X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Mon Jun  8 05:58:41 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6c9a05ec0906071710p5dfbd6fes18b2da0e932129c6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4A2625B5.7010705@post.pl>
	<25890ca0906030113r295a1e3as1452b924a5f7a55f@mail.gmail.com>
	<25890ca0906031153u6f231517n51cd4e0f21aec4fb@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A296177.9080504@post.pl>
	<25890ca0906051142l29a450f5m46b6f4d739884aff@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A298034.5010708@post.pl>
	<25890ca0906071603i5764989dp9451e4f2c76a4a6a@mail.gmail.com>
	<6c9a05ec0906071710p5dfbd6fes18b2da0e932129c6@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 22:58:22 -0500
Message-ID: <25890ca0906072058xc89bc50m2c1b1f52f83cea04@mail.gmail.com>
From: radek szulga <rsszulga@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -0.6
X-Spam_score_int: -5
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: Deacon also placed Jacurek on the editing restrictions
	notice, quite arbitrarily, or more specifically "for this and other
	recent edit-warring". That's sort of the thing - I know other admins
	are
	not gonna slap my name on that list unless I screw up but someone like
	Deacon can come in and just do it because he wants because he's "an
	uninvolved admin". [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.6 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
	0.3 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=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST autolearn=no version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] Taking on Deacon
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="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.6
X-Spam_score_int: -5
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:  Deacon also placed Jacurek on the editing restrictions
	notice, quite arbitrarily, or more specifically "for this and other
	recent edit-warring". That's sort of the thing - I know other admins are
	not gonna slap my name on that list unless I screw up but someone like
	Deacon can come in and just do it because he wants because he's "an
	uninvolved admin". [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.6 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
	0.3 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

Deacon also placed Jacurek on the editing restrictions notice, quite
arbitrarily, or more specifically "for this and other recent
edit-warring". That's sort of the thing - I know other admins are not
gonna slap my name on that list unless I screw up but someone like
Deacon can come in and just do it because he wants because he's "an
uninvolved admin".

So the first order of business here is to get Deacon out of the
"uninvolved admin" category since he's very clearly not. I think
there's plenty of evidence. One thing I thought of - while he doesn't
regularly edit Poland related articles he reliably shows up to every
vote on every related topic - if we could have a list of these it'd
help to demonstrate that, whatever his nationality, he's very clearly
taken a side - or rather 'sides', since it's which ever one is
anti-Polish at the moment.
The second thing is to get Deacon himself on the restriction list -
but it's unclear how this would work since he's an admin himself. Are
there other admins on the list already?

I thought about taking this to incidents under admin abuse or
something but that maybe over stretching it - Jacurek was a little
trigger happy with the rollback feature (I never use it myself)
although mostly on folks that deserved it.

Radek

2009/6/7 Molobo Molobo <molobus@gmail.com>:
> I think Jacurek should be offered some support. In the last few days he h=
ad
> hard times, fighting with Neonazi on Battle of Wielun(that article still
> needs fixing) and now Deacon. A friendly word and information he has
> supported would be encouraged.
>
> 2009/6/8 radek szulga <rsszulga@gmail.com>
>>
>> I think Deacon's recent abuse of his admin's power to remove Jacurek's
>> rollback access:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jacurek#Notice_of_rollback_remova=
l_and_editing_restrictions
>> when Jacurek used EXACTLY in the way it's supposed to be used is a
>> pretty clear example of his continued harassment of Polish editors.
>> If his admin action gets reversed, together with other stuff it may be
>> enough to at least get him put on the notification list.
>>
>> Radek
>>
>>
>> 2009/6/5 Piotr Konieczny <piokon@post.pl>:
>> > radek szulga wrote:
>> >> Yeah I saw that - be sure to note "Be careful about citing this
>> >> principle too aggressively. An exhortation to "Assume Good Faith" can
>> >> itself be seen as a breach of this very tenet, since it fails to
>> >> assume the assumption of good faith if the perceived assumption of bad
>> >> faith is not clear-cut." from the guidelines.
>> >>
>> >> I'm holding off a little bit on Kurfurst - even though he's annoying
>> >> on Strategic Bombing I thought I'd give him more time since he seems
>> >> like one of those editors that sooner or later ends up putting their
>> >> foot in their mouth and then the case'd be stronger and more straight
>> >> forward.
>> >
>> > He is also annoying some other editors there; there is little harm in
>> > wikiemailing them to sound them out and later innocently bringing
>> > WP:DIGWUREN to their attention :)
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Prokonsul Piotrus aka Piotr Konieczny =A0 =A0 =A0 |||____ =A0__ __
>> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =
=A0 =A0 I=3DI=3D=3D=3D=3D__|_|I__I=3D>
>> > "Lennier, get us the hell out of here." =A0 =A0 |||
>> > "Initiating 'getting the hell out of here' maneuver."
>> > =A0-- Ivanova and Lennier in Babylon 5:"The Hour of the Wolf"
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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

