X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Mon Jun 15 00:43:40 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c3b2b3db0906140952l766ad448y365a731b785493ec@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ceb.5baec31f.376677e2@aol.com>
	<c3b2b3db0906140952l766ad448y365a731b785493ec@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:43:27 +1000
Message-ID: <4f045a880906141543n3273eb90x82cd1150e7ee5935@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin <martint20@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -0.2
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 have to agree with Andrei, it is better to deal with
	these people via AE. RFCs and ArbCom takes up a lot of energy, and
	ArbCom cases can have unpredictable consequences that can back fire on
	us. As Sandstein said, we already had an ArbCom case, now it is time for
	enforcement. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.2 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
	0.7 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=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] Further strategy on pro-Soviet cabal
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: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.2
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 have to agree with Andrei, it is better to deal with
	these people via AE. RFCs and ArbCom takes up a lot of energy, and
	ArbCom cases can have unpredictable consequences that can back fire on
	us. As Sandstein said, we already had an ArbCom case, now it is time for
	enforcement. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.2 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
	0.7 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

I have to agree with Andrei, it is better to deal with these people
via AE. RFCs and ArbCom takes up a lot of energy, and ArbCom cases can
have unpredictable consequences that can back fire on us. As Sandstein
said, we already had an ArbCom case, now it is time for enforcement.

So the key is to be absolutely clean with our own edit comments and
strictly adhere to 2 reverts per day. Be patient and their own
behaviour will condemn them.

The 72 hour block on PU is perfect. I propose just to wait and when PU
attempts more disruption, file an AE report citing this 72 hour block
for similar activity.

Martin

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 2:52 AM, Andrei Dombay<wikibiophys@gmail.com> wrote:
> An easier strategy would be to bring R, O and PU with diffs about their edit
> warring and uncivil comments to AE and make Sandtsein deal with them (only R
> is currently noted in the DU case list). But they will do precisely the same
> with you... If you go to arbitration, I would support you with some diffs.
>
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 11:57 AM, <PetersJV@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> In a message dated 6/14/2009 9:40:16 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
>> sander.sade@gmail.com writes:
>>
>> pro-Soviet cabal, Russavia, PasswordUsername, Offliner, Shotlandyia and
>> FeelSunny.
>>
>> Offliner edits elsewhere, Shotlandiya not much and has had their hands
>> slapped; I haven't run across FeelSunny enough to comment.
>>
>> I think the current Estonian children molestation content incident may
>> be an opportunity to carve off PasswordUsername and Russavia on their own as
>> their actions are clearly in bad faith and incendiary--far more than just
>> pushing a POV. /p
>> ________________________________
>> Refinance and lower payments online with Ditech. Visit www.ditech.com
>> Today!
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

