::::: Welcome to Web Series Today "collaborative environment"
::::: Help get LGPedia back online!!!!! <== ACT TODAY!!!!!
::::: Welcome to new Web Series Today blog "authors". <= PLEASE READ CAREFULLY!!!

Sunday, September 28, 2008

Do No Harm

This blogspot has one clear guideline: "do no harm". In most situations this guide allows a great deal of freedom. It allows each author to post what they want in a way where they are personally responsible for the content of their post. From time to time we add and edit each others posts to improve them and provide additional information in the spirit of collaboration. We allow anyone to leave comments on the blogspot and we even allow anonymous. All of this is inherent to the philosophy of freedom that grew up on lonelygirl15 "comments" under the "stewardship" of WatchingOne and was built into this blogspot from its inception.

We expect each author to live up to that responsibility and ultimately they in turn are responsible to the community who will always make it quite clear when a post crosses the line. The "do no harm" guide does lend itself to different interpretations, but it is meant in the sense that to cross the line harm should be tangible and substantial.

Examples of harm can range from copyright infringement to personal liable, from the result of the creators leaving a mic on to a massive spoiler that would destroy a series for others. Sometimes their will be "fuzzy areas" where it is difficult to tell what is in game and what is out of game; what is a spoiler and what is not. We had one massive comments flame war that revolved around that theme. In the end we need to put our faith in the community.

For the most part when the community has asked an author to remove a post for one reason or another they have done it on a voluntary basis as should be the case. On occasion a post may be taken down on a temporary basis in order to provide time to consult with the author and the community regarding the post. However it is the author of the post, subject to the community response to the post, that is ultimately responsible for what is presented on LG15 Today.

It is the balance between individual judgment and our collective wisdom that makes the blogspot such a powerful tool. Having freedom is a great responsibility and we trust everyone who is an author on the blogspot to use it wisely.

There will always be new issues that arise and it is important that we listen to each other and understand each others concerns. However in the end LG15 Today only works if each of us is individually responsible for our contributions. It is not a blank check to do anything you want but rather an invite to engage with a really wonderful community and participate in a very special form of collaboration.


  1. Thanks Modelmotion - good to hear from you, and well said.

  2. Q too bad you missed the part where it says the POSTER upon request will voluntarily remove their own post. You probably mistakenly think the part where it mentions in very rare instances a post will be temporarily removed justifies your actions. You miss the part where a large portion of the community thought it should stay. Also notice it does not say anything about removing an author's ability to post..AND it does not say anything about changing other people's status..that being Greg and Milo that I know of. You stepped so far out of the guidelines its not funny. You still refuse to acknowledge this. Let me be blunt..if ModelMotion were so quick to power as you are..you would have been removed long ago..think real careful and heed my words.

  3. LordGreyStoke, Your views have been noted. Maybe it's a good point to allow some time and listen and review, and absorb a wider range of perspectives.

  4. I have always enjoyed the "Do No Harm" Policy of these blog, and I have always thought it allowed a wide range of freedoms. Thank you, mm, for reminding us of it again.

    I have missed a lot this weekend. The addition or removal of the video and the continued support of the series is something that I will not opine on. The community will decide this and that is always the way it will be. I am sure whatever resolution is come to will be satisfactory.

    The only thing I will opine on is anyone removing admin status or posting status without modelmotion's approval. The reasons given are that Q was trying to prevent chaos. Life is chaotic at times, and the wide ranging freedom of expression that this blog allows for sometimes results in chaos. Chaos isn't necessarily a bad thing. Even though it was only for an hour, it is not anyone's place but modelmotion's to remove admin or posting status for any reason, even to prevent said chaos. I would say if the blog itself was being attacked, and by attacked I mean a hacker, but the reposting and re-editing of a blog represents a disagreement that should not result in punishment to either party. I would never take away admin or posting status of anyone for this reason.

    I am hoping the removal of other admins is not something that happens in the future. Its not the place of any admin to do so to another, unless there are other reasons besides disagreement and "undermining" of other admins.

    Hopefully, the blog can now get back to regular programming. I'm happy I went and visited my family this weekend. :P

  5. Filling the holes.

    Modelmotion's expressed ideal is for individual authors to respond to the community in a cooperative fashion. This is, by and large, how things work - there are not that many conflicts. I think the implication here is that in the case of TunnelRatatat's videos, there would have been a huge public outcry, followed by a request to the author to remove the video or a possibly a temporary removal, and ultimately a decision by the author to leave it on or off the blog.

    But the reality in this case was a little messier. There were a mixture of views for and against the posting of the videos, with various specific reasons some to do with content, some to do with possible threatening intent (which was my concern) - see the discussion thread on the "Anger" video - and a good deal of confusion as always.

    Now examine what happened. I asked the author to help resolve the concerns and he remained silent (until a helpful email exchange with me today). I asked whether another admin (who added this author to the blog) could help put the video's message into context and got no reply. I asked others to comment and a discussion ensued. Then, after 24 hours, I made the call to remove the material, for the reasons stated in it's comments, while leaving the post up to allow the community conversation to continue.

    There was some brief chaos that arose because another admin started an editing war without a moment delay or any attempt to communicate with me. That just is not a functional way to operate here or anywhere else. I did the only reasonable thing. I hit the "pause button" , communicated to ease the confusion and return sanity, and then hit "unpause" on those affected. No one lost anything, nothing was deleted (just a couple of temporary posts set to "draft"), and no one has been prevented from expressing their views. This is very much like the process Modelmotion described about things being temporarily removed. After a brief discussion, the control and choice about what to do from there was up to the individuals affected.

    Now, three days later, we have heard a great deal of additional commentary, though little on the topic of the issues raised, and much more about the process and misinformation about what went down. It has disappointed me that a vocal few members of the community have focused on blaming me for taking action where our "do harm" policy was in question, rather than on discussing thoughtfully the original issues I raised about the content, which would have speeded us to a resolution.

    I have read and responded to much of the commentary. I have listened to both the vocal few, the quiet many, both in comments and in private messages. And I have reached out to other admins as well as the author in question to get the clarification needed.

    As a result, a resolution that I hope will be satisfactory to the community, including all of the above groups, is nearly in place. I would justify my approach on it's results. It has allowed the concerns raised to be addressed, while allowing the "collective wisdom" of the community to ultimately decide.

    But I leave you with a question. Here we have a cooperative author. What should be the process if the author is someone who just wants to disrupt, spew profanity, hatred, personal attacks, abuse, etc. or simply wishes to post something that many in the community cry out against? What if the author refuses to remove the work or insists on reposting it when it has been removed by an admin in response to community discussion? Is it really the author's call finally that decides?

    Because I can think of some real cases on this blog where that clearly has not been the case. At some point, an admin has to facilitate implementing the "collective wisdom" and that wisdom itself is never going to be completely clear and unified. Often, people just cannot agree.

    The reality is messy and requires judgement, and yes, someone has to perform the admin function on behalf of the community.

  6. Can someone please give me the link to the video that started this whole mess. I want to know what all the fuss is about.

  7. L.O.V.E. is the answer.

    L.O.V.E. will show us the way:)

  8. Joe, see here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXp2QzVYQOs

  9. The next time I hear "tyranny" and "censorship" tossed around regarding LG15 or LG15Today, I will scream.

    Not a manly one, either. High pitched, perhaps with tears. Falsetto, if you will. There will be crying. I just decided that last one right now.

    Abuse of language through such exaggeration hurts me. Physically. Please. Stop hurting me.

  10. "Abuse of language through such exaggeration hurts me."


  11. Pay attention to the definition of tyranny Mr Rapp. It is totally appropriate. Scream away.

  12. Yay! Can everything be all okay again now?

  13. Good sir, I would suggest not taking the path of nitpicking definitions. It's just a dark road.

    Abuse of a word to make something seem greater than it is has become a staple of American politics. People wonder why we've gone in the tank in recent years.

    This is why. Mountains out of molehills. Issues that don't matter spin out of control through emotion and hysterics while the ones that do lurk in the dark, unnoticed.

    I'm sorry, ladies and gentlemen, but this is a blog. Or a Wiki. At best, it's a web video show.

    The rage and gnashing of teeth that I have seen in the past month and a half has grown such that I felt the need to actually speak out.

    It's simply ridiculous. It's also preposterous to be speaking on this in such a way as to suggest that the fate of our world hinges on whether or not a blog comment is kept around, or whether or not an admin overstepped his bounds.

    You, in the heart of Gustav and Katrina, where our government has failed us the most, should most of all know better to have that greater sense of perspective. Instead you only perpetuate the cycle of accusation and recriminations over something that, in the long run? Won't matter.

    We had a presidential debate last week. Did anyone watch it? Or did we spend that time to pontificate about how we have to fight against someone who may be taking too much control of a website?

    I was certain I graduated middle school. I'm a little irritated it followed me.

    I love this community. Please don't make me start saying that in the past tense.

  14. LordGreystroke422: I mean no disrespect, but don't you think that you're blowing this out of proportion just a tad? QtheC did what he thought was best.

  15. Also it is interesting to note that TunnelRat's videos have not been put back up.

  16. He(QtheC) over stepped his bounds. And No..I am NOT blowing this out of proportion. And Mr Rapp...were you not paying attention to the socialization of the country? Were you not paying attention to the proposed expansion of Government to an unprecedented levels..all for our own good...the empowerment of the Treasury secretary to have unquestionable dictatorial powers? I think it exceptionally appropriate to make use of words that are MORE important than ever..on just a small little blog such as this..simply so that people are more aware of what they TRULY mean and are better able to recognize them when it counts for more. If you choose to leave again...just try and not wake up in a field..the grass stains are a bitch to get out of your khaki pants.

  17. WELL SAID Logan!

    Now everyone, GROUP HUG,

  18. I have 3 more cents.

    This is making LG15Today look pretty awful. That means when someone comes here who is not familiar with the site and/or new to the community they will find this. Try reading it from that point of view.

    Everyone pretend you are not you and read through this.
    Perspective is fun!

  19. Wrong again, LG422. GOP gave up on Treasury dominance. Strict oversight is agreed to. The golden parachute is agreed to be curbed.

    Again, mountains out of molehills. It's being ironed out. But you locked in on something and lost perspective.

    Keep up.

  20. As promised on the "Anger" video comments earlier today, and after communicating with those involved to iron out the details, the videos were restored to the blog within the last hour. The only change is a short disclaimer/clarification added to the video descriptions by TunnelRatatat reading:

    "The videos in this series are of a fictional nature depicting a community's grief and are not intended to be taken as threatening to others."



    I hope this resolution will satisfy the community as much as possible as to this particular issue.

  21. Hey I'm angry because you guys didn't censor Jane's death video! Are you saying it wasn't realistic enough!? heehee


  22. "I'm sorry, ladies and gentlemen, but this is a blog. Or a Wiki. At best, it's a web video show."

    It's good to know your feelings, Logan.

    I'll remember these words the next time you count on the blog to promote a series of yours.

    because, after all, it's just a blog, right? Who cares if anyone see's your work on it. It's not, after all, the primary basis of your fans.

    Nahh, no way. It's just a blog.

  23. I agree with Logan. I'm already screaming on the inside about the use of "censorship" and "tyranny" in these arguments (or discussions, if you prefer that word).

    Quick! Someone make a point disputing my opinion.

  24. mm's post is a masterstroke of international diplomacy.

    and he can't even see russia from his house!

  25. A rose by any other name would still smell so sweet..and prick the hell out of ya. Censorship is what Censorship is. Tyranny is what tyranny is. And it IS what QtheC engaged in. If properly using a word to its full extent is abuse then call me an abuser. You sir however are incorrect. See, I can do it too. If you find fault with using what a word actually means and not what most people think it means..maybe you should have stayed in the field.
    Anyone that disagrees with my use of the words..examine the definitions and then come back and use FACT to support your argument..not your opinion.

    Logan as to what is going on...You state that I am wrong you seem intent on discrediting me...but what did I say that was untrue? You missed some of the qualifiers I threw in such as proposed. Also..Things ARE being nationalized..which is SOCIALISM. You suggest paying attention to national matters then when someone shows a grasp of them you attempt to discredit them further. But if we want to get into matters of credibility..we can get really off topic and discuss the way in which you abused certain trusts after Glenn parted ways with you. Frankly sir..you are at least reputed to be untrustworthy so why would we trust your opinions. Bring FACTS.

  26. I'm just glad my name wasn't brought into it again... oh, wait.

  27. and since people seem to need help...

    From wikipedia:

    In modern usage, a tyrant is a single ruler holding absolute power over a state or within an organization. The term carries modern connotations of a harsh and cruel ruler who places his or her own interests or the interests of a small oligarchy over the best interests of the general population which the tyrant governs or controls. However, in the classical sense, the word simply means one who has taken power by their own means as opposed to hereditary or constitutional power (and generally without the modern connotations). This mode of rule is referred to as tyranny. Many individual rulers or government officials are accused of tyranny, with the label almost always a matter of controversy.

    The word derives from Latin tyrannus meaning "illegitimate ruler"

    Pay close attention to this part of it...

    "However, in the classical sense, the word simply means one who has taken power by their own means as opposed to hereditary or constitutional power"

    By QtheC blocking others Admin abilities..this is EXACTLY what he did...along with his deletions etc.

    But silly me..who cares what words mean.

  28. Interesting.

    You claim this is a "Do No Harm" blog, and yet qthec's vid post with a title that attacks a member of this community stating that he engages in beastiality remains on this blog. qthec knew exactly what those words meant when he typed them.

    And since qthec hasn't removed it, despite members of the community voicing valid concerns about it in the comments, why the hell hasn't another admin done something about it.

    You can throw the word satire around as much as you want with it -- it's sick, and gives great insight into the twisted mind of the author of it.

    What a bunch of bullsh*t this post is MM if you can't follow your own rules. If qthec's actions are somehow being justified by this post, this is blatant hypocrisy and a waste of bandwidth.

  29. "You sir however are incorrect. See, I can do it too. If you find fault with using what a word actually means and not what most people think it means..maybe you should have stayed in the field.
    Anyone that disagrees with my use of the words..examine the definitions and then come back and use FACT to support your argument..not your opinion."

    1. If this was aimed at me, I'd just like to point out that I'm female.
    2. I'm not screaming on the inside at the misuse of the aforementioned words, I'm screaming at their overuse.
    3. I'm not allowed to express an opinion? "Facts" can be interpreted in so many ways.

  30. Anonymous...I want the comments to stay..I wanted to video removed..its in his private stash now...that being QtheC...I will repost it in my privates(so lewd sounding) as well.

    Silver..I of course informed you in IRC I was not referring to you MAM..though in retrospect I guess I did respond to you...though directed it to Logan..and dear..facts are good..even when you lose your ass you can still have facts...but since opinions are like assholes...if you lose your ass..you loose your opinion....::ducks the logic police::

  31. "It's good to know your feelings, Logan.

    I'll remember these words the next time you count on the blog to promote a series of yours."

    Okay, not cool Greg. In fact, it's completely hypocritical to what you've spent days fighting against in the fact that it's pretty threatening and definitely alluding to censorship of Logan's work by not allowing it on the blog simply because he stated his opinion.

    Remember why you started this.

  32. There's a difference, people, between calling out someone for doing something wrong, and declaring someone a tyrant.

    Am I saying it's right? No, and I don't know enough to say whether or not it is. But the level of anger is disproportional to the perceived sin. At worst, it's a gaff.

    The level of seriousness people take about certain things frightens me. This is supposed to be fun. This is supposed to be enjoyable. This is not the end all be all of existence.

    When I post something, I automatically believe that what I post is crap. If people like it, great. If not, well, I thought it was crap. I don't post my videos for you. I post it because I did it and leaving it in the can is wrong.

    But I don't care what happens to my reputation, here as a result of this. Calling someone a tyrant over this is wrong and overly hurtful. I'll put it all on the line for this reason alone. It's wrong. Plain and simple. You want to vilify me for it? Bring it on, friend.

  33. My comments were honest. The title was originally "I Tarzan Dogs" only, and I just thought Tarzan made a funny sounding verb (based on the name LordGreyStoke), with the idea that it approximately "roughing up." The idea came from LordGreyStoke's hurricane videos where he was travelling around with his dog, who he obviously loves, and also his extreme negative reaction to the Reed anti-cat video. I did not conceive of a sexual meaning when I created that title. The video itself mentioned slapping a dog, but nothing intended to be of a sexual nature.

    A sexual meaning for "Tarzan" was brought up in the comments (On Urbandictionary.com, the 6th definition of 12 says that to "do a Tarzan" means to masturbate) - which I agreed if it was interpreted that way made the video even worse than I intended (which was extreme satire as it was). I've never heard that expression. I associate "Tarzan" with swinging on vines, beating your chest, and yelling the Tarzan yell. To me, it's a funny word.

    During that day the video was available, I added the word (Satire) to the title, added some text to the description to further state that the video was not meant to be taken as stating anything remotely factual, and sent a note to LordGreyStoke on YouTube saying I would leave it up until the end of the day to allow those immediately interested and aware of the context to view it, and then take it down.

    This is the kind of video that is problematic even for an informed and intelligent/friendly audience, and certainly should not be viewed out of context. The whole point was simply to point out how absurd LordGreyStoke's statements about me were in his video.

    I have no control over what LordGreyStoke does with the copy he says he has, but for my part, I don't plan to share it or show it again. He's proven he likes to propagandize, so stay tuned.

    If leaving the title on the blog is viewed as a problem, we can easily edit it and leave the comments in place. It's sort of a lose-lose situation because if I leave it as is, some might find it offensive, but if I change it, others might say I changed it to hide what I originally posted.

    Similarly, there is also the issue of the thumbnail showing LordGreyStoke's face, and his username remaining in the description for the video.

    I don't really care for myself what happens with these things.

    So I will defer to LordGreyStoke's preference. It's his call as far as I'm concerned.

  34. Did anyone miss the point of the "I Tarzan Dogs" video response to "Quit the Censorship" ?

    Just in case ...

    I am exactly as much in favor of tyrannical censorship as LordGreyStoke is of abuse toward dogs, and I appreciate being labelled accordingly just as much as he does.

  35. I most definitely abuse my dog..because right now as I TYPE this he is staring at me begging to PEE and POOP. So..with this...I admit to abusing my dog..now..ADMIT to what you did.

    Logan..I will deal with you after I deal with some dog shit..

  36. LG422 - I am not your petulant child.

    When you act like an adult, I'll treat you like one.

  37. Hmmmm, just thinking about the "I Tarzan Dogs" video. It has video clips (image only) from LordGreyStoke's Quit the Censorship video, with my audio recording over the images.

    So going forward, if someone wants to argue copyright (which LordGreyStoke mentioned previously, and Modelmotion echoed in his post above), neither one of us actually has the full right to distribute this video without violating the copyright of the other. I'm not sure what that actually means in the wonderful world of the internet, but just a thought.

  38. After my many lengthy clarifications in response to his many comments and misstatments, I'm not sure what LordGreyStoke could possibly think there is left for me to "admit" to. I think he just got stuck on the labels he stuck on me.

    So now I'm stuck to Tarzan. Ewww. I sure hope that isn't something sexual, because I don't swing that way. Get it? swing? Tarzan?

    Wow, getting dumb now. I need sleep.

  39. Ok..got that shit out of the way...now for some more shit...

    Are you actually aware of what happened? Are you aware where I actually USED the terms dictators and tyrants? I had learned of QtheC's removal of other authors to this blog's ability to post along with his removal of another author's postings. If you want to speak of this being fun...and taking it too seriously? LOOK at QtheC...because that is what he did with TunnelRat's videos. HE decided they were threatening. So he removed them. Now..if you want to apply your "have FUN" logic..then be consistent and admonish QtheC for getting overboard and forgetting this is all about fun..
    In response to what he did..I made a video..IN character..and related the whole thing to the Order..and actually brought up the C's own implementation of restricted speech on LGpedia under the guise of "safety". Remember though..I did this all in character as someone fighting the order..and portrayed these "censorship" actions as machinations stemming from the order...Wouldn't tyrants and dictators be useable for them? Because I have done it in the past. In any event I hammed it up and had it up in about an hour from my getting home.
    Your concept of using words that over blow a situation..pardon me if I have a greater grasp of the English language than you do...and an ability to use more than the most FREQUENT meaning and usage of words..its an amazing thing..open up the dictionary and pay attention.. there are often more definitions that just one. Once you do this...you will understand that my usage is totally proper.
    "Good sir, I would suggest not taking the path of nitpicking definitions. It's just a dark road. "

  40. QtheC,
    I actually don't expect you to admit to anything..because you are simply wrong..and someone such as yourself that suffers from a delusion of infallibilty could never do such..because you are a dishonest person. It's part of your make up. You have never ONCE attacked what I said with FACTS that relate to what I said. Instead you have obfuscated the truth with a lot of misdirection and misrepresentation. Lets get down to the facts. I used the term Censorship in reference to you. From Wiki:
    "Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which may be considered objectionable, harmful or sensitive, as determined by a censor"

    Does this describe what you did? It DOES..you deleted material. What your justifications were does not matter...because ALL of them are covered in this definition.

    Next term Tyrant:" in the classical sense, the word simply means one who has taken power by their own means as opposed to hereditary or constitutional power"

    You removed other equal members of the blogs powers thereby increasing your own...even if for a short time. It Perfectly describes what you did.

    Dictator:"A dictator is an authoritarian ruler (e.g. absolutist or autocratic) who assumes sole and absolute power "

    When you removed other authors posts..and yet other authors team status on the blog you at least moved CLOSER to becoming sole and absolute power in the absence of ModelMotion despite ModelMotion's OFTEN mentioned belief that this blog is egalitarian in nature which ironically stays his hand from out right removing you to further prevent YOU from removing other people.

    Now sir..Answer this post with FACTS. You can't..not honestly..because my arguments have stripped things down to their most basic root. Though..like most in denial of their own short comings.. you will try.

  41. LordGreyStoke wrote in the comment above:

    "You have never ONCE attacked what I said with FACTS that relate to what I said. Instead you have obfuscated the truth with a lot of misdirection and misrepresentation."

    Actually, I've tried to correct what you have said all over the place many times, as you of course know, so I guess if I say something happened, it doesn't qualify as a "FACT" in your mind, but other second hand misinformation that you base your rantings on is solid and reliable.

    Here is one example, copied directly from the comments on YouTube, at length, from your video "Quit the Censorship."
    And as long as these comments are, this is much shorter than the information I have provided, again and again elsewhere.

    {begin quotation}

    LordGreystoke422 (1 day ago) Yeah..this FINE opponent of Censorship doesn't seem to think that his deletion of a posting by a contributor to LG15today that was debated and disagreed with by another full admin with equal footing to his own is an example of censorship. In fact...QtheC saw fit to strip this other admin of his admin power on LG15today so that he couldn't revert the deletions which MOST people disagree with. It should be noted that the other Admin COULD have done the same thing to him but did not. DICKtator.

    imdjdan (1 day ago)
    Way to take partial facts and reshape them to construct a fantasy version that totally misconstrues what actually went down. You need to stop taking Greg's misstatements at face value and look at the whole picture and apply a little sense.

    But it's become obvious that you just want to hurl more insults and malign me at this point. I was hoping for a turn toward something better from you, some fairness. No sign of it yet. You're just a flat out lier at this point. You should get jackboots.

    imdjdan (1 day ago)
    Things LordLier forgot to mention...
    The real issues raised and discussion initiated by me in the first place. The time allowed for discussion before taking any action (>24 hours). No discussion was ended at that point, just the embeds removed. The disruption and chaos on the blog by the other junior admin in question generated without any discussion that I *temporarily* halted to open a sane conversation between admins. The immediate restoration of that admin's "powers" w/o conditions, etc.

    imdjdan (1 day ago)
    It's not at all clear that "most" people disagree with the action taken. It's clear that a vocal few have taken it upon themselves to wage a war of words over this.

    How about getting off the slander/misinformation campaign wagon, and returning to the issues I raised with the content that was posted?


    {end quotation}

    LordGreyStoke, seriously, If you had just stated objections to what you heard my actions were without all the heavily loaded labels and hyperbolic language, and suggested better ways to handle things, I think you might have had more success persuading others, and it might have led to a more constructive conversation and maybe some better understanding about what actually happened and why. I've tried really hard, multiple times, to make all that clear.

    Accusing me of obfuscation for putting actions in context, and explaining more fully the surrounding sequence of events and reasons for what happened? Really? Do you think that is a fair accusation?

    It's kind of funny, I seem to recall you complaining when someone replied about something you wrote without including all your "qualifiers." What do you think you have been doing over and over?

    Speaking of qualifiers, and since the above quotations relate to other conversations not quoted here, by "junior" admin I mean junior in experience, in a common sense fashion, not some formal hierarchy that has never been discussed or formalized.

    We have both posted some insulting things out of anger/frustration. That happened, that was what we did. Okay. I'd like to get past that now, if possible.

  42. "We have both posted some insulting things out of anger/frustration. That happened, that was what we did. Okay. I'd like to get past that now, if possible."

    So say you're sorry and move on.

  43. Yep what Jenni said Q..ADMIT what you did..I have clearly defined the words you say I used to slander you...when actually..the video was not ENTIRELY directed at you..was rolled into an fictional context and towards the fictional entity of the order..and yet..when examined..the words I used EXACTLY described what you did. I have NOTHING to apologize for in this regard so I won't. Additionally..this blog belongs to the community(straight from the BOTs logic circuits to my eyes this morning) and this is an extension of that community..so with that in mind.. You removed Milo's authoring ability here. There are VERY few "Senior" to Milo in experience in this community. Additionally, you show FURTHER lack of grasp of this blog..despite your self-vaunted experience here in that you continually use the term "admin" which ModelMotion, the technical owner and original creator of this blog has strongly avoided. He considers everyone equal here, something YOU do not. I suggest this as a solution, as this bickering and bantering can go back and forth forever we BOTH give up our status here as authors/team members and never request it again and then we give up this exchange.

  44. LordGreyStoke said:
    "You removed Milo's authoring ability here."
    That didn't actually happen. I did turn off his "admin" status just long enough to send him an email to clarify what was going on, get a response, and immediately turned it back on. It was just a few minutes. I've explained all this already numerous times. Just trying to give you the actual facts you seem to want. You can attach your labels now.

    On Saturday, I emailed Milo:
    "Milo, Sorry for the *temporary* change to author only status - I just wanted a pause to get us over to email. ~ QtheC"

    (and I hope he won't mind me posting this small quotation from his reply)
    Milo emailed back saying:
    "LOL, i didn't even know you did that, because i had no idea whether i had admin status or not."

    Milo was set to an "admin" on this blog at some point, probably by Modelmotion, but appeared not to be aware he had that setting until I mentioned it to him by email on Saturday. So yes, he's not really what you would call actively administering this blog. But we do have "admin" settings. Now I shouldn't use that word?

    I think what you are really arguing, at base, is who has authority here, and how the blog should operate when problems occur. Modelmotion sketched his ideal views in the article, and I posted a comment earlier called "Filling the Holes" which included trying to touch on some of the messiness that occurs in real situations, where Modelmotion's ideal doesn't always get us to a resolution.

    Maybe if you could add to that line of thinking we can quit quibbling over recent events.

    Is anything, anything at all, out of bounds in terms of content posted on this blog? Who decides, how is that decision implemented? etc. I have my views. What are yours?

  45. "I suggest this as a solution, as this bickering and bantering can go back and forth forever we BOTH give up our status here as authors/team members and never request it again and then we give up this exchange."

    hahaha, you were added as an author yesterday, and you are offering to give all that up? Here, I'll trade you this toothpick for your house.

    (sidenote: to anyone crazy enough to still be reading this, anyone is welcome to be added as an author on this blog, just send an email request to [email protected] and modelmotion will send you an invite)

    Now LordGreyStoke, more seriously, you have been a member of this community longer than I have (by a couple months maybe, not sure exactly), although you were inactive for a long time. This means you have a long perspective and long relationships with folks around here.

    I actually value your opinions about how to do things, I'm just asking you to stop making it all about me and these past couple of days, and think about the general issues. I think you may be able to add a little needed pragmatism to the discussion.

  46. And at this point, I am going to take a real break, and try not to reply to anything else here for as long as I can stand it.

    It bothers me that concerned people reading all this are feeling incidentally hurt by the ongoing sense of conflict in a place they care about, and for that hurt and my part in inflicting it, I do apologize generally.

    Off-blog conversations with me about specific issues to do with me are welcome.

  47. "Okay, not cool Greg. In fact, it's completely hypocritical to what you've spent days fighting against in the fact that it's pretty threatening and definitely alluding to censorship of Logan's work by not allowing it on the blog simply because he stated his opinion."

    Yeah, you are right. It wasn't really a threat as much as it was me taking something in the wrong light and being an ass about it.

    My apologies for my childish actions. What can I say? Sometimes I am a dumbass.

  48. QtheC has once again CENSORED a community members work. TunnelRat's videos have been removed. Once a Tyrant always a tyrant.


If you want to become an "author" on Web Series Today please read: http://tinyurl.com/becomeaWSTauthor

For more detailed information about Web Series Today please read: Web Series Today:

For other info contact: [email protected]

Join the discussion: http://www.tinyurl.com/webseriescommunity