WHY'd PEE WEE LEAVE?

Thorgrim · Post by **Thorgrim** » Fri Jul 25, 2003 11:48 am

Ok, Could I be so rude as to find out why he left? Why was he mad at the HC?

Thorgrim

Post by **Panzerfaust** » Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:11 pm

That horse has been beat to death, and then kicked and punched and lit on fire.

It's in the LD Member forum.

Heatmiser · Post by **Heatmiser** » Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:45 pm

Yeah there's like 150million posts about it on multiple threads.
Lets drop it already.

Defender · Post by **Defender** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 3:56 pm

Hmmm I wonder if Pee-Wee might have had a point after all.

Name ----------------- Level ---- Status ------- Last Upload
Timothy the Cynical -- 108 ---- Upload --- 2003-07-18 20:26:39
Tenchi Muyo ----------- 102 ---- Upload --- 2003-07-20 16:13:09

He'd still be sitting in the clan even now.

Either way, it is sad to see this kind of lack of activity from members of a chain.

Podunkmer · Post by **Podunkmer** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 4:44 pm

Defender wrote:Hmmm I wonder if Pee-Wee might have had a point after all.

Name ----------------- Level ---- Status ------- Last Upload
Timothy the Cynical -- 108 ---- Upload --- 2003-07-18 20:26:39
Tenchi Muyo ----------- 102 ---- Upload --- 2003-07-20 16:13:09

He'd still be sitting in the clan even now.

Either way, it is sad to see this kind of lack of activity from members of a chain.

Your point would almost be a good one, except that the ACStats database doesn't record updates from people who aren't in the chain. Since those two people were out of the chain due to Pee Wee's break and the subsequent incomplete patch, they will show as Upload status until they have updated a few times, and even then the chain managers might have to remove and add them again. That's what it took for me to get rid of Upload status after there was a chain move involving me, as no amount of me logging in and out would make the database update.

The perceived "lack of activity" is actually technical difficulties that resulted from Pee Wee's break. Sorry.

Defender · Post by **Defender** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 5:42 pm

Well, I stand corrected, on one point, the dates, we can't note when they did finally log in from those dates.

Although I was corrected on that point, it does not detract, nor excuse them, from their weeks worth of inactivity prior to the break.

I'm sure everyone would agree, it is something that should be addressed.

Oof · Post by **Oof** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 6:04 pm

Who is this? With only two posts on your account, and both of them in this thread, I'm wondering why you picked this particular (old) thread from among all the other threads in the forum to reply to. If you are thinking about joining one of the chains, and this perceived lack of attention by chain members is a concern, I will be glad to point you to our Policies thread. While I don't think we have to explain ourselves to a stranger, there was no unusual delay associated with the removal orders for Pee-Wee. Pee-Wee made an assumption that it was okay to break the chain after having waited four days (by his timetable). Our chain policy is that chain members have four days in which to comply, dated from the issuing of the orders. Four days after the orders have been issued, we issue new orders, expanding the range of characters involved in order to expedite the removal. We were near the four day mark, but not to it yet, when Pee-Wee broke.

If you have any other questions, feel free to PM me. We, in other threads in these forums, have already been over the details on this issue and there is no need to repeat old information.

Defender · Post by **Defender** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 8:22 pm

I never talked about the break, I'm really sorry if you thought that. I just made a point about inactivity. (I already noticed the several locked posts about the break)

I was just pointing out, that there is an issue as to how long some people take to update. Unless you agree that it's ok for people to go over a week without reading the boards or updating their stats, then Pee-Wee was right on that point. It's not a mortal sin to agree on one thing.

I'm sure that over week of inactivity is not in the best interest of the chain.

You did choose to explain yourself to strangers, by posting this on the VN's, which is where I came from.

I'm not trying to pick a fight, that is why I said "Either way, it's sad to see..." about the inactivity.

Thanks for the clarification though.

Heatmiser · Post by **Heatmiser** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 8:47 pm

We chose to notify the chain managers of other chains about it.

Easiest way to do that is VN, so thats what we did.

Let's get something else straight, PeeWee wasn't right about anything. He didn't read the rules he claimed to have read which makes him a liar. He broke the chain and in doing so left a mess for his clan mates to clean up. Very inconsiderate and not cool at all. Making light of people not uploading (which is probably a technical problem CAUSED by his break) is kind of funny considering the person you are saying was "right" was failing quota and leeching from the chain himself.

If you read the chain patch thread on this page, you would know and understand the entire situation regarding the patch for this break, the characters involved in it, and why their data may be bad. In light of access to that information I'll be locking this thread as Im tired of discussing this issue and explaining all its details over and over. If you're THAT curious about how chain breaks and non-compliance issues are handled feel free to browse the chain orders for the break patch or one of our "slacker list" threads to see how we handle noncompliance.

Thanks for your concern, but this is longest continually active chain on the server and there's a reason for that. (The reason would be because we know how to run it and do a good job doing it.) Looking at the chain page there are always going to be noncompliance issues or bad data that looks like noncompliance issues. The management is here to address that. Its true of every chain. If it wasn't, chains wouldn't need managers. (So its not really necessary to point out who may or may not be in noncompliance. We already know, and rest assured we'll handle it.)

Oof · Post by **Oof** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:06 pm

I was curious as to the reason for a new poster digging out a thread that relatively old news and keying in on one post, as oppposed to the typical, "Hi, I'm new here and just wanted to say hi" kind of thing. I also had a couple of extra minutes on my hands so I thought I would check on the IP address used in Defender's post.

The IP address Defender used to post is from the same block of IP addresses Pee-Wee has used extensively in posting before. The fact that the IP addresses belong to the same ISP, and to the same block of Class C addresses from that ISP makes it look suspiciously like the person posting as Defender is Pee-Wee.

I can list the IP addresses used if you like, along with the organization leasing those Class C blocks of addresses. If Defender is Pee-Wee, and you still have a burr under your saddle about something you should tell people you are Pee-Wee.

If this is a friend of Pee-Wee's posting something on his behalf, either be honest about what you are trying to do, whatever that is, or don't post here.