| Revision as of 21:06, 8 December 2011 editJehochman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers46,282 edits →CU request for Pesky: Nagging about old business is borning. Go do something productive, rather than trying to pick fights. Who sent you?← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 02:35, 19 November 2024 edit undoClueBot III (talk | contribs)Bots1,379,889 editsm Archiving 1 discussion to User talk:Jehochman/Archives 25. (BOT) | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/Templates/Inline image | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| |image = File:Naturhistorisk Privatundervisning.jpg | |||
| |maxarchivesize = 150K | |||
| | |
|size = 500px | ||
| |align = center | |||
| |algo = old(7d) | |||
| |alt = Placeholder alt text | |||
| |archive = User talk:Jehochman/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| |fullwidth = yes | |||
| |capcenter = yes | |||
| |caption = <br/>{{big|{{big|"Hold on, I zoned out for a minute. Which one of you was the Icewhiz sock again?"}}}}{{small|]}} | |||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{/Antizilla}} | |||
| <!--my archives are messed up so I have removed the links. They might be fixed some day--> | |||
| {{tmbox | |||
| {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis | |||
| |small= | |||
| |archiveprefix=User talk:Jehochman/Archives | |||
| |image=] | |||
| |format= %%i | |||
| |text= There's been a lot of communication over the ages. To find a previous conversation, please search the ].{{ | |||
| |age=168 | |||
| #ifeq:|no | |||
| |minkeepthreads=1 | |||
| | | |||
| |maxarchsize=350000 | |||
| |{{ | |||
| |numberstart=25 | |||
| #ifeq:|no | |||
| |header={{aan}} | |||
| | | |||
| |archivenow=<nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}</nowiki> | |||
| |<br /><inputbox> | |||
| bgcolor=#f8eaba | |||
| type=fulltext | |||
| prefix={{FULLPAGENAME}} | |||
| break=no | |||
| width=50 | |||
| searchbuttonlabel=Search archives | |||
| </inputbox> | |||
| }} | |||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{ | |||
| __TOC__ | |||
| #ifeq:|yes | |||
| | ''Please note that restarting a debate that has already ] may be taken as ], ] and even ]'', unless there is some evidence that ]. | |||
| | | |||
| }} | |||
| }} | |||
| {{TOCright}} | |||
| == Too many noticeboards? == | |||
| See ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 19:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :LOL. It's about time someone does something about this! ] (]) 20:08, 29 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::I don't know exactly what to do, but I started a blank page. Feel free to scribble upon it. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:14, 29 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::Do you want to make it an essay or a faux noticeboard? ] (]) 20:23, 29 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I'd go with faux. ] <sup>]</sup> 20:27, 29 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| {{Like|num=1}} :) ]<small> <nowiki>]<nowiki>]</nowiki></small> 20:40, 29 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Self service == | |||
| Hi Jehochman. I'd ask you don't ever post on my talk page again unless it is specifically to raise a complaint due to an admin action of mine that you have an issue with. If it's related to anything else use talk pages of articles, meta discussion etc. . You sir, in my opinion, use Misplaced Pages to simply further your own business. I don't like you, I think you're a nasty piece of work frankly, and I certainly don't want to lower myself by interacting with you. Given that, I also consider myself barred from your user talk as well - not that it's much of a loss. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">] : ] </span></small> 21:40, 3 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| : You are welcome to post here any time you like. And no, I don't use Misplaced Pages for self-promotion. It is a hobby. My business would be better off if I didn't spend time here, and instead focused on work. Whoever you've been chatting with about me has fed you a bunch of nonsense, and you apparently have swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Your post above and recent posts at ] are a disgrace to admin corps, and I suggest that you reconsider what you are doing here. ] <sup>]</sup> 02:35, 4 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::Wow, Pedro is an admin? Weird. But I suppose it could explain why he's got a practically clean block log, while users like Malleus and Giano can't sneeze without being blocked. ] | ] 16:59, 4 December 2011 (UTC). | |||
| :::Yes. I had to check the RFA archives to be sure. Funny thing is I have never said or done anything to Pedro to warrant such malice. He seems to be bearing somebody else's grudge. ] <sup>]</sup> 10:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Closure of RfC == | |||
| Hi Jehochman. I agree with your point of view on Badger Drink, I do not think he should be indeffed either and I have said as much. However, I do not think that it is appropriate for the RfC to be closed whilst discussion is ongoing at ANI. Badger Drink has stated quite clearly that he does not wish to participate, so nothing has changed now that he can't. What's more, both Bwilkins and I have commented at ] suggesting that it should not be closed. Would you mind undoing that action, at least until some sort of consensus has emerged at the threads? ] <span style="font-weight:bold;">·</span> (]) 12:15, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :I'd also like to point you to ], which gives 3 situations where an RfC/U should be closed and I don't see that this fits any. ] <span style="font-weight:bold;">·</span> (]) 12:22, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :: I think it is bad form to conduct an RFC when the subject can't comment. In arbitration a user is always unblocked so they can participate. The operative word is "can". They of course may choose not to. If BD is unblocked, the RFC can be resumed. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:03, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::BD has <s>refused</s> declined to comment at his RfC/U, and there's no are reasons to assume he would now. Instead, he (and others) now attack those who participated in good faith through other channels. I don't concur with everything Jehochman has done on this, but I certainly concur with the closure as having been carried out according to policy as resolved through another process: blocking - which has its own due process for appeals thus rendering the RfC moot. --] (]) 14:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Irony == | |||
| Disappointing to see Scott M removing criticism of himself . Ironic to see the issuer of the Badger Drink civility block using "dick" in an edit summary removing criticism of his actions. I've been back about a day and already see poor admin behaviour (not yours)... this place can be so discouraging. ] (]) 13:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| : I agree. The whole affair stinks of a "disrespecting your betters" punishment. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::Yes, it's ironic isn't it? I totally agree with Scott's removal of that sick and disgusting fake barnstar, and if I hadn't been involved I would have done it myself - it's the epitome of nastiness that ''will'' drive ''truly'' industrious editors away from Misplaced Pages. That said, I'm letting you know also that I consider the comment you left at ] to be just further baiting and unjustified admonishment of someone whose you've not cared to gauge against what . As far as the blocks of BD are concerned, if I had stumbled on his unblock request with no previous knowledge of the affair, from a totally neutral standpoint I would possibly have blocked him indefinitely for gross incivility, blanked and revdel'd the template, notified the arbs and oversighters of my action and hoped there would be a key that could be thrown away. It's the most despicable string of abuse from a so called 'regular' editor I've seen in all my time and edits edits here. Others who have expressed righteous indignation against the block clearly appear to support the notion that incivility is a normal and accepted behaviour to be practiced with impunity - and with still more irony appear to be supported in that belief by some admins. All very discouraging indeed. -] (]) 15:24, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::Kudpung, | |||
| :::You misread what we have written. I have not seen anybody excuse incivility. In fact, most of us have signed "outside views" noting a problem with occasional incivility from BD, who growls with style when he comes across plagiarism or purple prose. | |||
| :::Let us hope that the barnstar of decapitation may be retired! :) | |||
| :::<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 17:07, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message == | |||
| == Sven Manguard == | |||
| <div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> | |||
| I am seriously concerned that Sven Manguard is archiving sections prematurely, and massively overstepping his authority. He had earlier determined that your request for a checkuser was unfounded (I diasgree), and then determined that the section regarding Scotty Mac's hypocritical incivility would not result in any admin action. He is not an admin. I further note that he is '''obviously''' a returned user of some sort (cf. first edit, then immediately to the automated template adding). | |||
| <div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">]</div> | |||
| <div class="ivmbox-text"> | |||
| Hello! Voting in the ''']''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All ''']''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. | |||
| The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the ]. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. | |||
| What do you think I should do? ] (]) 15:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review ] and submit your choices on the ''']'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>] (]) 00:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small> | |||
| :Nothing yet. Let's see if friendly chat can help. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:23, 5 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| </div> | |||
| :: Apparently not. I still recommend walking away from this situation so that everybody has a chance to de-stress. ] <sup>]</sup> 06:05, 6 December 2011 (UTC) | |||
| </div> | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/01&oldid=1258243333 --> | |||
Latest revision as of 02:35, 19 November 2024
"Hold on, I zoned out for a minute. Which one of you was the Icewhiz sock again?"Source
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)