"Don't misquote me again, or I'll bite your head off."
Whew! What a relief that Uncle Ed never invokes violent imagery like that. Cuz if I did, people like Sheldon Rampton might wish aloud for a switch that sends high-voltage current through my chair...
Ed Poor
Brion wrote:
>On Tue, 2003-04-01 at 10:26, Daniel Mayer wrote:
>> >Please see [[Talk:Crass]]. In Michael's new
>>> >incarnation as Weezer, he wrote: "You call me Michael
>> >one more time. I'll pound on your neck, and smash you
>> >into pieces and kill you Zoe."
>> >
>> >Zoe
>>=20
>> Could one of the developers get this creep's IP so
>> that Zoe can call the cops? This is well above being a
>> simple bannable offense. Death threats can never be
>> justified.
>
>That's certainly highly inappropriate on Wikipedia,
Oh? I thought the current consensus was to allow Admins the ability to view
the IP number of logged-in users and the only reason this hasn't been done
yet is because it is a low priority right now for developers (nothing wrong
with that - so long as developers don't mind fetching IPs every once in a
while). And since when do users have the right stay truely anonymous (sic no
access to IP address data) after threatening anther user anyway? But maybe I
missed something (it wouldn't be the first time - I'm so dense sometimes), so
please enlighten me Brion.
>and quite probably
>contravenes their ISP (AOL)'s terms of service as well.
I fail to see how finding out the IP number that this user was using at the
time of making the death threat would contravene AOL's terms of service. That
is unless those terms protect the right of their users to make such threats.
I seriously doubt this.
>If Zoe would
>like to complain to AOL on this matter, by all means do so.
That narrows it down to about 30 million people. Better than nothing I guess.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
WikiKarma
The usual at [[March 24]]
208.63.114.185 also vandalized "swamp white oak", starting
the new page with the phrase "You are gay."
--
John Knouse
jaknouse(a)frognet.net
www.jaknouse.athens.oh.us
+1.740.589.4575
PO Box 1196, Athens, OH 45701-1196
Author - F. P. Jones
English - Experience is that marvelous thing that enables
you to recognize a mistake when you make it again.
French - L'exprience est cette chose merveilleuse qui te
permet de reconnatre une erreur quand tu es en train de
la commettre .
Quote supplied courtesy of Verba Volant at:
http://www.logos.it/owa-l/press.rol_ml.verbavolant1?lang=en
>
> I'm almost certain they're the same person - the first time Weezer signed
> his name on a talk page it was using an IP number that Michael had used to
> sign his name about three minutes earlier. (By the way, Michael has
blanked
> talk pages as well - it's not just carelessness, there's a good degree of
> wanton vandalism as well.)
>
It was the 'Crass formed in 1976' edit that clinched it for me as this is
one of Michael's pet bugbears, and I'm sure nobody else on the planet could
give a flying fig roll what year crass formed (It only bothers me because I
KNOW it's wrong). And also when 'michael' denied he was weezer on the crass
talk page he mis-spelled his own name, as if he'd rapidly altered what comes
up when ~~~ is typed... I guess it's academic now anyway.
Cheers Graham (Quercus robur)
Are you sure it wasn't just a newbie experiment? It looked like he was trying to figure out the syntax for creating a table -- something I myself have yet to master.
Ed Poor
> Message: 10
> Date: 01 Apr 2003 18:50:00 +0200
> From: erik_moeller(a)gmx.de (Erik Moeller)
> To: wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] 172--what happened
> Reply-To: wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org
>
> > Danny did nothing wrong. I intend to follow his example.
>
> > If I see people fighting over an article, I'm going to protect it and
tell
> > them to chill out.
>
> > AND I reserve the right to choose which "old version" to revert to.
>
> Obviously, you have to do this.
>
> > AND FURTHERMORE, if I can figure out a neutral way to fix the article, I
see
> > no ethical reason not to:
> > * make ONE edit
>
> No, this violates the sysop/editor distinction. Please don't do that. By
> making an edit and subsequently protecting it, you are giving it a raised
> status. This is entirely unacceptable.
This was the point I was trying to make when I commented at the village pump
about this situation- I didn't want to phrase as strongly that I thought
Danny was abusing sysop powers, but as a non-sysop, it did seem this way to
me. I only happened to pick up on the fact that the page was protected when
I wanted to make an edit myself when I spotted a minor typo not related to
the edit war that was going on. I realised that the page was protected, and
was quite surprised to see two further edits made by sysops before the page
became unprotected again (granted one was a revert to pre-edit war state).
I take on board what Danny & others are saying about vandalism, POV, etc,
but they have to in turn take on board how things look to 'the great
unwashed' of us non-sysops. There are enough people out there who are
already grumbling about there being two tiers of editorial priviledge, I
think sysops therefore need to be 'above reproach' as it were with regard to
this sort of matter.
Just my fourpennorth, I'll go back to sleep now,
Graham (Quercus Robur)
>>>Danny wrote: "Trolling is a form of vandalism. This could justly be
interpretted as trolling. (I am reminded of the constant edit wars with
Helga, which cost Wikipedia quite a lot in terms of time and people who were
disgusted and
left)
Danny is absolutely right.. at least to the degree that a vague
term can, somehow (in some vague way) be somewhat related to another vague
term... thats all. The idea sounds very very Orwellian, and I would suggest
it comes as a natural result of babysitter's fatigue, from dealing with
people like Helga and Susan.. Michael... etc... However, its not all on
anyone shoulders. A degree of trust in our fellow man seems to be necessary
to break away from our concerns, and allow others to fill roles we had
previously found for ourselves... Myself, have to admit that the desire to
increasingly escalate the efficiency of reprimanding measures can be
inviting... but theres a slippery-slope quality to this kind of thinking.
Incidentally, I had a reasonably civil conversation with Michael... I said I
like beans, and he said "me too"... which kinda puts a hole in the notion
that he's not capable of civility. -SV
>Please see [[Talk:Crass]]. In Michael's new
>incarnation as Weezer, he wrote: "You call me Michael
>one more time. I'll pound on your neck, and smash you
>into pieces and kill you Zoe."
>
>Zoe
Could one of the developers get this creep's IP so
that Zoe can call the cops? This is well above being a
simple bannable offense. Death threats can never be
justified.
--mav
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://platinum.yahoo.com