Forum:Ban Composite 4

Forums: Yew Grove > Ban Composite 4

This page or section is an archive. Please do not edit the contents of this page. This thread was archived on 21 August 2010 by Calebchiam.

User:Composite 4
[1] Ranting rather than reading Yew Grove for why we made a change.not applicable
[2] excessively rude. [3] Deleting his comments from a talk. [4] UTP violation saying I was biased when in fact I had never taken a prior action against him, and in fact UNBLOCKED him when I thought a block given him was unfair. [5], [6], [7], [8] in these cases while he is not violating a policy directly, he is DEFENDING his "joke" about raping 14 year old girls. [9] When told to be civil to others he reacts with hostility. [10] again, he is being extremely hostile to people asking him not to be rude. No one said anything to warrant a response of this magnitude.

Composite 4 has demonstrated that he unable to accept proper criticism for when he violates policies, he is extremely rude and mocking of us and our processes, and he is unable to admit to when he makes a mistake, instead defending his actions and calling those who disagree with him children. With this I ask the community to give Composite4 a three month ban from the wiki. Maybe he can mature a bit in that time and learn to respect other people.--Degenret01 03:46, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

Support For reasons I made the thread.--Degenret01 04:03, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - One week block is already in place per policy, and will be extended to 2 weeks if talk page incivility continues. If he continues this behavior upon his return we can discuss a more extensive block. --Aburnett ^(Talk) 03:56, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support 1 month ban - Okay a 3 month ban is a bit steep but i support a 1 month to make him/her learn their lesson and if it continues, 3 month then. Twig Talk https://i.imgur.com/772kZGs.png 03:56, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - He is a Grade A troll that clearly doesn't care about how he treats others. He has completely regarded UTP both on the wiki and in the clan chat on so many occasions that I'm surprised this discussion didn't come up sooner. He also holds grudges and has been known to harass others in the clan chat. Andrew ^talk 03:57, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

RS:NOT#OFFSITE. His block from the wiki should be based on his actions on the wiki only. The Clan Chat is a different matter entirely. --Aburnett ^(Talk) 04:01, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

I think I've been here long enough to understand our policies, so you don't need to treat me like that. I am allowed to reference other things to back up my opinion. Andrew ^talk 04:03, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

I'm just offering a reminder; all the mixing of the clan chat into the yew grove can get people mixed up. Referencing examples from the CC is fine, but irrelevant to this discussion. --Aburnett ^(Talk)

Of course. That's why I also mentioned the wiki. Andrew ^talk 04:10, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

I strongly agree with soldier

 Mythbusterma_Talk   ^HS<= BRASSICA PRIME

04:09, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Aburnett, would you mind point out which part of the linked paragraph justifies your statement? Thanks, User:Haloolah123/Sig 04:16, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

"However, strict wiki business should stay on the wiki." It doesn't get much more strict than a block, so anything involving the block should be based within the wiki. I understand that's not the best example for me to use, I would point you towards Forum:Clan Chat Consistency#Banned Wiki User in Chat for more/better explanation. --Aburnett ^(Talk) 04:21, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - His general ignorance is rather annoying and the rape thing was just stupid, three months, at LEAST.

 Mythbusterma_Talk   ^HS<= BRASSICA PRIME

04:09, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - He clearly needs some time off. Per Degen. User:Haloolah123/Sig 04:10, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Looking at it all he looks to be someone who has no real intention of being a helpful contributer, and just wants to cause problems for teh lulz of it. User:TyA/sig 04:13, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - One of the most irritating users. He performs his disruptive activities just inside the line which prevents us from perm-blocking him and has never showed and intention of being a genuine contributor uses his genuine contributions as a smoke-screen to make it harder for us to block him. 222 ^talk 04:31, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

The part about him never intending to be a good contributor is not entirely true. A glance at his mainspace contributions shows a number of good edits. --Aburnett ^(Talk) 04:34, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

I see. 222 ^talk 04:39, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per other supporters. From what I've seen, he's been extremely hostile towards other users and a three month ban has been well deserved. The Last Pun ^Talk 04:45, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Slight Support - Composite is one of the most harassing users on this wiki, and obviously needs to take a break. However, he has made some good contributions, and I don't think he's out there just for disruption. Also, his comment on the sidebar wasn't about Forum:Cleaning up the sidebar, it was about the sidebar reverting to some older, default version. ʞooɔ 04:55, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - After catching a glimpse of a few of his edits, I thought "troll" was a good description. After reading Degen's links, I agree with the other users have to say here.  Lil cloud 9 ^Talk 05:41, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - He is being rude, breaking polices and just being completely rude, we don't need him on the wiki and is a lot more trouble than his worth. Sentra246 06:13, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Ignorant troll. Such hostile resistance in our community is not allowed. Hopefully he uses these three months wisely. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 07:05, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

• I'm not sure I agree his level of incorrigibility warrants a ban (as distinct from a block) at this time. As an alternate proposal, I suggest that we close this discussion now. He will be informed that per clear consensus here, any further infraction of the UTP after his current block expires will result in his being summarily banned indefinitely. He is either misguided in his attempts to interact in the community, or he is intentionally stirring up trouble. Either way, his behavior subsequent to a "cease your hostility or you will be banned, full stop" warning will illuminate us as to his intentions. He will either yield to norms because he wishes to contribute constructively here, or he will not because he is a troll. I dislike the current proposal because bans with defined, short-term durations designed to allow the person to "learn his lesson" or, even worse, "grow up", are not effectual. Bans ought to be last-resort efforts to curtail disruption with finality, not to punish someone. This wishy-washy "maybe he will be nicer in three months" isn't what a ban should be about. wszx 09:04 August 2010 withdrawn

What's with your love of bullet-points. It's getting slightly annoying. Where'd "Comment -" go? 222 ^talk 09:12, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

You are getting slightly annoying as well. If you want to discuss my formatting predilections, please discuss on my talk page; stay on point here. wszx 09:20 August 2010

Jeez. I was asking about your use of bullet-points, that wasn't an insult ^{albeit I did not ask completely directly}. I'll go to the talk page next. Anyway back on point._below 222 ^talk 09:39, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

I've always found Comment to be more annoying. Obviously, if I'm typing something, I'm commenting, but I do it anyway because everyone else does. User:C Teng/sig 20:25, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Closing this thread might signal to him that he's being let off. Also, I doubt he's misguided, we've given out enough pointers/reminders/warnings. 222 ^talk 09:39, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

This proposal is not a punishment. It is saying that Composite 4 is not welcome here because his treatment of others is simply unacceptable. But we hope that in time he may grow into a person what is welcome here. Three months is a short amount of time to accomplish this but we hope it is enough.--Degenret01 09:24, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support 1mo - As I think I've said in the past, this thread alone is a wake-up call enough to him. A block for 1 month maybe would give him some time to cool off, although I can hardly imagine him returning afterwards. Chicken7 ^>talk 09:29, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support any timeframe - This guy has been warned countless amounts of times and he still just does not learn. He is incapable of following the policies that have clearly been highlighted towards him numerous times on his talk page. Rhys ^Talk 11:18, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Per Aburnett. bad_fetus^talk 11:55, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Although the term that you are looking for is indefinitely block. >.>

1. REDIRECT User:C886553/sig 14:28, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Indefinite would be until we felt like unblocking him. Setting a specific term is rather definite.--Degenret01 06:12, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Finally, we are not being soft on trolls. I fully support Degen in this. --Liquid^Talk 14:41, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Support - Seriously? It took you guys this long to figure out that he's ONLY a troll? To the opposers: contriubutions, IMO, don't mean ANYTHING to me if the user in question is a jerk to people. https://i.imgur.com/7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH _{(Actually Stinko)} 22:07, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

Transferred from talk -

“

Comment: If I was here for the pure purpose of being a troll then it's terribly odd that I make edits when I see something in need of improvement eh? Edit: Okay, let's look at the horrible irony of this situation. I am being called a troll almost every comment but not once has anyone been given the "This is a violation of the UTP policy bla bla bla". When I insult or make fun of policies it is because I disagree with them not because I am trying to troll anyone. This wiki does not belong to any of you so it's odd how you take it so personally when I disagree with a policy. Also @ 222, please stop making assumptions about why I make edits. Extra Edit: Oh jesus, reading FURTHER I caught a comment that perfectly describes why I make fun of policies "Support - Ignorant troll. Such hostile resistance in our community is not allowed. Hopefully he uses these three months wisely." Yea , disagreeing is something that should be nipped in the bud. I might taint the robot-like userbase you're trying to build up. Composite 4 Also, this is directed at you Degen, For link number 1, if you're going to accuse me get your facts straight. When wikia apparently reset the sidebar to the default version I made the comment. It had nothing to do with the changes discussed on the YG. Composite 4

”

--Aburnett ^(Talk) 22:12, August 8, 2010 (UTC)

O_o Seriously... everyone needs to calm down a notch. --Liquid^Talk 01:34, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. I'm not going to post my opinion if this argument is too heated. Coelacanth0794 01:59, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

This is for C4 to read: I may be making inaccurate assumptions about the driving force behind your editing, but if you keep making loud noises in that direction, people are going to make assumptions about your wishes and objectives. We as a species cannot read minds; so if you wish to be regarded highly and respected I suggest you make your intentions clear by acting more positively. 222 ^talk 06:58, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

I actually agree with Composite's concerns; our policies are not perfect, our aim/goal/scope is blurred and our userbase is starting to become robotic. Imo, something needs to be done about the situation or there are going to be many users leaving; it's already happened a lot. BUT, his attitude and the way he speaks, plus the words he uses, are not appropriate and such actions should be dealt with. Chicken7 ^>talk 08:39, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Have a lot of users really been leaving?! 222 ^talk 08:42, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

No. Please stay on topic. Use each others talk pages for further rumor spreading.--Degenret01 13:08, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

In reply to C4 (I have posted on his talk page, but I'd like people to understand what I meant here, also): I used to words "hostile resistance" to describe your rude remarks made towards civil people trying to politely ask you to be civil. You did not listen, and only worsened situations by being rude. I'm not trying to keep you from having a say at all, everyone has equal say on the wiki, I just ask that you do it in a civil manner. Telling people to fuck off or ultimately accusing them of trying to be superior to you isn't exactly civil, sorry to tell you. There is no need for that. Stay cool and respect other people and we won't have a problem. User:Lil diriz 77/Signatures 21:19, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Support - As per Degen.

Bonziiznob ^Talk

03:02, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Support - This type of hostility and ignorance of users/policies shouldn't be allowed on the wiki. Based on the evidence I've seen from the links above provided by Degen, all I see is yet another person trying to act like the constant victim and then troll the hell out of people. It sickens me to see this type of behavior on the rise as compared to a year ago. If the screenshot of the cc where he made a joke about rape is available, I'd like to see that too just so it is here on record and for my own personal memory to remind me why he was banned. Chaos Monk ^{Talk • Sign} 17:58, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I deleted my ss right after he admitted to his joke Forum:I_was_permanentley_banned_apparently?. Opening paragraph about the third line down.--Degenret01 06:12, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Ahh, I see how this could have played out, but an admittance from the person who said it is just as good as a ss. My support still stands. Chaos Monk ^{Talk • Sign} 16:33, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose:

• 1. Users aren't required to watch the Yew Grove for site changes. And criticism of the wiki is not against the rules.
• 2. I've seen admins say things "ruder" than that.
• 3. He deleted that comment a minute after he posted it, because he misunderstood. I do it, everybody has done it. I'll find examples if I need to.
• 4. He was angry because he was blocked, which is understandable, and he wasn't ranting or anything when he posted that.
• 5-8. Okay, he shouldn't have joked about rape. But, he was already blocked temporarily; no reason to block him again here. And all he was doing in those links was defending his position.
• 9-10. Okay, two legitimate instances. But those aren't worth more than a week block.

Everyone is overreacting. Composite's been year a whole year, and has only done a few minor things wrong. A week is enough. User:C Teng/sig 20:51, August 9, 2010 (UTC)

You seem to be assuming that the examples Degen provided are the only instances where he has behaved uncivilly or violated any policies. If you want more links and/or screenshots, just ask. Andrew ^talk 01:57, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

I picked the ones that seemed to best illustrate my point, there were a few others that I thought of including but thought these were enough.--Degenret01 02:02, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

So the block should be 1mo at the most; 3mo or even indefinite as some people have said is far too long for the harshness of his actions. Chicken7 ^>talk 06:30, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Degen, it is unbelievable how hard you're trying to get me banned. Looking at link #2 if you read the reason for the deletion you obviously could have understood that I misunderstood so the comment I made was no longer relevant. How about you start providing real facts instead of looking for any reason to get me banned, okay? Composite 4

Degen isn't trying "hard" to get you banned. He is selecting publicly available comments to present to other users for them to make a decision. Only if we agree will you get banned. Those "facts" are "true" because they are "there"; however as you can see, some users have provided reasons "invalidating" ^{in need of a better word} the "facts". 222 ^talk 06:47, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Transfered from talk -

“	222, Please read the comment at the beginning of this forum. All the comments are my terrible wrong-doings according to him. He is not choosing a bunch of edits I made regardless of whether they were bad or not, he was selecting ones that "prove" I'm a menace. Don't defend him when he's obviously in the wrong. Even though it was pointed out ages ago that the first two links were invalid he has yet to remove them	”
	— Composite 4

Cheers, User:Haloolah123/Sig 20:30, August 10, 2010 (UTC)

Of course he chose the "bad" edits. If he chose the good edits, and ignored the bad, what would be the point? If someone murdered a man and went to court for it, would you tell the judge all the good things about the murderer? Heck no. — ^En_ig^ma 19:56, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Composite 4 obviously has thin understanding of our social policies and is acting very childish, blaming others and refusing that he ever did wrong. 3 months is a suitable punishment. — ^En_ig^ma 19:56, August 11, 2010 (UTC)

Request for closure Denied - This has gone on long enough so let's make a decision and close this.--Turok Obama 16:33, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

It's only been 5 days, and per Forum:Have you ever seen the snow?, legitimate discussions need to be open for at least 1 week. User:Haloolah123/Sig 16:38, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

Actually, RS:SNOW is still an essay, so they don't have to be open for a week, but you can't apply RS:SNOW until after the first week. However, this discussion is still in progress so of course it isn't time to end it yet. Andrew ^talk 17:00, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

Slight Support - I just want to say offhand that when I said I was removing her from my Facebook profile that the point I was making was that I figured my friends would think it's weird seeing I have some 14 year old girl from the states as a friend on Facebook. The implication was that it was creepy anyway. Although he pushed the joke much farther than I implied, he was sort of on track. Either way, that was too much for the CC and his behaviour as posted is overboard. I am not vot, I am Melon! 21:04, August 12, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - Thou shalt not block for being mocked. I am neither for Compsite4's block nor against it. I however believe the prevalence of user treatment protocol is taken to a nose-bleeding intensity. It should be noted that it is best to shun and be civil and improve on civility. Ryan PM 02:01, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

Although the idea behind your point still stands, why are you linking a Wikipedia policy? melon 08:15, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

It isn't a policy, it is an essay. Although it does not necessarily apply here, it is a good read and something interesting for all users to perceive and understand. Chicken7 ^>talk 10:44, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

He's doing more than mocking one person, he was being overly aggressive and rude with multiple people. — ^En_ig^ma 02:33, August 14, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Stinko.

1. REDIRECT User:Swizzl3d/Sig 08:18, August 13, 2010 (UTC)

Copied from talk -

Comment: If the length of my ban depends on determining whether I'm a troll than let's review what I have done so far.

Link 2: I don't want to sound like an internet tough guy but here goes: I am abrasive and unfortunately easily angered and the comment in the link was prompted by a thread Stinko opened wanting to ban a user based on the fact he called an item in RS "retarded" and it was more than obvious Stinko wanted any excuse to have Melon banned when he did not deserve it.

Link 3: Still not removed even when proving there was no bad intent behind removing it.

Link 4: Oh yes, poor Degen. See, I absolutely hate when someone slaps me with the "RS:UPT, YOU JUST VIOLATED IT". Yes, as we can see from the link my assumption caused a great turmoil on the wiki and we have never recovered since. The fact is that piece of evidence warrants no more than a "C4, please assume good faith"

For 5,6,7,8: Now, I don't see anywhere in the rules where defending my joke warrants a ban and since an admin joked about rape here and there was no massive public outcry, even from Degen, I see a bit of hypocrisy there. Yes, his joke was not direct but linking to the youtube video is about the same.

To conclude, I react strongly when I see what goes on in this wiki and I'm sure someone will suggest I "leave if I don't like it here" but I do like it here and even though I can express myself in a nicer fashion my thoughts on the various policies and how someone cannot make a joke or curse or even make a move without 10 people presenting to them the various policies enacted in order to keep the innocence of...well who knows, because I can safely say that most of you here and aware that they world is not so nice and people do argue from time to time. As long as the admins assure that arguing does not escalate to pointless back and forths then an orderly wiki can be maintained. There is no need for the attitude admins and users take to simple arguing or even cursing. Composite 4
Have fun , 222 ^talk 10:39, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

Again, you are assuming the links Degen provided are the only examples of wrongdoing which is not true at all. Andrew ^talk 21:34, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

>my face when Psycho Robot left that Youtube link on Degen's talk, not vice-versa. A little more off topic, but it was a quest and a really damn retarded one at that. melon 17:39, August 15, 2010 (UTC)

cont

Copied from talk - A few responses to me and Andrew:

222, to "talk sense into someone" requires you to be correct, don't be so presumptuous. Composite 4

Andrew, if you're going to present more evidence then do so, so I can explain myself. If you're not then please don't go ahead and make un-backed claims. I can safely say that anytime I've insulted someone it wasn't because of trolling. Composite 4

Like I said, I'm no longer responding. Cheers 222 ^talk 07:16, August 16, 2010 (UTC)

comment - hey guys whats going on in this th- never mind. carry on. Fruit.Smoothie 04:17, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - Composite 4 will be blocked for one month. C.Chiam^Talk 11:27, August 21, 2010 (UTC)