• 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 Violations Reports - 63

Status
Not open for further replies.
Antvasima said:
I am very uncertain if simply calling people stupid is enough for a ban. It seems rather harmless to me.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with you if we were to take it at face value.

The issue is that it's repeated behavior even after warnings and multiple bans dating back to 2016, with context, the ban seems perfectly justified.
 
Okay. I am still uncomfortable with banning people for such minor offenses though. It makes us seem oversensitive and draconian.
 
Shouldn't we lift the ban and give him a strict warning instead? I don't want us to turn into speech police.
 
Antvasima said:
Okay. I am still uncomfortable with banning people for such minor offenses though. It makes us seem oversensitive and draconian.
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree with you, I've always preached that we should refrain from jumping the gun when it comes to something seemingly minute in these threads, but I trust in DDM and Schnee's judgement.

I do not believe they would have been so quick to the ban had it been another user, it's just the history here, they weren't being oversensitive, just using common sense to understand that the behavior was not going to change.

I won't comment further on the matter, to save thread space.
 
Well, it isn't a bannable offense to start with, and I don't want people to have to permanently walk on egg shells just because they have been banned previously. Henry has not been a problematic member in terms of editing as far as I recall, at least not in recent times.
 
Hm? Have you tried reloading the page? I haven't noticed any problem with username colours myself.
 
The problem seemed to be temporary as the username colours showed up again. I removed my post.
 
Anyway, would the rest of you be willing to give Henry another chance? We cannot shelter ourselves from all expressed negativity after all. Life doesn't work like that.
 
Gonna have to agree with Ant on Henry totally not because I also call people stupid albeit in a more roundabout way. I don't even know how he managed to get banned for doing so multiple times in the first place.
 
Ant he's had well over three chances already with the amount of warnings/bans he's had. It's less that he's rude and more that he's completely unwilling to change his behaviour, which makes him problematic. I'm for a long ban, maybe not a perm one.
 
Okay, but that still means that we require him to permanenty walk on eggshells even regarding casual personal annoyance.
 
Bit of an exaggeration, he explicitly called everyone in the thread stupid, which he knows hasn't gone down well for him in the past whatsoever.
 
Personal annoyance isn't the issue, so much as lack of self awareness and control when he lets it go too far. Many people here can get a bad temper, but can also step away and leave the conversation or take a moment to chill and go back.

Without this essential trait, something minor becomes an issue as it turns rampant and there's an obvious lack of control.
 
Yes, but calling somebody stupid is trivial in the first place.
 
I think the issue is more outright aggressiveness and an inability to let up even after incidents and warnings.

We do cuss, but again, the frequency, willingness, and inability to better the behavior when asked just sounds like unnecessary negativeness and unwanted aggression with no hope of betterment.
 
The word he uses isn't important. It's not even the core of the problem. Henry has been warned and banned several times because he doesn't control his temper and becomes aggresive to other people when someone disagrees with him, instead of being polite and reasonable.

This is a clear case of someone ignoring the warnings and refusing to learn self-control. No matter the word used, the fact that he doesn't follow the rules even after being punished for it m├║ltiple times is telling us he doesn't have interest in learning in the first place. Such people deserves no room here, as we're trying to be a community.
 
You know what happens when we unban him right? He comes back, inevitably causes more problems because he literally never learned previously, and we inevitably ban him when he does use something inevitably worse

Seriously, we are implying that this guy is actually going to listen to warnings when he comes back despite pure common sense with context dictating this won't happen.
 
As someone who has had to deal with Henry a bunch, I agree with the permaban here. I didn't know he was banned beforehand, but seeing as he has been banned before and warned multiple times for his behavior and has clearly not shaped up, I say good riddance and move on.
 
Okay. It seems like I didn't have the full picture and have been outvoted then. I am just concerned about that we shouldn't create an environment where our members are afraid of expressing themselves.
 
They mustn't. This case is obviously different as Henry has been warned and banned several times before this.

Users know they have to behave and follow the rules. They have nothing to be afraid of as long as they are willing to learn and behave. Henry didn't and he basically asked for a permaban by constantly ignoring warnings and refusing to learn from his mistakes despite he was banned three times before for this very same reason. It shows that he has no intention of learning politeness at all if short after being unbanned he goes and does the same thing that granted the ban previously.
 
Expressing yourself and calling people idiots because you're frustrated are completely different
 
Well, I suppose that makes sense.
 
Hey, On KH Abstract Stuffs I went back and look back on the CRT that acecpted the abstract stuffs that looks to be the basis of KH big upgrades recently. I believe none of the evaluating staffs did agree with a upgrade. The verse might need a big downgrade soon: I found the two influential CRTs: 1 and 2.

The changes should be reverted. It looks everything from Abstract Existence, Conceptual Manipulation, Regenerationn and Regenerationn Negation at Mid-Godly and Up should be removed.
 
It was supposed to be KH group that made the changes but in a thread which I discussed with Dragon works better, a discusion thread looks to work better. The report could be removed. I think I can handle the thread later.
 
Okay. No problem.
 
If Bob applied edits from a CRT that had been rejected anyways, I'd say he deserves a short ban for it. Either he did it knowingly or he just didn't understand that it was rejected, which is doubtful but still some astonishingly poor judgment. He's been around more than long enough to know better.
 
No offense, but honestly there is no logical way he's that stupid to genuinely believe that applying edits after all of the staff rejected it and not notifying them of the second thread was on accident.

Then again he was banned previously regarding a thread he made that involving R*** so it's not like he has good judgement
 
In support of a ban, currently thinking of a month or two. This is far from the first big oopsie Bob has under his belt. I understand the guy may very well just have bad judgement, but that's still a problem of his if it is going to negatively affect the wiki.
 
If you have poor judgment regarding CRTs you should not be making ones that aren't relatively simple, especially regarding Abstract stuff, which even I don't touch
 
Mr. Bambu said:
In support of a ban, currently thinking of a month or two. This is far from the first big oopsie Bob has under his belt. I understand the guy may very well just have bad judgement, but that's still a problem of his if it is going to negatively affect the wiki.
Click to expand...
Regrettable on Bobsican but I think this ban is fair.
 
I personally think that Bobsican seems harmless and well-intended in general. You should at least talk with him about it first.
 
Long-standing members haven't been banned for applying things without CRTs before. I don't think this deserves a 1+ month ban, especially since he's actively working to rectify it right now.
 
I'm not talking about applying minor things without a CRT. I'm talking about almost identical circumstances (major changes that were rejected in a CRT without talking to people).

Also, it doesn't seem like Bob's avoiding talking to staff, he's talking to them now and we're going through the process of undoing the edits and discussing the changes again.
 
Well, I just want us to make certain that there really were no staff members that accepted his changes.
 
Also, if he is actively helping to undo his mistake, perhaps a very strict warning is enough?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
99K
McFriesGuy075
McFriesGuy075
Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Discussion Rules lil Revision
Replies
39
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
A minor addition about discussion rules
Replies
4
Views
779
Deleted member 40688
  • Locked
Clarification Of Sentence Phrasings And Addition Of Expected Punishments For Each Type Of Rule Breach For All Rules Pages
Replies
21
Views
2K
Mahek_The_Assassin_Silent_Killer
Mr. Bambu
  • Locked
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
2 3
Replies
80
Views
9K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top