UDWiki:Administration/Sysop Archives/DanceDanceRevolution/2011-05-29 Misconduct

Administration » Sysop Archives » DanceDanceRevolution » 2011-05-29 Misconduct

29 May 2011

I just went to ban a spambot and accidentally banned Harrison (log). Similar to this case. It was for a minute before I unblocked SH's account and IP, since we have an "eye for an eye" policy regarding incorrect bannings (which I'm okay with), I'm putting this up here so hopefully a ban can be fulfilled, as it was kind of fail. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 02:25, 29 May 2011 (BST)

must have been when i went to the bathroom :P --User:Sexualharrison04:10, 29 May 2011 (bst)

Curious, how do you accidentally ban a user when it says on so many pages asking for confirmation the user's name?--Karek^{maps 2.0?!} 06:26, 29 May 2011 (BST)

When banning straight from RC you never really have any confirmation, as in, you never really have to type in a name. The story is one of fail regardless though. The wiki RC had just ticked over to the new day, and the bot's page creation had been done yesterday, so when SH replaced the page with {{BP}} it was in the new day and hence only the one dif was shown on RC just after SH's entry on A/VB/B (appearing alongside one another in RC). I got the page title, clicked on the "block" option on the user who had done the "only" dif (which I assumed was the page creation, not realising that a previous dif existed ungrouped in yesterday's RC) and blocked in the 1 second motion it takes to block most bots. I then realised it was SH. Naturally this isn't an excuse, but I'd just gotten out of bed (YES I check RC the second I leave bed what of it) and was drowsy, etc. etc. Just a silly human error. -- ϑ^anceϑ^anceℜ^evolution 12:03, 29 May 2011 (BST)

He's not the first wiki admin to do something like that.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 12:32, 29 May 2011 (BST)

Well, this is a pretty clear cut case technical misconduct. Per precedent, you are to be banned for one minute. Anyone object if I get that over with now?--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 12:32, 29 May 2011 (BST)

Nah no objection, I don't find this necessary, but yeah, carry out the "punishment". -- Thadeous Oakley Talk 12:42, 29 May 2011 (BST)

It's not particularly necessary, but it's good for accountability that sysops have to serve the length of any incorrect bans they put in place.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 13:00, 29 May 2011 (BST)

Stupid and a 1 minute ban.--Yonnua Koponen ^{T G P} ^^^ 12:45, 29 May 2011 (BST)

damn straight!--User:Sexualharrison14:00, 29 May 2011 (bst)

Haven't we all been tempted to ban that bastard? Meh-s-conduct -- boxy 15:07, 29 May 2011 (BST)

Mehsconduct. You've srsly accidentally banned the wrong user on A/VB/B? What a fucking tard. Good thing that no one else has ever managed that. -- Spiderzed█ 15:10, 29 May 2011 (BST)

Yeah Mehsconduct per SZ precedent. ~ _{17:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)}

Oh I see you've already served your time. I'll cycle, then. ~ _{17:58, 30 May 2011 (UTC)}