Greetings to everyone.
My wikipedia name is Enviroknot. Up until a few days ago, I did not know why my time at Wikipedia was met with such hostility, persecution, and horrid conduct from plenty of users.
A recent emailed admission by one A. Nony Mouse and subsequent contact over IRC have explained the situation to me. I was caught up in an experiment that this user conducted using hijacked systems (routers?), in an effort to root out problems in the behavior of certain wikipedia admins, which backfired and caused many users including myself to be falsely accused of being parts of that experiment.
I never understood why I was included in a request for arbitration which had nothing to do with me, except that it seems to be a common theme in that users who were involved in any sort of conflict were inevitably accused of being part of this project.
I believe if you look back at my edits themselves, instead of trying to lump them in with any conduct you can find, you will see me in a different light.
For your convenience, here is the link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Enviroknot
I will be completely honest with you. Up until this point I had completely given up on Wikipedia, to the point of forbidding my students from citing it in their papers as I considered it a completely unreliable source. I had hoped to make it better, and if I have the chance I would do so.
It is your choice whether you will behave in the good faith which you claim to exercise, or whether you will prove no better than a normal internet message board system.
Cranston Snord, AKA Enviroknot
P.S. No, it's not my real name, but as an untenured educator I do have to be careful.
_________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
Mr. Snord:
ur funny
-Snowspinner
On Sep 8, 2005, at 10:37 PM, Cranston Snord wrote:
Greetings to everyone.
My wikipedia name is Enviroknot. Up until a few days ago, I did not know why my time at Wikipedia was met with such hostility, persecution, and horrid conduct from plenty of users.
A recent emailed admission by one A. Nony Mouse and subsequent contact over IRC have explained the situation to me. I was caught up in an experiment that this user conducted using hijacked systems (routers?), in an effort to root out problems in the behavior of certain wikipedia admins, which backfired and caused many users including myself to be falsely accused of being parts of that experiment.
I never understood why I was included in a request for arbitration which had nothing to do with me, except that it seems to be a common theme in that users who were involved in any sort of conflict were inevitably accused of being part of this project.
I believe if you look back at my edits themselves, instead of trying to lump them in with any conduct you can find, you will see me in a different light.
For your convenience, here is the link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Enviroknot
I will be completely honest with you. Up until this point I had completely given up on Wikipedia, to the point of forbidding my students from citing it in their papers as I considered it a completely unreliable source. I had hoped to make it better, and if I have the chance I would do so.
It is your choice whether you will behave in the good faith which you claim to exercise, or whether you will prove no better than a normal internet message board system.
Cranston Snord, AKA Enviroknot
P.S. No, it's not my real name, but as an untenured educator I do have to be careful.
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/ direct/01/
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Are we to understand that you are an educator, who has been caught up in a dispute due to an association with your student's accounts?
A precursory look at your edits suggests that your edits are reasonable (junior high school teacher?). Continue to express yourself in a reasonable manner, and things will sort themselves out. Arbcom reviews matters presented to them -- thats what they do. Dont take offense at the basic fact that disputes will arise, and with experience you will learn to balance your manner more in accord with our core principles. Wikipedia is not just an encyclopedia -- its also an encyclopediastic culture.
SV
--- Cranston Snord enviroknot@hotmail.com wrote:
Greetings to everyone.
My wikipedia name is Enviroknot. Up until a few days ago, I did not know why my time at Wikipedia was met with such hostility, persecution, and horrid conduct from plenty of users.
A recent emailed admission by one A. Nony Mouse and subsequent contact over IRC have explained the situation to me. I was caught up in an experiment that this user conducted using hijacked systems (routers?), in an effort to root out problems in the behavior of certain wikipedia admins, which backfired and caused many users including myself to be falsely accused of being parts of that experiment.
I never understood why I was included in a request for arbitration which had nothing to do with me, except that it seems to be a common theme in that users who were involved in any sort of conflict were inevitably accused of being part of this project.
I believe if you look back at my edits themselves, instead of trying to lump them in with any conduct you can find, you will see me in a different light.
For your convenience, here is the link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Enviroknot
I will be completely honest with you. Up until this point I had completely given up on Wikipedia, to the point of forbidding my students from citing it in their papers as I considered it a completely unreliable source. I had hoped to make it better, and if I have the chance I would do so.
It is your choice whether you will behave in the good faith which you claim to exercise, or whether you will prove no better than a normal internet message board system.
Cranston Snord, AKA Enviroknot
P.S. No, it's not my real name, but as an untenured educator I do have to be careful.
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
"Cranston Snord" enviroknot@hotmail.com wrote in message news:BAY108-F12269F3A8D82EC7495DB65D8980@phx.gbl...
My wikipedia name is Enviroknot. Up until a few days ago, I did not know why my time at Wikipedia was met with such hostility, persecution, and horrid conduct from plenty of users.
I'm not familiar with precise details either, but that ID is now infamous---for whatever reason.
A recent emailed admission by one A. Nony Mouse and subsequent contact over IRC have explained the situation to me. I was caught up in an experiment that this user conducted using hijacked systems (routers?), in an effort to root out problems in the behavior of certain wikipedia admins, which backfired and caused many users including myself to be falsely accused of being parts of that experiment.
If you were to read this person's messages to this list over the past few months, you would hopefully begin to understand just how much bother they have managed to stir up.
I never understood why I was included in a request for arbitration which had nothing to do with me, except that it seems to be a common theme in that users who were involved in any sort of conflict were inevitably accused of being part of this project.
I recall numerous mentions of "Enviroknot sock-puppets". I will freely admit to total cowardice in avoiding the situation to the best of my ability.
I believe if you look back at my edits themselves, instead of trying to lump them in with any conduct you can find, you will see me in a different light. For your convenience, here is the link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Enviroknot
OK, I'm looking. Which bits are supposed to be demonstrating your innocence? What date ranges are you editing as opposed to someone else? Or are these all you (if so you hardly come out covered in roses, so I'm assuming not)?
I will be completely honest with you. Up until this point I had completely given up on Wikipedia, to the point of forbidding my students from citing it in their papers as I considered it a completely unreliable source. I had hoped to make it better, and if I have the chance I would do so. It is your choice whether you will behave in the good faith which you claim to exercise, or whether you will prove no better than a normal internet message board system.
OK, so you've issued your challenge. If we can keep talking in a sensible and civilised fashion, we might be able to get somewhere.
Cranston Snord, AKA Enviroknot P.S. No, it's not my real name, but as an untenured educator I do have to be careful.
I would strongly suggest that you select someone you think appropriately trustworthy---Jimbo or Angela spring to mind, or possibly David Gerard as the current custodian of the IP check thingamabob---and supply that person with your correct identity, with proof, so that further spoofing of your identity can be detected.
HTH HAND
Phil Boswell wrote: <snip>
I would strongly suggest that you select someone you think appropriately trustworthy---Jimbo or Angela spring to mind, or possibly David Gerard as the current custodian of the IP check thingamabob---and supply that person with your correct identity, with proof, so that further spoofing of your identity can be detected.
Tim Starling also comes to mind.