Oops, Durova's Mea culpa Options

Clearly, the right thing to do is to give all of the evidence you have about these people, to the Arbcom. board. Your statement is extremely important. Their sleuth behavior must be stopped.

ArbCom hasn't even responded to my previous request (Petition for Redress of Grievance) in my own case. Why would they pay any more attention to further correspondence from me?

I compltely disagree with the title of this board, DUROVA's MEA CULPA.

She didn't mea culpa. She tua culpa'd.

I prefer JE NE REGRETTE RIEN.


(that's Piaf, for anyone who cares)

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey: Sat 24th November 2007, 5:25pm

JzG's insistence on missing the point will know no discouragement. He still thinks this whole thing is WR's and SPECIFICALLY Kohser's fault. Up until just now I thought all along he was just selling those outbursts as a means of support. To think he actually, actually believes that...

I have no words.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=173353211

I doubt the existence of such a list.

http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=...Sekret_Evidence

2. They don't know this list exists. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=167325471

Unbelievable. I wish I could have realized earlier what one can accomplish on Wikipedia with blatant denial.

Looks like a meatpuppet to me.

They're pretty tight.

Back when I was corresponding with Mercury about reversing my block, he composed a back-channel message to Durova but sent it to me by mistake. In the salutation, he used her real name (which I was already aware of, as I had previously read her SEO blog). The point, however, was that he was seeking her advice and consent before taking up my case. She advised him against it, and that was that.

Mercury contacted me to say that he took exception to my characterization of him and the back-channel activities, above.

I invited him here to set the record straight.

--Begin my reply --



I am come to clear my good name.

When Moulton had contacted my about reversing the block, I knew Durova had some experience with Moulton. I wanted information so I could better make an informed independent decision.
I had asked her if it was ok to handle, as I did not want to duplicate her efforts. I sought advice, but not consent. I had, after reviewing everything, decided not to correspond with Moulton. This was my independent decision. I am no parrot.

I hope this helps.

Mercury.


postscript; I don't think I used the quote feature correctly, but this is in response to moulton's confirmation that I may be a meatpuppet.

Mod Note: I think I fixed the quote. GBG

This post has been edited by GlassBeadGame: Sat 24th November 2007, 9:15pm

I am come to clear my good name.

When Moulton had contacted my about reversing the block, I knew Durova had some experience with Moulton. I wanted information so I could better make an informed independent decision.
I had asked her if it was ok to handle, as I did not want to duplicate her efforts. I sought advice, but not consent. I had, after reviewing everything, decided not to correspond with Moulton. This was my independent decision. I am no parrot.

I hope this helps.

Mercury.

Hey Mercury, want to know the difference between Wikipedia and Wikipedia Review? Here, you more than welcome to clear your name. We, on the other hand, are specifically forbidden from doing the same over there.

Thoughts?

So Mercury, out of curiosity, do you still "doubt the existence of such a list?"

Oooh, snap. Intimidate that nasty troll Giano, Jimbo.

Oooh, snap. Intimidate that nasty troll Giano, Jimbo.

Basically: "You misinterpreted my comments, but they really do apply to you, so shape up or you're banned."

I sought advice, but not consent. I had, after reviewing everything, decided not to correspond with Moulton. This was my independent decision.

In view of recent disclosures about the reliability of information circulated in back-channel e-mails, it occurs to me that there may be good reason for an independent-minded and ethically responsible WP admin to discount any such information that has not been surfaced and subjected to a fair hearing, public review, and opportunity for rebuttal.

Just as I invited Mercury here to respond to my impressions about him, I hope that others on both sides of the WP/WR chasm will see fit to afford a fair opportunity to resolve misconceptions about the character of those on adversarial sides of these conflicts and disputes.

I sought advice, but not consent. I had, after reviewing everything, decided not to correspond with Moulton. This was my independent decision.

In view of recent disclosures about the reliability of information circulated in back-channel e-mails, it occurs to me that there may be good reason for an independent-minded and ethically responsible WP admin to discount any such information that has not been surfaced and subjected to a fair hearing, public review, and opportunity for rebuttal.

Just as I invited Mercury here to respond to my impressions about him, I hope that others on both sides of the WP/WR chasm will see fit to afford a fair opportunity to resolve misconceptions about the character of those on adversarial sides of these conflicts and disputes.

That goes without saying in most civil nations, and I suggest that we are pretty civil here...

but I am grateful you said it.

Agreed.

Oooh, snap. Intimidate that nasty troll Giano, Jimbo.

Jimbo's statement is nearly an admission that the first goal of the project is not to build an encyclopedia, for were it so, Giano would be fitter than most to lead it. Instead, the paramount consideration is keeping arguments on the noticeboards to a minumum, even as the chaos of mainspace and talk space continues unabated and mostly unaddressed, like a junta rounding up dissident intellectuals while street crime is rampant and the garbage goes uncollected.

Against this backdrop, the predictable refrain "let's get back to editing" translates as a command for proles to leave the palatial grounds of the noticeboards and get back to work while administrators call the shots. This might be tolerable if administrators weren't doing such a horrible job of keeping order and maintaining quality in the encyclopedia portion of the project. As jealously as they guard their authority and reject any measures of accountability for its misuse, they're just as adamant in denying responsibility for the state of the encyclopedia.

This post has been edited by Proabivouac: Sun 25th November 2007, 2:10am

Can someone from the mainstream press get the heck over here??

your behavior in terms of trolling and carrying on the way you do is unacceptable. You know this. And you will either change it or be banned from Wikipedia. You have caused too much harm to justify us putting up with this kind of behavior much longer.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 01:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

That is a threat if there ever was a threat.

For posterity, I think we need to show pictures, not links. This will be whitewashed shortly and possibly Giano will be ejeced from Wikipedia, for daring to suggest that he can't be told to shut up when people are being slimed online. Oh, and if Jimbo thinks its ok, then its ok. Where is the mainstream press when you need them?

Welcome to a Slideshow of "How Jimbo Treats Legitimate Whistleblowing Wikipedians" (Threatens Them) (click on image)


This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey: Sun 25th November 2007, 2:20am

Say, Mercury, you and Thekohser seem to go way back. Your 57th edit as Navou was to Greg's talk page, leaving the rather cryptic statement
"Not really, I might get anxious by wed. :P Navou talk 20:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)".

Do you remember what that was all about?

edit:sp

This post has been edited by tarantino: Sun 25th November 2007, 2:28am

That kind of Parent-Child Intimidation is unworthy of a project leader who relies on volunteer work and public donations to sustain his operation.

But even in a situation where a strong dominance hierarchy is appropriate, the vagueness of terms like "trolling" and "carrying on the way you do" and "this kind of behavior" is simply crazy-making in its imprecision and ultimate meaninglessness.

That kind of Parent-Child Intimidation is unworthy of a project leader who relies on volunteer work and public donations to sustain his operation.

But even in a situation where a strong dominance hierarchy is appropriate, the vagueness of terms like "trolling" and "carrying on the way you do" and "this kind of behavior" is simply crazy-making in its imprecision and ultimate meaninglessness.

Wikipediots have constantly stretched the semantic spheres of the termsofart, WP:Attack, WP:Harrassment, WP:Trolling, WP:Vandalism, and so on, until they have at this writing all become more or less indifferent synonyms for «Messages That Wikipediots Would Prefer Not To Receive».

Ah Bartleby! Ah Humanity!

Jonny

Say, Mercury, you and Thekohser seem to go way back. Your 57th edit as Navou was to Greg's talk page, leaving the rather cryptic statement
"Not really, I might get anxious by wed. Navou talk 20:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)".

Do you remember what that was all about?

edit:sp

It was a response to a question that Thekohser has asked me, this is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...81040&diff=prev
you should have one of your sysop friends verify that. Anything else?

Mercury.

Well, Durova is on a Wikibreak-break to rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic for her ArbCom candidacy.

Well, Durova is on a Wikibreak-break to rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic for her ArbCom candidacy.

She plays forest fire like Guiliani plays 911.

Say, Mercury, you and Thekohser seem to go way back. Your 57th edit as Navou was to Greg's talk page, leaving the rather cryptic statement
"Not really, I might get anxious by wed. Navou talk 20:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)".

Do you remember what that was all about?

edit:sp

It was a response to a question that Thekohser has asked me, this is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...81040&diff=prev
you should have one of your sysop friends verify that. Anything else?

Mercury.

If I recall, it was just that we had both signed up for access to the Auto Wiki Browser tool, but I hadn't received the instruction set or bit, and I think I just asked him if he had gotten his or not. I really don't remember this being a big deal sort of thing.

Mercury, your response seems really snippy.

Well, Durova is on a Wikibreak-break to rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic for her ArbCom candidacy.

She plays forest fire like Guiliani plays 911.

If my memory serves, we should recall that it was Durova who wrote to her local newspaper to say that people who lost their expensive homes to mudslides shouldn't be compensated by the government, since their greedy stupidity led them to buy expensive houses on tenuous hillsides.

I wonder how she feels about her home almost being lost to wildfires?

Greg

This post has been edited by thekohser: Sun 25th November 2007, 4:02am

Say, Mercury, you and Thekohser seem to go way back. Your 57th edit as Navou was to Greg's talk page, leaving the rather cryptic statement
"Not really, I might get anxious by wed. Navou talk 20:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)".

Do you remember what that was all about?

edit:sp

It was a response to a question that Thekohser has asked me, this is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...81040&diff=prev
you should have one of your sysop friends verify that. Anything else?

Mercury.

If I recall, it was just that we had both signed up for access to the Auto Wiki Browser tool, but I hadn't received the instruction set or bit, and I think I just asked him if he had gotten his or not. I really don't remember this being a big deal sort of thing.

Mercury, your response seems really snippy.

It was snippy. I actually had to research and trawl some deleted contributions to answer that.


...the poster emphasized my "57'th" edit. If you are counting edits like that, it is not just because you enjoy it.



Mercury.