[Wikimedia-l] Who invoked "principle of least surprise" for the image filter?

[Tobias Oelgarte]

Am 21.06.2012 21:55, schrieb Andreas Kolbe:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Todd Allen<toddmallen at gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> This thread isn't about copyvios, and I don't want to get too far
>> afield, but I think it does kind of show the thought process here
>> sometimes. From my read of the discussions with that editor, as well
>> as the incident discussion you linked, he is being blocked not for the
>> deletion nominations themselves, but for making them disruptively,
>> both by targeting editors he disagrees with and by being abusive
>> during the process. As a parallel on Wikipedia, if someone has a
>> disagreement with another editor, and proceeds to nominate 10 of their
>> articles for deletion with the deletion rationale "Delete this crap by
>> that moron", that person could be sanctioned even if all 10 articles
>> really -do- need to be deleted. I don't know if that's really the
>> case, nor do I feel like reviewing his contributions in enough detail
>> to find out, but the block discussion is absolutely -not- talking
>> about what you said it was.
>
>
> Notability is different from copyright. Copyright is fundamental. When
> editors in Wikipedia have pointed out multiple copyright violations or
> plagiarisms by administrators (we have had examples, up to and including
> arbitrators), they have not been subject to threats, blocks and bans. I
> don't think this sort of thing would fly in the English Wikipedia – not
> with copyright violations.
>
> Non-notable articles, perhaps, especially if the nomination were
> accompanied by abuse. But I am honestly not aware of Pieter ever having
> nominated a file with the reasoning "Delete this crap by that moron". These
> are your words. And I *am* aware of admins continuously picking on him and
> ganging up on him. This is not the first time this situation has arisen.
>
> If a file is a copyright violation, it is a copyright violation.
>
I don't tend to interfere with that issue. But from what i noticed you 
put Pieter in a very different light as i would put him. Knowing that 
you are unhappy with Commons, even dragging it down to a personal level, 
it isn't really surprising to me to read a comment like this.

I have to agree with Todds view that Pieter used deletion requests 
against opponents on Commons in a very unconvincing fashion, only 
hunting for pictures of this users. I also agree on the fact that a 
(un)justified deletion request is a separate issue from "stalking" 
opponents and making deletions requests purely to annoy them.