On 2/20/07, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 20/02/07, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86(a)comcast.net> wrote:
on 2/20/07 9:26 AM, David Gerard at
dgerard(a)gmail.com wrote:
> No, which is why we try to keep a light hand
and err on the side of
> letting stuff through. It takes a remarkable level of stupid for us to
> bother doing anything.
But David, this takes me back to the original
question: Is it really
offensive to call someone abusive? I, personally, would not use the word
to
define someone, I would, instead, describe their
behavior as abusive;
but
isn't that, in the context of this List,
somewhat nickpicky?
I'd generally allow it to pass myself in the first instance, FWIW.
Though I'd expect substantiation to follow. It's supposed to be a
productive working list for a project.
- d.
The user in question has, in fact, mailed in not just numerous diffs but a
very accurate description of the situation. In fact, they were attacked by
other users of this list for sending "too many" emails, apparently because
the list system was not functioning properly and did not inform them of the
moderation queue.
As far as I can understand after investigating with my own tools, the
behavior towards this user was in fact abusive on the part of the involved
administrators. In fact, the whole circumstances surrounding the case seem
to stem from an administrator who felt it was his "right" to poke and prod
and provoke a returned user, trying to get a reaction in order to justify a
ban.
The fact that administrators actually will stand up to defend deliberate
provocation - behavior that would NEVER be tolerated of a normal user,
especially if it were directed at an administrator or so-called "respected
user" - is one more bit of proof that wikipedia has become elitist and of
the major cultural problems generated by too small a pool of people who have
too much power for their egos to withstand. The "rules" as we put them forth
seem to only apply to "other people" and you can get away with far too much
if you've got a friend with power, or power yourself.
Of course, the fact that emails seem to have sat in the queue for 36 hours
or more (one email, which I did not receive until Monday night, was
apparently sent Sunday morning) isn't helping either. I'm sure that is
frustrating the user to no end.
Parker
--
====
Parker Peters
http://parkerpeters.livejournal.com