Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-04-20

Mediation Case: 2006-04-20
Please observe Etiquette and Talk Page Etiquette in disputes. If you submit complaints or insults your edits are likely to be removed by the mediator, any other refactoring of the mediation case by anybody but the mediator is likely to be reverted. If you are not satisfied with the mediation procedure please submit your complaints to Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal.

Request Information

 * Request made by: Cool CatTalk 21:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Where is the issue taking place?
 * On IRC at #wikipedia-en-vandalism.
 * The irc channel is owned by the WMF even though its unofficial part of wikipedia.
 * Since both parties involved are wikipedians and the issues resolvement serves wikipedia itself directly.
 * I think it is safe to discuss it here.


 * Who's involved?
 * User:Cool Cat, User:Essjay


 * What's going on?
 * The channel used to host my vandal detection bot, computer. After a very minor disagreement I left the channel in frustration about 15 days ago. When I decided to return I noticed I was banned from the channel. This means my bot cannot operate. The channel currently is unused still registered by Essjay.


 * ''What would you like to change about that?
 * I'd like to be able to run my bot on the channel. Due to the structure of the bot, the bot will only operate in channels following a spesific naming convention. Vandalism detection bots are imerative for the growing wikipedia.


 * If you'd prefer we work discreetly, how can we reach you?
 * I'd prefer the discussion be avalible for public view.


 * Would you be willing to be a mediator yourself, and accept a mediation assignment in a different case?
 * I am prohibited from mediating as per ArbCom hearing.


 * This is, following the Categorical Imperative, the idea that you might want to do
 * what you expect others to do. You don't have to, of course, that's why it's a question.


 * I'd prefer the channels ownership to be passed to me or someone else who will not interfere with my bots operation. Since the channel currently serves as a useless redirect to #wikipedia-en The channel had over 200 people registered for access (a check that filters out vandals), I do not believe this is unreasonable.

Mediator response
Hello, this is Cowman109Talk and it appears this case is out of the hands of the Mediation Cabal as the incident has been referred to the Arbitration Committee (and does not involve main Wiki space). Essjay is also unwilling to mediate. Therefore, I am closing this case.

Cowman109Talk 20:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Evidence
Please report evidence in this section with for misconduct and  for 3RR violations. If you need help ask a mediator or an advocate. Evidence is of limited use in mediation as the mediator has no authority. Providing some evidence may, however, be useful in making both sides act more civil. Etiquette: Although it's understandably difficult in a heated argument, if the other party is not as civil as you'd like them to be, make sure to be more civil than him or her, not less.

Compromise offers
This section is for listing and discussing compromise offers.

Comments by others
Comment by Pschemp: The reasons for this have been explained over and over to CoolCat and he doesn't seem to be listening. First, LEGALLY, (and this is a legal issue for the foundation), since the Foundation has not officially sanctioned the anti-vandalism activity, no one can use #wikipedia-en-vandalism, as per Freenode policy, any channel with the word Wikipedia in it is an official, sanctioned to, and belonging to the Foundation channel. It doesn't matter who wants to put what there, if its not offical, it can't go there. CoolCat's bot etc. has not been officially approved, nor have the other ones running, hence the change in channel names to #vanadlism-en-wp. Coolcat is, and has always been, completely free to run his bot on another channel of his own choosing, but refuses to do so, claiming he has changed the code so that it makes it difficult to run with a different channel name. Legal issues, are however, a fact of life and difficulty as a result will have to be dealt with, but this in no way requires a mediation case, as the decisions are not up to Coolcat or Essjay. psch e  mp  |  talk  12:59, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Can you cite sources for this Freenode policy you are talking about since freenode staff tells me something diferent.
 * Freenode staff told me that they do not interfere with what happens to #wikipedia-en-foo channels. They let wikipedia contacts deal with the matter, one being essjay although he wasn't one when Fennec registered the channel (and later gave it to essjay). I started the #en.wikipedia.vandalism channel which was renamed to #wikipedia-en-vandalism as a part of the freenode-wide renaming. Legal issues are adressed in courts and this issue is not one.
 * The channel in question was running fine until essjay banned me off of it for no real reason as far as I care. My bot is the backbone of the irc based vandalism detection. If you use Pgkbot or tawkerbot you will be using my code, both bots are still modified versions of my original code (I have no problem with that).
 * After banning me, Essjay not only changed the channel name but made sure I was banned from all channels such as #vanadlism-en-wp which he started shortly after banning me from #wikipedia-en-vandalism. I believe in coincidence. Coincidences happen every day. But I don't trust coincidences.
 * An official aproval was never and is not necesary for me to start a #wikipedia-en-foo channel. IRC channels are ALL unofficialy affiliated with wikipedia. We have a #wikipedia-admin channel (or something along the line) as well as many other channels for various wikipedia projects. Nothing said on an IRC channel can be used as evidence in arbcom cases as it is unofficial. #wikipedia-en is NOT the official irc channel for en.wikipedia. An official IRC channel does not exist for any project by the wikimedia foundation.
 * -- Cool CatTalk 15:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * This is a dispute between Essjay and me. Talking to him has not been constructive and unofficial mediation is second in line for the dispute resolution process. Do not attept to prevent it from happening. -- Cool CatTalk 15:24, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

While using the talk page of the article in question to solve a dispute is encouraged to involve a larger audience, feel free to discuss the case below if that is not possible. Other mediators are also encouraged to join in on the discussion as Wikipedia is based on consensus.

Discussion
I don't know where the heck I'm supposed to put my response in this, but I'm not willing to mediate at all, for the following reasons: 1) Wikipeida and Wikipedia processes have no control over IRC, 2) There is nothing to mediate here, and 3) I'm taking the issue up with Cool Cat's ArbCom mentors, and with the ArbCom if necessary.  Essjay  Talk •  Contact 20:41, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thats a self conflicting statement. -- Cool CatTalk 17:08, 22 April 2006 (UTC)