RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive5
< RationalWiki:Chicken coop(Redirected from RationalWiki:Administrative Abuse/Archive5)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This is an archive page, last updated 8 December 2018. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page:
<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>, <41>, <42>, <43>, <44>, <45>, <46>, <47>, <48>, <49>, <50>, <51>, <52>, <53>, <54>, <55>, <56>, <57>, <58>, <59>, <60>, <61>, <62>, <63>, <64>, <65>, <66>, <67>, <68>, <69>, <70>, <71>, <72>, <73>, <74>, <75>, <76>, <77>, <78>, <79>, <80>, <81>, <82>, <83>, <84>, <85>, <86>, <87>, <88>, <89>, <90>, <91>, <92>, <93>, <94>, <95>, <96>, <97>, <98>, <99>, <100>, <101>, <102>, <103>, <104>, <105>, <106>, <107>, <108>, <109>, <110>, <111>, <112>, <113>, <114>, <115>, <116>, <117>, <118>, <119>, <120>, <121>, <122>, <123>, <124>, <125>, <126>, <127>, <128>, <129>, <130>, <131>, <132>, <133>, <134>, <135>, <136>, <137>, <138>
, (back)
Irrationalatheist.[edit]
User is abusing bin/block privileges. To whit: Three non-friendly blocks vs. Earthland in a 24 hour period. Vandal binned a new user after a single talk page edit. Suggest tarring and feathering. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 20:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Support. -- =w= 21:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Suggest egg & flour attack, followed by toilet papering. It's more fun & easier to wash out than the tar & feathers. WẽãšẽĩõĩďMethinks it is a Weasel 21:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- 3 non-friendly blocks in a 24 hours period is too few. 21:05, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Promote.--BobIt's cold! 21:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Plus two previous non-friendly blocks and a totally-uncalled-for vandal bin? I'm not so sure. I'd promote for a while at least. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- IR is too ready with the bin & block. Seems to use them as argument points. Promote. yummy & honey(or marmalade) 21:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Plus two previous non-friendly blocks and a totally-uncalled-for vandal bin? I'm not so sure. I'd promote for a while at least. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 21:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Promote.--BobIt's cold! 21:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- 3 non-friendly blocks in a 24 hours period is too few. 21:05, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Suggest egg & flour attack, followed by toilet papering. It's more fun & easier to wash out than the tar & feathers. WẽãšẽĩõĩďMethinks it is a Weasel 21:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
72 hours? A week? A day? TheoryOfPractice (talk) 21:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Agree with a promotion - then lets see what he has to say for himself. Acei9 21:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- LANCB. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 21:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- (ECX2)Three days I think. We don't do ideological blocks. I've been avoiding Earthland's essay/talkpage saga (FFS everyone, if you don't like his stuff, don't read it!), maybe other people should too if they can't control themselves. Totnesmartin (talk) 21:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- I have already demoted him. When to restore is up to you guys. -- =w= 21:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- I think three days is reasonable. Did he really bin that new editor after one edit? ħuman 21:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- LANCB. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 21:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
He did. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 21:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, because the link above doesn't show it. That was why I was agreeing, since EL can unblock himself (right?) and is equally nasty to IR. But binning a noob is bad. ħuman 00:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
- I say a week promotion and three day block, unless it is too late to input my opinions, in which case I would like a sandwich and pickle. And maybe some salt & vinegar chips (That's crisps to all you Brits). --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 22:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Three days of promotion is enough, although it would be nice to hear from him. - π 23:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Looking at his user page, it looks like he's leaving and never coming back. I assume for the crime of not agreeing with his actions, thus making us irrational and Uncyclopedia and so forth. --Kels (talk) 23:11, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- He can have his rights back in three days regardless of whether he has left or not. His new sock will earn them in that amount of time any way. - π 23:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Looking at his user page, it looks like he's leaving and never coming back. I assume for the crime of not agreeing with his actions, thus making us irrational and Uncyclopedia and so forth. --Kels (talk) 23:11, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Three days of promotion is enough, although it would be nice to hear from him. - π 23:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)