I don't think this rises to an ArbCom situation, but I'm not sure what the current mores are on Wikipedia. I put something relatively rude on my userpage (I put up a version of the "Counter Vandalism Unit" userbox with the text "The Cunctator is a non-member of the Retarded Fascism Unit").
Drini removed the box without any warning or discussion.
I put it back, asking him not to edit my page.
Drini removed the box again without any warning or discussion.
I put it back, leaving a message at his user_talk asking him not to edit my page and to discuss the matter at my user_talk page, and protected my userpage.
Drini removed the box again without any warning.
I don't really mind, but my understanding is that Drini's actions were rude as well. I'd like to be able to express my opinions on my homepage with a reasonable lack of censorship.
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think this rises to an ArbCom situation, but I'm not sure what the current mores are on Wikipedia. I put something relatively rude on my userpage (I put up a version of the "Counter Vandalism Unit" userbox with the text "The Cunctator is a non-member of the Retarded Fascism Unit").
Drini removed the box without any warning or discussion.
I put it back, asking him not to edit my page.
Drini removed the box again without any warning or discussion.
I put it back, leaving a message at his user_talk asking him not to edit my page and to discuss the matter at my user_talk page, and protected my userpage.
Drini removed the box again without any warning.
I don't really mind, but my understanding is that Drini's actions were rude as well. I'd like to be able to express my opinions on my homepage with a reasonable lack of censorship.
I'm with Drini here. Whatever your opinions, gratuitous incivility is not to be encouraged.
-- Sam
And when I warned him about NPA for this edit summary: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:The_Cunctator&diff=prev&a...
He removed my warning off his talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AThe_Cunctator&diff...
Figures.
Ryan
On 2/6/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think this rises to an ArbCom situation, but I'm not sure what the current mores are on Wikipedia. I put something relatively rude on my userpage (I put up a version of the "Counter Vandalism Unit" userbox with the text "The Cunctator is a non-member of the Retarded Fascism Unit").
Drini removed the box without any warning or discussion.
I put it back, asking him not to edit my page.
Drini removed the box again without any warning or discussion.
I put it back, leaving a message at his user_talk asking him not to edit my page and to discuss the matter at my user_talk page, and protected my userpage.
Drini removed the box again without any warning.
I don't really mind, but my understanding is that Drini's actions were rude as well. I'd like to be able to express my opinions on my homepage with a reasonable lack of censorship.
I'm with Drini here. Whatever your opinions, gratuitous incivility is not to be encouraged.
-- Sam _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 2/6/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
I'm with Drini here. Whatever your opinions, gratuitous incivility is not to be encouraged.
I guess I feel that Drini's actions were rather uncivil as well.
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I put it back, leaving a message at his user_talk asking him not to edit my page and to discuss the matter at my user_talk page, and protected my userpage.
Not really a model use of admin powers, now is it?
Steve
On 2/6/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I put it back, leaving a message at his user_talk asking him not to edit my page and to discuss the matter at my user_talk page, and protected my userpage.
Not really a model use of admin powers, now is it?
No, I don't think edit-warring other people's userpages is a model use of admin powers.
The Cunctator wrote:
On 2/6/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I put it back, leaving a message at his user_talk asking him not to edit my page and to discuss the matter at my user_talk page, and protected my userpage.
Not really a model use of admin powers, now is it?
No, I don't think edit-warring other people's userpages is a model use of admin powers.
I believe that Steve was talking about your protection of your user page.
Also, people aren't required to get permission before editing a page. Please read the protection policy: --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Protection_policy
Chris
On 2/6/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
The Cunctator wrote:
On 2/6/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
I put it back, leaving a message at his user_talk asking him not to edit my page and to discuss the matter at my user_talk page, and protected my userpage.
Not really a model use of admin powers, now is it?
No, I don't think edit-warring other people's userpages is a model use of admin powers.
I believe that Steve was talking about your protection of your user page.
Also, people aren't required to get permission before editing a page. Please read the protection policy: --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Protection_policy
Please read the user page policy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:User_page
Quote: "In general it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing another's user page without their permission, but feel free to correct typos and other mistakes."
Yes, I violated [[Don't be a dick.]] So did Drini.
The Cunctator wrote:
Please read the user page policy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:User_page
Quote: "In general it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing another's user page without their permission, but feel free to correct typos and other mistakes."
Yes, I violated [[Don't be a dick.]] So did Drini.
I'm not sure how Drini violated "don't be a dick". All he did was remove a rather uncivil userbox from your user page, and repeated his action when you re-added it (twice). You then proceeded to call him a "sanctimonious jerk".
Chris
On 2/6/06, Chris Jenkinson chris@starglade.org wrote:
The Cunctator wrote:
Please read the user page policy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:User_page
Quote: "In general it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing another's user page without their permission, but feel free to correct typos and other mistakes."
Yes, I violated [[Don't be a dick.]] So did Drini.
I'm not sure how Drini violated "don't be a dick". All he did was remove a rather uncivil userbox from your user page, and repeated his action when you re-added it (twice). You then proceeded to call him a "sanctimonious jerk".
I just take it very personally when people edit my userpage. The problem of false attachment, and all that. I think the last person to delete content from my userpage without asking was LMS. Back then that was worse than making people unhappy by calling them names (which, I might note, I wasn't doing).
The Cunctator wrote:
I believe that Steve was talking about your protection of your user page.
Also, people aren't required to get permission before
editing a page.
Please read the protection policy: --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Protection_policy
Please read the user page policy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:User_pa%3E ge
Quote: "In general it is considered polite to avoid substantially editing another's user page without their permission, but feel free to correct typos and other mistakes."
Yes, I violated [[Don't be a dick.]] So did Drini.
From the protection policy:
Admins must not protect pages they are actively engaged in editing, except in the case of simple vandalism.
So, one person violates "It is considered polite", and another violates "Admins must not".
You don't really think you're in the right here, do you? I can understand how things happen in the heat of the moment, but in retrospect, it's pretty clear which one of you is at fault. It seems that Drini was acting in the bests interests of WP - he even stated in the edit summary "rm aggressive divisive userbox".
For what it's worth, here's the edit history of The Cunctator's user page.
# (cur) (last) 03:41, 7 February 2006 The Cunctator (It's getting a bit --what's the word -- nicey nicey? velvet rope? mm.) # (cur) (last) 03:16, 7 February 2006 The Cunctator m (I like how I've been managing to make fun of userboxes from day one without even knowing it. Now it even looks like one!) # (cur) (last) 03:10, 7 February 2006 The Cunctator m # (cur) (last) 02:46, 7 February 2006 The Cunctator (The Featured articles are, imho, some of the worst entries in Wikipedia.) # (cur) (last) 16:11, 6 February 2006 The Cunctator m # (cur) (last) 16:11, 6 February 2006 The Cunctator (Here's a more polite version, you sanctimonious jerk.) # (cur) (last) 06:55, 6 February 2006 Drini (yes but it goes against WP:CIVIL policy) # (cur) (last) 04:45, 6 February 2006 The Cunctator (For the second time.) # (cur) (last) 21:53, 5 February 2006 Drini (rm aggresive attacking userbox) # (cur) (last) 20:50, 5 February 2006 The Cunctator m (I'd like to be able to state my own opinions.) # (cur) (last) 22:13, 4 February 2006 Drini (rm aggressive divisive userbox)
Sorry, I'll let it go now. Just a bit disappointed.
Steve
Personal attacks may be removed. You are also violating assume good faith. However, no warning is wrong, as is edit warring over it.
Fred
On Feb 6, 2006, at 8:25 AM, The Cunctator wrote:
I don't think this rises to an ArbCom situation, but I'm not sure what the current mores are on Wikipedia. I put something relatively rude on my userpage (I put up a version of the "Counter Vandalism Unit" userbox with the text "The Cunctator is a non-member of the Retarded Fascism Unit").
Drini removed the box without any warning or discussion.
I put it back, asking him not to edit my page.
Drini removed the box again without any warning or discussion.
I put it back, leaving a message at his user_talk asking him not to edit my page and to discuss the matter at my user_talk page, and protected my userpage.
Drini removed the box again without any warning.
I don't really mind, but my understanding is that Drini's actions were rude as well. I'd like to be able to express my opinions on my homepage with a reasonable lack of censorship. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 2/6/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
Personal attacks may be removed. You are also violating assume good faith. However, no warning is wrong, as is edit warring over it.
I didn't make any personal attacks. I think the phrase "Counter Vandalism Unit" has fascistic overtones, and I think it's lame. I wasn't trying to broadcast this or stomp on everyone's fun, just state my opinion on my own userpage. I wasn't forcing this down anyone's throats, nor making any personal attacks. I had no idea who any of the people involved were.
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
Personal attacks may be removed. You are also violating assume good faith. However, no warning is wrong, as is edit warring over it.
I didn't make any personal attacks. I think the phrase "Counter Vandalism Unit" has fascistic overtones, and I think it's lame. I wasn't trying to broadcast this or stomp on everyone's fun, just state my opinion on my own userpage. I wasn't forcing this down anyone's throats, nor making any personal attacks. I had no idea who any of the people involved were.
The solution is simple enough - the box obviously offends some people. Rather than fight about it, be the bigger person and remove it yourself. Then place some nicely phrased text explaining what you feel, text that will inspire people to think, instead of inspiring them to remove it from your user page.
End result - thoughful discourse and an end to a revert war.
Ian
On 2/6/06, Guettarda guettarda@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
Personal attacks may be removed. You are also violating assume good faith. However, no warning is wrong, as is edit warring over it.
I didn't make any personal attacks. I think the phrase "Counter Vandalism Unit" has fascistic overtones, and I think it's lame. I wasn't trying to broadcast this or stomp on everyone's fun, just state my opinion on my own userpage. I wasn't forcing this down anyone's throats, nor making any personal attacks. I had no idea who any of the people involved were.
The solution is simple enough - the box obviously offends some people. Rather than fight about it, be the bigger person and remove it yourself. Then place some nicely phrased text explaining what you feel, text that will inspire people to think, instead of inspiring them to remove it from your user page.
End result - thoughful discourse and an end to a revert war.
I already did.
I don't really mind, but my understanding is that Drini's actions were rude as well. I'd like to be able to express my opinions on my homepage with a reasonable lack of censorship.
Frankly, I'm convinced that your personal crusade against the CVU has never gone beyond the level of blatant trolling, either on this list or on the wiki. If admins want to put a stop to it, that's their right.
On 2/6/06, Philip Welch wikipedia@philwelch.net wrote:
I don't really mind, but my understanding is that Drini's actions were rude as well. I'd like to be able to express my opinions on my homepage with a reasonable lack of censorship.
Frankly, I'm convinced that your personal crusade against the CVU has never gone beyond the level of blatant trolling, either on this list or on the wiki. If admins want to put a stop to it, that's their right.
I'm surprised that you think that admins have the right to put a stop to the CVU.
I don't really mind, but my understanding is that Drini's actions were rude as well. I'd like to be able to express my opinions on my homepage with a reasonable lack of censorship.
Frankly, I'm convinced that your personal crusade against the CVU has never gone beyond the level of blatant trolling, either on this list or on the wiki. If admins want to put a stop to it, that's their right.
I'm surprised that you think that admins have the right to put a stop to the CVU.
By "it" I meant "your personal crusade", not "the CVU", although I suspect you already knew that.
On 2/6/06, Philip Welch wikipedia@philwelch.net wrote:
I don't really mind, but my understanding is that Drini's actions were rude as well. I'd like to be able to express my opinions on my homepage with a reasonable lack of censorship.
Frankly, I'm convinced that your personal crusade against the CVU has never gone beyond the level of blatant trolling, either on this list or on the wiki. If admins want to put a stop to it, that's their right.
I'm surprised that you think that admins have the right to put a stop to the CVU.
By "it" I meant "your personal crusade", not "the CVU", although I suspect you already knew that.
Well, since you're willing to give me enough credit to recognize antecedents, maybe you'd be willing to consider that I'm making a serious point, one that's been agreed with by other people. Are they blatantly trolling too?
By "it" I meant "your personal crusade", not "the CVU", although I suspect you already knew that.
Well, since you're willing to give me enough credit to recognize antecedents, maybe you'd be willing to consider that I'm making a serious point, one that's been agreed with by other people. Are they blatantly trolling too?
If you just posted and said "Counter-Vandalism Unit is an unnecessarily aggressive name under which to organize counter- vandalism" that would be one thing. But you started with "Counter Vandalism Unit sucks and is a bunch of evil militarist jackbooted fascists!!" to get a bunch of responses on the mailing list. That's the textbook definition of trolling, or as we used to call it, "just trying to get attention".
On 2/6/06, Philip Welch wikipedia@philwelch.net wrote:
By "it" I meant "your personal crusade", not "the CVU", although I suspect you already knew that.
Well, since you're willing to give me enough credit to recognize antecedents, maybe you'd be willing to consider that I'm making a serious point, one that's been agreed with by other people. Are they blatantly trolling too?
If you just posted and said "Counter-Vandalism Unit is an unnecessarily aggressive name under which to organize counter- vandalism" that would be one thing. But you started with "Counter Vandalism Unit sucks and is a bunch of evil militarist jackbooted fascists!!" to get a bunch of responses on the mailing list. That's the textbook definition of trolling, or as we used to call it, "just trying to get attention".
That's not what I wrote. Mischaracterizing other people's words is the textbook definition of a strawman argument, or as we used to call it "just making stuff up."
Okay, we didn't call it "stuff".
By "it" I meant "your personal crusade", not "the CVU", although I suspect you already knew that.
Well, since you're willing to give me enough credit to recognize antecedents, maybe you'd be willing to consider that I'm making a serious point, one that's been agreed with by other people. Are they blatantly trolling too?
If you just posted and said "Counter-Vandalism Unit is an unnecessarily aggressive name under which to organize counter- vandalism" that would be one thing. But you started with "Counter Vandalism Unit sucks and is a bunch of evil militarist jackbooted fascists!!" to get a bunch of responses on the mailing list. That's the textbook definition of trolling, or as we used to call it, "just trying to get attention".
That's not what I wrote. Mischaracterizing other people's words is the textbook definition of a strawman argument, or as we used to call it "just making stuff up."
Okay, we didn't call it "stuff".
Forgive me for paraphrasing.
On 2/6/06, Philip Welch wikipedia@philwelch.net wrote:
By "it" I meant "your personal crusade", not "the CVU", although I suspect you already knew that.
Well, since you're willing to give me enough credit to recognize antecedents, maybe you'd be willing to consider that I'm making a serious point, one that's been agreed with by other people. Are they blatantly trolling too?
If you just posted and said "Counter-Vandalism Unit is an unnecessarily aggressive name under which to organize counter- vandalism" that would be one thing. But you started with "Counter Vandalism Unit sucks and is a bunch of evil militarist jackbooted fascists!!" to get a bunch of responses on the mailing list. That's the textbook definition of trolling, or as we used to call it, "just trying to get attention".
That's not what I wrote. Mischaracterizing other people's words is the textbook definition of a strawman argument, or as we used to call it "just making stuff up."
Okay, we didn't call it "stuff".
Forgive me for paraphrasing.
If I had the authority, I would forgive you your trespasses, but I'm just another humble soul. Not as humble as John S. Novak, though. I do forgive you for paraphrasing. I hope you'll consider taking my criticisms seriously. My sense of outrage at the project's name was entirely earnest, by the way.
Forgive me for dropping in from time to time and expressing, like Rip Van Winkle, my shock at how things change. The fact that I complain loudly about the things I think are wrong and don't loudly praise the bulk of things that are good (and there is, of course, much new good--templating, categorizing, bots, the Foundation, etc. are being used well the majority of the time) shouldn't be taken as a characterization of my overall opinion of How Things Are Going.
But the changes I think are pure unmitigated crap, or simply pulling the project in the wrong direction, do upset me and I will rail against.
"The Cunctator" cunctator@gmail.com wrote in message news:dfd0b40602061757m20aed09ay280e817ffb1188f0@mail.gmail.com... [snip]
.... Not as humble as John S. Novak, though.
ObNovak: nobody is as humble as John S Novak III, the Humblest Man on the Net