User talk:LibrarianBrent/Archive

From The Urban Dead Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Izone Group

Could you undelete the izone group? I didn't save that stuff. If there's something wrong with the group I suppose I could fix it. I just figured that you could delete the edits and keep the final version. --Radoteur 03:39, 29 Sep 2005 (BST)

Oh, sure. Misunderstood your comment. --LibrarianBrent 04:32, 29 Sep 2005 (BST)
ya, I have no clue what i'm doin, so i thought with all your super admin powers you could just get rid of all the edits and just keep the final version. --Radoteur 04:36, 29 Sep 2005 (BST)

Something Awful

For the record, I'm not a member of SA, in case it ever seemed otherwise.--Milo 06:02, 16 Sep 2005 (BST) Ok, thank you, I didn't know that. --Markus 18:41, 26 Sep 2005 (BST)

No problem. :) --LibrarianBrent 00:25, 27 Sep 2005 (BST)

User Pages

I think if User pages are the responsibility of the user (and hence no NPOV requirement) consistency demands that YuriRuler 90 gets to decide the contents of his talk page. If he's gotten the point and moved on, there is IMHO no need to keep the current comments. (I can see a case for limiting edits to those that keep the info accessible in history (vs. complete deletion) but if that's the point behind your revert, you IMHO ought to have specified that.) best --Markus 03:45, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)

I'm inclined to agree with Markus here. Up to now, anyway, I wasn't aware of a general policy not to blank Talk: pages, especially for user talk pages. If there are raging issues, then it's obviously rude and wrong to do so, but it didn't appear that there was anything obviously in need of resolution (as long as YuriRuler90 saw the last comments, which he presumably did since his was the next edit). --John 04:09, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)
Hm. That's one way of looking at it. I personally believe that User pages are seperate from User Talk pages, and that User pages should be NPOV while User Talk should incorporate any comments that people have made. In the past, it's been considered rude to delete a talk page that had relevant information or discussion on it. I'll have to think about this one. -LibrarianBrent 11:54, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)
"User pages should be NPOV" err, wouldn't that mean you'd support YuriRuler90's edits to Katthew's user page? "brave and vigilant" is hardly NPOV and there is more than enough evidence that other people have less favourable opinions of him, which also ought to be at least mentioned under NPOV. You definitely should think about this one.
Concerning the past, my problem with the deletion of e.g. the "Katthew controversy" was that it removed access to the information for everyone except mods and admins. I agree that should not be possible. Mere editing out is not a problem IMHO as everyone can do a revert if they feel it's necessary or simply copy from the history page. -- Markus 23:08, 28 Sep 2005 (BST)
Typo. I meant they should be POV, decided by the user themselves. That teaches me not to edit so early in the morning... :P --LibrarianBrent 00:07, 29 Sep 2005 (BST)
Gave you the Archive page as suggested Brent. Enjoy.--YuriRuler90 02:03, 29 Sep 2005 (BST)


Lol! I had completely forgotten about that, what a flexible mind you have! Yes I've read it, he's an amazing author. Down and Out in Paris and London is my favourite work of his, that and Road to Wigan Pier, terribly sad though. Have you seen The Office? Whenever I see the name Brent I'm reminded of it;)Winston 16:03, 12 Oct 2005 (BST)

No, I've heard about it, but haven't had a chance to see it, sadly. --LibrarianBrent 01:38, 13 Oct 2005 (BST)


I'm beginning to have doubts that going through and turning words like "zombie" into Wiki links is really that useful, that links do break up the flow of a paragraph slightly, and we all know what zombies are. Are all Wikis this fiercely hyperlinked? --Spiro 01:45, 13 Oct 2005 (BST)

Some are worse. Ever been to Wikipedia? :) --LibrarianBrent 06:04, 13 Oct 2005 (BST)
Although, Wikipedia at least stops at the first reference. Meatball wiki links every instance... -- Odd Starter 06:15, 13 Oct 2005 (BST)

Administration Requests

I direct your attention to .

You know what? I don't care. Ban me, ban him, ban both of us. But for Christ's sake, get the constant "ha ha our forum is better" edit crap off that page. Slicer 00:13, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Can you please take this to Moderation/Arbitration? The new moderation system prevents me from taking action in cases such as this one where the debate is largely a matter of personal opinion and doesn't involve direct vandalism. --LibrarianBrent 01:24, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Hey, Brent, please fix this up for me: also try and fix up "Filthy Jenkin's Biker Gang" in the human groups, thanks a bunch. --Officershaw <--- I would lock this it appears slicer is back and ready to vandalize.

Brent, since you seem to be one of the sysops here, what are the wiki/links policy on this wiki (if any)? Appreciate if you could leave a message on my talk page after you respond to this question here. Thanks. --Novelty 16:19, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)

I don't know whether alterations to the suggestions page needs to be approved my a moderator, but there seems to be overwhelming support for a change in the voting system - Talk:Suggestions#A_Change_to_the_SPAM_vote, adding a new vote type (Dupe) to get rid of the problems that arise when people complain about their ideas being Spaminated. Thanks for your time. --Daxx 13:30, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I've mostly distanced myself from the Suggestions page lately, since the quality of the suggestions seems to have drastically decreased as of late. However, I agree with this idea, and I suggest that you put the matter to a vote, as that's likely the best way to conduct things in a case such as this one. --LibrarianBrent 13:15, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Siege of giddings mall page

Can you please delete the_siege_of_giddings_mall page? I realized too late that I forgot to capitalize things in the title, so I created a new (almost identical page) with that corrected. This one is a useless duplicate. Thanks very much, sorry to take bother you. -CWD 01:58, 25 Oct 2005 (BST)

A redirect got established instead, so there's no real problem. :) --LibrarianBrent 05:40, 26 Oct 2005 (BST)


Eep... um...

CDF Eva has been tempbanned. --LibrarianBrent 01:22, 29 Oct 2005 (BST)
Ah... not that I'm really complaining, since I really don't like her, but it probably wasn't necessary this time. She was doing it before, but this time it wasn't actually vandalizing, just saying dumb things on the talk page... If you thought it was warranted in general, great, but not off of that comment, since it was old. I probably should have deleted it... Sorry if this has caused any confusion. Shadowstar 01:58, 29 Oct 2005 (BST)
It was kinda confusing, but she should have gotten a ban the first time she was vandalising anyway, so... --LibrarianBrent 02:57, 29 Oct 2005 (BST)

Re: Suggestions

I'm not sure protecting it is the answer here. It might do as a stopgap measure, but if we are going to protect it, we should put some notes up somewhere really visible as to why it's happenning. If the page is protected, maybe people'll read it. Of course, the possibility is that people will just jump to all the other Suggestions pages and put their stuff there. Which, admittedly, would be useful. -- Odd Starter 04:43, 29 Oct 2005 (BST)

LB, if you're going to take suggestions off the queue, at least throw them into Peer Rejected Suggestions. If you don't, there's no record of them, and they'll just get suggested again. -- Odd Starter 04:37, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Hm. IIRC the rule was that spam got deleted without being put to rejected or accepted, and the other ones were being taken out because they had the wrong format. --LibrarianBrent 05:52, 9 Nov 2005 (GMT)


Sorry, but you're in violation of the rules as written. It will be reposted as many times as you delete it against regulations. -- Amazing 04:15, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Sorry, but you're banned. --LibrarianBrent 04:22, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Got to admire that fighting spirit though. Nothing says "making a stand" like explaining the rules to a mod. --Zaruthustra 04:23, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Thanks alot for winning the "fight" for good. Good work, keep it up. --Carfan7 04:24, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Brent. I've contacted Kevan about this, just FYI. Not a threat but letting you know, because you're in the wrong here, and it's very obvious. You went against the rules of the Suggestion page, which may be your perogative as a MOD, but you DID break the rules. I was in the right to question this, disagree with this, and repost my suggestion since it was INCORRECTLY removed.

You could have re-written the rule quite easily, but instead you banned me. The reason you gave included "Threatened vandalism" -- This is an outright lie. I said I'd Raise Hell, which meant I would verbally argue with you about it and repost the suggestion since it was DELETED AGAINST THE RULE.

Then I logged in with a different IP address to say what I just said above, and you banned that IP saying I was 'stealthposting a deleted suggestion' or some silliness. Another lie. I logged in to defend myself against a runaway moderator, and didn't repost ANYTHING with that IP or any other IP other than the original one I used in the first place.

I look forward to removal of the ban, or I'm just going to keep peacably fighting you on this until we're both old men. I don't know how involved Kevan will be, but as I've said to him, he can look back at the logs and see that you violated the rule stated on the page, and banned me twice for things I didn't do.

Sorry to explain the rules to a Moderator, but it needed to be done since you were violating them. I know you probably took offense at this, but it was simply intended to inform you that you were incorrect -- something that happens even to Moderators from time to time. -- Amazing 04:40, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)

I wasn't incorrect. You hadn't looked far enough down on the talk page. Also, your ban wil expire in 24 hours. That's all I'm going to say about it. --LibrarianBrent 01:06, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Theres villainy afoot! Oh wait... just drama. As Brent stated an authors keep vote doesn't count to contest, or else no suggestion could ever be spam killed. Lets move along.... --Zaruthustra 04:48, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)

  • It's not stated in the rules that the suggestor's vote doesn't count as contesting Spam, so it counted. :\ It would've been easier to change the rules on me. The fact remains I was banned for false reasons because Brent got mad.. Brent, or Lemonlimeskull on AIM - We can clear this up, I'm sure. I just realized you thought I stealthposted because I didn't put a space between two lines. If you look back at the logs you will see I corrected that myself, so how could I have been trying to stealthpost? Doesn't hold water. But yeah, drop me an e-mail or AIM message so I don't have to cycle IPs to defend myself here against defamation. Thanks. -- Amazing 05:20, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
*rubs his forhead* amazing, it was added becasue apperently it wasen't obvious to you. it was pretty damn obvious to the rest of us that a creator's vote wasen't going to stop anybody from droping a bad idea into the garbage. jeeze. --Spellbinder 06:35, 22 Nov 2005 (GMT)
It IS stated there

Another problem is happening with Amazing's suggestions. He is appearing to be having a fight. You should take a look at this: [1] --Carfan7 04:10, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)

I saw that. I think that particular suggestion is OK, though. Let's leave it up, if it's really bad it'll be killvoted anyway. --LibrarianBrent 04:35, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
This is basically the same scenerio with you in place of the other guy. -- Also, you said my ban was removed and it actually isn't. Maybe you could correct that. Until then I have to make alternate accounts since it was stated that my ban was off -- Amazing 05:13, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT) -- See for yourself. I don't know what else there is for me to tell you. --LibrarianBrent 05:16, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
"User is blocked
From The Urban Dead Wiki
Your user name or IP address has been blocked by LibrarianBrent."
This may be an error with all your alt accounts being banned as well. Let's see if it clears up after I unblock the others that had the same IP as your original account. --LibrarianBrent 05:27, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)
There's an error at play or something similar. -- Amazing 05:24, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Holy crap, I just checked that IP block list! Holy..... --Carfan7 05:20, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Yeah, I didn't even know we HAD an autoblocker, much less that it was so effective... :P --LibrarianBrent 05:22, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Uh oh! ----> [2] --Carfan7 05:26, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)

All fixed. *dusts hands off* Seeya around, hopefully not on the same terms. -- Amazing 05:30, 23 Nov 2005 (GMT)

I am flattered you are watching me so closely. I prefer not to use the preview, but thanks anyway. -- Amazing 02:56, 16 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Caiger controversy page

LibrarianBrent. I have seen no reports of Zombies sending in Pkers to the mall on the forums. There have been many reports of revived zombies being pked but the only pking done against dedicated survivors that i know of is the slaying of Maggy Smith by Timmothy, who was collecting on a very old A.R.S.E. Contract, and a case where two survivors killed each other after a stray axe blow landed on one defender. I am curious as to the source of this claim. --Grim s 05:52, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)

DDDS Page controversy

Quite frankly, i am appalled that you allow other users to knowingly slander other users and organisations. I have ONLY acted to defend myself and those whos in game safety is my responsibility. If you will not let me defend myself in the only manner open to me (Because talking to Matthew Stewart is about as fruitful as sprinting face first into a wall), then i ask that a page be created and clearly linked to above his death list where both sides can argue thier cases in seperate sections. At least then people might not actually be sucked into the griefing shit he has posted (It has already resulted in one wrongful pking, which i avenged by gunning down Matthew Stewart, and then the Pker in question). --Grim s 05:58, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)

I'm sorry, but you were specifically warned about this by another moderator. If you want to put up an alternate opinion, don't put it on his group page. Create a controversy page or something, make counter-accusations on your own group page, or take it to the forums. Groups can do pretty much whatever they want on their own pages, as evidenced by DARIS and The Petorians. --LibrarianBrent 16:06, 25 Nov 2005 (GMT)
He doesnt link to my groups page. He has posted my groups list, but doesnt tell anoyone that they are a group, or which group, so i cant make counteraccusations on my page. No one will see them. If i create a controversy page, it will only be even remotely useful if it is linked to on his page, which he will not do on his own, as it will completely undercut his justification for killing us. --Grim s 01:59, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
So create a controversy page and link it in his group's NPOV section, which is completely allowed. --LibrarianBrent 03:23, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Can you clarify for me which part of the page is the NPOV section. I rummaged around for 20 minutes and found no reference to it. --Grim s 08:17, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
Sorry to bother you twice, but i asked Matthew Stewart a question regarding my classifications on his death list in the DDDS talk page Link and he "archived" (Read: Deleted) it in order to avoid answering it where it belonged. Last i checked, people were not allowed to do such a thing. I was not rude or obnoxious in any way, i merely asked him to explian the Griefer and Death Cultist tags he applied to me. I have restored the comment to the talk page. --Grim s 09:46, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)
You should put the link after these sentences: Dulston Defense Death Squad is a small hard-line group that is dedicated to securing the suburb of Dulston, though cooperation, information sharing, maintaining of strategic barricading and the execution of zombie sympathizers, death cultists and others who endanger the community. --LibrarianBrent 16:31, 26 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Needed to find a moderator, you were 5th on my list

Could you take a quick look on the deletions page, tell me if I have a good reason for deletion? It is under Some Journals. Thanks. --Andrew McM 09:50, 28 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Um, excuse me, I was warned by you for vandalising the CoL page. I don't see what I've done wrong. I posted the fact that the new CoL used to be DARIS, and then when it was deleted, I went to the talk page and argued that that deletion was unjust. -[user:lightman]

You posted the irrelevant and POV statement that the new CoL used to be DARIS, which may not even be true, on THEIR group page. --LibrarianBrent 02:50, 1 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Yo check out the suggestions page, one of the suggestions doubled for some reason. I don't want to delete because of controversy, arguements, etc. I'll give you a link as soon as I can, but by that time the double will probably get deleted anyways. --Carfan7 23:02, 3 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Here --Carfan7 23:03, 3 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Okay never mind it got fixed already :D --Carfan7 23:52, 3 Dec 2005 (GMT)

That was me -- Andrew McM 23:56, 3 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I found a weird page that you should delete. It's useless in my opinion, but whatever. ------> LINK --Carfan7 05:57, 4 Dec 2005 (GMT)

On the PKers group page there was a huge bunch of spaces. Was this on purpose? --Carfan7 03:48, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Crap, for some reason I can't link the page. It's just on the main page. I hope you can find it. Category:PKer_Groups --Carfan7 03:53, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Is Dupe a valid vote? --Carfan7 04:05, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I think it's equivalent to Spam but I don't know. --LibrarianBrent 05:13, 17 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I think you should make sure, because I have seen many people using that vote while I was on a mod run. --Carfan7 01:36, 18 Dec 2005 (GMT)


Question for you: What's policy on using an alias sig when signing? See this edit to Talk: CoL (new) by Deathnut. — g026r 23:12, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I'm trying to make it a bannable offense. --LibrarianBrent 23:26, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Unseemly goings on in Caiger Mall

Dear Brent,

I took this snapshot in Caiger Mall today. I thought you might appreciate a copy. --Timothy Askins 17:59, 2 Dec 2005 (GMT)


Yeah, thanks. I didn't really stay dead for long, though, since a guy revived me 15 minutes later. :P --LibrarianBrent 00:39, 3 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Well, it was just in case you wanted to file a bounty on him. :) Loathsome chap; I wouldn't waste a bullet on him, but an axe to the head might do him some good.

I already filed the bounty. :) --LibrarianBrent 01:22, 4 Dec 2005 (GMT)


I AM NOT THOR! AllStarZ 03:51, 5 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I never said that you were. What's going on? --LibrarianBrent 00:06, 6 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I believe he's referring to this:

Wikidrama at it's finest...--Milo 13:18, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

EDIT:Upon further review, that's the funniest impersonation I've ever seen.--Milo 13:24, 8 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Hey Brent, will you please warn allstar not to RE when he's not the author? --Spellbinder 00:37, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Sure. --LibrarianBrent 01:45, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I would like to say that TeaBag edited my suggestion, and has deleted the entire suggestions page. BTW, nice attempt to communicate using morse.

Er, thanks about the Morse code. I warned TeaBag13, hopefully he'll get smarter... --LibrarianBrent 13:59, 9 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Suggestions page software screwup

I selected the edit section button on the suggestions page, wrote out my comment and added it, but failed to notice that it was editing the whole page, and only included the text from the suggestion (Which resulted in most of the page being deleted). I would very much appreciate a revert on this, as it was a huge mistake, and not my fault at all, except for a bit of laziness in the checking. --Grim s 08:16, 9 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Nevermind, someone managed to fix it.--Grim s 13:40, 9 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Regarding your vandalism of my wiki page

I just noticed when looking at the history of my wiki page that you had deleted it and replaced it with a note. Despite kevan having reverted it, i am going to report you for that action.--Grim s 12:48, 11 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Okay, sure. Just so you know before you do anything rash, though, ban notices of that style on talk pages was the general norm before the new moderation system was enacted. --LibrarianBrent 02:51, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Regarding comments on Katthew's page

mind your own business. --Flaunted 03:46, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Why? --LibrarianBrent 04:33, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)
RE: The Gingerbread Men: she is constantly trying to add information to a page that needs none. and comes back at people with snide childish remarks. so i treat her the same way. the group has put the information they want on their page. why should they have to conform to what she wants.? --Flaunted 02:47, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Because she is right in this case and you are wrong. An nPOV section is prefered on a group's page. You didn't have one, so she added it. Then you deleted it for no reason and called her a vandal, which was false. You deleted relevant information for no reason and thus recieved a warning. --LibrarianBrent 02:54, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)
she has a personal vendetta against the members of the group. nothing more. wasnt she removed from being a mod for being impartial? --Flaunted 03:11, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Actaully no that wasn't the reason at all. However, reason appears to not effect you.--Axe-man 03:15, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Er, Flaunted, I don't think that you have the meaning of "impartial" quite right there. --LibrarianBrent 04:13, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Know if the Wiki's having problems?

I've noticed a number of accidental page blankings, along with some errors (e.g. when I try to look at my watchlist). Do you know if there's been any issues on the backend? (Or would you not be privy to that sort of information?) — g026r 05:54, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I've noticed similar issues, although a lot of vandalism lately did contriubte to the page blankings. Perhaps Kevan would know more? Try asking him. --LibrarianBrent 06:06, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Right. I keep forgetting he actually does check the wiki from time to time. Thanks. — g026r 06:10, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)
I've encountered both of those problems tonight as well, g026r. I'm still getting errors on my watchlist page -- I received those same errors briefly last night, but they cleared up after a little while. As far as the pages getting blanked, I had an edit to Moderation/Policy_Discussion ended up blanking the entire page instead of taking my edit, and I was only editing one section, not the entire page. --06:16, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)

How the hell did that go unnoticed for so long? --ALIENwolve 01:33, 18 Dec 2005 (GMT)

It seems that the vandal page is growing longer in the list with what seems to be unheard reports. --ALIENwolve 23:03, 9 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Re: People Adding Groups to PKer Category

Are you still warning people who do this? Because, for the record, I agree with you that a group should only be listed on that category if they choose it for themselves. But lately I've seen it happen quite a bit. Is there a discussion regarding this activity, and for that matter, the PK category itself? The talk pages seem dead otherwise. Riktar 01:58, 18 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I'm holding that off until there's a distinct policy decision regarding this. Please see the "Policy Discussion" section of the moderation page if you want to discuss this issue, as I will be bringing it up for debate shortly. --LibrarianBrent 02:01, 18 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Re: Banning

I'm not going to lift Spaceman2's ban yet, but I thought the Guidelines on ban escalation was day, 2 days, week, month, perm? We shouldn't be giving yearbans anymore, last time I checked. -- Odd Starter talk | Mod 12:21, 18 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Hm? I thought the policy was to ban alternate accounts for as long as possible, and I don't remember the permaban command. :P --LibrarianBrent 13:42, 18 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Don't think so, I think I put in the guidelines that we just bump the ban level up one if we find any alternates. At least I think that was it anyway. As for permaban, I s'pose that's just "as long as we can make it". -- Odd Starter talk | Mod 13:56, 18 Dec 2005 (GMT)
Ah, must have missed that in the guidelines. Sorry about that, then. Want me to unban him? --LibrarianBrent 18:13, 18 Dec 2005 (GMT)
At least for this time. If the little brother tries vandalising, I think he's up to week or month ban now, so go without prejudice. -- Odd Starter talk | Mod 00:47, 19 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Random whatnot

No, you're not wrong. The suggestions are getting worse. I can't even stomach looking at them most days anymore, because the suggestions are either so poorly conceived and idiotic, or it's so blantantly obvious that the poster hasn't even skimmed the old suggestions, that it drives me insane. Bentley Foss 17:42, 23 Dec 2005 (GMT)


I'd be very interested to discuss this. Can we speak privately through e-mail or preferrably on AIM? I have a bit of information about this that I haven't disclosed to anyone and would like to compare notes to see if what I know makes any more sense or is mislead.

For the basics, Sivad Yelznik PKed me and another player in Crossman Grove PD, claiming that Ludwig and the CoL wasbehind it. We never actually believed this simply because the both of us would be so far below CoL's radar. (not to mention that it doesn't fit with what I understand about he CoL anyway)

And of course the funniest part is Sivad's "Real Name" was listed as .... Brent. Contact me via AIM at lemonlimeskull if you want to compare notes. -- Amazing 18:40, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Oh, and Sivad Yelznik is dead on Nurten. I check if he's waiting for a revival there and kill him. He's died 3 or 4 times, all handed to him by CDFers. -- Amazing 18:52, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
What the HELL? Sivad Yelznik? Are you absolutely sure that that was the account name? Also, can you give me your email address? There's some private information that could prove helpful in this case. --LibrarianBrent 21:03, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
It's Kinzley Davis spelled backwards. That's odd and kinda cool. --ALIENwolve 21:05, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
No, it's really not that cool, considering my real name is VERY similar to that. --LibrarianBrent 21:06, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Then apparently it's someone you know. Or something like that. --ALIENwolve 21:09, 1 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Yeah it's definitely Sivad Yelznik. Check the CDF page I think his UD profile is linked there. My e-mail is - It's looking like my theory as to who it was is quickly dissipating.. but I know I have some info to offer. -- Amazing 00:02, 2 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Jason Killdare

Could I flag to your attention User:Jason Killdare? I don't know what's going on with him, but it seems virtually every single suggestion he makes is spaminated, and every suggestion that isn't sees blatant overuse of the RE: comment. It's not that they're just bad suggestions; they're really really obviously bad suggestions. I hate to say it, but he's looking suspiciously like a very good troll. Would you care to have a look at what he's doing? I know that banning him would be excessive, but if you could keep an eye on him that would be great. Cheers for your time. --Daxx 14:35, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Thanks for warning me. I'll be watching him. --LibrarianBrent 15:01, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Thanks a lot. --Daxx 15:35, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Bandwidth stealing

Does the wiki have an image use policy? I notice that there are some images that are linked from other public sites. --Nov 19:21, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Not as far as I know. If you're concerned, I suggest taking it up at the policy discussion page. --LibrarianBrent 23:03, 3 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Vote on suggestions

My vote on the rocket launcher suggestion is not trolling. It is abrasive, but it isnt trolling, unless you care to argue that the persistant posting of wildly unbalanced crate dropping suggestions isnt the behaviour of an imbecile. If you want to see trolling, just ask. I am more than happy to oblige. I was merely using strong language to make a point, and that point is one that is hard to ignore. --Grim s 07:32, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Oh, and Deathnut deleted the suggestion in clear contravention of the spam vote rules. I have since restored the suggestion (It had three non Author Keep votes, Qwako, Marluxia and CthulhuFhtagn all voted keep on the suggestion). I ask where i should file my complaint regarding his conduct. --Grim s 15:17, 4 Jan 2006 (GMT)

If you want to file a vandalism complaint, please visit this page. I personally think that you are clearly intending to be offensive, you're lowering the tone of the wiki, and that the suggestion should be removed. However, the current rules state that the suggestion should remain, and I will abide by them. You may want to look at some of the new Spam vote proposals that are being made on the talk page, though... if any of those are implemented your suggestion will likely die. --LibrarianBrent 00:10, 5 Jan 2006 (GMT)
I may have been offensive in the vote, but it was not trolling. If i had been trolling i would have gone on to compare the brain mass of said people with the brain mass of a flea and added a comment along the lines of "bring it, bitches". What i stated, even though it was offensive, was a valid reason more my vote. Furthermore, you have taken no offense to the text of the siggestion, where, apart from the wording, i said exactly the same thing. I am going to file my complaint, as Deathnut failed to respond to my query regarding his conduct (Indeed, he deleted it from his wiki discussion page).--Grim s 14:34, 5 Jan 2006 (GMT)
I think any suggestion that is obviously designed to be ridiculous is inappropriate for the page, but as I said before, the current rules state that your suggestion should remain. --LibrarianBrent 00:16, 6 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Your recent comment on the NT suggestion

Please explain what it was I missed, or didn't understand of the balance or game mechanics? you're a bit vague in your comment on my talkpage and without pointing out what I did wrong I can't learn from my mistakes.--Vista 17:28, 7 Jan 2006 (GMT)

  • My math and reasoning in the vote was indeed a bit rushed, because I found it only a side note in my message, but I'll repeat it more slowly then to make it more clearer.
  • The AP cost
You forget this is not a new add-on to the game. Tagging excist, it already happends. The AP is spend on it already. all this does is create an extra bonus to an action that already is in play. So for every AP spend it now gains something extra. something free the only cost is the time you spend going in to the necrotech building to make 10 counter one syringe. Note two things that he didn't say that the count would disapear after a day(*) and that he didn't specify if the max counter on your scanner would be 10 or more. Most necro's I know are stationed at Necro buildings. and if they are not after this implentation, they will. so the extra cost is only one AP per syringe. if the counter has a max beyond 10 or doesn't have a max at all. they don't need to relocate at all. just pop in when they pass a necro building. So much for the 'high AP cost'.
This hinges however on the presuption that there will be next to no change in the numbers tagging. Otherwise you have the effect of dubble scanning costing more AP. But that won't happen in large enough numbers, why? because as you know the cost is to high compared to other forms of finding syringes. For necrotechs searching is best, and for all other survivors there is the revive clinics for (almost) there is little incentive to hop on a scanning bandwagon. So I doubt that the added effect of dubble scan on AP will be enough. Now I could be wrong of course, but right now I think I based this on reasonable grounds.
All I have to say on the generators that every NT building I go into that there is alway a working generator and if there weren't the cost of refeuling would not even be a drop on a hot plate. insignificant.

The Numbers

total zombies is 20.000 and thus the maximum off near-free syringes thus with the magic number 10 the maximum amount of near-free syringes is 20.000
That is a unrealistic number however. Thus as I stated in the orginal vote. I look for a more realistic number. Based upon my experience as a tagger and a zombie I made an educated guess. that about half of the zombies get scanned. My zombie gets scanned about 75% of the time. But as I think that zombies in ridleybank get scanned less I adjusted it downward. It is not a pritty guess, I know, but there is no better data aviable.
so that makes 10.000 scanned zombies devide by the magic number 10 that is 1.000 syringes at 1AP for scanners based at necro buildings or lets 3 AP for those that merely pop in on the way. normally they cost 21 AP, now because every action except paying one AP to make them and perhaps 2 Ap to pop in because every action is already a duplicated action, it already happens.
So it adds resources to the game where you normally had to pay collectively 20.000 to 18.000 Ap's more for, I find that unbalancing, especially as it are syringes.
(*)I do not know how you got that you should have to scan 10 zombies within a day it doesn't say so in the suggestion as I said it is not like as if they disappear when the tag disappears. If 10.000 survivors gain 1 count per day you have 10.000 syringes in 10 days. Now correct me if I am wrong but isn't that a 1000 a day? just an example.
So hopefully I have redeemed myself enough in your eyes and I hope that next time you just ask, gee Vista what do you mean, you've frased it a bit obscure. explain! Instead of jumping to the conclusion that a condensending insult is the best solution. Yours faithfully --Vista 00:12, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Sorry, last bit I have to say about it. It wasn't a discusion about the merit of the suggestion, It was a discussion wether or not I was to stupid to vote on it. And I hope I have cleared that up, the suggestion I don't mind. You doubting me however I did, so I do hope that is settled, that was all... Cheers!--Vista 01:26, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)

"Bentley vs. Amazing"

Specifically regarding the Talk:Suggestions page. Can we please remove that little part in the middle with Bentley bragging about his "victory" over Amazing? Am I wrong, or does that not belong on any Suggestions page? I would delete it myself, but I'd prefer not to incite a potential revert conflict(I am unfamiliar with Bentley's personality). Riktar 03:56, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Please do NOT remove this section, as it is being used as evidence in an Arbitration case. --LibrarianBrent 06:03, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Aye, it's all taken care of anyways. Riktar 00:44, 10 Jan 2006 (GMT)

The lack of established Wiki rules

I'm going to say, per Odd Starter's comment on the arbitration decision, that not having any officially-decided wiki rules is pretty dodgy. How do things like Katthew's talk pages not get erased from existence? Bentley Foss 16:55, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Nobody brings them up for Arbitration? Please view Moderation/Policy Discussion for more information. --LibrarianBrent 18:08, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)
So are you saying, even weeks after the fact has passed, things like that are still viable for arbitration? Riktar 00:44, 10 Jan 2006 (GMT)
In theory, yes. --LibrarianBrent 02:58, 16 Jan 2006 (GMT)

The suggestions page is a hell hole

Between Amazing, Frosty, and Craw voting keep on nearly everything nothing is leaving the queue. Spam is nearly rivaling serious suggestions. Until we get our new spam rules passed kosher could we at least get a mod to get rid people like frosty and craw? Their trolling and drama is rapidly making the suggestions page more trouble than fun. --Zaruthustra 21:33, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)

No. --LibrarianBrent 22:34, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Votes and "Justification"

Since when were votes viable for removal for any reason besides lack of signing and invalid votes? When was "lack of justification" added as a rule? I've been around the Suggestion's talk page my fair bit, and I've never seen such a policy. Do you have a link? Riktar 00:46, 10 Jan 2006 (GMT)

The justification rule was added today by me, but moderators have had the ability to revoke votes for quite some time. We've had to set up some new guidelines in response to the recent trolling and controversy, and the justification thing was one of them. If one of your votes has been struck out on the grounds of "justification", though, all you need to do is add a reason and then remove the strikeout. --LibrarianBrent 00:51, 10 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Heya Brent. I was wondering two things about this new rule; 1) I may stumble across it myself but I was wondering if you could show me where it got added to the wiki so I can make sure I have the details right (I frequesntly vote without stating anything in reasons and it would seem that is behavior I need to correct now) and 2) is this new rule something we can diuspute somewhere (mod pages or suggestion talk or something)? I see where you're coming from in making the rule I think, but many people vote this way somewhat regularly. I can't speak for everyone but for many of us it is so we can avoid the flame war that is sure to come just for voting kill on something (check any unpopular suggestion put up by Amazing or Jason Kildare for examples). Thanks for all the ahrd work. SOrry you and the mods have to put up with so much garbage. --Thelabrat 23:32, 10 Jan 2006 (GMT)

You can probably dispute it on the Suggestions page talk, I guess. But it's now at the top of the Suggestions page under the header "Invalid Votes". This is a temporary fix until the new spam restrictions are applied, but probably should be continued. My main issue was that people were voting Keep on obviously trolling/ridiculous suggestions, and there was no way to remove their votes. Therefore, justification for any vote must now be made. Unfortunately, the trolls kinda messed things up for everyone else here- even I've made votes without justification in the past. --LibrarianBrent 23:38, 10 Jan 2006 (GMT)

  • Thanks, I found it shortly after I posted it here (figures). There is a brief discussion going on the talk pages right now about this topic (which you probably already know about but just in case). It's also mentioned again near the bottom of the page in a thread about Rule Changes to the wiki. To sum up the relevent bits, a "news" section related to the Wiki specifically (if not suggestions specifically) might be helpful so that we know when voting rules change (Dupe and Justification being two recent examples). Also, and this is pointed at myself and my fellow wordy voters, has the idea of a word/line limit on reponses ever been approached? It's the first thting that comes to mind that might help keep the trolling down on the justification of votes. I don't know if it would really help though. --Thelabrat 01:01, 15 Jan 2006 (GMT)

i figured you are a moderator, so i should probably pass this on to you: Matson Jade accidently put their vote before the last voters signature on a few suggestions today. i saw the one on mine, and noticed they did the same thing to the suggestion above my own. i was able to move it back to the correct place on mine, but the signature has since disappeared completely from the other suggestion (?). it was John Rove's vote stamp that was deleted on the other one (i'm assuming it was merely an accident), and as a moderator you would be the one to go to about amending that. --Firemanstan 02:41, 11 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Ergh, probably an edit conflict or a wikibug... I'm not really sure what to do about that, see if you can get them to reinstate their sig on the votes. --LibrarianBrent

02:49, 11 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Whats the policy on votes like this?

"Keep - I vote Keep because of the number of retarded reasons given for "Spam" votes. This is not spam based on the reasons given, infact the real spam is all the crap some of you wrote for your voting "reasons". --Daednabru 05:27, 20 Jan 2006 (GMT)"

Technically its a justification, albeit one with no bearing on the actual suggestion at hand. He tries to do this every time something is getting spam voted. --Zaruthustra 08:11, 20 Jan 2006 (GMT)


Um. Where did this happen? He was just in Millen Hills. MaulMachine 02:52, 11 Jan 2006 (GMT)

He was, at least earlier, in Gatcombeton with "Son of Uborkapete", killing me at McEvoy Drive Railroad Station. He said "Sorry LibrarianBrent, nothing personal" and killed me. This took place at game time 1/10, 21:07. --LibrarianBrent 02:55, 11 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Uborkapete and Son of Uborkapete are not members of LCD they are members of the Yagoton R. Clinic. --DarthRevan 15:40, 11 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Daxx editing Suggestion Rules

Just wanted to bring this to your attention since you do seem to be the Mod working the Suggestion area.

Daxx, failing being able to follow the rules, has actually changed them in a DRASTIC manner, removing a very old standard.

Click Here. -- Amazing 05:50, 11 Jan 2006 (GMT)

'Mkay, I'm going to go request protection on that template. --LibrarianBrent 13:17, 11 Jan 2006 (GMT)
I'm afraid I merely added a clarification since Amazing seems incapable of reading rules properly. Everyone knows that you can reply to a RE, and you have been able to do so since the creation of the suggestions page. That Amazing deems it necessary to report this to a moderator as vandalism is yet another waste of your time, I'm afraid. --Daxx 13:40, 11 Jan 2006 (GMT)
As far as I know, you've never been able to reply to a RE on the same page, but people always have anyway. --LibrarianBrent 14:36, 11 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Changing Reason for Vote

I read the suggestion for the Discussion, and still think it's spam that just negates the recent upgrade. I'll change my vote comment to reflect that, if you don't mind me removing the strike-out. --Dickie Fux 23:37, 12 Jan 2006 (GMT)

That's fine. --LibrarianBrent 23:42, 12 Jan 2006 (GMT)

a silly bugger at it

according to the log Shaft121 changed some text (added gay, and changed horde in 'whore' in a vote over in the suggestions page in Scent rot at 23.51 while making this suggestion all very juvenile and silly. although it probably isn't worth your time, He did it while making a suggestion asking for moderation so you giving him a little comment should make him happy then.

Sorry to bother you with something so trivial, but it just annoyed me a little. Yours --Vista 01:01, 28 Jan 2006 (GMT) (edit, sorry went straight to talk page without reading that you are on leave, I've taking it to an other mod)

Regarding your verdict with burning icarus5

Your verdict is under protest, due to the fact that the wording is percfectly clear, and has been explained to him. As such the person is knowingly posting false information on the wiki. I know you dont particularly like me, but i would like you to at least try and act in an impartial manner and review the case properly. --Grim s 06:09, 31 Jan 2006 (GMT)

I actually think you're a pretty good user, all things considered. Unfortunately, there is no effective way of proving that some of the criteria have been met, and the rules on that page rely on unclear definitions. It's not explicitly stated what "control of resource buildings" is, allowing for a lot of leeway in how people view a suburb. --LibrarianBrent 13:26, 1 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Le blah

Hey there. Since you seem to be the Moderator-on-duty for the Amazing vs MaulMachine debacle on the Arbitration page, I guess I should bring to your attention that Maul vandalized my post again after the two warnings you issued. It's all up on the Abritration page, sorry to bother. -- Amazing 19:03, 31 Jan 2006 (GMT)

I did so for reasons I have already stated. Since you ignore me so often, I'll say it again, Amazing: I wanted to keep this private between you, me, and Jorge. You're the one who brought it out in the open. This didn't have to go to a mod. You could have just done the right thing and ignored Jorge, but no, you had to do everything but try to get me vandalbanned to accuse me of being a Zombie Spy (TM). MaulMachine 19:19, 31 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Removing someone else's posts multiple times from multiple pages is vandalism. The End. Do not clutter up ANOTHER page with your back-peddling and stammering excuses. -- Amazing 19:34, 31 Jan 2006 (GMT)
And your adding my name as a zombie spy when you already knew I wasn't is kosher? You liar. MaulMachine 19:37, 31 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Once again, he called me a traitor despite knowing full well that I am not. Having proven him wrong many-a-time, can I delete this garbage from the Caiger Mall Survivors page and any other page I wind up on for this? I'm tired of him slandering me and me not being able to stop him. MaulMachine 04:30, 2 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Uuuugh. Sorry, LB but because he wasn't banned last time he's gone and vandalized two more times thinking he's untouchable. :\ Check out he arbitration page whenever you get the chance or feel like it, etc. etc. Sorry this keeps dragging out but I can't shake this guy following me around deleting things. -- Amazing 18:59, 2 Feb 2006 (GMT)

I wouldn't be deleting anything if you would stop vandalizing pages. Check out the vandal banning page while you're here, Brent. MaulMachine 19:26, 2 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Zaru Mod

Hey Librarian, if I could get some oversight on my work while I learn the ropes it would help me a lot. Just tell me when I'm out of line. For example, I gave a kind of a soft warning to User:Jason Killdare and would consider further actions if he never shapes up, would you agree with my assessment? --Zaruthustra-Mod 02:17, 9 Feb 2006 (GMT)

That particular action seems reasonable. I *am*, however, on hiatus, so I won't be able to give you feedback as often as I'd really like. I suggest taking this to Odd Starter, as he seems to be a reasonable guy. --LibrarianBrent 03:41, 11 Feb 2006 (GMT)

What Counts As Vandalism

"For consistency and accountability, Moderators are requested to note on this board their actions in dealing with Vandals." - have just had an email from MaulMachine saying that he'd been banned without warning or justification; it looks like you've just woken up after a week offline and banned him for something you saw while catching up. I assume it's because you judge an image that was uploaded purely to make a joke on a talk page to be "vandalism", but it'd be useful to clarify.

Does the Wiki actually have any strict guidelines for what counts as vandalism and what doesn't? I can't seem to find any. --Kevan 11:20, 28 February 2006 (GMT)

I too was wondering if there was some sort of policy written up concerning what was vandalism, or some sort of guidelines for wiki etiquette? If so could you please direct me to them? thanks for your time Mr. Brent.-Banana Bear4 20:20, 28 February 2006 (GMT)

Yeah, Maul e-mails Kevan and sends him directions to follow. Which he does. Guess Kevan can't be arsed to check and see Maul's been banned for vandalism in the past with warning. Anyway I just dropped by because I thought you might find this sadly hilarious. Or hilariously sad. XD -- Amazing 02:47, 3 March 2006 (GMT)

Bleh. MaulMachine is a repeat offender- he was not warned again because he had already been warned twice and banned previously, meaning his new vandalism elevated his next ban instead of providing a warning.

What counts as vandalism and what doesn't is a situation of interpretation that is largely up to the moderator in question, but in general I consider vandalism to be any of the following:

-deliberately adding false information to pages
-insulting or harassing other users on NON talk pages
-failing to comply with Arbitrator decisions
-uploading insulting or pornographic images
-adding links to unrelated sites (the e-poker adware bots, for example)
-blanking pages without explanation
-deleting talk page discussions while they are still current
--LibrarianBrent 04:00, 3 March 2006 (GMT)


I started a project me and STER had been talking about called lexicon. Any help or feedback you could give would be appreciated. Check it out at Category:Lexicon.


I did end up bringing my problem with 'STER to the Arbitration page. Thanks for your concern. -- Amazing 03:36, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Could you take a look at my ruling on the re-opening of Amazing vs. Lucero and somehow approve or disapprove it ? I believe i have reached a very fair ruling, that lucero agreed to and amazing didnt. --People's Commissar Hagnat [cloned] [mod] 19:41, 26 April 2006 (BST)


As per the conversation on the talk page of the petition to ban the user Amazing, said user has agreed to cease and desist all trolling, baiting and flaming actions provided that the exact same standards be applied to but not limited those he has taken arbitration cases against concerning his person. I have agreed to examine and report all such incidents that would apply to the above and submit them to two unbiased mods for their approval on the pain of banishment if any involved party find me flagrantly abusing such a position towards a bias of any concerned party. The abuse would be determined by aformentioned mods or a predominance of the evidence. I ask for the approval and the enforcement of the agreement should all concerned parties agree to the terms. --Prosperina 05:55 23 April 2006 (BST)

I've made a page for this proposal --Prosperina 08:55 23 April 2006 (BST)

Are there any policies against Verbal Abuse?

Today I was suggesting some new ideas into the suggestion page, and I recieved several, erm, verbal abuses. It may possibly because of my suggestions, but I really don't see it as why I should recieve verbal abuse, a dismissal of my idea will be fine, I dont see verbal abuse as needed in that situation. At the moment I do not wish to have names as I feel threatened.

Just to ensure you understand everything. I should tell you everything regarding this.

I was doing this new suggestion, and forgot that new suggestion has to go to bottom of the page. After inspection, and read the rules again, I realised I have put the suggestion the wrong place. Straight after this, I used copy and paste to move the suggestion to the bottom, and had pasted twice. I did not realise at that moment as I was facing a vast amout of text. After submitting the changes, I realised I had two multiple suggestions which are identical by the mistake described above. At that moment I went back to edit, and I simply just deleted one without noticing theres a vote, which now I have put it back again. Which can now be seen at the suggestion page. I hope this is clear enough to prove that it was simply a honest mistake rather than a 'planned' thing.

And then I noted it at the end of the page. Again, I recieved another verbal abuse. I understand theres another post regarding me apprantly was vandaling the suggestion page, nope. Just described above.

Sorry I can't put a link to the suggestion part. But I am confident that you will definately find it there. [changchad]

Re: Misconduct Hearing

I have a pending Misconduct case that needs to be resolved ASAP. This is a general call for any Moderator currently active to judge this case. -- Odd Starter talkModW! 07:19, 7 April 2006 (BST)

Re: Promotions

Just thought i should tell you that i responded to your comment regarding me on the promotions page. This isnt an attempt to change your opinion, its just that i feel you have every right to know, and since you dont appear to have dropped by since then, im informing you of it, just in case. --Grim s 19:43, 10 April 2006 (BST)


LibrarianBrent, I dont really know you or your policies as I havn't run into you much on the Wiki. However since I HAVE seen your work I would like to say thank you for the time and effort you put into modifying, editing, and reverting the Wiki as necessary. We may or may not aggree on any given issue that may arise but in an effort to phase out some of the negative, I just want to say thank you. Conndraka 17:41, 12 April 2006 (BST)

You're welcome. Stuff like this is always good to hear, especially in the midst of a crazy dramabomb like the one that seems to be going off now. --LibrarianBrent 03:10, 13 April 2006 (BST)


I haven't had that much dealings with you, but I'm trying for modship and I'd like your imput about me and my suitabilaty, thanks beforehand (I might not want to thank you afterwards, but that's an other story)--Vista W! 13:44, 19 April 2006 (BST)


Edit mistake, I didn't scroll and I just saw his replacing hag's spot with his own. I reverted it already. --Zaruthustra-Mod 04:36, 21 April 2006 (BST)

What about your comment when you made the edit? --LibrarianBrent 04:46, 21 April 2006 (BST)
I thought he was deleting hangat's argument. Not moving it. I sent him a note about it about a minute afterwords. Kept getting conflicts on revert. --Zaruthustra-Mod 04:48, 21 April 2006 (BST)
Okay, sorry about that. I believe I misunderstood the tone of your edit, seemed like you were just deleting his comments because he was Amazing. --LibrarianBrent 04:50, 21 April 2006 (BST)
S'cool. Lets just finish this thing. Win, lose. I don't even care anymore. --Zaruthustra-Mod 04:51, 21 April 2006 (BST)
Problem is anyone else would've gotten the benefit of the doubt as per the edit conflict. I sincerely doubt anyone else would've been accused of wrongdoing when the page is (according to Zar himself) undergoing a ton of edits. Plus my comments weren't oved or replaced, they were deleted in full, and only reverted when Zar found out it was a mistake - otherwise he would've simply left my text deleted, which is pretty much going against regulations. Feh.. Whatever. -- Amazing 01:28, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Attempt to find resolution and common ground

Because of the near perfect split on the discussion of Language an Offensive Users I created a page where maybe we can find an acceptable solution. If not, well at least I tried. Page can be found Moderation/Locational Language/Interaction I took on the mantle of responsible party so that even the MODs can state thier ideas and opinions. Conndraka 19:06, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Harassment Policy

Hey Brent. Check out the finished draft of a Harassment policy Wyndallin and I have put together here. Leave your feedback on either his talk page or mine. --Cyberbob240CDF - Arb - W! 13:39, 23 April 2006 (BST)


Very new at this wiki stuff. A page me and my team created "How to Blow things up so it looks pretty" has vanished, I can find no record of it in our histories or contrabutions, but the thing was clearly there last night. Any idea what happend? Padre


I'll level with you. I really have no intention of doing that. For a number of reasons. One, its a ridiculous claim. I never posted any kind of sensitive information about his location, or where to find it. Not to mention his reaction is completely contrary to everything he said or did up until that point. He's just feigning moral outrage for something he did himself earlier and seemed to have no problem with. Second, in my opinion coerced apologizes really have no place in a wiki. They're pointless, hollow, and completely contradictory to the purpose of moderation. So yea, I'll probably get banned for it but thems the breaks. You do what you have to, I know you need to close that case up. --Zaruthustra-Mod 23:39, 11 May 2006 (BST)

I'm sorry that I have to do this. Your posting rights will return in one day. --LibrarianBrent 01:52, 13 May 2006 (BST)

Mod Bid

I'm sending this message out to everyone who had spoken on my modship bid. Recently it was suggested that I wipe the slate clean and start over with a new bid. I decided against this for two main reasons: First, I don't want to risk causing any drama, and Second, I don't want to risk people on either side not being heard the second time around.

I am, however, asking anyone who has spoken to take a moment of thier time to review the case and deatermine if they need to change thier vote or, more than likely, keep it as is. Thank you. --SirensT RR 15:00, 12 May 2006 (BST)

And on a side note, have you considered condensing your talk page by throwing the stuff in an Archive? --SirensT RR 15:00, 12 May 2006 (BST)

Personal tools
project wonderful