Flipped out about a fuck up/possible troll post, was told to chill because it wasn't a big deal. Refused, was kicked, rejoined saying, "Fuck you."
00:03 Aelanna >_>
00:03 Aelanna I vote we ban this user.
00:03 Aelanna Seriously.
00:03 Lucavex If that SCP can exist for more than 20 minutes, I weep for this world.
00:03 murphy_slaw agreed
00:03 Xiao seconds Aelanna's vote.
00:03 Aelanna If he can figure out how to get his ass on IRC to ask us to remove it
00:03 Aelanna THEN we can talk to him
00:03 *** adnzzzzZ joined #site19
00:03 Aelanna If he doesn't, then we lose nothing
00:03 Faminepulse guys
00:03 Faminepulse http://www.scp-wiki.net/scp-1091
00:03 Nala Faminepulse: Scp 1091 [Other/Unknown] (rating: +0, 0 revisions, 0 comments) - tags: (none)
00:03 Faminepulse look
00:03 Faminepulse no look
00:04 Faminepulse look at it
00:04 Aelanna WHY
00:04 Aelanna FUCk
00:04 Aelanna NO
00:04 Aelanna FUCKING NO
00:04 murphy_slaw oh for the sake of fuck
00:04 Aelanna FUCKING BAN HIM
00:04 Lucavex God damnit.
00:04 NAC To all the non newbs of this site, I apologize as to what my kind has wrought.
00:04 Lucavex That number was supposed to be for MY SCP.
00:04 Nusquam Guys.
00:04 Nusquam This really isn't that big a deal.
00:05 Lucavex http://sandbox.scp-wiki.net/shortwave
00:05 Lucavex Dangit.
00:05 Vehemency Someone get TroyL. MAYBE IT CAN BE ANOTHER SCREAMING MAN.
00:05 Aelanna IT IS A FUCKING DEAL
00:05 Xiao Vehemency, I want it.
00:05 Nusquam Deep breaths.
00:05 Nusquam In… and out.
00:05 Aelanna Because I have to see this BULLSHIT on my recent changes list for the next fucking 24 hours
00:05 Lucavex ^nerdrage
00:05 Vehemency Can I re-write it?
00:05 Nusquam Don't look at recent changes for the next 24 hours
00:05 Xiao Veh, both of us?
00:05 Xiao
00:05 Aelanna Lucavex: Who the fuck are you? >:I
00:06 Xiao Aelanna, he's a new guy.
00:06 Faminepulse A brand of contraceptive
00:06 Lucavex Just a random new person.
00:06 Xiao Don't kill him yet.
00:06 Faminepulse i think
00:06 Lucavex Waited with bated breath for my chance at membership
00:06 Lucavex And to post a few SCP's and tales.
00:06 Aelanna I have a suggestion for you.
00:06 Aelanna Read the fucking rules. WORD FOR WORD.
00:06 Lucavex I already have, Aelanna.
00:06 Lucavex Twice..
00:06 Aelanna Don't skim, don't pass Go, don't collect two hundred dollars.
00:07 Xiao Lucavex, this is the time where you should simply STFU.
00:07 Xiao Just saying.
00:07 *** Aelanna was kicked by Nusquam (Chill.)
00:07 *** Aelanna joined #site19
00:07 Auric And I am back with an editied sandbox.
00:07 Aelanna Fuck you, Nusquam. :I
Ban was going to be a few minutes until she mellowed out. Then this in PMs:
00:11 Aelanna … excuse me?
00:11 Aelanna I was having a civil discussion right there.
00:11 Nusquam You were, but it was more what immediately preceded it.
00:11 Aelanna :I
00:12 Aelanna Okay…
00:12 Aelanna Whatever.
00:12 Aelanna Chat was past it, but you can be a douche if you want.
00:12 Nusquam The dramatic rage at fuck ups doesn't accomplish anything but make the chat look like a bunch of rabid ass hats.
00:13 Aelanna Staff doing nothing to prevent fuckups and doing nothing to improve the site is even worse.
00:13 Aelanna What's your point?
00:15 Aelanna Well,
since you won't even grace me with an official notice of how long I'm
banned for and exactly what the cause is, I intend to take this up the
chain.
00:15 Aelanna Have fun.
00:16 Nusquam Go ahead. I was making an 05 post, and calling me a douche doesn't really sound like a formal inquiry as to the reason.
00:16 Nusquam I assumed you were smart enough to figure out the reason on your own, but if I must spell it out, I will.
00:16 Aelanna It's your job. Please do.
00:18 Nusquam You
were going to be banned for a few minutes for not dropping the
melodramatic bullshit over what's either a fuckup or a trollpost after
being told to chill and immediately reconnecting with a jab.
00:18 Nusquam However, because I'm a massive douche, I'll be making it 24 hours for the pettiness you're demonstrating.
00:19 Aelanna You
gave no warning, just a kick that could easily have been interpreted as
screwing around. Once warned, I stopped engaging in the behavior that I
was warned against.
00:19 Aelanna There was no basis for a ban, and I will be complaining regarding that.
00:20 Aelanna Because, guess what? You're in a position of authority. You don't -get- to be a douche.
00:20 Aelanna So, you want to talk about being petty? We'll see.
Mibbit.com Pasted on 2012-04-23 05:23:43
There was a :P face after "Have fun." but mibpaste doesn't pick up emotes.
Will leave this in place for twenty-four hours, effective now. At 12:30 AM Tuesday, April 24, US Central time, this user may be unbanned. Ban has been lifted.
Dredging this thread up from the depths of the forum, a unanimous decision was made to tempban Aelanna from 19 for 24 hours after another incident.
http://pastebin.com/C2HiRpth This is the log.
[01:36:20] <Sinclair> I'm reading through "Bad Applications", by the way.
[01:36:24] <Sinclair> Who filed that one?
[01:36:26] <Sinclair> I would hate to be them.
[01:36:34] <Wogglebug> Bright does apps.
[01:36:43] <Wogglebug> Bright would hate to be you too.
[01:36:51] * salvagebar has quit (Ping timeout: 184 seconds)
[01:38:01] <Sinclair> There's a friend I would invite to the Foundation except I don't think he'd be able to distinguish User!Bright from LOL!Bright from Serious!Bright, and he'd go on that list too.
[01:38:30] <Wogglebug> Now old is he?
[01:38:42] <Sinclair> 19.
[01:38:57] <Bright> .nala .nala
[01:38:58] <Wogglebug> thenyofriendneedssomelearnin
[01:38:59] <Sinclair> A triumph of Australian education.
[01:39:05] <Wogglebug> It's just the one Bright.
[01:39:06] <Bright> .nala
[01:39:07] * Nala is a version 2.30 AnnaBot created by Raven Mackenzie (last updated 2013-03-11), currently indexing 1,968 articles, 187 supplementary pages, 187 unused slots, 1,057 tales, 21 guides, and 22 essays by 617 authors as of 2013-06-24 22:35:42 PDT (10 m 21 s ago).
[01:39:22] <Slate> Well, it's like the joke goes
[01:39:37] <Bright> The lsit was supposed to be a joke…but too many people treat it like it's canon for bright to act that way
[01:39:53] <Slate> A Canadian soldier is sitting in a trench in WW1 with a fresh Aussie conscript
[01:40:05] <Slate> And he looks at the young soldier and asks
[01:40:14] <Slate> "Friend, did you come here to die?
[01:40:23] <Slate> And the Australian says
[01:40:32] <Slate> "Nah mate, I came here yesterday."
[01:41:00] <Sinclair> Slate: :|
[01:41:03] <vezaz> :l
[01:41:09] * Salmander (~ten.elbacwahs.gc.63A9248-CRInys|rednamlas#ten.elbacwahs.gc.63A9248-CRInys|rednamlas) has joined
[01:41:13] <Sinclair> That actually works better if the Canadian is a South African.
[01:41:14] <Slate> It's an accent joke.
[01:41:16] <Sinclair> At least from my point of view.
[01:41:17] <Aelanna> Bright: You are the last bastion of LolFoundation.
[01:41:26] <Aelanna> Since everything else has been removed, people assume that yours is 'acceptable' somehow.
[01:41:34] <Slate> South African accents are great
[01:41:39] <Aelanna> The /responsible/ thing to do would be to remove the list. I for one don't see why it's so prominent.
[01:41:39] <Sinclair> Bright: I am so sorry for any day I have ever caused you trouble. Just looking at the Bad Applications list is painful.
[01:41:41] <Aelanna> But that's just me.
[01:41:56] <vezaz> if we killed it off entirely people would start going after the J's
[01:41:58] <Slate> Mostly becaause they confuse anyone who has never heard a South African accent
[01:42:21] <Wogglebug> Aelanna: I got to the site through that list.
[01:42:31] * Aelanna shrugs
[01:42:46] <Aelanna> All I'm saying is that it's hypocritical to say "no more lolfoundation" and still have stuff like that list.
[01:42:48] * Gargus (moc.ishcm.tneilc.ECAFABB2-CRInys|tibbiM#moc.ishcm.tneilc.ECAFABB2-CRInys|tibbiM) has joined
[01:42:52] <vezaz> The J's undercut every serious scp and aren't in fitting with the tone of the foundation we work hard to create.
[01:42:54] <Gargus> Huh…
[01:42:54] <Aelanna> I'm well aware of its so called "site cultural value"
[01:43:00] * Gargus looks
[01:43:04] <Aelanna> But, well, staff don't like to change things
[01:43:10] <Gargus> So I come back to a discussion on that.
[01:43:20] <vezaz> I think there's room for multiple visions, one lol, one not
[01:43:31] <Roget> I think the responsible thing to do is keep an entertaining piece
[01:43:33] <Roget> that people like
[01:43:33] * anqxyr (~PI.7A17246B.5C96069F.C67491C2|ryxqna#PI.7A17246B.5C96069F.C67491C2|ryxqna) has joined
[01:43:35] <vezaz> instead of cracking down we ought come up with a way to channel it, perhaps through the canon system
[01:43:41] <Roget> because we are here as an entertainment source
[01:43:48] <Gargus> In all honesty
[01:43:58] <Gargus> I think our tone has been shot to hell for about a year and a half now.
[01:44:07] <vezaz> gargus ?
[01:44:15] <TheAlly> Roget speaks true
[01:44:18] <Gargus> And not because of the flood of new folks
[01:44:21] * Vince|Mobile has quit (Client exited)
[01:44:24] <Roget> Thank you theally
[01:44:31] * Aelanna yawns
[01:44:36] <Roget> newbies are stupid and imitate stuff because they are stupid newbies
[01:44:39] <Gargus> Just because, going off of what I've observed, the site seems to inable to hold one, steady tone anymore
[01:44:47] <vezaz> that's hardly a bad thing
[01:44:51] <vezaz> the site is growing
[01:44:54] <Gargus> Of course not
[01:44:54] <Roget> if we removed lolfoundation, they'd just latch onto somethign else
[01:44:56] <vezaz> it'd be boring if everything sounded the same
[01:44:57] <Aelanna> Or perhaps staff aren't doing enough to guide newbies.
[01:45:06] <Aelanna> Out of a misplaced notion that "stuff ain't broke"
[01:45:07] <Gargus> I'm just saying that cutting J's because we want to still be spooky serious
[01:45:10] <Gargus> It's a bit dumb
[01:45:11] <Wogglebug> Or perhaps they are doing too much.
[01:45:25] <Roget> I think we are doing way too much in the guides
[01:45:29] <Gargus> Maybe it's just because I've got a J
[01:45:30] <vezaz> gargus that was a nonserious comment
[01:45:30] <Wogglebug> Out of a mistaken notion of EVERYTHING AM BECOME BORK
[01:45:39] * Xiao has quit (Ping timeout)
[01:45:43] <Roget> This is why troy is smoothing em out
[01:45:50] <vezaz> gargus I love the J's
[01:45:56] <Aelanna> I think that equating "guidance" with "the guides" is a perfect illustration of how out-of-touch current staff are with the delicate act of moderating an online community.
[01:46:10] <Aelanna> But what do I know, I'm just an angry bitch.
[01:46:15] <Roget> Guides do provide some initial guidance
[01:46:21] <Aelanna> hahahahaha
[01:46:25] <Aelanna> no. no they don't.
[01:46:27] <Aelanna> they don't do shit
[01:46:39] <Roget> The initial guidance of "this is our site, here are our rules"
[01:46:51] <Gargus> I never read any of the guides aside from the ones needed to get into the site
[01:47:01] <picone> I've read a few of them
[01:47:05] <Gargus> And really only revisited them for formatting my first few skips.
[01:47:08] <Wogglebug> I read all of them, and all the essays.
[01:47:09] <Aelanna> The people who are reading the guides are the people who won't be a problem to begin with.
[01:47:13] <Aelanna> The people who do their due diligence.
[01:47:16] <Gargus> Which, since my first few skips crashed
[01:47:23] <Gargus> Well, since /most/ of my skips crashed
[01:47:32] <Gargus> Wasn't worth a whole hell of a lot.
[01:47:47] <Roget> So, the shortening of the guides with troy helps them provide guidance to more people
[01:47:48] <Gargus> Course, I wrote my first few before the huge glut of guides
[01:47:52] <Gargus> So take that for what you will
[01:47:53] <Roget> because fewer folks go tl;dr
[01:48:01] * Aelanna rolls eyes
[01:48:10] <Aelanna> Delusional.
[01:48:13] <vezaz> I think we have plenty of guidance, too much of it; though all in all I think the site rolls along pretty well
[01:48:21] <vezaz> I think we're lucky that we have no serious problems.
[01:48:26] <Roget> That's a bit rude
[01:48:32] <Roget> (not you vez)
[01:49:09] <vezaz> Think about it, everything staff works on, are about preference, moderating comments etc; troublesome users come into line or are banned quickly; we get plenty of new submissions and some are even good;
[01:49:09] <picone> Gargus: I get the impression most SCPs crash
[01:49:16] <vezaz> there are no real problems with our model;
[01:49:20] * Snowshoe (~PI.6306CBE7.806B1748.049518D|criigc#PI.6306CBE7.806B1748.049518D|criigc) has joined
[01:49:23] <vezaz> the canons have injected a breath of fresh air
[01:49:28] <vezaz> and the community feels healthier than ever
[01:49:31] <Shoe> G'night, chaps
[01:49:34] <vezaz> so even as we go about trying to fix things
[01:49:34] * HatMan has left
[01:49:34] * Shoe has quit (Quit: bedtime)
[01:49:37] <Aelanna> stop making me laugh out loud
[01:49:42] <vezaz> it's comforting to know that we're in good shape.
[01:49:42] <Aelanna> it's late and people are asleep~
[01:49:53] * Wogglebug detects hatorade condensing in the air
[01:50:00] <vezaz> except for people who love to make nasty remarks about an internet writing community.
[01:50:05] <vezaz> but there's no fixing that.
[01:50:08] <Roget> Aelanna we're trying to have a discussion, you're being a bit condescending
[01:50:18] * Wogglebug turns on a fan to blow the hatorade out a window
[01:50:22] <Gargus> I want to go to sleep
[01:50:24] <Aelanna> No, you guys are circlejerking.
[01:50:25] <Gargus> But I also don't want to.
[01:50:28] <Gargus> It's weird.
[01:50:29] <Aelanna> Reassuring yourselves that everything is fine.
[01:50:32] <Aelanna> You are all blind
[01:50:41] <Jekeled> Aelanna: Are you being serious?
[01:50:44] <Aelanna> Completely, absolutely oblivious to shit that goes wrong.
[01:50:47] * Sophos peeks into the channel
[01:50:48] <Roget> Like
[01:50:49] <Roget> what
[01:50:55] <Jekeled> Aelanna: Because if not then you'd better get the fucking orchestra to get the sting.
[01:50:57] <vezaz> oh hell aelanna, if it's all so bad, why don't you quit? Ah, that's right, you did. But you came back. Why? Because at the end you like it here, as we do too.
[01:51:07] <vezaz> and if there were anything that awful going on you'd have /stayed away./
[01:51:25] <vezaz> It's the same reason I quit and came back.
[01:51:26] <Wogglebug> HEY
[01:51:33] <Wogglebug> Hows about a new topic or summat.
[01:51:37] <Wogglebug> This one feels angry.
[01:51:39] <Aelanna> Nah. That's a pretty silly assumption.
[01:51:40] <Gargus> Let's just talk
[01:51:44] <Gargus> About things
[01:51:45] <Sinclair> So guys.
[01:51:45] <Aelanna> Just like many other assumptions that are going on.
[01:51:46] <Gargus> And stuff.
[01:51:48] <Sinclair> How's about this weather we're having?
[01:51:49] <Gargus> How's that sound
[01:51:53] <Gargus> It's hard to be mad about things and stuff
[01:51:55] <Wogglebug> Wow that weather
[01:51:56] <TheAlly> I like cranberry muffind
[01:52:04] <Sophos> Wow, it's like pile-on-Aelanna day or something
[01:52:04] <TheAlly> *muffins
[01:52:06] <rumetzen> guys
[01:52:08] <Gargus> I mean, it's things and stuff
[01:52:14] <Gargus> It's perfectly neutral
[01:52:20] <rumetzen> merry and pippin are the best characters in the lotr movies and doctopus is a stupid butt right
[01:52:24] <Aelanna> Kittens are adorable.
[01:52:34] <Wogglebug> Kittens /are/ adorable.
[01:52:34] <Aelanna> I'm going to bed, but I'm going to just leave this here:
[01:52:43] <Wogglebug> I hope it's a kitten.
[01:52:43] <Sinclair> rumetzen: why do you have to bring in your VENDETTAS
[01:52:45] <Talanic> there's a couple things that I'd like to discuss - things I've seen said as foundation policy
[01:52:46] <Gargus> Even kittens without faces are adorable
[01:52:47] <Sinclair> no, Merry and Pippin are stupid butts.
[01:53:05] <Sinclair> Dominic Monaghan is okay though.
[01:53:06] <Sinclair> mmm.
[01:53:07] <rumetzen> Sinclair, a) my vendettas are the only reason I get up in the morning
[01:53:11] <rumetzen> b) shut your stupid face
[01:53:15] <Aelanna> The fact that y'all are piling on me and trying to silence me pretty much illustrates the "ignore the bad stuff" mindset that permeates the operation of this site. Staff are promoted purely on their writing ability, which is a terrible way to run anything.
[01:53:19] <Gargus> Although if we must hate something
[01:53:29] <Gargus> Let's hate on Buzzfeed
[01:53:30] <Aelanna> So… be blind if you want, I don't care. <3
[01:53:32] <Wogglebug> :(
[01:53:37] <Gargus> And their list of the 50 hottest Harry Potter characters
[01:53:38] <Wogglebug> Whyyyyyyyyyyy
[01:53:39] <Gargus> That's something to hate
[01:53:42] <Aelanna> G'night~
[01:53:48] <Wogglebug> Mack: don't be that way.
[01:53:49] * Aelanna has quit (Quit: )
[01:53:50] <Sinclair> rumetzen: a) what, you wake up in the morning and think, "I need to go collect a few pounds of flesh?"
[01:53:56] <rumetzen> Yes
[01:53:57] <Sinclair> b) MAKE me. You're not my real dad.
[01:54:06] * Waxx has quit (Quit: )
[01:54:06] <rumetzen> don't make me get my fucking belt boy
[01:54:07] <Salmander> bro u even lift
[01:54:11] * Gargus looks over the whole fiasco
[01:54:25] <TheAlly> beautiful isn't it
[01:54:28] <Gargus> Why were we sad when she left?
[01:54:30] * Gargus sighs
[01:54:30] * Moley (moc.aidemnigriv.elbac.1D1B92DD-CRInys|yeloM#moc.aidemnigriv.elbac.1D1B92DD-CRInys|yeloM) has joined
Her hostmask is nevaeh.ot.sgnoleb|anna#nevaeh.ot.sgnoleb|anna and is to be unbanned before 255 AM EST. I will send have sent a Wikidot PM sending her here, and explaining that the OPs deemed her blatant ignoring of a stop order to warrant a ban.
Well, this is amusing to wake up to.
In the future, you might want to instruct ops on the difference between a suggestion (such as "how about a new topic") and an action stop order ("stop talking about this"). There's a reason staff posts on the forums have "STAFF POST" at the top of them, and it's a little unfair to assume that everyone can always tell the difference.
The post-leave ban is disappointing for other reasons, but have it your way.
Um, yeah, what Aelanna said. There was no stop order. There was a suggestion for a new topic, but no directive from a chat op for everyone to move on to another topic. I do not believe this ban was warranted, particularly since once the topic-change suggestion was given, Aelanna gave her closing statement and left— and at that point, no chat op action was necessary.
So yeah. If a chat op is going to give a Stop Order, it needs to unequivably look like a Stop Order. (I'm also ambivalent about the decision to stop that conversation anyway. People were starting to get worked up, so yeah, a Stop for people to chill would not be unwarranted… but Aelanna has valid points to make, whether or not people are happy to hear them.)
Well, you can't see it in this log, but this bit:
[01:51:26] <Wogglebug> HEY
[01:51:33] <Wogglebug> Hows about a new topic or summat.
[01:51:37] <Wogglebug> This one feels angry.
was bolded when woggle posted it in chat, which made it more clear he was acting in his official capacity as an OP. Since this is pretty much how most stop orders are issued, and Aelanna is in the chat pretty frequently, I find it hard to believe that she didn't see this as an official op order(especially since everyone else in the channel did). And it's pretty obvious that Aelanna understood that it was a stop order, because she initially went along with the new topic. Plus, in the chat rules:
If an OP tells you to drop a subject, drop it immediately: don't get in the last word, don't say one more thing, just stop and move on.
She was pretty clearly getting the last word in before quitting the channel. This is something we would give anyone a 24 hour ban for, whether they immediately left the channel afterwards or not. This was not an issue of someone getting a point people wanted to hear across, it was a person ignoring an order to change the topic of conversation and being banned for it.
Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!
Then I request that, when chat ops do give a Stop Order, they are unambiguous about their statement being an official Stop Order. That way, there will be much less grounds for misinterpretation from users and outside observers. You shouldn't assume that hey, everyone involved has been here a while and knows how things work, so they should know that a suggestion for a topic change should be taken as a Stop Order. Official op actions should look, well, official.
Well, the bolding made it pretty obvious in the channel that this was an official order to turn the conversation in another direction. It looked official in the channel, since ops are the only ones who can make boldtext. It's not like she didn't get it was a stop order, since she started to talk about cute animals with everyone else until deciding to get the last word in and quitting.
I do agree that it could've been more clear, but since she got it was a stop order and then kept going on about it, the ban is absolutely justified.
Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!
Roget, you're making assumptions again— yes, it looked like Woggle's statement should have been taken as a Stop Order, and yes, it looked like Aelanna might have acted like she was following the Stop Order… but you can't know that for sure. This is why op actions (just like staff actions on the wiki) need to be unambiguously labeled as official actions. (Frankly, I think the whole "Aelanna should have known that was an official Stop Order" argument is weak, even with the additional context (bolding) provided.)
Mm. There's a better thread for this line of thought. Headed that way.
I feel like the stop order was unambiguous, and the 24 hour ban warranted. It should be noted this was discussed in staff chat before implementing.
Admin, SCP Wiki
I'm inclined to agree here. That did not read like a stop order. Stop suggestion, yes, but no unambiguous order.
SCP Wiki Administrator | Earth: We're all in this together.
It looked official in the channel, since ops are the only ones who can make boldtext.
This… this isn't correct. Anyone can make bold text… Unless some setting has changed that I don't know about.
I agree that the stop order was ambiguous (I missed it on first read of the logs, when I was reading quickly), and ops do occasionally "suggest" that conversation move on without giving a stop order (recently-ish, I can think of Xiao doing this, and myself, and I think others).
However, I also agree that most of the ops would have banned anyone else for this, which is why I did not contest this decision. People have been 24-hour banned for far less, as a cursory read of this forum will demonstrate.
I will also note that it's kind of difficult to have a discussion about Aelanna because:
A) Many of staff members (+ users in staff chat) are absolutely raring to punish her because she consistently acts really abrasively and has semi-regular freakouts that put everyone on edge.
B) Aelanna, you act dickish and then lash out and take everything personally and get really personally upset when things doesn't go your way. Abrasive + paper-thin skin would be easier to deal with if you only did one of those things.
C) Everything else covered to death in older threads.
There's also the issue that we've become fairly harsh in our dealings with newer people, and fairly harsh in dealing with people in general. Aelanna is part of this brigade — in fact, she often seems to be at the very tip of the spear. A number of people want to treat her (and other older members) exactly the same way we all treat newbies.
Others see a difference — to them, the behavior of Aelanna and others is okay because it's less stupid, not stupid at all, and/or they don't find it annoying. Others would counter-argue that behavior like this is just as stupid or annoying in a different way. And then we have a giant argument about whose standards we should take seriously.
I'd really like us to iron these things out, because on a personal level, I'm so so tired of dealing with FIRST, staff freaking out at me & others at the very idea that we might be favoring Aelanna and why can't we just discipline her like everyone else??????? in fact, why can't we come down on her hard because she's upset people before?????? and SECOND, Aelanna freaking out at me & others even if the only outcome involves zero disciplinary action because you apparently are siding against her by even attempting to see the other party's point of view.
This is like a one-two punch in the face and I'm tired of dealing with it. Guys, can we goddamn work out these neuroticisms already? Yes, that includes you, Aelanna, and yes, it also includes the staff who regularly hand-wring about you (I'm predicting both parties will feel that being called out is ~super unfair~). I get that you all give a shit and that's why you freak out and that your hearts are all in the right place (yes they are, let's not even start an argument about this, I'm not referring to the people who've actually harassed Aelanna) but that doesn't make it okay.
Side note: Roget, Aelanna, there's a certain level of irony to the two of you arguing about the unambiguity of a stop order, because Aelanna, the reason you freaked out on Roget before is that he ignored your request to stop talking to him which you apparently believe, and believed, was unambiguous, and Roget, the reason so many of us felt it was unfair that Aelanna freaked out on you was because we thought it was ambiguous and that you could have misunderstood it in the moment, including me, even though it was clear to me personally. It would also be nice if we could all make some effort to see each others' point of view.
Circling back again, finally, while Aelanna isn't being unfairly singled out here as others have been 24-hour banned for violating ambiguous stop orders (not just her), I thoroughly agree that we should make sure that future stop orders are clear and unambiguous, because if it was just me thinking it was ambiguous, then it's not even worth mentioning, but if Aelanna plus me plus a couple administrators think the stop order was ambiguous, then we have a problem. And an easily fixed one, too. Isn't that nice?
EDIT: Another side note — a week or two ago, I scolded Slate & Scantron & numerous others for backseat modding for suggesting a topic change. Other ops argued me down, saying that that wasn't backseat modding because anyone can suggest a topic change for any reason. This adds rather seriously to the ambiguity issue, I feel. Kind of easy to mistake a stop order for a stop suggestion if literally anyone can say the same thing as a suggestion that might be an order 30 minutes later.
We've given 24 hour bans for little to nothing, with no warning or stop order in the chat before. Does it really matter that things are now "too ambiguous" in this particular moment as opposed to all the other bans over little to nothing?
Concerning stop orders, how ambiguous is it? Is there a line for how obvious a stop order has to be? Do we have to mute the chat, or put it in all caps, or can we just say we're gonna start kicking people and proceed to hand out kicks and bans? "Hey this an op speaking and I'm yelling y'all stop"?
Living the dream, or dreaming the life?
We've given 24 hour bans for little to nothing, with no warning or stop order in the chat before. Does it really matter that things are now "too ambiguous" in this particular moment as opposed to all the other bans over little to nothing?
This is an extremely fair point, stated better than I did.
I haven't raised much of a stink over 24 hour bans because they expire in 24 hours but it's absolutely true that we 24 hour ban for basically nothing with no warning if the wrong op is annoyed at the wrong time. Some of you are going to read this and think "he means Echo" but I don't mean just Echo, because it's a number of us doing this, and most of us, including myself, have applauded it when we're annoyed enough, whether or not we should be applauding it.
Re: Stop orders — as Quik & I said in the other thread, good ideas include saying "I'm calling a stop to this conversation" and/or muting the channel and telling people to move on.
The request to stop did seem ambiguous to me as well.
Am I correct in thinking that chat bans are separate from wiki infractions, and do not count towards the three or four chances people get before a permanent wiki ban? (If they do count, then I think the chat ops need to be a lot more judicious about what is worthy of a ban or warning.)
SCP Wiki Senior Citizen Staff | Thank you for testing my new memetic Forum sig
Wiki and chat infractions are completely seperate… except in the case of something horrible, like the recent thing with Wilt.
Admin, SCP Wiki
Coming just about as late as possible and seconding almost everything. Supporting the temp; Aelanna was being obnoxious and needed to stop. Also seconding that the stop order could have been less ambiguous: honestly, when I do a stop, I usually do put it on +m and get the crowd's attention.
