Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-4614364-20151203045607/@comment-24200411-20151203225501

Keep in mind I am on no side still.

Destiny of Awe wrote:  He uses his bot, Villicus, to spy on the users. A single complaint cannot be said against him when Villicus is there. It reached the point where he actually REPRIMANDED A USER  through Villicus  for talking about him in chat. This could be seen as sockpuppeting to an extent, but I digress. I'm not entirely sure about spying on others, as far as I know he said the bot was solely for amusing other users.

I can recall something with him getting after someone through the bot, yes it was very bold, but as I recall someone was either insulting him, making fun of him or both. Either way, they said something that was out of line and the log feature of the bot is for that I believe.

But would this bring into question all bots we had overall? The user can look through the bot to see what's going on, as far as spying goes though, I'm not sure. Doesn't he technically have an obligation to know what happens in chat? Which is what the log is for?

Also as far as the current ruleset goes:

"However, multiple accounts are allowed as long as they are not used for deceit, and should clearly state which user originally owns them."

We knew it was his and what the bot was for, and technically we would have had to known he could have looked through it or checked the logs, so I'm not entirely sure if the statement can stand. He didn't try to, nor could he have tricked anyone into anything because we knew it was him from the start.

As I said, wouldn't it bring into question all bots overall? Blue owns one and technically should be able to look through it, would that count as spying and should we place some kind of rule with the bots and the logging feature?

Something else I need to point out as well.

''"I have never threatened anyone with death. I've made it clear that I refer to none of you when I talk like that. I don't think I do that "often" either. I care about you guys, why would I contradict myself by wishing harm on you? I've already apologized to anyone who felt offended. If there are any I missed, they can speak up." ''

I've looked through all the logs I have recorded and can't find you making it clear at all. I'm not sure if it's on main or not, so if you can find it for me I'd like that.

I've also had to warn you about this, because it's one thing for a user to say "I'd rip your throat out," it's another if it's coming from an administrator and it wasn't made clear it was a quote or a joke. (Not that it should even be a joke in the first place IMHO.) Because that can give users, even some new ones, the impression that it's okay to say such things to members of the administration.

" If any of you remember the sexual talk thread-- it states we can be sexual as long as it's not straight-up declaring what "you're about to do" you know what I mean. "

Most of this issue I feel comes from this rule alone. There is no exact definition written down, all it says is,

"Discuss or post anything overtly sexual or pornographic "

And it ends there. Of course I know it was already said:

"  We said that we're not allowing PERSONAL nsfw stuff "

One user in mind has said this kind of stuff before, but again, it was supposed to be joking around. Which again, goes back to the "rip your throat out" quote. No one is really stating if it's a joke or not, both sides of this. And there hasn't been any kind of moderation towards it.

"Regarding the demotion though-- Game's behaviour on those threads even shocked me when I first saw them, and our beliefs clash greatly.  After he indirectly called me out on  this thread without consulting me about it, or asking me when the situation was live-- that's when I lost quite a bit of respect for him. "

The thread states:

"In light of recent events, I'd like to remind the administration team that banning and blocking users are methods of  last resort. Please don’t be hasty with the ban hammer. "

I see nowhere in the thread that you were called out specifically. I also need to point out:

"You were who I had in mind when I asked the whole chat if we should ban. If you truly felt this way, why on earth didn't you speak up? "

I spoke up that night about it but was ignored even though I clearly stated how I felt about it multiple times. I don't know now if you exactly acknowledge the other members in reguards to bans, which goes back to this quote:

"I'd rather not get at someone for breaking even a smidgen of a rule, because I'm not like that and I don't appreciate others doing that either-- especially when it was wrong to begin with. "

So I again am not sure how well that statement can stand. There's something else I need to ask about.

"It is very unnerving when he tries to dictate my every action, and constantly reminds me to "excercise judgement" for something as simple as the banning procedure which we have been doing perfectly fine with for years. "

I'm not entirely sure but I don't think he would be unnerving at all. You technically are a buro, something like that shouldn't be worrying unless a majority of users spoke up about it.

"I'm not sure if demotion is necessary, but perhaps it'll at least allow him to cool down? "

This might be a better course of action, IMHO not a complete demotion, but more of either to patroller, or just time off from the wiki? From what he's told me I believe time off the chat would be best for him to collect his thoughts. Not a complete disconnect, but just time away from it.

"Is it just me, or are some of the reasons for demotion a little... personal? "

This might be the case, Russ did mention the Octa situation wich from what I've heard is long over now, nor can I recall Game mentioning it recently.

"Been nothing but a massive nuisance ""since I've got back"" on the wiki. "

"<span style="color:rgb(255,255,255);font-size:14px;font-weight:normal;line-height:22px;">I'm taking your behavior from ""the past month"" or so into account. "

These seem to point to it being more of a personal thing, not entirely sure how to feel about this yet.

Hopefully I worded this to be as civil as possible and didn't offend anyone. I still have no side to stand on yet and would like to wait a bit until other members speak up. (If you haven't yet, I ask you should do it now.) I still stand