Banning People for "Harassment"??

[Clayton]

I was asked to post this here.
  So as some of you may know, a user on FurAffinity by the name of "Cadbury" recently posted photos of his surgery to get staples in his back removed from when he was run over by a truck. Several trolls and others got upset over him posting photos of the staples and reported them. They were deleted.

  Cadbury then rages and flips out and creates a journal telling the admins to "suck a dick and fuck off". His account got a 24 hour suspension [temp ban]. A few users[namely Crovirus, Jude-Prudence and Amusa-Kohrl] who have known Cadbury because he is a well-known zoophile, go over to his journal and rag on him, telling him they wish he'd have been killed and other things. A couple whiteknights rush over and tell the users off. Cadbury's journal was then slammed with information proving he fucks dogs. More rage is created.

  Cadbury then returns from his suspension and deletes the journal. He then goes after user Ziggy's journal: http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/872403/ that was created a year ago over a note that Cadbury had sent to Ziggy [his quotes are bolded]. In the comments, Ziggy says that it was Cadbury who had sent the note. Cadbury flips out and trolls Ziggy's journal and Crovirus's artwork.

  Amusa-Kohrl goes to comment on Cadbury's new journal only to find they were blocked. Amusa then goes to their old photography account [which was emptied, not newly created] to comment. Admin ChasevRocket bans Amusa's account, their photography account and a club account[Dr_Percival_Cox] and then sends them an email saying they've been permanently banned for "sockpuppeting and harassment". Chase then deletes all the inflammatory comments on Crovirus's artwork [from Cadbury I believe], Cadbury's recent journal,  and the comments identifying him as the dogfucker in Ziggy's journal.

  Now. I find this all to be very strange. I've been banned for harassment before. CrimsonTheMastiff [zoobuddy of Cadbury] has been banned for harassment and sockpuppeting before, Cadbury has been banned for harassment before. None of us got perma bans for this. Not one. Only 48-72 hour long temp bans.
In order to "sockpuppet", I believe a user has to create an alternate account JUST to troll another user. Amusa did not do this. They had used their old photography account that they had wiped because dogfuckers were asking them to take explicit photos of the dogs at the shelter Amusa worked at. I'm guessing Chase saw this as a sockpuppet account because it was wiped.

  I think there's some bias here with Chase. If any of you know Chase's past - he was outed as a dogfucker [but apparently doesn't do the dirty anymore with dogs]. I have personally spoken to him and talked to him about a user on the site that have openly stated they fuck their dog [Sparklemotion]. Chase went so far as to go deep into my shouts [back a year or so] and find the shout in which S.M talks about it.
All S.M got was a slap on the wrist even though he has talked about fucking his dog numerous times.

  An admin cannot perma ban someone just because they don't like that person. Me, Crimson and Cadbury all got temp bans. [C.T.M was sockpuppeting too, remember this], yet Amusa gets perma'd.
I think that if you're going to have an admin on your team that is biased towards fellow zoobuddies, do not have them as staff. This is bullshit.

Lol check out Cad's new journal - he's ragging on Crovirus again. Too bad it'll only get him a slap on the wrist.

[rodox_video]

The long and short of this is that Chasevrocket is quietly doing the very thing we hoped he wouldn't do (but suspected he would) - cover for dogfuckers.

This why an animal shelter volunteer is permabanned for blowing up at a dogfucker.

[Clayton]

The long and short of this is that Chasevrocket is quietly doing the very thing we hoped he wouldn't do (but suspected he would) - cover for dogfuckers.

This why an animal shelter volunteer is permabanned for blowing up at a dogfucker.

Exactly. He deleted all incriminating evidence against Cadbury.

[Sechs]

First... man, that's a horrible writeup of the incident. You need to learn to stay on track, dude, you go into so many little asides and explanations that it makes it almost impossible to follow. This is half summation of current events and half personal history of everyone involved, and both are arranged badly.

Second... you were asked to post it here? O... kay. By Amusa, I assume? Why couldn't he come here and post it himself? Between that and the very Serious Business tone of the post, whether or not that's what was intended it winds up coming off as either a sympathy rallying attempt, or trying to garner a personal army.

I'm not sure what Vivisector could do about this other than get indignant. While it's a sucky situation, ranting about it here... secondhand... doesn't accomplish anything. For instance, have you contacted any of the other admins about this? Because doing so, and their response, may be the difference between "Dragoneer made a bad decision in appointing a mod and doesn't know what he's doing and why", and "Dragoneer willfully appointed a dogfucker and is letting him defend other dogfuckers".

I find the second unlikely, mostly because if Chasevrocket was being allowed to swing his mod powers at will in defense of dogfuckers, he wouldn't have given the other one you mentioned even a slap on the wrist, and probably all of you harassing the one would have gotten one, and the apparent dogfucker and friends wouldn't have even gotten tempbans. The fact that he's at least going through the motions of following some rules seems to indicate that he's doing one thing and telling the other mods something else.

[Clayton]

First... man, that's a horrible writeup of the incident. You need to learn to stay on track, dude, you go into so many little asides and explanations that it makes it almost impossible to follow. This is half summation of current events and half personal history of everyone involved, and both are arranged badly.

Second... you were asked to post it here? O... kay. By Amusa, I assume? Why couldn't he come here and post it himself? Between that and the very Serious Business tone of the post, whether or not that's what was intended it winds up coming off as either a sympathy rallying attempt, or trying to garner a personal army.

I'm not sure what Vivisector could do about this other than get indignant. While it's a sucky situation, ranting about it here... secondhand... doesn't accomplish anything. For instance, have you contacted any of the other admins about this? Because doing so, and their response, may be the difference between "Dragoneer made a bad decision in appointing a mod and doesn't know what he's doing and why", and "Dragoneer willfully appointed a dogfucker and is letting him defend other dogfuckers".

I find the second unlikely, mostly because if Chasevrocket was being allowed to swing his mod powers at will in defense of dogfuckers, he wouldn't have given the other one you mentioned even a slap on the wrist, and probably all of you harassing the one would have gotten one, and the apparent dogfucker and friends wouldn't have even gotten tempbans. The fact that he's at least going through the motions of following some rules seems to indicate that he's doing one thing and telling the other mods something else.

Sorry! :X Writing was never ever my strong point.
No, not asked by Amusa. Rodox_Video told me to because Amusa was the one who spoke to me about it. & I'm not trying to gather any personal army or anything. :\

No, I mean he takes action because he HAS to, he just doesn't take it seriously enough on the right people.
Amusa was given a perma ban for "harassing and sockpuppeting" when the dogfuckers have done that exact same thing in the past and only received temp bans. That is why it seems Chase is swinging his mod powers in defence of dogfuckers. Not to mention he deleted all evidence against Cadbury.

[rodox_video]

Yeah, sorry about that.

The deleting evidence bit is what's got me spooked, even though that's pretty much standard operating procedure for FA.

[Clayton]

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/1787/ziggyjournal.png

Neato. Good job Chase.

[loki]

FA has retarded and/or arbitrary rules about everything. :3

[Clayton]

FA has retarded and/or arbitrary rules about everything. :3

They have on/off rules.

[ProvincialTwit]

They don't so much have a 'double standard' as they have an n-standard

[Sechs]

Amusa was given a perma ban for "harassing and sockpuppeting" when the dogfuckers have done that exact same thing in the past and only received temp bans. That is why it seems Chase is swinging his mod powers in defence of dogfuckers. Not to mention he deleted all evidence against Cadbury.

Yeah, I get all that. I'm with you on all of that being sucktacular.

What I'm saying is, are you going to try and do something about it? Or just assume that the whole mod staff is in on it and just be grumpy about it? It seems that by trying to contact someone else in the mod staff, but Dragoneer directly being the best idea, and ask them their stance on this (outline what happened, present evidence if possible, definitely don't link back here just because you did it once already). Best outcome, you get a "wtf I knew nothing about this" and Chasevrocket loses mod powers. But even without that, we'd at least get an idea of what's going on in there, whether Chasevrocket has unofficial sanction to protect dogfuckers or what.

Also, okay, if Rodox asked you to, sorry for the "personal army" thing, but if you're going to say you were asked to post something, it's probably a good idea to say by who.

[Clayton]

Yeah, I get all that. I'm with you on all of that being sucktacular.

What I'm saying is, are you going to try and do something about it? Or just assume that the whole mod staff is in on it and just be grumpy about it? It seems that by trying to contact someone else in the mod staff, but Dragoneer directly being the best idea, and ask them their stance on this (outline what happened, present evidence if possible, definitely don't link back here just because you did it once already). Best outcome, you get a "wtf I knew nothing about this" and Chasevrocket loses mod powers. But even without that, we'd at least get an idea of what's going on in there, whether Chasevrocket has unofficial sanction to protect dogfuckers or what.

Also, okay, if Rodox asked you to, sorry for the "personal army" thing, but if you're going to say you were asked to post something, it's probably a good idea to say by who.

Dragoneer has been contacted and hasn't really given a stance on it. He has said nothing about Chase not doing his job correctly.
I'll update when he actually says anything important about it.

[Clayton]

Dragoneer has said that he told Chase to forward any zoo reports to him in the future.

[Sechs]

O... kay. Hunh.

So is Amusa still permabanned?

[a pigeon]

O... kay. Hunh.

So is Amusa still permabanned?

It was changed to a temporary ban.

A post was made about this drama on the Furrydrama_2 community on live-journal. Dragoneer turned up in the comments, and at first dismissed it as an attack on Chase. However he later declared that to appease furrydrama_2, he would no longer allow chase to handle zoophile/beast related stuff:

I told Chase tonight to forward any and all cases of bestiality/zoo to me to handle to keep the BAAAW Drama 2 community happy.

Amusa-Kohrl had talked to chase and said:

Dragoneer and Chase have both agreed that in the future, Chase will not handle "sensitive" subjects like this.

They also recanted and said they had committed character assassination against chase:

Cadbury is a monster but my vendetta and vigilante tactics were inexcusable. I have committed character assassination against Chase because of it and have only shown my infantile want to harass animal molesters. I made a stupid assumption and dragged Chase into it because of his past and my ASS-umption he was protecting Cadbury and removing evidence.

Any and all backlash against Chase is unwarranted. He does not deserve anyone's ire or renewed discontent for doing his job.

The thing is though, If Chase really is all that innocent, why is he now no longer allowed to handle zoophile related stuff on FA? I don't buy the idea that it's simply to appease members of a live-journal community & when Dragoneer was directly asked in a comment if he himself had any "problem with Chase handling zoophilia/bestiality related concerns on the site" he did not reply.

I think it's probably an ill tempered, graceless way of trying to save face on the part of Dragoneer and Chase by framing the admittance that Chase is a bad admin who can't be trusted with certain issues as appeasing people on livejournal.

On the subject of arbitrary enforcement of rules, I noted that someone mentioned in the comments on the FD_2 entry that they'd been banned by Chase from FA for 3 days, because they posted a picture of a glass pipe they had bought and mentioned in the comments that they'd smoked cannabis:

"It says in our records that you're 17. It's illegal for you to purchase even tobacco products until you're 18."

was how chase explained it, apparently.

[Sechs]

The thing is though, If Chase really is all that innocent, why is he now no longer allowed to handle zoophile related stuff on FA? I don't buy the idea that it's simply to appease members of a live-journal community & when Dragoneer was directly asked in a comment if he himself had any "problem with Chase handling zoophilia/bestiality related concerns on the site" he did not reply.

It might be more for the sake of appearances overall rather than to appease that one specific livejournal community. Kinda like how you don't send the cop whose wife made a lot of claims in the divorce proceedings out to cover domestic violence cases, even though only one person complained... you may say it's because that one person raised issues, but it's more because you don't want any other people raising issues at a future date.

Still, I find it all a bit strange in total. I'd have to wonder just what amazing moderator skills Dragoneer thinks Chase has that he's worth putting up with the specter of these issues being raised every time he visibly uses his moderator powers. ... But then, someone getting themselves in it deep on certain issues that would raise questions every time they exerted their authority, especially on related issues, doesn't seem to disqualify someone from getting a position in the US government, so maybe it's a bit much to ask from a furry website that they show better judgment.  

[ProvincialTwit]

amazing e-blowjob skills

fixed.

[Sechs]

Well I did say "thinks he has", but yeah, mebbeso.

[MazelTovCocktail]

But then, someone getting themselves in it deep on certain issues that would raise questions every time they exerted their authority, especially on related issues, doesn't seem to disqualify someone from getting a position in the US government, so maybe it's a bit much to ask from a furry website that they show better judgment.  

Given the history of the webmasters of so many furry websites (FA included) to show sub-par judgment on almost everything, I imagine that asking such a thing of Princess Piche and Co. would be a rather trivial pursuit.

[Jim Demintia]

when Dragoneer was directly asked in a comment if he himself had any "problem with Chase handling zoophilia/bestiality related concerns on the site" he did not reply.

I have to give him credit. He's either really restrained (unlikely since he seems to be pretty easy to provoke into responding to even the most petty drama) or he knows when it's in his best interests to keep his mouth shut.