Now, some time ago there was a forum regarding joke kicks and bans, and the outcome for that forum was that joke bans be removed and joke bans ended with no consensus. However a recent occurrence has come to my attention that has caused confusing towards the related ban that occurred later. As I am only a second hand witness to these events, I will only go off what I've been told, and will not name any names. The occurrence (as I've been told) was one user calling another "fat" (apparently in jest) which lead to said user being kicked with no follow-up of warning or sign of offence being taken, making this look like a joke kick in response to a joking insult from a user that has been known to do them on occasion. Some time later this lead to a ban, however due to an unhelpful ban reason, and no prior visual offence taken this at first looked like an illegitimate ban. After reviewing the logs of parties involved, I'm satisfied enough that the ban is legitimate enough for myself to not have to interfere as a third party, and said ban is not the topic behind this forum, merely an anecdote to showcase reason why joke kicks should not be utilised.
16:13, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
Addition: Joke bans are already disallowed. They were termed as power abuse in the last forum by Sactage. Please do not discuss them regardless of your position on them. This forum is for joke kicks only.
Discussion
I'm not sure if I raised it before, but this is one of the many reasons I dislike the idea of joke kicks, it lessens their effect when used when they're meant to be used and can lead to confusion like above. While it could be argued other factors were involved, like lack of visual offence at the time and no warnings given at the time, they could easily be counter-argued by the fact a kick is supposed to be a warning in it itself. If they become saturated over constant use when they weren't meant, then they become ignored and the user that did get kicked thinks nothing of it, as do onlookers. Frankly allowing them to remain weakens the power of the kick to the point where a user could use joke kicks as an adequate defence for not knowing they'd been warned.
16:13, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
I agree that we should stop with joke kicks and bans. Is it funny? Yeah, it can be. But for the sake of saving people from confusion and headaches it's better to not do so. I've asked people to stop doing so but it just keeps happening. I wish there was a written rule so every kick in the future would be seen as a clear warning. 
FireBird-Pinkie Pie! 16:20, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
This again? KλT 21:02, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- Because this is an issue and it needs adressing, no? FireBird-Pinkie Pie! 21:21, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- It's a made up issue that's relevant to sam's flawed perception of reality. The chat primarily used by old bastards and new users who end up leaving after being dismissed because the chat is just that empty. Or chat invaders. Using the kick function in this manner is fine. The fact this forum even exists is a joke in itself. KλT 21:51, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- During hours when chat is more active, one of the reasons that drives users away is because "everyone is such a dickhead", as you mentioned. I believe people would give the chat a fairer chance before leaving if we didn't. FireBird-Pinkie Pie! 22:04, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- Yea, people are dickheads because they don't seem to remember when every user was new and didn't know shit about anything. I've ranted about this in countless forums so i won't get into it again, but it's an issue. KλT 22:18, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- My point still stands. Such seemingly aggresive behaviour isn't attractive at all. And we can always cite COD:BITE if a user does it to newcomers. FireBird-Pinkie Pie! 22:24, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- The main deterrent to new users is just the attitude towards them in general. Most people don't want to bother with them. People including you have been dismissive to the point of rude before. What's happening isn't even covered in that policy. It's just elitism. None of you even consciously know what you're doing. KλT 22:42, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- If I am ever dismissive of newcomers it's because their intentions in the chat are short and/or to annoy people, like people asking to add us on PSN or acting childish - it's normal to show no interest in those users. With that out of the way, I'm talking about being receptional. Saying a hi and simply showing we are not "dickheads" should be enough to not scare them away. Joking around by calling each other names and joke kicking does not help in building a community. FireBird-Pinkie Pie! 23:07, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- Dude, you actually have no evidence to prove that joke kicking tubw a couple times a week actually has a negative outcome. Correlation does not imply causation bro. If you're real crusade here is to actually make the chat more accessible to people, banning a dumb fucking joke isn't gonna do it. KλT 00:42, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- I don't have proof, but I'm saying how I've seen it a few times - A user leaving without saying much after joining in the middle of a circlejerk. And I'm interested in this not only for that, but to avoid confusions like the case Sam mentioned, and because I personally don't like this kind of attitude. It's a long debate too, since 2011 some people have mentioned joke bans/kicks are not healthy, and that it does more harm than good. It's a dumb fucking joke indeed, one that can cause confusion and basically undermines the purpose of the kick function. I've made my points clear and I don't see how the chat wouldn't benefit from the correct use of kicking. FireBird-Pinkie Pie! 00:58, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- The kick function doesn't even really do anything in the first place. If someone has joined to fuck around, a kick won't deter them. They'll rejoin. I don't like people dictating what people should do. I don't agree with sam and I don't agree with you. But do whatever you want, if you guys want to run the wiki into the ground and make it a PC ceramic gallery go ahead. KλT 01:12, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- I don't have proof, but I'm saying how I've seen it a few times - A user leaving without saying much after joining in the middle of a circlejerk. And I'm interested in this not only for that, but to avoid confusions like the case Sam mentioned, and because I personally don't like this kind of attitude. It's a long debate too, since 2011 some people have mentioned joke bans/kicks are not healthy, and that it does more harm than good. It's a dumb fucking joke indeed, one that can cause confusion and basically undermines the purpose of the kick function. I've made my points clear and I don't see how the chat wouldn't benefit from the correct use of kicking.
- Dude, you actually have no evidence to prove that joke kicking tubw a couple times a week actually has a negative outcome. Correlation does not imply causation bro. If you're real crusade here is to actually make the chat more accessible to people, banning a dumb fucking joke isn't gonna do it. KλT 00:42, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- If I am ever dismissive of newcomers it's because their intentions in the chat are short and/or to annoy people, like people asking to add us on PSN or acting childish - it's normal to show no interest in those users. With that out of the way, I'm talking about being receptional. Saying a hi and simply showing we are not "dickheads" should be enough to not scare them away. Joking around by calling each other names and joke kicking does not help in building a community.
- The main deterrent to new users is just the attitude towards them in general. Most people don't want to bother with them. People including you have been dismissive to the point of rude before. What's happening isn't even covered in that policy. It's just elitism. None of you even consciously know what you're doing. KλT 22:42, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- My point still stands. Such seemingly aggresive behaviour isn't attractive at all. And we can always cite COD:BITE if a user does it to newcomers.
- Yea, people are dickheads because they don't seem to remember when every user was new and didn't know shit about anything. I've ranted about this in countless forums so i won't get into it again, but it's an issue. KλT 22:18, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- During hours when chat is more active, one of the reasons that drives users away is because "everyone is such a dickhead", as you mentioned. I believe people would give the chat a fairer chance before leaving if we didn't.
- It's a made up issue that's relevant to sam's flawed perception of reality. The chat primarily used by old bastards and new users who end up leaving after being dismissed because the chat is just that empty. Or chat invaders. Using the kick function in this manner is fine. The fact this forum even exists is a joke in itself. KλT 21:51, December 22, 2015 (UTC)
- Who is dictating what now? This is a discussion. And kicking does have a function. It exists to warn people. Newcomers see people getting kicked all around and that is not welcoming. Plus it's plain childish. I still don't know how you haven't understood that, but okay, you've shown you are not interested. And lets not be ridiculous now, we are discussing a minor CHAT rule change. It won't hurt the wiki any conceivable way. FireBird-Pinkie Pie! 01:53, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- I understand that you find it childish, it's just the fact that i don't think it is. That's how these things work. KλT 08:24, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- It's obvious people can have different opinions, I know that. So you think it's a grown-up thing? Still, it doesn't change the fact that joke kicking can be problematic. FireBird-Pinkie Pie! 17:54, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- It's obvious people can have different opinions, I know that. So you think it's a grown-up thing? Still, it doesn't change the fact that joke kicking can be problematic.
- Who is dictating what now? This is a discussion. And kicking does have a function. It exists to warn people. Newcomers see people getting kicked all around and that is not welcoming. Plus it's plain childish. I still don't know how you haven't understood that, but okay, you've shown you are not interested. And lets not be ridiculous now, we are discussing a minor CHAT rule change. It won't hurt the wiki any conceivable way.
(Reset indent) "It's a made up issue that's relevant to sam's flawed perception of reality." - I'm sorry Kat. But at what point in this forum did I attack you? You're a VSTF and Bureaucrat, and so far I've yet to see any professionalism from you. I made this forum because the joke kicks lead to an issue in which users were unaware if a ban was actually legitimate, and to be honest when I saw the ban reasoning as "the 1990's called, they want their easy targets and shitty jokes back" even I thought it was a joke ban which lead me to investigate the issue, furthermore, scrollding down the ban log shows two bans by yourself with the ban reasoning as " ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)", which was clearly a joke ban, but I chose to leave it be and not raise an issue, despite joke bans being one of the few things that we agreed we'd not do. You seem to be attacking me for having a warped view on reality, when you have a warped view on what is and isn't childish, when you currently hold two massively important titles. I like this Wiki, and believe that we should actually run it with a degree of professionalism, which means we use the tools as they're meant to be used and not as our own personal plaything. I mean, one of the reasons we had the whole IRC-Chat row a few years back was because IRC users came in to chat used to no enforced rules and joke kicks and got told off for it, like they should have been done before. If you really seem to hate rules and regulations, then why do you even have bureaucrat rights if you have no intent of enforcing our policies? Why do you have VSTF rights when you use kick tools for fun? Should I expect to find myself phalanxed as a joke? The point of this forum was to address joke kicks, and I left names out of it in an attempt to prevent personal attacks or off-topic debating, but clearly all you wanted to do was start slinging insults at me, just like last time, and hoping that distracts everyone from the issue. Well guess what, all you've done is hurt my feelings over something that I just wanted civilly discussed. yes, in the past I didn't like joke kicks, and I'm still not fond of them, but since before now no issue like this one had come up I was happy to leave them alone as that's what the consensus was, so thanks for thinking this was all just because I wanted it for some reason, it wasn't. I was just reacting to a situation that showcased an issue. So, all in all, my feelings are hurt, I just want to talk about the issue in question, and I'd like to see you do so as well instead of slinging shit at me.
12:02, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- Is it so hard to understand the concept of someone disagreeing with you? I'm not attacking you, i'm stating the damned truth. You feel the need to micromanage everything. If it's not joke kicks, it's removing old emoticons. There's no point to it. And professionalism? Lol alright bud, you want the wiki to be professional you're gonna have to do a bit more than banning a goddamn joke. And yes, you can totally expect for me to phalanx you as a joke. Quality argument there. At one point in time have i ever mentioned phalanxing you as a joke? Tbh, you already dragged me into this when you made my (obvious) actions a vocal point of the forum. So that's on you. Also, because i disagree with you on joke kicks i shouldn't have VSTF rights or bureaucrat rights? I mean, wow. Alright. KλT 22:53, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- Also you want to talk about what's childish? If you want the wiki to stop being childish, by that logic we should remove all traces of My little pony & anime, because it's "childish". How about we do that then? Cause i've seen situations in the past where that actually effects new users a lot. People join and they see everyone with these childish avatars and it's off putting to them. Who wants to be on a wiki full of childish objects such as that, eh? KλT 22:58, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- Also roleplaying. How about we don't have people call themselves by their nicknames and roleplay names? I've seen a few users using marital terms, that's pretty childish tbh. We should ban that as well, cause it's pretty alarming for new users. KλT 22:59, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- Seriously, what the hell? I started up this forum purely because issues with joke kicks lead to an issue where there was confusion amongst other users. Instead of address any actual points I made above, all you've done is continue insulting me. So frankly, that's why I can't trust your types of jokes. You ban someone for hurting someone elses feelings, when when I made this forum in no way calling you out, or attempting to (I was perfectly fine with the ban, if not the reasoning) you begin a tirade of insults against me. 23:06, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- In fact, how are you not finding it childish to throw the discussion completely off-track by simply throwing insults around? You've hardly even discussed joke kicks aside from stating your opinion is that they are funny, and that you don't care if others don't like them because that's just their opinion. I mean, we ended up having a huge row a good few months ago and I thought we'd managed to make up, but clearly you were just lying to me so you could continue to insult with your gaggle of de-sysop friends behind my back, waiting for another forum like this to crop up just so you could insult me again. I can't trust you with Sysop rights because right now I can't trust you. You've upset me, and I mean seriously upset me. You turned what was just a simple forum discussion something that may have been a bit controversial, but otherwise mundane in to a huge shit-slinging fest. So I really do hope you're happy about that. 23:14, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not throwing anything off track, i'm just trying to understand your argument against joke kicks. If the fact that it's "childish" is the baseline, it's not going to work dude. KλT 23:22, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- How is going "This again", "It's a made up issue that's relevant to sam's flawed perception of reality." and multiple other jabs at me in any way gauging my argument or not childish? All you've done is come in, try to dismiss it and then try and pin the blame on me. And despite two occasions of stating how you've upset me, you've not even tried to apologise. So right now, it does just seem like you're carrying on for the sake of carrying on with no real care for what you actually say. 23:31, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- You've been calling me childish this whole forum, calling my jokes childish, basically you just think i'm a child from what i understand. So nah, not going to apologize. These redundant forums are a joke. You've made them every single time, so sorry if I'm worn the fuck out after seeing this. Out of all the issues on the wiki, joke kicks is what you think our time should be spent on dealing with. Nevermind the fact that a community blog hasn't been published in close to a month. Editor count hasn't been lower since 2010, Community itself is slowly dying. The chat may as well be dead 80% of the time. But Obviously the problem is joke kicks, that'll certainly help the wiki out! Of all the issues, it's joke kicks that need to be discussed. Jesus christ. KλT 23:44, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, Kat, but how can you say this to Sam while you, another Bureucrat, doesn't act on such issues? Your three last forum posts beside this one were in December, July and February in this year, none involving the problems you mentioned. You haven't even done any anti-vandal or image editing. You don't show interest about the wiki, therefore your arguments are hypocritical. Frankly, the only joke in this forum is your immature behaviour and your inability to refrain yourself from personal attacks. FireBird-Pinkie Pie! 00:18, December 24, 2015 (UTC)
- I've been user since 2011. Over that period of time i've had quite a few forum posts involving the issues i've mentioned. I've been focusing on University for the past year, hence my inactivity. KλT 01:46, December 24, 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, Kat, but how can you say this to Sam while you, another Bureucrat, doesn't act on such issues? Your three last forum posts beside this one were in December, July and February in this year, none involving the problems you mentioned. You haven't even done any anti-vandal or image editing. You don't show interest about the wiki, therefore your arguments are hypocritical. Frankly, the only joke in this forum is your immature behaviour and your inability to refrain yourself from personal attacks.
- You've been calling me childish this whole forum, calling my jokes childish, basically you just think i'm a child from what i understand. So nah, not going to apologize. These redundant forums are a joke. You've made them every single time, so sorry if I'm worn the fuck out after seeing this. Out of all the issues on the wiki, joke kicks is what you think our time should be spent on dealing with. Nevermind the fact that a community blog hasn't been published in close to a month. Editor count hasn't been lower since 2010, Community itself is slowly dying. The chat may as well be dead 80% of the time. But Obviously the problem is joke kicks, that'll certainly help the wiki out! Of all the issues, it's joke kicks that need to be discussed. Jesus christ. KλT 23:44, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- How is going "This again", "It's a made up issue that's relevant to sam's flawed perception of reality." and multiple other jabs at me in any way gauging my argument or not childish? All you've done is come in, try to dismiss it and then try and pin the blame on me. And despite two occasions of stating how you've upset me, you've not even tried to apologise. So right now, it does just seem like you're carrying on for the sake of carrying on with no real care for what you actually say. 23:31, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not throwing anything off track, i'm just trying to understand your argument against joke kicks. If the fact that it's "childish" is the baseline, it's not going to work dude. KλT 23:22, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- In fact, how are you not finding it childish to throw the discussion completely off-track by simply throwing insults around? You've hardly even discussed joke kicks aside from stating your opinion is that they are funny, and that you don't care if others don't like them because that's just their opinion. I mean, we ended up having a huge row a good few months ago and I thought we'd managed to make up, but clearly you were just lying to me so you could continue to insult with your gaggle of de-sysop friends behind my back, waiting for another forum like this to crop up just so you could insult me again. I can't trust you with Sysop rights because right now I can't trust you. You've upset me, and I mean seriously upset me. You turned what was just a simple forum discussion something that may have been a bit controversial, but otherwise mundane in to a huge shit-slinging fest. So I really do hope you're happy about that. 23:14, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- Seriously, what the hell? I started up this forum purely because issues with joke kicks lead to an issue where there was confusion amongst other users. Instead of address any actual points I made above, all you've done is continue insulting me. So frankly, that's why I can't trust your types of jokes. You ban someone for hurting someone elses feelings, when when I made this forum in no way calling you out, or attempting to (I was perfectly fine with the ban, if not the reasoning) you begin a tirade of insults against me. 23:06, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- Also roleplaying. How about we don't have people call themselves by their nicknames and roleplay names? I've seen a few users using marital terms, that's pretty childish tbh. We should ban that as well, cause it's pretty alarming for new users. KλT 22:59, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- Also you want to talk about what's childish? If you want the wiki to stop being childish, by that logic we should remove all traces of My little pony & anime, because it's "childish". How about we do that then? Cause i've seen situations in the past where that actually effects new users a lot. People join and they see everyone with these childish avatars and it's off putting to them. Who wants to be on a wiki full of childish objects such as that, eh? KλT 22:58, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- Is it so hard to understand the concept of someone disagreeing with you? I'm not attacking you, i'm stating the damned truth. You feel the need to micromanage everything. If it's not joke kicks, it's removing old emoticons. There's no point to it. And professionalism? Lol alright bud, you want the wiki to be professional you're gonna have to do a bit more than banning a goddamn joke. And yes, you can totally expect for me to phalanx you as a joke. Quality argument there. At one point in time have i ever mentioned phalanxing you as a joke? Tbh, you already dragged me into this when you made my (obvious) actions a vocal point of the forum. So that's on you. Also, because i disagree with you on joke kicks i shouldn't have VSTF rights or bureaucrat rights? I mean, wow. Alright. KλT 22:53, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
Personally, I don't mind kick jokes. The only times they annoy me is when it is done repeatedly (which is a rare occurrence, but it's still something that shouldn't be done). However, bans shouldn't be used as a joke ever IMO. This occurrence with Exacri is a reason why. It was honestly confusing as to whether or not it was in jest (considering that the few joke bans there have been were removed almost instantly). 
DremYolLok 01:41, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
Joke kicks are actually very funny when done right. Usually it goes with TUBW being called Tubbie by somebody who's welcoming, then somebody wisecracking a "lol ur fat" joke, completely in jest, then the obligatory kick by TUBW. That's fine, no problem with that. It's happened numerous times and we're all in agreement that it's okay. However, when a user is being kicked for no apparent reason, which sometimes happens and is constituted by many as a "joke kick", this is completely unacceptable and shows a total lack of professionalism by the person who has performed the kick. There needs to be a line drawn between what is acceptable and what is not, I would welcome a new kicking policy wherein only users that are causing a problem or on last warning are allowed to be kicked but would also welcome established ruling wherein it is established what consitutes as jokes and what pisses people off/confuses new users. YELLOWLUCARIO TALK 21:23, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
- A rule regarding what is and isn't a joke kick would likely be difficult to write up and maintain. However, I'd rather have something on policy regarding joke kicks than nothing to help us avoid situations like the one above. However from the reports I heard, part of the issue was that no warnings came before or after the kick, which is what made the situation seem as though it wasn't a serious kick, so one thing that clearly needs to change is how verbal we are with our warnings if we hand out a kick, especially if it's one that may appear as a joke. 21:27, December 23, 2015 (UTC)
i may not have ever experienced or bared witness to a joke kick, but i 100%, completely think they should be disallowed. in my opinion, it seems like its abusing the admin or chat moderator rights given, and itll make those who it is done to angry or confused, or for someone like me who takes some things extremely seriously, upset that theyve done something wrong when in fact they havent. besides that, i dont think its funny at all. all in all, i think all that was necessary to be said was "its abusing admin/chat moderator powers", because it is. 
RisingSun2024 
(Talk Page 🎌 Blog Posts 🎌 Contributions 🎌 Social Activity) 00:29, December 24, 2015 (UTC)
edit: as chia said, if the two or more people consent to the joke then i dont see a problem with allowing it. however, otherwise as i said it shouldnt be allowed.
RisingSun2024 (Talk Page 🎌 Blog Posts 🎌 Contributions 🎌 Social Activity) 02:33, December 26, 2015 (UTC)- edit 2: damac has clued me in on what joke kicks/bans actually are, and i no longer see it as something that has to be stopped as it already sounds like its up to consent if your fooling around with the person. RisingSun2024 (Talk Page 🎌 Blog Posts 🎌 Contributions 🎌 Social Activity) 03:48, December 26, 2015 (UTC)
- edit 2: damac has clued me in on what joke kicks/bans actually are, and i no longer see it as something that has to be stopped as it already sounds like its up to consent if your fooling around with the person.
This was conversation brought to my attention so I'm weighing in. I'm not going to be responding to individual points or arguments made on this page because the last thing I intend to do is reignite this debacle. But I'm honestly disappointed in both parties here, both Sam and Kat. An attribute expected in administrators seemingly unmentioned here is the ability to cooperate and problem solve. Responding to a heated debate and egging on further responses instead of taking the moral high ground will just make things worse, regardless of who does it. I think at a time like this it would be helpful for everyone to look over the essay WP:COOL. I haven't yet read all of the desysoping thread, but I can see that Cod4 asked for a recess until January 1. I'll get involved with that as well when that time comes.
Regarding joke kicks from Special:Chat, it's my opinion that if there is to be any kicking it must be strictly "opt-in". That is to say that anyone who gets kicked for comedic effect must both know about the practice beforehand, be okay with it, and have expressed such views beforehand. This way people who find it annoying shouldn't ever be subject to it. I'm aware that it can send a confusing message to new users about the nature of the community, but if it is to take place at all this is how I believe it should be done. I personally find it annoying, but if two people who have no problem with it want to play around minimally I don't have much of a problem with that.
Can someone link directly to logs of the "joke bans" that were given out? I don't know what that's referring to. Since bans are publicly logged forever and are linked directly with your account I believe actions like that should be strictly and only performed in an official capacity. 
Sgt. ChiafriendRifleman 06:02, December 25, 2015 (UTC)
- Here and here are the logs for all Chat bans, as far as I'm aware. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 07:46, December 25, 2015 (UTC)
- I lost prior forum due to the WR being all muddled up. But there was a prior forum on joke kicks/bans, and while joke kicks ended on no consensus, joke bans were strictly prohibited, so those have been disallowed for a while now. 09:22, December 25, 2015 (UTC)
Personally, I don't see the problem with Joke kicks. I feel like any user, old or new, should be able to determine when a joke is being used as a joke and when it's being used as a serious punishment.
I mean, when you get joke kicked it's normally preceded by joking, the kick happens, and when you return/before you return the kick is jokingly acknowledged or outright ignored, cause it's a joke and we all understand that. I've never seen joke kicks be mis-used, such as having a user continually just kept out of chat by kicking them, so I've only seen joke kicks used in an, honestly, positive way. They're funny, and I've found them funny since my IRC days.
Similarly, it's very clear when a kick is being used as a serious punishment. It's preceded by a user breaking some kind of rule, they're kicked, and when they return the moderator, or sometimes even a couple moderators, warn them. It's a very different atmosphere and I don't think any user with a high enough maturity level would struggle to tell the difference between a joke kick and serious kick.
And those it's no the topic at hand, I honestly feel the same about joke bans. I don't see why we have to have regulations against, honestly, harmless actions. If there is ever a misunderstanding, the users involved can talk it out and work to prevent it in the future together, on an individual basis. This goes for both joke kicks and joke bans.
It really just seems like restriction for the sake of restriction. There's no benefit from banning joke kicks and bans. There's not much consequence, but there still is one. It removes what's honestly a source of community and relationship building. When properly used and timed, both joke kicks and bans are FUNNY.
I understand the concern that maybe there should be restrictions. Like a limit on kicks that other moderators should pay attention too when they're taking place (we do have multiple mods for a reason), an understanding of context like chia suggested, or a need for mods to un-ban joke bans immediately, but I don't think outright bans on joke kicks and bans is/was the right call. http://i.imgur.com/KUDLq.png 01:04, December 26, 2015 (UTC)
- i agree now that users who have been around for awhile would probably know if it was a joke kick, but i dont think a newcomer would know and may possibly leave the wiki by being offended due to a random kick, or because of finding it unprofessional of us to do it to them. plus, i know you think the joke bans/kicks are funny, but it could really annoy people who are trying to have a serious conversation, or are talking to someone in private or something, and then they are just randomly kicked. it would be ok to do to those who have consented to it, but not to those who havent and newcomers because it would likely drive them away. RisingSun2024 (Talk Page 🎌 Blog Posts 🎌 Contributions 🎌 Social Activity) 02:32, December 26, 2015 (UTC)
- Except you're defining to different kinds of kicks, not joke kicks. A random kick is exactly wha it sounds like, random and unwarranted. THAT is power abuse and grounds for punishment and possibly rights removals/bans. Kicks that are being used to directly interfere with discussion are ALSO power abuse. That is not a joke kick.
- You're confusing Joke kicks with unwarranted kicks. Joke kicks are preceded by joking and fooling around, and are usually just the culmination of a joke which means that the users in on it, and anyone observing, would be able to say "Oh, this is okay, it's just a joke." Random kicks of non-participants, or kicking people to stifle a discussion IS power abuse and should be treated as such, I agree. But you cannot lump joke kicks into categories or situations where they would not apply. http://i.imgur.com/KUDLq.png 03:40, December 26, 2015 (UTC)
- i apologize for mixing them up. it sounds like its already something that would be up to consent and i dont see a real reason anymore to get rid of them. thank you for explaining it to me. RisingSun2024 (Talk Page 🎌 Blog Posts 🎌 Contributions 🎌 Social Activity) 03:48, December 26, 2015 (UTC)
- No worries. To be honest the problem listed at the beginning of this forum seems like it was more a breakdown of communication than an actual problem with joke kicks. http://i.imgur.com/KUDLq.png 04:00, December 26, 2015 (UTC)
- i apologize for mixing them up. it sounds like its already something that would be up to consent and i dont see a real reason anymore to get rid of them. thank you for explaining it to me.
I'm not in the wiki's chat, but I feel I should give my two cents nonetheless after eyeing on this forum for the past few days. Personally, I don't particularly like joke kicks or especially bans, unless they're actually performed in a humorous way (I can't count all the useless pseudo-funny 1 sec bans I've seen elsewhere) and rarely, instead of mods (/admins) going crazy and jokingly kicking everyone every 5 seconds. But outside of my sense of humor, I don't think joke kicks or bans should ever be done to people without their express consent, it loses its comedic value when you find out they don't like it (as Chia mentioned). Context is important too: since bans are logged, to people not in the situation when it happened it's hard to make a distinction when it's a joke ban or a real ban with a joke reason, which is what happened here and which is why I'd rather not have joke bans on the wiki since they are indeed automatically logged. -- laagone (talk) 03:08, December 26, 2015 (UTC)