UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Amazing vs. 'STER

From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Padlock.png Administration Services — Protection.
This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

Amazing vs. 'STER

'STER has been behaving quite horribly due to vandalism cases I brought to the Mod team.

'STER was apparently tired of seeing my reports concerning a twice-banned repeat offender called MaulMachine, someone who constantly goes out of his way to annoy me in the game, on the Wiki, on a forum, and on my own forum. He even reported me as a PKer simply out of spite after things had cooled down a bit, igniting more trouble yet again.

Instead of letting someone else handle the case itself, 'STER basically destroyed it by warning both MaulMachine and myself for poor behavior. His "judgement" was simply to tell both of us to shut up and stop bothering him. In this case, the other party has been found guilty of vandalism and banned twice (warned even more) because of my reports. How does this make sense? The solution to 'STER's annoyance seems to be that I shouldn't be allowed to use the Vandal Report space to report vandalism. I guess that works really well for 'STER... but no one is forcing him to read my cases. That could easily be left to another Moderator.

I fail to see how (most recently) reporting someone for reverting POV info when he knows it doesn't belong on a page is bad behavior.

'STER saw fit to personally insult me like a gossiping hen because he was tired of reading what I STILL believe to be real cases of vandalism. His own boredom with this constant problem I am having with vandals who don't like me should have no place in his case decisions.

It's quite apparent that he let his dislike for yours truly influence his work as a voluntary Moderator of this Wiki.

In effect he also told me to stop filing Vandalism reports under threat of banning. How is this reasonable in any way? So I have to suffer any future vandalism targetted against me because 'STER is tired of seeing the reports and doesn't like me? Bah-loney.

What's ironic is that, of all the people I rabidly insult, 'STER has escaped much of my acidic tongue. It's sad that he has dumpster-dived into lame insults and abuse of his position through effectively blocking me from reporting Vandalism, and threatening me with banning if I don't stop offending his eye with said reports and the ensuing squabbling.

I'm not requesting any kind of actual action toward 'STER, but it would be much appreciated if someone could point out that he is indeed being blind to his own errant behavior and abuse of power. As a moderator, he is trusted to mainatin a certain ethic. He has clearly violated this trust.

Additional link: My User Page

You know.. I reported MaulMachine, yes. He replied with a TON OF INSULTS, CURSING, AND FLAMING. And I get warned for bringing the case up. Bullshit, 'STER. Bullshit.

All you folks see, for the most part, is my problem with MaulMachine and other assorted malcontents. I have several Wiki pages I created or maintain, and I've been a contributor of many Approved Suggestions in the past. As Moderators/Arbitrators, you're mostly seeing the bad shit, because that's what you've signed on to do. There's more to my Wiki usage than reporting Vandals and bringing problems to Arbitration, yet 'STER and some others seem to think it's a daily thing. Why not count up all my reports over the 6 Months I've been using the Wiki, and count up the ones that were judged in my favor? Sure it'll be a reasonably bulky number, but it's over the course of 6 months and they're never unfounded or purposeful misuse of the system. -- Amazing 03:26, 14 March 2006 (GMT)


Response from 'STER: I'll have to contest that last statement. Yes, MaulMachine has actually made some bad-faith edits. In this particular case, I did in fact warn him for the edit in question. However, I also warned Amazing. This was because Amazing has reported MaulMachine for vandalism any and every time he does something even slightly questionable. The fact that MM actually vandalised the Wiki some of those times was intirely incidental to Amazing's purpose, which was to annoy MaulMachine. He has a person vendetta which he was attempting to persecute via the Wiki, and that is not what the wiki is for. On one occasion I have reason to believe he actually had a friend create a compromising situation so that he could report MaulMachine for what seemed to be vandalism. He has continued to use the wiki vandal banning page for his own ends even thgouh I have asked him to stop. As such, I decided to warn him.--'STER-Talk-Mod 03:47, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

You're quite full of baseless accusations, aren't you? I point you to the fact that I walked away from Maul and he reported me to a PK list afterward. Does that sound like I'm the one with the Vandetta? Maybe I'm a little sensitive to Maul's edits when they concern me. That's from experience, my friend.
As for your gravely mistaken notion that I would ever set anyone up - I simply didn't think to check the History, because I thought he was making the first edit to that notation since it was first published. Frankly you're jumping on one mistake I made that is easily turned around and you're now trying to use it against me. LokiJester surprised me and a fellow CDF leader by going against MaulMachine so rabidly. We both thought.. "Go Loki!! Awesome." - It appears he went a little too far though in editing a false report against me into a false report against Maul. When Maul changed it back to my name, I thought he was changing the original post to my name. It's a simple mistake, and because of past experience, I took it as yet another in a long series of little jabs he makes when things "cool down" and I reported it.
I wonder how you can justify this behavior as a Moderator. You have no real reason to ask me to stop usng the Vandalism page for its purpose. As I say, maybe I'm overly sensitive to Maul's edits concerning me personally, but that's from the past events that resulted in his banishment. Basically, I'm drawing from history in my actions. You're ignoring it.
You could've voiced your disgust and left it alone for another Moderator who doesn't have as short a fuse.. but instead you took this into the realm of Moderator Power Abuse and personal Insult. -- Amazing 04:49, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Edit: nevermind. I have come to a decision.--ramby T--W! - SGP 03:51, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Abitrators decision: I have desided that both of you are being asshats about this. 'STER, I want you to apologize to Amazing about being an asshat. And Amazing; I want you to apologize for being a pain in the arse. And Amazing, if you won't make sure you are right; don't use the report vandalism page. in horter terms. 'Ster say you are sorry for calling Amazing an asshat. and Amazing, do not touch the vandelism page again. --ramby T--W! - SGP 05:02, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Soo.. What do I do if someone blanks my page over and over again...? I don't think that's something it's possible to abide by. -- Amazing 05:07, 14 March 2006 (GMT)
You should have thought of that earlier. 'STER was right in warning you, but he had no right to call you an asshat. I have made my decision, and as said above, my decision is final. - --ramby T--W! - SGP 05:11, 14 March 2006 (GMT)
I apologize - I do respect you - but I'm going to have to request a different Abritrator, as is my right given the rules of the page, which state both parties must agree to the Arbitrator. Your descision is impossible to abide by, because it gives free lisence to anyone who wants to deface my pages - since I'd have no way to report them. It's a textbook catch 22. Apologies, but this is not a ruling that can be abided by. A perminent ban from the Vandal reporting page when they have been making reports based on real actions that are suspect is not something that should ever be imposed on a user. I made sure I was right by checking one level of history on that page - I didn't check further because no one would in my shoes unless they were terribly anal. Also, 'STER said "Turd Burglar", and "asshat" was not an actual insult but rather a roundabout mockery. If you're going to claim I didn't do enough research, please make sure you've done yours. -- Amazing 05:19, 14 March 2006 (GMT)
Very well then. - --ramby T--W! - SGP 05:25, 14 March 2006 (GMT)
I accept the ruling, and fully intend to abide by it in full. Again I apologized for contesting the previous ruling, but I got such clear visions of "Vandalism against Amazing can't be reported!" ringing through the streets of Malton.. lol. :) In turn I apologize to 'STER and the rest of the Mod team for being a constant voice of complaint. If there's anything I've forgotten, let me know. -- Amazing 05:30, 14 March 2006 (GMT)
Wait, what happened to your second post?? .... Well, here it is reposted:
  • "Very well then. You are banned from the vandel report page for 1 month, and you are not to report MM unles he compleatly and totaly defaces your page. And you have complete and total proof he did it out of spite. I make this amendment because you have proven a flaw in my origanal dicision. I apologize for being irration and I must ask that you at least try not to insult anyone, because I do not want to have to arbitrate for you again. I believe this is what... twice now?"
I dunno if I accidentally deleted it when I replied or what.. wtf. -- Amazing 05:33, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Sorry about the first irrational decision. I have no idea how permement bannination from the vandel report page was a good idea. But at least do your research next time ok? --ramby T--W! - SGP 05:40, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Of course, yes. Heh, I definitely see what can happen when you don't now, that's for sure. It got an actual case thrown completely out, so that's always going to be on my mind. -- Amazing 05:46, 14 March 2006 (GMT)