It is completely wrong to characterize this as a me

vs >168 issue. Several people on Talk:DNA have tried to >work this out with 168 and Lir. This last bit

saw one revert from me, two from Bryan Derksen, three proposed compromise versions submitted by me and 6 reverts by 168. After 168's last revert to his favored version, he protected [[DNA]]. Erik later de-sysoped him for this. 168 then blanked his user and user talk pages.

Let's be more accurate. The current issue on the DNA (I mean, the content of the page itself) is clearly not a 168/Mav issue. It is more a 168/Lir issue that degenerated into meaningfullness. Most of the original contributors to the debate are wisely hiding themselves :-)

In a mail I received saturday, I had this comment (I dare making it public, because it is so true :-))

"I don't envy your position as mediator. Personally I think I will go back to investigating whether Huntsman spiders will really bite people as they are claimed to do, and whether it really hurts so much when they finally do it. I think maybe that is safer. ;-)"

Note that Lir is extremely discreet as well.

That leaves just a couple of people hurting themselves, and a good contributor leaving.

Mav just happen to be an element in the last reversion scheme.

However, the arbitration issue is another matter entirely. Mav wanted the arbitration to consider whether to unsysop definitly 168, or perhaps to get a pledge from him not to abuse power again. 168 considers Mav was highly unfair to him, and is partially responsible of what happened.

In my great innocence, I had hoped that the sysop issue could be fixed before we could go back to an unprotected article.

In my other great innocence, I had hoped that any conclusion resulting from the arbitration committee could help 168 feels better, and approach the article in a better frame of mind.

God preserve my innocence ! :-)

An except from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/168 (you should read both summaries if you want an overview of the two versions of events):

I added a third version :-)

On March 5 DNA was unprotected by Kingturtle.ns.

All the report by Mav is entirely correct.

Jimbo has not decided yet whether to allow admins the ability to block users for 24 hours for breaking this rule.

And this is correct as well. And I do not think there was an emergency to unsysop 24 hours after the reversion war. This should have been Jimbo or arbitration committee to decide.

Anyway, this conversation is pretty much academic now. 168 left anyway. Wikipedia is actively making sure to select contributors for their strength and ability to resist pressure and bullying. That won't help decrease the conflict to do so.

ihmo :-)

__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you�re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com