Disciplinary - UnknownASA

Summary:

Repeated shitposting

UnknownASA

RJB_R 15 Sep 2015 17:58

User unknownASA does not match any existing user name posted this on soon-to-be-deleted SCP-2106

(I accidentally posted this in the wrong place and I couldn't delete it. So I improvised this.)

Please, just don't make everything Echomax in your next SCP. I don't want to see something like this:

+ Level 20 Million Plus Clearance Required

Item #: SCP-Echomax

Object Class: Echomax Max

Special Containment Procedures: Put the thing in the Echomax Box.

Description: SCP-Echomax is a Echomax made of an Echomax alloy, composed of echomanium and echoluminum.

Addendum: It was found in the Echomax Apartment of Mr. Jerry Echomax Echomax, student of the Echomax University.

Interview Echomax-AD-495
> Interviewed: Echomax
>
> Interviewer: Dr. Echomax
>
> Foreword: Dr. Echomax attempts to inverview Echomax regarding Incident Echomax-D-193
>
> <Begin Log, Date E/CH/OMAX>
>
> Dr. Echomax: Echomax, Echomax Echomax Echomax Echomax Echomax?
>
> Echomax: Echomax. Echomax Echomax Echomax Echomax Echomax.
>
> Dr. Echomax: Echomaxxxxx.
>
> <End Log, Date E/CH/OMAX>
>
> Closing Statement: Echomax ultimately complied with the inverview and revealed "Echomax Echomax Echomax Echomax Echomax". Echomax was eventually escorted to it's cell by team ECHOMAX-ROMEO-294

Footnotes

1.Echomax is to be Echomaxed immediately

Obviously it's extremely over-exaggerated and the footnotes aren't that good, but hey, I did that in 10 minutes. Don't blame me. I had to improvise for the footnotes due to the codes not working the way I thought it should have. Anyways, not an aggressive jab at the author. It would just make me cry to see the above collapsible happen.

Closed staff post warning for shitposting, sent a PM with the same content.

---

Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!

Last edited on 15 Sep 2015 19:13 by Zyn Show more

Re: UnknownASA

Zyn 15 Oct 2015 03:31

Noting that they've got another thread here: http://05command.wikidot.com/forum/t-1349986 which I'm consolidating with this one for brevity. Here's the content of the previous thread:

New user UnknownASA does not match any existing user name recently made a lot of substantial edits to a coldpost: http://www.scp-wiki.net/scp-2912

including edit comments "Massive revision of the SCP.", "Fixed the interview (slightly).", and "More changes. You're welcome. It looked like a total wreck before I came here. Many grammatical, punctuation and format errors. The information does not form a report and resembles fantasy at most."

They also commented the following in the discussion page:

I have done some extreme revisions to the article. Hope you like it.

(in response to someone's critique of the page)

After looking at this thing, I just had to fix some errors. Some of the listed, however, are not yet done. Maybe I'll get back to this page I'll fix whatever mistakes the author made.

Modposted twice noting Site Rules, keep an eye on.

Re: UnknownASA

Zyn 15 Sep 2015 19:18

Noting that this user has already gotten warned in staffpost for shitposting, if I recall correctly. The post in question was something like "what in the name of god is this? It looks so sloppy like you slapped it together in 10 minutes or less and then immediately posted it!"

More questionable posts:

+ show block

(when someone asked a question about the "echomax" in a coldpost)
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1369138/scp-2106#post-2375927

Echomax Incident.
Echomax Experiment.
Echomax Procedures.

And now…

The goddamn Echomax A.I.

I'm not sure whenever to take this seriously or not.

(when called out on their "level million" thing):
http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1369138/scp-2106#post-2376001

I had to write something there. My brain created that in a jiffy. The heat is getting to my head.

Keep an eye on. They're possibly on the farther younger end of the spectrum, given that they've got two threads in General Advice asking about Data expunged/redacted and also what a transcript is.

Re: UnknownASA

RJB_R 15 Sep 2015 20:05

Let's ban on the next infraction, then.

---

Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!

Re: UnknownASA

Crayne 16 Sep 2015 08:50

I'd say that depends on the nature of the PM you sent. Unless you warned him there would be other disciplinary steps, I'd advise you to send a formal warning first, then ban on next infraction.

Re: UnknownASA

Decibelles 15 Oct 2015 03:28

Shitposting, again.

This thing is bare. Truly, if you gave me this article as an actual report on actual anomalous objects, I would slap you and turn you into a D-Class severely reprimand you and suggest you get demoted.

Procyon close staff-posted here:

UnknownASA, you've been told to stop making this kind of shitpost before. So stop making this kind of shitpost.

Re: UnknownASA

ProcyonLotor 15 Oct 2015 03:29

Recommending 24 hour ban.

Re: UnknownASA

Zyn 15 Oct 2015 03:29

Seconding ban.

Re: UnknownASA

Dexanote 15 Oct 2015 03:40

Thirding.

Re: UnknownASA

djkaktus 15 Oct 2015 03:52

We said ban on next infraction, so let's ban on next infraction. This infraction, to be specific.

I actually dislike 24 hour bans. I'll accept it if that's the consensus, but I'd personally prefer a week-long.

Voting for a ban either way.

Re: UnknownASA

Waxx 15 Oct 2015 03:54

Seconding on week-long.

Re: UnknownASA

RJB_R 15 Oct 2015 03:56

Ban of any length.

---

Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you!

Re: UnknownASA

Dexanote 15 Oct 2015 04:00

Ban of any length, but I'd like to keep to protocol.

Re: UnknownASA

Zyn 15 Oct 2015 04:06

I can get behind a week-long ban.

Re: UnknownASA

Crayne 15 Oct 2015 12:25

I dislike skipping 24 as it's a standard escalation track that I feel we shouldn't modify for transgression such as these. Yes, they're annoying, but do 24 first and then escalate.

Re: UnknownASA

Decibelles 15 Oct 2015 14:19

Not disciplinary, but I agree. If we're considering changing policy (and this was discussed on chat a bit), there should be a new thread for this. If we're skipping a 24 hour for this person and going straight for a week-long, I'd like to know the reason behind the week-long.

Re: UnknownASA

(account deleted) 15 Oct 2015 15:31

I'm not a staff, but I've got to agree with Crayne here - this isn't really an exceptional case, it's moderate grade shitposting.

Re: UnknownASA

Zyn 18 Oct 2015 18:21

And again, in response to someone stating that they assumed an article was a joke due to low-quality:

http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-1412509/scp-2186#post-2393203

As serious as it is (or was meant to be), this was clearly coldposted. "[user name]" clearly just has no consideration for feelings…or rules, I guess.

I closed-staff-posted telling them to let staff handle rulebreakers. At this point, 24 hour ban. I'm going to get that taken care of right now since it's effectively three days late.

Re: UnknownASA

Quikngruvn 18 Oct 2015 18:36

User has been booted from the wiki.

Re: UnknownASA

Zyn 18 Oct 2015 18:39

PM has been sent.