Why would Google care about our internal issues?
In a message dated 7/19/2009 5:38:36 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, brewhaha@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca writes:
Regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Wp_freedom_fighter ... No response from gmail about why his e-mail is still functional. The Apathy Cabal rules again.
**************Can love help you live longer? Find out now. (http://personals.aol.com/articles/2009/02/18/longer-lives-through-relationsh... slove00000001)
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 3:06 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Why would Google care about our internal issues?
I would assume because he was using a gmail e-mail address, maybe something the user was doing was against google's TOS?
"Casey Brown" lists@caseybrown.org wrote in message news:de28ceda0907191928u248ab87cr889c788006055132@mail.gmail.com...
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 3:06 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
Why would Google care about our internal issues?
I would assume because he was using a gmail e-mail address, maybe something the user was doing was against google's TOS?
He uses a googlemail account, and that is probably visible to a checkuser, too. A lot of hacking issues relate to weaselling into a system through people who should know better. I've seen it the other way around, where it was hard to get any work done, because nobody knew the passwords, and everybody knew how to stifle initiative. Security issues concern us all. Judging from his lack of respect for policy (integrity, really), he is very probably a banned user. If the admin candidate approval process is thorough, and all admins hav a modicum of integrity, then he will never get through. It is still annoying. Plus, no admin actions went against his account: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Wp_freedom_fi... on wikipedia. I omitted a header-complete copy of my correspondence with him on this list. Maybe it should go on nanas...I hav not figured that out.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:43 PM, Jay Litwyn < brewhaha@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca> wrote:
Plus, no admin actions went against his account:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Wp_freedom_fi... on wikipedia.
It's not the most intuitive thing, but the "user" field in logs actually gets you all actions committed *by* a user, not necessarily targeting that user. To get log actions targeting a specific user, the "title" field needs to be "User:Whatever".
Like so: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?page=User:Wp_freedom_fighter
-Luna