These things should actually be written into the existing guidelines. We
already have a "no personal attacks" rule, I know it is instruction creep
but perhaps it needs some expansion to say that repeat offenders may be
blocked for 72 hours and, if required, their talk page locked.
Now, I need to go book a hotel for tonight and train tickets to Amsterdam...
I've to give a lightning talk on Wikinews at the Wikimedia NL conference
tomorrow. (Any suggestions?)
Brian.
-----Original Message-----
From: wikinews-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Thunderhead
Sent: 26 October 2007 05:11
To: jason safoutin
Cc: wikinews-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] Ed brown's explanation for his actions
I appriciate Ed telling us why he acted in the manner that
he did. Personally, I feel that we as a community should discuss
this, and continue the block until it's expiration unless an alternative
is discussed. I believe that we should create, and ask Ed to abide by
a Conduct Doctrine which would act as an ArbCom ruling which gives
Administrators more leeway in blocking over conduct. If Ed is truly the
Wikinewsie that he says he is, and if he wishes to continue his work
here, than he can abide by a Conduct Doctrine. I've included an example
of one below:
1) Within regards to the Wikinews 3-revert-rule, Edbrown05 is now limited
to 2 reverts per day, excluding simple vandalism. Breaking this policy may
result
in a ban, as is applicable to the WN:3RR policy.
2) Personal attacks against another user will immediatly result in a 72-hour
ban, no
matter what the cause, or explanation. Talk page should be locked if any
other
attacks are attempted.
--
Thunderhead
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:Thunderhead
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thunderhead
_______________________________________________
DISCLAIMER: I hold no official position in the Wikimedia
Foundation. This message expresses the views of a single
Wikimedia user and not necessarily the community at large.
---- jason safoutin <cute24minbflo(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
(Reply below after a NOTE: Please send all Wikinews
related mails, in the
future, to: jason.safoutin(a)wikinewsie.org. I am in the process
of shutting
down this account)
IF this is a test, then I am Rick James Bitch...bah...He knew what he was
doing and
it matters not what his agenda was or if he had one. What does
matter is 1) He was aware of all his actions and the results that would come
form them 2) he did this to himself and no one else. 3) If eloquence acted
the same way I would respond in the same way.
I could care less about his mental state and frankly we have no right to
make any
assessment on his behavior because we don't actually know him. None
of us, as far as I know, never seen him in real life so for us to say he is
senile, or just crazy is disrespectful, regardless of how he treated
anybody. I say that because he is blocked, and his pages protected. He is
silent and will be until his block is up. If he does not behave, then we
wipe out his existence on Wikinews. I do not condone his actions in the
least, but we have done what we can up to this point and insulting him or
his personality through an unprofessional opinion, it not only makes things
worse and makes us look bad, but also prevents any hope of ArbCom working...
Setting that aside, if Ed didn't care about the fact that we blocked all
his
IPs and Users, then he would leave it at that and wait for his block to
be up. No he didn't apologize and he won't, but I have been around Wikinews
long enough to know that his "gang" of buddies, aka Neutralizer, and
international are not around anymore so all he has is to occasionally go on
a rampage...no its not good, but as I see it most of our current admins have
been blocked a time or two for attacks and such...
Plain and simple: he straightens up, makes USEFUL and productive edits,
stops with
his hisst fits, or get banned....it cannot be any easier than
that.
Jason
Christopher Harrington <ironiridis(a)gmail.com> wrote: Are you kidding me?!
I'm offended by his sheer gall. Insensitive or not, I am officially calling
mental illness here.
What's with the "my account has not been hijacked that I know of"...
almost as if he didn't understand that he's done something wrong.
This is absolutely unacceptable, and shows premeditation. If he needs a
three month
break, let's give him six, so we're sure he's had plenty of time
to mow his lawn in the spring, too.
This pisses me off. I really wanted to believe that he wasn't cognizant of
his
misconduct. He's on my shit list now. >:(
-ironiridis
On 10/25/07, bawolff <bawolff+wn(a)gmail.com> wrote: This message is being
forwarded to the wikinews admins (those whom I
have an email address for) + David (since his
involvement with these
events, and he is almost an admin).
I think i only sent to active admins. If I sent to you and you haven't
looked at wikinews in 6 months and don't care, sorry - please ignore
(or if you have an opinion, feel free to voice it).
Basically Ed says that he did what he did as a test. Personally I
don't think we should change our opinions on blocking him based on
this (test or not, its still being an idiot. This is WN:POINT to an
extreme ), but I felt I should forward it to everyone.
My opinion is we should block for three months. and that at this time
figure out as a community if we wish to forgive his "test", or if we
want to continue blocking.
Note: I responded to his email saying that I'm glad he wasn't crazy,
I've forwarded to all the admins, I disagree with his actions, if
you're a wikiholic, try putting it in your hosts file.
If you wish to talk about this by email, I recommend hitting reply
all, so we all get responses.
I received this email from ed.
On 10/24/07, Ed Brown <edbrown(a)msn.com > wrote:
>
>
>
> After a quick scan of the administrative action alerts page, it appears
to
> me that en.wikinews has accurately identified me
with the questionable
edits
> and remarks. Nobody has taken over my account
that I am aware of. There
may
> some mimic activity by anons, but I edit from and
IP that does not
change
> very often.
>
> This is a difficult mail to write. Like SVTCobra, who took a break to
work
> on some real life issues, I too have some very
real time issues to
resolve.
> I have been on the brink of being irresponsible
to those. My health is
good,
> and I am definitely neither senile nor suffering
from a personality
> disorder. I am suffering from an inability to not contribute. How weird
I
> would get myself blocked to fix that<!>
>
> Laughing! Anyway, I have to take it light heartedly because when Amgine
jams
> out possibly because the pressure becomes to
much, Neut gets the kick
for
> intellectual arrogance, Ilya fears getting into
the fray because any
misstep
> may be a disaster to that person, and I cannot
get 3 faucets installed
that
> I bought back in January, well some thing has got
to change.
>
> Yes, I bought those faucets 10 months ago for two bathrooms and a
kitchen,
> and they have gone uninstalled. I could call a
plumber, but I don't need
> one. I need for me to get off my butt and do it. So the question I have
> asked myself is this, am I blaming en.wkinews for me not installing the
> fixtures? Yes
>
> So the lover of wikinews that I am, turned to the community itself and
> performed a test. Homophobic? No I am not, I turned to the community to
see
> how it would respond. In a strange way, I am
proud of the response,
because
> it proves that it is working. I've always
been a 'just do it' kind of
> person. I need a 3-month block, but not perma banned.
>
> With regard to my accreditation, I would never cross over the line of
what
> would be my best and honest effort at reporting,
that is how much I care
> about news and the site. If my accreditation gets taken away, hopefully
I
> can earn it back if I feel I need it.
>
> My own objection to my actions: you performed a test at wikinews that
was
> hurtful to others? Yes I did. The lowest common
denominator has always
been
> a fascination of mine. An open process like
wikinews will (in its
present
> form) be open to the lowest common denominator.
Explore, explore,
explore. I
> did that, in self interest, and my interests have
been served now that I
am
> blocked.
>
> Now I have a donation to make, and gads what a mess under my kitchen
sink!
I trust you bawolff to do with this mail as you see fit.
----- Original Message -----
From: bawolff
To: edbrown(a)msn.com
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 8:56 PM
Subject: Wikinews stuff
Recently there has been lots of comments coming from your account on
the english wikinews, that is quite frankly beneath you and not
consistant with your edits in previous times. Homophobic personal
attacks, using socks, etc. I just wanted to email you to make sure
that it is actually you talking, and that your account has not been
taken over.
If this is actually you, I want to suggest that you take a step back,
and look whats happening, bearing in mind everyone always has their
own part to play. To be blunt, what your currently doing is really not
helping anything other then making you look like an absolute idiot
Sincerely,
Bawolff
--
- Brian
Caution: The mass of this product contains the energy equivalent of 85
million tons of TNT per net ounce of weight.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Wikinews-l mailing list
Wikinews-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l