Summary of thread:
JPH is somewhat of a prick who overmoderates, rage ensues
AceGunman supports him, giving more information than JPH ever supplied, but still not really justify the ordeal and apparently did not read the whole thread (forgetting that OP PMed JPH about this already, Shuanj66 sort-of approved the avatar, massive hypocrisy in letting djgarf have a talking penis as an avatar) more rage ensues
JPH hides behind "staff decisions are final, we don't need to explain" like he typically does
JPH assumes that we are his friends by signing his posts "-JP," the nickname his friends have for him, sadly he is mistaken.
I could go on with what is wrong here but I have to go for a while.
Nice summary.
I don't care to explain myself when the rules are there for you to refer to. It's a waste of time.
Djgarf has done more for the GBAtemp website and IRC channel than you'll ever know; show some respect (yes, I think he should be given leeway in this matter - don't agree? Well, I'm just so sorry - why don't you go whine to him?).
Yeah, I "hide" behind the
rules. Nice one.
BTW, my friends in real life call me "JP" (been called that since I ever could remember). Another nice one.
Please, continue on.
I find that rules are rather useless if they have no logical backing to them.
So justifying the rules with rules - that makes no sense.
I know that djgarf has done a lot for GBAtemp. I understand that. But - to refer to your precious rules - is there anything in there that says "Note: these rules may or may not apply to staff?" No. That line does not exist. The rules you love so much have just reinforced the hypocrisy in your actions. I have no problems with djgarf and I have no problems with his avatar, so no, I will not go whine and complain to him. I do, however, have problems with blatant hipocracy.
And yeah, you do "hide" behind the rules. To make a (bad) analogy to reinforce this: Remeber when everyone was in an uproad about a year ago because the Bush administration conducted interviews and such and decided that they did not need to release the transcripts of these interviews, even though they should have? Nobody liked that, and nobody should have liked it. This is the same sort of deal, just on a much smaller scale. While I understand that your rules are not a matter of national security, they are still important as they govern a body over over 100,000 members.
And as for your nickname, "JP," I was not implying that your friends in real life do not call you that. Rather, I was saying that when you sign your posts with the nickname your friends gave you (which is redundant anyway, if we wanted to see who made the post we could look at your username) you are assuming that we are your friends as well. As can be seen, this does not seem to be the case. If you want to act like you are above us all (which, in a way, you are, because you have powers on the forum that we do not), do not try to act like we are your good friends.
Also, another point, that I did not address in my first post, I hate subjective rules. They are stupid and should not be put in place. Saying something like "if a avatar is obscene or offensive we will remove it" is rather vague and subjective, interpretation of the rule varies from person to person. As we have seen in this very thread, while JPH is completely against the avatar, shuanj66 approves of it. Since shuanj has more power, the avatar stays. But why is there such a big discrepincy here? It is mainly becausethere is nothign in the rules that outlines what and "obscene" or "offensive" avatar is. Does it include cleavage (which is rediculous, because a) you can see lots of cleavage by walking downtown at any time of the day or night and b) everyone on this forum should be over 13 and I challenge you to find a 13-year-old that spends enough time on the internet to be able to find GBatemp that has not watched porn, which is much "worse" than cleavage)? Does it mean foul language? Drug refrerece? Gang symbols? Funny depictions of penises? What? If you're going to impliment such rules, there needs to be more constraints on theme - for example, I could say that p1ingpong's avatar is offensive because I am anti-war and it showcases a very lethal weapon. Or, I could say that I do not like Shuanj66's avatar because it is a roadsign from route 66, a highway that was dominated by rednecks, and I was raped by rednecks when I was a little kid so I have an enourmous fear and loathing toward them and all things related. While, obviously, I don't actually care about those things, somebody might, and then what? You'd tell them to basically that you're sorry they feel that was but you won't do anything about it, and they can go fuck themselves for all you care.
That ends my rant for now, I think I will go take out my anger and aggression on noobs in Counter Strike for a while.
I will be back, though, if I need to be.
To add as a closing note: As Gore said in a post on the front page of this thread responding to JPH calling zidane_genome a "prick" for wanting to use his not-really-against-the-rules avatar (that he spent a good amout of time on, drawing it himself):
Gore
Xdqwerty
Psionic Roshambo
The Real Jdbye
