WikiEN-l October 2005

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

160 participants
455 discussions

Re: [WikiEN-l] Silverback, indefinite block in order?
by actionforum＠comcast.net 17 Oct '05

17 Oct '05

-------------- Original message -------------- > I am not involved, and 172 supporting my RfB has nothing to do with it. In > fact if you check the arbcom pages you'll see I opposed 172. You were involved, perhaps what you mean is that you feel you were objective. I believe you thought you were, but in the real world, actions can appear to be biased based on appearances, so in procedural just appearances get emphasized, in lieu, of have personal knowledge of the persons motives. > But after > seeing all this crap he puts up with I think that I'll end up supporting. > Silverback has been attacking 172, trolling, being a level 19 revert > warrior, and is all around raising the stress for everyone involved. In fact > he'll probably end up in front of the arbcom, and I'm tempted to > indefinitely block just to save them work. He's turning into another Tern, a > user who I block for a short period of time, whines on the mailing list, > doesn't seem to let up anything, and will probably end up blocked > indefinitely. I'm also really tired of the political hatred and right wing > POV pushing by Silverback. Would anyone object to indefinitely blocking him? Procedural justice is a pain, it just slows things down, and worries about stuff like the actual evidence instead of just "insightful" characterizations of that evidence as "crap", I note that when you blocked me you prejudged issues that were the subject of an RfC. This form of "justice" has been found to be unreliable, try following the procedures. You seem comfortable labeling people, perhaps we have that in common. I don't take offense, it the label is slightly off, I offer my own opinion of what of what the label should be. BTW, I could have used your help on "right wing politics", I couldn't get libertarian labeled right wing there. Here is how I respond to a mischaracterizion, even if it is close to the mark. Note that it is more of a chuckle than an "I am a victim" whine: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACommodore_Sloat&diff=… Most other labelings such as yours were not worthy of a response. Someone calling me "right wing" is just try to distract from the merits of the issues. -- Silverback

1 0

Infinite Block by Abusive Admin/Extortion/Harassment/Fraudulent use of Wikipedia Abuse Emails
by jmerkey 17 Oct '05

17 Oct '05

Hello All, Frank V Waveren has been using his wikipedia admin powers to extort content removal on other websites. Legal Threats have been withdrawn and I have been editing pages on the Cherokee Culture. I was contacted by Comcast, my ISP indicating Fvw was emailing threats to them and bogus abuse reports. They have restored my home service and are blocking Fvw's ability to send any more emails. He has now blocked my accounts and set them to Infinite on Wikipedia in a childish fit of rage. This constitutes abuse and interference with my editing and other projects. While wikipedia can limit user access to its site based on abuse, I have committed no such abuse. What I have done is offend an abusive and childish admin. His blocks were an attempt to stop me from filing against him with the Arbcom. I have not made any legal threats, nor have I engaged in disruption, or harassment on this site. Only Fvw has been doing any harassing conduct. It's immoral and illegal to revoke or block my accounts on this site as a form of "extortion" to get me to take down other sites on the internet and filing false reports on behalf of wikipedia to my ISP and account providers. I have received several emails from Fvw threatening to block my accounts permanently unless I take down other websites on the internet which discuss his conduct. These websites are not wikipedia or affiliated with them. I This admin needs revocation of his admin status for abuse, and I have more articles to complete on the Cherokee culture. I would like for him to leave me alone on this site. I would appreciate a response from this site about what you plan to do about this abusive person. Thanks Jeff V. Merkey Gadugi 67.137.28.187 67.177.35.211 67.177.35.25

2 1

Re: [WikiEN-l] [username]: "[username] has baggage"
by David Gerard 17 Oct '05

17 Oct '05

>> I've put Silverback on moderation unless and until he ceases this >> habit of putting the names of people he's in a dispute with in the >> subject line. >I have no problem complying with that restriction, if it is >a general restriction, I was unaware of it, if is specific to me, >I still have no problem complying with it. I have no need >to put usernames in subjects, it just seemed an apopro >subject, absent any constraint. OK, I've removed the moderation. - d.

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] [username]: "[username] has baggage"
by actionforum＠comcast.net 17 Oct '05

17 Oct '05

-------------- Original message -------------- > I've put Silverback on moderation unless and until he ceases this > habit of putting the names of people he's in a dispute with in the > subject line. I have no problem complying with that restriction, if it is a general restriction, I was unaware of it, if is specific to me, I still have no problem complying with it. I have no need to put usernames in subjects, it just seemed an apopro subject, absent any constraint. -- Silverback

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] I've been blocked by an involved admin
by actionforum＠comcast.net 17 Oct '05

17 Oct '05

-------------- Original message -------------- > > A nice example of the dismissive attitude. Probably a case of burnout. > > > Posibly. > -- > geni me too. -- Silverback

1 0

[username]: "[username] has baggage"
by David Gerard 17 Oct '05

17 Oct '05

I've put Silverback on moderation unless and until he ceases this habit of putting the names of people he's in a dispute with in the subject line. - d.

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] I've been blocked by an involved admin
by actionforum＠comcast.net 17 Oct '05

17 Oct '05

------------- Original message -------------- > On 10/17/05, MAURICE FRANK wrote: > > Aha! This is a total admission of a corrupt system: > > among the worst of all human traits is "closing ranks" > > or "ganging up". > > > > This totally disproves everything that has often been > > said here before, about how you can find another admin > > to unblock you and how if you can't then your block is > > impartially upheld and must be proved fair! > > > > System caught out as weighted in its own favour. > > Nah it's mostly a case of burnout. There have been so many false > claims of admin persucution over the years that most of us have become > slightly fed up. Generaly your best bet is to find an admin who is a > least tagently involved in the case already. A nice example of the dismissive attitude. Probably a case of burnout. You know, perhaps procedural justice is a poor facsimile of real justice, but lets not dismiss it until we come up with something better. -- Silverback -- Silverback

2 1

Re: [WikiEN-l] I've been blocked by an involved admin
by MAURICE FRANK 17 Oct '05

17 Oct '05

Message: 6 Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 01:24:41 +0100 From: Chris Jenkinson <chris(a)starglade.org> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] I've been blocked by an involved admin To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org> Message-ID: <4352EF49.1070203(a)starglade.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > admins tend to trust each other's >judgments and are reluctant to get involved in cases >where they are >unfamiliar with the circumstances. Aha! This is a total admission of a corrupt system: among the worst of all human traits is "closing ranks" or "ganging up". This totally disproves everything that has often been said here before, about how you can find another admin to unblock you and how if you can't then your block is impartially upheld and must be proved fair! System caught out as weighted in its own favour. ___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com

2 1

Re: [WikiEN-l] I've been blocked by an involved admin
by actionforum＠comcast.net 17 Oct '05

17 Oct '05

-------------- Original message -------------- > Message: 6 > Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 01:24:41 +0100 > From: Chris Jenkinson > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] I've been blocked by an > involved admin > To: English Wikipedia > Message-ID: <4352EF49.1070203(a)starglade.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; > format=flowed > > > admins tend to trust each other's > >judgments and are reluctant to get involved in cases > >where they are > >unfamiliar with the circumstances. > > Aha! This is a total admission of a corrupt system: > among the worst of all human traits is "closing ranks" > or "ganging up". > > This totally disproves everything that has often been > said here before, about how you can find another admin > to unblock you and how if you can't then your block is > impartially upheld and must be proved fair! > > System caught out as weighted in its own favour. > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ > To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! > Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] Categories, Portals, Wikiportals, Wikiprojects and Notice Boards
by David Gerard 17 Oct '05

17 Oct '05

ilyanep wrote: >I agree that Categories and Portals can share jobs in some cases... Ideally, a category tree should be sufficiently well-organised that people don't need a portal, a "list of" article, article series templates and so forth - you should be able to start at the main category and find what you need, or stumble upon an article in a subcategory and find your way through a well-organised category tree. We're trying to do this with WikiProject Scientology - organise it in an NPOV presentation without having to use project-specific style guidelines. Having to use these is IMO a failure. Not always a major or avoidable one, but a failure nevertheless. - d.

2 1

← Newer
1
...
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
...
46
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

WikiEN-l October 2005