MM and SH indef blocked, Read all about it Options

[Achromatic]

Well, not much to read. Mantanmoreland and Samiharris both indefinitely blocked by Coren.

Lets see if David Gerard lights up the wheel war fireworks.

[The Joy]

What is this wikilegalese of it being just an "indefinite block" as opposed to a "community ban" and why is undoing an "indefinite block" frowned upon while a "community ban" can just be undone by a rogue administrator?

Wouldn't this just keep going back and forth between the "community" and ArbCom? I mean, we should be celebrating the defeat of a master sockpuppeteer, but there's no real finality to this. What's to stop Gerard, SlimVirgin, JzG, or any admin from undoing this especially with some socially-powerful admins crying foul over Coren's block of MM?

[Heat]

If someone does unblock MM I hope it's JzG. That could provide the tipping point to finally have him desysopped.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

This is indeed an interesting development. Watch this thread.

[Miltopia]

David Gerard has already pledged to unblock them. I wonder if Jimbo will desysop him for wheel warring like he did scou for unblocking me...

Then again, David does have three votes here... his own, his wife's, and his girlfriend's.

This post has been edited by Miltopia: Thu 13th March 2008, 9:30am

[dogbiscuit]

David Gerard has already pledged to unblock them. I wonder if Jimbo will desysop him for wheel warring like he did scou for unblocking me...

Then again, David does have three votes here... his own, his wife's, and his girlfriend's.

What is interesting that there are quite a few names that I don't recognise that have put their head above the parapet.


...and Durova has awarded a barnstar for the block.

[cyofee]

Doc Glasgow has unblocked Mantanmoreland.

Apparently, there exists a "significant admin disagreement".

[dogbiscuit]

Doc Glasgow has unblocked Mantanmoreland.

Apparently, there exists a "significant admin disagreement".

Perhaps gwh should re-block as an obvious self-idenitifying sockpuppet of WordBomb?

[Kato]

The dispute, which was over here has moved to the Arbcom request for clarification page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req..._Mantanmoreland


Despite there being overwhelming support for a block of Mantanmoreland, Doc Glasgow writes:

I'm actually neutral on the facts/evidence, but whether there is a community consensus is disputed. There is significant objection from some experienced admins.

Which I take to mean JzG, David Gerard and a few others who are so knee deep in this they were effectively parties to the disruption, and in Gerard's case was even named in the media scandal about the episode. Conflict of Interest anyone?

[Moulton]

By definition, all drama includes competing interests across the cast of characters.

In fact, drama is one of the ways to surface competing and conflicting interests.

[dogbiscuit]

The dispute, which was over here has moved to the Arbcom request for clarification page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req..._Mantanmoreland


Despite there being overwhelming support for a block of Mantanmoreland, Doc Glasgow writes:

I'm actually neutral on the facts/evidence, but whether there is a community consensus is disputed. There is significant objection from some experienced admins.

Which I take to mean JzG, David Gerard and a few others who are so knee deep in this they were effectively parties to the disruption, and in Gerard's case was even named in the media scandal about the episode. Conflict of Interest anyone?

It is difficult to untangle. Given that Fozzie and Cla68 to name but two, clearly are involved in the ArbCom, however, I don't believe they were ever involved in the article wars (happy to be corrected).

The main vocal opponents of the ban are not just opposition within the ArbCom, they have a long history of being involved in the dispute itself, and therefore should step back as being involved. There is also some friends of friends going on.

It would be interesting to peel back the involved admins and see what comments remain from genuinely neutral people. I was interested that Lar stepped up to the plate initially, as he is not a WR lackey, and did not play a particularly strong role in the arbcom (of the top of my head).

[Kato]

Some gems from Tony Sidaway who is opposed to the blocking:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=197981180

I find the suggestion that he imported a dispute into Wikipedia improbable.

Other than Weiss going onto Wikipedia and controlling articles on Patrick Byrne, naked short selling and other relevant topics where he was engaging in a real life dispute, then adding material that immediately identified the editor as Weiss to Byrne and others, and hence beginning this whole mess. Other than that, Sidaway is correct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=197994366

Mantanmoreland has no history of tendentious and disruptive editing. Apart from deceptive socking, there is no known issue with his editing. --[[User talk:Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The|Anticipation of a New Lover's Arrival, The]] 16:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Other than using his socks to bully off other editors, add duplicate votes in numerous discussions, create false consensus wherever he could etc.

[badlydrawnjeff]

But...but I thought the ArbCom case was going to FIX these problems.

Go figure - they punt on a ban and the banning becomes controversial for no reason other than a bunch of admins who probably shouldn't have the tools anymore anyway. Oh, and administrative misconduct was punted too, and look at what the main problem is at this juncture.

Absolutely ridiculous. What a complete failure.

[Jonny Cache]

But … but I thought the ArbCom case was going to FIX these problems.

Go figure — they punt on a ban and the banning becomes controversial for no reason other than a bunch of admins who probably shouldn't have the tools anymore anyway. Oh, and administrative misconduct was punted too, and look at what the main problem is at this juncture.

Absolutely ridiculous. What a complete failure.

And so surprising, too.

Jonny

[dogbiscuit]

I was surprised. I thought that the powers that be would have enough sense to see that it was not a battle worth fighting. While SV did pop up to support the ridiculous SH == WB notion, the old guard were in general keeping their heads down.

I had assumed that having been beaten at ArbCom, or perhaps a dishonourable draw would be a better view, that they then had the face saver to let MM disappear, eventually turn up in another guise.

But it becomes clearer that off-wiki they determined that they were not going to make a proper fight of the ArbCom, they knew that it was not going to go for any serious sanctions so there was no need to be obvious. They can now obfusticate, using the ArbCom debacle to support their position.

Yet I was surprised, I really thought there would be some puffery, but then they would let it die. What they have guaranteed now is that the knives will be out. Plus more good admins now have had the scales removed from their eyes and will understand far more clearly the scale of manipulation going on here. There are a number of admins who will now find that their blocks will be questioned. I predict far more drama and the likes of SV, Guy and so on (the "admins of good standing" NOT!) will no longer be able to rely on "I said so."

[Jonny Cache]

Here, tattoo this ↓ on your wrist, and maybe next time you'll be less surprised.

I was surprised. I thought that the powers that be would have enough sense to see that it was not a battle worth fighting. While SV did pop up to support the ridiculous SH == WB notion, the old guard were in general keeping their heads down.

I had assumed that having been beaten at ArbCom, or perhaps a dishonourable draw would be a better view, that they then had the face saver to let MM disappear, eventually turn up in another guise.

But it becomes clearer that off-wiki they determined that they were not going to make a proper fight of the ArbCom, they knew that it was not going to go for any serious sanctions so there was no need to be obvious. They can now obfusticate, using the ArbCom debacle to support their position.

Yet I was surprised, I really thought there would be some puffery, but then they would let it die. What they have guaranteed now is that the knives will be out. Plus more good admins now have had the scales removed from their eyes and will understand far more clearly the scale of manipulation going on here. There are a number of admins who will now find that their blocks will be questioned. I predict far more drama and the likes of SV, Guy and so on (the "admins of good standing" NOT!) will no longer be able to rely on "I said so."

[dogbiscuit]

Here, tattoo this ↓ on your wrist, and maybe next time you'll be less surprised.

Yeah, well. Perhaps I wasn't that surprised, just thought they were better at the game. Perhaps they are, essentially they always ignore all rules to keep the upper hand.

What is less surprising is the adaptation of 3RR techniques to blocking:

1) Someone makes a block you don't like.
2) Revert it and then claim anyone now reverting is wheelwarring and should be sanctioned.

Tony Sidaway:

Administrators should avoid taking action that might be interpreted as a controversial revert of Doc's unblock.

How about Doc should not have done a controversial revert of a block, especially as an interested party? Perhaps Doc should have an RFC raised on his actions.

[Moulton]

Hickory Dickory Doc
He clicked the mouse on 'block'

The block struck some
As being undone

Hickory Dickory Doc

[Doc glasgow]

Hickory Dickory Doc
He clicked the mouse on 'block'

The block struck some
As being undone

Hickory Dickory Doc

Do WR contributors accept barnstars? That made me laugh.


No I'm not an interested party. As to whether SH=MM=GW I neither know nor care. That's for arbcom to decide.

This post has been edited by Doc glasgow: Thu 13th March 2008, 7:24pm

[The Joy]

Hickory Dickory Doc
He clicked the mouse on 'block'

The block struck some
As being undone

Hickory Dickory Doc

Do WR contributors accept barnstars? That made me laugh.


No I'm not an interested party. As to whether SH=MM=GW I neither know nor care. That's for arbcom to decide.

But all ArbCom really decided was... it was indecisive?