I haven't seen the case of Yoder, but lets just sum up the Kurita77 case:
You say that Kurita77 is not Enviroknot because:
* He sweared in his e-mails, and Enviroknot didn't. * His IP eventually didn't match (although this can easily be done by forging the IP)
We say that he is, because:
* His IP initially matched that of Enviroknot, both on the mailing list and on Wikipedia. * He instantly edited on the same topics as Enviroknot. * On these topics he edited on, he shared an opinion with Enviroknot, which was a minority opinion anyway.
I don't know about you, but are points cancel out yours ten times over. I'm out of this case now, but I think that the case is solved anyway. ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Nony Mouse" temoforcomments4@hotmail.com To: wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 6:13 PM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Weyes
I am specifically NOT saying that *ALL* Admins are evil. However, there
ARE
a decent number of them who are regularly abusing their authority, and who (on this list and on Wikipedia in general) are not being reined in but instead are being encouraged to continue their behavior by mutual
protectors
who are ALSO Admins.
It's quite a racket. Get in as friends with the "right" Admins / ArbCom members, and you're functionally insulated from any penalty for breaking
the
rules or abusing your powers. Because no matter WHAT you do, they will
come
riding to your rescue and defending your actions. And all you have to do
in
return is treat the bigwigs as if their word had come directly from the mouth of $DIETY as divine law, and back THEM up when someone protests against THEIR abuses.
But I'm not allowed to name names. Since I don't run the list and I'm not part of the clique, that's a "personal attack."
I have presented my points in the case of Yoder and Kurita77. YOU seem to
be
dead-set on IGNORING it, because you want to justify the behavior of clique-member Admins.
A. Nony Mouse
From: "David 'DJ' Hedley" spyders@btinternet.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Weyes Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 18:06:54 +0100
If its such a problem, you don't have to edit. Infact, you don't even
have
to be on this mailing list, and the borderline, unjustifyable cases you
are
bringing up are making people not want you to do either.
Now, i'm not sure who you are, but you've been repeating yourself for the past couple of days and its quite clear that you aren't bringing anything to this mailing list that we haven't heard and defended ourselves against before.
The only case you seem to be bringing to us is the same old "Admins abuse power", "Admins are evil", etc. messages which aren't anything new. Its starting to bore people, to be honest, and unless you have any
substantial
evidence to present about all of this I really doubt that your
persistence
will get you anywhere. ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Nony Mouse" temoforcomments4@hotmail.com To: wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 5:55 PM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Weyes
From: Michael Turley michael.turley@gmail.com Reply-To: Michael Turley michael.turley@gmail.com,English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Weyes Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 12:43:16 -0400
On 7/5/05, A. Nony Mouse temoforcomments4@hotmail.com wrote:
You know something?
The behaviors of admins like Weyes could easily have become - the
"many
admins, and even some arbitrators" (read: just about ALL of the
current
Arbitration Committee as well as the now-retired "Red Queen") who
have
forgotten about civility and more generally about paying attention
to
Wikipedia policy - is what I've been talking about.
But instead of seeing them dealing with the issue, I've been
getting
almost
nothing but nasty responses from the "go away we don't want to
hear
about
it" inner Admin clique.
How does that grab you? What does that say about the current Admin
clique?
A. Nony Mouse
Your reply "grabs me" as considerably more critical than my own message was intended to be.
I don't see a clique, and I don't see any significant abuses of policy, but I do occasionally see excuses for harsh conduct where no excuses should be.
I call it a clique because it's the same admins - time and again - who
are
the ones coming in and making excuses for the bad behavior of their
friends.
And the favor seems to be returned.
It's not just here, it's on Wikipedia in general. All we see on this
list is
the tip of the iceberg, the very few users who cared enough for
WHATEVER
reason to take the option of last resort and appeal for the righting
of
wrongs.
Instead of getting it, they're getting harrassment at the hands of
this
clique of editors who see nothing wrong with bad behavior and in many
cases
encourage the bad behavior of their fellows.
That's a problem. A BIG problem. Without this clique of editors, we
wouldn't
have been subjected to expletive-filled rants by Kurita77 and Yoder. I
don't
blame the newbies, I blame the clique of editors who choose to take an opportunity to blow off steam by repeatedly biting newbies until they
blow
up.
A. Nony Mouse
Start dating right now with FREE Match.com membership!
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Don't know what Meegos are? Click to find out. http://meegos.msn.ie
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l