Rule Violations Reports (New forum)

[Agnaa]

My response to Milly ended up being pretty long so I've spoilered it.

Spoiler: Response

I would appreciate you stop lying about me.

My bad, I did fuck up a bit there.

My whole reason for coming here is asking why is behavior like that only worth a slap on the wrist?

Because it's minor.

Because he’s a good mod?

Technically kinda, if someone did this stuff constantly it'd be bad. But I'd moreso phrase it as "because this is a rare occurrence from them" rather than the way you did.

Because he’d feel “alienated”??

Nope.

I asked how is that a punishment

It's the lightest one, more akin to a warning/strike.

anyone can say chill out, it’s not a warning.

Coming from staff members it is, and it is treated as such. Stuff like that has been brought up in the past to demonstrate that a user has been warned before without shaping up.

Why are you, Wright, and Ant so dismissive of this earlier?

For me, because that one incident seems so small that it has already been sufficiently addressed.

This isn’t me even being over sensitive or wanting to start drama like what’s being portrayed

From my perspective it really seems like that.

I just want to know why exactly can he say I shouldn’t speak because he disagrees, and proceeds to say I’m spreading misinformation and lying??

Because one comment phrased pretty civilly (not in all caps, no slurs, no personal insults) is pretty damn tame, and able to be resolved with just an instruction to stop.

 

[Antvasima]

Eficiente is occasionally easily annoyed, but is generally rational, productive, and helpful, and has not done anything bad enough for a demotion.

It is much better if staff members here talk with him via PMs. I do not want us to incite some kind of gang-up behaviour.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

Eficiente is occasionally easily annoyed, but is generally rational, productive, and helpful, and has not done anything bad enough for a demotion.

It is much better if staff members here talk with him via PMs. I do not want us to incite some kind of gang-up behaviour.

I mean, I'm easily annoyed too, but I at least apologize when called out.

That said, I'd advise people to avoid lighting torches.

 

[Schnee_One]

Eficiente is not occasionally easily annoyed, most of his attitude on threads is the exact opposite of this, I can confirm. He keeps pulling this he should be.

Either way, I am now on his wall, we can all move this there.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Alright, fine, I’m just going to stop arguing this and just let this be since this apparently leads into a bigger problem about his attitude.

This in no way means I’m satisfied with how this went.

 

[Schnee_One]

Thank you @Milly_Rocking_Bandit

 

[Antvasima]

Several people ganging up on him via his message wall is the entirely wrong way to cause any positive change whatsoever. I strongly urge everybody who have attacked him there to delete their messages and move to separate PMs instead.

 

[XSOULOFCINDERX]

So far it's just Wright and Schnee.

 

[Antvasima]

Also, Eficiente gave thumbs up to staff comments that reprimanded him.

 

[XSOULOFCINDERX]

Also, Eficiente gave thumbs up to staff comments that reprimanded him.

That honestly doesn't mean a whole lot. I'm pretty sure anyone could do that.

 

[Rikimarox2]

It's not just that one comment he made in the blazblue thread, ant. It's that he has been apparently doing this for quite a while now. A discussion moderator is supposed to keep things civilized, not the opposite.

 

[Antvasima]

So far it's just Wright and Schnee.

More will likely come due to being publicly encouraged here. Again, take it to PMs, or you will likely provoke a destructive lashout reaction that benefits nobody in this community.

 

[00potato]

You keep trying to make this seem like an attack for some reason? Is framing it like that, despite the evidence and things shown a way to absolve him?
The reprimands were nothing let’s be honest. They were a smile and a wink and nothing would change, of course he would do the thumbs up, it makes him look better.

 

[Antvasima]

That honestly doesn't mean a whole lot. I'm pretty sure anyone could do that.

It means that he agreed with the comments.

 

[Schnee_One]

Several people ganging up on him via his message wall is the entirely wrong way to cause any positive change whatsoever. I strongly urge everybody who have attacked him there to delete their messages and move to separate PMs instead.

I have made one with literally no insults or ill will that is significantly less then the majority of posts he has made, I have made my point clear.

BTW Kudosing posts doesn't mean much when all it takes is literally one apology and him trying to shape up and this whole situation is solved, the fact that he is aware of this and doesn't even bother is even less trust worthy.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

I tried to make it clear that I least know where he comes from while still being frank.

 

[Antvasima]

Potato:

As Agnaa originally said, given just how much he was reprimanded in sum total, if anything the way he was treated was an overreaction for this somewhat semi-offensive comment.

 

[Purgy]

It's not just about that comment at this point though, apparently this is a regular occurrence.

 

[Schnee_One]

You say that in response to a man being given a job, and the power with it, and not doing the job.

I don't think anybody is over exaggerating, but if thats what you believe then fine.

 

[00potato]

The reprimands weren’t much besides a symbolic gesture, considering how consistently he acted like this (the others could attest.) It isn’t doing anything at all.

 

[Agnaa]

@Ant I believe Wright/Schnee's comments come from more of a knowledge of Eficiente's history, rather than just this one comment.

I also don't share your worry about attacks, especially with how civil but stern Wright/Schnee's comments there have been. But I do see why you'd rather this happen over PMs.

 

[Antvasima]

Schnee and Wright:

Okay. That is appreciated, but it is still preferably to talk in private for problems between staff members. It is even written in our rules.

 

[Antvasima]

@Ant I believe Wright/Schnee's comments come from more of a knowledge of Eficiente's history, rather than just this one comment.

I also don't share your worry about attacks, especially with how civil but stern Wright/Schnee's comments there have been. But I do see why you'd rather this happen over PMs.

I was responding to Potato.

 

[Schnee_One]

I need to get rid of that rule because it gets nothing done, but I am still keeping that post

 

[Antvasima]

You say that in response to a man being given a job, and the power with it, and not doing the job.

Look. I am under a massive amount of consistent stress nowadays, and still try to stay professional as well as I can, but not everybody have my ability to compartmentalise and enter some kind of work trance detached from increasing personal panic over the state of the world at large. So if a few otherwise productive staff members are occasionally in an annoyed mood, I try to remain reasonably tolerant.

 

[Antvasima]

I need to get rid of that rule because it gets nothing done, but I am still keeping that post

We should definitely keep the rule. It keeps antagonism between staff members along with public humiliation to a minimum.

 

[Schnee_One]

Schnee:

It is much better if you take it to private PMs instead of several members attacking him publicly at the same time. He is much more likely to respond well to that kind of approach.

Once they actually "Attack" Him, I will remove it. Nobody has right now.

 

[Antvasima]

It is still inappropriate. If you take it private, he is far more likely to respond well and shape up.

 

[Schnee_One]

It is not inappropriate to warn somebody when we literally do that to every single person on the wiki when they violate a rule.

We are not giving staff special treatment over normal members. This has gone on for far too long, lets drop this for now.

 

[Antvasima]

I definitely do not want us to initiate prolonged ongoing hostility between many staff members to be started for the slightest reason. It is an extremely bad idea, and would destroy a lot of community cohesion and organisation.

We handle warnings and prolonged arguments in private, period, and if they are serious enough, we involve the Human Resources group. It is not up to you to decide to suddenly overturn our working standards.

Anyway, I need to go to bed now. I would greatly appreciate if nobody causes any drama while I am asleep.

 

[ElixirBlue]

...

 

[Schnee_One]

I am not Overturning working standards by doing what we have done for everybody else. Somebody violates the rules, we warn them, simple. If we outright don't do this for staff under the guise of "Public humiliation and drama" then why is it okay to do this on normal members?

Nobody is attacking or destroying wiki cohesion.

 

[Antvasima]

@AKM sama @Promestein

Some help would be appreciated here.

 

[Antvasima]

Schnee:

If we are causing longterm hostility between staff members via public humiliation for very slight offenses, we will inevitably cause alienation and bad blood that gradually destroy the trust and cohesion within the staff.

These types of policies are up to the bureaucrats to decide, not to be suddenly overturned via public drama.

I would greatly appreciate if you drop this topic. Thank you.

 

[ElixirBlue]

Staff on message wall: Please don’t cause discord in threads.

Eficiente: Yes, so sorry. I apologize for my behavior. I’ll work to improve myself.

Everyone: Ok. Let’s move on.

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, again, I am very tired, and have to go to sleep now. I would appreciate if nobody detonates any volatile situation while I am gone. Thank you.

 

[Antvasima]

Staff on message: Please don’t cause discord in threads.

Eficiente: Yes, so sorry. I apologize with my behavior. I’ll work to improve myself.

Everyone: Ok. Let’s move on.

Okay. Thank you. This issue seems to have been solved then.

 

[Schnee_One]

"If we are causing longterm hostility between staff members via public humiliation for very slightoffenses, we will inevitably cause alienation and bad blood that gradually destroy the trust and cohesion within the staff."

For goodness sakes warning somebody is not public humiliation, we literally warn people on their walls all the time. Hell, I have been warned over this in the past as well.

 

[Tllmbrg]

I think it wasn't Ef actually doing that but Blue saying what he should do

 

[Schnee_One]

Okay. Thank you. This issue seems to have been solved them.

Eficiente didn't actually do this (On his wall), Elixir is just saying how this situation could have been resolved.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. That is unfortunate. I hope that he will be reasonable then.

 

[Schnee_One]

Likewise, have a good nights rest

 

[Promestein]

A public warning works fine. Warn and move on. If there's a more pervasive issue you can contact HR about it.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I trust Promestein's sense of judgement, but am worried that it will risk to alienate and cause productive staff members to quit.

 

[Schnee_One]

I know of basically zero staff members who consistently act like this without punishment, I assure you this is not alienating any other staff members and not even alienating to Eficente himself.

Regardless, this is settled, you should get some rest as I imagine its late in your area

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Good night.

 

[Promestein]

Good staff won't quit in response to punishment.

 

[Bobsican]

I'm just going to mention that being more transparent on the procedures that are done would be nice. Even if we're going to remain with the "in private" staff warning stuff and so on, the discussion over it should be made public at a later date at least, rather than only the outcome, if any.

 

[Schnee_One]

Eficiente has given a formal apology on his wall, seems this is settled

 

[I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die]

Let's drop the topic now

 

[AKM sama]

Welp

Guess I am late to this. But if this was a recurring issue, you should have brought it up with the HR group instead of starting drama here. We even have a rule for situations exactly like this and that's why we have HR group members. I am surprised nobody even mentioned it except for Prom.

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with AKM.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

I mean, having abuse of power dealt with in private by a handful of staff doesn't exactly inspire much confidence. If the problem is that staff aren't doing their job, why should people trust that these specific staff members are doing their job to investigate? Especially sense, as far as I'm aware, no one else on the site is privy to those conversations.

Like, it's one thing to not have a say in those things, it's another to not even be able to view the discussion. Especially in light of much bigger staff related fiascos in the past.

 

[Agnaa]

In some cases HR group will have to deal with somewhat sensitive information, so I think their role is a lot more justified there. You wouldn't wanna post proof of someone doxxing you on the RVT; since that kinda defeats the point of keeping that information private.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

Then keep cases where private info would need to be shared private and let us view the other ones.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

Going to bed. Will continue this tomorrow.

 

[ElixirBlue]

Basically, I believe what Wright is saying, Eficiente's attitude on the threads doesn't warrant a private discussion with HR, since it wasn't that big of a deal. Just Eficiente being rude, but not anything more.

The current discussion has now moved from, Eficiente's attitude, to, will staff always be treated with privacy for their actions, no matter what they do, while regular members continue get public executions on threads like we are on now?

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I suppose that this case could be handled via a simple reprimand, but I definitely do not want far more potentially explosive and sensitive situations handled in public. Among other things, it would force us to do extremely stressed out and rushed decisions, and be criticised at every turn for them.

 

[Antvasima]

For example, if a group of people are systematically destabilising the wiki, and/or something serious needs time to be investigated in peace and quiet, it is definitely not a good idea to try to force us to rush things with constant interference from anybody who feels like it, regardless of lack of qualifications.

 

[AKM sama]

If the problem is that staff aren't doing their job, why should people trust that these specific staff members are doing their job to investigate?

I am sure nobody here thinks that the entire staff team is not doing their jobs. HR group consists of highly level-headed and fair-minded admins who have a good sense of judgment.

Like, it's one thing to not have a say in those things, it's another to not even be able to view the discussion.

Having these discussions out in the public causes more of a problem in that everybody who has some bias against someone start a witch-hunt against the person who they want to see gone or demoted. People are much much more likely to listen if they are talked with in private by a higher-ranked authority in a calm manner, not like this where everybody is trying to publicly humiliate someone which just serves to stoke the fire. Or in worse cases where they are given specific warnings publicly, some people go out of their way to provoke a reaction to get them in trouble.

Eficiente's attitude on threads doesn't warrant a private discussion with HR, since it was(N'T) not that big of a deal.

The matter for which he was initially reported wasn't even report-worthy when it was already handled in the thread. Staff members are humans too and they can be volatile too. This is a debate forum where people need to have a thicker skin and not make a mountain out of a molehill as Agnaa previously said. But later, people brought the issue of this being an ongoing problem and yes, in that case, it does warrant a discussion with HR. That's the whole point of them being there.

will staff always be treated with privacy for their actions, no matter what they do, while regular members continue get public executions on threads like we are on now?

I already covered this in my response to Wright. Additionally, cases involving staff members almost always attract a lot more unnecessary controversy that tends to cause more drama than needed. Eventually, such cases were decided to be handled privately so that they could be dealt with in a fair and more efficient manner overall.

Anyway, the matter was resolved so we probably should stop this discussion.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

The word “reprimand” is beginning to irk me, because what does it even mean at this point? If it’s what was done in the BlazBlue thread, then that’s absolutely not anything that’s gonna leave an imprint for said person to shape up. That’s just a slap on the wrist, that honestly ends with the offender more satisfied. That doesn’t help anyone.

A reprimand should be something akin to what Schnee did, or at least someone of “high status”, because ultimately a bunch of normal members are not going to seem like it’s actually going anywhere. It should not in under any circumstances be a bunch of people apologizing for them, saying their reputation is why they should go off scott free, that’s not a reprimand.

 

[Antvasima]

I still strongly agree with AKM.

 

[Agnaa]

I already covered this in my response to Wright.

I'm not seeing an explanation for why staff reports should be treated differently from non-staff reports from your only response. Only a statement that they are, and that there's a rule about it.

@Milly Come on... Why do you keep saying he got off "scot-free"? You recognize that he got reprimanded but view that as nothing. What do you want if not a demotion or ban? If a warning is nothing, and he shouldn't be given nothing, that's the only option I see left.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Come on... Why do you keep saying he got off "scot-free"? You recognize that he got reprimanded but view that as nothing. What do you want if not a demotion or ban? If a warning is nothing, and he shouldn't be given nothing, that's the only option I see left.

A reprimand should be something akin to what Schnee did, or at least someone of “high status”, because ultimately a bunch of normal members are not going to seem like it’s actually going anywhere.

I’m not sure why this was skipped over.

 

[Agnaa]

It wasn't just a bunch of "normal members" reprimanding Eficiente in the thread. On top of Earl's reprimand that DDM "liked", Ant and Glassman also told him to stop. A bureaucrat, an admin, a discussion mod, and a non-staff user all were involved.

 

[AKM sama]

I'm not seeing an explanation for why staff reports should be treated differently from non-staff reports from your only response.

Having these discussions out in the public causes more of a problem in that everybody who has some bias against someone start a witch-hunt against the person who they want to see gone or demoted. People are much much more likely to listen if they are talked with in private by a higher-ranked authority in a calm manner, not like this where everybody is trying to publicly humiliate someone which just serves to stoke the fire. Or in worse cases where they are given specific warnings publicly, some people go out of their way to provoke a reaction to get them in trouble.

 

[Antvasima]

Milly:

He said something a tiny bit offensive, due to being in an annoyed mood, and you essentially want him repeatedly publicly punched in the face for it in a humiliating manner, but are not satisfied anyway no matter what.

Your extreme oversensitivity and thirst for vengeance for the slightest provocation is currently serving as a continuous destabilising influence in this community. I definitely do not want us to adopt an ongoing Twitter-style oversensitive lynchmob/victim mentality.

As I and other have mentioned previously, you need to grow a thicker skin, and accept that staff members (and other people of much higher authority) are just people too, who have bad days, or you won't be able to endure any challenges that human civilisation as a whole throws at you.

 

[Promestein]

Ant you're overreacting.

 

[Antvasima]

I do not think that I am when an issue is relentlessly repeatedly overblown to this degree, and nothing seems to be enough to satisfy the vindictiveness stemming from a tiny offensive comment.

 

[Promestein]

You're overreacting much worse and retaliated with an extremely bad faith interpretation of Milly's stance here.

With this said, I do think Eficente's been warned enough for that single incident. Staff have been quite involved already.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

It wasn't just a bunch of "normal members" reprimanding Eficiente in the thread. On top of Earl's reprimand that DDM "liked", Ant and Glassman also told him to stop. A bureaucrat, an admin, a discussion mod, and a non-staff user all were involved.

The comments were it was rude, and could’ve been worded differently. Glass was the only one who actually told him to genuinely stop the disrespect, regardless of reason.

Milly:

He said something a tiny bit offensive, due to being in an annoyed mood, and you essentially want him repeatedly publicly punched in the face for it, but are not satisfied anyway no matter what.

Your extreme oversensitivity and thirst for vengeance for the slightest provocation is currently serving as a continuous destabilising influence in this wiki. I definitely do not want us to adopt an ongoing Twitter-style oversensitive lynchmob mentality.

As I and other have mentioned previously, you need to grow a thicker skin, and accept that staff members (and other people of much higher authority) are just people too, who have bad days, or you won't be able to endure any challenges that human civilisation as a whole throws at you.

I really... don’t care if you think it was a tiny bit offensive. It was disrespectful, and above all is was unprovoked aggression which you yourself said he was likely right in. If you actually paid attention past me saying “I’ll drop it because it extends past me”, you would know I ALSO accepted his apology earlier and outright said prior I had no ill will over him.

You say I’m overreacting, in fact a lot of people are, yet they’re lying about the things I’ve said, forcing narratives in my mouth I ever said, or just straight up ignoring what I’m saying. Hell, or all three. All of them mods btw. If you again, READ WHAT I WAS SAYING, you would understand I was talking about how a reprimand should be handled, not trying to force another punishment for an apology I’ve already accepted.

I already told you I don’t care if they’re having a bad day, to me it’s outright just a shield to protect them from punishment. I snapped on Dargoo one time, and apologized after getting my head on, that doesn’t excuse me for blowing up. Stop portraying me as this bloodlusted fiend that wants him hung, when none of this had to do with getting him punished AGAIN.

 

[AKM sama]

With this said, I do think Eficente's been warned enough for that single incident. Staff have been quite involved already.

Agreed. We should stop this discussion at this point.

 

[Agnaa]

The comments were it was rude, and could’ve been worded differently. Glass was the only one who actually told him to genuinely stop the disrespect, regardless of reason.

Even with that interpretation, I either don't understand your take, or you're moving the goalposts.

You said you wanted something more like what Schnee did, someone of high-status and not a normal user.

I pointed out that other people were making those sorts of responses earlier in the thread.

You admit that Glassman did what you were talking about, and that Glassman is a staff member.

So that only leaves us back at the start with me not knowing what more you want done now.

 

[Antvasima]

Alright. I apologise if I overreacted. I strongly dislike public drama.

As AKM said, we should drop this issue now.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

The comments were it was rude, and could’ve been worded differently. Glass was the only one who actually told him to genuinely stop the disrespect, regardless of reason.

Even with that interpretation, I either don't understand your take, or you're moving the goalposts.

You said you wanted something more like what Schnee did, someone of high-status and not a normal user.

I pointed out that other people were making those sorts of responses earlier in the thread.

You admit that Glassman did what you were talking about, and that Glassman is a staff member.

So that only leaves us back at the start with me not knowing what more you want done now.

A reprimand should be something akin to what Schnee did, or at least someone of “high status”, because ultimately a bunch of normal members are not going to seem like it’s actually going anywhere.

Glass does fit the criteria yes (and the only one on the thread to do so), however my problem then is why that was mostly allowed to slide because he was a “good mod”.

None of this has to do with the ACTUAL POINT I WAS MAKING at the beginning, completely excluding Eff in particular, but just how the act of reprimanding should be handled in general, mod or member, since the object of discussion towards mods being talked to in private due to them potentially having negative bias.

 

[Agnaa]

Taking this to your message wall to stop the derailing.

EDIT: After talking it out on Milly's wall I've come to realize the misunderstanding. Hopefully this can help clarify things for anyone who is still in the same pitfalls I was.

Milly essentially wanted Eficiente to get something along the lines of a formal strike; acknowledgement of wrongdoing that could come into play if there are further incidents. This sorta thing is fine and has been done quite a lot on the RVT. I can't count how many times I've seen posts notifying everyone of very minor rule breaks so they can be taken into account later.

Sadly initial wordings led to some expanding misunderstandings, but in light of all of this it's clear imo that Milly had no ill will or drive to create drama out of nothing. It was a proportional response that was worded badly from not fully understanding our terminology around reports.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for the summary. I apologise to Milly then.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

It is fine, I apologize too.

 

[Antvasima]

ZaStando27 wonders if he could get another chance to rejoin this community:

Can we talk as in... could I have another go?

community.fandom.com

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

Didn’t he attempt this numerous times before?

 

[Rikimarox2]

permaban

What did he do, exactly?

 

[Ican'tthinkof1goodname]

Who is ZaStando27?

 

[DatOneWeeb]

Are you serious? Again? We've done this numerous times, ZaStando should NOT return.

 

[00potato]

Eh, let him come in.
See what happens, he seems relatively tame nowadays.

 

[KingTempest]

Apologies, can someone sum up the reason on his ban and why some are against it?

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

I don’t recall what got him permabanned initially, but it’s worth noting he attempted to circumvent the block with a sock account

TheImagineBreaker121212

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Lollipop_The_King]

This guy just changed Sonic's stats to Outversal.

 

[I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die]

Iirc I heard he was still being a problem in other discords and in other communities, and we know he made a sockpuppet account to circumvent It instead of waiting.
Zastando should not come back.

 

[KingTempest]

This guy just changed Sonic's stats to Outversal.

He did it again

 

[Damage3245]

I've given them a block.

 

[ElixirBlue]

Just lock Sonic's profile. It's too risky to allow regular members to have free reign over Pre-Gen and Modern Sonic's profile cause things like this could happen. Well, it could happen to any profile but most likely to the popular, well known ones.

 

[Antvasima]

I have locked the Sonic profile page, and extended the block to a permanent one.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

There was a Google Sheet listing a bunch of alts/socks. And it seems there are lot of things to go over, but ZaStando simply made way too many socks. And while he may not be anywhere near as bad as many others who did the same, we cannot make a double standard. Furthermore, some of his accounts such as BlitzSevenTeen were confirmed to be the same as ZaStandoBoi among other accounts. Which he and Imagine Breaker tried to argue wasn't ZaStando. Furthermore, I recall an incident in which ZaStando27ByThe11 posted on his wall, removed it. And then Imagine Breaker posted the exact same text instead. Which it looked about is fishy as an "Oops, wrong account" scenario.

 

[SamanPatou]

This new user poorly edited Neferpitou changing AP and other stuff

 

[Antvasima]

I blocked him.

 

[LIFE_OF_KING]

This user changed the profile of Whitebeard to 6-C for no apparent reason

 

[Damage3245]

I've undone their change and left a warning on their wall.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you, but no warning is shown there:

Nerazmos

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Damage3245]

Very weird. I could have sworn I typed one out but maybe I forgot to hit save.

I'll leave it there now.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thanks.

Could he have deleted your previous message?