This Forum has been archived

Visit the new Forums

Forums: War Room → Removal of adminship and rollback

This discussion is closed. The result of this discussion was:
No action will be taken.
Please do not edit this discussion.

In light of recent and previous events have lead to one unfortunate decision for me to make—some of our administrators and rollback users are behaving inappropriately and intolerantly towards other users. IRC has become a place where, instead of chatting friendly with the community, users abuse their influence, rights, and privileges—whether those are related to their user rights status or just their activity and relationship with the rest of the community. The behavior displayed by the users listed below is enough to render a possible removal of their user right privileges.

Contents 1 Proposal 2 Removal of rights 2.1 Administrators 2.1.1 Lady Lostris 2.1.2 Thailog 2.1.3 wjxhuang (The 888th Avatar) 2.2 Rollback users 2.2.1 Blue Dagger 2.2.2 KataraFanboy 2.2.3 KettleMeetPot 2.2.4 RandomRanaun 3 Before you discuss 3.1 Apologized 4 Discussion 4.1 Please read 5 Voting 5.1 Administrators 5.1.1 Lady Lostris 5.1.1.1 Support 5.1.1.2 Neutral 5.1.1.3 Oppose 5.1.2 Thailog 5.1.2.1 Support 5.1.2.2 Neutral 5.1.2.3 Oppose 5.1.3 wjxhuang (The 888th Avatar) 5.1.3.1 Support 5.1.3.2 Neutral 5.1.3.3 Oppose 5.2 Rollbacks 5.2.1 Blue Dagger 5.2.1.1 Support 5.2.1.2 Neutral 5.2.1.3 Oppose 5.2.2 KataraFanboy 5.2.2.1 Support 5.2.2.2 Neutral 5.2.2.3 Oppose 5.2.3 KettleMeetPot 5.2.3.1 Support 5.2.3.2 Neutral 5.2.3.3 Oppose 5.2.4 RandomRanaun 5.2.4.1 Support 5.2.4.2 Neutral 5.2.4.3 Oppose

Proposal

The following list explains how the proposals will go:

• Apology — all users that whose rights have been proposed to be removed will have the chance to apologize to all users they have offended in the evidence provided. If they decide to do so, they will be removed from the list of users that are candidates for losing their extra user rights. All evidence concerning them and only them will be removed. If any piece of evidence is used against a different user, their lines will stay for the sake of understandable context. A list of users that have apologized to all those they have insulted will be provided below.
• Resignation — any user who decides they do not want to apologize is welcome to resign. Please note that by resigning, all of your user rights are to be removed. Thus, administrators will lose both their sysop and rollback rights. Bureaucrats will lose their bureaucrat, sysop, and rollback rights. A list of users that have resigned will be provided below.
• Voting — all users who do not apologize or resign will have their rights’ fate decided by the community. If the community deems they be removed, so will be done.
• Staff — any user who is unfairly pardoned by the community — has obviously broken (an) Avatar Wiki and/or Wikia-wide policy(ies) — will be reported to Wikia Staff.

Removal of rights

Before I continue, I wanted to make sure everyone is aware of a few things: First off, I know the following is probably going to pop-up in the list for excuses in the discussion: I know that I have made a couple of mistakes myself. However, I have apologized for them; in fact, just to ensure everyone believes me: I apologize for any wrongdoing that I have done to you or to this community. If you believe you deserve a personal and longer apology, you are free to say so on my wall. Just title your message “Apology” and as your content include what I did wrong. Thank you!

Administrators

Lady Lostris

Offended the following people: There is evidence that Lady Lostris has offended the following people:

• MateyY
• Lemongrab

You can view all evidence provided here and here.

Thailog

The following administrator has been a candidate for user rights removal once before. Some of the evidence provided is the same as the one provided earlier. I urge you, however, after reading the new evidence to see the actions in a new light, and not just as a joke, as that is not what they are.

Offended the following people:

• Omar067
• MateyY

The following evidence is provided:

• Thailog supposedly “joking around” (please consider further evidence)
• Thailog talking about Omar067 in a disrespectful manner
• More of Thailog being disrespectful
• Thailog being disrespectful and mocking Christianity (obviously against Policy)

wjxhuang (The 888th Avatar)

Although not as mocking as his fellow administrators proposed for removal of rights, 888 has displayed quite some disrespect, and strictly refused to apologize to me, even after I had apologized to him.

Offended the following people:

• MateyY

Evidence provided:

• 888 logging on IRC just to mock MateyY and his code, as well as lie about his code having the same amount of options.
• Mocking Omar067 for not being able to use his nick
• Mocking Suzon after Suzon had a bad day

Rollback users

Blue Dagger

Offended the following people: Omar067

Evidence provided:

• Mocking Omar067 for not being able to use his nick
• Yelling offensive things about Omar067

KataraFanboy

First of all, I want to apologize to KFB for having to do this, but it is out of principle and overwhelming evidence. He already apologized to me, so please disregard that when looking at the evidence.

Offended the following people:

• Omar067
• BlackMonkey
• Lemongrad

Evidence provided:

• Talking against BlackMonkey
• Swearing at Omar067
• Talk against Lemongrad

KettleMeetPot

Offended the following people:

• BlackMonkey
• Omar067

Evidence provided:

• Mocking BlackMonkey
• Mocking Omar067 (briefly)

RandomRanaun

Offended the following people:

• Omar067
• Lemongrab
• MateyY (briefly)

Evidence provided:

• Laughing at Omar067 for his inability to use his nick
• Talking against Lemongrab
• Briefly laughing at MateyY

Before you discuss

Before you start discussing, I want to note a few things. First of all, we all need to understand that another user’s behavior isn’t an excuse for breaking policy. In other words, please do not say that someone is not responsible because another user is annoying. A user is truly not responsible for doing something when that user pushes them to a point where they have to truly protect themselves.

Another thing I want to ask of everyone is vote fairly. If a user has truly broken policy, please be responsible with your vote — do not vote against just because you believe that that person is just a good user or is your friend. Vote like it was done when The Bos had his rights removed.

Below I will list the users that have resigned or apologized.

Apologized

• KataraFanboy — Thank you!

Discussion

Your opinion, thoughts, etc. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  23:36, July 30, 2012 (UTC)

I gladly take option number three. I have nothing to apologize for to no one, neither did I display any behavior that warrants my rights to be taken away. My rights were given to me by the community, and if they so please to, they can be taken away from me by them and I will be happy to oblige then. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 23:47, July 30, 2012 (UTC)

I would just like to point out that, from what I saw on that screenshot (which isn't much since I got fed up with the off-the-side-of-the-page action going on), most of it was just pointing out faults in your and Lemongrab's logic who, I might add, were being extremely stubborn. And yes, a user who has been provoked is not entirely responsible for what happened; it takes two to tango, and someone has to lead. You and LG were the leaders, they were following. After a certain point, someone does get to a boiling point. That said, I do feel that some of what was said there was terrible, and some repurcussions must follow. I don't really know where to stand on this, but honestly -and this was said before in Thailog's demotion forum- the good all those people, with the exception of maybe two ore three, have done for this wiki outweighs this incident, which, as of yet, is singular. I'm not taking a stance.

Also, I'd like to point out that in each of these, you are always the victim, Matey. Just something to think about. Azulazulazula 23:50, July 30, 2012 (UTC)

To Azulazulazula, obstinance of two users does not warrant a beratement from some of the most influential members on this wiki. A user provoked is responsible for the actions since no one else forced them to make the decision they made and they were chosen for their positions because of maturity and responsibility(two qualities some of the accused obviously lack). Penultimately, past performance should not excuse a malicious inident such as this; think about it, is a murderer who has always paid his or her taxes and has never had a confrontation with any law upholding authority any less guilty? Lastly, I do not think that the majority of the accused deserve to be punished because a lot of the accusations are taken to an extreme, so I will hear what all parties have to say before I take a position. WEFAang (wall • contribs) 00:14, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Did you actually read any of these? Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  23:51, July 30, 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that, even though I'm the "victim" in one, unbiasedly, I think this is not admin behavior, just my two Yuan. --Suzon | Talk ^co Fanon 23:55, July 30, 2012 (UTC)

I have presented the three users outlined with apologies. I have said many a thing on IRC, and well...yes, I regret saying every word I did. If the community so sees it fit, I will resign my position as a rollback, and also step down from additional positions in maintaining wiki quality. I am deeply sorry for bringing shame upon this place...with all that has happened to me in the last 4-5 months; I have said things that ought not have been said. So once again, to the wiki, and especially to everyone I have wronged - I am truly sorry, and I will step down from any position as the community so sees fit. Katara and Bolin Fanboy Send me a messenger hawk 23:56, July 30, 2012 (UTC)

I have a lot of respect for the users mentioned and believe they are doing a good job with the extra tools the community bestowed upon them. Nevertheless, I will review through everything you have presented - long as it might take me. You can expect a comprehensive response when I'm done. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 00:00, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Matey, I think that in the heat of the moment you want to take this sort of action. I know that what happened may not be your best time on the wiki, but I don't support the removal of any of these administrator rights or rollback. Matey, the entire point of them is to keep the wiki a happy and full quality place. I hope you understand that what happened was not a personal attack; it was to help you help the community. I think you are awesome, and everyone respects you. I have a respect for you. Don't loose all of that in haste and anger.Iceland77 00:05, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Ice, it wasn't just him, these admins and rollbacks did not behave following policy... --Suzon | Talk ^co Fanon 00:09, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

It's not about anger–I'm not angry–it's about principles. If a user will keep talking about following policy, equality, and a good community, they won't talk about people behind their back. It's about following Policy. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  00:11, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Alright. I'm going to sound cheesy when I say: We have all broken some law or rule. You may not want to admit it, but everyone has. I think that if you simply acknowledge the things admins have to do everyday, I think they would get frustrated. I'm saying this not as an offense to you, but in general. They really don't get the thanks they deserve, yet when they do something they shouldn't have it's like the sky is falling. Just give them a little credit, and think about the good they have done rather then the bad.Iceland77 00:14, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Talking behind someone's back is no incident. Plus they can always apologize. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  00:17, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

I agree, it was something they should not have done. But think about what you are asking: removal of adminship? I don't know how the community could be much better by doing so. An apple will still be an apple. Nothing will have changed, except that everything they have done would have been worth nothing. We would just have fewer people with the tools to better this place. They really should apologize. But, and dont take this the wrong way, I believe you owe them an apology as well.Iceland77 00:20, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Per Lady, I'll gladly take option number three as well. This is a new low for those involved: hanging on IRC to horde supposedly incriminatory conversations to enact personal vendettas. The alleged "evidence" is so ridiculously flimsy that it's laughable. As for mine, I don't see any mocking of Christianity and even if I did, there's nothing on Avatar Wiki:IRC that prohibits one from chastising religion or politics. All the other "evidence" were already brought up before. This is just a few disgruntled users wanting to get back at another. This has nothing to do with "policy". ― Thailog 00:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Everyone needs to apologize to someone. Although there were definetly users who were more rude than others. PSU already apologized and I admire his maturity for doing so. I just hope everyone else apologizes so that no further action needs to be taken. Lemon☆Star 00:26, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

I think that perhaps an apology is in order, but I think the admins and rollbackers are responsible enough to apologise without being made to, and also that they are the ones that need to judge if an apology is in order. To let the community decide whether they should be stripped of their title is a very bad idea, because I suspect that many of them will vote for the admins to be stripped of their title merely to take out personal vengeance. I've heard many people who unfairly say the admins are irresponsible, just because they reversed some edit the user made. If these people were allowed to vote on the removal of the admin and rollback rights of users, we wouldn't have any left. Don't get me wrong, Matey, I can see where your coming from, but I think the ideas on this forum is the wrong way to go about it. FooFoo (wall • contribs • blog) 00:40, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Alright, first of all, where Beedee said, "SOMEONE SCREENSHOT THIS MOTHERF*CKERS!", etc., that was him being sarcastic. He was upset about BM screenshotting the convos and "tattling" on KFB and only said that to prove his point; that's out of context, which is completely not right. Second, yes, Omar, KMP, and wjx in that cconversation were totally wrong, and saying that wwas completely un-administrator-like. Third, wjx's comment about Suzon's love life was TOTALLY uncalled for, and for that, there have to be repurcussions. I'll review more and elaborate later. Fourth, Random's saying that Lemon is annoying was also uncalled foor, but not yet enough to remove his rights. 888's making fun of Matey's coding was also rude and not needed. All users pushing Omar around were not right, and so far I've only read till Beedee comes in. But 888's been mentioned 4 times now. A bit ridiculous if you ask me. Beedee calling Omar a "fucking idiot" is inexcusable, as is what followed, and honestly, those who didn't kick him for that are equally as responsible. This was completely ridiculous.

Alright, here's the deal. I don't think RR, KMP, or Lostris did enough to deserve any kind of demotion. However, Thailog, Beedee, wjxhuang, and KFB did some pretty inexcusable stuff there, apology or no apology. I support their demotion with sadness, as I do like and respect them all. But behavior like this cannot be associated with our wiki. So, I'll go through one by one why I want them demoted.

Thailog: I supported your previous demotion for the same reason I do this time. See the arguments in favor of said demotion here.

Beedee: Dude, I'm sorry, but I think we both know that was way outta line. Temper's important, and...I'm sorry, but that was just totally uncalled for.

wjxhuang: I respect you the most out of the people I'm voting to demote, but you're pretty much the top dog here, and saying things like that is just inexcusable. I'm sorry, but this is needed. Please note I still think you're a great guy; the behavior there is just wrong, though.

KFB: Well, you apologzied, yes, but you've been hiding behind the "I've had a bad year" excuse way too long. SHould we expect this type of thing every time you've had a bad day? I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound condescending, but this just isn't aceptable. Azulazulazula 00:41, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Just for everyone to see what Avatar Wiki's administrators Thailog and Lostris had to say about apologizing:

[19:23] <Lostris> Informed you of what? What is it that I have done that you so desperately need an apology for? 
[19:26] <Thailog> You won't see any apology from me.
[19:30] <Omar067> Listen all I want is my apology.
[19:31] <@I_made_the_forum> I don't think you-any of you-understand what it is we want: we want a simple apology.
[19:32] <Thailog> If you think you can coerce an apology out of me by threatening my rights, you certainly don't know me....
[19:32] <Lostris> I don't think you-any of you-understand what it is we want: we want a *reason* for what we need to give a  simple apology for.
[19:33] <Lostris> But again, I asked you to copy/paste a clear reason as to why you need an apology from me -still waiting.

Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  00:44, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Never in my three, nearly four years on this wiki have I seen unjustified action on such a scale. Let's take a critical look at the three pieces of "evidence" presented against myself, for instance.

• On the first link, talking behind someone's back i.e. gossip, while not the path of highest honour, is something that happens every day. As humans, we do have such irrational and emotional responses. While I regret that it occurred, it is not in any way a policy violation or indeed an offence in any jurisdiction.
• On the second link, we've been through this fight. If you expect a human such as myself to have no response whatsoever to the months of destabilisation and attacks, then there is no human fit to be an administrator. Mine happens to be sarcasm.
• On the third link, there is no possible construction of my remark that would suggest that I actually intended any malice to Suzon. That would only be possible if I had a studied pattern of dislike for him. For the record, that is not the case.

Essentially, my message is this. In my three and a half years as an admin on this wiki, what users can find in support of my removal are three isolated remarks. While two possibly constituted incivility, which is something that we on IRC all do from time to time, none constituted a direct personal attack, and none show that there is studied pattern of ignoring policy. The proposal against me wouldn't stand up in court, and what wouldn't stand up there should not here.

While I have said that I do not feel obligated to apologise, and I stand by that position, I am not saying that I was fully justified in making those remarks. I do regret that they were made and that this massive disruption to the wiki occurred. However, none of the users listed should feel obligated to apologise, because the relative magnitude of the "offence" does not add up with the magnitude of the action proposed. What I am asking for is a consideration that this proposal is really the classic case of getting a sledgehammer to kill a fly. The 888th Avatar (talk) 00:46, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I'm going to state my position on the whole thing now.

I don't think that either the Admins nor the rollbacks should have their rights taken away for what they said. They did indeed say things that could be considered offensive, though it was not actually harassment. If you look at it, there is no serious reports of a user continuously saying rude and clearly intentionally offensive things to another user. Or at least nobody intentionally attempted to harm other users. Which, is against our policy and *I believe* is what the users are being held accountable for, correct?

Look closely at the evidence, it is made obvious that in most of the stated cases the admins were not aware or knew that none of the victims of the talk were there. In other cases, there is teasing and relatively well-meaning mockery. None of theses sorts of behavior are at all similar to harassment, which is intentionally harming other users.

The form of behavior that this mostly seems to follow is the first type of such behavior, which largely resembles gossiping, or talking about others behind their backs. Now, I am sure almost everyone is familiar with this and has said at least one rude thing behind someone else's back before, correct? Now, many of these such users were doing that very same thing, which is perfectly normal. Now, because this is the internet obviously someone caught these members saying such things, and gave them to someone else because, on the internet, things tend to come and bite you back in the butt. And, this is probably the best of it. In query I myself have said ruder things about other users before, and I know that many frequent IRC users have said such things too, but because it was query nobody really kept track. So why should these users be punished for what they did publicly when its something we often do?

Now, that I've stated my opinion, I leave everyone else free to continue their debating. Truly Ferret 00:49, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

@Everyone: So here is 888, saying that he does not regret making offensive remarks, but regrets that there are consequences. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  00:50, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Matey, that's nothing different from what I said here. We can speak for ourselves. ― Thailog 00:52, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

@ATFF: I wasn't there the first time that happened to me. If I hadn't revealed myself today, I was probably going to be made look like a circus animal all because of my good intentions. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  00:54, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

@Thailog: I understand; I think we've seen enough evidence. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  00:56, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Matey, I think it's interesting that you are now trying to lynch me for incivility when your last remark is a considerable twisting of my words. Don't attribute inferences to me that I didn't make. I regret that this wiki has had to put up with this drama, and had I considered the magnitude of it, I would not have said anything. The 888th Avatar (talk) 00:58, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

888, stop making excuses. Just be a man and admit your mistake. I'm not saying I'm perfect because I make mistakes to. Besides, how have you taken the magnitude of the "drama"? Lemon☆Star 01:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

@888: I think I might have partially misread. My apologies. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:09, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

AAA, I find it hurtful that you feel that I should be judged on a different level to everyone else because I'm some "top dog". I have never given myself that kind of title, express or implied. I would like to think that I am judged based on my contributions to this wiki compared to the isolated incidents of incivility involving me, and not by some title I wholly reject.

Lemongrab: I did admit my mistake, and I regret it. What I refuse to do is to make the kind of unreserved apology that is sought after by people trying to lynch me. I don't feel my actions suggest the kind of treatment I am now being given. The 888th Avatar (talk) 01:14, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

So you are saying you don't deserve consequences? Because from what I understand is that you're implying for us not to be "tougher" on you just because you are an administrator or a user that is looked up to. Well, that can't really be fair, because if people are to look up to you, you need to be a good example. Please tell me if I misunderstood. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:19, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Then you misunderstand the direction of my comment. In no way do I imply that I am somehow above policy. What I am trying to say is that removing rights which I have exercised for so many years (and based on my record also became an admin on Central and a Wikia volunteer) is a very drastic action to take for two, three isolated remarks. I did fail to set the high standards that I expect from myself in these instances, but the consequences are far above the indiscretions. The 888th Avatar (talk) 01:23, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Per MateyY's vote, and conversation on IRC, it's clear that this is all about coercing an apology from us by holding our rights at gunpoint. This is not about justice; just petty revenge. ― Thailog 01:30, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Let me quote my previous edit:

"Thailog, I don't think you have a) been reading carefully or b) been trying to read carefully. There is good evidence and reasons for quite a few people to be demoted. PSUAvatar14, however, was brave enough to apologize. Just because you refuse to do so yourself doesn't mean that everyone is responsible for actions you committed. All you're doing right now is making up stories of why we want to demote people without actually looking into our reasoning. All you have to do is swallow your pride and apologize to a user. An administrator that isn't honorable enough to do that and keep his reputation in tact should not be an administrator on Avatar Wiki."

To summarize it, I'm asking you to be brave (be a man, or whatever you want to call it), swallow that pride, and apologize. That's the only way you or anyone else down there–PSUAvatar14 is the proof of that–will get an "oppose" vote for me. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  02:02, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Matey, I just have one question for you. What do you plan on accomplishing by having their rites removed?Iceland77 02:05, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Do I believe in users speaking ill of others (not pointing fingers at any one person, when I say this)? Of course not; I am all for respect and orderly conduct; however, these users whose rights you have suggested be removed are dedicated members of the community who help maintain and protect the site. We all have our flaws and incidents once in a while, but seeing the integrity of these users, I do not believe those incidents justify the removal of their rights. The Ultimate Waterbender 02:15, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

I'm starting to think every user on this site except for a select few greatly disliked The Bos and just wanted him gone. What rendered his removal was a joke compared to what most of these users did. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  02:41, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

If you are completely serious about the removal of user rights for certain admins and rollback users, may I suggest that the wiki form a council of admins/rollbacks/users. I'm on a Honor Code council at my school and we hear cases of misconduct and cheating, and we then decide what that particular student's punishment would be. By having a council/group review a users misconduct/abuse of rights, it would be more fair to everyone. Honestly I believe that we shouldn't just vote right here on weather the current users in question should have their rights be removed but rather determine if we need to take a new course of action like form a group to review cases like this. But in all truth, I think we should leave the system untouched for now. If anyone else has any ideas, I'm all ears. Sokka jr • Wall • Blogs 02:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

All this said - we have all had our fair share of slip-ups and wrong things said. However, all other users who are subject to this rights removal have done qualities of work that can't be thanked enough. In this case, the good is outweighing the bad, and there is no reason for them to lose their rights whatsoever. Katara and Bolin Fanboy Send me a messenger hawk 02:56, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to add MateyY for offending me with this nonsense. Seriously; is everyone able to get so hurt that they want to throw down other users for "being rude"? We're human, it happens. As if either side is ever 100% innocent. Come on.

And even to have the gall to say "if the community decides to keep said users" they will be reported to staff? Hooray for the idea of accepting community decisions. Seriously; get a grip, because this is excessive whining. Vulmen (talk • EoK) 03:05, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

First of all, you changed my words. What I sai was that if a user is pardoned unfairly, they will be reported. We will play by the same rules you played when The Bos was removed. No buts; he broke policy, and there need be consequences. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  03:22, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

I wonder what's gonna bring in this, more problems, just leave them. Apologize or not, they are the admins, they know alot of knowledge, but I will support, if they are really that way. For now, leave this, I oppose for now until time. If you continue, you will cause problems to the wiki and more. Just stop. Sshalwani (wall • contribs) 04:03, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Alright, I’ve had time to look things thoroughly through. I’m afraid that I have not come to the conclusion you might’ve hoped. You admit that your own actions have been flawed, but that you “apologized.” An apology is not magic. It’s often a good step in certain situations, but it does not completely wave away wrongdoing as though it never happened – especially if you want to call someone else out for something similar.

You claim that the actions below warrant some demotions, but removal of user rights is not an ambiguous exercise. We have set policies for this regarding admins: they cannot claim extra authority over the wiki – except regarding conduct of users and performing their duties, they cannot censor other users and they cannot abuse their rights for selfish purposes. This last one was the case with Bos, as he used his deletion tool to cover up his gaining of dishonest badges. None of the evidence you provided, however, seemed directly related to any of those. Also, note that IRC is generally less formal and controlled to the wiki itself. I don’t think that IRC has changed drastically. Incidents like these happened a year ago, though no one called attention to them like you’re doing here. Another one of our principles is “assume good faith” – and it’s good to keep that in mind anytime it’s ambiguous whether someone is being cruel or joking.

• Lady Lostris: you called her out below for talking behind your back, but when you were on IRC, she made perfectly clear that she was open about saying such things to your face. I was there. You’re leaving out a key part of the story. Plus, for much of it she was speaking in context of a heated debate she was engaged in with you and Lemongrab, so that has to be taken into account regarding the intensity of it.
• Thailog: the first piece of evidence was laughable. A lot of his statements about Omar were just what was happening at the time. Given the context of what was going on, I think it’s understandable if he wasn’t perfectly polite. It looks like he was talking about Omar’s apology in the BSST, and he didn’t think it was honest. It turned out that there was substantial reason to dispute that, but that’s another story.
• The 888th Avatar: I almost skipped over him when you said there was less evidence for him than Lady and Thailog, but I said I would look through all, so I did. So he criticized a piece of coding and indicated how he might optimize it: nothing wrong with that. And back to that memorable incident with a certain user. I recall 888 as being fairly patient throughout that incident, so if he makes one little remark on IRC later on about it, I won’t hold it against him. The last one was possibly uncalled for, but by itself it’s not adminship-removal material.

Now onto the rollback users. Just like with admins, we have defined policies for rollbacks. They’re similar in nature, but a little different. If a rollback user is abusive, the first step is always to approach them with a friendly message before resorting to rights removal. I did not see any evidence that you or anyone else had left a friendly message to any of them. So, the fair thing to do here would be to disregard all the evidence you gave against the four of them without any consideration. Nevertheless, I gave your scraps regarding them a look, anyway.

• I saw BlueDagger joking around about recent events on the wiki, and stating that Omar had trolled, vandalized and should be blocked. No disrespect to Omar, but this seems like a simple true statement for the time: he did troll, he had vandalized and he was blocked. I’m not saying anything bad about Omar. I’m just saying that this was true at the time. Omar’s block has since ended and hopefully we can all move on from that, among other things.
• KFB apologized and whatever issue seems resolved. No further explanation needed.
• The second piece of evidence is unclear based on what I saw, so can’t really elaborate much on that. The first piece looks like he’s telling a simple joke – and the “evidence” is a joke as well. Sorry.
• Random Ranaun talking to Omar in a similar context as 888 above. One statement supposedly behind the back but with unclear context. And another statement behind the back – can possibly give you that one, but by itself it’s not nearly enough to warrant rollback removal.

So, in the end, I found two pieces of your case worth noting – one for RR and one for 888. Also, RR later apologized. To clarify, that’s not two cases of necessary removal or even violating policy. It’s simply two incidents which might possibly have been out of line, but we can’t seriously hold it against them. At the end of the day, we’re all human. I have no less respect for them now than before. More importantly, these “incidents” had little-to-no connection to our laid-out policies on dealing with user rights issues.

Now, assume good faith only goes so far, and it doesn’t entail giving out blind benefit of the doubt in all situations. Honestly, even though you claim that this is about user behavior and policy and not about revenge, this seems to me like it is clearly petty revenge and nothing else. You talked about conduct and policies, but you didn’t show knowledge of our actual removal of rights policies. Understanding policy is also one of the criteria for gaining rollback, I might add. The Bos’s removal forum was about when he specifically used his admin rights to do wrong – and it was agreed to be unfortunate but necessary. Any forum like this is no casual matter, and you should’ve given it a lot more thought before posting this.

Regarding your four options, I strongly suggest that you delete #4 immediately. Wikia Staff doesn’t like to get involved most of the time, and they certainly won’t get involved in this. They’ve turned down requests to get involved against far worse actions than any on here. Most likely they will either be annoyed at you or laugh at you when you send them the request. This will make Avatar Wiki itself look bad, and by extension, the community and all its members. I know that there’s good reason not to assume good faith right now, but I’d like to believe that you have the wiki’s best interest at heart. So please, delete the part about Wikia Staff. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 04:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

From what I have seen here, people who are highly respected in the community are immune to any kind of consequence for their actions unless, the action performed is obvious. Above are many examples of admins and rollbacks acting like trolls, plus them talking about others in a disrespectful way, and if I was to perform what they have did in the evidence, I would've been blocked swiftly. In all of the votes that oppose the forum, people are basically saying,"It is completely justified for them to attack Omar even though he was already punished. Let's just attack him some more because we hate him."

That's what I got out of all those votes, because it's exactly the truth. This is what makes me angry. Even when the admins are wrong they are right and anyone who doesn't share their opinions, or try to report an admin for a wrong action, are looked on by the community as trolls.

"I'd like to add MateyY for offending me with this nonsense. Seriously; is everyone able to get so hurt that they want to throw down other users for "being rude"? We're human, it happens. As if either side is ever 100% innocent. Come on.

And even to have the gall to say "if the community decides to keep said users" they will be reported to staff? Hooray for the idea of accepting community decisions. Seriously; get a grip, because this is excessive whining."- Vulmen

You say both sides are not 100 percent innocent, so why the heck does one side get of free without any consequence? I think I'll use a comment that was in one of the oppose votes to answer that question.

"I think that perhaps an apology is in order, but I think the admins and rollbackers are responsible enough to apologise without being made to, and also that they are the ones that need to judge if an apology is in order."

That sums up everything.

This not a revenge forum. This forum is about admins not acting like admins, but that is okay. They have done too much to be demoted.--Omar067 (wall • contribs) 05:12, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Here, you know what Omar, we both really don't like each other at all. I'll offer up my rollback status to revocation because I've had the gall to state my opinion regarding someone else on here before so that means I should go to the chopping block as well. Obviously no matter what someone says, intentional, or unintentional, if someone finds it offensive then off with that person's head right? So go ahead, get someone to remove my rollback status as well, because I've also said some things to people before that weren't kissing their toes or masking my true opinions. Because that's what you're getting at isn't it? Someone says something to someone that just happens to be a little displeasing to that person so they think "Gee wiz I think this guy/gal's a real jerk. He/she should be crucified for this petty offense". This whole thing is ridiculous. SifuHotman90

@Omar: Do you really believe that? Do you really believe that the Internet is an all serious place where people who say anything mean it 100% sincerely, and that there is no true distinction in what we do in the IRC and what true "trolls" have done on the wiki proper? Not only that, but some of what was said regards something that went on months ago, long before even I joined - and that is telling a lot about some people, and their inability to let go of old grudges and to bring up drama whenever possible.

And when has this become about "sides", hmm, and why should it not be that the reason people are not supporting this is more about the flimsy "evidence" put forward? Evidence that cherrypicks nothing more than a few conversations out of the thousands that have been on the IRC, even up to a few months ago. Oh, and about that "revenge forum" thing, I hate to say it, but this looks more and more like a meticulous tabulation of every and any dirt that could be found, regardless of context or intention - and it seems that even best efforts bring up nothing more an average of two "points" apiece. Am I missing something, because there seem to be gaps in not only your own logic, but those of a few others as well. KettleMeetPot (wall • contribs) 05:32, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

I didn't say this was about sides, Vulmen did and I responded to the comment. The gap in your logic is that you think nothing should happen to the people who are in the evidence, even though they did things that a person like me would be blocked for. That's my whole problem.--Omar067 (wall • contribs) 05:56, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

No matter who said it first, you incorporated into your argument, and that argument was that "one side get[s] of[f] free without any consequence" - as if it has nothing to do with the ridiculousness of the "evidence". Didn't you expect this as a response, then, not only with such condemning proof but also from past "experience", hmm? Why bring it up at all then?

And if you seriously think that this evidence constitutes as a removal of rights, with it being soooo "offensive" and all, and some from months before this proposal, then perhaps you should have your priorities checked. And btw, your entire "point" on 'even though they did things that a person like me would be blocked for' is absolutely moot... In fact, it has nothing to do with this forum, which was objectively supposed to be judging these people with user rights against their supposed "wrongdoings". Why do you care so much about people with rights getting blocked anyhow, based on nothing but that opinion?

You're beating what remains of a dead horse, Omar. If you want to bring up the supposed "inequalities" of the wiki, do so somewhere else - preferably somewhere where it is both relevant and true, thank you. KettleMeetPot (wall • contribs) 06:23, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Matey, you seem to be ignoring one thing: You are tearing this community apart right now. never before has anyone seen this side on me on the wiki. But have you really come to the point where you want them as regular users? Does that change anything?? no. They could still do ten times worse, but they would just be warned a couple of times then blocked. I think you just feel bad because they were mean to you specifically. And if you just tell them that, without starting all of this....drama, then not only will you have mad your point across,but everyone would be happy here. This isn't fair. You are only seeing the ad right now, but you need to see the good everyone has done. If you cannot see it then, what makes you any better then them, in light of the situation(no pun intended)Iceland77 11:14, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

In MateyY's defense, he did talk to us on IRC before starting this, but he could not win the debate their either, so he probably figured that he'd try yet another approach. And btw, no one was mean to him. Maybe a bit harsh, but mean is too much. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 13:07, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Let me just be straightforward:

1. 888 was the one who proposed the forum, and he was the reason we had to go this far.
2. You obviously couldn't have said a single thing of what you said on IRC to me, because I still don't see it on my message wall. Until it's on there, you officially cannot. Also note that that would be no excuse for what you said. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  14:45, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Matey, I have made it clear in the forum in which we were discussion things, and the forum that prompted me to vent about you on the IRC that my qualms with you are that I do not think that your arrogant, self-righteous and credit-seeking attitude has any place on this wiki. You have shown a remarkable ineptitude of understanding our wiki's policy and the desired atmosphere is strives for. You proposed something in the War Room, I retorted, the debate got heated, that's the War Room for ya. I was in the IRC at that time and spew by disbelief in the stupidity of your arguments as you failed time and time again -after I had pointed it out multiple times to you- to answer any of my questions properly and on a manner that did not involve anyone having to pet your ego.

Please note that I have nothing to apologize for to you or to anyone else. As per our little talk in the IRC yesterday:

I_made_the_forum	I want to get this over with. First of all, I forgive you for everything. I, however, still ask you write at least Lemongrab an apology, and only then will I change my vote.
Lostris	For what do I need to apologize to Lemongrab for? I have done as much wrong to him as I did to you: nothing.
Lostris	You can keep your vote. I will apologize if I need to. I have asked multiple times to give me the clear reason, you never did. You want my rights taken away from me for something I did not even know I supposedly did, then go for it.
I_made_the_forum	Okay then, go write what you wrote on IRC on Lemongrab's wall.
Lostris	Why should I? Why do I need to apologize to him and he not to me for example?
Lostris	I don't see why he would need to apologize to me for, but apparently it's now the trend to ask every random user to apologize to one another for no reason.
I_made_the_forum	Because he didn't talk about things you might not have wanted to be talked about in such manner behind his back.
Lostris	I really don't care. I'm not a five-year-old toddler who is offended by that. It is a War Room discussion. It is a debate. If you can't stand the heat, than don't play with fire, and definitely don't come crying afterwards that you got burned.
Lostris	He owes me no apology, and I do not owe him any.

Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 14:56, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Please read

I don't wish to exacerbate this ongoing issue, but may you all investigate this particular wiki? It appears that the same group of users who participated in the proposal had banded together to form a wiki designed specifically for a malicious 'cause'. In addition, User:Lemongrab has created another wiki in preparation for the event of the aforementioned wiki's discovery. This user is impersonating another identity (Akane Star), and masquerades as his brother; clearly a sign of sockpuppetry. !mmortal talk 13:23, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing that to our attention. The Ultimate Waterbender 14:13, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Since more is gonna happen, I suggest we make a court, not that, like Vulmen is the burecuat and he will be the judge, someone (I would volunteer) be defense and someone prosecutor, we will do it in IRC at specific time made by Vulmen, anyone is allowed to come but mostly the witnessesy in slient and watch till they are called, we check the investigation, ensuring gulity or not, I do truly believe that they are not guilty and that someone is doing sockpuppetry. Sshalwani (wall • contribs) 16:20, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

You mean create more bureaucracy to slow the operation of the wiki down, just so that we can deal with more issues like this forum on a regular basis? Yeah...I don't think so. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 16:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Wrong, not more bureacuay, surprising that this community says to much to bureacuay, anyway, like Vulmen is the only one not blamed so he will be judge, someone will be the defense to defend the person, and another will be the prosecutor that go against showing proof of the evidence, but I have some evidence that may prove innocent, let happen in IRC, I believe that just for now, this should happen. Since this is getting nowhere. Let's do that, please. One time. Sshalwani (wall • contribs) 16:32, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

We already discussed and decided upon a similar proposal of yours before. This looks pretty much the same, except geared towards user rights abuses (something that thankfully doesn't happen often.) --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 16:40, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so, this is different, this is not user rights abuse, this is so this can solve problems. Sshalwani (wall • contribs) 16:46, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

This is just an idea I am throwing out. Most of these issues seem to have been triggered via IRC. Wouldn't it be worth a shot disabling the IRC and enabling Special:Chat? This would ensure that all criticisms are truly kept in private in private messages.  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  19:22, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Disabling IRC in favor of chat would solve nothing, you can still copy/paste from wherever. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 19:47, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

That depends who you decide to private message. If you really want things to be private and kept in private, then only speak to people you trust your personal opinions with. Nobody can see your private messages, and if someone still copy/pasted it, that's mostly your fault for trusting them with personal topics.  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  19:44, August 3, 2012 (UTC)

Thes administrators and rollback users are behaving monstrously. On the wiki, we should respect our fellow users, not mistreat them. If they abuse their rights, they don't deserve their status. AvatarKorraWaterbender- I'm the Avatar! You gotta deal with it! 22:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

I feel like the discussion on this page is getting a bit out of hand. We all should strive to present our opinions in the least offensive way possible. Yes, regrettable events have occurred, but it is clear that both sides are continuously antagonizing each other here. I believe a private discussion, with a simple statement only explaining why there are hurt feelings between parties perhaps monitored by a friend of both sides may quell some of the hard feelings. We all must try to have empathy for each other. LotusontheLake

Voting

Per The 888th Avatar, it is best we start a voting process, so that we can quickly and clearly decide what happens and what doesn’t:

[20:06] <wjxhuang> matey, why don't you bring the forum to a vote?

Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:17, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Administrators

Please note you are voting in support of their rights being removed! Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:17, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Lady Lostris

Support

1. Support — I'm sorry, Lostris, but I personally do not appreciate people talking behind my back and then behaving like nothing happened. If you have apologized, I would have gladly opposed. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
2. Support — Sorry but actions have consequences. Lemon☆Star 01:23, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
3. Support — One time, Lady Lostris disagreed with my proposal. Rassilon of Old ^{(Wall - Help)} 06:01, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   No, I'm not being serious, as ARG has since realized (in discussion on IRC). This whole "admin hate" thing has gone too far, so far that reading this brought me to tears. Tears of laughter. So what, the admins can be sarcastic, they have an opinion, they make mistakes. They're human! This all comes back to the notion that admins are the gods which rule the wiki how and when they please, which is entirely incorrect. They don't see themselves as such, so why do you? Administrators are not inducted on account of having perfect morals and ethics, they are inducted on account of how helpful they are to the wiki, and how much more they can help with the extra access sysop grants them. I think that all those that feel insulted and belittled take a step back and look at the whimsical evidence provided, and then say you've never made a negative comment about liking another user. We've had one incident of admins abusing their power, and the particular admin's "crimes" (for lack of a better word) were actual violations of policy, unlike this nonsense which didn't even occur on the wiki. This is pathetic. Grow up. Rassilon of Old ^{(Wall - Help)} 06:34, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   This one of the most beautiful things I've read all day. --Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 11:46, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Wait, do you want her rights gone or them to stay? It seems like we want her to keep them, yet you voted to have them gone. HenryJh 98 (talk • Avatar:The Sole Woodbender • Fanon Detective!) 21:07, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   I was being sarcastic. Of course I don't want any of them gone, but the proposal was too ridiculous not to poke fun at it. But mind you, the wiki would be a nicer place if there wasn't so much FLIRTING, so maybe I should vote to kick her out. :P Rassilon of Old ^{(Wall - Help)} 21:11, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Haha. I guess that makes sense.HenryJh 98 (talk • Avatar:The Sole Woodbender • Fanon Detective!) 02:31, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

   I resent that, remember the phrase "make love, not war"? The power of love/flirting, we should all revel in it ^^ (or you could just give us that flirting award, that would solve this as well.) Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 07:54, August 1, 2012 (UTC)

   I award thee the BEST FLIRTER AWARD :P HenryJh 98 (talk • Avatar:The Sole Woodbender • Fanon Detective!) 02:31, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral — I don't think it was worth demotion; but having no regret?... --Suzon | Talk ^co Fanon 11:38, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   I asked multiple times what I did wrong (and by multiple, I mean well over ten times). When I finally dragged some resemblance of an answer out of them, I explained why I did not feel I had to apologize for that and they failed to yet again, show me why I should've. So what, I need to apologize because someone's ego got bruised on the internet and they have the right to start a forum to get rid of my rights is an attempt to coerce me into some meaningless apology? I only have one regret in all this and that is that this forum was made with total disregard for the consequences it would have on community atmosphere, especially when you look at the joke that is passed on as evidence. So please, for what do you think I should in spirit's name have regrets for? Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 07:54, August 1, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose — nor reason necessary. These guys are important even if they mess up. I see no bad in them still, just a slip up. Don't ess up our system.Iceland77 01:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
2. Oppose — I personally don't see anything said as a personal attack, or any form of direct, malicious insult. SifuHotman90
3. Oppose — I do not think that Lady Lotus said anything that constitutes as a malicious insult or personal attack. Lady Lostris performs to the upmost standards and has had one slip up which is not atrocious enough to relinquish her of adminship.WEFAang (wall • contribs) 01:36, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
4. Oppose — Per my comments above: this is just a petty revenge from users seeking an opportunity to demote people they don't like. ― Thailog 01:44, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Wasn't The Bos's adminship removed for badge editing? So then why wouldn't Lostris' be for talking behind people's backs in, once could easily argue, offensive manner. I find that this is barely what any person with common sense and respect for our policies would do, and if you read our IRC policy, you'll find out that common sense is a major part of it. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Bos' incident was not isolated. This one is. The 888th Avatar (talk) 02:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   So you're saying that what The Bos did–which, by the way, did not harm or offend anyone–was bad because it was secret? So you're saying it's better to say things against people publicly behind their backs rather than do it at your home. I don't find that very logical. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  02:10, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Matey; you may as well put every last one of our other rollbacks and admins up for demotion. Who hasn't said things that hurt other people's feelings? Who hasn't vented to a friend about something that may frustrate them? So god forbid we have the human nature tendency to want to talk to and share our griefs with other users who we feel close to. I've heard my fair share from MANY users talking about others, frankly rather surprised at some of what goes on, even very dark secrets that I'd never repeat. Don't get so hung up on these. Vulmen (talk • EoK) 03:50, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

5. Oppose — Lostris is one of our most prolific contributors and one of the most principled people I have met. I don't feel that there is any true justification for doing anything so dramatic. The 888th Avatar (talk) 02:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
6. Oppose — How ridiculous. LL has been a great admin for ages, and doesn't deserve to be stripped of her title. FooFoo (wall • contribs • blog) 02:09, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   What everyone is saying here is: "Ignore policy, ignore what happened to The Bos, let's keep her." Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  02:11, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Actually what we are saying is theses accusations are unfounded and inflated and don't deserve anyone's attention, but for whatever reason someone has forced our attention onto it and most people aren't thrilled with that.--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 04:41, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

7. Oppose — Hells, bells, and whistles no!--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 02:36, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
8. Oppose — I don't believe her actions warrant this. Per Thailog. Annawantimes (Talk) 02:27, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
9. Oppose — Lady Lostris has been a long-time outstanding user, dedicated to improving so many areas of this wiki; her body of work is simply incredible and with her rights, she has been serving this community well. I see no solid reason to warrant the removal of her rights. The Ultimate Waterbender 02:42, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
10. Oppose — Uiop60 02:50, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
11. Oppose — See my opinion above. Katara and Bolin Fanboy Send me a messenger hawk 02:57, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
12. Oppose — Nothing much to say, the oppose comments above has made it clear. User:LiaSakura/Signature 02:59, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
13. Oppose — I don't see anything that can be taken as harassment by any of the administrators or rollback users mentioned in this forum, and I don't see in the "evidence" something that can be called as "inappropiate behavior" worthy of such drastic measure. I don't even understand why an apology is being asked. All I see is users letting know their opinions about other users' opinions on some matters and how they defend their stands, no insults. People is just feeling insulted by comments and critiques (in any way "behind their backs") that never attempted to be the "attacks" some users are refering to. This is just an exaggeration and the incapacity to understand comments as what they really are and, of course it doesn't justify the revocation of all these great users' rights. Dcasawang1 • wall 03:01, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
14. Oppose — Lostris is one of the best admins this wiki has ever seen, a great landmark for being the first female admin as well. I applaud her for not apologizing. Have fun reporting her to staff. My two cents. Vulmen (talk • EoK) 03:07, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
15. Oppose — THis goes for all possible demotees, especially 888, KFB, BD, and Thailog. I was pissed off earlier, due to irl stuff, and I really needed something to take it out on. The four I mentioned will be receiving personalized messages. Azulazulazula 03:14, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
16. Oppose — Though I did not officially meet her until this afternoon, she has been very helpful and welcoming to my questions and problems. I definitely do not feel or suspect any animosity between us in the least. I oppose the movement to remove Lady Lostris's adminship. --Specialk16^(wall) 03:23, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
17. Oppose — Per myself above. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 04:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
18. Oppose — Years of work and dedication, to be removed by a thimbleful of "evidence"? Is speaking one's mind within reasonable constraints a crime now? I mean, no one can just make everyone happy, and this is just looking more and more like a petty revenge. KettleMeetPot (wall • contribs) 04:40, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
19. Oppose — Per my earlier statement Truly Ferret 05:51, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
20. Oppose — Per the above. —Random Ranaun ^{(Talk to me!)} 06:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
21. Oppose — I see nothing here that warrants the rollback or removal of adminship to any of the admins. There is nothing wrong with perfect honesty and I think it is frequently forgotten. Avatar Corin 06:30, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
22. Oppose — Grow up. ... Wait, is that too rude too? Please, grow up. Seliah Jade 10:19, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
23. Oppose — Per above. --DarkKnightRises (wall • contribs) 11:03, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
24. Oppose — I'm going to level with you Matey, I think you went about this forum in completely the wrong way. The whole "lets just skip community discussion" idea in your proposal seems completely wrong, not to mention how much is wrong with the statement "unfairly pardoned". That statement is so arrogant is actually disgusts me; so just because you disagree with what the community decides, those people have been unfairly pardoned. WHAT?! WHAT?! WHAT?! I think you need to take a serious look at yourself if that is the attitude you are going to have. The other thing that disgusts me is the hypocrisy in how this forum was made. You keep saying this isn’t about revenge – flying-boar-crap. The text that appears when you hover over your signature says "let's end it"; no, that doesn't sound petty or revengeful at all. To sum up, I disagree with removing the rights from all these users. HAMMEROFTHOR 11:10, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
25. Oppose — This is quite obviously a grudge match at best and at worst a temper tantrum. Lostris is a fine admin. --Harpalyce (wall • contribs) 18:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
26. Oppose — I really admire her effort that she puts into the wiki. I think she should at least say sorry for what she said, but that is not something worth demoting her. Lostris is an amazing and irreplaceable community member.  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  18:49, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

    I thank you for your kind words, but I am not going to apologize for what I said. I did nothing wrong and I said nothing over the line in my opinion. I have asked multiple times for what exactly they wanted me to apologize and not once did I receive an answer, so for what should I apologize? For bruising their egos? Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 19:47, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

    I think an apology for talking bad about him would suffice. I know it wasn't meant for anyone to find out nor be offended, but they did find out, so that's where an apology would fit in. Nobody is forcing you though, you may do so or not at your own free will.  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  08:51, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

    You're missing the important point that I did not change anything when he did reveal himself, thus showing that I did not intend to talk behind his back, he was just not there. I told all those things in his face as well, so the "I know it wasn't meant for anyone to find out" is not correct. Sure, I never meant to offend him and I honestly thought that people who venture on the internet have a thicker skin than that and a more effective ability to put things into proportion and pay attention to the context things are being said in. I guess that was my mistake then. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 08:56, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

    @TechnologyWizard: Are you kidding me? An apology pressured is no apology at all... And people have the right to retain their opinions, even when mildly offensive to others. Don't treat the admins as if they have some kind of higher moral code to follow. And frankly, advocating for this "apologize or have your rights removed" ego-fest is far more unethical in my eyes than any refusal of apology from the admins. KettleMeetPot (wall • contribs) 08:58, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

    @KMP - I hope you realize that I voted for her to keep her rights. I also hope you realize that I clearly said "you may do so or not at your own free will." Did I ever say that she wasn't allowed to state her opinion?  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  09:19, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

    @TechnologyWizard: Oh, I do realize that. And with your response, I fail to see what point you are trying to make with the clarifications that you "you may do so or not at your free will" yet you say "an apology" would still "suffice". So, I must ask, why do you think that, and why did you bring it up, when we both know she will not apologize to people who are attacking her integrity with ridiculous "proof". And about your latter question, you certainly implied that she should apologize for it. KettleMeetPot (wall • contribs) 09:08, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

    I was simply trying to give her a reason to see that she had made somewhat of a mistake in the whole thing, which she has already admitted to, why does there need to be further discussion?  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  09:17, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

    Er. . . I did not admitted to any mistakes made, I admitted to being wrong to assume that "that people who venture on the internet have a thicker skin than that and a more effective ability to put things into proportion and pay attention to the context things are being said in." Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 09:24, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

    Whatever the case is, it's clear that you understand both points of views, so I don't understand why there needs to be more discussion... Also, a personal rule of mine is: "Most assumptions lead to problems".  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  09:35, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

    Actually, Technology Wizard, you must first explain it to me, because I don't understand this rule of yours that one should back-down and apologize to people just because they were offended by some off-hand comments, on the Internet of all places. Not to mean any offense, but don't you get it? She was outright threatened by MateyY and that little conspiracy of his to either apologize or have her rights taken. I see no ambiguity with this at all.

    And do you really think that the aims of the admins, as both people and members with rights, are to please everyone? Certainly not. And whether MateyY or any of those so-called offended people deserve apologies, they certainly do not now in light of the fact they have not only lied and broken policy, but also from their malicious attempt to demote users on the basis of dislike. If you can't understand why she has every right not to apologize, and probably will not, then you seriously need to rethink her position. KettleMeetPot (wall • contribs) 09:52, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

    Kettle, I think you're putting words in Tech's mouth. Remember when he said "you may do so or not at your own free will"? That is far from the notion of an admin trying to "please everyone" and the complete opposite of not "understand[ing] why she has every right not to apologize". You seem to believe that all who hold the belief that an admin or rollback should apologize for these ludicrous accusations is the same as the people who think admins and rollbacks are malicious power abusers who want them demoted, which is not true. It's obvious that Tech does not want Lostris demoted, per his vote. All he said was that he believes that when someone has their feelings hurt, it's polite to apologize. This opinion does not affect his vote in any way, so why must you, Kettle, keep telling him to change one thing about his own moral code that holds no water in this discussion? He probably only brought it up to tell Lostris that although he doesn't agree with her standpoint, he doesn't want her demoted, either.

    So please, both of you, you each voted not to have Lostris demoted. Why argue and hurt your relationships when it won't amount in anything constructive? Krazykid51 16:01, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

27. Oppose — Lostris is one of the finest examples of an admin on the wiki. I think the notion that she should be demotivated is frankly ridiculous. This is Slash, mission complete! 20:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
28. Oppose — --Purushelk (wall • contribs) 20:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
29. She didn't do anything — Lostris is a fine example of an admin, but she is human! You can't expect her to not make mistakes or call someone a jerk! HenryJh 98 (talk • Avatar:The Sole Woodbender • Fanon Detective!) 21:07, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

    Thank you for the nice words, but just to clarify, I never called anyone a jerk. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 07:54, August 1, 2012 (UTC)

30. Oppose — Whether it was intentional or not, offending a user is wrong, and I agree that efforts to mend hard feelings should be taken if possible. However, I have to point out that demanding an apology from someone is not going to encourage them to do it, and that trying to force it from them makes you at fault too. That aside, I don't care what Lostris said; what she accomplishes as an admin greatly outweighs it all. The first thing I ever did on this wiki was post on her wall as an anonymous contributor to ask for advice, and it was her friendliness that motivated me to even join this wiki. Lostris is one who encourages new users and upkeeps the quality of the wiki like no other, and that's what great admins do. --Minnichi 09:08, August 1, 2012 (UTC)
31. Oppose — Personally I still think that the proposition is not well thought out. Lostris is a good admin. I belive that we all make mistakes and that admins are as human as the non admin-users are, so if we use the voting for minor o we would all probably be banned. Without a doubt I disapprove of banning and rights stripping for minor offenses. Count the stars - Shao 16:40, August 1, 2012 (UTC)
32. Oppose — Although what LL said may have been a little rude, I don't think she deserves to lose her adminship. She does alot for the community and honestly, removing her user rights would be a loss for the entire wikia. MakoMako15
33. Oppose — Makotheactornotthecharacter (wall • contribs) 00:29, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

Thailog

Support

1. Support — I'm sorry, Thailog, but you have too many misconducts in your book. If you apologize, however, I will change my vote. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:22, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
2. Support — I will also change my vote if you apologize. Lemon☆Star 01:27, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
3. Support — Support. One hundred percent.--Omar067 (wall • contribs) 01:30, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
4. Support — Sorry Thailog, I respect you but your consitent failures to uphold the high standards we set for our admins allows me to fully support your fall from adminship. WEFAang (wall • contribs) 01:40, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Support — So this is how an admin acts behind the scenes? Shameful. Black Star 03:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

5. Support — Thailog always tells me when I upload an image incorrectly, and sometimes he makes sarcastic comments. Rassilon of Old ^{(Wall - Help)} 06:01, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
6. Support — I was debating this for sometime, but he shows no sign of stopping, and continues the behavior, and is mocking those who go against him, as we speak. --Suzon | Talk ^co Fanon 11:43, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
7. Support — Good with images on the wikia, but on IRC he is full of criticisms and mean remarks about others, which are mostly behind the victim's backs. I have never seen him find a solution to a user's problems, instead, only comebacks of why they are wrong - you can see it in forums or in just that screenshot of him and Lady that was posted above. I know he doesn't like me, and I am not afraid to share that we have mutual feelings for each other. Maybe he does do a lot of work on the wikia, I do agree with that, but even so, a hard-working bully is not needed here. I'm sure we can find a replacement who is just as good and is willing to be kind and forgive others. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Fire & Ice} 13:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
8. Support — I agree about this. HenryJh 98 (talk • Avatar:The Sole Woodbender • Fanon Detective!) 20:43, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
9. Support — Actually, I'd prefer with one who is give someone a chance.... Acer Indonesia Ask anything about fanon! • TCA:TFF 08:41, August 1, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

1: Neutral — Sadly I would rather vote to keep any admin and rollback that the wiki can. I have no reason to vote in either favor for a man I have no knowledge of. I'm sorry to say but there really is no point in this and I think that, like stated in my Lostris vote, this is a little thing that was put out becuase such-and-such user doesn't like so-and-so user. I think that this is completely useless and I encourage every one to think: There is always going to be disliking and distaste and mockery, I advise you to put on your big boy/girl panties and deal with it. I say that several (if not most) votes are opposing the removal of so-and-so's rights. We are a community and all communities have people that try to stir up trouble as often as they can. As a community should take care of their own and also not bicker over minor offenses. We agrue like freaking Politicians over minor issues! I furthermore request that you the reader research the creators and their past actions. This is Count the stars - Shao's final opinon on any people. Henceforth I say that we should delve into the issuse at hand armed with knowledge. Research before choosing please. We should conclude this quickly, please, and put this behind us. Count the stars - Shao 03:09, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose — I know he doesn't like me. But wiki needs him. Thanks Thailog.Iceland77 01:37, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
2. Oppose — I stand by Thailog as much as I did when I nominated him for adminship. Bluntness and honesty does not translate to a studied pattern of malice. Sometimes, I wish we were more honest. The 888th Avatar (talk) 02:05, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
3. Oppose — I don't think any admin should be stripped of their adminship because of this forum. FooFoo (wall • contribs • blog) 02:11, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
4. Oppose — I will not support what seems to be a silly attempt at payback for someone being honest and forthright with what they think. SifuHotman90

   This isn't about revenge Sifu. This was never about revenge. Lemon☆Star 02:22, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   It sure as hell looks that way. SifuHotman90

   I think you need to read this User blog:Lemongrab/Clarification:Removal of adminship and rollback before disagreeing with me. Lemon☆Star 2:59, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   read it... It's definitely about revenge.--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 03:27, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Boomerang did you even read it? I made it very clear that this is not about revenge. Lemon☆Star 3:38, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   I did read it, and while it may not sound like petty revenge, the action sure looks like it. Just so you know, I am being unbiased in my decision because I don't even know Thailog, not once have I ever made contact with him before this evening. Hell, I didn't even know he was an admin until about two weeks ago. SifuHotman90

   He said he read it, I'm sure he did. I read it too, and really...just look at the list, the majority of names up for demoting do a darned good job of showing it's just petty hurt that's fueled it/added certain names to the pile. I agree with Boomeraang. Vulmen (talk • EoK) 03:39, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   None of my feelings were hurt, and I'm pretty sure no other feelings were hurt. This really wasn't done for petty revenge. If you don't believe me, then there is nothing more I can say to convince you. Lemon☆Star 3:46, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   look, there are what 6-7 people up here! What happened did all are leaders suddenly turn to rotten apples! C'mon this obviously revenge there is no other reason for so many people to be up here other than revenge!--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 03:52, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

5. Oppose — Hells, bells, and whistles no!--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 02:37, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
6. Oppose — One of the best administrators we have, who has more than proved his worth for his rights as what he does just simply cannot be done without them. Bruised egos have no place on this wiki, and honesty should not be confused with insulting people. If we all had more Thailog's attitude, we would not be having this "discussion". Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 02:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
7. Oppose — Per Lostris. Annawantimes (Talk) 02:27, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
8. Oppose — As with Lady, someone who has done exceptional work on this wiki and who, as others have said, is simply honest. The Ultimate Waterbender 02:42, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
9. Oppose — Uiop60 02:50, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
10. Oppose — See my opinion above. Katara and Bolin Fanboy Send me a messenger hawk 02:57, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
11. Oppose — Per my comment in Lady Lostris's section. Dcasawang1 • wall 03:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
12. Oppose — This came up before. This was shot down then. And again my support goes toward keeping Thailog. If this keeps coming up, I'm going to become more annoyed than those that are annoyed with him. Vulmen (talk • EoK) 03:10, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
13. Oppose — I haven't met him yet, but I believe this wiki needs a strong, solid admin foundation. --Specialk16^(wall) 03:31, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
14. Oppose — Per myself above. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 04:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
15. Oppose — I have been on the end of Thailog's dry humor before, but if there is anything I know, it has never ever been meant in offence. Don't assume that Thailog is stupid; he was one of the most meticulous and intelligent people I have met on this wiki, and that is conveyed in not only his actions as an admin, but in his words too. KettleMeetPot (wall • contribs) 04:55, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
16. Oppose — Per my earlier statement Truly Ferret 05:53, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
17. Oppose — Per the above. —Random Ranaun ^{(Talk to me!)} 06:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
18. Oppose — I see nothing here that warrants the rollback or removal of adminship to any of the admins. There is nothing wrong with perfect honesty and I think it is frequently forgotten. Avatar Corin 06:27, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
19. Oppose — Per my vote concerning Lady Lostris. Seliah Jade 10:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
20. Oppose — Per my statement above. HAMMEROFTHOR 11:10, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
21. Oppose — Thailog can be crass, rude, sometimes annoying, most of the time a troll, and definitely our most controversial admin. However, he's an admin for a reason: He's a damn fine one. A Light Shining in the Darkness - ^Talk 17:14, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
22. Oppose — This is quite obviously a grudge match at best and at worst a temper tantrum. Thailog may be abrasive but he gets the job done, and done well. --Harpalyce (wall • contribs) 18:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
23. Oppose — A great member to the community. Talking about users in a crude and way does not require a demotion.  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  18:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
24. Oppose — Thailog is a great help to the community. Just because he offends some users does not mean he should be demotivated. This is Slash, mission complete! 20:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
25. Oppose — --Purushelk (wall • contribs) 20:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
26. Oppose — Makotheactornotthecharacter (wall • contribs) 00:29, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

wjxhuang (The 888th Avatar)

Support

1. Support — I admired you. Three simple words summarize it all; everything until we came down to the point where you started talking behind my back and making excuses. Face it like a man! Like a person someone would look up to! Apologize. But you've obviously made up your mind. So, I'm sorry. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:29, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   You know, with the constant catch-cry of "apologise", it's beginning to sound more like some confession extracted from a show trial rather than an interest in what is in the greater benefit of the wiki and justice. The 888th Avatar (talk) 01:32, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

2. As much as I don't want to... — Like Matey said, I admired, and still do. I have no qualms, nor see anything wrong with 2 out of the 3 cases brought before you, but your comment towards Suzon was in very bad taste. I was involved with Suzon in what he was undergoing, and understand where he is coming from, and your actions were anything but a significant blow to his self-esteem. I hate to say it, but that is almost unforgivable. SifuHotman90

   As I indicated above, I have nothing against Suzon. While I have indicated, quite strongly, that I don't believe that a reasonable construction of my remark could conclude that I intended malice, I apologise if Suzon's feelings were hurt. And I do wonder, if this is the case, why he didn't bring this up with me. The 888th Avatar (talk) 01:38, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   I'm sorry, but after seeing how bummed out he was after the incident predating your comment I feel that in order to as unbiased as possible I can't sit idly by and let it slide past. You may not have completely understood the context of the situation, but I would be lying out my backside if I said I didn't see anything wrong with your statement. SifuHotman90

3. Support — 888 don't make this harder on yourself. Just say you're sorry.Lemon☆Star 01:36, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Support — Per Sifu. Black Star 03:11, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

4. Support — I think that he has not behaved like an admin. --Suzon | Talk ^co Fanon 11:27, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
5. Support — I think that 888 really needs to just accept that I make mistakes, and he should back off instead of helping me to rectify the issues. Rassilon of Old ^{(Wall - Help)} 06:01, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

1. Oppose — I know I annoy him more then anything. But we need him. And he is nice. Period.Iceland77 01:40, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
2. Oppose — Per my comments above: this is just a petty revenge from users seeking an opportunity to demote people they don't like. ― Thailog 01:43, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Thailog I don't hate any of the people that are up here. That's a misconception on your part. Lemon☆Star 01:48, July 31, 2012 (UT)

3. Oppose — You really want to get rid of Avatar Wiki's longest-serving admin just because he said something that got your panties in a twist? FooFoo (wall • contribs • blog) 02:13, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
4. Oppose — Hells, bells, and whistles no!--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 02:38, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
5. Oppose — I find it utterly appalling that this is even happening. Oh no, a bad word on IRC, call 911! It is easy to break someone down, but as far as I know, there are currently seven people on this entire wiki that know what kind of crap and admin of the Avatar Wiki needs to take, and do you really want to punish one of our most valuable admins for replying with sarcasm? Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 02:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
6. Oppose — For the reasons I stated above with the two other administrators. Not deserving to have his rights removed in the least bit. The Ultimate Waterbender 02:42, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
7. Oppose — Uiop60 02:50, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
8. Oppose — Per Lostris and FooFoo. The last evidence shouldn't even be there. 888 was clearly kidding about it. Why not show the messages before it? There's no need to manipulate the last evidence to make it seem like he wanted Suzon to mope about having a bad day even more. Note ATFF's message, something clearly happened before that sarcastic message. User:LiaSakura/Signature 02:53, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
9. Oppose — See my opinion above. Katara and Bolin Fanboy Send me a messenger hawk 02:57, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
10. Oppose — Per my comment in Lady Lostris's section. Dcasawang1 • wall 03:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
11. Oppose — This is another user up for "demotion" that is just ridiculous to have on this list. Voting oppose is offensive for me to have to do, it's that ridiculous. Vulmen (talk • EoK) 03:11, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
12. Oppose — He has done nothing but help me since I have joined the wiki. Any day, any time. He was always friendly and willing to help. --Specialk16^(wall) 03:16, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
13. Oppose — You may not realize it, but we need 888th, he's done so much for the wiki. Also see my opinion above Sokka jr • Wall • Blogs 03:57, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
14. Oppose — Per myself above. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 04:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
15. Oppose — How can you overlook everything that 888 has done for this wiki for years with this "evidence" that a couple of people were offended? He committed no crime for speaking his mind, however bluntly sometimes, and it was always kept within reasonable boundaries. Imo, if people are that thin-skinned on the Internet of all places, then they really should re-assess their priorities. KettleMeetPot (wall • contribs) 05:12, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
16. Oppose — Per my earlier statement Truly Ferret 05:55, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
17. Oppose — Per the above. —Random Ranaun ^{(Talk to me!)} 06:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
18. Oppose — I see nothing here that warrants the rollback or removal of adminship to any of the admins. There is nothing wrong with perfect honesty and I think it is frequently forgotten. Avatar Corin 06:31, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
19. Oppose — Per above. I had never encountered a disrespect from 888. Unnamed Airbender 10:06, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
20. Oppose — Per my vote concerning Lady Lostris. Seliah Jade 10:22, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
21. Oppose — Per my statement above. HAMMEROFTHOR 11:10, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
22. Oppose — Father Wikia, The 888th Avatar, Wjxhuang, is the hardest working, most knowledgeable, and has the best judgement of all the users who are here. He's pretty much been around longer than anyone else on the site - and with age he has learned pretty much all there is to know around these parts. I don't care if this guy starts blanking pages, I will always want him as an admin. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Fire & Ice} 13:10, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
23. Oppose — This is quite obviously a grudge match at best and at worst a temper tantrum. Wjxhuang is the cornerstone of this wiki and a damn good admin that any wiki would be proud to have and quite frankly I'm surprised he's put up with this for so long. --Harpalyce (wall • contribs) 18:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
24. Oppose — While I don't think it was right that he was talking about others in such a way is correct, 888 is pretty much the reason the wiki has arrived where it's at today. He not only organized the wiki's physical details, but he also organized a team of amazing admins and rollbacks.  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  18:51, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
25. Oppose — Per my vote concerning Thailog. This is Slash, mission complete! 20:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
26. Oppose — --Purushelk (wall • contribs) 20:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
27. Oppose — Makotheactornotthecharacter (wall • contribs) 00:29, August 2, 2012 (UTC)
28. Oppose — Not just no, oh hell no! Per my vote concerning Lostris. Seriously The 888th Avatar is a helpful user and a good admin. Got your back 888th! Count the stars - Shao 03:12, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

Rollbacks

Please note that support means you support their rights' removal. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Blue Dagger

Support

1. Support — Being a Rollback user means you have to be mature. You clearly have not been mature. Lemon☆Star 01:53, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
2. Support — Sorry, but from what I've seen, Lemongrab is right–yelling at people and telling them to leave the wiki is such manner is immature and inappropriate. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  02:05, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Support — Per MateyY. Black Star 03:14, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutral — I have definitely seen him bully other users, but you know, he does like my fanon, so I can't bring myself to say anything else. BlackMonkey ^{Talk - Fire & Ice} 13:12, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Just because he likes your fanon, you are not going to say what you really think? This is quite disturbing, because it shows that you possible may vote to have a user's rights removed because they do not like your fanon (or some other petty and irrelevant issue). You are not being fair at all. If you believe there is a problem with an admistrator or rollback user that is worthy of having their rights removed then say so. If not, then oppose. WEFAang (wall • contribs) 00:16, August 1, 2012 (UTC)

@BlackMonkey: Speak your mind. If you aren't sure then neutrality is a nice little way to show your uncertainty. Count the stars - Shao 03:25, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

@WEFAang: So? I wouldn't critise a man's decision, it's a bitch to deal with. If this was a vote to remove MateyY's rights what would you answer? If you have fans that are your friends fine if you don't fine, but critizing a man's decision is petty. Count the stars - Shao 03:25, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

If Matey Y's rights were on this discussion I would have to see the evidence against him and for him and then decide, although I do not quite understand the relevance of the question. And I do not think that questioning the motives behind a decision when you do not know them or believe them to irrelevant to the issue is not petty at all. WEFAang (wall • contribs) 23:05, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

2. Neutral — Sadly I would rather vote to keep any admin and rollback that the wiki can. I have no reason to vote in either favor for a man I have no knowledge of. I'm sorry to say but there really is no point in this and I think that, like stated in my Lostris vote, this is a little thing that was put out becuase such-and-such user doesn't like so-and-so user. I think that this is completely useless and I encourage every one to think: There is always going to be disliking and distaste and mockery, I advise you to put on your big boy/girl panties and deal with it. I say that several (if not most) votes are opposing the removal of so-and-so's rights. We are a community and all communities have people that try to stir up trouble as often as they can. As a community should take care of their own and also not bicker over minor offenses. We agrue like freaking Politicians over minor issues! I furthermore request that you the reader research the creators and their past actions. This is Count the stars - Shao's final opinon on any people. Henceforth I say that we should delve into the issuse at hand armed with knowledge. Research before choosing please. We should conclude this quickly, please, and put this behind us.

Oppose

1. Oppose — Per my comments above: this is just a petty revenge from users seeking an opportunity to demote people they don't like. ― Thailog 01:43, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
2. Oppose — Per Thailog. The 888th Avatar (talk) 02:05, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
3. Oppose — As per above. FooFoo (wall • contribs • blog) 02:14, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
4. Oppose — Not gonna repeat what has already been said. SifuHotman90
5. Oppose — Yes, this is the internet, yes, we are communicating via machines, no, we are not robots. Let the guy be human. He's a good user who uses his rights responsible. Take a joke for what it is, a joke, and do not ever disregard the context. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 02:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Context or no context, he is still responsible. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  03:02, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   You show ever so clearly with that statement that you know nothing about how the world works. Try going outside and ignore context like you so consistently do, let's see how for that gets you. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 08:46, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

6. Oppose — Hells, bells, and whistles no!--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 02:39, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
7. Oppose — Repeating myself here; again, not deserving to have his rights removed based on a few past incidents that sometimes happen... The Ultimate Waterbender 02:44, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
8. Oppose — Uiop60 02:50, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
9. Oppose — See my opinion above. Katara and Bolin Fanboy Send me a messenger hawk 02:57, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
10. Oppose — Per my comment in Lady Lostris's section. Dcasawang1 • wall 03:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
11. Oppose — Yes; he can be wildly mouthy. I've gave him a slap a time or two to get him in line, but that doesn't speak a thing for him as a rollback. Get over it. Vulmen (talk • EoK) 03:13, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
12. Oppose — No friendly message was shown, so all other evidence is irrelevant. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 04:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
13. Oppose — I would consider this more of a warning. WEFAang (wall • contribs) 04:16, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
14. Oppose — Wait, didn't some of this "evidence" come from months ago? The fact that such a grudge was held for so long speaks more to the character of those who put BlueDagger on this list than the said man himself. KettleMeetPot (wall • contribs) 05:11, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
15. Oppose — Per my earlier statement Truly Ferret 05:58, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
16. Oppose — Per the above. —Random Ranaun ^{(Talk to me!)} 06:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
17. Oppose — Per my statement above. HAMMEROFTHOR 11:10, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
18. Oppose — per everyone.Iceland77 17:43, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
19. Oppose — Again, obviously motivated by revenge. BD is a fine rollback from what I have seen. --Harpalyce (wall • contribs) 18:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
20. Oppose — Per above.  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  18:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
21. Oppose — Per above. This is Slash, mission complete! 20:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
22. Oppose — --Purushelk (wall • contribs) 20:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
23. Oppose — Per above. Annawantimes (Talk) 17:15, August 1, 2012 (UTC)

KataraFanboy

This user has apologized for all of his offensive behavior to all users that he has offended.

Support

Neutral

Oppose

1. Oppose — PSUAvatar14, I admire the fact that you apologized. You should keep your rights because you were mature enough to admit you messed up. Lemon☆Star 01:26, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
2. Oppose — Per Lemongrab. You did what any honorable user and true Avatar Wiki rollback (and administrator) would do–apologize. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:27, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
3. Oppose — Per Matey and Lemongrab. This wiki isn't a place for disrespectful people. And your obviously not a disrespectful person. --Icarlyftw talk to me 01:36, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
4. Oppose — The sheer fact that the "accusers" changed their votes because PSU apologized shows how this is only about bruised egos. ― Thailog 01:45, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Thailog, I don't think you have a) been reading carefully or b) been trying to read carefully. There is good evidence and reasons for quite a few people to be demoted. PSUAvatar14, however, was brave enough to apologize. Just because you refuse to do so yourself doesn't mean that everyone is responsible for actions you committed. All you're doing right now is making up stories of why we want to demote people without actually looking into our reasoning. All you have to do is swallow your pride and apologize to a user. An administrator that isn't honorable enough to do that and keep his reputation in tact should not be an administrator on Avatar Wiki. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:54, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Like I said, I would apologize if I had anything to apologize about. Your old "evidence" were already presented to the community before and they deemed it insignificant to warrant a demotion. Your third evidence is me questioning Omar's apology, and the fourth is a lie, because there's nothing there about be mocking Christianity. That's all you got: old remarks and a comment about Omar's apology. ― Thailog 01:59, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   I'll quote:

   [12:12] <+wjxhuang> and too much logic

   [12:12] <Compulsive_> Oh wait... I guess he's just that "unique"

   [12:13] <+Thailog> like God make him

   If that's not an anti-Christian remark, I don't see what it is. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  02:07, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   And if I remember correctly -and I do- I laughed at that as well saying that "my mom and dad made me" oh no, the disrespectful horror in that comment! So what, Christians much deserve respect by default, but atheist must be stoned? Give respect, get respect, that's how it works. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 02:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   I'm a Christian and I took absolutely no offense to that statement.--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 02:34, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   The comment had an unnecessary note of sarcasm; that is why it was arguably offensive. Yours I took as more of a joke. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  02:38, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Your "offenses" are like ATLA innuendos: you can see an offense in anything. That's why we have that "good faith policy". Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 02:41, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Amen malady. Can I say amen? Wouldn't want to be tought of as anti-Christian.--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 02:49, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   And that's why we have a common sense policy—to stop users like from twisting the obvious. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  02:52, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   And said policy most certainly applies here, common sense tells u no one does this to so many different people unless they have a pone to pick!--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 03:05, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   And that's why there exist dictionaries, so people can look up words they do not know the meaning off, like "twisting words" or "common sense". Where and how did I twist your words? Can you show that, or are you just -as always- going to keep quiet about and just claim very loudly that we are twisting something without clarifying? Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 08:55, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

5. Oppose — PSU is a great user and and even more awesome rollback. Imo, the only mistake he made was apologizing here for no apparent reason. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 02:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   That just proves you haven't read the evidence. Calling someone what he did without any true reason is considered a personal attack. However, he apologized, and that is why everything is fine. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  03:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   What that proves is that you royally failed to produce anything that can even be remotely close seen as "evidence", even when using the largest possible openness to "evidence". The only think that you proved is that you have zero knowledge of the common sense and the good faith policy and every word screams that you are out for revenge. I will apologize to everyone and everything that I have offended if I have a reason to, which again, you royally failed to produce. If anything, you owe everyone on this pathetic list an apology for disrespecting all of them to act on your petty quest for revenge. This is just slander to all of them. I have nearly ten times asked you to clearly state -copy/paste preferably- what I did to you. You never once responded, which makes me think you don't even have anything on me. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 08:55, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

6. Oppose — Hells, bells, and whistles no!--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 02:40, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
7. Oppose — Same reasoning as before: exceptional work and does not deserve to have his rights removed. The Ultimate Waterbender 02:44, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
8. Oppose — Uiop60 02:50, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
9. Oppose — Per my comment in Lady Lostris's section. Dcasawang1 • wall 03:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
10. Oppose — Putting PSU up for demotion is the most blasted idiotic thing I could imagine. Sure; he's free to apologize, and it's thoughtful of him to do so, but to have to do so in response to such a challenging attack as this? The offense lies on the ones pointing the finger. Vulmen (talk • EoK) 03:15, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
11. Oppose — No friendly message was shown, so all other evidence is irrelevant. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 04:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
12. Oppose — Per my earlier statement Truly Ferret 06:00, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
13. Oppose — Per the above. —Random Ranaun ^{(Talk to me!)} 06:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
14. Oppose — Per my statement above. HAMMEROFTHOR 11:10, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
15. Oppose — if anyone disagrees, they will get a ten paragraph essay from me about it.Iceland77 11:18, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
16. Oppose — Per above.  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  18:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
17. Oppose — KFB is a great user. Those so-called attacks are not enough to strip him of his rollback abilities. This is Slash, mission complete! 20:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
18. Oppose — --Purushelk (wall • contribs) 20:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
19. No way is he getting his rights denied! — It takes a big man to apologize. Nice job, KBF! HenryJh 98 (talk • Avatar:The Sole Woodbender • Fanon Detective!) 21:03, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
20. Oppose — Per Lostris. Annawantimes (Talk) 17:18, August 1, 2012 (UTC)

KettleMeetPot

Support

Neutral

Oppose

1. Oppose — Per my comments above: this is just a petty revenge from users seeking an opportunity to demote people they don't like. ― Thailog 01:43, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
2. Oppose — Nothing I can say that Thailog hasn't already said. SifuHotman90
3. Oppose — Per Thailog. The 888th Avatar (talk) 02:06, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
4. Oppose — This is too ridiculous that he's even up here. He's one of the most promising and valuable users that joined us shortly. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 02:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
5. Oppose — Hells, bells, and whistles no!--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 02:41, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
6. Oppose — Same reasoning as before: exceptional work and does not deserve to have his rights removed. The Ultimate Waterbender 02:44, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
7. Oppose — See my opinion above. Katara and Bolin Fanboy Send me a messenger hawk 02:57, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
8. Oppose — Per Thailog and LL. User:LiaSakura/Signature 03:03, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
9. Oppose — Per my comment in Lady Lostris's section. Dcasawang1 • wall 03:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
10. Oppose — My god, I'm sick of seeing talented, well meaning people be complained about. Vulmen (talk • EoK) 03:16, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
11. Oppose — No friendly message was shown, so all other evidence is irrelevant. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 04:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
12. Oppose — I am not sure why he or she is up here. He or she did not do anything worthy of revoking rights. WEFAang (wall • contribs) 04:12, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
13. Oppose — Per my earlier statement Truly Ferret 06:01, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
14. Oppose — Per the above. —Random Ranaun ^{(Talk to me!)} 06:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
15. Oppose — Per my statement above. HAMMEROFTHOR 11:10, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
16. Oppose — per everyone.Iceland77 17:45, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
17. Oppose — This is quite obviously a grudge match at best and at worst a temper tantrum. --Harpalyce (wall • contribs) 18:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
18. Oppose — Per above.  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  18:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
19. Oppose — Per above. This is Slash, mission complete! 20:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
20. Oppose — --Purushelk (wall • contribs) 20:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
21. Oppose — Per Thailog. Annawantimes (Talk) 17:20, August 1, 2012 (UTC)

RandomRanaun

Support

1. Support — "God Lemongrab is annoying". I think I need to say nothing more. Lemon☆Star 01:30, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

   Support — He is always there to make small but inappropriate remarks. After a while, it becomes too much. Matey Y. (talk • A:TLoM)  01:50, July 31, 2012 (UTC)

Neutral

Oppose

1. Oppose — Per my comments above: this is just a petty revenge from users seeking an opportunity to demote people they don't like. ― Thailog 01:42, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
2. Oppose — Per Thailog. There was no wrongdoing here. SifuHotman90
3. Oppose — Per Thailog. The 888th Avatar (talk) 02:06, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
4. Oppose — Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Yes, it may be a bit harsh, but the measures being taken are unjustified. FooFoo (wall • contribs • blog) 02:16, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
5. Oppose — This is not called for since his comments were not vulgar or extremely insulting. WEFAang (wall • contribs) 02:20, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
6. Oppose — This is a disgrace. If you go to the War Room, be prepared, it is a debate. If you can't stand the heat, than don't play with fire, and definitely don't come crying afterwards that you got burned. Your arguments were indeed very annoying as you never answered any questions, completely ignored users in the end and refused to cooperate what so ever. Don't you taking out your bruised ego on a good user. Lady Lostris (talk • HotN) 02:24, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
7. Oppose — Hells, bells, and whistles no!--Boomeraang Squad, always right back at ya. (wall • contribs) 03:17, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
8. Oppose — Same reasoning as before: exceptional work and does not deserve to have his rights removed. The Ultimate Waterbender 02:44, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
9. Oppose — Uiop60 02:50, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
10. Oppose — See my opinion above. Katara and Bolin Fanboy Send me a messenger hawk 02:57, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
11. Oppose — Per my comment in Lady Lostris's section. Dcasawang1 • wall 03:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
12. Oppose — User of the Month (click), anyone? Seriously, get some sense and stop being so petty. Vulmen (talk • EoK) 03:18, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
13. Oppose — No friendly message was shown, so all other evidence is irrelevant. --AvatarRokus Ghost (Message me • Read my fanon) 04:08, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
14. Oppose — Err... Really? RandomRanaun? And "annoying"? I really can't dignify these support votes with a response. KettleMeetPot (wall • contribs) 05:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
15. Oppose — Per my earlier statement Truly Ferret 06:02, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
16. Oppose — Per my statement above. HAMMEROFTHOR 11:10, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
17. Oppose — just no. He has done more good then bad.Iceland77 11:17, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
18. Oppose — Calling someone annoying does not warrant a removal of his rights. Annawantimes (Talk) 16:29, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
19. Oppose — This is quite obviously a grudge match at best and at worst a temper tantrum. --Harpalyce (wall • contribs) 18:04, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
20. Oppose — Per above.  Technology Wizard  Wall  Contribs  18:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
21. Oppose — Per Thailog and Annawan. This is Slash, mission complete! 20:21, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
22. Oppose — --Purushelk (wall • contribs) 20:48, July 31, 2012 (UTC)
23. Oppose — I agree with Thailong. This may as well be a "Let's Remove The power that The People of wiki chose to give the power in the first place and anyone we don't like", Need i say more? Count the stars - Shao 16:45, August 1, 2012 (UTC)