StarGateWars Forums

Teal'C wrote:I agree Yes Mordack, And this is my point, now if 5 months down the road those same girls made fun of you, you would still be as accepting?

I'd suck it up.

The proof of this pudding will be in the eating. If Clarkey is involved in a case, and my conduct is deemed to be inappropriate and biased, then I'd recommend making a case about it to the administration. Or Clarkey can go to Jason about it if he prefers. I will gladly discuss the issue in question and defend myself. That's honestly all I have to say about this.

Thanks to everybody, serious or otherwise, whose given feedback so far. It's very early days for Jack and I, but I'm glad to see that most people are happy with what we've done so far.

The ombudsman is operating contrary to proper mores, as is evidenced in his choice of music and lyrics.


Seriously though, it was quite fitting.

Here's some feedback... nice to see what the Ombudsman are like behind closed doors.

Juliette wrote:My hands are tied. I've already got one ombudsman who declared he'll overturn every warning I give which is complained about, because I am 'biased'.. at this point, I cannot turn the other one against me as well.

So one Oms has declared they will overturn every warning this GM issues if the user complains about the warning. And therefore this GM refuses to mod posts made by the other Oms in fear of both of them being biased towards her and overturning all warnings this GM gives.

Does the Ombudsman just presents the case to the Admins, Clarkey???? Cause its really up to the admins to overturn the warning point and the Ombudsman just the middle man between the users and the staff. They have no power to overturn it, just get evidence enough to make it its valid to present to the admins to let them discuss it and determine if the warning point is valid or not and the last time I knew/checked the admins only has the power to take away warning points.

At least this is what I know of how it works, if Im wrong then I dont know how it works.

Clarkey wrote:Here's some feedback... nice to see what the Ombudsman are like behind closed doors.

Juliette wrote:My hands are tied. I've already got one ombudsman who declared he'll overturn every warning I give which is complained about, because I am 'biased'.. at this point, I cannot turn the other one against me as well.

So one Oms has declared they will overturn every warning this GM issues if the user complains about the warning. And therefore this GM refuses to mod posts made by the other Oms in fear of both of them being biased towards her and overturning all warnings this GM gives.

Juliette need not fear incurring my displeasure should she choose to moderate me. I am, after all, an ordinary user in the other sections of the forum. Indeed, during the recent furore over masking in links, I proposed that I be disciplined in the interests of setting a precendent and dispelling the notion that certain users were being favoured. It takes far more than being warned by someone to make me dislike them. I have never asked for special treatment, and nor do I expect to recieve it; a sentiment which I have made abundantly clear to all of the staff. In response to this piece of feedback, I will reiterate the point this coming Monday.

Whilst I have agreed with Jack about certain decisions Juliette has made, I do not feel she is a fundamentally biased. I will look at warnings issued by her as I would anybody else, and I will prevent the ombudsman office from overturning warnings which are clearly fair. Jack and I work in tandem, after all, and we talk other cases where we are not in agreement.

Thank you for your feedback, Clarkey. As it had been over a week since your last post in this section, I was starting to worry that you'd lost interest.

Clarkey wrote:Here's some feedback... nice to see what the Ombudsman are like behind closed doors.

Juliette wrote:My hands are tied. I've already got one ombudsman who declared he'll overturn every warning I give which is complained about, because I am 'biased'.. at this point, I cannot turn the other one against me as well.

So one Oms has declared they will overturn every warning this GM issues if the user complains about the warning. And therefore this GM refuses to mod posts made by the other Oms in fear of both of them being biased towards her and overturning all warnings this GM gives.

That is complete and utter BS. Neither one of us has said such tripe.

Please put my Oms feedback back in here. Remove the other stuff but return my feedback of both Jack and Mordack.

Spam again and you'll be warned.

Psi Kiya Trist wrote:jack and mordack have both also had influence and the power to affect this game, and they did their jobs well, despite claims to the contrary. they are even still serving this forum to the best of their ability, given their own personal circumstances(maybe not so for jack, but he's jack).

from what i've seen of both mordack and jack operating as ombudsman(this time around), they've been quick to address, organize, and give answers to petitions made of them.

Now Psi if we can keep to the topic of the Ombudsman because believe it or not this is a Oms Feedback thread not a discussion about me.

Jack - Do i regret what i did to Jack? Yes, because since that day i have seen a different side to him. Has he attempted to bully me because of it? No. Does he keep bringing up the past to throw in my face? No. Does he show and repeatedly show any anger, hatred or any other feelings towards me about what I did to him? No. That's not to say he doesn't feel any of that, but he has remained decent on the forums and in his role of Ombudsman. Granted I haven't yet had to bring my own case to the Oms but I have confidence that Jack would treat me as he would treat anyone else. I had doubts when he became Oms, but those doubts soon faded. So in my opinion Jack has been a capable Ombudsman to this point.

Mordack - This is the person who ran from his responsibility as an Admin the moment things got heated and left the other admins to clean up my mess. Then used the excuse that I wasn't punished enough as a reason for him leaving. Some admin, even I would have stuck around if the tables were turned to help fix things.

Whereas Jack (my actual victim so to speak) has not bullied me, brought the past up, and pretty much shown his feelings towards me, Mordack has. Mordack continues to throw the past in my face, and he continues to bully me on forums and in the process breaking rules. His most recent comment where making comments in regards to the past about my "so-called" mental health. That is a direct personal attack on me, yet he walked away from it without a warning. Mordack has not shown he has qualities of an Ombudsman as he does not remain neutral when I am involved. An Oms is meant to remain neutral.

He can claim when he was speaking of my "mental health" that he was not speaking as an Oms, but when you speak in the same text colour throughout the forums whether it is as yourself or an Oms then you can't expect people to distinguish between every post. You have clearly shown acts of bullying towards me and that is not expected of an Ombudsman. Even making jokes like in your previous post in this thread about my frequency of posting in the Oms section is proof of your lack of neutrality towards me.

Whereas Jack has shown he is capable of being an Ombudsman, Mordack has not.

My past actions as an administrator, whilst nonetheless an endless topic of discussion for some people, are not directly relevant to an ombudsman feedback thread. I suggest you consult this thread in which I spoke at great length about what happened. I disagree with almost every assertion you made in that paragraph, but if you wish to discuss it further than I suggest private messaging me or making another thread.

I am neutral toward you as a user. I do not like you, but if you were ever directly involved in a case then I wouldn't let it influence my judgement. I don't like a few people, believe it or not, but I nonetheless feel that their cases have recieved a fair hearing in the ombudsman section. Yours would too. If you are so woefully thin-skinned that you that the occasional piece of sarcasm causes you such considerable mental anguish, then I would recommend finding a hobby other than the internet. Note though that if you ever came to me with a real problem, and a real issue, then I would do my job. I worked in customer service for five years, and I'm accustomed to dealing with people despite not always liking them. We're never going to be best friends, and it's a stretch of the imagination to think I'll ever be nice to you, but the idea that I would ever deliberately rule against you out of spite is absurd and unwarranted.

Whilst I do welcome all feedback, and respect your right to post here, I also feel like adding that 'hypothetical' feedback isn't especially helpful. Your most recent complaint, Clarkey, like the one before it, is based largely on how you personally feel I'd behave in a situation which has yet to arise. Even if your feelings were warranted, it is difficult to respond in any meaningful way to feedback of this nature. I would prefer opinions based on what we have done, not what we might do; although naturally all content is welcome.

I ve to complain how Oms treated my case of being straight warned for a "spam"

viewtopic.php?f=132&t=172757

my sale account thread was being smaped wit lolz i reported and it was cleaned
then smone posted smth insulting to the sale , reported it , theres no category to the reporting process where it could fit so i picked spam.
also i replied after few hrs to explain to other interested what is my account worth so they wont be affected by that insulting post.

result is I was warned coz i tried to protect my thread.

the Oms treaded the case by quoting other ppl answers and not giving his full verdict backup by rules etc.

the case is/was :
why my post is considered a spam. the post it sef is only an explanation of questions and a request to avoid other price check.