Thank you. After the unpleasant experience I went through, I wonder if there are other people caught as collateral victims in this paid editing roundup. Something needs to be done to prevent this. Plus that, generally, I find the whole roundup process not addressing the issue of paid editing, just an unproductive way to produce new heroes and villains.
Desiphral
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 1:01 AM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
OK, I'll unblock you, and save you a step in the appeals process, to unblock-en-l. I can see several things going on, some cultural. There is no evidence in recent edits, checked by checkuser, that there is any editing by others or for pay. In other words, this user has, other than impudently disclosed information about events in the past, done nothing.
Fred Bauder
I agreed as I knew about it, I said "they will stay away from it" (without knowing about this policy, just for avoiding accusations of association) and I changed my password. If it's about the present tense of "I do not let 'arbitrary' people use my account, even less spammers", it was as a reply to the present tense of the previous text of Rspeer, considering that they talk about what happened in the past. Then I continued to describe what happened in the past and how they did what they wanted by themselves. The present had no relevance for me, since I did not edit on Wikipedia for a lot of time and, as far as I can foresee, I don't have plans to edit in the near future.
Plus that, anyway, with my knowledge of English, not letting arbitrary people does not imply automatically letting specific people (as one derived a conclusion).
Deiphral
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.netwrote:
Put simply, because there was an ongoing issue with a compromised account. A user was allowing other people to share his account, and
had
not agreed to stop doing this. That is an ongoing problem and rightly deserved a block.
Of course if the user later agreed to stop doing this, the rationale might not still apply.
There is still a problem: He still has friends; there is probably still only one computer; and his friends may be interested in writing Wikipedia accounts for hire, a legal activity, as he points out. We might have to sort some of this stuff out. I think we can.
Fred
----- "Nathan" nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
From: "Nathan" nawrich@gmail.com To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, 9 July, 2009 18:51:45 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain,
Ireland,
Portugal Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] The current purges in English Wikipedia
(...and
my personal case)
I'm not sure how blocking someone for conduct admitted from "some
years
ago", that doesn't appear to have hurt anyone or caused any
disruption,
is "the right thing to do." That's like saying "You violated 3RR in
2004,
I'm blocking you for 24 hours. If you wish to be unblocked, admit your guilt and promise never to edit-war again." It's not bad advice for someone
who
wants to be unblocked, given human nature, but it shouldn't be necessary. Nathan _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l