UDWiki:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2010 09
September 2010
User:Pissedatanasshole
Pissedatanasshole (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | Vandalism |
|---|---|
| Action taken | Perma |
TEV, based on contribs. Si? 
05:42, 23 September 2010 (BST)
perma -- LEMON #1 06:56, 23 September 2010 (BST)
Perma looks like a tony danza alt. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 09:24, 23 September 2010 (BST)
User:Dezonus
Dezonus (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | Not Vandalism |
|---|---|
| Action taken | {{{2}}} |
Made identical posts on 24 talk pages.
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24]
As I recall, anything more than 20 is vandalism. Discus. --VVV RPMBG 23:10, 16 September 2010 (BST)
Vandalism - Over 20 pages means he's a spammer.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 23:47, 16 September 2010 (BST)
I'm not sure this should apply as simple spamming, or we should at least discuss this first. Firstly, he is simply targeting groups that have self-labelled themselves as active survivor groups, that means they may be interested. This is simply an on-wiki version of, say, Justinbronze contacting the groups via their forums for POLNGOAK, except Dez opted to contact them via the wiki. Also, as I was forced to cite scores of times in Revenant's recent case, Karek's "It's a situational thing", meaning, if you think 20 is the point-of-no-return mark of vandalism, I think you're ruling for the wrong reason. He could have targeted 19 of the same survivor groups and just left out 5 of those above simply to avoid an escalation, and that mentality is just retarded. I also like in-game related advertisements to interested groups, I think it keeps the game interesting and fresh and allows users, if they are so inclined, to promote their own events or organisations. I'm abstaining for now, but if no one else has anything more to add to this conversation I'll be voting NV by the time the case is through.
In fact, the more I think about it, if shit like this counts as vandalism then I am gonna buttfuck Poodle for his faggy RIAC (links) shit where he spammed inactive groups, zombie groups, the BIG BASH and fucking KEVAN. Nice work on the objectivity in reporting, UUU. -- LEMON #1 04:01, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- Nice work on the consistency DDR. ¬_¬
- I didn't agree with this notion last time it was brought up and I still don't. Not vandalism by virtue of being good faith edits. 04:05, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- Besides the accusation, I don't think this case is anything much like the Rev case at all. Aichon summarises in a way I agree with below. -- LEMON #1 05:01, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- And while I'm here, I like that I'm still labelled as the poster boy for oppression when the sysops are the ones who voted in favour of Rev's spamming as vandalism. -- LEMON #1 06:44, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- I also don't think this case is like Rev's, but this guy chose 24 arbitrary groups and posted the exact same message on all of their pages. Some of them are nowhere near his group in the city, and it makes absolutely no sense for him to have contacted them, unless he randomly picked 24 groups and copy/pasted the message on their talks, which, in my opinion, is definition spam.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 07:39, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- At a glance, I had thought earlier that he merely went down the Recruitment page. Not completely arbitrary, but pretty arbitrary, yes. —Aichon— 08:55, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- Well, it's what the recruitment page is for (well, the exposure aspect of it anyway). And a lot of the group pages, DvB and mine (which was asked a day or so before) included yon, say on the main page that they will help survivors when asked. -- LEMON #1 09:23, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- Regardless, I stand by my decision that giving each group on the page an identical message without even investigating the groups is vandalism. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 14:18, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- Well, it's what the recruitment page is for (well, the exposure aspect of it anyway). And a lot of the group pages, DvB and mine (which was asked a day or so before) included yon, say on the main page that they will help survivors when asked. -- LEMON #1 09:23, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- At a glance, I had thought earlier that he merely went down the Recruitment page. Not completely arbitrary, but pretty arbitrary, yes. —Aichon— 08:55, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- I also don't think this case is like Rev's, but this guy chose 24 arbitrary groups and posted the exact same message on all of their pages. Some of them are nowhere near his group in the city, and it makes absolutely no sense for him to have contacted them, unless he randomly picked 24 groups and copy/pasted the message on their talks, which, in my opinion, is definition spam.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 07:39, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- And while I'm here, I like that I'm still labelled as the poster boy for oppression when the sysops are the ones who voted in favour of Rev's spamming as vandalism. -- LEMON #1 06:44, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- Besides the accusation, I don't think this case is anything much like the Rev case at all. Aichon summarises in a way I agree with below. -- LEMON #1 05:01, 17 September 2010 (BST)
Not Vandalism - And before folks cite the case with Revenant and the mayoral campaign a few months back, I think there's a big difference between posting a message related to repairing a suburb on the talk pages of survivor groups (i.e. something that they could reasonably be expected to take an interest in) and posting a message asking people to change their votes (and humorously threatening to PK them if they don't) on the talk pages of people that chose to vote against you. 20 is not some magical number after which everything is automatically vandalism. It's just a number we use as a baseline. We still need to consider the message and the audience. All of that said, he should still be told to try and use the established means to announce community projects in the future, rather than contacting people in this manner. While I don't consider this case to be vandalism, I don't think it's the way things should be done either. —Aichon— 04:08, 17 September 2010 (BST)
- I agree with pretty much everything DDR said as well, which he edit conflicted me to say. —Aichon— 04:09, 17 September 2010 (BST)
Not vandalism, but have a word with him about this type of thing. Dez wants to eventually become a sop, and this kind of bizarre rule of thumb is a good one to point out. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 10:23, 17 September 2010 (BST)
Vandalism - spamming so many pages, in such a short time, a few of them obviously inactive groups (at least on the wiki), and encouraging others to continue the spamming -- boxy talk • teh rulz 11:03 18 September 2010 (BST)
A word from the user in question - And I know it doesn't really matter all that much, seeing as how the verdict was already in my favour, but I would like to have my say on my Actions.
In game, My group, DI:MD, had been driven out of a third suburb, South Blythville, by the Big Bash. Why is the Big Bash so successful? Because they're a collaboration of groups, organised and working together. Now if the Zombies can do that, the survivors should be able to do.
Out of Game, I Contacted Every survivor group listed on the "Suburb Group Listing" of a 1 suburb radius, by posting the advert on their talk page. It is not my fault if they're inactive, because inactive groups are meant to be removed from the list. I then contacted every survivor group that is listed on the recruitment page. I know most of them aren't based near South Blythville, but some of them might have been willing to send a few supporters to us for assistance. Cannonball Crew is going to, and DEM is considering it.
I wanted to get the word out fast, as the whole of Malton's South west was becoming a dead zone at an alarming pace. Now, I didnt take the time to write out each individual post, because that would have taken a VERY LONG TIME....and I might have still been doing it. I also didn't expect many responses, so if I don't think they will even respond, why should I put in all that effort? I was also unaware that "Mass Mailing" Was against the rules, and I am sorry about that.
The minimal exposure provided by the Recruitment page is nowhere near the amount of exposure that I was seeking for something of this scale. What I was hoping for was something of a similar size of the Big Bash. Of course this wont happen, But I am determined to give it my ABSOLUTE best shot. And if you see a problem in that...I don't understand it...Shouldn't the survivors of Malton do their best to assist other survivors of Malton (exclude PKers and what not, just talking your normal Survivors).
I would be quite willing to discuss this more if you would like to. Regards, 
-Dezonus- (talk) 14:40, 18 September 2010 (BST)
- I would like to add another point to what I have written. TripleU and Yonnua Koponen have both referenced a magic number of 20 automatically being spam. Now, I just spent 10 minutes looking for ANY article on the wiki that confirms that that is policy, and I am yet to find one. Now, If after specifically looking for it I cant find it, How on earth was I supposed to know that that was the case?
-Dezonus- (talk) 14:54, 18 September 2010 (BST)
- 20 is case precedent, and ignorance has never been a defence. Most of your above post is completely irrelevant to the case.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 14:56, 18 September 2010 (BST)
- While most of what you're saying is making me grow respect for you for being able to make your own decision in cases (cyberbob's calls on you did actually grow on me) I still think you're wrong just on opinion of this call. He's willingly replied personally to the messages and he appears to have a genuine motive behind the posting that relates to in-game organisation, unlike, say, previous cases mayor of malton or imthatguy's "down the with the cats" spam crap. -- LEMON #1 16:39, 18 September 2010 (BST)
- Well, it sometimes is a defense in the case of wikinewbery (e.g. they accidentally delete something they shouldn't have), but, as Yonn said, precedent from past cases that are similar is that 20 is the baseline number for when things are generally considered to be spam. As DDR pointed out earlier, however, it's not a hard and fast number, since we're not cold machines. Someone could post 15 and have it be vandalism or 27 and have it not be. If you want a reference though, you might start with the Revenant case that was previously mentioned. —Aichon— 16:47, 18 September 2010 (BST)
- @Yonnua Koponen, I really get the impression hat you don't like me, and I don't understand why. But, for a moment, put yourself in my shoes. You've started The South Blythville Recovery Effort, and instead of being a one man army and doing it all by yourself, you want to get as much help as you can. How would you do it Yonnua Koponen? You may notice that the {{SBRadd}} has a tag on it that adds the page to Category:South Blythville Recovery, which allows me to keep track. If you look at that category, the pages listed are groups that I'm still waiting for a definitive answer from...in most cases still waiting for a reply...You Might also notice that those who took the effort to respond have been updated, (See: [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30]) -Dezonus- (talk) 23:53, 18 September 2010 (BST)
- Going onto the recruitment page, and contacting every survivor group there, knowing that most of them would be no-where near your location was a step too far. If it was just the ones in your area, perhaps you'd have a point. Your original post here is pretty much the definition of spam, you wanted to advertise as widely as possible, with the bare minimum of effort. This case is closed now though, and you didn't get a warning -- boxy talk • teh rulz 00:12 19 September 2010 (BST)
- Frankly, I have no real opinion about you either way. If you're asking whether I'd vouch for you as a sysop, I wouldn't, because I feel you conduct yourself poorly and have little understanding of the wiki's various rules. But then again, you wouldn't, you've only been around for two months. If you're asking me if I think this is vandalism, I absolutely do, but clearly my peers disagree. As for how I'd do it, considering I've just recently helped organise a largely successful restoration effort in Dulston and Rhodenbank, I guess I'd have to do what i did.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 22:44, 19 September 2010 (BST)
- 20 is case precedent, and ignorance has never been a defence. Most of your above post is completely irrelevant to the case.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 14:56, 18 September 2010 (BST)
User:TonyDanza
TonyDanza (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | Vandalism |
|---|---|
| Action taken | Perma |
This this and this. --Scott Timewell Imperium CFT 09:59, 15 September 2010 (BST)
User:Slater01
Slater01 (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | Vandalism |
|---|---|
| Action taken | Main Warned, Alt Banned |
MKer (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
User:MKer did this and this and IP check leads to Slater01 as a main. Banned the vandal account and warned main. -- LEMON #1 11:00, 14 September 2010 (BST)
I just received an email from Slater expressing regret about the allegations of zerging and has kindly asked me to wipe his talk page whilst he is at a computer that has UDWiki blocked. I've wiped the talk and replied asking if he'd like the allegations on the main wiped too, but in the meantime I've just blanked his talk. -- LEMON #1 12:51, 15 September 2010 (BST)
User:TexasXdooM
TexasXdooM (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | Vandalism |
|---|---|
| Action taken | Warned |
Pls warn for this lolstrocity, is an oldie but a goodie. has been warned before here -- LEMON #1 13:08, 8 September 2010 (BST)
Vandalism, obviously. Given the age, I'll wait for someone else to chime in before actually warning him. —Aichon— 15:18, 8 September 2010 (BST)
Blatant Vandalism - I'll have a crack at warning him, but I'm a tad tired so we'll see.--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 08:43, 10 September 2010 (BST)
- He be Warned --User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 08:49, 10 September 2010 (BST)
User:Bullish
Bullish (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss) Celmare (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss)
| Verdict | Vandalism |
|---|---|
| Action taken | 24hr ban/Alt permaed |
Blanking several zombie related groups.--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 18:27, 3 September 2010 (BST)
- Temporarily blocked while I deal with this.--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 18:29, 3 September 2010 (BST)
- I'm going with a ruling of Vandalism. He stopped after my temporary 3 minute ban, so hopefully he won't start again.--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 18:37, 3 September 2010 (BST)
I'm going with Vandalism and Permaban as a vandal alt. IP check confirms that he shares an address with Celmare (and a similar MO too), and the rest of his addresses look like open proxies that need to be banned as well. —Aichon— 18:45, 3 September 2010 (BST)
Murderball it. 18:47, 3 September 2010 (BST)
Perma as Aich. -- LEMON #1 18:52, 3 September 2010 (BST)
- Permaban. We should technically vote, I guess. If so, we need one more sysop.--User:Yonnua Koponen/signature2 19:07, 3 September 2010 (BST)
Permban the bullish alt, and an escalation for Celmare -- boxy talk • teh rulz 23:39 3 September 2010 (BST)
|
Vandal Banning Archive | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
