[WikiEN-l] Time to start discussing solutions?

[Scott Stevenson]

Resid Gulerdem,
You are trying to blame me for your repeated difficulties on
Wikipedia. This is FLAT OUT false as I have already demonstrated by
showing that it appears that wherever you go you are disruptive. Why
do you think you were so frequently blocked on the Turkish Wikipedia,
blocks that I had nothing to do with whatsoever? In my opinion
Wikipedia needs less influence from editors like yourself who'd do
better to leave the project permanently rather than try to create
policy that is ill founded from a contributor who's reputation is
demonstrably ill founded. You would do better to spend your effort
more productively elsewhere rather than being disruptive on both
English Wikipedia AND Turkish Wikipedia
.
-Scott Stevenson [[User:Netscott]]

> >From: "Scott Stevenson" <wikinetscott at gmail.com>
> >Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> >To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Time to start discussing
> solutions?
> >Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 11:15:08 +0200
> >
> >Resid Gulerdem you are a PERMANENTLY BLOCKED EDITOR
> who has not only
> >been disruptive on English Wikipedia :
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rgulerdem with
> corresponding
> >extensive block log:
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Rgulerdem
> >but you've been disruptive in an entirely independent
> way on the
> >Turkish Wikipedia:
> >http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kullanıcı:Rgulerdem
> >Where you have also been repeatedly blocked:
> >http://tr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Özel:Log&type=block&page=Kullanıcı:Rgulerdem
> >
> >For you to be discussing policy at this point is
> ridiculous. You
> >should STEP AWAY from the project for at minimum 1
> YEAR and then come
> >back to try and contribute as at this point it is
> surely likely that
> >you'll once again be disruptive when trying to
> formulate any sort of a
> >"policy" like [[WP:OURS]] through demonstrating the
> same types of
> >disruptive editor behaviour you've already repeatedly
> demonstrated
> >(involving WP:OWN, WP:3RR, WP:POINT, WP:NPA, and
> WP:CIV).
> >
> >-Scott Stevenson [[User:Netscott]]

On 6/4/06, Resid Gulerdem <resid_gulerdem at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear Scott,
>
> What is your panic for? My account is blocked, yes!
> This is the third time you are repeating the same
> thing on this list. I disclosed that at the beginning
> of the proposal too. I hope people smart enough here
> to see that you are trying to denounce the proposal by
> mud-throwing at me. I expect you will continue doing
> so to distract the attention of the community from the
> proposal itself. I had issues with some admins,
> blocked at the end and '''that is why I know the
> admin-abuse problem by heart'''. I am trying to make
> some structural suggestions so that new comers do not
> live through the same difficulties I had here. Isn't
> that really understandable to you? If you would like
> to talk about the issue, focus on the proposal and
> find some mistakes in it, that would be more
> persuasive that I am doing bad and be more useful to
> correct it.
>
> I am so sorry to say that you are not an exemplary
> editor in my sight from whom I can take some advise,
> and maybe in the sight of a few other users you are
> messing up around. I do not want to waste my time to
> provide links to show what kind of editor you are.
> (There are already two links in my previous message,
> accidentally.)
>
> Maybe I should just say this: It is no good to watch
> each and every step of a fellow editor and try to
> create a negative atmosphere around him by distorting
> the facts, slandering, using your experience and
> naivety of the new users in a negative manner, biting
> the new users, trying to spoil any positive relation
> the user may have by secretly talking to others,
> organizing other users against a fellow editor etc. It
> is not also good to spoil and ruin the articles and
> proposals by starting edit-wars, reverting without
> discussion, tag'ing the articles at which you have no
> other contributions or idea about without any
> explanation, etc. I cannot see the basis for your
> motivation and do not like to describe it in terms of
> phycology for the sake of kindness. I just want to let
> you know that those are the behaviors that damage the
> community spirit of Wikipedia.
>
> I want you not answer it to me but ask this question
> yourself: What will I gain from ruining another
> proposal ([[WP:OURS]]) as I did in the case of
> [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]]? Is mud-throwing ethical and
> can considered among the behaviors of a gentleman?
> Should I stop this poor behavior? If you have
> difficulty to find an answer please consult your
> parents for your childish behavior.
>
> If you remember, I told you 'bye' far ago. When I say
> it, I really meant that. Let me see if I can make
> myself more clearer this time: Bye again...
>
> Resid
>