UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Blood Panther vs Treviabot92

Administration Services — Protection. This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

Blood Panther vs Treviabot92

i just dont want him posting on my User talk:Blood Panther page. He wont follow it's rules so stopping him from commenting on my page would be great. i'll take any Arbitrator. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Blood Panther (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Let him know about the case.--Karek^maps?! 17:11, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

done and done.--'BP^Tmz 20:23, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Shame it's come to this. but I'll take it, sure.--Seventythree^Talk 11:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

ok. I choose you Seventythree.--'BP^Tmz 00:26, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair enougth. Do you agree to this, Treviabot92?--Seventythree^Talk 00:27, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

THIS. IS. FUCKING. RIDICULOUS. I ain't doing this, it's fucking stupid. Treviabot92 00:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

it's better if you do however it's not required. if you dont show your side of the story no one will.--'BP^Tmz 00:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but whether you want to or not, it's going to happen. Agreeing and going along with it means you might be able to come out in a better spot then you would have.-- dǝǝɥs oʇ ɯɐds: sʎɐʍ1ɐ! 00:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Who the hell cares? My suggestions suck anyways. FUCK ME!!! Treviabot92 00:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

If Trev doesn't want to be part of this, then it is required that he is represented -- boxy ^{talk • i} 00:49 18 December 2007 (BST)

Right. Seeing as Treviabot92 doesn't seem to want to be part of it (though I strongly suggest that you do)I'll take it from here. I'm going to ask BP to write up what he feels has happened from his point of veiw, and why he has taken this to arbitration and once this is done I am going to ask Treviabot 92 to respond. I would like to ask that you keep this as objective as possible and I'm sure I don't have to remind you, but try and keep personal insults out of it. --Seventythree^Talk 00:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to agree with Trevia here. This seems like a dumb way to do this. How about Trevia and BP just stop talking to each other, and pretend this never happened. Cause really. This seems to be a long and roundabout way of doing things, when one party is CLEARLY not interested. --Druuuuu ^OcTRR 00:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

that's pretty much exactly what i want. however, even if i dont talk to him, he can still talk to me. and there is no way to stop him as it's not vandalism. by getting an arb ruling stateing that he cannot post on my talk page, if he does it would be vandalism.--'BP^Tmz 00:49, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Please, can anyone not direcly involved with the arbitration keep their comments to the talkpage? --Seventythree^Talk 00:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually 73, someone needs to represent Trevia if he's not available. And he just got banned, not to mention he said he wants nothing to do with this.--Karek^maps?! 00:48, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll represent him, however I think we should leave a final decision of the case at least until his ban is served -- boxy ^{talk • i} 00:51 18 December 2007 (BST)

I'm willing to wait.--'BP^Tmz 00:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

O.K. I will wait until his ban is up before deciding. I usualy try to take my time anyway. How long has he been banned for?--Seventythree^Talk 00:53, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

first offense: 24 hours.--'BP^Tmz 00:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, at least it's not too long. This is a right bloody mess, isn't it?--Seventythree^Talk 00:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

that it is. and even if he does get barred from my talk page, im not sure he'll listen.--'BP^Tmz 01:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

That's why I'm rather hoping that at least some of this is going to transform into reasonable dialouge. Hopefuly in a day's time things will have calmed down, I'm not sure I want to see another user kicked off the wiki for something as daft as a conflict of personaltities.--Seventythree^Talk 01:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

May i make my counter-argument now?--'BP^Tmz 01:15, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

If you want, the more insight I get into this, the better.--Seventythree^Talk 09:48, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Blood Panther's argument

Well it's real simple. he wont follow my rules of my talk page, so i dont want him posting on it anymore. He just cant keep his words civilized.--'BP^Tmz 00:47, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

O.k. Can Treviabot92 place his comments now please?--Seventythree^Talk 00:49, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

er...he cant. he was just banned for deleteing comments on my talk page. proof he wont let this go.--'BP^Tmz 00:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I beleive Boxy has chosen to represent him now, although it looks like we're not going to be in any rush.--Seventythree^Talk 00:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Treviabot92's argument

As far as I can see, this all started on the suggestions talk page, where BP called Trev's suggestions retarded, and told him to stop dumbing down the wiki. Trev then took it to BP's talk page and told him to shut up, as he is allowed to make suggestions, especially on the talk page. That's what it's there for, newbies to discuss their silly ideas, and get feedback. Anyway, saying "shut up" is hardly an unreasonable response to having your suggestions called retarded, and being called dumb, however BP decided to mess with the header, and change it anyway, because it offended him (or summit). It turned into an edit war, and conflicting advice was given to both sides as to what was, and was not allowed in editing other peoples posts on talk pages.

I feel that BP was being more than a little prissy about being told to shut up, after what was said on the suggestions talk page, and rather than trying to calmly solve a dispute he started, by talking about it, he chose to censor part of Trev's response -- boxy ^{talk • i} 01:06 18 December 2007 (BST)

Blood Panther's counter-argument

yes i called his suggestion retared, but if you read the suggestions talk page almost everyone did they same. it does not excuse my actions, however, trevia decide to contact me and only me, and take revenge.--'BP^Tmz 00:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Treviabot92's counter-argument

That's because you told me to stop making suggestions. If you thought it was offensive, you should have just deleted the comment and told me it was ok for you to do that because it was your talk page, instead of messing with the header. All this did was create problems. Oh, and I had to do homework, so sorry I wasn't in earlier. Treviabot92 05:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I really need to start putting in my sig before edits. Treviabot92 05:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of the suggestions talk page, I was goanna suggest a sledge hammer, which would be found in mall hardware stores, power plants, police stations, because cops sometimes bring people in with sledge hammers, I'm just suggesting. Treviabot92 05:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Seventythree's Comments

Ok, what this appears to be is a conflict of personalities, sparked by (yet again) an argument on the talk:suggestions page, which quickly spread to the user:talk pages of the individuals concerned. Now, I count 7 edits on BP's talkpage from Treviabot before this was taken to arbitration, which, yes I will admit is a fair few. However, BP is not totaly in the right on this either, you do need two people to create an argument. The entire situation was compounded when the argument spread to Treviabot's talkpage and, due to several factors Treviabot found himself getting warned, and after this was taken to arbitration, banned for doing something rather stupid.

To Treviabot92: Firstly, you realy need to stop taking criticism so personaly. It's a harsh fact but true that if you make a suggestion people don't like it's going to get ridiculed. I'm not sure I particuarly like this state of affairs but there's little I can do about it. If you want to take part in the suggestions section, prepare for some harsh comments. Treviabot, I'm asking for you to calm down before you reply to people if it looks like the entire thing is turning into an argument. Looking at your edits when this was first taken to arbitration and your edits today now you're being calm and rational, I see two completely different editors. And to be honest, when you get wound up you do come across as a bit of a dick, as do most people. I'd steer clear of that if I where you. And yes, you where out of order flying off the handle like that following an argument on the suggestions talk page. Please, try not to do it again.

I'm not laying down any rules here for you, but I am going to ask that you refrain from taking discussions from the suggestion discussion page to people's talkpages, especialy if it looks like there might be an argument. While I haven't chosen to enforce this, as I beleive that it would be unfair to you, (and following a recent arbitration case I am wary of making any hard rulings on this page) I am asking that you follow it. While you won't be taken to VB for going againgst this you will lose a lot of respect in the community for making the same mistake twice, as it where. LEave discussions from the suggestions talk page on the suggestions talkpage from now on, ok?

To BP: (Well, not just to BP, but to everyone who uses the suggestions:talk page). You didn't have to make the comments you made on the discussions page so personal, did you? While you certainly didn't break any rules, it certainly didn't do any good did it? While Treviabot92 reacted badly, and over the top to what was said, if people hadn't been slating his suggestion in some quite harsh ways he may not have reacted so badly. Yes, Treviabot flew off the handle, and yes, that was wrong, but the entire thing could have been advoided if people (again, not just BP) thought a bit before posting something too horrible on the suggestions talk page. HAving said that, BP's example was one of the milder ones I have seen.

Again, BP I'm not making any hard and fast rules here, I'm merely going to ask that you, and everyone present of the suggestions talk page thinks before they post something particuarly nasty. This entire thing could have been advoided if people had maed similar comments to Swiers.

In conclusion, Treviabot has already been in enougth shit over this, and BP didn't realy do anything wrong. Both of you, go away and read what I have written and try to take my advice on board. And try to get along better in the future. If both of you had been just a bit more civil to each other, this would have never reached arbitration.--Seventythree^Talk 12:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Treviabot92's response

Dude, I don't mind getting criticism, I just don't want people telling me to stop making suggestions. I ain't the only one putting crap on the talk page, I've seen suggestions that even I've found stupid. Like I said before, shut up ain't no swear word, so, like you said, it was just a conflict of personalities, and this probably could have been avoided if he had just deleted the stupid comment. Treviabot92 20:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, Like I said, conflict of personalities, and all. Let's just leave it all here, ok? And I would consider it a favour if you both follow at least some of my advice.--Seventythree^Talk 20:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Blood Panther's response

very well. i will take what you have said under consideration.--'BP^Tmz 21:52, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. That's all I ask.--Seventythree^Talk 21:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)