the Black Prince for Divus

[Garbarsardar]

I would like to propose the member of the site the Black Prince for the award of the rank of Divus.

Let me start that tBP has been a controversial "issue" in many phases of the TWC's existance.

Let me add that I was the person who prosecuted him in the past and also that put pressure on him for relinquishing his Divus rank.

The last issue is non-existant now under the present form of the Syntagma. tBP is formally entitled to this rank.

The other issues that created some controversy in the past should not efface the offering of tBP towards this site.

He is one of the founding fathers of TWC he laboured long and hard for the prosperity of this site and even his past misdeeds can be attributed to his extreme passion for the site rather, than to any form of malevolance, which I sincerely believe heis devoid of.

This is a new era for TWC and I want this proposal to signal this era of reconciliation apart from giving tBP what he actually deserves for his contribuitions.

Thank you.
Garb.

[Søren]

We are not mono-theistic; and a pantheon can involve gods which some might find slightly flawed. Agreed.

[Belisarius]

Well if tBP qualifies and deserves the rank then I must say so do many many other people such as Garb and so on. I abstain.


hmm, Im curious, Garb.. WHat inspired this sudden change in opinion?

[Garbarsardar]

Well if tBP qualifies and deserves the rank then I must say so do many many other people such as Garb and so on. I abstain.


hmm, Im curious, Garb.. WHat inspired this sudden change in opinion?

The fact that we are in front of a new era of TWC and thus the need to address our past with less "passion".

I thought that tBP's total time was 18 months, sorry about this. I agree with Spartan that the Syntagma should be amended in a more reasonable way...

[the Black Prince]

i'm deeply honoured to be proposed, and must admit it would be nice...

but i do not qualify. the latest amendment to the Syntagma means Divus must have served as an administrator for at least 18 months, a much higher period that before. Under these new rules only one, possibly 2 members qualify as Divus, and thats Siblesz and maybe HorseArcher. Not even our sites two founding members, or the founder of the Curia logged 18 months of service, though all 3 currently hold that rank.

As i do not meet the current criteria for this rank, i do not see how i can be considered for it... (if anyone can explain how i can be made a Divus, i would happily accept however!)

my thanks to Garb for this proposal, i am, once again, deeply honoured

Aden, tBP

[Spartan]

Hmmm... I need to consider carefully if I should voice and opinion either in the affirmative or negative on this topic.

Given the past history between us over the years and his opposition to my ascension to the rank in question as well as nearly all my endeavors on behalf of the community in a seemingly endless antagonistic crusade I am inclined to post in the negative but that would simply be petty of me and not consistent with my value system or personal integrity. There are also the many troubles within the community facilitated by him time and time again nevertheless I'm not entirely sure most (if not all) of them were done from a disingenuous position or one of malice intent.

I have to mull this over for some time so for the moment I'll take a neutral position. However I reserve the right to make a finial declaration in the affirmative or negative.

UPDATE: Given that I just saw tBP's post (he posted while I was typing this the first time). I think that the time requirement should be for all Admins from the time of enactment of the proposal and any Admin prior should be held to the prior system or for the sake of justice all Divus ranks should be removed and reconsidered for action under the current system.

While I'm on the topic of the requirements, I have never been entirely comfortable with a time requirement as Admin as the primary factor. I always figured ones contribution to the community should be the primary distinction and that Admin time was simply representative of that contribution. Maybe a "demagogue" rank should be created for Admins work only with a confirmation vote after leaving office and the Divus rank should be reserved for those who have surpassed mere administrative contributions and added to the heart and soul of the community which after all is what religion is all about is it not?

[the Black Prince]

The whole argument over my resignation from the rank was because it was doubtful whether i met the time requirements then... under the new rules, its plainly obvious i don't meet them.

The trouble is, without a time limit, the only other requirement you could use is contribution and merit, and that falls foul of the floodgates rule. There'll be someone who will say that just about every admin has made a substantial worthy or significant contribution (or whatever term you use) and its impossible to quantify these measures.

I have no problems saying people like Siblesz and Paul made substansive contributions in their role as Staff to TWC. Its plainly obvious from their effect on the site they did so. My standard test would be to say those administrators who made a fundamental change that benefits the site in the form of contribution.

I once said the people i believed to be Divus were
Paul - Founder
Knight2100 - Co-Founder
Siblesz - no more needs to be said
the Black Prince - TC Vids and development of the Curia
Boris - Founding the Curia
Sulla - Leadership and Reform
(prospective) Imb39 - no more needs to be said.

i don't hold simple length of service as enough of a qualifier unless they do something that greatly benefits or makes some kind of profound change or improvement.

Spartan, the reason i've always considered you not to qualify as a Divus, is i can't think of what contributuion you made in your role as an administrator that made some great or fundamental change to the site for the better. I don't and cannot possibly deny your outstanding and dedicated work as a modder, but you didn't need to be an admin to do that. Of course, i'm not in any position to say what happened behind the scenes at certain points in history. There may well be stuff you did that i do not know of.

I would certainly say it was nothing personal against you.

@Garb,
neither me nor Boris scored 18 months... Sib and me went from November 03 to April 04, and then Sib carried on till the hack attacks, in May 05.

Not sure how long Archer held office for... at least a year i would imagine, but not sure of his exact date of promotion.

Certainly no one but Sib and maybe Archer qualify under this new limit, and Archer isn't eligiable for another 3 months...

to be honest, i said all this when the new rules on Divus went to vote not so long ago, but i was generally ignored and the people spoke lol.

[Spartan]

Fair enough. But using your logic I don’t see how founder status would qualify on face value. Moreover do you really think the videos are just cause? They almost killed this community.

As far as lists go - Ill list mine:

[1st Gen] Siblesz - Leadership, vision and devotion
[1st Gen] Boris - Founding the Curia, leadership and community building
[2nd Gen] Sulla - Leadership
[2nd Gen] Spartan - Founding the mod community, Help Center and ES, modding, leadership, vision and devotion
[2nd Gen] HorseArcher - Leadership, modding, vision and devotion.

===================
[1st Gen]tBP - (still undetermined)
===================

Regarding myself in addition to what I listed as you referenced I did many things for a long time only a very few people truly know about but I cant disclose in public due to the staff agreement as well as personal promise that I am still honor bound to uphold.

As to your comment about our "disagreements", I am also of that opinion hence my current position.

[Garbarsardar]

Spartan, you are aware of my support for your award of the rank; that despite my disagreement with some of your actions and the same goes for Sulla as can be seen in the relevant threads.

I think it is only fair to use the exactly same reasoning for tBP and later (in the fullness of time) for Horsearcher.

[Spartan]

Spartan, you are aware of my support for your award of the rank; that despite my disagreement with some of your actions and the same goes for Sulla as can be seen in the relevant threads.

I think it is only fair to use the exactly same reasoning for tBP and later (in the fullness of time) for Horsearcher.

Yes I am and thank you. I also believe I am using the same reasoning for tBP I'm still on the fence however regarding the merits of his actions with regards to community cohesion and advancement. Things like the TC videos and the db deletion situation as well as a couple separatist and insurrections movements spawned by him are what is of concern for me. :hmmm:

BTW: of the third and fourth generation of members you are one of the people I also believe merits such accolades however I did not list those people.

[Garbarsardar]

Yes I am and thank you. I also believe I am using the same reasoning for tBP I'm still on the fence however regarding the merits of his actions with regards to community cohesion and advancement. Things like the TC videos and the db deletion situation as well as a couple separatist and insurrections movements spawned by him are what is of concern for me. :hmmm:

BTW: of the third and fourth generation of members you are one of the people I also believe merits such accolades however I did not list those people.

Who of us can have a claim to merit under the miscroscope? Who can claim his offerings weigh more than his blunders in a scale so delicate?

I prefer to take a more macroscopic perspective on those actions since in the end we are all guilty. Of pride, if nothing more...

[Søren]

Spartan deserves his deification, IMO.

[the Black Prince]

starting insurrections? huh? first i've heard of this...

and i didn't delete the db, that was two members of the site, Phoenix and Cypher, there used to be posts showing it, they may have been deleted in various purges of the database though

[Wild Bill Kelso]

starting insurrections? huh? first i've heard of this...

and i didn't delete the db, that was two members of the site, Phoenix and Cypher, there used to be posts showing it, they may have been deleted in various purges of the database though

Oh.. they are still around. I actually stumbled upon some of them the other day. Regardless, though I did uncover the evidence that helped bring to light your ineligibility under the previous requirements last time, I would support any new motion to make you Divus.

[Fabolous]

As tBP himself said, he doesn't qualify under the current Syntagma. Personally, I wish there had been a version of the Syntagma that allowed at vote on tBP, the Curia voted for him once, and I find it disappointing that a Curial vote was overturned by technicality.

Garb, you could attempt to have "Syntagma should be amended in a more reasonable way" However you should probably note that the changes were voted in by the Curia just 4 days ago.

Spartan, you could probably motion to have all the current Divus removed and have them revoted on in the new Syntagma. But off the top of my head I don't think anyone but Sibs would qualify. (Archer wouldn't qualify, he was appointed Consul in Sept. of 05, so only 16 months. GEN was over a year if I recall correctly, but I doubt he made 18 months. I don't think Boris did, but if it came up I would of course check)
Due to so few qualifying, you would basically be asking the Curia to remove yourself as well as Paul, Knight, GEN, Boris, and Sulla. (I find it extremely unlikely that would occur)

[Spartan]

starting insurrections? huh? first i've heard of this...

and i didn't delete the db, that was two members of the site, Phoenix and Cypher, there used to be posts showing it, they may have been deleted in various purges of the database though

I dont want to warp the original and noble intention of this thread by engaging in a debate about things that will server no productive purpose for many on the forums today nor do I want to undermine the credibility you may have built up over the past year by airing dirty laundry so I'll keep this response short and it is in no way to be considered argumentative just a statement of fact from my perspective.

Lets see here... when I put you and a couple other 'opposition party leaders' on my staff to try to promote unity and develop a sense of solidarity between the major community factions, you immediately went about doing political engineering in opposition to what I was try to do on nearly every level and after I removed you from staff for that activity you then called for people to abandon TWC and go to the new forum you and your friends were running. Those actions qualify as insurrection activities in my book.

On the topic of the db deletion, I have considered giving you the benefit of the doubt before when you pleaded your case to the community however Sib told me one he was 100% sure it was you and frankly I'm more inclined to take his word over yours given that you have blatantly deceived me in prior dealings.

[the Black Prince]

wtf? i've never run another forum until 2005 when i launched the forum for Keele University LGBT...

ahh, wait, i guess you mean anagenesse and the exile forum set up by Sib and Boris... the only time you've removed me from staff was during the hack attacks... i had nothing to do with setting up or running that place... it was sib boris and nicks forum

as to topic deletion, sib was never in possession of the facts, he wasn't here. he was told what happened after the event. Morble asked for my account of things afterward, and comparing the 2 versions morble agreed i wasn't responsible. i believe, though i can't recall that morble, unlike nick and boris, had email conversations with the person who sent the apology, whereas nick and boris just ignored the emails, and sibs deleted the posted messages off the board. sib was 100% convinced because he refused to hear the evidence of what actually happened

[Spartan]

Hmmm.. I was not aware that Sib was involved with the Anagenesse or the exile forums given that Sib was on vacation at the time things transpired. However in fairness I left shortly after so he may have became involved with them after the fact. But that still does not change the fact that you publicly promoted the open rebellion against the leadership of TWC at the time.

[Garbarsardar]

Hmmm.. I was not aware that Sib was involved with the Anagenesse or the exile forums given that Sib was on vacation at the time things transpired. However in fairness I left shortly after so he may have became involved with them after the fact. But that still does not change the fact that you publicly promoted the open rebellion against the leadership of TWC at the time.

Funny timing for this statement though, since the current leadership of TWC is a result of an open rebellion against the previous leadership (and ownership of TWC).

Is it the "history is written by the winners" clause, again?

[Spartan]

Funny timing for this statement though, since the current leadership of TWC is a result of an open rebellion against the previous leadership (and ownership of TWC).

Is it the "history is written by the winners" clause, again?

Not really. I happen to believe that one should work for change within what ever system is in place. However if a group of people decided they did not like the current government and ownership and wanted dramatic change despite your best efforts to address the issues whether you perceive them as legitimate or not what would your reaction be? I invited the opposition into my government and gave them key positions. Would you guys as the current government? :hmmm: