User talk:Avillia/Archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Comments on Your Userpage

I understand the views you express on your userpage; however, I would like to ask you to please stop attacking everyone and everything with which you disagree. Many of these problems could have been resolved if you had merely taken Martin's advice and removed the link, at least until you could reach a compromise. I'm sorry you're having some hard times at Wikipedia, but I think you just need to slow down and stop interpreting everything as a personal attack on you. AmiDaniel (Talk) 01:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Z0MG

I don't do RfCs. But even if I did, I wouldn't touch Wikipedia:Requests for comment/TawkerPathosEssjay with a bargepole.

Also, nothing is "super-secret". Especially when you code everything from scratch yourself, as I do.

Oh, and try not to get worked up about things. In particular, don't take it personally. If it's really a problem, find something else to do, within Wikipedia or otherwise – Gurch 21:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] image on your user page

I have removed the image on your userpage per WP:FAIR as fairuse images cannot be used outside of the article space and even then only in articles that they are directly relevant to. I'm no expert on the topic on the involved copyright issues please feel free to leave a note on my talk page and I'll try to answer as best I can. Pegasus1138Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 22:13, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] hey

Just dropping you a note to say "I'm with you." Just not in lawsuits against Wikimedia Foundation. That would hurt Wikipedia, not help it. I doubt it would do any good anyway. Wikipedia has a disclaimer about information, etc. Send me an email to thewolfstar@gmail.com and I'll write back to you. I also am concerned about Wikipedia'a credibility and future. Remember this is a powerful cabal not the true Wiki government..I think. Please leave comment Maggiethewolfstar 22:49, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] You're not emo any more

Well hooray for that! Nice to see things have cleared up. Have yourself a good time – Gurch 23:27, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Congrats! :-) --Wesman83 22:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Just so you know

Just so you know, your signature is missing a tag so it is messing up anything after it. Please fix it. 69.182.48.34 21:15, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. -- Tawker 00:34, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Indefinite Block

The reasons listed for my block:

I have indef-blocked Avillia (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) after a string of very serious incidents. I'm bringing it here for review: 3RR and edit-warring on Criticism of Wikipedia (edit|talk|links|history|watch). Reposting of private IRC logs onto Wikipedia. Hacking of AWB to remove safety features such as the CheckPage. This was subsequently used by vandals to make fast-paced vandalism. A similar thing was done with VandalProof, another piece of software that has a check feature. A FreeNode official has investigated and confirmed that Avillia has been using IRC DCC exploits that affect me and others on the #wikipedia channel.


In order:

First, the Criticism of Wikipedia article was reverted by Jaranda saying I did not have talk Consensus. I did. I apologize when she explained it politely on the talk page, and I said to restore parts she considered in contest, which she did.
Secondly, you bet I posted 'private IRC logs' onto Wikipedia. I still stand I was in the right on that, and I will not back down. The issue was resolved after a few days, and that was that.
Thirdly, I was fully within my right to modify AWB to remove the authentication. I later removed it by a polite request. FreeAWB has -not- been used to make fast-paced vandalism; I clearly identified FreeAWB as itself and linked my userpage in every edit summary. In either case, edits are the responsibility of the users who do them, not me.
Fourthly, if there is the 'holy partition' between IRC and Wikipedia, where one does not affect the other, why am I being blocked for this duration over a supposed hack attempt? I have reviewed the evidence and while I plan on disputing the change with numerous people after it being used as justification, IRC should NOT be used as justification for on-wiki actions.
Fifth, I would point out that I have had direct or indirect conflicts with every person in support of my removal on WP:ANI, with no exceptions. Cyde, Essjay, Benon, Pschemp, Tawker, all WP:CVU, half of which I have had direct issues with, the other half which have clearly shown bias, and Jaranda who was involved with the edit dispute. Additionally, Ral315 has kept a extremely sharp eye on Criticism of Wikipedia historically, and has now used this singular issue as grounds for full reprotection (not semi-protection).
Sixth, with the exception of one short duration block issued by User:NicholasTurnbull, I have not once been blocked in relation to any of these issues, and if there are grounds for a 3RR block, they do not equate to a indefinite block.

I'm requesting a unblock, if for nothing else, then to allow the dispute resolution process to handle this. There are numerous actions here which do not conform to policy, and numerous actions which I personally define as direct administrative abuse. If for nothing else, let process decide it.

  • Passerby non-sysop comment. To whatever admin comes across this request for unblock, I'm the author of VandalProof and was among the first involved in a dispute with Avillia. While I strongly disagreed with his actions at the time, I feel he has made ammends for the IRC logs, the FreeAWB incident, and his conflicts with me. For the record, he never succeded in removing authentication from VandalProof, and that was one of the reasons given for blocking him. I don't feel this user currently poses a threat to Wikipedia, and I find his indef block rather drastic (unless I've missed something). Had you asked me a couple of weeks ago, I would have said "Ban him!", but now he's apologized for his actions, taken down the IRC logs, taken down FreeAWB, and has actually begun helping me to improve VandalProof. I might also note that, at the time he began logging his IRC conversations, it had not yet been "officially" stated in policy that this was prohibited--as I understand it, that was first introduced into policy during Swatjester's RfA. There may be a need for a dispute resolution or an WP:RfC, but I think indef blocking is quite unnecessary. Anyway, that's my two cents on the matter. AmiDaniel (talk) 04:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Psst, Amidanny.

Get on IRC, I'm trolling around various Freenode channels. I'll message you once you join #wikipedia. --Avillia 05:16, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Execute: Message Repetition. --Avillia 21:07, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Execute: Message Repetition Repetition. --Avillia 23:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Execute: Message Repetition Repetition Repetition? – Gurch 09:02, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah! It's a trap! --Avillia 16:07, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] unblocked

I have unblocked you because after reading the case at WP:AN/I, I didn't think there was sufficient cause, and reading AmiDaniel's comment above convinced me that some of the things said about you may have been taken a bit out of context. -lethe talk + 13:32, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Lethe unblocked a logged action without notice, as of this time unblock request is denied -- Tawker 22:05, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Notice to an admin. This user's block is a matter of heavy dispute at the moment. Please see WP:AN/I. Removing, shortening, or lengthening the block without consensus to do so will likely be seen as wheel-warring. If you disagree with the user's block, believing either that it should be longer or shorter, please voice your opinion at WP:AN/I, but try to avoid modifying the block. Thanks. AmiDaniel (talk) 21:05, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To Tony Sideaway and my "glory in trolling".

I've talked about my comedial, sarcastic, gimmicky membership to the GNAA twice. Once to SushiGeek as a joke following a GNAA crapflooding attack, and once in #wikipedia after I was specifically asked by another participant.

As to the accusations of me being disruptive to Wikipedia suddenly; Here is my edit history. See how the only article I've edited in a week is Criticism of Wikipedia, and how I got consensus, waiting 24 hours to any objection?

I removed what was somewhat to blatant POV and I asked someone else to reincorporate the Britannica-Nature argument, as I was not familiar at all with that situation. She reverted it saying, and I quote, "discuss in talk page before making a large edit like that"...Which I did. I reverted it back, saying I did, and she reverted it once again. So, I reverted it again, she went to talk, she brought back the previous version and removed what was blatant POV. (A violation of 3RR on her part, as well). It was a misunderstanding, and that's it. I said I was sorry right there on the farking talk page.

So, what's left. Me 'disrupting' IRC, where there has been no proof to the contrary and it has been handily used as a excuse to try and indefinite block me? My creation of a software 'used for fast-paced vandalism' when no diffs have been provided? Reposting of private IRC logs over a month ago?

By the way, since I'm on a soapbox: Good job at the personal attack in the block summary, Cyde. Same to you, Essjay, with your bad rubbish comment.

One last note: I thought stacking consensus was wrong? Isn't it funny that 5 administrators managed to come across and support my block within less than a half hour? Isn't it even funnier how all of them are well known CVU members, and half of them have administrative access to all CVU channels?

2 is voice, 10 and up is ops, 49 is channel owner, 40 could be described as superops, and 20 is between.
-ChanServ- 49 Essjay
-ChanServ- 40 Pschemp
-ChanServ- 20 Tawker
-ChanServ- 10 Ral315
-ChanServ- 2 Cyde
-ChanServ- 2 benon

Enjoy. --Avillia 16:37, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

"See how the only article I've edited in a week is Criticism of Wikipedia." Quite. I'm just not seeing anything to justify an extension of good faith to a person who openly admits being one of the more poisonous trolls on the net, who doesn't deny charges, made by generally reasonable people, of frigging software to vandalize Wikipedia, who hides behind technicalities when his history of disruption of IRC is discussed, and who falsely accuses other editors of consensus-stacking. --Tony Sidaway
You are not supposed to see anything to justify a extension of good faith. You are supposed to see something to justify removing that extension.
I'll say it again: The GNAA is a joke. I've only told two people of my affiliation, one privately as a joke following a flooding attack, and one in #wikipedia when directly asked. I have not participated in GNAA actions on Wikipedia or on Freenode, nor do I want to. Membership to this group isn't hard; two membership requirements, one copy-pasting something as a first post, and the second being watching a parody movie and answering questions. I don't brag about it, I don't support many actions, and quite a few people in the GNAA aren't fond of me.
As for IRC: There is no definite proof that I have disrupted the operations of Freenode or #wikipedia. A Tor node was used with my ident, my lastname, my email, my version. Three of those you can change in dialogues in mIrc, one with a very well-known set of scripting commands. The timing seems a bit convenient, no? Anyway, if we can now block for IRC, let me know; I'll grep my logs, we could have half of #wikipedia blocked by morning!
Third: I have denied charges. Have you read this page?
Fourth: The software was made to vandalize Wikipedia just as much as VandalProof and AWB were made to vandalize Wikipedia. I have not told anyone to vandalize with it, and 'still there is no one citing a diff with the edit summary my variation uses, let alone a abusive one.
Fifth: False accusal? Two well known CVU members, three members of CVU staff. Only one, if any, is known to patrol AN:I. It is extremely unlikely that all of them happened to come across that in the course of patrolling, let alone in the space of a half hour, let alone all five supporting it, let alone without giving rationale considering none of them should have been familiar with every single thing I was accused of. Quick votes, without barely enough time to review the evidence (or lack thereof)... Either extremely irresponsible pull-first-and-ask-questions-later administrators, or they are all extremely familiar with my situation (gogo wikistalking), or they were 'instructed' (I use the term loosely for all the possible meanings) to vote that way.
--Avillia 00:44, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Meh

I thought you were banned from Freenode? – Gurch 18:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

FUD. I'm only autoremove from #wikipedia, a step I do not object to at this time. --Avillia 18:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I see. Well, that's OK then.
BTW, I tried to read through the discussion on your block, but it's very long and I fell asleep halfway through. Now I'm confused. How long are you blocked for exactly? – Gurch 18:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
One week, currently. I'm prepping up a RfAr, as this is pretty much destined to end up there between constant assumptions of bad WP:FAITH, Cyde and Essjay's violation of WP:NPA, the two attempts at indefinite blocking, continued harassment...
I'm still personally stuck on trying to figure out how disruptive I've been to Wikipedia when the only notable edit I've done in the article namespace this week was Criticism of Wikipedia with full consensus over 24 hours. --Avillia 19:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ranting and Raving and general Essayification

Since it appears my time at Wikipedia draws slowly to a close, endless harassment at every turn, constant and systematic dissemination of my life on the internets at every straightaway, double-standards and calvinball used to justify abuse and cronyism, and no one seeming to care much about showing good faith, or not being a dick, or for the policies which they were given their abilities to uphold and follow...

And since I'm here, sorrowful and lonely, but most of all anchored to my humble abode for a phone call related to why my editcount has dropped in recent times, what better time than to write a extremely long winded essay about Wikipedia, my experience, and the fundamental flaws thereof, while hopefully generating some naive tangent of empathy and guilt in those I target.

I wish I could be poetic enough in my sarbeonceo to describe things from the point of an outsider looking through a proverbial looking glass on a tiny world with tiny boys and girls, without any pedophillic overtones, something memorable and heartfelt... But if I could be, I'd be off writing award-winning novels and not giving a damn about some collaborative encyclopedia project on the internets.

So, anyway, rather than have a elequent prose and structure in suit with the fancy words I've been using, I'm just going to bound from random topic of interest to random observation until I get this talk page to 100kb and complain when someone comes by and archives it for me.

First, let's go about my damnation, the GNAA. Once apon a time, I joined it. There was a interesting point of view there, one which still exists, and one which could arguably be purer than many of those I've had the pleasure of experiencing here on Wikipedia. Yeah, you heard me. I've enjoyed a lot of the opinions of the members of the GNAA than Wikipedia, as one would expect a 'troll' and a 'vandal' to have after going through what I've gotten through. But, rather than string personal attack after personal attack to strike a self-inflicted finishing blow, I'll talk about the GNAA and my limited experience.

Amazingly, the members of the GNAA aren't as idiotic as you might expect. Just like Stephen Colbert or Jon Stewart, there is what could be argued as definite contempt for stereotypes, standards, and bureaucracy. You go to the average discussion forum with something like 9/11 Loose Change, and you'll probably be pawned off as a nerd who urgently needs to get a tinfoil hat big enough for his head. Try the same in the GNAA, and you'll get a good hour long conversation about it. I cite Loose Change because, interestingly enough, it's a true-to-form example. Someone mentioned it in the GNAA's IRC channel, and there was a long discussion, point to point with intelligent points and counterpoints. Take someone else, like David Blaine, and you'll get a sect of people amazed and a sect of people who call him a pathetic slum craving attention. Unique and generally thought out viewpoints.

When I joined the GNAA once apon a time, I didn't know much about Slashdot, or Wikipedia, or much else. What I saw was a community with a very sharp grasp of wit and sarcasm, something which I really found lacking in the world at that time. So, one first post later and one giant racial slur of a movie later, I was in and that was that. I learned more, and, you know, I wasn't happy. I'm not fond of crapflooding, I'm not fond of logicless copy-paste bullion into every thread, and by and large I didn't participate. (Nor have I at all in relation to Wikipedia, if you've been trying to look past the FUD and bias.) For a pretty long while, I fell out of it completely. Later, I crawled back up, got in. Did a few things to curry favor in things that didn't just matter, taken credit for it all when asked or accused.

And, maybe I'm just trying to see the world through rose glasses and perfumed air, but I guess I don't see the logic behind discriminating against someone based entirely on their affiliations rather than their actions. I mean, I wouldn't be complaining about it if I had crapflooded IRC channels or vandalbotted articles here on Wikipedia, or hell, even done much disruptional at all aside from random god-forsaken Slashdot first posts. But, you know, I am. I guess I just hope that people can be a bit more logical, or a bit more emotio... No, rather, a bit less biased and clouded by shams and slander.

Anyway, that's four good paragraphs right there. Now's a good a time as ever to commit while I write the next hunk of garbage.


You need to be careful about the company you keep. These past few days people have been using the DCC exploit against me on FreeNode. Well, I finally installed the fix, found out who it was, contacted a FreeNode official, and he dealt with it, confirming that the guy is in GNAA and has been banned in the past. I'm not saying you're doing this, but someone in the group you are affiliated with is. So you need to carefully pick the company you keep. --Cyde Weys 01:29, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, I need to. --Avillia 01:36, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Drini, stop vandalizing my userpage.

>:| --Avillia 05:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Unblocked

I have reviewed the circumstances surrounding your block, and I feel that indefinite was probably a bit too long. I don't know if you are still reading this page, but I have unblocked you to give you a second chance (I'm not sure if the autoblocker is active - drop me a note if it is). However, I will be keeping an eye on you to make sure you do not go back to the problematic editing that caused you to be blocked in the first place. Raul654 19:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I think I love you. --Avillia 03:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Regarding your comment to me on IRC (I wasn't at my computer at the time), I'm Ral315- you were looking for Raul654 :) Ral315 (talk) 06:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, you have to admit, they are very similar. --Avillia 16:10, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I've been telling Ral315 that he needs to put a disclaimer next to his name - "Are you sure you didn't want user:Raul654?" :) Raul654 18:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Your VandalProof Application

Dear Avillia,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact with the new 1.1 version release it has even more power. As such we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that you do not quite meet our 250 mainspace edit minimum, however I see you know Daniel quite well and he can review this for you, thanks. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again in the not too distant future. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof. - Glen TC (Stollery) 06:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] My comment

So are you saying that this should end now? CoolKatt number 99999 21:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Bacon

You reverted my question on the VandalProof page! Now I'll NEVER know what it is because of you! I can't believe you did this to me! Cut the fat off for a tastier product. DirtyDyke 20:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

But the fat is tasty. --Avillia (Avillia me!) 20:46, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A testing template whilst I prepare for my unblock

16:36 - Angels and Airwaves by 70.243.117.239 / V / R / C / F

16:56 - loltheinterbet by someguy / V / R / C / F

20:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Drink a Milkshake and Watch Television?

It's OK. I like your humor. However, I had to say something, as they will all start making lame jokes and getting of the subject, which is quite serious. Wallie 20:25, 20 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my userpage. Bucketsofg✐ 22:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Anytime! --Avillia (Avillia me!) 22:27, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copy editing

Feel like completely copy editing my additions to the gene therapy page? (non-viral vectors) skorpion 04:15, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, lemme finish up what's left of this list and I'll smash right on over. --Avillia (Avillia me!) 04:16, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll see what I can do to make it more understandable. skorpion 04:46, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Welcome to VandalProof!

Hi Avillia/Archive2, thank you for your interest in VandalProof and Congratulations! You are now one of our authorized users, so if you haven't already simply download VandalProof from our main page, install and you're ready to go!

You are also welcome to add {{User:UBX/VandalProof}} (will add a user box) or simply [[Category:Wikipedians using VandalProof|{{PAGENAME}}]] to your user page.

If you have any problems please feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page. Welcome to our team! - Glen TC (Stollery) 05:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for catching and correcting the blanking of my user page. Dsmdgold 19:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] National Security Archive/Archive 1

Please do not edit archived pages as you did in the archive above. Thanks. --Strothra 00:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

You might want to put Talk archives in the Talk namespace to avoid these things. --Avillia (Avillia me!) 00:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Or you could read the part of the tag which states not to edit the archive stating "Its contents should be preserved in their current form." Please be more concious of the edits you are making before you make them. --Strothra 22:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Jude's RfA

I have a hard time believing that you meant that as a serious vote. Assuming you did not, could you please indicate that it was meant as a joke? I don't think you are trolling, but I can see why people would think that.--Shanel § 01:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

He has a point. If anyone deserves a unanimous vote, it's Bookofjude. If you're going to vote in RfAs, give a valid reason, and don't pick on the person with the most support, it's a bit obvious – Gurch 12:57, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Avillia, your oppose is completely unjustified. It pisses me off. Didn't your mother ever tell you that if you don't have something nice to say (or perhaps some constructive criticism), don't say it? ~MDD4696 16:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Triple reverse psychology. The entire idea was to do it, and kill it off at the last minute, rather than have someone else do it and not be willing to nerf his own vote, because then it wouldn't be unanimous. Thus, I keep my reputation as a troll and assure victory. --Avillia (Avillia me!) 16:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Erm, ok, I guess? You certainly made it difficult for me to keep the expletives from spilling though. ~MDD4696 16:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Go on ahead, one gets used to it after a while. --Avillia (Avillia me!) 16:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
People getting pissed off about other people's votes at RfA and spewing platitudes like "if you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all" pisses me off. Let me give you a tip, Mdd. RfA isn't your mother's tea parlor, it's a place where peoples suitability for adminship is evaluated. Harsh things are said there as a necessity. Furthermore, everyone is allowed to voice an opinion, it's up to the closing bureaucrat to decide whether that opinion matters towards consensus. -lethe talk + 16:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Lethe, you are my kind of admin. However, the entire thing is a evil scheme to make me a troll, keep other trolls away, and otherwise be completely psychologically crazy. Let's not escalate it. Also, I like apple pie. --Avillia (Avillia me!) 16:56, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
I like apple pie as well. ~MDD4696 21:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Mmmmmm... pie – Gurch 18:13, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] I, Wikistalker

Heya. I saw your post on my user talk page, and thought I should reply there for the sake of organisation. My responses (one very brief, one more considered) can be found here. RandyWang (raves/rants) 09:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Your Contributions

The joke is getting old. Humor's great, but Wikipedia is a serious encyclopedia. It is time to straighten up and make serious contributions. FFBot 14:19, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

AmiDaniel (talk) 19:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] AmiDaniel's RfA

I reverted your support, because AmiDaniel hasn't formally accepted yet. As far as I know, only the nominator can support before it begins, because it's understood that the nominator supports. WerdnaTc@bCmLt 19:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Doh. Sorry. --Avillia (Avillia me!) 19:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Re:Thanks for the revert.

No problem. I've just blocked the IP, as your page wasn't the first target... Petros471 20:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Committed vs. Comited vs. Commmmmmitttttttted

It's the keys on my keyboard, see — they're out to get me, out to trip me up. Honest!

Thanks for the get. Cheers, --MILH 04:37, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Good grief!

Pansophia. WP:ANI done. This is tedious is it not. Midgley 20:46, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/v/i/User_talk%7EAvillia_Archive2_24f8.html"