• An important announcement about how to solve problems with your discussion thread notifications, and other important issues.

    Please click here for further information.
  • Important information regarding the linking of images from Fandom wikis.

    Please click here for further information.
  • Important information regarding upcoming advertisements in this forum.

    Please click here for further information.

Rule Violations Reports - 65

Status
Not open for further replies.

Antvasima

VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
99,789
20,936
Well, I am fine with a shorter block for being very rude, but Upgrade didn't cause any harm or have any malicious intent, so I don't think that his offense is worse.
 

Damage3245

VS Battles
Sysop
Calculation Group
12,887
2,861
Haven't we already reduced his block as a measure of leniency in light of his explanations? What new information has come up that would lead us to reduce it even further?

Six months is entirely appropriate as a punishment and since other users besides myself seem fine with 6 months, it does not seem "very unfair".

I agree with GyroNutz. We should stop discussing it at this point.
 

Antvasima

VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
99,789
20,936
Well, I have been talking with him via fanfiction.net, and he just seems a bit paranoid, clueless, and confused. I am personally maturally inclined to be lenient towards those who simply make mistakes but do not mean any harm.
 

AKM sama

Automatic Killing Machine
VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
Human Resources
7,588
5,278
Well, I mean, it is a case by case basis though. How the person conducts himself within the wiki, his capability to improve and his general attitude, nature and intent does factor in the amount of time he/she gets banned. (Just a general comment, not linked with any of the above cases).
 

SomebodyData

El SiD
VS Battles
Sysop
Human Resources
13,238
1,867
@AKM I understand case by case, but this? A permaban reduced to 6, still arguing to 3 months and another member being permabanned for being rude is a stark difference no?

Though I agree with Gyro, I'll drop this.
 
5,968
915
My two cents but using socks to upgrade your favorite characters seems like a very malicious intent, and as the others have said, 6 moths for a violation that goes to infinitely banned seems VERY lenient
 

Antvasima

VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
99,789
20,936
As far as I understood, he used a sock on 2 occasions for brief "I agree" comments in versus threads. That doesn't seem particularly malicious to me. I may be wrong though.
 
5,725
2,255
Antvasima said:
As far as I understood, he used a sock on 2 occasions for brief "I agree" comments in versus threads. That doesn't seem particularly malicious to me. I may be wrong though.
Its an intentional breakage of rules that gets you infinite banned usually, malice notwithstanding. You can't really call it a mistake or cluelessness.

6 months has been agreed upon, let it run its course.
 

Antvasima

VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
99,789
20,936
Anyway, I seem to be outvoted here, so I suppose that there is no point that I bring it up again.
 

Antvasima

VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
99,789
20,936
I was told that they can significantly increase our protections if necessary, but that we should remind them in a few days.
 
2,108
297
Schnee One said:
We agreed with 6 months for >knowingly< going against a rule that results in a permaban and we're thinking of decreasing it more?
Wh- What?

It's circling around here because you guys don't get the memo of him not even knowing it's sockpuppeting.

Dude literally thought sockpuppeting is limited to simply using an alt to just insult peeps, and that using an alt to say "I agree" isn't a big threat.

If him not knowing all of those count as "knowingly", if my comment that was posted after you guys decided to not bring UpgradeMan case up again is considered irrelevant... then do whatever you want.

P.S.: Sorry for bringing this up again. I was asleep when you guys discussed that we not bring it up again, so I never had the chance to say it.
 
2,482
279
Not seeing the point in bringing up a decided ban over and over again. He socked, got a reduced ban of 6 months for it, end of story. Not seeing the point of trying to reduce it, and at this point sort of leaves the realm of leniency and goes straight into personal bias to keep trying to reduce it. It's not like other people in the past arguing for reduced bans for their buddies have had much success, especially when it comes to socks which the wiki nukes unless there are mitigating circumstances that aren't applicable here.
 

Antvasima

VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
99,789
20,936
He is not my buddy. I just dislike banning harmless members for a long time on principle.

Anyway, let's drop this issue.

Here is a message that he sent me a few hours ago:

"I accept the punishment i received.. Bringing me up is causing a lot of discord.. And im okay with 6 month ban. It gives me time to get a grip on the IRL situation going on.

Thank you for being my voice Ant. i do appreciate it."
 

Damage3245

VS Battles
Sysop
Calculation Group
12,887
2,861
@GojiBoyForever; he has already said he is okay with it. Please, drop the issue.
 

Antvasima

VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
99,789
20,936
I removed all of the posts with WHAM. Feel free to install the script yourselves Cal and Elizhaa, but it is extremely important that you only ever open it against blatant spam troll accounts to avoid accidentally making a disastrous mistake at some point.
 

AKM sama

Automatic Killing Machine
VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
Human Resources
7,588
5,278
Thanks for helping out.
Antvasima said:
Fandom's staff also further increased our wiki protections.
How's that?
 

Antvasima

VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
99,789
20,936
I am not sure if I should tell in public, but it will supposedly be harder for new members to sign up here.
 
I genuinely hates doing this reporting stuff, but this guy bringing up RL religion into a debate, which I recall is not allowed, just because the character he is rooting for is based on RL religion.

I have no grudge against the guy and has no intention to propose a ban for him. But can somebody explain to him that bringing up such sensitive stuff into debate is a d*ck move?
 

Damage3245

VS Battles
Sysop
Calculation Group
12,887
2,861
Having read their explanation posts, I don't see any reason for it to be lowered from an infinite ban. The original ban looks well-deserved.
 

The_Wright_Way

VS Battles
Thread Moderator
14,349
6,215
No. He almost constantly ignored any warnings while he was here and only pretends to listen after being blocked. Pmus, I feel like we've discussed lowering his ban before. He flippantly fave death threats to an entire nation and didn't seem to understand what he did wrong afterwards when he tried to get the ban lowered the first time. He's not coming back.
 

Antvasima

VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Sysop
99,789
20,936
Well, he said something like "all Japanese deserve to get death threats" if I remember correctly, so he technically did not intimidate anybody specific.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top