• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
@Antvasima; I think the earlier consensus was 9 months which is already a compromise. I don't think we should drop it down any further.

We'll end up second guessing ourselves too much.
 
That was before we read his explanation message. I think that it puts him in a much better light.
 
Ant no one said anything about unbanning the Bleach Discord. They were a bunch of malicious, disruptive, actually horrible people that I am fairly certain no one wants back here.

We're discussing how the situation could be compared to them, which in my opinion it cannot. It's not even close in terms of severity.
 
@Crabwhale

I think that Agnaa mentioned it. My apologies if I misunderstood.

@Damage

Thank you for being reasonable.
 
why does discussion always spark when I'm at work, hardly seems fair

I'll weigh in again. When I'm home.
 
Agnaa said:
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.
Click to expand...
Hey, I can agree with that, I'm literally the only person besides Kepekley who was in that server and has the screenshots/evidence of who did what.

If we're changing standards on what it takes for people to be banned for offline activity then only 3 members of the original Discord group should be banned (Fil, Blue, and Kami) since the rest did not partake in said doxxing, socks, destabilization, nor trolling the actual wiki. Solely insulting users offsite.

Edit: In fact, we already unbanned Aeyu/Dee. Aeyu took direct part in the original Discord and in the doxxing, destabilizing, insulting, and trolling due to good behavior and wishing to actually return and behave. So I'm not seeing the issue of unbanning the less serious offenses of the original Discord group.
 
As far as I remember, they all collaborated regarding the destabilisation. It seems like a very bad idea to allow people with hostile agendas to come back.
 
Antvasima said:
As far as I remember, they all collaborated regarding the destabilisation. It seems like a very bad idea to allow people with hostile agendas to come back.
Click to expand...
I have the screenshots, Kep still has the screenshots, I was in that server and Kep was in there with me.

If everyone collaborated in regards to destabilization then why wasn't I banned? Because not everyone in there was destabilizing, some were just talking crap and making jokes about users.

We can literally go to the thread Kep made and the albums of screenshots he took to see that only Fill, Blue, and Kami participated in destabilizing, doxxing, trolling, and harassing.

Also Ant, the user who was making fun of you on 4chan was already banned long before the Discord situation. That was Arigarmy who was not part of the Discord group.

This also still does not explain Aeyu being unbanned when she literally participated in the doxxing, destabilizing, trolling, and insulting. We gave her a new chance despite her being part of the Discord group since she said she would behave, so why can't we extend that to even the lesser banned users of the Discord group whose actions were not even as severe as Aeyu's?
 
You had nothing to do with it Imade. But talking crap and making jokes about the same thing with people who were actively planning on destabilizing, doxxing and harassing kinda conveyed their intention too, that they were supportive of such behavior by their friends and made no effort to prevent that. We don't want such people and nothing is going to change on that front now.

And I'm gonna be honest, it's because of that incident that people are still speculative of you too. Let's not pretend that those same users aren't here already with alternate accounts.

Anyway, this is basically derailing the thread by bringing up an old can of worms with nothing good coming out of it. So let's drop this one.
 
But talking crap and making jokes about the same thing with people who were actively planning on destabilizing, doxxing and harassing kinda conveyed their intention too, that they were supportive of such behavior by their friends and made no effort to prevent that.

Eugh, so if we think someone's planning on doing something we have to actively prevent it or we're just as in the wrong as they are? That logic makes me feel uncomfortable.

Anyway, this is basically derailing the thread by bringing up an old can of worms with nothing good coming out of it. So let's drop this one.

If we're creating a definitive policy on what off-site behaviour we're okay with punishing over, that old can of worms is something that we will have to take into account.
 
home again home again, seems like this has taken a new direction.

I'd like to say a few things I'm not sure are readily apparent. I spoke to Agnaa, sure, but I also spoke to others, the general consensus was that off-site behavior was punishable. We can't control what you do offsite, but we can control whether we want that toxicity reaching back here. Decidedly we do not. Among those I spoke to was Prom.

I'd also like to expand on the point that seems to be missed: while Agnaa is right, it does come down to opinion on whether or not off-site issues are readily bannable/punishable, the fact is that this behavior is a disruption of the wiki in that your discord friends took wiki matters over there, berated wiki members (such as Imagine, who I believe is banned nowadays), and then defended it by saying you removed it from the wiki. It still has the same tangible effect here, the same intent and outcome, it is decidedly punishable.

As a closing note: at the time of banning, I went through the screenshots and genuinely tried to discern whether there was legitimate, actual critique in there, however wrong said critique may be. Criticism can be given. I can say, for example (not a true statement) that I believe that Crabwhale is extremely biased towards My Little Pony and should be prevented from matches including the verse. That is different than having the sole contribution of picking fights and expending innumerous amounts of energy to spread toxicity against users off-site.
 
AKM sama said:
You had nothing to do with it Imade.
Click to expand...
Well that was a lie (or you just don't know what happened, which I don't blame you since only Kep can correctly recall what happened since he was the only other person in there), I was in that server.

I was friends with some people there, including a few of the people where were banned. I was even in some of those screenshots. I've literally talked to Kep about all this as well and even about things that happened in that server. I used that server to preemptively make CRTs and get advice on what the post as I was new to the Wiki at the time.

But talking crap and making jokes about the same thing with people who were actively planning on destabilizing, doxxing and harassing kinda conveyed their intention too, that they were supportive of such behavior by their friends and made no effort to prevent that. We don't want such people and nothing is going to change on that front now.
Then why was Aeyu unbanned when she was part of the Discord server?

I literally can post Aeyu's actions of doxxing, planning to destabilize, promoting such actions, trolling, and insulting users.

How can you say to keep the Discord group banned and let Aeyu be unbanned? Especially when users like Bluetrekking's actions that got him banned was literally two screenshots of him making fun of users. Some of those banned users did not partake in doxxing nor destabilizing and I am actual proof of that since I was part of that server.

And I'm gonna be honest, it's because of that incident that people are still speculative of you too. Let's not pretend that those same users aren't here already with alternate accounts.
1) The profile picture helps with that, but I'm fine with that.

2) Given how I still talk to some of them, I can show you comments by them of how they've quit any participation of battleboarding or fictional battle discussion. I'm arguing for this out of principal since this is a clear example of double standard on the Wiki.

Anyway, this is basically derailing the thread by bringing up an old can of worms with nothing good coming out of it. So let's drop this one.
Disagree, we're literally discuss an important facet of the previous discussion in regards to off-site actions and punishment of off-site actions.

We can't be unbanning Aeyu and banning other's for lesser or similar actions. It's straight hypocrisy or evidence of staff privilege.
 
@Agnaa My main point was not about banning people for not preventing it, as you can see Imade is still here. But joking and actively talking crap with a malicious intent about such acts with such people also paints you in the same color as them and makes you look like you actively support it.

If I'm being completely honest, you can't come out of a room filled with ink without a single stain. It's just about figuring out who were trustworthy and who were not based on the present evidences.
 
AKM sama said:
@Agnaa My main point was not about banning people for not preventing it, as you can see Imade is still here. But joking and actively talking crap with a malicious intent about such acts with such people also paints you in the same color as them and makes you look like you actively support it.
If I'm being completely honest, you can't come out of a room filled with ink without a single stain. It's just about figuring out who were trustworthy and who were not based on the present evidences.
Click to expand...
Then why was Aeyu unbanned when she was covered in the most ink? Bro, I literally have the evidence of this since I was in the server and took the screenshots.

Why wasn't I banned when I was in that room? Because I didn't participate in the doxxing or destabilizing just like some of the users that were banned solely for talking crap.
 
I'd like to say a few things I'm not sure are readily apparent. I spoke to Agnaa, sure, but I also spoke to others, the general consensus was that off-site behavior was punishable.

Correct. I did try to clarify in my post that other people shared your view on this.

We can't control what you do offsite, but we can control whether we want that toxicity reaching back here. Decidedly we do not.

What does toxicity reaching back here mean? Is it just screenshots of toxic behaviour being posted? The thing that really gets me is that the only site rules being enforced off-site are ones directly involving other members - general toxicity or behaviour that we ban here would be ignored. Unless I should be posting screenshots of me saying the n-word on Discord a few hundred times so I can get banned.

If no other toxic behaviour off-site results in a punishment on-site, except for shittalking other members, it really seems like it's not about toxic behaviour, but about people getting upset that people are shittalking them behind their back.

the fact is that this behavior is a disruption of the wiki in that your discord friends took wiki matters over there, berated wiki members (such as Imagine, who I believe is banned nowadays), and then defended it by saying you removed it from the wiki. It still has the same tangible effect here, the same intent and outcome, it is decidedly punishable.

How does it still have effect here? I'm not seeing the logical through-line that your presenting. It's a disruption of the wiki because wiki matters were taken there, people were shittalked, then people defended it???

My main point was not about banning people for not preventing it, as you can see Imade is still here. But joking and actively talking crap with a malicious intent about such acts with such people also paints you in the same color as them and makes you look like you actively support it.

Okay, so we're just not allowed to joke with people who are malicious towards the wiki, got it. Want me to post screenshots of me laughing along with some troll that sent gore to me on another wiki?

I also think the "actively supporting" it part demonstrates no awareness of group dynamics and how they effect people. Peer pressures have people normalize shitty things. But as long as they don't engage in it themselves, I don't think they're necessarily bad people.

EDIT: AKM/Bambu, if conversation about this isn't happening here please find another avenue to talk to me without it, because I think these proposed methods of punishment are unnecessary, disastrous, and untenable :3
 
Look, Aeyu isn't part of a group with hostile intentions towards the wiki, and has apologised a lot and been of great help to the wiki via Discord afterwards. Several trusted staff members also vouched for that she wouldn't be a problem, so we eventually removed her ban after over one year. She hasn't actually been active in the wiki afterwards anyway though.

However, letting several members who did actively help to troll a lot regarding The Everlasting and other issues back into the wiki, would be to take extreme risks for conflict, destabilisation, severely upset staff members, etcetera, at a time of turmoil when we also definitely cannot afford this.

Basically, Aeyu was eventually deemed to not be a threat, whereas we cannot take such a risk with the others.

I would appreciate if you drop this issue immediately. Nothing is going to change from you dragging up old drama again, and we are already busy discussing other issues here.

Nothing is going to change regarding the banned toxic Sonic fans either for that matter.
 
Antvasima said:
Look, Aeyu isn't part of a group with hostile intentions towards the wiki,
Click to expand...
She was part of the same group that was banned for hostile intentions towards the wiki.

and has apologised a lot and been of great help to the wiki via Discord afterwards. Several trusted staff members also vouched for that she wouldn't be a problem, so we eventually removed her ban after over one year. She hasn't actually been active in the wiki afterwards anyway though.
This type of connection wasn't extended to the rest of the Discord group, it wasn't even extended to those with actions of just talking crap.

However, letting several members who did actively help to troll a lot regarding The Everlasting and other issues back into the wiki, would be to take extreme risks for conflict, destabilisation, severely upset staff members, etcetera, at a time when we also definitely cannot afford this.
These are the same actions Aeyu took, once again not proving why the Discord group should remain banned. Especially those who did not doxx nor even participate in destabilizing.

At the same time, we literally have users still around who participated in The Everlasting situation like CinCameron (in fact, CinCameron was part of the Discord group).

I would appreciate if you drop this issue immediately. Nothing is going to change from you dragging up and blowing up old drama again, and we are already busy discussing other issues here.
Nothing is going to change refarding the banned toxic Sonic fans either for that matter.

I will not drop this for the same reason as Agnaa just brought up. This is an important discussion in regards to wiki policy of off-site behavior.
 
This type of connection wasn't extended to the rest of the Discord group, it wasn't even extended to those with actions of just talking crap.

I'm not this deep in the nitty gritty of Aeyu's situation, but did a staff member really come up to Aeyu and say "If you apologize I'll unban you"? The feeling I got wasn't that it was an offer, but that Aeyu apologized and then that was used to push for an unban.

I'm sure that if the other members showed they were repentant instead of screaming about hypocrisy that they'd be far closer to being unbanned.
 
Agnaa said:
This type of connection wasn't extended to the rest of the Discord group, it wasn't even extended to those with actions of just talking crap.
I'm not this deep in the nitty gritty of Aeyu's situation, but did a staff member really come up to Aeyu and say "If you apologize I'll unban you"? The feeling I got wasn't that it was an offer, but that Aeyu apologized and then that was used to push for an unban.
Click to expand...
Aeyu was friends with staff members before being banned and shared a server with them. That's part of how she was destabilizing as her screenshots showed.

In fact, several of the banned discord members tried making up on the Community Wiki message walls that we could literally link here.
 
Agnaa said:
This type of connection wasn't extended to the rest of the Discord group, it wasn't even extended to those with actions of just talking crap.
I'm not this deep in the nitty gritty of Aeyu's situation, but did a staff member really come up to Aeyu and say "If you apologize I'll unban you"? The feeling I got wasn't that it was an offer, but that Aeyu apologized and then that was used to push for an unban.

I'm sure that if the other members showed they were repentant instead of screaming about hypocrisy that they'd be far closer to being unbanned.
Click to expand...
because they don't have friends with green names and a bias for having them around.
 
You can keep pestering us about this issue, but we are not going to unban the Bleach Discord members under any circumstances no matter what you say. All that you accomplish is to cause drama when the wiki is already in a state of turmoil due to the upcoming forum move. So yes, you should drop the issue.

You may or may not have a point about that Aeyu should have remained banned, especially as she never visits here anyway, but I have been told that she has redeemed herself, is extremely regretful, and not a threat or part of a group with hostile intentions anymore, by trusted staff members.

On the other hand, letting back people who together would very much constitute a threat to the stability here, and, again, likely mostly have sockpuppets anyway, would be downright idiotic, especially with our current situation with the forum and important staff members quitting.

So yes, drop this issue. Nothing is going to change. All you are doing is causing unnecessary drama.
 
I'd like to say a few things I'm not sure are readily apparent. I spoke to Agnaa, sure, but I also spoke to others, the general consensus was that off-site behavior was punishable. We can't control what you do offsite, but we can control whether we want that toxicity reaching back here. Decidedly we do not. Among those I spoke to was Prom.

I agree with off-site behavior being punishable if it spills back to the site (although generally what was said on the wiki should be prioritized even if the drama started elsewhere). However this is not a case of behavior or drama spilling back to the site, this is Ashen giving DDM screenshots of stuff happening on Discord. There is no drama or negative behavior that spilled back to the site, only those screenshots. If DDM had for instance (didn't happen) confronted Shadow and Corgi about those screenshots and they then would have insulted him, that would be drama spilling back to the site. None of that happened and instead they were banned for something which exclusively happened off-site. If you want to control toxicity reaching back here then I suppose talking to Ashen who wanted to destabilize the wiki is a better option.

I'd also like to expand on the point that seems to be missed: while Agnaa is right, it does come down to opinion on whether or not off-site issues are readily bannable/punishable, the fact is that this behavior is a disruption of the wiki in that your discord friends took wiki matters over there, berated wiki members (such as Imagine, who I believe is banned nowadays), and then defended it by saying you removed it from the wiki. It still has the same tangible effect here, the same intent and outcome, it is decidedly punishable.

They took wiki matters over there because they want to talk about wiki matter over there, just as they like talking about Sonic over there. You are basically implying that they should be censored from saying anything about the wiki on Discord or that they are obligated to say certain things in a certain way, which is a direct violation of Freedom of Speech.

As a closing note: at the time of banning, I went through the screenshots and genuinely tried to discern whether there was legitimate, actual critique in there, however wrong said critique may be. Criticism can be given. I can say, for example (not a true statement) that I believe that Crabwhale is extremely biased towards My Little Pony and should be prevented from matches including the verse. That is different than having the sole contribution of picking fights and expending innumerous amounts of energy to spread toxicity against users off-site.

They are not obligated to give constructive criticism on a private Discord server, sure it may be helpful instead of complaining but it doesn't really change anything.
 
@IMadeThis @Heavens Feel I have a response, but to not derail, I've left it here.
 
Agnaa said:
I'm sure that if the other members showed they were repentant instead of screaming about hypocrisy that they'd be far closer to being unbanned.
Click to expand...
Actually Knight did apologize directly a while back. However this is clearly selectively applied so there's no point really.
 
Well, this is turning into an ongoing big mess. Thanks a lot for that, as if I wasn't tired and overworked enough already.

Anyway, again, we are not going to unban lots of people who would likely cause ongoing major problems if we let them back in. It is too much of a risk. Drop this. This sort of drama is causing harm to the community.

Upgrade on the other hand seems almost completely harmless to me, and to not have any ill intentions.
 
I would also reccomend that the people discussing it drop the topic.

Even if you feel strongly about it and think it warrants more discussion, this is not the appropriate thread for it.
 
SD and Monarch definitely didn't seem to think so, and this feels a lot like you're ignoring them to lower the ban duration. Especially when they haven't replied in 2 days since you suggested the idea.
 
Antvasima said:
You can keep pestering us about this issue, but we are not going to unban the Bleach Discord members under any circumstances no matter what you say.
Click to expand...
They're not even Bleach people, Fill, Blue, and Kami had nothing to do with Bleach.

All that you accomplish is to cause drama when the wiki is already in a state of turmoil due to the upcoming forum move. So yes, you should drop the issue.
I will not drop an issue that has to do with the current discussion of off-site behavior punishment. The Discord group is the most important aspect that would be affected by such a discussion.

You may or may not have a point about that Aeyu should have remained banned, especially as she never visits here anyway, but I have been told that she has redeemed herself, is extremely regretful, and not a threat or part of a group with hostile intentions anymore, by trusted staff members.
So were some Discord users, but they weren't unbanned.

This still doesn't answer the fact that some users were banned despite not having participated in doxxing or destabilizing.

Are you just going to ignore the fact that CinCameron, Zensum and even myself were part of that server? We're explicit evidence that some users did not doxx or destabilize and at worst just talked crap.
 
Just make a different thread about it. This is a thread to take action against problems that are currently happening, not a thread to keep continuing a discussion when it's already been agreed to shift it to another.
 
Antvasima said:
Actually, I am waiting for them to read Upgrade's letter and then respond to me.
Click to expand...
You already reduced the duration before telling people about it. I'm not sure exactly what is going to change your mind given you seem set on it and have acted already without staff input.
 
I have to call the old Discord group something distinctive from the current one, and it was recurrently Bleach-related.

Anyway, look, I can only go by what the most trusted members tell me regarding issues such as this, and I also have experiences regarding how several of the banned members behaved in conjunction with The Everlasting situation.

Aeyu made ongoing efforts to redeem herself, and this was noticed by the staff. If a few of the other Bleach Discord group members made similar efforts, and wouldn't cause problems anymore, but there is no way for me to verify this, then there is no way for me to do anything except roll the dice and make a massive gamble. It is regrettable, but also doesn't have any perfect solutions, and I have to mainly take the safety of the wiki community into account.
 
@Regis

From what I recall, I did get staff approval, but I also cannot wait forever for feedback.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
30 31 32
Replies
1K
Views
93K
Comiphorous
Comiphorous
Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Discussion Rules lil Revision
Replies
39
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
A minor addition about discussion rules
Replies
4
Views
750
Deleted member 40688
Clarification Of Sentence Phrasings And Addition Of Expected Punishments For Each Type Of Rule Breach For All Rules Pages
Replies
19
Views
2K
GarrixianXD
GarrixianXD
Mr. Bambu
  • Locked
Slight Adjustment to Rules Regarding Original Works
2 3
Replies
80
Views
8K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top