![]()
Nota bene: I believe there is a central fact being overlooked here. There are those who are calling for the head of kevarc, and there are those who call for the heads of his detractors. This is utterly irrelevant. Likewise irrelevant are the relative value of Mr. Arceneaux's contributions to the train simulation community or the contributions of his detractors, or any other issue such as relative status in the community in terms of age, post count, or duration of membership.The central fact here is that someone---I don't know who and don't want that to be known---who has been set in authority over us by Nels Anderson sat down, saw the complaints against Mr. Arceneaux, and found them valid such that a warning was reportedly issued. The moderator did not have to do this. He (I'm assuming here) could simply have dismissed the complaints of several as being without merit and invalid. However, that was not what occurred. Had no moderator found these complaints valid, I do not believe we would be discussing the departure of Mr. Arceneaux. Just think about that for a little bit.I do not address the merits of the "case against kevarc" or the "case for kevarc" and I do not take any position on this issue. This post is purely for clarifyingly informational purposes.
____________________________________________________________________
Norfolk & Western’s Radford Division, Pulaski District: Who needs the Marias Pass?
Printer-friendly page | Top
In re Arceneaux [View All], NW_611, 12:41 PM, Aug-19-03, (0) RE: In re Arceneaux, OTTODAD, Aug-19-03, 01:08 PM, (1) RE: In re Arceneaux, CBF, Aug-19-03, 01:35 PM, (2) RE: In re Arceneaux, ace6879, Aug-19-03, 03:08 PM, (3) Assumptions can be deadly, Robber Baron, Aug-19-03, 03:18 PM, (4) RE: In re Arceneaux, Curious142, Aug-19-03, 03:31 PM, (5) RE: In re Arceneaux, TrainTrak5000, Aug-19-03, 03:55 PM, (6) RE: In re Arceneaux, Curious142, Aug-19-03, 04:50 PM, (10) RE: In re Arceneaux, NW_611, Aug-19-03, 03:57 PM, (7) RE: In re Arceneaux, IcyFire, Aug-19-03, 04:01 PM, (8) RE: In re Arceneaux, Curious142, Aug-19-03, 07:53 PM, (17) RE: In re Arceneaux, Curious142, Aug-19-03, 04:41 PM, (9) RE: In re Arceneaux, Nels_Anderson, Aug-19-03, 05:26 PM, (11) RE: In re Arceneaux, NW_611, Aug-19-03, 05:39 PM, (12) RE: In re Arceneaux, Claude350, Aug-19-03, 06:07 PM, (13) RE: In re Arceneaux, ace6879, Aug-19-03, 06:42 PM, (14) RE: In re Arceneaux, Claude350, Aug-19-03, 07:18 PM, (15) RE: In re Arceneaux, DTA, Aug-19-03, 07:29 PM, (16) RE: In re Arceneaux, ace6879, Aug-19-03, 08:13 PM, (18) RE: In re Arceneaux, xgsft, Aug-19-03, 10:31 PM, (19) RE: In re Arceneaux, ssw, Aug-19-03, 10:46 PM, (20) RE: In re Arceneaux, ace6879, Aug-19-03, 10:54 PM, (21) RE: In re Arceneaux, chucksc, Aug-20-03, 00:05 AM, (24) RE: In re Arceneaux, BN_9402, Aug-20-03, 01:08 AM, (25) RE: In re Arceneaux, shep1935, Aug-20-03, 12:01 PM, (31) RE: In re Arceneaux, Nels_Anderson, Aug-20-03, 08:21 AM, (28) RE: In re Arceneaux, Claude350, Aug-20-03, 09:22 AM, (29) RE: In re Arceneaux, chucksc, Aug-20-03, 11:11 AM, (30) RE: In re Arceneaux, Nels_Anderson, Aug-20-03, 12:09 PM, (32) RE: In re Arceneaux, mailer_diablo, Aug-20-03, 12:44 PM, (33) RE: In re Arceneaux, dadbill, Aug-21-03, 03:07 PM, (34) RE: In re Arceneaux, kevarc, Aug-19-03, 11:18 PM, (22) RE: In re Arceneaux, dvdhoven, Aug-20-03, 01:24 AM, (26) RE: In re Arceneaux, ace6879, Aug-20-03, 01:27 AM, (27) RE: In re Arceneaux, chucksc, Aug-19-03, 11:51 PM, (23) RE: In re Arceneaux, Motley24Crue2, Aug-21-03, 09:12 PM, (35) RE: In re Arceneaux, annabelle, Aug-22-03, 01:12 PM, (36) RE: In re Arceneaux, Macster, Aug-22-03, 01:18 PM, (37)
Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic


