RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Information icon.svg Moderator noticeboard
Welcome BoN
Use this talk page to contact the mods and report behavioral problems.
The RationalWiki moderators are:

Ace McWicked BongolianLeftyGreenMarioRWRWScream!!Spud

Archives for this page
Moderator.jpg

Coop votes[edit]

10 votes to Ban, 10 votes to block for 1 week, plus sysoprevoke. Both options are for Raven alone. Make a judgement call. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 02:55, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, please, bring some closure to this issue. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 03:23, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
So the mods need to make the final decision? Thunderclapper (talk) 10:25, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
The fuck is this shit now? AceModerator 12:32, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Raven & EK are back. RWRW unbanned EK & she changed her name to "ZE" and "ZE" unbanned Raven. Thunderclapper (talk) 12:36, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Regarding Raven, it was disingenuous to LANCB before the vote completed only to return after a short period of time. I support sysoprevoke given that Raven has essentially engaged in intellectual dishonesty in an attempt to avoid punishment. A ban for 22 day seems reasonable even though it was a minority position, it was midway between the two tied positions. Bongolian (talk) 17:14, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
You know, I warned you all this might happen...but for what its worth as someone who vocally supported permaban in the original coop I am still (mostly) okay with Bongolian's proposal so I hope that can set a precedent for others who did as well.-Flandres (talk) 17:47, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't support banning these users, they should all be given one more chance. However, one immature piece of behavior associated with users recently on this website is repeatedly threatening to leave the website and close their account/s then they come back again a few days later and start up editing again under a different username or the same one. Is there way we can stop this? I would support a full ban for any user that does this from now on. If a user claims to have quit the website or places a "retired" template on their user-page this means they have left this website to never come back. We can't keep giving these users three or four extra lives, they repeatedly threaten to leave this website yet they are back a day later with all their rights restored. This brings stupid drama to this website. Once your out and fully decide on that, your out I say. Some of these users have been given so many chances, its getting ridiculous now. I say give all these users one more chance but if they break that get rid of them. I am not very active on this website right now, that will change shortly, but every time I log in here there are several users involved in unneeded drama and it's making us look bad. Just my 2 cents. John66 (talk) 17:59, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't think perma-ing users over LANCBs is worth anyone's time. Someone would have to patrol it, it'd be violating userspace policy (unless we revamp CS, and within regards to that: Bob's proposal to try it was met with exceptional negativity) and there's just a general unwillingness to do it. The socking argument is a fair one (although not one that actually exists in practice beyoned banning Mikemikev's alts, so it's not a particularly good one). Let users LANCB if they wish, it's not hurting anyone beyond fucking up the look of their userspace for a bit until they obviously undo it again and maybe some people poking fun at them. The Crow (row row fight the power) 18:07, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Interesting thanks for the info. What about if a sysop or sysop with tech rights advertises an LANCB - does that mean all their rights are removed? I noticed this does not seem to be the case currently because sysops and two with tech rights threatened to leave, then left, then came back a few days later but had all their rights installed. John66 (talk) 18:20, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
You might want to read this recent conversation to avoid reinventing the wheel. Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:24, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────LANCB is ordinarily meaningless, but this was a special case in which there was an active coop case. GR attempted to avoid punishment by LANCBing, then un-LANCBing after the case. The votes at the time of coop closure were: unanimous for sysoprevoke, with 10 for permaban, 5 for 22 week ban, and 10 for 1 week ban (:RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive104#A vote). Given the post-coop intellectual dishonesty exhibited by GR, I don't think there's any reasonable argument for the 1 week ban at this point. Bongolian (talk) 18:26, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I`m with Bongolian on this. Oxyaena Harass 18:38, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the link Bob, I see you pretty much was asking the same as me. I am going to LANCB now, see you all tomorrow! John66 (talk) 18:57, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Was the reasonable thing to do re:Bongolian blocking whatever his new account name is, for 22 days. ShabiDOO 19:09, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
EK's ban at worst was just a week and I think that week expired. I don't think she made the right call to unban GR especially without bringing it up in RationalWiki:All things in moderation. It was too quiet and that would've caused a stir even if her intentions are good and Raven decides to improve his behavior. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 19:16, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
@LeftyGreenMario I wasn't banned for any period of time and the only person who said I should be was KerKer, who just hates me personally for off-wiki reasons. I was blocked by my own request because I intended to quit, and it's only because some people here talked me into coming back that I returned at all. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 02:21, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I see that the 22 day ban has already been implemented. I fully support it. I also sincerely hope that Raven has changed his ways. Spud (talk) 05:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Whom Dysk banned for 3 months and that he shouldn't appeal it, or else... (threat. Also, KerKer said this on the deleted cord) Also, Dysk is a former Kiwi (saw that on the deleted cord aswell), so I can take a guess what the consequences are... Thunderclapper (talk) 08:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Oxy, again[edit]

I know this might be opening an old wound, but something struck me as...off about the way Oxy was treated. She surrendered her tech rights, then was subsequently sysoprevoked in a dispute partly with GodlessRaven, who IMO has been kind of a shithead. Something seems a bit wrong to me, and I think I've always kind of disliked outright sysoprevoking or banning someone. People who have known me for a while know that I tried to be more lenient during these disputes. So, here is what I propose:

  1. The conditional return of Oxy's mop (and ONLY her mop) for now.
  2. The placement of Oxyaena under probation; if she violates the terms of this probation, then her sysop rights can be taken away at-will, without a coop case.
  3. The appointment of a moderator or active sysop to monitor Oxy and to make sure she is keeping within the terms of her probation. I would suggest either RWRW or LeftyGreenMario for this; they tend to have the coolest heads on the mod team and might be able to keep Oxy on the straight and narrow.

As for the terms of her probation, I propose the following:

  1. Oxyaena cannot give a block exceeding 3.14159 days to anyone who is not a spam account.
  2. Oxyaena cannot use the Vandal Bin on users with more than 30 edits.
  3. Oxyaena has an active obligation to deescalate a confrontation with another user, with the possible exception of when another user is clearly trying to provoke her through malicious action (e.g., intentionally misgendering her). Oxyaena must contact a moderator to resolve the situation if she feels she cannot resolve the conflict diplomatically. Note: This does not extend to talking about people who are not users; calling out shitheads IRL is what we do, and Oxy is one of our loudest callers out of shitheadery.

I know that this is a painful wound to open, but simply banning users or sysoprevoking them isn't helping. I saw the I/P dispute, I saw how ineffective sysoprevoking Mona and Avenger turned out to be. We need to actively work to bring this together and try to get the users calm on this issue. RoninMacbeth (talk) 16:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

I agree to all these terms. Oxyaena Harass 16:38, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
No Scream!! (talk) 16:48, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
That's all you can say, without any further justification? It's a reasonable proposal. Oxyaena Harass 16:56, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Sounds good to me, and if Oxy’s on board then I say give it a go. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 16:57, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I mean no offense to most of the people who voted for it, but her promotion seemed very...vindictive. Especially because it was started by users who already disliked her hijacking a discussion about someone else. So I support this proposal.-Flandres (talk) 16:59, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
It was not vindictive. It was punitive and preventative. Punitive because facing consequences for her misbehavior will discourage her from misbehaving further, preventative because she can't do as much damage without sysop rights. IMO, we shouldn't be having this discussion until at least another month or two--Hastur! (talk) 17:59, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
No offense again, but you jumped in on a discussion about other users to take down a user you have repeatedly expressed problems with and that can be said for a lot of the people who voted to revoke. Forgive me if I do not take your claims not to be vindictive at their word.-Flandres (talk) 18:13, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Guys, let's calm down. Regardless of intentions in the past, the point here is to show forgiveness and mercy. So Ze, to answer your question, if it is best to extend a similar offer to Raven, then we should. RoninMacbeth (talk) 18:19, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) That's not how I remember it. There was some drama that Oxyaena was yet again neck deep in and at least partly responsible for. I proposed putting her in sysoprevoke to curtail said drama, particularly because she's a routine source of conflict and rights abuses--Hastur! (talk) 18:22, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Again, your memory of it may be flawed precisely because you consider her a long term problem you must take any opportunity to remove,(also "routine source of conflict and rights abuses" is overlooking how many of the people she was involved with were flame war causing concern trolls).-Flandres (talk) 18:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Five out of six moderators are not "flame war causing concern trolls"--Hastur! (talk) 18:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Irrelevant. Try looking back at the flame wars in the first place. Oxyaena Harass 18:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Hastur, did you read my post or not? I said a lot of people she has blocked in disputes were trolls, not the mods! Reading comprehension is a lost art nowadays, I swear...-Flandres (talk) 18:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Unless you would extend the same courtesy to Raven and others in commuting sanctions immediately I don't see how this would really help anything, we already have it a situation where in 1-3 months oxy is pretty much guaranteed her sysop rights back under probation, probably under similar terms to these, per the last coop on the subject. Trying to accelerate it makes the whole affair pointless imo since there was already a coop that determined it was best to wait. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 17:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Oxy, I could possibly even like you personally but you seem to me to be about twelve or thirteen and I don't consider that mature enough for any more rights. Scream!! (talk) 17:03, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I`m uh actually 19, and I was sysop for over five years before being sysoprevoked. I joined when I was 13. Oxyaena Harass 17:06, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Really don't see how that works in your favor. That's five years of evidence against you.--Hastur! (talk) 18:22, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
You don't even know my record, and yes, this is what Flandres meant when he says you obviously have a vendetta against me. Oxyaena Harass 18:33, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't personally think there is any substantial argument that oxy won't get sysop back, the only real consideration is why this should be done now rather than later as was pretty much agreed a week ago, and whether bringing this proposal to the coop now would actually succeed. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 17:10, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't think Oxyaena needs sysop rights. If she want to contribute to the wiki she can do so without them--Hastur! (talk) 17:26, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
It is customary to give good-faith users sysop rights, in order to level the playing field with other users. Oxy can be combative, but she is good-faith if anything. RoninMacbeth (talk) 17:33, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Would you extend that same comment to Raven? I'm not against the principle as long as it's applied fairly. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 17:38, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
"Oxy is one of our loudest callers out of shitheadery." And given her history edit warring, this is a reason to restore her mop?Ariel31459 (talk) 17:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes. Oxy stands for her truths and calls out shitheadery from people both on and off the site. So long as she keeps yelling at the shitheads off the site and lets the mods handle the ones on the site, then she should have her mop. RoninMacbeth (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

I can already imagine Ace's reaction... Thunderclapper (talk) 17:41, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Probably won't be good. RoninMacbeth (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I can picture it pretty well but let's see. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 18:01, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
This wiki is supposed to make it's points in the articles, not by "yelling at shitheads." The fact is one shouldn't yell at a shithead for the same reason one shouldn't argue with stupid people: they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. (S.L. Clemens).Ariel31459 (talk) 18:17, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I edit mainspace more than most people here. Oxyaena Harass 18:31, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Hastur What you did was uncalled for, and you're only further proving Flandres' point. Oxyaena Harass 18:43, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Just to be clear, here's what I did.--Hastur! (talk) 18:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Still uncalled for, and I couldn't do anything about it. It's unfair, I`m not a sysop, I can't undo my own block. Oxyaena Harass 18:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Hastur, may I suggest you take a step back where Oxy is concerned for a while?-Flandres (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
At this point, she's so combative with everyone, half the editors here ought to "take a step back"--Hastur! (talk) 18:50, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
If she is so "combative" why do you keep engaging with her? Nothing obligates you to, hmhmhm...-Flandres (talk) 18:51, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I`m willing to bury the hatchet with Raven, and as for Hastur, that was uncalled for, if I were in your place I wouldn't have done it. Remember when I tried getting you out of sysoprevoke and restoring your mop? Oxyaena Harass 18:54, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
You have to ask yourself who the common denominator is, Flandres--Hastur! (talk) 19:21, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
When many cases of her involvement in banning users were people like Unlicensed Thinker or theDarkMaster being the common denominator is not such a bad thing. And in these more recent conflicts you(along with other returning old guard) are pretty common yourself...it takes two to keep a feud alive, after all. The context of a conflict can make allegations about common denominators quite meaningless.-Flandres (talk) 19:30, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────As someone who voted in favor of the original vote (and still agrees with the outcome of that vote), here are my thoughts. First, I don't think the sysoprevoke should be permanent. I do genuinely believe that Oxy is willing to change her behavior and eventually get her mop back with the same rights as she had before (tech included if she wants it). Second, I can find agreement with the terms as specified by Ronin, although I will propose two additional stipulations:

  1. Oxy must put this notice on her userpage and may not remove it, unless the mob overturns stipulations as expressed. This is copied from a different user (specifically Bryan Sees coop). Specifically, she is not allowed to remove the notice when she places a Template:LANCB template on her userpage either. This is in order to both help moderators and herself remind her of the stipulations that may be placed on her.
  2. Oxy must keep a user subpage linked on her userpage in which she explains for each account that she bans for ban evasion what user it is, and what behavior caused her to ban it. Additionally, when blocking for ban evasion, she must specify the user that is evading a ban.

That second one is because as expressed in one of the Archives of this very page, Oxy's most used block reason is ban evasion with no reasons attached to it, and as examined by Nutty Roux during that section, she often is overzealous in using it and tends to block vandals permanently for ban evasion or sometimes ends up banning regulars who aren't logged in but are critical of her actions. Hence, keeping a log as to why she blocked someone for ban evasion would be useful (and I recommend a user subpage here since the block page has limitations in what you can enter and she often doesn't do it + it's easier to find for someone who needs it). The Crow (row row fight the power) 20:44, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Definitely. She would definitely have to put those stipulations on her userpage, just like the last person we used probation on. Though I think that by preventing her from blocking for an extended period of time (aside from spam accounts) she would be forced to explain to the mods what the situation is. RoninMacbeth (talk) 21:21, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Fair enough. Oxyaena Harass 21:22, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Yeah, that’s a no from me. There was a vote and Oxy lost the vote, the only vote being against was Oxy. So the punishment stands. AceModerator 00:44, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Also Oxy is so desperate for his powers it makes me wonder why she wants them so badly. AceModerator 00:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
A vote which didn't follow proper procedure, was finished in less than a day, and was voted exclusively on by people with vendettas against me. You should know there were abstaining votes and heavy dissension, and stop with your fear mongering crap. Oxyaena Harass 02:42, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
"abstaining votes and heavy dissension," I'm impressed at the mental gymnastics that must have been necessary for you to feel that nobody voting in your favor somehow vindicates you--Hastur! (talk) 02:46, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Voted on by people with a vendetta against you? And this in your mind vacates the vote? I’ll make sure the NZ government knows that during the election coming up this year that people who are anti the current government may vote against them. Shocking how people who don’t like government use their VOTES(!) to remove them from power. Amazing. AceModerator 02:53, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
In all seriousness Oxy, you lost and this craven behaviour you are still harping in about to somehow suggest the vote wasn’t fair does nothing to improve your standing. AceModerator 02:55, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I`m not the one who posted this segment, and the fact that there are several people here who either have second thoughts about their votes, or were disturbed by it in the first place, suggests your sentiment isn't as universal as it seems. I`m not the only one who says the vote wasn't fair, at least two other people on here (Ronin and Flandres) have also signaled they thought the vote wasn't fair. Oxyaena Harass 02:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Well, that’s tough shit for you then because there was a vote and you lost. Starting another vote is the only way you’ll win this. A community vote began it and only a community vote will end it. AceModerator 03:07, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Re: Raven[edit]

So pretty much as the above thing with Oxy, except with another person who got sanctioned. Essentially there was succession of related coop cases over a short lived but heated editorial dispute, in one of these coop cases there was a vote on Godless Raven, the breakdown of votes is as follows.


[A]Indef ban (10 votes)

[B]Temp ban (14 votes total)

[B.1]One week ban (10 votes) [B.2]three week ban (4 votes)


Raven has already been banned for a week since then, tho reblocked by a mod based on the minority option (B2) above. Additionally, Raven has been put in sysoprevoke, as all the coop options that were given included that, despite Raven having at no point misused the sysop tools, which if you follow RM's logic above and historical precedent on this site, is undesirable. Further to that, Raven promised to LGM that he would behave better this time, and LGM has publically said Raven has abided by it so far. Raven has also said he will make a public apology the moment he gets unblocked if people want him to, which they probably will. As much as that last editorial dispute did get heated Raven has at every point made some effort to respond to feedback, and the vast majority of Ravens work on the wiki was productive and unchallenged. Raven has been registered a year and made over a thousand edits in the time he was active, most of which people were happy with.

Therefore as this as good a place as any, I have made the following two polls, both to settle how long Raven is supposed to be blocked for, but more importantly what to do with the sysoprevoke issue. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 18:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Unblock Raven as time served[edit]

  1. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 18:41, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  2. Godless Raven SDAPOe logo.svg talkstalkwalkbalk 🌹 18:44, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  3. Oxyaena Harass 18:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  4. Yes, but with less tolerance for any bullshit going forward. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 19:09, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  5. Let's begin the healing. And what Duce said RoninMacbeth (talk) 19:30, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  6. I'd say he's on his last footing though. Let's apply WP:ROPE here. The Crow (row row fight the power) 20:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  7. Lets see how it goes. --RWRW (talk) 21:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  8. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 03:33, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Keep Raven blocked for 2 more weeks[edit]

  1. Scream!! (talk) 18:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  2. What Shabidoo said after my vote was cast.Flandres (talk) 18:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  3. You've presented an extremely skewed way of looking at the votes. If you look at it in a far more reasonable way: 10 votes for a one week ban. 14 votes for 22 days OR WORSE. 22 days is an extremely reasonable compromise. Jesus if the guy cannot wait three weeks to simmer down then I don't believe he's serious about coming back to the site sans the obnoxiousness. ShabiDOO 19:05, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
    Your method is also skewed. The only real majority consensus is that Raven should not be permabanned; lumping the more severe end of the "No permaban" camp together with the "permaban" is pretty sketchy votecounting, if you ask me. RoninMacbeth (talk) 19:37, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
    Saying he should be banned for a week(or more generally given a light punishment) is not reflecting the majority of the community either, for may who voted for the 22 day option said they thought a week was too short.-Flandres (talk) 19:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  4. cosmikdebris talk stalk 19:27, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  5. If he hadn't LANCB'd, he could easily have been permabanned. He dodged that punishment. If he's serious about being a good and productive user on this wiki, which I believe he can be, he'll sit out his ban without moaning anymore and then start anew. Spud (talk) 23:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Remove Ravens sysoprevoke[edit]

  1. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 18:41, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  2. Godless Raven SDAPOe logo.svg talkstalkwalkbalk 🌹 18:44, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Keep Raven in sysoprevoke[edit]

  1. Scream!! (talk) 18:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  2. Flandres (talk) 18:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  3. Of course...why on Earth would we remove so soon? ShabiDOO 19:06, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  4. For a bit longer, at least until we have had an opportunity to evaluate Raven’s behavior after unblocking. Pizza SLICE.gifChef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 19:10, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  5. Oxyaena Harass 19:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  6. cosmikdebris talk stalk 19:27, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  7. Thunderclapper (talk) 19:36, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  8. The Crow (row row fight the power) 20:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  9. I voted to unblock him, but for the time being it might be an idea to keep him in sysoprevoke. --RWRW (talk) 21:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  10. Yeah, he can edit the wiki without the tools for the time being. I spent years in other wikis without sysop tools, he'll be fine. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 03:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
    There’s literally no reason why not being a sysop should have any bearing on activity here unless blocked maliciously. AceModerator 04:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
    Er, no, wikis have different rules on who can be sysop or not. I wasn't sysop not because I misbehaved, just that there's limit on how many sysops can be there. What I mean is that I contributed fine without sysop tools and Raven can too if I can for so many years. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 04:28, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

  • Are we really voting on this again?--Hastur! (talk) 18:42, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
    Apparently Scream!! (talk) 18:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
    We are voting primarily on the sysoprevoke issue because I feel like it was shoehorned into the previous vote that didn't need it. But also there is some discrepancy in the time that they got blocked. Now I wasn't originally planning to bother but since Oxy has been brought up it would be unfair not to. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 18:48, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
    The fact that we're voting about this again makes it clear to me that we should ignore LANCBs and apply procedure. We should already be done with this. Permabanning yourself is a meaningless action, if you don't want to edit the wiki just don't edit it--Hastur! (talk) 19:41, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

This place is starting to look more and more like a kindergarden. No wonder no one takes us serious. Why have rules when people can bend them the way they want to or act like a bunch of fuckin' hippies (EK's plea)...

And instead of improving the wiki, (creating pages, updating pages, ect...) we're just going to be bickering about old coop cases. Heck, why not unban TDM2, Logicnsuch, Mikey, Morris & Ken. In fact, let's get rid of all rules, SINCE NO ONE SEEMS TO FUCKING CARE AT ALL!!! Forums have organisation and no one (maybe 2 or 3 people) bitch about a decision for like, maybe 2 days. This place doesn't, and never will if this gets a pass.

This is what happens when your site has no organisation. Bunch of edgy populists (a 14 year old teenager and a Chris Crocker clone) pull their victim cards against those that can be easily swayed and BAM.

Fucking hell... Thunderclapper (talk) 19:58, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Also, "Let's begin the healing"? The fuck is this, Scientology? Thunderclapper (talk) 20:01, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
I don't appreciate Ze hijacking this and reverting attention back around Raven. Also, if it'll placate some folks, I won't agitate for tech back yet. Oxyaena Harass 21:19, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
This Raven issue was posted on the page first, your section just got in the way before it was concluded and got sandwiched inbetween, if it had been posted later this wouldn't have happened ofc. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 22:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Time to put this issue to rest[edit]

Have this vote be at least four days long so everyone can get their voices heard. Oxyaena Harass 04:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Demote Oxy with probation[edit]

  1. I voluntarily relinquished tech rights, only to get spat on vindictively in a coop case that didn't even involve me. Oxyaena Harass 04:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
    Christ man, you're acting like a spoiled teenager who has been sent to their room. If this fails are you just going to come up with more excuses and run more votes? AceModerator 06:00, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  2. I proposed it, and I still think it's a good idea. RoninMacbeth (talk) 04:28, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  3. Old guard vendettas are not worth holding onto.-Flandres (talk) 04:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  4. Suspected Feminazi Harass! 08:43, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Desysoprevoke Oxy but don't demote[edit]

Too soon[edit]

  1. She hasn't demonstrated the necessary maturity--Hastur! (talk) 04:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  2. God why are we even doing this. What's wrong with you Oxy? You've been banging on like this for weeks now. Fucking hell. AceModerator 05:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Goat[edit]

Why is this still going on. Honestly I feel like this vote should chucked as null and void. We start sysoprevoke votes or vote on rights removal and that person just calls for another vote after deciding, based upon nothing, that the previous vote was invalid? What's to stop any users who loses a vote from just running another one when they don't like the outcome? AceModerator 06:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I mean really - this issue was already put to rest. If Oxy wanted show maturity she would accept the outcome and work herself into a position of trust rather than continuously complaining how unfair it all is. AceModerator 06:14, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Right? We never said putting her in sysoprevoke would be permanent. She just needed to show good faith for a few months, that's all. Instead she continues squabbling--Hastur! (talk) 06:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Doesn't any user have the right to call votes as much as they want until explicitly forbidden from doing so by mob action? She can bring this up as much as she wants until cooped or something. It doesn't really matter that you and a couple friends feel annoyed with addressing it.-Flandres (talk) 06:25, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
We already had a vote which for reasons unclear Oxy believes to be invalid. What's to stop her claiming this vote is invalid if she loses again? And just runs more and more votes until she gets her way? Where is the maturity? AceModerator 06:30, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) I have the right to do all sorts of ghastly things, that doesn't mean I ought to do them--Hastur! (talk) 06:30, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Here's a deal - if Oxy wins this I am going to insist we run another one because I don't like the outcome. You're cool with that? AceModerator 06:31, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
And she has the right to raise the complaint whether it is true or not. She can keep doing votes until the mob explicitly stops her. It doesn't matter if it annoys you or if you think it is immature. You also have the right to do the same thing.-Flandres (talk) 06:32, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Fucking absurd. Oxy is literally the only person who thinks this hasn't been out to rest already. AceModerator 06:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Roninmacbeth might disagree with you, considering that he brought this up(please actually read some of these threads before you comment on them). Again, it does not matter if you think this is absurd.-Flandres (talk) 06:40, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) It doesn't matter if it annoys you or if you think it is immature It absolutely does. These decisions are based on the health of the wiki and the community. That's why we put her in sysoprevoke in the first place. And by attempting to undo the vote she's just perpetuating her behavior--Hastur! (talk) 06:42, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Have you seen me say that my opinion matters? I'm expressing my own disbelief at Oxy's inability to act like an adult rather seems to act like my 7 year old daughter when I take her chocolate away for being naughty (It's not fair daddy!). AceModerator 06:44, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Hastur, that's what you think. If the community decides she should be given back her rights despite your whining about "immaturity" than tough luck for you. Ace, you were implying you had the right to stop her from bring up votes because you are apparently not capable of handling it. I was saying you can't do that just because you think it is "absurd" if her to call another vote.-Flandres (talk) 06:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I implied no such thing. All I said was my opinion is that this vote is null and void. I didn’t say there was anything I could personally do to stop. So, you know, try better to understand. AceModerator|
Okay, mister "oxy totally started this discussion." Also, if you can't handle people repeatedly bringing up a dispute why are you a moderator?-Flandres (talk) 06:52, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
What the fuck are you talking about? So as a moderator I can’t express an opinion? 06:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
But you can't handle a dispute being brought up again when your job is to moderate disputes? You have a right to express your views, you did, that is nice, but it cast doubt on your competence so I will bring that up.-Flandres (talk) 06:57, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Again what the fuck are you talking about? As a User and a Moderator my opinion is that Oxy should remain in sysoprevoke. As voted on above. I also think voting on this again is absurd. What are you having trouble with? Which part is incompetent? AceModerator 07:00, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
You are clearly the one having trouble-you just completely misread my point. I started a tangent that your stated view is not good for a mod. I could see how you might reply "stay on topic, that's irrelevant" but I can't see how you could miss the point entirely...but if you really just are not capable of understanding, it is that if you cannot handle repeatably discussing disputes than as a mod who MUST discuss disputes that makes you worse off. It is your job to deal with this, not bitch that you have to.-Flandres (talk) 07:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

You’ve lost me totally. Sorry man but I’ve stated my opinion which for some reason you think It is wrong of me to hold that opinion. There’s nothing here to moderate at the moment. AceModerator 07:10, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for losing you-I should have known better, hmhmhm...even excluding my little tangent about your competence,you still have not addressed the core point. She has a right to call this vote as much as she wants again and again until she is forced to cease, and that this matter(her user rights) clearly is not settled. Hell, she didn't even start this current discussion.Flandres (talk) 07:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I did none nor said nothing akin to anything you just wrote. AceModerator 07:19, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
You did-for starters you said that Oxy is the only person who does not think this is settled.-Flandres (talk) 07:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
So you are going to split hairs with me now? OK - it appears as of now, Oxy and 2 others do not think this has been settled. Said number could grow over time and I make no forecast on how many people believe this to still be an issue. How’s that? Ok with you? AceModerator 07:25, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Well, I personally think more people than the ones who already voted do not think this is settled, otherwise they would not have commented. But yes, I appreciate your ability to correct yourself and agree with the basics of what you said.-Flandres (talk) 07:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)