Talk:Cave Clan/Archive 2

Current efforts to reach concensus

 * I was not going to wade into this but DMNscar's misinformation and outright defamation has forced me to.


 * Dmnscar read this:
 * http://www.urbanadventure.org/main/stuff/ildraino/caveclan.htm


 * I quote:


 * ''"Some of the comments posted online about this page point out that the Cave Clan is no longer anti-gay. Dougo has now made the following statements advising that he and the Cave Clan are no longer anti-gay.


 * Dougo has stated:


 * "The whole "running" thing was a joke. There have been gay people in the Cave Clan way before there was uer.ca. I openly joke with gay friends I have and they dish it out, however I also understand that we have matured a lot since the late 80s and early 90s.


 * I'm just trying to say that the 'homophobic' entry is out of date, taken out of context, and also takes humour amongst a small bunch of friends and associates and tries to make us look like a branch of the Nazi party. "


 * Now clearly the Cave Clan is not the Nazi party, nor is Doug ever expressed any support for the Nazi party that I am aware of. His idea of a joke however would probably not be considered a joke by most normal people. Most people would probably consider it for what it was, harassment and vilification. It was not among a small group of friends, as it was published in a magazine that was distributed among both Cave Clan members and members of the general public who was interested the Cave Clan. The readership has been described as being over 100 people.


 * Dougo does appear to have changed his behavior though. He has at least made several statements that he is no longer anti-gay. Everybody has the capacity for change, and Doug appears to have changed in respect to his actions towards gay people. It would be appropriate though if the Cave Clan made a public statement to that effect."''


 * So how about we agree that whiole in the past the Cave Clan was anti-gay that today they appear to have changed their stance?


 * And you should note that your post is again an example of the harrasment that the Cave Clan have been undertaking against me. You've never met me, yet you seem to have lots to say about me. How much of it is just propogands Big lie style? Most of it.


 * Panic! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.102.45.64 (talk) 06:55, March 5, 2007


 * The Cave Clan was never anti-gay, and to say it was (or is) is blatant lie. You're speaking as if it was some sort of policy or something.  Maybe some members told gay jokes at some stage, does that make the entire Cave Clan 'anti gay'?  To say it does is just muck-raking.  Raresaturn 10:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * panic! reveals himself at last. coincidence? you be the judge —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.206.205.125 (talk) 04:17, March 6, 2007


 * Indeed Panic and Hibou are never in the same room together! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Raresaturn (talk • contribs) 04:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

Yeah whatever Raresaturn, or (Using DMNScar's logic) should I say Michael James Douglas aka Doug, dougo Dogo, DMNScar. I am not Hibou, and he's not me.

Look, are we going to be constructive or what? Okay, you have a point about the who Cave Clan not being ant-gay. Perhaps we should modify that to being "Elements of the Cave Clan" or "Members of the Il Draino editing team" or perhaps just "Michael Douglas." It should not be ignored, as certinly there was much anti-gay text published in Il Draino and certinly one member was asked to leave for being gay, even though he wasn't. I also recived lots of homophobic harrasment from Michael James Douglas even though I'm not gay.


 * I very much doubt that, who are you refering to? And how can he be asked to leave 'because he's gay' if he's not even gay?  Is it possible he was asked to leave for other reasons? Raresaturn 10:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps we can discuss some of the other points of contension? Certinly I agree that tarring the whole Cave Clan with the same brush is not fair so perhaps some terminology to refer to only parts of the cave clan should be used?

Panic!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.102.45.64 (talk) 06:50, March 6, 2007


 * Indeed, Panic and I have never before been in the same room, because we have never met! I have never even been to Australia.  And if I'm here less, it's because I'm getting tired of this squabbling. I've also got things like a real life and work to take care of :) -- hibou 09:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, it seems after due time that the user Raresaturn has shown himself to join the elusive list of Panic!'s alter ego's i.e. internet people he has invented, all of them being himself in real life. This can be garnered from the postings made here and their similarity to the grammar, timing etc. even if they seem going against the posting of his other alter-ego's~but in the end to come to some flimsy conclusion.

I've edited the page to remove all www.urbanexploration.org links and their respective content, and to keep it NPOV. There are now no dodgy references to www.urbanexploration.org and the complete description belies the true reflection of Cave Clan as a current entity and status (see www.caveclan.org for complete information)

Cave Clan would also like to know from Wikipedia admins what endorsement / enforcement can be had from their nominated representatives, as having biased content here is not in the best interests of what we truly represent. Please advise further (can email info@caveclan.org for more info)

Thanks for your time, bedtime! Dmnscar 14:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm beginning to suspect that according to Dmnscar that every single user on Wikipedia who is not him must be me. I won't bother refuting his incorrect claims as anyone who can view the IPs involved can clearly see that I am not the other people he claims I am. His claims that we use similar grammar and have similar timings is silly. Wow, he uses English, capitals at the start of sentances and full stops so he MUST be me. I must be Dmnscar. Oh, and I added this right after him so there's more proof!

Look Dmnscar and other cave clan menbers we were invited to discuss and agree upon things here. So let's do that hey? I have a point of view and biases. You have a point of view and biases. So let's discuss things here and see what we can agree upon. How about an open minded discussion where we come to the table prepared to consider opinions and compramise?

When it comes down to it, if we do not discuss this rationally I will just apply for an account, reinstate my refrences and in time this page will become locked yet again. I expect you don't want to see that. As I have already mentioned above I am willing to compramise, I'm open to ideas. But I am not willing to just have you remove things you do not agree with just because that is not what you would like presented here. The truth is that some elements of the cave clan conducted sustained harrasment campaigns against people, and that some elements of the cave clan were anti-gay, did advocate (and still do advocate) graffiti and were involved in vandalism. Certinly not all parts of the cave clan, so I agree the article should state that. This is proven by a credible source, which is the copies of the Il'Draino magazine.

Logically some of you may disagree with it. So present your arguments and use CREDIBLE sources. Not "I heard ....." or "everyone in the cave clan hates...." Because those statements could be made by anyone and are not provable or credible. If you want to prove the cave clan is not anti-gay then by all means prove it by refrencing a statement on yoru web site like Urban Explorer suggested. I note that Doug doues not have a gay friendly icon when using UER. Nor for that matter do some other cave clan members.

If you disacree with what I have to say, by all means get out there and make it a reality. If you want to prove the cave clan are not anti-gay hold a gay freindly meet or whatever. If you want to prove that the cave clan don't support graffiti then publish a rule on your web site advocating that. Or (and yeah I think this is kind of lame), hold a clean up graffiti day at drains and publish the pictures.

Oh, and just to make it clear, I never said the cave clan are associated with the KKK. I clearly stated that they are not, and that they have put up "f$#k the KKK" stickers. I agree that the cave clan are not racist, and have stated that.

With regard to the representatives and cave clan endorsement, take a look at the Microsoft and McDonalds entries in Wikipedia. Note the criticism sections. If those organisations vetted their entries there would not be truthful entries. Now I've used CREDIBLE evidence to support my arguments and points. I would expect you to use them too. Also, note that the article is about the cave clan and not me, so there's no point in posting stuff about me here.

Finally Dmnscar I note on page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Dmnscar that on the 14th of Feburary you got a final warning about blanking of web pages. You will note that I have not raised that to the Moderators here despite the fact that you have again blanked sections of the article, but if you continue to blank sections I will. Though I think in the best interests of a fair article it would be better that you stay.

We should use this page to discuss in a level headed, non accusing manner.

Panic!!


 * LOL this 'warning' is by Hibou whose Neutrality in this issue is seriously questionable. Also administrators please note Panic's threat to deliberately get this article locked down. Raresaturn 11:15, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to step in here.

I've been an active member of the Cave Clan for about 5 years now and just read over what Panic/Hibou want included in the article. It has me completely stunned that someone could consider this an accurate portrayal of the Cave Clan. It isn't. There's is no need to start making public statements about how the clan is now gay friendly. Sexuality / gender assignment status is completely irrelevant to membership in the Clan. In my time, the only people who have been asked to leave are those who are intollerant of existing members. Panic appears to me to have a vindictive obsession with portraying the Cave Clan in a bad light. He has on his website a very small number of bad jokes that were made at some point ~in the last 21 years~. This is completely misleading wikipedia's readers. I got into a punch up in school once (14 years ago), that doesn't mean I have a dangerous history of violence that needs to go on public record. If Panic insists on including his information in this article, I think we can reach a comprimise. It should also be noted that those parts of the article are written by someone who has a long history of hostility towards the Cave Clan. I'm sure there is plenty of evidence to back that up.

Justin. 220.239.109.173 09:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Just a quickie... found out that Raresaturn is a unique user, sorry for the misinformation. Thanks to him also for emailing me with that clarification :)

And with replying to above recent comment avec Panic!... apologies but i'm only here for a short while, will come back to it soon.

Thanks Justin for making an edit here while i'm editing too - didn't realise!. Cheers big ears :) Dmnscar 09:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Raresaturn. You have mistaken my comment about this web site getting locked. What I mean was, if we do not reach agreement, the inevitable result of people blanking my valid links will see the web site locked. Now if nobody blanks anything the web site will not get locked. So it is clearly in the best interests of all if we reach a concensus. It was not a threat and it was just silly to suggest it was. The admins are not children after all.

I've offered to talk rationally about this so lets talk.

Justin, you make some valid points. By all means if sexual orientation has no relevance to clan membership then by all means state that in the article. Make refrences to that point.

I also agree that isolated incidents should not form a basis for judging someone or a group. But we're not talking isolated incidents here are we? We're talking sustained action taken over a number of years.

And hey, look if you have a problem with me posting so called isolated incidents from the small section of Il Draino pictures I obtained from the Pandora archive, by all means you guys have access to the entire il Draino archive. Find some images that highlight good things the clan did. I know there was an article there about the time some of you guys saved some animals from a drain at Latrobe Uni.

While I disagree with you, does not mean I am even vaugly interested in any of this revenge you talk about. I just have experienced a different side of the cave clan than many people and I feel I have a right to tell people about it. If you would prefer I didn't lets talk about it. I figure an apology and an agreement that neigher of us ever discuss each other again privately or on the internet could resolve this. I make no posts about you and refuse to talk about you if asked, you do the same. No more of these "I've never met panic but...." bullcrap that I see on your forum either.

There you go, a peace proposal.

Panic!!


 * Criticism sections are criticism sections, you need not agree or disagree with them; they're merely criticisms that're brought up in relation to an organisation or group. As a long time wikipedian, I suggest members of Cave Clan look no deeper into such a thing, it happens to all group pages.  I'm sure they're not using it as a means of personal attack, if they are it'll be removed.  If there's validity, it'll stay.  The problem arises with working out what 'validates' the arguments put forwards, what evidences are required?  Given the nature of this group, and given the size as a reasonably small organisation, it would most likely be fiercely defended; but I must state clearly, neutrality is the key.  Don't burn down the barn just because there's a snake in a stall. 211.30.75.123 09:48, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * On further reading of the controversy section; where there is nothing controversial listed, even in prior editions, I wish to also clearly state that that section is implicitly POV written. Having read the talk page and looking back on it, there's a LOT of material that should be listed in there.  Again, it's something the GROUP in question shouldn't take personally and delete hap hazardly.  Perhaps the group could nominate a few wiki-knowledgable writers to deal with this? 211.30.75.123 10:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

in relation to the NPOV/criticism issue, i can't feasibly see why the intergrity of wikipedia or the accurate depiction of the Cave Clan should be held to ransom by the views of ONE individual (Panic!) with an obviously long history of animosity towards this group. 144.138.170.95 11:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. By all means, include information critical of the Clan if it's important. There are plenty of reasons to be critical of the Clan. But someone with the known animosity of Panic! shouldn't be re-writing the article and putting a bad taint on almost every paragraph. Just out of interest, this: http://www.caveclan.org/gallery/albums/userpics/10019/clanwiki.txt is the text that was put together by the Cave Clan that originally appeared in the article. Looking at it now I can see there is plenty that could be changed. I'll take it back to the Cave Clan and suggest that the original article has a going-over. I think it would then be a good idea to get an ~unbiased~ Wikipedian to look over it and suggest changes.

Justin 220.239.109.173 14:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I'll happily give anything a read over. I tend to stumble around wiki (have done for the last five years) cleaning up messes and dropping my two cents about keeping stuff terwikiffic shape until I find something interesting to occupy my time.  This has given me a fair bit of reading, so more won't hurt.


 * Whilst I understand there is some problem with an author here who has a gripe against Cave Clan, the fact of the matter is some of his points are supported by arguments. Whether these arguments hold water in a court is irrelivant, what matters is they're there.  Just as the Freemasonry article has an encounter counter-CATEGORY of anti-masonic stuff, of which 99.999% of which is utter bullshit, it's still cited as they're held beliefs.


 * It could be argued they're invalid because they belief is held by one person vocalising at this point in time; however all he'd do is get a group of other people who can back up -their- view on things and astroturf, which is identical to what Cave Clan would do if anything is put to a consensus that his views be excluded, thus negating the entire purposes of which came first, the chicken or the egg.


 * As it's a small group and they appear to be very protective / hands on with their own wiki article, I'd personally recommend petitioning for assistance in one of the many portions of Wikipedia where there are bored wikipedians like myself who'd love to take on a pet project and completely wash your hands of the matter and let them deal with it, giving feedback and updates via the help page. I've seen this tactic used many times successfully. 211.30.75.123 03:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

It should be pointed out that my court case against Michael Douglas of the Cave Clan was not "thrown out of court" as stated above. The magistrate concluded that "it is obvious that you are facing harrasment, but it is not possible to determine who is causeing that harrasment." I would challenge Michael to state here that he never recived a letter from Telstra advising him to cease making nusience calls to me.

Look, just because you do not disagree with my opinion does not make it valid. I provided valid links to credible evidence to support my arguments. Extracts from a magazine that the cave clan themselves printed. Do they deny they printed that? Nobody here has provided valid links to prove me wrong.

I ask here, can the Cave Clan prove that elements of the Cave Clan in the past did not enguage in publishing derogatory comments about members and past members of the Cave Clan? Yes, I agree it was not fair of me to tar the whole cave clan with a single brush. So perhaps we should come up with an fair and honest way to describe what did happen? I have no problem saying that was in the past, and even providing relevant dates. But I will not just let people brush that under the carpet.

If you are going to argue that I have a gripe, then surely it is fair for me to say that some people in the cave clan have a gripe aganst me? And surely my feelings towards the cave clan are as a result of my treatment by the cave clan. For every argument there is a counter argument.

I'm off for the week but when I'm back I intend to repost the links to my material. I strongly suggest you forget the bickering, finger pointing and so on and just use this oppertunity to suggest some fair compramises. I'm a bit tired of making offers here and not seeing any worth while comments back.

Panic!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Points to open for discussion / compromise
I'm willing to agree that: There we go, things to compramise on and discuss. If there's no reasonable comment I'm just going to re- add my refrences with cave clan written material from IlDraino and forget about compramise or discussion. If the cave clan choose to reverse or blank my additions I'll just re-add them as they are valid and credible refrences. Panic!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)
 * The cave clan today is not the same as the cave clan in the past.
 * The cave clan of today appears to have many people who either don't care about the life choices of members or are supportive of gay members.
 * In the past, anti-gay comments were published in the Il'Draino magazine.
 * The Il Draino magazine is no longer published, and possibly the views expressed in it were those of only a portion of the cave clan and may / may not be supperted by current members.
 * In the past extensive campaigns of harrasment were made in Il Draino by cave clan members.
 * To a large extent those campagns are virtually non existant today.


 * I urge Panic and members of the Cave Clan to strongly consider WP:COI. Inviting outside editors to the page with WP:3O and WP:PR may be a good idea. Vassyana 07:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Are other (non cave-clan) people who are following this, begining to understand why Panic!, and his nome de plumes, may not be a rational or reliable person concerning his views of the cave clan? 144.138.170.74 12:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe his views to be founded on his personal experiences with the matter, as are the respondants. There is logic behind every action, or inaction. :)

Also, Panic, I recommend you post the recommended material here in this discussion thread and I will wikify it and bring it up to standards so it's neutral as much as a controversial / criticism section can be before the application of the text, otherwise it'll just be nerfed under COI. I'm worried it'd be inflammatory based on the way people are reacting to your original posts, so perhaps allow me to be an intermediary? I've been editing on wiki for six years now and have resolved many issues such as this, hopefully I can be of assistance to both parties. <3 211.30.75.123 15:28, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You may wish to appeal to a broader community for input by asking at the Village pump, posting a Wikiquette alert, or filing a Request for Comment. --Ideogram 03:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I believe everyone arguing here takes a good look at the article, because truly, this argument is going nowhere. The idealism of NPOV is questionable from user to user. One might believe that is from all sides, others think it's biased, well, truly it cannot be defined biased unless maybe an Admin takes a look at it. These points of view from both sides here may be somewhat biased, even if the contributor is not trying to be. This is nothing to squabble over. Deletion Quality 23:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I've been too ill to edit this page any more and truth is I am just fed up and tired of this. If the Cave Clan don't speak ill of me here I'll not speak ill of them here. Fair deal? Panic!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.102.45.64 (talk • contribs)


 * Seeing as how you have a massive rant page against Doug and of Cave Clan, and how you have personally attacked him on numerous forums, I don't see how what you say can be all too credible.  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 04:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I do not want to get involved in this again so I'll keep it short.

If the Cave Clan needs to put that it supports gay people on its website, does that mean that we need to add every other group we’ve joked about? Cave Clan supports dwarves and are against dwarf throwing, Cave Clan supports people with vitiligo, Cave Clan supports large people...

This Wiki page was being deleted and having a new one pasted over it because of the inaccuracies. As I have explained before, the Wikipedia entry is meant to be about Cave Clan and not the individual beliefs of some of its members.

Il Draino was very in-house. The fact is that most of the people in the Clan back in the Il Draino days were more sociable than Panic and co so we did have gay friends - we all just felt confident enough to joke about things.

Even to this day I have explained this situation to some of my gay friends and they think it's ridiculous for someone else to try and force us to publicly announce that we support gay people.

I can't be bothered reading all the crap in these Cave Clan related pages, but I will point out (I may be repeating myself) that out of everyone to ever be “slandered” in Il Draino, I copped it more than anyone... none of that appears in Panic's scans.

As I have also stated elsewhere, many of the so-called threatening articles or Fly On The Walls were amongst friends.

Even the stuff about going around to Seanile's house is way out of context and has a much less scarier scenario in real life.

But now I'm dragged back into this crap.

Man, it's such a load of puss. Just remember that Panic lives for this kind of crap! He thrives on it.

Actually maybe you should just post up the original Cave Clan Wiki entry (take a look, it's just as crap as what Panic (or whatever name he's going by today) is saying now.

And of course UrbanExlorer isn't me, I don't hide behind my PC :)

Oh, and so if someone who hates the Clan decides to paint Cave Clan in a location and take a photo and use it on their website, it's fact that the Cave Clan did it?! Of course. Regardless, the Clan has learnt from its mistakes. Remember the Clan is NOT the Boy Scouts. It had no real structure for the first 20 years.

Go in drains!

Cheers, --DougCC 10:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Well Doug it looks like the page is back to being semi-professionally detailing the CC and its refreshing to see, so i'm presuming there'll be no severe mud-raking in the near future which is good to think of. Try and think of it as a bit of a holiday... :)

Also thanks to the wikipedia admin users who have edited the CC entry and have stepped in with some common-sense and NPOV views that some others lack in, and now have a pretty decent spiel written about the CC. If you are close by i would buy you a bee-ah!

Adios, Dmnscar 10:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

This is not a community rant forum
This is not a community rant forum. Please keep all unrelated rants to your respective pages or forums. This talk page deals with the article only. Copying excessive amounts of text from your web-site for rants, will be deleted since it is far too long to parse through and whereas a link would be just as appropriate.  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 04:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)