X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Thu Jul  2 23:16:36 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4A4D1FD4.3070805@post.pl>
References: <25890ca0906281732s3836a51i757b5568dd328d63@mail.gmail.com>
	<25890ca0906301452q70e09962v271a9b21198f06ad@mail.gmail.com>
	<c3b2b3db0906301558l3dd6f4b9p3f901958325e637a@mail.gmail.com>
	<25890ca0906301642qa1b9a47ncd8a4c76dfb74e1a@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4AC42E.9080204@post.pl>
	<c3b2b3db0906301929o30d77c9bi2b9114bf6be20c3c@mail.gmail.com>
	<c3b2b3db0907011244l6efbb29wf0ea850c623211cf@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4C3798.1080006@post.pl>
	<c3b2b3db0907020536u5cae907ex36ca309bf64cdad@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A4D1FD4.3070805@post.pl>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 00:16:25 +0300
Message-ID: <929ed1ec0907021416n4a8981b0u9538d2c6dce6c689@mail.gmail.com>
From: Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
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:  On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 00:00, Piotr Konieczny
	<piokon@post.pl> wrote: > That's helpful but it's not exactly what I
	was
	asking for: what makes an > admin (un)involved in an AE discussion in
	general? In other words, what > gives Jehochman the right to keep moving
	my comments from uninvolved > admins section to general discussion? The
	above only explains what > allows an admin to warn/sanction editors
	under DIGWUREN arbcom case. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.1 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
	0.8 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=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_MESSAGE 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: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4220010348075130092=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.1
X-Spam_score_int: 0
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:  On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 00:00, Piotr Konieczny
	<piokon@post.pl> wrote: > That's helpful but it's not exactly what I was
	asking for: what makes an > admin (un)involved in an AE discussion in
	general? In other words, what > gives Jehochman the right to keep moving
	my comments from uninvolved > admins section to general discussion? The
	above only explains what > allows an admin to warn/sanction editors
	under DIGWUREN arbcom case. [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.1 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
	0.8 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============4220010348075130092==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6d64163675b21046dbf8d5f

--0016e6d64163675b21046dbf8d5f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 00:00, Piotr Konieczny <piokon@post.pl> wrote:

> That's helpful but it's not exactly what I was asking for: what makes an
> admin (un)involved in an AE discussion in general? In other words, what
> gives Jehochman the right to keep moving my comments from uninvolved
> admins section to general discussion? The above only explains what
> allows an admin to warn/sanction editors under DIGWUREN arbcom case.


His arrogance.  And I'm serious here.

There are no consistence enforcement mechanisms on Wikipedia beyond social
pressure, and social pressure is rather weak in AE these days.  This means
that unlike court, where lawyers making up outrageously silly legal theories
would be rebuked by the judge, on Wikipedia, wacky legalistic theories can
fly.

If Jehochman is arrogant enough to claim that you're involved, and you're
timid enough to doubt your uninvolvement and thus, out of caution, staying
away, then -- according to all the feedback there is -- Jehochman's argument
held water.  Without a mechanism to enforce consistency, it really doesn't
matter what ArbCom wrote, except perhaps if ArbCom itself were to be
involved again.  And even then, it is not sure.

Mullah Nasruddin should be required reading for anybody trying to understand
Wikipedia's approach to arguments.  Natural conflicts are inevitably often
complex affairs; on Wikipedia, any complexity is shunned as "wikidrama".

-- 
Andres Soolo

--0016e6d64163675b21046dbf8d5f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 00:00, Piotr Konieczny <s=
pan dir=3D"ltr">&lt;piokon@post.pl&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=
=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padd=
ing-left:1ex;">
<div class=3D"im">That&#39;s helpful but it&#39;s not exactly what I was as=
king for: what makes an</div>
admin (un)involved in an AE discussion in general? In other words, what<br>
gives Jehochman the right to keep moving my comments from uninvolved<br>
admins section to general discussion? The above only explains what<br>
allows an admin to warn/sanction editors under DIGWUREN arbcom case.</block=
quote><div><br></div><div>His arrogance. =C2=A0And I&#39;m serious here.</d=
iv><div><br></div><div>There are no consistence enforcement mechanisms on W=
ikipedia beyond social pressure, and social pressure is rather weak in AE t=
hese days. =C2=A0This means that unlike court, where lawyers making up outr=
ageously silly legal theories would be rebuked by the judge, on Wikipedia, =
wacky legalistic theories can fly.</div>
<div><br></div><div>If Jehochman is arrogant enough to claim that you&#39;r=
e involved, and you&#39;re timid enough to doubt your uninvolvement and thu=
s, out of caution, staying away, then -- according to all the feedback ther=
e is -- Jehochman&#39;s argument held water. =C2=A0Without a mechanism to e=
nforce consistency, it really doesn&#39;t matter what ArbCom wrote, except =
perhaps if ArbCom itself were to be involved again. =C2=A0And even then, it=
 is not sure.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Mullah Nasruddin should be required reading for anybody=
 trying to understand Wikipedia&#39;s approach to arguments. =C2=A0Natural =
conflicts are inevitably often complex affairs; on Wikipedia, any complexit=
y is shunned as &quot;wikidrama&quot;.</div>
<div><br></div></div>-- <br>Andres Soolo<br>

--0016e6d64163675b21046dbf8d5f--


--===============4220010348075130092==
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

--===============4220010348075130092==--


