Forum:Request to unblock user from clan chat

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Request to unblock user from clan chat
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 29 January 2010 by Calebchiam.

Back in March, we unanimously agreed to permanently block Btzkillerv from our clan chat. Since then, he has shown a significant improve in behaviour and has expressed a desire to redeem himself and return to our chat for Wikifests, and casual conversation. In August, it was discovered that C Teng had unblocked Btz without consulting the wiki prior. When this happened, Btz stayed calm and mature and did not stir up more trouble. Despite this, he was re-blocked afterward. If you look on his talk page, he has written an apology. Karl West was unblocked in September, and her offenses were similar to Btz's. Everyone deserves a second chance, so let's give Btzkillerv a final opportunity to demonstrate that he is a better person.

Proposal: unblock Btzkillerv on a trial basis. If Btz demonstrates that his behaviour is improved, he will be unblocked.


Support - As nominator. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  20:30, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support Everybody deserves a second chance. Floppyc5 20:34, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support per Telos. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 20:35, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Improvement is already shown. Why not give another chance? scoot4.pngscooties 21:14, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support and comment - Per above. I'd just like to expand that he was reblocked in August because he permablocked by consensus, so had to be unblocked by consensus, but wasn't - however we're now taking consensus on unblocking him so its all good. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 21:25, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Pending - I feel the need to speak to him in game first, due to some personal issues pertaining to the original block thread. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 21:55, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. FredeTalk 21:57, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I wasn't here when he was blocked and I'm unsure of what he's done, but throught out the whole process he's been civil and has kept clam, and I respect him for that. Swiz Talk Review Me 22:00, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. Quest point cape detail.png Brux Talk 22:04, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I can't cast any stones, nor can anyone truly on this. Everyone has gotten second chances of redemption. I'm interested to see if he'll glow or burn out. Zaros symbol.pngChaos Monk Talk SignCoins 250.png 23:00, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Question - By "trial", do you mean 'probation'-ish? Hello71 23:44, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Yes. If he hasn't broken any rules after 2 weeks or so, he'll remain unblocked. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  23:57, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Let him have his final chance. Fishing.png NnK Oliver (600613) talk 00:03, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Updated comment on next section. Fishing.png NnK Oliver (600613) talk 00:57, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
I can't figure out why your striking out that comment has messed up this page now. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 02:47, January 26, 2010 (UTC)
Fixed now. Had to put in an extra </span> in my template sig lol --User:600613 03:25, January 26, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. Chicken7 >talk 03:25, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per all. - TehKittyCatTalk Wikian-Book 03:59, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I think he really wants to be a part of the community and from what I've seen (albeit little) I think he'll be a positive contributor. Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 08:38, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Nice and i had a conversation with btz in the chat Twig Talk 772kZGs.png 08:50, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose While I see he has made improvements, and I have very high hopes that it continues, I feel it is just too soon. Like a wound healing over and starting to scab, you leave the scab alone or the wound reopens. I really think the wrong thing could still set him off too easily and we will be back at square one. I would feel more optimism if this came in another 3-6 months. For those unfamiliar with his history, it is one of constant apologies for actions that then become those same actions that he was apologzing for to start with. When he was blocked from the wiki Karlis compiled a list of 73 separate offenses. That is not a typo people. 73. I will continue to hope that he doesn't revert to his old ways, but he should realize his probation will be more like 6 months than 2 weeks. On that note, do we always have a kicker in the cc?--Degenret01 09:03, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

There are generally multiple ranked users in the cc at any given time and I have never been present when there were not. This is mainly because I myself am a ranked user. Regardless, there are definitely enough. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 12:32, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Per degen. I wasn't here for what happened, as I joined after it, but I went and did some reading up on it, and it seems he has apologized before, but cae back and did the same things again, even after several blocks. Also, degen, yes there is usually someone on, but we can't really count on that, because things happen and the only ranked may have to leave unexpectedly. SNHBBMBucket detail.pngrwojy 09:31, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Support - On a permanent trial basis. He should be informed that if he breaks the rules again, it will be unlikely that he will be ever allowed back to the CC. I think everyone deserves a chance.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Veritas vos Liberabit (talk).12:43, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

"Permanent" Trial basis makes no sense. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 14:32, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
Lol. I should read what I write before saving. 6 month trial basis sounds good Veritas vos Liberabit 14:43, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
Why 6 months, exactly? If he is unblocked, and that does not look out of the question due to the number of supporters, He should be blocked again if or when he shows that he still cannot comply with the rules, we should not have to wait six months to make a decision like that if the decision is clear. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 19:36, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Degen made such a point that it cannot be ignored, the outstanding quantity of Btzkillerv offences prove that he cannot be trusted to remain civil in the Clan Chat. I'm usually one for second chances, but not this time. Ruud (talk)(Suggest me naems) 12:57, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Not yet - While he has shown improvements in his behaviour, I think that it is too soon. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 19:32, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Support The consensus to ban Btz (a discussion that started on 28 March and lasted for 13 days) was small in comparison to the previous discussion, which was not unanimous, and ended on 19 March after three days in response to Btz posting an apparent request on his own talk page. I am sure that ten months of reflection will have worked wonders. I am not saying that Btz will ever gain a rank in the cc, and as such he remains kickable if he offends again, and in a worst case scenario we can ban him with no more chances (seriously, even I would not stick up for him under those circumstances). In the meantime, if he intends to turn himself around, maybe make up for past injustices, and in any case start afresh, than that is the best possible outcome for all concerned. People can change. Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 04:28, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Weak Support - Under RS:AGF I am willing to let him back in, but only because it is on a trial basis. I Oppose him being brought back altogether, as we have not even completed a trial. Perhaps after the two-weekish trial period, we can make a choice on a total unblock. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 21:23, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose - For what he did? He should never be allowed back....he has SERIOUS anger management problems. -- 22:30, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Bring him back altogether

We are a community, and we need to support each other. This means forgiving past actions. He was banned in March. It's been awhile and I've periodically spoken with him from time to time. Forgiving is important and it's vital. Without it we wouldn't learn from mistakes or we'd be so tight up against one another nowadays no one would get along. Let him back, see what's been done. His past is his past, his future is what matters to us now.

Remove his ban from the wiki and the cc.

Support - As above

Bonziiznob Talk

06:17, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Look, I fully get agree that people can change and we need to forgive. But forgiving does not equal letting those who attacked us back into the wiki. I want you to try something Bonz, you and everyone who will support. Go and actually READ the ENTIRE list of the 73 links Karlis gathered together. Every single last one of them. Anyone unwilling to review all of them should not post here in either direction, only by being familiar with the past can we get a true feel for what was happening. Even then, if you weren't having to deal with it all the time back then you will still not understand just how much of a major down cycle that was creating. It was making the wiki a negative place and hard to deal with and virtually impossible to focus on pure editing. I am sure we lost several newer people that just said "the hell with it" because it wasn't worth dealing with. I am certain he has come a good way, but I am not certain he has come all the way to a full understanding that the wiki is not a place for venting frustrations and attacking other users. There was a very clear reason (73 of them) that the ban was permanent. To save people from looking up that talk I will put the links here. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] Apology #1 - [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] GTS - [23] [24] [25] “Things are fair” - [26] Apology #2 - [27] Really? - [28] [29] [30] Vandal - [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] Apology #3 - [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] Apology #4 - [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] Blaming - [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57] [58] [59] [60] [61] [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] Apology #5 - [67] Un-apology #5 - [68] Blaming - [69] [70] [71] [72] Apology #6 - [73] For the sake of the wiki, and to be fair to yourselves and everyone here, read these before you comment.--Degenret01 07:02, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

We often say assume good faith. We need to follow through with it, no matter how hard it may be and we need to assume his return will be for the better. I understand he has a past and I understand it has negatively affected the community, but as a community, we can come together and adapt from it, learn from it, address it, etc. Btz's actions were inexcusable and it's a past that will follow him for the rest of his wiki career. He knows that and we all know that. The points mentioned above are solid ground to keep him banned...but that's for most wiki's. We have developed differently our perspective of community life. It's about the whole, not just the select few that make all the major changes or edits. We need to offer our hand in forgiveness. That is what will separate us and ultimately give us the upper hand over the other wiki's and fansites. I know some will read this and think "This fool is giving back access to the person who wants to destroy him." Well, what if I am. I won't know until we try, forgiving is important, and I feel Btz has learned from his past and the action that was taken against him. 13:27, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
Copied from BTZ's talk page - I understand your concerns Degen, and I have no disagreements with my history, however, nine months can me a lot of change, I understand you will not take my word for it, and as a condemmed person with a magnitude of crimes I do not argue with you, This involves the Clan Chat and not the wiki, which will probrably not let me return as a user, and I accept that. I agree with having a 6-month probation and I shall not argue with it even if it is extended. I cannot convince you to see that I am a changed person beyond the measures which is within my reach, I respect your decision and those of others to oppose it.

Explorer's ring 3.pngBtzkillerv has entered the building! Cape (blue).png 17:52, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

"haha what r u gonna do bitch, ban me u dickhead, ban me, block me u bitch, no i dont dig, and get the fuck outta my page,i dont give a shit about u banning me or not, so infilite block me u motherfuck"
Thats exactly what we got a problem with it? 23:04, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Support and comment - Whilst I won't dispute the enormous amount of offenses you listed, let's remember that most of those things happened well over a year ago. Btz has a comment here that addresses your concerns. In addition, if he does continue to flame and break the UTP, it's all too simple just to ban him again. After 9 months away from the CC and a year away from the wiki I think he has learned his lesson and is ready to return. I'm sure Btz knows that this is his final chance and if he blows it he will probably never be allowed to edit the wiki again. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  07:45, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral I'm probably the only one who is gonna be neutral, but here it goes. I have read all 73 links, but I read more than that. I continued reading his talkpage up to now, and it does sound like he has changed, but that in itself is not sufficient. The only way to know if he truly has changed is to unblock him. But it is very difficult for me to ignore the fact that he has apologized several times in the past, and after each time he continued with flaming and harassing other editors. "People can change" does not equal "People do change. Also, degen, I think you should have said to continue going through the talkpage history, to show how it looks like he has changed. QPEYBucket detail.pngrwojy 11:58, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per nom FredeTalk 13:09, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I'm aware of Btzkiller's numerous offences, and I'm sure he is too. However, despite the fact that he was permanently banned, he didn't leave. If I were permanently banned, I would just forget about the wiki and disappear forever. But Btzkiller stayed... for nearly a year. He knew that he could never edit the wiki again, yet he lingered. Judging by his talk page, no one informed him of this thread, so he is obviously still keeping up with the Yew Grove. In my eyes, that's a sign that he really wants to forge himself anew. After all, a lot of things can change in 9 months. I'm sure he knows that if he breaks UTP again, he will be permanently and utterly blocked.  Tien  16:36, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Actually I informed him of my intentions to create this thread via in-game private chat shortly before I did. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  18:04, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
Orly? Well, luckily that doesn't detract too much from my point. It still looks like he had a glimmer of hope that his ban might be reconsidered and that he could prove himself to be a trustworthy editor.  Tien  00:02, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Support Bonzii's request to unblock from both wiki and the CC - I talk to him a lot now, and I know he changed from his past ways by the way he acts now, I'm sure he became a better person with the time, and he needs another chance, as Bonzii said, the future is what matters now. Quest point cape detail.png Brux Talk 18:11, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral - Sure he has made some progression in his behaviour, but I can't disagree with Degenret's list of offenses. I've met him in-game a while ago during a FFA clan war. I was with Stelercus, and Btz immediately started offending Steler when the latter had attacked him. He ran back into the arena and started talking, almost yelling, at us. Of course, being attacked by a fellow clan-member is annoying, but I think that this shows Btz's temper. When he has definitively shown that he is to be able to control himself, I will support, but not now. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 18:20, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Changed to Conditional Support - Per comment below. He seems to be apologetic (is that a word, or am I making it up?), and I think that, under certain conditions (his behaviour would have to be checked because he does have a history), he can be trusted enough. But if anything bad happens, I'll say truly permanent block. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 11:02, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Comment to Oli I wasn't aware that I was being offending Ingame, I wasn't willing to get in a fight at that particular time, being present only for spectating, I don't remember yelling or shouting at either of you, pardon me if my memory is incorrect, and if I did offend either of you, (which, I can assure you, I didn't intend to) I apologise, however, I am not in agreement with relating that as a sign of my temper. Explorer's ring 3.pngBtzkillerv has entered the building! Cape (blue).png 18:34, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 11:02, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Per Tienjt0 sig1.pngsig2.pngsig3.png 19:13, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Neutral leaning towards oppose - I wasn't around when this happened, but a permanent ban means banned forever. That is the most severe ban, and if anyone is bad enough to obtain that, then no matter how many times they say sorry a year later, it doesn't matter. They did the wrong, they take the punishment. scoot4.pngscooties 00:18, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

OPPOSE - "haha what r u gonna do bitch, ban me u dickhead, ban me, block me u bitch, no i dont dig, and get the fuck outta my page,i dont give a shit about u banning me or not, so infilite block me u motherfucka"

That is exactly what we why did you come you said you dont care..... 00:23, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

I notice someone censored this quote to replace certain words with asterisks. This is totally unjustified. You don't have the right to alter other people's entries on talk pages (unless it is blatantly irrelevant, spam or trolling), especially as the words used are attributable to Btzkillerv, and are entirely relevant to the discussion here. Please do not do that again.  :-p Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 16:53, January 19, 2010 (UTC)
Comment to IP/Mythbusterma That was two years ago, a LOT of change could've happened. in two years. Explorer's ring 3.pngBtzkillerv has entered the building! Cape (blue).png 11:04, January 18, 2010 (UTC)added by Stelercus
Comment - Well ok then......if you say the way howd you know it was me? 17:06, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
I recognised you from your other thread, I think you signed with the same IP. Swiz Talk Review Me 17:10, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Support - I am a good friend of Btzkillerv. I think he has changed a lot since his ban from the cc. Also, can we (possibly temporaily) un-ban him on the rsw to test him here as well?? Youdead00 18:08, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

That's what this section is for. The original proposal was to unblock him from the clan chat, but turned into a full unblock.

Support - 10 months is a long time, and I think that the discussion to permanently ban him was too short. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 20:02, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I agree. I can tell he still views random pages because he went to my (verry early) Birthday party of December 5th for awhile...Youdead00 21:03, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Support - Give him another chance. He has been around on the forums, and had shown great behavior. ~MuzTalk 02:03, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Not yet I am willing to see how Btz does in the CC, and maybe there might be a case later to unblock him from the wiki, but the many vicious quotes that Degen cited above are a pretty compelling argument against. Then again, people should not necessarily be punished forever because of something stupid they said when they were younger, so if he really has changed then he may yet have hope. However, just allowing him back into the CC (where he is instantly kickable) appears fairly controversial in the discussion here, so one step at a time is plenty IMHO. CC yes, wiki no (or at least not yet). Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 16:56, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Cannot we just undo any wrongs with rollback? It's no big deal...Youdead00 17:27, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Rollback is only suitable for blatant vandalism - from the above evidence there's only one instance (#31) of such vandalism. While the vandalism may be reverted with a click, personal attacks can often sting for a while longer. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 19:24, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Slight oppose - I'd like to see how he does in the CC first. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 19:24, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

I agree, we should oversee how he does in the cc for maybe a month. A if he shows civility we should aloow him back. Swiz Talk Review Me 19:31, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Wait - I'd like say to give him his FINAL chance in the CC, but I have a question first. If he does it again, will the sysops block him and there will be no appeals for further infractions? Fishing.png NnK Oliver (600613) talk 00:56, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - How many "final" chances are we going to give him? - Prayer.png Jedi Talk HS Log Tracker Summoning.png 01:19, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

As many as we feel like giving him. It is always a final chance until another final chance comes along, in which case the previous one was not final, but the new one is, so he is still on a final chance in theory. And, you know, "final chances" don't really work on wikis. Even if someone has a final chance and then blows it, getting blocked permanently, they still have the possibility that their block may be voted to be undone. I love politics. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 01:42, January 20, 2010 (UTC)
Comment to thread about full unblock I am content with people seeing how I do in the CC first, I suggest keeping the thread open but put the full unblock section on hold(not closing), the discussion can continue once my probation period in the CC is over and people make a conclusion on my behavior in the CC first Explorer's ring 3.pngBtzkillerv has entered the building! Cape (blue).png 11:06, January 20, 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I think the forum to block him was not a good idea, and they/we should have gave him a chance to cool his head...Youdead00 00:47, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

Youdead, it is fine to support a friend but for wiki business it is extremely irresponsible of you to ignore the facts here. His offenses spanned a 9 or 10 month time frame, he had plenty of time to "cool his head". If you simply can't be bothered to read how and why this event even happened then you should not be commenting on this thread.--Degenret01 04:50, January 21, 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - Seriously...I want him to see and show he has maturity in the Clan Chat before he even thinks about coming back to the wiki. I'm all for giving people second chances but...he's been given them before and has spit in our collective faces. --Eternalseed 01:32, January 22, 2010 (UTC)

Request for Closure - Would a neutral sysop or 'crat please find the consensus of this discussion.

Bonziiznob Talk

19:37, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Closed - Btzkillerv will be unblocked from the clan chat, and if he consistently shows good behaviour, another thread may be opened to remove his ban on the Wiki. C.ChiamTalk 12:12, January 29, 2010 (UTC)