PDA

View Full Version : Trials and Tribulations of Tak, military father



Capt Alfredo
04-20-2015, 10:54 PM
You all may remember our dearly departed forum colleague, Tak. During his time on this forum, he was going through some very hard times with his family, which may put some of his comments and behavior here into perspective. Take a look at his saga: http://www.jqpublicblog.com/the-good-son-part-1-third-and-fourth-grade/

Capt Alfredo
04-22-2015, 11:19 AM
Part 2 of Tak's story.

http://www.jqpublicblog.com/the-good-son-part-2-pride-manchester-house-2/

SomeRandomGuy
04-22-2015, 08:08 PM
Part 2 of Tak's story.

http://www.jqpublicblog.com/the-good-son-part-2-pride-manchester-house-2/

Interesting, I talked to Tak on the phone a few times when he used to frequent this forum. I showed him how to view the source code to identify the negative reppers during the infamous "rep wars". He seemed like a good guy. After he retired he spent a lot of time trolling this forum. That appears to be because he was bored and also because he needed a release. Hope he's doing well.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
04-22-2015, 08:22 PM
Interesting, I talked to Tak on the phone a few times when he used to frequent this forum. I showed him how to view the source code to identify the negative reppers during the infamous "rep wars". He seemed like a good guy. After he retired he spent a lot of time trolling this forum. That appears to be because he was bored and also because he needed a release. Hope he's doing well.

While on the MTF, I always thought he came across as somewhat defensive, combative and perhaps somewhat threatening. However, having read some of his af.mil and JQ posts, I have a much greater appreciation for who he is and the challenges he faces with his son.

That said, I am curious as to WHY he is telling his story. Is it to make the rest of us realize that we might not have it as bad as some people (not a bad reminder)? Is it to simply draw attention to himself? What is his motivation and why should we care? I don't mean any disrespect, just asking the question out of curiosity.

sandsjames
04-22-2015, 09:08 PM
While on the MTF, I always thought he came across as somewhat defensive, combative and perhaps somewhat threatening. However, having read some of his af.mil and JQ posts, I have a much greater appreciation for who he is and the challenges he faces with his son.

That said, I am curious as to WHY he is telling his story. Is it to make the rest of us realize that we might not have it as bad as some people (not a bad reminder)? Is it to simply draw attention to himself? What is his motivation and why should we care? I don't mean any disrespect, just asking the question out of curiosity.

Because we live in a world where people need to show you pictures of what they had for dinner and other people actually care.

Though that's not how I view his "story". No matter what the intent behind it, I think there are some things that others in similar situations can relate to.

SomeRandomGuy
04-22-2015, 09:20 PM
While on the MTF, I always thought he came across as somewhat defensive, combative and perhaps somewhat threatening. However, having read some of his af.mil and JQ posts, I have a much greater appreciation for who he is and the challenges he faces with his son.

That said, I am curious as to WHY he is telling his story. Is it to make the rest of us realize that we might not have it as bad as some people (not a bad reminder)? Is it to simply draw attention to himself? What is his motivation and why should we care? I don't mean any disrespect, just asking the question out of curiosity.

I read the first two posts. Haven't kept up with Tak since he left here. I'm wondering if there is a sad ending coming. Even if there is I'm not sure what the goal of his story is. Everyone I met in the Air Force has at least some real life problems. Some are worse than others.

In parts of his story he's talking about his chain of command not having much sympathy for his situation. It's an interesting take. The Air Force is far more lenient in these situations than any civilian job. I worked with a girl who had a special needs child. In about 1.5 years I don't think she ever worked longer than 730-1400. I know her situation was a burden on her but the way the unit handled it created a burden for the rest of us. She ended up getting pregnant with another kid and separated. We all felt bad for her situation but can't say anyone was sad to see her go. We needed someone who could be there and carry their weight. She counted as a billet on our unit manning document but only worked about half time and even when she was physically present she was dealing with appts and what not over the phone.

Mjölnir
04-22-2015, 09:49 PM
He seemed like a good guy. After he retired he spent a lot of time trolling this forum. That appears to be because he was bored and also because he needed a release. Hope he's doing well.

I have read some of the things he has written on JQP, he really can write well and made some really good points in one particular article. I kind of wish he had done that here vice the trolling and repetitious Community Guideline violations that eventually got him banned.

I do hope he is doing well.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
04-23-2015, 04:54 AM
I have read some of the things he has written on JQP, he really can write well and made some really good points in one particular article. I kind of wish he had done that here vice the trolling and repetitious Community Guideline violations that eventually got him banned.

I do hope he is doing well.

I agree his non-MTF posts are extremely well written and thought provoking, unlike any of his old posts on MTF.

Capt Alfredo
04-23-2015, 10:35 AM
I agree his non-MTF posts are extremely well written and thought provoking, unlike any of his old posts on MTF.

I'm not here to be the Tak defender, but I think your characterization of his contributions here is unfair. There was admittedly a ton of chaff that he spewed out, but there were several instances of wheat. To make a blanket characterization such as you did is just not representative of the facts.

Capt Alfredo
04-23-2015, 10:40 AM
Interesting, I talked to Tak on the phone a few times when he used to frequent this forum. I showed him how to view the source code to identify the negative reppers during the infamous "rep wars". He seemed like a good guy. After he retired he spent a lot of time trolling this forum. That appears to be because he was bored and also because he needed a release. Hope he's doing well.

I hope the mods allow this on a one-time basis, but I am going to cut-and-paste a few comments from Tak in response to a few of the comments.

Capt Alfredo
04-23-2015, 10:46 AM
Part 3 of the series

http://www.jqpublicblog.com/the-good-son-part-3-northwood-childrens-services/

Mjölnir
04-23-2015, 10:50 AM
I hope the mods allow this on a one-time basis, but I am going to cut-and-paste a few comments from Tak in response to a few of the comments.

Sorry, but no. I wish him well but he lost his access to post here (directly or by proxy) long ago. I didn't delete the links to his article on JQP, but do not want this to turn into a method of him posting on MTF by proxy.

In the past I invited him to engage privatly if he wanted to discuss his ban, nothing heard.

Capt Alfredo
04-23-2015, 11:22 AM
Sorry, but no. I wish him well but he lost his access to post here (directly or by proxy) long ago. I didn't delete the links to his article on JQP, but do not want this to turn into a method of him posting on MTF by proxy.

In the past I invited him to engage privatly if he wanted to discuss his ban, nothing heard.

I think you're making a mistake. His material has been tweeted out by AFT. His story has been included in the AFT-produced Early Bird. I think you're being short-sighted, but whatever. As I've said before, your ball, your rules. Good luck.

Mjölnir
04-23-2015, 11:58 AM
I think you're making a mistake. His material has been tweeted out by AFT. His story has been included in the AFT-produced Early Bird. I think you're being short-sighted, but whatever. As I've said before, your ball, your rules. Good luck.

Maybe, and as I said above, he can obviously write well and put together some good material. The issue in the past was he continually flaunted the Community Guidelines and made it clear he had no intention of adhering to them. The issue now is that after he was given a second & third chance he contintued to violate very simple rules; it had nothing to do with his viewpoint but how he derailed threads, disrupted conversations and was openly hostile to users. There are various users here whose views/opinions/ideologies differ from my own but who manage to not get permanenly banned because they can adhere to the guidelines that they agreed to when they registered their accounts.

The rules are not really mine, they were established long before I came around either as a user or a moderator and as I said I invited him to discuss it privately, he has not contacted me; as such, I wish him and his family well.

Capt Alfredo
04-23-2015, 12:07 PM
Maybe, and as I said above, he can obviously write well and put together some good material. The issue in the past was he continually flaunted the Community Guidelines and made it clear he had no intention of adhering to them. The issue now is that after he was given a second & third chance he contintued to violate very simple rules; it had nothing to do with his viewpoint but how he derailed threads, disrupted conversations and was openly hostile to users. There are various users here whose views/opinions/ideologies differ from my own but who manage to not get permanenly banned because they can adhere to the guidelines that they agreed to when they registered their accounts.

The rules are not really mine, they were established long before I came around either as a user or a moderator and as I said I invited him to discuss it privately, he has not contacted me; as such, I wish him and his family well.

Yet others blatantly violate the community guidelines and are only banned for short periods of time. Like I said, I am not here to be Tak's defender, but there are other users far more harmful to the community, in my opinion, than Tak ever was.

sandsjames
04-23-2015, 01:32 PM
Yet others blatantly violate the community guidelines and are only banned for short periods of time. Like I said, I am not here to be Tak's defender, but there are other users far more harmful to the community, in my opinion, than Tak ever was.

Agree. Tak's main "disruption" was again Moderators during a time when Mods were out of control. The "derailing" by him was no different than many posters, including myself. The truth of the matter is that he was banned for going after Mods. There was butt hurt and the grudge will continue. It's more about principal now. It's like when a boss at work tells you no and, no matter what else happens, the answer will remain no so he doesn't look "weak".

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
04-23-2015, 02:04 PM
I'm not here to be the Tak defender, but I think your characterization of his contributions here is unfair. There was admittedly a ton of chaff that he spewed out, but there were several instances of wheat. To make a blanket characterization such as you did is just not representative of the facts.

I stated my honest OPINION of TAK based on what I used to read on MTF posts, specifically with the arguments and (perceived) attacks he made on me personally. My opinion of him changed over time based on his non-MTF posts.

As for my opinions, I tend to form them based on my personal experiences, what I read, hear, see, etc. By no means do I expect you to agree with me, nor do I expect, or care if I've satisfied your desire for me to make "fair characterizations" of the people I form opinions about.

TJMAC77SP
04-23-2015, 02:05 PM
As an indicator of exactly how disruptive Tak was, I can't remember what it was (content wise) that got him banned.

Of course, that could also be a function of my advanced years.

Capt Alfredo
04-23-2015, 02:23 PM
I stated my honest OPINION of TAK based on what I used to read on MTF posts, specifically with the arguments and (perceived) attacks he made on me personally. My opinion of him changed over time based on his non-MTF posts.

As for my opinions, I tend to form them based on my personal experiences, what I read, hear, see, etc. By no means do I expect you to agree with me, nor do I expect, or care if I've satisfied your desire for me to make "fair characterizations" of the people I form opinions about.

My issue was with you saying that NONE of his posts were thoughtful or well-written. I don't expect you to care about "satisfying (my) desire."

Mjölnir
04-23-2015, 03:17 PM
The truth of the matter is that he was banned for going after Mods. There was butt hurt and the grudge will continue.

I disagree ... and will again say there was an unanswered invitation for him to discuss it privately. Also, if there was a grudge or butt hurt, why did I not just delete the original link to the article?

My perception (the 'truth of the matter' from my chair) is that there was some butt hurt on his part that he was not asked to be a moderator, which elevated his issue with the moderators. One of the consistent arguments was 'look at how many posts I have", "look how many likes I have" I won't argue that at first moderation was more strict than I would have liked or than it is now.

sandsjames
04-23-2015, 04:11 PM
I disagree ... and will again say there was an unanswered invitation for him to discuss it privately. Also, if there was a grudge or butt hurt, why did I not just delete the original link to the article?

My perception (the 'truth of the matter' from my chair) is that there was some butt hurt on his part that he was not asked to be a moderator, which elevated his issue with the moderators. One of the consistent arguments was 'look at how many posts I have", "look how many likes I have" I won't argue that at first moderation was more strict than I would have liked or than it is now.

We've had this argument before and it's still the same, IMO. There are many who are equally, if not more, disruptive and personal then he (or JB or RC) with the only difference being the relationship and interaction with the Mods.

At almost the same time is when you "Hammer of Thor" was placed in your sig line. Whether it was tongue in cheek or not, I don't know, but it was noticeable.

Mods have been much more hands off then they were at that time and it's a good thing. Just a shame that a few people had to be permanently banned before you guys decided to take a step back.

Mjölnir
04-23-2015, 05:08 PM
We've had this argument before and it's still the same, IMO. There are many who are equally, if not more, disruptive and personal then he (or JB or RC) with the only difference being the relationship and interaction with the Mods.

Am not (trying to) argue with you. Agreed, there is a different lens now, but noone was banned out of a 'personal beef' with a Mod or SysAdmin.


At almost the same time is when you "Hammer of Thor" was placed in your sig line. Whether it was tongue in cheek or not, I don't know, but it was noticeable.

I think I have explained before, I am a of Norwegian heritage, was raised on stories from Norse Mythology by my grandparents (from Norway). My last name in Norwegian roughly translates as "hammer wielder". While it has hothing to do with being a mod or 'ban hammer' it does lend me to use a sense of humor with .gifs or .jpgs ... the choice of avatar, moderator name, sig line is really nothing more than an expression of something I am interested in.


Mods have been much more hands off then they were at that time and it's a good thing. Just a shame that a few people had to be permanently banned before you guys decided to take a step back.

We are trying, and I think a better equilibrium has been reached. As I have said, for those who were permanently banned I offered them to contact me, and again ... nothing heard. I am not going to ask someone to come back, but am willing to discuss it if they would like. I am not really against them coming back, but I am also not a fan of Rep Wars v 2.0, extended interpersonal arguements, etc. The Guidelines are the Guidelines, set by the folks that pay for the server space & software lisence. MTF is a pseudo professional forum (most of the conversation is admitedly not about the military) ... but it isn't Maxim magazine or something like that. It is not one person's personal blog, nor will a specific (no Guidelines) section of the site be set up for one person to regin free outside of observation so they can violate the Guidelines free of accountability.

RS6405
04-24-2015, 01:25 AM
It is unfair to place the Rep wars on Tak. In fact he had nothing to do with them except be a victim like everyone else.

I am not going to rehash my previous statements. My opinion on the matter should be well known. However, I will point out that this discussion keeps coming back because the feelings and opinions on the unfairness still linger.

I think Tak is providing JQ some powerful articles. I find it ironic when I read someone's post here that mentioned how his articles are being shared on the AFT, but he is still ban here. Good point!

Mjölnir
04-24-2015, 11:12 AM
It is unfair to place the Rep wars on Tak. In fact he had nothing to do with them except be a victim like everyone else.

Was just an example ... but you are right.


I am not going to rehash my previous statements. My opinion on the matter should be well known. However, I will point out that this discussion keeps coming back because the feelings and opinions on the unfairness still linger.

Understand, but having also been on the other side of the fence, I think I was overly fair with Tak, multiple times.


I think Tak is providing JQ some powerful articles. I find it ironic when I read someone's post here that mentioned how his articles are being shared on the AFT, but he is still ban here. Good point!

I agree, his writings on JQP are good, I will echo that I think it is too bad he didn't exhibit that same level of thought here. When he did continue to violate the Guidelines he offered that I just had to understand his sense of humor, my counter to that is that he needed to understand the Guidelines.

RS6405
04-24-2015, 12:02 PM
Was just an example ... but you are right.



Understand, but having also been on the other side of the fence, I think I was overly fair with Tak, multiple times.



I agree, his writings on JQP are good, I will echo that I think it is too bad he didn't exhibit that same level of thought here. When he did continue to violate the Guidelines he offered that I just had to understand his sense of humor, my counter to that is that he needed to understand the Guidelines.

I do not think you were fair as it related to Tak. I believe you had no tolerance for him and looked for any infraction to punish him. The infractions against Tak were ones that were not equally applied to other members violating the same or similar rules around the same time Tak got in trouble.

The fact that you reached your limit with Tak and penalized him could have been tolerable had it not been for the fact that it was a perament ban. I am still unsure if that directive of a perament ban came from you or Bourne.

Ok I will stop here because I am repeating myself.

I am proud of Tak's articles on JQP. I remember when a lot of those events occurred, and the struggles he endured because of his son.

Mjölnir
04-24-2015, 12:13 PM
The infractions against Tak were ones that were not equally applied to other members violating the same or similar rules around the same time Tak got in trouble.

In a sense that was true, but because he had numerous warnings, infractions & violations ... as opposed to someone who had one or two infractions for the same thing...


The fact that you reached your limit with Tak and penalized him could have been tolerable had it not been for the fact that it was a perament ban. I am still unsure if that directive of a perament ban came from you or Bourne.

And as I have said, numerous times, there has been an invitation to him to discuss it, he hasn't. I am not against unbanning him, but am not going to beg him either.

sandsjames
04-25-2015, 01:09 PM
I agree, his writings on JQP are good, I will echo that I think it is too bad he didn't exhibit that same level of thought here. He did exhibit that same level of thought in many, many threads and posts. I can see the banning, though. I mean, it's not like he was on his death bed and this was his only lifeline.

Mjölnir
04-25-2015, 01:35 PM
I mean, it's not like he was on his death bed and this was his only lifeline.

So, about that ... ground truth:

1. His ban expired a few days before he passed. He didn't access MTF (either to read or post ... I checked after I heard he had died.)

2. I didn't know he was dying. I had gotten a cryptic email from another user asking us not to ban him regardless of how out of line he was being, talking of him being 'medicated' but not saying the situation was actually serious, without knowing the details I did ban him when he was once again overtly profane. To be honest, I thought the mention of him being medicated involved mental health ... since the email was not direct or simply state what was going on, I didn't know.

3. Had I known the situation as well as some of you, I may have made a different decision, but I didn't so my action was based on what I knew at the time.

sandsjames
04-25-2015, 01:47 PM
So, about that ... ground truth:

1. His ban expired a few days before he passed. He didn't access MTF (either to read or post ... I checked after I heard he had died.)

2. I didn't know he was dying. I had gotten a cryptic email from another user asking us not to ban him regardless of how out of line he was being, talking of him being 'medicated' but not saying the situation was actually serious, without knowing the details I did ban him when he was once again overtly profane. To be honest, I thought the mention of him being medicated involved mental health ... since the email was not direct or simply state what was going on, I didn't know.

3. Had I known the situation as well as some of you, I may have made a different decision, but I didn't so my action was based on what I knew at the time.

Anyway, discussing bans is against guidelines, so I guess you, me, and a couple others should probably be banned for a little while.

Mjölnir
04-25-2015, 01:50 PM
Anyway, discussing bans is against guidelines, so I guess you, me, and a couple others should probably be banned for a little while.

If you would like to discuss it, feel free.

I just laid out the facts of that issue, if your response is to drop out of the conversation vice continuing to snipe about something that was over a year and a half ago now that you know the other side of the story, that is your choice.

sandsjames
04-25-2015, 02:32 PM
If you would like to discuss it, feel free.

I just laid out the facts of that issue, if your response is to drop out of the conversation vice continuing to snipe about something that was over a year and a half ago now that you know the other side of the story, that is your choice.

I've heard your side and his side. We both know the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Mjölnir
04-25-2015, 03:24 PM
I've heard your side and his side. We both know the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

True & fair enough.

I do think in my time here I have been open & owned when I have thought I could have done something different/better. In the case of RC's last ban:

1. email from user about RC being medicated and likely not being 'restrained'
2. RC made a vulgar post -- which a user reported
3. RC received a private warning - which you & his friends likely didn't see
4. RC replied with a very vulgar PM - which you & his friends likely didn't see
5. RC received a temporary ban
6. RC's ban expired
7. RC died 2, 3 or 4 days after the ban expired. -- I don't see where he accessed MTF after the ban expired -- I could speculate on why, but I don't know.

In hindsight:

-Had I known the severity of the situation ... I may have made a different decision.

-If anyone (you, Tak, the user who sent the original email) had taken a moment to discuss the situation (since a few of you knew about it) ... I may have made a different decision.

-If the user who sent me the PM about RC being medicated had been a bit less vague (understand there was his privacy to take into account) ... I may have made a different decision.

Some people made a decision to say nothing, which impacted my decision. But ... I made a decision based on the best information available at the time. I am not placing this on anyone, I will own my decision.

#beginopenkimono

There were some users banned in the JUN, JUL, AUG, SEP 2013 time frame (when the moderators were first established) who got very, VERY nasty via PM, and few here know the contents of those emails. PMs etc. are virtual threats and "sticks and stones may break my bones" which is well and good until one user began threatening to use his position as a criminal investigator to cause problems for us in real life if we did not reinstate his account; he remains banned.

Contrary to some statements from earlier, Mr. Dorr was not 'driven off this site'. He got very agitated that we (the moderators) nor Gannett would tell him our real names. He asked, several times and was rebuffed, again ... I have those PM's that you likely didn't see. Mr. Dorr is not banned, he has not been on MTF in over a year.

As far as Tak, there were a lot ... A LOT of PM's back and forth that you &/or other users have likely not seen. Those PM's were part of the decision to finally ban him, so I don't expect anyone to fully 'get it' ... at least from my, the other Moderator or the SysAdmin's perspective ... but I can tell you that it was a pretty intensely debated decision. Tak received several warnings after having his 2d 'permanent ban' undone, which created more PM's, so yes, he was banned (after 13 warnings in 2 weeks) for things that someone else had done far fewer times. The aggregate of his history here, and his statement that he had no intention of adhering to guidelines made the ban indefinite.

STL7997
02-06-2016, 10:41 PM
Anybody else follow Air Force amn/nco/snco page on facebook? I was convinced for the longest time it was tak and now I'm sure it's him. An article was shared on the page about 5 worst bases and the admin talks about their time at Minot which matches the times tak talked about being there. He also shares and interacts with a lot of JQP posts.

Rainmaker
02-10-2016, 08:00 PM
Anybody else follow Air Force amn/nco/snco page on facebook? I was convinced for the longest time it was tak and now I'm sure it's him. An article was shared on the page about 5 worst bases and the admin talks about their time at Minot which matches the times tak talked about being there. He also shares and interacts with a lot of JQP posts.

My guess would be yes andThanks for posting that.

TAK was pure comedy gold. My favorite was his 'life thread' were locked himself in and went tit for tat with Robert F. Dorr...

I recently read here that Mr Dorr has terminal cancer. Not sure if he lerks here anymore. But, if so wish you God speed Sir and thanks for advocating for our Airmen (I'm still not sure if we're supposed to capitalize that or not?). You were definitely a class act. See you on the other side. Rainmaker out//

UncaRastus
02-10-2016, 08:17 PM
I usually check the list of people that have come into here in the past 24 hours, and I don't believe that I have seen Mr. Dorr in a coon's age.

Rainmaker
02-10-2016, 08:32 PM
I usually check the list of people that have come into here in the past 24 hours, and I don't believe that I have seen Mr. Dorr in a coon's age.

Lately we're just broadcastin to the stars man....

retiredAFcivvy
02-12-2016, 04:59 PM
I usually check the list of people that have come into here in the past 24 hours, and I don't believe that I have seen Mr. Dorr in a coon's age.

I don't remember exactly the source, but I believe saw where he passed a little while back.