UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Cornholioo vs Michaleson and Poodle of doom

Cornholioo vs Michaleson, Good Grief and Poodle of Doom

A merge of three exactly the same cases (see below). It would be extremely helpful if we can handle this in one big case.--Thadeous Oakley 20:40, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Good Grief maintains they have no personal problem with User:Cornholioo and that his persistent ass hattery of our name will invoke the gods of wrath on top of him. As representative of Good Grief I have already denied his claim until he realizes who he really needs to bring an A/A on. -- 

•   Timmah!  

•   Talk  

20:43, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I'm pretty sure you can't bring groups here. This is between individuals. Cornholioo, you can bring The Colonel to Arbitration but not his entire group. Once again, it would all be helpful if every party keeps the clutter under this header. Would all parties agree to accepting one arbitrator and treat this as a single case?--Thadeous Oakley 20:49, 12 April 2010 (BST)

you can check the archives--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:52, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Yes you can bring groups here if you want, you just need to be clear in why you want them here. As I stated before Good Grief currently is in vinetown, as their representative we do not have a problem with cornhole. If he were wise then he would focus on who to bring the arby to, but alas grandma must have said the hot pockets were done so he went to get them from her. -- 

•   Timmah!  

•   Talk  

20:53, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Right. Good Grief has declined the process, stating they have no issue with corn. Corn seems to have made the case after misreading the colonels signature. That part of the case can immediately be dismissed. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 20:55, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Okedokey. We might as well strike that case out. Could you archive that case then, Ross? --Thadeous Oakley 20:59, 12 April 2010 (BST)

This is a big fucking mess, eh? Regardless, all cases revolve around a no-contact issue, though it would be most efficient to just prohibit everyone on the wiki talking to Cornholioo and vice versa :/ --Thadeous Oakley 20:58, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I remind you no where does it say you have to be nice, just because he keeps bringing these does not necessarily mean we have to accept them. Someone can simply deny his request and continue to poke him with a stick. -- 

•   Timmah!  

•   Talk  

20:59, 12 April 2010 (BST)

See my past drama with SA. I have been pushed into arbitration before, you can't deny arbitration, if you do, the case will be ruled upon without your input. Of course, since Cornholioo specified not to pursue the case without you this doesn't matter for you. --Thadeous Oakley 21:03, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Volunteers to arbie all the cases collectively. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 21:10, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Again, I offer to arbitrate as well. --Thadeous Oakley 21:11, 12 April 2010 (BST)

And since Michealson and Poodle already accepted me below, if they agree with their cases being merged, all I need Cornholio's blessing. So? --Thadeous Oakley 21:14, 12 April 2010 (BST)

...you could go and ask him? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 21:17, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I would like to talk to poodle before Thad becomes arbite--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 21:19, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Actually, I was waiting for him. He's online, but yeah, I'll ask. --Thadeous Oakley 21:20, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Denied. Ik had al ongeveer 10 keer aangegeven dat ik niet publiekelijk over mijn idealen in debat ga. Vanwegen dit conflict twijfel ik aan je neutraliteit. --Cornholioo 21:22, 12 April 2010 (BST)

User:Misanthropy then?--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 21:23, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Slechte reden :P. Jouw idealen (en mijn mening hierover) staan hier volledig buiten. Het gaat over dat jij niet wilt dat de betreffende personen contact met je opnemen, en daarover, en alleen daarover, zal ik oordelen. Mijn mening doet er verder niet aan toe.--Thadeous Oakley 21:27, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Goed dan. I Accept. --Cornholioo 21:37, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I Deny Thad. --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 21:39, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Since I have only a vague idea of what the two of you just talked about,... I refuse Thad as arbitrator... and furthermore, refuse to have the arbitrations joined. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 21:42, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I agree with Poodle, this man speaks sense--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 21:42, 12 April 2010 (BST)

You want to handle the cases individually? Lol, you people give me a headache.--Thadeous Oakley 21:46, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Oh, and for the record translation.: "Bad reason :P. Your ideals (and my opinion about it) are completely unrelated. This is about you not wanting the persons mentioned to stop contacting you, and about that, and only that, will I rule. My opinion does not matter beyond that." --Thadeous Oakley 21:46, 12 April 2010 (BST)

You suggested that they be joined, so don't try to pin that on me. And second of all, the only reason why I refused you as arbitrator is because I don't know what you said myself. I had a vague idea,... but not the whole thing. That said, I can't be sure that any bias was or wasn't occuring there. And if it's all the same,... I'll drop my case similarly to Devorac's latest,... and wait for the result of Michaleson's before proceeding with my own. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 21:52, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I'm not pinning anything on you. It's just that these cases revolve around the same thing so I thought it would be easier to merge them. Of course, if you don't want that than that's you free choice and I respect that. And sorry about the Dutch, I guess that did look a bit shady, the reason he denied me at first was because he thought I was biased because of his "ideals". I convinced him that I wasn't biased that's all. No secret conspiracy between two fellow countrymen or anything in that direction, I assume that's you meant. --Thadeous Oakley 21:57, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I quote you: "You want to handle the cases individually? Lol, you people give me a headache.--Thadeous Oakley 21:46, 12 April 2010 (BST)",... I don't know what you meant by that I guess. That said, the non-english was shady... But I trust your translations... I just don't feel confortable with your nominations now. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 22:11, 12 April 2010 (BST)

So two separate cases. These comments can be posted on both separate pages when they are created.--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 21:48, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Actually,... I'd like to nominate Ross if the two cases stay joined.... Before you we go any farther,... please allow me to to contact Michaleson. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 22:11, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I guess Michaleson and I will be working togethor on this. Ross will remain nominated, and we'd prefer him, if he'll accept. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 23:28, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Sure, as long as Corn is also in agreement. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 15:35, 13 April 2010 (BST)

Okay. As per an agreement that Michal and I have, I'll be the main speaker in the case. That said,... I'll go out on a limb, and say that we're giving him another 24 hours to confirm you, or suggest another person, or we'll both be refusing to go to arbitration on this matter with him. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 22:21, 13 April 2010 (BST)

*Scratches head*, denying someone arbitration has consequences but I only forgot what..., if I recall correctly Cornholioo can go on without you, and the case will be ruled upon without your input. Doesn't really make sense, but I do know you can't just walk away from arbitration if the other party intends to press on. --Thadeous Oakley 22:45, 13 April 2010 (BST)

What if he decideds not to carry on, can we procced without him?--^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 22:55, 13 April 2010 (BST)

I'd have to see that in writing Thad.... I'll hold off until we do... that said... I'm tired of him starting cases, and not finishing them. I don't want this dragging on any longer than it absolutly has too... -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 23:32, 13 April 2010 (BST)

I accept Rosslessness. --Cornholioo 19:44, 16 April 2010 (BST)

Cornholioo vs Michaleson

Posting pictures on my talk page; also after they have been deleted. I have told him that I want him to stop commenting on my talk page.

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACornholioo&diff=1690472&oldid=1690469 --Cornholioo 20:26, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I will accept User:The_Colonel --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:27, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I just choked when I read that XD -- 

•   Timmah!  

•   Talk  

20:28, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Denied. I don't know if there's any way to solve stuff like this quickly, but these kids are making fun of this. Not only of me but also of the arbitration of this wiki. I hope there can be delt this, severely. --Cornholioo 20:29, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Rosslessness told you how to deal with stuff like this. ;) —Aichon— 20:42, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I offer to be rejected as an arbitrator. 20:30, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I accept User:Misanthropy --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:31, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I offer to arbitrate, most likely with the same conditions as the other case I'm currently arbitrating.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:32, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Are you left wing? --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:33, 12 April 2010 (BST)

My politics aren't relevant to this arbitration. ;) --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 20:34, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I'll think on it. --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:35, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I offer to arbitrate. --Thadeous Oakley 20:36, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Are you left wing? --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:36, 12 April 2010 (BST)

:: I Accept User:MisterGame --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:43, 12 April 2010 (BST)

I'll offer to arbitrate because I know nothing about this and am therefore impartial. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 23:55, 13 April 2010 (BST)

this is a joint case now, its a tad messed up --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 23:56, 13 April 2010 (BST)

Cornholioo vs Poodle of Doom

This guy keeps annoying me on my talk page. This is an example: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACornholioo&diff=1690318&oldid=1690313

He has been doing this before, so I'd like to have him banned from my talk page for some time. Thanks in advance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cornholioo (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Sorry for not signing. I sign it now, posted it about 15 minutes ago. --Cornholioo 18:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I offer to arbitrate. --Thadeous Oakley 19:11, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Heres what you do. Post a message on the top of your talk page saying that poodles comments are unwelcome and that all such messages will be deleted. Inform him directly of this on his talk page. That's a fair warning. If he continues, then you use VB for "harrassment" or arbitration to get a restraining order. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:16, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Here you go. Formal request granted. No need for arbitration. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 19:38, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Simples. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:39, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Cycle to recently concluded arbies? -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 19:43, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Very mature of you son, to, even now, continue your swearing. --Cornholioo 19:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Sore winner much? You got what you want. Leave the guy alone. —Aichon— 20:01, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Huh? Where swears? 20:01, 12 April 2010 (BST)

His page. Also see the comment below this one. But ok I'll leave him. --Cornholioo 20:05, 12 April 2010 (BST)

The comment below was in response to your persistant antigonization,... thus proving the need for arbitration after there was none. Second of all... it's my user page. I'll post whatever I want, when I want to,... and I'll have no guff from you. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 20:16, 12 April 2010 (BST)

You know what,... on second thought,.... Screw you asshole. I accept Thad. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 20:04, 12 April 2010 (BST) I'm going to wait on Michalson's case first me thinks, before proceeding with my own.... -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 21:55, 12 April 2010 (BST)

Opening Note

This is not a free for all. You each will have ample room for reply, and I will extend the process if I feel it is necessary. Only comment in areas under your own name. If you comment directly in your opponents sections, don't be surprised if I remove your comments to the talk page.

Corn's Opening Statement

Both guys have consequently sworn and posted pictures on my talk page. They both ignored warnings to stop. They were warned on their own talk page.

Later on I also warned them both on my talk page (at the very top), which Michaleson ignored as well. --Cornholioo 15:32, 18 April 2010 (BST)

Michaleson and Poodle's Opening Statement

I would like to start off by thanking Ross for going along with this. Next, the following points are what I wish to take away from this experience. I have provided further explination, and examples below each point.

• Minimal antagonization on cornholes part...
  

A good example of this would be this case. As you can see here, I agreed to refrain from posting further on his talk page. Regardless of the comments I made, the comment that led to the continuation of arbitration was made here, to quote:

"Very mature of you son, to, even now, continue your swearing. --Cornholioo 19:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)"

Frankly,... all would have been solved had he left well enough alone. I would of never spoken to him again. But he likes being difficult. I'd like to quote him again, this time, from another arbitration case:

"Unless the arrogant and offending tune of this post, I'll tell you that this is not about making claims here, it's about reproducing facts, reproducing the truth. Take such a tune again and I will report it, though. --Cornholioo 21:30, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

He even seems to provocate with the removal of comments. There's really no need for such provocation. The mass majority of problems could be solved through means other than arbitration, if his general attitude would simply change. Now I know that his attitude isn't something we're capable of dealing with, however, I'd like to find a happy medium. Perhaps when he feels provoked himself, he could find a neutral third party to help deescalate the situation to a calmer state? And I do mean without the use of arbitration, or by escalating the situation further by posting another VB case.

Please note that I don't want to restrict his use of arbitration, but rather, would like to see problems he has within the community solved via some other means, like posting on user's talk pages, and finding someone to help solve the matter.

• Without restricting access to the RPG aspect of UD, a limited role of the nazi subculture on the wiki. (I think he takes it to far...)
  

With regards to the arbitration case I mentioned above, I'd like to submit the following quotes from Cornhole:

"I'm going to work out now. Physical strong, mentally healthy: Nazi's. Meine Ehre heisst Treue. --Cornholioo 15:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)"

"Why you just don't react on all the neonazi arguments and proof them wrong, rather than saying 'you are just stupid.'? Well, that is stupid! And I'm trying to speak English as correct as possible. I haven't grown up with it, though. I'm Dutch. And can I make typos? -,- I said he has a low IQ judging on the language he uses, bringing up useless arguments and now also brings up arguments I've already reacted on. I don't think he has a great ability of logical thinking. White regards," --Cornholioo 9:03, 25 March 2010 (UTC) (I bolded, and italicized the portion that was relevant.)

"Here comes another Tactic of Judas. In steat of properly reacting on my arguments, Judas says back exactly the same thing. Are you a Jew?" --User:Cornholioo 12:28, 25 March 2010 (UTC) (Again, I added the coding for bold, and italicized text, though the whole thing was slanderous.)

At this point, I'd like to submit a complaint of a similar nature given to us by Infrastructure:

"This is getting out of hand. Aren't there rules against personal attacks? Also, if anybody has a low IQ it would be you. Not only do you believe in what in reality is fiction (The "Aryan race", the whole Jewish conspiracy thing, et cetera et cetera),..." -- Infrastructure 15:32, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

• I would like to see things similar in nature to the Battle of Krinks place either under his namespace, or the group namespace in the future.
  

Looks like I'll be getting my wish soon enough, one way or another.

• I would like to see one vandal banning case/arbitration cases open at a time, and have it so he's not allowed to start a second one until the first is finished (it takes to long for him to finish one... led alone two or three).
  

Self explanitory, though it goes back to what I was saying in the begining,... I don't want him taking everyone who makes an off handed comment to arbitration. Please also note that this would pertain only to cornhole,... and not anyone else, and their arbitration matters.

• I'd appreciate if pages written by him in the mainspace, in the future, could be written with a NPOV,... and for the ceasation of edit wars in the future.
  

Such wars have been noted by other users, mainly in the arbitration case he has against Iscariot, and the fact that the first Battle of Krinks page was protected because of it. You can also see some of the small edit wars that have happened here.

With that out of the way, I'd like to take the time to address the two issues brought up by Cornhole. They are as follows:

1. Both guys have consequently sworn and posted pictures on my talk page. They both ignored warnings to stop. They were warned on their own talk page.
2. 2Later on I also warned them both on my talk page (at the very top), which Michaleson ignored as well.

In regards to complaint number one,... I was never asked to quit swearing, simply not to post on his page again. When I took note of the fact that this was stressing him out, I did pull it back a bit, by that I mean,... I've only posted on his talk page twice, if I remember correctly. I never received any warnings to stop prior to the complaint on my talk page, which you can clearly see by comparing time stamps, that he made only after having filed for arbitration. Again, arbitration was my first warning, and I was caught somewhat off guard by all of this. Regardless,... I was taken to arbitration before I was talked to on my talk page, and before he posted his warning on his talk page. This can be compared to the history of his talk page for verification. As I stated in my goals up above,... the problem was solved as far as I was concerned when he told me not to speak to him on his talk page. The problem was only continued when he went to arbitration,... posted the warning on his talk page (which I only have a problem with in context to everything else, by itself, I take no issue with it),... then, after the issue was all said and done, he had to come back to arbitration to continue it by trying to mock me.

As for the pictures he claims we posted, I posted none, while Michaleson posted a few. I never posted any pictures on his talk space at all.

As for point number two above, I haven't posted on his talk page since then. And Michaleson has, ignoring the warnings,... which I spoke to him about. In his defense, though there really is none, I would like to say that he was simply trying to get the ball rolling on our arbitration case. Again, a simple check of the history would provide the necessary verification of this.

Again, thanks be to Ross for dedicating the time and energy necessary to see this case through to the end. Your help is much appreciated! -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 17:51, 18 April 2010 (BST)

• Just to add to Poodle here.

On point number 1, I have never sworn on This user's talkpage, and as Poodle I have never been asked to stop doing this.

On point 2, as you see here. This User clearly ignoreed the rules of my talk page. If said User can not follow the rules of other peoples talkpages, he should see that it is likely to happen to him as well. --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 16:51, 19 April 2010 (BST)

Ruling.

Evening Darlings.

This case has been too long. Everyone involved had a chance to defuse the situation. Several opportunities presented themselves where this whole process could have been avoided.

To simplify. User:Cornholioo has asked both Michaleson and Poodle not to post on his page. His tone was less than perfect, but the intent was there.

To formalise this.

User:Michaleson and User:Poodle of doom will be banned from editing User:Cornholioo's talk page for a period of One Month.

Likewise

User:Cornholioo will be banned from editing User:Poodle of doom's talk page, and User:Michaleson's talk page for a period of One Month.

This should minimise the amount of antagonisation that can occur.

Likewise, the result of UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Cornholioo vs Misanthropy now forces Corn to pursue matters through a third party before beginning arbitration cases. See User talk:Yonnua Koponen. This process seems to be working and no further action will be taken for now.

Finally Corn as Poodle suggests it is Strongly Advised that future pages, such as Battle of Krinks, Be created within your Namespace, for example User:Coornholio/Millionth Battle of Krinks.

Your namespace is your property. You can write pretty much whatever you want, remove all other comments, make all kinds of claims about other players, and even ask for the page to be protected to avoid vandalism. Such a move would show that your intent was to avoid drama, not create it.

Thanks for your time.--Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:32, 19 April 2010 (BST)

Pointless final header for complaints, acceptance and chat

Yeah that was about what I thought would come from this. Thanks for artbating Ross --^TCAPD(╯°□°)╯ ┻━┻ 20:40, 19 April 2010 (BST)

Hey,... I'm all for the ruling,... -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 21:16, 19 April 2010 (BST)