UDWiki talk:Administration/Arbitration/Boxy vs Jack's Cold Sweat and Chimera

Boxy vs. Jack's Cold Sweat and Chimera

I volunteer myself to be arbitrator if all parties involved accept. - Jedaz [02:53, 22 January 2008 (BST)]

Ditto, it'd be my first case but I've got a few days off work... -- Iscariot 02:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd love to give you a go, Iscariot, but you're a bit too new on the wiki, I feel. If it was my page thats fate was being decided, I'd probably go for you, but it's not. I'd accept Jedaz -- boxy ^{talk • i} 04:23 22 January 2008 (BST)

I accept Iscariot as an arbitrator, although I believe this case to be totally baseless. --Chimera 03:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I would also like to add that Jack's Cold Sweat has agreed not to modify the wiki, so I request that his name be dropped from this case. I am a group member of BRRC currently and feel I have a right to modify the page.--Chimera 04:10, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Since when is Chimera a member of the BRRC. Chimera for a long time was a member of the Malton Skeet Club, the same group that Jack was in. In fact, there are posts on the BRRC forums that indicate that they were in opposition to the MSC. I don't know where else I could have posted this, feel free to speedy delete or edit out if this isn't correct. However, I thought it relevant that the chances of chimera being allowed into the BRRC by the actual, honest to god BRRC would be slim. --Dhavid Grohl 13:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

If he posts here saying he agrees not to edit the BRRC page, I'll drop his name from this -- boxy ^{talk • i} 04:16 22 January 2008 (BST)

I'm done with this, all the heavy lifting is done anyway. We'll see what IAmDracula has to say, I linked him up to the BRRC changes in Pippard. As far as I'm concerned he and Chimmy can do anything else that needs to be done.--Jack's Cold Sweat 04:29, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I do not agree to this arbitration. I think boxy jumped the gun by filing for this arbitration, as he did not fully discuss this matter with me. Jack has agreed not to touch the page, as he has stated. Boxy's allegation that Jack's IP and my IP are the same is without merit, as can be verified through many websites. So, again, I do not agree to this arbitration and I would like to be informed as to what may happen if I do not participate in this. Thank you, --Chimera 04:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

If you choose not to participate, a representative will be appointed, the representative (given your assent to Iscariot, if Boxy has a change of heart) will let Iscariot arbitrate (or Jedaz, if the representative chooses.), and the case will proceed, independent of your assent, or further contributions. So it is to your benefits to succeed. And guess what on the IP front? She's a sysop and a crat- meaning she has Checkuser, meaning, it's not without merit, and you're a lying shit for trying to decieve us.  Nalikill  ^{TALK  E!  W!  M!  USAI}  05:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

You're a lying shit for continually breaking your promise not to login. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 05:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

And you go out of your way to insult Nalikill. be the bigger man and just keep away from him.--'BP^Tmz 05:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm the bigger man without even having to try. It's an inherent thing. --Cyberbob ^{DORIS CGR U!} 05:29, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Cyber, I am not breaking my promise- my last logoff would've been when I gave my ruling, if you hadn't brought the case against me. If you dropped the case, I'd leave right now, happily. I said I'd answer my last few edits before leaving, and the case you brought is a part of that.  Nalikill  ^{TALK  E!  W!  M!  USAI}  00:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I also offer to arbitrate--'BP^Tmz 05:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

The PKs went both ways, boxy. They PKed me more than the other way around, but you wouldn't know that since you've only seen "evidence" from one side. I did not chase them off, they got decimated in the Big Bash. We are friends now and conduct revives together, I don't see why events from a year ago should be given so much weight. I wanted to work a compromise with you , personally, as I am not at all familiar with wiki and arbitration proceedings, and it's going to take me a great deal of time to familiarize myself with these policies (I am busy with school and work.) I assumed a quick and fair talk would be amenable to you. If you are still unbending, then I will choose an arbitrator. I do not know one from the other so I will need a fair bit of time. Thank you --Chimera 20:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe this will help some, it's a list of arbitrators by cases they have arbitrated, with links to the cases.--Karek^maps?! 20:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

More Movings

I was under the impression that ignorance of the law does not excuse one from it. It is not the responsibility of the Wiki staff to inform anyone of the rules here on the wiki. Instead, it is the responsibility of every wiki member to find the rules, read them, gain understanding or request help from someone should they be unable to grasp the rules. Boxy is doing his best to put together an attack on your motive for changing the BRRC. I don't think he is pointing out any single "edit of bad faith" because he seems to believe that ALL of your edits are "in bad faith" and/or illegal, seeing as how you are not a member, and were in fact an enemy of the BRRC. For instance, no MSC member, LNTVC member, or Scour the Earth member is allowed to touch the TZH main page, and most of their comments on the TZH talk page are deleted quickly as well. Who posts on a given group page is the prerogative of the group whose page is in question, and no one else's. I hope that helps clear some things up.--Dhavid Grohl 20:31, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

My point is that the edits were not made in bad faith. I changed the forum link to a forum that worked. I'm conducting rotter revives presently, and have been (sporadically) for a while. Remaining members consented to my joining BRRC. The past is the past. I agree that he believes my edits were made in bad faith, but the fact is he is mistaken. One should try not to jump to conclusions from reading old information, but rather try to ascertain what the current state of affairs is before taking action. Your own group may benefit from such a practice. --Chimera 07:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)