X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Tue Jun 16 11:33:33 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
Message-ID: <439330.19747.qm@web33307.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
X-YMail-OSG: 9VKr3.MVM1lyYRxz3uyMt.ZKgU2bojaWqk1mwgBy007rALAvvuY.fFBNLWben4WAMhLhc17TsXfhfCub2b_hlHW21mjQz_EttRRuYxfseZOBY7BXjDTUm762McuWzkx3vRQ.5CPJ40PhJKHkDsmIuiXCe6N4kmX5K8wEpVtyosWFGVFYXhjCcmxf7qumJRyST4GRR4X2jPzoTP7W62y43gCMDvhZ0hKUKw_jF_CvpdKZPbtTshH6BJqo4Af9rdzvTetRgG9RxeErgwliTV1.PKj4Cj.F_fFJIoHWSBDwIKXA3jS.qWp7J0VNOIW2bPm00SI-
X-Mailer: YahooMailClassic/5.4.12 YahooMailWebService/0.7.289.15
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 02:33:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christian Suciu <christiansuciu@yahoo.com>
To: folks@wikipedometer.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spam_score: 0.7
X-Spam_score_int: 7
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:  From the recent Macedonia 2 case, a principle that I'm
	sure could be extended to Eastern Europe as well: It is potentially
	harmful to Wikipedia when editorial debates become strongly associated
	with real-world political polarizations and when they become dominated
	by groups of editors lined up along political lines due to shared
	national backgrounds. This is particularly harmful when such editors
	act
	in concert to systematically advocate editorial decisions considered
	favorable to their shared political views that contravene the
	application of Wikipedia policy or obstruct consensus-building. Mere
	strength of numbers is not sufficient to contravene Wikipedia policy.
	Defending editorial positions that support political preferences
	typical
	of a particular national background is not ipso facto evidence of
	bad-faith editing. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (0.7 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
	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
	1.4 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=1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE,DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no 
	version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: [WPM] Arbcom finding
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="===============0490991574459573441=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: 0.7
X-Spam_score_int: 7
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:  From the recent Macedonia 2 case, a principle that I'm
	sure could be extended to Eastern Europe as well: It is potentially
	harmful to Wikipedia when editorial debates become strongly associated
	with real-world political polarizations and when they become dominated
	by groups of editors lined up along political lines due to shared
	national backgrounds. This is particularly harmful when such editors act
	in concert to systematically advocate editorial decisions considered
	favorable to their shared political views that contravene the
	application of Wikipedia policy or obstruct consensus-building. Mere
	strength of numbers is not sufficient to contravene Wikipedia policy.
	Defending editorial positions that support political preferences typical
	of a particular national background is not ipso facto evidence of
	bad-faith editing. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (0.7 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0082]
	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
	1.4 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list


--===============0490991574459573441==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-214092234-1245144793=:19747"


--0-214092234-1245144793=:19747
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

>From the recent Macedonia 2 case, a principle that I'm sure could be extended to Eastern Europe as well:
It is potentially harmful to Wikipedia when editorial debates become strongly associated with real-world political polarizations and when they become dominated by groups of editors lined up along political lines due to shared national backgrounds. This is particularly harmful when such editors act in concert to systematically advocate editorial decisions considered favorable to their shared political views that contravene the application of Wikipedia policy or obstruct consensus-building. Mere strength of numbers is not sufficient to contravene Wikipedia policy. Defending editorial positions that support political preferences typical of a particular national background is not ipso facto evidence of bad-faith editing.



      
--0-214092234-1245144793=:19747
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;">From the recent <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">Macedonia 2</span> case, a principle that I'm sure could be extended to Eastern Europe as well:<div><br></div><div>It is potentially harmful to Wikipedia when editorial debates become strongly associated with real-world political polarizations and when they become dominated by groups of editors lined up along political lines due to shared national backgrounds. This is particularly harmful when such editors act in concert to systematically advocate editorial decisions considered favorable to their shared political views that contravene the application of Wikipedia policy or obstruct consensus-building. Mere strength of numbers is not sufficient to contravene Wikipedia policy. Defending editorial positions that support political preferences typical of a particular national background is
 not <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">ipso facto</span> evidence of bad-faith editing.<br></div></td></tr></table><br>



      
--0-214092234-1245144793=:19747--


--===============0490991574459573441==
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

--===============0490991574459573441==--


