Our chat policy governs the use of the chat feature, found on the right hand column, or rail, of most pages.
The new chat extension allows for live, text-based discussions to occur between people viewing our site. It can be used for quicker communication between editors than traditional forum or talk page discussions can allow. It is generally meant for social interaction, not serious editing discussions.
No substitute for Forums and Talk pages
Many users will probably find chatting immediately more sensible than the rather old-fashioned talk and forum pages that we currently use for discussing the running of the wiki. However, the chat extension has a major drawback at the present time. It provides no logs of conversations. Thus, if TimeTraveler and Sexybobo — just to choose two random people — use the chat decide that it would be a great idea to colourise all the black and white pictures on the site, there's no record that TheArtistBox could find of that discussion. Also, please remember that quicker isn't better. Just because TimeTraveler and Sexybobo happen to be in the chat room at the same time on Monday night doesn't mean that TheArtistBox might not have a reasonable comment to add to the proceedings, when she drops by the following Saturday.
Until the extension is upgraded such that it can provide logs of chats, chats should be used with extreme caution inasmuch as policy discussions are concerned. Unless we have a record of a conversation automatically generated by the software itself, it is inadvisable to claim the right to make changes in the running or editing of the wiki, and then add that one's justification was "a chat". In other words, chatting cannot be substituted for forums or talk pages.
This ruling will be reviewed when, and only when, the extension is upgraded to provide logs. Even then, it's not expected that chats will completely replace forum or talk pages. The logs just may be added to a discussion taking place in the forums.
- The main rule governing the public channel is that there shall be no personal attacks. Civility is required. It should also be remembered that kids from the age of 13 are able to use Wikia's systems freely. The administrators of this wiki can make no guarantee to users as to the suitability of the chatting environment for any particular age group, however swearing is tolerated but we reserve the right to kick or ban anyone who swears too much.
- Any commercial spamming or sexual solicitation shall not be tolerated. Indeed, such activity in private channels is not allowed. If you want sexually-charged chatting, choose another service, please.
- Discussion of specific ways to obtain copyrighted material illegally is grounds for banning. Discussion about the general concept or of its impact on the making of entertainment products is not.
There are in general two types of punishments than can be handed out — those that affect your ability to use the chatting software, and those that impair your ability to use the wiki as a whole.
- Violations of rule 1 will result in your chatting rights being revoked.
- Violations of rule 2 will immediately result in a complete ban from this site.
- Violations of rule 3 will certainly result in the revocation of your chatting rights, but it could easily lead to a complete ban, especially if it is not your first offense.
The length of your ban will depend on many factors. Rule 1 bans are usually measured in terms of days, whereas Rule 2 violations are infinite, and Rule 3 violations can vary from a few days to infinite. Sentencing is, at the end of the day, a judgement call. The software does not currently allow moderators to set a length of chat ban; you're either banned or you're not. Chat bans must be manually lifted, unlike bans administrators can place on your ability to edit on the site. You may need to politely inquire about the length of your ban, get an agreement in writing on your talk page, then — again, politely — remind the moderator or administrator when your time has been served.
Until the software is improved with some automation, it might be that you inadvertently get a harsher sentence than you thought. Do not construe this as maliciousness or carelessness on the part of the admin or moderator. It's just an odd quirk of the technology.