I appriciate Ed telling us why he acted in the manner that he did. Personally, I feel that we as a community should discuss this, and continue the block until it's expiration unless an alternative is discussed. I believe that we should create, and ask Ed to abide by a Conduct Doctrine which would act as an ArbCom ruling which gives Administrators more leeway in blocking over conduct. If Ed is truly the Wikinewsie that he says he is, and if he wishes to continue his work here, than he can abide by a Conduct Doctrine. I've included an example of one below:
1) Within regards to the Wikinews 3-revert-rule, Edbrown05 is now limited to 2 reverts per day, excluding simple vandalism. Breaking this policy may result in a ban, as is applicable to the WN:3RR policy.
2) Personal attacks against another user will immediatly result in a 72-hour ban, no matter what the cause, or explanation. Talk page should be locked if any other attacks are attempted.
-- Thunderhead http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:Thunderhead http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thunderhead
_______________________________________________ DISCLAIMER: I hold no official position in the Wikimedia Foundation. This message expresses the views of a single Wikimedia user and not necessarily the community at large.
---- jason safoutin cute24minbflo@yahoo.com wrote:
(Reply below after a NOTE: Please send all Wikinews related mails, in the future, to: jason.safoutin@wikinewsie.org. I am in the process of shutting down this account)
IF this is a test, then I am Rick James Bitch...bah...He knew what he was doing and it matters not what his agenda was or if he had one. What does matter is 1) He was aware of all his actions and the results that would come form them 2) he did this to himself and no one else. 3) If eloquence acted the same way I would respond in the same way.
I could care less about his mental state and frankly we have no right to make any assessment on his behavior because we don't actually know him. None of us, as far as I know, never seen him in real life so for us to say he is senile, or just crazy is disrespectful, regardless of how he treated anybody. I say that because he is blocked, and his pages protected. He is silent and will be until his block is up. If he does not behave, then we wipe out his existence on Wikinews. I do not condone his actions in the least, but we have done what we can up to this point and insulting him or his personality through an unprofessional opinion, it not only makes things worse and makes us look bad, but also prevents any hope of ArbCom working...
Setting that aside, if Ed didn't care about the fact that we blocked all his IPs and Users, then he would leave it at that and wait for his block to be up. No he didn't apologize and he won't, but I have been around Wikinews long enough to know that his "gang" of buddies, aka Neutralizer, and international are not around anymore so all he has is to occasionally go on a rampage...no its not good, but as I see it most of our current admins have been blocked a time or two for attacks and such...
Plain and simple: he straightens up, makes USEFUL and productive edits, stops with his hisst fits, or get banned....it cannot be any easier than that.
Jason
Christopher Harrington ironiridis@gmail.com wrote: Are you kidding me?! I'm offended by his sheer gall. Insensitive or not, I am officially calling mental illness here.
What's with the "my account has not been hijacked that I know of"... almost as if he didn't understand that he's done something wrong.
This is absolutely unacceptable, and shows premeditation. If he needs a three month break, let's give him six, so we're sure he's had plenty of time to mow his lawn in the spring, too.
This pisses me off. I really wanted to believe that he wasn't cognizant of his misconduct. He's on my shit list now. >:(
-ironiridis
On 10/25/07, bawolff bawolff+wn@gmail.com wrote: This message is being forwarded to the wikinews admins (those whom I have an email address for) + David (since his involvement with these events, and he is almost an admin). I think i only sent to active admins. If I sent to you and you haven't looked at wikinews in 6 months and don't care, sorry - please ignore (or if you have an opinion, feel free to voice it).
Basically Ed says that he did what he did as a test. Personally I don't think we should change our opinions on blocking him based on this (test or not, its still being an idiot. This is WN:POINT to an extreme ), but I felt I should forward it to everyone.
My opinion is we should block for three months. and that at this time figure out as a community if we wish to forgive his "test", or if we want to continue blocking.
Note: I responded to his email saying that I'm glad he wasn't crazy, I've forwarded to all the admins, I disagree with his actions, if you're a wikiholic, try putting it in your hosts file.
If you wish to talk about this by email, I recommend hitting reply all, so we all get responses.
I received this email from ed. On 10/24/07, Ed Brown <edbrown@msn.com > wrote:
After a quick scan of the administrative action alerts page, it appears to me that en.wikinews has accurately identified me with the questionable edits and remarks. Nobody has taken over my account that I am aware of. There may some mimic activity by anons, but I edit from and IP that does not change very often.
This is a difficult mail to write. Like SVTCobra, who took a break to work on some real life issues, I too have some very real time issues to resolve. I have been on the brink of being irresponsible to those. My health is good, and I am definitely neither senile nor suffering from a personality disorder. I am suffering from an inability to not contribute. How weird I would get myself blocked to fix that<!>
Laughing! Anyway, I have to take it light heartedly because when Amgine jams out possibly because the pressure becomes to much, Neut gets the kick for intellectual arrogance, Ilya fears getting into the fray because any misstep may be a disaster to that person, and I cannot get 3 faucets installed that I bought back in January, well some thing has got to change.
Yes, I bought those faucets 10 months ago for two bathrooms and a kitchen, and they have gone uninstalled. I could call a plumber, but I don't need one. I need for me to get off my butt and do it. So the question I have asked myself is this, am I blaming en.wkinews for me not installing the fixtures? Yes
So the lover of wikinews that I am, turned to the community itself and performed a test. Homophobic? No I am not, I turned to the community to see how it would respond. In a strange way, I am proud of the response, because it proves that it is working. I've always been a 'just do it' kind of person. I need a 3-month block, but not perma banned.
With regard to my accreditation, I would never cross over the line of what would be my best and honest effort at reporting, that is how much I care about news and the site. If my accreditation gets taken away, hopefully I can earn it back if I feel I need it.
My own objection to my actions: you performed a test at wikinews that was hurtful to others? Yes I did. The lowest common denominator has always been a fascination of mine. An open process like wikinews will (in its present form) be open to the lowest common denominator. Explore, explore, explore. I did that, in self interest, and my interests have been served now that I am blocked.
Now I have a donation to make, and gads what a mess under my kitchen sink!
I trust you bawolff to do with this mail as you see fit.
----- Original Message ----- From: bawolff To: edbrown@msn.com Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 8:56 PM Subject: Wikinews stuff
Recently there has been lots of comments coming from your account on the english wikinews, that is quite frankly beneath you and not consistant with your edits in previous times. Homophobic personal attacks, using socks, etc. I just wanted to email you to make sure that it is actually you talking, and that your account has not been taken over.
If this is actually you, I want to suggest that you take a step back, and look whats happening, bearing in mind everyone always has their own part to play. To be blunt, what your currently doing is really not helping anything other then making you look like an absolute idiot
Sincerely, Bawolff
--
- Brian
Caution: The mass of this product contains the energy equivalent of 85 million tons of TNT per net ounce of weight.
Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
These things should actually be written into the existing guidelines. We already have a "no personal attacks" rule, I know it is instruction creep but perhaps it needs some expansion to say that repeat offenders may be blocked for 72 hours and, if required, their talk page locked.
Now, I need to go book a hotel for tonight and train tickets to Amsterdam... I've to give a lightning talk on Wikinews at the Wikimedia NL conference tomorrow. (Any suggestions?)
Brian.
-----Original Message----- From: wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikinews-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Thunderhead Sent: 26 October 2007 05:11 To: jason safoutin Cc: wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikinews-l] Ed brown's explanation for his actions
I appriciate Ed telling us why he acted in the manner that he did. Personally, I feel that we as a community should discuss this, and continue the block until it's expiration unless an alternative is discussed. I believe that we should create, and ask Ed to abide by a Conduct Doctrine which would act as an ArbCom ruling which gives Administrators more leeway in blocking over conduct. If Ed is truly the Wikinewsie that he says he is, and if he wishes to continue his work here, than he can abide by a Conduct Doctrine. I've included an example of one below:
1) Within regards to the Wikinews 3-revert-rule, Edbrown05 is now limited to 2 reverts per day, excluding simple vandalism. Breaking this policy may result in a ban, as is applicable to the WN:3RR policy.
2) Personal attacks against another user will immediatly result in a 72-hour ban, no matter what the cause, or explanation. Talk page should be locked if any other attacks are attempted.
-- Thunderhead http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:Thunderhead http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thunderhead
_______________________________________________ DISCLAIMER: I hold no official position in the Wikimedia Foundation. This message expresses the views of a single Wikimedia user and not necessarily the community at large.
---- jason safoutin cute24minbflo@yahoo.com wrote:
(Reply below after a NOTE: Please send all Wikinews related mails, in the
future, to: jason.safoutin@wikinewsie.org. I am in the process of shutting down this account)
IF this is a test, then I am Rick James Bitch...bah...He knew what he was
doing and it matters not what his agenda was or if he had one. What does matter is 1) He was aware of all his actions and the results that would come form them 2) he did this to himself and no one else. 3) If eloquence acted the same way I would respond in the same way.
I could care less about his mental state and frankly we have no right to
make any assessment on his behavior because we don't actually know him. None of us, as far as I know, never seen him in real life so for us to say he is senile, or just crazy is disrespectful, regardless of how he treated anybody. I say that because he is blocked, and his pages protected. He is silent and will be until his block is up. If he does not behave, then we wipe out his existence on Wikinews. I do not condone his actions in the least, but we have done what we can up to this point and insulting him or his personality through an unprofessional opinion, it not only makes things worse and makes us look bad, but also prevents any hope of ArbCom working...
Setting that aside, if Ed didn't care about the fact that we blocked all
his IPs and Users, then he would leave it at that and wait for his block to be up. No he didn't apologize and he won't, but I have been around Wikinews long enough to know that his "gang" of buddies, aka Neutralizer, and international are not around anymore so all he has is to occasionally go on a rampage...no its not good, but as I see it most of our current admins have been blocked a time or two for attacks and such...
Plain and simple: he straightens up, makes USEFUL and productive edits,
stops with his hisst fits, or get banned....it cannot be any easier than that.
Jason
Christopher Harrington ironiridis@gmail.com wrote: Are you kidding me?!
I'm offended by his sheer gall. Insensitive or not, I am officially calling mental illness here.
What's with the "my account has not been hijacked that I know of"...
almost as if he didn't understand that he's done something wrong.
This is absolutely unacceptable, and shows premeditation. If he needs a
three month break, let's give him six, so we're sure he's had plenty of time to mow his lawn in the spring, too.
This pisses me off. I really wanted to believe that he wasn't cognizant of
his misconduct. He's on my shit list now. >:(
-ironiridis
On 10/25/07, bawolff bawolff+wn@gmail.com wrote: This message is being
forwarded to the wikinews admins (those whom I
have an email address for) + David (since his involvement with these events, and he is almost an admin). I think i only sent to active admins. If I sent to you and you haven't looked at wikinews in 6 months and don't care, sorry - please ignore (or if you have an opinion, feel free to voice it).
Basically Ed says that he did what he did as a test. Personally I don't think we should change our opinions on blocking him based on this (test or not, its still being an idiot. This is WN:POINT to an extreme ), but I felt I should forward it to everyone.
My opinion is we should block for three months. and that at this time figure out as a community if we wish to forgive his "test", or if we want to continue blocking.
Note: I responded to his email saying that I'm glad he wasn't crazy, I've forwarded to all the admins, I disagree with his actions, if you're a wikiholic, try putting it in your hosts file.
If you wish to talk about this by email, I recommend hitting reply all, so we all get responses.
I received this email from ed. On 10/24/07, Ed Brown <edbrown@msn.com > wrote:
After a quick scan of the administrative action alerts page, it appears
to
me that en.wikinews has accurately identified me with the questionable
edits
and remarks. Nobody has taken over my account that I am aware of. There
may
some mimic activity by anons, but I edit from and IP that does not
change
very often.
This is a difficult mail to write. Like SVTCobra, who took a break to
work
on some real life issues, I too have some very real time issues to
resolve.
I have been on the brink of being irresponsible to those. My health is
good,
and I am definitely neither senile nor suffering from a personality disorder. I am suffering from an inability to not contribute. How weird
I
would get myself blocked to fix that<!>
Laughing! Anyway, I have to take it light heartedly because when Amgine
jams
out possibly because the pressure becomes to much, Neut gets the kick
for
intellectual arrogance, Ilya fears getting into the fray because any
misstep
may be a disaster to that person, and I cannot get 3 faucets installed
that
I bought back in January, well some thing has got to change.
Yes, I bought those faucets 10 months ago for two bathrooms and a
kitchen,
and they have gone uninstalled. I could call a plumber, but I don't need one. I need for me to get off my butt and do it. So the question I have asked myself is this, am I blaming en.wkinews for me not installing the fixtures? Yes
So the lover of wikinews that I am, turned to the community itself and performed a test. Homophobic? No I am not, I turned to the community to
see
how it would respond. In a strange way, I am proud of the response,
because
it proves that it is working. I've always been a 'just do it' kind of person. I need a 3-month block, but not perma banned.
With regard to my accreditation, I would never cross over the line of
what
would be my best and honest effort at reporting, that is how much I care about news and the site. If my accreditation gets taken away, hopefully
I
can earn it back if I feel I need it.
My own objection to my actions: you performed a test at wikinews that
was
hurtful to others? Yes I did. The lowest common denominator has always
been
a fascination of mine. An open process like wikinews will (in its
present
form) be open to the lowest common denominator. Explore, explore,
explore. I
did that, in self interest, and my interests have been served now that I
am
blocked.
Now I have a donation to make, and gads what a mess under my kitchen
sink!
I trust you bawolff to do with this mail as you see fit.
----- Original Message ----- From: bawolff To: edbrown@msn.com Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 8:56 PM Subject: Wikinews stuff
Recently there has been lots of comments coming from your account on the english wikinews, that is quite frankly beneath you and not consistant with your edits in previous times. Homophobic personal attacks, using socks, etc. I just wanted to email you to make sure that it is actually you talking, and that your account has not been taken over.
If this is actually you, I want to suggest that you take a step back, and look whats happening, bearing in mind everyone always has their own part to play. To be blunt, what your currently doing is really not helping anything other then making you look like an absolute idiot
Sincerely, Bawolff
--
- Brian
Caution: The mass of this product contains the energy equivalent of 85 million tons of TNT per net ounce of weight.
Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ Wikinews-l mailing list Wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
wikinews-l@lists.wikimedia.org