Revising/Amendment changeEdit

Should cross wiki disruptance and general disruptance result in infinite block? Nerfmaster8 (talk) 00:51, August 15, 2017 (UTC)

First of all, thanks for having asked my opinion although I'm not an admin; I'm very uncertain, taking Learnedhand41's case (the only one user that was banned after that I joined this Wiki), he disrupted the Wiki many times, and despite he was banned not once, but three times, he continued with the wrong edits whenever he was unblocked. When a user act in this way I guess he/she has no chance of changing his/her mind and learning his/her behaviour was wrong in a short time, and so only in this case, as you did with Learnedhand41, I would block he/she for a long time (a year or more). However, I'm uncertain about if the block should become, in such cases, infinite, because in a year an user could easily "forget" the Wiki and unless he/she casually reminds the site, he/she won't return here, whether the block lasts a year or is infinite. Sim0ns11 (talk) 22:42, August 15, 2017 (UTC)

oh whoops forgot to respond to this. These two bullets would probably depend on the situation so perhaps nothing really needs to change. Sometimes others with much more experience in catching on faster can tell what stage a disruptive user is at or their actual intentions. in any case, the following would most likely be a block length of either 1 or 2 weeks to begin with.
  • general disruptance, harassment, intimidating behavior, taunting/flaming/baiting or other uncivil behavior
  • persistent counterproductive edit or move warring

Nerfmaster8 (talk) 01:15, August 17, 2017 (UTC)

I agree with what was stated, I believe 1-2 weeks is also a good amount of time. Ninxi (talk)

recent disruptionEdit

Here is what needs to be discussed and resolved:

  • users caught with multiple sockpuppets will be subject to a permanent block if extending the original block exceeds a year, each sockpuppet caught will result in doubling of the original block
  • frustrating the admin team will result in blocks set at administrator discretion.
  • all rules will be enforced by the spirit of the rule, not the literal transcription to avoid any loopholes
  • edit warring blocks will be set based on the incident's severity, generally will start at a day and increase per normal standards.
  • vandalizing, interfering or obstructing with discussions or votes will be subject to a block based on severity of the act
  • interfering with discussions you are not part of is discouraged and if distracting may lead to blocks set at administrator discretion
  • the code of conduct will be enforced and violations will be subject to the block policy

Nerfmaster8 (talk) 17:55, November 7, 2017 (UTC)

Sounds good. Maybe add some clarification on "editing/removing" other people's comments on demotion (or forums in general) if you think that would be acceptable. --Riptoze 00:35, November 13, 2017 (UTC)
New update looks good and transparent. --Riptoze 12:47, November 18, 2017 (UTC)
           I think there's nothing wrong with it, all sounds good and fair. Sim0ns11 (talk) 16:49, November 18, 2017 (UTC)