@sirfropsalot : Thank you for continuing a reasonable dialogue about this. I had almost given up :)

Can you clarify the following for me:

1. You & TGFT have no problem with KB publicly making threats that, by your own admission, would violate the charter if he followed through on them? I know the threat itself is not a breach, but that still strikes me as behavior you wouldn't want from your council

2. During the brief lifetime of that keying policy, it was allowed (even encouraged?) for TGFT to demand neutral guilds become non-neutral if they wanted to continue trade & trade related activities at the stations?

3. The last part of this, which I don't think you addressed-- bullying a smaller guild to kick out a member because they had a verbal altercation; TGFT is ok with such behavior? Even when this bullying is based on a threat that would violate the charter should it be carried out?

The answers to these three questions would go a long way to showing me, Harpo, joyless, and anyone else along for the ride how TGFT feels about the bizarre and embarrassing actions of kb.

And again; it's not like the only acceptable resolution is demoting kb (although speaking for myself, and I would guess some others, that would be the thing that most restores TGFT's credibility). From personal experience, I know that young pilots in positions of power sometimes do really stupid & immature things, and sometimes the way to handle it is to just say "hey, you acted like a dang fool, don't do that again" and be done with it. If TGFT were to do that publicly, it would almost be enough.

But there's still the matter of you forcing Mota out of his guild. If you guys aren't willing to demote kb (since it's clear he is unwilling to do the right thing, take responsibility, and tender his own resignation) I think Mota deserves some reparations at the very least. Something between 100-500 million would probably be fair, though Mota himself would have to chime in to give some sense of how much all of this has damaged his flytime.

@greenwall;

I think Kierky has been rather harsh in some of his responses... but if you truly don't see the difference between a plugin that does its location reporting automatically vs. one that requires the user to hit "LOG IN," before it does anything... then I really don't think you have much to contribute to this discussion

@Surb;

I've repeatedly called you out because you honestly surprised me with your commitment to doing a poor-man's Lecter. As I've said many times, I used to trust you to chime in with a reasonable point of view. To see your maturity level dive so drastically, and see you repeatedly double-down on these weak attempts to divert discussion about your own guild's charter and image is rather disappointing. I hoped mentioning it would bring you to your senses a bit. Unfortunately, that clearly isn't going to happen as, sadly, you seem to have come down with an incurable case of Emotional-Benjamin-Buttonitis.

But you're right, I shouldn't have hastily drawn that comparison: Lecter, I'm sorry... your diversion attempts are generally well-placed, well-timed, and usually amusing. They're good enough that you've inspired a copy-cat in Surb, although he's completely missing the part where you have to be SOMEWHAT selective.

The reason why very few TGFT have posted here is because we are very busy playing this game called Vendetta Online. All those of you who spend most of their Internet time on here should really try it out.

1. TGFT Utilities: Why are we still speaking about this plugin? It is all good. The creator has added a disclaimer. While it wasn't reasonable how it was used "against us" in a poor and ridiculous way by the enemy, I agree it needed a disclaimer to inform the user.
The situation is solved. There is no further dicussion needed. Only a fool would continue whining about it.

2. The Mota "incident":
smittens, TGFT has privately dealt with the situation and our relations with IGVT are fine again. The key-stance was changed; for a moment we went with a different policy which was certainly drastic, but was completely warrented at the given time since we had reason to believe something was going awry with guilds we are actually friends with (No, it did not include allowance to TGFT membership to threaten others...).
It is silly to request that TGFT kicks a councilor or demotes him if you do not have 100% insight into the situation. Minds heat up in space. It is a game after all.
Luckily, this all (and to my knowledge INCLUDING the specific case of Mota) has been discussed and solved.

I'd like to add that TGFT does not see any reason to share their politic talk with the entirety of Vendetta Online. Don't expect us to make a thread for every move we make. It's none 'ya business..
In fact, I am only replying to reward you for being probably the only "honest" player who seems to be confused with the situation. Reward me back by logging in and playing sometime. Much easier to catch up to things then...

And I thought BLT was a sandwich filling, and it turns out to be yet another westie alt trying to get easy pks off SKVs back.

Heh, Who would have guessed ?

Smittens, when or rather if you ever have anything of merit or relevance to something worth while to post then and only then will I bother to give you the time for a serious discussion instead of you hiding behind something as trite as what has been on display.

Thank you Sieger. I have actually been poking my head ingame, & moreso on IRC, so I do have a bit more than the pure-lurker's perspective on this... but I am certainly missing a lot.

1. Agreed, although greenwall's baffling oversight on some very basic facts irks the logician in me :)

2. I don't much care about TGFT-IGVT relations, but rather the immature arm-twisting and threats by a TGFT councilor. I'm basing my assessment of the situation on the facts as posted and corroborated by both Mota and KB. Given that they were the two parties involved, I assumed those facts were comprehensive. If there is something else I'm missing I apologize, however I'd like to point out that Harpo, multiple times,

tried breaking down

the situation

as simply as possible,

& asked kb and TGFT to point out any inaccuracies or missing information in the breakdown.... and was never corrected. But assuming it is all resolved to Mota's satisfaction, I suppose there isn't much more to be discussed.

As I said to sirfropsalot, I wholly agree that most dirty laundry should be dealt with in private, and of course you don't owe the whole forumboard an explanation for everything. But in this sort of incident, where a councilor publicly behaves embarrassingly (and it sounds like you agree kb's actions were not well thought out).... if you choose not to address it publicly, either with a statement or (more strongly) by demoting the offender, then it can only be taken as implicit acceptance of that behavior.

I'm very glad that you guys talked with kb and explained that his behavior was not ok for a TGFT councilor. As I said a few posts ago, just hearing that would be (& now, is) enough to lay this to rest in my book. Had it been announced sooner, that the rest of your council did not approve of his actions & would be discussing it internally, I probably wouldn't have drudged this all back up in what is now apparently the general-TGFT-complaint thread.

(Although personally I would still like to see a reparations payment to Mota, since it sounds like everyone, even kb, agrees that he was mistreated... plus, cmon, you can afford it).

Finally, I'll definitely try to find you next time I'm ingame, and you can blow me up really quickly and then we can talk about stupid shit there :D

Thank you for clarifying Surb, luckily some of your other councilors have stepped up and taken on the level-headed role that you vacated, and answered the few real questions lingering in this thread.

So you are welcome to.. ah, as you put it, keep hiding

[edit] Also, jeez, you really love that Lecter comparison don't you? But just a tip, when Lecter tries to impress us with run-on sentences he makes them a lot more readable.

Since this is the new dirty laundry thread I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome [SKVW], SKVieWing to the guild page! I have only read about 5% of the posts in this thread and from scrolling thru it's clear Smittens needs to get a 3rd or 4th job!

@Sieger

2. The Mota "incident":
smittens, TGFT has privately dealt with the situation and our relations with IGVT are fine again.

You have a unique grasp of the problem, I say that since you have managed to declare the problem solved but named the wrong guild, or the wrong character.

I'm fine with the fact that a TGFT councilor destroyed my ship and made threats to *me*, what I still see as a problem is the same TGFT councilor taking the action of destroying another INV vessel that was not involved in the incident while threatening an entire guild with TGFT KOS status. When I spoke with INV leadership and asked why I was ejected from the guild before talking to me, I was told that they had to do something right away and I was not online. This leads me to believe that the threats from TGFT scared them into action, and this talk by TGFT council of my ejection being strictly an internal INV matter is nonsense.

Why did I not, as someone suggested I should, speak directly to TGFT to plead my case? There is nothing TGFT can do for me since they have decided to back their councilor's actions. INV has no interest in my return, and other trade guilds have made it clear to me that I am persona non grata. I don't blame them since the public stance from TGFT is that TGFT has done no wrong, so what is to stop them from targeting any guild I am a member of...

I think I'm the only one who thinks that the Mota conversation doesn't really have any place here.

1 million credits remains yet unclaimed!

Mota Shekolen:

I did name the right character. Since I wasn't there when the incident happened, I had been thinking it was IGVT you were in, not INV. However, that is a mere typo as our key-policy discussions involved both of the guilds. Both guilds were talked with and seemed satisfied with out solutions and we were all good again.

I am sorry to hear that, contradict to my belief, the situation has not changed for you. (Why I was mistaken here is simple: I did not take part in the talks I mentioned, I was offline and only read about them...)
You are mistaken, too! TGFT can do something for you. I will take care of your case and speak to the leaders of INV. Likewise, it would be cool if you could contact me in-game so we can talk there. These threads here are highly undeserving of too many sane replies.

Deus ex machina...

The reason why very few TGFT have posted here is because we are very busy playing this game called Vendetta Online. All those of you who spend most of their Internet time on here should really try it out.

What a cop-out, what a cute excuse to not engage in uncomfortable discussions.

However, you did finally explicitly state that KB's behavior was unacceptable and did not reflect TGFT as a whole. I truly appreciate that, but I'm not content that you let him go a little too easy. He is a repeat offender. Once a leopard, always a leopard.

I think I'm the only one who thinks that the Mota conversation doesn't really have any place here.

This thread went off the rails pages ago. I think the tie-in was the neutrality aspect, but yea wtf.

Yea I said about 3 or 4 pages ago that TRIs neutrality is no longer in question and this talk should be moved to an appropriate thread.

Now, one day someone will be looking for this conversation and not be able to find it cause it took place in a thread that had TRI in tbe title...which is the last place you'd expect to see something like this