| Revision as of 20:23, 23 February 2010 editBrews ohare (talk | contribs)47,831 edits →Comment on block← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:52, 23 February 2010 edit undoBrews ohare (talk | contribs)47,831 edits →Blocked: February 2010: rewriteNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == Blocked: February 2010 == | == Blocked: February 2010 == | ||
| <div class="user-block"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''1 week''' for '''violating your physics topic ban and Misplaced Pages space restriction as explained at '''. Please stop. You are welcome to ] after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|Your reason here}} below. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 07:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-block2 |
<div class="user-block"> ] You have been ''']''' from editing for a period of '''1 week''' for '''violating your physics topic ban and Misplaced Pages space restriction as explained at '''. Please stop. You are welcome to ] after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may ] by adding the text <!-- Copy the text as it appears on your page, not as it appears in this edit area. Do not include the "tlx" argument. -->{{tlx|unblock|Your reason here}} below. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 07:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)</div><!-- Template:uw-block2 | ||
| {{unblock|1=This block was instituted by a single administrator Sandstein, who implemented this action also called for by editor Headbomb, who filed an action at WP:A/R/E . This WP:A/R/E action received no support, and to the contrary, was rejected unanimously by all participants, including one whose contribution was , because the whole WP:A/R/E action was shut down within hours by Sandstein before more responses could be obtained. All participants who got in under the wire rejected the claimed violation of sanctions. | |||
| --> | |||
| Despite the lack of community support for this action by Headbomb, Sandstein elected to take matters into his own hands. Upon his own unsupported judgment he instituted this block, providing the reason of violation of sanctions in place against me, the very argument brought by Headbomb in his action, and not supported. | |||
| {{unblock|1=This block was instituted by administrator Sandstein, who implemented this action also called for by editor Headbomb in an action at WP:A/R/E . Of course, I don't question the authority of Sandstein, I question the justice of this action. Its justice also is questioned by all participants that managed to join the discussion of the original WP:A/R/E action in the few hours before the whole thing was shut down by Sandstein, curtailing feedback. | |||
| As mentioned in the unblock request, the reason given for the block was a violation of sanctions that require me to avoid discussion of physics-related matters. Of course, I did not discuss any physics related matters: I discussed resolution of a quarrel on WP:AN/EW in an entirely generic, non-technical manner that would apply to such a quarrel over any type of article. It also was the opinion of all editors that managed to join the discussion at that this action was ''not'' a physics-related discussion. It also is obvious that it was not a disruption of WP. You may judge the matter yourself by looking at the diffs that are the basis for this action, found and . | |||
| ⚫ | The matter all seems rather high-handed to me, especially in view of the |
||
| ⚫ | The matter all seems rather high-handed to me, especially in view of the fact that the very action undertaken by Sandstein implements the poorly received request by Headbomb. | ||
| ⚫ | The action precipitating this block was a well-meant effort on my part to reconcile disputing parties on WP:AN/EW with a few non-technical and even-handed suggestions |
||
| ⚫ | The action precipitating this block was a well-meant effort on my part to reconcile disputing parties on WP:AN/EW with a few non-technical and even-handed suggestions. That action of mine is a far cry from disturbing WP or causing damage, and I am at a loss to understand the high-handed imposition of a block, especially against community opinion and in the face of good intentions. | ||
| I hope this matter will receive your serious attention.}} | I hope this matter will receive your serious attention.}} | ||
Revision as of 20:52, 23 February 2010
Blocked: February 2010
{{unblock|Your reason here}} below. Sandstein 07:23, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Brews ohare (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
This block was instituted by administrator Sandstein, who implemented this action also called for by editor Headbomb in an action at WP:A/R/E here. Of course, I don't question the authority of Sandstein, I question the justice of this action. Its justice also is questioned by all participants that managed to join the discussion of the original WP:A/R/E action in the few hours before the whole thing was shut down by Sandstein, curtailing feedback.As mentioned in the unblock request, the reason given for the block was a violation of sanctions that require me to avoid discussion of physics-related matters. Of course, I did not discuss any physics related matters: I discussed resolution of a quarrel on WP:AN/EW in an entirely generic, non-technical manner that would apply to such a quarrel over any type of article. It also was the opinion of all editors that managed to join the discussion at WP:A/R/E that this action was not a physics-related discussion. It also is obvious that it was not a disruption of WP. You may judge the matter yourself by looking at the diffs that are the basis for this action, found here and here.
The matter all seems rather high-handed to me, especially in view of the fact that the very action undertaken by Sandstein implements the poorly received request by Headbomb.
The action precipitating this block was a well-meant effort on my part to reconcile disputing parties on WP:AN/EW with a few non-technical and even-handed suggestions. That action of mine is a far cry from disturbing WP or causing damage, and I am at a loss to understand the high-handed imposition of a block, especially against community opinion and in the face of good intentions.
I hope this matter will receive your serious attention.Notes:
- In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
- Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:
{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=This block was instituted by administrator Sandstein, who implemented this action also called for by editor Headbomb in an action at WP:A/R/E . Of course, I don't question the authority of Sandstein, I question the justice of this action. Its justice also is questioned by all participants that managed to join the discussion of the original WP:A/R/E action in the few hours before the whole thing was shut down by Sandstein, curtailing feedback. As mentioned in the unblock request, the reason given for the block was a violation of sanctions that require me to avoid discussion of physics-related matters. Of course, I did not discuss any physics related matters: I discussed resolution of a quarrel on WP:AN/EW in an entirely generic, non-technical manner that would apply to such a quarrel over any type of article. It also was the opinion of all editors that managed to join the discussion at that this action was ''not'' a physics-related discussion. It also is obvious that it was not a disruption of WP. You may judge the matter yourself by looking at the diffs that are the basis for this action, found and . The matter all seems rather high-handed to me, especially in view of the fact that the very action undertaken by Sandstein implements the poorly received request by Headbomb. The action precipitating this block was a well-meant effort on my part to reconcile disputing parties on WP:AN/EW with a few non-technical and even-handed suggestions. That action of mine is a far cry from disturbing WP or causing damage, and I am at a loss to understand the high-handed imposition of a block, especially against community opinion and in the face of good intentions. I hope this matter will receive your serious attention. |3 = ~~~~}}
If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.
{{unblock reviewed |1=This block was instituted by administrator Sandstein, who implemented this action also called for by editor Headbomb in an action at WP:A/R/E . Of course, I don't question the authority of Sandstein, I question the justice of this action. Its justice also is questioned by all participants that managed to join the discussion of the original WP:A/R/E action in the few hours before the whole thing was shut down by Sandstein, curtailing feedback. As mentioned in the unblock request, the reason given for the block was a violation of sanctions that require me to avoid discussion of physics-related matters. Of course, I did not discuss any physics related matters: I discussed resolution of a quarrel on WP:AN/EW in an entirely generic, non-technical manner that would apply to such a quarrel over any type of article. It also was the opinion of all editors that managed to join the discussion at that this action was ''not'' a physics-related discussion. It also is obvious that it was not a disruption of WP. You may judge the matter yourself by looking at the diffs that are the basis for this action, found and . The matter all seems rather high-handed to me, especially in view of the fact that the very action undertaken by Sandstein implements the poorly received request by Headbomb. The action precipitating this block was a well-meant effort on my part to reconcile disputing parties on WP:AN/EW with a few non-technical and even-handed suggestions. That action of mine is a far cry from disturbing WP or causing damage, and I am at a loss to understand the high-handed imposition of a block, especially against community opinion and in the face of good intentions. I hope this matter will receive your serious attention. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}
If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:
{{unblock reviewed |1=This block was instituted by administrator Sandstein, who implemented this action also called for by editor Headbomb in an action at WP:A/R/E . Of course, I don't question the authority of Sandstein, I question the justice of this action. Its justice also is questioned by all participants that managed to join the discussion of the original WP:A/R/E action in the few hours before the whole thing was shut down by Sandstein, curtailing feedback. As mentioned in the unblock request, the reason given for the block was a violation of sanctions that require me to avoid discussion of physics-related matters. Of course, I did not discuss any physics related matters: I discussed resolution of a quarrel on WP:AN/EW in an entirely generic, non-technical manner that would apply to such a quarrel over any type of article. It also was the opinion of all editors that managed to join the discussion at that this action was ''not'' a physics-related discussion. It also is obvious that it was not a disruption of WP. You may judge the matter yourself by looking at the diffs that are the basis for this action, found and . The matter all seems rather high-handed to me, especially in view of the fact that the very action undertaken by Sandstein implements the poorly received request by Headbomb. The action precipitating this block was a well-meant effort on my part to reconcile disputing parties on WP:AN/EW with a few non-technical and even-handed suggestions. That action of mine is a far cry from disturbing WP or causing damage, and I am at a loss to understand the high-handed imposition of a block, especially against community opinion and in the face of good intentions. I hope this matter will receive your serious attention. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}
Reply to your e-mail
Sorry, I have neither the time nor the inclination to evaluate the merits of the various disputes between you and others of which the enforcement request appears to be the latest reflection. This has already been done by the Arbitration Committee at Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Speed of light. There, the Committee found that "Brews ohare has engaged in a variety of uncivil and unseemly conduct, including personal attacks and accusations of bad faith", and "Brews ohare has edited disruptively, engaging in tendentious debates and soapboxing". Accordingly, the Committee and, under their authority, administrators have made you subject to restrictions. If you do not agree with these restrictions, you may appeal them. But as long as these restrictions are in force, you must obey them scrupulously in letter and in spirit. This means staying far away from any physics-related issues. If you do not do this, for whatever reasons, you will be blocked, no matter who reports you for what reason. My advice is to continue your editing in articles that have nothing to do with physics and to above all to avoid any disputes that editors you were in conflict with are involved in. Sandstein 21:16, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- I respectfully disagree with your assessment that "physics-related issues" are at all involved in this matter. There was nothing to do with physics here. Neither argument nor evidence suggests such a thing, and bland assertions should prove insufficient support.
- It is your obligation to examine the matter carefully, which your misconceptions indicate you have not done so far. First, you have not looked carefully at the arguments that show no physics was involved. Second, I was not involved in the dispute I offered council upon. Third, my council was not directed in favor of one side or the other, but to conciliate both. Your caution to "avoid any disputes that editors you were in conflict with are involved in" is wide of the mark, as I engaged in no dispute. You are accusing the dog catcher of dog fighting, accusing doctors of disease, and an onlooking editor of dispute.
- Insistence upon obedience "scrupulously in letter and in spirit" is totally wide of the mark if the sanctions themselves are not interpreted with that kind of diligence and care. It is your responsibility also to make sure that the sanctions (and yourself) are not used instead to aid those interested in sloppily cramming down power disconnected from judgment. Brews ohare (talk) 22:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Repeat of unblock request
This block was instituted by a single administrator Sandstein, who implemented this action also called for by editor Headbomb, who filed an action at WP:A/R/E here. This WP:A/R/E action received no support, and to the contrary, was rejected unanimously by all participants, including one whose contribution was erased by Sandstein, because the whole WP:A/R/E action was shut down within hours by Sandstein before more responses could be obtained. All participants who got in under the wire rejected the claimed violation of sanctions.
Despite the lack of community support for this action by Headbomb, Sandstein elected to take matters into his own hands. Upon his own unsupported judgment he instituted this block, providing the reason of violation of sanctions in place against me, the very argument brought by Headbomb in his action, and not supported.
The matter all seems rather high-handed to me, especially in view of the lack of support for the very action undertaken by Sandstein that duplicated the poorly received motion by Headbomb.
The action precipitating this block was a well-meant effort on my part to reconcile disputing parties on WP:AN/EW with a few non-technical and even-handed suggestions. The offending diffs of mine that led to this block are here and here. That action of mine is a far cry from disturbing WP or causing damage, and I am at a loss to understand the high-handed imposition of a block, especially against community opinion and in the face of good intentions.
I hope this matter will receive your serious attention. Brews ohare (talk) 19:33, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Comment on block
Rather than question whether Sandstein has authorisation to sanction you (for clarity, he does), you might want to instead rebut the accusation that you violated your topic ban. If you find that you cannot, then perhaps it is time that you changed how you contribute to the project. AGK 19:58, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- AGK: Thank you for the opportunity to elaborate further. Of course I don't question the authority of Sandstein, I question the justice of this action. As mentioned in the unblock request, the reason given for the block was a violation of sanctions that require me to avoid discussion of physics-related matters. Of course, I did not discuss any physics related matters: I discussed resolution of a quarrel on WP:AN/EW in an entirely generic, non-technical manner that would apply to such a quarrel over any type of article. It was the opinion of all editors that were allowed to join the discussion at WP:A/R/E that this action was not a physics-related discussion. It also is obvious that it was not a disruption of WP. You may judge the matter yourself by looking at the diffs that are the basis for this action, found here and here. Brews ohare (talk) 20:21, 23 February 2010 (UTC)