User talk:Cmapm/Archive2

'''To make discussions on my talk page easier to understand for outsiders, I'll leave my reply to you both here and on your talk page. (Credits for the good idea: Dbenbenn)'''

User talk:Cmapm/Archive1

Gymnastics
According to your userpage, gymnastics was one of your hobbies, besides, English seems to be your native language (or at least you write in it at advanced level). Then why had you stopped contributions to related articles? :( I was waiting for a few words about compulsories... At least I, consider your edits very valuable.

P.S. If you don't like me speaking to you for any reasons, feel free to tell me this. I'll understand. Cmapm 02:34, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Cmapm! I don't mind your speaking to me at all. You've been very nice to me and you've been a great help on the gymnastics-related articles. Thanks for all your encouragement!


 * I actually hadn't realized that I hadn't updated the gymnastics articles in a few days. I've worked on brushing up the articles for some of the British and Brazilian gymnasts, and I've been thinking about how to go about writing about compulsories. I'll definitely be getting back to work now. :) Namaste, Mademoiselle Sabina 03:28, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, I forgot to mention this on my talk page--English is indeed my first language, although I wasn't born in an anglophone country. Thank you for the kind words! :)


 * Hi again, Mademoiselle Sabina! I've seen your latest addition to Artistic gymnastics article, it was great! Sorry, I hadn't taken into account, that you might edit biography articles instead of editing topics on general subjects. And I thought, that you stopped edits at all :) And once more I want to say, that I like your gymnastics-related editing very much!!! Cheers! Cmapm 09:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your kind words! Don't worry, I'm not leaving Wiki! =) I'm probably going to change the userpage back in a few days when I cool down somewhat. Luckily most of the editors on Wiki I have met have been extremely nice, but there are always a few who aren't. Someone on Wiki I intensely dislike--because I feel they are pretentious and do not research the edits they make--had changed a word in my gymnastics article to something completely nonsensical and I momentarily lost patience. I'm fine. :) Thank you for the concern and the words of support! They were needed today.


 * Thank you, I stay here :) By the way, as concerns a category of people, whom you dislike, some time ago I had heard similar things from another user, a researcher, who had scientific degree in history. Besides, there is a wide variety of other cinic users here - trolls, vandals, etc. There is a long article Criticism of Wikipedia about Wiki's problems.


 * Feel free to edit or delete these my comments when you shall cool down, if you want. And, please, keep in mind my words in the last sentence of my previous comment. I didn't say them only for support, I really think so. Cmapm 21:10, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

RfC, etc.
Cmapm, thank you so much for defending me in the RfC. I was beginning to feel quite alone there. I am astounded that people feel the way they do about the RfC--I'm quite surprised, to be honest.

Another editor, who has been able to present a level-headed third party view, contacted me and attempted to do some conflict-resolution on this issue (his responses are the last ones on my Talk Page right now; the rest of the discussion is on his Talk Page). We've come to some agreements here--that neither Mel nor I look particularly good in this case; I for losing my temper; he for his inappropriate responses.

At the moment, it has been suggested that I close the RfC and apologize. Frankly I do not see myself doing either of these things until Mel accepts some liability for his actions. I did say, however, that if he apologized and perhaps took down the attack page, I would discuss these options.

I would love to get your opinion here. I would not take down the RfC without consulting you and reaching an agreement on the dispute resolution. How do you think we can get this resolved, seeing as how things have come to a stalemate here?

Thank you again for supporting me here, and through all my edits on Wiki. It's really appreciated. Mademoiselle Sabina 11:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I think, that my suggestion of filing the RfC was a mistake, because I hadn't estimated the amount of support, administrators have here as compared to ordinary users. All following events were a consequence of that mistake. We three spent a significant amount of time on this topic, the only pluses for me (and I suspect, that for you too) was some experience in this field and that I expressed my personal view there, who and how interpreted this view, depends on one's honesty and doesn't matter for me.


 * I suggest that all three of us take a timeout to think of how to end this "dead lock" as quicker as we can and such way, that nobody of us would feel neither an excellent guy, nor a bad one in that discussion.


 * In case you agree with this, I'll post this suggestion to the third user involved on his talkpage.


 * BTW, some time ago I also came to the conclusion, that sometimes is better to ignore the user, if the discussion promises to be very long and pointless. I am feeling guilty, that I didn't tell that to you before we went into this discussion. Cmapm 12:09, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * As follows from the message, which I've just received from the third part, at least one of us should not like to recognize neither any wrongdoing, nor do any apologies even if they were mutual ones. Therefore, I'll not recognize neither any wrongdoing from me (excepting the creation of RFC), nor will I apologize. I also discourage you from doing this.


 * As concerns the withdrawal of the RFC, I suspect (I'm not sure enough though), that some of comments there are made on the "service for service" basis, and I more and more realize, that I was wrong to encourage RFC's creation. I didn't come to Wiki to make thousands of friends, and perhaps due to this I have no chances in this RFC dispute. Should you approve RFC's removal? If you do, I'll withdraw it and each of us will be able to concentrate on much more important topics as long as their excellencies administrators will allow us to do creative work here in Wiki.


 * I think, we should ignore such users in the future. Let their actions be on their conscience.


 * Anyway, these are only my suggestions, for example, probably you should rely on the comment by FrankB, but keep in mind, that it was I, who originated the RFC. I'm waiting for your opinion Cmapm 16:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm on my way out the door now, so this will be quick, but here are my thoughts. I'll respond more in detail later, but here are the bare bones.


 * I agree that perhaps if this matter is not resolved we should consider withdrawing the RFC. However, I am going to ask FrankB and CommanderKeane if perhaps there is a way to close the RfC as "unresolved"--ie, we stand by our original statement that Mel had some liability here, but recognize that the matter will not be resolved. I don't even know if this is a possibilty on Wiki but I will ask later.


 * Thanks again for all your help and support here. I really appreciate it!! Namaste, Mademoiselle Sabina 17:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Crossing Posts on MS v. ME

 * I haven't looked at whatever you just gave me as we've 'crossed' in posting... so got one back for you- see my post on the RFC (Attack page section). I was about to write you next anyway, so HI! (I'll see your link immediately)
 * I'm finding it very hard to catch up with this, as the thread was broken last evening; i do hope the thread has been pieced together again! The best thing for all is that this thing go away. Based on the dearth of respondants per the normal swarm, it's pretty close to dead already. 48 hours is a HARD Deadline. One of the few things the policy board is adamant about.
 * Need you to continue to help her recognize this was small potatoes indeed, and this was not the correct recourse. In particular, as there is hardly anything that occured here behaviourwise that deserves any kind of attention. Both tried to end it... but butted heads again while a wound was raw evidently.
 * FYI, what is being called an attack page is standard operating procedure when an admin suddenly has confrontations with a given editor. Fra nkB 18:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * re:By the way, here's her reply: [2]. I think, it's reasonable and I support her view. Cmapm 17:49, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

ANS Exhange_1
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Fabartus"
 * the link just puts me back at the top of your talk page. What am I looking for in particular, or would you edit the link so I am getting to a section of interest.  actually, which comment was addressed to you on hers would be a good 'thread building' chain.  I'm being whipsawed in four windows at once! Fra nkB  18:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * This is a quote from that her message:"However, I am going to ask FrankB and CommanderKeane if perhaps there is a way to close the RfC as "unresolved"--ie, we stand by our original statement that Mel had some liability here, but recognize that the matter will not be resolved. I don't even know if this is a possibilty on Wiki but I will ask later. " I support it, because I think, all three involved parts (me, Mel Etitis and probably Mademoiselle Sabina) were wrongdoing in some way. BTW, it was I, who suggested Mademoiselle Sabina to fil the RFC, so, I am the originator and is responsible for this. Cmapm 18:32, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

ANS Exhange_2

 * I see you're building your own 'attack page' (Big )... having the thread all in one place DOES help! I posted the essence of the above 'compromise' to MEL with a recommendation that he take responsibility for his occasional 'prof-to-student' manner by email. I lectured him on that abrasive tendancy as well. I doubt he'll deny it exists, he is a good egg. Cross fingers, hold postion and pray. That seems to have triggered all three of you, and it's just Mel being Mel. I'm sure he was rushed.  I addressed the 'tidying' issue on the RFC. I'm posative nothing was meant by that, as it's one of his catch-phrases.


 * As to the question about the RFC handling... A) I don't know if there is a procedure to withdraw one and file it, but seems reasonably likely. (I'd normally ask Mel about that sort of thing, so I'll drop a note to User: MacGyverMagic/Mgm (he's on the ArbCom board, iirc) who has the horsepower, if anyone does. Bothering anyone else is contraindicated as I can get him by email and co-post.  (Woops - broken link. Another casualty of Jimbo Wales inability to guide from on high, I'd guess!)
 * the rest of it is up to Mel and 'MS' (Gawd, I hate long user names! Well, a little. Not the person, just typing and remembering the name.) Fra nkB 19:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Given the broken link, let me poke around for an alternate. UncleEd or another few I've 'met' along the way. (User page deletion is only possible if the editor request it himself... or I've got a typo) Either way I need to consult the Administrators list. I'm sending Mgm an email anyway just in case. If he's gone, I'd like to know why. ttfn
 * Fra nkB 19:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

ANS Exhange_3
I'm taking the liberty of adding some structure to your thread of messages. Fra nkB 19:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC) Please see: Requests for administrator attention
 * ''This is one avenue:If you need to contact an administrator about...deletions undeletions page protection eporting vandalism ... or any other sysop activities

If you wish to discuss something with an administrator directly please visit one or several of the userpages below...'' but let me consult the list and find someone I know has horsepower before you do anything more. I'll be back soon. Fra nkB 19:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

ANS Exhange_4

 * Ok, I've called in a big gun -- too large really, but he's been active. Fra nkB 20:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * You were wrong to say, that I am a newbie of 2 or 3 months, I've been here for ~1.5 years and have more than 3000 edits. Cmapm 20:26, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

ANS Exhange_5A

 * My most humble apologies. I clicked earliest and misunderstood the date... It looked like you'd had only a couple of pages of edits taken 50 a pop. I'll strike that out on Tony's page, but if that's so, why the heck did this blow up like this?  Fra</B> nkB  20:37, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

ANS Exhange_5B

 * "but if that's so, why the heck did this blow up like this?" I don't know, but you see, that Mel did not just "struggle with newbies". I repeat, I believe, that all three of us were wrongdoing in this pointless discussion. Cmapm 20:41, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Aren't we all, but the 'question of moment' is why the Elephant Gun? Heck, the Wikietiquette thing and whole affair is still 'young' as these things go. Nothing had time to mature. Where's the request for mediation, etc.? That escalation was awfully early.  Hasty, in a word. And I still don't comprehend what was 'Attacking' on that so called page. It was much like your thread, a chronological record. Anyway, I've done my bit to TOOTW, so let's let it ride.  I'm checking your page for posts, so make it easy on yourself and answer here. That's why I added the headers - so I could link to same. I don't need an answer on the rehetoricals, but will take an friendly email if you want to make me see what triggered you both. <B>Fra</B> nkB  20:56, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * So, what I have to do? I've completely lost in this pointless discussion. Should I and other just users switch to other topics, be ignorant and all will be OK? Or I must do something to stop these infinite series of comments by me and other users? Cmapm 21:09, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Suggest you delete the edit conflict section and this note as we crossed again! <B>Fra</B> nkB

Resolution!
Post from my talk: Thank you again for all your help and mediation here. I know this has taken hours...days...when will it end? I am in total agreement with your compromise suggestion, and will wait to see what turns out. Namaste, Mademoiselle Sabina 21:01, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

No word from Tony S. The (my) 'deadline' has passed. May I suggest you two insert (Not append) a prominent note in the RFC saying the dispute is settled, and with due process that it will be gone, and such. Seems preferable to involving another attempt for speedydelete, and courteous to those who have better ways to spend their wikitime. Actually, not a bad idea to ask the Admins to close it via the normal link I posted (above?), where-ever. The thanks are welcome, but unneeded. Glad to POOTTW! I'm sorry I didn't get back to Mel immediately as I resumed my wiki-work. I could have headed this off before it exploded!

I've got to go mop floors and other fun stuff! The sunny afternoon is history now. Sniff. <B>Fra</B> nkB 21:12, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: your last 'What do I Do?'
 * Well, you got the attention you asked for <G>! (Enjoy the humor in it at least.) Let me take the heat for an non traditonal solution. I'll wipe the RFC with a note that I mediated it and that all parties want it to be archieved. If someone wants to make a fuss, I really don't care. And it should stop additional 'NOISE' on these talk pages. If they want to hang me, I'll give them the rope.

<B>Fra</B> nkB 21:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

User-page lyrics
I'm afraid that I've had to remove the song lyrics from your User page, as they seemed to be a copyright violation. If their copyright status is such as to allow their use in Wikipedia, feel free to replace them together with a copyright statement. --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 09:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The matter is closed
Iterim Notice of Resolution