Ban Appeal, Is it a year already? Options

[Ottava]

This thread is interesting as it brings out the crux of the issues surrounding my ban as it stands now:

1. How long was my ban? One year.

2. How often could I appeal? As often as I wanted after my ban was half way. There is no limitation to frequency of appeals and the words "six months" are no where to be found.

3. What does probation mean? It does not mean being banned. Probation, by definition, means release with restrictions. However, SirFozzie is trying to use these clear statements about probation to say that I can have my ban extended, when that is not the case.


From Ncmvocalist: "The ban is only "extended" if Ottava does not agree to comply with the probationary terms."

Funny, because there were no terms offered. I was quite willing to agree to any and all terms. If a criminal gets probation and the judge fails to set terms of the probation, the criminal does not go to jail but is free without restriction.

You'd think Newyorkbrad and the other lawyers who sit on ArbCom would notice this as they have to deal with such things such as the meaning of probation.

I emailed ArbCom to discuss terms of my probation. ArbCom did not offer any. That is their fault, and a clear refusal for them to restrict me. As far as I am concerned and as those of many admin and Stewards, once my one year time is up I am no longer banned and if the Arbitrators don't to restrict me then that is their problem.

[Craftyminion]

This thread is interesting as it brings out the crux of the issues surrounding my ban as it stands now:

1. How long was my ban? One year.

2. How often could I appeal? As often as I wanted after my ban was half way. There is no limitation to frequency of appeals and the words "six months" are no where to be found.

3. What does probation mean? It does not mean being banned. Probation, by definition, means release with restrictions. However, SirFozzie is trying to use these clear statements about probation to say that I can have my ban extended, when that is not the case.


From Ncmvocalist: "The ban is only "extended" if Ottava does not agree to comply with the probationary terms."

Funny, because there were no terms offered. I was quite willing to agree to any and all terms. If a criminal gets probation and the judge fails to set terms of the probation, the criminal does not go to jail but is free without restriction.

You'd think Newyorkbrad and the other lawyers who sit on ArbCom would notice this as they have to deal with such things such as the meaning of probation.

I emailed ArbCom to discuss terms of my probation. ArbCom did not offer any. That is their fault, and a clear refusal for them to restrict me. As far as I am concerned and as those of many admin and Stewards, once my one year time is up I am no longer banned and if the Arbitrators don't to restrict me then that is their problem.

I really hope they don't let you back in. You're just the most awful person I've ever encountered.

Nothing personal, but after the whole Wikiversity thing I feel I can say without fear of contradiciton that you have all the charm of a cornered rattlesnake.

Best of luck with the appeal. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[lilburne]

Nothing personal, but after the whole Wikiversity thing I feel I can say without fear of contradiciton that you have all the charm of a cornered rattlesnake.

Best of luck with the appeal. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

What is wrong with cornered rattlesnakes?

I find him amusing. In any case when OV starts up the antics he's lost the argument and plot anyway. Poke with a stick from a distance, that particular rattlesnake's strike is so slow and predictable even Hawkins could dodge it.

[Craftyminion]

What is wrong with cornered rattlesnakes?

Nothing, except they have such a chilling resemblance to Ottava.

I find him amusing. In any case when OV starts up the antics he's lost the argument and plot anyway. Poke with a stick from a distance, that particular rattlesnake's strike is so slow and predictable even Hawkins could dodge it.

I find him amusing too. What's more amusing is denying him the thing he wants like nothing else. Readmittance to WP.

I suspect for Ottava it's a bit like taking a shit. He can't wait to have it but once he's got it he won't want it any more.

Or such like.

This post has been edited by Craftyminion:

[lilburne]

I find him amusing too. What's more amusing is denying him the thing he wants like nothing else. Readmittance to WP.

Well it is demeaning and it denies others the chance to experience the humour.

[A Horse With No Name]

I really hope they don't let you back in. You're just the most awful person I've ever encountered.

I assume that you never met my brother-in-law. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif)

[Kwork]

I find him amusing too. What's more amusing is denying him the thing he wants like nothing else. Readmittance to WP.

Well it is demeaning and it denies others the chance to experience the humour.

There is a term, parrhesia , that became important in Hellenistic philosophy. It was pretty close in meaning to the 1960's phrase "speak truth to authority", and Michel Foucault gave an interesting series of lectures on the subject at UC Berkeley. http://foucault.info/documents/parrhesia/

In the context of Wikipedia, that means taking on administrative favoritism, and the irrational or self-serving use of administrative authority. The reverse, those who back up the administrators by taking on their targets, is not parrhesia. That is self-serving ass-kissing. I never had any use for ass-kissers, but respect those who take on authority, even when I do not entirely agree with their point. After all taking on authority takes some guts.

[Ottava]

I really hope they don't let you back in. You're just the most awful person I've ever encountered.

Nothing personal, but after the whole Wikiversity thing I feel I can say without fear of contradiciton that you have all the charm of a cornered rattlesnake.

Best of luck with the appeal. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

From Crafty on AN:

"Yeah that maybe so, but we all know you're just fixin' to let Ottava Hussein Rima back in here to advance your lieberal agenda."

Does that confuse anyone else? I've never been political on Wikipedia but if I was it probably wouldn't be "liberal".

[lilburne]

I've never been political on Wikipedia but if I was it probably wouldn't be "liberal".

Don't be a Protestant. Education is one of the Liberal arts. So by definition if you have ever done any of that you're a liberal.

[melloden]

This thread is interesting as it brings out the crux of the issues surrounding my ban as it stands now:

1. How long was my ban? One year.

2. How often could I appeal? As often as I wanted after my ban was half way. There is no limitation to frequency of appeals and the words "six months" are no where to be found.

3. What does probation mean? It does not mean being banned. Probation, by definition, means release with restrictions. However, SirFozzie is trying to use these clear statements about probation to say that I can have my ban extended, when that is not the case.


From Ncmvocalist: "The ban is only "extended" if Ottava does not agree to comply with the probationary terms."

Funny, because there were no terms offered. I was quite willing to agree to any and all terms. If a criminal gets probation and the judge fails to set terms of the probation, the criminal does not go to jail but is free without restriction.

You'd think Newyorkbrad and the other lawyers who sit on ArbCom would notice this as they have to deal with such things such as the meaning of probation.

I emailed ArbCom to discuss terms of my probation. ArbCom did not offer any. That is their fault, and a clear refusal for them to restrict me. As far as I am concerned and as those of many admin and Stewards, once my one year time is up I am no longer banned and if the Arbitrators don't to restrict me then that is their problem.

Did you expect anything different? When ArbCom doesn't like you, they ignore you. Then they say that they made everything quite clear from the very beginning.

[carbuncle]

Did you expect anything different? When ArbCom doesn't like you, they ignore you. Then they say that they made everything quite clear from the very beginning.

Wait, is that why ArbCom ignores me? Now my feelings are hurt.

[Text]

Forget appealing bans. Thekohser did it, succeeded in remaining around, and he couldn't resist remaining in the corruptocracy for a month, so he got blocked again.

The others who remain around after bans are robots like Betacommand.

[GlassBeadGame]

Getting banned from Wikipedia is no indicator of bad character. Caring about being banned is. Anyone who is banned and cares about it loses all appeal.

[Ottava]

Getting banned from Wikipedia is no indicator of bad character. Caring about being banned is. Anyone who is banned and cares about it loses all appeal.

So, if I "win" an appeal, I really lose appeal? Kinda clever.

[Text]

So, if I "win" an appeal, I really lose appeal? Kinda clever.

You don't win on any virtual world, you keep playing until you get bored and move on. How you play also influences the audience who looks at the game. If you play the good nerd loyal to the Wiki masters there's no entertainment.

[Kwork]

Getting banned from Wikipedia is no indicator of bad character. Caring about being banned is. Anyone who is banned and cares about it loses all appeal.

Yes. I agree completely.

Its better to know when to fold em. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNnrTNFWcsg

Ottava, you have gotten along ok without WP for a year, so you can get along without it altogether. It not a nice place, and now that you have taken the discussion to AN/I you are subject to one of their wiki-lynchings.

In Dante's "Inferno" the final line from the inscription on the Gates of Hell is:
Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate. (La Divina Commedia, Canto III.1--9 )
(Abandon all hope, you who enter!)

I planned to re-add that quote to the top of my talk page as a reminder, but got bounced out before I did. In my view, logging into WP is entering wiki-Hell. For Dante, who was passing through as a visitor, it is interesting and diverting to see what goes on in Hell. For those who go to there as residents -- as WP 'users' -- WP is the Place of Torment. As they say here in NYC: forgetaboutit.

[A Horse With No Name]

As they say here in NYC: forgetaboutit.

Actually, real Noo Yawkers say "Fuggedaboutit" (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[Kwork]

As they say here in NYC: forgetaboutit.

Actually, real Noo Yawkers say "Fuggedaboutit" (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Yes. I sincerely regret all my spelling, and grammar, mistakes on both WP and WR. I stand behind everything else completely. (Excepting only those statements that turn out to be wrong.)

[SB_Johnny]

I wonder whether Ottava will think I'm trolling here. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)

[Ottava]

I wonder whether Ottava will think I'm trolling here. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)

Well, if you aren't trolling, you could go here and request a clarification on two points:

Premise: Remedy one of the original ban said it was for one year. Remedy three says that after the ban ends that there would be probation. It also says he can appeal after the one half ban point.

1. How does ArbCom claim that Ottava has only 1 appeal per six months when the word six months does not appear nor is there language suggesting he is limited in the frequency and amount of appeals he can make?

2. How can a provision for probation, which, by definition, means to not be in jail, be used to justify an extension of a ban, especially when the provision assumes that the ban would be over and that he would be editing?


There was no grounds for them to make such claims and would be the sole reason why I would be banned beyond December 19.


If anyone questions why this is posted publicly, you can point to the AN thread showing that there is community concerns about the secrecy surrounding the matter and the possible problems regarding what ArbCom determined.

This post has been edited by Ottava:

[GlassBeadGame]

I wonder whether Ottava will think I'm trolling here. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)

Well, if you aren't trolling, you could go here and request a clarification on two points:

Premise: Remedy one of the original ban said it was for one year. Remedy three says that after the ban ends that there would be probation. It also says he can appeal after the one half ban point.

1. How does ArbCom claim that Ottava has only 1 appeal per six months when the word six months does not appear nor is there language suggesting he is limited in the frequency and amount of appeals he can make?

2. How can a provision for probation, which, by definition, means to not be in jail, be used to justify an extension of a ban, especially when the provision assumes that the ban would be over and that he would be editing?


There was no grounds for them to make such claims and would be the sole reason why I would be banned beyond December 19.


If anyone questions why this is posted publicly, you can point to the AN thread showing that there is community concerns about the secrecy surrounding the matter and the possible problems regarding what ArbCom determined.

A simple "thank you" would be less pathologically controlling.

[SB_Johnny]

Well, if you aren't trolling, you could go here and request a clarification on two points:

<snipped>

That's awfully lawyerly stuff there... arguing the fine points of ARBCOM's decision is probably the least effective approach (IMO). I don't really know enough about the particulars of the decision to ask in a coherent way. If you want me to post something, send it to me via email or better yet just plop in on my WV talk.

A simple "thank you" would be less pathologically controlling.

Given his extremely now opinion of me in general and my motivations in particular, I think that response was probably the best he could do.

[Malleus]

Premise: Remedy one of the original ban said it was for one year. Remedy three says that after the ban ends that there would be probation. It also says he can appeal after the one half ban point.

1. How does ArbCom claim that Ottava has only 1 appeal per six months when the word six months does not appear nor is there language suggesting he is limited in the frequency and amount of appeals he can make?

2. How can a provision for probation, which, by definition, means to not be in jail, be used to justify an extension of a ban, especially when the provision assumes that the ban would be over and that he would be editing?


There was no grounds for them to make such claims and would be the sole reason why I would be banned beyond December 19.

I think you're looking for logic where none exists, which is why I agreed with Newyorkbrad's proposal to wait until ArbCom's new blood is consecrated.

[Ottava]

Premise: Remedy one of the original ban said it was for one year. Remedy three says that after the ban ends that there would be probation. It also says he can appeal after the one half ban point.

1. How does ArbCom claim that Ottava has only 1 appeal per six months when the word six months does not appear nor is there language suggesting he is limited in the frequency and amount of appeals he can make?

2. How can a provision for probation, which, by definition, means to not be in jail, be used to justify an extension of a ban, especially when the provision assumes that the ban would be over and that he would be editing?


There was no grounds for them to make such claims and would be the sole reason why I would be banned beyond December 19.

I think you're looking for logic where none exists, which is why I agreed with Newyorkbrad's proposal to wait until ArbCom's new blood is consecrated.

Yes, so a different set of 18 people tell me that my ban is extended into 2012 and make up a completely different excuse as to how "one year" magically no longer means one year.



If you are bored, here are pages ready for FAC with only a copyedit needed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Smart
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ode_to_a_Nightingale
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kubla_Khan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ode:_Intimations_of_Immortality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elegy_Written...ntry_Churchyard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Plays_of_...iam_Shakespeare
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Coleri...versation_poems
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor_Rebellion_of_1733
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_War_of_1752-1753
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist_and_the_Author

10 without having to do much. The last 3 should be fun.

This post has been edited by Ottava:

[Malleus]

Premise: Remedy one of the original ban said it was for one year. Remedy three says that after the ban ends that there would be probation. It also says he can appeal after the one half ban point.

1. How does ArbCom claim that Ottava has only 1 appeal per six months when the word six months does not appear nor is there language suggesting he is limited in the frequency and amount of appeals he can make?

2. How can a provision for probation, which, by definition, means to not be in jail, be used to justify an extension of a ban, especially when the provision assumes that the ban would be over and that he would be editing?


There was no grounds for them to make such claims and would be the sole reason why I would be banned beyond December 19.

I think you're looking for logic where none exists, which is why I agreed with Newyorkbrad's proposal to wait until ArbCom's new blood is consecrated.

Yes, so a different set of 18 people tell me that my ban is extended into 2012 and make up a completely different excuse as to how "one year" magically no longer means one year.

Perhaps, that's certainly a worst case scenario, but perhaps not. As you know, I thought you were mad to initiate the case that ultimately resulted in your ban. But I think that if your ban isn't lifted, given that it will have to hedged with some face-saving ifs and buts, the new ArbCom will find itself held in no higher regard than the present one.

[Ottava]

Perhaps, that's certainly a worst case scenario, but perhaps not. As you know, I thought you were mad to initiate the case that ultimately resulted in your ban. But I think that if your ban isn't lifted, given that it will have to hedged with some face-saving ifs and buts, the new ArbCom will find itself held in no higher regard than the present one.

Well, I groveled. I begged. I offered to do anything. I wasn't even given a discussion nor asked any questions.

And the new Arb is mostly the same as the old.



All that can really be done is for others to just clean up pages like the ten above, put them through FAC, and continue to have my work outshine theirs.

As a side note, I do find it interesting how various Arbs spread claims about me yet ignore that I was known for things like this and being one of the few willing to defend those that no one else would defend, even when that person attacked me or harmed me in some way.

This post has been edited by Ottava:

[Malleus]

Perhaps, that's certainly a worst case scenario, but perhaps not. As you know, I thought you were mad to initiate the case that ultimately resulted in your ban. But I think that if your ban isn't lifted, given that it will have to hedged with some face-saving ifs and buts, the new ArbCom will find itself held in no higher regard than the present one.

Well, I groveled. I begged. I offered to do anything. I wasn't even given a discussion nor asked any questions.

And the new Arb is mostly the same as the old.

All that can really be done is for others to just clean up pages like the ten above, put them through FAC, and continue to have my work outshine theirs.

As a side note, I do find it interesting how various Arbs spread claims about me yet ignore that I was known for things like this and being one of the few willing to defend those that no one else would defend, even when that person attacked me or harmed me in some way.

The extension of your one year ban and its transmogrification into an indefinite ban was clearly iniquitous, but that can't be changed now. I don't think that either grovelling or begging are appropriate or even necessary, just a little more patience, until the January 15 deadline. If you push ArbCom now they'll just say no again.

[CharlotteWebb]

This thread is interesting…

You LIE.

[thekohser]

All that can really be done is for others to just clean up pages like the ten above, put them through FAC, and continue to have my work outshine theirs.

THAT'll show 'em!

[Ottava]

This thread is interesting…

You LIE.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unhappy.gif)



Malleus

The extension of your one year ban and its transmogrification into an indefinite ban was clearly iniquitous, but that can't be changed now. I don't think that either grovelling or begging are appropriate or even necessary, just a little more patience, until the January 15 deadline. If you push ArbCom now they'll just say no again.

Eh, SirFozzie and Shell.kinney said they would do whatever they could to make sure I stay banned until I stop having any connection to Wikipedia. Kinda odd, no?

[thekohser]

Eh, SirFozzie and Shell.kinney said they would do whatever they could to make sure I stay banned until I stop having any connection to Wikipedia. Kinda odd, no?

Ottava, let me suggest what has been very fulfilling for me. Sockpuppetry. Assume a new persona that they can't identify. It's like a career as an actor. Make them believe you're someone else. Load of fun.

[Text]

Ottava, let me suggest what has been very fulfilling for me. Sockpuppetry. Assume a new persona that they can't identify. It's like a career as an actor. Make them believe you're someone else. Load of fun.

Load of fun, and of course drama, which is never enough; people over there always crave for more (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[Milton Roe]

Ottava, let me suggest what has been very fulfilling for me. Sockpuppetry. Assume a new persona that they can't identify. It's like a career as an actor. Make them believe you're someone else. Load of fun.

Asking Ottava to try on a non-straightjacketted personna, is hilarious. Without the pressure-suit of his various stultifying ideas about reality, it would be like an astronaut exposed to vacuum.

Worse. Astronauts in vacuum don't blow up, but merely puff up and lose consciousness. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wtf.gif) Ottava's head would probably explode. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/sad.gif)

[Ottava]

What wonderful politics.

Thogo complains that I "harassed" him 8 days after I said Stewards were supposed to follow US law regardless of their personal political opinions, and two people who support the Commons porn say I should stay banned for it.

Nice Sarek, nice. You really make yourself look great there.




P.S. - Milton - http://images.cheezburger.com/completestor...4e24fc0016f.jpg

This post has been edited by Ottava:

[SB_Johnny]

Thogo complains that I "harassed" him 8 days after I said Stewards were supposed to follow US law regardless of their personal political opinions, and two people who support the Commons porn say I should stay banned for it.

Nice Sarek, nice. You really make yourself look great there.

Ottava, you accused me of "harassing" you for calling you up when I was genuinely worried about your emotional state. Least you could do is not knock people who jump to the same wacky conclusions that you do, eh? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/dry.gif)

[Ottava]

Thogo complains that I "harassed" him 8 days after I said Stewards were supposed to follow US law regardless of their personal political opinions, and two people who support the Commons porn say I should stay banned for it.

Nice Sarek, nice. You really make yourself look great there.

Ottava, you accused me of "harassing" you for calling you up when I was genuinely worried about your emotional state. Least you could do is not knock people who jump to the same wacky conclusions that you do, eh? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/dry.gif)

I don't get it.

Do you honestly think calling someone's phone number without permission is acceptable?

Do you honestly think calling someone's house is akin to challenging an on-wiki claim that US law is meaningless?

Do you not understand that WP:HARASS is about stalking, which calling someone's house can be construed as and what a line of criticism cannot be construed as?

[thekohser]

Do you honestly think calling someone's phone number without permission is acceptable?

Horrible people in the marketing research field do this to households about 50,000 times an evening, nationwide, I estimate.

[Milton Roe]

Do you honestly think calling someone's phone number without permission is acceptable?

Horrible people in the marketing research field do this to households about 50,000 times an evening, nationwide, I estimate.

PM me your address, Ottava, and I'll send you Mormon missionaries that will actually knock on your front door. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)

[TungstenCarbide]

Do you honestly think calling someone's phone number without permission is acceptable?

Horrible people in the marketing research field do this to households about 50,000 times an evening, nationwide, I estimate.

PM me your address, Ottava, and I'll send you Mormon missionaries that will actually knock on your front door. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)

you must really hate Mormons.

[Milton Roe]

Do you honestly think calling someone's phone number without permission is acceptable?

Horrible people in the marketing research field do this to households about 50,000 times an evening, nationwide, I estimate.

PM me your address, Ottava, and I'll send you Mormon missionaries that will actually knock on your front door. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)

you must really hate Mormons.

Milton the Hater, I say.

They [the clergy] believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: and enough, too, in their opinion.

Notes on Virginia is still worthwhile reading. I think it contains the earliest statement of Josh Billings' aphorism that it isn't the thing don't know that hurt you, such much as the things you know, that just aren't so.

Or as Jefferson says:

Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong.

That's hard to unpack in modern English, but once you get it, you see it's the very same sentiment.