User talk:Thekohser

Welcome
Tempodivalse [talk]  18:17, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Unblock
There's a thread about you at AAA. Please make a comment to this talk page if you wish to be unblocked. Mike moral  ♪♫  03:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Unblock request -- I have no idea what I did wrong within the Wikinews community that I warrant an infinite block

 * No, you haven't been disruptive here; the indefblock was actually implemented by the stewards, due to Jimbo's comments ... well you're aware of all that, I'm sure. According to the admin noticeboard thread going on about you, opinion is rather split on whether to unblock or not. I personally don't object to letting you edit, although maybe we should wait consensus to be more clear. Tempodivalse [talk]  14:18, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

-Tempodivalse [talk]  17:52, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'm not sure of anything really "controversial" that I've done anywhere, except maybe speak truth to power and corruption. I'll try to avoid doing that here at Wikinews. -- Thekohser (talk) 18:46, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

UnLOCK request
See the details of UnLOCK request While my account is apparently unblocked, it still seems to be suffering from the "global lock" that was put on it by Mike.lifeguard, based on personal whim and "discussion" that he will not discuss. Could a local bureaucrat please re-name my account, then name it back again, so that I can get out from under this "lock"? You'll note that this has worked well at Commons, Wikisource, and Wikiversity, where I am contributing productively. -- Thekohser (using 68.87.42.110 (talk) 19:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC))


 * I'm not happy that you were unblocked at all, to be frank. However, if this is to happen you'll have to sign in and prove it's you. Then we'll take a look at Commons, WS and WV and if they found it was needed... Well, I can't do anything to stop it.


 * You would not be the first user banned elsewhere to come here and become productive, but I'll believe it from you when - if - I see it. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:42, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your opinion, Blood Red. I don't know what I've personally done to cause you unhappiness, but that's your prerogative.  Quick question -- could you recommend to me how I would sign in and "prove it's me", if my account is under a Mike.lifeguard lock, which prevents my "Thekohser" account from editing here, even on my Talk page? -- Thekohser (currently using 68.87.42.110 (talk) 19:48, 26 August 2010 (UTC))


 * Moot point - I've checked out the IP elsewhere, so I'm happy enough that it's you. I'll poke a 'crat sometime tonight and leave it up to them (if nobody makes a decision first). However, I am blocking the IP on Wikipedia - if you want to edit there, seek unblock for your main account. If need be, put the unblock request on the IP's Wikipedia talkpage, but ask the community there if they are ready to take you back. You can't just edit under that IP when your main account is blocked... Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:54, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * For what it's worth, exactly 80% of the 2010 edits to English Wikipedia from that IP address were not by me, nor did I have anything to do with those edits. You're IP blocking about 3,000 people in the building, by my estimate.  If that doesn't bother you, no big deal.  It just seems a bit of a "reach" of authority to use information gained here on Wikinews to enact preventive measures on another project that are preventing exactly... what?  Good edits being made by people who wouldn't know an IP block from an engine block?  It's your call.  Certainly not the call I would make, though, given the honest evidence. -- Thekohser (using 68.87.42.110 (talk) 20:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC))


 * That means you are admitting to using that IP in 2010, then. Argue your case on WP, and see if a second admin will agree with my action or not. I'm always up for second opinions on any admin action I take. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 20:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't use the word "admitting", as if some crime has been committed. I will gladly attest to one of the edits (a good and beneficial one to the Wikipedia project) being performed by me.  I have no need to argue my "case" on WP, because there we find a deaf community audience, thanks to a botched ruling by a small portion of its ArbCom, which is appointed by the man who has a personal vendetta against me without basis in fact or true community consensus.  Could you point me to the WP policy or guideline that suggests an IP block is warranted if 20% of edits (all of which have been good, productive edits) are suspected to be made by a "banned" user on that project? I'm sorry, I will not apologize for or "admit" to content I've created for Wikipedia, such as Arch Coal, Alec Head, Job sharing, Line management, Lippe-Weissenfeld, National Fuel Gas, Propositional function, Robert Half International, and many others. -- Thekohser (using 68.87.42.110 (talk) 20:49, 26 August 2010 (UTC))


 * Well, in that case we will get along best together if we stop here - since I don't want this to degenerate into an argument between us. Now... Hopefully, I'll find you a 'crat tonight. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 20:55, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I've also received an email from this account, in case there is any remaining doubt about veracity - that's his IP, all right. I daresay Thekohser won't object to me posting the content:

Hello, Blood Red. I'm currently signed in to Wikinews, using my account "Thekohser". While I am not entitled by Mike.lifeguard to edit my own Talk page, apparently (by dint of your reading this) I am able to use the "Email this user" feature.

Is this sufficient proof to you that I am requesting my account to be unlocked here at Wikinews?

Thanks,

Gregory Kohs Cell:

Given that the community previously elected to give this guy a chance, I suppose we'll have to check the other projects (it's the easiest way to verify this is actually needed) and then do as he asks. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 20:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * How did that Bureaucrat search turn out? -- Thekohser (using 68.87.42.110 (talk) 14:28, 27 August 2010 (UTC))


 * The global lock was placed by Mike.lifeguard on May 30, thus making the local unblock here ineffective. However, there is evidence that this was basically Mike's opinion, though he claimed with the lock action that it was based on discussion. He's been asked, and doesn't point to any on-wiki discussion, thus is violating steward policy. We also have Comment by Pathoschild on original blocks and Comment by Pathoschild on consensus in this matter, his text: Mike's statements reflect his personal opinion; there is no steward consensus in favour of enforcing the ban in this way. My conversion of the global lock into local blocks was supported by steward discussion, although Mike is free to see it as a mistake.
 * There is, in fact, no ban. There is, as can be seen from the justification given with the local blocks, a statement from Jimbo, made in the heat of a discussion in March, about a global ban. It was never formally made as a global decision, but, as Pathoschild, there was a consensus to remove the global lock and go around to replace it with local blocks, which could then be reversed by local admins, per local process. Because Mike.lifeguard later made all this moot and ineffective, another route was found to handle the matter locally, which is to delink the local account from the global account, and this has been done on several wikis, allowing globally locked editors to edit. We have seen no protest from stewards on this, and this is how Thekohser was unblocked and effectively unlocked on Wikiversity, and he is now freely editing without incident, so far. The consensus to unblock was 75%, and, note, it takes a 'crat to accomplish this remedy. If a 'crat is not willing, but there is local consensus, anyone could go to meta and request a steward assist, pointing to the local consensus, which stewards are supposed to follow (generally). Obviously, there are sometimes exceptions. Good luck. --Abd (talk) 18:29, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Another three days, and still no motion (up or down) on my unblock. Is there something holding up the process?  How might I speed this along?  This is appearing perhaps to be more about political fealty to Mike.lifeguard and Jimmy Wales than about care and concern for the Wikinews project itself. I have been unblocked on English Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons, and English Wikiversity, and I have been contributing recently to all three. I have not noticed one whit of disruption that I've spurred at any of those three projects, and it's been months now on a couple of them. Could the Wikinews community please describe for me what exactly it is that you fear will result from an unblock here that will be damaging to either the project or to the project community? Perhaps I can offer assurances that those fears will not be realized, if only I knew what they were. -- Thekohser (using 68.87.42.110 (talk) 14:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC))


 * Renamed, and back again. I hope I don't regret this; please leave antagonising Jimbo and Wikipedians up to me. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:19, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

...

Thank yous to Brian McNeil, Tempodivalse, and any others who were helpful in bring about this restoration of justice. -- Thekohser (talk) 18:11, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It's just a single account on a WMF wiki, my friend, don't make it into the Cause of the Century. Okay? You are correct, no disruption so far, the sky does not appear to be falling, and hardly a whisper of anything that might cause disruption. Please be careful, and if something you do starts to arouse opposition, please stop and carefully discuss it, seeking consensus. Be slow, not quick, under such circumstances. I'm not saying that you have to permanently stop doing something that is proper and worth doing, merely because someone opposes it, but make sure to get support from the community before you go ahead in the presence of objection. And thanks for your cooperation, it has been very helpful.


 * Brian, your action to unlock was proper, given local consensus. Sometimes doing the right thing doesn't work out, but that does not make it the wrong thing. Wikis can be fixed. But I doubt you will have reason to regret this. --Abd (talk) 20:23, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikinews background
Greg, this project has had a quite antagonistic history with the WMF. I think the best advice I could give you is to steer well clear of WMF related coverage, leave policy as-is until you grok why it is the way it is, and keep editing as I've seen since 'hacking' an unblock for you.

We desperately need contributors with mastery over the English language; going the extra mile and grasping at 'news style' for writing is the next milestone.

I've been on-project about 5 1/2 years, they paid for me to attend and talk at Wikimania 2008; but, subsequent to that I've resigned from ComCom, handed in my checkuser bit, and then said 'eff off about giving up crat.

Work for the project goals, and avoid the WMF - I'm happy to see you here. Engage in a campaign against 'em, or POV war, I'll turn your user account into a smoking crater. As it says on the tin, this is not Wikipedia. Have fun! --Brian McNeil / talk 21:10, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Gunman holds hostage in U.S. television station offices
I've raised a concern on the talk page. --Pi zero (talk) 15:25, 3 September 2010 (UTC)