RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation/Archive54

GrammarCommie
Ok, I'm not sure what rule specifically this edit from GC violates, but I'm sure it's something. It's not quite threatening suicide, but definitely related. Given a bit of history, does anyone else want to weigh in here? 05:29, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for bringing that up. I found GC's comment to be disturbing and not funny at all. I am also not sure if it violates any rules, but suicide is not something people can joke about. I would like to hear GC's perspective and apology. LongStylus (talk) 05:33, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This is not the first time he has threatened such actions. He has threatened self-harm in the past and even brought it up unprompted, knowing full well that some people, like me, struggle with self-harm and are vulnerable to his comments. Due to the extreme, graphic, disturbing nature of the comments including history of said comments unprompted and for the health of community discourse, I have taken urgent immediate action including desysopping and a 9 hour block to prevent him from possibly making more explicit, disturbing comments that no one should have to read, and I recommend further action, including a potential sysoprevoke and a pi week block for repeat offense. He cannot be trusted with sysop tools. I do not want to impose these powers immediately but the nature of the comments are unacceptable for this wiki and I hope people understand and accept my decisions. 06:04, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The comments being directed at me, I have to recuse myself unless necessary, but if you or other moderators feel this is the best course of action I won't oppose it. He does tend to direct a bit of vitriol my way on various topics.  From the outside, how much of said vitriol is earned on my part, how much is excessive?  06:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The recent comments by GC are absolutely inappropriate and should not have been directed at you at all, regardless of your stance on this exchange. Severe disagreements can be made, insults maybe exchanged, but bringing up suicide in that manner crosses far into excessive vitriol that would be considered unacceptable, if not outright offensive in nearly every circumstance in most functioning circles. 06:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh dear. GC again. I'm uncomfortable hearing GC's sentence (in that edit). I sometimes imagine myself doing that, but stating that in public space (like, in non-vent spaces) ain't cool. I hope GC does okay during the 9-hour period (and some time thereafter) and that he won't be vitriolic here after that. 11:02, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * That edit is very disturbing and completely unbecoming of a sysop. --Andrew5 (talk) 12:00, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I’d hoped GC had learned his lesson after the last time. Given that he hasn’t, I support punitive action. We shouldn’t have to read graphic ideation like that. 12:09, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah... I completely understand his frustration at that whole thread and with corruptuser for his edgy takes (for lack of a better phrase), but that was too far. Inmate XIII (talk) 12:12, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Epic Games got banned for pi months for similar offenses (jokes of self harm are severe, especially as a repeated issue.) GC is treating this as a battleground. Either pi week or pi month ban is necessary, and of course GC won't have sysop during that time. Nothing less, I think, will get the point across that editing can't be treated as a battleground. When you look through the past coop cases and see what Scrooge, USHA, LTEC and Epic got pi months ban for; I'd argue this is more severe as it is a direct threat of harm, which IMO is the worst offense. --Andrew5 (talk) 12:15, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking back over those cases, they were all banned for being extremely disruptive. GC isn't that, he just has a severe temper and responds poorly to editors using flowery language to disguise either illogical or morally repugnant arguments, especially when they frame it in a way they know will piss him off. Not that that's a defense of his behavior, but it should be taken into consideration. Inmate XIII (talk) 12:58, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Even though LTEC was recent, I wasn't totally sure of the circumstances, nor for Scrooge, but USHA I remember, and Epic you were around for. But again, threats of harm are severe. If I saw that, I would've actually dialed a hotline,and if it was to others I would've called 911 if I knew their identidy. This is serious. --Andrew5 (talk) 13:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * InmateXIII: That severe temper is extremely disruptive, and there's zero excuse for it. DuceMoosolini already linked to a diff of an all caps rant. This was not the first time he did all caps either, actually kind of far from it. 14:54, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thought this was joking, but considering how the comments degraded overtime, I'm not so sure. TranslationForAll (talk) 12:52, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * GC has been around a while, and was also involved behind the scenes at various points. I don't know how fair it truly is, but every group bends the rules for members based on how much they contributed.  Just look at the real world; the doctors who attend all the meetings and are involved in the societies with their faces known to all the other doctors are not the ones who are grilled by the ethics committees, every jury to ever exist will pre-judge a defendant based on whether they think the defendant is someone they want as a neighbor.  13:52, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * That comment crosses the line of civility and good faith discussions we have in the CS (which mind you, is pretty hard to cross, before anyone accuses me of being selective). Suggesting a 3 day block to cool off and possibly an IBAN with Cory, this isn't the first time that GC has started a fight with Cory that crossed a few lines (even if I don't disagree with the frustrations that led to those comments). Remember the other person behind the screen. Don't steep to personal attacks, even if the person is being willfully ignorant. Take a moment to breathe in and out before you start taking pages out of "colorful insults and threats, deluxe edition". -- Techpriest (talk) 13:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * While inmate 8 is right in that some people wilfully or indirectly provoke GC, none of that should make the excessive number of tirades something that should be tolerated (think a less frequent but more severe Oxy). One loses count of how many times GC's snark has elevated to seriously unpleasant and sometimes worse to the absolutely corrosive. I support Techprists proposal. Shabi  DOO  14:42, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Knowing GC for years, I know he's not joking at all. 14:54, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I also do not think this comment and a history of similar comments should lead to a three day block. Due to the severity of the comment and history of severe comments, the situation should be treated as a severe breach. He should have a significant longer block and no sysop powers. I also remind you that he has misused sysop powers out of poor temper including user rights removal on other people and unblocking himself and continuing his tirade after I tried to get him to stop making explicit and disturbing comments. 15:06, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Interesting. Maybe the 9 hour block should just be left there. A 3.14 month desysop could work a bit. TranslationForAll (talk) 15:09, 25 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Am I allowed to respond before you lynch me? 15:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Seriously, I was blocked and held on trial while I was fucking sleeping. Without talkpage access, without the ability to respond when asked. 15:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Nobody's gonna lynch you. Proceed to respond. TranslationForAll (talk) 15:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Somehow I doubt they won't, but whatever. Now, as to my public statement, yeah I went a bit too far, and for that I apologize. However Cory's crap is fucking Race & IQ garbage with the race part swapped out for twins, and is toxic dogshit for all the same reasons. And I for one am sick of him just barging in with halfbaked notions that he pulled out of his fucking ass and decided to vomit up into the saloon. What's worse is when he fucking doubles down when pressed and refuses to even conceive of the possibility he might be wrong. I'm sorry, but that kind of Dunning-Krueger nonsense grates at me. Now, if you must insist on banning me from interacting with Cory, you damn fucking better be ready to address his crap, because I fucking won't be able to. There, apologies where due, gripes, where due, warning where due. You may proceed with your show trial. 15:38, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * TP, would the proposed iban be 2way? I'm not sure if my own comments towards GC have ever crossed a line beyond maybe something from like 2 years ago.  But if a 2way iban is necessary and would solve the issue...  15:40, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * See what I mean about refusing to even entertain the idea of fault? Can't even think of responding or considering things from my perspective, no sir. Straight to trying make the issue go away... 15:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Could y'all weigh in on GC's claim that the twin thing is "race and IQ garbage"? Because if you want me to get into that nonsense in particular, I could point out that a "racial gap" used to be caused by things like "hookwork epidemics the states didn't care about" or "poor neighborhoods breathing in clouds of lead"; it's important to acknowledge that a gap had existed and why, rather than plugging up our ears and pretending it didn't happen.  Is Africa today suffering a gap?  Oh really, people starving or suffering from easily cured diseases don't do as well in school, who could possibly have guessed that? /sarcasm  16:04, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Please do weigh in. Fun fact, "race" is a largely ad hoc category, and IQ is a severely flawed metric. Oh, and do show where I denied environmental factors playing a role in mental development. Oh, and do note that Cory is suddenly really interested in variable factors, when he thinks it supports him. Note how he just sort of ignored me when I pointed out he was fucking basing his conclusions about adults off of fucking reductive takes about fucking pre-fucking-natal development. Really fucking interesting that. Really fucking interesting indeed. 16:14, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I am particularly uninterested in the dubious nonsense that led to another one of your pointless corrosive moments GC even if it involved race, class, gender, sexuality or any other category. You sound slightly like Andrew at the moment with "yeah but" and "that's not fair" without listening to the very valid beefs the community has with you. Despite sometimes being provoked, none of this justifies how severely you lash out or your most corrosive moments. And you rarely (if ever) acknowledge this, and usually act as though this is reasonable, we should just deal with it or even "fuck you". Many of us don't want to deal with it. Do some inner-reflection and acknowledge that multiple users (many of whom in this conversation are very reasonable people) have the right to an absolutely minimal expectation of civility (and keep in mind that baseline is VERY low on rationalwiki) and not being attacked in this way or having to read your toxic tirades. Shabi  DOO  16:23, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I said I went to far. I did not say shit was unfair. I complained about being tried en absentee while I was asleep and unable to respond. And I complained about being blocked, without talkpage access, during that same period. I acknowledged what you all asked me to acknowledge. Fairness has fuck all to do with it. 16:46, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) GC's comment was uncivil, particularly because he had been warned before not to discuss self harm in a seemingly flippant sort of way like that. 2) Interaction bans are always 2-way. 3) We don't know when anyone sleeps, and the block was only for 9 hours — a cooling off period, presumably. 4) I think if GC will just agree to stop that behavior, and keeps to it, this can be resolved. 5) If GC is really having suicidal ideation, he's smart enough to know where to get professional help, but we do have links to resources on the Suicide page. Bongolian (talk) 17:58, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I said I went a bit too far. I don't know what else to say here to convey my understanding of the situation. 18:07, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * A bit too far? GC, that's an extreme comment that, if you were to make it most other communities, especially in a repeated fashion like this would most likely get you banned for a long time. 19:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * LGM is right. On Wikipedia that's an automatic permaban. Probably is on Uncyclopedia too. And I believe Fandom as well. Please review RationalWiki:Legal_FAQ, where it says, RationalWiki takes all threats of harm to self or others very seriously. Such statements will be removed from the wiki and all relevant information about the editor (including IP address) will be forwarded to appropriate authorities. This should be taken as a threat of self harm and proceed as such. --Andrew5 (talk) 19:48, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, let's just civilly talk about how Twins apparently have lower IQ. Mengele would be proud. GC just blows up for zero reason and that's totes more important than fucking soft eugenics. Fuck it. Fuck it! If this is the standard you set, fuck this site. Go civilly talk about fucking dehumanizing people using fucking garbage methodology that's been proven to be wrong for around a hundred years now. Fuck that shit. I shouldn't have fucking apologized. 19:56, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I retract my apology, all of you can go fuck yourselves, you disgusting fucking swine. You make me fucking sick. 19:57, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

The above is just proof that GC needs a significant sanction, they hav always used an aggrevated town (including RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Hegemony), but this is just tripling down. Andrew5 (talk) 20:07, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It's proof you'd defend the holocaust if Hitler talked politely about it. This site doesn't care about combating pseudoscience or anything built off of pseudoscience. You care about fucking circlejerking about how fucking righteous you are while fucking allowing fucking bullcrap as long as it isn't rude. Always as long as it isn't rude. We can't be rude while we dehumanize people now can we? No, we have to civilly talk about how certain groups are inferior to others.... 20:11, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, who gave you authority Andrew? You aren't a mod and no one fucking gave you a fucking badge. No one made you a fucking lawyer. You're a fucking garbage dipshit who sucks USSR jackboot and defends fucking authoritarians all for the sake of your fantasy civility bullshit. All so you can feel like you aren't the garbage human being you actually are. You play cop on wikis so you can compensate for the fact that in real life you're worth fuck all. 20:16, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Well at least we have more evidence...Andrew5 (talk) 20:18, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Could've been just "Fine. Message noted. I won't inflict serious shit again". Now it's onward to hastings. TranslationForAll (talk) 20:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah well, sucks to have stands I guess. That would me with the standard by the way. I ate crow, and in that moment I did so deservedly. But hey, people have to dogpile and get their kicks in, even when they throw whatever standards they nominally hold to away to do so... 20:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Andrew, shut the fuck up please. GC, I don't give a damn about the direct argument. Attack the argument, not the person making it. You've been warned before about flippantly using self-harm threats for shock value, and this broadly compares to that. If Cory breaks the CS, take it to here. If he's being an ignorant fuck, just respond with the troll template and move on. In addition, stop making suggestions of harming yourself. Good lord. Otherwise, I back what Bongolian says in addition to an IBAN because this isn't the first time an argument between GC and CU has spiraled out of control. IBANs are two-way to avoid any cases of intended (or unintended) gloating over the other for having an IBAN. It generally doesn't matter if both parties are some arbitrary value of "equally guilty". -- Techpriest (talk) 20:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, Mengele conducted ghastly experiments on twins. It's a stretch to draw the Saloon discussion as a parallel to Mengele. Cory was wrong on both the specifics (some Nobelists have had twins), and the generalities (the general problems of IQ, and a supposed quantitative difference from non-twins that is not necessarily even statistically significant). The discussion could have ended there, but it got inflammatory. Bongolian (talk) 20:35, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Before I'll accept an IBan, could you show me where I have a (relatively recent) history of being toxic towards GC, rather than "being a shithead" or something and GC going off the handle on me? If so, IBan might be for the best  20:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I assure you, Cory's argument and Mengele's worldview are made of the same stuff. 20:44, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * But hey, he only discounted the entirety of the human developmental process and all the accompanying variables, which need to be accounted for for accurate psychological testing civilly. 20:46, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * And again, I ate crow when told to. I realized I had fucked up. But because I didn't use the words everyone wanted to fucking hear while doing so, I'm the bad guy. 20:49, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm actually pissed now. Not at Cory, not anymore. I was annoyed with him and said shit I shouldn't have. No, now I'm fucking pissed at everyone who's dogpiling me to tell me how bad I am, and how I should have apologized with different phrasing, and oh that GC is so crass and rude, heaven help our poor civility obsessed frailty. Now I'm pissed at the rest of you. 20:52, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * That's not the correct application of the tone trolling accusation. You were told before to cut the inflammatory language. Yes Mengele was a sadistic monster. Bringing him up in this discussion is also extremely offensive. Anyway those 9 hours are looking more and more justified as well as a desysop. I'm pushing to sysoprevoke too. 20:52, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh I fully expect you to just keep escalating. 20:54, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * After all, you're dealing with someone who doesn't react well to threats and has lost their temper, the smart move is to keep threatening them so you can bait them, and then punish them for the shit you baited them into. Real smart. Dishonest as all fuck, but smart. 20:57, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Acknowledging your behavior is a start, but it's up to you how to manage your temper, which you're doing a very poor job at it. Right now, you're just blatantly causing disruption with your aggressive language, offensive comparisons, baseless accusations of dishonesty, and whatnot. My job here is to contain your behavior and advise you to knock it off. It's up to you how you respond, but I don't think your actions is earning you respect or agreement from others. 21:10, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

(EC) It's not like I don't trust LGM. But GC and her had a squabble only a few days ago, so I do think her judgment might be a bit too biased, even if it's not her intention. I think other mods could handle this specific case better. Cory's relationship with GC have always puzzled me, and I while I've seen GC using words like "hack" and "retard" to refer to him, I've also seen him praising Cory more than 10 times, and except for a few rare occasions like this one, Cory doesn't seen to care. Maybe the community does care though, but you can't put their relationship on the same level as Cory and Oxy. GeeJayK (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of the squabble where GC tried and failed to remove me of moderator rights, but I'm still of firm conviction that his GC's comments directed at CorruptUser are reprehensible and his own characterization as "acting a bit out of line" vastly underestimates the severity of his comments, especially if you factor in his history of making similar offensive comments. Simply acknowledging he misbehaved is not going to cut it, as he was given several chances to stop it (whereas in most other communities, he certainly would've gotten the boot already), but it seems like it's not working. 21:18, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * But how will removing his sysop rights make things better? Honest question. GeeJayK (talk) 21:22, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * GrammarCommie has a tendency to unblock himself if other people try to block him to have him stop a conflict. Bringing up relevant logs is a bit troublesome but on January 8 for instance in the block log, as well as July 29 of last year where two moderators blocked him (Bongolian and me) where he defied them and unblocked. Also see a block unblock exchange in March 25 where GrammarCommie DID make an explicit comment that DuceMoosolini linked here earlier. I had to remove his sysop rights and block him for 9 hours to prevent further disruption by him, as I do think it is more likely than not he'll try to unblock himself and make more inappropriate comments. His block expired long ago, and now he's lashing out, flaming people and making more of a scene. He additionally has a history of trying to mess with other people's sysop rights during any given conflict and my sysop removal was knowing this in mind and trying to prevent him to potentially remove CorruptUser's rights or trying to remove rights of other people that he accused of "dogpiling" and "dishonesty". 21:29, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I think my relationship with GC is thusly.
 * I sort of understand him, since he's an Aspie and I'm an ex-Aspie (i.e., I was diagnosed, but I've worked on it enough with enough compensation from other skills that I wouldn't be diagnosed today). I respect a lot of what he says, he's far from "dumb", but he has two problems that are common with us Aspies.  First is that he has the Manichean view that every Aspie suffers from to some extent.  Either it's This, or That, no nuance.  Take the twins discussions.  In GC's mind, "CU states there's a difference in IQ between twins and singletons" = "CU is Mengele".  No nuance.  No further ability to analyze what's be discussed.  Either you claim there are no differences, or you are a Nazi.  The second is the emotional regulation, again, something I constantly have to keep a handle on because I too don't have complete control, it's not something you Normies have to worry about nearly as much.  That's also a big problem, GC does need to work on that but for some, it simply can't be fixed.
 * From what I understand, a lot of his praise is from when he says something and the rest of us listen or implement something. He, like most people anywhere, likes being heard.  21:35, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You don't understand jack shit about me, and your explanation pretty definitively proves so. You want my position, you really should just ask, plain and straight, no leading, no snark. 21:43, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
 * OH for fucks sake, do you really not understand how offensive that saloon bar conversation was are you really that fucking dense???? You're lucky GC was the only one to go off on you. Inmate XIII (talk) 09:53, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, who are you again? 15:29, 26 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Conversations may become offensive, especially when they are taken personally. I don't know that GC's statement was anything other than a militant expression of frustration. The natural balm is to let the matter rest with an advisory: if you get angry with CU, take a breath. I don't imagine there is anything I can say to make you less upset. At this point it is time to stop saying things. Ariel31459 (talk) 19:17, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It is not civil behavior to talk about self-harm in a casual, jocular, or manipulative manner. First, it may cause people who have engaged in such behavior in the past to want to repeat it. Second, it can be viewed as manipulative behavior by attempting to put guilt upon the listener if the speaker later commits self-harm. Bongolian (talk) 02:43, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

So proceed? 18:54, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't know if he threw some towels. But I guess so because of the not so pleasant response here. TranslationForAll (talk) 19:01, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If you mean proceed with a vote, then OK. Bongolian (talk) 19:04, 27 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Do you want to present a smorgasbord of penalties, or do you have a simple penalty in mind? I think interaction bans that include moderators are inadvisable.Ariel31459 (talk) 19:32, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * As an aside, I do not like the 'smorgasbord of penalties' that we have sometimes had in votes. It tends to be confusing. It would be better to have fewer choices that still represent a range of opinions. Bongolian (talk) 19:42, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If consents to pledge he will not evoke any kind of homicide reference in personal conversations here, I would prefer a warning with the promise of a summary-judgement block of some duration. Ariel31459 (talk) 20:07, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * By 'smorgashboard of penalities' what exactly do you mean? Are we referring to something like to the degree of RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive130, or something less? --Andrew5 (talk) 20:19, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This probably should've been a coop case. But anyway I'll present several options

-Block- --Pi days-- --Pi weeks-- --Pi months-- --No block--

-Sysoprevoke?- --Yes-- --No--

-Interaction ban with CorruptUser?- --Yes-- --No--
 * Is this good? For block vote, whichever option gets most votes win, and we preferably have a comfortable margin of three or more votes. 20:34, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Would it not make the most sense to use the median vote to determine the block length? (Or if you wanted a 2/3 majority, the 1/3 quantile). Vomitorium (talk) 20:44, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * You can always open up a coop and link to this ATIM; many coops (like Scrooge in Coop127) start out here. I personally think we should have the lengths seperate, and not to pi days, because pi days always fails on the grounds of "too little to be doing anything useful". (That and also the original incident was 3/4 of pi days ago.) But that's just my opinion. --Andrew5 (talk) 21:23, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I think Chicken coop/Archive130 had excessive options. Yes, I think pi days is pointless. Sysoprevoke, if an option, should be clarified that it would extend past the block. Bongolian (talk) 02:02, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The issue is people have their own ideas for sanctions and if not properly discussed, it sounds like the one setting up the vote has a monopoly on punishment options, people whose ideas were excluded simply add their own. We should probably formalize this at some point. --Andrew5 (talk) 11:44, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Median vote leads to strategic voting. "I want 3 months, so I'll vote for 50 years so the median becomes 3 months!!!"  17:05, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Minder that discussions on vote policy belong on the talkpage of CS, not here. How we apply block length is also listed there. -- Techpriest (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Yea

 * 1) Threats of self-harm are absolutely unacceptable. GC's been warned about this before, and after a certain point there needs to be a line drawn in the sand. Plutocow (talk) 18:01, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Guy needs a clue that we're tired of his histrionics-Hastur! (talk) 18:53, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Given that it's not the first time, a warning is insufficient. Bongolian (talk) 19:24, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) Nope. I'm shocked GC is getting a free pass for his disturbing and extremely inappropriate comments that he has extensive history of doing, got told off for, and then 180'd his applogy on a dime and doubled down when people called him out for his remarks, with him ending on calling us all "fucking swines"??? He should stay out for a while. I personally don't want more "I want to [redacted] to myself" shit from him for a long time, a very long time. 20:12, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 5) Could use a wikibreak. 20:15, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 6) My informal vindication proceedings begin... Ushit the dipshit (I shit, Ushit...) 21:03, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Don't think that this absolves you of any of the debauchery you've pulled off yourself, Ushit. Plutocow (talk) 22:32, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  Shabi  DOO  21:06, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Well something should happen so that the standards of discussion actually exist. Vomitorium (talk) 00:33, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Plenty of coops have happened with no action. RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive124, RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive129. --Andrew5 (talk) 00:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * , you're making a fallacious argument Two wrongs make a right (we didn't punish before, therefore we shouldn't punish now) and Balance fallacy (comparing this case to two unrelated coop cases). Bongolian (talk) 05:41, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * No fallacy intended, I was simply trying to state having no action in a coop or ATiM case is acceptable. Also, I did vote for an iban, --Andrew5 (talk) 11:11, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  Leucippus Salva veritate 01:48, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) GC needs a break for a bit. 03:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Spud (talk) 11:30, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) Since I decided not to vote sysoprevoke, this gets my vote. --Andrew5 (talk) 11:37, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 5) I don't know if GC will read this or not given that he hasn't edited in a few days, but I am concerned about his well-being. I hope he'll take some time off to get help and mellow his short-temper. I don't hate him and I don't want to lynch him. He is welcome to come back and edit after making some self-improvements. After all, he's been editing on this wiki for a while. LongStylus (talk) 12:13, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * He was online last night, just not on RW. 12:54, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Nay

 * 1) GeeJayK (talk) 16:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Excessive. -- Techpriest (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Unnecessary. Ariel31459 (talk) 17:19, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Blocks are a bit much. If they're causing issues without sysop, we can block them then. --Andrew5 (talk) 16:45, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Blocks won’t work that much. TranslationForAll (talk) 17:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Ineligible. 17:32, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) —cosmikdebris talk stalk 17:42, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Scream!! (talk) 19:34, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Na Acei9 23:14, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) G Man (talk) 01:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Nay

 * 1) Bit too long in my opinion. I mean, we have banned others for longer for doing less, but, history and all.  16:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) GeeJayK (talk) 16:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Ludicrous. -- Techpriest (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) Untoward.Ariel31459 (talk) 17:19, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 5) Blocks are a bit much. If they're causing issues without sysop, we can block them then. --Andrew5 (talk) 16:45, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * TranslationForAll (talk) 17:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Ineligible 17:33, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) —cosmikdebris talk stalk 17:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Excessive, especially as unlike Scrooge, UShit, LTEC, etc., GC is actually a productive user. Plutocow (talk) 18:02, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Plutocow, for the firsthand demonstration soundly proving why humor-craving individuals need not rely primarily on The Onion nor The Babylon Bee as a means of sparking their daily guffaw. Ushit the dipshit (I shit, Ushit...) 02:25, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) --RWRW (talk) 18:12, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Scream!! (talk) 19:34, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Too much. 20:16, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) Nope Acei9 23:15, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 5) Vomitorium (talk) 00:22, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 6) 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  00:34, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 7) G Man (talk) 01:46, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 8) Excessive. 03:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 9) Too severe, although I encourage GC to consider taking a break longer than pi weeks of his own volition. LongStylus (talk) 14:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Yea

 * GrammarCommie has a poor temper. As LGM pointed out, on both July 29 and January 8, they had to be temporarily desysopped for a quick block, when they were abusing sysop rights. While USHA was partly to blame, they're bad faith revoking of sysop rights was also problematic back in July also. Every good admin action by GC can be done with another sysop. They should learn to actually engage in civil discussions; admin access allows them to bypass that by threatening, so we can take that away. --Andrew5 (talk) 16:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * There are some arguments against this, but trigger moments can happen. Maybe he can have a chance to earn it back after cooling down. TranslationForAll (talk) 17:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Your account isn’t old enough. Christopher (talk) 17:39, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Nay

 * 1) GeeJayK (talk) 16:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Point to concrete log events of right abuses to do with this case before proposing this sanction. In addition, GC is one of the more consistent, long-lasting spam cleaners on this site (something which is commendable). -- Techpriest (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Incommensurate.Ariel31459 (talk) 17:20, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) No.—cosmikdebris talk stalk 17:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 5) --RWRW (talk) 18:12, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 6) He didn't abuse his user rights. 18:40, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Not in this dispute, but they have in the past. For the Jan 8 stuff, please see User_talk:GrammarCommie/Archive6 and User_talk:Andrew5/Archive1. --Andrew5 (talk) 19:00, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Blocking a sysop isn’t an abuse of user rights. As for blocking you, you should’ve raised the issue at ATiM at the time if you wanted consequences. There’s no need to bring up old drama. Christopher (talk) 19:07, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I was actually going to, but GC imposed their 4th(!) re-block of me before I could save the edit, and before I was unblocked for good, a moderator had given them a formal warning, and I knew if I raised an ATiM it would've been shot down. --Andrew5 (talk) 19:19, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Christopher (talk) 19:07, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Scream!! (talk) 19:35, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Also too much. 20:17, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) Nope Acei9 23:15, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 5) Vomitorium (talk) 00:20, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 6) 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  00:34, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 7) G Man (talk) 01:47, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 8) Excessive. (I mean, only sysoprevoke during the block duration. The sysoprevoke would be removed when the block expires.) 03:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 9) GC does a good job of cleaning spam. LongStylus (talk) 14:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Goat

 * 1) Note sure on this one. GC is useful when he's calm.  16:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Abstain. Thought this over some more. --Andrew5 (talk) 11:26, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Yea

 * 1) This is the root of the whole problem, and CU wasn't totally innocent either. This would calm down the Saloon, and therefore gets my vote. --Andrew5 (talk) 16:31, 28 March 2022 (UTC) Inelligible to vote.
 * How am I ineligible? I have over 75 edits and over 3 months tenure. (Today's actually my 1 year anniversary.) --Andrew5 (talk) 16:45, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh nvm, thought you were created in Jan. My mistake.  16:51, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It's understandable.I've shifted through phases before. --Andrew5 (talk) 16:52, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Per my original statements. I don't care if CU thinks he's innocent, then he shouldn't see it as a punishment for him. Our job is, in part, to prevent HCM and keep conduct at an expected level of disorderly. GC and CU together means GC tends to fly off the handle, because in GCs mind, CU is willfully ignorant and doesn't tend to listen what he says, while CU stokes up his anger unintentionally. Both are at this from good faith, it's just that good faith in this case means discussions turn into a battlezone between these two, which we should prevent. -- Techpriest (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The only real option. TranslationForAll (talk) 17:29, 28 March 2022 (UTC) First edit Mar 4 2022. Ineligible.  17:30, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1)  Shabi  DOO  21:06, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Nay

 * 1) GeeJayK (talk) 16:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) Again, please explain.  17:03, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) Inadvisable. Ariel31459 (talk) 17:21, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 4) —cosmikdebris talk stalk 17:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 5) I fail to see what these accomplish-Hastur! (talk) 18:54, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 6) Christopher (talk) 19:08, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 7) Scream!! (talk) 19:35, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * No, especially since Cory is a sitting mod. 20:18, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * "is a mod" shouldn't be a factor, regardless of what I'd prefer. 21:32, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Mods have been ibanned before, please see RationalWiki:Chicken_coop/Archive121. --Andrew5 (talk) 21:43, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Interaction bans are fucking stupid. You know you can just ignore people right? Acei9 23:15, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Nope. The interaction ban between you and Oxy brought this wiki some well needed peace before she left. Shabi  DOO  10:07, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒   talk  00:34, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 2) G Man (talk) 01:48, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 3) LongStylus (talk) 14:06, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Göt

 * 1) Going to weigh in on this here. Can someone please tell me where my interaction with GC was inappropriate?  If Alice and Bob are both insulting each other, even if Alice was "more" at fault, an Iban for both wouldn't be out of the question, but I'm curious how I'm at any significant amount of fault in this case.  16:27, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * See what I said on Yea. The problem is that interactions between you two tend to devolve exceedingly quickly. In your case, due to excessive seemingly willful ignorance. That's the sort of behavior that is extremely frustrating to respond to, and as we've seen several times, GC doesn't handle that very well. IBAN between you two solves that. Doesn't matter if you're not at fault. -- Techpriest (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with TP except that I think you can moderate yourself. I expect you will be able to do so now that this has been brought to your attention.Ariel31459 (talk) 17:31, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I can try to.  17:35, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Uh. Abstain for now. 08:45, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Conclusion?
Been going on for a bit, shall it close? TranslationForAll (talk) 18:34, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The vote was opened over a week ago. It would mean nothing passes, pi week ban failing by a hair (65% support, 13-7.) --Andrew5 (talk) 01:34, 8 April 2022 (UTC)