Board Thread:Internal management/@comment-30588401-20161031102701/@comment-24024415-20161101165832

Foxtail Firepaw Flames wrote: Legofan9o5 wrote:

Foxtail Firepaw Flames wrote:

Legofan9o5 wrote: Camwood777 wrote:

Camwood777 wrote: I mean, it's one thing for this drama involving Discord to exist, but this half-official/half-unofficial really makes no sense. I'd be willing to oppose making it unofficial because:


 * A. at least it makes it an official chat and that confusion is cleared up
 * B. we don't have to go through all votes that were impacted by discord and re-tally votes that don't involve decisions impacted by discord
 * C. i can vote to remove it.

I mean, it's even more work to make it unofficial compared to work to make it official. Because making it unofficial means going through all those dozens of voting threads for mainspace, internal management, user reports, and promotions, and re-tallying them ALL to make sure one doesn't succeed/fail due to discord, which would be "unofficial". And don't get me started on the madness it'd put on the anti-harassment rules... I feel like mentioning this again. Making it unofficial is so much more work than making it official, and just voting to close and remove it, and removing it from the wiki like that.

Should Discord's impact on the wiki cease? Absolutely. But is blatantly detaching it, having to go through all that trouble to re-tally votes, and making it SUPER easy to exploit the differing rules and allow for stuff like being a jerk on Discord not having an impact on your Wiki status really the best way to go about it? No... Not really, no.

It's much better to make it official, and then vote to remove it like that. We can all agree Discord has caused drama, even the people who like Discord. But if we're going to choose a way to minimize Discord drama, this is horrifically inefficient. As Camwood said, ignoring the problem and the drama it creates is not a good thing.

The passing of this vote seems rather hazardous, since it gives carte blanche from users that harrass other users on Discord. Yes, even if it is unofficial, there can still be legitimate cases of harrassment that could occur, regardless of officiality. Context is certainly a factor on the validity of such cases, but "Discord Drama" could easily be as simple as a case of a person trying to convict another for showing malicious behaviour to themselves or other users, but being excused or even penalized because "Discord is unofficial, it does not matter if that user showed terrible tendencies that could be their true intents".

Also, nice strawman FFF, here's mine:

"What happens in Discord stays in Discord, amirite? hehehe... HEY! Don't post that case of me doing something that conflicts with the rules of the wiki! That is completely unbased because it took place in the unofficial place, so it does not matter!" So you're saying that you want discord to stay forever abused in the manner, of well, unofficial or not?

Look, I want to remove its officiality, and have no association with the wiki. Also, it's very easy to, again, NOT USE DISCORD AT ALL. Or BLOCK A HARASSER, but you naive little sheeps can't help but cry wolf instead of, well, using common sense and close the goddamn gate.

Also don't tie in what Copper is doing. He's abusing the fact that no one can actually tell if Discord is official or not. Somebody is trying to ban/block me for an entire month because I opposed their threads. It's sad to see controversial opinions are soo immaturely handled by users. Hopefully someone with common sense closes that damn thing. ''So ignoring an abuser is better than, 'yknow', announcing their 'wringdoing' so others will not be harrassed? No, we all should close our eyes to the problem causer until there is no one left to tell that user what they are doing is wrong and punish them for 'inappropiate' actions.'' I want Discord to recieve proper rules rather than being ignored. Otherwise it literally still causes conflict and "drama" since rules are not properly upheld.

And speaking of users specifically benefiting from the lack of this vote, there is still the fact that people will possibly abuse this rule just as much, if not more. AS I've mentioned, an abuser needs to be stopped to prevent damage to other users, in any occurance. Being subjected to Discord harassment is still harassment, and this rule does nothing but keep victims silent. How does this help stop Discord drama when it literally does the opposite and nurture it? Look, Discord is unofficial, and it always has been, this thread is going to be the final nail in the coffin because no one seems to understand that. It's unofficial, and always has, but some people here did not understand that. That means nothing. NOTHING.

To let you know my main issue with this entire rule, I'll bring the bases of the rule back for reference:

We can't report on it, we can't complain about it, whatever happens in goddamn discord stays in discord. We will never ever make a thread about discord.

You still haven't refuted my example that harassment victims will be punished. And this vote still will do that if it is implemented word-for-word as it stands.

And anyone who dares even tries to start any discord drama again will receive a warning, and thread close because I myself and tired of this simple problem.

Again, this limits the power of the victim to be compensated and the purpotrator seeing proper treatment and justice. I don't care if this thread is arguing that Discord is official or not anymore, I am only concerned that people who use this service will not have their problems silenced and their rights taken away from them.

I understand that we all want people to stop complaining about the Discord, its "effects" and how other poeple are complaining about it. Making it punishable that posting a completely baseless, inflamatory blog sounds like a great idea on paper.

But seriously, the wording on this vote is horrendous. "Discord Drama" is a poor indicator on what deserves and what does not deserve to be marked and removed. In an ideal rule, it should mean anything that is purely inflamatory is an offence and excludes reports on abuse. But that's not the angle you went with, huh? No, you go with "DISCORD = WARNING" for any and all topics relate to Discord, whether valid or not! That's downright tone-deaf to actual accounts of violations that this rule completely ignores.

Let's talk about the indicator of wrongdoing; "causing Discord Drama". What is Discord Drama? A post of inflamation? Any issue that relates to Discord? For those cases that escalate to breaking this rule to even mention an issue, it's all up to the sole judgement of those in charge of closing threads! Which is a good indicator of a vague and broken rule that either needed to be reworded and better defined, or removed all-together.

This is my gripe with this thread. You paint ALL issues concerning Discord with a single color, and refuse to acknowledge that this vote will only lead to one big mounting tension until we start bickering about this rule's interference with user rights, and we're back to square one. Define "Discord Drama" and let users report wrongdoings, and only then will I even consider this rule as fair.