| Revision as of 16:06, 9 April 2010 editDan Murphy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,045 edits →Answering request for diffs on charges made against DC by Ash: ce← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:08, 9 April 2010 edit undoDan Murphy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,045 edits →Answering request for diffs on charges made against DC by Ash: sheesh, more ceNext edit → | ||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
| The comment added by {{user|XinJeisan}} relate to edits I made in '''2006''' and '''2008'''. Considering that Delicious carbuncle's examples were from 2009, could anyone tempted to comment please note that I made over '''8,000''' edits in '''2010'''. In any dispute resolution process consideration should be given to editor's improving the nature of their contributions over time. Any evidence that is '''years''' out of date does not help the issue under discussion and is likely to be dismissed as irrelevant for this reason alone. ] (]) 08:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC) | The comment added by {{user|XinJeisan}} relate to edits I made in '''2006''' and '''2008'''. Considering that Delicious carbuncle's examples were from 2009, could anyone tempted to comment please note that I made over '''8,000''' edits in '''2010'''. In any dispute resolution process consideration should be given to editor's improving the nature of their contributions over time. Any evidence that is '''years''' out of date does not help the issue under discussion and is likely to be dismissed as irrelevant for this reason alone. ] (]) 08:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
| ==Answering request for diffs on charges made against DC by Ash== | ==Answering request for diffs on charges made against DC by Ash== | ||
| Ash requested diffs. Some of the most egregious were made, i believe, on Ash's since deleted User page (at his request) but many people saw the claims none the less. As for some claims that can be backed up with diffs. This talk page header originally named DC, later removed it but it was clear who was being referred to, as making "personal attacks" "unsubstantiated complaints" "continued lobbying" against Ash, and then below that you referred to a vague "particularly nasty personal attack" that involved "bullying your way into censoring." Clear implication was that DC was some kind of villain here, but of course without diffs. Here is an allegation by Ash of DC and others belonging to a conspiracy involved in "a direct or indirect form of canvassing or lobbying against gay-sexuality related articles" (in fact, the articles had to do with porn, not gay sexuality, but whatever) which is essentially an accusation of homophobia. Here you make a patently false that an edit by DC "appears to be a deliberate act intended to cause offence and inflame argument." Here is a long screed by you, in the context of your dispute with DC, in which you write "If I was abused on the street in such a blatantly nasty, personal and homophobic way such an act would be covered in the UK by the ] legislation" and "MedCab et al should advise members of minority groups to vigilantly keep their accounts anonymous for this reason, a fact that was not made clear to me when i registered" and "It should be made clear to all contributors that they should be prepared for direct personal attacks if they contribute to Misplaced Pages and advise as to what steps members should take to keep themselves safe, particularly if they are member of a minority group." The whole tone of this is that |
Ash requested diffs. Some of the most egregious were made, i believe, on Ash's since deleted User page (at his request) but many people saw the claims none the less. As for some claims that can be backed up with diffs. This talk page header originally named DC, later removed it but it was clear who was being referred to, as making "personal attacks" "unsubstantiated complaints" "continued lobbying" against Ash, and then below that you referred to a vague "particularly nasty personal attack" that involved "bullying your way into censoring." Clear implication was that DC was some kind of villain here, but of course without diffs. Here is an allegation by Ash of DC and others belonging to a conspiracy involved in "a direct or indirect form of canvassing or lobbying against gay-sexuality related articles" (in fact, the articles had to do with porn, not gay sexuality, but whatever) which is essentially an accusation of homophobia. Here you make a patently false claim that an edit by DC "appears to be a deliberate act intended to cause offence and inflame argument." Here is a long screed by you, in the context of your dispute with DC, in which you write "If I was abused on the street in such a blatantly nasty, personal and homophobic way such an act would be covered in the UK by the ] legislation" and "MedCab et al should advise members of minority groups to vigilantly keep their accounts anonymous for this reason, a fact that was not made clear to me when i registered" and "It should be made clear to all contributors that they should be prepared for direct personal attacks if they contribute to Misplaced Pages and advise as to what steps members should take to keep themselves safe, particularly if they are member of a minority group." The whole tone of this is that you're under some kind of threat because your gay (it's actually a transparent attempt to play the pity card in trying to get the upper hand in a garden-variety dispute about sourcing.) Here you can be found accusing DC of a "campaign" against "LGBT articles that I have created or added citations to" (again, gay porn, not really encyclopedic stuff about gay rights, human sexuality, etc... but, again, whatever.) Here you write "I am left unsure of at what stage repeated ANIs & RFCs would be considered harassment or a misuse of process. As far as I understand it, Delicious carbuncle is free to use these tactics indefinitely for any contributor to LGBT articles s/he takes up such a campaign against. His/her track record of successfully getting people to leave Misplaced Pages or spend most of their time in defending themselves is impressive."] (]) 16:06, 9 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 16:08, 9 April 2010
This is an RfC on BLP, nothing more.
Per Delicious carbuncle's comments here, it seems plain that there are more issues being addressed here than have been laid out in this RfC. If Dc would like to address more issues than Ash's BLP contributions, they should be processed through the proper dispute resolution channels (i.e.: spelled out clearly in this Rfc, to start). Otherwise, this can be perceived as WikiHounding. 207.237.230.164 (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, you can "perceive" in one hand...Bali ultimate (talk) 14:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- ...while giving the finger with the other? The outcome of this RfC will pertain to the issues addressed in the Statement of the Dispute, and nothing more. Should more changes be desired, they should be addressed directly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.230.164 (talk) 15:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Other having a troll deliberately misrepresenting what I've written, I don't see any cause for concern here. This RFC is about Ash's misuse of citations. The fact that I expect that there will eventually be an ARBCOM discussion relating to the topic area of gay pron performers and editors involved in it -- including me -- is immaterial. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ash stated that you "accused (them) of being a fraud, liar and accusing others of homophobia. Characterizations such as "seeing Fred Phelps around every corner" are inflammatory, misrepresent my statements make me seem ridiculously hysterical."
- You replied: "For the record, you seem to be attributing to me comments I have not made, but all of it is better dealt with at the RFC." None of which is actually addressed in this RfC. Correct? Correct. So how, exactly, were you misrepresented? 207.237.230.164 (talk) 17:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ash's comment was much longer than what you quoted, hence the "all of it" in my reply. I'm tired of your trolling now and you show no signs of going away, so it is time for you to be sent on your way: Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Rusty Trombone. Bye. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 19:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Other having a troll deliberately misrepresenting what I've written, I don't see any cause for concern here. This RFC is about Ash's misuse of citations. The fact that I expect that there will eventually be an ARBCOM discussion relating to the topic area of gay pron performers and editors involved in it -- including me -- is immaterial. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- ...while giving the finger with the other? The outcome of this RfC will pertain to the issues addressed in the Statement of the Dispute, and nothing more. Should more changes be desired, they should be addressed directly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.230.164 (talk) 15:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Note moved from main page
- Note: Tarc's comment above is in no way an expression of endorsement of Bali's summary in any way and should appropriately be moved to the talk page of this project. 207.237.230.164 (talk) 17:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- I have moved the above from the main page to this. This IP anon has already pestered me on my talk page to move my initial comment (I declined, as it is specifically addressing points made in the section), and no sees fit to place comments under my own, which IMO is the sort of thing that actually does belong on this page. Tarc (talk) 18:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Appropriate evidence to support this RFC/U
The comment added by XinJeisan (talk · contribs) relate to edits I made in 2006 and 2008. Considering that Delicious carbuncle's examples were from 2009, could anyone tempted to comment please note that I made over 8,000 edits in 2010. In any dispute resolution process consideration should be given to editor's improving the nature of their contributions over time. Any evidence that is years out of date does not help the issue under discussion and is likely to be dismissed as irrelevant for this reason alone. Ash (talk) 08:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Answering request for diffs on charges made against DC by Ash
Ash requested diffs. Some of the most egregious were made, i believe, on Ash's since deleted User page (at his request) but many people saw the claims none the less. As for some claims that can be backed up with diffs. This talk page header originally named DC, later removed it but it was clear who was being referred to, as making "personal attacks" "unsubstantiated complaints" "continued lobbying" against Ash, and then below that you referred to a vague "particularly nasty personal attack" that involved "bullying your way into censoring." Clear implication was that DC was some kind of villain here, but of course without diffs. Here is an allegation by Ash of DC and others belonging to a conspiracy involved in "a direct or indirect form of canvassing or lobbying against gay-sexuality related articles" (in fact, the articles had to do with porn, not gay sexuality, but whatever) which is essentially an accusation of homophobia. Here you make a patently false claim that an edit by DC "appears to be a deliberate act intended to cause offence and inflame argument." Here is a long screed by you, in the context of your dispute with DC, in which you write "If I was abused on the street in such a blatantly nasty, personal and homophobic way such an act would be covered in the UK by the hate crime legislation" and "MedCab et al should advise members of minority groups to vigilantly keep their accounts anonymous for this reason, a fact that was not made clear to me when i registered" and "It should be made clear to all contributors that they should be prepared for direct personal attacks if they contribute to Misplaced Pages and advise as to what steps members should take to keep themselves safe, particularly if they are member of a minority group." The whole tone of this is that you're under some kind of threat because your gay (it's actually a transparent attempt to play the pity card in trying to get the upper hand in a garden-variety dispute about sourcing.) Here you can be found accusing DC of a "campaign" against "LGBT articles that I have created or added citations to" (again, gay porn, not really encyclopedic stuff about gay rights, human sexuality, etc... but, again, whatever.) Here you write "I am left unsure of at what stage repeated ANIs & RFCs would be considered harassment or a misuse of process. As far as I understand it, Delicious carbuncle is free to use these tactics indefinitely for any contributor to LGBT articles s/he takes up such a campaign against. His/her track record of successfully getting people to leave Misplaced Pages or spend most of their time in defending themselves is impressive."Bali ultimate (talk) 16:06, 9 April 2010 (UTC)