UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2006 07

2006	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2007	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2008	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2009	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2010	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2011	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
2012	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Q3			Q4
2013	Q1			Q2			Q3			Q4
Years	2014		2015		2016		2017		2018		2019
	2020

Vandalism Report Space

Sreath147

This diff comparision speaks for itself. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 14:57, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 14:58, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Vandalized the M:VB page here by disregaurding the rules to place herself at top. Casual flippancy to written rules and lack of comprehension of opinons that are not said editor's own seems to be evidence of previous and, unless warned, continuous bad faith. --Karlsbad 05:59, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 06:07, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Nomader

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User%3ADangerReport%2FRhodenbank&diff=339933&oldid=339900 Has reported active zombies in the suburb but insists on changing it to Safe when the definition of Moderate is "Active Zombies". Sonny Corleone ^{WTF RRF ASS} 23:20, 30 July 2006 (BST)

Failure to understand rules is currently being handled by moderation staff. No Bad faith until the possibility of a lack of understanding is disproven. Not Warned. --Karlsbad 00:21, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Catcher In The Rye

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User%3ADangerReport%2FBrooksville&diff=339935&oldid=339921 I presented evidence in the talk page and he decided to ignore it. Evidence was there for all to see. He instead changed it back despite it being false. False info on a wiki is evil. Sonny Corleone ^{WTF RRF ASS} 22:51, 30 July 2006 (BST)

Your own evidence in this case seems to support that the suburb is not very dangerous. --Max Grivas ^JG,T,P! 23:59, 30 July 2006 (BST)

All buildings were open or empty. That's Very Dangerous. It doesn't have to only be 150+. Sonny Corleone ^{WTF RRF ASS} 01:05, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Take it to Arbitration, not here. Cyberbob Talk 14:17, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Kiki Lottaboobs

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User%3ADangerReport%2FShore_Hills&diff=339971&oldid=338694 Also ignored evidence that was out in the open on the talk page. Vandalized it knowing it was not Moderate. Sonny Corleone ^{WTF RRF ASS} 22:51, 30 July 2006 (BST)

Sonny Corleone is consistently entering bad data into the Danger Threat Map. I am a Superintendant in the Malton Police Department, I am not vandalizing anything. I would hope that the string of Sonny reported "vandlas" above would help to show that Sonny has a personal stake in keeping burbs red, when there is no reason to do so. The man's own statements in Talk:Suburb bear this out:

"..But right now I just love the Red all over the map." Sonny Corleone WTF 01:58, 19 July 2006 (BST)

He wants to keep it all red. According to the key in Suburb, most of these suburbs do not qualify as Very Dangerous. And 4 screenshots don't make his case. Ban me or I will continue to enter accurate data. --Kiki Lottaboobs 01:25, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Hooray for out of context. That was about changing Red Suburbs to Gray. Seriously Kiki, reading FTW. 4 Screenshots was all I could take before I logged off for an hour and logged back on to find the EH building wide open with me dragged in the street at 12 HP. I'm sorry that I couldn't take anymore screenshots for I had to take refuge in another building. And a personal stake? Oh yes, Kiki. If the suburbs are not red I don't know what I will do. What ever will I do? I guess I will never be able to live on without Red suburbs. Poor me. Poor little me. Sonny Corleone ^{WTF RRF ASS} 02:07, 31 July 2006 (BST)

User talk:DangerReport/Brooksville Need I say more? --Kiki Lottaboobs 03:32, 31 July 2006 (BST)

No. The more you speak the worse you make yourself look. Unless you want to help me prove that you can't use the wiki correctly. Sonny Corleone ^{WTF RRF ASS} 03:34, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Awwwe, I'm getting under your skin. That last post was all ad homenim. Here, lets move this up to the top and get this settled. --Kiki Lottaboobs 04:46, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Reorder the page again and I'll report you for a vandalism charge. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 04:48, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Wait, this is getting out of hand. I put this entry at the top of the page to get it resolved by a Moderator. I'm really upsetting some people. Wow. That didn't take much. --Kiki Lottaboobs 05:20, 31 July 2006 (BST)

The page is to be in order of report chronology, not perceived urgency. If no moderator has ruled on this, it means no one wants to. Can you really blame us? With the number of misconduct cases that have been filed over petty things, I'm not surprised that all of my compatriots are leery of this kind of case as well. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:23, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Not Vandalism. This is the kind of thing Arbitration was made for. Not Vandal Banning. Cyberbob Talk 14:08, 31 July 2006 (BST)

Rotticus

removed a suggestion from the suggestion page--Gage 23:23, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Probably just edit conflict. The software is a bit buggy. Not warned. --Brizth ^{M T} 23:31, 29 July 2006 (BST)

wikidead

Making sensationalist claims that our group is a pk group, first of all we are not, and even if we were he is changing our group page to say that he is and has done this a number of times, Our Page has been set back and it is there in the history, this occured on the 29th of july and is really become rather tiresome.--DannGunn 22:49, 29 July 2006 (BST)

this is the edit in question--Gage 23:07, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. --Brizth ^{M T} 23:10, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Poopman9

Repeated invalid votes on the suggestions page (e.g., one, two, three), and self-admitted intent to continue vandalizing. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 20:03, 28 July 2006 (BST)

I'd like to ban him, but I just know it would result in MISCONTRIBUTION LOL. Warned. Cyberbob Talk 00:45, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Reviewing his contributions, I've found a startling pattern:

–Xoid ^S•T•FU! 06:02, 29 July 2006 (BST)

if this is a vandal, he sucks. He obviously thinks this is just a playground or something --Gage 06:12, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Continued vandalism, warned second time. --Brizth ^{M T} 15:52, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Fuck You

trolling the suggestion page. Looks like a vandal alt to me, possibly of Poopman9 (his edit is along the same vein). Why else would you have an account named Fuck You?--Gage 15:16, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. I can't ban him until he's made three vandal edits. Fucking rules. Cyberbob Talk 15:18, 29 July 2006 (BST)

could you ban him considering that this is his only edit?--Gage 15:41, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Nope. The guidelines, in all their wisdom, state that an account has to have made three vandal edits before it may be banned. Cyberbob Talk 15:42, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Yeap, stupid but there you go. Any change to policy would be shot down and flamed to hell.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 15:45, 29 July 2006 (BST)

Flood Master

Vandalism and impersonation of yours truly. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:49, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. --Brizth ^{M T} 20:04, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Cyberbob240 ("A Bothan Spy")

Used revert function as a means of vandalism (erasing a non-harmful non-vandalism edit from another user). --The Fifth Horseman 12:29, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Group pages are like user pages, Fifth, and many groups are quite touchy about what can and cannot be added to them. Do you expect people to research every diff comparision just to find that minor edit you made, and see that Zak didn't care? Of course not. Both of you, go and play in the sandbox and stop bitching. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 12:36, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Take note that my edit can barely be considered anything else but re-wording, and Cyberbob has admitted below that he just did his revert and vandalism report "for kicks". --The Fifth Horseman 12:40, 28 July 2006 (BST)

PWNT. Cyberbob Talk 12:38, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Not quite.--The Fifth Horseman 12:40, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Prove it. Cyberbob Talk 12:41, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Already did it, dude. You really need to read the entry more carefully. --The Fifth Horseman 12:45, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Oh. I didn't notice that one. Only the "Not quite" one. Read mine, below. Cyberbob Talk 12:47, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Knock it off, both of you. Fifth: changing the wording looked like vandalism to me. It wasn't in their NPOV section, and many groups do not like having their numbers fiddled with. Until you made mention of your previous edit, I would have warned you. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 12:55, 28 July 2006 (BST)

What did I say, TFH? PWNT? Was I right? I can't seem to remember. Can you tell me what Xoid just said? Cyberbob Talk 13:00, 28 July 2006 (BST)

The Fifth Horseman

Vandalised the Neon Knights' page. I know I've reported similar cases, which were ruled not vandalism, but in this case he actually changes information about the group other than their size. Cyberbob Talk 12:17, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Pardon? What "other information" do you mean?

History comparison shows no other information has been changed. Furthermore, I am aware that two of the Neon Knight group members have left the group. That would mean they are down to four - however, no other NK members then Zaknrfama have been seen for a long while.

Also, I am the person who put "Six known, real number is still under speculation." in there, some months ago. Zaknrfama did not object to that edit, nor did anything to change it.

Do I need to remind you about something in the vandalism definition?

We make the following notes on what isn't vandalism:
(snip)
An edit that improves the page from a user you don't like.

Your personal hatred towards me (which you have quite visibly expressed numerous times) does not mean you can consider every edit from my person to be vandalism. --The Fifth Horseman 12:24, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Bleh. Whatever. To be honest, I actually didn't care whether you were warned or not. I needed some excitement, dammit! :P Cyberbob Talk 12:32, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Therefore you just admitted that both the revert and vandalism report were made with hostile intent. Thank you. --The Fifth Horseman 12:43, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Did I? Whoopsie. Actually, I still would have made the report no matter who made that edit. Cyberbob Talk 12:46, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Then, once again, you fail in the role of moderator.Read the page histroy. Scroll down to the bottom of the page. What do you see? Two edits by myself, not objected to or reverted by Zaknrfama.

Dude. Really. Think before you act.--The Fifth Horseman 12:53, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Mr. Pot, it's Mrs. Kettle on the line. She's inquiring about your colour. Apparently you've been making some untoward comments about hers. Cyberbob Talk 12:55, 28 July 2006 (BST)

sigh. See above case for the ruling on both. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 13:26, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Max Grivas

removed a suggestion before it was ready; even if you don't count the 5 Dupe votes it wasn't ready. Unlike the similar instance of mine, he appears to have counted correctly.--Gage 03:11, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Perhaps I have misunderstood the procedure cited in Removing Suggestions Eligibility for Spamination is acheived if there are at least 7 Spam/Dupe votes and the number of Spam/Dupe votes are equal to 2/3rds or greater of the total number of votes, with the author vote included in all these tallies. I belive dupe votes are inlcluded here intentional within the count, making it 75% in favor of removal. --Max Grivas ^JG,T,P! 03:20, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Spaminated with 7 Spams, 3 Kills, 5 and 1 author Keep... if you count the dupes, 7/16=.4375 if you don't 7/11= .6363. Either way, it is less than 2/3. I have always thought of the Spam and the Dupe votes of two seperate ways of removing a suggestion, but Max seems to be arguing that they can be used in tandem.--Gage 03:34, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Oh, I see, thanks for clearing that up for me. My mistake was combining them for 12/16=.75. Sorry for the confusion. Feel free to revert it and spit me out a warning. Plealse realize it was not intentionaly in bad faith. --Max Grivas ^JG,T,P! 03:38, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Not bad faith. This is simply an area where the rules are poorly written, no more. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 03:40, 28 July 2006 (BST)

What's new?--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 08:45, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Just pretend I voted spam. There, 2/3. It was bad enough that the author said we were gonna vote spam to remove it anyhow. -- 343 ^U! 17:59, 28 July 2006 (BST)

Axe Hack

Constant vandalism of the SE suburbs. Suburbs are not recruitment pages and they're not meant for news unrelated to the suburb at hand. What happens in East Becktown does not affect Dentonside. Sonny Corleone ^{WTF RRF ASS CoL} 15:18, 26 July 2006 (BST)

Link?--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 15:18, 26 July 2006 (BST)

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=East_Grayside&diff=334958&oldid=333869

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Danversbank&diff=334957&oldid=329954

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Whittenside&diff=334953&oldid=329421

All the other SE suburbs have the same too. Sonny Corleone ^{WTF RRF ASS CoL} 15:35, 26 July 2006 (BST)

Warned.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 15:38, 26 July 2006 (BST)

Another one after you sent the warning. I wouldn't use "I'm in the middle of posting" as an excuse since he admitted to copying and pasting. http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Suburb&diff=334997&oldid=334986 Sonny Corleone ^{WTF RRF ASS CoL} 15:44, 26 July 2006 (BST)

Quite close after my warning, i'll let it slip.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 15:49, 26 July 2006 (BST)

It's cool with me. Sonny Corleone ^{WTF RRF ASS CoL} 15:53, 26 July 2006 (BST)

Housemouse

Look kids, that makes three! Yes, I consider that vandalism. Look at the header title. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 08:10, 25 July 2006 (BST)

1. 2. 3. And out!--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 08:12, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Much appreciated, General. You deserve a medal or something. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 08:13, 25 July 2006 (BST)

No problem. Feel free to give me a medal though.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 08:17, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Unh, I personaly don't think it's really vandalism. Sure its not a friendly title or content, but it's just stating the users opinion. I don't see why someone can't just state on a groups talk page that they hate them as long as they don't spam the page. - Jedaz 08:31, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Uh huh. Had he not of vandalised our page first, I doubt we would've complained. It ain't hard to add his complaint or grievance to the talk page before he vandalised. He should've known damn well that his presence would be greeted less than warmly after that. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 08:39, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Yes, I understand that Housemouse has made two vandalism edits, and that their grievances probably should have been placed on the talk page, BUT I honestly don't count this third edit as actual vandalism. If you don't like the comment left by Housemouse then you can just flame them as much as you like, if I'm wrong about it not being vandalism please point me to the rules where it says that a user can't leave a comment on a group page about what they think about the group. - Jedaz 08:47, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Then unblock him, and strike the ban from vandal data. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 08:55, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Vandalism is a bad faith edit. He thinks we should kill ourselves. Obviously bad faith. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 08:55, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Furthermore, his posting on our talk page was obviously a last-ditch effort not to get banned, since he had been warned for two infractions before. And his only two edits were those two vandalisms before this last vandalism. Jedaz, why are you playing devil's advocate here? –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 08:59, 25 July 2006 (BST)

I've made more inflamatory remarks than that to Labine50 on public pages and no one has batted an eyelid. Please, Bob, don't make this like the BME where anything we don't like posted on out talk page is automatically vandalism. It's not, and you know it. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 09:02, 25 July 2006 (BST)

If that was the only edit that he had done, no, it wouldn't be vandalism. You're right. In light of his previous two edits? Give me a break. You guys disagree with me? Any of you can unban him. No one had to take me up on my vandalism report. But do you really think this guy was editing in good faith? Screaming at Labine is one thing. Reporting a repeating vandal is another. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 09:06, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Hm. Talking it over with the General, I'd agree that his edit was in bad faith. I just don't see the ruling sticking though. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 09:23, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Probably not. I don't want to seem like the BME -- I welcome disagreement with ASS. It's good publicity. But that guy took it too far. Nevertheless, we'll probably see a misconduct case or something. And if so: direct it at me. Leave The General out of it. I reported the edit, so if people want to bitch, they can do it to me. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 09:30, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Personaly I don't think that they were going to make any worthwhile contributions to the wiki (and hence is why I haven't un-banned them because it's just asking for them to vandalize the wiki more). The only reason that I was making a point about it is that if this kind of thing starts happening too often it's not too far from moderators banning long time users because they made an inflammatory comment. Well thats just what I think. - Jedaz 10:05, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Actually, since The General performed the mod action, a misconduct case would be leveled at him. I don't see the comments in bad faith, bad taste maybe, but it's really his POV. While this guy did not have any positive edits, I would hate to see another more responsible user get a vandal record for a disagreeing POV. God knows, I've suffered worse comments on the wiki. At least this dude wasn't vulgar on that last edit. --Zod Rhombus 18:33, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Housemouse

Did it again. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 07:55, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Going for a hat trick?--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 07:56, 25 July 2006 (BST)

He must be. What an idiot. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 07:57, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Yeah, i'm ready with the banhammer.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 07:58, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Thank you. Thought: why not do it now? His only edits are those two vandalisms. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 07:59, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Because some moronic fool will get me banned for it.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 08:01, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Oh yeah, I forgot. We aren't allowed to do our job. Sorry, my mistake. I'll just wait for this guy to vandalize our page a few more times I guess. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 08:03, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Yeap, ludicrous isn't it?--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 08:05, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Housemouse

Diff Comparision. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 07:46, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Warned.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 07:48, 25 July 2006 (BST)

Gage

Removed a suggestion that was not yet eligible for spamination. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 22:04, 23 July 2006 (BST)

it had the 7 spam votes, I was confused about the 2/3 of the total vote thing. It had 7/12= .5833 so it was really damn close. This was a good faith edit on my part. Just a mistake guys, I am sorry.--Gage 22:08, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Well, it would be ready at 10/15 votes, but I can see how that might have been good faith (although you did report 8 spams in your removal). Up to someone else to decide however. Just following the rules. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 22:10, 23 July 2006 (BST)

I counted wrong, as I listed 13 total votes when it only had 12.--Gage 22:12, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Good faith, not vandalism.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 22:12, 23 July 2006 (BST)

thanks--Gage 22:13, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Hooray, everyone's happy. Just make sure to count properly next time, Gage. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 22:18, 23 July 2006 (BST)

I don't know what i was thinking anyway, 8/13 ≠ 2/3--Gage 22:34, 23 July 2006 (BST)

ImperialRedDragon

Permaban. Made a whole slew of non constuctive edits, including page blankings and screwing heavily with surburb danger levels. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 20:13, 23 July 2006 (BST)

What the hell took so long? He was doing it for a long time. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 20:16, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Probably no one reporting it? –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 20:18, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Good point. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 20:19, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Well, yeah. I only just came online, and if it wasn't for Canuhearmenow whining on your talk page, I wouldn't have noticed. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 20:20, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Haha. I got on in the middle of a Red vs Blue episode because I had a feeling something was wrong. When you become Papa of the RRF you can tell when something happens in Ridleybank. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 20:23, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Spam - No psychic zombies. ;) –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 20:24, 23 July 2006 (BST)
Keep - Hooray for Banning vandals and 'Psychic Zombie' skill that lets you know when barricades go up or fall down!! -- Tirion529 20:26, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Darkness

Started a misconduct case against me when there was clearly no reason to do so. Why am I filing a vandalism report? I find it more than a little suspicious that after I removed a suggestion pertaining to changing one's account name, a brand new user account springs up and files a misconduct case against me — and the user's only two edits are on that case. Sound like bad faith edits from a sockpuppet account to anyone else? –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 00:23, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Yes, it does, but there is a guy who goes by the name "Darkness" and this could be him. No way to prove either way, I'm afraid. Cyberbob Talk 00:27, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Yeah. We really need that IP checker. --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 00:32, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Badly. There are more than a few accounts that I suspect to be owned by certain individuals, and it would be great to know for certain. I really hope that Kevan installs that extension when he updates the software at the end of this month. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 00:35, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Like Denzel's forty accounts. Including this one.-That's Why I did your Wife 00:38, 23 July 2006 (BST)

No. I'm not of the opinion that you're all the same person. I'm thinking of some other accounts, but I don't want to say which in case I'm wrong. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 00:43, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Care to share via E-Mail? Cyberbob Talk 00:48, 23 July 2006 (BST)

You never know. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 01:01, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Most of the accounts I suspect of being sockpuppets have been throwaways. Even if the IP checker comes in, does that really mean we'll be able to see the IPs from edits before it was added? –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 03:06, 23 July 2006 (BST)

I think so. Why wouldn't we? –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:15, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Were they stored when the edits were made? I'm not sure about this aspect of MediaWiki. If so, then why the hell is an extension required? It should be built in by default. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 05:27, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Well, I can't say for sure, but it only seems logical that it would record IP addresses. I don't know. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:30, 23 July 2006 (BST)

It does, they're attached to edits in the database.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 20:27, 23 July 2006 (BST)

If a idiot makes a throw away account without using a proxy he deserves to be sent to hell. Or nuked from orbit. Twice. --DarkStar2374383 ^{Talk | LDY | LOE} 20:30, 23 July 2006 (BST)

Well, currently he doesn't actually need to. As the chances of getting kevan off his arse to check the database it practically nil.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 20:32, 23 July 2006 (BST)

The General

I wouldn't mind normaly about this kind of stuff, but because everyones using the "Mod removal" powers on the suggestions page I just have to make the point that if you are going to follow the rules that you should do it properly. The General vanalised the main suggestions page by removing two suggestions and not placing them into peer rejected. It can be see on the 21st-Jul-2006 suggestions page that he removed Headshot and ZOMBEIS EXPLODE!1!!! from it, however if you look at the respective area on the peer rejected page they are not there. This violates the rules from Removing Suggestions on the main suggestions page. The exact rule is under Spaminated, point four, "Move the suggestion to Peer Rejected Suggestions page". - Jedaz 07:03, 22 July 2006 (BST)

The two suggestions were spam from a spammer whom Brizth permabanned shortly before i could get to it myself. As such, there was no reason to move them to peer rejected. They were intentionally junk, and could technically fall under the reign of rule 13 of the page (This is a comment, not a ruling). --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 07:08, 22 July 2006 (BST)

Check the suggestion he removed: [1] and [2]. --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 07:10, 22 July 2006 (BST)

Grim s has concisely made every point I was going to bring up. This is not a case of vandalism. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 07:11, 22 July 2006 (BST)

Hmm.... yes, I see your point now that I look at what the suggestions were. Ok then, well I withdraw this then. I'll do my research better first next time. - Jedaz 07:14, 22 July 2006 (BST)

You'd better. Or there's going to be some serious firepower brought into play. Cyberbob Talk 07:15, 22 July 2006 (BST)

You mean like the Big Guns? ;^) --Karlsbad 15:42, 22 July 2006 (BST)

<_< >_> No... where did you ever come up with that idea? Cyberbob Talk 15:44, 22 July 2006 (BST)

Clanluz

Vandalized Groups page. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 05:06, 22 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 05:09, 22 July 2006 (BST)

SPM MACHIEN

Vandalized the suggestions page here. Vandalized this same page too. Someone removed my report by mistake. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 23:21, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Banned. --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 23:22, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Sorry about removing the report. I was reverting it as well and didn't get any error / conflict messages. --Tethran 23:23, 21 July 2006 (BST)

It's ok, I knew it was done by mistake when reverting the vandalism. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 23:25, 21 July 2006 (BST)

For some reason it banned my ip, that'll teach me for using a variable ip at my holiday home.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 23:24, 21 July 2006 (BST)

A Vandal

Vandalized some group's page here. Also posted himself for moderation (in the wrong place) here. Suspiciously enough, talks like the guy below. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 22:45, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Infinite banned. --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 22:51, 21 July 2006 (BST)

TEH SPMMAR

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Suggestions&diff=329599&oldid=329593 Please shoot me. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 20:44, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Aw. I just entered my own report about this, hit submit and found (thanks to the edit conflict message) that you'd got there before me Sonny. --Tethran 20:54, 21 July 2006 (BST)

WUT DID I DO WRONG?!!?!! OMG LOL--TEH SPMMAR 20:56, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Yeah what did he do wrong? Oh right, breaking rules and being butt4brainzzxXorz-That's Why I did your Wife 22:18, 21 July 2006 (BST)

FUK OF U WANK3R!1!!111!1--TEH SPMMAR 22:23, 21 July 2006 (BST)

HUG!!!! :-D-That's Why I did your Wife 22:31, 21 July 2006 (BST)

It's like chatting with yourself on steroids Banana Bear =P --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 22:34, 21 July 2006 (BST)

FUK OF U WANK3R!1!!111!1-That's Why I did your Wife 22:36, 21 July 2006 (BST)

And the moron's at it again http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Suggestions&diff=329706&oldid=329698 --Tethran 22:37, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Permabanned. --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 22:54, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Aw...I was just about to report this guy here for his crap use of grammar and spelling and his obviously stupid suggestions. I need to move faster. -- Krazy Monkey ^W! 22:56, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Reptileus

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Fall_of_the_DARIS_Empire&diff=328659&oldid=326674 Guess what? He did it again. He was told not to but he made more fake edits. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 00:56, 21 July 2006 (BST)

He really needs to keep his personal history in a tiny box in a larger box hidden where no one will find it by accident. Shame on you Rep. -Banana Bear 01:04, 21 July 2006 (BST)

This is somewhat pathetic. Is he deliberately doing this, or is he just thick? Regardless, if he doesn't get the message that his edits to that page are nonsensical and unconstructive, he will most likely continue. As a result, I am warning him. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 01:17, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Prediction: Misconbiarbitrationduct in 3, 2, … –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 01:43, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Oh of course. It wouldn't be the wiki if we were allowed to do our jobs, now, would it? –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 01:44, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Absolutely not. It would be a magical dreamland that I call happyville, where the elected sysops wouldn't be penalized for working extra hard to keep things running properly. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 01:47, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Hey, if no one complains it ain't a crime. --Karlsbad 01:50, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Solution: Don't do the job. Works for me. :V – Nubis ^NWO 01:52, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Oh come on! Misconbitration's are the fun! -Banana Bear 01:56, 21 July 2006 (BST)

A few dirty rats are plotting to overthrow the wiki by giving moderators the power to moderate. Quick, stop them before it's too late! This conversation never happened. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:07, 21 July 2006 (BST)

Jon Irwin

Added this text to the Peer Rejected Suggestions page, and argued about my removing the suggestion here as well, in blatent violation of the suggestions page rules. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 18:08, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Warned.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 20:23, 20 July 2006 (BST)

AnimeSucks

This message has been posted in violation of a previous Arbitration ruling.

Akule, AnimeSucks and DarkStar2374383 will not interact with The Fifth Horseman anywhere on this wiki. If you must contact him, it will not be through this wiki.

Violating any of these points will considered an act of vandalism, as already set out by the arbitration page's rules. –Xoid M•T•U! 17:55, 24 June 2006 (BST)

--The Fifth Horseman 12:01, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Banned for 24 hours. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 12:33, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Ron Burgundy

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Ackland_Abattoir&action=history I don't think he has permission to alter this group's page. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 02:47, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Reverted and warned. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:04, 20 July 2006 (BST)

OMG, is this bad faith at all? Did anyone of the Abattoir complain? --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 03:22, 20 July 2006 (BST)

OMG, it doesn't matter. He altered their main page, removing a link to another page that still exists -- a page that talked about members of his group zerging -- under the pretense that it was "no longer news." Would you call that good faith? –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:29, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Agreed with Bob. --Karlsbad 03:31, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Sorry, I agree. I was under the impression that he added the link, when he actually removed it. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 03:33, 20 July 2006 (BST)

No problem, it isn't a big deal. Hey, as long as we're all agreed: *pops champaign* --Karlsbad 03:39, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Once again, to misconduct cases solved painlessly! I assume you saw the fun that transpired after you left? Bloody insane. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:43, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Yeah. Very much a tyfyc situation. --Karlsbad 04:50, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Jesus H. There's a real problem when reporting a "vandalism" is in bad faith and the "vandalism," itself, is not. I was going to delete the story on my page, which they linked to on theirs. It's something like a month old and, believe it or not, it's no longer news. Rather than having a broken link, I took it down intending to remove mine in a moment. Note, I took down only the link to my page, not the story itself, which had been up for a month, too. Hell, I even left a lengthy message on the history page about what I was doing. Then I got hungry and went out for Chinese food, never having updated it. Now I'm back, full of delicious Lo Mein, and finishing it. There's no vandalism here, just some help toward a Classy foe. Man, I sure do miss 'em! --Ron Burgundy 07:31, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Right, well that sounds good faith to me. I'll wait to see what the other moderators think, but I believe that the warning should be retracted.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 07:48, 20 July 2006 (BST)

You beat me to the punch General. In that case, my apologies, Ron. Warning rescinded. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 07:50, 20 July 2006 (BST)

However he should understand that you can't delete a thing on a group page without explicit permission, so instead of deleting the page he should have put it into an archive (where old news goes, you know) and then tell the group on its talk page the change and then maybe do the broken-link alter himself to where the news was contained. Otherwise he won't understand how you properly edit a wiki; you can take something on your own page down but you can't decide when to delete a link on another groups page. --Karlsbad 08:04, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Don't worry about it. You guys have a hard job and these things happen. :) --Ron Burgundy 09:11, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Reptileus

Major Urban Dead Battles and Fall of the DARIS Empire. Two inaccurate pages created by him. When asked to stop creating false pages (which were later fixed) he created more things. He must be stopped. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 19:25, 19 July 2006 (BST)

Also did this a while back. http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=User%3AXyu&diff=257324&oldid=192771 Sonny Corleone ^WTF 20:04, 19 July 2006 (BST)

Agreed, but I can't do anything until that vote you made goes through.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 21:08, 19 July 2006 (BST)

Or you could just warn him for pooping on the wiki, couldn't you? That vote is probably going to do nothing more than entertain lawyer trolls like me. -Banana Bear 03:56, 20 July 2006 (BST)

I agree with Banana Bear. If Vandalism is "an edit not made in a good-faith attempt to improve this wiki", we all can agree that his pages are bad faith edits that confuse everyone (especially newbies) that come trough it, exposing as facts events that have little resemblance with the truth. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 04:04, 20 July 2006 (BST)

You've all seen the recent misconduct cases, haven't you? I think I speak for all of the other moderators when I say, there is no way that any moderator is going to touch this case with the current broken set of rules. The risk of misconduct is insurmountably large. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 04:37, 20 July 2006 (BST)

More so then that Bob; I personally don't think that some of his pages are useless until left fallow. If edited to have the correct information then they are worth being here. --Karlsbad 04:41, 20 July 2006 (BST)

I attempted to fix some of it but he just kept adding more fake shit. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 04:42, 20 July 2006 (BST)

He said Katthew lead the "Good Guys" agains D.A.R.I.S. and their fell leader... Xyu. Its like a million unfunny WTFCentaurs, while I agree that misconduct has been silly large lately, I think making a big useless mess isn't good, and if asking him to stop didn't work, slapping a warning down would work better than a silly vote. -Banana Bear 04:45, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Link specific edits that delete true information and a warning will come. --Karlsbad 04:47, 20 July 2006 (BST)

He didn't delete true material. But on his talk page he was told not to create anymore fake shit and he created this the next day. 5th Of November Battle. He doesn't understand when people tell him something. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 04:52, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Sadly, not a case of vandalism. Only true method of correction is to ostrize and edit his work and possibly delete when he runs out of topics. --Karlsbad 04:56, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Actually, upon re-reading all those pages, it looks like they got cleaned up pretty well, if Rep isn't going to make more uninformative pages, I guess there isn't need for warning. I think I was overwhelmed by my initial disappointment at the travesty that DARIS one was. -Banana Bear 04:54, 20 July 2006 (BST)

That was me who did all the fixing. The only one I cannot fix is the 5th of November page. It's all messed up. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 05:03, 20 July 2006 (BST)

SAROMU FTW!! Reptileus is still the lose-Banana Bear 05:07, 20 July 2006 (BST)

DarkStar2374383

Released classified login/password information. That data list was meant only for the purposes of The Abandoned, and the login/password were not meant for public access.

I think you have some precedence about releasing classified information? --The Fifth Horseman 10:27, 19 June 2006 (BST)

I'm sure there is no precedent about this. Regardlees, if the password was old, why do you care? –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 10:55, 19 June 2006 (BST)

The password was changed shortly ago because of that data leak being discovered. I am unsure whether it was valid at the date when he has posted it.

Regardless, the material he linked to is group property of The Abandoned, and he had no right to publicise any part of it.

Especially that this database holds a large number of not only character names but also profile links. --The Fifth Horseman 11:01, 19 June 2006 (BST)

Although it is xoid's case I would like to give my opinion. This is indded something new. It doesn't fit the normal category of vandalism, but although we are a rather free form and liberal, as are most wiki's, we've always made it clear that releasing potential private information about other users here is probited and we've warned people for less serious infractions. This was placed on this wiki obivously as back up proof and DarkStar was under the impression that it was an outdated password on that forum. So he could argue good faith. However reveiling passwords even if out-dated on that particular forum is still a dicey business. That password could still be in use on other forums as people frequently use only a limited amount of passwords. As such it's clear that putting it up on the wiki was not conforming to the standard we use on this wiki. And darkstar should have known better. Especially as using the password for verification has only meaning to The Fifth Horseman using it in a public forum in stead of a private message is just plain neglicence. DarkStar should have thought of the potential for abuse. The fact that he didn't makes this a bad faith edit in my opinion.--Vista 17:26, 19 June 2006 (BST)

I didn't want to touch this; without a precedent I may end up getting another frivulous misconduct case and I am sick and tired of them. sigh. Regardless, I will do what is right in this case.

You say DarkStar didn't think about it. If it was malicious he would have thought about it and done it deliberately. Frankly I don't care if he did or did not think about it; premeditation would make this worse, but this is still far from a gray area. Posting passwords to a private access area on the wiki was more than questionable — even if he believed they were no longer useful. Commonsense would tell one to think better of it.

I think Darkstar stepped way over the line with this act. As such I am going to issue a warning to him. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 17:49, 19 June 2006 (BST)

Seems you might have another report on him, particularly on the subject of the "Fuck Abandoned" image he has used on his user page (unauthorised usage of an image he had not acquired permission from the author). I'll leave filing that report to the image's author, however.--The Fifth Horseman 18:25, 19 June 2006 (BST)

Amazing lost his case for something very similiar under the basis that parody and satire do not require prior permission. You will lose yours as well. Don't waste our time with it. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 18:40, 19 June 2006 (BST)

Yeah! :P Cyberbob Talk 18:43, 19 June 2006 (BST)

Except that one is plagiarism. --The Fifth Horseman 09:44, 20 June 2006 (BST)

The Fifth Horseman believes he has a working grasp of the law.

It cannot be considered plagiarism if it is parody or satire; Mad Magazine has been sued over this line of reasoning before. They've also been sued for their work under many other lines of reasoning for that matter. Repeatedly. They've won countless court cases. In numerous countries. Don't even consider trying to stomp on parody or satire — it is damn near sacrosanct and as such you will lose. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 10:19, 20 June 2006 (BST)

Seems that the author decided to use a different method of expressing his displease at the situation. One that you will notice in a short while. --The Fifth Horseman 10:23, 20 June 2006 (BST)

Darkstar has once again been releasing classified/confidential information: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Talk:Assault_on_Stupid_Survivors#In-Game_Kudos --The Fifth Horseman 15:05, 19 July 2006 (BST)

None of which couldn't be deduced by someone with an IQ over 5. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 15:08, 19 July 2006 (BST)

Which does not serve as an excuse, either. All of the discussions Darkstar has posted screenshots to were located in restricted-access portion of our forums. Which means that general public is not supposed to be informed of their content nor existence - no matter what. --The Fifth Horseman 15:12, 19 July 2006 (BST)

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but isn't this information already accessible elsewhere? I think he said it was DMES? –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 15:15, 19 July 2006 (BST)

Not according to my knowledge. --The Fifth Horseman 15:42, 19 July 2006 (BST)

Yep it was posted on another Forum before it was put on the wiki. --Technerd 16:34, 19 July 2006 (BST)

Fifth Horseman, please stop. The entirety of the Internet is doubled over in laughter at your pathetic antics. Dredge up the law that forbids screenshots of an OMFG SEKRET WEB FOROOM from being posted. We're all dying to see this. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:39, 19 July 2006 (BST)

Fifth, I dont know what you are talking about. According to those images YOU are the one who took the screenshots. --DarkStar2374383 ^{Talk | LDY | LOE} 02:05, 20 July 2006 (BST)

I'm afraid that by posting his message, DarkStar2374383 has broken the terms of the Arbitration verdict.

Akule, AnimeSucks and DarkStar2374383 will not interact with The Fifth Horseman anywhere on this wiki. If you must contact him, it will not be through this wiki.

Furthermore, I have not taken either of the screenshots he has posted. Close analysis of images proved them to have been faked. As you have probably noticed, Darkstar has removed the login name he used on the forum from every one of his other screens - with exception of these two, where he edited them so as to imply I was the one who took them.

This has been obviously an attempt to provoke me to either aggressively lash out or inquire as to how did he really obtain them; both would mean violating the same arbitration ruling, which I have no intention of doing.

The Fifth Horseman will not interact with Akule, AnimeSucks or DarkStar2374383 anywhere on this wiki. If you must contact any of them, it will not be through this wiki.

--The Fifth Horseman 11:57, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Oh boy, you're an expert on image analysis too? Where do your talents end? I, and the rest of the Internet, look forward to your conclusive proof that the screenshots were faked, as well. And do you almost have that law for us? We're waiting! –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 12:03, 20 July 2006 (BST)

No, I am not an expert in that field. My knowledge of image manipulation, however, and a simple cross-comparison with actual real screenshot of the forum was more then enough. However, as DarkStar has - it seems - removed the images in question, I cannot provide you with solid proof.

You have, however, my honest word that I never gave DarkStar any screenshots from The Abandoned's forum.

I can also prove that all his remaining screenshots had been taken from an account with a completely different username, even though he has had the real name of his spy account blanked.--The Fifth Horseman 12:21, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Actually they were moved to a different host due to bandwidth issues. If you want te images you can get them on my forum in the "Anti-Abandoned Warehouse" Board. Feel free. --DarkStar2374383 ^{Talk | LDY | LOE} 12:40, 20 July 2006 (BST)

If I have broke the ruling so has the fifth horseman, and I wont whine if i get banned for it. He started this up again. And by doing so He has also "Interacted" with myself on the wiki. --DarkStar2374383 ^{Talk | LDY | LOE} 12:09, 20 July 2006 (BST)

In this particular case an exemption should be made. If we only get to hear one side of the story on M/VB, then it is inheritly unfair to the other party. That being said, keep it civil, and keep it calm, no grandstanding bullshit, no flaming from either of you. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 12:29, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Xoid - proof that Darkstar has faked the login name on those screenshots is going to your e-mail right now. Please do not upload it anywhere or send it to any other person.

As he has erased the login name on all the other screens, faking it on these two particular ones proves that his intent was achieving a hostile response from my person.--The Fifth Horseman 13:28, 20 July 2006 (BST)

I know that he added your name — I may consider a vast majority of the Abandoned to be insipidly stupid, but nobody is that braindead. There is more to it, and since you are wishing for anonymity for your forums, it would be preferable to discuss this elsewhere. The "more to it" is unrelated to this case, and more towards the problem with the proof required. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 13:42, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Fair enough Fifth Horseman, fair enough. But I'm sure looking forward to seeing that law! –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 17:14, 20 July 2006 (BST)

Well, here you have another attempt at circumventing the arbitration.

Laffo5th — the parties will have 24 hours grace to Subst: the template into their user pages if they wish. Once Substed in or 24 hours passes, the template will be deleted.

The template in question has been re-created by Darkstar
The arbitration ruling clearly ordered deletion of that template. While it can be disputed whether this action is a direct breach of the arbitration verdict or not, it is quite clearly an attempt to circumvent the prior deletion. --The Fifth Horseman 13:13, 24 July 2006 (BST)

For the love of god. Stop reusing the same heading. From the recent misconduct case of The General, I'll err on the caution and say "not vandalism" and "despite the fact that DarkStar should've read the verdict, he isn't obligated to." Don't like that Fifth? Take it up with those who got The General banned. Put the redirect up for speedy and get on with it. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 13:37, 24 July 2006 (BST)

Er... what Xoid said. Cyberbob Talk 13:39, 24 July 2006 (BST)

Karlsbad

Called me a "troll lawyer" and suggested that we were the same person. Called my case malicous and retalitory. (What was I supposed to be retalialting against anyway?) These are bad faith, because he can't prove his claims. I really think this could have been solved civily, but karlsbad refuses to behave in an unbiased moderator-like manner.Jjames 07:54, 18 July 2006 (BST)

I prefer bob hammero or the general not rule on this as a good faith measure. Bob called me a troll and thegeneral has already bad mouthed this case. It seems like they are biased.Jjames 08:15, 18 July 2006 (BST)

No warning given. Insults are not considered vandalism. Either grow a thicker skin (recommended) or take it to Arbitration. Cyberbob Talk 08:21, 18 July 2006 (BST)

I thought accusations were considered bad faith. Such as: zerging or multiple account accusations. Doesn't this fall under that? --Jjames 08:23, 18 July 2006 (BST)

It is only if they changed a page they shouldn't have, each user can have their own opinions of what they think of other people. If you have an issue with someone take it to Arbitration where people go and try to resolve their differences. The vandal banning page is where there is an obvious bad faith edit (eg wipeing a groups page ect.), not for arguments or accusations between two users. - Jedaz 08:29, 18 July 2006 (BST)

General said that vandal banning was the place to go. This is clearly a bad faith edit, because you aren't allowed to post untrue statements about other users. In what way is karlsbad's accusation not a libelous claim? --Jjames 23:36, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Were you responding to Jedaz? Then why did you put your comment before his, thus screwing up the 'threading' of the conversation? Also: take this to arbitration. M/VB is not the place for this meaningless drivel. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 23:49, 18 July 2006 (BST)

MrAushvitz

Warned for placing a "humorous," not to mention racist, suggestion on the suggestions page. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 01:18, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Warned correctly, possible misconduct pending. (no report-warn, Bob...) . --Karlsbad 02:38, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Sorry, I don't follow. Are you taking me to misconduct? –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:50, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Have to at least put it up, but I'm not going to pin you down Bob. Sorry that it had to be me. --Karlsbad 03:08, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Eh, I don't take it personally. It was bound to happen at one point or another. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:50, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Why does this merit a warning? It seems like a good faith suggestion and is in no way racist. It suggests a tongue-in-cheek reference to the fact that minorities tend to be cannon fodder in horror films but one that could be actually implemented to gameplay. Under what basis are you able to determine his intent so that you can punish him for making a suggestion?Jjames 04:37, 18 July 2006 (BST)

What is and is not considered a humorous suggestion on the main suggestions page is a judgement call. In this case, I can't believe that you would stand up for this suggestion -- it's obviously not serious. There is no way that any sane person would see that suggestion and think, "why yes, introducing racism and completely fucking those players over is a great idea!" –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 04:45, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Oh leave Bob alone. Aushvits made something that was racist and acted quickly. When something like that happens you need to act fast and then push the papers. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 04:50, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Use. Your. Head. Numb. Skull.…

…'Humorous'. Suggestion. Equals. Vandalism…

…kthxbai. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 06:21, 18 July 2006 (BST)

That was unecessarily disrespectful, karl. My point is that I don't believe it was necesarily a humurous suggestion, and you can't prove it was. You aren't a mind reader and you don't know his intent. It was a suggestion that could conceibly be implemented based on the game's rules. Unless it is 100% clearly a humorous suggestion, you should assume good faith and not punish them.Jjames 07:01, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Even the author admited in his Author Keep that it was a humorous suggestion and he didn't care what we did with it because he was quitting. You still want to be Satan's lawyer? --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 07:04, 18 July 2006 (BST)

N, he said he didn't mind it people moved it to the humorous section. Which to me implies that he ment it seriously, but he would understand if people didn't take it seriously. That doesn't mena it should be punished.Jjames 07:17, 18 July 2006 (BST)

No Matt, he is apparently defending his college room-mate and trading off on the same computer so therefore can't actually know what the hell he is talking about and instead is trying to act like I personally am somehow B.S.'ing about this like he is. He chooses to fail at comprehending the situation because making Jjames look good isn't really important; it is more important that Scinfaxi have a well-thought alternate voice that defends him because no one else will. He is only a troll-lawyer and suspected sock-puppet and therefore expecting him to actually read what the helll he is talking about instead of looking like an idiot is beyond him. --Karlsbad 07:10, 18 July 2006 (BST)

I'm offended by your baseless accusations. I am almost never posting on the same place as scinfaxi, and in this case, he responded after I did. I am not a troll or a sock puppet, and referiing to me as such shows bias unbecoming a moderator. I will include this in your ongoing nisconduct case.Jjames 07:17, 18 July 2006 (BST)

You would make more headway in an arbitration case because I'm not going to abuse my moderator powers to call you an idiot. And unless you and Scinfaxi are playing on the same computer (hah!) and can't post responses at the same time, I maintain my opinion. So unless you somehow have 1- an edit conflict you can cite that this is affecting or 2- somehow can show that there is a precident of abuse of moderator priviledges that this is affecting, we're done here. --Karlsbad 07:28, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Don't become like the beardos you grief bob. It really is a tongue in cheek reference to something that actually happens in movies. It's not overtly racist, it's social commentary. Besides, it looks like you're all still alive and breathing so obviously there's not much harm done. Lighten up about it. Scinfaxi 06:35, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Failing to read the words and therefore placing a humerous (P.S. Why the Fuck would we care about cliches in movies effecting the game with an arbitrary bonus and flaw?) Suggestion gets you warned. The warning is not about the racism, but the votes in the Appropo Humorous Suggestions page seem to run in the "yeah its kinda racist" vein. So if you want to argue that, go troll over there. Because in all honesty you arguement is kinda useless here. --Karlsbad 06:44, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Aw shut the fuck up Karl. I don't think bob needs you to answer for him. Scinfaxi 08:34, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Also, I believe the definition of vandalism is offering suggestions solely for the purpose of vandalism. It might contain some social commentary, it does seem like a legitament suggestion. Scinfaxi 08:39, 18 July 2006 (BST)

You really want me to speak up here? Okay then. I think you and Jjames are being vindictive, annoying trolls. I think the suggestion was racist. I think the suggestion violated the rules. I think I was right in warning MrAushvitz. I think that if you look at my misconduct case, you'll see how I used the definition of "racist" to further prove the overt racism in that piece of shit of a suggestion, even though I didn't have to, because it's obvious to anyone with a brain. I think that if you look at that same misconduct case, you'll see that I was cleared of any wrongdoing. I think that you should attend a college that teaches critical thinking courses. I think you should stop cluttering this page. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 08:41, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Vindictive? What do I have to be vindictive about (also I didn't file any misconduct case)? Your using a narrow definition of racism to justify some action that you've already taken. I garuantee you Bob you'd be one of the same people accusing me of bigotry for saying Australians aren't qualified to do anything a few months ago. Lighten up bob, it's a wiki in case anyone forgot. Also, it's not racism to suggest a possibility of selecting your character racial traits & how you might be treated differently. Scinfaxi 16:26, 18 July 2006 (BST)

Arthas764

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_Two&diff=322990&oldid=322516 Vandalized The Two's page. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 18:36, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:07, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Vandal alts

Fkenee, Sggaagoo, Youguysssarestupid, Agrrahh, Mwnww, Nahnahnah - all permabanned. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 06:55, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Also OOBAA. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 08:45, 16 July 2006 (BST)

3page_you_know_who

didn't ban him already? --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 06:03, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Ah there we go, perma-baned. - Jedaz 06:06, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Adding Uber ninja man to the list - Jedaz 06:23, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Bwaahaha is also there... - Jedaz 06:26, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Ban Gothcca too. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 06:28, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Got it. - Jedaz 06:30, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Bob banned Youguysarestupid, Agrrahh and Mwnww, more coming... --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 06:40, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Don't worry about it, we can get them from the list later. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 06:41, 16 July 2006 (BST)

I feel like I'm missing all the fun =P --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 06:42, 16 July 2006 (BST)

More like 1% fun, 99% annoying. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 06:43, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Seanofthedead21 again

I'm very nice to the newbies, but this one... vandalized again adding a suggestion (that really resembles an humorous suggestion, except WITHOUT the actual humor) over another one and all his votes. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 06:58, 14 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Again. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 07:01, 14 July 2006 (BST)

Seanofthedead21

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Suggestions&diff=322017&oldid=322013 Vandalized the suggestion page. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 23:16, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Permabanned. Every "contribution" by this user was vandalism. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 23:24, 13 July 2006 (BST)

You asked me for my opinion on this, and I state it: good job. ~~Even the least questionable edit by this individual was clear-cut vandalism.~~ From the looks of it, it's little more than a throwaway account made by someone just being an asshat. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 03:00, 14 July 2006 (BST) Edit: apparently, I missed his only "constructive" edit. The other four are still blatant, though. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 05:15, 14 July 2006 (BST)

How can you jump to permaban? Sure, the guy's got issues, and I'm not saying he's right, but it could be possible that he's not that knowledgeable about using the wiki properly. I mean, there's some bad faith in there, but I think a permaban is harsh for a newer user. I see three infractions, so that would be warn, warn, 24h ban, according to current rules right? --Zod Rhombus 04:56, 14 July 2006 (BST)

Because he's tantamount to 3page or PQN or one of those vandals. Every single one of his five (not three) edits was vandalism, and he clearly never saw or listened when people reverted his changes. Not only that, but the nature of his edits clearly show that he wasn't seriously trying to do anything in good faith. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:16, 14 July 2006 (BST)

Obvious vandalism #1
Obvious vandalism #2
Obvious vandalism #3 - Humorous suggestions are considered vandalism, as is removing content. "Zombie ate my penis" doesn't exactly endear him to me either.
Obvious vandalism #4 - Humorous suggestions are considered vandalism, as is removing content. "Zombie Blowjob" doesn't exactly endear him to me either.

Come to think of it, that fifth edit of his looks like an actual attempt at participation. I'll rescind the permaban on him, but I still think that the fuckwit deserved it. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 05:15, 14 July 2006 (BST)

I agree he deserves punishment, but a permaban without warning sets a dangerous precedent. Although its possible, its not clear that his account is just a vandal alt. --Zod Rhombus 05:20, 14 July 2006 (BST)

"a permaban without warning sets a dangerous precedent." — perhaps you haven't heard of "Amaz'ing", or "Zod rhombus" then? Yes, I am nitpicking here over your wording, but that is what I do. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 05:26, 14 July 2006 (BST)

The second sentence qualifies the first, which is why its there. Obvious vandals vs. some doubt. I may be completely wrong about him, but there is a chance he's just an inexperienced dick and not a purposeful vandal. --Zod Rhombus 05:33, 14 July 2006 (BST)

Hammero: Constructive edit + apology. He's still a douche who seriously deserves a swift kick in the nuts, but if he doesn't shape up, he'll get shipped out soon enough. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 05:26, 14 July 2006 (BST)

His apology was for deleting the whole page for his suggestion. I reverted it and edited his suggestion to the list. Has nothing to do with him vadalizing the page with zombie blowjobs. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 05:33, 14 July 2006 (BST)

So it looks like my ban has been reversed. Shite. I was afraid of this... so, what's gonna happen to me? Isn't the standard thing supposed to be that I ban myself for the length of time that the guy was banned, or something? I was afraid of this, but it looked like the bastard was a nonstop vandal. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:23, 14 July 2006 (BST)

Looks like a mistake. Most of his edits were vandalism and it was hard to tell the difference between them. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 05:25, 14 July 2006 (BST)

Well, I knew what I was doing. Four obviously vandalism edits, and one fairly vandal-like edit (altering someone else's vote, perhaps unintentionally, perhaps not.) It looked like a serial vandal to me, but obviously he wasn't. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:28, 14 July 2006 (BST)

From the wording of the current guidelines, it's supposed to be "don't punish the moderator for doing what seemed right if it's an honest mistake", but we really haven't been following that, so Odds are that Hammero will end up with his first misconduct case. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 05:39, 14 July 2006 (BST)

I think i would have done the same. His edits were clearly oops, i am newbie at first, but after sonny warned him not to rape the entire suggestion page he kept removing other people votes and changing his own suggestion from shit to crap. It was a good ban. Good job bob. --hagnat ^mod 00:48, 16 July 2006 (BST)

Q240z

Deleted a bunch of shit off of my talk page. Someone ban him please, I've already given him two warnings, and I'm frankly quite leery of reporting and banning at the same time. Is that allowed or not? I thought we were supposed to take action as part of the job, as M/G outlines. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:34, 14 July 2006 (BST)

It is as the M/M case that I argued on definately not (I argued for non-retroactive precident and that Rueful was a vandal, but you still can not Report-Warn) Warned. --Karlsbad 03:16, 14 July 2006 (BST)

He already had two warnings from what I can see. Or is it merely that because some idiot decided to lump these all under tha same heading that it's impossible to tell WTF has gone on? –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 03:56, 14 July 2006 (BST)

Looks like he was actually banned, from M/VD. Maybe? He has been blocked, but for a "3rd warning." Strange. Anyway, they were under four separate headings, but, um, someone regrouped them. Check the history to see whom. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:59, 14 July 2006 (BST)

more shit! --^talk 22:04, 13 July 2006 (BST)

My second warning covered those edits as well. If he does any new vandalism, then we can take action. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 22:20, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Vandalized Repeated earlier vandalism after reversion. --Rayvern 21:23, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Warned a second time. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 21:23, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Vandalized twice after I warned him. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 20:11, 13 July 2006 (BST)

I can't really ban him, since he hadn't had his second warning when he made those edits. You should have gotten someone else to make this report, and given him the second warning before the next round of vandalism occured. Cyberbob Talk 21:32, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Damn it, I was afraid of that. So tell me: am I able to report and warn/ban over the same issue? I'm very wary of going wrong on that one over what I last saw over at M/M. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 21:35, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Uh...technically you can, but I wouldn't unless it's someone on a deliberate vandalism spree - like what PQN and 3page used to do. In those cases, you can just give them an instant permaban. Cyberbob Talk 21:39, 13 July 2006 (BST)

OK. Boy, I love how we get to be so secure in our positions as moderators.</sarcasm> Speaking of poorly-defined powers, what's with people's apathy regarding changes to our guidelines? On Xoid's prompting, I wrote up a nice revision to one of the insane M/G rules on M/P talk, and have gotten zero feedback. I brought up the same issue in the past on M/G talk, and got the same thing. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 21:47, 13 July 2006 (BST)

I think most people don't check the Moderation pages as part of their routine; they prefer to stick to the Suggestions page and suburb pages. You really have to shove policy changes in their faces. Like with an Announcement on that template. Cyberbob Talk 21:50, 13 July 2006 (BST)

So what should I do to get their attention? And am I allowed to update the latest news template that appears on the main page (not for this, but for other things)? As far as I know, it's protected, and technically doing so is vandalism. So. Stupid. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 22:22, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Not really. The news template is for game updates only, as far as I know. You *can* change the Community Announcements template, though. It's {{comannounce}}. Cyberbob Talk 22:23, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Er, yeah. That's what I meant. Good to know that I can update it without being warned for vandalism. Have I mentioned that M/G is crippled with retardation yet? –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 22:27, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Yup. You have. :-P Cyberbob Talk 22:33, 13 July 2006 (BST)

vandalized the Miltown page--^talk 19:03, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 20:07, 13 July 2006 (BST)

MartyBanks

Vandalized a bunch of suburbs pages (Yagoton, Molebank, Ketchelbank, Dunell Hills, Havercroft, Owsleybank, Gatcombeton, Judgewood, Roftwood, Darvall Heights, West Becktown, Peddlesden Village, East Becktown and Chudleyton) by adding an article on every one of them in this fashion. These edits are not much different to those made by Codename V or an adbot, and they wuold be undone already if it wasn't for Karlsbad POV in this issue. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 03:28, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Now that it is officially a moderation action, Warned. --Karlsbad 03:30, 13 July 2006 (BST)
P.S. Don't pout because I told you why you are an idiot.

Vandal friends are beyond the reach of logic. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 03:31, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Can these things be removed now? Sonny Corleone ^WTF 03:35, 13 July 2006 (BST)

He wants you to do it again =P. I'll help you. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 03:47, 13 July 2006 (BST)

All reverted. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^{YRC | T | W!} 04:02, 13 July 2006 (BST)

I as a moderator thank you for correctly solving a problem on the wiki. Please remember this before you start getting pissy next time. --Karlsbad 07:53, 13 July 2006 (BST)

ZombieScientist

1 Seems we missed this one. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 02:26, 13 July 2006 (BST)

This happened almost two ~~months~~ weeks ago... (I was looking at the wrong date) just leave it. They probably are not around or wouldn't even remember the incident--

^talk 05:38, 13 July 2006 (BST)

Saromu

edited my group page without my permission--^talk 15:30, 11 July 2006 (BST)

Warned.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 15:36, 11 July 2006 (BST)

Cwissbali

Blocked infinitely. Vandal, impersonator of Cwissball. --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 10:42, 11 July 2006 (BST)

Abslch

~~Vandalized Suggestions by modifying his suggestion after voting had started and then removing it from the page. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 20:24, 10 July 2006 (BST)~~

I'd hardly call those 'Vandalism' – Nubis ^NWO 20:25, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Discard it if you wish, but removing his suggestion entirely (I posted it to the talk page, not him) is vandalism by the suggestions rules. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 20:30, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Retracted after reconsideration. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 20:33, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Hey, I just want to take a second and apologize to people in general. I've been a bit on edge, and made some too-fast snap judgments here. I think I need to take a break from this particular page for a while. Sorry for the hassle I've caused anyone. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:31, 11 July 2006 (BST)

Rippah

Vandalized a user page with rude remarks.

Edited a group page without permission of the group, Included rude remarks.

Insulting the same group on their talk page.

Not signing any of his revisions, quite clearly a throw away account. DarkStar2374383 ^{Talk | LDY | LOE} 12:14, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Perma-baned - Jedaz 13:05, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Gold Blade

Goddamnit people, stop! Vandalized the suggestions page by re-inserting a spaminated suggestion and removing two votes from the page. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:34, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Fucking hell. Vandalized again. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:48, 10 July 2006 (BST)

And again (changed a timestamp on his comment). –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:49, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Another thing: the user is Gold Blade, but his signature links to Goldblade -- impersonation? –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:51, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. And I'd say Goldblade and Gold Blade are the same guy - look at the content on their respective user pages. Cyberbob Talk 02:58, 10 July 2006 (BST)

I just checked the Goldblade page -- not even a real user page. Damn n00bs. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:00, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Steel Hammer

Yes, again. Someone may argue this, but impersonation on this page -- unsigned comment directly below mine, in the same format as mine. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 01:43, 10 July 2006 (BST)

I choose to argue this: He obviously doesn't have substantial experience with the wiki; The intent obviously wasn't vandalism or impersonation. He used the pronoun "I" and signed the comment (albeit it made it look like 2 comments). He was obviously just following your example by saying Edit before his comment; He looks like a new user, give him a break. Aren't you a member of Project Welcome Bob?--

^talk 01:56, 10 July 2006 (BST)

As I said, a mod is free to tell me that this isn't vandalism, and I added the {{Unsigned}} to his comment just to be safe either way. But look over the verdict on his previous case: he claims an edit conflict, but the edit right before the one in question was made by him. So what, he had an edit conflict with himself? I don't buy it. Maybe he's a newbie. If so, fine, he's made a couple mistakes. Maybe he isn't a newbie though; I'll leave it up to a mod to decide. But either way, I don't think it's obvious that he wasn't trying to impersonate me, and regardless of his intent, reading his comment, it certainly looked like I had added a second addendum to my own comment. Yes, I'm a member of Project Welcome. I'm also a member of Project Don't Fucking Vandalize. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:03, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Addendum: a quick check of his contributions shows that he's been here since April. Plenty long enough to learn not to make "mistakes" of this nature. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:17, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Um. I'm leaving this one alone. I would like to say, however, that I find it kind of cool that both Bob and I picked up on that same fact, but completely independently. Psychic links FTW! Cyberbob Talk 02:25, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Oh my God. Stop reading my mind!!!11one. ;) (Aside: I find it kind of amusing that only one person has commented on my temporary, um, "redesign" of my user page. Maybe it's just that no one has seen it.) –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:29, 10 July 2006 (BST)

I saw it the other day. Looks pretty cool. Cyberbob Talk 02:34, 10 July 2006 (BST)

You're kidding, right? To quote Jimbo, "it looks like an angry gay pride parade." –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:01, 10 July 2006 (BST)

I was meaning the technical side of it. The actual look? Reminds me of a room designed by Stevie Wonder. Cyberbob Talk 03:04, 10 July 2006 (BST)

You know what.. Ban me.. Fuck you,(Gage... thanks for actually seeing what happened and being intelligent enough to read through it.) As for you other two, cyberboob and bob"i wanna"hammero"cyberboobwithmypenis", You Overbearing Insignificant Flagitating Morons. So I have been here since April. So I don't "LIVE" to learn how to edit a fucking WIKI.. So I made a mistake. I EVEN FUCKING APOLOGIZED AND IT WAS SINCERE, up to this point. But now you are just a fucking nit picking little weasel of a pussy who sits behind some perceived position of power. All I do around here in reality is add some comments every once in a while in hopes to make this "somewhat" entertaining game better. But you know what.. My life will go on without it. Will Yours???? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL... Probably not. Later Losers. Out of the wiki out of the game. --Steel Hammer 04:21, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Um...that was interesting. I don't think he realised that I actually didn't do anything, and wasn't going to. Oh well. Cyberbob Talk 04:33, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Y'know, were it necessary, I would have argued in your favour, but really, what've you just done makes me want to retch — you could have easily got your point across without questioning the sexuality of Hammero or Cyber. Especially since it was not said anywhere in this that Cyberbob had issued a warning. Regardless…

"So what, he had an edit conflict with himself?" — this has happened to me before. MediaWiki can be extremely finicky when she wants to be. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 04:35, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Another thing I find interesting is that he implies that he has a life and we don't, yet he is the one blowing his top over the Internet. Cyberbob Talk 04:42, 10 July 2006 (BST)

I left a comment on his talk page. It would sound better comming from me as I was the one to stand up for him in the first place. --

^talk 04:46, 10 July 2006 (BST)

The most interesting thing here is that I am actually friends with someone who is essentially the same is steel hammer, and I'm sure most of you can find someone like him too. Haha, angry kids! <3<3<3-Banana Bear 04:48, 10 July 2006 (BST)

I made a template to honor the occasion {{Wiki Gestapo}}. Don't take this too seriously. --

^talk 05:54, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Saromu already did. What did I tell you on your talk page? People get worked up over nothing nowdays. It's utterly ridiculous. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 05:59, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Wow Steel Hammer, way to overreact and make yourself look like an idiot. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 06:33, 10 July 2006 (BST)

For even more hilarity check out his talk page. Cyberbob Talk 06:34, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Zod rhombus

Impersonator of Zod Rhombus. Cyberbob Talk 01:23, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Wow, my very own impersonator. Permaban that sucka! --Zod Rhombus 03:10, 10 July 2006 (BST)

'Tis done. Cyberbob Talk 06:51, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Abslch

Vandalized the Ruddlebank, New Arkham, and Spicer Hills danger report pages. 1. The report wasn't even done properly. 2. Those suburbs are very much dangerous. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 22:29, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Hmm... this could be chalked up to a newbie's mistake. I'm leaving this open for someone else to decide; I can't. Cyberbob Talk 22:39, 9 July 2006 (BST)

I told him on his talk page what he's doing is wrong but he continued. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 22:41, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Oh, did you? In that case, warned. Cyberbob Talk 22:45, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Steel Hammer

Vandalized the Suggestions page by removing my vote. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:16, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Edit: And in the same move, apparently re-inserted a Re that someone else had previously removed. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:21, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 22:38, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Edit: The only information that I edited was my own. I went in and removed the section that stated that there wasn't a limit to the amount of points an individual could store, as after closer reading I saw that Jon had stated to characters maxiumum HP. As far as the RE goes its my RE that I put in. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Steel Hammer (talk • contribs) .

Bob - If I accidently removed your vote it was not intentional. I got an error that stated another user had edit the page when I attempted to save, so I copied my comments to my clipboard, clicked back on my browser, re-edited the suggestion and placed my vote. Sorry for any problems. --Steel Hammer 23:47, 9 July 2006 (BST)

It's your Re, is it? So, that would be impersonation? Cyberbob Talk 23:55, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Edit: I am not sure what Re you are talking about. The one I entered I signed, it was in rebuttle to one that Jon Pyre had placed after my vote. --Steel Hammer 23:59, 9 July 2006 (BST)

This sounds to me like a good-intentioned mistake --

^talk 00:04, 10 July 2006 (BST)

The Re below Nob666's vote? Have you even followed that diff comparison link? Cyberbob Talk 00:07, 10 July 2006 (BST)

If you go back two versions, Jon Pyre and Bob Hammero both could have possibly been editing when he clicked submit. He may have just made a newbie error and done something wrong at that point. --

^talk 00:18, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Bothan Spy I see what you are talking about with the link. But that RE is not something that I did.. What I did I stated above, if you choose to ban me for editing its your call your the moderator. But before you ban me you should ask Jon if he placed that RE first. --Steel Hammer 00:24, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Nice try guys, but no. Steel Hammer had two consecutive edits on the page, the second of which being the one in question. He would not have recieved an edit conflict on that one. The warning stands. Cyberbob Talk 01:26, 10 July 2006 (BST)

I dont normally weigh in on this, but i must protest. The wiki software is buggy when it comes to high traffic high edit places such as the suggestions page, and sometimes people click submit while another person is submitting. This causes one persons information to be lost. I know this because i got into a fight with a couple of people over it a while back, when it happened three times on the same page. In those circumstances no edit conflict notification is given, just simple overwriting as it quickly slams two revisions on top of each other. It has also been shown that in the past, the second edit by a person also sometimes bugs and draws on an earlier revision as its base and that comments get erased that way too. Im sure if i dig way way back i can probably find a few examples, but given the high traffic of that page it seems unlikely. I have no idea why this happens, but it does. As such, the liklihood is that you are warning a person for being the victim of a bug. --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 03:54, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Actually, I've had that happen to me a couple of times as well. Hmm. I suppose this could be an instance in which that happened, but it's hard to say. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:57, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Addendum: perhaps another reason to upgrade to the latest version of MediaWiki? I wonder if that bug has been fixed. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:58, 10 July 2006 (BST)

I just reviewed the page, and it fits the pattern of those bug instances perfectly. It always sparks off when a person edits a comment laid down in the above manner right after they post it. I cant understand how it does this though. I just know that it does. Steel Hammer is innocent of any wrongdoing. If the warning isnt removed by ABS by tomorrow ill strip it from the record myself. In other news, Bob Hammero edit conflicted me twice in the posting of this. This makes me a sad user. --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 04:02, 10 July 2006 (BST)

My mistake then, and sorry about the edit conflicts. I hate those. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 06:28, 10 July 2006 (BST)

XxXxXxX

vandalized the humorous suggestions --^talk 18:38, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 22:37, 9 July 2006 (BST)

fixed the link--

^talk 23:02, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Heh. Thanks for that. I accidentally created User:User:XxXxXxX. Not to worry though, it's already up for Speedy Deletion. Cyberbob Talk 23:05, 9 July 2006 (BST)

I think it may have been my mistake originally, but I fixed it anyway. --

^talk 00:03, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Karlsbad

Impersonation, ressurecting a closed case because he disagreed with the verdict. Here Scroll down to the bottom of the dif comparison to see where he struck out what i said and posted a complete turnabout under my name ordering a second hearing. Something he had no right to do. --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 07:22, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Well if The General was actually still banned then it'd actually be a problem. Warn me for this piddly bit, then grab your balls. --Karlsbad 07:26, 9 July 2006 (BST)

I cannot do that. What i can do however is report you for misconduct for throwing this hissy fit and unblocking The General arbitrarily and in defiance of a valid and fair ruling. --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 07:32, 9 July 2006 (BST)

I'll warn myself; its so beyond tacky what the hell this is. But fair? Please. No case, just an majority unwilling to explain yourself and an ivory-tower figure-head that prefers stonewalling to intellectual discussion. Look in the mirror Grim_S; Tyrants are the ones that refuse to explain themselves when they kneecap anyone who says different. --Karlsbad 07:44, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. --Karlsbad 07:44, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Beat me to it, lol. - Jedaz 07:50, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Grim_s

cleared Disscussion regaurding an open case citing a discussion and voting-closing rule that does not exist as a method to squash a reasonable and logical conclusion to the case. --Karlsbad 05:22, 9 July 2006 (BST)

I should probably stay out of this, but I don't know if you saw this on the page or not: "As far as I read there were 3 different opinions, if we decide to do this I propose that the opinion with a simple majority after 3 days of ~~voting~~ discussion is enacted.--Vista 21:20, 5 July 2006 (BST)" –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:24, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Vista proposing such doesn't mean that it will be accepted. He should have put up the verdict and seen what someone else would say about it. Secondly, Bob, if you don't want to get into anything, why do you want to be a mod? --Karlsbad 05:35, 9 July 2006 (BST)

I'm not a mod yet, and I wasn't part of that whole fiasco over at M/M other than trying to keep the page from falling apart. Otherwise, I'd have weighed in and all that. Damn it, couldn't you guys have waited two more freaking days, and then I'd have joined you? ;) –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:36, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Don't worry, we'll keep a bag-full of drama waiting just for you when you join up ;^). --Karlsbad 05:39, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Aww thanks, I'm touched. :P I've tried to spark some sort of action on my very own user page (go look, you'll see), but nothing. The wiki seems quiet... too quiet. Xoid, Cyberbob, etc. seem to have either disappeared or fallen into some alternate reality where the wiki isn't something to be edited on a daily basis. ;) –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:42, 9 July 2006 (BST)

I fail to see how this is vandalism, could you please elaborate why? If you have a problem with how Grim went about deciding the verdict then state why you belive so on the misconduct page, I just fail to see how this is vandalism. - Jedaz 06:54, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Pardon me, I cited his first edit in that one-hour string... the vandalization is best seen here. --Karlsbad 07:12, 9 July 2006 (BST)

I merely followed the steps posted to resolve the situation. That you did not like the final verdict decided by a simple majority is not enough reason to overrule it. --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 07:17, 9 July 2006 (BST)

The fact that you've yet to provide a reasonable defence of your own assertions is enough, thankyou. --Karlsbad 07:19, 9 July 2006 (BST)

That isnt true, nor is it relevant. The point is that the case is CLOSED. YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT TO ARBITRARILY SAY NO WHEN A MAJORITY RULED AGAINST YOUR POSITION. I AM REINSTATING THE VERDICT UNTIL YOU CAN GIVE A BLOODY GOOD REASON WHY IT SHOULDNT BE. --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 07:24, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Oh, so you ignored it, okay; 1- Rueful bad-faithed edited Amazing's userspace, which you have yet to discount 2- Hagnat when punished was given a vocal warning for such when the action was in the right 3- there is no rule against report-warning that The General would have been breaking. 4- What arbitrary no? I'm right. --Karlsbad 07:28, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Karlsbad. Shut up and act like an adult. A MAJORITY of moderators ruled that The General was WRONG to do what he did, and thus he was banned. Just because you disagree with it DOES NOT GIVE YOU THE RIGHT TO OVERRIDE IT. GROW THE FUCK UP. --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 07:33, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Karlsbad, are you an alt account of Vista? Because this strongly reminds me of the necromancy he pulled on this case when I was trying to enforce Grim & hagnat's rulings. Cyberbob Talk 14:39, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Cyberbob? one: don't try to be funny, two: learn the concept of due process. three: learn when you can leave comment like this and when you need to be very quiet. There were multiple rulings who were equally valid. Not only were you extremely close to a misconduct case quite simular to karlsbad's, your behaviour was abismal and not up to the standards of a moderator. So before you badmouth other the moderators I'd carefully look at your own actions.--Vista 12:58, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Vista? Are you an alt account of Karlsbad? Cyberbob Talk 21:28, 10 July 2006 (BST)

Nope, I'm denzel.--Vista 08:22, 11 July 2006 (BST)

OK... >_> Cyberbob Talk 09:09, 11 July 2006 (BST)

Damn it, Karlsbad told me that Denzel was Banana Bear. But if you're Denzel, then does that mean you're also Banana Bear? That's just crazy-talk. Crazy man. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 09:19, 11 July 2006 (BST)

All_hail_cale

Vandalized (plus this) the Suggestions page by placing a humorous suggestion there. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:36, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. --Karlsbad 05:12, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Soph

Vandalized the ASS page: once, twice! –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 00:50, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 00:51, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Gene Splicer

Removed a discussion Pesatyel had just started. Cyberbob Talk 23:55, 8 July 2006 (BST)

Warned - Jedaz 02:33, 9 July 2006 (BST)

I have no idea how I did that. This would be a case of Incompetence, not Vandalism. Is someone going to put it back, or should I do it? Especially since it's something I agree on him with. --Gene Splicer 13:35, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Actually, I really have NO idea how I did that. That edit was done inside the confines of my discussion, I have no idea how that could have completely deleted someone elses --Gene Splicer 13:35, 9 July 2006 (BST)

Labine50

Vandalized Talk:Suggestions by removing comments that he didn't like. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 00:08, 8 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. – Nubis ^NWO 02:59, 8 July 2006 (BST)

Brendoshl

I banned Brendoshl with an expiry time of infinite. Some diffs: [3], [4] and [5]. --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 15:07, 7 July 2006 (BST)

In case you didn't catch it, this is yet another attempt at impersonation: Brendoshl instead of Brendoshi. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 17:29, 7 July 2006 (BST)

Ah, right. Didn't realise that. Thanks. I'll put a notice on the vandal data. --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 17:47, 7 July 2006 (BST)

Hey look I got my own impersonator as well! ^_^ So who is left from ASS who hasn't had one so far?--Brendoshi 23:31, 7 July 2006 (BST)

I haven't gotten one :(--

^talk 02:50, 8 July 2006 (BST)

Start more controversy gage. Duh! sweet sweet controversy-Banana Bear 02:59, 8 July 2006 (BST)

If the vandal is reading this, which I am sure that he is, DO ME NEXT!--

^talk 03:55, 8 July 2006 (BST)

Uh. ASS isn't really a vandal-friendly group, in case anyone is wondering. Far from it. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 03:59, 8 July 2006 (BST)

My group thanks you for it. --Zod Rhombus 22:30, 8 July 2006 (BST)

Trouble0125

Vandalized the suggestion's page by deleting a spaminated suggestion here replacing it with his own (horribly spamable) sugestion. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^Talk 03:00, 7 July 2006 (BST)

Warned - Jedaz 10:30, 7 July 2006 (BST)

Legend X

In accordance with my arbitration ruling, I request that the next available moderator please place a one week ban on Legend X. (In case you don't read the entire ruling: I would give Legend X a warning, but he already has two warnings and two bans.) –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 21:49, 6 July 2006 (BST) Redacted; see arbitration for details. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 22:01, 6 July 2006 (BST)

Bangadesh

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Holy_Aura_Militia&diff=313810&oldid=277595 There ya go. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 02:57, 6 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 03:43, 6 July 2006 (BST)

Sonny Corleone

are you allowed to edit another users user page? The edit in question is here--^talk 22:22, 5 July 2006 (BST)

shit. Thought that was the talk page. I'll move it. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 22:29, 5 July 2006 (BST)

All clear? Good. (i.e. no vandalism here) --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 22:45, 5 July 2006 (BST)

JimboBob

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=The_Ridleybank_Resistance_Front&diff=313606&oldid=313353 There ya go. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 20:42, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Permabanned. – Nubis ^NWO 20:45, 5 July 2006 (BST)

These vandals are so inept, it's almost funny. Not only does Jimbo have an alt in the RRF, but his username isn't "Jimbo Bob." –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 20:52, 5 July 2006 (BST)

You'd think that after a while the person be out of variations your user names to use... or at least learn that the trick wont work...--Vista 21:28, 5 July 2006 (BST)

You'd think they would stop using others peoples names to vandalise the wiki and make their own. In fact they shouldn't do that either >.<--Brendoshi 21:32, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Bobhammero

vandalized the ASS group page here --^talk 18:00, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Hey look, my impersonator strikes again! Requesting immediate permaban in case it isn't obvious that someone is trying to smear my name. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 18:06, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Done. Cyberbob Talk 18:08, 5 July 2006 (BST)

I feel like celebrating my revert, as it is my first one so far. Go me! --Brendoshi 18:35, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Good job, and thank you. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:13, 5 July 2006 (BST)

3pwv is back!!!

Vandilized the suggestions page by blanking the whole thing and posting some inane shit message in its place as shown here. Ban the whole damn IP block. Or whatever it is you do. --Mookiemookie 16:03, 5 July 2006 (BST)

I wish that were possible... we don't have any way of tracking users' IP addresses. Permabanned. Cyberbob Talk 16:09, 5 July 2006 (BST)

I got it, but he's with AOL.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 20:35, 5 July 2006 (BST)

I fucking hate AOL. Useless load of crap… you could try blocking an entire IP range from AOL, but of course, we'll have users complaining profusely about that, even if it would deter him. *sigh* –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 14:40, 6 July 2006 (BST)

MPHavoc

vandalized here: here blanked this page:here --^talk 05:46, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Warned at 05:50, 5 July 2006 (BST). –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 05:50, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Bob Hammero

For vandalising my group page here . --Zod Rhombus 04:54, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Not. The. Same. Person. – Nubis ^NWO 04:56, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Yeah, I see that. Just someone trying to start shit up again. Delete this if necessary. --Zod Rhombus 04:58, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Xoid banned the vandal right after the vandalism (read down a little further on the page). My username doesn't have a space in it (BobHammero), and is proper case (Hammero, not hammero). That should help you tell me from other vandals (if there are any) in the future. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:12, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Canuhearmenow

For posting a humourous suggestion on the main suggestions page. Suggestions page history - Jedaz 22:37, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Warned --Karlsbad 02:22, 5 July 2006 (BST)

Gage

I have strong reason to believe that Gage created the account "Labine50isdumb" for the sole purpose of vandalism. He essentially indicated that he was going to vandalise a page in a specific way with a "throw-away account". I can post a chat log here, if required. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 11:45, 4 July 2006 (BST)

I stand behind Xoid on his assertions, 100%. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 11:54, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Well it would be useful if you provided some evidence of why you belive that Gage did this. I don't want to start going around banning people just because someone says that they suspect a person might have created a vandal account. - Jedaz 11:56, 4 July 2006 (BST)

The evidence -- which I have seen, since I am the co-leader and cofounder of one of the groups Gage is a member of -- is more than slightly damning. I will, however, let Xoid provide it, since he initiated the case. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 12:04, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Can you give me an email address, Jedaz? –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 12:10, 4 July 2006 (BST)

da_jedas@hotmail.com - there you go. - Jedaz 12:15, 4 July 2006 (BST) - Edit - Although I would prefer an offical record on the wiki so people can see it (prehaps having it and hiding it with ?) - Jedaz 12:18, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Sent. I'm also trying to upload it somewhere, but I'm getting problems. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 12:32, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Yep, I'm just reading it now. I don't think that the wiki software allows for uploading anything but images so you may have to find somewhere else to upload it. - Jedaz 12:39, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Download here. 20Kb, please wait 5 minutes for their servers to finish copying it to their mirrors. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 12:44, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Hmm... I'm not 100% convinced about this, it's a tough decision. I can't say either way if he did it or not. Although it implys that he is a likely candidate for doing this I also can not ignore the fact that it doesn't directly state that its his intentions, also the source is questionable as it could have quite easily been edited before it was recived by me or the community. Although I don't belive that Xoid would provide a modified document as a source of evidence, I do however have to weigh up the various factors of reliability of information and intent of malice. As I can not say with certainty that Gage is responsible I must rule that no warning shall be issued. However if another moderator feels that this ruling is incorrect then they may overturn my decision if they wish as I'm not fully convinced of Gage's innocence or guilt. - Jedaz 13:14, 4 July 2006 (BST)

It looked to me like a normal converstation about the limitations of the wiki. But nothing he said suggested he was actually going to do anything, and it is most likely to be in line with the amazing drama we had in the past, where a whole pile of dopplegangers came on and started vandalising after we banned him (Amazing drama you spoke of at length just before switching to labine exactly as suddenly as the switch to alts). Also Xoid. That site really sucks. --Grim s-^{Mod U!} 17:52, 4 July 2006 (BST)

"…like that 'hur' template in labine's…", and lo and behold. A couple of minutes later the exact same thing happened. I reserve my right to consider that more than coincidental. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 18:12, 4 July 2006 (BST)

I admit it, it was me. I am sorry guys. Please forgive me--

^talk 18:28, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 18:40, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Labine50isdumb

Vandalized here, here, here, here, and here. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 07:29, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Perma-banned. I think it's safe to say this user is never going to contribute properly. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 07:35, 4 July 2006 (BST)

W3c

Someone else may disagree with me and view this as good faith, but nevertheless, this user seems consistently unable to follow the rules of the Suggestions page: vandalized that page by removing his/her own suggestion as "spaminated" (instead of just withdrawing it), even though the suggestion was ineligible for spamination. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 21:27, 3 July 2006 (BST)

I have to agree with you: there's obvious good faith on his edit, the mistake was minimal and not contested by anybody (even the comments by Ybbor show a will to teach more than to correct), and if we warned him we wuold be punishing his learning. Even the guidelines of Project Welcome tells you to Show new people the ropes instead of berating. I think a heads up in his talk page wuold be enough, but bring him any closer to a ban? that wuold be discouraging new blood to join. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^Talk 02:25, 4 July 2006 (BST)

Irritating, but not vandalism. There are exceptions to this, but based purely on what is here, not vandalism. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 05:25, 4 July 2006 (BST)

ZOMBIEKILLER

Vandalised the Dartside Whiner's page: here, here and here. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 10:26, 3 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. - Jedaz 10:50, 3 July 2006 (BST)

Leeksoup

Vandalized the suggestions page here and here. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^Talk 07:21, 3 July 2006 (BST) He actually added a Humorous suggestion to the suggestion's page too, and thats a violation of the rule 13 for suggestion's making. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^Talk

Could you please fix it? I have no idea how to do that..--W3c 07:27, 3 July 2006 (BST)

There are multiple copies of my suggestion there! Please fix it?!--W3c 07:32, 3 July 2006 (BST)

I already reverted it, now let's wait mods to get on. --Matthew Fahrenheit ^Talk 07:53, 3 July 2006 (BST)

Thanks! --W3c 07:59, 3 July 2006 (BST)

Ok, they've been warned. - Jedaz 11:00, 3 July 2006 (BST)

Charlieeeeeeeeeeeeeee

I'm not sure what to make of this, but if it's not vandalism, I don't know what it is. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:26, 3 July 2006 (BST)

Further evidence of "contributions" makes me think an instant perma-ban is necessary. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 02:27, 3 July 2006 (BST)

Permabanned. A while ago. – Nubis ^NWO 02:32, 3 July 2006 (BST)

Ah554h63f

I believe this is vandalism... Evidence --Technerd 01:32, 3 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 11:02, 3 July 2006 (BST)

Bob hammero

Perma-ban. Impersonation + vandalism. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 14:08, 1 July 2006 (BST)

Hey, my own little impersonator! I was beginning to feel left out. Good thing you got him, Xoid, or he might have fooled the whole wiki, because i rilly haev a hardtiem speling loolol. ;) (But seriously, thanks.) –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 16:57, 1 July 2006 (BST)

GnizamA

Vandalising my page, Assault on Stupid Survivors, etc. put a two hour block on them, feel free to unblock them if you think they are not the same serial vandal we've had before, alternatively, feel free to perma-block them if you do. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 08:46, 1 July 2006 (BST)

GnizamA's "contributions".

I'd say it's a fair bet he is. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 09:56, 1 July 2006 (BST)

He's gone. --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 10:01, 1 July 2006 (BST)

SamaritanSam

Vandalized the Malton DEA page, as evidenced here and here. --Jorm 04:40, 1 July 2006 (BST)

Warned and reverted some of his other edits. --Brizth ^{mod T W!} 08:33, 1 July 2006 (BST)

Chris Masanori

Vandalised The Jerk List Evidence.

--Technerd 01:12, 1 July 2006 (BST)

His few other edits are all fairly suspicious looking too. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 01:22, 1 July 2006 (BST)

Warned. Cyberbob Talk 14:05, 1 July 2006 (BST)

Labine50

Part of an arbitration case Labine50 agreed not to comment about me yet he has done it in a suggestion (as seen in the other case below) and now this one. here Sonny Corleone ^WTF 23:45, 30 June 2006 (BST)

Wasn't that arbitration case removed before it could be ruled on? If so, then there is no arbitration ruling to be violated. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 00:45, 1 July 2006 (BST)

It was ended with the Arbitrator saying that since it was dropped that we could not talk about each other on the wiki to avoid anything. And if that is not a good enough reason I still do not want him to comment about me since all he does is spread negative things. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 00:52, 1 July 2006 (BST)

I do not see that anywhere in the case. Furthermore, you two never agreed on an arbitrator, and wanted to work things out on your own without an arbitrator stepping in. Even if someone did say that you couldn't talk to each other, it still wouldn't have any weight, since you never came to a consensus on an arbitrator. That said, from what I can see, it doesn't look like you two have been able to really work things out. If I were you, I would bring up a new arbitration case, present your evidence, agree on an arbitrator, and follow whatever ruling they set out. If you want me to, and Labine50 agrees, I would be willing to arbitrate the case. If you would prefer someone else, by all means, go with someone else. If you would rather not start an arbitration case, that's your choice too. But I don't think you have a case for vandalism. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 01:11, 1 July 2006 (BST)

Got confused with another case. I personally hate Arbitration since it takes too long. And I have avoided him so it's kind of a one sided fight, him doing all the fighting. Is there a way to just get it removed? Sonny Corleone ^WTF 01:14, 1 July 2006 (BST)

Not without asking him nicely, going through arbitration (and getting a ruling that requires that he remove it), or somehow showing that his edits violate some other rule. Arbitration can take time (although it usually doesn't, and frankly, this case seems pretty cut and dry), but it would get you some lasting peace if the ruling was in your favor. Completely up to you, however. You might find it simpler just to ignore him, and hope he stops. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 01:19, 1 July 2006 (BST)

Rueful

Was warned for vandalism when he should have been banned, just wanted to get a second opinion on this before I drop the ban hammer on him.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 19:20, 30 June 2006 (BST)

Although I am not a mod, I agree with your assessment. See here for my response to his case for not vandalizing. His vandal data shows that he should receive a 48 hour ban. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:31, 30 June 2006 (BST)

Vandalized again. I have reverted part of the vandalism (the applicable arbitration case allows bold text, but not links). –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:39, 30 June 2006 (BST)

Rueful did not acted in bad faith. I myself wished to get rid of this "amazingiswatching" crap, but i cant because of Vista's ruling on my case against Amazing. This just shows how stupid this thing is, and that it should be forbidden in this wiki (i guess it is in other wikis). In the second case, bob, Rueful did not vandalized TheGeneralIsWatching page, since he removed the link which was not following Vista's ruling, as noted in the summary. --hagnat ^mod 23:29, 30 June 2006 (BST)

Case dismissed.--hagnat ^mod 23:29, 30 June 2006 (BST)

My mistake, and apologies. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 23:34, 30 June 2006 (BST)

Well, my ruling hasn't the status of official policy, It is just a stopgap measure untill an official policy is developed. The views and rulings of a single person shouldn't dictate this wiki, and certianly not from such an easily gained, and unvetted, position as arbitrator. Ideally somebody whould open a policy discussion about this, but in my opinion a normal discussion whould have as much say, if not more, as my ruling in that arbitration case.--Vista 00:05, 1 July 2006 (BST)

He also removed the bolding which is allowed by the arbitration ruling. Anyway, I was only asking whether the incorrect warning should be changed to a ban, which it should have been originally.--The General ^{T Sys U! P! F!} 17:09, 1 July 2006 (BST)

Amazing stuff this. This idiot, Rueful, has been hounding another user, and had an arbitration ruling saying he can't mess with his userspace... so what's he do as soon as this other user is banned, he goes straight in and starts messing with his userspace instead of putting the offending template (a template located in the other users userspace) up for deletion through the official moderation/deletion pages. Any idiot can see it was a continuation of his crusade... yeah, like he cares about the wiki, and text outside the user page. And instead of doing anything about this, you guys decide to crucify the mod that could be bothered warning him? Weak. If rueful was acting in good faith (asif), then so was the mod, even if you later decided to over-rule his decision here --Boxy 11:11, 9 July 2006 (BST)

UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2006 07

Vandalism Report Space

Vandal alts

Seanofthedead21 again

Navigation menu

Search