• 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 - 65

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm going to be honest, socks are socks, and using socks to assist you in debates is absurdly disingenous and I stand harshly against the idea of reducing the ban. So I believe that our standards for length of bans for socks are quite long, and for good reason.
 
@GAMEOVER

He has been dealt with a while ago.

@Moritzva

I think that intent and general behaviour should factor in as well, and this is not a malicious member at all.
 
Given that it got to 6 months after several reductions already and that the offense itself is a perm ban according to the rules, I don't think we should keep lowering it. It compromises the integrity of our rules if we keep trying to find exceptions and mitigating factors to make certain cases treated differently than others.
 
I have to agree with Wok. The entire concept of having a sockpuppet is to create some sort of disrupption. Even though its minor in this instance, upholding a form of intergrity is more important. The punishment should serve as a means to encourage future users not to do this if they are serious about being here. It being or coming off as mean spirited should be almost entirely irrelevant, considering the fact that socks are a permabanable offense in the first place.
 
I still think the ban should stay as it is. Even if its not perma bannable, it still stands that they knew what they were doing was wrong.
 
Dienomite is correct. It depends on the circumstances and severity in how it was used.
 
"I don't think we should keep lowering it. It compromises the integrity of our rules if we keep trying to find exceptions and mitigating factors to make certain cases treated differently than others."

I agree with this, and we should mitigate any source of bias there is when it comes to giving bans.
 
I do not think that we should treat a well-behaved, productive, and non-malicious longtime member the same way as a new, malicious ill-behaved account that has not contributed anything to the site.
 
I don't know if I can comment here (I reported the sockpuppet and I don't know how far I'm allowed to say something), but Antvasima I agree with your point of view. However we need a consistent punishment to show examples, so people don't get using sockpuppets for wanking or downplaying a verse, and when they are discovered, they just remember that as a behaved member he will be able to return soon.
 
6 months is a long period of time for a member that didn't really mean or do any harm though.
 
I agree with wokistan, 6 months is already good, to decrease would be to show a favor that he shouldn't have, regardless of his intentions and his conduct.
 
Antvasima said:
I do not think that we should treat a well-behaved, productive, and non-malicious longtime member the same way as a new, malicious ill-behaved account that has not contributed anything to the site.
Click to expand...
If someone is using socks to further their arguments, they can't be that beneficial.
 
Well, please read his explanation posts regarding that, and it was only an extremely rare occurrence.
 
Yeah but he still you know did it. Don't wanna be the bad guy but again he knew he would get in trouble if caught.
 
JohnConquest1 said:
Yeah but he still you know did it. Don't wanna be the bad guy but again he knew he would get in trouble if caught.
Click to expand...
He knows?

Pretty sure I remember he told me he didn't know just using an alt is considered sockpuppeting.
 
I don't feel thats a good excuse to use on a site thats focused on debates. Should be the first thing that comes to mind when making a second account.
 
JohnConquest1 said:
I don't feel thats a good excuse to use on a site thats focused on debates. Should be the first thing that comes to mind when making a second account.
Click to expand...
That's the point. He should know it real well. But for some reason doesn't. So I don't think we should treat him like he knows it, just because we think he should know.
 
@John

Well, he seemed rather confused and a bit clueless when I talked with him, but definitely not ill-intended, as you can seen in his messages.

@BigSmoke

Just don't visit the messages that unknown people send you on other wikis, and click "Mark all as read" after first visiting the legitimate notifications from this wiki.
 
Even if its not ill intended he should've known better. Again I don't wanna be the bad guy but yeah.
 
Antvasima said:
@BigSmoke

Just don't visit the messages that unknown people send you on other wikis, and click "Mark all as read" after first visiting the legitimate notifications from this wiki.
Click to expand...
Seems LordAizenSama will send it to anyone on this Thread.

I just commented here, then I got messaged on it.
 
Is it the original LordAizenSama account that sends you this or just from the wiki?
 
I deleted and closed the thread by accident before I posted about it here, am I ******?
 
@Sera

Strongly agreed.

@KLOL

Probably not, beyond seeing some sick, depraved, and disgusting things that could easily have been avoided.
 
phew, and here I was thinking they'd hack my PC and make it blow up. Thankfully I already have backups.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Antvasima
  • Sticky
Wiki Vandalism Reports
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
99K
Homie890
Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Discussion Rules lil Revision
Replies
39
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
A minor addition about discussion rules
Replies
4
Views
780
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