Let me clarify some things:
Saboto215 is a sockpuppet account. It is my sockpuppet. Ryan Postlethwaite found it. Durova is correct.
I am not a meatpuppet of JB196. I know JB196's name from memory. For me to be a meatpuppet of JB196 would require me to have communicated with him at some point. I haven't, and have no intention of doing so. Durova thinks I'm involved, but she hasn't said how. She may have been trying to imply that I was a meatpuppet of JB196. She can choose to believe the truth, or not. She seems to have chosen the latter.
I have also never communicated with Burntsauce or Eyrian, and I don't remember ever talking to Alkivar either. I had not even heard of Burntsauce or Eyrian before the cases, but Alkivar was quite active and I have seen him comment on various issues. I do not know who any of these people are, and have no intention of finding out.
What Durova is not telling is that after she said she was "signing off the list", I sent an e-mail to the never-read gmail address nadezhda.durova AT gmail.com. The e-mail is copied below.
--Jonas ---------------- From: "Jonas Rand" joeyyuan@cox.net To: nadezhda.durova@gmail.com Subject: Hello Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 10:18:09 -0800 Hello Durova,
I didn't realize that the name was removed by now. It must have been some time since I read the page, as I last remember seeing the name there. I remembered the name, and I didn't think it was a secret (as he made an edit saying he was Jonathan Barber), but Alison removed in in 2007. I remembered that name and then did some searching on him not long ago. I know Grawp's name as well; that does not mean that I have ever communicated with Grawp (indeed I have not). I don't know how these things stick in my memory, though.
Yes, it is a mere coincidence that the date aligned with the arbitration cases and the Eyrian thing. I have nothing to do with JB196. I know, if I were so inclined, how I would go about contacting him (based on the search that I did), but I don't remember the address and I would have to do the search again. I have never e-mailed JB196, or contacted him via other means (such as a forum). You should ask him if he's ever communicated with a Jonas Rand.
The circumstance that I "didn't want to discuss" was that I wanted to make the hoax more elaborate, setting up a blog network referencing "Nikita Molotov" and advertizing the promotion. I reconsidered and thought that was too much work, so I decided not to do it. That's it.
Jonas Rand
Jonas, you have a very strange way of communicating. You started this thread to ask other people what I was thinking. They couldn't tell you, of course. Now you're trying to tell them what I'm thinking. That doesn't fly either
What I think is you have zero credibility, and that's your own fault. Don't expect the benefit of the doubt when you highlight an appearance of impropriety in your own unban request. Not after you've been socking and trying 'experiments' nearly the whole time you've been banned.
Now if you straighten up your act I'd nominate you for return myself. But it'll be a good long time before you establish clout. Look me up on 25 August 2009. If you haven't edited I'll start that AN thread and support your return.
But there's a catch. From this point forward every post you make on the subject extends that time frame by one month. So if you reply again at this thread, ask me in September. If you restart this drama somewhere else, same thing.
-Durova
On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Jonas Rand joeyyuan@cox.net wrote:
Let me clarify some things:
Saboto215 is a sockpuppet account. It is my sockpuppet. Ryan Postlethwaite found it. Durova is correct.
I am not a meatpuppet of JB196. I know JB196's name from memory. For me to be a meatpuppet of JB196 would require me to have communicated with him at some point. I haven't, and have no intention of doing so. Durova thinks I'm involved, but she hasn't said how. She may have been trying to imply that I was a meatpuppet of JB196. She can choose to believe the truth, or not. She seems to have chosen the latter.
I have also never communicated with Burntsauce or Eyrian, and I don't remember ever talking to Alkivar either. I had not even heard of Burntsauce or Eyrian before the cases, but Alkivar was quite active and I have seen him comment on various issues. I do not know who any of these people are, and have no intention of finding out.
What Durova is not telling is that after she said she was "signing off the list", I sent an e-mail to the never-read gmail address nadezhda.durova AT gmail.com. The e-mail is copied below.
--Jonas
From: "Jonas Rand" joeyyuan@cox.net To: nadezhda.durova@gmail.com Subject: Hello Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 10:18:09 -0800 Hello Durova,
I didn't realize that the name was removed by now. It must have been some time since I read the page, as I last remember seeing the name there. I remembered the name, and I didn't think it was a secret (as he made an edit saying he was Jonathan Barber), but Alison removed in in 2007. I remembered that name and then did some searching on him not long ago. I know Grawp's name as well; that does not mean that I have ever communicated with Grawp (indeed I have not). I don't know how these things stick in my memory, though.
Yes, it is a mere coincidence that the date aligned with the arbitration cases and the Eyrian thing. I have nothing to do with JB196. I know, if I were so inclined, how I would go about contacting him (based on the search that I did), but I don't remember the address and I would have to do the search again. I have never e-mailed JB196, or contacted him via other means (such as a forum). You should ask him if he's ever communicated with a Jonas Rand.
The circumstance that I "didn't want to discuss" was that I wanted to make the hoax more elaborate, setting up a blog network referencing "Nikita Molotov" and advertizing the promotion. I reconsidered and thought that was too much work, so I decided not to do it. That's it.
Jonas Rand
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I think the people subscribed to this list probably aren't terribly interested in all of this, hasn't it all been hashed out to the necessary extent on-wiki?
Nathan
----- Original Message ----- From: "Durova" nadezhda.durova@gmail.com To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2008 4:33 PM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] What exactly is Durova saying here?
Jonas, you have a very strange way of communicating. You started this thread to ask other people what I was thinking. They couldn't tell you, of course. Now you're trying to tell them what I'm thinking. That doesn't fly either
I don't get any claims of telepathy out of Ionas' post. I see honest work from Ionas# and several blocks extended from Ryulong. The most inappropriate one was a claim of Trolling his RfC. "Trolling" is anything that gets your goat (usually religion or politics). If I told my high school mathematics teacher that "Mathematicians who can't sing are incompetent", I would hav his goat, and he might not like the way I was issuing a challenge (I didn't say mathematicians who DON'T sing...). I see a [[WP:COI]] in Ryulong policing posts to his own RfC, even indirectly...and there might be language issues in the e-mails I can't see.
"ScRyulong" was a big mistake. It's not an insult, and it could still be threatening.
What I think is you have zero credibility, and that's your own fault. Don't expect the benefit of the doubt when you highlight an appearance of impropriety in your own unban request. Not after you've been socking and trying 'experiments' nearly the whole time you've been banned.
Now if you straighten up your act I'd nominate you for return myself. But it'll be a good long time before you establish clout. Look me up on 25 August 2009. If you haven't edited I'll start that AN thread and support your return.
Okay...so I found the twenty sock puppets in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Ionas68224 , so I really don't know how far back and frequently this would go unless you did a merjer of some kind.
I still don't get the part about desysoped admins or self-promoting wrestlers.
But there's a catch. From this point forward every post you make on the subject extends that time frame by one month. So if you reply again at this thread, ask me in September. If you restart this drama somewhere else, same thing.
You can not unilaterally block him from a list until September. As Durova began, she did not intend to respond beyond once. Nothing compels her to respond again or amend her noticeboard submission (I'm not even sure that any part of it is wrong, just hard to follow and devoid of redeeming qualities in the accused). This list is more open than the mailing list for unblocking. It is not really meant for such things, and I do not think anyone can say it is irrelevant.
What I am having trouble understanding is why Durova doesn't appear on [[user_talk:Ionas68224]] if she knows so much about him. This is kind of nasty, though. It's hard to figure out what he is talking about, and I am guessing that it is immediately after an e-mail that I am not privy to, and an RfC comment. I'm just going to say this once. Stay out of Ryulong's face, or I'll block you for disruption. It's that simple. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 06:01, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
-Durova
So, the motivation for all of those sock puppets seems like an honest *determination* to contribute, something that confuses non-wikiholics, and I can not subtract personal defense motives in Ryulong from the initial blocks that started it all. Then there's the warning thing. [[WP:STRIKES]] suggests three warnings, and I see about five blocks that get longer with about one intervening warning, unless they were delivered by e-mail. That's my guess, and I've only scratched the surface. _______ <a href="http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/">BrewJay's Babble Bin</a>
2008/11/30 Durova nadezhda.durova@gmail.com:
But there's a catch. From this point forward every post you make on the subject extends that time frame by one month.
Wow, really adult of you.
Some background appears to have been lost in this thread. For two years now I've extended a standard offer to support the return of banned editors under certain conditions.
*Refrain from socking for six months. *Promise to refrain from the behavior that caused the ban. *Don't create other reasons to rethink that offer.
That time frame is adjustable under certain conditions. I've been known to welcome people back in half that time if they do good drama-free work at a sister wiki.
Jonas is active at a sister wiki, but his record there is quite spotty. And he's been socking consistently. Each occasion resets that six month clock, so at the point he requested an end to his ban he was a bit short of the 90 day mark. Those aren't circumstances that would shorten the time frame. The question was whether to lengthen it.
Both his presentation and with his subsequent conduct have been unimpressive. Decidedly so. It's gone on long enough and I've declared my new offer. There's no obligation to extend one at all.
Ironically enough, just a few threads beneath Ionas's request I was helping another banned editor who really regretted his mistakes and who'd been getting the run-around from ArbCom for months. The other fellow's back now. And there's another ban I'm preparing to appeal soon.
Now if you want to discourage experienced Wikipedians from supporting the return of banned editors under fair conditions, an effective way to achieve that is to take potshots at the relative few who'll sponsor requests.
-Durova
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:06 AM, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
2008/11/30 Durova nadezhda.durova@gmail.com:
But there's a catch. From this point forward every post you make on the subject extends that time frame by one month.
Wow, really adult of you.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 7:06 AM, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
2008/11/30 Durova nadezhda.durova@gmail.com:
But there's a catch. From this point forward every post you make on the subject extends that time frame by one month.
Wow, really adult of you.
Durova's talking about her willingness to personally support someone's return, which is something she's entitled to place any restrictions on she wishes, I'd have thought.
-Matt