User talk:Scarian

Archives
	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Scarian is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon.

Continuation of debate from Malleus's oppose brought to talk as it is no longer about candidate

Malleus, if I'm brutally honest, I've seen more mature behaviour from Jamie than yourself. I think I'd know who I would trust more with my car... Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 21:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What leads you to believe that I have even the slightest interest in your opinion? As you must know, I think you're a disgrace as an administrator. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:39, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At least I had the ability to become one. At least people trust and respect me. I would rather be a disgrace as an administrator than you. You have no sway over anyone's opinion on this Earth. You hold no respect or dignity. You are just this sad little man that goes around Wikipedia thinking he's big and hard just because he can type. Big fucking deal. You can't hurt anyone with your little insults, jibes, and quips. You're a fucking nutcase if you derive some sort of sick sadistic pleasure from insulting someone. Get the fuck off of Wikipedia. You don't give a fuck about this project and no one, I swear to God, no one would give a flying fuck if you left. Have some self-awareness and LOOK at yourself and how you portray your character on this website... Do you think you've ever been nice to someone? Do you know what altruism is? Every day I check my e-mails and write out explanations and answers to new users who have gotten stuck and needed help. Every day I answer questions on my talk page to people requiring administrative assistance. Every fucking day I come onto here and I do my best for this project. Every single action I do improves this encyclopaedia. And for what? So you can be a fucking prick to anyone you want? I'm actually sick of people like you. I'm sick of spending my free time building this encyclopaedia when LUCK PUSHERS like you can just go and say what you fucking like. You are not important enough to even waste time on. You are the bane of Wikipedia. That's not an opinion. That's a cold, hard fact. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 05:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why this discussion is being held in multiple places, as the exact same exchange also is on Malleus' page. And I came here to state what I stated on Malleus' page---to remind you of WP:CIVIL. Scarian, the above tirade is one of the worst demonstrations of maturity and responsibility that I have seen out of an admin in a long time. I am absolutely appalled by it and frankly, people would care if Malleus left. He is an ass, and I've told him that before, but he is an extremely useful and helpful ass. While his behavior is not the best, it is rarely (if ever) as crass as you demonstration above---he usually picks his barbs in a more sophisticated manner than you demonstrated. He is also very valuable when it comes to content building. No he won't pass an RfA, but that does not mean that he isn't respected and trusted for what he does bring to the table. As for people trusting and respecting you? After reading the above post? No the respect/trust just went out the window and I guarantee that if you ran for adminship today, you would find it as difficult to pass as Malleus would. That's not an opinion. That's a cold, hard fact.---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 13:54, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When you come back, please seriously consider giving up the admin tools. Admins, like it or not, are part of the public face of Wikipedia. Your tendency toward throwing tantrums brings the project into disrepute. This is not the first time you've flown completely off the handle. Friday (talk) 15:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask where Scarian has abused/misused the tools? I honestly don't see it, so evidence of that would be appreciated. Best, – Toon ^(talk) 15:10, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing comes to mind. But I explained my rationale. It reflects very poorly on the project to have admins running around throwing tantrums. I don't care whether the tantrum involved the pushing of a particular button or not. Friday (talk) 15:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But what good does an hour-long block do, when the editor in question has already declared a wikibreak? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:55, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone, please stop and think. When mud is slung around, it hits the candidate unintentionally (as it did the last time round). Let's keep this RfA drama-free. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 16:55, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, I hadn't thought about that... Jamie is two for two... she's run twice and now we've had two admins step down because of their defense of her age ;-)---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 16:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Grendleish

I understand your inclination to assume good faith, but please keep an eye on this. They also sent me an email, which ended with this delightful remark "Now I will insult you, you bull dog simpleton" and they went straight back to removing others talk page comments. Beeblebrox (talk) 07:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

For purposes of fairness I'm notifying you that I've brought up your recent attack on malleus at WP:ANI--WebHamster 14:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While Scarian's behavior here is deplorable, I went ahead and closed the ANI report. Several admins have already chastized him here, at Malleus's page, and at the RfA in question. His conduct here has not gone unnoticed. As an isolated event, the most that might occur would be a temporary block, as he is taking a wikibreak, we don't even have to worry about that. Thus, in an effort to avoid a pile-on dramafest. I shut the ANI report down---we'll see if it stays shut?---I'm Spartacus! ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 14:37, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for posting this here WebHamster. I just realized I'd forgotten and came to do it. That said, I'm glad Friday reopened it. I don't care what slaps he's gotten on his talk page and the other numerous pages he advertised this shameful mess to. لenna vecia 14:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked you for 1 hour for your comments here. See my comment here. In practical terms, this shouldn't matter much, given your break, but there seemed to be wide agreement that particularly egregious comments like this often warrant a block. The length is short in hopes of making the block uncontroversial. Friday (talk) 15:26, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this a rather punitive block? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't preventing anything, seeing as the user is on a Wikibreak. – Toon ^(talk) 15:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by me

If someone gets the chance could they please post this to ANI. Done Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 16:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot make excuses for the way that I delivered my retort to Malleus. I know that I have a temper and I find it difficult to restrain myself when editors make attacks on myself or others that I care about. While I do apologise for the use of profanities in the message, I still stand by the general sentiment of the statement. Malleus' history of uncivil and "un-nice" behaviour far outweighs my own (And I challenge you to find another single uncivil diff of mine in the 7 months since Luke The Spook baited me). This man insulted me. He insulted the one thing that I am proud of on Wikipedia. What did I do? I called him immature. I wasn't wrong in doing that. He called that RfA candidate immature, but I saw it as hypocritical. Wiki Libs, on ANI, said I was a good administrator and I am. Friday and Jenna laughed at that statement but I see it as wholly true. I always do my best for this encyclopaedia... I know that doesn't cancel out my occasional "tantrum", but still... Malleus cannot get away with insulting people all the time.
And, Jenna, in reply to: [to paraphrase] "the cross posting was [just] done to get as many people as possible to see it" - I have embarassed myself in an unforgivable manner and now you wish to assume bad faith with the way I copy/pasted it, too? Is there anything else you wish to pick on? My signature perhaps? 1) I replied on the RfA talk because that's where it was brought to 2) I brought it to Malleus' talk because that's where he'd see it first 3) And I pasted it to my own as it was, clearly, my reason for talking a break. Happy now? He's your friend, apparently, so it'd be a good idea to distance yourself a little from the drama... again.
Again, I do apologise for the way in which I swore and lost control and I know that just because it's been a long time since I last blew-up (and even then a sockfarm was uncovered) it doesn't excuse what I wrote.
If I hurt you Malleus, then I am sorry. I honestly didn't mean anything by it... It was just a "passionate moment". I did consider bringing your original attack to ANI but didn't see the good of it with my veins flowing with adrenaline.
Additionally, in future, next time you wish to insult someone, Malleus, could you bite your tongue? And/or your fingers. Whichever stops you from irritating other human beings. It's not about: "Why should I be stopped from giving my opinion?" - It's about the damage you do to others. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 16:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I take no more notice of your grudging apology than I do of your egregious attacks Scarian. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:30, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. That has to be the worst possible interpretation of an earnest apology that I have ever seen. I am sorry. I have forgiven you for attacking me, but I don't mind if you wish to ignore my apology. You are free to do as you please. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 16:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fravia Semi-block

Could you please unprotect the Fravia page. Enigmaman doesn't seem to care about discussing his massive defacing of the article, or any compromise regarding the editing conflict.

Thanks in advace, Zorbid (talk) 15:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The protection was made to protect the article from edit warring, friend. Its intent was to stir up some discussion between you and E-man so you could work out your disagreement. I would hope that you'll use this time to point your side of the argument to him without edit warring, and visa versa. If you're adamant about getting it unprotected, you're going to have to ask another administrator to do it. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 15:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've unprotected the page as edit warring should result in full protection, rather than semi: semi-protection gives the appearance of side-taking with autoconfirmed users. No prejudice to full protection if someone feels it's warranted. –xeno ^talk 17:03, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Sorry. My error. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 17:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and full prot'd, as was my original intention. Sorry again. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 17:36, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. cheers, –xeno ^talk 17:37, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the edit war was effectively over, since both Enigmaman and I are oldbies, hence able to edit a semi-protected page, and we didn't do it. Legitimate sources are starting to emerge.

Don't step down... 'cause if you do...

Then that just means all the d**ks, pr**ks and a****les win. Including the ones whose usernames don't start with J. (or C. ) The Real Libs-speak politely 17:58, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]