On 2/26/06, Steve Summit scs@eskimo.com wrote:
I'm somewhat of a newcomer here, so pardon me if I'm not up-to-date on what is evidently a fairly old issue. As I understand it, the "wrong ArbComm ruling" you're complaining about here is that for at least the next 4 months, you are "required to discuss all reverts on the relevant talk page". Is that correct?
Or forever. Anyway, hey just added the 4 month thing. But there's no guarantee they'll go through with that. Last time, they asked me to wait six months, and I voluntarily left for a year. The escape clause that I be in no "interpersonal conflicts" is of course one I may be unable to meet, given how prone users are to pick fights here.
Anyway, one main issue is that they refuse to say what a revert *isn't*, though I specifically asked for them to clarify this, and I was already (wrongly) blocked twice for supposedly "reverting". In the absence of such clarity, I feel, probably correctly, that I can be blocked at any time because an edit I make resembles in the page history, with or without my knowledge. I believe Geni made some apt comments on this mailing list about how it feels to be constantly blocked.
A user attempted to deny the history of the Ukrainian famine, using the same discredited logic he always does. I was blocked for trying to write accurately about this history. That, is very wrong. (I'm guessing a Holocaust denier would not be so coddled.)
Also, this restriction prevents me from doing RC patrol, counter-vandalism, or defending myself against the next stalker that attacks me (and there's no reason to think one won't). Moreover, the AC ruling puts me in a bad light, in essence depriving me of legitimacy in the eyes of the community, with no justification. It implies that I'm an unreasonable user, which I am not and never have been.
Perhaps the most frustrating thing is that no one has told me what I've done wrong or, rather, no one has told me why my account of the edit histories in question is not adequate for them. Many of the cases where they accused me of misbehaving are so clearcut that really the AC should apologize for attacking me on those points. But not a peep has been uttered about what I raised.
In essence, they ignored every point I made. I wasted my time preparing a solid case thinking I would get a fair hearing from the current committee, and have been basically told to get stuffed. How would that make you feel?
VV