David Gerard wrote:
On 08/04/07, Jeff Raymond jeff.raymond@internationalhouseofbacon.com wrote:
Fleshlight.
Office.
No it wasn't. It was him deleting something because they told him something and ignoring consensus.
Israel News Agency.
Office. (Spamming attack troll.)
Wasn't when he was dealing with it, not an office action.
His block log.
Including office time?
Again, let's not confuse "things he did working with the office" with "office actions"
Musa Cooper. Sean Black's RfA. Essjay's RfB.
Unfamiliar with these. Details please?
Look 'em up.
His use of the rollback function.
Details please?
See the RfA for details.
And, although it's more than resolved, the Erik Moller situation is a fine example of the "shoot first, don't ask questions later" type of actions that people have, unfortunately, come to expect from Danny.
Office.
Well, no. Again.
So in summary, you're saying we get bad administrators when the administrators in question are employed by the Foundation.
Only if you think that every action done while employed is done as an office action. Only if working for the Foundation somehow makes you above accountability later.
That really is drooling idiocy on your part, and I would have expected better of you.
Wow. Thanks for that. Really constructive. What an asshole comment to make.
I know they don't like each other, but I don't know any other details.
I'd say accusing someone of being a self-promoter with zero evidence, thus tarnishing a longterm user's reputation on the project more than "they don't like eachother."
-Jeff