DMA Recall Discussion for the Plebes Who Cannot Vote

[Killthorne]

No offense, but I am glad I don't have the time nor interest anymore to be bothered with crap like this.

Honestly, peeps devoted to ALFA politics are like underwear in a never-ending spin cycle of a front-loading, glass-door washing machine. I smack myself to this day for ever getting that close or involved.

But perhaps I'm just opening the shades on the windows, to the sunlight that should be pouring into this dusty, stale room.

~Killthorne~

[Mikayla]

Mayhem:

I'd just like ot point out that dragging up issues from before the vote is totally irrelevant to the recall.

I disagree. Each voter will determine what is relevant to their decision for themselves - however, in my opinion, Rusty's track record is *the* issue. His track record of confrontation, unwillingness to compromise, rudeness, driving people off, playing games with people and servers, etc. etc. ad nauseum etc. As I mentioned before, if you take each incident in isolation, none is enough to justify a recall alone, and that is precisely how Rusty has gotten this far, but for this recall, I strongly urge the voters to look at the entire track record - two recall attempts, a resignation in anger, followed by a self-nomination, and all the various incidents on Rick's list and Wynna's list. On balance, Rusty causes more grief and drama as an Admin than he is worth as an Admin. Drama after drama after drama. At some point, enough is enough and hopefully that point is now.

[Misty]

Killthorne!

your sig. esplain, pls?

[Mayhem]

There is a vote.

Rusty wins.

There is an attempt to recall.

Rusty wins.

There is going to be another attempt to recall.

What, are the disgruntled minority going to be allowed to have as many recalls as they like until they finally win?

Maybe that isn't how it really is, but it is how it looks from the outside. Right now, you'd have to be a masochist to stand for DMA as apparently if anyone doesn't like you they can ask for a recall on a monthly basis until they get their way.

And I say minority, because clearly if they were the majority there wouldn't have been 2 wins already. "Oh noes, but they were all Rusties cronies"? For a guy thats as much as an ass as is claimed, its pretty impressive for him to have enough friends to block the vote...

[Swift]

What, are the disgruntled minority going to be allowed to have as many recalls as they like until they finally win?

Id agree with you if the result was the same, but the first recall failed to get the support it needed, while this one has and will go to a vote just as soon as Rusty gets back, or when he has been gone for long enough (whatever that period is)

And I say minority, because clearly if they were the majority there wouldn't have been 2 wins already. "Oh noes, but they were all Rusties cronies"? For a guy thats as much as an ass as is claimed, its pretty impressive for him to have enough friends to block the vote...

Maybe it still is a minority, but if that is the case, please enlighten us all on why this recall motion has been carried to a full vote while the previous did not get enough Admin/HDM support to move forward?

[MShady]

I'd also point out that the dude is not here, Mayhem...

How long are we supposed to wait? He's been gone for close to a month without word. Any Admin with a GOOD track record would be in this position if they left without warning like this...

Rusty's name under the DMA slot is not enough. We need an actual person. The DMA position would become be a "Weekend at Bernie's" parody.

[Zelknolf]

No, it isn't a criminal court, but if this really is a question of "whether or not the DMA remains fit to do his job" then we are presumably starting from the point that at the time of the vote, he WAS considered fit to do the job, past behaviour notwithstanding. If he wasn't, he presumably wouldn't have been voted in.

This is an erroneous assumption; someone who isn't considered fit for a position can very easily get an admin office. Said person need only have opposition (so that he needn't pass a vote of confidence) and be a better option than said opposition.

As you say, you look in from the outside, and do so with many guesses and assumptions. If the recalls really are ridiculous, they'll not pass. I would not attempt to silence peoples' ability to make those recalls, personally, even if they are frivilous and unneeded; they don't have any impact on the DMA's capacity to perform his duties unless they pass. (Unless he's at home crying about the complaints, and that's the reason for his absence -- you'd understand if I said that didn't seem like Rusty. I would bet it's a matter of his being severely waylaid by RL.)

[psycho_leo]

What, are the disgruntled minority going to be allowed to have as many recalls as they like until they finally win?

Or until he stops giving them reason. I have a very hard time believing the reason for these recall attempts is simply "I hate Rusty". If you really believe he still has the majority of votes among DMs and staff heads, then he'll still be DMA after it gets to a vote. In fact he doesn't even need a simple majority, as the charter says you need 60% of the votes for the recall to pass.

[Marklos]

I will never run for any office in ALFA's Admin. Thankless, loveless, tireless, and endless.

As far as history is concerned, I disagree with my darling Mikayla, this recall is not about history, but about his absence in a position that requires attention on a daily basis. That is why Ava was recalled. That is why Squams was recalled. Not because they were jerks to people, though Ava's was more personal, but because they were absent.

Read FIs recall post. I read it and what I took away was it was about his absence. Period.

I uphold that it is not about his history. That is why the motion got the support it needed. We need a DMA, not a vacancy.

[psycho_leo]

I will never run for any office in ALFA's Admin. Thankless, loveless, tireless, and endless.

As far as history is concerned, I disagree with my darling Mikayla, this recall is not about history, but about his absence in a position that requires attention on a daily basis. That is why Ava was recalled. That is why Squams was recalled. Not because they were jerks to people, though Ava's was more personal, but because they were absent.

Read FIs recall post. I read it and what I took away was it was about his absence. Period.

I uphold that it is not about his history. That is why the motion got the support it needed. We need a DMA, not a vacancy.

I would like to point out that the motion to recall was made based on Rusty's inability/refusal to carry out his duties for the month and a half prior to his absence with regard to the Warlock/Favored Soul issue. This is a continuance of the issues that have been at the heart of much of the issues many have had with Rusty. That Rusty has been absent for the past two weeks has less to do with this recall than may be assumed.

Let us not get hung up on the fact that Rusty has been away for two weeks. That is an aside that may or may not accent the point that is being made.

The Favored Soul/Warlock issue has been on the plate for two MONTHS. In the month and a half before Rusty's absence, Rusty has allowed the issue to go beyond the deadline given by his Head of Standards without pushing it within his team or giving an exlpanation to the community as to why it is taking so long.

The first bit as taken from her annoucement post in the general discussion forum, the second is from the recall poll thread in the Admin forum. Some votes may be based solely on his absence, but it's not what this recall is about.

[Marklos]

Apparently, what I took from it was wrong. Oh well.

Look at my post count and tell me if that is an indicator of how much I interact on the forums anymore.

[psycho_leo]

Look at my post count and tell me if that is an indicator of how much I interact on the forums anymore.

That's right mister! Get off the internetz and go back to the toolset.

[Mikayla]

Marklos:

As far as history is concerned, I disagree with my darling Mikayla, this recall is not about history, but about his absence in a position that requires attention on a daily basis.

Actually what I said was that each voter will decide for themselves what is relevant to their decision. In my case, Rusty's entire history would be relevant - maybe not so for others. Or maybe so.

Mayhem

There is a vote.

Rusty wins.

There is an attempt to recall.

Rusty wins.

There is going to be another attempt to recall.

What, are the disgruntled minority going to be allowed to have as many recalls as they like until they finally win?

Your pseudo time line is leaving out some important events:
There is a vote.

Rusty wins.

Rusty bullies someone/creates drama/acts like a jerk/etc.

There is an attempt to recall.

Rusty wins.


Rusty bullies someone/creates drama/acts like a jerk/etc. and/or disappears.

There is going to be another attempt to recall.

The disgruntled, be they a minority or majority, will keep having recalls until Rusty starts treating his fellow ALFAns with a decent level of respect. or until they flip from being the minority to the majority in which case the recall will pass.

[Mayhem]

Your pseudo time line is leaving out some important events:
There is a vote.

Rusty wins.

Rusty bullies someone/creates drama/acts like a jerk/etc.

There is an attempt to recall.

Rusty wins.


Rusty bullies someone/creates drama/acts like a jerk/etc. and/or disappears.

There is going to be another attempt to recall.

The disgruntled, be they a minority or majority, will keep having recalls until Rusty starts treating his fellow ALFAns with a decent level of respect. or until they flip from being the minority to the majority in which case the recall will pass.

Well, here's the thing. This thread is giving no sense of the incidences of bullying/jerkism that occured after the first recall attempt. The vast majority of anti-Rusty posts are bringup up stuff pre-recall, and in many cases pre-vote, hence my original concern about "is there anything actually new happening here, or is this the same old grudges getting recycled ad-infinitum until they win?

Now, an absence is a good and valid reason for a recall, and I assumed from the way folk were posting we were talking about a month or more - but the somebody mentions a mere 2 weeks?

Either way, it rather seems that most people don't feel the absence is relevant, its just another way of getting to have another go at Rusty for the same reasons as before, with a thin veneer of "no, its because he is absent, honest" painted over the top.

As you say, you look in from the outside, and do so with many guesses and assumptions.

Yup - but then, if you didn't want people doing that, why put this in the public forum whilst simultaneously NOT providing the actual, solid motives behind the recall?

[psycho_leo]

Yup - but then, if you didn't want people doing that, why put this in the public forum whilst simultaneously NOT providing the actual, solid motives behind the recall?

The reasons for the recall motion were specified in the recall thread, but assuming that everyone will base their vote solely on those is pretty naive.

Stuff like the good things Rusty brought to the table will surely be important for those that decide against the recall, as much as his track record of being rude and uncompromising will be important for those that do support it.

If you want to dismiss his disfavorable track record as basis for voting against him you'd have to dimiss the good parts as well and folks would have to vote solely on the grounds of "Do we want a DMA that takes months to make call on base classes?" and "Do we want a DMA that goes absent for over two weeks without explanation?"