User:MentalMouse42/Spencer10APSC

Spencer10APSC Display
The user Spencer10APSC has been posting a series of comments on my talk page that have gone from snippy through obnoxious to arrogant and finally incoherent. Since Ultradude25 has apparently decided to let him off with a warning, I feel my best remaining response, is simply to leave them online for other people to see (and if Spencer's not embarrassed by them, he should be). However, I don't want them crudding up my talk page, so I've moved them to their own page. Also included are my replies and Ultradude25's warning. --Mental Mouse 10:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Welcome! and a few NOTES.
Hi Mental Mouse, And welcome to Minecraft Wiki! I Just want to say, Please be carfull when saying that a User or Users have made a mistake like "Nuking" a page or topic. See Rule5. :) Just keep that in mind. You may also come to My talk page If you have any questions. Have a good time editing! :D Spencer10APSC 18:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

No, Not that kind.
"Hmm. The ability to ban people would seem to be a fundamental marker of a "mod" -- the user-admin link given by timrem lists several people who presumably have that ability, while the rest of us are limited to "sweet reason" and reversions. --Mental Mouse 12:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)"


 * No, Not that kind of mod. The kind that moderates pages for vandalism, fixing facts, E.T.C. Over here, It seems the Official Mods seem to be called "Bureaucrats". Call me crazy if you want, But I don't know exactly what Bureaucrats are. But yes, It would make since on a Forum, But Other then that, I guess you could be your own mod. Well As for the forum (What you said above), Talk to Dinoguy1000, He could probably help you with the Forum thing. Give him a "Call". Later. Spencer10APSC 18:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, that's a terminology issue. The thing is, in an open wiki like this one, any user can act to deal with problems... within certain limits.  That's the whole point of a wiki.  But imagine if every spammer and vandal was able to ban other users!  Clearly not a survivable situation... yet, any wiki such as this one needs at least one person (more for big sites) who has that power -- the delegated (or direct) power of the site owner, to kick out people who simply refuse to play by the rules, or are actively destructive.  Those folks are what I'm calling "moderators", because that's what they're called in the blog-style forums that I've spent more time in.  --Mental Mouse 19:10, 29 August 2012 (UTC)


 * *Sigh* Well what ever. There is no rule that says anything about using this term, Just as long as you use that term wisely. what I have is a mere expression. As you said: "any user can act to deal with problems... within certain limits." You also said: "...Those folks are what I'm calling "moderators", because that's what they're called in the blog-style forums that I've spent more time in." See that's your Problem, (Reasonably specking) You "appear" to think that this is a blog like site. (If I'm wrong about your thinking, Sorry, Just what it sounds like). Here, the term "Mod" Has more then one meaning. Like what timrem says: "I try to Moderate pages, and clean up vandalism". Or me, Saying similar. Moderating here As far as I know, is just patrolling the pages, And to the max of our allowable extent, try to help. Very sorry if this does not sound right, but here it is: No one likes a "tattle tale" about unnecessary "terminology issue(s)". Things here often have more then one meaning. Even if it does not make sense at first. You just need to ask what they mean by that. Also, I don't know if you pay attention to me, But if you do, You will notice that I almost never say anything about moderating, Unless of coarse, Some one asks. Same thing with Administrators/Bureaucrats. ''The term is just a term. Not to be used as a way to "WIN" a conversation. So that's that. The nice thing is, is that, When it comes to mistakes, like yours... is I, Unlike some folks, DO NOT get mad at you for making it sound bad. But I know what you mean. Even what you probably think you do not mean. (That happens sometimes ;)-). Regardless of that I'm trying to help you, if you don't mind, I'd rather NOT "Cary on" this topic Because this can raise more questions than I can answer. So Nicely speaking, this topic is over. Good regards. ☎ &#34;To Protect And Moderate&#34; (Spencer10APSC) 20:12, 31 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't have anything further to say about terminology... but weren't you, in a previous entry, telling me to be careful about calling out other users for mistakes? --Mental Mouse 02:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC
 * I don't recall what exactly what the user(s) mistake(s) was. I Do recall, that it had something to do with the FACT you at the time were new. That's all, did not want it to get out of hand. Just being clear about being careful at the time. Read my follow up message. ☎ &#34;To Protect And Moderate&#34; (Spencer10APSC) 16:05, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Suggestions.*
I am open to this topic (For now) Just keep it on topic! :). Now, Sorry, I forgot to tell you this. (Not that you knew this) But this is not the Place to post game Suggestions. It would be nice, but that is not allowed, this is a place to document the game. You can however, Post those Ideas on the forums. Like I said,*(My Mistake) Dinoguy1000 Does not (As far as I know) Help with the forums. *You should try asking Kizzycocoa, Or ultradude25. Ether one should be able to help you. Hope this will help. ;) ☎ &#34;To Protect And Moderate&#34; (Spencer10APSC) 20:34, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Dude, perhaps you should actually check with one of those folks yourself, before telling other users what's "not allowed". I've seen comments on the admin noticeboard making it quite clear that on talk pages, anything not actually spammy or abusive is allowed -- the admins were discussing a user who was running a personal, non-Minecraft-related forum on his talk page, and didn't seem to feel they had a right to smite that.  (The problem eventually took care of itself -- score one for restraint.)  Further, I quote the trailing note from the Wiki rules:  "Please note: Articles in the User: namespace can be used for anything, provided rules 1, 2, 5, 13, 15.1, 21.1 and 22 are still followed."  Whether my suggestions will be seen by anyone relevant is another question entirely, but I'm just stashing them here until I have the spoons to deal with the forum issue.  I do appreciate your suggestions for who to contact when I do get around to that. --Mental Mouse 02:01, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * 1st, The Suggestions are for you. Not me. 2nd, Orthotope that told me about the Rule 5, and said I could, to tell others about it when I had to. So if You have a problem with that, talk to him. 3rd timrem also told me about NO Suggestions on the wiki. ONLY POST FACTS. If you want to know about that, Talk to him two if you want. 4th, Ether way, I've been BUSY lately. (Read slowly:)So please stop telling me Your opinions. And Give me FACTS (With a link). If I am wrong about your opinions, Sorry, But prove they are fact(s). Otherwise I will NOT reply to your posts anymore Intel feather notice. Good regards. ☎ &#34;To Protect And Moderate&#34; (Spencer10APSC) 16:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Spencer, I'd recommend you read the rules properly before trying to tell people that they're breaking them... –ultradude25 (T&#124;C) at 08:32, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

More notes on Spencer's comments
I do want to point some things out for folks who might not have picked up on the subtleties here: --Mental Mouse 12:18, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Note that Spencer was leaving those notes on my talk page, yet he tells me "this topic is over", later warns me to "keep it on topic", and culminates by complaining that he's BUSY, and demanding that I "stop telling [him] [my] opinions".
 * 2) Even after establishing in the "terminology" exchange that he's not a Bureaucrat nor Admin, but a User just like me, he comes out with "The Suggestions are for you.  Not me."  It's not too clear just what he's referring to, but any way you read it, it's pretty rich.
 * 3) After I quote the wiki rules, he says "Give me FACTS (With a link)", and cites what he was "told" by two other "regular users" to support his claims.  Well, those wiki rules are up in the sidebar, but hey, here's a link.
 * 4) * Regarding the example I gave, I tracked it down and found I'd misinterpreted the business -- the guy did get told off for his private forum (which was at least for his own MC server) and the forum was shoved to a subpage. (It's apparently since been deleted.)
 * 5) His final comment ends with what looks like a classic "flounce".  Let's wait and see if he keeps that promise.