Giano gets blocked for saying the truth, AGAIN!, ...Giano, why don't you just go over to Knol and be done with it?? Options Rating

[Alison]

Horrible block. I looked through GWH's other recent (this year) blocks of named users and aside from Mackan and Bagadani none jump out as bad. But his bad ones are doozies.

And WTF, he insisted that Mackan send a passport or something to the WMF as an unblock condition?

I got in touch with Mackan79 that time. We chatted for almost an hour on the phone and I was able to identify him in RL (like, 100%). I then went back to ArbCom and stated that I'd verified his RL identity and could guarantee that he wasn't Wordbomb. They accepted that and thus, never did find out his RL details, as far as I know.

I think i missed that one. Mackan was block as wordbomb?

Worse again. He was actually blocked as a sock of "Judd Bagley / Wordbomb" Note the RL name used indelibly in a block log. Not good at all, and on a number of levels.

[Derktar]

Horrible block. I looked through GWH's other recent (this year) blocks of named users and aside from Mackan and Bagadani none jump out as bad. But his bad ones are doozies.

And WTF, he insisted that Mackan send a passport or something to the WMF as an unblock condition?

I got in touch with Mackan79 that time. We chatted for almost an hour on the phone and I was able to identify him in RL (like, 100%). I then went back to ArbCom and stated that I'd verified his RL identity and could guarantee that he wasn't Wordbomb. They accepted that and thus, never did find out his RL details, as far as I know.

I think i missed that one. Mackan was block as wordbomb?

Yes, apparently he "self identified as Judd Bagley." Absolutely ridiculous of course.

[Viridae]

Horrible block. I looked through GWH's other recent (this year) blocks of named users and aside from Mackan and Bagadani none jump out as bad. But his bad ones are doozies.

And WTF, he insisted that Mackan send a passport or something to the WMF as an unblock condition?

I got in touch with Mackan79 that time. We chatted for almost an hour on the phone and I was able to identify him in RL (like, 100%). I then went back to ArbCom and stated that I'd verified his RL identity and could guarantee that he wasn't Wordbomb. They accepted that and thus, never did find out his RL details, as far as I know.

I think i missed that one. Mackan was block as wordbomb?

Yes, apparently he "self identified as Judd Bagley." Absolutely ridiculous of course.

According to that block log I didnt miss it at all. Whoops - WP has so much DRAMAZ that its hard to keep track.

[Anonymous editor]

reading his talk page brings us the classic recall question from our very own Random832.

[Alison]

Horrible block. I looked through GWH's other recent (this year) blocks of named users and aside from Mackan and Bagadani none jump out as bad. But his bad ones are doozies.

And WTF, he insisted that Mackan send a passport or something to the WMF as an unblock condition?

I got in touch with Mackan79 that time. We chatted for almost an hour on the phone and I was able to identify him in RL (like, 100%). I then went back to ArbCom and stated that I'd verified his RL identity and could guarantee that he wasn't Wordbomb. They accepted that and thus, never did find out his RL details, as far as I know.

I think i missed that one. Mackan was block as wordbomb?

Yes, apparently he "self identified as Judd Bagley." Absolutely ridiculous of course.

According to that block log I didnt miss it at all. Whoops - WP has so much DRAMAZ that its hard to keep track.

... and, errm, a "cockpuppet", Viridae??

[Viridae]

Horrible block. I looked through GWH's other recent (this year) blocks of named users and aside from Mackan and Bagadani none jump out as bad. But his bad ones are doozies.

And WTF, he insisted that Mackan send a passport or something to the WMF as an unblock condition?

I got in touch with Mackan79 that time. We chatted for almost an hour on the phone and I was able to identify him in RL (like, 100%). I then went back to ArbCom and stated that I'd verified his RL identity and could guarantee that he wasn't Wordbomb. They accepted that and thus, never did find out his RL details, as far as I know.

I think i missed that one. Mackan was block as wordbomb?

Yes, apparently he "self identified as Judd Bagley." Absolutely ridiculous of course.

According to that block log I didnt miss it at all. Whoops - WP has so much DRAMAZ that its hard to keep track.

... and, errm, a "cockpuppet", Viridae??

Unfortunate typo - I believe that was the one caused by having my python (the reptile kind) wrapped around my wrist.

[Vicky]

Yes, apparently he "self identified as Judd Bagley." Absolutely ridiculous of course.

I think that's code for "he said something that our finely honed linguistic skills told us was evidence for sockpuppetry".

[Ottava]

Gesh. What would Giano do if he had my level of admins "waiting to block"? The poor guy wouldn't be able to breathe.

[Anonymous editor]

Horrible block. I looked through GWH's other recent (this year) blocks of named users and aside from Mackan and Bagadani none jump out as bad. But his bad ones are doozies.

And WTF, he insisted that Mackan send a passport or something to the WMF as an unblock condition?

I got in touch with Mackan79 that time. We chatted for almost an hour on the phone and I was able to identify him in RL (like, 100%). I then went back to ArbCom and stated that I'd verified his RL identity and could guarantee that he wasn't Wordbomb. They accepted that and thus, never did find out his RL details, as far as I know.

I think i missed that one. Mackan was block as wordbomb?

Yes, apparently he "self identified as Judd Bagley." Absolutely ridiculous of course.

According to that block log I didnt miss it at all. Whoops - WP has so much DRAMAZ that its hard to keep track.

... and, errm, a "cockpuppet", Viridae??

This thread comes to mind.

[Vicky]

Gesh. What would Giano do if he had my level of admins "waiting to block"? The poor guy wouldn't be able to breathe.

As we all know, there are one or two people whom certain admins would love to block.

[Giano]

Gesh. What would Giano do if he had my level of admins "waiting to block"? The poor guy wouldn't be able to breathe.

As we all know, there are one or two people whom certain admins would love to block.

There are one or two, Taxwoman, who should be blocked!

Giano

[Milton Roe]

... and, errm, a "cockpuppet", Viridae??

Unfortunate typo - I believe that was the one caused by having my python (the reptile kind) wrapped around my wrist.

Bleh. Your wrist, eh?

[Vicky]

There are one or two, Taxwoman, who should be blocked!

Giano

More than one or two. However, they are probably not the ones who will be.

[Sceptre]

I'm torn about the Giano block: on one hand, the unblock enforces my viewpoint that some cantankerous editors are treated more fairly than others (i.e. any block on Giano won't last), but it was a bad block, to be honest. It is not uncivil or a personal attack to call a spade a spade, unless that spade happens to be one of the seven dirty words. But I digress.

Edit: I don't mean cantankerous as an insult; you are "difficult or irritating to deal with". Most of this comes from your attitude, Giano. If you showed a little bit more restraint in your comments, there would be no reason for people not to like you. But you have to say, you do shoot yourself in your foot sometimes. While it may not be your nature, you have to dance around the maypole to edit hassle-free.

This post has been edited by Sceptre: Wed 3rd September 2008, 11:37am

[Cedric]

Pot. Kettle. Black.

[Rootology]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req....2F3.2F0.2F3.29

From the RFAR page, 3-3 now, yowza:

Accept. Some people are just being uncivil for no particular reason. It is not the case with Giano and Peter Damian. It seems clearly that their incivility issue is a result of some other more important issues. Civility can be nothing compared to those issues... IRC and some unwarranted admins' aggressive stance and style. This has probably nothing to do with Georgewilliamherbert who could have gone to Giano's talk page at least and see if he could fix the problem otherwise. Ok, now, Fuck both IRC and incivility (this is uncivil in my small village and I am just saying it here for the sake of argument)... Many troubles come from IRC. I personally do not recognize decisions being made there and consider that parasitism. In a nutshell, incivility is less a problem compared to some partisan decisions being made there or to some aggressive admin interventions. I suggest that the ArbCom keep the civility restrictions to counter unwarranted civility issues BUT rule out decisions made on IRC and address the admin way of intervening. Otherwise, the restrictions should be lifted. We cannot maintain civility paroles while closing our eyes when it comes to the roots of the problem. They serve for nothing but to worsen situations. Fortunately, the Peter Damian/Stifle incident has been solved in a very appropriate way but would that be enough? Not really. That is why I am accepting this case. -- fayssal / Wiki me up® 17:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Bold emphasis his, italics/underline mine. He also didn't accept Brad's proposal unless it addresses IRC as well.

[SirFozzie]

Which just means nothing will happen at all. Fayssal's accept reducecd it to a net zero, it still has to get to +4, and Brad's motion looks to not have much chance.

[Anonymous editor]

yeah, I don't see this one being accepted.

[Sceptre]

I've been thinking about Giano quite a bit recently. I think it's evident that the civility sanction, or in fact any civility block, really doesn't work. Instead, the community, or the committee (whichever) should lay down the following principles and remedies:

1. Brief civility blocks are manifestly "cool-down blocks", and as such inflame tempers.
2. Long time and esteemed article writers/vandal fighters are not exempt from policies and guidelines; instead, they are given more leniency (e.g. while a new user would be banned for constantly edit-warring, experienced users would be given 1RR sanctions).
3. Giano fits in the description of "long-time esteemed article writer". His attitude leaves more to be desired, but his experience has proved he is an asset to the encyclopedia. However, this does not afford him immunity from blocks or banned.
4. Instead of blocking Giano, which tends to annoy him, several esteemed and neutral administrators should help or mentor Giano (hopefully, with his consent) into showing more decorum and, eventually, reform his permanent attitude to be a lot less snippy.
5. Preferably, any discussion of Giano should take place on a high visibility page on-wiki, or in an IRC channel where he is present, to preclude any notion of clandestine activity.
6. If Giano's attitude is consistently as negative six months after mentoring begins, he may be liable to be banned for any amount of time.

What does everyone think?

[Peter Damian]

I've been thinking about Giano quite a bit recently. I think it's evident that the civility sanction, or in fact any civility block, really doesn't work. Instead, the community, or the committee (whichever) should lay down the following principles and remedies:[list=1]
[*]Brief civility blocks are manifestly "cool-down blocks", and as such inflame tempers.
[*]Long time and esteemed article writers/vandal fighters are not exempt from policies and guidelines; instead, they are given more leniency (e.g. while a new user would be banned for constantly edit-warring, experienced users would be given 1RR sanctions).

This is confusing. Are you saying that established editors should not be exempt from policies, or that they are not, but should be?

[*]Instead of blocking Giano, which tends to annoy him, several esteemed and neutral administrators should help or mentor Giano (hopefully, with his consent) into showing more decorum and, eventually, reform his permanent attitude to be a lot less snippy.

Giano dislikes the whole concept of mentoring, as being patronising.

Perhaps you are missing the whole point here, which is that Giano does not consider his behaviour uncivil at all. Nor do I. The problem is the narrow-minded conception of civility that is being forced by North Americans upon those who do not belong to their culture. Read his essay on civility.