Thread:SaucyDan/@comment-45037698-20200212064526/@comment-5956954-20200212073215

If nothing else, you can go to the wiki and let the administrators know of your thoughts and criticisms, so long as you remain civil and open-minded to differences and struggles. SaucyDan wrote: So they give admins permission to ban for whatever reason they want, and then offer them protection when a disgruntled user is harassing them for said unfair ban? No. While an admin can block for the reason they see is fit, they are only protected from users who violate the ToU (e.g. actually harassing them as interpreted by Fandom Staff). Criticism and comment is completely fine, especially if recommended guidelines are followed. VanityFiend wrote: Your best bet is to try to gather community members who think the local adminship is in need of demotion and start a community vote for demotion of those admins. It's certainly unlikely to amount to much, but that's your best option at this juncture. To clarify, this includes only community members part of the Jurassic Park Wiki, not outside the wiki (meatpuppetry). This would not be the best first step, though, as SaucyDan is yet to communicate with the administrators directly through their message wall. SaucyDan wrote:

1. But what counts as violating the terms of use?

2. and its not like a petty admin is going to be honest now is it?

3. Say if an admin bans a user because they are black and no other reason, that would be a clear violation right? But the admin could just say ' I banned him because its the weekend and I decided I dont want people editing on the weekend ' and apparantly, staff will accept that reason? wtf? how is that fair? 1. What counts as a ToU violation is up to Fandom Staff, so I cannot comment on this. The best resource is the Terms of Use page itself for you to read and understand.

2. That is assuming bad faith against a user, which is not recommended. It's recommended to first contact the administrators first and see their side of the story before making quick conclusions.

3. If there is sufficient evidence to suggest the administrator meant Reason#1 and not Reason#2, then Fandom Staff will take that evidence into consideration. Otherwise, you are always meant to assume good faith. Claims without evidence are harmful, so you must only stick to the facts and keep your opinion civil and open-minded to difference. SaucyDan wrote: I have tried to bring this to the attention of staff, that a single person has taken over a wiki using his own sock accounts and uses these sock accounts to back HIMSELF up in disputes -- the staff did not even reply to me. Fandom Staff have a tool called CheckUser, which is intended to identify sockpuppets. Provided you contacted Fandom Staff with this form, they would answer you within 2-3 business days. If not, try contacting them again or bumping the ticket.

I feel that I have provided enough information that you will get from Community Central. It's now up to you to do what's right for the Jurassic Park Wiki. Remember, assume good faith, be civil with criticisms, and reach a good compromise. Let's not take drastic measures like reporting sockpuppetry and demoting administrators unless every other legitimate option has been exhausted.

All the best!

And to VanityFiend, I'll ask you now to refrain from making Fandom Wikis seem like corrupt places or that Fandom only cares for money. While there are truths in isolated instances that occur throughout time, it is misinformation to generalise Fandom as a whole. There are many wikis in which this 'corruption' does not exist and gets heavy support from Fandom Staff and Wiki Managers, to name a few, so do take care to what's being said, especially to users willing to listen for help. You can talk to me more about this message on Message Wall:Cheeseskates, as I won't respond here further. I will still say, though, that some of your comments have indeed been valuable, and I can give praises for that :)

Once again, all the best