X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Sun Jun 21 22:58:01 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <25890ca0906211336h47a4185eg660716b7591628f3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c39.57b57f3e.376ee266@aol.com>
	<c3b2b3db0906202028s9291ce7webaed4493229aedb@mail.gmail.com>
	<6fb557d70906210719u3ac8b9b3l9f28443cce3dabe2@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A3E7FEE.8070601@post.pl>
	<929ed1ec0906211212p10320e3cwbfc9bb3780e2a5c3@mail.gmail.com>
	<25890ca0906211336h47a4185eg660716b7591628f3@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 23:57:40 +0300
Message-ID: <929ed1ec0906211357t6b784222rbfbdcea08f73c4e3@mail.gmail.com>
From: Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: 0.3
X-Spam_score_int: 3
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 Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 23:36, radek szulga
	<rsszulga@gmail.com> wrote: > Given the latest moving around of
	Piotrus' edits > >
	http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&curid=12936136&diff=297786750&oldid=297786362
	> and Jehochman's statement that "Digwuren is one of the most warned >
	and sanctioned editors on Wikipedia. They do not need any more chances
	>
	to reform. " (which is obviously false - and it betrays his prejudices
	> here) I think it's probably time to start questioning his >
	"uninvolvedness" as well. [...] 
	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]
	0.5 HTML_40_50             BODY: Message is 40% to 50% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.7 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=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no 
	version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] Well, there goes another weekend, the latest AE
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="===============8625756011891947092=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: 0.3
X-Spam_score_int: 3
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 Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 23:36, radek szulga
	<rsszulga@gmail.com> wrote: > Given the latest moving around of Piotrus'
	edits > >
	http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&curid=12936136&diff=297786750&oldid=297786362
	> and Jehochman's statement that "Digwuren is one of the most warned >
	and sanctioned editors on Wikipedia. They do not need any more chances >
	to reform. " (which is obviously false - and it betrays his prejudices >
	here) I think it's probably time to start questioning his >
	"uninvolvedness" as well. [...] 
	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]
	0.5 HTML_40_50             BODY: Message is 40% to 50% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.7 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============8625756011891947092==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d7841d1ec0d8046ce202d5

--0016e6d7841d1ec0d8046ce202d5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 23:36, radek szulga <rsszulga@gmail.com> wrote:

> Given the latest moving around of Piotrus' edits
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&curid=12936136&diff=297786750&oldid=297786362
>  and Jehochman's statement that "Digwuren is one of the most warned
> and sanctioned editors on Wikipedia. They do not need any more chances
> to reform. " (which is obviously false - and it betrays his prejudices
> here) I think it's probably time to start questioning his
> "uninvolvedness" as well.


I have for a long time suspected Jehochman's animosity towards me stemmed
from the conflict between me and Bishonen, but in light of the new epiphany,
this might be more complicated.

Anyway, the traceable arc begins with my voting against his RFA <
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Jehochman&diff=163407652&oldid=163406634>.
 On February 15, Jehochman endorsed William M. Connolley's block of mine <
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=270881310>,being
the only one to do so as can be seen at <
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive514#Request_for_a_review_of_Digwuren.27s_block_by_William_M._Connolley>.
 The block's erroneousness was so obvious that *another* administrator,
PhilKnight, did the block, not William M. Connolley -- it's rather rare on
Wikipedia, as administrators tend to shy away from anything that might look
like "wheel warring", and William M. Connolley subsequently apologised to me
<
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Digwuren/Archive_2&diff=270934457&oldid=270930301
>.

I confronted Jehochman about this appearance of bias <
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jehochman&diff=prev&oldid=271040689>,
and his response <
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jehochman&diff=next&oldid=271040689>
is the paydirt.  He deleted the whole thread soon after <
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jehochman&diff=next&oldid=271117479
>.

-- 
Andres Soolo

--0016e6d7841d1ec0d8046ce202d5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 23:36, radek szulga <spa=
n 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;">
Given the latest moving around of Piotrus&#39; edits<br>
<a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DWikipedia:Arbitratio=
n/Requests/Enforcement&amp;curid=3D12936136&amp;diff=3D297786750&amp;oldid=
=3D297786362" target=3D"_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=
=3DWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&amp;curid=3D12936136&amp;diff=
=3D297786750&amp;oldid=3D297786362</a><br>

=C2=A0and Jehochman&#39;s statement that &quot;Digwuren is one of the most =
warned<br>
and sanctioned editors on Wikipedia. They do not need any more chances<br>
to reform. &quot; (which is obviously false - and it betrays his prejudices=
<br>
here) I think it&#39;s probably time to start questioning his<br>
&quot;uninvolvedness&quot; as well.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I have =
for a long time suspected Jehochman&#39;s animosity towards me stemmed from=
 the conflict between me and Bishonen, but in light of the new epiphany, th=
is might be more complicated.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Anyway, the traceable arc begins with my voting against=
 his RFA &lt;<a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DWikiped=
ia:Requests_for_adminship/Jehochman&amp;diff=3D163407652&amp;oldid=3D163406=
634">http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DWikipedia:Requests_for_adm=
inship/Jehochman&amp;diff=3D163407652&amp;oldid=3D163406634</a>&gt;. =C2=A0=
On February 15, Jehochman endorsed William M. Connolley&#39;s block of mine=
 &lt;<a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DWikipedia:Admin=
istrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&amp;diff=3Dprev&amp;oldid=3D270881310">h=
ttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DWikipedia:Administrators%27_noti=
ceboard/Incidents&amp;diff=3Dprev&amp;oldid=3D270881310</a>&gt;,being the o=
nly one to do so as can be seen at &lt;<a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w=
iki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive514#Request_for_=
a_review_of_Digwuren.27s_block_by_William_M._Connolley">http://en.wikipedia=
.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive514#Reques=
t_for_a_review_of_Digwuren.27s_block_by_William_M._Connolley</a>&gt;. =C2=
=A0The block&#39;s erroneousness was so obvious that *another* administrato=
r, PhilKnight, did the block, not William M. Connolley -- it&#39;s rather r=
are on Wikipedia, as administrators tend to shy away from anything that mig=
ht look like &quot;wheel warring&quot;, and William M. Connolley subsequent=
ly apologised to me &lt;<a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?titl=
e=3DUser_talk:Digwuren/Archive_2&amp;diff=3D270934457&amp;oldid=3D270930301=
">http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DUser_talk:Digwuren/Archive_2&=
amp;diff=3D270934457&amp;oldid=3D270930301</a>&gt;.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I confronted Jehochman about this appearance of bias &l=
t;<a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DUser_talk:Jehochma=
n&amp;diff=3Dprev&amp;oldid=3D271040689">http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.ph=
p?title=3DUser_talk:Jehochman&amp;diff=3Dprev&amp;oldid=3D271040689</a>&gt;=
, and his response &lt;<a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=
=3DUser_talk:Jehochman&amp;diff=3Dnext&amp;oldid=3D271040689">http://en.wik=
ipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DUser_talk:Jehochman&amp;diff=3Dnext&amp;oldi=
d=3D271040689</a>&gt; is the paydirt. =C2=A0He deleted the whole thread soo=
n after &lt;<a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DUser_tal=
k:Jehochman&amp;diff=3Dnext&amp;oldid=3D271117479">http://en.wikipedia.org/=
w/index.php?title=3DUser_talk:Jehochman&amp;diff=3Dnext&amp;oldid=3D2711174=
79</a>&gt;.</div>
<div><br></div></div>-- <br>Andres Soolo<br>

--0016e6d7841d1ec0d8046ce202d5--


--===============8625756011891947092==
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

--===============8625756011891947092==--


