ChrisO prepares an RFC about Elonka and Elonka prepares a response. FWIW I don't think Elonka has handled this situation very well at all.

ChrisO needs someone to co-sign his RfC with him after he posts it, or else it will be deleted after 48 hours.

Apropos of nothing, I just glanced at both of those pages and it drove home to me one of the reasons I left wikipedia. As a writer, why would I ever want to write that many words for free?

I completely agree. It is a complete waste of energy. Contributing to something that is so unpleasant and dysfunctional - if not cruel? No.

What makes it even worse would be when someone then comes and erases it all.

I read through both arguements, and I side more with Elonka on this issue. Then again, I am bias on this issue. But her arguements do seem stronger to me. I do not think ChrisO is really a "neutral" party here. His pro-palestinian bias has been pointed out before. He has a habit of wronglfully claiming to be "neutral" on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I still remember how angry he got at me for my views on the Allegations of Apartheid issues.

I don't think that link demonstrates what you think it does Where is the pro-palestinian stuff?

Here are a few examples:

See here, where he makes his support for the existance of the Israeli apartheid article clear for one. Second, I think his recent opening statement to the Muhammad al-Durrah mediation is very revealing about his personal feelings toward the conflict.



Then there is his AFD nomination of Ouze Merham and his delete vote for Pallywood.

Overall, when I was editing, every disputed edit ever I saw him make was either pro-palestinian or anti-Israel. I have yet to see him take the Israeli side of the dispute, while he has taken the palestinian side many times. There may be an example I am unaware of, but I have not seen it. For these reasons, I conclude he is pro-Palestinian.

I just see your own bias in this. But is you are biased yourself, anyone in the middle will look biased.

The RfC has been posted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req..._comment/Elonka but it doesn't appear to me to be properly certified. ScienceApologists doesn't show where he attempted dispute resolution with Elonka.

According to Elonka, managing the creation of an encyclopedia is no different than administering DragonRealms:

Who could be in a better position to identify Wikipedia as an MMPORGP?

Well, hell, we can't have that. Since all the pro-Israel types have been booted off Wikipedia ages ago, if we had even one pro-Palestinian remaining, it would hopelessly pull the entire project into a vicious political warp, from which it might never return.

Banniate him, therefore!

Elonka gets the RFC deleted by using her influence with ArbCom member TheBainer who goes beyond the ArbCom remit and unilaterally deletes it. Good to see ArbCom keeping the drama quotient to a suitable level.

Rumble, rumble.

Oh boy, that one backfired pretty quick - as was predictable. Elonka should have stuck to a strategy of "I'm just an uninvolved admin taking the high road and doing my best to enforce civility in trying circumstances, and ChrisO is a [[civil POV pusher]] who's abusing process to get his way." Recruiting a meat-puppet to try and crush the entire RfC is just going to cast doubt on her own judgment and neutrality, whatever the merit of ChrisO's claims. Mind you, her "defence" was already quite flaky - she categorizes reasonable disagreement from ChrisO as abusive "threats," etc. If anything comes of this RfC it will be mainly the result of Elonka's highhanded and inept self-defence.

deletion overturned in a snowstorm at DRV

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:DRV...ka_.28closed.29

Jehochman proposed recall of Elonka under her own terms set at her RFA. Looks like a rat fucking is in progress.

Some people had it coming; Elonka definitely did.

It's fascinating to watch the rats scurry around with silly wikilawyering arguments why Elonka cannot be recalled. Various arguments like insisting that Jehochman is not in "good standing", or that she really meant "six net editors" or some other such nonsense.

I doubt she'll consent to recall; Elonka has never seemed particularly bound by any sense of honorable conduct, and I can't imagine that she'll start now. Besides, how is this really any different than what Jimbo would do in the same situation?

Elonka's actions aside, the RfC and recall have already turned into a festering pile of nonsense with everyone getting in their shot.

To increase the drama whoring even more, Bishonen is now threatening to block Elonka if she doesn't respond to her demands within 24 hours.

But of course, Bishonen isn't an admin...I guess Bishzilla really is a second personality with no knowledge of the first.

Welcome to Wikipedia Review, BTW

Six net editors, oh, that's good.

Elonka's tactic is to make enemies, then exclude them from discussions on the ground that they have a history with her. Her friends and sycophants, on the other hand, can always be involved.

Reading from the most worn page of her playbook, she has accused Jehochman of "harassment":

I've been trying to reserve judgement on the matter, but Elonka's post on Jehochman's talk page reminds me of another admin who is the current subject of two separate RfARs. To try to intimidate someone with unsupported accusations of harassment is unacceptable. She still hasn't withdrawn it.

I've decide to post for the first time. The atmosphere here is a bit less corrosive today than at Wikipedia.

Ah so glad of you to join us Jehochman, pull up a chair and stay a while.

I came to that realization some time ago. Welcome.

Welcome, Jehochman!

I was thinking of you earlier today, actually, and the discussion surrounding your RfA.

I'm somewhat less sanguine and welcoming.

I would see fit to ban JeHochman a priori. Beyond that for making any future comment with which I might disagree.

Reciprocity and all that.




It's the triumvirate of the perfect storm (of hypocrisy).


Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And your first job....... and your mother......... and your father......... and your husband....... and your ...... hobbies...... and your obsessive (ironic) COI attacks on others who do what you do ....

Hey 'LONKA......

Like, girlfriend: "Get a website" (oh you did), or "get a blog" (oh, well then) ok - "get thee to a knol(lery), GO!".

What are the expectations here? What are the different ways to get banned?

Lackey, think of all the fun you can have with me here. If I go away, that will be very BORING.

And where is my friend theKohser?

You overestimate your capacity for "being boring" unintentionally Jon.

On existential grounds. Sui generis yawnium.





But then, there's the ripe opportunity for accidental-unintentional "take myself so seriously I become hilarious" humor too.

So it all balances.

Fun? No. Many adjectives, adverbs and such would apply. Fun is not one of them. "Idiosyncratic" comes to mind.

I'm inclined to agree with DL. When I said the Elonka recall looked like a rat fucking, i wasn't distinguishing between any of the rats!

That being said, welcome Jon. Try not to overly attack or harass our dedicated volunteers.

Hey there, Jehochman! Welcome indeed to Wikipedia Review Do pull up a chair and grab a beer.

How come I didn't get a welcome when I came on a few days ago?

Late welcome!

Apologies, I try to get people when I see them post first.

Welcome! We need a "New members" forum where people can introduce themselves when they register.

Better late than never, I guess.

We use the Lounge for that. Welcome, Crestatus.

And also, we don't care that much about you.

For the first time since May 10, Elonka did not edit - to avoid the veritable shitstorm that is her talk page?

Will she step down? Place your bets...

Well, I try to choose my battles, but I'm thinking about getting involved in this one. I'll check to see if Elonka has backed up her allegations against Jechochman with any evidence, or else withdrawn them.

Elonka hasn't made a single edit since the very minute after the recall proposal was submitted to her talk page, so I doubt she's backed up much of anything with evidence.

My bet's on her not stepping down. With as many tries at RfA as it took for her to become an admin in the first place, I don't see her handing it over because of a dispute she so adamantly disagrees with.

"Try not to overly attack or harass our dedicated volunteers."

Don't worry, I'll go easy on them.

I'm leaning towards involvement. I supported Elonka's RfA. I haven't edited any of those articles (as far as I can remember without checking my contributions history). I think I'm as neutral as anyone. If I decide to ask her to recall, I won't stop until she's no longer an admin, supports her allegations, or apologizes and withdraws what she said.

Okay, so I have a few questions that perhaps Cla, Jehochman or anyone else following this may know. Because I hadn't really looked at any of it until yesterday.

1/ Are the majority of Jehochman's post over the past week focused on Elonka, specifically to her RFC?
2/ Has Jehochman ever been cautioned for harassment? If so, on multiple occasions?
3/ Has he made comments in the RFC that were not completely accurate?

I'm not being a smartass, I'm seriously asking.




Okay, looking myself.

1/ Clearly, yes. Practically all of them. Including one that says he wouldn't touch the RFC with a barge pole. See how that turned out.

her recall requirements were pretty clear

Witch hunts don't count. I'm not saying her use of the tools or her status as an admin hasn't been misused, I'm also not saying it has. I don't know. That's why I'm looking into it. But what I've seen so far isn't very compelling for a recall.

Many of those supporting the request are citing this above comment from her. If the comment proves to be valid, then that pretty much is an indicator that everyone flipping their shit over it needs to stfu. Six editors in good standing with a grudge isn't really fair. Of course, if there are six truly neutral editors that have reviewed the evidence and can be objective, then that's a different story.

Are her recall criteria overly simple to the point that she's basically screwed to resign to what is potentially (I'm not done looking at the evidence, thus "potentially") a mob? Or must she break her word in this voluntary processes because it is potentially being gamed? It looks like yes to me. Those appear to be her two options. Personally, in a case like this, I'd refer it all to ArbCom, should the RFC prove it necessary.

It's clear from looking at some talk pages in the past few days that there are a fair many editors supporting the recall that cannot possibly be objective. Biased and involved. The question is this: is it common sense that such editors would not be in a position to request the recall, or must her criteria, as noted above, be taken exactly as worded?

The bottom line is that she must step aside. The parameters have been laid down, and the parameters have now been met. She can always seek RfA again.

If Elonka does not step down, then it makes the whole recall thingy a joke. It will also make a joke out of Wikipedia, and leave very little credibility with many editors. Elonka is gone, and she has been too arrogant to too many. Admins, watch out!!

lara did she retained you as her wikilawyer or something?

her recall criteria was crystal clear, and most likely part of the reason her rfa passed at all

I really hope that the RfC can handle it then. I'm about as neutral on the matter as can be given the circumstances, and both have supported me making the final call... though that's a very trying responsibility for when it comes down to it.

You appear to be laboring under the misapprehension that recall is not already a joke.

Recall is pretty clearly a sham. I almost shit myself laughing at people who seriously ask about it at RFA. Has anyone ever stepped down in a recall, where they would not have had their bit taken away at an otherwise unavoidable ArbCase? I suppose you can use it to save face, and make a future RFA more likely to succeed.

Asked and answered: Czrussian. Maybe Durova, maybe Mercuy, hard to say. A cursorly glance suggests Czrussian was screwed otherwise. Durova probably was too.

No.