Forum:Stinko is at it again unfortunately

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Stinko is at it again unfortunately
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 4 April 2009 by Azaz129.

Stinko was in clan chat not 10 minutes ago fishing for sorrow because he feels he is not receiving the attention he wants for his block. I have no problem allowing these people in chat, but why in gods name does he have the power to kick and ban?  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tebuddy (talk).

Uhh... that was an uncalled for kick. There was no reason for that at all. I'm curious to hear the reasoning behind it, as you were trying to mediate... Karlis (talk) (contribs) 22:49, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
As far I see from those screenshots, it did not seem like Techie Elite broke any of the rules regulated under the clan chat policies. If Stinkowing, even if he is blocked at the wiki, should keep the privilgies of a ranked clan chat member, then I think it is a reasonable request that he uses his power responsibly and not for personal reasons (as in the above example). If Stinkowing cannot show at least a minimum of the self-control required of a "trusted user", then I don't see many reasons why he should keep his clan chat kicking powers. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 08:26, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree. I want to hear Stinko's reasoning behind the kick. As far as I can see, all TEbuddy did was tell Stinko not to start because he believed that it would start a flame war. This is as opposed to Stinkowing telling everyone on his talkpage that TEbuddy practically told him to shut up with this comment: Anyway, yes, I kicked Tebuddy. So what? He is NOT my superior (if he thinks he is, he violates AEAE) and I do NOT want him practically telling me to shut up about my block. I do not see how what TEbuddy did was telling him to shut up. C.ChiamTalk 08:33, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I have just responded to a post on stinkos talk page explaining my actions and letting him know why I did what I did. The fatal flaw I see with Stinkowing having power is that he has yet to demonstrate his ability to properly use it. His problem was not using the power for good when he wanted too, it was controlling it when anger and sorrow started to set in. He cant overcome his anger and remain calm and in control when people do things that he opposes or disagrees with. I think this is Stinkos first offense in the clan chat so I don't care to remove his power just yet. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 15:56, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I believe he should have his kicking powers taken away. Are we going to start letting other banned users, vandals, flamers, etc have kicking power on our CC? No way. I believe he is fishing for sorrow, like Tebuddy mentioned. Well, I'm not biting. I also believe he still may be a bit immature to handle duties where responsibility is needed properly, such as being ranked on the CC. It could also be his way of payback. Prayer.png Jedi Talk HS Log Tracker Summoning.png 18:07, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

You can't remove his powers after one incident of power abuse on the Clan Chat. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 00:41, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I Fail to see how calling someone "bossy" and "manipulative and whiny" not a good reason to kick someone. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 00:44, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Actually, it was Stinkowing calling Techie "bossy". Read more carefully, please. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 07:34, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Cteng, this is clearly not his first incident in clan chat. Doucher, he was being manipulative and whiny. Immediately after the kick someone apologized to me for Stinkos behavior (not stinko mind you) and I got three other pms suggesting his powers be removed. He was wrong, and if this is his second or third clan chat related offence (which I dont doubt it is) it is only fair his powered be removed. Isnt he blocked indefinitely from the wiki anyway for his behavior? Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 00:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
No. An indef. block would likely be considered power abuse (not that Vhosythe would mind). WWTDD? 00:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
Revan, I fail to see that Vhosythe has anything to do with this. Please explain that unnecessary comment. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 19:38, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Stinkowing is not behaving the way someone with kicking powers should. There was no justifiable reason for that kick, he only did it to be vindictive towards TE. I feel that power abuse is not something to be taken lightly and is grounds for a temporary demotion. Zaros tally.PNGBladeQuick chat button.png# 01:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Give me more examples of power abuse, Tebuddy. Just this time isn't enough. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 02:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I will ask around, but I would hope that the people who have seen Stinko act incorrectly previously in cc would post here. Besides, we cant have a simple ignore and forgive system, no one with admin has even warned him, he even went as far as to recede his apology. Dont put the pressure on me to come up with more proof when obviously stinko was out of line and has a history of it Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 03:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I totally agree with Jedi and TEbuddy. Stinko was abusing his powers, and a banned person shouldn't even HAVE kicking powers in the first place! Remove his powers DEFINITELY and consider adding him to R S Wikia's ignore list. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  05:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

First off, hes on a 30 day block, not ban, from the wiki. And I don't think what he did deserves blocking from the CC. That is a bit extreme, for use against those who ONLY cause trouble. That being said, he has shown he can not be trusted, so he should not have any rank at all. If we reach consensus as we seem to have here then C Teng will need to comply with that. --Degenret01 07:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Agree with TEbuddy. kick is for trusted users, and he has been blocked, and there has been 2 why is stinkowing still and admin. he is not trusted. Joe Click Here for Awesomeness13:41, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, from what I can see, Stinko's block could be considered fair under the grounds of a personal attack; TE called Stinko "maniupulative and whiny" Don't forget that. Now, I'm not saying Stinko's behavior has been peachy, either, but in this case I can definately see reasoning behind the kick. --Beware the underrated. Pikaandpi Berserker Fury!Hit hard or go home. 14:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I would say it is pretty obvious that TEbuddy's first priority was to prevent another flame war from erupting. I would define such an act as peace-keeping, and not a "personal attack". Besides, TEbuddy was pretty much spot on about the whining part: the liberty of Earthere has nothing to do with Stinkowing whatsoever, and complaining about things he cannot change is just an action of pestering the clan chat environment for the rest of us. That is not an ad hominem attack, it is fact. If Stinkowing cannot stand the truth, then he does not deserve being a "trusted user" in my book. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 17:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
That's an opinion, for one, not truth or fiction. Secondly, if I were to say that (insert editor here) is a (insert hateful term here), even if I think it's the truth, would it not count as a personal attack? It started off as a peacekeeping attempt, yes, I can't argue. But that comment was simply unneccesary. --Beware the underrated. Pikaandpi Berserker Fury!Hit hard or go home. 18:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
If I understand you correctly, your opinion is that the community are not allowed to criticise Stinkowing's behaviour, even in the case that we have evidence for it (as in the example of Stinkowing's whining about Earthere), because Stinkowing might be "hurt" by our judgements. You also seem to subtly imply that TEbuddy is using "hateful terms", without explaining yourself or including your definition of hateful; is this not personal attack from your side? Also, just because there is a "reason" behind Stinkowing's kick does not necessarily mean it is justified, because there are both "good" reasons and "bad" reasons to consider when kicking. From what most users think, Stinkowing is motivating his kicking with "bad" reasons, which is why many have concluded that he cannot continue to have acces to the kicking tools provided in the clan chat. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 19:02, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
By no means am I saying that the community is not allowed to criticise Stinko's behaviour, but saying that he's whiny and maniuplative is, in my opinion, going a bit far. I'm also not intending to say that TEbuddy was trying to be hateful, but that's certainly how, at least how I'm seeing it, it came out.
My defination of hateful really is using words to insult (trying to steer someone from wrongful behavior is a different matter, more on that later), as, in my eyes, calling someone "whiny" is. Keeping peace is one thing, but insulting is another. I admit, I really don't know how to put this into words, but basically, use tact. Saying someone has "a tendacy to lose self-control" is, in my eyes better than saying someone is "bitchy" (for lack of a better word, and as a secondary example, in no way quoting you for this)
Your turn now: How do you see this as a bad reason to kick, when he may have seen it in my viewpoint that it was a personal attack? --Beware the underrated. Pikaandpi Berserker Fury!Hit hard or go home. 19:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I want to interject that trusted users are not supposed to let their emotions control themm. I've had someone type out "S.U.E S.H.U.T T.H.E H.E.L.L U.P." to me before in CC, and I simply asked them to watch their attitude, else they would be kicked. People, other than 100% blatant vandals need to be warned first, at least once before being kicked. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 19:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Pikaanpi, Stinko was not interested in defending himself or being mature. If that was the case he would not have made the comment in the first place, and not snapped back at me when I told him not to start. Second of all, even if you want to classify it as a personal attack which I did not mean it to sound like, Stinko was at fault here. As wejer said above, he was motivated by the wrong reasons and had I not said anything we would probably be discussing a different flame war right now related to the seed he planted in clan chat. I keep saying this because it is very important, Stinko is fully aware of what he is doing when he says things like that in clan chat, he is trying to stir something up as to bring attention to his own situation. This is why I said he was being whiny and manipulative, and this is why I stand behind the fact that my comment was not a personal attack. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 19:25, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I am surprised to hear that a user (and I'm trying to stay out of the personal politics if I can) has been placed on as 30 day block from editing the wiki and still allowed kicking privledges on the clan chat. I have only loosely been following these events as I'm trying to stay as uninvolved with this mess as possible. I do want to ask though if we decide that someone needs to take a break from the wiki and not be allowed to edit pages for a certain amount of time, doesn't it also make sense for us to be proactive and say, you're allowed on the clan chat or IRC but your rank or kicking privledges have also been suspended for a similar amount of time? It sounds to me like a very mixed message and a setup for a difficult situation like what seems to have just happened. What do people think? Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 20:36, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
I think it's amazing Stinko's kicking priveleges haven't been revoked yet. OK, banning him from the CC is a bit extreme, but his powers on the CC should be permanently removed, unless he can TRULY demonstrate that he will not use them to cause trouble, and only to help out. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  21:50, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm curious - if he's proven he can't be trusted with sysop status (ergo, the ability to block people from the wiki), then why is he trusted by the same people with the same type of abilities elsewhere? The logic behind this is shocking. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 22:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

What you do in the Clan Chat and what you do in the wiki are unrelated. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 00:56, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
That is ridiculous and irrelevant, we are not seperate countries with different governments who have to negotiate between laws. It is a gathering ingame for editors on the wiki. If he cant manage his powers in one correctly, it makes sense he cant manage the other and his power should be removed. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 01:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

C teng is right, the cc and wiki are unrelated so what he has done on here have no consequences on the chat. However, his actions on the cc are self explanatory for why he shouldn't have a rank at this time. Zaros tally.PNGBladeQuick chat button.png# 02:06, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

It's the official chat of the wiki. It definitely is related. We've already made consensus of the following things: Actions on Wiki affect Chat status. Actions on Chat do not affect Wiki status (there is no paper trail). Can we please stop making exceptions to policy for friends? All it does it hurt the wiki and hurt the editors therein. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 02:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Ingame I was asked by C Teng if I had a grudge against Stinko, and the answer was no. I fail to understand why C Teng hasn't revoked Stinko's privileges already. C Teng, do you have some friendship with Stinko? You seem a little biased at the moment... ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  03:03, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Stinko has once again entered clan chat looking only to cause problems. If this is not ample support for the immediate revocation of his power, then I don't know what is.

The images are a bit fuzzy, but the only thing I said that you cant see in the screens was "Stinko are you sure this is the best course of action?" and "This is what caused problems in the first place". Stinko started by insulting wejer, then went on yo talk about how he wont be intimidated anymore and how he is going to bring wejer down. Honestly people, this is getting a bit ridiculous. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 03:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess the screenshots speak for themselves when it comes to judging Stinkowing's attitude towards his fellow wikians. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 15:55, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Now he's cocky and rude.

See his latest message. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 14:08, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

For gods sake, can't we just give him a massive block? Like 10 months? I know I will get loads of stick for saying this but he is just a nuiscance. The wiki would be better without him, he has caused countless problems.Its got worst now.Joe Click Here for Awesomeness15:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I am afraid that such a radical proposal, no matter how justified, is actually possible at this time. Please do stick to the subject at hand and do not lose focus: first we deal with Stinkowing's clan chat powers, then we may adress any other goal we may wish to achieve. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 15:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

For clarifiaction, I simply propesed this as evidence as to a reason his CC powers revoked, not an extended block. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 16:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but as wejer said, it IS possible, maybe another discussion, as he has seriously violated the user treatment policy many times. What makes him so special against earth and total rune?Joe Click Here for Awesomeness16:46, 31 March 2009 (UTC) And all the stuff he has done is waaayyy worse than dootdoot.Joe Click Here for Awesomeness16:50, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

d4k, chiafriend, cteng, fofo, and kevin are still opposed. I doubt kevin will switch sides, but hopefully we can accomplish something with the rest. Just so we are all clear, he has violated the user treatment policy a total of four times since we started this discussion alone. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 17:38, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
2+2, to answer your question, plenty. Earth severely breached Christine's privacy, and Total... well, you should really know. Stinko's behaviour is nowhere NEAR this. Period. --Beware the underrated. Pikaandpi Berserker Fury!Hit hard or go home. 19:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
This is overwhelming proof of how Stinkowing acts. He called Wej an ass, he referred to us Wikians as jerks, kicked Tebuddy when he was trying to mediate (some believe it was a fair kick but the majority, including me, think it was unfair), came on the CC to cause problems and his excuse is 'I had a bad day'. Seriously, how much more evidence do we need? ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  19:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
And TEbuddy is correct in his comment above in that everyone that has opposed has been a friend of Stinkowing, or has refused to acknowledge the proof. Somewhere above, D4K mentioned that people began bothering Stinko about 'something of the past' [his de-syopping]. What D4K hasn't acknowledged is that it was Stinko who started the conversation about his de-sysopping, trying to gain sympathy. It was Stinko who began moping that it was unfair that people were reviewing Earthere's block instead of his. I also have to ask Chiafriend12, D4K, C Teng, Kevin and Fofo: if Stinkowing was not your friend and was merely a random user you had never spoken too, would you still defend him and oppose the removal of his kicking abilities? ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  20:00, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

As if more pieces of evidence were needed at all:


The above comment by Stinkowing came totally out-of-blue and was not provoked in the slighest: regular editor Timwac and administrator Leevclarke (aka Max Bulldog) are witnesses to this.

It is self-evident that Stinkowing expressed a wish to abuse his kicking powers in clan chat without even the slighest of provocation. I fear that if we do not take decisive action now, Stinkowing's lack of self-control is bound to explode, potentially causing great harm to the individuals on this wiki, not unlike the last time, when he got his sysop powers removed.

A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 20:03, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

From my point of view, I found it utterly pointless to say that and leave immediately (which Stinko did). It just doesn't help anything, with no discussion whatsoever. Why not simply leave without saying it, if it bothered him that much? I hate to see a good wikian go bad, but the evidence is mounting up that Stinko is no longer acting in the best interests of the community. It's becoming personal, and that's a problem. I hoped that a temp block would help Stinko sort himself out, but I worry that he's just losing the plot. Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 20:13, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I cannot see the last image that Wejer posted, could somebody please transcribe it on my talk page? It would be greatly appreciated. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 20:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
In the picture it has some regular CC conversation, then Stinko randomly says "The longer I stay here the more I want to kick Wej... I'm outta here." and leaves. As Wejer said, it is proof that Stinko wanted to abuse his powers, and almost did. AGAIN. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  20:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
I think it's important to make a point in Stinko's defence here. To kick Wejer would have been abuse of power, as he had said nothing to warrant it. However, Stinko did not imply that he "almost" did so, merely that he wanted to, and didn't. That's a big difference. I would have wanted to if I were in his position, but I wouldn't have done it. Leevclarke talk Max_logo_mini.png bulldog_puppy.png 20:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

You wanted evidence, here it is

This following conversation between Leevclarke (Max Bulldog) and Stinkowing happened less than 30 min ago:

Stinkowing2.png Stinkowing3.png Stinkowing4.png Stinkowing5.png Stinkowing6.png Stinkowing7.png Stinkowing8.png

I am too tired to comment on this right now, I am sure you can make out the details yourself, and if not, get them properly explained to you by those who do. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 20:46, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Wait... so he WANTS to be wrong? I don't get it.  Tien  20:50, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Sighm I'll have to wait until I get home to read it. =\ Karlis (talk) (contribs) 20:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

What he's doing is saying that we are accusing him of abusing his powers for the sole purpose of abusing his powers. That has not been said anywhere. His motive doesn't change the fact that he's still abusing those powers, however. I find he's using it with a tendency to place himself in a position of power when he gets into an argument.

Frankly, this is like dealing with a temperamental child who throws a fit whenever you won't get them the candy they want. You disagree with Stinko, you get kicked. That's not acceptable.

To those defending him that are his friends: You're letting your bias take over the situation and cloud your judgement. I suggest you step back, take a real look at what he's doing to everybody and see just how much of a troll he has been to those around him. I don't understand where the logic is in defending a friend who does nothing but spit on all your other friends. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 21:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

And you would have us believe that you're completely free of bias, which is rather hard to prove... WWTDD? 21:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Revan what does this contribute to anything? We are free of bias because we do not want Stinko gone for any reason other than because he broke the rules. His friends want him to stay because they want to ignore his rulebreaking because they enjoy his company, which is what a bias is, why is why we claim they have one Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 22:57, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
It's relatively easy to display the fact that I'm tied to either side of this issue. I have never once had a personal nor professional relationship with Stinkowing, nor have we ever spoken to each other in the past. I am basing my decision solely on evidence provided both in chat and on the wiki. His attitude is unacceptable per the user treatment policy both on and off the wiki (a policy that ignore all rules does not apply to). Ignoring the UTP for his benefit is equivalent to gaming the system. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 19:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't know why this wasn't over in 10 lines. Someone mentions it to C teng, he removes it job done. Joe Click Here for Awesomeness15:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


Let's put it to a consensus. Vote Support to revoke Stinko's abilities immediately, or Oppose to allow him to continue to have kicking powers.

Strong Support - per TEbuddy, Tollerach, Karlis, Jedi, Wejer and all my comments above. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  03:03, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

OPPOSE. This is ridiculous. "Oh no, he kicked me, let's troll him back for ages and ages!". Why? Yes, why? And don't give me this pathetic "power abuse" excuse. Rather, tell me whether this is for the benefit of the Wiki. What will th Wiki earn from this? What will community earn from this? I believe that this is a personal issue that you have against Stinkowing. You are thinking about yourself rather then the community. I find that to be quiet low. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 03:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Prior to this issue and Stinko's desysopping, I have not even spoken to him, and I do not have anything against him. See my comments on his talk page, trying to calm him down. As for what this will accomplish, it will prevent flame wars and stop Stinkowing from abusing his privileges. Stinkowing is NOT a trusted user on this wiki, and has violated various policies many times - that is why he is blocked. Kicking privileges are given to trusted users. Allowing him to keep his powers is unfair to all of us who do not have kicking abilities. My first comment above did sound a lot more angry than I meant it to, but this is stupid! ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  03:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment - D4k, I think your definition of trolling is skewed. Aside from this yew grove post and the post I made on Stinkos talk page, I have had zero interaction with Stinko. He has come on clan chat twice now looking to cause a problem and only cause a problem. He has receded his apology to me for his actions, and both times I remained completely calm while talking to him. I am not requesting a block from the wiki or clan chat, I simply want his ability to kick and ban removed. Stop playing me out to be some child on a revenge kick.Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 03:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment - Very well said, TE. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  03:55, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I suggest you look at his contributions before you call him "not trusted". He is trusted. Very Trusted. He has not abused any of his powers on CC. I would kick anyone who calls me, or anyone else for that matter, "manipulative and whiny" without a warning as well. And if someone does not wish to be percieved as a "some child on a revenge kick", that someone might consider not acting liek one. Or saying "Wow, they must be freinds, he's backing him up till the end" behind my back. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 04:57, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Then I wouldn't trust you at all with kicking powers either. I'd rather see people with clan chat powers settle a dispute with civility and maturity rather than "GTFO *kick*." That is not something I'd want to see in such a situation and would be just like violating the user block policy here on the wiki. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 07:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - I like Stinko, but he's far to emotion to make an unbiased decision these days. I haven't seen him calm in weeks, and perhaps releasing the constraints (responsibilities) of any sort of mediator will be better for him. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 05:00, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

You know who else had hundreds of legitimate edits under their belts before they were blocked? Vhoscythe, earthere, and btzkiller. His contributions are not whats being put on trial here, its his attitude and his actions. Second of all, I said that in chat because I had just read your reply in the yew grove while I was looking at clan chat and thought I would start a conversation about the issue as I have done many times before. It was not an insult or gossiping behind your back nor did it have any negative connotations. Would you have preferred I acted like Stinko and called you an ass and started swearing? As well, I was informed you were in the channel and saw what I said anyway. Thirdly you were in the channel for the second event I just posted pictures for above. He directly insulted wejer, and then went off on me because he thought I was trying to deceive and intimidate him. How you could still be defending him so zealously is beyond my comprehension. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 05:55, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - As thread starter Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 05:55, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Strong Support - Per my comments in the initial discussion. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 07:59, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I call this "debate" inconclusive. Stinko Doesn't even get a chance to explain himself. He cannot post here. You're basically having his trial without him. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 15:22, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
He had his chance to explain himself and be civil the times he came into the clan chat, but waved his right to do so. Doing what he did to get blocked from the wiki is enough means he forfeit he ability to participate in this discussion. That aside, there is nothing for him to explain: He has become unconditionally disruptive, volatile and outright immature with his actions - this alone warrants the removal of his powers (the same reason it warranted the block and the desysopping). So why do you choose to blindly ignore what he's doing? What could we possibly benefit from with him keeping his powers? It seems we're getting trolled more frequently, flamed, and worst of all: kicked when we say "I've had enough of your crap." Giving a troll power is like feeding a troll, only much more harmful. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 16:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

For the last time, VOTING IS NOT CONSENSUS! (Please note that this is a comment on the flawed mechanism of decision in use, not as to whether or not Stinkowing should retain his kicking powers.)--

Helm of neitiznot (charged).png Azaz129 Crystal shield.png Talk Edits Contribs

15:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

This isn't a vote. We're showing our support or opposition with comments in order to reach an agreement (a consensus). We are not basing the decision on what side has the most votes, nobody said that. Keeping track of how many people are on each side does help visually represent where people are standing on the issue. This mechanism is not "flawed," you're just misconstruing the intentions behind it. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 16:12, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - You guys are overdoing this. This and his removal of sysop powers are two different events, and should not be treated like they're the same thing.

So, he kicked a few people and he came across being grouchy. That's a good reason to get them de-ranked? ... If I was really angry one day, went into the Clan Chat to talk to the people I know and trust, but was instead bugged about something that happened earlier that people won't stop talking about and I kicked some people, would that make me eligable for being de-ranked?

I cannot say this for everyone, but Stinko is a trusted user who is just currently going through some issues, while the people around him won't drop it. Though, because he currently is not a sysop, he should be re-ranked at Corporal or Sergeant. Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 21:24, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Clearly he isn't trusted because (almost) everyone is voting to remove his powers. As for the comment about 'people around him not dropping it', he was the one who initiated conversation about his block on the CC (as shown in the screenshots at the top). He was talking about how people were reviewing Earthere's block and not his - it wasn't the other players who started bugging him about it. Stinkowing his blatantly abused his kicking powers and, as I have already stated, a blocked person shouldn't have those abilities in the first place. </rant> ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  08:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Events on-site and events in-game and in the IRC are all held separate. Yes, he has been blocked on-site, and that's the end of that. We aren't discussing that. All he has done in the Clan Chat was cop a bad attidude and kick a few people. Honestly, kicking is just about as minor of a punishment as it can get. If he had a kickfest, that's one thing. Kicking someone else because he found that they were harrassing or whatever, that's another. No one has even let him tell about his intentions. How can you go around saying he isn't trustworthy when having only seen one side of what happened? Dragon medium helm! Whaddaya know?Chiafriend12Better than rune!I have 12 friends. 21:39, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
So you're saying that kicking people without good reason is acceptable? That's not logical by any stretch of the imagination. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 02:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Strong Support - All the way. Just read around this discussion for the reasons. Also per my above comments. Prayer.png Jedi Talk HS Log Tracker Summoning.png 21:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - I've seen Stink violate his kicking powers a few times and it needs to be stop.--Quest point hood.png Bigm2793Talk Quest point cape.png 22:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - Sorry, but "having a bad day" does not excuse one's actions, we cannot have someone that has a personal vendetta against everyone that supported his deranking etc. have the power to kick. He has abused it, started arguements and has just had a bad attitude. What he is going through and his contributions to the wiki does not put him above the rules. Zaros tally.PNGBladeQuick chat button.png# 23:04, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Neutral - *sigh* per my reasons from the last Stinko discussion =/ Andrew talk 03:03, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - And I want to be very clear that I support regardless of who the user is. If someone gets blocked or desysopped, we have to carry those decisions across to the other aspects of the community. The wiki, yew grove, our forums, the clan chat, and IRC (and maybe other things I haven't listed) are all part of the SAME community. We have the SAME users. We should be applying the SAME rules. We cannot do one thing on the wiki and a different thing in the clan chat. If someone's powers are revoked in the wiki, they should be for the clan chat and IRC and ... you get the point. Otherwise the situation will get out of hand like it just has. I also strongly suggest that we clarfiy how our rules/promotion/demotion correlate for each aspect of our community. That way we can apply them fairly in the future. Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 05:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - That is not how it works, Tollerach. See Forum:User block policy. We are deciding that if a user is banned in the wiki, he/she should not be banned in the Clan Chat. I think that only a few incidents of what you call power abuse is not enough to remove Stinkowing's rank, and definitely not enough to block him there. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 13:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment - I want to repeat that I'm not asking anyone to be banned from the CC. What I am saying is that because users automatically get a rank in the CC if they get promoted to an admin, I think that if someone loses those admin privledges, then they should also lose their rank in CC. That just sounds like common sense to me. Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 05:14, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Oppose Give me a few more reasons involving different people. Attack Ancient Fofo Slayer 19:32, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment - It is absolutely pathetic how people who are asking for more evidence can be so blind. [[1]] Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 20:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment The last comment was absolutely irrelevant. These are two absolutely different issues. And if you're unable to provide any solid evidence of real power abuse, this discussion is long over. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 00:31, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment - The fact that he kicks people who don't break the rules isn't power abuse? I don't care how bad of a day anyone is having, that's not acceptable. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 02:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Byte Master is right. If he was having such a bad day why go on to the wiki CC and start whining about his block? You seem to be ignoring the fact that it was Stinko who started it. When TE told him to stop being whiny and manipulative (which is exactly what he was being), he kicked him. If that's not power abuse I don't know what is. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  02:45, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment - D4k, how can you be so ignorant to what Stinko has already done? Just within this incident, he has misued his power and insulted four different community members. He also came into chat two different times seeking conflict. How much is enough for you to finally realize Stinko is not a good sysop/admin? Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 03:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment I never said it wasn't power abuse but how many times has he abused it in the cc? Attack Ancient Fofo Slayer 03:42, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment I count 3 including mine. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 04:19, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

HUGE Support well it is just silly now. After all he has done, flaming vho, 2 Yew groves to remove his sysop powers, obviously the second succeeding, he should just be stopped. The same thing has happened with earth and total rune, so why is stinko so special. These kind of things are cropping up everywhere. And couldn't someone of kicked him in the CC, if he was insulting wejer?Joe Click Here for Awesomeness15:22, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - I like Stinko, but I'm afraid his actions speak for themselves.  Tien  16:04, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Oppose Before I get all the "ZOMFG UR HIZ FREND AND DEREFOOR U ARE BIASED!!1!111!!oneone" comments, let me have my say, mmmkay? This is absolutely RIDICULOUS. We get ONE example, which in my opinion was very much justified, of him kicking somebody. BOO. FLIPPING. HOO. NEVER in my life have I seen someone blow something so incredibly out of proportion. He kicked Tebuddy because he was being called "manipulative and whiny", which is grounds for a kick in itself, but when Stinko got mad, Tebuddy basically said, "You're blocked, therefore you have no right to be offended, now shut it." And Tebuddy, it will take a long time for me to "realize" he is not a good admin. He is an EXCELLENT admin. He has blocked countless vandals, reverted countless harmful edits, and what happens? YOU GUYS GO ON A TANGENT ABOUT HOW BAD OF AN ADMIN HE IS! Grow the hell up. Kevin-020 02:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

'Comment - Kevin, we are not questioning his edits or contributions, we are questioning his emotional instability and the lack of control he has over his anger. He kicked me, insulted wejer, and came into clan chat two other times looking only to throw angry words around and not be mature. You sir should be telling Stinko to grow up, not losing your temper here. I also suggest before you post what you think is a really groundbreaking statement, that you at least read the replies before yours as to not repeat something that has already been said. I also recommend that you actually talk to stinko once or twice as so to see what kind of person you are defenidng. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 03:28, 31 March 2009 (UTC)Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 03:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment Tebuddy, that comment was completely and utterly uncalled for. Saying "what kind of person" I"m defending makes it sound as if I am defending a criminal. Also, he kicked you because you called him manipulative and whiny. Why on earth can you not wrap your head around the fact that maybe it was seen as an insult? I also recommend that you actually talk to stinko once or twice as so to see what kind of person you are defending. Yeah, I'm kind of one of his friends, in case you didn't notice. Although I'm not defending him just because he's my friend. I'm defending him because this is getting blown so out of proportion I don't know where to start. I don't need to tell him to grow up. I need to tell you to shut your mouth and get some common sense. Kevin-020 04:03, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment - All of the people that have opposed my request so far have been friends of Stinko, or have yet to acknowledge the evidence I provided both in screenshots and links to the yew grove about Stinko previously. Blowing an incident out of proportion would be for example if Stinko has no history of anger problems or power abuse and me requesting his power be removed. He has time and time again demonstrated that he is incapable of managing his anger and is unfit to use his power maturely and neutrally. I also doubt very heavily that this has anything to do with your opinion and it is mostly because you are good friends with Stinko and was also a good friend with btzkiller. I would also like to bring to your attention that without his clan chat powers, Stinko's participation would not be affected because he is already on a block from the wiki and he would not be banned from the channel. Also, please change your attitude. We are having a simple discussion, getting stressed out wont change anything. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 04:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - Reading what he said, Stinkowing took this out of proportion. A kick was too much. Just because he has a high rank in the CC doesn't mean he cannot be insulted in any way. and seeing this is not really an insult, the kick was uncalled for. This is not the first time I have had the same thing as Techie Elite had happen to me but I will not say who victimised me. TEbuddy was in the right as he did not want a flame war in the CC, which is reasonable. Then Stinko went insulting other people. On his userpage, he claims he has autism and because of this, he has a short temper. However, this is still not an excuse (Oh, and Stinko, if you take that as an insult, I'm sorry, it is not meant to be). By the way, seeing ranks are mainly for admins and bureaucrats (and other things I'm not sure the names of), and seeing he is not an admin anymore, he does not deserve the rank. Statistics.png Lvl 3 skils3 Choice! Talk~ Holiday Signup ~Hiscores 04:58, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - I'm sorry, but I think "this is ridiculous". Personally, I've never had problems with Stinkowing and I can't recall ever even talking to him..but my position on this would go for anybody. Where I work, if a lead, manager, or supervisor steps down, whether willingly or forced to, and takes on a lower position within the organization, they lose their admin rights across all systems, not just one or two and no exceptions are ever made. As long as this is the "official" clan chat of this web site he should lose his admin rights to everything, irregardless of what occurred above. If the problems in somebody's personal life begins to affect their judgment and activity on the job, then actions are taken to help them such that there is no disruption in the this case I see the workplace as the RS Wiki as a whole with the clan chat being an extension of it and of somebody's admin rights as they exist here. Hopefully the one month block will be what he needs to set things right and everybody can hopefully move past this. When he is unblocked and given his admin rights back, give them back for the clan chat and we can go from there. I am not saying that his ip should be blocked from accessing the wiki, nor his access to post things on the forums or his ability to use the clan chat with everybody else, only his admin rights across the board. Vadanea 08:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Support - I am not going to repeat what I have already said before. Therefore: read my comments above for more careful explanations of my position. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 12:13, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Upcoming Policy Changes - Consensus on policies that relate to this matter are being discussed here and here. Both of which are leaning to dictate that he will lose his CC powers after the discussions are closed anyway, as that's the direction the discussions are heading. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 19:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose The person who wants a block is playing merry hell, and i can clearly see a vendetta. Are you trying to edge him out to cover your trakcs, and prevent him having any say? Both of you need to calm down (invite for flaming from little girl who doesn't realise that calling someone manipulative is offensive) The Fire of the Angels Pester me! 19:25, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

comment - Such hostility. Stinko is on a block from this wiki for the exact same behavior he has displayed toward me and toward the other people in clan chat. Just once I want one of the opposers to acknowledge the evidence that has been posted by me and the three other people who have had confrontations with Stinko. If you had chosen to even read the information that many people posted above, or even my original post, you would know I dont care to have Stinko blocked from the cc. I just want his kicking powers removed. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 20:08, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Yes, Tebuddy. I think consequences should be laid down upon C Teng if he does not remove Stinko's rank. He might own the account, but it is the Wiki's CC. Prayer.png Jedi Talk HS Log Tracker Summoning.png 20:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

When we reach consensus, which we're pretty close to. C Teng isn't doing anything wrong, as this discussion seems to not end. I'm going to request closure and consensus be decided, as this seems like it will perpetually be the same thing. If he doesn't do so after this has been closed, then your point is valid. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 21:16, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Call for closure - Looking over, a vast majority seems in favor of removing his kicking ability based on his emotional instability and inability to keep his anger and frustration under control. No call has been made on blocking him, as that's not what this discussion was about. This has been open for some time, so I'd like to know: when are we going to call the consensus and remove his kicking powers? Nothing new has been brought to the table for days, and it's the same people recycling the same arguments for and against. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 21:16, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

comment - I think we should hear stinkos side then make a decision Player moderator crown.png Poppop24 Skillcape emote icon.png

This appears to be his side... Christine 23:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment Hmm not to blow your party up but i thought the RuneScape Wiki wasnt a democracy. Why in the world are you guys voting!? Also not to interrupt, the cc is sort of an extension of the wiki but... The wikis rules according to my interpretation of RS:NOT#JAGEX means that all problems offsite arent "solve-able" here. Im pretty sure there is an actual rule regarding things outside the wiki i just cant find it... I do not support or go against Stinkowing. I am giving my neutral point of view on this issue. Also what about RuneScape:Gaming_the_system ... Lastly i know im using very improper grammar and im just jumping in... arent "pictures" not considered evidence because of how easy it is to photo shop or edit them to make them say or show what you want? God Of War 03:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

God of war nobody has dispiuted the pictures because they were actual evidence and there were multiple witnesses. As well, we are not the United States court system and are not subject to those rules. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 04:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
What!?! are you saying the US courts can't touch us here???? WOOHOOO!!!! Break out my lucky dice, my pirate hat, and everything else I need for all those vices I can't have in the states. It's like our own offshore island. LOL! Air rune.png Tollerach hates SoF Fire rune.png 18:42, 2 April 2009 (UTC) Note: the preceding comment has no relevance on anything whatsoever.
Tollerach, I think it would be sensible to stick at the issue at hand until this dispute is resolved. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 19:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Both Karlis and I have given Stinko advice on his talk page to sit out for a while and calm down. He hasn't answered since, and he was playing RuneScape just last night I believe. Maybe it's just my opinion, but I think that's a good sign. Just wanted to point that out.  Tien  15:47, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


As byte master said a few days ago, no new information has been posted in several days and those opposing Stinko losing his power have not responded to any of the evidence or brought any new information to the table. I'm going to ask Cteng to go ahead and remove his cc power. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 04:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

There are currently 14 supporters and 6 opposers. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  06:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't count the numbers man. Please, people keep forgetting that. --Degenret01 07:10, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
You say that because it helps keep Stinko in the clear, but what you're forgetting is that there are some issues we can't reach a unanimous decision on. This is where the "at least 70% support" guideline comes in for calling consensus, like right now. Stop manipulating "not a democracy" to keep something in your favor, Degen. That's gaming the system. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 17:00, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I don't think Degenret01 is in such high favour among Stinkowing - namely, because he was among those who wanted Stinkowing desysoped in the first place because of power abuse and user treatment violation. So, Bytemaster: Please stick to the relevant arguments at hand instead of thinking that the "tyrrany of the majority" is an acceptable way of action. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 17:50, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Clarification: I do not want to win this case because of the arbitrary action of a majority vote. Instead, the side that give the best arguments are the side that should get their will through. As we can see, few of Stinkowing's supporters have brought forth any real evidence that would prove to counter our case, so do not think that we cannot win this the proper way as it should be done. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 18:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
I personally do not like the "us against them" mentality that is present in your statement... =\ Christine 18:42, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Instead of giving a long list of names, I say "Stinkowing's supporters". I do not see what is wrong with that. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 18:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Wejer: "Win?" This isn't something that is "won." That's a horrible way to think about it. Are you saying we should deviate from standard procedure just because you "don't want to win by majority rule?" Is there some reason for this? Do you get some sort of ego boost from making people agree from you or something? There's no need for "not wanting to win by majority rule."
There is no gray area or compromise here, this is one of those issues where it's either 'support or oppose.' It's a rare day when everybody supports or everybody opposes this type of issue. Calling it "no consensus" when it clearly doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of it going the other way doesn't help the community.
Deciding based on the side that "makes the best argument" is impossible to judge without bias to one or another side. That leaves the decision entirely in the hands of the bureaucrat who decides to close the issue. This voids RS:AEAE and RS:NOT#CABAL. Think about it.
I just want this issue closed and over with as soon as possible. Delaying it any further as you're suggesting is detrimental to the community. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 19:18, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Degen, wejer, heres the problem. Unless you guys want to switch your votes to oppose, nothing else is going to happen here. The last discussion I had with one of the opposers was with angel's fire over three days ago. I informed Cteng about the lack of activity and he was actually opposed at the time of the topic creation, but he also has chosen to to say anything here. Do you guys want to keep the discussion going when there is no one opposing us to chat with? ?This is the exact reason this issue needs to be closed, chritisne is not happy with how people sare phrasing things, some unsigned guy says wejer gets a kick out of manipulation, this is sidetracking garbage that does not need to be happening.

None of the people that think Stinkowing is innocent have said anything, the people that think stinkowing was wrong have been posting every day to reach a decision. Its pretty clear what needs to be done.Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 19:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Dude, I made two comments to this entire thread, and I was only unhappy with how one person phrased something, and I was not alone. Please do not needlessly single me out. Christine 20:51, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
My apologies, my intention was not to point out what you did and make fun of you. I was merely saying that the inaction in this thread has lead to numerous pointless discussions. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 22:14, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
That's right. We also need to realize a couple of points about issues like this before arguing about whether or not to close them.
  • There is clearly no way we're going to reach a unanimous decision. Expecting everyone to agree on the same thing in situations like this is a bit of a fantasy. Stop waiting for it.
  • There is nothing wrong with closing an issue that has a huge amount of support and few opposing. We do this all the time, simply because common sense dictates that the issue doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of going the other way.
Can we please close this and de-rank already? I'm really getting tired of recycling the same information. -Byte_Master bytesig2.png bytesig3.png 19:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
Fine, whatever.
To C Teng: I know you have been reading this topic very carefully, you even put a signature on an unsigned comment. Please show yourself and either give us some new information or reasonable arguments against any of our evidence. If you don't have anything, I think it would be sensible that this discussion be closed. A magic scroll.png WejerFeather.png 20:02, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

TE and Byte, I am not trying to prolong this thing, it has drawn enough wiki blood. I fully realize that there will not be unanimity. My statement was too short I guess, I was just saying counting the votes isn't the way to go. I have long been satisfied as to the arguments presented. But I also have zero expectations that C Teng will derank Stink without a directive from all 3 of our crats. Its why I have tried to stay away from this. You can argue forever but no one can "make" C Teng do what he needs to. Time for the next step, a new CC I guess. --Degenret01 03:32, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I fear you are right. I was in CC today with Cteng and he found every excuse in the book to not fully desysop stinko. He wanted the conversation archived before he would do anything but would not archive it nor tell me how to archive it. He kept saying the discussion was over when he was not active and no one besides those wanting his power removed active. Eventually he either added me to his ignore list or started ignoring everything I was saying. Cap and goggles.pngTEbuddy 03:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
We have two available CC's that I am aware of. R S Wikia2(Bonzi) and RSW CC(myself). As it is clear that the majority of the community is in agreement to remove his powers, and from what I read, he is refusing to do so, perhaps we switch CC. Karlis (talk) (contribs) 04:04, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I like rsw cc because its easier to type lol. Teng had his chance, lets do it now. Sitenotice it?--Degenret01 04:32, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I Support changing the clan chat. We need more consistency, and unbias. A consensus is not being followed through, and we shouldn't have to fight for it to be implemented. I am also going to be making some changing soon to the clan chat set up, see Forum:Clan Chat Consistency.

Bonziiznob Talk

05:48, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

C teng may own the CC but ultimately he has to answer to the community at large. We have spoken and if he chooses to ignore our voice we find another CC plain and simple. And no offense to the 'crats but this is the clan chat and only like two of them visit very rarely. We should not have to wait for their approval on this. Zaros tally.PNGBladeQuick chat button.png# 07:19, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Lets just go to RSW CC and keep that. Karlis is a very responsible user, he will do as the communtiy says (Not that bonzii won't) so lets just transfer.Joe Click Here for Awesomeness08:52, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

There, I demoted Stinkowing to no rank. I never said I would refuse to. I just wanted to wait until this discussion was completely over, and I really wasn't sure if it was or not. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 12:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Closed - Stinkowing has been deranked.--

Helm of neitiznot (charged).png Azaz129 Crystal shield.png Talk Edits Contribs

12:26, 4 April 2009 (UTC)