Non-Disc Record - RandomRedneck

Re: RandomRedneck

Tue, 29 May 2012 07:37:46 +0000

Who authorized it? Staff, or the author? 'cause if the author's around, they're the ones that need to grant permission.

EDIT: VAE's saying author gave him permission. Pretty strange thing to get butthurt about if that's the case, but I suppose we're through with him now.

Re: RandomRedneck

Tue, 29 May 2012 02:21:20 +0000

He deleted his account.

Re: RandomRedneck

Mon, 28 May 2012 23:25:48 +0000

VAE did an authorized rewrite of one of his better ideas. RR repines constructively with a downvote and:

Of course. When it's submitted by someone else, everyone loves it…

Butthurt ain't a crime, but it should be known that we're not through with this guy. I'll back any disciplinary action for any further assholery in the future.

Re: RandomRedneck

Fri, 25 May 2012 18:45:36 +0000

i, uh, actually had a conversation with him too, basically saying is he didn't accept help, he'd be removed fromt he site.

Re: RandomRedneck

Fri, 25 May 2012 17:34:08 +0000

He didn't respond to me, but he's being much cooler about feedback today so may I officially say: You were right Eskobar and Photo.

Re: RandomRedneck

Fri, 25 May 2012 15:58:02 +0000

Excellent. Thank you, Sorts. Now, if he continues categorically ignoring feedback after an official warning, I can get behind a tempban.

Re: RandomRedneck

Fri, 25 May 2012 03:19:12 +0000

Since I started the thread… done.

Here's what I sent:

+ show block

Re: RandomRedneck

Fri, 25 May 2012 02:25:43 +0000

Alright. So, let's have someone send him an official warning PM. Preferably someone more eloquent conversations-wise than I am.

Re: RandomRedneck

Fri, 25 May 2012 02:05:28 +0000

I acknowledge that he is in violation of Site Rules, but there is actually no defined manner in which simple, straightforward violations are to be punished. As such, I consider policy to be official warning by staff->tempban->permaban. I haven't seen any discussion of an official warning, i.e. a PM sent by Staff with Staff hat on, referencing the violation in question and the consequences for subsequent violations.

I think that a review of Site Rules is generally needed, which could include adding express procedures for the enforcement of rules that don't involve malicious behavior. For right now, though, I'm inclined to err on the side of mercy.

Re: RandomRedneck

Fri, 25 May 2012 00:33:44 +0000

In this particular situation though his absolute refusal to take criticism from people who wanted to help him is the key, that entire discussion thread on his now deleted random hairspray SCP was a complete mess, all because he would keep posting one line arguments about how he didn't need any help and he was going to keep doing what he was doing.

The big problem is that he causes these huge messes, is rude to people who were actually trying to do him a favor, and then self deletes and drags all of the posts out with him. There's nowhere to publicly call him out because he just covers his ears and ignores all feedback. I think a temp ban would be what is necessary to change that attitude.

Re: RandomRedneck

Fri, 25 May 2012 00:06:53 +0000

I don't think it does, actually. That sort of thing can be easily misinterpreted. Someone needs to tell him, explicitly, that what he is doing is against Site rules and that he's courting a tempban if he keeps it up. I'm aware that that is only my opinion, but I'm generally in favor of warnings being made obvious.

Re: RandomRedneck

Thu, 24 May 2012 23:37:05 +0000

Please look under user obligations. Specifically:

2.You are to be open to criticism, and to tolerate the opinion of others whom you may not agree with. If you feel a commenter is being unnecessarily harsh, please contact a mod.

He's been told by Staff that he needs to be open to criticism. To my mind, that constitutes sufficient warning.

Re: RandomRedneck

Thu, 24 May 2012 23:24:31 +0000

Okay, the guy's annoying, pointlessly stubborn, and not a very good writer. Buuuuuuuuut...

4. The following offenses will not result in bannings by mods/admins.

Writing shitty SCPs (although spamming the site with shitty SCPs can be considered an instant permaban).

Look, strictly speaking (according to the same document), disciplining members falls on Mods and Admins, so y'all can do whatever floats your boat. But we have a set, defined code of conduct on the site for a reason—namely, to ensure that everyone is held to one single, overriding standard. And according to that code of conduct, we specifically will not punish a user for being a shitty writer. Unless you can prove (find somewhere on the internet where this guy said "Hey, I'm gonna go write a bunch of shitty SCPs and make these guys mad, hurr durr") that he's a troll, he's just a shitty writer. A prolific shitty writer, which is something of an inconvenience. But we can delete his stuff on the same schedule as everyone else's. If I have a vote, I have to vote against a ban. (Warning, maybe. But not a ban.)

Yes, I know he said the proposal isn't to ban him for being a shitty writer, but we've tolerated annoying commenters before without dropping the hammer, and we can do it again. Warn him; if he acts up again, tempban him, if he acts up again, permaban him. If you qualify what he was doing as "excessive rudeness to others," that's the protocol to follow. If you just say "he violated a user obligation," well, we don't have a protocol in place under current rules for banning him without a warning. So my vote stands.

Re: RandomRedneck

Thu, 24 May 2012 22:00:45 +0000

The tool for doing so is in the site manager. Since mods apparently can't access it, admins have to hand out bans.

As I said, I'll get it done when I return from flying. I just want to get a bit more staff consensus, and I have a pretty specific idea of what I want to say to him regarding the ban (but not enough time to write it up).

Re: RandomRedneck

Thu, 24 May 2012 21:36:04 +0000

Yeah, I think a temp ban is necessary here. If consensus is still for temp ban when I get back from work, I'll take care of it.

Re: RandomRedneck

Thu, 24 May 2012 21:30:41 +0000

Drop the hammer.

Re: RandomRedneck

Thu, 24 May 2012 21:27:52 +0000

Kind of confusing, actually. Rules say:

Nominate users for banning/tempbanning

But also:

Give warnings/punishments in proportion to the offense

Though I suspect it may be in reference to:

Kick/ban users from the chat, provided a valid reason is given

But I'm not sure as it's not very clear and pretty outdated. So I'd wait for an admin to weigh in and/or do it.

EDIT: Nope. Done through Site Manager, requires admin-level access.

Re: RandomRedneck

Thu, 24 May 2012 18:42:15 +0000

Also in favour of ban.

Re: RandomRedneck

Thu, 24 May 2012 18:42:01 +0000

Can I ban? I don't even know how, let alone that it was in my own grasp. I thought it had to be an admin thing.

Re: RandomRedneck

Thu, 24 May 2012 18:27:05 +0000

You may fire when you are ready, Gridley.

EDIT: Let's just make it temp to start with. If that doesn't get the point across, fuck 'em.

RandomRedneck

Thu, 24 May 2012 18:04:56 +0000

It's not the constant stream of deleted shit, it's the obstinate manner in which he refuses to receive any advice or criticism, which is a violation of site rules. So I'm nominating him for a ban from the wiki, even if only temporarily.

See the circus of bullshit here:
http://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-470626/scp-1509#post-1458866

Relevant thread pastebinned because the entry is bound to be deleted:

Former Pastebin Link

hide

Dwarfio 24 May 2012, 09:39 GMT-07

No one will steal your ideas on sandboxes or the forum, friend. Pitch your idea, get feedback, start writing, get helped, make a good SCP object. Requiring some outside help isn't degrading. You're not R.L. Stine (the greatest author of all time btw), so don't expect to just write a totally rad SCP article with no outside help whatsoever.

RandomRedneck 24 May 2012, 09:42 GMT-07

I don't need any help. I can figure this out myself.

Boa Noah 24 May 2012, 09:43 GMT-07

You clearly can't.

Lycan Therapy 24 May 2012, 09:43 GMT-07

Yes, you clearly bloody well do.

Drewbear 24 May 2012, 09:46 GMT-07

Okay, Random, getting help isn't a sign of weakness. Every published author in existence has had their work editted and sometimes they completely rewrite stuff based on what their editor says. Again, let me state:

You have decent ideas.

But you're shooting yourself in the foot over and over and apparently not accepting any feedback on what you're doing wrong!

RandomRedneck 24 May 2012, 10:03 GMT-07

If I want any help, I'll ask for it.

Boa Noah 24 May 2012, 10:05 GMT-07

Such a shame.

Drewbear 24 May 2012, 10:06 GMT-07

sigh
Obviously you don't want help. And that means that you will almost certainly keep failing if you continue going on like you have been.

Generally speaking, we don't enjoy seeing people fail. Let us help you!

RandomRedneck 24 May 2012, 10:17 GMT-07

I don't need help. I've got more ideas than you can shake a stick at, and one of them is bound to stick.

Drewbear 24 May 2012, 10:20 GMT-07

sigh

Fine. I'll stop trying to help you, since you're obviously not going to listen. I'm just sorry that you're letting all these previous ideas go to waste when they could've been salvaged into good articles.

Dwarfio 24 May 2012, 10:25 GMT-07

You're not quite understanding what we're getting at.
Most of us agree: You've had good ideas. It doesn't matter. They're not going to "stick" unless your writing is up to par.

Also, if you act like this, then even if you do manage a good article, I imagine some of us actually will shake a stick at it, just based on principle. I've seen good articles get downvoted just because the author upvoted himself, so don't think nobody will downvote based on your attitude.

RandomRedneck 24 May 2012, 10:26 GMT-07

I haven't upvoted any of my submissions.

Dwarfio 24 May 2012, 10:31 GMT-07

Congratulations, I believe you have managed to respond solely to the one point which I didn't actually make.

ChazzK 24 May 2012, 10:28 GMT-07

Your ideas are fine. Hell, I love the idea of "can of hairspray that makes hair randomly go apeshit." That's the kind of safe thing I like on this site. It's the way you write them up that puts people through conniption fits.

As a point of reference, I'm currently 31 years old. (No I don't care if people know my real age, or that people nearly half my age have written better stuff on here) I've been doing various forms of creative writing since I was 12. If I never accepted any form of outside help or criticism, I would still be writing exactly as I had been back then, wondering when something would "stick."

It's honestly starting to seem like you either think people are trying to somehow look down on or judge you, or that you have an over-inflated self-image when it comes to your actual writing talent. Without having spoken to you in person or having any lengthy correspondence, I'm going to assume the first, and I assure you that even the BEST writers on this site have gotten help to get there, and still need help from time to time.

RandomRedneck 24 May 2012, 10:35 GMT-07

Again, if I want help, I'll ask for it.

Solan625 24 May 2012, 10:40 GMT-07

Okay, fine, but let me put it this way. If you don't ask for help, your articles aren't going to be good no matter how many times you try. If you fire a bow a hundred times without even looking at the target, you're not going to hit the bull's-eye no matter how good you think you are.

QuackOfaThousandSuns 24 May 2012, 10:45 GMT-07

I feel like you don't understand the point with what everyone is saying:
This is not a place for everyone to submit whatever they want. A wiki is, almost by definition, a community setting. That means that everyone helps everyone else. It's the foundation (ha) of this site.
If you were a published writer, that'd be one thing. You would write as you please, and get your work published (or not). But that's not the case.
Some Most of the best articles on this site have been collaborations. There is absolutely no shame in getting help. But I can tell you now that this article isn't going to stay up as it is. If you want this fantastic idea to stay, you need to figure out what's wrong with it.
I don't want to be "that guy", but get help, man. You have good ideas, it's only the execution of those ideas.

RandomRedneck 24 May 2012, 10:50 GMT-07

I. Don't. Need. Help.

QuackOfaThousandSuns 24 May 2012, 10:53 GMT-07

Articles get nominated for deletion when its raging gets to negative 5. Your article's current rating is negative 16. If you don't change it, it's going to be deleted. That's the bottom line.

Mod Post
Sorts 24 May 2012, 10:59 GMT-07

Calling for a stop on all offers or recommendations that RandomRedneck get help or feedback for his articles. That's not because you guys are doing anything wrong, the site rules require RR to be open to criticism, but that's just getting us nowhere right now.

For now, just downvote this so staff can delete this.