-
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 - 64
- Thread starter Antvasima
- Start date
- Status
- 31,372
- 34,119
Going to drop my two cents here, I agree with Bambu. I will also note that ShadowWarrior1999 can be fairly level headed and is usually good at hiding some of the drama and keeping them offsite. That's why his block was lenient. And why not everyone in the group was blocked. But the fact remains that the information was leaked, and the person who linked the scans did so with good intentions. People who talk horribly behind our backs in hopes that no one finds out about them which is still unruly behavior. And he still has about one more month.
Corgi on the other hand actually still has far more levels of toxicity. And there's a difference between simply having controversial opinions on politics, religion, sense of humor, ect, and being an extremist in any of those categories. Corgi has said plenty of things that indicate the latter; such as saying "Everyone of this group should die." And it really doesn't matter what his RL ethnicity actually is; in fact, even being racist against your own group is a petty excuse. It really isn't the "Neo-Nazi roleplay" that's concerning, but the borderline bigotry towards a bunch religious groups + people with mental illnesses are what's despicable. Which is what Corgi and GodHand have both been saying.
I'm not going to defend ZaStando27 too much, because even he admits he has said some pretty toxic things. And the first half of his doc basically being a defense against a certain fetish isn't really something relevant. However, there are even more scans and I did see how everyone treated him on his server. Everyone besides Corgi were just being typical asshats (Not enough to extend bans), but Corgi also started bigotting against both Asexuals and Hermaphrodites/Inter-genders. And was uploading a bunch of graphic **** videos on ZaStando's server.
Also, the other stuff Bambu said about Corgi is right. He literally doesn't seem to know the difference between being blunt or flat out harassment; either that or he deliberately refuses to acknowledge the difference. And has harassed many different staff members directly, myself included. Another thing is that, some of you guys actually did tried to paint Khan's "Suicide encouragement" as acceptable behavior. I don't even need to go into detail what is wrong with that. And I have also been informed he's not the only one who tells people that regularly. And I don't care how toxic someone is, absolutely nothing excuses that level of behavior.
And also, given that this isn't a Fandom matter, it's still a VSBW staff matter that we do have a right to handle things that concern us and the civilization of the wiki.
Corgi on the other hand actually still has far more levels of toxicity. And there's a difference between simply having controversial opinions on politics, religion, sense of humor, ect, and being an extremist in any of those categories. Corgi has said plenty of things that indicate the latter; such as saying "Everyone of this group should die." And it really doesn't matter what his RL ethnicity actually is; in fact, even being racist against your own group is a petty excuse. It really isn't the "Neo-Nazi roleplay" that's concerning, but the borderline bigotry towards a bunch religious groups + people with mental illnesses are what's despicable. Which is what Corgi and GodHand have both been saying.
I'm not going to defend ZaStando27 too much, because even he admits he has said some pretty toxic things. And the first half of his doc basically being a defense against a certain fetish isn't really something relevant. However, there are even more scans and I did see how everyone treated him on his server. Everyone besides Corgi were just being typical asshats (Not enough to extend bans), but Corgi also started bigotting against both Asexuals and Hermaphrodites/Inter-genders. And was uploading a bunch of graphic **** videos on ZaStando's server.
Also, the other stuff Bambu said about Corgi is right. He literally doesn't seem to know the difference between being blunt or flat out harassment; either that or he deliberately refuses to acknowledge the difference. And has harassed many different staff members directly, myself included. Another thing is that, some of you guys actually did tried to paint Khan's "Suicide encouragement" as acceptable behavior. I don't even need to go into detail what is wrong with that. And I have also been informed he's not the only one who tells people that regularly. And I don't care how toxic someone is, absolutely nothing excuses that level of behavior.
And also, given that this isn't a Fandom matter, it's still a VSBW staff matter that we do have a right to handle things that concern us and the civilization of the wiki.
- 10,688
- 4,810
https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/3749003#179
Obvious troll using "Soyboy" followed immediately by a trans slur, who's a new account with 2 comments.
Obvious troll using "Soyboy" followed immediately by a trans slur, who's a new account with 2 comments.
- 31,372
- 34,119
Blocked
- 10,688
- 4,810
There are other wikis seemingly created with the sole purpose of messaging people on this wiki with pictures like that. I won't name them because I want to avoid giving them the attention, but I've had to deal with them again recently.LordWhis said:
- 10,398
- 4,564
Emissary from Hell is currently writing up a response to Mr. Bambu's claims, If you'd be so kind to wait for his response that would be great.
- 12,085
- 2,096
now can we discuss John Cena Nation.
In my opinion, I propose a 9 month ban
1. He has made spite threads as well as plenty of faulty VS Matches
2. Been banned many times for this
3. Insulting a whole country and doing death threats is enough to get a long ban
In my opinion, I propose a 9 month ban
1. He has made spite threads as well as plenty of faulty VS Matches
2. Been banned many times for this
3. Insulting a whole country and doing death threats is enough to get a long ban
- 63,529
- 8,506
Death Threats should be infinite by default
- 15,436
- 7,857
I second an infinite ban. Death threats cannot be tolerated.
- 31,372
- 34,119
Death Threats are already permanent ban worthy, which he already recieved.
- 12,085
- 2,096
So, his perma ban stays.
- 14,575
- 5,876
I'm in the same team. JCN has been a recurrent topic in these threads, but what he did now is way worst than nonsensical pairing.
- 63,529
- 8,506
Not like he will be missed, even when he wasn't doing offenses he was nothing but an immense annoyance on almost every thread he was on with every post he made.
- 167,683
- 76,264
- Thread starter
- #215
Here are messages sent to me in private by TheUpgradeManHaHaxD to explain himself:
"Okay, there so.. perhaps the biggest question on most peoples mind (at least i assume) would be "Why did he do something like that?" and "Why did he have another account?"
I'll explain the account part first
That account is when i first started getting into vsbattle wiki. I was a noob, and i didn't know a whole lot. When i started mass deleting things on that account there was 2 thoughts going through my mind. "Wow. I was an embarrassment back then and complete fodder (In terms of debating ability)" To clarify, I was embarrassed of myself looking back at those memories. Then the other thought was along the lines of like this:
"Okay.. My friends are telling me to just debate his points, and don't bring up "fallcies" at all of any sort of any kind.. So what if i did that on a separate account? instead of my main? I'd need to get rid of connections where it would be reasonably assumed it was me" in other words, i wanted to talk about what i thought was a condescending atitude, and what i felt was like "looking down on me."
The thread i commited this crime on. if it was carefully read. there were times where i said i was busy, or had to walk away, something like that. Yes part of it was becuase i was busy, but in truth. i was trying to stay calm. I was getting so frustrated and flustered that i wanted to lash out, but i knew i shouldn't. So the idea popped into my head "what if vented my frustration using a separate account?"
In summary, i got annoyed with all this talk of "fallacies" and i felt intellectually inferior. Add on top that i felt like my case-points were being purposely corrupted, twisted, or changed (Basically i felt like i was being strawmanned). Which made me feel even more angry. Then i felt like he would often avoid my case/points by calling htem a fallacy for like a distraction.
Which over the course of th thread. I lost my cool. i went on to a separate account that took me a few hours to find because i forgot the password, and the email. and i vented my frustration
Now, i know it looks like i supported myself but i did that to make it seem less like me (obviosuly i failed at that lol), but in truth what was actually going on in my mind is that i wanted to vent my frustration, and anger and show i how i felt.
The point was not to support myself!
if we go back and look at my threads from long ago, and my post then. you can see i matured, and changed a lot throughout my history on the wiki.
the 1st time i supported myself on a thread. that was me being a noob, not understanding how the wiki runs/works at the time, and nothing was accepted on that thread iirc. and if it was it was never added.
if you can notice you can see a long period of inactivity on that account. its becaues i wanted to start a new leaf, go into a new direction using the account 'TheUpgrademanHaHaxD"
I only had those accounts. there was no other ones. And i only posted on my own thread those 2 times only.
If you go back and look at my behaviors on past CRT's most of the time i really valued a staff members opinion. and i always wanted appovral before adding things
May I also draw a comparison with this situation? Why is my situation more unique than the Kingdom hearts one? Where a member added (OP) abilities to them that were previously rejected?
Does any of this make sense.... im really sorry if its not..
Also, id like to talk about this "Conspiracy" and also the screenshots monarch took because he left out information."
"Also..
I understand that i made some enemies. I know i have been labeled with a stigma, and its going to cling hard.. There are people who are never going to trust me again.. people who will see me differently.. and people whose minds are already made up.. those who might be open minded, and those who may not be..
I just want people (Or someone) to hear myside.. what happens after that is up to the individuals.."
"also.. if anything is being misunderstood.. id like to know so i can clarify it..
i am not really good wtih my words.. especially when im..... upset..."
"before i continue i need some time to calm down.. i am sorry.."
He seems harmless to me.
"Okay, there so.. perhaps the biggest question on most peoples mind (at least i assume) would be "Why did he do something like that?" and "Why did he have another account?"
I'll explain the account part first
That account is when i first started getting into vsbattle wiki. I was a noob, and i didn't know a whole lot. When i started mass deleting things on that account there was 2 thoughts going through my mind. "Wow. I was an embarrassment back then and complete fodder (In terms of debating ability)" To clarify, I was embarrassed of myself looking back at those memories. Then the other thought was along the lines of like this:
"Okay.. My friends are telling me to just debate his points, and don't bring up "fallcies" at all of any sort of any kind.. So what if i did that on a separate account? instead of my main? I'd need to get rid of connections where it would be reasonably assumed it was me" in other words, i wanted to talk about what i thought was a condescending atitude, and what i felt was like "looking down on me."
The thread i commited this crime on. if it was carefully read. there were times where i said i was busy, or had to walk away, something like that. Yes part of it was becuase i was busy, but in truth. i was trying to stay calm. I was getting so frustrated and flustered that i wanted to lash out, but i knew i shouldn't. So the idea popped into my head "what if vented my frustration using a separate account?"
In summary, i got annoyed with all this talk of "fallacies" and i felt intellectually inferior. Add on top that i felt like my case-points were being purposely corrupted, twisted, or changed (Basically i felt like i was being strawmanned). Which made me feel even more angry. Then i felt like he would often avoid my case/points by calling htem a fallacy for like a distraction.
Which over the course of th thread. I lost my cool. i went on to a separate account that took me a few hours to find because i forgot the password, and the email. and i vented my frustration
Now, i know it looks like i supported myself but i did that to make it seem less like me (obviosuly i failed at that lol), but in truth what was actually going on in my mind is that i wanted to vent my frustration, and anger and show i how i felt.
The point was not to support myself!
if we go back and look at my threads from long ago, and my post then. you can see i matured, and changed a lot throughout my history on the wiki.
the 1st time i supported myself on a thread. that was me being a noob, not understanding how the wiki runs/works at the time, and nothing was accepted on that thread iirc. and if it was it was never added.
if you can notice you can see a long period of inactivity on that account. its becaues i wanted to start a new leaf, go into a new direction using the account 'TheUpgrademanHaHaxD"
I only had those accounts. there was no other ones. And i only posted on my own thread those 2 times only.
If you go back and look at my behaviors on past CRT's most of the time i really valued a staff members opinion. and i always wanted appovral before adding things
May I also draw a comparison with this situation? Why is my situation more unique than the Kingdom hearts one? Where a member added (OP) abilities to them that were previously rejected?
Does any of this make sense.... im really sorry if its not..
Also, id like to talk about this "Conspiracy" and also the screenshots monarch took because he left out information."
"Also..
I understand that i made some enemies. I know i have been labeled with a stigma, and its going to cling hard.. There are people who are never going to trust me again.. people who will see me differently.. and people whose minds are already made up.. those who might be open minded, and those who may not be..
I just want people (Or someone) to hear myside.. what happens after that is up to the individuals.."
"also.. if anything is being misunderstood.. id like to know so i can clarify it..
i am not really good wtih my words.. especially when im..... upset..."
"before i continue i need some time to calm down.. i am sorry.."
He seems harmless to me.
- 7,897
- 3,857
I empathize with UGM about his frustration getting the better of him and looking at his sockpuppet comment, it rings well with what he said here but he still broke the rules and should be punished accordingly. He's probably harmless now that this has happened but he's gotta do the time.
- 10,285
- 2,761
Did the crime, do the time
But there is no reason for giving out Permabans or a year's time to him
But there is no reason for giving out Permabans or a year's time to him
- 12,085
- 2,096
I mean, most of agreed to the ban since we thought he did to try to boost his threads, which is way worse than it seems to be according to him.
I argue for it to be reduced to 1 1/2 months
I argue for it to be reduced to 1 1/2 months
- 7,897
- 3,857
A 9 month ban seems kinda like too much now. How much is typically given for these incidents?
- 12,085
- 2,096
A month or 2.Dienomite22 said:
Venting on a sock is bad, but not to the point of 9 months
- 31,372
- 34,119
I've agree that 3 to 6 months seemed reasonable, and given he seems harmless now, i'm more leaning towards 3 months.
- 7,897
- 3,857
Damn, even 3 months seems like too much if 1 or 2 for sock rule breaks is the norm. 3 months is better than 6 or 9 though so I would go with that.
- 41
- 55
While it is true that these comments would never have reached the wiki had Shadow not made them to begin with, thus possibly leading one to conclude that the responsibility for the mess that was ultimately caused lies with him, I find that to be an exceedingly unfair and erroneous conclusion. Yes, Ashen wouldn't have been able to leak those screenshots had the comments not been made at all. However, Shadow should not be punished for simply saying things that others may find disagreeable. He had ample reason to believe that what he was saying wasn't going to cause any trouble in the environment he was saying it in. Ashen going out of his way to break the server's rules simply to satisfy some nonsensical personal agenda of his was completely out of Shadow's control.
This is much akin to getting tattled on in school because some classmate overheard you saying something naughty while in a conversation with a friend in an after school environment. And that's me being generous, since you could argue the school does have some authority over its students in that regard while the wiki has none over its users as far as their off-site affairs are concerned.
Shadow is essentially being punished for his speech simply because he was "caught", something quite nonsensical when you consider that his comments were made in a platform unrelated to Fandom and leaked against his will. If the issue is that it caused trouble, then the one who should be punished is Ashen and not Shadow.
I beg to differ, I think they are extremely important. Considering that Ashen's reason for doing it was that he wanted to cause staff to become unhinged due to his own personal grievances with the wiki, is that not him blatantly admitting that he was plotting to destabilize the wiki by manipulating the staff? The screenshots were merely a tool he used to achieve that and he ultimately got the result he desired.
Saying I take jabs at Ashen is a bit of an exaggeration, no? I believe I mostly make harsh comments about his plan. I apologize if it came across as me being gratuitously aggressive but I did not think it would be considered particularly objectionable considering the less than flattering nature of his scheme.
Besides, as far as bias is concerned, I believe that the screenshot more than speaks for itself and me liking or disliking Ashen affects that in no way whatsoever.
If that is indeed the case and the wiki does not intend to police the actions of people on Discord, then it should simply ignore what is said on Discord servers if it isn't being repeated by the users within the wiki itself. Had this been how the situation was handled from the very begining, it would have prevented unnecessary drama from escalating, as Discord is its own separate platform with a different (far less strict) set of guidelines where its users are given the freedom to act and speak their mind accordingly. If the stains are really the issue, then it makes little sense to punish Shadow, considering that he had next to no direct involvement with them ultimately reaching the wiki.
Even if Fandom considers this a matter that should be handled by the wiki, their stance in regards to off-site matters not being something to be handled within Fandom itself, which this wiki is a part of, should still be taken into consideration. Especially when the ones being punished are being punished for actions they took off-site and not those who directly caused the problem to reach the wiki in the first place.
Regardless of whether or not you want to take the more egregious stuff Corgi says literally, if he keeps it on Discord and doesn't say them on-site, then this should not be made an issue here. As for Corgi "harassing" staff, at worst he used some insults that aren't far off from the typical trash talking you'd see in YouTube comment sections. A dumb and unnecessary move yes, but he only confronted staff who were in Versus Central which he was also a member of (and to be fair multiple users in that server take jabs at each other).
The "beef" with ZaStando was brought up because it is in fact relevant, especially when Za Stando's actions are part of what triggered Corgi's ban. That alone is enough of a reason to shed light into his motives and expose his bias, which is a relevant factor. That said, it holds no significance beyond that. It's not meant to be a jab directed at him nor should it be interpreted as such. I am well aware he's already been banned and for good reason.
Others getting banned for a lot less doesn't address the concerns regarding Corgi's situation. Every situation is unique after all, the context of what is happening here is extremely specific to this case.
This is much akin to getting tattled on in school because some classmate overheard you saying something naughty while in a conversation with a friend in an after school environment. And that's me being generous, since you could argue the school does have some authority over its students in that regard while the wiki has none over its users as far as their off-site affairs are concerned.
Shadow is essentially being punished for his speech simply because he was "caught", something quite nonsensical when you consider that his comments were made in a platform unrelated to Fandom and leaked against his will. If the issue is that it caused trouble, then the one who should be punished is Ashen and not Shadow.
I beg to differ, I think they are extremely important. Considering that Ashen's reason for doing it was that he wanted to cause staff to become unhinged due to his own personal grievances with the wiki, is that not him blatantly admitting that he was plotting to destabilize the wiki by manipulating the staff? The screenshots were merely a tool he used to achieve that and he ultimately got the result he desired.
Saying I take jabs at Ashen is a bit of an exaggeration, no? I believe I mostly make harsh comments about his plan. I apologize if it came across as me being gratuitously aggressive but I did not think it would be considered particularly objectionable considering the less than flattering nature of his scheme.
Besides, as far as bias is concerned, I believe that the screenshot more than speaks for itself and me liking or disliking Ashen affects that in no way whatsoever.
If that is indeed the case and the wiki does not intend to police the actions of people on Discord, then it should simply ignore what is said on Discord servers if it isn't being repeated by the users within the wiki itself. Had this been how the situation was handled from the very begining, it would have prevented unnecessary drama from escalating, as Discord is its own separate platform with a different (far less strict) set of guidelines where its users are given the freedom to act and speak their mind accordingly. If the stains are really the issue, then it makes little sense to punish Shadow, considering that he had next to no direct involvement with them ultimately reaching the wiki.
Even if Fandom considers this a matter that should be handled by the wiki, their stance in regards to off-site matters not being something to be handled within Fandom itself, which this wiki is a part of, should still be taken into consideration. Especially when the ones being punished are being punished for actions they took off-site and not those who directly caused the problem to reach the wiki in the first place.
Regardless of whether or not you want to take the more egregious stuff Corgi says literally, if he keeps it on Discord and doesn't say them on-site, then this should not be made an issue here. As for Corgi "harassing" staff, at worst he used some insults that aren't far off from the typical trash talking you'd see in YouTube comment sections. A dumb and unnecessary move yes, but he only confronted staff who were in Versus Central which he was also a member of (and to be fair multiple users in that server take jabs at each other).
The "beef" with ZaStando was brought up because it is in fact relevant, especially when Za Stando's actions are part of what triggered Corgi's ban. That alone is enough of a reason to shed light into his motives and expose his bias, which is a relevant factor. That said, it holds no significance beyond that. It's not meant to be a jab directed at him nor should it be interpreted as such. I am well aware he's already been banned and for good reason.
Others getting banned for a lot less doesn't address the concerns regarding Corgi's situation. Every situation is unique after all, the context of what is happening here is extremely specific to this case.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 22,757
- 22,274
What triggered their bans were their actions. While it is not our goal to actively investigate activity off-site, it is our goal to peacekeep on site. Regardless of how it was brought here or who did it, the fact is that it amounts to their actions now being applicable to the site. Hence, the people who reported them? Immaterial and irrelevant, as always. I stand by my actions. If they don't want banned again in the future, I advise them to just strongly endeavor to, put simply, play nice.
Also, not super relevant, but
is it though, you called him harebrained lol.
Also, not super relevant, but
| Saying I take jabs at Ashen is a bit of an exaggeration, no? |
- 1,579
- 248
I definitely am.
- 8,153
- 2,177
I kinda feel like you're only listening to those who agree with you. Based off the original discussion SD seemed heaviily against these reductions in length which seems to be getting shorter by the second.
- 10,285
- 2,761
Yeah, but the argument for a year long ban was fueled by the possibility UGM was trying to get someone else ban for a "conspiracy" when it was him that did the crime.
And that "conspiracy" of UGM trying to ban someone else was non factual.
And that "conspiracy" of UGM trying to ban someone else was non factual.
- 41
- 55
That is incorrect simply by virtue of them having no involvement regarding those screenshots actually reaching the wiki. The things they said on Discord (their only "actions") not only have no relevance within the site on their own but would never be known to the users within it if not for the actions of an unrelated third party.
If you truly want to peacekeep the site, then you would discourage dragging off-site affairs on-site and then making it an issue here. The wiki should not be overreaching on its authority to police its users' actions based on what they do outside of it. Again, peacekeeping in this situation was only necessary because of Ashen's actions, I've provided you with evidence of him admitting to concocting a scheme to disturb the peace within the wiki, said scheme which ultimately led to what we're discussing here and now. Ashen doing something without their knowledge or consent most certainly does not somehow translate to their actions being applicable to the site. In simpler if more crude terms, they may have been the ones to produce the sewage, but they're not the ones who poked a hole into the pipe and let the shit storm rain down upon the wiki and therefore should not be treated as such. No, to simply ignore the context behind this entire situation and act as if it doesn't matter as you seem to be suggesting would be quite nonsensical, especially when the people who reported them are indeed material and relevant, as I've gone through great lengths to explain.
What is "play nice" exactly? Not get things they've said on Discord leaked against their will in a way that is completely out of their control again? Pardon the sarcastic tone, but I don't think that is exactly fair.
"Ashen simply concocted some harebrained scheme"
It is not. Harebrained is an adjective that is describing the scheme, not Ashen. It means "rash or ill-judged", hardly something that would apply as an insult to a person within the context I used it.
If you truly want to peacekeep the site, then you would discourage dragging off-site affairs on-site and then making it an issue here. The wiki should not be overreaching on its authority to police its users' actions based on what they do outside of it. Again, peacekeeping in this situation was only necessary because of Ashen's actions, I've provided you with evidence of him admitting to concocting a scheme to disturb the peace within the wiki, said scheme which ultimately led to what we're discussing here and now. Ashen doing something without their knowledge or consent most certainly does not somehow translate to their actions being applicable to the site. In simpler if more crude terms, they may have been the ones to produce the sewage, but they're not the ones who poked a hole into the pipe and let the shit storm rain down upon the wiki and therefore should not be treated as such. No, to simply ignore the context behind this entire situation and act as if it doesn't matter as you seem to be suggesting would be quite nonsensical, especially when the people who reported them are indeed material and relevant, as I've gone through great lengths to explain.
What is "play nice" exactly? Not get things they've said on Discord leaked against their will in a way that is completely out of their control again? Pardon the sarcastic tone, but I don't think that is exactly fair.
"Ashen simply concocted some harebrained scheme"
It is not. Harebrained is an adjective that is describing the scheme, not Ashen. It means "rash or ill-judged", hardly something that would apply as an insult to a person within the context I used it.
Agnaa
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Translation Helper
Human Resources
Gold Supporter
- 15,485
- 13,696
fwiw I've been saying for ages (and to Bambu directly) that I don't want to punish people for actions taken off-site that aren't directly targeting other site members (i.e. harassing the person directly, doxxing them, or conspiring to disrupt the wiki).
Bambu (and quite a few others fwiw) just seems to disagree and think that these actions should be punished. Arguing about the facts of the matter doesn't really matter when it's a difference in opinion over what we should punish people for.
Bambu (and quite a few others fwiw) just seems to disagree and think that these actions should be punished. Arguing about the facts of the matter doesn't really matter when it's a difference in opinion over what we should punish people for.
ShakeResounding
He/Him- 8,551
- 7,211
No disrespect to you guys, but are you gonna punish a guy because he said some mean words behind others' back and was sure you'd never see it? Is this really a matter of preventing bullying and drama, or is this an example of staff being too controlling of what one person says that reaches here because of what somebody else did? And don't try saying "Shadow could've gotten a longer ban". Saying that doesn't really mean anything other than "we could've made this an even bigger deal for no reason too, so be glad we didn't."
Corgi is a different case, but Shadow? The guy who kept to himself and started no issue yet was banned for, and I quote, "Continuous and targeted bullying of other users off site" despite never saying any of the stuff he said directly to the people he was talking about? For petty arguing at best if it was a direct confrontation?
Surely we realize that's not targeted bullying nor proper grounds for a ban, right?
Corgi is a different case, but Shadow? The guy who kept to himself and started no issue yet was banned for, and I quote, "Continuous and targeted bullying of other users off site" despite never saying any of the stuff he said directly to the people he was talking about? For petty arguing at best if it was a direct confrontation?
Surely we realize that's not targeted bullying nor proper grounds for a ban, right?
Abstractions
Femur Breaker
VS Battles
FC/OC VS Battles
Administrator
Content Moderator
Human Resources
- 2,639
- 2,827
Discord actions should be factored in if the person in question has offended here as a means of setting an argument of recurrent negative behavior, but never something to set precedent for a ban on its own.Agnaa said:
We aren't the internet police and shouldn't act on such off-site behavior unless it threatens someone's physical safety.
- 10,688
- 4,810
I agree with Abstractions. To a reasonable degree, we can't really censor people for their opinions off-site. However, if their actions directly impact the wiki then someone should step in.
ShakeResounding
He/Him- 8,551
- 7,211
Which is exactly why I'm asking why Shadow was banned when he doesn't even meet the mark for any of this.
No repeatedly negative behavior seen here, no actions that impact this wiki in a harmful way, and the very reason for his ban is false. One person felt like he was being bullied and all of a sudden Shadow's portrayed as somebody who bullies others off-site? Are we gonna get the internet police in here to investigate the scene? But nah, the ban could've been worse so we'll just leave it, right? Because that makes even the smallest bit of sense? No, it doesn't, and that seems self-evident. I stand firmly by the decision that Shadow should be unbanned from VS Battles, and especially if the reasons for his ban just seem like a lousy excuse to get him out of here for a while.
No repeatedly negative behavior seen here, no actions that impact this wiki in a harmful way, and the very reason for his ban is false. One person felt like he was being bullied and all of a sudden Shadow's portrayed as somebody who bullies others off-site? Are we gonna get the internet police in here to investigate the scene? But nah, the ban could've been worse so we'll just leave it, right? Because that makes even the smallest bit of sense? No, it doesn't, and that seems self-evident. I stand firmly by the decision that Shadow should be unbanned from VS Battles, and especially if the reasons for his ban just seem like a lousy excuse to get him out of here for a while.
- 11,389
- 13,139
I agree that this seens unnecessary. I've myself said some horrible stuff on VS Battles-related servers, probably even slagged off a couple users when angry, but I'd never take the beef anywhere else and neither will anybody else, and they're all perfectly rationable users who contribute normally.
We're not some righteous crusaders burning anyone that we see as commiting misconduct vaguely related to us. We can judge only on what happens on the wiki, severe circumstances like the Discord group fiasco not withstanding.
We're not some righteous crusaders burning anyone that we see as commiting misconduct vaguely related to us. We can judge only on what happens on the wiki, severe circumstances like the Discord group fiasco not withstanding.
- 31,372
- 34,119
I was hoping not to get to involved with this conversation again, but I do have some important things to note.
First of all, the fact that Fandom did say that they can only do things regarding actions done on Fandom basically says, they entrust the managing staff of the wikis to deal with manners that are happening offsite. That being said, it doesn't matter what platform it was used on; whether it be Discord, Google docs, other wikis, ect. If it's on the internet and if our names are being spoken, then we have everything to do with your actions. If you guys can claim we have no right to be monitoring offsite activities, then I could very well say between this and this, you guys actually have no right to even speak our names without our permission. Let alone constantly slur or say some bigoted dialogue that has nothing to do with our actual groups.
Regardless of actions ranging from petty schoolyard insults, slurring us (regardless if we actually are or aren't said ethnicity, gender, age, orientation, religion, or medical conditions.), making remarks about R*ping our mothers, or worst of all; telling us to commit a seven letter S word. We actually do have right to ban people who attack us on or offsite. Sure, I don't care if someone did minor stuff like photoshops my avatar on a meme. Or if there were a few moderate cuss words said about me. Perhaps some rare or moderate examples of light/moderate insults aren't ban worthy. But if like 7 or more people are both constantly slurring us behind our backs while at the same time being unreasonable aggressive on content revisions onsite. And making constant extreme insults. And spreading false analogies about us such as claiming we said things that were never said, downplaying the severity of your own actions while overplaying the severity of the oppositions actions. There is a line to draw. And word of advice, regardless of whether you tried keeping it offsite, some offsite insults are typically the first indication that you guys are hiding something far worse. It's called being "Dishonest", if you say things offsite in hopes that none of us are psychic, or no one screenshots it as evidence to report it to us, or someone far greater than any human doesn't exist. You can't always rule out any of those. The smartest and most mature thing to do is to just never insult/slur people in general.
I also noticed you guys compared yourselves to the previous Discord group. You said, "All we did was insult and none of us doxxed, encouraged trolls to make socks, or plot to destabilize the wiki." No one said you guys doxxed or made socks, but only 2 out of the 11 people would actually be banned if those were the requirements. Fllflourine and Thebluedash. The rest of them were banned for pretty much the same context ShadowWarrior and Corgi were banned. KamiYasha was considered the 3rd most toxic of the previous crew. His highlighted reasons for was that he threatened to beat up DragonMaster and called him "an au****ic N word (with no hard R)"; and said he would "Go on a Crusade against the Muslims if Antvasima banned Matt. And those are the reasons for why he was permanently blocked. Which is honestly almost identical in nearly every aspect to what both ShadowWarrior and GodHand have called me multiple times. If anything, KamiYasha's was tamer. They both used N words with the hard R, mocks towards Autism, Homophobic slurs, threats to slap me. And made some KKK support analogies where he thinks every religion except for one should be wiped out. KamiYasha also made the same excuse such as, "Those were jokes" or "Those were out of context". So if anything, given ShadowWarrior a lenient ban is giving him special treatment compared to KamiYasha. Speaking of which GodHand also literally praised the previous Discord group here.
Also, it appears people are divided on what "Plotting to destabilize the wiki" actually means. I'm pretty sure constantly expressing hostile behavior whether on or offsite, ganging up on knowledgeable or hardworking staff members, and trying to force them to agree/concede solely based on popular demand or out of context scans, and blatant hyperboles such as (Happy world means Universe) instead of following the sites rules or scientific details we lay out. And doing so in magnitude to the point where our "Most prominent staff members" don't even want to do anything anymore counts as "destabilizing the wiki." The wiki needs hardworking and active staff members to make sure each and every detail is spot on, instead of just overly popular fanbases trying to push for every exaggerated upgrade in the book and pushing for downgrades of any opposing verse. We also have every right to close threads if too many people are yelling, cussing, or throwing stones at people. And it's why staff discussion board for controversial verses in which only a few regular users are given permission to comment are often considered good ideas.
AshenCrow doesn't hate the wiki. Quite the contrary, he actually is a good friend with a lot of the staff. And even if he doesn't always agree with everything we say, he's at least reasonable polite. And he was not at all trying to "Destabilize the wiki." He was trying to protect the wiki by keeping us informed so that we can watch out for each and every single one of you. We have every right to watch out for potential threats, and we ban when their's full confirmation. We shouldn't be waiting for the damage to actually been done, and we can't have hardworking staff members being over-stressed or psychologically scarred by the constant bombardments we have to deal with on day to day bases. All he saw was that some of you were potentially plotting to destabilize the wiki, so he tried to keep is informed so we can be on guard before such a thing happened.
Also, the whole. "It's typical YouTube comment stuff" isn't really good defense. Google+ was shut down due to the overwhelming amounts of harassment that even staff members have been guilty of. And they were unable to manage it all due to poor management and security. And YouTube also has poor management and security. That's the only reason why people who do say some ban worthy stuff without getting banned. Unlike Fandom and other platforms where they do monitor everything said and done on their platforms. Even if they can be excessive at times.
Anyway, as Bambu informed me when I noted him. He said he simply doesn't care one way or the other if ShadowWarrior gets unbanned or if others get banned. But Corgi should absolutely stay banned for countless other reasons both exposed, and not yet exposed. Though he did say he's leaning towards that one remaining month should be long enough for him. I'm in agreement with him. Same with Moritza saying Corgi has gotten way too much special treatment despite his Mikoto/Jonathan Lighter/LordAizenSama levels of misbehavior.
I'm going to sleep, but I'd rather not get involved regarding ShadowWarrior's case. Going to remain neutral unless given better reasons.
First of all, the fact that Fandom did say that they can only do things regarding actions done on Fandom basically says, they entrust the managing staff of the wikis to deal with manners that are happening offsite. That being said, it doesn't matter what platform it was used on; whether it be Discord, Google docs, other wikis, ect. If it's on the internet and if our names are being spoken, then we have everything to do with your actions. If you guys can claim we have no right to be monitoring offsite activities, then I could very well say between this and this, you guys actually have no right to even speak our names without our permission. Let alone constantly slur or say some bigoted dialogue that has nothing to do with our actual groups.
Regardless of actions ranging from petty schoolyard insults, slurring us (regardless if we actually are or aren't said ethnicity, gender, age, orientation, religion, or medical conditions.), making remarks about R*ping our mothers, or worst of all; telling us to commit a seven letter S word. We actually do have right to ban people who attack us on or offsite. Sure, I don't care if someone did minor stuff like photoshops my avatar on a meme. Or if there were a few moderate cuss words said about me. Perhaps some rare or moderate examples of light/moderate insults aren't ban worthy. But if like 7 or more people are both constantly slurring us behind our backs while at the same time being unreasonable aggressive on content revisions onsite. And making constant extreme insults. And spreading false analogies about us such as claiming we said things that were never said, downplaying the severity of your own actions while overplaying the severity of the oppositions actions. There is a line to draw. And word of advice, regardless of whether you tried keeping it offsite, some offsite insults are typically the first indication that you guys are hiding something far worse. It's called being "Dishonest", if you say things offsite in hopes that none of us are psychic, or no one screenshots it as evidence to report it to us, or someone far greater than any human doesn't exist. You can't always rule out any of those. The smartest and most mature thing to do is to just never insult/slur people in general.
I also noticed you guys compared yourselves to the previous Discord group. You said, "All we did was insult and none of us doxxed, encouraged trolls to make socks, or plot to destabilize the wiki." No one said you guys doxxed or made socks, but only 2 out of the 11 people would actually be banned if those were the requirements. Fllflourine and Thebluedash. The rest of them were banned for pretty much the same context ShadowWarrior and Corgi were banned. KamiYasha was considered the 3rd most toxic of the previous crew. His highlighted reasons for was that he threatened to beat up DragonMaster and called him "an au****ic N word (with no hard R)"; and said he would "Go on a Crusade against the Muslims if Antvasima banned Matt. And those are the reasons for why he was permanently blocked. Which is honestly almost identical in nearly every aspect to what both ShadowWarrior and GodHand have called me multiple times. If anything, KamiYasha's was tamer. They both used N words with the hard R, mocks towards Autism, Homophobic slurs, threats to slap me. And made some KKK support analogies where he thinks every religion except for one should be wiped out. KamiYasha also made the same excuse such as, "Those were jokes" or "Those were out of context". So if anything, given ShadowWarrior a lenient ban is giving him special treatment compared to KamiYasha. Speaking of which GodHand also literally praised the previous Discord group here.
Also, it appears people are divided on what "Plotting to destabilize the wiki" actually means. I'm pretty sure constantly expressing hostile behavior whether on or offsite, ganging up on knowledgeable or hardworking staff members, and trying to force them to agree/concede solely based on popular demand or out of context scans, and blatant hyperboles such as (Happy world means Universe) instead of following the sites rules or scientific details we lay out. And doing so in magnitude to the point where our "Most prominent staff members" don't even want to do anything anymore counts as "destabilizing the wiki." The wiki needs hardworking and active staff members to make sure each and every detail is spot on, instead of just overly popular fanbases trying to push for every exaggerated upgrade in the book and pushing for downgrades of any opposing verse. We also have every right to close threads if too many people are yelling, cussing, or throwing stones at people. And it's why staff discussion board for controversial verses in which only a few regular users are given permission to comment are often considered good ideas.
AshenCrow doesn't hate the wiki. Quite the contrary, he actually is a good friend with a lot of the staff. And even if he doesn't always agree with everything we say, he's at least reasonable polite. And he was not at all trying to "Destabilize the wiki." He was trying to protect the wiki by keeping us informed so that we can watch out for each and every single one of you. We have every right to watch out for potential threats, and we ban when their's full confirmation. We shouldn't be waiting for the damage to actually been done, and we can't have hardworking staff members being over-stressed or psychologically scarred by the constant bombardments we have to deal with on day to day bases. All he saw was that some of you were potentially plotting to destabilize the wiki, so he tried to keep is informed so we can be on guard before such a thing happened.
Also, the whole. "It's typical YouTube comment stuff" isn't really good defense. Google+ was shut down due to the overwhelming amounts of harassment that even staff members have been guilty of. And they were unable to manage it all due to poor management and security. And YouTube also has poor management and security. That's the only reason why people who do say some ban worthy stuff without getting banned. Unlike Fandom and other platforms where they do monitor everything said and done on their platforms. Even if they can be excessive at times.
Anyway, as Bambu informed me when I noted him. He said he simply doesn't care one way or the other if ShadowWarrior gets unbanned or if others get banned. But Corgi should absolutely stay banned for countless other reasons both exposed, and not yet exposed. Though he did say he's leaning towards that one remaining month should be long enough for him. I'm in agreement with him. Same with Moritza saying Corgi has gotten way too much special treatment despite his Mikoto/Jonathan Lighter/LordAizenSama levels of misbehavior.
I'm going to sleep, but I'd rather not get involved regarding ShadowWarrior's case. Going to remain neutral unless given better reasons.
Agnaa
VS Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Translation Helper
Human Resources
Gold Supporter
- 15,485
- 13,696
You said, "All we did was insult and none of us doxxed, encouraged trolls to make socks, or plot to destabilize the wiki." No one said you guys doxxed or made socks, but only 2 out of the 11 people would actually be banned if those were the requirements. Fllflourine and Thebluedash. The rest of them were banned for pretty much the same context ShadowWarrior and Corgi were banned.
I never knew this. If only two of them doxxed, encouraged trolls to make socks, plotted to destabilize the wiki, or directly harassed people, then I'd support the other 9 people being unbanned.
If you guys can claim we have no right to be monitoring offsite activities, then I could very well say between this and this, you guys actually have no right to even speak our names without our permission.
I seriously doubt that. If you can get this pastebi taken down then you'd have a point, but I don't think you can do that. This justification for monitoring offsite activities holds no water.
I never knew this. If only two of them doxxed, encouraged trolls to make socks, plotted to destabilize the wiki, or directly harassed people, then I'd support the other 9 people being unbanned.
If you guys can claim we have no right to be monitoring offsite activities, then I could very well say between this and this, you guys actually have no right to even speak our names without our permission.
I seriously doubt that. If you can get this pastebi taken down then you'd have a point, but I don't think you can do that. This justification for monitoring offsite activities holds no water.
- 167,683
- 76,264
- Thread starter
- #240
I largely agree with Medeus, and we are definitely never going to unban most of the Bleach Discord group. Period. They were actively acting out a concerted conspiracy to destabilise the wiki within Fandom itself, systematically attacking me on 4chan, and similar neverending ongoing behaviour. They had very severely ill intentions towards this community.
The ones among them who really wanted to come back have made sockpuppets anyway, but know that they have to keep their behaviours much stricter in line to not be found out. I would much prefer to keep things that way.
In any case, no matter how much you try to argue with us about this extremely sensitive issue, we are never going to unban them. After I explained the situation to the official Fandom staff, they even offered to ban the Discord group's accounts entirely from this platform, as far as I understood.
I would appreciate if we could immediately and permanently drop this issue please, and return to if we should reduce the block of TheUpgradeMan from 9 to a few months instead. Unlike the others, he doesn't actually mean any harm.
The ones among them who really wanted to come back have made sockpuppets anyway, but know that they have to keep their behaviours much stricter in line to not be found out. I would much prefer to keep things that way.
In any case, no matter how much you try to argue with us about this extremely sensitive issue, we are never going to unban them. After I explained the situation to the official Fandom staff, they even offered to ban the Discord group's accounts entirely from this platform, as far as I understood.
I would appreciate if we could immediately and permanently drop this issue please, and return to if we should reduce the block of TheUpgradeMan from 9 to a few months instead. Unlike the others, he doesn't actually mean any harm.
- Status
Similar threads
