User talk:DanceDanceRevolution

edit User talk:DanceDanceRevolution Start a topic. Press: + Is it an emergency?  Email  Archives 2007 2008 2009 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 2010 H1 H2 2011 Q1 Q2 H2 MORE 2012 2013 2014-2017

Top of the new talk page

I win.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:57, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

--DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 00:01, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

First!

ಠ_ಠ --Orange Talk 23:58, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

--DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 00:01, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Angel is teh bestest sysops evar and I wuv him and never want him to leave the wiki agains!--Orange Talk 00:06, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I win

Thanks to HTML--Orange Talk 00:18, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I could win by altering the floating box code to go over it, but can't be bothered so :P -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 00:23, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

It's obviously not considered standard if people keep going "against" because of how many are running. And you know damn good and well that saying it's not a vote in bold was needed. >:( -- SA 00:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Noes

I winz :P -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 00:06, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

A/A

I noticed this particular line on the A/AG page (under "How to Arbitrate"):

4. Between them, the involved users choose an arbitrator

• The people in the case can choose any user of the wiki, be them listed in the Current Arbitrators list or not.
• You can see how an arbitrator has conducted their previous cases at Category:Arbitration Cases.
• If no arbitrator is agreed upon, one will be chosen by the administration team.

There is still no timeline of any kind (or precedent that I know of) as far as when the administration team chooses an arbitrator. But there does appear to be something on the wiki addressing it, if a little vague. --Maverick ^{Talk - OBR 404} 09:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

History is tangled. Look at the archive for the number of cases abandoned, sorted by users involved, sent to vandalism, etc. As for precedent, (someone) was trying to set up an archive of particularly ground breaking VB and Misconduct cases, but I can't remember who.--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 09:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Nubis on Izzy? --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 13:32, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Yonnua put this together.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 14:21, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Nah, that's rubbish. it certainly isn't what they're talking about.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:05, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

That line should be removed, I did once as it's complete shit made up by Hagnat attempting to claw more power when no-one was looking but either Karek or SA reverted it on the grounds that I'd made the change, subtly ignoring the fact that they were sysops and I was right... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 20:42, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm.. The thing is I would refrain from choosing any sort of arbitrator. Not only because I am indirectly an involved party, but also because I think the case is ridiculous. Might have to get another op to intervene, because the only outcopme I would push for is the closure of the case, or an arbitrator who encompasses that. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 15:56, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

We seriously fucking need to get something sorted to deal with dipshits who think they can cheat the system by doing the sort of thing you're endorsing right there. If the case is so blatantly ridiculous then I'm sure it'll be thrown out - so that "oh what a shit case look at how bad and horrible it is welp guess I'll just fuck with the system instead of taking the risk that I might lose such a "shit" case" crap is really just a bunch of empty posturing. peace Cyberbob  Talk  16:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

What he said^.-- SA 19:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Ugh...you guys really think I should accept one of Iscaridiot's candidates :/ ? I dunno at this point, I don't think it's a good idea to let Iz believe that he can try to just overthrow every arby case he doesn't like. Though, judging by his lack of activity in the case, I don't think he has enough time or interest to really pursue the case, but is to stubborn to withdraw.--Thadeous Oakley 20:18, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't lying when I said Revenant was the best offer Iscariot gave.-- SA 20:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not actually on the Arbitratot list, though. For a reason. ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 10:04, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

And you never suspected that's why I'm pushing for Thad to pick you without asking? I might have had a plan you know. >:| -- SA 18:15, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

lolwhat? I'm bad at guess games like that >.< --Thadeous Oakley 18:47, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

It's because you and SA are incompatible >=D --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 23:24, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't make me abandon all hope yet, =( --Thadeous Oakley 11:36, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Next time you have a plan involving me playing along, you might want to tell me that. :P ᚱᛁᚹᛖᚾᚨᚾᛏ 13:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

NEXT TIME READ MY MIND THEN. >:| -- SA 20:50, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Just give him his own treatment and drag it out as long as possible. Remember that you are the one with the optimum outcome if the case returns with null result, given Izzy is the one wanting the changes. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 10:00, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Wrong, disputed edit, as the rulings are disputed they don't apply. Therefore J3D is well within his rights to put you, Bob and anyone else he likes on any of his pages with any description. If MonsieurZerger was actually all about getting your case sorted, he'd be all about making his own representation as to why he was a fit and deserving arbitrator. We all know that he wasn't and that he can't defend his conduct to a competent judge. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 20:42, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

moronical

Aaw and I thought you liked me :( Especially harsh as it was your idea to nominate him in the first place... --Honestmistake 14:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Despite being the lowest form of wit, sarcasm is often my tool so be used to it. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 23:44, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Add a weapon to your page or I shall remove the category from it!-- SA 21:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I have a userpage with a monster, two dancing kittens and Clint Eastwood... --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 23:44, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

AND NONE OF THOSE ARE EXPLICIT WEAPONS YOU MORAN!-- SA 00:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Clint Eastwood. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 00:47, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

He's close. Very close. But the gun that is hard to see in the thumbnail covers it. You're fine my friend.-- SA 01:03, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Category:Speedy_Deletion_Candidates

D: --Janus ^talk 23:34, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Danke --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 14:53, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

And Link's sandbox? :0 --Janus ^talk 01:08, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

That is all. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 14:52, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Question (again)

Would pages like this count as a user redirect? It's a redirect in his namespace, leading to another page in the same namespace. --Haliman - Talk 00:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Nah. Redirect pages that are in the namespace to begin with, don't count. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 00:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

If ya' look at the edit summary, he was testing things, so let him be for now.-- SA 00:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Let him be... for now? There isn't anything we can do anyway :/ --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 00:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

For now because if he starts vandalising teh wiki we bring out the banhammer. KKK?-- SA 01:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

You can always have a drink and relax. User:Pyxzer/sig 01:07, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I know he was testing something. That's why I came here to ask about it instead of directly to him :P --Haliman - Talk 01:07, 29 November 2009 (UTC)