X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Fri Jun 12 07:20:37 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <bed.41534bc8.37633661@aol.com>
References: <bed.41534bc8.37633661@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:20:17 +0300
Message-ID: <f826636f0906112220tb93ba18jed759182bcab8296@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: 0.2
X-Spam_score_int: 2
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:  Biophys and Peters are absolutely right about
	PasswordUsername's tactic. He is very slippery. He fishes out what you
	accidently say in order to use against you. Out of interacting with him
	you stand to loose something, never to win something. My last night
	experience with him (first interaction) has proven them right 100%. In
	the future I will use "wooden language" with him. I will say that (a)
	he
	is involved in a content dispute over Baltic issues, (b) that he should
	resolve the content dispute and not attack the opposition, because it
	seems to me he wants to get at his content opposition by any means, (c)
	that he should prepare a RfC regarding the content disputes in those
	issues. Then I will repeat (a), (b), (c), until he either does not
	bother respond anymore, or makes some serious mistake, in which case we
	will have more discussion here as to how we should proceed to exploit
	that. One good thing came out of yesterday: I met him, so he can not
	complain later I am piling from outside. But the best tactic is
	disengagement, and react to him only when he starts behaving more
	anxious (anxiousness means more probability he makes mistakes). [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (0.2 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
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	1.1 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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] PasswordUsername, opportunity
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="===============1731259940772761999=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: 0.2
X-Spam_score_int: 2
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:  Biophys and Peters are absolutely right about
	PasswordUsername's tactic. He is very slippery. He fishes out what you
	accidently say in order to use against you. Out of interacting with him
	you stand to loose something, never to win something. My last night
	experience with him (first interaction) has proven them right 100%. In
	the future I will use "wooden language" with him. I will say that (a) he
	is involved in a content dispute over Baltic issues, (b) that he should
	resolve the content dispute and not attack the opposition, because it
	seems to me he wants to get at his content opposition by any means, (c)
	that he should prepare a RfC regarding the content disputes in those
	issues. Then I will repeat (a), (b), (c), until he either does not
	bother respond anymore, or makes some serious mistake, in which case we
	will have more discussion here as to how we should proceed to exploit
	that. One good thing came out of yesterday: I met him, so he can not
	complain later I am piling from outside. But the best tactic is
	disengagement, and react to him only when he starts behaving more
	anxious (anxiousness means more probability he makes mistakes). [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (0.2 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
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	1.1 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============1731259940772761999==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c924a82b7d7a046c1fdd30

--001636c924a82b7d7a046c1fdd30
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Biophys and Peters are absolutely right about PasswordUsername's tactic. He
is very slippery. He fishes out what you accidently say in order to use
against you. Out of interacting with him you stand to loose something, never
to win something. My last night experience with him (first interaction) has
proven them right 100%. In the future I will use "wooden language" with him.
I will say that (a) he is involved in a content dispute over Baltic issues,
(b) that he should resolve the content dispute and not attack the
opposition, because it seems to me he wants to get at his content opposition
by any means, (c) that he should prepare a RfC regarding the content
disputes in those issues. Then I will repeat (a), (b), (c), until he either
does not bother respond anymore, or makes some serious mistake, in which
case we will have more discussion here as to how we should proceed to
exploit that.
One good thing came out of yesterday: I met him, so he can not complain
later I am piling  from outside. But the best tactic is disengagement, and
react to him only when he starts behaving more anxious (anxiousness means
more probability he makes mistakes).

I also support Peters' "dashboard" proposal to implement on Dwiki.

Cheers,
Dorin



2009/6/12 <PetersJV@aol.com>

>  Alas, I ignored my own Latvian "old saying" device about not stomping in
> s**t because it only spreads and stinks and wrote a short tome on
> Aaviksoo.... A momentary failing. I'll try not to do again and just deal
> with PasswordUsername as dispassionately as possible until he implodes. I
> need to decide whether or not to file arb. enforcement. I know what his
> responses are, the question is how airtight a case can be argued.
>
> IMHO, his agenda to attack out anti-Soviet / anti-Russian propaganda
> editors is becoming quite clear, along with promoting the Baltics as a
> hotbed of Nazism.
>
> People always give up some information in their alter-egos. "Frank" from
> Wichita? My ass. I can easily see someone who is NOT open and honest (i.e.,
> frank), choosing that as their pen name for their nefarious purposes. If I'm
> sounding like Biophys, it's only because I've run into enough of these on WP
> to develop radar. My Spidey sense is tingling.
>
> ON ANOTHER TOPIC, we need some sort of dynamic/automated article dashboard.
> For example...
>
> (1)    list of ourselves and similar
> (2)    list of opposition
> Using, say, 3 edits (not minor) in 48 hours as a watermark (adjust
> empirically)
> (3)    (a)    list article, GREEN, increased activity by (1)
>         (b)    AMBER, increased activity by (1), one or more edits by (2),
> # edits by (1) >> # edits by (2)
>         (c)    RED, activity by (1) and (2), more than N edits in 48 hours
> and/or # edits by (2) > # edits by (1)
>         (d)    RED, any article prior on the RED list which has not been
> touched (stable) which is edited out of the blue by (2)
>         (e)    BLUE, an article either GREEN, AMBER, or RED with no edits
> in the 48 hours (bots excluded)
>
> Dashboard would persist for 3 blue cycles, then article would age off the
> list. Dashboard would (therefore) display 4 x 48 hours cycles. This could be
> scaled to 24 from 48. We'd have to see what works. Of course, this can be
> tuned up with historical data to see if problem articles immediately pop up.
>
> I need to do some more thinking on this. Clearly it is unproductive for
> each of us individually or a group to be checking up on edits by people on
> articles which might not be on our watchlist. Personally, I do have a
> reasonable number of articles outside of our area of contention on my
> watchlist, so I don't always catch things right away.
>
> /Peters
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Shop Dell's full line of Laptops now starting at $349!<http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1221881320x1201406166/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fclk%3B215218036%3B37264217%3Bz>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia statistics discussion list
> folks@wikipedometer.net
> http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
>
>

--001636c924a82b7d7a046c1fdd30
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Biophys and Peters are absolutely right about PasswordUsername&#39;s tactic=
. He is very slippery. He fishes out what you accidently say in order to us=
e against you. Out of interacting with him you stand to loose something, ne=
ver to win something. My last night experience with him (first interaction)=
 has proven them right 100%. In the future I will use &quot;wooden language=
&quot; with him. I will say that (a) he is involved in a content dispute ov=
er Baltic issues, (b) that he should resolve the content dispute and not at=
tack the opposition, because it seems to me he wants to get at his content =
opposition by any means, (c) that he should prepare a RfC regarding the con=
tent disputes in those issues. Then I will repeat (a), (b), (c), until he e=
ither does not bother respond anymore, or makes some serious mistake, in wh=
ich case we will have more discussion here as to how we should proceed to e=
xploit that.<div>
<br></div><div>One good thing came out of yesterday: I met him, so he can n=
ot complain later I am piling =A0from outside. But the best tactic is disen=
gagement, and react to him only when he starts behaving more anxious (anxio=
usness means more probability he makes mistakes).</div>
<div><br></div><div>I also support Peters&#39; &quot;dashboard&quot; propos=
al to implement on Dwiki.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Dorin<=
br><div><br></div><div>=A0<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2009/6/12  <sp=
an dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:PetersJV@aol.com">PetersJV@aol.com</a>=
&gt;</span><br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">



<div style=3D"font-size:10pt;color:#000000;font-family:Arial"><font face=3D=
"Arial" color=3D"#000000" size=3D"2">
<div>Alas, I ignored my own Latvian &quot;old saying&quot; device about not=
 stomping in=20
s**t because it only spreads and stinks and wrote a short tome on Aaviksoo.=
... A=20
momentary failing. I&#39;ll try not to do again and just=A0deal=20
with=A0PasswordUsername as dispassionately as=A0possible until he=20
implodes. I need to decide whether or not to file arb. enforcement. I know =
what=20
his responses are, the question is how airtight a case can be argued.</div>
<div>=A0</div>
<div>IMHO,=A0his agenda to attack out anti-Soviet / anti-Russian propaganda=
=20
editors is becoming quite clear, along with promoting the Baltics as a hotb=
ed of=20
Nazism.</div>
<div>=A0</div>
<div>People always give up some information in their alter-egos. &quot;Fran=
k&quot; from=20
Wichita? My ass. I can easily see someone who is NOT open and honest (i.e.,=
=20
frank), choosing that as their pen name for their nefarious purposes. If I&=
#39;m=20
sounding like Biophys, it&#39;s only because I&#39;ve run into enough of th=
ese on WP to=20
develop radar. My Spidey sense is tingling.</div>
<div>=A0</div>
<div>ON ANOTHER TOPIC, we need some sort of dynamic/automated article dashb=
oard.=20
For example...</div>
<div>=A0</div>
<div>(1)=A0=A0=A0=A0list of ourselves and similar</div>
<div>(2)=A0=A0=A0=A0list of opposition</div>
<div>Using, say, 3 edits (not minor) in=A048 hours as a watermark (adjust=
=20
empirically)</div>
<div>(3)=A0=A0=A0=A0(a)=A0=A0=A0=A0list article, GREEN,=20
increased activity by (1)</div>
<div>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(b)=A0=A0=A0=A0AMBER,=20
increased activity by (1), one or more edits by (2), # edits by (1) &gt;&gt=
; #=20
edits by (2)</div>
<div>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(c)=A0=A0=A0=A0RED,=20
activity by (1) and (2), more than N edits in 48 hours and/or # edits by (2=
)=20
&gt; # edits by (1)</div>
<div>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(d)=A0=A0=A0=A0RED,=20
any article prior on the RED list which has not been touched (stable) which=
 is=20
edited out of the blue by (2)</div>
<div>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(e)=A0=A0=A0=A0BLUE,=20
an article either GREEN, AMBER, or RED with no edits in the 48 hours (bots=
=20
excluded)</div>
<div>=A0</div>
<div>Dashboard would persist for 3 blue cycles, then article would age off =
the=20
list. Dashboard would (therefore) display 4 x 48 hours cycles. This could b=
e=20
scaled to 24 from 48. We&#39;d have to see what works. Of course, this can =
be tuned=20
up with historical data to see if problem articles immediately pop up.</div=
>
<div>=A0</div>
<div>I need to do some more thinking on this. Clearly it is unproductive fo=
r=20
each of us individually or a group to be checking up on edits by people on=
=20
articles which might not be on our watchlist. Personally, I do have a reaso=
nable=20
number of articles outside of our area of contention on my watchlist, so I =
don&#39;t=20
always catch things right away.</div>
<div>=A0</div>
<div>/Peters</div>
<div>=A0</div>
<div>=A0</div></font><div><br><font style=3D"color:black;font:normal 10pt a=
rial,san-serif"> <hr style=3D"margin-top:10px"><a href=3D"http://pr.atwola.=
com/promoclk/100126575x1221881320x1201406166/aol?redir=3Dhttp:%2F%2Fad.doub=
leclick.net%2Fclk%3B215218036%3B37264217%3Bz" target=3D"_blank">Shop Dell&#=
39;s full line of Laptops now starting at $349!</a></font></div>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Wikipedia statistics discussion list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net">folks@wikipedometer.net</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks" target=
=3D"_blank">http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>

--001636c924a82b7d7a046c1fdd30--


--===============1731259940772761999==
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

--===============1731259940772761999==--


