[Wikipedia-l] Edit Wars

[Michael R. Irwin]

Stephen Gilbert wrote:
> 
> --- "Michael R. Irwin" <mri_icboise at surfbest.net>
> wrote:
> 
> > Interesting.  I was unaware that 24 was banned.  How
> > was this decided?
> >
> > Was there a decision made to not ban me (mirwin)?  I
> > was attacked
> > for merely stating my personal opinion that I did
> > not consider "24"
> > a troll.
> 
> 24 was banned by Jimmy Wales because he issued threats
> against another Wikipedian. No one has ever considered
> banning you or anyone else, other than persistant
> vandals and people who threaten physical violence.

I never saw any direct threats from 24 as in:

I (24) am going to physically hurt you (someone).

The opinion stated (that I saw) was of the form: [Big X is a terrible 
person and bad things (some vivid gory wishlist imagery here) should 
happen to terrible people.]

Similar to the form {opinion, wish} or {why I wish, wish}
which Big X also used extensively during the heated rhetorical
episodes which preceeded 24's banning:

[Mirwin is a troll and should be ignored.]
[24 is a troll and should be ignored.]

<Spam insert begins here>

It is not currently possible to ignore trolls and vandals and
guarantee delivery of high quality content.

I reason thusly:  Positive action is required to delete errors, 
nonsense, and inappropriate material from the current pages served 
to the public.

</Spam insert ends here>


<Inuendo insert begins here>

Perhaps Big X meant that I should be physically eliminated
by his unknown associates or himself next time he is in town?

Now I am not sure I want my email address, personal data,
or physical address findable by miscellaneous Wikipedia
users/editors.

</Inuendo insert ends here>


I did see some statements from 24 worded as threats that 24 might 
invite indymedia.org participants to participate at Wikipedia.

It was implied that our feeble consensus building processes
would be quickly overwhelmed with dire consequences for the
viability of the Wikipedia.  Unfortunately when someone 
double dog dared 24 to issue the recruiting pitch he/she 
either spitefully refused, is ineffectual at writing invitations, 
is a procrastinator, the indymedia masses looked us over and found 
us so wanting as to not currently be worth the effort, or some
other manifestation of the universe has occurred which I 
have failed to articulate and/or perceive.

I hardly think inviting virtual visitors to participate
at Wikipedia to serve nefarious purposes can be construed
as a "physical threat".

In the course of the dispute I saw a specific threat to "out" 24 
despite Wikipedia's explicit and implicit policy of allowing anonymous 
participation.  In my opinion this would have been highly unethical.
Not to mention a potential personal problem should my fearful 
fantasies regarding Big X have any merit or congruence with reality.

To summarize:

Wishes are not fishes or apparently I would be not be
involved with Wikipedia, simply ignored.

regards, mirwin