From charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com Wed Apr 23 21:14:45 2008
From: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com (Charles Matthews)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:14:45 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
Message-ID: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>

> This calls for some form of response.
> Newyorkbrad

I think we need a straw poll of the 2008 intake. Is it

(a) the matter has been sufficiently reviewed; or
(b) there should be further review?

We want to end up with a situation where there is a "form letter" reply. The emails are not going to stop coming in, that's clear.

Charles
----------
From sydney.poore at gmail.com Wed Apr 23 21:21:45 2008
From: sydney.poore at gmail.com (FloNight)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:21:45 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
References: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <16032ea0804231421n73f1ce6pc8f955d424ca1184@mail.gmail.com>

I want to unblock Poetlister with conditions. She must use one account
and not use open proxies.

This would not be a clear your name block (I will tell her that
myself), but one based on time served and her good work on other
Wikipedia projects.

I see no harm from letting her edit under these conditions.

Sydney
----------
From sam.blacketer at googlemail.com Wed Apr 23 21:23:26 2008
From: sam.blacketer at googlemail.com (Sam Blacketer)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:23:26 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
References: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <e75b49f70804231423h714e5e70wb2c86d9e627f420@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 10:14 PM, Charles Matthews <
charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:

> > This calls for some form of response.
> > Newyorkbrad
>
> I think we need a straw poll of the 2008 intake. Is it
>
> (a) the matter has been sufficiently reviewed; or
> (b) there should be further review?
>

I doubt we would get any new information which would be decisive. Like
FloNight I think we could unblock but keep Poetlister on a tight leash, then
discreetly monitor what happens. (May be going soft in the head in my old
age though)

--
Sam Blacketer
----------
From user.jpgordon at gmail.com Wed Apr 23 21:26:01 2008
From: user.jpgordon at gmail.com (Josh Gordon)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:26:01 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <16032ea0804231421n73f1ce6pc8f955d424ca1184@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<16032ea0804231421n73f1ce6pc8f955d424ca1184@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <99c65f730804231426o25bee633v151af542a61715db@mail.gmail.com>

No open proxies and of course the understanding that she'll be regularly
checkusered to ensure she is sticking to the bargain.

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:21 PM, FloNight <sydney.poore at gmail.com> wrote:

> I want to unblock Poetlister with conditions. She must use one account
> and not use open proxies.
>
> This would not be a clear your name block (I will tell her that
> myself), but one based on time served and her good work on other
> Wikipedia projects.
>
> I see no harm from letting her edit under these conditions.
>
> Sydney
----------
From morven at gmail.com Wed Apr 23 21:38:58 2008
From: morven at gmail.com (Matthew Brown)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:38:58 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <16032ea0804231421n73f1ce6pc8f955d424ca1184@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<16032ea0804231421n73f1ce6pc8f955d424ca1184@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <42f90dc00804231438q7af5779fica87f90a67971dd@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:21 PM, FloNight <sydney.poore at gmail.com> wrote:
> I want to unblock Poetlister with conditions. She must use one account
> and not use open proxies.
>
> This would not be a clear your name block (I will tell her that
> myself), but one based on time served and her good work on other
> Wikipedia projects.
>
> I see no harm from letting her edit under these conditions.

I could support this.

-Matt
----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Wed Apr 23 21:55:18 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:55:18 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <16032ea0804231421n73f1ce6pc8f955d424ca1184@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<16032ea0804231421n73f1ce6pc8f955d424ca1184@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700804231455t5d74fafbw3481ad2ff54f84be@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:21 PM, FloNight <sydney.poore at gmail.com> wrote:
> I want to unblock Poetlister with conditions. She must use one account
> and not use open proxies.
>
> This would not be a clear your name block (I will tell her that
> myself), but one based on time served and her good work on other
> Wikipedia projects.

That point should be made publicly; otherwise she will continue to
assert that there was no evidence of her sockpuppeting in the first
place, and that Dom (and others) were lying.
----------
From dmcdevit at cox.net Wed Apr 23 22:14:17 2008
From: dmcdevit at cox.net (Dmcdevit)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:14:17 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <6a8d9d700804231455t5d74fafbw3481ad2ff54f84be@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com> <16032ea0804231421n73f1ce6pc8f955d424ca1184@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700804231455t5d74fafbw3481ad2ff54f84be@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <480FB4B9.7000508@cox.net>

Incidentally, I have gotten two emails from different people recently,
suspecting [[User:Habashia]] is a new Runcorn/Poetlister sock. The
contributions are certainly suggestive, so I checked it, but on a
preliminary glance, it looks like it is in London, but not on BT. Of
course, we know that this person is certainly smart enough to cover up
their tracks. Any opinions, or is it a dead end?

Dominic
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Wed Apr 23 22:27:49 2008
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 23:27:49 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <480FB4B9.7000508@cox.net>
References: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<16032ea0804231421n73f1ce6pc8f955d424ca1184@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700804231455t5d74fafbw3481ad2ff54f84be@mail.gmail.com>
<480FB4B9.7000508@cox.net>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140804231527k44736218k80059a5ebdeb2df3@mail.gmail.com>

2008/4/23 Dmcdevit <dmcdevit at cox.net>:

> Incidentally, I have gotten two emails from different people recently,
> suspecting [[User:Habashia]] is a new Runcorn/Poetlister sock. The
> contributions are certainly suggestive, so I checked it, but on a
> preliminary glance, it looks like it is in London, but not on BT. Of
> course, we know that this person is certainly smart enough to cover up
> their tracks. Any opinions, or is it a dead end?


One IP is on an ISP (with an odd variety of useragents), the other
looks like a work IP or a hosted box. "Reply hazy, try again later."


- d.
----------
From sydney.poore at gmail.com Thu Apr 24 21:04:32 2008
From: sydney.poore at gmail.com (FloNight)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:04:32 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <e648949e0804221724kec8b25eie2f19213e8012071@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e648949e0804221724kec8b25eie2f19213e8012071@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <16032ea0804241404g7c4d7f0ewea5e05ab7284fa70@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

Poetlister's situation is being discussed. I'll give you an update
within the next week.

Sydney

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 8:24 PM, Yechiel Robinson <yrobinso at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Arbitrators:
>
> Please inform me whether you have read and discussed my proposal to
> reinstate Poetlister, which I sent a week ago with Poetlister's prior
> approval. If you are not ready to respond, please suggest when you might
> respond.
>
> I understand that, with several current cases to work on, you cannot give
> priority to reviewing a year-old ban. Still, I need to know whether you
> will consider the proposal, or if you prefer to "stonewall."
>
> Thank you for understanding why this is important to Poetlister and me.
>
> Shalom,
> Yechiel
----------
From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 13:50:31 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:50:31 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <16032ea0804241404g7c4d7f0ewea5e05ab7284fa70@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e648949e0804221724kec8b25eie2f19213e8012071@mail.gmail.com>
<16032ea0804241404g7c4d7f0ewea5e05ab7284fa70@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4811e199.1e35440a.6603.ffffd9dd@mx.google.com>

-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of FloNight
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 10:05 PM
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list
Cc: yrobinso at gmail.com; Poetlister
Subject: Re: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister

Hello,

Poetlister's situation is being discussed. I'll give you an update
within the next week.

Sydney



My views on the Poetlister et al, situation.

Assume if Poetlister comes back we will have taxwoman, and at least a couple
of the others too, over time. That won't be a problem though unless abuse
takes place. The problematic activity on-wiki was two things: misuse of
admin tools (mainly unblocking), and stacking of debates. I tentatively feel
that I would be fine with these users back, on the following conditions:

1. They do not seek RFA.
2. They use regular ISPs only.
3. They arrange between themselves their editing interest in such a way that
if one has !voted in a debate or motion, the others will give the debate a
wide berth to avoid the appearance of stacking.
4. If further suspect activity occurs, in relation to stacking, proxying, or
the like, then the readmitted accounts will be rebanned.

I would also explain the background of the case and decision, and what we
saw, much as we did for the Archtransit case, so that it is understood why
we've acted as we have, and not get taken as a sign that the initial
assessment of the case is being withdrawn. Below is how I'd do it.

I think this might cover most of the risk areas. Thoughts how it might be
gamed and if it's sufficient to protect the wiki?

Thoughts?




=== Overview how I'd explain the desysop and ban ===

Poetlister and several other users were banned in may 2007 as being
extremely likely to be abusive sockpuppets of the administrator Runcorn.
These accounts were discovered to have stacked a number of debates,
including RFAs [LIST].

Since that time, a degree of rumor has sprung up; principally that the
checkuser findings were invalid or (as claimed in a number of other admin
sock cases) that these were not one person socking. So this is to sum up the
case. It has also been alleged in part that there has been silence from
ArbCom; this is incorrect, in fact there has been significant communication
on the matter by email.

; Checkuser findings

Much of what's claimed (often loudly) about the ban, is apparently
inaccurate (knowingly or innocently). For example it's apparently claimed
that a checkuser that Kelly Martin talked about shows no socking. But that
in fact wasn't at all the CU that the blocks were acted against. That sort
of thing.

The actual checkuser results are pretty damning. They read something like
this, from one IP alone:

08:56 . . Poetlister
09:03 . . RachelBrown
09:07 . . RachelBrown
09:08 . . RachelBrown
09:12 . . RachelBrown
09:18 . . RachelBrown
09:29 . . Londoneye
09:33 . . Londoneye
09:44 . . RachelBrown
11:02 . . RachelBrown
12:51 . . Poetlister
12:53 . . Poetlister
12:57 . . Poetlister

There are /several/ days where one sole IP has had edits of that kind.

They /could/ be a half dozen close friends sharing a PC for the day...
except I've asked about that and been told that Runcorn, another of these
accounts, was caught repeatedly opening up softblocks and proxies for the
other (non-admin) accounts that had shared his/her IP, to edit through. The
accounts concerned then performed "pile-on" !voting on a number of debates
and RFAs, including notably, a striking commonality with those debates where
the /uncontested/ Runcorn socks were also piling on.


(That's the limit of what I really know. Checkusers like dmcdevit, jayjg etc
would need to add anything I've missed.)
-----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 14:40:47 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:40:47 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <480FB4B9.7000508@cox.net>
References: <20080423211754.HCNO26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<16032ea0804231421n73f1ce6pc8f955d424ca1184@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700804231455t5d74fafbw3481ad2ff54f84be@mail.gmail.com>
<480FB4B9.7000508@cox.net>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700804250740g15808d3eqa8f7ab8f14298af7@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Dmcdevit <dmcdevit at cox.net> wrote:
> Incidentally, I have gotten two emails from different people recently,
> suspecting [[User:Habashia]] is a new Runcorn/Poetlister sock. The
> contributions are certainly suggestive, so I checked it, but on a
> preliminary glance, it looks like it is in London, but not on BT. Of
> course, we know that this person is certainly smart enough to cover up
> their tracks. Any opinions, or is it a dead end?

The edits are suggestive, but there's no technical evidence linking them.
----------
From charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com Fri Apr 25 14:50:53 2008
From: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com (Charles Matthews)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:50:53 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
Message-ID: <20080425144926.CNKC29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>

I've been hearing from a CheckUser, User:Cato on WikiQuote, with opinions about Poetlister. Anyone know much about this person?

Charles
-----------
From charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com Fri Apr 25 14:59:49 2008
From: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com (Charles Matthews)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:59:49 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
Message-ID: <20080425150526.VMHV26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>

FT2 wrote

> My views on the Poetlister et al, situation.
>
> Assume if Poetlister comes back we will have taxwoman, and at least a couple
> of the others too, over time. That won't be a problem though unless abuse
> takes place.

Sorry, I don't understand. You are saying that if Poetlister is unbanned by us, _we_ would also unban others of those accounts? Or that admins would independently unblock other accounts? If our position is that the accounts were abusive socks in the past, why would we be in favour of more than one unblock, under any circumstances?

Charles
----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 15:35:28 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:35:28 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
In-Reply-To: <20080425144926.CNKC29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
References: <20080425144926.CNKC29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700804250835x38417688m3089483cac3a5e99@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I've been hearing from a CheckUser, User:Cato on WikiQuote, with opinions about Poetlister. Anyone know much about this person?
>
> Charles

Just that I've seen him on the CU mailing list.
-----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 15:37:22 2008
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:37:22 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
In-Reply-To: <20080425144926.CNKC29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
References: <20080425144926.CNKC29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140804250837t6c416c8fg9cbbf6ddcfb625ff@mail.gmail.com>

2008/4/25 Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com>:

> I've been hearing from a CheckUser, User:Cato on WikiQuote, with opinions about Poetlister. Anyone know much about this person?


Wikiquote checkuser who thinks Poetlister's just great, has said so on
checkuser-l.


- d.
-----------
From dmcdevit at cox.net Fri Apr 25 15:39:56 2008
From: dmcdevit at cox.net (Dmcdevit)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 08:39:56 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <4811e199.1e35440a.6603.ffffd9dd@mx.google.com>
References: <e648949e0804221724kec8b25eie2f19213e8012071@mail.gmail.com> <16032ea0804241404g7c4d7f0ewea5e05ab7284fa70@mail.gmail.com>
<4811e199.1e35440a.6603.ffffd9dd@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <4811FB4C.4030205@cox.net>

I certainly don't mind forgiveness based on good behavior, but I don't
like the implication here that they are "just friends" or separate
people to be unbanned separately. How could you then claim that there
hadn't been an exoneration? I think the best way to emphasize that this
is not an attempt to exonerate would be to have ArbCom officially
declare Poetlister the recognized main account and change all the
sockpuppet tags and case page to reflect that. This might end up looking
like ArbCom is trying to shame her though, so I'm not sure.

I don't think that it is a good idea to post incomplete snippets of
CheckUser data. You're inviting people to second-guess you because, on
the basis of the small amount of information you've proposed to state,
it's not convincing. Now, there is a to be had about the evidence, but
unless you actually want to put it all out there and argue the case
before the community, it's best not to put a little bit out there for
the dramamongers. The typical "based on the sharing of IPs in a way that
a consensus of CheckUsers and arbitrators deems conclusive" should do.

Dominic
-----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 15:36:23 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:36:23 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <20080425150526.VMHV26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
References: <20080425150526.VMHV26699.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700804250836h5dfa9807tbb2caee1cb7aa83@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> FT2 wrote
>
>
> > My views on the Poetlister et al, situation.
> >
> > Assume if Poetlister comes back we will have taxwoman, and at least a couple
> > of the others too, over time. That won't be a problem though unless abuse
> > takes place.
>
> Sorry, I don't understand. You are saying that if Poetlister is unbanned by us, _we_ would also unban others of those accounts? Or that admins would
> independently unblock other accounts? If our position is that the accounts were abusive socks in the past, why would we be in favour of more than one unblock,
> under any circumstances?

Indeed. If Poetlister is to be the main account, then why unblock the
socks as well?
----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 15:44:27 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:44:27 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
In-Reply-To: <fbad4e140804250837t6c416c8fg9cbbf6ddcfb625ff@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080425144926.CNKC29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<fbad4e140804250837t6c416c8fg9cbbf6ddcfb625ff@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700804250844xbffaadob6d6faadf69862ee@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 11:37 AM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/4/25 Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com>:
>
>
> > I've been hearing from a CheckUser, User:Cato on WikiQuote, with opinions about Poetlister. Anyone know much about this person?
>
>
> Wikiquote checkuser who thinks Poetlister's just great, has said so on
> checkuser-l.

And she may indeed be a wonderful admin on Wikiquote - something which
is completely irrelevant to en-wiki, and her behavior on en-wiki.
----------
From sydney.poore at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 15:44:35 2008
From: sydney.poore at gmail.com (FloNight)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:44:35 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] I'm waiting for a response on Poetlister
In-Reply-To: <4811FB4C.4030205@cox.net>
References: <e648949e0804221724kec8b25eie2f19213e8012071@mail.gmail.com>
<16032ea0804241404g7c4d7f0ewea5e05ab7284fa70@mail.gmail.com>
<4811e199.1e35440a.6603.ffffd9dd@mx.google.com>
<4811FB4C.4030205@cox.net>
Message-ID: <16032ea0804250844k5666d053t3bc4fdaba310ef5c@mail.gmail.com>

I had no intention of bringing back anyone but Poetlister.

And I do not think any details of the past socking need to be discussed.

The statement needs to be short and to the point.

Sydney
----------
From dmcdevit at cox.net Fri Apr 25 15:45:09 2008
From: dmcdevit at cox.net (Dmcdevit)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 08:45:09 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
In-Reply-To: <fbad4e140804250837t6c416c8fg9cbbf6ddcfb625ff@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080425144926.CNKC29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<fbad4e140804250837t6c416c8fg9cbbf6ddcfb625ff@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4811FC85.8030403@cox.net>

David Gerard wrote:
> 2008/4/25 Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com>:
>
>
>> I've been hearing from a CheckUser, User:Cato on WikiQuote, with opinions about Poetlister. Anyone know much about this person?
>>
>
>
> Wikiquote checkuser who thinks Poetlister's just great, has said so on
> checkuser-l.
>
>
> - d.
>

Which is true; by all accounts she is a great Wikiquotian. I have shared
some details of the en.wp investigation with Herby, Lar, and Jeff (?)
but I am pretty sure that Cato is not someone I have talked to about it,
so I can't confirm if he actually has a privileged information, though.

Dominic
----------
From charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com Fri Apr 25 15:47:37 2008
From: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com (Charles Matthews)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:47:37 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
Message-ID: <20080425154610.DPBD29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>

jayjg wrote

> On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Charles Matthews
> <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > I've been hearing from a CheckUser, User:Cato on WikiQuote, with opinions about Poetlister. Anyone know much about this person?
> >
> > Charles
>
> Just that I've seen him on the CU mailing list.

The opening gambit was that Cato (I haven't actually authenticated that identity) wanted to discuss the evidence against P off the CU list. Now, I'm assuming that as a CheckUser this Cato is a known quantity? Cato was saying "ask a Steward about me".

So anyway it was a fishing expedition, and we talked about various things in the way of non-CU evidence. Cato went away I think completely unsatisfied, saying I'd been convincing that P wasn't Runcorn, and hurrah for WikiQuote. Well, I'm not a CheckUser, so that was somewhat pointless. I'm mentioning it because Cato was sounding a bit like P towards the end - all our evidence was rubbish, that kind of thing. Seems to be targeting Dmcdevit. I don't have a very good feeling about that.

Charles
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 15:46:26 2008
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:46:26 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
In-Reply-To: <6a8d9d700804250844xbffaadob6d6faadf69862ee@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080425144926.CNKC29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<fbad4e140804250837t6c416c8fg9cbbf6ddcfb625ff@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700804250844xbffaadob6d6faadf69862ee@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140804250846s23b6e5fu40f80dd007a90f7b@mail.gmail.com>

2008/4/25 jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com>:

> And she may indeed be a wonderful admin on Wikiquote - something which
> is completely irrelevant to en-wiki, and her behavior on en-wiki.


It shows theoretical redeemability. Hell, the AC gave Lir a second
chance. (Not that I would personally clamour to give Poetlister
another go.)


- d.
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 15:47:21 2008
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:47:21 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
In-Reply-To: <20080425154610.DPBD29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
References: <20080425154610.DPBD29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140804250847r1d29ff35u55874153cf3f1ebf@mail.gmail.com>

2008/4/25 Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com>:

> So anyway it was a fishing expedition, and we talked about various things in the way of non-CU evidence. Cato went away I think completely unsatisfied, saying I'd been convincing that P wasn't Runcorn, and hurrah for WikiQuote. Well, I'm not a CheckUser, so that was somewhat pointless. I'm mentioning it because Cato was sounding a bit like P towards the end - all our evidence was rubbish, that kind of thing. Seems to be targeting Dmcdevit. I don't have a very good feeling about that.


Yeah. I'm wondering if Cato = Poetlister.


- d.
----------
From sydney.poore at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 16:12:48 2008
From: sydney.poore at gmail.com (FloNight)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 12:12:48 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
In-Reply-To: <fbad4e140804250847r1d29ff35u55874153cf3f1ebf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080425154610.DPBD29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<fbad4e140804250847r1d29ff35u55874153cf3f1ebf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <16032ea0804250912u20cb5be6o7e6d0018288ae189@mail.gmail.com>

Cato = Poetlister. oh my!!

Sydney
----------
From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Fri Apr 25 16:31:04 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:31:04 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
In-Reply-To: <20080425144926.CNKC29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
References: <20080425144926.CNKC29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <4812072e.1636440a.63fa.ffffec27@mx.google.com>

Cato is indeed a checkuser on wikiquotes.

I got an inquiry myself about whether (as Poetlister claims) Taxwoman had
sought but got no reply, and stated it wasn't true (giving dates etc). I
replied via wiki-mail (in case this was a spoof email) explaining the rough
basis for the block in outline (stacking, proxy opening, multiple users on
same IPs etc).

I got a brief one-line reply "That's extremely helpful, thanks. Cato."

Unblock of one account sounds viable, but I would still set conditions, as
this is a user who has experience at gaming the system:

1. Poetlister not to seek RFA.
2. Poetlister to use a regular ISP only.
3. Our view that these are socks stands; hence the other sock accounts will
not be readmitted.
4. If further suspect activity occurs, in relation to stacking, proxying, or
the like, then the account will be reblocked.

My reason for suggesting unblocking all, was that if there is a condition on
co-editing, then stacking wouldn't be an issue anyway. They'd be obligated
to edit as legitimate alternate accounts and probably quickly fall into
disuse since they'd no longer serve the covert purpose.


Paul.
----------
From charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com Fri Apr 25 16:43:16 2008
From: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com (Charles Matthews)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:43:16 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] User:Cato
Message-ID: <20080425164150.EPPX29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>

> Cato = Poetlister. oh my!!
>
> Sydney

Quoting Cato:

"How about this for a scenario if Poetlister is guilty? Intelligent and technically capable person on WP tries to stop the POV attempts of a sockpuppeteer to remove lists and categories of Jews, and references to people being Jewish. Previous attempts had failed, due to the support this puppeteer is receiving from influential people. He nearly succeeds, but is thwarted by these same influential people. However, while doing so he has enriched WP with thousands of good edits and dozens of photos, on subjects ranging from the World's highest mountains to hogtie bondage, from British railway stations to Italian musicians, for which he has received no thanks. If he exists, he is a brilliant man who has done far more good to WP than harm, and WP:IAR applies."

Sleeping together?

Charles

Considering Abd's arguments on this very day, some of this is precious:




And in this series we have FT2 signing one of his ArbComm emails "Paul." Did we not suspect FT2 of being a "Paul"?

Oh, yes--- why yes we did:

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...ndpost&p=126671

Okay, perhaps a coincidence.