UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Jjames vs Zod Rhombus

Jjames Vs. Zod Rhombus

Continues to call me scinfaxi despite my repeated warnings not to. This an unproven allegation and one he knows I will not allow. It is most clearly in bad faith.Jjames 05:56, 20 September 2006 (BST)

links: [1] [2]

Ha. I said 'jjamesfaxi' not Scinfaxi. This was in response to the incoherent babblings they have posted on my group page. Even after deleting their nonsensical, rambling, antagonizing posts, they amazingly kept posting, and around the same time too. Since both 'users' seem to post at the same time and usually about the same inane crap, I rolled them into one. Grow a spine, jjames. I've been and continue to be called worse. --Zod Rhombus 06:09, 20 September 2006 (BST)

Merely stop any insinuation that I am scinfaxi, and i'll dorp the case. You mind find it petty, but there's at least one mod here who wants to ban me because he thinks i'm scinfaxi. So I take it seriouslyJjames 06:31, 20 September 2006 (BST)

I will arbitrate, if you'll have me. Cyberbob  Talk  05:58, 20 September 2006 (BST)

Whoa, two minutes. You made it here quick! --Zod Rhombus 06:09, 20 September 2006 (BST)

So who are you willing to accept as moderator Zod?Jjames 16:17, 20 September 2006 (BST)

The word is Arbitrator, Jjames; you do not have to be a moderator to be an Arbitrator, in case that was what you were unaware of. --Karlsbad 19:05, 20 September 2006 (BST)

I will accept Conndraka, Darth Sensitive, Gage, Karlsbad, The General or hagnat. --Zod Rhombus 21:25, 21 September 2006 (BST)

I would be prepared to arbitrate, but I know what Jjames will say.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 21:28, 21 September 2006 (BST)

Can I Arbitrate?--Canuhearmenow ^Hunt! 21:44, 21 September 2006 (BST)

I would be willing to serve. I dislike Scinfaxi as much as anyone, and I believe allegations that someone is in fact Scinfaxi are grievous charges.--Gage 22:13, 21 September 2006 (BST)

I am willing to serve if jjames accepts me. --Darth Sensitive ^W! 23:58, 21 September 2006 (BST)

Well I'd take Karlsbad, but he's already broken our arbitration decision once by suggesting I was Scinfaxi. I'd take Gage, but he got banned from ASS for unethical behavior, and i think he might blame me for that. I'd take The General, but he's shown me so much favortism in the past I'd worry he'd rule in my favor just because we're best friends, and not because of the facts of the case. I'd say something petty and mean about Conndraka or Darth Sensitive, but nothign comes to mind. I'll take hagnat.Jjames 06:07, 23 September 2006 (BST)

I accept this case. Now, lets play a little game where jjames tells me why he needs to post in the CDF talk page, even when he knows that he is not welcome there, and zod can play a good game of explaining to me why he needs to keep calling jjames scinfaxi or anything that gives the idea that they are the same person. Make it simple, make it quick, you might earn a few bonus points. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 10:42, 24 September 2006 (BST)

I post there as a rule because we had been trying to hammer out a ceasefire agreement. You will notice that only recently did they tell me to stop posting there, and i have honored their request.Jjames 16:21, 24 September 2006 (BST)

Actually, just read the comments jjames left in the link he used for this case - it has nothing to do with a ceasefire. I don't want that kind of crap on our page. I've worked hard to reorganize my group in the post-Amazing era. If he has no problem calling me a 'dick eating pedophile', then I have no problem calling him Scinfaxi, or jjamesfaxi, to be more precise. Actually, I came up with jjamesfaxi due to the similarity and timing of their posts, not that they are conclusively the same person. Since their IP is one in the same, their game goals are the same, their controversy-stirring achievements the same, and also their negative stance on the wiki (jjames and Scinfaxi's 50 last edits are mostly all drama-related), I thought to make an amalgamation of the two, hence jjamesfaxi was born. It is not without precedent, witness the Amazod phenomenon. While I was successful in getting the template removed, the title has still been used under various talk pages. I brought up no case and I feel jjames doesn't have one either. I have fought that label by being productive and away from drama, trying to break the stigma by contributing positively to the wiki, not by clogging up M/A with cases, crying that I was called a name. --Zod Rhombus 17:29, 24 September 2006 (BST)

From time to time i read the GANKBUS and CDF talk pages, to keep track on what's going on between you guys. Sadly, i didn't in the past weeks so i didn't follow the end of this history. BUT, i always remember seeing jjames trying to negotiate some peace between the groups. But, i also remember seeing him behave badly, especially when scinfaxi was around. Since we already had a problem with users being associated to others (see Amazod, the Devil, the Witch Hunters), my bit of advice to Jjames is to fight back this title not by filling several arbitration cases against those who call you a way you don't like, but by actions. Prove them you are a better person, that you are not scinfaxi and that you can make things that would difference you from him. As for Zod, i think that the "An Eye for an Eye" rule is not the best option here. You were called Amazod in the past (by myself included), you have suffered the trouble of being associated to a very negative icon of the wiki, so you should have known better how Jjames would have felt by being called Scinfaxi or whatever. I could rule Zod to stop calling Jjames scinfaxi, and Jjames to stay away from the CDF talk page, but i really don't want to. So, i ask you two: how should i rule this case without having to treat you two like kindergarten children ? --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 19:25, 24 September 2006 (BST)

I have already followed his request to stop posting on his page. No one has ever needed an arbitration case to force me to stop posting on their page. they simply have to ask. I don't mind being called names. People have called me a racist, a idiot, and a faggot here before, and I've never brought them to arbitration for it before. This is one issue I will consistently not allow. I am sorry if that seems stubborn or immature to you, but I have always been willing to compromise with people, but not on this single issue.Jjames 02:24, 25 September 2006 (BST)

I would like to clarify that I was "in character" when I called you a 'dick eating pedophile'. It was not meant in any way as a statement of fact, and was instead intended as the colorful rantings of a quaint country preacher. By the way, I have acted with far more decorum than the members of your group up until recently and have only acted out recently as a clever play on peoples negative, and in my opinion biased characterizations of me. I am a very sorry to see things turn out this way, but I feel that you gave me little option. You knew for a fact that I would take you to arbitration if you refused to stop libeling me, because i told you so. I obeyed your wish for me to stop posting on your page and you ignored mine to stop the slander.Jjames 02:24, 25 September 2006 (BST)

In that case, I was in-character when I called you 'jjamesfaxi'. It was not meant as a statement of fact and instead was the colorful rantings of the almighty leader of the Crossman Defense Force. --Zod Rhombus 03:09, 25 September 2006 (BST)

Why should any one believe you if you lie and cjange your story like that? Also, you called mr scinfaxi on my talk page, and amazing.Jjames 03:12, 25 September 2006 (BST)

I didn't cjange anything. If you were in character on the page, then my character must have responded since that is who you were referring to. I DID have a change of heart and marked out the other names on your page. --Zod Rhombus 04:06, 25 September 2006 (BST)

There's a delete key for having a change of heart. If you were in character then, you wouldn't have said so before I brought it up. I insulted you, not against the rules. You accused me of bring a vandal alt, and that's bad faith.Jjames 04:11, 25 September 2006 (BST)

WRONG. Maybe you should read my statements.

Quote - 'I came up with jjamesfaxi due to the similarity and timing of their posts, not that they are conclusively the same person. Since their IP is one in the same, their game goals are the same, their controversy-stirring achievements the same, and also their negative stance on the wiki (jjames and Scinfaxi's 50 last edits are mostly all drama-related), I thought to make an amalgamation of the two, hence jjamesfaxi was born.' - End quote.

I never accused you of anything. If I were to accuse you of being a vandal alt, I would just take it to M/VB, not just call you a name, John James. --Zod Rhombus 04:18, 25 September 2006 (BST)

You called me scinfaxi on my talk page. It isn't enough to strike it. You could have edited it out completely or never posted it the first place. And calling me scinfaxi is an accusation of being a vandal alt. If I were scinfaxi, I'd be banned immediately.Jjames 04:22, 25 September 2006 (BST)

Are you saying your IP data and Scinfaxi's are different? That would most certainly prove you right and me wrong. If you produce that, your case would be justified. Other than that you are just pissy that I called you a name. --Zod Rhombus 04:49, 25 September 2006 (BST)

It should be slightly different, yes. We're in apartments that each get their own adress I think.Jjames 06:06, 25 September 2006 (BST)

I ask that I be released from this miscontribtration. This idiot has caused a total of 19 VB cases and 2 Misconduct cases. I wish to have no part of this 'Jjamesgate'. He has clearly manipulated and abused the system and clogged it up with this crap. I have no wish to add to it. --Zod Rhombus 07:03, 25 September 2006 (BST)

I didn't even start a lot of the vb cases, gage did. I only have one misconduct case currently. You already agreed to the arbitrator, now we both have to abide by his ruling. If you didn't wish to add to it, maybe you shouldn't have antagonized me every step of the way and done the only thing I have asked people not to do.Jjames 07:06, 25 September 2006 (BST)

I asked you two to come into terms whitout me having to treat you like childrens, but in the process you two acted like childrens. This shows how stupid this case is, this shows how stupid you two can be! So, my kinder garten ruling: Jjames is to stay away from the CDF and Zod's talk page for a month. Zod is to stop calling Jjames scinfaxi, or any name associated. Now, you two, go sit on the corner ! You both grounded! --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 16:29, 25 September 2006 (BST)

Current drama directly or indirectly related to Jjames since yesterday

• M/VB = 26 cases
• Arbitration = 3 cases
• Misconduct = 2 cases

Why are we putting up with this? He keeps posting new cases, even though it has been suggested he shouldn't. Even Amazing never went this far, and he's permabanned. We just need a solution to this. --Zod Rhombus 06:37, 26 September 2006 (BST)

Quit blaming me for cases indirectly related to me. Since this all started with you doing something after I told you I'd take you to arbitration for it, then it's all indirectly related to you too. Some is even directly related. The arbitrator we both agreed on reached a decision and now we both abide by it. It's over for you. let it go.Jjames 06:42, 26 September 2006 (BST)

Indirectly related to you? YOU STARTED THEM.--Gage 06:58, 26 September 2006 (BST)

I didn't start all the ones he's attributing to me. You started quite a few of them in fact. He is also blaming me for those saying I am indirectly responsible. It is those I took issue with.Jjames 07:01, 26 September 2006 (BST)

Jjames, your an idiot, as he counted there is a total of 31 cases relating to you as of now. That's probably the most wiki drama since EVERYTHING focused around 'Zing. Your just an attention whore, aren't you? --CaptainM 07:11, 26 September 2006 (BST)

CaptainM, you were already warned not to continue trolling on this page. See you at M/VB. --Darth Sensitive ^W! 07:29, 26 September 2006 (BST)