This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections should not edit here.
User Auto movil has engaged in personal attacks on at least two editors on VfDs and/or their talk pages. In some instances these personal attacks have threatened physical violence. In most instances Auto movil engages in multiple edits/revisions of his abusive comments -- sometimes removing the attacks altogether after some time, other times replacing some abusive comments with other abusive comments.
These attacks have been in violation of
Users subject to uncivil comments or personal attacks from Auto movil:
Note: I (Jewbacca) do not believe that I have had any interaction at Wikipedia with Auto movil before the first comment below.
All comments are in sequential order (oldest to newest)
After these comments, I notified Auto movil on my talk page that I would file an arbitration request if he persisted in his attacks.
He replied:
He also added:
He then added to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Admin enforcement requested this request:
He also added to Wikipedia:Requests for mediation this request apparently to stave off any request for comment/mediation/arbitration I may file:
The comments directed toward Viriditas seem to have begun after Viriditas left the following comment on Auto movil's talk page:
(provide diffs and links)
(sign with ~~~~)
Much of what I'd like to say has already been included in this complaint by User Jewbacca. I'll add this at the moment: If Jewbacca were to stop making complaints, and having other users make complaints, to me privately and to the Wikipedia community at large, there would be no issue. I've initiated nothing. This user seeks out trouble and makes it his mission to complain and be 'offended' at minor criticism, even when the criticism is of a sort that the Wikipedia community (including myself) takes in stride. This is a user who conducts campaigns against ideas, views, and people. His history is easily-reviewed, and I suggest people review it.
I have no interest in communicating with this user again. I notice that the most relevant 'complaints' are talk page entries that were changed by me within minutes, during composition, but presented here as though they were public text. These are quite juicy. I wish I had something like this to present. I made a mistake in getting angry, when spurious threats of violations and sanctions were sent to me.
It is possible to use juridical means to construct a 'case' against a user, using false outrage. In my experience, such cases gain legitimacy by their very existence, even when they are nothing more than tools of harassment and intimidation. That is what this 'case' is -- a means of silencing mild criticism by escalating, and threatening outrageous sanctions. I have no interest in communicating with these users. I would like them to go away.
However, since this particular teapot-tempest has already been launched to bizarre proportions, I am quite happy to pursue this and other arbitrations, regarding any and all current or future disputes initiated by user: Jewbacca, to the exclusion of any other work I would do on Wikipedia.
I would also suggest to user: Jewbacca that another recourse is civil court, where he can file charges of Wiki-criticism, and perhaps win millions in damages, for extreme pain and suffering -- before the judgement is summarily overturned in Superior Court, when the judge discovers that he and others have been secretly howling at the defendant, whooping up a 'case' through sneaky threats and intimidation.
The guidelines:
General hints for dispute resolution
None of these were followed (see below). I would like User:Jewbacca to go away and perhaps help in building an encyclopedia.
From User:Jewbacca's talk page:
Hey man, This 'dispute' would be easy to resolve if you and your boys would stop contacting me. See my response on the relevant page. It baffles me what you think you're battling against, but I think this is, at best, a Pyrrhic one. Why would you expose yourself in public with charges such as this?
Also please see the relevant guidelines for conflict resolution. Sending threats but refusing to communicate in an adult fashion is not what's specified. Auto movil 20:15, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I have not contacted you outside of Wikipedia pages. I have not asked anyone to contact you outside of Wikipedia either. If you have evidence to the contrary please post it in the RfC. Thank you. --Jewbacca 20:17, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
No, I'll post on your talk page first. Please review the guidelines for arbitration. Auto movil 20:20, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
If you have evidence of me or others sent by me contacting you outside of Wikipedia pages, please post it here as well as in the RfC for all to see. --Jewbacca 20:22, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
Jewbacca, the RfC is liable to go badly for you. I will either discuss our supposed 'grievance' on your or my talk page, or I will put my lawyer-hat on and a big mess will happen in public. It's not my mess; it's yours. Auto movil 20:27, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
If you're giving me the option, as I read it, I would like to see this discussed fully at the RfC. Thank you. --Jewbacca 20:28, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
Please review the guidelines on arbitration. You have been asked nicely to resolve this conflict privately, and you have repeatedly refused. This is against Wikipedia policy, and I will ask one more time that this conflict be resolved privately. Auto movil 20:55, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Auto movil 18:59, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I endorse #3 in this section, and dispute the previous entries. If you would like to delete this entry, or institute a 'revert war,' please signal your deletions to this page. I will not add or modify any comment here. My proposal is clear -- no contact between you, your ostensible allies, and myself. Please review policy. Auto movil 00:02, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I will endorse this section in its entirety and apologize for any offense taken by any parties, and I will never initiate contact with any user named in this arbitration again. With this, I would prefer to assume that this action is 'over.'
I would caution user:Jewbacca that a long term of carefully skirting the guidelines (see records) has left him exposed. I would counsel good behavior, and not to count any 'victories.' I expect nothing in my inbox, and no incitements on my talk page.
I'm also going to say this very strongly: If I get a hint of a harassing email in my private inbox, user:Jewbacca is going to have to explain a lot in public, which perhaps nobody has had the time to file for arbitration for, in the past. User:Jewbacca is well-known to the admins, for being in constant controversy (please see public records).
I endorse this section in its entirety, apologize for any offense taken by any parties, and shall never again initiate contact with any user named in this arbitration. If any further demand is requested, I conditionally agree to that demand as well. This dispute is moot and over. Auto movil 00:11, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Auto movil has made repeated claims above about threats, harrassment and intimidation. I would ask Auto movil to please include direct evidence of these charges in his response section so they can be evaluated. Jewbacca 22:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
I am happy to arbitrate with you, user:Jewbacca.
from xxxyyy1238@hotmail.com: You are an asshole and you'll be in big trouble if you try to pull any fancy shit especially against iSrael. Yuop have been warned
Shall I post all 30 of them? Or would you like to settle this calmly in private (as I hope), instead of whooping up a public spectacle?
Auto movil 22:15, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
You're really determined to take this to the end, aren't you? I don't understand why a sane person would pursue a campaign like this, knowing it will end in the opposite of what he wants. My email address is apparently compromised already, and if you don't know or have access to it, it's [address removed -autom].
We'll certainly have the conflict you want, but I'm stating publicly again that in accordance with Wikipedia policy, disputes should be settled privately. I am amenable to settling this dispute privately, and if you choose to go against Wikipedia policy and refuse, that is a decision that you make in public. Auto movil 23:26, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Jewbacca, you're going to get in a whole lot of trouble. What you're doing now is 'lying,' and everybody has access to the relevant files. I notice that you didn't take up my offer of settling this 'dispute,' but only furthered it. I offer that we settle our differences privately. I think you don't want things to be settled, and instead want to win a 'battle,' involving any and all Wikipedia people necessary. I am quite amenable to settling our differences privately. Auto movil 23:46, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I notice you make many allegations too, User:Jewbacca. I will say again that I am quite amenable to settling this dispute privately, according to Wikipedia policy. If user:Jewbacca chooses to violate policy by perpetuating the 'dispute,' that is his decision. Auto movil 00:03, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
He's not trying to settle this, is he? Read my posts (above). If you want more, perhaps a battle, you know where to find me. Auto movil 00:11, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.
Auto movil claims that he "...would like User:Jewbacca to go away...", implying that Jewbacca is the cause of the conflict. From all of the evidence presented it certainly appears that Auto movil is the aggressor. Looking at their user contributions, Auto movil has made numerous derogatory comments on both Jewbecca's and Veriditas's talk pages (see Evidence of disputed behavior above). If Auto movil had truly been trying to settle a dispute in a reasonable manner there's absolutely no way he would have made this statement to Veriditas: "Now I am calling you, yourself, a shit-stained, ass-snorkeling fuck puddle." Completely unacceptable behavior. Carrp 20:32, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
Carrp is one of at least three users taking part in this behavior. This statement is not objective, relies on text hunted-up from erased edits (public for mere moments before being changed, but presented with mock-outrage, as 'evidence' of terrible crimes), and User: Carrp is also involved in the actions in question, and is not a neutral party.
Carrp: That is on my talk page. I will erase it right now if it will help end this dispute, but this is the context: While I don't know what this dispute is 'about,' I have received weird emails to my personal account, presumably from someone hunting up 'auto movil' on Google. Perhaps this was not by user:Veriditas. If not, I apologize.
One party to this 'dispute,' not myself, doesn't want it to stop. He finds more locii of conflict and perpetuates it, apparently seeing the arbitration process as 'punishment' rather than a means of resolution. It is not. And the simple solution is simply to stop the conflict.
I will endorse and follow any suggestion that includes no contact between user:Jewbacca and myself, also including others, such as user:Veriditas, who seem allied with him. This is an entirely fair position, in accordance with both the letter and spirit of Wikipedia policy. I would be curious what the counterproposal might be. Perhaps one is to be attacked or hounded? Wikipedia policy is very clear, and I have cited it above. I shall cite it again.
I'll also, again, cite user:Jewbacca's record, which seems to show quite a history of conflict, interpersonal weirdness, and continually skirting the edge of acceptable behavior.
I admit my crime: I yelled at him.
Re: Jayjg's comment (and I'm editing here to include MPerel's comment), User:Jewbacca and others are instigators who cause trouble and act innocent. I have no wish ever to have contact with User:Jewbacca again. Auto movil 21:17, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to this page's discussion page.
This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections should not edit here.
User Auto movil has engaged in personal attacks on at least two editors on VfDs and/or their talk pages. In some instances these personal attacks have threatened physical violence. In most instances Auto movil engages in multiple edits/revisions of his abusive comments -- sometimes removing the attacks altogether after some time, other times replacing some abusive comments with other abusive comments.
These attacks have been in violation of
Users subject to uncivil comments or personal attacks from Auto movil:
Note: I (Jewbacca) do not believe that I have had any interaction at Wikipedia with Auto movil before the first comment below.
All comments are in sequential order (oldest to newest)
After these comments, I notified Auto movil on my talk page that I would file an arbitration request if he persisted in his attacks.
He replied:
He also added:
He then added to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Admin enforcement requested this request:
He also added to Wikipedia:Requests for mediation this request apparently to stave off any request for comment/mediation/arbitration I may file:
The comments directed toward Viriditas seem to have begun after Viriditas left the following comment on Auto movil's talk page:
(provide diffs and links)
(sign with ~~~~)
Much of what I'd like to say has already been included in this complaint by User Jewbacca. I'll add this at the moment: If Jewbacca were to stop making complaints, and having other users make complaints, to me privately and to the Wikipedia community at large, there would be no issue. I've initiated nothing. This user seeks out trouble and makes it his mission to complain and be 'offended' at minor criticism, even when the criticism is of a sort that the Wikipedia community (including myself) takes in stride. This is a user who conducts campaigns against ideas, views, and people. His history is easily-reviewed, and I suggest people review it.
I have no interest in communicating with this user again. I notice that the most relevant 'complaints' are talk page entries that were changed by me within minutes, during composition, but presented here as though they were public text. These are quite juicy. I wish I had something like this to present. I made a mistake in getting angry, when spurious threats of violations and sanctions were sent to me.
It is possible to use juridical means to construct a 'case' against a user, using false outrage. In my experience, such cases gain legitimacy by their very existence, even when they are nothing more than tools of harassment and intimidation. That is what this 'case' is -- a means of silencing mild criticism by escalating, and threatening outrageous sanctions. I have no interest in communicating with these users. I would like them to go away.
However, since this particular teapot-tempest has already been launched to bizarre proportions, I am quite happy to pursue this and other arbitrations, regarding any and all current or future disputes initiated by user: Jewbacca, to the exclusion of any other work I would do on Wikipedia.
I would also suggest to user: Jewbacca that another recourse is civil court, where he can file charges of Wiki-criticism, and perhaps win millions in damages, for extreme pain and suffering -- before the judgement is summarily overturned in Superior Court, when the judge discovers that he and others have been secretly howling at the defendant, whooping up a 'case' through sneaky threats and intimidation.
The guidelines:
General hints for dispute resolution
None of these were followed (see below). I would like User:Jewbacca to go away and perhaps help in building an encyclopedia.
From User:Jewbacca's talk page:
Hey man, This 'dispute' would be easy to resolve if you and your boys would stop contacting me. See my response on the relevant page. It baffles me what you think you're battling against, but I think this is, at best, a Pyrrhic one. Why would you expose yourself in public with charges such as this?
Also please see the relevant guidelines for conflict resolution. Sending threats but refusing to communicate in an adult fashion is not what's specified. Auto movil 20:15, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I have not contacted you outside of Wikipedia pages. I have not asked anyone to contact you outside of Wikipedia either. If you have evidence to the contrary please post it in the RfC. Thank you. --Jewbacca 20:17, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
No, I'll post on your talk page first. Please review the guidelines for arbitration. Auto movil 20:20, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
If you have evidence of me or others sent by me contacting you outside of Wikipedia pages, please post it here as well as in the RfC for all to see. --Jewbacca 20:22, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
Jewbacca, the RfC is liable to go badly for you. I will either discuss our supposed 'grievance' on your or my talk page, or I will put my lawyer-hat on and a big mess will happen in public. It's not my mess; it's yours. Auto movil 20:27, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
If you're giving me the option, as I read it, I would like to see this discussed fully at the RfC. Thank you. --Jewbacca 20:28, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
Please review the guidelines on arbitration. You have been asked nicely to resolve this conflict privately, and you have repeatedly refused. This is against Wikipedia policy, and I will ask one more time that this conflict be resolved privately. Auto movil 20:55, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Auto movil 18:59, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I endorse #3 in this section, and dispute the previous entries. If you would like to delete this entry, or institute a 'revert war,' please signal your deletions to this page. I will not add or modify any comment here. My proposal is clear -- no contact between you, your ostensible allies, and myself. Please review policy. Auto movil 00:02, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I will endorse this section in its entirety and apologize for any offense taken by any parties, and I will never initiate contact with any user named in this arbitration again. With this, I would prefer to assume that this action is 'over.'
I would caution user:Jewbacca that a long term of carefully skirting the guidelines (see records) has left him exposed. I would counsel good behavior, and not to count any 'victories.' I expect nothing in my inbox, and no incitements on my talk page.
I'm also going to say this very strongly: If I get a hint of a harassing email in my private inbox, user:Jewbacca is going to have to explain a lot in public, which perhaps nobody has had the time to file for arbitration for, in the past. User:Jewbacca is well-known to the admins, for being in constant controversy (please see public records).
I endorse this section in its entirety, apologize for any offense taken by any parties, and shall never again initiate contact with any user named in this arbitration. If any further demand is requested, I conditionally agree to that demand as well. This dispute is moot and over. Auto movil 00:11, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Auto movil has made repeated claims above about threats, harrassment and intimidation. I would ask Auto movil to please include direct evidence of these charges in his response section so they can be evaluated. Jewbacca 22:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
I am happy to arbitrate with you, user:Jewbacca.
from xxxyyy1238@hotmail.com: You are an asshole and you'll be in big trouble if you try to pull any fancy shit especially against iSrael. Yuop have been warned
Shall I post all 30 of them? Or would you like to settle this calmly in private (as I hope), instead of whooping up a public spectacle?
Auto movil 22:15, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
You're really determined to take this to the end, aren't you? I don't understand why a sane person would pursue a campaign like this, knowing it will end in the opposite of what he wants. My email address is apparently compromised already, and if you don't know or have access to it, it's [address removed -autom].
We'll certainly have the conflict you want, but I'm stating publicly again that in accordance with Wikipedia policy, disputes should be settled privately. I am amenable to settling this dispute privately, and if you choose to go against Wikipedia policy and refuse, that is a decision that you make in public. Auto movil 23:26, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Jewbacca, you're going to get in a whole lot of trouble. What you're doing now is 'lying,' and everybody has access to the relevant files. I notice that you didn't take up my offer of settling this 'dispute,' but only furthered it. I offer that we settle our differences privately. I think you don't want things to be settled, and instead want to win a 'battle,' involving any and all Wikipedia people necessary. I am quite amenable to settling our differences privately. Auto movil 23:46, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I notice you make many allegations too, User:Jewbacca. I will say again that I am quite amenable to settling this dispute privately, according to Wikipedia policy. If user:Jewbacca chooses to violate policy by perpetuating the 'dispute,' that is his decision. Auto movil 00:03, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
He's not trying to settle this, is he? Read my posts (above). If you want more, perhaps a battle, you know where to find me. Auto movil 00:11, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.
Auto movil claims that he "...would like User:Jewbacca to go away...", implying that Jewbacca is the cause of the conflict. From all of the evidence presented it certainly appears that Auto movil is the aggressor. Looking at their user contributions, Auto movil has made numerous derogatory comments on both Jewbecca's and Veriditas's talk pages (see Evidence of disputed behavior above). If Auto movil had truly been trying to settle a dispute in a reasonable manner there's absolutely no way he would have made this statement to Veriditas: "Now I am calling you, yourself, a shit-stained, ass-snorkeling fuck puddle." Completely unacceptable behavior. Carrp 20:32, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):
Carrp is one of at least three users taking part in this behavior. This statement is not objective, relies on text hunted-up from erased edits (public for mere moments before being changed, but presented with mock-outrage, as 'evidence' of terrible crimes), and User: Carrp is also involved in the actions in question, and is not a neutral party.
Carrp: That is on my talk page. I will erase it right now if it will help end this dispute, but this is the context: While I don't know what this dispute is 'about,' I have received weird emails to my personal account, presumably from someone hunting up 'auto movil' on Google. Perhaps this was not by user:Veriditas. If not, I apologize.
One party to this 'dispute,' not myself, doesn't want it to stop. He finds more locii of conflict and perpetuates it, apparently seeing the arbitration process as 'punishment' rather than a means of resolution. It is not. And the simple solution is simply to stop the conflict.
I will endorse and follow any suggestion that includes no contact between user:Jewbacca and myself, also including others, such as user:Veriditas, who seem allied with him. This is an entirely fair position, in accordance with both the letter and spirit of Wikipedia policy. I would be curious what the counterproposal might be. Perhaps one is to be attacked or hounded? Wikipedia policy is very clear, and I have cited it above. I shall cite it again.
I'll also, again, cite user:Jewbacca's record, which seems to show quite a history of conflict, interpersonal weirdness, and continually skirting the edge of acceptable behavior.
I admit my crime: I yelled at him.
Re: Jayjg's comment (and I'm editing here to include MPerel's comment), User:Jewbacca and others are instigators who cause trouble and act innocent. I have no wish ever to have contact with User:Jewbacca again. Auto movil 21:17, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to this page's discussion page.