X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Sun Sep 13 08:35:56 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <929ed1ec0909122301g4fb488c1l2ed1f458adb82a04@mail.gmail.com>
References: <25890ca0909122059w4729e07cs801a1bb614df9276@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0909122301g4fb488c1l2ed1f458adb82a04@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 01:35:47 -0500
Message-ID: <25890ca0909122335t3ff56586u7a7c2533227ce92c@mail.gmail.com>
From: radek szulga <rsszulga@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
	running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
	label similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview: This isn't a bad idea. We don't have an uninvolved
	admin
	but we can force uninvolved admins to have to deal with the issue - why
	are they tolerating NPAs against one of their own? I've already said
	something at the AN/I (it just itched too much). If the whole thing
	starts turning like Russavia's topic ban is going to get revoked (or
	worse yet, revoked and Sandstein censured) I'm willing to file ANOTHER
	AN/I on Russavia for the personal attacks he's made on Sandstein and
	others since his ban, based on the argument that just because an editor
	is already in a shitload of trouble that doesn't mean he's reached the
	bottom of the shit pit - or, that being already banned already is not a
	good argument for why personal attacks should be tolerated. Appeal to
	the greater Wiki spirit and ethos and all that. The obvious
	counterargument is going to be WP:Hounding but I think that Russavia's
	managed to be obnoxious enough in his rants that enough diffs, quotes
	etc. can be squeezed out that such a charge won't stick. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.7 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb3 (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb3
Subject: Re: [WPM] Russavia and Loosmark
X-BeenThere: folks@wikipedometer.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Id: Wikipedia statistics <folks.wikipedometer.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Help: <mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2131987787801192910=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.7
X-Spam_score_int: -6
X-Spam_bar: /
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
	similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  This isn't a bad idea. We don't have an uninvolved admin
	but we can force uninvolved admins to have to deal with the issue - why
	are they tolerating NPAs against one of their own? I've already said
	something at the AN/I (it just itched too much). If the whole thing
	starts turning like Russavia's topic ban is going to get revoked (or
	worse yet, revoked and Sandstein censured) I'm willing to file ANOTHER
	AN/I on Russavia for the personal attacks he's made on Sandstein and
	others since his ban, based on the argument that just because an editor
	is already in a shitload of trouble that doesn't mean he's reached the
	bottom of the shit pit - or, that being already banned already is not a
	good argument for why personal attacks should be tolerated. Appeal to
	the greater Wiki spirit and ethos and all that. The obvious
	counterargument is going to be WP:Hounding but I think that Russavia's
	managed to be obnoxious enough in his rants that enough diffs, quotes
	etc. can be squeezed out that such a charge won't stick. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.7 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.2 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============2131987787801192910==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00151761ca486d449304736fc26e

--00151761ca486d449304736fc26e
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

This isn't a bad idea. We don't have an uninvolved admin but we can force
uninvolved admins to have to deal with the issue - why are they tolerating
NPAs against one of their own? I've already said something at the AN/I (it
just itched too much). If the whole thing starts turning like Russavia's
topic ban is going to get revoked (or worse yet, revoked and Sandstein
censured) I'm willing to file ANOTHER AN/I on Russavia for the personal
attacks he's made on Sandstein and others since his ban, based on the
argument that just because an editor is already in a shitload of trouble
that doesn't mean he's reached the bottom of the shit pit - or, that being
already banned already is not a good argument for why personal attacks
should be tolerated. Appeal to the greater Wiki spirit and ethos and all
that.
The obvious counterargument is going to be WP:Hounding but I think that
Russavia's managed to be obnoxious enough in his rants that enough diffs,
quotes etc. can be squeezed out that such a charge won't stick.

But let's keep watching.

Radek

>
> The lesson here seems to be that actually following wiki policies, being
>> polite, following rules is a bad idea and being loud, obnoxious and incivil
>> is the way to get what you want. Not good incentives.
>>
>> If nobody else wants to say it, I'll say something (toned down) like that
>> to Sandstein.
>>
>
> Russavia and his pals have been attacking Sandstein instead of defending
> himself for quite a while now.  That's the problem; that's why Sandstein has
> gotten ready to retreat.
>
> It would help if, in showing solidarity with Sandstein, some administrator
> enforced NPA on Russavia's anti-Sandstein rant.  Where can we get one?
>
> --
> Andres Soolo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia statistics discussion list
> folks@wikipedometer.net
> http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
>
>

--00151761ca486d449304736fc26e
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This isn&#39;t a bad idea. We don&#39;t have an uninvolved admin but we can=
 force uninvolved admins to have to deal with the issue - why are they tole=
rating NPAs against one of their own? I&#39;ve already said something at th=
e AN/I (it just itched too much). If the whole thing starts turning like Ru=
ssavia&#39;s topic ban is going to get revoked (or worse yet, revoked and S=
andstein censured) I&#39;m willing to file ANOTHER AN/I on Russavia for the=
 personal attacks he&#39;s made on Sandstein and others since his ban, base=
d on the argument that just because an editor is already in a shitload of t=
rouble that doesn&#39;t mean he&#39;s reached the bottom of the shit pit - =
or, that being already banned already is not a good argument for why person=
al attacks should be tolerated. Appeal to the greater Wiki spirit and ethos=
 and all that.<br>
The obvious counterargument is going to be WP:Hounding but I think that Rus=
savia&#39;s managed to be obnoxious enough in his rants that enough diffs, =
quotes etc. can be squeezed out that such a charge won&#39;t stick.<br>
<br>But let&#39;s keep watching.<br><br>Radek<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"=
><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204,=
 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class=3D"gm=
ail_quote">
<div class=3D"im">
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px =
solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
The lesson here seems to be that actually following wiki policies, being po=
lite, following rules is a bad idea and being loud, obnoxious and incivil i=
s the way to get what you want. Not good incentives.<br><br>If nobody else =
wants to say it, I&#39;ll say something (toned down) like that to Sandstein=
.<br>

</blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Russavia and his pals have been atta=
cking Sandstein instead of defending himself for quite a while now. =A0That=
&#39;s the problem; that&#39;s why Sandstein has gotten ready to retreat.</=
div>

<div><br></div><div>It would help if, in showing solidarity with Sandstein,=
 some administrator enforced NPA on Russavia&#39;s anti-Sandstein rant. =A0=
Where can we get one?</div><div><br></div></div><font color=3D"#888888">-- =
<br>
Andres Soolo<br>
</font><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Wikipedia statistics discussion list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net">folks@wikipedometer.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks" target=
=3D"_blank">http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>

--00151761ca486d449304736fc26e--


--===============2131987787801192910==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks

--===============2131987787801192910==--


