UDWiki talk:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2009 09

Archives

Talk Archives

e Vandal Banning Archive

2006 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2007 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2008 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2009 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2010 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Q3 Q4 2013 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Years 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

General Discussion Archives

• Archive1
• Archive2
• Archive3
• Archive4
• Archive5
• Archive6
• Archive7

General Discussion

JISOR/Halfdan and Mekhan/Tarpenz

Assuming these 4 are all ruled vandalism, are their votes in the election all struck? Would remove 2 additional votes from Stelar, leaving them at 23. --【ⅎooɹd ǝʌɐɥ ᴉ sʇɐoƃ sʍoʅʚ ⅎǝᴉɹɔuoɯ uǝɹɐʞ】 ☉ ☉ |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 07:58, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

We'd strike only the second (time-wise) of the votes for each candidate; e.g. JISOR's first two votes would remain, but any by Halfdan Pisket would be struck. Same with Mekhan/Tarpenz — Mekhan's votes remain, but Tarpenz's have been struck. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 12:15, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

I corrected the title for clarity. I have not been connected to the other two accounts. -- 14:47, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

JISOR’s final vote was made after both of Pisket’s. If a user has two votes, I believe it would make sense for all votes struck after the first two votes by a single user. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 14:54, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Oh, unless of course that scenario would end in a double vote like you described. Apologies. DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 14:56, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Totally right. I didn't realize Halfdan's were timestamped before JISOR's. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 15:15, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Sister Mary

moved from main page

Blanked User talk:Sniper4625 - normally I would give benefit of the doubt, but they seem quite hostile, so I thought I would bring it to your attention. Regards~ Sniper4625 (talk) 23:32, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

I won't need any benefit of doubt, thanks for considering my feelings though. After reading I wanted to have my talk page protected both Sniper and Dragontard came to write on my page - if you don't want any hostile behavior I suggest you fuck off and leave me alone :) I don't even know who the fuck you guys are. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sister Mary (talk • contribs) 23:37 June 3 2018.

Oh right. Ban the fuck outta my account if you feel like it Mr. System-Operator-Boss. I have no problem editing some page to get my message across to people who have a hard time getting it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sister Mary (talk • contribs) 23:38, 3 June 2018 (UTC).

-- LABIA on the INTERNET ^{Dunell Hills Corpseman} #24 - |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ^TMG 00:05, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Now now, there's no need to be rude and start flinging insults. --Dragonshardz (talk) 23:41, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Might I inquire why you decided the best choice of action to a harmless greeting was a rule-breaking act of vandalism? Quite rude. Sniper4625 (talk) 23:40, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Given talk pages are a pretty important element of regulating user behavior without needing to ban anyone the instant they step out of line, I'm really not sure Sister Mary has any interest in learning or following any of the community norms of the wiki. Swissaboo (talk) 23:51, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Per their talk page now they apparently have gotten many such pages deleted, which somewhat confuses me. Sniper4625 (talk) 23:52, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Adding onto this, in their protection request they clearly have no interest in bothering with the proper formatting for responding to other users and on their talk page they have placed the nominated for deleting template without any actual nomination for deletion having occurred. I don't know how much of this is actually against wiki RULES (except perhaps that last one?) but they're very clearly running roughshod over the expected standards of behavior. Swissaboo (talk) 00:00, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm sure you meant WIKI LAW when you said RULES. --Dragonshardz (talk) 01:23, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

This was exactly the point of having my talk page protected - the horde/jack/whateverzergs can't seem to leave me alone :) Sister Mary (talk) 00:10, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

The Jack got run out of town on a rail. Try again. --Dragonshardz (talk) 01:26, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

You never did explain why you thought breaking the rules in a very rude way was the best course of action, and why you thought getting demonstrably mad would make people pay *less* attention to you. Sniper4625 (talk) 00:24, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

The reason is pretty simple, and I thought you got the message, but okay, I will clarify for you why = I don't like you :) I will eat my warning with pleasure, don't worry about it! But.. this isn't your first time harrassing people, correct? I like that you feel like you have the upperhand over a guy that made 200+ edits within the last 24 hours, and only vandalized a single page of a user that didn't really go about making "a good-faith attempt to improve this wiki" by trying to trigger me by invading my talk page. Im looking forward as to how this will play out. I will just make another account and keep on editing from there so I didn't lose anything catching myself a warning, other than shifting focus to you ugly bunch of motherfuckers :D Sister Mary (talk) 00:39, 4 June 2018 (UTC) (See, I use my template just like you want to!)

Isn't sockpuppeting to avoid wikipunishments in itself a punishable offense? You just keep digging. Sniper4625 (talk) 01:18, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I see that you're trying to put words in my mouth - unfortunately thats not going to happen. As stated, I will be let of with a warning so I have no intention, and never have I stated that I would sneak away from any punishment. I think it's great that everyone can see how you guys clearly are trying to engage some sort of drama - otherwise you would have left me alone, like I asked to be. So if you think again, I will ditch this account to prevent people like you from being a harrassment. But regarding the sockpuppet behavior - how do we work out the fact that 3 different people came around at the same time, all with the same purpose, and all with the intention of trying to give me a bad time - did you guys coordinate some sort of drama on my behalf - After asking for my talk page to be isolated from people like you. I think im gonna need your shovel m8, seems like it digs that much faster than mine :) Sister Mary (talk) 02:00, 4 June 2018 (UTC) (Ohhhhh snap.)

Are you back, Jack? Because you're making the same "alts!" argument he did, and he was similarly disproven. I'm not sure how I put words in your mouth when you said "I will just make another account and keep on editing from there," but well, I did appreciate your attempt to sic Aichon on my compatriot. Too bad it failed. Sniper4625 (talk) 02:08, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

AHHHHHHHH :D I was actually just waiting for someone to pull out the "you're a Yocum" card! Sure dude - let's say im a Jack. I must be a great Jack. I mean, I edited 2 suburbs completely and have been editing the EMRP for 6 months on another account - but sure! YOU GOT ME! :D Im getting the idea that your dick is all so im gonna leave you to play with that! I will be back with another account, to edit another 200+ locations. Meanwhile you guys will have to enjoy yourself being annoying towards someone else! :D —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sister Mary (talk • contribs) 02:22, 4 June 2018.

Vandalism and a Warning. Don't blank other's pages. I'll serve the warning officially over at the Sister Mary page, but I assume you'll see it here as well. And yes, warnings carry over between accounts. —Aichon— 02:51, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

So...how does the wiki handle a user rage-reverting their own edits? --Dragonshardz (talk) 03:09, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Rage reverting? I edited 3 locations due to them being wrong :D Aichon you said something about the parties in question should talk, the rest should shut up. If this doesnt qualify as harrassment I don't know what will. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sister Mary (talk • contribs) 03:14, 4 June 2018 (UTC).

Sounds to me like someone is finally bored of this game and is getting one last laugh out of the community by being as much as a cunt as possible on his way out. Either that or it's his time of month and he's out of pads.---- ^{FoD PK Praise Rando!}06:37, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

"Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah" A ZOMBIE ANT 00:02, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

User: Revenant

Now think about it, I have a very distant memory of a user who used to remove all signatures of everyone else on their talk page as a kind of norm, but I can't remember who it was, or if it actually happened. Might have been Iscariot, maybe even Finis. Does this sound right to anybody? A ZOMBIE ANT 22:44, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, there was somebody, but fuck if I remember who it was. I think the logic was that if there was no signature, they could do whatever they wanted to the content and it didn’t count as impersonation? ЯЭV⁠€⁠NΛИ† ||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 00:56, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh god, I hope it never went that far. I can't help but feel it was Iscariot just being a bit narky about stuff. A ZOMBIE ANT 06:39, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

User:The Goth Store Owner

*snif* *snif* I smell drama. Is there drama ? OH MA GOSH IS DRAMA!!! --hagnat 21:39, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

The sooner they learn that 90% of this dispute should be on A/Arbitration the sooner I can sleep at night. A ZOMBIE ANT 01:07, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Is there a minimum time cases need to stay on the main VB page? Can't this shit just be moved to archives and locked? --_K^CLZA 21:48, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

A/VB is now archived on an annual basis, so it'll be cycled in January 2016. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 21:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

So quiet

* shuffles around looking for drama to feed on, finds none *
What happened to this place ? --hagnat 20:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me to drop the DramaLevel. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 21:05, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Hagnat spamming an administrative talk page was the excuse I needed to fulfill our VB case quota required by Kevan. To the wikicourt with him at once! -- Spiderzed▋ 21:18, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I like where this is going. Step back everyone, I got A/M covered. A ZOMBIE ANT 06:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

The fact that the drama level was updated almost prompted me to raise it a level, since that's more drama than we've had in months. —Aichon— 06:49, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

DDRs threat to use A/M before there even is a VB verdict alienates me. I will pre-emptively file an arbitration to forbid him from posting on A/M for 5.73 venusian years. -- Spiderzed▋ 20:44, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Foiled again by the cabal. A ZOMBIE ANT 00:54, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

I think you can update the DramaLevel to the lesser level of drama. This place is so quiet. --hagnat 16:23, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Ehh, I'm still a little on alert from the big bot attack last week. Not a true old-school drama, but it qualifies. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 18:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

It seems the big bot attack got under controle. Whoever pulled that out, congrats :) --hagnat 17:27, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Bots Discussion

Return of old, already banned, bots

Over the past couple of days, bots who were previous banned have been spamming again. Has the recent update of the wiki somehow unbanned them? -- boxy 10:35, 27 December 2014 (BST)

Hmm

It's been a few years, but we're getting a wave of bots again. Thoughts? Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 01:57, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Hopefully it's just a random burst, not a consistent thing? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

More spammers stuck inside? I gather fraud attempts are way up at the moment. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 08:01, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Has it been going on for a while? Like beyond this week? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 10:11, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

No, not yet. I just realized I've gotten complacent because we've had so few. If it continues for more than a week or so we can ponder other options. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 17:19, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Hopefully it's just a flareup for now... DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 23:31, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, like acne. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah.... acne.... DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 00:14, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Anyone want to review this? They're still here, and popping them isn't helping. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:33, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Do you think the captcha needs to be updated? If so I can try to get in touch with Kev. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 14:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Considering we all have better things to do than continuously ban spambots, probably worth asking! stelar ^{Talk|MCM|EBD|Scourge} 20:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I guess whoever has his ear, go for it. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Bots Discussion

Return of old, already banned, bots

Over the past couple of days, bots who were previous banned have been spamming again. Has the recent update of the wiki somehow unbanned them? -- boxy 10:35, 27 December 2014 (BST)

Hmm

It's been a few years, but we're getting a wave of bots again. Thoughts? Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 01:57, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Hopefully it's just a random burst, not a consistent thing? --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

More spammers stuck inside? I gather fraud attempts are way up at the moment. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 08:01, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Has it been going on for a while? Like beyond this week? DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 10:11, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

No, not yet. I just realized I've gotten complacent because we've had so few. If it continues for more than a week or so we can ponder other options. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 17:19, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Hopefully it's just a flareup for now... DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 23:31, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, like acne. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah.... acne.... DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION 00:14, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Anyone want to review this? They're still here, and popping them isn't helping. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 22:33, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Do you think the captcha needs to be updated? If so I can try to get in touch with Kev. Bob Moncrief ^EBD•W! 14:36, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Considering we all have better things to do than continuously ban spambots, probably worth asking! stelar ^{Talk|MCM|EBD|Scourge} 20:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I guess whoever has his ear, go for it. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 23:47, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

September 2009

LAZURMAN III

YOU CAN'T DEFEAT THE LAZURMAN! SUCK MY DICK YOU NIGGA!--LAZURMAN III 16:08, 25 September 2009 (BST)

Reason we need more and most importantly better sysops number 68445. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 16:10, 25 September 2009 (BST)

beep boop i am a robot from the 1950's Cyberbob  Talk  18:47, 25 September 2009 (BST)

Hence the jokes that would only belong in Lost In Space?--CyberRead240 20:08, 25 September 2009 (BST)

I'd like to know, after all his warnings about shitting up admin pages, how Cyberbob would like to illustrate that his addition to the main page is both constructive and relevant. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 04:28, 26 September 2009 (BST)

I don't understand how he justifies moving my comments to the talk page, leaving "beep boop I am a robot" behind. Idiot.--CyberRead240 05:05, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Shush! He's a sysop, he must know what he is doing!--SirArgo ^Talk 05:10, 26 September 2009 (BST)

You do know that you voted for him to be crat, right?--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 09:46, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Your point is? When he deos have to be a serious sysop, he can do it better than most on staff atm.--SirArgo ^Talk 00:08, 27 September 2009 (BST)

Because that A/VB commenting policy has not been passed yet. That is why. Cyberbob  Talk  08:42, 26 September 2009 (BST)

That doesn't validate your comment any more than anyone elses...--CyberRead240 09:49, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Then move his comment to the talk. You're technically allowed.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 09:52, 26 September 2009 (BST)

I did. He reverted it. Because he has shitfights with users he doesnt like. Hence why he shouldn't be a sysop.--CyberRead240 09:53, 26 September 2009 (BST)

As I say at the bottom of this conversation. Edit war = A/A.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 09:55, 26 September 2009 (BST)

It isnt a matter of A/A, it's Bob "shitting up the admin pages", there is plenty of precedent for it. However nobody has the balls to do anything these days.--CyberRead240 09:56, 26 September 2009 (BST)

An A/A ruling saying he can't comment on cases he isn't a part of, unless in the process of sysop duties, would prevent him. There's precedent for this kind of ruling, and it would certainly solve the issue.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 09:58, 26 September 2009 (BST)

I would prefer to let him go on a power trip over this issue, I feel it will prove my ultimate point a lot better, for future cases.--CyberRead240 10:00, 26 September 2009 (BST)

That one comment will be all I need to counter your "ultimate point" - you're more interested in ousting me because I fucked your arse so many times than SAVING TEH WIKI. Cyberbob  Talk  12:59, 26 September 2009 (BST)

lol, bait taken. Also, U mad?--CyberRead240 13:10, 26 September 2009 (BST)

I am kinda mad but not at anything on the internet - had a shit day Cyberbob  Talk  13:18, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Oh, and Iscariot has some nerve to attack me for "shitting up" after the number of times he rather mindlessly whined about needing "more but more importantly better" sysops in this case. How is that relevant to A/VB? Cyberbob  Talk  08:44, 26 September 2009 (BST)

My comment was relevant to the ongoing vandal attack that could have been stopped sooner with an active sysop. Your 'addition' was not a ruling, nor was it in any contributory to the case. And we both know if J3D had posted the same thing you'd have escalated him by now, but hey different standards for different users, right? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 09:50, 26 September 2009 (BST)

I like how he reverted it, because I moved his edit. Sysops need to wake up. Wrong person for the job, too much personal interest in his actions.--CyberRead240 09:52, 26 September 2009 (BST)

He isn't really allowed to revert it... I'd say that his comment should be on the talk, what with it not really being important to the case, but this may be a job for A/A. After all, they say it's for edit wars. I guess this is a minor version thereof.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 09:55, 26 September 2009 (BST)

A/A will solve nothing.--CyberRead240 09:55, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Iscariot is allowed to comment. He created the case, so he can comment. However, his comment IS slightly pushing it.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:00, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Of course it's pushing it. It's what he does. He makes comments critical of the sysops whenever he can, and then cries about it when one of them replies. He is the self proclaimed wiki martyr -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 10:11 26 September 2009 (BST)

And as we see, everyone and their contributions gets looked at in good faith..... unless the sysops don't like them. Also note the defendant's response to the case has now be removed from the page in an act of moderation contrary to the guidelines of this page, but we wouldn't expect anything different from certain people would we? -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:34, 26 September 2009 (BST)

You mean by the "defendant", LAZURMAN III? Well yeah, and given that it was an act of vandalism to even post when already banned, it would have been just as acceptable for me to simply wipe the comment altogether without moving it here... ie. revert the vandalism. GTFO wikilawyer -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 10:46 26 September 2009 (BST)

You shouldn't even respond or hardly even acknowledge vandals anyways, neither in edit summaries or edits themselves. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 16:28, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Yes, because his "defence" was of such integrity and strength, wasn't it? They raise a good point, Iscariot. Earlier, I asked you what you thought about me running as a sysop, and you just explained why you don't like the current sysops. --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:40, 26 September 2009 (BST)

I don't care about his contributions, I care about his rights. As the target of an open A/VB case he is entitled to make a response. So what if it's not articulate and thought out? Any time we arbitrarily decide to allow shit like this the to take place we open this wiki up to the notion of different people getting treated differently and that this is perfectly acceptable. We already have a massive problem with this striated make-up on this wiki, allowing this to perpetuate is not in the interests of the community, it provokes vandalism, bad faith editing and flagrant sysop abuse as per the treatment of Goons in times past. This is no different, just more insidious. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:46, 26 September 2009 (BST)

You're my hero, Iscariot -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 10:47 26 September 2009 (BST)

I do so enjoy it when you prove my point for me. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 10:51, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Iscariots right though. Even the most brutal of murderers is entitled to a fair trial.--CyberRead240 10:52, 26 September 2009 (BST)

He got his fair trial, his posting was ruled vandalism (ban evasion). Vandalism can be reverted by anyone, I moved it here to preserve the context of later posts that added nothing to the case. But of course whatever happens, you harpies are going to bitch and moan. So go at it -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 10:56 26 September 2009 (BST)

He does, but, as Boxy pointed out, he was evading his ban. He'd already had his trial, and had thus already been banned. If a user is permabanned, but didn't say anything at the time of the case, that doesn't give them the right to make a vandal alt and post incoherent nonsense on the case, just as a "defence".--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:57, 26 September 2009 (BST)

You see? This is what I mean when I say read and understand the case. He wasn't perma-ed for ban evasion, it has yet to be proven that he is an alt of the below case. He was banned for vandalism to templates on the main page, the case was made and he responded to it as he is entitled to do, he didn't remove the case or vandalise this page, he responded in the conventional manner. His contribution should have been left there. You'll notice that this all kicked off when Cyberbob decided that he could add pointlessness, Boxy may try and disparage myself and Read, but of course such conduct would be ruled vandalism by another user.... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 11:03, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Then we need an IP check. If they match, then he has no right to comment. Or, of course, we could just not bother with a pointless check, when the actual problem has been resolved. --Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 11:12, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Man, we were just having such a nice quiet time there too. Hmmmmmmmmmm what could have changed OH I KNOW read and iscariot are back in town Cyberbob  Talk  12:59, 26 September 2009 (BST)

if people would just stop giving them a platform by not responding (yes I know I responded, it was a mistake) they would either shut the fuck up or smarten the fuck up Cyberbob  Talk  13:02, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Stop replying to yourself it's kind of pathetic...--CyberRead240 13:10, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Odd isn't it that people like DDR don't cause this disruption deliberately. You don't get to troll the page in the way that you've tried your hardest to get others banned for and come out of this smelling like roses. What you did was deliberately wrong and done only to provoke a response, and you know it, and now everyone else can see it as well. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 13:12, 26 September 2009 (BST)

As a sysop I'm involved with the case and there's nothing that says that involved users can't post one-liners. Boxy was within his rights to move my post as sysops are allowed to decide based on the spirit of a rule rather than the letter. I'm sorry that you crave sysophood while hating it at the same time, must suck to be so conflicted Cyberbob  Talk  13:21, 26 September 2009 (BST)

ah fuck i'm doing it again - you are a fucking master at pushing people's buttons iscariot I'll give you that Cyberbob  Talk  13:23, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Stop replying to yourself, it's kind of pathetic--CyberRead240 13:53, 26 September 2009 (BST)

"lol, bait taken." --wiki user "Sexylegsread", 1844 Cyberbob  Talk  13:55, 26 September 2009 (BST)

you are one of those guys, who get tr00led hardcore by someone, get all offended, and then claim you were counter trolling when you find out how stupid you look.--CyberRead240 14:55, 26 September 2009 (BST)

you are one of those guys, who get tr00led hardcore by someone, get all offended, and then try and smugly "turn teh tables" when you find out how stupid you look. Cyberbob  Talk  15:39, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Grasping at straws now bob.--CyberRead240 15:43, 26 September 2009 (BST)

User_talk:Cyberbob240#I.27d_dump_you_too Cyberbob  Talk  16:01, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Sergeant Bobbo

Surely the correct course of action would have to have sought community consensus on A/D as to whether this was porn or not first and then begin a case based on that input. We removed the scheduled from porn due to questionable actions of sysops, this just seems like a new way of enforcing moderation. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 16:19, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Go away. Cyberbob  Talk  16:21, 23 September 2009 (BST)

If Iscariot's story was ten sentences longer this comment would have won the internet.--Thadeous Oakley 22:36, 23 September 2009 (BST)

No, in fact the porn scheduled was removed so this could be the new method: take it here, and unless a consensus by the sysops is reached, it is moved for A/D where it then sits in the limelight for 2 weeks. It allows for quick removal of obviously grotesque material while still allowing a proper stage for the sysops to decide whether it should be taken to A/D for 2 weeks. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 16:30, 23 September 2009 (BST)

My eyes..., just removed it. I'm pretty sure obvious porn gets deleted anyway. No need for A/D, this aint borderline but way over that.--Thadeous Oakley 19:27, 23 September 2009 (BST)

Fraid not, it all still has to come through A/VB. If it were up to me, we would have just deleted the image based on consensus and not warned this guy, but since it has to be deleted as vandalism we have little choice if we want it whiped on sight. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 01:47, 24 September 2009 (BST)

User:LAZURMAN!

I assume that his 3 edits were the creation of a new page and the two vandalisms of Template:Lastupdate? Otherwise, there's only 2 edits under that username.

As a sidenote, perhaps when a user creates a vandalism page as one of their "3 Edits", that the page title be part of the vandal report which states that 3 edits were in fact made. After all, when a page is deleted, so too is any log of edits to the page in User Contributions.

It's a loophole that makes it hard to judge misconduct. --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 11:51, 19 September 2009 (BST)

I didn't ban him with the 3 edit rule, I banned him because he's an obvious 3page alt. Paying attention is tech. Cyberbob  Talk  11:53, 19 September 2009 (BST)

He was an alt of a permabanned user. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 11:54, 19 September 2009 (BST)

Ah. I didn't know of 3page, and as such when you said 3page, I thought of "3 Edits", what with it probably being the most common phrase used on A/VB with 3 in the name. My bad. Still, the inclusion thing stands true, if not in this case, but in further instances. --Blake Firedancer ^{T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T.} 11:57, 19 September 2009 (BST)

He calls himself 3page for that reason, unfortunately :( --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 12:05, 19 September 2009 (BST)

User:Thurgood

Just out of curiosity, what did this user do to warrant the ban? His edits were annoying but I didn't notice any vandalism.--_GANG Giles Sednik _CAPD 15:46, 19 September 2009 (BST)

See above conversation. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 17:15, 19 September 2009 (BST)

User:Yonnua Koponen and User:BobBoberton

Did anyone ask them on their talk page to stop? I admit that it was a bonehead move to edit a user sub-page, but that part of the page does look like it's for ongoing discussion. Their edits don't seem blatantly bad faith, or even to be disruptive; perhaps a soft warning would stop these actions from continuing, provide closure, and send a clear message? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 00:46, 16 September 2009 (BST)

Not to forget the talk pages are protected... a bit weird for a wiki, where open discourse is supposed to be king. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 00:50, 16 September 2009 (BST)

Look, see? It was an honest mistake, not a bad faith edit; I think everyone can get off with a soft warning here and go back to the usual buisness of ignoring things that don't exist because they don't. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 13:39, 16 September 2009 (BST)

Lelouch stop pushing *cough* everywhere. You don't want to end up like ALiM. On a more important note, I have to agree that I don't feel it was a bad faith edit, more like a newbie error, but not with newbies.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 14:54, 16 September 2009 (BST)

It was just one of those simple accidents that happen every once and awhile, and excuse me for slipping a few wheezes or snorts in every now and then. There's no way this is going to become anything like an ALiM level attention-beg; I'm just slipping nothing into idle conversation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lelouch (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

Lol, alright then. So long as you don't sneeze too much on admin pages.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:51, 16 September 2009 (BST)

If you think what Lelouch does is Alim worthy, you don't know 2 Cool. They used to be a hundred times worse :( --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 17:52, 16 September 2009 (BST)

I meant popularising on Admin pages. It's how ALiM Started, and they've been A/VB'ed for it if I recall. Best not to take chances, what with Iscariot back.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 17:56, 16 September 2009 (BST)

I don't know who Isc is, but I don't think this will be a problem; the only reason I brought up nothing was because of how oddly uninvolved everyone was. I'll make a note: No talking about nothing on A/ pages. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 18:02, 16 September 2009 (BST)

Fair enough.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 18:04, 16 September 2009 (BST)

Not Vandalism - A good-faith mistake with a good-faith purpose- to help with something that was, at heart, very much like a policy discussion, enough to mistaken it as such. If they persisted then I would have ruled vandalism, but I think you really should have just removed the comments and warned them not to do it again on their talk pages before going to A/VB. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 16:03, 16 September 2009 (BST)

Behold the precedent you've just ignored. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 16:24, 16 September 2009 (BST)

Some retard coming onto a group page and claiming to be the leader of a strike and directly claiming responsibility for its success (and hence representing the group misleadingly) does not equal users trying give community input onto a page which has the talk page protected and should be in A/PD anyway. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 16:29, 16 September 2009 (BST)

It's not a group page, it's a user page. Have you read the policy, that I linked that states clearly that I can do whatever I want in my user space as those pages are my sole property? Your opinion of where I should put my projects is your own concern, the fact remains that my user page has been edited against my wishes, precedent shows this to be clear vandalism. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 17:32, 16 September 2009 (BST)]

It was indeed a group page, because at the time of that vandalism, it was being used as a template inclusion on Category:Mall Tour 2009. Way to try to fuck over our precedents and namespace specific rules on the wiki by putting a group page into the user namespace, using it as a template for a category page and calling that the actual group page. You fail at wikilawyering here, because sysops have the ability to ignore hard and fast rules in situations when common sense dictates that to do so would be against the spirit of the rules. For all intents and purposes, your precedent was in fact a group page of a currently active group, and was treated as such. I am about to go about moving all those MT09 pages to more appropriate locations -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 11:25 19 September 2009 (BST)

Nubis thought he was dealing with a group page, check the warning he gave the user. You linked no policy, because no policy says that editing a user subpage is clear-cut vandalism, it only states that the user has total control over what appears on their user subpages. You have the control, so delete it already, don't run to A/VB to punish people for trying to help out. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 17:46, 16 September 2009 (BST)

Way to mis-read Nubis' comment. The Mall Tour is understood to be an ongoing event (like Big Bash) and therefore not strictly a "group page". It is/was a well orchestrated plan that wasn't aided by edits done by anyone not in the approved group. If you can't recognize that there is a CLEAR difference between something like the Mall Tour and say another crappy Resident Evil Umbrella wanna-be group then you need to start actually PLAYING UD more. Not to mention that Jareth's edit was retarded and not keeping in the flow of the page. Nubis was right with that decision. -- #99 ^DCC 17:55, 18 September 2009 (BST)

I didn't say he wasn't :/ the punishment was right but it doesn't apply as precedent here is all. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 10:37, 19 September 2009 (BST)

DCC

Can he be tried, seperatly, for every administrative action he's taken as Nubis? Each one of those was impersonation at the least, and they should stack up nicely to equal that perma we're all thinking this case warrants. It's not like he played with Nubis' account for a day and then appologized; he's been doing it for months and influencing major wiki aspects from elections to A/VB. Does anyone here seriously claim that each one of those large-scale wiki-spanning impersonations doesn't warrant its own case, or at least its own escalation? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 19:04, 11 September 2009 (BST)

One would argue that it would be for each and every edit done under Nubis, as each one would be considered impersonation. Best case scenario, we believe Nubis in that s/he has been away for years and just came back, thus demoting Nubis, and banning DCC for stealing an account and impersonating another user. Worst case, Nubis gave the account away, will get striped of sysop powers, and can very likely join DCC in getting banned (perpetuating account impersonation and having countless violations from DCC's edits). --Akule ^{Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™} 19:22, 11 September 2009 (BST)

Even still, if you take them at their word, its a sock puppet that was used in voting, which in the past has been insta-banned, correct?--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 19:32, 11 September 2009 (BST)

Correct, but sit back and watch the 'sops almost fall over each other in failure to get the REAL punishments happening. Only DDR has or will show initiative.--CyberRead240 01:05, 12 September 2009 (BST)

If the impersonation is confirmed, then there are enough infractions for 500 permabans. It's absolutely ridiculous that one would not apply the same standards to DCC that are applied to every other serial vandal. If a "nobody" user made 100s upon 100s of impersonation edits as per DCC they'd be permabanned in a second, with no need for seperate cases for every edit to deal with such an obvious "career vandal". Why is this case any different? Or is it the balls of certain sysops that've shrivelled? Good on you, DDR, for doing it the right way, for actually have a working set. --WanYao 15:44, 12 September 2009 (BST)

"yummm dick tastes sooooo goood!!!! " - the above Cyberbob  Talk  16:14, 12 September 2009 (BST)

hmmm do we make a comeback to bob, thereby also criticising jed for the exact same joke... read this is particularly relevant to you Cyberbob  Talk  16:14, 12 September 2009 (BST)

One sysop says it is vandalism and another says it is not. Isn't that a tie and not "not vandalism"? --Akule ^{Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™} 21:14, 25 September 2009 (BST)

In the result of a tie, it is always "Not". Now, this case is closed, both your comment and mien should be on the discussion. I'll move them now.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 22:22, 25 September 2009 (BST)

So we're just letting him off the hook because a wave of drama and sockpuppets is passing over our submarine wiki? Maybe I'm old fashioned or blind, but I thought that impersonating a major sysop for half a year would be grounds for some serious punishment, which I haven't seen anywhere... Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 21:21, 26 September 2009 (BST)

There's no evidence that it was for anywhere near as long as he says it is. DCC could have only had the account for a week or so before the case.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 21:41, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Even if that's so, it seems like that's more than warning territory; plus, if DC didn't have the account for a while, who illegally deescalated his ban level? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 22:23, 26 September 2009 (BST)

Alledgedly, Nubis. I mean, everyone KNOWS he did it, but there's no proof he did it, so the sysops can't do anything.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 10:49, 27 September 2009 (BST)

Didn't he say he'd had control since some sysop trust vote event or something? I'm pretty sure that counts as a confession if he did. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 16:32, 27 September 2009 (BST)

Yes, but he could be lying.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:48, 27 September 2009 (BST)

If a murder suspect confesses, do you throw out his evidence because he could be lying? If he says that he did something illegal, then we have no reason not to believe him. It's not like we'd be punishing him unjustly, he knew what would happen when he either confessed or lied. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 16:50, 27 September 2009 (BST)

Not if the confession would implicate someone who might otherwise receive a much smaller punishment. If what DCC is saying is true, which it is, there's a substantial chance that Nubis would end up either perma'd, or with DCCs Vandal data. I know it's stupid, but it's how it has to work.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 16:54, 27 September 2009 (BST)

Zombie Boy

Are we sure he's a vandal alt? He has a user page, and left a relatively nice and newbie-characteristic comment on my talk page. That being said, he does seem to fit the roll a bit too perfectly, and could easily be employing camouflage based anti-peremptory-ban countermeasures. Still, are we sure? Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 02:47, 8 September 2009 (BST)

Far too many suspicious coincidences which put it beyond reasonable doubt. --  RoosterDragon  03:11, 8 September 2009 (BST)

Nallan

I knew this sysop thing meant the world to you but I really didn't think you would so readily test the integrity of your relationships while pursuing it.--CyberRead240 14:42, 7 September 2009 (BST)

It's that persona thing we talked about. My persona goes on anal streaks. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 14:48, 7 September 2009 (BST)

regardless of persona, it doesnt mean you can change what you stand for on different mediums.--CyberRead240 14:50, 7 September 2009 (BST)

I was conflicted, but I was going to add: And besides, I've been a sysop for much longer than just the time you've returned, you know, and I've tested relationships in that time steadily, because I try to treat every case with an unbiased perspective. Ask poor J3D. The point is, Nallan entered the fray with a dumb case, and before you complain about me being mean, I voted vandalism on the similar Cyberbob one and also the J3D one so I'm trying to stick with my guns here by being consistent anyway. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 14:54, 7 September 2009 (BST)

It's not the rulings, it's the way you go about them. You speak to nick daily. a few times a week in person, yet somehow it's ok to claim he can't think for himself? or act for himself? I don't know, one would think you were deliberately distancing yourself from your friends, and for what? I like it when someone can be deemed independant and capable of making their own decisions and being objective without having to scorn relationships and pasts in order to be accepted by a group of cyberfags.--CyberRead240 14:58, 7 September 2009 (BST)

I'm thinking that this might be a conversation better held in private? Cyberbob  Talk  15:00, 7 September 2009 (BST)

its not too big a deal to me, i was just shocked to see him say shit like that to nick, of all people, if you knew nick irl its a pretty weird thing to say. Jed is exactly the same though. lol.--CyberRead240 15:02, 7 September 2009 (BST)

Lol alright then, wow. I never said Nick couldn't think for himself. I just suspected that J3D pressed him to put the case forward, which, really, wouldn't seem to surprising if you found out it was true, right? If you want to press on with it, I can give examples of similar things happening in relation to J3D. Within the week even, but I'd rather not. And I have no desire to impress anyone. I'm going for the grim thing. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 15:11, 7 September 2009 (BST)

You don't get it, and by the sounds of that reply, you will never get it.--CyberRead240 15:16, 7 September 2009 (BST)

I don't think you get what I'm trying to say. This is a fucking wiki for a fucking text based game. You think I'm would expect Nick to give me a cold shoulder over it when we are at the pub? Have you talked to Nick about this? Does he feel the same way that you do? Because as far as I'm concerned he's a big fan of the lulz and not his Internet resume, similar for me. If he did anything like what I mentioned above I would seriously question what he expects of me as a friend, not the other way around. Also, I think you are doing too much work judging me and my attitude towards IRL friends based on one power trip as opposed to my entire time here as a sysop or even a user. All I implied was that J3D told him to put the case forward so he wouldn't have to. Simple. Same as he did with me A/Ming Nubis and same as he did with Nick uploading Colaporn. I'm too busy to argue about this over a wiki. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 15:26, 7 September 2009 (BST)

I don't believe seeing you insult nick and thinking "shit charlie insulted nick for no reason" is doing too much work judging your attitudes, but anyway....And since we are making it precedent to lie about our actions involving Nick and the wiki, I'll follow your lead and say I haven't spoken to him bout it, no.--CyberRead240 15:32, 7 September 2009 (BST)

Lying, eh? All I did was bring a VB case against him for making a petty case. Sheesh. And you didn't answer my all-important question as to whether he cared. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 15:34, 7 September 2009 (BST)

It isn't about this one issue, and it never has been. It is about the distancing, we can't figure out why you insist on distancing yourself so badly, is all. Saying he "cares" about what you said to him is silly, nobody REALLY cares what is said to them on a wiki, but you can be taken aback by it and a little put off by the situation.--CyberRead240 15:39, 7 September 2009 (BST)

Well if that is a case then it's his and my issue to talk about, not ours. You broke the fourth wall between us and our "characters" an hour ago and it was then that I was turned off this conversation. I won't be replying. --DANCEDANCEREVOLUTION-- 15:41, 7 September 2009 (BST)

I think it's fair to say he's distancing himself because he wants to be impartial as someone managing the wiki.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 15:42, 7 September 2009 (BST)

It is my problem because I do have an issue with it myself, and you are once again taking it too seriously. And to Yonnua, I know you are trying real hard for Sysop but you just dont get the situation, you haven't been around for long enough to get any of this. Also don't try the "I wont be replying", I invented that. In short, you are taking it too seriously, I'm not mad, nor am I generally opposed to it, I just feel a bit upset that you are so willing to distance yourself from our past on the wiki, but I do get the characters thing. I guess I just couldn't imagine crossing a mate on the wiki, but I understand your position means you will have to. Whatever it's late.--CyberRead240 15:47, 7 September 2009 (BST)

"All I implied was that J3D told him to put the case forward so he wouldn't have to. Simple." irrc I saw something very much like this said by you yourself, read, in IRC just the other day. I didn't make a big deal of it, it doesn't matter. As bob said, this is probably not something to be aired on the wiki. --WanYao 16:08, 7 September 2009 (BST)

I saw you come out of the closet and tell everyone your genitals resembled miniature marshmallows stuck together to form what probably SHOULD look like a penis but it doesn't really do the trick, hence why your last girlfriend dumped you for a small african midget who had a talent that you seemed to be unable to bring yourself to say without stopping for 30 seconds to ejaculate. All of this is true until you actually come up with "something very much like this said by me myself" rather than just adding on to the end of conversations and then claiming later that you are all innocent and you don't like conflict baww.--CyberRead240 16:41, 7 September 2009 (BST)

Since MichaelRead is making such a big stink of it, here and at this very moment in IRC... Here's the log of the conversation I was referring to:

• [2009-09-06 01:42:38] <WanYao> negress is not racist
• [2009-09-06 01:42:55] <michaelread> its not, in america it is used to define an independant black woman
• [2009-09-06 01:42:59] <WanYao> it's not exactly politically correct ... but it's not racist
• [2009-09-06 01:43:17] <michaelread> bobs "hahaha"
• [2009-09-06 01:43:22] <michaelread> can that be removed to talk page
• [2009-09-06 01:43:25] <michaelread> for irrelevant comments?
• [2009-09-06 01:44:33] <WanYao> yeah....
• [2009-09-06 01:44:34] <WanYao> do it
• [2009-09-06 01:44:50] <michaelread> ill get banned for it, he is jumping on any of us
• [2009-09-06 01:45:04] <michaelread> it took him nearly lessthan a minute to move what jed said and put it in vb
• [2009-09-06 01:45:06] <michaelread> less than a minute
• [2009-09-06 01:45:09] <michaelread> and the problem here?
• [2009-09-06 01:45:12] <WanYao> i'll do it.
• [2009-09-06 01:45:13] <michaelread> he wont get in trouble for it.
• [2009-09-06 01:45:37] <michaelread> normally i would but i am one escelation from a week ban
• [2009-09-06 01:48:15] <WanYao> conn is no longer around to vote for bob
• [2009-09-06 01:48:18] <WanYao> :)
• [2009-09-06 01:48:33] <michaelread> so good
• [2009-09-06 01:48:41] <michaelread> too busy with his super duper important life
• [2009-09-06 01:48:46] <michaelread> haha
• [2009-09-06 01:50:51] <michaelread> bob moved it from talk dude

etc, etc.
as i said before, i didn't and don't consider it a big deal. but it did happen. and since the whole thing apparently is a big deal to michaelread... there's the logs. --WanYao 17:07, 7 September 2009 (BST)

Moving a comment to talk page is not the same as getting someone else to post a vandal case for you. DDR was implying that Jed said "hey nick, post this for me because I dont want to be seen as petty while there is a case about that very thing". Mine was to alert those who were currently talking to something that I found wrong, but since I was embroiled in an edit and vandalism war at that very moment, I didn't want to fuel any fires I was involved in. --CyberRead240 17:43, 7 September 2009 (BST)

Actually both of them are variants of asking someone else to do a controversial edit on an Admin page which you're scared to do yourself because you think it'll get you another Vandal ban. I don't care either way, but I sure as hell am not going to let you pretend you're not someone who asks others to "do your dirty work"... because you asked me to. That doesn't prove anything in relation to the case at hand, but it clears up any implications you'd zomg never do such a thing evar11! --WanYao 00:46, 8 September 2009 (BST)

Sorry, bro, but your own "evidence" shows that I never asked anybody to do anything, you voluntarily said "I'll do it". I just said I wasnt going to because I was embroiled in Drama at the time. Examplefail.--CyberRead240 04:12, 8 September 2009 (BST)

J3D 2, Cyberbob 2, Cyberbob 3

The popcorn comment might be cliche, but damn, is it appropriate here. When is this going to stop anyway? A/VB is cluster fucked once again. Though really, this whole affair screams personal vendetta to me. A/A?--Thadeous Oakley 08:49, 6 September 2009 (BST)

If I decide to take anybody to A/A over this stuff it will be after everything else has been cleared up. Cyberbob  Talk  08:52, 6 September 2009 (BST)

You? Lol. It's your vendetta mostly. If you want to stop hows about no more petty cases? --xoxo 08:54, 6 September 2009 (BST)

It's kind of scary when MisterGame is reading my mind..... --WanYao 08:56, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Not wanna go there :P --Thadeous Oakley 09:10, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Hm yes, I do agree with you that believing the word "negress" to be racist == pursuing a vendetta. Maybe if you didn't always feel the need to make those stupid "edgy" racial double entendres these cases wouldn't keep happening. Cyberbob  Talk  09:17, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Or you could stop pretending you care when a regular user says a slightly offensive (in your eyes) word on the wiki, just so that you can sting him with a VB case to further yourself in a personal vendetta. I think that one would avoid the drama a little better.--CyberRead240 09:21, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Or, maybe, as per my suggestion... You should ALL just shut the fuck up and stay away from taking each other to A/VB and Misconduct. None of you are coming across as at all mature or objective, and it's high time this shyte just ended. --WanYao 09:33, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Maybe you should take everyones suggestion, and butt out of stuff that doesn't concern you, when your comments are inflammatory and keep these wars going? Dont try to play the "omg im so innocent" card when you have filed a lot of VB and M reports throughout this too...--CyberRead240 09:38, 6 September 2009 (BST)

^^^^ Cyberbob  Talk  09:39, 6 September 2009 (BST)

If there was one thing to unite slr and bob...--xoxo 09:41, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Better than Arbitration, Wan is. Cyberbob  Talk  09:56, 6 September 2009 (BST)

The wiki is a public sphere; therefore, being a member of the "general public", these cases are my concern. I am totally within my rights to comment on them. Meanwhile, making statements about me is just trying to deflect the subject and the attention away from your own little private territorial pissing war. Classic tactic, nice try, but I'm calling you on it. Focus on the issue at hand. --WanYao 18:01, 6 September 2009 (BST)

So, the issue at hand (in your eyes), is for us to NOT post any cases against each other ever again....wouldn't that limit the "public sphere" of this wiki? If users were not allowed to report each other for things they deem inappropriate or incorrect? I also don't see how I am trying to deflect the attention away from the cases...if anything, my comment before YOU butted in was keeping the argument going, fighting for what side I believe in, you know, free speech, democracy, freedom, the essense of a "public sphere" etc? You fail. TrYiNG 2 SoUnD sMaRt Is A cLaSSiC tAcTiC, bUt IM cAlLiN u oN iT!--CyberRead240 18:06, 6 September 2009 (BST)

If bob or J3D commit something that is clearly inappropriate vandalism, I think that the odds are good that another user would be willing to call them on it; It's not like you two are each other's personal watchdogs, you just self appoint yourselves that so you can catch the other when they slip up. I'm not saying that bob or J3D is right in these series of cases, but I'd think that bob should be able to trust his fellow sysops, and J3D his fellow members, to report blatant misconduct and vandalism when they see it (of their own accords). Anything less is probably in the grey area and grounds for A/A, which also gets things done. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 18:39, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Hi, I am a longtime user, I didn't read your text wall because of reason #4 - "And you are?" Good Day.--CyberRead240 14:38, 7 September 2009 (BST)

I think the point was, Wan, that you are hardly innocent and totally uninvolved in this mess. You have made a fair few number of pretty obviously emotionally-based misconduct and vandal cases against people (mostly me) over the last couple of months. Remember how hard you were trying to bring my sysophood into a case about moving a section to the top of a page? Remember how ridiculously overblown that whole deal became because of your melodrama? I'm literally lol'ing at your attempts to repaint yourself as some kind of wrathful angel flying high above, because all that is needed to prove that you work just as hard as anyone to enmesh yourself in this business is to make a cursory glance at all the terrible cases you've been making a habit of bringing. Cyberbob  Talk  00:05, 7 September 2009 (BST)

I'm not repainting myself in any way, shape of form. But neither am playing your game of derailing this discussion by trying to turn it into a character assassination session. Or by responding to you pulling out an old example of my alleged "melodrama" -- which melodrama, by the way, was a response to a completely out of line and bad faith edit by you... Are you trying to stir up drama and make a flamefest, here, bob? It sure looks like it. Either that, or NOTHING you can say to or about me can possibly be objective, or free from the personal, the ad homimen attacks. Meh... --WanYao 01:36, 7 September 2009 (BST)

You're both doing it. --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 01:56, 7 September 2009 (BST)

And now you are! And so the cycle continues...--Nallan (Talk) 04:22, 7 September 2009 (BST)

kittens --Bob Boberton ^{TF / DW} 05:50, 7 September 2009 (BST)

My eyes!--Thadeous Oakley 13:54, 7 September 2009 (BST)

User:J3D

13 hours isn't a quick skim, if you were serious about the case you would have had more than a quick skim too. Don't try to "play it cool" to make it look more convincing, you knob.--CyberRead240 02:16, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Yes I mean it's just so inconceivable that I might have had other things to do in that time, such as homework and going to sleep. Cyberbob  Talk  02:28, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Next time you make a shitty comment like that on the main page you'll receive a case of your own, by the way. Cyberbob  Talk  02:29, 6 September 2009 (BST)

Don't be so petty OMG IM GONNE MAKE BIG VANDAL CASE COZ UR BEIN A FUCKIN BABBIE--CyberRead240 05:57, 6 September 2009 (BST)

By "shitty" I mean "not contributing anything of worth or relevance to the case". Trolling fits that pretty much to a tee. Cyberbob  Talk  06:27, 6 September 2009 (BST)

babbie--CyberRead240 06:30, 6 September 2009 (BST)

User:Nallan

DanceDanceRevolution said:

Fair call. Problem is I don't have it, I would assume only Nallan has a copy.

Try moviefap.com, i hear nubis has a membership.--xoxo 04:17, 5 September 2009 (BST)

Is that supposed to be an insult? Somehow saying that I have visited a page that someone else SAVED an image from and re-posted is worse? Wow. You are losing your touch...--– Nubis ^NWO 19:28, 6 September 2009 (BST)

And you just took the bait.--CyberRead240 16:42, 7 September 2009 (BST)