User talk:Zordrac/Poetlister
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Acknowledgements
I have included everyone's names who contributed in some way, which includes people who contributed by being very nasty. Without their negative and obstructive editing practises, I likely would never have been able to find out what was really going on. I would like to thank them for helping to produce an accurate and neutral article. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 15:09, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Size etc
I am being a bit reactionary here, but I trimmed down the size a lot and made it more obvious what I was saying. I got rid of a lot of opinions, to try to make it more factual. Now I am just plain confused what to do. Do I fix it to try to make it more believable for critics? Or do I ignore critics and just focus on what looks best? I am a bit confused. Thankfully history is there in case I need to change it back to earlier versions. I got rid of the early e-mails by the way, and just focussed on facts. Link-o-phobia apparently, but its evidence, and its hard evidence. Its indisputable evidence really, and its the kind that Wikipedians tend to like. Links. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 19:44, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Related cases
I've been directed to 2 similar cases, one involving User:Marsden and the other involving User:FuelWagon and User:Ed Poor, both of which had similar results to this one and both of which involved the same people (or at least similar people). I've also noted that both of the "back patting" post-Christmas blocking admins were involved in those 2 similar cases, and indeed one of them was a noted friend of User:Antidote. However, I think that it is a bad idea to list that kind of stuff in this article, because I think it could be seen as clutching at straws or rubbishing people's names. All I want is to revert an unjust decision and sort things out. Whilst it is clear that this kind of thing has happened before, and that the people concerned are repeat offenders, it all starts to look like a big conspiracy theory if we include all of that. I want to just include the obvious stuff. There is of course an awful lot more, but that'll do me really. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 12:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Additional bans to "silence" users
- User:Bonaparte - who offered to take it up with Jimbo, was banned just days afterwards, although this was allegedly on an unrelated matter.
- User:Mistress Selina Kyle - the 2nd most involved person in protesting this, was banned indefinitely in early January, supposedly due to "disruption" that had started here. The bans were undone, then redone, then undone, etc.
- User:Zordrac, the author of this page, was indefinitely banned, allegedly due to sock puppetry, although User:Ambi had previously stated that she would do it due to "disruption" related to creating this page.
[edit] Non bans and inaction
- User:Antaeus Feldspar continues to harass the author of this page and spreading lies everywhere about him, specifically on his talk page and every page he has ever visited. He is yet to be banned, or even asked to stop.
- User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters was allegedly "spoken to" by User:El C in a limited capacity, but did not receive a block.
- User:Kelly Martin did have a request for comment, but over an unrelated issue, and still have sysop powers.
- User:Antidote has not been banned for sock puppetry and coordination, and his Request for Comment remains inacted due to this ban.
This situation uncovered a much greater issue plaguing Wikipedia.
