On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 14:02:43 -0500, "Alec Conroy" alecmconroy@gmail.com wrote:
You think. I think it was repeating a baseless allegation made by a banned user with a grudge. But then, I have been harassed by these people for so long that I am inclined to think that anything which has its origins in one of their memes is done with deliberate intent.
Okay!! Well, we're making progress. That's basically all I've been saying. There's been a culture developed where good-faithed editors who "sound somehow similar" to the banned people generally face an assumption of bad-faith and are often inappropriately treated incivilly because of it.
Alec, do you actually have any idea how patronising that sounded?
Let me correct a misconception you seem to be carrying. When an admin with long experience of one of our long-term abusers identifies a pattern of behaviour matching that abuser, you would be *amazed* how often CheckUser reveals that the IPs are either the same or open proxies.
You'd also be amazed how often those admins are sincerely trying to defend the project against abuse.
I am sure that one day an innocent, completely uninvolved, good-faith contributor will come along and ask, using an open proxy they've not used before, that we investigate some conspiracy theory they picked up on a website devoted to attacking and harassing our editors. One day, but I don't think it's happened yet.
You really do seem to be extending an assumption of good faith to the banned that you are not extending to long-term contributors to Wikipedia. I find that more than somewhat irritating.
Guy (JzG)