for Haschel and it'll appear under his username if he accepts as much. Other stuff should be handled now, too.
I don't like the title but
Nth Haschel for the thing
Because this is a really shady thing to do. Like, he got the title, it went through the process, but because you forgot to implement it however long ago you've now arbitrarily decided not to give it to him. Seriously, I've generally agreed with your calls up until now but this? This is poor form.
I'm probably overexaggerating how much I actually care about this because on one hand it isn't a great title but I know I'd feel ripped off if this happened to me and I think it's bad form and a bad precedent for the title fairy to let this happen
My objections to the title are substantive and meaningful. And I've set out a clear way for the community to overrule me if they disagree with these objections. I've put tons of titles into limbo before. The only difference in this case is that the title got further along in the nom process before I limboed it. The title was never implemented, so I disagree with the position that I'm locked into it now. I have straightforward but substantive reasons for disagreeing with the title nomination, but as has often bein the case in situations like these, instead of just saying "no" to it, I'm letting the community decide if it goes through or not. That way, if my concerns or handling of this situation are wrong, they will be quickly overruled. But if there is merit to my position, they won't. I disagree that the most orderly thing to do when I make a mistake is to just double down on the mistake.
What I'm trying to do is right my wrongs while empowering the community to make the call about what happens next instead of myself.
Do you disagree as well that ani crossed a line? Because I think there's a clear difference between how other users have handled their disagreement with my decision and how he did.
In post 5808, Psyche wrote:Do you disagree as well that ani crossed a line? Because I think there's a clear difference between how other users have handled their disagreement with my decision and how he did.
I agree that ani crossed the line through using the word "retarded" but your reason for the ban apparently includes "arguing with something you've cemented a decision about" which is, again, bad precedent.
When I think of the words “Mr Know It All” I don’t have a positive association.
Kind of makes me think of some asshole who has this superiority complex
Does everyone really think it’s a good title for Haschel when he is a nice guy
"You are the Joker of mafia players" - Oversoul
"last time I was scum with Firebringer
his first post in the scum PT was "yes I rolled scum!"
I decided to post "haha just don't post that in the main thread", but to get up to date on the main thread first.
His first post in the main thread was "yes I rolled scum!" -popsofctown
It's completely natural for the Title Fairy and community members to disagree over stuff. I have gone through great pains to ensure that compared to previous Title Fairies, the community is empowered to overrule me when they think I've done something wrong.
I hope that no matter whether you disagree with me or not about my handling of Haschel's nom, you at least understand the effort I've undertaken to give the
community
not [/i]me[/i] power over how this process unfolds.
"You are the Joker of mafia players" - Oversoul
"last time I was scum with Firebringer
his first post in the scum PT was "yes I rolled scum!"
I decided to post "haha just don't post that in the main thread", but to get up to date on the main thread first.
His first post in the main thread was "yes I rolled scum!" -popsofctown
In post 5805, Psyche wrote:The only difference in this case is that the title got further along in the nom process before I limboed it. The title was never implemented, so I disagree with the position that I'm locked into it now.
Look I'd agree with you if the title was newly at this point - i.e. you pmed the user and then realised you didn't like the title so rescinded it.
But.
The title was never implemented because of
your mistake
in forgetting to implement it. It
should
have already been put as Haschel's title, and thus I feel should be treated that way, that it should be treated as if Haschel already has the title, and I don't think that's an unreasonable way to view it.
In post 5805, Psyche wrote:The only difference in this case is that the title got further along in the nom process before I limboed it. The title was never implemented, so I disagree with the position that I'm locked into it now.
Look I'd agree with you if the title was newly at this point - i.e. you pmed the user and then realised you didn't like the title so rescinded it.
But.
The title was never implemented because of
your mistake
in forgetting to implement it. It
should
have already been put as Haschel's title, and thus I feel should be treated that way, that it should be treated as if Haschel already has the title, and I don't think that's an unreasonable way to view it.
I HATE YOU SO MUCH PLEASE GO JUMP INTO A FREEZING LAKE - Mr. Freeze
And this was like me realizing that you were a serial killer. - Hathor
"but I must declare my love to Edelgard here, i offer you the treasure I stole from Raphael, an idol LOL" - Shamir
I agree that it’s bad that I did not implement the title, but I also think it would be bad for me to implement a title I think is weak without giving it a hard time. From the moment I forgot to implement Mr. Know It All, or perhaps from the moment I let the title slide into haschel’s dms, I was already committed to some major bad thing. I believe I’ve set forward a process for the community to decide what to do with my mistake.
In fact, now that I think of it, I’ll do one better. If the community doesn’t come up with a better title for Hash this week, I’ll give him what I said I would. I have no backbone, and that’s what I should’ve said in the first place.
In post 5823, Psyche wrote:If the community doesn’t come up with a better title for Hash this week, I’ll give him what I said I would.
For the record after thinking I was about to suggest you do that.
I think the issue with how you handled it is that it was basically only ever going to play out the way it has, and also focuses discussion too much on whether or not what you did was right over discussing a different (hopefully better) replacement title. Good on you for backing down. It's not having no backbone, it's taking onboard discussion rather than stubbornly doing something bad, and it's a good quality.
