Tweet
The reaction many, maybe most, have to what the raccoon (ikeo) pulled was the gist of his self-proclaimed 'guerrilla marketing.' It didn't help that his message was mixed. For example, he'd say in one post that he wanted to 'help' and in the next claim he should be given control, then in the next claim that he could help if given access which Kestryll has never (to our knowledge) allowed, then in the next be 'suggestive' about how Kestryll was not servicing the community and should sell it, then declare he could fix it quickly because it was simply this, then he'd claim it was actually something different, then he'd claim something else, then he'd claim a combination. In short, he made it clear, including in posts on his site, that he wanted access to and, preferably, control of the name/branding. (That's without getting into the allusions that he wanted access to other things which could aid him behind the scenes.)
There are a few who, like you, have and continue to cast accusations as to some form of malfeasance regarding how the funds were utilized. If you have personal issues, then all you had to do was not send money or stop sending your funding and discontinue usage of the site. Kestryll has not made the site pay-to-play and promised he never would. Insofar as discontinuing your use of the site, that raises a question. If you are so disenchanted with how it's run and how Kestryll manages it and/or the money, why are you still here utilizing it? It would seem, to many, to be a bit disingenuous to be so critical of something, yet continue using it. That's not 'mud-slinging,' though I grant some of that does appear to occur, though it's decidedly not a one-way street or even predominantly coming from our side of it. Have you noted all the bashing of this site and Kestryll which has and continues taking place on the other site? As I've said, our continuing commentary pales by comparison, despite raccoon claiming such is 'not allowed or condoned' on his site.
But, that brings up another aspect of what you reference as 'disdain.' There are those in this Life who have a low tolerance for dual standards and regardless of his many objections, ikeo has made it clear that the standards, while not necessarily 'dual,' are his and what he feels keeps or will keep his site 'marketable.' It's the core of his reasoning for not allowing an OT on his site in that he does not condone the timbre generated there. (Never mind that OT here is only open to members and isn't publicly viewable.) Put another way, his standards are subject to similar 'discretionary' application as what many on that site accuse Kestryll of; with many of those having caught his attention for one reason or another and resenting it. Thus, if you're going to reference 'disdain' and 'mud slinging,' the newer site's skirts are anything but pristine.
If you wish to continue with innuendo, bear in mind that 'something else will replace it' is one of the concerns. Why? It has been said that two sites would be maintained, but with separate identities, were the raccoon given the power. What has never been discussed is how long those identities would be maintained vs. similar controls over what is allowed being implemented and, eventually, the two sites merged into the 'collective' the raccoon himself has now stipulated he's attempting to build.
Personally, I don't have a problem with two, different sites. Where I've been having issues is the methods which have been used (and, in some respects, continue being used) to 'build' the other site. This site doesn't or shouldn't have to be 'condemned' as dead or inappropriately managed or alluded to as an 'illicit operation' to generate monies to justify or rationalize another site. In fact, while the story of how the other site 'acquired' its name, one so similar to this site's that it has spawned questions by those who aren't aware of the background, is out there, it does bring questions to mind in terms of the 'something else will replace it' line; particularly in light of the raccoon's repeated laments, claims, calls for, meanderings regarding, etc. his being granted access and/or managerial control. If you want to build another site, more power to you and I hope it works out. If you feel that you need the name/reputation of this site, not to mention control of it or access to its 'secrets' (be it metrics or advertisers or whatever) to do it, then you're walking the tightrope of projecting a readily apparent conflict of interest.
Just like those who continue posting here and are 'active' on the newer site, where the majority of their posts here are touting the new site and 'suggesting' things about this site. It kind of makes one wonder.
There are a few who, like you, have and continue to cast accusations as to some form of malfeasance regarding how the funds were utilized. If you have personal issues, then all you had to do was not send money or stop sending your funding and discontinue usage of the site. Kestryll has not made the site pay-to-play and promised he never would. Insofar as discontinuing your use of the site, that raises a question. If you are so disenchanted with how it's run and how Kestryll manages it and/or the money, why are you still here utilizing it? It would seem, to many, to be a bit disingenuous to be so critical of something, yet continue using it. That's not 'mud-slinging,' though I grant some of that does appear to occur, though it's decidedly not a one-way street or even predominantly coming from our side of it. Have you noted all the bashing of this site and Kestryll which has and continues taking place on the other site? As I've said, our continuing commentary pales by comparison, despite raccoon claiming such is 'not allowed or condoned' on his site.
But, that brings up another aspect of what you reference as 'disdain.' There are those in this Life who have a low tolerance for dual standards and regardless of his many objections, ikeo has made it clear that the standards, while not necessarily 'dual,' are his and what he feels keeps or will keep his site 'marketable.' It's the core of his reasoning for not allowing an OT on his site in that he does not condone the timbre generated there. (Never mind that OT here is only open to members and isn't publicly viewable.) Put another way, his standards are subject to similar 'discretionary' application as what many on that site accuse Kestryll of; with many of those having caught his attention for one reason or another and resenting it. Thus, if you're going to reference 'disdain' and 'mud slinging,' the newer site's skirts are anything but pristine.
If you wish to continue with innuendo, bear in mind that 'something else will replace it' is one of the concerns. Why? It has been said that two sites would be maintained, but with separate identities, were the raccoon given the power. What has never been discussed is how long those identities would be maintained vs. similar controls over what is allowed being implemented and, eventually, the two sites merged into the 'collective' the raccoon himself has now stipulated he's attempting to build.
Personally, I don't have a problem with two, different sites. Where I've been having issues is the methods which have been used (and, in some respects, continue being used) to 'build' the other site. This site doesn't or shouldn't have to be 'condemned' as dead or inappropriately managed or alluded to as an 'illicit operation' to generate monies to justify or rationalize another site. In fact, while the story of how the other site 'acquired' its name, one so similar to this site's that it has spawned questions by those who aren't aware of the background, is out there, it does bring questions to mind in terms of the 'something else will replace it' line; particularly in light of the raccoon's repeated laments, claims, calls for, meanderings regarding, etc. his being granted access and/or managerial control. If you want to build another site, more power to you and I hope it works out. If you feel that you need the name/reputation of this site, not to mention control of it or access to its 'secrets' (be it metrics or advertisers or whatever) to do it, then you're walking the tightrope of projecting a readily apparent conflict of interest.
Just like those who continue posting here and are 'active' on the newer site, where the majority of their posts here are touting the new site and 'suggesting' things about this site. It kind of makes one wonder.
Comment