Content deleted Content added
m Protected User talk:Zibiki Wym: banned user [edit=sysop:move=sysop] |
banned |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Gregory Kohs is banned by community consensus. |
|||
== [[WP:AN]] or [[WP:RFAR]] == |
|||
Mr. Kohs, I like to be the first to step forward and apologize when I've actually made a mistake. I don't believe I've been mistaken here, but since you've chosen to renew your grievance I urge you to do so in a forum where the grievance could be resolved. Perhaps other parties would view the matter differently. Wikipedians do their best to be fair and sometimes administrators make mistakes. Regular procedure is better than innuendo. I have already offered to disclose the relevant e-mails I exchanged with journalist Brian Bergstein, should that be necessary. |
|||
If you do not choose one of those venues then please drop the matter. Your repeated description of my words as ''defamatory'' treads on the margins of a legal threat and your ban was lifted with a caution about editing productively. I am pleased by the quality of your recent article edits. Let's take this through regular channels or treat it as water under the bridge. Respectfully, <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]</font><sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charge!]]''</sup> 16:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:Durova, could you please send me the e-mails that you sent to Mr. Bergstein? I don't need or care to see his responses, as I've had a discussion with him already about his take on your claims. I would just be curious to see what you thought constitutes "proof" that I gave him misleading information. Also, you can stop any level of concern or paranoia that I am threatening a legal action. I'm too busy running a business to waste time bringing a charge against someone who (let's assume?) has no more than $100,000 in net assets. The word '''defamatory''' merely means ''harmful and often untrue; tending to discredit or malign''. It is not exclusively a legal term. I think the responsible thing to do would be for you to retract your statement. It would take you about 2 minutes. But, let me see your e-mail(s), and maybe I'll change my tune and agree with you! Fact: I've been misleading before, multiple times in my life. I maintain, however, that I never gave misleading information to Brian Bergstein, so that's where we differ. (Funny that we're even talking about "misleading information to journalists" in the shadow of the Essjay fiasco, don't you think?) Thank you for praising my [[Czech Air Force]] and [[Liz Cohen]] edits. I, too, respect and commend almost all of your contributions to Wikipedia! Heck, only one of them is sticking in my craw. ;-) I'll look forward to your e-mail. --[[User:Zibiki Wym|Zibiki Wym]] 16:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::Let's see if I understand this correctly. After speculating [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Banning_policy&diff=118803063&oldid=118802845 here] ''It's like being libeled by Daisy Duck. I don't think the courts would accept a case labeled Kohs v. User:Durova!'' you follow up with an estimate of my personal net worth and a request that I forward e-mails to you personally. It is by no means ''paranoia'' to respectfully decline that request on the hunch that you would attempt to glean personally identifying information from the headers. The legitimate portions of both of our concerns would be adequately addressed by the arbitration committee. If you would like their assistance then by all means go to [[WP:RFAR]]. |
|||
::I suggest again that you avoid allusions of a legal nature. I would not block you, but I may open a thread to request impartial review at [[WP:AN]]. Please be aware that this site treats legal threats as grounds for immediate indef block, which could be the result if uninvolved people decide you have crossed the line. I would rather see you in [[WP:ADOPT|mentorship]] and editing productively. Regards, <font face="Verdana">[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]]</font><sup>''[[User talk:Durova|Charge!]]''</sup> 17:07, 29 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::I suggest you calm down. |
|||
:::#You could create a throw-away e-mail address such as "durovaisnotdaisyduck@yahoo.com", and just paste in the contents of what you sent to Bergstein. There would be no way for me to "identify" you in this way. I trust that you can find a valid e-mail address for myself. And, I trust you not to modify the text of what you sent to Bergstein. (Imagine that, "trust"!) |
|||
:::#I was not trying to "estimate" your net worth. I was matter-of-factly throwing out a personal net worth figure that probably applies to all but the wealthiest 10% of Americans, which I hastily assumed you were not. I obtained this "estimate" from a narrow space that resides between the muscles upon which I am currently sitting, not from Experian or Equifax. You must have missed the point, and that being, I'm not going to waste $10,000 in legal fees, travel, and time, to try to hunt down some average John or Jane Doe(rova) who anonymously typed something that I find to be an unflattering, but not career-jeopardizing, statement of opinion that lacks any verifiable proof. |
|||
:::#If your position was so iron-clad solid, that I "gave misleading information to journalists", shouldn't you be quick to just lay out your evidence here and now, rather than requesting that the offended party go through all kinds of bureaucratic hooplah '''within the domain''' that currently endorses the anonymous defamer and only recently unblocked the identified subject of the untruth? Sounds like a kangaroo court to me. |
|||
:::#Finally, I have to say that your obstruction on this simple matter reveals to me that you (like myself, quite admittedly) probably thrive on the ''drama'', not the harmony, of Wikipedia. The big difference is, I'm fortunate enough to land '''paid''' speaking engagements to talk about wiki communities, and (so far as I can tell) you don't. The more drama I'm presented with on Wikipedia, the more material I have for my next seminar gig. Because I am a real, identifiable person both inside and outside of Wikipedia, this kind of publicity only helps me. I don't know why you'd want to feed more oxygen into that fire. |
|||
:::In sum, I'm not trying to drag you into court. I'm not trying to expose your true identity. In fact, I'm trying to '''reduce''' the need or desire for either of those processes. So, if you continue to dream up reasons why I need to do this "by your rules", when you are the one who says that I've given misleading information to journalists, supposedly have proof or evidence, but you refuse to share it with me (except maybe in a kangaroo court where the jury will be comprised of a very elite sub-set of people who love you and might despise me), I'd really have no choice but to further publicize this drama in the "real world", where public opinion will have a more balanced assessment of what's actually going on. I can assure you, Durova won't get the same evaluation in the real world that she does within Wikipedia. Have you read the newspapers lately? Wikipedia's not exactly the apple of the media's eye any more. Nonsense like this would only hasten that downward reputation slide. --[[User:Zibiki Wym|Zibiki Wym]] 18:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Conflict suggestions == |
|||
Zibiki, Durova asked for some outside opinions on your conflict. |
|||
First, as far as I can tell, you object to Durova's statement that you "[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Community_sanction_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=111685154 has given misleading information to journalists that was published in the mainstream press]". You have asked Durova to share private correspondence with a journalist about this subject, but Durova would prefer not to. Durova has offered to submit this to some form [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]], but you would prefer not to. Is that a fair summary? |
|||
If so, here are some suggestions of what you guys could do. |
|||
#You could both let the matter drop. In two months, no one (including, hopefully, both of you) will care which of you was right about this. I understand that Durova presumably had a good faith belief that you provided misleading information, and you presumably have a good faith belief that you didn't. These disagreements happen every day - if you both make good edits, it doesn't really matter which of you is right. |
|||
#If one or both of you insist, you could try to resolve the dispute. [[WP:MEDCAB|Informal mediation]] might be a good start - no one can make anyone do anything they don't want to, and a neutral mediatior can try to find ways to settle the dispute. |
|||
Any thoughts? Thanks, [[User:TheronJ|TheronJ]] 20:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:08, 29 March 2007
Gregory Kohs is banned by community consensus.