UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2008 10

e Vandal Banning Archive

2006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2009 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Q3 Q4 2013 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Years 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

October 2008

User:DanceDanceRevolution

DanceDanceRevolution (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Posted a frivolous A/VB case that could have been just as easily resolved on my talk page. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 09:00, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Not vandalism - a soft warning has been given, to all parties conserned, including you, bob. Please step away from the admin pages, now -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:02 24 October 2008 (BST)

Does that include me? I was involved, after all - I mean I wouldn't want you to make a bad call or something.--Nallan (Talk) 09:05, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Ditto Nallan, does this also include me? Full list of all those 'soft warned' please. Also, I think you meant concerned. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 09:07, 24 October 2008 (BST)

The list is 2 cases down... but I can extend it to you guys if you insist -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:22 24 October 2008 (BST)

Not until someone tells me what the fuck a soft warning is.--Nallan (Talk) 09:26, 24 October 2008 (BST)

No boxy, you posted one list and then in a separate VB case said all parties involved. The two are mutually exclusive, mainly because you as the ruling sysop are involved. Are you 'soft warning' yourself? Also, I don't think threatening users with the extension of warnings to include them is proper sysop conduct.

Nallan, soft warnings don't exist at all in policy. They are a device used by rogue sysops such as Hagnat to subvert the A/VB system. I really thought we'd got over using these imaginary constructs, apparently not. There's no point in taking it to misconduct, due to the judges there. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 09:36, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Which is why we need someone that actually represents people the on the wiki who aren't all buttfucking each other, to be promoted to sysop.--CyberRead240 09:38, 24 October 2008 (BST)

I guess you guys are screwed then; you've pretty much redefined the meaning of the word "circlejerk". --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 09:41, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Nah it still means the same thing ;) --Nallan (Talk) 09:42, 24 October 2008 (BST)

I'm interested to know how we could have possibly changed it? Man we are pretty fucking powerful, we have control over the english language. FUCK YES.--CyberRead240 09:43, 24 October 2008 (BST)

User:Cyberbob240

I know its a shitstorm of Cyberbob vandal accusations, but I really couldn't see a reason for this? Legit explaination will immediately be followed with love and cuddles. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:51, 24 October 2008 (BST)

If all you're after is an explanation a note on my talk page would have sufficed. This is extremely frivolous. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:54, 24 October 2008 (BST)

I don't think that counts as an explaination. I'll assume it should have been put on this page then? D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:57, 24 October 2008 (BST)

I did it for two reasons, one being the same as for all the other reverts. The other is that with the edited version of the request ZA put on the page the longer one is redundant. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:59, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Not vandalism - this is part of the last case (not allowing the A/SD request to be moved to A/D) that has already been ruled on. Please take note of my soft warning below, DDR, it applies to you too -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:00 24 October 2008 (BST)

User:Cyberbob240

Cyberbob240 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Shitting up admin pages. --xoxo 08:19, 24 October 2008 (BST)

You really want to go down that road? We could sit here reporting each other's edits of that nature all day. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:20, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Or you could stop vandalising =p D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:22, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Soft warning, and it applies to Bob, J3D, DDR and Sexy. The number of edit conflicts I've had to work through in the last half an hour here, trying to sort through your pages of trolling is ridiculous -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 08:58 24 October 2008 (BST)

And yet none of it is justified because the guilty goes unpunished. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 09:00, 24 October 2008 (BST)

It's his case, he is allowed to comment as he likes. And are we really going down the soft warning route again? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 09:00, 24 October 2008 (BST)

User:Sexylegsread

Sexylegsread (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

If this doesn't count as spamming admin pages I don't know what does. That image is breaking tables. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:14, 24 October 2008 (BST)

More. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:17, 24 October 2008 (BST)

I found it a perfectly legitimate way of ending an argument that would have continued to break everything anyway. It is ironic that he needed to bring out that image to actually stop the argument between me and CF. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:19, 24 October 2008 (BST)

lol butthurt--CyberRead240 08:20, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Cancer, I really, really should have known. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:20, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Sorry to disappoint guys, but it isn't mine. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:21, 24 October 2008 (BST)

lololol, totally butthurt. Also, thankyou to whoever resized my images, I r noob with interweb stuff--CyberRead240 08:25, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Vandalism - a legitimate way to end the argument would be to stop posting, or at least take it to a talk page. Spamming main admin pages with huge images isn't on -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 08:42 24 October 2008 (BST)

"Also, thankyou to whoever resized my images, I r noob with interweb stuff" - sexylegsread. The images were relevant, the size was not. He didn't know how to resize them and didn't make them big again when they were resized. Hardly bad faith...--xoxo 08:44, 24 October 2008 (BST)

No, I honestly didn't know how to resize, or how big they were before I posted them, then it got caught up in the shit storm.--CyberRead240 08:44, 24 October 2008 (BST)

How long have you been around on the wiki for again? Not an excuse after so long, sorry. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:45, 24 October 2008 (BST)

It is my excuse, its the first time I have uploaded an image that wasn't already prepared for me.--CyberRead240 08:46, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Coming from the guy who can't read a/sd policy after over 2 years?? --xoxo 08:47, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Coming from the guy who failed as a sysop cause of his stoooopid handling of wiki policy? D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:49, 24 October 2008 (BST)

I can read it. I figured that the obvious bad faith in which you guys made those votes rendered it null and void. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:49, 24 October 2008 (BST)

If that's your excuse you probably should report everyone who voted for vandalism. I'm sure User:Jen will be interested to hear what you have to say.--xoxo 08:50, 24 October 2008 (BST)

I'd love to except I know it would be pointless (being too subjective). As for Jen, had they actually gone ahead and voted that wouldn't have been bad faith as they are an uninvolved party. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:53, 24 October 2008 (BST)

He shouldn't have put them there, if he didn't know how to do it properly. And frankly, the nature of the images wasn't relevant to the case at all. It was trolling nonsense -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 08:51 24 October 2008 (BST)

Ah yes, the "trolling not allowed" policy. You're a repository of wiki lore, did you know that box-y?--Nallan (Talk) 08:58, 24 October 2008 (BST)

No, wasn't trolling, Cyberbob said he didn't have myspace, and my quick googling proved him wrong. It ended that particular conversation.

You're saying that if I didn't know how to do it properly, I shouldn't have done it at all? Thats not fair, you get to pose as a Sysop every day!:(--CyberRead240 09:12, 24 October 2008 (BST)

If you want to discuss someones god damn myspace page, do it on their talk page, especially if it involves putting up huge images. Now GTFO this page with this worthless discussion -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 09:20 24 October 2008 (BST)

I told you sirsysop that I didn't know how to resize them, otherwise I would have. Assume good faith. It was a visual post, I used an image instead of text. This isn't worthless I am telling you that I don't think I have committed vandalism. You don't need to get all agro when someone says your a shit sysop, just prove them wrong, be a good sysop. I'll be waiting.....for a very long time.--CyberRead240 09:25, 24 October 2008 (BST)

The conversation isn't over, as that myspace is not mine. Thought you might like to know. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 09:14, 24 October 2008 (BST)

It is over as far as I am concerned, I believe it is yours, and I wont be swayed otherwise.--CyberRead240 09:15, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Why does it matter? --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 09:17, 24 October 2008 (BST)

It doesn't, end of.--CyberRead240 09:17, 24 October 2008 (BST)

For something that doesn't matter you sure seem pretty determined to press your side of the argument. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 09:19, 24 October 2008 (BST)

...look who's talking...just give up, I think its yourspace, you think it isn't. Difference of opinion. No need to continue this.--CyberRead240 09:25, 24 October 2008 (BST)

User:J3D

J3D (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Insists on removing the requests for the Speedy Deletion of the Cyberfaggot and Cyberbob240 pages from A/SD despite there being absolutely no reason to - subjective or otherwise. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:10, 24 October 2008 (BST)

J3D has done nothing but revert. This may have been a good faith mistake as a consequence of his participation in current edit war. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:13, 24 October 2008 (BST)

I missed the part where reverting vandalism in it's entirety wasn't a reason for removing things from pages.--xoxo 08:15, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Neither of those two requests are involved in that which you are trying to paint as vandalism. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:16, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Please learn to read, it'd save us all repeating ourselves. Until then, let me help you: I reverted edits that included vandalism. If you don't want stuff moved, please don't incorporate it in your vandalism sprees.--xoxo 08:18, 24 October 2008 (BST)

It's your responsibility to learn how to edit properly, not mine. Laziness is no excuse. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:19, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Reverting vandalism is my responsibility, i did that Now shh shh and wait for the sysops to arrive.--xoxo 08:21, 24 October 2008 (BST)

In your attempt to revert "vandalism" you oh-so-ironically committed actual vandalism of your own. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:22, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Good faith; Learn it, he had it, you have none. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:31, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Good faith is but a matter of perspective. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:32, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Indeed. And your perspective is wrong.--CyberRead240 08:34, 24 October 2008 (BST)

You clearly don't know how closely the words "perspective" and "subjectivity" go hand in hand. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:36, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Not vandalism - but getting close. I'm going with the "didn't notice" excuse during an edit war. Be careful, J3D -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 08:38 24 October 2008 (BST)

Wow i'm impressed! Correct! Gotta be the first time in, what, a month? Since you probably didn't mean it i'll let you change your decision and rule based on your personal opinions of users.--xoxo 08:40, 24 October 2008 (BST)

User:Cyberbob240

Cyberbob240 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

continually and deliberately ignoring A/SD policy that clearly states "A Speedy Deletion may be circumvented by a single vote of Keep under the request. " Several such keep votes have been made, and 2 seperate users tried to move the pages in question from a/sd to a/d. Despite being warned of a/vb action and having his attention directed to such policy Cyberbob decided to continue reverting the edits. In addition to this he is continually placing a speedy delete template on the pages up for deletion, despite being fully aware they are no longer up for speedy deletion. I will continue to revert until a sysop arrives.--xoxo 08:03, 24 October 2008 (BST)

As will I. Voting Keep is clearly in bad faith violation of SD Criterion 9. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:04, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Proof of moving the contents back. If that is needed of course. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:07, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Cyberbob's continued vandalism, over 10 acts so far should result in more than just a single escalation on a/vd as he shows no desire to go with reason, general consensus of users online OR policy and as an ex-sysop, should know better.--xoxo 08:08, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Fail. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:18, 24 October 2008 (BST)

What, the vandalism or your defense? D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:21, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Not vandalism - the redirects obviously do qualify for speedydeletion, and there was no valid reason to vote keep on them, other than DDR not wanting the rules that apply to everyone else to apply to him. The case is supposed to be moved by a system operator, by the rules, so yeah, it should stay on A/SD until revived by a sysop. However the speedydeletion nomination probably has to go to A/D, seeing as there is a keep vote on it. I'll have a look later -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 08:33 24 October 2008 (BST)

winnar --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 08:34, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Concurance. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 08:43, 24 October 2008 (BST)

User:Shakey60

Shakey60 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

This more or less speaks for itself. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 07:15, 24 October 2008 (BST)

I always just assumed you created it =] D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 07:19, 24 October 2008 (BST)

He just made it. I don't know how you would have had time to "always assume" anything. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 07:30, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Also, this. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 07:30, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Well, CF, I didn't have the time to check the history, ya dig? I just saw it on the RC and had a little giggle. D^ANCED^ANCER^EVOLUTION (TALK | CONTRIBS) 07:31, 24 October 2008 (BST)

Warned -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 08:22 24 October 2008 (BST)

User:Rober e killer

Rober e killer (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Warned [1] --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 18:45, 22 October 2008 (BST)

User:McWaffle

McWaffle (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Created this suggestion. His comments included "honestly I just thought it was funny" and in response to a vote of Humourous "glad someone liked it anyway ;)". Clearly intended as a humourous suggestion.

Adding a humourous suggestion to the main system is vandalism as defined by point 10 of the suggestions guidelines. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 15:40, 22 October 2008 (BST)

It was borderline. I left a note on his talk page about it. Not Vandalism.--– Nubis ^NWO 16:38, 23 October 2008 (BST)

User:Gamestriker4

Gamestriker4 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

I'm all for a bit of friendly sandbox/sandpit trolling but this edit really fucked up the page. It's not his first massively page breaking edit to the page and/or sandbox either.--xoxo 00:04, 22 October 2008 (BST)

Meh - it's the sandpit, a place for testing shitz, he's testing out how annoying he can be... and succeeding. Better there, than anywhere else. I suggest you stop using the sandboxes/sandpits as your private chat/advertising rooms if you don't like people experimenting in the middle of your conversations -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 08:14 22 October 2008 (BST)

Sigh you are predictable, policy out the window for personal vendettas. --xoxo 08:41, 22 October 2008 (BST)

I don't do vendettas, but it looks like you're working on getting another one going again. The whole point of sandboxes is so that people can do stuff that would get them warned if they stuffed it up elsewhere. There are limits (pron links and what-not), but this doesn't reach it for me -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 08:57 22 October 2008 (BST)

Repeated intentional breaking of the page doesn't reach it for you? Hmmm, each to his own i guess. --xoxo 09:06, 22 October 2008 (BST)

You might try Arbitration. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 09:14, 22 October 2008 (BST)

I use this page, and when I clicked the link it caused srs lag on my end. How inconvenient, for me a regular user :(. I hope my elected sysops do something about this annoyance.--CyberRead240 09:32, 22 October 2008 (BST)

You see, I always thought 'bad faith' was designated as an edit made with the clear intent to not improve the wiki. Can these edits to a community page in any way be seen as 'good faith'? Is this person repeatedly testing things so that he can improve his wiki coding and be constructive elsewhere in the community? If this cannot be seen as 'good faith' in any way the a vandalism ruling should result. Bad faith = vandalism. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 09:58, 22 October 2008 (BST)

Fail. For one, the page in question is not a community page. For two, this case is too subjective to be subject to A/VB. Like I said to the guy who actually made the case - Arbitration is where this should be taken.--HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 10:34, 22 October 2008 (BST)

It isn't under anyones userspace?--CyberRead240 10:37, 22 October 2008 (BST)

No, but as a sandpit it can't really be placed in the same category as something like Suggestions. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 10:58, 22 October 2008 (BST)

True, but there should still be boundaries on pages like that, perhaps not as stringent as we'd have on suggestions. porn links for example as boxy said, repeated page breaking (imho) would be another.--xoxo 11:11, 22 October 2008 (BST)

This is exactly the sort of discussion that would be best had in an Arbitration case. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 12:32, 22 October 2008 (BST)

No, it's not. Disputes over a/vb aren't arbies material (see countless past examples). At least hold out for a few more sysops views. If it's a unanimous no i'll drop it, if it's not, then boxys may have to accept he's on a vendetta :P --xoxo 12:34, 22 October 2008 (BST)

This may be a more suitable location for your private chat page? -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 12:51 22 October 2008 (BST)

That's right boxy, head in the sand. --xoxo 12:53, 22 October 2008 (BST)

You should replace {{Sandpitwarning}} with {{ALiMNav}} though, to make it clear that you get to say what should, and what should npt be on your pages -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 12:54 22 October 2008 (BST)

WARNING, AGENDA ALERT, AGENDA ALERT..UNFIT 'CRAT IN THE VICINITY--CyberRead240 12:56, 22 October 2008 (BST)

That'd be bitter ex-crat. Seriously boxy, do you have the ability to look at this even slightly objectively? --xoxo 13:01, 22 October 2008 (BST)

You guys make me lol. Not in a good way, though. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 13:07, 22 October 2008 (BST)

Cool story bro--CyberRead240 13:10, 22 October 2008 (BST)

Not Vandalism - Oh my people, it's a sandbox. People are pointed to these things to make test edits or fool around. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 18:28, 22 October 2008 (BST)

Did you scroll down and look at the edit? Also, it's a sandPIT :P--CyberRead240 05:06, 23 October 2008 (BST)

Not Vandalism this time. Note left on his talk page explaining that perhaps he should make his own sandpit. --– Nubis ^NWO 16:41, 23 October 2008 (BST)

User:Ottotorrens

Ottotorrens (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Oh well look at that, whoops?--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 22:27, 20 October 2008 (BST)

Was already warned for that. See below. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:31, 20 October 2008 (BST)

its a different vandalism though... This has nothing to do with Sonny... or am I missing something...--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 22:43, 20 October 2008 (BST)

Check the link in boxy's ruling. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:48, 20 October 2008 (BST)

oh... lulz--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 01:48, 21 October 2008 (BST)

User:Tomer

Tomer (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Wiped the page BEGINNERS MSF FORCE as seen here.--SirArgo ^Talk 05:39, 20 October 2008 (BST)

Not vandalism - it looks like it's his page, it's just that there's been a history wipe -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 05:44 20 October 2008 (BST)

User:Fluffy

Fluffy (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Serial spammer with no valuable contribs:

• nonsense
• nonsense
• nonsense

etc. etc. --Funt Solo ^QT 17:51, 19 October 2008 (BST)

Gone. Again. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 17:52, 19 October 2008 (BST)

User:WOOT

WOOT (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Impersonation. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 05:24, 19 October 2008 (BST)

OH SHI- *This hip bopper just got sent to the cell ya dig?*--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 05:49, 19 October 2008 (BST)

Warned - please go back on the medication, WOOT :P -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 10:39 19 October 2008 (BST)

I lost my pills... all of them... ;_; --/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 17:51, 19 October 2008 (BST)

User:Smackelbap

smackelbap (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

looks like vandalism to me...--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 00:19, 18 October 2008 (BST)

Oh, and this, what a fag--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 00:23, 18 October 2008 (BST)

Permabanned. Only one contributive edit which he then undid. -- Cheese 00:25, 18 October 2008 (BST)

Ah, so, how's little Timmy doing? You ever tell AHLG that I'm the father?--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 00:42, 18 October 2008 (BST)

User:Imthatguy

Imthatguy (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Vandalism --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 21:47, 17 October 2008 (BST)

Not vandalism - looks like a newbie mistake, commenting on the main page, rather than the talk page. I've left him a note about where to leave any comments -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 01:09 18 October 2008 (BST)

Ottotorrens

Ottotorrens (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Pasting Sonny's talk page this time. -- Cheese 18:53, 15 October 2008 (BST)

24hr ban for the above edit, which is trolling impersonation, and also for this edit which was immediately undone by the page owner -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 12:41 16 October 2008 (BST)

User:ScouterTX

ScouterTX (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

this looks like impersonation to me.--Kristi of the Dead 20:32, 15 October 2008 (BST)

It is indeed. Warned -- Cheese 20:36, 15 October 2008 (BST)

User:Ottotorrens

Ottotorrens (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Here --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 00:53, 15 October 2008 (BST)

And isn't this impersonation? --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 00:53, 15 October 2008 (BST)

Warned -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 13:28 15 October 2008 (BST)

User:Luckydogpsycho

Luckydogpsycho (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Created a page for a person he does not like in game, as seen here and here. Bad faith. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 02:20, 13 October 2008 (BST)

If anyone cares, this vandalism was turned into a page.--SirArgo ^Talk 03:11, 13 October 2008 (BST)

Warned Conndraka^{mod TAZM CFT} 05:46, 13 October 2008 (BST)

User:Secruss

Secruss (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Blanking of Talk:Crusade '08 page here and again here, because he thinks disagreement is trolling. --Silisquish 22:52, 12 October 2008 (BST)

Per Specific Case Editing Guidelines, users & groups do indeed have the right to remove content from their talk pages, although it is considered poor form to do so without creating an archive. You are always free to post your comments on a page of your own. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 05:21, 13 October 2008 (BST)

Heh, I didn't know that --Silisquish 20:28, 13 October 2008 (BST)

Not vandalism, and if you, Silisquish, restore those bits that Secruss has removed again I will report you for vandalism yourself. Groups have special ownership rights on their own pages, and the associated talk pages. They can remove conversations that they don't want there -- boxy ^{talk • i} 08:28 13 October 2008 (BST)

User:Leon365

Leon365 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Check This entire history with his edits. He just added some lines of insults. Like Here and Here.--SirArgo ^Talk 01:37, 11 October 2008 (BST)

Warned - -- boxy ^{talk • i} 03:10 11 October 2008 (BST)

User:DCC

DCC (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Vandalism on my user page here And again hereand again here —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stephen Colbert DFA (talk • contribs) 05:35, October 9, 2008.

Are you serious? -- #99 ^DCC 06:18, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Ok, let's take this to the talk page, fellows. I'm pretty sure I'm going to vote Not Vandalism on this, but you two seem to need to talk this out. --– Nubis ^NWO 07:31, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Yep, not vandalism, he just missed your talk page. Stoopit doesn't equal bad faith -- boxy ^{talk • i} 10:15 9 October 2008 (BST)

Not vandalism - As Boxy. Tabbed browsing is convenient but does have it's drawbacks. -- Cheese 21:36, 9 October 2008 (BST)

User:Reader5

Reader5 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Removal of a vandal case. No idea what he was hoping to achieve. - User:Whitehouse 17:36, 8 October 2008 (BST)

Warned -- boxy ^{talk • i} 10:41 9 October 2008 (BST)

User:Schizoidgull

Schizoidgull (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Sockpuppet to evade ban. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 23:50, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Banned the sock. I call a Permaban Vote. -- Cheese 23:53, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Yep - Continues to evade bans despite having 3 socks killed in past hour or so. -- Cheese 23:53, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Wait up, that sock puppet's contributions are from the same time the last one was banned, so the puppet gets banned, but not an escalation. And when you ban someone who's using sock puppets, please make sure you block the IP addy for the same period, which should have stopped this rot 2 cases ago -- boxy ^{talk • i} 10:37 8 October 2008 (BST)

User:Cyberbob240

Cyberbob240 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

I have asked cyberbob twice to cease posting exclusively to troll on my misconduct case, as you can see here, he has not done so. (My requests can be found in the second deep set of indents here. Trolling is exclusively bad faith, FYI. --The Grimch ^{U! E!} 23:24, 7 October 2008 (BST)

You've been warned about spamming admin pages several times, bob. That's a 48 hour ban. -- Cheese 23:26, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Overturned the ban since the escalation was to such a level that punishment would be a ban it is only fitting that this gets a sysop vote. Not to mention that the "offense" is so "open to interpretation" that a discussion is clearly needed on what his exact "crime" is. Not Vandalism since he has every right to post there. --– Nubis ^NWO 14:26, 8 October 2008 (BST)

Vandalism - You have been told to stop this crap, many, many times. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 18:39, 8 October 2008 (BST)

If I was trolling, you should go and bring cases against like three quarters of the people posting in that "We have found a witch, may we burn it?" section. Whoops, damn, I forgot - you only bring cases against people that disagree with you. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 21:41, 8 October 2008 (BST)

Wouldn't that be just about the entire user base of the wiki? :/ I don't think 200kb would be enough room, we'd need to have pages like: UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2008 10/Grimdler's List/Page 4 of 67 -- Cheese 21:46, 8 October 2008 (BST)

Oh, I don't think that would be much of a problem for Grim. If there's one thing he has lots of it's free time. --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 06:29, 9 October 2008 (BST)

Bleh. Next!--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:03, 13 October 2008 (BST)

User:Schizoidgull

Schizoidgull (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

This ID circumvents a week ban. Persistent vandal, request perma due to repeated ban evasion. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 23:17, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Extended to 1 month ban. Next one gets the Permavote. -- Cheese 23:21, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Sweet. If he gets perma then I'm adding him to the list on the Witch Burners. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 23:27, 7 October 2008 (BST)

User:Schizoidgull

Schizoidgull (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Ban Evasion using this account. Ban extended to 1 week. -- Cheese 22:54, 7 October 2008 (BST)

User:Schizoidgull

Schizoidgull (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Intentionally putting a suggestion policy in the main suggestion system. --Midianian^{|T|T:S|C:RCS|} 07:59, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Well, he's already serving a 48hr ban, so while I'm inclined to rule this as vandalism, I'd include it in the case below (ie. no A/VD escalation beyond what has already been applied), but will remove the spammy suggestion -- boxy ^{talk • i} 10:17 7 October 2008 (BST)

User:Schizoidgull

Schizoidgull (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Vandalized again. le sigh. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 01:43, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Some more --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 01:45, 7 October 2008 (BST)

More after I asked him on his talk page to stop. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 02:05, 7 October 2008 (BST)

Another he did to someone else earlier today. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 02:07, 7 October 2008 (BST)

48 hour block --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 02:12, 7 October 2008 (BST)

User:Shotgun

Shotgun (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Here's a case of impersonation, and vandalism as he's just making shit up that doesn't reflect the in-game reality, as well as altering someone else's post and trying to disguise it as if a user called "Monkeh" did the edits. Also, check his contribs, where he's edit warring on the Fort Perryn page with similar nonsense. As it's serial trolling and shitting up of the wiki, I came straight here rather than try diplomacy. Some people just are vandals (and besides, a guy called Lord Nightmare has tried asking him to stop on the Perryn edit war). --Funt Solo ^QT 20:33, 5 October 2008 (BST)

Some examples [2], [3], [4], [5] and spreading false information. No desirable edits therefore, blocked.--  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 03:42, 6 October 2008 (BST)

User:Obsdark

Obsdark (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Soft warning given to Obsdark for deleting comments (poorly) off Talk:Suggestions. Remember kids, just because you don't agree with a poster that doesn't mean you can delete their comments off public pages. (The T:S page history is a nightmare, but he deleted a DCC post and placed ranting nonsense over it.) Just posting for informational reasons. --– Nubis ^NWO 01:05, 5 October 2008 (BST)

Since when did deleting comments merit a mere soft warning? --HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK COCKS 01:07, 5 October 2008 (BST)

Anyone is free to give unofficial warnings rather than bring a VB case here, if they feel that is a better way to deal with the situation. Saying that you've done it here is counterproductive. Please don't -- boxy ^{talk • i} 13:57 5 October 2008 (BST)

Nubis is a pansy ass and worries that if he comes down hard "defending" a fellow goon people will scream favoritism. He's a fucking moron.-- #99 ^DCC 02:51, 6 October 2008 (BST)

User:Happykook

Happykook (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

This edit. Removing a signed comment from a talk page without reason. Given Happykook's history with me, this is clearly targeted and therefore a bad faith edit to remove my comment from a community talk page. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 11:55, 3 October 2008 (BST)

Not Vandalism - Take it up with him instead of bringing it here. -- Cheese 13:26, 4 October 2008 (BST)

I point all readers to the above case and this one to compare and contrast. Both regarding removals from community talk pages, however one results in a soft warning (in which the sysop in question clearly states it would be a full warning if the case was brought here) and the other where it's ruled not vandalism and the ruling sysop recommends further contact with the vandal in order to promote more wiki drama. A/VB, when you absolutely positively have to flip a coin for any decision, accept no substitutes. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 12:17, 5 October 2008 (BST)

This is why the syops need to decide, be a dick to everyone (Grim), or be kind and helpful to everyone (AHLG). Not stuck in the middle, giving out "soft warnings" to some, and "LOLBANz" to others based on who they are. And how in the fuck is this petty? He removed his whole comment...--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 17:23, 5 October 2008 (BST)

Not Vandalism - very petty reporting from Iscariot, yet again. It was a purely coincidental comment about wiki maintenance that any decent wiki contributor should be fine with it being removed once it had served it's purpose (keeping the section from being re-inserted on the main Mall page). However I see no reason why the comment was reinserted by Cheese if there was already a ruling of not vandalism, as it did nothing but up the drama level on the page -- boxy ^{talk • i} 13:54 5 October 2008 (BST)

User:Schizoidgull

Schizoidgull (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)

Blocked for a day. More vandalism --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 01:21, 1 October 2008 (BST)