Recent Incidents - Please Read
#16
Posted 18 June 2004 - 04:13 AM
QUOTE (Baseballl @ Jun 18 2004, 12:04 AM) |
As I said earlier to those involved in the conflict, just "act" like you want them back but don't flame them. |
Ah, I guess I need to work on my lying a bit. It's quite hard to just put on a false smile, and just throw away any feelings for the better of the clan. Guess I have something to work on, eh?
#18
Posted 18 June 2004 - 04:30 AM
QUOTE (Dictionary.com) |
lie2 ( P ) Pronunciation Key (l) n. 1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood. 2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression. |
Welcoming someone back who I feel is not welcome is a lie, face it.
#20
Posted 18 June 2004 - 04:38 AM
Pick one.
Better yet, stop posting about me in this thread. Please.
#21
Posted 18 June 2004 - 04:41 AM
#23
Posted 18 June 2004 - 06:13 AM
What Baseballl is saying is basically that if you don't want someone to join SeeD, you don't have to reject them and try to make them feel unwelcome. They won't do anything to you by joining and maybe they have other friends in SeeD, no single member can decide who can and who cannot join. What he is saying to do is not "lying", he is saying that if you are going to comment about someone joining it should not be a put-down. Giving a compliment or friendly comment is not altering the truth, it is just being friendly. If you really don't want to have anything to do with someone who is joining I would recommend just not posting, therefore you will not hurt anyone and you don't have to go against what you believe.
Everything is fine, no worries Killer, I think there is just some confusion among a few members regarding this.

#24
Posted 18 June 2004 - 07:05 AM

This post has been edited by Bigbro69: 18 June 2004 - 11:46 AM
#26
Posted 19 June 2004 - 07:30 PM


World of Warcraft info--
Server: Baelgun
Grengar - Level 80 Orc Shaman
#27
Posted 19 June 2004 - 08:03 PM
QUOTE (Muler @ Jun 19 2004, 03:13 PM) |
Yes, we should try to avoid this. But Cspace, I must admit, sometimes people just have to put their feet down after the 10th or so time of rejoining |
That may be true but the people who didn't want him back made it so harsh. I've seen a bunch of posts people wrote. If you don't want him back, you don't have to voice it. If you don't want him back, then you should leave. I don't see how big a problem it is for you to occasionly see a post by him. If it's about him leaving/joining, you don't have to read it. If you're getting annoyed by him repeatedly saying he has 99 cooking (I've only seen this 3-4 times) then ask him politely to stop through pm's. You guys practically bullied him. Who wants hate mail(in this case posts) at home?
#28
Posted 19 June 2004 - 08:08 PM
QUOTE (Muler @ Jun 19 2004, 02:13 PM) |
Yes, we should try to avoid this. But Cspace, I must admit, sometimes people just have to put their feet down after the 10th or so time of rejoining |
While some find it annoying there is no rule against it. Most would consider it repetative and in a community most don't do that, but it doesn't cause anyone trouble (it isn't like we have to go through some extensive process to have someone join). It would be best to put your foot down when someone breaks a rule or starts a conflict, but not in something like this. You can obviously mention it, but by no means should he be put-down or driven out of the clan for it (not saying that you did, I am referring to those who did).
There is no rule against expressing your feelings about something but they cannot be worded in a negative manner that is intended to hurt someone. I will second what Viet was saying about the use of PMs in such situations.


#29
Posted 22 June 2004 - 12:16 PM
Just on a minor matter I want to clear up, though...
QUOTE |
While some find it annoying there is no rule against it. |
I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that a while back it was announced we shouldn't make leaving topics, and especially shouldn't keep joining and leaving. I seem to remember you posting this quite a while back, and aforementioned member taking offense at the fact it was mainly directed towards himself. Once again I could have got it mixed up somehow, but I just wanted to try and work it out either way for the future.
#30
Posted 22 June 2004 - 01:18 PM