User talk:Tcdoom

Re: Bjweeks is a vandle

Many games have clan activity but Wikipedia is not the place to describe every clan or to spam your clan links. BJ^Talk 00:47, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:Assume good faith before calling me a vandal and threatening me. BJ^Talk 01:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Visit the Zdaemon Clan Website before you come in here and edit posts. Fact is that they are a community that thrives on Clan Membership. Furthermore, many members of the community have been playing since the bbs Days and would appreciate a way to find Doom2 Alumni.

It is the very clans that make up the community with the hosting of Servers that users play on.

Thats great but still Wikipedia is not the place for a list of clans. BJ^Talk 01:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are clearly a vandal and will be banned shortly. Your last incident deleted the Current Staff Members of the community. It's obvious you are out to sabotage this WIKI. If you insist on acting like a 13 year old kiddie hacker then my next step will be to contact the authorities at your High School in AZ and bring your hacking activities and vandalism to their attention.

Grow up and go do some homework.

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. BJ^Talk 01:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words. I was not aware that you were so sensitive. I will seek other means to deal with this matter as it pertains to the content in question. Mediation would seem the appropriate step at this point so as to avoid unnecessary disruption to the rest of the contributors.

Because the content was here for some time before you deleted it, and no one other than yourself objected to it, I would ask that you respect the content as it was and that we mediate this matter. Zdaemon devotes their front page toward their Clans and Clans are an very important to the community. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_(computer_gaming) is a great example of the important of clans as they relate to the internet and first person shooters. Because Doom2 was the first multiplayer first person shooter game to go mainstream, one could strongly argue the importance of clans and their relationship to the zdaemon.org community. Anyone who played doom2 in the late 90's in a multiplayer environment, would more than likely appreciate the clans and finding former clan members. Dwango United is one such example as well as TCDOOM, as they have over 5,000 members in the late 90's.

"I was not aware that you were so sensitive"

"You are clearly a vandal and will be banned shortly" "13 year old kiddie hacker" "next step will be to contact the authorities at your High School in AZ" "I will contact his high school directly and notify them of this abuse." "If this vanalism continues, you will be reported."

Your constant threats against me are disruptive and against WP:NPA. My edits are not vandalism, they are good faith edits because I feel that the content should not be in Wikipeida. I have already requested a third opinion and I hope you can keep this dispute civil without threating me, calling me a vandal, etc. BJ^Talk 02:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for again bringing the WP:NPA to my attention. I have since sought mediation with Armedblowfish regarding this matter. I was unaware that mediation was an option and it was my contention to contact the proper authorities as this would be my normal course of action if I believe there is internet hacking or vandalism occuring. If you are truly "threatened" by my posts, then perhaps you should refrain from smug instigation. It is both counter-productive and disruptive. I sincerely ask for your cooperation in this regard.

Please stop making this personal in nature and refrain from the continued instigations.--Tcdoom 02:44, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea how _I_ made this personal nor what "smug instigation" I have posted. BJ^Talk 02:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have contacted Armedblowfish. If you would be so kind as to avoid posting to my talk, I would be grateful. At this time I would ask that you please follow the proper Wikipedia policies and procedures, as it will help us both to avoid further conflict or controversy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes, more specifically "Second step: Disengage for a while". I thank you in advance for your cooperation.--Tcdoom 03:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation vs. Arbitration

Hello, on the recent message you left on my talk page, you seemed to use the terms "mediation" and "arbitration" interchangeably ("mediation" twice, and "arbitration" three times).

Mediation and arbitration fulfill two very different roles. Mediation attempts to find a solution that everyone will be happy with, or at least satisfied with. Mediation cannot enforce anything, or come to a binding decision. In other words, mediation is entirely voluntary.

Arbitration, on the other hand, does come up with a binding decision, and can enforce it. Arbitration does not necessasarily try to come up with a solution that makes all involved parties happy/satisfied, although that is not to say they don't respect the overall will of the community as they interpret it. Arbitration does not require the consent of all parties. (Similiar to arbitration is third opinion, but this is not binding, and is more like a tiebreaking vote.)

Anyways, I'm not completely sure which you are interested in, but I'm a mediator. So, if you'd like mediation, I'd be happy to help, so long as the other party agrees. If you want arbitration, you'll have to take your request to the Arbitration Committee, although I doubt they would hear your case this early in the dispute resolution process. (Alternatives are Requests for Comment and third opinion.)

Thanks!
Armedblowfish (talk|mail) 14:24, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I left this on your talk page

Armedblowfish, thank you for your prompt attention.

As per dictionary.com:

ar·bi·tra·tion (ärb-trshn) Pronunciation Key

n. The process by which the parties to a dispute submit their differences to the judgment of an impartial person or group appointed by mutual consent or statutory provision.

me‧di‧a‧tion 1. action in mediating between parties, as to effect an agreement or reconciliation.

—Synonyms 1. Mediation, arbitration designate processes for bringing about agreement or reconciliation between opponents in a dispute. Mediation implies deliberation that results in solutions that may or may not be accepted by the contending parties. Arbitration involves a more formal deliberation, it being understood that the results will be binding on the contending parties.

Semantics aside, I would appreciate your help in dealing with this certain matter, however that may be.