Giano takes it to the limit, blocked for "incivility" Options

[Peter Damian]

This was absolutely predictable. The other side know that there will be people needling Giano, so are taking a flexible attitude. But Giano knows this too, and is determined to push things to the very limit.

You have begun to interest me, stalking is a game that two can play...I'm wondering why the Arbcom accepted a case from you with such speedy, almost suspicious, alacrity - if I were one of those Arbs I would now be very worried, because your edits have started to interest me too, first one on Masturbation - now there's a sunject and a half. As I said I am now very interested indeed.You see John I am still far from happy about the IRC case, and I will get to the bottom of it, if not here then elsewhere. Giano (talk) 23:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:John254"

I understand why you could be upset at john, but this is a little disapointing. I saw it as some kind of threat - you should know that taking things elsewhere isn't what we do here. I personally have a lot of respect for you and I honestly thought you were way above this - just take a step back and think about things for a minute. Ryan Postlethwaite 23:20, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

You have absolutely no respect for me at all so don't be so bloody hypocritical. By elsewhere I mean of course IRC, isn't that where you and all your buddies and the Arbs hang out, and where if we want to discover the truth concerning Wikipedia we are all forced to go these days? You see Ryan, I will get to the bottom of this, the very bottom, and if one way draws a blank, I shall go in another direction. I know the truth, all I have to do is prove it. Giano (talk) 23:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[Moulton]

Stalking the elusive evidence that establishes the ground truth.

What a game!

And a game that many can play.

Doubleplus, it sometimes calls for original investigative research.

[ThurstonHowell3rd]

Giano has been blocked for "incivility":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...ion_enforcement

One and one-half hours after he engaged in this conversation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:FloNight#IRC_Admins

His last edit:

"Now I am also in possession of many logs which don't quite bear out your earlier statemnts concerning reform, but for now I'm going to bed. Hopefully we can continue this fascinating conversation in the morning,"

This post has been edited by ThurstonHowell3rd:

[Aloft]

The fact that Giano is blocked while Mantanmoreland roams free is a perfect example of how screwed up Wikipedia is.

This is how Arbcom helps the encyclopedia, folks.

[badlydrawnjeff]

I'm glad Thatcher decided to make a cheap shot at Giano in his comment.

That's really disgusting to me.

[taiwopanfob]

I'm glad Thatcher decided to make a cheap shot at Giano in his comment.

That's really disgusting to me.

Even worse is that FloNight doesn't seem to be a shrinking-violet type: she can clearly take care of herself. Based only on that exchange, it is easy to conclude that Thatcher has problems with women, not Giano. As the Wikipediots say, "Creepy."

[wikiwhistle]

Not so- I have to say, Giano did keep pestering Flonight there.

I don't know all the ins and outs of the case, but he should think of his blood pressure or something, I know what it's like to get worked up about something people did/do (he admits he's bitter now) but it's not the most healthy and happy of things.

If a group of chums/admins want to have an IRC room there's no real stopping them. If they aren't allowed to plan the (perhaps nefarious) actions they want in the 'official' admins' room, they'll simply go to messenger chat or email like everyone else, and as they do already. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

This post has been edited by wikiwhistle:

[taiwopanfob]

Not so- I have to say, Giano did keep pestering Flonight there.

Hm. The exchange opens with Giano saying directly to FloNight:

Following assurances made by yourself at the close of the famed IRC case, could you now please confirm to me, how many non-admins and ex-admins still have access to the Admins channel.

I have no idea if FloNight gave such assurances, but if she did, who else should Giano "pester"? And if FloNight refuses live up to her word by "assuring", then why not make a point of her disingenuity? She is a sitting ArbCom member: if you can't trust her to keep her word, who the hell can you trust? Are not these individuals to be held to a higher standard than a lowly administrator?

Why Thatcher took this opportunity to (unnecessarily, and without any supporting facts) play the gender card is a mystery though.

I don't know all the ins and outs of the case, but he should think of his blood pressure or something, I know what it's like to get worked up about something people did/do (he admits he's bitter now) but it's not the most healthy and happy of things.

I dunno. If someone says to me "I'll do X", and I then come back and ask for "X", and get an answer like "Leave me alone: go see that guy over there.", I'd be upset too, depending on what X is and its contextual significance.

This raises an interesting question: why do simple aspects of human nature have to be explained to Wikipediots? Repeatedly?

If a group of chums/admins want to have an IRC room there's no real stopping them. If they aren't allowed to plan the (perhaps nefarious) actions they want in the 'official' admins' room, they'll simply go to messenger chat or email like everyone else, and as they do already. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

There you go: FloNight could have defused this situation by simply asking FT2 the question privately and, living up to her end of an agreement, answering Giano with the knowledge so obtained. But instead we have drama construction, more goading, and an opportunity for another public whipping of Giano.

[Pumpkin Muffins]

Giano has been blocked for "incivility":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...ion_enforcement

One and one-half hours after he engaged in this conversion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:FloNight#IRC_Admins

His last edit:

"Now I am also in possession of many logs which don't quite bear out your earlier statemnts concerning reform, but for now I'm going to bed. Hopefully we can continue this fascinating conversation in the morning,"

This is really remarkable. In blocking Giano, it's like the cancer cutting out the healthy parts of the body.

Does anyone know how old FT2 is?

[Milton Roe]

Giano has been blocked for "incivility":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...ion_enforcement

One and one-half hours after he engaged in this conversion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:FloNight#IRC_Admins

His last edit:

"Now I am also in possession of many logs which don't quite bear out your earlier statemnts concerning reform, but for now I'm going to bed. Hopefully we can continue this fascinating conversation in the morning,"

This is really remarkable. In blocking Giano, it's like the cancer cutting out the healthy parts of the body.

Does anyone know how old FT2 is?

Here's the link to the whole last conversation, which is interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=200929185 Giano got 31 hours in the Klink. If this sort of pointed questioning is what passes as blockable incivility on WP where days, then the JzG case really tickles the funnybone. I note that Giano's 1 year probation was not voted violated at Arbcom recently. Only a matter of time before they revoke his parole, though.

This post has been edited by Milton Roe:

[Giano]

Giano has been blocked for "incivility":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...ion_enforcement

One and one-half hours after he engaged in this conversion:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:FloNight#IRC_Admins

His last edit:

"Now I am also in possession of many logs which don't quite bear out your earlier statemnts concerning reform, but for now I'm going to bed. Hopefully we can continue this fascinating conversation in the morning,"

This is really remarkable. In blocking Giano, it's like the cancer cutting out the healthy parts of the body.

Does anyone know how old FT2 is?

Here's the link to the whole last conversation, which is interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=200929185 Giano got 31 hours in the Klink. If this sort of pointed questioning is what passes as blockable incivility on WP where days, then the JzG case really tickles the funnybone. I note that Giano's 1 year probation was not voted violated at Arbcom recently. Only a matter of time before they revoke his parole, though.

It's all rather sad isn't it - with Wikipedia, they are terrified to death of discussing their problems. One is now not even allowed to press an important Arb member for promised information. It appears they are reluctant to have me continue the fascinating discussion this morning - presumably they want to see it here rather than there. Now that is some strange logic by anyone's standards. I don't disapprove of Wikipedia Review, as I regard all criticism as healthy, but I do think all problems and anxieties are best discussed in the right place, so the last few weeks I have tried to keep all my comments there and not here. But, I must be stupid, I just don't seem to get it, proper debate is just not allowed there, it's either "trolling" or its"incivility" and it has to be suppressed - they just don't get the damage they are doing to themselves - they are forcing people off the site to air their problems - I don't think I even insulted the wretched woman - just pressed her for an answer - that lot would not survive running a fairground in the real world. I must be the most stupid person alive for keeping on trying to solve the problem there. That was a rhetorical statement - it does not require agreement.

Giacomo

[Proabivouac]

Giano, I saw nothing particularly uncivil about your comments. Sharp, but comfortably within the realm of civilized discussion and debate, and wholly on-topic. Every British MP and most professional writers would be tossed from WP by the standards they're applying to Giano, and Giano alone.

This post has been edited by Proabivouac:

[Giano]

Giano, I saw nothing particularly uncivil about your comments. Sharp, but comfortably within the realm of civilized discussion and debate, and wholly on-topic. Every British MP and most professional writers would be tossed from WP by the standards they're applying to Giano, and Giano alone.

No I was not incivil, I was careful of that, it was to shut me up. I edited properly for the first time since the case yesterday, I think they had rather hoped I was on the way out, to be honest I too thought I was. Then I got the old entheusiasm back for writing, so that was not quite according to plan either. There is quite a lot going on behind the scenes at the moment - so they are shouting Giano is paranoid again (Doc on my page now) well I have been there and lived through that one before and been proved right - that was how I had my block log wiped clean of "hate speech" after I was less than welcoming to pedophiles. Wikipedians seem by nature not to be a very introspective lot. It is interesting that I had a chat just before the block about a prospective Admin candidacy that will shortly be coming up - I announced I would oppose it strongly, they probably want me blocked for a long time when that one rears its ugly head - as a German speaker I would feel forced to oppose! Then there are some other matters too - so you see there is a lot going on. yesterday was not a good day for the Arbitration committee.

Giacomo

[Peter Damian]

Does anyone know how old FT2 is?

Early 40's. However, whereas Postlethwaite for all his man-child posturing and illiteracy is still fundamentally in good faith (I believe), there is something altogether more sinister about FT2. He has clearly been through the world, and is perhaps the worse for it.

It took people here some time to understand this.

Giano, I saw nothing particularly uncivil about your comments. Sharp, but comfortably within the realm of civilized discussion and debate, and wholly on-topic. Every British MP and most professional writers would be tossed from WP by the standards they're applying to Giano, and Giano alone.

I agree. But it was almost certainly this

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=200879619

that prompted the block. FT2 comes on with his usual pompous longwinded flannel. Giano comes straight back with a magnificient shot across the bows. It wasn't uncivil or rude, just a home truth, briefly put, and FT2 hates that.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Peter Damian]

In fact, FT2's comments on the noticeboard here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...cement#Giano_II

make it very clear it was that remark that prompted the block. You don't have to be incivil any more. Just anything that is perceived as 'snarky' or pointed, or just witty, and the perceived slight must be corrected by a block.

Risker comments that there is a clear COI on the block. Does anyone understand FT2's reply here? Risker wittily counters that those with a COI rarely believe that they have one.

[Peter Damian]

The following interchange on FT2's page reflect the key points nicely. Bakharev makes the point some people are making huge contributions to the project in good faith. We should not be treating these people the same as some thug or POV-pushing newbie.

This is the key issue, but is of course heresy in the new world. FT2 replies: civility, civility, civility.

FT2, as I said before, you have all the rights to block Giano. I guess our opinions on the helpfulness of this block are differ. Lets hope the future will show you are right and I was wrong. My opinion is based on my experience in my corner of the wikiuniverse, but IMHO the main problem of this project is that we do not retain the best and brightest contributors particular those without the admin bit. They are not driven away by the incivility but by the all sizes fit approach there the opinions of an editor who basically created (by himself and by inspiration to other editors) huge sections of the project and who has an invaluable insight on the real-life inner work of the project is set to be equal in validity to any troll or POV-pushing newbie and infinitely less important than an opinion of anybody with higher level of editorial privileges. Some people literally give the project half of their live and talents and could not receive in exchange from people who are the official faces of the project even minimal patience and tolerance. Giano has a huge experience and insight with the ills of the project as well as the energy and desire to fix them. His methods are incovenient but I am not sure he would get the results using normal methods. It would really help to give him an ear and a hand rather than try to shut him up or teach him manners. Alex Bakharev (talk) 05:28, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Users have tried, for a long time. It is hard to know what to do with someone whom you tell emphatically and repeatedly that "nobody has asked you to change views" and that "having strong views" and "having questions if asked appropriately" are all absolutely okay, and whose response is "do I pretend these things don't happen... or do I say I must... say nothing". It's dramatics. He knows what needs doing. He just doesn't seem to want to. He's had support from me, encouragement from others, to learn this. The views and concerns are fine, the manner of expression via gratuitious backhanded and borderlined incivility has to end. I know he doesn't want it to. But he needs to put himself in others shoes. As he says he despise double standards, so do others. The double standard he wants to invoke is "the community can reach agreement on civil speech regardless of viewpoint"... and he wants the right to opt out and make snarky asides and attacks to people, and assume the worst then attack them for it. I don't know what for. Its so unnecessary. But it's not okay. That's not our agreement here. I don't know how to say it plainer. FT2 (Talk | email) 10:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:FT2"

[Peter Damian]

Now Geogre weighs in:

FT2: What' was "incivil" in Giano's comments. Please be specific. Giano has many comments on FloNight's page. There is a satire of her continued silence. Was that "incivil?" Was there a characterization of her motivations, mentality, words, etc. that was scandalous? I see repeated questions... well, one, actually... and continued "no one is going to answer because the answer is already somewhere else." Again, there is no basis of this block. Furthermore, 31 hours is a non-standard time. How did you arrive at that? Isn't the usual to begin with, perhaps, 12 or 24? I see no justification for this at all. If "any admin may block on any perception of incivility" is in force, may "any admin unblock?" Is there some magical force where any single administrator gets to determine for all others what is not allowed in speech on Wikipedia? Can we say, again and again, that pictures of David Shankbone's penis are perfect, because we're not censored, but this piece of speech (a question) must not be allowed? When that speech is interrogative and does not involve charges of real life illegality, etc. (no "you're a Nazi/Communist"), it cannot be instantly blockable. If you want to see someone merely trying to get anger, look at the bottom of my user talk page. Giano was trying to get a user to answer about why that user thought something was a good idea one day and a bad idea the next, and why the "resolution" of a case by ArbCom was abandoned without a word to the community. Those are legitimate, and it is poor service (what ArbCom is supposed to be about -- service, not power) to keep running away and blocking the questioner. Geogre (talk) 10:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. I see pointedness and humour in Giano's questions. Where is the incivility?

[Moulton]

What I see is yet another instance of Bill of Attainder.

Bill of Attainder is a manifest breach of Civil Rights.

If anything could be called incivil, it would be a gross breach of Civil Rights.

But then, as Lar reminds us, Wikipedia doesn't do Due Process.

[Pumpkin Muffins]

This is the key issue, but is of course heresy in the new world. FT2 replies: civility, civility, civility.

Civility is the new censorship - selectively applied, of course.

[Pumpkin Muffins]

Now Geogre weighs in:

FT2: What' was "incivil" in Giano's comments. Please be specific. Giano has many comments on FloNight's page. There is a satire of her continued silence. Was that "incivil?" Was there a characterization of her motivations, mentality, words, etc. that was scandalous? I see repeated questions... well, one, actually... and continued "no one is going to answer because the answer is already somewhere else." Again, there is no basis of this block. Furthermore, 31 hours is a non-standard time. How did you arrive at that? Isn't the usual to begin with, perhaps, 12 or 24? I see no justification for this at all. If "any admin may block on any perception of incivility" is in force, may "any admin unblock?" Is there some magical force where any single administrator gets to determine for all others what is not allowed in speech on Wikipedia? Can we say, again and again, that pictures of David Shankbone's penis are perfect, because we're not censored, but this piece of speech (a question) must not be allowed? When that speech is interrogative and does not involve charges of real life illegality, etc. (no "you're a Nazi/Communist"), it cannot be instantly blockable. If you want to see someone merely trying to get anger, look at the bottom of my user talk page. Giano was trying to get a user to answer about why that user thought something was a good idea one day and a bad idea the next, and why the "resolution" of a case by ArbCom was abandoned without a word to the community. Those are legitimate, and it is poor service (what ArbCom is supposed to be about -- service, not power) to keep running away and blocking the questioner. Geogre (talk) 10:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. I see pointedness and humour in Giano's questions. Where is the incivility?

A little off topic here, but I just have to mention that Geogre's use of language and ability to communicate concepts is extraordinary, I've never seen anything like it. That guy should write an article for the New Yorker about Wikipedia. Go read some of his articles, even if you have no interest in the topic. They are just stunning. Wikipedia is unbelievability fortunate to have editors like him - even though his value is probably lost on most admins; yet another manifestation of failed leadership.