I would advocate for a shortish ban (~1 week to ~1 month) for posting unhelpful critique that denotes a category of demographic in a derogatory manner. It does not help the author and also espouses bigotry that we do not want in the community of the SCP Foundation.
Living the dream, or dreaming the life?
Seconding this, as I already said in SSSC earlier. This isn't something we want in the slightest on the site and we should come down harder than just a warning.
Noting here that the idea is most likely lifted from the experiments from Lilo & Stitch. I mentioned the similarities, the response was:
I've noticed they are similar. What about it?
They're communicating right now that reviewing their work is a waste of time, especially with the dismissive nature of their responses.
User kenny070287 has a post history that suggests a bit of a troubling pattern, particularly with regards to sexual/creepy comments.
Just for record-keeping's sake. I'd say definitely keep an eye on them.
Permission granted by Lily.
EDIT: meant to copy instead of save this. Ignore this post for now. <3
For the read me first vs guides to writing I was basing it off the existing guide. I can definitely break it up like this if there is more agreement on the subject.
With regards to tagging, the difference between essay and guide is kind of a mess. There's a lot of each one that should really be the other, and even in the old hub there were some essays/guides listed under the opposite section. Were it up to me I think a lot of them should be retagged, but that isn't my choice. For the two page bit, I personally agree and originally had all this on one page. However, I was advised by Zyn to split it up as a frequent complaint was we already had too much in the existing hub, and this had quite a bit more.
You're the second person to bring that up about the downvote form. I'd suggest someone with the authority remove the essay tag and then I'll remove it from the draft.
Personally I disagree with the last bit. I think a section for dedicated glossaries makes sense and doesn't belong with guides on community participation.
As for the essay page, I'm concerned with the inclusion of the joke 'Standard Form For Downvotes' (why on Earth is this tagged as 'Essay' to begin with?) It's not remotely helpful, and doesn't deserve a place in a hub collecting useful information on how to operate on the site.
Agreeing with this. It only misleads new users into false justifications. At the least, it should be listed among the essays.
Whilst not disc staff, blayant homophobia is surely worth a short ban at minimum, in my opinion.
~🏵~Flower Power~🏵~
User HarrisBaker just made the following post in the discussion on Sex At Frigid Temperatures. See below for transcription.
I didn't like it. I don't generally like love stories(I have yet to run into one I remember, let alone like), but the whole homosexual relation thing is not something I think is good. There's a reason for that, but I don't want to start anything, so I'll sit on it.
I downvoted this because of the homo. It turned me off that quick, I didn't read it properly, so I can't speak to anything else.
Decibelle staffposted.
It's 4:27 AM and I can hardly function, please discuss.
Can we rename 'Read me first' as "Required Reading", and move each guide tagged such under that banner? It seems a odd to lump important rules and guidelines under 'Guides to Writing' (they're more like guides to the submission process). Maybe it could be subdivided, beginning with 'For All Members', followed by 'For Contributors', or something like that? Everything seems jumbled, and it may be easier for new members to get a handle on things if we kept policy separate from style guides.
On that note, shouldn't the Criticism Policy, Image Use Policy and perhaps the Licensing Guide be tagged as 'required'? Should some of the writing 'guides' instead be tagged 'essay', and vice-versa? If we're going to actually split the guide hub into two pages (personally not a fan of having to send people to different pages for these resources), perhaps we should take a closer look at how everything is tagged?
As for the essay page, I'm concerned with the inclusion of the joke 'Standard Form For Downvotes' (why on Earth is this tagged as 'Essay' to begin with?) It's not remotely helpful, and doesn't deserve a place in a hub collecting useful information on how to operate on the site.
You could probably do away with the 'supplement' section. For instance, why not place 'Glossary of Terms' in the 'Community Engagement', as it deals with jargon frequently used by community/site members?
I'd rather keep it at perma.
Admin, SCP Wiki
Perma, no appeal.
Admin, SCP Wiki
Hello all,
After a discussion earlier this week, Zyn asked me to put together updated hubs for guides and essays. Considering there was no essay hub, and that the guide hub was mostly essays and was out of date, I think an update is due. With the first drafts done, Zyn has asked me to post here to ask for your thoughts.
http://scpsandbox2.wikidot.com/modern-erastaff
http://scpsandbox2.wikidot.com/modern-erastaff2
The first link is a sandbox for the guide hub and the second for the essay hub. Every previous article is there, as well as every page tagged guide or essay. I also added some new sections, deleted and redistributed a couple, slightly updated the formatting, and moved a few things around. One thing to note is that the previous iteration had a handful of guides in its essay section and vice versa. As I thought most of these placements made sense in the hubs, taking out of the account their tags, I kept them where they were for the most part.
Chickenpeep (account age: 369 days, membership age: 367 days) has made four threads for essentially the same article:
The extensive feedback that has been provided does not appear to have been put to use in a meaningful way when it was not actively resisted, and the user appears to be generally unaware of site standards and practices. Zyn agreed that this behavior was troublesome and merits keeping an eye on them.
Disgraceful. Perma with no appeal.
Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!
In their own draft thread here, ianofdoom2 had a negative response to feedback and proceeded to start an argument, which included implied insults toward a staff member. Relevant bits below.
When given crit by Pedantique:
Not to sound rude, but there's a reason I've gone off-site for criticism.
When called out by Lily for cherrypicking:
I'm not cherry picking anything-I just don't think ''This is stupid'' is valid criticism (Yes, that was something I was given without any context, from a well known author here BTW).
Why do you think I removed the poster, the scientifically inaccurate dumb hole, and that quantum non-local device? Hell, the entire damn concept was different before I made it into an assless cat. Also, no offense, but saying ''we're better than everybody else'' most of the time is considered arrogant and narcissistic where I come from.
And when pointed out the oddity of that statement:
I'm not just talking about the Foundation-I'm talking about writing in general.
Thanks to Zyn for locking the thread.
Edit: They sent me a message that was mostly an odd rant about how everything they said made sense and implying I was a hypocrite. Nothing outright offensive or anything in it though.
This is plagiarism, and the fact that it was done on submissions for a contest is particularly troubling.
A shame. From what I remember, they were otherwise an okay site member.
We would need to go with perma. I personally would be alright allowing an appeal in one year, but I'll defer to staff who can be more objective in this scenario.
I agree with Soulless here. While we do have precedence for art theft, the relevant scenario was over 6 years ago and does not apply.
This is basically worth counting as straight plagiarism.
I believe this is considered heavy plagarism, for which we do not tolerate on the site.
Living the dream, or dreaming the life?
Noting that today they posted a huge thread about making basic tables: http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-3373943/basic-cell-tutorial (most, if not all of which was already covered by existing guides)
They also necroposted on a 2-year-old comment that had already been answered: http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1019136/how-to-use-this-forum-questions-desk#post-3574693
I guess I can appreciate their willingness to help, but they really should pay more attention to whether what they're doing is necessary or not.
