--- Cranston Snord <enviroknot(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> You are lying, David, and you are violating
> Wikipedia policy in doing so.
Somebody block this guy from the mailing list, please.
RickK
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
On 5/29/05, Rick <giantsrick13(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> > What?
> > This is insane.
> > I suggest you withdraw the VFD right away, signature
> > removal or not.
>
> Thanks for the reasoned discussion. Care to explain
> ''why'' you think I should remove it, or do you just
> go around making demands all the time?
Because there is nothing wrong with a user complain about admins...
First we frustrate the heck out of him, then try to cast his
frustration as a crime? That is utterly unacceptable.
My suggestion wasn't a demand of any sort... It was, as stated, a
suggestion. One made in the name of discouraging escalated ill
feelings, and discouraging allegations of abusive behaviours by admins
by showing that you support an environment that treats users fairly
and that you welcome criticism...
I thought my thoughts on this matter were made clear in my earlier
posts, I apologise for not taking the time to provide you with a more
complete reply initially.
--- Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/28/05, Rick <giantsrick13(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> > User:Sam Spade has created an attack page in his
> User
> > space at [[User:Sam Spade/Report rogue admin]].
> Which
> > is fine. If he wants to make his silly
> allegations
> > there instead of in the official pages, he's more
> than
> > welcome to do so. But now every one of his
> discussion
> > page edits consists of an enormous signature with
> a
> > link to the page and the signature of "Click here
> to
> > report admin abuse". The signature doesn't even
> > include his real name OR his User name. This is a
> > clear case of a personal campaign against the
> admins
> > listed on his page, and should not be allowed.
> Let
> > him keep his page if he wants, but he should be
> > required to remove the disruptive link in his
> > signature. I've listed the page for VfD, but I'll
> > withdraw that if he'll remove the signature, which
> he
> > has no inclination to do.
>
> What?
> This is insane.
> I suggest you withdraw the VFD right away, signature
> removal or not.
Thanks for the reasoned discussion. Care to explain
''why'' you think I should remove it, or do you just
go around making demands all the time?
RickK
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
With all respect, Danny, I have one more comment for the record.
Yes, Sam Spade removed the signature and his false accusations against
myself. It is ironic that he would use the exact same evidence
(copy&paste) that he posted on my RFA (i.e. before I was an admin), to
accuse me of abusing admin powers -- yes, with the same evidence which
predated me becoming an admin.
1. I explain this bellow the accusations (Note how I am the ==first==
one to be singled out):
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ASam_Spade
2FReport_rogue_admin&diff=14376526&oldid=14376341
==> "Talk to talk." Sam Spade moves comment to talk, leaves false
accusations on the page.
2. --Then-- I post on AN/I:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_not…
==> Sam Spade acts offensively (see bellow), before removing the 'evidence.'
3. Also, my response to his evidence is important to note:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AViajero&diff=14379533…
The removal of the signature and false accusations follow this
conversation on AN/I:
----------
Perhaps I should leave the project, and leave Wikipedia to his
devices. I can't waste anymore energy on his constant harrasment. El_C
23:10, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
If you do I promise to send in a $50 donation. Click here to report
admin abuse 23:12, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks to Sam Spade for more contempt and snide innuendo. El_C 23:15,
28 May 2005 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#User:Sam_Spade.2FReport_rogue_admin.
Click here to report admin abuse 23:21, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
Bravo, Jack. See also: WP:POINT El_C 23:22, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
Exposing admin abuse is disruptive, eh? Well I'm not the one who
brought it here for comment, i agree that was a bit disruptive...
Click here to report admin abuse 23:28, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
Eh. I have not abused my admin powers, ever. As mentioned, all the
evidence depicted by Jack, entirely predates my adminship. El_C 23:31,
28 May 2005 (UTC)
That may be true, until I can show otherwise, I have removed you from
the list. Click here to report admin abuse 23:40, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
Whatever, Jack. El_C 23:48, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
---------
I have no further comments at this time, but I wish to have reference
to these here too. I hope no one will flame me for this.
El_C
--- geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/28/05, Rick <giantsrick13(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > --- Cranston Snord <enviroknot(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > You are lying, David, and you are violating
> > > Wikipedia policy in doing so.
> >
> > Somebody block this guy from the mailing list,
> please.
> >
> > RickK
> Don't you enjoy shooting yourself in the foot being
> raised to an artform?
> --
> geni
Is this addressed to me?
RickK
__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Use Yahoo! to plan a weekend, have fun online and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/
--- Cranston Snord <enviroknot(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> I find the whole thing hilarious.
>
> Not only are you not interested in the truth, you're
> actively attacking me
> for following Wikipedia guidelines and for bringing
> my case.
Yawn. Bored now. Typical troll behavior. Move on,
nothing more to be seen here.
RickK
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> The third listed revert is not a direct revert. You
> could claim it is
> a complex revert but it doesn't meet my standards
> (which normaly
> involve past history of gameing the rule). If a
> block is disputed it
> is standard practice that the user remains
> unblocked.
You REALLY believe Jack Lynch doesn't have a history
of gaming the entire Wikipedia? Do you have any idea
what you're saying?
RickK
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
I recently blocked an account for what looked like
link spamming. All the edits were adding a link to an
external website that has something to do with Branch
Davidians vs. Koreshians and to a bunch of unrealted
articles like poverty and sex. I now have an 32kb
email in my inbox suggesting changes to the articles
they're concerned with so that they are more ''NPOV''.
I'm really not familar with anything to do with Waco
and the mess that followed, would anyone be willing to
take a look at the changes and get back to
the-branch.org, or should I just unblock the account
and let them edit in good faith and hope that the two
groups will sort it out between themselves.
--Peta Holmes
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/