RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive54

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>, <5>, <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>, <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>

, (new)(back)

Devandalbinning FAMAS

Who is FAMAS? They're that guy who always refers to themself in the third person and has an aversion to good grammar. They appear to be sane, just difficult to understand. Many of their edits are reverted for being unreadable, rather than spam or unsourced. They've asked to be unvandalbinned. Any thoughts, everyone? Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 16:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

"This User" finds FAMAS to be annoying, but hardly the worst person we have let run around on this site. I'm fine with him being out of the vandal bin, on the condition that they make a good faith attempt at being less annoying. CorruptUser (talk) 07:25, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

On the stipulation that flooding the site with lame edits will land him/them/whatever in the hole again (without the need for a coop decision), I support unvandalbinning. I was always one to support giving people second chances. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 11:52, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Devandalbinning Avenger

I hereby petition and ask for me myself and I, Avenger to be let out of the current penalty of being in the bin. Please consider my plea with the same honesty and sincerity as the abovementioned plea. I rest my case. Avengerofthe BoN (talk) 20:36, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

How about this? No, no, and HELL NO. Are you upset your newest sockpuppet account Worzelpete (really clever, these names, huh?) can only edit every thirty minutes? What's wrong with that? Are you incapable of making good contributions without being allowed to edit without limits? You edit warred for months on end, and along with Arisboch caused several goodstanding users to leave. You then created multiple sockpuppet accounts to continue pursuing your agenda here. Why would we forgive all this? NO. Applesauce (talk) 21:02, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

No. αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 21:10, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

No thanks. —Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 21:38, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but how the hell do you guys know Avenger created all of those socks? I'm not saying we should debin Avenger yet, but I don't see how any of those accounts are his sockpuppets. On the other hand, it is weird that User:Worzelpete has a blank userpage... RoninMacbeth (talk) 03:25, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

By the way, I'm going to vote No on debinning Avenger. RoninMacbeth (talk) 07:26, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Defended you in the past. You didn't learn then. Prove you've learned now. Until then, bin. CorruptUser (talk) 04:57, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

No no no no no no no. No. No to unbin, no to a change in attitude, no to it all. Avenger cannot be allowed back. We should continue being his socks when they act up. PB (talk) 05:44, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

He can come back if he proves that he's reformed. But due to the overwhelming evidence that he only causes trouble, the amount of effort he'd have to put in in order to be let back in would be a pretty high bar indeed. CorruptUser (talk) 08:57, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

NewFrenchHotness

I responded to a post in the Saloon Bar, and NewFrenchHotness suddenly and viciouly attacked my character and personality. This has happened several times in the past, but this is the first time I've actually reported it. The severity of this particular attack (calling someone a 'sociopathic cunt') I think warrants some form of community punishment. What do you guys think? PB (talk) 20:49, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

No. Please spend your time caring about things that actually matter, such as: not this. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 21:09, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

This case does seem pretty bad. I don't understand why anyone here would attack someone and call them a sociopath and a cunt here. It doesn't make much sense and if NewFrenchHotness were an IP address, it would be instantly blocked as abuse. Why are our standards different here? Applesauce (talk) 21:15, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

@Pbfreespace3 If you are really concerned about people attacking your character, treat others how you want to be treated and refrain from attacking every single American's character.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 21:44, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

This issue doesn't appear to be coop related. If the comment seems to harass, either ignore it or remove it. If the harassment continues, report it to a mod. The coop should be used to solve abuse of sysop powers.--Owlman (talk) (mail) 00:13, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

* dons Mod Hat * 

Before this becomes anything worth caring about: I've told NFH to cool it. Please move on, everyone. As the great DJT once said, it's just words. αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 22:22, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Owlman put me into sysoprevoke

This harassment needs to stop! Worzelpete (talk) 23:11, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

We are not going through this again, Avenger. Fuck off already.--Owlman (talk) (mail) 23:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

I hit that button by mistake. Also, who or what is Avenger? Worzelpete (talk) 23:14, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Please! No more of what happened with LH!-(Ir)RationalWikian (talk) 23:56, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

In my opinion, give him another chance. If he blows it again, no more chances.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 05:04, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

You did it again. You're done.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 05:20, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I did what again? Hitting rollback on some random bon shitting over articles? Could you please reconsider and let me out of the bin? Worzelpete (talk) 23:16, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

If I didn't get stripped of my rights over this edit, Worzel shouldn't be stripped of his/hers over that edit. Cheeseburger, go back to your "if he blows it again"-stance. Seems he didn't blow it yet. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 01:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree with the above comment. Worzelpete (talk) 02:02, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll go with the flow.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 03:55, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I'm inclined to believe this person is currently innocent of Avengerhood. They haven't editwarred about Israel nearly enough. Am I wrong? Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 00:39, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Notice his focus on Israel, Zionism, and Glenn Greenwald. Zionism is a big interest of Avenger, and this brand-new user wrote an entire article on it in days. That's a pretty clear interest. Also, the fascination of Israel is another hallmark of Avenger's. Also, Mona loved to use Glenn Greenwald extensively as a source, and Mona basically biased the article in favor of Greenwald, so maybe Avenger wants to undo that. PBfreespace (talk) 02:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

"Also, who or what is Avenger?", this is pretty much his stupid catchphrase. But Worzelpete came around not too long after LH "left" and this tactic of acting civil towards the community has been tried by his Pizza sock and LH sock. I don't care if Avenger sticks around by using a sock because he will just make another one in a couple days; all I ask is that he doesn't get sysop powers so we don't have to deal with his shit again.--Owlman (talk) (mail) 07:10, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Who died and made you king? Worzelpete (talk) 23:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Ooh, that's a good one. The FCP Foundation (talk/stalk) 01:46, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Worzelpete (talk) 20:07, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Not good, I'd guess. B) talk 22:08, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

¡Ay que mundo cruel! Worzelpete (talk) 22:27, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Actually, let's move on to banning Aneris

4/5 Board vote to ban Aneris for trying to use RW as a platform for serious defamation. Now excuse me as I revdel a shitload of shit - David Gerard (talk) 22:03, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Looks like you already did this. This should probably be removed now. Did Aneris contribute anything significant besides defamation? If not, then a perma-ban sounds good to me.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 00:46, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

yeah, just leaving it up for a bit so people know. You'd think "don't use the wiki as a platform to call living people paedos" was a fairly simple, obvious and sensible rule that nobody would have the slightest problem seeing the reasons for and keeping to, but it turns out ... - David Gerard (talk) 01:15, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Well the bad thing is that people can point to this as a strawman for mods abusing power. Rationalwiki doesn't have rules but rather guidelines. "Breaking" them is not uncommon and I see that "breaking" them is okay so long as it has good intentions. Worst case scenario, people don't like your actions and your actions get reverted, omg so terrible.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 04:51, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

As long as there's precedent or it's not blatantly-authoritarian, I don't care what DG does. RoninMacbeth (talk) 07:14, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Pbfreespace3

I hereby request that I be taken out of the vandal bin. I've been in it for a month, and you haven't seen any bad behavior from me during that time. Quite frankly, I think I was put there in a bit of a fevered time. You know how things can sometimes get in the chicken coop. I think it will do more good than harm for me to be taken out, so I ask that you have mercy. PBfreespace (talk) 04:07, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

I'd be in favor of it.-(Ir)RationalWikian (talk) 04:13, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Ugh, fine, I vote in support of you. Just don't act like your former self please.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 04:29, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm in favor. Just please don't do stupid shit like this in the future. B) talk 17:42, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

And please don't remove snark from (or attempt to whitewash) the The Amazing Atheist article. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 17:56, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Provisional yes, on condition that sysoprevoke remains. Sir ℱ℧ℤℤϒℂᗩℑᑭƠℑᗩℑƠ (talk/stalk) 17:54, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

What Fuzzy said. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 17:56, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hasn't been stirring too much shit recently. We'll see what happens if he's let out.--JorisEnter (talk) 18:54, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Treat this the same way we treated Castaigne's case. Continued sysoprevoke but no more binning as long as the threats end.--Owlman (talk) (mail) 23:06, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

I guess that delays the Age of Aquarius yet again. ~ Aneris ✻ 00:04, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I vote yes. RoninMacbeth (talk) 06:01, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

So say I. Nerd271 (talk) 15:20, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

It's been over 2 weeks and I'm still on sysoprevoke and can only edit every 30 minutes. Can this restriction please be removed? Thanks PBfreespace (talk) 22:07, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

It appears like the issue is the autoblock affecting my IP address. Is there anything way to manually remove this? I don't want to waste any more data on my phone. PB (talk) 22:26, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

I got into the Vandal Bin and paroled the the IP addresses associated with you that were blocked. No more trouble please. Nerd271 (talk) 22:35, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Owlman's repeated harrassment and blatant abuse of sysop tools

Owlamn is repeatedly reverting me without ever requesting to my entreaties to please use the talk page and he has now abused his sysop tools to sysop-lock pages to shut down debate and put me into the Vandal Bin in clear violation of all policies. ¡Hay que poner fin a esa injusticia! Worzelpete (talk) 20:00, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

So stopping an edit war now counts as abuse of sysop tools? Oh come on. He was trying to bring peace to many pages that were always the subject of intermittent edit warring. You just want to push a Pro-Israeli viewpoint on this wiki under the guise of being 'neutral'. This will not be tolerated.

You were put in the vandal vin because you're another dread sockpuppet of AvengeroftheBoN. He was a user who was Zionist and got the wiki into a whole bunch of drama this time last year. Don't try and deny it; that'll only get you banned again. If you were actually honest and upfront about your identity and intentions maybe we wouldn't be so suspicious of you. Applesauce (talk) 20:06, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Jesus Christ, he's still going at it? How many different proxies and VPNs is he using now? The reason he complained he couldn't edit after he was banned is probably because of the autoblock affecting his IP address after the Laurogeita Hamabost ban. PB (talk) 20:11, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

So if I say I am not Avenger, I am obviously guilty of the heinous crime of denying being Avenger and if I say I am Avenger, I am obviously guilty of whatever crimes Avenger has committed. So how do I get out of this bind? And will Owlman ever be punished for his abuses, including reverting me on sight without even reading my contributions? Worzelpete (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

I was simply saying that every time you denied you were a sockpuppet account, you ended up getting banned/vandal-binned. Your old strategy never worked. Perhaps it's time to try another strategy to implement your Zionist agenda here. You have endless sockpuppets, so why not mix things up? Applesauce (talk) 21:13, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

* dons Mod Hat * 

This is the second time Aveng -- uh, Worzelpete has come whining to the Coop. His goal is to push his ideology, despite being banned. Please ignore him. He is the epitome of a concern troll. Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 21:15, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Given that a moderator claims that I am banned (which I am not, I am binned), I see no way any strategy might work. Besides of course creating yet more sockpuppets. In essence you will end up banning/binning people for holding an opinion on Israel not in line with your ridiculously anti-Zionist articles. You can do that. But you will have to lay in the bed you are making if you do that. And that is one of being an anti-Zionist echo chamber that silences dissent. If you have no problem with that. Fine. Pero no se quejen si la gente les llama hipocritas Worzelpete (talk) 21:49, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

You know, my personal view is that this website should not mention Israel or Zionism whatsoever. (Sole exception: debunking "ZIONISTS CONTROL THE WORLD" conspiracy theories.) But you admit to being a pusher of ideology and a sockpuppet. There's a reason we binned you and banned all the other accounts -- we don't want the endless drama. Grow up. If you want to fight Zionism or whatever, there are better ways than trying to change RationalWiki's view on it. (Who cites RationalWiki about Zionism? Anyone?) Go concern troll on Wikipedia, please. αδελφός ΓυζζγςατΡοτατο (talk/stalk) 22:02, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

My opinion on Zionism is that the articles on this website are one-sided and badly researched and I wanted to change this by nominating the article for deletion, which sadly did not produce any tangible result. I then tried to edit the articles but was immediately reverted. I think Israel should exist. Does that make me a Zionist agenda-pusher? Creo que no. Worzelpete (talk) 22:20, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

While I do support the binning of Worzelpete, I do find it immature that people are doxing Worzelpete by linking him to other trolls. This really needs to stop. Worzelpete was binned for boring, repetitive reversions, that's all.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 17:36, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

That's not what doxing is. We didn't reveal personal info. FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 20:02, 17 December 2016 (UTC)