The Wylted Commission (The Official Report on The Hall Of Fame Election)

Author: Wylted

Posts

Total: 37
Topic's author
#1
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Please do Not post anything until I am finished posting my report


THE WYLTED COMMISSION
The Official Report on The Hall of Fame Election






DeputyModerator Involvement

I of course want to start with the most shocking thing I uncovered.Which is that Virtuoso participated in a campaign to get the user known as SupaDudz into the Hall Of Fame, and he should resign from his position or be impeached immediately. It is well known that The User known as Wylted launched a campaign on the Discord server after his ban for a personal attack to get Supa into the HOF. Rational Madman made a good case for why this in fact happened, and I feel it is unnecessary to restate his case. Supa also discusses the situation a bit in the following thread. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/2912/clearing-the-air-regarding-wylted-situation

I not only sent out several PMs asking people to vote for Supa, but made public statements on Discord pushing for Supa to get into the HOF. In post number 14 of the Hall of Fame thread Virtuoso voted for RM, Mike and Ramshutu. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/2876/hall-of-fame-i-voting . This occurred at 7:25 PM on October 15th.

On October 16th at 11:44 Am I sent a message to Virtuoso on Discord that urged virtuoso to vote for Supa. Shortly after that, he responds saying he’ll think about it. I prod him once again by pushing the pointhome, and explicitly telling virtuoso to remove his vote from Ramshutu and vote for Supa. On October 17th at About 9:25, virtuoso removes his vote from Ramshutu, who I instructed him to, and places his vote on Supa who I instructed him to vote for.

Ican send evidence to BSH1 of this occurring but Virtuoso left the Discord server so I only have a screen shot of my portion of theconversation, but the time stamps should be enough to prove what happened. If I was banned for being involved in this plot, than at the very least a mod who knows better should be removed from his position for knowingly breaking the rules he is supposed to been forcing. I am asking Virtuoso to step down, but if he does not resign, Bsh1 should remove him. Should neither thing occur, I think the users of Dart should immediately begin impeachment proceedings.

BSH1,I know you will likely launch an independent investigation of thismatter, and I want you to know I will fully cooperate, even though I am alienating myself and my campaign to rig the election involves a few well known people on the site who can make my life hell. I will share every screenshot from my campaign on Discord as soon as I am unbanned from there and have screenshots to share, assuming the users I reached out to don’t immediately edit their portions of the conversations to hide their guilt.

Topic's author
#2
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Chief Moderator Involvement

I don’t find any involvement in a conspiracy for BSH1 to get his favorite people nominated. I feel he made a good faith attempt to make keep the election fair. He went too far in banning the Hammerand let his emotion’s get the best of him in that particular situation. The problems aren’t with the person in the position itself as much as it is in how that position is structured.

As of this writing the chief mod has too much power and his weakness is in his belief that he is capable of even being unbiased. His role has also expanded to include things that should not fall under a Moderator’s domain. Let’s start with the power dynamic.

1.The Code of Conduct at the very beginning states that the mod has full power to interpret the code of conduct however he feels like. https://www.debateart.com/rules

This is unacceptable. The rules need to be written in a way so as to almost make the moderations reactions automatic and take judgement out of their hands. The reason being as that as a human, cognitive biases and distortions happen even to the best of us. The line about the mod having power to interpret the COC however the hell he feels,needs to be removed.

Inthe hate speech section we have a clear example of how the rules are so vague they can be interpreted to quite literally mean anything.

“Whether aimed against other users or not, hate speech is treated as an aggravating factor in weighing moderation responses to other violations of the COC. Disagreement over what constitutes a religion,race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, etc., is not a legitimate excuse for hate speech.”

Let’s forget about the fact that something as vague as “hate speech”should not be considered an aggravating factor in any mod decision.The real problem is that any person in the chief moderator position will disagree with what hate speech even is, and it will come down to the fact that instead of users of a wide variety of beliefs being moderated in a consistent way, they can be moderated more harshly because their beliefs are offensive to whoever the mod is that enforces the rule.

The other problem is that the COC allows moderators the ability to ban people for not assisting them in investigations. This gives moderators too much power to bully people into submission as we sawin the banning of theHammer. It brings another problem as well. It is impossible to know if a user is assisting them in an investigation or not. Let’s say theHammer was being honest that their was a vast conspiracy to get Rational Madman into the hall of fame. Bsh1 saw itas obstruction that screenshots proving theHammer’s claims were not provided, but for all we know theHammer was working diligently behind the scenes begging his co-conspirators to come forward. If given the time, instead of making a snap judgement to outright ban him, perhaps theHammer could have convinced these individuals to come forward or got so frustrated begging them that he decided to name names.

Itis simply impossible to know if he was cooperating or not, and if he was cooperating it was quite possibly more effective at getting the truth out, but the efforts were squashed before they could bear fruit.

Itis also written into the COC that the chief moderator’s decisions cannot be appealed. This is ridiculous. In order to justify this policy, we would need to assume the chief moderator is infallible and God Like. This is simply not the case for anyone other than my lord and savior Jesus Christ.

My suggestion here is to rewrite the COC to take judgments out of the moderators hands, to make them robotically just decide things in the only way to assure we eliminate the risk of cognitive bias and distortion affecting their decisions. I would also suggest adding an appeals process to the Chief Moderator’s decision.

2.There is just too much conflict of interest in allowing moderators to organize community events such as the Hall Of Fame. It also distracts from the moderators ability to moderate the site if his attention is divided. We need a community elected leader to run these sorts of fun events, perhaps create some official tournaments as well as other initiatives to make the site better.

A community elected leader can also ensure another one of these Hall Of Fame controversies does not happen in the future, by talking to the mods behind the scenes as well as suspected parties and sometimes negotiating fair agreements between the two. Plus some people don’t care to pay attention to the day to day happenings of the site and would just like to elect a trusted official to be a proxy for them. I suggest holding a presidential Election on December 15th of this year so all interested candidates have time to build a platform and campaign.

Topic's author
#3
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
ThePlastics

In post number 70, in the HOF Nomination thread Thett casts votes for Wylted Spacetime and Tyrone. Post #75 the Hammer comes on board and votes for Wylted Coal and Tyrone. In Post #76 Spacetime votes for Spacetime, Wylted and Tyrone. Then Thett changes his vote from spacetime to Coal.

This tells me the votes likely weren’t organized and that Thett saw an opportunity to spontaneously start a pattern. It doesn’t appear this voting was organized in any way either, though I suspect before the Hall of Fame election started this group of friends discussed who they wanted to see win, all people in the group known to enjoy seeing silly results and took advantage of what they knew of each other’s motivations to vote in accordance with each other.

It has also became known that they in fact had earlier plotted to do an election coup but their plans never developed due to loss of interest and failure to come to a consensus. Being partially privy to some oft he schemes being thrown around, it appears they just subconsciously fell back on the vote choices they preferred and knew other members of their cabal would likely vote for as well.

This type of strategic thinking does not fall under the sphere of collusion or vote campaigning. It appears there was no election hacking at this point in time, by this group of users.

Topic's author
#4
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
VariousBans

Spacetime/Tyrone

What seemed suspicious at the time of the election was various bans of users who voted for a combination of Wylted, Tyrone and Coal. Whether the bans are justified or not, both the banning and the severity of the bans, seems rather suspicious. For example it is widely known that Spacetime and Tyrone share an IP address, and spacetime has a history of multi-accounting. In the HOF nomination thread BSH 1 says the following on post #84

let me state--for the record--that the accusation was neither absurd nor unfounded. Your accounts are linked by IP, device type, and you have a known history of multi-accounting (which caused you to be temp-banned previously).

I have assured you that I am going to continue to investigate in an effort to resolve the issue. I further assured you that--in the interim--your nominations and any nominations you receive would be counted. I think that is a reasonable accommodation under the circumstances.
From what I can gather from my sources, Bsh1 had made several implied threats so that spacetime would cooperate with his investigation. So under duress Spacetime confessed to multi accounting. Now I reasonably sure that the forced confession was true given spacetime’s record, but we simply don’t know and the timing of the whole thing to coincide with the election after BSH1 had all of this prior knowledge almost points to a conspiracy to try and control the result of the election by making voters he disagreed with, disappear.

In the upcoming election thread, BSH1 mentioned that all users have aright to participate in Hall of Fame voting, but we have a clear case of voter suppression from the various bans that were conveniently timed that ended up keeping users the moderation team disagreed with from voting.

Topic's author
#5
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
TheHammer

On October 18th the Hammer made a thread claiming to have manipulated the HOF election, it was concluded that he was trolling by BSH1 chiefmoderator. BSH1 attempted to get him to share screen shots of the alleged vote manipulation. This created a type of double bind fortheHammer. IF the allegations were true then the Hammer would bebetraying people he communicates with on Facebook routinely, making enemies that know personally identifying information about theHammer. If the confession was false, then coming clean would have also resulted in a ban. Either way, this is an inescapable double bind.

In the confession it was stated that most of the early voters in the nomination phase of voting were recruited votes. The following people voted for RM in the early phase of nomination voting in this order;

1.Pressf4respect
2. virtuoso
3. Bsh1
4. Bmdrocks
5.Trent405
6. Supa
7. oromagi
8. avoiddeath
9.Arose
10. mharman
11. Waterphoenix

I have decided to eliminate bsh1, virtuoso and supa as suspects in this pool of candidates and have sent PM’s interrogating the rest to determine if they were in Cahoots with the Hammer, I will release the information to the proper authorities once these individuals get back to me. Some of these names aren’t very active in the forum soit is reasonable to suspect a sort of conspiracy to get rationalmadman into the HOF among this group.

When I reached out to the above users, the ones who responded, which were most of them assured me that they were never reached out to by anybody to vote for Rational Madman, and did so of their own accord.I believe them. There was no collusion on the part of theHammer which I can uncover.


The personal attack combined with the excessive trolling aggravating factor would have earned him about 10 days. What earned him the rest of that time is lying to me repeatedly and falsifying evidence in order to exonerate himself. I am not going to go into more details about that, but I will state unequivocally that obstructing a moderation investigation is an incredibly serious offense. The verballying earned him 10 days, and the falsification of evidence earned him the last 10 days.

Since lying and falsifying evidence are actually part of the same crime“Excessive Trolling”, than it should not have resulted in theextra 20 days. The ban is only justified if it is limited to 10 days in length, and this is assuming that his false confession is worthy of a ban. We have other users who posted similar confession threads and received absolutely no punishment.



At least 2 of the other confession threads are comparable to what was posted by the Hammer, and since they resulted in no punishment to that user, theHammer should have not been punished either. At the very least we deserve consistent moderation.

Conclusion

Recommendations

1.Ban Virtuoso and/or remove him as deputy moderator replacing him witha community picked leader.

2.Rewrite the CoC to make decisions less ambiguous.

3.Create an appeals process to reduce the likelihood a moderator canabuse their power

4.Create a presidency position so the community has a unified voice andan organizer

5.Unban theHammer

6.Officially recognize that the Hall of Fame Results were not influenced by collusion and that no Obstruction took place.

Topic's author
#6
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Finished, you may now post
Topic's author
#7
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
spacing is always a problem when posting from libre office. Will attempt to fix now. Hopefully it is easy to read. If a lot of people are having trouble I will put it into pdf format
#8
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
This proves definitively that TheHammer was banned for joking about breaking the rules, while a moderator actually did break the rules but just skated by. Bsh needs to provide a response to this 
Topic's author
#9
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@bsh1
Do you have a response to what Thett said and the contents of the report?
#10
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Wylted
"He was banned for (a) lying to moderation and refusing to cooperate in moderation's investigation, (b) excessive trolling, and (c) making knowingly false allegations designed to hurt another user on this site. That is very clearly a serious kind of personal attack."

Why are you wasting his time?


Topic's author
#11
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Read the post, it explains why that we can't know whether he was cooperating or not. BSH1 would have to be a mind reader. It also shows similar threads by other users that were ignored. It also provides evidence that a moderator was involved in a scheme to manipulate the results of the election and a whole host of other facts. Did you even read it?
Topic's author
#12
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
I don't know why you think I didn't consider and include that evidence in the long form of this report. I even included BSH1 basically repeating that but paraphrasing in the above report
#13
Speedrace
Speedrace's avatar
Debates: 63
Posts: 6,283
4
9
11
Speedrace's avatar
Speedrace
4
9
11
-->
@David
@Wylted
It's funny, I was watching a presentation of 18 U.S.C. Statute Code 1961 yesterday, which covers the Rico conspiracy sector, which has to do with racketeering. It's similar to Virtuoso's alleged actions. But basically, if you can't prove he did it because you told him to, he would be exonerated (of that charge at least). What if your message made him think about Supa vs. RationalMadman and he truly wanted to vote for Supa? Just my two cents.

#14
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Wylted
Read the post, it explains why that we can't know whether he was cooperating or not. BSH1 would have to be a mind reader. It also shows similar threads by other users that were ignored. It also provides evidence that a moderator was involved in a scheme to manipulate the results of the election and a whole host of other facts. Did you even read it?
He makes things you would like to see private because of privacy concerns. You would have to challenge him on that if you want him to change his mind. Your claim of inconsistency doesn't stick. 

Topic's author
#15
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Speedrace
It could be coincidence. But it seems like I convinced him to change his mind based on the order of events and out interactions.  Hopefully he will show his integrity if he has any left by confessing
#16
Speedrace
Speedrace's avatar
Debates: 63
Posts: 6,283
4
9
11
Speedrace's avatar
Speedrace
4
9
11
-->
@Wylted
Or, hopefully, it was coincidence and he won't feel pressure to confess to something that he didn't do.
Topic's author
#17
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@TheRealNihilist
You need to read my post again. I am aware of more than you think. Also everything I based this on is publicly known information.  I am not at all complaining about anything bsh1 is keeping private, and my report does show I believe bsh1 is innocent of any conspiracy but he is guilty of being human and having bias
Topic's author
#18
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Speedrace
The chances of it being coincidence is next to zero. He told me in PM he was co sidering what I said and then he followed my directive. He was acting unethically, don't let me acknowledging the one in a million chance it was a coincidence distract from the facts of this case
#19
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@Wylted
You need to read my post again. I am aware of more than you think. Also everything I based this on is publicly known information.
Tell me how I am wrong instead of saying to read the post again. I will read the post again and come to the same conclusion because your claims a really easy to dismiss. I much rather bsh1 go into detail why you are wrong then me using second hand evidence like you did.
I believe bsh1 is innocent of any conspiracy but he is guilty of being human and having bias
Not shown in what you said. It just seems like you are linking things you have no idea bsh1 has explained or should be understood if you didn't cherry-pick what occurred. 


#20
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
Topic's author
#21
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Go read BSH1's report. A lot of the stuff you are disputing with, he seems to agree with me on in his thread. Me and bsh1 seem to have the same facts we are pushing, but we are pushing these facts in different ways
Topic's author
#22
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Note in the thread bsh1 linked to. Virt offered a public apology and bsh1 basically rehashed exactly what I said here confirming this report is accurate and the final word on the events. The next step is following the path laid out at the end
#23
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
holy shit
#24
Annie_ESocialBookworm
Annie_ESocialBookworm's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 96
0
0
8
Annie_ESocialBookworm's avatar
Annie_ESocialBookworm
0
0
8
2. virtuoso
3. Bsh1
I'm not saying that RationalMadman doesn't deserve a spot in the HoF, because from what I've seen and heard, he most definitely does. But is it fair that the moderators get to vote in the HoF? If someone in a high position on the site were to vote in the HoF elections, that would surely sway noobs or sycophants more than TheHammer or Wylted ever could, not so? 

Hence, unknowingly or secretly knowingly, bsh1 and virtuoso influenced the elections more than TheHammer and Wylted, and deserve to be banned for at least one month, the same punishment that TheHammer received for his "obstruction or lack thereof." 
#25
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@Annie_ESocialBookworm
It is precisely because of these concerns that all mods were sent this message:

The Hall of Fame Nomination Thread will be posted tomorrow night (the 12th). You are free to participate in the process, but as a moderator, there are a few limitations I would ask you to respect. First, please wait until the thread has at least 12 posts total before posting there. Second, please limit the total number of posts made in the thread to just those you need to cast your votes (along with any justifications you may wish to provide for those votes). Third, do not publicly criticize any of the nominees, and do not post vote counts. And, finally, do not actively talk to anyone about the HOF process until both stages are 100% complete. Thanks. This is a C/P'd message to all mods
By burying our votes in the middle of a page, by limiting our presence in the process, and by not criticizing any of the nominees, we could mitigate any impact we had on the election. On DDO, mods were never excluded, and arguably Max had more influence to sway the vote than I do here. But I don’t think mods should be banned from participating just for being mods. I think that the safeguards we implemented were a reasonable alternative step, and I would be open to suggestions on ways to improve these safeguards. 
#26
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Annie_ESocialBookworm
Both of you are wrong. Voting late is strategically optimal from a defensive perspective. It's why Ramshutu ensured to be one of the last voters both times. I went for an offensive strategy as I realised I had the hugest lead and knew which forum threads and my own username that I wanted to get in so I had no reason to stall.

If I had waited until the 12th post to even vote and been disallowed to talk about anyone being voted in the HoF, I would have been unable to expose anything or even defend myself. It is not corrupt what they did, if anything you are trying to corrupt this against the mods for no reason at all.

Sycophants and sheep mentality is what happened with people going 'hee hee let's vote wylted, tyrone and coal who have all done next to nothing for the website and two of which are racist, homophobic bullies!'
#27
Castin
Castin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,238
3
2
7
Castin's avatar
Castin
3
2
7
What I like about the report is that I'm not in it at all.

Topic's author
#28
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
I like how RM said tyrone is not a racist merely because he is black
#29
Speedrace
Speedrace's avatar
Debates: 63
Posts: 6,283
4
9
11
Speedrace's avatar
Speedrace
4
9
11
-->
@Wylted
I like how you say you're not a racist and then the reason you give for not being racist is racist.
Topic's author
#30
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Speedrace
I fucked so many black chicks, that I have a free pass to say a lot of things that would be racist coming from your typical white guy. I have more of a pass to say the N word than you do, because I have likely spent more of my life in predominantly black neighborhoods and fucking black chicks than you have.