Non-Disc Record - Dr Rhummhaven

Non-Disc Record - Dr Rhummhaven

Dexanote 14 Jun 2022 22:53

The Sandbox subteam brought user DrRhummhaven (account age ~1700 days/4.5 years) was brought to my attention concerning a draft of his. The draft is, in essence, an unfinished "The SCP is that there is the belief that the Allies won WW2", which raised concerns in members of the Sandbox team.

+ See Here.

Initial conversation revolved around immediately banning; those present decided to back down for now as we have no reason to believe that the user actually harbours any positions reflected in the draft, but we'd still like to at least touch base with them. I've reached out with a PM asking for context on intent.

+ See Here.

Hello Rhummhaven, I'm Dexanote of the SCP Wiki administrators.

Recently the draft in Sandbox III found here was brought to my attention. Upon looking it over, it is clear that the page in question is an incomplete draft, but consists of subject matter related to the Nazis, specifically implying that they had won World War II. I would asking you to provide context and elaborate on what the intended message of the draft in question is/will be.

Regards,
Dexanote, Admin//Disc Captain

Re: Non-Disc Record - Dr Rhummhaven

OptimisticLucio 15 Jun 2022 13:25

I don't think we should be policing draft content to this degree. Hell, unless it's flagrant rule-breaks, I don't think we should be policing the content of the sandbox at all.

The sandbox is meant to function as an open notebook for authors, letting them jot down ideas without having them judged. A place for unfinished works, where you can throw shit at the wind until you have something to present. The stuff on the sandbox is, more often than not, not presentable, and so making a summary judgement of its contents is ill-advised at best and dangerous at worst, as it could easily dissuade authors from wanting to write more.

Even if an author doesn't get reprimanded themselves, they could hear stories of others getting reprimanded on their unfinished content, and be afraid to use the sandbox for fear of judgement where there is meant to be none.

And as you said, we have no idea whether this article was meant to be pro-nazi. The article is so barely written it cuts off mid-sentence. We shouldn't be DMing people to ask them about their unfinished ideas, we'll judge them once they decide it's final-revision-worthy and post it to the mainsite.

(For the record - yes, getting a message from the site staff questioning you on what you're writing is a reprimand.)

Last edited on 15 Jun 2022 13:26 by OptimisticLucio Show more

Re: Non-Disc Record - Dr Rhummhaven

ManyMeats 16 Jun 2022 14:37

I feel that our obligations both ethically and mechanically begin when the content is posted to a space that we control and not only when its creator deems it ready for judgment. Although I categorically agree that authors should be allowed leeway to explore their ideas, I am not sure that I understand how this action is not exactly that: leeway?

The sandbox is not an open notebook for freedom from judgment, it is a place associated with the main site where you can refine drafts for posting. It's content we can reasonably expect that you want to post, even if you end up scrapping the idea. A work being "unfinished" is not and should not be an adequate shield for an indefensible ideology and we, as the stewards of this content, must be allowed to at least ask if we feel it prudent.

While your reference to a deterrent effect is in theory plausible, I have trouble accepting your premise. Staff maybe seeing your content and asking about it if found questionable isn't something that's as-or-more intimidating than putting your article on the main list with a vote module for anonymous readers to possibly make you delete. Especially with how frequently one happens versus the other.

Re: Non-Disc Record - Dr Rhummhaven

OptimisticLucio 17 Jun 2022 08:05

Although I categorically agree that authors should be allowed leeway to explore their ideas, I am not sure that I understand how this action is not exactly that: leeway?

No. Leeway would be to judge whatever they decide is post-worthy, this is not letting them experiment with an idea.

A work being "unfinished" is not and should not be an adequate shield for an indefensible ideology…

I'm going to stop you right there - yes it is. If our metric is how bad an article seems on the surface, then allow me to introduce you to a german GOI you'd surely have a problem with. These are articles that show the horrors of what the nazis did, while presenting it through the lens of in-universe nazis. If you read two paragraphs from an article of theirs and bailed midway, you'd think this is pro-nazi literature, but the entire point is to show that nazis were not just mustache-twirling inhuman beasts. That's why we vowed to never forget: They were human, and as humans, we could repeat these actions if we don't properly learn from history.

So yes, having a work that doesn't instantly go "nazis are bad we hate nazis those faceless villains who are different from us" is a good thing.

Staff maybe seeing your content and asking about it if found questionable isn't something that's as-or-more intimidating than putting your article on the main list with a vote module for anonymous readers to possibly make you delete.

One of the two happens with the author consenting to criticism, the other happens by surprise. One of the two is in a space that touts itself on being only for final works, the other is a space for unfinished, unpolished drafts. This is an unequal comparison.

Last edited on 17 Jun 2022 08:41 by OptimisticLucio Show more

Re: Non-Disc Record - Dr Rhummhaven

ManyMeats 17 Jun 2022 15:19

Leeway would be to judge whatever they decide is post-worthy, this is not letting them experiment with an idea.

I strongly disagree that's what is happening. Nobody is stopping the draft or deleting work done. Nobody is stopping experimentation. We're asking a question we have a right to ask about content on a space we control which is subject to our site's rules. You might assert that being approached in this manner and about this topic is akin to putting a gag order on author but that invites a whole host of diverging branches of this topic better explored elsewhere.

If our metric is how bad an article seems on the surface,

It's not. Like many things this is a reason to look further. If you ask how old someone is and they supply you with two different birthdays, such as when joining the site, this should raise suspicion. This does not mean they are underage, it means something doesn't look right and you can ask more. Surely this is agreeable? Right now the articles lacks anything further for us to judge, so we're asking.

So yes, having a work that doesn't instantly go "nazis are bad we hate nazis those faceless villains who are different from us" is a good thing.

Sure, it'd be great if the author could make that case instead of anyone (including Disc) assuming intention. We agree on that, we just disagree on where we can and should be asking.

One of the two is in a space that touts itself on being only for final works, the other is a space for unfinished, unpolished drafts. This is an unequal comparison.

It's only an unequal comparison in the sense that they are separate containers for the same set of rules. Yes, you do different things in the gym than you do in the grocery store but state law applies in both locations. Our site rules apply to both locations. Plagiarism, article vandalism, non-CC compliant images, all of these rules apply to both locations just one is infinitely more difficult to keep up on than the other. There are different rules within each such as voting thresholds and article deletions and out-of-band stuff but there is no different content policy.

---

Furthermore,

I'm going to stop you right there - yes it is.

While you're entitled to your strongly held personal convictions I can't really discuss this with you if this is how you're going to approach this topic and me.