Misplaced Pages

User talk:Saedon

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sandstein (talk | contribs) at 22:14, 4 July 2013 (→July 2013: r). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:14, 4 July 2013 by Sandstein (talk | contribs) (→July 2013: r)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

User talk:Saedon/Archive1

Main Page
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.
Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update
No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)
This editor is a Veteran Editor and is entitled to display this Iron Editor Star.


The Signpost: 18 March 2013

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Vital articles/Expanded

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Vital articles/Expanded. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:17, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 March 2013

Please comment on Talk:Syria

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Syria. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Today's articles for improvement

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Today's articles for improvement. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 18:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 April 2013

The Signpost: 08 April 2013

Please comment on Talk:Charlize Theron

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Charlize Theron. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:16, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Template talk:Sonic games

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Template talk:Sonic games. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 April 2013

Re: What?

The only reasonable conclusion? Again, what? :) --Joy (talk) 07:20, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Child protection

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Child protection. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

"more obvious" policy disputes?

how can the POVPUSH be any more obvious?

I have already gone through an RfC/U, multiple DRNs and RSNs, and an extensive AN/I discussion about consistent NOTFORUM.

I will not drop it. If you need to block me for this reason, I am fine with that. -- # _ 07:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

It looks like your Arbcom case is picking up steam, so good luck with that. Sorry for the late response, busy weekend. Btw, I'm not an admin and cannot block you, I was merely pointing out the fact that making yourself a nuisance on ANI will lead to a block. Sædon 20:41, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dragon Ball

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Dragon Ball. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 16:21, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

Arbitration case "Race and politics" opened

An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 21, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm 01:56, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 17:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

Please comment on Talk:Treaty

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Treaty. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:21, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

Please comment on Talk:Cheers (season 1)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Cheers (season 1). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:19, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

Please comment on Talk:Indeterminacy of translation

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Indeterminacy of translation. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:22, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2013-06-03

Please comment on Talk:List of Virtual Console games for Nintendo 3DS (North America)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:List of Virtual Console games for Nintendo 3DS (North America). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 21:23, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 June 2013

Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2013-06-10

Please comment on Talk:Ristar

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Ristar. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:19, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 June 2013

Please comment on Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 23:20, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/The bot flag

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/The bot flag. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 00:17, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 June 2013

Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2013-06-24

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Article Incubator

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:Article Incubator. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 01:18, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.   Sandstein  17:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Template:Z8 

The Arbitration Committee has permitted administrators to impose discretionary sanctions (information on which is at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions) on any editor who is active on pages broadly related to Scientology. Discretionary sanctions can be used against an editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, satisfy any standard of behavior, or follow any normal editorial process. If you continue to misconduct yourself on pages relating to this topic, you may be placed under sanctions, which can include blocks, a revert limitation, or an article ban. The Committee's full decision can be read at the "Final decision" section of the decision page.

Please familiarise yourself with the information page at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions, with the appropriate sections of Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee/Procedures, and with the case decision page before making any further edits to the pages in question. This notice is given by an uninvolved administrator and will be logged on the case decision, pursuant to the conditions of the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions system.

Please refer to this AE thread for an explanation of this block and warning.  Sandstein  17:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

Saedon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Absolutely ridiculous. I have been an editor in good standing since 2007 and have a completely clean block log with not a single warning in my history. For you to block for a one off comment on AN/I without simply discussing the problem with me first is ludicrous and outside normal WP practices. I should not be publicly embarrassed like this even if I did cross the line, as being a regular editor should afford me a bit of respect - as it usually does for most regulars. Beyond that, being that I was not engaged in further commenting your block does not prevent damage to the encyclopedia and by the language you used at AE it is clearly a punitive block. If this block is not lifted consider me gone from the project. As an aside, I have never as far as I know edited any pages related to scientology and this is the only time I've ever commented on it. Sædon 20:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Absolutely ridiculous. I have been an editor in good standing since 2007 and have a completely clean block log with not a single warning in my history. For you to block for a one off comment on AN/I without simply discussing the problem with me first is ludicrous and outside normal WP practices. I should not be publicly embarrassed like this even if I did cross the line, as being a regular editor should afford me a bit of respect - as it usually does for most regulars. Beyond that, being that I was not engaged in further commenting your block does not prevent damage to the encyclopedia and by the language you used at AE it is clearly a punitive block. If this block is not lifted consider me gone from the project. As an aside, I have never as far as I know edited any pages related to scientology and this is the only time I've ever commented on it. ]<sup>]</sup></font> 20:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Absolutely ridiculous. I have been an editor in good standing since 2007 and have a completely clean block log with not a single warning in my history. For you to block for a one off comment on AN/I without simply discussing the problem with me first is ludicrous and outside normal WP practices. I should not be publicly embarrassed like this even if I did cross the line, as being a regular editor should afford me a bit of respect - as it usually does for most regulars. Beyond that, being that I was not engaged in further commenting your block does not prevent damage to the encyclopedia and by the language you used at AE it is clearly a punitive block. If this block is not lifted consider me gone from the project. As an aside, I have never as far as I know edited any pages related to scientology and this is the only time I've ever commented on it. ]<sup>]</sup></font> 20:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Absolutely ridiculous. I have been an editor in good standing since 2007 and have a completely clean block log with not a single warning in my history. For you to block for a one off comment on AN/I without simply discussing the problem with me first is ludicrous and outside normal WP practices. I should not be publicly embarrassed like this even if I did cross the line, as being a regular editor should afford me a bit of respect - as it usually does for most regulars. Beyond that, being that I was not engaged in further commenting your block does not prevent damage to the encyclopedia and by the language you used at AE it is clearly a punitive block. If this block is not lifted consider me gone from the project. As an aside, I have never as far as I know edited any pages related to scientology and this is the only time I've ever commented on it. ]<sup>]</sup></font> 20:12, 4 July 2013 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
  • I would chip in here and say that, actually, I agree with Saedon. His comment certainly crossed the line, but the crucial phrase in discretionary sanctions is "repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere". I can't see any evidence this is more than a one-off, and I wouldn't consider Saedon's comment (in isolation) problematic enough to justify a block without any prior warning or discussion. Ironholds (talk) 20:26, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
    Commented on Sandstein's talkpage. Ironholds (talk) 20:28, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your understanding Ironholds, I wouldn't mind at all if you'd exercise the bit and unblock me as you are within your rights to do since Sandstein blocked under normal administrative action and not as an arbitration enforcement. Otherwise I'd like to take this to AN/I for review by the community and will of course abide by what ever consensus develops there. Sædon 20:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm going to offer Sandstein an opportunity to discuss the issue; if he doesn't take it up, or if he does but I don't find his explanation satisfactory, I'll either (a) fling it at AN/I or (b) unblock you and fling myself at the mercy of AN/I hahaha. AN/I. Mercy. Ironholds (talk) 20:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
I suppose this is acceptable, thank you for your assistance. Sædon 20:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
No problem. I am duty-bound to scold you for the regular editor comment, however; Sandstein's actions were (on their face) unconscionable regardless of the frequency or length of your editing tenure. We're all held to the same standards, newbie, regular and admin alike (or should be, at any rate). Let's see what he says. Ironholds (talk) 20:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Actually, the block is a bit worrisome on a couple of levels. The comment was blunt, but I'm curious as to the part that caused the block. It was a one off comment. Was it the "silly" part? The "cult" part? More than a few people have used Scientology and cult in the same sentence, although the context was admitted rude here. Regardless, I would support an unblock. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments as well, Dennis. I agree it was blunt and rude; I was having a bad night and this is very far out of my regular character. With that said, the idea that scientology is a cult, as you point out, is not new and has been published in multiple reliable sources, though I'm not sure if that's the part that was problematic. @Ironholds: I understand this point entirely in theory, but in practice it's generally a much different story. Nonetheless, scolding accepted. Now if we could just do something about the block... :) Sædon 21:01, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Since Sandstein doesn't seem to be editing at the moment would someone please be so kind as to file a block review at either AN or AN\I? I'd rather not ask either Dennis or Ironholds to step on Sandstein's toes so I'd like the community to review it. Thanks. Sædon 21:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Additionally, if the community reviews it and comes to the same conclusion that I have - that it's an inappropriate block - I think it will lessen the "taint" factor on my account history. As you can imagine, having never been blocked before and then suddenly having that on your record is not a great feeling. Sædon 21:40, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

He's just come back and notes he'll respond here. Ironholds (talk) 21:49, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
I just noticed that, thanks. Sædon 21:51, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I am responding here to the queries on my talk page and to the unblock request. The thinking behind the block was that personal attacks are forbidden by policy, and I consider personal attacks based on another person's religious (or similar) beliefs, or on other personal characteristics such as race or nationality, especially reprehensible. That the particular system of belief at issue here is Scientology, which does in my view have many questionable aspects (as do other religions or philosophies), is not important: In an international collaborative project, all must treat each other with respect no matter what one's opinions about the other's faith are, or whether it is a minority or mainstream faith. Certainly it is not forbidden to express negative views about Scientology or other faiths (although doing so is a bit beside the point of Misplaced Pages generally, which is a project for whose purpose our own opinions are irrelevant, and certainly beside the point of ANI or AE). But it is beyond the pale to phrase one's disapproval of a faith as disapproval of a fellow editor who adheres to that faith. If you have difficulty understanding why that is so, it may help to rephrase Saedon's statement by substituting a more mainstream faith for Scientology, in which case the comment would read: "But let's be direct here: Islam is a ridiculous cult and we do not need members of said cult to build our articles on the subject."

That Saedon (with whom I was not previously acquainted) is a veteran user is a point in their disfavor, because I would have expected them to know better. In particular, I would not have expected an experienced user to behave similarly in a thread that is especially about the case in which the Arbitration Committee imposed discretionary sanctions in response to frequent misconduct in the Scientology topic area. I would have only warned a newbie, but I am not normally warning editors who can be expected to be familiar with our conduct policies. No editor should expect to be only warned for serious misconduct: the blocking policy provides that "warnings are not a prerequisite for blocking".

The policy further provides that blocks should be preventative in that they "deter the continuation of present, disruptive behavior; and encourage a more productive, congenial editing style within community norms" (WP:BLOCK#DETERRENT). Because the above comments (and especially the unblock request that begins with the words "Absolutely ridiculous") do not indicate, to me, a real understanding on Saedon's part of how disruptive their comments were, I am of the view that the block continues to be necessary for these preventative purposes, and decline to lift it at this time.  Sandstein  21:58, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't find this convincing. You are arguing that the block was justified on a preventative basis based on comments that Saedon had made after the block was made. Can you please point to evidence that he would continue to be disruptive that pre-dates your blocking action? Ironholds (talk) 22:02, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't think it is necessary to look for such evidence, as the unblock request above indicates that Saedon believes that their status as an experienced editor should afford them a significant degree of protection against sanctions for disruptive conduct. This mistaken assumption (if anything, the opposite holds true) makes future misconduct more likely, especially if it is proven true by way of an unblock.  Sandstein  22:14, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the further explanation. Obviously you and I are at an impasse then and I ask that you (or someone else) ask for community input at AN or /I. I think you are misusing the spirit of "preventative, not punitive," as when you consider the totality of my history you can inductively infer that the majority of my time in the future will not be spent making similar comments. Sædon 22:03, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
I infer nothing of the sort. I simply conclude that in view of your statements, the block will reduce the likelihood of similar misconduct by you and possibly others in the future, whereas an unblock would not. I see no grounds on which I should ask for community comments. I recommend that you read WP:GAB and reconsider your approach to this discussion.  Sandstein  22:14, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Category:
User talk:Saedon Add topic