On Sun, 1 Aug 2004 15:46, Ray Saintonge wrote:
Brion Vibber wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
Jerome Jamnicky wrote:
On Sun, 1 Aug 2004 07:10, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> I am annoyed by the behaviour of user:fire. He is not a sysop on
> Wikisource, yet he was able to come and block a user indefinitely with
> no better excuse than a non-working link to wikipedia about
> policy. I immediately reversed the block.
> Those who participate in Wikisource are quite capable of deciding who
> should be blocked. We don't need this loose cannon who has not
> otherwise participated in Wikisource to sneakily acquire some kind of
> superior access for no other reason to block a user that he does
> not like.
You should get your facts straight before you make accusations like
Butting in to prove your ignorance are you?
Odd that you sent this message three minutes after admitting that you
were wrong. Would you mind retracting that statement and apologizing
to Ronny, to Jerome, and to this list?
There was no such admission, I merely said that I now understood what he
did, and suggested how the situation could be better handled in the
future. My response to Ronny speaks for itself. Jerome asked for it
when he stuck his nose in. Thre was no attack against the list.
Sticking my nose in? This is my business since I am one of the two people who
has recently been doing the username change work. You have falsely accused
Fire of two serious offences:
1) Acquiring sysop access in an underhanded way.
2) Blocking someone for personal reasons.
Fire was following instructions and made the simple error of leaving
"Wikipedia:" out of his explanatory link. You did not check your facts, and
you behaved as a "loose cannon" (to borrow from your vocabulary) and a
in a china shop" (your vocab, again).
People are wondering if this kind of behaviour makes your net contribution to
the project negative. If you'd like to change this, you could start by
apologising to Fire.