Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
Reguyla (talk | contribs)
Line 35: Line 35:


*I would add that I've been following the situation since right after the initial community ban, which itself was rather quick and lightly attended. The problem was what to do about it. I've exchanged dozens of email with Reguyla as well, but for as long as the original socking continued, I didn't believe there was anything I could do except watch and encourage him to stop socking via email. My experiences and observations are exactly the same as Worm's above. This was an unfortunate situation but one that Reguyla made worse by his overreaction to the situation. In some ways, I could understand his reactions, even if he took it too far, and understand why he felt the process failed him, as it did. The history became so convoluted with blocks and bans, it was hard to tell what any single admin could do without community input, but I appreciate Worm sorting it out. In short, I fully and wholeheartedly support Worm's decision and actions here and hope Kumioko/Reguyla puts the opportunity to good use, and resists the urge to push the boundaries here. You're a smart guy with a lot of offer Wikipedia, and as long as you can follow the basic restrictions here, I think we are much better off with you than without you. [[User:Dennis Brown|<b>Dennis Brown</b>]] - [[User talk:Dennis Brown|<b>2&cent;</b>]] 11:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
*I would add that I've been following the situation since right after the initial community ban, which itself was rather quick and lightly attended. The problem was what to do about it. I've exchanged dozens of email with Reguyla as well, but for as long as the original socking continued, I didn't believe there was anything I could do except watch and encourage him to stop socking via email. My experiences and observations are exactly the same as Worm's above. This was an unfortunate situation but one that Reguyla made worse by his overreaction to the situation. In some ways, I could understand his reactions, even if he took it too far, and understand why he felt the process failed him, as it did. The history became so convoluted with blocks and bans, it was hard to tell what any single admin could do without community input, but I appreciate Worm sorting it out. In short, I fully and wholeheartedly support Worm's decision and actions here and hope Kumioko/Reguyla puts the opportunity to good use, and resists the urge to push the boundaries here. You're a smart guy with a lot of offer Wikipedia, and as long as you can follow the basic restrictions here, I think we are much better off with you than without you. [[User:Dennis Brown|<b>Dennis Brown</b>]] - [[User talk:Dennis Brown|<b>2&cent;</b>]] 11:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
**Thank you both for your comments and thank you Worm That Turned for finally unlocking my account. You both represent the best of the projects shrinking pool of responsible and respectful admins. I am going to make this reply and try not to speak of it again. In fact I will archive this in a couple days once all the trolls have a chance to come here and fight and cry about how unfair my return is and I expect this to be overturned or manipulated by one of them shortly so I am going to be blunt. Its only a matter of time before one manipulates this like they did in the past, no one stopped them then and no one will intervene this time. It goes without saying I never agreed with the way the original ban was done and still don't and nearly everything in the last 2 years would have been avoided had policy been followed and enforced at that time. I also want it clear I don't agree with several of the things that you state above and it paints me in an unfair light given all the policy violations by others along the way but you are entitled to your opinion, especially as the only one willing to facilitate my account being unblocked. As I stated via email I regret many of my actions and I should have handled it better and much of my actions were born out of my disappointment and frustration with how it was handled. I am further disappointed by the failure of the admins on this site to follow the community decision and allowing a couple people who voted against my return to change the outcome they didn't agree with. But its time to set that all aside and move on. I still believe in this project even if there is a lot of petty bullshit and politics on this project that I can't change. My hope is that at some point the larger community as a whole will get tired of being treated like trash and the double standard between the community and the admins so that everyone on this project is treated fairly, not just the ones with the power to block. At least that is my hope. Just as I confirmed I would follow the community ban decision last year and did before it was violated by others with their own agendas, I confirm that I will abide to the stipulations set forth above even though I feel they are not necessary and shouldn't be required because that was not in the community decision I agreed to last year that was never taken seriously and was never going to be allowed by some on this site. After this reply, I will do my best not to engage any admins or admin areas as outlined above. If questions arise that I feel need to be addressed I will discuss them first. [[User:Reguyla|Reguyla]] ([[User talk:Reguyla#top|talk]]) 13:46, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 13:46, 5 October 2015

Unblocked, with conditions

Having spent a long time looking into this case and discussing the matter with Reguyla, I am hereby unblocking him with some restrictions detailed below.

Reguyla (as KumiokoCleanStart) was banned in February 2014. At that point he launched a massive campaign to disrupt Wikipedia with the expectation that someone would see it all as unjustified and unblock him. I should know, I was one of the arbitrators on the receiving end of the junk, getting hundreds of emails, often abusive. Along side that, he violated the ban over and over again. Generally, this behaviour had the effect of further alienating him from those who may have been in a position to help him.

Despite this, he did manage to persuade Fluffernutter to put forward a ban review in August 2014. The outcome was that Reguyla was "unbanned" and to be left blocked for 6 months with "zero disruption". And here's where things fall apart - disruption is different to each editor. Reguyla's talk page was left open, so he started using it - noting issues he'd seen and areas he was planning to improve.

In October 2014, he started talking about RfA - an area for which he holds much animosity. By the end of the month, he was pinging large groups of people to bring the discussion to where he could join in. In November, The Land (who closed the ban review) advised that an angry argument could result in his block being extended, and sure enough that's what happened.

Is that disruption? There's a very reasonable argument that it is, but there's also a reasonable argument that it isn't. I certainly cannot blame Reguyla for violating a woolly restriction, especially as his talk page was explicitly left open. At any rate, a subsequent ANI lead to the block (and explicitly not the ban) being reset, without talk page access.

In February 2015, just short of the initial 6 months "zero disruption" period, Reguyla started evading the block. His block was reset, and eventually set to indefinite - all by individual administrators. The case was never brought back to the community for a ban discussion. So, I decided to open dialogue with Reguyla offwiki. We discussed his previous behaviour and I was pleasantly surprised to see him freely admitting regret with regards to the email campaign. I felt he was being genuine enough to come up with some restrictions - something that I thought would allow him to return to editing (which we want), but keep him away from "hotspot" areas.

He did agree to my conditions, and as a sign of good faith declared his evasive editing. He also agreed not to make any edits to Wikipedia for the period of one month. I marked this point with an edit on his talk page (archiving the content) at that point. In the mean time, I have discussed my intent to unblock Dennis Brown, who may have some comments to add.

Whilst I do not intend to actively "mentor" Reguyla on his return, I do intend to keep a keen interest in his returning behaviour, as well as being a point of contact for him if he's struggling or indeed any other user if they're having an issue with Reguyla.

So - Reguyla. You are hereby unblocked with the following restrictions.

For the period of 1 year following the unblock

  • You may not comment on administrators as a group, nor on any sysop or desysop procedures.
  • You may not participate in any noticeboard listed in the general section of "Template:Noticeboard links" unless you are previously involved in or named as a party in a discussion that has been brought to the noticeboard.
  • Should you wish to take up an issue against any administrator, you must discuss the matter with Worm That Turned prior to doing so and get his agreement.

After the period of 1 year, these restrictions will expire. Should you break the restrictions, you will be blocked for a finite period of no less than 72 hours and no greater than 1 month. If the restrictions are breached 3 times, an indefinite block will be reinstated.

I'm putting a lot of faith in you here, aware that you have a history of being a decent editor. Keep away from the areas that have caused grief in the past and prove that my faith was not misplaced. WormTT(talk) 07:26, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would add that I've been following the situation since right after the initial community ban, which itself was rather quick and lightly attended. The problem was what to do about it. I've exchanged dozens of email with Reguyla as well, but for as long as the original socking continued, I didn't believe there was anything I could do except watch and encourage him to stop socking via email. My experiences and observations are exactly the same as Worm's above. This was an unfortunate situation but one that Reguyla made worse by his overreaction to the situation. In some ways, I could understand his reactions, even if he took it too far, and understand why he felt the process failed him, as it did. The history became so convoluted with blocks and bans, it was hard to tell what any single admin could do without community input, but I appreciate Worm sorting it out. In short, I fully and wholeheartedly support Worm's decision and actions here and hope Kumioko/Reguyla puts the opportunity to good use, and resists the urge to push the boundaries here. You're a smart guy with a lot of offer Wikipedia, and as long as you can follow the basic restrictions here, I think we are much better off with you than without you. Dennis Brown - 11:40, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you both for your comments and thank you Worm That Turned for finally unlocking my account. You both represent the best of the projects shrinking pool of responsible and respectful admins. I am going to make this reply and try not to speak of it again. In fact I will archive this in a couple days once all the trolls have a chance to come here and fight and cry about how unfair my return is and I expect this to be overturned or manipulated by one of them shortly so I am going to be blunt. Its only a matter of time before one manipulates this like they did in the past, no one stopped them then and no one will intervene this time. It goes without saying I never agreed with the way the original ban was done and still don't and nearly everything in the last 2 years would have been avoided had policy been followed and enforced at that time. I also want it clear I don't agree with several of the things that you state above and it paints me in an unfair light given all the policy violations by others along the way but you are entitled to your opinion, especially as the only one willing to facilitate my account being unblocked. As I stated via email I regret many of my actions and I should have handled it better and much of my actions were born out of my disappointment and frustration with how it was handled. I am further disappointed by the failure of the admins on this site to follow the community decision and allowing a couple people who voted against my return to change the outcome they didn't agree with. But its time to set that all aside and move on. I still believe in this project even if there is a lot of petty bullshit and politics on this project that I can't change. My hope is that at some point the larger community as a whole will get tired of being treated like trash and the double standard between the community and the admins so that everyone on this project is treated fairly, not just the ones with the power to block. At least that is my hope. Just as I confirmed I would follow the community ban decision last year and did before it was violated by others with their own agendas, I confirm that I will abide to the stipulations set forth above even though I feel they are not necessary and shouldn't be required because that was not in the community decision I agreed to last year that was never taken seriously and was never going to be allowed by some on this site. After this reply, I will do my best not to engage any admins or admin areas as outlined above. If questions arise that I feel need to be addressed I will discuss them first. Reguyla (talk) 13:46, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply