Difference between revisions of "NSWiki:Arbitration/Syskeyia"
|Line 77:||Line 77:|
=== Evidence submitted by third parties ===
=== Evidence submitted by third parties ===
== Preliminary decision ==
== Preliminary decision ==
Revision as of 19:43, 24 October 2004
Arbitrators will be working on a proposed decision at /Proposed decision.
- 1 Statement of complaint
- 2 Statement by affected party
- 3 Comments
- 4 Evidence
- 5 Preliminary decision
- 6 Final decision (none yet)
Statement of complaint
First some notes:
- I will not be acting in my capacity of a Sysop in the matter regarding Religion in Tanah Burung as I have become an involved party.
- Tanah Burung did not request arbitration. Starting arbitration procedure was a policy decision which was made, again, without my involvement as a sysop.
- Syskeyia has a tendency to vandalize articles of other players with references to RL and silly comments. Evidence about this is presented here. Since Syskeyia has apparently not responded to previous warnings, I urge that something be done to remedy the situation.
- The second issue has been withdrawn after consultation with other sysops, as it seems to be moving through other channels.
Again, evidence here: by the plaintiffs
Statement by affected party
- I apologize for saaying "F----ian" was one of SeOCC's major languages. The "joke," which was aimed at SeOCC's player's fondness for the particular swear word, was childish, immature. stupid, wrong, and possibly immoral. I repent, and apologize.
- As for my alleged "vandalism," this has to do with the relation of NS and RL history. In my opinion, RL history is like a book, and NS players are like authors - they are free to add chapters, scenes, charatcers, and so on provided they fit into the RL history "plot" in a plausible manner; seriously altering what has already been written,especially the denial of RL events, however, is a different matter. Knootoss, Der Angst, and others have done the latter in their "past histories." I tend not to dwell on this issue that much, believing that IC this is, at most, a squabble among Syskeyian and other scholars regarding history books and the like - Syskeyian scholars believe Spain owned Holland, etc, and the "Knootian Declaration' et al as fabrications, while Knootian scholars believe vice versa, and they argue amongst themselves while everyone else goes about their daily lives. Knootoss et al, however, assert their alteration of history as the NS truth. I simply wish to point out that not everybody in the NS world accepts their historical alterations as fact, and leave the decision on which is the NS truth (if they believe such truth exists at all) up to them.
- As for the Tanah Burung situation, I have several things to say. First, as a RL Roman Catholic I refuse to RP a NS Catholic Church which differs fundamentally with the RL one. I do, however, respect the decisions of those who do otherwise. While I have great respect for Holy Vatican See's RPing skills, I have chosen to ignore him because he does not RP John Paul II, the current RL pontiff. Also, the Catholic Church has traditionally condemned homosexuality, and I believe that Knootoss' suggestion that the reference be changed to 'some elements of the Church' would portray those who condemn homosexuality - a condemnation that the Catholic Church has maintained for millennia - as in the same league as aged "hillbillies" who believe cars are a work of the devil and the American Civil War never ended, and such. Furthermore, I understand HVS' actions regarding the Tanah Burung Church's activities to be a toleration of vice, rather than a condoning of virtue; this toleration, in my speculation, is derived somewhat from Tanah Burung's status as a third world country and HVSs' pontiff's failed ambition to be a missionary. Nevertheless, I do not think it to be a violation of the neutral point of view to say that the Catholic Church has traditionally condemned homosexuality.
Additional comments by Knootoss
In reply to the initial statement of Syskeyia regarding the alleged vandalism I would like to make an addition to the case.
In the opinion of Syskeyia, this has to do with "the relation of NS and RL history." It is not exactly the first time that this issue has been raised. In fact, Syskeyia has raised this issue every single time a history thread was made by me, Tanah Burung, DA or Lavenrunz. And the discussion has been the same time and again, and nobody has actually ever agreed with Syskeyia, and with good reason. Please allow me to elaborate.
As a player, you can have whatever view you like regarding NS history. Fractal reality (eloquently described in the article) is usually applied in such cases. (Scolo refers to 'the Break', which is an interesting idea but it is not used by all.) Syskeyia is comepletely free to claim that he fought in World War II. Several players have made some interesting points about why it is impossible to say that "history goes on undisturbed" when you fight with millions of troops in WWII, but that is his choice. Basically this is because only the player can say what a nation is like.
As such, claiming that another nation is Spain or putting ("Or Holland") behind "Knootoss" is godmodish and disrespectful of their original idea. Knootoss is not the Netherlands. Lavenrunz is not Spain. Der Angst did not encounter Napoleon. Why? Because the players say it is so. If I say that my constitution was written in 1581 and if I have actually agreed on a whole backstory in cooperation with other players then others should not be second-guessing it at every turn.
To give you an example, I could hypothetically think religion only serves to make people unhappy. Hence, all Syskeyians should be very unhappy. Do you see me editing in bits that "Some believe that millions of people commit suicide because of their depressive, fundamentalist religion. Syskeyian government denies this". Or "some believe that, despite the economic stats they present, IFTA economies are in a deep recession because communism does not work."
Answer: No. Why not? Because it is your history and your nation. I think this precedent that already exists in NS should be extended to NSWiki because, with the ability to edit in stuff, it becomes all the more relevant.
Sure, I would like to remind my fellow Sysops, we can disagree on descriptive matters. Certainly we can disagree on how something that was roleplayed could be summarised. The spirit of NSWiki is to edit each others remarks. However, this is about things which have been individually made up about ones own nation. In the opinion of this plaintiff, claims about ones own nation, independent of ANYTHING that relates to others or involves others, ought to be respected at least on a basic level. -- |Knoot|KNOOtalk 20:10, 23 Oct 2004 (GMT)
Additional comments by Syskeyia
OK, for one thing, I never claimed I had "millions of troops" in WWII. But I see your point. As for "people can do whatever they want<' don't you think there is a limit to that? What about all those tyrants who think that their whole population is fanatically devoted to them? The only thing I have a problem with is when people I RP with go and remove events from history. Why? Because I don't want to accept their alterations of history, but I still want to RP with them. So there my dilemma, and my reason for butting in every single one of your historical threads.
And Napoleon did kick your arse. :p ~Syskeyia
Anyone, whether directly involved or not, may add evidence to this page. Please choose an appropriate header for your evidence and sign your comments with your name.
It is extremely important in order that your submitted evidence be considered by the Administrators that when you cite evidence to provide a link to the exact edit which displays the transaction, links to the page itself are not sufficient. For example, to cite the edit by Rezo to the article Der Angst expanding the Education section use this form:   (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php?title=Der_Angst&curid=1012&diff=0&oldid=8642).
This section is not for general discussion - for that, see the comments.
If you disagree with some evidence you see here, please provide counter-evidence, or an explanation of why the evidence is misleading. Please do this under a seperate header, to seperate your response from the original evidence.
Be aware that the Administrators may at times rework this page to try to make it more coherent. If you are a participant in the case or a third party, please don't try to refactor the page, let the Arbitrators do it. If you object to evidence which is inserted by other participants or third parties please voice your objections on the comments page. It is especially important to not remove evidence presented by others.
Evidence by the plaintiffs
Syskeyia has been misbehaving here for a while. Yes, he has made some useful contributions (which I welcome) but on the other hand I have to check every single entry he makes for childish comments and (sometimes) vandalism. Examples:
- Adding silly RL comments in Der Angst entry, after which DA warned him clearly not to do it again.
- That did not stop him from Adding childish RL comments to my 19th century history , which I subsequently removed with comment.
- Adding 'Fuckian' as a language of SeOCC was an example of plain vandalism. He was warned about this on his by me on his talk page. This was a clear violation of the rules. Syskeyia never bothered to respond to this warning.
- Knootian independence entry declaring that my edit was 'supposedly' written in 1581
- I consider these edits to the Utrecht entry to be childish and bordering on vandalism. Removing the link to Knootian independence to replace them with the implication that Lavenrunz is Spain certainly was over the line.
As a normal user (not as a sysop) I'd recommend that something be done about all of this. From our warnings AND all the reverting edit comments it should be abundantly clear that we did not want such edits. (And he reads the reverting edits, since he uses them himself to reply to MY reverting edits so it is IMO a bit difficult to feign ignorance on that matter.)
Now, seperate from this is the matter of the Tanah Burung entry. See the corresponding talk page and edit history. It has been decided that this will not be a matter for arbitration. - |Knoot|KNOOtalk 21:52, 22 Oct 2004 (GMT) -- |Knoot|KNOOtalk 20:39, 23 Oct 2004 (GMT)
Evidence by the respondants
Evidence submitted by third parties
Comments by administrators on hearing this matter (2/0/1/0)
- As this is the first-ever arbitration case being heard by the NSwiki administrative team, let me make a few comments about the arbitration process before beginning. First, arbitration is the last step in dispute resolution, meaning that it shouldn't even be taken up unless all other options have been exhausted. The administrative team reserves the right to refer arbitration cases to an earlier form of dispute resolution before taking action.
- NSwiki:Requests for comment - The RfC page isn't used much, so I'm not going to really consider it in this case. However, I have added a reference to the cases in question to that page.
- NSwiki:Current surveys - Before arbitration is activated, I think it might be wise to gauge community opinion with some kind of opinion survey in these matters. Therefore, at this point I'm inclined to defer arbitration until some kind of survey on the Category:Religions page is held.
- I referred Knootoss to this page after he requested that I take administrative action against Syskeyia in the IRC chat - the proper way to request administrative action when it's not blatant vandalism is through arbitration. Note that (based on U.S. Supreme Court and Wikipedia Arbitration Committee precedent) it takes (majority of admins)-1 admins, which is currently 2 administrators, to agree to take an arbitration case. In the interest of establishing a coherent arbitration precedent, I will vote to take this case, especially given that altering the histories of other nations seems to be a case under our jurisdiction. --Goobergunch|? 18:17, 23 Oct 2004 (GMT)
- I also believe that arbitration should be taken, as it will establish a coherent precedent.--Defaultia 18:50, 23 Oct 2004 (GMT)