User talk:Suicidalangel: Difference between revisions
Line 212: | Line 212: | ||
::::That is an excellent clarification Bob. You didn't really address my question about sockpuppet vs meat puppet but that's okay. I do respect the standard by which you conduct your votes, though I disagree completely. We have vastly differing ideas about democracy which can be resolved on one of our talk pages. In the meantime, let's give SA a chance to respond to my original rant.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 18:45, 19 July 2009 (BST) | ::::That is an excellent clarification Bob. You didn't really address my question about sockpuppet vs meat puppet but that's okay. I do respect the standard by which you conduct your votes, though I disagree completely. We have vastly differing ideas about democracy which can be resolved on one of our talk pages. In the meantime, let's give SA a chance to respond to my original rant.--{{User:Giles Sednik/sig}} 18:45, 19 July 2009 (BST) | ||
:He wasn't laying a trap for anyone. He was demonstrating the irony of your victimisation from what he perceived as meatpuppeting. Having deliberately avoided that whole affair, I won't comment on whether I think it was valid or not, but I'm basically saying this was more of ''that'' than it was a trap to get you A/VB'd. SA isn't that sort of user. --[[User:DanceDanceRevolution|<span style="color:black"><u><big>ϑϑℜ</big></u></span>]] 18:51, 19 July 2009 (BST) | :He wasn't laying a trap for anyone. He was demonstrating the irony of your victimisation from what he perceived as meatpuppeting. Having deliberately avoided that whole affair, I won't comment on whether I think it was valid or not, but I'm basically saying this was more of ''that'' than it was a trap to get you A/VB'd. SA isn't that sort of user. --[[User:DanceDanceRevolution|<span style="color:black"><u><big>ϑϑℜ</big></u></span>]] 18:51, 19 July 2009 (BST) | ||
I said that on the talk page because it looked like you were starting to throw a fit because your guide was voted out. I wanted to quash it before it turned into a full-blown shit storm, because I don't really know you and I had no idea if you'd try to start all sorts of shit over it. It wasn't taunting, it was being abrasive to prevent yet another giant flamefest. Sorry, but that tactic tends to work better than civility does here. That, and thank you for your input. :D | |||
I wasn't exactly rubbing it in your face as I was looking at everything that started from the concept and idea of you meat puppeting and then it failing. It made me laffs. Shorry. :D | |||
And last, as seen on DDR's talk page | |||
"Yarp. I could probably round up some support from my groups. Oh well. I'll just crawl over to them with this knife in my back. Love, --donuts by dayGiles Sednik CAPD SWApoetry by night 05:16, 7 July 2009 (BST)" | |||
hope you enjoy the sight of me striking votes due to meatpuppetry --Cyberbob 05:19, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
What is this "meatpuppetry" you speak of? --donuts by dayGiles Sednik CAPD SWApoetry by night 05:32, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
Do you really not know or are you being cute? --Cyberbob 05:34, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
I really don't know how you mean it in this context. I would think of meatpuppetry as being using alts or something to vote. --donuts by dayGiles Sednik CAPD SWApoetry by night 05:36, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
That's sockpuppetry. Linkthewindow Talk 05:37, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
No Giles, you are the puppets. (Meatpuppetry is like sockpuppetry, except they're actually different people. Like that Fiffy lazer beem eyes suggestion.) --Bob Boberton TF / DW 05:40, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
This too. Linkthewindow Talk 05:45, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
Of course. Under sockpuppetry in the wiki, we find a subsection for meat puppet: "Editors of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia use "meat puppet" to deprecate contributions from a new community member if the new member was (apparently) recruited by an existing member only to back up the recruiting member's position." Of course I wouldn't stoop to that. A couple of members of CAPD and the SWA do already actively maintain wiki accounts and contribute to the wiki. I'm not above shooting them a link to the voting on our forums and asking them to make up their own minds. That certainly isn't meatpuppetry, yeh? --donuts by dayGiles Sednik CAPD SWApoetry by night 05:42, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
It is, but only slightly. --Bob Boberton TF / DW 05:43, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
Whether it's slightly or strongly meatpuppetry is irrelevant. --Cyberbob 05:44, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
Isnt that what the democrats and republicans do every election? I also demand proof that he is meatpuppeting or im putting cyberbob up for misconduct--Imthatguy 05:48, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
you're precious --Cyberbob 05:50, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
Firstly, real life =/= UDwiki. | |||
Secondly, you're an idiot. Misconduct is for abuse of sysop powers (not just regular editing,) and Bob never accused Giles of anything. He warned him against meatpuppeting. Linkthewindow Talk 05:51, 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
Apart from anything else, Giles, meatpupeting is hella lame. It's a fucking guide, FFS. Some people don't think it deserves to be a reviewed one, and voted that way. Deal with it, instead of fucking over the wiki by getting your mates, who wouldn't have otherwise voted, to force it through simply to stroke your own ego -- boxy talk • teh rulz 21:50 7 July 2009 (BST) | |||
It seems as if multiple users explained that they thought it was a problem and explained a few reasons why, not to mention the actions of some users seemed to have confirmed it. After they explained it, I didn't see the point. You already knew what we thought was a problem, one more person repeating it wasn't going to help.--[[KyleStyle_For_Everything|<font face="Rage italic"><span style="color: DarkMagenta">Mr. Angel,</span> ]][[User_talk:Suicidalangel|<span style="color: DarkGreen">Help</span>]] [[Project_Mentor|<span style="color: Black">needed?</span>]]</font> 20:35, 20 July 2009 (BST) |
Revision as of 19:35, 20 July 2009
Æ
The two and only rules: I'm the only one allowed to use blinking text, and the rules are subject to my smallest whims.
A/PM#CyberbobGot any objections to it? Linkthewindow Talk 11:50, 19 June 2009 (BST)
FYI: Bid archived here. By the way, 5 promotion bids? Really? Isn't there a limit on this sort of thing? --Blake Firedancer T E RNL? P.I.S.I.T. 10:05, 21 June 2009 (BST)
You never know what yer missing until its goneThis place is so much shittier since they've gone. I need to goto the waffle house and drawn my sorrows in some pie, and some sad country songs on the jukebox, hoping oneday Grim and Karek can return.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens 15:31, 16 June 2009 (BST)
MehWhat's your thoughts on it? I can't see you thinking he needs to be promoted now, so unless you respond quickly, I'll close the case in the next few hours. It doesn't pass A/PM crit 2 anyway, and there's precident for closing cases that are obvoiusly going to get rejected. I'll leave this here for a while then, and if I don't catch you on IRC between now and tommorow morning, I'll close it then. Linkthewindow Talk 11:42, 15 June 2009 (BST)
Just Wondering...Hi SA, long time no speak. I was just rummaging through my email and I found out about the arbi case you started a while back against the guy who used blinking text, then I noticed how your sig now says 'Mr. Angel'. I remembered our conversation a while back about how your name sounds feminine, and I can't help but ask; did you change it to Mr Angel to avoid people making assumptions? ----Ash | T | яя | 10:28, 13 June 2009 (BST)
ArbiesPlease see your arbies case for an interim ruling -- boxy talk • teh rulz 23:47 11 June 2009 (BST) A ruling has been made, basically, just keep away from each other for a while, s'ok -- boxy talk • teh rulz 22:47 22 June 2009 (BST) Promotion Bid - CyberbobWell maybe, if we stop voting for sysops who are aggressive and abuse their power, then such a wonderful place might exist. Oh, and I added an archive.--Yonnua Koponen Talk ! Contribs 07:41, 11 June 2009 (BST)
Edit warYeah, it was an edit war on The Brookes Arms, and you saved me from it. But I assume that I'd have to be a "sysop" to furthur edit the page?--Bishop Vagancia I 20:46, 8 June 2009 (BST)
Template_talk:Navigation#Merchandise_Link --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 22:10, 7 June 2009 (BST) Site hostA WHOIS lookup on the new server's IP shows it is still provided by Poundhost. Just so you know when you meddle/fix/eradicate the TOU later. -- RoosterDragon 01:52, 9 June 2009 (BST) Wiki Cookies...?
a/ashow me the precedent please. No one else has linked any and you might not have spotted my comment what with the two page moves it's had since then.--xoxo 03:07, 10 June 2009 (BST)
Formal request...And with A and B prepped for the project I beleive I've surpassed the necessary edits to have at least 1 of the vandal warnings stricken. Conndrakamod TAZM CFT 04:04, 10 June 2009 (BST)
EVILSuicidal, I'm Poodle of Doom. I don't think we have ever spoken before. I have seen you around a lot. You are one of the few people left on the wiki that's still here after I came back from my Hiatus. I've taken the last year of the game off. Needless to say, I was wondering if your in a group at all? My new group is looking for allies.... -Poodle of doom 04:14, 10 June 2009 (BST)
How to make a suggetionHey, I don't know who to ask anymore and you might know.... I have a few suggetions to make for the game, and I don't know how the suggetions work anymore. They all use to be on the same page, but the rules have changed, and they're a little tricky now. They're all like "Make this page, add this group box to that flagbox with this link,..." and blah blah blag..... Could you put it in simple english for me? -Poodle of doom 01:05, 14 June 2009 (BST) Alright, step by step.
Good?--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 01:17, 14 June 2009 (BST)
ThanksThanks for doing that, its appreciated...--The Shoemaker Talk Red Faction 20:00, 14 June 2009 (BST)
Guess who?Its been too long. Far too long. And so I decided I'd pay another little visit to see if you've had those talks with wiki staff you said you would. ;P Neozumi 23:59, 4 July 2009 (BST) MisterGameI would suggest (because boxy isn't going to change his ruling) waiting to see if he starts pestering you again once the arbitration period is over. If he does, take him back to arby's; I'll bet you'd stand a much greater chance of having the ban being permanent once he's shown that the temp one was futile. --Cyberbob 03:18, 6 July 2009 (BST)
EhShouldnt this be changed as per this?? --xoxo 14:04, 6 July 2009 (BST)
about your questionGod, why the hell are you all so desperate to preserve a picture of a cumming dick? Is everyone so desperate for gay porn? - One word: freedom. Freedom to send whatever i want to the wiki, freedom to have fun, freedom to make fun of others inside this game enviroment. I'd rather defend this freedom when the subject were boobs, but one cant always decide what to bear during a fight. --People's Commissar Hagnat [talk] [wcdz] 22:13, 7 July 2009 (BST)
A/PM#The_RoosterGot any objections to it? (I, obviously, don't so if you don't think this needs any discussion and want to go right ahead, do so.) Do it, faggot Linkthewindow Talk 15:41, 11 July 2009 (BST) come back.the counting thread demands it!----Sexualharrison 18:20, 15 July 2009 (BST) A/VBdo you really believe that my response to Bob and DDR's nonsense rulings (since over turned) were in bad faith? I would like to ask you to look again at my reasons for posting and see if you honestly think I was wrong. If that will not sway you then I would ask you to look again at the actual rules for posting and please explain why my post is worthy of a vandalism charge when the pages rules (and precedence) are clearly against such a ruling. --Honestmistake 02:01, 18 July 2009 (BST) A rant from GilesOkay, I am here to give you a piece of my mind in regards to your vote on the civility guide and how I perceive your actions. Before criticizing you, I want you to know that I'm not here to simply shit talk you or to start a flame war. I am coming from a place of sincerity, and I will listen to your response without automatically attacking what you say. The way you went about voting against my guide through the use of a sockpuppet was annoying, and your general demeanor was childish. You taunted me in the discussion page, and rubbed it in my face when the guide failed to pass. You also struck the votes of my teammates without bothering to talk to them first. Now then, I do believe that you were coming from a place of genuine frustration because you thought I was unfairly using meat puppets. But here is my specific problem: you could have just directly confronted me with your suspicions and told me why you thought I was wrong instead of resorting to snide quips and machiavellian tactics to "make your point". Undoubtedly if I had stricken your sockpuppet vote I would have promptly been taken to A/VB. Do you enjoy laying traps for ordinary users? I sure hope not. While you acted within the letter of the law by not voting twice on the same guide, this feels vindictive and immature. You were probably convinced I was trying to screw up the voting process, but I was equally convinced that I'd done nothing wrong. And I'm willing to defend that position if you care to hear me out. I hope from now on you'll try to resolve any issues with me through dialogue. I actually respond pretty well to logic and I can be made to reconsider my actions through honest, direct confrontation. I don't troll this wiki and I do try to make all of my edits in good faith, unlike some of your peers. Unless you have any specific questions or challenges, I'll let you have the last word here, since this is your talk page and I've completely expressed my irritation with you.--GANG Giles Sednik CAPD 23:19, 18 July 2009 (BST)
I said that on the talk page because it looked like you were starting to throw a fit because your guide was voted out. I wanted to quash it before it turned into a full-blown shit storm, because I don't really know you and I had no idea if you'd try to start all sorts of shit over it. It wasn't taunting, it was being abrasive to prevent yet another giant flamefest. Sorry, but that tactic tends to work better than civility does here. That, and thank you for your input. :D I wasn't exactly rubbing it in your face as I was looking at everything that started from the concept and idea of you meat puppeting and then it failing. It made me laffs. Shorry. :D And last, as seen on DDR's talk page "Yarp. I could probably round up some support from my groups. Oh well. I'll just crawl over to them with this knife in my back. Love, --donuts by dayGiles Sednik CAPD SWApoetry by night 05:16, 7 July 2009 (BST)" hope you enjoy the sight of me striking votes due to meatpuppetry --Cyberbob 05:19, 7 July 2009 (BST) What is this "meatpuppetry" you speak of? --donuts by dayGiles Sednik CAPD SWApoetry by night 05:32, 7 July 2009 (BST) Do you really not know or are you being cute? --Cyberbob 05:34, 7 July 2009 (BST) I really don't know how you mean it in this context. I would think of meatpuppetry as being using alts or something to vote. --donuts by dayGiles Sednik CAPD SWApoetry by night 05:36, 7 July 2009 (BST) That's sockpuppetry. Linkthewindow Talk 05:37, 7 July 2009 (BST) No Giles, you are the puppets. (Meatpuppetry is like sockpuppetry, except they're actually different people. Like that Fiffy lazer beem eyes suggestion.) --Bob Boberton TF / DW 05:40, 7 July 2009 (BST) This too. Linkthewindow Talk 05:45, 7 July 2009 (BST) Of course. Under sockpuppetry in the wiki, we find a subsection for meat puppet: "Editors of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia use "meat puppet" to deprecate contributions from a new community member if the new member was (apparently) recruited by an existing member only to back up the recruiting member's position." Of course I wouldn't stoop to that. A couple of members of CAPD and the SWA do already actively maintain wiki accounts and contribute to the wiki. I'm not above shooting them a link to the voting on our forums and asking them to make up their own minds. That certainly isn't meatpuppetry, yeh? --donuts by dayGiles Sednik CAPD SWApoetry by night 05:42, 7 July 2009 (BST) It is, but only slightly. --Bob Boberton TF / DW 05:43, 7 July 2009 (BST) Whether it's slightly or strongly meatpuppetry is irrelevant. --Cyberbob 05:44, 7 July 2009 (BST) Isnt that what the democrats and republicans do every election? I also demand proof that he is meatpuppeting or im putting cyberbob up for misconduct--Imthatguy 05:48, 7 July 2009 (BST) you're precious --Cyberbob 05:50, 7 July 2009 (BST) Firstly, real life =/= UDwiki. Secondly, you're an idiot. Misconduct is for abuse of sysop powers (not just regular editing,) and Bob never accused Giles of anything. He warned him against meatpuppeting. Linkthewindow Talk 05:51, 7 July 2009 (BST) Apart from anything else, Giles, meatpupeting is hella lame. It's a fucking guide, FFS. Some people don't think it deserves to be a reviewed one, and voted that way. Deal with it, instead of fucking over the wiki by getting your mates, who wouldn't have otherwise voted, to force it through simply to stroke your own ego -- boxy talk • teh rulz 21:50 7 July 2009 (BST) It seems as if multiple users explained that they thought it was a problem and explained a few reasons why, not to mention the actions of some users seemed to have confirmed it. After they explained it, I didn't see the point. You already knew what we thought was a problem, one more person repeating it wasn't going to help.--Mr. Angel, Help needed? 20:35, 20 July 2009 (BST) |