Blitzaholic wrote:Bruceswar wrote:lokisgal wrote:Im interested but Ive been told Blitz has decided to black ball me and has said its because hes chairman of the committee so he can do what he wants.
If Im not mistaken this is a public venture and not something called Blitz's Hall of Fame but Rather CC Hall of Fame
And he says hes chairman? Should this not be an elected position also? Not to deny all the hard work hes put into it but Since this is CC's hall of fame it seems like anyone who wants to help should be allowed and all positions should be up for vote
Wait so now people are getting black balled because of who blitz likes and does not like? Should the Chairman not be elected? That statement if true, is very disturbing.
JP is correct, basically most found me to be best suited for the criteria committee. I am open to chair and several suggested that I should be chair or am chair, but, currently I am not as this is still all unofficial. I am willing to do whatever CC/admin feels is best, if they rather me not chair or step down in that area, that is fine too. I am learning to let go more. We will iron that out in due time. For now, I am the leader of a user group criteria forum committee which is in the process in which all will have equal say with andy drufense being invited to oversee the process to ensure it is all fair and just, I will also invite lackattack as well when he comes back. I did NOT blackball anyone. I did "suggest" loki who is on my foe list due to trust issues from the past, not be on the committee out of her behaviour and constant drama over the years, which I do not have time to get into. So, to be respectful and not smear her name in public, I will just leave it at that and not mention specifics. This is not the time nor place for that. Also, some of her recent posts in other threads still show some lingering resentments which can tint integrity and honesty on decision making processes. We simply cannot have that on neither committee. This rings true for anyone, if their is major conflicts, foes, irrational behavior, etc. within either committee, it can cause unwanted division within the groups. No one wants this. Our common goal is focus on solutions and remain optimistic about this opportunity. I had a great idea for CC to have a Hall of Fame and maybe I did make some mistakes, perhaps I did not go about it all the right ways, I am NOT perfect, however, my intentions are good, yet, some players just criticized and ridiculed me all over in public. We cannot have that kind of behavior in these committee's, we need them to be as impartial as possible. So, to be fair, that is where I am at and I think many would agree. I have been more open in the last couple weeks and made some changes and will continue to make changes, thx to the CC community recommendations, input and posts. This is still unofficial and nothing has been finalized, in some ways, I have to go back and scrap things and start a fresh. There is a lot of hard work, time and brainstorming that needs to go into this in order for it to be successful. Thx for reading and thx all for the interest many of you are showing in this.
Respectfully, Blitz
Some times you are your own worst enemy Blitz.
Blitzaholic wrote: JP is correct, basically most found me to be best suited for the criteria committee.
Before any one starts, I have not pasted the rest of the sentence/argument regarding yourself as it is little more than an attempt to reinforce an argument you have decided in your mind already. JP is correct, but you fail, notably, to mention what he is correct about.
He actually says:
jpcloet wrote:I missed the part where Blitz is the chairman.
I'm assuming that after the public votes, that within that group of players, they will internally select a chairman (or woman) from amongst them. Blitz would still have to get public votes as well. I think Blitz is better off being on the criteria group personally.
You do this all the time Blitz and I cannot figure why. JP is saying, quite clearly, that you along with everyone else would have to be voted for. You do not know that most would find you best suited to be the chair, so to say so is incorrect and infers you have already decided this. He also mentions categorically that he feels you would be best on any committee that decides Criteria, he does not mention any public Committee who would either nominate or award (should the community go down this route).
Blitzaholic wrote: I did "suggest" loki who is on my foe list due to trust issues from the past, not be on the committee out of her behavior and constant drama over the years, which I do not have time to get into. So, to be respectful and not smear her name in public, I will just leave it at that and not mention specifics. This is not the time nor place for that. Also, some of her recent posts in other threads still show some lingering resentments which can tint integrity and honesty on decision making processes. We simply cannot have that on neither committee. This rings true for anyone, if their is major conflicts, foes, irrational behavior, etc. within either committee, it can cause unwanted division within the groups. No one wants this.
The above does not bear close scrutiny. To suggest that some one does not serve on anything due to ‘past issues’ foe list or anything else is not, with respect, for you to say, it is either for those who vote (should this be the case) or those who nominate (should this be the case). To then continue after saying “I will just leave it at that and not mention specifics. This is not the time nor place for that” is a very poor show indeed. On the one hand you have said it is not for discussing, then on the other you continue in a ‘nudge nudge wink wink’ kind of way, a poor show indeed. You then continue (as if you hadn’t done enough) as if any posts Lokisgal had made showed a general poor attitude. I have searched and, again with respect, any posts of a negative nature were aimed at you. This brings me to the next point; if you cannot handle negativity against you personally, then you are not fit and proper to chair anything! For the only logical conclusion can be that you only want people who like you and that you like, a recipe for absolute disaster as skills required are placed second to your wants and needs. You need to understand Blitz that to be even handed means you must accept the majority decision of a committee. As I mentioned in the other thread, the Chair is not actively involved in pushing the committee one way or another, but should act as the person who moves things along and, in fact, only votes when there is a split decision!
You then do what I have noticed is a pretty standard procedure with you and hit the ‘humble’ mode.
Blitzaholic wrote: I had a great idea for CC to have a Hall of Fame and maybe I did make some mistakes, perhaps I did not go about it all the right ways, I am NOT perfect, however, my intentions are good, yet, some players just criticized and ridiculed me all over in public. We cannot have that kind of behavior in these committee's, we need them to be as impartial as possible. So, to be fair, that is where I am at and I think many would agree. I have been more open in the last couple weeks and made some changes and will continue to make changes, thx to the CC community recommendations, input and posts. This is still unofficial and nothing has been finalized, in some ways, I have to go back and scrap things and start a fresh. There is a lot of hard work, time and brainstorming that needs to go into this in order for it to be successful. Thx for reading and thx all for the interest many of you are showing in this.
Respectfully, Blitz
Let’s just break this down one step at a time;
1) yes your idea is great, no argument there.
2) You have gone about it the wrong way in some aspects, the Lokisgal issue I mention above being an example of this.
3) To seek approbation or sympathy by mentioning some who criticise and ridicule you is not, repeat not, a cogent argument to attempt to stop them being on any Committee. I lampoon you because, quite frankly, you leave yourself open to being lampooned! (Now before you regard this as a personal attack, do remember I lampoon any one and every one I feel I wish to….many will recall my weekly updates on the Gen Congrats threads where no one and no subject matter was sacred including Lackattack himself!)
4) To say ‘We cannot have that kind of behaviour in these committee's, we need them to be as impartial as possible’ does not hold water as an argument. I refer you to my comment as to the responsibilities of the Chair in any group…it is for that person to keep order and to allow enough freedom of expression to ensure ALL attitudes and ideas (whether they are welcome or not) are expressed openly. If the Chair is not strong enough to do so and keep order then the person chosen should NOT be in that position to start with otherwise it just goes full circle to what I have been saying over and over again.
5) Your comment regarding going back to the beginning and scrapping things smacks of throwing toys out of the pram. Get a grip Blitz. One the one hand you are implying a threat and on the other seeking sympathy which is quite unnecessary.
6) You mention that there is a lot of hard work and brainstorming to be done. This is not quite true.
a) So far we have consensus on many of the core issues. The work to be done (in public) for now is pretty much done.
b) You need to move on getting a forum space sorted (which, if I read correctly you are doing so well done there).
c) You also need to press admin for a list of those they think would be good to serve.
d) You need to promote the idea of others serving on the Criteria Committee in a rational way that is clear and concise. This is not rocket science, just start a thread clearly stating what the task will be (I am happy to provide you with script on this should you wish by PM) so that there are reserves should there not be enough nominations who accept from Admin
Once this is done, you are ready to roll in that the Committee can be formed, the Chair voted for and the discussion on the long list of criteria to date started.
Anything else can wait, but again, as I mentioned in the other thread, there is little to stop the nominations for the future committee of Awards.
