Non-Disc Record - Bennings

Summary:

self-victimization?

Bennings

Aelanna 19 Feb 2014 22:10

I will simply let this thread speak for itself: http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-777946/what-kind-of-stories-can-be-uploaded-here

tl;dr — He threw a big fit about possibly getting in trouble by posting a non-Foundation tale to the SCP Wiki, would not stop bringing it up, and generally was either being as dense as neutronium or intentionally trolling. If the former is the case, then the irony in that his nonstop worrying actually resulted in an Issues thread is just… mind-boggling.

Anyways, thread was locked. No need to entertain this nonsense.

Re: Bennings

ProcyonLotor 19 Feb 2014 22:12

Cross-posting for prior behavior:
http://05command.wikidot.com/forum/t-720396

Re: Bennings

Communism will win 19 Feb 2014 22:13

I suppose I should take a little responsibility for making a post that was easy for him to misinterpret as being threatening. I mean, obviously his paranoia is his own problem, but I definitely could have handled it better.

Anyways, I guess the issue is basically closed, so yeah.

---

if your reading this your gay

Re: Bennings

Zyn 20 Feb 2014 03:54

I recall having to deal with this guy before.

Personally, I do think there was some overreactions that occurred in the "can I post this" thread. I'm willing to help the guy out through PMs if need be, since his behavior in that thread seems well-meaning, but obviously comes off as silly.

Re: Bennings

CryogenChaos 09 Mar 2014 01:16

Has been officially warned for continuous self-depreciation after being told numerous times to quit it: http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-798393/falling-and-falling-and-falling#post-1986978

Re: Bennings

SoullessSingularity 09 Mar 2014 21:04

I think he should be banned by now. He has at least two official warnings.

---

Living the dream, or dreaming the life?

Re: Bennings

ProcyonLotor 09 Mar 2014 21:10

Seconding. His behavior has been persistently negative.

Re: Bennings

Eskobar 09 Mar 2014 21:20

Thirding this.

Re: Bennings

(account deleted) 09 Mar 2014 21:41

Yeah, nothing but idiocy

EDIT: It bears mentioning that I've asked him to stop beating himself up in chat several times as well
He seems to interpret everything said to him as a direct order from a member of staff, regardless of what is said or who said it.

I've also asked him several times not to say that people have said things unless he can show exactly where they have said them.

Last edited on 10 Mar 2014 02:38 by (account deleted) Show more

Re: Bennings

CryogenChaos 10 Mar 2014 02:33

I am a sensible, reasonable man. I like to think that I have a large amount of patience and tolerance with people.

But if he's going to ignore me, act like a victim and pretend that staff hate him, then I'm done with him. Ban him, please.

Re: Bennings

Zyn 10 Mar 2014 01:42

Made a post in regards to his ban: http://www.scp-wiki.net/forum/t-798393/falling-and-falling-and-falling#post-1987599

There is a massive diffrence between self depreation and self depreating humor. Look, I get that you don't like me, but a ban for that comment seems harsh.

I am sorry.

I posted a reply in which I told him to talk to staff through PMs, and he sent me two:

First PM

Alright, about the ban.

I am sorry. I know, it doesn't matter.

I'm not really going to defend myself.

Look, you'll all probably glad that I'm going to go, so I guess what I'm about say is meaningless.

First, rules seem a bit scritoprenic. Sometimes the same actions can either end in trouble or nothing at all.

Question: are members of staff who are not ops allowed to boss people around on chat?

Also, it seems like staff themselves disagree on a ton of issues, which generaly just left me confused. Sometimes one staff member might tell someone (i.e. me) that my idea is fairly good, while another might say it's awful. I know, that's how people work, but what the hell is the guy in the middle of it all meant to think? There never seem to be a big enough sample group to see how anything would do.

I know this has nothing to do with my ban, but they are issues. I'm not trying to say that these instantly absolve me of all guilt.

Second PM

Also, did cryogenchaos actually know I'd been warned before hand?

I guess this'll be the last time I'm on the site.

Good luck, to all of you, I suppose.

I need to eat dinner right now (bad timing, I know) but I think he raises some valid points. That said, if there's any action to be taken against him, I'd like to be able to speak with the guy myself through chat or PM first. Naturally, if enough staff would prefer straight-up ban I'll defer to them.

Gonna go eat now, be back as soon as I can to discuss the matter and contact the guy.

Re: Bennings

ProcyonLotor 10 Mar 2014 02:09

With regards to the first PM, taking it point by point:

+ Ended up being longer than I wanted.

First, rules seem a bit scritoprenic.
Sometimes the same actions can either end in trouble or nothing at all.

This is a problem with enforcement. He was made aware that he should stop pity-seeking behavior, among other negative trends. Staff not finding every single instance of it and staffposting doesn't mean suddenly the prior warnings are invalid.

Question: are members of staff who are not ops allowed to boss people around on chat?

Not certain how this has anything to do with the matter at hand, although the policy on that point is already very clear.

Also, it seems like staff themselves disagree on a ton of issues, which generaly just left me confused…

I find this disingenuous: he has often said that people liked prior drafts of his, but, upon being pressed has been unable to provide any evidence, or the evidence that he does provide shows users making broad statements only tangentially related to the draft at hand. Even so, writing quality is not an action we can instigate discipline for (in all but the most extreme circumstances), and is not being factored in here, and as such, isn't really a valid objection.

Last edited on 10 Mar 2014 02:12 by ProcyonLotor Show more

Re: Bennings

Zyn 10 Mar 2014 05:06

I sent him a PM asking him to contact me to let us know his side of the story. No reply as of now.

Edit: He's replied, and we'll talk it out sometime in the next few days. Any questions/grievances you want me to discuss?

Last edited on 10 Mar 2014 17:02 by Zyn Show more

Re: Bennings

Eskobar 10 Mar 2014 14:32

First, rules seem a bit scritoprenic. Sometimes the same actions can either end in trouble or nothing at all.

Not to start a whole conversation about this, but I don't even see this as a problem with enforcement. You do something we feel is inappropriate, we notice it, we warn/revoke/ban/whatever. You do something we feel is inappropriate, we don't notice it, nothing happens. It doesn't make either thing appropriate just because staff aren't omniscient. I drove 85 MPH to work this morning in a clearly and repeatedly-marked 65 MPH zone, along with about eight other people doing the same thing. The fact that I didn't get pulled over doesn't make that an 85 MPH zone from now on, nor does it give me any expectation that that behavior will be ignored in the future. All of this assuming that his behavior wasn't covered in the rules in the first place; once you read it in the rules (as you are required to do), you're held to it regardless of whether it's enforced with 100% accuracy and appropriateness. We can't be everywhere all the time, and I don't buy it as an excuse.

Re: Bennings

ProcyonLotor 10 Mar 2014 15:43

That is pretty much my exact sentiments. Perhaps less than ideal phrasing on my part.

Re: Bennings

eric_h 10 Mar 2014 20:39

Exactly. Just because you got away with it once doesn't make it right.

---

SCP Wiki Senior Citizen Staff | Thank you for testing my new memetic Forum sig

Re: Bennings

eric_h 10 Mar 2014 07:29

He just made me look up 'scritoprenic' on the internet, and it apparently is not a real word. Makes me feel better since I had no idea what it meant.

---

SCP Wiki Senior Citizen Staff | Thank you for testing my new memetic Forum sig

Re: Bennings

Zyn 14 Mar 2014 01:50

Got another reply from him:

(subject: (This is addressing staff in general, not any induviduals) )

No, I guess I don't have anything else to say. I guess what I was trying to say was that I've seen people get away with less.

Also, one last thing: I still have no idea what anyone was saying in that "Can I post this" thread, since it seemed staff themselves were confused. This may not justify what I did, but you can't exactly go "High O5 we handled that perfectly", I got a lot of conflicting responses. Can you really blame me for being confused? Maybe so, but it wasn't handled perfectly.

Thanks and Apologies.

Thoughts?

Re: Bennings

ProcyonLotor 14 Mar 2014 03:11

My thoughts are that he's intentionally missing a very simple point in order to deflect blame from himself. It's hard to justify confusion when staff tells you something in Simple English in 80-point font.

Re: Bennings

Accelerando 14 Mar 2014 03:05

Just noticed Bennings edited his first post in the Can I post this thread:

Anyway, what I've learnt from this thread:
My tale is boring
I need to shoehorn in SCP elements
I am not allowed to upload the story
I need to upload the story elsewhere
I am allowed to upload the story
If I upload the story I'll be banned for it.
If I had just uploaded it without asking, I wouldn't be getting banned for it
The story is so bad I'm getting banned for it
No emoing
My story is neither weird or cool
I'm an asshole/idiot
I just wrote a story combining V for Vendetta, Watchmen, The Thing and The Shining, yet has nothing to do with any.
I'll only be in trouble if the tale is deleted.
Whatever happens I won't be in trouble

Now I'm really confused…

Seriously, Inception made more sense than this thread. I've gotten god knows how many replies, all of which seem to be saying different things.

I'd like to say that his misunderstandings comes from him jumping to conclusions, and maybe the responses by multiple people just made him do it more, but what the hell. This is ridiculous.

Re: Bennings

AdminBright 14 Mar 2014 06:08

Apparently he thinks everyone should have one unified opinion, on all things SCP.

---

Admin, SCP Wiki

Re: Bennings

Aelanna 14 Mar 2014 15:26

I think that at some point, someone is just going to have to slap sense into him with a banhammer. Moping about on the forums becomes disruptive at some point, and disruptive behavior is something that disciplinary action ought to be appropriate for.

Re: Bennings

ProcyonLotor 14 Mar 2014 16:06

While I agree/support whole-heartedly, it should be noted that this edit occured before any official warnings.

Re: Bennings

Aelanna 14 Mar 2014 16:10

Ah, my bad. I didn't actually look at the thread.

Re: Bennings

Photosynthetic 28 Mar 2014 23:00

Cross-posting for doing much the same thing on chat: http://05command.wikidot.com/forum/t-833824/bennings