SashiRolls requests a hearing
- Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2964
- kołdry
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
- Contact:
SashiRolls requests a hearing
I have formally requested today that ArbCom drop its opposition to the community hearing appeal of
Cirt v. SashiRolls (Dec. 2016)
&
Cirt v. SashiRolls (June 2017)
Is saying that on an independent website canvassing?
Cirt v. SashiRolls (Dec. 2016)
&
Cirt v. SashiRolls (June 2017)
Is saying that on an independent website canvassing?
los auberginos
- Midsize Jake
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9952
- Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
- Wikipedia Review Member: Somey
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Only if you're against the idea...?Bezdomni wrote:Is saying that on an independent website canvassing?
The conventional (and I would say correct) definition of "canvassing" would require you to contact potential supporters individually. What you just posted was a public announcement, which runs the risk of exposing your plans to opponents who might not otherwise hear of them - not the same thing. So, if you're accused of canvassing here, it's because Wikipedians have tried to redefine the term (as they have in many other cases) to suit their site-specific immediate requirements.
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Agreed: even by the Wikipedia standards of canvassing this wouldn't count. Canvassing would be if you were saying "vote delete in this AFD" or "go revert this editor, please". Which is something you're obviously not doing.
So I'd say you're in the clear.
So I'd say you're in the clear.
- Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Cool. Now I just need some sort of digital wet-suit and safety goggles and I'll be all set. ^^
los auberginos
- Dysklyver
- Cornishman
- Posts: 2337
- Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 2:02 pm
- Actual Name: Arthur Kerensa
- Nom de plume: Dysk
- Location: England
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Cool. Hopefully the JzG car-crash can be towed out the Arbcom lobby in time for this interesting event.
Globally banned after 7 years.
- Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
It was approved by the list-watcher within 30 minutes, so I imagine I'll have some response within the next 30 years or so.
los auberginos
- Dysklyver
- Cornishman
- Posts: 2337
- Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 2:02 pm
- Actual Name: Arthur Kerensa
- Nom de plume: Dysk
- Location: England
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
I think we established that the Steward email never responds but that the Arbcom one generally does, so you should be in luck.Bezdomni wrote:It was approved by the list-watcher within 30 minutes, so I imagine I'll have some response within the next 30 years or so.
Globally banned after 7 years.
- Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Well, it looks like you're right. I got a response, but no action, from BU Rob 13.
In response to:
I'm pretty sure that BU Rob 13's comment (above) was not necessary, although perhaps others might not see this is *exactly* what I've asked the ArbCom to do in the original message (though admittedly without using the MobCar-preferred "courtesy block" language for the extra layer of blocking). Again, as I've said since day 1, the block reason should be WP:NOTHERE as there is no there there. Sage was engaged in a straightforward policy violation and should therefore not have been prosecuting people because they had asked about his previous accounts.
This is also the Arb who has been very creatively forgetting all they'd heard about Sagecandor prior to Pudeo filing an SPI. Their memory is getting better.
Before he said he'd never heard of Cirt (§); now he remembers responding to an email in which Cirt was the main subject of the first line.
In response to:
NB: I did not ask Euralyus to modify the block record as he did (though I did resignedly accept his proposal as being better than nothing). Never was it made clear that this would make appealing the cabal-railroading more difficult. But it did solve the immediate problem of my daughter seeing libel about me on her screen. What I had asked him to do was notice that Wikipedia was being negligent in allowing a cabalista to damage the reputation of a Wikipedia editor. (twice prosecuted by a sockpuppet who didn't have standing to edit any of the pages we interacted on because of their topic ban, much less to prosecute me for asking questions)SashiRolls wrote:The first step should be making clear in the block record that Euralyus' reason for modifying my block record was to eliminate the libelous block reason appearing on screens in my home and not to prevent me from appealing the bad block to the community. (It has been misunderstood by OTRS as the latter.)
I had a look through the Wikipedia namespace (and through all the namespaces). This is indeed the first known attestation of the term "courtesy {{Arbcom block}}". A couple of people have used the term "courtesy-block" to mean "I'll block that account you don't like for you" (§), however.BU Rob 13 wrote:As indicated to you in January and May, the Arbitration Committee is willing to revert the courtesy {{ArbCom block}} placed on your account to reduce your distress over the original block rationale. This would allow you to appeal your original block to the community. This is currently the only route to appeal (I, as a member of Arbcom, will make) available to you.
I'm pretty sure that BU Rob 13's comment (above) was not necessary, although perhaps others might not see this is *exactly* what I've asked the ArbCom to do in the original message (though admittedly without using the MobCar-preferred "courtesy block" language for the extra layer of blocking). Again, as I've said since day 1, the block reason should be WP:NOTHERE as there is no there there. Sage was engaged in a straightforward policy violation and should therefore not have been prosecuting people because they had asked about his previous accounts.
This is also the Arb who has been very creatively forgetting all they'd heard about Sagecandor prior to Pudeo filing an SPI. Their memory is getting better.
Before he said he'd never heard of Cirt (§); now he remembers responding to an email in which Cirt was the main subject of the first line.
That's progress!SashiRolls 25 May 2018 wrote:I would still like to be able to appeal this inappropriate block, and (to have) the record of all the blocks related to the desysopped administrator Cirt (aka Sagecandor) removed.
los auberginos
- iii
- Habitué
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:15 am
- Wikipedia User: ජපස
- Wikipedia Review Member: iii
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
I cannot speak for BU Rob 13, but I imagine this is supposed to mean that arbcomm is willing to revert the tagging of your accounts with the block notice as a courtesy.Bezdomni wrote:Well, it looks like you're right. I got a response, but no action, from BU Rob 13.
In response to:
NB: I did not ask Euralyus to modify the block record as he did (though I did resignedly accept his proposal as being better than nothing). Never was it made clear that this would make appealing the cabal-railroading more difficult. But it did solve the immediate problem of my daughter seeing libel about me on her screen. What I had asked him to do was notice that Wikipedia was being negligent in allowing a cabalista to damage the reputation of a Wikipedia editor. (twice prosecuted by a sockpuppet who didn't have standing to edit any of the pages we interacted on because of their topic ban, much less to prosecute me for asking questions)SashiRolls wrote:The first step should be making clear in the block record that Euralyus' reason for modifying my block record was to eliminate the libelous block reason appearing on screens in my home and not to prevent me from appealing the bad block to the community. (It has been misunderstood by OTRS as the latter.)
I had a look through the Wikipedia namespace (and through all the namespaces). This is indeed the first known attestation of the term "courtesy {{Arbcom block}}". A couple of people have used the term "courtesy-block" to mean "I'll block that account you don't like for you" (§), however.BU Rob 13 wrote:As indicated to you in January and May, the Arbitration Committee is willing to revert the courtesy {{ArbCom block}} placed on your account to reduce your distress over the original block rationale. This would allow you to appeal your original block to the community. This is currently the only route to appeal (I, as a member of Arbcom, will make) available to you.
I'm pretty sure that BU Rob 13's comment (above) was not necessary, although perhaps others might not see this is *exactly* what I've asked the ArbCom to do in the original message (though admittedly without using the MobCar-preferred "courtesy block" language for the extra layer of blocking). Again, as I've said since day 1, the block reason should be WP:NOTHERE as there is no there there.
It's poorly worded to the extent that it doesn't parse the way I think it's intended, but the patter and rhetoric of the word "courtesy" in Wikispeak is more in line with that sensibility. "Courtesy", in these scenarios, is often used in conjunction with removing something from public internet view. "Courtesy blanking", for example.
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
The wiki version of 'courtesy' should always be parsed as 'We are willing to do it (action that you want), as long as you shut up and stop making a fuss, if you dont, it will be undone'.
Which pretty much is the sum response of Rob there 'If you want to continue to make a fuss by appealing, we are going to undo the nice action we took previously to mitigate your distress in order to cause you more distress as a punishment for making us spend our precious time on this'.
Which pretty much is the sum response of Rob there 'If you want to continue to make a fuss by appealing, we are going to undo the nice action we took previously to mitigate your distress in order to cause you more distress as a punishment for making us spend our precious time on this'.
- Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Well, some progress has been made. I have been Arbcom unblocked and have talk page access for the first time in 16 months or so, now all I need to do is convince the folks at AN/I that it isn't OK for topic-banned accounts to prosecute people for showing evidence of their astro-turfing. I don't imagine that will be easy given what I know about the drama boards. I'll give it a whirl soonish, but for the time being, I'll just revel in the fact that 16 months after being blocked, I am finally authorized to appeal like any normal "convict".
I wonder what will happen. Maybe Deputy Goldenring will come out of retirement (§) just to put in a good word for me and end up checkusered. In any case, I won't be allowed to mention teh kabalahz, I suppose.
I wonder what will happen. Maybe Deputy Goldenring will come out of retirement (§) just to put in a good word for me and end up checkusered. In any case, I won't be allowed to mention teh kabalahz, I suppose.
los auberginos
- iii
- Habitué
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:15 am
- Wikipedia User: ජපස
- Wikipedia Review Member: iii
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
This is a terrible idea. What is your endgame here? Do you want an apology? If so, why?Bezdomni wrote:Well, some progress has been made. I have been Arbcom unblocked and have talk page access for the first time in 16 months or so, now all I need to do is convince the folks at AN/I that it isn't OK for topic-banned accounts to prosecute people for showing evidence of their astro-turfing.
If your goal is to be unblocked or unbanned, AN/I is not the place to do it. Hell, AN/I is not the place to do anything.
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Realistically its the only option. Short of waiting until arbcom is populated mainly by Arbs who didnt actively hide Cirt's editing in an area he was banned from. Which may work in ANI's favour if it wants to poke the arbs in the eye.iii wrote: If your goal is to be unblocked or unbanned, AN/I is not the place to do it. Hell, AN/I is not the place to do anything.
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
You probably want AN, not AN/I for a block appeal.
The best odds of a favorable appeal would (IMO) be to stand by your objective (pointing out that someone was using a sock to evade a BLP ban) but acknowledge that the approach Pudeo used (detailed case laid out in an SPI filing) would have been the better approach, and that's the approach you'll use going forward should that situation appear again. Assuming you agree with all that.
You don't need to grovel, and indeed you shouldn't.
The best odds of a favorable appeal would (IMO) be to stand by your objective (pointing out that someone was using a sock to evade a BLP ban) but acknowledge that the approach Pudeo used (detailed case laid out in an SPI filing) would have been the better approach, and that's the approach you'll use going forward should that situation appear again. Assuming you agree with all that.
You don't need to grovel, and indeed you shouldn't.
- iii
- Habitué
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:15 am
- Wikipedia User: ජපස
- Wikipedia Review Member: iii
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
This is the correct answer. It's so very inside baseball, but it's a proven tactic that works on that website.Mason wrote:You probably want AN, not AN/I for a block appeal.
The best odds of a favorable appeal would (IMO) be to stand by your objective (pointing out that someone was using a sock to evade a BLP ban) but acknowledge that the approach Pudeo used (detailed case laid out in an SPI filing) would have been the better approach, and that's the approach you'll use going forward should that situation appear again. Assuming you agree with all that.
You don't need to grovel, and indeed you shouldn't.
- Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Thank you for all the sensible input. I've been looking through the various pages concerning unblocks (particularly standard offer and blocking policy) and hadn't come across suggestions related to these boards. In fact reading those pages it seems like it all should be taking place on my own talk page. Still, this is very different to the block appeals I've seen since, which have taken place at one of the boards (AN/AE/ANI).
One thing I can't help but notice is the continual reference to community input at the original case (e.g. from Standard Offer: "The standard offer applies to community-based indefinite blocks and bans in situations where things just didn't work out"). At least 4 of the people involved in that June 2017 case were insiders who have had to rename their accounts because of previous drama they had stirred up. At least three of them have since been blocked or topic-banned, including the person who brought the case. I suppose any mention of that fact (except for Cirt) would be seen as immaterial.
The difficulty with the tack of saying I think I should have filed an SPI at the time is that since I was not a seasoned en.wp editor, I had no idea *who* Sagecandor could have been a sock of, though I *was* certain (like a fair number of others) they were a sock of a former insider. Cirt had stopped editing before I became an active contributor in the political sphere.
It was only after a fair bit of noise had been made here that people who *did* have that experience began to look into the question. At least a half dozen people worked on compiling the information that Pudeo was able to post at SPI. I don't think it would have led to a different result had I filed an SPI, because the only evidence I had at the time was the blatant astro-turfing, which did (temporarily) end as a result of my post. Still, there is wisdom in your suggestion, Mason, because I do have to point out something that I've learned (and so much of what I've learned can't really be talked about on wiki).
iii: no, I'm not looking for an apology, I am looking for my block record to be modified to show that neither of the two cases should have been resolved as they were, which, in retrospect -- knowing who was doing the prosecuting and who was piling on per "defend each other" -- seems pretty obvious. There is no reason for me to have the lengthy block record that I do as a result of Cirt's two prosecutions. Most importantly, the block reasons need to be brought in line with the reality of legal definitions of "harassment and intimidation". I never once contacted, or sought to contact, Cirt or Sagecandor on any other platform by phone or by email, so it's all rather a mystery how they perceived any sort of RW intimidation or harassment on their talk page or on the talk page of Bibliography of Donald Trump (T-H-L), or And you are lynching Negroes (T-H-L). At worst, there was a bit of mild snark.
One thing I can't help but notice is the continual reference to community input at the original case (e.g. from Standard Offer: "The standard offer applies to community-based indefinite blocks and bans in situations where things just didn't work out"). At least 4 of the people involved in that June 2017 case were insiders who have had to rename their accounts because of previous drama they had stirred up. At least three of them have since been blocked or topic-banned, including the person who brought the case. I suppose any mention of that fact (except for Cirt) would be seen as immaterial.
The difficulty with the tack of saying I think I should have filed an SPI at the time is that since I was not a seasoned en.wp editor, I had no idea *who* Sagecandor could have been a sock of, though I *was* certain (like a fair number of others) they were a sock of a former insider. Cirt had stopped editing before I became an active contributor in the political sphere.
It was only after a fair bit of noise had been made here that people who *did* have that experience began to look into the question. At least a half dozen people worked on compiling the information that Pudeo was able to post at SPI. I don't think it would have led to a different result had I filed an SPI, because the only evidence I had at the time was the blatant astro-turfing, which did (temporarily) end as a result of my post. Still, there is wisdom in your suggestion, Mason, because I do have to point out something that I've learned (and so much of what I've learned can't really be talked about on wiki).
iii: no, I'm not looking for an apology, I am looking for my block record to be modified to show that neither of the two cases should have been resolved as they were, which, in retrospect -- knowing who was doing the prosecuting and who was piling on per "defend each other" -- seems pretty obvious. There is no reason for me to have the lengthy block record that I do as a result of Cirt's two prosecutions. Most importantly, the block reasons need to be brought in line with the reality of legal definitions of "harassment and intimidation". I never once contacted, or sought to contact, Cirt or Sagecandor on any other platform by phone or by email, so it's all rather a mystery how they perceived any sort of RW intimidation or harassment on their talk page or on the talk page of Bibliography of Donald Trump (T-H-L), or And you are lynching Negroes (T-H-L). At worst, there was a bit of mild snark.
Last edited by Bezdomni on Wed Oct 24, 2018 7:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
los auberginos
- Kumioko
- Muted
- Posts: 6609
- Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
- Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
- Nom de plume: Persona non grata
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
I disagree with the sentiment that you don't need to grovel to be unblocked. On Wikipedia, admins expect you to admit fault even when it's not yours if you were the one that was blocked. They do not care if you were wronged, if you were right or if the ban/block was justified. There is an assumption, often incorrectly so, that if you were blocked, the admin must have been right and the only time it can be proven otherwise is if other admins are willing to step in and speak on your behalf. Otherwise, it oftentimes does, absolutely, require the editor to humble or even humiliate themselves to an admin (of course the amount of ring/ass kissing depends on the admin) in order to be unblocked and even then, admins frequently decline their requests.Mason wrote:You probably want AN, not AN/I for a block appeal.
The best odds of a favorable appeal would (IMO) be to stand by your objective (pointing out that someone was using a sock to evade a BLP ban) but acknowledge that the approach Pudeo used (detailed case laid out in an SPI filing) would have been the better approach, and that's the approach you'll use going forward should that situation appear again. Assuming you agree with all that.
You don't need to grovel, and indeed you shouldn't.
The notion that groveling is unnecessary is about as misleading as anything I have seen on Wikipedia. The fact that the admins, including you Mason don't do anything about the admins who are abusing this, is another problem entirely.
- iii
- Habitué
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:15 am
- Wikipedia User: ජපස
- Wikipedia Review Member: iii
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Why do you care what your block record is? My block record is as long as your arm, but that says nothing more than I got some admins upset from time to time. Boo hoo.Bezdomni wrote:iii: no, I'm not looking for an apology, I am looking for my block record to be modified to show that neither of the two cases should have been resolved as they were, which, in retrospect -- knowing who was doing the prosecuting and who was piling on per "defend each other" -- seems pretty obvious. There is no reason for me to have the lengthy block record that I do as a result of Cirt's two prosecutions.
What a long block log does is help weed out the insipid from the insightful. When people like GreenMeansGo (T-C-L) make arguments that because I have a long block record I should therefore be banned from Wikipedia, that's a strong piece of evidence as to the soundness of their judgment.
In any case, the most that you can possibly hope for in this regard is that a sympathetic admin would block you for one second and annotate the record, but this won't shorten your block record and it is purely cosmetic (as the block record is in the first place). Getting entries on your block record stricken from the record is a distracting pipedream. I strongly suggest getting another goal.
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
You have almost zero chance of this happening. Block records are almost never amended. Also that would require an admission they were wrong in the first place.Bezdomni wrote: I am looking for my block record to be modified to show that neither of the two cases should have been resolved as they were
- Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Just as a clarification, I thought AN was supposed to be an administrator's board? In any case the appeal is live. Special thanks to GW for saving from oblivion a decline-per-Calton !vote by a non-admin. ^^
Looks like there are going to be a fair number of people who won't actually read the unblock request. And of course I have no automatic right to reply to any of these non-admins who have not even noticed Sagecandor was topic-banned yet in their careful study of the evidence provided. lol. (sigh)
Looks like there are going to be a fair number of people who won't actually read the unblock request. And of course I have no automatic right to reply to any of these non-admins who have not even noticed Sagecandor was topic-banned yet in their careful study of the evidence provided. lol. (sigh)
los auberginos
-
- Critic
- Posts: 240
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 3:22 pm
- Wikipedia User: GorillaWarfare
- Actual Name: Molly White
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Oh come on, don't pretend to be irritated at me for fixing a bot's mistake. LSB III mistakenly archived the comment when trying to archive another thread—evidently there's an issue where a bot can make an edit fractions of a second before the previous one and wipe it out without running into the edit conflict.Bezdomni wrote:Special thanks to GW for saving from oblivion a decline-per-Calton !vote by a non-admin. ^^
Non-admins have always been allowed to comment at AN, and this particular one helpfully flagged the fact that they aren't an admin. Their edits don't just go down the chute when a bot messes them up any more than those of an admin would.
-
- Critic
- Posts: 240
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 3:22 pm
- Wikipedia User: GorillaWarfare
- Actual Name: Molly White
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Given that the admin you pinged hasn't been active for over five hours and you pinged them an hour ago, I suspect they're sleeping or otherwise getting on with their life; they're not denying you your "right to reply". I've copied it over for you.Bezdomni wrote:And of course I have no automatic right to reply to any of these non-admins who have not even noticed Sagecandor was topic-banned yet in their careful study of the evidence provided. lol. (sigh)
- Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Sometimes the silences are the most interesting in music.
Also, I did not say anyone was denying me anything. That said, thanks for copying my reply.unqoted SashiRolls wrote:Looks like there are going to be a fair number of people who won't actually read the unblock request.
los auberginos
- 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: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Only if it's using a time machine.GorillaWarfare wrote:evidently there's an issue where a bot can make an edit fractions of a second before the previous one
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche
-
- Critic
- Posts: 240
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 3:22 pm
- Wikipedia User: GorillaWarfare
- Actual Name: Molly White
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
~*~*~software~*~*~Poetlister wrote:Only if it's using a time machine.GorillaWarfare wrote:evidently there's an issue where a bot can make an edit fractions of a second before the previous one
- iii
- Habitué
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:15 am
- Wikipedia User: ජපස
- Wikipedia Review Member: iii
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
I wrote the forward to some sort of novel.Bezdomni wrote:Sometimes the silences are the most interesting in music.
Also, I did not say anyone was denying me anything. That said, thanks for copying my reply.unqoted SashiRolls wrote:Looks like there are going to be a fair number of people who won't actually read the unblock request.
I wish we had spent a bit more time talking about what is and isn't possible over at that other site. Your request was not written very well according to the nonsense rules of that website, but we'll deal with what we'll deal with.
Good luck in your quest.
-
- Critic
- Posts: 228
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:48 am
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Decline
1. Calton
2. Mythdon
3. Johnuniq
4. Carl Tristan Orense
5. O3000
6. Ivanvecto
7. Beyond My Ken
8. MjolnirPants
Accept
1. SerialNumber54129
2. Only in death does duty end
3. 28bytes
4. Begoon
5. Jschnur
6. Cullen
7. Mr Ernie
8. Drmies
9. Boing! said Zebedee
10. Kevin
11. Capitals00
Analysis
Who on earth is that ridiculous little creature, MjolnirPants?
1. Calton
2. Mythdon
3. Johnuniq
4. Carl Tristan Orense
5. O3000
6. Ivanvecto
7. Beyond My Ken
8. MjolnirPants
Accept
1. SerialNumber54129
2. Only in death does duty end
3. 28bytes
4. Begoon
5. Jschnur
6. Cullen
7. Mr Ernie
8. Drmies
9. Boing! said Zebedee
10. Kevin
11. Capitals00
Analysis
Who on earth is that ridiculous little creature, MjolnirPants?
- iii
- Habitué
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:15 am
- Wikipedia User: ජපස
- Wikipedia Review Member: iii
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
He is a member here.WhoReallyCares wrote:Analysis
Who on earth is that ridiculous little creature, MjolnirPants?
- Boing! said Zebedee
- Gregarious
- Posts: 644
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:47 pm
- Wikipedia User: Boing! said Zebedee
- Location: Liverpool, UK
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Simon Adler is an accept that you might have missed,WhoReallyCares wrote:Decline
1. Calton
2. Mythdon
3. Johnuniq
4. Carl Tristan Orense
5. O3000
6. Ivanvecto
7. Beyond My Ken
8. MjolnirPants
Accept
1. SerialNumber54129
2. Only in death does duty end
3. 28bytes
4. Begoon
5. Jschnur
6. Cullen
7. Mr Ernie
8. Drmies
9. Boing! said Zebedee
10. Kevin
11. Capitals00
Analysis
Who on earth is that ridiculous little creature, MjolnirPants?
-
- Critic
- Posts: 228
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:48 am
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Yep -- you're right. And Ealdgyth has added: "Support per Boing and Cullen". So:Boing! said Zebedee wrote: Simon Adler is an accept that you might have missed,
Decline
1. Calton
2. Mythdon
3. Johnuniq
4. Carl Tristan Orense
5. O3000
6. Ivanvecto
7. Beyond My Ken
8. MjolnirPants
Accept
1. SerialNumber54129
2. Only in death does duty end
3. 28bytes
4. Begoon
5. Jschnur
6. Cullen
7. Mr Ernie
8. Simon Adler
9. Drmies
10. Boing! said Zebedee
11. Kevin
12. Capitals00
13. Compassionate727
14. Ealdgyth
===========
Above results @ 8pm Bangkok time [GMT +7]
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
He is also apparently the editor who Lourdes wanted to sanction for incivility resulting in this RfC.iii wrote:He is a member here.WhoReallyCares wrote:Analysis
Who on earth is that ridiculous little creature, MjolnirPants?
No coffee? OK, then maybe just a little appreciation for my work out here?
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Currently the Arbitration Committee is not conducting any business in public. None. But, I'm sure they're still quite busy with private business, as they apparently always are.
So, I don't see any links here and while I'm generally sympathetic with SashiRolls' causes, I don't know where to find this !vote.
EDIT: Oh, I figured it out. Since he's a blocked user who can only edit his own talk page. Duh.
So, I don't see any links here and while I'm generally sympathetic with SashiRolls' causes, I don't know where to find this !vote.
EDIT: Oh, I figured it out. Since he's a blocked user who can only edit his own talk page. Duh.
No coffee? OK, then maybe just a little appreciation for my work out here?
- Kumioko
- Muted
- Posts: 6609
- Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
- Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
- Nom de plume: Persona non grata
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
What? Johnuniq and Beyond My Ken opposed? Tell me it isn't so! Both of those 2 idiots should have been booted a long time ago. Both breath fire on even the most benign discussions and both do almost nothing of use to benefit Wikipedia.
- Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Thanks Boing! I really appreciated seeing what you wrote. I will listen to Cullen's words and even to some of those who were more directly critical.
If I do end up being unblocked, it's going to be harder to write fun sentences here. I'll always be second-guessing myself to be sure that I'm impersonalizing the debate enough. I'll try to keep everybody happy.
Of course, there are many people other than you to thank here too Boing! but you're the one I've probably been the most aggressive with, which is why I particularly appreciated your pardon. I'll try to live up to your enthusiasm at seeing me unblocked in quiet ways.
If I do end up being unblocked, it's going to be harder to write fun sentences here. I'll always be second-guessing myself to be sure that I'm impersonalizing the debate enough. I'll try to keep everybody happy.
Of course, there are many people other than you to thank here too Boing! but you're the one I've probably been the most aggressive with, which is why I particularly appreciated your pardon. I'll try to live up to your enthusiasm at seeing me unblocked in quiet ways.
los auberginos
- The Garbage Scow
- Habitué
- Posts: 1750
- Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 4:00 am
- Wikipedia User: The Master
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Why do some people always believe that stating the original block rationale was invalid is an "automatic non-starter"? That's horseshit.
And if the fact that absolute groveling is the most important factor in a ban appeal isn't apparent by many of the comments there, I don't know what is. Their appeals process is like Soviet show trial.
And if the fact that absolute groveling is the most important factor in a ban appeal isn't apparent by many of the comments there, I don't know what is. Their appeals process is like Soviet show trial.
Last edited by The Garbage Scow on Mon Oct 29, 2018 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- 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: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Because it implies that an admin is occasionally not infallible, a self-evidently absurd proposition.The Garbage Scow wrote:Why do some people always believe that stating the original block rationale was invalid is an "automatic non-starter"? That's horseshit.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche
- iii
- Habitué
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:15 am
- Wikipedia User: ජපස
- Wikipedia Review Member: iii
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
"Impersonalizing" (I like that coinage) is a good goal, but, to be clear, it's much, MUCH more important that you achieve that goal at that other website than it is here. In fact, I would recommend (within limits) to be a little more free with your bluster over here so that you can let off steam. If unblocked, you will be scrutinized heavily, so be prepared to walk on eggshells on-wiki. It's not fair because there are a lot of people active over there who will be able to get away with a lot more than you, but that's how it works.Bezdomni wrote:If I do end up being unblocked, it's going to be harder to write fun sentences here. I'll always be second-guessing myself to be sure that I'm impersonalizing the debate enough. I'll try to keep everybody happy.
- Boing! said Zebedee
- Gregarious
- Posts: 644
- Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:47 pm
- Wikipedia User: Boing! said Zebedee
- Location: Liverpool, UK
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Nah, I never thought of you as aggressive - more annoyed and frustrated. And with hindsight, I can understand your frustration now - you knew who Sagecandor was, but nobody would listen.Bezdomni wrote:Thanks Boing! I really appreciated seeing what you wrote. I will listen to Cullen's words and even to some of those who were more directly critical.
If I do end up being unblocked, it's going to be harder to write fun sentences here. I'll always be second-guessing myself to be sure that I'm impersonalizing the debate enough. I'll try to keep everybody happy.
Of course, there are many people other than you to thank here too Boing! but you're the one I've probably been the most aggressive with, which is why I particularly appreciated your pardon. I'll try to live up to your enthusiasm at seeing me unblocked in quiet ways.
As an aside, I'm singularly unimpressed by the oppose that's partly based on your use of Wikipediocracy. The opinion it expresses is very much wide of the mark, and what you do on other sites should have no bearing on Wikipedia unless you were pursuing nefarious ends (which you clearly were not). I might add a brief comment about that.
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
I was surprised to see the link to this thread suppressed on AN. But the "no badsites" enforcement has always been wildly inconsistent, I suppose.Boing! said Zebedee wrote:As an aside, I'm singularly unimpressed by the oppose that's partly based on your use of Wikipediocracy. The opinion it expresses is very much wide of the mark, and what you do on other sites should have no bearing on Wikipedia unless you were pursuing nefarious ends (which you clearly were not). I might add a brief comment about that.
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Given you are going to get unblocked, I would advise that you should not edit controversial or anything related to the subjects you edited before. At least not for few months. Those who have opposed your unblock are going to check your edits every day to invent a new reason to get you site banned.Bezdomni wrote:Thanks Boing! I really appreciated seeing what you wrote. I will listen to Cullen's words and even to some of those who were more directly critical.
If I do end up being unblocked, it's going to be harder to write fun sentences here. I'll always be second-guessing myself to be sure that I'm impersonalizing the debate enough. I'll try to keep everybody happy.
Of course, there are many people other than you to thank here too Boing! but you're the one I've probably been the most aggressive with, which is why I particularly appreciated your pardon. I'll try to live up to your enthusiasm at seeing me unblocked in quiet ways.
- iii
- Habitué
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:15 am
- Wikipedia User: ජපස
- Wikipedia Review Member: iii
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Redacting links to badsites is an integral part of Wikipedia culture, Boing!! You should know that by now!Boing! said Zebedee wrote:As an aside, I'm singularly unimpressed by the oppose that's partly based on your use of Wikipediocracy. The opinion it expresses is very much wide of the mark, and what you do on other sites should have no bearing on Wikipedia unless you were pursuing nefarious ends (which you clearly were not). I might add a brief comment about that.
I don't know... it may be best to let those nattering nabobs of negativism remain content in their discontent. So they Oppose per BADSITES. It just shows how problematic the "other side" is.
No less a Wikiluminary than Newyorkbrad (T-C-L) has consistently argued that it is important for Wikipedia to be tolerant of criticism. But criticism here and at other places exposes Wikipedia to risk because that website has some flaws that are exploitable by those who criticize it --especially off-site (mostly related to it being a nominally opensource site which tries to abide by a contradictory commitments to pseudonymity, free culture, and acting within the bounds of copyright law). I think the hypocrisy is rather self-evident, but you might be right that it deserves highlighting.
- Eric Corbett
- Retired
- Posts: 2066
- Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 5:38 pm
- Wikipedia User: Eric Corbett
- Actual Name: Eric Corbett
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Newyorkbrad is an impotent windbag whose arguments carry very little weight.
- Kumioko
- Muted
- Posts: 6609
- Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
- Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
- Nom de plume: Persona non grata
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
+1, there was a time when I thought NYB was one of the more moderate admins but I have come to learn that it's merely the perception he maintains through manipulation of site policy and wikilawyering. He is a perfect example of how blatant violations of Wikipedia policy are ignored if you are an admin and have enough pals in the community.
- iii
- Habitué
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:15 am
- Wikipedia User: ජපස
- Wikipedia Review Member: iii
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Look! A beautiful example of how you can let off steam and be personally rude at this BADSITE. This kind of insulting the curia is not allowed at that other website.Kumioko wrote:+1, there was a time when I thought NYB was one of the more moderate admins but I have come to learn that it's merely the perception he maintains through manipulation of site policy and wikilawyering. He is a perfect example of how blatant violations of Wikipedia policy are ignored if you are an admin and have enough pals in the community.Eric Corbett wrote: Newyorkbrad is an impotent windbag whose arguments carry very little weight.
- Kumioko
- Muted
- Posts: 6609
- Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
- Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
- Nom de plume: Persona non grata
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Yeah I'm an asshole but I didn't advocate for others to contact the employer of another editor I disagreed with and out them to try and get them fired! Which as I recall, is a violation of "that other sites" policies as well!
So, in light of the fact that some on Wikipedia think he is the second coming, if you're looking for sympathy, you'll find it on Wiktionary between shit and syphilis!
So, in light of the fact that some on Wikipedia think he is the second coming, if you're looking for sympathy, you'll find it on Wiktionary between shit and syphilis!
- Midsize Jake
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9952
- Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
- Wikipedia Review Member: Somey
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Admittedly, I was hoping people would ignore that post so that I could change "impotent" to the less-connotative "ineffectual" later on without anyone noticing.iii wrote:Look! A beautiful example of how you can let off steam and be personally rude at this BADSITE. This kind of insulting the curia is not allowed at that other website.
After all, this is Mr. Bezdomni's (aka SahiRoll's) thread, and we should try to respect his... well, whatever it is he's trying to accomplish.
- The Garbage Scow
- Habitué
- Posts: 1750
- Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 4:00 am
- Wikipedia User: The Master
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
I'm guessing Principle. Make people do what's right, especially in accordance with their own rules.
- Bezdomni
- Habitué
- Posts: 2964
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
- Wikipedia User: RosasHills
- Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
- Contact:
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
They've left the link to the blog in my statement, so there's that, I guess. I see they sure are spending a lot more time scrutinizing me on-wiki than they did scrutinizing Sagecandor. ^^ Should I really respond yet again to point out that my only sockpuppet ever made one contribution once two years ago? That edit stuck for about a year, until orangepi went on a cleaning frenzy. It was blocked shortly after I clued Arbcom into that account's existence by linking to a page showing how annoyed the Green Party was with the Wikipedians for smearing their candidates. Bbb23 got that message from the MobCar CB. Abusing multiple accounts how very dramatic!Mason wrote:I was surprised to see the link to this thread suppressed on AN. But the "no badsites" enforcement has always been wildly inconsistent, I suppose.Boing! said Zebedee wrote:As an aside, I'm singularly unimpressed by the oppose that's partly based on your use of Wikipediocracy. The opinion it expresses is very much wide of the mark, and what you do on other sites should have no bearing on Wikipedia unless you were pursuing nefarious ends (which you clearly were not). I might add a brief comment about that.
los auberginos
- iii
- Habitué
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 4:15 am
- Wikipedia User: ජපස
- Wikipedia Review Member: iii
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
Absolutely not. If you want to apologize, you can do so, but offering excuses is not going to help you especially as this involves politics and you are still banned there.Bezdomni wrote: Should I really respond yet again to point out that my only sockpuppet ever made one contribution once two years ago?
- Kumioko
- Muted
- Posts: 6609
- Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 2:36 am
- Wikipedia User: Kumioko; Reguyla
- Nom de plume: Persona non grata
Re: SashiRolls requests a hearing
That gives Bbb23 another account to build up their edit count. That's all he cares about, banning and blocking as many accounts as possible to build up his stats! He doesn't really do anything positive for the project, he's just runs around destroying stuff and blocking people.Bezdomni wrote:They've left the link to the blog in my statement, so there's that, I guess. I see they sure are spending a lot more time scrutinizing me on-wiki than they did scrutinizing Sagecandor. ^^ Should I really respond yet again to point out that my only sockpuppet ever made one contribution once two years ago? That edit stuck for about a year, until orangepi went on a cleaning frenzy. It was blocked shortly after I clued Arbcom into that account's existence by linking to a page showing how annoyed the Green Party was with the Wikipedians for smearing their candidates. Bbb23 got that message from the MobCar CB. Abusing multiple accounts how very dramatic!Mason wrote:I was surprised to see the link to this thread suppressed on AN. But the "no badsites" enforcement has always been wildly inconsistent, I suppose.Boing! said Zebedee wrote:As an aside, I'm singularly unimpressed by the oppose that's partly based on your use of Wikipediocracy. The opinion it expresses is very much wide of the mark, and what you do on other sites should have no bearing on Wikipedia unless you were pursuing nefarious ends (which you clearly were not). I might add a brief comment about that.