Important: The tag titles

[Sigma Morgan]

So few things.

It is Winner's forum, if he pays for it god bless him. He can always pull the plug when he decides he doesn't want to deal with everyone's drama or deal with someone stirring the pot, hope it never comes to that, but still keep that in mind before you decide to mouth off about the guy. Also he is probably ultra busy in real life.

I don't think having a five year long title reign is good, but none of us pay for or run the server. I also don't think having it dropped will immediately revive the tag division, that will probably take a year or two. Also the irony of a person who himself is about as active as Winner being the one to stir the pot lmfao.

I'm sure Winner probably has something in motion to drop the belt, real life has probably just gotten in the way, Winner could always just drop it now, finish the thread later. That's probably an easy solution, whether or not he does up in the air, this also isn't a Democracy, either so you guys might wanna at least calm down and not insult or be assholes to the guy.

[Pegasus]

Can we just let Winner get his bearings together and just get a response out? Everyone has valid points, but the last thing we need is to descend into civil war.

[Lunaspark]

Can we just let Winner get his bearings together and just get a response out? Everyone has valid points, but the last thing we need is to descend into civil war.

This.

He knows of the situation, he’s seen the thread, there’s no point in everyone getting heated and angrier before he’s been given a chance to respond and speak his mind.

[ThatPolishDude]

My man, you are arguing with a point no one made. We all agree something should be done but we are walking in a circle. And i asure you that winer also knows something should be done but us piling on him cause he is a big man here doesn't make it any easier, if anything that line of action has been pushing him away from the forum.

So let's just chill a little, cause right now we are arguing past eachother

That's a salient point. Pragmatically speaking, there were various issues with how people approached Winner regarding matters. Those approaches made matters worse.

At the same time, I think Winner—as an authority figure dealing with sensitive interpersonal matters—had a duty to act better. Or, if not an outright duty, a pragmatic impetus.

As angry as I am with Winner's engagement towards myself and others, I'll concede that I am culpable for how I've approached matters. I'll also concede that I've made things worse at times, and have almost certainly caused him grief without accomplishing anything positive. But, as evidenced by this thread and various rumblings throughout the community, Winner's actions have been markedly imperfect and have caused harm (see CaptainL's post for a quick example).

Like everyone's actions would be, it is kind of a none statment that some of what he did afected law negatively, put anyone else in those shoes and they'd make other calls that would also damage the comunity. If we want to speak on what has been done wrong we can't point to abstracts, that achives nothing other than flapping our gums. So far the real issue i see here is lack of consequence in action.
I also do not find "duty to do better" to actualy mean anything. are you saying he didn't try to do what's best? i find that hard to belive and if you find his action present some moral lacking then it isn't really a quantitive value so what's the point you are trying to make.

DSX's entire point was that fair treatment for all should be seen as the standard for forums. It was in response to one bolded line. How ya'll missed that and made it an argument, ive no idea.

Becouse that bolded line was taken out of context, nobody was implying that fair treatment should not be standard. I would hope nobody is assuming any ill intent from any party involved

and just as a closing thought

I don't think having a five year long title reign is good, but none of us pay for or run the server. I also don't think having it dropped will immediately revive the tag division, that will probably take a year or two. Also the irony of a person who himself is about as active as Winner being the one to stir the pot lmfao.

taking personal trips does nothing to further this conversation. getting angry, throwing insults or acusations is only going to make it devolve and we are not gonna achive anything here
Ultimetly i think we can all agree that we want law to thrive and so far we have been civil in discusion of this but a large part of recent messages is just repeating the same sentiments for the sake of just making a response while the party in question is yet to respond, let's just sit back for a moment, take a deep breath and wait, we achive nothing by arguing past eachother

[CaptainL]

I have to agree with the general sentiment here. We were off to a good start with this thread and achieving constructive discussion, but assuming ill intent and bringing personal arguments into this is just going to make everything worse. Bare said that he was impressed with how things were going. Let's try to stick to that.

[Pegasus]

Everyone just needs to drop it until Winner gets a chance to explain himself. Once he does, then we can talk more about this. End of discussion.

[Ichi]

For the sake of not derailing things too much, I'll put some of my comments in the spoiler before:

Click to expand

My man, you are arguing with a point no one made. We all agree something should be done but we are walking in a circle. And i asure you that winer also knows something should be done but us piling on him cause he is a big man here doesn't make it any easier, if anything that line of action has been pushing him away from the forum.

So let's just chill a little, cause right now we are arguing past eachother

That's a salient point. Pragmatically speaking, there were various issues with how people approached Winner regarding matters. Those approaches made matters worse.

At the same time, I think Winner—as an authority figure dealing with sensitive interpersonal matters—had a duty to act better. Or, if not an outright duty, a pragmatic impetus.

As angry as I am with Winner's engagement towards myself and others, I'll concede that I am culpable for how I've approached matters. I'll also concede that I've made things worse at times, and have almost certainly caused him grief without accomplishing anything positive. But, as evidenced by this thread and various rumblings throughout the community, Winner's actions have been markedly imperfect and have caused harm (see CaptainL's post for a quick example).

Like everyone's actions would be, it is kind of a none statment that some of what he did afected law negatively, put anyone else in those shoes and they'd make other calls that would also damage the comunity. If we want to speak on what has been done wrong we can't point to abstracts, that achives nothing other than flapping our gums. So far the real issue i see here is lack of consequence in action.
I also do not find "duty to do better" to actualy mean anything. are you saying he didn't try to do what's best? i find that hard to belive and if you find his action present some moral lacking then it isn't really a quantitive value so what's the point you are trying to make.

You've made this argument to me before. Everyone makes mistakes, but the fact that everyone will cause harm does not excuse someone from causing harm, nor does it excuse them from causing harm that could reasonably be avoided.

Just because a leader will make mistakes doesn't excuse all mistakes, nor does it render mistakes non-mistakes.

Leaders have a duty to show a certain level of interpersonal skills and accountability. Winner has fallen short at times. That doesn't mean he can't be forgiven for it, nor does it necessarily mean that the leader will fall short on the future. But it does mean he has fallen short at times.

Whether or not Winner "did his best" is immaterial to whether one acted sufficiently as a leader. I made no claims about whether or not he tried his best—I believe he has, but trying one's best does not preclude one from falling short at times.

I've neglected to give specifics thus far as I believe that it would only escalate things and needlessly expand the scope of this matter—but that doesn't mean that I don't have specifics in mind. But ultimately, while I'm not working with substanceless generalities, I have no right to demand that you take me at my word.

—

However, while I don't have the moral authority to say this, given that I've contributed to these side tangents against better judgement, I'll say that at this point, it's probably better to focus on the untimely title reign—that's more actionable than trying to discuss all of the other grievances towards Winner, even if they are still very salient in a "behind the scenes" sort of way.

I'll also say that, in all fairness, I've been too hard on Winner at times. While I believe that he has made missteps that have substantively affected others in negative ways, and while I believe that he has tendencies that are not conducive to solid leadership at times, I'll acknowledge that—in all likelihood—my approach has been incommensurate with the severity of his actions and their effects. Although, to be clear, that does not trivialize the anger that some (understandably) feel towards Winner for the title scene and (preponderantly) matters beyond it.

I'll also acknowledge that, in my chase for clarity and accountability, I have mistreated people (as Malk and Winner can attest to). I'm still very much angry with Winner over a number of matters and incidents, but at this point, I don't think it's prudent for me to aggressively push my perspective. If Winner wishes to talk to me in private and ask for my perspective, I'd be tentatively willing to do so. However, I'd need time to gather up my thoughts and figure out how to phrase things tactfully (and to reflect on what I myself have done wrong). Should that sort of conversation happen, I'm hoping that I'll keep it in mind that I'm not entitled to have Winner agree with me—even if I believe I'm right, even if I'm right, or even if I'm wrong.

(P.S. I realize that my rhetoric had conveyed the opposite, but I acknowledge that Winner has done a lot of good for the community and is not without his merits—I say this as a matter of fact. Granted, I recognize that such words coming from me might not mean much.)

[ThatPolishDude]

Ichi, I will give it to you straight, over our prior conversations and observing your need to add onto a subject we otherwise unanimously agreed we should pause on untill wniner makes his stance, you are not inspiring trust. You are coming off as self-righteous and with a vendetta against winner and i stright up find it hard at this point to trust your judgment.

So please, for the love of god, let's actually comit to waiting this time, we are adding nothing of substance to the conversation right now

[Monsy]

Please keep any future clashing to DMs/PMs.

Regardless of how we feel or view this matter, there is no excuse to throw remarks and labels at our fellow users, which goes for all parties including Winner. We are one community, so let’s try to co-exist and stay respectful if we have something to say. Tis all from me, so have a good Saturday everyone.

[CaptainL]

Well said. I think it's important to say that, while there are issues in how the titles are handled, throwing around insults and accusations will only cause more damage to an already fraught situation. I highly recommend that everyone step away and engage with something else until we get an official statement. We'll deal with that when the time comes, but for now there isn't anything else that can be said or done, and a lot of us aren't in the right frame of mind to deal with any such statement right now anyway.