Hello, I think this is a communety thing. Its to bad that you lost your adminship but why should people from other projects step in? I mean this is something on the en.source not a global thing. huib
2009/3/10, Ray Saintonge <[email protected]>: > The behaviour of three people in driving me out of adminship at > en:wikisource has left me bitterly disappointed with and deeply offended > by the length to which some will go to rid themselves of someone whom > they personally dislike. I cannot but view their efforts as anything > but a series of concerted personal attacks. The details can be found at > http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Administrators/Archives/Eclecticology > > The process began in the context of an annual confirmation at > Wikisource. John Vandenberg began stirring the pot with a series of > five claims which were all easily refuted. He later commented:"there is > no expectation that evidence is provided here, nor is there a > requirement to have attempted to "fix" the admin conduct prior to the > vote of confidence." This is clear hostility to any peaceful resolution. > > Pathoschild did not hesitate to distort and exaggerate individual > incidents to suit his purposes. If I call a certain type of edit > "useless", it can hardly be construed as a comment about the person. > When he went so far as to say that I was belittling others, that was a > bald-faced lie. His comment, "Of course he can reapply at any time, but > I'll likely object then for the same reasons," tells me that he is > willing to hold on to his grudges indefinitely. > > Although, to his credit, Thomas V did not cast a vote because his > en:wikisource activities have recently been sparse, that did not prevent > him from dragging in old settled issues pre-dating the division of > Wikisource into separate domains. He did not hesitate to attack two > individuals who supported my continued adminship. For one he complained > that his support was based entirely on the way I looked in a picture of > me taken at a Portland meetup. There was no doubt more to the IRC > conversation than that, but I am not privy to how those > behind-the-scenes conversations may have influenced opinions. > > The grudges with the latter two individuals have been ongoing for a long > time, and in the past year I have been more than happy to keep my > contact with them to a minimum. I certainly have not had the energy to > wantonly dig up dirt on them when their confirmations came up. > > The underlying issues for the complaints against me would be laughable > in certain other projects. NPOV issues are fairly uncommon in > Wikisource; persistent copyvios are not an issue; no questions of > edit-warring are involved. Much of the problems had to do with cleaning > up backlog, or differing views about how articles should be named, or > banners on an author page to say that we had no works by that author > even though that fact was already obvious because all the links were > red. I have also had strong differences with the more technically > minded people (including all three named above) over technical solutions > and how we use templates. I happen to believe that an overuse of such > techniques will drive away desperately needed help from non-technical > people, and that some of the more rigid structures actually hinder our > ability to become a value-added project. I have no compunctions about > expressing my visions forcefully, or allowing for multiple solutions to > a problem without feeling obliged to choose one as superior. If one is > indeed superior it will eventually prevail without being forced. Being > an admin should not prevent anyone from strongly arguing views that are > different from those that currently prevail, and the fear that those > tools may be taken away should not serve to intimidate admins away from > taking unpopular actions. Proceeding with fairness and integrity is > more important than popularity, and if it means that my actions will > occasionally be reversed I'm not too worried about that > > I have participated in these communities for seven years already, and my > loyalty to their success is beyond question. I was active on the > original Wikisource from the day that it opened, and have always > maintained a vision for that project that goes far beyond the current > trends. > > In the course of the confirmations I did express my willingness to > consider mediation, but that received no response at all. The > Wikisource community is too small to have a regular arbitration or > appeal process, and seeking a review from the same people who drove the > tyranny of the majority is not likely to be successful. They are not in > a position to take a fresh unbiased approach to the matter. I would > appreciate it if someone could give a fresh look at this, and perhaps > provide a degree of mediation. > > Ec > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- Leave nothing but footprints, take nothing but pictures http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:SterkeBak _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
