Tech Wars 101: The Issue and Discussion

[Arieg]

Also for the record when it comes to a combination of detail in the article, the art of the article (when needed), and the capabilities included I do believe overall I make the best tech on SARP, followed by a close second on setting articles, Khas has me beat there.

 

[CadetNewb]

It's called having a 'Life' Raz. Because of that, I'm mostly reviewing by-request. If someone asks for me, I will do it. In fact, if Ametheliana felt she's doing too much of it all, or had something she didn't want to review, she could say so or ask me to do some for her. For that very same reason, I am doing Arieg's articles. He asked. It's as simple as that.

More importantly though, I keep hearing mention of articles that should not have passed? If they are a concern, bring them up in the appropriate thread. It's not hard, and despite your beliefs Legix, I do appreciate any mistakes being corrected.

 

[Navian]

There's more pressure on mods to approve submissions than there is on them to reject submissions. For the most part, people care much more about having submissions they want approved than they do about having submissions they don't want rejected. Moderators are extremely likely to lose their positions because people are angry about them 'blocking' something, but extremely unlikely to become unpopular because they've been too permissive. This is a problem.

I am in favour of submissions being slowed down in general, see my earlier post in this thread here.

 

[raz]

It's called having a 'Life' Raz. Because of that, I'm mostly reviewing by-request.

We all have lives and I'd bet yours isn't anywhere near the busiest. But even if it was, that's not an excuse; it's entirely irrelevant. As Legix said, you volunteer for a job here. If you can only take submissions that people personally ask you to take because they know you'll rubber stamp their approval, then it's proof of your bias and that you aren't cut out for the wider task.

I keep hearing mention of articles that should not have passed? If they are a concern, bring them up in the appropriate thread.

Last time people disagreed with you, you got further dissent in the thread closed. Rofl.

 

[CadetNewb]

Again, this thread is going full circle.

Constructive criticism is always welcome, but if it is obstructive in nature or unhelpful, it is not welcome. That it went so far that Wes locked the thread and sided with me in my decision should speak volumes about the dissenters in that thread. And, yet again, this is why some of us have brought up the idea of NTSE Mods being able to silence obstruction.

 

[Navian]

To put it from another perspective, it'd make just as much sense for someone to only review submissions they're asked to review, not because the asker expects to get approved easily, but because the person being asked expects to be grilled and abused by any submitter who didn't ask for them.

It's possible for someone to ask for criticism, too, the person asking doesn't always have to be greedy.

In any case, this is probably a symptom of being overworked. So long as there's so few moderators we're going to find problems with all of them, unless we really are looking for someone uncritical.

 

[CadetNewb]

Like all things, it can go both ways, sideways, and every single axis of direction there is. That is correct Navian; there's all sorts of reasons someone could ask to be reviewed, or why someone would only do requests, with some of those reasons directly contradicting each other.

 

[Legix]

Again, this thread is going full circle.

Constructive criticism is always welcome, but if it is obstructive in nature or unhelpful, it is not welcome. That it went so far that Wes locked the thread and sided with me in my decision should speak volumes about the dissenters in that thread. And, yet again, this is why some of us have brought up the idea of NTSE Mods being able to silence obstruction.

Because you can't defend your points, so you resort to silencing the opposition who explain theirs.

You wonder why there's hostility? You've derailed the thread and brought your own credibility into potential hazard just from your actions within this thread. You're following a trend of insulting people when you're not sure how to answer something. Arieg, just a few posts ago, confirmed that he metagames.

Also for the record when it comes to a combination of detail in the article, the art of the article (when needed), and the capabilities included I do believe overall I make the best tech on SARP, followed by a close second on setting articles, Khas has me beat there.

Remember earlier when you said that it was just Arieg being competitive? He's had a reputation from everyone I've asked for doing this, but you don't treat him with scrutiny. In fact, most of the approvals of his that you've handled? You've tried to be lenient with. Which has led to people complaining, you accusing them of just being bias, and then in most cases getting forced to change your decision or found that you almost bypassed someone.

This thread is going full circle because a few people (such as you) decide to come here, insult people, and force us to discuss you personally. You've forced us to change topic to address an issue that is tied to this discussion, though, so I don't think this is bad or derailed fully quite yet. After all, potentially changing the NTSE is a solution that could work to solve the tech war dilemma and the brewing issue.

To put it from another perspective, it'd make just as much sense for someone to only review submissions they're asked to review, not because asker expects to get approved easily, but because the person being asked expects to be grilled and abused by any submitter who didn't ask for them.

It's possible for someone to ask for criticism, too, the person asking doesn't always have to be greedy.

I disagree on the point of them being grilled harder because they chose someone. This is evidenced in previous articles where Cadet was found too lenient (see the Hades system) and the complaints of many and later input resulted in drastic changes. There is potential to make it so who you pick reviews you closer and grills you harder... but that's not happening here.

Not only that, but people who ask for criticism in my experience on SARP tend to dismiss it as "hate" and then force them to not post despite their points being valid and/or not responded to. The majority of meta-gamers are known to do this, and Cadet has gained a reputation for FORCING people to be silenced. Whether or not someone did it to to deserve it (I can admit Raz sometimes does), this is a go-to card that treads on players rights to comment on submissions.

Again: If there was any proof that Cadet was trying to better provide constructive feedback upon personal request, I'd love to hear it. In every instance, though, I've only ever seen him be lenient and then have other people come out and have to do his job to ensure there's some actual attempt to improve the article. Seriously, I kid you not. It took me asking multiple times just to get an answer and I still came out of that not satisfied/properly answered. But posting there again would have got me punished for simply because I asked the same question a different way to get a more precise answer.

 

[raz]

Seriously, I kid you not. It took me asking multiple times just to get an answer and I still came out of that not satisfied/properly answered. But posting there again would have got me punished for simply because I asked the same question a different way to get a more precise answer.

Yeah, I had more stuff to say in that thread that related directly to why it should not be approved based on "the merit of the submission." But the fact there was even a warning, which Cadet admitted was at his request, brought on a chilling effect and put me off from even trying because I got the feeling he'd either just have ignored it or claimed it wasn't constructive.

 

[Navian]

Until I've seen one example of an NTSE moderator who I wouldn't consider overly permissive, I can't agree with singling anyone out for being too permissive. It would be hypocritical. Yes, I don't like how easy CadetNewb goes on everyone he reviews, but I don't like how easy anyone goes. And I know this isn't just because people want to go easy, it's a job requirement--if you aren't overly permissive, you get accused of all kinds of crimes against the community. I admit, it would be nice if we could silence those outcries--it wouldn't work, though, it'd come back to us just like it's doing right now.

I don't think CadetNewb or anyone else who's been in the same position is exceptional in how they've handled this, the problems are not with the mods. Submitters, commentators, and the process itself are also culpable. In short, you can't fix the NTSE by removing or replacing him. Since one of the problems is that it's short-handed, this would more likely make things worse.

 

[CadetNewb]

Legix, I called you out on getting something wrong, and very wrong at that. Was I impolite? Yes. Could I have said it more nicely? Yes. But rather than changing the discussion to scrutinize me, you could have simply accepted that you made a mistake, and that if you felt insulted, say so to me, so I would apologize for doing so in turn like an adult. Since you continue to attack me and my integrity as a Mod however, the topic will naturally derail onto that instead. Since you mention Arieg however, I chalk it up to him being himself; in other words, I need to keep a closer eye on him. Which we also discussed earlier. Also, while you accuse me of bias and fast tracking those I favor, take into consideration that Arieg's Indigo is still very unapproved.

Especially because @FrostJaeger has brought up legitimate concerns, and properly.

Now, despite making the request, Wes agreed to doing so in the end of the day Raz. Unless you believe Wes is not to be trusted, then he can be expected to judge the situation and act accordingly. It's not like calling for Wes is an "I Win" button I press whenever I feel like it. I'd be calling Wes all the time if that were the case.

On a side note, you're like a gust of fresh air @Navian

 

[Legix]

Until I've seen one example of an NTSE moderator who I wouldn't consider overly permissive, I can't agree with singling anyone out for being too permissive. It would be hypocritical. Yes, I don't like how easy CadetNewb goes on everyone he reviews, but I don't like how easy anyone goes. And I know this isn't just because people want to go easy, it's a job requirement--if you aren't overly permissive, you get accused of all kinds of crimes against the community. I admit, it would be nice if we could silence those outcries--it wouldn't work, though, it'd come back to us just like it's doing right now.

I don't think CadetNewb or anyone else who's been in the same position is exceptional in how they've handled this, the problems are not with the mods, submitters, commentators, and the process itself are also culpable. In short, you can't fix the NTSE by removing or replacing him. Since one of the problems is that it's short-handed, this would more likely make things worse.

No, but we can ensure that the changes and attempts to resolve it are better placed in clean hands.

There is someone I talk to quite a bit who's of the mindset that the NTSE should let very little to anything through in a similar vein to harder reviews. However, they share a different view and that's that the vision of the NTSE members is wrong. I can see purchase in this, especially after having seen Cadet in this thread. You are correct, however, that the NTSE system is flawed... but this vision is also a problem in the same line of thinking.

As an NTSE member, I don't think Cadet can change his ways and work to improve his ability around a changed and refined system. Firmly and based along his actions here, I can say that without an inch of doubt. Again: I've not met someone getting flagged for not being overly permissive except a single other NTSE member. At least, not in any shape of "recent".

If someone doesn't have the fortitude to defend themselves against some people's allegations and prove they're not committing "crimes", then they shouldn't be trusted to do their job. If someone doesn't have to lie, then they oft to never have anything to fear.

Legix, I called you out on getting something wrong, and very wrong at that. Was I impolite? Yes. Could I have said it more nicely? Yes. But rather than changing the discussion to scrutinize me, you could have simply accepted that you made a mistake, and that if you felt insulted, say so to me, so I would apologize for doing so in turn like an adult. Since you continue to attack me and my integrity as a Mod however, the topic will naturally derail onto that instead. Since you mention Arieg however, I chalk it up to him being himself; in other words, I need to keep a closer eye on him. Which we also discussed earlier. Also, while you accuse me of bias and fast tracking those I favor, take into consideration that Arieg's Indigo is still very unapproved.

Especially because @FrostJaeger has brought up legitimate concerns, and properly.

Now, despite making the request, Wes agreed to doing so in the end of the day Raz. Unless you believe Wes is not to be trusted, then he can be expected to judge the situation and act accordingly. It's not like calling for Wes is an "I Win" button I press whenever I feel like it. I'd be calling Wes all the time if that were the case.

On a side note, you're like a gust of fresh air @Navian

Considering the rate of which you complained people called on Wes, it is a tad bit ironic you have been resorting to it more and more. Atop that, you keep saying "legitimate concerns"... I'd love to finally get a definition from you.

As for the Indigo, it's really not held up because of you. It's held up because Jaeger is there, speaking up and you haven't silenced him yet. But you're fighting for the power for NTSE to be able to do such a thing. I also wasn't talking about your unapproved/still in process article. I talked about Hades. Which you opted to not speak on for some strange reason? Maybe it's that you can't acknowledge that the points I raised were backed up by Wes after we called on him to speak on it? It seems to be a running theme that when I've called for Wes, I'm called a whiner... yet every time you've done so, we're forced into silence about our disagreements.

There's no discussion when you mute one side, especially on the context of you getting to choose what is and isn't constructive. Especially when someone else comes in and you listen when THEY say it.

 

[CadetNewb]

Well consider this; Wes had to make calls, and in the end of the day, he sided with my decisions and not yours. Whenever I call Wes, I do so very sparingly, but when I do, I know he can just as easily approve my decision just as easily as he can reject them, which he has in the past. You seem to think he always sides with me, and always against you like a force of nature that simply is. That is not the case.

Stop belittling Wes; he's a person who calls the big shots, making decisions each and every time he is present. Not some item you can just point your finger at to blame.

 

[raz]

Stop belittling Wes; he's a person who calls the big shots, making decisions each and every time he is present. Not some item you can just point your finger at to blame.

Dude. Legix never said or suggested anything that would belittle Wes or blame him for anything.

This is exactly what I was talking about when I said "Some people have proven their bias and eventually will resort to insults and literally saying anything to win" a few posts ago. Stop trying to institute some false narrative on someone who is making really great points.

 

[CadetNewb]

Except he has? Legix isn't considering why he never gets his way when Wes is involved. He's treating Wes like some, well, I already said it.

 

[Navian]

@Legix, The fortitude required for someone to defend themself while being attacked by more than one other person is, all else being equal, superhuman. This is because it takes approximately the same amount of energy to defend yourself as it does to attack someone, and if there's two people attacking you, you, one person, need to exert twice as much force as one person in order to defend yourself.

All else isn't equal, and yes someone with an official position can be assumed to give it more energy than someone without. But the moderator is already putting their energy into reviewing submissions, and nothing is keeping the people attacking them from putting in as much energy as they want, so even if you assume the moderator is at an absolute advantage, they're still at a relative disadvantage.

I'm not going to rebut the rest of your arguments, I'm just going to point out they're presumptuous of you. I think you're more motivated by a desire to attack CadetNewb, in anger, than you are by one to improve the NTSE at the moment. This doesn't mean you're wrong, but it does mean you're in the wrong at the moment.

Raz, what are these 'really great points' you're referring to? I don't think I'm seeing what you're seeing.

 

[Ira]

Too much bureaucracy is a bad thing. Rather that more rules, that people will inevitably try to work around, why not stream line things.

 

[Legix]

Except he has? Legix isn't considering why he never gets his way when Wes is involved. He's treating Wes like some, well, I already said it.

I'm sorry? What?

If you read my message (I know, you can't read well), you'd see quite the opposite. I made it clear Wes chooses sides he supports. The difference is that when he backs me and others, you bitch about how we're just whiners.

Meanwhile you have silence.

Until you insult us and put words in my mouth (and others) to try and continue attacking me (and others). You are on a great defensive, trying desperately to make it like I view Wes as a tool.

@Legix, The fortitude required for someone to defend themself while being attacked by more than one other person is, all else being equal, superhuman. This is because it takes approximately the same amount of energy to defend yourself as it does to attack someone, and if there's two people attacking you, you, one person, need to exert twice as much force as one person in order to defend yourself.

All else isn't equal, and yes someone with an official position can be assumed to give it more energy than someone without. But the moderator is already putting their energy into reviewing submissions, and nothing is keeping the people attacking them from putting in as much energy as they want, so even if you assume the moderator is at an absolute advantage, they're still at a relative disadvantage.

I'm not going to rebut the rest of your arguments, I'm just going to point out they're presumptuous of you. I think you're more motivated by a desire to attack CadetNewb, in anger, than you are by one to improve the NTSE at the moment. This doesn't mean you're wrong, but it does mean you're in the wrong at the moment.

Raz, what are these 'really great points' you're referring to? I don't think I'm seeing what you're seeing.

I can agree to some of this. But let's recap: Cadet has gone out of his way to make it personal. View my many other posts insisting I thought the NTSE was capable.

Then watch for pages as Cadet ruins his credibility and image, attacking me and highlighting issues in his process with personal bias and confirmation of things he dismissed. Now this attempt to deceive people into thinking I find Wes to be a "tool to use". He's manipulative and I'm perfectly fine getting him exposed, whether it's for the right reasons at the time or not.

Better to be the hunter who shoots poachers to keep his land hunted normally than to let them destroy the ecosystem.

 

[raz]

Except he has? Legix isn't considering why he never gets his way when Wes is involved. He's treating Wes like some, well, I already said it.

You're doing exactly what Legix just accused you of, so I'm not going to write a well-thought-out reply and play into this duplicitous game of yours. Anyone can read the posts here and see you're making stuff up.

This quote, however, really sums up your disgusting conduct in the past few posts:

Because you can't defend your points, so you resort to silencing the opposition who explain theirs.

You wonder why there's hostility? You've derailed the thread and brought your own credibility into potential hazard just from your actions within this thread. You're following a trend of insulting people when you're not sure how to answer something.

 

[Navian]

Legix, when you're angry you tend to view things in a distorted light. From the very beginning, the things you were saying destroyed CadetNewb's credibility... didn't.

You were saying things like 'You admitted to a display of bias against Zack, that means you're unqualified!' which doesn't follow, and 'This statement is inconsistent with this statement, this is proof that you're unreliable!' when not only didn't it follow, it also wasn't true--you only couldn't or wouldn't reach a more reasonable conclusion.

I just let that go because I could tell you were worked up and assumed you'd relent eventually and realize what you were doing, but if you still believe that the conclusions you jumped to back then were accurate ones, apparently that needs to be addressed. CadetNewb doesn't deserve to be demonized the way you've been doing.

Raz, ... nevermind. Points for irony, I guess. Lots of them.