RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation/Marcus Cicero (2)

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

MarcusCicero (2)[edit]

Complaint and discussion[edit]

Despite his one month ban, I see he is still trolling and still adding his filth to the site.[1][2]

He has shown no remorse for his actions and continues to use RW as his own little sandbox.

I propose that his ban be increased to infinite, with the same to apply to all IP edits he makes and all posts made by him are to be reverted immediately. He has shown he cares nothing for RW, why should we care about him? PsyGremlinTala! 14:25, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I was about to bring this up over at the mod's page, but probably best to do it here. An infinite ban will generate epic debate, and I think it says as much about us an our inability to not feed the troll as it does about Marcus and what a horrible person he is. While I reserve judgement about infinitely banning MC until there's been some discussion, I think we're gonna have to live with the anonymous edits -- infinitely banning ips won't fly, and shouldn't. Years ago, when some TOR troll was going nuts, I suggested getting rid of ip editing altogether and was pretty much shot down. That would make the present situation a little easier to deal with. But permabanning ips is a step closer to range blocks. No way. P-FosterThe Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire. Discuss. Moderator 14:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
(EC) Infinite bans on his IPs will do us no good, he can just reset his modem and come back with a new IP. Just revert and block for an hour or so. -- Nx / talk 14:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I'd say just revert and ignore. EddyP Great King! Disaster! 14:35, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Of course, we shouldn't be infinibanning IPs. I do think that we should ban him forever, though. I guess he can keep up the random IP abuse like any vandal might - we have to put up a few of those already. But how entertaining can it be when we just revert it and block for three days each time? It's not hard to reset your modem, but after the tenth time maybe he'll realize how pathetic he's gotten.
Ban him forever, block his IPs, wait for him to get bored.--ADtalkModerator 14:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
The behavior under discussion.--ADtalkModerator 14:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Then his account, at least, should be permanently banned. Or for 2 years, under the TK protocol. PsyGremlinTala! 14:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I'd hate to start this whole debate up again, but I figured I'd state the obvious here: just ignore the bastard. That way, no blocks are needed, he doesn't get the attention he doesn't deserve, and we don't even have to revert him. Just ignore the bastard. Trust me. Thank you for your time. The Spikey Punk I'm punking my punk! 14:48, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
With all due respect, you're not the one being called a racist cunt. PsyGremlinTala! 14:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, DFTT doesn't work, never has. -- Nx / talk 15:02, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
TK protocol indeed. TK was actively plotting with numerous people to destroy this site from inside and out. He lived and breathed hatred for us. MC, not so much. So MC gets off on pushing buttons. I'm sorry he found Psy's. Psy's obviously not racist against black Africans. We knew that. But he's a horrible bigot against New Zealanders and Texas and that's unforgivable. Let's come up with a policy that anything remotely obnoxious can be reverted on sight, including posts from people who took the bait and got their buttons pushed. We will never succeed in banning MC from RW and even attempting it's only going to make things worse. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 16:22, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
No one is proposing that. This proposal is barely even a change - we're just extending his block, because even while temporarily blocked he kept up his behavior.
The fact that anyone even opposes this is frankly pretty mysterious to me. I mean, the community blocks him for a month, and he spends that month putting long tirades of abuse on people's talk pages and telling the Saloon Bar "FUCK YOU ALL"... and people think there should be no consequences?--ADtalkModerator 01:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
We started doing this because that approach doesn't work. Seriously.
2 years, I agree. It feels tiresome, but I guess we should vote. Let's make it fast unless there's opposition so this doesn't drag out again.
Proposed: that MC's ban be extended to two years, and his further IP edits be reverted and blocked for a day each time. Vote to run one day, simple majority, three-week-established users eligible. Any objections?--ADtalkModerator 14:50, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
A day is too short (not for the blocks, for the vote). Also, should be announced on intercom. -- Nx / talk 15:01, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I have doubled the time for the vote. Adding it to the intercom is a good suggestion, I'll do that.--ADtalkModerator 15:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I object, but I'll take my objections to the ballot box. The Spikey Punk I'm punking my punk! 14:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Agree. PsyGremlinHable! 14:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I concur with RSN, the only reason DFTT doesn't work is because people insist on feeding them titbits. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic?Moderator 15:01, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I wrote this in response to WfG's vote, but Genghis insist I don't reply in the voting section:

But that's exactly what we're voting on: revert and move on. We need this vote, otherwise every time we'll have a HCM over whether we should revert his comments or not. -- Nx / talk 19:49, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Let the "vote" run a week at least. That way all the kangaroos can chime in. ħumanUser talk:Human 00:29, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

That's about the only thing I agree with on this page, Human. Good call. Some of my good friends are among them so I regret saying that people who let MC get their goat aren't doing it right. You've got thinner skin than the fat atheists objecting to Ken's wise observations about the causal relationship between atheism and obesity, lesbianism, murder, communism, pederasty, mental retardation, and suicide. A community ban might work with someone who doesn't have a 4 year history of IP editing, who you can trust to honor the community's wishes, and who hasn't expressly said he has no intention of going quietly. It's not going to work with Marcus. You guys are only making things worse for yourselves; he'll continue making good sport of some of you and you know it. He correctly judged that he could get the community to go apeshit over a small number of edits, perhaps because everyone's still got sore nerves from May. If nothing else, this mob is predictable in that regard. I'm awfully sorry you guys aren't instead discussing a policy permitting users to immediately remove disruptive comments. Aside from stuff that gets you all into such a lather, which may or not even be a substantial proportion of what he does here, I view Marcus as a complicated and conflicted delight and I'll miss him popping up. Too bad you can't ask this mob to slow down and do some real cost benefit analysis after the snownall gets rolling like this. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 14:57, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
I'm awfully sorry you guys aren't instead discussing a policy permitting users to immediately remove disruptive comments We already have the LJ's decision, look how much good that has done us. -- Nx / talk 06:36, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Let's just go ahead and let everyone draft up a list of everyone they want to be permabanned, and get this all over with, rather than dragging this out. If we ban everyone who is offensive to someone (or even everyone) we are only silencing ourselves. When the whole reorg crap was going on, MC was constantly expressing serious worry that the new rules were going to make him the first target of a coordinated plan to kick out all the trolls. Congratulations everyone, you've made MC right. When MC receives his permaban (or 2 year ban, which is like a 50 year sentence on the intarwebs) it will now become acceptable for RW to ban people whose speech people don't like. We will become an oppressive authoritarian community, from whom your opinions must all be filtered lest the thought police throw you in jail to rot. "When they came from MC, I didn't care, because I wasn't a troll..." --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 21:55, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Free speech doesn't mean "I can say whatever I want whenever I want and damn how it makes anyone feel." Communities have standards for what is appropriate when. This is why you don't ask Granny to fuckin' pass you the goddamn peas you old bitch at Thanksgiving, even if you hate her. This is why you don't tell your friend that her teenage daughter is a hot little piece of ass. Look at some of the incredibly foul, misogynistic and racist language that MC used with virtually every edit he's made here recently, and ask yourself if that kind of abusive behavior is something that we should welcome. P-FosterThe Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire. Discuss. Moderator 22:00, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Actually, it does, really. So MC called PG a "racist". Aw, poor PG. Get the fuck over it, PG, no one is honoring MC's naughty little post by believing it. However, PG, I do believe you are a lame ass nasty cunt, for your hate speech you spew on you blog about me. See how this works, P-Foster? PG is making a "complaint", yet impugns the honor of board members on his personal hate site uninterrupted. PG should be blocked for two years and MC welcomed with open arms. I will unblock MC until you strip me of the right, and then appeal to the Modernators. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:06, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Eira, have you ever considered setting up a Rationalwiki Tea Party? You have the same fear of creeping control that the TP has. "Today they're banning assault rifles with extended mags and grenade launchers, but tomorrow it'll be handguns". "Today they're banning self-acknowledged troll MC who's had more chances than a cat has lives, but tomorrow it'll be an honest member who swears". EddyP Great King! Disaster! 22:06, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
I've already seen certain people, who hate other people, bring frivolous issues to the coop calling for bans or whatever. Honestly, if all you fucking assholes kick MC, I might just pick up the mantle and make a shit fest over it. If you want to call me a fucking "Tea Party" activist for wanting to protect free speech, then go fuck yourself. --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 22:11, 1 August 2011 (UTC)4
Do you mean to say that you don't think there's a difference between free speech and simple trolling? EddyP Great King! Disaster! 22:16, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Did you read my quote below? Freedom speech can either be free, or we muzzle trolls. If we muzzle people just because they're being offensive, then that's not free speech. Can free speech be abused? Yes, it can be, but we cannot stop the abuse without stopping the genuine rights to free speech. Poe's Law applies analogously to distinguishing between "simple trolling" and honest social commentary. --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 06:02, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Actually, free speech DOES mean "I can say whatever I want whenever I want and damn how it makes anyone feel." (Excepting: calls for immediate lawless action, and false defamatory statements.) However, subsets of communities have expected social mores about what may be said and what may not be said. If I told my Granny to "pass the fucking goddamn peas you old bitch." Sure she might be upset, and I might never attend another family dinner, but I can't be put in fucking jail for it. Don't like MC? Don't play. Simply revert, and move on. Ignore him. Banning him for 2 years is over-punishing him. (And did you ever think that maybe the escalation in his vitriol is proportional to the escalation in punishments that you all are handing out?) --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 22:09, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Jebus, a troll gets banned and all of a sudden we're paraphrasing quotes from the founding fathers and the Holocaust? Really? I'm tempted to make an MC script that spams everyone's talk page with "ASPIE FASCIST AUTHORITARIAN CUNT CUNTY CUNT I TROLL U LOLOLOL!!!" and then whine about fascism and "OH NOEZ JUST LIKE CP!!! U CANT BAN MEEE!" when I inevitably get cooped. Free speech, yo. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 22:14, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
"Don't feed the bots!" ~ Kupochama[1][2] 22:21, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
ECAll I want to do is what Granny would do; not let him into the house for dinner because of what he did. Nobody wants to put him in jail, that's being over dramatic and you know it. We have standards. He doesn't respect them. Why tolerate his fundamental disrespect. Let him go play on 4chan with all the other sulking loners. P-FosterThe Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire. Discuss. Moderator 22:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Because banning him won't solve anything, and you all already have evidence of this. What did your 1 month or whatever it is ban accomplish? You got him to switch to BoNs, and then rotating IPs. Congratulations. MC is invested here, and he's not going to just walk away because we ban him. Your "average" troll will get bored and stop poking at things, but MC isn't the average troll. He's a house-hold name here, and he's being treated like a celebrity with this whole affair. OF COURSE he has come back and ban-evaded...
And now, we're essentially holding a trial in absentia for him, because he can't comment on this page and provide defense. With people above calling for "TK protocols", since when did we ever try to emulate CP's blocking strategy? Oh that's right... when all this became SRS BZNS! Have you noticed that I haven't been around? Have you noticed that I resigned from the Board? It's because this wiki is full of petty people seeking to erect an authoritarian structure on this wiki. We were running a social experiment, that authority should always be defied, and MC exemplified this. And now that the whole mind of the wiki has changed, and we've embraced this "we can censor our wiki!" attitude, so of course MC as the pillar of antiestablishmentarianism on RW is the first to fall. I stepped away from the wiki so that I could de-stress, because all the bullshit here had me depressed... and this whole kangaroo court action here is exactly a perfect crystallization of everything that I hate about what the wiki is turning into.
I frankly expect Psygremlin (or someone else; he just already hates me) will soon throw a shit fit and call for me to be blocked... you know, because I'm the pedantic bitch who refuses to sit down and be silent and eat the bullshit that others set in front of me, even if they do say it's filet mignon. Fuck you all, this is bullshit, it smells like bullshit, and it looks like bullshit. Muzzling people on this wiki was never the modus de operandi before... --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 06:00, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Of course banning his main account won't solve anything. Reverting his IP comments will starve him of the attention and drama he craves. -- Nx / talk 06:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Oh fuck off, vandal. Your powers have been so abused you should just shut up. Your opinion is irrelevant. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:12, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Right, so nothing need be done here. Banning him longer won't solve anything, because banning him already has been shown to accomplish nothing. I thought we were evidence-based Rationalists on this site, yet we think that "maybe if we ban him for MORE time, that will make him stop"... wtf? --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 01:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
We banned him for a month, and he has been loudly and explicitly anticipating the expiration of that ban to cause more trouble. If he has no prospects of return and we revert his IP comments, then we will be circumventing his attention-seeking behavior. He'll just be another IP troll and vandal.--ADtalkModerator 01:54, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Which is kind of my point. Banning him accomplished none of the intended goals, and only exacerbated the situation. Why are we going to expend even more effort under the belief of "this time we'll get it right!" It's like, huh, my wife died when she got sick, and all I did to treat her was pray to God to heal her. I must not have prayed hard enough. Now that my son is sick in the same way, I'll pray EXTRA hard, and whip the shit out of my self with razor whips... that ought to get it to work. --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 08:18, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
This is certainly a good point: if a month block didn't work, then why would a two-year block work?
As I said, though, it seems to me like a month is just too brief - it keeps him "in the game" and actually encourages him to come back. It schedules in a time for him to return, at minimum.
In two years, he's just plain going to find something else interesting to do. He'll maybe grow up a little bit, too. And until then he'll just be another IP vandal - a thing that is much less interesting than being the big Headless-Chicken-Mode-causing MarcusCicero. He'll probably bug us some, maybe even for a few months. But since he's already doing that and has always been doing that, then we're not really losing anything.
It's actually kind of strange to me that we're having this particular argument, because to me this is the new tactic. Ignoring him hasn't worked and blocking him briefly didn't work (as was immediately apparent). We've been self-flagellating with MC for years... this is the time to finally put the whip away.--ADtalkModerator 08:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

And in other news[edit]

I can edit on Conservapedia, and MC can't edit here? Come on, people, get a clue. THINK. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:12, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

You apologised at CP and have begun to build bridges with sysops. MC just keeps insulting people. If you can't spot the difference, I can only assume you're on the cheap booze tonight. –SuspectedReplicant retire me 06:30, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
If he edits my talk page and is reverted, I'll block whoever did it for 48 hours for castle abuse. PS, Psy, I owe you a 48 hour block for violating my "castle", you asshole. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Lol, that "evidence" is so lame it's not even funny. I can't believe people are buying into PsyG's butthurt anger. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


Proposed: that MC's ban be extended to two years, and his further IP edits be reverted and blocked for a day each time. Vote to run for one week, simple majority, three-week-established users eligible.


Please confine your entry to your signature or a brief statement and do not engage in debate with other editors in the voting section.

This vote has been closed. Please do not add, remove or change votes.
The result of this vote was: Marcus Cicero is to be banned for two years.


  1. --ADtalkModerator 14:56, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  2. -- Nx / talk 14:58, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  3. --Whatever. DeltaStarSenior SysopSpeciationspeed! 15:01, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  4. --PsyGremlinParlez! 15:06, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  5. --P-FosterThe Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire. Discuss. Moderator 15:13, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  6. --Pippa (talk) 15:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  7. --stunteddwarf/Stunteddwarf Spirit of the Cherry Blossom 15:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  8. --The Emperor Kneel before Zod! 15:59, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  9. --Röstigraben (talk) 16:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  10. SuspectedReplicant retire me 16:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  11. --BobSpring is sprung! 16:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  12. --User:Brxbrx/sig 18:00, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  13. --TallMan (talk) 18:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  14. --Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 20:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  15. --He trolls here because we let him. So don't let him. Real first name and last initialTalk, talk, talk skim my contributions 21:44, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  16. --This is like the tenth time we've discussed this since I joined. ~ Kupochama[1][2] 15:18, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
  17. EddyP Great King! Disaster! 21:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
  18. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 22:15, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
  19. Yea. Except that I propose blocking the IPs 1 - 3 months at a time; w/ anon. users only. RatMaster háblame 23:03, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
  20. --larronsicut fur in nocte 21:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


  1. Of course he's guilty of trolling, but I object only to the two year penalty time - both on philosophical grounds and because I think it will be difficult to enforce. Blue Talk 18:41, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  2. Due to having a Joycean/Flann O'Brienish feel for the surreal. It's an Irish thing, and I get it. DogP (talk) 18:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  3. Exactly, making a 1 month punishment into a 24 month punishment is too harsh. I would prefer something under 5 months. --ʤɱ socialist 18:48, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  4. Pointless waste of electrons (((Zack Martin))) 19:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  5. I don't think this is him. A sorry imitation. --Talpidae (talk) 22:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  6. And I strenuously object to a "vote" lasting only two days. A week should always be the minimum[1]. If I hadn't happened to pop in to check out an old "you're clueless" I'd have missed the whole necktie party. It seems to me the plaintiff is trying to set the terms of the discussion, calling for a summary conviction. Anyway, that's my abstract commentary, and my vote. The reason for my vote was doubled when the orange box I got upon checking in was PG deleting a comment from my user talk page. Please don't do that. ħumanUser talk:Human 00:28, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
  7. Redchuck.gif ГенгисIs the Pope a Catholic?Moderator 15:06, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  8. I would prefer for him to return and see his behaviour after his disciplinary block before issuing any new blocks. - π Moderator 09:45, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
  9. You ain't my bronies this week. Nutty Roux100x100 anarchy symbol.svg 15:02, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
  10. I'm moving from "goat" to nay. If it were me, I would wait till he comes back, see what he does under his own name, his own account, then block him again for one month. Then block him again for one month. I don't see how it's a hard ship to block him or any other troll, over and over 1 time per month.--Pink mowse.pngEn attendant Godot 15:43, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
  11. "Some degree of abuse is inseparable from the proper use of every thing; and in no instance is this more true than in that of the press. It has accordingly been decided, by the practice of the states, that it is better to leave a few of its noxious branches to their luxuriant growth, than, by pruning them away, to injure the vigor of those yielding the proper fruits." —James Madison. The quote is over freedom of press, but free speech applies the same. Let's chill all public debate here by banning someone for being offensive. Let me be the first to say fuck every who votes "yay". --Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised. 21:44, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
  12. and "polls should a) be of a more realistic length and 2) trigger a message of some sort. LowKey (talk) 08:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
  13. fascism never works. at least not on wikis. Occasionaluse (talk) 14:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
  14. Let's not ban people just because they are stupid. On the plus side: MC have entertainment value. Alain (talk) 15:03, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


  1. I propose we throw a goat at his head instead. It'd be more effective. The Spikey Punk I'm punking my punk! 14:59, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  2. by letting him once again make it into an issue, you are playing right into his hands. his threats are a game, to get under your skin. If it bugs you, ban him, but do it permanently, quietly, as a matter of daily business. Otherwise, just revert his posts and say nothing again, just as a matter of business. every time you talk about him, he wins.--Pink mowse.pngEn attendant Godot 16:27, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
  3. I understand that DFTT is certainly not going to happen, but it seems the only way this may work. My vote does lean to the 'yea' side, however. Aboriginal Noise Oh, you want to hit people with garbage cans? 01:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Goat with a twist[edit]

Whatever "punishment" MC gets, those bringing the charges should get one-half the "sentence".
I note that the conversation that elicited the current load of feces from MC's BON was nothing more than troll bait, "User:xyz used the "c" word...OMG, so does MC, (it's his FAVORITE!), ipso facto User:xyz=icewedge MC!!1!!"

Christ, I swear, you're all a bunch of whiny little twats running around bitching about stuff that doesn't matter. Please proceed to feel better about yourselves by banning someone who doesn't know any better. C®ackeЯ 22:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand you at all. The conversation that brought this about was actually him doing things like in the links I provided in the proposal: putting a message saying "FUCK YOU ALL" on the Saloon Bar that also declared his identity, from an IP he has used in the past. And it's not like he's a child or new to this: this is, after all, the second vote we're having on the matter because he's already been blocked over his behavior.
This doesn't "matter" in any greater sense, I agree... but no one's trying to make it out to be a larger cause or anything. We're just voting to extend the block of a vulgar and abusive self-admitted troll.--ADtalkModerator 01:28, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
OMG, he told us all to FUCK OFF? BAAANNNNNINATE HIM. That and he called Psygremlim a racist cunt, I guess (twice). Since we are to febrile to handle such challenges to our wikihood, we most certainly should ban all of Western Europe and all proxy IPs. Otherwise, poor Psygremlin might have to endure such hardships again. Oh, and fuck all of you who voted "yea", you fascists. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:09, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
It's not like I'm butthurt or insulted by cursing, and neither is Psy. But I guess you know that.
MC has trolled us for years, and has tried to disrupt and cause as much chaos as possible. He has gone on vandalism sprees, posted long vulgar screeds filled with nothing but personal abuse, tried to duck responsibility by claiming it to have been the behavior of a deranged brother, and launched a really obvious series of concern troll movements designed to cause infighting. He has admitted these things explicitly. In response, the community all got together, held a fair vote, and decided to block him for a month. A month. That is unbelievably lenient, but it's what was agreed in light of his obvious abuses.
Without even waiting for his block to expire, he began posting further abuse. He continued his behavior, demonstrating in a really obvious way that he was not ever going to stop, no matter how many chances we gave him. I guess we could just keep on reverting him, keep on ignoring him, and when his block expires endure more of the same trolling and abuse. I think it would be better to just eliminate his MC account from consideration, and treat his IPs like any other vandal. Without the ability to draw personal achievement, he will eventually get bored.
You disagreed, so you voted against it. That's fine. But you're being an asshole, Human, when you tell those of us who voted for the movement that we're "fascists," and implying that our motivations are in some way craven. It's low of you, and disappointing.--ADtalkModerator 10:04, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Indeed his sole reason for being here is to cause problems. There is always somebody ready to give him "one more chance" - but it's just one more chance to cause problems. In any event "he" isn't banned in any real sense. He's almost certainly operating as one or more socks as well. But now if he uses those accounts to the same end they will presumably suffer the same fate.
Like AD I'm surprised at the abuse being heaped on those who hold this opinion.--BobSpring is sprung! 14:27, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
No, AD, his purpose is not to cause problems. His purpose, for those of us who remember, is to keep us true to our goals - and to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted. I am surprised at how many people missed all this history. ħumanUser talk:Human 06:20, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Weird. I thought he was "[r]iding the wave of mock grievance; So many times you put me on the centre stage with a semi reasonable grievance and I made sure to maximise the fallout as much as possible" and "[d]oing my best to persuade half of you that I 'was a dick who has something worthwhile to say', while really just being a dick and doing my best to annoy as many people as possible."
I guess you have a special insight into his motives, beyond even his own.--ADtalkModerator 06:59, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Come now AD, that wasn't MC. It was his retarded brother John. EddyP Great King! Disaster! 08:37, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

All will perish[edit]

  • Aceof SpadesSilverbrain.png 22:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
    • The grey globs indicate Moderators, correct? ħumanUser talk:Human 00:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


Seeing as how the voting ended yesterday and the ayes were ahead, I've blocked MC for two years. EddyP Great King! Disaster! 15:45, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Probably should have been done by a moderator, but whatever. Getting the mods to get stuff done seems more difficult than I hoped it would be. DickTurpis (talk) 13:00, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
  1. You're right, I changed it. GK