List of banned users
|The banned list has been deleted!!!!!! Finally, we can get back into building an encyclopedia! -Jimbo Wales|
List of banned users (WP:LOBU) or banned list is the result of butthurt editors who seek for revenge on trolls who are crazy about trolling or also known as vandalism. The banned list documents their trolling history. The butthurt editors feel that a ban is "punishment" and therefore would indirectly impose "cruel and unusual punishment" by publicly humiliating trolls. But a simple "deny recognition" is something these butthurt editors don't understand. These trolls would eventually move on, hence why the phrase of "do not feed the trolls" in the first place was invented.
As currently stands, the banned list enshrines trolls who are mostly inactive, making the "punishment" useless at best. Only a few trolls on the banned list are active to see editors try to deny recognition! But can they do it by reverting all their edits? No, the whole point of denying recognition is to not feed the trolls. Ignore them completely! They obviously don't get that which makes Wikipedia such a laughingstock! It has never occurred to them that these trolls are doing it for fun in the beginning which is what makes it fun to see trolls watch these butthurt editors SUFFER! Sometimes new policies are created as a result of banned users trying to destroy the Wikipedia community. But in the end, the new policies will dictate and enforce Wikipedia and not allow the freedom needed to write quality articles. Will Wikipedia succeed in its goals? Or will banned users eventually take over?
—Jayron32, From a potential administrator's perspective
Today the banned list is used as the Wikipedia Wall of Shame for having too many trolls who lose at life due to living in the corrupt society. It is the place where Wikipedos enshrine trolls to make sure that their bad deeds do not go unremembered and should ultimately be where losers like you want to land up. The LOBU page itself is a list of persistent trolls, with unfunny details on their vandalism. It is important to these trolls that their source of pride and prosperity is documented.
While most Wikipedos happily gave them this honor, some do not and want to "deny recognition" creating massive lulz. If you troll Wikipedia, which is extremely lulzy and stupid, that Wikipedos "deny recognition" of you, you will most likely have your own long-term abuse page but you will most likely not have your history on banned list.
- 1 How to get on the banned list
- 2 How to get off the banned list
- 3 People with disabilities being banned
- 4 *The* Video(s)
- 5 Sockpuppet hunting Hall of Fame
- 6 The drama that led to the distinction between "ban" and "de facto ban"
- 7 Distinction and confusion between "ban" and "de facto ban"
- 8 Deletion of the list
- 9 Examples of retarded people supporting deletion of the banned list and ending up being butthurt
- 10 Other considerations
- 11 See Also
- 12 External Links
How to get on the banned list
There are three ways: Tick the "de facto leader of Wikipedia" off; Screw with the ArbCom's goals, or ANGER the community by exhausting their precious "patience"! Although, getting banned by Jimbo would require lots of trolling but it gets considerably less attention than the others! Consider yourself lucky if you can get banned by him; meaning you have unlocked the secrets of Wikipedia's success! It appears no one has tried to do it in a VERY long time! So it's time for you to get creative! These are just suggestions; feel free to come up with MORE lulz!!! :)
- Troll Jimbo Wales's talk page.
- Destroy Wikipedia's reputation!!
- Pretend to have mental limitations such as Asperger's syndrome by using your fake special needs to troll.
- Legal threats.
Misuse of admin powersPaid editing is not okay for non-admins, but it's just fine for sysops.
- Argue over a controversial issue and make Wikipedia look like the bad side.
- Team up with administrators and make them side with your views while violating the neutral point of view policy.
- Accuse other editors as your sockpuppets.
- Direct profanity at people who reported your sockpuppets.
- During your ban discussion, go on other websites particularly Y!A to laugh and insult the Wikipedos discussing your ban.
How to get off the banned list
Once on the list, almost nobody was ever removed from the list, especially if their ban was handed down by that shit-eater gang called ArbCom. You have to suck up to Wiki asswipes to get unbanned and you have to do it for years. Ask Giano or Malleus.
People with disabilities being banned
Concerned parents became concerned of people with disabilities being banned without realizing this is the Internet! For the 5000000 times, no one gives a shit, how many times do we have to say until it clicks? But it does give ED something to write about! Even if it's a little bit. This is not Special Education where the concerned parents want their children to receive full benefits from being educated but then ended up at Vocational Independence Program making it pointless!
|WIKIPEDIA DISCRIMINATES PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES!!!!|
Someone opposes full inclusion. How shocking! 
One of Simulation12's socks kindly reported on his talk page by posting a Youtube video for an unblock (BALEETED). It's probably not the best but it's a start! Please add more videos like this below and the ones with the most graphic, lulz, etc. WINS!
Sockpuppet hunting Hall of Fame
There are several well-known sockpuppet hunters who watch out for banned editors on Wikipedophilia. They decided to lead the CheckUsers to the holy land by reporting over 9000 socks. Some argue, that reporting sockpuppets is not good and just becomes an "endless series of conflicts". We salute the following anti-trolls of Wikipedia:
- Daedalus969 - the king of sockpuppet hunters who enjoys creating some tasty drama! Finally he admits!
- WhatamIdoing - the queen of sockpuppet hunters. (She even has her own personal list of banned users to remind her!)
- Various butthurt Wikipedia editors
The purpose of banning is pointless when sockpuppet hunters “cannot conceivably stop” banned users from editing. An example of a CheckUser in action: having so many socks at one time is wrong and is justified for a ban discussion! Sockpuppet hunters tend to be overzealous during SPI investigation hoping their suspicions are correct.
The drama that led to the distinction between "ban" and "de facto ban"
|WARNING Wikipedos love feeding the trolls!|
—Georgewilliamherbert, Asking for it always results into a ban discussion!
Then Fred Bauder decided to argue with him...
—Fred Bauder, Fred is stupid for someone who was part of ARBCOM
Georgewilliamherbert realized the fact that Fred is getting old!
—Georgewilliamherbert, Fred doesn't know. Give him a break!
Georgewilliamherbert, satisfied to see Fred Bauder, an EX-ARBCOM member obliged.
—Georgewilliamherbert, Fred appreciated his guidance.
Wikipedos are afraid of being laughed at or insulted!
—MuZemike, And this is why Wikipedos are no fun!
In one month and nine days, Kindzmarauli went ahead and be bold. He decided it was time to change the nature of the banned list.
He changed it by making a specific distinction between "ban" and "de facto ban". Franamax said de facto ban is nowhere mentioned in the banning policy. Burpelson AFB reverted the edit saying that "admins can impose bans by themself" but only on users who don't have trouble editing but are de facto trolls! However, the distinction is described in the next section:
Distinction and confusion between "ban" and "de facto ban"
As you can see, the banning policy did not make a distinction between them. Perhaps someone will. In order to have a "ban", the troll must be very disruptive by creating really unfunny vandalism so the community can ban him or her. In order to have a "de facto ban", the troll must be really a dick to cause extreme disruption to have the community "deny recognition". And then, the troll(s) create more sockpuppets, which clearly is a cause for massive lulz. This causes administrators to put the troll on the banned list without the ban discussion, as shown in Bambifan101, Scibaby, Willy on Wheels, etc. Here is quick way to figure it out. Any time it says ban then it's an official ban for the troll meaning the troll has LOST! If it just says banned, it's not. Sometimes, it's not used and it means its a completely a fake troll like Scibaby. In any case, these Wikipedos refused to acknowledged the troll. It's that simple. It is also common for editor(s) to get confused here on Wikipedia as shown here: Complaining that Scibaby is not really banned, and complaining again
—Georgewilliamherbert, It is always a crime to not give it to them.
—Georgewilliamherbert, Only those who ask for it can have the actual true ban per policy.
Deletion of the list
—Cyde Weys, Leader of anti-lulz
—El_C, That's what happen when people try to delete lulz!
Wikipedia trolls the world over shed a collective tear when the list was deleted on October 2, 2014, on the sixth try.
Examples of retarded people supporting deletion of the banned list and ending up being butthurt
The only possible way, highly unlikely would if the few hundred banned users begged for mercy and get unblocked. But that would never happen as the banned list is incomplete and those users not on there will serve to replace the ones that served their sentence. If the banned list were a selected list of banned users, then the banned list would be pointless and can be deleted. But until now, it doesn't appear that the banned list will ever be deleted.
Another possibility about getting the list deleted is to somehow convince the community that it's not important. Yeah right, these Wikipedos are too in love with themselves to realize that!
Conduct towards banned editors
—Georgewilliamherbert, Technically he's de facto banned.
Administrators are angry people. They commonly will tell banned users to "go away" if they come back. Please do not take this personally. However, it does provide a vendetta for banned users to return.
—Administrators think it's appropriate to bait banned users to get them into more trouble!
- Last version before deletion, courtesy of Wayback Machine
- List of banned users page on Wikipedia
- Failed attempt at deletion
- The banning policy
- Difference between bans and blocks: the official story
- How to ban an editor
- Answer to question 7: "A ban is a punishment..."
- Kindzmarauli changes the nature of who is considered banned
- Who is Scibaby?
- Who is Bambifan101?
- Deny recognition page on Wikipedia
- Angry admin
- Franamax said de facto ban isn't mentioned in the banning policy
- One of Simulation12's socks asking for an unblock
- The man who started it all!
- Jimbo Wales hates trolls!
- Burpelson AFB says admins can impose bans!
- Another anti-troll
- Don't stuff beans up your nose page on Wikipedia (Another stupid essay that Wikipedos thought of.)
List of banned users is part of a series on
Visit the Wikipedia Portal for complete coverage.
List of banned users is part of a series on
Visit the Trolls Portal for complete coverage.