New GAT Voting

Recommended Posts

Alright, it's been a few days so I'll start the voting now. If we're missing some nominations, latecomers are welcome. A few of the nominees might drop out so they can just say the word, that's no problem.



So the system is like last time: to vote you reply to this thread, saying who you're voting up and who you're voting down. You need to give reasons for downvotes but not upvotes. You only get one set of votes per physical body. Discussion about the vote should also go in this thread. Anyone can vote on anyone. And yeah, some of the stuff in that protocol is a bit arbitrary so if anyone has a problem with it then it can be fixed.


I said the voting period was two weeks, so I'll close this vote some time on 25-09-14. After that, anyone with a positive vote count (>0) will become a GAT, since there are more than enough 'spaces'.


Below is the list of nominees, with a running vote count. I'll update this when new things happen.


Quilten +12

sushi +12

Dog +5

swashy +6

fennecgirl +5

Kronkleberry +9

Joshua +3


Quora quit so can't really become a GAT now.



For starters, consider me voting up everyone on the list.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quilten +1

Quora -1

sushi +1

Dog -1

Swashy +1

Fennec -1

Kronkle +1


My experiences with Quora and her system suggest that they are in this for political reasons rather than actual concern or interest, so I cannot in good conscience vote them up. This is putting how I feel about their participation lightly.


Similarly, I cannot vote Dog in because the few interactions I've had with him suggest he can be immature at times and has been known to be a bit of a troll.


I feel that the Guide approval team should have a constituency of members that have had more positive experiences with tulpas; for this reason I feel fennecgirl would not make a good candidate, especially because of the recency of certain negative events in her tulpamancy experience.


I've upvoted all others, but have no experience with Sushi or Quilten. I do seem to remember that Kronkleberry can be angered a tad more easily than would be optimal, but I do not feel that that should disqualify them from this because of the mostly nonconfrontational work done in the GAT.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I upvote everybody except for Quora and Kronkleberry. I don't know Kronkleberry, so I'll abstain there, and I'm giving Quora a downvote because I do not feel like she is capable of providing useful and constructive criticism, based off of what I've seen of her in the past. I've also read her posts against the GAT, this one in particular http://pastebin.com/HBaZW69j and it makes me think that she is not willing to join the GAT because she wants to contribute, but rather to have influence from within the team, which does not appear to be the correct mindset to me. As I've mentioned earlier in the thread, I've also never seen her be constructive or helpful before. This doesn't mean that she can't be - maybe I simply missed those posts or there was behind-the-scenes work that I am unaware of, but I think that a significantly contributing member would be known for being one. That, plus the fact that she nominated herself, is why I'm downvoting her.


EDIT: My post may have been a little vague - that pastebin is something I found here and it's basically all the deleted posts from that thread, that started with Quora attempting to "debunk" the GAT and derailing the thread.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 Quilten, sushi, and swashy.


-1 Quora

After going through a lot of her posts and the pastebin that Sierra linked, I don't think that Quora would be a good fit for the team. Like schlondark said, they probably wouldn't join out of interest or concern, and she doesn't seem to have the right mindset for it at all.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay woah let's start. I shall write the longpost where I give reasons for everything just in case someone goes "hey I wonder why that Sands voted that way". Implying someone cares I know, but I'll do it to be as transparent as I can.


+1 for Dog and Quilten


I nominated Dog and the reason can be seen in this post. I saw what he can do and I was pleased, so I hope they could keep it up. I talked to Quilten about GAT and what he would bring to the table, and it does seem like he at least knows how to keep up the standards and everything. He also knows criticism isn't an attack and is in a situation where he gets it often himself, so that kind of experience I think of highly. It at least shows me that a person is quite chill and can handle their words. I do hope that they could assist GAT and maybe grow into a better team member if others feel they're not quite there yet.


Let's get the "meh" ones out of the way. Swashy's just meh because I haven't seen him in ages and don't even know what he's up to now. Sushi I have previously told off I'm quite sure, but it has been a long time since then. It seems like he might have changed a bit into a better direction and could finally have his place on GAT, but he did have to leave quite fast last time for a reason. I hope this reason has been taken care of and they can give their full attention to this now? How's it going, Sushi?


The slightly more negative "meh" ones are Fennecgirl and Kronkleberry. Kronkleberry only because I tried to contact him and ask about GAT stuff, but he apparently was "too busy", so I don't even know. It does kind of leave a bad first impression, so I feel like the others will be able to rate them better than me. Fennecgirl has some negative history. While they are helping a lot in Reddit now and some of it is helpful, some of it has been very silly or just outright bad. They seem like they're quick to say "no" and that's coming from me. Still, can't really seem to find them now as I didn't go saving them, so I can't remember how bad they were or show you guys ~~proof~~. There's also the whole thing they did in the past where they just threw away any help after asking for it because it wasn't what they wanted. It seemed like Fennec was only after pitypats and couldn't figure out that the real problem might be themselves. Or couldn't accept it at least. After that none of us who did it previously really tried to help them anymore, so I dunno how they react to help these days. I can only hope they have grown up as a person and I'll leave the decision to those who know more of their current actions.


I hope my concerns will make others think if the issues are still, well, issues and then vote accordingly.


-1 for Quora


To start it off, I feel that this person already goes against the rules about proper GAT members as listed here, mainly these following parts:


- The individual is generally considered sensible by most, and is not a common troll or considered to be the local idiot


- The individual has the ability to listen to others, and have proper discussions - not somebody who will start a flame-war or feel offended at the smallest hint of something that may not be in their favor


Ever since Quora nominated themselves, it seems like people have been worried how to react to it. Like how they would rather abstain from voting than vote no because they don't know how they will react or they have been worried what they can say without them freaking out and reporting it. I think that tells a lot what a community thinks of a person and how they have handled issues previously. When people are afraid to tell of their experiences and say what is the truth, I could hardly call such a person "sensible" or "having the ability to listen to others" or well, the rest of the second sentence in that quoteblock. Such a person does not belong to GAT according to the pastebin we have used as our rules.


Similarly, they have not been able to have proper discussions about many things. I don't have logs so you can take this with a grain of salt (unless those who have seen it want to back me up), but the moment they get into a position where they are being proven wrong, they tend to just quit. Either they never respond on the forums or just ragequit the conversation in IRC. It apparently has happened many times, so I don't think such a person should be in a position where they can't even hold a conversation with people where they have to explain their points and listen to the other side. They also seem to have a habit of ignoring everything that doesn't support their own view of things. GAT members are ultimately doing a very people-centric job where good communication skills and the ability to handle stress are both required. I have only seen proof of the opposite.


Quora also has the habit of being the mouthpiece of everyone sharing their body to the point where people claim they all are the same person. Whether or not that is true or what I think is not important, so I shall continue calling them separate people to please them at least that much. Still, by putting Quora on the team we would also be putting every single other person in their head on the team, to which I also object as none of the ones I have actually seen talking are any better. These are the kind of people who supposedly try to get people fired from actual jobs (I do have logs of someone claiming this though whether or not you wish to believe the person saying it is up to you), trying to get IRCops fired for saying something about them because they "abused their op powers" even though everyone knew it already (I was there so I can show logs about that too), and badmouthing and insulting .info users in private mod channels which is not allowed and should not happen for us to actually have any trust in mods (happened often enough for them to have to put a system in place where such now will lead to warnings). Don't have the logs of this one saved but I might be able to get the leaked logs from someone else who was there at the time.


While those might not be strikes against Quora if you don't think my point about them being the mouthpiece is valid – and they do tend to claim they can't be held responsible because someone else said/did it, apparently – there is something about those that still makes Quora themselves look quite bad. The fact that they did nothing to stop the others and often try to hide the proof of what they have done so no one else can see it. They can't even moderate or criticize the people they live with. They haven't apologized to anyone or said they have been wrong. Any way I look at it, it almost seems like they think they were right to do those things. I'm sorry but I'm not fine working with someone like that. Perhaps a bit of a personal reason, but I'll be honest with you guys here. It does not say that someone is a good GAT member to me. If you disagree, I hope the rest still works for you.


Another point is that they are extremely selfish and despite all their talk of doing it "for the community", they only seem like they're doing it for themselves. While these are just the kinds of patterns I have noticed due to being somewhat involved, this is basically all Quora does here. One day someone else in their body gets told that one just can't "join" GAT; they must be nominated and voted in. And the votes already were over, this was the first time this was done. What happens not too long after? Quora making a post that apparently should make the GAT look bad. Okay. Then much later their guide gets critiqued. It does end up getting approved, but there are members who disapproved it. Meanwhile their little group rages and insults people behind our backs in that private mod channel we can't join, forcing mods to deal with their personal drama and inability to handle criticism. Okay. The some time later they make another post talking about how it was basically unfair, which they then leave alone because they didn't apparently want to respond to any points others raised. Okay. Their latest concerns thread was still mostly about their own guide which they still haven't gotten over, even though it got approved. It was posted quite soon after GAT started rating another guide I assume they probably liked and didn't like how it was getting disapproved. But hey, that's conjecture on my part, up to you to decide how you see it. The previous point I think still stand.


I also get the feeling that they are trying to do this for redefinitions which is always bad for this community and also lowering the standards of approved guides, which... Well, is bad for the guides section and just means we would just approve everything. Which makes GAT completely useless and makes the guides section just as messy as it was before.


Tl;dr version: Quora goes against the GAT nomination rules by being the kind of a person not many trust and they also can't handle anything negative said against them. They also can't hold any kind of conversation where they have to listen to others and counter their points if they can, which to me makes them unfit for GAT duty. I also second the point of them not doing it for the community which other have pointed out as well, as I have only see them doing it for themselves and the other people in their body. They also seem pro-redefinitions and pro-lowering guide standards, which already aren't exactly strict and would make it so everything gets approved. Which would destroy the reason to have GAT in the first place.


If others disagree and feel Quora could be a GAT member, then obviously they will get in. Maybe they will prove us all wrong and I will be happy if they do. But if they just constantly cause trouble for the team and would force us to lower our already low standards, GAT members can be voted out so no lasting damage would be done if things take a turn for the worse.

The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll vote up everyone on the list (though I’m already positive those near at the negative mark will probably stay there). There’s really no reason for me to use ad hominem, nor an ad hominem circumstantial (e.g. because they’re bitchy in the chat-logs, they’ll be incapable of providing something constructive) for justifications on downvotes. I’ve seen people just as equal to whatever demeanor they claimed those they may dislike (or worse), but that didn’t mean they were all too horrible in critiquing.


We’re limited to circumstances, and generalizations between certain relationships with other members, but I do know that members that used to be in the GAT before clearly bragged about certain people they didn’t like. Though that really didn’t stop anyone from giving their opinions for guide submissions, so I’m not too sure how reducing personal strife would change anything in the actual critiquing. And if these individuals truly had motives that would just burn the concept of GAT down, well, contingencies like booting them out can always be implemented.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sushi, Dog, Kronkelberry, and fennecgirl all get my vote.

[align=center]Even though my username is that of my tulpa, Quilten, my name is Phaneron, the host, who does all of the actual posting.

Tulpas: Quilten, Jira


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 Kronkleberry

-1 Obama

"Assert the supremacy of your Imaginal acts over facts and put all things in subjection to them... Nothing can take it from but your failure to persist in imagining the ideal realized."


-Neville Goddard

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.