POTCO Players Wiki talk:Archive5

Archive5

Rules

Administrators

Rollbacks

Chat Moderators

Community Newsletter

Wiki Calendar

Featured Article

Development Suggestions

Welcome to the Seven Seas Court! The Admins will review this page Daily for New Suggestions What you can do here.. Suggest Block, Demotion, or Promotion requests. Give feedback on the Wiki systems and provide suggestions. How it works? Users can suggest votes ( Other than rule requests ), updates, or ideas here, then rollbacks and admins will vote on it, if the vote is successful it will be put to a Community Vote. Community Votes Lord Andrew Mallace • 26 May 2020 11 Community Vote: The Future of the Wiki Copied from the "Dissolution of the SSC and Granting of Eternal Presidency" thread here: "Friends, I … Read Full Post Squirto19 • 21 September 2018 12 Community Vote: Removal of the ISP Copy pasted from this thread: "This wiki has changed so much since its creation back in 2010, it's c… Read Full Post Squirto19 • 5 September 2018 11 Community Vote: Bureaucrat Demotions For some time now, G-man has been allowed to hold Bureaucrat powers on two separate accounts since … Read Full Post Lord Andrew Mallace • 15 June 2018 12 Community Vote: Unban Request - Will Greasescarlett As per our rules, Unban requests must be passed through a community vote. As much as I'd like to j… Read Full Post

Approval

The majority of the admin team ( Burs, Admins, and Rollbacks ) will vote either support or oppose to an idea, and if support wins, the vote will take place as a community vote, if oppose wins, it will not. The admins can and will discuss whether it will help the Wiki or not.

Suggestions

Example Suggestion

Give Tama63 some ice cream --Tama63 20:09, March 16, 2012 (UTC)

Example 2

Make a rule where Captaingoldvane2 gets to have Step's World Eater Blade

Ban Request: Sven Daggersteel

Well it says it all

Settled with the Admins, I quoted something from a PM I was not comfortable with, I did not intend to put it on public chat. For proof Zel Marque said "PM NAO" Mean's PM now. and I quoted what he said, I thought quoting something was allowed I was wrong

INITIATE PARYRANT.

1. The most Sven would get is a chat strike, so a ban request here is redundant.
2. Sven explained that he intended it for a PM, and didn't even notice the cursing.

Thus, Oppose -

--Parax 01:56, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

Ban Request: Boogiemango

Well, Boogiemango has recently broken several rules, including the No Pearson rule and the cursing rule.

Basically, he's working as Pearson's slave - posting his messages on the wiki and causing drama - all because he believes Pearson will buy him a gamecard. We talked to him in chat, and requested he stop posting Pearson's messages (note: this is not the first message from Pears he has posted). To this, he freaked out on us, threw a fit, and began cursing. I believe for his actions, a ban of a day or two is necessary. Not too serious, but he definitely needs a quick cooldown. Screenshots are below.

-- Jeremiah Garland 05:00, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

Jeremiah, you started insulting me, calling me pathetic, just because I wanted to enjoy the game. Then, oh then, CROSSBONES had to BREAK in, and he started calling ME a slave. news flash, slaves don't earn rewards. This blog wasn't even ABOUT Pearson, this was about Spain. But, if that's how BIAS you are all gonna be, then fine.

By the way, I saw Jack Pistol say "shit", and nothing happened to him. Once again, that is BIAS.

1) I called you pathetic after you had begun cursing and throwing your fit.

2) You're right, Crossbones shouldn't have busted in to the conversation and raging at you. Then again, it doesn't make you a better person for raging back at him.

3) Pearson isn't going to buy you a card. You and I both know that. He's using you as a puppet to get through to the wiki.

4) Everybody knows that blog is about Pearson. You aren't fooling anybody. The blog itself has Pearson's guild in the name. We aren't idiots.

5) Typical. Somebody writes a ban request, and they begin the cries of bias. Yes, Jack Pistol said that, but in all fairness he was given a warning. We told you to stop cursing and you kept on going.

1. You called me pathetic before I started raging and cursing.

2. Crossbones is immature, power-hungry, and he doesn't have any common sense to know better.

3. I know he isn't going to buy me a card... NOW. He could have, you know. He's desperate for an army.

4. So, the blog has his guild? Yes, I know he wants to rule every country, take over, blah blah. He wanted me to say it was a great idea, but, frankly, I hated it, also.

5. Yes, the wiki IS being bias, even at the slight name of the country "Spain". You never told me to stop, you just waited for a chat moderator or admin saw it. I said "shit", which should be covered. I said "ass", which is allowed. The only thing I said to hurt anyone, including myself, was "dicks", but that's because Crossbones wouldn't shut the Hell up.

~Unsigned Post

From what I can see, this is worthy of a short ban. Simply the language was far too unacceptable. Support - a 2-7 day block for this user. Sorry, tired, bad typing. 05:39, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

How immature of you, Boogie. I thought better of you.

First of all, you know that you cannot make blogs about banned users, especially the most dramatic of all, Pearson. Yet, you decided to sellout the wiki, your friends and what is right for a bloody game card? They cost like $10!

I came in here thinking "Hmm, okay so he got annoyed and started swearing. That is fine, a strike would be more sufficient." but I am starting to agree with the ban now... You have seen me (and other admins/mods) being lenient on the past for cursing when being attacked, so you might have got off with a strike or chat ban (which you got, and I agree to). However, your immaturity and slandering the site and administration elsewhere on the internet has made me think otherwise of you.

You raged for being called pathetic? That in itself is rather pathetic. From what I understand Blastshot dealt with you, and everyone contributing to the argument, including Crossbones, which even Garland agrees was at fault.

And lastly, the thing you cannot get over.... You think by bringing up my one-time mistake that it will excuse all your future actions? Wrong. I had a bad day, I was thinking of resigning and I honestly (yes, honestly) intended to say "shit" in PM to the people I was discussing the problems with. As soon as I noticed my mistake I said "Dang it! Just strike me, or whatever..." but the admins chose to be lenient, like we often are depending on the situation, context and magnitude, and so I was not striked and apologized for it. You, on the other hand, have moaned, whined, sworn, raged, slandered the community, broken several other rules (not only swearing, hello) and expect the same treatment?

Boogie, I have been here for almost 2 years and that is the first time I EVER swore in chat. I have up to now received no bans, strikes and only 1 warning (for joking with Robert, by lying to him). If it means so much to you though, and you really want to see if it in anyway changes your predicament that YOU caused for yourself, I will gladly ask the other admins and mods if I should be striked for that incident.

For now I am Neutral -, but extremely close to supporting because of how Boogie is handling this, because I was not present so I would rather not make a rash decision. I will wait on other votes.

Well, Jack. To start, I did not sell ANYONE out. I have money for a game card, just no transportation to get there, because I have a strict mother.

Next, this is the first time I have EVER cursed in chat purposely, and I tried to hold myself back. I am not offended easily, but I try to defend myself. And then Crossbones, oh, CROSSBONES, HIS HONORABLE AND WORTHY, makes EVERYTHING worse, for then I start to use vulgarity. If anyone has been immature, it is him.

Everyone gets the same punishment, but for you to? Like I said, this is the first time I have EVER cursed in chat! But, of course I get a ban, and you come out clean? That's not how it works, Jack. I'm not saying I want you to be strike, I'm just saying you shouldn't get off so easily.

But of course, you know all of the admins will support my ban, because the blog had to do with SPAIN. I mentioned Pearson ONCE, and that is because he is the person that wanted this to happen. But, it wasn't ABOUT him. Stop living off of the rumors spread.

It seems like you did to me. You chose to break a rule for a game card from Pearson.

Like I said, Matthew has told Crossbones to stop the immaturity or action will be taken against him. Albert got striked for his actions, and you got banned from chat. You got banned because you broke a number of rules, whereas they, from my understanding, did not. I have no accurate way of checking up on the statement that this was your first time swearing in chat (thanks Wikia) although I highly doubt it.

Once again, using that one instance against me is NOT going to excuse anything you do in the future. Not everyone gets banned or striked for swearing, the admins and mods assess the situation, and make a decision! That is why they are mods, because they know when and when not to be lenient. I have let many people off with swearing, and if I was on I might have let you off provided you stop, but from what I can see you continued and also argued and caused drama, thus the ban. You weren't only banned for swearing. You were banned for swearing, arguing, drama and whatever else you did in chat, not to mention continuing it long after it should have stopped.

If you do not want me striked, then what would you like? I offered to strike myself, but instead I got let off and I apologized, it was an honest mistake, whereas you swore purposely in public chat... at other users. That is already 2 intentional violations of the rules, whereas I made one unintentional violation. However, I don't think that just because I am an admin I should be let off, and I don't want people think I, or the rest of the wiki is bias, so please, what would you like? If you don't want me striked, the next thing below that is a warning.

It was not that it had to do with Spain, it was that it was a message FROM Pearson. That is the problem. We do not allow banned users to make contact with the wiki, especially infinitely banned users, and even more so, banned users that constantly try to do so and stir up drama. Pearson just happens to be the one that does it the most.

I am an admin, I have not supported, but I am close to it. Not because of "SPAIN!" or "PEARS!", but because what I have gathered from looking at the evidence, and how you have reacted to all of this.

PS: I am not living off rumors. I have looked at the facts (screenshots, comments on the wiki, etc.) and made my decisions. The reason I was neutral to start with is that I was not present in chat, and so it would not be a good idea to make a rash decision.

What the actual hell? You don't need to mention me in every single post. There were TONS of people doing things much worse then me, and you only point out me. Typical. I already knew you weren't friendly towards me but I didn't know you act like a complete douche bag for no reason. I HOPE you leave the wiki, and go back to the LOOTERZ or W.I.M.P, your own kind. Freaking dumb ass. Oh yeah, did you know it breaks ToU for a 7 year old like you to be on the wiki. "Strict Mother"? That's bull. You're jut kissing up to Pearson because he claims to be getting you a giftcard. How are ANY of the things I said offensive compared to how you treat me. I'm not a fan of fat asses, so please, leave me alone.

WHY IS EVERYONE HERE HAVING A CONSTANT MAN-PERIOD!? BY GOD, SHUT THE HELL UP!

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 13:41, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

And, by the way, I am taking Boogie's side in this. He's being Pearson's "bitch," so what? He didn't break a rule, because a previous rule cancels out the "No Pearson Wright issues" rule. And even if it didn't, Boogie wouldn't be the first to break that rule, so we'd have to go through and ban or strike every offender. And what about his cursing? Well, knowing the "lovely," community around here, I'd probably curse too. He's provoked with insults, taunts, and slanders, and finally snaps. It has happened to all of us, so just back off him. I swear to God, some of you act worse than Pearson...

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 13:47, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

John, from what I understand he was not banned from chat for only the swearing, if so that would have been ridiculous, especially without prior strikes. It was all the drama, swearing, insults and so on. The reason, I am still neutral on this vote, is that the only thing he did on the wiki was post the blog and do some arguing, he was already punished for his actions on chat... but my vote can still change.

Thank you, John.

Oh, and Crossbones, go home a whine to your diabetec parents about why you're hated at school. Hate you break it to you, but it isn't genetic. Stay out of the conversation. You were as much of the problem as Garland and Goldtimbers.

I go by facts and the rules. Plain and simple. Copied directly from the official rules page:

13. Please refrain from creation of blogs/pages related to the user formerly known as "Pearson Wright". These cause unnecessary drama and fighting

No where on the rules page does it mention any "override" of that rule, and to my understanding, it still applies. When I brought this rule up earlier, many people thought this was bias. I disagree. Pearson Wright, as many of you know, ensued so much hell on this wiki through his constant harassment of others, thirst to cause drama, proven cyber-bullying, and overall disgusting attitude. He was banned for a reason. He broke several rules, and ergo, the admins gave him a fair and fitting global block. Anybody object? Yet, when this rule is mentioned, it is called bias... Do you know what "bias" means? Let me give you an example of bias: a new user decides to join the wiki. They have no idea how anything works, and is constantly asking for help, much to the annoyment of the community. Things escalate, and the user is slandered and ultimately banned from the wiki, simply because he/she was new and didn't understand how things worked. Thank God this isn't that type of community. Pearson, on the other hand, has a reason to be banned. There's a reason for anything related to him to be outlawed. Bias is marginalizing someone or something without reason. Therefore, because there's reason, it isn't bias. He's attacked the wiki (just look at his videos), said many brash things about admins and users alike, sockpuppeted several times, and has been shunned by the community. That shun is beginning to fade though, and for whatever reason, many users (especially several newer users who never witnessed the drama he caused more than a year ago), are beginning to pity him. We need to keep him and anything to do with him out of the wiki, as we have for the past year plus. And same goes for his "minions" that visit the wiki. No, that isn't bias either. You know why? They cause just as much trouble as he does. They break rules too. But, because they're affiliated with Pearson, when they're banned, people automatically assume it's because they're affiliated with Pearson, and begin the chants of "bias".

Anybody who's been on this wiki for two months would know that Boogie's blog had everything to do with Pearson, so don't even try to cover it up by saying it had nothing to do with him. That aforementioned rule was also put in place for a reason: to stop drama before it happens. Every single blog published here that relates to Pearson receives much drama from the community. That's no mystery. So, we try to stop the drama at its root and delete the blog(s) before the arguing breaks out. It' a completely fair rule, and Boogie violated it. End of story.

-- Jeremiah Garland 15:02, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

Does this crap always have to happen the instant I log off? O_o

Anyways, Garlic summed it all up, so… nothing for me to say here.--Parax 15:06, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

Well, clearly you keep mentioning him ten hours AFTER the incident. You must be breaking the rule, also.

You brought him up with that stupid blog. This is the fighting and arguing (that I mentioned) that ensues. We aren't just pulling his name out of the blue like you did.

Also, can I just say you're not helping yourself with your stabs at everything put against you, and your off-topic yet brash remarks to Tyler, who has already received a warning. Just calm down, Boogie.

-- Jeremiah Garland 15:15, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

Garland, at this point in time, I don't care WHAT I say to Crossbones. He's immature, whiny, power-hungry, a perfect example of a "noob". The admin's majority will already be against me, and they'll side with Goldvane.

Alright Boogie, I will be speaking about your last remark about me: "Oh, and Crossbones, go home a whine to your diabetec parents about why you're hated at school. Hate you break it to you, but it isn't genetic. Stay out of the conversation. You were as much of the problem as Garland and Goldtimbers." lol? My "diabetic parents" could own you. My house is in magazines, MAGAZINES lol. My Uncle is actually a billionaire and he could buy your little garbage can of a house. And hated at school, really? You're the freaking phedopile with no life. I have friends, MANY friends. More people then you will ever talk too. I'm done with idiots like you.

My father used to be a BILLIONAIRE because he owned a furniture store. We practically live in a mansion, with 5 bedrooms, 4 bath, 34 rooms. Sun room, entertainment room, library as big as HELL, office, patio, we even have a pond with a bridge.

Many friends? Highly doubt it. You are the most IMMATURE, little runt I have ever seen. As I am not the one the says, " I LIEK BEEF IN MY MOUTH ALL NIGHT, YES? " I have more friends than you'll ever have. You are just too afraid to admit that you're an outcast.

When did this become an argument over wealth and popularity? O_o--Parax 17:03, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

Whenever Crossbones can't insult. He's completely useless in arguments.

-talking in a Sean Connery voice- It is in my expert opinion that half if not 3/4 of this wiki suffer from Pearsonaphobia. The mere mention of this person turns even the toughest of men into scared pussy cats. I say, why not let the man say what is to be said. File:ILLUSIVE

We aren't scared of him. We're just sick and tired of the crap he brings here and the drama he causes. By being scared of somebody means you respect them. Every ounce of respect I've ever had for Pearson has vanished, so you can eliminate that theory.

-- Jeremiah Garland 01:25, October 22, 2012 (UTC)

Did I say anything about him? No, I didn't think so. He and I were hoping it would bring peace throughout the game, but of course, that idea was shot down. Yes, it may seem like he's trying to take over, which, I don't know, go ask him yourself.

"My house is in magazines, MAGAZINES lol. My Uncle is actually a billionaire and he could buy your little garbage can of a house." -Tyler Crossbones

And what does that have to do with ANYTHING in the conversation? Absolutely nothing. Stop trying to be an internet tough guy, that's just pitiful.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 10:32, October 22, 2012 (UTC)

DDDDDDDDuuuuuuuuuuuh I don't tink de ponies son amarillo pero yo necesito una job porque yo soy un immigrante. Queiro que trajabo en Taco Bell, y Boogie needs to be dealt with properly. I support. DIDN'T USE THE TEMPLATE, WIN Talk

@John: Crossbones is, as Mallace calls is, a lost case. That's the best insult he can come up with.

Oh, and by the way, when will the ban start? Only two admins have voted.

The Halloween background?

My blog has been passed with 20 supports from the wiki. Halloween blog. I was just wondering when will it be uploaded to the wiki?

Request: Complete Banning of any Hitler/Nazi References

I find it offensive enough to any users or visitors with Jewish roots or relatives who died in the Second World War. It's also scaring off potential users. If I came onto this wiki and saw someone posting curved Swastikas everywhere, I would get out of there quickly and maybe even report to Wikia staff.

This would NOT outlaw the peaceful, true Swastika which was not used by Hitler.

Daylight Owl (talk) 00:54, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

Support -, this is very much needed because as stated above, seeing those symbols here can be offensive to people who are Jewish or have a Jewish heritage Stpehen Was Here^Hello ^ - Except it isn't.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member

I Oppose - If we can't talk about that now, 67 years later, we'll never be able to move past it. Also is an affront to free speech. I don't condone people using Hitler and Nazi references but they should still have a right to do so.. the moment we make the distinction between what is ok and what isn't with this sort of thing, suddenly everyone will be requesting the banning of anything they find offensive. We should just trust each other to exercise respect and common sense.

(not sure if this is an admin-only thing, if so feel free to not count my vote and/or delete this but at least think about what I said.)

Countpr^{Truth. Trust. Justice.} 01:26, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

This material can be found extremely offensive to some, I don't believe that they deserve a place on the wiki.

G-man.

01:36, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

I'm not even going to be nice. This is ridiculous. Where should I start?

1. Jewish Heritage - Half of my family is Jewish, by the Third Reich's standards, I am a Jew. I have never once used the words offended to describe what Adolf Hitler and his Nazi party created, performed, and left the world with. It is ridiculous to say you're offended by swastikas and Hitler references, because frankly, you're not. You're just saying you're offended because that's what you've been taught to be "offended by," when in reality, it's rarely offensive at all.
2. Disregard for Veterans and Survivors - I find this to be in complete disregard and disrespect for the veterans of the Second World War, and the survivors of the Holocaust. Just thinking about this is encouraging us to move on and forget the atrocities of the past. Maybe it's easy enough for you, a Catholic, who's all about forgiving and forgetting. But I don't forget. My ancestors died at Nazi hands, and to outlaw me from speaking about their murderers? That is the offensive part of this. Or how about those alive? They can never forget, you can't order them to. Same for the veterans. It's imperative to speak about your experiences, or the horrors will be forgotten. And until history is learned from it will repeat itself. I know there are no veterans on this wiki, but you're teaching this to the future generations, and they'll only learn to shut up at sensitive topics, and they'll never adapt to how to handle these sorts of things.
3. Forgetting History - I touched on this above. Countpr did as well. If we can't learn about something that happened over a century ago, where will we be in ten years? Ignorant to the past. And the past will repeat itself. Speaking of these horrors, even if only by mouth, teaches what we must never become, and what must never happen again. Supporting this tosses education and remembrance to the wind, and says "screw it."
4. Limiting Speech - So, basically, you want to limit the speech of others because it may offend someone? Well then, you all can never mention me unless it's to my face, because it may offend me. And we can never say "The BNO" because it might upset Mallace. See what I'm getting at? You can't limit someone's free speech over the internet because it may offend someone, or you have to do it for everyone else.

Read that. If you don't want to, just stay ignorant. --John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 02:10, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

this simply cause i was gone through a stage, where i thought the NAZI uniforms were cool. but john is correct

My Grandad My Hero Private Henry McMillan 1926-2007

at the end of the day it is offensive to me to glorify NAZIs as my grandfather was a British Army Officer and Agent for the British Military Intelligence in WW2 in the heart of Occupied France! He was captured and visciously tortured by the Germans and yet he never gave up! never! by the end of the second World war he was awarded a VC and promoted to Sergeant along with his commanding officer. he said to me once before he died the NAZIs werent the problem, it was Hitler and His fanaticals who corrupted the good which the National Socialist Party of Germany tried to put implace which was freedom of speech and the right to be free of tyranny but once again as throughout history we see what happens to people who arent meant to be in power!!!!

Lieutenant General Richard Venables 02:23, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="Alright. Here we go.... "OH MAH FREAKING GOD ITS A SWATSIKA, GOD HELP ME I DONT WANT TO DIE" That is alllll I see. It is so freaking SAD that you can not get over something that was apart of our history. It was history, it is not like we are spreading the word saying "Kill Jews! Killing Jews is a good thing!" No. Just no. It is a part of, not just the United States' History, but the WORLD'S History. I must agree with John and oppose this entirely. You have to realize that today, in our modern world, that if we had Nazis controlling a Germany with a strong military, then we would be more justified to fearing the swatsika. Guess what? That was more than 2 Generations Ago! We have people who may still believe in Nazism but most are white supremacist groups if not all, and we are not such nor supporting it! In our Modern World, we are not in danger of Nazis, we are in much more of danger (if you are the US or such threatened place) of a Nuclear Iran, Nazis were so fears 2 generations ago. I officially oppose,

<font color=" 03:45, October 30, 2012 (UTC) <font color="

<font color="<font color="

<font color="As much as I really want to write an essay as John, did I'll keep this short. I oppose. Yes, Hitler killed Jews. But, he also killed several others. I have two immediate relatives (a great grandfather and great uncle), who were both killed fighting in the Underground in Europe. Yet I couldn't even ponder on how I could ever become offended at the mere mention of "Nazi" or "Hitler". It's history, get over it. As long as users aren't making Holocaust jokes, openly showing support of Nazi beliefs and idealogies, etc, this rule shouldn't pass. As John said, it'd be completely ignorant, and, ironically, very dictator-like to outlaw the simple mention of a chapter of history (I'm not calling the admins dictators, chill your horses). They teach it to us at school, so it should be allowed here.

<font color="Oh, and as for the Swastika images, we went through this months ago, and decided they're allowed.

<font color="-- Jeremiah Garland 03:13, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="OFFTOPIC:Jeremiah get on UN chat :3

<font color="Secondly I Support this. Both sides present reasonable arguements, but I find them too offensive.

<font color=" Talk <font color="

<font color="Not to bring anyone down, but this is an admin only vote, you wrote all that for nothing. <font color="

<font color="^ @Daylight Owl: They can still hear our opinions. <font color="

<font color="Anyways, I oppose the subject. Many of Jewish heritage could and should be offended when they see a swastika, or hear about Adolf Hitler. It is history, the past that cannot be changed. Get over it. You're going to learn about this in school if you haven't already, which should be World/American History. I make Hitler jokes all the time, but never about the Holocaust. So, please, settle your horses. As long as there aren't any Neo-Nazis around, I think we'll be fine. <font color="

<font color="Also, though, certain users sometimes spam swastikas in chat, which I find a bit over-the-top.

<font color="

<font color="We appreciate all the opinions we are getting on this subject, but we ask you users not to fight over this very simple possible rule-change. It is not actually a big deal, your rights aren't being threatened. The worst that could happen for you users who enjoy having conversations on this unique subjects is that hitler and nazi references might be banned. I am still unsure as to this point what my vote shall be. Though I have rarely seen any talk of Nazis or Hitler offend anyone, it also makes our Wiki look rather sloppy, with pictures of and pages named after the Nazis. We have heard enough opinions(From both sides), we do not need anyone to argue on this court page.

<font color=" 14:39, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="Respect for Goldvane = lost.

<font color="That statement has proved you have no regard for education, the veterans of World War II, or individual human rights. I hate to use this, but every time you outlaw how we can speak, you push us closer and closer to a complete totalitarian form of leadership. And the last time the admins supported totalitarianism, O'malley took over. Want it to happen again? Neither do I. I'll be plain and simple - it doesn't make the wiki look sloppy, and it doesn't drive users away. Go ahead and pretend it does, it doesn't. Supporting this is supporting totalitarianism, disrespect towards veterans, and disregard of education. And you literally cannot deny that, unless you're completely ignorant and have no understanding of how life works (like some of you are....).

<font color="--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 14:46, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

Well, to start off, I don't agree with this request, and here are my reasons:

1.) Mention of Hitler and Nazism is only referencing to historical events. perhaps we can speculate that saying things like "Hitler did the right thing" and "The Jewish had it coming" are bad, but mention of Hitler and Nazism is only referencing historical events.

2.) If a user is going to come to this wiki and immediately leave, why would we expend any extra effort to make the wiki more comfortable for just them? I mean, really; if they're immediately going to not only leave the wiki, but report us to the wikia, why should we invite them into our community? In any case, I highly doubt there are rules against the use of "offensive" symbols, like these, on the wikia; i'm sure there are historical wikis that use the same kind of photos when discussing topics like the Holocaust.

3.) (This may not be as valid of a point as the other two i've made, however,) How is the mention of historical events where people died "offensive"? I may be missing something here (considering i've never felt offended before), but how could the mention of a historical event be offensive? My great-grandfather served in the European front of World War II (he survived, though), and i'm not offended whenever people mention the war Hitler and Nazism provoked that he served in.

Yours Sincerly, <font color=" 20:44, November 1, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="This is complete nonsense.. I'm tired of people making fun of a German Government that did some terrible things. Like 70 years later and people choose to joke around and make fun of Nazis and Hitler. That's pathetic. Hitler was a dictator. Yet you fools joke about what he did. So killing 6 million innocent people is a laughing matter? A War that my own grandfather took a bullet to the thigh for the allies and to stop a power from taking away your liberties and freedoms you all take for granted today. He still has nightmares about no to mention it has progressed his dam alzheimer's is really something to joke about? All those who oppose this are just plain don't give a damm about History. All you children who go around and joke about this are just plain sick. To me this is like your dam 9-11. Let's say your a New Yorker. You see stupid kids making fun of 9-11. Wouldn't you be upset or angry? Note that is an example of how a certain bad time in history effects people. I believe that we shouldn't remove the topic from History discussion in chat but making fun of it, joking around with your photos. Just plain inadvertent and asinine behavior. Think about those Veterans who gave their life for you do not need to live in a totalitarian society. Think about the innocent who have died. Learn from history for it doesn't repeat itself. Mr. Mango you sir are a careless rationalist and you sir are under the impression of being a tool to someone who shall not be named. You are not yourself. I recommend you come back to this Earth with all those who have a mind to comprehend History class. Your thought of wars from long ago have no impact upon the world we live today is false. Everything mostly from the 17th Century to this day have influenced our present day world. Most importantly WWII caused the Cold War which in leads to today. You can believe in whatever but everytime I come on the wiki I don't want to see Swastikas on a POTCO player wiki. GO ON TWITTER, FACEBOOK OR WHATEVER. I cannot see how swastikas are related to POTCO. Stop using this wiki as a blogging site. In conclusion I myself will not stand to see you all stoke that low to put steriotypical symbols of which leads to a bad believe of evil, dictatorship, mass murder, nazis, corruption, etc, etc, etc. You people made my grandfather yell at me when I was looking upon your black hearted jokes. Stop being children and be mature.

<font color="

<font color="

My Grandfather during WWII

<font color=" <font color=" <font color="

<font color=" 21:05, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="<font color=" <font color="

<font color="<font color="Is this only for admins? I dont know, or care. Anyway, this is a website that branched off of a pirate game, and were using swastikas for stupid crap like how they ARE being used? Are you kidding me? I dont care what the hell a swastika was originally used for, but not only is it EXTREAMLY offensive to some users, but its pointless, WE ARE ON A WEBSITE BASED OFF OF PIRATES IN A GAME FOR GODS SAKE. I dont care how many times you tell me a swastika isnt an anti-semetic design but it isnt ethical to use it in todays society----Ok ive read goldtimbers statement as of those-'s. You can make all the excuses why you SHOULD be allowed to use a swastika in pictures and other stupid crap you want to post, but its completely unneeded, and this is a website about a Disney game that takes place 250 years before a swastika is even relavent to anything in anyones society! Please, GOD do something about this. -Jeffrey Blasthawk

<font color="<font color="I think as true Americans, we need to respect and acknowledge all the veterans who have lost their lives in World War II under Hitler's rule, and the Holocaust history. A ban is not needed, and even if you're not an American, it is history. You can not erase it. Jack Goldwrecker <font color=" <font color=" <font color=" <font color=" <font color=" <font color="

Johnny, my grandfather fought in World War II as well.. you're not alone in that respect. They fought to preserve human life as well as to preserve the rights of the nation, which they believed in with enough convinction to die for it. So we're now going to forsake those rights because someone might get offended? The greatest offense will be taken if in fact this is passed, as it will be seen as a symbolic suppression of free speech. While this may seem like a small issue because few people here are neo-nazis and nobody "jokes" about nazis so I have no idea where you got that from.. it really is bigger than that. It's about whether or not we'll be able to talk about whatever we want here, reference any part of history without putting up these ominous veils over the holocaust like its "the unspeakable subject". Doing that not only stops the recognition process so that we can learn from it for the future, it also has the opposite effect: the fact that it's so bad a subject it can't even be brought up just makes it seem that much worse, and will just bring about more fighting, more people using it as a weapon.. it's just a huge mess. This rule should've never been proposed in the first place, it will cause much more trouble than it is worth. The only solution to this now is to shut down the rule, and give this whole thing the cold shoulder. Just don't bring it up anymore, and nobody will post anything about it. We didn't have to lose our rights, and nobody is spamming the wiki with swastikas. Everyone wins. <font color="

<font color="Countpr^{Truth. Trust. Justice.} 04:16, October 31, 2012 (UTC)

<font color=" Oppose -Completely. It's upsetting to see this request, not Holocaust, Hitler, or Nazi references. This is actually racism. Mentioning Hitler or anything that had to do with him is in no way offensive to Jewish people or the community (at least it shouldn't be unless there's bias and racism within said offended person's character.) It's like saying "All Jews and Germans are nazis." That's an offensive assumption, so in that case it shouldn't be tolerated. But it's honestly infuriating that anyone would request doing away with any mentioning of Hitler, nazis, etc. (This also contradicts strongly with the "No bias" rule.) ~Madster

<font color="Ban Request: Jack Goldwrecker.

<font color="Plain and simple. Three-day ban. I'm tired of Jack's loud, know-it-all mouth.

• <font color="He pretends he completely understands the universe.
• <font color="Still occasionally preaches.
• <font color="Spams "opinion," when people are against him.
• <font color="Trolls.
• <font color="Can't hold a real argument, so he in-turn starts accusing people.

<font color="I'm done with it. Are you?

<font color="--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 19:50, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

• <font color="I don't pretend that. I actually and honestly just say what I know, and you yet you come and say things, like this, that you suddenly "claim" that I said when I didn't.
• <font color="I never preach. I try not to, and I don't want to if it gets you mad. You, however, never tell me when I preach, so how do I know when I'm doing it?
• <font color="I only spammed it once today. I never have spammed it any other time. I admit I did it to get John mad, but he had already done some crazy stuff that got me exetremely mad.
• <font color="I don't troll... That is plain ridiculous.
• <font color="I never accused anyone in this political "debate," in fact, it was Boogie who did a lot of the accusing.

<font color="As you can see, I did mess up and go out of hand, but nothing deserving of a strike. Come on, you just do not like me, and I know it. Calm down, and I will. Stop judging me, harassing me, and accusing me and then I will be able to think.

<font color="Jack Goldwrecker

<font color="Let's add this up here.

• <font color="You claim a lot more than you know, and deny it when it comes back to bite you.
• <font color="You still preach a lot. Denying so would be completely foolish.
• <font color="So you admit to spamming, and to trying to get me mad. Trolling at it's finest.
• <font color="Addressed above.
• <font color="You don't accuse people? Please. If I have to, we can get the logs where you blatantly accused us of several different things.

<font color="Only when you do that same.

<font color="--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 20:04, October 30, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="For now, I'm Neutral - but leaning towards Oppose - simply because I think Jack's preaching has decreased and his attitude on the whole religious topic (as well as mine) has gotten better. Still, he may be doing it and I am unaware. I'll wait to see how this plays it before giving a definite yay or nay.

<font color="-- Jeremiah Garland <font color="

<font color=" Support - I came onto chat today to see Jack calling someone "not a true Christian" because his system of beliefs was different than Jack's. I argued that according to his own religion, only Jesus can judge people. He acknowledged this and said he wasn't judging. W...What? He was clearly saying that for reason X, person A was not a "true" Christian, and thus, Jack, being presumably a true Christian according to his own standards, was better than him. That's judging. While he never made that claim, that's the effect it had: it gave Jack an air of superiority and was judging someone's beliefs in a negative manner. We had a long talk in PM after which he said I should "leave him be". When I said that in order to not be judged he has to not judge others, he refused to accept this and said I was confused, that a Deist like myself could never be "enlightened" and that the conversation was over.

<font color="Later, when the political discussion started, he responded to Boogie's escalation of the chat to using caps and being rude and closed-minded about other people's standpoints by doing the same thing Boogie was doing, then after the fact trying to blame Boogie for the whole thing. I think both he and Boogie should receive a short chat ban for this. I can confirm that he was spamming "OPINION" - 7 times.

<font color="I kinda feel bad about this because I really want to like Jack and I can see he's at least trying.. but he really needs to get passed this idea that he has a right to judge other people because "Jesus gave that ability to his followers", and that he's the only enlightened person out of all of us. I'm sorry Jack, but the reality is that you don't have any special right to judge us anymore than anybody else has to judge anyone. It's a double standard to say that he can judge others because Jesus said he could but that we can't judge him for doing so. He needs to accept that we all have our own opinions on both religion and politics, and as far as the political chat goes, he needs to learn that fighting fire with fire doesn't work. <font color="

<font color="Countpr^{Truth. Trust. Justice.}21:58, October 30, 2012 (UTC) <font color="

<font color="What I did was try to shut you the Hell up whenever you started to quiz me politically. I told you I was busy EDITING something, and you continued on. That's when I got rude, telling people to "stuff their cornholes with butter sticks."

<font color="Other than that, I did nothing wrong except defend my beliefs.

<font color="

<font color="I'm Neutral - on this with Garland, I want to see how this turns out, then I might change my vote.

<font color="G-man.

<font color="01:39, October 31, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="The Fat people have spoken - Neutrality is the key to life. (#tacobell)

<font color=" Talk

<font color="Revised: Banning of Hitler's Swastika

<font color="

Revised. <font color="

<font color="This is pretty self-explanatory. No, this will not ban the mention of Hitler or the Nazis, just the curved Swastika. <font color="

<font color="Reasons:

1. <font color="Has nothing to do with POTCO anyway, Hitler's Swastika wasn't made till.... well, not 1745.
2. <font color="Showing this image pretty much means you blame the Jews for all the world's problems, which, not to sound like an idiot, is offensive (o:)
3. <font color="Commn sense? Hitler's Swastika doesn't have anything to do with history except for the fact Nazis used it in WW2. So don't attack me and say "you can't ban history," and etc.
4. <font color="Could result in our wiki getting is trouble. Big trouble.

<font color="Oppose -Still completely ridiculous and offensive. I could list off tons of reasons for you here, but for now I'll just address yours. 1. Lots of things on this wiki have nothing to do with POTCO, gaming, pirates, or the time period POTCO is said to take place (those things include pictures). 2. So the swastika represents the cause of the world's problems, huh? I don't think that at all when I come across a swastika. It's a symbol of the Nazi party, just as flags represent countries. When you see a flag--or so I would hope--you would think of the country it stands for. You wouldn't think "They went to war and killed people!" Lots of countries did; so how is Germany different? Your statement that showing the Swastika is blaming the Jews for the world's problem is highly offensive. 3. It represents history, and no you can't ban it. Just because you don't care for what it represents does not mean it should be banned. 4. It wouldn't get us in "big trouble" at all. In fact, disallowing it could. It's biased and, frankly, racist. Why don't we just ban any pictures of flags here? No more allowing symbols of what your country stands for. That's basically what you're asking.

Madster _{was ^here}

<font color=" <font color="

22:53, November 1, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="

<font color=" <font color="

<font color="So you're saying it's racist to dislike a racist group? <font color="

<font color="And yes, it is history. Barely. There is still a Nazi movement, or something like that. <font color="

<font color="I'm sorry Madster, but you're arguement is invalid because this is an admin vote. <font color="

<font color="Actually, she can still put in her opinion, so it isnt invalid. Also, "Showing this image pretty much means you blame the Jews for all the world's problems, which, not to sound like an idiot, is offensive (o:)" Lolwat. That's not at all what it means.... you have no knowledge of the Nazis...

<font color="--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 23:04, November 1, 2012 (UTC)

<font color=" Oppose - I see no reason to get rid of a certain symbol because it had a bad history. I took so long to vote on this because of school work. I agree with Madster about that we don't need to get rid of the symbol. --KatBlueDog^Hiya!23:08, November 1, 2012 (UTC) <font color="

<font color="kk :)

<font color="Daylight Owl (talk) 23:14, November 1, 2012 (UTC)

<font color=" Oppose - Per Madster.--Parax 23:35, November 1, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="SSC is Unneat

<font color="Alright, what the actual hell is going on here? I come on and go through requests but have no freaking idea who is proposing, or voting and in some instances saying! I think we might need to make some formal rules for the SSC. Such as using signatures with coding that can overflow into the next post and cause mass chaos. Or better yet, actually using signatures. I don't want to bloody well look through revisions to see who said what! It is quite ridiculous. If users want to put their opinions here than they better do it properly, because they are actually just spamming up this page. I think some rules and requirements should be typed up among the admin/rollback team later.

<font color=" <font color="

<font color="Lol Pistola. Sadly, it's true, certain users are not signing posts and we don't know who said it! Then of course we have to look at revisions which is also ridciulous, and is it just me, or are we going to need to archive this again soon? <font color="

18:43, November 2, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="Now Jack understands why I get confused on the SSC at times! I try to figure out who said what with revisions but it's hard at times, so I have been seperating messages using ~Unsigned Post.

<font color="Election Request

<font color="Note: Please read the whole thing, or you will jump to conclusions. This is not what you think. Hello, all my fellow wikians. I come to you today in hope that you will hear out my request, reading this as a whole, and hopefully taking time to think about it. Now, like I said, think about this. The upcoming election for the presidential office, wether it be President Barack Obama or Governor Mitt Romney, will end in four days. Due to this and the campaign for Lord Marshal, I have came up with a new idea. An idea, in my opinion, that will prove exetremely beneficial to the wiki. Here it is:

<font color="An election process, directly and exactly copied from the real actual presidential election. Debates, campaigning, and all. The elected member would be called the "Wiki President," "Wiki Executive," "Wiki Representative," or "Wiki Governor." Now, here's the process:

• <font color="THE PRIMARIES

1. <font color="A candidate must decide to run first, and check at least two admins. If you have any type of ban (chat or wiki), you can not run until they expire. If you have more then one strike, you also can not run until that ban or strike expires.

1. <font color="Next, the candidate must make a blog announcing his decision to run. You don't need and you shouldn't go over your beliefs and plan(s) in this blog, just an overview to the beginning of your primary campaign.
2. <font color="You will know be enter the primary election. A page will be constructed (made by me) where you and all the other candidates will post your political party (not that important, but remember, this is to be like reality), your name, and you will make a medium-length statement about your plan for this wiki, how you'll help it, details, etc.
3. <font color="You have two months to campaign, with the primaries taking up two weeks. Due to this, time is key. Any ban during these two weeks and you are eliminated. More than one strike and you are eliminated. Throughout these primaries, you are suggested to make many blogs stating your beliefs, in which these you will give more detailed descriptions of your vision for the wiki, etc. everything not covered in the previous blogs and descriptions.
4. <font color="Now, after a week and a half, the admins will hold a vote for the rest of the week. The vote will decide between the six candidates. (maximum candidates for primaries) Whoever wins, moves on. The admins will choose two candidates to campaign for the remaining month and two weeks. The two candidates must be two different parties.
5. <font color="The two candidates will make a blog stating again their vision (you can add stuff, you know), and they will state their process.

• <font color="CAMPAIGNING

1. <font color="Now, it is time to campaign. During this period of time, you will have a series of debates. You will also choose a running mate. The debate will go as following.

1. • <font color="The two candidates and the moderator (admin) enter chat.
   • <font color="There will be an audience, but they will agree to be silent. If someone types anything besides the mod or the candidates, they will be kickedbanned.
   • <font color="The debate willl last half an hour. It will be divided into two halfs of fifteen minutes.
   • <font color="The moderator will ask questions concerning the wiki and how they think of it. (I will go into more detail when and if it passes)
   • <font color="The candidates will have two minutes each to answer the question, and then they will enter a general discussion and debate. Once this is over, they move on to the next. (Discussion time may be limited due to time's sake.)
2. <font color="The running mate (vice) will be choosen by each candidate. They must have no bans on them, and only one strike if any. The running mates will campaign with the two candidates, making speeches and blogs also along with them.
3. <font color="At the end of the two months, a vote made by the admins will take place. The vote will start on the third week of the second month, to give time to vote. At the end of the vote, the votes will be tallied up between the two candidates. If it is a tie, the vote will go to the admins, and they will vote. However wins will be announced by an admin of choice made by the winner. (the winner is notified in PM.)
4. <font color="The winner will give a new speech or blog stating again, what he will do, and review anything he or she would like to say.

• <font color="AUTHORITY OF THE WINNER

<font color="Ok, I know there will be some controversey here. Actually, a lot. However, I don't want that to make this go opposed. Politics is my dream and my passion, and maybe others here to. I also think this good be great for the wiki. However, I know you're all asking, "but, don't we already have a president? Isn't that why we have admins? Do we really need this? How much power will be given?" Ok, first off, there will be a fine line between an admin and the election winner. Let's say the winner is Bob. Bob would be the representative of the community, and would hear out their demands and complaints and requests. Problem? Go to Bob. Bob will have direct contact to the admins, and will get things done with them. The winner will be a chat mod and rollback automatically, but not an admin nor anything higher. Therefore, Bob is a bystander. Bob will hear out both sides of the story. We can't have raging opposite forces. We need one trust person who is not biased, and will view problems from the sideline. This way, we can solve and help our wiki. But we can't just elect some dumbo, so that is why the process of election is so complex, even if it sounds so unneeded. And imagine it, basically a real election taking place. Wouldn't that be fun and exciting? Bob would not be put above or equal to the admins. Just a person who represents the community as a whole, and helps fix the problems by viewing things with a neutral attitude.

<font color="Example:

<font color="Jim Logan is requested for chat mod promotion...

<font color="Admins contact Bob, and aks what he thinks.

<font color="Example:

<font color="A guy threatens the wiki or there is controversy...

<font color="Admins contact Bob, and ask what he thinks we should do

<font color="Example:

<font color="Users feeling too much power given to admins...

<font color="User contacts admins, informs them in an un-biased way, and solves problems with help of admins and users.

<font color="Example:

<font color="Too much use of chat, no true usage of wiki...

<font color="What can we do about it?

<font color="It's Bob's job to think about it, plan events to help it, etc.

<font color="POWER COMPARISON:

<font color="Admin can ban.

<font color="Bob can ban. <font color="

<font color="Admin can promote and demote.

<font color="Bob can not promote and demote. <font color="

<font color="Admin can enforce rules.

<font color="Bob can enforce rules. <font color="

<font color="Admins are the people put in charge of the wiki.

<font color="Bob is neutral. He stands as the "leader" of the wiki with limited but balanced power, but in a non-biased way that will not create controversey. Bob is not in charge, just is a way to balance power and give an insight on both sides of the stories, and how to fix issues, etc. <font color="

<font color="Please, support this, and give it a try. If you have doubts, tell me! I will settle them for you! This will not become a popularity contest, and I have already thought about preventing it, and thus the election process is complex and long.

<font color="Please, think about it.

<font color="Jack Goldwrecker 02:27, November 3, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="Gonna have to Oppose - this. The SSC court is meant to be the main connection between the admins and users. We don't need people to be that connection... The court is enough for that.Stpehen Was Here^Hello

<font color=" Oppose - because this is a fan wiki for Pirates Online not a political place. I don't really think this is needed to elect people for admin/chat mod or rollback. I think this is also a waste of time for the chat. The chat is meant to a be a place to chat with people not be quiet watching a boring debate. I don't mind people talking politics in chat but this is too extreme for the wiki. I think this is way too much for a wiki that is meant to enjoy pirates online. We come to the wiki to chill and talk not get all official in chat. --KatBlueDog^Hiya! 03:13, November 3, 2012 (UTC)

<font color=" Neutral - for now, waiting on other opinions. I see some good and some bad in this, so I am going to touch on both. This idea looks fairly good in terms of its proposed cause, but in the context of the wiki, and our users, it might not be such a good idea. I see some stuff was added since you spoke to Parax and I, some I am fine with, others not.

<font color="Firstly, I do not agree with the person being called the Wiki President, that is Katbluedog and it should stay that way. I also do not think they should be the "leader" of the Wiki. That is basically taking Kat, throwing her out the window and putting some guy who won a popularity contest in her place. Kat is our "leader" and from what I understood this person that would be in this election, that I shall be referring to as the "Representitive", would represent users and not be some leader.

<font color="I am sure you noticed I called it a popularity contest and not an election, that is because of the wiki reacts to this sort of thing. Everyone will want to be a candidate and win, but that cannot happen which causes much drama. This could also definitely turn into a power grab. The Representitive will have user rights now, and additionally a leadership role on the wiki. What non-admin/non-mod would not jump at the oppurtunity? Very few, is the correct answer.

<font color="Another thing I can foresee, is that this will tear the community apart. During the campaigns and voting there will be, without a doubt, loads and loads of drama and fighting. Something we really do not need. People who say support one candidate, would be in all-out war with people supporting a different candidate, breaking up friendships and even tolerance among acquaintances. I do not like that.

<font color="I also don't like the idea that Bob can enforce rules. That will make things extremely hard for him to remain objective to both sides of the community, and for the same to happen to him. When you take on special roles, such as mod and admin, a lot of things change. You have to be completely objective when dealing with issues, especially people you are not fond of or are your friends. If Bob is put in an admin/mod role, that will definitely change things and how he must handle users. That is very far from neutral. This may also cause people to become upset with him, when he enforces rules on them.

<font color="I will now discuss how this could become a power grab. It is very simple actually, people will see that becoming a candidate gets them a shot at being the leader of the wiki, and chat mod/rollback so they jump right in. We have seen many many requests in the past, all trying to get some position of indirect power: Voice of the Players Wiki, Players Wiki Page Inspector, Players Wiki Represntive, etc. All of them unnecessary, and rather more like a power grab.

<font color="This is one of my biggest issues with this, the Representitive becoming a mod and rollback. Now, like I said, this will cause a clash in the Representitive's role, it could spark power grabs and so on. This worries me because we are trying to go the slow route on promotions again, giving the user time as rollback and if they do well, then to chat mod and so on. This will mess with that system, as well as the conventional system of users being chosen on merit to gain special rights, and not this "election". This will also thrust this user straight in to a fairly big responsibility here on the wiki, besides just being the Representitive. Chat Mod is not an easy adjustment, and you need to get a feel for it first, before you are successful. Then, what happens if they start screwing up as a mod? Do we just remove that from them and carry on? Sounds like more drama to me. Then, when the representitive's term ends do we just demote them again if a new person gets elected or do we make both of them mods? I don't like either of those ideas, because with the one we will have to many mods, and the other we will have constant changes between mods.

<font color="Other simple minor things I do not like include: the time taken for this process; users can always contact admins anyway (a middle man is hardly necessary); "A guy threatens the wiki or there is controversy... 'Admins contact Bob, and ask what he thinks we should do" we have been admins long enough to know hot to handle these things, going to a guy who is new to it seems useless.

<font color="Now I do see some good in this. A representitive for the community can't exactly be a bad thing, if done properly. I also think the election could be fun, although I do foresee a lot of drama that will arise from it.

<font color="

<font color="@Jack, Ok, they don't need to enforce rules, or be chat mod or rollback. And also, he or she could be called "Representative," "Governor" then. I only added the middle man explanation to assure you that the winner would not be equal to the admins, just a trusted representative of the community. Also, the real elections don't tear the community apart, and it won't be any different then how things are now (with the real elections taking place.) Also, I said chat mod because it would give the candidates more to work for. Throughout this process, the goal is to get to know the community more and be more responsible and trustworthy for the community, and if they know how to do it right, you would promote them (again, there would be only one chat mod, and in the next four months they rerun again.) You don't have to promote them if they aren't ready. Also, for Kat, we can take out the debate part. That wouldn't work good I guess.

<font color="And also, I guess I'm just trying to get the rep. to be like the POTUS, but without all the power. Basically, something worth running for :P Also, why would it create any more drama than what we have going on now with this EITC election?

<font color="@ Step @Kat, don't you see any good in this? It would prove fun for the wiki, and would be something new. Give it a chance please, and then we can stop it at any time. You've also said that we don't need an "admin," and that this is not needed. That makes me think that you didn't read the whole thing, because I explained all this. :P

<font color="Please think this over, I bet we can make this work.

<font color="Jack Goldwrecker 13:48, November 3, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="I have not read the entire request, will do that at some point when I am probably bored, but by what I have seen it seems like what Jack (Pistol) has said is true. This seems unneeded and a power grab. I myself don't care much about political debates, so I can not say anything good on that point, but the whole idea of someone gaining power, if not in actual admin/mod powers but in gaining a title and a status, then I would say no. I remember the time when there were admin reps or whatever the heck they were called. People jumped at the chance to be one, including myself. I thought it would be fun to have the chance to help the wiki, but I don't know if I could say that for the other people. It became a mess, and was removed a week later. I am not going to officially vote yet, since I have not read the entire thing as I mentioned before, but I am learning towards opposed at the moment.

<font color="

<font color="A Request Regarding a Certain User

<font color="I believe that a ceratin user named Voxelplox has had a certain role-to-play for the wiki, but he has not been online for a certain amount of months, which I find certainly suspicious. I do believe, from a regular user's standpoint, there be a demotion request put forth soon.

<font color="

<font color="As per our policy, Voxelplox will not be considered inactive until the 16th of this month. When that time comes, he will be notified and warned and if it continues, and the rest of the admin team agrees, something will be done.

<font color=" <font color="

<font color="If he wanted the job that much, then he would come on regularly, which he can if Stphen, you, and Lawrence can. That takes desire. If we send him a letter, and he does come back, maybe for a few days, then goes back inactive. That would be that he is ignoring his job on the Wiki and ignoring its health and users.

<font color="

<font color="As Jack said, it will wait until the 16th.--Parax17:33, November 3, 2012 (UTC) <font color="

<font color="Afterwards, if he leaves after a couple of days/weeks.

<font color="Agreed with Jack and Parax. We wait until the 16th, then give a notification. If he comes back for only a week, then we will have to demote anyways, because he would technically be still inactive.

<font color=" <font color="

<font color="Well yes I've been inactive for a while, but I'm trying my best to come on atleast.

<font color=""If he wanted the job that much, then he would come on regularly" I cant be on all the time, like I was a few months ago, because I have schoolwork, and some other projects going on. But when I am on, I try to fuffill my position and duties the best I can. And also to mention, being a chat moderator, means I need to moderate chat, well, I've be on chat numerous times, doing just that. I'm a busy person, it shows effort that I try to come on and do my job.

<font color="

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk <font color="

<font color="That is quite true, I have seen Vox on chat numerous times in the alst few months. He just rarely edits on the wiki, except for the occasional comment. He is not entirely inactive, but rather less active than he used to be. Curycoo was totally inactive, and would only return in random bursts and not for very long.

<font color="

<font color="Promotion Request: Lord Andrew Mallace

<font color="Mallace has been on this wiki for a while. Although he was broke a few rules, I think he will not be bias as a chat mod/rollback. I think he would be very responsible with this job

<font color="- Basil Brawlmonk

<font color="This request is null and void considering only admins can submit promotion / demotion requests. (If it was legitimate, I'd Support - :P)

<font color="-- Jeremiah Garland

<font color="@Request-

<font color="You aren't goldvane :3 This requst is void.. And secondly, due to the whole BNO drama, I think before anything like this was made the community would need to chill out. I would happily decline this (and its void) because i don't necessarily have the best repuation- and with that, usually, no good things are to come.

<font color=" Talk

<font color="Actually, I think you would do a good job, Mallace, maybe even as good as Yours Truly, BoogieMango. <----------- Awesome writing.

<font color="

<font color="Well, this request is unvalid as Garlic has said above, because only admins and burs can create promotion requests, which would go directly to a blog post once the admins voted on it in an administrative discussion site. We are currently trying to decide between A: zero tolerance policy and B: More chat mods. If B is chosen I can easily see Mall being on the candidates list, but for now it will remain in administrative discussion. Thank you for your suggestions. (-Slowly hands Basil a bag of money for making a promotion request-. Now Mallace will support on my next promotion blog, whenever that is xD ) 13:32, November 4, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="Brawlmonk made the request. :P

<font color=" <font color="

<font color=" Oppose - because he is always trying to push admins to their limit, making fun of users, not to mention the sexual references. ~Unsigned Post

<font color="@Boogie - Oh, edited. :P 16:21, November 4, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="Welllll Mr. Goldvane, I know all of you admins love some insightful insight from the Garlicdog, so I'll just say this... Go with plan B. Knowing the crowd here on the wiki (whom I love so dearly), going with the Zero Tolerance Policy will result in a LOT of unhappy campers, and presumably several long Breasleblogs (not necessarily written by Breasly himself, just in that style), which are always coupled with a myriad of unbridled drama. Not to mention I've recently found myself on chat often where there are no chat mods... Sometimes, not always, but yeah.

<font color="-- Jeremiah Garland <font color="

Why the hell wasn't this published sooner?! Support - Great guy, user-friendly, semi-responsible and a good sense of humor…

<font color="Wait, this isn't valid?! You bastards. :/--Parax03:29, November 5, 2012 (UTC) <font color="

<font color="RE:Jeremiahs post

<font color="A chatmod isnt needed on 24/7, but if one isnt on and someone does something bad users should always report it with our one of a kind report button :D ( or... am I thinking of another wiki/site with the report button.. hmm im sure we have one :D )

<font color="

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

<font color="Wiki Revival?

<font color="So, for the past few weeks I've noticed there is a dramatic lack of activity, and that the userbase is alot smaller, I think we need to revive the wiki, as it starts to seem there is a lack of content to create, now I've summed up the most edited types of content, and it seems the wiki is more oriented towards Roleplay, which is fine, but I think we need to diversify the wiki, like the old wiki was ( where people wrote stories, fan characters, etc, ), which as I like to think of it, was a creative time.

<font color="So I think we need to change somethings, the current way works, but it could be better like the old days, :)

<font color="This isnt really a vote, because I think we all agree that we need to diversify our wiki, so it is not mainly roleplay, but also contains lots of active content in fan pages, stories, plays, etc,

<font color="We should think about..

• <font color="Stricter rules ( No tolerance policy, infact, we did vote on this a long time ago, and it passed, now we just need to enact it, right? )
• <font color="Come up with new ideas, reward people for being creative ( a point system possibly? Users can gain points by the content of their pages, users can give pages points, and points go to its author(s), possibly? I'm sure we can sort out the technical bits.. or we could have some contests..
• <font color="Not quality standards of pages, but award pages for being good quality, such as a star ontop of its page, with a link to a list of good quality pages, this is smaller then Featured article of the week, and will encourage more people to improve their work ( everyone wants a star right? :D )
• <font color="For roleplayers, work on the neglected roleplay space, seperate background for its pages, forum, extra fun stuff :)
• <font color="Recreate an energetic community!

<font color="These are just a few ideas, but I do think we need to think about new ideas, and ways to improvhe wiki. :)

<font color="

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

<font color="Ooh! This looks nice. I think I Support - 1, 2, and 3. 4 is a bit unneeded, I think roleplay is good the way it is. If approved by the rest of the council, I will start to work on the award system. I think it is a great idea. 00:45, November 7, 2012 (UTC) <font color="

<font color="Gentlemen: let's face it: this wiki's glory days are over and we are forseeing its doom. I've been here since the second month of the wiki. I've seen too many users come and go, like James Warhawk, who unfortunately left us because of my greed. Really, the glory days were when Pip was still around. And the end could be in another year. It could be another week. Whether it's due to loss of activity, or we get busted. All I know is that this wiki is running out of time. <font color="

<font color="Forgive me, but this the truth in my eyes.

<font color="Daylight Owl (talk) 01:10, November 7, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="I Support - this with everything I got, you KNOW I do, but do you REALLY think more then half the community would support this too?

<font color="The Vital Element 13:03, November 7, 2012 (UTC)

<font color="I dont see a reason why people wouldnt support it, and Daylight Owl, actually on lots of wikis I've been on, the topic or general attidude changes, like on one example, its factual, but eventually all topics on the game are covered, and articles are so perfect ( think the sims wiki ) that they have to think of new ideas of what to do, so they started creating fanon portals.

<font color="Either way I stand away from the point, we need to do that, think of reviving the wiki, either come up with new ways to get people to be active, or continue on how we are, we dont need new users, we just need the level of activity to increase, I can see edits made 5 hours ago in recent changes, shouldnt we want to increase activity, and make the community more constructive ( not that it isnt )? Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

<font color="So basically, let me sum it up, we need to broaden our reach, broaden what we write, and from what I can see, the wikis more social ( chat is more dominant then actual editing ), so we need to incorporate that into things, and focus on the active aspects, ( so making it more social, etc ) and focus on boosting less active areas ( fan fiction, writing, etc )

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Vandalism Prevention

With the recent vandalism, I think there should be something done that works more for preventing it in the first place, rather than blocking the users after it's done. We have something already that blocks users automatically when it senses vandalism, right? I was wondering if it's possible to make something similar to that. This is my suggestion: When a user makes their first edit, they automatically are run through an IP check to see if they match any others for sockpuppeting or a liability for vandalism, or they are pinpointed and set aside for the admins to check. And since the IPs of vandals don't always match others, the thing we already have (immediate block for admins to edit after vandalism is detected) it could be edited (if possible) to block vandals after just one page content deletion/replacement. And to really step it up, there could be a change where admins and page creators only could physically make edits to pages. I'm not sure that any of this would be possible, as it calls for some reprogramming, but it would probably be effective to prevent vandalism in the first place. Short version: -Immediate block of users after one page content deletion/replacement is detected by editing the system we already have -Running new users through an IP check after their first edit automatically or set aside to be done manually -Making it physically impossible to edit pages unless you're the page creator or an admin (or make it where the page creator/admins can determine who edits the page)

Again, I'm not sure that any of this is even possible, but of it is, I'm asking the admins to consider, even if it's difficult to put in place. I know vandals may do anything they can to vandalize and this likely can't prevent things being added (like the pornography), but it could do a lot. Thanks :) Madster _{was ^here 17:25, November 21, 2012 (UTC)}

I think this is an outstanding idea, and would looooooooooooooove for it to be in place. Thing is we don't have that stuff (yet?) But Mads, that is a great idea. Maybe you could suggest it to Wikia and who knows it could be put in place soon? I am not sure, but once again great idea. 17:37, November 21, 2012 (UTC)

Great idea. Jim and I have also been talking with administrators on Community Central about possibly installing a WikiBot that automatically detects and bans users. We definitely need something done about this.

-- Jeremiah Garland 17:40, November 21, 2012 (UTC)

This sounds very helpful! Unfortunately, I don't think this feature exists, but perhaps you could get in touch with Wikia? We are currently thinking of any ways to stop the spammers/vandals but haven't come up with anything yet. We are open to ideas! Personally I think these immature children will give up eventually but why not prevent "night owl" users from the trouble of undoing this mess?? 17:44, November 21, 2012 (UTC)

I can ask wikia staff about the suggestion if this gets enough support from the admins. I have an email ready to send if I get the O.K. Madster _{was^{[Special:AbuseFilter]]ayers.wikia.com/wiki/Madster%7C here]} 18:28, November 21, 2012 (UTC)}

Sure, why not?--Parax 18:31, November 21, 2012 (UTC)

This would be great, however, I have no idea if the feature exists. Go ahead and send the email to Wikia, they will hopefully consider it. Stpehen Was Here^Hello

I think Special:AbuseFilter can autoblock someone who blank's an article I know you can disallow someone from making an article blank. Sharple Talk Page 20:50, November 21, 2012 (UTC)

And I think Sharple is the smartest person here :O Talk

@Sharple, the abuse filter blocked some of the vandalism already. The abuse filter also did a range block on the first night. I wouldn't mind adding more to the abuse filter. I don't really how to use it since Tama did it. I don't think we can something to check IPs, it doesn't exist yet. This is a good idea but we don't have the ability to do this yet. The best solution we have is to add more abuse filter blocking options. --KatBlueDog^Hiya! 21:44, November 21, 2012 (UTC)

') -- 00:02, November 22, 2012 (UTC)

I sent an email and got a reply just now:

Tim Quievryn, Nov 22 03:46 am (UTC): Hello,

Thanks for contacting Wikia. Sorry to hear that vandalism continues to be an issue on your wiki.

In short, no, sorry but none of the mechanisms you suggest are currently implemented in MediaWiki and as such I have no way to turn them on. I do agree with some of the community members that the best thing to do is simply improve the current AbuseFilters you have in place. I would strongly recommend consulting User:Randomtime or User:Sactage. They are Wikia volunteers who are very, very good with AbuseFilter syntax (plus they are VSTF, so they can probably figure out the vandalism patterns) and would probably be highly willing to help write some new filters for you guys.

---

Timothy Quievryn Wikia Community Support Team

Madster _{was ^here 04:06, November 22, 2012 (UTC)}

Sorry, no quite such a thing does not exist. We have the AbuseFilter and I think a spam filter, but otherwise not really. When a user has their IP blocked then they are auto-blocked if they try to edit anyway, so I suggest IP blocks from now on for vandals (we do it mostly anyway).

I don't really think we need to worry too much, this is the first serious event in a while and can be dealt with.?

Wiki Newsletter?

After Sharpe and Benjamin left the wiki, the newsletter production stopped, losing both of its writers. I was wondering if I could write new wiki newsletters, either with another person or myself. I know that the newsletter wasn't a large part of the wiki, but it was still nice to have. I really think that bringing back the newsletter would be beneficial. Thanks for reading this request.

G-man.

04:07, November 25, 2012 (UTC)

I Support - you doing the newsletter again. I like reading the newsletter about activities on the wiki. If you can find someone to help, I agree. --KatBlueDog^Hiya! 04:10, November 25, 2012 (UTC)

Greetings from Ankara. I had some free time, so decided to check up on the wiki through one of the hotel's computers (I left my laptop back home).

Concerning this matter at hand, I completely agree that we should start the newsletter back up. If you talk to Goldvane and / or Parax, they'd tell you that I've talked to both of them recently about me starting up the newsletter. That being said, I'd be very much interested in restarting the newsletter along with you. My qualifications: I'm a co-editor of my school's newspaper; consider myself a decent writer and a better journalist; I'm a complete grammar Nazi; traditionally, the newsletter has been written cooperatively by rollbacks (which you and I both are); and, as I've said, I've expressed interest in restarting the newsletter for a while now. G-Man, if you're interested, I'd very much like to write it with you. We could either take turns doing it (you do one month, I do the next), or straight-up co-write it.

Do think about it, I'd love to help write it! I gotta run now, I'll catch you guys in a couple days.

-- Jeremiah Garland 04:37, November 25, 2012 (UTC)

It would be great to co-write the newsletter with you.

G-man.

04:40, November 25, 2012 (UTC)

I agree Support - completely. I think the both of you would be perfect for this. Good luck!

Oppose- Sorry Jerry I hate Nazis, Nothing against your views but the Jewish popoulation did nothing to you..

Talk

Lets get the wiki ready for Christmas

Okay our sister wiki has gotten their Christmas stuffs up already http://piratesonline.wikia.com/wiki/Closed_Vestwithawesome snow flakes falling ^_^ and I was wondering if we can bring up our Christmas theme up to the wiki now. Sadly I won't be able to make a Christmas background for the wiki :( but I can try to make one on my schools computer. If there is someone else who can make it please do so we can get into the Christmas spirit. Oh yes @Kat I made this for the wiki :P on Thanks giving day. I don't think anyone noticed my wiki post card blog xD http://potcoplayers.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Marc_Cannonshot/Wiki_Holiday_Postcard_2012:_Happy_Thanksgiving!

Support - Very nice for the Christmas spirit :3--Parax 21:18, December 2, 2012 (UTC)

Unban Request: Blake Stewart/Tyler Crossbones

The Council has made a decision! The Majority of the Court has voted Oppose!

Okay, I'll be very quaint here.  Two weeks for using an IMAGE on a signature is just plain RIDICULOUS.  I'm not even going to do the flattery.  It's a damn IMAGE that he added.  There is no special power embedded in the image.  It is 100%, without question, an image.  It does not give him the power of an admin, and he was not trying to imitate one for any harmful purposes.  Undebatedly, that is the most ridiculous ban given for a first offense.  I shouldn't even have to make this.  It should've been three days at most!  Now, this isn't Tyler's first offense, so maybe his should be a bit longer.  But seriously, two weeks for using a powerless image?  That is honestly the most childish, most over-reacted ban I've ever seen issued on a wiki.  Grow up, and learn to have tolerance, it would make you a lot more popular.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 22:35, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

I Support -, using an image I think is not ban-worthy. And if an unban request doesn't pass, I think we should at least lower the ban length, 2 weeks for an image?

G-man.

22:38, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

I {{Support}}. Blake is somewhat new to the Wiki, and he wouldn't have known better, since it wasn't even in the RULES, and still ISN'T. Has he ever done wrong to us before? No, at least I don't remember, and I am on chat nearly every day, LONGER than ANYONE else. I occupy activity as every now and again. This IS truly the stupidest ban that I have ever seen. It's pathetic.

If memory serves me correctly, it was mainly the fact that they used Kat's signature here on the court. I am not going to vote yet.

I don't think the ban was just for the image. It was for using admin signatures on the SSC, a talk page, and page comments in which Kat's signature was used many times. We have already been discussing this in an admin forum for awhile, as Blake issued an apology on his talk page. I think 2 weeks might have been excessive, but nonetheless this was still considered spam as well. Same as Lawrence, I am going to wait to vote.  22:51, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

Tyler and Blake used my signature and Goldvane's signature to impersonate us. Tyler used my signature to say I hate everyone on here. He also used it tell Goldvane that I was demoting him for no reason. Tyler also told a brand new user that they were banned for "not liking them" using the rollback image. Blake used Goldvane's signature for impersonating as well. Is that enough proof to let them wait out the ban? So I vote Oppose - and they can wait out the ban. --KatBlueDog^Hiya! 23:03, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

While I agree that a two weeks ban for using an admin's signature is a bit harsh, I will remain Neutral - simply because what he did was breaking a rule, disrespectul, and ergo worthy of a punishment. Also, it should be noted that at least twice now he has ban-dodged, which is in itself against the rules.

-- Jeremiah Garland 23:35, December 11, 2012 (UTC)

At first I was going to Support -, but then Garlic brought up an interesting point. So… I'll be Neutral - for now. Still, leaning towards support.--Parax 00:09, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

SUPERCALIFRAGISLISTICEXPIAKATBLUEODOGSPECIALGENLAWRENCEGOLDVANEJAROD.

That is all, thank you for your time. Talk

I Oppose - GREATLY They Are Clearly not ready to come back and should serve their punishment

- basil brawlmonk

So, basically, Tyler did something bad, Blake used a signature as a joke once, and they both get two week bans?  In all honesty Kat, I think you're just upset they used your signature.  No matter what argument you can try to give, two weeks for Blake's first offense, which isn't even stated in the rules?  I thought we were better than that, but maybe not.  As for Basil, this isn't a matter of them being "unready to return," it's a matter of the ban outweighing the crime.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 20:48, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

I personally think that Admins' who had their signatures used shouldn't really make the decision on this request as their view is in a way biased because they were the "victims". Victims feel different and biased rather than fair judges. I personally believe 2 Weeks does not seem long (but I am biased myself as I kind of not on good terms with these two people) and know how they feel. But from a fair person's perspective, it is in fact a little long.

21:02, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

They can wait out the bans. They have 5 more days. We banned them based on an admin team decision. The length was decided by the team not just me and Goldy. --KatBlueDog^Hiya! 21:10, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Well there are Admins rethinking after seeing some points from others, Kat. This is why the discussion is open again, there isn't anything wrong with that is therre?

21:48, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Isn't the whole "no using the admins' signature thing" simple common sense? Sure, it's not in the rules, but I don't think the admins were expecting to have to deal with something like this when they wrote them (they can't predict the future). Plus, it's not all that subtle that the admin signature is for admins only when the only people signing with it-- ever-- have been... well... admins. Just saying, and I am Neutral - on the ban length issue >.>

Cher Bear =D (talk) 22:07, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

While John makes a valid point about this being his first-ish offence ( John said it wasn't his first and then said it was his first, and I don't even remember if it was or not, so I am unsure on that ), Garland, Kat, and Cher Bear also bring up good points. We didn't expect to have to write down every possible offence out there, and this was basically something that users should have known not to do. Blake and Tyler were both guilty of this offence, which ends in like 4 or 5 days. It's not like they are going to jail, they are being blocked for two weeks ( add schooling and that's about 1/5 weeks ) from a POTCO fansite. I change to Oppose - for the following reasons:

1. As Cher pointed out, we cannot think of every offence to add to the rules.
2. As Garland pointed out, the ban is nearly over, so all they have to do is wait a few days to be unblocked.
3. As Garland also pointed out, Blake has bandodged several times now, which should  have boosted his block time, but we chose not to increase it.
4. Other reasons I listed above. 

22:20, December 12, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose - I agree with the points Gold has made. It is impossible for us to have guessed someone would do this. Who would have guessed people would have tried to take over the wiki back a a year ago at least? No one. Well, it wasn't written in the rules, was it? No. It's called "unwritten rules," also known as common sense. They still apply even though we may not specifically say "If you do this you get ban."

I now Oppose - after seeing Blake's attempts to ban-dodge.

G-man.

01:09, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose - Bandodging is, as stated clearly in the rules, subjecting the offender to a prolonged ban. Blake has done just that. Multiple times. While the main offense itself was not serious, he's proven he can't take the punishment.

-- Jeremiah Garland 01:57, December 13, 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if any administrators care, but he tends to not even be caring about his ban. if it's supposed to make an impact, then how is it that he edits pages freely, using his own signature, and nothing happens to the account he is on...? IF I could, I would propose to extend the ban length, 1:

Because of the mass amounts of ban-doding that has happened and the fact that he still has yet to take responsilbitily for his actions, and 

2: The Ban hasn't had any affect on him, He has only sockpuppueted and ban-dodged, and edits frequently with no consequence. He isn't learning anything by attempting defiance.

And I quote from Garland's POTCO vs. Minecraft blog: "Yes. I reset my I.P :P"

Talk

Perhaps two weeks was harsh, but using other users' signatures is not on, especially when you use an admins to try stri up trouble. Since it is only a few days left, they did deserve punishment and their is a case of ban-dodging, I Oppose -.

I love how people overlook Tyler's ban because Blake ban-dodged.

LieutenantNigel (talk)

The Council has made a decision! The Majority of the Court has voted Oppose!

Chat Strikes Organization Proposal

The Council has made a decision! The Majority of the Court has voted Support!

There's been quite a bit of mix-ups recently concerning the chat strikes page, and when a strike should be removed. In a nutshell, this proposal is to create a slightly more efficient system to avoid any and all possible confusion that could result from the way we usually do it. For example, say a user has received two strikes, and they currently have two strikes down on the "chat strikes" page. Well, the way it is now, only the date of their most recent strike is recorded; not the first one they've received. It can be quite difficult to know when a month has passed before their original strike can be expired, when we no longer know the date for it. We could go through the page history to pinpoint when they received the original strike, but that is very strenuous. Therefore, I propose a system in which we display the following: name of the person who gets the strike(s), the reasons for each individual strike, the date they got each strike (as opposed to just the most recent one), and, if they have three strikes, the length of their ban from chat.

And in addition, we could also have a designated admin / chat moderator who goes through the chat strikes page daily, and, with the date of each individual strike shown, can clear out any month-long expired strikes.

Thank you for reading and considering.

Cheers,

-- Jeremiah Garland 03:09, December 22, 2012 (UTC)

Support - Would help in organizing a lot.--Parax 05:14, December 22, 2012 (UTC)

Support - We really need a new system to organize the strikes. I completely agree with this idea. --KatBlueDog^Hiya! 06:03, December 22, 2012 (UTC)

Support -, this is needed. Stpehen Was Here^Hello

Support - We need this to keep things sorted and so that there is no confusion or controversy.

Support -. This is needed. I have had some confusion with this particular system.  15:51, December 23, 2012 (UTC)

The Council has made a decision! The Majority of the Court has voted Support!

Block for user 81.89.60.232

First, he vandalized one of our newest pages "Spain's Empire" and wrote "Pears is till king of Spain dumbasses" anyways, I didnt bother to screen that. Admins can look that up in history. I then assumed, it was Pearson Wright. I checked his I.P. and this is what showed up...

IP scrambling.

Pearson Wright, used IP sramblers to ban - dodge last time (hint). Therefore, I think he need to be banned.

Matthew O'Malley

Well, we just got rid of Leon, and now another blast-from-the-past is requesting to be let back on the wiki. Jim Logan and I have been speaking to Matthew O'Malley (User:The 7th Master) in a separate chat. He is requesting his infinite ban on the POTCO Players Wiki be overturned, claiming the reasoning for his banning in the first place was invalid. Also, he says that if the admins do not immediately "release a statement" concerning his ban, he will get a wiki moderator involved. In addition, he claims that he has changed for the better, and his only intentions on our wiki are to be a faithful editor. He states:

"Okay I think it's about time I said it! I waited long enough for the admins to decide whether or not to let me back on the wiki! I promise to abide by all the wiki rules as long as the admins abide by their code of conduct set down by Wikia ToU. I have changed for the better. I have even been helping your wiki even though you people continue to have me banned. I am doing right by your wiki, I only ask you return the favor to me. I'm not asking you to let me back as an admin, I'm asking you to let me back as an editor. It's a new year, leave the past behind us. I am ready to return, I've learned my lesson. 'Thou shalt not do harm unto thy neighbor for thou convene under thy neighbor's jurisdiction' is a motto I am choosing to carry. So please let me back. Forgive my past sins and let the new year be filled with joy for all."

I am completely neutral for the time being. I have very little knowledge on what exactly happened to him, all I know is that he attempted to take over the wiki (as an admin), but was ultimately permabanned from the wiki by Tama. But, as we have recently given Leon two weeks to redeem himself on the wiki, I don't see why we can't give him a week or two to see how he does. Regardless, I will stay neutral for now, as I am completely in the dark to O'Malley's relation with the wiki and the situation at hand, and was simply told to make this request. Thanks.

Cheers,

-- Jeremiah Garland 04:08, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Give him two weeks. Then we shall decide. 04:15, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

I think Matt deserves another chance, if he is faking it, we can ban him again, but we really should just let him back.

Livewire Logan (talk) 04:39, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Neutral - Only because of the threat to get a Wiki Moderator involved. You will not get unbanned because of threats. Stpehen Was Here^Hello

Oppose - O'malley has shown me his true colours recently. He hates us simply for not unbanning him. If he unblock him due to a threat others like Wright and Redbeard will use the same tactic. 05:06, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

I strongly Oppose -. Why? What good would it be to let him back? It ruins the point of infinite bans. I think it would be stupid to let him back. Who cares if he changed. If he really wanted to be an editor here, here wouldn't have done what he did in the first place! Its easily said to change, but not easily done. Another chance? Gee that sure worked well when we gave Pearson another chance a long time ago.. I doubt Matthew would do anything bad, but still it defeats the purpose of an infinite ban especially when he makes threats. And the above quote doesn't help, it basically looks like hes begging to come back. He says hes been helping this wiki, how? Also Jim, it makes no sense to ban him again if hes faking it, don't let him back in the first place. Also, of course you would support this.. he was the one that talked to you about it, and most likely convinced you entirely he should be back. Rules are rules. If someones banned, they should be banned. Theres my 50 cents Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Well, I've had a good half-hour to think about it, and I'm going to have to go with oppose as Benjamin said, what's the point of having infinite bans if we're simply going to let everybody back, because they claim "they've changed"? Maybe he has changed. I don't know. But I'm a strong believer in taking responsibilities for your actions, and when O'Malley attempted to usurp control of the wiki, he has to pay the price. I think we need to stop being so sympathetic, and let him serve his punishment. When Tama granted him an infinite ban, he was implying that that ban would indeed be infinite. I'm also not a huge fan of O'Malley's threatening us, either. So I'm going with a strong no.

-- Jeremiah Garland

DUHHH I DO NOT KNOW WHY U SUCH A HATER! CAPATAAINN GOLLLLD VEIN U HATE HIM CUZ HE BLACK? i See how it is. I could hate Jack Pistol just beacuse hes AsianAfrican (which I do) but I don't! If my vote counted I would vote support because we need positive members like him and tha admins are abusive (especially freaking jarood.) also some of our mods aren't intellectual enuf to b stupid so i call them rocks. Toodlez Talk

Im with Mall on this one. He knows what hes talking about. Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

No thanks, I Oppose -. He has been let back after his initial infinite ban and, like with all other users, it does not work. O'Malley was banned for literally taking over the wiki by demoting the other admins and destroying a lot of stuff. I fail to see how that makes his ban invalid.

He has come and ban-dodged here many times, so no, he has not waited patiently. O'Malley also does really weird and random things, that hint to instability. One time he begged me to help his noob on POTCO, and after a while he got bored, raged on me and said he was quitting because the game was communist. I saw in the recent war between Britain and Switzerland (or whatever), how he took things too far. He kept messaging John about how he surrenders and John can take him captive or whatever... And in the game he found Goldvane and I, and started going on about "THIS IS WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR. DO IT! KILL ME!"

Also, if we allow O'Malley back that sets a standard that we can go back on all infinite bans, which is poor leadership. It makes me feel like we will change our minds to easily and not stick to our guns and do what is right. We cannot just keep giving in, or even considering giving in, because it gives these banned users hope that if they keep pestering us they will be unbanned.

No.

Can I remind the admins to remove regular user's vote templates, as this is admin-only... I did the favor of removing the non-admin vote templates for you and replacing them with regular words.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 14:50, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Here's what I think:

Let's take two people who he will most likely use as to why he should be unbanned.

Slappy and Leon.

Slappy

Why Slappy? Slappy attempted Wiki Takeover and was only banned 3-4 Months for it, rather than infinite, which points to some things, don't you think? Maybe I'm wrong

Leon

Why Leon? Leon has socked god knows how many times (Prince Leon, Goldloather, James, and others) and was infinitely banned on all of them and was also, when he came back, given the chance to redeem himself! If we had any sense we would have banned him Johnny on the spot. Period. O'Malley also socked as Olivia Bishop whatever the hell is the rest. And only once, unlike our friend Leon.

But now since we did it with Leon (a black list user, in my terms, someone who is to never come back) why not O'malley? I mean it's only fair. And once again as I said with Leon,  if he hasn't changed then we ban him like that. BAM! Gone. I bring this point not because I like O'Malley.

By the way we do things, it is only fair which I must urge to tell Admins:

We must think MORE before we act. This Leon thing can already start firing back, because, as VSTF, with what I said on my screen, I'd unban O'Malley. It's simple logic. With that in mind I think we should all consider what might happen.

You say Redbeard and Pearson will use that same excuse to be unbanned as well, and I wouldn't be surprised if they decide to as well because, using the logic of what has happened here, it's only fair. But, the thing is, O'Malley didn't misbehave and cuss out everyone and anything of the sort from what I understand. (I could be wrong so don't quote me) He was banned for wiki take-over and socked once. Never let back.

I am personally neutral on the subject, but those are just points to consider. And I sure don't know much so you're going to have to educate me,

Sincerely,

16:28, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Albert, I must disagree with your logic. You are basically suggetsing we allow this whole Leon saga, which we just ridded ourselves of, happen again. No thank you, the drama has been quite enough. O'Malley will not be returning. He has already messaged me a whole lot of stuff about him wanting to help the administration and so on, but frankly, who said we want his help? He has been the cause for many problems here and I am not keen to let him back, nevermind help us. We have let him back in the past and he has sock-puppeted many times and caused trouble. He is no better than Leon. 

I think it is ridiculous to drop our standards and back off from what we should be holding strong too. We cannot do things and keep on changing our minds, because of "second chances" or whatever. That, in my opinion, is poor leadership. Decisions must be made and kept to, which is why I was very upset with many of my fellow admins and mods with the recent Leon saga. They were all up in arms and ready to have him banned, and make a vote. Then when the vote is made, Step and I were the only ones who held true to our word. Garland, Gman and Par changed around all the time, and although I dont want to attack them on this I am not very impressed with them for it. Sure, maybe the community vote was a mistake, but almost everyone agreed to Leon being banned, so if these individuals had stuck to their guns, stood their ground and fought for what was right (which happened in the end anyway) the vote would have been over sooner. Thus, less drama. Checkmate, geniuses. If that didn't make sense allow me to ellaborate - I am saying if all the people (I am looking mainly at the special rights members) had stuck to their word, the vote would have passed sooner, because support would have kept the upper-hand and less people would have jumped ship to oppose. 

John brought up a decent point, that he likes when an admin votes, even if it may be the wrong vote. Although, I think the right vote is always the best (then again, it is a matter of opinion on what is right and wrong) this is very true. The admins are here to lead and be strong, and that means taking a solid stand in a vote. Now, I can understand an initial neutrality, to better assess the situation at first, but before it ends the admin/mod should make a vote. I know this is slightly off-topic, but it is part of my point with O'Malley and I need to get this frustration of my chest.

Allowing these black-list users back gives them hope that they may always have a chance to return. No such thing should exist, because they should never return. They were banend forever, and they are not coming back. O'Malley mentioned that the fact that a user who no longer uses Wikia, Tama, banned him, his ban is invalidated. That is utter stupidity and a desperate attempt to convince us to let him back by bringing up senseless points just so his argument seems bigger. It is like saying that when a judge who sentenced a criminal to life in prison dies, the criminal should be released. Unfortunately, that does not suddenly make your crimes non-existant.

He also wants to get a "wiki moderator" involved. I am not sure if he meansstaff, but once again that is either a poor threat or a useless idea. They do not care that we banned him, because we did so validly. They will just be annoyed by the drama he is creating for them. He also mentioned something about keeping him on a pedestal for the world to see to display Tama's might, but this made very little sense and I suspect is once again random crap he thought up to add to his senseless argument, or it is some form of an ego-boost, because he thinks that is how much we care/worry about him. Hahaha, good one!

In short - no.

um exchooz me. we changed around all teh tiem as a joak. we were going 2 change bak 2 support on teh last day.--Parax 03:45, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

I am also not going to reply to him, because I know he will read everything I say here. I do not wish to play his game by humouring him with my responses, nor do I wish to have contact with him or be a member of that wiki. If I think up some comical senseless arguments (which is how I see his), I might engage him.

He also just said something to the effect that we are unfiar in chosing who we be lenient to (implying Leon, I guess). Well, firstly, I did not allow him back - it just happened and was dealt with. If we were so lenient to him, why did we ban him? He also added that we won't get any respect for this (I assume from him) - how disappointing, as O'Malley's respect is the one thing I have always strived for in my life.

Oppose -I don't see any reason to allow O'malley to come back to the wiki. I also completely agree with Jack. He makes some very good points about why we shouldn't let him back. He was banned for a very valid reason. He has also had too many chances to prove to us that he deserves to edit here. We have given him multiple chances to come back but he breaks the rules every single time. He also creates new accounts to ban dodge. I appreciate that he tries to helps us but we don't need him to be unbanned. At this point, I think he shouldn't come back. --KatBlueDog^Hiya! 18:01, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - Matthew O'malley should not be let back into the wiki. The reason for the ban was completely valid. He has tried to dodge his ban multiple times using alternate accounts. As Goldvane said, he hates us for not unbanning him, why should we let him back?

G-man.

03:01, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Unban Request:Prince Leon the Mango

The Council has made a decision! The Majority of the Court has voted Oppose!

--Goldvane did this illegally put him on suspension o_O i don't see any opposes besides his

Uhhhhh yeaahhhhhh I just to eesayy.. well first off, PHilipinos DO HAVE SOULS...... so yeah.

But secondly: I think pearson iz bahhdd por de brain.

Basically, the adminz r abuseve and if we donz act we shall be taken over. We must unban leon now! Viva la communism!

in other notes, I request the unbanning of pearson wright Leon because I think hes actually a positive member of the community

????

15:59, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

Jokes are no accepted on the Court. They are funny on chat or blogs but this is for serious matters only.

19:19, January 6, 2013 (UTC)

How dare you consider it a joke~Unsigned

Your corrupt attempts shall fail, Spark. Ghostvane rules, BWAHAHA xD ~unsigned

Mango, what IS this nonsense?! 

Demotion Request: Voxelplox

Where to start...

Well, I believe Benjy's time as a rollback should be quite finished.  He has clearly shown over the last few days that he is not capable of handling what power this wiki grants him.  He has started several fights with myself and others in chat by mocking and jeering us, and then demanding we "stop fighting" and warns us when we defend ourselves.  He abuses his position in the roleplay council to challenge me.  His newest creation "Extension of the RP Council" is directed at me, and was only created after a fight he instigated in chat.

He had shown completely irresponsible and immature qualities by fighting with users, and using his power to suppress others.  Not to mention he only appears once every so often, and causes drama whenever he appears.

Now, I know what you're going to say: "You're just doing this because you don't like him.  Plus, what damage can he do if he's mostly inactive?"

1. I, infact, used to consider Benjamin one of my best friends.  It's apparent that the feeling is no longer mutual.
2. He can cause a lot of damage if he's mostly inactive.  What would be the point of keeping mods who rarely appear and do anything unless it pertains to them?  It makes the wiki look bad to have inactive mods who return and assume they understand the whole situation when they don't.

I'd like the admins to really consider this.  Every user with power I've called out early has been ignored, and later caused immense problems, resulting in their demotion.  Would you rather cause a bit of drama now and avoid a later time bomb going off, or would you rather let it tick away until an even bigger fight erupts in the future?

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 02:50, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Even if he is here, he is making pages on The British Goverment which is a total spam page. He has not done anything that rollbacks need to do either. 02:53, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

As per rule thirty-eight, this request is invalid as users may not create demotion requests for users with certain privileges.

-- Jeremiah Garland

As per an unstated fact, that applies to demotion blogs, not the SSC.  The SSC is used to request the creation of things like demotion blogs.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 03:05, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

I disagree with literally everything you accuse me of, but I wont even bother saying anything else..

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Hmm. Well, Ben has been a bit more active recently. I wish you two could stop bickering, but it appears that is impossible. It seems more like this is a personal issue between you two to me, but I will state that the British Government page and the fact that Ben isn't very active sets some red flags... Neutral -for now, will see other opinions and then vote. 

I'm sorry if the wiki isn't my biggest, and highest priority. I have been more active lately. Also it isn't a personal fight between John and I, because there isn't really any fighting going on. Its simply; if someone tries to stand up for others, and tell John he isn't the King of the World - he gets mad at you. And we can certainly see that in previous demotion requests hes made. The British Government page was a joke and wasn't meant to make anyone mad. It was more or less a parody of some of the pages that shouldnt belong on the wiki, like the What if pages ( as in What if you were a cartoon character or something like that ) All I have shown is maturity, and the ability to do my job properly.

I'd like to elaborate on the activity part, in no way has my inactivity harmed the wiki. It is worse for an admin to be inactive in my opinion right now, because we have a lot of chat mods on the chat. I have not failed my duties as a chat mod, or rollback you can clearly see that in chat. I also understand the rules of the wiki. I am trying to increase my activity, and you can certainly see that, and my activity will increase. 

Now, John has a history of losing his temper when people point out that he is not the king of the world, and the most powerful wiki user on this wiki that can start a wiki rebellion in seconds, and can kick out whoever questions him. I'm not going to go any further, because I don't want to get into a conflict here, but he also tends to think he is above the rules. Which he is not, nobody is. Also, I've noticed, if John gets a strike on chat - he will sometimes demand the chat strike to be removed. Is this the person you think would write a reasonable demotion request? Am I really that bad? I sure am handling this a lot better then when his demotion as an admin was requested. Also lets look back into the history of demotion requests long ago, which were all made John, I think he wanted to demote Parax before? Tama63? Sharple? Is this one any different? Its made out of anger, not real facts. What have I done, that really makes me a bad chat mod, or rollback? 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

I could write a lengthy essay on how I think you're wrong, but I think I'm just going to bullet point it to get the general point across.

• The only, and by only I mean the only excuse people ever use against me is "He thinks he's the king of the world."  I think there is ample evidence enough to disprove that as being a bird cry for people who have a lack of "dirt" to hold against me.
• Yes, Benjamin, the BNO was a joke as well.  Unfortunately, admins and mods shouldn't be making fun of other pages.
• I don't think you're the person able to judge your own actions in a discussion referring to you.  What you may have seen as appropriate and mature may be interpreted by everyone else as immature and rude.  And in reference to you "doing your job properly," what exactly do you do, other than lay around in chat and give your opinions on countless topics, resulting in fights brewing?
• Oh look, someone insulting me because they don't have any good defense for themselves.  How quaint.
• It would appear that I often demand the strike be removed.  Normally because it is issued on inappropriate grounds, or was issued out of malice.
• My attitude towards people has little to do with my ability to sense when a figure of authority needs to be removed, and it's fairly funny how you mentioned that.
• I was also being lied about, Benjy, and attempting to defend myself rather than degrade others.
• Unfortunately, most of my demotion requests worked out to have come true anyway.  Jz, Sharple, Skull... all of which caused excessive drama.  All of which could've been dealt with easier had I not been ignored.
• This demotion request has been compiled of 100% facts, and the proof is in your face.  You posted it, in fact.  You degraded me rather than attempting to argue the facts I dealt.

Instead of defending yourself, you resulted to degrading me and stating that I'm incompetent and selfish.  That doesn't look nice on your part, considering one of the reasons is insulting users.  Along with that, you've proven to me and anyone who reads this that you have little ability to combat the facts that were brought to attention, and you would rather draw attention away from them.

My competence has little to do with how legitimate this request should be.  Despite my motives, I presented nothing but facts and logical reasoning.  You, on the other hand, presented an inability to defend yourself, and an ample ability to insult others, and attempt to turn the tables - which does not work in your favor, lad.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member

Deletion of the role play council

Well, this has been over a lot of peoples heads.

Reasons:

-Does not fix drama

-Role play lived without it

-Not a lot of new players on the game, therefore, no noobs will claim anything.

-Our roleplay system is giving users who hardly/if ever play the game more power because they're active here. Ex: Garland/Mallace.

03:11, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

I have no comment other than your above statement is false (And I am STILL an HCO..) and the Roleplay council has established a fundamental ways of organizing and structuralizing the Wiki.

Alright, I'll tackle this point-by-point (obviously, I oppose)

• While you may not notice it, we actually do fix drama. When was the last time you saw a major argument on the wiki about SvS scores, or some noob claiming made-up or nonexisting land? We've created a system so players must make requests to claim countries before they go calling them their own. While this may appear controversial to some, it has reduced arguments dramatically that existed prior to the council's formation. While asking the council to claim countries is not the "traditional" way of "acquiring" countries, it is certainly much more organised and prevents confusion, and more importantly, prevents inexperienced roleplayers from acquiring nations they cannot lead. All people wishing to claim a country must send in an application explaining why the want the nation they've requested, what experience they have, and must show that they understand a subtle amount of background knowledge and history of the country they wish to claim. Each application is considered and voted upon by each council member. This process is literally the only function the RP Council serves, we aren't the tyrannical oligarchy several make us out to be. Rest assured, we have indeed created a very organised system that has greatly reduced drama.
• True, roleplay lived without the council. But, didn't the independent United States of America live for 13 years without the US Constitution? Didn't the Kingdom of England prosper for about a century and a half before their historic document, the Magna Carta, came into effect? Point is, roleplay as we knew it two years ago, when it was just beginning, was very... limited. I see the Council as an embellishment to roleplay; a step forward in organization. Our main goal is to form and maintain a healthy, fair roleplay community, and that's exactly what we've begun. Roleplay was extremely calm and happy up until about three weeks ago, when random outbursts from various gentlemen associated with England, for very insubstantial reasons, suddenly wished to have the Council shut down. Nonetheless, Blake, you're relatively new to England, are you not? You're also fairly new to the wiki as well. I and several others have been roleplaying long before you have, and I don't think you're really in any position to judge how roleplay was run before the council.
• Going back to my first counter-argument, really the Council's primary function is preventing inexperienced roleplayers ("noobs") from claiming random countries. In requiring an application to be filled out and agreed upon by the council, we've eliminated this possibility, thus reducing arguments, controversy, and confusion. Now, as the game becomes less and less popular, you are correct in that there are therefore lesser people becoming interested in roleplay, and thus lesser people to wish to claim lands. However, this does not automatically deem the council redundant. We will continue to do our duties, and do them to the best of our abilities and with the best intentions.
• Now this is the big one. Your mistake here, Mr. Stewart, is that you are under the impression that the council's main goal is power. I don't blame you for thinking this. I find that whenever anybody on this wiki disagrees with anything, they claim it is either A) corrupt / bias, or B) a power-grab. I can assure you the Council is neither of these things. There is not a single member of the council who seeks power as you claim; that is logically impossible, as the only "power" available on this wiki comes through promotions, which is not related to roleplay. Secondly, I've sung this song a dozen times, but I shall sing it again: the wiki and the game are two completely separate institutions, and should ergo be treated as such. I understand that the wiki is based off of the game, but nowhere is it written that everything on this wiki should operate exactly as it was / is operated in the game. We have, in a way, established our own sect of roleplay here on the wiki that is not similar to roleplay in the game. In the game, there are a few major countries competing for power, whilst on the wiki there are several countries and very little conflict. Needless to say, several disagree with one method, and agree with the other. It's no secret that many gentlemen associated with Great Britain have come to hate the council and prefer roleplay the way it's been operating in the game. To this, I say excellent. England rules roleplay in the game, no doubt. But why do you so desperately wish to expand your influence to the wiki, where we have clearly established our own method(s) of roleplay? Our system is not broken; only you claim it to be broken out of disgust and ill-will. Several times I have heard said various gentlemen associated with England pronounce their disgust for the wiki... while on the wiki. This is what I simply do not get. If you hate the wiki so much, why stay here? If you only like the way roleplay goes in the game, why not just stay in the game? We're quite happy with the way we roleplay: why must you ruin it for your own interest? The way I see it, you have three options: submit to our form of roleplay on the wiki (I don't recommend this), stay on the game and avoid the wiki (again, this may not be the best option), or simply let us roleplay how we want to, and we'll let you roleplay as you want to. We're not saying England has to love the Roleplay Council, but, despite what you think and believe, the Council works. Even if some of us can't get on the game, the Council still runs a very healthy and happy roleplay system right here on the wiki, and I see no problem with that.

Now, lastly I'd like to say that my reply will most likely be reprised with much bitter argument and castigation. Doing so will only better improve my point in that England is fighting hard to destroy the Council for not very good reasons. Even John himself made the analogy that the RP Council is like the United Nations, and that England is like the United States. Whether John knew it or not, the United States is actually quite unpopular in the UN, and power is shared by all 193 members, not just one. True, the USA is in the UN Security Council, but so is six or seven other equal countries. Point is, nobody or not one country should hold unlimited power over all other countries. The Roleplay Council is here to maintain an equal balance of that power, and while England may hold the most prestige, it is not in their place to suddenly declare all other countries null and void, proclaiming themselves rulers of the universe. Doing so would clearly be power-hungry which, ironically, they have accused us of.

Cheers,

-- Jeremiah Garland 06:24, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. I think I am going to be Neutral -, temporarily. I want to see other votes. But I will say I am leaning towards oppose because there isn't much provided that convinces me the RP council is unneeded. I understand roleplayers don't like follow other people's rules, but we need to have organized roleplay here as well. Both the council members and the members of the England country claim each other are "powerhungry", or "corrupt". I need to look a bit more closely into this, gather some opinions, and then I might finally cast my official vote. I also would like to see other votes and opinions here.  17:10, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - For the same reasons as Garland.--Parax 19:58, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose for the reasons that Garland stated.

G-man.

02:58, January 8, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose -  I see it as being very important for the wiki going forward, were we are bound to see some form of conflict arise ( dont say this wont happen, because it always happens ) and we need someone to deal with the smaller countries, and to make sure roleplay on the wiki is updated and maintained. However, we also have to please the users since this is a democracy, and give them a say. I think there is a large majority of people that dislike the RP council, but yet a large amount of people that do like it. We need to take into consideration that this wiki is a entirely different institution then the game's roleplay ( as my friend Garlic said ) . This being said, they aren't forcing you ( I'll use England as an example ) to do as we do here. If you hate the system here, and prefer the games roleplay, then simply roleplay on the game. Its like reading a book, if you don't like it, don't read it. Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

No Tolerance Policy?

Well looks like we all forgot about something.. we passed a no tolerance policy awhile ago. I rememeber we all were tallking about something like that, we'll looks like we passed it awhile ago :) 

Its great to bring this up when we're talking about bringing O'malley back, but I hope we can possibly bring this no tolerance policy into force, to prevent conflicts from arising on the wiki. 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Wow, that is an old blog. I do not know why it was not put into place if that was passed, or if we had something similar that we just didn't refer to as a zero tolerance policy. We have actually been talking about a policy for awhile now, but we figured it was not needed at this time. When the BNO users were getting out of hand we had it ready, but  now things seem to have calmed down a bit. For now I Oppose -, as I do not believe this policy is needed at this time. Though the blog passed, that was another time, more than a year from now. If there is a time when a policy is needed, we will put one into place.  17:21, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

It was passed a while back, Voxel is not asking for a community vote but a reminder and it is needed even when the wiki's drama is cooled down. Sharple Talk Page 19:09, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

Hmm… it did pass, but I'm seeing trouble starting to cool down a little. Normally, I'd immediately add it to the rules, but given how things have been at the moment, I recommend a talk with the admins/rollbacks.--Parax 19:58, January 7, 2013 (UTC)

I know I'm saying we dont need it now, I just brought it up because I was going through my bloglist and saw that. :) 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Wrong Goldvane.. The BNO hasn't died yet..... #TheRevolutionisComing

Oppose -, while this did pass, it passed over a year ago in December 2011. We have had no major drama worthy of a no tolerance policy at this time. Stpehen Was Here^Hello

Ban:What if Pages

I mean the what if pages like "What if yoour in a movie" not "What if: THe Death of ___} 

I will comprimise, sense I know lots of people dont like The British Government page, so what if we delete that page, and ban the silly what if articles? They aren't needed on the wiki, and are merely spam.

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

I like this because... well, because those pages annoy me.  You might want to change the title to "Ban: 'What if you were a' Pages" to make it clearer.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member

I agree. These new users come in and make these pages, and it gets annoying. What really gets under my skin, though, is the grammar. I just hate seeing it not capitalized. Erg, just saying.

Support - I have seen a huge increase in these pages, it was only a matter of time that someone made a request to stop them. I was planning on making something like this soon. Stpehen Was Here^Hello

Support - These pages should be made into blogs.  00:13, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

I don't have any say, but people could just make them into blogs if they really wanted them, users might not be able to add themselves, but if you don't wanna put in the time, then don't make it.

Support - We need to control the what-if pages. I completely agree with this request. --KatBlueDog^Hiya! 00:58, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

I ACTUALLY agree with this. I created the "What-if" pages to make new storyline ideas like "What If John Breasly, died?"(sorry bro, best example) or "What if-The Brethren Courts were never founded?"(a planned one I never got around to.), not "What if you were a dog" or a fake England page.

Livewire Logan (talk) 21:53, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Jim, only admins votes can count, so users are not to use the template on the Court.  23:07, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

While I agree that pages like "What if you were a candy?" or "What if you were in a movie?" should be posted as blogs, I believe that if pages like "What if so-and-so ruled the entire world?" or "What if so-and-so died?" or other things along those lines were to ever spring up, they could be considered fan-fiction (and most may agree that our wiki needs more activity in that department) and permitted to stay.

We dont want to ban things like "What if ____:Died" or "What if ____ never became king of ___" we want to ban "What if you were in a movie.." type of things :) 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Notify All admins

Hello. Talk has been around of admins being inactive. These admins include the wiki's president, Katbluedog. The main admins that have been inactive as of late: GenLawrence, Jarod Pillagebane, Stephen, and Katbluedog, all need to be given a warning/notice from Parax., Goldvane, or Pistol. Like the curycoo deal :P

~Unsigned Post

OK HERE!IS WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN! ^^^^^^ That crap doesnt make sense! Admins need to be given notifications sauing that they need to become MORE ACTIVE! OR ELSE DEMOTION! 06:02, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

SUR YESSUR--Parax 06:03, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the admins have already been doing this, you do realize a lot of people are inactive due to things such as having a life? There's school, work, and in some cases, family to worry about.

Jason Shiprat CEO of Shiprat Industries

Ok, I'm not sure who wrote this request, but, bossy much? Just so you know, these administrators have been notified they need to be more active. They have school and sometimes do not have time for the Wiki. What is it with this demand for demotions? You know we aren't promoting anymore admins anytime soon, so this will not cause us to promote more. 

Also, the Seven Seas Court is used for requests, and suggestions, not demands or notes.

16:01, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Ok, after looking through revisions I have concluded Blake wrote this section, and then referred to it as "crap" that "doesn't make sense"... o_O?  16:06, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

The Largest Proposal Yet?????

Dear Admins,

Please take this seriously and please let my voice be heard. It would be greatly appreciated.

 Section 1

           Firstly, I would like to address that FAOTW has gone inactive. This is something I am rather not happy about and would like to see something more done with FAOTW, and I have some ideas in mind to keep FAOTW back up and running. FAOTW is abbreviated for Featured Article Of The Week. Being "Featured" means it must be very high quality or very popular page users look at! And if it is like that, I think there should probably be a reward of some type, which Im sure we can all figure out, thats not just a banner and front page feature. I believe also that there should be a new rule added to FAOTW to where you may NOT nominate your own page, but another. Something else that Ive been thinking of adding to FAOTW, alongside it, FAOTY. FAOTY?

 Section 2

           What? Featured Article of the Year. Now, before you go all crazy and bizerk, just read. FAOTY would only be picked from the FAOTW Winners. The system to choosing it I believe should work out something like this: We have different categories for the different kinds of pages that have won FAOTW. Fan Stories, Fan Locations, Governments, etc. This would then be posted on a poll, and depending on how many are in each category, the category can have two polls in which the winner goes on to the next round or something. Then once its down to one page from each category, we would vote which one should win and be deemed "FAOTY" for that year. It would be featured on the front page like FAOTW, but also featured anywhere else possible, like Wiki Activity sidebar and such. And thats that.

 Section 3

           Nextly, there is something thats been on many users' minds. The inactivity of Administrators GenLawrence and Jarod Pillagebane. I feel as if the topic has not been discussed and would like to officially address it. We barely see them every 2 Months and when we do they usually go AFK in chat after awhile. I don't mean to seem like I hate Law or Jar, but in all honesty if you say "I'm going inactive, cya in a few weeks/couple months, I don't see how your fit to be one, since you must be very busy. This to me should be solved. I believe Blastshot, Garland, or Benjamin could be promoted to Admin easily and handle the job well while being active. It is alot more rare to see an admin than usual, especially Step and Kat. And although they are watching and whatever, they have college. They are active enough but still hard to see and also unpredicatable of when they'll say a peep during the week. Jack Pistol is only active on Fridays and Weekends unless on vacation. Which leaves Goldvane and Parax., whom can't always be on as well. I would like to see this be solved as soon as possible. And I am sure other users will agree.

 Section 4

          And speaking of inactivity, I would also like to address the next thing, The Inactivity Policy. By what I said above, I believe it is obvious it needs to be amended and changed so it is more strict on Admins who lack of activity and just don't have the time to be an Administrator. As long as they come back within They continue to be an Admin. Which would then, let them start that time all over when they come back for their 1-3 Days. Any Administrator doing that would seem to be in a way Power Hungry to me. I think this needs to be amended where they are on at least 3 Days a week like Jack Pistol. Activity to me is the real problem with the current Administration and should be fixed.

Section 5

         Fifthly, as we move on, I would like to suggest some more minor things. I suggest we review the Wiki Policy and make sure it is cleaned up in any way; We should probably look through and do some cleaning of any unnecessary pages and make awareness of any pages that haven't been edited in a while, IF POSSIBLE. And also POSSIBLY set up a template to message the author of the page. I think we should also archive ALL of the SSC after all current requests finish as it is becoming rather lengthy again. Everything below Tama's Examples should be archived I believe so it is a fresh new start for this year as well.

Section 6

         Sixthly, I would like to suggest an official adoption page for page sin which the authors no longer care for them, or have been inactive for more than a year, a swell as left the wiki. The page I believe should firstly be reviewed whether it's too precious to give away or whether it could use some adding on to. If it were too precious, then Id send to a "Museum" part of the wiki in which it is protected and has a template that it is no longer to be edited. If it isn't too precious and is more of a page that could use work then it would go to the adoption page. I am sure there are some pages users would love to edit to make it a better page to the wiki.

Section 7

         Seventhly, should the above be approved, I believe we could organize a contest in which could generate some activity and editing seen in the activity. We would most likely, depending on how many decide to enter, divide the pages they all adopt into categories, like FAOTY. I think this could also inspire some activity after words when they get ideas to create more pages and such.

Please be sure to look into all of the following, it would greatly be appreciated by many, I am sure.

21:40, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

PS, Whatever happened to the Ex Post Facto Page Banner? Did we pass it or what? And something to add to it is maybe make a category for those pages.....

I agree with all of the above. 21:58, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

• Support - section 1 and 2. Fan Fiction is what this Wiki was created for, not pretending to rule countries. I understand this is fun and all, and I'm not saying we should rid or limit roleplay, but we need more fan fiction. Also, I find most users in chat nowadays, turning this place into a social community, not a fansite. We need this competition to encourage users to write. They need to be rewarded for their good work instead of everyone ignoring fiction. Back when, for example, the Mystery of the Stolen Designs and my Goldvane Trilogy works were popular, people spent their time commenting on those pages. I mean, 1000 comments even for MOTSD, and probably about 1000 for TGT if it wasn't renamed. That shows that Fan Fiction is popular, people cared about it. Users spent their time writing to try and become popular. There needs to be a larger community for fan fiction, the competitive crowd. I think if this is added with perhaps a few adjustions, it could improv the site and hopefully renew this Wiki to it's former glory or a fan fiction site, instead of a chatting center for former players of POTCO to make sex jokes.

• As for Section 3 and 4, I know alot of you have been bringing up the inactive administrators. We are looking at this situation and realize Jarod and Lawrence aren't exactly active enough. If this is a demotion reqeust for both of them, I Oppose -, as Law saws he is planning on becoming active soon, and perhaps we can give them a couple months to promise better activity. I think the policy could be altered a bit, thought, so I Support - the general idea of an improved system.

• Now, section 5, I guess we could do some cleanup, not sure if this particular idea is big enough for an actual section, but eh. 
• Section 6, I am also unsure. This could easily lead to some unhappy campers who leave for awhile and then return. I am Neutral - for now, I wish to see other votes.

22:08, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

• Section 1: Support -, we were working on a system like this, but never implemented it. Kat just doesn't have time for FATOW, so maybe another admin can take over.
• Section 2: Neutral -, though it does sound good, we would have to do it at the end of each year...
• Section 3: Oppose - While we are considered "inactive" do to lack of edits, I see most admins in chat almost daily. I rarely, however, see Law and Jarod.
• Section 4: Support -, this is a great idea, since Jack cannot be inactive all week long.
• Section 5: Support - An archive of the stuff is needed, only active votes should be kept up to continue voting.
• Section 6: Support - I agree, some users would like to upkeep big pages, but I think large stories should not be up for adoption.
• Section 7: Neutral - Not sure how this part would work.

Stpehen Was Here^Hello

• 1 and 2. Support - I have been too busy with school to do FAOTW. I wouldn't mind doing a FAOTY event. We can decide when the best time is to do the FAOTY. I also wouldn't mind doing a featured article of the month. I would have more time to do a monthly featured article instead of a weekly one.
• 3. Oppose - I understand that they are inactive but we need to give them a chance first. I am trying to be active but school gets in the way.
• 4. Support - I agree with changing the inactivity policy.
• 5. Support - I can archive SSC when it gets full when I have some free time.
• 6. Support - I like the idea of adopting some of the pages to new users. I am not too sure about the really big story pages.
• 7. Neutral - because I don't know if this will work.

--KatBlueDog^Hiya! 22:46, January 13, 2013 (UTC)

Obviously Kat and Step would oppose because it forces them to actually do work on the website where they are president/vice-president...

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member

Yes I do realise I have not been as active as I was, but I frequently check activity and lately nothing really . . . dramatic or conflict-causing has been happening lately so I haven't commented or anything. School keeps me busy but I do plan on editing some of my pages more in the near future and will find ways to be more active in the future.

• 1. Support - Why not? Sounds like a good idea. I'm tired of people nominating their own pages, time to step out of the box. Plus a FAOTY could really keep people interested.
• 2. Support - Same as above.
• 3. Support - I'm supporting the fact that these people need to be more active, not your suggestion of demotions and promotions (:P). The thing is, by becoming administrators of the site, these folks were not only pledging their hard work and effort, but also their time. I realise people have school and a lot going on, but so do I. Even still, I dedicate a little bit of time during the day to come on here. I have absolutely nothing against Law and Jarod; they're great friends. But, I highly doubt that their days are so busy that they can't take 10 or so minutes just to check on the wiki, say a few comments, edit a few pages, and let everybody know they're still here. Even during the weekends and the past break, we hardly saw any activity from either. It seems that whenever Jarod does any activity, it's either to drop a historic anecdote in comments or go AFK in chat. As for Law, he might work on a story every few days. Point is, they aren't really performing administrative duties, and if they simply don't have the time, they shouldn't hold the post.
• 4. Neutral - Meh. I like the idea of a renewed inactive policy, but I don't see what you mean by the admins being power hungry from not coming on...
• 5. Support - YUUP.
• 6. Neutral - In my opinion, going through and basically archiving old pages just seems a little redundant. I personally don't think this is really needed, but I also don't strongly oppose it.
• 7. Neutral - As this goes hand-in-hand with number six, I'm not really catching the drift on the whole "page adopting" thing.

YOU DIDN'T GET ANY OPPOSES FROM ME. CONGRATULATIONS.

-- Jeremiah Garland 06:10, January 14, 2013 (UTC)

Okay well . . .

1. Support - I agree with, as FAOTW has just been my page and two others on there for what, two months?

2. Support - Same answer as above. ^

3. Yes I do realise I have not been the most active lately and that is not entirely my fault. I like spending time here, I really do, but a lot of times mixing everything in my schedule with this doesn't work, but I'm starting to be a little bit less busy, so I promise I will be more active than I have been. As for Law, I'm pretty sure he told you guys something similar.

4. Support -  I agree with Jerry . . .

5. Support -  I agree completely.

6 Neutral -.  Eh . . . don't give me the whole "It's Wikia's page!" song and dance here, but I don't think it's really right just to give someone's page away. If Gold went on vacation for a while and then came back to find The Goldvane Trilogy in the hands of someone like Will Greasescarlett . . . Well . . . you know how that would turn out.

7. The above pretty much cancels out this one.

1. I Support - because FAOTW needs to become more active again and it needs to become a bit more prestigious otherwise it is just a bore. As Step suggested perhaps another admin could take over because Kat is too busy?
2. I am Neutral - on this idea, because although it seems good I am not so sure it would happen.
3. I am in full Support - of some action being taken. I am sorry, they are my friends but this inactivity thing does not fly with me. If I can make time, anybody can. I am not even home Monday to Friday, and then have loads of homework, a life and other things I want to do, but I still come one. It is clear they have quite simply lost interest in the game and wiki, but who can blame them? The game is a bore, and the wiki isn't entirely buzzing with activity. I am not saying they should be demoted, but they definitely need to shape up or accept our decisions on what to do with the issue. On a side note, what upsets me quite a lot was that these two were the ones who really wanted adminship and were very dedicated to the wiki, and now have almost entirely lost interest. They made a commitment to serve this wiki voluntarily and they are not doing that, and we need people to do that.
4. Support - Reshape the Inactive Admin Policy please. Even if I am deemed too inactive I will accept it, because I have to face the fact that I am not very active here. This popping in for a few minutes once in a blue moon does not work though, and unfortunately adminship is a hands-on duty, not a wait for something to happen and if I see it on my weekly check I will say something and not follow it up. I am not trying to bash Law and Jar, but they need to come to terms with the fact that they are unacceptably inactive and the community is not happy.
5. Support - Yes, because yes.
6. Oppose - It causes too much controversy and frankly, many people are going to go adoption crazy and then forget about the pages themselves.
7. Neutral - Whatevz.

So, shall this be put into place?  21:52, February 2, 2013 (UTC)

1 Month later.....

 Allison Spark / Sparky Wonderwolf
 
• Make Allison/Wonderwolf go mad!
• Dat Blog Spot
• Who is Allison/The Wonderwolf?
• Wonderwolf's Awesome Wife!

01:09, February 28, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion: Chat Strike Template

I am just creating this topic for discussion

There is a chat strike rule forbidding users from using the /strike template, however, the code for said template is on the Project:Chat page. This seems incredibly foolish to me, but for some reason the page is not showing any template or section for the emotes list that appears on the page whether in source mode or visual mode. I know not how to remove the code from the page, but I suggest the rule forbidding the use of said template be removed until the code is removed from the page.

16:49, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

It's because someone used the {{:MediaWiki:Emoticons}} showing all the content from the media page. A better way to do this tho is to copy the information from the MediaWiki page and insert it in the proper page, then removing the chat strike emote from the Project:Chat page. Sharple Talk Page 17:15, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

Admins and mods need to use it though, that's why users can't. I don't know if I understand what you're trying to say but wouldn't that just remove it completely? . . .

Nope, like Sharple said, copy and paste what is on the mediawiki page for emoticons, and when you add it to the chat page remove the strike template, the mediawiki will still have the emote and will work, the page has nothing to do with it, it's just an easier way to find it and see the emotes, rules, etc.

Squirto19 - Talk Page 17:36, January 16, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Jar. Get rid of it altogether, it is hardly used anyway.

Umm... Jarhead never said to he wanted to remove it completely, he was asking a question. O_o Sharple Talk Page 16:23, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Ban request: Jack Goldwrecker

I have been on chat and it seems our fellow user has a nazi flag as his profile picture and says his likes hitlers ideas.... Ok first this offends lots of fellow users and some are just plain annoyed at his recent actions. This idea of his ban has been brought up many times but yet it has been declined. But tonight im asking as a user to admins to ban jack goldwrecker for bringing a nazi flag onto this wiki that offends many other users. Lord Jason Blademorgan, EITC Officer 04:32, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

While both crude and unneeded, Jack is completely within his rights to do this.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 05:53, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

The flag doesn't offend you; the idea of it does. Jack isn't promoting the idea of Nazism, and by simply displaying an image does not mean he supports it. It simply interests him. Get over yourself.

-- Jeremiah Garland 06:07, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - it has already been discussed that users are allowed flags as profile pictures. This is completely unworthy of a ban, as simply a user using a Nazi flag does not "offend" you. A while back someone had a nazi flag and there was an incredible issue over it, but I believe we decided to allow users anything as profile pictures other than cursing or inappropriate images. This is still currently our policy.

Also, even if he says he "likes Nazis", that's his opinion. There have also been cries of bloody murder about "Expressing opinions!", and I see in no way how his opinion could offend you, seeing as he is only implying interest in Hitler, not support of the cause of Nazism.

15:16, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Ban Request: Jack Goldwrecker

Since Goldwrecker has begun his preaching long ago , at first it did not bother me. He was just expressing his religion. That was ok with me. When he started to use his religion and his faith against people to judge, offend and discriminate. That made me angry. His constant two cents in every topic by which is always or mostly biblical on Chat and sometimes on the wiki itself has made me sicken with disgust.  It is clear of anyone of my religion that he uses "God's name in vain" by which is offensive and a sin in my religion.

I am tired of his ignorant and talk of his superior being as he on his User Page he clearly says he is a "Disciple of Christ". Now that would mean in my religion he is a student of Jesus Christ. Meaning that he must be apart of a Christian group. By which he is not apart of. Any group. Also meaning he is more superior than the average person. He preaches daily offending myself and others in the way of using God's name as a tool. This completely up right offends me. I do not mind if there is a listing of your faith on the wiki for your POTCO player, but I am offended when he uses that religion that he so proudly declares his own against people possibly of different or the same faith to judge and try to convert others to his common belief by expressing their wrongs in comparison to God and Christ. Not only does he make himself feel superior above all since he has a ego and attitude of him being "Enlightened" above all rest. Users have already shown their dislike for this outrage on this wiki. When religion is used against others then that is how Holy Wars start. That is how conflict between 2 or the same religion start. I have expressed my dislike and feeling of offense to Jack multiple times. Jack in my opinion acts smart to try to cover his offending ways by saying that he is not preaching in any way. Well that may be true. That may not. But he has offended users using his own beliefs and expressing them towards users in a negative way. As shown by Sven's Blog.

I demand religious talk be banned from the wiki on a note except for use in stories or a listing of what a certain fan creation could be. Such as for example since Johnny Goldtimbers was a Spanish Conquistador he would be Catholic. If religion is used in stories then people are less forced to respond to that since all in all it is their belive or opinion in a fan creation article or page. Now that to me would mean that using it in comments, a blog or in chat should not be allowed. So the very fine line should be:

Using religion to exclude, judge, or offend others in any possibly way should be not allowed upon this wiki. 

I demand action be taken against User: Jack Goldwrecker for his offensive, prejudicial and blasphemous use of religion against users on this wiki.

20:03, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - Now hear me out, I can see your points against Jack, but for now I think this is done out of personal dislike. I know you and Jack have a few little conflicts, so I think this is more out of personal dispute then anything else. Jack has been doing fine lately, and hasn't caused much drama at all. I agree that religious talk shouldn't be allowed on this wiki ( except for fan fiction, etc, ) but I do not think Jack has exactly harmed anyone lately with that, and he has been doing a lot better then he was beforehand. Jack also had a fair share of conflict with John Breasly, so I think Johnny here may be trying to ban Jack because of that. I don't think there are enough points here to ban Jack. I would go neutral because I see you do have some valid reasons against Jack, but I don't really like being neutral on anything because it doesn't do much good for a vote. :)

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Hmm. Benjy brings up a good point, this is most likely created out of personal dislike. You never display offence against Goldwrecker, only disgust and hatred. However, Goldwrecker has been out of order lately, and that must stop. For now I am Neutral -, awaiting other opinions. 

I just read through this again, and I want to point out that demand isn't a good way to put this. You don't demand religious talk to be banned on the wiki, you may suggest it. Demanding won't get you anything, come here, and respect opinions, don't just plain out demand something be done. An aggressive tone on things wont exactly help you out here, demanding action be taken against a user isn't exactly the greatest way of putting it.

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Benjamin I used the term "demand" to express the offense that his religious talk has caused me. Why can't I demand things? Hmmm? I am not threatening a user. I am demanding that something be done about this. Meaning the amount of disrespect, and offensive prejudice is something to just be suggested? I am making the discussion something to be looked at now. Not weeks from now. Now. If someone offended your beliefs would you be in a lighter tone? Or a more demanding tone that something must be done about this.

Benjamin if you are just oposing because you think I'm out to get people. Consider this. How many times have I made a ban request? Not many. How many times do I just try to stay out of these problems unless I being the British Prime Minister need to address? If you agree with that Religion shouldn't be used to judge, or offend people then why are you just oposing? I am doing this because I am offended and I do not want his actions to continue. 

20:34, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - In my view, he isn't preaching... And that's coming from a guy who despises religion.

-- Jeremiah Garland 22:18, January 21, 2013 (UTC)

Oh just admit it, you don't like me. Stop being a coward by using "religion" to hide you hatred of me. Now, this is an almost laughable blog. Almost everything here is inaccurate. But I will not argue. J Goldwrecker

Johnny I'm still opposing.. 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

You may try what you want, I have no opposition to you. I look for a more peaceful world, and if you want to delay my longing, then be my quest. You will get no arguement nor satisfaction from me, Johnny. I've recognized my offense long ago, and I deeply am sorry to both you and to the Lord. However, that being said, I have changed. Your view on me, apparently, has not. I try, I really do, to make peace. Wether you try or not, that is up to you.

Honorably, 

Jack Goldwrecker

Ok, first off, Jack when you say "stop" it makes people want to go more. We have chatmods for a reason. When they feel enough is enough, they step in. Not you. You have absolutely no powers at all in regards to chat. Whenever someone tells you to shut up, it requires you to talk about peace and how you want the world to be. But guess what? The world is not yours. It is god's. He will direct it in his plan. Not some online User's plan. Vice Admiral Blake Stewart of the EITC Third Division 01:54, January 22, 2013 (UTC)

Demotion Request: GenLawrence (Sorry, friend.)

Guys, even though he is indeed a good admin, I do not see him enough here. I do not see him on chat, commenting, or doing his basic job as an admin.

Reasons (Basic):

• Inactive as of lately

• Cannot be counted on being "here"

• Has not contributed to the wiki.

Sorry, Law. Vice Admiral Blake Stewart of the EITC Third Division 23:46, February 7, 2013 (UTC)

I hate to support these but this I have to. Admins honestly need to be demoted if they cant give alot of time, and Law has only come in once on wiki in a while to respond to 2-3 talk page messages. I havent seen him do any Administrative Tasks and we need an active Admin. As I am pretty sure I said in my lare request titled "Largest Proposal Yet???" its not that because hes inactive hes a bad Adimn, but we need active Admins. I am starting to see another Admin or two (actually Burs I should say) to go into this stage, and we cant be having this. We need active Admins able to be on. All I really see is Goldvane and Pary. Recently some of Jarod. But thats pretty much it. We need active Admins. And I can prove my point further since my proposal I mentioned earlier has not yet been put into play. The parts that have been passed I have not even heard being worked on.

In conclusion, Support.

23:55, February 7, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - Per the inactive sysop policy, he needs to be sent a message FIRST before a request, and the request is invalid since he hasn't been warned yet.. :) 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk 23:58, February 7, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, as your friend "John Breeze" stated, you can put ANY request here, just not in a blog. Also, your opposal is simply because you said it has to be messaged first, not your true feelings about it. Benjamin, you are truly a consending idiot sometimes.

Vice Admiral Blake Stewart of the EITC Third Division

Benjamin, to be quite honest, we have already "warned" him verbally and he promised to be more active 2 Weeks ago or so and I have not seen anything yet. 00:05, February 8, 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, well, Law hasn't really been messaged about this. I propose we contact him and ask if he can become more active. If not, then I'm afraid this is needed :/. Neutral - temporarily. 

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

00:44, February 8, 2013 (UTC)

Proposal:Updates

So I have been wondering, and I sure many others are, what have the Admins been doing lately to help improve the wiki? We dont really know to be honest. So I thought of something. Why not put out a weekly Admin blog on what the Admins are doing and discussing? Update the users, because alot of us I am sure feel like were in the dark and not being told about anything at all. It would be weekly which shouldnt be hard to do as you as an Admin should be active. It's a suggestion.

00:01, February 8, 2013 (UTC)

Support - However, you can check their contributions, but I think you want their to be a weekly blog. I agree there should be weekly updates -on a forum I'm a mod on, the entire changelog is posted on a weekly update, and bulletpoints about whats going on- 

However I don't think theres much to update on, considering most thigns they need to do are simply banning vandals, reverting vandalism, and all big changes are voted on here.. 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Hmm. I Support - this with a few conditions. We do alot of stuff behind the scenes, and oblivious people always say "You're lazy admins, you do nothing!", which is such a blind comment. We discuss ALOT of future promotions, rules, and just general discussions all the time. Ban lengths, user requests, etc. While I think it would be nice to share some BTS discussions with users, I do want to point out we prefer not to discuss some things such as promotion plans, ban discussions, etc, as it might offend some users. For example, "Bob doesn't have admin qualities" is not something that is very polite to say, while it is indeed required to be said in these discussions. I think that maybe a weekly-monthly ( Or perhaps an every-2-weeks ) system for sharing some of our latest updates might be a good idea. In general, I support this, but perhaps with the conditions of a possible change to every-2-weeks or just possibly every month, as well as a general lowered expectation due to some discussions that should remain in the dark. 

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

00:37, February 8, 2013 (UTC)

Reminder Concerning Ben

So after Ben tried to take over the wiki, he's still a rollback?  Can I request an admin strip him of his rollback powers, as it seems to have slipped their mind.  And even if they're against it, we all watched Ben resign his powers in chat, so he shouldn't have rollback.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 00:48, February 8, 2013 (UTC)

I resigned from chat mod, I'd still like rollback because its a handy tool to have and it does no harm. I resigned from chat mod because everyone was unhappy. I've used rollback 3 times since then, and would like to continue to have that so I can easily help with vandalism, as believe it or not it is a problem. 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

It does do harm when it allows you to vote on the SSC after trying to take over the wiki.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 14:06, February 10, 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion about the religion rule

Okay so first of all, I would like to request that the religious rule be heavily modify because Do not force your religious beliefs upon people is not very strict at all. This allows users to actually say what's good about their religion and what's bad about another religion. That is bad, it could cause quite a stir if there is a conflict with religions. This also allows users to actually "preach" not forcefully but peaceful, this can offend people with different religions, and it'll annoy users since... well... this wiki isn't meant to spread your religious all over the place. This rule also leads to unnecessary blog posting trying to convince not forcefully but CONVINCE people to switch religion. If it's roleplayish religion then I can consider that fine since it's either part of that country or in-game. If anything the rule should be stated as this:

Please do not preach religion or attempt to spread your religious ways.

Something like that, so users wouldn't be able to spread their religion (this isn't the place to do that anyways), and of course preach to others. This will decrease the religious activity in our wiki community and decrease drama as well.

Sharple Talk Page 06:19, February 10, 2013 (UTC)

-gives stamp of approval- 06:26, February 10, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Reasons stated by Sharpe, I completely agree.

G-man.

06:48, February 10, 2013 (UTC)

Support - Sounds good to me, we could also add soemthing about not insulting or arguing based on religious beliefs.

I don't necessarily agree or disagree, I just think it'd be rather difficult to define when somebody is "spreading their religious ways". It's a good idea, and it has to be changed, but there's really no fine line.

-- Jeremiah Garland

Jer's got a point. The idea of the rule itself isn't a bad one at all, but it'd require people to be mature, realizing that simply talking about and/or making references to religion (not arguing, or doing these things with malevolent intent) is not preaching/trying to spread it. What one person defines as preaching, another may disagree with in certain cases-- ergo, there might be fights about the rule itself if it's not carefully worded and definite, applicable to all people and cases.. Case in point: Jack Goldwrecker; everyone agrees that a while back he was preaching about his faith, but now some users feel he's calmed down, while others still see his actions as preaching and wish him banned. 

In short, I agree with the idea of the rule as well as the fact that it has to be changed, but you are going to have to be careful how you change it. Take some time changing it, don't make it just a couple-minute thing, because one word could mean the difference between drama/users getting voted off the island and avoiding such situations. Just a thought. (:

Cher Bear =D (talk) 14:04, February 10, 2013 (UTC)

Support - I can't believe we didn't have something like this already..

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

I agree with this. I have not thought that the rule could be thought in that way, but it surely can. So, I Support -

Rule Request: No Good Faith edit-ceasing after 100 overall/50 mainspace

I really shouldn't have to explain this one too much, but the bottom line is that if I have to edit to get somewhere on this wiki, why are those who have gotten there not continuing that edit pattern they followed to get there? They don't even make good faith edits as frequent anymore. It's always drama, then chat, and repeat. I don't see many postive contributions from any of them ever since each got chat privilege. I want a rule that requires people who have access to chat to be forced to continue to edit in good faith to continue to be allowed to use chat. The moment anyone of them stops editing in good faith, after 2-3 days, they will not be allowed to come on chat until they continue it. That is my request.

Luckey Handford (talk) 23:22, February 12, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - People just have to work up their way slowly, gaining the edits and putting as many ideas as they can into the wiki. When they are out of ideas, they go on an edit hiatus. Being able to access chat now, they proceed to socialize, having earned the ability to chat.

But forcing them to keep editing? Um. wat. This is an encyclopedia, not a Socialist site.--Parax 23:32, February 12, 2013 (UTC)

Parax, it is unfair for a user like me to see people like them using chat and doing less work then I am. Luckey Handford (talk) 23:34, February 12, 2013 (UTC)

You gave your opinion, and I have given mine. I find it unfair to force users to continuously edit in order to keep a privilege that they already had. My opinion, not changing. Now we await votes from the other admins and rollbacks.--Parax 23:36, February 12, 2013 (UTC)

AND CHATMODS

I Oppose -Let me explain this as simply as possible. We don't want users that barely have any edits to just come here to chat, okay? It would be extremely difficult to limit who can come onto chat if we have a rule like your proposing, and these users have tons of edits, and have contributed a lot to the wiki. I don't see you having 10k edits. I think this is because your angry at how it works, and don't think other people deserve to have chat. Its a simple reward for editing. 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

What I don't get, is why you guys allow these people to stop editing AT ALL, and sit in the chat 24/7 like they're trapped in a cave! Luckey Handford (talk) 23:45, February 12, 2013 (UTC)

Well these people happen to have done a lot more for the wiki THEN YOU, so maybe get busy editing and making articles. They don't stop editing at all, if you notice activity VERY active, the wiki has close to 700,000 edits. The majority of active users have more then 100 edits and use chat. Also many great projects on the wiki have come from chat. There is nothing faulty at the system. This isn't socialism.

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

If I could, I would oppose this. Luckey it's obvious you are just jealous. What will happen when you have access to chat? My guess is you will immediately cease editing. Considering you only have 12 edits since you joined December 3rd, 2011, I'm gonna bet you're just gonna stop completely. True, I only have 104 mainspace edits on this account. But considering I have 642 on my old main account, Special:Editcount/HermesDude, I feel pretty accomplished. 746 edits in 2 years. True, it's not as much as some users have, but considering that it's becoming harder and harder to come up with new ideas, and add to pages, I'm happy with it. Luckey, you have to learn things aren't just handed to you, but you also have to learn that if you love something, it comes easily to you.

Squirto19 - Talk Page 14:13, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

I Oppose - this would do nothing to help the wiki. I completely agree with Jason, Par and Benjy on this one.

G-man.

17:11, February 13, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the other commenters. The problem with being active on the wiki for a while is that you get to a period where there is nothing interesting to create. Many people either either move on for the wiki, go to chat, or move onto other interests. So, does that mean we should take away things that they have earned a long time ago due to this period of non-inspiration? No. I Oppose - this.

Ban Request: BoogieMango

Okay, this is nothing but stupidity. If you ban your top contributer for a week for saying "piss off" and then someone says it afterwards towards another user, then calling him a jackass in a rude way, action needs to be taken.

Proof

Vice Admiral Blake Stewart of the EITC Third Division

You go around thinking you know everything, and then you call me a "dumbass"? Why should I not do the same to you?

Neutral - but leaning towards oppose. I feel that maybe this ban request was written out of spontaneous anger towards Boogie, which doesn't make it illegitimate, but I still don't feel this is worthy of a ban. In Breasly's case, his saying of "piss off" was the result of several minutes of unbridled arguing, and when an admin asked him kindly to stop, is when he interjected that less than respectful phrase. There's quite a difference. Everybody just needs to end the arguing because, quite frankly, you're arguing about nothing. Nonetheless, I feel that the word "piss" should indeed be outlawed, and I have been a strong advocate of outlawing it for a while now. Still, not quite worthy of a ban.

-- Jeremiah Garland 05:16, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

I know my opinion does not count for anything and it utterly useless in the brains of the administration, but I do believe that if we refer to the page that started all of this, Blake deserves an equal if not longer ban. He not only insulted goldvane but also used "Dumbass" and such as insults.--Mallace

Talk

Interesting point, Andrew, and I have to agree. Both parties are at fault here. Still, I feel this whole thing is ridiculous and, whilst no lengthy bans are necessary, a couple of sharp warnings will suffice.

-- Jeremiah Garland 06:18, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - I think this was written out of anger, also you didn't post the entire argument, so we are only seeing his comments. Also, I don't see how banning Boogiemango would better the wiki, seeing as bans should only be used in good-faith to help the wiki, this just seems to be out of anger or personal dislike. I'd possibly change to neutral if I saw the rest of the argument, and it heavily depends on who provoked who... 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Regardless of his motives, if you're failing to ban someone who broke the rules just because of who the creator of the block request is, that is exhibiting bias and discrimination against users.  Boogie broke the rules and needs to be punished, regardless of who wrote it.  If you fail to ban someone because of who requested the ban, you're failing to uphold your duty as an administrator to punish the rule-breakers and should therefore be removed from the vote and left to someone who will fairly judge the situation.  Not to mention everyone who put in their two cents dislikes Blake.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 02:53, February 26, 2013 (UTC)

It wasn't really my fault that I believe "piss-off" was allowed, because I had seen it in Chat, and nothing was done about it. I've seen it in Chat many times since then. I also was inactive for the 2 weeks and your banning, so I did not see the argument. That would be failing to uphold their duty as an administrator.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse to break it.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 03:16, February 26, 2013 (UTC)

I do not believe it says anywhere in *Le Rules* that it is not okay to say "piss-off" to someone (other than causing drama), as it isn't actually a curse word, just very vulgar and immature to say. But, it was my understanding that it WAS allowed since it was being used in Chat and nothing was done to prevent such behavior from possibly happening again. Besides, Blake called me a "dumbass", in which if I recieve a ban, he should, too. He knows the rules and has broken them many times before (as have I), but he has broken the same rule (which I had not and had no knowledge of the rule being). 

People seem to use the first sentence as an excuse to ignore common sense…--Parax 19:48, February 26, 2013 (UTC)

Must I repeat, Boogie?  Ignorance of the law is no excuse to break it.  You broke a rule, you're going to get punished.  Regardless of what biased Ben and Jerry post.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 21:10, February 26, 2013 (UTC)

John, I'm saying that if I indeed recieve a ban, Blake should, also. Him being one of your best men, you don't seem to bring him up.

Ok, I have to Support - this now. Boogie really is a little ignorant of the rules. I opposed at first because I didn't see the argument, but in chat he posted a link to facebook with some widly unacceptable links in the comments - and didn't recognize that was a problem. I think thats careless, and sure its an honest mistake but it did change my opinion, you have to be careful when posting links, and it was completely careless. 

Voxelplox ^{Ƭalk '}

If I am banned, Blake should be banned, also, because he knows the rules, he just neglected to follow them, but I didn't know you couldn't say "piss-off" and I didn't see the comments, because I was on the main page, not the page where it shows the comment and the picture, but whatever.

Promotion Request... or, I guess.. "Appeal for Consideration": Nults McKagan

I'm not ENTIRELY positive it is within my power to "request" the promotion of a user... nor if this is valid, etc. But nonetheless you get the point I"m trying to make.

A while back, as a comment on Kat's "retirement" blog, someone stated that "we should be moving forward and suggesting the promotions of new people" rather than sitting here. Ok, I shall abide to that, Mr. Anonymous.

I do believe new insight to the administrative team is key to forwarding the sucess and moderation of the wiki, and whilst others may disagree on who I feel apporpriate, I do feel that its time someone made a promotion request and at the least tried to "forward" the wiki. Since kat's resignation, I've seen no such acts. I know many will disagree with me but hey, I'm allowed to share my opinion :).

WHY YOU ASK?

1. Considering experience, he's been here longer than 60% of the active users. His first edit was made on June 25th, 2011. He's watched the wiki grow, seen it through hardships, but most imortantly, he's been a part of our extremely unique community. He understands the power and effect  that roleplay has on our community and how argumentative our users can be. He also has formlery lead a country so he's been in the business.

2. Behavioral standings. Most recently he was unfortunately involved with the "ben takeover" skit, but as we proved through time, it really wasn't anything to be of concern. Perhaps Ben just got a little too excited one night. In all screenshots provided, he doesn't once appear as inconsiderate. I also reviewed some logs and didn't find any (if ANY) recent bans or strikes in chat.

3. Finally, he isn't a hated member of our community. Many of you will gasp at me saying this, but lets be quite honest. There is unfortunately a considerable amount of hate (of which I tried to lesson with #MovingFoward) on the wiki, and promoting some users (such as those associated with the BNO.. although Jerry dissproved that) would cause lots of controvery and only spark more arguementation.. if thats a word. He gets into small brawls againt England but hey.. who doesn't, lol. In my eyes he is a respected member worthy of rollback and the chance to represnt users as a vote on the SCC.

Yes, his edit count is low, but it's over one thousand, which to me is adequate. We have never once discriminated upon one worthy of promotion based on "oh, he doesn't edit enough." He is here lots and contributes regularly. And with that, I formerly request that the admins please review this and provide input. And users, of course ;3

Adios, --Mallace 

Talk

P.s. - AREN'T YOU GLAD YOU READ ALL THAT? NO? Well shucks..... too bad.

If goldvane makes it this far he gets a cookie :O. Pistol gets nothing. --Mall

-~- Heh. Goldvane will never make it this far. If you already made the cookie can I have it? :0 (Id put my opinion but then again, Im not sure if thats allowed....) 07:01, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

Yes. 100% definitely Support -. And, since a rollback / chat moderator / person of higher power supports this, this request is hereby legitimate. In fact, I was thinking about writing this myself.

Well, Mallace pretty much covered the highlights as to why Nults should be promoted, but I shall reiterate. He is a fair user, and in the two years I've known him, not once have I seen him lose his temper or start a fight. In fact, as far as I know, he has a perfectly clean record when it comes to chat strikes. Not only is he a good friend of mine, but he has become a model user on this wiki. He is fair, unbias, and is able to understand when it is time to stop an argument. He knows the rules well. It is also to my knowledge that he has a subtle amount of knowledge of coding, thus making him an applicable candidate for rollback. As far as his experience goes, as Mallace said, he's been here for quite a while; much longer than several others. And yes, his edit count is not stellar, but that has potential to rise, as I know he's been working recently on his new book, "The Kingdom". Furthermore, he's a regular user on chat, and at times I've noticed him take charge and keep a good control on chat whenever any other chat moderator wasn't available. In short, I'd not only love to see a star next to his name, but would be honoured to work alongside him. He is an exemplary user, and is very smart. I know that if he is promoted, it will certainly benefit us all.

Mallace, thank you for making this. With the recent resignation of Voxelplox and, of course, the recent leaving of Step and Kat, our wiki is certainly in need of a promotion or two. I am glad to see that somebody is finally striving to bring about a change in our wiki's authority, and Nults is just the man for the job. Admins and all others, I ask you to consider this. Nults is a good user who seldom argues, is always fair, unbias, and never causes drama, and is perhaps the least controversial person you will ever meet. I know that he is perfect for this promotion.

-- Jeremiah Garland 07:15, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

I will take time to consider this. 

Garland, I disagree witht the fact that you can legitimize it, but whatever, no biggy. Goldvane and I have been discussing promotions, however, it has been difficult to talk to the other admins because some are rather inactive (you know who you are). I think it is perhaps necessary for Goldvane and I to just move forward with Par, and the other admins must just accept what we decide, since they clearly do not want to be actively involved here.

As for Nults, yes he is a good and old user, however, his edits reflect to me that his dedication to the wiki is not of a very high level, and rather chat and socializing is his focus. I can look past this though, so I will take time to consider.

Is that an insult, Jack? :o. Well... you do know that I check the wiki once in a while, it's just that nothing calls to my immediate attention. You know that if you ever need me, I'm just a talk page message away. My talk page messages should go straight to my email, which I check regularly (almost obsessively), so if you ever do need anything, I can be realitivly quickly. You can also check my comment on the 100 Chat rule change thread above to get a pretty good idea as to why I am not as active.

Also, I trust your judgement with whoever gets promoted, so I'm worrying.

Since Nults hasn't replied to this, and obviously hasn't said it enough, I will tell you all that he is planning to become less active on the wiki. His reason is because he wishes to be more active in his own life, there are other reasons but I can't remember them exactly... :P Although I'm pretty sure he'd still be here once in a while, from what he was said it seems that it would be a rare occurrence, like with a few admins. I'm not saying he wouldn't be good for the wiki, but if he chooses to become inactive to be more involved irl, then we don't need him. Although I am sure he would do a great job, he's going inactive, and besides that he already was a little inactive. Also about him being here longer then 60% of the active users? I've been here longer then him :P And also he wasn't the greatest user to begin with >_> But then again neither was I :P Still didn't do as much as him though... o.o

Squirto19 - Talk Page

Believe it or not, my dear Lawrence, I was thinking that if I say that you and Jar would be the first people to see and reply to it xD It was sort of a gamble, but I was only half-right :/ (Curse you, Squirto).

I know that we can contact you if we need to, but to me that seems silly to bother you unless it is super important. Jar you just sort of have to catch, and Law you need to make formal contact :P

As for what Squirt said (rudely interrupting my gamble >.>), if that is true, that will play an important role in the decision making...

You're welcome (Muahahaha... :P)

Squirto19 - Talk Page

Hmm. Well, I want to point a few things off. First off, ^ -grabs cookie and eats-. I in fact did read the entire request, thank you very much, walrus wallace. Secondly, yes, we all know Law knows who he is xD

On to the topic. There are several good points made here. I'll start with Mallace's original request. Mall makes some good points here such as the behavioral standings. Nults has not engaged in hardly any immature arguments from what I have seen. However, many users are saying we "need" more admins. Well, if everyone thinks "Kat and Step were playing on Minecraft all day and ignoring the Wiki", they wouldn't be here at all now, would they? So with that in mind, we would have needed more admins then, not just suddenly. With the logic of Kat and Step doing nothing, the Wiki is in the same shape it was before their departure.

This being said, I want to point out that I do not agree with said logic of Kat and Step doing nothing and ignoring the Wiki. They did alot of behind the scenes work and made a lot of decisions. Which is something we now lack, seeing as Jack is only around on weekends, and other than Parax, the other admins are inactive ( You know who you are )

Garland also makes some points here, but I am unsure about one moderator having the ability to legitimize a request. Only I can do that! ( jk ) ( As for Law's comment, he wasn't even sharing his opinion. He was just defending himself, so... yeah. Nonetheless, he still knows who he is.... )

If what Squirt says is true, I will definitely take that into consideration while thinking about this request. However, I would like to see Nults actually say this, rather than hear it from another user. It's nothing against Squirto, just something I'd like to hear from the actual person. As for Squirt being a candidate, I still have one thing against him. He has used all those darn images of Robert Downrey Jr. that I can't use! Curse him. I wanted a Downrey Jr. avatar!

In a short conclusion, I would like to talk with Pistol about this in a private message before I make my final decision. We have been talking about promotions for a LONG while now, even before people started going after Kat and Step.

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

I would Support - this if Nults would be active. If what Jason said is true, then I would not support. I've come to know Nults and I am certain that he would be perfect for the position if he planned on remaining active on the wiki. He has a good sense of the rules and understands how the rules work. He has been on this wiki for a long time and is experienced. Richard (Yes, I called you Richard, Richard Cannonwalker) is intelligent, strong willed, and should become a Chinese philosopher.

G-man.

18:30, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

1. I can understand Gold. 2. Muahaha... :P Besides you don't deserve them for mispelling his name... 3. When did I become a possibility for a candidate? :o

Squirto19 - Talk Page

First of all, i'd like to thank you for considering me for promotion. Second of all, I DID say that I would try to become more social & active in real life last night, but I have doubts that i'll actually go through with it. If I do, i'll make it a point not to let it have a large impact on my time on the wiki. I plan on helping keep this wiki afloat and stable with my time since this wiki has been a good hobby to me for some time now. Also, just to throw it out there, I don't have much knowledge of coding. I have to copy-and-paste codes I use from elsewhere :P. Thanks for considering me, and if you elect me, I promise not to disappoint.

Didn't mean to do this... But here's your pair of flip flops Nults - hands them to him -

Squirto19 - Talk Page

Well Squirto, when I said i'd become "more inactive" to become more active & social in real life, I was exaggerating. "More inactive" was only supposed to mean that maybe I wouldn't come on the wiki on a specific weekday every blue moon & maybe come on a short amount of time less when I do (which is still a long amount of time). But, like I said, I doubt i'll be going through with such a plan.

@Goldvane and Pistol - by "legitimise" I only meant that I could have requested the same exact thing and therefore make it up for voting.

-- Jeremiah Garland 21:39, February 25, 2013 (UTC)

I oppose this...

I have wanted to see Jim Logan promoted for some time now, and as Jackie said, Nults does not have too much edits. Nothing against you Nults, but I do not think you're right for the job. (Opinion) Vice Admiral Blake Stewart of the EITC Third Division

Jim doesn't WANT the job. Anyways, support.

Boogie, only admins and rollbacks can use the {{Support}} template on SSC

Squirto19 - Talk Page

I support Nults becoming an admin. Why? 1) He's an old member of the Wiki, and has seen it grow. 2) He seems very mature in chat Tyler - Talk

Request for a Change to Rollbacks & Chat Mods

Hi all.

The reason I'm requesting this is to make the wiki's system more orderly, and frankly easier for the administration.

Section 1 - Regarding Chat Moderators

Chat mods are something we clearly lack here.  Often AFK, or simply failing at their job, I believe that chat mod should come before rollback.  While an issue on chat can be easily resolved if the mod acts inappropriately (unbanning is the clicking of... three buttons?), entire rollbacks to page can be disatrous depending on who's edits were rolled back (which would be at the discretion of the rollback).

I believe that from now on, users should be put through the duties of a chat mod before rollback.  On-wiki administration is tougher than moderating chat, which is a relatively small part of the wiki.

My last bit of support for this would be that most other successful wikis carry it out this way.  I know, I know, we're not those wikis.  But those wikis are successful, and have far less drama than we do.  It's not a matter of design flaw, it's a matter of administration flaw.  We need to take a page from the successful wikis' books.

Passing this would mean that more chat mods are promoted, and even less are considered for rollback.  The only restriction would be that you have to have been a member of the wiki for four months before becoming a chat mod.

Section 2 - Rollbacks

Not only should people in the running for rollback be severely cut down, but I should think our current rollbacks should be put into review.

Sub-Section 2.1 - Restrictions on the Promotions of Rollbacks

I believe rollbacks need a lot more restrictions on who can become one.  For instance, the United States Congress' House of Representatives requires you to have been a citizen of the United States for the past seven years.  I am not saying that our rollbacks have to wait seven years, but I think six months should be a good limit to even be CONSIDERED!  That is half of a year, and would definitely prove their worth to the wiki.  They should also have been required to be a chatmod for at least two months, which would give us time to review their behaviour with power.

We need to remember that regardless of someone just being a rollback, they are entrusted with the ability to revert vandalism and do what is best for the community.  The position of rollback has become a form of patronage for the admins.  These people can go on any page, click rollback, and revert ALL of the edits someone did to that page.  That's fairly powerful if it's a high-traffic page, and it's easily abused.  As I said in the previous section, on-wiki administration is much tougher than chat administration.  We need to make clear that the users picked are going to make calls that are best-suited for the wiki.

Sub-Section 2.2 - Review of Current Rollbacks

I believe our current rollbacks need a review as well.  Not necessarily suggesting demotion, but expressing that re-evaluation is needed.  This section, as it directly affects rollbacks, cannot be voted on by rollbacks as you are not allowed to vote on something concerning you, as clearly stated by the administration in countless scenarios of ban requests and demotion requests.

• G-man - As to not be called biased towards my friends, I am going to do a clear review of G-man.  G has been a great addition to the administration, only experiencing one or two errors from what I can remember.  Though his edits on the wiki are decreasing slowly, I believe he is safely locked in his position for now.
• Lord Matthew Blastshot - Same as above.  Matthew has always been controversial for the wiki.  His aggressive nature is a major turn-off for respecting the rules to plenty.  While his average edits per day drops, when a situation is at hand, he does handle it well.  I think that he is in relatively the same "zone" as G-man, but could fluctuate one way or the other.
• Jeremiah Garland - To be completely honest, Jeremiah does rarely use his powers.  I see him getting involved in roleplay, and SSC debates, but not much else.  If Jeremiah does not intend to use his power to assist in settling on-wiki disputes, it should be stripped from him.  We don't need powers given to people who rarely use them, whereas they could be rested in the hands of someone who will do much more with them.  I could also tend to point out that his votes also lean to the influence of what his friends support or deny.  You may call it like-minded views, but I think it's much more a factor of peer influence.
• Voxelplox - When Ben was first promoted, he seemed to be the best guy for the job.  Since then, his edit count has significantly decreased, which raises the question, "Why does he need the power if he doesn't intend to settle disputes responsibly with it?"  His votes lean in the favor of his friends, or against people he dislikes.  He's held a grudge on several users for a matter of years (one of them actually being myself).  He has already been stripped of his chat mod powers, which should be an instant turn-off for his rollback powers as well.  Not to mention the fact that any respectable member of the administration should never allow themselves to be put in such a controversial position such as he has.  Looking at it from someone who not only saw his friends admit to his plots, but had seen him act inappropriately such as ban users from this wiki's chat who intended to show evidence to the admins (my alternate accounts, granted, but he had no way of knowing), I would say he is most unqualified for the position he holds.

Section 3 - Voting Rights on the Seven Seas Court

As I have established, chat moderators and rollbacks are entrusted with the following responsibilities:

• Chat Mods - Keeping chat a safe and clean place for any user to visit and discuss whatever the topic of the chat room may be at the time.
• Rollbacks - Reverting on-wiki vandalism or otherwise bad edits and settling edit/page disputes.

I see nowhere in there that gives them the right to vote on important matters on the wiki, such as on-wiki bans, promotions, demotions, or otherwise important rule requests.  We entrust our staff to do what I laid out above, and not much else.  Giving them a vote almost disregards a user's vote and gives them more power of among the community than is clearly deserved.

Solutions?

1. Introduce legislation that requires you to have been both a chat mod AND a rollback for a certain amount of time in order to vote.
2. Introduce legislation that only allows the administrators and above to vote on matters requested on the Seven Seas Court.

I have made it clear that I would rather support the latter of these two options, but I think either would be a suitable solution to issues faced.

Thank you for taking the time to read through this entire request, and I hope this works in the favor of the entire wiki during it's stressful times.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 21:56, February 26, 2013 (UTC)

Good post, John, and I agree with much of this, especially that a user should be promoted to a chat moderator before rollback.

However, in my defense, I'd say I exercise my power quite a bit, even more-so than my rollback / chat-mod colleagues. I'm not saying that G-Man and Blastshot are doing an inferior job, I just do not think that was a very accurate statement. As for my involvement in the wiki, again: I feel you give me less credit for my involvement than I really do. I haven't been involved at all in role-play for several weeks now, and my only recent involvement with the SSC was replying to Mallace's "promotion request" for Nults, which I genuinely agreed with. Whilst I was thankful and understanding towards your critique of the rollback / chat moderator's current performances, I was offended when you told me I tend to vote for the same decisions my "friends vote for". Again, this is not very accurate at all.

As for the voting rights, I feel that this has been established several times before, and the agreement we settled with is that all users that hold special priveleges, admins and rollbacks alike, are able to vote on such matters.

Overall, this is a good request, and I feel we can definitely pull some ideas from here. However, I feel that you are calling for too many changes (minor changes; but changes nonetheless) when that simply isn't necessary. True, we are going through some stressful times, but I do not see how limiting the voting system to just admins, et cetera, would make things "less stressful". If you were to ask me, I would say our main concern at the moment is the lack of support and activity among multiple admins. Rest assured, our currently active admins of higher power are working out a solution to this. All in all, though, I don't think it's our rollback / mod system that is broken. Thank you, however, for this informative post and I will strive to work harder to fit the criteria put forth in your critique. Much appreciated.

Cheers,

-- Jeremiah Garland 22:39, February 26, 2013 (UTC)

I think the majority of this is mainly to strip some of us of are ability to vote. I've tried to apologize and make ammends with you the past few weeks, but I don't think you realized that. I don't want there to be any troubles between us, and I think some bits of this are mainly pointed at trying to get rid of my vote ( as you have requested that before ) so you decided to make a much larger, and more vague request. There is no point in having rollbacks, chat mod, and admins if we give all the power to the users ( which wouldn't be a problem, but there are so many with huge different ideas and this wouldn't be productive ) Thats just my opinion, and I hope you respect that as I respect your opinion. I won't oppose or support, as it would be tasteless to do so as in a sense I feel its mainly targetting me :)

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

I'd be crazy not to agree with this! This makes perfect and is literally, word for word, what I've been thinking and believe should be put in place. I support for sure.

Allison Spark / Sparky Wonderwolf

 

• Make Allison/Wonderwolf go mad!
• Dat Blog Spot
• Who is Allison/The Wonderwolf?
• Wonderwolf's Awesome Wife!

01:07, February 28, 2013 (UTC)

I Support - this. I like being able to vote on the Court, but I believe that it would be a good decision to restrict voting on here to admins only. 

G-man.

01:07, March 1, 2013 (UTC)

I must disagree with a lot of this. In my opinion, rollbacks actually do less work and have less responsibility now that there is less traffic and less vandalism on the wiki, where as people are on chat all the time.

I feel rollback is sort of a transition phase, where we see how they handle their new responsibilites and if they do not do well, then chat mod is not for them. Chat mod seems to be in high demand, because that is where a lot of power lies since people are on chat a lot. If you had to ask users, they would prefer chat mod to rollback and there is a problem already. I have seen a lot of mods crumble under the sudden pressure of being a mod, simply because they were thrust into such a position so quickly. I dont wish to name anyone, but you can think for yourselves that this has happened, even with our current mods and admins.

Next, I dont think we need to make an official rule for how long one must be here to be considered. We generally do not look at newer users anyway, so this is not a problem.

As for the reviews, I agree, but I do think you give Garland too little credit and are still angry at Vox (I do not blame you, though). 

Lastly, I dont really agree with that. Perhaps we could take away rollbacks' rights to vote here, but I like that as it is part of their transition phase responsibilites, and if they abuse that then a demotion would be the obvious course of action.

Changed to Neutral - with Jack's points >_<--Parax 15:30, March 2, 2013 (UTC)

I'M TERRIBLY SORRY! I have had many periods where I cannot chat or comment, and lately I've barely been able to edit at all. Today is the first day I've been able to edit smoothly. 

I'm afraid I'm going to have to Oppose - this. Basically, Jack has said what I've been wanting to say. This seems to be written out of personal dislike for two particular rollbacks and chat mods. Don't get me wrong, it's a well written request, and I was considering supporting, but I have to disagree here.

1. As for the Chat moderator section - I do not believe Chatmod should come before rollback. Yes, rollback can do damage, but that can be easily reverted. Chat moderator is a HUGE responsibility for users, as chat is where the community is now. Being a chat mod is more difficult than being a Bureaucrat if you ask me. Also, I think rollback is a good test run to see how users do whilst being on the team. Being able to vote on the SSC, being part of things, and just simply putting forth an example. Also, I do not think comparing the site to a government is very accurate.
2. As for rollbacks, I agree with your review, except for the fact that I think you let Garlic take quite a bit of the heat, and it is clear that you and Benjamin have had some disagreements, though I can see reasons why both sides are angry.
3. As for rights, I am unsure. I do think that being able to vote on the SSC is a huge responsibility, which helps rollbacks and mods to train for being an admin. Perhaps Mods can vote and rollbacks cannot? Still iffy on this subject

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

18:39, March 6, 2013 (UTC)

Promotion Request: Jeremiah Garland

I know this is happening rather fast, but I believe Jeremiah Garland should be promoted to admin for at least the time being. As far as I can see, Goldvane is going less active, and Garland is really starting to get the hang of all wikia duties. I see that he also has the potential to be a great admin. Vice Admiral Blake Stewart (Talk) @User

I am very flattered by this request, and I thank you, Blake, for considering me. Alas, only admins / rollbacks / chat moderators may write promotion requests :P

-- Jeremiah Garland 04:27, February 28, 2013 (UTC)

Users can, just not in blog form.... Vice Admiral Blake Stewart (Talk) @User
 

Holy God yes! Not because he's my friend (He is), but because he's ready for it. I'm looking at Jarod's progression. . Jarod was chat mod/rollback for 4 months before his administrative position. Jerry's been in his for nearly 5 now. Don't say "thats outrageous, it's never been done before" BECAUSE IT HAS. Since I can't (suppport) I (AGREE) Talk

We cannot use them :( BUT! We can use!

.Template:Agreed3 = Template:Agreed3

.Template:Disagreed = Template:Disagreed

.Template:Average = Template:Average

Vice Admiral Blake Stewart (Talk) @User

I support. Jerry has been mature, and has used his powers considerably well while solving problems. 

Tyler - Talk '

I support this I'm liking Jerry's new attitude. -Basily Galifizois IV

Guys, you can't use the {{Support}} template and you know it...

Squirto19 - Talk Page

Stop making these, users cannot request or suggest votes here. We will make promotions in our own time. If you continue this, we will delete these.

WHO DELETED THE AGREE TEMPLATE- THOSE WERE AWESOME :( BURN IN THE FIERY PITS OF THE UNDERWORLD!!!!! Talk

Adding section back. Accidentally rollbacked -_-

Chat Unban Request: TinyLittleWheatley

Basically, yeah.

I'm pretty much, well, am, the longest surviving user, and you'd probably think I'd have a lot more than 50 mainspace edits. I lost my other account in a tragic accident involving an error inside the software of the self-aware mainframe they call "WIKIA."

tl;dr I lost my account which had 50+ mainspace edits for reasons beyond me, so I request the chat unbanning of TinyLittleWheatley.

The fact you are the longest surviving user has zero to do with what you can do on this wiki, do not use that as leverage for getting unbanned. You are treated like every other user on this wiki. Also, don't use the "other account" thing, this is your CURRENT account. 

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

The Adjustment of Tolerance Policy (no tolerance policy)

This Community Vote has Ended! The side of Support won in the vote!

It is time that we all have this conversation. However, we are too busy dealing with drama. It's time we change that, and end the drama. Our sister wiki has managed to do this, and look at them now! No drama compared to us. They are perfect in my opinion. I'm jealous of how they operate their wiki. We need to adjust how we view certain things. I propose an elaborate reform of policy, not too dramatic. This will safeguard our wiki as a no drama place, end the RP drama possibly, and protect our users rights. It's time we man up, and become more democratic. It's time we fix our main issue. Drama. Vandalism, spam, drama, attacks, have caused this wiki to turn into hell. We can reverse that. We can even prevent it. Never again will we let drama rule us, its time  WE get on top of things. I propose a no tolerence policy, we passed it before but never enacted it. Its time we vote on this again. With this, we will be able to protect our wiki, protect our users, and bring the wiki to its previous state. What happened to the times when we wrote about our pirates and had fun? Why has that changed? We've let chaos come in, and harm our wiki, threats from outside our wiki. This is most likely the fault of Pearson Wright, we are so use to having drama from him that we must cause drama ourselves. This must end. It's time we get a tight grip on this wiki. Safeguard our community, and become drama free like our sister wiki. 

Here's my proposal, it is mainly what we have now - however I made somethings stricter.

The Adjustment of Tolerence Policy

Summary

The Adjustment of Tolerence Policy aims to increase the rights of users, whilst making the wiki drama, spam, and vandalism free. The policy is aimed to reform the wiki's rules, in order to make the wiki stricter on drama, while still making sure that users do not lose any rights or power from the adjustment. The policy further clarifies that the Pirates Online Players Wiki has no tolerence for any actions that may lead to drama, or harm the well being of the community ( i.e: trolling, spamming, edit warring, user conflict ) and any action that may disrupt the community. 

The policy is split into articles, with sections ( the below is purely technical - as it is a reform to the current rules ) reading on is not required, however to understand the technical aspects of what we deem as a no tolerence policy please read on. 

Article 1: Section 1

Activities that may cause drama

• Spamming, vandalism - this will warrant either 1 more chance, or an immediate ban ( the first choice for minor spamming, vandalism, the latter for severe spamming, vandalism, ban should be long as a deterrent ( i.e: 1-5 months, or infinite )
• Creating blogs that openly attack a group of users, or an individual - warrants a long ban ( 5-8 months ) by attack, a blog would need to criticize a user or group of users, with no other reason then to insult, or offend others.
• Bringing RP drama to the wiki -take it to the game or PM-
• Writing complaint blogs ( user will not be banned, but it is highly frowned upon )

Article 1: Section 2

No discrimination

• Do not discriminate against any user. Do not ban them for their ideas, or who they support.
• Do not make rules directly against a certain user or group ( for example, a rule cannot be passed that discrimates against a user or group; "Do not mention (insert name)'s name"
• Do not make pages, or blog that could directly or indirectly offend a group or individual user.

Article 1: Section 3

Spamming and Vandalism

• An unregistered user who spams, or vandalizes should be blocked infinitely, the chances are they have no edits on the wiki and only want to vandalize, and will probably not register an account to actively edit on the wiki.
• A user who excessively vandalizes or spams should be blocked for an indefinite amount of time. This will send a message that we do not take vandalism or spam lightly, and will act as a deterrence. Most editors that do this will most likely not want to, or have contributed a lot to the wiki.
• Users that have had a previous history of causing drama on the wiki will be banned infinetely ( or until a vote is help on SSC ) on the passing of this rule. These include users that have had previous issues with drama on the wiki, and are often the ones mainly causing drama.

Article 2: Section 1

Read the rules

• Nobody can use the excuse "I didn't know the rules", everyone will be treated as if they know the rules off by heart, if they have trouble or questions they should contact an administrator for help.

Article 2: Section 2

Outside Drama

• It should be openly discouraged to go onto other wikis and cause chaos ( such as going to potco-united-nations and causing drama, spamming, or trolling; this reflects badly on this wiki )
• Do not go to community central and complain about a ban or unfair admin, if doing so your block may be increased. ( if you have a problem, contact a local administrator. Staff will not listen to you if you have a problem with an admin or think your unfairly blocked )

Article 2: Section 3

Administrators

• Users should respect an administrators judgement, and not complain - as the administrators work for the good of the wiki.
• Administrators should respect users, and their opinions.
• All promotion requests/demotion requests require a majority ( if a vote is 9 oppose, 10 support, support wins as they have the higher votes ) any vote that reaches its goal amount automatically passes. Demotion/promotion requests must be voted on by rollbacks, administrators, and burs before being voted on by the public.

Article 3: Section 1

Seven Seas Court

• All votes require 2 days of voting ( unless it is a major vote, then it is 5 )
• All votes that pass, or do not need to be marked with the Passed or declined template and archived ( to keep the SSC easy to read, and not too long )
• Users may give their input, but should not cause any problems on the SSC.
• Requests such as banning or unbanning a user on the SSC should not be there, and should instead be passed onto an administrator. IF the administrator deems it is legit, he or she will create the request.
• Users cannot ask for the promotion, or demotion of a user.
• Admins reserve the right for emergency promotions or demotions, where no user vote is required only a SSC vote. This should only be used in emergency cases.
• Admins reserve the right to call a promotion/demotion ( if it is too close, admins can decide on the promotion/demotion)
• Admins reserve the right to disband a demotion or promotion.
• Rules can be adjusted/added without notice

Article 3: Section 2

User management

• Users should not complain, or cause drama.
• The wiki should be strict with keeping peace. Anyone that threatens peace ( causes drama ) should be banned infinitely. (Votes would be held on the Seven seas court on a fixed ban length for that user, unless its obvious )
• Users must give REAL reasons when voting on promotions, demotions ( not just "I like the guy")
• Users may only vote on the SECOND PROMOTE OR DEMOTION REQUEST. Not the one on the Seven seas court, if the one on the SSC passes then users are allowed to vote on a blog.
• If a user breaks a rule on chat or the wiki and an admin, or chat mod isn't around they should be encouraged to take screenshots and report the user.

Chat policy

• The user should keep in mind that all conversation should be PG-13
• No using offensive language.
• Don't use words such as ( testicles, anus, vagina, eggsack, etc )
• Touchy topics should be avoided ( politics, religion, race, or anything that may be offensive )
• If a user is offended by a conversation, they should say they do not feel comfortable with the conversation and it should end immediately. If the users do not stop, the user who is offended should report this to a chat mod, or admin.
• Arguing on chat is not tolerated.
• Cussing in chat is a big fat NO. Any cussing will result in an immediate chat ban of up to a week, no strikes ( if you only get a strike then its not a big deterrent to not cuss)

So....We can't say Hell, Damn, Crap, Ass?

Semper Fi 12:19, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

Role-playing

• A no tolerance will be put onto roleplay drama. There will be no blogs that will create drama
• Roleplay should be kept mature.
• All fighting should be taken somewhere else
• Users that cause too much drama will be banned.

Insults

• Do not call any user anything that could be insulting ( e.g: You fat bastards ))

Thank you, and please remember. We need to protect our community from itself. Our biggest problem right now is us.

I think a vote to 10 would be good, considering we don't have 20 rollbacks/admins... or until Friday the majority will win the vote.

Thanks

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Support - Drama's gotta end homie. Tired of people messing the wiki up with the excessive and unneeded fighting, drama, etc. However, I do think politics and religion should be allowed, as long as the conversation is civil :3. I am also a bit unsure on promotions/demotions—I do feel users should have a say in promotions/demotions, but right now I'm contemplating the possible outcomes of each thing…

EDIT: Not a big fan of an ex-post facto rule (the new one, where we ban people for having a previous history of drama upon the rule passing), so hoping we can edit that out...--Parax 02:01, March 12, 2013 (UTC)

-in response to Par's edit- But if we ban the trouble makers ( like the pirates online wiki did ) wont that ease the drama that we are trying to get rid of? Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Perhaps, but again, I'm not a fan of ex-post facto rules, and would prefer to just punish a user for trouble they cause after the rule is passed.--Parax 22:38, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

Have you seen the movie Minority Report? They catch criminals before the commit the murder. Shouldn't we ban the users that we KNOW will create more drama in the future, in order to prevent that? Would you rather ban a few users to PREVENT drama in the near future ( and from previous history, we know the amount of drama is a LARGE AMOUNT ) or would you rather ban them when they actually create the drama ( the damage would already be done )? Either way I respect your opinion. :)

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

There are some thing I dont necessarily agree with. Politics and Religion are allowed so long as it is civil. For example, discussing how interesting Buddhism is. As long as you are staying positive or neutral, not offending anyone with it it's fine. Another thin gis it doe snot help that rules are kind of sort of changed in wording every now and then. I was pretty sure (for example and Im sorry if it sounds like Im bringing up some dramatic subject but this is the only thing I cant hink of) there was a 2/3 Majority Rule at one point eb,ven for a 10vote Community Vote but that wa showever changed but users would not know that. The rules are worded differently or re worded every so often. Then we have the promotion and demotion part. I think users should be able to make suggestions to the Administration on promotions or demotions. But a slong as they are legitmate reasons and not like extreme arguing. You get the idea though. Theres a few other things but Ill wait til what others say. Neutral - ReyesDeLulz 02:08, March 12, 2013 (UTC)

I Support - this of course. By banning politics and religion, I mean making sure it is civil. If users want to discuss that they can use PM, but as the past has shown these conversations generally end up badly.. also with promotions/demotions, I'm  afraid lots of users would be biased with that, and admins would generally know who should be promoted/demoted. As we've seen recently,  there's been lots of drama over this - and the wiki as it is currently is very divided, so I think current measures need to be put into place to close that divide. I respect your opinion, and yes we will see what other rollbacks, admins think. Also, with the historical bit, we must remember this may be offensive to some people. IF you want to discuss it, there is PM for a reason!

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Hmm. I agree with Parax. I Support - this, while I think it could use some editing and altering. I would like to talk with my fellow administrators about what we can possibly do with this. I'm unsure on the roleplay section and a few other things might need to be altered. In general, though, I Support the majority of this request. 

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

02:35, March 12, 2013 (UTC)

WAIT.  So now we can't insult people?

So the biggest debate now is whether this place is becoming communist or fascist.

And by the way, the SSC is used for admin approval.  The admins will have to make a community vote after this.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member

I wrote a song too:

Sig heil to the wiki admins!

Rules away is your punishment!

Pulverize the actual users,

Who criticize your government!

Bang bang goes the editing rights and,

Kill the roleplay cause it DON'T AGREE.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 22:20, March 12, 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to say I love the song. dont necessarily agree or disagree with it, but Breasly uo have potential in the music industry. Talk

I really like a lot of the ideas here. A few things that may need discussing, but overall this is quite brilliant. For now, however, I'm going to pull a Goldvane and wait to see some other opinions before putting in my final decision. So I guess you could call me Neutral - for now.

-- Jeremiah Garland 03:33, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Garland, there are several things that need altering and discussing. Other than that, it's a good idea. Parax and I were already discussing a zero tolerance policy a few days ago.  

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

16:40, March 13, 2013 (UTC)

A Thesis on the Benjy Mac Request...

Where to begin. Ah yes, 

• "Creating blogs that openly attack a group of users, or an individual - warrants a long ban ( 5-8 months ) by attack, a blog would need to criticize a user or group of users, with no other reason then to insult, or offend others."

Garland if so recently created a blog that openly accused Pearson Wright of I quote:

"So then why is the wiki just experiencing problems now? Why hasn't the internal drama ripped us apart much earlier? There are several explanations. My theory is Pearson Wright."

Not only does half of his proposed rule contradicts exactly what a colleague of his; just a day ago wrote that Pearson Wright is the reason for the Wiki's problems. He being Jeremiah Garland whom is singling out a already banned user who has not even commented on this wiki for most over two years. He blames Pearson Wright for such problems for the recent vandalism attack to whom we cannot for say for sure with undeniable proof that it was indeed in fact Pearson Wright who had attacked this Wiki. If Jeremiah then again did not just criticise Pearson Wright but in his mind used him as a fresh and notable example of his past with the Wiki then with no doubt he is still attacking said Pearson Wright. "he attacked our wiki and caused chaos." Quite the assumption for a long time banned user. 

• "Do not make pages, or blog that could directly or indirectly offend a group or individual user." 

Pages such as the Parody page of the RP British Government clearly shows a insult to anyone who is British or is role-playing as a Brit. 

"All promotion requests/demotion requests require a majority ( if a vote is 9 oppose, 10 support, support wins as they have the higher votes ) any vote that reaches its goal amount automatically passes. Demotion/promotion requests must be voted on by rollbacks, administrators, and burs before being voted on by the public."

So forth for a request if a particular group such as the admins desire to place a user in power and the said user is not in favour of the general community then how do you think the admins get their way? 

If there is nearly as equal opposition as there is supporters then the Wiki is divided.. If you people let the vote go on for more than a day you would have more of the community's user feedback rather then only 19 people as was observed on this Promotion Request of Nults McKagan. The admins in my opinion have literally gathered a set number of people such as 8 of them to vote either support or oppose for that it will be much easier for 1 side who has prior knowledge about said promotion or demotion request to have a unfair advantage.

Literally within minutes 8 people voted in extreme haste to push their side closer to victory without most of us who are quite busy and preoccupied with other elements in life are unaware that nearly in less then a hour 8 people had voted support and only 2 oppose. Where is the democracy in that? If I was the head of the Admin team I could literally have all my admins vote the way I want without question. Look at that quite a few former or present admins who had voted Support nearly in haste that was less then a hour... 

1. Captaingoldvane2
2. Jarod Pillagebane
3. Pencil
4. Squirto
5. Stpehen
6. Jeremiah Garland
7. KatBluedog
8. Jack Goldwrecker.
9. KittyNomsYou
10. Jasonblade

8 of these users either are admins, or have discussed to be moved towards one side through their availability on Chat. It was a race for either one side to reach 10.... Why 10? Are you people afraid you may not have enough pre-set supporters to actually have a real legitimate vote? Are you people afraid that if you do not have the 10 votes to win in less then a hour things might not go the way you planned due to the reality of the to be promoted may not  be in the popular favour of being capable of performing the duties of a Rollback, Chat Mod, Admin, Bur, etc.

• "All votes require 2 days of voting ( unless it is a major vote, then it is 5 )"

That literally doesn't matter if there is already a pre-set number of votes a SSC Vote requires to pass or be denied. So let's say 8 users who had prior knowledge of a topic who are former admins, in relation to the admins, or admins themselves vote one side nearly right after each other. Where is the chance for the opposition to come in and question the proposal. How is that fair? 

• "Admins reserve the right for emergency promotions or demotions, where no user vote is required only a SSC vote. This should only be used in emergency cases."

This reminds of the epic Si-fi movie of Star Wars quote by quote.. (I am sorry if it is not proper English it's Jar Jar Binks for that) "

"Itsa clear that desa Separatists made a pact witha desa Federation du Trade. Senators, dellow felagates, in response to this direct threat to the Republic, mesa propose that the Senate give immediately emergency powers to the Supreme Chancellor."

This is exactly how Palpatine if you ever seen the movies; came to power. He became almost like a dictatorial figure who blinded the Republic with a war. With the War in his favour he pushed to become Emperor and the Republic to be reorganised into a Galactic Empire.

A Admin then could promote anyone he desires for a "emergency promotion" with the most simplest cause. If Vandals attack more rollbacks will be promoted without the community's say? We cannot just trust anyone to revert the history on a page. If they perform the task at hand wrongly then it would only serve to be a failure of a promotion. 

• "Admins reserve the right to call a promotion/demotion ( if it is too close, admins can decide on the promotion/demotion)"

It has already been said that admins first then choose to push for a promotion or a demotion. You are saying that if  the wiki is somehow tied on the scale of the present way of voting is 10 users to either support or oppose said discussion. Then admins should then decide to vote when there are more than 20 users who edit this wiki? I do not understand the logic of either we have 10 votes for a SSC to pass or be denied or we abolish the number of votes required and have a time limit for the vote. It would make more logical sense to just have no preset number of votes required for a subject to pass but a time limit of 2-days as said in this lovely written essay... Again the voting is a major subject that needs to be reformed due to it's effect on other said proposals. 

• "Admins reserve the right to disband a demotion or promotion."

Truly admins then can disband a demotion or promotion they do not like. The admins have formed a team. If we say that a admin needs to be demoted.. and a fellow admin takes upon that request due to it's popularity or need of it then the admins could then go completely against the community and save their friend from possible demotion? That doesn't make any sense at all. This is literally destroying our user rights. If I want someone demoted and If I have support with proper cause then by word that demotion cannot be stopped by a admin's right to just go against the user's right to call for a demotion or promotion! If we cannot change our own government that we dislike. Then this government is in flaw. 

• "Rules can be adjusted/added without notice"

This is one of the biggest blunders of this proposal. You expect us to follow rules that we may not be even aware were added? A admin could literally edit the rules to suit the present situation such as just to have the justification to ban or issue a strike, or punish a user in some shape or form. Rules cannot be added without notice. PERIOD. If there is a law that says I can vote for President if I am a Citizen and another day that law says only fat people can vote for president! Then you sir are mistaken. I have every right to vote. And if the rules are subject to change without notice then where is the capability and responsibility of a user to have to check the rules every day to see if a admin has tried to make a rule just to stop someone he doesn't like.

You cannot be responsible for the failure of the admins to communicate with the community. Why do you think laws, acts, pacts, etc are always let known to the public? Why is there a horribly boring Government channel for Parliament? or the House of Congress or the U.S. Senate? To communicate... The Government wants you to know about the new, the old, and the present rules or laws for you to follow them or for you to change them if seen unfit. We can use dictatorial countries as prime examples.. Take 17th Century England. Oliver Cromwell and Parliament had King Charles beheaded. News did not automatically spread to the rest of the nation. Scotland, and Ireland had mostly been left in the dark as well as the rest of Europe. During wars with the Dutch... news leaked out slowly but ever surly. By that time Cromwell had established a dictatorship banning Christmas! Do not let the admins take away your Christmas. 

• "The wiki should be strict with keeping peace. Anyone that threatens peace ( causes drama ) should be banned infinitely. (Votes would be held on the Seven seas court on a fixed ban length for that user, unless its obvious )"

How strict can a wiki get.. Anyone causes drama must be banned infinitely? Garland and Benjamin have done that already many times in the past. Garland tried to make a new King of Spain that was ill-supported.... Benjamin tried to form a new independent EITC away from England.... And now just recently :) Garland openly criticised and attacked Pearson Wright and with that blaming the Wiki's problems solely on him. Thus causing drama. To what extent will this rule if approved be enforced? You cannot just say "If you do something bad you will be banned infinitely" duly because this is not even being at the slightest being specific. Said rule is too broad for proper understanding of the rule. What kind of drama? Would you ban Shakespeare's greatest plays? Is that considered drama? Drama occurs daily in life if you like it or not. If you people want a community where conflict rarely occurs in the form of argument, aggressive discussion, or straight out fighting. Go tell that to the world and see if they listen. Humans have been fighting over differences since our very existence. Deal with it ladies. Grow-up and deal with it. Why does North Korea hate everyone and why do we hate them? Hmmm? Why does Iran, Iraq hate the U.S.? Hmmm? Why did France and Britain have their wars, battles, conflicts, etc. It's called humans. 

If you people want a dramaless society then good luck finding one of those. It surprises me so that inactive homeless people quit POTCO to goof off, play around on chat, and complain about everything people do because they have nothing better to do with their spare time. Truly Pathetic. Now before you say it. I am forced to rant upon this proposal due to the fact.. It... will.. affect...me.. 

• "Arguing on chat is not tolerated."

How in the world are you suppose to stop being from arguing? How in the world are you going to tell people to shut up when something annoys them? You cannot control what we say. The Users just should have some common sense not to be immature and cuss, use offensive language, bring up offensive topics, using words from Anatomy Mostly) harmfully towards others. Arguing to a level should be in place. If they are not as said before using offensive language, topics, profanity, etc towards each other then let it be. If they break the rules while arguing then strike them.. If they continue... Simple.. Ban... That must be what the purpose of the strike emote is! :O

• "A no tolerance will be put onto role-play drama. There will be no blogs that will create drama"

Basically this wiki is living off role-play. Deal with it. How can you tell there will be drama coming from a blog? Can you read other people's minds? If I declare War on Russia tomorrow and make a blog it will be deleted? Again You cannot control drama. Stop trying to control it. Let it be. You are causing "Drama" by trying to move people for a wiki that to me sounds like a dictatorship filled with complete censorship and as G-man says "They no give me free speech talk"  while he quotes his random songs.  Garland, Benjamin and whoever is supporting him have caused RP drama.. The only reason there is drama on this wiki is because you inactive hobos can't get on the game and argue it there, or svs, pvp, fight about it in game. So forth that is where the need of RP Drama escalated to this wiki because of the fact.. There is no other shape or form to fight but through words. 

• "Do not call any user anything that could be insulting ( e.g: You fat bastards ))"

Insults? We are suppose to be 13 and over while if some 8 year olds in disguise wish to complain about insulting then please go. If you think me calling someone a fat bastard hurts their feelings because maybe in reality they are fat.. or etc. Then please explain why this hasn't been addressed since the start of this wiki? :O Is it because I who likes to call Goldvane a fat whale because he admits to being fat or is it being rudely towards him in the way that he literally as of yesterday ignored my clear warning of possible vandalism and how the admin team should oh I do not know BE AWARE of the situation that might be ahead. Instead he has the indecency to comment on how I fear the vandal's power. I fear the fact that our admins are fat whales who rather argue and "insult" users who are just trying to warn, or provide useful information that could potentially help the wiki. Goldvane, I have nothing against you but still if you truly think I am afraid of people vandalising the wiki that can be reverted then you are sadly mistaken. 

What I was trying to say before I was cut off by Goldvane's whale song. :) I am afraid of the vandal's capability to attack us on a daily basis that would discourage users to even try to edit or even look at the wiki due to the constant struggle over control over the content of the wiki. The vandals most likely used IP Scramblers. There might be a bot, etc to solve that but for now you are ultimately open to daily attack if they so please. 

Finally, I am just appalled by the ignorance of those who have already voted on this entire long matter with the only thought of more admin power. More control over the community. More rules. Well I say to those who can't read. Stop skimming over the entire thing without reading it thoroughly. One detail in a entire contact and mean life or death; Literally. For those who just choose to ignore or not acknowledge this proposal's flaws, and failures then you must only care for yourself and not for the goodness of the community. I clearly now have pointed out more than 10 flaws with this proposal and it was a pain to write. 

From the Desk of the Prime Minister of Great Britain,

02:32, March 14, 2013 (UTC)

After scanning that briefly, I just see my name in there a bunch of times, so I figure Goldtimbers once again, is somehow trying to find a way to pick at me, like he always does. So I'm not reading that.

-- Jeremiah Garland

Oldipooh, let me get this straight with you. I doubt you understand that fully, "emergency promotions" are great. If an admin harms the wiki, shouldn't he/she be removed instantly? If we need more rollbacks, they should be promoted for a set time. More admin control? Is that a bad thing? We think of "control" as being bad, but we need control over the situation. Let me paint a picture for you, take a look at our lovely sister wiki, the Pirates Online Wiki. Do they let their users rule the place like we do? No. How are they doing now? Brilliantly. How are doing? Rubbish. Their wiki has almost no drama, is clean of vandalism, and is perfect compared to us. The fact is, our wiki is doing poorly. If you were to make a chart on the correlation between user activity ( such as how much control they have, etc ) and drama, I'm sure you would find that MORE USERS having control over the wiki means more chaos. I believe, the users elect certain users to guide the wiki and represent them. How you want things seems to be to make every user an admin practically and expect the wiki to excel. 

I can not help but laugh at your essay long reply, and I also remember you scolding Jerry for his essay like replies. Well look at this, I summarized what I wanted to say in a little more then a paragraph. 

Thank you,

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

I think we passed this, as it ends on Friday, which has passed, and the majority has supported. Through my conversations with other rollbacks and admins on this chat and others I think all of us agree that this is needed to prevent drama, so I would like to ask for this to be made official seeing as the vote has ended.

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

That is a lot to read, so I am going to write my response as I work through it. Please, in the future, use lower-level headings for sub-sections instead of the main ones.

Article 1, Section 1: The ban times seem a little lengthy. I prefer to use my discretion and not be bound by a standard. Wikia also tells us to always assume good faith, so warnings and strikes are what I think is a better route to start with, and then bans of a shorter variety. Oppose -

Article 1, Section 2: This I can agree with, but there are some grey-areas. Lots of people can go around saying petty things offend them or they feel discriminated, so once again, admin discretion is key. Also, the thing about not making blogs that could directly or indirectly offend a user seems harsh, as many people will be offended by many things since we are all individuals. The severity of the offensiveness is my concern. Oppose - what you are proposing, but Support - the principle.

Article 1, Section 3: Yes, this seems good except the last bit. I am not going to ban users who have had a dramatic history (basically all of us. No! Support - all but the last, which I strongly Oppose -.

Article 2, Section 1: Support -

Article 2, Section 2: Hell yes. Support -

Article 2, Section 3: I Support - the first bit, but Oppose - the last. 2/3 majority or an extension on time.

Article 3: Section 1:

• Oppose - I would prefer a week since I am not active enough to see everything that happens within 2 days.
• Support -
• Support -
• Neutral - I dont mind either way.
• Support -
• Support - but I think that after the emergency is over an official vote must be made to keep said user in their position.
• Support - although I think they should be able to ask for demotions in some cases, but not abuse it.
• Support - but with same argument as I used 2 bullets up.
• Oppose - not unless there is a valid reason to do with the rules being broken by the vote.
• Oppose - we must tell the users when we change the rules, it is just good practice.

Article 3, Section 2:

• Support -
• Oppose - Infinitely is ridiculous. We should be strict, but not that strict.
• I guess? Uhm...
• Oppose - They should be discussed respectfully and within reason.
• Oppose - Another grey area, and discretion is the key.
• Oppose - Depends on severity and excess.
• Neutral - Good point, but I dont know.

Roleplaying: Support -

As for comments: TL;DR! I am too busy, and I will be back on Wednesday. Par, keep things in order xD

Finally, I want to say we need more striking and less leniency or immediate bans in its place. We need a middle ground.

Unban Request - Lord Hector Wildhayes

I don't really have some detailed argumentative paragraph to type to be honest with you. I'm not sure why Hector was banned. I can only guess its because of something minor, but I think it was infinite. Anyways. Hector has really been helping me out a lot lately as well as many other people who I can only hope will also vote him back. I really don't want anybody manipulating or pressuring anyone into supporting or opposing. I want people to give their honest opinions here. In the time that I've known Hector, I've seen him to be very kind and helpful. However, he may have been different in the past for all I know. By the way, I'm Bella. :) Anyways, please leave your vote in the comments and give a reason for why you support or oppose.

As for me, I support Hector Wildhayes being unbanned because I see him as a very polite, mature, and helpful individual. He is also The Pope in RP and it would really do well to have him here helping us out. :)

(Community discussion: User blog:Isabella V Clemente/Unban Request - Lord Hector Wildhayes)

~Why Hector was banned~

This user is currently blocked. The latest block log entry is provided below for reference:

• 15:56, 2012 July 20 Stpehen (Talk | contribs) changed block settings for Lord Hector Wildhayes (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (account creation disabled, e-mail blocked, cannot edit own talk page) (Ban dodging: "Hector" and "Giovanni" claim to be the same people, but not Pearson. However, "Giovanni" is on the same account as Pearson, making Giovanni Pearson. As "Hector" is Giovanni, he must be Pearson.)

Well after getting to know Hector I realize he is not in fact Pearson. There are many differences. I'll be honest and not some corrupt idiot saying "Oh no I always knew he wasn't Pears". That's stupid and only shows I am a big fat stupid lying twat. Because he isn't Pearson I Support - his unban (Rollbacks and Admins can vote I believe.)

ReyesDeLulz 23:11, March 26, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - I've seen him on the POTCO UN Wiki, and I don't think we need him here. Whilst he may not be Pearson, from what I have seen from him, he has the same attitude. Not to mention we've given him several chances here before. Also, watch the language, Al... "Twat" is extremely vulgar on this side of the pond.

Cheers,

Jeremiah Garland 01:09, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Neutral - Normally, I do not let the actions of someone on another wiki affect their time here, but as Garland said, I see very hostile behavior from Hector on other wikis. This, coupled with the theory that the user in question may or may not have been a sockpuppet account, initially left me leaning on Oppose -. However, I have not taken a side as I wish to gather opinions from others before I make a decision.--Parax 01:47, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

I just want to add something. Hector Wildhayes was originally banned for being "suspicious" of being Pearson. However, as Garland and Albert Spark have both acknowledged; he's obviously not Pearson, and therefore, that invalidates his infinite ban which technically obliges the people that banned him to unban him. Nowhere in his ban log does it bring up any of these topics that you're all pointing out. I don't think the actions of another user on a seperate wiki should be used against them here. I believe Parax has said himself that the administrators here do not control the actions of this wiki's users on other wikis. I recall him saying that when Pearson came to him complaining that members of this wiki had vandalized his wiki. Anyways! Just thought I'd add that! Please don't delete my message! :) I'm gonna go to bed now, night night! :D

Isabella V Clemente (talk) 01:58, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

As a side note, I don't recall Pearson complaining to me about this at all. When was this? O_o--Parax 02:01, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

It may not have been Pearson, but I recall hearing about you saying that to somebody a while back, lol. Isabella V Clemente (talk) 02:03, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Lol, I believe Isabella is Pearson. I believe we postpone this vote and hold a I.P. scan before going further into this issue. Tell Community Central Paradox Overlord has recieved a global ban and is suspected of being on other accounts. Surely Isabella you wouldn't mind this since you're sure Hector, and yourself, are not Pearson.

Sven Daggersteel, GM of Royale Co. Navy

I utterly hate these kind of requests, they are so bias. Isabella here is very favorable to Hector, and I see there being some kind of agenda here. Hector was banned for a reason, and will stay banned. We don't need him! Hector even goes onto the POTCO UN wiki chat calling us all a bunch of "asses" and "mother ____ers". Is this the person you want back on this wiki? NO. I firmly Oppose - this, and I, in the communities best interests, will make sure that this request does not pass. We don't need these types of people on our wiki. I think I speak for the majority of users, in the sense that we want this wiki to be drama-free, and bringing Hector back will only ignite that! I also have reasons to believe that their will be a unban request for Pearson soon. I hope this doesn't go through, we REALLY don't need these users on our wiki.

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Oppose - Hector was always a hostile and lawless individual. Even if he is not Pearson, he always fights for Pears to return or allows Pears to go on his account and frankly, we do not need that here. Besides that, I agree with my colleagues above.

Switching to Oppose - after reading Voxel and Jack's reasons. While his most recent hostility is exhibited on other wikis, it does show that personality-wise, he is not the kind of user to be welcomed here. Additionally, the possibility of him letting a blacklisted user access his account also convinces me to stay on Oppose ---Parax 18:56, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Sure Sven, you can run an "IP Scan", seeing as Pearson's IP was globally blocked, I don't know how I could be him. Anyways, none of you are addressing why Hector was banned in the first place. You're just passing accusations none of which are supported by a single fact. I don't recall Hector ever being hostile towards anybody. It's funny how you'd accuse him of being rude to people on other Wikis when just 2 hours ago Basil Brawlmonk went and vandalized our Wiki. Be sure to "report" him too. It's sad how nobody here will do anything about that, but you can use that against somebody when you don't like them....? Seriously? I'd like to see somebody give me evidence of Hector's supposed "hostility". Yes Voxelplox. Hector was banned for a reason. He was banned for being suspected of being Pearson. However, it's now widely acknowledged that he is indeed not Pearson. As I stated above, this obliges the administrators of this wiki to unban him immediately. How can you say, "We don't need these types of users on The Wiki" when just a month ago you were attempting to "Take over" here? This type of discrimination is EXACTLY why Hector should be unbanned. You speak of Hector's hostility when yet whenever I see you on The POTCO United Nations Wiki, you're cussing somebody out in chat, or screaming, "Pearson it's your fault that our Wiki sucks! Stop causing drama!", yet you're the one raging on OUR Wiki. ANYWAYS, just thought everybody should take all of this into consideration before casting a blind vote. This Wiki truly cannot get any worse, and a year long block for being "Pearson" when in fact, he isn't, is quite absurd. Let's try and stay on topic here.

Isabella V Clemente (talk) 21:31, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Well Missymoo, lets get the facts straight here. Your speaking a bunch of malarky. Hector was BANNED because PEARSON used his account. FYI I still Oppose -.

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Really? I'd love to see proof of that. I don't recall any ever being presented when he was originally banned over a YEAR ago.

Isabella V Clemente (talk) 21:35, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

FYI, your "the admins are obliged to unban him!" quote is, quite frankly, overused, invalid in this case, and doesn't make us any more inclined to do as you say.

And I do ask, why should we "report" Basil? He vandalized on another wiki, kay. If you want him banned on your wiki, then do so, but don't tell us what we have to do here for what Basil did on another wiki. Hector's case of bad behavior on other wikis is different, in my opinion; he is hostile and easily agitated, on both there and here prior to his ban.

This is all I have to say on the matter for now; my vote remains on Oppose ---Parax 22:18, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

That's fine and dandy, but the thing is, if he were truly sooooo rude and whatever else you claim him to be, that would have been included in his ban log, would it not? Judging by how I was treated when I joined the chat, I can't blame him for getting "agitated". The reason I brought up Basil vandalizing another Wiki is because you were using things that happened on other Wikis against Hector. I don't think Hector's ever vandalized anything... and there's still yet to be any evidence of him acting out in a rude manner. I don't recall ever saying you were obliged to unban anyone until now lol.. and, if we're going by the rules of this Wiki, then you indeed are obliged to unban him. :)

Isabella V Clemente (talk) 22:24, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

1. Considering that ban-dodging is a major rule-break, that was all that was required. However, if you do so desire, I could always add "harassment/hostility, disregard for rules" to the ban reason ^_^
2. I never said Hector vandalized.
3. Evidence? Check his contribs (probably a few in his deleted contribs, accessed by admins only, unfortunately), or perhaps even, go look on your wiki. While his hostile behavior on other wikis shouldn't count against him, it does show that someone with that attitude is not the kind of person wanted here.
4. Other "you are obliged to unban him!" quotes were used sometime prior to Hector's ban. While my example is outdated, it does show you are quick to jump to that in arguments whenever you want something done for you.
5. In what rule on the wiki are we obliged to unban him? Do I detect another attempt to tell us how to do our job, using invalid examples?

--Parax 22:32, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Request for the Reconsideration of User:The 7th Master

I realize this is one of the most dodgy subjects for all of you, but hear me out. The 7th Master does not care what has occured in the past, that's not something he likes doing. The past is the past, move on. You cannot change what either you nor he has done, you've corrected it with your rollbacking. You must make a choice here and now to reconsider him. Forgive him for his crimes, not because he wants back, but because it's human nature to let go. You cling to your wiki and refuse to forgive him, afraid it may all crumble in his wake. I assure you, he has no involvement in this request. He would make a great editor, he's become good at coding and editing. Don't shoot this request down because you don't agree with his opinions, or because you don't like him. Favoritism is never a healthy thing. Please forgive The 7th Master, and work towards utilizing his improved editing habits and coding skills. He would be the first great step to an amazing future.

Luckey Handford

Although I am not a rollback, I believe that opinions here should be strongly needed. Moving on, the last time there was a unban request for Matthew he actually threatened that if he was not unbanned VSTF would be contacted (^_^), I don't know about you, but that just does not sit well with me. Another problem is that for most of all of his unban requests the main (and mostly only) reasons for his unban are "Coding and editing." This just isn't enough. If he, you, and anybody else who wanted the ban to drop, then you should put EFFORT into it! Give us a good reason why he should be unbanned. Give us a reason why Matthew is so different from all the others with infinite bans! Why should we put our money on him when countless other tries for bringing back others have failed, failed, and failed? Don't just tell us he'll be good for the wiki and contribute, SHOW US! Moving forth, I would personally oppose this, not because of my previous points, but with this one. Although Matthew keeps claiming that he was infinitely banned for nothing, while there was a reason. While the infinite ban handed to him by Tama, may have been wrong at first, we all learned that what he was for the community, wasn't good. He came back several times with sock puppets, trolled and begged admins on game to unban him. Well that's just wrong. If he really wanted to be unbanned, he should have waited his time, and let the admins decide for themselves he would be good for the wiki. But since he has proven over and over again that he isn't, I simply see no reason to even think about unbanning him. While there might be others who think it is time, this is my opinion, and I shall stand by it, good day to you all

Squirto19 - Talk Page

From what he has shown me on the POTCO-Switzerland Wiki, months after his ban here, I oppose. He nearly took over the Wiki there after abusing his administrator rights for 4 months. Also on Skype, he continously threatened to get VSTF involved in shutting down both Wiki's. Tyler - Talk

Oppose - We don't need users that aspire to take over wikis. Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Oppose - His ban is infinite, and an infinite amount of time has yet to pass. He does not deserve to return.

Oppose - He threatens me, if I dont help unban him, basically what others have stated here. ReyesDeLulz 18:53, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - He's an old friend and all, but a user with the qualities the other opposers have listed tell me that passing this would not be a positive thing for the wiki.--Parax 18:59, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - We've seen this same request several times before, and I simply feel we don't need him here due to the amount of drama he tends to bring.

And with that... - slams hammer - the result of this vote is officially and unanimously Oppose - kbai.

-- Jeremiah Garland 23:30, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

I truly believe Matthew is a good person but is a tad bit bipolar and this causes his emotions to spiral out of control from time to time. He's certainly turned a new leaf on our Wiki, but I couldn't speak for how he'd act on this one.

Isabella V Clemente (talk) 23:32, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Ban Request: Isabella V Clemente

Hello, I want to ask you all a question. Do we allow seedlings on this wiki? Do we want a drama queen? Do we want a user that is so close to Pearson on this wiki? No. Isabella, badmouths all of us on her own wiki. Calling us a bunch of "Mother____ers" Do you respect her for that? I sure don't. We know she will cause drama for us here, and it is hell time that we make sure she doesn't get the best of us. She is a troll. She is already unpopular on this wiki. She WILL cause drama here, and we need to end this. 

So, let's think. Will Isabella V Clemente contribute a lot to the wiki? Do you think she will cause drama here? Do you think we desperately need her here? 

Also she tries to bring HECTOR back, so this proves that they are trying to bring their seedling friends over to our wiki!

Voting ends by Friday - or when a group gets to 10.

Thank you, :)

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Neutral - While there has been an increase in drama since she arrived, insults on other wikis, and her attempting to tell us what to do, I remain neutral for the time being. I wish to gather more data before I draw a conclusion.--Parax 22:41, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Um... I don't call you that on my Wiki. Please back your accusations up with proof. I think its fair to say that I've been working pretty hard to try and represent Spain in a positive way despite you insulting both my friends and my boyfriend. I'm trying to bring Hector back because I'm the only one of my own kind here. Sorry if I feel cornered..? I can't make unban requests for users who were unfairly banned? Is there a rule against that? I check the recent activity and I see you arguing with people while I'm trying to make pages to get my edit count up. :/

Isabella V Clemente (talk) 22:46, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

1. As stated above, she hasn't caused any real issues yet, and you can't be banned on the wiki for external reactions.

2. I request the punishment of Voxelplox for attempting to hide my oppose to my vote to boost his ego, as you can easily see in the activity, he was the next person after me to edit, and after it was done, the original post was gone, good job.

22:49, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

Issues are waiting to arrive. Agreed with Voxel.

Sven Daggersteel, GM of Royale Co. Navy

Well geez. I didn't know I was this resented. If you really want me to leave, just ask. You don't have to make some community-wide ban request... :/

Isabella V Clemente (talk) 22:54, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

What Isabella does on another wiki should not affect her here.  It doesn't matter what she says about us, as long as it is not on this wiki it shouldn't matter.  I have yet to witness this girl say one rude comment, unless I have missed something.  She hasn't seemed to start any drama here yet, unlike the most of you commenting on this particular thread.  I would highly recommend you re-evaluate the situation, or at least wait until she does break the rules.  At which point she should not be banned right away, she should be given strikes.  Treat everybody fairly, no matter who they are or where they come from, that will help save your wiki, not banning everybody from it at the first chance.

^ Thank you...

Isabella V Clemente (talk) 23:27, March 27, 2013 (UTC)

@Pencil. I'm sorry if I removed anything other then your oppose template. I ONLY removed your oppose template, I'm sure I didn't remove anything else. If I did, it was purely accidental and I apologize for that. I'm busy, I have close to a dozen tabs open - if I accidentally remove something like that, then it is purely accidental. I think either a conflict edit, or I accidentally selected the entire post - but it was completely accidental, and I don't want you to think I would do something like that..

Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Demotion Request:Voxelplox

Not to harm, but honestly...

• Most unproductive Rollback here.

• Gets Attitudes with normal users every now and then

• Ridiculously bad with handling his power here.

*He hates the Kittehstani Government.

In all seriousness,

King Of Kittehstan BLAKE STEWART (HAIL THE SEEDLINGS!)

Neutral - Id like to see what others say ReyesDeLulz 04:59, March 29, 2013 (UTC)

no. 내가 금지 싸울 이유는 채팅에서 쫓겨났습니다?

Hello, I represent the soon to come consul leadership of the nearing Communist revolution, and I am neutral.

Oppose - I haven't seen him do any wrong. His relations with other certain users, whilst they may be faltered, is not a good reason to be answered by a demotion request. Also, one rollback to another, he's definitely the most talented rollback here when it comes to coding.

-- Jeremiah Garland 16:27, March 29, 2013 (UTC)

Unproductive? OK that is offensive. LET us see what I have done:

• Made the theme -that nobody has put into wikia.css, which irritates me considering its been approved for the past 5 months or so.
• Rollback unproductive edits, yes. I ACTUALLY do my job. I follow certain users who appear to not be making productive edits, and rollback them, and help them make good faith edits.
• I think this request is made out of personal distaste, sure I dislike certain people here, don't we all? But I try my hardest to be friendly, and keep it professional, and professionalism is important when being in this type of position. No this request doesn't do harm, I think its serious. You obviously dislike me, and its partly my fault because I need to try and please everyone here. :)
• I have to admit, I've been easy to temper lately, but that's just because I am very stressed out as of late from some personal matters that I don't want to get into.
• I actually have been trying to make amends with some users here.
• Some people complained before that I was a bad chat moderator, but just to show how hardworking I am - who stayed in chat at 2am, to kick and ban spammers? Who came in right when there was a spammer spamming chat?

DANK YOU LE VOXEL OUT Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Oppose - I agree with Jeremiah. Vox is not a bad rollback at all. I am not even sure if this is a serious request or a joke.

Its not a joke, this is serious. ReyesDeLulz 18:37, March 29, 2013 (UTC)

He's not particularly bad but he gets offensive and rude when he gets into quarrels with users. Not to mention he rarely does anything. As for coding - he can do the same as a user that he can as a rollback. Coding is null in this discussion.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member

I rarely do anything? I rollback edits in badfaith, and revert vandalism. I have an entire screen on recent changes ( not wiki activity ) and revert any bad faith edits. Voxelplox ^Ƭalk

Ban request: <insert name here>

I, Parax, request that <insert name here> is banned for:

1. Swearing in chat and on the wiki
2. Uploading vulgar images, specifically pornographic images
3. Arguing with admins, calling them "biased", and disrespecting them when told to stop
4. Demanding that we unban fairly-banned users
5. Insulting. Check out this user's recent contributions to see what I mean.
6. Harassment of users
7. Linking to inappropriate videos.

So, I request this user be banned for probably infinite due to this behavior.

--Parax 14:37, April 1, 2013 (UTC)

I totally support this. They have had more than enough chances. In fact, I think I'll be talking to VSTF about their behaviour. Absoultely ridiculous. King Of Kittehstan BLAKE STEWART (HAIL THE SEEDLINGS!)

This behavior MUST be stopped! I fully agree, <insert name here>'s behavior should not be tolerated! Thank you Parax for finally creating this request. We've all wanted to for awhile.

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

Support - This user is a menace, one that must be stopped,

<3 ReyesDeLulz 15:12, April 1, 2013 (UTC)

I Support - we totally need to rid the wiki of <insert name here>. I would go as far to say that we need to report them to the FBI for some of their behavior against Jim Logan.

• Hello
• About

Also yes i jerrys ban because basically he is a poop. moreso, he drank der curry TOODLES

Bot request: Voxelbot

Bonjour peasants pirates. News-Tron my beloved slave is well.. not functioning ( password gone, e-mail gone, AutoWiki Browser program set up for news tron is glitched as hell ) and I sadly GEICO doesn't cover this .. so I came to request another one! I would like to request that User:VoxelBot be granted bot flags by Wikia. We need to vote on this first, so I can send the request to them.

Voxelbot will help with the following

• Flagging pictures that haven't ever been used for deletion

• Reverting spam in mass amounts if that is ever needed 

• Sending messages to all users if needed

• Helping around generally 

• Categorizing mass amounts of pages

• Adding a certain template to a mass amount of pages,

• the list goes on and on..

With this request, I also request that User:Voxelbot be given rollback rights, as I, a rollback, would be operating it ( and if we needed to revert mass vandalism and spam well.. rollback would help ) 

Also, I know how to use the program AutoWikiBrowser ( the automated editing program that can be used for bots ) so I got that covered. 

Since this is such a little request.. then.. Voting will end Friday, or until we get to 5 votes ( I say 5, because there is a small number of rollbacks, and small amount of active admins so 5 is easy ) 

Thanks

Voxelplox ^Hello

Support - Seems legit. Don't see how this could not be beneficial to the wiki.

-- Jeremiah Garland 03:31, April 3, 2013 (UTC)

Support - The list goes on and on..... Perfect reason for me to support :333333333333

JK! No seriously support but with reasons above other than the endless list.... :P

ReyesDeLulz 19:07, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Possible Demotion Requests: GenLawrence and Jarod Pillagebane

I believe this is needed, but that's just me. These two admins are NEVER active, and look what the Wiki has fallen to. They might check the Wiki activity every once-in-a-while, but I'm pretty sure every other user does that. That isn't doing enough for the Wiki. Last time I saw Lawrence, he was opposing his own LAST demotion request, or something. And with THAT many demotion requests, you can tell he isn't a favorite admin, clearly. Last time we saw Jarod, he was making some historical point on someone's blog, which happens about every two or three weeks, as Jeremiah stated. Do they really think that we can live on just ONE active admin?! I realize you two are busy, but even so, Jack is, too, and he makes TIME for the wiki. If you don't have time and are too busy with more important things, I believe you should RESIGN, before the popular vote kicks in. Look at the list below:

• Inactive.
• Do not help the Wiki whatsoever.
• Do not participate in admin activities.
• Do not watch chat.

Even if they DID go into chat, they'd always be afk.

These two need to be sent messages. They've known this has been coming for a LONG time.

Thank you,

Ive said it in the past and Ill say it again, I dont have anything against them and theyre great Admins except for the fact theyre not active. And when we are in what youd call an Administrative Crisis in a sense, you dont need inactive Admins on the team as theyre just seat warmers, nothing more. Thus I Support - ReyesDeLulz 03:11, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Albert said everything I was going to say so.. Support -

Voxelplox ^Hello

Support - I was going to write these myself, at least for one of them, but I see you beat me to the ball. It isn't fair for the rest of the wiki to have two administrators who simply do not care at all anymore. In all honesty, this should have been written months ago. I know we already have so few admins as it is, and the last thing we'd want to do is get rid of half of our admin staff, but these two are simply not beneficial to us anymore, and I really feel it is time we've paved way for more admins who wish to help keep the wiki alive.

-- Jeremiah Garland 03:25, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Well. Honestly I'm not that surprised. I don't really have much time to divert to the wiki anymore, though I try to come in chat when I can. A lot of times I would just look at activity and see really nothing going on... so I woukldn't do anything. Honestly though, what this wiki really needs to do is break down the barriers between all the little sects and groups of people on the wiki, making a more open community, as well as open up the wiki by sprucing it up as well as editing more and making, I don't know, a contest or something. It's clear that without more users the wiki will just drift into inactiveness as everyone gets bored and leaves.

I'm, just saying, yiou must not be trying hard enough to get into chat, even if you watch activity. Then, whenever your name pops up, you magically appear.  Chat needs supervision, Jarod. But, I'm glad you're honest.

Support - I completely agree, these should have came along months ago.

G-man.

04:27, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Well Boogie, chat isn't everything. I know I am sounding like a broken record here but we really need to start editing serious pages again. Wikia isn't a social network as some apparently perceive it. We need to focus less on the social aspect and more on the editing aspect. We won't get more users if our wiki is basically empty other than in exclusive chat room. Oh and relating to this, Boogie, I have actually been thinking of resigning for a while and might soon.

Chat isnt everything at all, indeed. We do need more Mods to monitor there, but the problem with this site is not a social feature, chat, but the other things. @Jarod There is always something going on, Administratively such as Administrative discussions. They may not be on activity but they have been present forever in the day, especially since the resignation of Kat and Step, and even more since Goldvanes resignation. There is always something going on. Im not trying to sound rude or be arguementive. But right now I will tell you the talk of what the Admins are going to do and what will happen to this sites future is talked of at least three times a day since the resignations. ReyesDeLulz 04:49, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

To counter onto what Jarod said in his first message, your right, but lots of us come up with excellent ideas on how to make the wiki better, but we don't have enough active admins to implement it. There is surely enough for you to do as an admin, so the excuse "there isn't anything for me to do" is invalid. I don't want to be rude, but there are so many things you can do - spam, vandalism, deleting unneeded photos. I made a theme request months ago, that passed, but yet no admin implemented it into wikia.css. Disfuntionality? A user has been proven to need to be banned, but has been here for days ( sock puppeting, bragging hes still here ) and Parax and Jack are in overdrive. There's plenty to do. Also, you are right. I think many of us think of Wikia as a social network. I think chat is a big problem for our wiki, many people prefer to chat to each other, instead of editing or commenting. Oh and chat, we don't have enough mods.. I resigned from mod ( which was actually kind of silly of me seeing as we have a huge demand for them now ) and there's generally only one mod on, but is usually afk ( not his fault ).. 

Oh and you didn't mention when this vote will end, so I will.. since this is a rollback, admin vote, there are 7 in the team that aren't included ( jarod and law are discluded in the vote since they cannot vote on their own demotion ) so we will need a clear majority, and by that I mean 6/7 or 7/7 support, then this will move to a community vote. The initial rollback, admin vote will end next week Wednesday ( or until support wins ), then will move for a community vote which will last for a week if it passed, or until support on that will win.. 

Voxelplox ^Hello

I Oppose - because we can still promote other admins, and we will always have these guys on standby. If there is a really big issue, they are only a talk page message away (as long as they have their e-mails open). So, I do not think we should demote now, when we are so short on admins. I am willing to have them stick around until either they want to get more active, resign or we have enough admins to fill their void.

Jarod already said he was thinking about resigning. Besides, there are three prefectly good chat moderators waiting for a promotion.

I have to agree with Jackie here. There really isn't a positive reason to demote them.  Sure, they are inactive, but every little bit helps. It doesn't HELP the Wiki by demoting them. Just because there are more people to be promoted doesn't mean you have to demote the inactive admins. I Oppose - if Jack kept me as a rollback and if rollbacks can vote on SSC. Still unsure on that <.<

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

18:32, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Well see I honestly support this due to not just my reason above but also another few things.

The last time we opposed these demtions.... twice on this page, I being one of the people suggesting it, and another, is they are constantly said to become more active soon.... the first time that was said was at the beginning of the year.... January 4th. Today is exactly 3 Months later since that was said. How many times have they voted and put opinions on SSC? How many times have they made an edit? And honestly I find it hard to believe that with just one message on a talk page they will respond because I will tell you, about a week ago I left Law a message and since then have not heard from him again. The only reason Jarod is here is because he remembered/had time on his hands. Honestly, it would help pass SSC requests faster instead of waiting for their opinions la la la..... Also, may I remind that everyone has to follow the Wiki's Policies. These two have to follow the Inactivity Policy, because if they don't then it would, despite what anyone claims, be biased..... I don't like the word, and honestly I don't want to support this but we NEED active Admins. And see Ill tell you if we did not demote them due to inactivity, then that would not be fair that we had to demote our Site's FOUNDER due to that policy. No exceptions. THIS is why I support because not only are they not active but you can't even see their signatures on almost anything looking back. As I said before I, Support -. They are great Admins and great with so many things except being active and carrying out Administrative Tasks when necessary, when they are present. ReyesDeLulz 18:52, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

So far 4 supports, 2 opposes ( though I'm not sure if Goldy is a rollback or not ) we just need Parax to vote and everyone will have had their opinions put in.. then it goes into community vote. 

Voxelplox ^Hello

Goldvane's vote COUNTS?

It saddens me that I don't really have time for the wiki anymore, but honestly I don't. I can help out sometimes but not as much as I would like. It is okay if you don't wait for my opinion.

@Boogie - My vote COUNTS if I'm a rollback ( Jack asked if I wanted to keep a rollback position, I said ok, not sure if he ever made me one though ) and if Jack decides rollback votes are still allowed. :P

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

Rollbacks have been able to vote since I became a rollback... if Jack wants to stop rollbacks from voting then that will require another vote ( which probably wouldn't pass.. considering I'm sure the current rollbacks wouldn't want to lose their right to vote ) AND YES GOLDILOCKS CAN VOTE. Let's get this damn freaking straight people.. Voxelplox ^Hello

Gold is not a rollback at the moment, but if Par agress I will promote him again. I think it will be useful to have an experienced user on standby with the powers.

  

I support - BGB IV

The Word "Pear" or reference to Pearson

I Basil Brawlmonk,your father and mother request this...... Pearson was a menace to the wiki then, he is still that now, he sends people to violate our wiki/slander it. He even was bold enough to create his own wiki link -http://potco-united-nations.wikia.com/wiki/User:Paradox_Overlord he's blocked from his own wikia. The word Pear usually causes drama, so does the references to Pearson. It's bias, but it sure as hell would stop some of the drama here. Are you guys afraid of him? Just end the usage of his name in ANYTHING

- Basil Brawlmonk

If my vote mattered, I'd strongly oppose this. Just because his name sparks fights at times, doesn't mean we should outright ban the word. I mean, that is the most childish thing I have ever heard of (And I've been here for 2 years). Continuing, if you really hated the use of the word, I would suggest you ignore it, or ask politely to stop. I mean, unless we're all under 13, and violating the ToU, we can all stop being childish, can't we? How easy is it to just stop saying "Pears" or "The Fruit" or "Seedlings" randomly? Or even worry about a seedling doing something. When they do do something they will be given punishment. Basically what I'm trying to get at is: This request is useless, and should not have even been given yours or my time. Good day sir

Squirto19 - Talk Page

Uh is this serious? We can't do that, that's discrimination against a particular user. No offense, but Pearson isn't exactly our main problem now. It would also be too much of a hassle to ban people from saying Pearson and would just be pointless, lets try not to restrict people's freedom of speech. It would just be silly. That is why I strongly Oppose -.

Voxelplox ^Hello

Request:Nomination reform

Okay so. First off, Alberta and I agree on something ( which is amazing since we normally dont agree on things xD ) we need more mods. Now, I have an idea. This applies for everything, rollback, admin, chat mod. 

Look at this for example, these are from a wiki Jack Pistol, John, and I made awhile ago but we forgot about it :p it was fun to make it, and we had it all planned out.. oh well 

so we had nomination request pages for userights. like these

for rollback

for chat mod

for admin - users can vote on these, but cannot nominate. admins get final say in a final vote.

for bur - this would just be voted on by admins

As you acn see on the links, it all says "available" "no". So, this means that admins will only open any request when that is in demand. This solves a lot of problems, gives more liberty to users, fixes our activity problem among admins, etc. Also I believe we should not have self-nomination allowed. on many wikis they allow that, but i think in our current situations users may abuse that ficture.

As a big vote, I'd like user input on this ( note votes but input ) and I believe that we need a clear majority among admins and rollbacks on this. Voting will end until we have a majority vote and figure out logistics and go ahead.. thank you 

ps sorry for bad spelling dont think im careless with spelling haha im  using my galaxy note so its a bit diffuclt to type properly and autocorrect is just god awful 

Voxelplox ^Hello

Support - As stated above I agree with this, because, all it really is, is a suggestion system for Admins on who to possibly promote, who might users be fine with seeing as the Administration is unsure who to promote. ReyesDeLulz 03:01, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Also users complain these nominations are biased.. well.. now their voices can be heard! :)

Voxelplox ^Hello

Neutral - until I see more opinions.

Request: Bring back the badges!

Well so I was reading Jarods points above, and it made me think.. how can we increase editing again? I know I may sound crazy here, but lets bring back the badges! It will create vandalism and bad faith edits, but we can handle that. I doubt it will that big of a deal, we are all mature people ( I hope ), and it will create some friendly-competetion ( I think we've all somewhat settled down, and respect each other..) even temporarily, we will see an increase in editing and commenting which will increase activity of course.. I think we need to have a plan on how to increase activity. Its a shame to see this place fall apart, so lets at least leave the place in the same or better state as we've found it! 

Vote ends Tuesday, requires 9 votes ( 7 really, considering 2 are inactive ), clear majority wins.

Voxelplox ^Hello

We. Need. More. Editing. We know it, everyone does. I came here one year ago as of February 27th with activity constantly being refreshed with NOT comments on page sor blogs, but rather, actual good faith edits. One year later, nothing much. Nithing. Maybe a tumble weed or two rolling by. Badges, is a great way to bring back competition as it doesnt require lots of hassle to do this this and this so such and such recieves that. All it takes is some customization (if necessary) and then the click of a button. Done. Finished. Thus, I Support - ReyesDeLulz 05:22, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Neutral - awaiting more opinions. People can get rather crazy about the badges, and try and point out that they are better than others or more suited for admin jobs just because of how many badges and points they have.

Gromit, we've forgotten the badges!

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 18:12, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

I'd be interested to know what John's opinion is ( its obvious you'd be #1 on the list haha ) do you think we should bring back badges? I think we need user input on this one, considering it is enabling a feature..

Jack, how do we know they will get crazy? Its been so long, plus we have more mature users now.. ( I cant believe im saying that ) I think we should give it a shot, and if it doesn't work then we simply turn it off. There's no harm done in testing :)

Voxelplox ^Hello

I support this. It has the potental to boost activity on the wiki by providing an incentive for people to edit. Although maybe it's not going to make everybody want to edit 1,000 times over a day, but it's worth a try, right?

Requests

Can't type much, on phone, but here are a couple of requests. - Gman

(Note: It wont let me edit below the requests for whatever reason) Chat logs would be a big help, as users claim things and well.... crap happens sometimes. Also, I believe we do have an Abuse filter as the other day I saw it ban an IP for attempting to clear a page. With that Support - ReyesDeLulz 05:35, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Yes, we do have an abuse filter, but it clearly isn't strong enough, look at past vandalism attacks.

G-man.

06:06, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Bot flag request:G-mot.

I believe that G-mot. being flagged as a bot could be valuable. I am familiar with AWB, a semi-automatic MediaWiki editing program, which can be used to run a bot. It can do everything that Voxelbot can (see above) but can also take chat logs using Javascript.

Request: Abuse Filter

An abuse filter would strongly benefit the wiki. It would give users a warning when clearing a page of content, stop users from vandalising, stop users from using disallowed words on pages, and more.

G-man.

05:25, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Unban Samuel Redbeard?

I know samuel was banned for reasons but. I think he might deserve another chance. He doesnt cause as much problems as pearson and leon. He seems to be a bit more mature.?

Jason Blademorgan French Officer 

19:08, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - No, no, no, no! If we unban Samuel then we have to unban Matthew, and Pearson. I'm a reasonable guy, but just no. We'd have to unban a large group of other users. Also he is sock puppeting as we speak ( I hope hes been banned by now ). We certainly won't unban him now. Also, he had a dozen chances, its time he accepts his punishment. I also question the legality of this request, has an infinite amount of time passed yet? I don't think so. We aren't going to unban users when we already have set up a punishment for them. I think my opinion is the popular one among my fellow rollbacks, admins.. he will stir up problems again. He was banned for a reason

Voxelplox ^Hello

The wiki is quiet lets just bring back samuel not matthew not pearson. This wiki needs more users back Jason Blademorgan French Officer 19:17, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

As Ben said, we need to review the reasons that Samuel was banned to determine whether Mylo Xyloto needs to be banned or not.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 19:56, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

I believe user opinion is needed here. But in case you don't want to read the following paragraph or so, my answer to this is: no. Samuel Redbeard, a famous roleplayer, known to most. While he was at this wiki he was really not a good influence on anything. Being rude to users, and such, he really reminds me of a few other users, but we shall not get into that. Continuing, you might be asking why he received his infinite ban, look here. If you're too lazy to look, then here's a list of the reasons:

1. He has been banned many times before on the wiki
2. It was decided that this was his last chance here
3. He broke several wiki and chat rules
4. He already has 1 strike ( 3 are not always needed for a ban )
5. He swore ( censoring swearing, abbreviation swearing and reference to swear words all count as swearing )
6. He insulted other users' religions
7. He insulted other users
8. He used a sock-puppet
9. The sock-puppet had an offensive and racist username
10. He was racist
11. He has been banned from chat 3 times this month
12. He tried to complain about the ban on the game

For the evidence and the full story though, I really do suggest you look at the blog. Now, you may say he's changed, but how many others with infinite bans have said they've "changed"? Matthew O'Malley, and Pearson (Although they are the only ones I can think of at the moment, I'm sure there are more) have both said they've "changed", yet I'm sure we can all agree that mostly they just were saying that to get back onto the wiki, and really hadn't changed at all. Now, bringing up a point I actually used in a previous unban request... Give us GOOD reasons that will make us change our minds about him I don't think being better then Leon and Pearson in the sense of maturity, is a good reason. How does that even help the matter? Maturity is something we should have here, yes, but I see no proof given besides words. Words can crumble in a second. Unless there is something that actually shows that he has in fact changed for the better of the wiki, I will not change my position on this matter. You may call me stubborn, or a moron for not even giving him a chance. Consider the fact that all of the infinitely banned have had chances before their ban. The reason they GOT those infinite bans is because they screwed up their shot. I'm not try to say we don't all make mistakes. But I am sure it is very simple to just ignore someone if they are getting to you, and not even have the urge to comment on something where someone is attacking you. Now you may think that I am stating the impossible. Well I'm not, because it is very simple for me, to let an insult go by, because the beauty is I don't cherish the opinions of someone I know over the internet. I am not trying to say we should be outright mean to each other, but in fact the opposite! We might not get to know each other besides over the internet in forever, but what's to say, we can't at least know we tried our best at being nice to each other? (I know I am getting carried away, but here is where it ties back) Now I realize that in being nice, we should give second chances (I in fact am a strong believer in second chances) but Samuel has simply proven us wrong over and over again that he has changed. Now, having said that, let me move onto the point, that if we were to give yet another second chance to Samuel, why not give a second chance to all the others with infinite bans? Don't they deserve it just as much as he? They've all have been banned infinitely, they all had second chances, and they've all broken rules. There are differences in their personalities, but they've all received the infinite bans fairly, which means if we don't give a second chance to anyone besides Samuel, we don't seem like we're biased, we WILL be... Now I want to end this, by saying that I hope you all choose carefully on how you vote, whether it be oppose, or support. Good day

Squirto19 - Talk Page

I think that you shouldn't be too hasty to ban ur unban him. You have to review the cause of the ban and decide whether or not is worth unbanning him. Edgar 20:03, April 4, 2013 (UTC)'

@Jason that is a terrible reason "the wiki is quiet so lets bring samuel back, not matthew or pearson". First off, if we bring back Samuel, then it would be unfair against Matthew and Pearson. Also, so your solution to the wiki being quieter ( it really isn't that inactive ) is to unban banned users? I'm sorry, thats a terrible reason. Voxelplox ^Hello

I oppose, Samuel has done various things, indeed, as we speak, he uses Mylo Xyloto or whatever. I see no reason to bring him back, he will only cause more disorder to the wiki, he was Mort, James, and now Mylo Xyloto. He was also banned for an infinity amount of time, and that is yet to pass.

20:34, April 4, 2013 (UTC)

We would have have unban all infinitely banned users? Are you mad? Are you saying everyone is the same? John.. You literally did all of that except sock-puppet, and complain on the game since you hardly come online. Are you infinitely banned? No..

It would not be unfair to unban Samuel. You are comparing Samuel to Matthew (tried to take over the wiki), and Pearson who has sent his fruit numerous times to vandalise this wiki. Samuel has barely tried to fight his ban. He complained (AT First) to try to make a unban blog, it was unfair. Which in retrospect it is. Numerous users have used socks in the past and did not receive a infinite ban. He eventually just accepted it and figured that he would be unbanned a 1 - 6 months later due to good behaviour. Has Samuel really done anything that is worthy of his ban? Possibly. But in comparison to others on this wiki. I see insulting, harassing, people being racist, people insult other users' religions, and sometimes swearing get past the chat mods nearly on a daily basis.

Truly, I do not see a reason we shouldn't give Samuel a second chance just because of "sock-puppeting". We have not really confirmed Samuel is Mylo because of a Youtube account. We cannot completely rely on foreign sources to prove such suspicions. The user of the Youtube account could be trying to impersonate Samuel. We do not know. If a man wears a V for Vendetta mask, do we automatically assume it is anonymous, No. It is from a popular movie and the mask is sold internationally as a Halloween costume?

Samuel should be given a second chance after what nearly a year? or even more than a year. Don't you believe someone can change, mature over a period of a year? Certainly I do. Teenagers, even young adults still witness changes (mentally) in a year. I used to not care about grammar, what I said, what I did, and literally look back and laugh since I joined this wiki. XD Do you not believe Samuel could of changed? He has not done anything to be even COMPARED to Matthew O'malley and Pearson Wright.

I support Samuel being unbanned.

From the desk of the Prime Minister, and King-Regent of France,

Aka

Oppose - Redbeard does not deserve to return and allowing him to do so will result in O'Malley and Pearson, notorious whiners, complaining about not being allowed to return.

Ban Request: Duke Hannibal Clemente

Ok, its sad to have to write a ban request for a user, but sadly I feel that User: Duke Hannibal Clemente should not belong to this wiki. We have seen that he starts arguments, and his behavior is counter to what our no tolerance policy allows ( he called a user gay, insulted them, and she seemed eager to start an argument, im sure this behavior will continue ). Since the no tolerance policy has passed, and it is common sense and already in our rules that insulting, and eagerly starting arguments is disallowed I feel that an infinite ban should be in place. He will no doubt start other arguments, or even be productive to the wiki. How do we know he won't let Pearson use his account too? We know from past experiences that his cult like followers give him their passwords, and this is just a potential threat to the wiki. So for the reasons I stated, I request this user to be banned infinitely. :) Voxelplox ^Hello

Yuuup. I Support - for the reasons Benjamin has stated.

-- Jeremiah Garland

The admitted to being Pearson.

00:55, April 5, 2013 (UTC) Technically he was being sarcastic, Jarod. Anyways, Support - Reasons above. ReyesDeLulz 01:03, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

This is Pencil-, not Jarod, his signature has a tan stripe instead of white, and his is "James Van Oranje," mine is "Joan Van Oranje." :P

01:07, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

Though I'm not backing him up, I'm still sure he called the song that I posted gay.

He is Pearson, even he says so. So now we have a case of sock-puppetry.

Voxelplox ^Hello

Ban Request:BoogieMango

Honestly...

Quite ridiculous for the fact that this wiki had been porn invaded. And we had no admins here. Not to mention, when one of your "active contributers" go along with it. I have proof (screens), via iPad that Boogie did play a role in this attack. Now, I'm not trying to make this a big scenario, but I mean, come on...

Now, just a heads up for the next screens that are posted. They are extremely vulgar.

Now, maybe that you have checked this, you will see where I am coming from. On a side note, I have no clue in which order they go in.

King Of Kittehstan BLAKE STEWART (HAIL THE SEEDLINGS!)

Yes, well maybe I did that, but I didn't TELL them to vandalize PPW, I told them to vandalize MY wiki, The King's Marines Wiki. Ban me, I don't care. I didn't make an account, I didn't vandalize, I don't HAVE to tell you that there would be a vandal, but I did.

And I am most definately NOT a seed. So I was in Skype with him? John Breasly, Johnny Goldtimbers, and Blake Stewart were, also.

P.S.I told them to hurry because they can't ban you, so they better do what they were gonna do BEFORE they got staff.

P.S.S. Yes, I admit I did something very immature, and that being in Skype with a drunk man is a very stupid choice. 

Hmm.. I can say I'm very disappointed. I expected a lot better from Boogie, after I defended him in chat. Also, I can say that I have lost all respect for Boogie after seeing the reference to me. What, so its funny that I care about the wiki and I and G-man went to the VSTF chat to get help? I guess its really hilarious, considering you said in chat and I quote "I have a destruction fetish" wait wait wait.. how sick is that? You think its fun to see destruction on this wiki? Wow. I Support - this, and also since you never mentioned when this vote will end, the vote will end 5 days from now so Wednesday ( thats enough time for all admins, rollbacks to vote ). 

Voxelplox ^Hello

I found it funny, because everything else around happening was funny. It isn't, really, just to me it was. I didn't hope for destruction on the Wiki, even after encouraging Pearson to "hurry up and get things done" I told him to vandalize my wiki, and that I wasn't going to take part because I didn't want a global ban.

Support - After reading through those images I am very disappointed in Boogie. This is not the first time he has been involved in something like this, and if he wants to do something like this and cause trouble behind the backs of others well then these are the consequences. 

I am saddened to Support - this request. I just finished viewing the images and find a ban to be sufficient, a fitting consequence for someone who tried encouraging vandalism on the wiki.--Parax 15:06, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

I don't have alot of time here, but I have to Support -. I am very displeased with Boogie. He has been involved in numerous plans to vandalize or spam this Wiki, along with Pearson. I remember once he was discussing in another chat, plans to plagarize and steal pages from this site and use them on their own Wikia.

These screens ALSO proves that Pearson is  behind this spam ( We all knew it, but THIS is LEGITIMATE PROOF that Pearson is indeed behind all the immature attacks on this site. And yes, he and his seeds and socks will deny it. De nile isn't just a river in Egypt. ), which further indicates his obsession with attempting to either A: Return to this site B: disrupt this site. If he can't be here, he wants to annoy the people who can.

I'm no longer an admin, but personally I would have Boogie banned for at least a month. AT LEAST. Not my decision, though. 

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

These screens are edited. I was in a private Skype call with Pears at the exact same time this happened, and there was no key-raging or laughing. In fact, he had to go downstairs to tell his sister's friends to shut up multiple times, and when he came back we were talking for about an hour straight before he fell asleep. I can't believe you people are falling for this, seriously. Whatever though, it's not really making Pearson look any worse than you've already tried to. I just thought I should present the facts before you ban an innocent user. I also recall there being a rule here that states that you can't ban anyone for things that occur off the site, at least, that's what I was told when multiple people from this Wiki went and vandalized ours and Parax refused to do anything about it.

Isabella V Clemente (talk) 17:37, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

I don't think he should be banned, not because he is innocent, but because I don't think our Wiki should extend its juristicition beyond this wiki. Whatever members of this wiki do on other wikia's should not be our concern.

Viceroy Robert McRoberts (talk) 18:57, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

Changing to Neutral - because of what these two said. Although I doubt the pictures were shopped (honestly Bella, whether Pearson said that or not, it does not really concern me, that is his business, only Boogie does) it was kind of off-site. However, that is not the reason I am changing my vote, because it is still pretty clear Boogie had a hand in this, off the wiki or not, the reason I am changing my vote is because Boogie is yet to be banned so I think maybe a strike is more in order. I may be wrong, though.

Rofl, Elizabeth, Boogie even admitted to this. You and I both know you just lied right through your teeth. I will be laughing my ass off the next time this does happens. Also, I'd like to remind everyone, she is connected to someone who is banned. Also, Boogie even admitted to this happening. He could even screen shot it if he wanted to, not to mention I was on an iPad, therefore, how would I edit it? King Of Kittehstan BLAKE STEWART (HAIL THE SEEDLINGS!)

Hmmm.. I am possibly thinking of changing my vote to neutral, mainly because Isabella brought up that these could be edited. They seem legit ( you can generally tell if they are edited ) but I'd be interested to know if Isabella has any proof of that. Also, he did accept his actions and formally apologize. But for now I am still support, and we need to make clear that you SHOULDN'T encourage vandals, or do anything in the bad interests of the wiki or you will accept the consequences... 

Voxelplox ^Hello

Promotion Request:Voxelplox

We've all been expecting this, so let's get straight to it.

Reasons:

• Very Active
• Commonly taking action when other admins and mods do not (Looking at you, <insert name here>.)
• He tries to reason before taking action, so the result is usually fair to all.
• Good at coding.
• Commonly helping around the wiki.

Supports:

1. Jeremiah Garland

Opposes:

Neutral:

So, yup.

Support - It's about time Voxel regained his status as a chat moderator. People have been complaining we don't have enough of them, so here's a perfectly good rollback with experience and skill.

-- Jeremiah Garland 04:34, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

Whereas Jeremiah's point is semi-correct, lets not forget about he has been promoted and demoted 3 times now, the first for being inactive, and the second for his little communist takeover mishap with Jerry and Jack. I think he should have been fully demoted and was lucky to have kept his status, so I think a promotion is nowhere in sight for him. But thats just my opinion.

P.S. I just had an edit conflict, hope nobody's work got destroyed o_O

and also to clarify, I was never demoted, only resigned. I wasn't demoted for inactivity, I resigned because I knew I'd be inactive ( I had a family crisis ) an would not be able to do my duties for that time. Also teh takeover? LOL. No comment I just laughed out loud at that, let me repeat this a dozen times more. We talked and debated on how the wiki should be improved, and yes we did have strong opinions on some people.. but we just wanted to have some fun, and take the wiki by storm with our hilarious comedy and more seriously, our ideas . and I respect your opinion, I really don't care about being promoted, I just care that I'm able to help the wiki in some way, so any how I'm able to help the wiki I'm glad. 

Now, my stance on this is well.. I don't care. It isn't a valid request ( I don't think ) but I'm flattered to see you'd like me to be a chat moderator, and I too would somewhat like to see a star by my name, as it is painful to see a troll or someone spam chat, take advantage of a lack of moderators on and go unpunished. By the time you report it to a moderator, they will have already spammed and do their malicious activites. But really, whatever floats your boat. I'm fine either way.. I doubt this will end up being a real request, and I can tell you that Admins find it annoying when there is a promotion request on SSC.. 

Voxelplox ^Hello

Clearly you cannot let it go just as much as I can't. 

and uh.. ". We talked and debated on how the wiki should be improved, and yes we did have strong opinions on some people.. but we just wanted to have some fun, and take the wiki by storm with our hilarious comedy and more seriously, our ideas "

Yeh, I bet. Hilarious comedy. Is that why you used such intense words in that picture sven posted? I can debate you all day on this is you wish, but hopefully we'll both find it pointless in the end. And don't forget about when John backstabbed Jerry and we got the other wonderful pic of "his honest take." :O

Support - We need more mods and honestly Vox has been doing his very best to help this wiki. Par and I cannot always be around and I had to go last night and I was gone all of today. Looking at me? What did I do? I wasn't even here when all of this happened :/

Support - Yeah I agree, he deserves this back since from what I recall he wasn't demoted but rather resigned, so he didn't really break rules in order to lose it.

@Pistol: Username template, noob :P

@Mally: There was no communist takeover plot o_O

-- Jeremiah Garland

Support - User resigned, is very active and helpful, and the current mods/admins cannot be around all the time. User will be suitable for the job.--Parax 15:09, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

Are you all mental?  Voxel constantly starts fights, he was attacking users for being religious, and he's not only tried to get other users banned for his own self-gain, but has tried to take over.  I'm seriously confused as to why anyone would support.  I understand we need mods, but you're PRAISING him for trying to take over!

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 16:10, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

Voxel has made a change to redeem himself, John. I have seen him on his best behaviour lately.

Jack.  Meet me in chat.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 16:25, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

I think it is noteworthy that Voxelplox is notorious for holding grudges.  He has been out to get me banned ever since I took England back from him in roleplay.  We were completely friendly before that.  After that, and since then, he's been sour towards me.  I think that's proof enough, and we don't need a begrudging chat mod.  I might also bring up images from other wikis where he's downright attacked me.  We don't need a chat mod who goes around everywhere and attacks people for things that happened two years ago.  Voxel has made it clear which users he dislikes, and he stops at nothing to get us banned.  He's abused his powers, slandered users (me, mainly), and made it very clear he will not end his childish behaviour.  He is not eligible for any sort of power if he keeps an attitude like that.  He's a goody-two-shoes for admins, but when they disappear, he's rude and angry towards anyone who disagrees with him.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 16:38, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

Ooh, isn't this unfortunate?  Please pay attention to how Jerry admits their guilt.  Ben did try to take over, and he wasn't banned like Slappy was.  Done and done, Ben has tried to do something terrible and is not eligible for promotion.

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 16:52, April 6, 2013 (UTC)

I've explained this to you several times and I'm not going to do it again. Nevertheless, those screens contain cursing and are therefore not allowed to be posted. Please blur out the cursing.

-- Jeremiah Garland

Once again, I don't have much time, but I Support - this. Ben has ageed to improve, and he actually wasn't "attempting to take over the WIki". He simply used the wrong wording for something as simple as he and other users discussing how they thought the WIki should be. I can't go into details atm, but I know it wasn't a "Wiki Takeover". They tried to pull me into their convos, honestly I didn't care much about it, but they kept me filled in, and I can tell you here and now it was NO "takeover". Yes, their ideas at what the Wiki should be may or may not have been good, but I feel that Ben has improved and is worthy of a chat mod position. There aren't hardly ANY other good candidates for this, and you guys need more mods, so I help this happen by supporting.  Best of luck with the future of this site ( I also would like to point out that Garland would make a good admin, especially with your current need for administration ( you desperately need it ) :P )  Note: I won't be arguing on this at all, debating, or even commenting again on this thread. If you don't like what I said, boo. freaking. hoo.  

Captain R. Goldvane^Talk Writer of The Goldvane TrilogySpecial:Editcount/Captaingoldvane2 Edits ~"ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRNT!"

Oh yes, I forgot that the "conspirators" spoke to Goldvane at the time. The fact that Goldvane says it was not a take-over and that this is in the past and they have changed is pretty much all I need to hear. I remember Gold telling me about it, and there really seemed to be no major issue or I would have acted on it.

Rollback Request: Jim Logan

NOW I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE THINKING!  But let's get something straight here - he's actually not a bad user.

• Banned only for cooldown reasons, one day at the most, and all in 2011 (which was a rocky year)
• Has been on the wiki since the beginning
• Has 11k edits (which is around what I had when I was promoted)
• Always edits in good faith
• Keeps pirate roleplay alive
• Has admin experience
• Has fairly good judgement
• Not really enemies with anyone
• Knows the rules very well
• Always works to make the community better

Opinions?

--John Breasly, Savvy Designs Member 00:15, April 7, 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, not sure what I make of this. Jim is a good guy and seems like he would do well at this. Not sure though, so Neutral - til I decide for sure.

Even though I'm not allowed to vote, I'd support because he's in chat a lot, not to mention he helps stop fights that break out. He said he didn't want a promotion, but I told him to take it if it had passed, and he said he would. Hopefully we will see some more of Mr. Logan.

Support - Despite my lack of authority, I support this. If he had been promoted previously, certain attacks on the wiki where admins were not present would have been quickly adhered.

Edgar 00:57, April 7, 2013 (UTC)