Board Thread:News and Announcements/@comment-36816124-20180904040620/@comment-36816124-20180904205313

Prism55Writes wrote: Okay, I promised that I would respond to this a few hours ago. So here it is, my response. I will cut out all the parts I don't think are important, so that this reply doesn't get way too long.

Haikusfortodd wrote: Let’s start with Chas. Chas is crazy, no doubt about that. But have you ever thought that there might be a logical reason to his spree of hatred? I have investigated and come up with a result: Yes. Believe it or not, there is. The Chas/Green conflict started with the plagiarism drama involving a youtube video created by Chas. This drama was quickly resolved and forgotten about.

Then, one of his friends by the name of Stacy was banned for being ‘underage’. She attempted to make sockpuppets, however she was harassed to the point that Chas decided to ban the people who were targeting her. Despite being in right of doing so it caused an outrage and he was promptly banned. This was when he decided to do the revolution and all that crap that he stupidly did afterwards. This is one of the bigger issues I have about your original post: you got the Chas war timeline a bit wrong, but it changes a lot.

The part about the Plagiarism "War" (I don't like calling it a war, as it was very short) is correct. However, the rest of the short timeline has some major issues.

You claim that Stacy was banned for being "underage" (you seem to think that Stacy wasn't actually underaged), and Chas was banned after he banned people who were harassing Stacy's sockpuppets. This is blatantly untrue.

Stacy was a user that came over to this wiki from a wiki called Hypothetical Hurricanes Wiki. Over there, they take the underage rule seriously, and ban anyone who is underage. There were suspicions that Stacy was underage, but no concrete proof, so nothing could've been done to her.

Stacy came to this wiki from my profile (as at the time, I was the only user who edited on both wikis). Stacy also had a wiki of hers, called "What-might-have-been Hurricane Seasons Wiki" (or something along those lines). It was dedicated to a certain subtype of hypothetical hurricane seasons, that take real-life seasons and edit them a bit, adding or deleting storms, changing intensities and such, based on what COULD'VE happened but didn't. The wiki wasn't too successful, and a few months ago a person Stacy promoted to bureaucrat spammed porn there and the wiki got shut down.

In late January, Stacy posted an image of herself in a thread on this wiki, which revealed that she was around 9 at the time of posting. I saved the image on my PC (I think I still have it there), and posted it in the official HHW Discord server. Stacy was promptly banned from the wiki. Later that day, an unknown user reported her to FANDOM for being underage, and she was banned.

After this, drama sprung up and Stacy made a few sockpuppets. On her wiki, a small argument commenced between StrawberryMaster (a bureaucrat of HHW) and Stacy. Out of nowhere, Chas banned StrawberryMaster, for no reason. Reminding you, StrawberryMaster did nothing that would warrant a ban. The wiki had no rule against arguments, and there was no point in banning StrawberryMaster.

When I saw this, I went into the MCCW live chat to report my findings. I said that this showed that Chas was not a good candidate for admin, the rank which he received just 2-3 days prior. Coupled with Chas' past offenses, Fico decided to post a poll, where users could decide what punishment Chas should receive. The poll showed that people overwhelmingly voted for a permaban. However, due to suspicions of sockpuppeting (there were hundreds of votes, more than the number of active users on the wiki), Chas was instead banned for a day, and demoted from his Admin rank.

His first permanent ban came only a few weeks later, in early February.

Your description of the drama missed out many major things: that Stacy WAS actually underage, with clear proof; that nobody was harassing Stacy, in any way - the HHW admins were just following their rules of banning underage rules; that Chas' first ban lasted just a day, along with a demotion. This is all crucial information, because Chas didn't ban StrawberryMaster for a good reason. Stacy wasn't the sole bureaucrat of the wiki. In fact, it was a false ban.

After he got unbanned he got banned again. And as far as I can tell it was for reporting harassment put onto him by Hood, Pop and a few others. What harassment?

Haikusfortodd wrote: Speaking of Deku, lets move on to the second point – hypocrisy and immaturity. If you search up Mike Zilo in users you will find a user page of a banned user which has been heavily vandalised. Further investigation shows that Deku was behind this – a bcrat. A bcrat who disobeyed many of our wiki rules in the process. Vandalising and harassing peeps ain’t cool, and the fact that he did this and got away with it is unacceptable.

You can also view the comments of the popular creepypastas – Herobrine, Entity 303 etc. Here you will find a lovely place full of staff members bashing and mocking creepypasta believers, which once again is against the rules, and other unranked users trying to praise and follow these believer bashers out of fear. I can agree here: the vandalism by Deku (and several other users who used to vandalize the userpages of vandals/rule breakers) was unacceptable. Some users also left rude and insulting messages on the message walls of said users - including me, occasionally.

However, you also need to realize that this was a while ago. This wiki only really made rules against this a few weeks ago. Before that, it was considered "acceptable", even though it never was ACTUALLY acceptable. However, users here thought that it was. This is why several vandal userpages got cleared recently - to remove some of the vandalism that was added to them.

Haikusfortodd wrote: There are also staff members who attack others and swear a crap ton for no reason – take Toasters for example. He swears way too much and yet nobody cares, despite it CLEARLY being against the rules. Swearing by itself is not against the rules. It is only against the rules if it is targeted at another user.

The rules state:

"Swearing and cursing IS allowed, However, it is not to be used in excess and especially not if it's directed at anyone."

The "excess" part seems to be the main point here. However, "excess" is arbitrary - what is considered "excess" for one user is basically nothing for a different user. One person might consider a single f-bomb excessive, while another user might consider a post where one third of the words are swear words excessive (hyperbole, of course). For Toasters, he might not consider his swearing excessive, while others (like you) do. Honestly, that part of the swearing rule should just be outright removed.

Haikusfortodd wrote: Oh, and there is more. Y’know how we are banning sockpuppets for trolling etc.? Well, why doesn’t anyone pay attention to CZHouzit’s alts? People are allowed to have alt accounts, provided that they sign them up at the official page for signing up alt accounts.

About CZHouzit using his alts to insult people as a part of the alt account’s “personalities” - Houzit was punished for it. He was the center of major drama, people began disliking him, until Houzit himself completely demoted himself. I reinstated some of his rights, and he remains a Content Mod until this day (he used to be an admin). His reputation still hasn’t completely recovered.

Haikusfortodd wrote: Y’know, if a content mod or lower used sockpuppets to rig an election, they would get banned, right? Well Chicken only got temp demoted, because he is considered a ‘war hero’ despite the fact that he has caused wars and ‘false’ banned people for ‘treason’. Hm, remind you of anyone? I actually agree with this part. Even though Chicken is one of the original users and a “war hero”, he still tried to rig an election in order to become the most powerful rank on the wiki. He deserved a stricter punishment for his actions, instead of a demotion that barely lasted a few weeks.

Haikusfortodd wrote: We also have people who take this whole war thing way to seriously. Pop, Toasters – just to name a few. But most importantly we have everyone’s favourite Gen V war hero, Blueheart. Oh boy. A lot of these people tend to over-exaggerate crap and make it all seem like a disaster is imminent any second. These people need to calm the hell down. This wiki was not made for war. This wiki was not built around drama. Years ago, when LifeUpStudios reigned – well, that’s the point. He didn’t reign. He didn’t treat the wiki like his castle, one that he needs to protect the moment something bad happens, one that would constantly do literal public executions (ban petitions), one that fed off negativity. Of course, a lot of people opposed it, saying he needed to be harsher, thus starting the First Trollpasta War with Themaster and Itty. But our wiki hasn’t gotten stricter – just greedier.

These people treat these wars like a fun little game, one that Itty has referred to as the ‘faker’s game’ in the past. They make it seem like it’s the universe, which they are of the centre of. They want the war to be about them, they want to be seen as heroes by the bcrats and they will constantly push for more conflicts for them to be the hero of. Sort of agree here, some people take the wars way too seriously - as you say. I wouldn’t go as far as to claim that they “constantly push for more conflicts for them to be the hero of” and that they do it just to be the heros. They just take it all far too seriously. It’s just drama with a single user, he can’t take down 2 wikis at once.

In fact, I will be reinstating some old rules that I implemented during the first Chas war, which prohibit talking about Chas or speaking to him.

Haikusfortodd wrote: I quote ’This brings us to the biggest and bloodiest war of the wiki, however as a whole, it's sort of like 4 wars as a whole. The war In taking about scarred many users for life, and I'm actually not making it up, proned some users to nearly take their own lives, only being convinced otherwise by their allies. I'm talking about the EnderChas War. ‘

‘Scarred many users for life’ & ‘proned some users to nearly take their own lives’. That’s just wrong, wrong, wrong. Absolutely agree here.

Haikusfortodd wrote: And finally, one last thing before I move to the solutions – notice how a lot of the past wars involve RCCW? RCCW seems to be the root of most evil, and members from that wiki want to spread their wars to our wiki for bonus attention points. Uncool. If I recall correctly, none of the major wiki wars involve RCCW, with the exception of the EnderChas and R543 drama. RCCW was only involved in the drama because of Chas - he first brought up his initial permaban on RCCW to try and get a base of supporters. R543 attacked MCCW and RCCW primarily because of EnderChas and how he disagreed with his moderating of RCCW (he also thought MCCW was supporting Chas, even though it wasn’t).

The solutions are mostly based on what you said in the main part of the post, so my response to them is basically the same as the response to their respective issues mentioned. I don’t really need to add anything there.

Overall, interesting post. I’m pretty sure I can guess who the user behind the post is, but there is no reason to punish you. You bring up some good points, and some incorrect ones. That’s all fine. Thank you for posting this - it encourages conversation about this wiki’s issues. Thank you for your response.

1. I do understand there was some misconception regarding my sources. I used Chas' autobiography and the MCCW: Wiki conflicts pages for my sources and since they both had a considerable amount of bias (another problem, mind you) I kind of had to fuse them together in a weird way that would somewhat ​​​​​​​fit in with my personal experiences. Despite my facts not being 100% true my point still stands - Chas is insane. But what if there actually was something that led to that insanity?

2. I noticed the new commenting policies, however rule 2 and 8 still exist and did exist before hand. Especially rule 8 - that needs to change. Rule 8 is so blatantly corrupt that its funny.

3. Another thing I will let you know something regarding Chicken -  once he did actually false permaban me for treason because I questioned his opinions. On top of that, he did cause a war. Whilst he is no where near as insane as Chas I feel very comfortable comparing the two with eachother.

4. Thanks for implementing these new rules.

5. There are few that take it to seriously but for real reasons - take Pop. She has good in her. But I don't get why someone like Toasters will actually flip out if someone distrupts his plans because they weren't going anywhere.

6. I did over-exaggerate my RCW point slightly but I still believe that RCW plays a big roke in feeding these wars, as do we. I think that if we stop any BIG wiki relationships and ties with this wiki we would be a little bit safer. Not to the point where we can't go there - but perhaps just call the wiki 'mutual friends' instead of 'war allies.' Unless thats already the case. Then I shall sit in the corner and cry.

Hope you liked my responses.

Also, I am curious to see your guess!