UDWiki talk:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2008 12: Difference between revisions
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
:::You said "if other users are too stupid to work this out, it's their problem", which isn't really correct. We have to assume good faith, and stupidity isn't bad faith in itself (if it's repeated, that's another matter). I admit, it was a very close call, and perhaps another sysop would/will decide otherwise. Anyway, I've made it clear that they should leave the page alone, it now has the group subpage category on it, and is clearly labeled, so future messing with the page will see a warning given <small>-- [[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup> 00:56 30 December 2008 (BST)</small> | :::You said "if other users are too stupid to work this out, it's their problem", which isn't really correct. We have to assume good faith, and stupidity isn't bad faith in itself (if it's repeated, that's another matter). I admit, it was a very close call, and perhaps another sysop would/will decide otherwise. Anyway, I've made it clear that they should leave the page alone, it now has the group subpage category on it, and is clearly labeled, so future messing with the page will see a warning given <small>-- [[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup> 00:56 30 December 2008 (BST)</small> | ||
::::[[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2008_12#User:We_Cell|Consistency does not reign here]]. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 01:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC) | ::::[[UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2008_12#User:We_Cell|Consistency does not reign here]]. -- {{User:Iscariot/Signature}} 01:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
:::::Both of the guys in that case were editing each others main group pages (tit for tat). No way they could be confused with anything but group pages. The wiki (just like the world) is full of grey areas, Iscariot <small>-- [[User:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">boxy</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Boxy|<span style="color: Red">talk</span>]] • [[The Rules|teh rulz]]</sup> 01:38 30 December 2008 (BST)</small> | |||
===User:We Cell case=== | ===User:We Cell case=== | ||
Revision as of 01:38, 30 December 2008
Vandal Report Discussions
Old Content has been archived. See below.
December 2008
User:MisterGame case
How precisely is this 'Not Vandalism', when this case is?
Both cases concern removal of information from a group's subpages. This is vandalism, as has been proven time and again.
The notion that the Umbrella page could be considered public by accident is simply fallacious. Using the "/" is the accepted way to establish a user/group subpage. He clearly knew it was vandalism, hence the copyright rubbish, which has no basis in any way.
Kill lists have always been allowed, so have enemy and intelligence lists. The simple fact remains. This user edited another group's page, given the history between the groups, this user knew clearly that the page belonged to another group. This must therefore be considered vandalism. -- 
.
. <== DDR Approved Editor 00:15, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- The page Philosophe Knights/Kill List can't be mistaken for a main namespace battle report, that would be like thinking it was a page about the Philosophe Knights versus Kill List. The use of the battle template confuses the issue. On the copyright issue, the information has clearly been copy and pasted from somewhere, but I do agree, calling "copyright" on such stuff is a weak argument -- boxy talk • teh rulz 00:24 30 December 2008 (BST)
- The template does nothing, a group can have whatever they like on their page, if other users are too stupid to work this out, it's their problem. The battle template is not forbidden on non-battle pages, page ownership rules apply that mean they can have it there without the page changing from a group page.
- Copyright has to be established, they haven't. The correct place to do this would be arbitration. If arbitration finds that it is copyright violation then the warning can be removed as it's been established that it was a fair edit, until then this is vandalism, an unwanted edit to a group page by a non-member. --
.
. <== DDR Approved Editor 00:37, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- You said "if other users are too stupid to work this out, it's their problem", which isn't really correct. We have to assume good faith, and stupidity isn't bad faith in itself (if it's repeated, that's another matter). I admit, it was a very close call, and perhaps another sysop would/will decide otherwise. Anyway, I've made it clear that they should leave the page alone, it now has the group subpage category on it, and is clearly labeled, so future messing with the page will see a warning given -- boxy talk • teh rulz 00:56 30 December 2008 (BST)
- Consistency does not reign here. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 01:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
- Consistency does not reign here. --
- You said "if other users are too stupid to work this out, it's their problem", which isn't really correct. We have to assume good faith, and stupidity isn't bad faith in itself (if it's repeated, that's another matter). I admit, it was a very close call, and perhaps another sysop would/will decide otherwise. Anyway, I've made it clear that they should leave the page alone, it now has the group subpage category on it, and is clearly labeled, so future messing with the page will see a warning given -- boxy talk • teh rulz 00:56 30 December 2008 (BST)
- Copyright has to be established, they haven't. The correct place to do this would be arbitration. If arbitration finds that it is copyright violation then the warning can be removed as it's been established that it was a fair edit, until then this is vandalism, an unwanted edit to a group page by a non-member. --
User:We Cell case
This is precisely the reason Hagnat is unsuited to being a sysop on this wiki. Warning at whim based on your real world mood is modding, something that this community has been shown to be against time and again. Such behaviour is unfair to the community in general and causes drama.
The whole notion of not wanting to 'punish' them is clearly fallacious. There is a reason the first escalation is not a term length ban, and if Hagnat actually read the policy that he's supposed to be following (Hagnat not knowing policy and making it up as it suits him? I'm just as shocked as you!) then he'd know that this community does not 'punish' vandals in any way and the entire escalations system is set up around this principle. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 11:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- Although I don't support your "Impeach Hagant!" tone, I can't help but agree on your basic idea. He should really read up on the policy, as he was in danger of setting up a double standard. Someone could say in future, "Well you let We Cell get away with it!" and then similar cases couldn't even be acted upon. Linkthewindow Talk 11:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- That's the point, as has happened in the past, people have then pointed to previous cases and even then they've been ruled differently. It creates doubles standards, drama and a climate where it's not what you've done but rather the ruling sysop's mood and opinion of you which decides the case. That's moderation, the community has refused this approach time and again, modding surreptitiously is acting against the community in the worst sense. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 11:59, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- That's the point, as has happened in the past, people have then pointed to previous cases and even then they've been ruled differently. It creates doubles standards, drama and a climate where it's not what you've done but rather the ruling sysop's mood and opinion of you which decides the case. That's moderation, the community has refused this approach time and again, modding surreptitiously is acting against the community in the worst sense. --
Monthly Archives
|
Vandal Banning Archive | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
