UDWiki talk:Administration/Vandal Banning/Archive/2010 05

May 2010

User:Craptalker

Dare I bait him into the 3-edit rule...? ;D --

 

 

 

 

05:43, 30 May 2010 (BST)

You shouldn't. If it's a vandal alt, it will either deactivate or 3-edit itself anyway; there's no reason for you to put yourself in a situation where you as a sysop and A/VB member are trying to get someone to commit vandalism. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 17:09, 30 May 2010 (BST)

DDR a sysop, what? —Aichon— 19:59, 30 May 2010 (BST)

If not in title, in heart. Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 23:33, 30 May 2010 (BST)

I was hoping the wiki fairy visited yesterday, gave him back his title, and I had somehow missed it. Now I'm sad. :( —Aichon— 23:44, 30 May 2010 (BST)

The bureaucrats don't shouldn't have to put up with such homophobic jibes :p -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 12:17 31 May 2010 (BST)

haichu —Aichon— 23:15, 31 May 2010 (BST)

If it makes you feel any better, the forget fairy stopped by and visited me! If you want DDR to be an op so bad, just harass him until he takes the job back (or kills himself). Lelouch vi Britannia is helping make Ridleybank green_ and gives Achievements 23:49, 30 May 2010 (BST)

You're both right, it's a pretty immature thing to do, so it's probably for the best that he didn't take the bait. Oooooh I feel so much like Iscariot right now with all this newb baiting ;D --

 

 

 

 

02:18, 31 May 2010 (BST)

User:Saromu (2)

Sonny makes 3 cases and that is the same as Iscariot's reign of terror and J3D's war against Bob? I'm impressed that his 3 cases added up to that much! The two links you give have SEVERAL links to cases and arguments, but Sonny's 3 little cases are CLEARLY just as bad! Please backseat mod with your opinions of punishment some more. I imagine you shaking your fist angrily as you do it.--– Nubis ^NWO 13:59, 24 May 2010 (BST)

Where the fuck did you came from? Begone, demon! --Thadeous Oakley 14:06, 24 May 2010 (BST)

Shaking fists? Hardly. Your comeback deserves such imagery. 1. It's 4 cases (count pls). 2. The precedents don't have to show that this is as bad, just to show that its a punishable offence. 3. Iscariot and J3D both actually posted and maintained substantial positions in the community whilst they were doing this which make Sonny's "visit UDWiki once every month and bombard ops with misconduct cases"" seem a little more obvious, yes?

Got any other stupid claims/positions Nubis? Pls just keep posting as DCC from now on, makes it easier to follow. --

 

 

 

 

14:07, 24 May 2010 (BST)

Iscariot actually claimed to not contribute to the wiki in one of my A/M cases when I actually tried to defend him and say he was a useful member. I can dig up the quote/link. J3d's "contributions" were adding ALiM links and categories to every fucking page that he could. Shining examples of contributions! DCC or --– Nubis ^NWO 14:14, 24 May 2010 (BST)

Quotes mean dick, especially if they were coming out of anything as biased as Iscariot's mouth. I'm talking about actual evidence, ie. contributions and time spent around Admin pages and matters. They were both pains but they were around. Sonny? Maybe in 2008 when the wiki was fun for trolls. --

 

 

 

 

14:19, 24 May 2010 (BST)

To be quite honest, I think this should sticked under the case below. In my humble opinion, one vandal case about spamming was enough. This is only adding fuel to the fire. Though at the same time Sonny should receive a warning for the second case against Cheese, because that was just frivolous. If anything this is again starting to blow beyond proportions. In before SA makes a sneak in here. Also, fist. --Thadeous Oakley 14:14, 24 May 2010 (BST)

I don't think this is a particularly bad idea, though I don't think it's specifically right. Yes, Sonny should be warned for something in his stupid shit-stirring. As long as the ops have the right decision in doing it for something he's definitely guilty of, rather than maybe knowing about a case that was uncharacteristically up for a couple of hours. The choice goes to the ops. --

 

 

 

 

14:19, 24 May 2010 (BST)

If maybe I didn't have a team of guys pulling punches cause of hi-and-bye fuckbags like Sonny and Nubis here making bi-monthly shitfests, maybe we'd get some actual rulings done. Argh and the like. 22:14, 26 May 2010 (BST)

User:WOOT

Hi, can someone explain to me why this is Vandalism when he was seriously trying to become a sysop? Vandalism requires an edit in bad faith. He may not have done it in good faith like to cure cancer, solve the Palestinian problem, or end world hunger but that doesn't make what he did bad faith. Him and I spoke about it and we decided it was time to truly get him into the sysop community. Y'all just racist. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 09:33, 20 May 2010 (BST)

Honestly, until you guys brought it up again, I had completely forgotten about the fact that his race has come up in the past as an issue. At the moment, I have no idea what race he is, you are, or pretty much anyone else on here is for that matter, and, to be frank, I don't care to know (in fact, going further, I don't want to know), because it doesn't matter and shouldn't enter into my thinking (and so far has not). In terms of why it's vandalism, he was up for promotion a few months back. What criteria has he worked on or improved since then? None, from what I've seen, so it's hard to treat this as an honest effort to become a sysop. He also has a history of doing this sort of thing, which means he can't get off by saying he didn't know better. Couple that with the precedent of the previous escalations and it's a pretty clear case of vandalism. —Aichon— 09:48, 20 May 2010 (BST)

He's from Costa Rica, making him Hispanic. Misanthropy has already showed bias against Woot for being Hispanic. Making this a touchy subject when the sysops constantly go after Woot for no reason in particular. Not meeting the criteria to be a sysop shouldn't be vandal worthy since its really a matter of opinion. Simply meeting the requirements does not make someone automatically a sysop, it has more to do with opinion. It is my opinion that you're a basement dwelling, anti-social, asspie faggot who should be as far away from responsibilities as humanly possible. But my opinion doesn't matter, I'm not a sysop. YOU are a sysop, your opinion matters. When you use your opinion in a biased way you abuse your powers. If Woot is punished for trying to be a sysop so that he can clean up the wiki then I will bring miscontribution on every single sysop involved. Because this has nothing to do with rules, its about your dislike for Woot and his ethnicity. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 23:36, 20 May 2010 (BST)

He's recieved bans for it twice before now, so he has no reason to still be making this form of bids. Saying "Not meeting the criteria to be a sysop shouldn't be vandal worthy" is completely strawman, and has nothing to do with this case. This case, as per the other two I just linked to, is about him spamming admin pages with bids, fully knowing that if he does not attempt to be a member of this community beforehand, he will get a vandal case. Just because he's ignored the past two warnings doesn't give you the right to storm in here and accuse us of misconduct.--Yonnua Koponen ^{Talk ! Contribs} 23:50, 20 May 2010 (BST)

We are making a statement by not conforming to your faggotry. Woot is a freedom fighter like Che Guevera. He will not take part in the system unless its changed. That is why he wants to be a sysop. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 23:53, 20 May 2010 (BST)

"this has nothing to do with rules, its about your dislike for Woot and his ethnicity." Yes, clearly I disliked WOOT's ethnicity, despite the fact that I didn't know what it was until you just told me (despite the fact that I made it clear I didn't even want to know). Your astounding display of logic has caused me to rethink my shameful ways. I'd respond further, but you're just trolling now, and I'm tired of playing those games. When you want to have a rational conversation, you already know plenty of ways to find me. Use one of them. —Aichon— 02:43, 21 May 2010 (BST)

He never wasn't trolling... You actually think he cares about WOOT and didn't think he would be banned for putting up an A/PM? --

 

 

 

 

03:06, 21 May 2010 (BST)

Why do you still try sonny? You used to be hilarious because you could get people to come to you and make a dick of themselves. Now you're so desperate for a reaction, every single one of your comments is just deliberate, idiotic and obvious rather than cleverly devised. --

 

 

 

 

02:00, 21 May 2010 (BST)

Unlike you, DDR, I speak with all honesty. If I have any motives I make it clear from the beginning. I have no intentions of getting Woot banned or in trouble. My intentions are to make him a sysop so that he can get rid of the rest of the faggot sysops. There's no secret here. Now put your tinfoil cap back on and go back into your hugbox. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 19:22, 21 May 2010 (BST)

No, seriously, why are you still trying? --

 

 

 

 

03:40, 22 May 2010 (BST)

To get rid of the faggots. I thought I already said this. I apologize if I use too much big words. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 21:07, 22 May 2010 (BST)

If you wanted to do that you could have put someone else up, or yourself. You knew woot would be put for vandalism for the third offense, and you aren't an idiot. Too scared to do the job yourself, I see. But you knew that, so I'm still expecting a proper answer. Though I think I already know it, as its been your same motive for 4 years --

 

 

 

 

00:54, 23 May 2010 (BST)

Remind me again, when did you become the Sonny Spokesman? Because I don't remember ever knowing Woot would be VandalBanned considering he isn't breaking any rules. I had a feeling you faggots would rage, but that is the point since we want to get rid of you. I have no one else I can trust with the job except maybe DCC but I know Woot better. And I don't have time to be a sysop, Woot does. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 21:08, 23 May 2010 (BST)

Playing dumb too hard sonny sorry. Still not convincing anyone. Proper answer plz --

 

 

 

 

00:49, 24 May 2010 (BST)

Nice to see the Misconduct case was voted on by all the Ops that voted on the Vandal case (in less than 24 hours). Sysop voting Block FTW. It would be a shame to actually let the case sit long enough to give the other ops a chance to read it. Might as well vote for the permaban since the Op clique seems to be active right now. -- #99 ^DCC 13:17, 20 May 2010 (BST)

QQ? Oh no, the troll haven that was 2008 UDWiki isn't here anymore. Shouldn't stop you, Sonny, Woot and other tards from coming to try to restore it to its former glory, then cry when all sysops have a common interesting in keeping you fags out of here (mistakening it as a clique). You're the clique, you're the idiots, now fuck off. --

 

 

 

 

14:32, 20 May 2010 (BST)

"Nice to see the Misconduct case was voted on by all the Ops that voted on the Vandal case (in less than 24 hours)." I'm sorry, but who would you prefer voted on these sorts of things? Of the nine sysops we have, six are currently active on A/VB and A/M. One of them was involved in the two cases so couldn't vote, and of the remaining five that are active here, four voiced their opinions within 24 hours. So unless you're suggesting that we bring in circus clowns to start voting on our behalf, it sounds like you're getting hot and bothered because the sysops actually did their job in a timely manner. And voting the same on open-and-shut cases does not a voting block make. Go look at something divisive and see how they voted then. —Aichon— 21:51, 20 May 2010 (BST)

For all fucking things holy, can you guys just ban him already and stop the source of all this prepubescent moaning? --

 

 

 

 

02:44, 21 May 2010 (BST)

User:VashX20

Hmmm. I was about to say that I thought Not Vandalism was a good stance at this point but having seen the link where Whesker, prior to being permabanned basically admits that his main is Vash (my interpretation), I think my choice would have been to vote vandalism (for avoiding ban, even suspected to be avoiding ban is enough to vote vandalism). --

 

 

 

 

02:17, 18 May 2010 (BST)

And seriously, nice detective work Thad, Good work :D --

 

 

 

 

02:17, 18 May 2010 (BST)

User:Spiderzed

I have decided your further messages on my talk page are unwelcome. That message alone should be clear enough. They are unwelcome. End of story. I've decided that they are unwelcome based on this quotes:

- "Is NSU now going to employ its stated standards and list my group Hetzjagd auf Nazis as an enemy? Or do I have to write Sonny-style on my user page that Corny is a moron who's even incapable of enforcing his very own standards within his very own group?"

- "Sir Tintin of Tulips, my fine and prospering group Hetzjagd auf Nazis actually consists now of more then one single alt: Evidence and more evidence. I'll take you by your word."

- "Why does only my FU buddy get listed as enemy, and not me? I've done the same and PKed you once, what seems to be sufficient to get the one-man-group of his PKer alt listed as an undying nemesis of the NSU. I demand that my one-girl-group Hetzjagd auf Nazis gets immediately recognized as an nemesis as well!"

- "We don't even do guerrilla tactics. We just sit around in the open, have a coffee in Krinks' rest room, and then we decide occassionally to shoot up some NSU. I have sat inside of an unlit EHB school with just two babah zambahz in the whole green burb, and in retrospect I have to say that it felt more threatening and exciting then the whole "2nd Battle of Krinks". "2nd Battle of Krinks", you remember? Ah, yeah, of course you remember, that so-called "event" consisting of three smashed radios that Corny is so desperately trying to create such a buzz about, just to make a name for his group. (Or are it already four radios?)"

- "Why doesn't the NSU fight back? By now, FU's PKer alts in the area have killed two gnatzys, while suffering no single casualty yet. You should really know some of us now, today one has thrown Batavian out of a window in Budgen Building, while mine asked him outside to stand up so she can give him a headshot. (And she has killed Cornholioo in Krinks before that, too.) Fighting NSU is more like painting the wall, the only thing moving is oneself while the wall allows everything to happen to it."

- "I'd have a dumbwit of Cornholioo today in Krinks, and an screenshot image of Batavian in the same area from April 10th. Now if there would only be a screenshot of either of them in the time inbetween..."

Also, you have once edited the time one of my messages was placed. But I guess you have not done that deliberately so I'm not reporting you for that.

Furthermore, this isn't the first time you're posting on my talk page after I made clear your messages are unwelcome. You've done that before. That time you had posted this: "I know that I'm not welcome on your talk page, but in this case I think it's important to let you know that action has been taken: UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2010_04#User:Cornholioo. Maybe your own reaction will save you from a formal warning (or maybe not), but in every case that data will be purged as soon as another sys-op sees it. (Feel free to delete this comment now, it has served its purpose by alerting you.)"

I have not reported you that time. I'm neither making a second case for this, where I could. Though, it has been enough now. Since you've done it again, I am reporting you now. What you're doing is simply ignoring the message on top and then trying to justify it. That is unacceptable. --Cornholioo 21:00, 2 May 2010 (BST)

I admit that I've posted not the nicest thinkable posts on the talk page _before_ I was deemed unwelcome. (And I can't remember to ever have changed the time in any foreign signature, so I'd welcome a pointer about that.)

And yeah, had I posted anything like that after the warning, I'd be the first to understand why I receive a warning.

However, after the warning, I've only done those two comments, and both have been kept informative, brief and in good faith, as they both have been purely helpful. --Spiderzed 21:20, 2 May 2010 (BST)

This time I have deleted it an hour after the post, before I filled in the arbitration. --Cornholioo 21:01, 2 May 2010 (BST)

Sorry, I don't get the relevance. If you want him to be escalated as a vandal, he has to be breaking one of the rules. Since we don't have a policy in place regarding disallowing users to post on each other's talk pages, the only way to do that is to get an arbitration ruling that he cannot post on your page. Breaking the terms of an arbitration ruling is considered to be vandalism, and we can rule on it as such at that time. Until then, these cases are frivolous. —Aichon— 21:12, 2 May 2010 (BST)

Ross told me to write down at the top that his messages are unwelcome and take him to vandal banning upon still posting on my talk page. --Cornholioo 23:41, 2 May 2010 (BST)

While yes Ross did say that, there is a difference between someone nicely attempting to point something out to you for you to fix, and the pictures I spammed on your page. If you totally want them to not post on your page, then take them to an Arby and ask that they not have permission to post there, otherwise minor things that someone may post there to help you, are gonna get laughed at and thrown back in your face much like this right here. -- 

•   Timmah!  

•   Talk  

23:54, 2 May 2010 (BST)

Here's what Ross said. If we take what Ross said at face value, then Spiderzed's comments were not harassment so there isn't a reason to rule vandalism. If you want a restraining order on all his comments to your page, you should take him to arbitration. —Aichon— 00:28, 3 May 2010 (BST)

I'm gonna be sort of honest, Ross is wrong. It's been a while but we used to have users spam other users for hours a day without getting in trouble at all. In fact, it's a shame the history purge happened because I can't show you :( but Boxy might remember... If it ain't backed up by arbies, it shouldn't be escalatable. Sorry cornhole. --

 

 

 

 

01:04, 3 May 2010 (BST)

Yeah, my original comment, which I trimmed back, mentioned that I wasn't sure about the harassment idea and would need to look into it to see if it, as it would apply here, would be a valid means for escalation. Regardless, it doesn't apply to this case, so there's nothing at all for it to stand on. —Aichon— 01:23, 3 May 2010 (BST)

You guys are free to ignore precedents en masse anyway. We used to spam the hell out of finis, it was great, and he had too much pride to take us to arbies over it so he just wiped our comments, about 50 times a day. Ha ha --

 

 

 

 

01:46, 3 May 2010 (BST)

And also, I realise this is the second time in 2 days I've tried telling ops what is vandalism and what isn't, this isn't as black and white imo as the last one, and it would be a good idea in the long term to start escalating users for this stuff in long term harassment situations, and only for deliberate harassment, not just jumping into to conversations to offer (what should be) welcomed input. --

 

 

 

 

01:54, 3 May 2010 (BST)

User:Cornholioo (2)

Judaism is a religion, not a race. The idea of Jews being racially different stems from anti-Semitism. Thus you, yourselves, are the ones being prejudice. Cornolioo is simply being a moron. --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS I jizzed in my pants pr0n} 04:47, 15 May 2010 (BST)

UDWiki:Administration/Vandal_Banning/Archive/2009_03#User:Iscariot. --

 

 

 

 

13:34, 24 May 2010 (BST)

Cornhole

Is this going to close or not? --Thadeous Oakley 14:16, 9 May 2010 (BST)

See This to find out why it hasn't been. -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 14:20, 9 May 2010 (BST)

Cheese and Ross are both still active around here, so I've been leaving it open to get their feedback. Those of us that have ruled already aren't all in agreement, after all, and I prefer having a decision that's more conclusive if possible. I'll close it in another day or two if they don't rule on it. There's no particular rush to have a ruling with this case, though I can understand why people are eager to see the ruling close as it is now. —Aichon— 19:49, 9 May 2010 (BST)

I'm in no rush,... just that I love it when you all dish out punishment.... -Poodle of Doom^{M! T} 20:39, 9 May 2010 (BST)

You're pretty creepy. Cyberbob  Talk  09:42, 10 May 2010 (BST)

You guys will be trippin' balls if you merge the two Corn cases. --

 

 

 

 

08:24, 10 May 2010 (BST)

HEHEEHEHEHEHEHE CORNHOLE ROFLROFLFOFLROFLFOORORROFL Cyberbob  Talk  09:42, 10 May 2010 (BST)

HEH HEH I have no bungholio HEH HEH -- boxy ^{talk • teh rulz} 11:08 10 May 2010 (BST)