Stromae: CSS purchased.
Shab: I have added a “*” to Slider due to his current loss of modship. If he has lost mod already, I’d like to hear from him why he should get it back.
Greetings ACP, this post is directed to all moderator retirees who come on the ACP chat daily.
UPDATE: To retired veterans – please leave the chat 15 minutes prior to an event. In order to have a successful event, we must be able to prepare for it. Having conversations irrelevant to Club Penguin and CP Armies on main can be quite bothersome and burdensome to the leaders. If you wish to continue your conversations, please move to another chat temporarily. There you will not have the same language restrictions, and you are free to talk about anything you wish. I apologize if this sounded rude to any of you, but it’s necessary in order for us to be able to have events worth posting.
~
As the head of the Gendarmerie, it is my obligation to maintain order and ensure a safe and fun environment for the ACP troops and recruits. In this post I will be representing the current ACP leadership along with the other ACP soldiers who believe that something has to be done regarding the retirees’ attitudes towards ACP’s troops and leaders. This post will also be discussing whether these people should remain a moderator on our chat or not. If you are included on this post, please don’t take it offensively. As stated before, we are thankful for what you have done for the ACP in the past, and we also believe that you should be rightfully credited for it. However, some of you have been constantly interfering with our events, and/or are simply mean to new recruits and troops in the ACP. It is our duty to keep the ACP up top, which is why there are times where we must prioritize the current ACP troops over the retired veterans of the ACP.
Before I begin, some of the retirees have been complaining about the bot on the ACP chat. The bot is there for a purpose. It makes new visitors a member instantly, can announce things on chat (in PC or PM as well), can bump everyone before an event, and have many other merits that are beneficial to the ACP. However, the most important purpose of the bot is to insta-ban those who break our chat rules. Inappropriate content, vulgar language, and spamming are not allowed on the ACP chat–it’s been like that for 7 years. There are times when the bot bans somebody accidentally, but we have done our best to prevent things like that from ever happening again. Therefore, if you are still being kicked or banned by the bot you are obviously saying something that’s not allowed on the ACP chat. If you’re demanding the removal of the bot, you are probably wishing it for it to be gone so that you can say whatever you want on the ACP chat without being kicked or banned. Being on our chat is a privilege, not a right. Please follow our chat rules and respect them the same way you used to when you were in the ACP.
Retirees are supposed to be something helpful to the army. Their knowledge, experience, and advice can aid the ACP a lot. I am thankful to the army veterans such as Boomer 20, Mchappy, Matre10, Shaboomboom, who advise us and give us tips on what to do. They’re never demanding, but they give wise advice and spark inspiration within the ACP leadership. However, most of you are more demanding than advising. Those people demand answers when they know nothing, and others order change for their own personal needs. The ACP do not have stupid leaders. We have knowledge, and we usually know what we are doing. Advice is always appreciated, but don’t make it sound demanding. There’s a difference between, “Hey, I was wondering if you could allow swear words on chat”, and “why the hell can’t we say ‘s h 1 t’ without being banned. thats stupid.” Again, please reply neatly and calmly to the person you are talking to. If they refuse your advice or proposal, don’t start an argument. There’s no other way to say it, so I’ll just say it in the most direct way possible. You don’t lead the ACP–we do. If you want some sort of change that was refused by the current ACP leadership, do it yourself by earning leader or owner. The time spent in arguing can be used on recruiting or creating bonds with the ACP troops. Please do not waste our time with pointless arguments that are for the solemn purpose of relieving your stress and outrage. Advice is always acceptable. Arguments aren’t. If you are extremely disgruntled talk to Boomer about it, but please stop bothering the ACP owners if they have already made their points clear.
Also, if an owner asks you to do something, please do your best to follow the person’s orders, and try to be nice about it. Here’s a conversation I had with a retired 3rd in Command today:
Flipmoo: Hey, can you be a bit nicer to the troops?
Retiree: What’s in it for me?
~ Skipping a few quotes ~
Flipmoo: Is asking to be nicer to the troops too much to ask?
Retiree: Well yes, when you’re theoretically asking me to change my personality.
This retiree is obviously asking for trouble when I simply asked for the person to be nicer to the troops. This retiree isn’t the only person with attitudes like these. There are many other who are rude and blunt towards other ACP troops and leaders.
There are also those who are a moderator on the ACP chat although they have never been an owner rank in the ACP before. We understand that they are exceptional legends who are granted moderator on the ACP chat, but there have been a few people who have been disagreeing with making these people a moderator. Also, considering the fact that we have way to many moderators who aren’t in the ACP anymore, we may be demodding a few retirees depending on what other people think after this post is published. These people have a “*” besides their names.
Te people whom are mentioned below are those who either have an unwelcoming attitude towards the ACP or are veterans who are granted moderator despite the fact that they have never achieved owner. Being on this list is not a disgrace of any sort, and I hope that nobody takes it offensively. To those who are interfering with our ways of leading the ACP, take this as a precaution. To those who are moderator but have never achieved owner, this is just to reassure your moderator statuses on the ACP chat room.
- Buckley
- Splashy
- Slider568*
- Keiranfb
- Jacob (Please moderate your language on main.)
- Michael *
- Caitlyn *
To those without the “*” besides your name, take this as a precaution.
If you choose to rage either in the comments below or on chat, it won’t help you at all. This is only a precaution. If you fail to change your attitudes towards the other leaders or troops, that will be the end of your privilege of being on chat.
To those with the “*” besides their name, please comment on why you think you deserve to be a moderator on the ACP chat. We will then discuss it amongst the ACP leadership and will conclude on whether you will remain a moderator or not. Again, your names were not included on this post because of one person’s solemn opinion. It’s based off of a few claims from many different people.
A side note: Retired leaders, please do not unban anybody on the ACP chat unless you witnessed an unfair ban from the bot. If another owner or leader banned the person, do not challenge the decision of the owner. If you have a problem, report it to one of the mains (Flipmoo, Sercan, Jerry, Boomer 20, or Shaboomboom.) Boomer and Shaboomboom, if you get any requests of unbanning please talk to the leaders before doing so. I’m sure there’s an explanation for the person being banned in the first place.
Thank you for taking the time to read this post. Please feel free to comment your opinions below.
★\ACP Leader//★
Gєηєяaℓιѕѕιмσ Flιρᴍσσ
Filed under: ACP |
Yeah the bot can be annoying, but it does it’s job.
Very good post, certainly this is what I believe in since in many armies with my own eyes I have witnessed how some retiree’s can be offend troops and will not listen etc. etc. And so posts like these are very important to make great one sir.
Here here.
Okay so if I’m commenting you’ve obviously struck the wrong chord for me. I’m not… outraged at this point, but after thoroughly reading this post I’m a bit offended and I feel disrespected.
I won’t post some long comment I’ll try to keep it short. I understand your concern, being a former ACP Leader myself during some of the worst oncoming invasions we’ve ever had in our history but it was never a problem for me. I always just hushed chat before the event and made sure no one had side conversations. I kept hushing if someone wouldn’t listen. So I’m a bit offended that you’d go through the trouble to make this post when there’s much simpler fixes to the problem rather than embarrassing former troops.
Why I feel disrespected is because you don’t seem to… really appreciate, how do I say this without sounding narcissistic? I’ve given you guys advice and ideas, whether or not you’ve asked for it and whether or not it was all good, none of it was for my self interest. As I explain time and time again, I only stick around for the benefit of the ACP. So I feel rather disrespected that you’ve decided to mention my intention falsely. I know what you guys meant though.
Nonetheless, if you are truly adamant about retirees not playing any parts on the ACP chat, site, etc then so be it. I can’t speak for my friends and former peers but I can tell you that I won’t be doing a single thing until the ACP needs me again. Hopefully that fate doesn’t happen to you “GOLDEN” Leaders.
Final notion, please stop persecuting retirees. Not just you, but Sercan and Jerry too.
With all due respect, I found this reply very confusing. I didn’t take anything in the post to be a personal affront to you, nor do I think the lack of mention showed any sign of disrespect. For those who offer advice, “army veterans such as” was the key phrase, and Flip was merely listing examples of a few who have helped him out. If he were to include everyone who has offered suggestions, the list would have consumed half the post.
With that being said, it took every ounce of my self-control not to make this post myself. The behavior of some of the retired mods has been abysmal as of late. In some cases I’m not even sure why some of them are mods considering they are not “legends” in ACP. If this were Shab and my administration, we’d have just carried out another “unmod week”, so to those who have been warned, consider yourselves lucky you were not answering to me instead. The undue sense of entitlement also needs to stop, because as much as some of the problematic individuals would like to believe, they are not in fact better than all of the soldiers of the current generation. Many of the current soldiers and leaders work just as hard as you did. And being regarded as a legend is in part based on how you carry yourself publicly and how you represent this army even after you’ve retired, so don’t think you are immune to being punished because of a title you earned years ago. If this continues to be an issue, I will speak to those individuals personally.
I’ll personally show you (Meaning on chat) where I feel a friend of mine and myself were blatantly disrespected.
I still feel like this post was rather discriminatory and that there are other solutions to the “problem”.
I can’t say I read either of your entire comments (I have a headache and am losing my usually confident grip on the English language) but I’d like to point out the last thing Cap said – this post is unnecessary and only serves to humiliate retirees, who deserve the same respect as active leaders and troops. There are quieter, more respectful ways of dealing with this issue, which us retirees would be perfectly happy to engage in.
I apologize if it may have offended the retirees in general. In this post, we were referring to the few retired veterans who were clearly being mean or rude to the ACP troops and leaders. This post had two points; the first being the issue about belligerent retirees, and the other being whether the people with “*” besides their name deserve moderator or not. The names with a “*” besides them means that there are certain people who believe that those people shouldn’t be a moderator, but not because of the reason that they are mean or anything. We wanted to hear why you deserve to be a moderator. (If you were ever an ACP owner in your career, I will remove your name from the list. We’re only talking about those people who are currently a moderator and have never achieved owner before. If that’s the case, I’m deeply sorry for including you in it.)
I’m sorry for the misunderstandings that this post may have caused.
Considering Cas’s gen and before has nothing to do with the current success, they don’t deserve anything.
They were able to get away with disobeying the rules when they were relevant, but now that they are really left behind in the dust, the issue arises.
The current generation has been carved by the current owners and mods, not the ex-leaders or the retired owners.
And by “they don’t deserve anything”, I mean they shouldn’t get special privilege.
I’m not saying all of them don’t deserve mod, but some were modded intentionally by other retirees and weren’t decided by the official leaders, and don’t deserve mod from their work in ACP.
bla bleblablabla
I agree with Tom. Hushing is effective. I get demodding certain people who the current leadership feels should be is fine. Putting their names on a post like this is humiliating and degrading.
This wasn’t meant to be a reply.
Hushing is an option, but by doing so we will also involve the new recruits and troops. Most of them don’t understand what a hush is, so we will have to explain how they weren’t the only ones hushed and whatnot before an event.
The people without the “*” in their names on the list are those who are deliberately trying to provoke or annoy the ACP leadership or troops. We’re offering them a warning instead of taking action right off the bat. But yeah, it may have been wiser to talk to them before posting their names on here, but from my recent conversation with Splashy I was convinced that this post had to be done.
At the very least, you admitted the situation could have be handled different. +1 respect points.
So boomer and shab get special treatment as always while us (the other retired leaders) get treated like poo?
Well first off, your in another army so that means you couldve still been in the ACP.
Not really “retired”
Its obvious why I’m not in the ACP.
Former 2nd in command, get it right.
The leadership must’ve been in shambles….
Yeah, almost as bad as this one
^^ STOP BULLYING FLIPMOO HES ONLY DOING THE RIGHT THING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111welp!!
Flip always does the right thing. That’s why ACP has the best leadership since Flen and why acp is 1st for almost a whole month.
Ster clan approved.
“Inappropriate content, vulgar language, and spamming are not allowed on the ACP chat–it’s been like that for 7 years. ”
http://i.imgur.com/zXPfrQu.png
“Being on our chat is a privilege, not a right. Please follow our chat rules and respect them”
We deeply apologize regarding this incident. I vow to you that it will never happen again.
30-40 minutes is excessive. As Shab said to me, 10 minutes should be the number. If you guys need half to three quarters of an hour to prepare for your usual battles without retired people talking, then you have a problem.
Btw Flipmoo I need to be appreciated moar by you.
:@
Flipmoo we should talk. Reply to me when you see this.
Sure, add me if you have a KIK. My user is; Flipmoooo
Do you have an email? Or I can just make a private post.
Yeah, I agree. I’ve changed it to 15 minutes instead.
As I went through reading this monstrosity of a post, I came to realise a number of mistakes/problems this post managed to accomplish, to which I will go through in an hierarchical order
From what I gathered this post argued that the continued repeat of breaking of rules by retirees was causing a disturbance within the army.
First of all one of the main problems I found was the focus on “mod retirees” even though the title of the post was “Addressing the Retirees” and “Chat Issues”. Immediately their is a focus on the mods for example “This post will also be discussing whether these people should remain a moderator on our chat or not.”, obviously this is explainable due to most retirees on chat being mods, however throughout the post it is always in reference to the mods, all those cautioned were mods. The failure of this is the inability to realise this it is not a mod retiree problem, not even just a retiree problem, its the whole army’s problem. There are countless examples of owners, mods and members all creating chat issues including those who aren’t retired, so to focus on mod retiree’s even if they are the majority of chat issues is frankly absurd.
Secondly I took issue with the statement “Retirees are supposed to be something helpful to the army. Their knowledge, experience, and advice can aid the ACP a lot. I am thankful to the army veterans such as Boomer 20, Mchappy, Matre10, Shaboomboom”, even though the post focuses on the mod retirees, all those stated in helping the army were current owners and former leaders, I don’t believe it is the job of retirees such as the majority of mods to advise leaders, if all retirees advised ACP is would be illogical, they would not all be listened to by leaders, I frankly believe it doesn’t make any difference to the army for me to suggest something to an owner. It is rather former leaders and ranked advisers jobs to aid the ACP as they have the experience of leading the army or have the job of advising which were those mentioned in the post.
Thirdly is the hypocrisy is this post, I find it hard to understand how you can highlight the breaking of rules when all those apparently responsible within ACP mentioned in the post (Flipmoo, Sercan, Jerry, Boomer 20, or Shaboomboom) have also broken the rules. If you require proof of this, ask me or I’m sure some comment in this post will show a current owner of main owner abusing their authority and breaking the rules which you have just asked to be followed. It is even more disgraceful as owners and mains are those who are meant to be role models for new recruits. This is undeniable. Even when you compare those cautioned for breaking rules to those who are accordingly responsible there is little difference.
Finally one personal issue related to the post was “why the hell can’t we say ‘s h 1 t’ without being banned. thats stupid.”. For me this relates to the banning of the word “sh3t”, this is not a swear word or used offensively within chat, but rather used to describe a group of friends, therefore I find it utterly wrong for this to be banned within chat as it is a form of general casual communication and friendship. Surely what ACP promotes. It was also said that “Again, please reply neatly and calmly to the person you are talking to.”, to which I am doing now, I’d appreciate that the word sh3t be allowed on chat.
Thanks,
Ollie, replies will be answered.
Nothing to add, just want to say that I completely agree with you.
You make some logical points, Ollie.
(The only irony in Ollie’s comment is that he states that he’s correcting the author of the post yet he makes numerous grammatical mistakes. I just wanted to point that out hehe. -Grammar Nazi)
Correcting the author in concept not grammar.
“1. No cursing:No swearing on the chat, and censored swears are also counted as swears. Swearing in private chat is also not allowed. F and N word will result in a ban without warning. You will receive a warning for the S or B word first. A word or “Fag” will result in kicks.”
” this is not a swear word or used offensively within chat, but rather used to describe a group of friends, therefore I find it utterly wrong for this to be banned within chat as it is a form of general casual communication and friendship. “, not a swear word or censored swear but a group.
“There are countless examples of owners, mods and members all creating chat issues including those who aren’t retired, so to focus on mod retiree’s even if they are the majority of chat issues is frankly absurd.”
Process of elimination. We’re sorting out the issue regarding ACP moderators right now. As you stated, this post is direct towards the retired veterans who are a moderator on the ACP chat.
Are they the cause of all our problems? No. Am I referring to ALL of the ACP retirees? No. Do some retirees need to be flexible and nicer to others? Yes.
If there is an issue with the owners regarding the chat rules, please feel free to talk to me about it. I am aware of the screenshot where one of our leaders banned the bot and included an inappropriate word in the reason of the banning. For that I apologize and will work my hardest in order for the owners to further enforce and oblige to the chat rules even more.
” I don’t believe it is the job of retirees such as the majority of mods to advise leaders, if all retirees advised ACP is would be illogical, they would not all be listened to by leaders, I frankly believe it doesn’t make any difference to the army for me to suggest something to an owner.”
Okay, that’s a good opinion. I was simply trying to state that we do listen and consider any proposals that retirees give us, regardless if they’re an owner or moderator.
“Thirdly is the hypocrisy is this post, I find it hard to understand how you can highlight the breaking of rules when all those apparently responsible within ACP mentioned in the post (Flipmoo, Sercan, Jerry, Boomer 20, or Shaboomboom) have also broken the rules.”
As stated above, I will do my best to enforce the chat rules even further and will do my best so that these incidents will never happen again.
“Finally one personal issue related to the post was “why the hell can’t we say ‘s h 1 t’ without being banned. thats stupid.”. For me this relates to the banning of the word “sh3t”,”
I used the number “1” as a censor to prevent the real word from being published on the ACP website. I was not referring to sh3ts at all. Sh3ts is already an approved word on the ACP chat, but thanks for asking politely anyways.
I hope this reply was satisfactory, and I’m sorry I didn’t get to you sooner
long story short from the retirees: 30-40 minutes is too long. make it 10-15 minutes.
Okay, done.
thanksies 😀 hopefully all this controversy can be sorted out soon. there’s many good solutions out there
rage rage rage rage
You should be demoted.
Care to explain?
Whoever the retiree in the convo w flip is I demand them to be named.
They sound like such an awesome person
That was me
Dude nice job
How’s that a nice job?
The bot is a joke. Chances are if you’d asked me i’d have answered in more or less the same way. Usually there are reasons why peole arent nice to each other.
It’s probably much deeper than “just be nice to them”
Can you explain what the deeper meaning to refusing to be nicer is?
I’m not the one you need to ask that to
Plus, the retiree was being harsh towards an ACP troop that had no reason to be disliked.
yo dude what did i even do i don’t even talk on main anymore
Probably because the leaders have no idea why you are mod in the 1st place?
Or the fact your mod has been in question a number of times.
The names with a “*” besides them means that there are certain people who believe that those people shouldn’t be a moderator, but not because of the reason that they are mean or anything. We wanted to hear why you deserve to be a moderator. We’re only talking about those people who are currently a moderator even after their retirement and have never achieved owner before.
I could be mistaken, but aren’t you the one who get Cait mod in the first place?
Yes, I was. However, a few others doubted her modship, which is why she was included on this post.
However, I personally believe that she should keep mod.
Retirees/Legends should have no issues with leaving early (Member or* Moderator). If you are given the privilege of Moderator while you are a retiree, you must be willing to accept any and all responsibilities, consequences, and specific rules/guidelines than come in return.
If you are not listed above as being disruptive towards ACP members or its events, then blame your fellow counterparts. It is because of fellow retirees this post is here, and why you feel pressured. While I am friends with some of those retirees listed, that doesn’t mean I can’t see why they are there, or why this post was created. If retirees cannot handle leaving events (with the exception of staying to help, by logging onto Club Penguin, and staying on-subject at all times, and following orders) early, and constantly make argument of the subject, then that individual or group of individuals does not deserve the status of a Moderator. Moderators are to set examples, retirees even more so, strict legends more than that.
Retirees were Moderators (or Owners) before as active members, and were given the chance to stay one once they retired. All retirees know the rules, the gray areas of the rules, and what/what not to do while in chat more so than a new member in ACP, or recently promoted Moderator. History and time within the ACP does not give invincibility to the rules or guidelines set by the leadership.
This whole reply is not meant to attack anyone that was listed above. If a newly promoted Moderator can follow and enforce the rules, then a retiree can do even more. It’s shameful this post needed to be here, and it’s embarrassing for me to be in a group with so much negative controversy. If the majority of retirees can’t be responsible enough to follow the rules, none of them should be modded in the first place.
Listen Jet, you’re not wrong but I do disagree with you fundamentally. You’re saying that unless they want to essentially rejoin the army, that veterans need to leave the chat.
That’s the issue we’re all having. I for example, am a former leader, and feel that due to my service, I don’t need to be expelled from the chat until the battle is over. I don’t cause a fuss during battles though, I just shout to people to go on Club Penguin if needed.
As for the retired people who’ve earned mod only, they shouldn’t be expelled either. When I said you’re not wrong, I think you’re not wrong by saying retirees shouldn’t be as rowdy during events. I figured that was always that way though.
I didn’t say anything about leaving the chat. That being said, if there is a decision to make retirees leave however many minutes before an event as this post suggests, I’d agree with that until somebody comes up with a better idea. Nobody has to leave the chat during any other time, nobody must rejoin. I would never suggest that.
If you can’t keep up with the responsibility, consequences and rules that come with being a Moderator, it should be taken away, is what I said. I don’t think anyone should just have their Moderator status taken away for any other reason.
now, I’m not saying I’m the best mod ever, but I don’t believe I did anything wrong to be punished. I have not broken any rules, abused anyone, or wronged anyone. So why me? I’ve put time and work into this army and deserve to be rewarded. This public degration is honestly unnecessary and highly offensive to all who were listed. You should of talked to all of us personally, not put us in the public spotlight and make us look like problems. I’m quite disappointed.
You go gurl <3
So because you follow rules means you should stay mod? I didn’t know mods were the only ones who had to follow rules. And no, you did not put a lot of work into this army. Since when did not even achieving high mod in ACP become hard work? Please tell me what you have contributed to be rewarded.
I think there’s been an unfortunate misunderstanding here. Back when Cait and I were soldiers in ACP, getting to high mod in ACP was hard word and was an achievement worthy of praise. This isn’t to say you haven’t worked hard to get where you are, Sky, but since the general performance of ACP has declined, it’s become easier to reach high ranks. Cait served ACP during its heyday, when the army was chock full of legends like Boomer 20, Saint1119, Klug1234, and so on. It was harder to make it, in those days. My point is, I think you’re making inaccurate assumptions about Cait and I kindly ask you to back off, because you are unfortunately mistaken.
The names with a “*” besides them means that there are certain people who believe that those people shouldn’t be a moderator, but not because of the reason that they are mean or anything. We wanted to hear why you deserve to be a moderator. We’re only talking about those people who are currently a moderator even after their retirement and have never achieved owner before.
I’m sorry if it you took it offensively, and I admit that this post was indeed sloppy and unclear. I am sorry for hurting your feelings.
Now I’m not one to talk about this, seeing as last time I was on often was Christmas time but when you have issues with a certain group of people, and specific people in that group you do not publicly shame them like this. Your post should say something along the lines “I would like to ask our retired moderators to please behave better.” and then you talk to those who you have the issue with privately. This is utterly disrespectful to them considering the situation.
I agree. However, I’ve already talked about the chat rules and whatnot twice (three if you include this one). Although my previous posts weren’t towards the retirees, they made it clear on how the chat should be and how people should be nicer to each other.
I am merely referring to the few retirees that are belligerent towards the ACP. I’m sorry if I disrespected them, but they’ve obviously done something that resulted in their names being on this post. (Those without the “*” in their names)
Well, Flip, I don’t think we’ve officially met yet, but hello! Secondly let me apologize on behalf of myself and my fellow retirees (especially the one who mouthed off to you. Personally I try my best to be polite to new troops – I had a nice chat with one last night, actually. Anyway, my point is, most of us were ACP noobs once upon a time, and all of us were noobs somewhere. Show them some respect. People showed you respect or at least tolerance when you were a noob, that’s why you’re here.)
With all due respect to you, Flip, I think there’s a misunderstanding here. I don’t have an unwelcoming attitude towards ACP troops, and I am a former co-leader of ACP, so I’m not sure which of those categories you’ve placed me in. I can honestly say that I’m not a bad mod. Since I came back in late December (around there, anyway), I’ve focused on kicking and banning troublemakers (following rules 5 and 8, mostly. But aside from that, I’ve seen a lot of sexism, primarily, around here. Which, sorry, but that’s kind of disgusting. We just had two big posts on CPAC about women in armies. I know relatively little about armies in 2014 compared to my knowledge about armies in 2008-2009, but back then, sexism was not tolerated. I don’t think any of you here consciously tolerate sexism, of course, but the bot doesn’t pick up on it, and I don’t see owners talking on chat a lot, so they don’t see it either.)
ANYWAY, I think I’ve digressed from the main topic a little bit. Converse to my anti-troublemaker stance and (I think) fairly welcoming attitude towards new troops, I have to admit I do have a tendency to make jokes of poor taste and last night I did lose my temper a little bit (which I suspect is what this whole post is about, rather than rule-breaking or actually being a bad chat mod.) I apologize if I’ve angered or offended anyone since my return, but I’d also like to point out that last night when the event started, I was asked to leave and complied immediately, so not entirely sure what the problem is there. And now the addition of a retired pool (an idea I LOVE, by the way, hats off to whoever’s that was) makes that as simple as possible. There is no problem, at least from my perspective. If you disagree, then by all means I am open to discussing it privately with you or someone else from your leadership, at your convenience. Nice meeting you, Flip. Hope to see you around sometime.
-Fox
I am deeply sorry for ever including you in the list. Those with a “*” besides their names are those who are retired but are a moderator on the ACP chat despite that they have never been achieved an owner rank before. I was told that you were never an ACP owner, which is why I was told to include you in the list. If you were an ACP co-leader there was absolutely no need for you to be mentioned in this post.
Again, I am deeply sorry for the mistake that I’ve made. Your name has been removed from the list.
Thank for you your efforts of trying to be nice to the new recruits and troops. We really appreciate it.
It’s amazing to see al the people that usually don’t comment on posts comment on this one.
It’s called retirees man. Once in a blue moon they come out when their modship is threatened.
Nobody’s defending our modship. Not because we don’t deserve modship, but because that’s not the real issue here. We defend our integrity because that’s the issue. I think I have a right to defend my and my friends’ integrity, don’t you?
I’m not saying you don’t have the option to argue, but there would be a lot less hostility if it was just names and not the threat of de-modding.
Whether your views of integrity lay in it or not, the fact of the matter is you are commenting on this post is making you look less of a retired 2ic than a new recruit who did not get a promotion. And that in your long career in ACP, you have not learned taking the issue straight to the leader is the best way to handle the situation.
If you want to handle the situation this way, then by all means, make another 300 word comment if it makes you feel like its worth your time out of retirement, when I’m sure flip would be more than willing to hear your concerns.
The first problem with this post is that the only people on the list are ones who dislike how the current leaderships handles situations. The second problem is that I have received a different explanation and reason from each leader that I’ve talked to. This is not an army-wide problem. One or two leaders has a personal issue with the mods that are listed but they don’t really have a reason to get rid of any of them.
Nobody will tell me who reported me, which is fine, but the fact that, without evidence, their opinions are trusted over mine is very unfair. Not one picture was provided by the “members and mods” who apparently complained about me and my midship is at risk because of their word, yet when I say that one of the leaders has broken a rule, I’m blamed for ACP’s downfall and possible rebellion?
I don’t know if leaders don’t see it or if they choose to be blind to it, but there are a lot of people in ACP who have a problem with things like the lack of activeness by the leaders and how little they seem to care about anybody but themselves.
It is clear that this post is an attempt by current leaders to secure their power and to let us all know how big and strong they are because two of the three people with stars next to their names are ONLY there because of their consistent complaints and issues with the leaders, while one of the people listed with a warning has openly admitted that he is a homophobe, sexist, racist, and a bigot. He knows and acknowledges that he is all of those things and is proud of each and every one of them. If that isn’t more unmod-worthy than “starting arguments” I don’t know what is.
The only person close to that that I could think of would be Jerry for his conversations about p*rn, human/drug trafficking, and constant abuse of retirees. Rule 1: No cursing: No swearing on the chat, and censored swears are also counted as swears. Swearing in private chat is also not allowed. F and N word will result in a ban without warning. You will receive a warning for the S or B word first. A word or “F*g” will result in kicks. I have seen multiple owner-ranked people break this rule, including Sercan who decided to use the F word as a reason for a ban. Rule 2 says that inappropriate topics will result in a kick, guest, and then ban. What did Jerry receive for joking about drugs, p*rn, and human trafficking? Nothing! He did say that it was okay because he was Hispanic though, which kind of breaks the rule even more as a rude stereotype.
Another problem is the bot. Retirees don’t hate the bot because we think we’re above the rules and we don’t like being kicked and banned for breaking them. In fact, it’s not just the retirees who dislike the bot. The bot constantly abuses people because it is a machine and it has flaws. For example, “faking/fake,” “patrick,” and “stick,” are all words that people have been banned for because the bot thought they were inappropriate. We all know that glitches and errors happen with bots, but the only people who ever do anything about it are Eric and Shab, who are both retired. That being said, people who are new to ACP and maybe on xat for the first time will not understand how the bot works. If they were to get banned for something like that, it is very likely that they would get upset thinking they’re in trouble and never come back. If they do, they won’t be happy, like the rest of us. If the bot worked properly, nobody would have a problem with it. However, that’s not the case, and it’s making a lot of people mad. If there was an open poll asking if people want to keep or get rid of the bot, I think the majority would vote against the bot, due to its immense amount of flaws consistent abuse towards soldiers. The only ones who seem to like it are the ones whose job it does and the ones who cannot be kicked or banned by it. It completely takes away the responsibilities of a moderator since it bans before people can even see what it’s saying and it makes it so that mods can’t unban anyone.
This post is very hypocritical if you’re going to try and tell me that it’s members and mods that have a problem with me and not the leaders. If you want to tell me that I break the rules and I deserve to lose my modship, most of you (the owners) should lose your ownership, as well. However, if you want to say that this post is because you have a personal problem with me because I constantly tear apart your leadership, I’ll accept that, because I do. I don’t believe it’s what starts arguments (which are two sides, anyways, so I’m not the only one to blame) but I’ll take half of the responsibility if someone mature can take the other half. An army like ACP is only where it is because of some of the retired people who still come on chat and I believe that they deserve a little more respect than they get. Based on the comments on this post and the things I see on chat, a lot of current members and mods agree. The retirees have absolutely no problem with not being on chat while a battle is going on because we were all in ACP and we know what it’s like, but I do not appreciate being told to leave at 3 AM EST when nobody else is talking because I’m retired and ‘disturbing’ chat. I also do not appreciate being among those blamed for the downfall of ACP, when really, the retirees have nothing to do with it. ACP is nothing like it was when a lot of these people were here, so maybe their advice and opinions aren’t so bad.
This comment probably got me closer to being membered than I was before, but there is not a single lie in this post and if I get demoted to member for sharing nothing but the truth, that will say a lot about who’s in control right now. I may not deserve mod, but there are many people on that list who do. Both of the people whose names are marked along with mine deserve to keep their modship.
Alexa was a 2ic during some of ACP’s best days and she’s seen great success and knows a lot about it. If she were to be unmodded, it would be worse than membering at least half of the past leaders simply due to the fact that she was ranked as high as she was and that she has that experience. She doesn’t break the rules enough to have been given such a harsh “warning.” Cait on the other hand, doesn’t break the rules at all. She hardly even talks on main, so her name being on that list must be some kind of personal problem.
If the leaders have a problem with me and want to member or ban me, I don’t mind, but think about what you’re doing before you make a post like this. I kick and ban people when they break the rules and I answer every single PC no matter what it’s about, so I can’t be that much of a poison. If you, as an owner, can say (and truly believe) that you put your best foot forward with every battle and every silly PC or request, every rule, and every retiree, you have every right to get rid of us, but I don’t think any of you can. I don’t think I should be demoted because I don’t break any of the chat rules besides the argument one and I do my best to treat every soldier well and to answer all of them. Before you go accusing multiple people of breaking the rules and threatening their modship, make sure that all of you have the same story ready to shove down our throats when we ask you for a reason and maybe a little bit of evidence instead of peoples’ opinions because we’ve done nothing to make our opinions and sides of the story less important than theirs. If you can seriously tell me that this post has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that I openly dislike a lot of the leadership here and that I don’t bow down and kiss all of your feet (and provide some evidence or proof that this is due to issues that soldiers are having with me and not you personally), I’ll be able to accept it a little more. Still, I don’t plan on handing out respect to people who have done nothing but slander my friends and I in a public post for everybody to see, so if this is your best effort, maybe you should take a step back and look how you’re running this army.
For the leader(s) who made this post, the reactions from everyone in the comments should tell you how people really feel and that nobody believes that soldiers are the ones who have a problem with us. We’re not as stupid as you think we are and the soldiers seem to be on our side. When you try to blame an entire group for your mistakes and your lack of results, at least make sure you treat all of the other groups as best as you can so that they take your side. While you’ve been attacking us and ignoring them, we’ve been talking to each other and we’re all on the same page. If any of us had power over you, you would be so much nicer to us, but since we aren’t, you don’t feel the need to acknowledge any of our concerns. I’d like to see you do the same with somebody who has power over you. If membering me (or others) will make you feel better, go ahead. I won’t lose my ability to talk, only my ability to moderate chat, so nothing will change and it would be kind of pointless. The only people who will suffer are the ones who benefit from chat moderation. I, on the other hand, have nothing to lose.
I didn’t intend for this post to sound as rude and menacing as it does, but I don’t think there was any other way to get the points across that I needed to get across. I’ve tried many times to talk calmly to leaders, but I can only try so many times. I’m sorry if this seems like a hate post on ACP, because it’s not. The soldiers deserve better than what they’re getting and so do the retirees and that’s all I’m trying to say.
I apologize for any grammar/spelling errors and/or repetition.
Thank you,
Michael
preach
comment of the year right here
More like essay of the year. Amirite?
The names with a “*” besides them means that there are certain people who believe that those people shouldn’t be a moderator, but not because of the reason that they are mean or anything. We wanted to hear why you deserve to be a moderator. We’re only talking about those people who are currently a moderator on the ACP chat even after their retirement and have never achieved owner before.
I’m deeply sorry if you took this post offensively. This post was mainly directed to those without the “*” besides their names. As for Alexa/Foxtails, I was told that she was never made an ACP owner in her career. I thought she was, but I was convinced that she wasn’t. It’s my fault for not confirming, and for that I have apologized to Alexa. This is completely my fault.
As for Cait, she is indeed a calm and nice moderator. I was actually the person to add her on the legends page and reassured her modship on the chat when people were trying to get her unmodded. Her name is not on the list because she’s mean or anything, we’re just requesting for her to try to explain why she deserves mod (which she has in a comment on this post) to prove that she is a person that should be a moderator.
Your name was included for the same reason. I do not hold a grudge against you, but there were a couple people who felt as if you shouldn’t be a moderator on our chat. (I am not one of them. As stated herein, I was the one to post this, but it was the voices of many troops and commanders that requested this post to be published.
This post is basically asking for you to comment and explain your history in the ACP, and why you think you deserve to be a moderator. I’m sorry for the misunderstandings that this post may have caused as it was indeed sloppy and rushed. This post was mainly directed to those without the “*” besides their name.
Wait, what? Fox was a former 2ic.
I vouched for Michael this morning privately with a leader (seeing as Michael vouched for me and Cait), and was asked to repeat what I’d said in private to him publicly so here we are.
I cannot say that Michael was ever an owner rank, because he wasn’t, and a quick look at the legends page would reveal that bit. But what I can say is that Michael is well deserving of his modship, hence the legend status. My first point to the aforementioned leader was that the only reason Michael never reached an owner rank was due to personal grudges between himself and one of the leaders (what it was about, you’d have to ask him. I never remember. It was stupid, though.) That answer would be a copout all on its own, though, so of course I will expand on Michael’s achievements that actually did happen, which if I do say so myself were pretty impressive. Michael led the largest and most successful ACP division (twice!) – once with Buckleybeans, whose resume is too long to list here without diverting entirely from the topic at hand, and once with me, former co-leader. With Buck, Michael led Alpha to have the most soldiers ever online during a division event. If those of you who reported Michael still think that’s unimpressive, then that’s your prerogative. Regardless, I’ll bet Michael has contributed more to ACP than some of the soldiers who reported him (no disrespect to those soldiers – this is meant to be a testament to Michael’s contributions rather than a criticism of you.) There’s no reason to unmod Michael at this point – he’s certainly not a nuisance or a detriment to this community. In fact, I’d even go so far as to suggest he is a more responsible moderator than many active ACP mods. ~IN CONCLUSION~ Michael should not lose his modship and is just as deserving of respect as all of you who seem to think you’re better than us because we’re retired.
I’d like to point out a couple of things I’ve noticed since the creation of this post:
I went on a bit of a tangent about sexism in ACP in my comment. In the following twenty minutes or so, two males jeered me for it (innocent jokes, which is why I’m not mentioning their names, but still) and one woman has approached me thanking me for the mention, “because guys never think of it.”
Currently, Michael (as you know, he is a retiree and an ACP legend) is showing a new recruit how to join ACP. The recruit asked how to join. Soldiers are online, but Michael’s the one who stepped up.
As I believe has been pointed out already, but I will reiterate: The majority of the comments on this post, and being made by soldiers on chat, speak in favor of the retirees targeted by this post.
@ “The majority of the comments on this post, and being made by soldiers on chat, speak in favor of the retirees targeted by this post.”
Well absolutely, because the inculpate f want their own notions to be noted. Obviously there will be supplementary to the opposition. The ACP ownership and upper mod-ship as a entity believed this was a logical proposal, therefore not necessarily needing to criticize every remark or having to write out their every opinion.
Not condemning any of your opinion, just literating a point.
*because the inculpated would obviously want their own notions to be foreseen.
My last comment was very vague, and Skyfish has decided to politely point that out to me! I shall elaborate more on why I should be modded on this wonderful establishment and I will go over a few things I learned after I found out some more information over this.
Now onto my current point. I was in ACP from 2009-2011. Although I was there for 3 years, I reached a very low rank (major general). I’ve been questioned on that before. Perhaps the reason I reached such a low rank was because I did not care for gaining the ranks and reaching an owner rank. I was happy with just being a moderator and having a low rank. Not to mention there were people who deserved higher ranks more than me (I came from a big generation of ACP, you know!) I was respected and had some power and that was good enough for me. While in ACP I dedicated lots of time and effort to help grow ACP. I was active everyday, I helped lead events, and I was a mod for around a year. Despite having a bad attitude most of the time (sorry) I think I did pretty well for being around 10-12 and highly hormonal. Even after I retired I stayed around and helped with some events and helped try to encourage troops to do their best. And all my work paid off at around Thanksgiving of 2013 when I was named a legend. I had been a mod for around 2 months prior to be named legend (Shab had considered me “practically a legend” and decided to mod me and nobody objected). When I was a mod prior to being named legend, nobody had minded. But as soon as I was named a legend I had begun being harassed daily by one certain person (not naming names). Despite this one person’s many attempts, I have not been removed. Many people who served in ACP with me agree with my legend status.To all the people asking me why I’m a legend, that is why.
I have a question to ask the ACP leadership. Why am I on your “most wanted” list? I don’t talk to anyone on main except Tori, Alessa, Shab, and Michael (usually). And when I do talk to these people it’s usually just a quick “Hi” and “How was your day?” thing. I don’t disobey rules, abuse my power, or wrong others. So why am I being targeted for this list? Eric and Shab have both agreed that I’m not suitable for the list. http://prntscr.com/2u2nkt Eric vouching my innocence. I don’t have a picture of Shab doing it, for the chat log was deleted by the time I decided I wanted to screenshot, but you can ask him yourself. I just don’t understand why you’re deciding to make me a public super villain when all I do is greet my acquaintances then switch over to play minecraft.
Last but not least, I feel as though you’ve handled this whole situation inappropriately. Your problems with us should of been brought to us and carefully explained so we all clearly knew what we did wrong. Some of us are highly confused. Is us being punished really the whole army’s problem? They have bigger things to worry about than your problems with us. Putting us in a bad public spotlight is degrading and offending to all of us listed above.
I think all of the current leaders are doing a fine job with ACP and I have no problems with any of them but this whole incident is quite confusing to me and also slightly offending. I don’t feel as though I am a bad role model to any of the other mods or members, considering I don’t speak. I’d like to know why you guys have chosen me for this list as soon as possible so I can improve my horrid behavior of coming onto chat and greeting my pals.
Please and thanks,
Cait.
The names with a “*” besides them means that there are certain people who believe that those people shouldn’t be a moderator, but not because of the reason that they are mean or anything. We wanted to hear why you deserve to be a moderator. We’re only talking about those people who are currently a moderator even after their retirement and have never achieved owner before.
I’m sorry if it you took it offensively, and I admit that this post was indeed sloppy and unclear. For that I am sorry.
I remember when I received a private chat from you in late 2013 regarding your legend title. I believed that you deserved to be a legend so I made you one and reassured your modship on the ACP chat.
Your name was included on the list because there are still some people that doubted your modship. I wanted for the people with “*” besides their name to talk about why they deserve to be a moderator (of which you have done in the preceding comment). This post was mainly directed to the people without the “*” besides their names.
This post was indeed sloppy and a bit unclear which has lead to multiple misunderstandings, and for that I apologize. I am deeply sorry if I have offended those who I never intended on offending, and I believe that you are one of them. Again, I’m sorry.
That is perfectly fine, misunderstandings do happen. Thank you for getting back to me!
I second what Fox has said. Some retirees are being nice to new recruits, engaging in conversations with them, and showing them where the Join page is and how to join. I don’t see why there is a problem with the retirees.
Some retirees haven’t done anything wrong to be on that list, which I find rather amusing. If there is something personal going on, don’t you think it’d be appropriate to deal with it in private, instead of publicly humiliating some of the retirees on this list? Otherwise, I don’t see a reasonable explanation as to why this post was necessary.
As for leaving the chat, just yesterday, the retirees were asked to leave while an event began. If I recall correctly, we never argued the fact that we were asked to leave chat. Instead, we simply went to another chat and continued our conversations there. With that being said, I don’t see why there is a problem with this.
If there is an explanation that is logical and reasonable as to why this post was needed, then please, do tell. We all would like to know.
This post is only directed to those who act unpleasantly on the ACP chat. There are plenty of wonderful retirees who still help out on chat, and we are very thankful to those who still continue to aid us despite being retired. In this post we are not referring to all of the retirees, but only those who are mean and provocative.
The names with a “*” besides them means that there are certain people who believe that those people shouldn’t be a moderator, but not because of the reason that they are mean or anything. We wanted to hear why you deserve to be a moderator. We’re only talking about those people who are currently a moderator even after their retirement and have never achieved owner before.
This post was mainly directed to those without the “*” besides their name. I hope this clears up the misunderstandings of this post.
Thank you for moving chats before an event. I’ve also changed the times to 15 minutes prior to an event instead of 30~40. Your efforts of trying not to disrupt our ACP events are greatly appreciated. Thanks a bunch.
I apologize if I wasn’t clear. I was referring to some of the retirees on the list. Such as Buck, Kieran, Fox, Michael, Cait, and Jack. Sorry ’bout that.
So many long comments. I don’t have the patience to read them all espicially since I can summarize them all in a single sentence; “This post is BS”. Your welcome. No moar essays plz.
The retired leaders and soldiers of the ACP are just articulating their opinions. And in a very good way too.
I’ve read them all, and I’ve replied to them all.
The opinions and perspectives of the retirees cannot be summarized into one sentence, so please be a bit more mature.
Yeh you didn’t reply to mine a bit offended here, please scroll up.
My apologies. I’ve replied.
I’m sorry, did you just tell me to be more mature?. Hi I’m Gobby, have we met before??
Making the statement “Tell us why you think you deserve mod” has kind of a pompous vibe to it, no? Not only that, but you said so on a public sticked post. Everyone on that little list, you insulted by questioning what they did for the army. Weather it needed to be done was your call. But you basically said “Regardless of what the past regimes thought, we want you to publicly illiterate what exactly you’ve done for the army that makes you so special. Next time, why not make them stand trial? Or make them dance like monkeys to keep Mod?
HI RETIREES CAN I HAVE UR AUTOGRAPH?
I will try to sum up the reason behind this post by responding to each segment from Michael’s comment.
Nobody will tell me who reported me, which is fine, but the fact that, without evidence, their opinions are trusted over mine is very unfair. Not one picture was provided by the “members and mods” who apparently complained about me and my midship is at risk because of their word, yet when I say that one of the leaders has broken a rule, I’m blamed for ACP’s downfall and possible rebellion?
I don’t know if leaders don’t see it or if they choose to be blind to it, but there are a lot of people in ACP who have a problem with things like the lack of activeness by the leaders and how little they seem to care about anybody but themselves.
Through Shab’s unmod week, we will tell you exactly why you were chosen to be unmodded. We will also check their IPs to double check the authenticity. And us leaders DO care about others and this post should prove it- We wanted to secure the safety of the new troops who come in everyday. There are incidents where inappropriate talk runs rampant and it scares the soldiers. Unfortunately, the post came out as a direct attack for which we are sorry.
It is clear that this post is an attempt by current leaders to secure their power and to let us all know how big and strong they are because two of the three people with stars next to their names are ONLY there because of their consistent complaints and issues with the leaders, while one of the people listed with a warning has openly admitted that he is a homophobe, sexist, racist, and a bigot. He knows and acknowledges that he is all of those things and is proud of each and every one of them. If that isn’t more unmod-worthy than “starting arguments” I don’t know what is.
Like I said before, we shouldn’t have listed names of retirees. That was a mistake on our part and we should’ve just held an unmod week like the one Shab is running now.
The only person close to that that I could think of would be Jerry for his conversations about p*rn, human/drug trafficking, and constant abuse of retirees.
I don’t recall ever talking about p*rn, and the drug trafficking was purely a joke run by a friend of mine. I’ll make sure not to have these topics on main again. And I have never abused a retiree, I respect all of you for your work done in ACP. If you found anything else that I did wrong, please tell me so I can work on improving myself.
Rule 1: No cursing: No swearing on the chat, and censored swears are also counted as swears. Swearing in private chat is also not allowed. F and N word will result in a ban without warning. You will receive a warning for the S or B word first. A word or “F*g” will result in kicks. I have seen multiple owner-ranked people break this rule, including Sercan who decided to use the F word as a reason for a ban. Rule 2 says that inappropriate topics will result in a kick, guest, and then ban. What did Jerry receive for joking about drugs, p*rn, and human trafficking? Nothing! He did say that it was okay because he was Hispanic though, which kind of breaks the rule even more as a rude stereotype.
What Sercan did was of course a mistake on his part which he has apologized for. And I swear I do not recall ever saying that.
Another problem is the bot. Retirees don’t hate the bot because we think we’re above the rules and we don’t like being kicked and banned for breaking them. In fact, it’s not just the retirees who dislike the bot. The bot constantly abuses people because it is a machine and it has flaws. For example, “faking/fake,” “patrick,” and “stick,” are all words that people have been banned for because the bot thought they were inappropriate. We all know that glitches and errors happen with bots, but the only people who ever do anything about it are Eric and Shab, who are both retired. That being said, people who are new to ACP and maybe on xat for the first time will not understand how the bot works. If they were to get banned for something like that, it is very likely that they would get upset thinking they’re in trouble and never come back. If they do, they won’t be happy, like the rest of us. If the bot worked properly, nobody would have a problem with it. However, that’s not the case, and it’s making a lot of people mad. If there was an open poll asking if people want to keep or get rid of the bot, I think the majority would vote against the bot, due to its immense amount of flaws consistent abuse towards soldiers. The only ones who seem to like it are the ones whose job it does and the ones who cannot be kicked or banned by it. It completely takes away the responsibilities of a moderator since it bans before people can even see what it’s saying and it makes it so that mods can’t unban anyone.
The purpose of the bot is to do a few things:
Auto member new troops, ban for curse words (like the f word) and to clear inappropriate language from the main chat (like sh*t). As of right now, the bot is doing it’s job perfectly after some tinkering with it and after listening to all of your concerns. If you still have some issues with it, please talk to us.
This post is very hypocritical if you’re going to try and tell me that it’s members and mods that have a problem with me and not the leaders. If you want to tell me that I break the rules and I deserve to lose my modship, most of you (the owners) should lose your ownership, as well. However, if you want to say that this post is because you have a personal problem with me because I constantly tear apart your leadership, I’ll accept that, because I do. I don’t believe it’s what starts arguments (which are two sides, anyways, so I’m not the only one to blame) but I’ll take half of the responsibility if someone mature can take the other half. An army like ACP is only where it is because of some of the retired people who still come on chat and I believe that they deserve a little more respect than they get. Based on the comments on this post and the things I see on chat, a lot of current members and mods agree. The retirees have absolutely no problem with not being on chat while a battle is going on because we were all in ACP and we know what it’s like, but I do not appreciate being told to leave at 3 AM EST when nobody else is talking because I’m retired and ‘disturbing’ chat. I also do not appreciate being among those blamed for the downfall of ACP, when really, the retirees have nothing to do with it. ACP is nothing like it was when a lot of these people were here, so maybe their advice and opinions aren’t so bad.
The leadership did not want this to become a personal attack, we just reacted very sloppishly towards the retirees. The entire point of the post was to get ALL retirees AND current mods to fix their act on chat. After this unmod week, everyone including the owners will be working on improving themselves. And when have you been blamed for the downfall of ACP? That is not an opinion from any of the leaders, it is far from it.
This comment probably got me closer to being membered than I was before, but there is not a single lie in this post and if I get demoted to member for sharing nothing but the truth, that will say a lot about who’s in control right now. I may not deserve mod, but there are many people on that list who do. Both of the people whose names are marked along with mine deserve to keep their modship.
You won’t be membered for having an opinion.
Alexa was a 2ic during some of ACP’s best days and she’s seen great success and knows a lot about it. If she were to be unmodded, it would be worse than membering at least half of the past leaders simply due to the fact that she was ranked as high as she was and that she has that experience. She doesn’t break the rules enough to have been given such a harsh “warning.” Cait on the other hand, doesn’t break the rules at all. She hardly even talks on main, so her name being on that list must be some kind of personal problem.
After unmod week, we will determine if Alexa should keep her modship. She was put on the list because we received quite a number of complaints about her. And then we reacted too quickly and sloppishly about it and the result is this post. Many complain about Cait because they do not believe she earned her modship on chat. However, we’ve decided to let her keep her modship (unless the unmod week results say otherwise)
If the leaders have a problem with me and want to member or ban me, I don’t mind, but think about what you’re doing before you make a post like this. I kick and ban people when they break the rules and I answer every single PC no matter what it’s about, so I can’t be that much of a poison. If you, as an owner, can say (and truly believe) that you put your best foot forward with every battle and every silly PC or request, every rule, and every retiree, you have every right to get rid of us, but I don’t think any of you can. I don’t think I should be demoted because I don’t break any of the chat rules besides the argument one and I do my best to treat every soldier well and to answer all of them. Before you go accusing multiple people of breaking the rules and threatening their modship, make sure that all of you have the same story ready to shove down our throats when we ask you for a reason and maybe a little bit of evidence instead of peoples’ opinions because we’ve done nothing to make our opinions and sides of the story less important than theirs. If you can seriously tell me that this post has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that I openly dislike a lot of the leadership here and that I don’t bow down and kiss all of your feet (and provide some evidence or proof that this is due to issues that soldiers are having with me and not you personally), I’ll be able to accept it a little more. Still, I don’t plan on handing out respect to people who have done nothing but slander my friends and I in a public post for everybody to see, so if this is your best effort, maybe you should take a step back and look how you’re running this army.
We acknowledge that the way we handled the situation was sub-par. We’re sorry for that and we are aiming to fix the situation by having one on one conversations and by holding the unmod week run by Shab.
For the leader(s) who made this post, the reactions from everyone in the comments should tell you how people really feel and that nobody believes that soldiers are the ones who have a problem with us. We’re not as stupid as you think we are and the soldiers seem to be on our side. When you try to blame an entire group for your mistakes and your lack of results, at least make sure you treat all of the other groups as best as you can so that they take your side. While you’ve been attacking us and ignoring them, we’ve been talking to each other and we’re all on the same page. If any of us had power over you, you would be so much nicer to us, but since we aren’t, you don’t feel the need to acknowledge any of our concerns. I’d like to see you do the same with somebody who has power over you. If membering me (or others) will make you feel better, go ahead. I won’t lose my ability to talk, only my ability to moderate chat, so nothing will change and it would be kind of pointless. The only people who will suffer are the ones who benefit from chat moderation. I, on the other hand, have nothing to lose.
I didn’t intend for this post to sound as rude and menacing as it does, but I don’t think there was any other way to get the points across that I needed to get across. I’ve tried many times to talk calmly to leaders, but I can only try so many times. I’m sorry if this seems like a hate post on ACP, because it’s not. The soldiers deserve better than what they’re getting and so do the retirees and that’s all I’m trying to say.
I apologize for any grammar/spelling errors and/or repetition.
Thank you,
Michael
The leadership wanted to fix the situation between retirees and complaints received about them. Unfortunately, it came out as a personal attack. We acknowledge that what we did was a mistake and we apologize for that. What we wanted to do was to ask the retirees to be more appropriate on chat. We now realize that we too have been at fault for the same reasons we made this post and we will do better at following the rules. Hopefully we can work forward from this point and ease the situation so that both sides are happy.
Okay. I asked for this reply and I appreciate getting it because this reply alone is more words than I have seen Jerry speak in the two months I have known him, despite various attempts to communicate him since the attacks were made on myself and my fellow retirees. (I actually clearly asked him to read Michael’s comment on Sercan’s post, not Flipmoo’s, but this is similar to what I expected his reply to be to the other post, too.)
Unfortunately Jerry is offline and I am unable to communicate with him directly, and I will have a very busy week this week (I’m a sound technician for my school and there’s a play this weekend) so I’m going to get my thoughts out now because I fear I won’t have time tomorrow or Tuesday.
I think you misunderstand the point of unmod week – which is perfectly understandable, because you have never experienced one. I have experienced multiple unmod weeks and I don’t want to speak for Shab (although I think he would agree with me), but in my experience, unmod week is not about who you (the leaders) want unmodded. Unmod week is about who the soldiers and other chat-goers (including you, but not solely you) want unmodded. If you intended to use unmod week to unmod me or my friends, I am pleased to inform you that the last I heard, Michael, Buck, and I (three of those who were publicly attacked because you had received multiple complaints about us) have a grand total of zero votes for unmod week.
“It’s a joke” is not an excuse for discussing inappropriate topics on main. You know that as well as I do. And this post itself – and Serc’s – are both abuse of retirees. Public attacks? Come on, man. We could have dealt with this privately, but unfortunately we have to resort to this.
Saying the f-word on main chat does not warrant an apology. Saying the f-word on main chat warrants a ban. I don’t care what your rank is. The fact that I have been told multiple times that it’s okay that Sercan swore because he APOLOGIZED is ridiculous. He broke a rule. He needs to take responsibility for it.
The bot is not doing its job perfectly. Today I saw two people get banned for “fluke.” How is that even remotely a curse word? If I wanted to censor the f-word, “fluke” would not come to mind. And tomorrow we’ll discover a new ridiculous thing that the bot considers a swear word. Like I said in my vote for unmod week, the bot is a good thing, but it has endless kinks and until those kinks are fixed, we should not pretend it is doing its job perfectly because it is not. (As somewhat of a side note, I’m also disturbed by the fact that someone somewhere along the way decided mods were unable to properly moderate the chat. The things you mentioned – kicking for vulgar language, membering new soldiers, etc. – are easily done by a human being. Mods have done those things for seven years. There is absolutely no reason they need a robot to do it.)
I believe that you didn’t intend for this to become a personal attack, but I lament that it is an extreme display of poor planning. Posting a list of names beside the words “unpleasant” and “unwelcoming” is a huge red flag for a personal attack. I understand that your intentions were good, but the execution is atrocious and I have yet to receive an apology or an explanation for how this situation got so hilariously out of hand.
The claim that this post was targeted towards retirees AND active mods is absurd. I mean, maybe that was your intention. That’s fine. But nowhere in this post – nor Sercan’s – are active mods asked to change their behavior or accused of anything. CERTAINLY their names are not listed publicly. I’ve watched their behavior on chat closely for several days now and clearly they did not take this post as a warning to clean up their act, which is understandable. I have no idea how they were supposed to take it that way, because it’s clearly targeted towards retirees.
You say we won’t be membered for having an opinion. Here’s our confusion: We haven’t the foggiest idea what we’ll be membered for (I was actually told we wouldn’t be membered at all, but evidently that has changed).
Okay, you say you’ll determine the fate of my modship after unmod week. My gut response to this is that I have zero votes for unmod week with two days left, and it’s unlikely I will be unmodded due to Shab’s unmod week. It strikes me as a little ridiculous that you would still unmod me despite evidence that you are the only ones who want me unmodded. Maybe it’s just me, but I think it would make you look bad. (The same all goes for Cait and Michael.)
I acknowledge that there are retirees who are inappropriate. In absolutely no way do I condone the way Slider speaks on chat. I don’t know Splashy, so I won’t defend him (sorry, Splashy, it’s nothing personal). However, I rarely ever see my retired friends – Michael, Buck, Jack, Cait, Kier, among others not on the list – act inappropriately on chat. Obviously, I am not online all hours of the day, so it’s possible I’m missing something. But the leaders have failed to provide proof of me or my friends acting inappropriately. I think Michael will agree with me when I say we are extremely confused by the vague accusations made against us. We have been told that there were complaints made about us. What complaints? We are told different things by different leaders – unwelcoming attitudes, failure to provide proof of legend status (WE HAVE A LEGENDS PAGE FOR A REASON), general unpleasantness, and more. I do not have an unwelcoming attitude. I am a former 2ic. I do not consider myself an unpleasant person, and I have not recently been told otherwise. The fact that I have received zero votes for unmod week makes it even more confusing. If you refuse to tell me what complaints were made, I could just ask Shab. However, no complaints have been made to Shab. In short, I am frustrated that I am being accused of something, but no one will tell me what. How am I supposed to reform my behavior if no one will tell me what’s wrong with it?
I hope I have shed some more light on where my confusions lie pertaining to this issue, and I hope we can keep the discussion open. I know you and your fellow leaders are busy, but I think this is important and I hope we can solve the issue quickly and peacefully.
With respect,
Alexa/Fox
Alexa’s comment sums up my opinion on the response very well. Unfortunately, Jerry’s comment isn’t either constructive or helpful for two main reasons. First, it was in response to a comment made before unmod week and the ‘apology’ post. The reason behind Flipmoo’s post and Sercan’s post are completely different. One is claiming that we are inappropriate, disruptive mods, and the other is claiming that we are not ‘qualified’ to be mods because of our lack of contributions to the ACP. Our comments along with Jerry’s response only tackles the first accusation, whereas the comments included every accusation and would benefit more from a response than the comments on here would. Secondly, the inclusion of Shab’s ‘unmod’ week makes this response invalid because Shab’s unmod week and this post are two completely different types of unmod week. Like Alexa said, Shab’s focuses solely on the opinions of the soldiers, while this one focuses partially on what soldiers have said and partially on how the leaders feel about the people being reported. This post and these comments were also created before unmod week had even been announced, so it shouldn’t really be part of the justification or cover-up, whatever you want to call it. They weren’t connected at the time and are only connected now because of the unexpected response from the soldiers and retirees, so using it in your responses won’t be very helpful in clarifying what was meant by this post.
I don’t have much else to add since Alexa hit the nail on the head, but I think everyone is just going to find this response more confusing since now the reason for our mod abilities being taken away is being changed, yet again. We would all really appreciate it if any of the leaders would take a look at the second post and the comments that were made on it and take the time to reply to them before this situation becomes any more ridiculous for either side.
Thanks again,
Michael