# Forum:Unfair ban?

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Unfair ban?
Note: This topic has been unedited for 2886 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

I was recently banned for 3 months by Famine for making this[1] edit. The block log entry read: "22:13, 11 September 2006 Famine blocked "Aaadddaaammm (contribs)" with an expiry time of 3 months (QVFD'd)".

I was unblocked by another admin (Rcmurphy), and then I posted quite a civil comment[2] on Famine's talk page. For this, he blocked me for a further day.

I don't think Famine was acting fairly, what do you guys think?

• Three months probably was a bit harsh. You definitely should have linked the word "Fcuk" to the FCUK article, which is quite funny, IMO. Also, it's "implore," not "emplore," so that probably deserved a day or so right there.  c • > •  22:32, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
(off topic) Thanks for the kind words; I started the FCUK article (one of my earlier attempts), and it's been improved marvelously by other users. It's particularly good since in real life, a judge ruled that the FCUK brand was not entitled to trademark protection since it was a misspelled obscenity, which actually led to the company planning to change its name (don't know if it has or not yet). It's good satire of an idiotic and very annoying marketing concept.--Hrodulf 00:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I think Fa- aaaa... Whoops, Honey-Trap! i like FAMINE and admire hIS Peaceful ventures at hUmanitarian woRk in the poorer rEgions of Africa. wE are incredibly lucky to haVe hIm and people just Like him around. -Rusty, Rusty Shackleford Eh?The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mr. Briggs Inc. (talk • contribs) 17:43, 15 September 2006 (I'm watching you, Briggs. -F)

Translation: FAMINE IS PURE EVIL. Aaadddaaammm 02:38, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

You totally deserved it, and I hope bitching here about it earns you another. 23:21, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I feel that Famine completely overstepped his bounds. There is nothing wrong with a user intentionally screwing up shortcuts to important pages. That's what Uncyclopedia is all about! And furthermore, if such a user were to ever get unjustly banned for such an action, they have every right to tell the admin in question to "think a little longer before you block people". If our admins can't be heckled by disruptive users, what use is it to have admins?
I for one, feel that after being rescued from Lions, Adam (with all the excessive letters) should have every right to go back into the lion's den and tell them that they were wrong, and should "think a little before trying to eat me". It is an entirely just, righteous, and intelligent thing to do. Furthermore, I believe that Adam has every right to tell Mike Tyson, should he ever meet him, that he's a washed up pussy who doesn't know how to throw a punch. And he should be able to do that without fear of reprisal. For this is Amerika, where free speech and freedom live forever in glorious splendor. 23:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[Note: Both the previous paragraphs are authored by Famine. Aaadddaaammm 02:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)]

Holy crap - I'm glad you pointed that out! I mean, there are a lot of people here who would have never realized that I wrote those paragraphs. I mean, I should learn to sign my comments or something! Thanks again! 02:56, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
You're a fucking retard, Famine. You fucking know damn well that you were trying to mislead with that post. You must be so god-damn insecure to have to waste your time blocking people excessively for trivial matters. I bet your cock is the same size as your Mum's. Grow up. Get a life. Go fuck yourself more than usual. Know when to say you're wrong. Aaadddaaammm 03:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
On the other hand, I guess if you really want the three months... or, perhaps twelve...  c • > •  03:41, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
He's certainly getting another day on account of failing to get the hint. Adam, as I've said before, shut the fuck up. You think any of us here wants to do this crap? They had to drag me kicking and screaming into being opped, and four months later, I have officially lost all faith in the portion of humanity that can use the Internet. Maybe it's the fact that we wade through more shit per day that you even thought possible, but we don't take kindly to insults, especially when we're enforcing the fucking rules. I'd especially like to point out to you rule #2: don't be a dick. Granted, three months for fucking with the QVFD redirect was a bit harsh. I personally would have given you one month. However, the second two bans you totally had coming. And thank your lucky stars I didn't block for longer. —Hinoa talk.kun 03:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Also, remember one of the fundamentals of Uncyclopedia; $Famine > You$ -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 23:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Least I look at all humble, where the hell did that come from anyway? Or, more importantly, how long has this been in effect, and why did no one inform me of it earlier? 23:53, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
"We hold these truths to be self-evident..." -- Sir Codeine K·H·P·B·M·N·C·U·Bu. · (Harangue) 23:58, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
"...that we normal users shall obey the mighty admins, for we are dumb, and they are smart..." -- 01:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Damn straight. And don't forget it. Besides, we're talking about someone who banned a Wikian. You think he's going to afford you any more courtesy than he shows the people who host us? That's right, I didn't think so. Now, Adaaaaaaaaam, kindly STFU. —Hinoa talk.kun 02:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

quote: You're a fucking retard, Famine. You fucking know damn well that you were trying to mislead with that post. You must be so god-damn insecure to have to waste your time blocking people excessively for trivial matters. I bet your cock is the same size as your Mum's. Grow up. Get a life. Go fuck yourself more than usual. Know when to say you're wrong. Aaadddaaammm 03:26, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, there goes all my sympathy for the guy. I'm not going to complain about you banning him now Famine, you may be pure evil, but adam is 3-month-old, nasty, grimy, polluted evil!

quote: You fucking know damn well that you were trying to mislead with that post.

NO! But he seemed so... sincere :(. Mr. Briggs Inc. 10:04, 16 September 2006 (UTC) Eh?

Uh...I really don't know what to say. Is this user so new that he doesn't know to expect sarcasm, satire, and allegory from me, almost exclusively? Humm...that shouldn't be the case since he's been here for months. I guess the only other explanation for this outburst is that he's stupid. I wonder if he'll come back and poke this light socket with another paperclip once his burns heal. I'm betting yes. 13:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Heh, at least his insults are creative, even if he is very confused as to what kind of site we run here.-- 14:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Creative? I've seen better insults from a three yea--oh, that was sarcasm, wasn't it? Damn. —Hinoa talk.kun 18:09, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

A3d3a3mthis is ridiculous has made useful contributions to Condoleezza Rice (my fav. page!) as early as today. he should be treated more kindly. BUT there is something about that page. Toytoy (creator of the moon landing img in that page) begged to be banned (for like ever) and he would not rest till his wish was complied with - he had to literally beg & grovel and then suffer ridicule, become the butt of jokes here etc. before getting the boot he wanted -- you don't know how tough getting banned is until you attempt it. moral: those who get banned without having to struggle for it do not appreciate it. -- mowgli 20:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

(Adam)3 See, that's an easier way to do it... also is being a dick. Rule #2 explicitly prohibits that. Banning tends to depend on how you treat the site and its members, not on whether you want to or not. —Hinoa talk.kun 20:58, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

### Why must we fight?

Hear Hear! -- 23:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• To slay the infidels!  c • > •  05:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Well I've come back armed with a novelty-sized paper clip and a bucket of burns cream. I think (... here we go!) one of the problems with uncyclopedia is that the admins think they are doing the world such a huge, favour by being admins. What a self-sacrificing act they are performing. The society shouldn't be about "I'm an admin, you're stupid, I'm cool, in your face". It should be about being funny, and it should be fair. FAIR. That's all I ask. --Aaadddaaammm 05:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

In a perfect world, you wouldn't be able to know which users are admins except by checking the list (or seeing deletions and whatnot on recent changes, I suppose). I think the gap between admins and regular users should be smaller. However, considering that your long ban was removed, I think you are overreacting a bit about this. —rc (t) 06:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, </delurk>--The Right Honourable Maj Sir Elvis UmP KUN FIC MDA VFH Bur. CM and bars UGM F@H (Petition) 15:42, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

there are a lot of users here with extremely complicated signatures who aren't admins. don't be fooled. famine is a weirdo who wants to fool you into thinking that he's yet another user. some admins are also staff - a yet another species. to be brief, you can't tell who's an admin here until you wise up to the knowledge behind how not to get yourself accidentally or unknowingly banned (see russell paradox for more on this). -- mowgli 19:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I figured for once, I'd try to explain why. This is why. 01:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

## It's a Completely Serious Proposal

I just think the problem here is that certain people are raised to expect others to be polite and civil, and when the other person's actions are negative or harsh, they even expect them to be apologetic. They might even get that kind of behavior from people on other internet forums (though I've yet to encounter such a thing). But I've concluded that there's something about the wiki environment that makes it nearly impossible to get an unforced apology from anyone, for anything, at any time. It's like there's some sort of law against it. Personally, I think it's one of the most unappealing things about Wikiland, and one of the reasons why Wikipedia is ultimately doomed. But in the short term, I'd recommend that we add the following text to Beginner's Guide/Proper, or maybe even make it a seprate page called Beginner's Guide/Letitgo:

Whaddya think? I'm being completely serious here... It might not prevent incidents from happening, but it might at least help with the aftermath, in a few cases such as this one.  c • > •  00:02, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't like it. If users aren't allowed to expect admins to be civil, admins shouldn't expect users to be civil. However, there is a power imbalance. Admins can do stuff when users aren't conducting themselves politely. Users, on the other hand, have no power at all. They cannot do stuff. A good example here is, oh I don't know, maybe that case when Aaadddaaammm was blocked with no warning for an excessive period of time... oh, or maybe that time when Aaadddaaammm was blocked for behaving uncivivally (sp?) in a discussion about the previous block. --Aaadddaaammm 02:10, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
But we have to be realistic, Aaadddaaammm. This isn't the real world, and this isn't real life - the more you think in those terms, the deeper a hole you'll dig for yourself, psychlogically and emotionally.
Now, I know this website like the back of my hand at this point; I've seen it all, followed every trend, thread, twist and turn, as well as several other things beginning with "T," and do you want to see the only example of an admin genuinely apologizing to a regular user that I've ever encountered here? It's this user page. The incident took place over a year ago. The admin was User:Marcos Malo, who has essentially disappeared, along with the non-admin user in question. Malo's last edit was roughly two weeks after this happened, and since then, to my knowledge, nothing like this has occured here.
Admins here don't refuse to apologize because they're assholes, Aaadddaaammm - they avoid apologies because it makes them look like they're tired and depressed. At which point they get the "gosh, are you okay?" messages on talk pages, and they start to wonder what people are saying about them in private, or on IRC when they're not around. (Which only makes things worse, if in fact they really are depressed.) If you show weakness, it isn't just that people assume you're weak; people will assume there's something seriously wrong with you, and nobody needs that kind of shite, frankly.
I've had "difficult" incidents happen to me here, too - twice, in fact - and in both cases I was completely dismayed by the circumstances. It was way over the top, it was ludicrous, and in the first case, I'd say it was even Kafkaesque. I felt like I had to behave the way I did because I couldn't show weakness either, but ultimately the only way I persevered was to just forget about it. I love this website, and I'm not going to let a bunch of stooges and brainwashed idiots (don't worry, Tompkins, I promise I'm not referring to you) drive me off to suit their sinister and nefarious purposes! If they want me to go, they can ask politely, as a community, or they can just vote in my handy poll and tell me I'm worse than Hitler (ehh, don't all go and vote at once, kids). Sure, if that's what they want, then fine - but I'm not going to let a couple of freak incidents give them an easy victory. If I do, the terrorists will have won, and all of this work I've done will have been for nothing. The same goes for you, Aaadddaaammm - by making a big deal of this one incident, you're simply proving to them that they were right all along, at least as far as they're concerned, whether they were right or not. If you really must try to beat them, do it by excelling at all this stuff - and don't worry, if you do excel at it, they will remember that they almost drove you out of here with that overly-lengthy ban that one time back in September 2006.
Otherwise, just don't worry about it! It's only a website, it was a mistake (or at least it seemed that way), it's been corrected, and forgetting all about it is both the popular and the classy thing to do. It's Wikiland, and that's just how it works, for better or worse.
Trust me! You can do it! c • > •  05:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
If you're gunna take the "can't change it, so let's not try" line on admins apologising, surely users can then take exactly the same argument when they blank pages and make "Daniel sploogen lieks cock" pages. How about, instead of the blurb you propose, make one directed at admins saying "if you fuck up, apologise"? At least admins will probably read it. --Aaadddaaammm 05:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
We read everything, even when it has nothing to do with us (incidentally, User:Imrealized got an quasi-apology somewhere around here... somewhere... kinda. At least it was admitted that the thing that was thought turned out to be completely wrong... by an admin who was unrelated to the whole incident).-- 05:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Stop being such a girl, Adam. You messed up, and you got banned. The length of the ban is entirely irrelevant, as pretty much all bans are the same length. The pattern is:

• You fuck up, either intentionally or unintentionally.
• Someone (Famine) bans you for as long as he feels like, depending on how pissed off/drunk he is.
• You go to IRC and crawl to another admin and get unbanned.
• You think twice next time.

This has happened to everyone here, and the only thing you have achieved by bitching about it is now everyone will remember your name for the whining and patronising attitude on this thread. And by patronising I mean adding to Briggs' and Famine's comments 'in case we didnt get it'. Just take it like a man next time. 07:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh well, any publicity is good publicity, as they say. You're not funny, either, FreeMorpheme. --Aaadddaaammm 07:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

FreeMorpheme, I'll be honest and say that you've never been a favorite of mine. I've always felt that you were a little rough around the edges, and a little too confrontational for my taste. But what you just spewed out is some of the wisest stuff that I've seen for some time. The only users I recall banning are the ones who made a whiny stink about it. The ones who have gone through the initiation you describe I never remember, and I am often surprised to find out later that I once banned them. Why? Because most people take the hint, don't let it happen again, and make useful contributions to this site. The rest never come back. A few make a stink about it, and generally garner more contempt than sympathy.

Aaadddaaammm: My ban was harsh, and at least three times longer than necessary. However, as FreeMorpheme pointed out, had it been an hour, a day, a month, or a year, the end result would have been the same: a quick trip to IRC, a quick, "Sorry, won't happen again", and your life is back on track.

Aaadddaaammm: You are not special. I did not set out to ban you, in any way shape or form. I banned some asshole who fucked up QVFD, a page which more than 150 pages on this site link to. It is important. The fact that it was you is your problem. I did not choose you. I did not say, "That damn Aaadddaaammm, I'm going to get him good". I said, "Oh, look, here's a another asshole who's just destroyed an important page on Uncyclopedia. What is wrong with people? Why do they come to this site to destroy things, instead of create them?" Then I banned that person. Because that is my job. To discourage malicious vandals from editing this website. Which is what you were at that moment.

I have no remorse for dishing out 99% of the bans I dish out, because I rarely ban people "just bacause". For the most part, I ban vandals, malicious users, people who come here to stir up angst, fight with admins and users, and generally devalue the site. If you maliciously fuck up the site, by, oh, I don't know, replacing an important redirect with "Fcuk yeah Jim Carrey sucks thigh" I will ban you. And I don't give a flying fuck who you are. Because it's my job to discourage that from happening as much as possible.

So, Aaadddaaammm, that first ban wasn't personal. It was my job. What was personal was when that same malicious vandal whined on IRC, got unbanned, and then promptly went to my userpage and told me to "think before banning people", as if I didn't already do that. I do think before banning people. Usually I think, "Look at that fucking asshole, vandalising Uncyclopedia! I'll put a quick stop to that." Which was exactly what I thought before banning you. I rarely get pissed off at users. I often get pissed off at vandals. If you are a vandal and post cheeky shit on my userpage, I'll ban you every time. I do not choose whether or not you are a vandal, Aaadddaaammm, that is your choice. At the moment, you've chosen to be a vandal and a disruptive user. I'd personally recommend against that choice. 23:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the proposal to add text to the beginner's guide, this territory was covered under A few words about personality conflicts, If you get banned and Before you get infinitely banned, read this also. I have no problem with changing the Beginner's Guide to have the above text, but just wanted it known that there is a tutorial on the site dealing with this sort of situation. --Hrodulf 00:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

RIGHT, I'm sorry. There are a number of throw away lines that I am trying really hard to not bitch about. But all in all you guys are mostly right. I'll be good now. And now that we've all got acquainted, how do you fancy my chances of being an admin? :D --Aaadddaaammm 05:49, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Heh heh. At the risk of sounding like an admin myself, which I'm not, probably less than 50-50, I'm afraid. Still, you might consider that we wouldn't all have dropped so much verbiage into this situation if we didn't think you were capable of coming up with funny material! So at least there's that... However, I've been meaning to point out your tendency to place periods outside of quotation marks when they should (nearly always) be inside them. On the other hand, who really cares, everybody else does it...  c • > •  07:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I'd say he has a slightly better chance than I do . . . --Hrodulf 07:01, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
In Soviet YTMND Wiki, you get infinite BANS!!

## Obligatory Vote (as no VD topic is complete without one)

Aaadddaaammm for the inaugural "Whining Little Pussy of the Month" award.

Score: 0