UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/TerminalFailure vs AnimeSucks and Saromu

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

User:TerminalFailure vs User:AnimeSucks and User:Saromu

Reason: An Arbitration ruling that I feel was biased, unnecessary, and counterproductive. I would like to see the ruling overturned, and Anime Suck == s's future status as an Arbitrator called into question.

Pages affected:UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Sonny Corleone vs TerminalFailure , User:TerminalFailure , User talk:TerminalFailure

I will accept boxy, thekooks and Seventythree for this case. --TerminalFailure 15:41, 30 March 2008 (BST)

You're an idiot. You can't be the one making this sort of a case - otherwise we'd have appeals up the wazoo. It needs to be a third party if there is to be any hope of keeping the system running smoothly. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 15:46, 30 March 2008 (BST)

He can't have it overturned this way but he can still try to get a case in his favor if he wins, as unlikely as it is. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS MSD MOB pr0n} 15:48, 30 March 2008 (BST)

I'm going to accept this, I think it is fair that TerminalFaliure gets to challenge the ruling.--Thekooks 16:28, ==

30 March 2008 (BST)

Meh. I'll accept. Don't really care at this point. Don't know if AS will accept though. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS MSD MOB pr0n} 16:32, 30 March 2008 (BST)

He can dispute this arbitration ruling. Precedence on this have been created by yourself on Cyberbob vs Nalikill. And i'd like to ask you to stop trolling on administration pages (arbitration still is an admin page). This is counterproductive, and only serves to create unnecessary drama. If you want to address any other user in admin pages, do it in a civil manner, or be treated as a vandal. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 18:17, 30 March 2008 (BST)

Why thank you Cybermoron. That's the nicest thing you've ever said to me. Show me the rule where it says I can't. And I really don't care how smoothly the execution machinery runs as long as I get this resolved. --TerminalFailure 15:49, 30 March 2008 (BST)

omg im so hurt :((((((((((((( --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 17:02, 30 March 2008 (BST)

Thank you, and done. --TerminalFailure 16:31, 30 March 2008 (BST)

Meh, I will also volunteer to arbitrate as all three parties have yet to agree to a person but I doubt Terminal will accept me.--Karek^maps?! 16:39, 30 March 2008 (BST)

I'll also put my name forward, as both Sonny and Terminal had put me forth as a possible arbitrator in the previous case. --Akule ^{School's in session.} 19:28, 30 March 2008 (BST)

I offer to arbitrate. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 19:39, 30 March 2008 (BST)

Wow, the formatting of this arbies is horrible. Anywho. As far as Arbitrators, I will accept Akule as he said he was accepted by both parties in the last arbies. I may accept Atticus Rex, Hagnat, and Kooks.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 21:56, 30 March 2008 (BST)

Thekooks, boxy, Seventythree, or no one. I am not letting anyone remotely like AnimeSucks near this case. --TerminalFailure 22:00, 30 March 2008 (BST)

Oh, so no one is an option. I accept that. Sonny?--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 22:02, 30 March 2008 (BST)

Kooks is listed by both users as an acceptable arbitrator. Please contact him and see if he is interested on arbitrate this case. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 22:07, 30 March 2008 (BST)

I'll let my accuser do all the work.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 22:11, 30 March 2008 (BST)

Erm, Hags? Did you see this: "I'm going to accept this, I think it is fair that TerminalFaliure gets to challenge the ruling.--Thekooks 16:28, 30 March 2008 (BST)" that was posted further up? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 22:13, 30 March 2008 (BST)

I'm happy to do this, right now I am very busy. I'll be on next in about 12 hours time. Feel free to wait or choose another arbritrator if you want it sorted out quicker.--Thekooks 23:05, 30 March 2008 (BST)

I can understand that. You don't want to have a repeat of the previous arbitration. Does your previous grievances from the prior arbitration still hold true? Will this new case be to reverse the ruling of the first and then address the issue again? Or, based on your input on my talk page, have you come to understand the situation with Sonny's characters? If so, then this case is rather simple to arbitrate. Sonny has already removed the offending section of his talk page. All you would have to do is remove the offending section of your talk page and Sonny can go back to clarify things further on his user page to inform people that he does not zerg, so as to hopefully prevent things like this from happening again. If you still feel strongly about the issue, you could simply make a template for your user page stating something like: "This user feels that using more than one character in Urban Dead is zerging." This would avoid making any statements about an individual person and let people know how you feel about zerging and the use of alts. --Akule ^{School's in session.} 23:07, 30 March 2008 (BST)

/me still accepts Akule as he wants this done quicker--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 23:16, 30 March 2008 (BST)

/me will only accept Akule or TheKooks. And why would I need to clarify that I don't zerg? No one else does that when they list all their characters. Hagnat does the same exact thing on his, he lists his characters. Just because I've played 5 characters in total over the course of nearly 3 years doesn't mean I zerg. This is retarded. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS MSD MOB pr0n} 23:28, 30 March 2008 (BST)

Oh, not something like: "I don't zerg." I imagine he means clarifying the group section of your page. You could also add this template to your collection. Really, we'd have to see what he wants to even get out of this arbitration first, so you have an idea of whether or not you even really have to defend yourself or if he just wants the first arbitration result reversed. --Akule ^{School's in session.} 23:43, 30 March 2008 (BST)

I will also be filing a counterclaim in my argument.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 23:35, 30 March 2008 (BST)

I will throw my name into the hat... though i doubt i will be accepted! --Honestmistake 00:44, 31 March 2008 (BST)

no thanks. kooks will be fine.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 02:56, 31 March 2008 (BST)

The most neutral and understanding arbitrator is one who doesn't really know any of you. Therefore, I offer my services as an arbitrator. Yes, you heard me. I have no reason to do so other than I believe, by having a completely neutral standpoint, my judgment is awesome. Also, I don't expect to be accepted anyway. » JS talk contribs » 00:53, 31 March 2008 (BST)

I like pepsi, so probably based on that, TF will prolly deny your proposal.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 02:56, 31 March 2008 (BST)

Thank you for the offer, but I think thekooks has already been chosen by all three of the parties involved. --TerminalFailure 06:19, 31 March 2008 (BST)

Yay, freedom from responsibility! » JS talk contribs » 12:07, 31 March 2008 (BST)

Arbritrator speaks

Ok, obviously there is still issues between TerminalFaliure and Sonny, however the purpose of this arbritration is to hear TerminalFaliures grievances with the ruling that AnimeSucks issued. I would suggest that if TerminalFaliure or Sonny wants another arbritration case to stop more drama that it be done separately. Though at this point I think the drama between TerminalFaliure and Sonny has died down.

So this is how it will work. TerminalFaliure please air your grievances under your heading. AnimeSucks please describe why you came to the arbritration ruling he did and would you please defend your ruling. Sonny please describe your views on the ruling. I will then allow for rebuttals from all of you, I will then ask any questions I feel I need to and after the responses I will make a decision.

After two weeks I will make a decision regardless of the state of the arbritration case.

TerminalFaliure

Only TerminalFaliure writes here. Please describe what problems you have with AnimeSucks ruling, add as much detail as you want. You can include events that occured after the ruling to help your case.

I have no idea what I was thinking when I chose Anime Sucks to arbitrate, except that out of a misguided faith in the community I believed the Arbitrators could place a useful resolution to conflicts over personal conflicts. Obviously this did not not happen, with Saromu assigned a much lighter, time limit-free requirement and me forced to write an absurd apology. Upon reexamining the wiki, I found that Saromu was "a Close Personal Friend" of Anime Sucks, creating a major potential for bias. This was something of which I was unaware when I selected Sucks as an Arbiter. I would like the ruling over-turned, along with any warnings issued because of it, and the case brought before a new, neutral arbitrator. In addition, I would also like to have any one else who selects him as an Arbitrator made aware of his "Close Personal Friends" and his tendency to rule in their favor, although having the case overturned is my main priority. --TerminalFailure 23:48, 31 March 2008 (BST)

AnimeSucks

Only AnimeSucks writes here. Please describe the reasons for and defend your ruling.

My defense is quite simple. TerminalFailure failed to bring any evidence towards the case except for one notation which was on Sonny's talk page while Sonny had brought forth evidence a fairly reasonable amount of evidence showing that TF was flaming and acting libelous against Sonny.

My relationship with Sonny is rocky at best, there are times when I think he's an okay guy, but there are other times when I think he is just an outright trollish member of the community. Come to chat sometimes and see the arguments we get into. So calling me biased because of people who at one point or another carried the banner of Close Personal Friend of Anime Sucks, well, I suggest you ask people like Dark_Shines, or Teksura, or a host of other people who were once Close Personal Friends of Anime Sucks. The Close Personal Friends of Anime Sucks was a clique on Resensitized, and was actually more of a clique of people who were either banned, pancaked, and/or mocked on Desensitised. It was a farce, and Sonny yes was a member of that clique. But has you can see, there really hasn't been any activity with that society since 2006. It's 2008. A lot can change in 2 years. And as you can see by this evidence, a screenshot from the adminstration page of Resensitized who is not listed on there.

Yes, I am fully aware of Sonny's attitude on the wiki, and it mirrors quite of a lot of others attitudes on the wiki. But the fact remains that TerminalFailure failed to provide any evidence. I figured someone defending his case against this would have atleast something besides a conversation with Sonny and Cyberbob on Sonny's talk page (which was removed as per the ruling).

Another reason why I ruled against him was that TerminalFailure very loudly (well as loud as one can be on the wiki) kept proclaiming that Sonny was a zerger. Again, he failed to bring forth evidence even after I gave him more time to do so. I had hoped that someone who would so blatantly accuse someone of zerging they would actually have evidence to back them up. He didn't, and to me that is the game equivalent of calling someone a thief because it can ruin someone's reputation even if they are innocent.

I think my ruling was fair because I gave the standard fair of the wiki retraining order to both. I asked Sonny to remove the flamebaity message from his talk page (the only evidence that TF brought forth), and I asked TF to remove the flamebaity things from his userpage and talk page to which he refused to do. I have counciled this with several other people and that would have been what they would have said also.

Even if my ruling was, and to quote Hagnat, a power trip,

Hagnat said:

<hagnat> actually, you was really power tripping there

TerminalFailure hasn't even shown the slightest bit of wanting to try to work this out with Sonny despite my ruling. He has shown no intention of being civil with him, while Sonny as it would seem has followed the arbitration.

Tell me, if this case were overturned and ruled by someone else, would there not be infact a restraining order between the two, and no flamebaiting between eachother allowed under punishment of vandalism? That is essentially what my verdict was.

kook whatever questions you have I will be more than happy to answer. --THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 05:23, 1 April 2008 (BST)

Edit: I forgot to put my counterclaim:

I would like all current and future flamebait reference to me removed from his pages that aren't involved in conversations with another user. For example: "Anime Sucks can go stuff himself."--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 05:38, 1 April 2008 (BST)

Sonny

Only Sonny writes here. Please describe your views on the ruling.

Ok. TerminalFailure's biggest grievance is currently that he received a much harsher sentence than me. This is true. He received more, but that's because he was guilty of more. The only evidence he presented was a flamebait section on my talk page that I was told to move to my archive. I decided instead of continuing the fight I would just get rid of it all together to stop the drama llama. TF received more punishment (more like ruling because it isn't a real punishment) because I presented more evidence. This isn't to say I had more stuff against me that he didn't present. On the contrary. I only had the one flambait section of my talk page. In TF's case he had flamebait on his main page, his talk page, his signature, his posts on other people's talk pages, and claims that I am a zerger (which is the equivalent of accusing a Boy Scout leader of child molestation, guilty or not he's shunned).

TF received more because he dished out more. You want to call me a troll? Fine. I can troll but I have control. TF did not control anything he did and kept going and going and going. When I realized it was escalating too much I created a case against him to end it. From there he just kept building it up and up and up, breaking the ruling and even creating more problems. Instead of blaming me or AS for the ruling he should blame himself.

It is not his fault however for not taking responsibility for his actions. TerminalFailure is the product of years of coddling and denial. Today's generation is plagued by lack of responsibility and discipline because the parents refuse to acknowledge that their child can do wrong. We live in a world where "it's not my son" and "my daughter would not do that." By putting the blame on others their children learn to do the same. Today's yutes blame other's for their actions, not their own. It is a shame TF is like this, though I do not necessarily blame him since I figure he is only 13-14.

Anyway, I feel the case should not be overruled as TF had a lot more guilty actions than I did. He complains about me having a lighter sentence but its only because I didn't do what he did. I also feel that he should be punished again for not adhearing to the former case. The smart thing to do is follow the sentence and then try to get it overruled. Instead he, going back to my previous statement, feels that he is always right and can never be wrong and fought the system because he feels he is special and does not need to follow the rules. It's plain and simple, he doesn't think the rules apply to him that he should have to follow sentences when he's found guilty of things he doesn't think were wrong. The world, and certainly the wiki, does not work that way.

TF should received another punishment for not following the rules and a moderator should forcibly remove the flamebait from his pages. And I'd still like an apology to the wiki for stating I am a zerger when I'm not, but do not expect this to happen. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS MSD MOB pr0n} 00:17, 2 April 2008 (BST)

Rebuttals

Let the Rebuttals begin. If you feel that there is nothing to Rebutt then obviously just put something to that effect in the box. I will not hold that against anyone.--Thekooks 19:28, 2 April 2008 (BST)

TerminalFaliure Rebuttals

TerminalFaliure, feel free to rebutt what AnimeSucks or Sonny has said.

Anime Sucks, I did bring evidence, at least as much as Saromu did. You simply ignored it. You state that Saromu's status did not affect your case. Tell me, do you view Saromu differently than you view other users on this wiki? As for the allegations of zerging, if he has at least 5 characters, with most of them stated to be active and some working for the same goal, then I can't help but suspect him of zerging. It would help if he stated exactly which characters are inactive .

Saromu's wild guesses are complete garbage, and he's obviously pulling bullshit out of thin air. With that said, I'd like to state that my beef is with the unequal punishment for what the Arbitrator viewed as equal offenses. If Saromu and Anime Sucks feel that his ruling was reasonable, they should have no objection to a re-trial. --TerminalFailure 06:27, 4 April 2008 (BST)

AnimeSucks Rebuttal

AnimeSucks feel free to rebutt what TerminalFaliure or Sonny has said.

Oye... No, you brought claims, and opinion, but failed to back them up with evidence. I consider evidence in the forms of links, screenshots, chatlogs, ect.. to which you only brought forth one piece of evidence:

TerminalFailure said:

The defendant would like to begin by noting that free speech is a protected right on the wiki according to the prosecutor [[1]] . Lible(sic) is not a valid complaint on the wiki. If Saromu does not like my statements, let him first prove himself innocent. Until then, i am free to exercise my right to free speech and state that he is a zerger. His use of 5 alts certainly does suggest such a conclusion. In addition, stating that one "fears for his wiki life" is not a valid case. If he fears for his wiki life, he should not be a troll, especially not on other users's pages.

While Sonny on the otherhand, quite winded and overstated brought forth several points of evidence against you:

Saromu said:

The people of Sonny Corleone's party would like to bring charges against TerminalFailure who has produced slanderous lies in the form of lible that may hurt Sonny Corleone's upstanding image in the eyes of the community. Count One and Two against the accused party of TerminalFailure. In this edit TerminalFailure is clearly seen accusing the victim of "Zerging". Never in his 2+ years to the community has Sonny Corleone been convicted of Zerging. In fact, the client had signed the Coalition for Fair Tactics back in 26 July 2006 at aproximately 05:09 BST, as seen Here. Also, the accused part of TF has made stalkerish threats to Sonny Corleone Here. Terminal Failure is also a vigilante who was convicted for a 24 hour period. The final grievance against the accused party is the constant use of the name "Saromu", when the client has legally changed his name to Sonny Corleone. Fact of the matter, the people's client Sonny Corleone fears for his wiki life and would like the accused party of TerminalFailure to, and I quote, "bugger off" and "stop accusing of zerging". In recent attacks the accused made this comment on the victim's talk page and changed his name briefly to "Saromu Sucks", clearly an insult that is unwarranted. --Sonny Corleone RRF DORIS MSD MOB pr0n 03:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Had you brought forth evidence of how it pertained to you, if he was targeting you somewhere on this wiki, to which I am unaware, this case might have gone a different route, but you didn't. All I saw in evidence, aside from Sonny, Hagnat, and Cyberbob's conversation on Sonny's talk page, which I asked him to remove just like I asked you to remove your flamebaity stuff, to which wasn't even part of the case and I only found by accident by the poorly formatted link you gave in your statement quoted above. You didn't even link that as evidence. You linked [[2]] which to me seemed more like evidence against you then it was helpful evidence for you since you are started the topic and began flame baiting by calling him a twit, and telling him to go play in traffic.

Seriously, what am I supposed to do with that? You gave no other evidence. Sonny provided several instances of you harassing him. I can only judge a case based on the evidence presented, and like any other person I'm not going to go out of my way to find evidence for you. That is your job to back up your claims.

I'm sorry you feel like you have been railroaded, but had it been any other arbitrator, I feel that they would have ruled in the same fashion by forcing both parties to go to their seperate wiki corners, and remove all flame bait material from their wiki pages. That is exactly what I did. I stand by my decision and I do not feel that there is a need for retrying the case. Overturning this case just to make the same ruling will be idiot, not the mention there is already bias against you and Sonny. My suggestion would be to remove any instance of flamebait (including the ones against myself) and just go about your normal wiki lives and leave eachother alone. There is plenty of room on the internet for both of you.

Now to field your response a little bit more

TerminalFailure said:

You state that Saromu's status did not affect your case. Tell me, do you view Saromu differently than you view other users on this wiki?

Yes, but then again, I can say with completely certainty that compared to the normal wiki user, any arbitrator on this wiki, or atleast the ones at the time the case was open has an opinion of Sonny one way or the other. Sonny is the type of guy you either like, or don't like. Hence why I only judged this case based on evidence brought forth. I didn't know you from Adam whent his case began, but I certainly have an opinion now, and to be honest.... I would put you on the same level as Sonny, you just aren't as seasoned.

TerminalFailure said:

As for the allegations of zerging, if he has at least 5 characters, with most of them stated to be active and some working for the same goal, then I can't help but suspect him of zerging. It would help if he stated exactly which characters are inactive .

Sonny chose me to be the arbitrator because I, along with TBM and the other moderators and ZHU are the "experts" when it comes to placing the status of zerger onto a player as we run the Zerg Liste. This is a volunteer job we take fairly seriously and have council with many top players in the game over this. But, having 5 characters doesn't mean someone is zerging. I have atleast 5 characters, and I don't zerg. Plus there are countless of other people who have 5 or more characters and don't zerg. You say they are active and working towards the same goal, yet you bring forth no proof to substantiate your claims. Sonny has told me his characters and how he plays them, and he did so in the arbitration:

Saromu said:

I chose you, AnimeSucks, to be the Arbitatortot because I know that you lead the zerg list. You are the expert on zerging in the game. Having five characters is not a crime. I do not even play all 5 of them each day. I rotate every other day which zombie I use and which survivor I use. On one day I'll use Sonny and Anthony, on the other Canderous and Fidel. This is a purely legal tactic...it isn't even a tactic. This does not make sense. How is this zerging? Characters are never even close to each other. They're nto even in the same organization. Sonny is RRF in the Ridelybank area. Fidel is MOB in the Caiger area. Anthony is MSD in Penny Heights. And Canderous is DORIS in Giddings-Dowdney area. These characters are no where near each other. This accusations of zerging are, for lack of better words, retarded. TerminalFailure does not know how to insult. Calling someone a zerger when they are not a zerger is dumb, plain and simple.

To which you responded with:

TerminalFailure said:

"TerminalFailure has no clue what he is arguing about, just like he has no idea what zerging is." I can call him a zerger all I want. If he has that many characters, its quite probable that he is zerging. Using two or more characters to affect an area IS zerging, even if he takes the time to move one out of the zerg flag's range before bringing his alts in to finish whatever business he was conducting. Besides, expressing my views is not forbidden, and this is not the first time allegations of zerging have been raised against users on the wiki. You don't like it? Too bad.

And I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I asked you to bring forth evidence, and you did not. Sonny could easily bring forth evidence that he wasn't zerging, plus as I do know Sonny, I know his playing style and I could say with most certainty that he is not a zerger, but I've been fooled before and that is why I needed evidence.

With the evidence presented, all I saw was a case of you harassing Sonny and his responses to your harassment. Next time you find yourself in an arbitration. Spend more time to formulate a statement and bring all the evidence you can find.

Sonny Rebuttal

Sonny feel free to rebutt what either TerminalFaliure or AnimeSucks has said.

AnimeSucks hit the nail on the head. TerminalFailure feels he was wronged because he had to remove all flamebaiting and bring forth evidence of his ridiculous claims. He is also upset that I only had to remove one thing. Tha'ts because I only had ONE THING! TF trolled so much more which is why he had to do more. TF only brought one form of evidence and a whole lot of bullshit. I brought so much evidence. I'd bring more here but this isn't a new case but a review of the old one so the old case has everything. There is nothing new. It's the same bullshit.

And as for zerging. 5 characters is not zerging. I don't even use one. Saromu is retired and has been since April 06. Like seriously. I already said that one day I play two characters, the next day I play the other two. I don't play them all in one day and definitley not in the same area. It doesn't even make sense to have a pker, a survivor, and two zombies in the same area. It's just stupid. TerminalFailure has no basis for anything. He just spouts bullshit as he goes along.

Seriously, this is a waste of time since it makes no sense. TF has once again provided nothing. I will settle for nothing less than all flamebaiting removed from his pages and getting punished for not following the previous case (which he broke before trying to overrule it). I am honestly just tired of this bullshit and want it to end. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS MSD MOB pr0n} 03:11, 5 April 2008 (BST)

Arbritrators Questions

I don't have any real questions that I want to ask, and I am aware of the need to not let this case drag on so I will just give my ruling now. --Thekooks 16:40, 5 April 2008 (BST)

Arbritration Ruling

I will make my decision here

Right, well after looking at the evidence in some detail. And looking over the past case I can see no indication of AnimeSucks being biased. It seems to me that he ruled in the best interests of everyone, and that the "unequal" punishment was because Sonny actually did not do as much as TerminalFaliure, Sonny did not have much to remove. However, I have a problem with forced apolagies, it is well known that Arbritrators simply do not issue them. So:

TerminalFaliure

You will not be required to make an apology on your User Page to Sonny. You may remove it without facing Vanderlism charges.

You will be required to remove any mention of AnimeSucks or Sonny on your User Page. Simply for the reason that there is no need to mention them, and all that it does is fuel drama..so just get rid of it. You have one week to remove the comments about AnimeSucks on your User Page, and then any mention of AnimeSucks or Sonny on your User Page will result in one further escalation of Vanderlism.

You will not be required to follow this "Your signature throughout this has been disheartening, so therefore I am requiring to return to your name nameplace in your signature for the duration of one months time. After this one months time, you may not place ANY flamebait references in your signature as this will result in one step of vandalism." part of the ruling. I find that this is not needed and does nothing to stop the drama between Sonny and TerminalFaliure.

However, you will be required to follow the rest of AnimeSucks ruling.

AnimeSucks

I conclude that you were neutral in your position of Arbritrator, and that the ruling was fair. It is suggested that you don't use anymore forced apolagies in any future arbritration case.

To stop anymore drama you will not mention TerminalFaliure on your User Page, doing so will result in one further escalation of Vanderlism.

Sonny

I find that you have done nothing wrong since the previous arbritration case.

To stop anymore drama you will not mention TerminalFaliure on your User Page, doing so will result in one further escalation of Vanderlism

The End

I hope this marks the end of this bit of Drama, it has sort of died down now anyway.

Also, this will be the last time I am an Arbritrator, the whole procces is too time consuming.--Thekooks 12:59, 6 April 2008 (BST)

Third Party Comments moved to the talk page--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 12:06, 8 April 2008 (BST)