World Beyblade Organization by Fighting Spirits Inc. Other Closed Threads

Deikailo's Ban.

Apr. 02, 2012  10:38 PM
 
Yeah, let's stop with the guessing and assumptions and this and that and back and forth, guys.

Those who know nothing, do not assume to know anything more than what we have provided. What we have provided are fact, and you can trust that information - but assume absolutely nothing further.

Those who think you know something, but have no confirmation, be quiet.
Apr. 02, 2012  10:40 PM
 
I think we've already made clear point #4 isn't actually fact, given she didn't make any profit off that site.

But the rest, yes, they are, but as always: Context is very important.
Apr. 02, 2012  10:42 PM
 
I thought Arupaeo was going to jump out and yell "April Fools!" but in all seriousness, I never knew Deikailo was like this. Now everything makes sense, including that website she made and got people who don't know what they're doing to advertise it everywhere on Facebook. She sounded like she had honour, from that message that used to be on her bio "My goal is to help bladers" something like that, and the post in the bullying section "I host tournaments to help kids yayaya and when it doesn't go this way, this'll be the day i quit the WBO yayaya". Guess I was wrong.
Apr. 02, 2012  10:45 PM
 
being banned because of attitude, that's quite sad
Apr. 02, 2012  10:46 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:42 PM)Mickey Wrote: I thought Arupaeo was going to jump out and yell "April Fools!" but in all seriousness, I never knew Deikailo was like this. Now everything makes sense, including that website she made and got people who don't know what they're doing to advertise it everywhere on Facebook. She sounded like she had honour, from that message that used to be on her bio "My goal is to help bladers" something like that, and the post in the bullying section "I host tournaments to help kids yayaya and when it doesn't go this way, this'll be the day i quit the WBO yayaya". Guess I was wrong.

Well that probably wasn't her intentions. She did want to help bladers, let me tell you that. She told me that last year. It's just life hit her and she lost track of intentions.


Apr. 02, 2012  10:46 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:42 PM)Mickey Wrote: I thought Arupaeo was going to jump out and yell "April Fools!" but in all seriousness, I never knew Deikailo was like this. Now everything makes sense, including that website she made and got people who don't know what they're doing to advertise it everywhere on Facebook. She sounded like she had honour, from that message that used to be on her bio "My goal is to help bladers" something like that, and the post in the bullying section "I host tournaments to help kids yayaya and when it doesn't go this way, this'll be the day i quit the WBO yayaya". Guess I was wrong.

Do you have the full story? I've been brought up to question everything including those in power. And i'm not saying this to stand on either side. There's always some truth in lies though. Everyone seems to just jump on the bandwagon because it's the "In" thing to do. This isn't meant as a slight to any...But use your heads..question and find the answers yourself before passing judgement.
Apr. 02, 2012  10:50 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:46 PM)!MORTAL Wrote:
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:42 PM)Mickey Wrote: I thought Arupaeo was going to jump out and yell "April Fools!" but in all seriousness, I never knew Deikailo was like this. Now everything makes sense, including that website she made and got people who don't know what they're doing to advertise it everywhere on Facebook. She sounded like she had honour, from that message that used to be on her bio "My goal is to help bladers" something like that, and the post in the bullying section "I host tournaments to help kids yayaya and when it doesn't go this way, this'll be the day i quit the WBO yayaya". Guess I was wrong.

Well that probably wasn't her intentions. She did want to help bladers, let me tell you that. She told me that last year. It's just life hit her and she lost track of intentions.
Told you that last year?!
Please, I'd love our one day member to elaborate on his life-long friendship with a veteran of this site. Go on.

Apr. 02, 2012  10:51 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:40 PM)th!nk Wrote: Context is very important.

Are you questioning the reliably of the Committees' information? You, of all people, should know that the Committee is a reliable source for pretty much everything. So there is no reason for them to lie about something this serious. We have lost a very important part of the community and we all realize this. The Committee wouldn't lie about the reasons for Deikailo's banning.
Apr. 02, 2012  10:52 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:40 PM)th!nk Wrote: I think we've already made clear point #4 isn't actually fact, given she didn't make any profit off that site.

She took money from people and used it for her own means, regardless of what they are, rather than working with us. That is, in every sense of the word, "profit", for her intended goals.

As for "context", it is not remotely acceptable to have this entire thing aired out in the way you seem to want it to be, for either side of the fence, nor for the community as a whole. It would be a great deal uglier than I think you're properly imagining, and would probably become personal almost immediately.

And, in regards to bandwagoning, wild assumptions, and guessing, yes, people really, really need to stop.



(Apr. 02, 2012  10:45 PM)4DBladerXD Wrote: being banned because of attitude, that's quite sad

If you're not going to read, do not post.
Apr. 02, 2012  10:53 PM
 
Okay me and her met like 2 years ago at a Beyblade Tournament. I just knew her and I talked to her on Facebook everyday.

Me and her never were "best" friends, we just knew each other for a while that's all. Gave me enough time to realize she had a attitude.
Apr. 02, 2012  10:54 PM
 
Hazel: She used it in exactly the same way the WBO does: To fund costs. I'm sorry, but last I checked we don't have a monopoly on competitive spinning tops.

I'm pretty sure I know most of the ugliness, and I do know that the full thing could not be aired. However, it should have been managed much more fairly, and my main concern at this point is the people who don't know her jumping in and making opinions based on only one side of the story, even if it is not the full side, it's more than has been presented of the other side.

(Apr. 02, 2012  10:51 PM)©oke Wrote:
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:40 PM)th!nk Wrote: Context is very important.

Are you questioning the reliably of the Committees' information? You, of all people, should know that the Committee is a reliable source for pretty much everything. So there is no reason for them to lie about something this serious. We have lost a very important part of the community and we all realize this. The Committee wouldn't lie about the reasons for Deikailo's banning.

I am not saying they have lied, merely that we have not been presented both sides of the story. From their position it is not humanly possible to present both sides of the story. They ARE one side.

You would do well to not tell me what I should and should not know, in future, and perhaps consider why I "do not "know"" certain things, too.

@!Mortal: Wow, that's a whole lot of "not valid things to base your assumptions and make such bold statements on". Nice Work!
Apr. 02, 2012  11:03 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:54 PM)th!nk Wrote:
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:51 PM)©oke Wrote:
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:40 PM)th!nk Wrote: Context is very important.

Are you questioning the reliably of the Committees' information? You, of all people, should know that the Committee is a reliable source for pretty much everything. So there is no reason for them to lie about something this serious. We have lost a very important part of the community and we all realize this. The Committee wouldn't lie about the reasons for Deikailo's banning.

I am not saying they have lied, merely that we have not been presented both sides of the story. From their position it is not humanly possible to present both sides of the story. They ARE one side.

You would do well to not tell me what I should and should not know, in future, and perhaps consider why I "do not "know"" certain things, too.

First, all I was saying is that the Committees' information is as accurate as can be, so there isn't much of a reason to question it.

Also, the facts that Committee has provided is a viable reason for her banning. If we do hear her side of the story, I doubt much of it will be true. I believe if any of us were in this situation, we could think of reasons for our actions other than for personal benefit, if that's what the actions were for. It is human nature, and you can't change that.
Apr. 02, 2012  11:03 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:54 PM)th!nk Wrote: You would do well to not tell me what I should and should not know, in future, and perhaps consider why I "do not "know"" certain things, too.

You would do extraordinarily well not to be so bold as to make veiled threats at people on this forum, in private, or in broad daylight, regardless of whatever the consequence of your threat being ignored may be. Ever, for any reason, at any time.

We are one side, and we experienced the other side in thoroughly sufficient enough detail regarding everything that led to her ban.

And, to fund the costs of starting her own organization separate from ours, because ours was not lenient enough about results, money, or how much we allowed people to steal from us. It's a grimy thing to do under any circumstance, I'm sorry.
Apr. 02, 2012  11:06 PM
 
Although I'm sure you have thought a lot about this decision, I am a skeptical on one detail and would just like to point out the following:

The skepticism I have is although the WBO claims to be non-profit, there is no record of where all the money actually goes to. If one were to add up all the profit made from passports, tournaments, and donations, one could clearly see that the money from those three alone is much greater than the price of keeping the website's domain and host, prizes, and giveaways.

Again, I am not going against the committee's decision or trying to undo it, rather just stating my opinion.
Apr. 02, 2012  11:06 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  11:03 PM)Hazel Wrote:
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:54 PM)th!nk Wrote: You would do well to not tell me what I should and should not know, in future, and perhaps consider why I "do not "know"" certain things, too.

You would do extraordinarily well not to be so bold as to make veiled threats at people on this forum, in private, or in broad daylight, regardless of whatever the consequence of your threat being ignored may be. Ever, for any reason, at any time.

We are one side, and we experienced the other side in thoroughly sufficient enough detail regarding everything that led to her ban.

And, to fund the costs of starting her own organization separate from ours, because ours was not lenient enough about results, money, or how much we allowed people to steal from us. It's a grimy thing to do under any circumstance, I'm sorry.

It wasn't a threat, haha, you've misinterpreted me, I was merely asking him to reconsider why I may be saying what I'm saying. I admit, I worded it really badly, and I can see where you're coming from, my bad, sorry Coke.

It's a free country, if someone wants to start their own site, that's their choice, and the only thing it has to do with you is your own darned jealousy.

Also, let's try and stay on topic but trying to warn someone for something you interpret as a veiled threat with one of your own (not the first time you've made veiled threats, either), is not befitting of an administrator...

@Coke: I'm saying, quite simply, that it isn't enough, it is only one side of the story. As for the latter part of your post, again, baseless assumptions do not help.
Apr. 02, 2012  11:10 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  10:22 PM)th!nk Wrote: I still take offence, however, to people who have not even spoken to her, jumping on the bandwagon and saying "yeah she's the worst person ever".

I really hope this isn't what people are thinking, because it is absolutely not what we wanted to convey. We aren't saying she is the "worst person ever", we're trying to be transparent with our reasoning as to why she is being banned; not to "smear her name" or anything of the sort. And as was said in the OP, this is not a decision we made lightly at all. We gave Deikailo many chances to right her wrongs, but in the end she chose another path, so it left us with no choice. Brad's sentiments earlier perfectly reflect how the entire Committee feels about her:

(Apr. 02, 2012  6:46 PM)Bey Brad Wrote: However, we/they continued to do it because Deikailo, for all her faults, was a pretty passionate and dedicated person. But when that passion becomes redirected to focus on herself instead of the Beyblade community as a whole, it's dangerous. It seems that the risks finally outstripped the rewards.

We appreciate immensely all of the good that she did do, but that could never be enough to exempt her from the things she did wrong afterwards.

(Apr. 02, 2012  10:54 PM)th!nk Wrote: I am not saying they have lied, merely that we have not been presented both sides of the story. From their position it is not humanly possible to present both sides of the story. They ARE one side.

If it isn't possible for us to share both sides of the story, then how would you expect us to do so? Let Deikailo post before we banned her? Or ...? It would end up exactly as Hazel has been describing. Kai-V has allowed you to speak for her, so I'm not sure what else you are looking for.
Apr. 02, 2012  11:11 PM
 
Of course we do not keep our financial records public - that would be genuine insanity, and I do not know of many organizations - non-profit or otherwise - actually does this. However, absolutely none of the money is at any time pocketed, it remains in a Committee-monitored account - what isn't spent(either on prize/expense reimbursement, lottos, giveaways, or The Blader Rewards, which constitutes quite a lot of money) is saved for future events, and we do actually have several plans coming up for it.

It is perfectly her choice, yes, but the fact is that she still hosted a tournament and pocketed money, then threw it toward her own goal(and the efficiency of the spending is something I could mention, given how cheap a domain could've been, as they are really not that expensive at all unless you buy someone else's, which was not at all necessary). I, and every other CM by now, has fully explained our feelings regarding that course of action of hers and why we mentioned it at all, so we are beating a figurative dead horse with its figuratively dead jockey.
Apr. 02, 2012  11:11 PM
 
greed is a terrible thing it corrupts many of people but still What she did was just MAN that was wrong on so many levels especially the charity one...
Apr. 02, 2012  11:15 PM
 
Kei: I've made very clear that I'm not questioning your veracity, and most of the current discussion refers to the initial handling more than anything.


And yeah, I'm honestly with Hazel, until/unless Deikailo has something to say on this that she would like to have heard, there's little more to say.
Apr. 02, 2012  11:15 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  11:11 PM)Clonetos Wrote: greed is a terrible thing it corrupts many of people but still What she did was just MAN that was wrong on so many levels especially the charity one...

yay! A prime example of the kind of stuff that gets posted when you make this kind of affair public!


And yeah, her domain is apparently much more than a couple of bucks..
Apr. 02, 2012  11:16 PM
 
Good, then.

Let's have the personal attacking and back and forth about familiarity and bandwagoning also put to rest, please - this thread was not created so people could bandwagon, hate, or argue, but rather be aware, comment(respectfully), and move on.
Apr. 02, 2012  11:17 PM
 
Backing up on what Hazel said, there is such an account. The WBO does have a nonprofit account in PayPal, which it uses for prizes and giveaways, which then goes to the sellers to pay for the giveaways. Such as been the case with me. And let me tell you, it reads " nonprofit".

I would not doubt that the WBO has at not any time been greedy.
Apr. 02, 2012  11:19 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  11:06 PM)th!nk Wrote: @Coke: I'm saying, quite simply, that it isn't enough, it is only one side of the story. As for the latter part of your post, again, baseless assumptions do not help.

How is my opinion baseless? I'm agreeing with the fact that Deikailo is banned for her actions that didn't agree with the rules of the community and that the Committee can't trust her anymore.

As for the one side of the story part, how isn't it enough? There isn't really a way to get her side of the story other than through the Committee.
Apr. 02, 2012  11:21 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  11:19 PM)©oke Wrote: As for the one side of the story part, how isn't it enough? There isn't really a way to get her side of the story other than through the Committee.

...what?
explain how that works haha
Apr. 02, 2012  11:22 PM
 
(Apr. 02, 2012  11:19 PM)©oke Wrote:
(Apr. 02, 2012  11:06 PM)th!nk Wrote: @Coke: I'm saying, quite simply, that it isn't enough, it is only one side of the story. As for the latter part of your post, again, baseless assumptions do not help.

How is my opinion baseless? I'm agreeing with the fact that Deikailo is banned for her actions that didn't agree with the rules of the community and that the Committee can't trust her anymore.

As for the one side of the story part, how isn't it enough? There isn't really a way to get her side of the story other than through the Committee.

Perhaps half-based then? It's simple bandwagoning.

We've already determined that if Deikailo wants something said, that I can post that for her (obviously within limits), if she wants that. I'm saying, however, that something similar should have been done from the start.
Prev
Page 6
Next