Difference between revisions of "User:PeterKa"

Revision as of 02:30, July 22, 2014

I like penis.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-How can you get rid of an editor you don't like on  Wikipedia? Team Harassment has it down to a science. Bullies will harass the victim until he reacts. Then they use his reaction as the basis for a complaint to Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents (ANI). Established liberal editors rarely get sanctioned for harassing a conservative, the situation has to be resolved somehow, so the result is often a "topic ban" for the conservative. At this point, Team Harassment smells blood, and more people get involved. They accuse the victim of violating the topic ban. He generally has to stop editing for an extended period, and he may even be banned altogether. If he doesn't fall for any of these gags, the matter can always be referred to a trollocratic clique of senior admins who act as feminist enforcers. This clique has extraordinary powers that are not documented anywhere in the guidelines, at least as far as I am aware. They hand out extended blocks without prior warning, make up their own rules, and skip ANI.
+I like penis.
-Bullying is part of how the Internet works, and Wikipedia's guidelines make it clear that users have no right to due process. After all, it's not their job to give every troll and vandal a fair shake. All the same, with eight years experience and 33,000 edits, I feel I am entitled to something more than a "'Shut up,' he explained" and a form letter from Arbcom. (I'm "Kauffner" on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_Wikipedians_by_number_of_edits this list].) It's not like one day I decided to go on a rule-breaking rampage. I kept doing my thing while old editors who had been my friends moved on, new editors with chips on their shoulders arrived, and Arbcom adjusted various policies.
-In June 2012, Arbcom decided to topic ban a user named GoodDay after he was harassed by pro-diacritic editors. Editors who saw this decision as a vindication of bullying tried to extend it broadly. In ictu oculi became obsessed with my case, spent the next year going through my editing history looking for people who might have grudges against me, and fashioning them into a team. IIO began by inciting MSGJ, a newbie admin, to block me for "your [[diacritics]] crusade," as he put it. The rationale for the block was so thin that Jenks24, another admin who was a friend of mine, immediately unblocked me. But having friends in high places turned out to be more trouble than it was worth. This "wheel warring" episode unleashed a wave of indignation from the brotherhood of the admins. I was brought before ANI several times. Each time, I argued circles around Team Harassment and escaped sanction. After all, I was implementing a guideline for Vietnamese titles which I had written myself, and this guideline conformed to higher-level Wikipedia policies.
-A few months later, Jenks24 stopped editing and Team Harassment set up a trap for me. One member started blanking articles that I'd written. I reverted the blanking and was blocked for "edit warring" by Ponyo, a high ranking admin and oversighter. The edit warring guideline classifies article blanking as a form of "obvious vandalism," so I don't see how what I did could be considered edit warring. Even if I was edit warring, it is most unusual for an admin to block a user without warning. The message explaining the block refers back to the "diacritics crusade" block from a year earlier. So I don't think it was primarily about edit warring, or even diacritics. Perhaps Ponyo was more interested in [[User:PeterKa/Filipacchi | this essay]].
-After I was blocked, an ANI discussion could be held without my participation. There is of course a rule against this sleazy tactic. To bring up the same set of complaints repeatedly is called "forum shopping." In fact, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive252#Ban_proposal:_Kauffner the discussion which resulted in my being banned] consists almost entirely of references to previous discussions. Proper procedure is to appeal an ANI finding to Arbcom. There is not much in the way of specific accusations against me, much less diffs to support them. No one suggested that that I was an experienced editor who made mistakes. No, I was an interloper who never belonged on Wikipedia. This is quite a lot of smugness when you consider that I had about the same level of experience as many of the people in the discussion.
-One editor in the banning discussion suggests that I used multiple accounts to vote multiple times in Requested Move discussions. Although the post does not give the name of the RM in which this nefarious activity allegedly occurred, this is the closest thing I saw to a specific accusation. It is complete nonsense. In fact, the entire subject of multiple voting had never even come up earlier. The post was made by a drive-by editor who admits that he does not understand the situation. Yet it is now treated as a more or less official explanation of why I was banned.
-As an ex-Wikipedian, editors are now free to post personal attacks against me. They even give out my real name, supposedly a big no-no under WP:OUTING. In an Orwellian twist, the past is fair game too. Some oversighter has gone through the discussion archive and removed my most effective arguments.
-==See also==
-* Read my [[User:PeterKa/Filipacchi | notorious parody of the gender categories bruhaha]]
-* [[User:PeterKa/Arbcom | My Arbcom appeal]] has a blow-by-blow account of what happened to me.
-* [[Diacritics]] — This is a zippy overview of the subject, if I do say so myself.
-* [[User:PeterKa/Diacritics_proposal |Diacritics proposal]] — This is a tediously detailed set of arguments which I will one day edit into something more concise and readable.
-==What I have written==
-*[[Nazarene]]‎, [[J. Frank Norris]], [[Peter Ruckman]], [[Textus Receptus]], [[sensus plenior]], [[divine accommodation]], [[Yule]], [[Johannine Comma]], [[Codex Washingtonianus]], [[Star of Bethlehem]], [[Fundamentalism]], [[Andy McIntosh]]
-*[[Diacritic]], [[Nuclear option]], [[Star_Trek_franchise#Political_themes]], [[Tang Tuyet Minh]], [[Roman Warm Period]], [[No Gun Ri]], [[Vietcong]], [[Republic of China]], [[rule of law]], [[YAD06]], [[Girls' Generation]], [[Xia dynasty]], [[Shang dynasty]].

Difference between revisions of "User:PeterKa"

Revision as of 02:30, July 22, 2014

Navigation menu

Search