[Demote] MetalDeerSolid -- Regular abuse

[Prox]

Agreed 100% but... Issue is he's been warned by three Vip's within a 6 hour time frame. So what good would another warning do... Sorry if I'm mistaken about the ingame warnings being official as well.

If that's correct then he should be demoted.

[[TTPN] ShadowMoon]

If you don't know what is going on or you're neutral to the situation : don't vote

I totally agree with memo
If one don't give a shit to the situation, don't vote.
But then you, Metal, voted no, and ignoring ursus (gamefreak)'s questioning about your decision.

[Juan_Ambriz]

Lets not lock this and such until metalbeer responds, just to see what he has to say.

[Shockah]

If you don't keep a track of chat or anything else on the server, then you're a completely useless reg. I'd say that he needs to be at least warned.

Then a solid 30-40% of our regs need, "at least warnings".

[Prox]

Then a solid 30-40% of our regs need, "at least warnings".

I was obviously referring at this report as well.

[ursus]

I'm not so much pissed off by the fact that he voted no for fun as I am by the fact that he refused to explain himself.

Treating a votekick as an opportunity for a joke and then ignoring anyone who disagrees is not why we promote people to reg. The only purpose of the rank is to vote on kicks and bans, and that entails actually paying attention and not being a self-righteous martyr over things when you rustle the wrong jimmies.

[○ Μαρία ○]

What I see is a regular who was voting no because he is not taking his job seriously, or maybe just to cause issues. Gamefreak asked him cosecutivley about what his reasoning was for voting no when the majority chose otherwise, and he did not give him any reasoning, no matter his excuse. So his argument about "I have a right to my own opinion" is bullshit when he doesn't state what his opinion is. And if he really can not take the time out of his game to glance at the chat, that shows lack of responsibility in who he is as a regular, so I .
If you are voting "no" on something that a large group of others vote "yes" I think you should automatically state why you did so in order to avoid these things.

If he can not take what little responsibility he has seriously, he should not be a regular.

[Sabb]

I'm not so much pissed off by the fact that he voted no for fun as I am by the fact that he refused to explain himself.

Treating a votekick as an opportunity for a joke and then ignoring anyone who disagrees is not why we promote people to reg. The only purpose of the rank is to vote on kicks and bans, and that entails actually paying attention and not being a self-righteous martyr over things when you rustle the wrong jimmies.

I see. The fact that he's not visiting and posting on the thread isn't very promising either. Basically just shows that keeping reg isn't a priority and therefore I doubt managing the tiny bit of responsibility that he does have would be a priority either.
Still though, the whole vote thing wasn't that big of a deal. It would have been better for him to have actually paid attention and responded, or simply not have messed with the votes to avoid situations like these, but oh well.

I'm still not totally decided though. I'll think it over or get Snivy's opinion.

[Sabb]

Alright never mind. He will be demoted but I will allow him to reapply when he wants.