X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Sat Apr  4 00:52:51 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f826636f0904030603v46797bf8x382795167fd9b01e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <929ed1ec0904021519y23c5e37bm2dd7bd3e71b2aea6@mail.gmail.com>
	<49D53E8B.6090902@post.pl>
	<4f045a880904021614y5e0f78bcn4ae396902de2e37d@mail.gmail.com>
	<49D5510F.2040405@post.pl>
	<4f045a880904021713v13da21e0h44055f5fb1b46f6d@mail.gmail.com>
	<4f045a880904030315u745efe0eyba8a71f652dc5481@mail.gmail.com>
	<f826636f0904030603v46797bf8x382795167fd9b01e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 09:52:39 +1100
Message-ID: <4f045a880904031552x6e593daeo9c213a714a7c2323@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin <martint20@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: 0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 1
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:  I guess I was just unlucky,
	William initially closed the
	3RR reports as no-vio, Offliner presented additional evidence after and
	William changed his decision. My mistake was not providing meaningful
	edit comments, hence the reason William had the impression it was just a
	regular squabble. Offliner then was pushing William (see his talk) with
	additional evidence on Colchicum. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (0.1 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	1.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] WMConnolly blocked Martin
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-Archive: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/private/folks>
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: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: 1.4
X-Spam_score_int: 14
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:  I guess I was just unlucky, William initially closed the
	3RR reports as no-vio, Offliner presented additional evidence after and
	William changed his decision. My mistake was not providing meaningful
	edit comments, hence the reason William had the impression it was just a
	regular squabble. Offliner then was pushing William (see his talk) with
	additional evidence on Colchicum. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (1.4 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	0.0 BAYES_50               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60%
	[score: 0.4884]
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	-0.3 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

I guess I was just unlucky, William initially closed the 3RR reports
as no-vio, Offliner presented additional evidence after and William
changed his decision. My mistake was not providing meaningful edit
comments, hence the reason William had the impression it was just a
regular squabble. Offliner then was pushing William (see his talk)
with additional evidence on Colchicum.

I wrote William a long email yesterday detailing the history of the
conflicts here and how some Wikipedians were POV pushing the Backman
line, that anonymous IP, Russavia, Offliner, Petri Krohn on one side
and Digwuren, Colchicum and my self on the other. William thought it
was a simple squabble, but now he understands what is really going on
now, that is why he declined to block Colchicum after Offliner
presented additional evidence and semi protected the Johan Backman
article.


Martin

On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am sorry for the whole event. In fact, I only commented on your talk page
> later, after William unblocked you, in an attempt to do something to clear
> your record. I was trying to bring his attention to look over more
> carefully, hoping that he wouldn't like to know he was used as a tool to
> throw mud at you.
>
> I don't know what would be the best next strategy. If none of you had any
> unpleasant experience with William, then I would suggest we all try to talk
> him nicely into looking at the articles, and we should all behave very nice
> when editting there, but a little bit provocative, only enough that
> Offliner, Russavia, the anon (possibly Baeckman) and/or PetriKrohn react in
> a bad behaved fashion.
>
> When this happens, Martin can step up and say to William: there are two ways
> to respond to such edits: 1) give up editting the article and let it be owed
> by the offender, or 2) revert with the risk of getting 3RR reported and mud
> stuck at you. And then we all can step up and say that it is abnormal to be
> put in front of such an alternative, and that William should do something to
> avoid in the future such dilema-situations.
> If this is too complicate, then at least I could help do some reverts/edits
> in these articles at times. Now that I have been involved a little bit, it
> won't look strange if I get more interested in the future.
>
> Dorin
> 2009/4/3 Martin <martint20@gmail.com>
>>
>> I've just been unblocked early.
>>
>> Thanks to Piotr, Biruitorul and Dorin for your comments on my talk
>> page, it evidently convinced William to lift my block.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Martin
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikipedia statistics discussion list
>> folks@wikipedometer.net
>> http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia statistics discussion list
> folks@wikipedometer.net
> http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
>
>

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

