X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Fri Jun 12 12:27:08 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <929ed1ec0906120243w435eb442p604279561d019f1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <292063.51782.qm@web32802.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<f826636f0906111553l77c2fa8i4498ee714154408b@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0906120025q5ffaecacvb348ec9533a8ef81@mail.gmail.com>
	<f826636f0906120204y1fba64bagc900122aabaad9c1@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0906120243w435eb442p604279561d019f1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:26:49 +0300
Message-ID: <f826636f0906120326p56f72190q6246e94155d591f9@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@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:  2009/6/12 Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com> > 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. > [...] 
	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="===============0688398410352538557=="
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:  2009/6/12 Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com> > 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. > [...] 
	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]
	0.4 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

--===============0688398410352538557==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5a26e72c1e1046c24253a

--001636c5a26e72c1e1046c24253a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

2009/6/12 Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com>

> 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.
>

All I meant to say is he managed to stick his nose and with suggesting you
violating two things at once.


>
> 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.
>

Well, you went down in 2007 for the team.

Can this be pulled off actually? If Digwuren disappears and somebody else is
in, with just the same interest in articles, won't that be suggesting
meatpuppeting?

In fact post 2007 you only have 2 blocks (including the one yesterday), and
both were lifted within 4 hours of being issued. That speaks for itself when
one looks into. Unfortunately many admins don't.


>  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.
>

Interesting. I will be ready to comment whenever you tell me.


>
> 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?
>

Sending a message to everybody with subject "new WP article" should be
sufficient. The person who reviews, sends afterwards a reply to everybody
"Done". But, please do use the subject line accordingly, because I don't
have time to read all our email threads right away (and if I see it 2 weeks
latter, what's the point).

Can we eventually get a topic ban for PU? For example based on the 2007
ArbCom case. Topic bans were proven quite effective in Moldova related
issues. One die hard Soviet friend WP editor got a topic ban exactly on what
he cared mostly to edit, and now he's like a fly without wings. We won't
have to bother if PU can freely edit botany or bridge construction.

Dorin

--001636c5a26e72c1e1046c24253a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2009/6/12 Digwuren <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt=
;<a href=3D"mailto:digwuren@gmail.com">digwuren@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span><br=
><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1=
px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D"im">On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 12:04,=
 Dorin Cheptea <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:dorin.cheptea@gmail.=
com" target=3D"_blank">dorin.cheptea@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><bl=
ockquote 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=A0<span style=3D"border-collapse:collapse">=
Vicenarian. You have sacrifized yourself, don&#39;t let that be in vain. Le=
t it at least be info for the rest of us (incl. those who will join in the =
future).</span></div>

</div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Actually, it might be useful t=
o point out wrongful CSD taggings by him elsewhere. =A0And a few other peop=
le who do such things, so as to appear principled. =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.=A0</div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class=3D"gmail_quot=
e"><div></div><div class=3D"im">
<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"><d=
iv>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 yo=
u say so?! I <i>felt</i> I forgot something. Oh, that&#39;s detail, no matt=
er. How about this...?&quot; 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.</div>

</div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Hm. =A0This appears to be a go=
od point. =A0Thoroughly counterintuitive, but matches the evidence.</div><d=
iv class=3D"im"><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"m=
argin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div></div><div>
<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. =A0PasswordUsername&#39;s clumsy attempts t=
o connect these affairs will probably be useful at a future date to demonst=
rate 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><div>Check out the comparativ=
e threads at AN/I. =A0Once we&#39;ve gotten AE done with Shotlandiya, Peter=
s can lift his thread -- together with the numerous diffs -- to AE, as reco=
mmended by Sandstein. =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. =A0He lost a chance to attack Sander, however, which is=
 a good thing.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>All I meant to s=
ay is he managed to stick his nose and with suggesting you violating two th=
ings at once.</div>
<div>=A0</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"><d=
iv></div><div class=3D"im"><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>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><div>I&#39;m considering account re=
placement. =A0Block log is like underwear: it should be kept clean.</div></=
div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well, you went down in 2007 for the te=
am.=A0</div>
<div><br></div><div>Can this be pulled off actually? If Digwuren disappears=
 and somebody else is in, with just the same interest in articles, won&#39;=
t that be suggesting meatpuppeting?=A0</div><div>=A0</div><div>In fact post=
 2007 you only have 2 blocks (including the one yesterday), and both were l=
ifted within 4 hours of being issued. That speaks for itself when one looks=
 into. Unfortunately many admins don&#39;t.</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></div><div class=3D"im"><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></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><div>I use British English. =A0I ev=
en use it in articles that are written in American English; a clear violati=
on of the appropriate policy. =A0Accordingly, viable target for criticism.<=
/div>
<div>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>:)</div><div>=A0</div><blockqu=
ote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc s=
olid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div><br></div><div>But =
I think that if I change account, I&#39;ll use American English instead. =
=A0It&#39;s counterintuitive, but Europeans writing American English are le=
ss conspicuous on Wikipedia; plus, it will (slightly) hamper textual analys=
is. =A0I&#39;m also planning to do a number of other spelling and wording q=
uirks. =A0Perhaps I can write a tool for Dwiki to do pre-specified quirks a=
utomatically, so Molobo can return, too.</div>
<div class=3D"im">
<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"><d=
iv><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>We should make this steak to PU&#39;s reput=
ation. And generalizing we can try sticking it to his entire team.=A0</div>=
</div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div><div>Piotr=
us, would you consider issuing an outing block to PU if requested? =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. =A0Piotrus is not involved in any of this, nor does he have histo=
ry with the current incarnation of PasswordUsername; and PU does not have a=
 habit of editing Polish articles. =A0There&#39;s a risk that Deacon might =
get involved if he thought it&#39;s about the Polish cabal, so somebody not=
 identifiably connected with it would probably be preferable.</div>

<div><br></div><div>It does not matter if the block is later removed. =A0Th=
e only consistently referred record of reputation on Wikipedia is the block=
 log, so it might even be beneficial to first issue a block, clearly mentio=
ning WP:OUTing in the block summary, then tweak it, then, after discussion =
with the user lift it before expiration with a summary saying something lik=
e &quot;PasswordUsername regrets; the =A0block is provisionally lifted&quot=
;. =A0That&#39;s three block log entries for price of one. =A0Plus, if Piot=
rus lifts the block himself, even Deacon won&#39;t be able to claim that th=
e block demonstrated some sort of anti-PU bias.</div>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Interesting. I will be ready to comm=
ent whenever you tell me.</div><div>=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;=
">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div></div><div class=3D"im">
<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"><d=
iv>In the yesterday&#39;s case, it should have been enough that one of us c=
onfirmed the article is all right. So, IMHO, we should make this a universa=
l 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><div>Good idea. =A0How should we im=
plement it?</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Sending a message t=
o everybody with subject &quot;new WP article&quot; should be sufficient. T=
he person who reviews, sends afterwards a reply to everybody &quot;Done&quo=
t;. But, please do use the subject line accordingly, because I don&#39;t ha=
ve time to read all our email threads right away (and if I see it 2 weeks l=
atter, what&#39;s the point).</div>
<div>=A0</div><div>Can we eventually get a topic ban for PU? For example ba=
sed on the 2007 ArbCom case. Topic bans were proven quite effective in Mold=
ova related issues. One die hard Soviet friend WP editor got a topic ban ex=
actly on what he cared mostly to edit, and now he&#39;s like a fly without =
wings. We won&#39;t have to bother if PU can freely edit botany or bridge c=
onstruction.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Dorin</div></div><br>

--001636c5a26e72c1e1046c24253a--


--===============0688398410352538557==
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

--===============0688398410352538557==--


