Reworking the Hylian Knights

[Onilink89]

Everyone should strive to be helpful and kind, and for those that are they don't need a rank or group to reward them for it.

You see it as "rewarding" while its meant to "motivate" or "to strive" to be a better member.

As for us lowly "normal" members, it's our community as well. If that staff thinks we should have say, then we do.

Oh please, spare me the whole "you think we are less then you just because we dont have a rank". You make it sound that the HK represents whole ZD or something.

Rep stated "but a decision that came as a result of user opinions". How can I trust an opinion/vote of someone who doesn't really know the whole situation of the HK? Especialy if there was no issue or drama this time.

 

[Emma]

Oh please, spare me the whole "you think we are less then you just because we dont have a rank". Rep stated "but a decision that came as a result of user opinions". How can I trust an opinion/vote of someone who doesn't really know the whole situation the HK? Especialy if there was no issue or drama this time.

I do think they have a right to be included. But I do not think they have the right to tell the knights they have no right to exist because their nature upsets them. I also felt it necessary to point out the hypocrisy in saying that it'd take too long to resolve this is too many existing knights were retained because the current number was too many to work with, and yet the issue was made public to normal members anyway. I feel these two ideas are in conflict and cannot rationally coexist while retaining any degree of credibility. And I do agree that the majority of the "normal" members arguing for the death of the HKs are/were extremely ignorant of what was actually going on. Even A Link in Time cannot instantly absorb all the information about what was going on in the time he's been an HK, as it takes time to learn the facts. An effort should have been made to inform people of what was really happening instead of jumping forward with these decisions. I can't, and refuse, to believe the staff was not aware that the majority that want the HKs dead have no idea what was going on behind closed doors and they were operating on many false assumptions. I would also point out that I was accused of making false assumptions about what was going on with the staff behind closed doors, indicating that false assumptions are something that were on their mind and it is something that they ought to have anticipated in this issue and I feel the right thing for them to do is, for both this case and in the previous poll, to accept responsiblity for being too quick to offer a radical "solution" to the HK issue without taking into account misinformation and heightened emotions that were in place.

 

[Onilink89]

I do think they have a right to be included. But I do not think they have the right to tell the knights they have no right to exist because their nature upsets them.

I agree. But here are the reasons why i don't approve of normal members voting about this subject!
1. The whole forum got involved, the staff started drama while their actual job is to prevent it
2. Members didn't knew (until i explained it) the whole situation and past of the HK, yet they have an "opinion" about it, and certainly not some sort of personal dislike.
3. Issue came from that members were bothered by "mere excistence"
4. There was no major issue to begin with that required a removal or purge.

 

[Emma]

I agree. But here are the reasons why i don't approve of normal members voting about this subject!
1. The whole forum got involved, the staff started drama while their actual job is to prevent it
2. Members didn't knew (until i explained it) the whole situation and past of the HK, yet they have an "opinion" about it, and certainly not some sort of personal dislike.
3. Issue came from that members were bothered by "mere excistence"
4. There was no major issue to begin with that required a removal or purge.

While I don't agree they should have never been included. I completely agree that everything you described here is a serious problem that the staff needs to accept responsibility for rather than shifting the blame to me to cover up their own mistakes with fabricated "offenses" that I allegedly committed. Despite the actual posts contradicting what I was accused of.

 

[Onilink89]

Ok staff, anyway there is no need to go over this again. Like i said, its not like im asking to revert the whole thing. Whats done is done. Just please keep in mind that everything will not be solved by voting and tackle member-frustrations head on in a proper fashion instead of redirecting it. But i rather see a honest and direct Admin/Mod even if there would be conflict, rather then avoiding conflicts in a a subtle way by diverting and letting the conflict grow larger. Mods and Admins are people too, its not like im saying you guys should be the perfect peace maker. Just... try to get gud.

 

[Justac00lguy]

Considering that I'm advocating for free expression as opposed to suppressing anything that displeases anyone, I think I am supporting the community. That is what is is. The argument for killing the knights ultimately boils down to people simply not liking what they feel it represents. I don't believe that anyone's personal feelings gives them the right to tell others what they can and cannot do and no degree of magnitude of numbers of people can ever make that ethical.

Is supporting the community pushing something that the majority of the community don't want? That was the whole point of the poll. It doesn't matter if you deem people's reasonings to not be sound, they make up the community. So as a collective, their voice deserves to be acknowledged. They didn't ask for the Knights to be reworked, they asked for its complete removal. Whether you agree with their reasonings or not, you have to realise that this isn't about personal preference, or your ideal vision for the community, this is taking the community's general opinion and doing something to make the current situation better.

You keep on mentioning people's reasonings for the ranks removal as "they have no right", well they do have a right, they have every right. There is a poll asking people if they want the rank to be removed, so it's only right they give their thoughts. Some views may be biased, some not, some views on the contrary (supporting HK) may be biased but that's not the point. Every opinion, every vote, matters. The bigger picture was that the HK rank should be removed and it was conclusive.

Do I wish that the community liked the HK rank? Sure. But I have to put any personal preference of mine as aside and look at the bigger picture.

I have stated this many, many, MANY times and I really, truly wish you'd stop asking me to repeat it. It makes it look like you are ignoring me and demanding the exact same explanation to be stated again. My proposal can be found in this thread at post number 88, repeated in post 57 of the Clans thread. Please, stop asking me to explain again why my idea for clans is and how the knights would transition into as I've already explained it several times. What we need are more ideas on the various mechanics of the system and for what kind of clans to have. Like I have already stated, I don't think any individual person's personal disapproval of the existence if the knights, in any form, is reason enough to justify blocking them from existing in the new clan system. If people don't like what it would become there, they don't have to have anything to do with it and the idea is to have multiple options. And then the members of the new incarnation of the knights, whatever its name will be, will prove their sincerity through their actions and not by anyone voting them or by any hearsay that people want to take as fact like they're doing now.

Ok but I was genuinely confused, hence why I asked the question.

Anyway, the reason for the confusion is that I originally asked whether the forum mutually agreed on your clan idea. So when you mentioned the HK clan idea again, I was baffled because I saw no agreement on that idea in the previous clan thread. In fact I saw more support for things like a set number of neutral clans (ala Zelda Universe) and customisable groups. So that's why I was confused, because I wasn't exactly sure what idea you were referring to - neutral clans or a HK clan.

So from what I understand, you want the HK group to be turned into a group which helps the community and anyone can join? Well of anyone can join then I'm not exactly against it because that goes away from the exclusivity idea that people don't take kindly to.

 

[Emma]

Is supporting the community pushing something that the majority of the community don't want? That was the whole point of the poll. It doesn't matter if you deem people's reasonings to not be sound, they make up the community. So as a collective, their voice deserves to be acknowledged. They didn't ask for the Knights to be reworked, they asked for its complete removal. Whether you agree with their reasonings or not, you have to realise that this isn't about personal preference, or your ideal vision for the community, this is taking the community's general opinion and doing something to make the current situation better.

You keep on mentioning people's reasonings for the ranks removal as "they have no right", well they do have a right, they have every right. There is a poll asking people if they want the rank to be removed, so it's only right they give their thoughts. Some views may be biased, some not, some views on the contrary (supporting HK) may be biased but that's not the point. Every opinion, every vote, matters. The bigger picture was that the HK rank should be removed and it was conclusive.

Do I wish that the community liked the HK rank? Sure. But I have to put any personal preference of mine as aside and look at the bigger picture.

You are covering up how mismanaged the poll was and how the staff aggravated the situation. And no amount of desire can make something that is unethical justifiable. You are severely overstating things when you say that a "majority" of people wanted the knights dead. The poll you keep referring to was badly implemented, first being claimed that it was only going to be used to gauge the general feeling of the community, and then that it would decide the fate of the knights, and then back to only gauging the feelings. People who initially voted in there were under the impression that they were just expressing their opinion and not deciding its fate. Many of the people who voted on the poll were poorly informed of the issues and wouldn't necessarily make the same decision again. Others were scared away from voting because the poll results were public and people against removal were being treated with hostility. Claiming that a majority wanted it is absolutely incorrect and is denying the staff's poor management of this entire ordeal. Even if they made the decision anyway if they were informed, it doesn't mean that the decision is right. Telling people that they cannot do something because it upsets someone else, despite that someone having nothing to do with it and not being involved in any way, is entirely unethical. And I absolutely stand by the assertion that the staff is being corrupt if they support that course of action. Choosing to yell at me again for it won't make that problem go away no matter how much you don't want it to be there. Saying "I'm offended" doesn't give you the right to push people around and get your way. The staff is being completely irresponsible and harming the community if they support and condone such sentiments. And I think that efforts to say that the previous poll were definitive and represented a majority opinion should stop. Such a claim does not hold under criticism or scrutiny as it was not even remotely the case at all. And I severely doubt that a new one would fair any better because judging by your statements here, the staff still refuses to take responsibility for how badly this whole affair has been handled. Oni summed up the problems with it very well and you can refer back to that post for reference.

So from what I understand, you want the HK group to be turned into a group which helps the community and anyone can join? Well of anyone can join then I'm not exactly against it because that goes away from the exclusivity idea that people don't take kindly to.

That is what I've been saying all along and it is the point of suggesting that transition. Making the knights that open would be awkward if the knights stood alone, but it would be just normal routine if it was clan among many. And I do genuinely believe having multiple clans can help improve many things going on here.

 

[Justac00lguy]

You are covering up how mismanaged the poll was and how the staff aggravated the situation. And no amount of desire can make something that is unethical justifiable. You are severely overstating things when you say that a "majority" of people wanted the knights dead. The poll you keep referring to was badly implemented, first being claimed that it was only going to be used to gauge the general feeling of the community, and then that it would decide the fate of the knights, and then back to only gauging the feelings. People who initially voted in there were under the impression that they were just expressing their opinion and not deciding its fate.

I wasn't a staff member when the poll was created, so the intention of it was unclear to me. But I do disagree with this statement: People who initially voted in there were under the impression that they were just expressing their opinion and not deciding its fate.. I don't think the intention of the thread affected want people were going to choose. First off, the poll was very bluntly put: keep the HK rank or do not keep the HK rank. So the intention of the poll aside, the people who chose the latter option declared that they didn't want the rank to stick around and I'm confident that they would make the same choice for a second poll was to go up with a clear intention to be conclusive.

Many of the people who voted on the poll were poorly informed of the issues and wouldn't necessarily make the same decision again. Others were scared away from voting because the poll results were public and people against removal were being treated with hostility. Claiming that a majority wanted it is absolutely incorrect and is denying the staff's poor management of this entire ordeal.

Do you actually know this though? You can't just call people misinformed without clear evidence. And how do you know people were scared away? And what if those scared people voted to remove the rank?

Also a majority, by its very definition, is the greater number. Are you denying that nearly 30% more people vote for its removal than to keep it? You can't just say people were misinformed and that this 30% difference would vote the other way; that's pure speculation.

Even if they made the decision anyway if they were informed, it doesn't mean that the decision is right. Telling people that they cannot do something because it upsets someone else, despite that someone having nothing to do with it and not being involved in any way, is entirely unethical. And I absolutely stand by the assertion that the staff is being corrupt if they support that course of action.

You're missing the point. If a majority doesn't want the rank then that's that. There is no point in making a poll if you just deem people's reasonings to be off. It was a poll based off quantitive data. It's impossible to make a community decision based off qualitive data as you're basically ignoring a huge portion of the community. I could be the admin of this forum and make every decision by myself in what I thought was objectively the best choice; however that doesn't necessarily mean it's best for the community.

Choosing to yell at me again for it won't make that problem go away no matter how much you don't want it to be there.

Where did I yell at you?

Saying "I'm offended" doesn't give you the right to push people around and get your way.

Where did I say you were "offended" and where I have I pushed people around? Please stop making false accusations, or at least back it up with clear evidence.

The staff is being completely irresponsible and harming the community if they support and condone such sentiments. And I think that efforts to say that the previous poll were definitive and represented a majority opinion should stop. Such a claim does not hold under criticism or scrutiny as it was not even remotely the case at all. And I severely doubt that a new one would fair any better because judging by your statements here, the staff still refuses to take responsibility for how badly this whole affair has been handled. Oni summed up the problems with it very well and you can refer back to that post for reference.

The poll showed a clear majority and you can't deny that, doing so goes against the whole definition, I'm not forcing that the rank should be removed, I'm merely stating my own thoughts and referencing the last poll to strengthen my argument.

 

[Emma]

I wasn't a staff member when the poll was created, so the intention of it was unclear to me. But I do disagree with this statement: People who initially voted in there were under the impression that they were just expressing their opinion and not deciding its fate.. I don't think the intention of the thread affected want people were going to choose. First off, the poll was very bluntly put: keep the HK rank or do not keep the HK rank. So the intention of the poll aside, the people who chose the latter option declared that they didn't want the rank to stick around and I'm confident that they would make the same choice for a second poll was to go up with a clear intention to be conclusive.

The point is that you can't keep calling it definitative when it wasn't.

Do you actually know this though? You can't just call people misinformed without clear evidence. And how do you know people were scared away? And what if those scared people voted to remove the rank?

there was clear evidence. People kept talking about things they thought were the case with the knights that were not true. That is a textbook case of misinformed. And people such as myself were under constant ridicule for not wanting the knights to go. I don't think it's appropriate to keep denying this was the case when the staff are supposed to be monitoring these threads and should have seen it.

Also a majority, by its very definition, is the greater number. Are you denying that nearly 30% more people vote for its removal than to keep it? You can't just say people were misinformed and that this 30% difference would vote the other way; that's pure speculation.

A majority of that majority didn't know what they were voting for and were not informed of the issues and the staff knew that people were hysterical and weren't going to be reasonable and they put up the poll anyway.

You're missing the point. If a majority doesn't want the rank then that's that. There is no point in making a poll if you just deem people's reasonings to be off. It was a poll based off quantitive data. It's impossible to make a community decision based off qualitive data as you're basically ignoring a huge portion of the community. I could be the admin of this forum and make every decision by myself in what I thought was objectively the best choice; however that doesn't necessarily mean it's best for the community.

If the staff handled it badly, which they did, that that is absolutely not it. They have to accept responsibility for their mistakes and not ignore that they happened.

Where did I yell at you?

When you sent an unwarranted warning to me on behalf an unethical decision the staff made that was never fair and was totally undeserved.

Where did I say you were "offended" and where I have I pushed people around? Please stop making false accusations, or at least back it up with clear evidence.

I should stop you right there and clarfiy that I was using "you" in the plural sense. I took pains to try to make that clear but it looks like you still think I'm talking about an individual. Unless I specify otherwise, I am speaking of the staff as a whole. And the things I have said were done do have evidence to back them up and I am not the only one to have pointed them out. As you just seen, Oni agreed completely that the staff did a poor job handling this case. Repeatedly insisting that what I'm saying is false is not going to make this opinion go away and the more you tell people not to say it, the more they're going to believe it.

The poll showed a clear majority and you can't deny that, doing so goes against the whole definition, I'm not forcing that the rank should be removed, I'm merely stating my own thoughts and referencing the last poll to strengthen my argument.

We've been over this, the poll was badly handled and many people who voted for it were upset that they were not informed. Dark Master for instance was under the impression that they were voting against the system the HKs had in place in 2012 and was not aware that things were different now. Repeatedly insisting that the poll is final is not going to erase the fact that people were misinformed and that people who wanted the knights gone went and asked inactive people to vote on their side without them having any awareness of what was going on and there seems to have been some new accounts too. You need to have more than "more people voted for it" to justify your claim that it was legitimate and binding. Because it wasn't.

 

[Onilink89]

Can we close this thread please? Now its becoming a who's right and who's wrong discussion. There is no need to bring the subject into loops.
I would say we properly discussed it and found a good suggestion about it, so move the subject to the "clans" thread please?

 

[Terminus]

Since all y'all like saying the OP was too "vague", here it is. VERY clearly states that the poll would decisively decide the future.

Addressing a few people.

@Matt, you can't just say our opinions are misinformed just because we disagree with you.

@Oni, this is part of our forum, we deserve to have a say in it (more of a right than you, I might add, who hasn't been remotely active for ages).

 

[Seth]

Since all y'all like saying the OP was too "vague", here it is. VERY clearly states that the poll would decisively decide the future.

Addressing a few people.

@Matt, you can't just say our opinions are misinformed just because we disagree with you.

@Oni, this is part of our forum, we deserve to have a say in it (more of a right than you, I might add, who hasn't been remotely active for ages).

It also clearly states Mases thought the community as a whole should have an input. Not just HKs.

 

[Justac00lguy]

Matt I'll have to PM you as this discussion isn't exactly reaching a conclusion and is kind of clogging up the thread.

I'll leave the thread open for those who still want to dicuss though.

 

[Onilink89]

Since all y'all like saying the OP was too "vague", here it is. VERY clearly states that the poll would decisively decide the future.

Addressing a few people.

@Matt, you can't just say our opinions are misinformed just because we disagree with you.

@Oni, this is part of our forum, we deserve to have a say in it (more of a right than you, I might add, who hasn't been remotely active for ages).

>has not be remotely active for ages

VS

1. The whole forum got involved, the staff started drama while their actual job is to prevent it
2. Members didn't knew (until i explained it) the whole situation and past of the HK, yet they have an "opinion" about it, and certainly not some sort of personal dislike.
3. Issue came from that members were bothered by "mere excistence"
4. There was no major issue to begin with that required a removal or purge.

Try Harder

 

[Emma]

@Matt, you can't just say our opinions are misinformed just because we disagree with you.

Correct. The fact that the things you and the others said about the knights being false makes you misinformed. Not the fact that you disagreed with me. And I'd appreciate it you didn't accuse me of having that reasoning for claiming there was ignorance. My statements were addressing what was said, your statement addressed my character. Ad hominem.
And really we are wasting time here. I don't see any progress happening. People are being too emotional and there's too much back and forth. Closure might be warranted.