User:Balloonman/notes

While I hope not to use this, I've decided to document the recent wikidrama with Dorftrottel.

The wiki-community has repeatedly afirmed Kurt's right to oppose RfA's on the basis of self nominations. This has been affirmed in two RFC's, an attempted ArbCom case, and numerous complaints to AN/I and |Another ANI report supporting Kurt's position.

Yet everytime he posts an oppose, it turns into a major disruption. Kumiko's RfA, Milk's favorite cookie, Northern Thunder, Geni, Poeloq, Soxred93,Brainreading, Jouster, Blueboy96,Shoe of Death see support 26 in particular, Remember the Dot, and Tivedshambo's RfA had some particularly rude comments---see support 13, 31, and Oppose 1. Those are just the cases since January 2008.

Then there was Transhumanist 5 was a particularly nasty episode. Transhumanist showed such disregard and hostility towards Kurt that many people, including his supporters, commented on his behavior. When Kurt responded with his objection, strawmen arguments are instantly posted "as if on cue", or get a wife, or get a life. One oppose clearly states that both Dorftrottel and the Transhumanist crossed the line.  Dorftrottel tried to distant himself from the attack, by claiming that get a wife isn't as offensive.  Of course, we are expected to believe that "get a wife" is a less rude than "get a life."

People have grown tired of the constant disruption created by the people who wish to ridicule Kurt. I am not opposed to discussing the rationale, but the problem is that the discussions have degenerated to attacks on Kurt. It is the opposition to Kurt's position that is creating disruptions in the RfA process.

EVula removed an unconstructive comment by Dortrottel on SLgrandson's RfA becuase it was unnecessary. AndonicO removed another comment that included a discourse by transhimanist and he removed another here I then removed a post from a string that added no value.  This removal included an ad hominem attack on Kurt's position, You mean per "KMweber" by Dortrottel and a completely unnecessary commentary by Transhumanist. Dorftrottel then lectures me to which I choose not to respond.

Dorftrottel's hostility towards me stems from previous discourse with him. As a result of Dorftrottel's and LraDrama's initial post on SLgrandson's RfA. I contacted both of them with a note that I cross posted to the RfA Talk page. LraDrama, comes to my page and we have a civil discussion about it, to which LraDrama responds, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3ARequests_for_adminship&diff=204747474&oldid=204746884 Balloonman has a fair point. Kmweber's opposes are stupid, basically, but I admit I am one of the people who just make it worse by confronting him. ... Thankyou Balloonman, this discussion has been most useful.] Dorftrottel had a vastly different response.

Before I go on, I should point out, I wasn't the first person to approach Dorftrottel about his commentary, another admin had already approached him Such poking at his comments is a distraction from the discussion of the user at hand. To which Dorftrottel responded, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dorftrottel&diff=next&oldid=204638121 No thanks... Therefore, screw the rest who freely choose neither to assume good faith with me and my usually short comments nor to at least ignore them.]

Unlike LraDrama, Dorftrottel, however, got defensive. He responded on his talk page and the RfA talk page. Having seen his edits at both places, and knowing that he intended to continue his incivility towards Kurt, I explicitly state that in that case Dorftrottel becomes the cause of the disruption.  I probably could have worded it better, but I stand by the notion that people who are attacking Kurt (and not his position) are the one's creating the disruption.

I goto EVula's talk page, where he has described me as shortsighted. I respond to him there. And since then Dorftrottel has decided to become increasing belligerent. We had a discussion on my talk page. I decide that the discussion isn't going anywhere and stopped responding to him.

Dorftrottel, however, continues to make posts about me. Two days later, Kurt responds to me on my talk page. If you notice, I haven't responded to his attacks in several days--eventhough he's attacked me in several forums. In the preceding time between my last comment to him, Dorftrottel had made the following posts:


 * 1) Here he calls me aggressive and accuses me of escalating the issue.
 * 2) Here You should explain to User:Balloonman how your comment is constructive, otherwise he might call it disruptive and remove it.
 * 3) Here he has a few choice words.
 * 4) Here he goes to another and declares that balloonman 'might snap at any moment'
 * 5) Here, he strikes his !vote declaring User:Balloonman does not allow me to freely participate in RfAs, therefore striking.
 * 6) Here, he strikes his !vote declaring User:Balloonman does not allow me to freely participate in RfAs, therefore striking.
 * 7) Here he claims that I 'will continue to remove each and every single RfA comment by me and others if and when it relates to Kurt Weber's position.' (I never said that, I said I would remove the disruptive ones---the one's which are attacks.)

Having seen his attacks on 3 RfA's and admin pages---and seen that he had two accounts previously unblocked, I refer to his having two accounts blocked previously. Shortly thereafter, I apologize.

He then responds to a person stating, Balloonman has decided that I cannot freely put good-faith comments in RfAs. I'm sorry, but the edits of his are not good faith edits. Telling somebody to get a wife and "right on cue" are not comments on the logic, but rather the messenger.

I then spell it out, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dorftrottel&diff=prev&oldid=205615103 I've tried to break away from this, but you keep posting to my talk page and making rude comments elsewhere. I've chosen to ignore you---elsewhere---despite your continued agressiveness and belyaching towards me. If you want this to die, then move on.] To which he says  no.

Keeper76 tries to play peacemaker, but I've already decided not to respond to him (unless he's responding on my talk page.) After two days of relative peace, Keeper deletes his attempt at peace (neither of us was participating.) Keeper indicates that it appears as if peace has been restored. Dorftrotter responds, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dorftrottel&diff=prev&oldid=206091835 It has not gone away. That depends entirely on Balloonman's further behaviour and comments.] Notice, I haven't responded to him OFF of my talk page in several days, while he has made several pointy attacks on me. (To which he had been approached.) My response, is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABalloonman&diff=206095973&oldid=206091444 As long as he lets it die, I'm happy to see it go away. If he continues to take the pot shots on various RfA's or spread garbage around, then I might take it to an RfC. I've not responded to him anywhere (but here) in several days despite his efforts to (IMHO) pick a fight.] Of course, Dorftrotter has to respond.

And then he continues to beg for a fight, here