Wikipedia talk:AMA Coordinator/Archive 1

Association of Member Investigations
Please see Wikipedia_talk:Association_of_Members'_Advocates. Cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 09:13, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Inter-advocate relations
User:Wally and I have had a breakdown of communication, and I request your assitance in regards to our inter-advocate relations. Please see User_talk:Sam_Spade, User_talk:Wally, and WP:RfM. Cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 14:18, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm not exactly sure what all this is about. I am representing a user, and Sam is representing himself, on the opposite sides of a dispute. The fact that he's come to you is close to a conflict-of-interest on his part. You can see Sam's talk page for most of the 'dispute', and mine for the opening parts; be aware, however, that for reasons passing my meager understanding Sam deleted a request I'd made a month ago to conform to Wikipedian civility standards. See here: Deleted section Wally

Do you mean User_talk:Sam_Spade? I moved it, altho its been so long that it would have been perfectly reasonable to archive or delete it. I didn't, I kept it around, indeed referring you to review it (when I said "see above"). This, (along w the ludicrous suggestion of a conflict of interest) is the sort of nonsense that has me requesting assistance from our coordinator. The obstructionism and / or lack of attention to detail on your part is also becoming increasingly clear. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 08:29, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * And this has what to do with our Coordinator? Wally 16:59, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I am objecting to your actions as El C's advocate, and our inter-advocate relations relating to that. I should think that was obvious. The above is an example of the sort of behaviour I object to. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 18:26, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sanction request
I feel that User:Sam Spade has acted contrary to not only the interests of the AMA but to the spirits of the organization as well with this, forgive my strong language, abomination: User:Sam Spade/Report rogue admin. In it he attempts to list administrators that he feels are 'rogues' with a 'mandate to abuse'. He specifically states that he maintains the page in order to bring attention to these users and prepare for arbitration against them. I feel this is totally unacceptable behavior for someone who is voluntarily sworn to 'resolving disputes and reducing conflict'. An opinion from the Coordinator would be highly helpful. Wally 03:24, 29 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I was unaware that sanctions were part of the AMA. Sam Spade 09:34, 29 May 2005 (UTC)


 * It is the Coordinator's job to maintain the dignity and integrity of the organization, non? Wally 16:36, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Not as far as I was aware...

Sam Spade 17:26, 29 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I think I'll leave that to Alex to decide. I merely thought that your behavior ought to be brought to his attention. It doesn't exactly smack of attention to the human rights around which this organization is based. Wally 19:38, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Whistleblowing is an abomination against human rights? ;/ Anyhow, I had the page deleted and apologised to an admin it offended (your client), so I can't say I see the need for this hysteria. Sam Spade 17:57, 31 May 2005 (UTC)