User talk:Kingsindian
Add topicWelcome to Meta!
[edit]Hello, Kingsindian. Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum if you need help with something (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!
-- Meta-Wiki Welcome (talk) 13:45, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Wikipediocracy comment
[edit]In regards to your comment here, Auerbach told me he had sent only two e-mails to Wikimedia DC on June 7 and June 9, the second e-mail being to request a response to his first e-mail. He states that he then sent an e-mail to ArbCom on July 1st, exactly one day before Gamaliel started contacting his employer on Twitter with false smears. Whether Gamaliel had been told about the July 1st e-mail is unclear, though GorillaWarfare does say they didn't share the actual e-mail with him. A couple weeks after Gamaliel threatened his job, Auerbach then sent several more e-mails to ArbCom requesting a response to his July 1st query, most were simply requesting a response to his question. The last e-mail he showed me was sent on July 27th, four days before Drmies blanked some of the material on Auerbach's Wikipedia bio. Given my own experiences with Drmies, I sincerely doubt that was a coincidence. I have seen him do this in cases where it was clearly malicious, but also cases where it was apparently not malicious. Whether this instance was the latter or the former I leave to you.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 22:07, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
- @The Devil's Advocate: If someone had been trying to go after my job, I would be careful/paranoid as well, so I do not blame Auerbach for anything. Gamaliel's comments on Twitter are a very different category from the incidents around Auerbach's BLP. I don't see any evidence of people trying to go after Auerbach's BLP. However, it would have been good if Drmies had not come anywhere near the article, because WP:INVOLVED applies. Kingsindian (talk) 06:02, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I was just pointing out that he probably did arrive at that article in response to an e-mail by Auerbach, in contrast to what you say in that post, it just was not the e-mail on July 1st. You should correct your statement on Wikipediocracy implying there is no connection between Auerbach's e-mails and Drmies editing Auerbach's page.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 14:57, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- @The Devil's Advocate: Drmies participated in the AfD discussion for the article prior to all this drama. I don't see any evidence that he arrived at that article through the ArbCom email. Of course, these things can't be proven one way or another. Kingsindian (talk) 15:43, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- The stuff he removed had all been in there during the AfD when he voted delete. I may not have a surveillance video of Drmies seeing the e-mail and immediately clicking over to Auerbach's page to fiddle with it, but given that only four days had transpired and this action is just the latest in a pattern of behavior, that is enough for me to say he edited Auerbach's page in response to that e-mail. Certainly it accounts for the time gap you mentioned in your WO post.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- @The Devil's Advocate: Sure, it is possible and you can draw any inferences you want. I have linked to your point on WO. Kingsindian (talk) 16:18, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- The stuff he removed had all been in there during the AfD when he voted delete. I may not have a surveillance video of Drmies seeing the e-mail and immediately clicking over to Auerbach's page to fiddle with it, but given that only four days had transpired and this action is just the latest in a pattern of behavior, that is enough for me to say he edited Auerbach's page in response to that e-mail. Certainly it accounts for the time gap you mentioned in your WO post.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- @The Devil's Advocate: Drmies participated in the AfD discussion for the article prior to all this drama. I don't see any evidence that he arrived at that article through the ArbCom email. Of course, these things can't be proven one way or another. Kingsindian (talk) 15:43, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Well, I was just pointing out that he probably did arrive at that article in response to an e-mail by Auerbach, in contrast to what you say in that post, it just was not the e-mail on July 1st. You should correct your statement on Wikipediocracy implying there is no connection between Auerbach's e-mails and Drmies editing Auerbach's page.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 14:57, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Survey on Inspire Campaign for addressing harassment
[edit]
Thanks for your participation during the Inspire Campaign focused on addressing harassment from June 2016. I'm interested in hearing your experience during the campaign, so if you're able, I invite you to complete this brief survey to describe how you contributed to the campaign and how you felt about participating.
Please feel free to let me know on my talk page if you have any questions about the campaign or the survey. Thanks! I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 03:24, 10 September 2016 (UTC)