UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Grim s vs Blood Panther

Administration Services — Protection. This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

The Grimch vs. BP

OMG! The Arbies page being used for its purpose instead of silly vendettas!

The matter is simple: 'BP and myself are unable to reach an accord in an argument over vote movage. I say he should leave a note on the persons talk page asking them to do something if he thinks they have made a mistake, and he says he should just move them regardless. Full text is here. This case pertains solely to the scope of this argument. There is no drama involved as yet, though without this there may well be some in future. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 05:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

ehem: I refuse all arbitors with the exception of boxy.--'BP^Tmz 05:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

i refuse boxy on account of his demonstrated hideous bias against me. How about karek? --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 05:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, i accept boxy, on the condition that he judge just the case fairly based on its merits, and ignores who the participants actually are. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 05:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

then lets see if boxy accepts.--'BP^Tmz 05:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

It seems your both set on boxy, but I'll offer my services anyway.--Karek^maps?! 06:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

sorry karek, maybe next time.--'BP^Tmz 06:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Generally, this isn't something that should be worked out on arbitration, it's something for the whole community to have a say on. I can only rule on how you should treat each others votes -- boxy ^{talk • i} 07:21 22 January 2008 (BST)

Well, since this came about because he shifted a vote of mine to the spam section, i dont see a problem with that. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 07:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Dont forget to mention that at the time the vote was bolded "spam". but really I dont see a case here. all I see is Grimch wanting someone to say he's right.--'BP^Tmz 07:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Dont forget to realise that the guidelines say # justification --~~~~. The justification was entirely for the suggestion, and since by that guideline, a Spam or Keep or Martians! isnt needed, or particularly relevant. Its just a custom most people carry on from a previous version of the suggestions system. My request is that he goes to peoples talk pages and asks if they have made an error, rather than jumping out to force a move based on his opinion of the posters comment. This cuts down on drama all round. Oh, and id very much like him not to move my votes around again. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 09:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, make your cases below without specifically referencing each others case, then I'll give instructions on how we go forward (there will be a chance to rebut regardless) -- boxy ^{talk • i} 10:00 22 January 2008 (BST)

And remember to take it from the top, I don't know which edits you're referring to, so diff comparisons would be appreciated. Don't make me go looking please -- boxy ^{talk • i} 10:03 22 January 2008 (BST)

Grimch's case

I have my own heading! Yay! In maintaining the lighthearted nature of this case, in an attempt to prevent it from spiralling into a drama clusterfuck, i shall tell it in the form of a story. Gather round children as as Uncle Grimchie retells a story of heroism and villainy from within the dark realms.

Once upon a time, not long ago, while questing in the dark realms, our hero came across a newly raised tower, these were not uncommon, and he stopped by to take a look. Our brave and noble hero, myself, Sir Grimch (Also commonly known as Count Grimch the Vile), quickly discovered that this tower was of good and noble spirit, and it was besiged by many men, as well as the foul "Heavy Toolbox compensates for the crappiness of ruin" argument monster. He engaged the foul and loathsome argument in battle, and after a long posting had slain it (Do not blame me, i do not name the beasts, i only slay them). After dispatching his foe, he mistakenly placed an incorrect hostile marker on the site. Twas a force of habit, for he regularly marked things as hostile (Spam), rather than safe (Keep). However, the corpse of the vile argument was sitting right there next to it, as well as the numerous other signs that indicated safety, so such should not have mattered to the passing judges, who decreed if towers were worthy after two weeks. The marker was merely a formality from a bygone era, and was no longer required so long as the signs were present (Justifying it and putting it in the correct section).

Not long after Sir Grimch set forth for his noble homelands, the Dark Wizard 'BP the Rearranger, a mage formerly of the school of interior decorating (Feng Shuimancy), came across Sir Grimch's handiwork, and observed the incorrect marker. With an evil grin twisting his once handsome features, he cast a hideous spell upon the Noble Grimch's handiwork, shifting it into the realm of darkness. Fortunately, the Towers lord sent a runner after Sir Grimch and informed him of the Dark Wizards vile actions. He swiftly returned and with the purity of his heart and the help of a bunch of local goblins whom he convinced to assist him in exchange for an empty can, he shifted his handiwork back into the land of the light.

Sir Grimch was not done. He then hired a passing scribe and dictated to him a message which he then passed to a runner who sent it on to the Dark Tower of 'BP the Rearranger, explaining the situation and requesting he communicate with the adventurers whose postings contained erroneous markers before casting his vile shifting magics upon thier works.

His response was anything but civil. When the messenger returned, he had been turned into a toad. Taped to his back was a message admitting that he could have asked, but that he chose instead to take the evil option, as that suited him better, because it allowed him to channel more dark chi into his Dark Tower, Sir Grimch assumed. Feng Shuimancers are expensive to consult. They clashed with words, instead of arms, simply because they were too lazy to actually ride out and meet each other on the field of battle when they had a convenient runner boy to ferry their hastily scribbled messages back and forth. Sir Grimch then requested that 'BP the Rearranger not work his vile magics on his workings in future, to which the Dark Wizard coldly replied in the negative. At that point Sir Grimch knew he had to bring this to the attention of the correct authorities, and brought the matter before the board of mediation. Both Sir Grimch and the Dark Feng Shuimancer quickly agreed upon the Djinni Ali boxi to mediate the case, trusting his judgement on such a minor dispute. And now they present their arguments, Sir Grimch's in the form of a story. We will soon see what form 'BP the Rearranger's argument takes.

And thus ends the story, for now. Soon we shall see how the story ends.

OOC:

Basically, im saying that moving a vote based on a non essential marker, (Spam/keep/kill) is wrong, and technically vandalism as you are changing a persons vote. A vote is counted by the section its in, not by the marker it has (Exception, Dupe/Spam difference), since all a vote requires is a justification. By moving my vote instead of consulting me and asking if i had made a mistake, he changed it without my consent. I have asked him not to do so again in future, and even threatened to take him to A/VB over it if he does it again, and he has so far refused to do so, stating he will in actuality continue moving votes he feels are in the wrong sections without consultation. This creates a twofold problem: Firstly, by moving a vote without informing the person, he has a pretty decent chance of shifting a persons vote indefinately. It was only good fortune that i was informed of the switch and rectified it. Secondly, allowing people to, effectively, change the votes of others at will based on only their opinions of the vote can only end badly, and would stir up a drama shitstorm and a whole bunch of A/VB cases regarding the matter when it was discovered, not to mention have a nasty impact on the Suggestions page itself. I presented to him the answer i have always used in the rare occasions this problem crops up: Leaving them a message on their talk page asking if they had made an error.

Instead of taking him to A/VB, not really believing i would get much of a fair hearing there given the recent drama there, i brought this matter up with him. He and i have a disagreement, and i would rather prevent this disagreement from flaring into drama in future by either getting a ruling that proclaims that sort of act as vandalism, or at the very least, prevents him from shifting my votes in future.

In summary, a vote belongs to the person who made and signed it, and shifting it should not be done without their express written consent.

Thank you. you've been a lovely audience. Im off to the local tavern to chat up the wenches and engage is manly feats of skill, such as darts. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 12:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

BP's case

My case( while not as entertaining as grims) is simple. anyone who has spent anytime on this wiki, knows the grimch, and knows how sarcastic he can be. In all truthfulness, I thought this was the case. add the fact it was marked spam, made me think he might have made a mistake. this happens fairly often, although mostly with newbies. People place votes in the wrong spot. other people, to save time, place them in the right spot. You dont go around asking every newbie if they made a mistake. It's one of the key jobs of a WikiGnome, to fix small mistakes other people make.--'BP^Tmz 21:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Further instructions

Please wait for further instructions before continuing on to rebuttals -- boxy ^{talk • i} 10:00 22 January 2008 (BST)

OK, my view so far;

• Grim made a mistake by labeling his keep vote with spam,
• BP moved it despite it being clearly justified as a keep,
• BP didn't take enough care in reading for such a significant movement,
• Grim did the right thing by discussing it with BP,
• Grim would be well within his rights to take further moves, by BP, with the same level of disregard to A/VB,
• BP doesn't have to agree to leave Grims votes alone, as long as he knows he risks a warning by doing so.

At this stage, the ruling will probably involve a short cooling off period where both of you leave each others suggestion votes alone, and a directive to BP that further movements of Grims votes where the justification clearly fits the section it is in, despite the label, will be seen as a violation of this cases ruling.

If either of you disagree with any of the above, or wish to rebut points made by the other, then post once below under a 4th level header. If neither of you have posted in a days time (or both say you are happy beforehand) I will rule. -- boxy ^{talk • i} 00:37 23 January 2008 (BST)

I'm happy with this.--'BP^Tmz 01:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I dont see the need for any cooling off because we didnt actually have a fight or any actual drama. We didnt get all hot and sweaty to begin with. As for the rest, thats fine. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 02:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Ruling

• Both of you will refrain from editing or invalidating the others votes on suggestions for a period of one week, this includes (but isn't limited to) unsigned or trolling votes. Let others fix these things up for this short period. This is simply to avoid the perception that such actions may be done as a continuation of this dispute (as calm as it's been so far). If you believe something may be overlooked, either contact the voter via their talk page, or get a third party to deal with the problem.
• BP will not move any of Grim's votes to other sections unless there is absolutely no doubt that a mistake has been made. Given the common use of sarcasm and satire in votes, extreme caution is advised. You would be well advised to leave them alone altogether.

This ruling will expire in 6 months time. If BP moves any of Grim's votes after this period they can still be referred to A/VB, but wont be a violation of this ruling (although it may be taken into account as evidence of fair warning) -- boxy ^{talk • i} 03:29 23 January 2008 (BST)