|
|
12
|
|
Hi,
Who banned Xxzme in wiki a while ago? Please do it again. Not only he
abuses mappers, in part by deleting parts of their pages in private
namespaces, he also renames and/or modifies in a bad way wiki pages that
many mappers link to. E.g. there is no "How we map" page now.
This is not his first time, so I propose an indefinite ban. No point in
repeating past arguments, you all know what he does.
Thanks,
IZ
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
Ilya Zverev wrote:
> Who banned Xxzme in wiki a while ago? Please do it again.
Seconded.
Richard
|
|
|
Hi Ilya,
Consulting with a few other users, I have gone ahead and blocked the user.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Special:BlockList?wpTarget=XxzmeHis last block was for a month. I have given him a 3 month block this time.
Kind regards,
Grant
On 10 May 2015 at 11:14, Ilya Zverev < [hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Who banned Xxzme in wiki a while ago? Please do it again. Not only he abuses
> mappers, in part by deleting parts of their pages in private namespaces, he
> also renames and/or modifies in a bad way wiki pages that many mappers link
> to. E.g. there is no "How we map" page now.
>
> This is not his first time, so I propose an indefinite ban. No point in
> repeating past arguments, you all know what he does.
>
> Thanks,
> IZ
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
On 10 May 2015 at 11:40, Grant Slater < [hidden email]> wrote:
> Consulting with a few other users, I have gone ahead and blocked the user.
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Special:BlockList?wpTarget=XxzmeIn the absence of blatant vandalism or base abuse, I would have
expected, first, a recent, clear and unequivocal warning on the user's
talk page, with a suitably direct subject heading ("Warning: you may
be blocked from editing", or suchlike), and a statement of what the
user should do differently, or not do, in order to avoid the bock.
I do not think discussions which might reasonably be interpreted as
mere differences of opinion, as currently seen on Xxzme's talk page,
suffice in this regard. Likewise the four-month old notice from
January (where, I note, Xxzme's question went unanswered)
We might also consider imposing edit restrictions (e.g. "You may not
move pages; you will be blocked if you edit war; this will be reviewed
after 3 months").
Once a block has been made, I would also expect a notice to be placed
on their talk page, stating clearly why, how to appeal, and how to
request an unblock ("You may be unblocked if you give a statement that
you will not do X again").
Finally since the current bock includes "email disabled, cannot edit
own talk page" (were either of those privileges ever abused? If not,
that part of the block should be rescinded ASAP.), it does not seem
possible for Xxzme to discuss how they might make a return to
productive editing.
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
Hi Andy,
I no longer have sufficient time to administer the wiki and to review
cases thoroughly. User:Lyx has done a great job in my absence, but he
could use additional help. I am going to focus my available time on
OSM hardware & other operational work.
Andy, I have now made you an administrator & bureaucrat on the OSM wiki. ;-)
To others: Check out Andy's credentials:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PigsonthewingKind regards,
Grant
On 10 May 2015 at 13:47, Andy Mabbett < [hidden email]> wrote:
> On 10 May 2015 at 11:40, Grant Slater < [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Consulting with a few other users, I have gone ahead and blocked the user.
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Special:BlockList?wpTarget=Xxzme>
> In the absence of blatant vandalism or base abuse, I would have
> expected, first, a recent, clear and unequivocal warning on the user's
> talk page, with a suitably direct subject heading ("Warning: you may
> be blocked from editing", or suchlike), and a statement of what the
> user should do differently, or not do, in order to avoid the bock.
>
> I do not think discussions which might reasonably be interpreted as
> mere differences of opinion, as currently seen on Xxzme's talk page,
> suffice in this regard. Likewise the four-month old notice from
> January (where, I note, Xxzme's question went unanswered)
>
> We might also consider imposing edit restrictions (e.g. "You may not
> move pages; you will be blocked if you edit war; this will be reviewed
> after 3 months").
>
> Once a block has been made, I would also expect a notice to be placed
> on their talk page, stating clearly why, how to appeal, and how to
> request an unblock ("You may be unblocked if you give a statement that
> you will not do X again").
>
> Finally since the current bock includes "email disabled, cannot edit
> own talk page" (were either of those privileges ever abused? If not,
> that part of the block should be rescinded ASAP.), it does not seem
> possible for Xxzme to discuss how they might make a return to
> productive editing.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
On Sunday 10 May 2015, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>
> In the absence of blatant vandalism or base abuse, I would have
> expected, first, a recent, clear and unequivocal warning on the
> user's talk page, with a suitably direct subject heading ("Warning:
> you may be blocked from editing", or suchlike), and a statement of
> what the user should do differently, or not do, in order to avoid the
> bock. [...]
Please have a look at past interactions of Xxzme with users on the wiki
and discussion here in the recent thread
Problems with the wiki (was "Why OSM and not another collaborative
mapping service?")
This does not come unexpected and the end of Xxzme's current editing
pattern has been called for by a lot of people based on the clear
impression from various sides that Xxzme is immune to any attempts of
productive social interaction. There has been a previous one month
block with no visible change in interaction and recently a lot of clear
communications that Xxzme's behaviour needs to change but as Frederik
put it "short of a miracle I don't see that happening" - which is an
assessment shared by many. AFAIK no single opinion has been voiced
indicating that anyone has successfully and productively interacted
with Xxzme on the wiki.
My suggestion to those with an admin position on the wiki is that if the
ban is lifted after 3 months and if Xxzme continues editing then it is
closely monitored if there is a change in social interaction with other
wiki editors to avoid the situation getting again as unbearable and
damaging for the atmosphere on the wiki as it was now.
--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
Hi,
On 05/10/2015 02:47 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> Finally since the current bock includes "email disabled, cannot edit
> own talk page" (were either of those privileges ever abused? If not,
> that part of the block should be rescinded ASAP.), it does not seem
> possible for Xxzme to discuss how they might make a return to
> productive editing.
Frankly I don't view the Wiki as an appropriate way to discuss anything
and welcome Xxzme to discuss things on this mailing list if they so desire.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [hidden email] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
Congratulations, Andy.
On 11/05/2015 1:11 AM, Grant Slater wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> I no longer have sufficient time to administer the wiki and to review
> cases thoroughly. User:Lyx has done a great job in my absence, but he
> could use additional help. I am going to focus my available time on
> OSM hardware & other operational work.
>
> Andy, I have now made you an administrator & bureaucrat on the OSM wiki. ;-)
> To others: Check out Andy's credentials:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pigsonthewing>
> Kind regards,
>
> Grant
>
> On 10 May 2015 at 13:47, Andy Mabbett < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 10 May 2015 at 11:40, Grant Slater < [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Consulting with a few other users, I have gone ahead and blocked the user.
>>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Special:BlockList?wpTarget=Xxzme>> In the absence of blatant vandalism or base abuse, I would have
>> expected, first, a recent, clear and unequivocal warning on the user's
>> talk page, with a suitably direct subject heading ("Warning: you may
>> be blocked from editing", or suchlike), and a statement of what the
>> user should do differently, or not do, in order to avoid the bock.
>>
>> I do not think discussions which might reasonably be interpreted as
>> mere differences of opinion, as currently seen on Xxzme's talk page,
>> suffice in this regard. Likewise the four-month old notice from
>> January (where, I note, Xxzme's question went unanswered)
>>
>> We might also consider imposing edit restrictions (e.g. "You may not
>> move pages; you will be blocked if you edit war; this will be reviewed
>> after 3 months").
>>
>> Once a block has been made, I would also expect a notice to be placed
>> on their talk page, stating clearly why, how to appeal, and how to
>> request an unblock ("You may be unblocked if you give a statement that
>> you will not do X again").
>>
>> Finally since the current bock includes "email disabled, cannot edit
>> own talk page" (were either of those privileges ever abused? If not,
>> that part of the block should be rescinded ASAP.), it does not seem
>> possible for Xxzme to discuss how they might make a return to
>> productive editing.
>>
>> --
>> Andy Mabbett
>> @pigsonthewing
>> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
On 10 May 2015 at 23:15, Bryce Nesbitt < [hidden email]> wrote:
>> In the absence of blatant vandalism or base abuse, I would have
>> expected, first, a recent, clear and unequivocal warning on the user's
>> talk page, with a suitably direct subject heading ("Warning: you may
>> be blocked from editing", or suchlike), and a statement of what the
>> user should do differently, or not do, in order to avoid the bock.
> Xxzme had plenty of warning.
I see no *recent, clear and unequivocal warning*; perhaps you could
point me to it; bearing in mind my comment:
I do not think discussions which might reasonably be interpreted as
mere differences of opinion, as currently seen on Xxzme's talk page,
suffice in this regard. Likewise the four-month old notice from
January (where, I note, Xxzme's question went unanswered)
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
I don't know what falls unders base abuse, but although Xxzme didn't directly insult anyone since the last ban, he still wrote false or misleading statements in edit messages.
Since this case has been happening for a long time now and has received a lot of attention, please communicate with the community about your related actions in the future.
|
|
|
Hi,
On 05/11/2015 03:07 AM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> Of the dozens of people interacting with Xxzme, none had the authority
> or position to issue such a *recent, clear and unequivocal warning*.
What exactly constitutes a warning matching these three adjectives, or
whether a warning needs to match them in the first place, is certainly
subject to discussion.
But I would say that having been banned once for a month already is
clearly some indication that one is not expected to continue where one
left off after the ban is over, or turning it the other way, is clearly
a strong hint that if you continue you'll be banned again.
> I expect to see Xxzme back under a different username soon.
This is not going to be a problem I think. Xxzme is not a hard-to-detect
vandal who changes the direction of oneway streets. If he pops up under
another user name and continues his past behaviour he will immediately
be found out and banned without further ado; if on the other hand, he
pops up under another name and makes useful edits without intimidating
others so that we don't even notice it is the same person, then he's
totally welcome!
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [hidden email] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
On 2015-05-11 at 08:41:48 +0100, Lester Caine wrote:
> On 11/05/15 02:07, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> > I expect to see Xxzme back under a different username soon.
> This is the real problem.
> While it is now common for people to hide behind anonymous nicknames on
> the internet, it is certainly not courteous these days since it does
> prevent proper interaction on what IS a social platform. There are
> places where hiding ones identity is necessary, but here is not one?
forcing real looking names does not solve this issue: creating a fake
account under a name like "John Smith" is just as easy as creating one
under a nickname, and even less likely to be identified.
Requiring verification through official documents is going to bring
a number of logistic and legal problems (and won't stop motivated people
from using fake documents).
On the other hand, this tends to give problems to people with unusual names,
who see their real name refused by the system, and prevents people with
long term pseudonimes to subscribe to the system with the name they
are actually known as.
--
Elena ``of Valhalla''
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
On 11/05/15 09:39, Elena ``of Valhalla'' wrote:
> On 2015-05-11 at 08:41:48 +0100, Lester Caine wrote:
>> On 11/05/15 02:07, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
>>> I expect to see Xxzme back under a different username soon.
>> This is the real problem.
>> While it is now common for people to hide behind anonymous nicknames on
>> the internet, it is certainly not courteous these days since it does
>> prevent proper interaction on what IS a social platform. There are
>> places where hiding ones identity is necessary, but here is not one?
>
> forcing real looking names does not solve this issue: creating a fake
> account under a name like "John Smith" is just as easy as creating one
> under a nickname, and even less likely to be identified.
>
> Requiring verification through official documents is going to bring
> a number of logistic and legal problems (and won't stop motivated people
> from using fake documents).
>
> On the other hand, this tends to give problems to people with unusual names,
> who see their real name refused by the system, and prevents people with
> long term pseudonimes to subscribe to the system with the name they
> are actually known as.
I'm not advocating anything like that ...
Just purely sticking a hand up to say can we have a bit more openness on
who we are ACTUALLY talking to ...
--
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-----------------------------
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contactL.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.ukEnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.ukRainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
Andy Mabbett wrote:
> In the absence of blatant vandalism or base abuse, I would
> have expected, first, a recent, clear and unequivocal warning on
> the user's talk page
No. Please remember that the primary means of discussion and consensus in OSM is mailing lists, even when the subject is the wiki, and even though the mailing lists suck. There is no precedent for obtaining consensus on community decisions via wiki talk pages.
Talk pages might be how it's done in Wikipedia, but we're not Wikipedia.
Richard
|
|
|
I have now written some justification for the ban, as I see it, on his talk page:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Xxzme#Blocked_for_3_monthsMy plan was to draw together various threads on his talk page and then write something like this immediately before banning him. I was in the process of doing this, slowly. But Firefishy beat me to it and banned him, largely due to calls on this mailing list I guess.
I felt like some kind of evidence building was needed in this case, because (as I described at the link above) Xxzme has actually tempered his rudeness somewhat. The justification for the ban is not clearly pinned to one particular edit or outburst. It's more a case of sheer quantity of dubious edits he has been making. I would say that a user's talk page is a great place to draw together threads which build up the picture and help us to conclude that the user should be banned in a case like this. As it was, we had several different people spending a long time chasing around trying to reason with Xxzme and then clearing up after his mess. If more people linked to problems off this user's talk page, that might have been a smarter way to organise ourselves. I might have been more confident to ban him a few weeks earlier without needing to investigate so much myself.
Not that a wiki discussion would ever carry the gravitas of a mailing list discussion of course :-)
This is all very unusual. Actual wiki contributors (ignoring spammers) have only been banned in a handful of cases over the years. On the one hand this means it's worth spending a bit of time considering and justifying. On the other hand it's nice that we haven't had to get too heavy on process over the years.
Harry
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Fairhurst < [hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Cc:
Sent: Monday, 11 May 2015, 10:08
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Please ban Xxzme in wiki
Andy Mabbett wrote:
> In the absence of blatant vandalism or base abuse, I would
> have expected, first, a recent, clear and unequivocal warning on
> the user's talk page
No. Please remember that the primary means of discussion and consensus in
OSM is mailing lists, even when the subject is the wiki, and even though the
mailing lists suck. There is no precedent for obtaining consensus on
community decisions via wiki talk pages.
Talk pages might be how it's done in Wikipedia, but we're not Wikipedia.
Richard
--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Please-ban-Xxzme-in-wiki-tp5843984p5844138.htmlSent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
|
|
On 11 May 2015 at 10:08, Richard Fairhurst < [hidden email]> wrote:
> Andy Mabbett wrote:
>> In the absence of blatant vandalism or base abuse, I would
>> have expected, first, a recent, clear and unequivocal warning on
>> the user's talk page
>
> No. Please remember that the primary means of discussion and consensus in
> OSM is mailing lists, even when the subject is the wiki, and even though the
> mailing lists suck. There is no precedent for obtaining consensus on
> community decisions via wiki talk pages.
In that case: At what point was Xxzme advised of this? Or indeed any
new user - I certainly never have been.
> Talk pages might be how it's done in Wikipedia, but we're not Wikipedia.
I don't recall saying that we were (indeed, in another recent
discussion, I pointed out that we are not).
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
|
12
|
Locked
