This is the thread we use to talk things over with people who have received a suspension notice. A lot of the time the notice goes out just so we can explain how seriously we take certain things, not because we want the person to feel bad and go away.
If you're suspended, give What to Do If You Are Suspended a read, then post here to begin your appeal. We try to respond to appeals in order via batch posts every few days. If a moderator has responded to your appeal, you will receive a notification in your private messages, even if you're suspended from PMs.
The Forum Rules
apply here.
Don'ts
- Don't be rude. Rule 1 applies here, too.
- Don't try to negotiate your suspension outside of this thread, such as by sending Private Messages to moderators or posting elsewhere. Such activity may be thumped or otherwise removed, and may warrant an additional suspension block if it keeps happening. All communications have to take place within this thread.
- Don't respond to other suspended users. This is a place for you to discuss your suspension, not others'.
- Don't post multiple times about your appeal if it hasn't been a few days since your last reply from us, since it makes it more difficult to compose responses. If you've posted, we're likely looking at it, and kindly request you to be more patient.
- Don't make another account to try and get around your suspension. This is called ban evasion and will get you bounced. (Again, read What to Do If You Are Suspended if you don't know what these words mean.)
Edited by Synchronicity on Jul 15th 2023 at 11:35:01 AM
Lost in Space
Your location doesn't matter. If you want to work on Lithuanian translations of articles, that's one thing. If you want to contribute to the English language wiki, we require acceptable writing, and you don't have it.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Hey I was suspended a few months ago and I'm wondering what I can do to get My editing privileges back.
Okay, I’ve been looking over the pages that I have recently edited, and it turns out that contrary to my belief, I actually had misused the example indentations since my last edit warning.
On the Demoted to Extra/Video Games page I added examples with three bullet levels. At the time I did not recognise the problem, due to the fact that I was focusing more on trying to avoid my other issue with indentations that had gotten me my previous edit-warnings (e.g. adding a second example from a work as a two-bullet level, without changing the first example to a two-bullet level).
Secondly; I did not realise that I was using the three-bullet levels incorrectly. Since I had previously attempted to avoid this problem by using the \\s as a substitute, only to have another editor change my \\s to ***s with no protests raised, I was left somewhat uncertain as to what qualified as appropriate usage. That being said; looking at the entry I posted, I can see that this was one of the times where I could have easily condensed the example by merging it with the previous two-bullet paragraph.
So in the future, if I’m allowed to edit again, I think I’ll just avoid any attempts at using three bullet levels.
I was suspended a few weeks ago and wondering what I could do to get my editing privileges back. Thanks.
Lost in Space
~thenightmareman: You need to respond to us when we explain why you were suspended. We don't like being ignored.
~Firebird Maximus: You have consistently displayed either the inability to understand or a willful disregard of the editing rules despite multiple notifications and several prior suspensions. Quite frankly, I don't believe your claim to have suddenly recognized your errors after all this time.
~snowviolet: Thank you for stopping by! You were sent several notifications about indexing articles, but continued creating new ones without doing the proper work. See How Indexing Works for an explanation of this.
Second, you have been adding Zero Context Examples to various articles, including Characters pages. All examples should contain enough information that a reader with no knowledge of the work will understand how a trope applies.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Badass Normal
Why was I banned? What did I do? I said I was sorry for acting out and I apologized. Why am I banned now?
"Marth likes just the tip, Lucina likes the whole thing."
Lost in Space
"Get off my damn back!" is not the kind of language that indicates someone who's calmed down or is ready to participate civilly. Take a break — let's say a couple of days worth.
Also: "The hell is everyone thumping my posts for?" We thumped your posts because you got out of hand, talking about other players as "tourneyfags" and similar derogatory language. That's unacceptable.
edited 18th Sep '14 6:34:06 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Badass Normal
Alright.
I guess I did get a little excited. I have Autism you see and it's hard for me to stop when I get going. It's been a problem my whole life and I guess I haven't completely mastered control of it yet. A couple of days is fine. Sorry.
"Marth likes just the tip, Lucina likes the whole thing."
Lost in Space
A warning: we don't consider mental or emotional handicaps to be excuses for misbehavior. Come back in three days and we'll let you post again.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Badass Normal
I'm not trying to make an excuse. Why would I do that? Just know that it pops up from time to time and it makes me look weird.
"Marth likes just the tip, Lucina likes the whole thing."
Moczo
Hey there! I seem to have been suspended from editing, so I was wondering what I did wrong and how I could get that undone? I have not edited anything in a long time, so I am actually not quite sure when this even happened.
Hello,
I read that I was suspended following what happened on the Streisand Effect page. I'll try to sum up the facts and explain my position and why I would like my suspension to be lifted. Please note beforehand that I acted because I felt an other user, darkrage6, went too far with the removal of an example. It seems that it was judged I also went too far, hence my suspension. If I offended anyone, I sincerely apologize. Since I'm no longer able to read the Discussion page after being suspended, I also don't know what people said there. Finally, I understand that everything that happened about Zoe Quinn is a sensible issue: we are not here to determine if some allegations against her are true or not (and, frankly, it may be impossible to say for sure what happened and what didn't). I acted before I thought that darkrage6 had "an agenda" (my words, though said words may have been infortunate).
Quick summary of the facts:
- 18th Sep '14 12:36:54: User darkrage6 removed an entire example about Zoe Quinn on the Streisand Effect page. His editing reason was the following: "Zoe WAS hacked, those claims are not "inconsistent", also there's little proof that Quinn or anyone she knew actually did anything like that, also this is completely whitewashing all the terrible things that were done to Quinn in response to what her ex posted".
- 18th Sep '14 1:11:43: When I read this, I thought that darkrage6 shouldn't have deleted the example in question. At the time, I thought he violated TV Tropes rules, specifically this one from the Administrivia page: "You may never delete an example solely because you disagree with it or dislike it, especially in YMMV subpages." Following this, I edited the page and left a single message as a editing reason, without actually adding or removing content on the page: "Take that to the discussion page. If this example needs to be rewritten, fine (and I think it actually needs to be rewritten), but you, deleting the article altogether? This page is about the Streisand Effect. Everything that happened about Quinn led to one. You can't delete an entry just because you disagree with it (and you have no more conclusive evidence that the one who wrote this article in the first place)." I now realize that I shouldn't have acted that way, and instead should have written my message directly on the Discussion page.
- While browsing the Internet Counterattack page history, I discovered that the same user, darkrage6, tried to removed in two occasions a part of the example about Zoe Quinn. The first time was 16th Sep '14 7:05:11, when he removed the example entirely. His editing reason was: "there is zero proof she faked it". He also rewrote a part of the remaining example later, saying it was "natter". Following this, Sorantheman, who I believe wrote the Zoe Quinn and Gamergate examples on both the Streisand Effect and Internet Counterattack page, put back the parts of the example which were removed by darkrage6, stating: "This isn't about if she faked the threat or not. This is about the counterattack that resulted as a cause of the accusations of faked threats! Also, I'm adding a better link to why people think the threats might be fake." and "Also, I don't see why you removed this part as well since it is part of the internet counterattack against her. If you simply needed a link for it in order to understand where the accusations came from, you could have just asked for a link instead of removing the whole thing! ".
- When I saw this, I thought at the time that darkrage6 was trying to remove things he disagreed with on TV Tropes regarding Zoe Quinn and the Gamergate. I went back to the Streisand Effect page, put back the example which was deleted, and stated in my edit reason (18th Sep '14 2:15:59): "So, I saw that you tried to removed an entry about Quinn on the Internet Counterattack page, based on, I quote, "natter". You obviouly have an agenda here. I'm putting back the example. If you want to discuss this entry, you are welcomed to do so on the discussion page."
- Later, darkrage6 went to the discussion page in order to discuss his point of view. He also added, via an edit reason, on the Streisand Effect page the following message: "there's no "agenda" here, just trying to people from making baseless claims about Quinn that they have no real tangible proof of(I find it very difficult to believe she's been behind EVERY single bit of censorship, that has about as much credibility as those 9/11 conspiracy theories)".
- Finally, later a moderator, Fighteer, edited the page and removed the example altogether, stating (18th Sep '14 3:38:28): "Removing this as people cannot seem to get it into their heads that this website is not a place to carry on Internet dick waving contests." It is at this point that I discovered that I was suspended.
Why I acted like I did: I acted because I thought at the time that the user, darkrage6, was breaking TV Tropes rules, and was actively trying to remove content about Zoe Quinn and the Gamergate on the website. Both examples on both pages were, in my eyes, valid, and were good examples of their respective tropes. That being said, I shouldn't have engaged in an editing war, and just invite people to discuss the issue on the discussion page. For my behaviour, I sincerely apologize.
Why I would like my suspension to be lifted: I understand that, while wanting to enforce TV Tropes rules and trying to protect content, I may have acted in a way which was harmful to discussion on TV Tropes as a whole, and broke some ground rules on my own (ie. Edit War and Rudeness - I had no right to throw accusations, and as a result I broke the "Don't be a dick" rule). For that, I apologize, and in the future I won't repeat the same mistakes. I have no plan to continue to meddle with anything related to Zoe Quinn and the Gamergate, since these stories are very divisive (not to mention it is downright impossible to check some claims from both sides of the issue), and I'd rather not involve myself any further with this.
edited 19th Sep '14 10:39:33 AM by NonoRobot
Lost in Space
~moczo: You've been improperly adding Zero Context Examples to various Characters pages. All examples must explain how the trope applies, as if the reader had no knowledge of the work.
~Nono Robot: After reviewing the history of both Internet Counterattack and Streisand Effect, and taking into account the furor over Zoe Quinn, it's apparent that there are two sides that are waging a war with each other all over the Internet. Let me be absolutely clear here: We will not be a party to this war, or indeed any other war. People who carry it to our site will be suspended.
We'll separately review darkrage6's behavior, but the issue at hand here is yours. Your apology is accepted, and we appreciate the offer to stay away from the controversy on TV Tropes.
I'll lift your suspension since we've reached an understanding.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Badass Normal
...Has it been three days yet?
"Marth likes just the tip, Lucina likes the whole thing."
So... Apparently I got temporarily suspended for writing about Zoe Quinn's article on Cracked, similarly to Nono Robot's situation above. However, the main arguments that I were making weren't related to Quinn herself (though I admittedly do believe that she was whitewashing herself in regard to the situation), but to the censorship and completely one-sided viewpoint that the Cracked moderators were enforcing there. I have no intention of bringing the whole GamerGate warfront to here, but I was just disgusted with David Wong and company for refusing to acknowledge another point of view in regard to the whole mess.
I've been a long-time editor for the site, and I don't want something like this to ruin my relationship with the powers that be. I just thought I'd let you know here.
edited 20th Sep '14 2:18:26 PM by KingClark
Lost in Space
~Blueblur21: Sure, why not. I'll lift your suspension.
~King Clark: Let me be clear: we are not interested in discussing GamerGate on this site. Not when it's caused such ridiculous arguments. Anyone who so much as mentions it on any article on this wiki will be suspended until we get it through people's skulls that we don't talk about real people in that manner.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Heel
Hi. I got suspended recently but have no idea why. There's nothing in my mailbox telling me why I got suspended.
I no longer edit on TV Tropes but will continue as an occasional forum poster.
@Laptop Guy: You've not been indexing articles that you created.
"Yup. That tasted purple."
To whoever is reading this, may I please have my editing privileges back? I apologize for any disruption to this site. I had no malicious intentions; I was just screwing around. Again I apologize and thank you for your time.
New media? No thanks.
Lost in Space
~Awesome Waffles: Among the least convincing reasons to have your suspension removed is "I was just screwing around".
We could possibly overlook this once, but never again. Understand?
edited 20th Sep '14 2:55:27 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Yes. I apologize. Thank you for the consideration.
Lost in Space
I removed your suspension.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Moczo
Ah, okay. Explain all examples from now on, I got ya. May I know when the suspension will be lifted?
edited 20th Sep '14 6:37:30 PM by moczo
I'll let you go. Just keep the rules on ZC Es in mind.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
You know is hard. When I'm from Lithuania and after all how can you know if person improvess or not, if you don't have them second change.
edited 16th Sep '14 8:02:24 AM by Lithuanian1996