![]() |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Abd |
![]()
Post
#1
|
Postmaster ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Regulars Posts: 1,919 Joined: From: Northampton, MA, USA Member No.: 9,019 ![]() |
JzG at AN, the usual
Some of the usual usual, but I'd noticed before that T. Canens knew the difference between a block and a ban, and he points it out. JzG will try to get a ban declared, that's his history. Not that it matters. JzG, however, has been the long-term POV-pusher here, that's clear. EnergyNeutral was, indeed, my sock. Demonstrating how I'd edit if not for the ban. Middle-of-the-road, actually. JzG archived and collapsed a discussion that was started by others, in which I'd merely commented, as if it were mine. EnergyNeutral was cooperating with Brian Josephson, a Nobel laureate in physics. By comparison, JzG has a friend who is a scientist. And he's 100% convinced that he's right. (I.e., that what his friend told him years ago is The Truth, which it might even have been, but you have to have some background to understand the issues.) He thinks he's talking about me. (EnergyNeutral was created for just what I wrote on the EN user page, because of what I saw happening at EnergyCatalyzer, which is either the biggest fraud ever to hit the field of cold fusion, or it's the real thing, and .... the real experts are saying, "Damn! We can't tell, this is either a huge fraud, or Rossi Has Done It." Lying was not involved.) EN "pushed" for reporting what is in reliable sources, only, and added highly skeptical material. Brian Josephson had been active there, that's how he became involved. Off-wiki, he's known as a supporter of cold fusion research, and so have at least two other Nobel laureates in physics.... Hut 8.5 points to the Wikiversity documentation. Why, thanks, Hut! I tried to point to that on-wiki and it was Revision Deleted. Leading to some, ah, consideration of the boundaries of revision deletion.... The last edit documented there was May 13, and very little has anything to do with ban evasion, but it's all block evasion. EnergyNeutral was ban evasion, almost totally editing in cold fusion. How was EnergyNeutral identified? Topic interest. Any new editor who isn't pseudoskeptical in the cold fusion area arouses claims of ban evasion, since the road is littered with knowledgeable banned editors. Has Wikipedia ever considered that it's banning scientists and experts? (Most experts simply stay away, to be sure.) If Wikipedia were sane, the "ban evasion" and "block evasion" would be considered as to the effect. But WP isn't sane. The early block evasion consisted entirely of self-reverted edits, so there was no necessity for further enforcement. But we all know that they don't think that way. It was when they turned to revision deletion and larger range blocks, making it less convenient to IP sock, that I turned to socking. I wonder. With some socks, I've not been so careful, with some, I very much doubt they could find them. EnergyNeutral was very obvious as a suspect, and I didn't take any care about OS and browser details, so Coren did not have to work hard. Rdfox 76 suggests a global ban, based on alleged "POV-pushing." That's interesting. WTF is Rdfox 76Â (T-C-L-K-R-D) ? From the user page, I get the distinct feeling that this guy isn't, er, collaborative. Guns. Not only can someone be banned on Wikipedia for coming to positive conclusions about cold fusion (which is now a substantial minority position among scientists, possibly a majority opinion among subject matter experts, like the peer reviewers in journals), but we will attempt to make sure that it isn't even studied, as at Wikiversity. My, my. JzG edits BLP on Brian Josephson. That had been discussed on Talk, and the removal had been suggested by Stanistani, I decided that it was poorly sourced, took it out, and 2over0, normally an editor who'd as soon see me vanished, agreed and praised the removal. From my supposed POV-pushing, I'd have wanted it mentioned that Brian Josephson is friendly with cold fusion researchers, and, of course, I know it to be a fact, because I know the field and am in close contact with the scientists, including face-to-face contact with some, and, I expect, more coming. I'm having fun, except when I get tempted to look back at Wikipedia.... Someone may notice JzG's restoration of improperly sourced BLP material.... This post has been edited by Abd: |
![]() ![]() |
Abd |
![]()
Post
#2
|
Postmaster ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Regulars Posts: 1,919 Joined: From: Northampton, MA, USA Member No.: 9,019 ![]() |
And now Raul654, that flatulent luminary (do not strike matches around Raul), chimes in:
QUOTE You've hit the nail on the head. Given that Abd is already permanently banned from editing the english Wikipedia, and further given his use of Wikiversity to document his disruption of Wikipedia, the topic of discussion here should be if and how to impose a ban on him on all WMF projects. The best venue to do it, I think, would be to work through it with the Office people. Raul654 (talk) 19:27, 4 June 2011 (UTC) So: it's now "given" that Abd is "permanently banned," and that Wikiversity is being "used" to document the situation -- documenting something is a problem? -- we will have a little discussion with the "Office people." The Office decides on global bans? That's news! I thought they stayed out of this crap!Last time I talked with "Office people," they were less than thrilled with Raul654, who had been almost single-handedly responsible for the creation of the massive Scibaby sock farm, through his abuse of tools. What's being suggested to me, by non-Wikipedians, would be, in fact, going above ArbComm, i.e., to Jimbo or the Foundation. So if Raul et al actually do this, I'd have a perfect reason to go there. I've been assuming they'd not be interested. If Raul et al make them interested, well .... That "documentation" on Wikiversity would show a police riot, where "enforcement" does damage, whereas the standard RBI would cause little or no harm. They really don't understand RBI, do they? This could actually get interesting. Oh, crap! MastCell came in with some sanity. Can't win for losing. Raul654 told a little story about what happened in early 2010. What he didn't mention is that this was part of how some of the Founder tools got removed, when Jimbo got sucked into intervening. Sure, Wikiversity is slow to block and hardly ever "bans," but it does get around to it when it's really needed. That was about Thekohser, and aboout projects where it was possible to assert that "disruption" was being organized, whether or not that was really true. In the end, it all blew over, and Thekohser was unblocked. If you look at that silly page of mine, it documents what has happened with self-reversion in the past, which included work with Thekohser. The page is only documenting what has already been done, and response, and is not any kind of attack page. (If there is "attack" there, it should be removed! And that page is under a Request for deletion, simply normal process. It's not a battle. If you look at the WV RfD page, you'll see that the prime "clerk" on that page, and most frequent closer, is ... Abd. And I've yet to close a discussion in a way that was reversed. While there is obvious lack of consensus for deletion of this page, even consensus to Keep, I'm not going to close this one for obvious reasons. The first signs of harassment from WP appeared yesterday, possibly, in some Talk page comments for me and Poetlister. But it's unclear. I got a note from an administrator about it. Believe it or not, all the custodians at Wikiversity are friendly, even when there have been disagreements. It's a very different place, possibly because there are no struggles over scarce "article space." Forks are even encouraged on WV. Fingers crossed! This post has been edited by Abd: |
tarantino |
![]()
Post
#3
|
the Dude abides ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Regulars Posts: 1,441 Joined: Member No.: 2,143 ![]() |
The Office decides on global bans? That's news! I thought they stayed out of this crap! See this current discussion on foundation-l where various wmf employees weigh in. Global ban - poetlister? You'll need to generate much more animosity before people consider you on the same scale as MB. |
The Joy |
![]()
Post
#4
|
I am a millipede! I am amazing! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 3,839 Joined: From: The Moon Member No.: 982 ![]() |
The Office decides on global bans? That's news! I thought they stayed out of this crap! See this current discussion on foundation-l where various wmf employees weigh in. Global ban - poetlister? You'll need to generate much more animosity before people consider you on the same scale as MB. The rights of individual wiki communities versus the rights of the Wikimedia Foundation? Where have seen a similar dispute? Oh yeah... (IMG:http://i528.photobucket.com/albums/dd325/Majorbloodknock/Astek/Diamond/Zed/Z286.jpg) |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: |