User talk:Drbug

Press release

Editing on the meta version of the press release has effectively stopped. Please finalize your version of the press release. We may be distributing them as early as Monday the 29th. --maveric149 22 Sep 2003

Русская Вика в дауне. Я добавил   в http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Mainpage между словами "Заглавная" и "страница". Для того, чтобы в меню они не переносились на другую строку. В итоге, из-за знака ";" вся русская Вика ушла в даун с сообщением:

Fatal error: Call to a member function on a non-object in /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-new/includes/Skin.php on line 872

Не знаете как всё можно исправить? Я пишу админам и девелоперам в английской вике, но они пока молчат. --Ctac

Не знаю, кто всё починил. Но Вика вновь заработала. Ура!--212.5.125.25 11:38, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Смартасс - Лебедев Михаил Альбертович

из Северной Каролины - 74.167.230.137.

Question concerning Soviet Copyright

Hi. I fear you were asked this question a million times before, but I still hope you'd give me an answer. The English Wikipedia lists a certain category of images that are flagged as PD, due to their release prior to May 1973. Could you confirm the information that these pictures are PD ? And do you know anything about the legal situation in Germany concerning these pictures?

Greetings an Best Wishes. - http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Nasiruddin , German Wikipedia, Portal Imperialism and World Wars

Trust in Wikipedia

this is Cathy from Hong Kong working on a research about trust on Wikipedia. I wonder if you would kindly contact me at researchingmedia@gmail.com? I'd like to chat with you about Wikipedia of your language. Would you kindly drop me your email or IM (Skype, MSN, AIM or ICQ)? It wouldn't take more than ten minutes, but it would help enormously for us to understand the overall trust-based social landscape of Wikipedia. Thank you!

Disputed image

Dear Dr Bug, I don't know why your (and anyone else's) honour should be under discussion for such a case.
I admit I gave an opinion based on Jaroslavleff's words only and without knowing in detail the policies of ru.wiki.
On it.wiki we started to be very cautious and began to remove many pictures for which the situation is not crystal clear. We allowed few exception after discussion, but they mainly refer to "public" information only (coat of arms, road signs and so on).
The cleanest way to solve the problem is to ask the user who uploaded the picture to send an email to permissions@wikimedia.org in which he/she declares under his/her responsibility to have obtained the agreement of the "Olimp" company to use the picture.
Hope this helps. Bye. --Paginazero 13:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Смартасс - Лебедев Михаил Альбертович

из Северной Каролины - 74.167.230.137.

Check User mailing list

Unfortunately I'm just a subscriber of the list as you are. I cannot answer about the delay. Please wait for a while and, if necessary, write again. Sorry. Bye. --Paginazero - Ø 12:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

(Sorry - I confused the topic) - yes, the list is moderated. Please be patient for a while. Bye. --Paginazero - Ø 13:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Transbabel

Hi, Drbug, would you like to put Transbabel besides babel templates? It indicate you as so-and-so lang combo translators and help to generate a translator list automatically.

Thank you for your consideration! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aphaia (talk • contribs) .

Dear Naoko, thank you for this informaion. But is it possible to do this withoud user box? I don't like user boxes, and if there is some plain text template or category, I would prefere to use it. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 10:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Stewards/elections 2006-2

Paginazero хочет, чтобы мы исправили его переводы на русский. Да и сами можем переводить данные о кандидатах на русский или любой другой нам доступный язык. --Obersachse 16:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Переводы

Спасибо. :o) --Paginazero - Ø 17:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Translation_teams/ru

Привет! я добавил тебя в Translation_teams/ru - думаю, не зря --Kaganer 16:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Да, ты не ошибся. Спасибо! Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 20:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Я хочу подать иск в АК

Привет Drbug! Спасибо за помощь. Я не знал что есть Ombudsmen Commission на ru.wiki. :o) Пока. --Paginazero - Ø 20:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Добрый день, Paginazero! эта комиссия Ombudsman_commission - здесь, на Мете... У нас там (в ruwiki) пока только Арбитражный комитет :-). Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 21:12, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Привет еще Drbug. Тебе ничего смотреть эту просьбу проверки пользователя [1]? Большое тебе спасибо. --Paginazero - Ø 18:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Не за что! Написал. Правда, и без проверки, по modus operandi понятно, кто это... Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 15:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Translations

Thanks for translating the candidate statements to Russian! If you could, when you're done translating, it would be great if you could add links to the translations in Template:Election candidates 2007/quickview ML, like this, so that others can find them more easily. Thanks again! —METS501 (talk) 12:19, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the coordinator team and thank you for your enormous translations! If you or your friends have posted something to Russian projects, please list those postings on Board elections/2007/Translations/en#Wikimedia projects, our distribution list. Thanks again! --Aphaia 00:14, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I will do this tomorrow! Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 19:07, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Chapter stuff

Hello Vladimir,

One first comment. There seem to be a confusion in your assessment of what a chapter *is*. Chapters are *not* chapters of the Wikimedia Foundation. They are simply Wikimedia chapters. They are independant legal entities that just share a name and overall goals with the Foundation.

To go back on your list:

• Management of content rights:
  • Gathering of written GFDL confirmations from authors (to send them to WMF).
    • I don't see that as a necessity from chapters, since this is taken care of by the community, but why not?
      • I mean, to do this in some systematic way. It's quite easier to Russian authors to send letter to Russian address.
  • Issuing approvals for commercial organisations to allow them to use Wikipedia/etc content.
    • Not so much to use the content as to use the trademark. Remember, content is free ;-)
      • Content is of course free, but no one will seriously work in Russia not having a paper with signature (and stamp) allowing him to use the content. So most need some written document confirming that the content is free. What do you think about this? It is a question of responsibility, indeed...
        • Then noone will work with Russia. You have to realize (and I realize that every day) that Wikipedia is a new "way of doing things". No organisation, whether the Wikimedia Foundation or the chapter, should ever take responsibility for a content that's widely known as "user generated content". If they're not going to do anything without a written paper, then...nothing will be done ;-)
  • Commercial activity such as printing Wikipedia/etc or publishing on DVD.
    • Never ever ever. Chapters (as well as the Foundation) should NEVER engage in publishing activities of any kind, print or offline. It is a very important basic point to remember. Authors are responsible for the content. The chapters and the Foundation may work in partnership with publishers so as to help them with publishing the content of the projects (such as the project I talked about on the village pump of a Russian DVD), never become a publisher themselves.
      • It's just due to my bad wording :-). I meant, to arrange agreements with publishers to promote them to publish the products. Again, few here will use here free content non having an agreement at hands.
        • OK.
  • To represent WMF in courts (subject to additional POA from WMF on per case basis).
    • Again, this should never happen. Chapters are legally independant organisations from the Foundation. Although they might assist the Foundation in understanding a legal case, they should never represent the Foundation to avoid the Foundation be liable in a country where it is not by default liable. Having the chapters act as representatives in their country of origin would extend the scope of laws under which the Foundation had to operate. So when the first chapters have been founded, we've made sure that they stayed completely independant from the Foundation. It is our most important line of defence.
      • It's again wrong wording case from me. I meant, to assist WMF in Russia whenever WMF decides it is resonable. For example, in cases of WMF's trademark violations, etc.
      • Then OK :-)
• Promotion of Wikipedia/etc and of free content ideology.
  • Advertising.
    • Why not ;-)
  • Organisation of meetings and conferences.
    • Yes
  • Lobbying of Copyleft/other free licenses-friendly changes in legislation.
    • Yes
  • To represent WMF in different forums.
    • No, again please forget the "representation" idea. In local forums, Wikimedia Russia would represent Wikimedia Russia. End of the story ;-).
      • I think it's bad wording again. Chapters can not avoid somehow representing WMF and its projects, because they have WM in their title :-). I'll try to explain in more details, what I mean. What if Russian Wikipedia is nominated to some prize? It's some kind of officiality, so prize organizers may need some Russia-registered artificial person to represent the project. How should it be managed? Should local chapters care of it or they should avoid any national prizes?
      • Of course, Wikipedia/etc are community-driven. However, it's sometime inconvient or even impossible to act without having some registered artificial persons, that should somehow represent the community. If it shouldn't be chapter, it's ok with me, but I just a bit in doubt, if chapters can not represent the community at some minor extent, who could? (It's not a rhetoric question, I really interested in answer!)
        • Then the better wording is "act as a real-life emanation of the community when needed". Yes, you're right, getting a prize and stuff can be one of those things. But it also can be that Wikimedia Russia pays the train trip to any random or designated community member ot go and get the prize for example, on behalf of the Wikipedia community. I think the tricky word her eis "representation". A better word would probably be that a chapter will be mandated by the community to do things. It does not by default take the place of the community. If that makes sense.
• Local technical maintainance:
  • Local cashing servers infrastructure.
    • If the need arises and the chapter does not become liable by hosting content, yes, such as the help that has been provided by Wikimedia Germany in Amsterdam.
  • Local service servers (for bots, mailservers, etc).
    • I would see that as a service to the community, so why not, yes.
      • Of course, to the community. I suppose, everything the charter does, is for the community - either for those who are already users of Wikipedia/etc, of who may become user of it :-).
• Finances.
  • Managing donations, fundraisings.
    • Yes.

Hope my answers help.

Please have a look at Wikimedia Chapters, Local chapters FAQ as well as Step-by-step chapter creation guide for more info. You can also direct your questions at the Chapters committee or write to me directly at dmenard [zat] wikimedia [punto] org. notafish }<';> 15:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I've looked there earlier! I just tryed to say in my own words how I understand it, to avoid and fix any discrepancies! Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 16:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Hope my further answers clarify some of the dark points. notafish }<';> 15:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Письмо Кэри Бассу

Примерно так:

Сообщество русской Википедии организует первую Викиконференцию - см. ru:Википедия:Викиконференция 2007 (пока, к сожалению, только по-русски). Она должна состояться 27-28 октября в Санкт-Петербурге (Россия). Как только будет определённость с местом проведения, будет сделан краткий пресс-релиз, который мы обязательно переведём на английский язык (ориентировочно - в начале следцующей недели).

Для общения с различными организациями орг. комитету очень помог бы e-mail вида "ruwikiconference(at)wikimedia.org". Можем ли мы попросить Фонд выделить нам такой e-mail хотя бы временно, на период конференции? Это нужно для использования в пресс-релизах и переписки с потенциальными участниками - ВУЗами и иными консервативными организациями.

На наш взгляд, это мог бы быть адрес, перенаправляемый на специальный лист рассылки, участниками которого будут члены оргкомитета. По нашему мнению, это не должно согздать большой нагрузки на сервера Фонда.

Можно ли рассчитывать на такую помощь ?

С уважением, и т.п.

--Kaganer 17:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, here is the translation with my minor adjustments, I will copy it to Cary:

The Russian Wikipedia (and other mediawikis) community is organising its first WikiConference (ru:Википедия:Викиконференция 2007 - unfortunately, in Russian only yet; it might be something like Wikimania 2006). It is planned on October 27-28 in St.Petersburg (Russia). As soon as we make a final choice where exactly it will be held, we will issue a short press-release, which we are going to translate in English (hopefully in beginning next week).

In order to contact various organisations, a e-mail like "ruwikiconference(at)wikimedia.org" would be quite useful for the organisation committee. Could we ask the Foundation to grant us such an address at least temporarily? We need it for use in press-releases and when writing to potential participans like universities and other rather conservative institutions.

As we see it, it could be a e-mail address redirected to a mail list used by the wikiconference organisation committee members. We suppose it couldn't cause any significant load on the Foundation's servers.

Could you please advise us if we could get a help like this, or how we would handle this problem else?

Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 19:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Спасибо. Я там за нас обоих подписался ;) --Kaganer 15:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

О НП

Сэр, Срок голосования по учредителям был установлен 8 октября, сегодня 20, я в очередной раз спустился с гор, через неделю мне на вахту недели на две уезжать. Давайте завершать, тем более я остался один под вопросом :-). Надеюсь, этому есть технические причины. --Egor 13:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Да я думаю, что DrBug ждал, пока все выскажутся. А они тормозят. Я попросил Айвола и Стаса определиться - думаю, этого будет достаточно. --Kaganer 11:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Спасбо, Павел! Мне хотелось дождаться чтобы было не совсем на грани. Поскольку возражений нет, то теперь всё понятно. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 17:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Events

Посмотри Events#Wiki-Conference in Russia. Если есть поправки - вноси. --Kaganer 00:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia Russia

I saw that you now have finished the translatioon of your By-laws. Are you planing to contact Chapcom for their recommendation fro approval soon? Anders Wennersten 18:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC) (ChapCom member)

I finished my revision. Wulfson 19:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Кстати, я написал в Talk:Wikimedia Russia/Устав про "Президента" - мне кажется, что это зря затеяли, уж очень претенциозно выходит. --Kaganer 08:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Ответил. В принципе, я даже не знаю. С одной стороны хорошо, с другой - плохо. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 11:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Выборы

А ты не забыл проголосовать ?

)--Kaganer

Falsification by ru.wikipedia.org checkusers

Thank you very much for finally revealing to the public the terrible behavior of ru.wikipedia.org checkusers.

I would like to follow up on that. This is regarding falsifications by ru.wikipedia.or checkusers and the so-called "arbkom". I already wrote about this to Kv75, but he did not reply.

I was accused of having the following sockpuppets which do not belong to me and cannot have any intersection with my IP address (and you know my IP address): :ru:User:+Shipilov, :ru:User:VirginiaRules, :ru:!WaMu, :ru:User:!MaiBan, :ru:User:Parrots, :ru:User:Popinjay, :ru:User:NSB, :ru:User:Попугай 1973, :ru:User:WaiFai2. In particular, here Kv75 attributed an account to me. Recently DR attriburted another account to me, and preveiously he found an intersection of one of these accounts with some other "active use", not me, but refused to report who that was.

So, my request to you is to check these accounts and the checkuser logs, investigate and explain who orchestrated these falsifications and why. SA ru 15:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

OK. Let me put it little differently. Given your own words:

Если бы спросили, то получили бы ответ, который я неоднократно давал, в том числе на выборах в Арбком почти два года назад (там пояснение сформулировано сразу под под «пьедесталом изложения подходов»): флаг проверяющего нужен мне для следующих вещей:

• контролировать отсутствие нарушений со стороны других проверяющих;
• принимать участие в разрешении сложных случаев, что приводит к более разносторонней оценке ситуации;
• иметь возможность компенсировать выпадение из работы других проверяющих (я имею возможность продемонстрировать это на примере флага бюрократа: пока был активен Томас, моя постоянная активная работа не требовалась; сейчас, когда у Томаса возникли проблемы, я оперативно выполняю все необходимые действия).

I conclude that you knew very well that the above named accounts did not belong to me. Nonetheless, you approved the falsification, which makes you a falsifier yourself (which is not a big surprise after the story with :ru:User:Kavel). SA ru (talk) 06:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for delay. Unfortunately, I can't help you now: I've suspended by checkuser actions. I didn't check +Shipilov and others. However, I don't understand why are you interested in those checks. Whether or not theses +Shipilov, etc. were controlled by you, it currently doesn't change fate of your account. If you wish it to be unblocked at ru, you should apply to Arbcom... Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 16:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Drbug, Let's not pretend to be crazy here. I need your confirmation that +Shipilov and others is not me because I want to get the record straight. Falsification is a serious misconduct. You are a checkuser, so please go ahead and check these accounts or read the log. This is your job. Unblocking me in ru.wikipedia.org would be also good because I am a good author and I did not deserve to be blocked (I did not violate any rules as you know very well). You are a sysop; you can unblock me if you want. I do not care about the "arbcom" because at least 3 arbiters are not trustworthy. Please check out this page and leave your comments. SA ru 17:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

You are quite active in your political games in ru.wikipedia.org these days, but cannot respond to a simple checkuser request. By the way, I do not believe your explanation ("отмазке") that you know nothing because you did not conduct the check. According to your own declaration, you had access to the logs for a long time (and on some other occasion you stated that you check the logs regularly, as a control function), so you saw the sockpuppet IP addresses. If you lost the logs, ask Kv75 to give them to you. Of particular interest is the "accidental" intersection of one of ru.wiki users to one of the puppets (DR concealed the user name). So, who was that user? SA ru 14:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

У ДрБага осталась вся чекюзерская рассылка где обсуждается кто чей виртуал. Итоги проверок есть у Kv75 безусловно, он их сохранил на случай перепроверки у стюардов или омбудсменов. Serebr 17:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Of course Drbug has all the logs in his disposable, and he can inspect these checks without any problem. As a matter of fact, it would be wise of him to send these documents to the ombudsman committee and honestly report all the misconduct of ru.wikipedia.org checkusers. SA ru 18:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I'll check on wednesday next week if you remind me. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 20:03, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Don't forget to get the name of the active user who "accidentally" intersected with his puppets. SA ru 23:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Reminder

I am reminding you upon your request. SA ru 00:21, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

• Присоединяюсь. Serebr 16:51, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the reminder!

I didn't remember any details on +Shipilov incindent.

However, as for :ru:User:VirginiaRules and others, I remember these. I participated the discussion and confirm that findings of checkusers are quite reasonable.

Now I find that +Shipilov is tied with these accounts, and conclude that the findings look to be correct.

Of course, CheckUser is not magic wiki pixie dust, especially recalling The Avsyannikov case.

However, I don't see any possible cause for mistakes in these contested cases, sorry. From the checkuser point of view, the conclusion looks quite firm.

If you are sure that it wasn't you, it means that there is one who knows too much about you, who is quite powerful, who wishes to set up you, and who passes the duck test in all imaginable aspects. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 23:02, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

"Попугайчики" продолжили свою деятельность, и Смартассу удалось показать свой IP параллельно с подражателем, ранее прошедшим "утиный тест" в арбкоме. Таким образом, предыдущие выводы чекюзеров оказались опровергнутыми, формального подтверждения чего от Вас и просят. Serebr 00:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Собственно Вас просили не написать очередную отписку а поднять ВСЕ логи проверок Смартасса (его записи - Smartass2008, Smartass2009, Smartass2010, InkognitoIzPeterburga) и его подражателей - полный список тоже можно попытаться вспомнить, и написать обоснованный честный итог. Serebr 00:28, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

OK. You confirmed our original suspicion that you are a liar. That's a good thing that you are no longer a checkuser and hopefully all other flags will be soon removed from you. In your provocative statement you missed one "little" piece of information: these sockpuppets do not intersect with my IPs and have a different geographical location. Of course we do not know where they are located (you know, though), but from you avoiding even speaking about the IP addresses it is clear that this location is quite distant. Additionally, we have very good memory and remember what you wrote 2 or even 3 years ago. Comparison of those statements to the present one permits to make certain conclusions about you. Good bye and once again I hope you are removed from Wikipedia "administration" soon. SA ru 13:13, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

If I had disclosed any specific information on IPs and geolocations, you would have been the first in line to condemn me for disclosing your private information. I would like to repeat once more: if it wasn't you, it was someone who knows too much about you, including your geolocation, of course. If you consider this a mistake, and if you wish to fix it, you should behave quite differently than you actually do. For example, if you are interested in unblocking under mentorship, I could try to assist, despite you offend me. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 14:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I would be certainly the first in line to condemn you for disclosing my private information which is not of anybody's business (including you and Wulfson for this matter). If you disclosed the IP of +Shipilov I personally would not worry too much, but you are certainly bound by the privacy policy. All what was needed from you is just a simple confirmation that +Shipilov's IP addresses do not match mine. This would not break any policy, and nobody would condemn you for telling the truth. Yes, I was disappointed by you because at the bottom of my heart (so to say) I hoped that some honesty is left in you. I got this impression from reading your writings lately. Well... Who knows, may be there is still hope. Why don't we try to communicate normally for starters, without any pretence? Checkuser logs are not rocket science, you know; and I can assure you that I have nothing to do with those sockpuppets. Just confirm that there is no IP match, and this will be enough. All the speculations about "someone knowing me very well" are inappropriate for several reasons. The first reason is that, to quote yourself, this would be trying to invade too much in my personal affairs. Second, you yourself fit this description perfectly (I hope you do not need to be reminded why). Since you are not me (I hope you believe in that) then this could be any person with highly developed curiosity like you. What do I have to do with that? This is beyond my control. In any way, let's close that particular topic; you yourself explained very well recently that such issues should be out of checkuser scope. Regarding your proposal of unblocking me, why not? I am a reasonable author, I would not mind participating in another project. I even share some of your opinions which you recently expressed (or, better, repeated something that I proposed several years ago). My only concern is about the arbitration committee. If you could negotiate this deal privately, without any shows like arbitration committee hearings, that's fine with me. Let' continue talking about this deal on this page. SA ru 16:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Your question sounds bizzare. Of course, evidently, there was no direct digit by digit match, otherwises the reports would sound quite differently. Disclosing any details on +Shipilov would inevitably disclose your private information, it's why I neither agree to disclose any more details nor I see any faults in the findings. Believe me, +Shipilov is really close to you. Therefore checkusers and anyone who would probably inspect them conclude that it's your creatures indeed, and nothing on the Earth could change this conclusion. So, I agree, let's close this topic. Let's better take as basis my assumption of your good faith, and try to go forward.

Of course, I could first try to discuss the unblocking privately. But the final hearings should be public anyway. I guess that you won't be allowed to make edits ouside the main space and your user/talk page, and it will be prohibited to use them in manner as you used to do. I can't describe it in right words, but I guess that you understand what it means - no things like "APE" and "smartassisms"... Which limitation do you agree to suffer? Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 20:00, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Part 1. My old friend Drbug! Are you trying to play with me or something? (I do remember that you said once that you often say stuff just to observe the other person's reaction.) You are saying that my questions sound bizarre, but I did not ask you any questions. I just commented on your speculations about "someone who knows me very well" and noted that you and Wulfson after repeatedly checking on my private information know me pretty well. Since this private information was given to the checkusers (7 people), arbiters (up to 10 people) and other undisclosed users, the number of potential suspects (of the kind you describe) can be pretty high. This is not something bizarre, this is just a simple comment on you statement. In any way, as I explained, knowing me very well is not the checkuser business (you and Wulfson in particular), and I would not advise you continuing your inquiries. The fact of the matter is that I have nothing to do with +Shipilov and Co. I repeated this to you several times. I take your statement that "there was no direct digit by digit match" as an acknowledgment that the IP addresses did not match. Thank you. Further, according to your checkuser friend (or whom you consider your friend or whatever), the distance between +Shipilov and me is 870 km. He wrote about this to someone, and that someone gave this information to me. I do not know whether this is true or not true, but this statement clearly contradicts your assurance that +Shipilov is very close to me. 870 km is not close. (Distance from St Petersburg to Moscow, isn't it?) You should remember once and forever that after I was banned in ru.wiki I did not make appearances there with the exception of a few edits by Smartass2009, Smartass2010 and IncognitoIzPeterburga which were made simply to show the checkusers my real IP address. Actually, if your were more observant you would notice that the distance between IncognitoIzPeterburga (at the time of registration) and yet another sockpuppet blocked by DR (I do not remember the name; can get it if you want) was not 870 km, but much more. Actually, there was one more recent edit -- by safari just to tell a few words to Wulfson. That was it. Since I am not involed in the project, I do not appreciate these stupid accusations in sockpuppetry. They are especially annoying for me because I do not have any control over this stuff. It seems that each time Shipilov edits, his edits are automatically attributed to me. This is not good. I do not want to share authorship with this creature. Hopefully we can reach some understanding here. SA ru 21:44, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Part 2. Regarding "limitations that I agree to suffer", I actually do not agree to suffer any limitations. I did not violate Wikipedia rules to at an extent that would justify an indefinite block. Certainly, my past actions could be classified as "trolling" or whatever, but they were not much different from what other people did, and this stuff was considered permissible at the time. I know how to play by the rules, and I do not see any point in limiting my rights in any way. So, this is out of question. As far as my activities outside Wikipedia (making fun of you guys), I may be agreeable to change those. This should not be a problem. I certainly do not agree to any "public hearing" because that's complete nonsense. Just have whoever blocked me unblock me, and this should be it. Since you are trying to lead the project, you should understand that removing good authors is not a good idea. Compare, for example, yourself to me. You contribution to encyclopedic content is about zero. If you are blocked tomorrow nobody would even notice. On the other hand, if I re-enter the project, I would write articles and have a solid contribution to the encyclopedia. It is obvious that I am a much more valuable author compared to you. From this point of view, your proposal to restrict my edits sounds simply ridiculous. SA ru 21:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Evidently you are not interested in my assistance, as I see no your point in insulting me. Well, it's up to you.

Anyway, you are smart enough to understand that any attempt to unblock you without restrictions imposed has zero chances to be accepted by the Arbrom and by the community. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 06:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I am mostly interested in law and order in Wikipedia. If one checkuser (Kv75) tells someone in private mail that +Shipilov resides in a place 870 km from me, and the other (Drbug) claims that +Shipilov is real close to me, that's not law and order, my friend. This is called lying and breaking the rules. I am not playing this game, and this is exactly why I am not accepting any restrictions on my rights as a wikipedian. Wikipedia is a free project where anyone is free to edit as long as he follows the rules. Wikipedia is a project that guarantees user anonymity and where checkusers are supposed to follow privacy policy. If someone tries to create a different model -- call it "arbcom" or even "community" -- that's not law and order. You may think that law and order have zero chances, but you will see, they will be restored. SA ru 14:10, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I wouold be happy to see law and order... Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 22:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

User agent?

I thought about your obscure statements a bit more and also remembered something what Wulfson (better Molchalin) wrote in livejournal, and it donned on me that the intersection between me and +Shipilov may be through the user agent. I think I understand now what you think. You presume that I use a laptop to connect to the internet when I travel, and the user agent is the same as I had several years ago. However, this is completely wrong. I did have a laptop, but it broke ~2 years ago (or even more), and currently I do not own a laptop. Well, if +Shipilov reproduced the user agent from that laptop, then that's very bad. This means that one of the checkusers copied my former user agent and used it for those provocations. One of you guys may be involved: you, Wulfson, Codemonk, EvgenyGinkin, Wind or DR. EvgenyGenkin looks the most suspicious to me. That's a pity that you do not have the checkuser flag anymore. I would recommend that you check EvgenyGenkin thoroughly. In any way, this once again shows that having checkusers as a conspiracy that conducts private investigations is very bad. Instead of conducting investigations you should have simply asked me, and I would have clarified all your questions. SA ru 15:56, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Now I assume your good faith. So you don't need to prove me anything - I assume that you have nothing common with these accounts.

On the other hand, I see that there are no chances to convince those who is unable to assume good faith.

I agree that the conspiracy should be reduced, and I'm going to try to do it slowly... Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 22:15, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I am actually not particularly interested in what you assume about me. From the way you answer to my questions it is clear to me that you are a liar. This conversation is finished. Good bye. SA ru 17:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

As you wish. Farewell. Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 01:36, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Смартасс - Лебедев Михаил Альбертович

из Северной Каролины - 74.167.230.137.