MOCpages : Share your LEGO® creations
LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop C.O.P. (Coalition of Planets)Space and science fiction
Welcome to the world's greatest LEGO fan community!
Explore cool creations, share your own, and have lots of fun together.  ~  It's all free!
Conversation »
Imperial Hammer Board
Join to comment
 Group admin 
The place where the fate of offending members is decided. The Admin's decision overrules all others naturally, but most of these decisions will be decided by the votes of the mob. If the majority want someone to be banished, or kicked, that is usually what will happen.

Members who have broken Important rules multiple times are applicable to banishment/kick requests.

With approval from Awe, I would like these to be the voting rules.

Normal members: can request banishments and Vote once.

Moderators: can request banishments and their votes count as two each.

Admins: can request banishments but cannot vote. Instead they have the final say in the matter, after taking popular vote into account.

Offtopic comment spamming will result in an auto-kick.

0ffenses, even if the perpetrator suffers no punishment, can be reported here.

I'll think of more later.
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 3:07 am
 Group admin 
Approved. In the spirit of socialism, the People will have their justice.

It's funny, we're more democratic than the UNE in many ways. Anyways, let the reign of terror begin. Do we have a rule that admins and mods can't be ousted?
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 3:17 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Awesome-o-saurus The Not-So-Great
Approved. In the spirit of socialism, the People will have their justice.

It's funny, we're more democratic than the UNE in many ways. Anyways, let the reign of terror begin. Do we have a rule that admins and mods can't be ousted?

Yes, the idea to let people decide is democratic.

as for the other part of your comment: You can be ousted by Ian, but otherwise, you, as defacto leader have the final say including over the other two admins. You can actually choose to ignore the popular vote, but it would be unwise, and people may start to revolt. The 0ffender can choose to defend himself, or simply let us decide.

The idea is that you first discuss the matter of the 0ffense with the other admins and a few trusted mods, and then call for a vote, which should decide the fate of the defender.

as I said before, the 0ffender gets a fair chance, both to defend himself and for the vote.
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 3:48 am
 Group admin 
I think we should discuss the matter of Gastric the Pearce tommorow, I've got to go now.
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 3:51 am
Oooh hammers!
I have a feeling it is going to be like: "I don't like you off with your head!" This is going to be fun.
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 6:44 am
 Group admin 
Like the idea of the people feeling that they are necessacary. Not trying to sound big headed, just more empirical. However would a peoples revolt be somewhat useless in its nature?
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 11:35 am
Quoting Alori Zriešto .


Who's him? What have him done?
District Pearce (Spencer pearce)
has been demanding attention in the topic below.
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 12:26 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Awesome-o-saurus The Not-So-Great
Approved... ...Do we have a rule that admins and mods can't be ousted?


I laiks not getting ousted. Where is the Caupo flame war?
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 1:52 pm
Quoting Glenn streeter
Quoting Alori Zriešto .


Who's him? What have him done?
District Pearce (Spencer pearce)
has been demanding attention in the topic below.


Someone had a bad day you cant kick him for that? plus theres hundreds of other reasons why
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 2:01 pm
Quoting Emperor Warlock

Someone had a bad day you cant kick him for that?
Did i say anything about kicking him?,nein i did not.

Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 2:35 pm
Quoting Glenn streeter
Quoting Emperor Warlock

Someone had a bad day you cant kick him for that?
Did i say anything about kicking him?,nein i did not.


meh, i thought how this being the one of the few groups being run by responsible people would carry out business
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 2:51 pm
Quoting Phazezorz .
waiwaiwaiwaiwait.

You don't want the dude to be banned (on account of irrefutable irresponsibility), yet you want the people who run the COP to be responsible.....



I meant the admins, and you (something of an unofficial admin)
it wouldent be very responsible if you didnt hear him out first. so if any votes on him going will happen atleast let him have a say

Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 3:30 pm
Quoting Phazezorz .
waiwaiwaiwaiwait.

You don't want the dude to be banned (on account of irrefutable irresponsibility), yet you want the people who run the COP to be responsible.....

Its a understandable sentence from a understandable man,Listen to Phaze because i know you can. Ok i admit that was really bad. And I blame sterotyping.

Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 3:45 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Emperor Warlock

I meant the admins, and you (something of an unofficial admin)
it wouldent be very responsible if you didnt hear him out first. so if any votes on him going will happen atleast let him have a say

So you are suggesting a court system then?
Admitedly some things are different but the judges here are played by the admins what with our decisions. The members being the jury with their full powers and the poor soul who has offended enough of the COP to warrant a trial being the defendant.

I'm not too sure how good an idea this is. The reason admins have powers is so that they can delegate and decide themselves and this new system I fear will just bring on witch hunts and unnessacary child-like petiness.
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 3:45 pm
Quoting oucho t cactus
So you are suggesting a court system then?
Admitedly some things are different but the judges here are played by the admins what with our decisions. The members being the jury with their full powers and the poor soul who has offended enough of the COP to warrant a trial being the defendant.

I'm not too sure how good an idea this is. The reason admins have powers is so that they can delegate and decide themselves and this new system I fear will just bring on witch hunts and unnessacary child-like petiness.


You couldn't of explained it any better! thank you!
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 3:49 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Emperor Warlock

Someone had a bad day you cant kick him for that? plus theres hundreds of other reasons why


Bad day? Well, considering how I can count the times this has happened on more than one hand, and people are getting annoyed...
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 6:59 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting oucho t cactus
So you are suggesting a court system then?
Admitedly some things are different but the judges here are played by the admins what with our decisions. The members being the jury with their full powers and the poor soul who has offended enough of the COP to warrant a trial being the defendant.

I'm not too sure how good an idea this is. The reason admins have powers is so that they can delegate and decide themselves and this new system I fear will just bring on witch hunts and unnessacary child-like petiness.


A court system is exactly what I think we need, though one that has input from everyone. The people of the COP don't actually have much say in anything, but I ask for opinions because that's what I do. Like the original post says, the 0ffending member can defend themselves here, they will be heard out. As like the two most active authorities in the COP, Danny and I could use a bit of help in deciding what to do.

Witch hunts are no good. But remember, if things get out of hand, any of us admins can just stop it. That means you too, Oucho. However, I have approved this for the following reasons:
-I'm not the easiest to anger. Therefore, I'm a lot more lenient than I sometimes should be.
-If someone's just being really annoying to the general public, this is where they can come in to complain about it. If others agree, then can vote to kick them out. Just like city councils and rowdy establishments. If we authorities see this is a just action, we'll follow what the people want. If it's just a bunch of hype and witch hunt, then it will be stopped. I'm confident in my abilities to remain impartial and calm here. After all, this is group represent's a great deal of my recent life's creative work. I don't tread lightly with it.
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 7:08 pm
I have a felling, for resons stated before, that this will start out good but crash and fail.
We'll see.
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 8:07 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Matt The Backward One
I have a felling, for resons stated before, that this will start out good but crash and fail.
We'll see.


Sometimes the only way to try something is to actually try it. Look at America, for example.

Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 8:14 pm
Quoting Awesome-o-saurus The Not-So-Great Sometimes the only way to try something is to actually try it. Look at America, for example.
Are you referring to what I think you're referring too? If it is, then that statement was one of the dumbest things I've ever heard anyone say on national television.
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 8:17 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Matt The Backward One
Are you referring to what I think you're referring too? If it is, then that statement was one of the dumbest things I've ever heard anyone say on national television.


No..? I'm referring to the idea of a democracy run by the people. You do know that all the Euros were convinced we'd fail and fall apart, do you not?
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 9:23 pm
 Group admin 
ok, so if we can come to an agreement, I'd like to start the case of Pearce. I think he wants to be kicked anyway, but personally I think he deserves a ban. I don't think I need to explain to many of you exactly how he's behaved here, and also in the UNE, though I think that conversation is, or is about to be deleted.

I have word from Awe that this is not the first outburst from the defendant, and perhaps if it were he would only be punished lightly for temporary insanity, but enough is enough.

All in favor of a ban say aye.

I am in favor of such, and since I'm a mod, my vote counts as two.
Permalink
| December 6, 2010, 9:39 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting danny morgan
ok, so if we can come to an agreement, I'd like to start the case of Pearce. I think he wants to be kicked anyway, but personally I think he deserves a ban. I don't think I need to explain to many of you exactly how he's behaved here, and also in the UNE, though I think that conversation is, or is about to be deleted.

I have word from Awe that this is not the first outburst from the defendant, and perhaps if it were he would only be punished lightly for temporary insanity, but enough is enough.

All in favor of a ban say aye.

I am in favor of such, and since I'm a mod, my vote counts as two.


I'll say my word now:

Pearce is an interesting character, no doubt. Given his not-so-perfect past, that'd be understandable. But, it's when those things spill over to here that people start to have a problem. Is Pearce to be punished for his inability to control himself? If so, how far is he to be punished? These are the questions I want people to be thinking about when they make their choice. This isn't a witch hunt, this is a serious discussion.

Permalink
| December 7, 2010, 7:12 pm
Quoting danny morgan
ok, so if we can come to an agreement, I'd like to start the case of Pearce. I think he wants to be kicked anyway, but personally I think he deserves a ban. I don't think I need to explain to many of you exactly how he's behaved here, and also in the UNE, though I think that conversation is, or is about to be deleted.

I have word from Awe that this is not the first outburst from the defendant, and perhaps if it were he would only be punished lightly for temporary insanity, but enough is enough.

All in favor of a ban say aye.

I am in favor of such, and since I'm a mod, my vote counts as two.

I personally think that his "outbursts" are quite entertaining. But if he wants to leave the whole UNE/COP thing, then I say we let him. If he leaves, comes back, and causes more drama (if thats how you would imply it) then you can ban him. So Im neutral on all of this.
Permalink
| December 7, 2010, 7:52 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Awesome-o-saurus The Not-So-Great

I'll say my word now:

Pearce is an interesting character, no doubt. Given his not-so-perfect past, that'd be understandable. But, it's when those things spill over to here that people start to have a problem. Is Pearce to be punished for his inability to control himself? If so, how far is he to be punished? These are the questions I want people to be thinking about when they make their choice. This isn't a witch hunt, this is a serious discussion.

Aye. I see how it could be almost understandable that he did what he did.

However, why should we take this shizzle? We are not a councilling group. I think if this were the first time, he would deserve a kick, but it isn't. I'm not requesting his banishment so much as a punishment, but rather for the good of our own group. My vote still stands.
Permalink
| December 7, 2010, 8:43 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Awesome-o-saurus The Not-So-Great

I'll say my word now:

Pearce is an interesting character, no doubt. Given his not-so-perfect past, that'd be understandable. But, it's when those things spill over to here that people start to have a problem. Is Pearce to be punished for his inability to control himself? If so, how far is he to be punished? These are the questions I want people to be thinking about when they make their choice. This isn't a witch hunt, this is a serious discussion.


I vote for a kick. If he returns, it will be because he knows that one outburst and its ban. He will get no notice. This way, if he doesn't want to lose dignity with an actual ban, he can just leave. You sort of understand?
Permalink
| December 7, 2010, 9:59 pm
Quoting Awesome-o-saurus The Not-So-Great

It's funny, we're more democratic than the UNE in many ways.

Indeed! I've been noticing that myself of late.
Permalink
| December 7, 2010, 10:57 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Cisco Da Mongoose

I vote for a kick. If he returns, it will be because he knows that one outburst and its ban. He will get no notice. This way, if he doesn't want to lose dignity with an actual ban, he can just leave. You sort of understand?


I understand completely. I'm not going to voice my opinion though, because I don't want to sway any minds. We're in the truth zone now.

Permalink
| December 7, 2010, 11:05 pm
I've heard that this outburst wasnt the first? can someone tell me before i cast a vote?
Permalink
| December 8, 2010, 10:43 am
 Group admin 
Not to voice my full opinion at the moment but I don't think that a ban is what is needed now, more a kick with a strong heeded warning.
Permalink
| December 8, 2010, 11:27 am
 Group moderator 
I'd say kick, for the same reasons as Cisco.
Permalink
| December 8, 2010, 12:33 pm
I would say ban, but then again,I'm in a bad mood right now...


Permalink
| December 8, 2010, 12:42 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Emperor Warlock
I've heard that this outburst wasnt the first? can someone tell me before i cast a vote?


In the past, there have been at least 3 other incidents before this. The first time was before I was an admin, and I'll say I tried to be sympathetic then. It happened again and again though, he left the site, came back, left again, came back, left again, and now he's back again.
Permalink
| December 8, 2010, 12:44 pm
 Group moderator 
So. Kick with ultimate redemption package, or coup de grace?
Permalink
| December 8, 2010, 6:47 pm
I have read the whole conversation, and decided to point something out. I do not know much about Mr. Pearce's actions, but you should take into consideration the possibility that attention is all he really wants. And doing this will give him just that.
Permalink
| December 8, 2010, 7:07 pm
 Group moderator 
Quoting Josh B.
I have read the whole conversation, and decided to point something out. I do not know much about Mr. Pearce's actions, but you should take into consideration the possibility that attention is all he really wants. And doing this will give him just that.


That's why I propose this. We kick. He returns perhaps. We hear so much as a peep of trouble, and hammar time mah bois!!!
Permalink
| December 8, 2010, 7:57 pm
Quoting Cisco Da Mongoose

That's why I propose this. We kick. He returns perhaps. We hear so much as a peep of trouble, and hammar time mah bois!!!

I think that's happened three times already.

Enough's enough, even if he is a good source of schadenfreude.
Permalink
| December 8, 2010, 8:34 pm
After reading this whole topic I'm still really not 100% not sure. On one hand, Pearce isn't commiting anything too drastic (yet). On the other hand, it is an annoying problem and it needs to be delt with. Like Sir Cactus said, Pearce doesn't neciessarily need a ban, but rather a hard, strict warning (although that would probably classify as blackmail). But since so many people vote to ban, and this needs to be delt with, I say, ban. That's two more votes for ban.
Permalink
| December 8, 2010, 9:39 pm
 Group admin 
Ok, so the majority vote for a ban.

I don't think there is anything else to discuss. Motion passed.

One other matter, one of little urgency right now, is, should we let future accounts of Pearce back into the group or not? Assuming ofcourse he ends up rage quitting the 'Pages and creates a new account 5 months later...
Permalink
| December 9, 2010, 4:28 am
 Group admin 
The people have spoken. Pearce, if he deletes the new account, will be allowed back in on a new one only if the members decide so, or one of us authorities.

However, since we're not all evil, I'd like to wait a few days so Pearce can say what he wants to say.
Permalink
| December 10, 2010, 12:39 am
 Group admin 
I believe Pearce has already left of his own accord. I think we should still ban him anyway so he can't rejoin at will.
Permalink
| December 10, 2010, 2:21 am
 Group admin 
Quoting danny morgan
I believe Pearce has already left of his own accord. I think we should still ban him anyway so he can't rejoin at will.


It seems you're right, Pearce is gone, we have nothing more to discuss. Let it be known that Pearce is not to be accepted again without consent based on the lawful judgment of his peers for his actions of late.

This case is closed.
Permalink
| December 10, 2010, 2:24 am
Other topics
student teen kid toy play lego child video game hobby blocks construction toy legos fun games



LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop C.O.P. (Coalition of Planets)Space and science fiction


You Your home page | LEGO creations | Favorite builders
Activity Activity | Comments | Creations
Explore Explore | Recent | Groups
MOCpages is an unofficial, fan-created website. LEGO® and the brick configuration are property of The LEGO Group, which does not sponsor, own, or endorse this site.
©2002-2014 Sean Kenney Design Inc | Privacy policy | Terms of use