Three days after the announcement made by Austin Hair on behalf of
this list administrators, which also includes Ral315 and
AlexandrDmitri, that Greg Kohs was banned and Peter Damian moderated,
this much has been accomplished by about 41 posts on that subject:
1) Austin Hair, Ral315, and AlexandrDmitri continue to be the list
administrators;
2) Greg Kohs is still banned and Peter Damian moderated;
3) Five members posted supporting the list administrators decision;
4) Nine members posted against or questioning the list administrators decision;
5) Greg Kohs has been accused of and/or called (after being banned =
unable to self defense)
5.1) brinkmanship, boasting, troll, by Gerard Meijssen
5.2) actively opposing [the project], criticizing in public forums in
exaggerated ways, not adding anything constructive or helpeful,
trollish and disruptive behavior, bad faith, malice, engaged in a
campaign intending to harm, have and use substantive issues [to
harm], by Fred Bauder
5.3) completely unable to keep his contributions civil, causing more
flamewars than constructive discussion, by Austin Hair, list
administrators reasons to ban
5.4) having a long, unmitigated and unambiguous record of trolling,
spamming, harassment, and abuse, openly soliciting bids from "web
manipulators" whom he intends to pay to post pre-written negative
comments to news stories about Wikipedia, with a very clearly stated
motive to drive traffic to his revenue-generating sites, clearly
unethical and profit-driven behavior and trolling, wasting much time
and energy, throwing much shit [of and at others], returning here
frequently with throwaway email accounts, by Erik Moeller, Deputy
Director, Wikimedia Foundation
5.5) being abusive, somewhat sensationalistic, unwilling to abide by
reasonable internal behavior standards, that behavior being a
defining factor of his interaction with the list, rarely being able
to suppress it for long, by George Herbert
5.6) and associated with troublesome, trolls, and harassment, by phoebe ayers
6) Peter Damian has been accused of and/or called (after being
moderated = self defense not guaranteed)
6.1) making you believe there is nothing good to be found in
Wikipedia, posturing as a superior mind, boring, not toning down his
retoric, not relevant, by Gerard Meijssen
6.2) actively opposing [the project], criticizing in public forums in
exaggerated ways, not always contributing something constructive and
helpeful, trollish and disruptive behavior, bad faith, malice,
engaged in a campaign intending to harm, have and use substantive
issues [to harm], by Fred Bauder
6.3) not always posting something that is even marginally acceptable,
by Austin Hair, list administrators reasons to moderate
6.4) and associated with troublesome, and trolls, by phoebe ayers
Sixteen hours after the ban and moderation, the 19th post was
off-topic. Three and a half hours later, by the 25th post the
discussion got off-topic for good staying that way, until someone
change the topic title. Of 41 posts, 18 (including the last 17) were off-topic.
Half an hour after the 19th post that would eventually send the
discussion off-topic for good, another topic was open. It added a
total of 19 posts, six of them by the list member that started it. It
generated one post questioning the list administrators decision to
moderate Peter Damian, and three supporting the list administrators
decision to ban Greg Kohs. Furthermore,
7) Greg Kohs (after being banned = unable to self defense) was
accused of campaigning against Wikipedia, having a big anti campaign
in progress, being disingenuous and having bad faith, by Fred Bauder
8) Greg Kohs and his publications off-list were accused of
being/having (after Greg Kohs being banned = unable to self defense)
8.1) sheer number of inaccuracies and misportrayals, by Michael Peel
8.2) full of misinformation, erroneously blaming the WMF for content
issues, simultaneously arguing two sides of an issue, flat out false
or outdated, troll, by Ryan Kaldari
8.3) continual attacks on the content don't appear to consistent and
give the appearance (to me based on my view) of attacking the WMF
because he has a personal axe to grind, Posting long screeds
attacking the content providing nature while ignoring the fact that
WMF is legally a host, not using a productive method for encouraging
positive change, Continually railing on and on about these cases of
pornography, plagiarism and libel just are ignoring, He doesn't feel
like he's addressing systematic problems with the user created
culture but attacking to attack, faulting the community (which it
feels like) for not dealing with these problems on specific pages,
attacking your average contributor, It feels like he's not attacking
.the WMF but the base of people like you and me, can't try to make
positive change, won't fork, gives the appearance of trying to take
down a project, by Laura Hale
9) Peter Damian (after being moderated = self defense not guaranteed)
was accused of bad talk, by Fred Bauder
10) Peter Damian and his publications off-list were accused of
being/having (after Peter Damian being moderated = self defense not
guaranteed)
10.1) exaggerating, going beyhond negative comments, by Fred Bauder
10.2) blog complaining about moderation being itself moderated by
him, by Ryan Kaldari
There seems to be nothing unusual or particularly remarkable in this
case when compared with what can be seen on this list or in many
Wikimedia projects. Hopefully this may be useful to others, helping
them understand what to expect and how things work and are done and
dealt with here.
Sincerely,
Virgilio A. P. Machado
(Vapmachado)