Vote to unblock FortressOfNight (Evie Dark) | Fandom

This post is locked.

RusMan·1/2/2016 in Community Voting

Vote to unblock FortressOfNight (Evie Dark)

I'm sure all of you are aware by now, but about a month ago, the well-established community member FortressOfNight (Evie Dark) was blocked from the wiki on November 28th, 2015. According to several sources, the administrators decided amongst themselves to block Fort from the wiki for /Eternity/ for nothing major in particular, only on the basis that he had been warned in the past to improve his behaviour, however Fort apparently did not commit any new offence for which to be blocked. Also, according to Fort himself, he has not heard from any administrator about the reason for the block at all, and so I see no reason as to why he should be /permanently blocked/ for seemingly nothing other than being warned before on certain things. So, since it appears that he has been unjustly blocked from this community, I propose that we unblock him.

[A] Yes, unblock Fort from the wiki.

[B] No, continue to block Fort from the wiki.

[C] I am neutral on this matter.

Current Votes:

A: 19 votes

B: 7 votes

C: 7 votes

(Edited by administrators)

0

Johnyjo·1/2/2016

If what Rus says is true then I vote A. :P

(Edited by Johnyjo)

0

Jdude420·1/2/2016

Alemas2005 wrote:

Obi the LEGO Fan wrote:
I'll step in just to give some advice on the legitimacy of this vote, since I have no stake in this and can act as an impartial third party...

1) Technically, the rules require admins to approve unblocking or shortening blocks [1]

2) However, LMBW:UCS also applies here. If the community believes the above rule is damaging the community in this case, they can legitimately ignore it.

3) AFAIK, the admins don't really have authority to delete a community voting topic just because they interpret it as illegitimate - but I don't recall any rules which deal specifically with this. If anyone knows where these might be, that would be relevant to the discussion.

The problem is this phrase...

"A block is never to be undone, shortened, or lengthened, unless it has been discussed and approved by multiple admins."

This thread would probably make more sense if it were a petition... However, petitions got banned in a community vote. A community vote for unblocking a user doesn't make sense if, in the end, the admins have to approve it.

So basically this topic will accomplish nothing.

And I remember a couple of cases in which we had to delete CVs to block Yada as we passed them off as joke CVs... Indeed, there aren't really any rules dealing with "illegitimate" CVs.

I had the same train of thought, Alemas.

I just would like to know whether or not this topic will actually be allowed to change anything? It seems all very grey and ewy. Because, if it is. It should really be re-voted again with all of the evidence stated at the beginning why he was blocked so a proper conclusion can be made by the voting users.

(Edited by Jdude420)

0

T-007Bond·1/2/2016

C

(Edited by T-007Bond)

0

Coggsworth Motors·1/2/2016

B. (but not forevor, come on. That's just silly) But explain it to him.

(Edited by Coggsworth Motors)

0

Slicer Vorzakh·1/3/2016

Coggsworth Motors wrote: B. (but not forevor, come on. That's just silly) But explain it to him.

If you dont want him to be blocked forever why vote B?

(Edited by Slicer Vorzakh)

0

TheShadowAssassin·1/3/2016

A.

I hope I don't regret this.

(Edited by TheShadowAssassin)

0

Obi the LEGO Fan·1/3/2016

Jdude420 wrote:

Alemas2005 wrote:

Obi the LEGO Fan wrote:
I'll step in just to give some advice on the legitimacy of this vote, since I have no stake in this and can act as an impartial third party...

1) Technically, the rules require admins to approve unblocking or shortening blocks [1]

2) However, LMBW:UCS also applies here. If the community believes the above rule is damaging the community in this case, they can legitimately ignore it.

3) AFAIK, the admins don't really have authority to delete a community voting topic just because they interpret it as illegitimate - but I don't recall any rules which deal specifically with this. If anyone knows where these might be, that would be relevant to the discussion.

The problem is this phrase...

"A block is never to be undone, shortened, or lengthened, unless it has been discussed and approved by multiple admins."

This thread would probably make more sense if it were a petition... However, petitions got banned in a community vote. A community vote for unblocking a user doesn't make sense if, in the end, the admins have to approve it.

So basically this topic will accomplish nothing.

And I remember a couple of cases in which we had to delete CVs to block Yada as we passed them off as joke CVs... Indeed, there aren't really any rules dealing with "illegitimate" CVs.

I had the same train of thought, Alemas.

I just would like to know whether or not this topic will actually be allowed to change anything? It seems all very grey and ewy. Because, if it is. It should really be re-voted again with all of the evidence stated at the beginning why he was blocked so a proper conclusion can be made by the voting users.

@both Alemas and Jdude

The question is whether the community wants to use their authority to override existing rules. Personally I think that blocks should be within the purview of admins, but the community does have the authority to ignore certain rules if they think that benefits the wiki.

So there needs to be a clear understanding that if the community does this, they are willfully going against written policy. They can do that, but it should be clear to everyone.

(Edited by Obi the LEGO Fan)

0

Madkatmaximus·1/3/2016

Fort just messaged me. He said to tell you, Ale, that he's already reading through all the posts in this thread, and to "stop acting like i don't exist in any way that allows me to interact with anybody involved in this discussion, it's irritating and a tad offensive".

He says that dupes, swearing, and the like are not on the same level as 20 months of passive-aggressive behaviour.

"ftr i haven't received any PM warnings afair, maybe ale said something once a while back but i can barely remember and there definitely wasn't anything like "bruh dont be a rude or we'll literally permablock you"

"the whole concept of "vote to unblock" isnt right to me, i mean yeah it's about me so obivously im in favor, but i have said that blocks/bans should stay out of the realm of direct democracy and don't want to compromise that just because it's me in question... but a review of the situation at the least would be nice"

(Edited by Madkatmaximus)

0

ZXSpidermanXZ·1/3/2016

At this point even if it's just in the hands of admins. I would want to go with what the community wants and let Fort back in, but I do think he needs a stern warning if so because the insulting comments do need to stop. It doesn't make for a good environment.

(Edited by ZXSpidermanXZ)

0

Legofrodo12·1/3/2016

Honestly, I feel really conflicted about this. I'm going with C.

(Edited by Legofrodo12)