We Need Your Feedback PLEASE

Wow my name was tossed around way too much for the part I played in this. All I did was keep servers running and vote, as per my position required. Can’t really say I’m surprised though, what I say here and in RL gets distorted so badly that it’s often not even in the same ballpark and when I ask for a link to where I posted it not a single one has ever been able to tell me.

I’ll address my mentions one at a time:

Quote:

Oh, and the fact that certain people (like Mitch) seem to think, that “Oh, they’ll come crawling back”. Well, I think not.

Never once have I said this. Not once. The only thing even remotely close was my comment that if your SGA petitions or recruitment didn’t go well that you would be more willing to negotiate a re-merger, and that was only said because at the time you weren’t even willing to come to the table to talk.

Quote:

It’s like I’ve had to tell Mitch on servery occasions, I am not a mind reader.

According to ITS, you were informed the server was ready for setup 2 months before they told a VP as they were seen as secondary contacts. Now I’m sorry if you didn’t get it or ignored it but both the staff advisor and our primary server contact for the last 5 years said you were told. Both view the president as the only contact for the club, which has never been a problem. Every exec knew this was a serious problem and that you didn’t is, well, odd. You may not be a mind reader but *edited* it wasn’t written on the walls in giant, boldface letters. This could have been a giant mistake and if it was I’ll be first in line to apologize but ITS has thrown you under the bus on this one just like they threw Nickname and me under the bus on the webserver backups.

Quote:

Quote:

What changes do you think the WCU Gaming Club needs to make for it to accommodate you and your friends needs?

nothing you can do…unless you want to kill youself

Now here’s the FOUNDER of the club asking what it would take to bring you back to the table and one of your founding executive members says “nothing except kill yourself”. Now what do you think SGA would say if we told them we directly asked your club what we could do to make things right and your responce was “kill youself”. Dispite what you guys may think, we haven’t given up on you and would love to have you back but it becomes harder and harder for us when all we get in return for the attempt is more and more hatred.

Quote:

1. Liam is not suppose to be webmaster… so have Alums back off of everything and actually let the students run it is what should happen.

There is no webmaster position and alumni have only an advisory position. We have no power or control over anything. The only power alumni and non-students have now are the powers that the club execs decide we should have. Even then, we never get to vote. So I guess problem solved (?) idk.

Quote:

How about following 1 constitution. The one that was sused to kick me was voted on AFTER I was kicked, which in and of itself shouldnt have been allowed to occur and made no since whatsoever.

Your right it doesn’t make sense, probably because that’s not what happened. The constitution that was used to remove you from office was the up-to-date version. Where I think you’re getting upset is because the version on the website was NOT up-to-date. There are at least 5 people to blame for this laziness and as one of them I would like to apologize. It did go almost 2 years under your leadership without being changed so you’re one to blame as well . I can’t tell you when that revision or amendment was voted on because record keeping on that stuff got really bad a couple years ago but if you believe nothing else I say please believe that regardless of my personal feelings on your removal I would never sit there and allow something unconstitution to take place. I love this club too *edited* much to let personal feelings get in the way of its rules.

Quote:

I want a chance to run for Pres. again (NOT in 2 years) since that BS stunt was pulled last semester. That “You cant run for said position for 2 years after being booted” mine as well had my *edited* name written on it.

That restriction applies to all positions and was NOT written with you in mind. If you were in mind we could have gotten away with just saying 1 year. Over this club’s history we’ve had several people that have been elected to a position, done terrible, were removed by the execs, and then got voted back into the position the following year. It’s annoying, extremely unproductive, and generally a major hassle for the exec that has to do his job. This also ensures that someone that isn’t good at their position but keeps getting re-elected because they’re well liked can be removed in a way that gives a replacement time to establish themselves before having to compete with the popular, yet poor performing, exec. Something I think you’ve missed here is that it doesn’t say you can’t be an exec, just that you can’t do that particular job for a while. Everyone I’ve talked to thinks you’d be a perfect console VP and even those in tF have said they would easily vote for you.

Quote:

Oh and I love how after the little fiasco of kicking me out occurred, then they add to the constitution that the students vote on whether or not the said person is kicked. What a *edited* move.

Obviously you haven’t read our constitution because that’s not what it says. It says that members can vote to override the decision of the execs but need an 80% majority to do so. The new constitution doesn’t change the removal process in any way. I brought a number of “exec vs member” voting rights to the table that I picked up from when I helped NCSU’s gaming club write their constitution but not many were added, unfortunately. My proposals gave general members WAY more power.

Quote:

The administration last semester wanted to have so many “exec meetings” because they felt that the students should not have the authority to do things such as help out with remaking the constitution. But people like Mitch were, a man who is not even a student anymore?

YOU were president when that happened, you could have put a stop to it. If your complaint is regarding the constitution rewrite I helped with you are sorely mistaken on how it went down. It took 3 meets in a 2 day period to rewrite it. Execs, students, alumni, and nonstudents were involved. The meetings were in public places, like the Reynold’s lobby, and even non-gaming club students hanging around the area offered advice. Actually some of the non-club related students gave really good advice that made it into the final version.

Quote:

Hell, I remember when Freezer told 7eyes to shut up during a meeting because he told him to stop wasting time trying to get in touch with Mitch for the meeting. Honestly, he shouldnt have been called. You know why? Because he’s not a student!

You’re right, I wasn’t a student. I was, however, one of your execs, and the only one of your execs that had any previous experience in club constitution writing. The president allowing one VP to tell another VP to not contact an exec for his input about a constitution rewrite is not something I would be bragging about, it looks terrible.

Quote:

I understand that the club is suppose to attract incoming students, but when has that actually ever been done? Ive NEVER heard input from an incoming student saying that they wanted something added to the club and having it approved. This actually leads to my next problem.

You’ve run the club for the last 2 years. Anything that didn’t get done or any objectives that were ignored were things you could have fixed. Here again, you’re the guy at the top blamming other people because stuff didn’t get done. Like Adam said, that’s like a CEO blamming a company vice president for the entire company’s failings. I won’t say it’s never been done before but it certainly isn’t something that gets you another CEO job.

Quote:

Why do all of the decisions in the club have to pass the approval of everyone on the forums? I think this is one of the dumbest rules Ive heard/read about involving this club. For example, Liquid brought up on your forums that Magic The Gathering has gained a pretty good following and I even thought it would be a good idea to try to implement it into the club. But Freezer and Shingi both said that he would have to prove its popularity by getting people to sign into the forums and talk about it.

You, yourself, presidentially decreed that the forums and IRC would have no voting rights or say in the club’s official business, how is it now a scapegoat for your problems? You decreed that we would have no say yet somehow our disapproval of something still prevented you from doing it? That doesn’t make sense. Yeah we were squeeky wheels on some issues but that typically didn’t stop you from doing what you wanted, like when you held constitution revision meetings and then kept the revisions a secret. Was it the right decision? History will tell, but you had the right and you exercised it. Kudos.

As to MTG, that was never said. What was really said was that they needed some sort of proof before making it an official part of the LANs. Every console or game has had to do this. It took the PS3 over a year to get the attendence at an event needed for official tournaments. All you had to do was get 10-15 people to show up and have an unofficial tournament at a LAN event and you would have likely gotten it. This point is moot however because one of your MTG weekly players stated that the gatherings were unrelated to the club and that you had no intention of making it an official club activity, which no one here would have had a problem with btw.

Quote:

Bring down the private section of the forums. I kept no secrets in that club and I see no reason why the hell thier needs to be an invisable forum. If a matter is so *edited* important that it needs the attention of all the Execs, hold a meeting!

Your club has already been caught with foot in mouth over postings on your board that weren’t meant to be public, something about an AIM conversation. Interesting read, btw. Also, anytime someone from this club that Josh doesn’t approve of, which is almost everyone, tries to join your board we get banned. It’s not fair to say that your board is open and public when you can’t view anything on it without registering and anyone you don’t like is instantly banned. Even your own members have questioned the validity of some of your bans. Compare that to here, I don’t think we’ve ever had a nonspammer ban on our forums. Now you’re going to say “well Josh is banned” and yes that’s true but we stored all his spam in a thread and I’d be happy to send you a copy of it. It wasn’t the spam, it was the extremely foul content and vulgar language in the spam and his blatant disregard of the warnings from club executives.

In closing I want you to know that I don’t dislike you. I respect many of the things you accomplished as president and hated to see things end the way they did. You being removed is not how I saw your relationship with this club ending and I sincerely hope that breaking off and forming a rival club out of pure spite isn’t your legacy here. It pains me to see you moving to destroy all your own work you’ve put into making this club a success.

I know you hate me and I know that some of that is deserved, but not to the ever increasing degree that you seem to have. Regardless of what you’ve been told or what someone has said I said about you or your club, I would ask that you please form your own opinion about me and my motives and not listen to the slander of others unless they can back it up. I have never spoken ill of or disliked Josh but for whatever reason he hates me and will *literally* say anything to make others others do the same. I can link to several threads on here where he’s been directly caught in his lies and made up stories. Hell the last time I saw him at a LAN he couldn’t even look me in the eyes. I don’t think I’ve ever spoken to 7eyes in RL yet his opinion of me is the same as Josh’s because he thinks I said things I didn’t.

If you ever want to talk, need help with your club’s website, want advice on your constitution, or just want to lay into me and chew me out feel free to call. I’d much rather you call and spend 30 minutes venting so we can get what you dislike about me out in the open. I can promise you right now, if I was in the wrong on something I WILL apologize but I can’t apologize or move to fix something when all I see is blind hatred. I’m not a mind reader

not to go off topic but…

they have 29 members and think they are hot *edited*.

we have 61 PAGES of members, yet they are saying we don’t know how to run a club?? uhm….

Nickname said:

ITS ABOUT GAMING WHY CANT WE HAVE FUN GAMING TOGETHER?

Because it’s evident one side is out to dominate the other.

Look, please for the LOVE OF GOD stop posting my facebook stuff on here, its aggravating to no end. Like I just posted, I am NOT advising anyone to come to this thread b/c of what I have already said. However, I am willing to possibly come to the clubs first meeting and have a little chat with the two VPs before it starts. If I like what I hear, Ill consider coming back. Unlikely but Im willing to talk to them and ONLY them about this. Thats all.

I know Im right in what I said. I just dont give 2 *edited*s at all what non students have to say. So back off.

*in most laid back casual tone possible*

As a student, on the forums, who has no ill will towards you, what is it you want to hear Kaz-ka. There is something that if said will make you come back to the club as you stated above. Im just curious and want to know what it is?

Kazka I know you want to hear the opinions of the students the most and see them posting, etc but isn’t it also important to hear what your community says? I know you’re frustrated with the Alumni and have been for a while, so I can understand you being upset with their posts, activity, etc on this thread. In this thread alone there have been posts by myself, Thor, and Ephraim who are all students and have given their opinions on the matter. I know what matters most in these decisions is the opinions, thoughts, and desires of the students but the community consisting of non-members and non-students is huge, we value those that have come to our website and joined our community via our games and offer them a chance for their opinions and thoughts as well, even though they have no voting privileges or anything.

Look, is everyone on agreement on the fact the students are supposed to be making decisions here?

How about we do this:

Hold a meeting at the very beginning of next semester where all students who attended at least one LAN or meeting hold full voting and executive eligibility. Then the students will get what they want,.

That’s not what I mean. Let me skim through the constitution so I can rephrase that better.

PROlapse said:

Look, is everyone on agreement on the fact the students are supposed to be making decisions here?

Kazka took away nonstudent’s right to vote last fall and the new constitution specifically states that nonstudents cannot hold positions of power or vote.

This is a nonissue.

1. That compromise is not going to happen. It’s way too much to ask. We’re willing to compromise, but not that much.

2. A new list of members does need to be written pretty fast, but I don’t think every person who attended a LAN or meeting last semester should automatically get membership status. establishing that list is going to be far more complicated.

3. You were at the ratification meeting and didn’t raise any concerns.

PROlapse said:

Quote:

Once one has obtained full membership, said member need only attend one meeting and one LAN event each semester to maintain full membership status.

 

There are a LOT of people who attended LANs and meetings last semester, but since the membership log had to be revamped for the new constitution, many of them no longer count as members. So, I purpose you give those people full membership.

To be a member, you have to attend 2 LAN events and “half” the meetings in a 1 year period. Most of the WCUGA members should still be members here.

The only problems I forsee is if it appears that WCUGA members are coming to our election meeting solely to vote their own execs back in and “take over” the club so to speak. Now if this is genuinely what the members of both clubs want then there is no problem but from the tone we’re seeing with your facebook and forum posts the elections could very well already be decided before the meeting even starts and even you can admit that that’s not how things should be done. If 20 WCUGA members attend the meeting and all 20 of them vote for their own person for every position… it just reaks of staged voting.

PROlapse said:

Quote:

If an officer is removed from their position they cannot run for that office again for the period of two years. This restriction also pertains to officers who resign after the removal proceedings have begun. Removal proceedings is defined as the investigation of an officer or the scheduling of a meeting for their removal.

 

Under most situations, I would approve of this clause, but I feel that the removal proceedings last semester were not defined well enough, and his removal should be invalidated.

 

I believe this temporary changes for one meeting would be enough of a compromise to bring both clubs together and satisfy the majority of the students who care about the gaming community on campus.

There was some vagueness to the process b/c of website updating issues and I apologized for that in my first post. If it would make things right between us I’m sure the execs would be more than willing to remove that restriction from Kazka but it wouldn’t really make a difference as one of the current VPs has the right to step up to the president position and fill his remaining term that lasts until spring 2011. If I’m not mistaken he’s graduating next spring so it would be inappropriate for him to run for the president position.

If the only way to make this right is to instantly put your leader back in charge here you’re being unfair.