Caution

In addition to what John said: The automatic feature is there for simplicity's sake - nothing more. If we were attempting to scam people out of money, we'd be advertising recurring subscriptions for a cheaper price than a flat-fee or cancellation penalties / contracts (which is what a lot of major corporations do). Do some people forget that they are subscribed? I'm sure there definitely are people that fall into that category - but at the end of the day, that is 100% on the buyer. I don't have the time to go through each person and ask if they're good or not; I do, however, typically take pride in my moral compass (not really sure how some people think automatic payments that can be activated / deactivated on the user's end = a faulty compass)...meaning that if someone reaches out to me and explains their situation, I almost always lean towards giving them their money back. I can't recall a time I've actually fought with anyone about that. I check my personal financial accounts quite routinely, and I encourage everyone to do the same. If you have been missing out on $5 or $10 every month and have never noticed it, you should probably pay more attention to your finances. And, if you're using another person's card, they really should be giving you explicit permission each and every time that card is used, or that can be considered fraudulent usage. I get you two have gone off and started doing your thing at another place, but 100% do not come here and attempt to make this community out to be fraudulent / "screwing people over". I am not playing the game with you guys.

Huge thanks to Liam, Nishok, Fantastic, and the rest of the tech guys who stayed up forever making this transition happen. You guys are the best.

Also, just for clarification: I have permed Gumline myself and voted against unbans during several situations. My opinion of the situation stands with or without Gumline being one of the people involved.

After talking with BD's & the IM, I'm overturning the ban (and the warning itself). There was a bit of discussion that seemed like opinions may have been swayed as well - but, for simplicity's sake since the end result is the same, I'm just going to say that it's a veto. First and foremost, I want to be explicitly clear about the environment I expect at SG, in a nutshell, referencing harassment / sexual harassment - this has nothing to do with this specific situation whatsoever. I've worked my entire adult life in some department of the federal government (and I'm the union rep now) - so we receive extensive training on harassment & sexual harassment. Bom mentioned it in another post somewhere that our rules and expectations here at SG are based on actual rules of society, which I believe to be 100% true. At the same time, however, we need to recognize we're not in a formal environment that requires the microscope of Human Resources. I expect everyone to be allowed to play, post, hang out, etc., here free of legitimate discrimination against race, color, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, etc. I expect every higher up to look into each and every allegation of harassment or sexual harassment. All of this being said - that does not mean that we're being extremely PC or not allowed to joke around. Sometimes we investigate things that are obviously sexual / regular harassment, but oftentimes it's not. There's usually a lot more backstory to a situation. That's where confronting a person and saying something to the effect of "You are harassing me. Please stop" and then leaving the channel helps us, as investigators, make a determination that it is harassment after that point (minus somebody being ridiculous about petty crap). Without that, unless it is extremely black and white, action probably shouldn't be taken, because it's almost impossible for us to prove gross negligence / malice. Even in a situation that is completely black / white, a formal investigation (including an interview of the accused) typically occurs. --------------------- On to this specific scenario: I'm not trying to air anyone's laundry out in public, so I'm going to withhold from using names as much as I can. If you're anyone involved and you'd like further clarification or to get with me after, please feel free to shoot me a PM. I watched a 17 minute video - not just listened, but physically watched the chat in a private game. In the video, which was the spark of the aforementioned warning PM, I observed admitting to intentionally trying to get Gumline banned, refusing to leave to another channel when prompted by someone else to avoid Gumline, intentionally trying to engage in conversations with him in order to get him to admit to saying something (that really wasn't even bad to begin with), and a few other less-than-desirable actions. I think there were some parts that were dumb to complain about, some parts where 'feeling the room' should have occurred, and some parts where the issue was confronted and resolved...ish. There was also a BD sitting in the channel, actively engaged in the conversation - if there was legitimate harassment occurring, messaging the BD on the side to say something if you're afraid or nervous to confront the individual directly would have worked wonders. The 'official' warning under threat of ban that Gumline received is overturned for the aforementioned reasons. After the fact, he joined a channel that had the user in it. The warning PM received by him was not clear in mentioning to avoid joining any channels, it simply said to avoid contact (which could go either way, because it doesn't really specify what that means). When asked if he had received this PM, he said he did not. There was no read-receipt, no verbal confirmation, Gumline was never pulled into a Discord channel to discuss the situation, etc. I find it just as likely to not be received as it is to be received - meaning tie goes to Gumline. There's no reasonable expectation nor trend of established forum activity to warrant thinking it is more likely to be received than not to be received. Gumline's response is what got him permed, which was probably not the best response, but didn't warrant a ban either way because it was determined that he might not have gotten the warning to begin with. No one needed to engage with him beyond 'Here is your warning - you've been served'. The permanent ban Gumline received is overturned for these reasons. ------------------------ To the people involved: Stay the fuck away from Gumline. Gumline: Stay the fuck away from them. To everyone else: If someone is harassing you, do everything in your power to inform the person harassing you, remove yourself from the situation, and then report. Do not stay and engage. This is not saying that the harassers get to roam free while people being harassed are force to succumb - what it's doing is providing you with all the ammunition you need. If you can come to us and say 'I told this person he was harassing me, I told him to stay away, I left the channel, and he keeps following me around...', odds are that's enough to punish in some capacity. If my expectations are unclear, please let me know.

Here's a down and dirty form. I plan on adding a bit more to it later, but it does the job for now, especially for those who can't make it tomorrow. Yes, you could just send me a PM, but I'd like to make this more accessible to the general public and a tool for more people to use / see as an option. It is completely private and sent to only me. To clarify: it’s private in the sense of it is between you and me. It is not an anonymous submission, however.

Hey everyone, There will be a community meeting tomorrow, June 15th, at 12 PM PDT (daylight savings time, yo) in Discord . In this meeting, I will be specifically gathering thoughts on the honorary system - having an open dialogue on this is way easier than doing back and forth posts that repeat the same exact information. I'm curious on what thoughts are of where it stands now, why those with issues have certain issues, etc. I will also be gathering thoughts on the switch to Discord as well. So if you are neither here nor there about the honorary system change / the switch to Discord, feel free to skip this meeting. I don't think there's a whole lot else to brief, but I will be adding a suggestion form to be sent directly to my inbox, and my inbox alone. Standby for that. In the meantime, if you can't make the meeting - feel free to PM me your thoughts. I will read them during the meeting and respond with my thoughts to them, and give you an IOU for a TS conversation at a later date. If anything, this is really more of an open dialogue between me and the rest of you guys about some of these changes. Not so much of a meeting where we're briefing stuff.

you should not buy a v6 mustang

been a year or so since this pic was taken, but I have the other arm basically done now too. would have had it done, but pandemic and whatnot. moving onto the legs shortly after.

we’ll need hydrogen chloride, muriatic acid, and caustic soda

I take melatonin. ZZquils gummies are pretty good. That or copious amounts of whiskey. I usually only average 5-6 hours.

I could turn it around and say the exact same thing about you though lol. To me, it's you saying that you're unable to grasp any other concept beyond it being a slap in the face to you. Several times now I have mentioned my personal opinion on specific matters, but me not caving to the claims of bias and a popularity contests won't be entertained as me not seeing any other possible way lol. At this point, I'm almost entirely for removing LG and Vet alike, leaving nothing but HG.

Personally, no. I don't think Grandfather clauses are remotely a good way to go about business, mainly because we'd have a million different ranks with a million different permissions, because every time we do a change, there would be a grandfather clause. At that point, I'd rather just get rid of LG and RS, then give everyone HG (which is what used to happen).

.

That's not really the way it worked, nor was it cut and dry. I'm actually not sure what you're talking about whatsoever, because after RS, LG has always been a BD determination of who got what, and it was based on several factors that had nothing to do with a popularity contest. People absolutely still see that they helped the community become better; that's the entire point of the recognition ranks in general, whether it's HG / LG / Vet. LG was absolutely given as a thank you, but our gratitude does not start & stop at what permissions or pretty colors we give. We're not going to completely disallow any type of change whatsoever to the rank just to make sure people feel extra thanked. That's like me getting butthurt if Applebee's gives Veteran's discounts, then later stops. Even the BD rank was redone a decent amount to better fit our needs and the direction that we want to go in as a whole.

Not really a point to argue with you then if you can't see it another way. The example I used of restructuring the AO rank is generally about the same. Yes, both situations had powers removed, but both groups were focused in a more specific direction, as opposed to arbitrarily giving people things that may not align with the direction that we want the community to go on, just because 'well that's how it's been for the last x amount of years'. And, to be technical, LG was actually given additional powers (basically the same as a CA, to include access to the CA section).

As mentioned in my previous post, I'm not going to go in depth about who did what to deserve this rank or that rank. There is a lot that most people don't know about that I will not air in public - save for said person going around and openly discussing it, which is a different ballgame and forces us into a position where we have to respond usually, which nobody wants to do. I don't want to put anybody down or air anyone's past in public if it can be helped, because a lot of it just isn't appropriate. While complete objectivity in any situation is generally impossible, it's something that we strived for here. Beyond saying that we didn't take into account personal relationships and friendships, there's not a whole lot that I can say to prove that. It can either be accepted or rejected, which the community members will have to make their own determination on. Anyone that was around in the past that the rest of the BD's did not know about (Henda, Broncoty, mNote, Litkey, etc.), I either made the call myself or filled everyone in on generally what they did, and we made a determination from there. There are plenty of people that I am personally friends with not at LG, as well as people I don't care for at LG. Personal bias is impossible to 100% avoid, but we do try our best. I actually recuse myself entirely (not abstain) from certain votes if I know that I'll hold a bias in the vote. Not just with this situation, but in general as well.

Hello everyone, I've still been pretty busy at work with this whole pandemic thing, so haven't had a whole lot of time to dedicate here lately it seems. I just wanted to touch base real quick on this change and respond to a couple of things that were mentioned, without getting too in-depth. I am, however, going to lock this thread. This was meant to serve as an announcement, and not really a 'let's hear your feedback' thread. I don't have an issue with people offering their insight / input / memes at all, but that should be taken to another thread in another section. That way, it's kept a bit more serious and can actually have people posting pure input, instead of half memes half input. I think this thread needed a bit of input from a BD though before the conversation carries elsewhere. While I'm not the best person to lead the press conference for this, I figured I should respond a bit to a few things so we're all somewhat on the same page. A lot of this is just my personal opinion. Prez brought up a great point about getting out of the 'if it isn't broken...' mindset. That's simply not how every aspect of every angle of life works (and I would argue that most parts of SG aren't looked at with this mindset). Sometimes, things need to be improved upon, expanded, reworked completely, scrapped, etc. This was deemed as one of those things. I'm not really sure how many times in the past we've reworked, whether on the front-end or the back-end, the general concept of an honorary rank - HG, LG, RS, etc. Ranks have been brought back, scrapped, tweaked, etc: I'd guess somewhere around a dozen. Sometimes it's random, and someone happens to come up with an idea and we sort of run with it, and other times it's because we're doing a bit of an overhaul on ranks (sort of like we are now). So I will tell you right now that the argument of 'if it isn't broken...' is not going to hold weight in the majority of circumstances. Red pill: I am forever grateful for the work that old-schoolers and new-schoolers alike have poured into this place over the years. Whether it is an admin who has dumped in a ton of hours administrating a server, a CA who busts their ass in meetings, etc - all the work here is appreciated. That, however, does not mean you are immediately and forever automatically entitled to admin forever. I'm not really sure where that notion comes from - but I want to make that extremely clear: you are not, in any way / shape / form, entitled to permanent administrative powers on the servers. The time that you have put sacrificing away from families, work, school, or just because you are bored, was not done under the illusion of being promised admin powers forever. We happened to have a rank (LG) that granted this power to everyone, because we figured 'why not', and never bothered reworking the system since the last time RS went to LG because it never got brought up. Now that we are redoing ranks, it made sense when the topic was brought up about re-doing the LG system. A lot of you bringing up how enraged you are haven't touched a server in months / years. On top of that, if some of you really want to go in-depth about the work you put in: I've been around for a pretty decent amount of time, and was privy to seeing some of the 'work' (or lack thereof) that was put in. The demotion discussions, the missed promises, the punishments, etc. I'm not going to go more in-depth than that because I don't want to discredit anyone's actual work they did put in here: just know that some of the names I've read in these threads either saying certain things themselves or just being mentioned by another...there are oftentimes a lot that you do not know on the back end of things and a lot of dirty laundry that I don't particularly care to air in public. You being trusted at a certain rank years ago has literally zero to do with being trusted with administrative powers on the server today; those two things are apples and oranges. People with administrative powers on the servers are, typically, expected to maintain a certain level of activity, and actually be involved with forum discussions for any type of rule changes. While this definitely does apply to a few LG's, 98% fall into the category of not meeting the standard criteria of what we typically require. Even I go onto subforums / read the MOTD in depth before playing on a server I haven't touched in awhile - or I just don't use admin powers unless it's against one of the universal SG rules. It has nothing to do with 'well you trusted me at one point so I am forever trusted'. Well...no, not really. I may trust that you're a nice guy, can come on the forums without being an ass, etc., but that trust does not blindly extend to you administrating servers when you haven't even been around in years. That's not saying I don't personally trust anyone falling into that category - but moreso it's not just a giant blanket of trust for anything and everything relating to admin powers. As mentioned above, we just had a rank where people just sort of landed into permanent admin powers. After evaluating the discussion brought up weeks ago and then this thread in recent terms, I would rather just see admin removed entirely from LG as well. I have no idea where the notion came that people were entitled to admin forever, but I just want to cut extremely to the point and point-blank say that has not, is not, never has been, never will be, the case. Every aspect of this community is flexible and open to the possibility of change, at any point in time, in any capacity. I'm sorry that some of you guys viewed this as a demotion, but it's not meant to be. The same way that when we moved from AO to AT, it wasn't an AO demotion - it was the Board moving the community into another direction that is overall thought of as being right. Nobody likes to have powers removed - in any capacity, so I get it. However, you have to understand that us giving you admin powers on the servers is not the only possible way for us to give you recognition. If you think that it is, I'm not quite sure what to tell you. What I can say, however, is I will never, ever personally support giving someone admin for life after reading this thread and seeing how many people think that it is entitled because you put in work here. I would rather it just be removed and us give it back on a case-by-case basis for those old-schoolers who do want to come back and administrate for a bit. Once again, thanks to everyone over the years for your work. I genuinely do appreciate it. Our appreciation, however, does not start & end based on the amount of permissions we give you here.

I noticed that you're not a fan of ceilings - broken / overcast layers. Personally, I prefer broken layers. They're very easy to visually observe, and make everything a little more dark without being completely covered and becoming overcast. A scattered layer is okay, I suppose, but only if it's leaning closer to the 5/8's obscuration. Not a huge fan of 1/8's obscuration.

still going to work. not a whole lot has changed for me other than work schedule. basically 5 days on, 5 days off, but still paid as normal. can't complain.

During the formation of ZM / SG, the 2008 election was going on. There were legitimately admins who would enforce a ‘no politics’ thing on the server, especially when it was closer to election time. I think there’s merit to it, to an extent: meaning when the conversations get hostile (they usually do), I don’t have an issue with an admin telling people to drop it. But a flat-out ban on anything mentioned politically is dumb. If it distracts from gameplay then I encourage admins to use their discretion.

'Death' is the only one that I know of that's public knowledge...outside of that I can't say much.

Get to talk to them a lot. They’re cool planes.

Gonna lock this as well so the PB overlords can (maybe? If it’s actually needed?) further clarify in a separate post on rule updates. You can literally just change the text to them not being able to give orders, short of dropping weapons (yes, say weapons, because if you just say guns then eventually someone will say that grenades don’t count). Arguing in the first place that telling someone to drop a weapon is a special order is so ludicrous lol. It’s not a special order; it’s an order. Lmao