85 replies to this topic

[Van55]

The following people have been "nominated" to serve as decision-makers on additions to and/or deletions from the Scumbag and Bad Trader List"

Hev
Mustang
Tech
Rob-in-KC
Tone-NY
FuenteFan

I respectfully ask each of these guys to post here whether or not he is willing to serve in that capacity.

If so, I respectfully request Moki to appoint three of them to so serve.

The list has remained in limbo too long.

Edited by Van55, 31 January 2010 - 05:36 PM.

[Smokin' B]

If they turn the position down will the nomination be changed to an addition?

[Tech]

Appreciate the nomination but I pass.

[Mustang]

I pass too. Nomination is appreciated. I'll throw in input, but I don't want to be in that position, personally.

[Souldog]

I still put forth jfields and Insight as possible decision-makers.

[Max Power]

Jesus.

[SmokeCheck]

He would just forgive everybody.

[Souldog]

SmokeCheck, on 31 January 2010 - 11:51 PM, said:

He would just forgive everybody.

Yeah, but he only forgives once!



Can o' whoopass!!!

[Da Ali G]

Souldog, on 01 February 2010 - 12:47 AM, said:

Yeah, but he only forgives once!



Can o' whoopass!!!

He does resemble Harris.

[Van55]

Wow! The "job" that nobody wants....

If you guys are concerned about liability issues and are turning it down as a result, I repeat my suggestion that you communicate with moki about it in private. Though I generally prefer transparency, I can understand perfectly well why people might not to be named Scumbag Gatekeeper in public. No one has to know who the final arbiter is, so long as it's someone other than Moki with whom Moki is comfortable.

[Tech]

Van55, on 01 February 2010 - 11:31 AM, said:

Wow! The "job" that nobody wants....

If you guys are concerned about liability issues and are turning it down as a result, I repeat my suggestion that you communicate with moki about it in private. Though I generally prefer transparency, I can understand perfectly well why people might not to be named Scumbag Gatekeeper in public. No one has to know who the final arbiter is, so long as it's someone other than Moki with whom Moki is comfortable.

I have no issues being involved with decisions related to GarTrader I am just not comfortable making decisions about folks at sites I don't participate at. That's why I made the following suggestion pn the Nateski thread.

Tech, on 22 January 2010 - 05:06 PM, said:

one other option is to create a list of Asshats that pertains only to transactions on this site. It could be stickied and locked accept for Admin and kept in the Hall of Shame.

When an infraction takes place a nomination for them to be added could be place in the Clubhouse asking for votes. The vote would be left open for 7 days. One vote by each member (in good standing) could be made be anybody interested by saying yes or no on a post when signed in. Majority would rule.

I'm sure more rules could be thought out but it's a quick thought.

No matter who takes over duties I would think they would want responsibilities for only things going forward not those already on the list since they didn't make those decisions.

[SmokeCheck]

I nominate griz.

[grateful1]

This may be a matter of, if it's broke don't fix it!

[kludge]

What's the urgency on this? Is someone on the docket to get on the list?

[Van55]

kludge, on 01 February 2010 - 12:45 PM, said:

What's the urgency on this? Is someone on the docket to get on the list?

Yup.

I can think of four candidates who are worthy of being considered for addition.

[SmokeCheck]

Nateski?

[kludge]

Van55, on 01 February 2010 - 12:58 PM, said:

Yup.

I can think of four candidates who are worthy of being considered for addition.

Well, lets have the list then!

[Tech]

One other issue I see is under what protocol is the nominations for the decision maker being made at GT? CF I could understand.

Edited by Tech, 01 February 2010 - 01:17 PM.

[grateful1]

Tech, on 01 February 2010 - 01:16 PM, said:

One other issue I see is under what protocol is the nominations for the decision maker being made at GT? CF I could understand.

Exactly.
If the list has not become a more 'open' internet list of the cigar community scum, why work on getting a gatekeeper via GT?

------------

Oh yea...and let's see the list for potential add-ons.

Edited by grateful1, 01 February 2010 - 02:32 PM.

[Van55]

grateful1, on 01 February 2010 - 02:30 PM, said:

Exactly.
If the list has not become a more 'open' internet list of the cigar community scum, why work on getting a gatekeeper via GT?

------------

Oh yea...and let's see the list for potential add-ons.

My rationale was as follows:

(a) Moki maintains the list here;

( Moki tried to enlist a volunteer or volunteers at CF without success;

© Nateski was exposed here and is a logical candidate;

(d) With GarTrader being an active buy/sell/trade site, it has may have a greater interest in keeping the list up to date than CF, for example.

[Tech]

a. The list is currently maintained on vitolas.net NOT on GarTrader

b. I was not aware of that. None the less I can only imagine the amount of bitching that will arise if the appointment is done here without involvement from CF.

c. Definitely agree Nateski is list material

d. There is tons of selling/ trading at CF, Wade's and CP as well though. The trading here is currently handled separate from the forums so a number of folks here aren't even aware of it.

I definitely agree the list is important and needs a judge but don't want the decision to be something that creates issues. I've said my piece so will shut up, step back and let others run with things.

[grateful1]

Van55, on 01 February 2010 - 03:22 PM, said:

My rationale was as follows:

(a) Moki maintains the list here;

( Moki tried to enlist a volunteer or volunteers at CF without success;

© Nateski was exposed here and is a logical candidate;

(d) With GarTrader being an active buy/sell/trade site, it has may have a greater interest in keeping the list up to date than CF, for example.

I hear ya. I guess I said my stuff as well and will let folks sort it out accordingly.

Are there ANY threads on CF that pretain to this discussion?
<for historical reference value>?

[Van55]

grateful1, on 01 February 2010 - 03:38 PM, said:

I hear ya. I guess I said my stuff as well and will let folks sort it out accordingly.

Are there ANY threads on CF that pretain to this discussion?
<for historical reference value>?

I just topped this thread at CF: http://lounge.cigarf...ad.php?t=221401

I'm not interested in causing any trouble between CF and GarTrader either.

[PlayadelSoul]

OK, I'll be the fat dude from Sons of Anarchy. "This ain't club business, Clay."

[redraider]

So is somebody gonna put Lee on the scumbag list for being a bad santa to Souldog. Screwing over Souldog

This is the most ridiculous thing I have read. The guy owns the fucking website!!

[Van55]

redraider, on 01 February 2010 - 08:56 PM, said:

So is somebody gonna put Lee on the scumbag list for being a bad santa to Souldog. Screwing over Souldog

This is the most ridiculous thing I have read. The guy owns the fucking website!!

OK, now three of the four guys I think should be considered have been mentioned over here. The fourth is a vendor.

[SmokeCheck]

Hmmmm...a vendor. Hmmmmmmm....

[AmbassadorMark]

Get a newb to do it. Not many of the FOG's trade anymore anyway.

[Da Ali G]

IMO, a lot of people moved to this website to avoid the silly dramas at CF. Let CF or some other site run the list.

[Souldog]

I still like the representatives from different boards as "gatekeepers." In my opinion, we're over-thinking this. Granted, alot of people feel the SL is "CF's," and even if it started there, the entire comunity of forums as a whole use it and have access to it. As far as I'm concerned, the list is hosted on a website that many different cigar smokers visit and get information about our hobby, so why not keep in that same sense and make it a universal list? It's so simple to me...

It's not "Gartrader's Scumbag List," or "Cigar Family's Scumbag List," or "Cigar Pass' Scumbag List," or even "ICC's Scumbag List." It is all of ours, so lets just get this thing going. As far as criteria, I think that if the respective community as a whole deems the particular individual's actions to be so low that they should be added to the list, then a representative from the community where the "scumbaggery" took place should present their case to the gatekeepers and outline why the individual should be added. The gatekeepers can then confer and decide, and the individual is either added or they are not added.

Where the "representatives from multiple boards" comes into play is that it minimizes personal bias in the decision making, and a somewhat neutral committe can make the decision.

Hope this makes sense, I'm a bit tired....

[Da Ali G]

It just seems odd to me that people are clamoring for the newest board with the smallest membership to take this on.

[jfields]

Da Ali G, on 02 February 2010 - 09:30 AM, said:

It just seems odd to me that people are clamoring for the newest board with the smallest membership to take this on.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I never took it to be a Gar Trader proposed item, but just a discussion (that has just happened to have taken place here) that it needs to be re-vamped.

It should continue to be maintained at a neutral place like Vitola's, and an array of members from different boards can be responsible for making the decisions of who deserves being placed on it. The list can then be used by anyone from any board that they call home as a "buyer beware" tool.

That's the way I took it.

Edited by jfields, 02 February 2010 - 09:56 AM.

[insight]

I agree with John. Put it somewhere neutral and let several people participate. The idea that it is only for CF is hubris, a number of people are on that list for things they did elsewhere. Discuss it anywhere/everywhere but lets just get some shit done. Once we figure out HOW names are getting added it will be time to figure out who the new additions will be (there are a few obvious possibilities out there).

[RudeDude]

I think everybody is missing the boat by not going with Blake. He's got mad skillz and secret access that nobody else has. Just ask him and he'll tell you how great he is.

[Van55]

Da Ali G, on 02 February 2010 - 09:30 AM, said:

It just seems odd to me that people are clamoring for the newest board with the smallest membership to take this on.

What clamoring?

Besides, it's not relevant that this is the "newest board with the smallest membership." Moki maintains the list at vitolas. This board has greater participation among the CF FOG's to whom the list has meant something than even CF does. Moreover, I think it more likely that we can find someone whom Moki and others know and trust here than elsewhere.

The point remains that Mokie wants someone or more other than himself to consider the facts of each case and make a decision whether the evidence is strong enought and the behavior bad enough to justify a listing. I don't personally care whether that person is a member of CF, GarTrader, CigarPass or somewhere else, so long as s/he is willing to perform the service and so long as Mokie is comfortable in trusting the judgments made.

Okay, so maybe this post IS a clamor.

[Souldog]

Van55, on 02 February 2010 - 01:58 PM, said:

Besides, it's not relevant that this is the "newest board with the smallest membership." Moki maintains the list at vitolas. This board has greater participation among the CF FOG's to whom the list has meant something than even CF does. Moreover, I think it more likely that we can find someone whom Moki and others know and trust here than elsewhere.

THIS!!!!!!!! Van, you get a super cool green +1.

[Fuente Fan]

Just getting back from my clean up after my flooding. What is the deal with this? Exactly what are the responsibilities?

[TheMuskyDude]

Hard to believe anyone even gives a shit about this crap anymore. If you don't know the person don't deal with them. Pretty simple.

Someone got screwed over on by their Santa? LMAO What else is new. Only happens every year. Don't participate in that stupid bullshit. Don't deal with people you don't know and trust, don't buy OR Anejos from Wades, don't buy 98 Trinis from a certaIn vendor with a never ending supply, blah blah blah...

[Tech]

TheMuskyDude, on 03 February 2010 - 09:52 AM, said:

Hard to believe anyone even gives a shit about this crap anymore. If you don't know the person don't deal with them. Pretty simple.

Someone got screwed over on by their Santa? LMAO What else is new. Only happens every year. Don't participate in that stupid bullshit. Don't deal with people you don't know and trust, don't buy OR Anejos from Wades, don't buy 98 Trinis from a certaIn vendor with a never ending supply, blah blah blah...

+1 for the post

The exception is the list helps protect new folks who tend to be over-eager on trading and documents the history of bad transgressions.

[SAF]

This reads like minutes from a senate meeting.

Fuck the "gatekeeper" nonsense, it is going nowhere. Just list the people whom you think need to be added to the list and take a poll, start a similar thread at CF and then edit the list by consensus.
Carry on.