X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Sat Jul  4 23:59:30 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4A4FBA38.10401@post.pl>
References: <4A4FBA38.10401@post.pl>
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2009 00:59:21 +0300
Message-ID: <f826636f0907041459i2c47ed40pd7714a2c38f773ae@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@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:  Good idea. Please,
	notice that Thatcher has just posted on Radeksz' appeal.
	http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&curid=12936136&diff=300300352&oldid=300295478
	He claims Radek "is no stranger to the EE controversy", and implies he
	should have known better than to revert without comment on the talk
	page. [...] 
	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]
	0.5 HTML_40_50             BODY: Message is 40% to 50% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	0.2 HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD     BODY: HTML font face is not a word
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.5 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=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_40_50,HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD,HTML_MESSAGE 
	autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] Appealing Molobo's block to ArbCom
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="===============4191107732675331208=="
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:  Good idea. Please, notice that Thatcher has just posted
	on Radeksz' appeal.
	http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&curid=12936136&diff=300300352&oldid=300295478
	He claims Radek "is no stranger to the EE controversy", and implies he
	should have known better than to revert without comment on the talk
	page. [...] 
	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]
	0.5 HTML_40_50             BODY: Message is 40% to 50% HTML
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	0.2 HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD     BODY: HTML font face is not a word
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.5 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============4191107732675331208==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016364d2c99a44659046de8627a

--0016364d2c99a44659046de8627a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Good idea.
Please, notice that Thatcher has just posted on Radeksz' appeal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&curid=12936136&diff=300300352&oldid=300295478
He claims Radek "is no stranger to the EE controversy", and implies he
should have known better than to revert without comment on the talk page.

Also, Thatcher says:
"I have been canvassed off-wiki with the concern that Radek is a good admin
candidate but won't pass RFA with a revert limit on his record."
IMHO, this is not very nice of Thatcher towards the person who wrote him the
email (I presume it was Piotr).

Dorin

2009/7/4 Piotr Konieczny <piokon@post.pl>

> Something to consider in a month or so: Molobo could appeal his block to
> ArbCom. Arguments:
> * apologize for using a sock to avoid 1RR restriction, point out that
> violations were infrequent and your primary motivation was to retire old
> account, not avoid blocks
> * acknowledge that reverting is your biggest problem and promise to
> adhere to 1RR for a year if unbanned
> * promise not to sock again, of course
> * ask for a mentor
> * point out that you are a content creator and civil discutant at talk,
> and have a lot of materials to add which you've accumulated over the few
> months of your ban (you can attach a doc with some stuff, just to show
> how you'd benefit the project by quantity)
>
> Bottom line, appeal to ArbCom cannot hurt you, and may result in unbanning.
>
> --
> 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
>

--0016364d2c99a44659046de8627a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Good idea.=A0<div><br><div>Please, notice that Thatcher has just posted on =
Radeksz&#39; appeal.=A0</div><div><a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/inde=
x.php?title=3DWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&amp;curid=3D129361=
36&amp;diff=3D300300352&amp;oldid=3D300295478">http://en.wikipedia.org/w/in=
dex.php?title=3DWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&amp;curid=3D1293=
6136&amp;diff=3D300300352&amp;oldid=3D300295478</a></div>
<div>He claims Radek &quot;is no stranger to the EE controversy&quot;, and =
implies he should have known better than to revert without comment on the t=
alk page.=A0</div><div><br></div><div>Also, Thatcher says:</div><div><span =
class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-family: -webkit-sans-serif; line-h=
eight: 19px; ">&quot;I have been canvassed off-wiki with the concern that R=
adek is a good admin candidate but won&#39;t pass RFA with a revert limit o=
n his record.&quot;</span></div>
<div><font class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"-webkit-sans-serif"><span cla=
ss=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"line-height: 19px;">IMHO, this is not very=
 nice of Thatcher towards the person who wrote him the email (I presume it =
was Piotr).</span></font></div>
<div><font class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"-webkit-sans-serif"><span cla=
ss=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"line-height: 19px;"><br></span></font></di=
v><div><font class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"-webkit-sans-serif"><span c=
lass=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"line-height: 19px;">Dorin</span></font><=
/div>
<div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2009/7/4 Piotr Konieczny <span dir=3D"l=
tr">&lt;piokon@post.pl&gt;</span><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" styl=
e=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Someth=
ing to consider in a month or so: Molobo could appeal his block to<br>

ArbCom. Arguments:<br>
* apologize for using a sock to avoid 1RR restriction, point out that<br>
violations were infrequent and your primary motivation was to retire old<br=
>
account, not avoid blocks<br>
* acknowledge that reverting is your biggest problem and promise to<br>
adhere to 1RR for a year if unbanned<br>
* promise not to sock again, of course<br>
* ask for a mentor<br>
* point out that you are a content creator and civil discutant at talk,<br>
and have a lot of materials to add which you&#39;ve accumulated over the fe=
w<br>
months of your ban (you can attach a doc with some stuff, just to show<br>
how you&#39;d benefit the project by quantity)<br>
<br>
Bottom line, appeal to ArbCom cannot hurt you, and may result in unbanning.=
<br>
<br>
--<br>
Piotr Konieczny<br>
<br>
&quot;The problem about Wikipedia is, that it just works in reality, not in=
<br>
theory.&quot;<br>
<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>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>

--0016364d2c99a44659046de8627a--


--===============4191107732675331208==
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

--===============4191107732675331208==--


