Observation: Lots of people are unhappy with superpie having admin, and accuse him of misconduct.
Observation: A large chunk of these complaints come from GT members such as myself. -- I only point this out, because many of the people who detract from the issue at hand seem to have personal issues with GT.
This could mean that there's a massive GT conspiracy to defame superpie. It could also mean that superpie has something against GT members. Or (more likely, in my opinion) the number of complaints from GT members correlates with the size of GT.
Observation: Whenever somebody has a complaint about superpie, they themselves often get attacked by pie's supporters.
Does this mean that his defenders can't make a proper defense for him? That they need to resort to defaming those who criticize him due to lack of a better argument?
Maybe, no way to know for sure. Hell, I could be completely misinterpreting what others have said, and their intentions.
Observation: These forum rules seem to be ignored when admins in general are criticized:
3.) Healthy debates in topics are allowed. Flaming to the point of insult-trading is NOT okay.
4.) No spamming or advertising (includes useless multi-posts and bumps.) (This one is for you, NotYarou.)
4b.) No thread hijacking.
5.) Stay fairly on topic.
6.) Criticism must be constructive.
6b.) Do NOT harass other members.
6c.) Do NOT troll!
Observation: Those criticizing superpie may not have done so in the most mature way possible (myself included.)
My personal analysis: I feel that the people who are accusing superpie are being attacked unnecessarily, make another topic about them if it really means that much to you. I also feel that, while provoked, superpie often times uses excessive/unnecessary punishment- Which is against server rules. Admin abuse can often times be a very emotional topic, which can make posts seem melodramatic, immature, etc.
Common sense: We should focus on the person who is being accused, more than the poster (unless it's completely relevant to the issue at hand.)
Note: Nobody is a perfect admin (or person for that matter,) this is why we need other admins to point out the folly in another admins actions wherever necessary-- At the same time, it's a completely different matter when an admin refuses to take any constructive criticism, or to put it more bluntly, is a bad admin.
Another note, common sense: When you criticize the poster for irrelevant matters, it detracts from the topic. It goes off topic (possible violation of forum rules 4b and 5.) We should focus on the alleged abuser, not the concerned individual posting about him.
One last note: This thread hasn't degraded (too far) as of yet, please try to keep it that way. (Also, I realize that I may have been somewhat redundant, but it's just to get my point across.)
~Medi