MatthewKeys was banned after much discussion, including one-on-one discussion with the admins, for trollish edits. The following accounts were created by Mr. Keys to circumvent entry protection and bans and have also been banned: DavisWikiGnome..., DavisWikiGnome~, DavisWikiGnome., PhotoGeek, RadioNinja and RadioPirate.
DavisWikiGnome was banned on 2006.06.01 for malicious and vile edits on Tragic Events along with other pages. JeffreyDahmer was banned on 2006.06.07 for very similar edits, and is likely the same user. This user is likely the same user as MatthewKeys.
The account "BillRitter" was an impostor account created by someone who may have been pretending to be Bill Ritter. The actual Bill Ritter emailed the davis wiki admins and stated that he was not connected with the account and was confused.
DoucheySteve appears to be a vindictive account for harassing SteveOstrowski. The password was also posted publically. Recommended for deletion by JasonAller, seconded and performed by JabberWokky. Notice made to Wiki Community/Proposals.
MaxHeadroom2 was used to attack several user accounts on 2007-04-04. The attacks were vulgar and homophobic, and repeated when the vandalism was cleaned up. Banned by JabberWokky (the IP was blocked earlier by GrahamFreeman).
ProLife2008 was an account created by SteveOstrowski used for circumventing edit locks, as was DJEmpire. SteveOstrowski was banned from the Davis Wiki after much discussion and a strong consensus that it was the right thing to do.
attentionwhore was banned after uploading pornographic images and wiping the Front Page repeatedly.
ABan for spamming, including posting non-event advertisements on the Events Board.
Appropriate name, I guess
Famke started out periodically adding entries that were phishing scams and slowly progressed to simple and direct spam.
RuthBrown initially spammed a classic spam site, then started randomly inserting sexual vandalism and removing characters from entries after the spam was cleaned up.
DavidBaron and associated accounts were banned on 2009-09-20 after making increasing threats against fellow editors, including intimations of physical violence.
contacto spammed many many people across several wikis. File a complaint at Yahoo. Update: Yahoo replies that they have determined their TOS was violated and they have taken "appropriate action" against the account.
contact spammed for an online casino on at least two wikis.
louisuuitt spammed fake designer handbags. Twice.
suzettec spammed Davis and Chico wikis, jamming in external links for unrelated businesses.
CampusRec was a plural account used by several people within Campus Recreation, which spawned TheWarrior (above). With no accountability due to multiple individuals using the account, and a series of questionable edits, including spam, there was community consensus to ban the account.
OhMammy was banned for being a racist jackass.
PhilAllen engaged in repeated legal threats against other contributors.
stephdis was a most determined spammer, not allowing anybody to stand in her way.
seoagent came back and was... well... an SEO agent, aka spammer. It was what it said on the tin.
jessicperson replaced the Front Page with industrial tool spam.
RoseAcar spammed a non-local coupon site on several wiki spot wikis.
I'm not sure most people understand why they've been banned, or even that they have been banned. What does this look like? Can we make a little "Hey, you got banned, here's why" message? — ArlenAbraham
Other than automated spammers, all individuals who were banned were involved in an active dialog with the community or admins before being banned. I don't think anybody (other than a clearly automated non-human account) should or would be permanently banned without an active discussion of the issues at hand. All this of course is best effort; it is within the realm of possibility that a person could be mistaken for a banned individual returning under a fake name. I gave some thought to the issue, and I don't think a template can be created. I believe every incident is too specific and unique to create a generic notice. Plus, it should be hard to ban a user and require thought and effort. — JabberWokky
As a followup, I now put a message on their user page (usually creating one). The reason for the ban, and a method of appeal is included. I am doing this even for what appears to be automated spam.
ashlee is not banned, simply because I'm guessing (and may be proved wrong within hours) that those automated linkspam accounts are single shot, and I don't want to load a ton of automated, never-to-be-used again accounts into the banlist (the interface is unwieldy for large numbers of names, and I worry about performace issues if that list grows over the years, which Philip is free to say is a non-issue). If there's another incident of clear link spamming from the account, I'll toss it in. Consider this a "know thy enemy" test about the soulless automated spammer folk. — JabberWokky
I wish there was simply a way to delete accounts like this. Now if someone wants to use the name "Ashlee" on wikispot, it is unavailable. Boo spammers. :( —WilliamLewis
Update: Banned. Repeated autospammalator behavior 8 days later. — JabberWokky
2009-09-21 — As a note to the community, because there are individuals who are making threats to seek attention, some reverts are being performed with administrative removal so that they do not show up in the history. This prevents people from "getting around" a ban by spamming the RC comments and feeling that they are still getting attention. It is being done only to edits by individuals previously asked not to edit the wiki. I'll also try to note when I do this. -jw
McCain is a spammer from Pakistan. Please ban if the spam continues.