UDWiki talk:Moderation/Policy Discussion/Amazing

Administration Services — Protection.
This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log.

Voting closed

The voting on this page has been closed and I have put it up for protection.--The General ^{W! Mod} 20:35, 10 May 2006 (BST)

Community Announcements Link

Seeing as there has been some debate over whether or not this petition should be added to the Community Annoucements template on the Wiki Main Page, I think this is a suitable place to reach an agreement on whether or not a link should be there, and if so what the text should be. Thoughts? – Nubis ^NWO 09:04, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Personally I think it should be postponed because of this page here. --Prosperina 09:06 23 April 2006 (BST)

Re I would appreciate it if all signers to this petition took a look at the proposal and added their input.--Prosperina 04:17 24 April 2006 (BST)

Evidence to add against

Add ONLY evidence that can be confirmed.

Amazing making a snappy remark at Karlsbad after Karlsbad edited the page so that it would format better: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Moderation/Arbitration&diff=205369&oldid=205368

Another funny case of Amazing freaking out when someone's edit messed up his formatting: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Moderation/Arbitration&diff=206835&oldid=206781

Don't know what type of evidence exactly you're looking for, but tantrums like this abound. (feel free to nuke this stuff if it's too mundane) -- Rueful 21:31, 21 April 2006 (BST)

I believe the idea that he's a troll is implied, so I won't add these. I'll keep them here for reference though. --Sirens^{T RR} 21:44, 21 April 2006 (BST)

The pro-Amazing side has noted that Amazing has been "insulted" by being called a zerger. This would be legitimate, were it not for the fact that Amazing is a zerger. Unless I'm very much mistaken, running two characters in the same group, regardless of their geographical proximity, constitutes zerging - and Amazing has been doing just that. --Tehasskickars 02:32, 25 April 2006 (BST)

Your evidence provides conclusively... nothing. That's like saying that I can't be taking the same program in university as someone else (for whatever reason), finding out I go to the same university as them, and then giving me hell for it. Um... no. Provide a screenshot of them working together, not just being in the same group, and it will be permissible. And the term I think you're looking for is multi abuser. -Wyndal ^{(talk)-(W!)-(SGP)} 02:41, 25 April 2006 (BST)

First, to quote from the page you yourself sent me to: "Multi abuse is commonly referred to by UD players using an umbrella term zerging". They're effectively synonyms. Second, I can't make any kind of sense out of whatever analogy you're using there. Please clarify. Third, while I agree that what Amazing's doing is not as loathsome a form of zerging as operating two characters in the same building or 'burb (which I don't think he's doing), it still violates the basic principle that your characters should always lead "completely seperate existences". He's got two characters pursuing the exact same group goals, and for my money that's zerging. That's hardly a position without precedent, either. The RRF, and, I believe, many other major groups forbid players from having more than one character as a member, regardless of whether they play them in the same exact area or not. --Tehasskickars 04:45, 25 April 2006 (BST)

Point 1: No relation to the Wiki. Point 2: Filling out the group field can hardly be considered any sort of abuse, much less Zerging. Point 3: It's purely for In-Character purposes. Point 4: Beyond all that anyway, big deal. -- Amazing 04:25, 25 April 2006 (BST)

Rebuttal 1: You're claiming we're guilty of some vicious slander by calling you a zerger, and that therefore your trolling is an acceptable form of self-defense. You gave it relevance to the wiki. Rebuttal 2: I don't think "just for laffs" is really going to cut it as an explanation of why you've got two characters in the same group. Rebuttal 3: Bullshit. Using that as an excuse would be like me running two characters in the same 'burb to attack the same people and claiming it's okay because I'm RPing them as brothers. --Tehasskickars 04:51, 25 April 2006 (BST)

Hurr 1: Being called a Zerger is one very minor part of the overall defense. In-game links are not part of the wiki, but commentary placed specifically here is. Hurr 2: Don't put words into my mouth, and I won't put lemons into yours. Hurr 3: You're wrong again (surprise) - Demanding is played as a character who came to the area he's currently in because he was dispatched by another survivor group. He's played as a begrudging ally to all the people there that he doesn't know, because it was told to do it. Now, his affiliation could be "The Horrible Spam-Mongers" or whatever, of course, but it makes more sense for his back-story to come from a real area of the game than something made up. --- Amazing 04:59, 25 April 2006 (BST)

Really, the only fitting description of your reply is the one you yourself gave it - HURRRRRRRR. Next time, try to remember that your arguments are supposed to further your cause, not discredit it even more. --Tehasskickars 23:23, 25 April 2006 (BST)

Thanks for your display. -- Amazing 02:37, 26 April 2006 (BST)

No problem. I understand you're already pretty skilled at humiliating yourself, but if you ever need me to help out again, just let me know. ASS is all about community service! --Jimbo Bob _ASS 08:13, 27 April 2006 (BST)

Sure is humiliating to constantly correct you guys and point out how idiotic you are. -- Amazing 18:50, 27 April 2006 (BST)

Oh, yeah. When you busted out that incoherent threat about lemons, I almost cried. --Jimbo Bob _ASS 02:47, 28 April 2006 (BST)

Hahahaha! "Threat". You're priceless, by which I mostly mean you have no worth - but even so, that comment was hilarious. -- Amazing 06:36, 28 April 2006 (BST)

<yawn> ...I'm sorry, were you trying to insult me again? Go on, try again. I promise I'll pretend to care this time. --Jimbo Bob _ASS 07:03, 28 April 2006 (BST)

Evidence to add in favor

Add ONLY evidence that can be confirmed.

I would debate that adding names you have been called does not truly excuse your Amazing's actions, as they only prove the lack of class of the people who call him those names. Therefore, they are more appropriate to an arbitration or vandelization or misconduct case against the people who say the words rather than as a defense of Amazing; therefore they should be removed for not being relevent. --Karlsbad 05:31, 25 April 2006 (BST)

If you look below, it ends with a statement saying that a little anger may be justified in light of all the info cited above it. Is it too vauge about that? It's not an excuse, it's a blow-by-blow statement about WHY specifically I am angry at times, since otherwise it seems as if I simply have little to no reason - or not enough reason - to be cross. Not an excuse, an elaboration. That said, let me know if you still think it's useless. -- Amazing _{• SGP¦McZ¦CDF¦UDPD •} 06:25, 25 April 2006 (BST)

Amazing made the Defile suggestion. That's all I could come up with. - CthulhuFhtagn 06:27, 20 April 2006 (BST)

Added --Sirens^{T RR} 13:17, 20 April 2006 (BST)

Amazing came up with McZeds. --Lucero Capell 16:28, 20 April 2006 (BST)

Did he? I thought that was some other guy. --Zaruthustra-Mod 17:01, 20 April 2006 (BST)

Well, he claims he did on his User page. --Lucero Capell 17:03, 20 April 2006 (BST)

Adding with note of speculation. --Sirens^{T RR} 00:12, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Lord. YES I created McZeds. Jesus Christ now you guys're going to actually start going into negatives and take away things I HAVE done. Weird. Also, feel free to add all the peer approved suggestions I've made, as well as the Urban Dead Profile Directory I created, the fact that I have been a major part of building Crossman Defense Force up, and the fact that I'm fuckin' awesome. (Last part's highly negotiable.) I also came up with the process of numbering votes on the suggestion page and have made the standard contributions to various info pages that any user would. -- Amazing 04:54, 21 April 2006 (BST)

I know you've made a decent chunk of contributions, but I'm going to need links if you want me to add them to your supporting evidence. --Sirens^{T RR} 04:58, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Eh, I don't really need to feed you links available right on my user page. Either way you're still going to persue your agenda. Not worth honoring your frivolous request for info already available right in an obvious place you've already been many times. -- Amazing 05:49, 21 April 2006 (BST)

I did loook at your user page. I don't consider working on your group page to be additions to the wiki, ditto for suggestions. But I noticed that I overlooked the Profile DB. I don't really consider this a contribution to the Wiki, but I'll add it anyways. --Sirens^{T RR} 05:53, 21 April 2006 (BST)

lol. Then why'd you add one of my suggestions to the main page? A bit contradictory? -- Amazing 06:59, 21 April 2006 (BST)

I had a link handy. This petition is against you, you've noticed. If it's not linked on your page, or here, I'm not going to search for it. You should be thankful I'm fair enough to add evidence to support to at all. --Sirens^{T RR} 14:14, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Thank you for being a troll who tries to look fair to cover her ass. -- Amazing 02:04, 22 April 2006 (BST)

People tend to protest when I cover my rear, but you're welcome anyways. You could just, you know, provide me with some links. It really is that simple. --Sirens^{T RR} 02:19, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Hmm, yeah I guess it's hard to find a link to Peer Approved Suggestions. It took me a couple hours to dig that one up. (But which is it? Suggestions don't count, or you didn't have the links?) -- Amazing 03:19, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Both, really. I don't feel like digging up your stuff for you. It WOULD be really easy for my to click that link, search for Amazing, and probably find them, but it just doesn't tickle me pink. Offer still stands, but you have to give me the links to those suggestions, here, and I'll add them. The full link, you know, to the section in question.

Searching for "Amazing" won't do you any good. It doesn't turn anything up because authors aren't listed. --Lucero Capell 03:28, 22 April 2006 (BST)

This is where I decide not to waste my time. The suggestions are there, All you need to do is read my user page and right-click on the Table of Contents where they're listed. I guess this all makes you their Queen, eh? -- Amazing 03:32, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Allow me to reitterate. It WOULD be really easy, and so on and so forth, but it just doesn't tickle me pink. --Sirens^{T RR} 03:37, 22 April 2006 (BST)

It's so easy that it's almost easier than not doing it. Wait, what? Anyway, I'm sorry but I really don't think I should be talking to you anymore. You're trouble. -- Amazing 03:45, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Space for Discussion

No trolling

Part 1

Given the dictatorship of the proletariat system we work off of I guess this is legitimate. But at least move it to policy discussion or vandal ban. --Zaruthustra-Mod 06:25, 20 April 2006 (BST)

For the good of the wiki as a whole, I think its time the masses expelled him. For this to be any sort of legitimate it'll need to be moved over to plicy discussion or vandal banning eventually. --Zaruthustra-Mod 06:33, 20 April 2006 (BST)

Due to the massive trolling present on any of the Moderation pages, I am keeping it here for now. I WILL but links in those areas though.

Despite personal disapproval of his most recent actions, I cannot in good conscience condone such an action. He has overreacted and acted rashly, yet his actions have also been a result of bad behavior on the part of others as well. To ban this person for his actions would mean that you would also have to ban everyone else involved. I find it ironic that most of the people who vote for this petition have also voted against the civil language petition on the fundemental concept. If you truely wished to stop the drama, then many of you on the opposing side of this petition should not have gone out of your way to single him out for harrassment. Had you not done so and had he acted in such a manner, I might have been sympathetic to your arguements, but as it is now the cycle of blame is too contrived for one person alone to take the blame. Prosperina 06:31 20 April 2006 (BST)

Consider this: Amazing is at the center of most of the trolling that goes on around here. His fault or not, if he wasn't around, the trolling involving him would stop, ja? And besides, I've looked at some history: Amazing has been trolling without being provoked for a very looooong time. --Sirens^{T RR} 13:07, 20 April 2006 (BST)
- I don't doubt that he has done so, yet I also detest the whole bandwagon flame response to him as well. To ban him would be to send the message that, flaming and trolling people that the moderators do not approve of is alright. This should not be an issue of which troll has enought backers. With an absense of clear and unbiased grounds for banning, such as the unrepentant and outright malicious vandalism of PQN, I am extremely relectant to condone the banning of anyone. Either punitive action must be taken against all who have perpetuated this trolling or none can. --Prosperina 16:33 20 April 2006
  - If Amazing goes away the rest of these people will melt into the woodwork. He however has proven that he won't. He has gotten in fights with a mass of users, every moderator here, and the owner of the game. He doesn't actually do anything anymore. He just trolls. --Zaruthustra-Mod 16:55, 20 April 2006 (BST)
    - Actually, Zar, I've noticed attitude problems on the side of the people 'defending' themselves again Amazing, even when they're not talking about him. Not saying you, specifically, but various other people who make this wiki a hostile place. It would only be a matter of time before they created another Amazing to cause exorbitant amounts of drama. -Wyndallin 03:46, 23 April 2006 (BST)

I don't really like Amazing and I'm sure I'm not alone, but I think that Prosperina is right there. I didn't see enough reason to ban him, probably because I can live with trolling better than other people. Congratulations, you convinced me. -Craw 16:58, 20 April 2006 (BST)

Banning a user is not the solution of any problem. Unless that user is a troll like PQN. Amazing should be allowed to stay. Stay away from the wiki, for now, but to stay. He shouldnt be banned, he should just leave for his own will. He might return in a few months, when most of this drama was long forgotten and much of our user base have already changed. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 18:40, 20 April 2006 (BST)

I agree, I really do. But he's not going to go away on his own, unless to prove those of us that say so wrong. Hence why I offered the idea of temp banning. --Sirens^{T RR} 19:10, 20 April 2006 (BST)

i was reading this talk page and other sections of this wiki and, as much as i dont believe that banning him would be the solution - just another problem, it seems that there is nothing on earth that could add sense to Amazing's head. Therefore, he needs to be banned from this wiki so this wholte drama thing can get to an end. Nothing personal amazing, but the only way we can make this wiki productive is by banning you. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 17:16, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Check this out, Hag, before you advocate banning just yet. Discussion between Mia, CyberBob and I. -Wyndallin 17:18, 22 April 2006 (BST)

"Nothing personal" - Good one. -- Amazing 19:26, 23 April 2006 (BST)

How does this work? It seems like you're trying to expand the definition of "vandalism" to cover one specific person. Do you guys really want to set a precedent of baning people for being obtuse? It's demagoguery! What's more, even in the extreme, this sort of thing can go very wrong, very quickly. Think about expanding it to the next less extreme case; should you ban someone people like slightly less disliked than Amazing? The worst part about it is that you're universalizing a maxim that can't be willed into existence. If person X hates person Y and wants to ban him, person X makes that judgement based on hatred alone and has to concede that if person Z has similar feelings for person X, person Z is completely justified in doing the same damn thing. Kant must be turning in his grave (no pun intended). --Ron Burgundy 21:37, 20 April 2006 (BST)

You mean, like Mr. Aushvitz? His suggestions are getting better, but if these same people had had their way, he'd be gone, too. Amazing isn't as much of a victim as he thinks he is, but the Wiki isn't suffering as much as the people who support banning him are making him out to be. Repeated incidents on isolated pages where the 'victims' are in the wrong does not a ban make. And as for flaming, all I have to say is, again, every person on the list to support banning him is just as guilty as Amazing. I'd have to have access to the cleared history (which is impossible, I know), but I'm certain I could find evidence. -Wyndallin 13:51, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Despite that, I have to say that things will only get worse if he stays. You can't think he actually contributes anything around here, man, he's a drag on the whole wiki. When three groups form exclusively to kill him in-game, that should be message enough that he needs to go. MaulMachine 21:39, 20 April 2006 (BST)

That's what I'm talking about. Only an idiot would think that targetting someone like that will make them back down. When has that ever worked seriously? And who thought up the bright idea of attacking the people he was associated with? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard and look how well is worked. The only thing that's done is make things worse, because it makes them more determined to stay just to spite said groups. Backing down would make them take an hit in reputation, so by doing that you have only encouraged him to act trollishly and give him a legitimate reason for complaint. Good job there whoever thought of that plan.--Prosperina21:51 20 April 2006 (BST)

Next time he says something you don't like, say "What? What's that? Look, I don't speak Spanish." Just ignore him! We're all adults here, right? (Ha. Ha.) --Ron Burgundy 21:50, 20 April 2006 (BST)

Fair enough... and LMAO @ quote, even if it is off.MaulMachine 21:52, 20 April 2006 (BST)

In many other circumstances I would say "Hey, let him stay, if he takes a break from it he could come back and be productive again, but knowing Amazing through all the drama that's been splashed over this wiki, he seems utterly unable to let anything go. I'd suggest forcibly removing him for a length of time. The he can decide if he truly thinks this wiki is worth his effort. BuncyTheFrog ^{Talk GBP} 23:02, 20 April 2006 (BST)

As much as I dislike Amazing's attitude, I can't really support banning him like this. It's just not right. Even if he does misbehave, I believe in doing things through the proper method. When Amazing deleted the image, I reported him for bypassing the wiki system. Banning him without going through the full process (Vandalism Reporting) is unfair and against the spirit of the wiki. All that aside, I think we'd just be pouring gasoline on the fire. Even a temp ban would just make him more convinced that "the wiki is out to get him," and thus more likely to act out. --TheTeeHeeMonster 00:11, 21 April 2006 (BST)

I would like to point out that I have yet to sign this petition. I merely started it to see where people stand in general, though if it comes up in favor of banning, I will submit it formally. Also, I do not hate Amazing. I find his personality detestable. I started this petition because I honestly believe there is malice in his edits. Feel free to scream "Bias!" all you want but I have reported people that I'm friednly with, and snapped at my own horde members for trolling. Finnally, Amazing isn't someone who's only been trolling for a month or so. He's been a continuous troll since at least Novemeber. --Sirens^{T RR} 00:12, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Note: As of today, I've voted. I figure if Amazing can vote to save himself, I can neutralize it with a counter-vote. --Sirens^{T RR} 19:09, 22 April 2006 (BST)

I have a suggestion that might work for all concerned parties. I suggest that instead of outright banning that Amazing be put on indefinate probation. That means that he will be put on a strict no trolling regimen. That means he must refrain from all personal attacks, he must not bait, he will drop all complaints against all parties and he must not edit anyone else's posts, period. He will also be prevented from posting at all on user pages that currently have the no amazing template. However in return, this would mean that all templates that are directly insulting him be taken down and that all groups will cease formal targetting him and his associates. That means take down all mention of him from the talk pages of the group as well and send it to archives. He will not post on any of pages or group pages that he has taken to arbitration and nor will any of their group post on his. Any trolling will be immediately deleted and submitted to mods, if they both agree that it is flaming they will give him two warnings but the third instance will result in immediate ban. The moderators may keep this probation until they find it no longer necessary. If all involved parties find this acceptable, would you find this preferable to outright banning? If need be I will keep tabs and report him myself if he gets out of line. --Prosperina 00:33 21 April 2006 (BST)

This will cause even more wikidrama as every one of Amazing's posts are scrutinized and Amazing attempts to flame w/o actually flaming.--Mpaturet 03:39, 21 April 2006 (BST)
Not really, the moment he flames. He get a warning. He does it three times and he gets banned no questions asked. I will take personal responsibility of the examinations of his posts and if you find me flagrantly letting him get away with flaming you can ban me as well. The question is whether you all will have the self reserve to cease and desist as well.--Prosperina 03:44 21 April 2006 (BST)
- This will only work if the people who are targeting him are put on a similar probation period with regards to him. While the blame between Amazing and other participants in the dramafest can be fairly evenly split (Yes, it can. Grim specifically, among other people - including mods - are just as guilty as he is.), I can easily see how he would become irrational and overreact to the zounds of people who are baying for his blood. I had no opinion on him until I came on the wiki, saw the huge dramafest, and I personally wanted to slap him myself. But then I started reading responses, and precursors, and there are quite a few people on here that I'd quite like to ban for provoking this entire goddamn thing. Long and short, Amazing is just as guilty as his many detractors; simply because the people he gets into fights with are relatively prominent and 'well-liked' doesn't mean that he should be banned. Mia, Grim, Lucero and most of the regulars could quit the wiki completely and it would still run. Not very effectively, mind, but it wouldn't come to a screeching halt, with or without Amazing on it. This is equal parts attack on Amazing as it is a defense of him; I just find this whole matter revolting and I'm starting to think I should leave you all to your drama. I'm tired and aggravated by this whole mess, so I apologize if I'm rambling. -Wyndallin 13:24, 22 April 2006 (BST)

I thought I'd like to add that petitions actually don't have an impact in the wiki. You'll have to go to an Arbitration (although I wouldn't advise that until it gets cleared up - might be a while!) page or something, if you want to get him banned. --Cyberbob240^{CDF - Arb - W!} 13:44, 22 April 2006 (BST)
- Honestly, it's good that we're going to get more mods, although if they're pulled from the 'in-crowd', I fear for newbies. Either there are not enough of them, the ones that we have are too overworked, they simply aren't doing their jobs, or their jobs haven't been outlined well enough. Regardless, if the mods had solved this conclusively in its early stages, it wouldn't have progressed this far. -Wyndallin 13:47, 22 April 2006 (BST)
  - For all the alleged abuse of power, moderators don't really have much. No policies against trolling or harassment exist (despite amazings protestations), or we could have acted on this before. --Zaruthustra-Mod 03:41, 23 April 2006 (BST)

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN- A page has been set up concerning this debate and a proposal for a solution to the problems at hand. Please keep in mind that all flames will be struck out. --Prosperina 08:35 23 April 2006

Part 2

"Additionally, I feel that there is reason to believe that he may one day attempt to sabatage the Wiki As recent page-blanking vandals have done." - Can we come to some sort of agreement where you stop blatantly pulling false allegations out of your butt? Doesn't seem like much to ask. Consider yourself on the fast-track to being up for Arbitration once this is all said and done unless you clean up your act. You've made a huge effort to cause harm to me - and I'd appreciate it if you'd at least keep that huge effort on the up-and-up. -- Amazing 01:23, 23 April 2006 (BST)

"Additionally, I feel" That means it's an opinion. Go look up the definition of opinions. --Sirens^{T RR} 01:37, 23 April 2006 (BST)

You've made a very questionable statement in the most damning way possible. Also, being insulting and trolling are not the best ways to support your point. :) -- Amazing 02:06, 23 April 2006 (BST)

~~HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA "Also, being insulting and trolling are not the best ways to support your point. :) -- Amazing 02:06, 23 April 2006 (BST)" HAHAHAHA--Mpaturet 02:08, 23 April 2006 (BST)~~

~~Thanks for your appreciation of my comment. You think you're pointing out hipocracy, but really you're just missing the fact that I was pointing out hers. -- Amazing 02:11, 23 April 2006 (BST)~~

Amazing, I do believe you're the last person who should be giving advice on not trolling to make your point. --Sirens^{T RR} 02:12, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Take a moment to read my reply to Mpaturet. That was my entire point - I was using your own baloney to point out you're pretty much worse than I am. -- Amazing 02:14, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Maybe you're right. Maybe I'm a horrible serphant, and you really are innocent. Maybe elephants can fly. Maybe fish will rule the world someday. And while we're rediculous claims, I'm going to say that you flippin rule. --Sirens^{T RR} 02:19, 23 April 2006 (BST)

~~{{Ohsnap}}--Mpaturet 02:21, 23 April 2006 (BST)~~

And may I say that you're totally not further destroying the Wiki by enlarging the drama a hundred fold with all of your drama-soaked diva actions. -- Amazing 02:22, 23 April 2006 (BST)

You mean keeping it isolated in my userspace? --Sirens^{T RR} 02:24, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Seems to me you made a vandal report to advertise this. Care to keep going with the false statements? I mean, why stop now... -- Amazing 02:26, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Oh gee, a notice on Vandal Report and another page to let people know whats going on. Would you rather I had silently whispered it to my friends and your enemies so it could be completely one sided? --Sirens^{T RR} 02:29, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Interesting responce to someone stating you weren't truthful. Side-step it right into another aspect. Good work. -- Amazing 02:34, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Missed this. I didn't say I wasn't lieing. In fact, I didn't say anything regarding that at all. Honestly, I don't feel letting people know something is going down elsewhere as spreading my "drama-soaked diva actions." Amazing, I've been a WHOLE lot nicer about this than I should be, and if you don't shut your hole soon, I'm going to get that much nastier. --Sirens^{T RR} 02:46, 23 April 2006 (BST)

You really don't know the true meaning of the word. :) Don't threaten me, because you of all people know I push back. -- Amazing 02:53, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Seems you edited the Community Announcements link to advertise this. Care to keep going with hypocritical accusations? I mean, why stop now... – Nubis ^NWO 02:28, 23 April 2006 (BST)

After the vandal report, in order to get PEOPLE WHO AREN'T AMAZING-HATERS in here. Right now it's almost a private party for people like you - AND if I WERE to be banned (won't happen) because of this, it'd affect ALL USERS because they'd risk being banned if they fought back against people who attacked them. Plus if I recall correctly, I don't think your comment is even on-topic. Weren't we talking about weather or not Mia kept her bile in her own userspace? -- Amazing 02:32, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Discussing my merits and demerits is completely off topic. Thus far I have allowed it because we're getting a good laugh out of it. Vandal Reporting is a public page. --Sirens^{T RR} 02:34, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Okey doke. Thanks for giving me the satisfaction of proving you dishonest, though. If there's nothing else to say, I'm pretty happy with how you've morally imploded so far, don't really need to show your true nature any further - Reasonable people will get it. -- Amazing 02:38, 23 April 2006 (BST)

You're cute. Amazing, continuing to attack me is going to get you no where. My nature is indicated right on my user page, first paragraph, and if you feel thats not accurate enough, suggest a change on my talk page. That said, stop wasting your time, and try and make some friends. You know, people who will actually support you? --Sirens^{T RR} 02:46, 23 April 2006 (BST)

I'm above asking people who like me to come to the Wiki when they don't already. Surprising, I know. Congratulations on having "friends" on a Wiki, no matter the fact that they're just your fellow trolls. As I say, if there's nothing else, that's all I have to say. -- Amazing 02:51, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Don't worry Amazing; I don't hate you! --Cyberbob240^{CDF - Arb - W!} 02:45, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Thanks. Nice to know I have support without having to ask people I know to come and support my position. :) -- Amazing 02:47, 23 April 2006 (BST)

You're perfectly welcome. It should be said, though, that I don't support you as rabidly as I used to. While I think those other people are blatant trolls and griefers, I also think you're giving them more fuel for their accusations when you bite back. I think you and everyone else involved in anything should have a probation period for... let's say a month. When it's over, you'll have all (hopefully) forgotten about your arguments and could settle down. --Cyberbob240^{CDF - Arb - W!} 02:52, 23 April 2006 (BST)

That's as much support as he has from me. -Wyndallin 03:31, 23 April 2006 (BST)

I disagree. Almost all my communications with Amazing were in my official capacity as moderator or in conversations with other people. I find conversations with Amazing as about as edifying as being kicked in the face by a mule. So because a single user decides to bring charges against people they automatically get punishment? That hardly seems fair. --Zaruthustra-Mod 03:50, 23 April 2006 (BST)

It wouldn't be punishment; rather a "timeout" period, to give all those tempers a chance to cool down. --Cyberbob240^{CDF - Arb - W!} 03:52, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Perhaps each of the issues should be examined by a third party, uninvolved in the debate. Obviously, CyberBob and I would be fairly even-handed, but we've already expressed bias in one way or another. Regardless, if this neutral third party did not see any sort of taunting or whatnot on the part of the 'defendant', then there would be no probation. -Wyndallin 03:54, 23 April 2006 (BST)

I've decided that I no longer want to be associated with this pointless drama and waste of time, and that my stance on this matter is "I don't care anymore." Have fun slinging the zingers at each other. – Nubis ^NWO 05:49, 23 April 2006 (BST)

That's a really good stance. Rock on. -- Amazing 05:53, 23 April 2006 (BST)

You never really were. --Cyberbob240^{CDF - Arb - W!} 05:54, 23 April 2006 (BST)

I've taken the time to expand a bit on exactly why I think this is a poor decision.

I believe that petitioning to ban a user sets a bad precedent on the Wiki. A Wiki, by nature is a community effort in which anyone can join and contribute their piece. What this is doing, in my opinion, is attempting to turn the Wiki into a sort of 'club.' If this passes, it opens up the potential for a large group of users to ban whomever they please, turning the Wiki into an elitist playground of the in crew. This would obviously be detrimental to the Wiki, as any information could easily be skewed into POV arguments smearing people. I can't stand for such action.

If you have a problem with a user, solve it legitimately through Arbitration and.or Vandal Banning instead of getting all your friends together to kick someone from the Wiki.

As for the specific petition, all it is right now is a glorified flame war between Amazing, Mia Kristos and a several others veiled with an air of 'legitimacy.' If this is what the community has to resort to to solve problems, I feel there are much more important underlying issues that people need to look at. – Nubis ^NWO 12:18, 25 April 2006 (BST)

Agree. I regret having signed the petition or even having read it in the first place. This does not mean that I support Amazing or anything like that: I think he is a whiny, petulant child, and only respects arbitration or moderation authority when it works in his favor (his history of rejecting arbitration decisions and bypassing bans proves this). That's partly why this entire thing is so pointless. But further: it just spreads his bad behavior patterns into everyone else.--Jorm 17:43, 25 April 2006 (BST)

I'm glad you feel that way, if its not too much trouble please check out the link I have put above. I want to create an agreement that will not only discourage bad behavior patterns but create clear definitions of them so there is no question as to what they are, and for the parties involved it will also involve the quick and immediate action from a mod upon infringement of that agreement--Prosperina 18:02 25 April 2006

So Sue Me

Yeah, that's right, removal of my vote put the "for Amazing"s in favor. The people who have removed thier votes are right: This thing is nothing more than a glorified flame war, and should never have been started. If a person has any sense left, they'll take thier name off it period. --Sirens^{T RR} (Initially Unsigned, Tiem and date is sometime before 13:30, 28 April 2006 (BST))

Mia does have a point. It's rather harsh to try and ban someone for being a figure of public interest (albeit in a negative sense). The situation needs to be resolved, and I thought that a ban of opposing sides may work, but it would just create more resentment towards the wiki in general and create a more "it's an everyone v me situation." I just want a resolution. -- Buncy _T ^GBP 13:30, 28 April 2006 (BST)

I've asked The General to set a non-negotiable date for this awful mess to die. --Cyberbob240^{CDF - Arb - W!} 13:32, 28 April 2006 (BST)

Probably the best thing. All the bickering arguments need to stop, and we need to open a rational, calm form of discussion to resolve this. -- Buncy _T ^GBP 13:35, 28 April 2006 (BST)

Deletions Two weeks from when it was put up for deletion there should be a consensus of what to do with it. There's no reason to go outside the normal channels. – Nubis ^NWO 13:37, 28 April 2006 (BST)

OK, but what if it's voted to be kept? It'll last forever if no date is set. --Cyberbob240^{CDF - Arb - W!} 13:40, 28 April 2006 (BST)

And nothing will ever come of it either, so it's no big deal. – Nubis ^NWO 13:42, 28 April 2006 (BST)

Except it'll be a rallying point for all the drama in the wiki. --Cyberbob240^{CDF - Arb - W!} 13:44, 28 April 2006 (BST)

On the contrary, more than one Mod has said they will ban me if that side prevails. -- Amazing 18:36, 28 April 2006 (BST)

I know that Zaruthustra said that but which other mods apart from him said they would. I'm certainly not going to ban you just because some users think you should be.--The General ^{W! Mod} 18:55, 28 April 2006 (BST)

Didn't Zar say that he would ban you, not if this petition passed, but if it was taken to policy discussion, and voted on there, and an official anti-Amazing policy was made, then he would follow policy, and ban you. He never said that he would ban you based on this petition, you've been told that before. -Banana¯\(o_º)/¯Bear 20:02, 28 April 2006 (BST)

The end date is the 10th May, as Cyberbob suggested.--The General ^{W! Mod} 16:57, 28 April 2006 (BST)

Ahhh you people are so complicated. WHy can't you just get along like one big happy..wiki family...amazing...stop being a twit, noob, thicky ect. and everyone else...just leave him alone and stop abusing him...*shish* the rate your going we'll be lucky not to have a wiki war. --Sammyjayfox123 02:56, 28 April 2006 (BST)

Space to Troll

Flame on

Part 1

Okay, since it is allowed... I hate this BS. As in the whole kit and kabootle. It's wiki-drama that doesn't need to be here. Yes, Amazing whinged about my edit of his line; you know what? I'm beyond that. I am a zombie! I get knocked down, I spend my AP, and stand up again. It doesn't impact me at all.
But this crap, this gets me down. Why the Hell is it here? I doesn't MEAN ANYTHING. If it was voted on AS POLICY, then it would be important, because then it wouldn't fall under the grouping of "user page control" and I would personally NPOV edit all the extranious Bull-Crap throughout it. There shouldn't be an implied thing about Amazing being a troll- if it was an actual credible petition, it would be spelled out, black and white, every single thing that is important, and it wouldn't be Mia's job to do so! She complains about not wanting to work hard- search for links, put it on the page, whatever- and geuss what: IT SHOULDN'T BE! Every single wiki-user should be allowed to add, edit, delete, and reform every single peice of it. But instead, its Mia's party, and we all happen to be invited. Whoopty-do.
And ofcourse, if anyone else acts like it is their party, it is shot down; see the above about Amazing posting about this on the main page. Of course, Mia herself linked to it already, but because it wasn't HER INVITATION, it is shot down and used as evidence of how terrible Amazing is. God, look at the title of this page! Rather than trying to put this on a public page, it is put in Shining Red Letters that its all about Mia v Amazing- like some kind of G'Dmn boxing match. And honey, its not about you. People should realize that they are acting like sheep to all this drama; and the only person who gets the ultimate credit for it is the person with their name first- a Lennon/McCartney¹ song, entitled "Now I'm E-Famous."
But in all actuality, I know that I shouldn't attribute to malicousness what I can consider to be incompitance. Maybe Mia didn't read on the desensitized forums that "people across all the UD chat rooms are talking about Amazing", and maybe she only didn't consider trusting the userbase because she didn't realize that she is capable of adding to something without it being on her user page. Maybe she didn't realize that since this is on a User Page, even the most stringent enforcement of the "Anti-Flaming" rules that are being voted upon wouldn't impact her.
Realize this; the only people who should care about Amazing is himself, his group, and his cult of PK'ers. We're ZOMBIES! We don't need to worry about what survivors do. They shoot us, we eat their faces, revives all around, the game goes on. Anyone too concerned about this should really realize that this is a Survivor-only conflict; zeds need not apply. This is why I question Mia's Zed State; I think she is a Trenchcoat with Anklegrab, except instead of 25 fully-loaded shotguns, she's armed with a bagfull of little drama-games and "I'm too silly to be threatening" nattering, chattering manner. Shes a Survivor who happens to have their rot on the outside, both in the way of the physical and in her personallity.
¹ For those who are young or uniformed, Lennon/McCartney is the writing duo for most of the Beattles, and I personally think that Lennon wasn't as talented- which is a POV, of course- and therefore my comparison is that the real person with the Charisma is the second person, not the first person named, who will usually get the credit. --Karlsbad 05:10, 23 April 2006 (BST)

holy shit. -- Amazing 05:16, 23 April 2006 (BST)

ditto. -Wyndallin 05:19, 23 April 2006 (BST)

seconded. --Cyberbob240^{CDF - Arb - W!} 05:37, 23 April 2006 (BST)

I agree with 'Zing here. That was a lot. I only have a few bits to state. First, it's in my user space so I can more readilly control trolling. Second, I approved of Amazing's link on the main page. Hel, it'd be more fair. Someone else removed it. I don't remember what the other points were. --Sirens^{T RR} 05:18, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Mine was a happy/stunned "holy shit", just to be honest. -- Amazing 05:22, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Yeah, but if it was in a public space, then it wouldn't be about trolling YOU, it would be about the PETITON, and you would again be forgotten. But ofcourse, again, you prove with your reply that I shouldn't attribute maliciousness with incompitence: its not like you are attempting to be mod again, and its not like most of the points about you that were made before this petition are that you, and I paraphrase, just haven't proven that you can do anything at all. And it is not like most of the support you are receiving now happened to happen after you created this page. And maybe you simply, tee-hee, forgot to defend Amazing's Main page advertisement.
You don't want to reply to something here, defend yourself, actually stand for something? Okay, go ahead, its your party- but don't expect someone to think highly of you because of that like they do when you say that you are pregnent, or are drinking alcohol, or both. --Karlsbad 05:37, 23 April 2006 (BST)

I bitched Nubis out in a chatroom for deleting that, thank you very much. And Abort/Retry/Fail is entirely for feed back so I know what I need to improve on. If you don't think I'd be a good mod, go there and SAY SO! I'm not going to defend why this page is in my user space any further. Karl, I know you're tired of this stuff, you said so yourself. So please stop attacking me and try talking to me in a civil way. Lord knows if Amazing had tried that instead of instantly taking advantage of this spot, I might have changed my mind. --Sirens^{T RR} 05:52, 23 April 2006 (BST)

You "bitched" about it so much in the chat room you immediately did something about it on the wiki, did you? But again with the malicious versus incompitent debate: Maybe I shouldn't consider the former, because its not like I can be certain that you would be more inclined to set yourself as the Queen Bee of the Chat Room instead of actually contributing to the wiki, that you might simply have forgoten how to go to a different window in your computer to get to a different program, because working with computers is so hard, tee-hee.
The only thing you could improve on in your quest/campaign/sheep-herding to become a mod, to me, is by making me forget that you admited to lying to Amazing in chat because you wanted to "get him". Though maybe you thought, 'tee-hee, that ofcourse it was impossible to speak to the Great Beast Amazing honestly, and simply went about it in the easiest way you knew how.
And don't assume my name is Karl, because it isn't. You don't know me, don't act like you and I share some kind of pet-name relationship. I said I was tired of all this wiki-drama, but your constant act of "I'm not causing this, I didn't know that, I'm too busy, tee-freaking-hee" is a mighty fine expresso. Talking with you is like attempting to nail a gooey-jello monster to a wall; maybe the "jiggly-jiggly" bit is an accident, or maybe its the only way it knows how to respond. Civility is lost when the other party acts too jiggly to be considered an equal.
Hey, you think that was too long, you want civility? Okay, how about you respond to my assertion that you have nothing to contribute beyond drama. Act like you didn't create a page about a user you've said that you are attempting to ignore, with the sub-heading "Space for Trolling" and are, tee-hee, surprised that people are using this to explain EXACTLY what they think of your actions. --Karlsbad 06:14, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Part 2

Welcome to yet another circle-jerk for trolls who like calling their target the troll. Good luck accomplishing anyth-- Wait, you don't care about accomplishing anything, you just like to constantly badmouth me.

Masturbate away. And Zaruthustra - supporting a ban for someone who isn't a vandal should get you de-modded faster than... well, me. You're nothing but a position-abusing bully.

And Mia? I really insist you stop being so obsessed with me. It's not healthy to concern yourself so heavily with a stranger, and frankly you don't really have a shot at getting into these jeans.

Yep. You'd all like to have me banned or on 'probation'. How absurd. For a very long time now, the policy has been "People keep trolling Amazing. Amazing doesn't let them do it without saying his part. Amazing reports people who are abusing the Wiki. This means that if we get rid of Amazing, everyone'll be able to smear him without being spoken to. Sounds like a good plan!" -- Amazing 05:53, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Me obsessed with you? you're the one who left Mama Mia on your page after I'd removed everything about you from mine. --Sirens^{T RR} 05:57, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Who initiated using User Pages to talk about eachother? Right. Case closed. My User Page bears my side of the situation for those who followed the link from your page. Nothing more. Yep, you're obsessed with me. Contacting me on AIM.. commenting about me repeatedly after we'd seemingly gone our seperate ways.. creating this page specifically to get at me.. Just please don't boil my bunny. -- Amazing 07:02, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Amazing, frankly its your choice, it always has been. You can choose self restraint on the condition of others self restraint reguarding yourself or you can continue the way things have been going. I've merely offered a suggestion. You're smart enough to see the writing an the wall or should be. You can continue to be petty or you can chose to change things, the choice is yours.--Prosperina 06:21 21 April 2006

You're just telling me to allow people to keep flaming and trolling me. In the past I tried to get out of it and tried to ignore it. This is the end result of months of unchecked and largely unmoderated abuse. Petty? Petty?? Look at this entire page and tell me I'm the one being petty. Can you go find the page I've created against any other user? You sure can find a handful of pages specifically created against me. I'd say I'm far from the pettiest petty-person at this petty party. -- Amazing 07:02, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Yes you are being petty. Calm down, getting angry won't help you. Quit thinking in terms of revenge, it won't get you anywhere. If you truely want to correct the harrassment, you have to make some changes. You can't just protest, things don't change that way. It's a tit for tat situation. They have no reason to agree to anything if they can't get anything out of it. If you agree to censure yourself and they censure themselves there is no more cause for anyone to flame about anything. They won't provoke you, you won't provoke them. You aren't free of blame yourself and neither are they. You want them to stop, then you're gonna have to make sacrifices as well. It may not seem fair but its the situation that is present. --Prosperina 07:24, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Re: And I'll give you an actual reason to trust me as well. If you agree to the probation and you ever think I'm being unfair to you in the reports then say the word. I will ask for someone impartial to replace me and I will ban myself willfully. I'm putting myself on the line because I trust you will do the right thing. So what do you say, will you take the gamble and show yourself to be the better man? --Prosperina 7:46, 21 April 2006 (BST)

Don't mistake "attempts to stop people from ruining my use of this entire site" with "revenge". You may think you are helping, but take a step back and look. You're just suggesting a new way to possibly remove me from the site. That's what THEY want, and that's what I'M fighting against. They're trying to PRESSURE me off the site, and OUT OF THE GAME ITSELF. Think, man. I can't disappear from the Wiki and the game in order to use the wiki and the game. -- Amazing 02:16, 22 April 2006 (BST)

You know, you could have talked me out of this, as I've already been thinking about it, but the fact that you were the first person to take advantage of this section makes me think I was right. Go look at them twenty-some people on the other page. They agree with this petition. Perhaps they all want revenge too. --Sirens^{T RR} 02:32, 22 April 2006 (BST)

I don't know if I should comment on the fact that you think you should be 'talked out' of doing something wrong.. so I won't. ;) Anyway, yeah, go ahead and get 20 people who follow you, me, and the drama of this wiki. Congratulations on rounding up trolls to proclaim their unreasonable, unnecissary, and.....

Wait, fuck.. You got me talking to you again. Damn it. Clever. Very clever. -- Amazing 03:09, 22 April 2006 (BST)

I resent being implied as a troll. I've never insulted or led you on in any way. I'm simply under the impression that you are utterly incapable of letting anything go, and pushing until everything breaks apart. Needless to say other people are at fault too, and I would actually like to see most of the offending parties given a "time out," but as you're the core of the problem, so it would seem, the solution would be to put you on a forced vacation. It shouldn't be the only step, but a start. BuncyTheFrog ^{Talk GBP} 17:51, 22 April 2006 (BST)

"We the Jury have decided that Mr. Smith's problem of being repeatedly shot will not end unless we send him to prison." -- Amazing 18:02, 22 April 2006 (BST)

You make me giggle --Sirens^{T RR} 18:09, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Amazing. Read. Thanks. -Wyndallin 18:08, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Unfortunately, I respected the fact that I was requested to stay away from her talk page. Though it's interesting to see you all talking behind my back for the 354th time, I'd support EVERYONE being on probation. All I want is for people (including Ms. Fatal Attraction) to leave them the fuck alone. Putting ME on probation wouldn't do that. Putting THEM on probation would, I don't care if I'm on it too at that point - because once the TROLLS leave me alone, the problem's absoultely eliminated. I didn't start any of this shit, and my DEFENSE OF MYSELF is not what's continuing it. What continues it is the knowingly unchecked and unmoderated harassment. I would need to compile the list (or at least add to it) myself though, otherwise it'll leave off someone(s) who will continue to bother me, and I can't say anything becuase I'm "on probation". -- Amazing 18:37, 22 April 2006 (BST)

First, even when you weren't welcome there, such was limited to your trolling. That notice isn't there anymore, what makes you think I still want you to stay far far away? Second, I gave you a chance to leave me alone. You screwed it up. Sure I only gave you three days aat the most, but you still screwed it up. PHHHBBBBTTT! --Sirens^{T RR} 18:41, 22 April 2006 (BST)

I completely left you alone, and only responded to your 'after-the-agreement' smearing of me on YOUR page. What is this baloney where you get to do all this shit to me and I can't say anything about you on my page? Who the hell violated our 'leave eachother alone' agreement?! -- Amazing 18:48, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Mia, immaturity. Amazing, tone. Don't make me send you two to your corners. *grumbles* -Wyndallin 18:50, 22 April 2006 (BST)

'Zing, you were trolling my comments on things that didn't concern you, outside the user pages. Where did I do that to you? --Sirens^{T RR} 18:53, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Pardon me? I don't think that actually happened. Maybe I'm forgetting, but if you supply a link you might jog my memory. -- Amazing 19:00, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Meh, I couldn't find it, but then again, I'm not trying to defend my position to anyone. --Sirens^{T RR} 19:09, 22 April 2006 (BST)

That's okay. Consider yourself to have an unlimited time period to find the link that proves what you alledged. Whenever you find the time, etc. -- Amazing 19:14, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Either sincere and poorly phrased, or condescending and sarcastic. Either way, poor choice of words, because it's certainly not making anyone like you any *more*. When you're facing a ban, especially for something that you claim is not your fault, one would think that you'd cut back on the offensiveness. Seriously, dude, you're not helping yourself here. Mia isn't going to lose sleep if you get banned. Don't provoke. Not smart. -Wyndallin 19:23, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Sorry I responded to false accusations with a less than loving tone. (This too is sarcasm. Oh man, I just bet I'll be banned for being sarcastic and replying to people, too..) -- Amazing 19:27, 22 April 2006 (BST)

You know, if you'd like, I can see if I can find a backhoe for you. That shovel is quickly getting worn out; but until such time as I can procure the backhoe, please, by all means, continue using the shovel to dig yourself into a hole. I don't want to dislike you, but you're making it difficult. -Wyndallin 19:33, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Can you explain how responding to a false accusation with sarcasm is a grave offense? -- Amazing 19:43, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Never said it was. Nice pun, by the way. I was making the observation that claiming you aren't a troll by being sarcastic and condescending is probably not the proper way to go about it. -Wyndallin 19:49, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Oh, for the love of sweet baby zombie Jesus, would you quit with the persecution complex. We were discussing what to do about the whole issue, not just you. And for the record, that comment lowered you to oh, a peg above Grim on my dislikes/likes scale. I particularly liked the dramafest with regards to copyright issues. Well, not really. That made me nearly go bald, pulling out my hair, nearly literally going 'omgwtf!11?!1/?1?11?!' in real life. So you know, Mia, CyberBob and I were discussing what could be done. I was neutral, before you started flying off the handle. We already know where Mia and CyberBob stand. It was a meeting of the minds, and we all seemed to support the probation of yourself as well as anyone who had interacted negatively with you in the past month. I won't disagree that there are some people on here who seem to have it out for you. Fine. Sure. But every ounce of trouble past the first that you got, I'm honestly starting to believe that you earned. And I don't like feeling that way about people. -Wyndallin 18:43, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Ha ha ha. I can't even compromise and accept probation without you insulting me. -- Amazing 18:48, 22 April 2006 (BST)

First off, I applied the proper indent. Secondly, if that's what that was, you sure as hell confused me. To be completely honest and unemotional about it, it seemed like applying and shifting blame needlessly when it didn't need to be brought up in the first place, and so I feel that my frustrated response was at least somewhat justified. -Wyndallin 18:52, 22 April 2006 (BST)

I'm stating a fact. If people weren't able to bother me, I wouldn't speak to them. How can you take my "This is what would happen" statement and demonize me yet again? It's not shifting blame to say, for example, if Mia didn't try to get me banned, I wouldn't be talking here right now. Can you truly deny that fact? Also, it's truly saddening that you think I earned scorn by my actions instead of thinking their actions earned my scorn. A bit one-sided, there, completely looking at me in the light of "earning their trolling" instead of their trolling earning my current aggrivation. Shifting blame? No. You guys shifted it onto me to begin with. -- Amazing 19:00, 22 April 2006 (BST)

In which case, how is it inappropriate to say that if you had not responded to the first incidents of trolling, none of the events of the past five or six months would have happened? Regardless, stating a 'fact' in overdramatic text, including excessive caps does not lend itself well to stating something calmly on the internet. And no, as a fairly even-tempered person who is relatively slow to anger, I don't get one-sided very quickly or very often. With the melodrama that I routinely see in your posts, coupled with the generic 'you guys', grouping all of the viewers into the group to be maligned, it makes you seem as graceful with words as a one-legged monkey. And I don't mean that to be insulting, I say that to be descriptive. If you feel I've been offensive, I apologize, but I do not retract any statement I've made regarding you so far. If caught, any melodrama can be turned into a mellow drama, and that has not happened here. -Wyndallin 19:05, 22 April 2006 (BST)

No disrespect (really) but you and a few others (Mia for example) have a very limited view of all this. You're coming in at the end of it all (I hope) rather than keeping track of the entire body of harassment. This all initially started out of dislike of my group Crossman Defense Force and the associated ingame battles and controversies. The GANKBUS/ASS/FAGGOT folks took it out of the game to the Wiki. In defense of my ENTIRE GROUP of players who TRUST me to defend them, I attempted to stop these groups from wantonly insulting and smearing folks in my group (literally, by name) - but this was widely ignored by the Mod team, and the attacks got worse. I won an arbitration case that effectively told some of these folks to knock it off. That was flippantly ignored, and nothing was ever done to punish them for violating the ruling. As this progressed, yes aggrivation is a factor. How can it not be? I have a responsibility to friends who play this game and were obscenely defamed. Now it's a matter of people like you who come into it, look around for a few seconds, and come up with their own backstory. I'm sorry, but this all stems from in-game griefing that spilled over onto the Wiki. These folks want me removed from the leadership position I hold because I keep the group together and host many of the group's resources on my own tab. They're just seeking a troll/griefer 'win' by dissolving my group. Some of them even go to college together, and use the Wiki/Game in the computer area in unison, making a game of destroying me, my group, etc. (I only know this through their bragging to me about it.) All of this is in persuance of that end result. Now, as I say there are a couple hangers-on like Mia, Grim, and I guess you now. People who got swept up in the resulting aftershocks of this game-world overthrow attempt, and are now holding me responsible for not lying down and letting people shit on me. -- Amazing 19:21, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Actually, for ASS it started because we disliked you, specifically, in-game. We formed our group to carry out our in-game goals, and chose to list it in the groups section. Then you came to us. Hell, you even made a point to keep things stirred up when it looked as though they might be dying down ("Just wondering if you're enjoying your failure to meet your goals"). Sure, we reacted to you - enthusiastically - but don't pretend that you've got no blame for this drama spilling onto the wiki. If anything, you're more responsible than we are. Oh, and your little tin-foil hat thing about how we're SECRETLY DESTROYING THE CDF? Gimme a break. We've never made an allegation against the CDF that wasn't demonstratably true, and while we certainly don't like the CDF - it says right on our group page that we don't condone zerging - we're not trying to destroy them through some kind of sinister intarwebs conspiracy. Promise. --Tehasskickars 21:39, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Firstly, thanks for admitting you hated me in-game and YOU brought it to the Wiki. (That's exactly what you said.) and Secondly, thanks for being such an obvious liar. Your page is full of derogatory, untrue comments about people in my group. -- Amazing 23:34, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Honestly, it wouldn't have been hard to ask a mod to keep your group's page blanked and protected, and asked the mods to watch the offending groups' pages; it would have made things simpler if you had to have simply done that. Simple route not taken, dramafest ensues. Frankly, people are always talking about keeping in-game stuff off the Wiki. I don't see it happening much at all. And I'm the sort of person who, if given mod powers, would mercilessly ban people intentionally posting disgustingly warped things on a group's page regardless if it was a 'commonly held belief' in the group. If someone said on their page, 'Amazing rapes kittens', that wouldn't even be a warning, as far as I'm concerned. Long story short, the mods are tied up in too much red tape and the drama with you and the rest clogs it up more, so much so that the arbitration page is a nightmare. I'm a relatively latecomer, but frankly, events in-game unless reported on the wiki are irrelevant. Gankbus griefing you is exceptionally annoying to read, and I can only imagine what it was like to go through it, but honestly. Drama + wiki = bad. -Wyndallin 19:31, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Why would I want my group's page blanked..? I don't see why you think that people attacking someone should cause that someone to have their page/personage removed from the Wiki. A user was once banned for uploading an insulting image and saying it was a photo of me, with no warning and no process. I don't think the red tape is the entire problem here. Not to say it isn't, but they can and have circumvented it in the past, you know? And what I said was that in-game malice spilled into the Wiki through the Grifers' pages and edits to my pages, not that in-game events were relevant beyond that. -- Amazing 19:43, 22 April 2006 (BST)

I never said that you should be removed from the wiki. To make this simple. Y says something incredibly rude about Z, with no possible way of backing up their own statements. Admin X comes along. X bans Y without even warning. That's the situation I was putting forth as most appropriate. If I was a mod at the time of the drama, that's what *would* have happened. The reason for this, as I've previously stated, is that drama+wiki=bad. -Wyndallin 19:52, 22 April 2006 (BST)

In my arbitration case, I was already asking people be told to leave me alone or be civil with me under threat of warning or banning. That's already my goal. -- Amazing 02:07, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Yet at the same time, it would be unfair not to ask you to do the same. An arbitration ruling wouldn't be fair if they were forced to be quiet while you "shit on them" to use your terminology. Since you have trolled them, whether if it was defense of yourself or in retaliation for their actions, you still trolled and therefore you also lose innocent victim status and significantly harm the chances of getting a settlement in your behavior, because you then become a problem to be dealt with --Prosperina 5:31 23 April 2006.

Please don't misunderstand - If I was told to stop doing something, and the folks I see as harassing me were told the same, I'd be so happy that I might actually go out and celebrate. (Out..side? Is there such a think??) No, really. I would embrace the F out of a ruling saying I had to leave those people along - as long as they were bound to do the same in the exact fashion I was. See, I know with 100% certainty that if these folks left me alone, I would never have to deal with them, and beyond not having to, I would also choose not to at every turn. -- Amazing 05:46, 23 April 2006 (BST)

I'm confused, this was the fundemental premise of my suggestion, yet you refused it on the grounds that you did not want to censor yourself. The two actions appear contradictory in my eyes, perhaps you can clarify. --Prosperina 05:52 23 April 2006

Well, I assume that unless it's a Mod action, it won't hold any weight - and the Arbitration page isn't going to work because some will simply dismiss all arbitrators. Plus from my initial (mis)understanding, I thought it was focusing on me as opposed to equality for everyone involved. -- Amazing 06:12, 23 April 2006 (BST)

That's why you get at least two mods to sign on. And I am fairly certain that is well within reach. However to do that, I first need to get the o.k from you to do that. Without your approval, the motion is stalled and since you are risking banning to do so I need your approval first. If we cannot find two unbiased mods, we can have each side select a mod. Since this misunderstanding has been cleared up, are you interested? To clarify, you will be in no way obligated to the proposal until we have the mods approval and the approval of all other concerned parties that they will agree to ruling. --Prosperina 06:22 23 April 2006

I'm for, as long as the 'other side' is restricted from contacting me or speaking of me in a way that is clearly meant for nothing but offense and inflamation. I don't care what restriction are put on ME as long as it's on them in the same EXACT capacity, and meets my standards of "leave me the F alone." Before anything actually proceeded, though, I think we'd need to go over everything so it's ironed out in a clear way, in a non-chaotic area. That way it's all fixed and ready to go. Keeping in mid the Mods may not go with it, and the trolls may give even stronger resistance if it's shot down. I don't think you're going to get their (the opposition) support on this, y'know? -- Amazing 06:29, 23 April 2006 (BST)

There is always that chance, but the potential gains far exceed the risks. With your approval I will submit this conversation to the arbiters of all your current cases as well as all the mods. Mia has already agreed to support this proposal provided that it is fair to both sides. --Prosperina 06:37 23 April 2006

Does anyone else find it absurd that people are having a flame war all the way over here in the corner? Someone said something and then someone said something back! And then bitch bitch bitch into the corner. We can't let this shit go! It's too important! --Ron Burgundy 19:22, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Bitch Bitch Bitch Bitch Bitch

Bitch Bitch Bitch

Bitch bitchbitchbitch! And yes, it is quite silly. -Wyndal ^{(talk)-(W!)-(SGP)} 19:25, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Someone call the Waambulance, tell it to just keep indenting and you'll find us! --Ron Burgundy 19:28, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Part 3

The Colons of DOOM! That could be an interesting movie name. Ron Burgundy and the Colons of Doom. Sounds vaguely odd, though. Meh. Could be an Indiana Jones-style flick.-Wyndal ^{(talk)-(W!)-(SGP)} 19:34, 23 April 2006 (BST)

It was getting rediculous. Haha. Sorry, Ron. -Wyndal ^{(talk)-(W!)-(SGP)} 19:35, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Yeah, it was! I'm tempted to strikeout this whole page. Think I'd get yelled at for something like that? Well, it's not important. What's important is what I should get for lunch. Indian, Thai, or Lebanese food? The Indian place near me sorta sucks, the Thai place is expensive, but I go to the Lebanese place like every single day. Any thoughts? --Ron Burgundy 19:42, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Dude, go for the thai. Thai food kicks ass.--Mpaturet 19:47, 23 April 2006 (BST)

I know! Actually, I enjoyed some beef lemongrass with steamed dumblings, last night. I'm kinda leaning toward getting a lamb kabob sandwich, at the moment. --Ron Burgundy 19:50, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Damn that sounds really good. WTF is up will all this strikethrough?--Mpaturet 21:30, 23 April 2006 (BST)

I was actually tempted to wipe it too, you know, after you snapped at me. Thats part of why I moved it. --Sirens^{T RR} 19:55, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Snapped? I didn't mean to snap at anyone! Ron Burgundy is a creature of benevolence! I love all of Odin's creatures. Except Wes Mantooth. You're not Wes Mantooth, are you? --Ron Burgundy 19:57, 23 April 2006 (BST)

The Internet is such a bad medium for communicating emotion. :) --Ron Burgundy 20:05, 23 April 2006 (BST)

My. Memory. Sucks. Nevermind the "you". --Sirens^{T RR} 20:06, 23 April 2006 (BST)

You were thinking of Kb, weren't you? -Wyndal ^{(talk)-(W!)-(SGP)} 20:12, 23 April 2006 (BST)

YES! Dear bob, get them out of my head! --Sirens^{T RR} 20:34, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Don't worry Mia - I'm here! They'll be out in no time! --Cyberbob240^{CDF - Arb - W!} 18:02, 25 April 2006 (BST)

Don't worry about it! I'd still kill zombies with you. Oh, wait... you're in the RRF, aren't you? Maybe not, then. --Ron Burgundy 20:40, 23 April 2006 (BST)

Yes I am, but you're welcome to hunt me down like the....the...uh....living dead girl that I am! :P --Sirens^{T RR} 20:48, 23 April 2006 (BST)

You may be RRF, but we can still be BFF!! Look at all this love and happiness in the trolling section! I should be ashamed of myself, going off topic like this. --Ron Burgundy 00:14, 24 April 2006 (BST)

<joke>Yes you should you worthless excuse for a harman!</joke> --Sirens^{T RR} 00:40, 24 April 2006 (BST)

Part 4

I'm not asking that you leave the wiki, Amazing, I am offering you a choice. Listen to what I am saying. I am willing to put myself on the line so that you may stay and continue use the wiki, however it is on the condition that you learn to control your temper and speech. You need to think about how what you say will affect other people and how it will look to other people and be damned careful about how you say things. But that is it. You will still be allowed to make contributions and people will not be allowed to troll you anymore, period. However, this hypothetical situation hinges on whether or not you will be willing to exhibit self-restraint and agree to it. Each side will be allowed to write the conditions of what the other side cannot do providing the other side agrees to it. If you agree to this we can have the best chance of reaching a situation that will work for all parties concerned. If you want them to stop ruining the game for you, then you need to realize that seeking revenge will only hinder your chances of doing that. Drop all grudges. This goes for everyone involved. I truely believe that this can work if you agree to control your temper. But if you refuse this proposal and continue as you are now, I can do nothing to help you.
I will submit to the banning if anyone finds that I am being unfair to either side. Not just by you but to those who support this petition as well. Each seems to believe that the other is ruining the wiki for them, if that is the case let us put an end to the behavior that you believe is ruining the wiki on all sides. --Prosperina 4:20 22 April 2006

You seem to be a good guy - just stop, man. Your advice is noted and I choose not to submit myself for possible punishment when I'm the never-endingly attacked party. -- Amazing 05:24, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Very well then. I shall respect your decision. I regret that I was unable to convince you on this and the proposition will remain open should you change your mind. If you wish to report my edit to your user page, then I will second the vandalism charge. My vote on this petition will remain unchanged. I wish you the best of luck even though I disagree with your decision. --Prosperina 5:35 22 April 2006
- Fortunately, I'm not that petty. -- Amazing 05:39, 22 April 2006 (BST)

Why Ban him though? The way I see it, he's just being picked on. There seems to be much more evidence for him to stay. He may have had a few arguements but so what? From what I've read on the article he has been threatened, slagged off and ridiculed. That is bullying and I dont know about you guys but I think that is wrong. The people who are slagging him off should be banned, not him.--Krazy Monkey 11:29, 2 May 2006 (BST)

This one person has caused this much trouble. Is it really worth keeping him on? Also, this attitude has lasted for even longer than you have been here Krazy Monkey. This is just basically, "We have had enough". AllStarZ 03:07, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Who wrote this idiotic page

What a lame attempt at framing the entire situation with a pro-Amazing bias. I just think Amazing should go play whatever kick ass game he threatened was going to steal Kevan's player base. Scinfaxi 09:11, 28 April 2006 (BST)

Climb in the Trollcart and ride away. -- Amazing 18:34, 28 April 2006 (BST)

Then edit it. You feel strongly about it, you are free to attempt to cast it in a version that you feel is more correct. The fact that you have instead decided to crap on the wiki-process means that either A) You don't feel that your opinion is correct or important enough to deserve being inserted into the page, or B) You feel that your editing skills are so weak as to make your contributions not worth the effort. So, are you wrong or simply stupid? --Karlsbad 22:12, 28 April 2006 (BST)

I feel it is more like... C) Probably didn't read it, never plans to, simply came here to make an inflammatory comment and doesn't actually care about the page. -- Amazing 06:45, 29 April 2006 (BST)

There are so many bullshit Amazing pages it would be a full time job just to edit all of them. I do what I can. Scinfaxi 18:11, 29 April 2006 (BST)

Glad you agree the pages people create about me are bullshit. -- Amazing 06:42, 30 April 2006 (BST)

Amazing, people don't do these things for no reason. You can't say that there is something wrong with the entire wiki and nothing with you.

On a related note, I would like to also say that Amazing has arose feelings of anger in quite a bit more than a few members of thsi wiki, and he will continue doing so until he is made to leave permanently or made to learn a lesson. AllStarZ 02:44, 3 May 2006 (BST)

On a related note, I would like to say that several people on the wiki are excessively opinionated and act in a fairly typical 'internet' manner - saying things that they can't in real life for fear of being punched in the mouth. It is those people who should be punished, as well as Amazing. -Wyn ^(talk!) 02:57, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Never said anything about the entire wiki being wrong. Some do support me. ;) As for feelings of anger, I'd say it's quite the opposite. I was doing fine in the Wiki, my only 'adversary' in any real regard was MaulMachine. Then GANKBUS was formed and the Wiki-and-beyond harassment began. Etc. and so forth. -- Amazing 03:26, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Excessively opinionated? He even pisses the mods off, people who are selected because of their neutrality. AllStarZ 03:02, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Look at the drama on the Deletions page and tell me that Grim isn't opinionated. And neutral people can get pissed off, too. Mods aren't androids. -Wyn ^(talk!) 03:06, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Mods are voted on, not selected. -- Amazing 03:26, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Actually, users are allowed to give thier opinions on whether or not a user should be a mod. Ultimately, it's up to the Bureaucrat(s). It even says, "This is not a vote. It is instead merely a request for comments from the wiki community. This will continue for two weeks, as all users get a chance to air their opinions on the candidate."

However, it goes on to say, "Once the two weeks are up, the Bureaucrat will review the community discussion and make a decision based upon it." I believe it is this way so that people who have a vendetta against a user, and vote against simply because they don't like them can be safely ignored.

Anyways, just felt that statement needed correcting. --Sirens^{T RR} 03:45, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Exactly my point. AllStarZ 03:09, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Well, I know first hand that putting yourself up for a "vote", being unpopular, and having a Mod approve you anyway is 'against the rules', so they're "voted" (Vouched?) in, not selected, even if a Mod has a final approval. -- Amazing 03:48, 3 May 2006 (BST)

That's true, but then again, if you can't get at least one person to vouch for you - not even friends - what was the point of trying in the first place? --Sirens^{T RR} 03:53, 3 May 2006 (BST)

I'm sorry, your 'point' seems to support my views more than yours. If I got enraged with you between now and hypothetically becoming a mod, does that mean that you should be banned, especially if a handful of vindictive, drama-causing users dislike you? -Wyn ^(talk!) 03:11, 3 May 2006 (BST)

The mods are supposed to be neutral. And yet he has insulted them to the point that they have reacted. He also harassed through AIM the person who made the reason that this wiki exists. AllStarZ 03:14, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Okay. So. What has he done to affect you? It's all well and good that he's insulted Kevan and the mods so far, but if they were going to ban him for it - especially Kevan - don't you think they would have done it by now? And to tie in with my original point, if they haven't done it so far, how is it your business to tell them to do so? -Wyn ^(talk!) 03:20, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Actually, I insulted Mods only when I deemed it necissary to get across a point "IE: Stop being a lazy dink" or what have you. Furthermore, Mods are NOT neutral, and consider themselves "regular users" who can do or say anything a regular user can. As for contacting anyone on AIM - that's simply not true in the least. -- Amazing 03:27, 3 May 2006 (BST)

His attitude of arrogance and self-possessiveness towards others including me, as well as lashing out at any that would oppose his suggestions. I would also like to raise the point that this has been happening for even longer than when you joined, and this probably only manifested due to the increased numbers of people in the wiki. AllStarZ 03:27, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Is this because of that Arbitration case against you so long ago in which I believe you lost? -- Amazing 03:30, 3 May 2006 (BST)

So far as to my knowledge, I have never been engaged in an Arbitration. If it exists, prove me wrong and show me the link. AllStarZ 03:34, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Well, the logs have long been cleared, the archives might not contain it, we'll see. I'll go check. I could be mis-remembering a Mod telling you to knock something off. We'll see. btw Thanks for your contributions to McZed's™. -- Amazing 03:40, 3 May 2006 (BST)

No see, I got nailed for vandalism, not arbitration. I changed something in your user page from King of *something* to King of Assholes AllStarZ 20:27, 10 May 2006 (BST)

REGARDLESS. It is not relevant. AllStarZ, I agree that there is arrogance there. Not having witnessed any interactions between you two, I can't comment, but Amazing has jumped all over me in a condescending, snotty manner as well, yet I'm using my vote on the 'petition' to attempt to balance the number of votes on both sides. I'm at least making the effort to attempt to reduce the amount of drama over the situation, but I won't hesitate to cause more drama if Amazing gets banned, because in my opinion, he hasn't done enough to warrant it, regardless of what you believe. -Wyn ^(talk!) 03:46, 3 May 2006 (BST)

I can respect your opinion. However, I am unmoving in the opinion that removing him will put much hate to rest. I shall comment no further on this page. AllStarZ 03:47, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Insanity

This petition is complete and utter rubbish. If this passes, I suggest that people immediately bring petitions against Scinfaxi, Mpaturet, Tehasskickars, Bobhammero and Jimbo Bob, just to show how ridiculous this sort of thing is. -Wyn ^(talk!) 02:19, 3 May 2006 (BST)

It never made it to the front page for serious consideration, and both sides are zerging like crazy. In my eyes this stopped being legitimate a looong time ago. --Zaruthustra-Mod 02:20, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Oh, good. I assume, then, that even if the 'Ban Amazing' side wins on the 10th, that you will take no action? If so, good, because that sets a dangerous precedent, I feel. -Wyn ^(talk!) 02:21, 3 May 2006 (BST)

The precedent is fine with me, it just never had serious consideration. Its almost impossible to get somebody vote banned, so if it ever passed they probably deserve it. This vote discounts all the people who have never heard of amazing and would have been directed here by the front page. They would have overwhelmingly voted no. --Zaruthustra-Mod 02:26, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Well, two things - one, it was put up on the front page but was taken down as 'not relevant' or somesuch; I believe that Grim was the one who did it. And two, people with no definite opinion would probably either do research or simply stay out of it. I did research, myself. -Wyn ^(talk!) 02:36, 3 May 2006 (BST)

It was removed because it wasn't official, it was on a user page. When it moved to mod/pol talk it became "real" so to speak. The legitimacy of this may change depending who you ask. There is definately ample precedent in our philosophy and prior rulings to support it in theory. People who aren't inolved almost always rule with the plaintiff in these situations, mostly out of an "it could happen to me" fear. --Zaruthustra-Mod 02:39, 3 May 2006 (BST)

I like how the Outbreak Lexicon gets an official notice, but Mod-supported petitions to get a user banned who isn't vandalizing gets deleted. (And Zar said he'd ban me if I lost the vote, btw. Another did, but I don't recall which atm.) -- Amazing 04:04, 3 May 2006 (BST)

The thing is, this is completley legitimate. It may not be completley moral but it's an amendment to the rules--Mpaturet 04:20, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Unfortunately, the folks who WOULD bring a petition against those people are the ones who are above doing that. Also, I really don't see any obvious signs of zerging. Lurkers, newbies, and people asked to vote need to be taken into account. It was never legit anyway. -- Amazing 02:23, 3 May 2006 (BST)

It is justified. Amazing has angered more than a few people on this wiki. AllStarZ 03:00, 3 May 2006 (BST)

And so have the people that I suggested be put up for ban petitions. Long-term harassment, finally culminating with a ban, is not acceptable. I do not support Amazing. But I won't support any motion to remove him from the Wiki without counterbalances, such as the people harassing him getting banned as well. -Wyn ^(talk!) 03:05, 3 May 2006 (BST)

So we should bring approximately a quarter of the wiki down with this person? AllStarZ 03:18, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Yes. The people who are harassing Amazing, Scinfaxi in particular, has said that he harasses Amazing 'for fun'. Long-term harassment for fun. Think about that. It reminds me of taking a magnifying glass to an anthill. If you want to get rid of nuisances, you have to get rid of them all. -Wyn ^(talk!) 03:22, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Personally, I think all of the Amazing drama on the wiki is bullshit. ASS's deal with Amazing has always been in game. It was he who started complaining about it here. --BobHammero _ASS 03:28, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Wrong. It is you who insulted and defamed and attacked and trolled me on the Wiki because of your dislike of me - which eventually caused me to respond. -- Amazing 03:31, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Personally, I think you both are misremembering. Amazing, you've shown a surprising amount of sensitivity and explosiveness towards any sort of contradiction or insult, perceived or otherwise, and ASS et al. have shown incredible disregard for politeness and decency. At this point, what you both are doing is pointing fingers and going They started it! -Wyn ^(talk!) 03:49, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Meh. Check the History and you'll see that was one of the first edits after page creation, and the first appearance of "ASS" on this Wiki. Also, it was not inspired by anything I did. I didn't even know who these people were before seeing that page linked at some point. It's also funny to cycle through the differences (both ways) and see how it progressed. You can pretty much see that "Group" was formed around "We hate Amazing!" with an actual group 'goal' thrown in for appearances. -- Amazing 03:55, 3 May 2006 (BST)

And I'm not saying that I disagree with them griefing you on the game. In fact, they're more than capable of doing so, and apparently more than willing to do so. In fact, as far as I'm concerned, they're completely able to have a Wiki page detailing how the entire group is about griefing you until you quit. But when they start wandering all over the wiki, driving politeness and decency before them like abused kittens, that's where I draw the line. -Wyn ^(talk!) 03:59, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Erm. You said about finger-pointing as to who brought this to the Wiki ... Did you read the text of the page I linked? (Or am I misunderstanding your post?) -- Amazing 04:02, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Well, I just read it, but yes, you misunderstood. The drama should have been kept to their group page, their group talk page, and your talk page. When it escapes and turns into personal attacks across the wiki and polarizes it as much as it has, that's an issue. -Wyn ^(talk!) 04:14, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Please try not to be hyperbolic and intimate that we've gone all over the wiki, spreading our annoyance at Amazing as far and wide as we can. I believe this entire drama that we're talking about now has spawned mainly out of the arbitration cases started by Amazing (regardless of whatever criticism of Amazing we had on our group page beforehand). The arbitration case against ASS seems to be something along the lines of "supporting ASS against Amazing constitutes abuse," which I think is ridiculous. When Amazing first commented on our group page (and if you'll look, you'll see that he started the discussion there), he complained about the wording on our page, and out of a show of good faith, we modified the page. Despite this, Amazing has yet to respond to our requests that he modify the CDF page to correct the typo of our group name, and remove the blatant insult about ASS that he has there. Considering the degree to which the wiki is polarized over this entire thing, ask yourself: is it really a relatively new group that's the cause, or could it be someone else, perhaps someone who started ten arbitration cases all at once? --BobHammero _ASS 04:39, 3 May 2006 (BST)

You seem to be making it to Amazing vs. ASS, which is only one part of this entire problem. There's also Amazing vs. Grim, Amazing vs. Scinfaxi, et cetera. I have no problem with your group. Also, I apologize for making it seem one-sided. Both sides are to blame. Regardless, I'm not referring to the groups, I'm referring to actions of specific users. -Wyn ^(talk!) 04:46, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Not a problem, and thanks. Personally, I'm going to be glad when this entire mess is resolved (assuming it will be). Urban Dead is supposed to be a game, after all! --BobHammero _ASS 04:58, 3 May 2006 (BST)

You guys honestly have jumped into my 'discussions' with other users for the purpose of inflaming tensions. Plus, in the future, you guys need to watch your language when speaking of other users, lest you be considered at fault by any given person you're calling a prick. -- Amazing 06:32, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Please restrain yourself from shaming us as though we were children. Also, your page edit is rather pathetic. Do you really think that you're helping matters? I don't even have to tell you that everything you wrote there is false. You knew that at the time that you wrote it. Do you really want another tedious arbitration case to deal with? --BobHammero _ASS 07:17, 3 May 2006 (BST)

I don't know, Bob. I was actually really impressed with Amazing's edit. --Jimbo Bob _ASS 07:20, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Know what Jimbo, you're actually right. Amazing does demonstrate a marked ability to produce coherent English words from time to time. Kinda makes me want to reward him in kind on our page. --BobHammero _ASS 07:26, 3 May 2006 (BST)

I think that talking to you as if you were children may be the only way to actually get a message through to you. As for "Helping matters" - I find it comical that you pretend the matter of your griefing can be "helped" in any way. Oh, to giggle! And yeah, Your group was founded based on PKing me. Tough to deal with history logs, idn't it? -- Amazing 07:40, 3 May 2006 (BST)

No, it's not. Have you ever thought of taking some sort of critical thinking class, or do they not offer those at the zoo? --BobHammero _ASS 07:49, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Sorry, but you can't argue with the logs. See... they're pretty honest, y'know. -- Amazing 07:53, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Unlike you. I don't even know who the hell "Jack Charlton" is, and yes, you were very swiftly put up as our target. That's because we debated target choice BEFORE taking the group public, you shit-wallowing excuse for a human being (no offense! ^_^). Your little exercise in amateur telepathy sure was amusing, though. It's been hard to find performers like that since they stopped using insane asylums as places of entertainment. --Jimbo Bob _ASS 08:05, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Watch your language and your tone. You're crossing the line beyond even my realms of accepted language. And yeah, you do know who Jack Charlton is. Rasher spoke with you long ago via your User Page specifically to this effect. You quickly deleted it, but not before it was read by me and I'm sure a few others. It's just a shame the logs have been forever lost. -- Amazing 08:09, 3 May 2006 (BST)

OH NOES!!1!1 I have offended Amazing??!? If only I gave a shit!!1

And no, I don't know. You calling someone else a liar is rich, though. By the way, clever of you to take advantage of the log wipe to make up some shit I can't disprove. Maybe there really is a neuron twitching away in there somewhere. --Jimbo Bob _ASS 08:24, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Since you have implied that I myself am a liar as per your opening statement, I invite you to prove that. Unless you're going to look at your own windfall of log deletion and use that as an excuse. Anyway, I think we're done here. Thanks for helping my cause. -- Amazing 08:29, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Prove what? That you're a liar? Sorry, but I'm afraid you already beat me to that. And since I haven't deleted any logs, I honestly have no clue what the hell you're talking (read: lying) about now. I'd request that you clarify, but it seems that you've decided that cowardice is the better part of valor here. Reference my statement elsewhere about how all you do is start and lose fights. --Jimbo Bob _ASS 08:44, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Sorry you have nothing productive to add. I suppose it's better this way, since this was getting a bit long. Let me know if/when you have something to say that has merit and I'll happily respond. As it stands you're just leading the discussion in circles and into dead-ends of falsehoods and insults. -- Amazing 08:50, 3 May 2006 (BST)

You project like a motherfucker, Amazing. Stop pretending that I'm the one who's guilty of your crimes. Oh, and coming back after declaring your part in this closed just so you can play at having the "last word"? Pathetic even by your low, low standards. --Jimbo Bob _ASS 08:56, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Ha! "I think we're done here" means I'm not coming back? Okay. Anyway, yeah. Thank you for the very comedic statements (though I'm sure you didn't intend it) and all your assistance. It's nice to come away from this with no doubt in (resonable) peoples' minds that 100% of what you say is balognarz. Hopefully this will be the end of it. If you want it to be, at least leave things out of your reply that beg (BEG LIKE A DOG!) for attention. -- Amazing 09:02, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Since you didn't seem to get it the first time: You project like a motherfucker, Amazing. Stop pretending that I'm the one who's guilty of your crimes. Oh, and coming back after declaring your part in this closed just so you can play at having the "last word"? Pathetic even by your low, low standards. --Jimbo Bob _ASS 09:09, 3 May 2006 (BST)

It's sad to see someone degenerate into ignoring a reply and copy/pasting. It's like... watching a dying man grasp for his last shred of hope. :( Now I'm all emo. -- Amazing 09:13, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Ignore? Au contraire. I simply noted that my previous reply was every bit as applicable to your fresher bullshit, and thought I'd see if I could crack through your precious shell of stupidity. Guess not. Oh, and coming back after declaring your part in this closed just so you can play at having the "last word"? Pathetic even by your low, low standards. (Maybe third time's the charm!) --Jimbo Bob _ASS 23:20, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Never declared I was done. Quote it? I think all you'll find is optomistic "I think we can end this" type statements. Anyway, the more you 'speak' the more you reveal yourself to be the antagonist here. By all means let this conversation never end! I'll come out looking like... well... Jesus. -- Amazing 06:55, 4 May 2006 (BST)

This reminds me an awful lot of talking to a chatterbot, but most of those at least attempt to sound intelligent. --BobHammero _ASS 07:59, 3 May 2006 (BST)

The logs show you had a previous hatred of me and that your entire group was formed, in the very beginning, with the intent of PKing me. So therefore we can conclude your group was set up specifically for that purpose, initially. What don't you understand about that? -- Amazing 08:03, 3 May 2006 (BST)

You have committed a logical fallacy. Just because you were set as our current target at the time of formation does not mean that the group was formed to PK you and you alone. Look at our trophy list. Tell me, are you the only one on there? Don't think so. --BobHammero _ASS 08:13, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Ha ha ha! Your entire page centers around me, and everything on your trophy list is claimed to be my fault! Furthermore I'm mentioned in most listings by name, and you claim it will only end when you get to PK me for a very long amount of time. Face it, you're out there in the open, a group formed specifically because of me. Frankly, I'm a but flattered. :) -- Amazing 08:15, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Seriously, were the guys who programmed you retarded? You're "a but flattered"? Also, nice attempt to deflect our pointing out your pathetic lack of an education. --BobHammero _ASS 08:31, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Pardon me, I did not realize that every drool-coated syllable that dropped from your chortling mouth was a nugget of golden wisdom that had to be addressed. Silly me, I thought I could bypass an idiotic, trollish comment that wasn't worth letter one. Nice attempt to bypass the fact that I've stated exactly how your entire group/page centers around me. -- Amazing 08:35, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Special Thanks

I want to thank everyone for their vote in my support. You're great people, even though I don't pretend to believe you're all entirely on my side. I know some of those vote were probably "what's right" as opposed to "what's preferred."

That said, I am a template whore, apparently, and made one for anyone who wants to use it.

Template:SaveAmazing

(If someone is going to delete this, at least leave the important part, which is the 'thank you'.) -- Amazing _{• SGP¦McZ¦CDF¦UDPD •} 07:06, 24 April 2006 (BST)

-I don't support you. -Craw 20:55, 28 April 2006 (BST)

I'm crying now. :( -- Amazing 02:20, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Well you are right about one thing. You are a template whore. You have made countless templates glorifying yourself and demeaning others. If this voting thing doesn't pass, I would at least have most of those templates removed. AllStarZ 03:04, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Hey now, being a template whore isn't necessarily a bad thing... --Lucero Capell 03:07, 3 May 2006 (BST)

In addition, precedent dictates that unless a template has nothing to do with UrbanDead, the wiki, or a user, or is offensive, it won't be removed. Deal. Just because you don't like him doesn't mean you get to erase his contributions. -Wyn ^(talk!) 03:09, 3 May 2006 (BST)

I challenge you to show the "countless" templates I made to glorify myself and demean others here. -- Amazing 03:35, 3 May 2006 (BST)

With links, not the templates themselves, if you please. -Wyn ^(talk!) 03:39, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Amazing is Cheating

And creating accounts just to sign the petition for him. PROOF! Rasher 21:27, 2 May 2006 (BST)

Actually, I'm not at all. Keep talk on the talk page, troll. -- Amazing 23:51, 2 May 2006 (BST)

Seeing as accounts are being created just for this petition on both sides I don't think we can automatically claim foul play, much less that Amazing is the only one doing it. – Nubis ^NWO 23:54, 2 May 2006 (BST)

I'd like to note (due to the wording of your statement, not purposeful, I'm sure) that I'm not doing it at all. Furthermore you can't rule out "Lurkers" and folks on both sides who have been asked to vote. -- Amazing 02:15, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Rasher, nubis, let's see some proof for both claims. MaulMachine 23:55, 2 May 2006 (BST)

Matthewfarenheit, KimChi, Ilovedeniro, Sixtimesnine, 2FAST2FURIOUS, Malevolently_red, A1C_Jerry all made either their first or second edits on the petition to ban Amazing (and if it was the second, the first edit was to their user page). I'll let Rasher go through the list of people who signed to vote that he should stay and pick out suspicious accounts, as he raised the allegation. – Nubis ^NWO 00:03, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Maul, you can't have "proof" of the claim that it ISN'T being done. -- Amazing 02:15, 3 May 2006 (BST)

True, but irrelevant. Both claims were that something WAS being done. To quote a mutual acquaintance: "It's sad how folks like you don't know what they're talking about, but still think they're right". Sound familiar? --Jimbo Bob _ASS 07:34, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Well, can't blame them, but they're similar enough that they do look a little off. Rasher? What were yours? MaulMachine 00:09, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Err... im one of the ones listed as cheater, or just a guy making an alt account to vote amazing out. That pretty much not true, as last time i saw myself on the mirror i was not Grim S or any other user ^_^. Talking seriously, i joined the Urban Dead Wiki recently after scouting it for 1 month or so, looking at almost all pages that are not user/group owned or too deep in the wiki. As a wiki user, and pretty much a well informed one (i believe) i took the liberty of voting on that petition, not called to do so by anybody, just expressing my personal oppinion as an user. IF people thinks i should not be allowed to vote based on the amount of edits i have made, let me know so, but as far as i know, theres no rule stating such think, so my vote stands, for now... --Matthew Fahrenheit 06:25, 3 May 2006 (BST)

Also, as i work out my abilities with the wiki, i can see that Karma, Deadly Tide, JB007, Flent, Apocalypsenow, Roscoe, Pain, Sammyjayfox123 & Moon stone signed the petition on their 1st or 2nd edits, LCpl Mendoza and Gurst did it on their 6th and 4th respectively .StJiMmY made 2 edits, one in Amazing's favor and the other one vandalizing a group's page based on a copyright *cough* issue here, and this guy I.V that vandalized a lil bit too and roots for... guess who?? all in 4 edits. All this guys rooting for poor ol' Amazing, so he doesn't feel alone. And now i got tired of searching, they may be some more, but i have to work and then go sleep ^_^ Matthew Fahrenheit 06:07, 4 May 2006 (BST)

You sir have way too much time on your hands. As the friend of both flent stjimmy an I.v they are all different people well sort of...they are all brothers so i see no reason why thats against the rules and secondly the copyright *cough*issue thing, i belive he had every right to do that because it was going against the Games Work Shop copy right now unlike you sir i have better things to do--Flent 11:16, 24 May 2006 (BST)

Still not me, any of them. Did it occur that perhaps the actions of some of my detractors caused some folks to stand up and register? Heck, you guys could have pissed one person off enough for him to make multiple accounts. Still not me. Sorry. -- Amazing 06:49, 4 May 2006 (BST)

Im not trying to prove that you did anything Amazing (i say this as the 1st time im actually TALKING to you). Just helping to denote what accounts are most probably the fake ones (its unfair that all accounts pointed by Nubis are against you, so i tied the scores), and, while doing so, im proving myself as a real person ^_^. Its just odd when someone points that you do not exist. The title shouldnt be "Amazing is cheating", something like "people is cheating" wuold be more fitting to the issue--Matthew Fahrenheit 06:55, 4 May 2006 (BST)

Check the Crossman Defense Force roster and you'll see a couple are CDF members, probably roused to vote when their leader was being attacked. Another I recognize from my game, and the rest... who knows? Denoting which accounts seem fake really accomplishes nothing atm. I mean... as far as I know the Moderators can't even find out of it's true. It's just meaningless at this point. Maybe they have the ability to check IPs, I dunno. Not saying you shouldn't, just stating... well... I don't know if it's going to mean anything in the end. We also had a Log Deletion recently. A couple could have posted lightly before that. Never know. *shrug* -- Amazing 07:02, 4 May 2006 (BST)

Probably youre right. You can be a nice guy when not carried off by other guys, so why bother when they do?? you could have saved yourself a lot of trouble just ignoring some people back then (and i say "back then" but i dunno how much time "back"). I even LIKE some of your contributions, like the SGP. Now 9 out of 10 actions you take are drama-generators and/or part of this neverending flamewars. And theres no come back, you had built a reputation now, and its quite THE reputation indeed. Its a shame, but the UD Wiki right now could save itself a lot of drama with 1 user less. --Matthew Fahrenheit 07:19, 4 May 2006 (BST)

If you ever have a large-scale effort to damage your character put into effect (let's hope not) then you'll see how tough it is to maintain your reputation. If I let it go, they prance around spreading defamation without being countered. If I don't let it go, I'm an asshole for countering their defamation. It's lose-lose, but this way I get to voice my opinion instead of biting my tongue until it bleeds. These people selected me. I didn't select them. -- Amazing 05:56, 8 May 2006 (BST)

UDWiki talk:Moderation/Policy Discussion/Amazing

Contents

Voting closed

Community Announcements Link

Evidence to add against

Evidence to add in favor

Space for Discussion

Part 1

Part 2

So Sue Me

Space to Troll

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Who wrote this idiotic page

Insanity

Special Thanks

Amazing is Cheating

Navigation menu

Page actions

Page actions

Personal tools

General

Search

Resources

Wiki

Toolbox