X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Sun Jul  5 02:21:36 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f826636f0907041459i2c47ed40pd7714a2c38f773ae@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A4FBA38.10401@post.pl>
	<f826636f0907041459i2c47ed40pd7714a2c38f773ae@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 20:21:29 -0400
Message-ID: <c3b2b3db0907041721t33b359b0j8b1e312ea8a77817@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrei Dombay <wikibiophys@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -0.2
X-Spam_score_int: -1
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: Major point we should probably emphasize (or even post
	as a clarification request): The warning is not a "formality" because
	Radek was unaware that his SPECIFIC actions (such as reverts in Nashi)
	are subject of the sanctions, and because he was familiar with Arbom
	ruling that tells "warning first" (I tried to explain this in my
	statement). Thatcher was also well aware that warning is not a
	formality as he said here [...] 
	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]
	0.5 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
	0.0 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_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="===============6910539451410179097=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.2
X-Spam_score_int: -1
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:  Major point we should probably emphasize (or even post
	as a clarification request): The warning is not a "formality" because
	Radek was unaware that his SPECIFIC actions (such as reverts in Nashi)
	are subject of the sanctions, and because he was familiar with Arbom
	ruling that tells "warning first" (I tried to explain this in my
	statement). Thatcher was also well aware that warning is not a formality
	as he said here [...] 
	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]
	0.5 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
	0.0 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============6910539451410179097==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5a90bef04c2046dea5e3a

--001636c5a90bef04c2046dea5e3a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Major point we should probably emphasize (or even post as a clarification
request):

The warning is not a "formality" because Radek was unaware that his
SPECIFIC  actions (such as reverts in Nashi) are subject of the sanctions,
and because he was familiar with Arbom ruling that tells "warning first" (I
tried to explain this in my statement). Thatcher was also well aware that
warning is not a formality as he said here

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement&diff=299606947&oldid=299594987

That is why Thatcher rushed to issue such warnings to everyone (but forget
Radek), and then immediately issued editing restrictions.

This matter was first brought to the AE by Brandmaster:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive41#Appeal



On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com>wrote:

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

--001636c5a90bef04c2046dea5e3a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Major point we should probably emphasize (or even post as a clarification r=
equest):  <br><br>The warning is not a &quot;formality&quot; because Radek =
was unaware that his SPECIFIC=A0 actions (such as reverts in Nashi) are sub=
ject of the sanctions, and because he was familiar with Arbom ruling that t=
ells &quot;warning first&quot; (I tried to explain this in my statement). T=
hatcher was also well aware that warning is not a formality as he said here=
  <br>
<br><a href=3D"http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DWikipedia:Arbitr=
ation/Requests/Enforcement&amp;diff=3D299606947&amp;oldid=3D299594987">http=
://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enfo=
rcement&amp;diff=3D299606947&amp;oldid=3D299594987</a><br>
<br>That is why Thatcher rushed to issue such warnings to everyone (but for=
get Radek), and then immediately issued editing restrictions.<br><br>This m=
atter was first brought to the AE by Brandmaster:<br><br><a href=3D"http://=
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive41#=
Appeal">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforce=
ment/Archive41#Appeal</a><br>
<br><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Dori=
n Cheptea <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:dorin.cheptea@gmail.com">=
dorin.cheptea@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail=
_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt=
 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
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" target=3D"_blank">http://en.=
wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DWikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcemen=
t&amp;curid=3D12936136&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 =
style=3D"font-family: -webkit-sans-serif; line-height: 19px;">&quot;I have =
been canvassed off-wiki with the concern that Radek is a good admin candida=
te but won&#39;t pass RFA with a revert limit on his record.&quot;</span></=
div>

<div><font face=3D"-webkit-sans-serif"><span style=3D"line-height: 19px;">I=
MHO, 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 face=3D"-webkit-sans-serif"><span style=3D"line-height: 19px;"><=
br></span></font></div><div><font face=3D"-webkit-sans-serif"><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><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><br><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204,=
 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Something 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" target=3D"_blank">folks@wikipedo=
meter.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></div></div><br></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>

--001636c5a90bef04c2046dea5e3a--


--===============6910539451410179097==
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

--===============6910539451410179097==--


