[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Gxxgle's Censorious Urges are Playing a VERY DANGEROUS Game

Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent “Trump situation” in 2020 on Hidden Cam

Breakouts, burns and zingers: What to watch in the debates

How Evil Wins: The Hypocritical Double Standards of Political Outrage

Cops Accuse Innocent Hospital Patient of Trying to Steal His IV Bag, Rip IV From Arm, Arrest Him

Georgia Woman who Spent Months in Jail Because Cops Thought Cotton Candy Was Meth Sues Police Department

Artist Sheefy McFly arrested by Detroit police — while working on mural for the city

NASA wants a kid to name the Mars 2020 rover

DEFINITIVE SLAM DUNK 9.11 VID (Posted by Gxxgle's most feared "Truther" YT'er)

Oregon Democrats Go Full Dictator

Evangelical leader fails to explain why Trump gets a pass but ‘character matters’ for Bill Clinton

Trump’s promise to ‘cure’ cancer if reelected shows show stupid he thinks his supporters are

CUBA 2.0 Russia warns build-up of US weapons near its borders risks repeat of Cuban missile crisis as Moscow warship docks in Havana

Knitting Website Ravelry Bans All Pro-Trump Content

Boxed in by Neocons and the Media, Will Trump Launch Iran War?

House Resoundingly Approves Broad Marijuana Federalism

'Burn that rag!' Activists to desecrate the flag at Trump July Fourth rally

Lies They Told Us: A Long History of Being Manipulated Into War

Google Censors Apollo 11 Moon Landing Hoax Videos and Articles

Elizabeth Warren Demands Reparations For Gay And Lesbian Couples

John Bolton Flies to Israel to Apologize for Not Bombing Iran, Says He Will Do It Soon

I think I got this figured out

The Fact That Americans Need To Be Deceived Into War Proves Their Underlying Goodness

Who is John Bolton? "Tough Guy," Vietnam Draft Dodger

Dr. Marijuana Pepsi Won't Change Her Name 'To Make Other People Happy'

LPD: Woman arrested for turning in husband's firearms to Lakeland (FL) police

A Dozen Cops Swarm, Arrest Man Because He Had an Air Freshener on His Mirror

NXIVM: Founder found guilty; ties to Clinton and other prominent Democrats

Revealed last secret of American Pie - pop's most enigmatic song: Drugs, Elvis, murders and how a lost verse sheds new light on Don McLean's hauntingly evocative lyrics...

Massive Fireball Rises Into the Sky as Blaze and Explosion Rock Philadelphia Refinery (Video)

Feds Say They Plan on Drug Testing Every Single Person Attending Burning Man

Vets Who Use Medical Marijuana Shouldn't Have to Give Up Second Amendment Rights

NY POST: 'Trump hints US will respond soon to Iran shooting down drone' (Trump and Iran both being baited into war by Globalist Warhawks)

'These People Aren't Coming From Norway': Refugees in a Minnesota City Face a Backlash

WHITE HOUSE INSIDER: War with Iran planned by Trump, to occur in the Fall of 2019

White House insider who predicted Iran False Flag, David Goldberg found dead in his New York apartment

Andrew Leahey & the Homestead - Airwaves

Police State-Conditioned Jury Acquits Cop Who Shot a Therapist for Helping Lost Autistic Man

Cops Fail at Window Tint Stop After Man Calls Them Out for Being ‘Above the Law’

Declassified U.S. Government Documents Claim The West Supported The Creation of ISIS

The Jackboots Are Coming: Mass Arrests, Power Grabs and the Politics of Fear

Homosexuals In Israel's Armed Forces

House Votes Down Amash's Attempt To Stop Warrantless FISA Surveillance

Forbidden footage of actual location of Red Sea Crossing & Mt. Sinai (*MUST-SEE! NOT Hype!*)

[From 1977] The 116 Planet Earth images NASA wants Aliens to see [Too pretentious, diverse, and anti-West even then?]

'Git-R-Done': Trump opens 1.4 million federal acres to hunters, anglers

Trump fills the Pentagon swamp

Why Avoiding the Cult of Personality Is Important

Bret Stephens, Warmonger

The War Hoax Redux


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

BANNED AT LIBERTYPOST
See other BANNED AT LIBERTYPOST Articles

Goldi banned censored delete elpee

Title: Clarification requested if needed
Source: libertypost
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jan 12, 2015
Author: sysadmin LP
Post Date: 2015-01-12 10:44:49 by tpaine
Keywords: None
Views: 24188
Comments: 61

To: tpaine

Subject: Clarification requested if needed

>> sysadmin-LP -- It has come to light that I may have misinterpreted some part of your offer. If so this was not intentional on my part, I was piecing together parts of several emails to arrive at a cogent description of the entire package.

----- I asked you in my 'offer' emails to post them at LP, because you refused to allow me to comment there. --- Instead, you pieced together parts, which in my opinion led to an non cogent description of the entire email exchange.

>> Information short, what I gathered from your emails and what I have attempted to represent: --- Your accepting ownership of LP is contingent on the following conditions: --- 1. If 25% or more of LP active users indicate they do not want you as owner, (that is, do not vote for you) the offer is withdrawn and you do not accept ownership. (This logically translates to 75% approval. A vote for another option is counted toward the 25% figure.) ---- 2. You will not take ownership until a suitable moderator is selected with a 75% approval rate from LP members. --- (If you have been following the discussion thread on LP of course you already know this but I wanted to put it on the table as accurately as possible.)

------- I have been attempting (like others) to follow your comments on those threads, and and like the others, I find them confusing. Why don't you just post our original email exchange, in its entirety, and then try to explain why you decided to make this a complicated four choice election instead of simply asking the members if they wanted me as an owner? ----- If 25 individuals had voted no, that would have been the end of it for me.

>> If I am mistaken in any of this please provide a precise statement of the contingencies which I will post in its entirety on your behalf. If there are any significant errors in my reporting of your offer I will publicly apologize for my error in interpretation and take whatever action is necessary to insure a fair vote, including invalidation of current votes and starting the process over if it comes to that. Despite our differences you made a bona fide offer and it is my desire to give you a fair shake. ------ sysadmin posted on 2015-01-12 9:11:42 ET

-------- The way you put on a four part 'election' did not make it a fair shake for anyone, imho. --- But it did indicate that my ownership of the site was not acceptable for at least 25 out of the 100 or so active members. So be it...

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: All (#0)

Please, if someone would post this over at LP and ping the sysadmin, I'd appreciate it.

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   10:49:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: tpaine, TooConservative, redleghunter (#0)

Ping to tpaine's request in reply #1.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   10:51:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: tpaine (#0)

sysadmin is wilting under the intense pressure of the poll he constructed.

Oh, it's killing him!

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   10:56:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Fred Mertz (#3) (Edited)

Yeah ... who gets to bury step mother --- towel boy on the titanic cleaning chairs !

A few normal overworked volunteers babysitting FR reject mutant savage crazies !

tpaine - mrmagoo will be their pole - war god totem !

If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !

BorisY  posted on  2015-01-12   11:07:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Fred Mertz, Y'ALL, tooconservative (#3)

sysadmin LP --- I understand what you are saying, but this process has all taken place in the open and tpaine has not complained.

Bull, I've complained about his procedure since I've been posting here. And most if not all of those posts have been reposted at LP.

TooConservative--- That's harder to do when he's banned here. You could at least let him comment but not post articles. --- And regardless of whether he complains, he made one proposal only. A single vote for him and for his moderator (assuming he can find one). Not tossing in Pericles, you or shutting LP down.

Obviously, sysadmin, will not hear any criticism of his methods.

Obviously, he is winning hands down already. Only votes for you or for shutdown can exclude him in any fair assessment of the votes cast. ---- Are you really content to hand the forum over to a retread who Goldi banned instead of someone who posted steady for 10 years at TOS and then posted for 8 years here at LP without getting banned? Maybe the record should be allowed to speak somewhat for itself. ---- tpaine should have apologized for posting Volokh. But not everyone knows that WaPo purchased Volokh. I always oppose posting LAT/WaPo articles due to their litigation against TOS. But LP is a non-profit and a very tine forum, not even visible on Google/Yahoo/Bing. So the risk really is quite minimal. There are far better targets for packs of media lawyers to sue than to pick on LP. For instance, the known for-profit aggregators over at TOS. And they get away with excerpts and reach a far larger audience.

Your kicking a dead sysadmin's horse. He's convinced I did something, gasp, illegal...

The point remains: tpaine never proposed taking a vote on anything other than him and his choice of moderator and that alone. So when you keep trying to say these are tpaine's conditions, that isn't true. He never proposed a vote between him and Destro. Or between him and you. Or between him and shutting down LP. tpaine proposed none of that. You can't seriously pretend that he did. If you think he did, post his email here where he suggests anything other than a straight up-down vote on him and a moderator.

Thank you for calling his bluff.

Of course, I'm not even sure that tpaine is still interested. --- TooConservative

Frankly, I'm not. Even with you as a moderator/techie, I can see that it just wouldn't work. -- I hate to see LP go under, but as someone mentioned, LF is an option, among with thousands of others.

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   11:20:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: tpaine (#1)

Now, Neil is counting votes in a way I've never seen.

What a goat rope!

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   11:21:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: tpaine, RIP elPee (#5)

#379. To: Neil McIver (#377)

By way of further discussion, my own opinion, again, is the site should be shut down.

I agree. I have made the executive decision. LP will be shut down. I apologize to people for putting them through all this, it just took me way too long to understand that the "right thing" all along was for LP to end when Goldi passed away. I was too focused on trying to keep her "baby" going when in fact LP was a part of her and should have been turned off after people were informed of what happened. Add this to all of the personal hassle and aggravation it has caused and there is really no reason for me to continue this.

What needs to be done to enable site email and can you give a short description of how it works? I don't want to just cut people off from each other.

sysadmin posted on 2015-01-12 11:22:25 ET

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   11:26:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Fred Mertz (#7)

all along was for LP to end when Goldi passed away.

I would think that Goldi would want her words and opinions to live on.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-01-12   11:28:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: A K A Stone (#8)

What we think doesn't matter now. I agree, it's a shame.

You need to clean up your act if you get elPee members posting here. I expect you'll get more than a few.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   11:30:46 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Fred Mertz, Y'ALL (#7)

I have made the executive decision. LP will be shut down.

His bluff was called, and our anonymous sysadmin shut it down.

Call me cynical, again, --- but I'd bet the sysadmin has some connection to the gatlin faction, and seeing that they were rebuffed by the vote (in effect if not in fact) the plug will be pulled.

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   11:41:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: tpaine (#5)

My guesstimate:

- 90 percent want elPee to carry on [Options 1, 2 or 3]

- 10 percent want to shut it down [Option 4]

So, what do they do? They shut it down.

They've chosen the easier wrong.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   11:42:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: tpaine (#10)

sysadmin has been there from the start...of elPee

#402. To: Willie Green (#391)

I'd really hate to lose access to those old discussions/debates (some friendly, some not) that we had once upon a time.

We could consider providing read-only access to LPs articles as part of Goldi's memorial, but I'm not sure she would want to be remembered for some of the goings-on here in recent years. I'll discuss that possibility with Neil. But LP's time is over. Neil helped create it and he realized that when Goldi's death was first discovered. I was also involved in LP's birth (hardware and operating system support) and have finally come around to realizing the wisdom of Neil's position. My main regret is having prolonged the agony here, I should not have done that, it was a fool's mission to try to keep this site going after Goldi's demise.

sysadmin posted on 2015-01-12 11:54:26 ET

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   11:58:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Fred Mertz, *Yukon neo-Progressive Vermin* (#11)

The phony election wasn't going his way, so sysy pulled the plug.

There could be a big rush of new users here. Invasion of the neocons!


The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party


"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul

Hondo68  posted on  2015-01-12   12:01:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: hondo68 (#13)

The phony election wasn't going his way, so sysy pulled the plug.

The guy has the patience of a circus monkey.

He wilted under the pressure of his own election process!

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   12:04:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Fred Mertz (#6)

It's called the Approval Method. You can visit the link I posted on the thread.

If you're not used to it, and only used to the simple plurality system that allows you to only express an opinion about one option, it can seem odd. But AV allows voters to express their preferences to a much greater degree. And having had the opportunity to educate people about it, I decided to take it.

AV voting is vastly superior to the commonly used system. 3rd parties would be elected with it. Only reason it's not used is people don't know about it.

Pinguinite  posted on  2015-01-12   12:06:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: tpaine (#10)

Call me cynical, again, --- but I'd bet the sysadmin has some connection to the gatlin faction, and seeing that they were rebuffed by the vote (in effect if not in fact) the plug will be pulled.

Okay, you are cynical, and you'd lose the bet.

The connections he has are not to Gatlin, but to his own life and family. He's not accustomed to all the pain and trouble that comes with running a forum, including the issues of handing it off to someone else. He tried to work with your conditions for taking over, but the extra complications were ultimately a turn-off.

Pinguinite  posted on  2015-01-12   12:09:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Pinguinite (#16)

Call me cynical, again, --- but I'd bet the sysadmin has some connection to the gatlin faction, and seeing that they were rebuffed by the vote (in effect if not in fact) the plug will be pulled.

Okay, you are cynical, and you'd lose the bet.

Then why did he have such an obvious bias for gatlin and crew, and against me, to the extent that he banned me at his earliest opportunity, over some 'legal' bull?

The connections he has are not to Gatlin, but to his own life and family. He's not accustomed to all the pain and trouble that comes with running a forum, including the issues of handing it off to someone else.

He quite eagerly banned me, then set things up so that he thought he could easily win control of LP. -- When that 4 vote ploy blew up in his face, he blew up LP.

He tried to work with your conditions for taking over,

My conditions were fairly uncomplicated. -- His were, --- unnecessarily so.

but the extra complications were ultimately a turn-off.

Yep, he didn't realize the complications inherent in an anonymous takeover.

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   12:34:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: tpaine (#0)

Good Lord. For being such a massive windbag, you can't effectively communicate a simple point.

Try paring down your novel by about 10,000 characters. Simplicity can be your friend.

LP is dead anyway. All of your goofball pals will be over here soon laying this place to waste.

Kind of funny that you were such a poor choice the place votes to commit Hari-Kari rather than have you in charge.

Nexus6  posted on  2015-01-12   12:41:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Nexus6 (#18)

Kind of funny that you were such a poor choice the place votes to commit Hari-Kari rather than have you in charge.

Quit lying, liar.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   12:44:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Nexus6 (#18)

Good Lord. ----- you can't effectively communicate a simple point.

Which point is that?

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   12:47:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: Fred Mertz (#19)

Neil --- With 83 comments posted, I count 43 voters with the following breakdown.

TPaine: 23

Perciles: 6

Status Quo: 24

Shutdown: 11

With supposedly 64? votes counted, 11 were for Hari-Kari.

Hardly a consensus.

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   12:58:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Fred Mertz (#19)

How am I lying?

He was a terrible choice. He couldn't get 25% of members to vote for him.

The sysadmin chose, along with many members, to shut it down.

Nexus6  posted on  2015-01-12   12:58:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: tpaine (#21)

Status quo was a no vote for you and a yes vote for sysadmin who expressed his desire pre and during the vote to close the place.

You and Pericles combined couldn't get a bigger majority than shut it down.

Apparently Americans don't like to be controlled by a foreign agitator in Pericles or a know it all windbag like you.

Don't worry. You are here now and you can pontificate as much as you want. You will be liked and respected as much as you were over there.

Nexus6  posted on  2015-01-12   13:02:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: tpaine (#21)

With supposedly 64? votes counted, 11 were for Hari-Kari.

I just went through that thread and counted 4 for Hari-Kari/first choice.

One person voted 3 or 4, so you could make it five votes.

I stand by my guesstimate above - 90/10 or 80/20 to keep the place alive.

sysadmin and his family couldn't take the intense pressure involved.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   13:09:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Nexus6 (#22)

He was a terrible choice. He couldn't get 25% of members to vote for him.

No one made me a 'choice'. -- I told the sysadmin I would play at being the owner, -- unless 25% of the members vetoed me. -- And frankly, I'm glad they did.

The sysadmin chose, along with many members, to shut it down.

The sysadmin made one of the 11 votes to shut it down.

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   13:11:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Nexus6, know it all windbag (#23)

The ballot was rigged, and the counting was communist approval style.

One voter could vote for three choices. The whole process is as crooked as the Willard M. Romney nomination in Tampa.


The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party


"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul

Hondo68  posted on  2015-01-12   13:12:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Fred Mertz (#24)

sysadmin and his family couldn't take the intense pressure involved.

That's his story, and he's sticking to it.

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   13:15:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: tpaine (#27)

In case you are upset and want to learn something from this experience, don't talk behind someone's back, especially when you know it's going to get right back to them.

Nexus6  posted on  2015-01-12   13:18:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: tpaine, sneakypete, meguro (#27)

sneakypete didn't get the message yet. He posted here in the past until he got fed up with A K A Stone's antics.

meguro did too until Stone banned him.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   13:19:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: Fred Mertz (#29)

#436. To: redleghunter (#386)

Where can we meet if LP goes down?

LF.

Is Stone back on his meds? If not,that place is nothing but a lunatic asylum.

sneakypete posted on 2015-01-12

LOL


The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party


"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul

Hondo68  posted on  2015-01-12   13:43:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: hondo68 (#30)

Well, sneakypete is one poster whose stuff I usually enjoy reading.

He's on www.rights-right.com/ and I am registered there too. Like many sites these days, its not very active.

Too bad Stone pissed off petey so much.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   14:21:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Fred Mertz, tpaine (#11)

My guesstimate:

- 90 percent want elPee to carry on [Options 1, 2 or 3]

- 10 percent want to shut it down [Option 4]

So, what do they do? They shut it down.

They've chosen the easier wrong.

Please help me out here. You claim that 90% want LP to continue and 10% wanted shut down - that's 100%. And you are claiming that both positions are wrong with one being easier than the other? I can't wait to hear you logic on this.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-12   16:55:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: tpaine (#17)

Then why did he have such an obvious bias ....

He quite eagerly banned me, then set things up so that he thought he could easily win control of LP. -- When that 4 vote ploy blew up in his face, he blew up LP.....

You are entitled to your opinions.

Best....

Pinguinite  posted on  2015-01-12   17:20:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: tpaine (#21)

With supposedly 64? votes counted, 11 were for Hari-Kari.

Hardly a consensus.

11 of 43 voters selected a shutdown as acceptable. The 64 figure is not significant.

Pinguinite  posted on  2015-01-12   17:22:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Fred Mertz (#24)

sysadmin and his family couldn't take the intense pressure involved.

More of a choice not to deal with it, rather than an inability to deal with it.

But it is the best & most appropriate decision. To anyone who disagrees.... fine.... start a new forum. Problem solved.

Pinguinite  posted on  2015-01-12   17:24:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: hondo68 (#26)

The ballot was rigged, and the counting was communist approval style.

One voter could vote for three choices. The whole process is as crooked as the Willard M. Romney nomination in Tampa.

Approval voting, if adopted nationwide, would be the single best thing that could ever happen to break up the 2 party monopoly. It's not a new thing either.

www.electology.org/#!approval-voting/cc04

The current system, billed as a great thing for democracy, is far inferior.

Pinguinite  posted on  2015-01-12   17:28:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Pinguinite (#34) (Edited)

With supposedly 64? votes counted, 11 were for Hari-Kari. Hardly a consensus.

11 of 43 voters selected a shutdown as acceptable.

Still, hardly a consensus.

The 64 figure is not significant.

You're entitled to your opinion, and my best to you sir.

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   17:32:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: Pinguinite (#36) (Edited)

One of my objections is to not defining the vote counting method prior to the vote. If the method were known, some folks would likely have voted differently.

Note that some people started changing their votes, once the election rules became known.


The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party


"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul

Hondo68  posted on  2015-01-12   17:38:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Pinguinite, Fred Mertz (#35)

sysadmin and his family couldn't take the intense pressure involved. More of a choice not to deal with it, rather than an inability to deal with it.

But it is the best & most appropriate decision. To anyone who disagrees.... fine.... start a new forum. Problem solved.

Excellent accessment of the situtaion.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-12   17:45:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Fred Mertz, sneakypete (#31)

Too bad Stone pissed off petey so much.

Pete is a militant atheist who regularly attacks my faith.

He is also welcome here. He is also right on a lot of issues. Maybe most. He is willingly ignorant about matters of God.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-01-12   17:47:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: hondo68 (#38)

One of my objections is to not defining the vote counting method prior to the vote. If the method were known, some folks would likely have voted differently.

I'll concede that, yes. SysAdmin had initiated the vote a bit ahead of me. One could re-tally the votes in instant run-off fashion if interested. I doubt it would have made any difference, particularly since Tpaine wanted 75%.

I won't bother though. I've other things to do, and the decision is made.

Pinguinite  posted on  2015-01-12   17:52:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: SOSO (#32)

Please help me out here. You claim that 90% want LP to continue and 10% wanted shut down - that's 100%. And you are claiming that both positions are wrong with one being easier than the other? I can't wait to hear you logic on this.

Yes, 80 - 90% wanted elPee to remain alive and in operation. Votes for Options [1, 2 or 3].

That would take some funds, effort, time and energy to keep the place going. That is the harder right thing to do IMO.

10 - 20% wanted to shut it down - Option 4. That's easy to do with the one time effort...and wrong IMO.

I don't know why you didn't get it. Do you get it now?

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   19:22:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: Pinguinite (#41)

I've other things to do, and the decision is made.

Many decisions can be unmade, like that one.

But why bother?

If we all collect here now, at LibertysFlame, this will be a bigger site than LP was, with more people and more viewpoints.

And a clean slate too, for those who wish to avail themselves of it.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-01-12   19:31:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: Vicomte13, Pinguinite, TooConservatice, murron, A K A Stone (#43)

And a clean slate too, for those who wish to avail themselves of it.

Not if some get their way....and they know who they are.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-12   19:34:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: tpaine, Fred Mertz, hondo68, redleghunter (#5)

Thank you for calling his bluff.

Probably pushed him over the edge. I had a very strong feeling it was all over when Neil posted his close-it-down comment. After that point, sysadmin's comments indicated no real consideration was ongoing.

Neil mentioned that he visited sysadmin at Thanksgiving when he was back in the States. They know each other in real life. Goldi and sysadmin knew each other, maybe back in college. Neil never met Goldi in person but knew sysadmin. Then we have this post by sysadmin:

"I've been with LP since Goldi and Neil came up with the idea, helped build the first server, and have worked with it ever since behind the scenes. Turning out the lights is not an easy thing at all but it is something that needs to be done."

And what was LP's first server and where was it located? Don't post the answer but you should be hearing bells ring.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-12   20:25:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: TooConservative (#45) (Edited)

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-01-12   20:27:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: Pinguinite (#41)

I won't bother though. I've other things to do, and the decision is made.

It's done. He wanted out and he had the strongest connection with you and you only. I doubt you could talk him out of it if you tried.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-12   20:27:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: A K A Stone (#46)

Clue me in if you want to. Or not if you don't.

It's ancient history, how LP started and all that. Excruciatingly dull stuff.

I'll spare you any explanation. You'll thank me later.     : )

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-12   20:29:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: tpaine, Fred Mertz, Pinguinite, hondo68, A K A Stone (#21)

http://www2.libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=36973&Disp=21#C21

#21. To: Fred Mertz (#19)

Neil --- With 83 comments posted, I count 43 voters with the following breakdown.

TPaine: 23

Perciles: 6

Status Quo: 24

Shutdown: 11

With supposedly 64? votes counted, 11 were for Hari-Kari.

Hardly a consensus.

tpaine posted on 2015-01-12 12:58:31 ET

With 84 comments and the thread locked, I count 64 votes with only 45 discrete individuals participating. Of those, only 7 stated a first preference of shutting down the site. If status quo/sysadmin were not an actual choice (it seems it was not), then a vastly different choice would have been faced, tpaine, Pericles, or shut down LP.

That breakdown of 36 clear first preferences is:

14 -- tpaine
01 -- Pericles
14 -- status quo/sysadmin
07 -- shut down LP

As for the "approval" vote, some voters cast their approval in order of preference and others did not. Some votes, if they be votes, are unclear. The vote is a mess and the only thing clear is that the voters were not clear about the process.

That "approval" breakdown is:

20 -- tpaine
06 -- Pericles
24 -- status quo/sysadmin
14 -- shutdown

The 14 people who listed a shutdown as one of their choices and the post number.

#4, domer
#5, 22rifle
#7, Fibr Dog
#19, SOD
#24, fallujah nuker

#41, GeorgiaConservative
#55, sysadmin
#57, TooConservative
#64, redleghunter
#68, byeltsin

#73, Neil McIver
#76, listener
#78, medicalmalcontent
#81, Orthodoxa

One instruction for the process, on the VOTING thread was:

Please limit your response to this post to a single line containing one of the following options:

1. tpaine
2. Pericles
3. status quo (sysadmin)
4. shut down LP

If you feel the need to discuss the merits or demerits of these various options please do not post that here, please take it to the existing ownership change discussion.

NOTE ON THE "APPROVAL VOTE" SYSTEM. That was discussed on a different DISCUSSION thread and never mentioned on the VOTING thread.

http://69.164.197.124/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=350039&Disp=167#C167

#167. To: Neil McIver (#164)

There is something very clean about this suggestion.

Yes, there is. My plan is to abide by the wishes of the community. I am going to set up the voting thread momentarily and will put forth 4 choices:

1. tpaine
2. Pericles
3. sysadmin (will continue looking for someone to take over)
4. close down the site.

I agree with the idea of purging all email and IP information from the database should an ownership transfer take place.

sysadmin posted on 2015-01-10 13:15:29 ET

http://69.164.197.124/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=350039&Disp=174#C174

#174. To: sysadmin (#167)

1. tpaine 2. Pericles 3. sysadmin (will continue looking for someone to take over) 4. close down the site.

Won't post this on the vote thread, but might I suggest the "Approval Vote" method?

In this method, people can vote for more than 1 option. I.e. all they approve of, and then the option getting the most votes of approval wins. There's no run-off required.

It's a simple voting technique that, if used in public elections, would actually give 3rd parties much greater standing. Voting for "the lessor of two evils" goes away. Just a thought...

Neil McIver posted on 2015-01-10 13:51:31 ET

http://69.164.197.124/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=350039&Disp=175#C175

#175. To: Neil McIver (#174)

I was planning to vote for my preferences in order, much as you suggest.

TooConservative posted on 2015-01-10 14:02:50 ET

http://69.164.197.124/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=350039&Disp=186#C186

#186. To: Neil McIver (#174)

It's a simple voting technique that, if used in public elections, would actually give 3rd parties much greater standing. Voting for "the lessor of two evils" goes away. Just a thought...

I note some people are putting in more than one choice, so we can tally it up that way at the end.

sysadmin posted on 2015-01-10 18:52:13 ET

People who followed the instruction on the VOTING thread got one vote for one choice. People who chose to adopt what Neil mentioned on another thread cast as many as four choices.

The first vote was recorded at 2015-01-10, 13:48:59 ET. Neil McIver's suggestion to use the "approval" system was recorded at 2015-01-10 13:51:31 ET, shortly after voting had commenced. sysadmin's coment was recorded at 2015-01-10 18:52:13 ET, about five hours after voting commenced and 56 posts were already on what would be an 84 post thread.

Where a voter cast a vote of "1 or 3, in that order," are they counted as equal approval of 1 and 3, or as a preference for 1?

At #17, JTIDSGUY wrote:

So just who decided that these were the only choices? I would rather stick a pin in my eye than have pericles in charge of anything. tpaine is just a bit less annoying. SYSADMIN has been doing an ok job. Raise some money to keep the doors open and look at this matter again later. Maybe the new head cheese can buy an Olive Garden in a couple of years.

JTIDSGUY posted on 2015-01-10 14:30:36 ET

Maybe that equates to #3 status quo, or not.

At #55, sysadmin indicated he inserted a vote by tpaine for tpaine.

I count 64 total "votes" by 45 people, including tpaine.

There are several similar to #76:

3,1,2,4

listener posted on 2015-01-11 11:28:50 ET

All four choices are listed in preference order. Is this a vote of approval for each choice or one vote of disapproval for a shutdown? That counts as four votes if approval is counted. Such counting provides my total of 64. Perhaps it should be counted as approval for 3, 2, and 1.

At #13, AuntB posted:

I haven't been around consistently enough to have a vote, but I hope the place continues.

I did not stretch this non-vote to three votes, one approval each for 1, 2, and 3. I did not construe a desire that the place continues to be an approval of tpaine, Pericles, and/or sysadmin.

At #27, stoner posted:

1. tpaine

or 3. status quo (sysadmin)

sysadmin, you have done a good job. Many thanks to you for your efforts. But since this has become a burden you do not want,

I will vote for tpaine

Is that 1 or 3, or just 1? I counted it as approval of 1 and 3. If counted just for tpaine, then the total is 63 votes and one less for sysadmin.

At #35, JustUsealittleBrainPower stated:

3 without a doubt. Tpaine is okay....

I counted this as approval of 1 and 3.

At #57, TooConservative recorded all four choices.

At #76, listener recorded all four choices.

At #78, medicalmalcontent recorded all four choices.

The last listed choice of #57, 76, 78 was to shut down. Is this three votes to approve shutting down the site?

The 45 voters and the post number of their recorded votes.

01 -- IRTorqued
02 -- A Pole
03 -- Paul CJ
04 -- domer
05 -- 22rifle

07 -- Fibr Dog
11 -- Murron
14 -- Booshbot666
16 -- The Examiner
17 -- JTIDSGUY

19 -- SOD
22 -- Infowarrior
23 -- Dead Culture Watch
24 -- fallujah nuker
25 -- Leopold Stotch

26 -- cranky
27 -- stoner
28 -- Uncle Siggy
29 -- Pericles
32 -- out damned spot

35 -- JustUsealittleBrainPower
36 -- Izthla
37 -- RLKK
39 -- MJS
40 -- Good Ole Boy

41 -- GeorgiaConservative
46 -- Tea Party Reveler
54 -- Mister White
55 -- sysadmin
57 -- TooConservative

62 -- UaDeaghaidh
64 -- redleghunter
67 -- sneakypete
68 -- byeltsin
69 -- Vicompte13

71 -- Molon Labe
72 -- Marguerite
73 -- Neil McIver
76 -- listener
77 -- Sven Golly

78 -- medicalmalcontent
81 -- Orthodoxa
82 -- Willie Green (changed original vote at #12)
84 -- Anon Poster

** -- tpaine (sysadmin at #55 stated he recorded a vote by tpaine for tpaine)

nolu chan  posted on  2015-01-12   20:37:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: nolu chan (#49)

#57, TooConservative

I shouldn't have even included shutdown as an option. I never wanted LP to shutdown. Maybe over the long run, it will prove to be for the best but that was not my wish.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-12   20:43:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: nolu chan (#49)

You are one thorough dude Columbo.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-01-12   20:46:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: nolu chan, thanks for yet another chuckle over a true clusterfooted event (#49)

Really, I do appreciate all the effort. But thank God it's over.

(Unless TC and Sneaky man up)

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-12   20:55:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: nolu chan (#49) (Edited)

Thanks for the effort you put into this, nolu.

It is as clear as mud to me with the Approval Method applied.

I only saw 4 or 5 Option #4 (first choice) votes. Edit: Okay with sysadmin and Neil I see 6 now - just went over there again.

Thanks again. All is moot now.

Fred Mertz  posted on  2015-01-12   20:55:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: TooConservative (#50)

I shouldn't have even included shutdown as an option. I never wanted LP to shutdown.

That is the way I took the intent of these votes. There never should have been an "approval" vote unclearly implemented on another thread hours after voting started. It needed far more explanation, and it needed to be explained on the VOTING thread, prior to voting.

If sysadmin was not a real option, that should not have been offered. I only see seven people come out and say shut it down.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-01-12   21:05:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: nolu chan, (#54)

I said it was rigged too. Sysadmin might as well have been on the ballot 3 times.

Once for him, once for shut down, once if stale mate.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-01-12   21:18:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: nolu chan (#54)

There never should have been an "approval" vote unclearly implemented on another thread hours after voting started. It needed far more explanation, and it needed to be explained on the VOTING thread, prior to voting.

And the whole Euro voting preference, I think people got confused. I know I did. The election kinda changed over the first 24 hours.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-12   21:20:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: nolu chan (#49)

Vicompte13

Vicomte

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-01-12   21:55:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: TooConservative (#50)

I shouldn't have even included shutdown as an option. I never wanted LP to shutdown. Maybe over the long run, it will prove to be for the best but that was not my wish.

It's really a moot point now.

Regardless of what various people proposed in threads, it is obvious that sysadmin had grown quite tired of dealing with the site and its' denizens. It was kind of him to keep it up for as long as he did so that people could arrange to migrate or at least say their farewells.

Orthodoxa  posted on  2015-01-12   21:57:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: Vicomte13 (#57)

Vicompte13

Vicomte

I'm sorry. The error is all mine.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-01-13   0:27:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: Fred Mertz, TooConservative (#42)

I don't know why you didn't get it.

Easy, you did not atriculate your thought very well. Read it again. It easily can be understood to mean there was a harder wrong and an easier wrong choice.

Now you claim that keeping LP alive was the right choice. You are entitled to your opinion but its strange coming from one that abandon that site quite some time ago - and especially if you still maintained an account there from which you could have registered your vote.

There were very few on LP in the most recent discussion about the vote that expressed the opinion that tpaine was getting screwed by the way the vote was constructed and the representation that tpaine himself asked for a 75% approval on a four choice vote. If you still have access to LP do the research. If you don't asl TooConservative to fill you in.

From what I recall of you truth seeking is not your strong point.

SOSO  posted on  2015-01-13   1:13:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: nolu chan (#59)

I'm sorry. The error is all mine.

It's a terrible tragedy, but we shall have to endure nonetheless. Heh heh.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-01-13   7:03:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com