User i-n-f-a-m-y has recently left a spree of posts that range between incoherent, useless, and stupid, and most of the areas in between.
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1142524/scp-2283#post-2247734- Disrupting a relatively serious discussion about bladed weapons with
What about norse swords? WHAT ABOUT NORSE SWORDS???
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1143073/scp-2789#post-2247677- Left the following as critique:
Because its talking about "flesh" it makes me very confused when i see the picture, which is a mineral that does not in any way resemble flesh, other that that the article seems half finished.
Of note is that the "flesh" mentioned was in scare quotes, and that the article looks pretty dang finished to me.
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1142783/scp-2086#post-2247676
Responded to another user's comment with a post that only said "+1".
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-77170/scp-579#post-2247885
Series 1 is "vintage"
Like a vintage brandy, or wine, just to look at rather than to actually use in any way. The standards of the current foundation are much different that the old foundation.
Poor understanding of series 1, wine, brandy, basic English conventions.
Coony's got a point. This Infamy guy's account was created: 6 Mar 2015, 11:59 (3 days ago) Modster's "goodbye" post was: 6 Mar 2015, 10:49, about an hour and ten minutes prior.
The relevant posts are:
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1143337/project-solootion-subjet-14-sic#post-2247751
Well i once saw a guy get chewed for this but everyone seems to hate on humanoids who are caucasian, maybe make them asian?
Other than that i think that the article so far is a tad bit to bland, and i must say the idea doesn't grab me as much. However humanoids aren't as easy to do as normal SCP's so do not be discouraged.
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1143337/project-solootion-subjet-14-sic#post-2247758 (note that the second sentence about staff was edited in)
Sorry man i saw a guy get chewed up, i think he was modster or something get chewed up because of his critique not being about the humanoid. A staff said he should of been focusing on how a lot of humanoids are caucasians.
For the record, my own post telling modster to stop is as follows: http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1135482/scp-2949-draft#post-2244449
Modster101, this feedback is vague and unhelpful. For example,
you do not need these parentheses because it is implied that they need proper equipment.
the parentheses text takes away from the flow of the article
The two instances you pointed out are actually correct uses of parentheses. The Foundation capturing and detaining individuals isn't particularly out of the ordinary because they have teams specifically designed for that sort of stuff (not everything has to be a crazy chase/struggle/fight to the death), mute people can still communicate so it's not so much a plot issue so much as an absence of detail, and you haven't mentioned any of the pressing issues, namely the far-too specific containment and the generic state of the idea itself—we get tons of violent humanoids, and for some reason they're usually Caucasian. This idea is fundamentally uninteresting.
As such, modster101, please refrain from giving any further feedback in the forums until you've written a successful mainsite post.
Author, humanoids are actually pretty difficult to write successfully; if you're really set on writing one, then take a look at this handy guide. What you have currently will not be successful on the mainsite without a lot of work.
Official warning.
Warning followed immediately by a revocation on the next infraction.
Warning sent here, also sent boilerplate warning PM with much of the same content.
I checked their sandboxes. Same person.
Modster's sandbox: http://scpsandbox2.wikidot.com/modster101
INFAMY's sandbox: http://scpsandbox2.wikidot.com/welcome-to-the-sandbox-of-i-n-f-a-m-y
Modster cleared their page, but both have the same Catacombs draft.
Permaban for sockpuppeting.
Yup. Perma it is.
EDIT: didn't mean to post under photo
Removed and blocked.
Eskobar, please do us a favor and send them a PM informing them that they have been banned (or assign another to do it).
The primary account, modster101, is still a member of the site. I would advise a vote in their thread on what action to take regarding their primary account.
This account has been banned from the SCP Foundation wiki as a sockpuppet of the user modster101. Disciplinary action regarding that account will be taken presently. Site rules forbid the use of sockpuppet accounts by users.
—Eskobar
Moderator, SCP Foundation wiki
Reply:
What is a sockpuppet? and why are you accusing me of this? where is youre proof that i am modster101?
I'll review the evidence and put together a reply.
If you still need evidence, INFAMY's sandbox first edit is a copy-paste of everything in modster101's sandbox before they wiped it. I'm pretty sure that a real new member to the site would have very little, if any, reason to take up writing any of the stuff they had.
Even if INFAMY turned out to not be a sockpuppet, they'd probably still be plagiarizing, since they lifted the exact text from modster's sandbox, and modster already noted that they were planning to return at some point.
However, given that they are ban-evading here, modster should receive a permaban.
Did we ever officially ban Modster? If not, this isn't really evasion; we can't expect users to read our minds. It's slimy and ridiculous, yes, trying to get a "fresh start" like that, but it's more sockpuppeting than evasion. Punish as per sockpuppeting, IMO.
An instant permanent ban only results from vandalism, blatant and obvious trolling, harassment of a site member, sockpuppetry, or other, severe misconducts.
It doesn't really matter so much. It's still a perma ban.
"WELL FOUNDATION. YOU MADE IT SO EASY. SO VERY VERY EASY." - dimensionpotato
Ugh. Reply from infamy:
Ok fine, look i copied the sandbox of modster101, i liked the tale he had in the works and since i saw that he wasn't going to be on the site anymore i thought it would be ok to copy his work. now as a sock puppet i looked up what it meant and i can tell you i am not modster101. Im really sorry that i copied his work but please do not ban my ip, i read the O5 command page about me and i was accused and banned because you guys think that me and modster101 are similar? that accusation is baseless and empty. An accusation on account creation based on time of application is completely empty and worthless. Modster101 made a series of posts and used corrupt-a-wish a lot so that means that because i use corrupt-a-wish a lot i'm him? It makes no sense whatsoever. To further clarify my sandbox is copied but i'm not the same person, i understand that i probably will get in trouble for plagiarism but i think that my account being globally banned is kind of overkill. I hope that the staff will at least consider this instead of jumping the gun on their decision.
-Sincerely, I N F A M Y
Question one being: Do we believe this? I have trouble doing so, given that I have literally never seen one person copy another person's sandbox because "they like the idea" without having some connection to the first person. Question two: Do we care? Plagiarism is still a bannable offense, even on the long odds that it's a different person. I can't help but notice that they knew exactly where 05 was and where their thread would be found, which, like everything else here, isn't conclusive evidence, but does suggest a certain conclusion.
It's either sockpuppetry (plus lying about it) or plagiarism (brazen and thorough, with the only offered rationale being that the victim is no longer around — how does that make it any better, except that without them here to call you on it, you're marginally less likely to get caught?). I don't particularly believe that it's the latter, but even if it were, it wouldn't make much difference.
Just my thoughts in passing.
Sockpuppetry is an offense that we arbitrarily decided we weren't ok with…had we developed slightly differently as a community it's entirely possible that we could have ended up being ok with alts and such(NOT saying that's what we should do now, but it would have been possible). Sockpuppetry is annoying and it's an offense we decided we should ban for, and that's fine.
But plagiarism is NEVER ok. So while this user is almost certainly doing one thing that we decided we want to ban people for doing….if he ISN'T sockpuppeting, then he is flat out confessing to committing one of the worst offenses we have on the site.
It's kinda like saying you couldn't have ran that red light because you were too busy robbing a grocery store on the other side of town.
So. There's that.
Exactly. I would let someone slide for a sockpuppet if they were being non-malicious; to me, it's more that we need the option to permaban based on that, not that we must do so.
But plagiarism of another user's work… yeah. What you said.
Definitely a permanent ban. If they want to claim that they committed a much worse act than the one we thought they did, who are we to argue?
An accusation on account creation based on time of application is completely empty and worthless. […]
Nitpicky here, but it wasn't based on time of application. It was based on the time of modster's "goodbye" post… although this might be indicative of the account being created very close to the time of application, since y'know, that's how most sockpuppets start out.
Also, I find that saying that an "accusation" is "completely empty and worthless" tends to raise many more eyebrows than "I see how it would seem suspicious, here's my side of the story". I'd be more willing to believe this person is they told us why they felt that the evidence against them is so empty. It's not the individual reasons, but the accumulation, but at this point there's not much left to redeem them. :/
Keep the perma. I've yet to see this person demonstrate anything productive for the site.
(account deleted)