Subject: [arbcom-l] RH&E / Usenet
------------------------
From: Roger Davies <roger.davies.wiki@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 14:37
To: Phil Nash <phnash@blueyonder.co.uk>, English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Hi Phil
In strict confidence
The attention of the Committee has been drawn to Usenet posts. Because of the nature of these posts, we have a responsibility under Foundation policy to enquire about them and would therefore would appreciate your comments in confidence.
These posts were made over many years by a contributor calling themselves Phil Nash, Philip Howard Nash or variants, and using a series of screen names, including "Witt", "The Janitor of Lunacy" and "Reality Surgeon". The number of similarities between the Usenet posts and your account go far beyond merely sharing a name. For example, the educational details here:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activis...158276ede2faca1closely correlate with information you have provided on your Wikipedia user pages. Additionally, the Usenet contributor appears to suffer from chronic ill health.
Perhaps the most concerning aspect of this is the following disclosure of a conviction for possession of child pornography:
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.politics...1dd709b9a3072c1Per longstanding policy, the Committee never raises nor comments on such matters on-wiki (and indeed normally suppresses such discussion there); nor will we pass on the information off-wiki. Nevertheless, your immediate attention to the above would be appreciated.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Roger Davies
cc ArbCom
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Roger Davies <roger.davies.wiki@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 15:52
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
<lo>
I do not propose to reply to this.
Roger
On 28/03/2011 20:43, Phil Nash wrote:
Roger;
when I am already seriously suicidal, having this thrown at me doesn't help in the slightest and I am not going to respond until I have taken legal, but more importantly, medical, advice. It may be that I will have to go into hospital after all, for my own protection, and I will be looking into that tomorrow. The advice is for my benefit and is not intended to constitute a legal threat.
Meanwhile, you should not assume that everything on Usenet is necessarily true, nor that it emanates from myself.
Phil
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Jonathan Clemens <clem4609@pacificu.edu>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 16:02
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Well, that went about as expected. Now the ball is in his court on this, such as it is.
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Xeno <xenowiki@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 16:05
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Since he keeps alluding to suicide, I support keeping him blocked indefinitely.
-x
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 17:07
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
I agree.
--
John Vandenberg
----------
From: David Yellope <dyellope.wiki@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 17:08
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Agreed.
Just gotta figure a way to say it publicly
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: <philknight@mail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 18:37
To: arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Suggest something along the lines of:
"Following recent correspondence between RH&E and ArbCom, the committee believes that in his current mental state that it would be in neither his best interests to continue editing, nor the best interests of the project."
Maybe?
Phil
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Xeno <xenowiki@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 18:40
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
It's really tricky. I'd prefer to avoid saying 'recent correspondence' - correspondence is privileged and even this vague statement kindof characterizes the correspondence and gets people speculating.
I'd also like to avoid saying 'his best interests' - we've already been hammered for trying to act in his best interests before.
I don't have an alternative to offer, though. =|
-x
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Jonathan Clemens <clem4609@pacificu.edu>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 18:42
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
It's a sticky wicket, really. Privacy laws vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, so no matter what we say, it would probably be impermissible *somehwere*.
Hey, since we're appointing new Audit Subcommittee members, let's turf this to them, and ask THEM to explain it appropriately to the community... :-)
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 18:45
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
We could create a /Motions page with a draft or two, and hammer out
the wording there. That gives the community a focal point to see us
working through the issue, the outcome of which is inevitable. He can
also provide one final statement there by emailing it to clerks-l.
----------
From: Cool Hand Luke <User.CoolHandLuke@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 20:05
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
No; this simultaneously reveals information he might consider privileged, and it's highly patronizing to boot.
Given his lame public response to the evidence, I don't think we need to say much. Maybe something like "After further discussion, the committee indefinitely extends the block of User:Rodhullandemu, who may appeal by email after X months. We have already communicated this decision to him."
Frank
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Michelle Kinney <shell.kinney@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 21:11
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Cc: Cool Hand Luke <User.CoolHandLuke@gmail.com>
I think that's a good way to go.
Shell
----------
From: John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 21:30
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
I've taken CHL's draft, added that our decision is based on
discussions with Rodhullandemu, replaced 'block' with 'ban' and
stipulated that the ban can only ArbCom can hear the appeal, and wont
do so until 12 months has elapsed. I would also support an appeal in 6
months, if someone feels that is more appropriate. IMO he is unlikely
to provide a good appeal to this committee.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/arbc...ndemu_indef_ban"After further private discussion with User:Rodhullandemu, the
committee indefinitely bans User:Rodhullandemu. Rodhullandemu may
appeal the ban after 12 months by emailing the committee.
This decision has been communicated to Rodhullandemu privately and
posted to User talk:Rodhullandemu."
----------
From: Xeno <xenowiki@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 21:32
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
On Mar 28, 2011, at 9:11 PM, Michelle Kinney <shell.kinney@gmail.com>
wrote:
Yep.
Hopefully the community's uncharacteristic enquitude continues.
-x // mobile
----------
From: Xeno <xenowiki@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 21:41
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Slightly prefer CHL's version - I see where you are going with this
(not leaving loose ends), but I think less is more here.
The finality of a ban will surely just stir things up on all sides.
-x // mobile
----------
From: John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 21:55
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Xeno <xenowiki@gmail.com> wrote:
>..
CHL's doesnt say how many months he will be blocked for, so that is a
detail which needs to be addressed.
We have nine days to address this. We should be able to vote through
a few alternative motions.
His acting like either someone who is suicidal or an pompous idiot.
An appeal to the community is not appropriate, and we need to make that clear.
--
John Vandenberg
----------
From: Jonathan Clemens <clem4609@pacificu.edu>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 21:55
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
I agree with Xeno that a ban might create problems--I think we want to be very careful crafting this.
How about something along the lines of "a ban for cause per established policies, unrelated to the actions which prompted the recent case regarding revocation of administrator privileges"? That way, we make it clear that his actions were strongly trending "desysop", but that the ban is for unspecified unrelated conduct. I hope...
Jonathan
----------
From: John Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 22:01
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Here is the current block log.
(del/undel) 2011-03-25T05:09:21 Roger Davies (talk | contribs | block) changed block settings for Rodhullandemu (talk | contribs) with an expiry time of indefinite (account creation blocked, e-mail blocked, cannot edit own talk page) ‎ (Turn off Wikipedia email for now. Refer queries to Arbitration Committee) (unblock | change block)
(del/undel) 2011-03-16T03:40:23 Risker (talk | contribs | block) blocked Rodhullandemu (talk | contribs) (account creation blocked, cannot edit own talk page) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ (refer queries to Arbitration Committee) (unblock | change block)
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Phil Nash <phnash@blueyonder.co.uk>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 19:30
To: roger.davies.wiki@gmail.com
Cc: arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Please cite Foundation policy, because I can't see it. All I see is [[Wikipedia:Child protection]], and that does not apply to me. Throwing additional mud is all very well, but you should be aware that (a) I am not a pedophile (b) neither have I ever advocated, or supported, pedophilia, on Wikipedia and © you shouldn't assume that even if I take a stance on Usenet, even discounting forgeries claiming to be me, that is not part of [[participant observation]] of a phenomenon worthy of academic research, and er, I may not actually believe in what I say, but say it to elicit a response from the population I'm studying. You may disagree with my research methods, and so may my academic peers, but in order to infiltrate suspect communities, sometimes a simulacrum of "belonging" assists in drilling down to the reality of the situation. But all I've done is to cite research from others, and put an "Aunt Sally" position, ready to be knocked down, to little effect. My government-supported infiltration of some newsgroups and IRC channels actually resulted in more convictions prior to [[Operation Ore]] than they could ever have hoped for. If there was any fault, it was that nobody told the Manchester Police of my operational status, and that is a major failure of the system.
Meanwhile, all of this has nothing at all to do with my contributions to Wikipedia; I've long-since retired from the intelligence community, largely due to being hung out to dry 14 years ago. My pension may be small, but assured, and sadly, deferred for a couple of years. Until then, I must struggle.
As regards confidentiality, I am still plausibly deniable as an operative, becase "Phil Nash" is not necessarily my real name, so in real terms, this is going to go nowhere unless you want to press the point locally. Up to you.
Phil
----- Original Message -----
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Phil Nash <phnash@blueyonder.co.uk>
Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 19:47
To: roger.davies.wiki@gmail.com
Cc: arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
I'll just add this: I've moved on from the work I was doing 14 years ago, and have retired from that, and most other stuff. Look at my Wikipedia/Commons contributions, and if you can see any agenda beyond keeping the project on track, feel free to kick me into touch. But please don't do it on the basis of unsubstantiated, incredible and irrelevant material. My desysop was shameful enough without bringing up stale material, and this new stuff reeks of paranoia.
Cheers.
PS:If I'm not responding within a week, I'm in hospital.
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Roger Davies <roger.davies.wiki@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 00:42
To: arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
I don't think we should or need say anything about the block.
The case page announcement merely needs amending to say that the case is suspended indefinitely (to remove the 7th April deadline).
Roger
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Roger Davies <roger.davies.wiki@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 00:44
To: arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Another two responses from him are on their way through the moderation pipeline.
They present, at best, a somewhat confused and contradictory picture.
Roger
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Kenneth Kua/ArbCom <kenneth@planetkh.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:17
To: roger.davies.wiki@gmail.com, English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
The email sounds to me that he will probably not stop there, even if he were to be banned.
Kenneth/MD
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 04:17
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
<list only>
Ah, the intelligence operative excuse. I don't think we've seen this one for a while, have we?
Kirill
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Marc A. Pelletier <marc@uberbox.org>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 07:15
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
So, there are only two possibilities left; he is either delusional or has lost all sense of perspective in his bullshit.
-- Coren / Marc
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Newyorkbrad <newyorkbrad@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 07:25
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
I don't recall having ever seen it, actually.
Newyorkbrad
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Jonathan Clemens <clem4609@pacificu.edu>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 09:57
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Ah, I was under the impression Kirill was speaking in general, not with direct application to RH&E.
Ultimately, this is too much BS. Were he in the US, I'd prefer to require self-identification to the foundation and the completion of a clean background check suitable for employment in a child care agency for him to return to editing.
As is, his online persona seems to be a house of car... err, lies.
Jonathan
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Cas Liber <casliber01@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 14:02
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
<snip>
<snip>
Partly the latter - showing a lack of empathy in that folks would believe him, and partly telling stories.
Reminds me of Mattisse in htat under pressure, the level of disturbance in thinking becomes very apparent.
Very interesting when you interview people like this IRL too.
Cas
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Elen of the Roads <elenoftheroads@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 16:58
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
He has hinted it several times
Elen of the Roads
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Newyorkbrad <newyorkbrad@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 17:02
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
I've seen him refer to intelligence service several times, but not as an excuse for anything. I thought Kirill was referring to some other user or case. Ah well, doesn't really matter; thanks for clarifying.
Newyorkbrad
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Elen of the Roads <elenoftheroads@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 17:24
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
He definitely says he spent time in the US working for the UK government in some secret capacity.
I wonder if he was kidnapped by aliens - that's the big thing that's missing from his cv
Elen of the Roads
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 17:29
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Maybe we should ask him if he ever ran into SlimVirgin while in the service.
That part is classified. He'd have to kill us if we found out.
Kirill
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Elen of the Roads <elenoftheroads@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 17:50
To: English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
I have proposed alternate wording
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/arbc...h_block_not_banI do not believe it is necessary to state terms for unblock onwiki.
Elen of the Roads
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Roger Davies <roger.davies.wiki@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 01:27
To: arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
The thing that strikes me about RH&E is the knee-jerk "I'm too ill/I'm suicidal" response whenever challenged. What's all that about, Cas? What's the mechanism? Just deflection?
Roger
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l----------
From: Cas Liber <casliber01@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 16:17
To: "roger.davies.wiki@gmail.com" <roger.davies.wiki@gmail.com>, English Arbitration Committee mailing list <arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
<snip>
<snip>
The common theme in all his correspondence is /his/ hard work, /his/ health i.e. "I'm having a hard time and you don't care". There is not /any/ consideration of the other side at all, which is interesting.
it illustrates a fairly profound lack of empathy of knowing or caring about his obligations (role of admin), or problem it puts us in (threat of suicide and letting him edit). Admittedly this gets worse when a person is stressed (even reasonable folks can lose empathy (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)))
Cas
_______________________________________________
arbcom-l mailing list
arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/arbcom-l
Nutters - what happens when you let anyone edit, or why boners like Rodhullandemu shouldn't try digging for my info
MaliceAforethought Nutters - what happens when you let anyone edit 
