On 2/26/06, Steve Summit <scs(a)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