X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Fri Jun 12 11:44:15 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f826636f0906120204y1fba64bagc900122aabaad9c1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <292063.51782.qm@web32802.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<f826636f0906111553l77c2fa8i4498ee714154408b@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0906120025q5ffaecacvb348ec9533a8ef81@mail.gmail.com>
	<f826636f0906120204y1fba64bagc900122aabaad9c1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:43:54 +0300
Message-ID: <929ed1ec0906120243w435eb442p604279561d019f1@mail.gmail.com>
From: Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: 0.4
X-Spam_score_int: 4
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, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:04, Dorin Cheptea
	<dorin.cheptea@gmail.com>wrote: > That's unfortunately so. But we knew
	this. So we should act accordingly. We > should keep a list of people
	that practice that. That list will come in > handy one day. For example
	I and the rest here will know how to approach Vicenarian. > You have
	sacrifized yourself, don't let that be in vain. Let it at least be >
	info for the rest of us (incl. those who will join in the future). >
	[...] Content analysis details:   (0.4 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
	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=0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no 
	version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] blocked
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="===============2853382704861911968=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: 0.4
X-Spam_score_int: 4
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, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:04, Dorin Cheptea
	<dorin.cheptea@gmail.com>wrote: > That's unfortunately so. But we knew
	this. So we should act accordingly. We > should keep a list of people
	that practice that. That list will come in > handy one day. For example
	I and the rest here will know how to approach Vicenarian. > You have
	sacrifized yourself, don't let that be in vain. Let it at least be >
	info for the rest of us (incl. those who will join in the future). >
	[...] 
	Content analysis details:   (0.4 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
	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

--===============2853382704861911968==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c92457f556e7046c238b42

--001636c92457f556e7046c238b42
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:04, Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com>wrote:

> That's unfortunately so. But we knew this. So we should act accordingly. We
> should keep a list of people that practice that. That list will come in
> handy one day. For example I and the rest here will know how to approach Vicenarian.
> You have sacrifized yourself, don't let that be in vain. Let it at least be
> info for the rest of us (incl. those who will join in the future).
>

Actually, it might be useful to point out wrongful CSD taggings by him
elsewhere.  And a few other people who do such things, so as to appear
principled.  We can't probably enforce the principle consistently all over
Wikipedia, but if we decide to go for it, we can make hit-and-run deletion
tagging costly in a small section of Wikipedia -- just enough to deal with
single people.

If you show too much dignity in face of such persons, they are angry at you.
> Showing lack of dignity is also excluded. So the only way out IMHO is to
> show them ignorance. "Ah! That is what you meant! Why didn't you say so?! I
> *felt* I forgot something. Oh, that's detail, no matter. How about
> this...?" and immediately change the topic of discussion to something
> requiring to actually do serious work. They will leave you in peace, because
> they got what they wanted and would not steak around to get loaded with some
> job to do.
>

Hm.  This appears to be a good point.  Thoroughly counterintuitive, but
matches the evidence.

I wouldn't be so sure.  PasswordUsername's clumsy attempts to connect these
>>> affairs will probably be useful at a future date to demonstrate his
>>> battleground mentality.
>>>
>>
> Short-term, he did.
>

Check out the comparative threads at AN/I.  Once we've gotten AE done with
Shotlandiya, Peters can lift his thread -- together with the numerous diffs
-- to AE, as recommended by Sandstein.  PasswordUsername has nothing that
can be used at AE; he's back in square one.

He certainly made an attempt, but I don't see anything that he gained.  He
lost a chance to attack Sander, however, which is a good thing.

Simultaneously we should portray you as a person who only does mistakes
> because of forgetting something or because of ignorance or not understanding
> what is wanted from you. In short, lack of battleground mentality.
>

I'm considering account replacement.  Block log is like underwear: it should
be kept clean.

We should all repeat out loud there that you do not have battleground
> mentality (and if really necessary criticize you for something minor, like
> using or not using British English) and he has battleground mentality until
> it sticks on all walls.
>

I use British English.  I even use it in articles that are written in
American English; a clear violation of the appropriate policy.  Accordingly,
viable target for criticism.

But I think that if I change account, I'll use American English instead.
 It's counterintuitive, but Europeans writing American English are less
conspicuous on Wikipedia; plus, it will (slightly) hamper textual analysis.
 I'm also planning to do a number of other spelling and wording quirks.
 Perhaps I can write a tool for Dwiki to do pre-specified quirks
automatically, so Molobo can return, too.

We should make this steak to PU's reputation. And generalizing we can try
>> sticking it to his entire team.
>>
>
Piotrus, would you consider issuing an outing block to PU if requested?  I
think that the appropriate on-wiki chain should involve Biophys making a
passing comment to Dorin, Tymek or Sander, who would then request Piotrus to
investigate.  Piotrus is not involved in any of this, nor does he have
history with the current incarnation of PasswordUsername; and PU does not
have a habit of editing Polish articles.  There's a risk that Deacon might
get involved if he thought it's about the Polish cabal, so somebody not
identifiably connected with it would probably be preferable.

It does not matter if the block is later removed.  The only consistently
referred record of reputation on Wikipedia is the block log, so it might
even be beneficial to first issue a block, clearly mentioning WP:OUTing in
the block summary, then tweak it, then, after discussion with the user lift
it before expiration with a summary saying something like "PasswordUsername
regrets; the  block is provisionally lifted".  That's three block log
entries for price of one.  Plus, if Piotrus lifts the block himself, even
Deacon won't be able to claim that the block demonstrated some sort of
anti-PU bias.

In the yesterday's case, it should have been enough that one of us confirmed
> the article is all right. So, IMHO, we should make this a universal rule
> whenever one of us creates new articles. It's a good habit that can save us
> some potential trouble.
>

Good idea.  How should we implement it?

-- 
Andres Soolo

--001636c92457f556e7046c238b42
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:04, Dorin Cheptea <sp=
an dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:dorin.cheptea@gmail.com">dorin.cheptea=
@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;">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>That&#39;s unfortunately so. But we knew th=
is. So we should act accordingly. We should keep a list of people that prac=
tice that. That list will come in handy one day. For example I and the rest=
 here will know how to approach=C2=A0<span style=3D"border-collapse:collaps=
e">Vicenarian. You have sacrifized yourself, don&#39;t let that be in vain.=
 Let it at least be info for the rest of us (incl. those who will join in t=
he future).</span></div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Actually, it might be useful to poin=
t out wrongful CSD taggings by him elsewhere. =C2=A0And a few other people =
who do such things, so as to appear principled. =C2=A0We can&#39;t probably=
 enforce the principle consistently all over Wikipedia, but if we decide to=
 go for it, we can make hit-and-run deletion tagging costly in a small sect=
ion of Wikipedia -- just enough to deal with single people.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex=
;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><=
div>If you show too much dignity in face of such persons, they are angry at=
 you. Showing lack of dignity is also excluded. So the only way out IMHO is=
 to show them ignorance. &quot;Ah! That is what you meant! Why didn&#39;t y=
ou say so?! I <i>felt</i> I forgot something. Oh, that&#39;s detail, no mat=
ter. How about this...?&quot; and immediately change the topic of discussio=
n to something requiring to actually do serious work. They will leave you i=
n peace, because they got what they wanted and would not steak around to ge=
t loaded with some job to do.</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Hm. =C2=A0This appears to be a good =
point. =C2=A0Thoroughly counterintuitive, but matches the evidence.</div><d=
iv><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;b=
order-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div></div><div class=3D"im">
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div><blockquote =
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid=
;padding-left:1ex">
<div>I wouldn&#39;t be so sure. =C2=A0PasswordUsername&#39;s clumsy attempt=
s to connect these affairs will probably be useful at a future date to demo=
nstrate his battleground mentality.<br></div></blockquote></div>

<div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Short-term, he did.=
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Check out the comparative thre=
ads at AN/I. =C2=A0Once we&#39;ve gotten AE done with Shotlandiya, Peters c=
an lift his thread -- together with the numerous diffs -- to AE, as recomme=
nded by Sandstein. =C2=A0PasswordUsername has nothing that can be used at A=
E; he&#39;s back in square one.</div>
<div><br></div><div>He certainly made an attempt, but I don&#39;t see anyth=
ing that he gained. =C2=A0He lost a chance to attack Sander, however, which=
 is a good thing.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" sty=
le=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>Simultaneously we should portray you as a p=
erson who only does mistakes because of forgetting something or because of =
ignorance or not understanding what is wanted from you. In short, lack of b=
attleground mentality.</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m considering account replacem=
ent. =C2=A0Block log is like underwear: it should be kept clean.</div><div>=
<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bord=
er-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div></div>
<div>We should all repeat out loud there that you do not have battleground =
mentality (and if really necessary criticize you for something minor, like =
using or not using British English) and he has battleground mentality until=
 it sticks on all walls.</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I use British English. =C2=A0I even =
use it in articles that are written in American English; a clear violation =
of the appropriate policy. =C2=A0Accordingly, viable target for criticism.<=
/div><div>
<br></div><div>But I think that if I change account, I&#39;ll use American =
English instead. =C2=A0It&#39;s counterintuitive, but Europeans writing Ame=
rican English are less conspicuous on Wikipedia; plus, it will (slightly) h=
amper textual analysis. =C2=A0I&#39;m also planning to do a number of other=
 spelling and wording quirks. =C2=A0Perhaps I can write a tool for Dwiki to=
 do pre-specified quirks automatically, so Molobo can return, too.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex=
;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><=
div class=3D"im"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8=
ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>We should make this steak to PU&#39;s reput=
ation. And generalizing we can try sticking it to his entire team.=C2=A0</d=
iv></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Piotrus,=
 would you consider issuing an outing block to PU if requested? =C2=A0I thi=
nk that the appropriate on-wiki chain should involve Biophys making a passi=
ng comment to Dorin, Tymek or Sander, who would then request Piotrus to inv=
estigate. =C2=A0Piotrus is not involved in any of this, nor does he have hi=
story with the current incarnation of PasswordUsername; and PU does not hav=
e a habit of editing Polish articles. =C2=A0There&#39;s a risk that Deacon =
might get involved if he thought it&#39;s about the Polish cabal, so somebo=
dy not identifiably connected with it would probably be preferable.</div>
<div><br></div><div>It does not matter if the block is later removed. =C2=
=A0The only consistently referred record of reputation on Wikipedia is the =
block log, so it might even be beneficial to first issue a block, clearly m=
entioning WP:OUTing in the block summary, then tweak it, then, after discus=
sion with the user lift it before expiration with a summary saying somethin=
g like &quot;PasswordUsername regrets; the =C2=A0block is provisionally lif=
ted&quot;. =C2=A0That&#39;s three block log entries for price of one. =C2=
=A0Plus, if Piotrus lifts the block himself, even Deacon won&#39;t be able =
to claim that the block demonstrated some sort of anti-PU bias.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex=
;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><=
div>In the yesterday&#39;s case, it should have been enough that one of us =
confirmed the article is all right. So, IMHO, we should make this a univers=
al rule whenever one of us creates new articles. It&#39;s a good habit that=
 can save us some potential trouble.</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Good idea. =C2=A0How should we imple=
ment it?</div><div><br></div></div>-- <br>Andres Soolo<br>

--001636c92457f556e7046c238b42--


--===============2853382704861911968==
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

--===============2853382704861911968==--


