Snowtroopers.ca - Star Wars collecting news and information in Canada.

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Looking into the forum errors


SPONSORS

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Sifo-Dyas

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 68
1


I'm not about to lock/close this thread because it does have merit. 


I am in agreement with the last most recent posts, come on, this forum is for the fun of collecting.  I love visiting this board to get my updates in regards to SW news. 

Yes I think everyone here does, and I think they'd like this site to continue to be the place they go for that info and updates. And we thank you for it!
However, I think many would agree that one of the site's best assets is the B/S/T.
If a member has reason to believe that the integrity of the B/S/T/feedback has been comprimised, they should speak out about it, first to staff and then to the members if they feel there is info that the members should have, as Arizona did here. If other members feel the issue is not being addressed properly, they should speak out and voice that opinion. Anyone disagree with that much?
And if during the discussion, the Admins. get a better understanding of member's expectations and the members get info and understanding of the Staff's side of things, what's wrong with that? I don't think it should be beat to death but the ongoing exchange has at least the potential to lead to improvement. So I don't see a need for members to say "enough, move on". If you don't want to read it or participate in the discussion, DON'T. There are well over 12 thousand other topics to talk about toys in and ONLY this one about protecting the integrity (as defined by Arizona) of the data posted on this board! If it leads to improvement and more mutual understanding, what in the world is the problem with that? Do what you will but I don't value the concept of telling people not to discuss things on a discussion board, especially the topic of improving the board we all enjoy when things have happened that threaten to degrade that enjoyment for some.

That being said, it should be moved to the suggestions or neg. feedback section or wherever would be most appropriate but I don't see any value in member's implying that there is no more info or understanding to be gained here. That may be true but more likely it is not because communication is the key that unlocks understanding. Hard to see the future is hmmm?

2
Snowtrooper Collections / Re: Richard the Bloody's stuff
« on: August 14, 2007, 08:06:00 PM »
"You gotta get the Galactic hero one and a minty vintage one now..."


Or TWO!  :rollfloorlaffsmiley:


C'mon man! You have to have the Guards in pairs!


Oh yes how very silly of me!  I COMPLETELY agree. It should be a crime to display a lone Royal Guard if you ask me!  :tongue0024:

By the way, you only have one on display loose there. I'll need to see that situation rectified A.S.A.P.  :cool0037:

3
Yep, could be the wrap-up factor, that's why I didn't presume to know the reason. Just saying that it's a fact and the staff shouldn't be so quick to presume that there isn't something they could do about it or to portray the board as flourishing when it clearly is not. ( I concede that ONE reason the interest is likely down is due to not much happening in the SW world. That being said, many other SW sites are actually growing and becoming MORE active)

Well I tried to let a Mod know last week about how his statements were inappropriate and harmful to the well being of the board but the thread was then deleted because another staffer decided that it was "almost a personal attack".

It seems we have to not only let you know but say it in the words that conforms to J.J.'s personal doctrine of how to use the english language.

Please don't say it should be said in PM because that  behind the scenes stuff does nothing to let the members know that issues are being addressed and does nothing to solicit the opinions and experiences of the other members.
Furthermore, PM's didn't bring Arizona the required level of satisfaction or disclosure, as evidenced by this thread.

I don't think the site needs to become one big self devouring drama fest but things should be hashed out in a part of the site that is reserved for such discussions in full view of the member's that are affected by said issues. SOME Staff here have a history of being afraid of ANY openly discussed conflict. Pretty pathetic for a discussion forum IMO.

4
By the way, the ONLY thing that was a fiasco about the "religion" thread was other member's inability to recognize a valid scientific discussion and to be intelligent enough to appreciate that SOME people can in fact debate the paradox presented when evaluating the merits of faith and the scientific method. The thread's subject matter was actually ABOUT applying the principles of science to matters of faith, (although few were intelligent enough here to realize that) so the thread was not "highjacked" at all.
Brainakarobin, to whom the posts were directed, understood this perfectly and responded in an intelligent and debate fostering fashion. It was the myopic, flamy posts of other members calling names and demanding that no one be allowed to discuss the faith/science paradox on this board because they are unable to control their emotions and unable to let reason and intellect dictate their reactions that caused the thread to go slightly astray. Brian never took offence and actually appreciated the interest in the subject and the scrutiny of the application of science but other members needlessly and rudely jumped in to defend him. I don't recall you telling any of those people that they were butting in to someone else's "fight". How VERY ironic.
Just because some people can't have a fruitful discussion on the paradox of faith and application of the scientific principle doesn't mean that no one can.

 A failed low blow and completely irrelevant reference that only makes you look bad, J.J.

I don't fight the fight of others, I give my own opinon on matters as any helpful member of any community should do, and as any member should not only have the right to do but be encouraged to do, unlike the discouragement of such action that you are incredibly offering here.
. And to be clear, if there is a problem with the perceived integrity of the staff of this site, it is EVERY member's concern, not just the person who noticed the issue. If a thread title is edited, it is the business of EVERY member and everyone has a valid opinion on the merits of the reason for the change, at least they should . You seem to fail to grasp the principles that make a community function, a terrible flaw for a forum admistrator unless you want the forum to be the very antithesis of what the word actually means. Perhaps you should change the name of the board from the Snowtroopers.ca discussion forum to J.J.'s personal do what he wants/say what he wants regardless of other member's opinions playground.  :shakehead:

And Rad, the number of active members posting here has been slowly but undeniably dwindling. To suggest anything else is truly misleading.
Ever since the last episode of perceived staff impropriety, the members who objected to that offence have not returned regularly, some almost never and some not at all. Could be coincidence, or maybe not. I'm just keeping it factual.

5
Snowtrooper Collections / Re: Richard the Bloody's stuff
« on: August 14, 2007, 03:20:47 PM »
Great stuff!
I like how you have Leia up there with the other biker chicks  :tongue0024:

That Leia/R2 maquette is pretty frickin' saweeet eh? I seriously have to get one of those.

Nice pics dude. I see you got that comic pack you needed.
You don't see alot of Royal Guard focuses. Very unique. You gotta get the Galactic hero one and a minty vintage one now...

6
Yes, good post, Rad74. Very resolution focused as opposed to the ellusive and somewhat combative input we have been getting (my opinion.)

I just want to clarify that the fact that the original deal was (eventually) completed is not at all relevant.
I too have dealt with the member who had neg. feedback left and everything went well.
But Arizona felt that his negative experience warranted noting for the benefit of other members. I remember his post well and in it he said that "the time may come when I feel it is appropriate to remove this thread" thereby reserving the right to have it left up EVEN if the deal eventually was completed.
If I was going to do a deal with a member that had in the past taken weeks longer than stated to send his end of the deal and had failed to respond to multiple emails about the issue, I'd want to know about it and this is why Arizona wanted the post left up. I'm sure every member here would like to have that info about a prospective trading partner.
 The fact that a Mod would delete the negative feedback of a member who he calls a personal friend is at best a conflict of interest that gives the appearance of impropriety and at worst is a gross abuse of Mod powers. Either way it negatively affects member's confidence in the usefulness of the feedback system.
Let's hope this site has seen the last of that kind of ugliness. Thanks for making a definitive statement in the best interest of the board.

For the record, I have no problem with the editing of posts that violate the site's terms of use or code of conduct. Some ppl have stated that they think NOTHING should ever be edited or deleted but this is not that kind of site and I appreciate that. There are other sites to go to for unmoderated, uncensored freedom of speech. They're usually full of the type of mayhem that mistersql talked about, which I like, but I understand that here is not the right place for that.

7
Here's some airing of issues and differing points of view, for those of you who like that sort of thing:


Quote from: Snowtroopers.ca representative (name witheld):

"Sifo -  you're obviously trying to whip up an anti-mod or anti-admin sentiment amongst the members. Can I ask why? What are you hoping is going to happen? You must realize that there are other places for you to discuss Star Wars if you're not happy here. "



Sifo-Dyas: I'm not trying to "whip up anything". I legitimately resent the accusation that I'm "trying to whip up anti-admin. sentiment" and hold your statement as further evidence of how poorly the site's representatives deal with resolving member's concerns.

To the question, what am I hoping is going to happen, the answer is improvement.
Is your last comment suggesting that members who are not 100% "happy" with a forum or how issues are handled there should walk away and abandon it rather than contribute, offer suggestions for improvement and discuss the problem issues?
Shouldn't the members take an active role in improving anything that includes a membership? Is your opinion of what a member may deem taking an active role in improving things the only opinion that matters to you?
Do you not care if members feel that a Mod has acted inappropriately and has demonstrated a lack of the judgement, intelligence, diplomatic and critical thinking skills required to moderate the forum that they care about? Do you not care that they are posting their displeasure with these actions?
It sounds like you're saying, "you or any member being a pain in the ass about issues I'd rather not acknowledge or deal with can just leave and not bother trying to think that you can do anything to improve the situation or whip up trouble." So to speak.

Are you of the opinion that no Mod has acted inappropriately regarding these issues of lately? If not, then why not acknowledge that mistakes were made and lessons learned when the concerns are eventually posted publically etc. not behave as though no valid grievance(s) exists?

FYI: I never said that the site staff should post the name of the Mod. I said Arizona should. But issues should be openly addressed not swept under the rug.

If you're genuinely interested in improvement then you can relax because that's what I'm about; improvement and open discussion on a discussion forum, even the discussions that staff wishes that the members didn't think was important to discuss.

If all of the members got fed up with problems and permanently left when you suggested that they can just leave if they're not happy rather than do the right thing and ask what you can do to resolve the situation, what kind of a forum would you have then?


b-ill



Just to avoid confusion, I understand and appreciate that the Kevins have provided this forum for the members with nothing to gain for them personally. It's because of this mainly that I think it is only fair for the membership to take an active role in improving the forum, not abandon it if they feel unsatisfied with it.


 




8
Wampa Cave / Re: Saga Fan Choice '08
« on: August 13, 2007, 08:32:07 PM »
Yep, I get your point. I'm just saying that it's shouldn't be a surprise that people vote for Clones because there is never enough of them!

But I agree with you in some ways. Make figures that will sell.

9
Sorry for double post but I'd like to add that it's very difficult to do your own due dilligence when site staff has deleted the documented history of negative feedback for a member who's reputation they (or one of them) are trying to protect. I don't even know why you'd say that in these circumstances.


Also, editing/censoring the title is intrusive and overly oppressive. He stated that it's his opinion that the site has lost integrity. He did not ask it as a question. He should be allowed to voice that as his opinion without being censored because a staffer is "offended" by his opinion. That in itself is an "integrity issue". This site has indeed lost integrity here in this very thread in my opinion.
Why censor a member's opinion or appraisal of the site or it's staff? How does that serve the integrity of the site or serve the members? It does not. It only serves you. A staffer that takes action on the site that affects the entire membership to serve himself harms the "integrity" of a website.

10
I don't think it's hard for anyone who pays attention to figure out what happened.
Yes, I agree that post should have stayed. There should be a record kept of things like this, which is why you posted it. If you wanted it deleted, then you would have done it yourself. What interest does this Mod have in interfering with this?
(I think I know the answer but the members should be asking the question)

Here's a suggestion for improving  how things should be moving forward:
Mods shouldn't be running around deleting things like this at their discretion. The board is for all members and the negative feedback section is there for a reason.


I advise you request that the Administrators immediately de-Mod the Mod.
You should also post who the Mod is. They should be accountable to the members and explain themselves to the membership.

Mods also shouldn't be deleting posts because they feel a post makes a member look bad especially when the post is just coherently and validly pointing out the flawed logic of another post or the self contradictory statements made by staff. It's a DISCUSSION forum for crying out loud! This discussion forum is far too restrictive of open discussion, self criticism, grievance voicing and dissention.
Improvement ONLY comes from critique of past performance.

11
Wampa Cave / Re: Saga Fan Choice '08
« on: August 13, 2007, 03:26:32 PM »
I've never seen the market "flooded" with clones or Stormies and likely never will.
Zuckuss and Lobot are not "Legends" and should never be repacked in this "greatest hits" format. They received milliseconds of screentime in the entire saga, had NO lines etc. You almost never see a trooper warm the pegs for more than a day so they should put them out by the case full if you ask me. Literally, solid cases of Clones and Stormies!

12
Scout Report / Re: Post Retail Finds of NEW PRODUCT Here!
« on: August 10, 2007, 12:57:57 PM »
Found Saga Legends on CDN card @ WM in B.C.

13
Off Topic / Re: New Snowtrooper
« on: August 09, 2007, 02:59:49 PM »
Hey, congratulations!  :D

14
Wampa Cave / Re: Hasbro Canada - YOU SUCK!
« on: August 06, 2007, 11:02:31 PM »
That's great if you want one of every figure and if it is indeed the same as TRU price once you figure in shipping... but ...
most of our sponsors were charging $25 for the McQuarrie stormie or concept Fett. What if you just want a couple of those? The only really "new", exciting figures cost 2-3 times retail at specialty shops, due to high demand created by Hasbro's lack of supply and understanding of the market. It wouldn't be that way if Hasbro and the retailers had their crap together.

15
Off Topic / Re: looking for Toy knights
« on: August 06, 2007, 07:34:34 PM »
Schleich makes the best I've seen in person but you won't like the prices, I hope your boy doesn't want too much of it  ;)
It's really cool stuff though. My son has a few and they're tough with good detail and high play value, accessories, kid friendly etc.

This Papo stuff I saw online looks even more detailed but also pricey, haven't seen it in person.. They do have some cool knights that are cheaper than Schleich though.

http://www.schleich-toys.com/home.php

This link has loads of pics of figures, just keep scrolling
http://www.toycon.com/papo/m_papo.html

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 68

Page created in 0.176 seconds with 31 queries.