FANDOM


Forums: Yew Grove > Regarding the user "Imxor Solmo"
Replacement filing cabinet
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 2 May 2013 by Cåm.

Hello, I am Ice Rush12, as you probably know, and Wahiesitel in the clan chat. I will get down to the heart of this matter; or in this case, the heartless. There is a certain player within the wiki that is repeatedly infesting the clan chat with his constant slander, profanity, and rule abuse. He has, above all, broken RS:UTP time and time again. In fact, I have solid evidence of this, in screenshots given to me by a fellow wikian; the links are below.


(1) (2) (3) (4)

In all of these cases, our fellow wikian is being constantly harassed. Since, according to the calm responses, and the good faith policy, there should be no discretion with the person that submitted the screenshots.

My request is simple. Rather than let Imxor Solieve Solmo to continue to wreak havoc in the clan chat, and receive only a slap on the wrist from an admin, I believe that we should put him on a tighter leash, and kicking does not solve this; he has a friend(s) that is(are) unknown to me, that has been recruiting him back into the clan just as fast as he ticks an admin off and gets kicked. I think that if he utters any type of slander, harassment, or more serious cussing, and a screenshot is submitted, he should be banned. In this, I'm tired of those who have rank being the ones to decide what happens to those who break the rules, for once, why can't the rest of the Runescape Wiki have a say in things?

Imxor is like a mushroom on a tree; he takes our pleasure from being in the clan chat when he's logged in, and we receive nothing in return! I don't think I've seen him say so much as "gratz" to someone who has achieved something! If you think that Imxor should have a tighter leash, please leave a "yes" as a reply. If you don't think that Imxor is as harsh as he is, please don't say anything.

Thank you for your time reading this. We need to get rid of Imxor!Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 23:39, April 22, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Comment - All of these messages appear to take place in Private Message. If it's harassment, ignore them. User:TyA/sig 23:44, April 22, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - All the given screenshots are from private messages, and so aren't good evidence. It would be far better if actual evidence from the clan chat was presented, not just some private conversation with someone - not yourself - who has "left" the wiki for some time. Also, not 'gratzing' is a ridiculous comment - you might get 6-10 'gratzes' from a clan of 25-50 people logged in, should they all be banned too? Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 00:06, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Ban them. MolMan 00:07, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
Though I know that they are from private messages, Imxor has done this kind of thing plenty times in the Clan Chat. It happens fairly often; it would be easy to get plenty of screenshots provided enough time. Plenty could even be over 30 screenshots.User:King kolton9/Signature 01:57, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
Maybe that should've been done before bringing this to the 'grove then. Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 09:35, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
I agree, that should have been done, it could probably be done before this forum is closed. User:King kolton9/Signature 21:27, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - as someone who is not part of the RSW clan, this just seems like a witch hunt to me. Small recharge gem AnselaJonla Slayer-icon 00:10, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

One that isn't even aimed at the right person, due to your persistent inability to get the name right. Small recharge gem AnselaJonla Slayer-icon 00:12, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - This is about Imxor Solmo right? And not User:Exor Solieve? Haidro (talk) 01:03, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

You're both at fault. Ice, you need to stop baiting Immo. Immo, you need to stop being your regular dickish self. Although I would like to know who re-invited Immo after I kicked him. In any case, this is terrible evidence and isn't going to lead to anything meaningful. ʞooɔ 01:12, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Commensalism ftw - User:Urbancowgurl777/Signature 01:16, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Screenshots for this case are horrible "solid" evidences. I can easily edit one up with basically anyone's RSN to it. At least make a video of it if you really want to provide "solid evidence". --Jlun2 (talk) 01:19, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

You know how difficult it would be to "edit one up"? It is real evidence, there is no doubt, but what the evidence is depicting is what the problem is. User:Urbancowgurl777/Signature 01:21, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
Here you go:

ChattingRS_zpsc0d7e212.png --Jlun2 (talk) 01:42, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

You forgot the period. User:Urbancowgurl777/Signature 01:44, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
The point of the image wasn't to show off my editing skills, just to demonstrate that it can be done without much effort. Also, just to be clear, I'm not saying that the images the OP presented are fake, just trying to show that images cannot be "solid" evidence for conflicts in chats.--Jlun2 (talk) 01:49, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
My point was that yes, image editing can be done, but that doesn't mean you are professional enough to avoid obvious mistakes that would show if an image is faked or not. User:Urbancowgurl777/Signature 01:51, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
Until someone denies that the pictures are real, this is a pointless exercise. ʞooɔ 01:52, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to point out the fact that the screen-edit was done with a fixed size game; the chat window is solid. Though I'm not disputing anything, I'd just like to say to avoid anything in the future: Ice can't Photoshop anything. Anything. He can't even use a cookie cutter or whatever your image editor calls it. Again, I'm just making points, not challenging or disputing anything.User:King kolton9/Signature 02:05, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Cook, 原來是你。 Anyways, I've been attentive enough to know in the clan chat that Imxor has had quite some conflicts with RSW's clan mates, especially his attitude and tone during conflicts. Although I cannot really recall specific cases concerning the conflicts he's been involved in, I know that his attitude can sometimes create a bad atmosphere in the clan chat. While the image evidence is compelling, I doubt it's enough to warrant a ban. --Spined helm SpineTalkBook of knowledge 02:17, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

First of all mushrooms are delicious so we hardly get nothing in return. Second, telling people who disagree with you not to say anything here is, uh, not how things are done. Third, it's a hoot and a half that your screenshots are from Warthog. Fourth, sure he's a dick but I like dicks and he's much more fun in the chat than you are. User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 06:57, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

What, do I not count anymore?
However, at no time may a user's group membership, in-game experience, or any other factor regarding that user's status affect the validity of his opinions in disputes.
 :Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 22:17, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Request for Closure - This is as ridiculous as thread as the Derank yoda thread Forum:Yoda_and_his_negativity. It's going to achieve nothing except continuing trolling, which I'll abstain from, and will achieve nothing.

Given that you have no evidence of behaviour inside the CC, as those screenshots depict behaviour outside the CC, It's a little ridiculous to postulate that any 'any type of slander, harassment, or more serious cussing' should result in an immediate ban. That would set a terrible precedent, and would not doubt result in your removal within hours of that being instituted. Furthermore, cussing can be solved by turning your chat filter to on.

In the interest of full disclosure, it was Rel that let me back into the Clan.

And now, we come to this, 'I'm tired of those who have rank being the ones to decide what happens to those who break the rules'. Do you misunderstand the concept of an Rfr? It is to decide who the community decides who should decide who is breaking what rules. What good would a rank be if you didnt get to decide who was breaking the rules.

Not even going to touch the mushroom analogy. Although, im pretty sure i wished Elune grats when he got 99 slayer. (Even though he got it before me. Bastard.)

Vote Immo/Lash 2013

Slayer helmet (c)Immo Voted Worst Wikian 2013 Slayer cape (t) 09:40, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

In addition to the point about RfRs, if you have an issue with how one/more clan admin(s) are enforcing the rules, you should talk to them about it, or make a review thread on their adminship (a la User:TyA/Administrator Review or RuneScape:Editor Review/Archive). Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 17:27, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Not gratzing=ban forever - Bad Immo, Bad! Korasi's sword Archmage Elune  TalkHS Void knight deflector fetus is my son and I love him. 09:46, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - as joke threads go, this one wasn't particularly funny. Ended up appearing too serious and leaving the OP looking embarrassingly like he genuinely did think the thread might work. 3/10 Ardougne cloak 4 Raging Bull Talk 09:53, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - I did not ask for a ban, and saying that he did not say "gratz" was harsh - I just ask that we put a little tighter leash on Imxor than waiting for him to slip on his own tongue. I can't even say anything when Imxor is online without him nagging me about my own RFRs.Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 20:12, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Everyone is wrong. Dead wrong. MolMan 20:39, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - I'm just going to leave this here, from the IRC logs collected by Evilbot. Defend Imxor, as you please, I mean... He doesn't do nothing wrong, right?...

[06:41:23] :Warthog!~Warthog@wikia/Rhys-Jones JOIN #rswiki

[06:41:39] :Warthog!~Warthog@wikia/Rhys-Jones PRIVMSG #rswiki :Is Cook_Me_Plox present? [06:41:42] :Immo!~immo@unaffiliated/immolation PRIVMSG #rswiki :THIS WILL GO WELL [06:42:01] :Immo!~immo@unaffiliated/immolation PRIVMSG #rswiki :EAT A DICK WARTHOG. THIS IS A PLACE OF BLASPHEMY, AND HORRORS YOU THINK YOU'RE ABOVE

Relevant discussion starts at the above quote, and continues for a short while.

It frustrates me how this thread has derailed from a level of User:Ice Rush12 declaring a very solid argument on how the wiki is allowing their user to break several rules, on several different occasions, and yet he faces no consequences for his actions. How about the time has was banned from the IRC for a long time for consistent disruptive and obnoxious behavior to other users, I guess that counts for naught too, right?

I'm shocked at the level of diplomatic behaviour everyone is showing towards User:Ice Rush12, just because of small simple past judgements. I've heard of people being up someone's arse, but the fact that a valid point has been brought up, and the thread has turned into a "Let's show how great the remainder of the wiki's community is by acting like absolute dicks towards another user". Pathetic Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 22:08, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

From what I've seen, most of the discontent on this thread has been about the nature of the evidence, not who posted what. I don't deny that there have been some instances of this though. Also, how are we meant to come to a clear conclusion when we don't have all the necessary facts and with you hiding behind somebody else who may very well agree with you? All we have are a bunch of PMs, and now that IRC log, which didn't come to light until after this thread was started Template:Signatures/Ciphrius Kane 22:24, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
There's a clear difference between users being discontent at said evidence due the possibility of it being faked, and obnoxious/nitpicking posts by User:Raging bull, User:Elune Anzu, User:(wszx) and others, with the full intention of trolling User:Ice Rush12. As side in this, I'm by no means hiding behind another user, this thread is entirely down to the decision of the original poster, and he requested whether or not he could use the evidence of harassment in his argument. I don't see why you're taking a shot at me over the timing of my post either, some of us are exceptionally busy doing other thing. Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 22:37, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
Ok let me be more blunt: you are claiming that there is more happening but not providing the evidence, then moaning when we do not take the non existent evidence into account. As for the evidence being faked, if you bothered to read the thread you'd see that was 1 person whose entire argument has been destroyed. And as for the trolls? Just ignore them! If they're being a bunch of dicks then their views will be counted as such Template:Signatures/Ciphrius Kane 22:44, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
Let me be entirely honest here; I don't exactly look in to the future expecting any screenshot evidence of heated conflicts or obnoxious behaviour to be worthy of taking screenshots of. Plenty of other users know the kind of behaviour said user displays in the clan chat and other community sectors of the wiki, and I've attempted to provide evidence for things that I can remember, that is within my ability to draw upon. I'm going to ask you to stop being a judgmental prick in whether or not I have taken the time to read the thread. If you bothered to read my previous comment, you'ld see that I acknowledged that that argument was made, but never gave any further comment on it. Oh, and come on... Let's just ignore the dickish replies on the thread... What? Is that how the wiki deals with all of it's problems now, just with like Imxor's constant malbehaviour? We sweep it under the rug and forget about it? Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 22:54, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Before I begin, I will point out that I can't speak for the clan chat, as I am not in the wiki's clan and never frequent the cc. However, I have plenty of experience on IRC and on this wiki itself, and it's enough to tell me two things: Immo is a dick, and it's completely perplexing that so many people choose to defend his behavior.

Immo has been a thorn in the side of this community for a while. On or around 16 June 2011, he was banned from IRC for UTP/GTS violations. His ban was extended to a year shortly afterward for ban evasion and continued trolling. Since his return I have not noticed a serious improvement in his behavior: He is still antagonistic, aggressive, and disrespectful. I have clashed with him multiple times in the channel, the most previous time being because he didn't like something I had said about reddit several months prior. (Search "fuckwit" to reach the relevant text, as well as to see an example of Immo's tendency to use personal attacks.)

In addition to that, Immo's talk page is dotted with comments about his attitude. Check out this section on his talk page, detailing a polite request from Rhys (Warthog) to stop harassing him in-game (seemingly, about the same comments on which this thread was founded); "blow me" is Immo's elegantly written response.

No one can deny that Immo is a dick. We must turn, then, to the question of why so many people defend him. I see folks beating up Ice Rush12 for providing imperfect evidence of his behavior. So what? Which is more likely: Warthog went to the trouble of faking those screenshots in order to discredit Immo, or Immo is being, as Cook eloquently put it in this thread, his usual dickish self? I firmly accept the latter proposition. I would accept it even if the screenshots were faked. Yes, it would demonstrate that this particular incident did not happen, but it would not be evidence that Immo is not a dick. I have already provided examples to the contrary, and if you care enough to be reading this thread, you too have probably seen plenty of examples of his poor behavior.

We have a very well-known policy about the treatment of other users. Immo has violated it so many times that he clearly has no regard whatsoever for not just the policy, but the concepts of respect, maturity, and common courtesy on which the policy is based. We either enforce the policies that we've set down, or we don't. I for one am tired of the other administrators giving Immo a free ride to ignore the rules and act however he pleases. It's doubly unacceptable that those who complain are dismissed with comments like "just don't provoke him" (Cook) and "he didn't violate UTP enough to deserve a mute" (paraphrased from a comment made by Ty in the aforelinked evilbot log). Immo doesn't even edit articles or improve the wiki's content, so what exactly is he bringing to the community that is beneficial enough for people to ignore his behavior?

I'm tired of waiting for other people to step up. I propose that we permanently ban Immo from the wiki, clan chat, and IRC. He's had it coming for a long time. (Edit on 23:18, April 23, 2013 (UTC): Forgot to add that Releara should be investigated for abuse of position for undoing Immo's kicks.) Discuss, please. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 23:11, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - I'm just dragging this back from the archive, minus the extra comments, as it is a relevant piece of evidence. There are some other smaller personal attacks in the lines proceding the quote below.(5).

[06:41:23] :Warthog!~Warthog@wikia/Rhys-Jones JOIN #rswiki

[06:41:39] :Warthog!~Warthog@wikia/Rhys-Jones PRIVMSG #rswiki :Is Cook_Me_Plox present? [06:41:42] :Immo!~immo@unaffiliated/immolation PRIVMSG #rswiki :THIS WILL GO WELL [06:42:01] :Immo!~immo@unaffiliated/immolation PRIVMSG #rswiki :EAT A DICK WARTHOG. THIS IS A PLACE OF BLASPHEMY, AND HORRORS YOU THINK YOU'RE ABOVE

Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 23:25, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - I hugely agree with AndorinKato, and would give a vote to the thing, but since I created this article, I believe that I can't, so you have my mental applause/approval :)Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 23:28, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Whilst I'm slightly sceptical of what appears to be a suggestion that someone who does not edit the wiki should be treated different to someone who does, I think Andorin has a point. When I first heard about this thread being in the pipeline (a couple of weeks ago) the fact that it was being created by Warthog and Ice Rush did dull the overall point of the message being stated here, and frankly the original execution isn't a convincing argument. I will concede that Immo does tend to provoke those with not particularly thick skins, but it's a lacking defence to a history of policy violations. I have no personal issue with him, nor do many of the regulars of IRC or clan chat as we can see by the archived discussion, but this isn't acceptable behaviour.

I'm not commenting on Releara's actions until he/she has commented here, or has at least been made fully aware of this thread and it's implications.

  1. REDIRECT User:Cqm/Signature
Thick skins shouldn't matter. The fact remains that Imxor has been acting like Imxor.--User:King kolton9/Signature 23:53, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
Moving to neutral.
  1. REDIRECT User:Cqm/Signature

Comment - With how light the moderation is in the IRC, I see no reason to permanently ban him from it. The CC and Wiki are other matters that I have no strong feelings towards his banning on. User:TyA/sig 23:42, April 23, 2013 (UTC)

The whole point of my post is that light moderation is part of the problem. If the ops actually enforced UTP against Immo when appropriate, we wouldn't have this issue. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 23:49, April 23, 2013 (UTC)
You are one of the ops. You cannot complain about enforcement if you're the one not doing it. Slayer helmet (c)Immo Voted Worst Wikian 2013 Slayer cape (t) 06:34, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, he enforces things alright. Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 07:51, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Per Andorin Regarding a lot of recent comments, I have moved my stance to oppose. It really does seem like a vandetta at this point. Granted, Imxor does act like a dick, but the proposals from ice rush seem a bit hastily made/disorganized. Unless there is substantial evidence soon, I remain at this stance. I'd also like to Request for closure. At this point people are fighting for the sake of fighting, and this will go on forever. No progress is being made, whatsoever, in this thread. Even then, pretty much every point to make has been made here.User:King kolton9/Signature 21:33, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

Clarification - Relaera says that: She reinvited Immo after he said he'd left the clan. She had no knowledge of the circumstances he "left" under. ʞooɔ 01:08, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Can we skip the imminent 'evidence in drabs' bullshit that's going to happen over the course of this thread. Warthog: Finish going through your 50mb log files, produce all the evidence you want, and lets finally start deciding. There's no need to keep fucking around. EDIT: You too Andorin/Ice Rush.

Slayer helmet (c)Immo Voted Worst Wikian 2013  Slayer cape (t) 10:15, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose CC ban, Neutral IRC - I've seen Imxor in Clan Chat plenty of times, the first thing I'll admit is that yes he can be argumentative, in fact, I think at any one point of time, most of the Clan Chat users (including Ice Rush, and myself) can be argumentative, there are some extremely passionate debates in the Clan Chat itself (I'll come to that in a moment).

First however, referring to 'the evidence', my take is that it's healthy debate, Imxor was curious as to Warthog's involvement in a Request for Rank after he left the clan chat, Warthog explained that he still had a vested interest (presumably because he still uses the Wiki, and the wiki community extends to the clan chat), and explained why he likes his new clan better. I don't see enough to sway me that Imxor's behaviour is inappropriate for the clan chat.

As for my second point, Warthog does have a point (in screenshot 2) about rules enforcement, I recall approximately two weeks ago a rather politically/religiously charged conversation between two parties (I can't remember who the second party was, so I won't name the other user's name out of fairness), about evolution, after two polite requests per the rules that they consider taking to a friend chat, I decided to turn off my clan chat, as it was bugging me after a bad week. If the rules were have been respected, and/or enforced as written then the argument would be moot. My point is, there are bigger fish to fry.

I can't speak for Imxor's IRC behaviour, as I have only recently rejoined the IRC channel, but in summary for the request for a Clan Chat ban, it comes down to: Did the argument/discussion spill into Clan Chat? Unknown/No Proof. Are there worse violations of the rules in the Clan Chat? I think so. Would it be fair to single out & punish Imxor in the CC for something said in private? Based on previous answer, I don't think so. Finally, does the Clan Chat need big arguments like this, no. --RSDaftVader (talk) 10:26, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

This is stupid - I have spoken to both Wahkesitel/IceRush and Imxor Solmo about this, and have spent quite a lot of time in the CC when both were there. This whole "issue" is just a personal feud between the two which has nothing to do with the wiki. I suggest Wah/Rush and Imxor sort their issues out personally (with a mediator if necessary) or try out the new Duel Arena to decide who is right.

IceRush, the RSW has nothing to do with this fight and you know it. Bringing something like this to the Yew Grove is a waste of time for all of us. Ancient talisman Oil4 Talk 11:59, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

Also, what the hell is "If you don't think that Imxor is as harsh as he is, please don't say anything." supposed to mean?! Ancient talisman Oil4 Talk 12:10, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

I don't usually voice my opinions on clan chat issues like this, but I feel like I should post my opinion on this one. Regarding Immo, I think Cook summed up what I would say. In addition, Ice Rush and Rhys should have both added Immo to their ignore list long ago (and made use of ignore features in their IRC client as required). Rel, I can't fault - if he didn't know, he didn't know (since Immo was not on the clan banlist).

As Immo said (and I commented on) above, ranks decide how to deal with rulebreakers as they have passed a process where the wiki decided that it trusts them to act out the rules on its behalf (be that a RfA or RfCCA). Bringing every tiny discussion to the 'grove is just a waste of everyone's time, so the ranks are there to moderate. Again, if you disagree with how an admin dealt with a/some situation(s), then you should speak to them about it, or make a review thread about their actions if necessary. I would also encourage other admins to be open to criticism or review - if you have a problem with how I have dealt with something or my actions in general, please chat with me about it.

Finally, the moderation aspect. Yes, sometimes I agree that the moderation could be better. It doesn't help that surprisingly often, when people are asked to drop their discussion or move elsewhere, they just ignore the admin - I know that this has happened to me several times, as well as to others (Rel jumps to mind). If people want the moderation to be effective they need to actually listen to the moderators, and respect the rules. (If you really think this is an issue then it should probably be its own thread.) Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 13:08, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

Wait, if he was never supposed to be re-invited, then why is he still here? Shouldn't that end the argument?User:King kolton9/Signature 13:38, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Being kicked without being added to the banlist implies the kick was not meant to have any permanence. A slap on the wrist without an extended time away. Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 16:42, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Is enforcing the rules against the rules? For every YG I've seen related to a user in IRC or the clan chat, it always seems that the underlying issue is that the moderators are not moderating. User:Urbancowgurl777/Signature 15:55, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Maybe it is worth making another thread to discuss the issues with the moderating in the clan chat? Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 16:42, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Moderation thread has now been created here. --Shockstorm (talk) 19:19, April 24, 2013 (UTC)


Comment - I returned to RS a few weeks ago, and a few days in I became wary of Imxor. While he has been showing hostility towards Ice Rush inside the CC he does normally stop after a warning - at least when I'm there, anyway. That said, Imxor is not always the instigator here - I have seen Ice/Wahi start fights too; I don't have screenshots for this but it has happened. With regards to the exceptionally vague proposal, I'd suggest that Ice Rush clarifies what he means by a "tighter leash", since that could mean anything from an official warning like the one issued to Parsons a while back, to a ban. Without a concrete idea of what action would be taken there is little to nothing to support here. User:Real Not Pure/Signature 16:41, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - This thread is shocking... The wiki blatantly has an obnoxious user, that has violated rules many times in different areas of the wiki's community. You have allowed him to repost responses in the thread that aren't exactly any nice, and yet you're making User:Ice Rush12 look like the enemy in this case. If you have a problem with him, take it to another thread about him, it shouldn't be here. Things like this are primary reasons into why I left the clan chat: If you're within this group of people, you've got special rights over everyone to be an obnoxious and malicious twat to others, with no repercussions. This thread is just a waste of my time now. Bawble was banned for reasons nowhere near this severe. Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 17:41, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

This thread is shocking? Calling another user an "obnoxious and malicious twat" is therefore not, I assume. Nobody is making Ice Rush look like an enemy, only questioning his evidence and the rather peculiar "If you don't think that Imxor is as harsh as he is, please don't say anything". I agree entirely with Cook and Oli in that this discussion is entirely based on a personal vendetta between you and Imxor, which Ice Rush entered for some strange reason we have yet to find out. If this is so, please keep it that way: wiki drama is unnecessary and not nice. Hey, here's a great idea: use the ignore list! I'm sure you know what it is, so apart from the intention to deliberately instigate conflict I really am in the dark as to why you have yet to implement it.
Sorry for the rather aggressive post, but I just had to get it out of myself. bluefire2_zpse555e907.png Bluefire2 Talk page Vandalize my sig
Guestbook My violations of AGF
bluefirerune_zps31e89991.png
Oil4 I made this 18:01, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
"Use the ignore list" - I keep hearing that... So what... The wiki approves of their members verbally assaulting other users... And when someone is at fault, it's the other user for not using their ignore list? So much for policies... Hey, admin, don't like what that guy is saying in the clan chat? Don't enforce rules and punish him, use your ignore list instead! Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 18:12, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
I wonder, why do you so vigorously refuse to use the ignore list? I cannot see what is so difficult about clicking a button and pressing some keys. Yes, it's not your fault that someone's harassing you, but your argument against that person becomes so much better when you do everything in your power to either resolve the issue or stop it from happening, and using the ignore list is the first thing I can think of to do with that. Conversely, the fact that you refuse to try to calm it down by ignoring Imxor makes your position much weaker and might as well be you saying that you don't really care about getting the conflict resolved and over with, and all you want is, on the contrary, to create as much drama as possible. You're like the bullied child who refuses to ignore the bully and walk away from the situation, and instead provokes him, and then complains about it. Tl;dr: if you actually tried to resolve the issue by ignoring Imxor and didn't refer to him this obscenely, I can guarantee you there would be significantly less arguments against you in this thread. bluefire2_zpse555e907.png Bluefire2 Talk page Vandalize my sig
Guestbook My violations of AGF
bluefirerune_zps31e89991.png
Oil4 I made this 18:29, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Whether or not I use the ignore list is completely irrelevant in this argument. I'll put this a simply as I can: Imxor is breaking rules. Imxor is not being punished for breaking said rules. Rather, others are being made to be at fault for a decision that wasn't made by them. Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 18:44, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Whether you do as much as is possible to reduce the need to complain is most relevant. bluefire2_zpse555e907.png Bluefire2 Talk page Vandalize my sig
Guestbook My violations of AGF
bluefirerune_zps31e89991.png
Oil4 I made this 18:52, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
It doesn't constitute a defence for the person in question, however. Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 18:58, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
1. If someone was complaining to you and requesting action against a person, you'd want to be sure that the had at least tried to resolve the issue, right?
2. Can you please answer the question I had posed earlier: why do you so vehemently defend your right not to use an ignore list instead of going ahead and using it? bluefire2_zpse555e907.png Bluefire2 Talk page Vandalize my sig
Guestbook My violations of AGF
bluefirerune_zps31e89991.png
Oil4 I made this 19:10, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Sadly, the ignore list doesn't spill over to the IRC when I'm being asked to "Suck a dick" by Imxor, nor does it spill over on to my talk page in which he has kindly asked me to "Blow" him. Ignoring him in-game doesn't stop potential contact elsewhere. Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 19:15, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Wth dude? If someone is being disruptive, they should be removed from the clan chat. Asking all users to put the disruptive user on their ignore lists is ridiculous, and that is basically what you are asking because, from what I've seen on this thread, Rhys isn't the only one being "bullied". User:Urbancowgurl777/Signature 19:17, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
What Fergie said. Bluefire, why are you defending Immo's behavior? If he's breaking the rules, the onus is on him to not be a dick, not on everybody else to put him on ignore. You might claim it's private harassment only (and therefore, somehow not enough of a violation of UTP to warrant disciplinary action), but it became public when Immo posted that comment on his talk page. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 19:32, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree with Fergie. If someone is being obnoxious and is asked to stop, the response is certainly not "Ignore list me or put up with it." User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 19:54, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
I'd be interested to hear the reasoning behind linking to that screenshot. This discussion concerns Imxor, not Rhys. User:Real Not Pure/Signature 20:19, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
It's pretty obvious that I wanted to point out that Warthog is a ghastly hypocrite who wants people he annoys to add him to their ignore but when someone annoys him, that person needs to be banned. User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 20:33, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Okay, but let's not get off topic again. User:Urbancowgurl777/Signature 20:34, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
←It's not actually offtopic. It pretty clearly shows that vendetta is what's driving Warthog, not genuine disinterested concern. If it were, Warthog would surely apply the standards to himself that he wants to apply to everyone else as regards the ignore list. User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 20:40, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Well, I guess that disproves my assertion, and evidence thereof, that Immo is a dick. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 20:43, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
I didn't say anything about you, Andorin, except this just now: Immo is indeed a dick, but so are you. Should we ban you as well? User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 20:45, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
Well, I guess that makes three of us. I, however, am "being a dick" because I'm trying to enforce this wiki's rules. You are being a dick just because you can. Kindly stop plaguing this thread with your pseudo-trolling and post something constructive or nothing at all. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 20:49, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Per Andorin. If there is any justice left in the policies laid out by the community, you would learn to listen to the consensus that you created as a community. Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 19:02, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

Ya'll screwed up. Big time. - This petty arguing and gross misrepresentation of justice is why I left the CC and joined the one Wart/Rhys is in. People cannot be elitist assholes all the time...but I see it anyway. Too bad, really, but it is what it is. If someone's a dick to someone else, you don't defend that someone, you look for ways to correct it, not punish others. I was hoping not to get involved in an idiotic decision for a cold-hearted community, but meh. That's all I can say, really. 7kyt1iT.gif --WINE OF GOOD HEALTH (Actually Stinko) 20:54, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose- This honestly seems like more of a feud between Immo and a few other users than an issue that would affect the Wiki and the clan. If you're really this upset, just add him to ignore.  Also, "If you don't think that Ixmor is as harsh as he is, don't say anything", that right there is an obvious attempt to stop any opposing votes from being posted. Megadog14Talk 22:53, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

You don't think the fact that Immo is pissing off multiple people is a sign that he's a problem for the community as a whole? Also, don't forget I have called out the community as a whole in my post for tolerating Immo's UTP violation in an apparent double standard. We enforce UTP for everyone or for no one, and Immo has flat-out admitted in IRC that he has no regard for it. --Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 23:01, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
I don't consider 3 people to be multiple, especially when 1 of them isnt even in the clan or the CC. Also, could you please link a picture or something showing Immo saying he has no regard for UTP? Megadog14Talk 23:33, April 24, 2013 (UTC)
From evilbot's logs:
[22:43:36] :ty!ty@wikia/vstf/TyA PRIVMSG #rswiki :rules smooles
[22:44:07] :Immo!~immo@unaffiliated/immolation PRIVMSG #rswiki :Thats long been my policy about UTP, ty.
--Andorin (Talk) (Contribs) 07:43, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
Wait wait wait. You oppose double standards for UTP violations? That means you will be blocking Warthog for calling Imxor a malicious twat posthaste, right? Right? User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 08:22, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
That's a "no," then? Double standards indeed. User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 18:16, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

Obvious Oppose - I have talked it over with the Overlloyd and promise to be good Slayer helmet (c)Immo Voted Worst Wikian 2013 Slayer cape (t) 22:56, April 24, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - As others have said and is not irrefutably incorrect information, Immo is a dick. His sarcasm is wet and he generally hates incompetence. PMs are supposed to be private, by leaving them open you accept getting anything from anyone. That being said, he is not anymore lynching to members as most of the worst offenders we've had come by and even some of the own (myself included at times). I've been a friend with him for a few years and he generally is a nice guy to talk to, you just need to find common ground and have a sense of intuitive speaking. Let bygones be bygones. Top hat (blue)LashaziortalkBlack cane 01:35, April 25, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Imxor was kicked from the clan, and was reinvited by Relaera, who was unaware of the fact he was kicked. If he was kicked for a reason, shouldn't he stay kicked? -- Spined helm SpineTalkBook of knowledge 01:51, April 25, 2013 (UTC)

If a user is kicked, but not banned, he is eligible for an immediate reinvite at the discretion of the ranks. Obviously, the kicking administrator isn't going to reinvite, but unless there is some sort of list on the wiki for temporarily banned people (and I would oppose creating one, it'd be too annoying for every recruiter to check that every time he wanted to invite), then at least from a legal standpoint this action is fine. The other possibility is to ban him for a short amount of time (an hour, a day, et cetera), but that requires fairly diligent bookkeeping on RS:BLOCKED (which has been very spotty) and a subsequent unbanning action. --LiquidTalk 05:51, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
It wasn't really at Rel's discretion since she thought he had just left. ʞooɔ 08:06, April 25, 2013 (UTC)

Support - If someone violates a policy, shouldn't that be that, regardless of who it was that brought it to anyone's attention? From what I've seen here, you have people ignoring this, because of how this was worded and over the validity of some pictures. You have IRC logs, and multiple people backing them. Why is this still going on? Jagex named me Able Tis (talk) 02:38, April 25, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Firstly, Relaera did nothing wrong. Without a ban, there is nothing wrong with reinviting a kicked user (even if Relaera was present when Immo was kicked and decided to reinvite immediately, a situation that did not occur).

My personal opinion on this thread mirrors Gareth's. I see this back-and-forth as more of a personal vendetta than a clanwide issue. Yes, Immo is a dick sometimes (or all the time, depending on who you are). No, Ice Rush is not the most innocent person when it comes to baiting. However, I feel that an immediate permanent ban would be a hasty rush to judgment. If we are to deliver him a stern warning, this thread does that job wonderfully. Beyond that, a kick wouldn't solve much.

I have no opinion on the IRC ban or the wiki ban, as Immo is usually civil in the IRC and I have not interacted with him on the wiki. --LiquidTalk 05:58, April 25, 2013 (UTC)

Arbitrary section break

About the rage - comment - Why is this so undecided? Vendetta or not, clanwide or not, CC or IRC or S:C or RSW, he is clearly BREAKING THE RULES! We have perfectly clear evidence of that! Someone is voilating one of the most firm rules of RSW unitl it looks like precautions in a cookbook! He is breaking rules, that is clear! By trying to hide him with "I haven't seen him be mean in the CC" when you are in the CC maybe, what, once a month? IRL that would obstruction of justice! It is clear that he is plainly in need of a very long ban, so bloody ban him and stop dancing around the Imxor!Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 16:14, April 25, 2013 (UTC)

lol. User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 17:47, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
Omg bluefire2_zpse555e907.png Bluefire2 Talk page Vandalize my sig
Guestbook My violations of AGF
bluefirerune_zps31e89991.png
Oil4 I made this 17:54, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
It's undecided because this is a 'discussion'. Where people 'discuss' the merits of both sides. Just because you posted doesn't mean it was all going your way. I remember you being a large component in many incidents, including the one Cook kicked me for. Also, please stop making analogies. They're ridiculous and don't even make sense. If people haven't seen me do anything, Why *shouldnt* they say so. They're not obliged to believe everything you say off the bat.
Secondly, you've got no concept of obstruction of justice. These people aren't flagrantly blocking the judicial process.
Thirdly, why am I in need of a long ban now. Your initial post merely specifies that you wanted to keep a closer eye on me.
Slayer helmet (c)Immo Voted Worst Wikian 2013 Slayer cape (t) 19:36, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
Id just like to point out that you think that allowing someone who is not always in the clan chat to voice their opinion and state what they've seen is obstruction of justice, but yet you directly tell people who oppose your post not to say anything?!? Megadog14Talk 22:25, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
I said that nobody that disagreed with this post should be quiet, because, despite all that those higher up say, RSW is still a bureaucracy, and should certain people voice disagreement, it would mean not only that this post would be abandoned, but the fact that Imxor needs to have a tighter leash, would be abandoned. Immo, since Gaz already expressed that he approved of this forum, and that he hasn't expressed otherwise, basically means that you were lying when you said you had talked to Gareth. That, and promising "to be good"; I don't trust you, why would I trust your 'promise's? A kick is basically a promise, and yet you avoided that! Regarding adding you to my ignore list, people request more evidence; if I ignore you, then there goes the evidence! Hello? If I only cared about not having to put up with Imxor, and not about the clan as a whole, I would have added him to my ignore list long ago, or quit the clan.Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 23:51, April 25, 2013 (UTC)
No, you said, and i quote, "If you think that Imxor should have a tighter leash, please leave a "yes" as a reply. If you don't think that Imxor is as harsh as he is, please don't say anything." Meaning that if you dont think Immo is harsh (AKA disagreeing with your thread) dont say anything. That right there is telling people who disagree to be quiet!  Megadog14Talk 01:49, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
I did speak to Immo. Multiple times now. Please don't put words in my post. Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 22:42, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
If certain people voiced disagreement, then this post would be abandoned? Maybe you should read RS:SAOW. If people want to follow someone else on making their decision, who are you to suggest to stop them? You realise that Gaz hasnt formally posted since my post about discussing him? Where is your evidence to suggest that that is a false statement. You don't need to trust me. I realistically couldn't care less if you trusted me or not. You keep making this sound more and more like a vendetta (Which it's transitioned to at this point, if it wasn't from the beginning). You also make it sound like you're the only one to be able to 'produce' evidence if I do anything wrong in the future. Given that you've contributed no evidence of your own, and only posted Warthog's screenshots, it's demonstrating that even when you are able to read what i post in the CC, you're incapable of producing any evidence anyway.
Again, this is still a little silly at this point. There's no chance it's going to reach consensus, and will probably end up being nothing more than a way to fill in 5-10 minutes a day of Andorins, Warthogs, Ice rush's, and my time.

Slayer helmet (c)Immo Voted Worst Wikian 2013 Slayer cape (t) 05:57, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

You who like to apply legal terms to things, should be able to grasp the concept of the doctrine of unclean hands. In this edit you treat the very user who is the subject of this thread with disrespect, when this thread is about disrespect towards you. The doctrine of unclean hands would make your claim void in a court of law, but the thread is currently still going on.
Tl;dr - Wikilawyering is not very helpful.  a proofreader ▸  06:35, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

No - Even if Ice Rush's arguments were valid (which they are not), or his evidence solid (which it is not), his incredible lack of judgement, Blindness to his own (innumerable) faults, and general immaturity rob his opinions and comments of any semblance of weight. There's no way that something this superficial and asinine can be taken seriously.--Cheers, Off-hand Ascension crossbowYodaAscension crossbow 01:58, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

See the name of the thread? It's Regarding the user "Imxor Solmo". Not regarding Ice Rush12. For a clan admin you seem to have a blatant lack of understanding of a really basic policy. ʞooɔ 02:12, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - Immo isn't the nicest user, but nothing that he's done that I've seen has warranted an extended ban.--Cheers, Off-hand Ascension crossbowYodaAscension crossbow 02:22, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - Sure, Immo is a dick. We have a lot of testosterone in the clan. However, all the dicks have something to balance, something they "bring to the table", metaphorically, besides a large pile of fecal matter. Yoda is a perfect example; sometimes, he makes me want to rage, but he keeps his cool, and remains a pro dger. Immo…doesn't really bring much to balance the very large heap of excrement he drags into the clan chat. He has nearly no edits, except for talk page and Yew Grove edits, most of which are either defending himself, smearing people's good(or not so good)names until they're looked on with disgust, or just being a male reproduction organ. I mean, seriously, what is it that he has that makes the admins, metaphorically, splay their legs, make alarmed honking noises, and pass(a lot)of gas in perfect, disgusting harmony? Hmm?Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 06:13, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

That is pure name-calling; please stay objective and provide evidence of misconduct, and do not pile misconduct of your own into this thread, lest it become a festering pile of excrement.  a proofreader ▸  06:22, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
Occasionally i post on RFRs too. Slayer helmet (c)Immo Voted Worst Wikian 2013 Slayer cape (t) 06:25, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure dicks bring semen, not fecal matter. Just sayin. User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 06:49, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
Wait, you're trying to convince us that Imxor is a dick and you are a victim, and you do that by swearing at him and calling him names? You're just making yourself look like the offender here man. Ancient talisman Oil4 Talk 07:26, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
Seriously, Ice? I thought better of you until this. Your comment on the user's editcount is entirely irrelevant, your persistent namecalling and unnecessary metaphors and analogies just make you look more stupid and destroy your argument, and your comment on Yoda's dungeoneering skill, whether you meant that to be a major part of your argument or not, kinda contradicts your assertion that everyone should be equal no matter who they are, and what you told me yesterday. Tell me, do you enjoy making all of your arguments look stupid by diminishing your own image? bluefire2_zpse555e907.png Bluefire2 Talk page Vandalize my sig
Guestbook My violations of AGF
bluefirerune_zps31e89991.png
Oil4 I made this 07:30, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
Eventually you'll realize that every time you post here, you lower the chance of your thread passing. ʞooɔ 07:37, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
So, if I put two metaphors into a YG post that has a very good question(which is what does Imxor do to help the community), the comment is disregarded/hated on, while Imxor can do all that he wants, and people just say 'you should have added him to your ignore list.' Speaking of that, if I add him to my ignore list, how then would I get more proof that allowing him to stay unhindered is a bad idea?Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 15:23, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
Because you say stuff like "what is it that he has that makes the admins, metaphorically, splay their legs, make alarmed honking noises, and pass(a lot)of gas in perfect, disgusting harmony?" which is nothing but name-calling. Ancient talisman Oil4 Talk 15:54, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
Please consider closing this thread, and strongly resisting any future desires to open threads of a similar nature. You talk so extensively about what users "bring to the table" as a means of quantifying their validity as users of RSW. Yet, despite this, you incessantly start up these defamatory threads that do nothing but stir up drama within the community. Think about it this way: By first trying to remove users and then blatantly insulting them when the thread takes an unwanted turn, what have you brought to the table?--Cheers, Off-hand Ascension crossbowYodaAscension crossbow 17:22, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
The presentation of a message is as important as the message itself. The community is reacting in this way because of the presentation of your message, which is hypocritical. I can't speak for the Clan Chat and haven't seen the people asking you to ignore Imxor Solmo, but that has no relevance to the request you have made of the community, which is to decide whether anything — and if yes, what — should happen to Imxor Solmo, given the evidence presented.  a proofreader ▸  18:11, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
Reading back, I see that the very first comment by TyA points out that you received messages in private and not in the Clan Chat, and suggests ignoring the person.  a proofreader ▸  18:22, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

Possibly closing the thread - comment - I would like to keep this thread going until we find more than enough reasons to get rid of Imxor, but by doing so, it' throwing more chaos into RSW than Imxor was, so I am emmitting a challenge, of sorts; 24 hours for those that are defending Imxor to produce proof that Imxor is aiding the community, whether him just capping in the citadel, or anything. The way it will work is thus; if 4 reasons are provided, the thread will be closed, and other solutions will be thought of. If some are shown, but not as many as times when we have evidence Imxor harrassed a clanmate, a kick will be requested, and Relaera will be warned. If none can be acquired, than there is no point in him remaining in the clan, and a ban will be requested. PLEASE do not sumbit false information/screenshots. Also, the evidence must be more than 24 hours old, because otherwise Imxor would just be really nice in the CC for a couple hours an take screenshots. I believe this is the most fair and honest way to do this.Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 19:18, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

lmao Ronan Talk 19:22, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
Ultimatums are not the way to go, either. Please clearly state either:
wat Slayer helmet (c)Immo Voted Worst Wikian 2013 Slayer cape (t) 19:32, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
Oh, sorry, since when were you the one who sets challenges/ultimatums and decides what to do with forum threads? bluefire2_zpse555e907.png Bluefire2 Talk page Vandalize my sig
Guestbook My violations of AGF
bluefirerune_zps31e89991.png
Oil4 I made this 19:47, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
When I opened this, I wanted to express something, maybe have a vote, and be done with it; but now people are using it as a hating thread, belittling anyone that they dislike and see on the forum. I see no other solution to stop this, but to either come up with some sort of challenge, or to request that from here on people will only express direct feelings, and vote, rather than going on and on down the rabbit hole, something even I have done, and make a serious choice like the respectable community that we do our best to be.Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 20:17, April 26, 2013 (UTC)\
Wah, normally I wouldn't say something like this, but please, please, it's for your own good: READ OVER YOUR COMMENT. It contradicts its self. I'm pretty sure saying out in the open that you hate someone is a direct feeling.User:King kolton9/Signature 22:18, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
What do you think gives you the right to issue a challenge, that based on the 'number' of screenshots presented, would determine whether I am to be removed or not. Also, how did you intend to police and enforce that, or even prove the age of the screenshots themselves. If you put a little thought into your posts, instead of the angsty vendetta of the last 4-5 posts, you might have actually got somewhere with them, instead you managed to remove the last of what credibility you have left, and managed to destroy your argument in the process. Slayer helmet (c)Immo Voted Worst Wikian 2013 Slayer cape (t) 20:45, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
Age of pictures are fairy easy to procure: if within the wiki, links, and then age is effortless. If in clan chat, the other people seen in the chat can be questioned, as well as friends private and public chat. Since people are opposed to the idea, however, I won't try to continue it.Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 21:33, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
This is not a good idea. Everyone would have a different idea what aiding is. Besides, aiding people isnt a requirement of this clan! Should we ban everyone who doesnt max in the citadel, or people who only log on once a month and dont talk in the CC? Should we ban anyone who doesnt answer someones question, or as you said in your original post, ban those who dont say grats when someone levels up? Megadog14Talk 21:49, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
You can't provide irrefutable proof that a user is beneficial to the community - what's good and what's bad are largely subjective. We aren't going to kick people just because you don't like them. Also, you want to "keep this thread going until we get enough evidence to ban Immo"? Consensus isn't always favourable to your viewpoint, and in this case everyone seems to agree that Immo should be kept around.--Cheers, Off-hand Ascension crossbowYodaAscension crossbow 22:00, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

Comment - I have spoken to Immo a few times and come to an agreement. I first asked him to stop being such a dick, and then in the interest of trying to bring this thread-turned-farce to some sort of conclusion, I later said that if I see him being a dick then I would remove him myself.

I extend the same to Ice Rush, as between what I remember of ingame and see from his posts on this thread, he baits Immo (maybe unintentionally) as much as Immo trolls him. I encourage him and Immo to utilise their ignore lists so they don't get drawn into arguments.

Whether or not this is adopted by the thread as its conclusion, or it continues in effort to to get him banned, or whatever, that's up to you guys. Regardless of the result (ignoring a ban) I'll keep to that myself anyway. Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 22:42, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

While I think we all agree that you are judicious and reasonable, delegating the community's power to ban this user to you alone, particularly when consensus here is pretty clearly against it, does not seem appropriate. User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 23:08, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
That's not what I meant. I was not implying that I would be the only one to ban him - that would be silly, my playtime has been down and will continue to be down for the foreseeable future. I made an agreement with Immo that I would kick him if I saw him being uncivil myself; I thought this would be something that could be an acceptable conclusion for the rest of the community to adopt (i.e. any admin would kick him if they found him being uncivil). If the community decide that they don't want to use that, then fair enough. I think I worded myself badly. Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 23:37, April 26, 2013 (UTC)
I'm confused. Incivility already means a kick (in theory) so you're proposing ... what? That ranks will enforce UTP at all against him? Or that you'll be more zealous in doing so? I genuinely do not understand. And just to be clear, you're not conflating a kick with a ban, are you? User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 08:31, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

Support Gareth's Proposal - Seems fair. I'll aid in keeping an eye on the players mentioned; I'm sure the rest of the admins will echo that sentiment.--Cheers, Off-hand Ascension crossbowYodaAscension crossbow 01:33, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

Support Gareth's Proposal - Because giving a slap on the wrist to a close friend that you're willing to overlook most of the time is certainly the way to go to make the clan chat atmosphere a much nicer place. Indeed. Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 15:00, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

Gareth's formal proposal

Clarification on proposal - Since my brain was melting orange last night, I'll clarify:

  • Immo, essentially, stops being a dick.
  • If Immo breaks that, then he's kicked (maybe a reminder of the agreement before but no more; admin discretion).
  • A ban is enacted since not banning would be pointless (especially given the kick without ban noted earlier in the thread). Let's just say a 1 month ban.
  • If this happens the kickbanning admin should make sure to get screenshots of the incedent.
  • This also applies to Ice Rush baiting Immo - as well as any other users that should be highlighted - I would say Warthog but he is not part of the clan anymore anyway. I encourage them all to utilise their ignore lists.

The difference with this versus 'the standard process' (what there is of one) is that there are usually multiple warnings before a kick, if there is one at all, and where here there would be at most one warning - though less of a warning and more of a reminder of this agreement - then he's kickbanned.

In terms of IRC then the issues with kicking and banning and muting are null as we actually have proper tools there.

Hopefully we can get somewhere toward getting this thing closed. Feel free to reject this proposal and substitute your own. Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 16:41, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

I like this. In other news this thread is now 60kb.
  1. REDIRECT User:Cqm/Signature
6zcugyG.png MolMan 16:47, April 27, 2013 (UTC)
If your proposal is to turn both of them into small fluffy animals (preferably hamsters) then I'm good with this. On a more serious note Gaz's proposal is essentially what all clan kickers should do, plus some screenshots. I'm fine with not giving Immo or Ice Rush any differing treatment after this thread, but if screenshots are needed then that's OK too. User:Real Not Pure/Signature 17:39, April 27, 2013 (UTC)
The idea of the screenshots is mainly because of the failure to provide evidence for the initial proposal. If there was proper evidence given then maybe the thread would have been different - but all we have is based on what people remember and such. Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 23:18, April 27, 2013 (UTC)
I still oppose giving the power to ban Imxor to individual ranks. The power to ban is not one they have had before and I am very wary of beginning the path to giving them that power with this proposal. Particularly since consensus here is against the ban—a single more incident of dickishness would not suddenly make everyone who opposed here suddenly support it. User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 18:16, April 27, 2013 (UTC)
A kick without a ban throws the same issue we had before, when Cook removed him. There is no cooldown on a clan kick alone; he could instantly rejoin if someone invited him. All admin+ ranks have the ability to ban - that's not something we can change aside from adding/removing users from the group.
People want him to stop being a dick but people don't want to ban him - what other compromise would be feasible? Weird gloop @Gaz#7521 23:18, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

Support the above - Sarcasm aside, I believe I can live with that level of a justice, a final formal warning of sorts. Broav pet Rhys Talk Completionist cape 18:39, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

Seal of approval - I like this. Except for hopefully it's not a matter of time before we forget this; probably a good idea for this thread to be archived.Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 19:45, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

all threads are archived Ronan Talk 20:21, April 27, 2013 (UTC)
I think you mean closed, Ice. User:Real Not Pure/Signature 20:28, April 27, 2013 (UTC)
Am I missing something, or do you guys not notice there's only, like, 13-14 archived threads? Or am I going to find out I'm really short-circuiting?Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 19:50, April 28, 2013 (UTC)
Those are the most recent, all past threads (with a few exceptions) are stored in Category:Forum archives. User:Real Not Pure/Signature 20:04, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

Question - Where, roughly, will the line be drawn with regards to "being a dick"? The same as for other users, or harsher? Ancient talisman Oil4 Talk 19:06, April 28, 2013 (UTC)

Request for closure - After a read through this thread, I've come to the conclusion that this thread is no longer being taken seriously. So far, Ice Rush has been putting together glittery comments in an attempt to slander his enemies, and they have little to no reinforcement of the main idea of this thread. To be honest, this seems to be another case of his ranting and raving at someone who criticizes him- does anyone else remember the 'Ban Yoda' thread? The thread in its current state has become a circlejerk; the arguments that have been made in this thread have been dragged out and beating senselessly like a dead horse. On a side note, I say we disallow Ice Rush from making any more 'Ban (example' threads as well. This is making my brain hurt. S T Y G 07:21, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Support of Gaz's proposal - If one thing in this thread should be taken seriously, it should be this. S T Y G 07:23, May 1, 2013 (UTC)
Oppose Closure - Warthog and Ice support Gaz's proposal, but I'd like to see Imxor himself state his opinion in this thread before it is closed. Ancient talisman Oil4 Talk 09:25, May 1, 2013 (UTC)
Immo said that he talked to Gaz and promised to be good. Megadog14Talk 20:13, May 1, 2013 (UTC)
I know - I would just like to see him state so on this thread, so that if someone looks back on it in the future, it will be clear that all parties involved agree with this solution. I have asked Immo to do so on his talk page already. Ancient talisman Oil4 Talk 08:21, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
Styg's comment breaks the All Users are Equal policy, right there. You're saying that since I made this thread, it isn't something anyone should logically agree with. Also, who said any threads are like a horse, let alone a dead one? Your comment makes no sense.Ice Rush12Zaros symbolTalkHiscores 18:44, May 1, 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for proving my point, Ice Rush- I don't see in any way how I'm violating RS:AUAE; all I've done in the comment was point out your actions throughout this thread and your recent actions. The past Ban Yoda thread and your RFRs just prove how insecure you've shown yourself to be when confronted with flame baiting and trolling, and since then, you've hardly changed whatsoever. This thread is the perfect example of such a reaction- when you get angry, you do stupid stuff, and only dig yourself a deeper hole into this mess; the comments you have made are contradictory and hypocritical- a note that quite a few people in this thread have pointed out so far, yet you choose to ignore it and continue. If you're so sick of everyone trolling you, THEN IGNORE THEM ALREADY. You continuing this will only hurt your standing in the wiki. Love, S T Y G 23:00, May 1, 2013 (UTC)
That's not even close to what he was saying. You really need to cut your losses and just get off this thread. User:(wszx)/sheeeeple 19:09, May 1, 2013 (UTC)
Flogging a dead horse is a metaphor for trying to carry on with an idea that's obviously failing iirc. The fact that this thread has degenerated into explaining metaphors and trying to score points on calling policies proves this thread is quite clearly not moving anywhere. User:Real Not Pure/Signature 19:27, May 1, 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not getting involved, but here's some context. MolMan 20:16, May 1, 2013 (UTC)
Support Closure - I dont think theres really a need for Ice Rush to be banned from making ban threads, most people dont take them too seriously anyways. Megadog14Talk 20:12, May 1, 2013 (UTC)

Support Closure w/ Gareth's Proposal - This thread isn't doing anything constructive anymore. Additionally, one might argue that the fact that Ice Rush's ban threads aren't taken seriously is a good reason to keep him from making any more. Why should waste our time extensively debating threads that don't really go anywhere (and then give birth to more threads of a similar nature), when we know that the proposals won't be taken seriously due to the fallacious logic given for banning the user, coupled with the less-than-shining reputation of the thread's OP?--Cheers, Off-hand Ascension crossbowYodaAscension crossbow 00:35, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Your own logic is fallacious. Never use the someone's "reputation" for determining how you vote on a thread. You should know this by now. Stop letting your clear hatred of the guy make you look foolish. ʞooɔ 01:01, May 2, 2013 (UTC)
I genuinely believe that Immo should not be banned, and that Gareth's proposal is the best course of action for everyone. This is my opinion, regardless of whether or not that opinion is shared with Ice Rush. Additionally, what I said about his creation of future threads was not meant as a personal attack on him, but rather as an honest observation. He's created two threads of a similar nature, the one to de-rank/ban me and this one, and neither has been taken seriously based on his reputation with the wiki. I'm not saying that that's the right thing (as it is technically a breach in policy to discount a thread/vote based on the user who wrote it) but it seems that this is the direction in which we have traveled.--Cheers, Off-hand Ascension crossbowYodaAscension crossbow 03:03, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Support - I agree with any and all things specified by my Overlloyd Slayer helmet (c)Immo Voted Worst Wikian 2013 Slayer cape (t) 09:08, May 2, 2013 (UTC)

Closed - There is no consensus to take any sort of action against Immo in either IRC or the wiki. With regards to the CC, Immo has apparently admitted that his behaviour is disruptive, and has agreed to improve his conduct. Given the overall opinion that Immo's behaviour disrupts the cc, yet is not severe enough to warrant a ban, the terms suggested by Gaz will be adopted. Immo is hereby given a last chance to behave in the CC, a warning may be issued before a kick at the enforcing admin's discretion. Ice Rush is also requested to stop baiting Immo with the same consequences should he fail to do so. I see no reason to place any restriction on Ice Rush making ban/derank threads at this time.

The discussion regarding a review of CC moderation can be found here.

  1. REDIRECT User:Cqm/Signature
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.