User:Karek/ProjDev/Archives?

Content copied directly from UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Archive's source code.

Alexei Yaruk vs Katthew

Ok, I am putting this here because it doesn't look like it goes anywhere else.

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/User_talk:Katthew

There is some MAJOR profanity on that page. I want it removed, for good. If the mods would be so kind.

Sorry, users have freedom to say what they want. Also, I really don't think you want to start this thing up again... --LibrarianBrent 07:04, 30 Nov 2005 (GMT)

LB's right. Trust us, if profanity was a bannable offense around here, Katthew would probably have been banned indefinitely by now. As it stands, however, profanity is acceptable on Talk pages. Doesn't mean you should use it, of course, since it'll make you look like an arsehole, but it's not bannable, especially not on Talk pages. -- Odd Starter 09:28, 30 Nov 2005 (GMT)

Ah RATS. Well Its true I dont have to look at it... --Alexei Yaruk 18:53, 30 Nov 2005 (GMT) Ps, This arbitration is over, right?

I assume so. The conflict itself seems resolved. -- Odd Starter ^{talk | Mod} 00:34, 21 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Humorous_Suggestions & Suggestions/8th-Dec-2005

Ruining, author of the Not Have Zombies suggestion, keeps reverting the movement by ALIENwolve of this obviously-ludicrous "Modest Proposal" suggestion to Humorous_Suggestions. I believe it is necessary to move or remove this suggestion to preserve the central purpose of the Suggestions page - presenting useful ideas, so that Kevan can potentially make use of them in the game. Allowing "Not Have ____" suggestions to move all the way through the suggestion-process as a "protest action" simply opens the way for more protest-actions to be taken, and unless we wish for the serious suggestions to be buried under everything from "Not Have Survivors" to "Not Have Katthew" as everyone uses the Suggestions page to air personal grievances without including positive contributions to fix the problems they believe exist... well, we need to make sure that suggestions of that form can't go through the queue without being weeded out.

Frankly, I think this is as serious an infraction as the PK group using the old UrbanDead forum to threaten the zerging of every safehouse in the game unless Kevan personally answered their grievances. It is abuse of the purpose of the wiki setup, pure and simple. --Drakkenmaw 21:43, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I'm refraining from any further manual action. Either it is to be deleted or not. After his futile plea for attention ends its two weeks it will be deleted; seeing as how it will not be used. --ALIENwolve 21:47, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Note - I have also become aware that most of the recent Keep votes are from a long line of red named people. While I cannot check background it seems that "someone" has decided to make repeated votes. --ALIENwolve 22:42, 12 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Nothing so sinister -- these are all (well, almost all) known forum users. The suggestion got linked on the forums, so you're seeing a lot of participation by aggrieved zombie players who saw the link there and support the original point. Most of them aren't very active wiki users, so their user pages, like mine, are still red, but they're real people. -- James Holloway 01:40, 13 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I've been asked to step in.

To be honest, I think there's some usefulness in having a place for protest, that said I don't think the place for such protests is on the Suggestions queue. If Ruining does not wish for his suggestion to be marked as humourous (which may be fair), what would suit him if leaving it in the queue is unacceptable? -- Odd Starter ^{talk | Mod} 03:12, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)

A compromise was suggested (not by me) for a Grievances page. --ALIENwolve 03:57, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I appreciate the compromise solution and like it. I can not speak for the zombie hordes who, you may notice, are mostly backing the idea, nor can I speak for the leaders of the other zombie hordes, but I have spoken with Barcoded and we would like to see the vote continue for its two weeks (we're halfway there anyway), and then allow the grievances page. Would such-and-such player sux roflcot be allowed? No. Would we be able to point out injustices as perceived by a significant portion of the playerbase? Yes. If humans were outnumbered 3:1, I'd see it as the natural flow of a game about zombies, but I understand and respect the concept of a more 1:1 balance, so a swing in the other direction would certainly be cause for examination, just as we zombies feel the current situation warrants. I have nothing against applying moderational concepts to a grievances page to keep out "OMG STFU?!" type comments while valid, or at least justfiably arguable, criticisms would remain. I'll be back to proofread and/or further discuss later; I'm about to hit the airport for a flight home. But that a fair number of zombies would rather see them removed than remain in their crippled state should bring light that something's afoot that we believe needs a'fixin. -- Ruining 1108 Dec. 14, 2005 (EST)

As you are the one who suggested it, I'm going to assume that your vote is the most important one - other suggestion authors have removed their entries entirely without consulting those who voted for their idea, so I believe it's understood that you have the authority to determine what happens to it. That said, I have no problem with allowing the suggestion to run its full two weeks now that it's understood that it will be going to a separate page afterwards - I figure that if we require that any grievances must run through a voting process before going on the separate grievances page it will inherently cut down on the people who will post things in Suggestions specifically to insult one person or group. It will, basically, be just like Suggestions - only it won't be for suggestions, but instead for rare "statements" such as the one which is currently the source of this compromise. This will also give me time to set up the page properly and discuss rules and allowances with others to make sure that the compromise doesn't create more issues than it solves. Thank you, though - I believe we can call this "successfully-concluded." --Drakkenmaw 16:29, 14 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Amazing vs MaulMachine

My name is MaulMachine, and I would like to request an arbitration in my conflict against Amazing.

Okay. You'll need to give us some extra information (like, say, what the conflict is, what pages it involves, etc. Once that's done, we can start proper). -- Odd Starter ^{talk | Mod} 23:48, 23 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Amazing

LOL. I was just about to take this up as well. Check out the Discussion page for Crossman Defense Force, Liberation of Crossman Department, and DarthRevan and their history pages. You will see a history of MaulMachine slinging profane insults, deleting my comments on Discussion pages, and rampantly deleting his own in an effort to then cover up his own profanity and hot temperedness.

Information

There is a Survivor Group called Crossman Defense Force.
A Zombie group, Church of the Resurrection, attacked our home base.
A couple people formed Liberation of Crossman Department (LCD) as a result, hoping to come back and clear out the CotR.
CotR left before LCD got back.
LCD discussed killing everyone in the Crossman Grove PD. The exact phrasing escapes me, but it was because of heavy barricading of the PD which they didn't like, and they also wanted CDF and unaffiliated people on the PD to join them, leave, or die if they wouldn't do one of the first two.
CDF didn't like this, there was quite a bit of back-and-forth about it.
MaulMachine has been a thorn in my side ever since, as you can see he follows from page to page deleting my comments and replying with huge amounts of insults and profanity.

This has happened in cases that did not concern him. Once when I was talking with someone in another Zombie group (OMEN) at which point he interrupted and caused grief -- And Once when I was leaving a message to his "Superior" in LCD (DarthRevan) and he decided to delete it before she ould come back and read it.

I have requested that he not deal with me and CDF stuff. His own Leader has asked him the same.

He refuses. This is just a game and not so important that he needs to resort to personal insult and profanity at the drop of a hat.

He has even followed me to my message boards and posted insults there and interfered. He is not even a member of the player group I am in.. why is he following me around and interjecting?

This amounts to low-level stalking and antagonism with the sole purpose of annoying and insulting me because he feels that he is somehow in charge of all these silly game matters.

It's quite tiresome. I would appreciate it if he could somehow be stricken from posting on CDF and "Amazing" related pages on the Wiki. Then I just have to deal with him when he edits and smears on other pages.. he really does not need to be bringing this crap to my feet, however. -- Amazing 00:00, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Edit: - You can clearly see below that MM is full of lies, half-truths, and insults. I don't really need to say any more about that. All I offer though is links to clear proof of the specific lies he has placed upon this page. I know you guys are busy so I'm willing to drudge through the edit history and Wiki pages in hopes I can be rid of this once and for all. -- Amazing 04:12, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Sidenote: - I guess I edited this while he was posting more and more. I have witnesses from Crossman PD who will attest that MM is lying about most of the events concerning "Game Moderator". I NEVER used profanity, and I never gave him some time limit in which to leave the building. Also, he did claim Game Moderator was a PKer, as his own troops can attest should they be called upon. I'm not going to edit any more here because I assume he'll be posting a lot more and I can pick it all apart ad nauseum. Just ask me if you want any more info and I'll oblige, until then I'll sit back and prepare the proof. -- Amazing 04:17, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)

(Have to post once more for this: Part of the above has been admitted to by MaulMachine in the face of evidence and I guess is no longer an issue.) -- Amazing 04:57, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Evidence

I present this clearly tremendously abusive message unedited as was placed in responce to one of my posts. MaulMachine removed it a short time later. This goes to his character as well as contradictions in his own words. Pay special attention to his mention of PKing "Game Moderator" and you can see the differences between his statements. -- Amazing

Now you listen you mindless little attention whore, I've had enough of your mouth. Now you either stop lying and insulting me, or you explain these baseless accusations. Game Moderator threatened to have me banned. How does that make him innocent? I was there when he came whining into CGPD, begging for your protection like I had done something wrong. When somebody, ANYBODY, comes into a meeting and threatens a ban, I get to complain about it. If you ever again so deliberately ignore the facts in persuit of your own little fantasies, so help me God I'm going to take it straight to Kevan. Get your facts straight. When Game Moderator came into Goodson,he immediately posted a message saying that we were all banned as of 12/14. Now if that isn't a threat, I don't know what is. I did not order a "hit," as you so stupidly put it, I simply said that IF HE DOES IT AGAIN, then he is to be headshotted and dumped. That is what I said, and you can quote me on that. Now, I don't know who this Jeff person is supposed to be, and I really don't give a flying fuck. Trying to go around me and complain to my superiors for the simple reason of petty vengeance is mindless and whiny. You sound like a little idiot. If I EVER catch you trying to ruin my reputaion like this again, then I will be forced to remind you that this is a fucking GAME, and that you and I and Cortonna and Rhombus are all just facelss little players. I don't CARE what you have to say anymore, I don't give a flying FUCK what you think about me or my stance on the CDF anymore. I can stand PKing, i can stand pranks, but I cannot and WILL NOT stand such lies and unsportsmanlike conduct. You will IMMEDIATELY apologize for these senseless and hurtful remarks, you will IMMEDIATELY stop your mindless slander and libel of myself and the orgaization I temporarily control, you will post this so-called conversation with administration you mention in your wiki discussion page,and you will stop the mindless propaganda against us in your said wiki page. I am sick and tired of having to fight a lack of control and supplies, endless waves of zombies, incompetant moderation, and your mindless tirades all at the same time. Have I made myself anything less than CRYSTAL FUCKING CLEAR?! --MaulMachine 23:27, 14 Dec 2005 (EST)

MaulMachine

MaulMachine, please place your side of the story under this header. Up until the part where he actually mentions me, he is not wrong. However, when he says that I "followed" him to his boards, this is a lie. The link was posted in public wiki, and I went to the site before hthis unpleasantness started.

- First off, I would note that when the CDF/LCD confict about the possible return of LCD to Crossman settled down, I asked him on the wiki if it would be all right if my men came back and idled. His exact response was I'm sure there will be no problem with that at all. -- Amazing 23:13, 18 Nov 2005 (GMT) Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but I see no profanity on either part there. Now, as for the NEMO matter, you continue to shw your ignorance and utter lack of research by continuing to call the group OMEN. They are called NEMO. OMEN is simply a subgroup of the group. I would also point out that you claimed that 'OMEN' was PKing your troops within Crossman. In response to this, I was personnaly dispatched to Crossman by Cortonna, my at-the-time leader within LCD to kill the NEMOs within. This I did, and I also killed a MotA spy inside. After killing them and reading your repeated statements on your wiki page that OMEN and NEMO were pking your men and the other crossmen were doing nothing about it, I told you that I was there to help and you thanked me. This is where what you say happened and what really happened begin to diverge. I went to the OMEN and NEMO homepage, www.galacticnemos.com (I think that's it) and did a bit of research. I read of them and their past exploits, and discovered that the PKing they had done was began when you or one of yours actually killed one of them for no apparent reason. I do not know if this is true, but it seemd so. I came back to the wiki full of this knowledge, and I admit, a bit of presumption, and declared on the CDF wiki that there had been a great misunderstanding. I had, up until now, not said anything inflammatory or profane.

In fact, what I said was nothing short of a plea for all three or four of the involved groups to stop fighting and talk. You, with absolutely no reason whatsoever, said that I was "interfering," and "pandering to the enemy," and in fact went so far as to insult me by calling me a, and I quote: "DISGRACE TO HUMANITY." I, shocked at this rudeness, responded on the CDF private forum indignantly, again using no profanity, and listed a number of things I hoped would not happen between our various groups. You and another member of the CDF, Zod Rhombus, replied saying that I did not speak for the CDF anymore, and that you wanted a war with NEMO, though you continued to call it by the incorrect and more apocalyptic name of OMEN. The only reason I can think of for this misunderstanding is that you found it to be the more intimidating of the two names.

I responded, angrily this time, by saying that I was well aware of the fact that i no longer spoke for the CDF, and in fact had never claimed to. NEMO's representative and one of the ones killed by the belated CDF purge, deadgonzoman, a man of some standing ithin the NEMO heirarchy, sent me a note saying the following, and i replied as thus:

Re: Attempt at diplomacy

Sent to: deadgonzoman on: December 02, 2005, 11:24:02 PM

--- Quote from: deadgonzoman MaulMachine,

This is an attempt at diplomacy. Before casting its final vote the NEMO council has asked that I speak to you. I think you know what my stance is but I always respect the wishes of the NEMO majority and will do as they ask. You seem like a nice guy. But there are a few pricks in your midst that I really have a woody for.

1. Cease all NEMO related slander from your group.

2. Remove NEMO and any of its members from any kill on site lists.

3. Amazing is to delete negative comments about NEMO and post an apoligy in its place.

4. Quit killing inoccent civilians of any group unless you are attacked.

I have asked all NEMOs to pull out of your area temporarily to remove any misguided interpretation of a threat by any of your members. I have asked them to remain untagged and at least 10 clicks away from your groups positions. It might interest you to know that I was loosing the vote.,roughly 20% before Amazing started talking out of his ass. The vote is now at 46%. Twenty NEMO elders have withheld thier vote untill you have a chance to show this sign of good faith. Those 20 elders have the power to give me the 51% majority needed to declare a full NEMO collective war if I choose to do so.

-Deadgonzoman

Well...I appreciate this. I could never ask this of the Many or the RRR... Anyway, Amazing, you must remember, is not part of our group. Or perhaps I should say, we are not part of his. He is a member of a group called the Crossman Defence Force. He is neither its leader, founder, nor designated spokesman. I am a member of a splinter group called the Liberation of Crossman Department. I am the second in command and the designated spokesman, and the ranking field commander...though I have temporarily acceeded that post to another. TO be honest, the only reason I so adamantly protested is that he is an abrasive ass who is a known PKer. This is not the case of the populace of Crossman, or either group...he just is an asshole who 'til now has gone unchecked. the CDF is a reviver group...for all I know,they do not want a war and would retreat if one were to be declared. We, the LCD, are a different matter in that we would probably not retreat. We have no need, for we are not dumb enough to keep all of our Nectecs in one place. In fact, we don't even HAVE any men in Crossman right now...it's nothing but CDF idlers, most of them n00bs, joining only so they can be on the wiki. The real reason I dislike the thought of NEMOS in CGPD is because we draw supplies and recruits from there...but we have been attacked by larger gangs (larger, not necesarily better...and I have no wish to repeat the last LCD-CDF vs some horde incident...). LCD and CDF have different tactics, different troops, different bases, and different leaders. If you want a war, talk to a soldier called Exo2000 (CDF chief) or Amazing himself. Now, the reason Amazing killed one of yours was because someone said that that man/men PKed one of his. I have no clue if this is right, just reporting the news. Just know that if you do attack CGPD...LCD will not be there. We aren't even in that suburb right now, if you want to know. Neither is Amazing, or Zod Rhombus, I bielieve. Hit Crossman now and you will be attacking an empty shell. So...do what you want. Thanks for the wire...

MaulMachine, Chief Tactical Commander, LCD

"OMGwtfBBQ!1" Someone smart

PS You may not know this, but Minions of Apocalypse also has spies in Crossman. Perhaps you should ask if they know WTF is happening.

As you can see, despite the fact that this is a private message, I share it willingly.

Then, Amazing came onto the LCD wiki and posted this bullshit:

To all who may be worried or interested: There won't actually be a war. MM is taking an argument to the extreme and being alarmist. This amounts to two guys in a bar starting to have cross words, and a third guy running over and shouting: "FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!" before screaming out of the room with his hands over his head. Furthermore anyone dissatisfied with the notion of running away from zombies can scoot on over to the Crossman Defense Force page and join up with the original group if they're made of tougher stuff. -- Amazing 03:31, 30 Nov 2005 (GMT)

This is clearly meant to undermine my position and is an obvious lie.

Now, onto the rest of the story. Zod Rhombus, who until this point I had held in relatively high regard, continued to insult me personally, as did Amazing. I finally heeded their requests for a withdrawal, and left the CDF wiki page to plan an attack on Ridleybank. This is when a most unfortunate point came into play. It was on the evening of the 13th of December when a player by the name of Game Moderator came into the building I was located in, along with the majority of my men, and said

Game Moderator said "Your account has been banned for 24 hours starting 12/14/2005 Please take this time to get your character to safety. "

This is the exact message that was found in my HQ building. Taking it seriously, I asked that the remaining LCD confirm if they had also seen the message. They responded in the affirmative, and when I asked if they could see his profile, they responded that he had joined in late November, and that it was obviously a fake. On the 14th, when nothing happened, I indignantly ordered the LCD to kill Game Moderator on sight if he were seen again, and said that he was to be executed for sabotage. I did not say that he was to be killed for PKing however...indeed, nobody present did. Having said this, I went to the adjacent Crossman Grove PD to stock up on supllies...and who did i find but Game Moderator, whinging about how I had "threatended to PK" him, to quote him, and that I was being a big mean bully. I am not paraphrasing the languadge, that is almost exactly what he said. Clearly, he was unaware that I was there. Amazing's response was :" All right, Game Moderator, as opf now, you are under our protection from the LCD. MaulMachine, leave the building within 50 hours" (or some time amount like that) "or die." Zod Rhombus chimed in, saying that my "PKing" was uncalled for and that our grouyps would never be allies again. I told them what had happened, and posted a quote from the problem on Kevan's wiki page, asking if such a Moderator even existed. Kevan's respons and my follow-up comments were as such:

Is this legit? Because I have done nothing wrong...

1. Game Moderator said " Your account has been banned for 24 hours starting 12/14/2005 Please take this time to get your character to safety. " (12-14 02:28 GMT)

--MaulMachine 21:46, 13 Dec 2005 (EST)

Ah. No, it's not, it's just someone who chose Game Moderator as a character name. There are no in-game moderators. --Kevan 03:36, 20 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Kevan's words: "And I've no idea who MaulMachine is," You're a liar, and the proof is on your own Wiki page. Wow. -- Amazing 02:57, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Did you just call us both liars? --MaulMachine 22:29, 22 Dec 2005 (EST)

As you can see, Amazing is clearly referring to some "conversation" that he had had with either the real moderators or Kevan himself. It is to be noted that he had referred to this conversation in the past, in the context of wanting me dead or kicked out of Crossman. After a night or two, Amazing began screaming at me in Crossman, claiming that I was "conspiring to get him banned" and that I had "banned" two players, whom i assumed to be Game Moderator and someone else. When I said that I had not banned anyone, and I said that I had not banned Game Moderator, Amazing responded with this crap here: "Wow. I never said Game Moderator. Whatr an astounding coincidnece. Heh heh heh." Please note that this is a direct quote from him. When I demanded an explanation, he said that I had gone out of my way to get his "little brother" banned, along with someone named "Jeff." When I said that I had done no such thing and that I did not know who this person named Jeff was, he responded by calling me a filthy liar and a "meddler," and then accusing me of everything from lying to the LCD and the Crossmen to incite a war to wiki tampering to cheating and right back again, and when I repsonded that he needs to back these comment up if he wants to avoid a war, he told me, using much profanity, that I was "confusing the issue."

At this point, I lost any and all control. At this point, I lost any and all control. I posted angrily, calling names. I had done all I could to stop Amazing's rampant lies and childish information obscuring, his anti LCD meanderings and his lunatiuc claims. I had had enough, and I angrily spoke within Crossman, declaring that I had had enough lies. I told the now-silent CDF that if they did not retract their mindless ramblings, it would be war in fifty hours. No sooner had I said this than I was PKed and dumped. I have had enough of this mindless propagandistic bullcrap from the CDF. I demand an immediate and respectful explanation of his threats, a transcript of this quoted but never-seen conversation with Kevan, and a withdrawal of the empty claims on Cortonna's wiki page. Now. --MaulMachine 23:26, 22 Dec 2005 (EST)

Edit: I also wish to state that I have not lied once on this entire page, and that I hae noted any and all confusion about times, dates, and websites. Amazing, I have also stated REPEATEDLY that I do not wish this conflict, and that all I have ever wanted is an explanation. All you are doing is making my case stronger by posting links to the sites. I suggest that you do as I ask. If you really have done nothing wrong, why do you continue to deny me the goddamned Admin conversation?! You have quoted it, now show me the whole thing! I'm not asking much! I refuse to be blamed for something I didn't do, especially since you refuse to show me where you are getting this from. Also, who is this LCD you are blathering on about on my messages page? I have heard no such thing. --MaulMachine 23:33, 22 Dec 2005 (EST)

Edit 2: My apologies, it appears I DID, in fact, call GM a PKer. I sincerely apologize for this uncharacteristic lapse of memory. I still hold to the remainder of my statements though.

Odd starter, what did you do? o_O

He organized it. Your evidence is quite messy. --ALIENwolve 22:10, 24 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Zod Rhombus reply

Sorry to interrupt, but since I was implicated in the incident, I only thought it fair to respond. As far as any personal attacks are concerned, you will see all of my comments are on the CDF wiki page, unedited. I was as diplomatic as possible given the situation. I have never posted on the LCD wiki. I see Amazing as being abrupt at times and I don't always agree with him. I just wanted to show a united front to wiki users instead of the squabbling and personal attacks from BOTH sides that doesn't need to be on the wiki. As far as the Conversations in the CDF HQ that MaulMachine refers to, I have SAVED the transcripts. I asked him politely to leave -"MaulMachine, I believe it is best for you to leave the PD until this mess is sorted out." There was no mention of PKing him, only his answer--"So you're saying you'll kill me if I dont' leave?" to which there was no response. This conspiracy to PK him was concocted in his own head. MaulMachine was PKed by Evan Zero, in a strange twist that did not involve the CDF. I don't think Zero is an alt of anyone in the CDF, since he has repeatly PKed one of our leaders, Exo 2000. I don't see how the CDF can be held accountable. Evan Zero was questioned before he was killed and gave a reason for PKing Maul. I immediately went to LCD HQ to let them know of the incident. MaulMachine consistently demands answers and 'yells' in the CDF HQ, where he has no right to. I think Amazing and MaulMachine's personal squabbles need resolution, and MaulMachine not postinf on our wiki is a good start. --Zod Rhombus 00:15, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Seperated from Zod's post to keep it nice and neat and so that Moderators can choose to read this or not based on their preference. It gets pretty sordid from here.. and now the moved replies to Zod's post:

Evans isn't one of yours. I know. See on the wiki where I thanked you for the quick addition to the enemies list? :P --MaulMachine CHRISTMAS EVE, AMERICA (EST)

Your write-up above is a bit misleading in that you've made it sound like the PKing was a result of what you said. A lot of what you have posted is out of context, like my calling you an embarassment to humanity, in-game humanity and you had called me an embarassment right before that. But the Arbitrator can and will go see that for themselves. -- Amazing 18:18, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Didn't read the whole thing, did you? I specifically said that I knew Evans wasn't one of yours. --MaulMachine 15:06, 25 Dec 2005 (EST)

You have a problem with comprehending. I said "In your write-up above". Your words: "I told the now-silent CDF that if they did not retract their mindless ramblings, it would be war in fifty hours. No sooner had I said this than I was PKed and dumped." In your write-up above. Take your own advice and read. Take a moment to sit back and ingest the information, THEN reply. this is getting maddening. -- Amazing 21:32, 25 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Where did I mention you in the second sentence? Not once did I say he was yours. NOT ONCE. --MaulMachine 22:13, 25 Dec 2005 (EST)

Your convenient omission of who the PKer was in your original write-up alluded to it being related to your statement against CDFers.. And you know that. ;) Don't bother back-peddling on the omissions or the outright lies. There are witnesses and Wiki history pages that will just make it a waste of time. -- Amazing 03:17, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I'm not lying. And I apologize for the confusion. You go right ahead and look through the pages, and you will find all the lies fall squarely on your side of the equation. I have had enough of you. Odd Starter, how long does this process take? --MaulMachine 23:31, 25 Dec 2005 (EST)

I've already proven you wrong several times. I'll save the rest for when/if asked by the Mods, I suppose we've mucked up this page enough. I'd push for a Ban for you if lying and cursing up a storm were against the rules, but really I suppose they aren't. All you could be banned for is Vandalization, but I don't consider that a bannable offence unless malicious. Give Odd Starter a break, it's the Holidays for crap's sake. -- Amazing 05:11, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I haven't vandalized anything. At all. The conversation that took place between us was carried out on the CDF page because of convinience, and, funny, I didn't hear you complaining then. Also, you will notice, that you are the only one who has used any profanity beyond a simple emphatical outburst since this little arbitration started, and, hey, whaddaya know, I haven't lied. At all. In fact, on the very small handfull of occasions that I have been confronted with something, I have admitted, with all the appropriate humility and apology, to being wrong. I have not lied, you can not prove I did, and you were the last one to post on my talk page, without my approval. In fact, since this started, I have not made one single post on the CDF page, while you have the audacity to post on MY LCD talk page, and actually issue an order to my men. I have had enough of your presumptuous little backtalk, and I would greatly appreciate it if you would stop posting this libelous crud, stop issuing my men orders, and kept your little taunts and insult to someone who gives a damn, because as soon as this little conflict is over, whether they rule in my favor or not, you better believe that whatever last, tiny, lingering bit of repsect I might have once had for you will fly away like sand in a high wind. Are we anything less than perfectly clear? Do not presume to post your libelous, slanderous little quips on this page again, especially since they CLEARLY have no purpose except to rouse me against you. Now, I admit, though I do find your persistance in what I can only hope to be persuit of the truth to be an admirable and mutally shared virtue, your incessant whinging and implied complaints of foul play on my behalf are growing wearysome and repetitive. If you have any new accusations, be they your usual baseless ones or something with a bare hint of truth behind them or not, I would kindly ask that you keep them to your own section of the page, and stop cluttering mine up. Got it? Good. --MaulMachine 00:28, 26 Dec 2005 (EST)

PS... Merry Christmas from Stanstock.

You vandalized the talk pages by removing my posts. (There's one of your lies.) You have used tons of profanity, even on this page. (There's one of your lies.) I have not used profanity aside from the word "piss" if that's considered. (There's one of your lies.) Being confronted with proof you lied and then retreating does not mean you never lied in the first place. I can prove you lied though witness testimony. You claimed I said things I never said, and others can attest to that. I never issued any orders to your "men". (There's one of your lies.) Come out of the game for a second. You're not a Military General. You have no "Men". You are a dude sitting on a computer typing, and you're not even the "leader" of this group you're speaking of anyway, which makes it all the more surreal to hear you rant and rave so insanely.

Also, don't assume I care what you think of me, much less what you think about anything else. If you have any remote iota of respect for me, fine - that's a lot more than I have for you, liar.

This isn't your section of the page, this is Zod Rhombus'. Please try to keep things straight in your brain and don't speak unless you comprehend things. It just makes you look worse and worse, liar. -- Amazing 05:47, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Every single word of that is a lie. First off, if you had actually read the pages you linked to, you would know that I am in fact the leader of LCD group. So you lied then. I removed my posts on the CDF pages, not yours. (As I recall) I have used no profanity that I did not explain. So you lied then. I have not made up a single quote on the page. So there's another lie of yours. I did not "retreat," I corrected a simple mistake. We both make them. So...there's another lie of yours. You said on the CDF page that I was "destroying the mutual respect." So there's another lie of yours. You have once more quoted that you have witness testimony. Once again, you quote it but do not show it. I am growing tired of your lies, and despite my requests...you continue to pour your ceaseless crap on my section of the page. You just said, less than thirty minutes ago, on the LCD page, that editing wiki is not something I can stop you from doing, it, quote "it all comes down to honoring requests not to." This is something you seem not to be able to do. Way to go. Now shut up. I have had enough of your prattle for one night. --I_think_you_all_know_who_I_am_By_now... 00:57, 26 Dec 2005 (EST)

As much as you think you're a military leader, you can't order people to "Shut up" or tell them not to post on LCD or DarthRevan's "talk" pages.. crazy.. lol Anyway, all your comments are pretty obvious bullhockey, so really I guess you're just been given enough rope to hang yourself. I am starting to think you are either clinically insane, or 8 years old.

Moderators.. I don't think Arbitration can do anything to fix this. It's just a matter of Maul being insanely creative in fabricating fantasy worlds, and me being too pig-headed to just sit back and let him lie about me. I should be the better person and do that, I guess... let the baby have his bottle. Oh, well. -- Amazing 06:02, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)

So, now that I have categorically proved your allegations to be false, you retreat to the familiar ground of personal insults and attempts to make me look bad. Well done. I am astounded...dare I say it...Amazed?...at your continuing lack of any attempts to consider any viewpoints other than your own. Why is it that you cannot return the courtesy that I have extended you, and accept that nobody is right all the time? I have done nothing but argue in a civilized manner, while you fabricate elaborate but transparent libel in an attempt to discredit me. Wow. And you have the audacity to call me childish, to call me a baby? You and your allegations are absolutely absurd. I cannot see how such a simple misundterstanding over the orientation of a third party could have possible escalated into such a bloody argument. I cannot understand how a member of our shared community such as yourself can be so blind and wilfully oblivious to the truth. Haw can you be so flippant and insulting in the face of the truth? You have manufactured asinine quotes and blustered on about STILL as-of-yet unproduced conversations and witnesses. You have concocted wild conspiracies and unprovoked insult upon myself and my organization. Your arguments are childish, your method is crude at best and your online manners are nonexistant. You have had the gall to personally and indirectly alike insult me with uncalled-for jabs at my memory lapses, to which, I point out for the mods, I have not responded in kind...why do you prolong this needless conflist with your pointless bickering? I find myself truly flabbergasted by your endless tirade of insults and trivial responses. You have truly cast aside any respect I may have still harbored towards you. Congratulations, you have revealed yourself as the petulant little child I had discovered you to be, such a painfully short time ago. Until such time that the mods finally take action to resolve this conflict, I respectfully request that you stop posting...again...on any and all linked pages except to carry out routine messages, a gesture to which I shall respond in kind. Any faliure to respond to this effortless, on your part, measure to restore some measure of dignity to this proceeding will be viewed in my eye as yet another lapse in your already lacking internet manners. I am asking, not that you produce reams of data to support any claim,nor that you produce any new, undoubtedly manufactured "evidence" of my alledged "lies," only that you and I both stop this clearly pointless discussion until a neutral third-party come to do the job for which this page was created...namely, moderation and arbitration. All I am asking for is silence. That's all. I assure you, if you keep quiet, I will be more than happry to do so as well. Thank you. As for the evidence you have produced, specifically, the nastygram I wrote on the 14th, if you would have done the courtesy of producing the nameof the page on which it was posted, as well as its context, it would be clear what and why this message is. I do not deny its existance, nor do I deny the angry spirit in which I created it, but I would like to point out to you that I made this post in response to your declaration earlier that I was to leave Crossman and not return,and that you did not and still have not produced a shred of evidence as to a reason for your demand. Still waiting, Amazing...produce the evidence upon which the statement this quote is based on, and perhaps I will reconsider. --MaulMachine 01:22, 26 Dec 2005, (EST)

(sigh).. Do I need to remind you AGAIN that you're not a real military commander and can't make orders to provide you with anything? If the Mods want my private conversations then fine, but really you're being insane and obsessive about it.

This all started because you're a hot-head with a loose grasp on reality, and I don't just abide it. Once more, you are not a military commander. You cannot order me to produce anything you will then crap on.

I am done producing evidence and proving you a complete filthy liar. Here's a chage.. Why don't you produce one shred of evidence supporting anything you have said? -- Amazing 06:31, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)

All discussion on this topic will cease immediately. I will take a day or two to read through the matter and review the evidence, and I will come to my conclusion shortly. No one is to continue discussing on this page. -- Odd Starter ^{talk | Mod} 06:36, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)

To set the record straight, I'm not affiliated with any groups. My attack was completely random. I don't remember the details, but there was alot of arguing and complaining going on in that building, mostly directed at MaulMachine, so I just killed him and left. It was around the time I started PKing, because I got bored with killing zombies or being one. If you don't believe this is actually Evan Zero I'm sure we can find a way to prove it. I'm currently a zombie at the Maine Building in Peppardville. Sorry about the mess.--Evanzero 04:55, 3 August 2006 (BST)

Odd Starter's Conclusion

Before I start, note that I'm only a Moderator for the wiki, not for the game. Any hope that I can "force" MaulMachine to do something within the game is misguided, since I have no authority there. As Kevan himself stated on his talk page, there are no game moderators. Period.

In reality, this entire debacle seems to be a clear example of what happens when two players cannot keep their in-game differences in-game. To be honest, both of you are very clearly perpetuating this yourselves (as evidenced by the little spat above (There is no need to reply to the other's accusations, since I have the entire wiki at my hands to confirm whatever is being said)), and I think this has gone far past the point of discussion to reconcile, and is firmly in the territory of an argument to win.

Frankly, this whole argument seems somewhat petty. If either of you are truly interesting in stopping this spat, then stop it. Right now. Don't exchange any other harsh words. I'm not going to enforce a restraining order (because I think that's rather childish, difficult to enforce, and not my job anyway), I'm going to expect that the two of you are going to drop this and walk away. If at some point the two of you feel the need to talk with each other, I'd highly recommend doing so with utmost courtesy, regardless of the reaction of the other.

Thus is my decision.

Odd Starter ^{talk | Mod} 21:33, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)

This was suggested to be brought to Abritration by LibrarianBrent, not by either of us.
I never asked anyone here to do anything to MaulMachine in-game.
I've noted I didn't think Abritration had any use in the matter.
I never asked you for a restraining order, just that you could maybe ask him to stay away from me. I know how a Wiki works and I know you probably can't specifically force him not to post on any given page through any other means than verbally.

Thanks for taking the time to check all this out anyway. I wish that the idea that I can walk away from it and he won't follow me was a valid one. As you know from what you've seen, I've tried that before.

One of the duties of a Moderator, either implied or expressly stated, is to prevent abusive behavior. This duty has now been flatly ignored. Either he is abusive, I am abusive, or we both are.

Vandalism of my posts on Discussion pages has also been flatly ignored. -- Amazing 22:41, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Well, among other things that was more a symptom than anything else. It's also a vandalism, and thus should be reported to Moderation/Vandal Banning with the evidence. I'll look into it, see if your case has merit. -- Odd Starter ^{talk | Mod} 05:32, 28 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Looking into your case, I find it... suspect. If you are referring to this edit, I think you will find that it was not targeted at you at all, but was apparently a maintenance blanking. Further, while blanking talk pages is considered rude, it's not actually considered vandalism. I further note that if this is the case you are referring to, then you have not reverted it back (or done anything else to make the conversation more visible), thus I must assume that this blanking was performed with your implicit blessing.

If you are referring to this edit, This may very well be a candidate, with the issue that once the conversation was restored no further action was taken on MaulMachine's behalf. Thus, more likely a faux pas then a malicious edit. If he had continued further, perhaps. I see no grounds for warning or banning. -- Odd Starter ^{talk | Mod} 05:51, 28 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Thanks for taking a look at it, at least. If it happens again I'll post it on the vandal page, but since this was brought to Abritration I figured we were supposed to post all our grievances concerning eachother. I was surprised to find no mention of it in the previous ruling. Not reverting does not imply blessing - just as not replying to someone's post does not imply agreement, which will be a road I will have to take from now on, I guess. There was at least one other deletion by MaulMachine or page blanking, by the way. As I said I was willing to give more info/links if asked, but wasn't asked. -- Amazing 05:55, 28 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Not the outcome I was expecting, but I will abide by it. Any attempts to contact you, Amazing, will be resrained to IC discussions, and any conversations that are OOC will be held in public domain. And, of course, our mutual requests for no more wiki editing will be held to the case of an emergency. Fair enough, Odd? --MaulMachine 20:47, 26 Dec 2005,(EST)

Unbelievable. No sooner do I post this than I spy this garbage on the LCD talk page.

Your post refers to me as "You" so it was to me. Nice try but you're still a liar. You cannot vandalize a page by posting comments on a discussion page. Go ahead and try.

Since the Moderators have ignored their duty to prevent abusive behavior, I guess I'm free and clear to call you a malicious little turd with no Earthly value beyond a paper-weight.

You're an idiot and a loser who most likely has nothing going for him except for the temporary command of a UD player group. Get a life. You're less than a speck of dirt on the backside of a pig. When Cortonna gets back I will lobby full-force for your dismissal from LCD, lest our groups be considered adversaries.

Go to Hell, tiny-brained idiot. -- Amazing 22:48, 26 Dec 2005 (GMT)

I will not stand for this, especially since this was posted after both your decision and his reply. I have taken all I will stand. This goes beyond the realm of argument into flaming. I hereby request Amazing's ban for vandalism and personal insult,as well as an oath that this animosity not lead into ingame reprisal. I have had enough. --MaulMachine 20:53, 26 Dec 2005 (EST)

EDIT ONE: Nice. Not only has he defaced my page with this garbage, he has asked onb his group's wiki page for players to "monitor" my activity and has accused me harassment and unethical behavior, of which I have done neither. I refuse to allow this. EDIT TIME: 20:57 26 Dec 2005 (EST)

Ok, you want a 3rd party choice? I think both of you are idiots and that Amazing should start a slap duel between you two. Take it like a man and ignore him. --ALIENwolve 02:00, 27 Dec 2005 (GMT)

Are you a mod? The mod list says you aren't. So go away and let a mod consider my request. --MaulMachine 21:06, 26 Dec 2005 (EST)

Personal insult, I think you'll find, is not a bannable offense, and is in fact not our problem currently. Also, the group page is currently his, and wiki policy, while currently in discussion about this very issue, states that he is in the clear by adding this to his own group page. Thus, I have no grounds upon which to warn or ban him. -- Odd Starter ^{talk | Mod} 05:27, 28 Dec 2005 (GMT)

K. --MaulMachine 00:40, 28 Dec 2005 (EST)

Amazing vs Bentley Foss

One only need check out his Talk page and my Talk page, along with the Suggestion discussion page, Zaruthustra's talk page, and that zany WCDZ page.

He has also committed at least one act of vandalism by deleting my reply to one of his votes from the main suggestion page. He then moved it to the Discussion page with his own rants where fewer people would ever know it existed.

I'd appreciate a warning for abusive/trolling/flaming behavior as well as harassment. This may not be a bannable offence, of course, but you're more than able to twart flame-wars before they get out of hand. -- Amazing 18:18, 7 Jan 2006 (GMT)

I'll make a decision after Bentley posts his side of this story, as per the Arbitration guidelines. --LibrarianBrent 19:34, 7 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Domo Arigato. To keep it clear I'm not looking for any massive reprocussions or anything in my bringing this here, but I'd prefer this didn't spread any further since it seems to have 'infected' multiple pages as it is. -- Amazing 21:47, 7 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Just a quick reply, because I'm about to head out for the day

I was under the impression that Talk pages were exempt from Arbitration, as per the Moderation/Policy_Discussion#Insults_and_Language in the Locational Language/Interaction and Free Language/Interaction sections. If I've misinterpreted the rules regarding personal talk pages, please let me know. Everything should still be up on my talk page if you need to see it.

Aside from the personal talk pages, we have the discussion page discussion. In the short and simple version, I said "Here are lots of valid reasons why your suggestion is a bad idea", and got counter-arguments such as "everyone's just being a stupid dick", "Bitchy McWhiner", "Try not being a stupid little kid", "lame-ass", and whatnot. When the suggestion was still on the main page, following the customs of all such extended discussions in recent memory, I moved the four or five replies to the talk page and provided a link telling people that they could follow our enlightening discussion on the talk page. This is the "act of vandalism" to which he referred.

I have to get going for now. If you need any more information, just drop me a note and let me know.

quick edit a couple minutes later Oh yeah, the original suggestion over which this all arose can be found here.

Bentley Foss 20:24, 7 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Response: Talk pages are NOT exempt from Arbitration. In fact, most Arbitration evidence is based on information found on talk pages. The Locational/Free Language/Interaction proposals have not been fully decided upon, and merely state that insulting people is allowed (i.e. won't get you banned). --LibrarianBrent 21:06, 7 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Please provide a link to the fully decided upon rules, because to be quite honest, I have not found them. I thought the things I linked to were the rules. Thanks. Bentley Foss 07:05, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)
- Well... Currently there are no fully decided upon rules. That's why it's still on Policy Discussion - we're still awaiting input from the community. -- Odd Starter ^{talk | Mod} 07:11, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)
  - Eh...something doesn't seem quite right about that, but eh, oh well. If that's the way things are. Thanks. Bentley Foss 07:15, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Arbitrator Decision

In this case, it is entirely obvious that Bentley Foss, as well as Daxx, is being consistently antagonistic and insulting towards Amazing. In particular, his actions on the Talk:Suggestions page are outrageous and irresponsible, and his use of a group page to insult other contributors to the wiki is completely inappropriate. Bentley claimed that he had "said lots of valid reasons why Amazing's suggestion was a bad idea", whereas in reality, he had created a section on the discussion page entitled "Let the destruction of Amazing commence". Although Amazing's own responses could certainly be considered rude, they are obviously provoked by Bentley's outrageous conduct. Bentley Foss and Daxx are hereby directed to STOP their harassment of Amazing, and REMOVE all antagonistic content from currently-existing pages. Failure to comply with this judgement will result in banning, as dictated by the Arbitration guidelines. --LibrarianBrent 06:18, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)

I took down everything on my talk page and on the suggestion discussion page. Everything else was either gone before I got there or on Amazing's page, and I'll let him handle that task himself. Bentley Foss 07:23, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)
Also, can I assume I'm still free to vote on his suggestions when they appear (and have extended reasons on the discussion page, if required to make a point) as long as I make it "wiki-neutral" or whatever the term is? Bentley Foss 07:12, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Yes, of course. Just stop harassing him. --LibrarianBrent 18:07, 8 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Amazing vs. MaulMachine again..

Linky! As you can see MaulMachine deleted an unfavorable post because he did not appreciate the content. This is a case-in-progress, as I am asking another from my group to re-post the info so it's not ME posting it. If he deletes the second post I will probably ask for a ruling on this. -- Does this belong in the vandal banning area? -- Amazing 03:47, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Blow-by-Blow Update: He just edited my User page (not the talk page) to slam me. Linky! -- Amazing 03:53, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Moved it here. -- Amazing 05:22, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Ergh. He's been warned twice for vandalizing your page and the other talk page, if he does this again he'll be banned. --LibrarianBrent 05:31, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Much obliged. Sorry to take up Mod time yet again. :\ -- Amazing 05:33, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)

It looks like Maul Machine just posted a comment to the Amazin's User page instead of User_Talk, by mistake. Once, and without an edit war. Hardly banning-offence vandalism, unless I've missed something. --Spiro 06:01, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)

In this instance I believe (correct me if I am wrong) that the history of behavior is being taken into account along with the fact that MaulMachine is a long-time poster who knows the difference between what he's doing and what he's supposed to do in terms of Wiki comment placement. As I say there was a previous case in which both he and I were chastised for bickering obnoxiously and beyond the limits of proper Wiki usage. Taking that into account, MaulMachine's removal of a comment on a page that isn't even his ABOUT a person that wasn't even him, coupled with the fact that he made up a fake Moderator Ruling, coupled with the fact that he went to my page to post on the front page instead of where he was supposed to makes for the case as a whole. If that didn't make sense, blah! heh. -- Amazing 06:37, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Now if I could just stop Daxx from doing similar content-driven deletions. :\ -- Amazing 06:41, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Response

I need hardly point out that until this time, I had refrained from posting on Amazing or CDF pages because of the ruling. I would also point out that Amazing posted on the LCD talk page calling one of our men a "little shit", and has now declared me an enemy of his group for absolutely no reason at all. As for the allegation that I have "helped" the Mall Tour...OF COURSE I DID. One of my characters has Brain Rot. Is it a crime to play as a zombie now? Amazing, I'm not the only person that you have hideously insulted with your complete and utter lack of manners on the wiki. You've done everything from piss off the mods to go after CoL members to call Kevan a liar. If anyone here needs to penalized, it is him. Now, my subordinate's comments were uncalled for, but calling me a "Zombie Spy" for doing nothing other than playing through an alt is hardly appropriate. I find your behavior appaling and your utter disregard for wiki decorum disgraceful. This matter was closed, Amazing. Do not open it again.

Now, on to the unfounded accusations that have been leveled against me. Yes, I did edit his user:Talk page. I did it in response to the demands he leveled against Jorge Bermudez and the group as a whole. His comments were uncalled for and viciously rude. I responded by reminding him that he was not to post on the page and that Jorge was absolutely right in his comments. Though his methods were uncalled for, his message was clear: the group we split from was indeed more active and as a whole, better than the one Amazing ran. Now, while this has no bearing on this mater, I believe that it needs to be said: we cut off relations before because you are a liablity, Amazing. Your lack of foresight and humility is truly disgusting. Your activites are petty and backstabbing. You sucked up to whomever you feel like sucking up too in return for positive views, then turn and use everything from obscene language to cryptic warnings to get whatever you weant. You play people's words and mock them. I cannot believe I ever considered allying myself with you, one way or another. You are a foul person in terms of wiki behavior, and though I have made some slight transgressions, they cannot in the same sentence be compared to your slimy actions. You have personally insulted me and my organization, and it is only in the face of the looming Caiger Mk. 2 siege that I do not uproot myself andd move to another area of the map permanently. I cannot and will not stand for any claims that your actions on the LCD talk page were anything but petty vandalism. If you have an issue, then take it up with the member that caused it, not the whole group. You, "sir", are a disgrace and are no friend of the LCD. I await the ruling with anticipation, for one way or another, your pointless whining and needless bickering has wasted a great deal of my time and the time of my superiours in-game.

You have insulted me, you have issued absurd orders, yes, ORDERS, to my group, you have issued false information to your group (after, oddly enough, having me put up for moderation for doing the same thing before, you mindless hypocrite), and you have called the game's CREATOR a liar. I can't honestly believe you have retained your posting rights as far as you have. Despite my angry response hereof, I do consider myself capable of acts of unbiased nature, and from the vantage point of clarity, even then I am incapable of fathoming the nonexistant reasoning behind your thoughtless acts. He has asked for my banning, and claimed that my acts are stand-alone proof fot its necessity. This is a bald-faced lie, and I am stunned that anyone would think otherwise. This is a matter of balck and white, moderators...I am right and he is wrong. My actions do not constitute a ban, wheras his actions are clearly designed to do little nothing more than to stir up further trouble. An order has been given by my in-game superiors to withdraw from Caiger and regroup to discuss the situation. It is with great reluctance that I withdraw from the up-coming seige, for I dearly wished to prove wrong the claim your filthy mouth has put foreward: LCD DOES NOT RUN. We NEVER run. We fight to the last, not snug ourselves into some police department in the back of beyond. We are not cowards, we are not, in your own words, and this is a direct quote: "Little shits", and we are by no means the kind of people who simply cut and run. I have had enough of your mindless slander and your senseless fightmongering. Your libelous claims and "holy-er-than-thou" orders to my group are baseless and are to be treated as such. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a very clear point. Your argument is punctuated with Blah! heh. and you expect to be taken seriously?MaulMachine 15:00, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)

(Christ on a fourwheeler, that was a it of an essay, wasn't it?

Wow, he even changed my post of support on the Caiger Mall Survivors to say I betrayed them, which as you all know is a lie. I changed it back. I run an alt that is a zombie, Amazing, stop making that sound like a betrayal. MaulMachine 17:43, 30 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Edited for grammar.

Summary

I've archived the Bullshiz HERE for anyone who wants to read the argument between MaulMachine and myself. It was cluttering this page and has been Archived - which Maul will claim was vandalism, I'm sure.

A running tally of how many vandalizations MaulMachine has committed. Note he had deleted other peoples' posts, not just my own. Note that some were about him but some were NOT about him. Note that a lot are on TALK pages where discussion is allowed on this topic and more. Note that the Caiger page has a LIST OF SPIES AND BRAIN ROTTERS and I merely added that he may be one. -- Amazing 01:30, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Knowing full well that I wasn't. MaulMachine 01:30, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

EVEN IF YOU WEREN'T THAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU ARE ALLOWED TO DELETE POSTINGS AND BLANK PAGES. Stop Replying. You were and you are a traitor. "MaulMachine's Return" was a member of LCD then turned Brain-Rot Zombie and helped the Mall Tour. You WERE MAULMACHINE ON UD AND THE WIKI. Stop replying to every fucking post I make anywhere on the Wiki. -- Amazing 01:33, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Stop lying in every single post you make in the wiki. Christ,you're like a fuckin' four-year-old with a need for pising off the parents. MaulMachine 01:35, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Last Word. (Let's see if he can resist replying.) -- Amazing 01:36, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

About that last one... Ahem. ... HOW THE FUCK IS EDITING MY OWN TALK PAGE VANDALISM?! MaulMachine 01:47, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Case "officially" closed as per Vandal Banning section, I'd think. -- Amazing 04:59, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

MaulMachine has been banned. Hopefully that's the end of this dispute, sorry I couldn't act sooner. --LibrarianBrent 14:47, 3 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Ruining vs Xeeron

Someone please clarify this issue, before we both get stuck in a long revert war. The site in question is Siege of Ackland Mall where my edit has been reverted 4 times so far by User:Ruining. Check also this for the source of the quote and my talk page for some rather fruitless discussion. --Xeeron 16:29, 27 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Looking at the links Ruining appears to be in the wrong as he is vandalising pages and insulting you for no valid reason, however, I will wait until Ruining posts his side of the story before making a desicion.--The General 11:23, 29 Jan 2006 (GMT)

I keep rolling it back because Barco, if you'd ask him yourself and as he's told me, meant he'd like help from the game and the random number generator, as in, "I'd love to not get shafted by the random number generator." Instead, Xeeron, without talking to Barco, started posting as if Barco had gone all nancy boy, crying for help at Ackland. Barco is "disgusted with the entire issue." He knows that I'm leading the Ackland campaign and would not countermand me or ask for assistance without my go-ahead. The same applies when he or Nav have charge of the horde since we rotate control; the other two leaders step back and offer support and advice only. Barco hopes that such misrepresentation causes people to "choke on their own bile." Xeeron, in a humanist smear campaign, continues to misquote Barco without so much as footnoting to the original context or speaking to Barco. As Pwotters does not go about posting snippets of humans whining whenever they're getting consumed, we're outraged by the situaton. However, we understand that people become overzelous at times; we've been known for it ourselves. Therefore, we ask that Xeeron not be banned, as the court ought generally do to griefers. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time that Xeeron has been in trouble for such malicious actions. We Pwotters feel that justice would best be served with a stern warning to Xeeron to not attempt to impersonate or explain the words of others in the others' stead.

Thank you. -- Ruining 12:23, 29 Jan 2006 (EST)

Looking at all the evidence it appears that Xeeron was quoting out of context and you were right to revert it. The descion is that Xeeron should cease posting his edit on the page. However, it looks like an honest mistake and no further action should be taken as long as Xeeron does not re-post his edit.--The General 20:39, 29 Jan 2006 (GMT)

Well if with this (full, noting removed, he only posted this and nothing else) quote "We could use some help, actually. The server is curiously slow and the barricades are curiously fast at being repaired. Barcoded 12:27, 25 Jan 2006 (GMT)" he was requesting a better random number generator and not more zombie players, my apologies to Barcoded. Further apologies if anyone did mistake the quoted quote as his statement instead of a quote. You don't have to worry about any further missunderstandings since I will stick to wikis where people are less likely to missunderstand me and where I won't be cussed at for arguing my point. --Xeeron 00:08, 1 Feb 2006 (GMT)

In other words your going to leave just because you lost an arbitration descion? I agree that Ruining's comments were unwarrented but you cannot expect a descsion based on that. On the other hand Barcoded's edits are a completely different matter and if this continues the descision will change as I believe that edits like that void a users right to post or have fair descisions made.--The General 19:23, 4 Feb 2006 (GMT)

RCDC vs. Newgrounds

Respected moderators:

I'd like to head this revert war off before it starts. There seems to be a conflict between my group, RCDC, and Newgrounds--specifically, between me and the person who seems to be in charge of Newgrounds wiki activities, User:Matt guthrie.

I'd like you to take a look at the last few edits on the Newgrounds and RCDC-Newgrounds feud pages. I feel that my edits accurately captured the feud between our groups--which, you'll note, they started. Matt's, on the other hand, consist mostly of deleting my text. He's also edited the RCDC page itself, once, to remove a Newgrounds member from our prospective PK list (at the time, we were voting on how we would respond to their actions), which isn't as big a deal. Maybe you could get him to just stop it; if not, maybe you can get him to come up with something better than

Dear Fuckbag-- YOU don't tell ME how to run MY club. STOP TRYING TO INTIMIDATE US; WE DON'T CARE.

Y'all might look over [their group board] to get a sense of what they are about. I feel that we have demonstrated more than the required degree of restraint in our dealings with this group. In any case, I feel that the UD wiki is in general pretty well-moderated; I will abide by whatever decision you make, and will try to convince my group to do the same. --Bulgakov 21:59, 13 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Their edits appear to be just petty vandalism. I will make the descision when the newsgrounds post their side of the story.--The General 10:16, 14 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Respected moderators:
Do whatever you want.
I've stopped caring about anything to do with the RCDC.
Matt

The descision is that the Matt Guthrie should stop deleting the text as the deletions appear to serve no purpose other than surpresing acurate information and and the lack of proper statement means that nothing has been done to persuade me otherwise. Also, as a note to Bulgakov, he will have to stop it now as failure to comply with an arbitration descision is considered vandalism and is treated as if the vandal has already recieve two warnings.--The General 18:29, 17 February 2006 (GMT)

Amazing vs. 'STER

'STER has been behaving quite horribly due to vandalism cases I brought to the Mod team.

'STER was apparently tired of seeing my reports concerning a twice-banned repeat offender called MaulMachine, someone who constantly goes out of his way to annoy me in the game, on the Wiki, on a forum, and on my own forum. He even reported me as a PKer simply out of spite after things had cooled down a bit, igniting more trouble yet again.

Instead of letting someone else handle the case itself, 'STER basically destroyed it by warning both MaulMachine and myself for poor behavior. His "judgement" was simply to tell both of us to shut up and stop bothering him. In this case, the other party has been found guilty of vandalism and banned twice (warned even more) because of my reports. How does this make sense? The solution to 'STER's annoyance seems to be that I shouldn't be allowed to use the Vandal Report space to report vandalism. I guess that works really well for 'STER... but no one is forcing him to read my cases. That could easily be left to another Moderator.

I fail to see how (most recently) reporting someone for reverting POV info when he knows it doesn't belong on a page is bad behavior.

'STER saw fit to personally insult me like a gossiping hen because he was tired of reading what I STILL believe to be real cases of vandalism. His own boredom with this constant problem I am having with vandals who don't like me should have no place in his case decisions.

It's quite apparent that he let his dislike for yours truly influence his work as a voluntary Moderator of this Wiki.

In effect he also told me to stop filing Vandalism reports under threat of banning. How is this reasonable in any way? So I have to suffer any future vandalism targetted against me because 'STER is tired of seeing the reports and doesn't like me? Bah-loney.

What's ironic is that, of all the people I rabidly insult, 'STER has escaped much of my acidic tongue. It's sad that he has dumpster-dived into lame insults and abuse of his position through effectively blocking me from reporting Vandalism, and threatening me with banning if I don't stop offending his eye with said reports and the ensuing squabbling.

I'm not requesting any kind of actual action toward 'STER, but it would be much appreciated if someone could point out that he is indeed being blind to his own errant behavior and abuse of power. As a moderator, he is trusted to mainatin a certain ethic. He has clearly violated this trust.

Additional link: My User Page

You know.. I reported MaulMachine, yes. He replied with a TON OF INSULTS, CURSING, AND FLAMING. And I get warned for bringing the case up. Bullshit, 'STER. Bullshit.

All you folks see, for the most part, is my problem with MaulMachine and other assorted malcontents. I have several Wiki pages I created or maintain, and I've been a contributor of many Approved Suggestions in the past. As Moderators/Arbitrators, you're mostly seeing the bad shit, because that's what you've signed on to do. There's more to my Wiki usage than reporting Vandals and bringing problems to Arbitration, yet 'STER and some others seem to think it's a daily thing. Why not count up all my reports over the 6 Months I've been using the Wiki, and count up the ones that were judged in my favor? Sure it'll be a reasonably bulky number, but it's over the course of 6 months and they're never unfounded or purposeful misuse of the system. -- Amazing 03:26, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Response from 'STER: I'll have to contest that last statement. Yes, MaulMachine has actually made some bad-faith edits. In this particular case, I did in fact warn him for the edit in question. However, I also warned Amazing. This was because Amazing has reported MaulMachine for vandalism any and every time he does something even slightly questionable. The fact that MM actually vandalised the Wiki some of those times was intirely incidental to Amazing's purpose, which was to annoy MaulMachine. He has a person vendetta which he was attempting to persecute via the Wiki, and that is not what the wiki is for. On one occasion I have reason to believe he actually had a friend create a compromising situation so that he could report MaulMachine for what seemed to be vandalism. He has continued to use the wiki vandal banning page for his own ends even thgouh I have asked him to stop. As such, I decided to warn him.--'STER-Talk-Mod 03:47, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

You're quite full of baseless accusations, aren't you? I point you to the fact that I walked away from Maul and he reported me to a PK list afterward. Does that sound like I'm the one with the Vandetta? Maybe I'm a little sensitive to Maul's edits when they concern me. That's from experience, my friend.

As for your gravely mistaken notion that I would ever set anyone up - I simply didn't think to check the History, because I thought he was making the first edit to that notation since it was first published. Frankly you're jumping on one mistake I made that is easily turned around and you're now trying to use it against me. LokiJester surprised me and a fellow CDF leader by going against MaulMachine so rabidly. We both thought.. "Go Loki!! Awesome." - It appears he went a little too far though in editing a false report against me into a false report against Maul. When Maul changed it back to my name, I thought he was changing the original post to my name. It's a simple mistake, and because of past experience, I took it as yet another in a long series of little jabs he makes when things "cool down" and I reported it.

I wonder how you can justify this behavior as a Moderator. You have no real reason to ask me to stop usng the Vandalism page for its purpose. As I say, maybe I'm overly sensitive to Maul's edits concerning me personally, but that's from the past events that resulted in his banishment. Basically, I'm drawing from history in my actions. You're ignoring it.

You could've voiced your disgust and left it alone for another Moderator who doesn't have as short a fuse.. but instead you took this into the realm of Moderator Power Abuse and personal Insult. -- Amazing 04:49, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Edit: nevermind. I have come to a decision.--ramby T--W! - SGP 03:51, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Abitrators decision: I have desided that both of you are being asshats about this. 'STER, I want you to apologize to Amazing about being an asshat. And Amazing; I want you to apologize for being a pain in the arse. And Amazing, if you won't make sure you are right; don't use the report vandalism page. in horter terms. 'Ster say you are sorry for calling Amazing an asshat. and Amazing, do not touch the vandelism page again. --ramby T--W! - SGP 05:02, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Soo.. What do I do if someone blanks my page over and over again...? I don't think that's something it's possible to abide by. -- Amazing 05:07, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

You should have thought of that earlier. 'STER was right in warning you, but he had no right to call you an asshat. I have made my decision, and as said above, my decision is final. - --ramby T--W! - SGP 05:11, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

I apologize - I do respect you - but I'm going to have to request a different Abritrator, as is my right given the rules of the page, which state both parties must agree to the Arbitrator. Your descision is impossible to abide by, because it gives free lisence to anyone who wants to deface my pages - since I'd have no way to report them. It's a textbook catch 22. Apologies, but this is not a ruling that can be abided by. A perminent ban from the Vandal reporting page when they have been making reports based on real actions that are suspect is not something that should ever be imposed on a user. I made sure I was right by checking one level of history on that page - I didn't check further because no one would in my shoes unless they were terribly anal. Also, 'STER said "Turd Burglar", and "asshat" was not an actual insult but rather a roundabout mockery. If you're going to claim I didn't do enough research, please make sure you've done yours. -- Amazing 05:19, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Very well then. - --ramby T--W! - SGP 05:25, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

I accept the ruling, and fully intend to abide by it in full. Again I apologized for contesting the previous ruling, but I got such clear visions of "Vandalism against Amazing can't be reported!" ringing through the streets of Malton.. lol. :) In turn I apologize to 'STER and the rest of the Mod team for being a constant voice of complaint. If there's anything I've forgotten, let me know. -- Amazing 05:30, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Wait, what happened to your second post?? .... Well, here it is reposted:

"Very well then. You are banned from the vandel report page for 1 month, and you are not to report MM unles he compleatly and totaly defaces your page. And you have complete and total proof he did it out of spite. I make this amendment because you have proven a flaw in my origanal dicision. I apologize for being irration and I must ask that you at least try not to insult anyone, because I do not want to have to arbitrate for you again. I believe this is what... twice now?"

I dunno if I accidentally deleted it when I replied or what.. wtf. -- Amazing 05:33, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Sorry about the first irrational decision. I have no idea how permement bannination from the vandel report page was a good idea. But at least do your research next time ok? --ramby T--W! - SGP 05:40, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Of course, yes. Heh, I definitely see what can happen when you don't now, that's for sure. It got an actual case thrown completely out, so that's always going to be on my mind. -- Amazing 05:46, 14 March 2006 (GMT)

Amazing vs Rasher, Scinfaxi, and GANKBUS

Ooookay. Here we go again. Sorry.

Rasher is a member/the member of a PKer group called GANKBUS. They've been attacking me personally (Gee, I must be paranoid. Sure.) and have now moved on to PKing other members of my group.

Anyway, that's just the backstory. Several GANKBUS members have been editing the Crossman Defense Force page in very bad faith, most recently another false personal attack on me.

You can also see his attempts to undermine the group's control of its page here, here, here, here, and here. (This goes to his character and wanton disrespect for group control of its page.)

Eventually, we'll have to admit that yes, I'm a controversial figure in the game and on the Wiki - and people do harass controversial figures. It's just the way it is, for better or worse.

He also edited my user page, which is my domain, to futher slam me with this stuff. I don't even think Rez Bots could exist. Said bot would have to run over, revive you specifically, and run away again... Not even possible, I think. lol

Members of my group revive me because - hey - I'm one of their leaders. What a surprise. This is unnecissary and inflammatory behavior on the part of Rasher, and it needs to be nipped in the bud. These GANKBUS Pkers (if there is even more than one of them) do not know when to stop, and do not have any idea of where "the line" is, much less when not to cross it.

I myself created the GANKBUS page as a resource for information on this new group that was attacking me. Since then it's been turned into what is, very obviously, a simple "Slam Amazing" page. I'm not sure as to the rules regarding pages being worked up simply as an attack on a user or users.

Amazing 20:56, 28 March 2006 (BST)

More editing with the intent of obscuring information and annoying the group. -- Amazing 21:49, 28 March 2006 (BST)

More. -- Amazing 22:02, 28 March 2006 (BST)

More. Anyone alive? -- Amazing 23:32, 28 March 2006 (BST)

I have gone ahead and retracted/blanked the GANKBUS page - since I created it - because it was nothing more than a source of harassment and insult directed toward me. - Plus the responce to this complaint has been less than timely, so I need to protect my continued enjoyment of this site, since others haven't attempted to yet. -- Amazing 03:01, 29 March 2006 (BST)

I've talked to a friend and we're going to use my GANKBUS page to promote our new two-man group (so far) called GANKBUS. It was my intention to alert people to the PKers originally, but now I'd like to take my page in a new direction. -- Amazing 03:35, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Well, I'm sure the moderators are tired of this bullshit. First off, I was told not to contact Amazing and I didn't. He has somehow developed a fetish for me though, even though I believe we both been warned on the subject, wrote me a few love letters. I somehow don't think it's going to play very well for Amazing to create a monopoly on the GANKBUS title, and the group is just going to find a page somewhere else. That's my thoughts on the subject, so if this does require some moderation (as so many issues with this crybaby do), perhaps we can move the page. Scinfaxi 06:08, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Oh yeah, I didn't edit the CDF wiki. Scinfaxi 06:09, 29 March 2006 (BST)

You used other means to attack and harass me, yeah. I will delete every single page you use to defame me with such rabid obsession. This is a promise. Moderators may not be willing to do what they volunteered for in a timely manner, but I assure you I will not wait for them to in clear cases of personal harassment. Also, you're just another LIAR. -- Amazing 06:43, 29 March 2006 (BST)

It's going to take me some time to look through all those links. One thing I would like to note is that calling Amazing a crybaby on this page is not the best way to resolve this. The desicion will be made after I have looked through all the links.--The General 07:59, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Thinking about it, it is possible to make a rez bot, but it's not feasible because of the hugely complex coding that would be required. Anyway, if someone wanted to cheat and revive themselves then it would be easier to do it manually.--The General 12:12, 29 March 2006 (BST)

My own personal (paranoid) belief is that he chose "Rez Bot" because the Barricade Bot is such a hot topic. I believe he purposefully stated this simply to try and draw some of the Bot controversey over to me, hopefully destroying my Wiki usage even more with hundreds of anti-Bot messages. As you say, why not say "He uses alts to Rez himself" instead of using the Bot topic? BTW, my alts are never in the same Suburb, though I do use alts so I can play the game more than 50 AP allows. As I've previously stated, a group leader probably just gets revived faster than a PKer. -- Amazing 18:52, 29 March 2006 (BST)

I apologize for not posting here sooner. I didn't realize the discussion over arbitration took place here. Let me clarify some things;

Amazing does not have the right to delete or move our group page because he created it. Wikis are not "owned" by anyone, and anyone has the right to edit pertinent information on a wiki page. You created the page to warn people about us, but now that we use it for our own information you don't get ot take it away. You can't simply say "oh I made a new group called gankbus so it gets priority over your page". There's nothing that could stop us from doing the same and making a zombie group called Crossman Defense Force that defends Crossman zombies from attacks by your police station, and requiring the same change of page. This isn't a game you want to play.
I made the edits to the CDF page to indicate that GANKBUS is not one person, it is 4. Amazing kept changing this back so I put a picture of happycat above the PK list.
We think he has a "rez bot" in that he has a player dedicated to rezzing himself, which is against game policy (bot meaning another character, not related to automation in any way) - this has nothing to do with our complaint about the GANKBUS page.
We are requesting that the original GANKBUS link shows our page - we don't mind providing a link to Amazing's "new group" at the top, but we have the right to have our information on the original link. If this is not changed, we will create an alternate Crossman Defense Force and move their page to a /old . It's in exactly the same spirit and I hope you can see the obvious solution here.
Thanks to Scinfax for fleshing out our wiki...if you have a cellphone we would like to contact you in game. Rasher 3:42 EST March 2006

I'm sorry but putting "GANKBUS" in your affiliation does not give you ownership of the page I created. You abused your Wiki privlages by turning the page into one big insult toward me. Since I created the page I am now going to use it for my own group I am forming. Furthermore I alledge you have a Pez bot that feeds you Pez ingame which is against the rules of the game. (No more rediculous and unfounded than your claim.) I'm sorry but as I say you simply have GANKBUS in your affiliation, that doesn't entitle you to ownership of my new group's page. You should have created it if you wanted one, but now you're just trying to steal it away from me since I'm going to be using it. -- Amazing 01:42, 30 March 2006 (BST)

I'm sorry Amazing, but you are wrong. You said yourself, you created the page to warn people about GANKBUS actions against you and your mates. You cant just simply decide 'ow, i am going to create a group named GANKBUS and i want the page back' and remove all their stuff now that they are using the page. And dont think we are foolish enough to actualy accept that you created this new group for your own personal use, because we know you are not going to and why you decide to create this. GANKBUS is moving a personal attack against you, and the same ruling that was decided in Daxx vs. Amazing (removal of all Amazing hate messages from the WCDZ page) should be put in action. The GANKBUS page now belong to them, and any editions you make to it that they dont see fit should be declared as an act of vandalism. --hagnat ^talk 02:13, 30 March 2006 (BST)

I'm sorry but I do not accept you as arbitrator. The General was here throughout this case, and you added your name to the list right *AFTER* "ruling" here, specifically joining to decide this one case. You are not accepted as the arbitrator for this case. I created the page and am now using it for my own group. Furthermore, editing of a page does not mean ownership. By that logic I could edit the CMS page a lot and claim I own it. The General may indeed decide against me, I don't deny that, but he said he needed time to look through the links, and I think that you should respect that and not "Rule" on this case, then add your name as an arbitrator afterward.

I am more than willing for them to have GANKBUS(old) and for us to have GANKBUS(new) with the current page used for clarification between the two. As I proved with the CMS analogy, you are incorrect as to page ownership. Again, if a member of Ridleybank Resistance Front edited their page alot, then decided HE was the leader - that doesn't mean he owns the page and gets to name himself as such. -- Amazing 02:40, 30 March 2006 (BST)

He. I didnt ask to be the arbitrator in this case. I joined the Arbitrations rank mainly because i just realized that i could help in here somehow. My previous statement was made as one of this Wiki users, nothing more, nothing less. The previous statement was place in hope that you realize how wrong you are about your actions against the GANKBUS group. Not that the GANKBUS group is right on personally attacking you, but you must level down to make things right. You wanted to be a moderator ? Right. Start behaving like one. --hagnat ^talk 02:54, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Please do not place comments in the middle of my text. I know this was just a silly mistake, of course.
You made a statement about this case and then placed your name on the Arbitrator list. It's clear you were actually trying to arbitrate the case.
Please keep a civil tone.
I have a group called GANKBUS that includes me and another player. We are going to see that my Sacred Ground Policy is spread throughout Malton.
Please start acting like an Arbitrator and, as I say, keep a civil tone and keep an eye on scenerios where you may be seen as pulling shady "Rule on a case, add your name to the list, claim you were speaking as a user when confronted" tricks.

Amazing 03:01, 30 March 2006 (BST)

He. Guess you have a point in here. I believe i should have sent my first stament to your talk page when i added myself to the arbitration ranks to avoid being confused as an arbitrator. For that, i am sorry. It was not a trick, it was only a foolish mistake from my part. The comment in the middle of your own, edit conflict. You must have placed your own while i was placing mine. --hagnat ^talk 03:13, 30 March 2006 (BST)

No problem. I guess I'll add my GANKBUS listing now, since you've graciously created the disambiguation page and placed the old GANKBUS page but not mine. ;) Heh. -- Amazing 03:16, 30 March 2006 (BST)

The new gankbus didnt had a page to link to. I left a link there so you could use it as a shortcut thing. Dont blame me if you didnt did your part on the deal you made with the old gankbus guys. --hagnat ^talk 03:29, 30 March 2006 (BST)

I actually said yesterday that I'd get on it tonight. lol -- Amazing 03:35, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Ok, so let me weigh in. Thanks for the decision. I have no intention to post any of Amazing personal information he did not make available off the wiki, nor did I ever. I fleshed out the wiki to HILARIOUSLY describe what GANKBUS, and people who generally PK Amazing, are thinking. Scinfaxi 02:36, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Harassment will not be allowed in any form. Sorry. -- Amazing 02:42, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Today I removed all comments about amazing not specifically pertaining to factual details about GANKBUS and moved our GANKBUS page back to the original link. Amazing, however, responded by vandalising it again and claiming that he does not accept the decision listed above. Rasher 30 March 2006

Take a moment to read before posting so you can see that was not an Arbitration decision, according to the poster. Also, I removed inflammatory comments about me myself when I moved the page to "old". That should have been satisfactory, even if you still wanted to change the url and add a page to clarify the difference and link to both. It's not vandalism to revert your action based on your misunderstanding. -- Amazing 03:07, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Right, I think we've worked out a suitable solution. You can each have your own page and the current page will link to the two and explain the differences between them. All infalammatory comments about Amazing which are not based on fact should be removed.--The General 08:35, 30 March 2006 (BST)

This isn't a suitable solution, this is Amazing's solution. If this is what you think is fair, then our new Zombie defense team in the crossman area (The Crossman Defense Force) will be creating its own wiki shortly. We will move the original Crossman Defense Force to a new page (Crossman Defense Force Original) and ours to a new page (Crossman Defense Force Zombie) and create a disambiguation page. The purpose of our group is to defend zombies from mall raids in the area near Crossman police station. This, according to your ruling, is perfectly allowable. Our CDF holds the exact same legitimacy as Amazing's GANKBUS. Rasher 9:05 EST 30 March 2006

Except that Amazing's CDF wasn't created by you, your GANKBUS was created by Amazing. Anyway, how do you think this should be resolved?--The General 15:15, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Creation has absolutely nothing to do with wiki policy. There is no "ownership" because you wrote the first entry for a page. If you're going to arbitrate, please understand the rules behind wiki use. We have modified the CDF page to be a disambiguation page as stated. Any vandalism will be reported on the validization banning page. I mentioned specifically above how we want this to be resolved: We want the original GANKBUS link back. We will put a link to Amazing's new group at the top. If this happens, we will allow the same treatment of our Zombie CDF page. Rasher] 9:32 EST 30 March 2006

Wiki policy on "ownership" is very unclear and is currently being disscussed. You are both trying to bully each other into submissian and this is not acceptable. I would suggest that the way to solve it would be to get Amazing to move his new GANKBUS group to a different name but demanding things is not the way to get this resolved. The desicion is that Amazing should change his new GANKBUS group to a different name and you should change your new CDF page to a different name. All iflamatory comments about each other are to be removed. Failure to comply with this desicion will be treated as vandalism.--The General 15:48, 30 March 2006 (BST)

GANKBUS is satisfied with both groups changing names and restoring each page to its original status. GANKBUS is now reverting to the original GANKBUS and removing non factual information about Amazing. GANKBUS is changing the name of CDF - Zombie to not conflict with the Survivor group's page. We expect CDF to comply. You can read about ownership here | Five Pillars of Wikipedia

Amazing must comply with the desicion or it will be treated as vandalism. As a note about ownership, that is wikipedia's policy, because we have in game groups managing wiki pages, it is nessecary for us to take a slightly different stance to ownership of pages.--The General 18:20, 30 March 2006 (BST)

GANKBUS has since moved our page back to its original status and removed reference of CDF - Zombie from the CDF page. The new group is called Crossman Zombie Defense Force and should not conflict in any way with searches or links to the original group name. No references to it are left on the CDF page. The CDF page needs to be restored to its original state, before the creation of the CDF - Zombie. Right now the CDF page is just a link to their original page. Also, while I agree that the circumstances are slightly different, groups and organizations are still listed on Wikipedia in the same way they are here. They may not be as much of a focus, but they are still very much a part of Wikipedia's 1 million + entries. Rasher 30 March 2006

I am going to leave it to Amazing to restore the CDF page.--The General 18:43, 30 March 2006 (BST)

I want to point out that while Rasher may point to Wikipedia rules, this site is not Wikipedia. Also, I will abide by this ruling - and will personally remove any and all inflammatory harassement from the GANKBUS page whenever it surfaces if Rasher or a GANKBUS member does not. -- Amazing 19:02, 30 March 2006 (BST)

If there is any more inflammatory harassement then contact me and I shall post it on the vandal banning page, on the grounds that failure to comply with an arbitration desicion is regarded as vandalism and will be treated as if the vandal already has two warnings.--The General 19:14, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Ahhh, okay, cool. -- Amazing 07:54, 31 March 2006 (BST)

Grim s VS Zombie Squad

The conflict has been going for a while, but recently it has come down to a relatively minor issue:

Zombie Squad was caught zerging (And two people even made confessions to it eventually, which i have screenshots of, pretty much making any complaints about its placement there as unverifiable null and void). Basically it has gotten to the point where my addition to the NPOV section (Refined by Spiro) is being juggled around the page, with Skeletor, and more recently Nick shaw moving it to a "Drama" section at the bottom which basically contained a lot of attacks on me, then the NPOV edit moved to the bottom of the page under that. I contend that the text belongs in the NPOV section,l while they contend that it belongs at the bottom of the page, outside the NPOV section after a whole pile of abuse directed towards me with nothing substantial.

My reasoning is thus: The edit is an NPOV edit made by me in good faith to improve the accuracy of the wiki, and as such it belongs in the NPOV section, where such information should normally reside, where it can be absorbed as the neutral information it is, as opposed to down the bottom, where anything read is read after a significant amount of character assassination (And despite the fact the information contained in there is slanderous, i dont much mind it remaining, even correcting some of the grammar).

As a request to the Arbitrators of this case: I request that The General be the arbitrator for this case, as he is one person who has not been a part of the "Zerg wars" on the wiki, and i can trust him to be impartial in this matter. --Grim s 16:13, 28 March 2006 (BST)

Hug:Looking at the page, moving the information to the bottom of the page completely devaluates the information and is as good as deleting it. I think it should go at the NPOV section at the top but I will wait for a statement from Zombie Squad, as per wiki rules, before making the final desicion. You may continue to move it to the top of the page until they make a statement.--The General 16:41, 28 March 2006 (BST)

So let me gets this straight. Grim S first personally attacks me and my fiance when this orgianlly all started back in November/ Decebmer of 2005. Calls all of Zombie Squad Zeging Cunts in addition bashes the real life Zombie Squad which is a non -profit organization to help people with natural diasters slandering their name as we'll as the team in the Game of Urban Dead. Vanadlizes our wiki page repeatadly by adding old information that a couple of team memebers post that they where talking with their characters since during the holidays the Game was dead so they deciced to entertain people. So he labels the entire team as Zergers or even previous Zergers for the sake to get his way. Then sends this to Arbitration where HE picks the judge. Hmmmmmm. So the team that is ours has no say as to what is on their own teams wiki site and people like Grim S are allowed to succeed in their own personal internet vendetas. The NPOV has holes in it and Grim S is doing his best to crawl through them for what reason none of us will ever figure out.

I hereby request that the the statements involving members of ZS zerging be stricken from our Wiki entry and the user known as Grim S. be asked to no longer edit our entry. We in turn will remove all comments regarding Grim S. The members who were accused of Zerging have long since stopped such practices and there is no need to continue harping on events that involved 2 members several months ago. --Skeletor 00:57, 29 March 2006 (BST)

In theory, all you'd have to do is disagree with Grim's choice of arbitrator, and in effect -- no one can decide this case. Since he's dimissed all others, and you can dismiss his choice. Hmm. Methinkst this may be a loophole that needs closing. Not that Skeletor would do it, I'm just pointing out the fact that it needs to be fixed. -- Amazing 02:50, 29 March 2006 (BST)

I removed the Drama section and what Grim S added to our wiki.i hope that will end this dumb editing war Yours truly Nick shaw

As a member of ZS's Team Winchester and an activer member of ZS for the past year or so I would too like to request the removal of Grim's "contribution" to our wiki. The subject matter that he continual edits into our page is controversial at best since the screenshots in which he claims to have captured zerging is merely two characters of the same person standing in the same building with no evidence of them being used for a collective purpose. In addition to this, the two members in which the zerging conversation took place are either no longer a member of ZS or has been inactive for months. As for Grim's counterclaim which he has backed by a quote by Skeletor, I believe Skeletor was speaking hypothetically and have never seen him use his characters in the described manner.

However, rather than debate the validity of Grim's claim against ZS, there are numerous other reasons as to why Grim's edits should be removed. First and foremost is the fact that ZS has since disallowed any forms of zerging as defined by the accusations against us. Furthermore it is my understanding that Kevan has now included a hit percentage penalty when characters of the same IP are in close vacinity to each other. Since Grim's accusations against ZS can now be viewed more as "historic," it would be an overstatement to say that ZS "tolerates if not support" zerging. With this being said, if ZS were to be required to keep Grim's edits on our wiki page it would be saying that information on a UD group's past beliefs and actions must be a mandatory addition to their wiki page. If this arbitration were to be ruled in Grim's favor, I would personally like to see every UD group maintain information about all of their members' past beliefs and past events, no matter how insignificant or irrelevant they may be. Such an example might be having the New CoL outline and include all information pretaining to the former CoL in their wiki as part of their current organization.

If not too for the sake of ZS's image, I would also like this matter absolved seeing that edit wars have broken out on the ZS wiki for several months. Whether or not Grim claims that ZS is attempting to slander his name is merely irrelevant as there has been a thread on the official UD forums where personal attacks have been made against Skeletor and his fiance including photo editing of pictures obtained off the internet. According to Grim's reasoning, should the arbitration rule in Grim's favor, phrases like "Grim S is an internet asshat" should also be allowed in the ZS wiki as it is both an accurate summation of ZS beliefs and historically accurate in regards to the opinions of the majority of ZS.

For the sake of civility, I simply ask that Grim part ways with the ZS wiki and that ZS be allowed to present an image of itself that isn't defined by a past event as dictated from the viewpoint of Grim S. --ZekeThePlumber 03:17, 29 March 2006 (BST)

You are absolutly right I am going to disagree with Grim's choice of arbitrator--Skeletor 03:28, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Are you sure? I was about to see whether Grim would agree to the compromise.--The General 07:55, 29 March 2006 (BST)

I cant see any reason why he would reject you other than the fact i chose you. In any case, unlike Amazing said, i did not dismiss all the others, i just asked for The General to arbitrate. I am also willing to accept Zaruthustra, despite the fact i had a bit of a shouting match with him immediately pior to the formation of the WCDZ. --Grim s 10:31, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Apologies. "as he is one person who has not been a part of the "Zerg wars" on the wiki, and i can trust him to be impartial in this matter." sounded like dismissing the other Mods as Zerg warriors who could not be trusted to be impartial. I can see how you might not've meant that. (Seriously.) -- Amazing 07:57, 31 March 2006 (BST)

First of all: No, i already stated that i dont much care what you are saying about me on your page (I even corrected the grammar, if you check the history). You may continue to call me names, attack my lineage, disparage my penis size, claim i have manboobs, whatever you like, as in my opinion it merely demonstrates your childish attitude to the whole thing. The Edit is not intended to be an attack on your group, it is meant to be a statement of historical fact. Your group did do it, you got caught, you changed your ways. In that manner one could even argue that your groups character is better than the average group groups whos stance is unknown, because while you DID cheat, when it was called out you changed your ways instead of obstinately sticking to your guns about the matter, as many far less intelligent and more arrogant and belligerent people tend to do.

Is there any reason to dislike the choice of arbitrator? I chose someone i can trust to be impartial (As in, wont favour me over others or the other way around) and who has not been involved in the wiki zerg wars, and as such is far less likely to dismiss the case entirely and at least consider it. Have you any complaints other than the fact that i asked for him?

As for Zeketheplumber:

Kevan in the FAQ:

Am I allowed to play multiple characters?
You are, provided that they lead completely separate existences within the game - your characters should not collaborate, 
nor share the same building. Multiple characters found to be working together in a suspicious fashion will be automatically 
flagged, penalised or even banned by the system. If you're running a few characters, it's best to make sure that they stay 
in separate suburbs.
(If you're sharing a computer or workplace with other players, it's recommended that you don't work together too 
closely, as this may be wrongly interpreted as a single player using several accounts.)

These are screenshots of CONFESSIONS, there is absolutely no doubt that they did it, so it is historically accurate. All i ask is that the history of the group be accurately represented in the NPOV section. However, should Zombie Squad request, i shall stop doing any editing to their page and simply set up a section on the Anti Cheater Alliance Page (A Group i am a founding member of, devoted to outing cheaters past and present) where i shall be far less flattering, and point out the fact that there are no fewer then five current Zombie Squad members on the Zerg Liste on the desensitised forums, all of which came from AFTER they officially changed their policy regarding zerging. This is something i have refrained from adding to their NPOV section as a good faith gesture, but when operating on my own turf i have no need to be so kind. --Grim s 08:20, 29 March 2006 (BST)

I have absolutely on interest in whether Zombie Squad was zerging or not I just want this edit war resolved, Grim is adding NPOV information to the NPOV section (and doing it quite reservedly as well) if you have any reasons, which have not yet been mentioned, for not wanting it on the page then please post them. I will make the desicion as soon as Zombie Squad have posted any further reasons they have for not wanting it on the page.--The General 10:07, 29 March 2006 (BST)

General, I find the fact that you are uninterested in the debate whether or not ZS has zerged is clearly biased towards Grim in the resolution of this matter. Beings that you have already stated that Grim will be adding an NPOV section to the ZS wiki, as opposed to debating the validity of Grim's NPOV, leads me to believe that you are putting myself and the rest of ZS in a defenseless position to make an argument. Should a NPOV be allowed on the ZS wiki the presense of NEUTRAL subject matter should be the basis for this descision. Rather than waste my time making a counter argument against Grim's accusations, I request a change of arbitrator. --ZekeThePlumber 18:22, 29 March 2006 (BST)

I believe you are mistaken, I don't think I did state that Grim will be adding an NPOV section to the ZS wiki I said that it looks like NPOV information and should therefore go in the NPOV section and I also said that Grim could keep adding the information until you made a statement, as you have now made a statement then I believe that all editing regarding the information should be suspended until this is resolved. The reason I am not interested in debating whether ZS has zerged or not is that it is impossible to prove either way and isn't going to resolve anything. I think that the fact that you are not prepared to make a counter argument against Grim's accusations, but would rather have a different arbitrator, says a lot about the validity of his claims.--The General 19:14, 29 March 2006 (BST)

You didn't respond to Zeke's earlier comments about the accusation being "historical" (that it was a brief and minor episode, happened months ago, and group policy hasn't allowed it since) - do you see them as being relevant to this, or would you rather that it was raised in a separate Arbitration? Have been vaguely following this one, and it seemed Grim was quick to raise it specifically for the "relatively minor issue" of NPOV-positioning to get a judgment in his favour, avoiding the issue of whether it should even be in the NPOV section at all. --Spiro 19:32, 29 March 2006 (BST)

General, you've clearly been contridicting yourself for quite some time. If, and I quote, "The reasong I [General] am not interested in debating whether ZS has zerged or not is that it is impossible to prove either way and isn't going to resolve anything." If this cannot be proven, why should debatable information be included in our wiki? The fact that I haven't made another argument against Grim's accusations is that you've pretty much established yourself as a biased third party, even moreso backed by your previous statement saying "the fact that you are not prepared to make a counter argument against Grim's accusations, but would rather have a different arbitrator, says a lot about the validity of his claims." Should I know that my comments are actually going to recognized, I could easily pump out another three to four paragraph rebuttal against Grim. Rather than take an analytical and logical approach to this, you claim that you're uninterested in every argument I've presented and just make another statement saying that if ZS would like to include any other reasons that ZS believes Grim's edits should not be allowed in the wiki to do so. As stated by Spiro, you haven't even addressed any of my previous comments. --ZekeThePlumber 20:19, 29 March 2006 (BST)

You have a point, and I apologise for overlooking that. I would like to resolve where it should be on the page first, and then either debate whether it belongs on the page at all, after the desicion, and then change the desicion accordingly, or make a seperate abitration and deal with it there.--The General 20:05, 29 March 2006 (BST)

May I suggest that we debate whether it should be on the page first before we determine where it should be if it is. It would seem like a more logical course of action to me. --ZekeThePlumber 20:22, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Actually, you're right, that does make more sense.--The General 20:29, 29 March 2006 (BST)

I would like to point out that this "evidence" that Grim so holds dear and repeatly post is first off 1.)Skeletor666 and Beastman where in the same building in Dulston during the Holidays when the game Urban Dead was slow becuase players where busy with the holidays. Do you know what they where doing?? They where singing CKY's skeletor homoerrotic song and singing Christams carols to people in the game purly for entertainment purposes. This does not constitute lableing the entire team as Zerging. 2.) the other evidence is a unreadble thread post where I was stating that my characters lead different lives which according to Kevans rules clear states is ok. Even then you notice that the majority of the characters roles are not even contributing to the game for example pie throwing or reciting poetry. This once again does not fall under Zerging. and the 3rd.) piece of eviedence is from a former ZS memeber which was banned months ago and he was more so doing it much like when someone tells a kid not to do something so they do it to be defiant. So how is it that the team does or did tolerate Zerging?? If you want to be 100% accurate and abide by the oh so holy NPOV we can add to our teams wiki that we like to sing Christmas Carols durring the holidays.

Which brings me to the purpose of our wiki in the first place. To provide general information to players intersted in partcipating in Role playing missions within the Zombie infested city of Malton and link them to our Team boards. All of our teams info is located there historial and current. We don't want a detailed historical archive all every little thing we do on the wiki. If we did the thing would be cluttered beyond any usfulness like some other teams or causes. Placing inaccurate and not so favorable terms on our teams wiki such as Zerging turns away potientail new memebers. I firmly bieleve that this entire ordeal is purly because Grim S is so pro Zombie he will stop at nothing in or outside the game to do what it takes to minimize the ranks of survivors even if it requires him to spending extra time disputing small issues like this. Read his profile he will even maintain your teams wiki for you!! I commend his persistance, a trait the undead are best known for along with their continious moaning --Skeletor 22:35, 29 March 2006 (BST)

Skeletor:

1: I suggest you reread the FAQ. He specifically states you are not supposed to have multiple characters of yours share the same building. You are one of the groups leaders, and like it or not you set an example for others in the group to follow. If the leader condones it, then the group condones it, as the leaders word is law.

2: The post is far from unreadable, and you just declared it was genuine.

3: I am pro-game continuation and Pro-truth, I want the game to be balanced and i want people to play it fairly, and as a result i go after people like you who cheat.

4: All you need to do is say the word and i will not bother your page again. I will, however, nail you to the wall on a page where i can do so freely, and unlike on your page, i will include a vastly detailed summary of your events, even the part where you accused all the people who called you on your zerging "Humourless Nazi's" and refused to stop until other members of your group shouted you down. You dont want that, do you? I lose this, and thats the first thing i do, and there is not a thing you can do to stop me. Yes, this is a very evil thing of me to do, but nowhere have i ever claimed to not be a bastard (In fact, i cheerfully confirm this to all who ask me or accuse me of it). You have your backs to the wall, you get a choice of two evils, the lesser evil of two-three lines of text on your group pages NPOV section, or the greater one with a massive in depth description of your antics which will surely turn people off towards your group.

5: My wiki entry says i am willing to stealth post and maintain a wiki entry for any group that wishes to remain anonymous and outside the reach of petty threats of other individuals. One such organisation that has taken advantage of this is FOBU, whom the CDF and several other groups are determined to greif if they are found, and i would not put email harrassment past them. --Grim s 07:59, 30 March 2006 (BST)

If ZS doesn't want it on their page then it should be removed from their page, unless Grim has any more proof of zerging. I am not going to stop Grim from posting the information on another page but you may, if you wish, take out a separate arbitration case to resolve that.--The General 08:48, 30 March 2006 (BST)

If the confessions of the accused are not enough to prove it, then nothing can ever be. --Grim s 11:35, 30 March 2006 (BST)

How about if the entry was changed to say that a member was caught zerging and has been expelled from the group?--The General 11:46, 30 March 2006 (BST)

It would be blatantly false, and thus unacceptable by both sides, as Skeletor (A Leader of the organisation) was one of the Zergers. He is Skeletor666 (Which i PKed shortly after that screenie was taken) and ZS Beastman from the first screenie in my set of three under my quote from the FAQ. Also, no evidence has emerged to suggest that Lukehes has been ejected from the group. --Grim s 12:55, 30 March 2006 (BST)

It was just that his counter arguament admits that one member was zerging but that he was expelled from the group, so I was assuming that that would be pretty safe ground.--The General 15:19, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Grim i hate to break it to you but Lukehes is gone i haven't seen him in months Nick shaw

Thank you for that information. There was no way for me to obtain it myself however, as Skeletor, way back during the incident in question, decided to make it impossible to look at the forum as a guest. There is still the case of Skeletor having two of his alts in the same building, which is against the rules stated in the FAQ (And thus Zerging). --Grim s 17:41, 30 March 2006 (BST)

You have a point, and even though I don't think having two alts singing christmas charols is cheating, it is still defined as zerging.--The General 17:51, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Grim once again your persistance is amazing and you can't seem to get it through your thick skull that this is a game and no one is hurting you or your prceious Zombies cause I had characters screwing around in a GAME!!!! In fact no one seems to care but you. The incident does not varify that we as a team do or did tolerate Zerging. Where ever you put your accusations you should include what the characters where doing in the buidling and mention that is was only MY two characters not the TEAM of ZS. And since you are so concerned about accuracy you should be required to include the lyrics of CKY's Skeletor and Beastman Homoerrotic love song and the lyrics of jingle bells to explain to who ever reads your junk that they where entertaining others who didn't want to go out in the snow durring the holidays. I think you need serious help and this causes for an intervention much like someone who has an alchool problem. Might I suggest you spend some time on a web sites like this http://www.healthyplace.com/ instead of trying to play god on a wiki that surrounds and online TEXT based zombie roleplaying game. I don't give a crap about what you post about me but leave the ZS logo and the Zombie Squad name out of it and leave anything to do with Zombie Squad alone. Zombie Squad in the game of Urban Dead and the real life organization has done more for people then your self proclaimed evil bastard mind can ever imagine. --Skeletor 19:01, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Let's just quit all the "it's a game" rubbish, that could so easily be turned around against you.--The General 19:38, 30 March 2006 (BST)

Skeletor. Kevan has far more important things to do that examine every single case of cheating in the game. As a result people in the game need to do a bit of the policing themselves. This results in people such as myself tracking down these offenders, digging up incriminating evidence, and posting it where others can see to completely destroy the reputation of cheaters and ensure thier swift execution at the hands of like minded players. Of course, using "its just a game" as though it excuses your actions is completely childish, as have been your outbursts thus far in this discussion. --Grim s 07:44, 31 March 2006 (BST)

Sigh... Well if this hasn't already gotten out of hand... Okay, so there are a few things that I would still like to point out regarding this debate. According to the wiki "to zerg is to create multiple characters (also known as Alts ) and coordinate them as if they were a single one. Zerging is a way of creating de facto super-characters. This behavior is considered cheating in Urban Dead. Anti-zerging countermeasures have been taken; zerg characters can be automatically penalised or deleted. Zerging technically refers to the use of multiple new throw-away characters. The zerg characters receive little or no maintenance and are often discarded after one use. Another form of cheating, more correctly called multi abuse, occurs when one player uses two of their own characters in tandem or to assist each other, rather than having the characters lead completely separate lives." The wiki then continues to list uses of zerg characters as combat mobs and sentinals. I personally fail to see how Skeletor falls under this description. For the sake of clarity in the allegations made against Skeletor, for your convenience General, I'd like to give you an idea of what brought Skeletor's alts to come to occupy the same building. One of ZS's Team Winchester's role playing missions was titled "Race for the Cure" in which our members of our team would race across Malton to specific checkpoints and eventually to the finish in Dulston. Skeletor set up one of his alts at each checkpoint to ensure that the racers were making it to each checkpoint and then finally to the finish in Dulston. Skelly also had one of his own characters in the race to use as a "pace car" so to speak. It was Skeletor's character in the race and the one at the finish that led them to eventually occupy the same building. After the race, we decided to stay in Dulston for the time being as the holidays were approaching and we wouldn't be able to carry out another mission until their passing. It was then that Skeletor fiendishly committed the henious crime of singing Christmas carols with his alts while we waited out the holidays in our temporary safehouse of Much Arms in Dulston. I would hardly consider this an offense worth the brash remarks made by Grim towards ZS.

Granted Kevan did state that alts should not occupy the same building. However, rather than just consider this an ultimate rule, I would rather look at this analytically. Kevan of course would not make such a statement without reason, this reason would be non other than to protect players from people who use their alts collectively to gain an unfair advantage. With said, I'd also like to make a note that Kevan initiated means to penalize players who do such things. I'm refering to the hit penalty, of course. I'd also like to state that its Kevan's job to punish those who break the rules, not Grim. According to the wiki, zerging is the use of multiple characters for one purpose. For Skeletor, there was no one purpose. You could try to make the argument that that purpose was to make silly in-game antics, but I'm sure Kevan would even find this laughable and dismiss this as completely harmless.

As far as lukehughes is concerned, he is officially no longer a member of ZS. The team forum passwords have been changed and he has not been told them. Personally, I was glad to see him leave as he didn't do much other than give ZS a bad PR. I would then ask of you General to disregard any information about him in your descision.

Also, Grimmy dearest, you are hardly in a position to offer an ultimadum. Recreating a page to denounce Skeletor would be nothing other than recreating the forum thread in which all of this took place. I however find that if you were to do so, it would be motivated by a personal vendetta against Skeletor as seen from said thread in which a photo of Skeletor's and his fiance were photoshopped to swap their heads and other juvenielle attacks were made. I forsee any attempt to create another page would result in nothing more than more editing wars and further arbitration. --ZekeThePlumber 20:33, 30 March 2006 (BST)

First of all, Zergings definition with regard to Urban Dead has stretched to cover all multi account abuse.

Secondly: Rules are rules. If you ignore them because you think they dont apply to your instance, they lose all meaning whatsoever, and are not worth the time they took to type. There is also the fact that Skeletor had a third account performing revives in an NT building 5 blocks away.

Thirdly: I am glad to hear LukeHughes has been expelled from the group. I would advise you to visit the Zerg Liste thread on the desensitised forum to clear up the matter of teh five ZS people being on the list, either confirming or clearing the peoples involvement in that activity. I much prefer to work with solid facts.

Finally: Zeke, the page in question is the Anti Cheater Alliance Page where the accusations and proof are laid out in a clear and concise manner against a group or individual (Except in the case of the zerg list, as this would make the page far too large. Instead, in those cases, the proof is provided as requested, usually taking the form of screenshots of peoples alts together, but occasionally forum posts where they admit such behaviour), and any challenges against the information set forth are done on the talk page, where the matter is discussed in a sensible manner by myself and the complainant. FYI, i did not approve of all the image manipulation there, and such behaviour only comes from the inhabitants of that section of the forum where the thread resided, and they are not in charge of it. Any actions of the sort will be deleted by myself in any case, and if it is done to the article page, it will be vandalism of the page and reported as such.

Oh, and it is nice to finally meet a person in your group who can write in a controlled manner. --Grim s 07:44, 31 March 2006 (BST)

Grim, can you provide all evidence that you have and then let them make counter arguaments against the evidence. I will then make the desicion.--The General 12:50, 31 March 2006 (BST)

Part of this is copied from earlier, with extra screenies added from the depths of my photobucket account. FYI: "Santa Claus" appears in a few screenies. One of the admins used a word filter on the site for a couple of days turning Zombies into Santa Claus.

Kevan in the FAQ:

Am I allowed to play multiple characters?
You are, provided that they lead completely separate existences within the game - your characters should not collaborate, 
nor share the same building. Multiple characters found to be working together in a suspicious fashion will be automatically 
flagged, penalised or even banned by the system. If you're running a few characters, it's best to make sure that they stay 
in separate suburbs.
(If you're sharing a computer or workplace with other players, it's recommended that you don't work together too 
closely, as this may be wrongly interpreted as a single player using several accounts.)

Screenshot of two of skeletors characters in the same building. (Skeletor666 and ZS Beastman)
Screenshot of Skeletor's post on the ZS forum which confirms the validity of my screenshot. He also confirms he is using three characters in the suburb (Specifically his Scientist, ZS Communications, Skeletor666 and ZS Beastman). It is also important to note that he said they were all doing different things, as opposed to "Two of them are acting in the Much Arms while another is reviving at the Duport Avenue revive point and staging from the Whitlock Building five blocks away". It suggests that what his accounts did was a little more than just talking.
The change in policy that hints at others using multi's in Dulston.
The killing mentioned in the previous screenshot.
skeletor's comment in that thread, whereby he further confirms that he has been using multiple accounts in the suburb and calls those who caught him Nazi's.
Screenshot of LukeHughs confessing to zerging. (Subsequent kick notwithstanding. He was a member at that time. Please also note the comment by melanie in that screenshot, further suggesting that the zerging was not a couple of isolated cases, but a systemic problem in the group.
Enlightening comments by Skeletor about Zombie Squad (Indicating violation of the collaboration term in the rule on a group wide level).
Confirmation that what he was doing he was doing to "Piss people off", a clear indication of collaboration with alts, even if not in the traditional sense.

As you may have noticed i used a bit of free time researching this. --Grim s 14:21, 31 March 2006 (BST)

I will give him a chance to respond before making the desicion, but I think that that is pretty damming evidence, really.--The General 15:12, 31 March 2006 (BST)

If it wasnt this strong i would not be arguing this forcefully to get it on thier page. --Grim s 15:42, 31 March 2006 (BST)

I will make a comment sometime tonight on behalf of ZS, I just need to wait till I have some free time. --ZekeThePlumber 20:25, 31 March 2006 (BST)

Ok, if I don't make a judgement immediately it's because i'm going to Wales and won't be back until Sunday evening.--The General 20:36, 31 March 2006 (BST)

Okay, I apologize for the tardiness but I do infact have a life outside of Urbandead, unlike some people ::cough grim cough::. But alas, I figure the easiest way to go about defending ZS would be to address each piece of Grim's pieces of said evidence.

Screenshot of two of skeletors characters in the same building. As I have already stated in one of my previous posts, Skeletor was using these two characters as NPCs in the Race for the Cure mission. Granted two of his characters were in the same building, he did not in anyway affect the game for other players. Labling this as Zerging is completely nonsensical.

Screenshot of Skeletor's post on the ZS forum which confirms the validity of my screenshot. First of all, this doesn't "confirm" the fact that Skelly had 3 alts in the same burb at the same time. He states "I think I have 3 characters in Dulston each doing something different." I'd imagine that if I were actively running 7 characters I'd lose track of their positions as well. However, Kevan says that its "best" if your alts occupy separate suburbs as long as they leave separate lives, not "mandatory" as Grim is making it out to be. Either way, you know two of them were simply goofing off for kicks thus not disturbing the game for other players. As far as the Ackland Mall incident is concerned, this was an event that happened far earlier in Urbandead's history before anti-zerging measures such as random spawning locations were instituted and zerging among zombies was a far greater problem. Skelly was simply trying to level the playing field against an overwhelming threat. If Skeletor were to be singled out for that, it would be incredibly unfair especially given the situation.

BB's Statement I'd like to make it a point that bigguyinblack is not a member of Team Winchester but a member of a different team in ZS. Therefore BB was not in Dulston at the time and his statement should have more accurately read IF you have multiple alts in Dulston. This statement simply comes out of despairity due to Grim and the other forum attacks sullying ZS's image over the allegations made against Skeletor. While I can vouch for other members of ZS, the only former member of ZS who used his alts together was Lukehughes, and that problem is long gone. Also, during non-mission periods unless ZS has a cause or another group/area requests help, their members will pretty much act independently of each other whether it be leveling up on their own or seeking others in need of help. As for this situation, Skeletor had told us that in the next mission we will need revive syrings, but left out the details of the mission as he often does for his own twisted fun. Stockpiling syringes was our general purpose for the duration of the holidays so if there were alts in Dulston at the same time, we can be confident that they were leading separate lives. I would still like to reiterate that Kevan has never said it was mandatory for alts to reside in separate suburbs.

The killing mentioned in the previous screenshot. All I have to say about this is: WHAT THE HELL DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING? Congratulations Grim, you've PKed Skeletor and you're trying to rule Urbandead with an iron fist only to beget further PKing and bad blood among groups. Why was this even put under evidence?

Skeletor's comment in that thread, whereby he further confirms that he has been using multiple accounts in the suburb and calls those who caught him Nazi's. ::Sigh:: I think anything in this picture has already been established. The fact that you're making it a note to point out that Skeletor called people Nazis is in bad taste on your part as the thread in which you started was called Skeletor is a zerging cunt. Skeletor's remark was done so after much frustration and simply goes to prove that your efforts tend to border on harrassment rather than for the common good of the game.

Screenshot of LukeHughs confessing to zerging. A couple things you should probably know about this thread picture before you make judgement here. Melanie has been a member of ZS Team Winchester for a couple months BUT she has been inactive longer than Lukehughes has been booted. Back when she was active she would only be active for a few days at a time and then disappear for multiple weeks. Even so, she has only been in two missions that I can recall from memory, one of which was one of the earlier missions and the second was the Race for the Cure. With this being said, I'd like to make it a point that her spectrum of view as to what ZS does and doesn't do is very limited. As far as I know, the only reason for her to make such a statement would be her exposure to Lukehughes actions and Skelly's use of NPCs in Winchester missions.

Enlightening comments by Skeletor about Zombie Squad I can't help but find this comment as misleading. Since it has been taken out of context, its hard to tell exactly what "it" is and whether "they" refers to Skeletor's teammates or "alts." However, I find it that Skelly is speaking hypothetically and doesn't actually confess to having done so. Besides, trying to spin this as a reflection on ZS still doesn't do your accusation any justice.

FWAPPing "A clear indication of collaboration with alts, even if not in the traditional sense," eh? This goes to tell you the complete harmlessness of what Skeletor has been doing. He was making jokes, big deal.

Well, thats done with. My head hurts and I'm exhausted so depending on what the General warrents I may or may not make a closing arguement. This will suffice for now. --ZekeThePlumber 06:27, 3 April 2006 (BST)

Regarding the first. Kevan explicitely states you should not have two of your characters in the same building. Skeletor did that. Even without acting in an attacking manner, such a presence would provide a meatsheild effect for other humans in the building, a meatshield that would absorb 40ap from a zombie with Rend Flesh and Deathy grip (Tangling grasp was not implimented at that time), 50ap from a zombie with only neck Lurch (A popular choice for lower level zombies), and 75ap from a newbie zombie with VM. None of these amounts are trivial to a zombie. I also sincerely doubt he wouldnt have barricaded were there a breach.

Regarding the second: His third account was ZS Communications located in the NT Building north of the Mall. I located that one, but wasd unable to terminate it due to the fact i lacked the ammunition. Also, I was aware of no Ackland mall incident. Did your group zerg there too?

As for the third. A whole lot of nothing, and again the claim that it isnt mandatory that they be in other suburbs. However, that is not the case. What we are talking about is thier presence in the same building, and that IS plainly written in the FAQ.

Fourth, i was just confirming the killing mentioned in the previous as a way of further reinforcing the validity of the third screenshot. If you dont like people backing up evidence, perhaps you should leave.

Fifth: Firstly: I wasnt the one who renamed the thread. Twas Petrosjko who did it. Secondly: He cheated, so we dogpiled him. Thirdly: It goes to indicate his attitude towards those who called him on his cheating and how he refused to consider two characters in the same building to be cgheating, despite it being spelled out quite clearly in the FAQ.

Sixth, Please re-read the first paragraph of it. Try it. Thats collaboration between alts, and Zerging.

Seventh: He clearly said he was doing it to piss people off. He was using multiple accounts together in the same building to do it. I dont see how that cant be collaboration. --Grim s 09:56, 3 April 2006 (BST)

Argh... I was under the impression that General would make a ruling after we both presented our case as dictated in the RULES OF ARBITRATION but since Grim would like to make a rebuttal to everything I have to say, I too would like one last comment. I figured this would have happened as Grim has sent me a message saying "I don't mean to rush you but..." Either way I would like to make a closing argument to point out the sheer absurdity of Grim's comment but will only be able to do so in about four hours as I have work in a few minutes. Until then. --ZekeThePlumber 16:16, 3 April 2006 (BST)

Ok, the desicion will be made after you have posted your final comment, all comments after that will not be considered.--The General 19:20, 3 April 2006 (BST)

Alright, once again I apologize for the delay but I would like to thank the General for being patient with me. Now, I'd like to start off by addressing Grim's fondness of using Kevan's FAQ as a means to prosecute Skeletor. While Grim has continually used the FAQ as a reference for his argument, I too will use it for a similiar purpose. As Grim has constantly reminded us about the use of alts: "You are, provided that they lead completely separate existences within the game - your characters should not collaborate, nor share the same building. Multiple characters found to be working together in a suspicious fashion will be automatically flagged, penalised or even banned by the system." You may ask what my purpose is in bringing this up in argument but what I would like you to focus your attention on is the statement that "Multiple characters found to be working together in a suspicious fashion will be automatically flagged, penalised or even banned by the system." Since Grim has based his argument around this FAQ and considers this an iron clad rule, this statement is ultimately infallable. However Grim, has made continual claims that Skeletor's characters have been working together BUT if that is true then why has Skeletor's characters not been flagged, penalised, or banned as the FAQ states. This leaves several possiblities: 1) Skeletor's characters were never working together even though they were found in the same building, 2) Skelly's characters were never found to be working in a suspicious fashion, or 3) Kevan's FAQ is infact fallable and should not be interpreted literally. Personally I would prefer a type of laissez-faire interpretation of the FAQ, so to speak. Rather than interpret the rules as panultimate, I'd like to look at what Kevan is trying to protect by initiating such rules. Obviously Kevan intended to protect players from people who abuse the freedom which Kevan grants them in this game to gain an unfair advantage over the another group, whether it be humans or zombies. Objectively, Skeletor has not gone against the intention of Kevan in creating these rules.

Grim's argument that the presense of an alt in a building provides as a meatshield for other characters I find to be rather weak. In addition to having been a member of ZS, I also have raised a zombie to level 36 independent of ZS. Infact, they don't even know of the character's existence but would probably recognize it as one of mine for obvious naming trends among my characters. And quite frankly, when I break into a building and start attacking survivors I could care less who I attack when attacking either ZS Beastman or Skeletor666 will still bear the same amount of XP. Infact, when I break into a building I'd be more than honored to have numerous "meatshields" in the same building; Hell, the more the merrier. May I add that meatshields tend to not be very effective when you can choose your target when you attack. Regarding your assumption that Skeletor would barricade if it was breached is completely irrelevent to your argument as 1)Dulston was a human controlled suburb with a human controlled mall to further quell the zombie threat, 2) Much Arms was a low profile building not warrented to have organized attacks on it by zombies, and finally 3) Much Arms was considered a ZS safehouse by the fact that our members contribute to ensuring its safety by keeping the barricade as high as possible. Skelly's characters probably didn't even need to barricade with all the other ZS members there.

As far as the Ackland Mall incident is concerned, if you were to look at Skeletor666's profile URL you would notice that the number at the end of the URL is roughly 6000. In case you were unaware, this number represents the numerical order in which the character was created. Given the fact that originally players were allowed to create 5 characters a day with an IP limit of 500, it would be safe to assume that Skeletor was one of the first few hundred people to start playing the game upon its release. During the begining of UD problems of zerging among zombies was a huge problem as people could chose their starting suburbs and it wasn't uncommon for zombies to overrun subburbs at a time. Skeletor was merely fighting back against a force with what he could when there was little to do against overwhelming odds, before ZS even had an organized Urban Dead group. I firmly believe this event was far in the past and UD has evolved far beyond this as a game, thus having no bearing on the case at hand.

Lastly, Skeletor's use of the anacronym FWAPPing is merely an attempt to represent words for the 2 letter p's as a way to lighten the atmosphere of the accusations made against him. Skelly's choice of "piss people off" is used under the sense that he would be offending people by making homoerotic displays in public places such as malls. This by no means should be interpreted as pissing people off by messing with or abusing the mechanics of the game. You should be aware of the jovial nature of Skeletor when he tries to amuse his teammates ingame.

In hindsight, I find that the nature of this arbitration has changed from its orginal purpose and has seemed to turn into Skeletor vs Grim S rather than Grim S vs Zombie Squad. However clearing Skeletor's name is just as relevant in this matter but I would still like to point out that the entirety of this matter was that if Grim's comments about ZS were justified despite the fact that ZS and Skeletor are not the same entities. Either way, I await your descision General. --ZekeThePlumber 01:58, 4 April 2006 (BST)

It will take me a minute to re-read all the evidence but I would just like to point out that Skeletor's characters were probably penalised, but as he was not searching or attacking he probably would not have noticed.--The General 08:13, 4 April 2006 (BST)

Could you please leave a message on my talk page when you make your decision? --Grim s 06:00, 7 April 2006 (BST)

Ok.--The General 10:14, 7 April 2006 (BST)

I would like to ask zombie squad why they are so opposed to having this on their page, and I would also like to ask Grim why he is so insistant that it should go on their page. I find it an incredibly minor point that shouldn't really matter to either side.--The General 10:14, 7 April 2006 (BST)

Personally, i want it there because people cheat so often and get away with it that if for once people who got caught were blatantly exposed and branded with it for life, it may serve as a deterrant to others considering the same actions. --Grim s 15:52, 7 April 2006 (BST)

Right, I have made a temporary desicion. Grim may add the allegations to the Zombie Squad page but they must be strictly NPOV and say that certain members of the group were caught zerging and that Zombie Squad no longer supports zerging, it must not be a personal attack on Skeletor. I will be checking up on it to make sure that it is not made into a personal attack. As I said this is a temporary desicion and is subject to change pending answer to my question.--The General 21:16, 9 April 2006 (BST)

General to answer your question as to why I personally don't want Grims additions has been stated previously. 1.) Placing inaccurate and unfavorable vocabulary on our teams wiki such as Zerging turns away potential new members. 2.) What I was “caught�? doing wasn’t cheating nor does it effect the overall game of urban dead 3.) It was only me that had 2 characters singing to each other and if Grim wants to brand the entire team of Zombie Squad “for life�? as a cheater because my sole actions makes no logical sense. 4.) We as a team do not wish to have historical information on our wiki to clutter it and merely want to use it as a gateway to interested parties to find out general information about our organization, the real life Zombie Squad organization, and the team within the game of Urban Dead. Grim even states he is trying to "make an example" of me but the only example he is making to other players is to not role play and not have fun.--Skeletor 05:42, 11 April 2006 (BST)

I don't think Skeletors characters being in the same place warrants a label of "zerging". I was more thinking of the group member who was caught zerging and was expelled from the group. Out of interest, is there a place on the page where you wouldn't mind the information going?--The General 19:29, 12 April 2006 (BST)

I once again direct you to the in game FAQ on the subject. --Grim s 09:38, 13 April 2006 (BST)

Yes but I don't think that warrents labeling an entire group as zerging.--The General 19:42, 13 April 2006 (BST)

That was never my point. My point is that they condoned such behaviour by tolerating it. Skeletor is a Leader, if not the leader of the group, and his actions reflect on the group. If a leader commits an action, the group (Since he makes the rule) officially condones it, even if each individual player does not. --Grim s 06:54, 14 April 2006 (BST)

Looking at it all, the desicion is that text is to be added to the page saying that a member of the group was caught zerging and was expelled from the group. I do not consider Skeletors characters being in the same place a warrant for labeling him or the entire group "zergers". Zombie Squad may make one comment to suggest a different solution, if they wish.--The General ^{W! Mod} 13:50, 17 April 2006 (BST)

Amazing vs Karlsbad

Karlsbad has promised to edit all of my text that he deems unnecissary. I would appreciate a quick Mod/Abritator warning to him that he is not permitted to do such things.

Basically, I posted a message asking for help for my group against his. He edited my post saying it was old information, thusly trying to stop help from coming to aid against his group. Now he has said that tomorrow he will do more of the same, editing out everything I have said that he thinks is "neither informative nor professional".

Karlsbad is simply threatening to use the Wiki as a device to inflict grief because of the request to CMS for asisstance. (After which a scout was sent to check on the situation, and the zombies fled the area. Basically sour grapes.)

Again, a simple note informing him that he is not permitted to do that would suffice. -- Amazing 22:23, 1 April 2006 (BST)

*Sigh* Karlsbad edit was done in good faith, therefore is not a vandalism. He added the edditorial note because he altered his own post on that thread, and added that editorial note thing so any people will realise it was an outdated response, and so you could change it to reflect his latest edit. Again, he did nothing to harm the wiki, he was actually trying to help.

Anyway, he is not supposed to edit things this way. If he want to add further information to one of his own messages, he must leave it after any replys that same message received. Karl, i hope you to change that.

Amazing, this could have been worked out without you running to the arbitration page IF you talked to him without threatning to report him as a vandal. Try to be polite in the next time, and you will surprise yourself. --hagnat ^talk 23:15, 1 April 2006 (BST)

I didn't "Run" anywhere, thank you very much. In your twisted version of this, I would waste a lot of time reverting everything of mine that he editd. In my version, I am asking for someone to make note that he is not allowed to go willy-nilly editing my comments across the Wiki. Don't tell me to be polite to someone who is being less than polite to me. Why does everyone expect me to shrug off attacks, vandalism, insult, and impoliteness while absolving the other person of all of it? (Now I'll probably be told I'm rude again in the face of your condescending behavior.) -- Amazing 23:29, 1 April 2006 (BST)

You see. There is this whole thing about NOT descending to the level of your enemies to attack them. If you talk politely with them, they will be polite with you. If they are not, this doesnt give you the rights to be unpolite with them. Again. Next time. try to solve things politely, give space for common sense, explain people how they should do things right. And then, only when you finds no way to solve things alone, ask for arbitration. --hagnat ^talk 23:46, 1 April 2006 (BST)

Being polite (not confronting him) and not seeking abritration would result in my having to waste a lot of time reverting his vandalism if he does indeed go through all my text to remove what he deems unnecissary or unprofessional. Sorry, but that's not really my best option. Granted, nothing may have come of this either - but at least I tried to prevent wiki-abusive behavior, y'dig?. -- Amazing 00:12, 2 April 2006 (BST)

Is this just that he's commenting on your posts by putting his own clearly-labelled-as-his comments inside yours in superscript, instead of underneath? I don't think we've got a policy on comment format, and I don't see that this is confusing anything. --Spiro 23:10, 1 April 2006 (BST)

Both altruistic viewpoints, to be sure. Basically it amounts to:

Hey everyone, come to these coords for a meeting! ^{There is no meeting, don't come} -- Userguy 23:29, 1 April 2006 (BST)

No, people should not be allowed to add their own editorial commentary into someone's text, before their signiture.. Just because the letters are raised, you're telling me that it's not an attempt to destroy/dismiss the text itself? Plus, I am still waiting on a comment about his promised editing/removal of everything he deems unnecissary of mine. If that sounds like good faith to you, I'm afraid you do not understand the concept. :X -- Amazing 23:29, 1 April 2006 (BST)

He signed the editorial thing. It is different from this example of yours. Anyway, i already warned him NOT TO do things this way again. --hagnat ^talk 23:46, 1 April 2006 (BST)

That's deliberately misleading, I can see that he's signing the superscript edits. It is a bit weird, though, yes, so maybe you could edit them into normal-sized indented responses for him, or talk to him about it. And him promising to edit all text that's "neither informative nor professional" is what wikis are about, he's aiming it at everyone, not just you. He's entitled to the opinion that your edits aren't informative or professional, you can call for arbitration over it after he's edited them, if there's disagreement and you can't resolve it.

But as things stand this isn't an arbitration issue. Arbitration is for "occasions where wiki users find themselves unable to reach accord". It doesn't look like you're particularly trying to reach this, you're just ignoring his points and angrily threatening to report him for vandalism, in what seems to be quite a fresh argument against a new wiki member. You should at least make some effort to compromise, and show that he's unwilling to accept this, before bringing the case to Arbitration. Thanks. --Spiro 00:01, 2 April 2006 (BST)

Well, it was faily obvious to me that he had a set plan and was going to enact it "tomorrow" by his own statement. I suppose I should wait until next week to come to Abritration with it? I dunno. Seems appropriate to nip it in the bud when it's a promised action, I told him not to do it, and he replied saying he still would. I would also like to remind you that Talk pagers do not have to be informative or professional, nor do pages which said user owns, and I'm sure there are other cases - so no, removing all non-professional or non-informative posts (and keep in mind, this is his opinion as to what is relevant or "professional") is not allowed nor supported. -- Amazing 00:09, 2 April 2006 (BST)

Well, he didnt say he would edit any talk page. Did he ? As far as I can see it, he only placed that editorial note in the Caiger Mall Survivors front page. His statement to remove all not informative or unprofessional posts were obviously targeted at that same page. --hagnat ^talk 00:18, 2 April 2006 (BST)

Hrm. All I can do is quote Karlsbad himself: "Currently, however, I plan on editing all text tommorrow that is neither informative nor professional, such as your responses, as they add nothing to the wiki." I mean, the CMS page has three "responces" from me. That hardly seems to warrent the words "all text" and "such as your responces" cites my commentary on the CMS page as only part of the intended edits. Furthermore, just look at his inflammatory and insulting reply to my original post there, and you'll see the nature of his attitude toward this scenerio and probably the future edits. -- Amazing 00:23, 2 April 2006 (BST)

Mrh?He was very polite in the CMS page. He wasnt in your talk page after you threatned to report him here. This is what i am talking about. You failed to be polite with him, he failed to be polite with you too in his second reply. If you want others to be polite with you, be polite with them. --hagnat ^talk 01:08, 2 April 2006 (BST)

Are you joking? His first reply to me included: "any assisstance would be in the form of charity work for the pitiful" and that sounds polite to you? "Mrh?" indeed. -- Amazing 01:33, 2 April 2006 (BST)

Thanks to both Abritrators, I believe this may be resolved. I just wanted someone to speak with the user. Moderators (as opposed to Abritrators) have been less than responsive, even in a one-on-one setting, so I figured this was the way to find someone other than myself (since no would be inclined to listen to me, of course) who would speak to this individual. Thanks. -- Amazing 00:17, 2 April 2006 (BST)

It is nice to know that the person that demands arbitration can be calmed down by our volunteer "wiki staff". I personally thank all the users that attempted to discuss the meanings of my posts and I regret not being able to do so myself.

I was unaware of the rules, and improperly noted the irreverence of Amazings reply in consideration to my newly edited post. My words of "Currently"- yadda yadda "-such as your responses" were in the CMS section, and I assumed wrongly that it was known that I only referred to the specific comments about the CMS main page. I should have been more explict so that all users, even overtly passionate ones, would be able to comprehend my meaning.

Secondly, I was unaware that Amazing's cry for help was in response to the remaining feral zombies, not any assualt by TSO. I wrongly assumed that any survivor group with the history of CDF would have been able to fight off feral zombies, and therefore assumed that his reply was dated to the period of time at which TSO was assualting Crossman, which would have been outdated considering the victory already acheived by my accomplished zombie breathren. Therefore it is of my opinion that my reply is not needed to be included to defend the achievements of my zombie horde, and could therefore rightly be whiped from the front page as unneeded text.

Lastly, as a side note: Amazing, I find it worring that you say you do not believe (as you noted by saying "Being polite (not confronting him)") that it is possible to confront someone and remain polite to them without involving arbitration. I would recommend a deeper thought process to the tone and method in which you deliver your responses in the future and see if it is possible to do the same work that has been done here could have been done without taking the time of others simply because you believe that it would save you personally time.

Thank you again --Karlsbad 03:13, 2 April 2006 (BST)

Amazing vs Rasher (again)

Well here we go again, folks. This time it will be really interesting, I promise.

So I contact Rasher on AIM asking what the Hell he's trying to do, exactly. His responce? That nothing will stop until "Gold is put into the box" or some such rediculous phrase alluding to payment.

I've done my research. I found Rasher myself by trying to find out how I could contact him outside the wiki to handle things. (This Wiki is hardly the place for any kind of uninterrupted discussion, and I'm sure EVERYone wishes this would all move off the Wiki)

I came across Rasher's Resume online, very quickly by entering his e-mail address into google. (hoping I'd find his AIM name)

Where does he go to school? A school.

Bear with me. I am not making his private information public without cause.

Now, "Amazingrules" has been vandalising my pages very recently, AND I've gotten SPAMMED in my e-mail by someone repeatedly resetting my Wiki password. The vandalism to my page is highly helpful to GANKBUS, falsely saying that I and my group ran away from them.

Who has been resetting my pass?

Well, the idiot who kept resetting it to spam me and keep me off the Wiki (guess what, I don't have to re-enter it when you change it.) was stupid enough to not realize the Wiki sends me his IP address with every request.

urbandead@urbandead.com  to me   More options   1:53 pm (1½ hours ago)

Someone (probably you, from IP address 152.14.70.119)
requested that we send you a new The Urban Dead Wiki login password.
The password for user "Amazing" is now "QFqgT8Q".
You should log in and change your password now.

So I trace the IP, once again using our friend Google to find a reverse IP lookup site.

Where does it lead?

OrgName:    North Carolina Research and Education Network 
OrgID:      CNRT
Address:    PO Box 12889
Address:    3021 Cornwallis Rd.
City:       Research Triangle Park
StateProv:  NC
PostalCode: 27709
Country:    US

NetRange:   152.14.0.0 - 152.14.255.255 
CIDR:       152.14.0.0/16 
NetName:    NCREN-B14
NetHandle:  NET-152-14-0-0-1
Parent:     NET-152-0-0-0-0
NetType:    Direct Allocation
NameServer: UNI00NS.UNITY.NCSU.EDU
NameServer: UNI10NS.UNITY.NCSU.EDU
Comment:    
RegDate:    1994-08-08
Updated:    1998-09-17

That's right, it's someone. He thought I'd never be able to tell who it was, much less prove it. I can forward one of the old "Password Update" e-mails to whoever wants it to PROVE it's someone. It'll have the info to show it cane from the UD wiki and it'll have his school IP on it.

At this time I ask for a complete and utter PERMINENT BAN on Rasher for abusing the Wiki to this extent. It goes beyond vandalism. He's willfully reset my password multiple times, enough to spam me - with the intent of harm. (though he failed in the 'harm' part, thankfully.)

I also ask someone CHECK HIS IP AGAINST "Amazingrules" to further prove my case for his banishment.

This is really enough. He's using the Vandalism Report page as a smear page against me because he knows I cannot post there to defend myself. Furthermore the reports he is making concern me removing what I was told did not belong from a previous arbitration case.

Perminent banishment for Rasher would be the right thing at this point, there is no doubt. (except from Rasher and GANKBUS members, I'm sure.)

Related links: Rasher's email address, is no longer posted on

Scinfaxi's talk page by Rasher himself.

Google.com, where you can enter the e-mail address found here for the name of the school he goes to.

(again, posting this info is regretable, but it is now necissary due to his actions.)

I'm sure someone will say: "WAIT! LIKE 50 PEOPLE USE THE WIKI FROM A SCHOOL, THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVE IT WAS ME! WAIT! NOOO! WAIT!!!" - So I will pre-emtively mention this: Banning the IP of the user who did this is not stopped by mutliple people using the IP.

-- Amazing 23:23, 5 April 2006 (BST)

Note: I do not know which came first, my contacting him or him vandalizing and resetting my pass. For the purpose of being honest and upstanding I wrote the above as if I had contacted him on AIM first. -- Amazing 23:32, 5 April 2006 (BST)

Ok. First of all, i am all agaisnt posting private information from others in here or any other page. Second, this has gone too far. I believe a mod is needed here, since any arbitatrion decision wont be followed by EITHER sides. If no other Arbitrator has something against this, i wish Amazing to be released from his ban on the vandal page just this time. --hagnat ^talk 23:43, 5 April 2006 (BST)

Since there's no "report people for resetting your password a lot, asking for money in exchange or leaving you alone, AND vandalising" page, I didn't know where else to put this. Perhaps an arbitration ruling of: "Yeah, Rasher needs to go away, all other matters aside" could help get at least one of the many Mods into action. As for the private info.. How else could I prove anything? :\ - I could offer the info in e-mail form to anyone who asked, but so what? Then people just ask for it and I send it. heh. His e-mail was made available BY HIM, and that is the source of all info I've gotten. Anyone with his e-mail and Google can see the two pages that list his personal info. Heck, taking the "@gmail.com" off even brings up more about him. Besides, I don't think that pasting in the reverse IP info of someone who reset my pass without my permission violates any sort of rule, material or immaterial. -- Amazing 23:54, 5 April 2006 (BST)

I do go to NCSU and use a public wireless network which is where the IP came from. They're randomly assigned to anyone who uses a laptop. I know personally at least 10 other students at NCSU that play Urban Dead, although I will not reveal how many of them are related in any way to GANKBUS for game security reasons. At a campus this large I'm sure there are more as well. 'amazingrules' is obviously coming from a laptop on campus as well. In fact, it probably happened somewhere close to me. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people on the internet that dislike you. We report you for vandalism because you try to "color" our comments about our goals with your own points of view, which is against the policy. The vandalism page clearly shows that. If this is a request to somehow stop us from reporting you, we'll remove our request if you stop editing our page. I'll accept both pages (CDF and GANKBUS) being protected from the opposite teams -The General, Amazing, all members of CDF, and all members of GANKBUS and affiliates (scinfaxi). Also, we legitimately think The General is somehow connected to CDF. This personal information proves that I go to NCSU and so does amazingrules. Remove my personal information at once. Rasher 23:47, 5 April 2006 (BST)

Rasher says "Amazingrules" was from the school as well in order to cover his ass when the IPs match. I will accept NO LESS than total banishment of that IP. Since Rasher has posted the school which he attends on the Wiki now, I guess it's no longer in question as to weather or not I should have posted it. Seems he has no problem telling others, could've said he didn't go there and secretly gotten it removed by a Mod. -- Amazing 23:54, 5 April 2006 (BST)

Remove the personal information at once. It proves it was from the same subdomain as Rasher, and nothing more. As I said before, other members of GANKBUS and UD players go to NCSU and use the free wireless networks...why wouldn't they? I'm fine with an IP ban of amazingrules ip, on the condition that Amazing, The General, and CDF be barred from editing, in any way, GANKBUS. The same will be held for Scinfaxi, myself, and GANKBUS on CDF. Rasher 00:00, 6 April 2006 (BST)

Im not removing info you posted on the Wiki yourself. Furthermore, it's the info of the person who reset my pass. All I said is what school you go to. You said it too, so no. No removal. (this is just Rasher seeing an opportunity to cause more work) -- Amazing 00:03, 6 April 2006 (BST)

You have a link to my resume. Remove it.

Know what? I replaced the link with a link to Google. See? One of us is reasonable. -- Amazing 00:08, 6 April 2006 (BST)

The e-mail SPAM of my password being REPEATEDLY RESET continues. -- Amazing 00:06, 6 April 2006 (BST)

What can i say ? Amazing, you cant touch the Gankbus. Rasher, you and your crew can organize your group agaisnt the CDF, BUT no wiki page is supposed to be a UserHating page. Therefore, any Amazing hate messages will be deleted BY A MOD OR THE ARBITRATION TEAM. Amazing, you dont count as an arbitrator in this case for obvious reasons. I volunteer myself to remove any content that i find hateful, biased or false from that page upon request. Ademais, no gankbus member can touch any CDF or amazing related page.

If i find that either Gankbus or Amazing actions against each other have went too far again, i will *gladly* report it as vandal actions, since i am, and i believe most of this wiki user are too, tired of all this gankbus vs. amazing battle.

I ask you two, and all others involved, to act in a mature way while using this wiki service. This should be a place for people to gather information and have fun, not a place to solve personal vendettas against users you dislike in any form. --hagnat ^talk 00:09, 6 April 2006 (BST)

And, amazing, please remove rasher's personal information from here. --hagnat ^talk 00:09, 6 April 2006 (BST)

Done. How do you propose I report all the inflammatory and false info Rasher and his buddies will be posting, without a doubt? Your talk page or what? That's going to get pretty annoying for you, won't it..? (Seriously) As for misusing the wiki, CDF isn't a grop out to attack GANKBUS. GANKBUS is a group out to attack CDF and me. Easy to see the cause of it all. -- Amazing 00:14, 6 April 2006 (BST)

You can use my talk page, or we could create a section in the arbitration talk page (i think this is better). There will be disclaimer on the NPOV section of the GANKBUS page explaining how things are going to work now. --hagnat ^talk 00:32, 6 April 2006 (BST)

Leave it up to the moderators. We're not going to post anything intentionally inflammatory (other than general anti CDF stuff like we had up before). If something is actually personally offensive, in a legitimate sense (not correcting factual data) you can post it to one of our talk pages.Rasher 00:24, 6 April 2006 (BST)

Your information "like you had up before" will not be inflammatory or offensive in any way either. -- Amazing 00:27, 6 April 2006 (BST)

You know what? This doesn't address the IP that reset my pass. That still needs to be banned. Also, - Someone needs to report Amazingrules for vandalism unless we're picking and choosing now. Zaruthustra ignored my request to look this over, for the record. -- Amazing 00:24, 6 April 2006 (BST)

For that use the vandal report page. I asked you to be released from your ban in there, this time. Wait for another arbitrator to accept it. --hagnat ^talk 00:34, 6 April 2006 (BST)

It should already have been on the vandalism page since an abritration decision said the GANKBUS page had to STOP being an inflammatory attack page. No one took that up, so here everything lies. -- Amazing 00:38, 6 April 2006 (BST)

I've decided to block Amazing's offending IP for 24 hours, at the very least. If after this ban the IP continues to reset Amazing's Pass, I'll happily begin stepping up (This should also have the handy benefit of letting us see which user accounts use that IP (and sorry, Amazing, this is not something I can check manually - Unless I can get access to the actual weblogs (which I can't), which IP is behind which username is off-limits to me). -- Odd Starter ^{talk • Mod • W!} 01:27, 6 April 2006 (BST)

Much appreciated. I'm sure that all the folks on that IP can play from home. It's a wonder they haven't been flagged for Zerging (Just because of the mutual IP.) -- Amazing 02:57, 6 April 2006 (BST)

Unfortunately I can't do that myself. I removed my email address from the talk page, and edited it from your talk above. If you have a problem with this you can repost it, but I consider it personal information. Rasher 00:29, 6 April 2006 (BST)

Actually, no you do not edit my Report. You made it public, sorry. -- Amazing 00:31, 6 April 2006 (BST)

I still consider links to and directions how to obtain personal information inappropriate. Do we otherwise agree on the circumstances of arbitration? Rasher 01:25, 6 April 2006 (BST)

By that logic "Look for Rasher on the internet!" would be inappropriate information. I have no problem with the ruling, all that would change is someone else removing your insults/incorrect info instead of me. Actually saves me some work. :) -- Amazing 02:57, 6 April 2006 (BST)

MrAushvitz VS The majority population of the Suggestions page

Zaruthustra requested we take it to the vandal banning page, but i thought this was a far more suitable place for it.

The problem is that MrAushvitz has been making legions of shitty suggestions for well over a month now, usually three a day. I, speaking on behalf of the angry mob you see on the suggestions page (The one with the pitchforks and burning torches), hereby request that MrAushvitz be banned from the suggestions page (Not the wiki) for a time (Preferably a month), so as to give us all a break from the incessant garbage he has been shovelling on us in three heavy servings a day, getting longer and longer as time goes by, and forcing him to act upon the advice freely given to him by the community numerous times regarding his suggestions, and spend the time to think several suggestions through for submission, rather than have him tossing out half baked ideas constantly.

More details and the discussion thats spawned this can be found here.

It is requested that the arbitrator be Zaruthustra, because he has already said he will come to a decision about this. --Grim s 19:22, 14 April 2006 (BST)

Would you settle for me? If so then then the very simple and quick desicion is that he is banned from the suggestions page for a month, unless he can come up with a good reason not to.--The General 20:48, 14 April 2006 (BST)

Well lets get him over here and see his side. --Zaruthustra-Mod 23:15, 14 April 2006 (BST)

Strangely enough, I don't have a problem being banned for a month, if it's the quicker solution to the problem. The way I see it, I was new, and it took time to get the "jist" of things around here (the way things are done, prior arguments which were voted on, etc.) So logically, if I had taken the time to read the voter accepted suggestions, and the others, also listed. That would have solved a lot of these problems. Both friendly and unfriendly voters and messages have mentioned to me basically the same thing. And I have learned from it, unfortunately, this comes on the heels of prior ideas from weeks ago which were not well recived (many recent ones were well recieved!) So in closing, I'm 34, and an adult, I know better, we all make mistakes.. but I am a firm believer in Justice and the "good swift kick in the ass" deterrent. If it is decided that I am to be banned for a month, who more deserving than me, I have improved, BUT people wasting space in the Wiki, when we have sooooo much saved information that can answer questions is just ignorant, or a bit lazy. I accept whatever punishment is slapped on me, mainly because there were times I suggested something (twice, as I recall) that was either: already in the game, and I didn't know it.. OR was on the peer accepted (already voted on and done, on it's way to the assembly line assuedly.) I have also broken the template suggestion page once or twice, that's not cool, but new posters do that, even experienced ones do if they aren't watching. Blah, blah, key point, my only defense is many of the allegations are very inaccurate, I do not always post 3 messages a day, there are times I have taken days off, even as of the last week, and at times I only post 1 or 2 good ones. but again, many of this comes from what has already happened. I do admit, I will defend my suggestions if they are good ones, and for that I will not apologize, only if they are too lengthy or admitedly not needed, I can listen and learn, I have demonstrated this. I have no more to say, freely render your decision based on my usefulness and other considerations, if any. --MrAushvitz 23:33, 14 April 2006 (BST)

Zaruthustra requested we take it to the vandal banning page, but i thought this was a far more suitable place for it. I bet you did.
It is requested that the arbitrator be Zaruthustra, because he has already said he will come to a decision about this. Too bad the "decision" he's said he'll make has already been fixed at a monthly ban, rather than hearing the entire case first, acting as though he's never heard it before. THAT'S how a proper arbitration should be. --Cyberbob240^CDF 00:12, 15 April 2006 (BST)

Objectionable as always Bob. Unfortunately (for your case), I never said anything about banning Aush for a month, and if he wants another arbitrator he can certainly contest my nuetrality. --Zaruthustra-Mod 03:12, 15 April 2006 (BST)

Sounds pretty cut and dried to me. Everyone wants him banned, he said he'd accept a ban and admits guilt. Case closed? --Cinnibar 05:47, 15 April 2006 (BST)

Not everyone actually. While I agree his suggestions tend to be slipshod I do not feel he has violated the rules of the suggestions page enough to warrent a ban, temporary or otherwise. It should be noted that his suggestions have improved, after considerable chastising from a large portion of the voters (myself included). Mind you the improvement has been spamminated suggestions to failed suggestions but improvement none the less, albeit slower then you normally see with the suggestion makers. As for his current method of suggesting, length over quality, while annoying, are still not a violation of the suggestion page's rules, and do not merit a ban. While I don't like his suggestions and would rather see no suggestion rather then a bad one I do not feel this is the right way to go about it. Velkrin 10:08, 15 April 2006 (BST)

I do not feel he deserves a ban, either. I fail to see how he has damaged anyone or harrassed anyone; as near as I can tell he's been entirely polite. Eagerness and ignorance are not crimes; in fact, eagerness should be rewarded, in my opinion.--Jorm 10:30, 15 April 2006 (BST)

I think this is a farce, MrAushvitz's defence is quite right, people have started to vote keep on his discussions meaningful discussions have come forth on his suggestions. I don't believe in punishing people for being green, even if MrAushvitz's took a very long time learning, but now he's about halfway decent, The precedent of banning somebody on a page because we just don't like his (now previous) suggestions is an afwul one, The suggestions page has always been about mucking trough 100 bad suggestions to come across the one gem, like the zombie attack accurasy revision or feeding groan. MrAushvitz certainly deserved some of the derision he recieved, but everybody always overlooked the fact that he's obviously very committed and enthousiastic about this game. Banning people from the playground because he just isn't one of the popular kids is very immature nor in style with what this wiki is about.--Vista ^W! 12:05, 15 April 2006 (BST)

The idea isnt to kick him out permenantly, but to force him to think on his suggestions before posting them. While eagerness is all well and good, posting a steady stream of vastly underdeveloped suggestions is not something that should be looked kindly upon, especially when months of advice has been given by everyone freely to him, and apparently ignored. At present, he just posts the first thing that comes to mind, and his most recent suggestions have been a rather spectacular return to his original form. While blocking him permenantly from the page would be wrong and a waste, blocking him temporarily gives him the time to work his way around in the game researching everything, learning all the little quirks that exist in the game, and how the game balance is maintained and what have effects on it (And how strong they would be). It will also teach him the patience required to develop a suggestion from its earliest spark of inspiration, and thus we may get actual good suggestions, instead of things that look to be an idea (Good or bad) with hastily cobbled together and ill thought out mechanics which drag the whole suggestion down as a result of the haste with which he rushes to post things. It will also allow all the other voters on the page to cool off, and prevent knee jerk killing of his ideas. Honestly, i feel a break would be better for him, us, and the page as a whole, rather than him lobbing out a steady stream of suggestions as fast as he can in the hope he makes a good one by accident. --Grim s 12:49, 15 April 2006 (BST)

This simple rehash of all the arguments for banning ignores a few things, First punishing people extra for not taking advice is plainly contradictionary to the term, we gave advice, we did not gave dictations. We wanted him to make better suggestions. sometimes he took it, sometimes he did not. And the result were there to see. For not taking our advice, his suggestions failed more then if he had. The punishment was already built in. Second, A month ban is in effect a lifetime ban, besides a small core of suggestors and voters, we have an very high turn over, and it is very doubtful that after serving a month ban he would return to the suggestions page. It isn't for nothing that vandals after two warnings only get a day, and that a month ban is the fourth increasement in punishment on the books for vandals, for which you have to be such a serious repeat offender that there is nobody on vandal data who recieved it. You propose the draconian punisment of a partial ban for somebody who besides the fact that his suggestions are sub-par and that he doesn't take advice has never seen official action against him, and has been on the whole a normal but enthousiastic user. punishing him relativaly higher while his infractions are relatively lower, even considering the scale defies the princible of fairness that should lay foundation to all actions against users. Third The cooldown period, While he has been inflamatory, he has been on the whole more respectful then a lot of his detractors, whose wishes for his death uttered quite regualarly. That would make it seem that those users indeed could use a rest period to recouperate from their lack of relativism, Punishing MrAushvitz to do so seems wrong however because while his actions aren't without fault, they've shown more respect then theirs. Also prevension of autokill votes isn't the issue, as whenever MrAushvitz has made a resonable suggestion the votes reflected this and comments were made to show that the author was recognised but the vote was on the merit of the suggestion. Even if this would be a problem the fault would not lie with MrAushvitz but with the autokillers as the rules are very clear on this point you have to vote on merit of the suggestion instead of on the merit of the suggestor, and of course the last couple of weeks have shown how important it is to follow the rules even if somebody makes it hard for you to do so. Again not worth punishing/banning the user who didn't commit the act himself.

I stay with my original judgement but i'll reword it, Banning people from the playground because they just aren't good at playing the game or one of the popular kids is not in style with what this wiki is about, nor a responcible action to undertake.--Vista ^W! 14:37, 15 April 2006 (BST)

Now wait a second here. He's broken quite a few rules/guidelines. He breaks the wiki page, overuses the RE tag after being repeatedly warned about it, insults the voters, deletes votes, votes 'KEEP' on suggestions for reasons other than idea merit, posts developing suggestions (for discussion?) in the main suggestion page rather than the discussion page, his timestamps are a mess half the time... I haven't even gotten to the part where he posts complete stupidity in a badly formatted, over-boldfaced, randomly quoted way. His suggestions suck, but it's his blatant defiance of guidelines and deliberate attempts to antagonize the users that bring him to this point, not the ideas themselves. He's a troll, he enjoys being a troll, and he's distracting people from the actual purposes of the page by waving a red cape in front of the voters. Overuse of RE alone after repeated and constant warnings to troll the negative votes shows that he's more interested in a flamefest and antagonizing people than pushing real good ideas out. Timid Dan 15:57, 15 April 2006 (BST)

Deleting votes is vandalism, and should be dealt with in the established way we deal with all vandalism. on the vandal page, with supporting links to the history. A mod then decides wether or not it was in good faith and deals the appropriate punisment. That has not happend, If you come across him deleting votes, please, by all means, report him. Go through the proper channels like all other breaking of the rules are dealt with. But as niether this report here or your the mayority of your comment goes about the rules, but rather about the fact that that he posts: 'complete stupidity in a badly formatted, over-boldfaced, randomly quoted way' that 'sucks', and that he doesn't follow all the guidelines. Both are annoying. But as soon as posting bad suggestions is a reason for banning somebody the suggestions page will have about 5 users left, sure he's worse then the rest, but trust me, most of the rest doesn't smell like roses to me either. As with the guidelines again, blatent abuse should be dealt with in the proper channels. but of course the problem is that half of the guidelines are only guidelines, another problem is that the guidelines are partly based on the famous princible of I'll recognize it when I see it. suggesting a month long ban on the grounds that "he post to much RE's" is excessive. As for him being a troll, As I already mentioned he's been insulting and inflametory, and you know what bothers me the most about this whole case, His actions were more muted then most of the plaintiffs. The way to deal with trolls it is to make sure you're above their behavior, not to sink below it. You see, if this was about anything else but to get rid of him the demands made whould be quite different. I've been one of the biggest quality freaks on the suggestions page for close to half a year now. And you know what, if you want something, you ask for it. But it sticks out to me that people asked for a ban, to have him removed, yet cite quality reasons. Why is it that nobody asked for him to have a 1 a day/1 per 2 days limit on his suggestion posting, a 3 RE's maximum policy on those suggestions. a proof reading by a project welcome member, etc, for a month? Those are the actions that would improve precisely what everybody is complaining about, yet nobody asked for it. Can you give one legitimate reasons why my closing statement in the paragraph above yours doesn't hold true?--Vista ^W! 18:04, 15 April 2006 (BST)

Is there a way one can possibly limit his posting w/o outright ban? Maybe a 2 edits a day to the suggestions page?--Mpaturet 19:44, 15 April 2006 (BST)

Arrrggghhh! The timing for this is way off IMO. I don't know how long this arbitration thing lasts, but I've seen some gradual, if slow improvement, culminating in the day before yesterday's (or something like that)'s decent suggestions... followed by yesterday's (or is it today, hard to tell with time zones) fiasco (suggestions that were remiscient of his first days in complexity, lenght, and outright crappiness). Let's just say I'm confused more than anything, and I'll probably change my mind about this soon, depending on how it goes. Still, I personnaly think 1 month is a lot of time... Given recent ameliorations, even if followed by a pile of crap, I think 1 week would be better, but right now I'm opposed to those kinds of restrictions. I think he's finally come to his senses and will be able to at least try to make things better (finally). --McArrowni 22:08, 15 April 2006 (BST)

IMHO It's not just his suggestions that need improvement, it's his voting. He votes Keep for anything that he deems "Original" even if it is horribly game breaking.. You know what is original? Putting Godzilla in UD. Does it break the game? Yes. Is it out of genre? Yes. Does it deserve a Keep? By MrAushvitz's standards Hell yes--Mpaturet 22:36, 15 April 2006 (BST)

Votes are subjective and based purely in opinion. Unless he's voting dupe on suggestions which are completely diffrent you really can't fault him for voting in a way you disapprove of. Velkrin 02:21, 16 April 2006 (BST)

Forgive my opinion, but we are a bit off topic here in a sense. My voting is not a relevant subject as to this banning for a month matter, in relation to abuses perceived or a breaking of rules. If you were to restrict my voting privileges (which, being banned for a month does do per se.) That would be a bad idea. I will say point blank that I have seen the overuse and abuse of spam voting, and it seems at least 1/3 of the time you see anyone use a spam vote it is a violation of the voting right then and there (because spam is not a "strong kill." Says so in the rules. And yet it is used as a 3rd degree burn for something some people want to vanish before anyone else can see or vote on it.) Trying to limit my keep votes, or point the finger at what I vote keep on is, a waste of energy, and time when there are much worse problems relating to voting. Your efforts would be better spent on toning down rude and abusive comments added to the spam and kill and dupe votes than even looking in my direction. --MrAushvitz 02:43, 16 April 2006 (BST)

Decision

Oh dear, that was a lot of text for such a relatively unimportant argument, and sadly I'm going to add quite a bit of my own. I have to say that I think both sides have legitimate arguments.

Lets start with the case for banning. As Grim aptly albeit coarsely put it most of Aush's suggestions have been dysfunctional on a game breaking level. and he's has been submitting them at a fairly break neck pace as well. This isn't anything we can ban him for, and there isn't really a case for it. However, what he has done is basically ignored most efforts to get him to conform to the suggestions guidelines. When people ignore pointed advice to come into compliance with the guidelines it can't be said that they are acting in good faith, especially with the numerous warnings. We've banned people for this before (if memory serves actions were taken against Eddo and Jason Killdare) and the case is strong here as well. I know a lot of people will say that its not a big deal and that not everything peer reviewed gets in the game. But on the same token the suggestions page as an institution has kind of been teetering on the edge of illegitimacy as long as its existed, and only a very concerted effort has kept it from degenerating into a massive spam heap that Kevan would completely disregard.

And as for not to ban. We have to admit that most of the failures of fringe contributors and voters are our failures as core members. We were the ones who wrote all these rules and let’s face it; they've become bloated and increasingly worthless. Growing archives and rule creep have become so bad that we can't honestly expect people to abide by these all the time. It is now effectively impossible for the average person to read through peer reviewed and rejected to look for their ideas. And the spam vote has basically been diluted and watered down to the point where only by systematically abusing it can you use it for its intended purpose, deleting game breaking suggestions so they don’t spam up the queue. Remember, we don't ban people here as "punishment". I like to think we're all adults and we can control ourselves. Banning should only be used as damage control and as a last resort. Aush's suggestions have been slowly improving and from my talks with him he seems to generally be acting in good faith.

So, I am not going to suggestion ban Mr. A at this time. However I will be keeping a closer eye on the suggestions page and if his behavior doesn't change (at a more rapid pace) he will be asked to take a considerable amount of time off from the suggestions page. I would like to see him start screening ideas on talk, paring them down, and bringing them into line with the suggestions guidelines. If he'd like I am on very frequently and can answer any questions about suggestions, why they won’t pass vote, or why they would hurt the game. Also, I'd love for everybody to join me on suggestions talk for a major revamp plan to the suggestions page, so we can avoid this in the future. --Zaruthustra-Mod 05:46, 16 April 2006 (BST)

Wikigate

This case was getting so lenghty that we could barely understand what was going on. Follow the links to any specific case to see how it is being ruled. If you are not involved in that case (ie, you are not one of the sides of the case or an arbitrator), avoid posting on the front page. Use the discussion page for that.

Amazing vs. GANKBUS

Ruling: dismissed
Arbiters: hagnat, vista

Amazing vs. Rasher

Rulling: Rasher and Amazing are to stay away from each other. 21:10, 16 May 2006 (BST)
Arbiters: hagnat

Amazing vs. Rueful

Rulling: Ruling Penned 5-10-2006 Conndraka^{mod T W!} 00:02, 11 May 2006 (BST)
Arbiters: Conndraka

Amazing vs. ASS

Ruling: solved
Arbiters: Brizth

Amazing vs. Banana Bear4

Ruling: closed
Arbiters: N/A

Amazing vs. Mpaturet

Ruling: Dropped (Misunderstanding)
Arbiters: ???

Amazing vs. Scinfaxi

Ruling: Arbitration refused by Scinfaxi.
Arbiters: Arbitration refused by Scinfaxi.

Amazing vs. The Faggots

Ruling: The Faggots cleared until further evidence is posted.
Arbiters: The General

Amazing vs. Lucero Capell

Ruling: Amazing and Lucero Capell have agreed to a contract that limits their actions towards each other for a period.
Arbiters: Vista

Amazing vs. Zaruthustra

Ruling: Amazing and Zaruthustra are to stay away from one another.
Arbiters: LibrarianBrent

Available Arbiters

At the moment, it is advisable that both parties present to simply list 5 Arbitrators each, that would be agreeable to them personally and see if any overlap. If not, repeat it again with different choices. If there are, contact those arbitrators listed on both lists and see who wants the case.

If you are an arbitrator and wish to arbitrate any of the pending cases, sign below.

Amazing's list of possible arbitrators.

Amazing listed those Arbitrators he found that would be unbiased against him or that couldnt be trusted as objetives. The following lists show who amazing would accept -and who he wont- to rule any of the wikigate cases.

Arbitrators Amazing will accept

Arbitrators Amazing won't accept

CthulhuFhtagn - Not trusted to be objective.
hagnat - Not trusted to be objective.
Jjames - Involved in the greater case, not trusted.
Karlsbad - Nothing personal.
Lucero Capell - Involved in the greater case, nothing personal.
MaulMachine - Not trusted to be objective.
Mia K - Not trusted to be objective.
Mpaturet - In no way fit to arbitrate anything.
Odd Starter - Not trusted to be objective.
TheTeeHeeMonster - Nothing personal.
Zaruthustra - Involved in the greater case, not trusted.
'STER - Nothing personal.

hagnat vs. Amazing

Is this ready to be archived yet? -Kb

Amazing is using the namespaces pages as templates exploit to call User:Amazing/Amazingiswatching inside the Crossman Defense Force. While the input code is inside the code for the CDF page (which is Amazing domain), the output of this code is shown outside the page, just above the UrbanDead logo in the left-top of the page (which is public domain). If we allow any kind of messages to be written outside the borders of any page, we might start seeing people creating pages that dont use the wiki interace at all. --hagnat ^mod 19:04, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Arbiters: i will accept anyone but Scinfaxi, Jjames and Amazing (for obvious reasons). --hagnat ^mod 19:04, 29 May 2006 (BST)

I offer to Arbitrate--Admiral Ackbar ^{U! WTF} 19:06, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Denied. -- Amazing 19:08, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Responce: THIS BELONGS IN POLICY DISCUSSION, so we can clearly see this is not really started for the purpose stated. Want to prevent abuse of DIVs? Then make a guideline through a vote. Userspace and Group Pages are the domain of the user or group. Nothing damaging is being done, in fact hagnat has said his only reason for this is that others might misuse it in the future. This is simply another case of someone who doesn't like me finding something to pick at me about. Comes soon after me listing Hagnat as enemy #1 of Malton Neighborhood Watch and Crossman Defense Force zombie list. The same DIVs hagnat is referring to have been up for a solid while before he suddenly decided to remove one. He didn't remove the one from my userpage, only the page that lists him as an enemy. Nuff said. -- Amazing 19:08, 29 May 2006 (BST)

This is off topic, but for the love of god, R-E-S-P-O-N-S-E. I've seen you spell that wrong so many times, over so many pages I want to gouge my eyes out. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 19:37, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Arbiters: I will accept Conndraka, Cyberbob240, Karlsbad, LibrarianBrent, Mia Kristos, The General, Tycho44, or Wyndal. -- Amazing 19:10, 29 May 2006 (BST)

If you would except me, I would be willing to arbitrate.--Vista 19:13, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Well, I ruled you out originally, but I'm willing to allow it since you've expressed interest and aren't someone I consider incapable of fairness. -- Amazing 19:17, 29 May 2006 (BST)

I like to think so myself, And as I'm not excluded by hagnat I'll get right on it.--Vista 19:26, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Go for it! --hagnat ^mod 19:29, 29 May 2006 (BST)

My reasons has nothing to do with me being ranked #1 on your page amazing. I am laughing at that rank, btw, since i am noone in the game, and find it highly entertaining. My reasons on this is that it brings bad precedence, where if we try to remove this kind of thing in other cases it could be argued that we let you (or anyone else for that matters) use it. --hagnat ^mod 19:15, 29 May 2006 (BST)

I'm wondering what your motives are here. Why have it at all? Unless you can come up with one amazing reason, I'm going to assume it's due to you wanting to increase your page ranking. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 19:11, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Xoid and everybody, only comment that are directly helpful to the case. this is not going to be wikigate 2. if you want to say something, stuff it. seriously. only technical comments allowed. This is going to be handled quick and easy without any flaming or trolling allowed.--Vista 19:13, 29 May 2006 (BST)

To clarify: What are the motives to remove it? Right, because it's me. Anyway - It is a spoof of the very common "STREETS IS WATCHING" quotation, placed somewhere that folks will see it and go: "Waugh! Amazing is watching!!" - As you can see from the history of the page (if you care to look in the first place?) the link was an afterthought. It's a joke similar to the fact "New Message" notation set up by another user. I get enough hits without having to rely on the two or three people that may click in from this Wiki per year. -- Amazing 19:17, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Only to note, i always do what i think its best for the wiki as a whole. If it were to piss you, Amazing, i could have find very attractive ways to do so a long time ago --hagnat ^mod 19:29, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Additional Note: It should be noted that I do not support the use of such DIVs anywhere besides Userpages and Group pages, which are not 'public property', and even then only by the page owners. If a hypothetical user wants to block the entire menu and be an idiot on his own userpage, I think that's his problem. -- Amazing 19:31, 29 May 2006 (BST)

The ruling. I can see the problem hagnat has with it and he has an point. on the other hand I don't believe in the sliding scale. So we can allow one thing without having to resort to allow everything. This had the intended effect on me, it got a small chuckle and I wondered how it was done. same as all those userboxes did during the time they were fresh and I have no doubt that at the end of the week it will be just as old and just as annoying. But to avoid the same problems we had with userboxes:

Only usable on pages owned by the user himself.
only 25 characters of plain text, no pictures, no links, no line breaks. no changing of font size, no nothing. the only thing allowed is standard roman characters. the only deviations are capital letters, italics and bolding. changing font color is also allowed.
all other normal editing limitations apply.

-Thats it. if somebody has extra questions about this ruling. ask it here. if you want to rant at me, Hagnat or Amazing use our user talk pages.--Vista 20:11, 29 May 2006 (BST)

Sounds about right. One question - does point 1 include Group pages or should I remove that? -- Amazing 01:23, 30 May 2006 (BST)

It includes group pages.--Vista 08:13, 30 May 2006 (BST)

What about using them to fake system messages? Amazing's "This user must not be antagonized." (at the top of his user page, outside of the body content) concerns me more than his "watching". I know it's not a standard format for any real warning, but it looks like it's something other than the user-written content of his page. --Punchkin 02:04, 31 May 2006 (BST)

I don't believe for a second that you or anyone else would believe someone would think that's an "official" message. -- Amazing 04:03, 31 May 2006 (BST)

I first noticed it during Wikigate and briefly assumed it was put there by a mod as the result of a ruling. I imagine a wiki-naive user could think the same. Can I ask why you put it there and what purpose you think it's serving? --Punchkin 17:00, 31 May 2006 (BST)

You can ask, but you already know the answer (IE: Joke) so really your reason for asking is suspect. Drama Drama. -- Amazing 23:18, 31 May 2006 (BST)

Okay, I'll go with good faith on this: it's a joke system message for some reason and you didn't stop to think that a new user might take it seriously, and don't care now that this has been pointed out. This ruling still requires you to cut it down to six characters (I assume the 25 characters is "in total", otherwise people could just string them together) and remove the bullet points and underlining. --Punchkin 02:33, 1 June 2006 (BST)

It's not a "system message", even as a joke. That space is not for system messages at all... It's more akin to a template saying: "This user or group must not..." etc. etc.
I don't believe it needs to be cut to 6 characters, and I think the person who actually made the ruling should be the one saying what you're presuming if it's so. Also, I thought bullets were part of 'regular text'. -- Amazing 02:43, 1 June 2006 (BST)

I know it's not a valid system message format, I'm just saying it looks like one. To a reader who assumes that users can only edit the main body of their user pages, it looks like a moderator has added it. If being a fake system message wasn't part of the joke, then I really have no idea what the joke was, now. --Punchkin 03:04, 1 June 2006 (BST)

Well, you have to step back and completely remove Moderators and System Messages from your thinking on this, since that wasn't in mine. Now - It's a message placed on my page by me myself, and I expected it to be seen that way - so the "joke" (though admittedly, we've gotten to a point where this isn't really a very GOOD joke, but what other term is there?) is that I'm telling people not to antagonize me as if there's any weight to my "demand". I guess the proper way to look at it is as if it were in the standard location at the top of my page in the are it'd be expected to be in. I put it next to my name at the top because it's a reference to me, and I figured it belonged in close proximity to my name, on the same line. Granted, this isn't some kind of comedic genius, it's just a (sarcastic?) statement made by myself in reference to the ongoing attacks/insults/defamation/antagonization I experience. I only intended it to carry as much "weight" as a standard Template, really. -- Amazing 03:09, 1 June 2006 (BST)

I'm with amazing on this one. Some messages are standard to MediaWiki, some are not. It becomes obvious really quickly that his "must not be antagonised" warning is nothing more than just that — warning people not to antagonise him. (Or else he'll bog 'em down in arbitration cases… Mwhahaha. </slander>)

Are you really sure you want to eliminate over-writing things, or fake system messages completely? Like with my cheeseburger example (for the former), or Grim s' rather eeeeevil fake "you've got new messages" template? (For the latter. Which I really should caught on to quicker. It's not like Uncyclopedia's "You've got nude massages." didn't have prepared me …) –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 03:38, 1 June 2006 (BST)

Any message official or otherwise lends it authority from the position it is made not from it's formatting or its text. Just like some idiots reguarly claim jokingly to ban people, as they are not moderators, it's meaningless. If people mistake it for actual official talk the mistake is theirs -within reason ofcourse- --Vista 16:19, 31 May 2006 (BST)

But a naive new user can't judge the position that a message is made from. Jokingly banning people (or threatening to ban them) should be quite serious if some new users are taking it at face value and being pushed around, shouldn't it? Claiming to have banned someone would of course be meaningless if the user tried to edit a page to check, but a threat of "I am a mod, stop posting suggestions or you're banned" would carry a lot of meaning. I assumed this would count as vandalism or something, but maybe I'm wrong. --Punchkin 17:00, 31 May 2006 (BST)

It would, as I said all within reason. 'Bad faith' editing is the yard stick by which we measure. bullying a newby with banning him certianly would be bad faith. But even for a confused newbie amazings notice carries no penalty.--Vista 17:13, 31 May 2006 (BST)

I think it's readable as an official-looking warning of "if this user has offended you, you may be punished for retaliating". Which is weak, I just think fake system messages should be more of a concern than "Amazing is watching" if we're discussing what should and shouldn't be allowed. --Punchkin 17:33, 31 May 2006 (BST)

Sorry, you're just trying to encourage more drama. That is all. -- Amazing 23:18, 31 May 2006 (BST)

Can't someone ask a question around here without you taking offense? MaulMachine ^U! 00:56, 1 June 2006 (BST)

Yes. Also, what question? -- Amazing 01:07, 1 June 2006 (BST)

No, I did actually say that this case was weak, I'm just answering Vista's point, and discussing an aspect of div abuse that he didn't mention in his ruling. I'm sorry if this sounds like drama to you. --Punchkin 02:33, 1 June 2006 (BST)

What about other uses, such as this one: {{Custom Title|left|Cheeseburger}}, which you can't see unless you check the heading of the page, or until someone comments it out. While cheeseburger was a stupidity-fuelled example, there are legitimate uses for the template. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 02:37, 31 May 2006 (BST)

BananaBear vs. Legend X

Legend X has repeatedly edited the Bale Mall Elite NPOV section so that "on our Enemies List located below " read "on our Enemies lies located below", even though the phrase was referencing the enemies list, and there is not even an enemies lies section. Whenever I have changed it to the proper word, Legend X changes it back and threatens to take my to wiki court. I would like Legend X stop changing the word "LIST" to "LIES" as in context "Enemies LIES" makes no sense. This is one example of what keeps happening--Banana Bear 17:38, 31 May 2006 (BST)

Any preference for an arbitrator?--Vista 17:40, 31 May 2006 (BST)

I would prefer not to have: LCpl Mendoza, axe-man, RCG Tiburon, or v2Blast, as I was surprised to see they exist, and also, I would prefer not to have Amazing, simply given our track record.-Banana Bear 17:48, 31 May 2006 (BST)

Would've ruled on your side as per this case, but oh well. ;) -- Amazing 23:20, 31 May 2006 (BST)

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=BME&diff=next&oldid=265068 Note the change from the User:LibrarianBrent to LibrarianBrent. LibrarianBrent was just a fucking redirect to User:LibrarianBrent until it got huffed. WTF did he change this for? –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 17:42, 31 May 2006 (BST)

keep on topic Xoid, Why don't you go ask him on his talk page?--Vista 17:46, 31 May 2006 (BST)

'Tis on topic. It shows a pattern of Legend X reverting changes just because they were not made by him, regardless of what they are. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 17:48, 31 May 2006 (BST)

I think it might just be sloppy editing, where Legend X didn't like my edit, but didn't bother to check what was in the stack below it, that would also get destroyed if he reverted to his version. It happened once before I think. This is all just supposition on my part though. -Banana Bear 17:53, 31 May 2006 (BST)

Probably right, come to think of it. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 12:24, 1 June 2006 (BST)

I would be willing to arbitrate this case if both sides agree to it. --Bob Hammero ^T•W!•U! 23:45, 31 May 2006 (BST

Also willing to arbitrateJjames 00:26, 1 June 2006 (BST)

Willing to Arbitrate --Duce Nauks 03:06, 1 June 2006 (BST)

Count me in... if you'll have me, that is. --A Bothan Spy ^{Mod WTF U!} 08:18, 1 June 2006 (BST)

Also willing to arbitrate Conndraka^{mod T W!} 12:18, 1 June 2006 (BST)

All good and well all those people willing to arbitrate, but first things first, lets wait for legend X responce first before the fighting starts.Vista 12:19, 1 June 2006 (BST)

I admit fault and will change it to "list" right away. The main problem for over 3 months is that Banana Bear who is a known PKer and Zerger in the real game thought it would be funny to erase and edit the BME page non-stop with his cyber pal Denzel Washington. They took their players behaviour in the game and personified it. I can't stand either guy as they have no life BUT it appears that he was actually trying to help this time. That being said I think he realized what was going and enjoyed the fuss it caused. you see he would come i nright after Denzel's vandalism and then just change the spelling of that one word. I assumed - incorrectly - that he was vandalizing as well. Sorry. Changing now - LEGEND X

- Done. Changed the spelling Legend X ...So what's up with this case? --V2Blast 21:31, 6 June 2006 (BST) Nothing it just needs to be archived--Vista 21:38, 6 June 2006 (BST)

I think I'm the best arbitrator here. I get everything moved along. :P --V2Blast 12:44, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Sonny Corleone vs. Rosicrux

Does not understand the difference between a new post and a post aimed to discredit another group's post. Decided to create an edit war even after the post was turned into an unbiased post that still shows their side of the story. Was warned for vandalizing and told to take to arbitration but decided to vandalize again.

Arbitrators that I will accept:

These were picked random except for the few that are mods so they are to be trusted.

Sonny Corleone ^WTF 16:49, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I will be willing to arbitrate, if Rosicrux will have me. Cyberbob Talk 16:51, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I'll accept you. You're a mod. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 16:57, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Rosicrux didn't do anything after the vandalization warning. If you read the history page http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&action=history it is clear that it was me who posted back Rosicrux's original post with some additional information. This arbitration is not needed. Bonefiver 19:07, 11 June 2006 (EET)

Fine. Dropped. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 17:09, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Sonny Corleone vs. Labine50

Made a template and a page directed at a member since said member called him a spammer and that his made-up suburbs are unfit to wipe said member's arse. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 19:13, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Proof:

User talk:Labine50

Template:H8sonny

Arbitrators I will accept:

I'll accept anyone but Amazing, not because of anything personal but because I want to give him a break from the Arbitration page.

Note: This is my first Arbitration case so I'm not sure about a lot of things. So someone help me out here. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 19:14, 8 June 2006 (BST)

I would be willing to arbitrate this case. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:19, 8 June 2006 (BST)

What are your goals for this case? Your desired outcome?-Banana Bear 19:20, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Desired outcomes? I want Labine50 to never make another user directed template, never talk about me on a page of his, and I want him to stop spamming Throc-laffo even when he's told to stop because it's up for deletion. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 19:23, 8 June 2006 (BST)

You don't get to choose what desired outcomes you want. Here's the way it works:

Create an arbitration case (done)
Pick an arbitrator who has volunteered, or ask one who hasn't
Wait for the other person to agree to that arbitrator as well
If #3 fails, go back to #2
Follow whatever the arbitrator's instructions are (submitting evidence, waiting for a ruling, whatever)
Read the arbitrator's ruling, and abide by it

Nowhere in there is getting to choose what you want to happen, beyond stating what problem you're having. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:32, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Like I said. I have no idea what I'm doing. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 19:33, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Sorry Bob, my bad. -Banana Bear 19:35, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Don't worry about it guys. I'd rather not know than have gone through Wikigate myself. :-) –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 19:36, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Willing to Arbitrate --Duce Nauks 19:43, 8 June 2006 (BST)

I'm willing to arbitrate.Jjames 20:00, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Me too. And as a note to other arbitrators, I would like to suggest that we wait for them to reply before continually volunteering. This seems to be a pretty clear-cut case. Has Labine been notified of this case? If so, he should post here at least once. --V2Blast 21:01, 8 June 2006 (BST)

I'll agree on BobHammero as Arbitrater or whatever for this case.--Labine50 ^MHG 21:40, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Sonny, is this acceptable to you? –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 21:45, 8 June 2006 (BST)

I'd like to see more arbitrators first. I'd like to get a feel of them all. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 21:51, 8 June 2006 (BST)

I won't be at all offended if you don't choose me, but you should know that the likelihood of every arbitrator volunteering here is very low. If you want to see what they're all like, my advice is to visit each of their user pages, and take a look at their last contributions. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 22:02, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Unlike you I don't have all day Corleone! If this is going to take more than half an hour, I'd like to delay it, because I have to be somewhere at 3:30 CST, which is about 35 minutes from now.--Labine50 ^MHG 21:54, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Good for you. I also have to go in 15 minutes. Now I am being civil about this but obviously you are not. Please calm down. It'll take as long as it has to. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 21:56, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Just taking a page from your book. Your like the cornerstone of civility Quote:Why are you so retarded? Sonny Corleone WTF 03:43, 8 June 2006 (BST)--Labine50 ^MHG 21:58, 8 June 2006 (BST)'

Oh and heres another goody for you Quote:It's not the lack of content. It's the lack of intelligent content. It's retarded. It doesn't need to exist. It's unoriginal. It makes little children cry. And fuck your dead kittens. Sonny Corleone WTF 03:29, 8 June 2006 (BST)--Labine50 ^MHG 22:01, 8 June 2006 (BST)

to save you some time heres another one of sonny's civilized, dignified, and well thought out remarks. Your Throc shit is up for deletion. Stop creating more. Sonny Corleone WTF 03:12, 8 June 2006 (BST)--Labine50 ^MHG 22:08, 8 June 2006 (BST) I'm being civil now because we're in Arbitration. Now calm down and let's wait. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 22:09, 8 June 2006 (BST)

[1]--Labine50 ^MHG 22:11, 8 June 2006 (BST)

Ok, I'm pretty sure we've seen all the Arbitraters that are online or that are going to be online for the next couple hours. and also, something you should note about his comment, he outright says that he's rarely civil.--Labine50 ^MHG 22:22, 8 June 2006 (BST)

I'm civil when I have to be. Now let's please all be quiet until more arbitrators come. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 22:27, 8 June 2006 (BST)

I'm sorry (not) but I have to go. I'm fine with bobhammero, and if your not, that's your problem then isn't it?--Labine50 ^MHG 22:30, 8 June 2006 (BST)
Calm down guys, we can wait a day or two if we need to. Be civil. That's the point of Arbitration. And by the way, not that many people come to this page (unless, of course, the case involves Amazing). So agree to a couple after a couple of days. --V2Blast 23:04, 8 June 2006 (BST)

As V2Blast said, be patient, calm down, and please do not fight on this page; it only makes you look bad. When you have both decided on an arbitrator, then he/she will request information from you. Until then, there is no need to continue quoting each other. Arbitration cases are usually settled within a few days, not hours. If you both cannot agree upon an arbitrator within the next few days, I advise you to each make a list of the top 5-10 arbitrators that you will accept, and see at what point you agree. Then, start contacting arbitrators and see who is willing to take the case. Until then, be patient, and don't continue to flame each other. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 23:13, 8 June 2006 (BST)

If it's ok I'd like to work this out before it turns into a big thing. I'll leave Labine50 alone. I won't contact him unless it's over something like editing mistakes, simple unbiased things. I'll do this in exchange for that user directed template deleted and Labine50 stops making anymore Throc. (I know he voted delete on them but just saying) Cool? Sonny Corleone ^WTF 02:22, 9 June 2006 (BST)

That's cool with me. I'd delete it myself if there was a delete button.--Labine50 ^MHG|^MalTel 03:26, 9 June 2006 (BST)

Well if it's ok with the arbitrators I think it's solved. I apologize for being rude and overreacting. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 03:27, 9 June 2006 (BST)

Hey, we prefer it if people work things out on their own. As far as I know, you can consider the case closed. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 05:32, 9 June 2006 (BST)

Yay, peaceful negotiation. Haven't seen that in a while here... or rather, ever, in Arbitration. So should this be moved to the archive or whatever? --V2Blast ^P! 03:33, 10 June 2006 (BST)

You musta missed Banana Bear 4 vs Legend X; Legend X admitted fault the moment he heard of what the case was about. Fixed the spelling mistake and case closed. I'm glad to see that it wasn't a one off though. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 05:48, 10 June 2006 (BST)

As a matter of fact, I did see it before, and noticed that Legend X admitted fault, but didn't really know what happened with the case and assumed it was dismissed. --V2Blast ^P! 19:14, 10 June 2006 (BST)

Someone move this? --V2Blast ^P! 03:43, 13 June 2006 (BST)

Sonny Corleone vs. Bonefiver

Does not understand the difference between a new post and a post aimed to discredit another group's post. Decided to create an edit war even after the post was turned into an unbiased post that still shows their side of the story. Was warned for vandalizing and told to take to arbitration but decided to vandalize again.

Arbitrators that I will accept:

These were picked random except for the few that are mods so they are to be trusted.

Sonny Corleone ^WTF 16:49, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I will be willing to arbitrate, if Bonefiver will have me. Cyberbob Talk 16:51, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I'll accept you. You're a mod. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 16:57, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Based on your comments on http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Moderation/Vandal_Banning page (on Rosicrux case) and my talk page http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/User_talk:Bonefiver I cannot accept you as an arbitrator for the possibility of biased attitude against me. Bonefiver 19:11, 11 June 2006 (EET)

Pistols at fifty paces. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 17:22, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Should I point out at this phase that I was never given a warning about vandalization. I believe the description of this case is incorrect because it was copied and pasted from the Rosicrux case. Bonefiver 19:37, 11 June 2006 (EET)

Why, you're absolutely correct. Warned for this edit. Thanks for reminding me! Cyberbob Talk 17:43, 11 June 2006 (BST)

No problem. However the description is still inaccurate. After that warning (and that edit for that matter) I haven't vandalized the page in question or other pages. Bonefiver 18:00, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I don't understand what you're getting at. Nor, to be honest, do I care. Cyberbob Talk 18:02, 11 June 2006 (BST)

This has nothing to do with that. This is a civil case between to wiki users. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 18:01, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Sorry for spamming and being new to this, but is it possible to add related issues from my point of view to this arbitration so that we can continue gaming sooner? Bonefiver 19:42, 11 June 2006 (EET)

Don't like pistols at fifty paces? Um, yeah, both sides of the story are supposed to be heard here. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 17:48, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Before doing so, I'd advise actually choosing an arbitrator? Cyberbob Talk 17:50, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Like I said. Those were the ones I'd accept. He just has to pick one. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 17:54, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I know. It was addressed to him. Cyberbob Talk 17:56, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I am Willing to arbitrate. Conndraka^{mod T W!} 18:33, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I'll accept you as an arbitrator. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 19:09, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Fine by me too and I assume neutrality even if the arbitrator and the opponent know each other beforehand (See User_talk:Conndraka). Bonefiver 20:01, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Now, if you please, I'd like to hear what I'm being accused of. As mentioned before the description is inaccurate and it should be revised. If the arbitrator has some other approach in mind please ignore this post. Bonefiver 20:01, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I am willing to arbitrate also.--LCpl Mendoza 19:52, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Also I would like the Sonny Corleone vs. Rosicrux case (http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Moderation/Arbitration#Sonny_Corleone_vs._Rosicrux) removed from this page because the arbitration was dropped by Sonny Corleone being without grounds. Bonefiver 20:10, 11 June 2006 (BST)

Fair enough. Done. – Nubis ^NWO 20:48, 11 June 2006 (BST)

~~I am also willing to arbitrate, I can't tell if you all settled on Conn, if you did, Conn's good too. -Banana Bear 20:21, 11 June 2006 (BST)~~ Bapow! Go Conn!-Banana Bear 20:52, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I think we settled on Conndraka. Bonefiver 20:27, 11 June 2006 (BST)

OK. Conndraka is arbitrator. I'm accusing of Bonefiver of editing the Stanbury Village page in bad faith. When asked to keep it unbiased so that it doesn't out right say you're aimed to discredit another statement Bonefiver ignored it and decided to continue. Then when it was fixed so that it still shows their POV but does not discredit Bonefiver made a comment about me writing it. Bonefiver is mad that a while ago I removed their group from the page, this is because I removed groups that have no updated in a while. I was cleaning out suburb pages because there were a lot of groups on suburb pages that no longer existed. I removed MRH and said "If you guys still exist please add yourself since you have not updated in a while." That was not done in bad faith but to ensure an up to date wiki. All I want is Bonefiver to keep his news statements unbiased so that they do not go to discredit a previous statement, this creates edit wars as we now know. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 22:31, 11 June 2006 (BST)

I am assuming Sonny Corleone directs this arbitration towards this: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=286445&oldid=286341 news item, since he didn't specify the target in above post. It was done on good faith but to discredit the earlier news. Now that I read it I would strike out the Malton Retirement Housing recommends zombies try not to make up stories, as it hurts their tiny rotted brains comment so that it's not that offensive. Otherwise it seems a clean rebuttal (with a twist of humor) of the earlier news items which are incorrect and which the opponent thinks can't be edited or deleted as inaccurate. Any Malton Retirement Housing member can verify the fact that they are inaccurate. Also your edit (http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=286699&oldid=286445) directly after aforementioned edit can be seen to be done in bad faith. First of all it mentions Malton Retirement Housing directly and to a casual wiki user it seems to be written by a Malton Retirement Housing member which is not true. This message also serves as an open invitation for zombies to come to Kersley Mansion for a feast. In that regard the message was written or compiled to directly harm Malton Retirement Housing. Lucky for you no harm is done because the post is inaccurate and should be edited or deleted.

My reply to the above edit is not part of this arbitration because I have received my warning about it.

I can agree that I edited the Stanbury Village page in bad faith once, but it was this edit: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=286746&oldid=286699 and I have recieved a warning for it. Case closed. Note that this points to the Bonefiver made a comment about me writing it sentence in the above post.

I would like to hear where you asked to keep it unbiased. So far I have seen only blunt deletions.

This is irrelevant to this arbitration but I would like to know where did you get the notion that I'm mad at you? Also I would like to know how you asked MRH or anyone else if it's ok to remove their group from Stanbury Village page? I read the history and the Stanbury Village talk history as well as Malton Retirement Housing equivalents and I couldn't find it. On the other hand your comment on that exact edit http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=253885&oldid=249134 makes my eyebrows position themselves vertically higher. As I said this is irrelevant to the current arbitration, but it would be nice to know and perhaps sheds light on my opponents' stance.

Also I would like to know if you Sonny Corleone think it's okay to post news that aren't truthful? Should these posts be either edited, deleted or denied?

Bonefiver 06:45, 12 June 2006 (BST)

I will respond to Sonny Corleone's post later after the arbitrator arrives, but meanwhile I start with my side of the story.

This is how I believe the incident was started: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=285607&oldid=281778 Rosicrux posted an event which discredits the earlier news. While it is an offense there should be a way to negate them if they are completely false which they are. Any Malton Retirement Housing member can verify this fact. Some contacts can be found on the Malton Retirement Housing home page.

Sonny Corleone replies with deleting the post: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=285770&oldid=285607 His comments say: Technically isn't news sincei t doesn't update anything but instead tries to discredit another news item. It should be noted that there is no big RRF presence because of Excursion. First he claims in several occasions (http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=281774&oldid=275779 http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=270836&oldid=269410) that Stanbury Village belongs to The Ridleybank Resistance Front and then in that comment he says there's no big RRF presence. Any Malton Retirement Housing member can verify that during those times the zombie activity has been very low.

Rosicrux removes the inaccurate posts: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=286115&oldid=285770 This was deemed as vandalism and Rosicrux was given a warning and I believe he accepted the warning. However a similar situation in Ridleybank (http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Ridleybank&diff=265040&oldid=264966) where Sonny Corleone deleted a post claiming it is inaccurate, Are you on drugs? There's zombies everywhere in Ridleybank. It's Ridleybank for christ's sake! in his own words, didn't result to a vandalism warning. In both cases Sonny Corleone singlehandedly decided that there is enough zombies to claim a suburb. Any Malton Retirement Housing member can verify that in Stanbury Village this was not the case.

This is the edit which brought us here for arbitration: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=286445&oldid=286341 Notice the quotes taken from Sonny Corleone's edit descriptions which are in line with the above statement originally written by Rosicrux. The only offensive line which should've been removed was this Malton Retirement Housing recommends zombies try not to make up stories, as it hurts their tiny rotted brains.. Otherwise it is in line with the current policy on posting latest events -stories.

Sonny Corleone replies with this: http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=286699&oldid=286445 The comments say There you go. Unbiased and does not discredit. Just a simple update. You could have done it yourself but you're too busy trying to discredit. however the action of editing the page like that discredits mine and Rosicrux's work and earlier submissions. Also it is uninformed and assumes things that do not exist like in the earlier presented cases. Any Malton Retirement Housing member can confirm that the last latest events post is inaccurate.

Last of my edits (http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=286746&oldid=286699) was reverted and I was given a warning for it. I accept the warning, however the warning was given hours later by a moderator (Cyberbob240) who I consider to be Sonny Corleone's friend (in the internet sense of the word) based on these forum posts: http://zombies.dementiastudios.org/boards/index.php?topic=162.15 . Anyway this posts case is closed and it should not be part of this arbitration.

I aknowledge and appreciate the work Sonny Corleone has done for the wiki, but in this case I think he has been blinded by earlier lack of opposition on his changes. His posts are biased and reading the The Ridleybank Resistance Front rules it is understandable because he propably has one zombie around to observe the world.

I would like him to write the news regarding Stanbury Village according to the style guide (http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/The_Urban_Dead_Wiki:Style_Guide) and especially following the Wikipedia NPOV (Neutral point of view) policy. The last four latest events -posts in Stanbury Village page have been sub par while being inaccurate too.

I would like to add a disclaimer to the latest events saying that the events displayed might contain subjective observations and they represent the views of an individual. Also the latest events should be signed so that the individual can be identified. Currently (and I stress that word) Stanbury Village is a safe place for a survivor to be, but the latest events give a false idea of the suburb.

Also I would like stress the fact that my alter ego in this small imperfect universe of Urban Dead lives in Stanbury Village too. I would like to post new events and fix or delete false ones, but so far the job has been hindered by Sonny Corleone who thinks he knows better.

Write and let others write. Bonefiver 23:04, 11 June 2006 (BST)

You have no idea how the wiki works or the game for that matter. The RRF noticed the suburb being downgraded to orange. To keep law and order in the suburb the RRF annexed it and declared martial law. That is NPOV since it does say "RRF takes all suburb, all humans gone." It simply says the RRF annex it. Survivor groups do not need to recognize it. This is the same in Barrville, except no group is creating an edit war.
The MRH created a statement that was biased and aimed to discredit a previous statement. These are not allowed because they create wiki wars. A fine example would be the recent news post on the Rhodenbank page. A zombie made a biased post and it was struck out.
To be fair I kept your post there but edited to meet the standards. Instead of accepting it you made a statement that it is by me. There is no need for that.
Now your whole group is declaring a wiki jihad on the page and is throwing out your credibility.

Sonny Corleone ^WTF 23:11, 11 June 2006 (BST)

"Now your whole group is declaring a wiki jihad on the page" -Sonny

You jump to conclusions. This is not a jihad, nor is our whole group involved.

I added one (1) news item to the Stanbury Village page, and while the truthfulness of it was none whatsoever I can only say that I follow your lead in that regard. This is a thing that is sometimes referred to as irony (a subclass of humour), ie pointing out your errors by being equally ridiculous. I have now gotten a warning for this (vandalizing) which I accept but truth to be told I think this shows some double standards among the moderators since - AFAIK - Sonny has got none.

What I'm asking with this post is that Bonefiver is not to be judged based on my actions. My vandalism has nothing to do with the matter at hand, it was only a consequence of the already ongoing wiki war. And for the record, credibility is not an issue in this matter. Credibility? On the Internet? Is there such a thing?

You may now go back to your Internet.

--Astram Loccasin 01:48, 12 June 2006 (BST)

I would assume that being downgraded to orange (from red) means that the zombie activity has lowered in the suburb. That is entirely correct and any Malton Retirement Housing member can verify that during those times the zombie activity has been very low. Your announcement of annexing the suburb should not be the only thing that is needed to raise the level. And we, the survivors of the city, should be able to rebut your claims. Zombie activity has been slightly higher for the last two days so perhaps your latest events will become reality later but not the day that you posted the event. Or am I completely mistaken and all the status reports are to be made by a (or one of the) dominant zombie population?
Yes. It was made to discredit your post which was inaccurate. Since you didn't let to delete your inaccurate news (http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=286341&oldid=286115) it was the only option left. Currently there's no options left to comment on a subject that someone has started first. Does it sound fair to you?
There is a need. As I said before the event description mentions Malton Retirement Housing in a way that it sounds like the event was posted by a Malton Retirement Housing member. Also it is an open invitation for zombies to come to Kersley Mansion and as such it can be seen as an attempt to use the wiki as a weapon of war against a rival group. Now that Malton Retirement Housing is denied to rebut these claims by Sonny Corleone by any means (http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=285770&oldid=285607 http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=286341&oldid=286115 http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php?title=Stanbury_Village&diff=286699&oldid=286445) the wiki and it's biased writings affect Malton Retirement Housing's status in the game.

Bonefiver 07:12, 12 June 2006 (BST)

Active Arbitration: Wow. This is going to be interesting.

Bonefiver, myself and Sonny are to determine a person that is acceptable as an editor of Wiki articles. Once that is done, that person will be the only person to edit the Stanbury Village page on behalf of MRH or the RRF division currently led by Sonny. Neither Sonny nor Bonefiver are to edit the Stanbury page but will instead report what they would like edited onto the page to the moderate third party (to be determined) who will then edit the page appropriately in an NPOV fashion.

Bonefiver and Sonny are "technically" warned that inaccurate statements will not be allowed on Suburb pages, and suggest both be aware of the following statement.

Please note that all contributions to The Urban Dead Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then don't submit it here.

Please note that I believe that the edits in question were in fact done in good faith, but either poorly written, non-POV or both.

Ruling Penned: 03:00 BST 12 June 2006 Conndraka^{mod T W!} 02:55, 12 June 2006 (BST)

EDIT: This Ruling Shall remain in effect for aprox. 120 Days from Date of being Penned ie 12 October 2006. Conndraka^{mod T W!} 09:57, 13 June 2006 (BST)

May I comment? What about spelling errors and things not related to news? I write lexicons for suburbs so I'll need to edit it for that. And if you think about it bugging one guy to edit things is kind of unfair for that guy. Why not make it so that they cannot post news articles about the other group? That solves the biased and discrediting problem. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 03:01, 12 June 2006 (BST)

I can handle the NPOV section of the page in question.Its business and I don't care about personal loyalties and all that other bull.Just have both sides email me what their side is concerning status of Stanbury Village I will mix them together and remove anything i consider biased.I will mention the fact that RRF annexed the suburb in question but that the MRH contests this claim.I think thats fair enough.Email is kgensen@aol.com if you agree to me handling it.--LCpl Mendoza 03:10, 12 June 2006 (BST)

Sorry, but I can't agree on that based on this post on RRF forums (http://forums.ridleybank.org/viewtopic.php?p=28272#28272) I quote: DeadSchultz Stiff Joined: 28 May 2006 Posts: 49 PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 12:36 am Bonefiver your a dumb piece of inbred shit.So is your friend Lexda44.Please go fuck yourselves,choke on a dick,die and get you and your motherfucking snakes off OUR MOTHERFUCKING FORUMS.Thank you and have a nice day.Sincerely yours LCpl Mendoza of the IWM,ASS,and ofcourse a proud member of The Constabulatory of the Ridleybank Resistance Front. -—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bonfiver (talk • contribs) too busy with the research? -Kb.

Yes. That was my comment. I'm 98% sure I signed it, but ... Above unsigned tag by Karlsbad (too busy with tagging? ;)) Bonefiver 06:50, 12 June 2006 (BST)

Heh, you could clear it and add your own sig if you wish. --Karlsbad 07:05, 12 June 2006 (BST)

This arbitration ruling is really unfair. There's no way to get a guy to post for every little thing we write. I would have settled for "Don't write news articles about the other group." Of course, why should we do that? That would be the easiest thing to do. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 12:25, 12 June 2006 (BST)

Actually either of you can go here and put what ever you want, However the actual edits to Stanbury Village must be made by a third party acceptable to both agrieved parties. Conndraka^{mod T W!} 16:03, 12 June 2006 (BST)

I like it. The ingress is spot on :P Bonefiver 17:27, 12 June 2006 (BST)

Answer this question though. What about things unrelated to news? Like spelling errors, things in the wrong order, and adding lexicon pages? Sonny Corleone ^WTF 20:55, 12 June 2006 (BST)

As long as intended Content is not changed, I dont see a problem with typographical, or minor editorial issues being fixed by either party. But no significant changes. Conndraka^{mod T W!} 22:57, 12 June 2006 (BST)

Ok. So pretty much no group related news is allowed? I'm asking these question so that I don't get in trouble later. What about updates in sieges? Stanbury Village has a Mall so sieges are expected. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 22:59, 12 June 2006 (BST)

Sieges would fall under content, so no. Allow someone in an unrelated group Post news of the Seige et al.. Conndraka^{mod T W!} 08:43, 13 June 2006 (BST)

Re:Bonefiver you brought wikidrama to the RRF forums.I certainly was not going to give you a cookie for doing so.But thats irrelevent to me.Really I could careless about what dispute you have.I would not mind doing this for you regardless of my feelings and if you are concerned i may be biased well someone else could check my work.Perhaps Conndraka could review it etc.But I'm just trying to be helpful thats all.If you don't want me to help out ok its your right.But if I decide to volunteer my services don't you think I would have the decency to be impartial in my work. I'm a man of my word.If I say I will be impartial and fair I will.Again its your call.--LCpl Mendoza 22:03, 12 June 2006 (BST)

Negative. I don't think you would have the decency to be impartial in your work because one of the parties involved is your "alliance" mate and the other is "a dumb piece of inbred shit" as you so eloquently put it. Peer reviews would just mean extra work for Conndraka or someone else. Bonefiver 07:36, 13 June 2006 (BST)

Gentlemen please take this to a discussions page. Thank You. Conndraka^{mod T W!} 08:43, 13 June 2006 (BST)

If you are a third party and are interested in taking up this editing task. Please leave your name here for consideration. Conndraka^{mod T W!} 08:43, 13 June 2006 (BST)

How long would this "job" last for? –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 09:51, 13 June 2006 (BST)

Until October 12th per the addendum to the ruling. Conndraka^{mod T W!} 09:57, 13 June 2006 (BST)

I can deal with that. Is there a system already set up for how it is to be done? (e.g. Saramou/RRF places his stuff on page A, Bonefiver/MRH places it on page B, and I get a message saying; "A'ight, it's ready Xoid." –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 10:21, 13 June 2006 (BST)

What if one of us quits the game before that date? Say Bonefiver quits, would it be null and void? If I quit? Sonny Corleone ^WTF 21:03, 13 June 2006 (BST)

I assume that's how it works. Arbitration isn't really my thing. I prefer to ~~abuse my dictatorial powers and intimidate my opposition into bowing before me~~ follow the rules, and be a good little boy. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 01:29, 14 June 2006 (BST)

Do I consider this whole thing dead, or what? WTF is going on there? –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 17:10, 21 June 2006 (BST)

I'm guessing that either both understood, one understood but didn't post anything (and the other didn't read it), or neither read it. --V2Blast ^{T•P!•C•SR} 21:19, 22 June 2006 (BST)

I read it. Now it's done and over with. Good. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 21:20, 22 June 2006 (BST)

Koppie vs. Saromu

Does not understand the difference between a new post and a post aimed to discredit another group's post. Decided to create an edit war even after the post was turned into an unbiased post that still shows their side of the story. I recently led a team into Ridleybank (we're still there) and added information to that effect on the Ridleybank wiki page. Saromu/Sonny Corleone has deleted my posts twice, made threats, and used vulgarity. To wit:

"If you're going to shit up a page at least do it right. Survivor faggotry at it's best..." "Drama is against the rules and you're lucky you're not being put up for vandalism like a mod suggested"

This isn't vandalism, this is fact. As much as Saromu hates to admit it, the Cannonball Crew is operating in "his" suburb. The hard proof of that is that there are now 21 heavily barricaded buildings in Barrville. This fact has been discussed on the RRF's own forum. Barricaded buildings notwithstanding, Saromu believes that my claims are fake because of an unused forum on the AoG website, and because of a PM he received from Tony Blair (another member of the Cannonball Crew). Saromu misunderstood Blair's PM; when he said the Ridleybank invasion was a "diversion," he didn't mean that it didn't exist. My team really is in Ridleybank; there is also a much larger group in Barrville. My team was sent to Ridleybank to stir up a ruckus (which it has done) and distract the RRF away from Barrville (which it apparently has not done).

According to the The_Urban_Dead_Wiki:Style_Guide and the wikipedia NPOV policies, information on neutral pages should be fact-based. If there is more than one viewpoint, BOTH should be displayed. To quote from the NPOV: "The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting views. The policy requires that, where there are or have been conflicting views, these should be presented fairly, but not asserted. All significant points of view are presented, not just the most popular one. It should not be asserted that the most popular view or some sort of intermediate view among the different views is the correct one. Readers are left to form their own opinions."

If Saromu doesn't believe my crew is in Ridleybank, and he doesn't believe the barricades are going up, he can post something to the following effect: "The RRF refuses to accept the CC's claims. The RRF believes that there is no significant human presence in Ridleybank and that the barricades have not been going up." That way, both points of view are portrayed, instead of Saromu beligerently erasing all my posts.

Alternatively, I would like an arbitrator to verify the truth of my claims. Because my team is engaged in a sensitive mission I don't want to post troop strength & locations on this page. But I'd be willing to give this information to an appointed moderator, and trust him/her not to divulge my classified information.

I'm not familiar enough with the arbitrators to pick one, so I will leave it up to Saromu to suggest one. But since I'm not familiar with the arbitrators, I reserve the right to object at a later time, before the arbitrator is actually picked.

I apologize if this is not proper arbitration protocol, I'm new to this whole thing.

--Koppie 16:48, 19 June 2006 (BST)

Any preference for arbitrator? -Banana Bear 18:35, 19 June 2006 (BST)

This case can be thrown out since I have a PM from Tony Blair stating that the Cannonball Crew are only updating the Ridleybank page to distract the RRF while they are in Barhahville. Now this is not allowed on the wiki. Also Nubis, a mod, said that you should be brought up for vandalism for this. But because I don't feel like being an asshole I didn't. If you want I will bring you up for vandalism. If not, thank me for my kindness and stop spreading lies on the wiki to cause drama. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 18:41, 19 June 2006 (BST)

Edit If indeed the Cannonball Crew are there then why is it that no one has ever seen you there? I get intelligence reports every day. Mostly newbies and RAT every other day. If CC are "indeed" there then keep it on your group's page. The only reason why you're posting it on the Ridleybank page is to get a reaction. We don't need this kind of things and putting it there is only causing trouble. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 18:52, 19 June 2006 (BST)

And Hagnat just made it NPOV. Does it make you happy? It makes me. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 19:08, 19 June 2006 (BST)

Yeah. I just made a NPOV entry for that. I am inside ridleybank now and am not seeing a single barricade in there. Either do something, or this NPOV would be all you will have in the Ridleybank page. --hagnat ^mod 19:10, 19 June 2006 (BST)

I just walked through Ridleybank; there were plenty of barricades on my path through it. Even some EHB buildings. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 07:19, 22 June 2006 (BST)

Group H broke into some of them. Empty. Barricade strafers. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 13:32, 22 June 2006 (BST)

Possible Arbitrators

I'll arbitrate, if you guys'll have me. Cyberbob Talk 18:38, 19 June 2006 (BST)

I would be willing to arbitrate. –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 18:39, 19 June 2006 (BST)

I am also willing to arbitrate; I currently have one un-aligned alt in the suburb and surrounding area and so could also verify claims by one party or another. --Karlsbad 19:00, 19 June 2006 (BST)

I'll take Karlsbad since he can prove it. Also on a side note even if they are found in the area them adding their group to the side shouldn't count. Does the RRF put their name in every suburb they hit? No. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 19:06, 19 June 2006 (BST)

So the question is, does Koppie agree to Karlsbad as an arbitrator? --V2Blast ^{T•P!•C•SR} 21:13, 22 June 2006 (BST)

I think it was settled outside of the wiki. I spoke to Tony Blair about it. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 21:17, 22 June 2006 (BST)

So is it settled between you and Koppie? If so, this can be archived. --V2Blast ^{T•P!•C•SR} 21:22, 22 June 2006 (BST)

Leave it up for a couple more days. If nothing else is said then it's over. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 21:23, 22 June 2006 (BST)

I am also willing to have Karlsbad arbitrate. Karlsbad, I will send you "classified" information that helps prove the CC are in Ridleybank. I will have to trust that you will keep this information CONFIDENTIAL. Saromu, stop acting like you're in charge here. You didn't settle it "outside the wiki," and it's not your call to end the arbitration just because it took me a couple days to agree to an arbitrator.

Here is some additional evidence that I can make public:

Here is the letter from Tony to Saromu, which Saromu claims is proof that the CC aren't in RB. As you can see it says the opposite. Tony gave me permission to reprint this letter.

"My sergeant major came to me with a plan for a decoy mission which I approved. He was in charge of putting the whole thing together, because it was only a secondary mission I was in charge of the CC's primary mission. The sergeant major is the third in-command, and he has led a lot campaigns in the past so this was completely his baby, because I was way to busy with the collation to have any part in it myslef. Also my 1st lieuteante has been away for awhile so the sergeant major is actually the acting secound in-command. The idea was to start a dummy invasion of Ridleybank after we took our positions in Barrville. It's a suicide squad they have no hope of winning and they don't even have back up. It was only a distraction to take the heat off of Barrville but he launched the squad too soon. I'm telling you this in confidence he worked hard on this mission, and it was only a stupid miss communication that caused this to happen. He stands no hope agasint the RRF and he knows it the mission was desinged that way. The RRF may just ignore him or they may take him on and crush him, but either way he deserves his shot. The man put together an entire campaign with no help."

Here is some photographic evidence. For reference, Tony Blair and Xoom are both CC members. I can provide additional proof of this if it's needed.

Picture #1 Picture #2

Finally, here is a thread in Saromu's own chatroom talking about a CC member was found in a building in Ridleybank. For reference, ISnipewithaKnife is a CC member. The thread has a link to his profile so you can verify this for yourself. Here's the thread.

Saromu, I'm not sure if your actions were based on an honest misunderstand of what Tony said, or if it was based on hostility. Either way, I think the evidence is clear that the CC mission in Ridleybank is small but very real. You don't own the Ridleybank wiki page; it is a neutral page for all interested parties. Your actions go against the NPOV policy, not to mention that your conduct has included inappropriate remarks and threats.

--Koppie 01:24, 23 June 2006 (BST)

Edit: I just realized I don't have a way to send confidential information to Karlsbad. Karlsbad, if the above evidence isn't enough for you, please email me and let me know how I can get the additional information to you. Thank you. --Koppie 01:38, 23 June 2006 (BST)

Misunderstanding. I read it that the CC were making it up of invading Ridleybank. My bad. I'mm willing to settle that they update news. However their group doesn't belong on the side. That's for groups that are going to stay in the suburb. The RRF doesn't put their group on every suburb they visit. It happened once and it was removed. When I was PARA I visited Penny Heights for 2 weeks. Did I put the group there? No. This isn't Darvall Heights where every group and their brother places their group on the page. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 01:59, 23 June 2006 (BST)

I'd be willing to agree to that, if the arbitrator approves. I'll also make sure to note that the CC presence in RB was not undisputed. I'd also like an apology but I don't expect to get one. I'll settle for Saromu respecting my right to post facts on the wiki. --Koppie 03:22, 23 June 2006 (BST)

I apologize for removing the news. I thought that it was lies to distract us. Sorry for all that. And you do not need an arbitrator to drop a case. Sonny Corleone ^WTF 03:37, 23 June 2006 (BST)

No, but you need both parties to agree. So is it settled this time? --V2Blast ^{T•P!•C•SR} 18:15, 23 June 2006 (BST)

I figure its done, and I didn't have to do any heavy lifting. To quote the A-Team: "I love it when a plan comes together." --Karlsbad 20:54, 23 June 2006 (BST)

So can this be moved? --V2Blast ^{T•P!•C•SR} 19:13, 28 June 2006 (BST)

Now. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 08:04, 29 June 2006 (BST)

The Fifth Horseman vs Akule

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Image:Laffo5th.gif

http://wiki.urbandead.com/index.php/Template:Laffo5th

Akule took a personalized avatar (altough the image is indeed based on copyrighted contents) that I made for my own and private use (given the fact that it took a fair lot of work to make it the way I did it, nobody was given permission to re-use the image (though if they asked, that would not be a problem)) and vandalized it with insults directed at me in person. This image has already been nuked on ImageShack (because of the harassment) and Resensitized (for same reasons), so to continue that harassment he has uploaded the image to the Wiki. Additionally, he incorporated it in a template with purpose of insulting me.

Two other parties can be considered to be co-perpetrators, as they have used the image and template on their own user pages.

Furthermore, Akule has created vandalized versions of The Abandoned group logo and forum logo onto which he has superimposed insults.

I demand the offensive content to be removed and the offender to cease these ridiculous insults. I have nothing against people expressing their hostility, however in a mature manner.

Thus, Akule and the others can still take their concerns to my (or The Abandoned's) user talk page, provided they express them in a mature manner without degrading themselves to that sort of petty trolling.

Arbitrators that I will accept:

A thousand apologizes great sahib, but I believe the image falls under parody rulings from the past. I did a little bit of reading, especially here, and it would seem that this isn't the first time something like that appeared. As for the template, it only appears on user pages, and I can easily adjust the comments so people will make sure to only use it on their user page, which I believe is sancrosanct and protected under the wiki bylines. I would like to have Xoid and Cyberbob240 (both have been extremely helpful in explaining some of the wiki rules and guidelines to me) Bob Hammero as Arbitrators, as well as: Mia Kristos (we need more female Arbitrators in this discussion), and Mpaturet as Special Guest Arbitrators. Who knows if I can even do this, as I have no real idea of how to proceed, but I will spend some time reading the process in order to better understand things. --Akule 06:16, 20 June 2006 (BST)

My advisor told me that I would have to change the template. Is everyone nice and happy now? The 5th horseman fan club. It puts him in a good light (which is hard to do). --Akule 06:39, 20 June 2006 (BST)

Upon reading 5th's user page, I'd like to point out that he has been asked to stop posting on our wiki talk page several times, as we wanted to discuss things with Doubler. 5th continually posts and harasses the group, despite being blatantly ignored, or even asked to be more civil. We have been quite patient with him, and for the record, we have not posted on the Abandoned wiki pages, nor have we been asked to stop posting on his user page. I will do so, if that is the arbitration result, however, I seriously question his motive for this arbitration if he continually instigates us on our wiki page and on the resensitized board, yet claims that we are harassing him, when a simple deletion request would have accomplished the same goal. It is my belief that this is just another form of harassment that he has chosen to perform on me and the group as a whole, as I have dared to say something that he disliked. Granted, I mocked him, but that seemed to be the only way to deal with him, short of restricting his wiki access. I leave the ball in the Arbitrator's court, as I believe the facts will speak for themselves. --Akule 09:39, 20 June 2006 (BST)

And I'd like to point out the simple fact that I would not have bothered with posting on CC talk page ever again all if not for Akule's behavior - what he is doing is basically attempting to fight an in-game conflict first through Resensitized and now (as he has been forbidden from doing that on RS) through the Wiki. --The Fifth Horseman 12:47, 20 June 2006 (BST)

Like to re-read the PM from TBM, Horseman? It actually said that Akule only had to wait until he can access TMES before the argument can continue. Not that he was forbidden to ever continue on the entire forum. Cyberbob Talk 13:14, 20 June 2006 (BST)

In other words, that meant he was forbidden on doing that on the entire forum WITH EXCEPTION of TMES.

At that point, Akule he stopped doing that on RS and took it here. TBM had nothing against taking the matter to Private Messages, but it seems Akule takes some perverted satisfaction in doing his "boo-hiss-I-H8T-U" act in front of a larger audience. --The Fifth Horseman 14:24, 20 June 2006 (BST)

It seems like I am involved as I was a part of the discussion that eventually lead to all of this, so I will post some evidince. I stated that I wasn't going to be talking to you anymore. You continued despite my refusal to discuss things with you, and even escalated things here, by bringing the discussion from the Resensitized board to the wiki before Akule did. Now, I don't condone his actions beyond that point, but you did bring it to the wiki first. This means that you were hoping that he would bring the argument over here. Aside from the Cannibal Corps talk page let's look at further evidence at you attempting to escalate matters.

You took a previously moderated discussion by Odd Starter and attempted to reverse the decision by posting hereand here. You knew about the previous moderation when you posted at Anime Sucks talk page here.
You started making ambiguous statments here, which seem to do nothing other than to inflame the situation. If you are really serious about quashing the childish discussion, why not actually bring forth any proof rather than making generalities that are designed to instigate matters further?
Your teammate continued the matter here, which seems to point out childish behavior on both sides. Tell me, if you are so above all of this, why is it that you are further instigating things with DarkStar2374383 and Akule? It seems to me that this arbitration could have been avoided if you hadn't brought the situation up to a boil in the first place, and had kept in in PMs like TBM had advised on the Resensitized boards. Instead you brought it here to the Wiki and tried to involve people that weren't even involved with the situation on the Resensitized board and continued the discussion after TBM cautioned you against continuing it in the forum. Thus YOU started the whole thing here on the Wiki, and are EQUALLY to blame. Akule shouldn't have followed over here, but probably wouldn't have done so if you hadn't moved the discussion once it was kicked off of a private forum. Arbitrators, I say give them both warnings and be done with it. --Ahote 00:38, 21 June 2006 (BST)

If you want answers...

I made the post on Wiki in hope that your "higher-ups" (if there are any - several months ago you denied existence of any higher command structure in CC) would put an end to Akule's harassment of my person and The Abandoned.
The user pages had all the marks of additional accounts created to circumvent the deletion. I did not read any posts before posting on AnimeSucks' talk page. :::::::* The question on the Anti-Cheater Alliance talk page doesn't have to do anything with your group. Of course, that didn't stop Akule from flaming me there.
Sexypixels has politely asked for the image to be removed, a request he had the right to make. Akule appeared there and flamed him, not forgetting a verbal jab towards my person as well. If not for Akule's flame, it is not very likely Sexypixels would do what he did. Neither I nor any other members of The Abandoned supported his actions. When he posted that image on our forum, I attempted to stop him, but he has already posted it on the Wiki and Resensitized. :::::::* Prove when, where and how exactly I have been instigating the conflict with Akule and DarkStar.
If you claim I have started the conflict on the Wiki, look first at your own and Akule's posts here. My post only contained a requet towards your group to put a stop to Akule's hostile actions, while it was Akule who began actively flaming my person.
Akule had all the opportunity to utilise PMs on Resensitized in order to continue the dispute and his attempts to harass me. Instead, he took it to the Wiki.

Thus, while by some criteria I might be considered co-responsible of the situation starting, it was your group member who continued the flaming and vandalism despite being repeatedly asked to cease. --The Fifth Horseman 10:10, 21 June 2006 (BST)

Before this goes any further is there a mutial agreed arbitrator here or or the both of you both just have this nice little arguement by yourselves?--Vista 16:59, 21 June 2006 (BST)

I'll take Option B, thanks Eddie.</obscure reference> Cyberbob Talk 17:05, 21 June 2006 (BST)

Neither party has any arbitrators in common, nor have they indicated that they are willing to accept someone other than those already listed. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 17:10, 21 June 2006 (BST)

So this isn't an arbitration case then. I'm giving them another day were they've have to get an arbitrator, If they don't I'm getting rid of it.--Vista 11:42, 22 June 2006 (BST)

I'm willing to agree on Xoid to arbitrate the case.--The Fifth Horseman 13:40, 22 June 2006 (BST)

Me? An arbitrator? Arbitration is not really my bag, but I'll do my utmost to be impartial. I'll re-read the entirety of this and start looking into the links. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 13:51, 22 June 2006 (BST)

Heh, you're not even on the list. I can image your surprise.--Vista 17:04, 22 June 2006 (BST)

I'm really new to the wiki, so I didn't really know how to proceed. I thought he was allowed to pick a few, and then I would pick a few. I don't have a problem with Xoid being an Arbitrator, or with Nubis, Odd Starter, or Vista. I figure I didn't do anything worse than he did (with the exception of posting his photo, but then again, I didn't know that was considered wrong here). I don't really feel that Arbitration is necessary, as some of the images I posted will be coming down, and I'll be changing the template back to the original image, since it is protected as an opinion and doesn't violate any rules. --Akule 17:59, 22 June 2006 (BST)

Actually, I would think that since it is in a community area and since you are attacking another user, it would not be acceptable. But that's just based on what I've seen happen with Amazing. --V2Blast ^{T•P!•C•SR} 21:50, 22 June 2006 (BST)

What exactly are you referring to, V2Blast? –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 11:00, 23 June 2006 (BST)

Wikigate. all templates that attacked amazing personally were banned. The templates that attacked his group were allowed, I believe. I'd have to read up on it to be sure about the last part though--Vista 12:11, 23 June 2006 (BST)

All anti-Amazing templates were deleted? I think you are forgetting about the "Amazing Fan Club" template, while it may not have been obvious about it, it certainly wasn't meant to be a friendly gesture of supporting him. The ASS template was forced to become the much better looking version it is today, and pretty much all of the other templates were to be deleted. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 12:22, 23 June 2006 (BST)

Actually, I believe he made that one himself...--Vista 13:13, 23 June 2006 (BST)

No he didn't. But he didn't quite understand the joke and assumed that it was genuine. Cyberbob Talk 13:17, 23 June 2006 (BST)

I simply thought he had a sense of humor... who did make that template then?--Vista 13:22, 23 June 2006 (BST)

Wasn't it Karlsbad? –Bob Hammero ^{Mod•B'crat•T•A} 18:18, 23 June 2006 (BST)

He made it all himself, but I was the one who asked him to make it to prove how much I was beyond the mini-blood fued we had. I didn't know it'd be so, er, unflattering. I did however edit it as a minor joke/prank to point out his lovely, lovely beard; which may be what Cyberbob Talk remembers. --Karlsbad 21:05, 23 June 2006 (BST)

The Ruling

From the ridiculous amounts of text that I've read, and the countless history revisions that I've gone through; I'd say that this started out as a series of misunderstandings in-game, got heated, was dragged out of the game, continued to escalate, and finally reached boiling point when it hit the wiki. At this stage, I don't think any of you will apologise for your individual parts in contributing to this pointless feud, so instead I am focusing on damage control.

Akule, AnimeSucks and DarkStar2374383 will not post any messages on The Abandoned's talk page, nor will they post any messages on The Fifth Horseman's talk page.
Akule, AnimeSucks and DarkStar2374383 will not interact with The Fifth Horseman anywhere on this wiki. If you must contact him, it will not be through this wiki.
The Fifth Horseman will not post any messages on Cannibal Corps's talk page, nor will he post any messages on Akule, AnimeSucks, or DarkStar2374383's talk pages.
The Fifth Horseman will not interact with Akule, AnimeSucks or DarkStar2374383 anywhere on this wiki. If you must contact any of them, it will not be through this wiki.
{{Laffo5th}} — the parties will have 24 hours grace to Subst: the template into their user pages if they wish. Once Substed in or 24 hours passes, the template will be deleted.
Laffo5th.gif will be deleted. If a replacement image is provided that does not constitute an ad hominem attack on The Fifth Horseman, the replacement may be used without incident. Note that I have not, and will not allow the usage of a photo of The Fifth Horseman, a derivative of his avatar is acceptable, a photo is not.
All parties may continue to put whatever they wish onto their own User page, as long as it is not forbidden by normal wiki rules.

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

So when should this be archived? --V2Blast ^{T•P!•C•SR} 19:30, 28 June 2006 (BST)

Now. –Xoid ^S•T•FU! 08:04, 29 June 2006 (BST)

Dakerstown Issues

In an effort to difuse the situation in Dakerstown I am STRONGLY encouraging the following parties to figure out their differnces and discontinue their in game tete-a-tete on the Wiki. I've been watching the Dakerstown page and some of the CRAP that has appeared on that page is ridiculous.
Duce Nauks and the Imperial War Machine vrs Certified=Insane and Urban Guerillas
Please, work it out. Once all of the parties with intrest agree to arbitration, I ask that another arbitrator help them work this out because I for one am tired of the calls of Vandalism (valid or not) that is coming up because of the personality conflict. Conndraka^{mod T CFT} 17:46, 13 October 2006 (BST)

IWM Input

Ok, if Insane want's to dump blame on me to make himself look better, go for it. All I know is I'm not going to scream "Waaah! It's all HIS fault! all of it! I didn't do a thing! Waaah!". I do not agree to arbitration.--Duce Nauks 21:12, 13 October 2006 (BST)

UG Input

Ummmm, I gave up on this a while ago. Just look at Duce Nauks' history of edits, he's been doing this ever since he got here. I tried to reason with him, but I lost patience soon enough. It's rediculous what went on there, and I tried not to feed the trolls, but at some point, when someone lies to degrade my group, I stand behind anyone who steps up to them. I don't feel like having a big discussion here, just look at his history and you'll know what I'm talking about. Hell, look at the moved section in the Dakerstown Talk page ^.-. I posted some input as requested, if you want anything else, just drop another message in my talk page... -Certified=Insane^☭ 20:56, 13 October 2006 (BST)

For the record, I refuse arbitration by Taco Death (saying this as he just added himself to the arbitrator list). Anyhow, perhaps clearer rules as to what is and isn't acceptable on those pages would be appreciated, as I'm sure we can agree both parties have been stretching the limits of the rules. That being said, I would like to point out that my entries were generally done with NPOV in mind (exept responses to outrageous lies), and the mud-slinging fest started with Duce Nauks comparing us to Stalin, comparing himself to Freedom Fighters, then from then on it deteriorated to the "special olympics" remark, getting one of my members involved as he wouldn't take that crap, and I support him. While claiming that my entries fully respected NPOV would be a stretch, I would like to say that I tried to limit what I said to what we DID, as well as what we THOUGHT, which was clearly marked in my opinion. -Certified=Insane^☭ 23:05, 14 October 2006 (BST)

~~This~~ This gives me every reason to believe Taco Death to be part of, or closely associated to, the IWM. Kick this guy out of here. -Certified=Insane^☭ 04:07, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Arbitratators Input

In response to the statement by the "Urban Guerillas", This is pretty much what's happening when smart people read what you write. . .
http://www.youtube.com/v/dywGykKrAwk
There ya go buddy. --Taco Death 03:35, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Excuse me, but were you ever mentioned as a possible arbitrator? Were you agreed upon by both sides to arbitrate? 'Sides, that comment don't look very neutral to me. Cyberbob Talk 03:38, 15 October 2006 (BST)

And looking at the comment by Certified just above, you were specifically refused. Exit's on your right. Cyberbob Talk 03:42, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Lol, I'm not arbitrating dumbass, I'm making fun of stupid people. People like you.--Taco Death 03:46, 15 October 2006 (BST)

I'm not the one who can't indent properly. Cyberbob Talk 03:56, 15 October 2006 (BST)

I would be willing to arbitrate.--Gage 03:39, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Are you guys fucking stupid? Lol, there is NO arbitration case until both sides agree. From what I'm seeing, the IWM doesn't want arbitration.--Taco Death 03:46, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Are you fucking stupid? Read the rules of this page. If even one group wants it, the arbitration is a go.--Gage 03:48, 15 October 2006 (BST)

Heheheh, good luck with that one buddy.--Taco Death 03:50, 15 October 2006 (BST) Sockpuppet comments struck. Conndraka^{mod T CFT} 05:34, 15 October 2006 (BST)

User:Karek/ProjDev/Archives?

Alexei Yaruk vs Katthew

Humorous_Suggestions & Suggestions/8th-Dec-2005

Amazing vs MaulMachine

Amazing

Evidence

MaulMachine

Zod Rhombus reply

Odd Starter's Conclusion

Amazing vs Bentley Foss

Just a quick reply, because I'm about to head out for the day

Arbitrator Decision

Amazing vs. MaulMachine again..

Response

Summary

Ruining vs Xeeron

RCDC vs. Newgrounds

Amazing vs. 'STER

Amazing vs Rasher, Scinfaxi, and GANKBUS

Grim s VS Zombie Squad

Amazing vs Karlsbad

Amazing vs Rasher (again)

MrAushvitz VS The majority population of the Suggestions page

Decision

Wikigate

Available Arbiters

hagnat vs. Amazing

BananaBear vs. Legend X

Sonny Corleone vs. Rosicrux

Sonny Corleone vs. Labine50

Sonny Corleone vs. Bonefiver

Koppie vs. Saromu

Possible Arbitrators

The Fifth Horseman vs Akule

The Ruling

Dakerstown Issues

IWM Input

UG Input

Arbitratators Input

Navigation menu

Search