Bring GWG back
- Yes, he was awesome!
- Yes, for reasons I will post in the thread.
- No, and I hate fun and I like to step on cats.
- No, for a NON HATEFUL, LEGITIMATE REASON i will post in the thread.
- I take a neutral stance on this.
- Who is GWG?
...I sincerely believe the poll is biased, Imperial Guardsman. [...We're talking about a
serious topic and you have cat/fun hating? Nitpicking anyway ._. Excuse that. It's out of place {for me}.]
I stand against on the matter however it was to be addressed that there was the attitude. Referencing Digital Hellhound, he did not apologize in cases wherein he
was wrong, but there were also cases wherein ...it was actions out of emotion--something not truly thought about. There were times where he had been spoken to in a clear, concise and calm manner, but the process of conversation didn't follow well. It is hard for me to explain it but it was in the details.
The reason for bringing him back (sans this...poll) does not justify the act however--while I'm more neutral on his case (and hold no grievances or bias against GWG), I'm against bringing him back
under these grounds [or those mentioned] as I'm judging not the person-but the attitude that led to this occurrence.
Though I have to note--there was a significant change in his attitude towards the years of 2013-2014...prior to that, he was pretty much ok. On the note of this whole thread's purpose--
do not rely on popularity as a cause for revoking a ban request: rely rather on rationality and merit.But really, I guess it is a moot point, especially considering the direction the wind in this thread blows already.
GWG is pretty much an OK guy. Just that in some cases, a bad part of his personality shows and...it seems it isn't that well controlled. It showed itself in an otherwise harmful way, and did not contribute for the better (though the rest can't be said it was for the worse--there is no wrong in arguments as a general rule, but in how you argue [and of course the topic]).