• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Rule Violation Reports - 48

Status
Not open for further replies.

Antvasima

Maintenance worker
He/Him
VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
164,955
71,672
Please report any rule violations in this thread. Notifying us of such incidents is highly appreciated.

Additionally, kindly report any sockpuppets that you come across.

Only report violations regarding the wiki rules. False reports due to personal vendettas are unacceptable.

Also, this thread should be for reporting actual rule-breaking, not every single little disagreement.

In cases of extreme vandalism or trolling, you can report the accounts at the VSTF wiki.

If blocked members create sockpuppet accounts to circumvent their block repetitively, or several are created at almost the same time, you may contact the Fandom Staff, to politely request permanent range IP blocks.

You can also find specific users with the Search Function by typing with the format: "User:Username"

Here is a useful page for discovering sockpuppet accounts: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Special:Log/newusers

Notes:

All staff members, kindly follow and bookmark this thread.

Remember to inform members via their message walls if that you have reported them here, in case they have performed severe enough rule-violations to risk being blocked. However, this should only be used in uncertain cases, not if they have done something instantly ban worthy, or if their offenses are minor.

It is against the Fandom rules to upload any offensive images to the wiki, so in order to show screencapture evidence of extremely bad behaviour, you must use external sites, such as Gyazo or Imgur, in order to not get globally banned yourself by the higher-ups:

https://gyazo.com

https://imgur.com/

https://imageshack.us

Do not derail the Rule Violation Threads with irrelevant nonsense or internal disputes. It is solely for making serious, warranted reports of violations of the Site, Discussio, and Editing Rules, and not for discussion or side comments. Such posts should preferably be removed by the staff, and if a member continues to derail after being repeatedly told to stop, this will result in a temporary ban.

Given the extreme levels of systematic harrassment towards this community, kindly remember to not share/post any evidence of malware or child abuse publicly in order to prevent unwillful distribution. Submit any evidence of child abuse and severe systematic threats to the police.

If something goes outside the jurisdiction of the VS Battles wiki bureaucrats, or even the global Fandom staff, you need to report it personally to the authorities.

Also, absolutely do not click on any random links from suspicious users. You could potentially access content that contains dangerous malware or illegal types of pornography.

However, do not feed the trolls by discussing their behaviour here, as they get excited and motivated by any form of attention. Strictly report them to the staff, who then block them and mass-delete their contributions.

If there are genuine serious problems with the behaviour of certain staff members, do not cause drama by extensively arguing about it here, but rather contact the Human Resources Group.
 
I gave the Kappatalism a warning like you asked. Tho it wasn't a strict one since his actions on their own weren't all that bad.
 
Give him some instruction on the thread, I would prefer that over giving an official warning for one immature statement.
 
Tho it would be best to confirm it, his other contributions seem to be normal.
 
A warning for the guy who insulted me is probably fine, i.m.h.o., but it is probably inappropriate for me personally to decide.
 
I second Ants comment, especially since he was being a complete hypocrite in the process given he was driven to insult someone over a debate about fictional characters. Tbh, that guy screams trouble, should probably keep an eye on him.
 
I think reserving warnings for more aggressive and disruptive actions would be better. If we gave out a warning for every bit of immaturity it doesn't give the best impression of us.
 
He was being needlessly aggressive towards a staff member. I think that allowing people to just come here and feel free to take potshots at us would give an even worse impression.
 
I agree with Ant. Just letting ourselves lay on our own bellies so people can just step on us is a pretty bad idea as it will fill their heads with the idea that they can do even worse stuff and get away Scott free.
 
One comment, with no offensive language, and not honesty that bad relatively speaking

I'm not saying this id perfectly fine but giving him a warning for this comes off more as being incapable of handling a random mean person on the internet than trying to maintain order in the site.

If his behavior worsens then it might be justified tho.
 
I agree more so with Andy, insulting one's choice of work is wrong, but he did it because he felt he wasn't being dealt a fair shot with you dismissing him because you are busy.

You were not wrong for this, we know how hard you work (and appreciate it), but he hasn't done anything too disruptive to be considered worthy of a warning.

Users speak out of turn from time to time, it shows our strength to not find the need to resort to disciplinary actions over something relative to ourselves.

EDIT: In response to below, I had been broad with my choice of wording in terms of "disciplinary action" and that is my fault. Him suggesting the hilarity in the subject of him insulting you is wrong.
 
Well when I think about it further I think both sides have valid points. Andy is right that we shouldn't give out warnings to every passive aggressive comment we see. At the same time Antvasima also makes a good point that a warning is not as bad as it sounds in this scenario. I suggest that we should just give the user a small little warning in the thread itself instead of on a message wall like our usual protocol. This way it does not seem as us taking too much action for something that isn't worth it, but at the same time getting our point across.
 
A warning on a wall is still a lot more serious than a general instruction given on a thread and will be a major point of evaluation in any future violation. It absolutely should not be given unless necessary.

If we gave someone an official warning indicating that they are in trouble with the staff for being immature one time, we might as well be making them walk on egg shells, because one or two mean comments is apparently too much for everyone to ignore.
 
Look Andy, I appreciate that you are generally trying to help, but if you recurrently argue against even allowing warnings for blatant hostility and gleeful meanspirited insults against staff members, you will not help this community, you will continuously damage it by counteracting our ability to maintain some semblance of order along with any respect for the staff when trying to do our work. It will create a far more hostile atmosphere that will wear down your fellow staff members, including myself.

Personally, I do not think that bans are an overreaction for new or casual members who are extremely disrespectful and gleefully insulting within the wiki itself. What I find uncertain is to what degree we can punish our members for hostility directed towards the staff outside of the wiki. Warnings on the other hand are nothing given such circumstances.
 
MYHERO said:
Well when I think about it further I think both sides have valid points. Andy is right that we shouldn't give out warnings to every passive aggressive comment we see. At the same time Antvasima also makes a good point that a warning is not as bad as it sounds in this scenario. I suggest that we should just give the user a small little warning in the thread itself instead of on a message wall like our usual protocol. This way it does not seem as us taking too much action for something that isn't worth it, but at the same time getting our point across.
Guys we shouldn't go back and forth with something like this. How do you guys feel about my compromise?
 
Personally I think that we should ban him for a few months. It is what we usually do for these types of situations. Why should it be more okay to attack me just because I am usually one of the most polite and helpful staff members.
 
@Antvasima Just because he insulted you doesn't mean it's less than if he would insult a regular member. Not only that you said it's inappropriate for you to decide what to do with him so you might as well take a step back on this and let another staff decide.
 
A new member who has contributed nothing to the wiki insulting a regular member and then stating that he finds it hilarious to do so is bad enough to be considered a troll, and be banned, yes. Undermining staff authority on top of that is even worse though.
 
@Ant What I'm asking is to treat a random mean comment for what it is, a random mean comment that is better off ignored. If he had repeatedly done something like I wouldn't have any problem with a warning, but with how small the whole thing actually was I think a warning is unnecessary and that's my honest opinion on the matter.

If you think I will cause damage to the community for making that assessment then I'm sorry for trying to speak my own mind, I thought that was something I coukd actually do in this site without worrying like every place else.
 
Antvasima said:
A new member who has contributed nothing to the wiki insulting a regular member and then stating that he finds it hilarious to do so is bad enough to be considered a troll, and be banned, yes. Undermining staff authority on top of that is even worse though.
Except here he isn't some new member that didn't contribute to anything. He has made CRTs to fix profiles that he thought needed fixing. Yes if it was a new member started attacking out of nowhere we can block him as he is a suspect of a troll, but this time the user is not like that. A warning is enough, we've done it to people like him in the past before and we should do it again.
 
@Andy

Since when have you needed to worry for speaking you mind exactly? I am just stating that a too lenient attitude towards rule transgressions, especially unwarranted hostility toward the staff by new accounts, is going to make it much harder for us to do create a productive and peaceful work environment.

@MYHERO

If we do not ban or even warn people who blatantly create a hostile and condescending work environment for the staff, then staff members who are crucial for the wiki functioning properly are going to become gradually worn out and chased away. It is already beginning to happen with Matthew for example.
 
I feel like we're spending too much time on a subject that isn't even a big deal to begin with. I said it once and I will say it again, we should just tell him to calm down in the thread itself instead of giving him a warning on his message wall.

Like Andy said that was just a small little comment that should not be taken seriously enough to take usual measures when in the past we gave it to people who have continually been rude. And this is his first showing.

Antvasima is also right that if we let it slide we can give him an idea that he can get away with this behavior and that he should at least be aware that this route of action will not be tolerated.

So that's why I think giving him a small heads up that he shouldn't behave like this in the thread is the way to go. It will get Antvasima's point across that he shouldn't behave like this, while at the same time not feeling like we are going too far by going out of our way to give a warning on the message wall itself like Andy suggests.
 
Again, if we do not even give a warning for something as severe as extreme gleeful disrespect from an extremely casual member, we might as well scrap our rules of conduct altogether, and that would be disastrous. I would also appreciate if the regular members leave it to the staff to decide appropriate disciplinary actions, without interfering, as that is part of the entire point of having a staff.
 
Or at least MYHERO seems to continuously make it much harder for us to enforce our rules in these reporting threads, so I would appreciate if he leaves them alone from now onwards, unless it is very important.
 
I would leave this alone if you guys have already resolved this, but you have not and let it drag out. And at that times like this, if there is ever a divide between the staffs then it is best we make a compromise, and I will suggest that if it's for the best whether I am a staff or not.
 
I have noticed that you are continuously interfering and trying to prevent us from carrying out appropriate disciplinary actions. It is changing this wiki for the worse, as it is preventing us from properly doing our work and keeping some semblance of order. You are not staff. It is not your place to decide.
 
No, it definitely isn't, and yes, this wiki definitely has changed for the worse in the respect that a few regular members who have no business deciding disciplinary actions, keep interfering and trying to make it impossible for the staff to do their jobs to keep order in the wiki. It genuinely does create a very bad work environment for several members of the staff.
 
I believe I also have to agree with a strict warning. At the end of the day, it was just some display of childish behavior.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top