X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Fri Jul  3 06:06:16 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
Message-ID: <27384.90058.qm@web32808.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
X-YMail-OSG: kqYU9h4VM1l9MSYfzENQdXsdT1KoO.PW3ASE8FqMM7QZfS1wgYYveq7ncPLzu6rUIh_cS8CmZ4NX4pAdS4RmxvjZVG6nn2NDYqEMsYGUVlnYoJVH.5MoQvcLp3VM8OHp_1tRnD7xHWRW0ikNV_iu8YapRJnBFf57OF6I64f435JCOcyu5jhJe_TIR4UnVGwX0aBRieXT9i1XDQ.cEXg1NmXzFMLzAS.AYvYbV2a6CvEh9Gxb4b7.F2WSCESY4vPVcknLWFhghw1.WdGoa5FN9mumZIWA2XiS32hzOj5I4sBJfEJ8ZP9o3Ki_81yLEBcSsli5HqjPAlaGuyugTJ7EEls7DUSttydG7A--
X-Mailer: YahooMailClassic/5.4.17 YahooMailWebService/0.7.289.15
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 21:06:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: piotr micula <basiaipiotr@yahoo.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
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:  If the guys are OK with it, prepare the draft, and I
	will copy/paste it as Tymek. --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Andrei Dombay
	<wikibiophys@gmail.com> wrote: From: Andrei Dombay
	<wikibiophys@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [WPM] Appeal at AE (was: Let's
	give Thatcher some breathing space) To: "Wikipedia statistics"
	<folks@wikipedometer.net> Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 1:47 PM [...] 
	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]
	0.4 HTML_30_40             BODY: Message is 30% to 40% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	0.2 DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE RBL: Envelope sender in abuse.rfc-ignorant.org
	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-deb (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE 
	autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] Appeal at AE (was: Let's give Thatcher some breathing
	space)
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="===============8353093632424080985=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
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:  If the guys are OK with it, prepare the draft, and I
	will copy/paste it as Tymek. --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Andrei Dombay
	<wikibiophys@gmail.com> wrote: From: Andrei Dombay
	<wikibiophys@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [WPM] Appeal at AE (was: Let's give
	Thatcher some breathing space) To: "Wikipedia statistics"
	<folks@wikipedometer.net> Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 1:47 PM [...] 
	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]
	0.4 HTML_30_40             BODY: Message is 30% to 40% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	0.2 DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE     RBL: Envelope sender in abuse.rfc-ignorant.org
	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


--===============8353093632424080985==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-110856144-1246593960=:90058"


--0-110856144-1246593960=:90058
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

If the guys are OK with it, prepare the draft, and I will copy/paste it as =
Tymek.=20
=A0

--- On Thu, 7/2/09, Andrei Dombay <wikibiophys@gmail.com> wrote:


From: Andrei Dombay <wikibiophys@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WPM] Appeal at AE (was: Let's give Thatcher some breathing sp=
ace)
To: "Wikipedia statistics" <folks@wikipedometer.net>
Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 1:47 PM


I can prepare a short draft of the clarification request if there are no ob=
jections. Piotrus and Radek, should we do it?=20


On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 1:58 PM, piotr micula <basiaipiotr@yahoo.com> wrote:






I can file whatever you need, but please write here whatever is necessary, =
and I will paste it. I want to help you guys, and I really do not have time=
 to search all diffs, to keep all these lists and stuff. So whatever you ne=
ed, just write here. You guys know best what is going on in all these confl=
icts and arbitrations.
=A0
Tymek

--- On Thu, 7/2/09, Andrei Dombay <wikibiophys@gmail.com> wrote:


From: Andrei Dombay <wikibiophys@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WPM] Appeal at AE (was: Let's give Thatcher some breathing sp=
ace)
To: "Wikipedia statistics" <folks@wikipedometer.net>
Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 7:36 AM





Here it is:=20
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Digwuren#Di=
scretionary_sanctions

"an administrator will be considered "uninvolved" if he or she is not engag=
ed in a current, direct, personal conflict on the topic with the user recei=
ving sanctions."

You, Deacon, or Alex certainly qualify as such.

There is a difference between an appeal (challenging an administrative sanc=
tion), and request for clarification - something to facilitate work of admi=
nistrators at AE.=A0 I could file it, but this=A0 should be better done by =
someone else.=20



On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Piotr Konieczny <piokon@post.pl> wrote:


Andrei Dombay wrote:
> I suggest that someone should =A0file a clarification request to ArbCom t=
o
> clarify several confusing issues that already caused problems at AE
> (let's help AE administrators and user . The questions:
>
> (1) Uninvolved administrators. According to current definition, people
> like Piotrus, Alex_Bakharev and Deacon would certainly qualify. Please
> reconfirm this or change the definition of uninvolved administrators. If
> these admins do not qualify, one could dispute Jehochman and some others
> as well.

What definition? I can't find one, and that's a big part of the problem.
Currently, being involved or not depends on the PERCEPTION of the person
making the comment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests#Definition=
_of_an_.28un.29involved_admin


> (2) Warnings. Should the users receive an official warning (logged in
> the case), then be given some time to improve, and sanctioned if that
> does not happen, as stipulated in the Arbcom decision? =A0This issue was
> first raised by Grandmestein at AE (see his appeal), and now there is a
> confusion about Thatcher's sanctions (I asked him a couple of questions
> at talk page to clarify his opinion).

Thathcher first warned editors... than restricted them further
~hours/day later - this seems like gaming the system. And he never
warned Radek - actually Radek is still not mentions in the DIGWUREN log
for warned people...


> (3) Edit warring. If someone limit himself to 1RR per article per day
> AND participate in discussion, =A0can he be safe from sanctions for "edit
> warring"? Last sanctions by T. show that no one is safe. Let's place
> some reasonable safeguards.

Indeed. Once we start restricting people that revert 3 times in two
weeks, this is a free season for anyone. This is why 3RR rules was
created; and edit warring should be clearly defined as well. Leaving it
to arbitrary admin's decisions creates chaos and unfair treatment of
editors depending on what admins looks at them and in what mood is he
that day...


> (4) Tag-teams mentioned by T in his official 1RR restriction message.
> Should the idea of collective responsibility ever be used by
> administrators? (several users treayed as one, as Deacon said). The
> tag-team is a controversial concept, which was not supported by ArbCom
> in the last EE case. A group of editors may indeed revert someone who
> fights against =A0consensus. A tag-team?

Exactly. EE Arbcom specifically noted that there is no conclusive
evidence about existence of those tag teams. So I think it is pretty
clear that admins should not impose sanctions "per sides", and thus T
went against the ArbCom wisdom / intents. Collective responsibility =3D
collateral damage.



--



Piotr Konieczny

"The problem about Wikipedia is, that it just works in reality, not in
theory."

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


-----Inline Attachment Follows-----



_______________________________________________
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



-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
=0A=0A=0A      
--0-110856144-1246593960=:90058
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<table cellspacing=3D"0" cellpadding=3D"0" border=3D"0" ><tr><td valign=3D"=
top" style=3D"font: inherit;"><DIV>If the guys are OK with it, prepare the =
draft, and I will copy/paste it as Tymek. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><BR>--- On <B>Thu, 7/2/09, Andrei Dombay <I>&lt;wikibiophys@gmail.com&=
gt;</I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(=
16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: Andrei Dombay &lt;wikibiophys@gmail.com&gt;=
<BR>Subject: Re: [WPM] Appeal at AE (was: Let's give Thatcher some breathin=
g space)<BR>To: "Wikipedia statistics" &lt;folks@wikipedometer.net&gt;<BR>D=
ate: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 1:47 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV id=3Dyiv1900450102>I can prepare a short draft of the clarification re=
quest if there are no objections. Piotrus and Radek, should we do it? <BR><=
BR>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_quote>On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 1:58 PM, piotr micula <SPAN=
 dir=3Dltr>&lt;<A href=3D"http://us.mc328.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=3Dba=
siaipiotr@yahoo.com" target=3D_blank rel=3Dnofollow ymailto=3D"mailto:basia=
ipiotr@yahoo.com">basiaipiotr@yahoo.com</A>&gt;</SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dgmail_quote style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt=
 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
<TABLE cellSpacing=3D0 cellPadding=3D0 border=3D0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: inherit; font-size-adjust: inherit; font-stretch:=
 inherit" vAlign=3Dtop>
<DIV>I can file whatever you need, but please write here whatever is necess=
ary, and I will paste it. I want to help you guys, and I really do not have=
 time to search all diffs, to keep all these lists and stuff. So whatever y=
ou need, just write here. You guys know best what is going on in all these =
conflicts and arbitrations.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Tymek<BR><BR>--- On <B>Thu, 7/2/09, Andrei Dombay <I>&lt;<A href=3D"ht=
tp://us.mc328.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=3Dwikibiophys@gmail.com" target=
=3D_blank rel=3Dnofollow ymailto=3D"mailto:wikibiophys@gmail.com">wikibioph=
ys@gmail.com</A>&gt;</I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(=
16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: Andrei Dombay &lt;<A href=3D"http://us.mc32=
8.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=3Dwikibiophys@gmail.com" target=3D_blank rel=
=3Dnofollow ymailto=3D"mailto:wikibiophys@gmail.com">wikibiophys@gmail.com<=
/A>&gt;<BR>Subject: Re: [WPM] Appeal at AE (was: Let's give Thatcher some b=
reathing space)<BR>To: "Wikipedia statistics" &lt;<A href=3D"http://us.mc32=
8.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=3Dfolks@wikipedometer.net" target=3D_blank r=
el=3Dnofollow ymailto=3D"mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net">folks@wikipedomete=
r.net</A>&gt;<BR>Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 7:36 AM
<DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=3Dh5><BR><BR>
<DIV>Here it is: <BR><A href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requ=
ests_for_arbitration/Digwuren#Discretionary_sanctions" target=3D_blank rel=
=3Dnofollow>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration=
/Digwuren#Discretionary_sanctions</A><BR><BR>"an administrator will be cons=
idered "uninvolved" if he or she is not engaged in a current, direct, perso=
nal conflict on the topic with the user receiving sanctions."<BR><BR>You, D=
eacon, or Alex certainly qualify as such.<BR><BR>There is a difference betw=
een an appeal (challenging an administrative sanction), and request for cla=
rification - something to facilitate work of administrators at AE.&nbsp; I =
could file it, but this&nbsp; should be better done by someone else. <BR><B=
R><BR>
<DIV class=3Dgmail_quote>On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Piotr Konieczny <=
SPAN dir=3Dltr>&lt;piokon@post.pl&gt;</SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dgmail_quote style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt=
 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
<DIV>Andrei Dombay wrote:<BR>&gt; I suggest that someone should &nbsp;file =
a clarification request to ArbCom to<BR>&gt; clarify several confusing issu=
es that already caused problems at AE<BR>&gt; (let's help AE administrators=
 and user . The questions:<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt; (1) Uninvolved administrators. A=
ccording to current definition, people<BR>&gt; like Piotrus, Alex_Bakharev =
and Deacon would certainly qualify. Please<BR>&gt; reconfirm this or change=
 the definition of uninvolved administrators. If<BR>&gt; these admins do no=
t qualify, one could dispute Jehochman and some others<BR>&gt; as well.<BR>=
<BR></DIV>What definition? I can't find one, and that's a big part of the p=
roblem.<BR>Currently, being involved or not depends on the PERCEPTION of th=
e person<BR>making the comment.<BR><A href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/=
Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests#Definition_of_an_.28un.29involved_admin=
" target=3D_blank
 rel=3Dnofollow>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Req=
uests#Definition_of_an_.28un.29involved_admin</A><BR>
<DIV><BR>&gt; (2) Warnings. Should the users receive an official warning (l=
ogged in<BR>&gt; the case), then be given some time to improve, and sanctio=
ned if that<BR>&gt; does not happen, as stipulated in the Arbcom decision? =
&nbsp;This issue was<BR>&gt; first raised by Grandmestein at AE (see his ap=
peal), and now there is a<BR>&gt; confusion about Thatcher's sanctions (I a=
sked him a couple of questions<BR>&gt; at talk page to clarify his opinion)=
.<BR><BR></DIV>Thathcher first warned editors... than restricted them furth=
er<BR>~hours/day later - this seems like gaming the system. And he never<BR=
>warned Radek - actually Radek is still not mentions in the DIGWUREN log<BR=
>for warned people...<BR>
<DIV><BR>&gt; (3) Edit warring. If someone limit himself to 1RR per article=
 per day<BR>&gt; AND participate in discussion, &nbsp;can he be safe from s=
anctions for "edit<BR>&gt; warring"? Last sanctions by T. show that no one =
is safe. Let's place<BR>&gt; some reasonable safeguards.<BR><BR></DIV>Indee=
d. Once we start restricting people that revert 3 times in two<BR>weeks, th=
is is a free season for anyone. This is why 3RR rules was<BR>created; and e=
dit warring should be clearly defined as well. Leaving it<BR>to arbitrary a=
dmin's decisions creates chaos and unfair treatment of<BR>editors depending=
 on what admins looks at them and in what mood is he<BR>that day...<BR>
<DIV><BR>&gt; (4) Tag-teams mentioned by T in his official 1RR restriction =
message.<BR>&gt; Should the idea of collective responsibility ever be used =
by<BR>&gt; administrators? (several users treayed as one, as Deacon said). =
The<BR>&gt; tag-team is a controversial concept, which was not supported by=
 ArbCom<BR>&gt; in the last EE case. A group of editors may indeed revert s=
omeone who<BR>&gt; fights against &nbsp;consensus. A tag-team?<BR><BR></DIV=
>Exactly. EE Arbcom specifically noted that there is no conclusive<BR>evide=
nce about existence of those tag teams. So I think it is pretty<BR>clear th=
at admins should not impose sanctions "per sides", and thus T<BR>went again=
st the ArbCom wisdom / intents. Collective responsibility =3D<BR>collateral=
 damage.<BR><FONT color=3D#888888><BR><BR><BR>--<BR></FONT>
<DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Piotr Konieczny<BR><BR>"The problem about Wikipedia is, that it just w=
orks in reality, not in<BR>theory."<BR><BR>________________________________=
_______________<BR>Wikipedia statistics discussion list<BR><A href=3D"http:=
//us.mc328.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=3Dfolks@wikipedometer.net" target=
=3D_blank rel=3Dnofollow>folks@wikipedometer.net</A><BR><A href=3D"http://w=
ikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks" target=3D_blank rel=3Dnofo=
llow>http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks</A><BR></DIV><=
/DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV>-----Inline Attachment Fo=
llows-----
<DIV class=3Dim><BR><BR>
<DIV>_______________________________________________<BR>Wikipedia statistic=
s discussion list<BR><A href=3D"http://us.mc328.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?t=
o=3Dfolks@wikipedometer.net" target=3D_blank rel=3Dnofollow>folks@wikipedom=
eter.net</A><BR><A href=3D"http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinf=
o/folks" target=3D_blank rel=3Dnofollow>http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/ma=
ilman/listinfo/folks</A><BR></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></TD></TR></TBODY></TA=
BLE><BR><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>Wikipedia st=
atistics discussion list<BR><A href=3D"http://us.mc328.mail.yahoo.com/mc/co=
mpose?to=3Dfolks@wikipedometer.net" target=3D_blank rel=3Dnofollow ymailto=
=3D"mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net">folks@wikipedometer.net</A><BR><A href=
=3D"http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks" target=3D_blan=
k rel=3Dnofollow>http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks</A=
><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV><BR>-----Inline Attachment Follows---=
--<BR><BR>
<DIV class=3DplainMail>_______________________________________________<BR>W=
ikipedia statistics discussion list<BR><A href=3D"http://us.mc328.mail.yaho=
o.com/mc/compose?to=3Dfolks@wikipedometer.net" ymailto=3D"mailto:folks@wiki=
pedometer.net">folks@wikipedometer.net</A><BR><A href=3D"http://wikipedomet=
er.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks" target=3D_blank>http://wikipedometer=
.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks</A><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></t=
able><br>=0A=0A      
--0-110856144-1246593960=:90058--


--===============8353093632424080985==
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

--===============8353093632424080985==--


