User talk:Karmafist/Archive22

¿Como estás?
Welcome back! I got a new username (and a new sig):  Λυδ α  cιτγ (TheJabberwock). Like it?

I don't know if you care about userboxes, but I think everybody (with the possible exception of Cyde) is sick of the userbox wars. It seems like people are accepting The German solution. I personally have subst'ed all my boxes, so I don't care that much.

Hopefully your Wikibreak has enabled you to edit articles once again!

See you around,  Λυδ α  cιτγ (TheJabberwock) 02:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Welcome from me, too! -- GeorgeMoney T·C 03:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Karmafist, what do you hope to achieve with your edit summaries? --Sam Blanning(talk) 08:37, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Karmafist - those edit summaries are not helpful to this project. You are spamming your e-mail address for personal reasons and stirring up dissent. I realise that your intentions are no doubt good, but the effect is disruptive and makes you look like a troll. Please cease and desist. I really wouldn't want to have to block you. Use e-mail if you want to contact people off-wiki. --Doc ask?  08:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Let me be quite clear, before I'm misrepresented. I think a book about wikipedia might be a great thing. If this project is to succeed then critical reflection and constructive comment is neccessary. We must also be open to people trashign us too. My objection is to the misuse of edit summaries - they are for...well summarising edits.... not advertising projects. E-mail folk. Post to the Pump for comments. Why not see if Signpost will do an article on your project? Just don't misuse edit summaries - and don't (and I'm sure your not) stir up conflicts. A book should record not increase any problems. --Doc  ask?  11:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

save wikipedia
wikipedia is fine, thank you. Cheers.User:Mikereichold | User_talk:Mikereichold 12:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? because I don't think it is. ILovePlankton 18:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * What's wrong? -- Cyde↔Weys  18:32, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Well for one users who continue to disrupt wikipedia after they have been asked multiple times to stop and no one does anything about it. And there is far to much fighting going on and not enough trying to make wikipedia better. ILovePlankton 18:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * For two, disruptive admins, and users who show any resistance whatsoever being labelled "disruptive" or "trolls". Shall we go on? There's more material yet. — Natha n  (talk) 03:50, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I need specifics; these accusations are all way too vague. -- Cyde↔Weys  17:22, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Greetings
Hi, Karmafist. I'm sorry to say that I don't think you should be unblocked either. Your recent edit summaries have nothing to do with your edits; they appear to me to be an attempt to spam recent changes. (Just imagine if everyone on Wikipedia were to use edit summaries that way&mdash;they'd be useless for recent change patrolling!) They do, also, go against the spirit of the arbitration ruling. I believe that you do want to make positive change here, but your methods of going about it are only hurting you. You are welcome to mention your projects to your personal friends and contacts, but misusing features such as edit summaries to do it is not acceptable.

Also, please don't remove others' comments while you still have the request to unblock up. It's misleading to other admins who wish to evaluate your request if they cannot see that others have refused. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 22:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

hey Karma, what goes around comes around (even though it seems to take too long). i might suggest to not let your recently gained political power in NH go to your head. things go around there, too. r b-j 20:00, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, rbj. Ditto for you too, buddy. Karm  a  fist Save Wikipedia 21:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Your book
Do you have a title for it? ILovePlankton 21:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I like that title, it seems to go well with where wikipedia is at right now. Also I have a couple of questions. Is it going to be a story about you, or is it going to be a book about wikipedia? Will you have other people in the book (Like me? :p), and if you do will they have the same names in your book as they do on wikipedia? After the book is done are you going to leave wikipedia (please don't)? Is it going to sell in canada and Britain? ILovePlankton 17:08, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Did you miss my questions? ILovePlankton 22:36, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you, but I was also wondering if it would sell in canada or britain, I know nathanrdotcom would like to buy it, if you don't know I understand. sorry about that ILovePlankton 22:45, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You have a way of making me feel good. :) Thank you for all you have done for me and wikipedia. ILovePlankton 22:53, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh I second that, of course. — Natha  n  ( talk ) / 19:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

call it an award if you want
A while ago you welcomed me under a different username, Afc3737. Well here I am btw is your book about Wikipedia? B/c I already started writing one :). --Osbus 23:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

On my userpage, how do I align the boxes vertically on the right?

Re:book
The book Im writing is along the lines of wiki-culture and focuses on WP. Nevertheless, I have plenty of ideas for your book...but is it meant to be published and read by WP editors or the general public? Good luck, --Osbus 02:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for coming back and not getting blocked! Your edit summaries are looking a lot better now. -- Tantalum Telluride 02:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I concur. &mdash; Nightst a  llion  (?) 14:55, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

A short Esperanzial update
As you may have gathered, discussions have been raging for about a week on the Esperanza talk page as to the future direction of Esperanza. Some of these are still ongoing and warrant more input (such as the idea to scrap the members list altogether). However, some decisions have been made and the charter has hence been amended. See what happened. Basically, the whole leadership has had a reshuffle, so please review the new, improved charter.

As a result, we are electing 4 people this month. They will replace JoanneB and Pschemp and form a new tranche A, serving until December. Elections will begin on 2006-07-02 and last until 2006-07-09. If you wish to run for a Council position, add your name to the list before 2006-07-02. For more details, see Esperanza/June 2006 elections.

Thanks and kind, Esperanzial regards, &mdash;Cel es tianpower háblame 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I surely hope that you will try for nomination. --Nearly Headless Nick 09:38, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello
I just saw you and dropped in to say hello. How are you? Busy, I am sure. I wish you all the best for your new role in the real life. --Bhadani 16:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Our red tape and processes and all the attendant paraphernalia created to save and value add to wikipedia may be doing more harm than the good. Still, I being an eternal optimist shall do my part to improve the credibility of the Project and make it an encyclopedia in the truest sense than an encyclopedia based on consensus, and ultimately the largest blog created in the human history! Nice to hear from you. --Bhadani 17:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

advocate of democracy userbox
Hi,

Being the creator of:

I want to ask you if you would mind if I move your userbox to my user space per The German Solution to prevent its potential deletion? Tal :) 09:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I'll take that as a yes... Thanks! Tal :) 08:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Edit summaries
Dude, what's up with the Dadaist edit summaries? -- Proto /// type  14:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

We Need You
You're the only one who can lead the revolution against overzealous admins. Please come back full time and rally the troops. juppiter  talk #c 18:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

AMA Roll Call
There is currently an AMA Roll Call going on. Please visit the page and sign your name to indicate whether or not you're still active. :-) אמר Steve Caruso ( desk / poll ) 18:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Miracles do happen
Check it out. Maybe they wont get that Nobel, but this looks pretty good to me. talk to +MATIA 09:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Nifty
I didn't know this, but sorry about the outcome. Fairly conservative district I suppose?--MONGO 13:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MONGO&diff=64656934&oldid=64656899 Sure, I would like you to be around. Please.]--Bhadani 13:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Neutral
I added a Neutral section to your manifesto page.  the_ ed1  7   17:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Andrew Sylvia
You shoukd re-create your article on Wikinfo or another wiki. &mdash; goethean &#2384; 18:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You might also try re-creating it here - the only reason it was deleted here was because the article was created by a banned user. If you recreate it and reliably source it, it potentially would not be deleted. FCYTravis 22:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

My dear Karmafist
My dear Karmafist, seing you showing up your beautiful face once again has filled me with joy - can I hope this means you're back with us? Please say you do.... I've missed you greatly these months :( Is there anything we can bribe you with? ;) If you feel like talking you know exactly where to find me > that way! Please take care, and I hope to see you back asap - big hugs, Phaedriel  &hearts;   The Wiki Soundtrack! <font color="#FF0000">♪  - 19:58, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Research Survey Request
Hello, I am a member of a research group at Palo Alto Research Center (formerly known as Xerox PARC) studying how conflicts occur and resolve on Wikipedia. Due to your experience in conflict resolution on Wikipedia (e.g., as a member of the Mediation Cabal) we’re extremely interested in your insights on this topic. We have a survey at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=400792384029 which we are inviting a few selected Wikipedians to participate in, and we would be extremely appreciative if you would take the time to complete it. As a token of our gratitude, we would like to present you with a PARC research star upon completion. Thank you for your time.

Parc wiki researcher 00:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC) PARC User Interface Research Group

Civility parole violation
I have blocked you for 48 hours for a violation of your civility parole with this edit. I just do not understand why you are constantly pushing the buttons as much as possible. A cursory glance over your block log seems to indicate that you have chronic problems with keeping yourself in check, and if this goes on any longer, you will end up facing the one year block per your RFAR sanction. --Cyde↔Weys 17:25, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I have extended your block to 1 week per the terms of your arbitration probation. I was actually trying to be nice with only 48 hours, but your response made me realize the leniency wasn't deserved. --Cyde↔Weys 17:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I can't condone removing block notices and calling them "spam", but a block for that edit? There's a difference between criticism and uncivility.  I see no name-calling or other similiar malfeasance here.  Are you sure you're not looking too hard for reasons to block?  Friday (talk) 17:54, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * See ; Between deciding not to contribute to the encyclopedia and incivility, Karmafist is choosing to walk a tightrope. Calling that edit -- a notification of a block -- "spam" while removing it is incivil in my book, and is a return to behavior that was raising hackles just a few weeks ago on this talkpage, actually. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:01, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * This has the hallmark of kicking someone when they are down. "*Delete due to Kelly's reputation, it appears to be a hitlist of some sort." is simple precis of the whole argument: If no one had thought it was a hitlist, no one would have cared. I'd like to see this block lifted. - Aaron Brenneman 03:33, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I've also removed the protection to this page. If someone removes a warning, replacing the warning and instructing them not to removing it may be appropiate, but there appears to e little consensus on this.  Protecting the page after one removal is clearly overkill.  --brenneman 03:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I support this block in view of the animus Karmafist has developed; describing such attacks as a "simple precis of the whole argument" isn't helping to make Wikipedia a reasonable place in which Kelly and others can work. Simply put, we can do without such loutish behavior and those who condone it.  The protection was also reasonable in the circumstances, but not strictly necessary. --Tony Sidaway 19:51, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * We are talking about the creation of pseudo-attack lists with the stated aim of getting an adminstrator to block her, right? Because the suggestion that Karmafist was the uncivil one here is simply astounding. -  brenneman  color="black" title="Admin actions">{L} 15:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * There was no attack list nor anything that could be described as a pseudo-attack list.  You're simply repeating and compounding Karmafist's attack. --Tony Sidaway 04:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd direct you to the meaning of "pseudo." Kelly had, by her own declaeration, created a pseduo-attack list in order to bait another adminstrator into deleting it/blocking her.  She re-created multiple versions of this list after it was deleted.  Karmafist accurately decribed the public perception, and does not in fact appear to be expressing his own opinon.  To suggest that this was an attack, out of the blue, on someone just casually minding her own business is simply bizarre. - brenneman 04:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You're simply repeating, in different permutations, your own misconception of what Kelly did and said. This appears to based upon the most malicious possible interpretation of her words,  And that is pretty much what got Karmafist blocked under his incivility parole. --Tony Sidaway 04:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * How many possible interpretations are there of "I created it for one express purpose: to see if El C would jerk his knee and attempt to punish me for creating it."? - Aaron Brenneman 05:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I only want to address your misinterpretation, which is that "Kelly had, by her own declaeration, created a pseduo-attack list in order to bait another adminstrator into deleting it/blocking her." That interpretation can only have been based on the purest malice. --Tony Sidaway 05:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That is, well, amazing. What exactly does that statement above of Kelly's mean then?  The previous list was being discussed on ANI, there was some perception that it was an attack list.  Please, provide some other reasonable interpretation of the statment linked above and explain how my summary is off-base, I'm dying to hear it.  - Aaron Brenneman 05:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It means only what it says. --Tony Sidaway 05:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * And it says "I created it (a pseudo-attack page) for one express purpose: to see if (bait) El C would jerk his knee and attempt to punish (block/delete) me for creating it." If there is another reasonable way to interpret that statement, you seem dreadfully hesitant to provide it. -  brenneman  color="black" title="Admin actions">{L} 09:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That particular statement definetely seems like an attempt to bait El C. I don't see how else that can be interpreted without tripping all over yourself logically. <font color="Black">The Ungovernable   Force  09:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm
I'm sorry to learn that you're in the midst of a conflict; I do hope that things eventually get sorted, and that when the block elapses, you will still be interested in contributing to the project. You are a good contributor.

Oh, and extremely belated thanks for voting on my RfA. DS 02:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't let the bastards win!
Just a reminder: You still have a lot more friends and supporters here than enemas. Please don't let a bunch of bullying, petty-minded, vindictive fools get you down. This is still OUR community, inspite of their best(worst) efforts to turn it into their own egotrip playground. Should they succeed, all our work will have been wasted and this project will be rendered a bigger joke than even Colbert could conceive. Courage and Truthiness my friend,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 16:40, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

this puts it all in perspective. Apologies for the Spam-a-rama if I sent it to you already Fist:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Radio
You were mentioned by name on national radio today, have you heard? It was on Talk of the Nation, around 50-55 minutes into the show. You're famous! Or, in the context of the comment... perhaps infamous. :D Cheers, C HAIRBOY  (☎) 04:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * What? Really? OMG, that's fabulous...:) --Nearly Headless Nick 12:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

User talk:Stephencolbert
Regarding the above, please review Administrators%27_noticeboard to see why your edits are being reverted. Thanks! - C HAIRBOY (☎) 21:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
<div class="boilerplate metadata rfa" style="background-color: #ffffff; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 2px #eeeeee;">

Unblock request
I would like to know the justification of my block. The messages that were posted on the forum were not my work. It was some imposter. -- Karm a  fist  06:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * ,,  --Tawker 07:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)}.  Additional diffs that I do not have at hand are included, however, it had nothing to do with any external forum, I have no knowledge of such.


 * Reviewed and declined by Tawker. Formatting broken, though. - brenneman  color="black" title="Admin actions">{L} 08:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Though Tawker was the one who originally placed the block, I have to say I would decline this too. Karmafist, you used to be a good editor, but you haven't done anything worthwhile in months. I understand you feel wronged by your desysopping, but if you can't fit into the community and contribute any longer, I see no reason you should be allowed to continue stirring up trouble. Note there is further discussion of this indefinite block on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Notice of community ban. the wub "?!"  00:01, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Karmafist, you reap what you sow. You haven't done anything but be disruptive and snide in months. You've been playing us for fools, continuing to post unproduective comments in the brief interruptions between your ArbCom-sanctioned one week bans. You've had your last hurrah, and it's really time for you to move on. -- Cyde Weys 00:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Unblocked
You have been unblocked assuming good faith by User:Tawker. Please reform yourself, and keep your promises; be civil, and don't disrupt Wikipedia. Otherwise you'll be blocked till eternity :D You used to be a great guy; show us that you still are. Welcome back! -- May the Force be with you! Shr e shth91 ($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 07:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've asked on ANI that to avoid any unpleasantness, admins who don't have (or haven't voiced) strong opinons on your conduct be the ones who watch your every move, even while you sleep. ^_^ I'll do my best to keep the wolves at bay, but you've got to help me out.  Can you stay away from welcoming, from wikispace pretty much full stop, can you avoid anyone with whom you've had problems in the past, and work on articles for a while?  If there is an issue in wikispace or if someone does something that you're finding hard to ignore, drop a note on my talk page instead of doing anything yourself.  How does that sound? -  brenneman  color="black" title="Admin actions">{L} 07:17, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, Karmafist. We can help you, if you help yourself. And, you have been a great friend. :) --Nearly Headless Nick 07:25, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Statement To All
Thank you all, I, Karmafist, promise to stay away from any and all talk pages excluding those of people who have been kind and supportive to me here, until January 1st, 2007 at the earliest.

I also believed that asymmetrical warfare was necessary in order to help people on Wikipedia, and that vandalism would be part of that. With the help of friends like Aaron and Nick, I once again belief that I don't have to vandalize in order to help those in need here, which I am glad for.

My account still appears to be blocked by Doc Glasgow, which is fine for now until things are figured out. I have some uttapam, and i'm going to eat it for lunch and then log off since i'm at work. Karm a  fist  17:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


 * You like South Indian food? Yum.  Welcome back.  --BostonMA 22:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Really!!! Great to learn that you uttapam, you may find more in digital form at Tamil cuisine. --Bhadani 15:30, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It was good, but i'm not a big fan of sambar to be honest, too bland. Then again, maybe it was the kind I had. We'll have to have lunch sometime, Bhadani. :-) Karm  a  fist  17:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the offer. However, I am afraid in the meantime someone around here listening to our talks may "use" me for his or her lunch. I am telling assuming utmost good faith, and without any offence. --Bhadani 17:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I could go for a masala dosa right now. -- Samir   धर्म 18:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * And I thank you. It was virtually delicious.  Settled for green curry chicken in real life as I was too lazy to go to Gerrard Street -- Samir   धर्म 19:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Request
Now that you've been welcomed back and have apparently disavowed your guerrilla campaign against the encyclopedia (or at least the wicked Cabal), I've come to ask that you make good. Several of your sockpuppets have supported a Request for Adminship whose outcome remains in doubt. It is important that people have faith in the processes of Wikipedia, a faith which can be undermined by this kind of duplicity. Now that you've been unbanned and unblocked it would be a considerable and welcome gesture of good faith on your part if you rescinded those votes. Thanks, and best wishes, Mackensen (talk) 00:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Statement #2
I, Karmafist, will also not be voting on anything, unless requested by someone else, until January 1st, 2007 at the earliest. I'd like to share this elsewhere, but this IP address is blocked by Doc Glasgow still. Karm a  fist  17:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, One More Thing
If there's anyone out there trolling to provoke a response out of me, please do so somewhere else. Thank you. Karm a  fist  17:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I see that you removed my comment twice. Let me rephrase: why should we let you back when we've caught four of your sockpuppets in the past week alone that were used for abuse and RFA sockpuppet voting? You haven't even apologized for them. One of the conditions of you continuing to be allowed to edit is that you fess up for all of the bad things you did and apologize, otherwise there is no place for you here. -- Cyde Weys 17:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Ben, I don't know what you're talking about, and if you could, please follow the statement above. It's for everyone, but you in particular. Karm  a  fist  17:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Andrew, it's unbelievable that as soon as you are allowed to edit Wikipedia again you immediately turn around and start accusing people of trolling. It's like you're just asking to be reblocked so you can righteously declare, "Look how unfair they're being to me again."  -- Cyde Weys  17:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Ben, it doesn't look like anyone is around, so i'll answer here. You are correct, Wikipedia's "laws" are unfair; they are often poorly defined, arbitrary and usually prone to misinterpretation and misuse. I'm going to be around in one form or another until that changes or Wikipedia is no longer as influential as it is on the internet. You can ban this account, but you cannot ban what it stands for and those who believe in what it stands for -- I am in control, not you. I hope you have a pleasant day. Karm  a  fist  18:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Cyde, leave him in peace for awhile. --Nearly Headless Nick 09:12, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

IP Unblocked
Your main IP has been unblocked now. Mackensen (talk) 17:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Mackensen. If you could, do you mind somehow helping me curtail Cyde up above? It seems like he's trying to provoke a reaction from me. Karm  a  fist  17:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Trapped in wikipedia
Is there a self-help group? I'm just sayin. Maybe I could get a job, like night watchman or something where I can wiki all night long and nobody cares. Wjhonson 16:19, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Thank you and sorry
It's quite alright. No offence taken. I just hope you'll be a good guy; and I'm here to help. BTW, you must have confused me for somebody else. I didn't stand up for Carmen Chamelion AFAIK :) -- May the Force be with you!  Shr e shth91 ($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|)  16:23, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello
I was just curious who you were, some people thought I was you. Vice President In Charge Of Office Supplies 12:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)