X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Mon Jun 15 06:06:02 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
Message-ID: <4A35C91E.2060401@post.pl>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 00:07:58 -0400
From: Piotr Konieczny <piokon@post.pl>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
	rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090303 MultiZilla/1.8.3.4e SeaMonkey/1.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
References: <c51.5020f267.3766f0da@aol.com>
	<c3b2b3db0906141809s5d7a0756h27fd9f590f6cd38e@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c3b2b3db0906141809s5d7a0756h27fd9f590f6cd38e@mail.gmail.com>
X-Spam_score: -2.4
X-Spam_score_int: -23
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: Andrei Dombay wrote: > Who said two reverts a days
	would be fine? Looking at this > >
	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Result_concerning_Shotlandiya
	> > it's clear he can block anyone for a couple of poorly justified
	reverts > made in different articles > a few months ago. Following this
	way may lead to everyone on all sides > being restricted. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-2.4 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	0.1 FORGED_RCVD_HELO       Received: contains a forged HELO
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.1 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=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] Further strategy on pro-Soviet cabal
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: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -2.4
X-Spam_score_int: -23
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:  Andrei Dombay wrote: > Who said two reverts a days would
	be fine? Looking at this > >
	http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Result_concerning_Shotlandiya
	> > it's clear he can block anyone for a couple of poorly justified
	reverts > made in different articles > a few months ago. Following this
	way may lead to everyone on all sides > being restricted. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-2.4 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	0.1 FORGED_RCVD_HELO       Received: contains a forged HELO
	-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.1 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

Andrei Dombay wrote:
> Who said two reverts a days would be fine? Looking at this
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Result_concerning_Shotlandiya
> 
> it's clear he can block anyone for a couple of poorly justified reverts 
> made in different articles
> a few months ago. Following this way may lead to everyone on all sides 
> being restricted.

Again, this is a very good argument for those of us who can to start 
seriously consider getting an adminship. As long as you are a normal 
editor, there is a chance an admin will decide the stars are shining 
wrong on you and block you. This time it worked well for us, but it's 
is, for the most part, a complete admin lottery. We cannot reasonably 
count on cabal members getting blocked more often then us in such 
proceedings.

-- 
Piotr Konieczny

"The problem about Wikipedia is, that it just works in reality, not in 
theory."

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks

