Guild Wars Wiki talk:Requests for adminship/The Scythe Has Fallen

You claim to want admins to be less lenient banning trolls. You do realise that you are a troll and if the admins were less lenient, you'd be banned? (To be honest, I am also disappointed with the admins being unable to ban, say, you. I believe that the drama caused whenever Auron bans a troll and when Pling perma'd Ariyen is putting the admins off banning as they do not want to lose their powers.) 207.182.131.34 22:36, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

lol. 98.248.90.248 22:43, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I've stated numerous time that what I do is not "trolling", and -- in my humble understanding -- that they dont want to lose sysops powers, its that they dont want to get grief for it. I also believe that, i've not been perma'd simple because i am not a troll. — Scythe 22:45, 10 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Even if you aren't a troll, which I believe you are, you cause massive amounts of drama and it's not really worth having you around.207.182.131.34 22:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

the same applies to you? (1/2 minus the drama part) — Scythe 22:51, 10 Sep 2010 (UTC)

I do not cause massive amounts of drama on a regular basis and persist after having been warned and banned several times. How does the same apply to me? 207.182.131.34 22:53, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

the 1/2 as intended to be read, since all 3 4 of your contribs have been trolling. — Scythe 23:00, 10 Sep 2010 (UTC)

I get that you think absolutely everything is an attempt to troll you, and you can't help thinking it, but I'm not trying to troll you here. At all. I'm asking serious questions. Also, you accuse me of trolling, but deny being a troll yourself? I'm sorry, but what? 207.182.131.34 23:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

IP, try to tone down the aggressiveness. Scythe, try to tone down the defensiveness. It's standard operating procedure for users to use an RFA's talk page to ask questions to the potential admin, to get a better idea of the candidate or clarify things, or even to try to persuade others one way or the other. And to stave off the question before it's asked: Yes, IPs can vote on RFAs (assuming the IP isn't a sock). - Tanetris 23:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

in the case of 207, however, its a no. (0/100 required edits) — Scythe 23:17, 10 Sep 2010 (UTC)

You're thinking of bcrat elections. No edits are required to vote in RFAs. - Tanetris 23:19, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) 100 edits is for bureaucrat elections, I am sure. I do not feel the need to vote, because it is quite obvious what the outcome will be already. 207.182.131.34 23:21, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

"You're thinking of bcrat elections. No edits are required to vote in RFAs." sorry, my bad D: — Scythe 23:27, 10 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Hell, maybe I should start a RfA :D Karate Jesus 23:54, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

You don't have what it takes to admin a wiki. Noob. — Raine Valen 0:13, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Bandwagon/Cabal

Who is this group you keep talking about? It would be handy to know who they are seeing as it might be dangerous to have such a group on GWW. King Neoterikos 00:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

The Cabal:

Includes, but is not limited to, the following users:

• Auron (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Karate Jesus (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Mini Me (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Oneshot (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Raine Valen (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Lania Elderfire (talk • contribs • logs • block log)

May also include, but is not limited to, the following users:

• Dandy (talk • contribs • logs • block log)
• Aliceandsven (talk • contribs • logs • block log)

--The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Raine Valen (talk).

I don't think you have the slightest idea of what you are talking about. There is only one, possibly two people on that list that are actually part of the "cabal". -- Wyn talk 00:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't think he's referring to the "IRC Cabal" so much as the "AuronLetsThesePeopleTrollMeMercilessly Cabal". — Raine Valen 0:48, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

I've never seen Lania or Raine troll anyone. elix Omni 00:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

This is because you are not using Scythe's definition of "troll". Perspective makes a world of difference. — Raine Valen 0:52, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Also, I don't believe Auron is the only sysop on the team that allows various users much more leeway than others. -- Wyn talk 00:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but Auron is the only one that Scythe has a personal inquisition going against; hence, the others aren't brought into question here. — Raine Valen 0:52, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) (2x)thats kinda why i started this RFA (cuz ya'kno, if it wasnt an official thing i'd just be more of "scythes drama tl;dr troll it) in my opinion, this was less of a "lets get me some sysops" more of a "lets bring attention to the real issue here. — Scythe 1:06, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

although, that was meant to be a response to Wyn, totally different meaning in this comment order... — Scythe 1:06, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

That is what indenting properly is for. You use one more indent than the person that you were responding to; this makes it easy to determine what comments are in response to what comments. — Raine Valen 1:15, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

"I started this RfA [...] [to] bring attention to the real issue here." — You

You're saying and doing things under false pretenses to rouse negative emotion for some cause.

"Troll: an internet user who sends inflammatory or provocative messages designed to elicit negative responses or start a flame-war." — dictionary.com

And you would argue you are not a troll HOW? — Raine Valen 1:15, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Refer to my vote for your answer. 98.248.90.248 01:16, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) umm, lets see, trolling usually involved the "for the hell of it, why not" frame of mind, i kinda meant to be legit, as this was sposed to be... — Scythe 1:19, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Some people troll for "the lulz". You are trolling for "no one fucking knows why because you are a bad troll". Regardless of why you are trolling, you are still trolling.

We've this policy that says something along the lines of "Don't disrupt wiki to prove a point". That is exactly what you are doing right now. If you are not trying to prove a point, you are still disrupting wiki. It's not just RC clutter in your case, either: you are veritably spamming the Admin Noticeboard every time someone opposes your crusade and you are starting troll RfAs.

It is nice that you are saying that you wanted this to be "legit" now, but I'm going to have to call bullshit based on what you've said eslewhere.

The part that really amazes me, though, is that you are guilty of trolling and disruption leagues beyond what Auron is, and those are the reasons that you've used to oppose him at every turn. It's bloody staggering. You want him stripped of his powers, which he uses is quite possibly the least-biased manner possible (note how you're not banned yet), yet you're pulling this shit in the mean time. One of the other massive differences between you and he, though, is that he has an enormous positive impact on the wiki when he handles shit like this (i.e. banning people doing what you are doing right now). You don't.

With that in mind, how would you handle a user like yourself if you were a sysop? Would you allow you to troll and disrupt the wiki to the degree that you have been? If you say yes, how can you look at any sysop and say that you should not have been banned by this point? If you say no, how can you look at any user and expect them to respect your RfA? It's not jumping on a band wagon: there are lots of very good reasons to oppose this RfA.

We'd really appreciate if you did what people have been telling you for what feels like ages now: knock it the fuck off. You and your trolling are not accomplishing anything save irritating people. Thanks. — Raine Valen 1:40, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

hi, GWW:NPA, for starters.

secondly, i would have (probably) done exactly what Why and Emmett did, short ban. Not "knock it the fuck off." /flameing

clearly you aren't admin material either.

oh, and if i really was going for drama i'd dig up rapta & igor, but im not.

also, " I'm actually not confident that this will pass, but hey, if it needs to be me that does it, so be it. However, i would also like to point out that if this RFA fails, someone else needs to step up, and help the sysops team (who are frankly overworked / overloaded)." yeah, i can do quotes too. — Scythe 2:04, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

I missed the NPA. Clarify, and not like "auronquoted300andisnowofficiallyaracist" clarifying, but real clarifying. Also, by looking at every candidate statement ever made here or anywhere else(including government and the like), it is quite apparent that most are bullshit to make people think you're actually trying to do something positive. 98.248.90.248 02:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) You don't know what a personal attack is. You'll find the definition about a quarter of the way down that page.

Warnings happen before bans, ideally. A warning may not read "knock it the fuck off", but that is, in essence, what it is saying. Content matters more than prose.

I may or may not be admin material. When I RfA, that will be determined. For now, though, bringing that into this conversation comes closer to being a personal attack than anything I've said on this page, as it's not related at all to the my argument.

I don't know what Raptaz and Igor have to do with anything or why you are bringing them up.

The issue isn't that the sysop team is overworked or overloaded. There are plenty of available sysops (many of them opposed this RfA), yet none of them have banned the biggest troll on the wiki right now. Why? Because none of them are Auron.

Yes, some other sysop will have to step up if for no other reason than that Auron can't ban anything without "bias" coming from all corners of the wiki.

Now, the interesting part is where you say "I'd've done what Why and Emmett did". You've had two short bans. Each time, you've come back and gotten steadily worse, cumulating in this. At what point do you say, "This user is bad for the wiki" and apply a longer ban?

I, personally, think it's long overdue. — Raine Valen 2:25, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

I'm assuming you think those people are "in league" with each other, or are besties? Because I certainly don't see Mini and Auron in that boat. Oops, I thought Scythe put that list up... King Neoterikos 00:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

sorry, i spaced this comment, as you can see, I'm not the only user who acknowledges the "cohort-ing cabal" — Scythe 2:04, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I posted those names based on what I presumed (apparently, accurately) your perspective would dictate.

I don't agree with them, for the most part. Feel free to modify the list to more accurately reflect your perceived "Cabal", though. — Raine Valen 2:27, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

What the hell Scythe? People are not in "league" with each other. They just happen to share the opinion that what you're doing is wrong. That doesn't justify you causing drama in an attempt to get at these people, nor does it support your own arguments. I realise Raine made the list originally but it was subsequently edited by you to reflect your opinions. I honestly don't see what you're trying to achieve by branding these people part of some sort of group. ShadowRunner 09:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Obviously we are all part of a secret group and meet every second saturday of the month to discuss what we're going to do against Scythe next! --neshot. 9:32, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Shhh, don't let him know about our secret plans :< - Mini Me 09:54, 11 September, 2010 (UTC)

Holy shit, I'm part of the wiki cabal now? Karate Jesus 19:39, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

A word of advice

Scythe, I'm sorry, but you keep talking about "shedding light on the real issue". The only REAL issue I see happening lately is you creating, as has been said before, a shit ton of unnecessary drama, this RfA included. You say that your bans have taught you something, yet if there is even a modicum of intelligence at work, you had to be fully aware that this RfA was going to cause yet another drama storm. Do what you do to contribute to the purpose of this wiki. Stop focusing on what everyone else is doing, and most of importantly STOP FEEDING THE TROLLS! Trust me, they get bored easily and will just go away to find a more interesting target. This RfA was a monumentally bad idea. -- Wyn talk 01:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

and for that, i am sincerely sorry, however i just find that nothing has been (or will be, it looks like) about the terrible, overrun state of the wiki :( I could really use guidance at this point, because without provoking drama, nothing will happen. (This thought process also applies to changing policies, or anything like that) alot of drama will result, however in my opinion, it is necessary to push though it to see results... This was really a last resort tbh — Scythe 1:31, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Seriously? Thats what you think? lol.Just know that anything you do from now on will stir up massive amounts of drama regardless of what it is. 98.248.90.248 01:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

<self-removing comment realizing the stupidity of answering> — Scythe 1:35, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

I agree with wyn 100% here... Scythe, what you're experiencing is a type of a "persecution complex", where you feel everything is wrong, you're in the minority, and everyone is against you. You become super defensive, cause drama and disruption, and headaches on some users, over basically "nothing" from the perspective of most users on the wiki. Either grow a thicker skin and shrug off crits, trolls, minor attacks, and well "nothing", or get out. I know you are 14 but age isn't an excuse, and most socially adept 14 year olds know better. --Lania 02:49, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

This is as true as it gets. Age should not be an excuse and the proof of the "persecution complex" is this whole bandwagon and cabal thing. You're unnecessarily labelling people and branding them as a whole against you. ShadowRunner 09:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

i'd like to know where i used my age to defend myself, if you could be so kind. — Scythe 13:32, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

I realise my error in saying that. However, the rest of my comment still stands. ShadowRunner 13:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

understandably. However you cant argue that the cabal dosnt exist. — Scythe 13:56, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Although the list above isnt very accurate. To reason my oppose I point to the above comments. This wasnt a good idea at all. -- Cyan 14:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

i actually somewhat agree with you, i get too involved sometimes. however most of this talk page shows people didnt read the statement... — Scythe 14:08, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Actually, most people probably read the statement and don't want you as an admin anyway. --neshot. 14:12, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

reading a comment is required before replying to it, fyi — Scythe 15:12, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

I did read it. I'm not retarded. --neshot. 15:39, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

Maybe

The best troll ever. Should we really be taking this seriously? He mentions Raptors (before my time) and Igor (met this moron), but what if he's better than both of these? He's certainly got a lot of attention with this rfa and all the drama that has come before it, so why haven't we brought down the hammer hard? I vote ban, and you might even call it preemptive, because this could just escalate more after the rfa fails, escalating is all it's done so far. -- Tha Reckoning 03:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

You won't get any objections from me; permablock for scythe is the best course of action. --Lania 03:49, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

because this is serious, not "4 teh lulz", maybe. — Scythe 13:58, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

I feel the need to make you aware that nobody is taking this seriously. -- Tha Reckoning 18:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

He's banned for 3 months, let it go. - Reanimated X 18:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

End this

Ok, I'm going to go ahead and say that this discussion should end. Now. It's been disruptive enough and it's obviously going to fail. --JonTheMon 03:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Jon, is ending this discussion going to stop the disruption? — Raine Valen 4:00, 11 Sep 2010 (UTC)

I'm with you on this one. -- Tha Reckoning 05:06, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

+1 ShadowRunner 09:13, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Guys, you're doing it wrong

You're supposed to bold something to the effect of "Strongly Oppose", prior to your statements! Ryuu -Matters. ♦ 06:14, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Why did nobody slap a delete tag on this to begin with? Koda Kumi 14:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay

I've watched this little show go on for a day hoping that it would subside. Unfortunately that has not happened and I do not see it happening in the near future. Scythe has a history of starting drama, so this should be as no surprise to anyone. I am still unsure as to how causing this drama or going on some crusade is directly related with some cabal on some irc, but it's done now.

Now, if others want to follow in Scythe's wake and be banned, please continue this drama. Otherwise, let's have a great weekend. Thanks — Gares 15:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Are you going to close the RfA? Because I am pretty sure this RfA was setup to fail to "prove a point". --Riddle 21:18, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

For reference, this RfA was made with more good faith than Scythe's, and yet it was closed within a day. --Riddle 21:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Just to note, that was closed by Unendingfear's request. -- pling 22:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I was going to allow this RfA to run its course. Regardless of its intention, I feel there is a slim chance that something good could come out of it. Perhaps after reading everyone's comments and how things play out, Scythe will come back a more valuable contributor. That is being highly optimistic, so we'll just have to see about that.

That doesn't mean I would be opposed to another bcrat severing the cord on this RfA, so if Misery or Aiiane feels it is warranted, I will not protest. — Gares 23:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't see any point in continuing an RfA when the user in question is doing very badly and also banned for three months. I think we can consider this matter closed for now. Misery 23:38, 11 September 2010 (UTC)