User talk:Jehochman: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:10, 28 August 2010

Welcome to Jehochman's Talk Page
Please feel free to put your feet on the coffee table, and speak candidly. Or for more better relaxation, stretch yourself luxuriously on the chaise longue in Bishzilla's Victorian parlour and mumble incoherently.

User talk:Jehochman/Archive index

Delete after reading

Fair enough.[1] Thank you.--Cube lurker (talk) 16:40, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we're even since I'm not sure what you mean by the message on my talk page.--Cube lurker (talk) 16:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's better that way. Trust me. Jehochman ^Talk 16:49, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Justice

Do you believe WMC is interested in fair justice here [2] in Wikipedia. He seems to have denied my appeal on his editing restriction, without even a hearing. Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 21:22, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

People can remove comments from their own talk page for a variety of reasons, or for no reason at all. You can assume he's read your comment but doesn't wish to respond to it. That being the case, it's generally considered rude to keep badgering someone on their own talk page when they've made it clear they don't want to talk to you. Does your conception of "fair justice" include the right to keep posting on someone's talk page after they've made clear that they wish you to stop? MastCell ^Talk 22:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the most part, I've been respecting WMC's request to stay off his page; however, does he respect mine and others to improve his behavior? I apprecate he and others can appeal restrictions aimed at helping him. Is he interest in my appeal to talk to him directly? The concept of clean hands is what comes to my mind about justice. WMC seeking equitable appeal while granting none, is largely unjustly. Seems like Jehochman is interested in justice, maybe he will hear my appeal, will you Jehochman? Zulu Papa 5 * (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do not post to WMC's talk page unless he invites you to do so. Failure to comply may result in your account being blocked. It is not acceptable to badger a user on their talk page where they cannot get away from unwanted conversations. Jehochman ^Talk 00:06, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

tick..tick..

Time is now 2 days past the period where we voluntarily topic-banned ourselves. I'm going to continue, for at least one more week, even if i've been tempted several times, especially considering that others seem to have dropped any pretence of following this. Perhaps there should be a call to extend? Or a general acknowledgement that the heat-death of the universe has a slim but apparently real possibility of occuring before ArbCom ;-) --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 00:08, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did what I could to calm matters. It's up to ArbCom to issue a ruling. They should do so soon. Jehochman ^Talk 00:12, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I found (and find) it a good initiative - which is also why i think you should call for extension (voluntary as well), although whether it was effective is another thing :) --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 00:46, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that the publication of the Proposed decision means that the voluntary topic-bans are over? I can't completely recollect the terms? --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 17:07, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Others would seem to hold that view, and I've noted that at the voluntary agreement list as well as moving myself to the "withdrawn" list. As noted, I made minimal edits to at least register my concern about a BLP issue; I've explained these edits at the CC decision talk page. The initiative did indeed calm matters, at the expense of letting a few editors run wild. . . dave souza, talk 03:17, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

I've opened a request for modification of the prior sanction at Wikipedia:General_sanctions/Climate_change_probation/Requests_for_enforcement#William_M._Connolley_comment_editing_restriction_modification. ++Lar: t/c 18:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Input please

I'd appreciate your input and feedback regarding my proposed proposed remedy/enforcement found here. Thanks. Minor4th 17:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EE circus

Having this circus in town is not helping the situation. Unless someone is going to do some "enforcing", I think it is time for the caravan to move on. Beside the show is really lousy, same clowns doing the same stunts all over again. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see Biophys is unwilling to back down. Haven't checked whether Russavia has agreed with my proposal. I'm unable to focus on this for about 24 hours. If another admin could issue the blocks (if needed) and be available afterwards, they should feel free to proceed. See first thread on WP:AE, my talkpage admin lurkers. Jehochman ^Talk 01:35, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now this is too much, someone voting against me on a move proposal on the disambiguation page State. I have never seen him show up on this part of Wikipedia before. I have a strong feeling that this was a punitive edit caused by something I said at AE. I am getting out of this mess, good bye and take care. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 02:41, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 ::Now [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:State&diff=381421998&oldid=381233169 this is too much], someone voting against me on a move proposal on the disambiguation page [[State]]. I have never seen him show up on this part of Wikipedia before. I have a strong '''feeling''' that this was a punitive edit caused by something I said at AE. I am getting out of this mess, good bye and take care. -- [[User:Petri Krohn|Petri Krohn]] ([[User talk:Petri Krohn|talk]]) 02:41, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
-==MastCell's section==
-It is and has been in MastCell's evidence section. See link on my talk page. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — [[User:Rlevse|<b style="color:#060;"><i>R</i>levse</b>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 19:08, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
-: The evidence is quite voluminous. Since no proposals were mooted against me in the workshop, I never notice that.  Will you give me a chance to review the evidence and respond? I need a few days to dig through all this (due to outside commitments).  Is there any reason you didn't alert me to this concern at an earlier stage?  [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 19:20, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
-::First I think you owe me an apology for the unfounded attacks you made on my talk page. It's not my fault you didn't see it. Second yes, you can respond. Third, whether you agree or not, arbs aren't in the habit of going around saying "a finding is going being posted on you" - certainly not when it was in the evidence and/or workshop pages, for reasons I'm sure you can figure out. Also, there's another evidence section in which you figure prominently. Since you've posted your own workshop proposals, how can you have missed two evidence sections in which you were so prominently mentioned?<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — [[User:Rlevse|<b style="color:#060;"><i>R</i>levse</b>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 19:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
-:::How can you draw a conclusion about an issue without seeking input from both sides?  You saw somebody say something about me, and you also saw that I did not respond.  Why didn't you ask me to respond?  It is very poor form for you to take a conclusion (apparently a wrong one), without getting input from those affected by the decisions. Now that you've demanded an apology, you can be quite sure you'll never get one. Forced apologies are despicable, as are the people who demand them.  You at the moment have power over me.  Do you think asking for an apology will be effective?  I pride myself on never submitting to any form of bullying.  You can go straight to hell as far as I am concerned. :-) (Before seeing your comment here I had intended to refactor my remarks as there seemed to be a misunderstanding between us.  Now that you've pressured me, I will not do so.  Suggest you start by removing your remark above, and then I will do the appropriate thing with my remarks.) [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 20:41, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
-::::You had your chance in the case and now. Not my fault you blew both. "You can go straight to hell" will get you a long way.<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — [[User:Rlevse|<b style="color:#060;"><i>R</i>levse</b>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 20:57, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
-:::::Don't ever come here demanding an apology.  You know better than to treat me like that.  Refactor your remark, and I will clean up mine. [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 21:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
-::::::And you know better than to treat me the way you have and conduct yourself the way you have. <span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — [[User:Rlevse|<b style="color:#060;"><i>R</i>levse</b>]] • [[User_talk:Rlevse|<span style="color:#990;">Talk</span>]] • </span> 21:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
-:::::::We both know better.  The first one to start refactoring is the better man. [[User:Jehochman|Jehochman]] <sup>[[User talk:Jehochman|Talk]]</sup> 21:07, 28 August 2010 (UTC)