[WikiEN-l] Re: I am very concerned by the arbcomm decision against jguk

Sun Jun 19 19:26:55 UTC 2005

Ambi

SouthernComfort has provided no evidence of me changing articles from one notation to another, he has merely listed my reverts. If he wants to provide evidence of me changing things he has to show that the articles always used BCE/CE notation beforehand, which he has not done. He is making the accusations, arguing that I should be banned because of them: it is for him to support them. Of course, he can't, but I see no reason why I should waste a couple of days defending in detail any diff he chooses to quote when I have already explained that it was a revert of a change he was making? (Indeed, this was the reason I left, I edited WP because it was fun to do so - I have better things to do in life than spend hours and hours defending every edit I make - by the way, this included defending [[2005 English cricket season]] against deletion, not just the ArbCom dispute.)

SouthernComfort has merely provided evidence that is entirely consistent with what I have said, namely (ignoring months-old issues that are now resolved and pre-date this dispute):

(1) Slrubenstein made a proposal that was very divisive and which failed
(2) SouthernComfort (and others) attempted to enforce that proposal
(3) I (and others) reverted them in line with the community vote
(4) I have reverted other editors making such unnecessary changes to date style before this
(5) I have copyedited articles that have used inconsistent notation so that they use consistent notation (which is consistent with good practice on style)
(6) I have not deliberately changed BCE/CE notation to BC/AD notation where the article has consistently used BCE/CE notation throughout (although I think I made one mistake in this recent dispute on [[Elamite Empire]], for which I am willing to apologise, but I do not think I should be hanged for one mistake)

I admit that I have chosen not to spend time putting together lots of diffs made by SouthernComfort as I don't think the underlying facts are really disputed. (And whilst he and others did deliberately lie to me and were deliberately offensive to me, I chose not to take that point.) Similarly, I did not choose to escalate the matter by bringing in evidence against others (including one arbitrator) who have, far more recently than me, unilaterally changed date notation for no other reason than their own personal preference. That is, I have consciously chosen not to make this case messier and more acrimonious than it already is.

The issue before the ArbCom is a straightforward one: If a policy proposal fails, some editors start implementing it anyway, and other editors revert them, what should happen? Unfortunately, it's a question ArbCom isn't even addressing.

Kind regards

Jon

Ambi wrote:

Folks, if you don't provide evidence, then don't be surprise when your
concerns aren't included in a ruling. The vast amount of evidence
there points to the conclusion I noted before - there are piles upon
piles of examples of Jguk systematically changing stuff, and about
four examples of SouthernComfort doing the same thing. We can only
consider what is put before us, and almost all of that relates to
Jguk.

-- ambi

---------------------------------
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos