Content deleted Content added
Spinningspark (talk | contribs) |
Binksternet (talk | contribs) →I hope this wasn't intentional: replies |
||
Line 248: | Line 248: | ||
::Thank you for the detailed explanation you gave at AN3. My above response to NYyankees51 was something you called a snide admission that I was gaming the system. It was snide, yes, but no admission. I looked at the two links he provided and I saw there was absolutely a minute more than 24 hours, so I could only conclude that there was no answer NYyankees51 was looking for from me which he did not already know. I have a friction-filled history with NYY so I did not provide him with more details such as what I was intending or thinking. In that respect it was a snide answer. I'm sorry my snide answer formed a part of your response to the situation. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet#top|talk]]) 01:27, 20 November 2011 (UTC) |
::Thank you for the detailed explanation you gave at AN3. My above response to NYyankees51 was something you called a snide admission that I was gaming the system. It was snide, yes, but no admission. I looked at the two links he provided and I saw there was absolutely a minute more than 24 hours, so I could only conclude that there was no answer NYyankees51 was looking for from me which he did not already know. I have a friction-filled history with NYY so I did not provide him with more details such as what I was intending or thinking. In that respect it was a snide answer. I'm sorry my snide answer formed a part of your response to the situation. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet#top|talk]]) 01:27, 20 November 2011 (UTC) |
||
:::To be clear, I didn't take that comment as an "admission" (though you ''acknowledged'' the situation); the 1RR vio is obvious enough by itself. Don't think that the block was in any way influenced by a comment that I may have misunderstood. ''[[User:Swarm|<span style='color:black'><font face="Old English Text MT">Swarm</font></span>]]'' <sup>[[User talk:Swarm|<span style="color:blue;"><font face="old english text mt">X</font></span>]]</sup> 01:43, 20 November 2011 (UTC) |
:::To be clear, I didn't take that comment as an "admission" (though you ''acknowledged'' the situation); the 1RR vio is obvious enough by itself. Don't think that the block was in any way influenced by a comment that I may have misunderstood. ''[[User:Swarm|<span style='color:black'><font face="Old English Text MT">Swarm</font></span>]]'' <sup>[[User talk:Swarm|<span style="color:blue;"><font face="old english text mt">X</font></span>]]</sup> 01:43, 20 November 2011 (UTC) |
||
::::Swarm, the 24:01 difference was simple chance. I have made more than 68,000 edits on Wikipedia so naturally two article reversions might be 24:01 apart. I happened to be sitting down at the computer at about the same time on two successive nights, looking at the ''[[Maafa 21]]'' article to see what was useful and what needed changing. As always, I had multiple browser windows open, all relating to articles I have on my watchlist, ones that had changed recently. One was the ''Maafa 21'' article contribution history. Another was the article talk page. I [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AMaafa_21&action=historysubmit&diff=461062565&oldid=432936336 added the abortion sanctions 1RR template] to the talk page, hit 'save page' at 04:27, and then I closed that browser window, revealing the revision history of ''Maafa 21'' which I examined for past editors, to see if there had been any useful prior content contributions that had been subsequently deleted, or whether there were earlier contributors worth talking to. I noticed that [[User:Lifedynamics]] was already warned and blocked for username violations, being the same name as the film production company. The next edit I made was to click on [[User:Maafa21]] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Maafa21&action=history give him a similar warning] about username policy. The next handful of open browser windows that I dealt with took about 45 minutes of my time but I was getting sleepier, and after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Twain&diff=prev&oldid=461066769 removing a possibly misleading inflation number] from the Mark Twain biography I was about to shut the computer off for the night. Before doing so I remembered the ''Maafa 21'' article, opened it up and examined it for anything worth keeping, made the now fateful revert, and went to bed. There was no sense of gaming the system on my end, no drumming of fingers and watching the clock to make sure I was not breaking 1RR. There was only, oh, hey, I forgot to actually edit the article after sifting through its page history. |
|||
::::When NYyankees51 showed me the diffs on my talk page it was the first time I saw the 24:01 time span. I thought, oh, it looks like I got lucky and missed 1RR by a minute. I thought that, because of the minute leeway, I would not have to take any remediating action—would not have to defend myself. If I had felt guilty of gaming at that point I would have done something about it. Let me reiterate that I held no intention of gaming the system. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet#top|talk]]) 19:32, 20 November 2011 (UTC) |
|||
:::Binksternet, I was on the edit warring noticeboard filing a report when I figured it must have been a mistake (I've violated 1RR because I didn't check the history and hated getting blocked for it) since I couldn't believe that you would go down to the minute. I was giving you an opportunity to self-revert and remedy the situation. Instead, you defiantly acknowledged that the 1 minute was intentional. I was trying to assuage our "friction-filled history" by giving you a chance instead of going straight to AN/EW, and you responded in this manner. [[User:NYyankees51|NYyankees51]] ([[User talk:NYyankees51|talk]]) 02:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC) |
:::Binksternet, I was on the edit warring noticeboard filing a report when I figured it must have been a mistake (I've violated 1RR because I didn't check the history and hated getting blocked for it) since I couldn't believe that you would go down to the minute. I was giving you an opportunity to self-revert and remedy the situation. Instead, you defiantly acknowledged that the 1 minute was intentional. I was trying to assuage our "friction-filled history" by giving you a chance instead of going straight to AN/EW, and you responded in this manner. [[User:NYyankees51|NYyankees51]] ([[User talk:NYyankees51|talk]]) 02:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC) |
||
::::That's a lovely story for the children, but the adults among us will notice that in the very same minute I was examining and responding to the two diffs you offered above, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maafa_21&diff=prev&oldid=461498327 you were making further changes] to the ''Maafa 21'' article such that any reversion by myself would be impossible. There was already no opportunity for self-revert after [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maafa_21&action=historysubmit&diff=461068342&oldid=461066993 changes by Uncle Dick] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maafa_21&diff=next&oldid=461110663 by Roscelese]; all before your changes. Instead of offering me a chance of self reversion you were hammering one more nail into the coffin. |
|||
::::I did not "defiantly" acknowledge any intentional gaming; instead, I snidely responded with another rhetorical question, the irony of my own rhetorical-to-rhetorical response noted by the following emoticon: ^_^ . I guess that wordless emoticon has now served as seed for a wide variety of responses. For me, though, it was only expressing the irony of responding to a rhetorical question with another rhetorical question. Whatever defiant acknowldedgement you thought you observed was absent on my end of things. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet#top|talk]]) 19:32, 20 November 2011 (UTC) |
|||
{{unblock|reason=I see now and fully understand that I have been unhelpful in my work on the ''Maafa 21'' article, specifically in making content reversions on November 16, 17 and 19; all without support from article talk page consensus. In fact there is no consensus at this point on the talk page. I promise to refrain from further reversions in the article until and unless a clear consensus develops on the talk page or on noticeboards. With this promise of mine, I will not be able to game the system (though that was never my intent) nor will I be able to perform the 1RR-style edits that other editors will continue to enjoy. I promise to work toward consensus as necessary on the talk page or elsewhere. With this promise of mine, the block is no longer necessary to protect Wikipedia from my hand. Per blocking policy, the block is a preventative measure, not a punitive one, and I have shown the worthiness of my word in the past when I promised a self-imposed 1RR limitation for six months from January to July 2011. That voluntary 1RR promise was kept to the letter, and so will this promise of 0RR at ''Maafa 21'' until consensus is clear. [[User:Binksternet|Binksternet]] ([[User talk:Binksternet#top|talk]]) 19:32, 20 November 2011 (UTC)}} |