Board Thread:Petitions/@comment-30779788-20171203163351/@comment-28083312-20171206151512

QUEEN AYSHA wrote: What are you counting?? I'm counting people who's votes are invalidated because they're not verified yet or whatever, because ya'know opinions, and I count me and Hayden and Uktar as not necessarily normal users because we were staff at some point which makes it 6 or 7 to 2? I can't tell what Biscuit-whatever-his-name-is said, there's lots of replies. That would be almost unanimous. That’s a weird way to count, also, Utkar is on Staff! If they agree with you, they suddenly are not Staff & are normal users, but if they disagree with you, then they are evil Staff ;) Love the double standard. But to answer your question, I was counting any non-Staff that were eligible to vote. Utkar is Staff, so that leaves 5 eligible non-Staff voting against, two of which are Former Staff. If you remove Staff from those voting for, you have Hayden, Kuro, Auf, & Electro, two of whom are Former Staff. There’s only a 1 person loss.  If you include disqualified votes, then it becomes 5 in favor & 7 against, still far from unanimous. The only way it would look unanimous is when you deliberately apply different logic to each group, like how you counted Utkar as non-Staff just because he agreed with you 😏 QUEEN AYSHA wrote: Hey hey hey hey wait a minute, I'm not saying staff shouldn't vote, @ all you staff! I'm saying it's too bad that we're split on this in this way, and actually no I was just planning on telling you that if the staff do win, we should work a little bit (as always) at trying to reach a compromise here instead of just saying "here's the rules shut up about them", since the minority is large and very upset. I'm not implying anything of the sort, I'm tryna say you should just y'know, mentally acknowledge that "woah, the staff really like strict stuff and normal users not really". That's why it matters, and that's the only thing I'm implying. I will not acknowledge that because that is not representative of reality, like I showed you with the numbers. It’s one (or two depending how you count) more non-Staff voting against than for, & overall it is a small minority. However, even though it is a small minority, I am always open to compromise & I am open to hearing those you suggest. Here’s a compromise I would be fine with; a grace period, we can give you until January, longer if you wanted, to clean up your blogs to make the transition easier. That’s just one concession I would be happy to make, & if you have others I would love to hear & consider them.

QUEEN AYSHA wrote: That last paragraph is scalding and now you're acting like you hate me, you're kind of putting words in my mouth. For the record, I don’t have you. There is no malice in what I’m saying, this is just open debate. Now, you complain I am putting words in your mouth, yet you say this: QUEEN AYSHA wrote: Show me where I said "Ursuul, you don't deserve your rights and you don't deserve to vote", show me. I never said you said this. I said… Ursuul wrote: …even to those who are uncomfortable with me having the same rights as everyone else. …which is backed up by this reply… QUEEN AYSHA wrote: See now! If there was no staff voting, there would be more people hating this than supporting it. I know that's off topic and I'm sorry, just makes me upset. Which, conveniently, was deleted very recently, although perhaps I should’ve said “upset” & not “uncomfortable”. QUEEN AYSHA wrote: Because that's not what I was implying at all. And you should think that's not what I was implying, because that's actually really mean and not how I think at all. Sorry you thought that, Ursuul. Water -> under bridge. Let us move back to the topic at hand, this back-&-forth over who-said-what is just going to hurt everyone’s feelings. Please, by all means lay out your compromise so that we can get a solution that works for everyone.