RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive127

= Unclescrooge =

A walking behavioral violation. Constantly trolling and was given far too many chances, like it's fucking ludicrous to see patience we've displayed here. For instance this user deserved to be put swiftly in vandal bin and was let off quickly because the user incessantly begged, on terms and conditions which user violated immediately and got put back in the bin, which the removal of binning in the first place was a really poor display of judgement. Not to mention the disruptive pinging abuse, the gif abuse, the horrific quality posts and edits, the attempts to coop other users for frivolous reasons (which he has done right after Christopher made the mistake of undoing my block on him and made the coop before I even posted this comment; I'm exasperated also at Christopher, who has frequently undo/reduce blocks on this obvious troll), attempts to permaban other users, regularly personally attacks other users; there's a goddamn laundry list of violations but apparently I need to give him a warning to stop, and blocking for more disruptive comments is too severe. I'm now motioning mods for a long term block of 22 days minimum, but preferably a permaban. You can turn this into Chicken Coop if you need to, if mods disagree how to proceed, but I rather go through a coop with this troll than put up with this patience comedy act any longer. 22:52, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Coup Unclescrooge. He's abusing the coup process. I've had enough of that shit. In fact, I'll go ahead and do it myself. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 23:11, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * [EC]It wasn’t a mistake, like I said in the unblock message it gave him a chance to actually do something wrong. I seem to find him a lot easier to ignore than most people, and think he was treated too harshly initially when he wasn’t such an obvious troll, but I’d also support an extended block. I say 3.14 months and go from there, but won’t vote against a permaban. Christopher (talk) 23:13, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * scrooge is a complete nobody; we can vote to ban him here, please don’t start a coop case over some trolling. Christopher (talk) 23:14, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem, we can discuss this here. PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 23:16, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * In situations like this, it helps to ask the question "what are we losing if we sanction the user in question?" I would like people to consider that before they start defending scrooge, at least.-Flandres (talk) 23:18, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * He's been PMing me on Discord begging to unblock him and spamming his stupid Mario videos. I'm tired of this kid's bullshit. 23:22, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Has Scrooge made any constructive mainspace edits? Bongolian (talk) 23:23, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd favor a ban of π months (at a minimum) for egregious violation of the community standards, trying to coop anyone who upsets him, and making no worthwhile contributions here at all. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 23:24, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * (Edit conflicy) My deeming it as a "mistake" is not a literal mistake but my own exasperated judgement strongly disagreeing with yours, and my feeling correct when letting blocked would've prevented scrooge from further disruption. Perhaps there's silver lining that the unblocking also was a final straw for me and maybe something could be done, but this back and forth (which you might see as my actions as being too aggressive while I see yours as too accomodating) is tiring me. Apologies if I came off as abrasive. 23:24, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * (STOP GETTING INTO EDIT CONFLICTS WITH ME!!!) Flandres, I created the page on Red Eagle Politics. Christpher, I'm NOT a nobody!! Unclescrooge (talk) 23:25, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No need to apologise, I take most of the blame for any conflict. I do stand by my earlier defence of him but lately it’s mostly just been stubbornness (and frustration at the often flimsy block justifications, given how easy it is to wait for actual block-worthy edits). Christopher (talk) 23:28, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Personally I think these discussions should be about how much you’ve done wrong, not what you’ve done right, but he’s made less than 50 mainspace edits and none of them were very good. Christopher (talk) 23:29, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Wow, amazing resume, Unclescrooge. What will the wiki do without a page on some blogger that's been in draft zone for over a month, that time better spent on article improvement than wasting other people's time with you?
 * Christopher, I do believe what he has done is blockworthy, just for disruption. Benefit of doubt is zero so in turn, bar for him getting blocked for disruption is also really low. That's how I saw things. I can see your way, I believe but I don't agree. 23:33, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

UncleScrooge's primary reason for being here is to be disruptive. His behaviour hasn't improved in spite of the multiple short term blocks and other small punishments he has received. He's going to get banned eventually. We might as well do it sooner rather than later. Spud (talk) 00:43, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I would tolerate, even welcome US if he were original, funny or interesting at trolling. But he's just boring and tedious. I say we get rid of him. 主要行事月 (talk) 01:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * As noted in the coop, I support any punishment for Scrooge that looks like it could have enough support to pass. Bongolian (talk) 02:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, let me explain what you are doing wrong: everything. You are an embarrassment to the small community of virtuous trolls here on the wiki. Going to the CC to "coop ban" members in better standing than yourself makes you appear to be an idiot. LGM is one of the most even tempered editors on the site, and you managed to antagonize them. To what end? And funny? No chance of that. As has been pointed out, you are a froward contributor. UncleKrampus (talk) 02:50, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I’d go up to a pi months block. I wouldn’t vote for a permaban, but this user is annoying enough that I also wouldn’t vote against it. 06:13, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I too am bored with the constant coop-trolling and grovelling. At this stage I'd support a short (pi week/month) block, and would support a much longer block if this was to continue afterwards . --RWRW (talk) 06:22, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I say a 3.14 week block, with talk page access revoked so it is paid in full. If disruption insues after that, perm block.Gale5050 (talk) 12:18, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitely agree on revoking talkpage access, given how he uses it. It’d be good if people could make that clear when voting. There’s no rule saying you can’t state your opinion but remember you can’t vote as your account isn’t old enough. Christopher (talk) 12:23, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

I did block Scrooge initially for 3 weeks, then 3.14 weeks (as per RW tradition), only to realise that you were cooping him for the purpose of a block, which I didn't realise at the time. Sorry for my mistaken block, I'll try and avoid making this mistake in the future. Harry Potter (talk) 12:38, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I vote Aye to cooping Unclescrooge, as there he clearly has a case to answer. Harry Potter (talk) 12:46, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * He’s already been cooped, and you don’t get a vote on how long he’s blocked for. See CS. Christopher (talk) 12:47, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * As for talk page access, I say revoke it. What would he use it for anyway? For the purpose of appealing the ban? But who would hear such an appeal, let alone unblock him anyway? I say if he wants to appeal, let him email the blocking admin. Otherwise, it should be revoked, or at the very least revoked at the first sign of trouble. I didn't know that, for the record is your claim that my account is younger than 3 months or that it does not have 75 edits? Either way I'm pretty sure you're mistaken, I am an eligible voter as both of those apply to me. Harry Potter (talk) 12:49, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Assumed your account was new because you only recently became active, my mistake. Christopher (talk) 13:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * That's correct, I technically created this account around September last year (so more than 3 months ago) but I took a long LANCB shortly after. Then I returned to RW quite recently. So I can understand, it's fine. :) By the way sorry about the my mistake in updating the status to the wrong one, I didn't know what HCM 4 meant but that's still my mistake. Harry Potter (talk) 13:21, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Can verify. There first edit was on 24 September 2020. But I didn't welcome them until May 12 though. Meanwhile my first was on 28 March 2021, so I will be eligible in a month. Gale5050 (talk) 14:58, 29 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Ping me when it's time for a vote, I can't be arsed to care beyond that. 15:14, 29 May 2021 (UTC)


 * About the length of the block, most people above seem to support months. I'd also vote for 3.14 quarters of a year if that's an option, but would probably be neutral to years and to permanent. I mention this because I haven't seen a more moderate length above 3.14 months mentioned yet. (My current reasoning: Maybe Unclescrooge may change in time, but if it happens, I think it will probably take more than a few months.) --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 16:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * In most coops, I only see the following block increments offered-pi-days, pi-weeks, pi-months, and permablocking.-Flandres (talk) 16:42, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add in any block length you want as an option when voting starts. If people want to stick to the dropdown options they can vote for them. Christopher (talk) 16:44, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I noticed I'm too new (March 23) and can't vote anyway. Well, the idea may or may not be relevant for others who vote. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 17:14, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * For the sake of clarity, has a vote been formally started yet? Harry Potter (talk) 17:23, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No, because it has not been 24 hours.Gale5050 (talk) 17:31, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Could someone show a few diffs? I'm likely to support (I've seen Scrooges shittery) and it wouldn't surprise me it's more widespread than what I've seen...but seeing a few more diffs would help. Shabi  DOO  18:59, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Most diffs taken in isolation look fairly harmless, off the top of my head there are his bullshit coops   Christopher (talk) 19:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I support pi months and a soft threat that if he doesn't stop with the crying wolf shit that we could see escalations from there. Scrooge is very tiresome to deal with and is one of the few reasons (not the only one) I took a short break from the wiki. Techpriest (talk) 20:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Well.... Also it doesn't take specific diffs to show his posting manner. He makes excessive use of punctuation. It's clearer than an Invisible Mario to me that this user's only intention is to draw much attention to himself through punctuation, all caps, ping spam, and GIF abuse, which are all traits of poor quality trolls. I think a month ban is appropriate but I also think that's on the "easy" side and I believe Unclecrooge should be yeeted off for a very long time. He's cemented his awful reputation since February and has been registered here since September 2020, and I had to type this up when I could be scrubbing toilets instead. Why are we keeping him here for so long? WHY have we kept him for this long? 20:14, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Bullshit coops also had Unclescrooge calling users to be permabanned.
 * Inserting completely inappropriate entries for WIGO, similar habit in Salooon Bar. Extremely low quality WIGO.
 * Poor to horrific quality edits in mainspace (generally removing categories with a dopey "huh?" edit summary)
 * Constantly complaining about being binned/blocked / Begging to be removed from vandal bin (this one is a promise to insert inappropriate Mario content for the wiki) (spammed Saloon Bar for this)  (post also calls for long-term blocking users)   flaming Cosmikdebris,  calling Plutocow a "fascist" and begging for sysop powers,,  begging Christopher to be let back on a Discord server)
 * Ping abuse
 * Trolling users, quick to flame them for doing the reasonable thing like preventing further disruption. (calling Kevlastar a "fascist"),  (typical right wing trolling),  (calling Gale5050 a "fascist"),  calling Spud a "fascist",  (trolling Chicken Coop),  (trolling Chicken Coop; no that's not a copy/paste mistake),  (playing right wing troll against GrammarCommie for doing the correct thing of removing disruptive premature Chicken Coop voting)
 * GIF spam, particularly including a giant ass gif including filtering so it looks horribly ugly. The gif is his current user page content.
 * Created several awful Debate pages.. This one is the first one, and cemented extremely negative impressions by most users on him.
 * Created shitty drafts, some shittier than the others. (the shitty one).
 * Created a horrific essay that ended up buried for going plain against RationalWiki's mission..
 * Reregged under another account to complain to Rockford Roe and Rockford Roe has complained about him sending harassing DMs in this coop.
 * in addition to that, look at there terrible block log. Gale5050 (talk) 20:52, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Jesus fucking shit-crackers. That is not "minor" pestery. Pi months at a minimum. The amount of users who have had to deal with Scrooge's grief is really long. It's not just a case of a "person being annoying" but being pointlessly toxic and irredeemable while at the same time being of no use to the site. Shabi  DOO  22:57, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't go that far, but yes, this is a sheer net negative. -Gale5050 (talk) 23:02, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If the user in question gets blocked for a significant time, I sincerely hope they use the time away from this website to read about what fascism actually is. 23:31, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Thoughts
Scrooge is a (very) minor pest, and is in the bin where he belongs. To mitigate some of his genuinely irritating / disruptive behaviour, I'd propose the following:
 * 1) The binning won't be reviewed for 12 months. If he complains about being in there, or asks to be unbinned, at any point before 29/05/2022, then it's escalating week-long blocks (1, 2, 3, etc.) from the first sysop / mod who sees it.
 * 2) If he starts a coop case which is then judged to be frivolous by a simple majority of the mod team, then it's escalating month-long blocks (1, 2, 3, etc.).

As for his generally bad / dumb / argumentative edits, and bog-standard right-wing talking points, then that's just the perils of editing on an open wiki, and some of you seriously need to get a grip. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 21:42, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Scrooge was initially removed from the bin after begging, the quickly rebinned for repeat behavior. Binning has no effect on Scrooge other than reducing the frequency of bad behavior. Bongolian (talk) 21:52, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Per Bongolian, this is why I think a decently sized block is needed. Scrooge ends up being a fairly boring yet annoying plague on talkpages, constantly calling us fascists or suggesting we're like Ingsoc from 1984, which at this point is starting to get seriously frustrating to deal with. 3 weeks probably wont send a message. 3 months will. Infinite blocks are silly for now, I do think that a cold shower might be needed for him to get his act together and stop being a 5 year old (question; does anyone know how Scrooge is? I seriously at times question if he's 12), but it's not hit so far for him, so perhaps a clearer message is needed. Techpriest (talk) 22:05, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that for the bad edits, bans should be short, like 1 or 9 hours, if they occur. Gale5050 (talk) 22:18, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how "get a grip" will work. This user is very clearly a troll. This user feels like they're testing the tolerance limits of RationalWiki. What do trolls want? Disruption. How do they achieve disruption and get attention? Cheapest way is all-caps, punctuation spam, blowing up images to give them prominence, making over-the-top insults to get reactions, etc. Ignoring them isn't the solution, as the giant images, all-caps, the pings, the punctuation all already do work drawing attention to them. They'll keep on trying to get attention and they'll take advantage of tolerance of them to do this. It's not about "getting a grip", it's about deciding if it's worth it to keep someone whose motives are explicitly to waste time and call attention to themselves. Like a troll. They're past the point of being ignored if they start coops and try to harass mods (such as spamming tons of pings, which is also the same as all-caps disruptive messages) to do something. 23:24, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I tend to agree at this point. I have shifted to supporting a ban. 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * They not only said things we didn't like, but they bludgeoned and it began to become disruptive editing. Check here(the Oct. 6 block). They were blocked for 3.14 months, and still persisted in there disruption. That 3.14 month block should have been a stern warning. Instead, they continued there disruptive editing. They had enough chances. Any blocks they have should be their last temporary one. Gale5050 (talk) 02:00, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't know how to break this to you dickheads, but someone consistently saying stuff in ways you dislike, and which you frequently disagree with, is not the same fucking thing as trolling.

If it helps get it through your thick skulls, please try your very fucking best to recall the multitude of times where you've all tolerated exponentially worse behaviour from editors for whom you feel some measure of ideological sympathy.

I've no particular wish to lay anyone to rest on the hill of their own rank hypocrisy right now, so do yourselves a favour, and wrap your heads round the sad reality that if Scrooge had mostly been gibbering about how we need to kill the rich or ACAB, he wouldn't even be in the fucking bin. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 00:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * HBC is still a whiny bitch obsessed with oxy! News at eleven, hmhmhmhmhm...-Flandres (talk) 00:46, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I thought about this too. Oxy is not even active anymore, and as far as I know she never said anything about killing people because of her failed ideology, no reason to bring her here, HBC. I'm not going to do this myself, but I hope someone collapses this whataboutism section. GeeJayK (talk) 00:49, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * (ec)I think she said some stuff you can definitely see that way some time ago (and was threatened with a coop if she did it again), but you are also right that she has nothing to do with this case and should not have been brought up at all. Some people just can't get over their obsessions, hmhmhmhm...-Flandres (talk) 00:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I certainly didn't anticipate anyone indulging in such a gleefully masturbatory celebration of their hypocrisy, but here we are. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So, you admit this was an irrelevant tangent you started because you can't get over Oxy?-Flandres (talk) 01:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Pro-tip: there's no "owning it" or styling it out after you've shit yourself in public. You're just the malodorous idiot waddling around awkwardly. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 01:34, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So, you admit this was an irrelevant tangent you started because you can't get over Oxy?-Flandres (talk) 01:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I salute your determination to waddle on regardless. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 01:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Wrong-headed and ridiculous, but let no-one doubt your commitment to the cause of beclowning yourself. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 01:46, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So, you admit this was an irrelevant tangent you started because you can't get over Oxy?
 * Also, I could point out this is psychological projection on a grand scale, because you are "owning" that you started whining about a user who has been inactive for nearly two months in an unrelated case for...reasons I'm sure you think are very intelligent. You are the only one "beclowning" yourself, as multiple users have pointed out. Then again, we both know you are not capable of self-reflection to that degree, hmhmhmhmhmhm...-Flandres (talk) 01:49, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Still waddling, I see. I hope you're still as pleased with this strategy tomorrow. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 02:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So, you admit this was an irrelevant tangent you started because you can't get over Oxy? And you admit to the whole "you are projecting" thing?-Flandres (talk) 02:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Look, man: it's one thing to be the kind of self-pwning dick who responds to a general observation re. hypocrisy with "Hi, everybody! I'm one of those hypocrites!", but it's quite another to *checks notes* quadruple down on your initial stupidity. Basic humanity now requires me to ask you to stop doing this yourself. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 02:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So, you admit this was an irrelevant tangent you started because you can't get over Oxy? And you admit to the whole "you are projecting" thing? I mean, you don't exactly seem able to contest it...-Flandres (talk) 02:24, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * HBC's posts seem to get more and more sulphuric with each passing month. Ironically, HBC's comments are starting to remind me a little of how Oxy would deal with a scenario where most people disagreed with her (that is, lash out, imply such people are stupid/awful, belittle/insult and then pronounce her intellectually superior truth). I'm now just waiting for the other usual troll defenders to come along and explain why it is exactly the wiki needs disruptive and useless shit-stirrers like Scrooge.  Shabi  DOO  02:34, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's what I was thinking too, HCB. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 01:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * (ECx2) Charges laid against Scrooge include "trolling users, quick to flame them" and calling lots of people fascists. "As far as I know, she never said anything about killing people" and the response "she said some stuff you can definitely see that way some time ago" would seem to set an awfully low bar for tolerable behavior, and a correspondingly high bar for what it takes to be "a walking behavior violation".  The question is what makes Scrooge worse, so that something like a permaban or pi-month block would be justified in this case.  Obviously, Scrooge makes no or few meaningful contributions to mainspace, but I, for one, am not convinced that it is a good policy that toxicity toward other users becomes permissible when accompanied by sufficient mainspace activity.  What I am saying is, I am not convinced that this is irrelevant simply because the user is no longer here, especially given that they are gone by their own will, and could in principle return any time. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  01:48, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No, it is irrelevant because this is a case about Unclescrooge. Wait to coop Oxy till she comes back at least...-Flandres (talk) 01:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not trying to coop Oxy. I am suggesting that it is worth considering how these kinds of things have been dealt with before in evaluating Scrooge.  If I went before an actual court, and cited precedent as part of my arguments, I would be rather upset if the court refused to hear it on the grounds that the cases were closed.  I am not claiming that we cannot overturn precedent if we so choose.  I am not suggesting that Oxy should be put under double jeopardy.  I am not suggesting that only Oxy should be considered.  I am suggesting that we consider what has been done before in dealing with similar behavior, which would at least give us a chance to either emulate past success or avoid past failure, and just maybe move toward a more effective strategy for dealing with trolls.  Really, what this case is about (at least in part) is disruptive behavior. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  03:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Precedents get shattered all the time, and in many cases they deserve it. I would not base my argument around looking at them on a site which does not have that many hard-and-fast rules.-Flandres (talk) 03:30, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I remember Oxy and HBC being involved in multiple coops, but did either of them try to throw multiple laughable attempts at bullshit coops over minor trivial edit conflicts? PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 03:33, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Seems like HBC didn't grasp at all what "trolling" means (HBV has reduced Unclescrooge's behavior as just "minor annoyance" and "political disagreement" when my focus is the disruptive behavior from, again, the all caps, punctuation spam, gif spam, giant images, etc and obvious bad faith posting) and is trying to compare Oxyaena to Unclescrooge. Sorry, they're two different issues (Oxy isn't here to clearly troll, and it feels like HBC can also "get a grip" dealing with Oxy after they turned coop observers against them after their petty little dirt digging a few months ago). HBC, work on persuasion and also stop acting so terminally incapable of courtesy because your abraisve gimmick is so awfully tiring. Can we collapse now? 03:39, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure, go ahead. Little of this has really advanced the broader discussion anyway.-Flandres (talk) 03:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * (EC) I believe that precedents get shattered all the time, but I question whether anything is actually learned about how best to deal with trolls, whether any net movement is ever made toward better ideas. Personally, I think precedent indicates that slaps on the wrist are absolutely worthless, but I also question whether permabans have any teeth.  Part of me thinks RW's only useful tool is the vandalbin, such that it is preferable to keep a disruptive user on the same account and in the bin than to permaban them and have them spam new accounts anyway.  To be blunt, I would oppose a permaban, because Scrooge spamming accounts would be worse than Scrooge staying Scrooge, and I think there is a substantial risk that this is what he would do.  I am aware RW has few hard and fast rules, but I see that as a poor excuse not to reflect on past strategies.  A mob that bothers to inform itself about how to get what it wants is going to do better than one that pretends the past never happened. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  03:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input Serene. You probably need to reinstate your thoughts out of the collapse though, as it's caught in the crap here. I don't agree that leaving trolls in vandal bin will discourage them from reregging. I'll explain my thoughts more after I take a night here. Don't disappoint Mario, fellow editors. 07:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yawn, quick (edit: or not) sum up why I didn't go haste with banning Oxy: she isn't here to troll. I don't like her approach to conflict at all and I find her trigger finger being way too weak. But I think she does try to be involved in the community and I feel she does try to adhere to mission goals of at least anti authoritarianism (ACAB is a sentiment shared by a fair few members here, some less strong as Oxyaena) and she has listened to my advice despite not long term acting adequately on it, but she does apologize if she steps out of line and if you don't act aggressive. You contrast this with Unclescrooge whose stay here is summed up as trolling and disruption. Is Oxy disruptive? Sure. But she doesn't cause disruption for the sake of it, not in the blatant and deliberate way Unclescrooge does. That being said, she's still sanctioned and had interaction bans as well as having received blocks for disruption. The accusation of hypocrisy from HBC is just a lot of crap stirring and that sort of demanding explanation for different applications of sanctions could've been done in a far less aggressive way, but who am I kidding: being diplomatic is alien for HBC. 07:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Good points, and well put. Since you’ve been active here longer than me, I weigh your input about the vandalbin seriously.  At this point, I would endorse a long term block, but probably not a permaban just yet.  One thing I’d like to look at, if it exists, is a list of permabanned users.  To my knowledge, some of them were not trolls, but were instead banned for other unacceptable behaviors (I.e. doxxing).  Of the remaining trolls, what proportion have actually left after getting permabanned?  Off the top of my head, Nobs is gone, but Mike and Ken are still here pretty much constantly. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  13:33, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * A (possibly incomplete) list does exist here. --RWRW (talk) 14:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * While permabanned trolls do try to skirt the block lengths, you'll notice dealing with them is far swifter. We had lengthy, tiring coops on Ken, who then got permabanned but was then relatively swiftly dealt with when he tries to post. There are still some that feed him, to my chagrin at those that know his behavior better, but overall you compare how we dealt him as a normal user and a banned user. Same goes for Godless Raven: he was tiring, had multiple big coops (this for example), but ultimately got permabanned and he was later much easier to deal with even if he tried reregging. There was UnlicensedThinker years ago who was also tiring and posting in bad faith who appeared to have left after getting docked several times up to a permaban. Mike is just a despicable troll who should get the "shoot to kill" treatment on sight, and he was never contentious to deal with. DMorris is another despicable person on a similar boat with Mike but is slightly less atrocious. Oliver is more obnoxious than downright vile but he's also a bit easier to deal with now the message is clear that we don't want him here even in spite of his attempts to tell us about Mike and such, which can fool newer users but his obssessive behavior with Mike and HBD do often expose him to more seasoned users. 18:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for going into detail. If the permabans do make them easier to deal with, then that's good reason to make use of them.  For now, though, I'll only endorse finite blocks.  While permabanning Scrooge might make him easier to deal with, I think the same could be said of HBC's proposal, or something close to it (depending on implementation and Scrooge's behavior, it's virtually a de facto permaban; one trolling edit from Scrooge every few weeks/months wouldn't be that bad).  A solution combining a pi week or pi month block followed by an escalating block scheme would be my most preferred solution; it would effectively stifle Scrooge without a permaban or need for further coops and drama in the future.
 * One thing that has occurred to me, and has come up before, is the issue of confusing the incompetency of new users with trolls. While I don't think this would be an issue with Scrooge sockpuppets, due to the transparency of his trolling, I see it as a significant consideration more generally.  Partly I'm basing this on my own experiences; I have had several accounts here, usually correcting grammatical errors, and have usually been swiftly blocked (and then unblocked, but for most I suspect it would be pretty discouraging).  The more account spamming and sockpuppetry from trolls we have, I think, the greater the risk of such mistakes.  The community isn't that big, and I see the mistaken blocking of a good faith, but not-yet-competent new user as much worse for the project than the mistaken short-term letting through of a long-term troll.  In any case, I'm getting a bit off topic at this point. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  19:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * and thank you for your responses. I'd like to discuss more, but I'd go in another place like All things in moderation. 23:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

The collapse template is overused. Christopher (talk) 14:11, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * True, but this discussion is already at 48KB. Collapsing the unnecessary would help relieve this problem. Gale5050 (talk) 15:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The collapse was needed because there was lengthy squabbling between HBC and Flandres that wasn't really productive to the coop. The collapse was used just so readers know which comments should be read and which shouldn't; i.e. legibility. This is only the second collapse (other coops had more collapses) and I feel some nature of discussion is bound to be unproductive and tiring to read. 17:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Re-enabled per LGM. Gale5050 (talk) 17:13, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * And also, that squabbling caused this coop to (temporarily) go to HCM 4, it went back to 5 and then 6 though. Gale5050 (talk) 13:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Is Unclescrooge run by a Conservapedia user?
I previously suspected that Unclescrooge could be LT. I currently have doubts about that hypothesis, though I won't preclude the possibility that the user could be from Conservapedia. Here are some following questions that may help answer the question:
 * Does Unclescrooge's style of editing/commenting reflect their true personality, or is it just a cover?
 * If it reflects their actual self, is they just a random kid who may happen to be on the autism spectrum? (people on the spectrum can have varying personalities)
 * If it's just a cover, who's likely to be the culprit here?
 * Why would anyone waste so much time inserting silliness on RationalWiki if they know it's pointless? That would reach a level of irrationality even surpassing that of Plutocow's utter stupidity.

I don't know if this helps, but it's something to think about. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 22:29, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * While this is just all speculation and irrelevant to the behavior, it is rather strange Unclescrooge knows a fair bit about Conservapedia, such as repeating an over-the-top ad hominem about California voters that echo exactly something RobSmith said about California voters years ago. He also compared me to Karajou too, which is an oddly specific insult. Jesus christ, and I thought I had all the diffs needed for the coop. 23:12, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Political ideology really has sod all to do with this. I'm sure that Unclescrooge would get banned very quickly on Conservapedia for being a liberal troll. Yes, Unclescrooge has at times tried to come across as being very right-wing. But I think that was done more to get a rise out of us rather than out of any genuine political belief. This is just a case of somebody being a troll just for the sake of being a troll. I very much doubt he's a Conservapedia editor. But whether he is or not is really irrelevant to this discussion. Spud (talk) 01:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Let's suppose Unclescrooge is a sock of a CP user who is banned here. Then that guy can get perma-blocked for that reason alone. I've finished analyzing some of their contributions, and I'm reaching a conclusion that it's likely someone from CP. Something tells me it could be a shared account, though I'll need to examine some further details and read between the lines more closely... UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 01:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * If this were the sock of any banned user, not just someone who has a CP account, that would be reason for a permaban. But I think that's a really big if. Honestly, what's more likely, this is DMorris, Ken, LT and Rob Smith clubbing together to try to destroy us or this is just some kid dicking around? Spud (talk) 02:05, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * To be honest I'm pretty sure this is a Conservapedia troll, why the fuck would a random kid create a "Schlafly's inept advisers" debate article? PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 02:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * My thoughts exactly. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 04:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)


 * This speculation is dumb. If scrooge is to be sanctioned, then he will be so regardless of whether he might be from CP. Get it together, people. 02:28, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed. We have more concrete things to look at, anyway.-Flandres (talk) 02:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Correct, unless it's a previously-banned CP interloper. Bongolian (talk) 03:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Time to vote
It’s been 24 hours. Per CS, votes to block/ban require a two thirds majority. asked to be pinged. Christopher (talk) 14:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Stupid question, I know, but if this vote were to go past 6/28, would I be eligible to vote, or no? Gale5050 (talk) 14:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Not going to happen in this case, but if another vote started closer to that date you would be eligible. From CS:
 * "you must have at least 75 total edits and a registration date at least three months prior to the conclusion of the vote."
 * Christopher (talk) 14:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * asked to be pinged too. Kevs  Ping!  15:09, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks.Gale5050 (talk) 15:15, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Yea

 * 1) Unclescrooge (talk) 14:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Nay

 * 1) Silly. Techpriest (talk) 17:32, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Goat

 * 1) This is stupid. I mean, that is like........a dectillionth of a second at most. Gale5050 (talk) 21:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) Unclescrooge (talk) 22:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) What can I say? Even Scrooge himself agrees. All I can say is bah humbug, LOL. :D Harry Potter (talk) 08:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Yea

 * 1) Shabi  DOO  17:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Nay

 * 1) Too short. Kevs  Ping!  15:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) Omicron (talk) 16:42, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) Meaningless. Bongolian (talk) 16:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 4) Too short to be meaningful. While I have mostly been too senioritis-ridden by homework to watch the site as often as before for the past couple months, I've watched and interacted this guy enough just before my hiatus enough to say that, while a permaban is too harsh, this long-term rightist shitposter deserves a longer exile. -- Goatspeed. 06:57, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 5) Meaningless. Techpriest (talk) 17:32, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Yea

 * 1) Omicron (talk) 16:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) Shabi  DOO  17:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) Underrated option if you vote for π months too. Sanctions are AFAIK cumulative, and this will result in a 4 months block. GeeJayK (talk) 16:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No, they aren't. But they'll extend if he tries to evade it. Kevs  Ping!  16:20, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Bare minimum. Techpriest (talk) 17:32, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) Hiya!-Flandres (talk) 02:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) Kauri0.o (talk) 00:17, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Nay
Still too short. Kevs  Ping!  15:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Pointless, as it is just too short. Why bother at all with this kind of block length? He's already binned! Harry Potter (talk) 17:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You need to have had an account for a least 3 months to cast a vote. Bongolian (talk) 17:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I made the same mistake; their account is old enough, although they only became active this month. Christopher (talk) 17:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * OK. Bongolian (talk) 18:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * They made their first edit on 24 September 2020, but took an LANCB until May, when I welcomed them on the 12th. Gale5050 (talk) 21:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * For the record, I've retracted my own vote, and therefore have striked it out. Thanks. Harry Potter (talk) 09:05, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


 * 1) Too short to be meaningful. While I have mostly been too senioritis-ridden by homework to watch the site as often as before for the past couple months, I've watched and interacted this guy enough just before my hiatus enough to say that, while a permaban is too harsh, this long-term rightist shitposter deserves a longer exile. -- Goatspeed. 07:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) Bongolian (talk) 18:08, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 02:41, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Goat
How come? I've only voted against one single block length for that reason, solely to make a point that if we block him for merely pi weeks or less, then we'd may as well not bother blocking him at all. Harry Potter (talk) 17:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Voting against block lengths because you think they’re too short makes no sense. Christopher (talk) 17:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * While I'd normally support this in case the really-long block failed, I decided to vote no on the pi weeks because at this point US has a virtually 100 percent chance of getting that sentence, as we still have yet to have a single editor vote to acquit him from that one. -- Goatspeed. 07:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * In case pi weeks/months both have a supermajority, what will happen? Kevs  Ping!  17:36, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * He’s blocked for pi months. Christopher (talk) 18:00, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So if it would be 12:0 for pi months and 4:2 for perma, he'd be permabanned? Kevs  Ping!  18:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes. Christopher (talk) 18:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * ? I thought it would be whichever got more support. Gale5050 (talk) 19:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah should be whatever gets more support and less oppose. The better ratio. 19:28, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Is this mentioned in the community standards? Kevs  Ping!  19:44, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No but neither is Christopher's idea. I think the best way is a runoff, so if pi weeks and months both get 2/3, there is a week runoff, where say, if pi months wins 11-4, we proceed with that, no other options (kind of like those senate races in Georgia). Gale5050 (talk) 21:50, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It’s not my idea, just how things have always been done. A runoff would make everything take longer than needed, but I wouldn’t be opposed to a different system that still relied on one vote. That’s a discussion for the community standards talk page though. Christopher (talk) 22:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I will start one now. Gale5050 (talk) 22:24, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok, the discussion is at RationalWiki talk:Community Standards, please do feel free to participate there as well. Gale5050 (talk) 22:28, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Yea

 * 1) Christopher (talk) 14:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) --RWRW (talk) 14:49, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) —cosmikdebris talk stalk 14:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 4) Scream!! (talk) 14:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 5) Thanks for informing me!  15:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 6) Omicron (talk) 16:41, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 7) Bongolian (talk) 16:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 8) Well deserved, block length just right. Harry Potter (talk) 17:00, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 9) One could hope this would convince him to be less of a pest. They'd be wrong of course, but they could hope... 17:07, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 10) -Flandres (talk) 17:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 11) To prevent further disruption. I have doubts behavior would change. I only hope the block is enough to signal that the trolling must come to end. But the month block shows we're still giving the user probably a few chances left. If the disruption doesn't stop at least the next blocks will show we already tried. 17:14, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 12) Why keep tolerating a user who is both disruptive/toxic AND  of no value to the site.  Shabi  DOO  17:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 13) Sure enough. 18:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 14) We gave them enough chances. Plutocow (talk) 18:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * and the agreement on a finite block rather than indefinite is yet another chance. 18:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) In agreement with GC in terms of comment. ℕoir LeSable (talk) 21:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, juust right. Long enough to be effective (given how rarely attention-whoring shitposters actually maintain interest in just one account after pi months anyway), short enough to not be unnecessarily heavy-handed. -- Goatspeed. 07:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) In the style of his typing patterns: PLEASE GIVE ME MORE ATTENTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 07:26, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) As per my post on the π weeks. GeeJayK (talk) 16:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) Reference my comment in coop. Techpriest (talk) 17:32, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 4) Perhaps he should take a break during the summer. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 02:34, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 5) Kauri0.o (talk) 00:17, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 6) Per basic human logic. JJPMas ter 23:08, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 7)  Leucippus Talk 22:56, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 8) Since permaban won't pass.. User:Kevlarstar (talk) 06:35, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Yea

 * 1) I wavered a bit, but I’m coming down here.  23:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) I'm just going to put a vote here, even though it is not likely to pass. He is only here to get an emotional reaction out of us so he can tell himself he "owned the libs-" since he is here in bad faith there is no point in keeping him around.-Flandres (talk) 23:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) In that case, I'll support GC. Bongolian (talk) 23:13, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 4) Why delay the inevitable? The way things are going, it looks like Unclescrooge will be blocked for 3.14 months, he'll come back in September, be the same troll he's always been again and then get permabanned. Why not just skip that bit and permaban him now? Spud (talk) 23:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Question - would this permaban be a normal indefinite block that’s appealable or an actual forever block? Gale5050 (talk) 23:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Permabans are generally indefinite and can be appealed, from my understanding. But if you want to appeal, you have to show drastic behavior improvements and such. I mean maybe a few years someone like GR's like, totally changed as a person and it shows and we can unblock... 01:49, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Would it require another coop? Gale5050 (talk) 12:37, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Not sure. If it does, make it hopefully swift. Or maybe go to all things in moderation to get mod and mob consensus. 18:04, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm sure if they want to change, they can create a better behaved sock. :p PanGalacticGargleBlaster (talk) 02:27, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) First time to vote for permaban - and I hope it will be the last time. Kevs  Ping!  06:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) awakening from my slumber just to make my vote count. 08:57, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 4) Someone whose only activity is to start frivolous coop cases is not a positive user for the community. Plutocow (talk) 18:00, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 5) This pest is another UT, and humoring him will not make things any better. 18:08, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 6) If this person wanted to contribute anything of benefit to the community, they would have done so already. But even when faced with a long ban in this very coop, they repeat past behavior even after being asked to stop multiple times. I have no reason to expect that any ban short of permanent will change this pattern. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 22:34, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Nay

 * 1) Omicron (talk) 16:41, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) Really? Why be that harsh? He's already binned and I'm pretty sure that a shorter block will do the trick. Harry Potter (talk) 17:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) If he can straighten up his act. If we have to take him to coop again, he gets PB'd. Yes?  18:29, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Exactly. I fully agree with you Roman. :) Harry Potter (talk) 08:20, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) As much of a pest as he is, this option can probably wait. 14:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) Overall, I tend to support bans only for those that support totalitarian regimes like fascists and tankies and those that evade blocks. I do agree that there are a few exceptions one in a while, but this is not the case yet. GeeJayK (talk) 16:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) I fully believe in a second chance. I have zero faith that he will take it, but I do think he should get that chance. Therefore, right now this is too far. Techpriest (talk) 17:32, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 4) Short of obvious Klansman spambot or whatever, we can wait for users to screw up after monthly ban and then perma. 18:33, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 5) Just ban him again in pi months if he continues to play up.Kauri0.o (talk) 00:18, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * 6) Excessive. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 16:41, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Goat

 * 1) I saw a few people who looked like they’d support a permaban during discussion, I’m surprised no one’s voted for it yet. Christopher (talk) 22:44, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think they meant perma ban as last resort. Gale5050 (talk) 22:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm leaning there as I do think no improvement will be made but I'll be patient. 22:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I would have voted for permaban if it was likely to get 2/3rds. My rational was Scrooge's defamation of GC (RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive126) in addition to everything else. Bongolian (talk) 22:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * That coop got to HMC 5, and was archived within an hour and a half and was against me. However, it was actually good in case for some reason I get disruptive, as just in case it would provide back story, but it was pointless. Gale5050 (talk) 23:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Only if Scrooge follows in 🇰🇪's and Gutless Ragamuffin's footsteps and abuses multiple accounts during the really-long block that it looks like he will get as we still have yet to see any serious objection to it at all, would I say that he should be permanently not welcome here. That being said, I refuse to cast a supermajority-breaking vote against his perma, and would not shed a tear if the mob does indeed vote to throw the book at this clear bad-faith rightist idiot who probably lacks a father figure and the ability to satisfy a woman and is taking it out on tEh LiBz. -- Goatspeed. 07:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Mehhhh we can just stick with the fact he's just a poor quality troll without going into child-parent status or relationship status. 18:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Not conclusive about this at the moment, will decide soon. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 02:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Decision reached. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 16:41, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Hang on
Unclescoorage created many drafts, like Draft:Thom Tillis. Since they are likely to be permabanned, what happens to there drafts? &mdash; Unsigned, by: Gale5050 / talk / contribs
 * There's only seven votes for a ban, with seventeen for a multi-month block. Further, drafts should be assessed not on who made them but on the quality of each draft. 13:37, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Per this, it is the highst one with a supermajority, the perma ban is 7:3, which is a super majority. -Gale5050 (talk) 13:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * A)That could easily change. This vote will be open for days.
 * B) We do not typically delete every contribution the user made to the site just because they were permabanned.-Flandres (talk) 14:05, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ok, we will find out what to do with this later.Gale5050 (talk) 14:29, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Have we a verdict yet? 18:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Scrooge got blocked again
fFr calling another user a "fascist" again. Truth is, nothing will change here, he will be blocked for π months. Can't we just finish this coop a little bit sooner? GeeJayK (talk) 21:05, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * No, but he can be blocked on June 6 or 7th, I don’t know how to add very well. Gale5050 (talk) 21:09, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * [EC]Has to last 7 days minimum, doubt it’ll go much over that minimum. I personally don’t see the point in blocking him when he’ll be gone for 3.14 months so soon but I won’t unblock him. Christopher (talk) 21:11, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Kinda same.Gale5050 (talk) 21:54, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Wait 3 months, see him shitpost again after the block expires, do a swift coop to block him again indefinite. That's probably how it'll pan out. 22:56, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Minimum time is over. I think we can end it,. User:Kevlarstar (talk) 16:32, 6 June 2021 (UTC)