UDWiki talk:Administration/Vandal Banning
Archives
Talk Archives
|
Vandal Banning Archive | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
General Discussion Archives
General Discussion
Vanished Comments
If anyone can get the right comments back please do. I don't have time to search them up but the histories are now merged. They're hidden in the revisions right now because of the re-merging of the A/VB pages. You'll only need to find the most recent revision of the A/VB talk comments. --Karekmaps 2.0?! 02:17, 16 May 2011 (BST)
May 2011
User:AinSynagoga
Buddy, you can't be serious on this one, yeh? In large part, this wiki is a social space for nerds who play the same game to interact. Flaming is a fairly standard aspect of these interactions, and actually you'll be hard pressed to find any discussion area on the wiki where arguments don't spring up constantly.
Most of the people who contribute to this wiki probably do so because they enjoy the "drama". A flame on a talk page is par for the course by our wiki norms, especially on a talk page like the dead, where everyone seems to mingle for the sole purpose of insulting each other. By our standards, trash talking is constructive interaction, in that it contributes the type of content that this wiki has evolved to encompass.
Which is not to say there's no recourse for someone going too far. If a user is being a pest there are ways to deal with that. Use their talk page, for starters, and ask them to leave you alone. If they don't and you can't reach an agreement with them then there is always arbitration to deal with harassment.
You should not use your sysop powers to randomly check user them and then block their account before anyone else can rule on the case. Sheesh.--GANG Giles Sednik CAPD 03:07, 28 May 2011 (BST)
- People seem to forget this is a wiki, not a forum. If someone's only interest here is in flaming users who are actually contributing, they can find somewhere else to do so. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:26, 28 May 2011 (BST)
- I'm the leader of the group this guy is in and I say ban his ass. --Penguinpyro 06:40, 28 May 2011 (BST)
User:Revenant
I have an issue with the suddeness and unwillingness to believe that this is anything other than vandalism because the person who made it was a goon. Suddenly, it's "bad faith" and "Sharing a signature = impersonation," even though it's got a lot of clever wiki-code that gives each goon a different color and only shows the link to the goon posting at the time. Yes, you could put forth a convincing argument that sharing a signature causes a lot of unnessicary confusion and that the policy should be altered to ban it. I'd even agree with that, but I don't see this as anything other than an attempt to de-legitimize a canidate in the current Beaurocrat election.--Fjorn 00:25, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- Hey Fjorn, not exactly true, it shows the links to ALL the users, not just the one who signed. I'm now moving this comment to the talk page. --Rosslessness 00:31, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- If it looked the same but all linked to the user who made it, I'd be fine with it. Hell I'd be impressed (as I was when I saw the sig and first thought that was the case). And I didn't know Rev was a goon. -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 03:36, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- That might actually be possible, I must have missed that part of the discussion. Hmm…
Yeah, I signed up for unrelated reasons the day before The Dead's resurgence. Hell of a coincidence, right?
ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 03:42, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- If it did do that, I'd really have no issue with it. --Rosslessness 09:57, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- Errr am I supposed to feel bad right now? Couldn't care less whether you were a goon or not or whether I didn't impeccably notice your activity :/ -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 10:21, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- That might actually be possible, I must have missed that part of the discussion. Hmm…
Once those wonderful people have changed to the new version, I'll happily agree. --Rosslessness 11:31, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- Ok. I am responding under this particular comment because there is something I need to say here: Rosslessness. You're an idiot. The actions of other people have no bearing on the merits of Revenant's guilt or innocence. For shame. You Dickhead.
Next I would like to take the opportunity to point out that this applies universally. This entire case is attempting to screw Revenant over for... doing nothing wrong. Where have we seen that before? Oh yes, I remember. When I was last highly active around here. Classic witch hunt here. jolly good show everyone. I love how there was an immediate assumption of bad faith for creating the page in the first place, reasoning that not only could it not be used for anything other than vandalism, but there was no way it could possibly be a work in progress that would result without it possibly being vandalism. Great job MisterGame! All you need now to be like the corrupt asshats of old is what Dorothy's scarecrow was searching for. Mind you, they still needed an instruction manual for the thing.
Yes. As before what we have here is a jolly good case of tribalism gone mad. You, the wretched inhabitants of this wiki, have once again instinctively banded together to defend yourself from the great nebulous GOON outsiders. Remember, they are a shadowy organisation of brigands who burn crops, loot stores, stampede people, and rape cattle. Oh wait. They aren't. They are just regular folks who spend much of their time elsewhere, and have a time honoured tradition of shaking down the status quo for spare change. They are large, they speak their mind, and compared to you lot they are bloody well organised (Also, smarter, kinder, etc. To be honest, you folk have very few redeeming qualities at all.). Naturally, they are a threat and must be fought with all of your pitiful might.
Which brings me back to this case. This is another transparently trumped up case in a futile attempt to try and oppose someone outside your collective. Specifically, the purpose is to remove a goon candidate from running in the crat elections, especially since it seems like he is winning and there is not a damned thing else you can do to stop it. This is political. And the really sad thing is that you are all so fucking pathetic and incompetent that you cannot even hide it properly. Everyone involved in this case that has at some point ruled against Revenant here has violated the vandalism policy and not only assumed bad faith, but condemned Revenant for the actions of others.
Great to know that my coup changed absolutely nothing about how the dirty work of adminstrator corruption was carried out. One would have thought that maybe, just maybe it would have gotten a few synapses firing within your skulls. But sadly I made the assumption at the time that you all had enough brain cells left to form one.
I stand corrected. --The Grimch U! E! 12:52, 2 May 2011 (BST)- Thanks Grim. --Rosslessness 12:59, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- Grim, hold still. I want to jam my ovipositor down your throat so you can have my babies. Kiss kiss! --カシュー, ザ ゾンビ クィーン (ビープ ビープ)
@ 13:04, 2 May 2011 (BST) - omg grim said somethign -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 14:36, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- Sploosh. Fucking sploosh. --
||||||||||||||| 22:26, 2 May 2011 (BST)
NEXT TIME FIX IT YOUR FUCKING SELF INSTEAD OF MAKING STUPID A/VB CASES ABOUT SIGS THAT WERE CONSENTED TO IN THE RECENT PAST. THAT IS ALL.--Karekmaps 2.0?! 15:05, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- sigh -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 16:49, 2 May 2011 (BST)
- FUCKING /SIGNED.
Thank you, Karek, for once again providing a voice of reason and commonsense, not to mention wiki kung fu, which are all too rare these days. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 23:08, 2 May 2011 (BST)
what the fuck
in the butt butt
you people have gone completely nutso over a bunch of goon signatures? --Karloth Vois ¯\(°_o)/¯ 10:20, 3 May 2011 (BST)
- What else would you expect from a bunch of sperging retard
randomly enforcing things that may or may not actually be WIKI LAW? --|||||||||||||||| 10:38, 3 May 2011 (BST) - P sure it was thad and the goons that went nutso. We just made our stance, and jumped on for the riddeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee -- ϑanceϑanceℜevolution 12:07, 3 May 2011 (BST)
User:Boxy
The ol' "one set of rules for the clique, and another set of rules for the rest". Now it looks like we're adding a third set for anything that involves Goons. At this point you're just flagrantly rubbing your hypocrisy in everybody's face just to prove you can get away with it, aren't you? Business as usual.--
| T | BALLS! | 22:34 3 May 2011(UTC)
Bots Discussion
Return of old, already banned, bots
Over the past couple of days, bots who were previous banned have been spamming again. Has the recent update of the wiki somehow unbanned them? -- boxy 10:35, 27 December 2014 (BST)
Hmm
It's been a few years, but we're getting a wave of bots again. Thoughts? Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 01:57, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hopefully it's just a random burst, not a consistent thing? -- AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Has it been going on for a while? Like beyond this week? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 10:11, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- No, not yet. I just realized I've gotten complacent because we've had so few. If it continues for more than a week or so we can ponder other options. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 17:19, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hopefully it's just a flareup for now... DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 23:31, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, like acne. -- AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah.... acne.... DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 00:14, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, like acne. -- AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hopefully it's just a flareup for now... DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 23:31, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
- No, not yet. I just realized I've gotten complacent because we've had so few. If it continues for more than a week or so we can ponder other options. Bob Moncrief EBD•W! 17:19, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
Anyone want to review this? They're still here, and popping them isn't helping. -- AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:33, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
