Recent Changes for "Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski" - Davis Wikihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_OstrowskiRecent Changes of the page "Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski" on Davis Wiki.en-us Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2008-09-28 13:18:31JasonAllerdarn Steve pages are hard to link fix <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 123: </td> <td> Line 123: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Around the same time, JabberWokky edited a few pages with comment logs with stuff like "Steve, call me." He then added the phone number to his wikipage with the best times to reach hmim. Anyway, just posting this to show, as I said, that the effort has been made many times to try to seriously talk with him, even on the telephone by a neutral party! Even if Steve denies it. He also replied to JabberWokkys comments about his phone batteries being dead, so at the time there's no way he couldn't have known. -["EdWins" ES] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Around the same time, JabberWokky edited a few pages with comment logs with stuff like "Steve, call me." He then added the phone number to his wikipage with the best times to reach hmim. Anyway, just posting this to show, as I said, that the effort has been made many times to try to seriously talk with him, even on the telephone by a neutral party! Even if Steve denies it. He also replied to JabberWokkys comments about his phone batteries being dead, so at the time there's no way he couldn't have known. -["<span>Users/</span>EdWins" ES] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2008-09-28 13:13:55JasonAllerlink fix <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Given the history and behavior of user: StevenOstrowski, a consensus was taken of the wiki users to resolve an action to hopefully lead to a better community. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Given the history and behavior of user: <span>["Users/</span>StevenOstrowski<span>"]</span>, a consensus was taken of the wiki users to resolve an action to hopefully lead to a better community. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 54: </td> <td> Line 54: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Exactly. I feel like we're cycling through the same cycle of edits. Like I said, sure, he'll occasionally make some good edits, but he obviously has _not_ changed anything about it. The ban page has been around for over 9 months, and he was a user well before that. That right there should be a sign that obviously something is not going right, so why would it start now? This whole idea with locking out is too little too late. I think he's abused and shown to be anything but deserving of a normal user status. Short of vandalizing every single page, is there anything else he could do to be worthy of a ban? It's not even just revert wars, so I don't think even JasonAller's request will have effect - it's the stuff like: [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 this]. Steadfast refusal. And even JA noted [http://daviswiki.org/Users/KarlMogel?action=diff&amp;version2=199&amp;version1=197 that questions dont get answered]. After all the shenigans, I think any "good" that may come out of his edits is far outweighed by ultimately every other action on the wiki for well over a year. How many chances has he already been given, been asked of, or begged to do? On a side note, I think this is good precedent for future editors there may be on-going problems with. I really have to say that I feel that a lot of this could have been headed off completely, were it to be done around 6 months ago as many are saying. Lack of action then was, of course in hindsight, an error. -["EdWins" ES] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Exactly. I feel like we're cycling through the same cycle of edits. Like I said, sure, he'll occasionally make some good edits, but he obviously has _not_ changed anything about it. The ban page has been around for over 9 months, and he was a user well before that. That right there should be a sign that obviously something is not going right, so why would it start now? This whole idea with locking out is too little too late. I think he's abused and shown to be anything but deserving of a normal user status. Short of vandalizing every single page, is there anything else he could do to be worthy of a ban? It's not even just revert wars, so I don't think even JasonAller's request will have effect - it's the stuff like: [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 this]. Steadfast refusal. And even JA noted [http://daviswiki.org/Users/KarlMogel?action=diff&amp;version2=199&amp;version1=197 that questions dont get answered]. After all the shenigans, I think any "good" that may come out of his edits is far outweighed by ultimately every other action on the wiki for well over a year. How many chances has he already been given, been asked of, or begged to do? On a side note, I think this is good precedent for future editors there may be on-going problems with. I really have to say that I feel that a lot of this could have been headed off completely, were it to be done around 6 months ago as many are saying. Lack of action then was, of course in hindsight, an error. -["<span>Users/</span>EdWins" ES] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2008-07-26 21:11:56JasonAllerlink fixes <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 25: </td> <td> Line 25: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * The goal is to prevent a flurry of fake accounts and whack-a-mole. It's a whitelist rather than blacklist for the same reason it works well for spam. It creates a nasty gatekeeper system, but I can't see any other *practical* method. I think this might be a solution that could work, as opposed to banning, which is exclusionary, incites petty warfare and is ultimately ineffective. If he hadn't already pulled a series of sockpuppets, both blatant and subtle, I'd agree with just locking him out. This falls into the category of "it's a bad solution, but the best of the bad ones". Let me be '''very''' clear -- I also agree this is a bad idea. That's why I numbered the proposal and did it as a proposal. It is just the best of the bad ideas I could find. --["JabberWokky"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * The goal is to prevent a flurry of fake accounts and whack-a-mole. It's a whitelist rather than blacklist for the same reason it works well for spam. It creates a nasty gatekeeper system, but I can't see any other *practical* method. I think this might be a solution that could work, as opposed to banning, which is exclusionary, incites petty warfare and is ultimately ineffective. If he hadn't already pulled a series of sockpuppets, both blatant and subtle, I'd agree with just locking him out. This falls into the category of "it's a bad solution, but the best of the bad ones". Let me be '''very''' clear -- I also agree this is a bad idea. That's why I numbered the proposal and did it as a proposal. It is just the best of the bad ideas I could find. --["<span>Users/</span>JabberWokky"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 27: </td> <td> Line 27: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * Yeah, I hated the idea as well. I just wanted to propose anything other than kicking a member of the community out of an open community resource. You ''could'' have pointed out the simple solution when I emailed you. ;) (note to everybody else... he ''did'' point it out in his reply, but I didn't parse it until after I had posted the proposal). No worries... a group with one account in it is a blindingly obvious thing that didn't occur to me because I was so worried about dealing with escalation. No need to worry unless it occurs. --["JabberWokky"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Yeah, I hated the idea as well. I just wanted to propose anything other than kicking a member of the community out of an open community resource. You ''could'' have pointed out the simple solution when I emailed you. ;) (note to everybody else... he ''did'' point it out in his reply, but I didn't parse it until after I had posted the proposal). No worries... a group with one account in it is a blindingly obvious thing that didn't occur to me because I was so worried about dealing with escalation. No need to worry unless it occurs. --["<span>Users/</span>JabberWokky"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 75: </td> <td> Line 75: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * How does backoff editing apply to instant reverts? Gabe posted a comment - Steven reverted it. JasonAller then reverted that, re-adding Gabe's comment. Who was supposed to have backed off there? - ["Edwins"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * How does backoff editing apply to instant reverts? Gabe posted a comment - Steven reverted it. JasonAller then reverted that, re-adding Gabe's comment. Who was supposed to have backed off there? - ["<span>Users/</span>Edwins"] </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 125: </td> <td> Line 125: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * ''Phone is out of batteries and I am in a computer lab classroom. My activity will cease at around 2 due to another class. --["SteveOstrowski"]'' </td> <td> <span>+</span> * ''Phone is out of batteries and I am in a computer lab classroom. My activity will cease at around 2 due to another class. --["<span>Users/</span>SteveOstrowski"]'' </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 138: </td> <td> Line 138: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> The real question is, what is the best way to get silence, from the admins' point of view? We are waay beyond any freedom of speech issues here. If Option B would result in silence but with less work for the admins, I'll support it. But I am not bothered by any accusations of squelching speech associated with Option C. If that's the easiest path to silence, I'm all for it.<span><br> - <br> -</span> -- ["MattJurach"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> The real question is, what is the best way to get silence, from the admins' point of view? We are waay beyond any freedom of speech issues here. If Option B would result in silence but with less work for the admins, I'll support it. But I am not bothered by any accusations of squelching speech associated with Option C. If that's the easiest path to silence, I'm all for it. -- ["<span>Users/</span>MattJurach"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-10-02 01:29:25DavidPooleBrought back, edited <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- This proposal was drafted from discussion on the ["Ban Steven Ostrowski"] page.<br> - <br> - = A =</span> </td> <td> <span>+ Given the history and behavior of user: StevenOstrowski, a consensus was taken of the wiki users to resolve an action to hopefully lead to a better community.<br> + =Options=<br> + == A ==</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 7: </td> <td> Line 7: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> = B = </td> <td> <span>+</span> <span>=</span>= B =<span>=</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 11: </td> <td> Line 11: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> = C = </td> <td> <span>+</span> <span>=</span>= C =<span>=</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 13: </td> <td> Line 13: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- '''Ban.'''</span> </td> <td> <span>+ '''Implemented:''' Banish the user from the editorship of the wiki.</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 15: </td> <td> Line 15: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> [[comments]] </td> <td> <span>+</span> [[comments<span>(Discussion)</span>]] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-10-02 01:26:25DavidPooleRevert to version 94 (Page should remain for historical purposes). <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- deleted</span> </td> <td> <span>+ This proposal was drafted from discussion on the ["Ban Steven Ostrowski"] page.<br> + <br> + = A =<br> + <br> + - retracted -<br> + <br> + = B =<br> + <br> + '''Implemented:''' Lock Steve out of entries specifically and allow all others to edit the pages like normal. Ban Steve's fake accounts. He would be free to contribute to discussion on the Talk pages and to edit the other pages around the wiki as usual.<br> + <br> + = C =<br> + (This option added hours after B was implemented.)<br> + '''Ban.'''<br> + <br> + [[comments]]<br> + <br> + ''2007-09-06 12:12:34'' [[nbsp]] Sounds good to me. When you say new users though, do you mean newly registered users or just anybody that hasn't posted on one of his pages yet? --["Users/BradBenedict"]<br> + * It would work like a spam whitelist. Here's the first revision of the notice: --jw<br> + <br> + [[Include(ProtectedEntry)]]<br> + <br> + ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think it should be tried on a trial basis and assess its effectiveness on a regular basis. --["Users/JamesSchwab"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out (and ban his fake accounts) and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. I think we should do '''B'''. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]<br> + * The goal is to prevent a flurry of fake accounts and whack-a-mole. It's a whitelist rather than blacklist for the same reason it works well for spam. It creates a nasty gatekeeper system, but I can't see any other *practical* method. I think this might be a solution that could work, as opposed to banning, which is exclusionary, incites petty warfare and is ultimately ineffective. If he hadn't already pulled a series of sockpuppets, both blatant and subtle, I'd agree with just locking him out. This falls into the category of "it's a bad solution, but the best of the bad ones". Let me be '''very''' clear -- I also agree this is a bad idea. That's why I numbered the proposal and did it as a proposal. It is just the best of the bad ideas I could find. --["JabberWokky"]<br> + * The amount of work required by admins to maintain this "good approved wiki editor list" is greater larger than the amount of work required to ban his occasional fake accounts. There are also philosophical issues (elitism, mostly) that come with such a list. Why dive into a complex proposal rather than trying out something simple like locking him out first? We can see how that goes and adapt accordingly. I think the overwhelming consensus of the community is that Steve ought not to be able to edit a few particular problem pages, but that Steve himself is someone who could potentially contribute to the wiki in positive ways. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]<br> + * Yeah, I hated the idea as well. I just wanted to propose anything other than kicking a member of the community out of an open community resource. You ''could'' have pointed out the simple solution when I emailed you. ;) (note to everybody else... he ''did'' point it out in his reply, but I didn't parse it until after I had posted the proposal). No worries... a group with one account in it is a blindingly obvious thing that didn't occur to me because I was so worried about dealing with escalation. No need to worry unless it occurs. --["JabberWokky"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 12:48:42'' [[nbsp]] 'b' sounds cool. --["Users/PxlAted"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 12:53:25'' [[nbsp]] Let's hope he doesn't start editing from other places to try to get around the ban. I'm glad that the madness has subsided for now. --["Users/KarlMogel"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 14:05:50'' [[nbsp]] If we're locking Steve out of pages that he tends to allow no changes to, I certainly hope that we are also applying that rule to other people who do the same. Double standards are lame. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> + ''2007-09-06 14:10:32'' [[nbsp]] Who does the same? --["Users/JamesSchwab"]<br> + ''2007-09-06 14:13:42'' [[nbsp]] Take a gander at any revert war that goes on and on without either (or one side) attempting compromise edits. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> + ''2007-09-06 14:17:04'' [[nbsp]] Commissioner Bleckman, I don't know of anyone else who won't allow changes to a page. I mean, sometimes I get on my high horse, but when I realize that a lot of people are against me, I just go to sleep and let others sort out the debate. Fundamentally, a wiki is made to edit. Those who don't want it edited ''and'' who have been told repeatedly over months that they weren't playing fair -- sure, I think we can lock those people out of certain pages.<br> + <br> + Or, you know, just ["Ban Steven Ostrowski" ban them] and get it over with. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]<br> + ''2007-09-06 17:13:40'' [[nbsp]] No one else edits as he does. [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 Who else has ever been like this] on multiple pages? He always tries to keep info secret and refuses to ever do anything about it. That's not a double standard at all. It's more than "just reverts" which is why I vote ban. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 17:22:34'' [[nbsp]] Steve has contributed almost NOTHING of value and his antics have gone on for too long. Sure, B is good because it ended these current edit wars. However, Steve's going to keep on editing in the same way and we will simply have to keep on adding to the list of pages that he isn't allowed to edit. The work required to maintain such a list is not justified in light of the quality and nature of the other non-controversial edits that he makes. Additionally, B is not sufficiently punitive. Steve has blatantly disregarded wiki-norms for months and has gotten away with his behavior with little consequences besides losing his edit wars. A ban would be most appropriate. It's a permanent solution to the problem that is Steve. It also will signal that we as a wiki are tired of funny business and will not tolerate repeated, intentional, and malicious disregard for community standards. --["Users/WilliamLewis"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 17:26:43'' [[nbsp]] There was only one option up on this page (the first was taken off in hours?), and it was implemented almost instantly. I disagree. JabberWokky made the proposal, but I don't think it was a fair set of choices from what's been voiced.<br> + <br> + From the last 48 hours on the ban page, several people voiced in favor of banning: me, Karl, SteveDaubert, JesseSingh, WilliamLewis, Pxlated, BradBenedict (6monthban), JamesSchwab. There were also many votes prior to the last 48 hours as it's a rather long page, but not including those. (Though it's indicative of former frequent editors opinions which (imo) are still valid and just shows that theres a lot of people in favor of banning).<br> + <br> + JasonAller posted said he doesn't prefer a ban, but wanted a limitation. No one posted in SO's favor (JabberWokky asked if anyone would defend him). Several people called for a ban yet again, none defended, and yet banning isn't even on this proposal, which was implemented immediately? Maybe people are fine with choice "b" now, but if banning wasn't even offered....I don't really feel like that's appropriately representative. That is, unless B is temporarily implemented until a ban takes place? Are people waiting for more feedback? It's not really clear. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> + <br> + You're right -- the community heavily favors a ban, but there's a couple of (older) exceptions. The reason why I said we ought to just lock him out, and allow him to edit other pages, is that it encourages -- or at least gives him the option -- of contributing elsewhere. I was thinking that it would decrease the likelihood that he'll "play nasty" and try and create sockpuppet accounts because he still has general wiki editing privileges, just not on a couple of pages. In the past, with the other person we'd banned, it became a bit of a nightmare (for admins) because the individual felt it necessary to continually circumvent bans. By allowing Steve to be a legitimate user we can send the message that we want him to use his normal account for all of his edits.<br> + <br> + We should do what the community wants. We'll ban him if that's what people really want, but keep in mind that it will probably create more trouble than its worth, at least for the admins. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 17:58:22'' [[nbsp]] Nobody saying being an admin would be easy. And I'd rather trouble the few admins than the hundreds of users who have to put up with his nonsense on a daily basis. Proposal B would've been good... 6 months ago. --["Users/JesseSingh"]<br> + * Exactly. I feel like we're cycling through the same cycle of edits. Like I said, sure, he'll occasionally make some good edits, but he obviously has _not_ changed anything about it. The ban page has been around for over 9 months, and he was a user well before that. That right there should be a sign that obviously something is not going right, so why would it start now? This whole idea with locking out is too little too late. I think he's abused and shown to be anything but deserving of a normal user status. Short of vandalizing every single page, is there anything else he could do to be worthy of a ban? It's not even just revert wars, so I don't think even JasonAller's request will have effect - it's the stuff like: [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 this]. Steadfast refusal. And even JA noted [http://daviswiki.org/Users/KarlMogel?action=diff&amp;version2=199&amp;version1=197 that questions dont get answered]. After all the shenigans, I think any "good" that may come out of his edits is far outweighed by ultimately every other action on the wiki for well over a year. How many chances has he already been given, been asked of, or begged to do? On a side note, I think this is good precedent for future editors there may be on-going problems with. I really have to say that I feel that a lot of this could have been headed off completely, were it to be done around 6 months ago as many are saying. Lack of action then was, of course in hindsight, an error. -["EdWins" ES]<br> + <br> + I think you all know where I am on this proposal, being the one that created the ["Ban Steven Ostrowski"] page, [wiki:drama:"at least 100 years ago"]. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 20:38:43'' [[nbsp]] steve can play the game of politics and come up with cute wordings all day long, I'm just sick of it --["Users/StevenDaubert"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 21:20:26'' [[nbsp]] It may create more trouble initially, (remembering What's-his-face from Vacaville). However once this has settled down, if he is banned, his puppet pages should be pared down and removed of the slights against him. This should reduce his desire to try to find a workaround to continue doing what he does.<br> + <br> + I am continually disturbed at his choice of language in this matter, rather than duck his head he is saying "do what you want to me now - I'll have it my way when you look the other way" which pretty much signals that he has no desire to do things differently. Ban him from specific pages, he'll just create more for himself to play in and clog the Recent Changes with his drama. Even with option B we still have whack-a-mole.<br> + <br> + He's got until June 2008, and then he graduates, and will probably be gone and won't look back. The question may become, which will be the easiest way to keep him from peeing all over the wiki until then?<br> + '''C'''<br> + --["Users/KarlMogel"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 23:00:30'' [[nbsp]] Because Steve has repeatedly and blatantly and willfully violated our community standards for so long, and yet because I do believe that people can redeem themselves, I vote to ban Steve for 6 months.<br> + <br> + I'll help on the admin side (mostly with IP address investigation, firewalling, and filing abuse complaints) when Steve tries to circumvent the ban.<br> + <br> + However, I no longer have the time to keep an eye on Recent Changes, so I'll rely on the community to notify me via email/Jabber/phone when Steve plays fake account games. --["Users/Graham.Freeman"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-07 15:49:45'' [[nbsp]] [http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ExponentialBackoffEditing Backoff editing] &gt; Banning. Try it, folks. It'll work. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> + * How does backoff editing apply to instant reverts? Gabe posted a comment - Steven reverted it. JasonAller then reverted that, re-adding Gabe's comment. Who was supposed to have backed off there? - ["Edwins"]<br> + * In general I dislike reverts, but I would say that both sides should make an effort to backoff edit. Just because one side does not, shouldn't be a carde blanche for their rivals to reciprocate. Its stuff like that that ends up cluttering recent changes. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-07 16:18:53'' [[nbsp]] Clearly, as these games progress, Steve has no respect for the Davis Wiki Community. Each warning goes in one ear and out the other. --["Users/KarlMogel"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-07 23:09:53'' [[nbsp]] I support a ban. I don't want to see Recent Changes cluttered with junk anymore. --["Users/GregWebb"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-08 00:56:30'' [[nbsp]] What Karl said...<br> + <br> + It's also the way he will obfuscate at everything --["Users/StevenDaubert"]<br> + ------<br> + I'll throw my hat into the "no-ban" pile. Banning him from certain pages is one thing, but knocking him off completely would be, in my opinion, a terrible blow to the wiki's ability to fairly and accurately represent certain aspects of Davis. In my opinion, he represents a sizable portion of the community (opposition parties in student government, for example) that we don't have many other examples of hella-active editors from. Any "problems" he causes on a page can and will be worked out eventually, and I have faith that it will ideally be through consensus, not by the silencing of his side. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> + <br> + We've already locked him out from the very pages you say he's worth keeping over. Thus, your reason for keeping him no longer exists. Notwithstanding that, should he be allowed to write about ASUCD stuff and his stuff again, the SFL@UCD page demonstrates that '''he is not a trustworthy source. He is not interested in the truth.''' He has been given many chances to change his ways over the months and he has shown no willingness to strive for accuracy. Also, you'd always side with him regardless of any other considerations, despite what you'd have us believe about your independence. It's obvious to outsiders and even moreso to people involved in ASUCD. You're his lackey. A vote against a ban from you is ever so slightly more objective than a vote against a ban from Steve himself. Finally, we're not silencing his side. If someone (i.e. you) wants to come in and write extensively about Steve's ASUCD antics in a manner sympathetic to him, nobody is going to remove those edits. We're worried about his continual efforts to censor and whitewash things in a way favorable to himself. Steve's edits have not been informative; they have been propaganda. -wl<br> + * Lackey? Choosing to insult someone you're debating is, in my opinion, detrimental to keeping positive wiki dialogue. Do try to refrain from doing so. I haven't been playing ultraclose attention to the proceedings, but I wasn't aware that he was locked out of every single ASUCD page. Is that so? Now yes, I am his friend. Discounting opinions of his friends makes no more sence than discounting opinions of those who dislike him. Shall we discount them too? I supose eliminating the feelings of those pro- and anti- certain subjects would result in a neutral result, but it would also lead to a wiki with less flavour. While I would certainly prefer more people who represent all points of view to be active on the wiki, we're not blessed with that situation. For whatever reason, Steve is one of the more active editors, and silencing him is not going to suddenly encourage more people to take his place. Oh, it might lead to a more "happy" wiki, one where less points of views are questioned. It certainly would make for a "cleaner" recent changes. "Yay." --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> + <br> + It's not about what Steven stands for. 1) If Steven were a moderate or a liberal and behaved in this manner we'd still be having this conversation. 2) Steven is not above the rules of the wiki just because he "represtents" a political minority ("shares the views of" might be a better term, since many far-right conservatives on campus are warry of being associated with Mr. Ostrowski). If your argument held, Joseph, nobody on the wiki could ever be held responsible for anything so long as he or she holds 'any' political perspective.<br> + I agree with you, though, that the purpose of our Wiki is to fairly and accurately represent Davis. Many of us have realized that Ostrowski's tactics do nothing to keep the Wiki fair and accurate; quite to the contrary, Steven deliberately uses the wiki to foster chaos and confusion. Considering nothing else, I think the general quality of information on the Wiki would increase with a total ban of SO.<br> + In the spirit of full disclosure, I've fought against nearly everything Steven has done in and regarding ASUCD, largely because his tactics and goals in student government are so similar to his tactics on the wiki. This being said, I'd like to see a full ban of Steven Ostrowski. -Paul Harms<br> + His antics are childish and shouldn't be allowed. I'd like to see a full ban as well. -Matt Shannon<br> + <br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-08 11:37:20'' [[nbsp]] what about just allowing him to make comments but not allowing him to edit pages. This way he can still add his opinions to the wiki, marked with his user name, but can't do anything beyond that. --["Users/MattHh"]<br> + The software isn't currently built to do that. Ability to leave a comment inherently is ability to edit. -wl<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-09 09:32:51'' [[nbsp]] A lot of you guys are talking in generalalities. Pick a page, any page, and I will tell you why I must be on the Davis Wiki to provide balance. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> + * ["Aioli Bodega Española"]<br> + * ["Action Blue College Democrats" ABCD] --["Users/StevenDaubert"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 09:58:18'' [[nbsp]] Though I am just taking a gander at this issue after my long vacation from all this drama, I am still adding my two cents as a quasi-netizen of this community.<br> + It seems clear to me that Steven has an obsession regarding certian issues and topics on the wiki, perhaps stemming from his own internal political beliefs (libertarianism thus anti-governmentish) and religious beliefs (catholic thus 'pro-life'), and perhaps personal sentiment against certian individuals who have been a barrier to him in accomplishing his goals. I am a bit of an optimist but I do not think that either a lockout nor ban are appropiate options for the community (I am curious as to what A is). Perhaps these problems are reflective of Steven's personal problems in life or something like that, or they are highly contrived attempts at manipulation for a greater sense of personal power (which reflects that he feels a lack of such power), in either case I suppose the question becomes that of the community 'putting up' with the difficulties caused by Steven. Before such measures are considered, has anyone attempted to talk with Steve, in person, in a non confrontational way? perhaps differences may be explained or resolved such that these things could work better, Steven probably feels that the crowd is against him (judging by this page it is), I dunno, perhaps you guys are being a bit to hard on the poor sod, thus is my sympathetic vote, talk to the guy? --["Users/DavidPoole"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 10:25:04'' [[nbsp]] Though I am just taking a gander at this issue after my long vacation from all this drama, I am still adding my two cents as a quasi-netizen of this community.<br> + It seems clear to me that Steven has an obsession regarding certian issues and topics on the wiki, perhaps stemming from his own internal political beliefs (libertarianism thus anti-governmentish) and religious beliefs (catholic thus 'pro-life'), and perhaps personal sentiment against certian individuals who have been a barrier to him in accomplishing his goals. I am a bit of an optimist but I do not think that either a lockout nor ban are appropiate options for the community (I am curious as to what A is). Perhaps these problems are reflective of Steven's personal problems in life or something like that, or they are highly contrived attempts at manipulation for a greater sense of personal power (which reflects that he feels a lack of such power), in either case I suppose the question becomes that of the community 'putting up' with the difficulties caused by Steven. Before such measures are considered, has anyone attempted to talk with Steve, in person, in a non confrontational way? perhaps differences may be explained or resolved such that these things could work better, Steven probably feels that the crowd is against him (judging by this page it is), I dunno, perhaps you guys are being a bit to hard on the poor sod, thus is my sympathetic vote, talk to the guy? --["Users/DavidPoole"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 10:27:53'' [[nbsp]] Dude...the first ban page was started in December of 2006. That was a pretty long time ago. I'm pretty sure that several people have spoken with him, many many times. Many times. Of course, every time the banpage is bumped, someone asks "why not try talking to him?". I'm just asking you keep the time frame in month - it doesn't seem to stick. If someone's been on the verge of being banned for *that* long...that alone should speak of a problem. JabberWokky has spoken to him on the telephone several times over the months, including as recent as within the last week I believe, and JasonAller is always the nice guy who tries to talk with him. I think the "talking with him option" wore out a while ago. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> + * Not to interrupt your intriguing conversation but I received only one phone call from Jabber Walky and that was a few days ago. I have received none since I first became an editor. As for being contacted by others, the last one who talked with me was Craig and it was an issue in which we both agreed on for some reason, other than that I don't recall anyone contacting me. But continue your talk. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> + --------<br> + <br> + ''2007-09-10 10:49:17'' [[nbsp]] I was pretty sure I remember JabberWokky asking for your number months ago, then commenting that he had left you messages. I assumed that since he had your number, and commented that he was trying to talk to you multiple times, that he eventually had. Sorry for assuming! He may also have left his number for you to call around the same time, but I don't want to dig through the 10 million edits to find the page versions. [talk continued]. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> + * He may have, I don't doubt that maybe he tried over the last few months but I never got a voice mail and sometimes I don't possess a phone because I tend to lose them. Some of the editors here, I have been in contact with many a time in ASUCD but I wouldn't say those conversations were about the Davis Wiki and if they existed at all would be very brief. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> + * He may have? Only one? oic. Here:<br> + [http://daviswiki.org/Users/SteveOstrowski?action=diff&amp;version2=341&amp;version1=340 From a long time ago]<br> + 2007-03-05 09:28:50 Steve, you have been an editor on this wiki for quite awhile. I am asking you very seriously to reconsider your editing style and make an effort to compromise and work with other editors, recognizing their input and allowing it to be represented on entries. —JabberWokky<br> + Is not a matter of that. Superiors told me that if there was a problem with the content on the Davis Wiki, we have to go back and figure out what else can be done. —SteveOstrowski<br> + Steve, call me. 615 517-6900. We need to discuss this. —JabberWokky<br> + I have class most of the day but I will keep the number in mind. —SteveOstrowski<br> + 2007-03-05 11:33:20 Steve, I have called and left several messages. If you are able to update the wiki, does that mean you have time to speak briefly? It is important that we talk. —JabberWokky<br> + Around the same time, JabberWokky edited a few pages with comment logs with stuff like "Steve, call me." He then added the phone number to his wikipage with the best times to reach hmim. Anyway, just posting this to show, as I said, that the effort has been made many times to try to seriously talk with him, even on the telephone by a neutral party! Even if Steve denies it. He also replied to JabberWokkys comments about his phone batteries being dead, so at the time there's no way he couldn't have known. -["EdWins" ES]<br> + * Steve also acknowledged that he got JabberWokky's voicemail message, although seemed to indicate that he wouldn't answer it. Here's the following edit from March 5th.<br> + * ''Phone is out of batteries and I am in a computer lab classroom. My activity will cease at around 2 due to another class. --["SteveOstrowski"]''<br> + Unless the cell phone account was closed, Steve deleted the voicemail and declined getting in contact with JabberWokky. (Unless he hangs onto it to listen to it from time to time... you never know)<br> + Am I the only one that finds it odd that he tried to sell cell phones and still can't seem to get them to work for him? -KJM<br> + * Yeah, those who know me best know that I am notorious for not charging my phone, reading my voice mail, or not calling people when I should. I am getting better at it through necessity but that's the deal with that. I don't remember hearing any voice mails, doesn't mean they didn't arrive in my inbox but I never picked them up or replied back. Also, I have had three phones since January 2007, I keep losing them for some reason. The deal is that I have only heard Jabber Wokky's voice once and that was a few days ago and I am not going to reveal the contents of that conversation, but Jabber can testify himself that he has only talked to me on the phone that one time. Now, for the quotes that you have mentioned I never called Jabber Wokky despite his request at the time and the issue in which he wished to call about how been resolved as far as I was concerned so afterwards I didn't feel a need to call. And of course, I don't need that edit to tell me his phone number, it has always existed on his own page. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> + Um...that's not a very good excuse. Sorry. -PH<br> + Excuse implies that I feel guilty about it or that I should feel guilty about it which I feel neigther. I don't even remember what it was about, probably something very trivial. The point being is that Jabber wanted to call me that one time and I didn't get the phone call for whatever reason and I decided not to reply back because the issue had already been resolved. I would rather not have to call people about such things like the Davis Wiki. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> + <br> + <br> + ------<br> + ''The question may become, which will be the easiest way to keep him from peeing all over the wiki until then? --KarlMogel''<br> + <br> + Yup. His good edits contribute little or nothing to the DW knowledge base. His bad edits, which are legion, clog the pipes with misinformation and edit-war BS. Complete silence from him would not rob us of any meaningful content, but would instead let us spend our time and bytes on real information and opinion.<br> + <br> + The real question is, what is the best way to get silence, from the admins' point of view? We are waay beyond any freedom of speech issues here. If Option B would result in silence but with less work for the admins, I'll support it. But I am not bothered by any accusations of squelching speech associated with Option C. If that's the easiest path to silence, I'm all for it.<br> + <br> + -- ["MattJurach"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 13:11:53'' [[nbsp]] Well, Graham offered (up the page) to help take care of enforcing a ban admin side. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 16:37:37'' [[nbsp]] WOW i had no idea the Davis Wiki was such a censor-whore. Who knew they're were a few powerful men who went around trying to shut up....ONE man on the wiki. I hope you are all satisfied with yourselves. Hope im not next... --["Users/WeMo"]<br> + .... Sorry to stoop to a personal attack, but did you read the proposal? Can you try to understand why DW is fed up with Steve? --["Users/StevenDaubert"]<br> + <br> + <br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 18:02:57'' [[nbsp]] ....Yes i have read it, but i, unlike some of you have actually sat down with Steve and have had a personal conversation to understand where he is coming from....did i get get fed up? Nope... --["Users/WeMo"]<br> + ''If you have read why he was banned and think it's censorship, I respectfully submit that you '''do not''' understand what happened. Sorry. -wl''<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 18:19:04'' [[nbsp]] Thanks for making that comment extremely CLEAR....both on this page and my own.... i wasnt sure i got it the first time around..... you've expressed your opinion a dozen times.... so i think its only fair you let me express mine about Steve once....yea? Or is going to get me into WIKI trouble too? :::gasps::: --["Users/WeMo"]<br> + ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 18:36:29'' [[nbsp]] Don't embarrass yourself. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-10-02 00:43:08LabBantersPage deleted (Malquoted, edit fullwise ) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- This proposal was drafted from discussion on the ["Ban Steven Ostrowski"] page.<br> - <br> - = A =<br> - <br> - - retracted -<br> - <br> - = B =<br> - <br> - '''Implemented:''' Lock Steve out of entries specifically and allow all others to edit the pages like normal. Ban Steve's fake accounts. He would be free to contribute to discussion on the Talk pages and to edit the other pages around the wiki as usual.<br> - <br> - = C =<br> - (This option added hours after B was implemented.)<br> - '''Ban.'''<br> - <br> - [[comments]]<br> - <br> - ''2007-09-06 12:12:34'' [[nbsp]] Sounds good to me. When you say new users though, do you mean newly registered users or just anybody that hasn't posted on one of his pages yet? --["Users/BradBenedict"]<br> - * It would work like a spam whitelist. Here's the first revision of the notice: --jw<br> - <br> - [[Include(ProtectedEntry)]]<br> - <br> - ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think it should be tried on a trial basis and assess its effectiveness on a regular basis. --["Users/JamesSchwab"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out (and ban his fake accounts) and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. I think we should do '''B'''. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]<br> - * The goal is to prevent a flurry of fake accounts and whack-a-mole. It's a whitelist rather than blacklist for the same reason it works well for spam. It creates a nasty gatekeeper system, but I can't see any other *practical* method. I think this might be a solution that could work, as opposed to banning, which is exclusionary, incites petty warfare and is ultimately ineffective. If he hadn't already pulled a series of sockpuppets, both blatant and subtle, I'd agree with just locking him out. This falls into the category of "it's a bad solution, but the best of the bad ones". Let me be '''very''' clear -- I also agree this is a bad idea. That's why I numbered the proposal and did it as a proposal. It is just the best of the bad ideas I could find. --["JabberWokky"]<br> - * The amount of work required by admins to maintain this "good approved wiki editor list" is greater larger than the amount of work required to ban his occasional fake accounts. There are also philosophical issues (elitism, mostly) that come with such a list. Why dive into a complex proposal rather than trying out something simple like locking him out first? We can see how that goes and adapt accordingly. I think the overwhelming consensus of the community is that Steve ought not to be able to edit a few particular problem pages, but that Steve himself is someone who could potentially contribute to the wiki in positive ways. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]<br> - * Yeah, I hated the idea as well. I just wanted to propose anything other than kicking a member of the community out of an open community resource. You ''could'' have pointed out the simple solution when I emailed you. ;) (note to everybody else... he ''did'' point it out in his reply, but I didn't parse it until after I had posted the proposal). No worries... a group with one account in it is a blindingly obvious thing that didn't occur to me because I was so worried about dealing with escalation. No need to worry unless it occurs. --["JabberWokky"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-06 12:48:42'' [[nbsp]] 'b' sounds cool. --["Users/PxlAted"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-06 12:53:25'' [[nbsp]] Let's hope he doesn't start editing from other places to try to get around the ban. I'm glad that the madness has subsided for now. --["Users/KarlMogel"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-06 14:05:50'' [[nbsp]] If we're locking Steve out of pages that he tends to allow no changes to, I certainly hope that we are also applying that rule to other people who do the same. Double standards are lame. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> - ''2007-09-06 14:10:32'' [[nbsp]] Who does the same? --["Users/JamesSchwab"]<br> - ''2007-09-06 14:13:42'' [[nbsp]] Take a gander at any revert war that goes on and on without either (or one side) attempting compromise edits. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> - ''2007-09-06 14:17:04'' [[nbsp]] Commissioner Bleckman, I don't know of anyone else who won't allow changes to a page. I mean, sometimes I get on my high horse, but when I realize that a lot of people are against me, I just go to sleep and let others sort out the debate. Fundamentally, a wiki is made to edit. Those who don't want it edited ''and'' who have been told repeatedly over months that they weren't playing fair -- sure, I think we can lock those people out of certain pages.<br> - <br> - Or, you know, just ["Ban Steven Ostrowski" ban them] and get it over with. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]<br> - ''2007-09-06 17:13:40'' [[nbsp]] No one else edits as he does. [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 Who else has ever been like this] on multiple pages? He always tries to keep info secret and refuses to ever do anything about it. That's not a double standard at all. It's more than "just reverts" which is why I vote ban. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-06 17:22:34'' [[nbsp]] Steve has contributed almost NOTHING of value and his antics have gone on for too long. Sure, B is good because it ended these current edit wars. However, Steve's going to keep on editing in the same way and we will simply have to keep on adding to the list of pages that he isn't allowed to edit. The work required to maintain such a list is not justified in light of the quality and nature of the other non-controversial edits that he makes. Additionally, B is not sufficiently punitive. Steve has blatantly disregarded wiki-norms for months and has gotten away with his behavior with little consequences besides losing his edit wars. A ban would be most appropriate. It's a permanent solution to the problem that is Steve. It also will signal that we as a wiki are tired of funny business and will not tolerate repeated, intentional, and malicious disregard for community standards. --["Users/WilliamLewis"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-06 17:26:43'' [[nbsp]] There was only one option up on this page (the first was taken off in hours?), and it was implemented almost instantly. I disagree. JabberWokky made the proposal, but I don't think it was a fair set of choices from what's been voiced.<br> - <br> - From the last 48 hours on the ban page, several people voiced in favor of banning: me, Karl, SteveDaubert, JesseSingh, WilliamLewis, Pxlated, BradBenedict (6monthban), JamesSchwab. There were also many votes prior to the last 48 hours as it's a rather long page, but not including those. (Though it's indicative of former frequent editors opinions which (imo) are still valid and just shows that theres a lot of people in favor of banning).<br> - <br> - JasonAller posted said he doesn't prefer a ban, but wanted a limitation. No one posted in SO's favor (JabberWokky asked if anyone would defend him). Several people called for a ban yet again, none defended, and yet banning isn't even on this proposal, which was implemented immediately? Maybe people are fine with choice "b" now, but if banning wasn't even offered....I don't really feel like that's appropriately representative. That is, unless B is temporarily implemented until a ban takes place? Are people waiting for more feedback? It's not really clear. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> - <br> - You're right -- the community heavily favors a ban, but there's a couple of (older) exceptions. The reason why I said we ought to just lock him out, and allow him to edit other pages, is that it encourages -- or at least gives him the option -- of contributing elsewhere. I was thinking that it would decrease the likelihood that he'll "play nasty" and try and create sockpuppet accounts because he still has general wiki editing privileges, just not on a couple of pages. In the past, with the other person we'd banned, it became a bit of a nightmare (for admins) because the individual felt it necessary to continually circumvent bans. By allowing Steve to be a legitimate user we can send the message that we want him to use his normal account for all of his edits.<br> - <br> - We should do what the community wants. We'll ban him if that's what people really want, but keep in mind that it will probably create more trouble than its worth, at least for the admins. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-06 17:58:22'' [[nbsp]] Nobody saying being an admin would be easy. And I'd rather trouble the few admins than the hundreds of users who have to put up with his nonsense on a daily basis. Proposal B would've been good... 6 months ago. --["Users/JesseSingh"]<br> - * Exactly. I feel like we're cycling through the same cycle of edits. Like I said, sure, he'll occasionally make some good edits, but he obviously has _not_ changed anything about it. The ban page has been around for over 9 months, and he was a user well before that. That right there should be a sign that obviously something is not going right, so why would it start now? This whole idea with locking out is too little too late. I think he's abused and shown to be anything but deserving of a normal user status. Short of vandalizing every single page, is there anything else he could do to be worthy of a ban? It's not even just revert wars, so I don't think even JasonAller's request will have effect - it's the stuff like: [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 this]. Steadfast refusal. And even JA noted [http://daviswiki.org/Users/KarlMogel?action=diff&amp;version2=199&amp;version1=197 that questions dont get answered]. After all the shenigans, I think any "good" that may come out of his edits is far outweighed by ultimately every other action on the wiki for well over a year. How many chances has he already been given, been asked of, or begged to do? On a side note, I think this is good precedent for future editors there may be on-going problems with. I really have to say that I feel that a lot of this could have been headed off completely, were it to be done around 6 months ago as many are saying. Lack of action then was, of course in hindsight, an error. -["EdWins" ES]<br> - <br> - I think you all know where I am on this proposal, being the one that created the ["Ban Steven Ostrowski"] page, [wiki:drama:"at least 100 years ago"]. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-06 20:38:43'' [[nbsp]] steve can play the game of politics and come up with cute wordings all day long, I'm just sick of it --["Users/StevenDaubert"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-06 21:20:26'' [[nbsp]] It may create more trouble initially, (remembering What's-his-face from Vacaville). However once this has settled down, if he is banned, his puppet pages should be pared down and removed of the slights against him. This should reduce his desire to try to find a workaround to continue doing what he does.<br> - <br> - I am continually disturbed at his choice of language in this matter, rather than duck his head he is saying "do what you want to me now - I'll have it my way when you look the other way" which pretty much signals that he has no desire to do things differently. Ban him from specific pages, he'll just create more for himself to play in and clog the Recent Changes with his drama. Even with option B we still have whack-a-mole.<br> - <br> - He's got until June 2008, and then he graduates, and will probably be gone and won't look back. The question may become, which will be the easiest way to keep him from peeing all over the wiki until then?<br> - '''C'''<br> - --["Users/KarlMogel"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-06 23:00:30'' [[nbsp]] Because Steve has repeatedly and blatantly and willfully violated our community standards for so long, and yet because I do believe that people can redeem themselves, I vote to ban Steve for 6 months.<br> - <br> - I'll help on the admin side (mostly with IP address investigation, firewalling, and filing abuse complaints) when Steve tries to circumvent the ban.<br> - <br> - However, I no longer have the time to keep an eye on Recent Changes, so I'll rely on the community to notify me via email/Jabber/phone when Steve plays fake account games. --["Users/Graham.Freeman"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-07 15:49:45'' [[nbsp]] [http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ExponentialBackoffEditing Backoff editing] &gt; Banning. Try it, folks. It'll work. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> - * How does backoff editing apply to instant reverts? Gabe posted a comment - Steven reverted it. JasonAller then reverted that, re-adding Gabe's comment. Who was supposed to have backed off there? - ["Edwins"]<br> - * In general I dislike reverts, but I would say that both sides should make an effort to backoff edit. Just because one side does not, shouldn't be a carde blanche for their rivals to reciprocate. Its stuff like that that ends up cluttering recent changes. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-07 16:18:53'' [[nbsp]] Clearly, as these games progress, Steve has no respect for the Davis Wiki Community. Each warning goes in one ear and out the other. --["Users/KarlMogel"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-07 23:09:53'' [[nbsp]] I support a ban. I don't want to see Recent Changes cluttered with junk anymore. --["Users/GregWebb"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-08 00:56:30'' [[nbsp]] What Karl said...<br> - <br> - It's also the way he will obfuscate at everything --["Users/StevenDaubert"]<br> - ------<br> - I'll throw my hat into the "no-ban" pile. Banning him from certain pages is one thing, but knocking him off completely would be, in my opinion, a terrible blow to the wiki's ability to fairly and accurately represent certain aspects of Davis. In my opinion, he represents a sizable portion of the community (opposition parties in student government, for example) that we don't have many other examples of hella-active editors from. Any "problems" he causes on a page can and will be worked out eventually, and I have faith that it will ideally be through consensus, not by the silencing of his side. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> - <br> - We've already locked him out from the very pages you say he's worth keeping over. Thus, your reason for keeping him no longer exists. Notwithstanding that, should he be allowed to write about ASUCD stuff and his stuff again, the SFL@UCD page demonstrates that '''he is not a trustworthy source. He is not interested in the truth.''' He has been given many chances to change his ways over the months and he has shown no willingness to strive for accuracy. Also, you'd always side with him regardless of any other considerations, despite what you'd have us believe about your independence. It's obvious to outsiders and even moreso to people involved in ASUCD. You're his lackey. A vote against a ban from you is ever so slightly more objective than a vote against a ban from Steve himself. Finally, we're not silencing his side. If someone (i.e. you) wants to come in and write extensively about Steve's ASUCD antics in a manner sympathetic to him, nobody is going to remove those edits. We're worried about his continual efforts to censor and whitewash things in a way favorable to himself. Steve's edits have not been informative; they have been propaganda. -wl<br> - * Lackey? Choosing to insult someone you're debating is, in my opinion, detrimental to keeping positive wiki dialogue. Do try to refrain from doing so. I haven't been playing ultraclose attention to the proceedings, but I wasn't aware that he was locked out of every single ASUCD page. Is that so? Now yes, I am his friend. Discounting opinions of his friends makes no more sence than discounting opinions of those who dislike him. Shall we discount them too? I supose eliminating the feelings of those pro- and anti- certain subjects would result in a neutral result, but it would also lead to a wiki with less flavour. While I would certainly prefer more people who represent all points of view to be active on the wiki, we're not blessed with that situation. For whatever reason, Steve is one of the more active editors, and silencing him is not going to suddenly encourage more people to take his place. Oh, it might lead to a more "happy" wiki, one where less points of views are questioned. It certainly would make for a "cleaner" recent changes. "Yay." --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> - <br> - It's not about what Steven stands for. 1) If Steven were a moderate or a liberal and behaved in this manner we'd still be having this conversation. 2) Steven is not above the rules of the wiki just because he "represtents" a political minority ("shares the views of" might be a better term, since many far-right conservatives on campus are warry of being associated with Mr. Ostrowski). If your argument held, Joseph, nobody on the wiki could ever be held responsible for anything so long as he or she holds 'any' political perspective.<br> - I agree with you, though, that the purpose of our Wiki is to fairly and accurately represent Davis. Many of us have realized that Ostrowski's tactics do nothing to keep the Wiki fair and accurate; quite to the contrary, Steven deliberately uses the wiki to foster chaos and confusion. Considering nothing else, I think the general quality of information on the Wiki would increase with a total ban of SO.<br> - In the spirit of full disclosure, I've fought against nearly everything Steven has done in and regarding ASUCD, largely because his tactics and goals in student government are so similar to his tactics on the wiki. This being said, I'd like to see a full ban of Steven Ostrowski. -Paul Harms<br> - His antics are childish and shouldn't be allowed. I'd like to see a full ban as well. -Matt Shannon<br> - <br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-08 11:37:20'' [[nbsp]] what about just allowing him to make comments but not allowing him to edit pages. This way he can still add his opinions to the wiki, marked with his user name, but can't do anything beyond that. --["Users/MattHh"]<br> - The software isn't currently built to do that. Ability to leave a comment inherently is ability to edit. -wl<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-09 09:32:51'' [[nbsp]] A lot of you guys are talking in generalalities. Pick a page, any page, and I will tell you why I must be on the Davis Wiki to provide balance. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> - * ["Aioli Bodega Española"]<br> - * ["Action Blue College Democrats" ABCD] --["Users/StevenDaubert"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-10 09:58:18'' [[nbsp]] Though I am just taking a gander at this issue after my long vacation from all this drama, I am still adding my two cents as a quasi-netizen of this community.<br> - It seems clear to me that Steven has an obsession regarding certian issues and topics on the wiki, perhaps stemming from his own internal political beliefs (libertarianism thus anti-governmentish) and religious beliefs (catholic thus 'pro-life'), and perhaps personal sentiment against certian individuals who have been a barrier to him in accomplishing his goals. I am a bit of an optimist but I do not think that either a lockout nor ban are appropiate options for the community (I am curious as to what A is). Perhaps these problems are reflective of Steven's personal problems in life or something like that, or they are highly contrived attempts at manipulation for a greater sense of personal power (which reflects that he feels a lack of such power), in either case I suppose the question becomes that of the community 'putting up' with the difficulties caused by Steven. Before such measures are considered, has anyone attempted to talk with Steve, in person, in a non confrontational way? perhaps differences may be explained or resolved such that these things could work better, Steven probably feels that the crowd is against him (judging by this page it is), I dunno, perhaps you guys are being a bit to hard on the poor sod, thus is my sympathetic vote, talk to the guy? --["Users/DavidPoole"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-10 10:25:04'' [[nbsp]] Though I am just taking a gander at this issue after my long vacation from all this drama, I am still adding my two cents as a quasi-netizen of this community.<br> - It seems clear to me that Steven has an obsession regarding certian issues and topics on the wiki, perhaps stemming from his own internal political beliefs (libertarianism thus anti-governmentish) and religious beliefs (catholic thus 'pro-life'), and perhaps personal sentiment against certian individuals who have been a barrier to him in accomplishing his goals. I am a bit of an optimist but I do not think that either a lockout nor ban are appropiate options for the community (I am curious as to what A is). Perhaps these problems are reflective of Steven's personal problems in life or something like that, or they are highly contrived attempts at manipulation for a greater sense of personal power (which reflects that he feels a lack of such power), in either case I suppose the question becomes that of the community 'putting up' with the difficulties caused by Steven. Before such measures are considered, has anyone attempted to talk with Steve, in person, in a non confrontational way? perhaps differences may be explained or resolved such that these things could work better, Steven probably feels that the crowd is against him (judging by this page it is), I dunno, perhaps you guys are being a bit to hard on the poor sod, thus is my sympathetic vote, talk to the guy? --["Users/DavidPoole"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-10 10:27:53'' [[nbsp]] Dude...the first ban page was started in December of 2006. That was a pretty long time ago. I'm pretty sure that several people have spoken with him, many many times. Many times. Of course, every time the banpage is bumped, someone asks "why not try talking to him?". I'm just asking you keep the time frame in month - it doesn't seem to stick. If someone's been on the verge of being banned for *that* long...that alone should speak of a problem. JabberWokky has spoken to him on the telephone several times over the months, including as recent as within the last week I believe, and JasonAller is always the nice guy who tries to talk with him. I think the "talking with him option" wore out a while ago. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> - * Not to interrupt your intriguing conversation but I received only one phone call from Jabber Walky and that was a few days ago. I have received none since I first became an editor. As for being contacted by others, the last one who talked with me was Craig and it was an issue in which we both agreed on for some reason, other than that I don't recall anyone contacting me. But continue your talk. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> - --------<br> - <br> - ''2007-09-10 10:49:17'' [[nbsp]] I was pretty sure I remember JabberWokky asking for your number months ago, then commenting that he had left you messages. I assumed that since he had your number, and commented that he was trying to talk to you multiple times, that he eventually had. Sorry for assuming! He may also have left his number for you to call around the same time, but I don't want to dig through the 10 million edits to find the page versions. [talk continued]. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> - * He may have, I don't doubt that maybe he tried over the last few months but I never got a voice mail and sometimes I don't possess a phone because I tend to lose them. Some of the editors here, I have been in contact with many a time in ASUCD but I wouldn't say those conversations were about the Davis Wiki and if they existed at all would be very brief. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> - * He may have? Only one? oic. Here:<br> - [http://daviswiki.org/Users/SteveOstrowski?action=diff&amp;version2=341&amp;version1=340 From a long time ago]<br> - 2007-03-05 09:28:50 Steve, you have been an editor on this wiki for quite awhile. I am asking you very seriously to reconsider your editing style and make an effort to compromise and work with other editors, recognizing their input and allowing it to be represented on entries. —JabberWokky<br> - Is not a matter of that. Superiors told me that if there was a problem with the content on the Davis Wiki, we have to go back and figure out what else can be done. —SteveOstrowski<br> - Steve, call me. 615 517-6900. We need to discuss this. —JabberWokky<br> - I have class most of the day but I will keep the number in mind. —SteveOstrowski<br> - 2007-03-05 11:33:20 Steve, I have called and left several messages. If you are able to update the wiki, does that mean you have time to speak briefly? It is important that we talk. —JabberWokky<br> - Around the same time, JabberWokky edited a few pages with comment logs with stuff like "Steve, call me." He then added the phone number to his wikipage with the best times to reach hmim. Anyway, just posting this to show, as I said, that the effort has been made many times to try to seriously talk with him, even on the telephone by a neutral party! Even if Steve denies it. He also replied to JabberWokkys comments about his phone batteries being dead, so at the time there's no way he couldn't have known. -["EdWins" ES]<br> - * Steve also acknowledged that he got JabberWokky's voicemail message, although seemed to indicate that he wouldn't answer it. Here's the following edit from March 5th.<br> - * ''Phone is out of batteries and I am in a computer lab classroom. My activity will cease at around 2 due to another class. --["SteveOstrowski"]''<br> - Unless the cell phone account was closed, Steve deleted the voicemail and declined getting in contact with JabberWokky. (Unless he hangs onto it to listen to it from time to time... you never know)<br> - Am I the only one that finds it odd that he tried to sell cell phones and still can't seem to get them to work for him? -KJM<br> - * Yeah, those who know me best know that I am notorious for not charging my phone, reading my voice mail, or not calling people when I should. I am getting better at it through necessity but that's the deal with that. I don't remember hearing any voice mails, doesn't mean they didn't arrive in my inbox but I never picked them up or replied back. Also, I have had three phones since January 2007, I keep losing them for some reason. The deal is that I have only heard Jabber Wokky's voice once and that was a few days ago and I am not going to reveal the contents of that conversation, but Jabber can testify himself that he has only talked to me on the phone that one time. Now, for the quotes that you have mentioned I never called Jabber Wokky despite his request at the time and the issue in which he wished to call about how been resolved as far as I was concerned so afterwards I didn't feel a need to call. And of course, I don't need that edit to tell me his phone number, it has always existed on his own page. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> - Um...that's not a very good excuse. Sorry. -PH<br> - Excuse implies that I feel guilty about it or that I should feel guilty about it which I feel neigther. I don't even remember what it was about, probably something very trivial. The point being is that Jabber wanted to call me that one time and I didn't get the phone call for whatever reason and I decided not to reply back because the issue had already been resolved. I would rather not have to call people about such things like the Davis Wiki. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> - <br> - <br> - ------<br> - ''The question may become, which will be the easiest way to keep him from peeing all over the wiki until then? --KarlMogel''<br> - <br> - Yup. His good edits contribute little or nothing to the DW knowledge base. His bad edits, which are legion, clog the pipes with misinformation and edit-war BS. Complete silence from him would not rob us of any meaningful content, but would instead let us spend our time and bytes on real information and opinion.<br> - <br> - The real question is, what is the best way to get silence, from the admins' point of view? We are waay beyond any freedom of speech issues here. If Option B would result in silence but with less work for the admins, I'll support it. But I am not bothered by any accusations of squelching speech associated with Option C. If that's the easiest path to silence, I'm all for it.<br> - <br> - -- ["MattJurach"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-10 13:11:53'' [[nbsp]] Well, Graham offered (up the page) to help take care of enforcing a ban admin side. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-10 16:37:37'' [[nbsp]] WOW i had no idea the Davis Wiki was such a censor-whore. Who knew they're were a few powerful men who went around trying to shut up....ONE man on the wiki. I hope you are all satisfied with yourselves. Hope im not next... --["Users/WeMo"]<br> - .... Sorry to stoop to a personal attack, but did you read the proposal? Can you try to understand why DW is fed up with Steve? --["Users/StevenDaubert"]<br> - <br> - <br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-10 18:02:57'' [[nbsp]] ....Yes i have read it, but i, unlike some of you have actually sat down with Steve and have had a personal conversation to understand where he is coming from....did i get get fed up? Nope... --["Users/WeMo"]<br> - ''If you have read why he was banned and think it's censorship, I respectfully submit that you '''do not''' understand what happened. Sorry. -wl''<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-10 18:19:04'' [[nbsp]] Thanks for making that comment extremely CLEAR....both on this page and my own.... i wasnt sure i got it the first time around..... you've expressed your opinion a dozen times.... so i think its only fair you let me express mine about Steve once....yea? Or is going to get me into WIKI trouble too? :::gasps::: --["Users/WeMo"]<br> - ------<br> - ''2007-09-10 18:36:29'' [[nbsp]] Don't embarrass yourself. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ deleted</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 18:36:29BrentLaabsComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 153: </td> <td> Line 153: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 18:36:29'' [[nbsp]] Don't embarrass yourself. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 18:19:04WeMoComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 151: </td> <td> Line 151: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 18:19:04'' [[nbsp]] Thanks for making that comment extremely CLEAR....both on this page and my own.... i wasnt sure i got it the first time around..... you've expressed your opinion a dozen times.... so i think its only fair you let me express mine about Steve once....yea? Or is going to get me into WIKI trouble too? :::gasps::: --["Users/WeMo"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 18:17:43WilliamLewis(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 150: </td> <td> Line 150: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''If<span>&nbsp;you</span> you have read why he was banned and think it's censorship, I respectfully submit that you '''do not''' understand what happened. Sorry. -wl'' </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''If you have read why he was banned and think it's censorship, I respectfully submit that you '''do not''' understand what happened. Sorry. -wl'' </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 18:15:03WilliamLewis <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 150: </td> <td> Line 150: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''If you you have read why he was banned and think it's censorship, I respectfully submit that you 'do not' understand what happened. Sorry. -wl'' </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''If you you have read why he was banned and think it's censorship, I respectfully submit that you '<span>''</span>do not<span>''</span>' understand what happened. Sorry. -wl'' </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 18:14:19WilliamLewis(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 150: </td> <td> Line 150: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''If you you have read why he was banned and think it's censorship, you do not understand what happened. Sorry. -wl'' </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''If you you have read why he was banned and think it's censorship, <span>I respectfully submit that </span>you <span>'</span>do not<span>'</span> understand what happened. Sorry. -wl'' </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 18:08:58WilliamLewis(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 150: </td> <td> Line 150: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ''If you you have read why he was banned and think it's censorship, you do not understand what happened. Sorry. -wl''</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 18:02:57WeMoComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 148: </td> <td> Line 148: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 18:02:57'' [[nbsp]] ....Yes i have read it, but i, unlike some of you have actually sat down with Steve and have had a personal conversation to understand where he is coming from....did i get get fed up? Nope... --["Users/WeMo"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 18:02:47WeMo(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 148: </td> <td> Line 148: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ....Yes i have read it, but i, unlike some of you have actually sat down with Steve and have had a personal conversation to understand where he is coming from....did i get get fed up? Nope...</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 18:02:24WeMo(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 146: </td> <td> Line 146: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + <br> + ....Yes i have read it, but i, unlike some of you have actually sat down with Steve and have had a personal conversation to understand where he is coming from....did i get get fed up? Nope...</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 17:36:58StevenDaubertattributed / slight re word <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 145: </td> <td> Line 145: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> .... Sorry to stoop to a personal attack, but did you read the proposal? <span>Do</span> you <span>seem</span> to understand why DW is fed up with Steve? </td> <td> <span>+</span> .... Sorry to stoop to a personal attack, but did you read the proposal? <span>Can</span> you <span>try</span> to understand why DW is fed up with Steve?<span>&nbsp;--["Users/StevenDaubert"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 17:34:38StevenDaubert <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 102: </td> <td> Line 102: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * ["Action Blue College Democrats" ABCD] --["Users/StevenDaubert"]</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 144: </td> <td> Line 145: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ .... Sorry to stoop to a personal attack, but did you read the proposal? Do you seem to understand why DW is fed up with Steve?</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 16:37:37WeMoComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 142: </td> <td> Line 142: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 16:37:37'' [[nbsp]] WOW i had no idea the Davis Wiki was such a censor-whore. Who knew they're were a few powerful men who went around trying to shut up....ONE man on the wiki. I hope you are all satisfied with yourselves. Hope im not next... --["Users/WeMo"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 14:17:06EdWins <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ This proposal was drafted from discussion on the ["Ban Steven Ostrowski"] page.<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 13:11:53EdWinsComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 138: </td> <td> Line 138: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 13:11:53'' [[nbsp]] Well, Graham offered (up the page) to help take care of enforcing a ban admin side. --["Users/EdWins"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 12:48:23MattJurachentering the debate to support Option C <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 131: </td> <td> Line 131: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ''The question may become, which will be the easiest way to keep him from peeing all over the wiki until then? --KarlMogel''<br> + <br> + Yup. His good edits contribute little or nothing to the DW knowledge base. His bad edits, which are legion, clog the pipes with misinformation and edit-war BS. Complete silence from him would not rob us of any meaningful content, but would instead let us spend our time and bytes on real information and opinion.<br> + <br> + The real question is, what is the best way to get silence, from the admins' point of view? We are waay beyond any freedom of speech issues here. If Option B would result in silence but with less work for the admins, I'll support it. But I am not bothered by any accusations of squelching speech associated with Option C. If that's the easiest path to silence, I'm all for it.<br> + <br> + -- ["MattJurach"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 12:07:17SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 127: </td> <td> Line 127: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ Excuse implies that I feel guilty about it or that I should feel guilty about it which I feel neigther. I don't even remember what it was about, probably something very trivial. The point being is that Jabber wanted to call me that one time and I didn't get the phone call for whatever reason and I decided not to reply back because the issue had already been resolved. I would rather not have to call people about such things like the Davis Wiki. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 11:54:26PaulHarms <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 126: </td> <td> Line 126: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ Um...that's not a very good excuse. Sorry. -PH</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 11:51:35SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 125: </td> <td> Line 125: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- -------</span> </td> <td> <span>+ * Yeah, those who know me best know that I am notorious for not charging my phone, reading my voice mail, or not calling people when I should. I am getting better at it through necessity but that's the deal with that. I don't remember hearing any voice mails, doesn't mean they didn't arrive in my inbox but I never picked them up or replied back. Also, I have had three phones since January 2007, I keep losing them for some reason. The deal is that I have only heard Jabber Wokky's voice once and that was a few days ago and I am not going to reveal the contents of that conversation, but Jabber can testify himself that he has only talked to me on the phone that one time. Now, for the quotes that you have mentioned I never called Jabber Wokky despite his request at the time and the issue in which he wished to call about how been resolved as far as I was concerned so afterwards I didn't feel a need to call. And of course, I don't need that edit to tell me his phone number, it has always existed on his own page. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]<br> + <br> + <br> + ------</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 11:22:10KarlMogelit was acknowledged. Then probably deleted. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 121: </td> <td> Line 121: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Steve also acknowledged that he got JabberWokky's voicemail message, although seemed to indicate that he wouldn't answer it. Here's the following edit from March 5th.<br> + * ''Phone is out of batteries and I am in a computer lab classroom. My activity will cease at around 2 due to another class. --["SteveOstrowski"]''<br> + Unless the cell phone account was closed, Steve deleted the voicemail and declined getting in contact with JabberWokky. (Unless he hangs onto it to listen to it from time to time... you never know)<br> + Am I the only one that finds it odd that he tried to sell cell phones and still can't seem to get them to work for him? -KJM</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 11:10:33EdWins(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 120: </td> <td> Line 120: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Around the same time, JabberWokky edited a few pages with comment logs with stuff like "Steve, call me." He then added the phone number to his wikipage with the best times to reach hmim. Anyway, just posting this to show, as I said, that the effort has been made many times to try to seriously talk with him, even on the telephone by a neutral party! Even if Steve denies it. He also replied to JabberWokkys comments about his phone batteries being dead, so <span>unless he lost his mind (and his phone) I</span>'<span>m pretty sure he knew at the time (e</span>ve<span>n if he forgot it now)</span>. -["EdWins" ES] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Around the same time, JabberWokky edited a few pages with comment logs with stuff like "Steve, call me." He then added the phone number to his wikipage with the best times to reach hmim. Anyway, just posting this to show, as I said, that the effort has been made many times to try to seriously talk with him, even on the telephone by a neutral party! Even if Steve denies it. He also replied to JabberWokkys comments about his phone batteries being dead, so <span>at the time there</span>'<span>s no way he couldn't ha</span>ve<span>&nbsp;known</span>. -["EdWins" ES] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 11:08:23EdWins(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 120: </td> <td> Line 120: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Around the same time, JabberWokky edited a few pages with comment logs with stuff like "Steve, call me." He then added the phone number to his wikipage with the best times to reach hmim. Anyway, just posting this to show, as I said, that the effort has been made many times to try to seriously talk with him, even on the telephone by a neutral party! -["EdWins" ES] </td> <td> <span>+</span> Around the same time, JabberWokky edited a few pages with comment logs with stuff like "Steve, call me." He then added the phone number to his wikipage with the best times to reach hmim. Anyway, just posting this to show, as I said, that the effort has been made many times to try to seriously talk with him, even on the telephone by a neutral party!<span>&nbsp;Even if Steve denies it. He also replied to JabberWokkys comments about his phone batteries being dead, so unless he lost his mind (and his phone) I'm pretty sure he knew at the time (even if he forgot it now).</span> -["EdWins" ES] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 11:05:58EdWins <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 120: </td> <td> Line 120: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ Around the same time, JabberWokky edited a few pages with comment logs with stuff like "Steve, call me." He then added the phone number to his wikipage with the best times to reach hmim. Anyway, just posting this to show, as I said, that the effort has been made many times to try to seriously talk with him, even on the telephone by a neutral party! -["EdWins" ES]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 11:04:17EdWinsmight satisfy DavidPoole too. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 116: </td> <td> Line 116: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> <span>&nbsp;*</span> Is not a matter of that. Superiors told me that if there was a problem with the content on the Davis Wiki, we have to go back and figure out what else can be done. —SteveOstrowski </td> <td> <span>+</span> Is not a matter of that. Superiors told me that if there was a problem with the content on the Davis Wiki, we have to go back and figure out what else can be done. —SteveOstrowski </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 119: </td> <td> Line 119: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- *</span>2007-03-05 11:33:20 Steve, I have called and left several messages. If you are able to update the wiki, does that mean you have time to speak briefly? It is important that we talk. —JabberWokky </td> <td> <span>+ </span>2007-03-05 11:33:20 Steve, I have called and left several messages. If you are able to update the wiki, does that mean you have time to speak briefly? It is important that we talk. —JabberWokky<span><br> + <br> + -------</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 11:03:39EdWinsorly <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 109: </td> <td> Line 109: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: -----<br> - * [http://daviswiki.org/Users/SteveOstrowski?action=diff&amp;version2=341&amp;version1=340 Ah!] From back in March!<br> - 2007-03-05 09:28:50 Steve, you have been an editor on this wiki for quite awhile. I am asking you very seriously to reconsider your editing style and make an effort to compromise and work with other editors, recognizing their input and allowing it to be represented on entries. —JabberWokky<br> - * Is not a matter of that. Superiors told me that if there was a problem with the content on the Davis Wiki, we have to go back and figure out what else can be done. —SteveOstrowski<br> - * Steve, call me. 615 517-6900. We need to discuss this. —JabberWokky<br> - * I have class most of the day but I will keep the number in mind. —SteveOstrowski<br> - *2007-03-05 11:33:20 Steve, I have called and left several messages. If you are able to update the wiki, does that mean you have time to speak briefly? It is important that we talk. —JabberWokky</span> </td> <td> <span>+ --------</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 117: </td> <td> Line 111: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----<br> - ------</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 121: </td> <td> Line 113: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----</span> </td> <td> <span>+ * He may have? Only one? oic. Here:<br> + [http://daviswiki.org/Users/SteveOstrowski?action=diff&amp;version2=341&amp;version1=340 From a long time ago]<br> + 2007-03-05 09:28:50 Steve, you have been an editor on this wiki for quite awhile. I am asking you very seriously to reconsider your editing style and make an effort to compromise and work with other editors, recognizing their input and allowing it to be represented on entries. —JabberWokky<br> + * Is not a matter of that. Superiors told me that if there was a problem with the content on the Davis Wiki, we have to go back and figure out what else can be done. —SteveOstrowski<br> + Steve, call me. 615 517-6900. We need to discuss this. —JabberWokky<br> + I have class most of the day but I will keep the number in mind. —SteveOstrowski<br> + *2007-03-05 11:33:20 Steve, I have called and left several messages. If you are able to update the wiki, does that mean you have time to speak briefly? It is important that we talk. —JabberWokky</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 11:02:10EdWinsYour turn, Steve. Please, continue! <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 109: </td> <td> Line 109: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: -----<br> + * [http://daviswiki.org/Users/SteveOstrowski?action=diff&amp;version2=341&amp;version1=340 Ah!] From back in March!<br> + 2007-03-05 09:28:50 Steve, you have been an editor on this wiki for quite awhile. I am asking you very seriously to reconsider your editing style and make an effort to compromise and work with other editors, recognizing their input and allowing it to be represented on entries. —JabberWokky<br> + * Is not a matter of that. Superiors told me that if there was a problem with the content on the Davis Wiki, we have to go back and figure out what else can be done. —SteveOstrowski<br> + * Steve, call me. 615 517-6900. We need to discuss this. —JabberWokky<br> + * I have class most of the day but I will keep the number in mind. —SteveOstrowski<br> + *2007-03-05 11:33:20 Steve, I have called and left several messages. If you are able to update the wiki, does that mean you have time to speak briefly? It is important that we talk. —JabberWokky<br> + <br> + ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 112: </td> <td> Line 121: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 11:00:51SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 111: </td> <td> Line 111: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * He may have, I don't doubt that maybe he tried over the last few months but I never got a voice mail and sometimes I don't possess a phone because I tend to lose them. Some of the editors here, I have been in contact with many a time in ASUCD but I wouldn't say those conversations were about the Davis Wiki and if they existed at all would be very brief. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 10:51:34EdWins(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 110: </td> <td> Line 110: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2007-09-10 10:49:17'' [[nbsp]] I was pretty sure I remember JabberWokky asking for your number months ago, then commenting that he had left you messages. I assumed that since he had your number, and commented that he was trying to talk to you multiple times, that he eventually had. Sorry for assuming! [talk continued]. --["Users/EdWins"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2007-09-10 10:49:17'' [[nbsp]] I was pretty sure I remember JabberWokky asking for your number months ago, then commenting that he had left you messages. I assumed that since he had your number, and commented that he was trying to talk to you multiple times, that he eventually had. Sorry for assuming! <span>&nbsp;He may also have left his number for you to call around the same time, but I don't want to dig through the 10 million edits to find the page versions. </span>[talk continued].<span>&nbsp;</span> --["Users/EdWins"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 10:49:17EdWinsComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 109: </td> <td> Line 109: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 10:49:17'' [[nbsp]] I was pretty sure I remember JabberWokky asking for your number months ago, then commenting that he had left you messages. I assumed that since he had your number, and commented that he was trying to talk to you multiple times, that he eventually had. Sorry for assuming! [talk continued]. --["Users/EdWins"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 10:48:10SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 108: </td> <td> Line 108: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Not to interrupt your intriguing conversation but I received only one phone call from Jabber Walky and that was a few days ago. I have received none since I first became an editor. As for being contacted by others, the last one who talked with me was Craig and it was an issue in which we both agreed on for some reason, other than that I don't recall anyone contacting me. But continue your talk. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 10:27:53EdWinsComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 106: </td> <td> Line 106: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 10:27:53'' [[nbsp]] Dude...the first ban page was started in December of 2006. That was a pretty long time ago. I'm pretty sure that several people have spoken with him, many many times. Many times. Of course, every time the banpage is bumped, someone asks "why not try talking to him?". I'm just asking you keep the time frame in month - it doesn't seem to stick. If someone's been on the verge of being banned for *that* long...that alone should speak of a problem. JabberWokky has spoken to him on the telephone several times over the months, including as recent as within the last week I believe, and JasonAller is always the nice guy who tries to talk with him. I think the "talking with him option" wore out a while ago. --["Users/EdWins"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 10:25:04DavidPooleComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 103: </td> <td> Line 103: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 10:25:04'' [[nbsp]] Though I am just taking a gander at this issue after my long vacation from all this drama, I am still adding my two cents as a quasi-netizen of this community.<br> + It seems clear to me that Steven has an obsession regarding certian issues and topics on the wiki, perhaps stemming from his own internal political beliefs (libertarianism thus anti-governmentish) and religious beliefs (catholic thus 'pro-life'), and perhaps personal sentiment against certian individuals who have been a barrier to him in accomplishing his goals. I am a bit of an optimist but I do not think that either a lockout nor ban are appropiate options for the community (I am curious as to what A is). Perhaps these problems are reflective of Steven's personal problems in life or something like that, or they are highly contrived attempts at manipulation for a greater sense of personal power (which reflects that he feels a lack of such power), in either case I suppose the question becomes that of the community 'putting up' with the difficulties caused by Steven. Before such measures are considered, has anyone attempted to talk with Steve, in person, in a non confrontational way? perhaps differences may be explained or resolved such that these things could work better, Steven probably feels that the crowd is against him (judging by this page it is), I dunno, perhaps you guys are being a bit to hard on the poor sod, thus is my sympathetic vote, talk to the guy? --["Users/DavidPoole"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-10 09:58:18DavidPooleComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 100: </td> <td> Line 100: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-10 09:58:18'' [[nbsp]] Though I am just taking a gander at this issue after my long vacation from all this drama, I am still adding my two cents as a quasi-netizen of this community.<br> + It seems clear to me that Steven has an obsession regarding certian issues and topics on the wiki, perhaps stemming from his own internal political beliefs (libertarianism thus anti-governmentish) and religious beliefs (catholic thus 'pro-life'), and perhaps personal sentiment against certian individuals who have been a barrier to him in accomplishing his goals. I am a bit of an optimist but I do not think that either a lockout nor ban are appropiate options for the community (I am curious as to what A is). Perhaps these problems are reflective of Steven's personal problems in life or something like that, or they are highly contrived attempts at manipulation for a greater sense of personal power (which reflects that he feels a lack of such power), in either case I suppose the question becomes that of the community 'putting up' with the difficulties caused by Steven. Before such measures are considered, has anyone attempted to talk with Steve, in person, in a non confrontational way? perhaps differences may be explained or resolved such that these things could work better, Steven probably feels that the crowd is against him (judging by this page it is), I dunno, perhaps you guys are being a bit to hard on the poor sod, thus is my sympathetic vote, talk to the guy? --["Users/DavidPoole"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-09 11:46:23BrentLaabsk, here's a page <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 99: </td> <td> Line 99: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * ["Aioli Bodega Española"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-09 09:32:51SteveOstrowskiComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 97: </td> <td> Line 97: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-09 09:32:51'' [[nbsp]] A lot of you guys are talking in generalalities. Pick a page, any page, and I will tell you why I must be on the Davis Wiki to provide balance. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-09 08:37:24MatthewShannon <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 92: </td> <td> Line 92: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ His antics are childish and shouldn't be allowed. I'd like to see a full ban as well. -Matt Shannon</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-08 17:19:37PaulHarms <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 89: </td> <td> Line 89: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ It's not about what Steven stands for. 1) If Steven were a moderate or a liberal and behaved in this manner we'd still be having this conversation. 2) Steven is not above the rules of the wiki just because he "represtents" a political minority ("shares the views of" might be a better term, since many far-right conservatives on campus are warry of being associated with Mr. Ostrowski). If your argument held, Joseph, nobody on the wiki could ever be held responsible for anything so long as he or she holds 'any' political perspective.<br> + I agree with you, though, that the purpose of our Wiki is to fairly and accurately represent Davis. Many of us have realized that Ostrowski's tactics do nothing to keep the Wiki fair and accurate; quite to the contrary, Steven deliberately uses the wiki to foster chaos and confusion. Considering nothing else, I think the general quality of information on the Wiki would increase with a total ban of SO.<br> + In the spirit of full disclosure, I've fought against nearly everything Steven has done in and regarding ASUCD, largely because his tactics and goals in student government are so similar to his tactics on the wiki. This being said, I'd like to see a full ban of Steven Ostrowski. -Paul Harms<br> + </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-08 15:47:58JoseBleckmanmoving discussion about my TV. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 88: </td> <td> Line 88: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- *Joseph C. Bleckman is only a lackey to the princess, whoever that is. - ["GregWebb"]<br> - * The Princess being referred to is the one mentioned in Mario Brothers, Joe likes to play that game often but not so much since his TV is gone. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-08 15:46:49SteveOstrowski <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 89: </td> <td> Line 89: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * The Princess being referred to is the one mentioned in Mario Brothers, Joe likes to play that game often but not so much since his TV is gone. --["Users/SteveOstrowski"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-08 15:42:40GregWebb <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 88: </td> <td> Line 88: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ *Joseph C. Bleckman is only a lackey to the princess, whoever that is. - ["GregWebb"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-08 13:49:13JoseBleckman <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 87: </td> <td> Line 87: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Lackey? Choosing to insult someone you're debating is, in my opinion, detrimental to keeping positive wiki dialogue. Do try to refrain from doing so. I haven't been playing ultraclose attention to the proceedings, but I wasn't aware that he was locked out of every single ASUCD page. Is that so? Now yes, I am his friend. Discounting opinions of his friends makes no more sence than discounting opinions of those who dislike him. Shall we discount them too? I supose eliminating the feelings of those pro- and anti- certain subjects would result in a neutral result, but it would also lead to a wiki with less flavour. While I would certainly prefer more people who represent all points of view to be active on the wiki, we're not blessed with that situation. For whatever reason, Steve is one of the more active editors, and silencing him is not going to suddenly encourage more people to take his place. Oh, it might lead to a more "happy" wiki, one where less points of views are questioned. It certainly would make for a "cleaner" recent changes. "Yay." --["Users/JoseBleckman"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-08 11:41:39WilliamLewis(quick edit) <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 89: </td> <td> Line 89: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ The software isn't currently built to do that. Ability to leave a comment inherently is ability to edit. -wl</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-08 11:37:20MattHhComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 87: </td> <td> Line 87: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-08 11:37:20'' [[nbsp]] what about just allowing him to make comments but not allowing him to edit pages. This way he can still add his opinions to the wiki, marked with his user name, but can't do anything beyond that. --["Users/MattHh"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-08 11:21:12PhilipNeustrommoved here <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 83: </td> <td> Line 83: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + I'll throw my hat into the "no-ban" pile. Banning him from certain pages is one thing, but knocking him off completely would be, in my opinion, a terrible blow to the wiki's ability to fairly and accurately represent certain aspects of Davis. In my opinion, he represents a sizable portion of the community (opposition parties in student government, for example) that we don't have many other examples of hella-active editors from. Any "problems" he causes on a page can and will be worked out eventually, and I have faith that it will ideally be through consensus, not by the silencing of his side. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> + <br> + We've already locked him out from the very pages you say he's worth keeping over. Thus, your reason for keeping him no longer exists. Notwithstanding that, should he be allowed to write about ASUCD stuff and his stuff again, the SFL@UCD page demonstrates that '''he is not a trustworthy source. He is not interested in the truth.''' He has been given many chances to change his ways over the months and he has shown no willingness to strive for accuracy. Also, you'd always side with him regardless of any other considerations, despite what you'd have us believe about your independence. It's obvious to outsiders and even moreso to people involved in ASUCD. You're his lackey. A vote against a ban from you is ever so slightly more objective than a vote against a ban from Steve himself. Finally, we're not silencing his side. If someone (i.e. you) wants to come in and write extensively about Steve's ASUCD antics in a manner sympathetic to him, nobody is going to remove those edits. We're worried about his continual efforts to censor and whitewash things in a way favorable to himself. Steve's edits have not been informative; they have been propaganda. -wl</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-08 02:42:48JoseBleckman <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 73: </td> <td> Line 73: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * How does backoff editing apply to instant reverts? Gabe posted a comment - Steven reverted it. JasonAller then reverted that, re-adding Gabe's comment. Who was supposed to have backed off there? </td> <td> <span>+</span> * How does backoff editing apply to instant reverts? Gabe posted a comment - Steven reverted it. JasonAller then reverted that, re-adding Gabe's comment. Who was supposed to have backed off there?<span>&nbsp;- ["Edwins"]<br> + * In general I dislike reverts, but I would say that both sides should make an effort to backoff edit. Just because one side does not, shouldn't be a carde blanche for their rivals to reciprocate. Its stuff like that that ends up cluttering recent changes. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-08 00:56:30StevenDaubertComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 78: </td> <td> Line 78: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-08 00:56:30'' [[nbsp]] What Karl said...<br> + <br> + It's also the way he will obfuscate at everything --["Users/StevenDaubert"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-07 23:09:53GregWebbComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 76: </td> <td> Line 76: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-07 23:09:53'' [[nbsp]] I support a ban. I don't want to see Recent Changes cluttered with junk anymore. --["Users/GregWebb"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-07 23:07:02EdWinsquestion to JB, and as PN said, 'the community heavily favors a ban' <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 73: </td> <td> Line 73: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * How does backoff editing apply to instant reverts? Gabe posted a comment - Steven reverted it. JasonAller then reverted that, re-adding Gabe's comment. Who was supposed to have backed off there?</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-07 16:22:35KarlMogellinky <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 72: </td> <td> Line 72: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2007-09-07 15:49:45'' [[nbsp]] Backoff editing &gt; Banning. Try it, folks. It'll work. --["Users/JoseBleckman"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2007-09-07 15:49:45'' [[nbsp]] <span>[http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ExponentialBackoffEditing </span>Backoff editing<span>]</span> &gt; Banning. Try it, folks. It'll work. --["Users/JoseBleckman"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-07 16:18:53KarlMogelComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 73: </td> <td> Line 73: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-07 16:18:53'' [[nbsp]] Clearly, as these games progress, Steve has no respect for the Davis Wiki Community. Each warning goes in one ear and out the other. --["Users/KarlMogel"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-07 15:49:45JoseBleckmanComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 71: </td> <td> Line 71: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-07 15:49:45'' [[nbsp]] Backoff editing &gt; Banning. Try it, folks. It'll work. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 23:25:21Graham.Freemanclarification <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 66: </td> <td> Line 66: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2007-09-06 23:00:30'' [[nbsp]] Because Steve has repeatedly and blatantly and willfully violated our community standards for so long, and yet because I do believe that people can redeem themselves, I vote to ban Steve for 6 months.<span>&nbsp;</span> I'll help on the admin side (mostly with IP address investigation, firewalling, and abuse complaints) when Steve tries to circumvent the ban. --["Users/Graham.Freeman"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2007-09-06 23:00:30'' [[nbsp]] Because Steve has repeatedly and blatantly and willfully violated our community standards for so long, and yet because I do believe that people can redeem themselves, I vote to ban Steve for 6 months.<span><br> + <br> +</span> I'll help on the admin side (mostly with IP address investigation, firewalling, and <span>filing </span>abuse complaints) when Steve tries to circumvent the ban.<span><br> + <br> + However, I no longer have the time to keep an eye on Recent Changes, so I'll rely on the community to notify me via email/Jabber/phone when Steve plays fake account games. </span> --["Users/Graham.Freeman"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 23:00:30Graham.FreemanComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 65: </td> <td> Line 65: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 23:00:30'' [[nbsp]] Because Steve has repeatedly and blatantly and willfully violated our community standards for so long, and yet because I do believe that people can redeem themselves, I vote to ban Steve for 6 months. I'll help on the admin side (mostly with IP address investigation, firewalling, and abuse complaints) when Steve tries to circumvent the ban. --["Users/Graham.Freeman"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 21:20:51KarlMogelminor <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 62: </td> <td> Line 62: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> He's got until June 2008, and then he graduates, and will probably be gone and won't look back. The question may become, which will be the easiest way to keep him from peeing all over the wiki until then? --["Users/KarlMogel"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> He's got until June 2008, and then he graduates, and will probably be gone and won't look back. The question may become, which will be the easiest way to keep him from peeing all over the wiki until then?<span><br> + '''C'''<br> +</span> --["Users/KarlMogel"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 21:20:26KarlMogelComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 57: </td> <td> Line 57: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 21:20:26'' [[nbsp]] It may create more trouble initially, (remembering What's-his-face from Vacaville). However once this has settled down, if he is banned, his puppet pages should be pared down and removed of the slights against him. This should reduce his desire to try to find a workaround to continue doing what he does.<br> + <br> + I am continually disturbed at his choice of language in this matter, rather than duck his head he is saying "do what you want to me now - I'll have it my way when you look the other way" which pretty much signals that he has no desire to do things differently. Ban him from specific pages, he'll just create more for himself to play in and clog the Recent Changes with his drama. Even with option B we still have whack-a-mole.<br> + <br> + He's got until June 2008, and then he graduates, and will probably be gone and won't look back. The question may become, which will be the easiest way to keep him from peeing all over the wiki until then? --["Users/KarlMogel"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 20:38:43StevenDaubertComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 55: </td> <td> Line 55: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 20:38:43'' [[nbsp]] steve can play the game of politics and come up with cute wordings all day long, I'm just sick of it --["Users/StevenDaubert"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 18:41:19EdWins <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 52: </td> <td> Line 52: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: -----<br> -</span> * Exactly. I feel like we're cycling through the same cycle of edits. Like I said, sure, he'll occasionally make some good edits, but he obviously has _not_ changed anything about it. The ban page has been around for over 9 months, and he was a user well before that. This whole idea with locking out is too little too late. I think he's abused and shown to be anything but deserving of a normal user status. Short of vandalizing every single page, is there anything else he could do to be worthy of a ban? It's not even just revert wars, so I don't think even JasonAller's request will have effect - it's the stuff like: [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 this]. Steadfast refusal. And even JA noted [http://daviswiki.org/Users/KarlMogel?action=diff&amp;version2=199&amp;version1=197 that questions dont get answered]. After all the shenigans, I think any "good" that may come out of his edits is far outweighed by ultimately every other action on the wiki for well over a year. How many chances has he already been given, been asked of, or begged to do? -["EdWins" ES]<br> <span>- ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----<br> - ------</span> </td> <td> <span>+</span> * Exactly. I feel like we're cycling through the same cycle of edits. Like I said, sure, he'll occasionally make some good edits, but he obviously has _not_ changed anything about it. The ban page has been around for over 9 months, and he was a user well before that. <span>&nbsp;That right there should be a sign that obviously something is not going right, so why would it start now?</span> This whole idea with locking out is too little too late. I think he's abused and shown to be anything but deserving of a normal user status. Short of vandalizing every single page, is there anything else he could do to be worthy of a ban? It's not even just revert wars, so I don't think even JasonAller's request will have effect - it's the stuff like: [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 this]. Steadfast refusal. And even JA noted [http://daviswiki.org/Users/KarlMogel?action=diff&amp;version2=199&amp;version1=197 that questions dont get answered]. After all the shenigans, I think any "good" that may come out of his edits is far outweighed by ultimately every other action on the wiki for well over a year. How many chances has he already been given, been asked of, or begged to do? <span>&nbsp;On a side note, I think this is good precedent for future editors there may be on-going problems with. I really have to say that I feel that a lot of this could have been headed off completely, were it to be done around 6 months ago as many are saying. Lack of action then was, of course in hindsight, an error. </span>-["EdWins" ES]<br> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 57: </td> <td> Line 55: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 18:35:40EdWinsreply. still too little, too late. really now. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 52: </td> <td> Line 52: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Your version: -----<br> + * Exactly. I feel like we're cycling through the same cycle of edits. Like I said, sure, he'll occasionally make some good edits, but he obviously has _not_ changed anything about it. The ban page has been around for over 9 months, and he was a user well before that. This whole idea with locking out is too little too late. I think he's abused and shown to be anything but deserving of a normal user status. Short of vandalizing every single page, is there anything else he could do to be worthy of a ban? It's not even just revert wars, so I don't think even JasonAller's request will have effect - it's the stuff like: [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 this]. Steadfast refusal. And even JA noted [http://daviswiki.org/Users/KarlMogel?action=diff&amp;version2=199&amp;version1=197 that questions dont get answered]. After all the shenigans, I think any "good" that may come out of his edits is far outweighed by ultimately every other action on the wiki for well over a year. How many chances has he already been given, been asked of, or begged to do? -["EdWins" ES]<br> + ----- /!\ Edit conflict! Other version: -----</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 54: </td> <td> Line 57: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ----- /!\ End of edit conflict -----</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 18:31:53BrentLaabsreiterated my opinion <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 11: </td> <td> Line 11: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Ban. </td> <td> <span>+</span> <span>'''</span>Ban.<span>'''</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 52: </td> <td> Line 52: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + I think you all know where I am on this proposal, being the one that created the ["Ban Steven Ostrowski"] page, [wiki:drama:"at least 100 years ago"]. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:58:22JesseSinghComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 50: </td> <td> Line 50: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 17:58:22'' [[nbsp]] Nobody saying being an admin would be easy. And I'd rather trouble the few admins than the hundreds of users who have to put up with his nonsense on a daily basis. Proposal B would've been good... 6 months ago. --["Users/JesseSingh"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:46:54PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 47: </td> <td> Line 47: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> You're right -- the community heavily favors a ban, but there's a couple of (older) exceptions. The reason why I said we ought to just lock him out, and allow him to edit other pages, is that it encourages -- or at least gives him the option -- of contributing elsewhere. I was thinking that it would decrease the likelihood that he'll "play nasty" and try and create sockpuppet accounts because he still has general wiki editing privileges, just not on a couple of pages. In the past, with the other person we'd banned, it became a bit of a nightmare (for admins) because the individual felt it necessary to continually circumvent bans. By allowing Steve to be a legitimate user we can send the message that we want him to use his normal account for all of his edits. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> You're right -- the community heavily favors a ban, but there's a couple of (older) exceptions. The reason why I said we ought to just lock him out, and allow him to edit other pages, is that it encourages -- or at least gives him the option -- of contributing elsewhere. I was thinking that it would decrease the likelihood that he'll "play nasty" and try and create sockpuppet accounts because he still has general wiki editing privileges, just not on a couple of pages. In the past, with the other person we'd banned, it became a bit of a nightmare (for admins) because the individual felt it necessary to continually circumvent bans. By allowing Steve to be a legitimate user we can send the message that we want him to use his normal account for all of his edit<span>s.<br> + <br> + We should do what the community wants. We'll ban him if that's what people really want, but keep in mind that it will probably create more trouble than its worth, at least for the admin</span>s. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:41:54WilliamLewisthreading <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 32: </td> <td> Line 32: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ------<br> -</span> ''2007-09-06 14:10:32'' [[nbsp]] Who does the same? --["Users/JamesSchwab"]<br> <span>- ------<br> -</span> ''2007-09-06 14:13:42'' [[nbsp]] Take a gander at any revert war that goes on and on without either (or one side) attempting compromise edits. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> <span>- *</span> ''2007-09-06 14:17:04'' [[nbsp]] Commissioner Bleckman, I don't know of anyone else who won't allow changes to a page. I mean, sometimes I get on my high horse, but when I realize that a lot of people are against me, I just go to sleep and let others sort out the debate. Fundamentally, a wiki is made to edit. Those who don't want it edited ''and'' who have been told repeatedly over months that they weren't playing fair -- sure, I think we can lock those people out of certain pages. </td> <td> <span>+ </span> ''2007-09-06 14:10:32'' [[nbsp]] Who does the same? --["Users/JamesSchwab"]<br> <span>+ </span> ''2007-09-06 14:13:42'' [[nbsp]] Take a gander at any revert war that goes on and on without either (or one side) attempting compromise edits. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]<br> <span>+ </span> ''2007-09-06 14:17:04'' [[nbsp]] Commissioner Bleckman, I don't know of anyone else who won't allow changes to a page. I mean, sometimes I get on my high horse, but when I realize that a lot of people are against me, I just go to sleep and let others sort out the debate. Fundamentally, a wiki is made to edit. Those who don't want it edited ''and'' who have been told repeatedly over months that they weren't playing fair -- sure, I think we can lock those people out of certain pages. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 38: </td> <td> Line 36: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Or, you know, just ["Ban Steven Ostrowski" ban them] and get it over with. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]<br> <span>- *</span> ''2007-09-06 17:13:40'' [[nbsp]] No one else edits as he does. [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 Who else has ever been like this] on multiple pages? He always tries to keep info secret and refuses to ever do anything about it. That's not a double standard at all. It's more than "just reverts" which is why I vote ban. --["Users/EdWins"] </td> <td> <span>+ </span> Or, you know, just ["Ban Steven Ostrowski" ban them] and get it over with. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]<br> <span>+ </span> ''2007-09-06 17:13:40'' [[nbsp]] No one else edits as he does. [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 Who else has ever been like this] on multiple pages? He always tries to keep info secret and refuses to ever do anything about it. That's not a double standard at all. It's more than "just reverts" which is why I vote ban. --["Users/EdWins"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:40:37PhilipNeustromrationale -- reply ot edwin <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 48: </td> <td> Line 48: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + You're right -- the community heavily favors a ban, but there's a couple of (older) exceptions. The reason why I said we ought to just lock him out, and allow him to edit other pages, is that it encourages -- or at least gives him the option -- of contributing elsewhere. I was thinking that it would decrease the likelihood that he'll "play nasty" and try and create sockpuppet accounts because he still has general wiki editing privileges, just not on a couple of pages. In the past, with the other person we'd banned, it became a bit of a nightmare (for admins) because the individual felt it necessary to continually circumvent bans. By allowing Steve to be a legitimate user we can send the message that we want him to use his normal account for all of his edits. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:29:55WilliamLewis+ indent <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 38: </td> <td> Line 38: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Or, you know, just ["Ban Steven Ostrowski" ban them] and get it over with. --["Users/BrentLaabs"] </td> <td> <span>+ </span> Or, you know, just ["Ban Steven Ostrowski" ban them] and get it over with. --["Users/BrentLaabs"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:28:17EdWinsthreading. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 31: </td> <td> Line 31: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ''2007-09-06 13:34:32'' [[nbsp]] Out of option B and...nothing, I vote for C: ban. Far too many chances, too many strikes. This would have been fine if implemented months ago, but it's too little too late. --["Users/EdWins"]<br> - ------</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 38: </td> <td> Line 36: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ------<br> -</span> ''2007-09-06 14:17:04'' [[nbsp]] Commissioner Bleckman, I don't know of anyone else who won't allow changes to a page. I mean, sometimes I get on my high horse, but when I realize that a lot of people are against me, I just go to sleep and let others sort out the debate. Fundamentally, a wiki is made to edit. Those who don't want it edited ''and'' who have been told repeatedly over months that they weren't playing fair -- sure, I think we can lock those people out of certain pages. </td> <td> <span>+ * </span> ''2007-09-06 14:17:04'' [[nbsp]] Commissioner Bleckman, I don't know of anyone else who won't allow changes to a page. I mean, sometimes I get on my high horse, but when I realize that a lot of people are against me, I just go to sleep and let others sort out the debate. Fundamentally, a wiki is made to edit. Those who don't want it edited ''and'' who have been told repeatedly over months that they weren't playing fair -- sure, I think we can lock those people out of certain pages. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 42: </td> <td> Line 39: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ------<br> -</span> ''2007-09-06 17:13:40'' [[nbsp]] No one else edits as he does. [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 Who else has ever been like this] on multiple pages? He always tries to keep info secret and refuses to ever do anything about it. That's not a double standard at all. It's more than "just reverts" which is why I vote ban. --["Users/EdWins"] </td> <td> <span>+ * </span> ''2007-09-06 17:13:40'' [[nbsp]] No one else edits as he does. [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 Who else has ever been like this] on multiple pages? He always tries to keep info secret and refuses to ever do anything about it. That's not a double standard at all. It's more than "just reverts" which is why I vote ban. --["Users/EdWins"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:27:45EdWinsedit if I'm hasty. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 10: </td> <td> Line 10: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- </span> </td> <td> <span>+ (This option added hours after B was implemented.)</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 51: </td> <td> Line 51: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> JasonAller posted said he doesn't prefer a ban, but wanted a limitation. No one posted in SO's favor (JabberWokky asked if anyone would defend him). Several people called for a ban yet again, none defended, and yet banning isn't even on this proposal, which was implemented immediately? Maybe people are fine with choice "b" now, but if banning wasn't even offered....I don't really feel like that's appropriately representative. --["Users/EdWins"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> JasonAller posted said he doesn't prefer a ban, but wanted a limitation. No one posted in SO's favor (JabberWokky asked if anyone would defend him). Several people called for a ban yet again, none defended, and yet banning isn't even on this proposal, which was implemented immediately? Maybe people are fine with choice "b" now, but if banning wasn't even offered....I don't really feel like that's appropriately representative.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;That is, unless B is temporarily implemented until a ban takes place? Are people waiting for more feedback? It's not really clear. </span> --["Users/EdWins"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:26:43EdWinsComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 46: </td> <td> Line 46: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 17:26:43'' [[nbsp]] There was only one option up on this page (the first was taken off in hours?), and it was implemented almost instantly. I disagree. JabberWokky made the proposal, but I don't think it was a fair set of choices from what's been voiced.<br> + <br> + From the last 48 hours on the ban page, several people voiced in favor of banning: me, Karl, SteveDaubert, JesseSingh, WilliamLewis, Pxlated, BradBenedict (6monthban), JamesSchwab. There were also many votes prior to the last 48 hours as it's a rather long page, but not including those. (Though it's indicative of former frequent editors opinions which (imo) are still valid and just shows that theres a lot of people in favor of banning).<br> + <br> + JasonAller posted said he doesn't prefer a ban, but wanted a limitation. No one posted in SO's favor (JabberWokky asked if anyone would defend him). Several people called for a ban yet again, none defended, and yet banning isn't even on this proposal, which was implemented immediately? Maybe people are fine with choice "b" now, but if banning wasn't even offered....I don't really feel like that's appropriately representative. --["Users/EdWins"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:22:34WilliamLewisComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 44: </td> <td> Line 44: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 17:22:34'' [[nbsp]] Steve has contributed almost NOTHING of value and his antics have gone on for too long. Sure, B is good because it ended these current edit wars. However, Steve's going to keep on editing in the same way and we will simply have to keep on adding to the list of pages that he isn't allowed to edit. The work required to maintain such a list is not justified in light of the quality and nature of the other non-controversial edits that he makes. Additionally, B is not sufficiently punitive. Steve has blatantly disregarded wiki-norms for months and has gotten away with his behavior with little consequences besides losing his edit wars. A ban would be most appropriate. It's a permanent solution to the problem that is Steve. It also will signal that we as a wiki are tired of funny business and will not tolerate repeated, intentional, and malicious disregard for community standards. --["Users/WilliamLewis"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:15:42EdWinsputting in option C. a lot of people were in favor of it on the Ban page. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 8: </td> <td> Line 8: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + = C =<br> + <br> + Ban.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 17:13:40EdWinsComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 38: </td> <td> Line 38: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 17:13:40'' [[nbsp]] No one else edits as he does. [http://daviswiki.org/Students_for_Life_at_UCD/Talk?action=diff&amp;version2=21&amp;version1=19 Who else has ever been like this] on multiple pages? He always tries to keep info secret and refuses to ever do anything about it. That's not a double standard at all. It's more than "just reverts" which is why I vote ban. --["Users/EdWins"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 14:17:04BrentLaabsComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 34: </td> <td> Line 34: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 14:17:04'' [[nbsp]] Commissioner Bleckman, I don't know of anyone else who won't allow changes to a page. I mean, sometimes I get on my high horse, but when I realize that a lot of people are against me, I just go to sleep and let others sort out the debate. Fundamentally, a wiki is made to edit. Those who don't want it edited ''and'' who have been told repeatedly over months that they weren't playing fair -- sure, I think we can lock those people out of certain pages.<br> + <br> + Or, you know, just ["Ban Steven Ostrowski" ban them] and get it over with. --["Users/BrentLaabs"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 14:13:42JoseBleckmanComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 32: </td> <td> Line 32: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 14:13:42'' [[nbsp]] Take a gander at any revert war that goes on and on without either (or one side) attempting compromise edits. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 14:10:32JamesSchwabComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 30: </td> <td> Line 30: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 14:10:32'' [[nbsp]] Who does the same? --["Users/JamesSchwab"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 14:05:50JoseBleckmanComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 28: </td> <td> Line 28: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 14:05:50'' [[nbsp]] If we're locking Steve out of pages that he tends to allow no changes to, I certainly hope that we are also applying that rule to other people who do the same. Double standards are lame. --["Users/JoseBleckman"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 13:34:32EdWinsComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 26: </td> <td> Line 26: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 13:34:32'' [[nbsp]] Out of option B and...nothing, I vote for C: ban. Far too many chances, too many strikes. This would have been fine if implemented months ago, but it's too little too late. --["Users/EdWins"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:53:25KarlMogelComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 24: </td> <td> Line 24: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 12:53:25'' [[nbsp]] Let's hope he doesn't start editing from other places to try to get around the ban. I'm glad that the madness has subsided for now. --["Users/KarlMogel"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:50:58JabberWokkyGads, but I loath this whole thing. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 3: </td> <td> Line 3: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- - retracted for now, B is being implemented -</span> </td> <td> <span>+ - retracted -</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 6: </td> <td> Line 6: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Lock Steve out of entries specifically and allow all others to edit the pages like normal. Ban Steve's fake accounts. He would be free to contribute to discussion on the Talk pages and to edit the other pages around the wiki as usual. </td> <td> <span>+ <br> + '''Implemented:'''</span> Lock Steve out of entries specifically and allow all others to edit the pages like normal. Ban Steve's fake accounts. He would be free to contribute to discussion on the Talk pages and to edit the other pages around the wiki as usual. </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:48:42PxlAtedComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 21: </td> <td> Line 21: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 12:48:42'' [[nbsp]] 'b' sounds cool. --["Users/PxlAted"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:42:40JabberWokky <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 20: </td> <td> Line 20: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * Yeah, I hated the idea as well. I just wanted to propose anything other than kicking a member of the community out of an open community resource. You ''could'' have pointed out the simple solution when I emailed you. ;) (note to everybody else... he ''did'' point it out in his reply, but I didn't parse it until after I had posted the proposal). No worries... a group with one account in it is a blindingly obvious thing that didn't occur to me because I was so worried about dealing with escalation. No need to worry unless it occurs. --["JabberWokky"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:32:05PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 19: </td> <td> Line 19: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * The amount of work required by admins to maintain this "good approved wiki editor list" is greater larger than the amount of work required to ban his occasional fake accounts. Why dive into a complex proposal rather than trying out something simple like locking him out first? We can see how that goes and adapt accordingly. I think the overwhelming consensus of the community is that Steve ought not to be able to edit a few particular problem pages, but that Steve himself is someone who could potentially contribute to the wiki in positive ways. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * The amount of work required by admins to maintain this "good approved wiki editor list" is greater larger than the amount of work required to ban his occasional fake accounts<span>. There are also philosophical issues (elitism, mostly) that come with such a list</span>. Why dive into a complex proposal rather than trying out something simple like locking him out first? We can see how that goes and adapt accordingly. I think the overwhelming consensus of the community is that Steve ought not to be able to edit a few particular problem pages, but that Steve himself is someone who could potentially contribute to the wiki in positive ways. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:30:35PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 19: </td> <td> Line 19: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- * The amount of work required by admins to maintain this "good approved wiki editor list" is greater larger than the amount of work required to ban his occasional fake accounts. Why are you diving into a complex proposal rather than trying out something simple like locking him out first?</span> </td> <td> <span>+ * The amount of work required by admins to maintain this "good approved wiki editor list" is greater larger than the amount of work required to ban his occasional fake accounts. Why dive into a complex proposal rather than trying out something simple like locking him out first? We can see how that goes and adapt accordingly. I think the overwhelming consensus of the community is that Steve ought not to be able to edit a few particular problem pages, but that Steve himself is someone who could potentially contribute to the wiki in positive ways. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:29:07JabberWokky <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 2: </td> <td> Line 2: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- Okay, I have a viable concept in mind that doesn't involve banning an account but would prevent all the current frippery. I'm still mulling over the precise details (it is a variation on a suggestion by Jason Aller), but it would very effectively lock Steve out from editing the entries he is abusing. It would also lock out any new users who might have input (until they are authorized) and would create a special category of entries. Please understand that this would be a bad thing to do, and I'm suggesting it only as an alternative to a complete lockout of a person, which would be worse. It would also be an easily reversable thing: I imagine in a year or so, Steve will have moved on. He'll still be able to request various changes on the talk pages, but another editor would have to make them active. Please do not debate a Ban here, let me know what the editor community thinks about locking Steve out on a long term basis from the entries he has been abusing... with the collateral damage of freedom and simplicity. So far the admins have been even handed about content by being passive (not editing locking entries, and making all locks universal). This would require active gatekeeping of content, which is always subject to abuse, intentional, unintentional, and disputable. This is a proposal before the community of the Davis Wiki, and I want you all to be aware of the full consequences should the community decide to go this route. Remember the board also exists as a body to appeal the actions of admins to.</span> </td> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 4: </td> <td> Line 3: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- I have spoken not only with active editors involved in the fracas, but with wiki-savvy editors who are not interacting at all with Steve. The feedback is that the community would like something to be done. Consider this an open forum for this particular action (again, don't debate a ban here, as that is a different proposal). I would highly appreciate it if the editors who have remained silent on the issue weigh in to get a good cross community view of the issues involved.<br> - <br> - --<br> - Evan "JabberWokky" Edwards<br> - (615) 517-6900<br> - [[Mailto(jw DOT dw AT timewarp DOT org)]]<br> - ''...does not want to go down in the history books as having given the wiki an infection of lawyers...''</span> </td> <td> <span>+ - retracted for now, B is being implemented -</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:29:02PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 26: </td> <td> Line 26: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * The amount of work required by admins to maintain this "good approved wiki editor list" is greater larger than the amount of work required to ban his occasional fake accounts. Why are you diving into a complex proposal rather than trying out something simple like locking him out first?</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:26:24JabberWokkyClarification <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 25: </td> <td> Line 25: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> * The goal is to prevent a flurry of fake accounts and whack-a-mole. It's a whitelist rather than blacklist for the same reason it works well for spam. It creates a nasty gatekeeper system, but I can't see any other *practical* method. I think this might be a solution that could work, as opposed to banning, which is exclusionary, incites petty warfare and is ultimately ineffective. If he hadn't already pulled a series of sockpuppets, both blatant and subtle, I'd agree. This falls into the category of "it's a bad solution, but the best of the bad ones". Let me be '''very''' clear -- I also agree this is a bad idea. That's why I numbered the proposal and did it as a proposal. It is just the best of the bad ideas I could find. --["JabberWokky"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> * The goal is to prevent a flurry of fake accounts and whack-a-mole. It's a whitelist rather than blacklist for the same reason it works well for spam. It creates a nasty gatekeeper system, but I can't see any other *practical* method. I think this might be a solution that could work, as opposed to banning, which is exclusionary, incites petty warfare and is ultimately ineffective. If he hadn't already pulled a series of sockpuppets, both blatant and subtle, I'd agree<span>&nbsp;with just locking him out</span>. This falls into the category of "it's a bad solution, but the best of the bad ones". Let me be '''very''' clear -- I also agree this is a bad idea. That's why I numbered the proposal and did it as a proposal. It is just the best of the bad ideas I could find. --["JabberWokky"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:25:28JabberWokky <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 24: </td> <td> Line 24: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out (and ban his fake accounts) and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I '''greatly oppose''' a whitelist-style system (A). I think we should do '''B'''. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out (and ban his fake accounts) and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. I think we should do '''B'''. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]<br> + * The goal is to prevent a flurry of fake accounts and whack-a-mole. It's a whitelist rather than blacklist for the same reason it works well for spam. It creates a nasty gatekeeper system, but I can't see any other *practical* method. I think this might be a solution that could work, as opposed to banning, which is exclusionary, incites petty warfare and is ultimately ineffective. If he hadn't already pulled a series of sockpuppets, both blatant and subtle, I'd agree. This falls into the category of "it's a bad solution, but the best of the bad ones". Let me be '''very''' clear -- I also agree this is a bad idea. That's why I numbered the proposal and did it as a proposal. It is just the best of the bad ideas I could find. --["JabberWokky"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:24:52PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 24: </td> <td> Line 24: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out (and ban his fake accounts) and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. I think we should do '''B'''. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out (and ban his fake accounts) and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I <span>'''</span>greatly oppose<span>'''</span> a whitelist-style system<span>&nbsp;(A)</span>. I think we should do '''B'''. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:24:05PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 13: </td> <td> Line 13: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> Lock Steve out of entries specifically and allow all others to edit the pages like normal. Ban Steve's fake accounts. </td> <td> <span>+</span> Lock Steve out of entries specifically and allow all others to edit the pages like normal. Ban Steve's fake accounts.<span>&nbsp;&nbsp;He would be free to contribute to discussion on the Talk pages and to edit the other pages around the wiki as usual.</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:21:40PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ = A =</span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 11: </td> <td> Line 12: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ = B =<br> + Lock Steve out of entries specifically and allow all others to edit the pages like normal. Ban Steve's fake accounts.<br> + </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 12: </td> <td> Line 16: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ------</span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 20: </td> <td> Line 24: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out (and ban his fake accounts) and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out (and ban his fake accounts) and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. <span>I think we should do '''B'''. </span>--["Users/PhilipNeustrom"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:19:41PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 17: </td> <td> Line 17: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ------</span> </td> <td> <span>+ </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 20: </td> <td> Line 20: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>-</span> ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"] </td> <td> <span>+</span> ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out <span>(and ban his fake accounts) </span>and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"] </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:18:34PhilipNeustrom <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 19: </td> <td> Line 19: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:18:04JamesSchwabComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 18: </td> <td> Line 18: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <span>- ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]</span> </td> <td> <span>+ ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think it should be tried on a trial basis and assess its effectiveness on a regular basis. --["Users/JamesSchwab"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:18:04PhilipNeustromComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 17: </td> <td> Line 17: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 12:18:04'' [[nbsp]] I think, if Steve is to be locked out of entries, that it would be good to just lock him out and not instead create this "whitelist" style system. The wiki should be free for all to edit. I greatly oppose a whitelist-style system. --["Users/PhilipNeustrom"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:15:43JabberWokkyReply <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 14: </td> <td> Line 14: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ * It would work like a spam whitelist. Here's the first revision of the notice: --jw<br> + <br> + [[Include(ProtectedEntry)]]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:12:34BradBenedictComment added. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 12: </td> <td> Line 12: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ ------<br> + ''2007-09-06 12:12:34'' [[nbsp]] Sounds good to me. When you say new users though, do you mean newly registered users or just anybody that hasn't posted on one of his pages yet? --["Users/BradBenedict"]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div> Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowskihttp://daviswiki.org/Wiki_Community_Proposal_1:_Steven_Ostrowski2007-09-06 12:07:49JabberWokkyPlease read. I don't want to sugar coat this. <div id="content" class="wikipage content"> Differences for Wiki Community Proposal 1: Steven Ostrowski<p><strong></strong></p><table> <tr> <td> <span> Deletions are marked with - . </span> </td> <td> <span> Additions are marked with +. </span> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> Line 1: </td> <td> Line 1: </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> <td> <span>+ Okay, I have a viable concept in mind that doesn't involve banning an account but would prevent all the current frippery. I'm still mulling over the precise details (it is a variation on a suggestion by Jason Aller), but it would very effectively lock Steve out from editing the entries he is abusing. It would also lock out any new users who might have input (until they are authorized) and would create a special category of entries. Please understand that this would be a bad thing to do, and I'm suggesting it only as an alternative to a complete lockout of a person, which would be worse. It would also be an easily reversable thing: I imagine in a year or so, Steve will have moved on. He'll still be able to request various changes on the talk pages, but another editor would have to make them active. Please do not debate a Ban here, let me know what the editor community thinks about locking Steve out on a long term basis from the entries he has been abusing... with the collateral damage of freedom and simplicity. So far the admins have been even handed about content by being passive (not editing locking entries, and making all locks universal). This would require active gatekeeping of content, which is always subject to abuse, intentional, unintentional, and disputable. This is a proposal before the community of the Davis Wiki, and I want you all to be aware of the full consequences should the community decide to go this route. Remember the board also exists as a body to appeal the actions of admins to.<br> + <br> + I have spoken not only with active editors involved in the fracas, but with wiki-savvy editors who are not interacting at all with Steve. The feedback is that the community would like something to be done. Consider this an open forum for this particular action (again, don't debate a ban here, as that is a different proposal). I would highly appreciate it if the editors who have remained silent on the issue weigh in to get a good cross community view of the issues involved.<br> + <br> + --<br> + Evan "JabberWokky" Edwards<br> + (615) 517-6900<br> + [[Mailto(jw DOT dw AT timewarp DOT org)]]<br> + ''...does not want to go down in the history books as having given the wiki an infection of lawyers...''<br> + <br> + [[comments]]</span> </td> </tr> </table> </div>