Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Editing of Biographies of Living Persons/Evidence/Alansohn's conduct post-case

Evidence about Alansohn post-case
Note; unless otherwise stated/signed, these are direct quotations of Alansohn's comments.

Unsubstantiated serious allegations

 * "I do enjoy how Postdlf and Good Olfactory are working together to manufacture a controversy. There is apparently no remark so trivial that it can not be used as fodder for further abuse of Wikipedia process."
 * "Both Good Olfactory and Postdlf, who have been directly involved in this conflict, have imposed blocks and threatened to impose blocks for various manufactured incidents, despite their rather clear and continuing conflict of interest. This pattern of harassment has continued despite rather clear changes in the tone that they have requested. Good Olfactory, in particular, has made an effort to actively misinterpret any form of communication, whether he was involved or not, and no matter how trivial, as some sort of personal affront."
 * "The allegation is rather simple: Were you an active party to a conflict when you imposed not one but two blocks in the span of two weeks? Your tag team partner Postdlf has a fig leaf of imposing only one block, but with two in two weeks you're clearly in the middle of a conflict. Tell me how many diffs you need to prove that you were in conflict at the time and that you imposed the block in violation of your obligation to act honestly and independently, and I will be happy to provide as many as needed to prove otherwise. The word "threat" is a very real issue when you're willing to abuse administrative powers and then blithely deny the simple truth." (note also the edit summary in this edit)
 * "Postdlf, while your block may have a fig leaf of noninvolvement...Good Olfactory will have a far more difficult issue with squeezing out of his blatant conflict of interest violation in imposing multiple blocks while involved directly in a conflict. It's nice that the two of you are now working together now on a tagteam basis." (note also the edit summary in this edit)

Misrepresentation of others commentary

 * 1) "I am baffled by the lengths that are being taken over what you yourself call an "overreaction" on Good Olfactory's part"
 * 2) "Please stop confusing comments about you with those about Good Olfactory - I haven't said Good Olfactory overreacted; again, that describes your view, and yours alone, and I've only noted that was how you described it....Ncmvocalist (talk) 06:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)"
 * 3) Alansohn's comment was never refactored, nor did he make any effort to apologise.


 * 1) "You have been asked by me and by Ncmvocalist to stay off of my talk page."
 * 2) "I haven't asked Good Olfactory to stay off of your talk page, Alansohn. Ncmvocalist (talk) 06:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)"
 * 3) Alansohn's comment was never refactored, nor did he make any effort to apologise.


 * 1) "describing that you imposed a block because you were "just taking the side of a friend" hardly comes across as uninvolved"
 * 2) "I clearly said "just taking the side of a friend" was your perception of why I blocked you (you said as much on your talk page at the time), not mine or anyone else's perception....postdlf (talk) 19:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)"
 * 3) Alansohn's comment was never refactored, nor did he make any effort to apologise.

Other inflammatory responses during good faith dispute resolution regarding his conduct

 * 

Harassment of uninvolved users; abuse of dispute resolution; gaming the system

 * (note also the edit summary in this edit)
 * "I believe the word we're looking for is "hypocrisy". Ncmvocalist seems rather determined to find incivility...seems to have no problem dishing out infinitely more blatant incivility. A response on his part would be helpful here before a separate WQA is started". (note also the edit summary in this edit)
 * Filed a retaliatory WQA on Ncmvocalist regarding something he was not a party to
 * Edit-warring a close by another uninvolved user over the same WQA
 * Persisting in wikihounding and abusing the dispute resolution process in response to commentators who were otherwise uninvolved