X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Fri Feb  6 17:15:35 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6c9a05ec0902060407u3a10e23tb29caea71d749963@mail.gmail.com>
References: <498B34BB.8030309@post.pl>
	<6c9a05ec0902060407u3a10e23tb29caea71d749963@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 18:15:25 +0200
Message-ID: <f826636f0902060815l52f3be7l46d6c58da122da12@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: 0.8
X-Spam_score_int: 8
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:  Piotrus, You have now all 4 arbitrators that commented
	so far, in your favour, so the issue should settle all right. There is
	only one thing they softly critisize: you should not have closed a 3RR
	report on an article you have 300+ edits. This is, for example, more
	than the number of edits on my top article, so perhaps you shouldn't
	have there, but instead you should have asked an admin among us to do
	it. Which brings me to the main question: what other admins besides you
	are here? We should do something about it. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (0.8 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	0.8 HTML_00_10             BODY: Message is 0% to 10% HTML
	-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
	0.9 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=2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no 
	version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] An AE thread involving me
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: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3909797153055381785=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: 2.1
X-Spam_score_int: 21
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:  Piotrus, You have now all 4 arbitrators that commented
	so far, in your favour, so the issue should settle all right. There is
	only one thing they softly critisize: you should not have closed a 3RR
	report on an article you have 300+ edits. This is, for example, more
	than the number of edits on my top article, so perhaps you shouldn't
	have there, but instead you should have asked an admin among us to do
	it. Which brings me to the main question: what other admins besides you
	are here? We should do something about it. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (2.1 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	0.8 HTML_00_10             BODY: Message is 0% to 10% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	0.0 BAYES_50               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60%
	[score: 0.5000]
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	-0.4 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============3909797153055381785==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d9a13b2447b504624254fd

--0016e6d9a13b2447b504624254fd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Piotrus,

You have now all 4 arbitrators that commented so far, in your favour, so the
issue should settle all right. There is only one thing they softly
critisize: you should not have closed a 3RR report on an article you have
300+ edits. This is, for example, more than the number of edits on my top
article, so perhaps you shouldn't have there, but instead you should have
asked an admin among us to do it. Which brings me to the main question: what
other admins besides you are here? We should do something about it.

Also, try in your replies to mention negatively Deacon rather than the whole
mixture of Deacon and Lithuanians. You should show at least formally
eagerness to reach out to Lithuanians. I do not imagine you getting on
friendly terms with Deacon, but in some future I think you should colaborate
well with at least one-two Lithuanians. Look for example at *Novickas* 's
reply: I read into it quite a degree of frustration to be associated to the
Soviet team. Don't get me wrong: M.K. 's actions that I saw (as few as I had
the pacience to read) were clearly in bad faith, and I can imagine other
Lithuanians are provoked by M.K.'s involvement to defend a "Lithuanian side
of the story". This is pure diplomacy. We all should try to single out M.K.
and Deacon, and not mention Lithuanians in general even when they are
factually wrong. So that other Lithuanians start feeling the pressure to
reach out to us and to dissociate from M.K. (and Deacon). I am not saying to
invite Lithuanians in the forseeable future, but simply to drive a wedge
between the most radical and the abstract Lithuanian user. The abstract
Lithuanian user should feel that the origin of the problems lies in their
ranks (M.K. and association with team USSR). Associations built on ethnic
groups are very strong. The success of Piotrus2 case was in part based on
the fact that we stressed that there is a Soviet lobby (we never said
Russian, moreover we had a couple Russians on our side). IMHO, the same
strategy should work with Lithuanians. You cannot expect the average modern
Russian be very anti-Soviet, but you can expects a sizable fraction (20%?)
to be. I wouldn't worry about Germans and Jews: you will never have all or
even most of them against you. (Plus you and we all have a lot friends among
Germans and Jews.) The most serious danger, IMHO, lies strangely in the
smallest group: Lithuanian. Even when you are 100% right and they are 100%
wrong, do whatever possible not to say (even if non-explicitely) something
against them as a group.

Dorin

--0016e6d9a13b2447b504624254fd
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div>Piotrus,</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>You have now all 4&nbsp;arbitrators that commented so far, in your fav=
our, so the issue should settle all right. There is only one thing they sof=
tly critisize: you should not have&nbsp;closed&nbsp;a 3RR&nbsp;report on an=
 article you have 300+ edits. This is, for example,&nbsp;more than the numb=
er of edits on my top article, so perhaps you shouldn&#39;t have there, but=
 instead you should have asked an admin among us to do it. Which brings me =
to the main question: what other admins besides you are here? We should do =
something about it.</div>

<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Also, try in your replies to mention negatively Deacon rather than the=
 whole mixture of Deacon and Lithuanians. You should show at least formally=
 eagerness to reach out to Lithuanians. I do not imagine you getting on fri=
endly terms with Deacon, but in some future I think you should colaborate w=
ell with at least one-two Lithuanians. Look for example&nbsp;at <u><font co=
lor=3D"#0000ff">Novickas</font></u>&nbsp;&#39;s reply: I&nbsp;read into it =
quite a degree of frustration to be associated to the Soviet team. Don&#39;=
t get&nbsp;me wrong: M.K. &#39;s actions that I saw (as few as I had the pa=
cience to read)&nbsp;were clearly in bad faith, and I can imagine other Lit=
huanians are provoked by M.K.&#39;s involvement to&nbsp;defend a &quot;Lith=
uanian side of the story&quot;. This is pure diplomacy. We all should try t=
o single out M.K. and Deacon, and not mention Lithuanians in general even&n=
bsp;when they&nbsp;are factually wrong. So that other Lithuanians start fee=
ling the pressure&nbsp;to reach out to us and to dissociate from M.K. (and =
Deacon). I am not saying to invite Lithuanians in the forseeable future, bu=
t simply to drive a wedge between the most radical and the abstract Lithuan=
ian user. The abstract Lithuanian user should feel that the origin of the p=
roblems lies in their ranks (M.K. and association with team USSR). Associat=
ions built on ethnic groups are very strong. The success of Piotrus2 case w=
as in part based on the fact that we stressed that there is a Soviet lobby =
(we never said Russian,&nbsp;moreover we had a couple Russians on our side)=
. IMHO, the same strategy should work with Lithuanians. You cannot expect t=
he average modern Russian be very anti-Soviet, but you can expects a sizabl=
e fraction (20%?) to be. I wouldn&#39;t worry about Germans and Jews: you w=
ill never have all or even most of them against you. (Plus you and we all&n=
bsp;have a lot&nbsp;friends among Germans and Jews.)&nbsp;The most serious =
danger, IMHO,&nbsp;lies strangely in the smallest group: Lithuanian. Even w=
hen you are 100% right and they are 100% wrong, do whatever possible not to=
 say (even if non-explicitely) something against them as a group.</div>

<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Dorin</div>

--0016e6d9a13b2447b504624254fd--


--===============3909797153055381785==
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

--===============3909797153055381785==--


