FANDOM


This page is for requests to join the TSPTF. Currently there is no set limit to the number of Constables. There can only be one administrator for every 1000 articles (Lieutenants and Brass combined). Calls for new administrators will be made each time a new one is needed or a current administrator has retired.

Voting will last two weeks from the date of nomination, ending at 0:00 UTC of the 14th day, at which time, if the vote is affirmative, the nominee will be granted the requested user rights.

Only registered users with 200 or more edits and at least two months on this wiki will be allowed to vote in the user nominations or to nominate candidates.

Constable Request

Rules

  • You may nominate another editor so long as they accept the nomination first.
  • You cannot nominate yourself.
  • Self-votes will not be counted in the vote totals.
  • Nominated user must explain why he wants to be a Constable.

To view past requests, see the archive.

Requirements

There are some basic things to consider when nominating a fellow editor to be a constable.

  • They have an account under a username.
  • They have actively contributed for at least six months to the wiki.
  • They have demonstrated a need for the ability through extensive anti-vandalism work.
  • Registered users' votes must have a two-thirds super majority for the request to be accepted.
  • TSPTF members’ votes must have a two-thirds super majority for the request to be accepted. (Separated from user votes)
  • You must also include the date in your nomination.
  • They must also not have had a nomination fail or been blocked in the last six months.

Current Nominations

Please copy and past this format for your own nomination.

===[[Name of Editor]]===

*'''Supporters'''

*'''Objectors'''

*'''Discussion'''

Note: Please put new nominations at the bottom.

Lieutenant Request

Rules

  • You may nominate another editor so long as they accept the nomination.
  • You cannot nominate yourself.
  • Self-votes will not be counted in the vote totals.
  • Nominated user must explain why he wants to be a Lieutenant.

To view past requests, see the archive.

Requirements

  • They have an account under a username.
  • They have actively contributed for at least six months to the wiki.
  • They either are of adult age (18 years or older) or have one and a half years' worth of solid contribution to the site.
  • They have demonstrated they are willing to take on additional responsibilities to make the community better.
  • They have had at least some major article contributions.
  • They have dealings with other users on a regular basis in a fair, restrained and constructive manner.
  • They have demonstrated an understanding of the community's methods of operation.
  • Registered users' votes must have a two-thirds super majority for the request to be accepted.
  • TSPTF members’ votes must have a two-thirds super majority for the request to be accepted. (Separated from user votes)
  • You must also include the date in your nomination.
  • They must also have not had a nomination fail in the last six months.

Current Nominations

Please copy and past this format for your own nomination.

===[[Name of Editor]]===

*'''Supporters'''

*'''Objectors'''

*'''Discussion'''

Note: Please put new nominations at the bottom.

Brass Requests

Rules

  • Brass may be nominated here purely by another Lieutenant or Brass. (Please ensure they accept the nomination first)
  • You cannot nominate yourself.
  • Self-votes will not be counted in the vote totals.
  • Nominated user must explain why he or she wants to be part of the Brass.

To view past requests, see the archive.

Requirements

There are some basic things to consider when nominating a Lieutenant for promotion.

  • They are a Lieutenant.
  • They have actively contributed for at least a year to the wiki.
  • They have actively taken on additional responsibilities to make the encyclopedia better.
  • They have dealings with other users on a regular basis in a fair, restrained and constructive manner.
  • They have a deep understanding of the community's methods of operation.
  • Registered users' votes must have a three-fourths super majority for brass status to be accepted (Only users who have been registered for over a month — from the day the nomination is put forth — are counted).
  • TSPTF members’ votes must have a three-fourths super majority for nomination to be accepted.
  • You must also include the date in your nomination.
  • They must also not have had a nomination fail in the last six months.

Current Nominations

Please copy and past this format for your own nomination.

===[[Name of Editor]]===

*'''Supporters'''

*'''Objectors'''

*'''Discussion'''

Note: Please put new nominations at the bottom.

Impeachment

It is entirely possible that a member of the TSTPF may neglect his duties and/or abuse their power. If this happens they must have their user rights removed. To keep it fair, the following procedure has been adopted.

Rules

  • User who feels a TSPTF member should be impeached from his position, must first contact the TSPTF on their talk page with their complaint and attempt to work out the issue with them.
  • If user refuses to accept any compromise from the TSTPF he may then bring up the TSPTF member for impeachment, with support of at least one TSTPF member.
  • Impeaching user must explain why he thinks the TSPTF member should have his user rights removed.
  • Registered users' votes must have two-third super majority to impeach a TSPTF member (Only users who have been registered for over a month — from the day the nomination is put forth — are counted).
  • TSPTF members’ votes must have a two-third super majority to impeach a TSPTF member.

To view past impeachments, see the archive.

Reasons

There are only a few recognized reasons why a TSPTF member should have his user rights removed:

  • They are not actively participating as a member of the TSPTF.
  • They have not been carrying out the responsibilities they volunteered for.
  • They have have not been fair, restrained and/or constructive in their dealings with other editors.
  • They consistently refuse to follow the conventions and guidelines of this community.

One of these reasons alone is probably not enough to impeach a TSPTF member. Consider that before demanding an impeachment.

Current Impeachments

===[[Name of TSPTF Member]]===

*'''Supporters'''

*'''Objectors'''

*'''Discussion'''

Vivaporius

Honestly this has gone too far. He starts with this "Dirigism" bullshit which advocates pedo shit, (danger to society in general), and the only reason he survived the last impeachment was the whole Ace shit. He regularly makes vulgar alien porographic stories, and that is simply toxic for wiki culture. I propose an impeachment, not any step further.

Keep in mind the last attempt at impeachment was only blocked due to fear of a repeat of the Upvote situation. This isn't a matter of debate this time, we have a serious societal threat on this wiki armed with mod powers. Therefore there is ground to impeachment.

Honestly enough is enough. Just like weinstein should not be enabled, we cannot enable viva further. Let us unite to impeach him. This is a matter of morals an principals.

Edit: I will also add that Viva hasn't actually done any work in a while, so there is little point of supporting him in this process. He literally needs to be impeached.

To those saying "muh doenst have any powers"

thats not the point, we dont need a pedophilia apologist with the stars.

Warrioroffreedom123

  • Supporters
    • Oh, I didn't mean to push that button!Oh, well leave a message I guess 22:39, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
    • Colgan this isn't necessarily about Viva's political beliefs (homophobia, et al.), in fact I ignore that and just yesterday I had a civil conversation with Viva about his beliefs. It's just that as a mod he has shown to be unfit; since his last impeachment he has done zero moderator work that would constitute positive work, and in the same time frame (and especially before that) has had many incidents that shown he is actually doing negative actions. As a moderator he should be held to a higher standard than that. It's nothing personal, it's just self evident that he is not acting as a moderator, is not contributing as a moderator, and is not being beneficial as a moderator. Neesym (talk) 23:04, August 8, 2019 (UTC)
    • I heard he doesn't like pandas, nor conservation efforts >:( General534 (talk) 01:21, August 9, 2019 (UTC)
    • In an intense conversation with Vand and others, Vand told me in his own words that Viva posted a porn drawing (of one of his species), violating both the rules of Discord and Fandom, that alone is grounds for impeachment for a mod. -KK
    • Vandenhoek (talk) 03:59, August 9, 2019 (UTC)
    • Curmudgeonly yours - Crim 05:35, August 9, 2019 (UTC)
    • Sure be toxic, sure be intolerant, sure be creepy; but don’t be surprised when you receive backlash. † ⌒⌒⌒\(;ᄋ;\)三(ノ>ᄉ<)ノ ~ ("니가먼저키스해!")
    • Stepintime
    • I'm sure as hell agreeing here      Cthulhu     Wolf hd by arma3lonewolf-d8m9rto   Deadly State of Mind Leader of the Knights of Scraw.  19:57, August 9, 2019 (UTC)
    • I believe the evidence against Viva is substantial and his arguement a very poor one over legalistic issues which find me indifferent, which surprised me since i was leaning on supporting him but his stance left me no other choice, diverting the arguement and not attempting to refute it with evidence therefore admiting his guilt, not only that but his resort to what i would characterize as cheap tactics, by slandering his accusser and not refuting the arguement made against him i believe him to be damaging the collective reputation of this wiki. Therefore the only rational action i can take is vote for his impeachment, he has forced my hand. BearCav
  • Objectors
    • This entire fiasco is entirely out of personal spite and hatred for Viva. Though Viva has views I don't agree with, especially on homosexuality, I have never seen him actually use hate speech against gays. I’ll vouch for viva that he in fact did not post gay porn in althistory, and is was in fact Ethan, who posted gay porn in an entirely different server, therefore that argument is entirely null and void and cannot be used seriously as an argument against Viva. Furthermore it is very clear and common knowledge that Viva’s projects do not reflect his actual political views and he is definitely not a pedophile. I’ll state again that this entire fiasco is bullshit and is fueled by personal hatred for Viva. This isn’t justice, this is revenge. Colgan dog 13:57, August 9, 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

Warrior, you have to discuss the issue with the TSPTF first and if you cannot resolve the issue with them, then you may request an impeachment.

User who feels a TSPTF member should be impeached from his position, must first contact the TSPTF on their talk page with their complaint and attempt to work out the issue with them.

Follow the rules please, and you will have your impeachment if a solution cannot be found by the moderators. Thank you. Flag of Xyon Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:28, August 8, 2019 (UTC)

yeah....no. The grads are letting this process and you crossing it out is due to a conflict of interest. You may need to try harder to escape your inevitable downfall and accountability.

warrior

You're free to continue with your request for an impeachment, but you have to go through the process as laid out by the rules. Conflict or not, the rules are what they are. You can't jump ahead of the process because you have a personal gripe with one of the administrators. I don't make the rules, I just follow them. And I ask you to do the same. Flag of Xyon Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:44, August 8, 2019 (UTC)

I’m pretty sure granting oct, a self proclaimed troll mod powers and at one point vandalizing principia isn’t following the rules. Warrior

Viva cannot cross out his own impeachment proceedings, this is a conflict of interest.

Scrawland Scribblescratch 20:50, August 8, 2019 (UTC)

I would suggest that the rules be adhered too, but if you see it that way, I won't complain. Flag of Xyon Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 20:53, August 8, 2019 (UTC)

Antiquated rules or no, it is still a conflict of interest.     Cthulhu     Wolf hd by arma3lonewolf-d8m9rto   Deadly State of Mind Leader of the Knights of Scraw.  20:57, August 8, 2019 (UTC)

As I already stated, I won't contest the decision by Scraw. We'll just let this play out. Flag of Xyon Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 21:03, August 8, 2019 (UTC)

It's no secret that I've not been following the allegation nor am I aware of what took place over Discord. However, the rules ought to be followed in any proceeding, and quite simply: they were not. Viva should not have crossed out the impeachment on his own, but the rest of the TSPTF (and indeed, those in the user base who would rather uphold the rule of law rather than the rule of masses) ought to ensure that impeachments follow proper protocol. I will not be voting in this matter unless this farcical effort to circumvent the rules is allowed to take place, in which case I will vote against impeachment to uphold our wiki-wide rules. Reximus | Talk to Me!<font color=red">Talk to Me!</font>​ 21:26, August 8, 2019 (UTC)

Bottom line is Viva has to go. He has proven time and again to be a toxic presence on the wiki. I have said before that he gets in argumentative moods for the sake of being argumentative. He antagonizes people into these arguments and draws them out longer than necessary, which is the very definition of a troll. This behavior has been pointed out time and again, his powers on discord have been neutered, and he still has not learned his lesson. It is clear that if he has not changed already, it's unlikely that he ever will. In other terms, he has been approached about his behavior before and has not done anything to correct his behavior. Much as strict protocol was not followed, I think the amount people complaining to him about his behavior over the span of years speaks to itself. Moreover, this incident exemplifies why many of the site rules need to be updated to better reflect what the community is now. It is, rather than a strictly wikia-based community, a group of people largely interacting on a discord channel. I implore the TSPTF to re-examine how incidents like this are handled on the future. Curmudgeonly yours - Crim 05:35, August 9, 2019 (UTC)

I will address what needs to be avoided. This cannot turn into a drawn out drama. While that might be inevitable, I will do my best to reign in any chaos. Last time everyone seemed to get turned to emotion when edge called ace a vivcrony. That might have been a flawed tactic, but the fact the entire attempt was dropped was a major stain on our principles. Viva has caused almost irreparable damage to the reputation of the site. Having been on ah.com, I can confirm due to viva’s repugnant dirigism manifesto, there is some flawed perception we are a twisted political cult. To those saying viva never broke any rules I can say take a look. If viva a few years ago didn’t intentionally abuse his powers by giving oct mod powers he is then delusional and mentally unfit for assuming that is reasonable in the slightest. Furthermore vivaporius has vandalized the principia page, inspite of Reximus’s protests. Numerous mods have testified viva has posted phonographic images. Many of our users, such as colgan are extremely young and lack emotional maturity, and thus may get traumatized by such actions which are semi illegal to begin with. Vivaporius has a history of belligerent behavior, and one may argue he is not active, yet they miss the point entirely. Such behavior CANNOT be tolerated and he DEFINITELY should not have any sort of mod title. The fact that he has single handled pushed users off the wikia is also telling. I thank the TSPTF for granting me this opportunity to take a stand. I believe that when I see a injustice occurring, I must rectify it. It is both my religious belief and views of principle. Let us repair the damage that ensued due to the freezing of the motion in 2016. I have faith in the wiki as a whole to make the correct decision. Take care and god bless. Warrior

To KK, I would suggest you get the information from the source rather than from someone who frequently makes assumptions based on someone without knowing or caring about the details. Vand's determination of what is and isn't porn seems to be unusually flexible. First, it wasn't porn; an anatomy illustration doesn't qualify and that is something that I made clear before I posted it. Second, I posted it on my personal Discord server, according to the rules there; Discord does not ban porn, meaning that even if I did, it wouldn't violate the TOS they have. It should be mentioned that Vand didn't mention any of this, but gave you his version of events, meaning that for an individual concerned with the "truth", he made no effort to provide the truth. Finally, I don't post my work to the Althistory Discord, because my work isn't related to this wiki. All of my work is either posted to my personal server, or Centrist16's server, where there is a section for art where I received permission from him to post it. So my work on a seperate wiki cannot be held to the arbitrary personal standards of an abstantee user of this wiki, and you all know that.

From what I can see, Warrior is deliberately creating false information that cannot be verified. Let's take a look at one of these claims he's making:

"The fact that he has single handled pushed users off the wikia is also telling. I thank the TSPTF for granting me this opportunity to take a stand."

Well, when did this happen, where did it happen, and to who did it happen? Warrior can't provide any evidence of this, and seems to be making it up for personal gain. And its odd he levels claims of pornography at me, when he was directly ordered to stop posting gay softcore porn images on Centrist16's channel by one of his moderators. No one had seen Warrior in forever, and when he appeared, he began complaining about my work, and harassing both myself and several individuals on the channel. He thens begin to post gay porn on the channel, leading to this direct statement from the mod and the following interaction:

Warrior Actions 1

This was after Warrior posted at least ten images of gay porn to the channel, most of which the mods had to manually remove of the server. 90% of Warriors argument is based on activity he wasn't around for, and which had been dealt with according to various circumstances he wasn't present for. He is likewise trying to have me stripped of my role based on my personal opinions, which aren't subject to Wikia's TOS. You can clearly see that he has a personal motivation for do this based on his own statements in his last paragraph, and most of the user base have already expressed their disgust with his actions and this sham of an impeachment. Flag of Xyon Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 13:31, August 9, 2019 (UTC)

Loool viva. That was on con worlds for one lmao. Keep this to wiki discussion. Not altverse mirahaze. Also you seem to be jumping to assumptions. This is a matter of principle, and you are trying to divert it to an ideological debate. In terms of the con worlds situation, I will say I have already cleared the situation with Trav and "porn" is kinda a stretch when no genitals are showing. But I refuse to engage over this childish and rebuked irrelevant dispute because it is a mere diversion tactic. Rather than actually providing evidence to the contrary, you're like "look i got him here!" on me for leading the impeachment. I've already cleared up this off wiki drama, now please stay on topic. Interesting how you point to con worlds. Also, do you not remember the teacher you pushed off? or are you conveniently forgetting. I could further rebuke your point on con worlds because you too resorted to open trolling, but this would be a mere diversion. Anyway diversion attempt failed, get back on topic. When you have an actual credible rebuttal, post it, and I shall calmly explain how wrong you are.

Adressing Colgan, I posted no gay porn on althistory. I posted softcore porn on altverse miraheze. Please do your research, and actually study the situation before making such a "point."

Furthermore, I don't have mod powers, not on this wiki, not on the altverse miraheze. Again, I send the same message I sent to viva to you, please come up with an actual credible point so I may education you on how you are incorrect.

Warrior

I clearly stated in my objection that you did not post porn on althistory and that you posted it on another server. Next time actually read what I have to say before posting things such as this. Also when did I say you had mod powers? Now you are just making shit up. Colgan dog 15:54, August 9, 2019 (UTC)

Warrior, you're also admitting that you did post porn to the server. Porn is still porn regardless of whether or not it was softcore or hardcore. Which now brings me to my question. Why are you trying to run an impeachment against me with porn as the crux of your argument, when you clearly admit to having done this yourself, with images that were clearly of a sexual nature? I asked for permission to post my work, and the work itself was not sexual in nature. You posted porn against the objections of everyone else and you knew it was against the TOS as that wasn't the channel for what you had. You did it to harass someone else, and then you continued to behave aggressively for the entire time you were there. Flag of Xyon Vivaporius: "I don't need a slogan" 16:19, August 9, 2019 (UTC) I am not a moderator unlike you. This is also not conworlds. I shouldn’t have to continue addressing this deflection. As I have said, come up with a valid point rather than a conspiracy theory I’m some “butthurt lib.” Unlike you, I don’t hold grudges. Again a revert to the nature of the discussion is needed. I’m not going to entertain the trap you tried and succeeded in during the 2016 disappointment. Waiting for an actual argument, and will calmly debunk it as soon as possible. Honestly I could give two shits about altverse miraheze - if you have a problem there, bring it up to Justin. Now back to the issue. Honestly by taking out of wiki behaviors you are opening a pandora’s box that will baClaire unto you.

warrior

Viva you posted the softcore porn stuff on althistory Discord. Ethan posted two men kissing, but that was on Conworlds first of all, so not relevant to this wiki. But more importantly it's not relevant because Ethan isn't a mod. You are a mod so you are held to a higher standard than that and expected not to do something similar to what the users do (users who were chastised for posting it too). Also Viva posted it on Althistory Discord, it's just that he deleted it when Vand asked him to. You can find it in the archives on Althistory. I would post it here, but unfortunately it is definitely banned on FANDOM, so I can't even really illustrate the issue here (but we have screenshots on discord). To reiterate, pointing out that Ethan also posted porn before is not relevant, because 1. That was an entirely different server 2. He is not a mod 3. He was chastised for it, so by your logic you should be chastised for posting something that is (in my opinion) worse. Trying to post screenshots from another server to show Ethan also posted porn is more like hearsay than anything else, because it's just an attempt to defame the accusor rather than prove your innocence or not. Neesym (talk) 17:37, August 9, 2019 (UTC)

If people despise you to the point you can barely find anyone to side with, there's clearly a problem. Also, I've seen what Ethan said. It was two men embracing in a shower, and it was cut at the shoulders. It wasn't explicit, it wasn't sexual, it might not have been exactly work material but characterizing it as pornographic in nature is an exaggeration. Also, this isn't about solely your violation of discord rules (which is rather trivial), but your general condescending and patronizing attitude and your toxic ideology. Having a person who condones or at least tolerates the issues of rape, incest, and pedophilia (and more) should simply not be at a position of power. You literally explicitly stated at the beginning of the document that it was your ideal world – as in, how the world would be organized with you at the top. This time you can't delete the evidence, even if you delete the original document, there'd still be text from other forums that'd give an example of the nature of its content. † ⌒⌒⌒\(;ᄋ;\)三(ノ>ᄉ<)ノ ~ ("니가먼저키스해!")

Again, that is provably false. When we had a NSFW channel on the other channel, I never went there because I didn't need to use it or want to use it. Why would I post porn to Althistory when I am well aware of the rules? What would I have posted there anyway? You can go through the Discord logs and you won't find anything, so you know that's a bold face lie. And if I deleted the image, then surely the text would still be available for you to post here. So either you're lying yet again, or it didn't happen. As for the screenshot from the other server, that isn't hearsay. That was a mod telling a user not to post porn, for which Ethan himself admitted to doing in the above post. As for defamation, that's literally all this impeachment is based on. There is nothing I've done wrong except for actions Ethan had to dig into the past to use against me.

Mind you, he appeared out of nowhere after being absent for more than years. He goes on a rant about me for projects I worked on years ago, and then begins posting gay porn on the server and harassing me and my brother. After he was reprimanded by the mods there, he then goes on to demand an impeachment for things not even affiliated to this wiki. Last I recall, someone's personal views and opinions on subjects not brought up on this wiki aren't qualifications for an impeachment, yet Ethan literally states them as being the reason this impeachment should even take place. So if my actions outside of Althistory are grounds for impeachment, then Ethan's actions outside of this wiki should likewise be up for scrutiny.

As for Candies screed, someone's political views are still not up for debate on this wiki, especially when it wasn't posted on this wiki. Likewise, I stated my objection in the article I wrote at the bottom, which you tactfully skirted to make your statements. And mind you, I never even mentioned raped, so now you're throwing things into this argument that I haven't spoken of. And why would I delete it? It's been around for four years, and I freely share it with others when they ask. You are deliberately trying to make me out to be some lunatic trying to hide their actions from the world. Everyone already read it, said their piece, and moved on. You stand provably accused of conspiring with Nathan to impeach me the last time because you were personally upset over something simple. When I shared the evidence with everyone, the charges were dropped because they saw you planned the whole thing. So you have nothing to add to this debate. Vivaporius (talk) 18:19, August 9, 2019 (UTC)

Huh? I was the one who said that everyone read it. You can try to say the opposite, but I have receipts which I took in case you do anything funny and delete stuff from the chat to prove your "point". Second, you in said chat (which occurred in Conworlds – funny you're trying to covertly attract followers there) accused me of trying to tell everyone to read it, and act as if it was news that people had knowledge of it. Thirdly, I do have something to add to this debate, which is precedences of which you've posted questionable material to the chat – including an image depicting female genitalia. Of course, I cannot personally add this here, due to the rules of the wiki (which you have trespassed, ironically), but anyone supervising this impeachment may contact my discord to do so. And I have taken many angles and photographs to show it was not manipulated. † ⌒⌒⌒\(;ᄋ;\)三(ノ>ᄉ<)ノ ~ ("니가먼저키스해!")

I will say I’m not proud of posting kissing men in retrospect, and though it’s been handled, you are opening the Pandora’s box. I could just as well point out your troll article over a “cure” for homosexuality. In fact I probably should have complained to Justin, but none of this is the point. It’s problematic because you are still missing the reasoning. You still haven’t admitted any wrongdoing when there are countless archival evidences. It’s also rather unfortunate you hold the pretentious view that this is some butthurt revenge quest. No, this is literally the right course of action, and something that should have occurred years ago. To be honest none of this has to do with discord drama, which I am usually responsible for (hence my detox) This is a matter of principle. Where was the justice when you promoted a self proclaimed troll to admin status? What about you vandalizing principia? You haven’t learned your lesson unfortunately, which was the hope of the last impeachment. You were given a chance, and you blew it. Blew it real fast, since you vandalized principia after getting banned with a lack of consequence. If I acted in such a toxic manner, breaking wiki rules to such an extent, I would get some sort of disciplinary action. You have gotten none, not even a slap on the wrist. It’s unfortunate because you continue to deflect. I could care less if you post these screenshots. Go ahead, I really have nothing to hide, unlike you. You argue that I am doing this because of your blatant homophobia, but no. If I were to argue colgan was doing this for a personal dislike against me, I would get immediately jumped on. I’m not going to stoop to your level. But you are really losing credibility with this constant distraction by posting discord drama I already have been talked to about. Really post more, I have nothing to hide, and besides I’m taking a break from discord given my habit of starting conflict. Now care to address the issues directly? Because it’s getting suspicious. I have a feeling you know the truth deep down and fear directly addressing claims as you lack any justification. Anyway I’m on a time crunch, but I take back no claims and I stand with what I said. I am willing to clarify myself further if I must. I think you guys are too intelligent to really need that however. Warrior

Responding to Ney: Yeah no, this entire impeachment isn’t because Viva isn’t fit to be a mod nor is it because he is a bad one, it is just purely just for revenge. Colgan dog 23:57, August 10, 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I promised to myself that I wouldn't post again. Yet I find really no choice. There are a few issues that need to be addresses. Colgan is being rather ridiculous over whether this is a matter of revenge. There were times that other admins, such as Edge, Josh, and United Republic were very provocative in chat in the past, I never resorted to impeachment. There were no grounds for impeachment. Yet in this, there is achieved evidence of Viva's wrongdoing.

With Colgan's nonsense debunked, I find it important to address a different issue. Apparently some seem to believe i'm a front for another user, because my signature is currently broken? Anyway, that is pure slander. Truth is I began impeachment proceedings with initially no support. Even the people who are accused of using me as a front/meatpuppet,(Vand, Ney Ney) urged caution at first. So if you have an issue with Vivepeachment, do not slander them and attack them, instead directly tell me. I shall retain the response "tell me your disagreement, I shall explain how you are wrong."

Anyway, much of the arguments opposed to Vivepeachment do not retain much relevance. Revenge? That is debunked, and it is rather cheap since it avoids Viva's abuses altogether. Politics? I don't try to punish Bear, Nathan, or GB for political disagreements. I did cite Dirigism, but it wasn't merely due to the UR-Fascistic nature, but due to its pedophilia apologia, which has stained the Wikia reputation. (Many on AH.com seem insistent our site is some cult evolved around Dirigism.) Finally, the first valid concern is my lack of signature. That has led many to believe I am a front. However I addressed that earlier if you wish to see my explanation. Anyway the vast majority of arguments are rather Pedantic and deflective, and I have seen no credible defense.

Take care and God Bless,

~~~~warrioroffreedom123

How have I attempted to punish GB, Nathan, and Bear for political disagreements? Vivaporius (talk) 13:10, August 12, 2019 (UTC)

Lol viva I was talking about MYSELF not auctioning against them. Read text fully viva. Lmao Warrior

Well I did read the text completely. You mentioned it as a point of contention regarding my behavior, which you wouldn't have unless it was of importance to your argument. You also stated that I abused my moderator powers, which you haven't presented any evidence of. In what instances have I done that if you don't mind highlighting them? Vivaporius (talk) 18:04, August 12, 2019 (UTC)

In all seriousness (and since Viva asked me to elaborate), I'm voting 'yes' for two reasons:

  1. The evidence explicitly points to Viva having posted inappropriate images on the official Discord, as well as other questionable content on the Wiki and on other sites. I myself was a witness to one infamous case which is so often brought up, but I did not know Viva was a mod at the time of seeing it. With that knowledge now, and having reviewed ~23 additional pieces of evidence, I have come to the realization that Viva is not someone who ought to be representing our community. Because I believe in preserving the integrity of AltHistory as a respectable center for the development and discussion of alternative history, not an outlet for fetishes and personal fantasies, I must vote my conscience.
  2. The consensus is clear. This impeachment is, in many ways, a vote of no confidence from the community. Those who have cast their vote thus far have brought up numerous valid grievances and issues that have not been addressed by Viva, only deflected. I cannot speak for everyone, but it would seem that a plurality sees Viva as unfit for the role he currently holds. In other words, the people have spoken.

Lastly I would like to add that my decision is not personal. I have nothing against Viva pursuing his projects in their appropriate environments and continuing to be a member of this community in a normal capacity, but he should not be managing it. Thank you. General534 (talk) 06:47, August 13, 2019 (UTC)

In response to the above:

  1. The image I posted may have been inappropriate by the standards of some here, however, that would have to go equally for the other moderators on this wiki if that is the standard we are holding ourselves too. Simply putting aside the fact that nudity is not against the ToS of Discord, two of these mods stand credibly accused of posting what would be deemed inappropriate material to the wiki, whether it be sexually explicit (in the case of Crim; of which three pieces of evidence exist) or racially insensitive (in the case of Scraw; of which two pieces of evidence exist). Regardless, I did so with the belief that it would have been appropriate given that other moderators were posting far more explicit content to the server; I wasn't aware my benign illustrator (which had been preceded by a discussion of the species itself and their culture) would have been one of the grounds for my impeachment. Therefore, it would be the height of hypocrisy to hold me to a different standard while our other moderators stand here free of any accusation of impropriety. As to my other works, since when was it appropriate to impeach people from one wiki because of their activities on a completely separate one? Am I now guilty of some sort of violation because material I posted somewhere else in a separate capacity not related to my activities here as a mod? Let us not forget that unless you actively sought out my other work, which had no relation to this wiki, you would never have interacted with it in the first place.
  2. So far, the grievances addressed here can't be addressed or deflected, only questioned. How would I address a four-year old claim of vandalism on the Principia Moderni page when everyone knows it wasn't vandalism, and which was already known to be a post made after a ban from the game? How would you have me address the claim that I'm at fault for my actions on a separate wiki with separate rules which had nothing to do with the rules here? Why should I defend my work not affiliated with this wiki and which I never shared with you? Are you now entitled to know everything that I do away from this wiki in my private life and judge me accordingly to rules that have nothing to the operation of this wiki?

You stated that you have no issue with me pursuing my projects in their appropriate places, but that is exactly what I've done. Which of my works on this wiki give us a bad name? Dirigism? That's on a sandbox wiki. The Mikaeans? You mean the one illustration of a person from a tropical environment I posted (not unlike the Zulu, Tupi, or Papuans, but let's ignore them for a moment because that would make too much sense)? It certainly can't be the Xanians. I don't remember them being anywhere on this wiki. Long story short, all of my works reside in their proper places. The people have spoken, but their cries are based on flawed information and failure to realize that I don't post my "mature" work to this wiki for the very reasons you've cited. Vivaporius (talk) 07:20, August 13, 2019 (UTC)

In taking a broad view of the case, and the history leading up to this case, one finds that the accused TSPTF member has certainly evoked the third and fourth guidelines on prompting an impeachment. The details themselves are quite myriad in deflections and justifications, but what is important is not just that technical rules have been broken, but that the spirit of the community itself has been violated. The community was founded on the inclusive sharing of ideas, and creative writing among friends. Since the impeachment question is about the extra power of a user, the accused must be held to a higher standard. The accused must hold themselves up to a higher standard so that they could protect our community. Regardless of their other merits, if the accused abuses their power by attacking others or if they cannot represent the community then they must lose their position. Impeachments then are not really about the impeached but about the community.

-Stepintime

You said that my actions qualify me for impeachment under its third and fourth rules. Allow me to deconstruct your argument regarding the claims against me.

They have have not been fair, restrained and/or constructive in their dealings with other editors.

In what manner have I not been fair to the other editors on this wiki? In what way have I not been restrained in my dealings with others? Since you spoke of the history leading up to this case, then I suppose you have also seen the history of this wiki as a whole. Arguments and disagreements are common here, and by no means unique to me. I'll admit that I do have a fiery personality that has been a source of soreness for some here. However, you will never see me actively causing problems for the community out of spite for others here. Even though Scraw and I dislike each other, neither of us go out of our way to argue. Even if you look at our discussions, they always start off civil, but tend to devolve into arguments due to our conflicting views and personalities. But I do not start arguments for the sake of having them. I freely and willingly provide support to the other members of this community, and you would be hard pressed to point out an instance where I was unfair to anyone else, even those with whom I have a long history of poor relations with. I have always executed my role as a moderator to the standards expected, and I would challenge you to prove otherwise.

They consistently refuse to follow the conventions and guidelines of this community.

How have I consistently refused to follow the guidelines of this community? Do you think that the role of lieutenant just fell on my lap after my suppose years of violating the guidelines of the community? I was unanimously voted into the roles of lieutenant and constable specifically because I followed the guidelines of this wiki, because I adhered to the inclusive sharing of ideas you mentioned. Do you really believe that between then and now I just stopped out of the blue, even though I have consistently worked to deal with acts of vandalism, provide support to timeline articles by providing my knowledge to other users, and participating in the community for the last seven years? In what way have I qualified under the fourth rule for impeachment?

...what is important is not just that technical rules have been broken, but that the spirit of the community itself has been violated.

You have accused me of deflecting the accusations against me. Am I really guilty for following in the example of my fellow moderators, who hold themselves to the same high standard of behavior expected of me? You when state that my actions have broken the spirit of the community's will, when I have done nothing but abide by it. You state that the technical rules have been broken, when I have shown conclusively that none of the rules were broken. Again, I challenge to point to any of the instances where I have broken these roles, more so especially since you have claimed evidence for such is abundantly available for all to see. Vivaporius (talk) 17:01, August 13, 2019 (UTC)

In reference to the accused, I advise that all people are fallible, and we all make mistakes. Our Wiki, oftentimes, covers flawed historical people, and their mistakes or the 'what if' around their mistakes. While the accused may feel that they have been surrounded and attacked unfairly, sometimes all that can be done is to accept what has to be accepted. In this case, the decision to relive the accused of their authority is near-unanimous.

It may be time to step down, with dignity, and take a breath, after which one may engage in a journey of introspection. Loss- is difficult for us, especially when we put our time and efforts into creative endeavors- that is understood. But, at the end of the day, one must ask themselves what will cause more or less suffering, not just for others, but for the self. Every sunset is followed by sunrise, and every sunrise is indeed new.

-Stepintime

Warrior you didn’t “debunk” my nonesense lol, the only nonesense that was debunked was yours. 16:25, August 14, 2019 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.