I'd welcome. I don't think they have nearly enough time for this but that's up to them.

So you just cut things willy nilly and edit what you like an no one else has an opinion or there is no other option out there to possibly handle it another way? I like the idea of perhaps getting moderators to have even some sort of 'form letter' PM that could be sent to someone in an instant just as this but, if you're doing the deed how will they track it?

BTW since she is talking over on her sight about her personal feelings and being more open and honest or silly and sarcastic and frankly, I believe it to be both, BUT--she isnt doing it here, dont you think that was courteous to your site in a way?
You can think it rude but you know, think on it a bit more Craven, not that it will change your mind but, you know..thoughts happen

Glad you dont think communication to be a trivial matter--tis why we are here arent we?