2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Discussions on Wikimedia governance
User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
kołdry
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Tue Aug 26, 2014 2:41 pm

Well, it should be called the "2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom" or maybe the "Mr. 2001 Can Make People Do Crazy Things Case" or maybe the more whimsical "Grand Illusions and Delusions of Grandeur Case."

The actual working title of the case is "Banning Policy."

This is a thread for Greg Kohs, who doesn't have a mechanism for giving testimony in a case ostensibly all about him — the series of posts which he or Joe Jobs pretending to be he have trickled across Jimbotalk, causing anti-paid editing crusader Smallbones to blow a brain gasket, with the assistance of dedicated provocateur "Tarc" — the guy who trolled simultaneously both this site and WP during the "Private Manning's Privates" dust up.

Initiator of the case is a guy in such danger of being whacked in a head by a boomerang that I'm starting to suspect he's a drunken Aussie at a family picnic, Mr. Hell In a Bucket... Yes, the same person who trolled Mr. New York Brad's talk page during the recently fizzled "Malleus Malevolence XLIII" non-case...


Away we go... Here's the opening statement by the case initiator.
Hell in a Bucket wrote: "There is a lot of dispute if WP:EVADE ( linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... _of_blocks[/link] ) is covered under talkpage posting. It's my understanding that when banned that person is persona non grata and all edits are to be reverted. If in an article and it's not vandalism another editor may take responsibility for that edit but posting on their behalf or attempting to repost their concern is not appropriate.

Enter User:Tarc. Tarc (T-C-L) has been blasting insults, incivility and outright trolling on Jimbos page. Edits such as "someone has a hissy fit again, I'll just post your comment as my own, with attribution. Let em stew on that." ( linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 31731%7CIf[/link] ) or this edit summary "try ONE revert, and see if that's enough to get the serial harasser goes and finds another house to haunt. If not, either I or someone else can bring Smallbones to ANI again, then I'll just re-post this user's concerns to Jimbo's under my own name." ( no actual link provided )

Apparently the word cunt is not ok but telling a editor "you think you have the balls to remove something I post under my own name, then come at me bro" ( no actual link provided ) or telling me "can go the the first part of my username" ( no actual link provided ) or the attitude that this is a game "challenger appears" ( no actual link provided ). There are many more edits stating that Smallbones and myself are whiteknighting, overzealous and etc. Jimbo has not replied and there is an impasse as Smallbones and I are within policy to revert on sight edits on or on behalf of a banned user without regard to 3rr. Why will we ban people then let them post if it's good contributions, there are plenty other editors with lots of great contributions banned and there is no question about it. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 11:18 am, 15 August 2014, Friday (UTC−7)
Well, aside from the obvious fact that Mr. Bucket has a lot of trouble actually generating the URLs for Wikipedia diffs, one thing is perfectly clear about this statement. Oh wait, no, nothing is clear about this statement. That Mr. Bucket has embroiled himself at ArbCom over some petty low-level sniping that would have been laughed out of AN/I tells you something about him... Oh, BTW, he gave himself a two week ban immediately after dumping his chum bucket over the side for the sharks... Wacky.

That ArbCom has decided to accept the case tells you something about them. But what? That I'm not sure...

Fortunately, the other primary parties have been more coherent about what ails them...
as part of his tl;dr presentation, Smallbones wrote: "Jimbo has left a note...essentially saying he was on vacation and will start a discussion (AFAIK on this topic) in a few days (or more). I would guess that that discussion will take at least a few days, and then any questions at issue here will be moot. In line with that, I'll suggest that this case request be closed, and if anybody has anything leftover they want to pursue, they may open a new case request later.

I also want to remind folks that I did not propose this case. HIAB, the proposer has given himself a 2 week ban and essentially dropped out of the case. (what's that all about?) I would not have proposed the case, and I do not consider myself an ally of HIAB in any way. He did jump in and do a few things that I approved of, but he also confused the issues at times, and took the bait, at times, of folks who were clearly trying to disrupt Wikipedia. I don't think he has broken any Wikipedia rules however. I don't think he will want to reopen the case after the discussion at Jimbo's talk page, and doubt that there could be any sanctions against him if he did.

I'd also like to point out that nobody has made any credible accusation that I've broken any Wikipedia rules, so that if anybody decides to reopen this, I'll request that they specify exactly what rules they think I've broken.

Yes, there are some folks who say that I've edit warred, despite WP:NOT3RR and
Wikipedia:Edit warring#Other revert rules - "Reverting edits by banned or blocked users is not edit warring."
Some have accused me of some vague violation of our user talk guideline, despite
Wikipedia:User pages#Ownership and editing of user pages - "Other users and bots may edit pages in your user space .... Material that clearly does not somehow further the goals of the project may be removed (see below), as may edits from banned users."
Some seem to suggest that I have reverted Tarc for WP:PROXYING. Check the record - I have not.

Some have accused me of violating some special unstated rule of Jimbo's talk page, despite Jimbo clearly stating: "Over 3,000 Wikipedians monitor my user and user talk page via a watchlist, and I trust them to edit and remove errors or attacks. " (5th paragraph of User:Jimbo Wales)

And everybody should reread WP:REVERTBAN
Edits by and on behalf of banned editors
"Anyone is free to revert any edits made in violation of a ban, without giving any further reason and without regard to the three-revert rule."
So if you'd like to accuse me of anything on this page, I think you have a long row to hoe.

Smallbones(smalltalk) 10:39 am, 18 August 2014, Monday (8 days ago) (UTC−7)
Well, at least Smallbones is consistent in his being oblivious to the disruption he has been causing...

Then we have Mr. Tarc, bless his tinder-sparking soul, who is at least lucid...
Tarc wrote: Hell in a Bucket (T-C-L) is mounting a rather superlative misdirection campaign by highlighting my use of silly internet memes ("a challenger appears", come at me bro", etc...) in edit summaries. For someone who casually throws around misogynist c-bombs into discussions in this project, and someone who acts as deplorably as he did at User talk:Newyorkbrad#Word usage ( linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk ... Word_usage[/link] ) in defending the c-word, I find it to be the height of hypocrisy to call anyone out for incivility.

This whole mess is about a few different things, but one in particular; a fundamental difference in opinion regarding what it means to edit a page in this project, be it a user talk page or an article-space page. One site has a strict interpretation of "banned means banned", and that all edits by socket (whether proven or unproven) can and will be reverted on sight. This means that any possibly banned user who posts a question to Jimbo's talk page is automatically reverted, as well as a possibly banned user who adds a freely-licensed image to an article is automatically reverted. The other side wishes to evaluate the merits of the post or the article addition and believes that either should remain in place unless there is something egregiously wrong, e.g. WP:NPA or a topic ban violation. This is a collision of a draconian interpretation of the ban policy vs. how things usually flow in this project, and have flowed for years. Users have traditionally been granted a bit latitude in allowing banned users to post to their talk pages; I do that myself with a few people on mine. Users have also been traditionally able to "take responsibility" for revert article content and have been able to re-add it as their own if deemed a "good edit". Both of these have been denied lately; here at Jimbo's page, and one here involving a suspected sock of Russavia. I asked Kww if he plans to call for a block of the user, as he threatened to do to me, who restored the image at Dassault Falcon 7X, but have yet to see a response. [...]

The other aspect of this is the situation of editors reverting suspected socks of banned/blocked users...and no, not that they are literally flagged as a suspected sock, but that the reverter him/herself is the one with the suspicion. That is how I got embroiled into this mess initially, when Hell and Smallbones were reverting an account with no block log and no SPI. The account is now blocked, but I and others are rather uncomfortable with regular users patrolling another user's talk page and removing content based on their own guesswork alone.

If this case is accepted, I would urge the committee to not focus on the who but more of the substance of what is at stake here. "Russavia" and "Mr. 2001" (alleged to be "thekohser") are being invoked here as boogeymen, people that quite frankly no one, even myself, particularly care for. We shouldn't craft policy or make decisions with the aim in mind of punishing specific editors.

So this is where we're at... "banned means banned" vs. "if a rule prevents you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore it". Tarc (talk) 11:51 am, 15 August 2014, Friday (UTC−7)
Well, thank god somebody at least knows what is going on...


RfB
Last edited by Randy from Boise on Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:31 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Ming
the Merciless
Posts: 2966
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Ming » Tue Aug 26, 2014 3:03 pm

People are kind of ignoring this (at least from Ming's TL;DR scan of it) but it's also the "how do we deal with Russavia's socks" case.

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Tue Aug 26, 2014 3:14 pm

My primary interest in this matter is as a Free Speech v. Censorship matter. I was directly impacted as a censorship victim in this case myself, albeit speedily reversed.

It is also interesting as another permutation of the ongoing Wales—Kohs soap opera, which is only slightly less compelling than Hatfields v. McCoys.

Finally, I think that anything that illuminates how toothless and powerless banning powers are for an encyclopedia which allows IP editing and mass anonymous registration is a positive thing. It's a ridiculous game that needs to be exposed as such.

RfB

User avatar
eagle
Eagle
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by eagle » Tue Aug 26, 2014 3:17 pm

The fundamental problem not addressed by the case issues as currently framed is: Why would an encyclopedia need a "God-King" and why should anyone pay attention to a "God-King"'s talk page? Would not a democratic community discuss and debate at the Village Pump?

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Tue Aug 26, 2014 4:18 pm

QUESTION FOR GREG

As part of his opening statement, the illustrious Wikipedian Jehochman (T-C-L) asserted that one of the (he feels righteously) reverted sock accounts was named as a provocation:
"The Receiver" is the original title of the Goatse.cx image. Whether that correlation was intentional, or an accident, any account with that name making provocative edits, as The Receiver 0814 (T-C-L) was, ought to be reverted, and anybody restoring such content ought to be blocked. Jehochman Talk 5:57 am, 20 August 2014 (UTC−7)
Mr. Hochman conveniently provided a link to a Wikipedia article on the same, which educates us that "Goatse.cx" was a shock site which included "four sections, two of which had images noted for their shock value." These included "'Receiver,' the main index page, contained the titular hello.jpg image. The image...originates from a set of 40 images...showing a man using dildos and butt plugs to stretch his anus.." as well as "'Giver,' a photo-edited photograph of a man reclining on a boat with an anatomically impossible penis reaching up to his chest, suggesting that the man in the first image is stretching his anus to accommodate the giant penis."

Mr. Hochman, without a touch of irony, subsequently struck this assertion with the notation that "One of my trollfriends emailed that I was stretching things" and that the naming similarity was merely a coincidence. ( linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =622824701[/link] )

Do you believe, Greg, that Mr. Hochman was indeed stretching things here? Or do you think that the username of The Receiver was an intentional reference to a gay pornographic internet meme?
Last edited by Randy from Boise on Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Tippi Hadron
Queen
Posts: 933
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 5:15 am
Wikipedia User: DracoEssentialis
Actual Name: Monika Nathalie Collida Kolbe

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Tippi Hadron » Tue Aug 26, 2014 5:55 pm

Randy from Boise wrote:Well, at least Smallbones is consistent in his being oblivious to the disruption he has been causing...
This thread needs a picture of one of WP's favourite deep-cover operatives. Mention his real name and Bad Things will happen.

Image
From the file description:

Bobbi Booker, Jim Hayes, Smallbones, Mary Mark Ockerbloom and Preston Stone, at the Chemical Heritage Foundation, June 20, 2013, at the Chemical Heritage Foundation Wikipedia Edit-a-thon. Downloaded with permission from the Chemical Heritage Foundation, as part of the Wikipedian in Residence initiative.

Ms Ockerbloom, a Wikipedian as well as an employee of the Chemical Heritage Foundation, is mentioned in this excellent article by the Evil Kohs. Has she been editing the article on the CHF? Do bears ... ?

Always remember, it's only paid editing when Smallbones says it is.

User avatar
Kiefer.Wolfowitz
Gregarious
Posts: 956
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:25 pm
Wikipedia User: Kiefer.Wolfowitz
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Kiefer.Wolfowitz » Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:31 pm

Randy from Boise wrote:QUESTION FOR GREG
As part of his opening statement, the illustrious Wikipedian Jehochman (T-C-L) asserted that one of the (he feels righteously) reverted sock accounts was named as a provocation:
Jechoman wrote:"The Receiver" is the original title of the Goatse.cx image. Whether that correlation was intentional, or an accident, any account with that name making provocative edits, as The Receiver 0814 (T-C-L) was, ought to be reverted, and anybody restoring such content ought to be blocked. Jehochman Talk 5:57 am, 20 August 2014 (UTC−7)
Mr. Hochman conveniently provided a link to a Wikipedia article on the same, which educates us that "Goatse.cx" was a shock site which included "four sections, two of which had images noted for their shock value." These included "'Receiver,' the main index page, contained the titular hello.jpg image. The image...originates from a set of 40 images...showing a man using dildos and butt plugs to stretch his anus.." as well as "'Giver,' a photo-edited photograph of a man reclining on a boat with an anatomically impossible penis reaching up to his chest, suggesting that the man in the first image is stretching his anus to accommodate the giant penis."

Mr. Hochman, without a touch of irony, subsequently struck this assertion with the notation that "One of my trollfriends emailed that I was stretching things" and that the naming similarity was merely a coincidence.

Do you believe, Greg, that Mr. Hochman was indeed stretching things here? Or do you think that the username of The Receiver was an intentional reference to a gay pornographic internet meme?
Thinking about such obsessiveness and imputation of malevolence, I quoted the "whiff of paranoia" about marginal members of marginal organizations in an earlier thread.
P.S. link
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=2567&p=108922&hili ... ia#p108922
George Packer wrote:there was a contingent of people who seemed to have nothing else going on--marginal, odd, a whiff of paranoia about them. One member was apparently normal in all respects except that he had an overly loud voice, and somehow this seemed linked to his being a socialist. Another insisted on writing her name with all lower-case letters. And what did they see in my face? Maybe just joining made us odd. Maybe oddness made us join. In friends, I might have found these peculiarities trivial; in comrades, I was hyperalert to every asocial quirk and twitch, for they implicated me. And this seemed to defeat the entire enterprise. I was supposed to be feeling solidarity with my brothers and sisters, and instead I was noticing that someone's navel was exposed.
(Follow link for ibliographical details)
Last edited by Kiefer.Wolfowitz on Tue Aug 26, 2014 7:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Kiefer.Wolfowitz (T-C-L)
You run into assholes all day; you're the asshole.

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Kumioko » Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:39 pm

I notice some fairly strong language by the Arbcom in this case. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't add a couple of folks to the Banned editors list and maybe a desysop or 2 just for good measure. A couple of the folks on that discussion are critical of admins and the Arbcom as I am so they are no doubt look for a reason to rid themselves of more critics. No doubt with the argument of "Not here to build an encyclopedia", which seems to be more and more commonly the fits all scenarios accusation. Time will tell I suppose.

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:45 pm

Kiefer.Wolfowitz wrote: Thinking about such obsessiveness and imputation of malevolence, I quoted the "touch of paranoia" about marginal members of marginal organizations in an earlier thread.
Yes, this does bring to mind the discussion we had a month or two ago about Greg being the Satanic Demon Figure needed by the Cult New Religious Movement of Thoughtfulness and Forgiveness and Togetherness and Helpfulness and Light. Obviously, if one believes in Supreme Evildoers, one always projects the very worst case scenarios upon their every move. An innocuous name of a sock becomes a conscious taunt worthy of immediate elimination, with anyone restoring the sock's output deserving an immediate block...

The hilarity of such a world-view seems to me self-evident.

RfB

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:52 pm

Kumioko wrote:I notice some fairly strong language by the Arbcom in this case. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't add a couple of folks to the Banned editors list and maybe a desysop or 2 just for good measure. A couple of the folks on that discussion are critical of admins and the Arbcom as I am so they are no doubt look for a reason to rid themselves of more critics. No doubt with the argument of "Not here to build an encyclopedia", which seems to be more and more commonly the fits all scenarios accusation. Time will tell I suppose.
If they figure out how to boomerang Hell in a Bucket with evidence that doesn't actually relate to this case, he is in deep trouble.

Neither Smallbones nor Tarc have done anything more than run of the mill 3RR violations worthy of 17-hour-and-23-minute blocks... If one of the 200 or so remaining active administrators had had gonads of sufficient fortitude to apply a block of that magnitude to both edit-warriors, this never would have made it to ArbCom.

Smallbones' reading of policy is clearly specious. And Tarc's name starts with T for Troll.

RfB

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Aug 27, 2014 1:35 am

Randy from Boise wrote:QUESTION FOR GREG
...
Do you believe, Greg, that Mr. Hochman was indeed stretching things here? Or do you think that the username of The Receiver was an intentional reference to a gay pornographic internet meme?
Mr. Hochman was indeed way, way off base here (which is a place where he's found himself several times regarding me in the past). I have discussed with the editor The Receiver 0814 (T-C-L), and the origin of the user name was simply to acknowledge that they intended to "receive" payment from the Reward Board user, The Rewarder (T-C-L). "0814" stands for "August 2014".

I don't know why Hochman's mind would go off into the Goatse gutter, but it is what it is, I suppose.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Triptych
Retired
Posts: 1910
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 12:35 am
Wikipedia User: it's alliterative

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Triptych » Wed Aug 27, 2014 2:00 am

thekohser wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:QUESTION FOR GREG
...
Do you believe, Greg, that Mr. Hochman was indeed stretching things here? Or do you think that the username of The Receiver was an intentional reference to a gay pornographic internet meme?
Mr. Hochman was indeed way, way off base here (which is a place where he's found himself several times regarding me in the past). I have discussed with the editor The Receiver 0814 (T-C-L), and the origin of the user name was simply to acknowledge that they intended to "receive" payment from the Reward Board user, The Rewarder (T-C-L). "0814" stands for "August 2014".

I don't know why Hochman's mind would go off into the Goatse gutter, but it is what it is, I suppose.
That is pretty bizarre to interpret such a thing from an everyday phrase such as "the receiver."
Triptych. A Live Journal I have under other pseudonym, w. email address: Tim Song Fan. My Arbcom Accountability Project: in German. In art.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by EricBarbour » Wed Aug 27, 2014 2:12 am

Randy from Boise wrote:If they figure out how to boomerang Hell in a Bucket with evidence that doesn't actually relate to this case, he is in deep trouble.
If "evidence" does not exist, some will be manufactured. And bystanders will be found to give the needed false testimony.
Neither Smallbones nor Tarc have done anything more than run of the mill 3RR violations worthy of 17-hour-and-23-minute blocks... If one of the 200 or so remaining active administrators had had gonads of sufficient fortitude to apply a block of that magnitude to both edit-warriors, this never would have made it to ArbCom.
The result is predictable. Mr. Hell and Tarc will receive lengthy blocks, Smallbrain will walk away scot-free.

User avatar
neved
Gregarious
Posts: 926
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 5:22 pm
Location: Here, for whatever reason, is the world. And here it stays. With me on it.

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by neved » Wed Aug 27, 2014 2:24 am

Once again newyorkbrad proves that
Newyorkbrad (Ira Brad Matetsky) = cowardliness + indecisiveness + dishonesty
Please take a look here

Mr. Matetsky has waited for almost two weeks to opine on thad request, and at last he did:
Pondering furiously; neutral for now. I realize this is useless as input, which is what happens after six and one-half years on the Committee. I'll vote tomorrow if the case hasn't already been opened by then. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I feel a long essay coming on, but I'm not sure how many people would feel like reading it.... Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:10, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Really what Larry Sanger said
I mean, they're so ridiculously self-important, when they aren't acting like trolls, and show no sense of grace, humanity, or even style. Admins and even rank-and-file contributors go around making high-sounding declarations and announcements, as if they were government officials dispensing court orders.

was said about Newyorkbrad.
"We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children." Golda Meir

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by EricBarbour » Wed Aug 27, 2014 2:39 am

Pondering furiously; neutral for now. I realize this is useless as input, which is what happens after six and one-half years on the Committee. I'll vote tomorrow if the case hasn't already been opened by then. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I feel a long essay coming on, but I'm not sure how many people would feel like reading it.... Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:10, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I feel a need to order him a tombstone -- with this crap chiseled on it.
But would rather he paid for it. (I suspect $20k is pocket change for Ira. Who sez slime doesn't pay?)

TheCurator
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 10:48 pm

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by TheCurator » Wed Aug 27, 2014 2:55 am

... six and one-half years on the Committee ...
What a way to live.

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13984
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Zoloft » Wed Aug 27, 2014 2:59 am

TheCurator wrote:
... six and one-half years on the Committee ...
What a way to live.
:welcome:
...and it's nice you've jumped in with both feet.

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Cla68 » Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:36 am

EricBarbour wrote:The result is predictable. Mr. Hell and Tarc will receive lengthy blocks, Smallbrain will walk away scot-free.
Post the evidence here and I can add it to the Arb page as I get accused of "proxying on behalf of banned editors."

User avatar
greyed.out.fields
Gregarious
Posts: 873
Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 10:59 am
Wikipedia User: I AM your guilty pleasure
Actual Name: Written addiction
Location: Back alley hang-up

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by greyed.out.fields » Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:33 am

thekohser wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:QUESTION FOR GREG
...
...The Receiver 0814 (T-C-L)... The Rewarder (T-C-L) ...
Have you gotten a follow up message from Betafive (T-C-L) after this this enquiry?

(Betafive managed to get banninated after almost 500 edits in less than a fortnight. Doubtless there's some back-story there.)
a cien años de soledad no tenían una segunda oportunidad en la tierra

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by thekohser » Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:18 am

greyed.out.fields wrote:Have you gotten a follow up message from Betafive (T-C-L) after this this enquiry?
Without any admission that I am "The Rewarder", I have not received any e-mail or telephone messages from anyone claiming to be Betafive.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Captain Occam
Gregarious
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:08 am

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Captain Occam » Thu Aug 28, 2014 12:08 pm

EricBarbour wrote:
Pondering furiously; neutral for now. I realize this is useless as input, which is what happens after six and one-half years on the Committee. I'll vote tomorrow if the case hasn't already been opened by then. Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I feel a long essay coming on, but I'm not sure how many people would feel like reading it.... Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:10, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I feel a need to order him a tombstone -- with this crap chiseled on it.
But would rather he paid for it. (I suspect $20k is pocket change for Ira. Who sez slime doesn't pay?)
Do you think this implies that he won't be seeking re-election when his current term is over? I know a lot of people have speculated that he won't, but I haven't looked carefully at what the conclusion is based on.

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Kumioko » Thu Aug 28, 2014 1:07 pm

Randy from Boise wrote:
Kumioko wrote:I notice some fairly strong language by the Arbcom in this case. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't add a couple of folks to the Banned editors list and maybe a desysop or 2 just for good measure. A couple of the folks on that discussion are critical of admins and the Arbcom as I am so they are no doubt look for a reason to rid themselves of more critics. No doubt with the argument of "Not here to build an encyclopedia", which seems to be more and more commonly the fits all scenarios accusation. Time will tell I suppose.
If they figure out how to boomerang Hell in a Bucket with evidence that doesn't actually relate to this case, he is in deep trouble.

Neither Smallbones nor Tarc have done anything more than run of the mill 3RR violations worthy of 17-hour-and-23-minute blocks... If one of the 200 or so remaining active administrators had had gonads of sufficient fortitude to apply a block of that magnitude to both edit-warriors, this never would have made it to ArbCom.

Smallbones' reading of policy is clearly specious. And Tarc's name starts with T for Troll.

RfB
I guess time will tell. With the current crew of Arbi-traitors I would more expect them to find a way to justify banning critics than to do whats best for the project.

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:24 pm

greyed.out.fields wrote:
thekohser wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:QUESTION FOR GREG
...
...The Receiver 0814 (T-C-L)... The Rewarder (T-C-L) ...
Have you gotten a follow up message from Betafive (T-C-L) after this this enquiry?

(Betafive managed to get banninated after almost 500 edits in less than a fortnight. Doubtless there's some back-story there.)
I ran into Betafive on Jimbotalk and in an AfD challenge of Titstare (T-H-L) , which I ended up rewriting in order to save a stub.

A most unpleasant person... Very aggressive and a troll.

Also 100% definitely a sock, unless you think that THIS: linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =621521233[/link] is a typical edit summary of a new editor. (As i recall they claimed to be a longtime IP editor — without providing that previous account info. One more reason IP editing should be eliminated...)

RfB

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:37 pm

Just for the record, Tarc tried to bait me into discussing my calling him a troll in this thread on-wiki yesterday.

Tarc: Do you think I'm gonna fall for that shit................ from YOU?!?!?

Do you really think that I am stupid?

Tarc is a troll. True statement of fact. Or do we need to dredge up the Alan Keyes avatar and revisit his month long provocation on and off wiki during the Private Manning affair? He was gleeful, mirthful, about his trolling after that.

And we all noticed, Tarc, we all noticed. Much like Wil Sinclair, you managed to piss both inside and outside the tent.

RfB

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by thekohser » Thu Aug 28, 2014 5:53 pm

When does the trial actually start? Does it happen on a new page, or does it just stay on the same page at which everyone's already yammering on?
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:03 pm

thekohser wrote:When does the trial actually start? Does it happen on a new page, or does it just stay on the same page at which everyone's already yammering on?
It will move to an "Evidence" page next, where people will present diffs of relevant (and not so relevant) behavior. Then things move again to a "Workshop" page in which people propose phrasings of the decision. Then comes a "Final Decision" page on which ArbCom frequently ignores everything and does whatever the hell they decided to do on their secret mailing list...

That's the breakdown in transparency — that ArbCom does its own deliberative thing by email, apart from the regular process.


RfB

User avatar
Jim
Blue Meanie
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:33 am
Wikipedia User: Begoon
Wikipedia Review Member: Jim
Location: NSW

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Jim » Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:04 pm

thekohser wrote:When does the trial actually start? Does it happen on a new page, or does it just stay on the same page at which everyone's already yammering on?
No, I think it gets its own page once one of the Lord Justices manages to ruffle their robes enough to get up and ask a clerk-minion to do it.
They have to wait until the accept/decline/don't care/too scared ratio is mathematically certain before building (copy pasting) the courtroom and gallows.

edit: Tim's right (we posted at the same time) - it gets its own set of Evidence/Workshop/Proposed Decision pages. No Tricoteuse (T-H-L) subpage though - maybe that's "Talk".
Last edited by Jim on Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:08 pm

I think the "when" relates to a running clock on the arbitrator comments section, sort of like waiting for a page to not receive comments to auto-archive.

There are already sufficient votes to accept the case, although much like Congress there can always be a couple people changing their votes to alter the result...

RfB

User avatar
Jim
Blue Meanie
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:33 am
Wikipedia User: Begoon
Wikipedia Review Member: Jim
Location: NSW

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Jim » Thu Aug 28, 2014 6:18 pm

Randy from Boise wrote:I think the "when" relates to a running clock on the arbitrator comments section
Yeah, I think there's something like that too, for added "Big Brother" style drama.

Once the mathematical "accept" exists a clerk starts some music, then all the arbs walk around and have until the end of the song to sit down in the same chair they got up from or a different one.

I'm not sure if blindfolds are involved, or if chairs get taken away if it's a tie.

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Cla68 » Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:47 pm

Randy from Boise wrote:
thekohser wrote:When does the trial actually start? Does it happen on a new page, or does it just stay on the same page at which everyone's already yammering on?
It will move to an "Evidence" page next, where people will present diffs of relevant (and not so relevant) behavior. Then things move again to a "Workshop" page in which people propose phrasings of the decision. Then comes a "Final Decision" page on which ArbCom frequently ignores everything and does whatever the hell they decided to do on their secret mailing list...

That's the breakdown in transparency — that ArbCom does its own deliberative thing by email, apart from the regular process.


RfB
Yes, that's how it's done. By the way, it's more effective to present evidence on the Workshop page than on the Evidence page, because people can directly comment on your evidence in the workshop. You can still put up your "wall of diffs" on the evidence page and cause the Arbs' eyes to glaze over when they see it if you really want to, but you should choose what you feel is the best evidence and present it on the Workshop page as a series of proposed findings. When I did that on the Manning ArbCom case, it seemed to influence two or three of the arbitrators, based on their comments. The rest of them appeared to have made up their minds on the decision before the case even opened.
Last edited by Cla68 on Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Kumioko » Thu Aug 28, 2014 11:14 pm

It has been my experience that you can tell the outcome of the case by the comments upon them accepting it. They don't accept a case unless they think someone is guilty and as such the conclusion can be predetermined with some degree of accuracy.

User avatar
SB_Johnny
Habitué
Posts: 4640
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:26 am
Wikipedia User: SB_Johnny
Wikipedia Review Member: SB_Johnny

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by SB_Johnny » Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:15 am

Kumioko wrote:It has been my experience that you can tell the outcome of the case by the comments upon them accepting it. They don't accept a case unless they think someone is guilty and as such the conclusion can be predetermined with some degree of accuracy.
Judging from the accept comments, it looks like the arbcommers are itching to hand out some bans. Coming straight out of that case against Möller that showed how impotent they are in the grand scheme of things, I guess you can't blame them.

The interesting part will be how they manage to avoid saying anything substantial about how to handle "banned editors" while delivering their verdict which will presumably ban a bunch of "editors".
This is not a signature.

User avatar
neved
Gregarious
Posts: 926
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 5:22 pm
Location: Here, for whatever reason, is the world. And here it stays. With me on it.

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by neved » Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:47 am

Statement by Jimbo Wales

My apologies for taking so long to respond to this. I've been away and somehow until I got an email today I had overlooked entirely that there was a potential for an ArbCom case. I would suggest here that all the editors who have been fighting about this please give each other a virtual hug and remember that we are all here to build an encyclopedia while the banned users who post to my talk page generally are not. There is fairly universal agreement and understanding that there is an important reason why my talk page has to be handled somewhat differently from others as a traditional space to have philosophical debates about the principles of the project, and for editors with grievances to have a chance to be heard. That openness to criticism and debate is part of what has made Wikipedia successful. At the same time, ending useless conversations with people who have no interest in actually fixing anything is also part of what has made Wikipedia successful. The difference between the two will always be difficult to draw.

What I would suggest is that the ArbCom, if the case is accepted at this time (I'm a bit late to request that it not be) quickly move to simply suspect it for a cooling off period. I don't think the issue is unresolvable.

Separately if ArbCom thinks my policy of excessive openness and toleration of our banned users is unwise and should be changed, then a private word with me will suffice - there's no need for a formal case.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 19:58, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
"We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children." Golda Meir

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:58 am

SB_Johnny wrote:
Kumioko wrote:It has been my experience that you can tell the outcome of the case by the comments upon them accepting it. They don't accept a case unless they think someone is guilty and as such the conclusion can be predetermined with some degree of accuracy.
Judging from the accept comments, it looks like the arbcommers are itching to hand out some bans. Coming straight out of that case against Möller that showed how impotent they are in the grand scheme of things, I guess you can't blame them.

The interesting part will be how they manage to avoid saying anything substantial about how to handle "banned editors" while delivering their verdict which will presumably ban a bunch of "editors".
I know Hell in a Bucket pissed off our friend NYB during the run up to the Malleus/Civility potential case...

They are licking their lips to boomerang Hell and I think they also want Tarc's bones for trolling during Manning.

There is an underlying issue that they need to rule on here, but I very seriously suspect this is all about thumping a couple of annoyances in the snout nice and hard.

Smallbones reads poorly and is annoying and wrong, but there is nothing he has done that merits more than a rap on the knuckles.

RfB

User avatar
Jim
Blue Meanie
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:33 am
Wikipedia User: Begoon
Wikipedia Review Member: Jim
Location: NSW

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Jim » Fri Aug 29, 2014 6:01 am

The "accept in order to whack" mindset is so transparent here, that even the "statements" comment on it:

Statement by Rich Farmbrough
I believe I commented elsewhere about Arbitrators assuming the result of the case before it has even started. The sentence reviewing the behaviour of people not here to build an encyclopedia. Several names here qualify would seem to match that description. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 02:20, 25 August 2014 (UTC).
Statement by Spartaz
AGKs comment people not here to build an encyclopaedia smacks of Jclemens' Not a Wikipedian gaff. For Shame. Spartaz Humbug! 16:42, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
or encourage it:
Statement by Jehochman
Accept case. Ban one or more editors for relentless drama mongering that disrupts people from writing articles. Jehochman Talk 21:27, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Packet of gravel, anyone?

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Poetlister » Fri Aug 29, 2014 11:55 am

Captain Occam wrote:Do you think this implies that he won't be seeking re-election when his current term is over? I know a lot of people have speculated that he won't, but I haven't looked carefully at what the conclusion is based on.
Whatever one thinks of him, it's difficult to believe things would be improved by his departure.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Kumioko » Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:45 pm

I often find it funny when the Arbcom or various admins complain about people not being on the site to "build an Encylcopedia". First, most admins and including the arbs, do very little actual content work. They try to argue that they don't have time, but people on the site do what interests them. If they "want" to build articles they will and if they want to be a politician and meddle in the drama, then they will do that. Secondly, somewhat in their defense, there is a lot more to building an encyclopedia than just writing articles. You must have people fighting vandalism, you must have people checking copyrights, deleting garbage spam and POV and ensuring that some amount of order is kept in the site. Running many of the bots these days is also a requirement. I can't imagine what life would be like if the bots weren't archiving talk pages and the like. None of these things are directly "building an encyclopedia", but are still necessary. I would also argue that these days, with so many article owners and pov pushers in the WikiProjects, the admin corps and even the Arbcom itself, a certain amount of dissent is required, to ensure some of these crazy cats don't get to big for their britches and take over more than they already have.

So the arguments of "not here to build an encyclopedia", are more often a weak and manipulative justification to get rid of someone that isn't inline with their personal goals for the site, while making it look to the average editor like they have the best interests of the project at heart.

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Kumioko » Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:55 pm

Poetlister wrote:
Captain Occam wrote:Do you think this implies that he won't be seeking re-election when his current term is over? I know a lot of people have speculated that he won't, but I haven't looked carefully at what the conclusion is based on.
Whatever one thinks of him, it's difficult to believe things would be improved by his departure.
If you are referring to NYB here, I agree that he is one of the more qualified candidates but he has been on the Arbcom (as have others) for so long I believe their views have become jaded. They need to get back to the project and get dirty again with some real work and they can rerun later. If you are referring to AGK, that is a whole nother matter. The Arbcom, IMO, would be better off without AGK and several others. Of course my viewpoint is jaded through some personal interactions with them but I have seen first hand how manipulative, controlling and underhanded they can be. Adding to the general lack of qualifications of several of the current members, we can do better and need too.

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Cla68 » Sat Aug 30, 2014 8:58 am

Kumioko wrote:I often find it funny when the Arbcom or various admins complain about people not being on the site to "build an Encylcopedia". First, most admins and including the arbs, do very little actual content work. They try to argue that they don't have time, but people on the site do what interests them. If they "want" to build articles they will and if they want to be a politician and meddle in the drama, then they will do that. Secondly, somewhat in their defense, there is a lot more to building an encyclopedia than just writing articles. You must have people fighting vandalism, you must have people checking copyrights, deleting garbage spam and POV and ensuring that some amount of order is kept in the site. Running many of the bots these days is also a requirement. I can't imagine what life would be like if the bots weren't archiving talk pages and the like. None of these things are directly "building an encyclopedia", but are still necessary. I would also argue that these days, with so many article owners and pov pushers in the WikiProjects, the admin corps and even the Arbcom itself, a certain amount of dissent is required, to ensure some of these crazy cats don't get to big for their britches and take over more than they already have.

So the arguments of "not here to build an encyclopedia", are more often a weak and manipulative justification to get rid of someone that isn't inline with their personal goals for the site, while making it look to the average editor like they have the best interests of the project at heart.
I think this is one of your most insightful observations.

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Sat Aug 30, 2014 3:25 pm

There are now 8 Arbs voting to accept this case, 2 opposed, 1 neutral, and 1 recusing.

This has been languishing in the Requests queue so long that even Jimmy Wales has weighed in with a statement:
JW wrote:My apologies for taking so long to respond to this. I've been away and somehow until I got an email today I had overlooked entirely that there was a potential for an ArbCom case. I would suggest here that all the editors who have been fighting about this please give each other a virtual hug and remember that '''we''' are all here to build an encyclopedia while the banned users who post to my talk page generally are not. There is fairly universal agreement and understanding that there is an important reason why my talk page has to be handled somewhat differently from others as a traditional space to have philosophical debates about the principles of the project, and for editors with grievances to have a chance to be heard. That openness to criticism and debate is part of what has made Wikipedia successful. At the same time, ending useless conversations with people who have no interest in actually fixing anything is also part of what has made Wikipedia successful. The difference between the two will always be difficult to draw.

What I would suggest is that the ArbCom, if the case is accepted at this time (I'm a bit late to request that it not be) quickly move to simply suspect it for a cooling off period. I don't think the issue is unresolvable.

Separately if ArbCom thinks my policy of excessive openness and toleration of our banned users is unwise and should be changed, then a private word with me will suffice - there's no need for a formal case.
linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =623108749[/link]

JW seems to have trouble expressing the concept "pointy comments = good; outright trolling = bad," probably because that is not an uplifting, loving, cooperative, forgiving, empathetic phrasing. Still, that's what he's trying to say.

Reading between the lines, I can even see a bit of belief in the old Hegelian dialectic slipping out: that the struggle between thesis and antithesis can lead to a productive new synthesis; or, that he enjoys swordfighting with his black-clad nemesis Kohs and thinks the outcome is at times profitable.

Of course, I have know this for quite some time: that both Greg Kohs and Jimmy Wales enjoy their exaggerated fisticuffs far too much for either one of them to give them up... Both of them need a cartooned nemesis and enjoy tweaking that nemesis's nose...

RfB

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Sep 02, 2014 2:25 pm

The case is all clerked up and ready to go.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Tue Sep 02, 2014 2:38 pm

thekohser wrote:The case is all clerked up and ready to go.
You have until September 16 to present your evidence here, Mr. Kohs. The limit on testimony is 1,000 words and 100 diffs, which should be used to support your various assertions.

RfB

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Sep 02, 2014 2:44 pm

Randy from Boise wrote:
thekohser wrote:The case is all clerked up and ready to go.
You have until September 16 to present your evidence here, Mr. Kohs. The limit on testimony is 1,000 words and 100 diffs, which should be used to support your various assertions.

RfB
Do I have to? I'm not even an "involved party" to what is purportedly "my" case!
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:20 pm

thekohser wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:
thekohser wrote:The case is all clerked up and ready to go.
You have until September 16 to present your evidence here, Mr. Kohs. The limit on testimony is 1,000 words and 100 diffs, which should be used to support your various assertions.

RfB
Do I have to? I'm not even an "involved party" to what is purportedly "my" case!
Only do it if it gives you joy!

RfB

P.S. Now calling for 96 degrees in Eugene Saturday, which is pretty much the hottest day of this summer...

User avatar
The Devil's Advocate
Habitué
Posts: 1906
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 12:19 am
Wikipedia User: The Devil's Advocate

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by The Devil's Advocate » Tue Sep 02, 2014 10:28 pm

thekohser wrote:
Randy from Boise wrote:
thekohser wrote:The case is all clerked up and ready to go.
You have until September 16 to present your evidence here, Mr. Kohs. The limit on testimony is 1,000 words and 100 diffs, which should be used to support your various assertions.

RfB
Do I have to? I'm not even an "involved party" to what is purportedly "my" case!
Involved or not, looks like there is already evidence being presented against you. Apparently, not even WO expats can escape the stain of association as Tarc is quickly assumed to be part of the ebil paid-editing conspiracy.

"For those who stubbornly seek freedom around the world, there can be no more urgent task than to come to understand the mechanisms and practices of indoctrination."

- Noam Chomsky


User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13984
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Zoloft » Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:17 pm

Sliced some silly stuff into the dustbin.

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


User avatar
neved
Gregarious
Posts: 926
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 5:22 pm
Location: Here, for whatever reason, is the world. And here it stays. With me on it.

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by neved » Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:48 pm

thekohser wrote:The case is all clerked up and ready to go.
Which means that govcom is not likely to listen to their constitutional monarch who advised them to suspend the case for a cooling off period.
"We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children." Golda Meir

User avatar
Kumioko
Muted
Posts: 6609
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
Nom de plume: Persona non grata

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Kumioko » Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:29 am

Actually it also probably means they have already made their minds up about the end result and that end result will not likely be a positive one with regards to any banned editors, Greg, or even the project. If the Arbcom can be expected to do anything, it will be to do whatever best benefits the sitting members.

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:59 am

I, for one, would like to thank Hell in a Bucket for being a customer of Comcast (2601:1:c080:eef:c944:3bd5:d647:87e4). That helps with my stock options every quarter, I'm sure.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13984
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: 2014 Greg Kohs Case at Arbcom

Unread post by Zoloft » Wed Sep 03, 2014 5:32 am

thekohser wrote:I, for one, would like to thank Hell in a Bucket for being a customer of Comcast (2601:1:c080:eef:c944:3bd5:d647:87e4). That helps with my stock options every quarter, I'm sure.
Hell in a Bucket is Mr. 2601!

:hamsterwheel:

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


Locked