ESB:Block reviews/Syde BOT

	Block reviews archive The following block review has been closed. The page has been protected and now serves as an archive. Do not edit this page. User requesting review: Syde BOT Date discussion closed: September 29, 2016 Result of discussion: Invalid block; the policy states that only alternate accounts that are not bot accounts can be blocked.

Syde BOT (wall • contribs • 2)

Information	Details
Blocking administrator	Squiddleward
Length of block	indefinite
Reason for block	Unauthorised bot.
User starting review	C.Syde65
Reason for review	I never wanted my bot account to make any edits on this wiki. It was a complete accident. If you check my bot's history, you'll find that I undid one of my bot's edits explaining my mistake. I then re-did the edit using my main account. My bot account hasn't made any contributions since. However I recently went in chat and asked if I needed a volunteer for me to test something in chat, the !tell "username" command thing, or whether it was okay to bring my bot account into chat for a couple of seconds to use as a test. I was assured that it was fine so I did just that, and I saw how the process worked. If it really wasn't okay, then I shouldn't have been assured otherwise. But a certain user still thought it was okay to be silent and allow me to do the test and then report my bot account afterwards, rather than tell me that such practice wasn't okay beforehand. I personally take that as a stab in the back. If a user already knows that something isn't how things are done, then the key is to tell them in advance. Normally I wouldn't have a problem with my bot account being blocked, but the fact is that I depend a lot on my reputation as an editor. Without the safety of my reputation, I feel lost, jumpy, and uneasy. And the thought of my bot account being blocked, well let's just say that short sighted users may be distrusting of me, just because they didn't bother to check why my bot account was blocked in the first place. It really brings my confidence as an editor down. I just don't get what I supposed to do if I can't ensure the safety of my editing reputation. I never meant for this to happen. I know that there are some situations where my wish may not be granted, but I would much sooner have my bot account walk away, unblocked.

Support

• Support - You have not really done anything wrong. Since you only used it for a test and the edits were accidents, it seems fine to unblock it to me. The Ninja5 Empire (Message Wall)
• Support - Per Jack.  Nicko756 ^{(M•C•E) Sign!}  11:38, September 28, 2016 (UTC) 
• Support -  Chuck123456 ^(M•C•E)  11:42, September 28, 2016 (UTC) 
• Support - Honestly, I don't really think it's wrong if it's just for test, I did say I think the block should stay once in chat but really, that was only because I wanted the conversation on it to end. Message Wall 11:55, September 28, 2016 (UTC)
• Support - It was wrong of Cans to do that. AustinD-3 (Message Me Here!)
• Support - I agree with above you should not be blocked Pickle Pants 2 (talk) 02:38, September 29, 2016 (UTC)

Neutral

• Neutral - Roller (talk) 00:07, September 29, 2016 (UTC)
• Neutral - AustinD-3 (Message Me Here!)
• Neutral - I'm not sure now. Message Wall 11:39, September 29, 2016 (UTC)
• Neutral - Don't really know now after reading the comments. The most expensive boss, Alex.sapre (talk) 21:57, September 29, 2016 (UTC)

Oppose

• Oppose - It does not matter if the bot was used for good or bad, a second account, such as a bot or sock puppet, which I know is not used for evading bans, is against the policy. Administrators cannot give out exceptions willy-nilly. --❧Cans48❦ (talk) 23:47, September 28, 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - regardless of the situation, non-administrators are not allowed to use bots here. i know you weren't aware of this rule, and you were told it was okay, but it is against the policy. ѕqυι∂∂ℓєωαя∂ ^{❮мεssαgε ωαℓℓ ● cσηтяιвυтισηs ● ε∂ιтcσυηт❯ 00:05, September 29, 2016 (UTC)}
• Oppose - The mistake was that he didn't even asked any admins or crats if it was okay. Regardless if it was an accident or not, bot accounts by non-admins aren't allowed. ZeoSpark  Talk  Contribs  Edits  13:37,9/29/2016 
• Oppose - Non-admins cannot have bots. Themasterofdenial (talk) 22:45, September 29, 2016 (UTC)

Comments

• Comment -"If it really wasn't okay, then I shouldn't have been assured otherwise. But a certain user still thought it was okay to be silent and allow me to do the test and then report my bot account afterwards, rather than tell me that such practice wasn't okay beforehand. I personally take that as a stab in the back." I told you that it would be blocked by an admin. --❧Cans48❦ (talk) 23:48, September 28, 2016 (UTC)
• Comment - The account in question was only used to edit by accident. And the users that were in chat at the time said that they felt that it was okay, but you remained silent until I did the test, and then reported the said bot account. Most users that were aware of the policy violation would have told me in advance, instead of waiting, and then reporting the account. You have no idea how I felt. I considered that as an act of treachery. And you never said that it would be blocked by an admin until the deed was done. You should have warned me in advance, rather than warn me after it was already too late. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 23:50, September 28, 2016 (UTC)

• Comment - "but you remained silent until I did the test, and then reported the said bot account." Please read the comment section. --❧Cans48❦ (talk) 23:51, September 28, 2016 (UTC)
• Comment - I was editing under the oppose section which I had started to do before you had published the comment. So naturally I wouldn't have seen it. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 23:53, September 28, 2016 (UTC)
• Comment - I am really confused by all of this. Is this about a bot account being used by a non-admin? It is against the rules for a non-admin to use a bot account here. Even if it's an accident, you shouldn't really have been testing a bot here in the first place. There is a good reason to make test wikis. ZeoSpark  Talk  Contribs  Edits  23:55,9/28/2016 
• Comment - You don't understand. I never meant to make any edits with my bot account. Please read my reason for making this review. I couldn't just do the test command on a test wiki, because it doesn't work on other wikis. I asked the users in chat whether it was okay for me to test the command out, which required a second account, and they said it was fine. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 23:58, September 28, 2016 (UTC)
• [2016-09-28 05:13:29] <Cans48> Uh, it has to be blocked after
  

[2016-09-28 05:13:29] <Jackninja5DipperGravityFalls> You have a bot too?

[2016-09-28 05:13:41] -!- Roller Cowards Rocks has left Special:Chat

[2016-09-28 05:13:42] -!- Roller Cowards Rocks has joined Special:Chat

[2016-09-28 05:13:46] <Roller_Cowards_Rocks> hey Syde

[2016-09-28 05:13:55] <TheOneFootTallBrickWall> [22:13:03] TheOneFootTallBrickWall: I am becoming a Wiki Councillor!

[2016-09-28 05:13:55] <TheOneFootTallBrickWall> @C.Syde

[2016-09-28 05:14:03] -!- C.Syde65 has joined Special:Chat

[2016-09-28 05:14:06] <TheOneFootTallBrickWall> !updatelogs

[2016-09-28 05:14:06] <SpongeBobiaChatBot> TheOneFootTallBrickWall: Logs updated (added ~81 to log page).

[2016-09-28 05:14:09] -!- Syde BOT has joined Special:Chat

--❧Cans48❦ (talk) 00:04, September 29, 2016 (UTC)

• Comment - You should have checked and made sure that I'd read and understood the message. I didn't even notice the message you'd written. You could have re-posted what you'd said, after it became clear that I wasn't aware of your message. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 00:07, September 29, 2016 (UTC)
• Comment - Were any of these other users admins or mainly crats? ZeoSpark  Talk  Contribs  Edits  00:09,9/29/2016 
• Comment - No there wasn't. There were no admins or bureaucrats in chat. And I feel really bad about this, and very annoyed that I wasn't given a proper explanation that this would happen. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 00:13, September 29, 2016 (UTC)
• Comment -Well, the Chat Moderators were at fault, they should have known better, they know the policy and should've said to you that second accounts from non admins are not allowed. AustinD-3 (Message Me Here!)
• Comment - Yeah. You really should've asked the admins where most of them are more experienced at this wiki rather than the users that are chat mods that are usually just active in the chat. ZeoSpark  Talk  Contribs  Edits  13:36,9/29/2016 
• Comment - I can't deny that I was at fault for letting some of this happen, he really should have asked an admin if it was okay, if not he probably just should have tested it on another wiki. Message Wall 13:41, September 29, 2016 (UTC)
• Comment - You can't test it on another wiki unless you have a bot installed to test it with. So that would be out of the question. The biggest reason why I'm having such a difficult time letting this go is because I feel that my editing reputation is at risk. I understand that the chances of this happening are very slim, but all the same, the chances of it happening are there. I feel that this whole situation thing is unfair, because I never intended for my bot to make any edits here, and other bots on other wikis haven't made any edits, yet they remain unblocked. Considering that the editing was done by an accident, I feel that it's unfair for it to count. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 20:07, September 29, 2016 (UTC)
• Comment - This situation isn't too major where it risks your editing reputation. I understand what you're trying to say here but you did make a mistake by asking non-admins (mainly crats since they flag the bots) if it's okay to test it here. Even if the bot editing here was an accident, you still should've asked first before even having the idea to test out a bot on a wiki where you need to be an admin at to use one. I aknowlodged this is an accident. We're all human and we all make mistakes. As for blocking the bot and I did read over something interesting in the policy where it says all alternate accounts with the exception of bot accounts must be blocked. Hearing that, it means that bot accounts that are used by non-admins don't have to be blocked but the user can get in trouble for using one without being an admin. That's why you should've asked at least a crat if it's okay to use it here instead of other users in the chat who really don't have any authority when it comes to blocks. I'll just say this again: I agree this is an accident and, honestly, it doesn't really need to be blocked since the policy says bot accounts don't have to be blocked. ZeoSpark  Talk  Contribs  Edits  23:15,9/29/2016 
• Comment - If you are reffering to this rule:
  

2. Only administrators may have a bot account. This account must be flagged after a discussion. :Any exception to this rule requires a discussion.

The non-admin bot block rule is immediatly after:

1. Each user is only allowed one account, unless you have a good reason that can be approved by :the administration. In that event, all users must identify themselves as the owner of the :accounts on the user pages. Any other accounts that are not a user's primary account with the :exception of bot accounts, will be blocked.

--☧ Habemus Papam! ☧ (Cans48) (talk) 23:22, September 29, 2016 (UTC)

• The first rule states, "Any other accounts that are not a user's primary account with the exception of bot accounts, will be blocked." Nowhere in the policy does it state that bot accounts have to be blocked. Also, the second rule states, "Only administrators may have a bot account. This account must be flagged after a discussion. Any exception to this rule requires a discussion." This is an exception.  Nicko756 ^{(M•C•E) Sign!}  23:29, September 29, 2016 (UTC) 

• Comment - @ Zeo Spark — That's why I feel that my bot account should just be unblocked, so that I can put this situation behind me. There has to be another way to make sure I don't use my bot account here again. And I have ideas on how to make that happen. I can't edit my bot's message wall greeting so that I can explain how my bot ended up on this wiki in the first place. Because I need my bot account to do that. If anyone's going to write up this message on my bot's message wall greeting, I must be the one to do it. I don't necessarily need to be the one to edit it, but I must be the one to write it, and even if I'm not, I feel that I must be the one to direct it. I'm pretty sure I edited the message wall greeting under my bot's account to identify myself as the bot owner. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 23:30, September 29, 2016 (UTC)