Here, enjoy. Mark what he says, read it, put some thought to it. At least open your ears a bit...
(16:13:35) MtG Subbie: what do you want to know that hasn't been said?
(16:13:42) MtG Subbie: They wanted things we couldn't give them
(16:13:52) MtG Subbie: they were very demanding about it
(16:13:58) Nathan: How so? They say you were stalling and muckrucking?
(16:14:22) Nathan: Is that untrue, or an exaggeration?
(16:14:24) MtG Subbie: they never understood the first principle behind the business of running a site
(16:14:26) MtG Subbie: it takes money
(16:14:30) MtG Subbie: if the money isn't there
(16:14:35) MtG Subbie: you can't do things
(16:14:39) MtG Subbie: we weren't stalling
(16:14:48) MtG Subbie: we just couldn't do what they wanted
(16:14:50) Nathan: What about the donation money. Certainly that could have helped, right?
(16:14:55) MtG Subbie: yeah
(16:15:00) MtG Subbie: except Daron stole it
(16:15:05) Nathan: Stole it?
(16:15:07) MtG Subbie: okay
(16:15:09) MtG Subbie: well
(16:15:13) MtG Subbie: draw your own conclusion:
(16:15:17) MtG Subbie: All of the money, he kept
(16:15:31) MtG Subbie: when asked where it went, he was never able to provide a single specific example
(16:15:37) MtG Subbie: there was $900
(16:15:43) MtG Subbie: and now there is $100 or less
(16:16:02) MtG Subbie: If you don't consider that stealing, then call it what you want
(16:16:07) MtG Subbie: I considering it stealing
(16:16:11) Nathan: And he has been unable to say where the other #800 went? Either him or JeffV or Cateran?
(16:16:19) MtG Subbie: only Daron knew
(16:16:25) MtG Subbie: this isn't Jeff or Cat's deal
(16:16:28) MtG Subbie: and no
(16:16:37) MtG Subbie: he has absolutely refused to provide documented proof
(16:16:47) MtG Subbie: stating "I can't go into specifics, but...."
(16:16:57) Nathan: Hmm...
(16:17:06) MtG Subbie: I tried for months to get info out of him
(16:17:52) Nathan: Well, what of his claim that the admin and staff never got any of the credit from your site?
(16:17:59) Nathan: Untrue, or exaggeration?
(16:18:09) MtG Subbie: both
(16:18:19) MtG Subbie: Did Daron ever receive compensation, no
(16:18:22) MtG Subbie: Here's the deal
(16:18:27) MtG Subbie: for legal reasons, we could not pay them cash
(16:18:30) MtG Subbie: they got paid credit
(16:18:35) MtG Subbie: Daron chose to stockpile.
(16:18:48) Nathan: As in, letting it build up for a while?
(16:18:49) MtG Subbie: He placed and order for it mere days before leaving
(16:18:51) MtG Subbie: yeah
(16:18:57) MtG Subbie: he quit before shipment
(16:19:04) MtG Subbie: so, it was never shipped.
(16:19:10) MtG Subbie: As far as Jeff goes
(16:19:13) MtG Subbie: he kinda stockpiled
(16:19:20) MtG Subbie: but made 2 orders around States time
(16:19:26) MtG Subbie: back in October
(16:19:30) MtG Subbie: and received all those cards
(16:19:41) MtG Subbie: So yeah, they were owed credit
(16:19:48) MtG Subbie: but not cashing in on it was their own choice
(16:19:57) MtG Subbie: they chose to stockpile it.
(16:20:01) MtG Subbie: I know that for a fact
(16:20:45) Nathan: Fari enough. I'm looking at many claim by Daron that indicate you would be what he calls a "jerk" and very "immature."
Are these email's his fabrication, or are they factual?
(16:21:56) MtG Subbie: depends on your definition
(16:22:04) MtG Subbie: first of all, Daron has no right to call anyone immature
(16:22:13) MtG Subbie: and I would definately say that does not apply to me
(16:22:15) MtG Subbie: A jerk
(16:22:16) MtG Subbie: well
(16:22:18) MtG Subbie: yeah, maybe
(16:22:25) MtG Subbie: I'm a rought businessman, no lies
(16:22:30) MtG Subbie: I like things done my way.
(16:22:37) MtG Subbie: not to say I don't listen to others
(16:22:38) MtG Subbie: I do
(16:24:06) Nathan: Well, according to one of your e-mails he has made public, you had an AIM conversation with him, and he had to go to take care of his child. And then you email him telling him that he is suspended, and that he is neither to patronize you or to break off a conversation with you, under any circumstance.
Is that out of context?
(16:24:19) MtG Subbie: Untrue
(16:24:24) MtG Subbie: very untrue
(16:24:33) MtG Subbie: he got pissed off
(16:24:36) MtG Subbie: wrote something nasty
(16:24:38) MtG Subbie: then signed off
(16:25:00) MtG Subbie: I don't think I have that conversation saved
(16:25:08) MtG Subbie: but that is a bold-faced lie he is telling there
(16:25:33) Nathan: but did he mention he had a sick kid at all? That could put him under duress, and he did later apoligize, right?
(16:26:08) MtG Subbie: if you call it an apology
(16:26:14) MtG Subbie: he made excuses
(16:26:22) MtG Subbie: and this is the first time I have heard to the "sick kid"
(16:26:26) MtG Subbie: he never mentioned that to me
(16:26:42) MtG Subbie: duress or no, you can't behave like that
(16:26:47) Nathan: He does have children, as far as we know.
(16:26:50) MtG Subbie: if he were 15 years old, I could understand
(16:26:52) MtG Subbie: he's 29
(16:27:01) MtG Subbie: at 29, you have to learn to act businesslike, children or no
(16:27:07) MtG Subbie: and signing off after a rude comment
(16:27:08) MtG Subbie: well
(16:27:15) MtG Subbie: a sick kid only becomes an excuse there
(16:27:17) MtG Subbie: if he did
(16:27:22) MtG Subbie: you say "brb" and stay on
(16:27:25) MtG Subbie: I understand "brb"
(16:27:33) MtG Subbie: not a nasty message then sign-off
(16:27:47) Nathan: What was his rude comment? What it anything like "F-you!" or "Go to hell!"?
How "rude" was it?
(16:27:54) MtG Subbie: I don't remember it
(16:27:55) MtG Subbie: honestly
(16:28:00) MtG Subbie: I don't remember cursing
(16:28:10) MtG Subbie: it was bad enough to get him suspended
(16:28:12) MtG Subbie: I know that
(16:28:57) Nathan: Well, here's what he said he typed before signing off:
"if you have something you need to say, email me!"
Was that at all what he said, or even close to it?
(16:29:08) MtG Subbie: that might have been it
(16:29:09) MtG Subbie: yeah
(16:29:17) MtG Subbie: and that would have incurred my wrath
(16:29:35) MtG Subbie: because:
(16:29:41) MtG Subbie: "sick kid, gtg", is a lot shorter
(16:31:17) Nathan: Fair enough.
I belive you would have to understand that most of MTGNews knew of, knew, and liked R_E an awful lot. To claim what he claimed is not so far fetched to many, since they like R_E so much more than you.
Would you say that is a fair assessment?
(16:35:28) MtG Subbie: In closing (since I have to go)
(16:35:38) MtG Subbie: R_E built himself to a level that people would beleive anything he said
(16:35:55) MtG Subbie: I promise, in the business world, I would hold far more credibility then RE
(16:36:00) MtG Subbie: but in this microchasm
(16:36:10) MtG Subbie: he is more respected than I
(16:36:15) MtG Subbie: I can only tell the truth
(16:36:22) MtG Subbie: how people interpret is up to them
(16:36:26) MtG Subbie: I can't force them to beleive it
(16:36:46) Nathan: Fair enough. Thank you for fielding some of my questions.
(16:36:51) MtG Subbie: no problem
(16:37:01) Nathan: There are others, but mayhaps I'll get at you another time.
he keeps sounding like he is telling the truth, either he is retarded and therefore doesnt no how rude he is being, and that suspending people for saying rude things to him is stupid, or he is very smart. Im going to say hes just stupid. I mean sure theres always the chance that R_E is corrupt and trying to take over the world or something, but personally, I wouldnt really care, I know I would end up being a little touchy if I had that much responsibility.
VOTE Rancored_Elf for world Dictator 2005-till death!!!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly corn hulio.
Hopefully i will have a swelling of pride sometime soon..........
If you dont get that, look at my username, and if you still dont get it, than your to young to have an account on here without your parents permission, YOU ARE A BAD LITTLE CHILD!!!!
it depends upon context and the inflection that you give it. On it's own it is very innocuous but if a person thought you were angry and being quippy, then it could sound rude. Basicly the angrier you are, the angrier/ruder the other person will sound. Still he's over-reacting at best.
it depends upon context and the inflection that you give it. On it's own it is very innocuous but if a person thought you were angry and being quippy, then it could sound rude. Basicly the angrier you are, the angrier/ruder the other person will sound. Still he's over-reacting at best.
No, he's just being Scott. Scott is a person who rages and throws fits whenever he finds himself bested. This can be in a game of pokemon (as I heard during my pokemon-ing days from people who've played the SOB), questioning his website managing skills (as I did when I wrote articles for Pojo), questioning his forum owning skills (as I and pretty much 90% of the people posting in this section have done... my avatar says it all about that), or being called on sucking as a businessman (as I did when he emailed me 3 days after ordering from his online store 3 years ago to tell me the cards he listed as having 4 of were not in stock). Scott doesn't like to be wrong and, when he is, doesn't like to be called on it. Any chance he gets when he has power in a given situation, he will throw the hammer down and issue of gauntlet of challange then laugh because he has total control in said places (EG: on a forum...) and your feeble attempts at reason cannot match the might of his ability to hit the "Edit Post" button FOR YOU.
But let's get off Scott personally, because all of you can clearly see what an ******** he is (most of you just don't know him well enough to know HOW MUCH of an ******** he is). If we were really such important and valuable comodities to him, as a businessperson (and *laugh* one as high calibur as he is *snikker*), it is in his best interest to win us over. He knows for a fact that we swarm to R_E and most of the other mods on MTGnews like flies to a feces, expired meat, and sugar festival. If that is the case, he should be trying is DAMNEDEST to not paint himself as an aggressor against someone who holds as much sway within his community as R_E. Not only has he failed to do that, but he's also openly SCORNING R_E and muting any and all among his potential customers who object to that. I call this Jim Williamson Syndrome, named after one of the co-owners of the Comic/Hobby store I work for. Unlike Jim, Scott doesn't STFU when it comes to scorning people because he's so obsesed with being right, whereas Jim eventually gains common sense and realizes that he's ruining the business by pissing any and everyone off.
It's like playing... well, let's just use Sonic. In Sonic, if you take out Sonic or Dr. Robotnic, the game ceases to be Sonic as the game was based around the fact that Sonic and Dr. Robotnic freaking hate eachother and they're always trying to one up eachother. In the same way, the forums were based around R_E and his rumor gathering and the fact that everyone got along really well with R_E. Once you remove that most basic and fundamental aspect of MTGnews, MTGnews ceases to be MTGnews.
But hey, that's just logic talking.
If I didn't know who this was from other sources, I just might believe him.
Regardless, it doesn't matter if someone quits on you, you still compensate them. Even if he hadn't placed the order, he still would have had that credit. Unless he had a contract that specifically said that quitting forfeited all unshipped credit, there is no reason at all to deny him that.
Testing invisitext
Additionally, his refusable to compromise is a terrible mistake with regards to his business; I don't see many people that have been following this ordeal shopping at his store in the future.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
GENERATION 7: The first time you see this, copy and paste it into your sig and add 1 to the generation. social experiment.
I enjoy this sort of post. Why? It's not biased, and it's proud not to be. Instead, it uses the pure raw force of the Truth, rather than meager opinions. Great content.
Taking this sort of attitude towards Scott should be encouraged. Calling him names and painting him out to be the worst thing since sliced Hitler isn't going to do anything. Getting him to be honest will. (And yes, folks, he can be honest. It's the parts of this interview where he tells that truth that are so damning.)
Spock is not portrayed correctly. If Vulcans are above petty emotions, what motivates him to join the most elite starship crew in the galaxy? I, on the other hand, have transcended the weakness of emotion and achieved a blissful lack of caring. Apathy is my strength, our strength, which prevents us from being all-to-human. In this spirit, may Meh be with you, always.
I must compliment Denver on a well conducted interview. Kept it impartial, got scott's point of view out there. A job well done.
As for what scott has said, I'm not sure what we can do. You'd have to be pretty angry to think of "if you have something you need to say, email me!" as rude, and if R_E wanted to be rude, he could have done alot better.
The 2 stories differ immensely, which means we almost have to pick one, and run with it. Right now, I'm undecided. Naturally, I'm leaning towards R_E, but thats more forum loyalty than anything else. We'll see.
I will have to agree with bill. Millions of people can spread all they want, but having him do it to himself is 100% more "damning". It did seem he was rushing to leave. Nothing really made that much since. I mean seriosly, how could you NOT remember so much. It's not that hard to remember if someone cussed at your or said "I have a sick kid" or whatever the case...jeeze.
I never really paid much attention to MTGnews before I heard about all of this. I am a casual player and usually spend time on GamingEtc. But When I heard such an important site to M:tg was going down, it caught my attention. From what I understand, everything has been on a curve towards disaster, speeding up rapidly lately. Seeing this conversation, I am going to do one of the things I am know for on GamingEtc: tearing down someone's argument bit by bit. Here goes.....
(16:14:24) MtG Subbie: they never understood the first principle behind the business of running a site
(16:14:26) MtG Subbie: it takes money
(16:14:30) MtG Subbie: if the money isn't there
(16:14:35) MtG Subbie: you can't do things
There could be truth in that statement. But then again, it could just as easily be a complete fallacy. This depends on what people wanted done. On GamingEtc, most of the features were hacked in by admins and members given access by the site owner. Considering this, it's fair to assume that what was probably needed was bandwith, which if MTGnews was as great as I have heard it was should have been easily afforded.
(16:19:41) MtG Subbie: So yeah, they were owed credit
(16:19:48) MtG Subbie: but not cashing in on it was their own choice
There is a problem with that. I get the impression that S_S is saying "The staff waited too long so they lost their credit." The problem lies in the fact that if credit is owed to someone, they must be informed of any and all expiration dates. It certain staff members were given free credit that was promised to all staff, and it can be proven in court, S_S could be sued. So he runs into legal trouble on this.
(16:20:45) Nathan: Fari enough. I'm looking at many claim by Daron that indicate you would be what he calls a "jerk" and very "immature."
Are these email's his fabrication, or are they factual?
(16:21:56) MtG Subbie: depends on your definition
Actually, this depends on common sense. Factual means it actually happened. Fabricated means it was made up. Looking in any dictionary would prove me right on this. This just discredits S_S by making him look like a fool. This bit just compunds the problems.
(16:27:15) MtG Subbie: a sick kid only becomes an excuse there
(16:27:17) MtG Subbie: if he did
(16:27:22) MtG Subbie: you say "brb" and stay on
No. If you have a sick kid, you do what is best for the kid, reguardless of any conversations. Judging by the fact that Daron is 29 and when most people have children today, his children must be young. Very young, in fact. Most likely 3 years or less. Considering that, any illness needs to be taken seriously. A sick infant would usually require an Emergency Room visit. A sick todler should still get higher attention. Children are more likely to be harmed from a disease than adults. Asking Daron to disreguard a sick is a poor choice, at best. This again discredits S_S by making him look cruel and inhuman, thusly increase the problems.
(16:28:57) Nathan: Well, here's what he said he typed before signing off:
"if you have something you need to say, email me!"
Was that at all what he said, or even close to it?
(16:29:08) MtG Subbie: that might have been it
(16:29:09) MtG Subbie: yeah
(16:29:17) MtG Subbie: and that would have incurred my wrath
(16:29:35) MtG Subbie: because:
(16:29:41) MtG Subbie: "sick kid, gtg", is a lot shorter
What was said seems like someone in a hurry to do something and really didn't care about the conversation anymore. When I don't want to talk to someone over AIM because I am getting frustrated, I usually tell them to talk to me about it later and sign off. It's called avoiding conflict. Daron may not have had the time to stay online due to a potentially ill child. He may have wanted to avoid a possible fight by getting away from the situation. Both are considered proper behavior considering the possible results. Hardly rude. This makes S_S seem rash, foolish, and far to quick to assume things. Again, this makes him look bad.
So, how can S_S claim he is not the bad guy here? You tell me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Who woulda guessed?
Jet black eyes. Deep thought. Riddles of life unravvel.
No, he was demodded. This has been confirmed by several sources- plus, at that time, he neither had the bold/italics of an Administrator's name, nor was he in the Forum Leaders.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sing lustily and with good courage.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
Well done Denver. Very professionally done. Unfortunately, people tend to remember events of this nature from their point of view, making it impossible to know what in fact did happen. SS makes some valid points, if they are true, but there is no way to know.
You know... many people feel that IM conversations should be kept personal. Theres no point posting every one people have with S_S. There's too much bad blood at the moment.
Actually, it might help people realise that S_S isn't a demon if we see him having AIM conversations without and stuff-ups.
VOTE Rancored_Elf for world Dictator 2005-till death!!!
Hopefully i will have a swelling of pride sometime soon..........
If you dont get that, look at my username, and if you still dont get it, than your to young to have an account on here without your parents permission, YOU ARE A BAD LITTLE CHILD!!!!
Agreed. He only talks in short, choppy talking points.
I have no extendo-sig. Sorry, I'm just not vain enough to think someone will click on it.
I have no extendo-sig. Sorry, I'm just not vain enough to think someone will click on it.
No, he's just being Scott. Scott is a person who rages and throws fits whenever he finds himself bested. This can be in a game of pokemon (as I heard during my pokemon-ing days from people who've played the SOB), questioning his website managing skills (as I did when I wrote articles for Pojo), questioning his forum owning skills (as I and pretty much 90% of the people posting in this section have done... my avatar says it all about that), or being called on sucking as a businessman (as I did when he emailed me 3 days after ordering from his online store 3 years ago to tell me the cards he listed as having 4 of were not in stock). Scott doesn't like to be wrong and, when he is, doesn't like to be called on it. Any chance he gets when he has power in a given situation, he will throw the hammer down and issue of gauntlet of challange then laugh because he has total control in said places (EG: on a forum...) and your feeble attempts at reason cannot match the might of his ability to hit the "Edit Post" button FOR YOU.
But let's get off Scott personally, because all of you can clearly see what an ******** he is (most of you just don't know him well enough to know HOW MUCH of an ******** he is). If we were really such important and valuable comodities to him, as a businessperson (and *laugh* one as high calibur as he is *snikker*), it is in his best interest to win us over. He knows for a fact that we swarm to R_E and most of the other mods on MTGnews like flies to a feces, expired meat, and sugar festival. If that is the case, he should be trying is DAMNEDEST to not paint himself as an aggressor against someone who holds as much sway within his community as R_E. Not only has he failed to do that, but he's also openly SCORNING R_E and muting any and all among his potential customers who object to that. I call this Jim Williamson Syndrome, named after one of the co-owners of the Comic/Hobby store I work for. Unlike Jim, Scott doesn't STFU when it comes to scorning people because he's so obsesed with being right, whereas Jim eventually gains common sense and realizes that he's ruining the business by pissing any and everyone off.
It's like playing... well, let's just use Sonic. In Sonic, if you take out Sonic or Dr. Robotnic, the game ceases to be Sonic as the game was based around the fact that Sonic and Dr. Robotnic freaking hate eachother and they're always trying to one up eachother. In the same way, the forums were based around R_E and his rumor gathering and the fact that everyone got along really well with R_E. Once you remove that most basic and fundamental aspect of MTGnews, MTGnews ceases to be MTGnews.
But hey, that's just logic talking.
Buy from me on TCGPlayer::Twitter::Flickr
Regardless, it doesn't matter if someone quits on you, you still compensate them. Even if he hadn't placed the order, he still would have had that credit. Unless he had a contract that specifically said that quitting forfeited all unshipped credit, there is no reason at all to deny him that.
Testing invisitext
Additionally, his refusable to compromise is a terrible mistake with regards to his business; I don't see many people that have been following this ordeal shopping at his store in the future.
Taking this sort of attitude towards Scott should be encouraged. Calling him names and painting him out to be the worst thing since sliced Hitler isn't going to do anything. Getting him to be honest will. (And yes, folks, he can be honest. It's the parts of this interview where he tells that truth that are so damning.)
Spock is not portrayed correctly. If Vulcans are above petty emotions, what motivates him to join the most elite starship crew in the galaxy? I, on the other hand, have transcended the weakness of emotion and achieved a blissful lack of caring. Apathy is my strength, our strength, which prevents us from being all-to-human. In this spirit, may Meh be with you, always.
As for what scott has said, I'm not sure what we can do. You'd have to be pretty angry to think of "if you have something you need to say, email me!" as rude, and if R_E wanted to be rude, he could have done alot better.
The 2 stories differ immensely, which means we almost have to pick one, and run with it. Right now, I'm undecided. Naturally, I'm leaning towards R_E, but thats more forum loyalty than anything else. We'll see.
*tips his hat to denver*
I will have to agree with bill. Millions of people can spread all they want, but having him do it to himself is 100% more "damning". It did seem he was rushing to leave. Nothing really made that much since. I mean seriosly, how could you NOT remember so much. It's not that hard to remember if someone cussed at your or said "I have a sick kid" or whatever the case...jeeze.
Legacy - Full English Breakfast
Vintage - Dragon, Cerebral Assasin, Oath
Nah, his tag is just broken, so I hear.
There could be truth in that statement. But then again, it could just as easily be a complete fallacy. This depends on what people wanted done. On GamingEtc, most of the features were hacked in by admins and members given access by the site owner. Considering this, it's fair to assume that what was probably needed was bandwith, which if MTGnews was as great as I have heard it was should have been easily afforded.
There is a problem with that. I get the impression that S_S is saying "The staff waited too long so they lost their credit." The problem lies in the fact that if credit is owed to someone, they must be informed of any and all expiration dates. It certain staff members were given free credit that was promised to all staff, and it can be proven in court, S_S could be sued. So he runs into legal trouble on this.
Actually, this depends on common sense. Factual means it actually happened. Fabricated means it was made up. Looking in any dictionary would prove me right on this. This just discredits S_S by making him look like a fool. This bit just compunds the problems.
No. If you have a sick kid, you do what is best for the kid, reguardless of any conversations. Judging by the fact that Daron is 29 and when most people have children today, his children must be young. Very young, in fact. Most likely 3 years or less. Considering that, any illness needs to be taken seriously. A sick infant would usually require an Emergency Room visit. A sick todler should still get higher attention. Children are more likely to be harmed from a disease than adults. Asking Daron to disreguard a sick is a poor choice, at best. This again discredits S_S by making him look cruel and inhuman, thusly increase the problems.
What was said seems like someone in a hurry to do something and really didn't care about the conversation anymore. When I don't want to talk to someone over AIM because I am getting frustrated, I usually tell them to talk to me about it later and sign off. It's called avoiding conflict. Daron may not have had the time to stay online due to a potentially ill child. He may have wanted to avoid a possible fight by getting away from the situation. Both are considered proper behavior considering the possible results. Hardly rude. This makes S_S seem rash, foolish, and far to quick to assume things. Again, this makes him look bad.
So, how can S_S claim he is not the bad guy here? You tell me.
Jet black eyes. Deep thought. Riddles of life unravvel.
No, he was demodded. This has been confirmed by several sources- plus, at that time, he neither had the bold/italics of an Administrator's name, nor was he in the Forum Leaders.
Be aware of singing as if you were half dead,
or half asleep:
but lift your voice with strength.
Be no more afraid of your voice now,
nor more ashamed of its being heard,
than when you sang the songs of Satan.
Well then. Do you think he'll come over here now?
Directed at Senori, too.
I wish I didn't have to keep answering this.
I recommend reading this thread:
http://www.retetched.com/optix/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=350&start=40&sid=dce111169a47b2b0b6e5f5541e2f4f48
My post on Mon Jan 03, 2005 9:45 am is most relevant to your question.
Actually, it might help people realise that S_S isn't a demon if we see him having AIM conversations without and stuff-ups.
I'll be sure to put on with my other questions.
And, I agree with billking. I think that some of the truthful things he says are the worst for him.