![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
[1] |
Well I wanted to give you a Barnstar of Good Humor for this, which made me laugh out loud. But apparently that barnstar doesn't like links inside of it. Kelly hi! 17:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC) reply
o hai. weburiedoursecrets inthegarden 15:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Why do you think that two thirds of Giano II's blocks have been reversed by another admin? Stifle ( talk) 09:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Hello. I have noticed you and you seem a fair and capable administrator. I was looking to get third party input on an UNDUE matter over at Circumcision. Garycompugeek ( talk) 17:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I'm afraid "fray" would be a good term to describe it. No worries. Good day. Garycompugeek ( talk) 18:21, 1 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Thanks. and you might want to look at my response there. DGG ( talk) 19:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No harm done. DGG ( talk) 00:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC) reply
here. I didn't clarify that it would be a reduction in protection for a short duration (perhaps a week at most). Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Unfortunately, an article cannot be prodded twice. Please take it to Articles for deletion so that the page can be deleted. Kariteh ( talk) 21:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Welcome!
Hello, HighInBC, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
giggy (
:O)
04:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
reply
This would be the case, had I posted it AFTER he was blocked, but seeing as I posted it before he recieved his block, I can't see it. Chafford ( talk) 17:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC) reply
What sort of thing is really "dickish" exactly? Lra drama 07:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed this comment you left at Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons/BLP_Special_Enforcement. After making my own comment, yours just really put things in perspective. Can I quote you on my user page for my own sanity?
"Drama is just another word for human interaction, we require and thrive on it, and we must not waste it!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by JimMillerJr ( talk • contribs) 05:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User_VintageKits_breaking_terms_of_probation.3F — Rlevse • Talk • 14:43, 28 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I've noticed you responded to my comment on the IAR talk page, and I've responded. Thanks for taking the time to respond to my first comment:-) Have a nice day!-- SJP ( talk) 15:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC) reply
I reverted your movement of my comment on this page. My comment was placed where it was, deliberately, to show that it was not a response to what followed it. Edit conflicts or delays often create out-of-time-sequence posts, and my view, and common practice that I've seen, is that indents are used to show threading, so your movement and edit comment puzzled me. [2] To make the matter more clear, I added extra indent and a note regarding the movement. I hope this satisfies your concerns. -- Abd ( talk) 17:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC) reply
That's why I added extra indent, which really flags that there is something below. And then the note, but, if you would rather the note be at the beginning of my post, that would be fine, too, or you could add a note there yourself, if you still think there is a reasonable possibility of confusion. I am solely concerned with making it easy to follow as possible, given my problem with brevity or lack of same. Problem is, for me to write less takes far longer, and I only do it when I have a serious POV to push. Thanks for your understanding.
And, by the way, I'm hoping that you gain a better understanding of what happened to Tango out of this. If his friends were to "get it," and explain it to him, and he actually apologizes and shows that he isn't likely to do it again, I think he'd get back his bit rather easily, if he still wants it. ArbComm isn't about punishing admins for making mistakes. It is about preventing future ones, which is why an inability to recognize a mistake is far more often a cause of desysopping than mistakes themselves. When there is a problem as with Tango, users may tend to line up and support their friend with arguments that their friend was right, which actually makes it harder for the erring admin to see the problem. A friend who doesn't get caught up in the frenzy might say, "You know, we all understand that you were trying to do the right thing, and that was really a nasty response, but there are very good reasons, also, for taking seriously the rule that admins don't block when they are personally involved. How you confused this was very understandable, because the "offense" seemed to be the same one. But, in fact, there were two separate offenses, one where you were arguably uninvolved and one where you were involved. You were involved when you made a judgment that a comment about you was an insult and illegitimate and therefore blockable." I've explained this, as I assume you know, on Tango's Talk as well as in the page mentioned here, and if it isn't clear, we should work together to make it clear. If you don't understand it, please continue to question it until you do -- or I and the community revise the consensus. It's important that you understand it, if it is correct, or that consensus be revised, if it is not. It isn't a minor thing and it isn't just about appearance. Thanks for any attention you give this. -- Abd ( talk) 18:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC) reply
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
[1] |
Well I wanted to give you a Barnstar of Good Humor for this, which made me laugh out loud. But apparently that barnstar doesn't like links inside of it. Kelly hi! 17:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC) reply
o hai. weburiedoursecrets inthegarden 15:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Why do you think that two thirds of Giano II's blocks have been reversed by another admin? Stifle ( talk) 09:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Hello. I have noticed you and you seem a fair and capable administrator. I was looking to get third party input on an UNDUE matter over at Circumcision. Garycompugeek ( talk) 17:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I'm afraid "fray" would be a good term to describe it. No worries. Good day. Garycompugeek ( talk) 18:21, 1 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Thanks. and you might want to look at my response there. DGG ( talk) 19:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC) reply
No harm done. DGG ( talk) 00:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC) reply
here. I didn't clarify that it would be a reduction in protection for a short duration (perhaps a week at most). Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Unfortunately, an article cannot be prodded twice. Please take it to Articles for deletion so that the page can be deleted. Kariteh ( talk) 21:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC) reply
Welcome!
Hello, HighInBC, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
giggy (
:O)
04:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
reply
This would be the case, had I posted it AFTER he was blocked, but seeing as I posted it before he recieved his block, I can't see it. Chafford ( talk) 17:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC) reply
What sort of thing is really "dickish" exactly? Lra drama 07:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed this comment you left at Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons/BLP_Special_Enforcement. After making my own comment, yours just really put things in perspective. Can I quote you on my user page for my own sanity?
"Drama is just another word for human interaction, we require and thrive on it, and we must not waste it!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by JimMillerJr ( talk • contribs) 05:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC) reply
See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User_VintageKits_breaking_terms_of_probation.3F — Rlevse • Talk • 14:43, 28 June 2008 (UTC) reply
I've noticed you responded to my comment on the IAR talk page, and I've responded. Thanks for taking the time to respond to my first comment:-) Have a nice day!-- SJP ( talk) 15:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC) reply
I reverted your movement of my comment on this page. My comment was placed where it was, deliberately, to show that it was not a response to what followed it. Edit conflicts or delays often create out-of-time-sequence posts, and my view, and common practice that I've seen, is that indents are used to show threading, so your movement and edit comment puzzled me. [2] To make the matter more clear, I added extra indent and a note regarding the movement. I hope this satisfies your concerns. -- Abd ( talk) 17:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC) reply
That's why I added extra indent, which really flags that there is something below. And then the note, but, if you would rather the note be at the beginning of my post, that would be fine, too, or you could add a note there yourself, if you still think there is a reasonable possibility of confusion. I am solely concerned with making it easy to follow as possible, given my problem with brevity or lack of same. Problem is, for me to write less takes far longer, and I only do it when I have a serious POV to push. Thanks for your understanding.
And, by the way, I'm hoping that you gain a better understanding of what happened to Tango out of this. If his friends were to "get it," and explain it to him, and he actually apologizes and shows that he isn't likely to do it again, I think he'd get back his bit rather easily, if he still wants it. ArbComm isn't about punishing admins for making mistakes. It is about preventing future ones, which is why an inability to recognize a mistake is far more often a cause of desysopping than mistakes themselves. When there is a problem as with Tango, users may tend to line up and support their friend with arguments that their friend was right, which actually makes it harder for the erring admin to see the problem. A friend who doesn't get caught up in the frenzy might say, "You know, we all understand that you were trying to do the right thing, and that was really a nasty response, but there are very good reasons, also, for taking seriously the rule that admins don't block when they are personally involved. How you confused this was very understandable, because the "offense" seemed to be the same one. But, in fact, there were two separate offenses, one where you were arguably uninvolved and one where you were involved. You were involved when you made a judgment that a comment about you was an insult and illegitimate and therefore blockable." I've explained this, as I assume you know, on Tango's Talk as well as in the page mentioned here, and if it isn't clear, we should work together to make it clear. If you don't understand it, please continue to question it until you do -- or I and the community revise the consensus. It's important that you understand it, if it is correct, or that consensus be revised, if it is not. It isn't a minor thing and it isn't just about appearance. Thanks for any attention you give this. -- Abd ( talk) 18:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC) reply