User:JWSchmidt/Blog/15 September 2008
Near the top of my user talk page it says:
The bad with the good. If you have a complaint about something I have done, please feel free to let me know what is on your mind. I strive to assume good faith and improve my behavior in response to honest criticism. For example, I often like to explore the boundary between what is socially acceptable and what is outrageous. If something I have done upsets you, please let me know. Also, I am sometimes blunt and and terse and my actions might seem needlessly confrontational. Let me know when I "cross the line" and start to disrupt the atmosphere of collaboration rather than support it.
After SB Johnny went out of his way to let me know that he refused to tell me what was on his mind, he told me that this is what was on his mind and that I had requested that page. In fact, what I requested is stated at the top of my user talk page: "Let me know when I 'cross the line' and start to disrupt the atmosphere of collaboration rather than support it." By refusing to use my user talk page to tell me what was on his mind, SB Johnny demonstrated what he means by "It is felt that lesser options than this review have already been exhausted".
When SB Johnny drew my attention to this, I asked him, " now the question is, do you still refuse to discuss things?". The expected answer came as soon as I tried to join the discussion and it was announced that somebody owned that page, and I was not allowed to join the discussion.
Day 1 Reflections
So far I have had a chance to read three of the cases and start to respond to them. Below are short summaries...click on the links such as "case 1 details" in order to see more detailed comments from me on each case.
case 1 details. My learning project about deletionism was not appreciated. However, the learning resource was about the idea that Wikiversity should welcome the contributions of new users and help them learn how to edit. Deleting the good faith contributions of new Wikiversity participants is not welcoming. Other people prefer to delete the contributions of new Wikiversity participants and they can often be heard calling such contributions "garbage". I prefer to welcome new users and expand new pages.
case 3 details. There is one Wikiversity participant who does not want to provide a link at the top of the Main Page from the word "students" to the main Wikiversity student portal page. I think Wikiversity should have such a link.
General reflections. The view of Wikiversity provided by Michael, SBJ, Cormac, and McCormack is rather alarming. It is a view of Wikiversity that does not mesh with reality. It will take me many hours to go through the charges and sort them out for the Wikiversity community. At the rate I work, I estimate it will take approximately three weeks to complete this project. I suppose at some point a few people will bother to examine the charges and they will see the extent to which these authors have misrepresented events in order to depict my editing in the worst possible light. It is really quite boring and sickening to participate in this process of answering to these twisted charges. However, I suppose this was inevitably the only way to sort things out at Wikiversity. I hope this process leads to a constructive discussion about the motivation and editing history of McCormack. McCormack has called me troll and I believe he would do anything within his powers to damage me, which largely amounts to putting on public display these twisted cases and charges. Dear reader: this is sickening stuff, but please try to read along. I know most of you care deeply about Wikiversity and that makes it hard to look at a witch hunt taking place within what we hope will become a center for scholarship. I know that some of you have been made uneasy by some of my learning projects. I still request that you discuss with me any issues you have with respect to my editing. Use my talk page. Come to #wikiversity-en and chat (however, see the next paragraph below. Special thanks to those of you who do take the time to talk to me and help develop Wikiversity resources with me. As always, it is a joy to collaborate with you. Eventually this process will end and we can get back to more interesting types of learning projects. Keep learning the wiki way!
UPDATE: I was banned from #wikiversity-en without warning, discussion or a reason given. This ban on my participation in #wikiversity-en is a clear violation of channel ops power. You can still find me in #wikiversity. I was banned from #wikiversity-en by User:SB Johnny who also blocked me from editing Wikiversity in order to prevent me from responding to all the false and distorted charges he made against me. His bad block was eventually overturned by the Wikiversity community, but I remain banned from #wikiversity-en. User:SB Johnny also used his false and distorted charges to attract the attention of a Steward and have my custodianship stripped from me. This was another abuse of his power since there was no reason to remove my custodial status and certainly no community consensus for such a move. As time permits, I will continue to respond to the false and distorted charges that have been made against me. --JWSchmidt 16:04, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Day 2 Reflections
I could not really work today because of this. Everything else seems unimportant.
There was an interesting session today in the #wikiversity-en chat channel. Ottava Rima was able to initiate an exchange of views between McCormack and myself. I learned that I had intimidated him by my editing style. I apologized for intimidating him. Hopefully this is a start towards getting us to the point where we can talk things out.
I again ask that if you have a complaint about something I have done, please feel free to let me know what is on your mind. If you have written about your complaint on some page other than my user talk page, then I probably have not seen it. I really do think it is helpful for people to come talk to me one-on-one when they do not like something I have done. Eventually I will have the chance to read everything here, but it will take a while.
Day 3 Reflections
While I've only gotten through case #3, I was asked to look at case 34 out of sequence. I was interested to learn that I am "an aggrieved Wikipedian". I feel the need to make another page to add to my collection that includes JWSchmidt is a Troll and Campaign for the inclusion in Wikipedia of religious views expressed as science. "enemies at Wikipedia and the foundation" <-- I demand that the four authors of this charge list my enemies. Other than one banned Wikipedian who has stalked me in real life, I do not know of any such enemies. I invite the Wikiversity community to read this. I spent weeks discussing with Moultan the fact that if he could not give up his interest in the real world identities of wiki users then he would be blocked from editing Wikiversity. I repeatedly asked him not to discuss the real world identities of wiki users while in #wikiversity-en. I will never apologize for my scholarly collaborations and various learning projects I have engaged in with Moulton or any of my other wiki friends. Yes, I have failed to turn Moulton away from his interest in the real world identities of wiki users. I take full responsibility for my failure. I did my best.
Day 4 reflections
case 4 details. I stand by my position that Wikiversity can decide for itself what is allowed on Wikiversity user pages.
cases 5 & 6. I just noticed that some cases are missing. It makes me wonder what we are not being shown. Given the absurd charges that we have been shown, what must have been in #5 and #6?
case 7 details. I made good faith edits to improve a template.
I've spent a significant amount of time trying to think of ways to both protect the good faith contributions of Wikiversity participants and prevent Wikiversity from filling up with stub pages. I still think that welcome templates are a good start. I recently tried to start some discussion on this idea which involves a special "Training:" namespace where stub pages could be used as learning exercises for Wikiversity participants who are learning how to edit.
I spoke with User:Emesee on IRC channel #wikiversity-en and I thanked him for agreeing to remain as a custodian.
Update. User:Emesee was one of the few Wikiversity custodians to stand up and resist the attacks that have been made on Wikiversity. For his trouble, he had his custodianship stripped away without community consensus. More comments on this sad turn of events can be found at this page. --JWSchmidt 16:11, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Day 5 reflections
I was blocked from editing Wikiversity before I could respond to all of the false and distorted charges that have been made against me in the review. Note: there was never a valid reason for the block. I thank those honorable Wikiversity participants who spoke out against this bad block and who were able to get me unblocked. During the time I was blocked, additional false charges have been made against me. The effort continues to use these false charges to "justify" blocking me from editing, banning me from #wikiversity-en and removing my custodianship status.
At this time, due to real world commitments, I have limited online time. Since my return to editing, I posted some of my thoughts about what is currently happening at Wikiversity at User:JWSchmidt/Blog/10 October 2008. As time permits, I will continue the sickening task of responding to all the false and distorted charges that have been made against me. --JWSchmidt 18:10, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Please continue this thread at User:JWSchmidt/Blog/19 October 2008.