Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Chat Incident

This forum post has been set up to correctly determine the events of the 2nd of June, in the Nukapedia Chat, along with the consequences of said events.

Note: I have locked this page and would like this matter dropped. All this is doing is stirring up trouble that we do not need. All I ask is for people with chat mod and higher user rights levels to act responsibly while in chat. Thanks.--Kingclyde 04:19, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

Several users, including a moderator and three administrators, were involved in a serious breach of chat rules and regulations, breaking the following rules:

Rule 1# - Personal attacks.

Rule 6# - Trolling or general irritation or disruption of other users.

Rule 7# - Being a dick.

Rule 8# - Whining.

Rule 10# - Spamming.

Along with the breaches of the aforementioned chat rules, administrative team members involved in the event have also abused their chat moderation powers to encourage obedience with the spamming of chat, insult other chat moderators attempting to quell the situation and kicking users for disrupting the spamming. It is also worthy of note that at no point was the event seen as a serious matter, instead it was frequently referred to as a joke by multiple users (see evidence section for further details and references).

Users Involved

The following users were involved in the events, also listed next to them are the specific rules broken; the list of names has been taken from the evidence provided to all users (both screen prints and chat logs) found below:


Rules 6#, 7# and 10#

Joining the spamming of chat, using capitalisation lock, harassing other users into joining the spamming and threats of kicking users without just cause.


Rules 6#, 7#, 8# and 10#

Joining the spamming of chat, using capitalisation lock, harassing other users into joining the spamming, threats of kicking users without just cause, kicking users without just cause and selective attacks on users who did not join.


Rules 1#, 6#, #8 and #10

Impersonation and mockery of a fellow user, joining the spamming of chat, using capitalisation lock, harassing other users into joining the spamming and threats of kicking users without just cause.


Rules 6# and 10#

Joining the spamming of chat, using capitalisation lock, harassing other users into joining the spamming.


Rules 6#, 8# and 10#

Joining the spamming of chat, using capitalisation lock, harassing other users into joining the spamming.


Rules 6#, 8# and 10#

Joining the spamming of chat, using capitalisation lock, harassing other users into joining the spamming.


Rules 6# and 10#

Joining the spamming of chat and using capitalisation lock.


Rules 6# and 10#

Joining the spamming of chat and using capitalisation lock.

Gauzz Rifle

Rules 6# and 10#

Joining the spamming of chat and using capitalisation lock.


Rules 7#

Kicking of user without just cause.


Chat Logs

Screen Captures


I just want to say before anything starts that I take full responsibility for everything that I did. When other users see this and the real arguing starts, I'll go ahead and join in with my side of the story. ~ Toci ~ Go ahead, make my day. 21:05, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

It would have made more sense to change all the avatars to Smith... >_>; Also reading that made my head hurt. UserGreatMaraMessage 21:11, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

I agree Mara. Those colours were way too trippy on the first link provided at least. I haven't looked at the others yet. Dragon Skål! 21:24, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Still reading through, but I will say that I don't consider changing your avatar to that of another user impersonating. To reach that standard I feel that a similar username would also have to be registered. However this kicking people (VG) for not playing along isn't on. The tools in chat are just that, tools not toys, and given similar high profile incidents earlier in the year I would have thought it was clear that using them in that way isn't on. If rulebreaking is encouraged by a "Star" then i feel that the regular user who follows them should not be punished. Agent c 21:27, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Well that's the thing Chad. We shouldn't follow someone with a star if they're encouraging rulebreaking. We each did what we did out of free will, not because someone with a star was doing it. Nevertheless, I just looked through everything and I'd like to say that it was a joke at first, yet when we all started spamming was when it got out of hand. And I didn't even know that VG was kicked. So yeah, whatever punishment you guys give I hope will be fair and befit the rulebreaking we have committed. RamboRob196 21:37, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Agreed to an extent Rob, but if a "star" effectively tells you its okay (which I feel they effectively were), then to me anything more than a warning for those that followed that advice is unjust. That said, I think looking at K and J's comments this is effectively settled now, and I'm removing my beak from the situation. Agent c 21:52, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
Ohhh please Nek, you aint got a leg to stand on. For starters you joined in the whole avatar changing thing from the start, when you took on Sigmas avatar. Secondly you also posted "We, might have been expecting you" at the same time joining in with the flow of what was going on in chat at the time. Finally, against the majority of chat, started whining about what everyone was doing (because you no longer liked it and thought it had gone to far) and essentially force a change in the topic that the majority was involved in, which I might add is against the rules. So at the very least you need to put yourself down for rules #7 and #8 at the bare minimum.
Finally, a few of your accusations are way over exaggerated. Plus posting it to the forums, causing even more drama for the wiki, I got to say is not the best way of dealing with it. Makes me wondering what your actual motives are, especially when J joined chat and you had an opportunity to take it further at the time with a b'crat. But at the moment I am seriously biting my tongue on any further comments.
As to everyone else, it was meant as good willed admiration. If it wasn't, why would people at the time post message to the b'crat in question to join chat. If it was meant as anything malicious, it wouldn't be the smartest move to get the one person who can remove rights and ban everyone involved to join chat at the time. I would suggest people keep that in mind. User avatar tagUser Avatar talk 21:39, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
I'd remind you that I have not at any one point excluded myself from this, instead I have given an initial list of findings and two sets of chat logs for other users and administrators to judge. As for my involvement, this was during the "light-hearted" stage of the events, where many users were quite tame about everything and no serious offences took place. The original use of Sigma's avatar was not malicious and was not deemed offensive by SigmaDelta at the time, so I see no reason for that to be brought up.
Now, for the "no leg to stand on" I find that quite ridiculous as though I may also be included in the final judgement you, and others, will also be brought under question. Just because I maybe judged does not exempt the entire situation. As for the matter of when Jspoel joined chat we decided that a better use of our time would be to collect the evidence listed and present it to Jspoel later, instead of a blind accusation, that coined with the aggressive stance already given to us when we threatened with kicks and bans for all those in participation at the time. We saw no fruit in acting then as those who were acting maliciously were still present and had the authority to act against us. Neko-signature Gothic NekoNeko's Haunt 21:48, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
As an addition, rules 7 and 8? That just 'aint right. Starting with 8, we requested an end to the spam, not the entire conversation, and we're well within our rights to say that it should stop, as the situation is the same as others, someone was breaking a rule, a mod can step in and request that it stops. As for 7, that just makes no sense. How did we go out of our way to annoy people...? When did we test the patience of a mod or an admin...? Simple answer, we didn't.
As for us divorcing ourselves from the situation, I've openly admitted in chat that I banned VG once at the beginning, Clyde knows it, chat knows it, what could I gain from keeping it away from view? After I mentioned it, VG expressed that she didn't mind that original one, but of course she didn't like what it descended into. --Sign243 22:06, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
DragonBorn, I cant even begin to tell you how wrong it is to think that a simple admission of guilt, does not make you any less guilty. Nor does it even excuse you from this public accusation. What on gods green earth gives you the right to be excluded, when others have not had the chance to admit there own guilt and be afforded the same exclusion from being dragged through the mud. Especially when you started the ball rolling on probably the most heinous of all the accusations (one which I was accused of, but didn't even commit!!!). So you, like Neko, don't have a f'ing leg to stand on, making judgement upon me.
As for the rules mentioned above, you seriously have no idea what rules you enforce in chat, do you? Did I say that he tested the patience of a mod or an admin, or that he was trying to annoy people. Nope, #7 is simply being a dick, for which he was. I aint even going to go into the detail, because I fear it is pretty much wasted on someone who think he should not be accused for such a heavy involvement. As for #8 - whining that people should change because it had no longer become as what they thought was fun (you cant really use the excuse that they where enforcing the rules, when they themselves was involved at some point), pretty much speaks for itself. User avatar tagUser Avatar talk 00:13, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

I would simply like to make a few points:

  1. I looked at the chat ban log and there were no bans issued that night. I want to make certain people reading this understand exactly what they're reading about. As far as bans go, kicking without cause, when the user can immediately reenter chat, would be a venial sin compared to the mortal sin of actually banning a user. Neither are acceptable, but let's keep this in perspective.
  2. I was away from chat when this happened, but later saw the avatar changes. Frankly, I'm a little flattered they changed to mine at one point, certainly not insulted. Also, after a thorough read of the chat rules, there's nothing about changing avatars or the frequency thereof.
  3. As Js said, I believe the lesson to be learned here is don't drink and chat:P Fun was had. Fun got out of hand. Were this my platoon, I would run them 10 miles while they were hung over and let mother nature take care of the discipline. The Gunny 380px-USMC-E7 svg 22:01, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
With full pack? ;-) Agent c 22:05, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
With full combat load and MOPP level 4. Uphill.-- The Gunny 380px-USMC-E7 svg 22:12, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

I have to say I'm rather disturbed by this. It may seem like harmless fun, but the chat isn't a personal playground for us, it's supposed to be a place where everybody can come in and chat. All that spamming and kicking people who disagreed made it virtually impossible for anybody to use use the chat for what it is intended to. You guys monopolized it for your own amusement just because you could, and you had no right to do that.

I appreciate none of you meant malice or harm, I really do, but the staff shouldn't engage in this sort of thing, specially not at this magnitude. We're supposed to be examples to to the other users, and anybody looking at will have a really bad reference. How can we have any authority to ban people violating the rules when the very people tasked to enforce them are breaking them and encouraging others to do the same? Please remember that when you guys act like this you're trashing the reputation of every other staff member here.

I agree with Js, there's no reason to make a big deal out of this. But there shouldn't be a repeat of that sort of behaviour either. Limmiegirl Lildeneb Talk! ♪ 22:08, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry, the fact that you have not included yourself in the accused IS excluding yourself, especially when you was involved directly in emulating what others where doing at points. I have no issue with being accused, what I do have an issue with is being accused by someone involved. For that I have zero respect for you as a person, if you had any decency you would also put yourself forward for violations. This is what I mean by you not having a leg to stand on, accusing others of an incident that you was directly involved in yourself. And I tell you why, this so called "light-hearted" stage is still in violation of the rules regardless of how you see it. Don't get me wrong, we also saw it as "light-hearted" ourselves, obviously to a larger degree than you did. Hence why we carried on, rightly or wrongly. But if we cant be excused for seeing it as that, then neither can you for your involvement (regardless of to what degree). You broke the rules and have the tenacity to sit there and judge others. I will take what ever comes my way, as I will stand by my actions and misgivings (can you say the same). But I am sure as hell not going to sit by and be judged by you, while you try and sit there acting innocent.
Now as for this forum creation, you are seriously going to use the excuse "collect the evidence listed and present it to Jspoel later" for the creation of more wiki drama and a public forum post about it. You do realise he has a talk page for such thing? (don't bother answering that, it was rhetorical) Why not do away with talk pages and lets post everything in the forums, that should appease the trolls hiding in plain site here. Which bring me to my next point that pisses me off far beyond this actual forum and the accusation. The use of the public forums for political and social posturing, and as a means to an end for personal attacks under the guise of "what's best for the wiki". If I am the only one who is able to see this, then there isn't much hope for the drama llama going away any time soon, and resulting in the community becoming more disenfranchised while waiting for the next days drama topic to be posted.
To be honest, I think everyone in the wider community, not just those involved here, should take a look at themselves and ask the question "how did we get here as a community, and what part did I play in it". Until then, nothing is really going to change. User avatar tagUser Avatar talk 22:32, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
If I was emulating other users in chat I would have spammed, kicked and "trolled" as you did. But I find this blatantly hypocritical, you are telling me to back down and not see justice is put on the right track, due to involvement (of which I have not denounced), but then you are also involved in this. How can you tell me to cease and desist due to my partaking when you, yourself, had a greater influence in the events. You have the audacity to permit justice only when it suites you? When you are at its spearhead? Tu quoque.
This forum was created as a hub for all the evidence and users to comment, as this was a large and serious matter, so people may add to the evidence and to their sides of the stories. I did give links to both Jspoel and Clyde on their talk pages, this was primarily for their judgement not for others, if that was not clear enough then I apologise. In the case of adding "drama" to the wiki I see no reason why I must abstain from seeing justice served in case somebody gets upset over it, that is the very reason why we see so much drama as of late, to not give people a chance to defend themselves in the open forum (of which this is related, General Wikia Discussion) would be not fair to the users involved, as there are many involved.
Certainly, though, nothing will change if we block the pursuit of justice simply for the case of a poor joke. Neko-signature Gothic NekoNeko's Haunt 22:54, June 3, 2012 (UTC)
Well this is the difference between me and you, I have not denied my involvement or responded to any direct accusations towards me as of yet (although that will change, as you have now posted blatant lies above, in an attempt to put doubt upon what I have said). Additionally, I am not trying to excuse the actions of myself or others, or attempt to rail road justice. If you read what I posted you see I said "I will take what ever comes my way (acceptance of any actions taken because of said incident), as I will stand by my actions and misgivings" (stating I did what I did, neither denying nor accepting the accusations towards me at present). I am not sitting here trying to act like an angle, nor am I pretending to be innocent, unlike some. What I am doing is seeing that justice is done fully (unlike you), by making sure that all those involved (regardless of degree of involvement, again "light-hearted" is not a defence) are called to question. Instead, you have judged yourself (something you have not allowed others to do) and dismissed any action be taken against you. Something you sure as hell don't have the right to do morally, when you sit there and accuse others and put them on public trial.
The reality is, you was involved in the incident and went along with it a times (regardless of whether you denounced it or not). As such, you should also sit there in the accused and be put on public trial for your actions, as you have done to others. The fact that you have excluded yourself, under your own judgement, shows what kind of person you are. And if you are so morally clean of said involvement, then you should have nothing to fear from a public scrutiny by your peers.
But since you put forward such an argument for justice being sort after, regardless for the drama is causes. You will have no issue with me starting another thread calling both you and DragonBorn (wondering why he was also excluded from you accusations, makes me wonder further on your morality and ethics) into question for said actions.
Now for you recent accusations, I would like to see a single bit of evidence that I kicked anyone, otherwise I would suggest you shut the F up, because I never kicked anyone during this incident. Especially when you exclude others who did kick people (notes DragonBorn own admission above) and where heavily involved in said incident (*cough*DragonBorn again*cough*) from said accusations. As for the trolling comment, to first prove that, you most first prove that malicious intent was meant for it to be trolling, something you have failed to do. This is just further proof that you are not looking for said justice, you so boldly claim that you are championing for. But instead using a public forum to soap box for your own unknown personal reasons. The fact that you have not been universally fair or wholly honest in this public lynching, can only be attributed to you either trolling, wantent causing of drama (which in itself is trolling), some kind of popularity contest to gain standing within the comment and therefore further authority (i.e. personal gain), or using this as an public attack on a set of individuals under the guise of doing what is good for the wiki.
In short, for those who don't want to read all that. For this to be truly fair and for justice to be served, all those involved, to whatever degree, need to either step forward or be brought forward into this public forum. User avatar tagUser Avatar talk 00:13, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
This forum post has been set up for that event, the idea is that all those involved would be listed in here under one post, not several. Again and again now you are proclaiming I am refusing to acknowledge my actions, often citing me as a malicious benefactor to only further some outlandish claim that I have a hidden motive. I seek no public respect from this, I seek no hidden agenda or plan, the only thing I want to see done is proper justice of the events, something you evidently don't want to see unless those who persecute you are also branded with the same level. Your responses are no feeling less relevant to this forum post, and the events in question, and now more so a direct personal attack against myself, something I will for one will not tolerate.
If you do start a new forum post relating to the events, more so the persecution of myself and DragonBorn96, then I will also place you under the same banner which you have so proudly placed upon me, that you are also involved and as such would not be in such a position to convict or judge me. If the evidence below finds me in part of these events and, as a result, I am also reprimanded I will take it as is, for that is what I wanted to see. I do not want to see self-righteousness to commandeer justice for the sole purpose of ridiculing and insulting the persecutor, that is too far. You may feel as though I am not being put under question, but that is not for you nor myself to decide, that now resides with Clyde and Jspoel (of which both have made their responses and we await their final verdict). As for the "kick" part, I apologise, I had not intended for it to be worded as that, it was to say "threaten to kick". The evidence of your "trolling" and threats are in the chat logs provided and the screen shots. If you feel as though these are not suitable, due to my and DragonBorn96's involvement, then I remind you that there is no suitable alternative since the only other source is from your own chat logs, which are unsuitable due to your involvement with them.
As for the lack of placing myself or DragonBorn96 in the listings of user's involved it was due to, at the time, neither of us taking part in the most damaging area of the events. If this was misguided, then I accept that and I'd ask somebody (not yourself) to add the names and the relevant rules broken. This will be my final words on the matter as I feel this is slowly turning into a personal attack, instead I leave into more capable hands of the Bureaucrats. Neko-signature Gothic NekoNeko's Haunt 00:42, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

If I am honest, I am highly disappointed in the users involved. It may have began as fun but it descended into something that any "normal" user would have been banned for. And for this, I think that the users involved should face the consequences for the simple fact that if anything, they should know better than a regular user. To break the rules you are supposed to govern over is unacceptable and it will be unfair to regular users if no action were to be taken. NextTattoo"Even In Death May You Be Triumphant" 22:34, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Seriously? All I did was to change my avatar like the others did and never said what was said more than four to five times. Vault boy joker by forarkan-d33uxps (1) "Game's rigged from the start."


After reviewing the logs, I am disappointed that chat mods involved did not realize that what they were doing was in violation of chat rules. Whether this was done knowingly or unknowingly, it is out of line. Several things bother me here. First off is the point of poking fun at J. Granted it may be funny and he may not even care but the fact that it got so immense that everyone took his avatar is silly. That can be seen as insulting but that is up to J to decide. "I am Jspoel. I do what I want" is again, pushing it. Especially after all of the prior spamming and avatar changing. As for the spamming, that is an obvious violation of regulations. As is this issue of "joke banning" which I will return to in a minute. The fact that almost everyone listed above spammed the same line "WE'VE BEEN EXPECTING YOU" is disappointing. When a person has chat mod powers and proceeds to do what they ban others for doing can be seen as quite hypocritical. The main issue that concerns me not only in this incident but in others is the so called "joke banning". Joke banning is unacceptable as it is a abuse of power and is not to be tolerated. I honestly am quite disappointed in the actions of the various mods that were involved and will be discussing with J any disciplinary actions that will be taken.--Kingclyde 21:34, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

No one was banned. ~ Toci ~ Go ahead, make my day. 02:12, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
Chatlog clearly shows Vault Girl was kickbanned and then unbanned. I want this matter dropped. Just let it be known that further "joke bans" will no longer be tolerated.--Kingclyde 04:10, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

Jspoel's comment

Ok, I browsed the chat log. Look like you all had a bit too much to drink on a saturday evening. Or just plain bored. I saw a lot of spamming, but more or less you all joined in that, except for a few. And the people who didn't join in the spamming were annoyed at a certain point (like Vault Girl), so that should have been a clue to stop right there. And you can't just plain kick people for fun. We can't have that anymore, ok? A bit of fun is ok, but enough is enough. I don't want to make it bigger than it is, so I want to leave it at this, with a warning. Don't do this anymore. Thanks. Jspoel Speech Jspoel 21:30, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

My '2 Cents'

will be inputting soon, so hide in your bunkers.--Zerginfestor 22:57, June 3, 2012 (UTC)

Now, usually, a chat filled with different people, basically a community, is like different vibrant colors or atoms/molecules in the empty room, sending out different hues of brightness, color, radiation, etc. Sometimes these molecules or colors will quickly clash among others, sending out different hues of color or spectrum of light and energy across the room, attracting others around the little 'light show' and possibly even joining with the others, creating a larger powerful flash of colors or energy before one side finally disperses, and just like how they disperse, the other side will also quickly disperse back to their different, unique forms, that sooner or later, the viewer will come to understand each molecule or color and their ways.

What I saw yesterday, was totally un-expecting, and NOT what I had in mind. It was like experiencing an epileptic seizure when mostly all the colors join in one flashing brightness of "DERP" that even I could barely withstand it, to stare in disgust at how they all formed and instead of a rainbow, you got yourself a floating large blotch of shit. Nearly every 'color' or member, I should say, that I THOUGHT I knew their actions enough, quickly reacted and turned into something that really just pissed me off to no end. I mean seriously, what in your damn minds thought this was a 'swell' idea to suddenly copy-paste Jspoel's avi, and start spamming out of control of a one-liner "WE'VE BEEN EXPECTING YOU". Expecting me to what? Get a headache? Then congrat-u-fucking-lations, you achieved it. What was worst was when you were all planning for this big moment when Jspoel gets on, and to just scare him or whatever (I have no idea what all of you were thinking of, trying to make him laugh or I don't know, in fact! The more you think of this whole thing, the more it just feels like it was just dumbass idea that was cooked up by Micheal Bay for a new movie "the attack of the Spam-Clones")

At first, I didn't mind the actual whole thing at the beginning really, I thought it was cute at first, making jokes of Jspoel and his actions in little manners, with me thinking it'll all just blow over and everyone going "alright alright, jokes over, let's go back to business" but...that's the thing. IT DIDN'T. it began to escalate out of control, to the point people were just spamming over and over the some one line, to forcing people to join in or get a kick out of the chat (sure they can jump back on, but in a way, it's a bit demoralizing, like a dog's tail between their legs as they walk back in), to the point of even brushing with Trolling, which again, is just wrong. It turned from 'cute', like a kitten trying to be tough, to when the kitten grew suddenly into a large tiger with Justin Bieber's face screaming "BABY BABY BABY" at the loudest pitch you can think of at Volume 11. It was really annoying, and unnecessary to continue a joke or 'admiration' as someone said.

What's worst (and this frankly disappoints me and pisses me off to the point Krakatau looks like match being lit compared to my anger) is who JOINED in the massive blob of annoyance. Some notable members, which is very upsetting, but the true notes you see is that a couple of Moderators, even an Admin, AN ADMIN, was in the fray, lollygagging. THIS. IS UN-FUCKING-ACCEPTABLE. Seriously? What were guys thinking at the time? Not only that, but you were all (save for Neko and Fraze later one) encouraging people to join in this crap and expect people to just nod their heads and go "OK!" and pile in? NO. I'm not fucking stupid, I don't join crap just because it's 'all the rage' for the next 3-4 seconds. I mean seriously (Sigma, and Tocino, I'm kind of really disappointed you guys joined in on the fray, especially you Sigma. Really?...that upsets me.), You guys expected to walk out of this unscathed? Sorry, but I got news for you: people who get hit by nuke, usually don't walk out god-like. They get obliterated.

Finally, I agree with Nicolle here and the rest: This can't just be pushed underneath the carpet and expecting the damn Elephant to just disappear. We have to treat all others equal according to the rules, including B'Crat, Admin, and Moderators. No one is above the rules, and each and every one has to abide to them, or suffer the consequences. You all (especially the higher-ups) should know better then to put your hand in the blender, expecting to get a cookie when your damn hand just turned into a milkshake.

Overall result: What in the HELL were you all thinking when you pulled this off?

finally, Neko didn't even join in on the fray, I should know. I'VE BEEN THERE. P.S. The only 'reson' I'm coming back on here is that I recall people talking about 'joining in because they told me' or out of fear, fun, etc, w/e. That doesn't excuse you from being seen and held up for your actions. You could easily just thought about how the dumb the overall action was and just stated "NO, I don't want to be part of this, it's against the rules, and I do not want to be part of it at all"That's it.

--Zerginfestor 00:28, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

TwoBears's Comment

Ok, the first red flag: I did not threaten to ban anyone. Second, it must have been literally 15 minutes of a joke that so many people were involved in. It was not solely to single out Jspoel, it was being done with other users, with my avatar being used at one point. We just decided it would be fun to use many Neo's. Honestly, lighten up, if all of your friends are doing something for 15 minutes and you feel the need to make a forum, you seriously need to find something else to do or, hey, here's an idea, let it go. It's done. Chat's back to normal, we can all calm down. My God, there used to be a time where this wouldn't have been an issue, but oh, we must consult the fora about everything. I'm frankly, pardon my language, quite sick and tired of this horseshit. --Bunny2Bubble 00:39, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

Another thing, you really are just beating a dead horse. The incident is over. Virtually ZERO harm done, and yet you drag it on. What would you like to see done? Us banned? Please do, I don't want to participate in a chat where everything you say and do is scrutinized. I really don't know if I want to be a part on this Wiki as a whole. Much to my regret for saying, it really has gone hill with these dramatic forums.--Bunny2Bubble 00:45, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
I agree with you 100% Burrs. I think this is unnecessary but I think at least some discipline should happen. It was all a joke and people take things to seriously these days. We are abusing the forums with shit like this. Detroit lions "Hawk da Barber 2012" 00:45, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
I have just two more points to add: One of my mantras is discipline must be fair and *consistent*. If one involved gets discipline, then everyone gets it. Period. In for a penny, in for a pound. Also, chat is usually a seeping cesspool of sewage anyways. Yesterday was just a high flow day at the sewage treatment plant. You come into chat, you'd better not have a thin skin. That does not excuse someone being unfairly banned, as has happened in the past, but everyone involved was a regular chatter. They know what to expect in the cesspool that is chat. If we were to punish every person for EVERY break of the rules in chat, there would be no chatters. The Gunny 380px-USMC-E7 svg 01:03, June 4, 2012 (UTC)
I completely agree with you Gunny. I will say though that the bannings were quite stupid. I believe I saw Fraze and one other kickbanned. That is the only thing that should really be at scrutiny here, even then not in a forum.--Bunny2Bubble 01:11, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

(Just to clearify, there were no bans. Only kicks. To those of you who may not be in chat that read this, a kick is just temporary, the user can come right back in chat. A ban locks them out for a set time. And I would agree with you. First, you bitch to your sergeant. Then you bitch to your CO. Only then, if you don't get results do you Request Mast] ie take it to a forum for the community. This could easily have been handled by one or both of the BCs, if we allowed them the luxury of doing their jobs, rather than going over their heads. The Gunny 380px-USMC-E7 svg 01:35, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

What the Greek letters have to say

Ha, I knew this was going to happen. As others have said, there were no bans, only a few facetious kicks. If a user does not wish to be kicked, he/she can simply say so. Was anyone kicked after he/she demanded to not be? No. It was all done in fun, albeit irresponsibly. It will not happen again (at least not from me). The rest of what I have to say GhostAvatar has summed up nicely. Thanks for the daily dosage of drama. --Skire (talk) 01:52, June 4, 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I did not clarify between kickban and ban, I figured people knew the difference between a block and a ban (kickban). Again, this is stirring the pot and I am going to lock this page. All I ask is that chat mods and higher please act with some form of responsibility. Thanks.--Kingclyde 04:15, June 4, 2012 (UTC)


I agree with Nicolle, a regular user would be banned for the reasons explined above. Because most of you edit regularly, I suppose no bans/user rights removal is neccesary (or a reconfirmation request would be made). But don't let that happen to you, from now on. MS: Destiny conquers all. 13:32, June 4, 2012 (UTC)