Talk:RainOfPain125

Multiple disputes against "TTastic" edits

"and the large northern island of Napistan was largely uninhabited compared to the rest of the world."

"IWW's claims across Napistan to more land

"the same in climate to Napistan"

"anonymous alt on a trip to Napistan"

The IWW voted to change the name of the continent to Anarquistica, or for short, Arctica on January 25th, 2020. The IWW was the only nation seriously settled there, and thus we decided we should be the ones to name it. Regardless if Napistan is an alternative name for the continent, the better solution would be to write "Arctica (Otherwise known as Napistan". This is in direct contrast to the factual history of CivRealms, and thus should be changed accordingly.^{[1] [2] [3]} As an IWW member, and as the IWW chose to rename the continent, it makes sense that this wiki page refers to the continent as Arctica.

"Rain not only knew he would need a lot of help to organize."

Removing the explanation of a partial reason on why I created the IWW is removing bits of history that did not need to be removed.

Completely removing the backstory that lead up to the MCSpenguin-Rain conflict

Not sure what to tell you. I do not know of any "disputes" on what happened, and if someone has an alternative perspective on what happened, they are free to include it. For example, the page could have the original explanation on what lead to the conflict, and include "however, [[user]] claims that _". This is a better alternative than simply wiping history away. If it is disputed, then let someone dispute it - that is the point of discussions and neutrality warnings. However, there is evidence to support my perspective on what happened. Current claim maps at the time featured no claims in the Arctic in the area I was building a new town in^[1] Ontop of more removed content, Maelstrom did infact exist at one point because it was featured in a claims map (cant find) but there is discussion of Maelstrom in general, as if it existed.^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}

You also made a grammatical mistake removing "nation" in the sentence "Conveniently, a named "Greenland" threatened the IWW"

Vote rigging of the first Server Organizer election

It is factual that Ian, Feezor, Pierre, hiduckhi, and myself ran for Server Organizer.^[1] While it is not possible to prove that votes were deleted (Google Forms does not show history of anything like that) there is factual historical record from me, who co-ran the vote, and can see the vote results, that suspicious behavior certainly did happen that suggests my claim of vote rigging is true. Within a single hour, 6 people voted for the same three candidates (and refused to cast their 4th or 5th ranked vote for me). ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]} This occurred two days after the vote had begun, all within one hour.^{[Time that the first vote was submitted]} I personally know that they sought to rig the election by deleting and recasting votes, because the person who created the vote (Ian aka 5492) admitted it to me directly^[1], after claiming that me going into group members DMs and asking them to vote was somehow manipulating the vote.^[1][2].

Therefore it is not merely "allegations" but in fact conclusive evidence that supports my claim that the election was rigged.

I will later write more on "TTastic" edits, and then "Heyduckhi" edits.

Reply to disputes -duck

Napistan vs Artica

Regardless of a vote made within the IWW during january to rename Napistan, this name never stuck with it never being commonly used within or outside the IWW. By the time you were removed from the IWW you were the only remaining person who called it Arctica. Thus, it is incorrect to refer to the continent throughout the wiki as "arctica" rather than "Napistan" as it is not a common name and obfuscates the article. A better solution would be at some point in the article to say "Napistan (Known by Rainie as Arctica).

Wiki articles should reflect the commonly used names for things for the purpose of clarity and standardisation.

Removal of content from history of iww section

The "partial reason" was removed due to its biased framing. Content should be objective and impartial.

"but expected backlash to something so "radical" and bold as Anarchism. The conclusion was to build a nation that gathered enough members and resources to, in some capacity, resist the toxic or "shitter" elements on the server."

This is obviously partial as the people you are naming "toxic shitters" are solely in your opinion.

"Rain can be somewhat thanked for "reviving" or enlarging CivRealms (and by extension Civ in general) as an entirety due to the magnitude of the advertising effort for the IWW."

This is entirely incorrect. The invite bot shows you never made it into the top 5 invites to Realms in this time period (meaning your invites introduced less than 11 people) and you have never been "thanked" for "reviving" Civrealms. The iww was entirely irrelevant until months after you were removed and its player-numbers never rivalled countries such as Norlund and Alexandria, especially during this time period.

MCSpenguin conflict

This has been gone over many times. Your explanation for the conflict was entirely opinionated and factually incorrect as has been completely substantiated by Penguin himself on multiple occasions, notably on the reddit. This section was wiped as there was nothing significant which actually reflected the factual and accepted course of events which occurred. For example, you claim that penguin never communicated his claims to you when you asked and he was on an alt. This is demonstrate-ably incorrect as has been shown with logs. If you need to be reminded, here: https://www.reddit.com/r/CivRealms/comments/gsw56u/illegal_nether_wart_farm_on_carbons_volcano_island/fs9kciy?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

Vote drama

As shown in that conversation by 5492 with you (of which i still have the screenshots) and as reflected in the current article, the change of votes occurred as the opposition coordinated to vote for Hiduckhi and changed their votes. There is no evidence that this was suspicious or evidence of malpractice, especially as none of the supposed "victims" ever came out saying that their votes were deleted or that they were pressured to change their votes. What the logs do show, however, is you complaining that it was "unfair" for people to change their votes. Further, it is not vote manipulation to ask people if they want to change their vote, that is ridiculous. No one had an issue with asking people to vote for you. What IS vote manipulation is you directly getting people who were not part of the IWW from your own seperate discord server (the aca) and telling them to vote for you.

The wiki article reflects the objective facts as they stand.

"Rain had issues with the results, claiming that the election was rigged as voters were allowed to change their votes upon request, as per the caucus. He claimed that by allowing voters to change their votes, 5492 had collaborated with the opposition to manipulate the results, despite the overwhelming support for the ability to change votes by all but Rain himself."

This is factually correct and reflects your complaints here.

"Simultaneously, due to the perceived unfairness of the vote by the opposition especially as it became evident that Rain was vote-stuffing by means of inviting new and inactive members from his personal discord to vote in the IWW election, the Crab group (Led by Ian/5492 and Hiduckhi) transferred snitches and bastions for the event that Rain refuse to abdicate."

this is also factually correct as previously elaborated.

- heyduckhi

Reply to disputes - TTastic

Word, what the duck said.