Category talk:REAL The Imperium

From The Urban Dead Wiki

I seem to have somehow broken your group listings, for this I apologize. I was attempting to fix the botch in alphabetical ordering and multiple listings. Or it may just be the case that my browser keeps loading an internally archived version of the wiki page, because according to your page itself, the listings should be right, but it's not appearing on the appropriate pages. Again, if it is broken, I apologize. - RosutoEnzeru 04:34, 7 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Being dumbasses in one wiki entry wasn't enough?

Precedent and such discussion

• Comment: I'd like once again to address the relevance of this deletion request. Many good points have been brought up by those favoring deletion, and if all other things were equal, I'd be on the side of deletion as well. The problem is that each and every argument for deleting this article is defeated by an existing precedent already established on this wiki. These precedents are as follows:

1. The top of a group page should be NPOV, but the rest of the page can contain whatever POV material the group desires (ref: DARIS). !1A should be required to remove the links to groups which do not wish to associate themselves with REAL The Imperium, and perhaps change the NPOV text at the top. Apart from this, the current rule of thumb is that it's his page to do with as he pleases.
2. The group doesn't have to have be sizable to qualify for a wiki article (ref: Category talk:Groups). Numerics aren't enforced for groups, just for Confirmed Groups. As long as !1A considers this to be a group, he can have a page.
3. Groups created for the purpose of trolling an existing group and which even use the same name as that group are allowed to maintain a presence on the wiki (ref: Council of Leaders (new)).  !1A's intentions when creating this group can't be cited as reasons for deletion.
4. Users can attack, berate, and belittle other users within talk pages as much as they want (ref: Katthew).  !1A may be a troll, and may not be capable of carrying on a discussion without resorting to childish attacks, but the moderators have specifically said that these actions are acceptable within this wiki.

I dislike each of these precedents on some level (with the possible exception of the group numerics), but they're established procedure for the wiki at this point. If we want to end the trolling behavior by !1A, then the policies and precedents which are in place on this wiki need to be reviewed and revised. In case anyone has the wrong impression, I do want this article to go away, but I feel even more strongly that the rules enforced on the wiki must be enforced consistently. As I've stated elsewhere in this discussion, we can't have different sets of rules for different users. I strongly believe that we can't allow this entry to be deleted without first having a serious reevaluation of the guidelines and precedents which have already been established on this wiki. --Chester Katz 19:36, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

• Comment: In spite of some of the excellent points being made here, I still get the distinct impression that everyone is rather pointedly ignoring the actual references I'm citing. For instance, Drakkenmaw, to which specific "abuse" are you referring:

To !1A's personal attacks on Alexei and other members of the Imperium? The moderators of this wiki have stated that this is perfectly acceptable behavior, both in reference to Katthew's behavior and specifically in reference to !1A's behavior.

To the trolling nature of the REAL The Imperium group article? Again, this is perfectly acceptable within the usage of the wiki. This is not a "situation outside normalcy", rather this is a very normal situation on this wiki and is accepted behavior.

Let me also state for the umpteenth time that -- outside of the need for some simple editing -- there is absolutely nothing that distinguishes REAL The Imperium from a group such as Council of Leaders (new). This whole issue comes down to one very simple point: if you don't want juvenile behavior on your wiki, then don't allow juvenile behavior on your wiki. It's as simple as that. As it currently stands, unfortunately, this sort of behavior is acceptable behavior on this wiki.

Please note that I personally do not find the above behavior acceptable. I believe that I'm in agreement with most, if not all, of the voters on this particular item, but the sad fact of the matter is that the real problem here is not specifically with !1A or REAL The Imperium, but rather that we've gradually allowed this wiki to be taken over by pervasive juvenile behavior. I personally feel that if this wiki would adopt some of the etiquette guidelines from Wikipedia, specifically the civility and no personal attacks policies, then we could clear much of this mess right up. --Chester Katz 21:52, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

• • Re: - The "abuse" is the persistant and widespread nature of this single person's negative actions. I personally have no issues with one person calling another person an "asshat" or whatever in a Usertalk, if that person is only doing it in the context of a specific disagreement. And I have no problems with joke pages, so long as they're not joke pages made with specific malicious intent. It's my general opinion that absolute rules are absolutely silly, because no rule that isn't couched in 14 pages of legalese is capable of covering all possible loopholes and consequences for that rule. It is the context in which things occur that determine their merit, and in this case the context of determined offense and antagonism means this person's posts are lacking in merit. Any clever troll can wriggle their way out of a rule or precedent, and thus the moderators and the responsible members of any wiki need to exercise a general quantity of common sense as to what is or is not basically an "acceptable" thing to do. In this case, !1A's actions are unacceptable - because they are. No legalese necessary. --Drakkenmaw 22:02, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)
    • Once again, you're clearly ignoring the very specific precedents which I've laid out, since they are perfectly described by the very arguments you use. To use your own points, the Council of Leaders (new) entry could be (and has been) described as a "joke page made with specific malicious intent". The Council of Leaders (new) entry is nothing if not a "clever troll", created in "the context of determined offense and antagonism". And do you seriously wish to present the argument that a person's actions should be deemed unacceptable "because they are"? I'm not even sure I know where to begin with that one. I am in definite agreement that any rules must be enforced with a measure of reason, but the problem is that we're already allowing the "clever trolls" to set the precedents. --Chester Katz 22:25, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)
      • Re: - Going to your discussion page with this, as this is just a question of semantics here. To put it briefly: to my opinion, effective moderators don't need to follow precedent to act on something harmful. If you pick moderators who make bad decisions about what to act on, you don't have good moderators - so pick good moderators, and you won't require so much firm and unbending adherence to the rules that people can slip through using legalese. --Drakkenmaw 22:30, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)
        • But you've yet to define "harmful" without defining it in such a way as not to include Council of Leaders (new), Katthew, etc., etc., ad infinitum. The long and short of my argument is that deleting REAL The Imperium would just be sweeping under the rug the greater issue of civility and conduct on this wiki. The inmates are already running the asylum, my friends, and rather than just locking up one inmate, I'm proposing that we take back the whole place. --Chester Katz 23:03, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)
• Comment - Got no opinion on this page, but fuckin' HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR about everyone talking about the new CoL. OMGZ ITS A TROLLING GROUP DURRR IT'S A JOKE HURRR - Shut. The. Fuck. Up. The group was created because the old CoL had been gone and we decided it'd be fun to become the new CoL. Had we known that the old CoL was still jerking its jimmy about being the most important metagaming group ever made, then we probably wouldn't have done it. As it stands, the old CoL had been missing in inaction for weeks if not months. Sure, part of the reason we made the group was to stir up drama. This is a very boring game and people need whatever entertainment they can get. The new players can rage on about who elected us and what the Hell we're playing at, the old players can rage on about how we're DARIS 2.0 and whatever it is they shit themselves about these days, and everyone who doesn't have a monumental stick up their ass can have a laugh. The new CoL is an active force in game - we've recruited, we've accomplished shit and we've had a fucking laugh whilst doing so. The only people who've said that the CoL is a "troll" have been members of the old CoL and other fuckwits who take this game far too fucking seriously. This group, on the other hand, doesn't exist except on the wiki, and it's plain to see it's an attempt to troll. So, yeah, delete it or keep it or whatever the fuck. Just don't go comparing this to the new CoL just because SA IS RUINING THE GAME!!!

Oh, just noticed that Chester Katz is a member of the MALTON CONFEDERACY. That explains the hard-on for the old CoL and the reason he has severe difficulties separating IC and OOC actions. Shine on, you crazy diamond! --Katthew 22:43, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

All things considered, I actually do consider the new CoL to be a "real group" -- it's mostly the choice of name and some of the discussion on the talk pages that I consider to be trolling. I've no problem distinguishing the IC and OOC actions, and it's only the OOC actions I'm concerned with for the most part. Since this particular point of the discussion doesn't really seem germaine to the discussion on REAL The Imperium, I'd be happy to continue discussing this on my own talk page if you'd like. --Chester Katz 23:06, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Hey, maybe if you weren't such a complete idiot you might not perceive half this stuff as "trolling" - especially since all you stupid Malton Confederacy dipshits do is troll, circlejerk and troll some more. Maybe if I felt you were capable of discussing something like a civilised person - or even a five-year-old with ADD, which'd be a big step up for you - then I'd simply love to continue having you shit your pants over the Council of Leaders. However, you're a moron and I'd rather pound my head against a brick wall than have any kind of debate with you. Not that there's even any debate about it. --Katthew 23:34, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Katthew, I'm going to give some sincere and simple advice: shut the fuck up before you make yourself look like the dumb bitch you really are. Chester has been the only person that has said anything that could be REMOTELY perceived to be negative about the new CoL. In fact, I see most of the people here (including myself) going OUT OF THEIR WAY to denote the differences between this page and the new CoL. Keep your fucking mouth shut if things don't involve you. Mrdbeau 23:10, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Comment- I suggest you also shut up. Any user may express their opinion be it Ludwig, Daxx or Katthew. Just because you don't like what they say doesn't give you the right to say that. Also, reading this it is rather Anti- new CoL, if only because people think it is trolling. If people wanted to do that there were far more availible ways then just making a new wiki page.--Axe-man 23:22, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

So I'm guessing you're directly involved with this whole debacle, then? After all, it's not like just anyone can throw in a vote on this page! Nope, has to be only people who're involved. Which I guess makes you extremely biased and thus not fit to vote on this subject. QUANDRY. In any case, I assumed there to be many people bitching and not - as I now see - Chester making BILLIONS of comments. So, okay, I guess I owe everyone else an apology. Except for you, you're a faggot. --Katthew 23:34, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Comment - Damn, I stirred up a hornets nest, didn't know hornets included faggots like yourself Katthew. If I did, I would of made you a personal wiki entry about it. Stay on track here guys, and don't let the idiots bother you. --YuriRuler90 04:46, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Oh man the irony here is overwhelming. --Katthew 05:47, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Comment = See this is the problem. Some of the people here genuinely want to discuss their opinions on the topics, and then there's people like Mrdbeau. He uses offensive language to directly attack a user. Thats the kind of person that starts messes like this. But think of it this way guys, in the real world beyond urbandead, users like !1A and Mrdbeau have no friends because they're offensive jerks. --RivalLightning 10:11, 13 Dec 2005 (EST)