Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ The Wikipedia Annex _ Adambro blocks JWSchmidt‎ on Wikiversity
Posted by: Adambro
Thought I'd do you guys a favour. "Jimbo's lording over Wikiversity again" is getting pretty long and although it is about Wikiversity, it doesn't directly relate to this. Since I'm sure my latest action will come under the scrutiny of the wikipedia review crowd I thought I'd lend you a hand and start a new thread for your comments criticism. I can't guarantee I'll pay it much attention though, sorry.
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Adambro @ Sun 11th July 2010, 5:21pm) 
Thought I'd do you guys a favour. "Jimbo's lording over Wikiversity again" is getting pretty long and although it is about Wikiversity, it doesn't directly relate to this. Since I'm sure my latest action will come under the scrutiny of the wikipedia review crowd I thought I'd lend you a hand and start a new thread for your
You guys need to get a room.
Posted by: Moulton
I'm open for suggestions on a song parody here.
Posted by: SB_Johnny
"c'mon, c'om, c'mon now block me baby" by Jimbo Moron's Son?
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Sun 11th July 2010, 8:21pm)
"c'mon, c'om, c'mon now block me baby" by Jimbo Moron's Son?
See, I already wrote "http://moultonlava.blogspot.com/2008/09/do-you-really-want-to-block-me.html" a long time ago, so this is getting kinda banal already.
Posted by: JWSchmidt
QUOTE(Adambro @ Sun 11th July 2010, 3:21pm)
I can't guarantee I'll pay it much attention though
Some people have an attention span that is only long enough to reach the block button....the standard Wikipedia method for avoiding or ending a discussion...certified by Jimbo as the way to run a Wikimedia wiki. What is the problem, Adambro, did you get tired of http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity_talk:Privacy_policy&diff=prev&oldid=582712 needed http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity_talk:Privacy_policy&diff=prev&oldid=582657, was it just easier to block me?
Abd recently suggested that wiki participants should not complain about sysops who "are not too abusive". I rejected that concept. I feel that if Wikiversity is ever going to be returned to its mission and become a collaborative learning community then participants need to complain about abuse of power by sysops.....it will surprise nobody that my complaints "earned" me http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:JWSchmidt#Bad_block.
Ottava recently started a new initiative to develop needed policies on Wikiversity, which I was participating in. Of course, the problem of abuse of power came up in the course of discussing needed policies. It seems that Adambro took particular offense at my involvement in policy development. It reminds me of when http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jtneill&diff=prev&oldid=582170. Now this year Adambro seems intent on giving me a trial at which I will not be allowed to participate. What a surprise.
related learning project: http://sites.google.com/site/exodemic/wave-test
Posted by: Moulton
What if they gave a trial and the defendant didn't come?
Oh wait. That's how they normally do it in Wikiversity.
Never mind..
Posted by: Jon Awbrey
QUOTE
http://blueslyrics.tripod.com/artistswithsongs/lightnin_hopkins_2.htm#mr_charlie
by Sam “Lightnin’†Hopkins
recording of 1968, Houston, Texas
from Free Form Patterns
(Spoken, without accompaniment:)
Once in the country there was a little boy; every morning that he would go to the table with his little two sisters and brothers, you know, he would go there, he couldn't talk but his mother didn't know what was wrong with him so … she would go to the table in the morning, she would fix for breakfast, she'd fix toast and coffee, enough, coffee for the tin, toast for the eggs for the church, then she would ask and say, "what you want this morning?" Oh mama, toast and milk, you know things like that you know. But the little old boy he couldn't talk good, so she asked him say "what you want son"? Said "sa-sa-a I want-t t-t-t-" She said "Hush". Say "I tell you what to do. You just hush, I just go bring you what I bring the rest of 'em, cause one of these days I'm gonna learn you how to talk."
She goin' back and she fixes, the next morning same thing. "So what would you children want this morning?" "Butter 'n toast mama." Get around to the little old boy, say "What you want"? He say, "bu-bu-bu- bu-bu-bu …" she say "Lord, have mercy," that's what mama said and she walked away, say "wonder what's wrong with my child?"
He heard her. But you know the little boy couldn't do no better. So after he'd find out that mama couldn't understand him, and he couldn't understand the way his mama was doin' him, he packed up his little flower sack, and he decide that he would leave.
So when he left, on his way, he run up on a old rollin' mill, what they call Mister Charlie's. So he walked up to mister Charlie, mister Charlie was workin' round in his rose bushes 'n things … so he taps him: "mi-mi-mi …" say "Mister!" But he didn't know his name that time. The man straightened up and said "my name is mister Charlie". He say "mi-mi-ch-ch-ch-ch-" He said "but boy I ain't got to fool with you, you can't work." He said, "me-me can work!"
So the man went on workin' and he'd tap him again. He said "me-me-me wanna home". He said "look, boy, I've got a old bunk house out in the back," said "and if you promise me that you will stay in this bunk house, and watch my mill, and keep the fire from burning my mill down," say "I live two blocks up the road," say "and if you see the mill's on fire, say you run up and tell me the mill's on fire, you got a home and meal as long as I've got it." "Ta-ta-ta-ta-thank you mister Charlie." So the little old boy went to bunkin' that night.
Sho' enough, late one Sunday morning, mister Charlie's mill caught on fire. Which he'd forgot about what he had told the little boy. The little boy run up to him, he was cleaning out his front yard, makin' it beautiful with them rose bushes, you know with them red rose bushes you know how to keep 'em red those rose bushes, and the little boy run up there, tapped him on his back, and he raised up and said "Hey son, why here's you again."
"Ye-ye-ye-ye-ye-ye-ye" and he was pointing back toward the mill, tryin' to tell him his rollin' mill was on fire. So mister Charlie said, "I ain't got time to fool with you." So the little boy stuttered too bad for him to understand. So mister Charlie stooped over him again, he pat him on the back, said "ye-ye-ye-ye-your ro-ro-" he said "Wait a minute." He said, "if you can't talk you must sing", and he hollered:
(sung)
Whooooooa mister Charlie, do you know http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Your_rolling_mill_is_burnin'_down?
Mister Charlie, do you know http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Your_rolling_mill_is_burnin'_down?
Mister Charlie said if you ain't got no water boy, just let that old mill burn on down
Little boy was lonesome, he walked off and cried, he said …
He walked back and he said it one more time
Whooooooooa mister Charlie, I won't have no place to stay
Mister Charlie, I won't have no place to stay
Mister Charlie said Boy, you'll have a home with me, just as long as there is a day
Little boy sighed and he tell it one more time
He hollered at him:
Whooooooa mister Charlie, do you know http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Your_rolling_mill_is_burnin'_down?
Mister Charlie, do you know http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Your_rolling_mill_is_burnin'_down?
Mister Charlie said, "If you ain't got no water boy, just let that old mill burn on down"
Take it away, Mousetro!!!
Jon
Posted by: Moulton
Uffda.
Posted by: Zoloft
QUOTE(Moulton @ Mon 12th July 2010, 12:53am)
Uffda.
Minnesota is beautiful this time of year.
Posted by: Abd
QUOTE(Adambro @ Sun 11th July 2010, 6:21pm)
Thought I'd do you guys a favour. "Jimbo's lording over Wikiversity again" is getting pretty long and although it is about Wikiversity, it doesn't directly relate to this. Since I'm sure my latest action will come under the scrutiny of the wikipedia review crowd I thought I'd lend you a hand and start a new thread for your comments criticism. I can't guarantee I'll pay it much attention though, sorry.
Well, this is making a molehill out of a French door.Adambro's was certainly the wrong admin to block JWS, but http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Request_custodian_action#User:JWSchmidt is what preceded this block. There is also discussion on WV user talk for Adambro and JWSchmidt, as well as some comment that has been removed from http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Caprice&action=history, i.e., Moulton.
There are users on the various wikis who were originally blocked out-of-process or in some abusive way, but who, themselves, became highly abusive, and who seem to be unable to move on even when the original problems have been largely resolved. For me, the situation would be comparable to carrying on some extended struggle to get Iridescent dinged on Wikipedia because she had the temerity to block me two years ago. Even though she's not still an administrator. Even though, in fact, she was just doing her job as she saw it. Even though it's just a damn wiki and errors can be fixed. Etc.
JWS has http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJWSchmidt&action=historysubmit&diff=582749&oldid=582746 that may resolve this. He doesn't correctly state what happened. He was not blocked because of his "participation in policy development," but for his continued incivility and insistence on His Way in spite of warnings aplenty. He has continually complained about abusive admins and seems to think that any admin who doesn't agree with him is dishonest, but he doesn't actually submit any of his disputes to the community or otherwise attempt to resolve them except by arguing endlessly, and continuing behavior after warning.
I've considered JWS's behavior blockworthy for some time. I started by warning him, at the same time as I suggested to him that he ask for his admin tools back. His response demonstrated to me that this suggestion was, indeed, a Bad Idea. But, hey, I tried.
I didn't block him myself, even though I thought he was doing damage with certain possible negotiations with Moulton, because I had become involved with JWS by my attempts to convince him to start working more collaboratively, to move on from the battles of the past, and he had rejected this. So I acted as an ordinary user, I asked for a review by a neutral admin. There was no comment there supporting JWS, but there was also no emergency, so I was surprised to see Adambro block. (The only situation where his misbehavior was likely to cause a problem was with the Moulton/Caprice situation, and even there, well, it's hard to damage the situation any more than it is already damaged... JWS was more or less inviting Moulton to make more comments about the original dispute, when the Caprice account was opened so that positive collaboration might have some crack in the door, not to debate the original dispute.)
If JWS believed that Moulton should be unilaterally unblocked, he had the option of asking for this at the Colloquium, or in other venues. Moulton has not requested unblock, claims that he prefers not to be unblocked, and that is quite believable. JWS has not served as an effective advocate for Moulton and has possibly delayed a resolution. Moulton appears to not want a resolution, and declined to advise JWS to cool his wikisuicidal course, when I asked him, so my sense is that Moulton doesn't give a crap if JWS is blocked, or even prefers it. I am, shall we say, less thrilled about Moulton than I was before this sequence unrolled. Nevertheless, I don't see that anyone benefits from continuous conflict. Moulton might disagree, that's up to him, but he's been describing perfectly ordinary administrative responses as if they were blatant examples of abuse, he's lost his balance, if, indeed, he ever had it. So far, today, though, nothing outrageous from Moulton/Caprice. So Caprice is still able to edit that Talk page. I hope it stays that way.
Posted by: JWSchmidt
QUOTE(Abd @ Sun 11th July 2010, 10:14pm)
his continued incivility
Please list what I said that was uncivil so we can discuss it. Adambro could not be bothered to do so before he imposed his bad block. There is nothing uncivil about discussing abuse of power by sysops while developing Wikiversity policy, as I did.
QUOTE
seems to think that any admin who doesn't agree with him is dishonest
Try again; that's not what I think. We all have to question the honesty of sysops who post false reasons for blocks and who publish false claims about the behavior and state of mind of Wiki participants.
QUOTE
I've considered JWS's behavior blockworthy for some time.
At Wikiversity, Custodians block vandals who add "Joe is gay" to Wikiversity pages. It is an abuse of sysop power to use vandalism fighting tools to end a discussion at Wikiversity. It is absurd for sysops to pretend that they are doing their duty to help Wikiversity when they abuse their tools in an effort to silence discussions about abuses of power.
QUOTE
I thought he was doing damage with certain possible negotiations with Moulton
What do you think, Moulton? Did I damage your "negotiations"?
QUOTE
start working more collaboratively, to move on from the battles of the past
I've edited collaboratively in many wiki communities for many years. Wikiversity is dealing with a few sysops who abuse their power and drive honest and productive participants away from Wikiversity.
I don't have to live according to anyone else's view of what constitutes "battles of the past". It would be fair to say that there has been one continual "battle" since the hostile take-over of Wikiversity in 2008. During the past two years, a few disruptive sysops and other functionaries have done vast damage to Wikiversity. If those disruptive invaders stop injecting the disruptive practices of Wikipedia into Wikiversity then Wikiversity will be able to return to its mission and re-form the community of thoughtful learners that formed from 2006 to 2008.
I was collaborating with Adambro to develop Wikiversity policy and he blocked me.
QUOTE
review by a neutral admin
Most of the Wikiversity community has been banned, driven away or intimidated by repeated threats to close Wikiversity and by other odious abuses of power. The Wikiversity community should decide about blocks and bans, not invading Wikipedians. Adambro failed to discuss his concerns with me before he imposed his block; similarly, he previously kicked me from the #wikiversity-en chat channel with no warning and no reason given.
Is there any remaining Custodian who has not been intimidated by the outside invaders who have taken control of Wikiversity?
QUOTE
his misbehavior
Only at Wikimedia wiki projects like Wikipedia is it "misbehavior" to discuss the abuse of power by sysops. In any normal community honest community members are expected to defend each other from abusive thugs.
QUOTE
he had the option of asking for this at the Colloquium, or in other venues
I do sometimes go to forums like the Colloquium and objected to abuses of power. Jimbo has shown the Wikiversity community that he and others who abuse their power are free to do so. Nearly the entire community of honest Wikiversity participants has been banned, driven away or intimidated into silence.
QUOTE
I don't see that anyone benefits from continuous conflict.
I'm an old man. I've seen many petty thugs come and go. My reading of history tells me that even the biggest tyrants eventually depart from the stage. I've also seen it take years to get justice for people who have been treated unfairly. Speaking the truth and being a witness against thugs is a duty that we all owe to each other. Eventually abusive sysops either get bored, get a job or have their tools taken away.
QUOTE
perfectly ordinary administrative responses
I object to "perfectly ordinary" methods imported from Wikipedia when they disrupt the Wikiversity project. "Wikipedia Disease" is what I call the process by which abusive practices created at Wikipedia spread to other wiki communities. I believe that Wikiversity can be a fun and productive learning community if it can be cured of Wikipedia Disease.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 12th July 2010, 1:14am)
Adambro's was certainly the wrong admin to block JWS, but http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Request_custodian_action#User:JWSchmidt is what preceded this block.
The problem with noshing on swiss cheese is that you miss out on the http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:JWSchmidt/Abd.
QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 12th July 2010, 1:14am)
There is also discussion on WV user talk for Adambro and JWSchmidt, as well as some comment that has been removed from http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Caprice&action=history, i.e., Moulton.
The giant holes in the swiss cheese are preserved elsewhere. Rest assured we will take them up, sooner or later, in another venue that is more collegial and congenial, where everyone will have a fair chance to play the game of Paintball. At the moment, I'm still working on the advertising jingles.
QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 12th July 2010, 1:14am)
There are users on the various wikis who were originally blocked out-of-process or in some abusive way, but who, themselves, became highly abusive, and who seem to be unable to move on even when the original problems have been largely resolved.
There is scant evidence that the problem of the corrupt abuse of power tools has even been addressed, let alone solved. It's less about any individual corrupt admin, or any individual instance. It's about the pattern of the metastacizing cancer that JWS calls the "Wikipedia Disease."
QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 12th July 2010, 1:14am)
JWS has http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJWSchmidt&action=historysubmit&diff=582749&oldid=582746 that may resolve this. He doesn't correctly state what happened. He was not blocked because of his "participation in policy development," but for his continued incivility and insistence on His Way in spite of warnings aplenty.
Compare and contrast that to the way http://encyc.org/wiki/User_talk:Moulton/Caprice, similarly telling them, "My way or the highway, Miss Caprice."
QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 12th July 2010, 1:14am)
He has continually complained about abusive admins and seems to think that any admin who doesn't agree with him is dishonest, but he doesn't actually submit any of his disputes to the community or otherwise attempt to resolve them except by arguing endlessly, and continuing behavior after warning.
It's a tad difficult to submit a case to the community whilst one is bound and gagged and unceremoniously stuffed into the janitor's hall closet. And it's even worse when the gang of bullies say, "We'll let you out of the janitor's closet if you promise never to mention that we locked you up in there."
QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 12th July 2010, 1:14am)
I didn't block him myself, even though I thought he was doing damage with certain possible negotiations with Moulton, because I had become involved with JWS by my attempts to convince him to start working more collaboratively, to move on from the battles of the past, and he had rejected this.
I am frankly unclear on what you have in mind when you refer to "damage" as I consider Socratic self-examination to be a healthy process, in the spirit of Action Research. As to collaboration, I think it's fair to say that JWS and I have collaborated more productively than just about any other triad of which I have been a member there.
QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 12th July 2010, 1:14am)
So I acted as an ordinary user, I asked for a review by a neutral admin. There was no comment there supporting JWS, but there was also no emergency, so I was surprised to see Adambro block.
Abd, do you perchance have a speculative theory as to why http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:JWSchmidt/Abd?
QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 12th July 2010, 1:14am)
Moulton has not requested unblock, claims that he prefers not to be unblocked, and that is quite believable.
As long as the User:Moulton login is SUL locked, a local unblock has zero effect. On sites where User:Moulton is not blocked (e.g. Beta.Wikiversity), the User:Moulton login cannot edit any page whatsoever, because that is the what the SUL lock does. It doesn't actually stop one from logging in, it just stops one from editing any page anywhere. So requesting an unblock of User:Moulton on WV is like going to a local magistrate asking them to overturn an IRS levy on your local bank account. It's out of your jurisdiction, Abd. That's why everybody (including Adam and Diego) suggested just staring a new account -- one not subject to an IRS levy.
QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 12th July 2010, 1:14am)
My sense is that Moulton doesn't give a crap if JWS is blocked.
Correct. I don't give a crap. I give a song, instead. As you well know by now, when someone in power acts atrociously, I respond in kind by writing an atrocious song parody. At last count, I'd written a hundred of them. Some might complain they are crap, but I dare say they will have more long-term positive effect than most people would care to acknowledge.
QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 12th July 2010, 1:14am)
Nevertheless, I don't see that anyone benefits from continuous conflict.
Oh yeah? Ask Richard Wagner about that. Or Leonard Bernstein. Or George Lucas. Continuous conflict is the stuff of operas and epic movies. My difficulty is that I don't have the talent of those artists. I only have their indomitable spirit.
(And the time and inclination to pen a memorial song parody in cases chosen semi-randomly.)
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(JWSchmidt @ Mon 12th July 2010, 3:21am)
QUOTE(Abd @ Sun 11th July 2010, 10:14pm)
I thought he was doing damage with certain possible negotiations with Moulton.
What do you think, Moulton? Did I damage your "negotiations"?Negotiations? What negotiations? I'm a science educator who takes advantage of the occasional teachable moment to elevate public awareness of scientific concepts. And I enjoy exploring http://changetheschools.ning.com/video/discover-democratic-education in selected cases where more traditional methods have consistently failed.
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Sun 11th July 2010, 9:20pm)
Minnesota is beautiful this time of year.
Which reminds me...whatever became of Keeper76? He lives in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area.
Posted by: Moulton
Ottava had a long talk with Adambro in IRC. At the end, they both consented to releasing it.
QUOTE(Today in IRC)
(03:53:17 PM) Ottava [~no@173-103-170-172.pools.spcsdns.net] entered the room.
(03:53:28 PM) Ottava: So... JWS, how are you?
(03:53:42 PM) JWSchmidt: I'm fine, how are you?
(03:53:48 PM) Ottava: I'm doing well
(03:53:56 PM) Ottava: What is the outcome you want from the recent dust up
(03:54:18 PM) JWSchmidt: well, I have an unblock request on my user talk page
(03:54:32 PM) Ottava: I think Abd might be a tad in over his head and would need his probationary period extended maybe a month or two
03:54:56 PM) Ottava: Oh, he complained when I told Moulton that if he didn't stay over on the Caprice page that I would block him ;/
(03:54:59 PM) Ottava: So
(03:55:09 PM) Ottava: I dont know if I can really say anything about unblocking you at the moment
(03:55:29 PM) JWSchmidt: why not?
(03:55:41 PM) Ottava: I could reduce your block to 24 hours, as I don't believe in admin blocking for more than 24 hours at a time without community involvement
(03:56:20 PM) Ottava: It wouldn't be an unblock, nor would me be responding to the legitimacy of the block or not
(03:56:36 PM) Ottava: Would that be fine? It would leave you open to another 24 hour block following the end of it
(03:56:42 PM) Ottava: Not from me, mind you
(03:57:13 PM) JWSchmidt: if you are trying to ease tensions and concerned that I'd be "disruptive" if unblocked, I'd agree to not edit for 24 hours
(03:57:29 PM) Ottava: Oh, I have no intention on paying attention enough to see if you are disruptive or not
(03:57:32 PM) Ottava: Im staying out of it
(03:57:52 PM) Ottava: Your 24 hour period from when Adambro blocked you would end in 3/4 hours
(03:58:03 PM) JWSchmidt: I'm saying, if you feel you would be risking your reputation, I'd try to help you by not editing
(03:58:17 PM) Ottava: I don't care about my reputation
(03:58:21 PM) JWSchmidt: ha ha
(03:58:24 PM) Ottava: I just don't believe that blocks longer than 24 hours can accomplish anything
(03:58:42 PM) Ottava: If there is repeated offense, block for 24 hours. If you think it doesnt stop anything, request from the community a longer block
(03:58:43 PM) JWSchmidt: I think the block tool is for vandals and such things
(03:59:52 PM) Ottava: Anyway, I'm just here to inform you that I will be capping it at 24 hours, wont be responding to any unblock request or saying if the block is good or not, and I would leave it open to Adambro or anyone else to reblock you for another 24 hour period if they think you deserve it. I wont be looking to see if you do or not
(04:00:19 PM) JWSchmidt: thanks for letting me know
(04:00:24 PM) Ottava: Wait, I was wrong, 24 hours will end in 2 hours
(04:01:20 PM) Ottava: I don't understand why people block for more than 24 hours, or why they think they need to do such a thing without any discussion
(04:01:24 PM) Ottava: It just inflames situations
(04:02:20 PM) JWSchmidt: I've been labeled as a "troll", so some people seem to feel that means I should be banned
(04:03:08 PM) Ottava: It happens
(04:03:09 PM) JWSchmidt: that it is a waste of time to talk to me
(04:03:31 PM) Ottava: I prefer "taking the piss" instead of the term trolling.
(04:03:45 PM) adambro_: Ottava: the block is the subject of a discussion at Wikiversity:Request custodian action, could you comment there as to your thoughts as opposed to simply unblocking
(04:04:07 PM) Ottava: Adambro - as I said, I am not opining on the correctness of the block nor am I going to
(04:04:07 PM) adambro_ is now known as adambro
(04:04:25 PM) JWSchmidt: I'm not familiar with "taking the piss" as an alternative to the term "trolling"
(04:04:34 PM) Ottava: And if he does something that you consider is a repeat offense, then if you block him for 24 hours again then thats you
(04:04:57 PM) Ottava: JWS - it is a Britishism
(04:05:02 PM) Ottava: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taking_the_piss
(04:05:43 PM) JWSchmidt: I prefer this term: education
(04:05:44 PM) Ottava: Its the best way I could describe Moulton's actions as Caprice
(04:06:23 PM) adambro: so you're just adopting a blanket policy of changing all blocks to 24 hours?
(04:07:04 PM) JWSchmidt: Moulton uses unconvention educational methods
(04:07:06 PM) Ottava: Adambro - those without consensus, yes
(04:07:21 PM) Ottava: If there is an immediate problem, it will be resolved in 24 hours
(04:07:28 PM) Ottava: if there is a long lasting problem, it needs discussion
(04:07:46 PM) Ottava: As I said, you can reblock him for another 24 hours, and then after that for 24 hours, etc
(04:07:47 PM) adambro: how many times are we going to discuss the same issue?
(04:07:59 PM) Ottava: If you honestly believe he needs to be blocked, then you can take the 30 seconds to do it
(04:08:21 PM) adambro: that seems crazy
(04:08:22 PM) Ottava: Discuss the same issue? Well, if he is still around and we keep discussing it, then chances are that there is no consensus to indef
(04:09:00 PM) JWSchmidt: how many times are we going to discuss the same issue? <-- at Wikipedia some issues have been discussed, repeatedly, for years
(04:09:05 PM) adambro: the indef block is not a suggestion that he should be banned permanently, rather a suggestion that he should be blocked until a point at which the community has worked out how to deal with the issues
(04:09:22 PM) Ottava: Community consent comes first, not second
(04:09:35 PM) Ottava: Admin don't have the authority to defacto ban then ask if it was okay
(04:09:48 PM) adambro: who says?
(04:09:51 PM) JWSchmidt: I'd prefer to be able to deffend myself in any show trial featuring me
(04:09:53 PM) Ottava: And all people have the right to prove themselves, so, if he goes back to his ways after 24 hours, that jsut makes him look bad
(04:10:01 PM) Ottava: Adambro - the Community Review policy
(04:10:08 PM) Ottava: That is the only one with banning authority
(04:11:00 PM) adambro: I think you should discuss this policy of unblocking after 24 hours on wiki
(04:11:16 PM) Ottava: Both blocker and blockee need to prove their side was correct. If the blocker was right, then multiple repeated 24 hour blocks will show that the person needs to be banned and cannot be trusted. If the blockee shows that they don't do anything problematic, then there is no problem.
(04:11:39 PM) Ottava: Its been discussed here many times
(04:11:46 PM) adambro: here? on IRC?
(04:11:52 PM) Ottava: and on Wikiversity
(04:12:27 PM) Ottava: Plus, 24 hour blocks is the easiest way to ensure that blocker and blockee do not alienate each other
(04:12:40 PM) Ottava: we are a community, not a place that separates out individuals into tiny bands
(04:13:27 PM) Ottava: If you prefer, I can intervene as an admin and instead unblock, which would completely undermine your authority.
(04:13:32 PM) JWSchmidt: anti-vandal tools like the "block" butoon are not used at Wikiversity to end or prevent discussions, this is not Wikipedia
(04:13:38 PM) adambro: I'm just astonished that you would rather start playing around with 24 hour blocks than actually engage in discussion about the block where it is already been discussed by the community
(04:13:50 PM) Ottava: adambro, discussions come first, not second
(04:14:00 PM) Ottava: otherwise, they aren't discussions
(04:14:09 PM) adambro: Ottava: have you considered the problems with that I have highlighted in this case?
(04:14:31 PM) JWSchmidt: It seems that Adambro would prfer not to talk to me
(04:14:33 PM) adambro: I don't really think there is a one size fits all solution to every problem
(04:14:34 PM) Ottava: adambro, as I said, I will not intervene with the matter and get into specifics.
(04:14:48 PM) Ottava: But I can assure you that if I do, I will take my personal understanding and experience of JWS into consideration
(04:14:52 PM) adambro: you are intervening if you unblock, how isn't that intervening ??
(04:15:08 PM) Ottava: which, over 2 years, has had him criticize me thousands of times but not once to the point I thought he deserved to be blocked
(04:15:20 PM) Ottava: Reducing a block to 24 hours is not unblocking or overturning
(04:15:47 PM) adambro: still intervening though, seems particularly disruptive when it is already been discussed
(04:16:05 PM) Ottava: Leighblackall, Jtneill, and Abd are against your block
(04:16:12 PM) Ottava: Darkcode is undecided
(04:16:15 PM) Ottava: No one has come to support you
(04:16:28 PM) Ottava: Now, many people have expressed disatisfaction with the way you use ops
(04:16:35 PM) Ottava: So, you can listen to what I say and save face
(04:16:40 PM) Ottava: or it wont end too well for you
(04:16:54 PM) Ottava: 24 hour blocks only
(04:16:58 PM) Ottava: discussion for anything more
(04:17:01 PM) Ottava: Did I make myself clear?
(04:17:09 PM) adambro: excuse me?
(04:17:12 PM) Ottava: You heard me
(04:17:38 PM) Ottava: It will be far easier to remove you than it will be to block JWS for any lengthy period of time.
(04:17:47 PM) Ottava: If you want to put yourself against him, the door is right there waiting for you.
(04:18:01 PM) Ottava: Now, do you want to keep your ops, which will have you accept a limitation to 24 hour blocks without community discussion
(04:18:05 PM) Ottava: or do you want to be shown the door?
(04:18:21 PM) adambro: since when did you have the right to make these demands?
(04:18:32 PM) Ottava: You must be completely unobservant
(04:18:38 PM) Ottava: No wonder why you are disliked so heavily
(04:18:57 PM) adambro: I think you need to take a step back here.
(04:19:04 PM) Ottava: Adambro, the above is all you get
(04:19:10 PM) Ottava: You better make your choice
(04:19:18 PM) Ottava: Otherwise, we can start desysop proceedings
(04:19:23 PM) Ottava: and right now, I can count 11 votes against you
(04:20:02 PM) adambro: do you think there is a problem with JWS?
(04:20:24 PM) Ottava: There is no problem strong enough to warrant more than repeated 24 hour blocks based on individual incidents without community discussion.
(04:20:42 PM) Ottava: You want to trumpt the authority of an educational environment, poison the atmosphere, and show a complete disrespect to this community.
(04:20:46 PM) Ottava: No one has that right.
(04:21:33 PM) adambro: that isn't what I asked
(04:21:56 PM) Ottava: No, this is what I am telling you.
(04:22:01 PM) Ottava: You either accept a limit to 24 hour blocks only
(04:22:04 PM) Ottava: Or you will be removed
(04:22:08 PM) Ottava: did I make myself clear?
(04:23:05 PM) Ottava: I'm waiting for an answer.
(04:26:31 PM) adambro: so, I think I've gathered that you aren't bothered about JWS as long as he is only targeting me because of your personal opinion of me. is my understanding correct?
(04:26:48 PM) Guest34739 [~no@68-245-239-90.pools.spcsdns.net] entered the room.
(04:26:53 PM) Guest34739: Sorry, disconnected
(04:27:21 PM) Guest34739: You either accept a limit to 24 hour blocks only or you will be removed.
(04:27:28 PM) Ottava left the room (quit: Ping timeout: 258 seconds).
(04:27:37 PM) Guest34739 is now known as Ottava
(04:27:44 PM) adambro: quit the threats thanks.
(04:28:09 PM) Ottava: Adambro, it is a promise
(04:28:17 PM) Ottava: Your actions have been disliked by most of the community
(04:28:23 PM) Ottava: your personality has been disliked by most of the community
(04:28:30 PM) Ottava: your attitude is detrimental to an educational environment
(04:28:34 PM) Ottava: and you have no background in that
(04:28:49 PM) Ottava: your actions and attitude towards the -founder- of Wikiversity has shown yourself to not grasp common sense
(04:28:55 PM) Ottava: and your desire to put yourself above discussion is troubling
(04:29:01 PM) adambro: ironic
(04:29:10 PM) Ottava: Stop with the games.
(04:29:16 PM) Ottava: You are acting like a damn child
(04:29:29 PM) Ottava: If you aren't going to take this serious, then I will put up the proceedings now.
(04:29:51 PM) adambro: so its okay to implement a 24 block blanket policy without discussion but not to (AGF, remember that?), try to deal with a ongoing problem
(04:30:08 PM) Ottava: You aren't dealing with any problems
(04:30:17 PM) Ottava: You are blocking people and -causing- problems
(04:30:25 PM) Ottava: You don't understand how poisonous your actions and behavior are
(04:30:30 PM) Ottava: We dealt with JWS for two years
(04:30:37 PM) Ottava: it wasn't until you got involved that it got so out of hand
(04:30:51 PM) Ottava: -You- are the one responsible for that
(04:31:04 PM) adambro: erm, and Moulton? my fault? I'm not even convinced, might need to check your dates
(04:31:07 PM) Ottava: And the fact that you don't recognize it nor recognize the need to stop with the childish bullshit
(04:31:09 PM) Ottava: that is a serious problem
(04:31:21 PM) Ottava: Moulton and JWS are two very different people
(04:31:24 PM) Ottava: Don't play that game
(04:31:29 PM) adambro: maybe, JWS was write after all, perhaps we should publish IRC logs on Wiki
(04:31:51 PM) Ottava: I have no problem with others of the community seeing what I stated as I already talked to them about your removal dating back two months
(04:31:51 PM) darkcode: <Ottava> Your actions have been disliked by most of the community
(04:32:00 PM) adambro: I would be quite happy for all my discussions on IRC to be published, Ottava, how about you?
(04:32:02 PM) darkcode: you can't count my undecided as not disliking what he did
(04:32:10 PM) Ottava: darkcode - you aren't most
(04:32:27 PM) Ottava: Adambro, if you paid attention you will see that I already stated I had no problem with it.
(04:32:38 PM) Ottava: You do know that the channel is logged, right?
(04:32:45 PM) Ottava: And that it is sent to many people who aren't in here, right?
(04:33:35 PM) adambro: perhaps we do need Moulton to teach us all about ethics...
(04:33:45 PM) darkcode: I never said I was, just you making it sound like he's alone ;p
(04:33:56 PM) Ottava: Adambro, I am an ethicist, Moulton is not.
(04:34:10 PM) adambro: you don't care about ethical conduct ?
(04:34:23 PM) Ottava: Adambro, do you know why I was brought onto Wikipedia?
(04:34:28 PM) Ottava: Because of my ethicist background
(04:34:46 PM) adambro: where are those ethics now?
(04:35:00 PM) Ottava: It is unethical to block for more than 24 hours and demand discussion after
(04:35:15 PM) Ottava: It is also unethical for you to continue your fighting with JWS
(04:35:21 PM) adambro: and to make threats? or do ethics not apply when inconvenient?
(04:35:40 PM) Ottava: As I said, it was a promise. And people who are acting like you need to know the ramification of their actions.
(04:35:49 PM) Ottava: If you are unwilling to accept 24 hour blocks, then that is a problem with you.
(04:36:04 PM) adambro: what is wrong with proposing that as a policy?
(04:36:17 PM) Ottava: Because this deals just with you
(04:36:19 PM) Ottava: And your behavior
(04:36:22 PM) adambro: I am not going to feel compelled to obey you in this way
(04:36:25 PM) Ottava: It is your chance for you to keep your ops
(04:36:35 PM) adambro: I don't crave ops
(04:36:47 PM) Ottava: Is that your excuse for abusing them?
(04:36:47 PM) adambro: if I loose my ops whilst maintaining my principles then fair enough
(04:36:53 PM) Ottava: You don't have principles
(04:36:59 PM) Ottava: You fought nastily with others on Wikiversity
(04:37:14 PM) Ottava: You have no right to do that when holding a position of authority
(04:38:52 PM) Ottava: Right now there are no supporters for your block.
(04:39:20 PM) adambro: well, as I say, I am not going to feel compelled to accept your threats, if you wish than propose my rights are removed then you better go ahead. like I say, I am more interested in always trying to do what I think is the right thing than trying to maintain my rights
(04:39:49 PM) Ottava: If you wanted to do the right thing then you failed a long time ago. Now you are just trying to justify your own behavior for your pride.
(04:39:50 PM) darkcode: again don't count me as not supporting his block
(04:40:00 PM) Ottava: Darkocode - still, one person
(04:40:13 PM) darkcode: undecided goes both ways you know ;p
(04:40:20 PM) Ottava: okay, so, 3.5 to .5
(04:40:24 PM) adambro: Ottava: for your reference, "A threat is an act of coercion wherein an act is proposed to elicit a negative response" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threat
04:40:52 PM) Ottava: Adambro, there is no negative response to be elicited. There is a positive response for you to accept a limitation to your abilities for the good of everyone.
(04:40:56 PM) Ottava: And it would be in your best interest.
(04:41:09 PM) Ottava: You overstepped your authority and if you don't recognize that, that is a problem
(04:41:29 PM) adambro: I will continue to do what I have always done on WV, try to help the project. I'm sorry but your threats don't work on me.
(04:43:54 PM) Ottava: Adambro, if you wanted to help the project, you would not be overriding the project
(04:44:23 PM) adambro: there is a discussion ongoing, I will respect the outcome of that discussion
(04:44:44 PM) Ottava: If that is how you wish to be
(04:44:57 PM) adambro: that is exactly how I wish it to be.
(04:45:15 PM) darkcode: yes let the discussion finish, have enough interruption mid way going around, don't need more
(04:45:55 PM) Ottava: JWS, based on community consensus, you are being unblocked
(04:46:06 PM) JWSchmidt: thanks
(04:46:31 PM) adambro: well I'm glad to hear that we are making decisions based upon discussion, not just blanket unwritten rules about 24 hour blocks
(04:47:11 PM) adambro: I trust there wasn't a CoI in your unblock
(04:48:01 PM) darkcode: there was
(04:48:03 PM) Ottava: The conflict of interest was in your block
(04:48:13 PM) Ottava: As you had extensive fighting with JWS
(04:48:21 PM) Ottava: JWS has attacked me many times, but not once did I fight with him
(04:48:23 PM) Ottava: or attack him
(04:48:26 PM) Ottava: or criticize him
(04:48:35 PM) Ottava: That is not what administrators do
(04:48:38 PM) adambro: when have I attacked him?
(04:48:57 PM) Ottava: Do you want specifics or would a link to your special:contribs be enough?
(04:49:01 PM) adambro: as JWS would say, please list all those instances so we can discuss them
(04:49:51 PM) adambro: I'll happily explain why I chose to do anything I've done on WV. My talk page is always open for constructive discussions
(04:50:15 PM) Ottava: I'd have reverted back in the IP edits Adambro removed, because JWS obviously prefers that the edits remain. When deep conflicts arise, it's important for custodians to step back from individual action and seek community support. In an emergency, any of us can act. There was no emergency here. --Abd 15:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
(04:50:20 PM) Ottava: I'm not the only one who recognizesz it
(04:50:26 PM) Ottava: And that was just one instance
(04:50:36 PM) adambro: how is that an attack on JWS?
(04:50:58 PM) adambro: that is me trying to enforce a block which the community hasn't concluded should be overturned
(04:51:02 PM) Ottava: It was a statement of your conflict of interest with one example
(04:51:06 PM) Ottava: Now, JWS - http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Community_Review
(04:51:19 PM) Ottava: I ask for you to start the proceedings on yourself and open yourself for community review
(04:51:26 PM) adambro: a CoI *after* I'd blocked him? hmm....
(04:51:28 PM) Ottava: I ask because 3 people have directly stated a desire for that
(04:51:58 PM) Ottava: I implore you that when phrasing the request, you are brief, do not attack others, and be willing to accept any criticism
(04:52:16 PM) JWSchmidt: Ottava: I ask for you to start the proceedings on yourself and open yourself for community review <-- are you talking to me?
(04:53:00 PM) Ottava: yes
(04:53:06 PM) Ottava: Everything after Now JWS
(04:53:32 PM) JWSchmidt: maybe you could draft the statement that you are thnking of
(04:53:34 PM) darkcode: it should be mentioned on the Colloquium as well per policy
(04:54:08 PM) Ottava: JWS - I also ask for you to provide some suggestions on what kind of actions or probations could be put in place to ease concerns that people have given about your previous behavior
(04:54:11 PM) Ottava: darkcode - getting there
(04:54:13 PM) adambro: Ottava: so, to clarify, at what point shall I expect you will propose my admin rights are removed?
(04:54:41 PM) Ottava: adambro, if you are so eager for it, I can drop everything else I am trying to do to accomodate you
(04:55:09 PM) adambro: well, if you have concerns then you should clearly raise them
(04:55:18 PM) JWSchmidt: Ottava: can I just paste what you are saying here into the wiki?
(04:55:54 PM) darkcode: I just want JWS to get all his demands/objections that he's had for the last 2 years down in one place, and give the community time to ensure it understands his demands/objections and decide whether it cares to do anything about them
(04:55:55 PM) Ottava: JWS - I'm asking you to come up with something on your own >.<
(04:56:06 PM) JWSchmidt: oh
(04:56:15 PM) Ottava: 5 sentences at most
(04:56:29 PM) Ottava: Something about what you think people's concerns are with -your- behavior
(04:56:32 PM) Ottava: don't discuss theirs
(04:56:41 PM) Ottava: and offer different suggestions on how you could address the concerns
(04:56:45 PM) Ottava: then others will state what they think
(04:56:47 PM) Ottava: then we can go from there
(04:56:49 PM) JWSchmidt: I see
(04:56:52 PM) Ottava: if you think there are no concerns, state that
(04:56:59 PM) Ottava: if you think there are too many to list, well, state that
(04:57:06 PM) JWSchmidt: ha ha
(04:57:06 PM) darkcode: JWS doesn't think he's done anything wrong and needs to do anything differently, so pointless no?
(04:57:23 PM) Ottava: Darkcode - possibly
(04:57:52 PM) Ottava: But JWS, remember, I do support possible future 24 hour blocks if you get too crazy, so please be calm and observant
(04:58:02 PM) JWSchmidt: ok
(04:58:05 PM) Ottava: Unlike Moulton, I know you are capable of self control
(04:58:41 PM) adambro: but providing JWS only targets me he's fine by you Ottava ?
(04:58:58 PM) Ottava: JWS targets me non stop
(04:59:01 PM) Ottava: What are you even talking about?
(04:59:20 PM) darkcode: thats why I say have him get all his objections/complaints down in one place, give the community an opportunity to make sure they understand the objections/complains, maybe have JWS write what he thinks should be done to resolve it after that, and then the community can let JWS know if it cares or do anything or not
(04:59:22 PM) Ottava: As I said, JWS has attacked my actions over 1000 times in a two year period
(04:59:45 PM) Ottava: darkcode - I think that could be a separate review entry, concurrent, sure
(05:00:45 PM) adambro: Ottava: ironic that you're proposing a policy saying children shouldn't be bullied yet seem to suggest it is okay for adults to attack each other. shouldn't we require civil constructive criticism rather than attacks?
(05:00:55 PM) adambro is now known as adambro_
(05:00:58 PM) darkcode: JWS thinks the community already understands from what I gather on his talk page, but JWS should still do it, if they community knows than it isn't going to hurt any
(05:01:04 PM) adambro_: back later
(05:01:07 PM) Ottava: Adambro, children have no ability to defend themselves. You are in a position of authority and have the ability to defend yourself.
(05:01:18 PM) Ottava: Don't try to act like you should be treated like a child, or we can accomodate you.
(05:02:17 PM) darkcode: just because people are adults, don't mean they know how to respond appropriately when bullied, some people never learn how to deal with bullies
(05:03:17 PM) darkcode: people shouldn't be bullied regardless of their age, of course the problem is different people have different ideas of what bullying is, so is hard to agree that someone is being bullied
(05:04:03 PM) Ottava: true, but the policy was mostly about children who are still intellectually undeveloped
(05:17:03 PM) JWSchmidt: Now I can edit
(05:20:02 PM) JWSchmidt: it is after 2 pm and I've not had anything to eat today, so I'm going to have lunch
(05:23:23 PM) darkcode left the room (quit: Remote host closed the connection).
(05:30:45 PM) adambro_: Ottava: may I quote what you've said on IRC on wiki?
(05:30:46 PM) adambro_ is now known as adambro
(05:31:03 PM) Ottava: which part?
(05:31:14 PM) Ottava: and didnt I already say that my statements could be quoted?
(05:31:16 PM) Ottava: I think three times
(05:31:37 PM) Ottava: If you want to quote the part where I said people lack confidence in you
(05:31:38 PM) Ottava: go ahead
(05:32:14 PM) adambro: I'd like to post everything we've both said since around 17:24 UTC (I think that's the right time)
(05:33:06 PM) Ottava: You might as well just post it up at WR because that is where it will end up
(05:33:33 PM) adambro: No, I'd rather post it on WV since that is where discussions about WV stuff should go on
(05:34:54 PM) adambro: well, since you don't seem too bothered and there is no policy against it on WV, I'll do so later once I've got round to removing the comments from others
(05:35:11 PM) Ottava: Well, you will most likely be attacked because of http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity_talk:Privacy_policy#IRC_chat
(05:35:19 PM) Ottava: People on WR will think of you as a hypocrit
(05:36:05 PM) adambro: I think I've made it clear that I don't care what people on WR think and I'm always prepared to reconsider my position on issues.
(05:36:20 PM) Ottava: You don't really care what anyone thinks it seems.
(05:36:24 PM) adambro: looks like Moulton has posted a portion of it on WR already
(05:36:29 PM) Ottava: Could be why you pissed so many off.
(05:36:41 PM) adambro: thanks Monitor
(05:36:43 PM) Ottava: As I said before, we are logged
(05:38:09 PM) adambro: moulton aka Monitor, why do you have two accounts in #wikiversity by the way?
(05:38:36 PM) Ottava: He isn't the only one logging, you know
(05:39:14 PM) adambro: It doesn't bother me. I'm sure loads do it but I suspect most isn't so they can try to find something juicy to make a massive thread on WR about.
(05:39:30 PM) Ottava: Well, then you underestimate SB Johnny or JWS
(05:39:43 PM) Ottava: Hell, I made one with logs with Gmaxwell for his abuse on Commons
(05:40:01 PM) adambro: I'm not sure why I'm underestimating anyone ?
(05:40:09 PM) Ottava: You sure are acting like you are completely new to IRC or to Wikiversity
(05:40:29 PM) adambro: why so?
(05:41:30 PM) Ottava: Because you are in a room where you are pretty much on your own, with multiple people recording you, and many wanting you gone since 2009
(05:41:59 PM) Ottava: You rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, and this is one of the most laid back communities
(05:42:49 PM) adambro: how should I act in the circumstances? am I supposed to be bothered that every word is being logged?
(05:43:44 PM) Ottava: They are being logged because they want to show others how you are. It has nothing to do with changing your behavior. Quite the opposite, they prefer you to be you.
(05:45:16 PM) adambro: does it provide a little excitement for the crowd on WR?
(05:46:35 PM) Ottava: Nah, they pretty much had a set view of you for quite a long time now
(05:47:15 PM) Ottava: I was your last main defender until you pissed that down the drain two months ago
(05:54:42 PM) adambro: two months ago?
(05:57:00 PM) Ottava: Mhmm
(05:57:36 PM) adambro: and I thought you could handle criticism? apparently not.
(05:58:01 PM) Ottava: I handle criticism. I don't handle people that abuse their ops in order to make their buddies happy on Commons.
(05:58:14 PM) adambro: I don't have any "buddies" on Commons
(05:58:17 PM) Ottava: And for what reason? To keep excessive amounts on porn?
(05:58:19 PM) Ottava: Sure
(05:59:02 PM) adambro: If I was in any doubt that this was personal, rather than because I've really damaged WV, I shouldn't be in any doubt for any longer I guess
(05:59:16 PM) adambro: a few comments you don't like any someone is an enemy for life?
(05:59:19 PM) Ottava: It isn't personal. You abused ops on multiple Wikis.
(05:59:21 PM) Ottava: You were told about that.
(05:59:28 PM) Ottava: You are a loose cannon.
(05:59:36 PM) adambro: where have I abused ops?
(06:00:05 PM) adambro: if I have abused ops on multiple wikis, why haven't you raised those concerns on each project?
(06:00:26 PM) Ottava: I did, I confronted you about it on Commons
(06:00:53 PM) adambro: where?
(06:01:19 PM) Ottava: On Commons
(06:01:31 PM) Ottava: there were only a few discussions we criss crossed during
(06:01:40 PM) Ottava: Maybe you should pay attention next time
(06:02:05 PM) adambro: only a few discussions. exactly.
(06:05:56 PM) adambro: should I expect your proposal to remove my admin rights any time soon?
(06:07:03 PM) Ottava: Depends on if you try to indef JWS again
(06:07:05 PM) Ottava: as I said before
(06:07:24 PM) Ottava: I told you that if you reblock him for more than 24 hours then there will be a problem
(06:08:12 PM) adambro: ahh right, well as I've said, I am absolutely prepared to do that despite your threat that I shouldn't if I consider it in the interests of WV. perhaps you should get on with it now since I've no intention of obeying your orders
(06:11:09 PM) Ottava: and when you do, you will be listed up for removal
(06:11:35 PM) adambro: as opposed to? I understood that was what you were meaning
(06:13:12 PM) Ottava: Have you reblocked JWS?
(06:13:39 PM) adambro: no, I've yet to see a reason to do so to, in my view at least, protect WV from disruption
(06:13:45 PM) Ottava: k
(06:14:38 PM) adambro: but, what happens if I decide to block a Moulton IP for more than 24 hours? does that rule apply there as well?
(06:16:00 PM) adambro: Ottava: you could go really wild and propose these little unwritten rules are made into policy
(06:21:52 PM) adambro: right, anyway, I have more useful things to do with my time than lurk in here so I'll be off, I shall look forward to seeing your proposal though Ottava
(06:22:02 PM) adambro left the room (quit: Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.6/20100625231939]).
(06:25:20 PM) Ottava: Adambro - I was refering to you and JWS
(06:25:22 PM) Ottava: No one else
(06:25:33 PM) Ottava: Bah, he left
(03:53:28 PM) Ottava: So... JWS, how are you?
(03:53:42 PM) JWSchmidt: I'm fine, how are you?
(03:53:48 PM) Ottava: I'm doing well
(03:53:56 PM) Ottava: What is the outcome you want from the recent dust up
(03:54:18 PM) JWSchmidt: well, I have an unblock request on my user talk page
(03:54:32 PM) Ottava: I think Abd might be a tad in over his head and would need his probationary period extended maybe a month or two
03:54:56 PM) Ottava: Oh, he complained when I told Moulton that if he didn't stay over on the Caprice page that I would block him ;/
(03:54:59 PM) Ottava: So
(03:55:09 PM) Ottava: I dont know if I can really say anything about unblocking you at the moment
(03:55:29 PM) JWSchmidt: why not?
(03:55:41 PM) Ottava: I could reduce your block to 24 hours, as I don't believe in admin blocking for more than 24 hours at a time without community involvement
(03:56:20 PM) Ottava: It wouldn't be an unblock, nor would me be responding to the legitimacy of the block or not
(03:56:36 PM) Ottava: Would that be fine? It would leave you open to another 24 hour block following the end of it
(03:56:42 PM) Ottava: Not from me, mind you
(03:57:13 PM) JWSchmidt: if you are trying to ease tensions and concerned that I'd be "disruptive" if unblocked, I'd agree to not edit for 24 hours
(03:57:29 PM) Ottava: Oh, I have no intention on paying attention enough to see if you are disruptive or not
(03:57:32 PM) Ottava: Im staying out of it
(03:57:52 PM) Ottava: Your 24 hour period from when Adambro blocked you would end in 3/4 hours
(03:58:03 PM) JWSchmidt: I'm saying, if you feel you would be risking your reputation, I'd try to help you by not editing
(03:58:17 PM) Ottava: I don't care about my reputation
(03:58:21 PM) JWSchmidt: ha ha
(03:58:24 PM) Ottava: I just don't believe that blocks longer than 24 hours can accomplish anything
(03:58:42 PM) Ottava: If there is repeated offense, block for 24 hours. If you think it doesnt stop anything, request from the community a longer block
(03:58:43 PM) JWSchmidt: I think the block tool is for vandals and such things
(03:59:52 PM) Ottava: Anyway, I'm just here to inform you that I will be capping it at 24 hours, wont be responding to any unblock request or saying if the block is good or not, and I would leave it open to Adambro or anyone else to reblock you for another 24 hour period if they think you deserve it. I wont be looking to see if you do or not
(04:00:19 PM) JWSchmidt: thanks for letting me know
(04:00:24 PM) Ottava: Wait, I was wrong, 24 hours will end in 2 hours
(04:01:20 PM) Ottava: I don't understand why people block for more than 24 hours, or why they think they need to do such a thing without any discussion
(04:01:24 PM) Ottava: It just inflames situations
(04:02:20 PM) JWSchmidt: I've been labeled as a "troll", so some people seem to feel that means I should be banned
(04:03:08 PM) Ottava: It happens
(04:03:09 PM) JWSchmidt: that it is a waste of time to talk to me
(04:03:31 PM) Ottava: I prefer "taking the piss" instead of the term trolling.
(04:03:45 PM) adambro_: Ottava: the block is the subject of a discussion at Wikiversity:Request custodian action, could you comment there as to your thoughts as opposed to simply unblocking
(04:04:07 PM) Ottava: Adambro - as I said, I am not opining on the correctness of the block nor am I going to
(04:04:07 PM) adambro_ is now known as adambro
(04:04:25 PM) JWSchmidt: I'm not familiar with "taking the piss" as an alternative to the term "trolling"
(04:04:34 PM) Ottava: And if he does something that you consider is a repeat offense, then if you block him for 24 hours again then thats you
(04:04:57 PM) Ottava: JWS - it is a Britishism
(04:05:02 PM) Ottava: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taking_the_piss
(04:05:43 PM) JWSchmidt: I prefer this term: education
(04:05:44 PM) Ottava: Its the best way I could describe Moulton's actions as Caprice
(04:06:23 PM) adambro: so you're just adopting a blanket policy of changing all blocks to 24 hours?
(04:07:04 PM) JWSchmidt: Moulton uses unconvention educational methods
(04:07:06 PM) Ottava: Adambro - those without consensus, yes
(04:07:21 PM) Ottava: If there is an immediate problem, it will be resolved in 24 hours
(04:07:28 PM) Ottava: if there is a long lasting problem, it needs discussion
(04:07:46 PM) Ottava: As I said, you can reblock him for another 24 hours, and then after that for 24 hours, etc
(04:07:47 PM) adambro: how many times are we going to discuss the same issue?
(04:07:59 PM) Ottava: If you honestly believe he needs to be blocked, then you can take the 30 seconds to do it
(04:08:21 PM) adambro: that seems crazy
(04:08:22 PM) Ottava: Discuss the same issue? Well, if he is still around and we keep discussing it, then chances are that there is no consensus to indef
(04:09:00 PM) JWSchmidt: how many times are we going to discuss the same issue? <-- at Wikipedia some issues have been discussed, repeatedly, for years
(04:09:05 PM) adambro: the indef block is not a suggestion that he should be banned permanently, rather a suggestion that he should be blocked until a point at which the community has worked out how to deal with the issues
(04:09:22 PM) Ottava: Community consent comes first, not second
(04:09:35 PM) Ottava: Admin don't have the authority to defacto ban then ask if it was okay
(04:09:48 PM) adambro: who says?
(04:09:51 PM) JWSchmidt: I'd prefer to be able to deffend myself in any show trial featuring me
(04:09:53 PM) Ottava: And all people have the right to prove themselves, so, if he goes back to his ways after 24 hours, that jsut makes him look bad
(04:10:01 PM) Ottava: Adambro - the Community Review policy
(04:10:08 PM) Ottava: That is the only one with banning authority
(04:11:00 PM) adambro: I think you should discuss this policy of unblocking after 24 hours on wiki
(04:11:16 PM) Ottava: Both blocker and blockee need to prove their side was correct. If the blocker was right, then multiple repeated 24 hour blocks will show that the person needs to be banned and cannot be trusted. If the blockee shows that they don't do anything problematic, then there is no problem.
(04:11:39 PM) Ottava: Its been discussed here many times
(04:11:46 PM) adambro: here? on IRC?
(04:11:52 PM) Ottava: and on Wikiversity
(04:12:27 PM) Ottava: Plus, 24 hour blocks is the easiest way to ensure that blocker and blockee do not alienate each other
(04:12:40 PM) Ottava: we are a community, not a place that separates out individuals into tiny bands
(04:13:27 PM) Ottava: If you prefer, I can intervene as an admin and instead unblock, which would completely undermine your authority.
(04:13:32 PM) JWSchmidt: anti-vandal tools like the "block" butoon are not used at Wikiversity to end or prevent discussions, this is not Wikipedia
(04:13:38 PM) adambro: I'm just astonished that you would rather start playing around with 24 hour blocks than actually engage in discussion about the block where it is already been discussed by the community
(04:13:50 PM) Ottava: adambro, discussions come first, not second
(04:14:00 PM) Ottava: otherwise, they aren't discussions
(04:14:09 PM) adambro: Ottava: have you considered the problems with that I have highlighted in this case?
(04:14:31 PM) JWSchmidt: It seems that Adambro would prfer not to talk to me
(04:14:33 PM) adambro: I don't really think there is a one size fits all solution to every problem
(04:14:34 PM) Ottava: adambro, as I said, I will not intervene with the matter and get into specifics.
(04:14:48 PM) Ottava: But I can assure you that if I do, I will take my personal understanding and experience of JWS into consideration
(04:14:52 PM) adambro: you are intervening if you unblock, how isn't that intervening ??
(04:15:08 PM) Ottava: which, over 2 years, has had him criticize me thousands of times but not once to the point I thought he deserved to be blocked
(04:15:20 PM) Ottava: Reducing a block to 24 hours is not unblocking or overturning
(04:15:47 PM) adambro: still intervening though, seems particularly disruptive when it is already been discussed
(04:16:05 PM) Ottava: Leighblackall, Jtneill, and Abd are against your block
(04:16:12 PM) Ottava: Darkcode is undecided
(04:16:15 PM) Ottava: No one has come to support you
(04:16:28 PM) Ottava: Now, many people have expressed disatisfaction with the way you use ops
(04:16:35 PM) Ottava: So, you can listen to what I say and save face
(04:16:40 PM) Ottava: or it wont end too well for you
(04:16:54 PM) Ottava: 24 hour blocks only
(04:16:58 PM) Ottava: discussion for anything more
(04:17:01 PM) Ottava: Did I make myself clear?
(04:17:09 PM) adambro: excuse me?
(04:17:12 PM) Ottava: You heard me
(04:17:38 PM) Ottava: It will be far easier to remove you than it will be to block JWS for any lengthy period of time.
(04:17:47 PM) Ottava: If you want to put yourself against him, the door is right there waiting for you.
(04:18:01 PM) Ottava: Now, do you want to keep your ops, which will have you accept a limitation to 24 hour blocks without community discussion
(04:18:05 PM) Ottava: or do you want to be shown the door?
(04:18:21 PM) adambro: since when did you have the right to make these demands?
(04:18:32 PM) Ottava: You must be completely unobservant
(04:18:38 PM) Ottava: No wonder why you are disliked so heavily
(04:18:57 PM) adambro: I think you need to take a step back here.
(04:19:04 PM) Ottava: Adambro, the above is all you get
(04:19:10 PM) Ottava: You better make your choice
(04:19:18 PM) Ottava: Otherwise, we can start desysop proceedings
(04:19:23 PM) Ottava: and right now, I can count 11 votes against you
(04:20:02 PM) adambro: do you think there is a problem with JWS?
(04:20:24 PM) Ottava: There is no problem strong enough to warrant more than repeated 24 hour blocks based on individual incidents without community discussion.
(04:20:42 PM) Ottava: You want to trumpt the authority of an educational environment, poison the atmosphere, and show a complete disrespect to this community.
(04:20:46 PM) Ottava: No one has that right.
(04:21:33 PM) adambro: that isn't what I asked
(04:21:56 PM) Ottava: No, this is what I am telling you.
(04:22:01 PM) Ottava: You either accept a limit to 24 hour blocks only
(04:22:04 PM) Ottava: Or you will be removed
(04:22:08 PM) Ottava: did I make myself clear?
(04:23:05 PM) Ottava: I'm waiting for an answer.
(04:26:31 PM) adambro: so, I think I've gathered that you aren't bothered about JWS as long as he is only targeting me because of your personal opinion of me. is my understanding correct?
(04:26:48 PM) Guest34739 [~no@68-245-239-90.pools.spcsdns.net] entered the room.
(04:26:53 PM) Guest34739: Sorry, disconnected
(04:27:21 PM) Guest34739: You either accept a limit to 24 hour blocks only or you will be removed.
(04:27:28 PM) Ottava left the room (quit: Ping timeout: 258 seconds).
(04:27:37 PM) Guest34739 is now known as Ottava
(04:27:44 PM) adambro: quit the threats thanks.
(04:28:09 PM) Ottava: Adambro, it is a promise
(04:28:17 PM) Ottava: Your actions have been disliked by most of the community
(04:28:23 PM) Ottava: your personality has been disliked by most of the community
(04:28:30 PM) Ottava: your attitude is detrimental to an educational environment
(04:28:34 PM) Ottava: and you have no background in that
(04:28:49 PM) Ottava: your actions and attitude towards the -founder- of Wikiversity has shown yourself to not grasp common sense
(04:28:55 PM) Ottava: and your desire to put yourself above discussion is troubling
(04:29:01 PM) adambro: ironic
(04:29:10 PM) Ottava: Stop with the games.
(04:29:16 PM) Ottava: You are acting like a damn child
(04:29:29 PM) Ottava: If you aren't going to take this serious, then I will put up the proceedings now.
(04:29:51 PM) adambro: so its okay to implement a 24 block blanket policy without discussion but not to (AGF, remember that?), try to deal with a ongoing problem
(04:30:08 PM) Ottava: You aren't dealing with any problems
(04:30:17 PM) Ottava: You are blocking people and -causing- problems
(04:30:25 PM) Ottava: You don't understand how poisonous your actions and behavior are
(04:30:30 PM) Ottava: We dealt with JWS for two years
(04:30:37 PM) Ottava: it wasn't until you got involved that it got so out of hand
(04:30:51 PM) Ottava: -You- are the one responsible for that
(04:31:04 PM) adambro: erm, and Moulton? my fault? I'm not even convinced, might need to check your dates
(04:31:07 PM) Ottava: And the fact that you don't recognize it nor recognize the need to stop with the childish bullshit
(04:31:09 PM) Ottava: that is a serious problem
(04:31:21 PM) Ottava: Moulton and JWS are two very different people
(04:31:24 PM) Ottava: Don't play that game
(04:31:29 PM) adambro: maybe, JWS was write after all, perhaps we should publish IRC logs on Wiki
(04:31:51 PM) Ottava: I have no problem with others of the community seeing what I stated as I already talked to them about your removal dating back two months
(04:31:51 PM) darkcode: <Ottava> Your actions have been disliked by most of the community
(04:32:00 PM) adambro: I would be quite happy for all my discussions on IRC to be published, Ottava, how about you?
(04:32:02 PM) darkcode: you can't count my undecided as not disliking what he did
(04:32:10 PM) Ottava: darkcode - you aren't most
(04:32:27 PM) Ottava: Adambro, if you paid attention you will see that I already stated I had no problem with it.
(04:32:38 PM) Ottava: You do know that the channel is logged, right?
(04:32:45 PM) Ottava: And that it is sent to many people who aren't in here, right?
(04:33:35 PM) adambro: perhaps we do need Moulton to teach us all about ethics...
(04:33:45 PM) darkcode: I never said I was, just you making it sound like he's alone ;p
(04:33:56 PM) Ottava: Adambro, I am an ethicist, Moulton is not.
(04:34:10 PM) adambro: you don't care about ethical conduct ?
(04:34:23 PM) Ottava: Adambro, do you know why I was brought onto Wikipedia?
(04:34:28 PM) Ottava: Because of my ethicist background
(04:34:46 PM) adambro: where are those ethics now?
(04:35:00 PM) Ottava: It is unethical to block for more than 24 hours and demand discussion after
(04:35:15 PM) Ottava: It is also unethical for you to continue your fighting with JWS
(04:35:21 PM) adambro: and to make threats? or do ethics not apply when inconvenient?
(04:35:40 PM) Ottava: As I said, it was a promise. And people who are acting like you need to know the ramification of their actions.
(04:35:49 PM) Ottava: If you are unwilling to accept 24 hour blocks, then that is a problem with you.
(04:36:04 PM) adambro: what is wrong with proposing that as a policy?
(04:36:17 PM) Ottava: Because this deals just with you
(04:36:19 PM) Ottava: And your behavior
(04:36:22 PM) adambro: I am not going to feel compelled to obey you in this way
(04:36:25 PM) Ottava: It is your chance for you to keep your ops
(04:36:35 PM) adambro: I don't crave ops
(04:36:47 PM) Ottava: Is that your excuse for abusing them?
(04:36:47 PM) adambro: if I loose my ops whilst maintaining my principles then fair enough
(04:36:53 PM) Ottava: You don't have principles
(04:36:59 PM) Ottava: You fought nastily with others on Wikiversity
(04:37:14 PM) Ottava: You have no right to do that when holding a position of authority
(04:38:52 PM) Ottava: Right now there are no supporters for your block.
(04:39:20 PM) adambro: well, as I say, I am not going to feel compelled to accept your threats, if you wish than propose my rights are removed then you better go ahead. like I say, I am more interested in always trying to do what I think is the right thing than trying to maintain my rights
(04:39:49 PM) Ottava: If you wanted to do the right thing then you failed a long time ago. Now you are just trying to justify your own behavior for your pride.
(04:39:50 PM) darkcode: again don't count me as not supporting his block
(04:40:00 PM) Ottava: Darkocode - still, one person
(04:40:13 PM) darkcode: undecided goes both ways you know ;p
(04:40:20 PM) Ottava: okay, so, 3.5 to .5
(04:40:24 PM) adambro: Ottava: for your reference, "A threat is an act of coercion wherein an act is proposed to elicit a negative response" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threat
04:40:52 PM) Ottava: Adambro, there is no negative response to be elicited. There is a positive response for you to accept a limitation to your abilities for the good of everyone.
(04:40:56 PM) Ottava: And it would be in your best interest.
(04:41:09 PM) Ottava: You overstepped your authority and if you don't recognize that, that is a problem
(04:41:29 PM) adambro: I will continue to do what I have always done on WV, try to help the project. I'm sorry but your threats don't work on me.
(04:43:54 PM) Ottava: Adambro, if you wanted to help the project, you would not be overriding the project
(04:44:23 PM) adambro: there is a discussion ongoing, I will respect the outcome of that discussion
(04:44:44 PM) Ottava: If that is how you wish to be
(04:44:57 PM) adambro: that is exactly how I wish it to be.
(04:45:15 PM) darkcode: yes let the discussion finish, have enough interruption mid way going around, don't need more
(04:45:55 PM) Ottava: JWS, based on community consensus, you are being unblocked
(04:46:06 PM) JWSchmidt: thanks
(04:46:31 PM) adambro: well I'm glad to hear that we are making decisions based upon discussion, not just blanket unwritten rules about 24 hour blocks
(04:47:11 PM) adambro: I trust there wasn't a CoI in your unblock
(04:48:01 PM) darkcode: there was
(04:48:03 PM) Ottava: The conflict of interest was in your block
(04:48:13 PM) Ottava: As you had extensive fighting with JWS
(04:48:21 PM) Ottava: JWS has attacked me many times, but not once did I fight with him
(04:48:23 PM) Ottava: or attack him
(04:48:26 PM) Ottava: or criticize him
(04:48:35 PM) Ottava: That is not what administrators do
(04:48:38 PM) adambro: when have I attacked him?
(04:48:57 PM) Ottava: Do you want specifics or would a link to your special:contribs be enough?
(04:49:01 PM) adambro: as JWS would say, please list all those instances so we can discuss them
(04:49:51 PM) adambro: I'll happily explain why I chose to do anything I've done on WV. My talk page is always open for constructive discussions
(04:50:15 PM) Ottava: I'd have reverted back in the IP edits Adambro removed, because JWS obviously prefers that the edits remain. When deep conflicts arise, it's important for custodians to step back from individual action and seek community support. In an emergency, any of us can act. There was no emergency here. --Abd 15:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
(04:50:20 PM) Ottava: I'm not the only one who recognizesz it
(04:50:26 PM) Ottava: And that was just one instance
(04:50:36 PM) adambro: how is that an attack on JWS?
(04:50:58 PM) adambro: that is me trying to enforce a block which the community hasn't concluded should be overturned
(04:51:02 PM) Ottava: It was a statement of your conflict of interest with one example
(04:51:06 PM) Ottava: Now, JWS - http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Community_Review
(04:51:19 PM) Ottava: I ask for you to start the proceedings on yourself and open yourself for community review
(04:51:26 PM) adambro: a CoI *after* I'd blocked him? hmm....
(04:51:28 PM) Ottava: I ask because 3 people have directly stated a desire for that
(04:51:58 PM) Ottava: I implore you that when phrasing the request, you are brief, do not attack others, and be willing to accept any criticism
(04:52:16 PM) JWSchmidt: Ottava: I ask for you to start the proceedings on yourself and open yourself for community review <-- are you talking to me?
(04:53:00 PM) Ottava: yes
(04:53:06 PM) Ottava: Everything after Now JWS
(04:53:32 PM) JWSchmidt: maybe you could draft the statement that you are thnking of
(04:53:34 PM) darkcode: it should be mentioned on the Colloquium as well per policy
(04:54:08 PM) Ottava: JWS - I also ask for you to provide some suggestions on what kind of actions or probations could be put in place to ease concerns that people have given about your previous behavior
(04:54:11 PM) Ottava: darkcode - getting there
(04:54:13 PM) adambro: Ottava: so, to clarify, at what point shall I expect you will propose my admin rights are removed?
(04:54:41 PM) Ottava: adambro, if you are so eager for it, I can drop everything else I am trying to do to accomodate you
(04:55:09 PM) adambro: well, if you have concerns then you should clearly raise them
(04:55:18 PM) JWSchmidt: Ottava: can I just paste what you are saying here into the wiki?
(04:55:54 PM) darkcode: I just want JWS to get all his demands/objections that he's had for the last 2 years down in one place, and give the community time to ensure it understands his demands/objections and decide whether it cares to do anything about them
(04:55:55 PM) Ottava: JWS - I'm asking you to come up with something on your own >.<
(04:56:06 PM) JWSchmidt: oh
(04:56:15 PM) Ottava: 5 sentences at most
(04:56:29 PM) Ottava: Something about what you think people's concerns are with -your- behavior
(04:56:32 PM) Ottava: don't discuss theirs
(04:56:41 PM) Ottava: and offer different suggestions on how you could address the concerns
(04:56:45 PM) Ottava: then others will state what they think
(04:56:47 PM) Ottava: then we can go from there
(04:56:49 PM) JWSchmidt: I see
(04:56:52 PM) Ottava: if you think there are no concerns, state that
(04:56:59 PM) Ottava: if you think there are too many to list, well, state that
(04:57:06 PM) JWSchmidt: ha ha
(04:57:06 PM) darkcode: JWS doesn't think he's done anything wrong and needs to do anything differently, so pointless no?
(04:57:23 PM) Ottava: Darkcode - possibly
(04:57:52 PM) Ottava: But JWS, remember, I do support possible future 24 hour blocks if you get too crazy, so please be calm and observant
(04:58:02 PM) JWSchmidt: ok
(04:58:05 PM) Ottava: Unlike Moulton, I know you are capable of self control
(04:58:41 PM) adambro: but providing JWS only targets me he's fine by you Ottava ?
(04:58:58 PM) Ottava: JWS targets me non stop
(04:59:01 PM) Ottava: What are you even talking about?
(04:59:20 PM) darkcode: thats why I say have him get all his objections/complaints down in one place, give the community an opportunity to make sure they understand the objections/complains, maybe have JWS write what he thinks should be done to resolve it after that, and then the community can let JWS know if it cares or do anything or not
(04:59:22 PM) Ottava: As I said, JWS has attacked my actions over 1000 times in a two year period
(04:59:45 PM) Ottava: darkcode - I think that could be a separate review entry, concurrent, sure
(05:00:45 PM) adambro: Ottava: ironic that you're proposing a policy saying children shouldn't be bullied yet seem to suggest it is okay for adults to attack each other. shouldn't we require civil constructive criticism rather than attacks?
(05:00:55 PM) adambro is now known as adambro_
(05:00:58 PM) darkcode: JWS thinks the community already understands from what I gather on his talk page, but JWS should still do it, if they community knows than it isn't going to hurt any
(05:01:04 PM) adambro_: back later
(05:01:07 PM) Ottava: Adambro, children have no ability to defend themselves. You are in a position of authority and have the ability to defend yourself.
(05:01:18 PM) Ottava: Don't try to act like you should be treated like a child, or we can accomodate you.
(05:02:17 PM) darkcode: just because people are adults, don't mean they know how to respond appropriately when bullied, some people never learn how to deal with bullies
(05:03:17 PM) darkcode: people shouldn't be bullied regardless of their age, of course the problem is different people have different ideas of what bullying is, so is hard to agree that someone is being bullied
(05:04:03 PM) Ottava: true, but the policy was mostly about children who are still intellectually undeveloped
(05:17:03 PM) JWSchmidt: Now I can edit
(05:20:02 PM) JWSchmidt: it is after 2 pm and I've not had anything to eat today, so I'm going to have lunch
(05:23:23 PM) darkcode left the room (quit: Remote host closed the connection).
(05:30:45 PM) adambro_: Ottava: may I quote what you've said on IRC on wiki?
(05:30:46 PM) adambro_ is now known as adambro
(05:31:03 PM) Ottava: which part?
(05:31:14 PM) Ottava: and didnt I already say that my statements could be quoted?
(05:31:16 PM) Ottava: I think three times
(05:31:37 PM) Ottava: If you want to quote the part where I said people lack confidence in you
(05:31:38 PM) Ottava: go ahead
(05:32:14 PM) adambro: I'd like to post everything we've both said since around 17:24 UTC (I think that's the right time)
(05:33:06 PM) Ottava: You might as well just post it up at WR because that is where it will end up
(05:33:33 PM) adambro: No, I'd rather post it on WV since that is where discussions about WV stuff should go on
(05:34:54 PM) adambro: well, since you don't seem too bothered and there is no policy against it on WV, I'll do so later once I've got round to removing the comments from others
(05:35:11 PM) Ottava: Well, you will most likely be attacked because of http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity_talk:Privacy_policy#IRC_chat
(05:35:19 PM) Ottava: People on WR will think of you as a hypocrit
(05:36:05 PM) adambro: I think I've made it clear that I don't care what people on WR think and I'm always prepared to reconsider my position on issues.
(05:36:20 PM) Ottava: You don't really care what anyone thinks it seems.
(05:36:24 PM) adambro: looks like Moulton has posted a portion of it on WR already
(05:36:29 PM) Ottava: Could be why you pissed so many off.
(05:36:41 PM) adambro: thanks Monitor
(05:36:43 PM) Ottava: As I said before, we are logged
(05:38:09 PM) adambro: moulton aka Monitor, why do you have two accounts in #wikiversity by the way?
(05:38:36 PM) Ottava: He isn't the only one logging, you know
(05:39:14 PM) adambro: It doesn't bother me. I'm sure loads do it but I suspect most isn't so they can try to find something juicy to make a massive thread on WR about.
(05:39:30 PM) Ottava: Well, then you underestimate SB Johnny or JWS
(05:39:43 PM) Ottava: Hell, I made one with logs with Gmaxwell for his abuse on Commons
(05:40:01 PM) adambro: I'm not sure why I'm underestimating anyone ?
(05:40:09 PM) Ottava: You sure are acting like you are completely new to IRC or to Wikiversity
(05:40:29 PM) adambro: why so?
(05:41:30 PM) Ottava: Because you are in a room where you are pretty much on your own, with multiple people recording you, and many wanting you gone since 2009
(05:41:59 PM) Ottava: You rubbed a lot of people the wrong way, and this is one of the most laid back communities
(05:42:49 PM) adambro: how should I act in the circumstances? am I supposed to be bothered that every word is being logged?
(05:43:44 PM) Ottava: They are being logged because they want to show others how you are. It has nothing to do with changing your behavior. Quite the opposite, they prefer you to be you.
(05:45:16 PM) adambro: does it provide a little excitement for the crowd on WR?
(05:46:35 PM) Ottava: Nah, they pretty much had a set view of you for quite a long time now
(05:47:15 PM) Ottava: I was your last main defender until you pissed that down the drain two months ago
(05:54:42 PM) adambro: two months ago?
(05:57:00 PM) Ottava: Mhmm
(05:57:36 PM) adambro: and I thought you could handle criticism? apparently not.
(05:58:01 PM) Ottava: I handle criticism. I don't handle people that abuse their ops in order to make their buddies happy on Commons.
(05:58:14 PM) adambro: I don't have any "buddies" on Commons
(05:58:17 PM) Ottava: And for what reason? To keep excessive amounts on porn?
(05:58:19 PM) Ottava: Sure
(05:59:02 PM) adambro: If I was in any doubt that this was personal, rather than because I've really damaged WV, I shouldn't be in any doubt for any longer I guess
(05:59:16 PM) adambro: a few comments you don't like any someone is an enemy for life?
(05:59:19 PM) Ottava: It isn't personal. You abused ops on multiple Wikis.
(05:59:21 PM) Ottava: You were told about that.
(05:59:28 PM) Ottava: You are a loose cannon.
(05:59:36 PM) adambro: where have I abused ops?
(06:00:05 PM) adambro: if I have abused ops on multiple wikis, why haven't you raised those concerns on each project?
(06:00:26 PM) Ottava: I did, I confronted you about it on Commons
(06:00:53 PM) adambro: where?
(06:01:19 PM) Ottava: On Commons
(06:01:31 PM) Ottava: there were only a few discussions we criss crossed during
(06:01:40 PM) Ottava: Maybe you should pay attention next time
(06:02:05 PM) adambro: only a few discussions. exactly.
(06:05:56 PM) adambro: should I expect your proposal to remove my admin rights any time soon?
(06:07:03 PM) Ottava: Depends on if you try to indef JWS again
(06:07:05 PM) Ottava: as I said before
(06:07:24 PM) Ottava: I told you that if you reblock him for more than 24 hours then there will be a problem
(06:08:12 PM) adambro: ahh right, well as I've said, I am absolutely prepared to do that despite your threat that I shouldn't if I consider it in the interests of WV. perhaps you should get on with it now since I've no intention of obeying your orders
(06:11:09 PM) Ottava: and when you do, you will be listed up for removal
(06:11:35 PM) adambro: as opposed to? I understood that was what you were meaning
(06:13:12 PM) Ottava: Have you reblocked JWS?
(06:13:39 PM) adambro: no, I've yet to see a reason to do so to, in my view at least, protect WV from disruption
(06:13:45 PM) Ottava: k
(06:14:38 PM) adambro: but, what happens if I decide to block a Moulton IP for more than 24 hours? does that rule apply there as well?
(06:16:00 PM) adambro: Ottava: you could go really wild and propose these little unwritten rules are made into policy
(06:21:52 PM) adambro: right, anyway, I have more useful things to do with my time than lurk in here so I'll be off, I shall look forward to seeing your proposal though Ottava
(06:22:02 PM) adambro left the room (quit: Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.6/20100625231939]).
(06:25:20 PM) Ottava: Adambro - I was refering to you and JWS
(06:25:22 PM) Ottava: No one else
(06:25:33 PM) Ottava: Bah, he left
And Ottava unblocks JWSchmidt...
QUOTE(Wikiversity)
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:JWSchmidt#Unblocked
You have been unblocked per lack of community consensus in addition to a strong conflict of interest between you and the blocking admin, the extreme measure of the block, the way the block was handled, and the desire by the blocking admin to put forth an indef before discussion instead of after.
This is not a support for any of your behavior, and you are warned not to continue with anything that might be seen as going too far to promote your view of various issues, especially those who bring you into conflict with other users. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:47, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
You have been unblocked per lack of community consensus in addition to a strong conflict of interest between you and the blocking admin, the extreme measure of the block, the way the block was handled, and the desire by the blocking admin to put forth an indef before discussion instead of after.
This is not a support for any of your behavior, and you are warned not to continue with anything that might be seen as going too far to promote your view of various issues, especially those who bring you into conflict with other users. Ottava Rima (talk) 20:47, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Posted by: SB_Johnny
Posted by: Abd
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Mon 12th July 2010, 5:36pm)
Posted by: Somey
Is it just me, or do these folks all seem like completely different people during IRC chat sessions?
I dunno, maybe it's WR itself that's the problem for these guys... Do you think all those little smileys to the left of the edit window are distracting them? I mean, I've learned to just tune them out, but maybe others don't have that ability.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Abd @ Tue 13th July 2010, 1:49am)
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Mon 12th July 2010, 5:36pm)
Abd, you can find the http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro/IRC12Jul10#Full_transcript. His copy doesn't wrap long lines, so you may find it easier to read the copy I posted here. I assure you they are verbatim and undoctored.
(If someone wants to check, I'm sure there are plenty of people who know how to set up a "diff" on Unix.)
What's really interesting, however, is that Adam has done something significant with the transcript.
He's extracted a few http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro/IRC12Jul10#Selected_quotes which illuminate teh dramah.
You can clearly see how strong-arm tactics are standard operating procedure in back-stage power politics. Ottava learned it from Jimbo, who first used it against the four WV bureaucrats who were in charge two years ago.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Somey @ Tue 13th July 2010, 2:17am)
Is it just me, or do these folks all seem like completely different people during IRC chat sessions?
I dunno, maybe it's WR itself that's the problem for these guys... Do you think all those little smileys to the left of the edit window are distracting them? I mean, I've learned to just tune them out, but maybe others don't have that ability.
I dunno, maybe it's WR itself that's the problem for these guys... Do you think all those little smileys to the left of the edit window are distracting them? I mean, I've learned to just tune them out, but maybe others don't have that ability.
It's a lot like actors going in an out of character, depending on whether they are on-stage or back-stage in the dressing room.
IRC is like the actors' dressing room, where they are discussing how their act is going over.
W-R, on the other hand, is a wine and cheese party where the actors meet the columnists and reviewers who critique their on-stage performances.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Abd @ Tue 13th July 2010, 1:49am)
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Mon 12th July 2010, 5:36pm)
Abd, you can find the http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro/IRC12Jul10#Full_transcript. His copy doesn't wrap long lines, so you may find it easier to read the copy I posted here. I assure you they are verbatim and undoctored.
(If someone wants to check, I'm sure there are plenty of people who know how to set up a "diff" on Unix.)
What's really interesting, however, is that Adam has done something significant with the transcript.
He's extracted a few http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro/IRC12Jul10#Selected_quotes which illuminate teh dramah.
You can clearly see how strong-arm tactics are standard operating procedure in back-stage power politics. Ottava learned it from Jimbo, who first used it against the four WV bureaucrats who were in charge two years ago.
Abd, a fish rots from the head down. You can see the rotting process directly exposed there, with Ottava and Adam playing their self-selected roles. What role have you selected for yourself in this rotten drama?
Posted by: SB_Johnny
QUOTE(Somey @ Tue 13th July 2010, 2:17am)
Is it just me, or do these folks all seem like completely different people during IRC chat sessions?
I dunno, maybe it's WR itself that's the problem for these guys... Do you think all those little smileys to the left of the edit window are distracting them? I mean, I've learned to just tune them out, but maybe others don't have that ability.
That's actually just a typical day on #wikiversity-en. Curious though: are you saying that the IRC chat sheds a worse light, or a better one?
Posted by: Moulton
I took Adam's (abridged) version of the same transcript and converted it to HTML with distinct colors for each party and with long lines wrapped for easier reading.
http://newscafe.ansci.usu.edu/~bkort/Ottava.vs.Adambro.IRC.html
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Tue 13th July 2010, 7:07am)
That's actually just a typical day on #wikiversity-en.
Johnny, can you now say (openly) what similar back-stage arm-twisting went on the first time Jimbo and Cary strong-armed you and the other three bureaucrats two years ago?
Posted by: Kelly Martin
QUOTE(Somey @ Tue 13th July 2010, 1:17am)
Do you think all those little smileys to the left of the edit window are distracting them? I mean, I've learned to just tune them out, but maybe others don't have that ability.
Smileys? What smileys are you talking about?Posted by: SB_Johnny
QUOTE(Moulton @ Tue 13th July 2010, 7:29am)
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Tue 13th July 2010, 7:07am)
That's actually just a typical day on #wikiversity-en.
Johnny, can you now say (openly) what similar back-stage arm-twisting went on the first time Jimbo and Cary strong-armed you and the other three bureaucrats two years ago?
I thought I already had, but maybe I should write up the story somewhere. Quikie version:
1. Jimbo threatened to shut down Wikiversity if we didn't block you.
2. We told him no.
3. Jimbo threatened to shut down Wikiversity if we didn't block you.
4. We told him that if he was so interested in you being blocked, he should do it himself.
5. Jimbo blocked you, and said it was done on our behalf.
Cary wasn't actually involved in that at all, so I'm not sure why you have such a hard on for him. He did give us a shoulder to cry on (we weren't particularly happy about the whole thing, and Jimbo wasn't replying to emails), but nothing more than that.
Posted by: Moulton
Thanks. It was Cary who conveyed the "Directive" that you referred to http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User:Moulton&diff=303375&oldid=301484 (and which he then http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bastique&oldid=1191992#Moulton.27s_blog was a "Directive" saying (on your own WV talk page) it was only "http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SB_Johnny/Archive&diff=prev&oldid=305937#re_Moulton.27s_Blog").
Posted by: SB_Johnny
QUOTE(Moulton @ Tue 13th July 2010, 1:23pm)
Thanks. It was Cary who conveyed the "Directive" that you referred to http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User:Moulton&diff=303375&oldid=301484 (and which he then http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bastique&oldid=1191992#Moulton.27s_blog was a "Directive" saying (on your own WV talk page) it was only "http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SB_Johnny/Archive&diff=prev&oldid=305937#re_Moulton.27s_Blog").
Right. I misunderstood (understandably, IMO), and he corrected me.
I was also under the impression that Jimbo could shut down WV with a wave of his hand. I really wasn't aware of how the whole thing worked at the time.
I'd say I would have done differently if I had understood the situation better, but frankly I wouldn't have done anything at all if I had understood the situation better. Hence the whole not contributing anything lately thing.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Tue 13th July 2010, 2:19pm)
I'd say I would have done differently if I had understood the situation better, but frankly I wouldn't have done anything at all if I had understood the situation better. Hence the whole not contributing anything lately thing.
I agree, that your optimal strategy would be to deliberately do nothing at all. In that case, an act of Civil Disobedience would have been the Null Act.
I've been trying (with notable lack of success) to convey to Adam, Abd, and Ottava the concept of Civil Disobedience, illustrating how and when to use it in the face of corrupt practices by officials in power.
In the Story of Caprice, she was simply an innocent kid (a young female goat) who was chosen to be the designated scapegoat in the Yom Kippur Ritual. In her case, her disobedience (departing from the script) revealed the futility of the ritual. You can't solve a systemic problem by picking a convenient scapegoat to blame it on. That is the timeless lesson that the Story of Caprice reminds us of.
Posted by: Abd
QUOTE(Moulton @ Tue 13th July 2010, 2:29pm)
I've been trying (with notable lack of success) to convey to Adam, Abd, and Ottava the concept of Civil Disobedience, illustrating how and when to use it in the face of corrupt practices by officials in power.
To be an effective teacher, one must be an even better student. Moulton, you have no idea, apparently, of what I know about civil disobedience, the theory behind it, how it works and how it does not work and when it can become ineffective or possibly even do more harm than good, though that's rare.My objections to part of your behavior has not been to civil disobedience but to actions that are positively offensive and harmful and, themselves, corrupt, a betrayal as your role of critic, and, within the drama, vicious and with willful disregard of the distress of others. That others, certain administrators, have shown the same willful disregard, does not justify your actions.
Sure, it's just a wiki, and nobody actually cut Caprice's throat here.
Posted by: Moulton
Good grief, don't stop there. Please spell out the specific actions that you characterize as positively offensive, harmful , vicious, distressful, and corrupt.
Posted by: Abd
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Tue 13th July 2010, 2:19pm)
I'd say I would have done differently if I had understood the situation better, but frankly I wouldn't have done anything at all if I had understood the situation better. Hence the whole not contributing anything lately thing.
Once again, I invite SBJ to return to Wikiversity and take up admin tools, to add another, now more experienced, participant in the community consensus. I tried to encourage JWS to do the same. In your case it would be easy, I'm sure you would be resysopped on request. In the case of JWS, now, particularly with what has come down after I made that suggestion to him, it would be more difficult, but if JWS were to provide assurances that are similar to what, I believe, any admin should make, I think it still could be done. I just don't think he's likely to do that.Posted by: SB_Johnny
QUOTE(Moulton @ Tue 13th July 2010, 2:29pm)
I've been trying (with notable lack of success) to convey to Adam, Abd, and Ottava the concept of Civil Disobedience, illustrating how and when to use it in the face of corrupt practices by officials in power.
I believe you may be suffering from a dearth of willing students
.
Posted by: SB_Johnny
QUOTE(Abd @ Tue 13th July 2010, 3:10pm)
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Tue 13th July 2010, 2:19pm)
I'd say I would have done differently if I had understood the situation better, but frankly I wouldn't have done anything at all if I had understood the situation better. Hence the whole not contributing anything lately thing.
Once again, I invite SBJ to return to Wikiversity and take up admin tools, to add another, now more experienced, participant in the community consensus. I tried to encourage JWS to do the same. In your case it would be easy, I'm sure you would be resysopped on request. In the case of JWS, now, particularly with what has come down after I made that suggestion to him, it would be more difficult, but if JWS were to provide assurances that are similar to what, I believe, any admin should make, I think it still could be done. I just don't think he's likely to do that.I used to think you were a smart guy, if a bit too verbose. You're getting better about the verbose thing lately, but not so good on the smart thing lately.
And Somey: 3 minutes is too short for the combined posts thing.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Tue 13th July 2010, 3:45pm)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Tue 13th July 2010, 2:29pm)
I've been trying (with notable lack of success) to convey to Adam, Abd, and Ottava the concept of Civil Disobedience, illustrating how and when to use it in the face of corrupt practices by officials in power.
I believe you may be suffering from a dearth of willing students .This is hardly a new problem, and hardly one unique to me.
One of the long-unsolved problems in the annals of human history is the challenge of educating the idiot king. The Story of Beckett and King Henry is one of the best in this genre. There was also the Story of Stephen Langton and King John. And then there was the Story of Galileo and Pope Urban.
I frankly don't expect to solve it. But I do hope to gain a smidgeon of insight into the nature of the learning disability that characterizes these fascinating cases.
Posted by: Moulton
Indomitable Spirit
The grandaughter of an Auschwitz survivor returns with her 80-yr old grandfather to dance at the Holocaust Memorials.
I Will Survive - Dancing Auschwitz
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/07/100713_auschwitz_dancing_et_sl.shtml
Posted by: Moulton
Fringe Characters and Fringe Science
Adam Brookes, the Javertian Wikiversity cop, blocks tens of thousands of IPs in Eastern Massachusetts...
QUOTE(Adam Brookes on Wikiversity)
(Block log); 10:56 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 141.154.0.0/17 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 month (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) (Repeat disruptive editing of pages: block evasion by User:Moulton)
(Block log); 10:56 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 68.163.96.0/20 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 month (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) (Repeat disruptive editing of pages: block evasion by User:Moulton)
(Block log); 10:56 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 68.162.192.0/18 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 month (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) (Repeat disruptive editing of pages: block evasion by User:Moulton)
(Block log); 10:55 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 68.160.128.0/18 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 month (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) (Repeat disruptive editing of pages: block evasion by User:Moulton)
(Block log); 10:56 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 68.163.96.0/20 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 month (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) (Repeat disruptive editing of pages: block evasion by User:Moulton)
(Block log); 10:56 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 68.162.192.0/18 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 month (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) (Repeat disruptive editing of pages: block evasion by User:Moulton)
(Block log); 10:55 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 68.160.128.0/18 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 month (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) (Repeat disruptive editing of pages: block evasion by User:Moulton)
That's 69,632 IP addresses in Eastern Massachusetts.
So, what was the occasion for all this massive range blocking? Let's go the video tape...
QUOTE(Wikiversity Request for Custodial Action)
http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity_talk:Request_custodian_action&diff=prev&oldid=583954#Custodial_disruption_intensifying
Because disruption by Moulton has intensified, he is revert warring as IP to restore his deleted comments, instead of allowing other editors who want them discussed to revert them back in, I am protecting relevant pages for 24 hours. Any admin may reverse this action, I am not insisting on it. Perhaps now we might be more generous with Adambro.... A range block might be more appropriate, but I've never done a range block and I don't want to be experimenting with it without guidance.... --Abd 04:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
To minimise collateral damage, a series of range blocks covering the Boston Verizon IPs which have been used will be necessary rather than a single range which would take out many other unrelated IPs. You can use this tool to calculate the appropriate range block based upon a list of IP addresses. I've made a list of IPs used by Moulton and have sorted it into groups to minimise the range blocks. At the moment, this would involved four range blocks of 68.160.128.0/18, 68.162.192.0/18, 68.163.100.0/22 and 141.154.0.0/17 although those may need to be refined further as some of those ranges are probably larger and I am aware that there might be more ranges. Ironically, the more IPs Moulton uses the clearer the requirements of any rangeblock. Those ranges could potentially affect 66,560 IPs. However clearly, we've got to weigh up the potential damage of blocking a load of IPs used by Verizon in Boston versus the other ways in which the block evasion could be prevented. The only other option is semi-protection of an ever growing list of pages which would of course impact on all anonymous/new users rather than just those using Verizon in the Boston area. I think using a range blocks would be preferable in my view since the risk of inconvenience to anyone else is much lower. Adambro 09:13, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Gentlemen, please http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:Jtneill#Community_Review:
In order to undertake the http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Talk:Action_research#A_Beginner.27s_Guide_to_Action_Research which James has called for, it will be necessary for you to ensure that the Colloquium, Request for custodian action, and Community Review remain open for IP editing, and that, http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Kadima, our joint problem-solving discussions are not disrupted by rollback reversions or semi-protection.
Moulton 10:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Because disruption by Moulton has intensified, he is revert warring as IP to restore his deleted comments, instead of allowing other editors who want them discussed to revert them back in, I am protecting relevant pages for 24 hours. Any admin may reverse this action, I am not insisting on it. Perhaps now we might be more generous with Adambro.... A range block might be more appropriate, but I've never done a range block and I don't want to be experimenting with it without guidance.... --Abd 04:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
To minimise collateral damage, a series of range blocks covering the Boston Verizon IPs which have been used will be necessary rather than a single range which would take out many other unrelated IPs. You can use this tool to calculate the appropriate range block based upon a list of IP addresses. I've made a list of IPs used by Moulton and have sorted it into groups to minimise the range blocks. At the moment, this would involved four range blocks of 68.160.128.0/18, 68.162.192.0/18, 68.163.100.0/22 and 141.154.0.0/17 although those may need to be refined further as some of those ranges are probably larger and I am aware that there might be more ranges. Ironically, the more IPs Moulton uses the clearer the requirements of any rangeblock. Those ranges could potentially affect 66,560 IPs. However clearly, we've got to weigh up the potential damage of blocking a load of IPs used by Verizon in Boston versus the other ways in which the block evasion could be prevented. The only other option is semi-protection of an ever growing list of pages which would of course impact on all anonymous/new users rather than just those using Verizon in the Boston area. I think using a range blocks would be preferable in my view since the risk of inconvenience to anyone else is much lower. Adambro 09:13, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Gentlemen, please http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:Jtneill#Community_Review:
“ Thanks all for your communications and efforts. Let's see what others might have to add as well, but I think to take these issues further, please raise them at Colloquium, Request for custodian action, and/or Community Review and let's see how we go at working through them. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC) â€
In order to undertake the http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Talk:Action_research#A_Beginner.27s_Guide_to_Action_Research which James has called for, it will be necessary for you to ensure that the Colloquium, Request for custodian action, and Community Review remain open for IP editing, and that, http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Kadima, our joint problem-solving discussions are not disrupted by rollback reversions or semi-protection.
Moulton 10:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
In order to understand the above a little, better, it will help to review the
QUOTE(Wikiversity Twitter Wire[/b)
(diff | hist) . . Wikiversity talk:Request custodian action‎; 10:51 . . (+2,923) . . 68.163.96.175 (Talk) (→Kadima Problem-Solving Services: Adam, it would behoove you to read the http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Empathy_Model, too.)
(diff | hist) . . m Wikiversity talk:Request custodian action‎; 10:48 . . (-2,923) . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) (Reverted edits by 68.162.208.163 (Talk) to last version by Adambro using rollback)
(diff | hist) . . Wikiversity talk:Request custodian action‎; 10:47 . . (+2,923) . . 68.162.208.163 (Talk) (→Kadima Problem-Solving Services: Adam, please respect the recommendations of James Neill)
(Block log); 10:44 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 68.163.103.93 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 week (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) (Repeat disruptive editing of pages: block evasion, User:Moulton)
(diff | hist) . . m Wikiversity talk:Request custodian action‎; 10:44 . . (-2,923) . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) (Reverted edits by 68.163.103.93 (Talk) to last version by Abd using rollback)
(diff | hist) . . Wikiversity talk:Request custodian action‎; 10:37 . . (+2,923) . . 68.163.103.93 (Talk) (→Custodial disruption intensifying: new section)
(diff | hist) . . m Wikiversity talk:Request custodian action‎; 10:48 . . (-2,923) . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) (Reverted edits by 68.162.208.163 (Talk) to last version by Adambro using rollback)
(diff | hist) . . Wikiversity talk:Request custodian action‎; 10:47 . . (+2,923) . . 68.162.208.163 (Talk) (→Kadima Problem-Solving Services: Adam, please respect the recommendations of James Neill)
(Block log); 10:44 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 68.163.103.93 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 week (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) (Repeat disruptive editing of pages: block evasion, User:Moulton)
(diff | hist) . . m Wikiversity talk:Request custodian action‎; 10:44 . . (-2,923) . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) (Reverted edits by 68.163.103.93 (Talk) to last version by Abd using rollback)
(diff | hist) . . Wikiversity talk:Request custodian action‎; 10:37 . . (+2,923) . . 68.163.103.93 (Talk) (→Custodial disruption intensifying: new section)
But wait, there's even more irony.
All the while that Adam is doing this pell mell deletion of the conversation that James Neill had just requested, what was James Neill doing? Why he was cautiously closing a http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion#Deletion_requests that had been in process for months. And what was James Neill's conclusion?
QUOTE(James Neill closing a conscientious Deletion Review of Junk Science)
It looks to me like no clear consensus and that the material should be retained for now with the {{fringe}} template. There is some support for tagging the pages for subsequent deletion review down the track but I think any such a system should be raised and discussed separately before implementation. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 10:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps they should carefully consider putting the {{fringe}} template on Adam Brookes, too.
Posted by: Moulton
Once more, into the breach...
As we have been noting for well over a decade now, a breach of expectations generates liminal social drama. In the absence of a functional dispute resolution process, liminal social drama devolves into lunatic drama.
It's the soap opera that never ends...
QUOTE(Suggestion from James Neill)
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Request_custodian_action#Suggestion_for_communicating_with_Moulton
Allow logged in editing of User talk:Moulton? I realise that for some people Moulton has gone too far too many times, but I also realise that for other people he hasn't been treated fairly and has important contributions to make. The Moulton account is currently globally and locally blocked such that Moulton can't edit anything. As a result, in order to communicate, he tends to use sockpuppets or anonymous IP which then engage reversion and blocking. An alternative option (if I've understood correctly from others who have looked into it) could be to use WV's capacity (via Bureaucrat actions) to allow Moulton logged in editing of User talk:Moulton. For some people this may seem to be too much to permit such editing access and for others it may be perceived as ongoing, unjustified restriction. However, if dealing with a conflict is going to move towards peace then I think the greatest prospects lie with some shift to middlish ground. Such a change would allow Moulton a place to edit without being reverted purely for block evasion. Then we could concentrate more clearly on listening to Moulton has to say. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:06, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Moulton already has already wasted a place to comment where I've been turning a blind eye to his block evasion. That was User talk:Caprice, an interesting experiment but not one I was particularly comfortable about. The attempts to negotiate with him regarding a possible unblock didn't go very well and that account is now fully blocked with talk page use disabled. However, if any such negotiations are to take place then in my view it should be at User talk:Moulton which can be enabled for Moulton to use logged in as that account if that was considered appropriate. My view is that users should in most circumstances only use their talk page when blocked to negotiate an unblock. I don't, for example, want to see as is sometimes done, a running commentary of a blocked users view of current events on the particularly project. So I think the question is whether anyone wishes to try to negotiate with Moulton regarding an unblock, or make a proposal that Moulton is unblocked. It isn't necessarily the case in my view that the community can't consider the appropriateness of an unblock without input from Moulton himself. I think really at the moment the ball is in the court of anyone who wishes to make efforts to get Moulton unblocked. They can consider whether to propose for community discussion an unblock of Moulton and whether they might need to discuss that with Moulton on-wiki. Adambro 12:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Allow logged in editing of User talk:Moulton? I realise that for some people Moulton has gone too far too many times, but I also realise that for other people he hasn't been treated fairly and has important contributions to make. The Moulton account is currently globally and locally blocked such that Moulton can't edit anything. As a result, in order to communicate, he tends to use sockpuppets or anonymous IP which then engage reversion and blocking. An alternative option (if I've understood correctly from others who have looked into it) could be to use WV's capacity (via Bureaucrat actions) to allow Moulton logged in editing of User talk:Moulton. For some people this may seem to be too much to permit such editing access and for others it may be perceived as ongoing, unjustified restriction. However, if dealing with a conflict is going to move towards peace then I think the greatest prospects lie with some shift to middlish ground. Such a change would allow Moulton a place to edit without being reverted purely for block evasion. Then we could concentrate more clearly on listening to Moulton has to say. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 12:06, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Moulton already has already wasted a place to comment where I've been turning a blind eye to his block evasion. That was User talk:Caprice, an interesting experiment but not one I was particularly comfortable about. The attempts to negotiate with him regarding a possible unblock didn't go very well and that account is now fully blocked with talk page use disabled. However, if any such negotiations are to take place then in my view it should be at User talk:Moulton which can be enabled for Moulton to use logged in as that account if that was considered appropriate. My view is that users should in most circumstances only use their talk page when blocked to negotiate an unblock. I don't, for example, want to see as is sometimes done, a running commentary of a blocked users view of current events on the particularly project. So I think the question is whether anyone wishes to try to negotiate with Moulton regarding an unblock, or make a proposal that Moulton is unblocked. It isn't necessarily the case in my view that the community can't consider the appropriateness of an unblock without input from Moulton himself. I think really at the moment the ball is in the court of anyone who wishes to make efforts to get Moulton unblocked. They can consider whether to propose for community discussion an unblock of Moulton and whether they might need to discuss that with Moulton on-wiki. Adambro 12:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
I'd respond to James and Adam, except that Adam has arranged to cut off all on-wiki communication with me.
What are they teaching young people around the world?
Posted by: Moulton
Fear and Loathing in Lost Vagueness
"I realise that for some people Moulton has gone too far too many times." --James Neill
14:44, 10 December 2008 MaxSem (talk | contribs) locked global account "User:Moulton@global" ‎ (enough is enough)
It's fascinating that my crime is some vague kind of excess, but the logs never quite get around to saying the name of the moiety of my behavior that they are taking exception to.
Here, for example, is http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=394370#The_posted_reason_for_protecting_Moulton.27s_Talk_Page, from when he protected User_talk:Moulton to prevent me from using it to communicate with other scholars at Wikiversity:
QUOTE(Log Entry from Jimbo Wales)
http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=394370#The_posted_reason_for_protecting_Moulton.27s_Talk_Page
Permission error
You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:
Permission error
You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:
This page has been locked to prevent editing.
This title has been protected from creation by Jimbo Wales. The reason given is '.
It's either the Null Reason or the Apostrophe (literally "http://www.google.com/search?q=apostrophe+%22turning+away%22").
It occurs to me that they are indeed turning away from http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Kadima.
Or maybe it's just too much of nothing.
Peter Paul and Mary - Too Much of Nothing
Too much of nothin' can make a man feel ill at ease
One man's temper might rise, while the other man's temper might freeze.
In the days of long confessions, we can not mock a soul
When there's too much of nothin', no one has control.
(Chorus)
Say hello to Adambro, say hello to carry-on,
Send them all my salary, on the waters of oblivion.
Too much of nothin' can make a man abuse a king
He can walk the streets and boast like most but he don't know a thing.
It's all been done before, it's all been written in the book.
But when it's too much of nothin', nobody should look.
(Chorus)
Too much of nothin' can turn a man into a liar
It can cause some man to sleep on nails, another man to eat fire.
Everybody's doin' somethin', I heard it in a dream
But when it's too much of nothin', it just makes a fella mean.
(Chorus)
Posted by: thekohser
It is indeed incredible how much time and effort they waste trying to keep Moulton out of the conversational forum, when it would be so much easier to just let him back in to blather on to his heart's content.
Posted by: Moulton
Heh. Adam has now blocked access to Wikiversity from the entire IPv6 address space. That's 2^128 addresses he just blocked.
Posted by: Jon Awbrey
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 15th July 2010, 11:55am)
Heh. Adam has now blocked access to Wikiversity from the entire IPv6 address space. That's 2^128 addresses he just blocked.
Some people seem to have no idea how many overlapping WiFi bubbles a lo-tech little bakwater like Boston actually has.
http://wilstar.com/midi/bugsmaroon.wav
WAM WAM WAM Jon
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 15th July 2010, 11:13am)
It is indeed incredible how much time and effort they waste trying to keep Moulton out of the conversational forum, when it would be so much easier to just let him back in to blather on to his heart's content.
I've been saying that for a while but people don't seem to listen. As I said, if Moulton were to edit just the three pages in question, that is far better than pissing him off to the point he randomly edits just about any page he finds.
Adambro must be getting advice from BP, where they dump all their money into unlikely plans to stop the leak while ignoring any containment and minimalization measures.
Posted by: Moulton
Oh, I'm not pissed off Jeff. I'm rather enjoying an infrequent opportunity to participate in dramatic re-enactment of famous episodes in the history of the Civil Rights Movement.
Not that I'm a very good actor. I have negligible talent as a thespian. That's why I could never have a chance in an amateur theater production. Even amateur theater is way above my pay grade.
But I greatly appreciate the opportunity to explore the travails of figures like Gandhi and King who battled real life oppression. One learns so much more about their struggles by participating in an amateur reprise of their dramas.
Plus, I can elect to play it more as a comedy than as a tragedy, since this is just a silly rerun of a drama that the real world dealt with and resolved two genrations ago.
Posted by: Moulton
Policies? We don't need no steenkin' policies.
QUOTE(Adam Brookes)
Since it is the community that decides policies, the community can decide to do things not documented in a policy or go against policies. --Adambro 17:20, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Posted by: Jon Awbrey
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 15th July 2010, 2:14pm)
Policies? We don't need no steenkin' policies.
QUOTE(Adam Brookes)
Since it is the community that decides policies, the community can decide to do things not documented in a policy or go against policies. —Adambro 17:20, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
It's gotten so bad that the Wiki-Pharisees are now ignorant even of their own Holey Ordures (WP:HO).
Jon
Posted by: Moulton
It's actually worse than that, since Adam generally acts without consulting anyone else and without being aware that there even is a relevant governing policy (or inversely that there is no policy expressly forbidding something that he desperately wants to declare a violation so he can swing his mighty banhammer).
Posted by: SB_Johnny
Good lord. Check out http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Problematic_actions. 
Posted by: EricBarbour
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Thu 15th July 2010, 12:35pm)
Good lord. Check out http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Problematic_actions.
They deserve the embarrassment.
If there was any "community" left, they would put the issue of letting Moulton in to a vote. I don't see that happening. Most likely because the "community" is moribund, and Jimbo and his little toadies Adambro, Darklama and Mike.lifeguard want to keep it that way.
Mr. Brookes! Mr. Brookes! Please, when you write your CV upon leaving university in order to seek gainful employment, please let us know wherein you apply. So the many disgruntled Wikiversity users can send nasty letters, warning the employers not to hire you. We love you!
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Thu 15th July 2010, 8:56pm)
If there was any "community" left, they would put the issue of letting Moulton in to a vote.
I real life, I am affiliated with 8 universities, three of which I still have current appointments at. Plus the National Science Foundation and the Boston Museum of Science. I can walk into any authentic institution of higher learning and freely participate in symposia or colloquia.
Only Wikiversity -- an MMPORG pretending to be an educational project -- imagines that I don't belong there.
And they are right. I don't belong in an MMPORG pretending to be a genuine learning community.
Posted by: Zoloft
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 2:04am)
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Thu 15th July 2010, 8:56pm)
If there was any "community" left, they would put the issue of letting Moulton in to a vote.
I real life, I am affiliated with 8 universities, three of which I still have current appointments at. Plus the National Science Foundation and the Boston Museum of Science. I can walk into any authentic institution of higher learning and freely participate in symposia or colloquia.
Only Wikiversity -- an MMPORG pretending to be an educational project -- imagines that I don't belong there.
And they are right. I don't belong in an MMPORG pretending to be a genuine learning community.
I don't consider Wikipedia to be a serious learning community. I agree that your work at real universities is interesting and valuable. I often wonder why you bother with Wikipedia/Wikiversity at all. I'm just a dabbler in this stuff, it's different.
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Fri 16th July 2010, 1:04am)
I real life, I am affiliated with 8 universities, three of which I still have current appointments at. Plus the National Science Foundation and the Boston Museum of Science. I can walk into any authentic institution of higher learning and freely participate in symposia or colloquia. ... Only Wikiversity -- an MMPORG pretending to be an educational project -- imagines that I don't belong there.
Right, but if your question is why do they imagine you don't belong there, then you've answered your own question.
Posted by: Moulton
Shreklisch Drama
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Fri 16th July 2010, 2:04am)
I don't consider Wikipedia to be a serious learning community. I agree that your work at real universities is interesting and valuable. I often wonder why you bother with Wikipedia/Wikiversity at all. I'm just a dabbler in this stuff, it's different.
It's not a http://www.ifets.info/journals/3_3/henrickson.html. It's not a http://knol.google.com/k/barry-kort/building-community/3iyoslgwsp412/20# at all, and (alas) negligible learning takes place there.
My own http://knol.google.com/k/barry-kort/barry-kort/3iyoslgwsp412/1#, as a scientist and science educator, focuses on http://knol.google.com/k/cognition-affect-and-learning. Within that field research, my current frontier is http://knol.google.com/k/cognition-affect-and-learning#The_Bardic_Arts Because WikiCulture is one of the more active http://knol.google.com/k/barry-kort/drama-engines/3iyoslgwsp412/28# on the Internet, and because the WMF is expressly http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission_statement as an educational organization, Wikipedia/Wikiversity provides a highly responsive venue for exploring the role of dramaturgy in education. Because Wikipedia and Wikiversity are home to so many http://www.trainingplace.com/source/research/mmresistant.htm, these sites are nearly ideal venues for my research.
It is said that real life drama (http://www.google.com/search?q=liminal+social+drama) is God's default method of education when all other conventional methods of education have failed. Where else can I find such a rich treasure trove of shreklisch drama?
Posted by: ulsterman
QUOTE(Adam Brookes)
Since it is the community that decides policies, the community can decide to do things not documented in a policy or go against policies. --Adambro 17:20, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
He's half right. Under Wikirules, the Community can at any time create a new policy. It can also modify policies to say the reverse of what they previously said. The only limit is if Jimbo notices and decrees that something is inconsistent with his pillars. It has happened quite often on WP, so why not on WV? Of course, there's the whole issue of what constitutes the Community creating or modifying a policy. It may just be one assertive admin doing so. That cetainly happens on WP.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(ulsterman @ Fri 16th July 2010, 7:13am)
Of course, there's the whole issue of what constitutes the Community creating or modifying a policy. It may just be one assertive admin doing so. That cetainly happens on WP.
I won't burden you with the copious evidence (http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Problematic_actions), but Adam has a track record of imagining and enforcing "policy" that he makes up on the spot, case by case, at times reversing the imaginary policy within minutes, depending on who the violator might be. It's rather comical at times.
Meanwhile, this morning...
QUOTE(Adam Brookes blocks the entire IPv6 network)
08:48, 16 July 2010 Adambro (Talk | contribs) changed block settings for 213.204.193.2 (Talk) with an expiry time of 2011-07-16T08:47:55Z (anonymous users only) ‎ (Open proxy or zombie (more info))
08:48, 16 July 2010 Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 213.197.27.252 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (anonymous users only) ‎ (Open proxy or zombie (more info))
08:47, 16 July 2010 Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 213.204.193.2 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) ‎ (Open proxy or zombie (more info))
16:27, 15 July 2010 Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 213.197.30.67 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) ‎ (Open proxy or zombie (more info))
08:48, 16 July 2010 Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 213.197.27.252 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (anonymous users only) ‎ (Open proxy or zombie (more info))
08:47, 16 July 2010 Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 213.204.193.2 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) ‎ (Open proxy or zombie (more info))
16:27, 15 July 2010 Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked 213.197.30.67 (Talk) with an expiry time of 1 year (anonymous users only, account creation disabled) ‎ (Open proxy or zombie (more info))
Those "open proxies" are nothing of the sort.
They are the gateways provided by http://www.SixXS.Org to enable people around the world who are on the IPv6 network to reach IPv4 destinations (like WMF sites). Adam has effectively blocked most of Asia and large parts of Europe, where ISPs are obliged to put their customers on the IPv6 network.
So, for the next year, no one in Asia, Europe, Africa, India, Australia, Oceania, or South America who is on the IPv6 network will have access to Wikiversity.
Posted by: JWSchmidt
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Thu 15th July 2010, 5:56pm)
If there was any "community" left, they would put the issue of letting Moulton in to a vote.
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/JWSchmidt_2010#Jtneill.27s_view
Posted by: Moulton
The Elimination Finals
In the middle of a discussion about ratifying the Child Protection Policy on Wikiversity...
QUOTE(#wikiversity-en)
(04:48:02 PM) adambro: it might also be useful to discuss a bit about the situation with wikipedia. clearly this is a bigger problem there. has WP been completely blocked by some or do they just get individual pages blocked ?
(04:48:34 PM) darkcode: supposedly some universities completely block wikipedia, but I have no idea if its related to this issue
(04:49:04 PM) darkcode: i've heard that supposedly some universities block because wikipedia is horribly inaccurate
(04:49:45 PM) adambro: seems a bit daft. can't they just teach their students to not believe everything on the net? lol
(04:48:34 PM) darkcode: supposedly some universities completely block wikipedia, but I have no idea if its related to this issue
(04:49:04 PM) darkcode: i've heard that supposedly some universities block because wikipedia is horribly inaccurate
(04:49:45 PM) adambro: seems a bit daft. can't they just teach their students to not believe everything on the net? lol
Not only is it commonplace for people in academia (faculty and students alike) to routinely disbelieve anything they see on Wikipedia, even people who play in the make-believe world of WikiCulture don't actually believe that they are doing anything more than playing a puerile children's game.
That's why all that silly stuff about blocking and banning is just childish gameplay, like CBS Survivor, where each week they vote someone off the island, or the game of musical chairs, or American Idol. It's basically a Game of Elimination.
Note that elimination is also the clinical term for taking a dump.
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 16th July 2010, 7:07am)
QUOTE(Zoloft @ Fri 16th July 2010, 1:04am)
I real life, I am affiliated with 8 universities, three of which I still have current appointments at. Plus the National Science Foundation and the Boston Museum of Science. I can walk into any authentic institution of higher learning and freely participate in symposia or colloquia. ... Only Wikiversity -- an MMPORG pretending to be an educational project -- imagines that I don't belong there.
Right, but if your question is why do they imagine you don't belong there, then you've answered your own question.
I understand Moulton really hates it when somebody quotes the wrong person.
Posted by: Moulton
Yah, I get it. They don't want me in their game, because I won't play their childish game by their silly rules. I (naively) went there erroneously imagining Wikiversity to be an authentic learning community, rather than just another role-playing fantasy game.
But the site is funded by tax-free donations to a 501c3 non-profit foundation chartered as an educational institution. So what the hell are they doing taking all that donor money just to play an MMPORG that has next to nothing to do with authentic education?
I'm doing them a favor by bringing some (unwanted) educational content into their puerile pathos.
Posted by: Subtle Bee
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 4:54pm)
Yah, I get it. They don't want me in their game, because I won't play their childish game by their silly rules. I (naively) went there erroneously imagining Wikiversity to be an authentic learning community, rather than just another role-playing fantasy game.
But the site is funded by tax-free donations to a 501c3 non-profit foundation chartered as an educational institution. So what the hell are they doing taking all that donor money just to play an MMPORG that has next to nothing to do with authentic education?
I'm doing them a favor by bringing some (unwanted) educational content into their puerile pathos.
You want to help, they don't want your help. Where's the disconnect, Androcles?
Posted by: Moulton
The disconnect is to be found in the http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission, which establishes the charter for what is advertised to the public (and represented to the IRS) to be going on at Wikiversity (and sister projects under the WMF umbrella).
Posted by: Subtle Bee
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 6:38pm)
The disconnect is to be found in the http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission, which establishes the charter for what is advertised to the public (and represented to the IRS) to be going on at Wikiversity (and sister projects under the WMF umbrella).
Yeah, I get it, they're hypocrites. What's not to get? You say you get it, but seem continually surprised and appalled nonetheless.
I don't get it.
Posted by: Jon Awbrey
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Fri 16th July 2010, 10:44pm)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 6:38pm)
The disconnect is to be found in the http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission, which establishes the charter for what is advertised to the public (and represented to the IRS) to be going on at Wikiversity (and sister projects under the WMF umbrella).
Yeah, I get it, they're hypocrites. What's not to get? You say you get it, but seem continually surprised and appalled nonetheless.
I don't get it.
There are two chief subcults in every cult:
- Slavation through grunt work
- Slavation through faith alone
Jon
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Fri 16th July 2010, 10:44pm)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 6:38pm)
The disconnect is to be found in the http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission, which establishes the charter for what is advertised to the public (and represented to the IRS) to be going on at Wikiversity (and sister projects under the WMF umbrella).
Yeah, I get it, they're hypocrites. What's not to get? You say you get it, but seem continually surprised and appalled nonetheless.
I don't get it.
See, in the role of Moulton, the schmegeggy scientist who is utterly and pathetically inept when it comes to teaching science, I am trying in vain to inject some actual educational content into Wikiversity so that if the IRS comes knocking they can say, "Well we did have this one schlepp who tried to inject some actual educational content, but it's not our fault he was a miserable failure."
Posted by: Subtle Bee
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 8:31pm)
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Fri 16th July 2010, 10:44pm)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 6:38pm)
The disconnect is to be found in the http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission, which establishes the charter for what is advertised to the public (and represented to the IRS) to be going on at Wikiversity (and sister projects under the WMF umbrella).
Yeah, I get it, they're hypocrites. What's not to get? You say you get it, but seem continually surprised and appalled nonetheless.
I don't get it.
See, in the role of Moulton, the schmegeggy scientist who is utterly and pathetically inept when it comes to teaching science, I am trying in vain to inject some actual educational content into Wikiversity so that if the IRS comes knocking they can say, "Well we did have this one schlepp who tried to inject some actual educational content, but it's not our fault he was a miserable failure."
OK, in the role of a bee, I'll bite, as bees often do. Why would you want to do that? Why not inject yourself out, and let the chumps fall where they may? Is there another purpose behind your self-aware flubbering, or is it just for the intense minty hell of it?
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 17th July 2010, 12:21am)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 8:31pm)
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Fri 16th July 2010, 10:44pm)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 6:38pm)
The disconnect is to be found in the http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission, which establishes the charter for what is advertised to the public (and represented to the IRS) to be going on at Wikiversity (and sister projects under the WMF umbrella).
Yeah, I get it, they're hypocrites. What's not to get? You say you get it, but seem continually surprised and appalled nonetheless.I don't get it.
I've been study learning theory for about 25 years now. It's not very difficult to build a successful learning community to serve the unmet needs of those who wish to learn. But there is a small percentage of the population whom my colleague, Maggie Martinez, calls http://www.trainingplace.com/source/research/mmresistant.htm. This is the problematic class of learners whose needs are the most difficult to meet. For reasons that I don't fully understand, WikiCulture is suffused with this type of learner. I don't know if I am making any significant progress in learning how to reach out to the Resistant Learner, but my intuition is that they require a dynamic learning environment rich in high-intensity drama. So that's what I'm doing there -- discovering how to employ high-intensity drama as an educational vehicle.
Posted by: Subtle Bee
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 10:02pm)
I've been study learning theory for about 25 years now. It's not very difficult to build a successful learning community to serve the unmet needs of those who wish to learn. But there is a small percentage of the population whom my colleague, Maggie Martinez, calls http://www.trainingplace.com/source/research/mmresistant.htm. This is the problematic class of learners whose needs are the most difficult to meet. For reasons that I don't fully understand, WikiCulture is suffused with this type of learner. I don't know if I am making any significant progress in learning how to reach out to the Resistant Learner, but my intuition is that they require a dynamic learning environment rich in high-intensity drama. So that's what I'm doing there -- discovering how to employ high-intensity drama as an educational vehicle.
I see. My own intuition is that 'pedians are "resistant learners" only insofar as they're not really "learners" at all, least of all in their own minds. They're not there to learn, they're there to tell, and are the sort of people who enjoy imagining they're writing a valuable encyclopedia. So I think it's predictable there are so many of them on wikis, and that they react with hostility to anyone ever trying to tell them anything. So in that way, I'm surprised that you're surprised, is all.
I'm intrigued by your dramatic ambition, but my guess is that in this case, the medium is the message, and that "drama" is itself incompatible with real education, but what do I know? Try shouting love and awareness at them, couldn't hurt.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 17th July 2010, 1:46am)
I'm intrigued by your dramatic ambition, but my guess is that in this case, the medium is the message, and that "drama" is itself incompatible with real education, but what do I know? Try shouting love and awareness at them, couldn't hurt.
So, we have two non-null hypotheses here.
Hâ‚€: (Null Hypothesis) Drama is entirely unrelated to education.
Hâ‚: Drama is fundamentally incompatible with real education.
Hâ‚‚: Dramaturgy has undiscovered and/or undeveloped educational potential.
I believe I can falsify Hâ‚€ and Hâ‚, and, in the fullness of time, demonstrate Hâ‚‚.
Can you envision a way to falsify Hâ‚‚ and demonstrate Hâ‚€ at best, and Hâ‚ at worst?
Posted by: Subtle Bee
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 16th July 2010, 11:05pm)
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 17th July 2010, 1:46am)
I'm intrigued by your dramatic ambition, but my guess is that in this case, the medium is the message, and that "drama" is itself incompatible with real education, but what do I know? Try shouting love and awareness at them, couldn't hurt.
So, we have two non-null hypotheses here.
Hâ‚€: (Null Hypothesis) Drama is entirely unrelated to education.
Hâ‚: Drama is fundamentally incompatible with real education.
Hâ‚‚: Dramaturgy has undiscovered and/or undeveloped educational potential.
I believe I can falsify Hâ‚€ and Hâ‚, and, in the fullness of time, demonstrate Hâ‚‚.
Can you envision a way to falsify Hâ‚‚ and demonstrate Hâ‚€ at best, and Hâ‚ at worst?
Interesting. A few caveats:
1) "drama" is understood in the wikilogical sense of petty emotional indulgence, as opposed to say Shakespeare.
2) "incompatibility" in Hâ‚means "displaces" rather than "destroys" - ie you could have some drama and still have some other education all in the same day.
3) I'm not the science-talking guy.
That said, "undeveloped and/or undiscovered potential" is a pretty low bar, and I concede there may be some marginal utility in specific circumstances (role-playing, illustrating the concept of "drama" etc); conversely, Hâ‚strikes me as an unprovable negative, unless I could prove it in principle, which I cannot.
THAT said, my vague hypothesis is that "drama" promotes anti-educational thought and behaviour, appealing to entrenched biases and emotional reactions while encouraging participants to personally identify with their positions. Unless this is somehow followed by cathartic/ traumatic deconstruction and re-assessment, it's hard to see how this leads to real education.
I'll let you know if I think of a way to prove any of that.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Sat 17th July 2010, 2:34am)
I'll let you know if I think of a way to prove any of that.
In the meantime, to see where I am with respect to establishing the highest possible bar for Hâ‚‚, take a look at this:
http://knol.google.com/k/cognition-affect-and-learning#
Posted by: Moulton
Every Sunday morning over WVBD...
B&D a fargenigen.
B&D men ken a bootkick grign.
A snoot, a Kort, a gabby dean.
Brengt areyn dayn klenem zing.
("http://yiddishradioproject.org/exhibits/commercials/commercials.php3?pg=3" with http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/bartonbrothers.)
Posted by: Moulton
Every Sunday, mourning, over WVBD
Ottava spells out the rules of his http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Colloquium#Note_from_Cormaggio...
QUOTE(Wikiversity)
This is not Wikipedia and Wikipedia policy is not in effect here. I favor the creation of a privacy policy that protects anonymous editors and protects people like Moulton from thugs who hide behind their anonymity. --JWSchmidt 00:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Okay, let me try another approach based on your fixation on the above language. Obviously, you aren't in a power or political position to determine what is fair, what wikiversity is meant to be, and the rest. Instead, you have been shown over the past two years that both you and Moulton are at the mercy of fickle admin who rely on arbitrary decisions. So, instead of claiming what should be, focus on what is. I provided the criteria that -I-, as a fickle admin relying on arbitrary decisions, would need to perform an unblock as a whim. You can say that is unjust or not right all you want, but it is how it is, and you can agree to the terms or not. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Precisely so. Ottava admits that he and the other custodians have knowingly and intentionally set up an unjust and corrupt governance regime, so as to learn (by direct experience) how I or JWS will handle such an exceptional situation. And I have responded by adopting the practices taught by Henry David Thoreau, Mohandas K. Gandhi, and Martin Luther King — namely civil disobedience. To the best of my knowledge, those are the ethical best practices under the current problematic situation. Moulton 01:46, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
To continue with your logic: in this fascist state, civil disobedience is still disobedience, and disobedience results in excessive blocks and a burnt earth policy. So, you can obey or you can be responsible with us that there are tons of innocent people harmed. Are you immune to the guilt caused by your unwillingness to stop using people's real names? Ottava Rima (talk) 01:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
If it pleases you to burn Wikiversity to the ground, rather than evolve to a 21st Century learning community committed to ethical best practices, who am I to deny you the ecstasy of your banhammerama? —Moulton 02:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Okay, let me try another approach based on your fixation on the above language. Obviously, you aren't in a power or political position to determine what is fair, what wikiversity is meant to be, and the rest. Instead, you have been shown over the past two years that both you and Moulton are at the mercy of fickle admin who rely on arbitrary decisions. So, instead of claiming what should be, focus on what is. I provided the criteria that -I-, as a fickle admin relying on arbitrary decisions, would need to perform an unblock as a whim. You can say that is unjust or not right all you want, but it is how it is, and you can agree to the terms or not. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Precisely so. Ottava admits that he and the other custodians have knowingly and intentionally set up an unjust and corrupt governance regime, so as to learn (by direct experience) how I or JWS will handle such an exceptional situation. And I have responded by adopting the practices taught by Henry David Thoreau, Mohandas K. Gandhi, and Martin Luther King — namely civil disobedience. To the best of my knowledge, those are the ethical best practices under the current problematic situation. Moulton 01:46, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
To continue with your logic: in this fascist state, civil disobedience is still disobedience, and disobedience results in excessive blocks and a burnt earth policy. So, you can obey or you can be responsible with us that there are tons of innocent people harmed. Are you immune to the guilt caused by your unwillingness to stop using people's real names? Ottava Rima (talk) 01:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
If it pleases you to burn Wikiversity to the ground, rather than evolve to a 21st Century learning community committed to ethical best practices, who am I to deny you the ecstasy of your banhammerama? —Moulton 02:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
So there you have it, kids.
Ottava's objective is to teach Bondage and Discipline, and mine is to teach Civil Disobedience.
Who's winning?
Posted by: Alison
QUOTE(Moulton @ Mon 19th July 2010, 8:19pm)
"banhammerama?"
A++++ Moulton phrase! I'm sooo stealing this
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Alison @ Tue 20th July 2010, 12:05am)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Mon 19th July 2010, 8:19pm)
"banhammerama?"
A++++ Moulton phrase! I'm sooo stealing this It's a song, too...
Banhammerama, guajira banhammerama
Banhammerama....
Guajira banhammerama
Posted by: Moulton
But wait! There's http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Colloquium&action=history...
QUOTE(Ottava's B&D Classroom)
Moulton, schools have the ability to come up with their own conduct policies. You failed to abide by it after multiple warnings from those in charge of the school. You were expelled. That was your own fault. That is the 21st century. You can abide by it or not, but you are currently acting like a lawless animal and not as a civilized human. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
No problem, Ottava. If your objective here is to teach the http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=30131&st=60&p=244472&#entry244472, who am I to deny you the ecstasy of getting off on your fetish. --Moulton 04:10, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
No problem, Ottava. If your objective here is to teach the http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=30131&st=60&p=244472&#entry244472, who am I to deny you the ecstasy of getting off on your fetish. --Moulton 04:10, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
B&D a http://stream.realimpact.net/?file=realimpact/soundportraits/yiddish/commercials/barton-joe_and_paul1.smil&mode=compact.
B&D men ken a bootkick krigen.
A snoot, a Kort, a http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:JWSchmidt.
Brengt areyn dayn klenem zing.
("http://yiddishradioproject.org/exhibits/commercials/commercials.php3?pg=3" with http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/bartonbrothers by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sholom_Secunda, courtesy of the NPR http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/features/2002/yiddish/index.html.)
Posted by: Subtle Bee
QUOTE(Moulton @ Mon 19th July 2010, 8:19pm)
So there you have it, kids.
Ottava's objective is to teach Bondage and Discipline, and mine is to teach Civil Disobedience.
Who's winning?
I'd love it to be you, and it can't be Ottava, but then there's this...
QUOTE
I have responded by adopting the practices taught by Henry David Thoreau, Mohandas K. Gandhi, and Martin Luther King — namely civil disobedience. Moulton 01:46, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
...and I have to call Niwdog on you.
So, to answer your question, nobody's winning.
Don't everybody spit-take all at once.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Tue 20th July 2010, 12:54am)
So, to answer your question, nobody's winning.
Right, because I took a contest and transformed it into a learning project.
I dunno what the hell Ottava thinks he's learning by running a B&D Fetish shop, but I'm having a ball learning to craft song parodies.
Posted by: Subtle Bee
QUOTE(Moulton @ Mon 19th July 2010, 10:00pm)
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Tue 20th July 2010, 12:54am)
So, to answer your question, nobody's winning.
Right, because I took a contest and transformed it into a learning project.
So in other words, when Moulton teaches, nobody wins?
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Tue 20th July 2010, 1:06am)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Mon 19th July 2010, 10:00pm)
QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Tue 20th July 2010, 12:54am)
So, to answer your question, nobody's winning.
Right, because I took a contest and transformed it into a learning project.When I learn how to write moar bettah song parodies, everybody runs for cover.
Posted by: Moulton
Every Sunday, mourning, over WVBD...
QUOTE(Today on #wikiversity-en)
(05:18:22 PM) The topic for #wikiversity-en is: Welcome to the English Wikiversity IRC channel: http://en.wikiversity.org | For assistance ask your question and WAIT for an answer or ask at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Colloquium | No public logging | Discuss http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/Sandbox_Server | CVN channel at #cvn-wv-en
(05:18:27 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: moulton is globaly unblocked?
(05:18:29 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: hi
(05:18:44 PM) JWSchmidt: the bogus lock is still on his account
(05:18:47 PM) Greensboro: Hi.
(05:18:56 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: so he is still bocked
(05:19:20 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: btw, it seems to me that you would prefer to study psychology than what you studied
(05:20:09 PM) JWSchmidt: psychology is too complex for me
(05:20:41 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: can we help you?
(05:20:59 PM) JWSchmidt: I can't understand psychotics
(05:21:00 PM) Greensboro: Would you like to help me?
(05:21:34 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: haven't seen you here before. so I assume you are new here
(05:21:56 PM) Greensboro: I am a stranger to Wikiversity.
(05:22:10 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: well it seems to me that Eric was right if I see what whats going on on wv
(05:22:22 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: and do you know Barry Kort?
(05:22:44 PM) Greensboro: His name is well known.
(05:23:09 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: what is his position?
(05:23:12 PM) Juandev: btw
(05:23:15 PM) JWSchmidt: "if I see what whats going on on wv" <-- what do you see
(05:23:27 PM) Greensboro: His position?
(05:23:39 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: what is he doing there
(05:23:47 PM) Greensboro: Where?
(05:23:55 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: on MIT
(05:24:08 PM) Greensboro: What is he doing at MIT?
(05:24:16 PM) Greensboro: Is that what you are asking?
(05:24:31 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: yes, sorry my English is not good
(05:24:48 PM) Greensboro: Barry Kort is affiliated with the Affective Computing Group.
(05:25:03 PM) Greensboro: But he rarely comes into MIT any more.
(05:25:21 PM) Greensboro: Mainly he comes in for meetings and big events.
(05:25:34 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: well, I think the page you started doesn't bring a good results, but vice versa if we talk about the community and "emotions"
(05:25:54 PM) Greensboro: Community and emotions?
(05:26:00 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: I see, we know him here well
(05:26:09 PM) Greensboro: Is that why you asked about Kort?
(05:26:19 PM) Greensboro: Oh.
(05:26:42 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: I read about 2 years ago he studies the influence of emotions on learning or something like that
(05:26:58 PM) Greensboro: Yes, he studies that.
(05:27:27 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: and what do you study?
(05:28:02 PM) Greensboro: The Civil Rights Movement.
(05:29:02 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: ummm
(05:29:34 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: adambro is a friend or enemy?
(05:30:57 PM) JWSchmidt: adambro is intent on preventing me from collaborating with my scholarly friend Moulton at Wikiversity
(05:31:40 PM) JWSchmidt: a friend would not disrupt my collaborative learning goals by bashing Wikiversity scholars on the head with his banhammer
(05:32:06 PM) Greensboro: Are there Civil Rights Issues involved?
(05:32:52 PM) JWSchmidt: civil wrongs
(05:33:03 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: dont know, you should have a look
(05:33:54 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: but as I remember your friend was blocked
(05:33:59 PM) Greensboro: Do you think there is a denial of civil rights here?
(05:34:13 PM) Greensboro: Blocked?
(05:34:20 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: don't think so
(05:34:23 PM) Juandev: :-)
(05:35:52 PM) JWSchmidt: many Wikiversity scholars have been blocked and abused
(05:36:18 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: yep
(05:36:35 PM) Greensboro: Blocked and abused?
(05:36:38 PM) JWSchmidt: many more left the project in disgust
(05:37:20 PM) JWSchmidt: this was the start http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Problematic_actions#MoultonBlock
(05:37:27 PM) adambro_ [~adambro@wikipedia/Adambro] entered the room.
(05:37:28 PM) JWSchmidt: Jimbo's might banhammer
(05:37:29 PM) adambro_ is now known as adambro
(05:37:33 PM) Greensboro: Who stayed behind? And why?
(05:37:42 PM) JWSchmidt: mighty
(05:38:00 PM) mode (+o adambro) by ChanServ
(05:38:05 PM) mode (+b *!*@vpn-g.media.mit.edu) by adambro
(05:38:07 PM) You have been kicked by adambro: (Greensboro)
(05:18:27 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: moulton is globaly unblocked?
(05:18:29 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: hi
(05:18:44 PM) JWSchmidt: the bogus lock is still on his account
(05:18:47 PM) Greensboro: Hi.
(05:18:56 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: so he is still bocked
(05:19:20 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: btw, it seems to me that you would prefer to study psychology than what you studied
(05:20:09 PM) JWSchmidt: psychology is too complex for me
(05:20:41 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: can we help you?
(05:20:59 PM) JWSchmidt: I can't understand psychotics
(05:21:00 PM) Greensboro: Would you like to help me?
(05:21:34 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: haven't seen you here before. so I assume you are new here
(05:21:56 PM) Greensboro: I am a stranger to Wikiversity.
(05:22:10 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: well it seems to me that Eric was right if I see what whats going on on wv
(05:22:22 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: and do you know Barry Kort?
(05:22:44 PM) Greensboro: His name is well known.
(05:23:09 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: what is his position?
(05:23:12 PM) Juandev: btw
(05:23:15 PM) JWSchmidt: "if I see what whats going on on wv" <-- what do you see
(05:23:27 PM) Greensboro: His position?
(05:23:39 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: what is he doing there
(05:23:47 PM) Greensboro: Where?
(05:23:55 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: on MIT
(05:24:08 PM) Greensboro: What is he doing at MIT?
(05:24:16 PM) Greensboro: Is that what you are asking?
(05:24:31 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: yes, sorry my English is not good
(05:24:48 PM) Greensboro: Barry Kort is affiliated with the Affective Computing Group.
(05:25:03 PM) Greensboro: But he rarely comes into MIT any more.
(05:25:21 PM) Greensboro: Mainly he comes in for meetings and big events.
(05:25:34 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: well, I think the page you started doesn't bring a good results, but vice versa if we talk about the community and "emotions"
(05:25:54 PM) Greensboro: Community and emotions?
(05:26:00 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: I see, we know him here well
(05:26:09 PM) Greensboro: Is that why you asked about Kort?
(05:26:19 PM) Greensboro: Oh.
(05:26:42 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: I read about 2 years ago he studies the influence of emotions on learning or something like that
(05:26:58 PM) Greensboro: Yes, he studies that.
(05:27:27 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: and what do you study?
(05:28:02 PM) Greensboro: The Civil Rights Movement.
(05:29:02 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: ummm
(05:29:34 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: adambro is a friend or enemy?
(05:30:57 PM) JWSchmidt: adambro is intent on preventing me from collaborating with my scholarly friend Moulton at Wikiversity
(05:31:40 PM) JWSchmidt: a friend would not disrupt my collaborative learning goals by bashing Wikiversity scholars on the head with his banhammer
(05:32:06 PM) Greensboro: Are there Civil Rights Issues involved?
(05:32:52 PM) JWSchmidt: civil wrongs
(05:33:03 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: dont know, you should have a look
(05:33:54 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: but as I remember your friend was blocked
(05:33:59 PM) Greensboro: Do you think there is a denial of civil rights here?
(05:34:13 PM) Greensboro: Blocked?
(05:34:20 PM) Juandev: Greensboro: don't think so
(05:34:23 PM) Juandev: :-)
(05:35:52 PM) JWSchmidt: many Wikiversity scholars have been blocked and abused
(05:36:18 PM) Juandev: JWSchmidt: yep
(05:36:35 PM) Greensboro: Blocked and abused?
(05:36:38 PM) JWSchmidt: many more left the project in disgust
(05:37:20 PM) JWSchmidt: this was the start http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Problematic_actions#MoultonBlock
(05:37:27 PM) adambro_ [~adambro@wikipedia/Adambro] entered the room.
(05:37:28 PM) JWSchmidt: Jimbo's might banhammer
(05:37:29 PM) adambro_ is now known as adambro
(05:37:33 PM) Greensboro: Who stayed behind? And why?
(05:37:42 PM) JWSchmidt: mighty
(05:38:00 PM) mode (+o adambro) by ChanServ
(05:38:05 PM) mode (+b *!*@vpn-g.media.mit.edu) by adambro
(05:38:07 PM) You have been kicked by adambro: (Greensboro)
Adambro a http://stream.realimpact.net/?file=realimpact/soundportraits/yiddish/commercials/barton-joe_and_paul1.smil&mode=compact.
Adambro men ken a bootkick krigen.
A "Scoot!" A Kort, a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JWSchmidt.
Brengt areyn dayn klenen http://netknowledge.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Ethics/Blocks,_bans_and_show_trials.
Cut Speech.
Posted by: The Joy
What I've noticed with WV and WikiQuote (WQ) is that the original founding group members usually thought "outside of the box" and appeared to initially eschewed the linear, entrenched, and inflexible thinking that seems to plague the English Wikipedia. WQ was at first a very bizarre place, but it was fun in that the head people there were "eccentric" (almost in a Lewis Carroll sort-of way) and thought of their project in a unique way. Then Cirt and others gained power there to assert the form of linear, entrenched, and inflexible thinking that has made Wikipedia a poisonous place to collaborate and work. Adambro is very much a linear, entrenched, and inflexible person and his way of thinking is prevailing over WV. When people obsess so much about how things must be a certain way, it destroys the entire point of a learning community and educational project.
The founding members of Wikipedia, WV, and WQ all started out with this naive mindset that they were creating a utopia. When people tried to interject criticism of the project, people changed from being enlightened and open-minded people to downright mean and defensive people. I don't know if people like Cirt and Adambro emerge as like antibodies to fight unwarranted thinking or not, but it would explain why these seemingly "eccentric" members would tolerate their presence and give them powers to eliminate threats. Adambro and Cirt do not seem to fit the original cultures that WQ and WV attempted to create and I'm curious as to why they do exist. I see it with TreasuryTag and many administrators on Wikipedia. For example, TreasuryTag likes to enforce rules that http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GiacomoReturned&diff=374556135&oldid=374517214 and not in an objective unbiased way.
It all reminds me of when Abraham Lincoln told General Joseph Hooker:
QUOTE
I have heard, in such way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the Army and the Government needed a Dictator. Of course it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain success can set up dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship.
The linear, entrenched, and inflexible people have been given the command. Instead of building bridges, WP, WQ, and WV are building http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_warfare. Haig today, gone tomorrow!
(Did the above make any sense? Did I overdo the military history analogies?
)
Posted by: Moulton
Every Sunday, mourning, over WVBD
QUOTE(The Joy @ Wed 21st July 2010, 10:55pm)
Adambro is very much a linear, entrenched, and inflexible person and his way of thinking is prevailing over WV. When people obsess so much about how things must be a certain way, it destroys the entire point of a learning community and educational project.
There is scant evidence that Adam Brookes does any thinking at all. It appears to me that he mainly does an automatic knee-jerk reaction to suppress anything that he imagines to be connected with me. Both he and Ottava have reverted content that they believed to have been from me, without bothering to think, or to realize they were simply mistaken.
QUOTE(The Joy @ Wed 21st July 2010, 10:55pm)
The linear, entrenched, and inflexible people have been given the command. Instead of building bridges, WP, WQ, and WV are building http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_warfare. Haig today, gone tomorrow!
(Did the above make any sense? Did I overdo the military history analogies? )
(Did the above make any sense? Did I overdo the military history analogies?
)Yes, they are building trenches, transforming WV from a pleasurable learning community into trench warfare.
It's not a http://netknowledge.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Ethics/Blocks,_bans_and_show_trials.
Posted by: Subtle Bee
QUOTE(The Joy @ Wed 21st July 2010, 7:55pm)
What I've noticed with WV and WikiQuote (WQ) is that the original founding group members usually thought "outside of the box" and appeared to initially eschewed the linear, entrenched, and inflexible thinking that seems to plague the English Wikipedia. WQ was at first a very bizarre place, but it was fun in that the head people there were "eccentric" (almost in a Lewis Carroll sort-of way) and thought of their project in a unique way. Then Cirt and others gained power there to assert the form of linear, entrenched, and inflexible thinking that has made Wikipedia a poisonous place to collaborate and work. Adambro is very much a linear, entrenched, and inflexible person and his way of thinking is prevailing over WV. When people obsess so much about how things must be a certain way, it destroys the entire point of a learning community and educational project.
The founding members of Wikipedia, WV, and WQ all started out with this naive mindset that they were creating a utopia. When people tried to interject criticism of the project, people changed from being enlightened and open-minded people to downright mean and defensive people. I don't know if people like Cirt and Adambro emerge as like antibodies to fight unwarranted thinking or not, but it would explain why these seemingly "eccentric" members would tolerate their presence and give them powers to eliminate threats. Adambro and Cirt do not seem to fit the original cultures that WQ and WV attempted to create and I'm curious as to why they do exist. I see it with TreasuryTag and many administrators on Wikipedia. For example, TreasuryTag likes to enforce rules that http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GiacomoReturned&diff=374556135&oldid=374517214 and not in an objective unbiased way.
It all reminds me of when Abraham Lincoln told General Joseph Hooker:
QUOTE
I have heard, in such way as to believe it, of your recently saying that both the Army and the Government needed a Dictator. Of course it was not for this, but in spite of it, that I have given you the command. Only those generals who gain success can set up dictators. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship.
The linear, entrenched, and inflexible people have been given the command. Instead of building bridges, WP, WQ, and WV are building http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_warfare. Haig today, gone tomorrow!
(Did the above make any sense? Did I overdo the military history analogies?
)Military part aside, I think you described the history of the internet since '95, and probably the evolution of many similar endeavours. Dreamers are like fireweed that flourishes in unpopulated frontiers, but gets overlongrun by duller crops. Circle of life and all that.
Posted by: Moulton
Dark Waffle's Dialog
Dark Waffle: Fargenigen, how do you plan to respond when people feel there is no further need to discuss issues of concern to you?
Fargenigen: When people begin to feel that way, Dark Waffle, how will they communicate that sentiment to me? After all, I cannot respond to a communication unless there is a communication to respond to.
Dark Waffle: Fargenigen, what do you plan to do when people feel there is no further need to discuss issues of concern to you?
Fargenigen: Would you like me to discuss my plans with you?
Dark Waffle: Fargenigen, what do you plan to do when people act contrary to your wishes because they feel there is no further need to discuss issues of concern to you?
Fargenigen: Why do you ask? Did you wish to become prescient about my plans during the imaginable future interlude when you have elected to remain ignorant of them?
... Time passes ...
Fargenigen: Do you have any more questions you like to discuss with me, my Dear Dark Waffle?
Posted by: JWSchmidt
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 23rd July 2010, 6:51am)
Dark Waffle's Dialog
Moulton, please credit your sources of http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity%3ACommunity_Review%2FJWSchmidt_2010&action=historysubmit&diff=586405&oldid=586387.
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(JWSchmidt @ Sat 24th July 2010, 6:08am)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 23rd July 2010, 6:51am)
Dark Waffle's Dialog
Moulton, please credit your sources of http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity%3ACommunity_Review%2FJWSchmidt_2010&action=historysubmit&diff=586405&oldid=586387.I would, except that I have no idea who Dark Waffle is. All I know for sure is that he's a genuine wiz at the MediaWiki codebase who is also one of the http://moultonlava.blogspot.com.
Posted by: JWSchmidt
QUOTE(Moulton @ Sat 24th July 2010, 3:15am)
the http://moultonlava.blogspot.com.
How can I block thee? Let me count the ways...
I block thee for pointing out policy violations of sysops
I block thee for my violation of the privacy policy
I block thee for putting {{policy}} on a policy
I block thee to allow discussion
I block thee for until guidelines are agreed upon
I block thee for editing a policy talk page
I block thee because I clicked "block" by mistake
I block thee because enough is enough
I block thee for protest about Jimbo/the WMF
I block thee for using my name
I block thee for dressing like a witch during a witch hunt
I block thee for objecting to my bad block
I block thee for your good faith edits while blocked
I block thee because Javert went in the Seine
I blocked thee because crosswiki issues
I block thee because you objected to being emergency
desysoped when no there was no emergency
I block thee because disruption
I block thee because you refer to you in the third person
I block thee because I want a http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum
I block thee because I never read the Wikimedia Mission
(http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum)
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:JWSchmidt#User:Beetlebaum_2
Posted by: Moulton
On Wikiversity, JWSchmidt has a (declared) alternate account, http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum, to craft a new collaborative project on http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Music_and_learning. Adambro takes exception to Schmidt's second account, and the Music and Learning Project.
Adam has blocked me on the English Wikiversity, so I posted this on Adam's talk page on Beta Wikiversity...
QUOTE(Posted on Adambro's talk page on Beta.Wikiversity.Org)
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum
Adam, on the English Wikiversity, http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:JWSchmidt#User:Beetlebaum_2 to http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:JWSchmidt:
Adam, please resign as a Custodian and end your reign of terror in the English Wikiversity. As near as I can tell, your role there revolves around indicting, persecuting, and censoring the contributions of other scholars, and I suggest this is the root of the problem there.
http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Moulton/Gastrin_Bombesin 12:52, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Adam, on the English Wikiversity, http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:JWSchmidt#User:Beetlebaum_2 to http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:JWSchmidt:
Please end your use of this account. As far as I can tell, most of your contributions using this account revolve around mocking other users and I think this only serves to exacerbate problems further. http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro 11:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Adam, please resign as a Custodian and end your reign of terror in the English Wikiversity. As near as I can tell, your role there revolves around indicting, persecuting, and censoring the contributions of other scholars, and I suggest this is the root of the problem there.
http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Moulton/Gastrin_Bombesin 12:52, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Meantime, Adam has gone ahead and blocked User:Beetlebaum...
QUOTE(Wikiversity Block Log)
(Block log); 20:06 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) blocked Beetlebaum (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (autoblock disabled) (Abusing multiple accounts: exacerbating problems by writing songs etc mocking other users)
I think Adam is just jealous of JWS, because JWS has a pony and Adam doesn't. Most likely, Adam wants a pony, too.
Posted by: Moulton
Update...
Beetlebaum takes exception to Adam interfering with the horse race...
QUOTE(Bad Block)
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:Beetlebaum#Bad_Block
This blocked user asked that their block be reviewed, but the request was denied. Other custodians may review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason.
* Reason for the unblock request was: Please unblock this account. This account is used for http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Music_and_learning. The http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro has some kind of vendetta against this harmless user account. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro having http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Problematic_actions#Adambro_and_privacy by misusing checkuser data. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro has http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:JWSchmidt#User:Beetlebaum poor http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum and http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Problematic_actions#21_July_2010. Please do not allow http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro to beat on a dead horse. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro falsely charged "Abusing multiple accounts" but http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro gave no warning and has no evidence of any abuse. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro falsely charged "exacerbating problems by writing songs etc mocking other users", but there has been only been the creation of a harmless learning project about http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Music_and_learning#Activities and http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum#Les_Songs_Learned. I believe http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum#Les_Songs_Learned is trying to disrupt my musical learning goals without justification. Can an honest custodian please unblock this harmless account? --the winner..... http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum 20:35, 25 July 2010 (UTC
This blocked user asked that their block be reviewed, but the request was denied. Other custodians may review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason.
* Reason for the unblock request was: Please unblock this account. This account is used for http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Music_and_learning. The http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro has some kind of vendetta against this harmless user account. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro having http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Problematic_actions#Adambro_and_privacy by misusing checkuser data. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro has http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:JWSchmidt#User:Beetlebaum poor http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum and http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Community_Review/Problematic_actions#21_July_2010. Please do not allow http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro to beat on a dead horse. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro falsely charged "Abusing multiple accounts" but http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro gave no warning and has no evidence of any abuse. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro falsely charged "exacerbating problems by writing songs etc mocking other users", but there has been only been the creation of a harmless learning project about http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Music_and_learning#Activities and http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum#Les_Songs_Learned. I believe http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum#Les_Songs_Learned is trying to disrupt my musical learning goals without justification. Can an honest custodian please unblock this harmless account? --the winner..... http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum 20:35, 25 July 2010 (UTC
Alas...
QUOTE(Adambro denies the unblock request)
* Reason for denying the request was: No. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro 20:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Posted by: JWSchmidt
QUOTE(Moulton @ Sun 25th July 2010, 2:12pm)
QUOTE(Adambro denies the unblock request)
* Reason for denying the request was: No. http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Adambro 20:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Beetlebaum says, "Neigh!"
Posted by: Moulton
http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/User_talk:JWSchmidt#Preamble_to_the_Declaration_of_Indignation
We hold these Truths to be Self-Evident — That all Scholars are Created Equal and are Endowed by their Creator (and by the http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission) with Certain Unalienable Rights, and that among these are http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Privacy_policy#The_public_and_collaborative_nature_of_the_projects.
http://beta.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Moulton/Montana_Mouse 11:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Posted by: Moulton
The Day the Music Died
zOMG...
QUOTE(Adambro on Wikiversity)
* (Deletion log); 22:00 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) deleted "http://hardnews1.ansci.usu.edu/~bkort/Beetlebaum.html" (Beyond scope: content was: 'Be Happy]]I'm better known as User:JWSchmidt. I created this account so I coul...' (and the only contributor was '[[Special:Contribution)
* (Deletion log); 22:00 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) deleted "http://hardnews1.ansci.usu.edu/~bkort/Music+Learning.html" (Beyond scope: content was: '431pxIn this learn by doing project, we will each explore our own musical interests while collaborating to document the w)
* (Deletion log); 22:00 . . Adambro (Talk | contribs) deleted "http://hardnews1.ansci.usu.edu/~bkort/Music+Learning.html" (Beyond scope: content was: '431pxIn this learn by doing project, we will each explore our own musical interests while collaborating to document the w)
Adam killed the http://hardnews1.ansci.usu.edu/~bkort/Beetlebaum.html?!? And the http://hardnews1.ansci.usu.edu/~bkort/Music+Learning.html too!?!
WTF?!?
Posted by: JWSchmidt
QUOTE(Moulton @ Sun 25th July 2010, 4:10pm)
Adam killed the http://hardnews1.ansci.usu.edu/~bkort/Beetlebaum.html?!?
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Son_of_Beetlebaum