Difference between revisions of "RationalWiki:Chicken coop"
m (Reverted edits by UShistoryanalyzer (talk) to last revision by SixtyNine) |
|||
Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
:::::::::::: I've [[wp:Special:Contributions/HurricaneTracker495|e]][[wp:Special:Contributions/Gale5050|d]][[wp:Special:Contributions/ImtheOneKhaled|i]][[wp:Special:Contributions/Andrew5|t]][[wp:Special:Contributions/Guttmana9|e]][[wp:Special:Contributions/HurricaneTracker495 School Chromebook|d]] wikipedia before (and also on many more IPs). It's tough, mainly due to [[wp:wp:CIR|the competence is required issue]], but I'd still encourage USHA to edit there and gain editing experience. I'm going to attempt to get unblocked there in September. [[User:Gale5050|Gale5050]] ([[User talk:Gale5050|talk]]) 23:27, 18 August 2021 (UTC) | :::::::::::: I've [[wp:Special:Contributions/HurricaneTracker495|e]][[wp:Special:Contributions/Gale5050|d]][[wp:Special:Contributions/ImtheOneKhaled|i]][[wp:Special:Contributions/Andrew5|t]][[wp:Special:Contributions/Guttmana9|e]][[wp:Special:Contributions/HurricaneTracker495 School Chromebook|d]] wikipedia before (and also on many more IPs). It's tough, mainly due to [[wp:wp:CIR|the competence is required issue]], but I'd still encourage USHA to edit there and gain editing experience. I'm going to attempt to get unblocked there in September. [[User:Gale5050|Gale5050]] ([[User talk:Gale5050|talk]]) 23:27, 18 August 2021 (UTC) | ||
::::::::::::: We should permaban him. Just end that son of a bitch! (Unsigned) | ::::::::::::: We should permaban him. Just end that son of a bitch! (Unsigned) | ||
+ | :::::::::::::: Look I am very sorry for what I did. I promise to be better in the future and check my sources. Thank you everyone for changing me for the better! Happy days! [[User:UShistoryanalyzer|UShistoryanalyzer]] ([[User talk:UShistoryanalyzer|talk]]) |
Revision as of 00:54, 19 August 2021
Defenses placed on alert.
The chicken coop is for the avoidance, containment and resolution of cases of Headless Chicken Mode (HCM). Despite the name, this tends to be serious business.
This page can be used for reporting cases of administrative abuse (abuse of sysop or moderator abilities such as blocking, page deletion, or user rights management), general abuse (such as trolling, wandalism, and personal attacks), and conflicts which cannot be solved through normal talk page discussion (such as long-standing edit wars or article content disputes), as well as reporting the violation of non-standard sanctions. Please be specific and provide evidence by including links to any relevant discussions, page edits or logs.
All editors are welcome to comment on the cases raised here, and to try to reach a consensus on any action to be taken. If no consensus can be reached, and the HCM seems to be escalating, moderators are expected to take some action. However, any serious or permanent solution, such as removal of rights or lengthy ban, requires a community vote here according to the guidelines laid out in our Community Standards.
Please try to resolve conflicts directly through discussion on other editor's talk pages before reporting them. It's better to just talk to someone rather than try to drag their name through the mud.
If the issue is not conflict resolution, but concerns RationalWiki policies, suggested changes to how things work around here, or similar matters of principle, please post on on the Community Standards talk page instead.
When presenting a case here, be sure to include whom you are accusing, what exactly you are accusing them of, some hard evidence, and a brief explanation. Since the sole purpose of the Coop is to resolve these disputes, don't post unrelated or more generalized complaints here — if you do, your posts will be moved off the page. Any vote started within 24 hours of filing will be considered invalid.
Use {{CoopNotice}}
to inform the user in question, so that they have a chance to discuss their actions here.
As a final note, if you think this page is a good tactic to apply in gaming the mob into doing your bidding, you may be shocked to see your post archived quite swiftly.
UShistoryanalyzer
What is there to say? Obvious troll, wastes everyones time, mainspace edits are primarily reverting BON vandalism, anything else usually gets reverted for being cranky wingnut bullshit. Has opened several ATIM and coop cases to the point that the ones left standing pretty much cover an archive page on ATIM in the past while. I'm opening this coop case mostly because I'm kinda done with everyone giving him excuses to whine about rights abuses. Let's make something stick. I'm of the mind of a permanent boot, but if you disagree with that, feel free to tell me why. Remember that no votes start until 24 hours after the coop has started, you all probably know the drill. Techpriest (talk) 19:31, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- And in order to pre-empt squeealing from him like a little pig, I've permanently blocked him in advance. Consider it use of the emergency button of "I am not putting up with this shit", which means that no matter what after 24 hours there will be a block vote. Techpriest (talk) 19:41, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- He's definitely not a troll. He's an idiot right-wing kid who wants to relitigate the Southern strategy as a prelude to claiming victory re. the Dems having always been the rEaL rAcIsTs!! I'm also pretty sure people are supposed to be allowed to comment on their own coop case, some extraordinary circumstance notwithstanding. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 19:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Anyone who wouldn't characterise them as a troll has lost all meaning of what a troll is. Blatant, obvious, troublemaking, useless fucking troll. Sick of their shit. ShabiDOO 19:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- I'm unsure of the functional difference HBC. In both cases he's here with a constant series of bad faith arguing about subjects that don't need relitigation that we literally already have debunked in our pages. And fair enough, I thought I'd save everyone the headache but if y'all want him to comment, then sure. Techpriest (talk) 19:48, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- We should at least block him for Pi-weeks. Even though the overwhelming majority of the community (that has expressed any opinion) is pretty damn fed up with his behavior, multiple blocks/mod warnings/penalty votes have failed to change his conduct. It's sad, but we have to start considering higher intensity options.-Flandres (talk) 19:52, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Maybe a pi month ban? probably enough to get our point across. Rockford the Roe boop my snootpraise Oscar Wilde 19:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Y'all are still assuming too much good faith on him. He won't change. If you're scared of a perma, may I suggest a 3.14 year block or something like that until the kid finishes high school and maybe has grown up a little bit. Techpriest (talk) 19:55, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Well, we did give scrooge that punishment for the same basic behvaior...so that seems pretty reasonable.-Flandres (talk) 19:55, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- I could probably get behind pi weeks. He genuinely believes the guff he spouts, though. There are likely turds in pools which can look forward to a warmer welcome than him around here, but he's arguing in good (stupid) faith. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 19:57, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- How about if he doesn't stop that behavior within those months, then we can permaban. Rockford the Roe boop my snootpraise Oscar Wilde 20:02, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- I'd vote for anything up to a ban. When I stick my neck out to defend someone like I did the last time the prospect of banning this idiot came up, I expect them to return the favor by making at least a bare minimum effort to not be a cunt. Otherwise, as in this case, I end up looking like an ass and people resent me. Now I'm pissed and out of patience. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante ItalianoMake a Reservation 19:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- How about if he doesn't stop that behavior within those months, then we can permaban. Rockford the Roe boop my snootpraise Oscar Wilde 20:02, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- [edit conflict] Either pi weeks or pi months I support. Because pi days failed, I don't think its worth it. As I mentioned at the ATIM case, we could try a ban on ATIMs, at this point the only thing that could work besides a ban from the site is a permanent ban from ATIM, unless explicity stated otherwise. Gale5050 (talk) 19:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Maybe a pi month ban? probably enough to get our point across. Rockford the Roe boop my snootpraise Oscar Wilde 19:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- We should at least block him for Pi-weeks. Even though the overwhelming majority of the community (that has expressed any opinion) is pretty damn fed up with his behavior, multiple blocks/mod warnings/penalty votes have failed to change his conduct. It's sad, but we have to start considering higher intensity options.-Flandres (talk) 19:52, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- I'm unsure of the functional difference HBC. In both cases he's here with a constant series of bad faith arguing about subjects that don't need relitigation that we literally already have debunked in our pages. And fair enough, I thought I'd save everyone the headache but if y'all want him to comment, then sure. Techpriest (talk) 19:48, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Anyone who wouldn't characterise them as a troll has lost all meaning of what a troll is. Blatant, obvious, troublemaking, useless fucking troll. Sick of their shit. ShabiDOO 19:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- He's definitely not a troll. He's an idiot right-wing kid who wants to relitigate the Southern strategy as a prelude to claiming victory re. the Dems having always been the rEaL rAcIsTs!! I'm also pretty sure people are supposed to be allowed to comment on their own coop case, some extraordinary circumstance notwithstanding. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 19:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
I am unaware of anyone who has been preemptively prevented from defending themselves in the Coop. There have been some rare cases of people given the opportunity to defend themselves and then prevented from further editing in the coop because of coop abuse (e.g., shitposting and not mounting a defense). UShistoryanalyzer should at least be given an initial chance to defend himself. Bongolian (talk) 19:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- While I think this one is not a troll functionally speaking, he does have genuine right wing beliefs; however he engages in constant bad faith, ignores advice repeatedly on how to change (and thus earn respect), doubles down when people lose patience and start yelling, and then tries to one-up others that understandably treat this user with disrespect. I don't think he's here to elicit responses per traditional definition of a troll but he's too troublesome to keep around, mostly due to being unable to listen to advice and demonstrating inadequte competency needed to maintain the mission of the wiki (e.g. uncritically sharing sources considered low quality by media analysis aggregates is counter to our mission). He's too much trouble to keep, takes time away from the community, is kinda like a disease. He's been here for months, he's tolerated for way too long. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Bongo beat me to the unblock.
- I'd prefer we have his insults and screeds here on record before we
executepunish him. We can always revert/block again if he goes cray-cray. I'll probably vote for avacationblock, but we'll see. CorruptUser 20:08, 18 August 2021 (UTC)- (ec) I'm pretty sure he is here to cause drama and thus get attention (a common problem with children) first and foremost. I can't fault people for wanting to ban him for good and I am pretty sure we will ban him relatively soon...but you know how this goes. You have to give a few unearned chances which you know in advance they will screw up before permabanning passes.-Flandres (talk) 20:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
How about confining any Southern strategy / similar guff to the talk pages of the essays he's created? Then anyone who really wants to can have at it with him over there, and the Bar becomes slightly less dumb on average. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 20:14, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- I appreciate the attempt at compromise but this does make the guy feel a little high maintenance for little benefit (that is, it's unprecedented to confine people to a really specific space and I'm not super on board on that, but kind of reminds me of that paranoid Brian guy a few years ago, if I recall the name). I'm morbidly interested to see what stupid crap he comes up with, what next garbage source he really wants to show us, but on the other hand, I don't want essay space be catered to these klutzy divas like him. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Are you referring to Bryan See/"Phobosgate?"-Flandres (talk) 20:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- "high maintenance for little benefit" accurately describes quite a few members on this site. CorruptUser 20:23, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Whilst my amusement that the bar will not be terrible on average is sky-high, I guess a few weeks or months wouldn't be a bad idea if you're not willing to perma (although I question somewhat why you wouldn't, but sure, I'm willing to bide my patience if y'all want to try the nice route first). I would definetly at least recommend him to have a block from posting in the Saloon in that scenario. That would at least stop giving his shitty takes pointless oxygen for editors who generally already have far too much time on their hands to argue with each other. It should just be a general block, USH doesn't really post in the bar outside of spilling crappy "the democrats are the real racists" takes, I don't think we'd lose any valuable discussion by not airing that out in the most trafficed place by frequent editors. Techpriest (talk) 20:23, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
It strikes me that the wiki lacks a decent mechanism for dealing with non-offensive monomanias that become deeply irritating through sheer weight of repetition. There's an obvious tension between the invitation to debate on the main page and people's understandable desire to tell someone to shut up and fuck off after the umpteenth iteration of an unsuccessful argument.
Essay space has always served in part as means of allowing people their say re. stuff that would never pass muster in an article. It doesn't seem too much of a stretch to use that facility to corral this kind of behaviour as well. I don't have any firm idea how many chances someone should get, but the basic idea is that, beyond a certain point, it's fuck off and write an essay, and anyone who wants to discuss this further with you will see you on the talk page. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 22:55, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- I've treated essay space as more as blog posts, personal opinions, but something that can potentially have some interesting views in them. I've used one essay to advance an unpopular opinion/controversial on police I can't really put in Saloon Bar and such. I don't have much faith that the guy will restrain himself from cobbling nonsense after nonsense, using the space as a blog (like how Conservapedia was appropriated as a blog). Heck, he already started a series consisting of three crappy essays, which is more essays than I've created. I don't think he'll abuse essay space but I'm not sure if he'll be any less annoying. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 23:03, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Well, essayspace is, for lack of a better term, out of the way. We are kinda obligated to deal with his crap in mainspace, and putting it on the saloon, where everyone will see it, maximizes his chance to be annoying to as many users as possible, perpetuating the cycle of drama. If he just makes crappy essays and almost nobody cares enough to respond to him the "right-wing keyboard warrior" aspect of his problems will cease to be relevant.-Flandres (talk) 23:08, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- I've called USHistoryanalyzer a troll in the past and I stand by that. The difference between him and the common or garden troll is that he has a political purpose. His main purpose in coming here, however, was to cause drama and upset, rather than to convince anyone that Democrats are all secret racists today because some were openly racist 60 years ago. His recent attempts at wiki-lawyering and concern trolling (protesting about me taking autopatrolled status away from a self-confessed Biblical literalist and Young Earth Creationist, protesting that me permabanning a Holocaust denier on sight, collapsing their Bar post and changing its title to "Nazi shit" somehow amounts to "coddling Holocaust deniers") just show what his game really is. We've put up with him for long enough. Give him the boot.
- Well, essayspace is, for lack of a better term, out of the way. We are kinda obligated to deal with his crap in mainspace, and putting it on the saloon, where everyone will see it, maximizes his chance to be annoying to as many users as possible, perpetuating the cycle of drama. If he just makes crappy essays and almost nobody cares enough to respond to him the "right-wing keyboard warrior" aspect of his problems will cease to be relevant.-Flandres (talk) 23:08, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- I will also point out that Unclescrooge's 3.14 month ban is about to expire. I'm pretty sure that by December the unreformed Unclescrooge will be permabaned. But so that we don't have to deal with both of those troublemakers at the same time, I think at the least a 3.14 month for USHistoryanalyzer is called for now. Spud (talk) 00:29, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
- I'm an open fascist (Anonymous)
- I will also point out that Unclescrooge's 3.14 month ban is about to expire. I'm pretty sure that by December the unreformed Unclescrooge will be permabaned. But so that we don't have to deal with both of those troublemakers at the same time, I think at the least a 3.14 month for USHistoryanalyzer is called for now. Spud (talk) 00:29, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
UShit statement
I did nothing deserving of a block or vandal bin. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 20:38, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- You violated the civility parole quite a few times with your feuds in the saloon bar and the talkpages. Rockford the Roe boop my snootpraise Oscar Wilde 20:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- You could stop using bad sources for your arguments. You know, little stuff to be just a little less annoying. CorruptUser 20:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Credible sources don't exist for his historical arguments. It seems pointless to pretend that if he looks a bit harder, he'll find something that'll persuade the audience here. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 20:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- "oH nOz wE mUsT bAn uShiT beCuZ wE dOn'T lIkE hIs sOuRCeS1111!!!oneoneelventy11one!!111one!!!11!!" UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Congrats, kid. You really are a complete fucking moron. I salute your taking ownership of the UShit label, though. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- It's sad, as in RationalWiki:Chicken_coop/Archive129#Voting_on_UShistoryanalyzer, he was spared. This time, I doubt it. He failed to take on this olive branch.Gale5050 (talk) 21:24, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- He's an idiot. He needs to go to Wikipedia, learn citation policies, and then maybe come back. Dutchbag (talk) 22:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Nah. The leadership of Wikipedia are complete dutchbags who I don't care for. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 22:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Gee, I wonder why??? Maybe they didn't like your unironic Breitbart and Daily Mail links either? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- USHA - it is 'douchebag' and, probably, 'whom' (depending upon which variety of English you use). Anna Livia (talk) 22:36, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, I know. 😃 UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 22:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- I've edited wikipedia before (and also on many more IPs). It's tough, mainly due to the competence is required issue, but I'd still encourage USHA to edit there and gain editing experience. I'm going to attempt to get unblocked there in September. Gale5050 (talk) 23:27, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- We should permaban him. Just end that son of a bitch! (Unsigned)
- Look I am very sorry for what I did. I promise to be better in the future and check my sources. Thank you everyone for changing me for the better! Happy days! UShistoryanalyzer (talk)
- We should permaban him. Just end that son of a bitch! (Unsigned)
- I've edited wikipedia before (and also on many more IPs). It's tough, mainly due to the competence is required issue, but I'd still encourage USHA to edit there and gain editing experience. I'm going to attempt to get unblocked there in September. Gale5050 (talk) 23:27, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, I know. 😃 UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 22:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- USHA - it is 'douchebag' and, probably, 'whom' (depending upon which variety of English you use). Anna Livia (talk) 22:36, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Gee, I wonder why??? Maybe they didn't like your unironic Breitbart and Daily Mail links either? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:30, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Nah. The leadership of Wikipedia are complete dutchbags who I don't care for. UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 22:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- He's an idiot. He needs to go to Wikipedia, learn citation policies, and then maybe come back. Dutchbag (talk) 22:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- It's sad, as in RationalWiki:Chicken_coop/Archive129#Voting_on_UShistoryanalyzer, he was spared. This time, I doubt it. He failed to take on this olive branch.Gale5050 (talk) 21:24, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Congrats, kid. You really are a complete fucking moron. I salute your taking ownership of the UShit label, though. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- "oH nOz wE mUsT bAn uShiT beCuZ wE dOn'T lIkE hIs sOuRCeS1111!!!oneoneelventy11one!!111one!!!11!!" UShistoryanalyzer (talk) 21:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- Credible sources don't exist for his historical arguments. It seems pointless to pretend that if he looks a bit harder, he'll find something that'll persuade the audience here. Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 20:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
- You could stop using bad sources for your arguments. You know, little stuff to be just a little less annoying. CorruptUser 20:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)