On 17 Feb 2007 at 19:42, Gwern Branwen gwern0@gmail.com wrote:
Please do not send *8* messages in a row. If you must write so much, consider consolidating messages into, I don't know, something less than a power of 2?
Technically speaking, 1 is actually a power of 2 (2 to the zeroth)...
Incredibly rude to other readers of wikien-l. I hope you get put on moderation for this; maybe then you will learn the difference between uses and abuses of email.
Yes... and quoting back all of the preceding messages in the set as part of each subsequent one, and quoting back the whole stinkin' mess when complaining about it, is also an abuse of email.
(My partial quoting below is for the purpose of specific commentary, as follows:)
"Samuel L Bronkowitz" countpointercount@gmail.com writes:
I will consider my options carefully, but you have done nothing to prove to me that Wikipedia is worth any contribution any more. You have likely lost the contribution of a 3+ year veteran, and I will probably start going in and removing articles I have previously contributed. You have no right to them any more.
Actually, when you submit content under the GFDL, they do have the right to use it, and continue to use it regardless of any changes of heart you might have subsequent to your original submission.
I am requesting an answer, but having received none, and having now seen how Wikipedia's administrators are more than content to let abuse of this sort go on with no answer, I am 90% certain that I will be leaving Wikipedia. I will not make things worse or vandalize articles, but I cannot say that the thought of doing so did not cross my mind. As I travel quite extensively, it would be very easy for me to acquire a new IP address every time that I go somewhere and damage Wikipedia a little bit just for the fun of doing so, since constructive editing and the right to defend myself against basely false accusations are being denied me.
Threatening to vandalize Wikipedia is a great way to convince people you're a good contributor who's being unjustly treated, isn't it?
Since I have apparently not had any of your time, I shall not thank you for it in this missive any more.
As far as this list is concerned, the first anybody has apparently heard of you is in your barrage of messages, culminating in your threats to quit and/or withdraw your contributions and/or become a vandal... all posted here before anybody has even had a chance to react to your issues or concerns.
Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
"Samuel L Bronkowitz" countpointercount@gmail.com writes:
Since I have apparently not had any of your time, I shall not thank you for it in this missive any more.
As far as this list is concerned, the first anybody has apparently heard of you is in your barrage of messages, culminating in your threats to quit and/or withdraw your contributions and/or become a vandal... all posted here before anybody has even had a chance to react to your issues or concerns.
All of his emails were sent within a period of four hours. When I read the first one I was somewhat sympathetic, but became less so as I read the additional ones. He has a problem with patience.
It doesn't help him much that Saturdays tend to be the lowest traffic day on this mailling list.
Ec
On 2/18/07, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
All of his emails were sent within a period of four hours. When I read the first one I was somewhat sympathetic, but became less so as I read the additional ones. He has a problem with patience.
That seems to be a pattern on this list. The personality of the messenger makes it difficult to AFG and hides the possibility that he might have a legitimate gripe. It's possible that the admins who these "evil messengers" are calling rogue were also put off by their attitudes and were a little quick with their LARTs.
On 2/18/07, Ron Ritzman ritzman@gmail.com wrote:
messenger makes it difficult to AFG^H^H^HAGF
Damn, now I'm doing what the OP did :(
What I didn't know was that "before anybody has even had a chance to react to your issues or concerns" existed.
I got the "your message is being moderated" messages long after I sent my last message in.
What I did see was as follows:
- Anybody who spoke up about the ongoing falsehoods and obvious wrong admin behavior was being accused of being a "sockpuppet."
- The "result" of the CheckUser by JPGordon was obviously falsified, it is supposed to give either an affirmative, negative, or at best "inconclusive."
He didn't give a listing for each accused person either, he just gave a blanket "likely." The same problem exists for previous CheckUser incidents I have looked at both in this case and others, it is obvious that the tool, or at least the power resting in the hands of those who have it but have no check and balance requiring that they honestly report the results, is being routinely abused.
- Discussions which were ongoing were constantly being "closed" by administrators trying to kill any investigation into this incident. Several users have now filed statements that they have a major problem with this, but the administrators guilty are facing no sanction and are likely to just keep doing it. No response to their other concerns has been placed anywhere. The only conclusion I can draw is that the administrators who did this know they were being abusive, their friends who protected them know it was abusive, and they are keeping their heads down hoping it blows over.
Knowing wikipedia, it likely will. Policing of the abuses by administrators is nonexistent.
- A bot "archived" these things, and so did administrators, again trying to lock off debate despite the fact that the community has strong misgivings about how this was handled and multiple users are convinced that the original indefinite-blocked user was provoked deliberately by the same administrator who did the indefinite blocking.
- My attempts to file a legitimate unblock request were being reverted by one of the other "users" who filed the abusive checkuser report.
- I did some investigating and found out that administrator Yamla answers over 40% of unblock requests just himself, and administrator Ryulong (one of the ones who abusively "closed" a discussion far earlier than it should have been closed) at least another 25%. They have yet to certify even one that I could find as deserving of an unblock, even in cases where policy states that one should be granted, such as people blocked for 3RR on first offense who promise not to do it again. It seems obvious to me that this is part of the problem, because "administration" of this function has turned into a rubber stamp with no meaning behind it.
It is now Sunday morning. Not a single administrator, on the Administrators Noticeboard, has answered any of the concerns, though more administrators have "closed" and "archived" discussions on it by normal users, which prompted Mis Mondegreen to file another thread here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:ANI#Stop_archiving.21_in_re_RunedChozo
The only "response" so far is user bbatsell now trying to stamp the debate again by claiming the place it is filed is "not the place" for it. He is so dishonest he does not even bother to address the concerns raised about abusive "archiving" and thread closings.
This is ongoing and systemic abuse. The fact that people like you are trying still to attack me rather than addressing it is showing me a side of Wikipedia I did not know about, but which sickens me.
As of now, I am unable to speak in my defense. Anything I try to post even to my own talk page, user Trebor Rowntree is sitting around to abusively remove.
So I am here. And from what I see here, just like on the administrators noticeboard, you are more interested in trying to attack the messenger than in investigating real abuses by your administrators. That certainly was the intent of your message, "Dan."
I invite you to prove me wrong, but I don't hold any hopes that you will. Previous example certainly shows me otherwise.
As far as this list is concerned, the first anybody has apparently
heard of you is in your barrage of messages, culminating in your threats to quit and/or withdraw your contributions and/or become a vandal... all posted here before anybody has even had a chance to react to your issues or concerns.
-- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l