Three days after the announcement made by Austin Hair on behalf of this list administrators, which also includes Ral315 and AlexandrDmitri, that Greg Kohs was banned and Peter Damian moderated, this much has been accomplished by about 41 posts on that subject:
1) Austin Hair, Ral315, and AlexandrDmitri continue to be the list administrators; 2) Greg Kohs is still banned and Peter Damian moderated; 3) Five members posted supporting the list administrators decision; 4) Nine members posted against or questioning the list administrators decision; 5) Greg Kohs has been accused of and/or called (after being banned = unable to self defense) 5.1) brinkmanship, boasting, troll, by Gerard Meijssen 5.2) actively opposing [the project], criticizing in public forums in exaggerated ways, not adding anything constructive or helpeful, trollish and disruptive behavior, bad faith, malice, engaged in a campaign intending to harm, have and use substantive issues [to harm], by Fred Bauder 5.3) completely unable to keep his contributions civil, causing more flamewars than constructive discussion, by Austin Hair, list administrators reasons to ban 5.4) having a long, unmitigated and unambiguous record of trolling, spamming, harassment, and abuse, openly soliciting bids from "web manipulators" whom he intends to pay to post pre-written negative comments to news stories about Wikipedia, with a very clearly stated motive to drive traffic to his revenue-generating sites, clearly unethical and profit-driven behavior and trolling, wasting much time and energy, throwing much shit [of and at others], returning here frequently with throwaway email accounts, by Erik Moeller, Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation 5.5) being abusive, somewhat sensationalistic, unwilling to abide by reasonable internal behavior standards, that behavior being a defining factor of his interaction with the list, rarely being able to suppress it for long, by George Herbert 5.6) and associated with troublesome, trolls, and harassment, by phoebe ayers 6) Peter Damian has been accused of and/or called (after being moderated = self defense not guaranteed) 6.1) making you believe there is nothing good to be found in Wikipedia, posturing as a superior mind, boring, not toning down his retoric, not relevant, by Gerard Meijssen 6.2) actively opposing [the project], criticizing in public forums in exaggerated ways, not always contributing something constructive and helpeful, trollish and disruptive behavior, bad faith, malice, engaged in a campaign intending to harm, have and use substantive issues [to harm], by Fred Bauder 6.3) not always posting something that is even marginally acceptable, by Austin Hair, list administrators reasons to moderate 6.4) and associated with troublesome, and trolls, by phoebe ayers Sixteen hours after the ban and moderation, the 19th post was off-topic. Three and a half hours later, by the 25th post the discussion got off-topic for good staying that way, until someone change the topic title. Of 41 posts, 18 (including the last 17) were off-topic. Half an hour after the 19th post that would eventually send the discussion off-topic for good, another topic was open. It added a total of 19 posts, six of them by the list member that started it. It generated one post questioning the list administrators decision to moderate Peter Damian, and three supporting the list administrators decision to ban Greg Kohs. Furthermore, 7) Greg Kohs (after being banned = unable to self defense) was accused of campaigning against Wikipedia, having a big anti campaign in progress, being disingenuous and having bad faith, by Fred Bauder 8) Greg Kohs and his publications off-list were accused of being/having (after Greg Kohs being banned = unable to self defense) 8.1) sheer number of inaccuracies and misportrayals, by Michael Peel 8.2) full of misinformation, erroneously blaming the WMF for content issues, simultaneously arguing two sides of an issue, flat out false or outdated, troll, by Ryan Kaldari 8.3) continual attacks on the content don't appear to consistent and give the appearance (to me based on my view) of attacking the WMF because he has a personal axe to grind, Posting long screeds attacking the content providing nature while ignoring the fact that WMF is legally a host, not using a productive method for encouraging positive change, Continually railing on and on about these cases of pornography, plagiarism and libel just are ignoring, He doesn't feel like he's addressing systematic problems with the user created culture but attacking to attack, faulting the community (which it feels like) for not dealing with these problems on specific pages, attacking your average contributor, It feels like he's not attacking .the WMF but the base of people like you and me, can't try to make positive change, won't fork, gives the appearance of trying to take down a project, by Laura Hale 9) Peter Damian (after being moderated = self defense not guaranteed) was accused of bad talk, by Fred Bauder 10) Peter Damian and his publications off-list were accused of being/having (after Peter Damian being moderated = self defense not guaranteed) 10.1) exaggerating, going beyhond negative comments, by Fred Bauder 10.2) blog complaining about moderation being itself moderated by him, by Ryan Kaldari There seems to be nothing unusual or particularly remarkable in this case when compared with what can be seen on this list or in many Wikimedia projects. Hopefully this may be useful to others, helping them understand what to expect and how things work and are done and dealt with here. Sincerely, Virgilio A. P. Machado (Vapmachado) _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
