On 6/18/07, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/18/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/18/07, elisabeth bauer eflebeth@googlemail.com wrote:
2007/6/18, K P kpbotany@gmail.com:
I was attacked to get me to shut up. Certainly it was a well-orchestrated, well, maybe not that well since it wound up being funny and ridiculous, but an attempt at a well-orchestrated gang up to get me to shut up and stop editing because I had the nerve to call someone on their bad conduct.
This happens all the time to editors on Wikipedia.
Could you please provide a link to your case so everybody can form his own opinion about it?
greetings, elian
It's on my talk page, links galore.
But what is your editing name????? Where is your Talk: page?????
The issues raised about Jay were concerning his access to tools that gave him information (and Slim Virgin it appears) that others do not have access to.
Evidence?
Both Slim and Jay revealed this information in RfAs,
Where has Slim done so?
Both revealed this information in RfAs,
Where has Slim done so?
If the policy is going to be enforced, don't enforce it at politically charged times only. Enforce it all of the time.
I do enforce it all the time. As I said, I block every open proxy I come across. I've blocked dozens, perhaps hundreds. And *every* time is politically charge on Wikipedia; frankly, especially now, when people are letting bizarre conspiracy theories fly at the drop of the hat, egged on by the banned trolls and WR, and other editors who make all sorts of opaque and unsubstantiated claims, then refuse to explain what they mean or back them up. And the latter refers to you, KP Botany.
I do back up my claims. I send them in to the list all the time, just for you, all my little AfD links, like the assertion that American Polygraph Association should be deleted because it's not notable, like Rock climbing for deletion.
There are no opaque and unsubstantiated claims coming from me on this issue. I am asking questions, because I think the issue goes further than just you defending your actions. I want to know what else is subject to revelation by users with access to check user tools. I want to know if my privacy will be invaded in a fly by, when someone else is subject to check user and my account shows up. I wasn't worried about check user when I was not ever subject to it--but CW was not subject to check user and she should have been concerned about what about her would have been revealed. The attached privacy policy is misleading.
KP