Apologies if I distorted some opinions. This would be
just a mistake :-(
Eloquence opinion : Shortly after I sent a mail to
Jimbo asking him to examine whether RK should be
banned for his obnoxious behavior, RK started
vandalizing several user and talk pages because he
felt *his* talk page was being vandalized. The
vandalism: People placed comments on it. I have
temporarily banned him (and no, I won't read through
his lengthy diatribes which will inevitably follow).
I strongly suggest turning this temporary ban into a
permanent one, at least for a month or so. I oppose
unbanning him until he retracts his "Nazipedia"
remarks.
Jack Nelson : I support this; he went a bit insane
there.
LDan : That's good, but I strongly believe that this
ban should be temporary. Eventually, RK not want to
act like this. Even Lir was unbanned eventually, and
RK was, for the most part, a good user.
Delirium : I disagree with both a temporary and a
permanent ban. The vandalizing user talk pages and so
on is over the line, but does not warrants a temporary
ban. Other users who did the same, including
EntmootsOfTrolls and BuddhaInside, among others, who
were not summarily banned. I don't see why RK should
be treated differently. As for a permanent ban, while
RK has been somewhat obnoxious in his
complaining about anti-Semitism, several other people
(notably SV) have been equally obnoxious in their
complaining from the other side RK has also added
quite a bit of useful content to Wikipedia, much of it
entirely unrelated to Judaism, Israel, or related
issues.
Vicki Rosenzweig disagrees with the fact a sysop is
doing the banning.
Tim Starling disagrees with the fact a sysop is doing
the banning ("I strongly believe that sysops should
not be capable of punishing other users in this way.
Threats of such actions could greatly increase the
perception of a power structure; a pecking order.") He
apparently disagrees with the banning "RK got angry,
he lashed out at a few users. He didn't replace the
contents of an article with "poo poo"."
Axelbold disagrees with Eloquence banning. He said "RK
rudely and unexcusably replaced four people's user
pages with angry messages, that's all. Wikipedia was
never under attack."
Eclecticology agrees with Vicky : Anything more than a
short term "emergency" ban needs to be a community
decision. I've never been a big fan of banning, and I
make no exception with regard to RK. I support 24
hours as the appropriate banning period. This is an
otherwise productive Wikipedian who has out-of-control
moments. The disrespectful "Nazipedia" comments should
likely be acknowledged as
having come in the midst of a rage. In cases like this
we need some kind of a "mentor" system. In this case
the mentor could be a person whom RK personally
trusts, and to whom he would pay attention. When he
shows signs of going out of control, that person could
say "STOP" or some other agreed secrt word, and get
the appropriate reaction.<br>
To Abe : If people who would otherwise bring sane and
rational opinions to a discussion keep quiet simply to
avoid the wrath of an extremist the project has thus
been diminished.
Gutza : Although I don't agree with Erik about
enforcing a permanent ban, I think the temporary ban
for a day was welcome. RK obviously lost it, he was
calling everybody names, he didn't accept even the
most mildly tempered comments and he started
vandalizing user pages because people were placing
comments on his talk page. So I agree with Erik -- he
just did what he had to in order to chill everybody
down. I don't think a month's ban would solve
anything. RK should either be banned for good (which
I don't support), or receive chill-down kicks (IRC
sense), which I fully support. Goodbye, to the troll
who has been temp-banned.
Anthere : Perhaps temporary is best first. I am sure
it will make him realize that he can't do anything he
wants to, with no punishment ever. Temporary banning
is mostly a way to say to someone "we would like you
to stay with us, but you really have to work on your
behavior". It is a time-break, to allow thoughts. A
temporary banning is also a nice compromise between
those who do not accept that situation any more, and
those who think it is acceptable. And imho, temporary
banning is an option that any sysop could "initiate",
that is just to us, all together, to discuss what
temporary means, and how we could use that time-out.
Matthew Brown :
Gareth Owen : to the comment "Fuck you sick Nazi
bastards" : Come back Special Relativity kooks, all is
forgiven..
Bogdan Giusca : Goodbye, Uncle Leo*! :-)
Mav : Dude! You have any idea how paranoid that
sounds? Just because people disagree with you and you
happen to be a Jew doesn't mean that that are
anti-Semites! Oh, and anybody who disagrees with me is
a homophobic bastard! ;-)
Quercus Robur : Could you stamp about and slam the
door a little more loudly on your way out? A few of my
neighbours didn't quite hear you.
Dante Alighieri : Even worse, accusing the entire
Wikipedia community of /anything/ is patently
absurd.... as a matter of fact, it's something that
bigots usually do... making broad generalizations
about entire groups of people.
Abe : I am going to make strong pleas against any
moves to ban RK or marginalize him. He generates chaos
and a lot of ill-will. He�s often obnoxious (but he
can magnanimously admit that he was wrong). He even
alienates his own supporters, and often attacks
potential allies with great bitterness. ... RK�s
intransigence, and often flat out bizarre behavior,
but it�s an indispensable part of a confluence of
opposing forces required for Israeli-Palestinian
neutrality.
Stan Shebs : We shouldn't be tolerating bad behavior
at all. If we make the excuse that we have to tolerate
it for the sake of content
Ed : While technically correct, I think your ban was
unwise. RK did indeed blank some personal pages, the
C-J talk page, and wrongly accused Martin of using an
alias. I would like to un-ban RK.
KNOTT, Theresa : I think a few days is enough time for
him to cool down. I propose he is unbanned on 5th
October.
Bj�rn Lindqvist : I won't lie, I'm QUITE HAPPY that RK
is banned now. Sure he added a lot of important
information to religious topic and so on, but please!
He has called everyone that has ever been in a
dispute with him an anti-semite. Not only those
contributors who debate with him in the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict as I firsth thought, even
contributors who has praised his work and/or are Jews
themselves have gotten the stamp "anti-semite". It is
no fun for one who has spent a lot of time and effort
fighting racisim to be called that again and again and
again. ... But I get offended by RK, a countless
number of anons get offended by RK and many
contributors have left WP because of RK's antics. It's
impossible to edit articles in the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict because if you do, RK will be there reverting
and calling you an anti-Semite. It is not fun and is
one of the reasons why I don't spend as much time on
WP anymore.
<br>And it isn't like he hasn't been warned. He has
been varned many many times, he got countless more
chances than for example EofT did but he has never
listened, not changed the slightest. He has gotten his
chances and he has burnt them all. It is time to say
goodbye.
Angela : I don't think that was a good idea. The last
thing we need is block/unblock wars. There was a lot
of objection to the EofT ban, but it would be very
wrong for any sysop to simply go and unblock the
account.<br>
To Ec mentor proposition : I'm not convinced you could
find such a person. RK regards all comments to him as
personal attacks. All I said to him was that Martin's
comment should not be regarded as vandalism and I
explained why Martin may have put what he did on RK's
page. RK then accused me of being a vandal for having
made such a comment.<br>
To Abe defense : No, we can not let RK be RK if this
means allowing such abominable behavior. To suggest
that Wikipedia can not be NPOV without RK's help is
ridiculous. And it's not just the Israeli-Palestinian
articles that you mention that he is doing this
on.<br>
To Bj�rn feeling offended : I think this is the part
172 and others are missing. A lot of people complain
about RK, but there are doubtless many more people who
do not and simply respond by avoiding editing any
pages that RK edits (myself for one), or worse leave
Wikipedia.<br>
About banning : I don't understand why the banning
procedure has to be different for IPs and logged in
users. Oppose unbanning him until he retracts his
"Nazipedia" remarks. I fully support a permanent ban.
RK has been discussed ad nauseum and it was about time
someone did something about it.
Adam : Now that RK knows he can be banned, and will
hopefully not continue in his previous course of
action. I beg the court show him mercy and allow him
the chance to atone himself. He has been punished
enough
Robert comment :
Fuck you sick Nazi bastards.
After Stevertigo was exposed for being a Nazi (and
this was PROVEN, not alleged) you sick Nazi bastards
began harassing me and vandalizing my home page. You
lied about him and his edits, falsely accused me of
saying things that SV wrote, and then attacked me?
Then you accuse ME of being a Nazi?
Then you harassed me on my own home page, and then
BANNED me when I pointd out that such behaviour is
wrong?
Never in my life I have ever seen such a community of
violent Jew haters.
Nor, for that matter, such a bunch of cowardly Jews,
who privately write me that they all agree with me,
but
publicly refuse to say their names.
Fine. You win. Nazipedia it is. I am gone. But from
now on the word will *widely* spread about the violent
anti-Semitism that Wikipedia encourages, the way that
it allows Nazis free reign, and the way it bans those
who speak out against hatespeech.
You've just bought yourselves bad publicity, and a
well
deserved reputation as a home for lying, leftist
anti-Semites.
Goodbye.
-------
I can't help feeling sad.
Anthere
Robert RK
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com