Hi Superfriends!!! I'd like to address all of Kyuuchi's VALID concerns addressed in this thread. Most of his personal opinions based on speculation will be disregarded, although I will address certain issues where I was personally named.
Personally, I think jitspoe should remove the inactive committee members from the committee, go back to the "Seeking Committee Volunteers" thread, and pick some more members.
Doubt anyone will argue with this logic. There is currently a committee topic on the matter and it will be resolved ASAP.
Both your points are valid Kyuuchi and pvtjimmy, although you seem to have little comprehension of what the Committee actually does or how the process actually works. The current Committee inherited a tremendous amount of work and while we do our best, we prioritize our time to make sure that really important matters are handled first. Other than multi-accounts, I don't see any other issues being “held up” in our forum. We have absolutely no control over how long it takes to ban someone after our suggestion to Jitspoe is submitted. As far as how long it takes Jitspoe to do things, you have to remember that he only has a certain amount of time to spend on this game and if I were him, multi-accounts would be the very last thing I'd want to spend my time on. I'm sure you can understand that.
Henrod, Justinph5 and Cameron. All good buddies of Rick. Also clanmates of Rick,they obviously thought "Hmm, let's get Rick unbanned! Yeahh! Lets do it!!" they obviously set up a poll in the committee members section, with options "Reduce ban, Remove ban, Keep ban" I bet jitspoe didn't actually create the thread.
Again you are acting solely on assumptions and have no real comprehension of the situation. Jitspoe created the thread and offered several options for the Committee. After looking at the issue, the Committee made a recommendation to Jitspoe on the matter. There were many factors that each Committee member weighed before making his own personal decision to vote for whatever he felt was proper and fair. This was treated just like any other thread that comes our way because that is our assignment as Committee members.
Kyuuchi you seem to be taking this all very personally. In what looks like about 70 lines of text, you have one well constructed thought about inactive members being replaced. The rest is riddled with speculation and opinion. Every one of your posts in this thread is complied of “The committee should”, “Jitspoe should”, “It's obvious”, “I think”, or “My opinion”. I understand that the forums are a public place that encourages all of us to share our thoughts and I think that is great. However, every one of your opinions and speculations is stated as fact, not allowing any room for discussion. Who are you to tell people what should be, in regards to the Committee, when you obviously have very little comprehension of what we do or the process involved? I'm sorry if that is harsh but I believe that it matches the tone of your posts. My suggestion to you is to truly grasp that this is just a game. Its not worth getting this upset over. Please for your own sanity, smoke a bowl and remember why you love playing this game. It is, after all, the best CTF any of us have ever played.
It's unacceptable that it takes up to weeks (and in some cases months!!) to ban people for hacking. Please get some active members, or totally stop with the commitee and give Jitspoe back the responsibility. Another idea might be to reduce the commitee back to 4-5 (ACTIVE) members
I challenge you to find a case of a hacker being reported and banned that took months to resolve with this Committee. Multi-accounting is not hacking and takes last on the list of importance for most members.
As for your other suggestion of a 4-5 person Committee, I would respond by asking if you think that 4-5 person Committee is a large enough sampling of our entire community to make proper decisions. The point of having 10 members is to have 10 different points of view, so as not to alienate certain groups or people. Also the voting process would be ridiculous. In a four or five person Committee, it would only take three votes to ban someone. Do you have three people in this game that dislike you? What if they were on the Committee? Do you think that would be fair in any way, shape or form?
Still 10 humans in the commitee. Still the problem of the commitee being biased.
Excellent and concise post. I'd buy you a beer for that one.
In summation we have an excellent Committee with excellent active members. We do not always agree on every issue and that is because we are ten individuals, each trying to maintain our own unique perspective. That is our assignment, and we do it to the best of our abilities.
If anyone decides to post in regards to any of what I said, I would appreciate factual posts or legitimate inquiries.
