QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 27th May 2010, 11:25pm)
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 27th May 2010, 10:44pm)
You didn't really answer me, or you answered me with, more or less, a refusal to comply with what I'd need. No harm, and, in a way, I don't blame you, but ... I would trust your assurances, it's up to you.
You make it sound like Abd is the only human who could possibly get my account unblocked on Wikiversity.
Probably not, I don't see why you say, "you make it sound" that way. I'm one person offering assistance and asking for something as a condition. Were I an admin there, as it looks like I might become, I would do the same, unless I saw the block as purely disruptive. There is an argument for that, but there is are arguments in the other direction. I'm trying to respect both sides of this, plus the welfare of the project itself. Overall, I suspect, it will benefit from your
restrained participation.
QUOTE
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 27th May 2010, 10:44pm)
Hey, what do you want to do on Wikiversity? Why do you care about access rights?
I don't know! Maybe it's just the principle of defying the irrational acts of a tyrant.
Pardon me if I make sure I'm not standing next to you when the guards notice your defiance. If you are going to shoot the King, don't miss! I appreciate your comment, and well understand it, but it doesn't make me feel particularly safe, thinking of suggesting unblock. Are you capable of restraining this impulse? Not suppressing it, that's different, but being careful about where you place and express your defiance. Just being back as an editor at Wikiversity would be a kind of defiance and victory, but if you then act in a way that justifies the block, you'd undo much of that or more.
QUOTE
Who knows where the human imagination will take me? Have you seen some of my recent
efforts on NetKnowledge.org? How disruptive have I been there? Many of my peers there are Wikiversity veterans. We seem to be getting along.
Good sign. Why don't they support your unblock on Wikiversity? Surely that would help. Or is only one faction represented there? (I haven't looked, don't have time yet). Problem is, Greg, those who would support you on Wikiversity, disappeared, abandoned the field. It wasn't just that they were blocked, mostly they are not blocked. But, probably, they got tired of the endless controversy. Hence my caution.
Take a look at the promise I made today at
My RfA. What if you made a promise like that, for some probationary period? I.e., "If you support my unblock, and during a set probationary period, I consent to reversion by you, I promise to stop any on-wiki activity if you object to it during the probationary period, and, if I violate this promise, and you request it, I consent to a block by any administrator who has supported or implemented this unblock request, with the administrator only allowing a violation of the promise if the administrator agrees that the welfare of the project required the violating action."
Or something like that. Your words. A promise you could keep and that protects those who support you and that might even mollify those who would rather see you drop dead. In fact, they may believe that you would be unable to keep the promise, so they will assume that, next time, you'll really be in the wiki-grave, truly banned by local consensus. They may try to stop the unblock anyway, out of habit, but not with great vigor, the rug having been pulled out from under their argument. Only those who approve your unblock get the promise, as I wrote it, which means that they are voluntarily willing to take the risk that they'd have to object....
You would have set up conditions that would not only make serious disruption quite unlikely, you would also have effectively solicited support by possible fence-sitters. Of course, if you really just want to be able to complain about the idiot administrators who block you, you may not want to do this.
I think there is valuable work you could do at Wikiversity, and I disagree that Wikiversity is not a place for criticism of Wikimedia projects. But such criticism should be done with the highest standards, and there is a problem at Wikiversity with inadequate supervision, so a resource there can readily become, shall we say, excessive. Or can be seen that way by those criticized. In order for this to not be disruptive, then, the criticism must be handled so that self-serving objection to it becomes visible as such. Which means giving those criticized no excuse. And that probably requires a community, not just one individual.
QUOTE
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 27th May 2010, 10:44pm)
And if an ugly user page is the problem, send me some wikitext. I'll put it up if I don't consider it disruptive.
Do you consider
this disruptive? If not, put it up on my Wikiversity User page. Then, get it back in place on Meta.
I'll look and do what I can, or tell you why not.
QUOTE
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 27th May 2010, 10:44pm)
Your comment above about Adambro, if it's typical of what you'd write on wikiversity, doesn't make me hopeful, though. But I do realize this is the Review.
I'm finding that Adambro's contribution history is little different than that of a bot designed to welcome new users, revert vandalism, create new categories, and move pages from place to place. Why does a bot have rule over the entire project?
Oh, come on! Wikiversity is very short of contributors. He helps, and maybe he did something less than helpful. It can be undone. It's a wiki. Do you think that you help the cause of unblocking you by criticizing Adambro? You know how far that argument goes, on Wikipedia, i.e., "I should be unblocked because the blocking admin is a biased robot of no intellligence." The editor might as well write [declined] himself.
QUOTE
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 27th May 2010, 10:44pm)
I'm hoping that Jimbo starts to use his influence, what's left of it (it's probably still considerable), to push for better governance, true consensus process. I think it's possible.
I'm hoping to win the Powerball Lottery, then devote a month's worth of training to run a 4-minute mile, and then I seek to become a licensed neurosurgeon. I think it's more possible than what you think is possible.
Good luck. I'm about the same, except I
WP:DGAF about the license. I noticed that you can buy scalpels without a license. Mostly, I haven't tried directly to influence Jimbo. I haven't felt ready. Just like I'm not doing any neurosurgery yet. Maybe tomorrow.