X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Sun Sep 13 05:59:31 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:59:18 -0500
Message-ID: <25890ca0909122059w4729e07cs801a1bb614df9276@mail.gmail.com>
From: radek szulga <rsszulga@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: -0.3
X-Spam_score_int: -2
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: Watching both of these unfold - it looks like Loosmark
	is not going to get his appeal granted, while Sandstein has stated that
	he's willing to let another (uninvolved) admin revise Russavia's block.
	Someone should say something at some point: [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.3 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	0.8 HTML_00_10             BODY: Message is 0% to 10% HTML
	-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
	-0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb3 (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_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no 
	version=3.1.7-deb3
Subject: [WPM] Russavia and Loosmark
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="===============7946786744579947643=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: -0.3
X-Spam_score_int: -2
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:  Watching both of these unfold - it looks like Loosmark
	is not going to get his appeal granted, while Sandstein has stated that
	he's willing to let another (uninvolved) admin revise Russavia's block.
	Someone should say something at some point: [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (-0.3 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	0.8 HTML_00_10             BODY: Message is 0% to 10% HTML
	-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
	-0.2 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============7946786744579947643==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015175cfd18d358e904736d9275

--0015175cfd18d358e904736d9275
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Watching both of these unfold - it looks like Loosmark is not going to get
his appeal granted, while Sandstein has stated that he's willing to let
another (uninvolved) admin revise Russavia's block.

Someone should say something at some point:

Loosmark followed proper procedures, filed a proper appeal, refrained from
making attacks or insulting Sandstein or otherwise tried to intimidate him,
did not canvass other admins/editors and, well, basically failed to generate
sufficient drama to get his appeal revised. Basically for following the
rules and behaving himself, Loosmark gets screwed.
On the other hand, Russavia, posts long tireds on his talk page, lashes out
and uses profanity at Sandstein, goes to all kinds of other editors, becomes
even more incivil and provocative, makes statements about "fighting",
blatantly misrepresents Sandstein's comments, and generally acts like a
total asshole and now it appears that he's got a chance to get his topic ban
reviewed (never mind the overall ban).
The lesson here seems to be that actually following wiki policies, being
polite, following rules is a bad idea and being loud, obnoxious and incivil
is the way to get what you want. Not good incentives.

If nobody else wants to say it, I'll say something (toned down) like that to
Sandstein.

Radek

--0015175cfd18d358e904736d9275
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Watching both of these unfold - it looks like Loosmark is not going to get =
his appeal granted, while Sandstein has stated that he&#39;s willing to let=
 another (uninvolved) admin revise Russavia&#39;s block.<br><br>Someone sho=
uld say something at some point:<br>
<br>Loosmark followed proper procedures, filed a proper appeal, refrained f=
rom making attacks or insulting Sandstein or otherwise tried to intimidate =
him, did not canvass other admins/editors and, well, basically failed to ge=
nerate sufficient drama to get his appeal revised. Basically for following =
the rules and behaving himself, Loosmark gets screwed.<br>
On the other hand, Russavia, posts long tireds on his talk page, lashes out=
 and uses profanity at Sandstein, goes to all kinds of other editors, becom=
es even more incivil and provocative, makes statements about &quot;fighting=
&quot;, blatantly misrepresents Sandstein&#39;s comments, and generally act=
s like a total asshole and now it appears that he&#39;s got a chance to get=
 his topic ban reviewed (never mind the overall ban). <br>
The lesson here seems to be that actually following wiki policies, being po=
lite, following rules is a bad idea and being loud, obnoxious and incivil i=
s the way to get what you want. Not good incentives.<br><br>If nobody else =
wants to say it, I&#39;ll say something (toned down) like that to Sandstein=
.<br>
<br>Radek<br><br>

--0015175cfd18d358e904736d9275--


--===============7946786744579947643==
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

--===============7946786744579947643==--


