Im checking in and out today- so ill be brief. Erik, your removal of RK from the VFA page
was contradictory to the rules, principles, etc of voting. Period. I agree with it
however, and I thank you for correcting me. It led to my taking the issue seriously, and
making
On the issue of RK's imminent sysopdom, I dont understand how you can accuse me of
trolling. I have yet to state my case clearly - I will do so now, and you can copy it or
refer to it as you like. RK is not a problem user. Hes not a vandal. He occupies a
particular niche of intelligent annoyance, and as such will continue to be so unless
things change.
Responsibility breeds self-esteem, standards of conduct and trust between parties. I dont
expect anyone to change - rather that an anti-RK sentiment (regardless that he alone is
responsible for engendering it -- as you say, highly unpopular ) is not grounds alone for
denial into more elevated capapilities and duties. Sysops have more to do, and their roles
require a concern for their community, moderation, and quality. Do the clothes make the
man or does the man make the clothes. I dunno. All I know is that Im sincere in wanting to
see him be more productive, less polarized, and
I believe that he has made gradual progress toward this end and that he has earned the
right to be nominated for a position of sysop. I have the right to nominate him, and to
campaign on his behalf. Many others see my meaning and are supportive ( I havent seen my
talk page yet, and will not answer anyone for a while ) RK has not accepted or rejected
the nomination -- you should acknowledge that you have little statutory justification in
removing his nomination after only two comments.
The worst thing that may happen is that he will ignore his responsibility to be civil, and
that he will go back to being a plebian contributor. I dont think this will happen, and I
find distasteful those opinions that prejudicially say otherwise. Give people a chance -
and they will give you your due.
I dislike doing this all third person, but I felt a response your rather sharp critique
was justified, Erik. By this I mean your comments have substance, but nothing that cant be
dispensed with by patience and fairness.
Respectfully,
SV
Erik Moeller <erik_moeller(a)gmx.de> wrote:
Steve-
I agree with the sentiments expressed by Oliver here
-- not that I dont understand Eriks comment as tongue
in cheek ;)-- but Erik's recent "unilateral removal"
of RK from nomination was a bit too "unilateral" -- as
such a philosophy of unilateralism tends to contradict
the more general notions of voting, democracy, and so
forth.
The only thing you will accomplish with this RK sysop nomination nonsense
(which he himself never asked for) is yet another flamewar because you
know exactly from the initial reaction that there is strong opposition to
this nomination. I consider your actions harmful to the community and
counter-productive. If RK wants to apply for sysop status, let him. But
there's no reason for you to nominate specifically controversial
Wikipedians. This kind of behavior reminds me very much of the
troublemaking that got Lir banned. Not only do you insist on starting this
flamewar, you also spammed many user talk pages to make sure that the
maximum number of people get involved in the flamewar. Great thinking
there! Here's a selection of your recent edits:
# 01:25, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Danny
# 01:24, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Cyp (top) [rollback]
# 01:24, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Cprompt
# 01:23, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Camembert
# 01:23, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Dante Alighieri (top) [rollback]
# 01:22, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Delirium (top) [rollback]
# 01:22, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:The Epopt (top) [rollback]
# 01:21, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Fred Bauder (top) [rollback]
# 01:20, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Goatasaur (top) [rollback]
# 01:20, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Hephaestos (top) [rollback]
# 01:19, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Infrogmation (top) [rollback]
# 01:19, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:JeLuF (top) [rollback]
# 01:19, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Karen Johnson (top) [rollback]
# 01:18, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Maveric149
# 01:16, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:LittleDan (top) [rollback]
# 01:16, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Evercat (top) [rollback]
# 01:13, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Jtdirl
# 01:11, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:AntonioMartin (top) [rollback]
# 01:10, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Andre Engels
# 01:09, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Anthere (top) [rollback]
# 01:09, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Brion VIBBER
# 01:08, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Olivier (top) [rollback]
# 01:06, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:The Cunctator (top) [rollback]
# 01:06, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Maveric149
# 01:05, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Deb (top) [rollback]
# 01:05, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Ed Poor (top) [rollback]
# 01:04, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Eloquence
# 01:01, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Jtdirl
# 01:00, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Lee Daniel Crocker (top) [rollback]
# 00:59, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Slrubenstein
# 00:59, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Tim Starling (top) [rollback]
# 00:58, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Tim Starling (form letter)
# 00:55, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Angela (2 messages -- gotta run)
# 00:54, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Mbecker (top) [rollback]
# 00:52, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:MyRedDice
# 00:40, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Angela
# 00:20, Aug 17, 2003 User talk:Angela
Frankly, I am increasingly convinced that you are deliberately trolling.
Maybe you could concentrate on writing articles for a change.
Regards,
Erik
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software