UDWiki talk:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2010 06
From The Urban Dead Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
June 2010
User:DanceDanceRevolution
- Delete it. Then we don't have to deal with it at all! --
10:52, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- Only sysops can rule in VB cases, and hence this vote. Should have made that more clear. :P --Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 10:53, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- Oh. Sorry. -- 10:55, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- Oh. Sorry. --
- Only sysops can rule in VB cases, and hence this vote. Should have made that more clear. :P --Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 10:53, 8 June 2010 (BST)
DDR's comment vote
Where should DDR's comment (hence including the resultant comments from Jorm and DDR which are still on the page) be kept?
- DDR tricked me in to making this, and Boxy has reminded me that it holds no value and this matter is in arbitration already. So yeah, whatever, remove this vote, Misconduct me or whatever's appropriate.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 11:38, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- Or someone tricked me. I have no idea. I'm too confused and hence shall have nothing more to do with this issue.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 11:38, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- I'm withdrawing the arbitration case. This can hold as much value as the ops allow, which, since Boxy's only reasoning is that he's overruled your (another op) action that it shouldn't be a problem for him either. -- 12:09, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- Or someone tricked me. I have no idea. I'm too confused and hence shall have nothing more to do with this issue.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 11:38, 8 June 2010 (BST)
Sysops only.
Main Page
Talk Page
- If you are not a System Operator, the user who made the vandal report, the user being reported, or directly involved in the case, the administration asks that you use the talk page for further discussion. Free-for-all commenting can lead to a less respectful environment. --RosslessnessWant a Location Image? 11:10, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- Talk.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 11:15, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- First off, I hate having my hand forced like this on an issue that we don't need to rule on. That out of the way, I understand why boxy put it where he did, and it definitely quieted the situation at the time. I'm not convinced of whether it was the right or wrong decision. I like Mis' proposed arbitration ruling however, since it's a fair compromise, so it's my first choice. But, barring that, those comments should be on the talk page. —Aichon— 12:20, 8 June 2010 (BST)
from main page
Not vandalism - Given that Bance Bance is an experienced user and past sysop, his comments on admin pages are often helpful to the team, there's been times where he's hurried us along with something we've overlooked, and anyone insulting wiki trolls is always welcome. 
16:14, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- No they are not.... or at least they should not be. DDR has continued to comment here despite no longer being a sysop.... often his comments are useful and just as often they are not. If the talk page is where every other none sysop must post then he should have the decency to follow that (stupid) rule himself. He knows better and he has history for enforcing such on others hence my request for the reminder. TBH this case was as much about reminding him that none sysops can have valid opinions as anything else, particularly important as he is most likely going to be [re]promoted. --Honestmistake 22:35, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- No one is required to use the talk page, it's just preferred. There is no rule forcing comments to the talk page, so regardless of whether said rule would be stupid or not, he can't break it if it's not there. You may be confusing an old arbitration that banned one user from front-page admin posting for a blanket rule. Since no one is prohibited from posting here at present, I see no reason why his comments, most of which I find useful, should be warrant enough for an escalation. 22:48, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- Plus, if we held those admin notices at the top of the page as law, then we should technically bring a case against you as well, since you didn't contact DDR on his talk page in an effort to sort out this situation first. Those notices are guidelines, and while pushing them too far will get you in trouble eventually, there's a lot of leeway in how they're applied and handled. —Aichon— 00:21, 9 June 2010 (BST)
- Too late. I recieved an actual vandal escalation from DDR (and Bob) for commenting on this page a while back so I know for a fact that the rules for posting here are considered "Law" by DDR at least. That said, it was never a rule I agreed with as what one person considers useful and meaningful comment can easily be seen as neither by others. --Honestmistake 09:22, 9 June 2010 (BST)
- Whoa whoa whoa hold up. You've just made two mistakes that I thought you might make eventually: 1. trying to relate this in any way to your own escalation for the same thing, and 2. Basically admitting that escalation was your reasoning for your request in this case. Your escalation was worlds away from this, you had displayed horrible, horrible abuse of leniency on a scale much quantitatively larger than what I have done here, and the edit that brought on the case was much, much worse than this, to the point that it literally said "this will be moved but FUCK THE OPS" and that was about it, if I remember right. I'm not trying to say you are a brat, but I just don't think these two cases apply. Having said that, I'm already happy to receive a soft warning for derogatory comments because I think it's a fair thing to do, I just think the comparison between our cases was much larger than should be applied here. -- 12:25, 9 June 2010 (BST)
- One of these days you're going to figure out that you're actually a pretty whiny guy and that it would be better for your image if you didn't try to write ~kIlLeR tExT wAlLz Of DoOm~ in response to literally every single mentioning of your name. Do you realise that you are basically the easiest person to bait on the Internet? I mean I got a reaction out of you on Boxy's talk page without even meaning to - shit, I didn't even mention your name. Seriously - take a step back for awhile. Cyberbob Talk 18:42, 9 June 2010 (BST)
- You do realise you just stepped into something that had absolutely nothing to do with you (again), just to say that, right? -- 06:52, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- If I had a dollar for all the times you've done the same I'd be positively rolling in cash. Might as well throw in a line about glass houses to the advice I have for you. Cyberbob Talk 08:23, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- Aaaah who am I kiding? You won't change. You'll keep on keeping on with your delusions of martyrdom and everyone else will keep right on feeding them. Nothing ever changes on this wiki. Cyberbob Talk 08:28, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- Lol. Likewise, except my fortune would come with the percentage of yours done over the total amount of edits you make. At leased I do other stuff on the wiki. I could go the obvious and say the irony here is astounding, but I think in the general view of it all the most fitting and true thing to say is of all people to give me advice yours is the one I'd most happily ignore. -- 08:51, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- That is one of the most awkward attempts at a burn I've ever seen. I'm curious, are you an only child? Cyberbob Talk 10:11, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- Erm, okay, I was only being honest, but tevs. You can't stay away, can you. That's perhaps something that will never change about this wiki. And no, I'm the eldest of three, but that'll probably give you the same impression as only child, dunno. -- 10:16, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- Nah you were p clearly going for some killer rebuttal with all that "incisive" and "cutting" phrasing. You being one of three is surprising, but a little worrying - one would think that, having siblings, you would have learned what is a good response in an argument and what isn't by now. Maybe they're as whiny as you are (and thus would be impressed by the kind of weak stuff you put out), who knows.
- PS I dunno why you always get so whiny with me when I try to help you and feel that you need to bite back with irrelevant stuff like "UR NOT PART OF THIS CONVERSATION LOL!!!!!!". Why do you bite back at all? Cyberbob Talk 10:32, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- Because the irony was just astounding, seriously, it was remarkably stupid. Really, umad or something? You're taking this to amazing seriousness levels. -- 13:23, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- Erm, okay, I was only being honest, but tevs. You can't stay away, can you. That's perhaps something that will never change about this wiki. And no, I'm the eldest of three, but that'll probably give you the same impression as only child, dunno. -- 10:16, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- That is one of the most awkward attempts at a burn I've ever seen. I'm curious, are you an only child? Cyberbob Talk 10:11, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- Lol. Likewise, except my fortune would come with the percentage of yours done over the total amount of edits you make. At leased I do other stuff on the wiki. I could go the obvious and say the irony here is astounding, but I think in the general view of it all the most fitting and true thing to say is of all people to give me advice yours is the one I'd most happily ignore. -- 08:51, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- You do realise you just stepped into something that had absolutely nothing to do with you (again), just to say that, right? -- 06:52, 11 June 2010 (BST)
- One of these days you're going to figure out that you're actually a pretty whiny guy and that it would be better for your image if you didn't try to write ~kIlLeR tExT wAlLz Of DoOm~ in response to literally every single mentioning of your name. Do you realise that you are basically the easiest person to bait on the Internet? I mean I got a reaction out of you on Boxy's talk page without even meaning to - shit, I didn't even mention your name. Seriously - take a step back for awhile. Cyberbob Talk 18:42, 9 June 2010 (BST)
- Whoa whoa whoa hold up. You've just made two mistakes that I thought you might make eventually: 1. trying to relate this in any way to your own escalation for the same thing, and 2. Basically admitting that escalation was your reasoning for your request in this case. Your escalation was worlds away from this, you had displayed horrible, horrible abuse of leniency on a scale much quantitatively larger than what I have done here, and the edit that brought on the case was much, much worse than this, to the point that it literally said "this will be moved but FUCK THE OPS" and that was about it, if I remember right. I'm not trying to say you are a brat, but I just don't think these two cases apply. Having said that, I'm already happy to receive a soft warning for derogatory comments because I think it's a fair thing to do, I just think the comparison between our cases was much larger than should be applied here. -- 12:25, 9 June 2010 (BST)
- Too late. I recieved an actual vandal escalation from DDR (and Bob) for commenting on this page a while back so I know for a fact that the rules for posting here are considered "Law" by DDR at least. That said, it was never a rule I agreed with as what one person considers useful and meaningful comment can easily be seen as neither by others. --Honestmistake 09:22, 9 June 2010 (BST)
- Plus, if we held those admin notices at the top of the page as law, then we should technically bring a case against you as well, since you didn't contact DDR on his talk page in an effort to sort out this situation first. Those notices are guidelines, and while pushing them too far will get you in trouble eventually, there's a lot of leeway in how they're applied and handled. —Aichon— 00:21, 9 June 2010 (BST)
- No one is required to use the talk page, it's just preferred. There is no rule forcing comments to the talk page, so regardless of whether said rule would be stupid or not, he can't break it if it's not there. You may be confusing an old arbitration that banned one user from front-page admin posting for a blanket rule. Since no one is prohibited from posting here at present, I see no reason why his comments, most of which I find useful, should be warrant enough for an escalation.
User:Jorm
I consider myself an involved party, and shall not be ruling.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 20:58, 6 June 2010 (BST)
- Meh. --
Thadeous Oakley 23:02, 6 June 2010 (BST)
Vandalism. Argh. I used to like that guy. 21:03, 6 June 2010 (BST)
- I hear ya. Never met Jorm before, but I had expected something better from the person founding the MOB, Nexuswar and Barhar.com --Thadeous Oakley 22:04, 6 June 2010 (BST)
- It's BARHAH dot com. BARHAH. "Barhar" is what douchebag harmans say.--Jorm 08:04, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- I know this will get moved to talk, but WHAT THE FUCK. This is why roleplaying is dead in this game. All it can take is for one shitbrain to fuck it up the arse and the fun is ruined. Goddamn it. -- 03:10, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- The "fun" was ruined once you 'shitbrains' applied fucking rules to it. Also, get the fuck off my IRC server, you douchetard, if you're that upset with me. I don't want you there.--Jorm 08:04, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- If you can't have fun within rules then fuck off to your own fucking dead wiki for your own fucking dead game. Also, you're the one that's upset with us obviously, so I'll make this clear: you don't want me on your IRC server, you fucking ban me from it, dickwad. You cunts over at Nexuswar IRC are all lube and no fucking. jeez. -- 09:08, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- Done, actually. You're now permabanned from my IRC server. Glad that worked out for you! --Jorm 09:24, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- No worries, and so your butthurt power tripping is proven worse than anything wiki ops have ever done. Glad doing business with you. -- 09:28, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- What the fucking fuck. This is completely fucking retarded. Jorm, you were in the wrong, but I'm not going to insult you over it. DDR, didn't have to insult. You're both being silly, tbh.-- Adward 17:11, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- He's desperately trying to apply power wherever he can get it, to spite me. It's hilarious. He banned me from his own IRC server (just make new account much?) and he's also trying to meatpuppet a promotions bid, which is idiocy in itself. It's lolicious. -- 05:40, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- DDR is also a faggot and should be banned for being one. Stop defending him. --Sonny Corleone DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n 05:32, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- omg stop harazzing me -- 05:40, 8 June 2010 (BST)
- What the fucking fuck. This is completely fucking retarded. Jorm, you were in the wrong, but I'm not going to insult you over it. DDR, didn't have to insult. You're both being silly, tbh.-- Adward 17:11, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- No worries, and so your butthurt power tripping is proven worse than anything wiki ops have ever done. Glad doing business with you. -- 09:28, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- Done, actually. You're now permabanned from my IRC server. Glad that worked out for you! --Jorm 09:24, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- If you can't have fun within rules then fuck off to your own fucking dead wiki for your own fucking dead game. Also, you're the one that's upset with us obviously, so I'll make this clear: you don't want me on your IRC server, you fucking ban me from it, dickwad. You cunts over at Nexuswar IRC are all lube and no fucking. jeez. -- 09:08, 7 June 2010 (BST)
- The "fun" was ruined once you 'shitbrains' applied fucking rules to it. Also, get the fuck off my IRC server, you douchetard, if you're that upset with me. I don't want you there.--Jorm 08:04, 7 June 2010 (BST)
