RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation/Archive21

Oxy
Hey mods. Inasmuch as Oxy claims to have retired (see here) Shouldn't his 'tech' status be removed? Scream!! (talk) 19:33, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think her recent abuse regarding blocking, promoting and deleting user comments needs a look. AceModerator 19:38, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * BTW - Oxy quits whenever she doesn’t get her way so nothing new here - she’ll be back within a day. AceModerator 19:40, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think removing their tech rights is the right way to go. Closes the door for any unpleasantness-- "Shut up, Brx." 19:46, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This conversation is doubtless to bring Oxy back anyway. She likes to think of herself as a de-facto Mod and is terminally power hungry so the threat of losing rights will be enough so I say hold off for 24 hours before removing rights. If Oxy doesn’t come back we can do it then. My personal feeling is that if we are going to remove Oxy’s rights it should be because of oxys abuse. AceModerator 19:50, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Makes sense-- "Shut up, Brx." 19:55, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Just realised that I referred to his status - I seem to recall that Oxy doesn't identify as male. Apologies Oxy. Scream!! (talk) 20:00, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * We need to find a way to prevent that edit warring. Oxy's been warned about edit warring way too many times. 20:01, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It’s bigger than that though. Edit warring is the least of it. Oxy acts with impunity regarding blocking (lies about the reasons) and has gone on to unilateral rights removal. Combined with the edit warring and not using talk pages it sets a really bad example for new users to see a tech running around doing whatever they want against the site standards (and yes, I am aware of the hypocrisy in me saying Oxy is setting a bad example). AceModerator 20:06, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Of all the people here only me and Bongolian edit mainspace, you people leave for weeks and months at a time and never do any mainspace editing. — Oxyaena Harass  20:08, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Irrelevant. Who edits what is irrelevant. AceModerator 20:11, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

You can't remove it without a coop case so this is the wrong venue anyway. Oxy can remove her permissions herself if she wants to actually retire, as some techs have before. Otherwise it stays unless a coop cases decides it should be removed. EK (talk) 20:04, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I always take it to the talk page, people don't care and revert my edits anyways. My edit to the page simply saying "Marxist" was supposed to be a compromise with Raven, but even that got reverted. I`m sick of this shit. Wikipedia is not a reliable source, period. Raven gets to keep poisoning the well and I get punished for trying to clean it up. reverted Raven's edits too. — Oxyaena  Harass  20:05, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think that there is any actual functional significance to retirement, since there is no mention of it in the Help pages. I agree with LGM, anyone who thinks Oxy should have tech rights removed should make a coop case of it. If anyone does so, please don't waste our time: lay out the evidence with links and specific violation of rules. Bongolian (talk) 20:06, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree - this is a coop case, but I ain’t starting it. AceModerator 20:08, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * So basically you two used this space as a drama gallery to release your gripes about Oxy without having to put it to a coop? Bravo. Please give Oxy the respect of not getting the pronoun wrong a third time? Shabi  DOO  21:52, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * No, someone raised something on the mod page so four of the six mods arrived to discuss it and it was decided that no action would be taken. AceModerator 22:03, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I just wanted to say that Oxy is editwarring again, here, despite me attempting to use the talk page before I edit anything. It's frankly frustrating. — Godless Raven 🌹 Heretic 13:47, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * You're edit warring, you dick. I cleaned up that section to make it fairer to both sides of the dispute. Fuck you. — Oxyaena Harass  14:01, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Requesting a better source (or at least an additional source) than an apparently-defunct anarchist website on the alleged success of an anarchist society in Chiapas is perfectly reasonable. Citing only an anarchist source is not "fairer to both sides". So, yeah, Oxy is edit warring in this case. Personally, I would rather not spend my 'retirement' shaking my stick at the clouds and cursing at people. Bongolian (talk) 16:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , you gave Oxy a 'last warning' on edit warring yesterday (User talk:Oxyaena, but as I indicated above, Oxy has continued to edit war as of today. What action are you thinking of? Bongolian (talk) 18:59, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I`m not edit warring, I specifically edited it to remove that source and get a better one, . I cited academic sourcing, Raven then reverted my edits and accused me of edit warring. Fuck you people. — Oxyaena Harass  19:04, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Given Oxy's consistently toxic attitude, I really don't think that doing nothing is the right way to go-- "Shut up, Brx." 19:11, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I am toxic only because of the constant shit and harassment I get. I`m fed up with this wiki. Morris, Raven, you fucks. — Oxyaena Harass  19:13, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * And yet you remain....-Flandres (talk) 19:20, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Because I can't help myself, fuck you too, Flandres, you dick. — Oxyaena Harass  19:22, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * But if we are all such terrible people, is it really worth spending time here? At some point you have to reach the conclusion that retirement, from a utilitarian stance, is the best solution. Is whatever you are trying to achieve worth burdening yourself with us?-Flandres (talk) 19:31, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I am a truly terrible person because despite consistently treating Oxy with respect, I am the subject her verbal abuse. Bongolian (talk) 19:35, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * And people say I'm abrasive...Oxy, just quit it now. Take a break and I mean a real break, not flouncing off in huff telling everyone you have LANCB only to return 2 hours later...and why the fuck are you still going on about Morris? Jesus man... AceModerator 20:25, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I am toxic only because of the constant shit and harassment I get Oxy you give it as bad as you get it. Maybe if you had a better attitude to disagreement you might get less shit from people but behaving as you have on this page opens you to abuse - act like a hysterical banshee and you'll be treated as one. AceModerator 20:28, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I think you guys (Bongolian and Green Mario excluded) are being just as hostile as Oxy only you're the ones lecturing her. Why don't you lead by example considering you're a beaurocrat? Shabi DOO  20:31, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * In what way am I being hostile? AceModerator 20:48, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * If by you guys you're including me, I'm quite curious as to how you think I'm as hostile as Oxy. As for everybody else, they're just responding to Oxy's toxicity-- "Shut up, Brx." 20:35, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oxy, you need to stop making things worse for yourself. The more you insult people, the less sympathy you get. 20:38, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

What is the purpose of this?
Is anyone here actually asking for mod intervention about anything? This issue is better off in the coop if anyone wants to take it there - I don't see how this is a mod issue. AceModerator 20:53, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe blocking them for a few days to help them cool off? Something harmless.  Oxyaena is a pain, but they're hardly the worst we've had to deal with here-- "Shut up, Brx." 21:01, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This was originally a request to de-tech Oxy, but it's turned into a more general discussion about Oxy's conduct. 21:06, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * While I agree Oxy's conduct is at times appalling I fail to see this as a mod issue unless someone wants the mods to take action. In which someone actually needs to make a proposal. AceModerator 21:07, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I just wanted to point out what I did was not whitewashing, I even told Raven his latest edit was acceptable to me, only to get barked at to "stop whitewashing." called Raven out on his crap, for which I thank him. — Oxyaena Harass  21:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Honestly, I gave up editing the Anarchism page. Oxyaena reverts any edits I do, misbehaves, insults me, stalks me, has removed my rights twice and all with impunity. Since multiple mods do agree that Oxyaena is a problem, what are you waiting for to do something concretely? This situation is unpleasant and unstable. — Godless Raven 🌹 Heretic 21:22, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Your rights were only removed once. AceModerator 21:25, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * No, twice. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 21:27, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't stalk you, I only revert the ones that consist of poisoning the well, and I don't understand why people are okay with your poisoning of the well. You're a problematic person and you were banned from the ratwiki discord for a reason, for once the Discord has more sense than the wiki. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  21:28, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * You were given sysop when you had zero edits. I don't see how that's incontrovertible, remember when you gave me a migraine and laughed about it? I do. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  21:29, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Doesn't matter Oxy, you unilaterally stripped rights and that is a no no. AceModerator 21:30, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Other people have stripped sysopship from people with no edits, why take issue with me and not them? — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  21:31, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Because it has never been brought to my attention. Either way you should leave rights alone. AceModerator 21:35, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I would say the first removal of Raven's rights (on 28 April) was justified, I had also removed his sysopship as he had no real editing experience at the time. --RWRW (talk) 21:42, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * So who was doing the sysoping? I don't think it matters if someone with no edits is made a sysop. AceModerator 21:45, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * EK, apparently-- "Shut up, Brx." 21:48, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm I wouldn't mind hearing EK's reasoning. AceModerator 21:50, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Nobody has been able to contact on Discord today, so I don't know how quickly she will respond. What I do know is they're both pretty good friends and, as I understand it, EK persuaded Raven to join the wiki. --RWRW (talk) 22:00, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Many years back my older brother dropping in here for awhile and I immediately gve him sysop rights. I think vouching for people should be ok to sysop. AceModerator 22:01, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Well I think it's fair to quote her on what she has said on the wiki support Discord: "@Oxyaena I made an actual effort to get raven to edit more because the wiki is so broken and irrationally slanted so stop being cringe" (07.06.2020)— Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 22:07, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

The wiki rules clearly state that any sysop can give sysop to any account as they wish and after this there has to be a legitimate reason to sysoprevoke. Oxy absolutely broke the community standards. EK (talk) 23:36, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * While I agree with you if you want to make a proper case for this take it to the coop. Oxy definitely broke the rules but she has been told now so if he does it again I’ll bring it to the coop myself. AceModerator 23:45, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Legitimate issue - Mon input requested
I have been loathe to do this but now I believe now there is a legitimate issue with Oxy's behavior towards GodlessRaven. Not only with the constant barrage of abuse but also the non-stop editing warring as well Oxt unilaterally removing GodlessRaven's rights on two separate occasions. We all know this isn't a first for Oxy so mods, what say the rest of you. AceModerator 21:34, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Again, the first time around was when he had zero edits under his belt. People with zero edits shouldn't get sysopship. It's cheating. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  21:39, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Huh? "Cheating"? WTF is "cheating"? Also, Oxy, you do not have unilateral carte blance to determine who and who shouldn't be given rights so you were wrong to target this user particularly given your history with this user appears personal. AceModerator 21:41, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I propose a three day ban (with temporary rights removal, naturally) to help Oxyaena cool off. She needs to understand that wikis are inherently collaborative and that her poisonous attitude is unwelcome-- "Shut up, Brx." 21:45, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oxy is threatening to LANCB again. 21:48, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Of course she is. She does this whenever challenged. AceModerator 21:49, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * That would make this a lot easier. So long as they agree to their user rights being removed as well.  Then we'll be done with all of this-- "Shut up, Brx." 21:49, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay, okay
I'll take a break and back off Raven. Please don't strip me of my rights. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  21:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you Oxy. There'd be no reason to strip your rights unless you keep removing rights from users. So hopefully we don't get there. Can we close this up now? AceModerator 21:59, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I think this mod issue can go away now, but of course let’s wait for more people to agree. 22:04, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * just leave Raven alone. EK (talk) 23:37, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with this for now, but I think the general tolerance for continued behavior along these lines is growing thin for some of us. Bongolian (talk) 00:11, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Not even a day and she is edit warring again. It's fucking impossible. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 10:36, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * you know it requires two people to edit war? who is that second party i wonder? AMassiveGay (talk) 10:41, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Me, EK, Ace and Brx, constantly having to undo the stuff Oxy reverts, specifically the parts critical of Anarchism. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 10:48, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * thats false to begin with. its you and ek thats have been doing the warring oxy. and that seems more like personal beef more than anything. the edits in question are of little worth defended only with a pissy condescension. this can be dealt with on the relevant talk page. AMassiveGay (talk) 11:11, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oxy has mentioned on her own talkpage, aswell as on Godless Raven's talkpage that he's (Godless Raven)into Necrophilia or something? So, I think the beef starts with the "dead body fucking" accusations (with, imo, is fucked up and a DSM VI, like bestiality, pedophilia, shit sex ect...). Beyond Reality (talk) 11:43, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think someone pointed out that off-site behavior is not something you can generally use to punish someone in here. Aside from that, I am not into necrophilia or whatever, that's an entirely different conversation we don't have to have because it is entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand: Oxy's abuse of power, harassment and editwarring, all of those are pertinent to the site. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 11:50, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you seriously piss off? I said I want nothing to do with you, and AMassiveGay has it right. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  13:32, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring and the anarchism article
Both myself and AMG have questioned to usefulness of the disputed section, but thus far Raven and EK have only responded with gloating and accusations of whitewashing respectively. Thusly I would request Mod intervention and arbitration to settle the dispute, at the Mods' discretion. 14:01, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I support this. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  14:05, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Don't forget that you are removing a section only because you dislike it (and based on what I have heard, purely based on ideological spite). If you think RatWiki is a save haven for anarchist propaganda, I think you might be very wrong. I hope the mods take the appropriate actions for blatant whitewashing. Nowhere in the article does it contain any bit of criticism and any criticism is removed, which is hilarious, because Anarchists supposedly don't like coercion (but of course they do).  — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 14:29, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I would caution against bringing the dispute to this page, and instead wait for a Mod response. 14:33, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * What happened to "Okay, okay"? Anyway. It's now nearly 11 o'clock at night where I am and I'm tired. But I promise I will look into it. Spud (talk) 14:41, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO FUCKING TELL YOU!? IT'S NOT FUCKING WHITEWASHING, YOU DICK! — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  15:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Fellow-moderator RWRW has protected the anarchism page for moderator-only editing., I advise you not to edit the page until these issues are resolved even though you have the capability to do so. You had previously indicated that you would not abuse your powers as Tech by making moderator-only changes, so I will assume that you made that last edit without knowing it was protected. Bongolian (talk) 16:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * That's crazy that people have to argue over this. Though there are gradations of what constitutes good science, and science is imperfect, there are clearly things that are not scientific. Bongolian (talk) 17:41, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * For starters, EK and their ilk started an ideological edit war and engaged in poisoning the well while doing so. EK accused me of communist propaganda when I copy and pasted the exact same information into another section. Quite franquly IMO the section should be improved and the ideological leanings removed.--Tuxer (talk) 20:26, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * you mean whitewashed of any criticism of anarchism so your favourite ideology looks better. That's literally what the whole argument was about avoiding. EK (talk) 20:36, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Not an anarchist and you've not provided anything constructive to the conversation other than poisoning the well and poorly constructed, trollish and ideologically driven edits.--Tuxer (talk) 21:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm also not an anarchist, but I do question why you are lying about me, accusing me of ideologically trolling when I offer even the slightest non-ideological criticism of anarchism, and repeated make your own obviously biased edits that aren't supported by the sources. EK (talk) 23:00, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not opposed to presenting criticism of anarchism as long it's not done in a trollish way. Adding "Failures" section with a list of anarchist revolution is poisoning the well (which is a form of trolling) making it appear those experiments failed because "lolz anarchists crazy" rather than the fact that they were brutally crushed by fascists and communists. I am not emotionally invest in whatever issues you have anarchism so back off. --Tuxer (talk) 23:29, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * you have provided no evidence of your claims. Lied repeatedly, implied that I'm overly emotional, ideologically biased against you, trolling, and claimed I'm poisoning the well when I haven't at any point. So in short could you stop being cringe. EK (talk) 12:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I just want to add that accusing girls/women of being emotional or hysteric is actually very sexist and I would hope that everybody on this website is above that. I hope. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 13:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I used Poisoning the well while referring to the specific content you added to the anarchism, not to this petty argument here. And adding a "failures" while ignoring the context list is trolling.--Tuxer (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This doesn't belong here. Take it to Talk:Anarchism. RWRW has locked the mainpage, fight it out on the talkpage. 15:53, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I am
going to be reducing my activity here by the bulk. I am sorry for the pain I have caused. I`m probably not gonna fully retire, but I`m not gonna be as active here as I was before. Goodbye, folks. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  16:46, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Fucking hell. Quit fucking grandstanding! 16:52, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Honestly, Oxy. Most people only retire once. I've personally only known one person to retire twice. You take the retirement cake. Perhaps we should reflect on the cautionary tale, Bongolian (talk) 16:56, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Every time. As soon as you don’t get your way it’s the I’m leaving gambits. AceModerator 16:59, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sure it was probably funny the first five or six times-- "Shut up, Brx." 17:02, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Whatever impact you think this has is long since gone. It’s just tiresome now, Oxy. 17:24, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

A path out of this
From my perspective, political pages — other than those that are related to authoritarianism — are not something that RW does particularly well. This is because of the problem of worldview and because of RW not having a specific political agenda other than anti-authoritarianism.

Be that as it may, RW has a lot of political pages that touch on issues related to RW's agenda. Consequently, conflicts (including edit warring) often arise for these pages. To try to resolve these issues, I propose the following guidelines, which are similar to ones that have been previously discussed (i.e., science vs. snark). Bongolian (talk) 17:22, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Citations from bona fide science-based sources and from members of the International Fact-Checking Network (not including opinion pieces from said organizations) should be prioritized over other sources.
 * Citations from sources that are clearly either biased towards or against the topic at hand should be avoided. An important exception to this is the use of citations to represent what the topic (or person) has to say about itself (e.g. quotations).
 * So, uh, I just came back from Discord where a few users had a hours long blowout over what counts as a scientific source, so I don’t think this is The answer. 17:25, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Scientific is always a stretch when it comes to philosophy and soft science anyways-- "Shut up, Brx." 17:31, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * There is also the thornier problem as what counts as "political". Is Creationism political? Alt-med? Conspiracy theories? It seems unclear where such a line between "political" and "not political" exists, if it exists at all. 18:27, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think we should include scientific papers for politics, it's bad enough that scientific facts (climate change, gravity, evolution etc) are politicised we should not make politicisation of science.--Tuxer (talk) 22:01, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Except there is political science. Science is, for better or worse, political just like anything else. It is also usually grifters that attempt to discredit science because of "political bias". Reality has a bias, and that's why I wanted to edit Anarchism to better reflect the factuality of this world rather than fulfill an extremist political agenda. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 02:27, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

When I said 'political', I meant politicians and political ideologies (communism, capitalism, etc.), not pseudoscientific ideas (conspiracy theories, denialism) that politicians may use to further their careers. Bongolian (talk) 02:42, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I shouldn't be pedantic here but communism, capitalism, etc. are economic systems, not ideologies, but ok, I get your point. But in the mission statement of Ratwiki we have "debunking crank ideas" and frankly, this could apply to any subject within or out of politics. Just because some editors have a political agenda to manipulate articles in politics doesn't seem to be a good reason to leave it out wholesale. I do think it's important to delineate how to deal with disagreement within those. I had an idea of the sort that opposing sides shouldn't edit each other's section unless there is a clear violation, bad sources, citation needed or similar. So, in the Anarchism article as an example, nobody should edit the critical part if they have a political interest in silencing criticism. — Godless Raven 🌹 <font color="Red">Heretic 02:51, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I mean given you've been unable or unwilling to defend your edits from moderates who have now repeatedly stated that they just don't see the point you're trying to make, and in fact that said point might in fact be unsound, it's a bit hard to take you seriously here. But again, this should take place on the appropriate talkpage... 03:09, 10 June 2020 (UTC)