From: (KnightLago)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:17:57 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
There is discussion taking place on functionaries regarding admin Cool3
being a sock of Kohs. I mentored and nominated Cool3 for admin by the way. I
have asked Alison to take a good look at Cool3 to see what she thinks. But
things are not looking good.
:-(
KL
----------
From: (Hersfold)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:25:51 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
I'm a bit occupied at the moment (hence my silence on wikis and emails
the past two days) but I can take a closer look at this when I take a
break from what I'm doing. Alison does know what she's doing, though,
and the evidence she's come up with so far looks extremely damning.
If this does appear to be Kohs, we may want to do a Level I emergency
desysop to give us time to work out the motions - this assuming Lar
doesn't just do it himself anyway.
----
User:Hersfold
hersfoldwiki at gmail.com
---------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:30:13 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
I have no problem with doing a Level 1 Emergency De-sysop once we get a bit
more review. Alison just posted some really damning info, but she said she'd
want to see what Thatcher made of it all.
---------
From: (KnightLago)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:34:57 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
She is taking a look at the range now. I think the conclusion on
functionaries is that Cool3 is a sock.
If it comes to a desysop/block I would like the honors on this one.
KL
----------
From: (Kenneth Kua/ArbCom)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 05:42:05 +0800
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
And it's only my first day in actual use of Checkuser. I certainly didn't
expect to catch such a Big Fish! XD
Kenneth/MD
----------
From: (KnightLago)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:43:14 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
Very good point. I will leave this alone then.
KL
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Roger Davies wrote:
> KnightLago wrote:
>
> She is taking a look at the range now. I think the conclusion on
> functionaries is that Cool3 is a sock.
>
> If it comes to a desysop/block I would like the honors on this one.
>
> KL
>
>
> Not a good idea. If you nominated him for admin, you're a bit too involved.
> It might look as if you're pushing it to distance yourself from him.
>
> Roger
----------
From: (Steve Smith)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 21:43:40 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
There was talk some time ago about Limey from WR having an admin account for
sale, and Kohs mentioned that he may be interested, so it wouldn't surprise
me to learn that he had and that this was it. The contribution pattern also
fits the pattern of somebody working an account up to admin and then leaving
it for later use:
http://toolserver.org/~soxred93/count/inde...i=wikipedia>----------
From: rlevse(Randy Everette)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:43:57 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
I don't recall ever hearing of this guy. And why are there only 3 RFAs
showing when the last one is numbered 4:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w...ests_for_adminship/Cool3
You might be looking for:
* Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cool3 2
<https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_admin
ship/Cool3_2> (unsuccessful)
* Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cool3 3
<https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_admin
ship/Cool3_3> (unsuccessful)
* Wikipedia:Requests for
<https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_admin
ship/Cool3_4> adminship/Cool3 4 (successful)
R
----------
From: rlevse (Randy Everette)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:44:42 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
Ah, first one was declined and deleted.
R
----------
From: (Hersfold)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:47:34 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
Aye. I'd be lying if I said this won't look bad at all, but the fact of
the matter is you did not, and could not, have known. You have that on
your side, and once that's explained, the majority of the community will
understand and drop the issue. The drama-mongers will continue to harp
on about it as they always do, but there's no need to give them
something tangible to hang on to by making a block out of a desire for
retribution.
I do very much understand the feelings of betrayal, but don't let that
cloud your judgment here.
----
User:Hersfold
hersfoldwiki at gmail.com
----------
From: (Steve Smith)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 21:48:24 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs
As well, I believe Kohs said back in the day that he wanted the admin
account mostly to access deleted articles that he had written. I told him
(and I think Iridescent did the same, when she was an admin) that he needn't
do that, as I'd be happy to provide him copies of deleted articles without
copyvio/BLP/privacy issues (on that note, see the functionary-l archives for
March 2009), but he said the volume was too much to bother us with.
Anyway, this is probably him.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Randy Everette <rlevse> wrote:
> Ah, first one was declined and deleted.
-----------
From: (Hersfold)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:12:49 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Ok, as I continue to ignore what I should be doing and keep looking at
the evidence that comes up, this looks far too significant for us to
ignore. So that this is done all formally and whatnot...
I am proposing an immediate Level I emergency desysop of the account
User:Cool3, on the grounds that the evidence provided on the
Functionaries-en list under the subject thread "Re: [Functionaries-en]
Playing games with Thekohser" indicates very strongly that this account
is operated by banned user Thekohser. As noted in that thread, it is
possible that this account may not have originally been controlled by
Thekohser, in which case it is compromised. In either event, recent
posts by the Kohser on Wikipedia Review have indicated that he is
undertaking a planned effort to conduct a "breaching experiment" to
disrupt the project; it seems logical that an administrative account
could assist these ends, if for no other reason than to serve as a
distraction.
For those unfamiliar with the procedure
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Procedures#Level_I_procedures),
this email is step 1 of the desysop process. Step 2 is discussion; once
three or more arbitrators, including myself, agree that a desysop is in
order, and provided there is no expressed dissent (all that was step 3),
an arbitrator handles step 4, by a) contacting a steward directly for
the removal, b) posting a removal request on behalf of the Committee at
Meta, and c) ringing the dinner bell for the dramamongers by
crossposting the hell out of the wiki. The crosspost notice should be
placed on WP:AC/N, WP:AN, and User talk:Cool3, listing the (brief)
reason for the desysop and the names of the arbitrators who consented to
the removal.
----
User:Hersfold
hersfoldwiki at gmail.com
----------
From: rlevse (Randy Everette)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:14:30 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Count me in .
R
----------
From: (Kenneth Kua/ArbCom)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 06:15:27 +0800
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
^stamp^ Endorse.
Kenneth/MD Approves This Message
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 6:12 AM, Hersfold wrote:
> Ok, as I continue to ignore what I should be doing and keep
-----------
From: roger.davies.wiki at googlemail.com (Roger Davies)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:16:27 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Ditto but let's get an okay from the non-arb CUs on func-en first. (See my last message.)
It'll only take a few minutes, I imagine, and it's good belt and braces stuff.
Roger
-----------
From: (KnightLago)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:19:17 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Staying out of this. But one small request, as Steve thinks Kosher may have
bought this account, could that possibility be included in the on-wiki
explanation? That would give me a little cover and not make me look like
such a moron.
Thanks,
KL
-----------
From: (Roger Davies)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:24:19 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Please leave the drafting of the announcements to me on this one.
Roger
KnightLago wrote:
> Staying out of this. But one small request, as Steve thinks
----------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:27:57 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Works for me.
I was thinking about requesting a hold until Thatcher spoke up, but with the
unanimity of the Func-l, I feel safe in it.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Roger Davies wrote:
> Please leave the drafting of the announcements to me on this
-----------
From: (Hersfold)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:30:15 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
This really has to be my last email here, then I *have* to get back to
work...
The crosspost notice could read something like this, which explains that
this is covered under Level I and somewhat covers KL's arse as
requested. Link as appropriate, of course:
"The Arbitration Committee has requested an emergency desysop of
User:Cool3, based on private checkuser evidence linking Cool3 to a
blocked account and a planned attempt to disrupt the project. Other
evidence available to the Arbitration Committee indicates a possibility
that this account may not be under the control of its original owner.
This request was made in accordance with Level I temporary desysop
procedures, and a further statement from the Arbitration Committee is
pending and should be released within a few days.
Arbitrators supporting the desysop: Hersfold, Rlevse, Roger Davies, [...]
Recused: KnightLago
For the Committee, ~~~~"
I do agree with Roger that we shouldn't take care of this just yet - we
need to wait until everyone has had a chance to read and comment, just
in case someone objects. If an objection is noted, this needs to be a
formal motion.
If I post to this list again before midnight tonight, someone slap me.
----
User:Hersfold
hersfoldwiki at gmail.com
-----------
From: (Kenneth Kua/ArbCom)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 06:32:56 +0800
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
In case my earlier message didn't make it to the list, I support the desysop
as well.
Kenneth/MD
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 6:30 AM, Hersfold wrote:
> This really has to be my last email here, then I *have* to
-----------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:33:32 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
You can put me down as a supporter of the desysop.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Hersfold wrote:
> This really has to be my last email here, then I *have* to
------------
From: (Roger Davies)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:36:20 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Here's how we'll do it.
The desysop will be certified by: Randy, David and Kenneth.
I'll post the announcement at WP:AC/N giving "confirmed sockpuppet of
banned user" as the reason.
I'll do the same on the Cool3 talk page and indef the account as a sock
of TheKohser
Randy or Herfold or Kennth? Want to do the Meta request? It's easy. Find
the User:Secret desysop a couple of weeks back in the history and copy that.
Link:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_req...issions#Removal of
access
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Permissions#Removal%20of%20access>
I'm waiting for a second non-Arb Cu to certify the confirmed sockpuppet.
Then we can move.
Roger
David Yellope wrote:
> Works for me.
-----------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:38:29 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Good call - Allie did the second certification in that thread, so you can
post now
Fred
-----------
From: (Roger Davies)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:40:13 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Right. Alison has certified "confirmed sockpuppet of TheKohser" too. All
ready?
Roger
-----------
From: (Roger Davies)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:44:24 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
If no one does it in ten minutes, I'll do the Meta request. Everything
has to follow from that.
Roger
-----------
From: (Hersfold)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:53:32 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Don't have the time myself, so carry on.
----
User:Hersfold
hersfoldwiki at gmail.com
------------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 22:54:42 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I would post it, but I'm not a certifier
Fred
-----------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:59:18 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Done, I hope:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?titl...5&oldid=1808778------------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:00:16 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
And now sit back with cocktails and relax as Wikipedia briefly explodes
around us
Fred
------------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:01:33 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
The "De-sysop Resturaunt at the end of the Wikipedia Universe?" (geez,
Python and Hitchhiker's Guide in less then 2 hours. My geek is showing)
------------
From: (Roger Davies)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:02:51 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Looks good. Well done,
Roger
------------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:05:50 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Except MZMcBride is now snarking at me there. Would another arb speak up
please?
------------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:13:10 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
commented for you at Meta
Fred
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:05 PM, David Yellope wrote:
> Except MZMcBride is now snarking at me there. Would another
-----------
From: (Kenneth Kua/ArbCom)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 07:16:20 +0800
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Commented as well at meta.
Kenneth/MD
-----------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:19:11 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I think we need an on-wiki announcement now - the hordes have noticed and
are demanding answers
Fred
-----------
From: (KnightLago)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:20:39 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I think Roger is on it. He just did Cool3's talk page.
KL
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Fritz Poll wrote:
> I think we need an on-wiki announcement now - the hordes have
-----------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:21:48 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Grand. I have 7 PMs waiting for me on IRC about this, so I imagine people
are interested.
Fred
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:20 PM, KnightLago wrote:
> I think Roger is on it. He just did Cool3's talk page.
------------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:24:17 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Makes me glad I'm not on IRC right now.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Fritz Poll wrote:
> Grand. I have 7 PMs waiting for me on IRC about this, so I
------------
From: (Risker)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:26:18 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I lucked out, my car is in for service and the service centre is now
providing free hardwired internet access, so I just logged into IRC. Feel
free to refer any of your customers over to me if you'd like, Fred.
Anne
2010/1/14 David Yellope
> Makes me glad I'm not on IRC right now.
------------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:44:27 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
They have been appeased, thanks Anne. Mind you, I love Majorly saying we
shouldn't desysop block-evading sockpuppets. Brilliant
Fred
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:26 PM, Risker wrote:
> I lucked out, my car is in for service and the service centre
-----------
From: (KnightLago)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:45:49 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
MZM is better, at Meta arguing that everyone is wrong and demanding
evidence.
KL
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Fritz Poll wrote:
> They have been appeased, thanks Anne. Mind you, I love
-----------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:46:56 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
And on IRC demanding the reason the account was checkusered. His
transparency binge is a very recent thing...
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:45 PM, KnightLago wrote:
> MZM is better, at Meta arguing that everyone is wrong and
-----------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:59:05 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I'd go in and help with the IRC demands, but I don't have a cloak (yet), and
I don't want certain folks snaffling up my work info (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)
Foz
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Fritz Poll wrote:
> And on IRC demanding the reason the account was checkusered.
------------
From: (Roger Davies)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:01:17 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Are we mentioning it's one of eight socks?
Roger
------------
From: (Hersfold)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:02:22 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Can't hurt.
----
User:Hersfold
hersfoldwiki at gmail.com
Roger Davies wrote:
>
> Are we mentioning it's one of eight socks?
-------------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:03:24 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I don't see why not. We can say that this was one of a number of Kohs socks
found during a checkuser of accounts disclosed by Kohs?
(well, maybe)
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Roger Davies wrote:
>
> Are we mentioning it's one of eight socks?
------------
From: (KnightLago)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:03:43 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere yet.
KL
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Roger Davies wrote:
>
> Are we mentioning it's one of eight socks?
-------------
From: (KnightLago)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:05:00 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
That would be funny.
KL
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 7:03 PM, David Yellope wrote:
> I don't see why not. We can say that this was one of a number
-------------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:08:24 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I would enjoy that
FP
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:05 AM, KnightLago wrote:
> That would be funny.
------------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:29:20 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
BTW, I do have to bring this up. I'm getting really leery of the
MzMcBride/Kohs combo here, as it looks like MzMcbride unilaterally unblocked
Kohs on Meta in late december..
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Reques...hser_re-blocked------------
From: (Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia))
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:35:29 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I haven't been able to check out the technical evidence yet but if
it's as solid as everyone says I certainly support the desysopping.
As a point of information, in these types of situations (e.g.
Archtransit, Pastor Theo) we've usually grabbed a Steward offline
first and posted on Meta second. We don't need outgoing admins
deleting the mainpage (or whatever today's equivalent is) once they
realize they have been found out. Of course this applies only in
situations where we're pretty darn sure of ourselves.
Newyorkbrad
------------
From: rlevse (Randy Everette)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:36:35 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
And of course Majorly says we screwed up again and we're being deceitful,
but who cares.
R
-------------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:37:38 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I enjoy his theories of mind over at WR
F
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:36 AM, Randy Everette <rlevse> wrote:
> And of course Majorly says we screwed up again and we're being
------------
From: (KnightLago)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:38:07 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I am glad I am not the only one who has noticed that.
KL
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 7:29 PM, David Yellope wrote:
> BTW, I do have to bring this up. I'm getting really leery of the
> MzMcBride/Kohs combo here, as it looks like MzMcbride
-------------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:38:10 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Yes.
Resisted the urge to say.
"I know you'd like the urge to rubberneck at the train wreck, but we have
this thing called a privacy policy for a reason, as well as the
functionaries-l mailing list....."
But, eh. Can't reach them all I guess.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Randy Everette <rlevse> wrote:
> And of course Majorly says we screwed up again and we're being
-------------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:41:31 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
if he wants to know on what basis a Checkuser was done (in response to
Tznkai's latest comment), can we please say "Off-Wiki, Thekohser announced
he was controlling multiple accounts. In accordance with normal procedure
when such accounts come to light, a checkuser was done to confirm this
information and during this checkuser, a total of eight accounts were found,
of which Cool3 is one of them".
*evil grins*
(yes, I know, it's bad for my karma to hope for such (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)))
Foz
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 7:38 PM, KnightLago wrote:
> I am glad I am not the only one who has noticed that.
------------
From: (Steve Smith)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 01:11:19 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
The "...of them" at the end of that message is redundant.
Steve Smith
Making brilliant contributions to ArbCom
Since 2010
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:41 AM, David Yellope wrote:
> if he wants to know on what basis a Checkuser was done (i
-------------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 20:15:54 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
I
Oops.. my bad.
I see at least one of the socks is still not blocked. I've posted something
on functionaries to see if we're ok to block.
"This post was approved by the department of redundancy department...."
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
> The "...of them" at the end of that message is redundant.
-------------
From: (FloNight)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 20:18:02 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Sincerest thanks for tackling the Cool3 desysop
promptly..
especially David, Roger, and Randy that put their names out there in the
line of fire.
I truly appreciate you all of you acting on this account in response to the
information provided by the Funct-l.
I regret that the initial responses on site have been negative. I know that
most editors don't share the view of these folks.
Take care,
Sydney
-------------
From: (David Yellope)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 20:21:14 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Sincerest thanks for tackling the Cool3 desysop
promptly..
Thanks Sydney. Much appreciated.
David
-------------
From: (Risker)
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 21:26:15 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Sincerest thanks for tackling the Cool3 desysop
promptly..
Yes, big round of applause to all for the excellent work. Kinda nice to
disappear into a 4-hour meeting and come out to find that a problem has been
identified and quantified, solutions posited, and the matter promptly,
appropriately, and quietly resolved.
Anne
------------
From: (Carcharoth)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 06:38:13 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Sincerest thanks for tackling the Cool3 desysop
promptly..
I missed all the fun. :-(
Seriously, that was a fast turnaround time. Barely time for me to
spend an evening and night playing chess and sleeping. Congratulations
and thanks to everyone who worked on this (could someone thank the
functionaries as well?).
Now I'm off to read the on-wiki reactions...
Carcharoth
------------
From: (Carcharoth)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 06:44:06 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Do try and balance transparency with not revealing too much (or
anything) about how the socks were found - that would only help Kohs
and others who sock. Kohs will know which socks are his, and if he
really objects to any of the blocks as not legitimate, he will say so
(it is not hard to work out, from the block log of the CUs, who got
blocked in the time frame in question).
Carcharoth
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 12:41 AM, David Yellope wrote:
> if he wants to know on what basis a Checkuser was done (in response to
------------
From: (Fritz Poll)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 09:25:33 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
Out of interest, why *have* we disabled Cool3's talkpage for editing? This
isn't normally done for a block unless the talkpage is being abused.
Fred
-----------
From: (Carcharoth)
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 10:43:35 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Admin Sock of Kohs - Level I Desysop
The ability to e-mail was also blocked:
"account creation blocked, e-mail blocked, cannot edit own talk page".
Roger asked him to e-mail us if he wants to appeal the block. Unless
the e-mail part of the block is lifted, I'm not prepared to believe
anyone who writes to us is the person who has access to the Cool3
account. That account will need to e-mail User:Arbitration Committee:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Arbitration_CommitteeCarcharoth
-----------
From: (Roger Davies)
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 08:01:09 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Sincerest thanks for tackling the Cool3
desysop promptly..
Why, thank you, Sydney (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) Happily, the negativism is now decreasing ...
so while I don't suppose we'll all get barnstars at least the torches
and pitchforks have been put away until the next announcement :-)
Roger
------------
From: rlevse (Randy Everette)
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 07:56:29 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Sincerest thanks for tackling the
Cool3 desysop promptly..
There are always the extremists who criticize us no matter what. The
section we have to worry about is the rational middle.
R
------------
From: (Risker)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 16:03:25 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Possible Thekohser sock
I'm at work now, so am not in a position to use my fancy tools, so can
someone checkuser this one please:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ions/DraftydoorClearly very knowledgeable user, not a lot of contribs, but focus on
usernames and moving "spam" templates to "conflict of interest" instead.
Today created a "Desysopped" template and put it on User:Cool3's page.
Just a tad fragrant.
Risker/Anne
-----------
From: (KnightLago)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 16:05:01 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Possible Thekohser sock
Will give it a shot.
KL
----------
From: (KnightLago)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 16:25:29 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Possible Thekohser sock
I do not think it is thekosher. But I think there is socking happening here.
Can someone with more experience take a look?
KL
------------
From: (Hersfold)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 16:33:33 -0500
Subject: [arbcom-l] Possible Thekohser sock
Here's the info. Doesn't look like Kohs, unless he goes to the
University of Oslo. I'm still going to block all of these, however.
IPs:
90.149.32.164 and 90.149.30.95 - NextGenTel, xDSL accessprovider in Norway
- Several accounts, mostly with the same useragent:
- - Icepickhaha
- - Pornomatic
- - Utsti?
- - Yrfnfryn
- - Ghiais0
- - Sheretrane
- - VisitGuadalcanal.sb
- - ???? ??????
<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:%D0%93%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB_%D0%93%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B5%D1%80&action=edit&redlink=1>
- - Guenter c.
- - Songlife909
- - Sinterklaas '88
- - Muntenesc Grande
- - Azarian Roads
- - NEXTransformerSTYLE
- - Misomoteur
- - X 71349315 X
- - Theendisvivid
- - Themanwhoreadverse
- - Senden40
- - Freezer Twelve
- - Ginnvermouth
- - Nipplewheel (username blocked, autoblock disabled)
- - Master7775
- - PiongAAA
- - Gtotnipple (username blocked, autoblock disabled)
- - Nipple29 (username blocked, autoblock disabled)
- /Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.6)
Gecko/20091201 Firefox/3.5.x (.NET CLR 3.5.30729)
/80.203.101.120 - The same ISP
- Couple accounts:
- - Ovrekil
- - Drezdet (already blocked for Jimbo harassment)
- - Stuntnipple (username blocked, autoblock disabled)
- Multiple useragents:
1. /Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10.4; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4)
Gecko/20091016 Firefox/3.5.4/
2. /Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10_4_11; nb-no)
AppleWebKit/531.21.8 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.4
Safari/531.21.10/
3. /Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X 10.4; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5)
Gecko/20091102 Firefox/3.5.5 - All of the other accounts on this
IP use this useragent
/
81.167.191.152 - Lyse Tele Residential, Norway
- No accounts
- /Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US) AppleWebKit/532.0
(KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/3.0.195.38 Safari/532.0/
129.240.198.49 and 129.240.195.50 - University of Oslo, Norway
- No accounts
- /Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR
2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)/
----
User:Hersfold
hersfoldwiki at gmail.com
------------
From: (Roger Davies)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:26:24 +0000
Subject: [arbcom-l] Cool3
Nope, standard block.
Roger Davies
Gregory Kohs wrote:
> Hey, Roger,
>
> So, did you make it impossible for Cool3 to even sign into the account
> any more?
>
> Greg
Cool3/Cool three (13 Jan - 8 Feb 2010)
MaliceAforethought Cool3/Cool three (13 Jan - 8 Feb 2010) 
