Thread:EnderMaster45/@comment-34414087-20181107235115/@comment-25793989-20181110212933

Prism55Writes wrote: 1. "Some of them, although not recommended, can be broken if you are an admin"

Remember this? It was a part of the rules in the past, saying that admins can bypass some rules. You should know that, as you are on MCCW for longer than I've been. You conveniently forgot about this part, sadly.

2. There was no majority. It was a massive minority compared to the whole wiki.

Yes, Pop was banned by Cutter. It was an expected reaction, considering Pop (who was, at the time, the only suspect) reported many users to Fandom. I didn't agree with the reaction, as I supported Pop's right to express herself, but I DID think it was a massively rushed reaction.

About you becoming a bureaucrat... that only happened because Cutter threatened to quit again and wanted a replacement bureaucrat. So there's that.

3. Okay, I shouldn't have mentioned you specifically. But if I recall correctly, several of the poor "abused" users got unbanned without any consulting, except among your group of supporters.

4. You could've just made a post on the forums, and I would've supported your right to express your opinions all the way through. I supported your right to express yourself when you guys rallied together against Chas, and I would've supported it there. Unfortunately, you made the stupid decision to report people instead.

"3 years ago" is a bit disingenuous, because 3 years ago murder laws without loopholes existed. But on MCCW, at the time there were available loopholes, easily exploited.

But lets consider your grand "plan" of getting justice to inactive vandals and pasta believers. Lets say Fandom listened and banned all the users you reported. Lets look at the result.

Justice - several inactive users, half of which are literal vandals and the other half are pasta believers, get "justice" in the form of their evil tormentors who left mean comments on their pages getting banned.

Byproduct - large part of the administration gets banned

Is it really worth it, to ban a large part of the administration, just to avenge some users who are not even active anymore?

There were plenty other ways you could've gone about it. Remember, I usually try to be impartial, and support(ed) your right to expressing yourself. The users who insulted others could've issued public apologies to the users who were insulted. It would've had the same effect on the insulted users - absolutely none, as they are inactive. But it would've had a much lesser impact on the general wiki.

Whenever you want to do such a drastic decision such as getting several administration users banned, it is always a good idea to consider the pros and cons of your decision. Is the payoff worth it when considering the whole wiki/community? Does the justice delivered cause more harm to the wiki than it causes good to the wiki/the user who receives justice? It's not even that you, Pop and the lot were morally wrong; it's just that your idea of delivering justice was over the top. That is the main issue we have: the way you chose to deliver justice. 1. I had no idea that was a thing. This is pathetic, and the fact that we all accepted it is even more pathetic. The fact that I thought, you thought, we all thought that it was OK is sad. I should've known about this earlier, way earlier, and done something about it. But I wasn't an admin back then. And if they are able to break rules, they could've just tormented me the way they did with the believers.

2. Never said it was a majority. I said it wasn't the biggest majority. I may have worded it funny but you should've got the idea.

Pop being banned shows the corruptness that was eventually kinda vanquished after the whole ordeal. Notice that after that whole show, everything became kinda peaceful? And even if it didn't become peaceful, I still had a few bcrats on my side ready to evacuate the wiki at notice. I won't name names because I don't want to spark more drama, but we (some of the bcrats, pop and the gang) were ready to leave the wiki during the whole ordeal. But now that it is ok, we have stayed. We could've left, but the whole drama had an effect that made us make the desicion to stay a bit longer and see if we could still save the wiki and surprisingly it worked ok.

Me becoming bcrat was actually a really emotional time for me. In the midst of the whole email drama I suddenly got power over almost everyone, and that made me feel overwhelmed. But very few wanted me as bcrat, including Cutter himself. They have gotten used to it now (I hope) but it wasn't smooth moving. When Cutter suggested me and Frown have a competition to see who would get bcrat I tried multiple times to pull out because it was too much for me. I got one vote. One bloody vote and literally everyone else opposed me. And when I became bcrat I was obviously happy but I seriously got the new kid on the block vibes. I tried to be the bcrat behind the others, picking up the rubbish they may have accidently littered around. I only stepped up to save Pop. And as a result, some of the bcrats campaigned to get me demoted. I honestly considered demoting myself because I couldn't handle it all, but I just left it in the end. I went inactive after I did a few other things because i felt so uncomfortable on the wiki because I knew the people didn't particularly want me in that position. Everyone loved you being bcrat Prism, but I can't say the same about me. It was honestly the worst time I have ever had on this wiki ever, which is surprising because shouldn't ranking up be the best time ever? So making those comments really trigger me and make feel super insecure about my rank. I know you probably didn't intend for it in that way but I just am letting you know that I still am trying to get over all of that.

3. Ok.

4. I am sure you would've, but you aren't the only bcrat here. The evidence of Pop being banned  is enough to prove this.

The intent was never to ban them

the intent was to scare them

and it worked.