I'm using Netscape 4.7 and the dreaded Windows 98 first ed. I'm going to try redownloading and reinstalling netscape to see if that makes a diff.
John Knouse
jaknouse(a)frognet.net
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 10:56:25 -0800 (PST)
> From: Rich Holton <rich_holton(a)yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia and hard drive
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID: <20040221185625.82021.qmail(a)web60304.mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Wow, John. Sounds really weird. What OS / browser are
> you using?
>
> -Rich Holton (aka Anthropos)
>
> --- John Knouse <jaknouse(a)frognet.net> wrote:
> > There's something wrong with Wikipedia or my
> > connection with
> > it. All of a sudden, starting Friday, Feb. 20,
> > whenever I
> > log onto Wikipedia it fails to respond, and all the
> > free
> > space on my hard drive suddenly disappears. This
> > does not
> > happen with anything else on-line. Anybody know
> > what's
> > going on?
> >
> > --
> > John Knouse
> > jaknouse(a)frognet.net
I protected that talk page. I think this is the first time a talk page
has been protected.
You know, Theresa, if you just didn't answer Iris this thing would have
fizzled out. You don't see me in any edit wars, do you?
Okay, I have a long-running dispute over global warming with a few
folks, but we've managed to keep it fairly good-natured... Did you see
the full page ad in today's New York Times by Al Gore?
Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: KNOTT, T [mailto:TKNOTT@qcl.org.uk]
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 10:34 AM
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Irismeister again
Irismeister has just been extremely unwelcoming to new users on
the page [[reflexology]]. See the talk page for details. We should ban
him for this alone (without all the other stuff). Being rude to newbies
is inexcusable IMO
Theresa
Ive been trying unsuccessfully to keep the recent changes list from looking
lik this: HectorRodriguez's reversion of VeryVerily's additions to [[mass
murder]], RickK's reversions of HectorRodriguez's reversions,
HectorRodriguez's reversions of VeryVerily's reversions of HectorRodriguez's
reversion, RickK's reversions of HectorRodriguez's reversions of
VeryVerily's reversions of HectorRodriguez's of [[Manuel Noriega]],
[[Panama]], [[History of Panama]], [[Communist Party of France]], [[Saddam
Hussein]], [[mass murder]], and countless other articles.
In effect, RickK and VV have been automatically (and arbitrarily) reverting
every single edit by Hector, subjecting him to a policy of auto revert
reserved only for hard-banned trolls - a recipe for edit wars. On a positive
note, RickK showed signs of agreeing to change his tactics in a recent edit
to the Saddam page, which addressed content issues without the ad hominems.
VV, however, still feels no need to defend his edits with counter-arguments
backed up by factual evidence on the talk pages. He calls Hector a vandal,
which he feels is sufficient reason to delete any edit by this user. When I
try to give him advice for avoiding edit wars, he attacks me incessantly and
refuses to contemplate his own biases.
Someone else has to put a stop to these silly ideological proxy battles. I
keep on failing to steer the discussion toward content issues.
See my comments on [[Talk:Saddam Hussein]], [[Talk:Manuel Noriega]], and
[[Talk:Mass murder]] for further details.
User:172
_________________________________________________________________
Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee when you click here.
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
There's something wrong with Wikipedia or my connection with
it. All of a sudden, starting Friday, Feb. 20, whenever I
log onto Wikipedia it fails to respond, and all the free
space on my hard drive suddenly disappears. This does not
happen with anything else on-line. Anybody know what's
going on?
--
John Knouse
jaknouse(a)frognet.net
(testo in italiano sotto / Text in deutsch unten)
Am Mi, 2004-02-18 um 19.13 schrieb antonio_bz(a)yahoo.com:
> ...Se possibile eviterei di sovrapporre
> (anche perch con un po di fortuna vorrei andare
> prendere pi piccioni andando nei giorni giusti sia a
> Berlino che a Genova)
Antonio writes, that he would like that someone could make sure, that
this summers Wikipedia meetings in Europe are not overlapping, because
- Jimbo should have the posibility to be present, if he wants to.
- Antonio would like to be in Genova and Berlin at the meeting
My reply:
I am happy, that there are others than me that will also try to be at
many of the european Wikipedia-meetings this summer.
To make sure that nothing overlaps, here the dates that are known to me
till now:
- 10.-12. of June in Berlin (Jimbo will be present)
- 26. or 27. June in Genova (Jimbo will try to be present)
- ???? in Munich (Jimbo mentioned, that he wants to visit Munich)
- ???? in Paris (Anthere, what do you think about this ;-)
- ???? London would also be nice, wouldn't it?
- any other proposals/ideas?
I look forward to meet you all,
Fantasy :-)
PS: Should we create a meta-page on this?
--------------------------------------------------
Un breve sommario:
Mi piace leggere che non solo io ma anche Antonio (e forse altri) che
cercheranno di essere a piu' Wikipedia meetings questa estate. Per
questo trovate sopra la lista delle date che so fino a adesso.
Ci vediamo, Fantasy :-)
--------------------------------------------------
Kurze Zusammenfassung:
Es gibt inzwischen schon ein paar Leute, die mehr als nur ein
Sommer-Wikipedia Meeting mit Jimbo besuchen möchten. Um
Terminüberschneidungen zu vermeiden, oben die bisher bekannten Termine.
Wir sehen uns, Fantasy :-)
Plautus says:
> Evercat is insisting that I must preserve all the context in every
> message on every talk page when I insert material
I recall complaining about something like this precisely once, on
[[Talk:Space Shuttle Columbia disaster]]. I may have forgotten some
other incident? Anyway, I'm certain I've not made an issue of this on
many occasions. Perhaps you're thinking of Raul654.
By the way, it's not "breaking up" posts that's the problem - this
can be legitimately done if one wants to respond in detail to
different parts of a user's post. The one incident I recall
complaining about was when you actually changed the text above my
comment, a different thing entirely.
Evercat
--
Allan Crossman - http://dogma.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
PGP keys - 0x06C4BCCA (new) || 0xCEC9FAE1 (compatible)
> So there's no need to urgent go around deleting things.
In any case, no tagged image should be deleted until we have deleted the ~36,000
images that have no tags on them, and about which we have precisely zero
information.
If we start deleting images because people do the *right* thing by correctly citing their
sources and providing information, then we'll be setting entirely the wrong precedent.
> There are no legal problems with what we're doing
For now, let us just say that there are two schools of thought on that matter, as it relies
on the interpretation of the meaning of "seperate and independent" in the section on
aggregation. A matter for wikilegal-l, of course (and thusly cc'd).
-Martin
I requested bureaucratship on the Request for Admins page, and I noticed
that a few people voted to oppose -- all for basically the same reason.
I'm too hasty and unilateral.
James wrote (there):
<< Oppose because of the unilateral ban of Wik less than 7 days before
this and the writing above saying he isn't a unilateralist, suggesting a
lack of recognition of his own tendency to act in haste. Also because he
continues to advocate unilateral banning on the mailing list. Ed, please
at least be consistent in your opposition to unilateralism, through your
deeds as well as your words in all places, not just this page. Once you
are, I'll support this. Until then, I don't think you're recognising how
you really act.>>
Okay, I'm officially going on record as saying that I completely oppose
unilateral bans. If it's not an emergency or a clear-cut, utterly
unambiguous example of "pure vandalism", then the admin should not click
the temp-ban link.
We're supposed to have all agreed on a formal and transparent procedure,
i.e., the Mediation and Arbitration committees.
I've been monitoring the temp-ban page ever since I realized I was wrong
to apply a unilateral ban to Wik. (BTW, thanks to Caroline and James for
gently awakening me to the error of my ways.) I un-banned one other user
whose "case" slipped by the committees; and no one saw fit to re-ban
him, either.
Let's all avoid unilateral bans, starting with me. I can't make this any
clearer.
Ed Poor