[Randactyl]

Partial quotes were only a problem when you left out points that addressed your responses, as I pointed out. I'm not offended, just seeking clarity.

Harven, I'm not against you. I'm not against any individual here. "No offense" truly meant no offense, as in "Do not take this personally." You were left as the subject of that sentence not as an attack, but with the hope that it would spark introspection. In fact, the subject of the larger point (authors have no accountability to the users in this environment) was all authors. Who am I? Who's Sirinsidiator, or Ayantir, etc.?

Unfortunately, it's that exact point which you've still not addressed. You've now introduced this insecure owner account that one person gets to hand out the credentials for based on their personal judgement of trustworthiness. There is now a three class system of authors with anonymous power (!), authors, and users. The accountability problem has just been turned up to 11. The official case has non-biased oversight for moderation and mediation as well as two groups of users on equal footing.

Needing power to be creative does not follow. There are no restrictions in Gitter. There are no restrictions on ESOUI. You don't have administrative power on ESOUI, have you not been creative here? Your list of 30+ projects suggests you have been.

Ah, the classic "muh freedoms" red herring. Nowhere in any my responses did I say you are not free to do as you please.

The point of the Discontinued and Outdated example was that there are far more cases of authors up and leaving compared to the one case of ESOUI staff neglecting a guild that requires near daily sign in to a game that at the time was gated by a subscription. A guild that never really saw a ton of use (from my experience on NA). So is the number exactly 618? No. But it still speaks to the relevant volume of cases.

Projecting your dissatisfaction doesn't work out so well when the response to Gitter was "Thank you!" with no cause to suspect sarcasm or that OP was flat out lying. The discussion about a Discord server has been mostly good. You could have sparked the conversation by saying:

"Why not also have a Discord server? That would be more player accessible than Gitter."

Instead, you described a personal distaste for Git then jumped to create a server and assumed control of it. You then went on to demonstrate a misunderstanding of the purpose of Gitter (that it was inconvenient for users to access) and that you also have a personal distrust of official things. This all works together to create the image of a power grab rather than an attempt to better our communication tooling. To your credit, you've attempted to incorporate some of my feedback, but there were some execution problems. That's the sort of discussion that should be had.

Again, I'm really not against you or anyone else. All of my responses have been in the interest of constructing a useful purpose for a sustainable ESOUI Discord server.

Since I drafted this message, more responses have come in.

@Dolby, that's good news! I certainly vote for making that one public.

@Harven, I think your decision to withdraw is unfortunate. It certainly wasn't the intended outcome. I'll stress again that none of this was to attack you.

@everyone, in light of what has already been raised, does anyone have anything else to add to the discussion of official vs. community for a user focused server? Should we get a poll going?