User talk:Eric the Grape

I Don't Understand your PC re-numbering on iTaC
Hi, I'm not understanding the reason you changed the Category:Episodes on iTake A Cruise from '405' to '505', although the PC is listed in the box (and script) as 405-407. Because of that, the Category is listed to airing in the 5th season and not in the 4th. Can you explain why you changed it, and what source (link) you used to change it? I believe it should be the '405' as listed in the script page and in the box, airing near the end of the 4th season; maybe the finale of it. I'm just curious on how iTaC is listed in what season, and how you know it's for the 5th instead of the 4th. Thanks. Katydidit 01:50, May 10, 2011 (UTC)


 * That's just the airing order, not the pc. I still think that #401 will begin Season 5 according to nickelodeon, but that's just my opinion. --  SeddieBerserker   (talk)  02:09, May 10, 2011 (UTC)

I know
I'm just a adding a few.

Slicknickshady 05:25, May 11, 2011 (UTC)

Hi SeddieBerserker! I'd really like to talk to you if possible.

AllzFayre 08:05, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

Real life ships
Since some people feel that especially the Jax page goes to far with spreading rumors, I'm discussing with SlickNick and Roxas if we should delete it and if we do, if all the other real life ships should go, too; I'm not into real life shipping anyway, so I don't really feel qualified to make a decision concerning this. Please give your opinion so we can decide what to do. Mak23686 17:25, May 13, 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm in for limiting it to the main cast; MnM is quite short (I doubt it will be missed), and Jax is full of stuff that probably doesn't really mean anything. Mak23686 10:23, May 15, 2011 (UTC)

Jathan Page
Does the Jathan page and other real life shipping page have to be deleted. I'll admit there's some fabricated rumors about their dating life, but it mostly about their friendship and it does involve two of the most popular actors on the show besides Miranda, Jennette and Nathan are good friends and work together more so than Miranda sometimes I think it deserves to still be a page. Just my opinion.

--DevonAndersen 23:08, May 13, 2011 (UTC)

Also posted the same thing on Mak's page

Your opinion on this blog
You think this blog should be deleted? Some passages and comments might be quite harsh towards Creddie.

http://icarly.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:Itzxlucy/Sam_can%27t_just_fall_out_of_love_with_Freddie

Mak23686 19:01, May 14, 2011 (UTC)

Another blog
Sockstar calls for deletion of this blog:

http://icarly.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:The_Sam_Puckett/Why_Carly_Is_NOT_Going_To_Make_A_Move_On_Freddie_After_iOMG

(he likes doing that now).

Personally, I think it would be enough to take out the line "the Creddie ship, romantically, has sailed" and work through the comments a little, but please give your opinion. Mak23686 17:40, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Vandals
Unfortunately, no. Several unregistered contributors wrote on Bunnyboo50's blog on Sonic Wiki saying that MeepSheep worked for Anonymous. The blog was deleted because of these comments. Parstin32 19:44, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Jathan.
Since Mak seems not to be interested/busy, can you please go to the Jathan page and make it clear to slicknickshady that he is incorrect with calling Jen and Nathan 'best friends' and that his 'documentation' is no longer valid. He's reverting your own edits and it is going to cause an edit war.

Everyone on the Jathan page is in agreement that they are no long best friends except him.

The wikia needs to be accurate otherwise it's worthless. He's holding the Jathan page hostage and hoping we all get tired of trying to make it accurate. Sockstar1 06:41, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I know you and Mak will take a look at the evidence and come to the same conclusion that everyone who isn't overly invested in the Jathan pairing came to. The accurate and correct one, and not a compromise just to avoid drama that introduces inaccuracy. I also know you won't be intimidated by one person who would otherwise refuse to listen to reason. Sockstar1 06:59, May 19, 2011 (UTC)

Jathan page
Since discussing it with SlickNick and Sockstar gets me nowhere, I'm gonna let the admins vote:

Do you think this sentence is needed in the opening paragraph of the Jathan page?

"Jennette has recently tweeted that she is not best friends with, and instead is just friends, with Nathan. "

I think its not because it goes too far into detail for an opening. Mak23686 17:59, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Check block
Please check this block:

http://icarly.wikia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:SeddieLoves89&action=edit&section=new

Remember to check the deleted contributions.

Mak23686 09:56, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Raging Cupcakes
[What follows is an exact copy of my discussion to Mak (and his replies) about his block on Raging Cupcakes for 1 month for expressing 'hatred' on Sam. I don't know how to post the same message to two people at the same time, if you know how to do that, please tell me; else it will be done separately with copy-paste.]

I wanted to ask you about Raging Cupcakes, banned for a month on May 17. She expressed a hatred for Sam, as you mentioned in your block. Is it now considered all right for us admins to block people merely for expressing hatred for a character without any ship-warring? I'm just wondering how far this blocking is going to go for disliking actors, characters, episodes, items in the episodes, etc. Did she use bad language or something so improper she had to be blocked for a whole month? Just curious what is going to be banned next in expressing views, and why. Thanks. Katydidit 22:25, May 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * Naah, the month was probably a bit harsh ... my bad. Two weeks should be enough.


 * Actively HATING on a character or a cast member is inappropriate. Mak23686 22:37, May 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok, but what is the distinction between *expressing* hatred for a character, and *actively hating* on a character you are making? Also, she *never* got a warning because I checked for it this time, which I think should be mandatory (except in the most egregious circumstances) before actually BLOCKing them. What do you say? And although 2 weeks is better, I still don't see why it should be anything at all, unless improper language, threats, or other valid reason to block someone is made in violation of an actual rule listed. I think we might be cracking down too hard in too many cases. Just my personal opinion, because of our disgust with ship-warring it leads us to do more blocking. WARNING should always be done first, and it wasn't done in her case. I'm inclined to rescind your block completely. Sorry, but I have to strongly disagree with the block unless you can make a case why any block is necessary on her. Let's re-think this "BLOCK mentality first" before issuing a polite warning and THEN if it happens again, consider a BLOCK and make it an appropriate length befitting the abuse. ok? Katydidit 22:57, May 21, 2011 (UTC)


 * I think we should discuss this with SeddieBerserker, before we do more BLOCKs without any warnings, and how severe and for what abuses we block for. I don't know how to post the same message to two people at the same time, so I'm going to repeat my entire message to you, to him. Katydidit 23:06, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Addition: I notice in the ICarly_Wiki_Community_Policy, there is *no* rule against expressing hatred against a character, actor, episode, items in an episode, etc. We are breaking our own rules in blocking people only because in our zeal stopping ship-warring (which *is* listed). This can't go on without an explicit rule change on whether expressing hatred is a rule-break, or not. And if not, why are we so concerned if someone hates a character or actor, as long as no bad language or improper action (threat) is expressed. We need your input on this very important matter. Thank you. Katydidit 23:27, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * See #8 --  SeddieBerserker   (talk)  23:33, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Addition 2: I was trying to post about #8 (when your reply stopped it) on 'Inappropriate' items. It does say 'bashing characters'. I think that should be removed, because it is too vague, and not threatening our integrity if someone expresses a negative view on a *character*. This is a tv show, remember. It's not a big deal if someone does that, as long as politeness is obeyed and nobody is physically threatened. Maybe you think it should be kept in anyway. I would disagree, but if you modified it to rephrase that #8 point in some way, it might satisfy my objection to it. My desire for more robust discussion, as long as it is done politely, is still paramount to me in this wiki. Do you feel the same way? Thanks! Katydidit 23:34, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Why does threatening a real person (cast/crew, etc.) equivalent to 'bashing' a character? I don't get it, or the reason for adding that last phrase. Can it be deleted without threatening the integrity of this wiki? I hope at least it could be rephrased, if not eliminated. Katydidit 23:37, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Robust discussion is fine. Bashing is not. You should take it up with the other admins if you have further concerns. --  SeddieBerserker   (talk)  23:43, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Why does threatening a real person (cast/crew, etc.) equivalent to 'bashing' a character? I don't get it, or the reason for adding that last phrase. Can it be deleted without threatening the integrity of this wiki? I hope at least it could be rephrased, if not eliminated. Katydidit 23:37, May 21, 2011 (UTC)
 * Robust discussion is fine. Bashing is not. You should take it up with the other admins if you have further concerns. --  SeddieBerserker   (talk)  23:43, May 21, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the change in title to Jennette McCurdy Discography
Thanks for the change in title to Jennette McCurdy Discography. Can moderators only shift titles? How do i become a moderator?Jeneral28 13:22, May 28, 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok.Jeneral28 12:53, May 30, 2011 (UTC)

Re:Blog
Yes. Absolutely. Without hesitation. I was hoping someone would ask that. Kenjiro (talk) 02:32, June 1, 2011 (UTC)

Explanation for bad behavior
Hi SeddieBerskerer, I just wanted to explain "my" cursing in the Creddie page, and offending the people there. My friend is hacking my account and she was super mad because Raging Cupcakes offended her. I just wanted to clarify that it WASN'T me! I hope you understand, thankyou for your time.

Check block
Check this block, please; if you think we should let him go bc he edited his comment, its cool. Mak23686 18:58, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

Forgot the link:

User talk:Mario123boy

Mak23686 19:19, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

Punishing an accused 'ship-warrer' before a finding of 'guilty'
Hi, what I just messaged to Mak was this reply on our punishing an accused ship-warrer with a 1-wk block *before* a subsequent finding of 'guilty' by at least 2 other admins. I mentioned getting you into this discussion, and I don't know how to reply to 2 people with the same message at the same time. If you can tell me how to do that, I'd appreciate it. Anyway, here is the text I sent after his ID'ing the accused:

User talk:Mario123boy

Mak23686 19:19, June 3, 2011 (UTC)


 * I went through his last 5 comments: 1 on May 27, 3 on May 29, and one on May 30. I didn't see anything resembling ship-warring. If what I'm seeing on his history (Contributions link) has been edited by him, he seems ok and shouldn't be blocked. If no more than 1 other admin says 'yes, block him', do you then immediately undo the 1-week block, since he was found 'not guilty'? Should admins be punished if we wrongly accuse someone of ship-warring without at least 2 other admins agreeing? How do we make it up to the wrongly-accused ship-warrer if he is blocked for 2+ days for nothing he did wrong? I think there should not be *any block* on an accused ship-warrer, UNTIL AFTER at least 2 other admins agree. IOW, no punishment before being found 'guilty', just as in law. What do you say to this reasonable change? There should be a discussion with SeddieBerserker on our imposing punishment *before* a finding of 'guilty'. Katydidit 19:58, June 3, 2011 (UTC)
 * Just warn them, we're not in agreement. --  SeddieBerserker   (talk)  20:01, June 3, 2011 (UTC)

Question
I was on the Creddie page (I was bored) and I saw a picture that said underneath it:"They actually ship Seddie?!!" Would that be considered ship warring?

HeyPeople145 02:13, June 4, 2011 (UTC)HeyPeople145

Emailing
How do you email someone? Kenjiro (talk) 22:10, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

How do you specify a target? Kenjiro (talk) 23:00, June 4, 2011 (UTC)

I LIKE ICARLY IS FUNNY AND IT MAKES ME LAUGHT 

Change Username
Hi. I want to change my username to StripedPurpleFudgeControl. And I want to change it completely like that, so when I comment it'll be like that. I heard the you change your name from SeddieBerserker, to your username now. I think you can help me. Thanks! Seddieluver8 17:06, June 11, 2011 (UTC)Seddieluver8

Did you tell Slicknickshady he could remove the warning I gave him?
Eric, did you tell Slicknickshady he could remove my Warning on his abusing our members in other websites as much as he wanted, whenever he felt like it? He told me that, but he could be lying. I wanted to get the truth on this from you. I hope you didn't say that to him, but if you did, I will *still* block him if I hear another complaint about him posting screen-caps on other websites ridiculing our members, and I strongly disagree on you doing that if true. What is the truth about what he said about removing the Warning? Are you going to stand by him no matter what he says (or does) in other websites about our members? If what Sockstar said you are buddies with him and that is why she told me instead of you, you might need to recuse yourself from any disagreements about him, just as judges do. Katydidit 02:58, June 15, 2011 (UTC)

I forgot to mention I revised the #4 and #5 Inappropriate policies because of what he did. I didn't believe someone would stoop so low to do something that despicable, but this is the Internet, so nothing can just be limited to this wiki when abuses occur. I think what he did was highly unethical at the least, and abusive to our members at worst. Katydidit 03:02, June 15, 2011 (UTC)

You are so wrong. I'm not going to stop. It's not against the rules. You just can't go changing rules by yourself. You can't block me by yourself. It's not inappropriate. It isnt abusive or unethical. Do you know why sockstar went to you? Because Mak and Eric didnt do anything i don't know because i didnt do anything wrong. You need to recuse yourself katydidit. Slicknickshady 03:11, June 15, 2011 (UTC)


 * Why should *I* recuse myself when I never heard of you before now? I don't have any previous contact with you to be either biased 'for' or 'against' you. Oh, and I *can* block you by myself, if Eric (or Mak) doesn't over-ride my decision on your Inappropriate conduct *before* any change I made. What you did was highly unethical if not actually breaking the rules. You are just blind to notice your abusive and unethical behavior to try to get around the rule because it wasn't made on this wiki. But you used information *from* this wiki and our members' comments to abuse and (probably) ship-war. I can't block you by myself on the ship-war charge, but there are 3 other admin's (we only need 3 of the 5 to convict) beside myself (excl. Eric) who *can* block you for 3 months minimum on the ship-war charge. Katydidit 03:45, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Good luck trying.
 * Slicknickshady 03:57, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Let it go, Nick. We'll sort this out by tomorrow.  Eric the Grape talk 04:01, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * He's not going to block me for 3 months. I have not ship warred at all. lol. He's making up stuff. I'm not blind. Katy just can't admit he's wrong. Who is he to decide what is unethical? He's not. Also it's not inappropriate. You don't decide that either Katy.
 * Slicknickshady 04:05, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * The "reason" I went to Katydidit is because I know he's an unbiased, rational moderator. Eric is biased due to his friendship with Slick (and as we have seen above Eric attempting to stop any kind of punishment for this blatant act of profanity and ship-warring), and Mak hadn't responded to the last issue I brought up with him. Sockstar1 07:02, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * Slicknickshady 04:05, June 15, 2011 (UTC)
 * The "reason" I went to Katydidit is because I know he's an unbiased, rational moderator. Eric is biased due to his friendship with Slick (and as we have seen above Eric attempting to stop any kind of punishment for this blatant act of profanity and ship-warring), and Mak hadn't responded to the last issue I brought up with him. Sockstar1 07:02, June 15, 2011 (UTC)

The rules are still there
Eric, the rules I amended are still there. If you do NOT remove or alter my changes to not say what they say now, they *are* the rules as stands. If so, and if Slick does what he did before, he will then be breaking the rules and should therefore be liable for punishment. Agree, or disagree? If disagree, then why? You are the head guy on this wiki. I'll go along with your decision. But if you let it stand as changed and any are therefore broken, you *must* allow enforcement of them by any admin! Let me know your decision, because any appeal to the other 3 admin's is then not applicable. Unless, you also want all 5 (is Dan TD still an official admin, who would be the 6th?) of us to rule on my rule change separately, besides on what Slick did. Katydidit 04:36, June 15, 2011 (UTC)

What kind of logic are you using? If he doesnt remove them he must agree?

Slicknickshady 04:40, June 15, 2011 (UTC)

Slick accuses admin of being a paedophile
http://i55.tinypic.com/2i0akwk.png

A clear breach of rules:

5: Insulting other user.

7: Harassing another user.

Rule 7 carries a punishment of a 3 month to permanent ban.

You can no longer say Slick is doing something outside our 'jurisdiction.' This is as clear a breach as you can get. You can no longer ignore his behaviour on this site. Sockstar1 09:36, June 16, 2011 (UTC)

What I messaged to Slick
Well I admire that you're such a huge Seddie/Jathan fan I love your posts and your personality, but it's not cool to diss people man. I mean I don't want to get all elementary school on you, but maybe next time instead of posting screen caps about people. Just ignore or you know vent to me or @EricTheGrape on his or my talk page. You seem like a pretty nice guy if someone says something you don't agree with again just vent to me or @EricTheGrape it's not cool to insult people as cliche as it sounds be the bigger person.

What I messaged @KatyDidI so does that mean u don't want me to post the seddie screen caps he posts? and what his comments comments were they offensive i always ignored those i just posted the seddie/jathan stuff he had I will if u feel that's necessary, but about the seddie/jathan stuff?

It will be necessary if you keep screen capping conversations. Just try to post positive is what I ask of you. Not trying to tell you what to do just an opinion/suggestion. I consider you a friend, but instead of screen capping just ignore it or vent to me or @EricTheGrape

I will also send this @KatyDidIt and I agree what he did went too far,but he seems like a fairly good guy. He just went too far

--DevonAndersen 15:35, June 16, 2011 (UTC)

My defense, and BLOG APOLOGY
Eric, I was going to delete my blog as I told you, but you did it before I could. Just thought you should know that before you make any decisions. Did you notice my BLOG APOLOGY TO ALL THE USERS? I still believe when it comes to punishing an admin, all the other active admins *should be given a chance to vote on the punishment* (if warranted at all), and if so found 'guilty' of an extraordinary abuse(s), the length of time, and not up to only one or two admins. I also believe you should read what Sockstar wrote, since he did better in writing my defense than I believe I would in how I handled this unfortunate, and extremely unusual and complicated situation that developed with the other user:

"I would like to point a point across. I myself have been in trouble in the past. I believe that in some cases leniancy is warranted (in others, none, depending on how bad the offence was). Obviously I believed that for myself, argued my points and was unblocked. Additionally, I campaigned to have the rules and policies of the wikia clarified so that others would have a fair (in terms of procedure, not in who makes those decisions) system in place for rule breaches. I have since tried to be a great wikia user for this site. I know that it's not always an easy road, and that I can make mistakes. I am still learning.

--

Katydidit has proven in this case to be an extremely unbiased moderator/administrator, who takes the evidence at face value, and has upheld his view of justice and follow of the rules of the site regardless of what people ship.

--

Leniency. I believe that the service that Katydidit has given to this wiki has been exemplary up to this time. I believe that this situation is far and above the normal situation the administration faces, and that when things happen for the first time, that they can be learnt from, rather than punished. Since the blog is no longer up I am going to assume it was deleted, and since there is a new blog apologising, I hope that us users, and the 4 other administrators, will accept the apology and allow Katydidit to continue as an administrator. Sockstar1 17:44, June 16, 2011 (UTC)"

A compromise
I would like to request the unbanning of Slicknickshady under the conditions that he publicly apologize to you, as well as the other Admins. He has agreed to do so, if this can lift his ban.

Thanks for your time.

MellamoSammo! 18:17, June 17, 2011 (UTC)


 * My reply to her request is here:

"I have nothing to do with his block, so you're asking the wrong person. He should apologize to me *anyway* for his vicious, hateful, and wrongful accusations to try to get himself off-the-hook for all of *his* abuses to our members, but still needs to serve his blocking time since he broke the rules, as Eric the Grape has determined and as I also believed he did at the time, which are now incorporated into the amended rules adopted by all the admins. He can never, ever say again he "broke no rules." He also subsequently viciously attacked me (plus all the other 4 admins) *further* in this many tweets since his block. He needs to learn the hard way *not* to ever do again what he did, unless he enjoys being punished. Sorry, but you are barking up the wrong tree. Katydidit 18:41, June 17, 2011 (UTC)"

---

Also, I'll ask him to edit his talk page to issue his apology. Thank you for listening either way. MellamoSammo! 18:56, June 17, 2011 (UTC)

He *has yet to apologize to ME, and to the other users he abused that started this whole thing in the first place. So, it wasn't I who started it, or the name-calling--it was HIM. I read his "apology." He left out someone: me, and the users on this wiki he abused and ridiculed. Until he does that, I'm not in favor of letting him get off, when he DID *break the rules as you [sic] documented in his blocking him for 1 month: "Intimidating behaviour / harassment: personally attacking an admin." So, he first has to admit he broke those rules, *then* apologize to both me *and* the users he abused with his screencapping he got from this wiki. Only then will I agree, and only on the condition and promise he tell Eric *not* to block me at all for any time, since Slick was the instigator in this event. Oh, and there is something else you (and he) should be aware of in his harassment: you [sic] documented in a tweet to him earlier today other users have been BANNED for making his vicious, cruel, and wrongful idea in calling me the term he used for those people who actually *abused* a young person. Here is the tweet link: https://twitter.com/#!/Eric_the_Grape/status/81848141275602944

Until he does that, I'm not going to accept his so-called "apology" or let him escape the 1-month block he richly deserves. A copy of this is going to (sic) you. Katydidit 02:11, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Added info: Eric, he claims he didn't break the original rules. I claim a person can break the spirit if not the letter of the rules, and this is exactly what happened with his using screencaps from this wiki to abuse and ship-war against our members. It was a loophole he exploited in his defense, and that was why I closed it for future events and any user who tries to do that. I won't do a rule change unilaterally again. You have my word on that. I'll ask you and/or Mak and maybe the other 2 admins for a full vote, if you want that to always be the procedure in any rule change. Unless you or Mak want to do it unilaterally, but IDK about that as final if you should or want. IDK how you feel about it, so I'm asking now. I only know I won't do it by myself again. I apologize for that, but I'm pleased the other admins agreed to it, at least vindicating my idea in adding it. Oh, and since I apologized for my blog on Slick, he needs to personally apologize to me on his blog, and on his cruel term he accused me of doing. Even you have to recognize I did *NOT* do that. A person is only that if he actually DOES an action. I only communicated in being friends. You can't deny or refute that. So, there would not be any reason to mention that against me unless I actually DO something physically with someone. Which I have never done. I hope that explains that satisfactorily, and speech should never be equated in having that vicious, cruel term used against me from him, as you documented others have been BANNED. Why let him off earlier than the 1-month if you admitted others have been BANNED? This is why Sockstar was afraid of special treatment for him, and I have to admit he has a good point. I hate to have to say that to you, but you also admitted you were tired of hearing that charge against you. [*] Now is a good chance to refute that allegation. If you let him off his block after only a day or two instead of at least 2-weeks if you feel he doesn't deserve a whole month, then you should not block me at all. Any block he gets should always be longer than any I may get (1-week max anyway, as Mak told me) because he was the instigator of this whole mess, not me. Thank you. Katydidit 02:38, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

[*] You experienced before only a small percentage of the much worse crime he accused me of doing in his cruel viciousness in trying to get off-the-hook completely. Katydidit 02:41, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

==[My reply to Katydidit] I'll try to cover as much as I can Edit== He can apologize to you and the user, but you DID start the name calling:

"I believe you *did* implicitly in using information from this wiki to post on other websites. We'll see what Mak, Lotstar, and TenCents have to say about it. I'm more than willing to let those 3 decide the issue since Eric and I are split on this issue. If only Slick hadn't been such a devious, obscene, and sneaky little piece of nothing in merely saying what he believed and said elsewhere without the screencapping, I'd have no problem with him acting like a little, immature brat anywhere else on the Internet he feels like being one. Katydidit 04:23, June 15, 2011 (UTC)"

Slick said nothing of the sort to you before this. His blog went over the line, but you clearly wrote some comments to spark reaction.

I cannot, and neither can Slick control an impending ban on you. However, the ban will not be regarding this issue, if that is what you wish.

Is there anything else you wish to address?

MellamoSammo! 02:31, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Copy to you on my reply to him:

Yes, his charge and blog about me was FAR WORSE than anything I said about him. You know that, so stop trying to equate the two. Many people have been told that and not accused the other of a horrible crime (and criminal) he accused me of doing. Can you understand that at all? If it was reversed, and he first told me the words I labeled him, and I responded how he responded to me, you would be the first to tell me my unfounded charge was the worst thing anyone could say to anyone else, except maybe murderer. Is there anything else you would like to say in defending him? He has a big mouth, and his worst enemy is himself, not I or anyone else. I read he has an OCD problem, so tell him to work on that before he goes off on someone else and accuses others of being what he told me I was. And, he does not have complete control over any block on me obviously, but he *can* request Eric not block me [on Twitter], as Slick was the instigator into this whole mess, in violating at least the spirit if not the letter of the law in my investigating what he did as my duty as an admin. And why would Eric block him for in the block log writing: (Intimidating behaviour / harassment: personally attacking an admin) if he did nothing wrong and broke no rules? Ok in hearing that, and understanding what he did *besides* what he did originally in abusing our users? It could have been *you* he abused, if you weren't his good friend. Think about that long and hard, and look at this tweet Eric wrote him earlier today on how others were BANNED for merely accusing one of what he accused me of being one, so he already got off easy with a mere 1-month block. https://twitter.com/#!/Eric_the_Grape/status/81848141275602944 Katydidit 02:57, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

You conveniently left out I have already apologized to all the users for those words I said about him. I have yet to read on his "apology" any toward me. He only mentioned the other 4 admins, but nothing about me *or* to all the users he abused. Why don't you tell him to apologize to me now for his vicious, cruel, and totally unfounded charge he threw at me, regardless if I used some words against him that were not anywhere as bad? I'm waiting to hear it from him, and I don't want *you* to be the go-between. I want to hear it from Slick himself and promise never ever to use that term against me ever again. Then maybe I'll *try* to forgive him. I won't ever forget his brutal and extremely cruel and vicious language used against me in trying to escape punishment for his abuse of our members using this wiki as his source, but maybe I might be able to forgive him. Understand now? Relay this message to him. I'll be waiting to hear *his* apology, and then we'll see. Katydidit 03:04, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

Problem resolved w/me and Nick, if you agree
Eric, Nick and I may have resolved the problem by ourselves, if you will agree to go along with the ideas. I accepted his apology to me and the users he abused on his talk page, and he accepted my apology for what I said to him. I talked with his friend and communicator, The Sam Puckett, and I said I would accept him getting a tiny 3-day block (already past the 1/2-mark now), if he will ask you not to block me and you agree. Can you do those two actions on reducing his block time, and not blocking me? We can all put this event behind us before this weekend is over, if you will accept the ideas on the trade-off. Thanks. Katydidit 06:21, June 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * Given the apologies, I'd be ready to lower Slick's block to 3 - 5 days, the exact length I'll leave to the others. As for Katydidit, I'm ready to go without a block, but if the others agree, I'd still support a week-long removal of his admin rights. Mak23686 08:02, June 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * Mak, can I ask why you would support a week-long removal of my being an admin? What would that accomplish (except to *add more work for you and Eric to do* obviously, when you and he have other things to do in your lives every day), when you supported my idea of Nick's reduction to his 1-month block to 3-days in exchange for no block or other change as the deal offered? I thought it was a fair deal, considering I apologized first before he was finally coaxed into he also doing it (apologize to me and the members he hurt) so he could remove 90% of his original 1-month block. That's what he would have gotten. Otherwise, I will remove my support of his tiny 3-day block as a reneging of the original deal and urge he get at least 2-weeks instead of a mere 3-days, which I know he will scream at you and Eric to reinstate him every day of those 2-weeks. Katydidit 08:17, June 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * We still give Slick a slight punishment, I simply think to keep things fair, a slight punishment for you would be in order, too; despite the apology, insulting people and posting blogs personally attacking them is inappropriate for regular users, and for admins even more so.
 * As I said, this is a suggestion I'm giving, the others don't have to agree with that, and if they don't, I'm fine with it, too. If they say to let you go or take away your rights for only one or two days, that's what will happen.
 * I hope we can eventually work out a compromise, this is starting to get on my nerves. Mak23686 08:31, June 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * I also wanted to add I believe I've been more than punished enough with his vile, cruel, and disgusting postings on both here *and* in his many tweetings I'm a person who abuses young people. I highly resent that, as would anyone, and you can't remove that from people's minds seeing that falsehood, and on the Internet with his tweets. That's why I support NO MORE PUNISHMENT for me at all. I've been punished enough by him alone in my reputation, and you can't get that back when people have seen it. Thank you in hearing my plea for no punishment. I've learned a couple of valuable lessons from all this, and have already been punished by his repeated claims here and on Twitter, and who knows where else. That should count as punishment enough, and I won't support anything more. Katydidit 08:29, June 18, 2011 (UTC)
 * Got a point there, I'll admit. I only considered stuff that happened here on the wiki, I'm sorry. Mak23686 08:33, June 18, 2011 (UTC)


 * I apologized on this wiki in messages to my 2 former friends for any hurt or embarrassment I caused them, I wanted you to know. I hadn't thought about reading what both might have written about this whole thing until earlier this morning. Yes, they now hate me, thanks to Slick's mouthing-off on this wiki, and on his Twitter--which neither former friend has an account or communicated with me there. Slick got a mere 1-week punishment, but I lost 2 friends apparently *permanently*. Who got off the easier in his errors made? Katydidit 14:48, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Block to check
Check this block, please:

http://icarly.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Seddie247

Mak23686 08:05, June 18, 2011 (UTC)

an old rule
I remember when you made a new rule and blog about not using all-caps and just using bold typing. now, there are some people who are using all-caps. what happened? why aren't you talking to those people about it? Kittygirl7878 15:33, June 19, 2011 (UTC)

Check this block
"there is a HUGE need to bash" --90snick, on the Creddie page. (comments) Katydidit 01:37, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Check this other block
"creddie is boring." --Luvsongs1000, on the Creddie page. (comments) Katydidit 02:30, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Check block
Check this block please:

http://icarly.wikia.com/wiki/User_talk:Lingopingodingo

Mak23686 19:51, June 20, 2011 (UTC)

Meepsheep
Keep your eyes open; Meepsheep is on the glee wikia again; keep a VERY close look at the newly created users and uploaded files over the next few days so you can get her before she does anything bad. Mak23686 20:33, June 21, 2011 (UTC)

Forwarded message from Ari&Seddie
I got a request from user Ari&Seddie to add this Javascrip information (below) to the Seddie page. As I know nothing about JavaScrip or what it does or may do, I'm passing the message onto you to decide if what A&S want to do is ok or not. Thanks! Katydidit 15:10, June 22, 2011 (UTC)

[start message from Ari&Seddie]

Hi! I wanted to add an app to the seddie page but it's javascrip. What I want to add is a widget for twitter for the seddie wikia account, so that people can see the news here in the seddie page. Here's the code:



new TWTR.Widget({

version: 2,

type: 'profile',

rpp: 4,

interval: 6000,

width: 250,

height: 300,

theme: { shell: { background: '#ffd1f0', color: '#000000' }, tweets: { background: '#ffffff', color: '#000000', links: '#001ede' } },

features: { scrollbar: true, loop: false, live: true, hashtags: true, timestamp: true, avatars: false, behavior: 'all' }

}).render.setUser('SeddieWiki').start;

So I would really appreciate if you could add this to the seddie page, so that the twitter becomes more popular. Thanks for your time!!!

Ari :)

[end message from Ari&Seddie]

You wanted to talk with me?
Hi! I heard you and Mak wanted to talk with me? As of now Tinychat is blocked on my computer... I could ask my mom to unblock it, but I don't even know how to use it or if you guys are still on it... Or if you wanted we could email since my dad is away and he won't be here to watch everything I do!... IDK, you can get back to me and let me know :) Sorry I didn't send you this earlier, I just got back from a meeting.. Samlovesham 00:44, June 23, 2011 (UTC)

New "Recommendation"
Think we should add a line in the "Recommendations" section of the policies to be careful about giving out accurate personal data? Mak23686 08:30, June 23, 2011 (UTC)

Ooh...
Okay, I know you wanted to speak with me but first, I would like to say something:

Basically, here's what happened, last night. I was just on the computer like I always am and Alica123 said she wanted to talk to me about what's been going on with Katydidit, and told me her own personal story with him on Tinychat. I told her that I went through a similar situation with him and she suggested that he should *stop* being an admin. This whole thing has made me *really* emotional, because Katydidit was my friend. Nevertheless, I went along with all of this because I thought it was the right thing to do. Especially considering how many people were getting *upset* over it. I honestly wasn't trying to start up more drama but Alica123 was *really* concerned so I felt I needed to listen.

Please note that I'm still *very* confused on how to feel about any of this and that half the stuff I've been saying has purely been driven out of emotion...

Cartoonprincess 19:13, June 23, 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your help with my issues! :)

 CreddieLuv4eva Check out my page! 01:07, June 27, 2011 (UTC)

Niranda Page Section
There was a section that used to be on the Niranda page called "Niranda Mentions on Twitter" and I have NO idea how it even got deleted in the first place, but it needs to be added back. Can you please add it back? Thanks.

ICarlyRulez5101 ~ Do I smell Seddie? ;) 19:39, July 1, 2011 (UTC)ICarlyRulez5101                                                                                                          ;) Peace!

John16734
This guy keeps copying and pasting the Disney Channel page on wikipedia, and sending people private messages and being annoying

Jon23812 23:06, July 4, 2011 (UTC)