UDWiki talk:Administration/Arbitration/Lelouch vs Zombie Lord

Ruling

It's a good ruling, on a not so easy case, judging by the length of arguments alone. Still, you're condemning yourself to forever babysit them on developing suggestions. You're basically forcing them to be civil to each other, which is noble, but also hard. Also, you are specifically mentioned dev suggs and voting pages, this isn't going to stop any drama of them on each of their respective talk pages. Preventing that should have been one of your actions in the first place since this case mainly centers about them not liking each other.

Really, a no contact order between their talk pages was an option. As for developing suggestions, they should be allowed to express their opinions no matter how griefing or trollish they are. This because of the simple fact that there isn't a civility policy on this wiki. Forcing civility on 2 persons, on a specific page is something I have doubts about. But maybe that's just me. --Thadeous Oakley 18:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

You're not part of the case, I didn't ask for your opinion. Stay the fuck off it.-- ¯\(°_o)/¯ 18:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

You did ask for opinions though. 19:21, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

My apologies, I wasn't sure where you would want any discussion, since you did not move the pre-case talkings to the discussion page. Regardless, you don't have to ask me, I always give my opinion free at cost without any remorse. --Thadeous Oakley 19:23, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I asked for questions, comments and concerns, from the involved parties. It's a common idea that if there is an arby case actually underway, talk goes on talk unless otherwise asked for. The reason why the pre-lim discussion stays is so I can read through that as evidence as well. If Thad wasn't incompetent in arbitration, he'd know, and you should know that too mis. :/ -- Big Cat 21:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Or maybe you should just clarify it better next time, or maybe just move it to the talk page without the hostile reaction. Maybe even an actual response to the opinion given. Just sayin' --Thadeous Oakley 21:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Or maybe you can just learn about things you regularly muck about in. It'd remove most of the hassle from EVERYTHING.-- Big Cat 22:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Settle, petal. Both of you. SA was unclear, Thad made a mistake, both of you hush. It's not really important, like. 22:16, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Unclear has nothing to do with it. I don't have to be clear on who can post ont he main page of an arbies case when they're uninvolved. If you're unsure, it's common sense to use the talk page.-- Big Cat 22:19, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

A comments section with no riders is an invitation for chit chat, though. 22:22, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Comment section on the main page of an arbitration case. Are you guys not paying attention to the section in, or are you trying to make me have a conniption? -- Big Cat 22:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

How long are going to keep nagging about this SA? I already made my apologies almost immediately after your "fuck yu" comment, are you going to comment on my opinion or not? --Thadeous Oakley 22:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

What's a conniption? --Thadeous Oakley 22:31, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Berserk mode. Thad, SA, you know you rub each other the wrong way, knock it off. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 22:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)