X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Wed Jul  1 01:43:12 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c3b2b3db0906301558l3dd6f4b9p3f901958325e637a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <25890ca0906281732s3836a51i757b5568dd328d63@mail.gmail.com>
	<25890ca0906290607n3820f96ledc8b75892a474f3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A490AA0.4010107@post.pl>
	<25890ca0906291156y47f38354y606b28ff9640c876@mail.gmail.com>
	<c3b2b3db0906291200w4701a20es9162d3a13509848b@mail.gmail.com>
	<25890ca0906291205q41ca8f46jb5bdeeaf0e22cf43@mail.gmail.com>
	<25890ca0906300826w3d2e7055k36965f3a3ed4729e@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4A8840.8040803@post.pl>
	<25890ca0906301452q70e09962v271a9b21198f06ad@mail.gmail.com>
	<c3b2b3db0906301558l3dd6f4b9p3f901958325e637a@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 18:42:58 -0500
Message-ID: <25890ca0906301642qa1b9a47ncd8a4c76dfb74e1a@mail.gmail.com>
From: radek szulga <rsszulga@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -0.8
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: I think I'm ok with Sandstein. Thatcher... And yes the
	Skapperod crap comes at a bad time. I am still writing this AE appeal
	up
	and probably won't make it for at least a day or two. But I need to
	know how this is going to play out. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.8 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] Appeal at AE (was: Let's give Thatcher some breathing
	space)
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: -0.8
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:  I think I'm ok with Sandstein. Thatcher... And yes the
	Skapperod crap comes at a bad time. I am still writing this AE appeal up
	and probably won't make it for at least a day or two. But I need to know
	how this is going to play out. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.8 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.1 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

I think I'm ok with Sandstein. Thatcher...
And yes the Skapperod crap comes at a bad time. I am still writing
this AE appeal up and probably won't make it for at least a day or
two. But I need to know how this is going to play out.

Radek


2009/6/30 Andrei Dombay <wikibiophys@gmail.com>:
> I would not go to AE with appeal anytime soon, because it is currently
> operated by Sandstein and Thatcher who are not sympathetic to your cause
> (see especially last comment by Sandstein about Piotr). This is an
> especially bad moment, with the German-Polish dispute accelerating (and you
> are mentioned in the diffs by S.). And if someone submits a new case about
> S. right now, as Piotr suggested...
>
> Going to Arbcom is also questionable because they want to support AE
> administrators after last filing by Jehochman.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 5:52 PM, radek szulga <rsszulga@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I thought about that ... it's a little like setting myself up for
>> further restrictions though. This is actually what I emailed Sandstein
>> about.
>>
>> I haven't contacted the four admins you mentioned - I want to have a
>> draft of what I'm going to post on AE before I do that just to make
>> sure everything fits together.
>>
>> Radek
>>
>>
>> 2009/6/30 Piotr Konieczny <piokon@post.pl>:
>>
>> >>
>> >> Is there a precedent that I can use as a template?
>> >
>> > Not sure about that, but you may want to structure it as a request to
>> > enforce a ruling against yourself :) Use the diff Thatcher cited on your
>> > talkpage as evidence, use the EE arbitration as the case, and so on -
>> > and than have your explanation of what he did, why you think he
>> > overkilled you, and how you are asking for another AE admin to review
>> > this.
>> >
>> > Make sure you have clear sections for neutral admin discussion, and for
>> > expected-to-be dramu by Offliner and others :) It would be bad if they
>> > would dramu your request into something annoying.
>> >
>> > Have you contacted neutral admins by email asking them for review, as I
>> > suggested? Any replies from Shelly or anybody else?
>> >
>> > --
>> > 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
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikipedia statistics discussion list
>> folks@wikipedometer.net
>> http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia statistics discussion list
> folks@wikipedometer.net
> http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks
>
>

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

