UDWiki talk:Administration/Arbitration

Message History Archive1 - (April/May 2006) Archive2 - (May/Nov 2006) Archive3 - (Nov 06/June 07) Archive4 - (June/Dec 2007) Archive5 - (Jan/Dec 2008)

General Discussion

A/A

I've been using the A/A link (and A/VB etc etc) for the best part of 6 months and i only just realised that A/A = AA. Not surprising considering the lowlifes we get around these parts...--xoxo 13:44, 22 May 2008 (BST)

How to start a case

How would one start an arbitration case against another group of wiki users? I will name specific names if required. This will be myself (NOT the DHPD) vs every proclaimed member of the dead. Its time for this to stop. Of course, it'll take an arbitrator not affiliated with the dead or sensitive to their martyr mentality but I'm convinced someone out there can handle a case like this. --Showcase^Talk 17:05, 9 April 2008 (BST)

dear god. No. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 18:28, 9 April 2008 (BST)

If you're talking about starting a case against the dead or those Something Awful guys, I realy wouldn't bother, theyve made it fairly clear that they don't trust the arbitration thing, and don't want it on more than one occasion, so they'd do their best not to have one. It's not a unique veiwpoint, there's plenty of other users who don't trust it either, and the SA lot do seem kinda paranoid that everybody is out to get them. Even if you did somehow get them to agree, finding an arbitrator would be another problem, I can't see many people wanting to touch the case.--Seventythree^Talk 18:29, 9 April 2008 (BST)

And what would be your objective? Because if you want an arbitration case about how the content on a single page or subject should be shaped you only the specific editors you have the conflict with should be involved. But if it's about an general editing restriction there would be little chance it would be honerated as it would be clearly against the good faith rule. If so, forget about it. It would be nothing more then dramawhoring.-- Vista  +1  18:36, 9 April 2008 (BST)

Good Faith rule? This group isn't the least bit worried about good faith? since day one they have done nothing but create bad faith. Is there no recourse? --Showcase^Talk 20:51, 9 April 2008 (BST)

The group exist of out of a couple of hundred individuals at least. And you want us to target them all for the actions of what, five users? on this wiki. How fair. Nope, we'll subject them to the same rules as everybody else. And those rules assume individual responsibility, not group responsibility.-- Vista  +1  17:44, 10 April 2008 (BST)

I did say I would name specific individuals if it was necessary...maybe some day. --Showcase^Talk 18:05, 10 April 2008 (BST)

Also, good luck finding an arbitrator willing to take the case. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 18:44, 9 April 2008 (BST)

I'll do it. I'll arbitrate if both parties want me. -- Cheese 21:02, 9 April 2008 (BST)

meh. I appreciate the offer but I've decided not to bother. Ultimately, I don't think anything I do will result in what really should be done with these jokesters. On the SA forums, if we went there with total asshatery that included spamming and trolling, we would be permabanned in just a few days. Why they expect to be allowed to run rampant here is beyond me. --Showcase^Talk 23:19, 9 April 2008 (BST)

For unfunny trolling, you would be banned in the first day. -- LABIA on the INTERNET ^{Dunell Hills Corpseman} #24 - |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| ^TMG 01:21, 28 June 2008 (BST)

Arbitration

What do Arbitrators do exactly? I'm interested in volenteering but I'd like to know a bit more about what they do. -- Krazy Monkey ^W! 21:20, 11 June 2006 (BST)

When a few people have a problem that they can't agree to a solution on, they take it to Arbitrition. There, an arbitrator is agreed on you handle the situation. The Arbitrator looks at both sides of the issue, and tries to find a solution. There are many different styles of doing this. --Sirens^{T RR} 21:23, 11 June 2006 (BST)

An index?

Anyone else think it would be worthwhile having an index of precedents from previous arbitration cases? Researching what past arbitrators have ruled is kind of time-consuming at the moment, and that's with only four archives to go through. Just a thought. -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 21:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

If you want to make a page called UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Precedents and do just that, feel free. But don't expect people to do it for you. – Nubis 21:38, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Hell, we should do it for every Admin page. --User:Axe27/Sig 22:37, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not a bad idea... will take some work, and those willing to do it.--THE Godfather of Яesensitized, Anime Sucks ^{Yalk | W! U! WMM| CC CPFOAS LOE ZHU | Яezzens} 22:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm willing to tackle it, but the layout is gonna take some thought so it's comprehensive without getting so bogged down that people can't easily find what they're looking for. Dunno why Nubis thinks I'm just showing up here to place orders... maybe he just doesn't know me. :D -- Atticus Rex ^{mfu pif} Δ 01:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe something like this, it seems too work, at least a little, with listing suggestions precedents.--Karek^maps?! 01:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

This probably would be useful to have so that people can see what the reasoning was that people applied to similar cases in the past. Of course, precedents shouldn't be binding - arbitration is a pretty easy system to game, you just need two friends willing to pretend to be "neutral arbiter" and "the other party". --Toejam 13:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Archive

The first archive seems to be missing content.--Karek^maps?! 10:58, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Strangely, the code is visible with View Source. --Toejam 18:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

This has happened with my first talk page archive too. It's really weird... --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 17:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

If you reupload the code it should fix it.--Karek^maps?! 21:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Arbitration Revamp

As any blind who follow Recent Changes can see, i have made some changes in the Arbitration system, filing each arbitration case on a page for itself. Not only i edited our current arbitration cases to this new system, but i also changed some of the recent cases found in the 4th archive. I did that in a free time i managed to enjoy here in my work, but now i need to do some stuff and attend a meeting, and that will keep me really busy for the rest of the day, therefore unable to carry on with the revamp. If anyone with some free time could finish this, it's a really easy task... and if anyone has A LOT OF free time, it would be great if anyone could read the cases archived and write a summary about them. Not only this will help us easily understand what the case was about, but allow us to gather precedent in the future. And if anyone has any suggestions for this new system, Be Bold! and work on it. Cheers. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 17:12, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

ok, so i managed to get more free time and completed the 4th archive. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 18:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The Archive, Again

The old Archive links now all redirect to Category:Arbitration Cases so as to preserve all links through them in the most practical way. Some links may not work due to small arbitrary changes done while the system was crossed over, such as UDWiki:Administration/Arbitration/Archive#Sonny_Corleone_vs._Rosicrux, which no longer works_{(at the time of this comment, It'll be fixed probably before anyone reads this)} due to a period not included in the new archive. Whenever any such errors are found please, feel free to fix them.--Karek^maps?! 20:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, forgot to mention, you can find a link using the old style system for every arbitration case here, please do not edit that page though.--Karek^maps?! 20:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

sound of silence

anyone else notice how much quieter it got around here since the change in formats? we went from one case everyother week to 4 cases that havent been updated since early february. wow. good job guys!--'BP^Tmz 07:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

To be fair 3 of those cases are closed.--Karek^maps?! 10:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

It's the silence before the storm... --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 14:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Nah. I reckon people are actualy getting on for once. The wiki is a lot more peaceful than its been in a while!--Seventythree^Talk 15:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

3 of them are closed? even better!--'BP^Tmz 18:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Although it messes up us people wanting the experience of running a case. still, cant complain. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:58, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't expect that to last for long, Funt's already stirring up shit.--Karek^maps?! 02:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

ARRGGH! Stop bringing up Simon and Garfunkel. I just got "Cecilia" out of my head. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS CRF MOB pr0n} 02:20, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Simon and Garfunkel are better than Outta love... --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 02:26, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

those cases are both done, haggy, wanna archive?--xoxo 07:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

He... if people though we were having too many arbitration cases, look at jul-sept 2006 period... --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 13:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

lol Yea,,,but how many would have been left if jjames had left the wiki after the first one? Sheesh. Conndraka^{mod TDHPD CFT} 13:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

And its all kicked off again. Wonderful.--Seventythree^Talk 13:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

hagnat said:

It's the silence before the storm...

I hate being right sometimes... --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 14:59, 31 March 2008 (BST)

pfft you love it, but still, very impressive hagz.--xoxo 08:02, 1 April 2008 (BST)

General Manners and Whatnot

Guys, please stop spamming cases with your arguments with the people who want arbitration before an arbiter is accepted, it's rude and unneeded. Stop trying to pressure people into choosing an arbiter unless you are an interested party in the case, it's, frankly, none of your business and you should stay out of it. If you're volunteering to arbitrate just say once that you volunteer and leave the page alone until they decide unless one of the invested parties in the case specifically ask you a question. It's spam, it makes matters worse, and it makes it harder to tell who has and hasn't volunteered and been declined/accepted.--Karek^maps?! 05:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you just ship their comments off to the talk page and make a quick table to list the arbitrators that have voluntered (as well as who has been accepted/declined)? Sure it's more work but at least it stays semi-readable. But you are right that people should pull their heads in. - Jedaz - 23:17/24/03/2008

I plan to, but it's simply easier if they understand why they shouldn't be butting in in the first place.--Karek^maps?! 01:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Removal of arbitrator list

This is an idea i had a long time ago, and every time i drop in this page it pops in my head. Why not remove the list of users offering to arbitrate ? It's usually outdated, with inactive users being listed there for aeons before they get removed. Since we have moved to a system where it's stated that ANYONE can offer to arbitrate, it really serves no purpose. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 15:16, 23 May 2008 (BST)

I second that... --Honestmistake 19:28, 23 May 2008 (BST)

We should vote in people... otherwise the list should be removed. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 19:34, 23 May 2008 (BST)

No. I would not want to only pick from people that the majority of people support. I agree in getting rid of the list and let anyone volunteer. This affect me mroe than anyone since I go to Arby's more than anyone else. --Sonny Corleone ^{RRF DORIS MSD MOB pr0n} 19:37, 23 May 2008 (BST)

Lose it, or per recruitment, timestamp it. Not reviewed after a month, then deleted. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 19:39, 23 May 2008 (BST)

Alright, makes sense. People ignore the list anyways. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 19:41, 23 May 2008 (BST)

It's done. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 20:42, 23 May 2008 (BST)

It's undone. I don't think it should be removed, just maintained to some degree, remove people who are inactive. And 5 hours is hardly time for something like this, especially considering I wasn't on in those 5 hours and I'm sure numerous other people who might have an opinion weren't either.--Karek^maps?! 21:54, 23 May 2008 (BST)

You do not need to be on the list to be an arbitrator so why have the list? The de-facto system is that someone posts a reason for their desire to enter arbies and interested/neutral parties who feel they have time volunteer to fill the role. The list does nothing useful at all!--Honestmistake 01:41, 24 May 2008 (BST)

To give people options that are prevolunteered so they have a pool bigger than the three to ten people that have been following their dispute and stick their hand up. Having my name on that lists means that if someone wants me as an arbitrator all they have to do is ask and I will do it, unless I say otherwise, I'd expect the same of anyone else who adds themselves to that list, as that is it's purpose.--Karek^maps?! 01:44, 24 May 2008 (BST)

Personally I think that the list should stay and addendum added to the top that says Anyone can actually be an arbiter in a dispute, however the following individuals have volunteered to give of their time to be a listed arbiter. Note: not all of the individuals listed here may be currently active on the wiki.Conndraka^{mod TTBA CFT} 01:52, 24 May 2008 (BST) Oh Wait... It already says that. Hmmmm Conndraka^{mod TTBA CFT} 01:54, 24 May 2008 (BST)

It should be there, people need a vague idea of who is potentially interested and if its gone theres gonna be a lot more offering to arby going on. I agree with whoever suggested the timestamp idea, and any user who wants to remain on the list has to come back at least once a month and update their timestamp.--xoxo 04:01, 24 May 2008 (BST)

Or we could simply use such timestamp to warn people of when the table was updated. Check every user in the table, if he hasn't made an edit in a month, his name gets removed from it, and the timestamp is updated for the day this check was made. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 15:47, 24 May 2008 (BST)

OK I finally got round to adding my name, thing is though... if I feel that its a case I could be fair on and have a good enough understanding of and have the time to give it the due attention I just throw my name into the hat. The table just seems kind of redundant to me!--Honestmistake 15:56, 24 May 2008 (BST)

Tried something to help check the contributions of the users listed there... fucking ugly, reverted it. --People's Commissar Hagnat ^{[cloned] [mod]} 16:14, 24 May 2008 (BST)

Not that bad, except for the superscript. --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 16:30, 24 May 2008 (BST)

Hm, ok i guess, still its a step, do people think that no contributions in a month warrents removal from the list? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 17:27, 24 May 2008 (BST)

I think two months is more realistic. I'm sure that many people on the list are lurking and make edits occasionally. 2 months in my opinoin is probably the best range. Has anyone actually checked the recent contributions of the users on this list? Are we sure that this is needed at all? I had a quick look at a few of the lesser known users and they seem to be fairly active. - Jedaz - 00:31/30/05/2008

It's always the ones you least suspect.--xoxo 01:06, 30 May 2008 (BST)

Hmm... well I went and done the list, only 6 out of 46 are inactive using my 2 month rule. I don't think thats too bad. Heres the list. I might as well remove those who haven't been around for a long while. - Jedaz - 01:37/30/05/2008

• Acoustic Pie - 29 May 2008
• Airborne88 - 22 May 2008
• Akule - 29 May 2008
• AnimeSucks - 29 May 2008
• Atticus Rex - 17 December 2007
• Axe Hack - 29 May 2008
• Blood Panther - 29 May 2008
• boxy - 29 May 2008
• Cheeseman - 29 May 2008
• Conndraka - 29 May 2008
• Cyberbob240 - 29 May 2008
• Darth Sensitive - 1 May 2008
• DevilAsh - 29 May 2008
• Dragon fang - 29 May 2008
• Dux Ducis - 29 May 2008
• Finis Valorum - 28 May 2008
• Funt Solo - 29 May 2008
• hagnat - 30 May 2008
• Headless Gunner - 27 July 2006
• Iscariot - 28 May 2008
• Jed - 30 May 2008
• Jedaz - 30 May 2008
• Jordan Salafack - 3 April 2008
• Karek - 29 May 2008
• Labine50 - 28 May 2008
• Matthewfarenheit - 11 May 2008
• Max Grivas - 18 February 2008
• Midianian - 30 May 2008
• MikhailA - 19 May 2008
• Novascotia - 29 March 2008
• Nubis - 29 May 2008
• Ornithopter - 17 May 2008
• Rosslessness - 29 May 2008
• Ryiis - 25 January 2008
• Sonny Corleone - 29 May 2008
• Scotw - 29 May 2008
• Seventythree - 30 May 2008
• Studoku - 8 May 2008
• Suicidal Angel - 19 May 2008
• The General - 27 March 2008
• The Grimch - 29 May 2008
• The Quiz Master - 29 May 2008
• Toejam - 29 May 2008
• V2Blast - 24 March 2008
• Z. slay3r - 28 May 2008
• Honestmistake - 29 May 2008

The Grimch versus Conndraka

Or, better know as: Grim just can't let shit go. 2.0.--User:Axe27/Sig 05:27, 29 May 2008 (BST)

How about it be called "I dont want to be bound by a perpetual absurd ruling that could get my arse banned for a day years after i have forgotten it". I damn near violated it today before i remembered, which is why i brought the case. Adding this on top of the shit Conn hass been doing lately and theres the case. A little advice: Events make more sense when you use your brain to process them. This is something you should have learned long ago, but apparently the education system isnt what it once was. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 06:12, 29 May 2008 (BST)

I assume the page in question is my user page. That's why I have the little warning at the top. The thing is, the ruling basically prevents you from posting on my pages or articles I create in an unofficial manner. Why does that really need to be reversed? Is there that big of a need for you to post on my user page, my group, or my journal? --Akule ^{Maker of fine, hand-crafted UDWiki sass since 2006 -- Akule School's back in session™} 20:55, 29 May 2008 (BST)

If he's an involved topic why shouldn't he be allowed to comment. You said something very very similar to that on your own talk page recently, the thing about restraining orders going two ways.--Karek^maps?! 22:07, 29 May 2008 (BST)

Akule, i was banned for a day for posting on a policy discussion you posted. Thats pretty official. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 03:21, 31 May 2008 (BST)

How do you let go a case that has no effective end to it's ruling?--Karek^maps?! 06:19, 29 May 2008 (BST)

Discussion of Arbitration Cases

Everyone on this wiki versus Iscariot

For being a cuntbagrashshitbitch.--xoxo 16:32, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Fuck yes. Let's do this shit. --brb, church ^{DORIS CGR U!} 16:57, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Oh boy...Who's gonna arbitrate? Everyone's gonna be biased. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:03, 5 July 2008 (BST)

A reliable source tells me "There is no precedent against an involved party also acting as arbitrator". All in favour of Iscariot arbying say GRAAAAAGH!...i mean, aye!--xoxo 17:12, 5 July 2008 (BST)

I will accept Iscariot, not only is he fair, balanced and ruggedly handsome, he's also modest about it. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 17:46, 7 July 2008 (BST)

I'm expecting another Arby's case after this one...Whatever. AYE! --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:13, 5 July 2008 (BST)

I am opting out of this as it was made without my consent. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 17:40, 5 July 2008 (BST)

In that case are you willing to arbitrate?--xoxo 03:29, 6 July 2008 (BST)

Imma opting out tambien, for above reason, I will arbitrate.... although I show a clear bias.... towards Iscariot, for being this Wiki's savior--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 03:43, 7 July 2008 (BST)

Oh noez! Bias! Must reject you in the interests of, like, fairness and shit. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 17:46, 7 July 2008 (BST)

Surely you mean everyone else on the wiki? --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 18:05, 7 July 2008 (BST)

I didn't make this case, and therefore could not comment on the intentions of the user in question. However for my case the prose is correct, although I have brought the case, I expect to be bound by the verdict along with everyone else. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 18:10, 7 July 2008 (BST)

Iscariot versus Everyone on this wiki

Regarding suburb pages -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 22:16, 4 July 2008 (BST)

You are an idiot. -- Cheese 22:17, 4 July 2008 (BST)

What regarding suburb pages? If a case is being brought against me i want to know specifics. Also who will arbitrate? We have to get a wiki outsider...--xoxo 01:19, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Specifics are brought in the opening statement, the general subject has been provided. There is no precedent against an involved party also acting as arbitrator. I shall accept anyone who I consider can evaluate the facts objectively. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 01:35, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Heh heh, wouldn't that mean that everyone on the wiki would have to accept the arbitrator as well? --Kikashie ^{Read the Dispatch!} 01:43, 5 July 2008 (BST)

This is the single dumbest fucking arbitration case I've seen in a good while. I hope you die, because your death will leave this world a better place. --brb, church ^{DORIS CGR U!} 01:46, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Worse than the time Karek and I made a case against each other for no reason. However if it is ok with everyone I drop out of the case and put myself forward for Arbitatortot. Does everyone accept? --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 01:58, 5 July 2008 (BST)

I will accept provided you are also bound by the result. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 17:47, 7 July 2008 (BST)

I'd be willing to arbitrate. I've never posted on a suburb page and don't intend to. --DarkStar (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss) 09:36, 5 July 2008 (BST)

You are someone and thus an interested party. As for myself, i refuse arbitration on the grounds of "What the fuck?" --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 09:52, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Right. Its simple. Next new user to register is arbie. No experience of the wiki, so the perfect neutral person. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:25, 5 July 2008 (BST)

But than that next new user would be part of "Everyone". Unless you don't wish to count that...Quick! Everyone get a new IP address and use that IP to get an account on this wiki! --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:05, 5 July 2008 (BST)

How about everyone involved posts a random number between 0-9. We add up all the numbers and then use the sum as a UD ID number. Whoever owns that character has to be the arbitraitor. That seems fair and balanced. Let's post our numbers alphabetically. (I mean post them in order by user names alphabetically, not eight, four, five, nine etc.) --– Nubis ^NWO 17:21, 6 July 2008 (BST)

Good idea, in principle. In reality, it means it's more that likely we'll end up with Finis. --Sir Bob Fortune ^RR 06:57, 7 July 2008 (BST)

Oh snap!!! I post a random number: 9! DanceDanceRevolution 17:37, 7 July 2008 (BST)

4, and jesus DDR, shorten your siggy... its so clutersome....--/~Rakuen~\^Talk I Still Love Grim 19:32, 7 July 2008 (BST)

Well, that's ID=13 and that belongs to [Holly]. She links [this LJ]. The system works! --– Nubis ^NWO 03:43, 8 July 2008 (BST)

You do realise you are bringing a case against YOURSELF (among many other people), right? Oh, and also Kevan?  Swiers 04:19, 8 July 2008 (BST)

You know, Iscariot is part of "everyone on this wiki," so technically this case is also against himself... --  AHLGTG THE END IS NIGH! 04:30, 8 July 2008 (BST)

Cheeseman vs. Kooks

He blatantly stole my sheep. Then Pked me. Twice. Then proceeded to mount my sheep in an inappropriate manner. This happened Friday and despite several attempts to ask him to return the sheep both in-game and via other means, he refuses to acknowledge that the event took place!! But it did and I want vengenence. Coz I have a Witness in the form of Darth Dude, who saw the whole thing and definitely not was on IRC with me about 15 minutes ago listening to my plan to incriminate kooks and helping me falsify evidence because this: [1] is real. Really. And this is not fake at all and in no way is a dig at the case below this one. At all. This is a 100% genuine problem that can only be solved by Arbitration and who gives a toss if its an in-game issue and if sheep aren't in the game, this is real. I will take any Arbitrator except kooks or Grim. Thank you. -- Cheeseman ^W!RandomTalk 23:22, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Disclaimer: Events may or may not be fictitious and may or may not be just a figment of the Complaining Party's imagination.

I offer to throw this out....I mean arbitrate...--'BP^Tmz 02:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Er, I think that someone got a bit of a stern warning for doing what you are doing now with the arbitration page as a joke. You might want to delete this before it causes any more crap on this page.--Seventythree^Talk 00:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I accept this arbritration case and will representing myself. I do not accept Blood Panther as Arbritrator.--Thekooks 15:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I second that. -- Cheeseman ^W!RandomTalk 21:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Everyone on this wiki versus Iscariot

For being a cuntbagrashshitbitch.--xoxo 16:32, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Fuck yes. Let's do this shit. --brb, church ^{DORIS CGR U!} 16:57, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Oh boy...Who's gonna arbitrate? Everyone's gonna be biased. --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:03, 5 July 2008 (BST)

A reliable source tells me "There is no precedent against an involved party also acting as arbitrator". All in favour of Iscariot arbying say GRAAAAAGH!...i mean, aye!--xoxo 17:12, 5 July 2008 (BST)

I'm expecting another Arby's case after this one...Whatever. AYE! --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:13, 5 July 2008 (BST)

I am opting out of this as it was made without my consent. --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 17:40, 5 July 2008 (BST)

In that case are you willing to arbitrate?--xoxo 03:29, 6 July 2008 (BST)

Logic defeats it. You can't have everyone against someone and then bring an arbitration case. Who the fuck would arbitrate? --User:Axe27/Sig 18:32, 7 July 2008 (BST)

Well, I've never arbied before and this seems like a good case to start on :P ----Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 22:34, 14 October 2008 (BST)

Iscariot versus Everyone on this wiki

Regarding suburb pages -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 22:16, 4 July 2008 (BST)

You are an idiot. -- Cheese 22:17, 4 July 2008 (BST)

What regarding suburb pages? If a case is being brought against me i want to know specifics. Also who will arbitrate? We have to get a wiki outsider...--xoxo 01:19, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Specifics are brought in the opening statement, the general subject has been provided. There is no precedent against an involved party also acting as arbitrator. I shall accept anyone who I consider can evaluate the facts objectively. -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 01:35, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Heh heh, wouldn't that mean that everyone on the wiki would have to accept the arbitrator as well? --Kikashie ^{Read the Dispatch!} 01:43, 5 July 2008 (BST)

This is the single dumbest fucking arbitration case I've seen in a good while. I hope you die, because your death will leave this world a better place. --brb, church ^{DORIS CGR U!} 01:46, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Worse than the time Karek and I made a case against each other for no reason. However if it is ok with everyone I drop out of the case and put myself forward for Arbitatortot. Does everyone accept? --Sonny Corleone ^{DORIS MSD pr0n} 01:58, 5 July 2008 (BST)

I'd be willing to arbitrate. I've never posted on a suburb page and don't intend to. --DarkStar (talk | contribs | logs | block | IP Check | vndl data | discuss) 09:36, 5 July 2008 (BST)

You are someone and thus an interested party. As for myself, i refuse arbitration on the grounds of "What the fuck?" --The Grimch ^{U! E! WAT!} 09:52, 5 July 2008 (BST)

Right. Its simple. Next new user to register is arbie. No experience of the wiki, so the perfect neutral person. --Rosslessness^{Want a Location Image?} 10:25, 5 July 2008 (BST)

But than that next new user would be part of "Everyone". Unless you don't wish to count that...Quick! Everyone get a new IP address and use that IP to get an account on this wiki! --•▬ ▬••▬ • •••• •▬ ▬•▬• ▬•▬ ^{#nerftemplatedsigs} 17:05, 5 July 2008 (BST)

This crap makes me speachless. Don't spam up the main arbitration page. - Jedaz - 12:47/6/07/2008

You're next for an all encompassing arby case.--xoxo 12:56, 6 July 2008 (BST)

On a serious note, I wouldn't mind arbitrating thsi case. I've never posted and/or took part in anything 'suburb-page-admin' related within the wiki itself and I know the policies that this wiki has in place. I'd mentioned that I'd never arbied on this wiki before, but that doesn't mean that I don't have experience dealing with issues. ----Ash  ^{|  T  |  яя  |} 22:39, 14 October 2008 (BST)

Need Arbitration

Im not exactly sure where to do this but this is the talk page and It was suggested I get one. Anyways Yesterday I mad an edit on the Ackland Mall news annnouncing M-BEK declares war on AMS. M-BEK and AMS has had 2 wars beforehand and we're looking for another one just as fun. However out of nowehere a /zom/ member posted I was killed by a zombie and said I was buthurt or something like that. I really didnt care too much cause he had his own opinion. HWOEVER someone called RedPuppy delted all my coments and posted up a bunch of bullcrap claiming our group is attacking Crimson clan, /zom/, and insuted my chronicle I posted up. I dont know who the guy was but I undid his comments. He kept redoing them and then I tried just to delete the whole thing but that didnt work out for him. He was redoing everything and was attempting to troll our group when it has NOTHING to do with them. Its obivously some disgruntled survivor who hates PKers. Anyways im seeking for the whole thing just do be deleted if he cant get over it.--Doctor Oberman ^MBEK 19:42, 4 August 2008 (BST)