Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
I am very puzzled. On 3 December, I am evidently being attacked for a a vote that I cast in August on an RfA. The vote was a Weak Oppose, based on the fact that he had apparently defined consensus as 100%. There were and are several ongoing content disputes where one disruptive editor is asked to respect consensus, and says that there is no consensus if he does not agree. It appears that RI then restated his position, and I did not watchlist the RfA, and RI did not tell me that he had restated his position. As of 3 December, Gmaxwell posts what I consider a strong personal attack on my talk page, and then you ask me what was my reasoning. My reasoning is simply that the definition of consensus as 100% permits a troll or disruptive editor to exercise a ''liberum veto''. I had had not subsequent interaction with RI or Gmaxwell between August and now. I will have to research the problem further. Thank you for at least asking me a reasoned question rather than slamming me. ] 15:10, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
I am very puzzled. On 3 December, I am evidently being attacked for a a vote that I cast in August on an RfA. The vote was a Weak Oppose, based on the fact that he had apparently defined consensus as 100%. There were and are several ongoing content disputes where one disruptive editor is asked to respect consensus, and says that there is no consensus if he does not agree. It appears that RI then restated his position, and I did not watchlist the RfA, and RI did not tell me that he had restated his position. As of 3 December, Gmaxwell posts what I consider a strong personal attack on my talk page, and then you ask me what was my reasoning. My reasoning is simply that the definition of consensus as 100% permits a troll or disruptive editor to exercise a ''liberum veto''. I had had not subsequent interaction with RI or Gmaxwell between August and now. I will have to research the problem further. Thank you for at least asking me a reasoned question rather than slamming me. ] 15:10, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
::I can summarize what I think has happened. On 28 August 2005, I cast a Weak Oppose vote on an RfA, based on a statement about consensus. The candidate then restated what he said. I probably should have watchlisted the RfA. That is a lesson learned. The RfA was then closed out as No Consensus. I would agree with another comment that that was a bureaucrat error. The bureaucrat should have left the RfA open to allow the Oppose voters to respond to the clarification. In any case, on 4 September, RI took a break from Misplaced Pages, although several of his supporters encouraged him to resubmit himself for adminship. I don't see anything obvious between 4 September and 3 December. As of 3 December, it appears that Gmaxwell has posted personal attacks on the pages of several (probably all) of the Oppose voters, demanding that they withdraw from non-article pages and possibly from Misplaced Pages. I think that RI may have overreacted. I don't think that any of us meant to be voting against RI, only not voting for his judgment on closing VfD's. Gmaxwell certainly is overreacting in demanding that 14 Wikipedians all leave Misplaced Pages, each based on a single vote. I also see a parallel between Gmaxwell and FuelWagon. FuelWagon is now before the ArbCom because he persists against all advice in continuing to rage about alleged wrongs done to him by SlimVirgin and Ed Poor, and then made the mistake of asking the ArbCom to take action against Ed Poor, and now they will probably take action against FuelWagon instead. Gmaxwell is attacking a "mob" of completely unrelated editors, each for a single vote. ] 15:57, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
::I was not basing my vote on 28 August on a "crisis", so much as I was applying my own judgment of what issues were important at the time. Perhaps I should have followed someone else's judgment of what issues were important. (That is sarcastic.) ] 15:57, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
::I have not changed my views on consensus in general, but I have changed my views on AfD. However, that is not really the point. ] 15:57, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
::I do hope that RI comes back. I do hope that Gmaxwell apologizes, but I am not optimistic. ] 15:57, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
::If I do leave Misplaced Pages, which I may, it will not be because I think that my Weak Oppose vote was an unforgivable mistake, but because it has too many flamers and bullies. ] 15:57, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Ok, so my last attempt at taking a break didn't work, but now I'm REALLY taking a break, honest! (yeah right, who am I fooling?) , and archiving just before. :-) I'm not gone or away or anything so don't dare miss me! I might even still edit a bit. Just I gotta fix RL stuff too eh?
New messages here, in case you still need me. (Hopefully not too much :-) )
Break
Enjoy your break, but do come back. And bring me back something pretty! --fvw* 03:30, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
You sound fed-up, so this is to let you know that you are appreciated. SlimVirgin 10:21, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
Well, at least take a couple days off, LOL - you sound like you could use it rowspan="1" style="background:#F8F9FA;color:black;vertical-align:middle;text-align:center;"|0. Don't leave for too long though... you have to be back in 6 weeks for my RfA!!! (Well, if I'm around in 6 weeks, of course) Ryan Norton10:30, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
You are my hero, and I offer you a token--something I just discovered. It is chocolate--without sugar--straight chocolate. It is incredible! I started from dark roasted cacao nibs--crunched beans. Then I moved to bars of 99% straight cocoa butter--Theobroma--food of the gods. You are a god, straight up. :)) ---Rednblu | Talk03:37, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
Bureaucratship
Hi, Kim. Thank you so much for your support and kind words on my bureaucratship nomination. Unfortunately, it didn't pass, but I intend to run again soon. If you'd like to be informed next time around, please let me know on my talk page. Thanks again! Andre (talk) 05:18, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
Given the conversation, I looked it up and I realised that you are not a b'crat. How not? (Looks like the break isn't going that well? Or is this a break?) Guettarda03:52, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
I never requested the bureaucrat privileges. People typically have to nominate me kicking and screaming. Since bureaucrat is a self-nom, this is one duty I've managed to avoid so far :-P. Oh you mean wikibreak? Ah um... right. Ok, this is last post (again). I promise! Kim Bruning11:11, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
Disaster planning
Hi Kim, I liked the conversation on #wikimedia. I found this article: http://www.colorado.edu/hazards/o/nov04/nov04c.html It is written a year ago about a scenario that now unfolded on NO. Some topdogs do claim now it was not foreseen - I would like to have it documented very well - sum of all knowledge is sum of all knowledge - especially disaster planning. Have you any idea where to put this story? Gebruiker:Dedalus11:09, 5 September 2005 (UTC) (I was wrong about no evacuation order - Ray Nagin called a 'mandatory evacuation' on August 29th)
GNAA FAC
It is going to fail. While I am glad I have kept it from going down to fights like it did last time, there are some things they want me to do that I do not have the ability to, and from what I checked earlier, many of the references have gone away. So, I took it off my watchlist and wait for Raul to remove it. I already closed three of my noms early, so I will let Raul take care of that one. Don't worry, I got some more backlogs to clear anyways. Zscout370(Sound Off)20:48, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
Thoughts
It definately sounds like a good idea to work together on that... I'm not sure how to. Maybe esperenza is a start, although I'd like to see a "Don't bite anybody" rule someday ;). Ryan Norton23:16, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
Dear Kim: Just thought I'd drop you a note to let you know that I've done the new version of the medcab that we discussed on IRC, and I would be most grateful if you would review it and offer any changes/criticism/flames as appropriate :-). I've made it a bit more serious, and I am hopeful that if all seems to be well we can set about integrating it into the dispute resolution pages. Best regards, --NicholasTurnbull04:15, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
Come back Kim
Moving this to talk since Darkfred is being trollish.
Rowrl the BARNSTARBEAR has eaten your WIKIBREAK! oH nOes!!!111oneone Come back Kim!
Dear Kim: Thank you so much for supporting my adminship! I consider the trust that you have placed in me a great honour, both through the trust that you have placed in me as maintainer of the Mediation Cabal and through your support of my adminship, and I do sincerely hope that I meet up to your expectations. Your continued company, advice, and support - especially when I have been going through a somewhat rough time - are irreplaceable, and I am most greatly indebted to you for the help that you have provided to me. I promise to do my very best as an administrator, and to use my newly-bestowed privileges to assist the community as much as I possibly can. I shall see you around on IRC, and on the wiki; I very much look forward to continuing to converse and work with you. Once again, thank you. :) Best regards, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk)(e-mail)(cabal)02:49, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your message. I've decided that I should slow down a bit, especially when servers have a high load. And perhaps I'll get one of those things, what is it called - oh yes, a life :-) Mindmatrix21:38, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your support on my RfA!
Thanks for your support of my adminship!! I was surprised at the turnout and support I got! If you ever have any issues with any of my actions, please notify me on my talk page! Thanks again! Get some rest and come back eventually :) - maybe when you do the servers will actually not be slow, LOL :).Ryan Norton04:03, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Like a total idiot ....
I went outside to look for my passport in my car, because I haven't seen it in a few days, but I forgot to take my keychain with me, locking myself out in the process. So I sat outside for three hours until someone came home to let me in. I wasn't ignoring you :) Páll22:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
Re: Jolly good show
Thank you for your kind comment on my talk page, Kim; and thank you for having nominated me the first time round, even though it failed. I admit even I was shocked at the superb positive outcome of my latter nomination, but perhaps I misjudged how much of an impact I'd made. All the best, Rob Church16:14, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Welcome back
Well, I guess you're still only only at "limited activity," but since that's a step up, and I saw your arbcom candidacy, I thought I'd take the time to say welcome back! I'm sure you and your evil :-) were missed by lots of people. I hope you're up to the job (personally I'd rather be a mediator) but that means you're going to have to stick around. Good luck. Happy to see you around again. Now take a deep breath and dive back in! Dmcdevit·t21:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Jimbo's changing the arbcom election procedure, so I'm going to have to wait up with that candidate statement, it looks like. Hello to you too! :) Kim Bruning21:52, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Really, where'd he say that? Was it the mailing list? I stopped reading it about a week ago because it's become so unmanageable, so of course he'd make an important announcement now. :) Dmcdevit·t22:00, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, welcome back :). It has nothing to do with stress - I just don't have much respect for people like that :). Glad to see you back! Ryan Norton21:03, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Stevertigo
Sorry, I need to be strict here and warn you: it is your duty as an administrator to uphold arbcom descisions at all times. Do not fail to do so. Kim Bruning00:31, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Kim, I don't use IRC/AIM/ICQ, etc. With particular regard to Misplaced Pages, I feel they are external to the process and place an undue amount of material out of sight of people who do not use IRC, etc. Further, I'm not aware of any log of actions on IRC so there's no reference base to refer to for dispute resolutions. Indeed, this is one of the things that I think has been the basis of the RfC against me; there were things going on outside of Misplaced Pages that I did not know about and could not respond to. I acted with the information that was available to me, yet I feel that I have been accused in part on a basis of the communications outside of Misplaced Pages. If there's something you feel you need to discuss with me privately, you can e-mail me. However, in general, I'd prefer to keep any discussion on this transparent though I defer to your judgement since you know of what it is you want to talk. --Durin19:06, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
By the way; Happy Wiki-birthday! (if a couple of days late). I just noticed you passed your four year mark on Misplaced Pages! Bravo! --Durin05:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Recognizing that WP:5P wasn't policy was an easy call; the instant I looked at it, I knew it isn't official policy. It isn't labeled as such, and had never gotten any serious discussion of its status on its talk page. While the 'pillars' it indicates are certainly generally accepted, I don't think citing accepted policy is enough to automatically make something policy itself. It could be a guideline, but it just doesn't seem to be offering any guidelines; it's more of a general statement of Misplaced Pages philosophy... and, again, it has never been discussed or accepted as a guideline. A page that attempts to summarize the philosophy behind existing policy and is neither policy nor guideline itself can only be an essay about that philosophy. I do think that it could be policy at some point (there's nothing wrong with a policy that attempts to outline philosophy--much of WP:NOT follows that pattern), but right now, given that it's neither accepted policy nor listed anywhere as proposed policy, I don't see where it could be categorized beyond "essay." --Aquillion06:06, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
my revised xd proposal was experimental. I did not delete any content by listing the 5 prior xd proposals below it. Furthermore, I solicited comment on the project page and on the talk page. You have did not comment in any of those forums before deleting my consolidated XD proposal. I will happily list my addition under XD6 if warrented by discussion on the WP:XD page. ∴here…♠08:45, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
I think your comments about "WTF" and "Keep this guy away from image editors" were very uncalled for. I know my way around Photoshop a hell of a lot better than most people. Everyone makes mistakes, and I fully admit temporarily lost my mind and oversharpened the image, but I didn't deserve that kind of abuse. Take a look at my image gallery, and specifically, my featured pictures gallery. There you will find images that have been sharpened correctly and have proper tonal adjustments. Well, most of the good ones that I cared to fix properly at any rate.
I didn't get 14 (as soon as the promotion procedures for the two images I have up now are completed) featured pictures because I don't know how to properly edit an image. What you said was extremely insulting, and goes beyond what I would normally consider criticism.PiccoloNamek01:23, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
You can say for some of them, sure.. For example, People aren't too impressed with your changes to Shepherd. Your photographs are good and I'm thankful you've contributed them. However, you need to get over this ego you're pulling, it wouldn't be fitting for a person whos work really was unique and amazing. Other people's featured picture candidates are not the place to practice your photochop skills. --Gmaxwell04:16, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
"Other people's featured picture candidates are not the place to practice your photochop skills." I don't think that's true. I've been on FPC for some months now, and until a few days ago I've never heard a word of complaint about Piccolo's work. You and Kim may think differently, but in my experience people are quite appreciative of the work he does. Raven4x4x09:27, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Heh, that's nice of you to say, but perhaps I don't deserve to be defended. I really did treat these people like crap. I was crude, rude, mean, and made a rather spectacular display of my own ignorance. I behaved in a way totally unbecoming of a Wikipedian. I think my WikiReputation meter just dropped from around 95-98% to 70% or so. And besides, perhaps not all of my edits were of as high a quality as I thought. I just uploaded a new version of the Mexican Beaded Lizard Picture. (Non-downsampled, lol.) Check out the new one and compare it to the original upload: http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:BeadedLizard-AHPExotics.jpg
Ouch! The original had too much contrast, and was fuzzy and poorly sharpened and heavily oversaturated. And the new one still has some problems that I couldn't fix, especially on the brightly lit scales on his back and head. But I did my best. Perhaps I should go and fix some of my other pictures too.PiccoloNamek09:41, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Digital image manipulation and Gmaxwell
But the things is, once I've clicked on the thumbnail, and then clicked on the image again in its image page, it isn't being downsampled by anything anymore. For some reason, you all seem to be hung up on thumbnails though. It's none of my concern anymore, however. I'm done arguing.PiccoloNamek07:39, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
"When you click on the image on the image page itself, you get access to the original (hopefully undownsampled) image. :-) "
Yeah, but the problem is, I have an old, crappy camera, that takes old, crappy looking pictures, full of severe image noise (even at ISO 64), obviously visible demosaicing artifacts, and general overall fuzziness. Downsampling by half seems to remedy these problems somewhat. But from what I've been told, this is all a big illusion, so if Misplaced Pages wants full-size images, Misplaced Pages will get full size images, demosaicing artifacts and all. Sure, they wouldn't be visible in any thumbnail, or even on the image page, but they would in the original. =( PiccoloNamek08:11, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm attempting to write all rules on a single page, which should be easy since we have very few rules in the first place. I'm adding some common misconceptions, such as the idea that all 3RR-violators must be blocked, or that all perceived POV warriors must be deadminned. Your feedback would be appreciated. Radiant_>|<23:08, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
BARNSTAR GET
I, grm_wnr, award this old skool barnstar to Kim Bruning for his valiant effort to reintroduce sanity into the Speedy Deletion process.
Aloha, Kim. I appreciate you getting involved in this matter, as I feel the more Wikipedians that attempt to help Eddie, the better. Perhaps you could help facilitate the CheckUser end of things. You'll find that Eddie is behind the accounts listed in the category. I'm not sure why he's playing these games, but contrary to his vehement protestations, the socks belong to him as many of his edits have already demonstrated. You may also want to check out his website to understand the full scope of this matter. See also: User_talk:NSLE#Eddies_accounts. --Viriditas10:17, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
EddieSegoura's reply: all Viriditas talk abouts is "sockspuppets". He/She has nothing else better to do then try to prove I'm a fake. I don't know what viriditas is trying to accomplish here. I do appeciate Your help in trying to end this, though.
What is "CheckUser" and how do I use it? EddieSegoura 7:35 AM, November 25, 2005 (EST)
My two cents: Eddie's becoming a less-contained problem rapidly. Looking at their edits leaves little doubt that the accounts in the sockpuppet category are either Eddie's, or the results of a masterfully-orchestrated smear campaign agaist this new user. I'm not sure CheckUsering is going to do much; he jumps from IP to IP quite a bit. Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Exicornt is more-or-less the focal point for all this. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:26, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
CSD, etc
I wasn't going to respond, but since you insisted...
Because what you were doing counts, at best, as a violation of WP:POINT. CSD's established, all the CSDs had to pass a huge threshold of voting to pass, and you're disrupting WP to make the point that you think CSDs are a bad idea rather than trying to talk people into proposing a vote on the issue, to be held on at least the same threshold as proposing a new CSD (75% IIRC), rather than trying to ramrod through your changes in the dead of night (literally). - SoM19:20, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
However, your feedback on the CSD is still appreciated. I still believe consensus supports the recently suggested changes, but there is a vocal minority opposition. Please note that Tony's characterization of the earlier vote is in error, and note that there has been little opposition to the proposals so far other than the allegation that it was previously rejected. In other words everyone's arguing process rather than merit. Any thoughts on how to proceed without having to annoy everyone with a wikiwide poll? Radiant_>|<01:44, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi, Kim. I need Your help in cleaning up a mess of "sock" tags on experimental accounts I created. I would like following User:Hompages redirected to User:EddieSegoura:
LetsGoYankees
Mr. Transit
Third Rail
I've been trying to do this Myself, but user NSLE (and other users as well) persistantly keep restorign the tages. It's frustrating.
Perhaps we can work on merging the accounts altogether before this gets out of hand? -- Eddie08:59, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
Just saw this. I knew it was you, even before I checked the history, from the mention of "brownie points". I really am trying to change the way I interact at Misplaced Pages, and I think this will help. Thanks. Uncle Ed21:00, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
RI Crisis
I am very puzzled. On 3 December, I am evidently being attacked for a a vote that I cast in August on an RfA. The vote was a Weak Oppose, based on the fact that he had apparently defined consensus as 100%. There were and are several ongoing content disputes where one disruptive editor is asked to respect consensus, and says that there is no consensus if he does not agree. It appears that RI then restated his position, and I did not watchlist the RfA, and RI did not tell me that he had restated his position. As of 3 December, Gmaxwell posts what I consider a strong personal attack on my talk page, and then you ask me what was my reasoning. My reasoning is simply that the definition of consensus as 100% permits a troll or disruptive editor to exercise a liberum veto. I had had not subsequent interaction with RI or Gmaxwell between August and now. I will have to research the problem further. Thank you for at least asking me a reasoned question rather than slamming me. Robert McClenon15:10, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
I can summarize what I think has happened. On 28 August 2005, I cast a Weak Oppose vote on an RfA, based on a statement about consensus. The candidate then restated what he said. I probably should have watchlisted the RfA. That is a lesson learned. The RfA was then closed out as No Consensus. I would agree with another comment that that was a bureaucrat error. The bureaucrat should have left the RfA open to allow the Oppose voters to respond to the clarification. In any case, on 4 September, RI took a break from Misplaced Pages, although several of his supporters encouraged him to resubmit himself for adminship. I don't see anything obvious between 4 September and 3 December. As of 3 December, it appears that Gmaxwell has posted personal attacks on the pages of several (probably all) of the Oppose voters, demanding that they withdraw from non-article pages and possibly from Misplaced Pages. I think that RI may have overreacted. I don't think that any of us meant to be voting against RI, only not voting for his judgment on closing VfD's. Gmaxwell certainly is overreacting in demanding that 14 Wikipedians all leave Misplaced Pages, each based on a single vote. I also see a parallel between Gmaxwell and FuelWagon. FuelWagon is now before the ArbCom because he persists against all advice in continuing to rage about alleged wrongs done to him by SlimVirgin and Ed Poor, and then made the mistake of asking the ArbCom to take action against Ed Poor, and now they will probably take action against FuelWagon instead. Gmaxwell is attacking a "mob" of completely unrelated editors, each for a single vote. Robert McClenon15:57, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
I was not basing my vote on 28 August on a "crisis", so much as I was applying my own judgment of what issues were important at the time. Perhaps I should have followed someone else's judgment of what issues were important. (That is sarcastic.) Robert McClenon15:57, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
If I do leave Misplaced Pages, which I may, it will not be because I think that my Weak Oppose vote was an unforgivable mistake, but because it has too many flamers and bullies. Robert McClenon15:57, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Clarification of closing RfAs.
Kim, I saw your comments on IRC regarding my closing of RfAs. I'm not closing them. I never have, even badly failing RfAs (I've been a staunch opponent of early removal of RfAs). As mindspillage (I think that's who it was) noted, not all bureaucrats close out RfAs properly. I don't "close" the RfAs. I watch for RfAs that close, and if the RfA has not had any of; the proper header/footer attached, the "vote here" link removed, and the ending time updated, I edit the RfA to close out the RfA properly. I'm not closing anything, I'm just closing it out properly. Please give me the benefit of the doubt in the future before blasting me on IRC, ok? :) --Durin15:17, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
User talk:Kim Bruning: Difference between revisions
Add topic
Enjoy your break! Come back soon, after you charge up your Wikibatteries. --Titoxd 06:13, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
14:22, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your support of my adminship!! I was surprised at the turnout and support I got! If you ever have any issues with any of my actions, please notify me on my talk page! Thanks again! Get some rest and come back eventually :) - maybe when you do the servers will actually not be slow, LOL :).Ryan Norton 04:03, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
