RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation

Not to be confused with the Chicken coop.

Moderator noticeboard Welcome, BoN Use this talk page to contact the mods and report behavioral problems. The RationalWiki moderators are: Bongolian • CorruptUser • Techpriest • Plutocow • Spud • KarmaPolice

Archives for this page

Dysk just nuked the Coop

LGM took away his tech rights and put him in sysoprevoke. As per procedure, we now must discuss it and decide if we want to keep it, and since the coop both was occupied and is right now out of commission, here goes. I don't really think he oughta get them back, this is probably the straightest abuse of rights as you can get. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 20:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

For the record, I’m fully in favour of Sysoprevoking Dysk after that stunt (about 20,000 edits got suppressed). For the sake of transparency in the aftermath I removed the rights from a bot he set up just today (no idea what it was for) and in my opinion that should remain the same. I also removed the tech rights from User:Ze, given that she’s Dysk’s sister and involved in the recent drama (though seemingly not involved in Dyskgate). I’ll leave it up to the others to decide if she gets tech back. --RWRW (talk) 21:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I'd suggest keeping a close eye on Ze, although I hope she wasn't involved and this is just Dysk going rogue on his own. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 21:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hopefully it was an error or misunderstanding. I'm curious to see what the explanation was.ShabiDOO 21:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

It probably was a fatfinger. No idea. Maybe. — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 21:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Are we ever going to talk about the mod abuses of LGM, though? — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 21:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)So, I would wait for Dysk to provide an explanation just because this might be a monumental technical fuck-up...but it had better be a pretty damn good explanation. Also, will everyone please ignore GR and his sad attempts to derail the conversation?-Flandres (talk) 21:20, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I have mostly stayed out of the GR business... except for now. Dude, fuck off - this isn't about you. Stay on topic or fuck right off. Ace^Moderator 21:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I didn't do anything though, Ace? — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 21:24, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes you did - you turned a section about someone else's behaviour into a grievance of you own. Don't do that. Ace^Moderator 22:29, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

It isn't about me. It's about LGM. She has a pattern of abusing her power. People here only look at the reactions of the attacked faction (like Dysk) but never care about what caused the reaction (like LGM consistently applying dishonest and hostile tactics). — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 22:32, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

For fucks sake you fucking daft dick. This was a section about Dysk and only Dsyk until you rode in and shooting your face off about some spat your having with LGM. This is fucking simple - take your bullshit elsewhere. This section is about Dysk you numb nuts. Ace^Moderator 23:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Since I just had to fold the bit with evidence, here is the Suppression Log again. It has evidence for his actions. Also, I just collapsed GRs comments. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 21:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Remove D’s tech rights. You don’t get to pull that shit. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:24, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

He's a staff member. — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 21:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Doesn’t mean shit. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@DuceMoosolini LGM did. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 21:27, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Fucking good. D has displayed serious impulse control issues and obviously cannot be trusted. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ That page was annoying me intensely. In a moment of anger I clicked a button to make it disappear. My bad. — Dysk (contribs) 21:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, regarding issues with impulse control, remember when someone told people in saloon bar "fucking ass shits, get covid and die"? That person has yet to be punished. — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 21:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@GR- fucking dead horses is alright with you, we know. Beating them too, apparently? @Dysk, I forgive you for your easily rectified outburst. We're only human--Hastur! (talk) 22:46, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

necrozoophilia, huh. — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 22:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I will assume Dysk made an honest mistake, but the deletion itself is a deliberate choice done in bad judgement, and the suppression so it didn't show in the logs was also a big, fatal mistake that happened that required a moderator to step in and fix. Regardless, the tech role is a big responsibility and Dysk has failed to honor this through impulse, so while mistakes can be forgiven, Dysk should not have the tech responsibility, not for a very long time, if ever again. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't see how this has very much gravity as a standalone incident. If you can demonstrate that Dysk has a history of pulling such stunts I am willing to listen but otherwise this is a harmless, easily undone fluke-Hastur! (talk) 23:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

That self-awareness right now... — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 22:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I presume that putting vaguely related users, who did nothing, in sysoprevoke isn't a mistake... oh wait, I can't talk about that... of course I agree with the basic principle, that deleting a page is a unforgivable action of grave importance, as the 5 seconds it takes to press the restore button is a tragic loss of administrative time, truly worthy of permanent censure. Carry on. — Dysk (contribs) 23:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm asking, why do we give out tech rights? Why do we restrict page suppresion, why is Dysk allowed to delete a page with 2,000+ revisions and the normal sysop can't? Why do we not grant block rights to people who can't be trusted to have block rights, as blocks are easily undone? Page suppression is not to be used really lightly, and it takes a moderator to undo the suppression and also try to view the suppression logs. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 23:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Why are you asking? I assume as a mod you would know what the answers are. In any case. Tech rights are given to people who want to use the edit filter, sitenotice, et al. We do routinely give block rights to people who can't be trusted with it, but, imagining for a moment we didn't do that, it would be to avoid users being unnecessarily expelled from the wiki. The bigdelete restriction on deletion is due to the possibility of very large deletions (eg: the saloon bar) taking out the database accidentally by overloading it. This would be a Bad Thing™. Page suppression is eh, tech/mod level delete, functionality is identical. — Dysk (contribs) 00:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not asking for an explanation of what the tools do and whatnot, I am asking, why do people ask for tech rights, why do we grant or reject their requests? And I will argue, that all blocks are easily undone too. Why do you think some people don't deserve block rights if blocks can just be undone? And yes, there's a restriction on bigdelete because it has serious consequences if abused, on top of the revdel abuse. What's stopping you from attempting to bigdelete Saloon Bar? I do not trust you from refraining from your impulses. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 00:27, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

This was a one-time fuckup and he admitted wrong-doing. He is a good faith user and ought to be treated as such.--Hastur! (talk) 00:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

They also reverted LGM's sysoprevoke of GR, done, I presume, to enforce a temporary block. Techs should not countermand moderators, that's what the coop is for.Ariel31459 (talk) 00:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Infinite block Ariel, and without following due process. — Dysk (contribs) 00:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Eh LGM, I would grant certain sysop rights to everyone including BoNs if I could... I think everyone should have block rights equally, the very principle of dividing sysops, mods, techs, and editors is distasteful to me. I could argue that this is a form of fascism, directly responsible for many HCM events, and so forth... the wiki would be fairer if there were no techs, no mods, no sysops, and editors gained rights automatically over time. Bans could be enacted via a voting extension, the details are not unworkable, of course it's not the situation here on this wiki right now. Putting my ideologically guided thoughts to one side, what are you saying here? I told you I agreed with your decision already, I don't doubt for a moment that I would have done the same. — Dysk (contribs) 00:54, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

That wasn't clear that you agreed with my decision. I am asking to explain your reasoning on why some rights are restricted, even if they seem like they can be easily undone, including page suppression from sysops. I'm sorry if I didn't come clearly. By the way, I don't think your idea of RationalWiki will work; I think we need some form of power difference to prevent abuse. I believe RationalWiki started as this but established moderators/crats as soon as issues cropped up. I do not see anything closely resembling fascism; I see a bunch of people with nearly equal rights as another fighting over what and what shouldn't be done. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 01:02, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I wrote the following:

"" of course I agree with the basic principle, that deleting a page is a unforgivable action of grave importance, as the 5 seconds it takes to press the restore button is a tragic loss of administrative time, truly worthy of permanent censure. Carry on. ""

Mayhaps this came over as sarcasm? The rest of my commentary here is my attempt at explaining I don't think userrights should be restricted as they are, that power imbalance is unnecessary hirachary (fascism), that you seem to have overreated to a momentary fuck-up in terms of your related actions, and of course a certain amount of confusion as a result. — Dysk (contribs) 01:32, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I ranted about editor retention because I quit the site in 2019 over an unrelated issue. Yeah I never returned from that LANCB, I ain't here now insofar as I have no intention of contributing. My presence as it is, is merely assisting the wiki in surviving via my maintaince of the edit filter for a year or however long, polishing a few bells and whistles, and seeing if I can get a few asshats to see reason once in a while. Oh yeah I'm on the board cause the fucking software needs updating. — Dysk (contribs) 02:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Dysk, I don't think that expressing your tangential desire to grant Sysop to all-comers exactly helps your case. Bongolian (talk) 01:53, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Of course, you are a liberal. Indeed you never agreed with me on the nature of that permission. — Dysk (contribs) 02:19, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Mod abuses

I wanted to ask if there will be any time in which the mod abuses of LGM will be discussed? She unilaterally indef blocked me and sysoprevoked me previously without proper cause nor notifying ATIM. [2] — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 21:22, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Mod elections. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Alright. — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 21:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

So...when will all the previous 13 threads be archived, may I ask? This page is getting rather long.-Flandres (talk) 18:51, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Feel free. — Dysk (contribs) 02:34, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Useless edit by sysop adds slur

Can we not do this? --Aurelia (talk) 09:04, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

If you read the paragraph, you'll see that it's not a slur because the accusations really were dumb. Spud (talk) 10:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

It's still a superfluous edit using a word that some people consider a slur. If you wanna haha own me in here by saying slurs aren't slurs when they're accurate, or that I'm an oversensitive wokescold, maybe RationalWiki is not the place I thought it was and I'll happily go away and you'll never hear from me again. Otherwise: The paragraph provides enough information that an outright value judgement in the title is really just making the article worse. --Aurelia (talk) 13:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I've undone it. Seems unnecessary to me, but why the need for moderator action? Kiko4564 (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm somewhat bit unfamiliar with how RationalWiki works. It seems Sysop is given out more lightly than other wikis, and does not even closely confer the authority usually associated with the role. My apologies. --Aurelia (talk) 14:03, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I'd say that while the status of the word dumb as a slur is... contentious IMHO (this goes in the territory of "are most of the words we use to describe really bad notions/ideas slurs", in which case, yes, but I'd argue that "dumb" is so far removed from that context that it's not really a slur anymore), the edit is rather useless. It adds an opinion that the content of the article does not reflect in and of itself (rather it explains the incident), so it probably shouldn't be in there. Also, feel free to dispute any section. Normally we use the article's talkpage to do that, not ATIM though. ATIM is more for larger problems between users (so that mods can come in and try to mediate) or dealing with rights abuses. Anyway, it seems like Kiko removed the section, so it's no longer a problem. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 14:24, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Even if one accepts the idea that it's a slur, it's not directed at either a sysop or a group of people (gender, sexual orientation, nationality, ethnicity, etc.) It's equivalent to 'dumb idea'. If we can't say that, we're fucked. Bongolian (talk) 16:42, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Lol, imagine thinking dumb is a "slur". Please. People need to get the fuck over themselves. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 16:44, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Semantics is not a hot topic around here. If by "dumb" one means, "this says little or nothing," then it is a fairly consistent usage with the adjective, "dumb." The verb "to dumb-down," essentially means to say less, usually for people who don't want to or can't understand more. Dumb as a synonym for stupid, is a mostly harmless though questionable usage. 71.174.3.97 (talk) 18:06, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Sysoprevoke

I'm in it, I demand to be let out of it. There was no vote, it would be highly irregular given the circumstances to maintain a sanction of this nature beyond the short term, it's disproportionate and unrelated to my recent heat-of-the-moment deletion of your second favourite page. In short, it should not stand. — Dysk (contribs) 02:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree - if he didn’t abuse his sysop rights then he shouldn’t had them taken away on someone’s whim. Ace^Moderator 02:20, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Wait until the Coop case is over and in the meantime make constructive edits and try to be nice about asking stuff back. I do not trust you anything beyond autopatrol. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 02:23, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Cool, I don't trust you with mod. That whole trust thing, it is how it is, not greatly important to the situation. As for being nice, this is me being nice... — Dysk (contribs) 02:32, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

At the risk of stepping into a fight… Since LGM and D are going to be working together on the Board, perhaps it would be a good idea for you two to at least come to some sort of détente? Bongolian (talk) 03:09, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate the attempt at diplomacy but I believe Dysk assumes bad faith from me and cannot take suggestions for improvement without firing passive-aggressive at me some more, and I find this nearly impossible to work with. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 03:14, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

LGM I strongly disagree with many of your recent decisions as a mod, the last time it was Kazitor, this time it's Raven. I'm not offering you any suggestions for improvement, it's a difference of opinion, a subjective matter of judgment. — Dysk (contribs) 03:50, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I have acknowledged Kazitor's claims of not disagreeing with my behavior but Kazitor was referring to my actions toward a bigoted anti-LGBT member. Whatever conclusion Kazitor has formed about my behavior is highly undermined that the interaction involved someone that was viciously attacking a sexual identity I happen to have (as well as more vile behavior toward gay and trans people). I rather people stop citing Kazitor as a legitimate criticism on my behavior considering the subject matter Kazitor believes is "up for debate" is some of the most vile, personal, and unpleasant things I had to endure, and I also do not believe Raven's criticisms have any merit. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 04:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah the way you think about Raven is the way I think about you. This is a two-way street. As for Kazitor... you drove him off the wiki. Funny how you do that. — Dysk (contribs) 04:19, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I do not believe how I acted is anywhere near comparable to Raven's behavior. I do not think I have to even begin to try to draw the comparisons. As for Kazitor, as I stated, Kazitor was really selective in what examples they did pick to illustrate the narrative of hostile moderators (the essay itself is short is and is devoid of examples beyond that one incident). Kazitor was upset at me being upset at this comment, this comment this comment that had me react with hostility to. If Kazitor believes these comments are in any way acceptable for the sake of RationalWiki:Constructive dialogue I do not believe Kazitor's complaints are valid, and I am not troubled by Kazitor leaving over this. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 04:34, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah you don't care about the thoughts of others, and willfully disregard the principle of free speech. I get it. — Dysk (contribs) 05:01, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

That's not true. Kazitor could've used any other example, but Kazitor, limited by very short length of the essay, was being selective about those examples. It's a short essay. Kazitor could've picked other examples, but the one example Kazitor chose involved a bigot that rubbed on my wounds from being asexual, and that bigot would've violated community standards by making homophobic remarks. It's far from the best example. I tried to take Kazitor seriously at the time, rethinking about the wiki approach to people (I might have even brought up civility standards and I think I've thought about it a few times), and I even remember at the time being disappointed Kazitor left and leaving a message saying I'll miss them. Again, Kazitor's conclusion had a point, but Kazitor's example is bad and undermined that point. In other words, wasn't helpful to me and I was left wondering what else was Kazitor was thinking about and being disappointed that I couldn't get more examples. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 05:14, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree. Bongolian (talk) 02:29, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

D should not have sysop. This wasn’t a little mistake, he misused tools to suppress an entire page of debate. He’d do it again too, by harassing people with repeated blocks or deleting the same page over and over again or using some other means of undermining this site and it’s users. He has shown himself to be a hostile element, no better than a troll. His petulant “demand” and antagonism towards someone he theoretically should be pledged to work with also shows this. D has no respect for the wiki or its users, and he means us harm. No sysop. It’s not like he even needs it for anything. It wouldn’t be worth the constant supervision he’d need.Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 03:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I did have some trepidation in agreeing to unrevoke D, mainly because he was unwilling to explain his actions. By détente, I was thinking of some circumscription around D's editing activities, and mutually agreed upon civility. Maybe I was too quick to agree if this bare minimum can't be agreed upon? Bongolian (talk) 03:24, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I suggested D to wait until the coop is over and in the meantime do some constructive edits to show how sysop tools will help them. I got met with hostility, though. Are my suggestions inappropriate? I can explain why I do not trust Dysk with sysop tools, namely because they have misused deletion and page visibility privileges on a large, public page on a whim and cannot be trusted to handle any pages while having access to the delete button. This is on top of block privileges they have used repeatedly on Crow despite being outlined in the Community Standards that advises against disruptive repeated blocking. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 03:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

The amount of bad faith here is hilarious. You are clearly using your own ideas of future events, as the base for your opinions. I admit, it was a clear example of tech abuse to delete your second favourite page, I freely admit that was my bad. The idea I mean the wiki harm is... interesting, yet false. I've never said anything to anyone which could give that impression. You made it up yourself. In the meantime I am asking for you to remove sysoprevoke, largely because it's a barrier for the upcoming mod elections... which you would no doubt prefer I didn't run for. That is why I must be pushy on this, apologies if it interferes with your master-plan or some shite. As for constructive edits? Gee, I created most of the current edit filters, and was the only one maintaining them for a fair chunk of time. I got onto the RationalMedia Foundation board, admittedly for the sole purpose of getting slacking sysadmins to install software. I created a few pages here and there as I recall. In any case, I'm not asking for sysop, I'm asking you to remove sysoprevoke. Not for any need to have tools, merely because there are associated restrictions. — Dysk (contribs) 03:43, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you believe that it's ridiculous that inferring from your prior judgement you cannot be trusted to change that judgement later on. Admitting your mistakes is only a part of the effort to get people's trust back; actually owning up to the consequences and not demanding favors from others is another. I do not see how your insistence on referring to the chicken coop as "your second-favorite page" is endearing or helping you get your tools back. As for sysoprevoke being a barrier to the upcoming mod elections, the elections will not happen a few months from now; you were lucky you didn't attempt to pull off massive page deletion during November. If you cannot provide a compelling case for enough people to get you out of sysoprevoke (see my suggestions: edit the wiki, wait until the Chicken Coop comes over, exercise basic respect for others) then that's on you and you will have to accept not being able to attend the mod elections. It is not about "interfering with the master-plan or some shit" (ignoring the more unnecessary passive-aggressive jabs at me). As for the edit filters, while you have created them you're the one that decided to abuse your tech powers and lose them. If they need maintenance and you cannot access them because of your prior bad judgement, it's you that left people not trusting of your capabilities.

In fact your recent attempt to delete the Coop as well as the constant hostility and passive-aggressive remarks ("Gee," "slacking sysadmins", "apologies if it interferes with your master-plan or some shite", "the amount of bad faith here is hilarious", "you are clearly[...]; this is only for this thread) after the fact makes you even less trustworthy to handle anything mod elections. I still am not convinced you should get your tools back. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 04:00, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

No offence, it's not your right to decide that. If you want to prohibit me standing in the mod elections, you are going to have to make a vote here to put me in sysoprevoke. Because right now, at this time, there is no community action confirming it. As for your master-plan as I put it... tell GC and your friends on Discord I said hi, cause I read the whole channel and woop, that was some hell of a read. — Dysk (contribs) 04:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

No but it'll help if you try convincing me to take you out of sysoprevoke. I do not "want" to prohibit you from participating mod elections. I want to make sure you establish trust again. I have made suggestions already on how you can win my trust back, which can make a difference in you getting your rights or not. We don't know yet if I'm adequately representative of what moderators think should happen to you, but you need to assume I am to make a better case for you. So far, I am not compelled by your case of you not editing the wiki because you're more interested in your plans to install software or update the filters. You can build trust if you edit the wiki and work from there. Yes, discussions about you have taken place in Discord. It's clear and no secret I don't take a liking to your behavior. I don't believe you talk about me with much enthusiasm in the Discord circles you frequent. I'm sure you engage in similar discussions but I'm not interested in them. I'm more visibly frustrated and angry in Discord than on RationalWiki, that is true. I don't see how this is indicative of a hidden master plan though; I want to make it clear I do not have an established means of doing whatever to you regardless what you do. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 04:19, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I have no intention of editing the wiki, not because I'm doing other things, although I am. But, because the wiki is beyond my capacity to fix, as little more than a giant fucking trash-heap of biased and outdated pages few ever read.

If you dislike my behaviour, you might do well to understand why I'm acting this way... you know, I've been extremely angry at multiple points, for the effect this has had on others (not Raven) I care about, this anger is not easily resolved, when a bunch of cunts (not you) are running around, making it worse.

You held serious discussions on Discord, on the subject of removing me from the board, because that's clearly relevant to deleting the coop. I guess? I'll make you a deal on that, I'll resign, when my to-do list of software updates has been completed. After all, that was the only reason I got on the board. Is it hyperbolic to describe this form of plotting as a master-plan? Maybe, maybe not. I certainly consider it relevant.

As for timing, my point is that I want this resolved now. I won't be doing anything between now and November. I need resolution on this matter before moving forward. I'm aware that I lost some userrights due to my own inappropriate action, but I have no intention of publicly explaining the exact goings on in my mind, as private matters are the primary concern in there. This leads me to post as I have, based on procedure, rules, proportionate actions and the like. — Dysk (contribs) 04:44, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

If you are ever going to be removed from board, you're going to have to be notified either way. At the time I am nervous interacting with you and I figure you'll be nervous and/or having reservations about interacting with me. But again, I have reservations about your overall ability to judge. I have lingering thoughts that you'll be able to put wiki matters behind and try to cooperate with board meetings. I imagine if I hear you I'll try to be pleasant and civil to my ability. I can't imagine trying to give off passive aggressive remarks.

I'm not sure how else you can demonstrate trust with me then. I'm trying to think of ways you can show trust or at least try to make an effort about moving on from the incident. Editing the wiki and engaging/responding in content disputes is a simple way of showing activity and participation. If you can propose me something else you can do to help me trust you, I'll listen. I'll try to bite back possible reservations.

I believe your anger is valid. I can imagine the frustration of having users talk some harsh, if not outright nasty stuff about you and then having your rights taken off immediately for a mistake you believe to not be serious. It's draining, and it affects your mood in the day. Perhaps this only confirms your suspicions that the wiki is a big circle jerk and laughs at people rather than being constructive and being a collaborative topic. I've seen how Raven was treated right when he joined. I tried to come to his defense when Oxyaeana came in and attacked for not really justifiable reasons. Some users admitted they really don't like Raven and distrust him, which might added to some dripping hostility that Raven responded with. I felt sympathetic for Raven when he met so much resistance at the beginning. I tried to extend a wing for him and tried to help him navigate through content disputes. The frustration is really there, being seemingly unable to contribute anything while people keep undoing your edits.

Hmmm, well, if you can't explain what's exactly going on in your mind, you'll have to risk having others like me make incorrect assumptions about you. I notice you asked me to understand you but it will help if you did explain your emotions and thought-processes. Anyhow I figure your plans sound reasonable enough, and I'm now inching to more getting you your tools on. I don't blame you if you think this is a master plan on my end, but I'm just venting a lot in the end and Discord is just a place I vent, and people sometimes give me more helpful advice on how to express to you. I could've done a lot worse on the spur of high emotions but I was told to hold off. Anyhow, at least let me know if you're feeling all right though. I'm feeling a little better talking to you about this. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 05:01, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I would like to voice my support for Dysk getting his sysop rights back, as this was never voted on and sysoprevoke must be voted on. I'd also like to see him get his tech rights back, if only for the sake of forgiveness and mercy in the face of a rare mistake--Hastur! (talk) 05:42, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Double standards noted. — Oxyaena ^Harass 10:28, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Dysk should not be let out of sysoprevoke, at least not yet. Give it time.-Flandres (talk) 12:10, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Then follow the procedure to vote on putting me in sysoprevoke as required. Nobody has the right to unilaterally put another user in sysoprevoke permanently, or for an undefined non-emergency period of time. — Dysk (contribs) 00:57, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Request to get sysop back

I think I've improved substantially, and I think that my conduct during the latest dispute with Raven, including making peace and being civil with him, shows favor on my record. I hereby request to have sysop back, even if only to not feel left out considering how most active users have sysop. — Oxyaena ^Harass 10:33, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

That doesn't look like a sufficient reason to be granted sysop. Why should you be given it? Kiko4564 (talk) 15:34, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Oxy, as recently as August 20, you called GR a "miserable piece of shit."[3] (RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive108#Oxyaena) Is it so hard for you to not resort to name calling? Bongolian (talk) 16:51, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I made peace with Raven after that, and I have been relatively civil since then. @Flandres and @The Crow can attest to that. — Oxyaena ^Harass 20:26, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Leaving Raven to his own devices ain't making peace in my book. — Dysk (contribs) 00:54, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Not this shit again. There was a vote on this only a month ago and you lost. Ace^Moderator 03:02, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Don't you remember ranting and raving about how everyone were dicks and making a big flounce on Discord because you lost a vote? Ace^Moderator 03:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Several people have changed their minds since then, and Ace, do you really need to be so unapproachable, for want of a better word? It's like every time you hear my name you instantly become hostile. — Oxyaena ^Harass 11:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I’m not being hostile. Ace^Moderator 05:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I endorse Oxy getting sysop back. Oxy’s behavior has improved quite a bit, and I think the sanction has gone on long enough. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:10, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I personally see her behavior as having stayed largely the same, and I can't help but mistrust her thirst for status. Also trying to put us through this process every. single. month. Does not speak to her maturity--Hastur! (talk) 21:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I genuinely think it’s less about power and more about feeling put out that everyone has sysop and she doesn’t. There’s a reason the user rights request page exists. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 21:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

That's exactly it. — Oxyaena ^Harass 21:38, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Oxy has definitely improved but I don't think the community is ready yet to give it back. I think a few more weeks without any serious conflicts and the community will agree to it. BTW Oxy, asking people every week to get it back will make some people vote against it. I'd recommend waiting four weeks or so. ShabiDOO 21:39, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Oxy last time you also said people had changed their minds and there needed to be a vote. You didn't get your way and had a huge fucking meltdown. That's why I do not endorse you getting your rights back - when things don't go your way you blame everyone else, quit multiple times, get really fucking abusive and the cycle restarts. Ace^Moderator 21:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘My stance is known. Ronins sanctions and the assumption that she doesn't melt down again during a second vote, as per the last time this was brought up. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 22:11, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Given the nature and seriousness of Oxyaena's misconduct as a sysop, I will continue opposing these requests until she admits what she did and we can talk about it with her losing her cool. Nutty Roux (talk) 22:46, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Oxyaena, I'd really recommend that you don't ask again until January at the earliest. Until then, keep your nose clean and walk away from trouble if you can. Spud (talk) 06:58, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Spud. Oxy, you voted for the change in community standards (RationalWiki talk:Community Standards/Archive21), which included civil discussion. Yet, you did not act civilly with regard to the GR dispute. Being uncivil can cause needless escalations and grief for people not initially involved. It's great that you are now at peace with GR, but not being a source of escalation in the first place shows greater maturity. Bongolian (talk) 07:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Vote on Dysk

This vote has been closed. Please do not add, remove or change votes. The result of this vote was: Slight majority (11 to 9) in favor of just warning Dysk not to do it again and leaving the sanction as a week or so in sysoprevoke (time served) with many of the votes the other way calling for a very limited sanction and in substantial agreement

Since y'all need to vote on this, here goes. A couple of days ago, I got pissed at a few unnamed users here on this wiki, and decided to use the Tech powerz I had to suppress (a form of deletion) the Chicken Coop. Obviously this was a somewhat inappropriate way to act under the circumstances, thankfully around an hour later this page was restored by LGM, and normal business resumed. Now for deciding on the sanction I get for this, I have arranged a vote below. — Dysk (contribs) 21:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Remove tech Remove tech, and sysoprevoke I don't think Dysk should get tech rights considering the impulsive actions. Sysop rights are more negotiable but I'm not opposed restoring rights at the sysop level sooner than tech. What's making me hesitate was that Dysk did not use a delete action properly (sysops can delete pages; if Dysk used tech powers to delete and suppress the Chicken Coop, I doubt Dysk can refrain from using basic delete tools under heavy pressure), and Dysk also engaged in disruptive blocking of one user despite repeated requests to stop. (RationalWiki:Blocking_policy#Joke_blocks states "overuse of minute-plus blocks, or blocks against sysops in the middle of editing, are never appreciated by the blockee"). Heck, I'm not opposed to omitting sysoprevoke compared to just Dysk simply not having any sysop rights. Dysk has to do more than just promise this won't happen again, though; I'd like to see them live out maybe a week or more without the rights which is long enough to feel consequences of impulsive actions, which is to hopefully have them thinking twice before acting on impulse, even if it's not long enough to drastically change habits. This length span also should be long enough before elections so Dysk can participate in them as needed. Permaban is way too harsh and not appropriate given the action, while disruptive, is not destructive enough for this. A warning, on the other hand, implies Dysk can follow through the warning, which I don't think really addresses the behavior as Dysk had opportunities to accept being told that their actions are inappropriate and they didn't react accordingly. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:55, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Cosign LGM. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 22:02, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Regrettable, but I think necessary. --RWRW (talk) 22:39, 31 August 2020 (UTC) I'd like to echo all the sentiments above. Spud (talk) 23:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC) I don't take pleasure in voting this and I only do so under the stipulation that this is super temporary and that it is returned at the first sign of conciliation. ShabiDOO 00:01, 1 September 2020 (UTC) @Shabidoo in this vote, temporary sysoprevoke is the warning and do nothing section, because dysk has been in sysoprevoke for a while already based on LGM doing it unilaterally. You are voting for a permanent sanction even if your words are different. — Z 20:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Flandres (talk) 00:54, 1 September 2020 (UTC) With Shabi. Sysop can be returned upon request anytime from my perspective from let's say... the first day of October onwards. On request only, I don't think anyone should be required to monitor it. As far as tech goes, I feel he kinda blew his chance at it for a longer while. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 22:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Concur. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 16:07, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Scream!! (talk) 22:22, 3 September 2020 (UTC) Perma-ban 3 month block Warning and do nothing A single mark on an otherwise spotless record. This is a good faith user and ought to be treated as such--Hastur! (talk) 22:32, 31 August 2020 (UTC) In the spirit of ambiguity, since Dysk is already in sysoprevoke, are you voting to leave them there?— Unsigned, by: Ariel31459 / talk / contribs He should definitely be taken out of sysoprevoke as he was put there unilaterally and he never abused his sysop rights--Hastur! (talk) 16:49, 1 September 2020 (UTC) I'm gonna assume this action is remove sysoprevoke. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC) I see little reason to question his trustworthiness overall given his longish record of being helpful, despite this easily correctable lapse in judgment. Lest I get personally attacked by Oxyaena for some perceived hypocrisy here, as she is wont to do, I'll just remind people that her record of rights abuses as a sysop involved pervasive lying, which should disqualify her from ever being a sysop unless and until she comes clean and discusses what she did without swearing at people she hates for calling her out. Nutty Roux (talk) 22:43, 1 September 2020 (UTC) Since it's apparently the first offence of note from Dysk, I'm willing to believe a temporary insanity plead. Slap him with a trout and be done with it.Coigreach (talk) 07:49, 2 September 2020 (UTC) So the user brings himself to the coop for review. He says he did wrong and we can assume that he does not intend re-offend. The purpose of any kind of "punishment" should be to ensure it is less likely that the offense will be repeated. I don't think it will be repeated so no action is necessary. Obviously if it is repeated then that would change. Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 12:12, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Time served already in sysoprevoke should be sufficient punishment, given that D has a long history of good service, and knows he was in the wrong, and was a first time offense. Bongolian (talk) 17:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Dysk wasn't trying to wreck anything as I pointed out when it happened, there were multiple far more damaging things that could have been done instead of deleting a page, undone in ten seconds easily, and his first post after it happened was to admit it was a mistake and explain it. — Z 20:09, 2 September 2020 (UTC) — Oxyaena Harass 21:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC) AceModerator 22:25, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Thanks for the show of support guys. I promise not to fuck-up again. — Dysk (contribs) 16:21, 3 September 2020 (UTC) Another leftwing fascist coup thwarted. nobsBlack Guns Matter 03:43, 5 September 2020 (UTC) D fucking cooped himself, you fucking ignorant arsehole! Spud (talk) 04:52, 5 September 2020 (UTC) @Spud Why is that so many users on RW have an issue with profanity? Is it to reflect on how rational (or not) this site is? LTMay Dataclarifier be well! 04:59, 5 September 2020 (UTC) It's Spud, he doesn't treat people respectfully. Just ignore (I am a lefty, to be clear, and he doesn't treat me properly either). — Godless Raven talkstalkwalkbalk 🌹 05:02, 5 September 2020 (UTC) @LT Your fucking Conservapedia friend Rob Smith just used the word "shot" a couple of fucking minutes ago. Why don't you gibe him a fucking hard rime for being a rude boy? Spud (talk) @Spud Is your reply meant to reflect on my point about profanity usage? LTMay Dataclarifier be well! 05:41, 5 September 2020 (UTC) @LT. Yes. "Gibe" was a typo for "give" and "shot" was a typo for "shit". There's your answer. So fuck off and tell Rob Smith not to use rude words. Spud (talk) 06:13, 5 September 2020 (UTC) GR here. Dysk is innocent of all charges. Ravenism (talk) 20:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Invalid, this account does not meet RationalWiki:Eligible users. Account is less than three months old and has less than 75 edits. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 20:28, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Fixed that. — Z 20:30, 2 September 2020 (UTC) You didn't. The log says created at September 2nd I'm afraid. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 20:33, 2 September 2020 (UTC) What does the old account say? GR (talk) 20:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC) RationalWiki:RationalMedia Foundation/Voter registration suggests that GR is eligible to vote. If necessary GR could vote by proxy using his old account anyway. — Z 20:39, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Those are for the RMF, not for policy or penalty votes. And if he wants to vote, he can use his Eligible account. It is not on our end that he according to what I know of it scrambled the password and changed the email to bollocks. But if he can sign in with his original account (his second account isn't Eligible either), he can vote, sure. Not on this one, this one isn't valid. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 20:44, 2 September 2020 (UTC) because you insist I reached out to the original account and it voted by proxy. — Z 21:09, 2 September 2020 (UTC) He can't proxy vote that way. Vote still invalid and I've struck this one entirely. Cut the bullshit as well as what is now honestly really blatant meatpuppetry. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 21:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC) no rule against it. — Z 21:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Goat Baa. — Dysk (contribs) 21:21, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Is "remove tech and sysoprevoke" = "remove tech and remove sysoprevoke" or "remove tech and implement sysoprevoke"? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:49, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Just clarify the proposition. If anyone disagrees, they can crossout their names.Ariel31459 (talk) 02:34, 1 September 2020 (UTC) I added a comma. That should do it if you mean both remove tech and put in sysoprevoke.Ariel31459 (talk) 02:37, 1 September 2020 (UTC) So having just accused others of off-wiki canvassing at the Community Standards, Ravenism is created and Ze unblocks herself and they both vote the same way in a poll to defend Dysk? Interesting --RWRW (talk) 20:17, 2 September 2020 (UTC) If canvassing isn't allowed, why is LGM, Crow, etc. allowed to do it? Ravenism (talk) 20:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC) I just looked through the conversation in question (the rat-workshop channel on RatCord). I see LGM, Crow and others discussing current events on the wiki. I didn't see any vote canvassing, no encouraging people to vote either in any way. I would ask you why you are here? You supposedly left this wiki, scrambled your password and created a new wiki. But here you are (again), causing drama (again) presumably because your ban vote isn't likely to go through.--RWRW (talk) 20:25, 2 September 2020 (UTC) It may have had smth to do with the attempt to get rid of dysk and other rule mischief, just a thought. — Z 20:28, 2 September 2020 (UTC) May I recommend looking at the actual substance of this vote. We don't want to get rid of Dysk. In fact, most people supporting removing his tech right and sysoprevoke are saying that he can get sysop back fairly quickly. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 20:30, 2 September 2020 (UTC) You have the tenacity to vote for permanent sysoprevoke and claim to not want to get rid of dysk. Ok. — Z 20:32, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Don't forget what Crow called me. A "you dishonest little shit" (not even punished, but promoted to tech!). GR (talk) 20:33, 2 September 2020 (UTC) It doesn't say permanent. Are you sure it's permanent? — Unsigned, by: 2600:100c:b2b0:8958:44b1:d5bf:a0a4:913b / talk / contribs Yes I'm sure and no option for temporary was proposed. — Z 21:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC) It's not permanent, it's just a "place into sysoprevoke right now", but if you look at the actual fucking description of these votes, you'll quickly realize that most people are at least willing to place him out of sysoprevoke and back into sysop pretty quickly. Jesus... Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 21:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC) if its not permanent, how long is it for and where does it say that. — Z 21:20, 2 September 2020 (UTC) Check the actual votes. Also, check our policies surrounding sysoprevoke itself. It can be overturned at any point the mob thinks it should be overturned, and the mob seems to overwhelmingly agree that he can get them back fairly easily. Finally, I find there to be some dry amusement in that you say that there is an attempt to get rid of Dysk but um... the person who made this vote is Dysk. So uh, unless you want to argue that the person who wants to "get rid of Dysk" is Dysk, then something here doesn't really add up. Techpriest (I am Alpharius! / / / ) 21:24, 2 September 2020 (UTC) The overwhelming support for letting me off the hook, so to speak, gives me some faith this wiki ain't completely fucked yet. Did I attempt to get rid of myself? Yeah I think I did in a subconscious way self-sabotage myself... oh well. — Dysk (contribs) 16:19, 3 September 2020 (UTC) Not sure I'd call it an "overwhelming" show of support, at this moment the vote is 8 votes to remove tech, 9 votes to keep tech (one of which is your own vote). But yes, I can't see it swinging the other way so it does look like you tech rights will end up getting restored. --RWRW (talk) 16:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC) I didn't expect any votes in favour of a lesser sanction. Furthermore, I expected at least someone to vote for a ban. The favourable response is welcome, yet unexpected. — Dysk (contribs) 17:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I would like to remind everyone that by suppressing the entire coop, it is entirely possible that RW has been opened up to possible legal issues. Please reference the suppression logs, where notably DG suppressed a case that was "potentially libelous", yet it had to be restored when unsuppressing the coop, as well as seemingly another supression by Oxy over something else before and a few minor other suppressions. Just pointing this one out. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 17:03, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Assuming I get tech back at this point. I can simply check and resupress the relevant revisions. After all, I am a board member. This ain't going to take me long to fix. — Dysk (contribs) 17:06, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Simple fix: Give Dysk tech so that he can clean it up. This isn't rocket science. — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 17:32, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I think this a good as reason as any to continue with normal business and let peeps fix what they broke. — Z 13:48, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

What the fuck is happening

LGM resigns as mod and Raven, who lancbed his way out of a coop, is back, and gets sysoprevoke removed and his tools restored. Y'all give Raven the benefit of the doubt numerous fucking times, and yet give me none, when it's been shown time and time again I`m nowhere near as bad as Raven. Seriously, what the hell? Someone just can't LANCB their way out of a coop and expect everything to be okay, not after how they treated us. LGM's gone, GC's gone, and I`m seriously considering leaving. Ugh, this wiki makes me sick. — Oxyaena ^Harass 20:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Didn't you say you would stop attacking me? GR (talk) 20:43, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I`m quite frankly disgusted at what is happening, Raven. Even you must acknowledge that part of the blame lies on your behalf. This shit would be funny if it were fictional, but it's really not. What has RW become? The circus? — Oxyaena ^Harass 20:45, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=RationalWiki_talk:All_things_in_moderation&diff=2220488&oldid=2220486 GR (talk) 20:46, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

And here we have 14 to 12 votes for you to be permabanned, which you weaseled your way out of via pulling a coop.

Here's some diffs to remind you of your past: [4], [5], [6], [7], and let's not forget when you insulted Flandres for being fair to you, and comparing me to Putin. — Oxyaena ^Harass 20:51, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

In fact, let's just link to LGM's detailed, and comprehensive essay on this subject at your coop case, which, you, again, weaseled your way out of via LANCB. — Oxyaena ^Harass 20:53, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

If you behave like this after a supposed détente, I won't vote to give you a sysop back. Not deserved. [8]— Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 20:58, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I`m not blameless, but this shit wouldn't fly if it were me in question. — Oxyaena ^Harass 21:00, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Raven, I don't want you angry, I want you gone. Just go away, this site isn't the right site for you anyways. It'll be a lot easier on everyone if you go away quietly, none of this needs to happen. — Oxyaena ^Harass 21:02, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Are you trying to get rid of me? I got a lot of butthurt when I said this. — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 21:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Forget I said anything, it's not worth rehashing. — Oxyaena ^Harass 21:15, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I won't forget it. Next time you ask for sysop I will oppose it (because of this). — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 21:24, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I mean, you admitted to starting drama on purpose on the Discord, so.... — Oxyaena ^Harass 21:37, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Since you quickly undid your promise to no longer attack me, I will no longer just accept your proposals of armistice, considering this recent breach of civility. Make your words worth anything. I will no longer entertain this subject. — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 22:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Proxy votes

Hello, everyone. I hate to bother people but Godless Raven was locked out of his account again (he apparently uses randomly generated passwords that he stores on his browser. When he deletes the stored password and removes his email information from his account, this makes it impossible for him to log back in). He desires to edit from this account. Now, the question is, does this account have franchise? Personally, I say yes. So long as he is only voting with a single account I don't see the issue. The spirit of the law is clearly being followed, Godless Raven meets the minimum edit count and account age requirements to be a voter in policy/penalty discussions.--Hastur! (talk) 21:39, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I mean sure. I don’t see why not. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 22:24, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

He just said he doesn't even want to be here, wants to leave and just wants his sysop so he can delete stuff before going away forever. Why does he need to vote then? ShabiDOO 07:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

The vote is needed because he fake-LANCBed before. If he was actually leaving, then why is GR still in the Saloon?[9] Bongolian (talk) 07:40, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

What's the problem here? — Godless Raven ^talk_stalk^walk_balk 🌹 18:39, 3 September 2020 (UTC)