As of the introduction of the Community Guidelines, the moderation team seldom acts on reports. It is also known that certain GMs act more strictly on certain reports than other GMs. There were often claims as to errors in judgement, but that was more common in the past; currently, as long as it's not a swastika you are unlikely to get suspended (there was a lot of pressure to get the moderation team to intervene when a huge amount of users drew pro-Apartheid flags over Pride flags in November and December. It got solved in January, but it took a lot of posts and a lot of reports to get there. I'm pretty sure that would be impossible today, with the new ruleset).

Regarding Territorial Disputes - as long as you make it clear you are actually drawing something, rather than just painting random colours, the moderation team is unlikely to intervene. There was 100% a point, where people were obviously griefing and the moderation team claimed it was just "Territorial Disputes", but that doesn't happen so often these days.

If anything happens, make sure to let us know on the subreddit. As long as you draw art, someone here will want to help you! Also, feel free to share anything cool you draw!


✅ **I voted FACT!**

As is Christianity, as is mostly any other religion.


I would rather do 120 steps daily than starve myself for money.

^(Chose: ¢1 for every meter you walk)


For example,

God himself taking David's wives and making Absalom force himself on them (2 Samuel 12:11 -> 2 Samuel 16:22) - I would say this is pretty dismissive of the feelings of the women involved; it comes through as if God harming David's property, rather than providing unimaginable harm to actual people.

God commanding the genocide of men and married women, as well as "taking unmarried women for themselves" (again, treating them like property) (Numbers 31:17-18)

God commanding another genocide, this time saying to Saul to "go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.” (1 Sam 15:3) When Saul doesn't do genocide thoroughly enough, God says he regrets making him the king of Israel.

God codifying slavery, rather than abolishing it - he gives advice on how to beat your slaves, how to trick your slaves from being temporary to becoming slaves for a lifetime; by the way, temporary slavery is only afforded to Hebrew men - any other group is enslaved for a lifetime (Gee, it sure feels like if God was against slavery, he would have made it part of his 10 commandments, but it's mostly ego stuff like "no gods before me etc")

God was also kind of a jerk - he killed Nadab and Abihu and forbade his family from mourning him, unless they wanted to face his divine wrath (Leviticus 10:6); he ruined the life of Job, because God bet Satan that Job would withstand Satan's torture. Job lost his entire family, but because of God's grace, his torture was only temporary and he had a chance to remarry. How gracious!

These are just examples from the Bible itself, of course there are hate groups and abusers who base their word on the Bible. The obvious ones are the KKK, the Crusaders, the Spanish Inquisition, Salem residents around 1692, but also you have people like the preacher Steven Anderson, who famously abused his wife and children and made sermons about that. On another note, the last residential school in Canada was closed in 1997 - their actions have been classified as a genocide of Indigenous people in 2015.

There are numerous ways in which the Bible spouts harmful BS. There are numerous events during which Christians have treated non-Christians (or fellow believers) awfully due to their religious beliefs. The Bible sets a dangerous precedent - imagine that you believed God was speaking to you. Would you force yourself on a woman? Would you commit a genocide? Would you enslave another person? According to the Bible, God could totally command you to do these things, and it wouldn't be out of character for him.


If you want to feel better about it, you can always paint it back after a few days, so the artist just gets a jumpscare after they visit the archive


I think that the mods taking action against multi-accounters is a good thing and I don't care for your GPT-generated ragebait.

Moreover, it's disgusting that you are putting the near suicide of a person on equal ground as multi-accounting and using droplets. **A PERSON ALMOST DIED**. You are using the darkest moment of their life off-handedly to say "haha, look how stupid a theoretical advocate for banning multi-accounts would sound like".

You are a deeply off-putting person. From the bottom of my heart, go improve yourself. I hope, through an immense effort, you better yourself and then manage to see just how despicable you were in this moment, cringe, and better yourself further until you ensure you will never make a mistake on that scale again.


In case this needs to be said: Personally, I am anti-AI. I was almost finished drawing this piece, which is why I'm even considering trying to fix it instead of starting from scratch. I did not look closely while making the overlay, and the pixels obscured the obvious tells (I thought they were the quirks of translating a high-res image to pixel art).
The location is in Norilsk if anyone wants to see it in pixel form.


If you want to use an AI, use DeepL. It's an actual translating tool rather than a sentence generator.


I hope the next time I look into a mirror, I look like my pfp

^(Chose: “I-I swear im going to give you good stuff! 🥺🥺” | Rolled: Get ideal look)


I entirely agree with this comment. However, in my mind, this doesn't excuse the way you brought up the Megumi case. The case was terribly mishandled by the moderation team. They almost caused the death of a woman. In your text, you wrote 2 sentences on her almost passing, yet complained about being able to buy paint charges for 4 sentences.

I understand if you wrote that way to avoid getting banned from the subreddit, but in case the reasoning was different - in my opinion, you should have written about what impact it had on *her,* the community, how the moderation team responded to public backlash, etc.


Here's what I see on the archive. A stretching trans pride flag has been there since January. You drew this logo directly over the flag at the beginning of June, minus the white background.

There is ample space just to the east of your location. You have deliberately drawn over the flag (which, judging by what I see on the archive, the users were completely fine with). Even when you drew the white background, the users, at most, drew over the background. It took you writing anti-trans propaganda to get them to draw the rainbow visible in the screenshot.

Now, they are working on an artwork over yours, as signalled by the WIP next to the rainbow. Painting artworks over other artworks has always been allowed, as is stated in 2.1. Fair Play: Territorial Disputes. Griefing requires there not to be any creative or strategic purpose. WIP indicates that strategic purpose. Even if it looks awful at the moment, that's not in and of itself against the rules.

Location: [https://wplace.live/?lat=39.73632298282803&lng=-85.13569335937501&zoom=13.417755375870344](https://wplace.live/?lat=39.73632298282803&lng=-85.13569335937501&zoom=13.417755375870344)


And that's the kind of language I would love to see in your post, rather than in the comments. I am way more engaged by the writing I see here than in your main post. In the main post, we see what happened to the bad guys, but not anyone else. The "operational failure" angle is absent in your post - we just see "griefers got compensated", not "a person was thrown to the wolves". In your attempt to show the moderation team taking one side over another, we see only what one side received, not how the other side suffered.

To be clear, I am not criticizing the points you have raised, but rather, the fact that a major takeaway from the Megumi situation was, in big part, absent from the body of the post.


You could have made a portal on both sides of the drawing. You could have offered an alternate route around your artwork. You could have drawn a boundary.

Instead you paid enough money to erase the trans pride flag (which went way beyond your artwork btw), wrote "I'm sorry you were SA as a kid" and thought the user would not retaliate.

Let's be clear here - you antagonized the user. There were ways of compromise, and you chose not to.


Let me ask you a question - when you told the user "I'm sorry you were SA as a kid", did you A. engage in stereotype, ergo harass the user over their identity, or B. genuinely feel sorry for a real event, thus doxxing (sharing private information about) the user?

Either option feels more serious than "wah-wah, I erased someone's work and they did it to me too"


Sure, [Location](https://wplace.live/?lat=69.33845619209302&lng=88.475185546875&zoom=14.340650909825461)


OP wrote that btw, had to check.


That'd be amazing! If you make either an overlay or Blue Marble template, feel free to share, I'd love to contribute the paint charges if I can!


I don't think I'm getting the money. On a sidenote, I'm likely dead.

^(Chose: 100,000,000 Dollars BUT + You Get Teleported To A Random Place On Earth And Have To Survive For One Hour | Rolled: Atlantic Ocean)


Update: OP got banned.


Here is an explanation of the rules totally independent of any artwork that may or may not be the topic of this post. Generally, artworks are not considered griefing. However, if they are deemed to lack creative, strategic or corrective purpose, they are reverted back upon report, and the person who is deemed to be griefing is **timed out** for a period of time (24h for first offence, increasing for every next offence). Bans are permanent and reserved for inappropriate content or multi-accounting.

To expand on the topic of griefing, let me give you an example: five straight stripes making up a flag may be considered griefing (depending on the moderator). However, if the artist would curve the lines, attach them to a flagpole,  and add a shadow, this would have a higher likelihood to be treated as an artwork. The best practice is to draw a person or object holding the flag or being the colour of the flag, or wearing the colours of the flag.


Is it a virtual phone number from an online service or something like a SIM or e-SIM? From what I've read, the former will not work; if you have the latter, then I have no idea what the issue could be.

Phone verification not working on a valid number (keeps saying its not supported)


From what I know, it's some YouTube group that makes inflammatory statements in random YouTubers' comments for engagement and to drive recruitment (from what I understand, most people who join are children). The messages range from "\[X YouTuber\] is lame, I'm cooler than them 100%" to "\[slur for minority group\] deserves everything they got, I love killing puppies".


Just wear a dress.

^(Chose: Bottoms (no pants, panties, boxers, etc))


Before we start, if you ask me who is wrong, then my answer is that you are both drawing according to the rules. That being said, here's what I think regarding which should remain and which should be drawn over. This is purely my opinion.

I think murals should be background to a character. Firstly, anyone familiar with David Bowie will recognize the albums even if they are partially covered, thanks to all the other albums next to that one. Secondly, but in case of albums, the art is kind of secondary to the music (though Bowie is an absolute icon, which undermines that point). Finally, in this specific case, having the character end before we see the boots makes them look incredibly off (at least from what I can glean from your screenshot).

If I were you, I'd either 1. replace the album covered up by the character with the weakest one (in your opinion) or 2. make a gap in between the albums that can act as a background for the character, and just stick the album at the end of the mural.

This is purely based on what I can see without context. My opinion could change based on what I could see on the archive.


They also drew another wojak on top of your GI robot IIRC. Also, if I remember right they got banned.

Let's hope that happens here as well.


🧢 **I voted CAP!**

Religion requires revering a supernatural entity. Atheism, by its very definition, rejects any supernatural entity.
The most I can grant is that some atheists use dogmatic thinking just like religious people would.


I vote for LEGO store


I would take this option even if it meant I lost 500 billion dollars as well.

^(Chose: You win 100k dollars but... + Elon musk loses 500 billion dollars)


They are rebuilding again


Here is a list of user IDs I grabbed. Feel free to add any that I missed! I prepared it in case anyone wants to write a message to the mods (I already did). Just FYI - it would be great to remove the # sign, as in Reddit messages, it enlarges the font for some reason.

General griefing:

\#12232047 #12232144 #12231941 #12347624 #12784862 #12787808 #12788698 #12937639 #13012786 #13013193

Hate speech:

\#13013467, #13012786 - drew a yellow swastika

\#12347624 - drew a red swastika

\#13012786 - drew a black swastika

Inappropriate content:

\#13012342, #13013467, #13013651 #12205090 - wrote >!"long way down", a reference to the suicide message of Charlotte Fosgate!<

Doxxing:

\#12205090 - doxxing (alliance name is Charlotte's deadname)


I got this in the bag.

^(Chose: Random Person (Wheel Chooses, they’re alive) | Rolled: Coughing Baby)


The GM instead of reverting the image just straight up removed the swastika. Genuinely don't know why they develop more advanced tools if they still end up just square-select removing stuff.


Once DV occurs, the victim has a much higher likelihood to expire prematurely.

^(Chose: Domestic Violence is worse)


I break the law of gravity and float everywhere. Alternatively, I don't pay my next parking ticket and don't show up to any hearing related to that offence.

^(Chose: You must break the law 24/7 + $100 billion)


OP is a chronically online troll. Look at their account - just over a month old and 55,000 karma. Deeply suspicious behaviour IMO.


I'm pretty sure a prion disease is incurable and fatal, whereas schizophrenia can be managed with medication.

^(Chose: Schizophrenia)


As a general rule, do not acknowledge it. You say he is open about trans stuff, but to what degree only you know. If it were me, I would only tell him I'm proud if he approached the topic first. If you absolutely feel like you have to celebrate, do not get into specifics, just celebrate the general feeling of "I feel like we became closer friends".

Transmasc student went swimming topless at pool party - can (should) I acknowledge that to him?


The only response you will get from the moderation team on your post is a call to send an [e-mail](mailto:contact@wplace.live) or [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/WplaceLive) instead of writing a post.

Also, remember to include a link to the location.