Look..... this is going to be very hard for me to post. I know the risks of doing so.... but it has to be done. I've felt so guilty all this time and hoped that this might have been resolved quietly without any drama like last time.... like last October.... ironic.. heh...
I know there will be a lot of anger with all of this, but I ask people to try to react to this in the most responsible way possible. You all have the right to be angry and outraged, but please, do not let it overtake your behavior here, as we don't want to give the forum staff any extra job of having to do cleanups.
I have talked with @PiratePony about this and told him of what I was about to do, I have talked with other members of staff, because I did not want to wade in blind nor did I want them to be taken by surprise when I posted this. They deserve to know my full intentions here....
To give a bit of a context, I was once a Global Moderator on this site (before that I was a Sectional staff member), I worked with the staff on most every matter that I could be working on here on the forums. However, there was one other who also used to do that. His name was Matey, @PiratePony. He was one of the greatest staff members to have ever worked within the forums, having been the treasurer of Poniverse as well at one point. Everything he did, it was so just and he was very understanding with everybody, very engaging and he went by the book..... and for that.... he was terminated within the staff....
See, dramatic things have happened within the staff. This took place back in April. But if I had to think harder about it, this actually took place a bit before that even, when the head of Poniverse, @AppleDashPoni came up with the idea of implementing an NSWF section here on the forums. This was rejected hard by most of us on forum staff, but none were as hard opposed to it as Pirate was.... and I think that is what drew him the ire of @AppleDashPoni. The conversation was not a pleasant one, AppleDash did not seem to understand that we worked as a team and that we reached common agreement before taking an action on something. We did discuss his wish, but in the end, we declined it.
Let us now fast forward over to April (even though I did not mention any date previously for the NSFW discussion). Pirate was informing us of the possibilities that we might have in regards to the possible change of leadership. Nothing out of the ordinary, this was information that we should have all been aware about... he was telling us this (and just to be clear, this all took place on Skype)... and then the dreadful message of [5.4.2017 20:01:32] *** Blackjack removed PiratePony from this conversation. *** happened..... this was..... everyone in staff (at least moderators and administrators) reacted negatively to this. And I can safely say here now that no one accepted what AppleDash did and we all protested this harshly. AppleDash had taken the authority to fire Pirate, a Global Moderator, on his own volition without consulting anyone about it, not even the forum's administration.
Look..... I am now going to provide you with the log with both the discussion we had about it and the log which @AppleDashPoni himself provided as "evidence" of Pirate "personally attacking" him and "working against the corporation's leadership". Look, when I provide you with the logs of the discussion we had within staff (Global Moderators and Administrators), you will see that some names will be presented as "Anonymous 1" or "Anonymous 2". Those are people who have either requested that their name not be shown or are people I have not been able to contact, so I will show them the dignity and respect for their privacy to not publicize their names. However, the names that will appear there are of mine and AppleDash and of those who have agreed to allow me to show their name.
I respect the privacy of people of not wanting to get dragged into some drama, but here come the logs of the conversation we had, though be warned, there will be missing context as I in the end leave the chat, but I have heard that the chat went on, though it was very unfruitful.... I have colored some of the names just to make it a bit easier to keep up with the conversation, on who is saying what. And when there is no space between lines, that would mean that someone is being quoated, for instance when it appears I am saying "And personal attacks, baiting, working against the corporation's leadershipFrom the example you provided, that is false. " this is actually me quoting AppleDash until it reaches "From the..." which is my reply to the quote of his words. Be aware that me editing the "anonymous" parts and putting color to names is the only edit I do. Everything else is completely untouched and raw.
Also, another thing to be aware of, AppleDash is actually Blackjack on Skype. That is (or was) his username at least.
If you are busy in any way, I suggest you keep this window open still as this might get removed, even though I have talked with the people who would have the biggest say here on the forums and I am in full right to write this.
[5.4.2017 10:31:27] PiratePony: Sorry guys i crashed a and didn't say goodnight. Thanks again
[5.4.2017 11:56:07 | Edited 11:58:11] PiratePony: PONIVERSE BUSINESS Hey guys. I know some of us have not been happy with some policies being discussed recently. Even though the first annual meeting hasn't happened yet, the class A membership can request a general members meeting if 5% of the membership requests it. The board of directors would then be bound to host it. At this meeting, we could discuss and vote on things such as to confirm or change the board of directors, approve and amend bylaws, etc. So I'm going to send a request, as I'm a staffer who is over one year of service and should be considered a class A member - Not only am I stating it here, but I'm going to send an email to email@example.com I hope that if you guys agree with me that you'll do the same
[5.4.2017 12:04:36] PiratePony: After all, this is a corporation, and as the actual members of the corporation, you have a right to have a voice in policy, as well as who is representing you on the board of directors.
[5.4.2017 12:23:59] PiratePony: Okay Appledash just informed me that I'm not a class a member
[5.4.2017 12:24:06 | Edited 12:24:11] PiratePony: As there's a membership freeze
[5.4.2017 12:25:50] PiratePony: So this one is up to you guys
[5.4.2017 12:28:56] PiratePony: If you class a members want a members meeting - demand it from them. If not, fair enough. But if this is something you have the right to do, take it before it gets taken from you.
[5.4.2017 20:01:32] *** Blackjack removed PiratePony from this conversation. ***
[5.4.2017 21:25:57] Anonymous 1: So could I get a count on who in here agrees with the action taken against Pirate, and those who disagree?
[5.4.2017 21:26:05] Anonymous 1: So far, myself, Jonas and Light disagree
[5.4.2017 21:26:16] Lightwing: This is a question for ALL staff thugh, sectionals should also get a voice if possible
[5.4.2017 21:26:19] Lightwing: And Anonymous 3 seems to disagree too
[5.4.2017 21:26:20] Lightwing: add
[5.4.2017 21:26:20] Lightwing: 4
[5.4.2017 21:26:35] Blackjack: What are you hoping to accomplish with this?
[5.4.2017 21:26:42] Lightwing: Something
[5.4.2017 21:26:49] Anonymous 1: I'm sorry but I don't think I was addressing you here
[5.4.2017 21:26:51] Lightwing: More than what we have gotten by "discussing" things with us
[5.4.2017 21:27:02] Anonymous 1: I was addressing the staff of MLPF
[5.4.2017 21:27:09] Lightwing: But yeah, you are not part of this
[5.4.2017 21:27:17] Lightwing: This involves only staff members of MLPForums
[5.4.2017 21:27:21] Lightwing: no chair members, no board directors
[5.4.2017 21:27:25] Lightwing: moderators and administrators only
[5.4.2017 21:27:34] Anonymous 1: hell, sectionals too
[5.4.2017 21:27:41] Lightwing: Prolem is contacting them
[5.4.2017 21:27:45] Lightwing: but they also have a voice on ehre
[5.4.2017 21:27:54] Anonymous 1: I'll talk to every single one of them privately if I have to
[5.4.2017 21:28:00] Lightwing: Problem is... well, THIS is the royal council
[5.4.2017 21:28:07] Lightwing: I'll talk to every single one of them privately if I have tolike if i have to do it too then
[5.4.2017 21:28:18] Lightwing: I already messaged an adminstrator personally to get more details of this
[5.4.2017 21:28:24] Lightwing: i don't have fear of doing the same with everyone
[5.4.2017 21:28:34] Jónas Candymane: So far, myself, Jonas and Light disagreeSo does Vengeful Strudel. He was tired
[5.4.2017 21:28:47] Anonymous 1: Vengeful Strudel too, and Anonymous 3 if I remember correctly
[5.4.2017 21:28:50] Anonymous 2: I have been reading these screenshots and I see that Pirate has been removed from a group. What is going on?
[5.4.2017 21:29:03] Lightwing: Anonymous 2, quick rundown: Blackjack fired PiratePony without consulting any staffer from MLPForums
[5.4.2017 21:29:06] Lightwing: no admins, no nothing
[5.4.2017 21:29:10] Lightwing: a personal vendetta, if you may
[5.4.2017 21:29:19] Anonymous 1: It was done for 'insubordination'
[5.4.2017 21:29:25] Anonymous 3: I cannot abide by the decision that was undertaken.
[5.4.2017 21:29:29] Lightwing: 5
[5.4.2017 21:29:31] Lightwing: People
[5.4.2017 21:29:33] Anonymous 1: In that Pirate did not agree with Blackjack being the leader
[5.4.2017 21:29:42 | Edited 21:29:44] Blackjack: And personal attacks, baiting, working against the corporation's leadership
[5.4.2017 21:29:48 | Removed 21:30:05] Lightwing: This message has been removed.
[5.4.2017 21:29:53] Anonymous 1: Anonymous 3, Light, Vengeful Strudel, Jonas, Myself
[5.4.2017 21:29:55] Anonymous 1: so far
[5.4.2017 21:29:56] Lightwing: Staff, what do you think of this?
[5.4.2017 21:30:05] Anonymous 1: We'll see who else as the day progresses
[5.4.2017 21:30:07] Jónas Candymane: And personal attacks, baiting, working against the corporation's leadershipFrom the example you provided, that is false.
[5.4.2017 21:30:17] Lightwing: Darnit, I removed my message by accident
[5.4.2017 21:30:22] Lightwing: I said "You don't have voice on this"
[5.4.2017 21:30:31] Anonymous 1: I wonder what happens if we find out 100% of MLPF staff cannot abide by Blackjacks decision?
[5.4.2017 21:30:33 | Edited 21:30:37] Jónas Candymane: So it can not be treated as a serious case of evidence
[5.4.2017 21:30:47] Anonymous 1: Id imagine that would mean something pretty significant
[5.4.2017 21:31:19] Lightwing: Firing people was never done before. It is only reserved for the absolute bottom.
[5.4.2017 21:31:34] Lightwing: Corrupted mods, disruption of the forums, abuse of power from the moderator's part, and such.
[5.4.2017 21:31:47] Blackjack: I consider this disruption of the organization
[5.4.2017 21:31:55] Lightwing: In which way?
[5.4.2017 21:31:58] Lightwing: Details, no "pm me"
[5.4.2017 21:32:10] Jónas Candymane: So far the only one who has been offering any kind of disruption, is you Blackjack
[5.4.2017 21:32:14] Anonymous 2: What exactly does Blackjack's position entail?
[5.4.2017 21:32:14] Blackjack: Once again - working against the leadership, and implying / encouraging that others should do the same.
[5.4.2017 21:32:16] Lightwing: I am gonna instantly ignore that suggestion of yours from this point on, I will only abide by team choices from this point on
[5.4.2017 21:32:19] Jónas Candymane: We have stayed within the realms of our work
[5.4.2017 21:32:22] Jónas Candymane: So has PP
[5.4.2017 21:32:36] Jónas Candymane: He stayed within the realm he worked in and was concerned with
[5.4.2017 21:32:50] Anonymous 1: [5. apríl 2017 21:32] Blackjack:
<<< Once again - working against the leadership, and implying / encouraging that others should do the same.Blackjack...we work with the leadership fine. We've done so for years and we will continue to do so
[5.4.2017 21:32:56] Jónas Candymane: He did not conspire against Poniverse, but worked for the benefit of the forums
[5.4.2017 21:32:58] Anonymous 1: but you have failed to act like our leader
[5.4.2017 21:33:01] Blackjack: You're not working with me right now.
[5.4.2017 21:33:02] Anonymous 1: and so you will not be treated as such
[5.4.2017 21:33:05] Lightwing: We have been doin this for years
[5.4.2017 21:33:12] Anonymous 1: What we are doing, is rallying
[5.4.2017 21:33:21] Lightwing: In the realm of experience even our youngest staffers have shown to SURPASS you in maturity and disposition to work
[5.4.2017 21:33:30] Jónas Candymane: You're not working with me right now.You are not giving any reason for us to do at the moment. And as Dawn says, we are rallying
[5.4.2017 21:33:36] Anonymous 1: and once we have grouped together, I imagine the next goal would be getting you removed from your position
[5.4.2017 21:33:39] Blackjack: Against the leadership.
[5.4.2017 21:33:40] Anonymous 1: Then, getting pirate reinstated
[5.4.2017 21:33:47] Anonymous 2: I'm a bit unfamiliar with what Blackjack's position entails. Please inform me.
[5.4.2017 21:33:59] Lightwing: I will message you more detailedly that because it's easy to get tangled here
[5.4.2017 21:34:00] Anonymous 1: lastly, amending the boards document about the chairs power on MLPF
[5.4.2017 21:34:02] Anonymous 3: If enough people aren't happy; it leads to a potential Motion of no Confidence.
[5.4.2017 21:34:08] Blackjack: What my position entails: http://puu.sh/vawNr/1c7bc57df5.png
[5.4.2017 21:34:36] Blackjack: I will message you more detailedly that because it's easy to get tangled hereThat's oddly hypocritical
[5.4.2017 21:34:45] Blackjack: I asked for you to do the same for the same reason, yet you declined
[5.4.2017 21:35:04] Lightwing: Difference #1
[5.4.2017 21:35:11] Lightwing: Everything that had to be said on that matter was said already in public
[5.4.2017 21:35:15] Jónas Candymane: You're not working with me right now.Also, just to highlight this because this is a very interesting thing for Blackjack to say.
When the whole NSFW thing happened, we worked with him. We discussed it with him. It got heated, however, we worked through the issues and we were processing it. We did not like what was presented to us, but we still dealt with it through communication.
What you are doing right now though, as vague as you were during the NSFW discussion, you are offering us nothing now. No information, nothing. You are keeping us in the dark and only providing us the justifications for your own powers, not the reasoning.
[5.4.2017 21:35:26] Jónas Candymane: So if there is anybody not working with anybody here, it is you
[5.4.2017 21:35:40] Lightwing: I can guess there are well over 400 messages on the MLPForums Staff Lounge and it can get lost easily. I just make an easy gateway for newcommers to understand, they can read the entire thing which was discussd from our part.
[5.4.2017 21:35:42] Blackjack: I have given you as much info as I can
[5.4.2017 21:35:46] Jónas Candymane: No
[5.4.2017 21:35:47] Lightwing: Difference #2
[5.4.2017 21:35:48] Jónas Candymane: You have
[5.4.2017 21:35:49] Jónas Candymane: Fucking not
[5.4.2017 21:35:53] Blackjack: What do you want?
[5.4.2017 21:35:56] Jónas Candymane: The log
[5.4.2017 21:36:00] Blackjack: Gain his permission.
[5.4.2017 21:36:06] Jónas Candymane: You just said it yourself
[5.4.2017 21:36:11 | Edited 21:36:16] Lightwing: I did it because making life easier. You do it for arrogance, so you can't be cornered by one person (spoiler, I could corner you any day)
[5.4.2017 21:36:23 | Edited 21:36:28] Blackjack: He has ignored my request for permission and I have a feeling he's doing it on purpose so he can protest it later on
[5.4.2017 21:36:32] Jónas Candymane: Alright - I can provide relevant logs, since from Jonas' screenshots it would appear that Pirate is alright with them being shared here.
[5.4.2017 21:36:37] Blackjack: Yeah, I rescind that
[5.4.2017 21:36:39] Jónas Candymane: THIS IS YOUR OWN WORDS!!
[5.4.2017 21:36:40] Blackjack: That's a bad idea in every way
[5.4.2017 21:36:50] Jónas Candymane: And now you magically decide to rescind that?
[5.4.2017 21:37:15] Blackjack: Yes - request permission from him and show me a screenshot of it
[5.4.2017 21:37:19] Blackjack: That should be easy to obtain
[5.4.2017 21:37:25] Jónas Candymane: Does not matter
[5.4.2017 21:37:27] Jónas Candymane: I asked him for one
[5.4.2017 21:37:30] Jónas Candymane: He is about to provide it
[5.4.2017 21:37:34] Blackjack: Alright
[5.4.2017 21:37:41] Blackjack: I have re-requested consent
[5.4.2017 21:37:48] Anonymous 1: This is unbelievably dumb. We have never had someone in power act like such a...child? I guess that's the best word. Acting like someone with 0 experience or 0 interest in the opinions of others
[5.4.2017 21:37:57] Anonymous 1: almost like a child dictator ?
[5.4.2017 21:38:13] Lightwing: Nah
[5.4.2017 21:38:15] Anonymous 1: Refusing to actually work with us on the decisions that matter
[5.4.2017 21:38:18] Lightwing: Child dictators want their candy
[5.4.2017 21:38:32] Blackjack: I'm trying to work with you on this and it isn't working
[5.4.2017 21:38:39 | Edited 21:38:46] Lightwing: What Blackjack wants is to have a group of sheep that follow their every command like if they didn't had emotions
[5.4.2017 21:38:39] Anonymous 1: Blackjack, you are not
[5.4.2017 21:38:45] Anonymous 1: you are not working with us
[5.4.2017 21:38:48] Anonymous 1: you are working against us
[5.4.2017 21:39:31] Jónas Candymane: Alright, a bit easy with the sarcasm/insult road we are going
[5.4.2017 21:39:33] Anonymous 4: Guys, I share disappoint and flat out disgust over the actions that have taken place earlier, but let's leave the insults and sarcasm to a minimum. Our views matter as well, but let's be careful of what we say for now.
[5.4.2017 21:39:50 | Edited 21:39:53] Blackjack: I want staff who will work to carry out my vision for the organization, not those who work against it.
[5.4.2017 21:39:57] Anonymous 1: If I'm not mistaken, we are currently working 'against the leadership' and are being 'insubordinate'.
[5.4.2017 21:40:00] Anonymous 1: Should we not be fired?
[5.4.2017 21:40:02] Jónas Candymane: I want staff who will work to carry out my vision for the organization, not those who work against it.Then I am gone
[5.4.2017 21:40:13] Blackjack: Alright, you are welcome to leave
[5.4.2017 21:40:28] Anonymous 1: Blackjack, its not YOUR vision that we're meant to work towards
[5.4.2017 21:40:31] Anonymous 1: its OURS
[5.4.2017 21:40:32] Anonymous 1: as a group
[5.4.2017 21:40:34] Anonymous 1: as a team
[5.4.2017 21:40:39] Blackjack: It literally is my vision that you're meant to work towards
[5.4.2017 21:40:41] Lightwing: we are a team for a reason, blackjack
[5.4.2017 21:40:41] Anonymous 1: YOU cannot run this place on your own
[5.4.2017 21:40:47] Lightwing: Nobody in Poniverse AS A WHOLE takes lone decissions
[5.4.2017 21:40:56] Lightwing: Nobody. Ask any staffer from any part of it, any place.
[5.4.2017 21:41:07] Blackjack: Indeed, I do not want to run it on my own either... That's the point of having staff that work with me towards my general goals.
[5.4.2017 21:41:15] Anonymous 1: You will not have that
[5.4.2017 21:41:17] Lightwing: Well then, your general goals are shit
[5.4.2017 21:41:21] Lightwing: Simple and dindle
[5.4.2017 21:41:24] Anonymous 1: Because again, this is not what your role is
[5.4.2017 21:41:28] Anonymous 1: you are not meant to be a dictator
[5.4.2017 21:41:32] Anonymous 5: Also reinforcing that we should drop sarcasm and insults to a minimum, please. I also am currently disagreeing with the actions taken.
[5.4.2017 21:41:35] Anonymous 1: You have misinterpreted your role
[5.4.2017 21:41:44] Anonymous 1: significantly
[5.4.2017 21:41:46] Blackjack: Can I please have a quick tally of who is willing to calm down and work with me, and who is not?
[5.4.2017 21:41:50] Lightwing: I tried hard to not use swearing on here, but it's getting harder
[5.4.2017 21:41:59] Anonymous 1: We are TRYING to, but you will not listen to reason.
[5.4.2017 21:42:04] Anonymous 1: You only want to do things your way
[5.4.2017 21:42:09] Lightwing: This is like arguing with a kid. Difference is that the kid at least gives in eventually to reason, but you don't.
[5.4.2017 21:42:32] Anonymous 1: I'll agree that we can keep the insults down, but the anger will remain.
[5.4.2017 21:42:39] Anonymous 1: Cause this is ridiculous
[5.4.2017 21:42:52] Lightwing: I'm gonna try to hold on my insults a little longer. Just one slipped down my radar, but I'm not letting another one do the same.
[5.4.2017 21:43:03] Anonymous 1: There need to be a meeting and a vote as soon as possible
[5.4.2017 21:43:13] Lightwing: But I will still say that your actions don't even categorize as "Bad", Bad is a compliment.
[5.4.2017 21:45:02] Anonymous 1: Can we get some kind of vote of no confidence in place?
[5.4.2017 21:45:04 | Edited 21:46:13] Jónas Candymane: Again with calming down, I echo what Anonymous 5 and Anonymous 4 have said.
However, as to me leaving. If the future will be that only your own vision is the one we must follow, where we are forced to abide by that which you dictate and come up with, without our agreement or consent in terms of forums matters, if this is the future of the forums, you can count on me resigning. That is a promise.
As to the discussion getting more heated, it is hard to keep it so cool while one is literally witholding all information, refusing to work and only wants things done privately without any kind of checks and balances, without witnesses.
You say you want people who will work with you. Fine, but there must be an incentive for it. Currently there is none at this moment. You must know what compromise is, as if there is one thing an actual leader compromises, it is his pride.
[5.4.2017 21:45:15] Anonymous 1: I'm pretty sure that's allowed no?
[5.4.2017 21:45:54] Anonymous 1: "A motion of no confidence (alternatively vote of no confidence, no-confidence motion, or (unsuccessful) confidence motion) is a statement or vote that a person or persons in a position of responsibility (government, managerial, etc.) is no longer deemed fit to hold that position: perhaps because they are inadequate in some respect, are failing to carry out obligations, or are making decisions that other members feel are detrimental."
[5.4.2017 21:45:58] Anonymous 1: That's what I want
[5.4.2017 21:46:05] Lightwing: I will make my stance clear too. I drop the badge if this "leadership" keeps going. When I signed up, I was greeted by a stern but fair leadership ladder, your very actions spit in the face of that ladder.
[5.4.2017 21:46:15] Anonymous 1: And in an organisation such as this I'm pretty sure that's a thing we can do
[5.4.2017 21:46:17] Lightwing: And I vote for that too. You are in no position to be a leader as of currently.
[5.4.2017 21:46:51] Jónas Candymane: I just told hin to give today's
[5.4.2017 21:46:53] Jónas Candymane: We are waiting
[5.4.2017 21:47:23] Jónas Candymane: He is also ready to provide screenshots in case of falseness
[5.4.2017 21:47:25] Anonymous 1: Whats AppleDash's skype?
[5.4.2017 21:47:40] Blackjack: <---
[5.4.2017 21:47:42] Anonymous 5: Because we've not had the first Membership meeting since incorporation, the current draft bylaws have not been ratified. Without ratification, I honestly don't know where anything is legally, to be honest. We're kinda in a limbo state relative to that.
[5.4.2017 21:47:58] Anonymous 1: oh, mixed names up
[5.4.2017 21:48:46] Anonymous 2: Well, based on what I've seen from the screenshots and what I have been told, I can't say that I conquer with Blackjack's action. I know that I am not necessarily involved in what happened with him and Pirate but I figured I'd put my input forth regardless.
[5.4.2017 21:49:06] Lightwing: We are a team Venomous, your voice is very appreciated by us. Thank you.
[5.4.2017 21:49:57] Anonymous 1: Anonymous 4, Anonymous 5, myself, Light, Vengeful Strudel, Anonymous 3, Anonymous 2, Jonas
[5.4.2017 21:50:05] Lightwing: Eight people
[5.4.2017 21:50:08] Anonymous 7: Nine.
[5.4.2017 21:50:17] Lightwing: out of 12 moderators/administrators
[5.4.2017 21:50:22] Anonymous 2: So what is the goal of this particular discussion?
[5.4.2017 21:50:29] Anonymous 7: This does not include sectionals either.
[5.4.2017 21:50:45] Lightwing: Sectionals should be included i too, but this is the royal council, so for now only mod/admins
[5.4.2017 21:50:51] Anonymous 7: I agree.
[5.4.2017 21:50:53] Lightwing: but Anonymous 8 already showed to be against that decission
[5.4.2017 21:50:56] Lightwing: so 10
[5.4.2017 21:51:13] Anonymous 1: the ultimate first goal of all t his is to move for a motion of no confidence
[5.4.2017 21:51:15] Anonymous 1: or anything similar
[5.4.2017 21:51:21] Anonymous 1: Because that's what this is
[5.4.2017 21:51:30] Anonymous 1: a complete loss of confidence and trust in the chair
[5.4.2017 21:51:38] Lightwing: I vote for a motion of No Confidence against Blackjack. He has shown to not be fit for a position as a leader.
[5.4.2017 21:51:51] Anonymous 1: We are not tools to be ordered around for the sake of a single persons vision
[5.4.2017 21:51:51] Lightwing: The actions that happened today just grounded it completely.
[5.4.2017 21:51:55] Blackjack: That isn't something you can do
[5.4.2017 21:51:56] Anonymous 1: We either work as a team, or we don't work at all
[5.4.2017 21:52:32] Lightwing: [5. apríl 2017 21:51] Blackjack:
<<< That isn't something you can doThe law is backing us up, kid.
In federal politics, a vote of no confidence takes down the government, and votes of no confidence may be asserted automatically if the House of Commons rejects the government's budget. Provincial governments may also fall if a motion of no confidence is passed by the legislature or if the legislature fails to pass a confidence measure (e.g. the provincial budget).
In the consensus government system of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, in which the premier is chosen among and by a vote of the members of the non-partisan legislature, a vote of no confidence removes the premier and cabinet from office and permits the members to elect a new premier."
[5.4.2017 21:52:48] Blackjack: This... isn't the government.
[5.4.2017 21:52:55] Blackjack: This is an independent corporation
[5.4.2017 21:52:56] Lightwing: We are an organization though by the end of the day, we have the right to call a vote for this
[5.4.2017 21:53:32] Lightwing: The only reason of why you don't want it is because you know the outcome, we cornered you and you have nobody to run towards.
[5.4.2017 21:53:59] Lightwing: more than 75% of the moderation team (not including sectionals as of yet) doesn't trust you in this position, what's your answer to that?
[5.4.2017 21:54:28] Blackjack: I have no comment at this time, mostly because I need to leave for about 5 minutes
[5.4.2017 21:54:40] Anonymous 1: "Members can remove a director by ordinary resolution at a special meeting. This does not apply to a director who is appointed because they hold a particular office. If a director is elected by a particular class of members, only the members of the class can remove the director in this way."
[5.4.2017 21:55:47] Anonymous 1: Members can take a number of actions under ONCA to make sure directors and officers are properly supervising the management of the corporation and complying with their duties. For example, members have the right to:
apply to the court for a compliance order to make officers and directors comply with ONCA, the articles and by-laws of the not-for-profit corporation (refer to section 191 of ONCA)
remove a director from office by ordinary resolution at a special meeting (refer to section 26 of ONCA)
have greater access to financial statements to make sure their corporation’s financial position is effectively supervised (e.g. upon request, a member can receive financial statements before an annual meeting)(refer to section 84 of ONCA)
in the case of a not-for-profit corporation that is not a public benefit corporation, disagree on certain fundamental changes and have any financial interest they may have re-purchased by the corporation (refer to section 187 of ONCA)
apply to the court for an order winding up the corporation (refer to sections 136 to 138 of ONCA)
apply to the court to require an investigation of the corporation (refer to section 174 of ONCA)
apply to the court for permission to act in the name of the corporation or to intervene in an action in which the corporation is a party (a derivative action)
this is not available for a religious corporation (refer to section 183 of ONCA)
[5.4.2017 21:55:48] Jónas Candymane: Alright, I read the log and I must say that I find BJ's reasonsings to be shit, to put it bluntly.
There was no personal insult there AT ALL!
[5.4.2017 21:56:10] Jónas Candymane: There was also no exact proof presented about "actively working against the leadership", only accusations
[5.4.2017 21:56:15] Anonymous 1: Those are the laws in Canada from what I've been able to see so far
[5.4.2017 21:56:18] Anonymous 1: in regards to non profits
[5.4.2017 21:56:25] Jónas Candymane: Plus, he was doing this in good faith, not bad.
[5.4.2017 21:56:32] Lightwing: We hold the right to call such vote, and I do want to make it come true
[5.4.2017 21:56:32] Anonymous 1: We have the ability to remove someone from the board
[5.4.2017 21:56:44] Lightwing: And quite bluntly, I don't see anyone opposing it
[5.4.2017 21:56:52] Anonymous 1: Even if its class A members only
[5.4.2017 21:56:54] Anonymous 1: we have enough
[5.4.2017 21:57:01] Blackjack: Jonas, the personal insults are not in that log - they are in this chat, IIRC
[5.4.2017 21:57:10] Jónas Candymane: The NSFW chat?
[5.4.2017 21:57:33] Blackjack: Yes
[5.4.2017 21:57:39] Jónas Candymane: Where a few of us went a bit off board with the sarcasm and we were told to tone down and we did so?
[5.4.2017 21:57:45] Jónas Candymane: That is your basis for firing?
[5.4.2017 21:57:59] Blackjack: That is part of it, yes
[5.4.2017 21:58:04] Jónas Candymane: No, that is it
[5.4.2017 21:58:05] Lightwing: Why target Pirate specifically then?
[5.4.2017 21:58:23 | Edited 21:58:24] Jónas Candymane: Because Pirate argued against him in good faith
[5.4.2017 21:58:48] Blackjack: Take note that many others here argued against me, yet I had no problems with them until today
[5.4.2017 21:58:52] Lightwing: I want to hear from his mouth though. That's the real reason, I wanna hear the "reason"
[5.4.2017 21:59:08] Blackjack: Lightwing in particular gave me a very good wall of text in PM
[5.4.2017 21:59:13] Blackjack: So did Anonymous 9
[5.4.2017 21:59:19] Jónas Candymane: Take note that many others here argued against me, yet I had no problems with them until todayPirate talked to others before suggesting the whole vote thing for Class A Members
[5.4.2017 21:59:26] Jónas Candymane: He even talked to me and I agreed
[5.4.2017 21:59:37] Jónas Candymane: Even though I was not Class A, I supported what he was doing
[5.4.2017 21:59:46] Jónas Candymane: Because that is the point
[5.4.2017 21:59:48] Jónas Candymane: Discussing
[5.4.2017 21:59:50] Blackjack: Both of those people, at least, were willing to work with me at that time, and I was willing to accept it
[5.4.2017 21:59:51] Jónas Candymane: Reaching a conclusion
[5.4.2017 21:59:52] Lightwing: When I saw taht chat I fully agreed to it. I am Class A after all, I called for such vote.
[5.4.2017 21:59:54] Jónas Candymane: Together
[5.4.2017 22:00:43] Lightwing: I still hold on the motion of no confidence, Canada backs us up in this regard, and you are not in a state where you would be a good leader. Opposite, you would be a very bad leader at this rate we are going.
[5.4.2017 22:00:44] Jónas Candymane: Both of those people, at least, were willing to work with me at that time, and I was willing to accept itSo did Pirate, it seems
[5.4.2017 22:01:14] Blackjack: Except he was not... He constantly went against me and was not willing to work with me in any capacity. I thought he was the other night, but then he turned around and proposed the members' meeting thing.
[5.4.2017 22:01:22] Anonymous 4: And apparently, Blackjack, you and Pirate spoke last night, and you two had a good conversation. However what you call your 'final straw' is weak reasoning at best, from my vantage point. And that occurred after said conversation.
[5.4.2017 22:01:31] Jónas Candymane: Except he was not... He constantly went against me and was not willing to work with me in any capacity. I thought he was the other night, but then he turned around and proposed the members' meeting thing.After hearing from others first
[5.4.2017 22:01:32] Anonymous 4: On 4/5/17, at 6:01 PM, Blackjack wrote:
> Except he was not... He constantly went against me and was not willing to work with me in any capacity. I thought he was the other night, but then he turned around and proposed the members' meeting thing.
Which there shouldn't be any problem with. :/
[5.4.2017 22:02:00] Anonymous 4: On 4/5/17, at 8:04 AM, PiratePony wrote:
> After all, this is a corporation, and as the actual members of the corporation, you have a right to have a voice in policy, as well as who is representing you on the board of directors.
On 4/5/17, at 8:28 AM, PiratePony wrote:
> If you class a members want a members meeting - demand it from them. If not, fair enough. But if this is something you have the right to do, take it before it gets taken from you.
There is nothing wrong with what was posted.
[5.4.2017 22:02:05] Jónas Candymane: He would not go about to do this if he did not think that there was not consent for what he was proposing and an actual will to do it
[5.4.2017 22:03:12] Blackjack: That doesn't mean it's a good thing to do.
[5.4.2017 22:03:27] Anonymous 4: Why is it not?
[5.4.2017 22:04:08] Blackjack: Do you really not see how effectively staging a less violent form of a coup is a bad thing in any organization?
[5.4.2017 22:04:27] Lightwing: He asked for a reasonable vote that was inside our RULESET
[5.4.2017 22:04:42] Lightwing: "A coup d'état (/ˌkuː deɪˈtɑː/ About this sound listen (help·info); French: [ku.de.ta]), also known simply as a coup (/kuː/), a putsch (/pʊtʃ/), or an overthrow, is the illegal and overt seizure of a state by the military or other elites within the state apparatus"
[5.4.2017 22:04:43] Anonymous 4: You're the only one seeing this as a coup; he was reminding voting members of their rights. Nothing more.
[5.4.2017 22:04:58] Lightwing: He did nothing against the rules, he, in fact, suggested a legitimate and legal way of working towards a common solution
[5.4.2017 22:05:02] Jónas Candymane: That doesn't mean it's a good thing to do.PFFFTT
[5.4.2017 22:05:04] Jónas Candymane: What?
[5.4.2017 22:05:07] Jónas Candymane: I am sorry, but what?
[5.4.2017 22:05:15] Jónas Candymane: "It doesn't mean it is a good thing to do"?
[5.4.2017 22:05:19] Jónas Candymane: what?
[5.4.2017 22:05:34] Jónas Candymane: So because it can mean that it is possibly not a good thing to do, BAMM FIRED!
[5.4.2017 22:05:58] Anonymous 1: [5. apríl 2017 22:04] Blackjack:
<<< in any organizationThe problem is you're not treating this like an organisation. You're treating it like a military
[5.4.2017 22:05:58] Blackjack: A "common solution" that most likely involves removing the person you're in disagreement with - that is as much a common solution as me firing Pirate.
[5.4.2017 22:06:16] Jónas Candymane: Do you really not see how effectively staging a less violent form of a coup is a bad thing in any organization?[5. apríl 2017 22:04] Lightwing:
<<< He asked for a reasonable vote that was inside our RULESET
[5.4.2017 22:06:27] Lightwing: You pretty much admitted to do it just because of fear
[5.4.2017 22:06:29] Lightwing: You
[5.4.2017 22:06:29] Blackjack: "less violent" is the key there
[5.4.2017 22:06:29] Lightwing: Fucked
[5.4.2017 22:06:30] Lightwing: Up
[5.4.2017 22:06:34 | Edited 22:06:38] Anonymous 1: We did not join up to serve as tools for YOU. We joined up to work as a team towards a common goal.
[5.4.2017 22:06:41] Lightwing: http://prntscr.com/esxuqz
[5.4.2017 22:07:01] Lightwing: This is not getting anywhere. You blatantly said "I don't want u guys to fire me so I fire him first"
[5.4.2017 22:07:03] Blackjack: I need a statement from everyone
[5.4.2017 22:07:56] Blackjack: Do you respect me as a leader and wish to work with me on implementing my vision for the organization, starting with resolving this issue personally? Yes or no. Continued discussion without an answer will be considered a no.
[5.4.2017 22:08:04] Lightwing: [5. apríl 2017 22:07] Blackjack:
<<< Do you respect me as a leaderNo
[5.4.2017 22:08:06] Jónas Candymane: No
[5.4.2017 22:08:10] Anonymous 1: No
[5.4.2017 22:08:39] Blackjack: Anyone who answers "No" - Please leave.
[5.4.2017 22:08:49] Anonymous 7: No, not anymore.
[5.4.2017 22:08:58] *** Jónas Candymane has left ***
Now, you have read the log of the conversation we all had and you can see it is all hostile. Usually we do not get so hostile, but Pirate's firing came as great shock to us all and it was too much of a surprise, it was just so surreal. To make matters worse, AppleDash did not really want to talk to us or even converse with us as a team, but rather talk to every single one of us "privately". We did not trust that, so we had the discussion within the group chat on Skype anyways because there was no way we were going to trust him with private chats. Better to keep things as transparent as possible.
Here is the log that @AppleDashPoni himself provided as "evidence" of Pirate personally attacking him and working against the leadership. I will post it in the form of the link he himself provided as when I copy and paste it over here, it just becomes really messy.
Now you basically have full context of what has happened.
I just want to say.... I did not expect things to go as they went....
You will ask: "Why? Why now? Why are you bringing this up now of all times and not immediately when it happened?".
To be honest.... I thought this might have gotten resolved within staff. I thought that my resignation (and I was expecting more to resign) might put more pressure on AppleDash's leadership and that Pirate would get reinstated.... but... nothing has happened. AppleDash is still the head of Poniverse and PiratePony is still no longer a member of staff. He has not even been apologized to. The people I worked with.... they tried the best they could..... but they were unable to succeed.
So things now fall upon the forums as a whole on what type of action they want taken here. I am not trying to start some populist outrage here, but I am doing what I consider to be the right thing to do. People deserve to know about this. Considering that such a gross violation and misconduct of power has been allowed to prevail, the people of Poniverse deserve to know who is leading them.
Now.... I intend to lock this commenting section of this blog if I can. Now you will ask why I would do so... because last time, last October when things blew over, when threads were made detailing everything that had happened.... people did not react in the best way in the thread and the anger only grew in those threads with people letting emotion taking more and more over to the point that the staff had to start hiding posts and even hide the thread as it was just so divisive. This is why I ask you, though you can be outraged, to not violate the terms of services of this site.... we all know the rules folks... even if some of our officials and leaders may not.... This might also just be the (former) staffer in me speaking out, trying to conduct public management and trying to contain spread of chaos and... well... you already know guys, heh.... old habits die hard I guess...
To summarize this up, Pirate was unjustly fired due to selfish reasons and the current management of Poniverse, or rather, it's current leadership, has shown itself to be untrustworthy and corrupt. Forgive me for using such strong words.... I have tried to stay as neutral in posting this whole thing.... but I think my own thoughts about this whole matter are valid as well.
However, @PiratePony If there is anything you wish to say upon this whole matter, I would be happy to unlock the commenting section just for you or to somehow highlight your thoughts upon this whole matter. We are all here for you man.... whether we are just public members or actual members of staff.
Btw if I am not able to lock the commenting section here, I ask people to please refrain from commenting here as to keep this clean as possible. Even if this whole thing I am doing here might end up doing nothing, people deserve to be informed. I invite all people who were involved in this matter, please, if you have anything more to add to this, please do so.
Don't shoot the messenger folks