Thank you

Fragment of a discussion from User talk:Blue
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Ace now receives an automated warning whenever he tries to edit your talk page, Vox. If he persists, let me know and we can launch the wiki into full HCM discuss further options.

Blue (is useful)04:58, 7 July 2012

Wow, how far RW has come.

AceThe Rep Grows Bigger05:01, 7 July 2012

Blue, if Ace makes personal attacks against Voxhumana on his talk-page, Voxhumana is allowed to revert them. As to other posts, I was unaware that RationalWiki makes a habit of protecting its editors from talk-page posts that they dislike.

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX05:12, 7 July 2012

I made no personal attacks. Blue's edit filter changes should be reverted immediatly - Blue has no authority to make the changes she did

AceThe Rep Grows Bigger05:13, 7 July 2012

Can someone cogently explain what happened?

Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg05:43, 7 July 2012

Voxhumana complained about Ace's posts on his talk-page. Blue put on an abuse filter that gave Ace a warning if he posted on Voxhumana's talk-page. Ace took away her tech rights. Her abuse filter changes were reverted.

Mjollnir.svgListenerXTalkerX05:44, 7 July 2012

....and we are left in a fix about whether or not Ace should give said rights back, obviously.

Peter HFB205:46, 7 July 2012

Grrrrrrr! Shit like this is why we cannot have nice things.

She shouldn't get back her tech rights. That was not the best way to handle the situation, as it only exacerbated it. That's unfortunate. It's hard to feel too bad for Ace because it was only made slightly harder for him to keep purposefully irritated someone, but nonetheless this was a misstep. Right direction, wrong footing.

ADtalkModerator07:48, 7 July 2012

It's the same thing I tried. If you can't talk sense into people and convince them to play nice (you tried, and it didn't work), force them. Unfortunately, it doesn't work.

-- Nx / talk07:50, 7 July 2012

Except nothing I did had anything to do with "force"! I honestly don't think you understand what I did, AD.

Blue (is useful)07:53, 7 July 2012

It's metaphorical force. No one thinks you hopped a plane to NZ with a wooden spoon and shackles.

Maybe you're right, though - I am not as techie as you. I was under the impression that you edited the settings on the AbuseFilter extension so that whenever Ace tried to edit Vox's talk page, he was faced with an automated warning?

ADtalkModerator08:05, 7 July 2012

When he clicked save, he got a warning (like when you forget an edit summary and have that option enabled), and had to save again.

-- Nx / talk08:07, 7 July 2012
 

It's basically an edit notice that appears above the toolbar with a generic notification. Like an edit conflict, but your post isn't lost. In no way does it inconvenience editing or make it any harder for Ace to actually do the deed. Lazy moderating on my part, as I probably should have talked to Ace directly.

Blue (is useful)08:09, 7 July 2012

Yes, no-one weeps for Ace because he had to click an extra button to annoy someone with his usual childish antics, but you have to realize that the filter is a very powerful tool, so naturally people view all activity with suspicion. Maybe tomorrow you'll write a filter that prevents him from editing any talk page.

-- Nx / talk08:20, 7 July 2012
 
 
 

Insightful! Yes, I think that's exactly it. I know she meant well, and I know you did too. But it would be wiser not to give her back tech for a while. Eventually she probably should, because she actually does a lot of great work in that gritty and unglamorous behind-the-signs style. Like you did, actually! I hope you're back and to stay, by the way.

ADtalkModerator07:57, 7 July 2012
 
 
 
 

Or...Vox complained I had engaged in a campaign of abuse (no such evidence has been provided of said abuse), he (or she I suppose) left citing my 'abuse' as the reason, after he left I carried on a conversation with DickTurpis on his talkpage, he came back and complained I was further abusing him, Blue took it upon herself to edit the filter so that I was warned anytime I tried commenting on Vox's page and suggested if I continued she would take of it.

A) No 'abuse' has been presented B) Blue doesn't have the authority to make said changes C) What the fuck?

AceThe Rep Grows Bigger05:50, 7 July 2012

Seems to me that she moderated. Can moderators not modify the abuse filter?

User:Brxbrx/sig11:05, 7 July 2012

From a raw "user rights" standpoint, moderators do not have the power to edit the abuse filter unless they also have "tech" rights.

I think that letting moderators use the abuse filter would go to great lengths in furthering their task. Remember when Nx protected Mara's talk page from vandalism? Then again, putting such power in the hands of Ace would be a terrible, terrible idea.

User:Brxbrx/sig11:18, 7 July 2012

Ah, but using the abuse filter requires some programming knowledge and, again, it's currently restricted to Tech users. Though I disagree with the sentiment of not allowing one to be the other. It would be a poor use of the talent here to not let Blue be both a Tech and a Moderator simply because we think that's too much power for someone to have. We, as a community, really need to either 1) gain a better sense of trust in our community or 2) not elect people to the Moderator position if we don't trust them.

not elect people to the Moderator position if we don't trust them Unfortunately, a large offsetting factor in mod elections is popularity, and not trust

User:Brxbrx/sig11:26, 7 July 2012

No, I know. I am well aware of this community's inherent problems.

Obviously moderators should also be given the ability to use range blocks as well /16 being the minimum setting.

Bad Faith (talk)11:34, 7 July 2012
 
 
 

putting such power in the hands of Ace would be a terrible, terrible idea. Jesus man, I am starting to sound like Magneto.

AceThe Rep Grows Bigger11:38, 7 July 2012
 

Not Maratrean's talk page, his user page.

-- Nx / talk13:06, 7 July 2012

I love it when Nx vomits his vile semen every where.

AceThe Rep Grows Bigger13:08, 7 July 2012
 
 
 

I think the "problem", such as it is, is that Blue only did something that wouldn't have been out of character for most any other Human being. The reaction seems to be the same too, though from different quarters. IOIYAR.

C®ackeЯ17:40, 7 July 2012
 
 
 
 
 
 

How far RW has come indeed. This sets a really bad precedent. Please don't do it again.

This is pathetic and why I can't stand RW any more. People confuse "can do" with "should do." And what a great time, right after elections! Ug.

sterilesporadic heavy hitter16:20, 7 July 2012

I will also add that Techs and Moderators are not the same thing. Using Tech abilities in the name of moderating is questionable.

sterilesporadic heavy hitter16:22, 7 July 2012

I agree and would go so far as to suggest that there should be a separation of powers.

Redchuck.gif ГенгисmaraudingModerator22:13, 7 July 2012
 

Nonsense! It wouldn't be RW without people getting deliberately offended over a minor action that had nothing to do with them and was reversed within the hour.

Blue (is useful)18:37, 7 July 2012

And you wouldn't be you without your total inability to accept that your actions and suggestions are not acceptable to a site of this nature.

rpeh •TCE21:59, 7 July 2012

That's a bit melodramatic for a simple misstep that she acknowledged was a bad move, don't you think?

Kels (talk)23:27, 7 July 2012

Melodramatic and irony meter busting considering we've just had someone drive an innocent and productive editor away and then deny they did anything wrong and few seem to be giving much of a crap about that.

Scarlet A.pngnarchist23:31, 7 July 2012

Take me to the coop (or the mod page) if you think there is a case. I'll defend myself and take any punishment that is deemed necessary without qualification. Drove an editor away? Please.

AceThe Rep Grows Bigger23:37, 7 July 2012
 

Well, as I said before I think Ace was well-meaning at that point (I dunno about other points) and any harassment was probably of the unintentional variety. I doubt there's a need to coop anyone, I think it's more convincing people to actually pay attention to how they act, and not assume other people will automatically know your intentions or have the same sense of humour.

Basically, try to treat other folks on the wiki in a decent way. We (and I include me in this) do tend to get a bit carried away at times.

Kels (talk)23:42, 7 July 2012

Kels.

Firstly while the person who emailed me to "update me on the situation" no doubt had the best of intentions, please let me say that I really want this issue to die. (ie: RPEH will be well justified in telling me to fuck off yet again.)

Now, while I cannot declare what Ace's actual intentions were, I certainly regarded it as harassment, and identified it as such.

Ace's current position appears to be "I did absolutely nothing wrong and Vox is a weird drama-creating newcomer that no-one should care about". He labels his harassment as "easily reverted", despite the fact that when I tried to revert he immediately undid it[1] and then blocked me for 30 mins [2]. I'm sorry for not seeing the humour in that.

I'll also note that Ace's alleged attempt to make peace ("Perhaps we have got off on the wrong foot - here is some music you might like"?") was made AFTER I had posted my LANCB statement, and even Trent observed that to an outsider it appeared to be "assholeish".[3]

I like it here at RW and feel I have a lot to contribute. All I want is for Ace to agree to never post on my talk page, either here or at RWW, and to not deliberately antagonize me elsewhere. He is a mod, and should thus be the exemplar of behaviour, not the instigator of such harassment. If there is a way of bringing this about, then please let me know.

VOXHUMANA00:46, 8 July 2012

and should thus be the exemplar of behaviour Mods are not "better" users nor do they have any requirement to act in any particular manner unless specifically moderating.

AceThe Rep Grows Bigger00:53, 8 July 2012

There's no requirement, but ideally mods shouldn't make new problems without good reason.

ADtalkModerator01:08, 8 July 2012

Riffing off what both you and Ace said, nobody should make new problems without good reason.

I mean seriously, unless it's a flamingly obvious troll like Marcus or Rob, why antagonize people at all?

Kels (talk)01:14, 8 July 2012

I wasn't deliberately trying to antagonise anyone, and attempted an apology in my own special way. I still maintain I wasn't 'driving an editor away' and I feel Vox is being quite precious about the whole thing. If anyone feels otherwise they are welcome to take me to admin abuse/coop where I'll defend myself and accept any, if at all, punishment deemed fit by the community.

AceThe Rep Grows Bigger03:26, 8 July 2012

You know very well nothing would come of a cooping, because the rules don't actually cover trolling and harassment.

User:Brxbrx/sig03:29, 8 July 2012

Please, for the love of god Brx, stay out of arguments that you don't need to be in...this is the main reason you are disliked.

AceThe Rep Grows Bigger03:35, 8 July 2012

I am throwing that in your face the next time you crash my talk page

User:Brxbrx/sig03:40, 8 July 2012
 

Ace, I am not asking for an apology, nor expecting any admission of guilt. I do not wish to initiate any formal process, or create any more drama.

I would simply like you to undertake to never again post on my talk page, or deliberately attempt to antagonize me elsewhere. If you agree to that, then this whole matter can be dropped and I can go back to writing articles and contributing in whatever other way I can.

VOXHUMANA03:46, 8 July 2012
 
 

Well, I never said you were. In fact, I said at least twice that I gave you benefit of the doubt and any harassment on your part would have been unintentional.

All I'm asking is that everyone (not singling you out, me too) just be aware that what's straightforward to you might not be to someone else. We've all got different perspectives, and when it comes down to it gotta get along to some degree.

Kels (talk)04:00, 8 July 2012
 

Hmm, maybe I wasn't really clear in my earlier comment. What I was getting at was where AD said that mods should take care to not start trouble where there isn't any, it follows from what you're saying that where mods aren't better than anyone else then everyone should try for that standard.

Mods are just aware of the fact, is all.

Kels (talk)04:06, 8 July 2012