UDWiki talk:Administration/Arbitration/Max Grivas and Grim s vs Akule

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Padlock.png Administration Services — Protection.
This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

Max Grivas & The Grimch Vs Akule

So, you're saying that putting up four cases for Vandal Banning is too much? Jorm spammed the crap out of the Deletions page with his attempt to strong-arm criterion 12. If Max thought I was utilizing the UDWiki:Administration pages too much, then why did he tell me to "feel free" to post them individually on the deletions page? If he was seriously having a problem with that, don't you think he would have moved them to the deletion page and then gone to my talk page and asked me not to use the administration services for a while? I can see that he is sick of the crap that surrounds the UDWiki:Copyrights policy, but he could have asked Kevan for clarification in order to ease the use on the UDWiki:Administration pages. Instead, he created a weak case for arbitration and tied up even more UDWiki:Administration pages in the process. Ask Kevan if he still supports UDWiki:Copyrights and what to do about the copyright debate and be done with it. --Akule School's in session. 01:19, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Akule, I'm not accusing you of anything. I was merely pointing out what others have accused you of. Personaly, I like to keep an open mind about things.--Seventythree 01:29, 14 September 2007 (BST)
It's just drama for drama's sake. --Akule School's in session. 01:39, 14 September 2007 (BST)
Yeah, its just that its hard to see who is going to be open minded, when looking back on what people have said against akule in the past. How can you expect those people who were pretty biased then, the put that aside now? I mean seriously the whole "because Akule needs to get laid or something" is really annoying, and its caught on like wildfire, and is the standard response against anything Akule puts up (which he may feel is in good faith or not). So, how do you find a arbitrator that both sides can trust? What happens if neither side can agree on a arbitrator? What happens then?--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 01:41, 14 September 2007 (BST)
Well, he's listed as a "close personal friend of AnimeSucks", and Matt already bowed out because he know he can't be impartial, so I think we're down to the others.--Jorm 01:42, 14 September 2007 (BST)
Akule burned his own bridges.--Karekmaps?! 01:44, 14 September 2007 (BST)
Look, seriously, I realy haven't been around that long, and yeah, Akule has annoyed me a bit, but then again so have a lot of other users. I realy have no specific gruge against anyone on this wiki and I'd much rather find a decent solution to this, and am willing to put the time in to find one. I can assure you that I will be totaly impartial and the only interest I have in this is ending this with the minimum of drama and spam and finding a proper solution that suits everyone. Just let me do it, I'd like to contribute a bit more, and this could help me out with learning a bit more, and help the Wiki in general.--Seventythree 01:47, 14 September 2007 (BST)
I'll have to think about it. In the meantime, I am going to ask Kevan and get a direct answer about UDWiki:Copyrights. If he still supports it, then what? Will people actually listen to him this time around? --Akule School's in session. 01:51, 14 September 2007 (BST)
I didn't bow out... I'm perfectly capable of maintain impartiality even with Grim on the case, but I understand that if Grim is here it's the better for me to remain on the outside so there are no concerns about bias. Anyways, if the case breaks down in some pieces instead of being the very dramatic "people of this wiki vs Akule" it's becoming, then I still offer my services as an Arbitrator. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 02:09, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Those non involved in the case should use this talk page, not the case resolution itself. --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 13:15, 21 September 2007 (BST)

I'll take this, if no-one minds. It'll be my first one!--Seventythree 12:47, 12 September 2007 (BST)
I offer my services as an Arbitrator as well. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 13:15, 12 September 2007 (BST)
I offer as well. Actually, just kidding. I want in on this case on Max Grivas's side. I am one of the aggreived parties, and thus have a right to a place. --The Grimch U! 13:57, 12 September 2007 (BST)
Sign me up as arbitrator and i promise to perma-ban fishboy! Hmm.... think i just ruled myself out ;) --Honestmistake 17:16, 12 September 2007 (BST)
I don't want to take this case, I just want to point something out. Everyone better be prepared for the massive serving of stupid that you'll be reading. Just thought I'd let you guys know. :D.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 17:37, 12 September 2007 (BST)
If you want me to arbitrate, I'm here. --ZombieSlay3rSig.pngT 18:04, 12 September 2007 (BST)
Man, this arbitration is going to turn into a flame war. I just know it.--Wooty 03:12, 13 September 2007 (BST)

This arbitration is logically impossible- Why? Who hasn't Akule been a jerk to or tried to rally to her cause?Nalikill

Hm. Good point. Oh well. *wipes and flushes down the toilet*. --User:Axe27/Sig 05:43, 13 September 2007 (BST)
Akule's not a chick... --Sonny Corleone RRF DORIS CRF pr0n 05:48, 13 September 2007 (BST)
He nags like one, though. ;p --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 07:24, 13 September 2007 (BST)

As additional parties have expressed interest in being listed among the aggrieved I would be quite willing to allow anyone to share the burden of presenting evidence. I would however need to insist that participants choosing to add themselves to the case, by including a link to their user page in the section heading, commit to not allowing this to turn into a flame war. There is simply no need for that. In my opinion the evidence will speak for itself in the most part. Creative self expression is of course left to your own interpretation. Also after an arbiter has been chosen we should maintain order by for example taking turns presenting evidence in the order we signed on. Please, unless you are quite serious and feel able to express your points rationally, refrain from participating or do so on the talk page. As Herr Engle points out the volume of evidence will require an arbiter who is both a tenacious reader and able to weigh a healthy mix of objective and subjective information to form an overall conclusion that best serves the wiki. Zombie slay3r or Matt might do fine but other aggrieved may have input on that as well. Thank you for your consideration. --Max Grivas JG / M.F.T. 07:54, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Matt cannot be trusted to remain impartial. He couldnt even remain civil on the talk page to his civility policy. That said, im more than acapable of expressig myself without flaming in a logical manner, as demonstrated most recently on the policy proposal i put forward. I am more than capable of maintaining a standard of decorum that wont devolve to flaming. I can, and will, however, use every debate skill i have learned over the years. This may be construed as aggression, but it is merely forceful debating. Also, as to arbitrators, You can choose Max Grivas, though i feel Jedaz and The General are both good potential arbitrators as well. Both are long time contributors to the wiki. I have added myself to the title. --The Grimch U! 09:01, 13 September 2007 (BST)
I would quite like a chance to prove myself on this one. I am, also quite capable of reading a lot, maintaining impartiality and ruling fairly. Bear in mind, also that my relitive "newness" would serve me well in this. I have received no real attacks from either party, and although I understand that Akule is badly thought of by a lot of people, I am also intelligent enougth to realise that does not neccisarily make him the bad guy in this. My relative newness means that I have no axe to grind, or any real problem with either of the people in the case. I have also already looked through some of the arbitration cases to see what sort of thing goes on. I'd quite like a chance to prove myself on this one.--Seventythree 10:29, 13 September 2007 (BST)
I think mister 73 could do a pretty good job. Thats if he remembers to follow procedures and watches those spelling errors! :D.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 11:19, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Thanks for your confidence SA. Yes, as this is relitively serious, I will follow all procedure, and run my typing through a spellcheck.--Seventythree 11:38, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Start with this one then chap "relitively"... sorry but i really could not resist ;) --Honestmistake 13:39, 13 September 2007 (BST)
Sorry about that, I've always had a bit of a problem with spelling.--Seventythree 16:05, 13 September 2007 (BST)
No problem... as I said; it was just too great a temptation. Oh and AKULE; while i hope you lose this ARBY, i think you will struggle to find a better choice for this than 73. he is level headed, fair, unbiased and willing to listen to both sides before he makes his mind up... as such I hope you choose Grim instead :) --Honestmistake 16:55, 13 September 2007 (BST)
Is Akule even aware of this? Maybe someone should tell him.--Seventythree 17:15, 13 September 2007 (BST)

If Grim is going to be included on the case I admit it may be best for me to avoid it, altough I'm starting to think that his auto-inclusion is not what Max wanted to have. I believe myself the most unbiased experienced Arbitrator Akule can get because, well, everyone around seems to hate him and even make false accusations about him like the latest "witch!" cries (why everyone that makes trouble around has to be unnecessarily compared to that infamous user?). By unbiased I do not mean that I will rule unnecessarily in favor to Akule, but that I won't rule against him out of despite like most would. That said, Seventhythree or someone else without a long history on the wiki and specially the Deletions page may be good too, just to keep impartialness. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 18:40, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Well, I guess all that's left to do now is for a decision to be made as to who the arbitrator will be. --Seventythree 18:59, 13 September 2007 (BST)

I'll throw my hat in --THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 19:31, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Jedaz has always done a fine job. As he is no longer involved in a pending case he would be acceptable if available. --Max Grivas JG / M.F.T. 21:59, 13 September 2007 (BST)

Ah, I see we are going to be putting on a farce. Well, I can't say I am surprised, as Grim's attempt to tie me to Amazing failed, so this had to be the next thing. Before you say anything, yes, I am aware that Max put it forth first, but based on past harassment from numerous sources, I am not surprised that it came out this way. On with the show.

I'm sorry, Seventythree, but based on your past involvement, I cannot accept you as an arbitrator. Ideally, if I had to choose, I would want Kevan to be the arbitrator in this matter. He's impartial and it's his wiki. He ruled on the policy that people choose to not follow, and should be the one to determine and explain how he wants it handled. Otherwise, I would prefer AnimeSucks or Matthew Farenheit to handle this matter. I could see Atticus Rex, Conndraka, The General, or Toejam handling this, but I would want to discuss it with them first. --Akule School's in session. 00:13, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Fair enougth, It's your perogative, after all. Good luck to the both of you and I hope you can both find a way to de-fuse this without too much drama.--Seventythree 00:24, 14 September 2007 (BST)
Well...there's no point in throwing my name into the mix... --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 00:36, 14 September 2007 (BST)
Thanks. Seriously though, a simple discussion with Kevan could clear up a lot of this. He could explain how he wants the copyright policy handled, or at least his take on it, and that should clear up most of the problems. It's not like I am bullying people into changing a policy. I'm simply following an existing policy (that Kevan supports). I'm only putting up one image at a time for voting, so as to not spam the deletions page. If we had permission, reference links, and modeled image pages like the actual wikipedia, or even just Kevan saying "Nah, let's not do that." I wouldn't even have to put anything up. As for the DEM Roster I don't see any "special clarifications" in the speedy deletions guidelines about criterion six and how you can circumvent previous deletions by making it a subpage of your user page. If that is the case, then Jorm should just have moved all of the groups that were put up for speedy deletion to a subpage of his user page, and they would have been safe there for all time. --Akule School's in session. 00:49, 14 September 2007 (BST)
That was nearly 1 year ago. He might not even support it now. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 00:52, 14 September 2007 (BST)
Why not simply ask him? We could easily clear up a lot of crap by just saying: "Hey Kevan, do you still support UDWiki:Copyrights or not? What is your take on it?" --Akule School's in session. 00:55, 14 September 2007 (BST)
Correct me If I'm wrong, but Max's problem was threefold. 1) you using Administration and vandal banning too much, you wikilawyering (i'm assuming this is the copywright thing) too much and you being a prick. We can safely rule out number 3 as being written in anger, I'm sure he regrets saying it, and it's not like you could prove or disprove that one, but that still leaves the issue surrounding the misuse of the Admin pages.--Seventythree 00:56, 14 September 2007 (BST)
But can people honestly say that Akule is being any more a prick than other people on this wiki. He just doensn't have the favor of the mob, like the other pricks do. But thats a cilvity issue, to which we are trying to figure out now anyway.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 01:02, 14 September 2007 (BST)
10 bucks says Akule is doing what he's doing so he can become a sysop. A very, annoying, sysop. You know what? Raise that bet to $100. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 01:05, 14 September 2007 (BST)

Look. THis page is getting stupidly long. Could we maybe leave off adding anything else until an arbitrator is selected? I unserstand that there is a lot of tension, but maybe we should move it to a talkpage or something. You can use mine if you like, everyone else does :-)--Seventythree 01:06, 14 September 2007 (BST)

I'm going to move the discussion to the actual discussion page. See you there. --Akule School's in session. 01:17, 14 September 2007 (BST)
What makes you think you have the power to move it? --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 01:19, 14 September 2007 (BST)
I was kind of suggesting that a mod moved it. I thought that was self explanitory, but I don't think that doing anyting like that is realy going to cut down on the drama, please don't move this Akule, seing as you're involved in this whole thing.--Seventythree 01:23, 14 September 2007 (BST)
Too late. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ #nerftemplatedsigs 01:25, 14 September 2007 (BST)
Nothing is moved, the discussion is just continued on the talk page. Geesh kid, simmah down a lil--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 01:31, 14 September 2007 (BST)
I wasn't planning on moving things up to this point, just the continuation of the conversation. --Akule School's in session. 01:33, 14 September 2007 (BST)
I misunderstood. My bad.--Seventythree 01:34, 14 September 2007 (BST)

People, we need structure to this or this won't get anywhere. So let me provide it until both parties agree on an arbitrator. Everyone else who is not applying to be an arbitrator or is a part of the aggrieved parties should leave all comments on the talk page. Any arbitrators who wish to volunteer may add their name to the end of the list and, if they choose so, leave a comment after the list. Both parties may add or remove users from their section of the list. If a users name appears three times (once in each section) then we'll confirm that both parties are happy with the arbitrator and then proceedings can begin from there. Also I volunteer to be arbitrator. - If Jedaz = 04:40, 14 September 2007 (BST) then pi = 2 + 1

I'd like to add that AnimeSucks is friends with Akule in the real life and should not be considered to be impartial whatsoever. He's gone as far as siding with Akule in many Deletion cases only because Akule is his friend, despite his votes being hypocritical. This can be seen in the Akule vs. The Fifth Horsemen drama over the use of the T2 logo, which he fought to have the image kept because of it being a parody of the copyrighted image. He will side with his friend even if it means doing the complete opposite of what he did before. And with that I should not be an arbitrator as I feel that I am among those grievanced by Akule. --Sonny Corleone RRF DORIS CRF pr0n 05:56, 14 September 2007 (BST)

It's really no different then you throwing your hat in the ring in the arby's vs Nalikill with your mind already made up. Besides, there have been plenty of biased people against akule willing to be arbitrators, why can't I say I want to be involved too? So? I've voted with Akule on things. Pretty much everyone here has voted against him. Yer point? And no, you are wrong, I didn't vote party lines because Akule is my friend, I voted because he is right, in my opinion, about the policies and the copyrights. But besides the point. I know I wouldn't get accepted as Aribitrator without you narcing on me because Max and Grim, I figured, wouldn't be dumb enough to have me as Arbitrator, like Nalikill did with you, but hey... you know never know when someone will get hit with the stupid stick.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 11:15, 14 September 2007 (BST)
It was obvious that Nalikilli vandalized. That was called impersonation. I based my decision off of a ton of vandal reports against impersonation. --Sonny Corleone RRF DORIS CRF pr0n 15:40, 14 September 2007 (BST)

What about Zombie slay3r? He volunteered as well. He was one of the first arbiters I considered. I really know nothing about him but after looking at his contribs he seems to make a lot of good comments on the suggestions page and I did not see any spam votes in the edits I reviewed. He is always polite and never seems to be drawn into drama while doing a good job on maintenance, archives, A/SD, A/D and A/VB. I did not see any rulings on arbitration cases but he has volunteered a few times. Seems a rational impartial volunteer. I don't know what more we could ask for. I've never seen him take a stance when the chips are down so its a bit of a gamble but would be acceptable to me. Grim and Akule, Do either of you have any particular reservations on this one? --Max Grivas JG / M.F.T. 17:22, 14 September 2007 (BST)

I honestly dont have a clue about him. He joined only a month or two before i lost internet access (Which i confess werent my most active months), and rose to his current position while i was away. Since i got back, i have had no dealings with him. Anyway, you can pick the arbitrator, i merely tossed a couple of names into the hat earlier as suggestions. --The Grimch U! 20:26, 16 September 2007 (BST)

Also, i have a request for this case. When it goes into active discussion, id like non participants from being barred from the discussion, under pain of A/VB for repeat offenses. If outsiders feel they have a pertinent contribution to make, they should contact the Arbitrator on their talk page, and then the arbitrator can repost it if they feel it is appropriate to the case at hand. Should only contain relevant facts to the case that have been overlooked by both sides. This will retain the structure of the conflict and keep everything managable. --The Grimch U! E! 10:49, 17 September 2007 (BST)

While I understand Grim s point on this one (and mostly agree) I think leaving the case with a talk page for everyone else to comment is going to be a must! --Honestmistake 10:56, 17 September 2007 (BST)
I'm willing to come out of retirement to do this. Conndrakamod TDHPD CFT 00:47, 18 September 2007 (BST)


Arbitrators that Akule has suggested

Arbitrators that Max and Grim have suggested

Arbitrators that have volunteered


Well since Conndraka has been suggested by both parties, and has volunteered to arbitrate, I'll ask for both parties to confirm that this is acceptable before proceedings begin. As soon as both parties confirm that they have accepted the arbitrator, no other users other then the arbitrator and the participating parties will be allowed to edit this section. Any comments by un-involved users may be directed to the arbitration talk page, or if of great importance to the case, Conndraka's talk page. If people fail to adhere to this rule then it will be seen as a bad faith attempt to disrupt proceedings and treated as such with a vandalism case. - If Jedaz = 10:31, 18 September 2007 (BST) then pi = 2 + 1

While I agree, what you said is not really a rule and you have no meanings to enforce it as worded, you know? --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 20:11, 19 September 2007 (BST)
Um, no. Once its agreed by the arbitrator, the case will be locked down, and no one but the participants will be able to fuck with it and cause drama. --The Grimch U! E! 20:23, 19 September 2007 (BST)
As I said, there's NO rule. Most edits could be considered bad faith as Jedaz said, but we have no rule of thumb to rule out ALL comments no matter what. And I said "we" including you, mr badge of authorithy. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 20:33, 19 September 2007 (BST)
I would like to confirm that I find Conndraka acceptable as an arbiter. I also hope the non-involved parties will choose to use the arbitration talk page for any patter they feel needs to be expressed. --Max Grivas JG / M.F.T. 20:27, 19 September 2007 (BST)
I'm fine with having Conndraka as an arbitrator. --Akule School's in session. 21:08, 20 September 2007 (BST)

Are you going for the record of "longest A/A case ever"?. It would be useful to put some time restraints... --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 06:54, 1 October 2007 (BST)

What does it matter to you as to how long this case goes for? - If Jedaz = 09:05, 1 October 2007 (BST) then pi = 2 + 1
There have been many longer cases.--Karekmaps?! 09:34, 1 October 2007 (BST)
I'm terribly interested in the outcome of this case. So it does matter to me. Lenghty cases are always suspicious, like when there's a R/L votation and they delay delivering the results: this always points to something fishy going on. And Conndraka latest posts in my policy discussion attempts give me the creeps. But that's how I feel. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 06:01, 6 October 2007 (BST)
Im writing my comment, but its an off and on affair, as i have duties elsewhere to attend to, both hre and in the land outside teh confines of the screen, so my attention is necessarily divided. That, and i just got a new book. Be patient. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 13:35, 6 October 2007 (BST)

Is this now the "official" longest Arby case ever??? --Honestmistake 13:53, 26 October 2007 (BST)

No. The General vs. Terminator 484 was the longest one. It took another arbitration case (hagnat vs. the general) to close that arbitration case. And i guess that there is still some cases in wikigate that were never ruled. --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 13:59, 26 October 2007 (BST)
The general vs Terminator took less than a month (2 days short actually), this one is still on after 45 days. Wikigate's cases still not ruled upon shouldn't count, as they're not active anymore: you should count how much time they were active, from first to last contribution, but not beyond. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 05:33, 27 October 2007 (BST)

For how long will this case be allowed to sit there inactive at the main A/A page? If for some reason the intention of the different parties and/or the arbitrator was to leave it inconclusive, then move it to the archive already; if not, then continue with the rebuttals. For now, the only achievement this case made is cluttering the A/A page for 9 weeks. --Matthew Fahrenheit YRC☺T☺+1 03:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I just emailed him and asked him to rule. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 04:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
'Bout damn time. I've been waiting ages to see how this turned out. It's kept me more entertained than StarCraft has been lately.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 04:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Got a response. he says he will try and take care of it soon, hes been busy. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 15:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


LMAO, this arbys decision was complete shit. "I see your point, but I ban you anyhow" WTF? This is why I hate the wiki guys. Take your playground and have fun. I am done until this shitstorm of croneyism gets better--Jellofun 03:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

tyfyc --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 04:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Complete sentences would be appreciated. I do not speak neopets nor 6 year old language. Thanks for the meaningful contribution though asshole :)--Jellofun 04:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I try to keep my comments on a level with the posts I'm replying to. I don't want to confuse anyone. --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 05:30, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Ruling3

You lie in the bed you make, Grim. It might not be a ruling that I feel is entirely fitting for the situation, but all of Conndraka's proclamations are well within the bounds of an arbitrator to declare. I'm absolutely sure that you'll still be able to put votes on anything Akule puts forward, just without the usual commentary. --Karlsbad 09:05, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

He included a whole pile of crap outside the scope of the case off limits. He misread the entire tone of the case. IF everyone was savaging each other incessantly, then maybe, maybe this would have been warranted, but this case has been going for momths now and there has been next to no "bloodshed". This is akin to using a suitcase nuke to dispose of that annoying cockroach problem you are having. Its excessive in the extreme, causes ungoldly amounts of collatoral damage, and there are far simpler means to acheive it. I refuse to abide by this ruling as a result. Please re-rule this case, seriously this time Conndraka. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 09:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Oh please. You agreed to the arbitrator - you have nobody to blame but yourself for how it turned out. Accept the ruling (is it really that constricting?) and take this opportunity to move on from the drama. --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 09:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
What fucking drama? This case has been going for two months, in which time Akule and I hardly crossed paths and Max Grivas went idle. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 09:50, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Every time you do cross paths, however, firestorms scourge the area. That's what I'm talking about. It would be nice if you were able to use this timeout to calm down a little (I'm referring to Akule as well) and to learn how to have an argument that doesn't spiral out of control. --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 09:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Bullshit. The last encounter we had was on the sysops cycling talk page, and that certainly didnt spiral out of control. There was a heated argument over it in which i was a minor participant, and then there was the meatpuppetry accusation in there which i answered then left, but thats hardly anything above normal background conflict. The ruling in this case was excessive in the extreme. It is based off the faulty premise that we are tearing out each others throats, which just aint so, and it moves on from there in harshness, blanket banning huge amounts of pages that arent even covered by the case. This has nothing to do with our groups, so why are they included? this has not gone to our talk pages, so why is it there as well? This is being incorrectly treated as a heated conflict between users, rather than as a couple of users bringing up a complaint against another users drama whoring and troll lawyering. It is because of this misunderstanding that i want this case reruled, without the thermonuclear solution conndraka has tried to apply. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 10:08, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Like I said (but you conveniently manoeuvred around) - you agreed to the arbitrator, you abide by the ruling. It is nobody's fault but your own if you don't like what you get. --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 10:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I agreed to a fair arbitration. Arbitrators cannot extend judgements beyond the scope of the case. The abuse such a permission would allow is insane. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 10:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
He is dealing with the underlying issues of drama and whine that have fouled up many a discussion involving either of you. Like I said - you picked him, you live with the consequences. I don't believe there is anything else that needs to be said. --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 10:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
And as i have said: What fucking drama? You keep asserting that there is some, but there plain isnt. There are some arguments, but arguments != drama. Even if there was drama, this is obscenely heavy handed, especially given the tame nature of the case. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 10:25, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Arbie rules are clear on this one:

"As a note, by requesting an Arbitration, all parties are thus obliged to accept the outcome of the Arbitration. Not doing will be considered Vandalism, and such vandalism attempts will be treated as if the vandal has already received two warnings."

you sure you want to ignore this ruling? Doing so will force the other sysops to issue warnings and probably a ban! You enforce rules strictly so don't expect to ignore them at will! You not only accepted the arbitration but chose to add your name to the case in the first place and the best you could come up with boils down to "I don't like what he stands for!" Tough... you both lose this case but I am assuming from Akules lack of complaint that he accepts the terms as fair and binding. --Honestmistake 12:14, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Ive made myself clear here: He overstepped the bounds of the case in making the ruling. This is like some people arguing about the contents of a suburb page, and as a result the arbitrator bans one of them from posting on, say, the suggestions page. It is for that reason as well as four others that i have objected to the ruling, and i have emailed asking him to provide a less insane ruling. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 12:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Heh. We finaly get a ruling on this month old case! Looking at it, and looking at how the drama between the users concerned has died down quite considerably does this strike anyone else as a case of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut? Given that the case is pretty much ainchent history, a ruling of "well, the drama has died down now, don't be idiots in the future" with no drama baiting formal stuff might have been a better plan.--SeventythreeTalk 13:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Actually, it's a perfectly resonable ruling. Using a sledgehammer to crack a nut is perfectly fine anyhow, because you still get the inside of the nut. If Grim wants to ignore the Arbritration terms, then I guess he'll end up in Vandal Banning. --User:Axe27/Sig 14:54, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Grim what are you even complaining about? Not getting to post on his pages? Big deal, thats pretty standard and I doubt you have much cause to anyway! Not interacting with him outside your official role, again standard and hardly heavy handed... all this whinging just makes it seem like your being petulant about not getting the result you wanted, by the way what did you expect to achieve? --Honestmistake 17:59, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Its excessive both ways. While i do not agree with Akules wikilawyering and borderline abuse of the administrative pages, i do not think he should be banned from using three of them, and certainly not for three months. A far, far better solution would have been "prohibiting Akule from posting cases on adminsitrative pages that require creative interpretation of the rules (The phrase, "grasping at straws" comes to mind), such to be determined by three sysops, none of which may be Grim or Max". The case was soley regarding the wikilawyering on adminsitrative pages, it had nothing to do with drama involved. Conndraka has gone beyond the scope of the case in his ruling, which he is not permitted to do. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 18:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, you are of course free to ignore his ruling... just don't be surprised when it ends up in Vandal Banning. --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 20:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I do think its a lil excessive as well. A lot of people went wideeyed and WTF when this came in. The fact that akule can't even vote on deletions, especially if they concern any page of his for 3 months can be brought up on this. The fact that grim can't come in and put forth ideas on a suggestion that Akule puts forth because he is the sole contributer of the entry for life is another example. But can't you just, if all parties agree, to get an new arbitrator and appeal it?--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS DORISFlag.jpg LOE ZHU | Яezzens 20:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
I think people might have thought that I was sticking up soley for Grim in my comment. If anything, Akule's ruling is a little bit harsher. I've revised my statement. This is like using a steamroller to crack a nut. I realy have had no contact or discourse with the arbitator in question, so I'm assuming this is just a mistake. Grim, Akule, if you two want, fell free to use my talkpage as a neutral discussion area about this ruling and whether you want a re-trial or something. That way you shouldn't get into any trouble.--SeventythreeTalk 20:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Akule got off easy, three months and he's back to normal, not being allowed to comment on anything Akule makes is by far the worse punishment, especially considering previous things he has created involving/targeting Grim.--Karekmaps?! 04:50, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
This is a major case of sour grapes here. Even if everyone concludes that Conndraka to be a bad arbitrator because of this ruling, the best you can do is let that inform you for any future use of A/A. The ruling itself, however, is a completely legitimate use of an arbitrator powers, and all parties involved agreed to abide by them even if they didn't like it. The only way that this ruling is going to be annulled by anyone other than Conndraka is if Max, Grim, and Akule agree to drop the arbitration case, as per precedent; Until then, I can promise that I will enforce the arbitrator's ruling. --Karlsbad 00:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Sour grapes? He went beyond the case. What he did is perfectly analogous to being asked to take care of a small dispute between users (This was exactly that, a small dispute), and then deciding that he wants to try and solve all the worlds problems with his ruling. As such, his ruling is completely and utterly invalid, as he hasnt ruled on the case he was asked to rule on. --The Grimch U! E! WAT! 06:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

So....Thats the big ending? Pffft, I was hoping for a more anti-climactic ending. :/ -- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 00:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I typed in paragraphs of arguments, but it all got deleted somehow. I will summarize it. Cockdrama the sledgehammer weilding arbitrator - go fuck yourself. That is all.--Wooty 04:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Jesus Christ, Wooty, you sure you've got enough vitriol there? --Cyberbob DORIS CGR U! 08:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
This ruling has created drama. How ironic. --Rogue 04:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, it's crap like this that is why arbitration is meant to be limited to edit conflicts, not personality ones. --Karekmaps?! 16:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Not surprisingly, extra drama has been added by third parties. Who would have thought. How about you drop it, so we can let it die? --Akule School's in session. 19:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://wiki.urbandead.com//index.php?title=UDWiki_talk:Administration/Arbitration/Max_Grivas_and_Grim_s_vs_Akule&oldid=1003293"