WikBack blocking? Options

Recently on The WikBack, Kelly Martin laid into my personality and character. In my lengthy attempt to defend myself, I quoted several e-mail exchanges between Jimmy Wales and me, so that people could see how reasonable I was in the Autumn of 2006 and how unreasonable he was.

This is the screen I now get when signing into WikBack, and clicking on ANYTHING effects no response.

Could someone please notify UC that I would like access restored, that I apologize for posting the e-mails, but that I would like the content of my original post e-mailed back to me?

Greg

I doubt it'll happen. They've probably been looking for a reason to ban you for a while.

It's amazing that a culture that promotes "common sense" and an "ignore all rules" mentality would be so caught up on technicalities, but I bet they'll say the ban is justified solely on those emails...

Recently on The WikBack, Kelly Martin laid into my personality and character. In my lengthy attempt to defend myself, I quoted several e-mail exchanges between Jimmy Wales and me, so that people could see how reasonable I was in the Autumn of 2006 and how unreasonable he was.

This is the screen I now get when signing into WikBack, and clicking on ANYTHING effects no response.

Could someone please notify UC that I would like access restored, that I apologize for posting the e-mails, but that I would like the content of my original post e-mailed back to me?

Greg

This is a BS issue and you shouldn't back down.

Unless JW (1) explicitly requested confidentiality and (2) did not himself make any statements at all about your interactions in or out of email, then there is no reason of ethics or etiquette why you cannot publish those emails.

Create a thread and publish them here.

In other advice, you should present your story to the public at large and quite wasting your breath treating the prosecutors like they are the jury.

Standard Disclamour. IANAPET (I Am Not A Professional Etiquette Theorist).

Jonny

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache: Wed 5th March 2008, 1:12pm

For the record, if I ever exchange email with anyone here, I'd appreciate that you assume confidentiality and only breach it with my ok.

For the record, if I ever exchange email with anyone here, I'd appreciate that you assume confidentiality and only breach it with my ok.

Typically, that's how I operate. However, this was a special situation in that I felt I needed those e-mails to demonstrate to someone that my exchanges with Wales were cordial, and also that I've been waiting since December 24th for a response from Wales about the issue -- which 3 times he has said he was getting around to responding, but never has. How much more effort must I put forth to try to respect Wales' wishes, if he won't bother to make a substantive reply?

There was nothing shocking or offensive or embarrassing in the posted e-mails -- just a very unsurprising portrayal of how Wales dealt with Wikipedia Review as a "trademark" problem.

I will likely take Jonny Cache's advice and re-post here -- it's just that it was a lot of work that will now have to be re-done.

Greg

This is a BS issue and you shouldn't back down.

Agree with Jonny. But Greg, you shouldn't expect any human decency from UC. He supports threats of violence against WR members. His opinion of you counts for zero. You are worth more than a billion UCs.

This post has been edited by gomi: Sun 9th March 2008, 1:44am

For the record, if I ever exchange email with anyone here, I'd appreciate that you assume confidentiality and only breach it with my ok.

Polite people do just that.

But it may be a good approach to write all your emails as if that is not going to be the case.

If only I had learnt that lesson before writing to unblock-en-l and having an admin come to my public talk page to gloat over not only my block, but my unpopularity...

Why is it a priority to post to UC's forum in the first place? I don't even understand why you'd want to. You can say what you want here, and WR must get at least as good an audience.

Why is it a priority to post to UC's forum in the first place? I don't even understand why you'd want to. You can say what you want here, and WR must get at least as good an audience.

Exactly, the place is run by a Wikipedia arbitrator, a representing party of the system which kicked him out from Wikipedia. There are probably more people reading this forum than Wikback, he can make his point here better than there.

"You can't publish e-mails from others on the WikBack."
http://www.wikipediareview.com/Image:WikBack_block.jpg

Whereas sharing them with arbitrators - never mind the sender's permission - is entirely alright.

It's not, then, a matter of privacy, but who gets to control it. The Arbitration Committee has appointed itself not as privacy's guardian, but as its broker.

Accordingly, Jimbo is granted privacy and protections that you and I aren't.

If only I had learnt that lesson before writing to unblock-en-l and having an admin come to my public talk page to gloat over not only my block, but my unpopularity...

Well that wasn't very nice of them, was it. Oh wait, I think that you're talking about this series of posts... that was me. Suffice it to say I don't quite characterise things exactly the same as you do about that incident. Nor was the mail content actually disclosed, just referred to. But I stand by what I said then.

As a note I think mailing lists and private correspondences are somewhat different, and if in some unhappy future, I found myself writing to unblock-en-l to request my unblocking I'd have zero expectation of privacy. But that's just me.

...having an admin come to my public talk page to gloat over not only my block, but my unpopularity...

Unpopularity? Perish the thought! Why, you're currently running at #3 all-time on our WR Fans Home Shopping Network show, behind only Wordbomb and myself. The mousepad licensing alone is probably worth at least half the GDP of most third-world countries.

Back to the topic though, I keep asking myself - should I start a wikiback.com account? Technically it's not a WMF-controlled entity, so there's no issue of personal principle involved... I dunno, it just seems like it would ultimately be pointless. Still, I'd probably be better able to find the specific thread being referred to when someone mentions one, which seems to be what's going on here...

Back to the topic though, I keep asking myself - should I start a wikiback.com account?

I think you have to sign up with a username that you use on a Wikimedia project.

I think you have to sign up with a username that you use on a Wikimedia project.

Oh yes, that... I asked Mr. Uninvited about that, and he said he'd make an exception in my case, or in just about anyone's case for that matter. Presumably they just want recognizability, not necessarily on-wiki contactibility, or bannability, or, ehh, whatever-abiity. Otherwise I'm not sure why he'd make such an offer, knowing that I could hardly do much over there other than cause trouble and insert cheap wisecracks where they're probably not wanted.

Ultimately, the real problem is that WP is so hide-bound at this point, no amount of so-called "constructive" discussion is going to get anything done over there - the only way to bring about reform seems to be to wait for a crisis to occur, and try to take advantage of whatever band-aid "fix" they come up with to try and sneak in some sort of marginal improvement. Or barring that, cheap wisecracks.

Back to the topic though, I keep asking myself - should I start a wikiback.com account?

Didn't you say you enjoyed being unbannable?

Given this whole thing seems to have been a trap on UC's part where he could lure WR members over to his board so he could ban and hurt them, I don't think so.

Presumably they just want recognizability, not necessarily on-wiki contactibility, or bannability, or, ehh, whatever-abiity.

Of course he wants bannability. Protesting threats of violence against banned users / WR members is a bannable offence over there, even if you have only made 10 posts and have already left.

UC is, quit simply, pure evil.

So if AW thought Charles had somehow brought bad publicity to WP by supporting me in some way, tell me, would AW have threatened to cut off my fingers if UC hadn't banned me, or at least hadn't turned it into a smear campaign against me? Or had Charles said something else in my favour somewhere other than WB?

Either way, UC should be banned for reckless endangerment.

This post has been edited by gomi: Sun 9th March 2008, 1:44am

I think you have to sign up with a username that you use on a Wikimedia project.

Oh yes, that... I asked Mr. Uninvited about that, and he said he'd make an exception in my case, or in just about anyone's case for that matter. Presumably they just want recognizability, not necessarily on-wiki contactibility, or bannability, or, ehh, whatever-abiity. Otherwise I'm not sure why he'd make such an offer, knowing that I could hardly do much over there other than cause trouble and insert cheap wisecracks where they're probably not wanted.

Ultimately, the real problem is that WP is so hide-bound at this point, no amount of so-called "constructive" discussion is going to get anything done over there - the only way to bring about reform seems to be to wait for a crisis to occur, and try to take advantage of whatever band-aid "fix" they come up with to try and sneak in some sort of marginal improvement. Or barring that, cheap wisecracks.

In point of fact, I was refused on the grounds that I didn't have a WP account. So unless he's suddenly changed the rules, I call BS

In point of fact, I was refused on the grounds that I didn't have a WP account. So unless he's suddenly changed the rules, I call BS

He let me create an account under my WR username; he may have changed the rules after he had his fun getting AW to threaten to cut my fingers off.

Goddamn sadist.

Perhaps it's a compliment. Maybe he didn't let you create an account because he didn't think you'd be fun to hurt.

This post has been edited by gomi: Sun 9th March 2008, 1:43am

Now Wikback has banned me for a week for responding to Thekohser's smartass reply to my witty quip in the "A Thought for Today" thread, after a Moderator Warning about "off-topic" stuff in that thread was posted (which I hadn't actually read when I posted my last reply, since it had caused the thread to scroll into a new page, which I hadn't gotten to).

On the whole, that forum is moderated in an excessively anal manner for my tastes, and also seems to be of, by, and for people completely lacking in a sense of humor.

On the whole, that forum is moderated in an excessively anal manner for my tastes, and also seems to be of, by, and for people completely lacking in a sense of humor.

That forum needs to be carefully moderated to allow for free and productive discussion between disputing parties, as a halfway house between Wikipedia's stifling talk pages and Wikipedia Reviewers' freewheeling rip-fests. The right tone could have been beneficial to all parties, and there were signs during the Wordbomb discussions that Wikiback had a role.

Unfortunately it is not carefully moderated. And will wither and die.