Forum:Farewell From Iritscen
BYE GUYS
Well, what can I say? It was fun while it lasted. I guess I could rant on about how one bad apple can ruin a good thing for other people. I mean, I was looking forward to continuing to contribute to the site for a long time to come. I was still getting settled in as a new member of Uncyclopedia when I found one day early in April that I had been banned for 30 days because I share an IP range with a certain vandal. After asking around, it turns out that this has happened to others, and it's considered "acceptable collateral damage" to shut out good members along with bad ones.
When I got to the bottom of the reason behind the 30 day ban, I resolved to wait it out, meanwhile finding out that there was a contest. Despite being sick and stressed out from work, I took the time to write and illustrate the Grumpikins article (are you surprised to learn that the article is the product of a fevered mind? No, I didn't think so). Elvis graciously posted it for me. I figured that it would either win the contest or be absolutely reviled and I would resign in infamy. And what do you know? People actually liked it.
Meanwhile, all I could do was post on my own Talk Page. When the 30 days were up, I eagerly tried to edit a page that seriously needed some TLC. I found that I was now under a 15 day ban until the middle of May. I laughed, tried to at least post to my own Talk Page to explain why no one had heard back from me recently, and found that now I had no editing privileges at all. This was slightly annoying, but I found other things to do with my time until the ban was up. I'm a busy guy.
So, at the end of May, I came back and found that my IP range was now under a 6 month ban. Since then the ban has been upped to one year. Yes, June 2007.
And I asked myself, "Self, how much does Uncyclopedia really mean to you?" I've only been a contributing member with editing privileges for roughly one month. So, I haven't really had a heck of a lot of time to get attached to the place. And honestly, at this point, I don't really care anymore. I'm not angry, I'm just weary. Who's to say that, if I come back in 6 months and resume my work here, I won't get incidentally banned again when some jerkface in my neck of the woods starts blanking pages? Then it will be harder to let go than it is now.
(It was pointed out to me that most people can obtain a new IP address by resetting their connection or what-not, but I don't see how that helps if the whole range is banned. I don't really understand the intricacies of that IP stuff. In any case, it's not an option for me because I don't have access to the Net except at work, or occasionally at public terminals, such as the one I'm using right now.)
Probably only about 5 people actually have conversed with me here at Uncyclopedia, but it's possible at least one of those 5 people is miffed because I was supposed to get back to them on something. I can't simply leave without at least explaining why I never did some of the things I said I would do. Although I might be back to check my Talk Page for responses, I'm no longer going to be reading anything else on Uncyc because it's too hard to look at the articles that need work and to know that I could fix them up, but I'm not able to.
One has to question whether it is productive to take out one pesky kid by using a wide-ranging ban that has also eliminated at least one productive member of this site, if not more. But I realize that running a wiki isn't an easy task.
Well, I told myself I wouldn't make this an angsty diatribe. Let me just say that I was honestly touched when my article was (probably just barely) selected as "Best Article". It showed me that I could do humor my way, being totally true to my own sense of humor, and that others could appreciate it. So I'm not going away angry. Just think of it as a premature retirement, with $10 in pension. I'll try not to spend it all in one place :-) Adios. --207.210.136.164 20:09, 19 June 2006 (UTC) (Iritscen)
- Don't go riding off into the west just yet. I'll have a word with the more technological minded on IRC tonight and see if there is something we can do. If there isn't I'd be happy to post your stuff for you. I'm not sure why there is a range block on any account, but I will ask someone who is likely to know. -- Sir Mhaille
(talk to me)
- *sniff* That's an amazing story. And so sad... --Brigadier General Sir Zombiebaron 16:11, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
A Call to Action!
Iritscen, this is known as Bug 550 on bugzilla.wikimedia.org, which is where Wikipeople go to have lengthy discussions about bugs, changes, and other technical issues, including this one. These discussions often become so extensive that to print them out on a continuous roll of paper would result in a printout longer than the height of Godzilla, hence the name "bugzilla." Needless to say, if the same amount of energy was expended in solving the problem as has been spent arguing about it, it's a fair guess that it wouldn't be a problem anymore! Meanwhile, the issue has also moved into the user-community discussion stage at Wikipedia itself.
I'd like to encourage everyone here who has a Wikipedia (or bugzilla) account to go over there right now and vote in favor of the first (or second) "Add this new form of blocking" proposal, assuming you haven't already, in the hopes that it will soon allow valued contributors like Iritscen to come back and not be subjected to this sort of grossly unfair, uh, sort of thing. Iritscen is a talented writer and a stand-up guy, he certainly deserves a break, and it'll only take y'all about 2-3 minutes! Do it! Do it now! c • > • cunwapquc? 02:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- I don´t get it. They are voting whether to apply this new way of banning there over wikipedia. How does that affect on us at all? Shouldn´t we disscus if we want to apply it over here?---Asteroid B612
(aka Rataube) - Ñ 16:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- I dunno... Maybe we can? The bugzilla page above has a link to the actual PHP patch code, but I wasn't sure if this was something that had to be built into MediaWiki itself or if it could be implemented on individual wikis. I guess I ass-u-me'd that if it were possible to implement it on individual wikis, Uncyc would have done it by now... But I could certainly be wrong about that, so if it's just a case of nobody having thought to do it yet, then personally I think we should, ASAP. Presumably the developers here can always change it back or turn it off if it becomes a problem somehow.
- To be fair, I think the practical objection to this proposal is that it would encourage vandals to create large numbers of spurious accounts, which would then clutter up the user list and make account names unavailable that real users might actually want. Spurious account names are certainly annoying, and the admins will have to decide of course, but I'd rather have a User:Iritscen even if it means a hundred User:Wankers on Wheels! accounts. c • > • cunwapquc? 00:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Several weeks later...
We're capable of range-block exceptions for registered/named accounts now, aren't we? If so, maybe now would be a good time to revisit this issue, as they say. c • > • cunwapquc? 03:52, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- Err... not that I know of, but I'll check with the techs.
t o m p k i n s blah. ﺞوﻦ וףה ՃՄ ண்ஸ ފއހ วอฏม +տ trade websites 04:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- 1.8alpha is the latest version and Wikipedia is already running with it. It's just this wiki that's a version behind. --Carlb 04:40, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Er, so does Iritscen get back in or not? And if so, I hope someone still has his email address -- Sir Armando Perentie 
KUN FP 07:41, 2 August 2006 (UTC)