X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Fri Aug  7 15:59:00 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <25890ca0908070643i50e7bd44q47ad633bdef549f9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c51.5461ce37.37acde30@aol.com>
	<25890ca0908070643i50e7bd44q47ad633bdef549f9@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 16:58:52 +0300
Message-ID: <929ed1ec0908070658y33e91406p9f0a131da8e1458c@mail.gmail.com>
From: Digwuren <digwuren@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:  On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 16:43, radek szulga
	<rsszulga@gmail.com> wrote: > Is this legit: > >
	http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Russian_influence_operations_in_Estonia_(2nd_nomination)&curid=23839722&diff=306544812&oldid=306491871
	> > PU is striking out Joklolk's vote because recently Joklolk got
	banned (I > think for sock puppetry) - but he voted before his ban and
	he didn't vote > twice as far as I can tell (I think his sock/master
	was
	ViperNerd) > > I'm not going to push it unless this is a breach of
	policy by PU. [...] 
	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]
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	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,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] AfD Communist genocide
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="===============3127340364251188293=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.3
X-Spam_score_int: -2
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:  On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 16:43, radek szulga
	<rsszulga@gmail.com> wrote: > Is this legit: > >
	http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Russian_influence_operations_in_Estonia_(2nd_nomination)&curid=23839722&diff=306544812&oldid=306491871
	> > PU is striking out Joklolk's vote because recently Joklolk got
	banned (I > think for sock puppetry) - but he voted before his ban and
	he didn't vote > twice as far as I can tell (I think his sock/master was
	ViperNerd) > > I'm not going to push it unless this is a breach of
	policy by PU. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.3 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
	0.6 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============3127340364251188293==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd2458cdffbcb04708da240

--000e0cd2458cdffbcb04708da240
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 16:43, radek szulga <rsszulga@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is this legit:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Russian_influence_operations_in_Estonia_(2nd_nomination)&curid=23839722&diff=306544812&oldid=306491871
>
> PU is striking out Joklolk's vote because recently Joklolk got banned (I
> think for sock puppetry) - but he voted before his ban and he didn't vote
> twice as far as I can tell (I think his sock/master was ViperNerd)
>
> I'm not going to push it unless this is a breach of policy by PU.


It's hairy.  Banning for "being a troll" does not automatically disqualify a
pre-ban vote in eyes of many Wikipedians, but does in eyes of others.
 Striking a vote because its caster "is a troll" is not exactly kosher, but
if it's a banned user, it is not exactly against the policy, either.

On the other hand, if Joklolk was banned because of evading an earlier ban
(which is implicit in the sock puppetry part), then policy says it's
appropriate to delete his vote entirely.  It's noteworthy that PU didn't do
that.

Considering how Wikipedia goes, it's unlikely that this can be construed as
a grave violation by PU.  If necessary, quite a bit of dramu could be spun
around it, but I think this AFD has enough dramu already.  But if you want
to do something about it, you could delete the vote *and* PU's comment --
the first on the theory that it's by a banned user, the second on the theory
that it's moot and/or that it's a personal attack on a banned user.
 Considering how PU seems to think, he might prefer that the stricken vote
be explicit, in the hope that voting "keep" might become associated with
trolling slightly more in the eyes of the closing admin.  If so, there's a
chance PU might get provoked by such deletion -- even though it's firmly
based in solid policy *and* it's possible to reasonably argue that its
immediate goal was reducing the dramu found in this AFD.

-- 
Andres Soolo

--000e0cd2458cdffbcb04708da240
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 16:43, radek szulga <span=
 dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:rsszulga@gmail.com">rsszulga@gmail.com</=
a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0=
 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Is this legit:<br><a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DWi=
kipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Russian_influence_operations_in_Estonia_(2nd_=
nomination)&amp;curid=3D23839722&amp;diff=3D306544812&amp;oldid=3D306491871=
" target=3D"_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DWikipedia:A=
rticles_for_deletion/Russian_influence_operations_in_Estonia_(2nd_nominatio=
n)&amp;curid=3D23839722&amp;diff=3D306544812&amp;oldid=3D306491871</a><br>

<br>PU is striking out Joklolk&#39;s vote because recently Joklolk got bann=
ed (I think for sock puppetry) - but he voted before his ban and he didn&#3=
9;t vote twice as far as I can tell (I think his sock/master was ViperNerd)=
<br>

<br>I&#39;m not going to push it unless this is a breach of policy by PU.</=
blockquote><div><br></div><div>It&#39;s hairy. =C2=A0Banning for &quot;bein=
g a troll&quot; does not automatically disqualify a pre-ban vote in eyes of=
 many Wikipedians, but does in eyes of others. =C2=A0Striking a vote becaus=
e its caster &quot;is a troll&quot; is not exactly kosher, but if it&#39;s =
a banned user, it is not exactly against the policy, either.</div>
<div><br></div><div>On the other hand, if Joklolk was banned because of eva=
ding an earlier ban (which is implicit in the sock puppetry part), then pol=
icy says it&#39;s appropriate to delete his vote entirely. =C2=A0It&#39;s n=
oteworthy that PU didn&#39;t do that.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Considering how Wikipedia goes, it&#39;s unlikely that =
this can be construed as a grave violation by PU. =C2=A0If necessary, quite=
 a bit of dramu could be spun around it, but I think this AFD has enough dr=
amu already. =C2=A0But if you want to do something about it, you could dele=
te the vote *and* PU&#39;s comment -- the first on the theory that it&#39;s=
 by a banned user, the second on the theory that it&#39;s moot and/or that =
it&#39;s a personal attack on a banned user. =C2=A0Considering how PU seems=
 to think, he might prefer that the stricken vote be explicit, in the hope =
that voting &quot;keep&quot; might become associated with trolling slightly=
 more in the eyes of the closing admin. =C2=A0If so, there&#39;s a chance P=
U might get provoked by such deletion -- even though it&#39;s firmly based =
in solid policy *and* it&#39;s possible to reasonably argue that its immedi=
ate goal was reducing the dramu found in this AFD.</div>
<div><br></div></div>-- <br>Andres Soolo<br>

--000e0cd2458cdffbcb04708da240--


--===============3127340364251188293==
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

--===============3127340364251188293==--


