User:Abd/Notices

this is a page for notices to the interested members of the Wikipedia community from this user. Please do not add notices to this page, but add them to my Talk page. I will pass them on if I believe they are appropriate for wider attention.

Any edit to this page not made by me, except as may be required by policy, may be reverted on sight. The attached Talk page should also not be edited except by me, it redirects to User talk:Abd/Notices/Comments, where comment is welcome. (talk) --Abd (talk) 14:21, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

The Request for comment on JzG ended up at ArbComm and my position was confirmed, in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Abd and JzG. Thanks to all of you for your support; the blowback began almost immediately. So I have now filed:

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abd-William_M._Connolley

It's all there, pretty much. I'll add some details here about my involvement with Cold fusion, it's been quite a transformative experience. --Abd (talk) 05:18, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Status update: WMC may be desysopped, possibly temporarily. I may be banned from Cold fusion or some other remedy applied. I've now recused from further argument; being opposed by many editors -- as happened with Wikipedia:Requests for comment/JzG 3 -- can be exhausting, if I reply, and many policy issues were raised, inviting comment. These editors, I call the cabal, because they have the effect of a cabal, regardless of how they think about it themselves, did not pile in in anything like such numbers in RfAr/Abd and JzG; I suspect it was because it was far simpler as an issue and the only accusation against me, then, was being disruptive by raising the issue of admin recusal. Since the evidence for that was crystal clear, it wasn't such a problem.

But here I had already been banned from Cold fusion by WMC and, when there was a pile-in at AN/I, community banned from the pages (for a month, it seemed, though that is now being revised in some of the arguments. I had no problem with a month.) This must have seemed more important to the cabal editors, because they also piled in to the RfAr. Hence, to show how it could be that so many editors could be upset with me without my having done something terrible, I had to name the cabal. All hell broke loose, of course. TINC TINC TINC, incant it three times and you can tag-team revert as much as you like while remaining safe from all harm or sanction.

In any case, it looks like the action will be successful. I'm not an SPA and, indeed, have no opinion that any individual editor is critical to the project. Administrative abuse causes massive damage, much of it not visible, as editors disappear, some in disgust, some because they are blocked and banned. A steady bias in who gets blocked eventually warps consensus, preventing true NPOV from being found and maintained. So even if I'm site-banned, I'd still consider this successful. The issues were raised, and even if the remedies aren't adequate -- and they might be adequate --, they will be a start. I can do something else if it comes to that. Thanks for the experience.... we'll see what happens. --Abd (talk) 02:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

There is a cabal -- or, please, site-ban me

See Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Abd-William_M._Connolley/Proposed_decision#If_There_is_No_Cabal.2C_please_site-ban_me. Community comment on this will be appreciated. But if you'd like to tell or ask me something, please email me, I'm on wikibreak! Thanks. --Abd (talk) 12:13, 25 August 2009 (UTC)