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
@ Fighteer: If that's the reason behind it I am more than capable of complying, assuming my suspension gets lifted. In the future, I will be sure to avoid making potentially frivolous entires, particularly ones that might stir up controversy as you mentioned.
It appears you understand. Lifting the suspension.
"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
Kyrian XVII, your suspension has been lifted. Just remember that we don't often give third chances.
"Yup. That tasted purple."
I would like to request that my editing suspension be lifted. My bulk YMMV deletions were a very stupid thing to do, I apologize greatly for the trouble that it caused, and I take full responsibility for what I've done. If you lift my suspension and allow me to edit once more, then I promise that it won't happen again. And I am aware that you guys don't give third chances, so trust me when I say that I won't take advantage of a second chance just to make more bulk YMMV deletions.
Lost in Space
Well, why did you do it? I'm just curious here. You've said all the "right words" but I'd like a bit more information.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
@ Fighteer
I did it because the entries I deleted came off as sounding like complaining to me. I know it's a ridiculous reason, but like I said, I realize that it was an incredibly stupid thing to do and if my editing privileges are restored, then I promise that I won't do it again.
Lost in Space
Alright, well, you know that YMMV allows criticisms. My other major concern is that you didn't leave edit reasons. While it is a good idea in general, always leave edit reasons if you delete stuff.
Suspension lifted.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
I haven't actually received a ban notice, but I seem to have been banned from Content Violation Discussions. I didn't receive anything like a warning, or any communication whatsoever, so it's hard to figure out why I was banned (other than that I think the policies are flawed and said so). Obviously I'd like to be unbanned.
You are an unhelpful presence in the Content Violations discussions.
You keep claiming that non-anime fans being members of the panel is wrong, ignoring the fact that all of our judges are well familiar with anime. You keep claiming we don't have "questionable" anime cuts only because of the ruling to not submit licensed works for review.
When Bliss Stage was restored, you claimed you are sure that "more than two of their decisions were incorrect", without any evidence. If you really wanted to help, you would bring forth those "questionable cuts" and show evidence on why they shouldn't be cut. You have done nothing of the sort.
When the whole process began, you tried to submit Sailor Moon and Utena for review, while you very well knew they weren't the kind of thing we were looking to remove. In short, you were trying to make a point and being disruptive in a very difficult time. None of this was appreciated, and you were treading on the edge of a ban at that time as well.
You have been consistently disruptive. The P5 requested that you stop. You have not.
Consider the ban permanent.
"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
I submitted those two entries for review because I thought the policy had bad implications and I wanted to call attention to those implications. I haven't nominated anything similar since then.
I see nothing wrong with the argument that automatically allowing licensed works means that the questionable cuts will be limited to works that almost nobody has heard of. This is just common sense.
And you are taking the reference to Bliss Stage out of context. My argument is that if a poorly classified work is reclassified mainly by luck (in this case because the creator of the visual novel showed up), it is likely that there are other works that were also poorly classified and didn't get lucky. Just because I didn't then list those works doesn't make that wrong.
(And since questionable cuts are limited to works that almost nobody has heard of, it's almost guaranteed that nobody's ever going to list them—you can't list works you haven't heard of. I did mention the one that I happened to have heard of (Advanced VG).)
edited 24th Jul '12 9:33:32 AM by arromdee
Lost in Space
This sort of rules lawyering is why you got in trouble. We are not going to talk about it here. This is the Edit Banned thread, not the Content Violations Policy thread. We've explained our reasons. You had plenty of warnings and it's clear that you don't even understand why we're upset with you, so we have no expectation that the situation will improve. So, as lu said, consider this final.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
I don't think it's rules lawyering to conclude, with reasons, that the process is bad. Are we not permitted to argue that there is something wrong with the process?
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
Not in this thread.
Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
Is it permissible in Content Violations, then?
The only reason I brought it up here was to show what I was actually saying in Content Violations.
edited 24th Jul '12 12:13:52 PM by arromdee
Can I be unbanned? I didn't really do anything wrong. TV Tropes is way to quick on the ban button.
edited 24th Jul '12 1:26:15 PM by Hadashi
Tropes I have created.
I would hardly call hijacking pages to spread a religious agenda "doing nothing wrong".
"Yup. That tasted purple."
Hi
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Not to mention using a sockpuppet to game the IP system for Large Ham after your suspension was issued.
Lost in Space
Hadashi, let me explain a bit more. You've been active around the Artistic License – Religion pages, with a number of assertions about atheism that appear to be based around some skewed interpretations of what the articles are about. Those articles are natter-fests, but that doesn't mean we want you taking them over.
Second, you made a couple of edits on the wiki that consist of Wall of Text digressions into how fake religions compare with Christianity. One example is below, from TheOrderOfTheStick.Tropes A-C.
, amusingly titled "Logical Conclusions" we get Roy and his girlfriend talking about war and the afterlife, they basically come to the conclusion that people would be a lot happier and if there wasn't one (or they didn't think there was) since they would be more frightened of dying. What they say might seem to make sense, but it really doesn't, especially when you consider the fact that this strip comes at the end of an ark where the current Big Bad told someone that a big reason for his becoming litch was to avoided hell ("Be a vampire, or a ghost....hell even a brain in a jar in a pinch. Anything to avoid the [[Hell Big Fire Bellow"). The fact of the matter is that it would probably stop heroic self-sacrifice (and, indeed, does on the comic), but it won't stop evil men who think that no hell means no punishment sending millions, or billions, off to die for their own Earthly gain. Stalin, Mao and Xykon all have one thing in common - they didn't think they would be held accountable in any kind of afterlife. So yeah, You Fail Religious Studies Forever and You Fail History Forever too, sorry Rich!This is absolutely not the kind of thing we want here. It has nothing to do with the work and looks more like you've got a pet topic that you just cannot leave alone. Not to mention that you utterly, completely, absolutely missed the joke in that particular comic strip.
All this, plus you've apparently been trying to game the system in Image Pickin'. And you were here once before, back in October. Altogether, it seems like what you want to do on the wiki is not what we want on it, which means you should probably go somewhere else.
edited 24th Jul '12 1:54:19 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
I fail to see why
- Viewers Are Morons: 'Puzzle' doors in dungeons are nothing but same puzzle repeated over and over in manner so even 3 year old could solve it in a few minutes, with solution painted on a near wall. Heck, even every dungeon is basically one long tunnel, so you won't get lost.
is followed by
Neither of these is a valid use of the trope, and both come off more as complaining about the players than about the game. Knock it off.
and resulted in suspension.
Lost in Space
@Handlewho, I sent you a natter-fy for that example because it is not what Viewers Are Morons is about. It (and the previous Viewers Are Geniuses example) was a misuse of the trope. That you seem to think that it's okay to call other players of the game idiots is troubling; it means you don't get what this wiki is for.
The suspension was because I looked at your other edits and saw some serious grammar problems. We expect decent English here. Not college textbook English, but enough that people don't have to edit everything you add to fix it.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Yes please
Could I at least hear a *real* reason why I got suspended? All I can see is a couple mod-edits by lu127... cutting "natter" (I know it's a bit cluttering, but it brings new information nevertheless). I am surprised I (or probably anyone else) wasn't asked to rewrite it or anything. Of course moderator did nothing else but cut it too. It could be rewritten in free time or something. Well, following this mindset I could easily cut 10-20% of the whole website. Can I has mod? >:[
@Fighteer I failed to find your natter-fy, unless it's in PM, which is... ironically turned off for me. I have no idea why you think I was calling other players 'idiots' in any way. I merely pointed at blatantly easy game elements which are supposed to be at least somewhat challenging.
Grammar part seems fair to me. You didn't have to be so aggressive about it, though.
Lost in Space
@Handlewho: It's your opinion that the gameplay elements are dumbed down, and that this is a bad thing. Opinions don't belong in examples in main articles, only facts. I saw a potential pattern of bad behavior so I wanted to bring you in to chat about it. Further, we have a serious problem with the Viewers Are Morons article if it attracts edits like that.
You natterfied me so I assumed that you had seen my PM and were being a dick about it.
@chochlik: We have a problem here. It's edits like this on Minovsky Physics:
You seem to think that pointing out every instance of scientific inaccuracy found in any work is useful to the wiki. It's not. We're here to talk about media, and if we spent all our time discussing every time a work isn't True To ScienceTM, we'd never get anything done. Further, all of your edits are framed as Conversation In The Main Page, which is not permitted even if the content is valid.
edited 25th Jul '12 12:55:00 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
I don't get it, either. The note on the ban was "nsfw link." To a webcomic page with no naked and no explicit anything. Lifting the ban.
Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty