Concerns over Spicyryans wiki powers

[Sirious]

Distinction between his guides which he can do whatever he wants with, and community guides, like blm, which he's currently manchild editwarring with Akkarinn over.


curprev 21:16, 25 June 2024‎ Spicyryan talk contribs‎ m 33,655 bytes −41,087‎ Reverted edits by Akkarinn (talk) to last revision by Spicyryan undo Tag: Rollback
curprev 21:15, 25 June 2024‎ Akkarinn talk contribs‎ 74,742 bytes +41,087‎ Yes, more man-child edits. undo Tag: Undo
curprev 21:14, 25 June 2024‎ Spicyryan talk contribs‎ m 33,655 bytes −41,087‎ Reverted edits by Akkarinn (talk) to last revision by Spicyryan undo Tag: Rollback
curprev 21:03, 25 June 2024‎ Akkarinn talk contribs‎ 74,742 bytes +41,087‎ Undo man-child tantrum changes. (talk) undo Tag: Undo
curprev 19:53, 24 June 2024‎ Spicyryan talk contribs‎ m 33,655 bytes 0‎ Protected "Community Black Mage Guide": Counter-productive edit warring: Temporary lock on the guide due to multiple rollback conflicts ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (expires 23:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)) [Move=Allow only administrators] (expires 23:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC))) undo
curprev 19:50, 24 June 2024‎ Spicyryan talk contribs‎ m 33,655 bytes −41,087‎ Reverted edits by Akkarinn (talk) to last revision by Spicyryan undo Tag: Rollback
curprev 19:46, 24 June 2024‎ Akkarinn talk contribs‎ 74,742 bytes +41,087‎ Undo revision 702992 by Spicyryan (talk) undo Tags: Undo Reverted
curprev 18:14, 24 June 2024‎ Spicyryan talk contribs‎ m 33,655 bytes −41,087‎ Reverted edits by Kaius (talk) to last revision by Spicyryan undo Tag: Rollback

21:15, 25 June 2024 Spicyryan talk contribs blocked Akkarinn talk contribs from the page Community Black Mage Guide with an expiration time of 3 days (Edit warring. 3 day temp from this page.)

[NynJa]

I just came to post that hes blocking people from community guides and reverting things but someone beat me to it. This is no longer him being a child and deleting “his stuff”. Youre hyper focused on the DRG guide and ignoring the forest for the trees. The DRG guide is just what got the spotlight.

Nonones saying “get into an admin war with spicy”. Were asking to get that petulant child in check before bgwiki goes the way of ffxiclopedia, because as i said in OP: some of us do still use the wiki, some more than others. I literally dusted off my account to post this.

[Shiriokumo]

spicey is a plague on the community,. he is one of the most toxic pissants BG forum or the game has ever seen ( yes bigger than poof ever was), he should honestly just fade away or better yet be deleted (should have been done nearly a decade ago) his guides would have been done by someone else. and they arnt even that good. he's an angry lil man who stalks people

[Draylo]

Gave him the benefit of the doubt once and he turned out to be as unhinged as people said. Sad to see someone who used to care about XI and its community to some degree, become such a mental case. I hope he finds help. He hates me for being a filthy botter of EXP, but apparently a pirated illegal FFXI server is okay. weird! I have to say, I did appreciate the effort he put into the wiki and was glad to see it, but I saw this coming a mile away. I'm honestly surprised BG wiki is even still there, so thanks for that too.

I stopped editing the wiki ages ago when I put a lot of effort into editing a few things here and there, and uploading pictures. Only to have them deleted later, so I stopped editing it. People say only one or two seem to be doing everything, but that's because they mostly chose for it to be like that when they edit and undo everything. If theres only finite amount of information to add, and one or two people are doing it all on their own will, it doesn't make sense to have 50 people trying to do the same thing.

[gaira]

let him do whatever he wants with his own guides, but having someone with a grudge against the community who has admin rights is probably a bad idea.

[Warudo Ecksu]

let him do whatever he wants with his own guides, but having someone with a grudge against the community who has admin rights is probably a bad idea.

This was pretty much my line of thinking. Anyone at any time can delete their contributions to the wiki. That's their choice.

[NynJa]

let him do whatever he wants with his own guides, but having someone with a grudge against the community who has admin rights is probably a bad idea.

This is literally the ongoing problem now and people on AH have already said theyre reluctant to make any changes.

[shepardG]

Oddly enough, I had pulled up his dragoon guide last week, then went out of town, came back Sunday, saw the drama lama and noticed that I had a fully loaded instance of his guide still up in fire Fox. I saved it and also converted it to PDF if anyone needs it.

Which is some weird shit considering I hadn't played drg in 4+ years and just wanted to fuck around with my shinning one.

[S N K]

( yes bigger than poof ever was),

Fuck no. Nobody and I mean nobody could ever top that crazy bitch Poof.

Edit: He wrote the guides so it's w/e to me but even so this lashing out should have his admin rights revoked. He doesn't care that a lot of people overall supported his work and just decided to go scorched earth. The whole thing reminds me of Phil Fish's meltdown many years ago if any of you remember who he is.

[zombie343]

Oddly enough, I had pulled up his dragoon guide last week, then went out of town, came back Sunday, saw the drama lama and noticed that I had a fully loaded instance of his guide still up in fire Fox. I saved it and also converted it to PDF if anyone needs it.

Which is some weird shit considering I hadn't played drg in 4+ years and just wanted to fuck around with my shinning one.

Please share

[zombie343]

let him do whatever he wants with his own guides, but having someone with a grudge against the community who has admin rights is probably a bad idea.

I personally don't agree with this approach. Why is no one advocating for the community as a whole? If someone authors a guide "Quick start 1-119 guide" for new players, that guide shouldn't be allowed to be take down. At what point, does something belong to the community as a whole? ...Never?

[Gokulo]

I personally don't agree with this approach. Why is no one advocating for the community as a whole? If someone authors a guide "Quick start 1-119 guide" for new players, that guide shouldn't be allowed to be take down. At what point, does something belong to the community as a whole? ...Never?

... what?

[Lolwutt]

In my opinion, any autonomy that Spicy deserves for 'his own work' is superceded by the way wikis are populated. If he's already written a thorough guide, then anyone else looking to do the same work is dissuaded. So, deleting his guide isn't just getting rid of 'his own work', it's leaving a hole in the knowledge base available to new and returning players that probably wouldn't have existed if he never wrote the guide in the first place. The terms of service seem clear enough that it's not a legal qualm to just restore his stuff and remove his admin privileges, and that's the best outcome for the primary userbase of the wiki as well as the community and game as a whole. I don't understand why you'd prioritize respect for someone who's currently behaving like an angry child over the general well-being of the game and community we are all here for.

Edit: For the sake of argument, you're not going to scrub it from the internet anyway. People will still have the guide through waybackmachine, they will still post it on XIAH, someone will eventually use it to create a derivative guide on bg-wiki that he'll argue 'stole' his ideas [despite many of them being universally agreed on by endgame players]. Removing it in the meantime is just inconveniencing people, it's not actually taking away his contributions. They're already out there.

[zombie343]

... what?

What about my statement confuses you? Someone going on rampant deletion-spree is something everyone should be concerned about. It doesn't matter that he deleted "his own work". The BG activity history shows over 200+ deletions. Images, spell descriptions, not just guides.

In my opinion, any autonomy that Spicy deserves for 'his own work' is superceded by the way wikis are populated. If he's already written a thorough guide, then anyone else looking to do the same work is dissuaded. So, deleting his guide isn't just getting rid of 'his own work', it's leaving a hole in the knowledge base available to new and returning players that probably wouldn't have existed if he never wrote the guide in the first place. The terms of service seem clear enough that it's not a legal qualm to just restore his stuff and remove his admin privileges, and that's the best outcome for the primary userbase of the wiki as well as the community and game as a whole. I don't understand why you'd prioritize respect for someone who's currently behaving like an angry child over the general well-being of the game and community we are all here for.

Edit: For the sake of argument, you're not going to scrub it from the internet anyway. People will still have the guide through waybackmachine, they will still post it on XIAH, someone will eventually use it to create a derivative guide on bg-wiki that he'll argue 'stole' his ideas [despite many of them being universally agreed on by endgame players]. Removing it in the meantime is just inconveniencing people, it's not actually taking away his contributions. They're already out there.

I understand your perspective but I don't think this situation should be focused around Spicyryan. FFXI has maybe a few thousand players, and a few hundred hardcore end-game players around the world? It's a small community, we should be protecting it from behavior like this and ensure that the community can thrive. This community should be insulated from any one person "taking their ball and going home." There should be a point, where when something is created, it belongs to the players. Again, not talking about Spicyryan in particular.

No one is advocating for players....but I guess it's just "if you want guides, go make your own". I don't think we should be allowed to leave temporary holes in our cumulative knowledge, especially for new players. The barrier for entry is high enough. Why are we making it harder on ourselves by allowing this happen?

I'm not accusing mods or admins of being "disengaged" ...but I'm asking what can we do / what is being done to make sure this doesn't happen again? If this happens again in 2030, do we have a date that we can collectively rollback FFXI's community pages and presence to a certain date?

[Gokulo]

What about my statement confuses you? Someone going on rampant deletion-spree is something everyone should be concerned about. It doesn't matter that he deleted "his own work". The BG activity history shows over 200+ deletions. Images, spell descriptions, not just guides.

The part where you're saying someone can't decide what to do with the work they created. It's one thing to say it's a shitty thing to do, it's another to say ownership/control should be taken from the authors "for the benefit of the community". Sure, this specific situation includes more shitty actions from Spicy, but you've made a blanket statement about authorship, which is pretty wild imo.

[Lolwutt]

The part where you're saying someone can't decide what to do with the work they created. It's one thing to say it's a shitty thing to do, it's another to say ownership/control should be taken from the authors "for the benefit of the community". Sure, this specific situation includes more shitty actions from Spicy, but you've made a blanket statement about authorship, which is pretty wild imo.

https://www.bg-wiki.com/ffxi/BGWiki:Copyrights

Ownership is already taken from the authors. When you submit content to the wiki, it becomes governed under the license of the wiki. You agree to this. The license allows anyone to copy, distribute, and transmit the work as long as it is not for commercial purposes and you follow any attribution the author requests. Since there was no explicit request or license provided on his guide, the most it can be fairly read as is that you cannot take away his name and credit when copying it.

It may 'feel' wrong to you that it's no longer under his ownership/control, but legally he ceded that ownership and control with very few stipulations the second he posted it on the wiki. What he's doing now is effectively vandalism, though of course the wiki owners have a right to exercise their discretion and let him get away with it. If you don't like the idea of losing control of your own content, you should be wary of the licenses under which you're posting that content.

Edit: Just to be clear, he also cannot go back and add a license now. Old licenses are still valid for old copies of the work, even if he were to release a new identical copy with a more restrictive license.

[Madeline]

in 2014 bg he would've been hoisted by his hosiery and yeeted into the fucking sun

bring back the golden era

[Gokulo]

https://www.bg-wiki.com/ffxi/BGWiki:Copyrights

Ownership is already taken from the authors. When you submit content to the wiki, it becomes governed under the license of the wiki. You agree to this. The license allows anyone to copy, distribute, and transmit the work as long as it is not for commercial purposes and you follow any attribution the author requests. Since there was no explicit request or license provided on his guide, the most it can be fairly read as is that you cannot take away his name and credit when copying it.

It may 'feel' wrong to you that it's no longer under his ownership/control, but legally he ceded that ownership and control with very few stipulations the second he posted it on the wiki. What he's doing now is effectively vandalism, though of course the wiki owners have a right to exercise their discretion and let him get away with it. If you don't like the idea of losing control of your own content, you should be wary of the licenses under which you're posting that content.

Edit: Just to be clear, he also cannot go back and add a license now. Old licenses are still valid for old copies of the work, even if he were to release a new identical copy with a more restrictive license.

I might not be understanding the specifics of this perfectly, but I don't see where it forbids you from editing (and by that I also mean removing) any content you added.

[Lolwutt]

I might not be understanding the specifics of this perfectly, but I don't see where it forbids you from editing (and by that I also mean removing) any content you added.

The license does not forbid spicy from editing or removing his own content, but it does grant anyone else who looked at it to do nearly anything they want with it, including copying or editing or reposting it on the same wiki. So, by the licensing of the content and the rules of the wiki, it is allowed for other people to just repost it. Presumably, the rules of the wiki do prevent destructive edits, so by the book Spicy is completely in the wrong. You may feel that it's "his content", but that doesn't give him unilateral rule over it.

It's ultimately going to be up to the bg-wiki mods whether they want to allow him to be destructive of his own content, because there are no legal issues preventing either stance, it just comes down to how they want to moderate. But, it seems pretty pointless to try to support him deleting his own stuff when it's already out there and licensed in a way such that people can repost it legally anywhere else.

Edit: I don't necessarily think the guides are huge and community-defining, but they do help new and returning players, especially the lv1-119 one. I'm imagining a lot of the takes here are from the perspective of people who don't rely on the guides. Curious how differently this topic would've gone down if it were, say, Byrth trying to get Gearswap erased because someone rustled his jimmies. At some point, the positives for the community end up being weighed against the positives for placating one nut job.

[NynJa]

The license does not forbid spicy from editing or removing his own content, but it does grant anyone else who looked at it to do nearly anything they want with it, including copying or editing or reposting it on the same wiki. So, by the licensing of the content and the rules of the wiki, it is allowed for other people to just repost it. Presumably, the rules of the wiki do prevent destructive edits, so by the book Spicy is completely in the wrong. You may feel that it's "his content", but that doesn't give him unilateral rule over it.

It's ultimately going to be up to the bg-wiki mods whether they want to allow him to be destructive of his own content, because there are no legal issues preventing either stance, it just comes down to how they want to moderate. But, it seems pretty pointless to try to support him deleting his own stuff when it's already out there and licensed in a way such that people can repost it legally anywhere else.

Edit: I don't necessarily think the guides are huge and community-defining, but they do help new and returning players, especially the lv1-119 one. I'm imagining a lot of the takes here are from the perspective of people who don't rely on the guides. Curious how differently this topic would've gone down if it were, say, Byrth trying to get Gearswap erased because someone rustled his jimmies. At some point, the positives for the community end up being weighed against the positives for placating one nut job.

At this point, its not even just "his content", which has been stated multiple times means fuck all based on the license he agreed to when he posted things to the wiki, he's blocking people from editing community guides.