User talk:Ajraddatz

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome to my talk page.

To leave a message, press the "add topic" button at the top of the page. I will usually respond on this page, rather than on your talk page. For any private requests, please email me.


Archive 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

I...[edit]

... am sad to see you leaving the team, but I wish you all the best for the future and congratulate you for your recent OC appointment. Regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 23:07, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. It's been six years, and honestly locking spambots isn't as fun as it used to be. That said, there are 15(!!!) candidates this year and most of them look really promising, so hopefully the team gets a big infusion of new blood! – Ajraddatz (talk) 23:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

What a shocking news! It's really sad and painful to see you resigned. To be honest, you are my idol. Thank you for giving me a new life 3 years ago and making me acknowledged what i had mistaken earlier. Good to connect with you! Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 06:53, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

I was surprised to see you're leaving. Wishing all the best in all the activities you have. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:39, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Per the above, sad to see you go. You had processed so much of my requests, Wishing you all the best in your new role in OC. :) --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 10:58, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

πŸ‘ enjoy! Fish!  β€” billinghurst sDrewth 13:47, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind words everyone. And I'll still be around, just in a different role :-) – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:31, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

I wanted to support you for your service during fawiki elections as a scrutineer, but noticed that you had resigned[1]. It's sad to see that. I wish you the best and hope to see you again as a steward. 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:19, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words, always happy to help out. – Ajraddatz (talk) 20:05, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Dear Ajraddatz. Usually I thank those who wish to quit below their resignation note. I couldn't do that for you as you resigned earlier, so that's why I thank you this way. Thanks for everything you did the past years, for being a good steward, colleague and most of all, friend. Good luck in the new role. With love, Trijnsteltalk 17:27, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I've enjoyed working with you as well over the years (and it's been many of them!), I'm very glad to see you staying on, and thankful for all the work you do -- particularly with the OTRS queue! All the best, – Ajraddatz (talk) 04:37, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I was also expecting a message on your confirmation page. First of all, I want to say that you aren't as funny like me, but you are still a very good user and I'd like to thank you for all what you have done like a steward. I hope that you joining IRC when having some free time. Bonne journΓ©e :). Matiia (talk) 14:22, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry[edit]

that my rename request ended as it did, I was too persistent in asking for the application of the policy exactly as it is written.
As I've said before, I respect your stewardship and person very much, but I feel that using the word "wikilawyering" for that discussion was implying bad faith, that's not part of my character. I always assume good faith, even when I experience that my appeals are ignored for as long as 7 months. I believe the proper words to describe that discussion is "citing the policy", "asking for explanation and justification". I'd like to ask you kindly to use these words to refer to the discussion and also my contributions preceding my enwiki block.

I have no intent to continue with that request, as I have written in my last comment, however I was surprised that my inqury for the basis of the decision was answered with a page-block. I have no intent to appeal that block either. To honor our fundamental principle of transparency, I'd like to ask you to document the username of the editors, who have decided the consensus to enact that block and also of those editors, who've decided the consensus to deny my request. I hope this is not too much to ask, nor would you find it "wikilawyering". I believe in honesty and openness and write this question in that spirit.

Thank you for your service.
With appreciation, β€”Aron Man.πŸ‚ edits🌾 08:04, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

@Aron Manning: I strongly suggest you drop the stick and move on. This is exactly the form of behavior which is on the edge. I welcome your apologies but I think ~riley said that there will not be disclosure of the people on the list who voted for or asked for your block. I strongly suggest you to go to other projects, be productive, and then regain your standing in enwp for the rename or whatsoever. Persistent continuation of such behavior here will really do no good for you. Even if it's something decided by a cabal, such continuation is not useful whatsoever. Regards,--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 15:59, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
You don't seem to understand the issue here, because you keep engaging in the same behaviour and making arguments that entirely miss the point. Your actions have established a relationship with other users whereby they will go to any length to decline even a relatively benign request like a rename. The justification given, that it would obfuscate previous bad conduct, makes no sense to me because you're already blocked on enwiki with no talk page access. But the fact that you have been so disruptive in the past that multiple people would be uncomfortable with giving you any potential new avenues to engage shows what the issue here is. I don't make these comments with a mean spirit; I hope that you reflect on your actions, try to understand why your approach causes such a hostile reaction, and make changes to your behaviour that result in you being a productive contributor here who is able to get along with others. – Ajraddatz (talk) 16:05, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

they will go to any length to decline even a relatively benign request like a rename. The justification given, that it would obfuscate previous bad conduct, makes no sense to me because you're already blocked on enwiki with no talk page access.

Thank you for your empathy. I agree, that's what I was trying to prove.

But the fact that you have been so disruptive in the past that multiple people would be uncomfortable with giving you any potential new avenues to engage

As you might be aware, I've refuted and appealed those allegations multiple times since June 2019 and none of those appeals were answered or even acknowledged. If someone were to suggest the community processes to appeal are a dead horse, I'm in agreement, however I'd rather resurrect those than to beat further into non-existence.
To be clear, I do not think that I've made no mistake. I did many, as I was very inexperienced and I'm aware of it. I've reflected on this many times and changed my approach accordingly. It's unhealthy, that making mistakes escalates to this level.

try to understand why your approach causes such a hostile reaction, and make changes to your behaviour that result in you being a productive contributor

I did. I am already a productive contributor in two communities, where someone else's hostile reaction wouldn't be my fault. Where it was my fault and my requests for help in unrelated hostilities were rejected, I don't want to return to, thus I was patiently waiting for a resolution without persuing this matter. I've only recently submitted an appeal to utrs that was instantly rejected without reason with a template response:

At this time, the English Wikipedia Unblock team is declining your unblock request, and will not hear your case anymore. Your next and final step of the appeal process is to email the Arbitration committee at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org.

As ArbCom hasn't been answering my emails since July 2019, please give specific guidance on which community process will hear my appeal.
Thank you with appreciation, β€”Aron Man.πŸ‚ edits🌾 20:43, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Your reply still shows that you don't get it. My recommendation is that you cut out the wikilawyering, contribute productively for a while (in this case, maybe even a long while), and request unblock in a year or two at least. Rather than insisting upon bureaucratic application of every rule, understand that our policies and guidelines aren't a legal code and are subject to volunteer judgment and discretion. There is a large history of precedent for how any policy is applied, so it's best to leave the policy complaints to people with more experience -- if an injustice has been done, someone else will comment on it. But as to what you can do, it's hard to rebuild bridges after they've been burnt, demolished, and buried. – Ajraddatz (talk) 00:10, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for your opinion and advice. Does this mean I shouldn't be appealing, or seeking remedy for the bullying I've experienced? AronMan (talk) 08:34, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Sigh. Might as well ask if I've stopped beating my wife while you're at it. We're done here; I've given my advice, it's up to you now. – Ajraddatz (talk) 13:00, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
I certainly have no such thoughts, I don't know how this came into this discussion. I don't have anything else to say other than I wish the best for your wife. β€”AronMπŸ‚ edits🌾 11:46, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
w:Loaded question, in case it wasn't clear. I was referencing your question in your previous comment regarding seeking remedy for bullying. – Ajraddatz (talk) 15:48, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
No, the bullying is unrelated to you. This was a straightforward, procedural question. If you don't understand that, there's no point in discussing it. I repeatedly and respectfully ask you: please stop assuming bad faith which is not there. β€”AronMπŸ‚ edits🌾 03:23, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Do[edit]

we add the CNadmin removal to Template:Votings. Is it practice to add removals to the template? Thanks.Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 19:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

I'd say so, yes. I think previous deadmin discussions have been linked. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:03, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
How shall we indicate the removal? Will 1 RFCN (removal) works?Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 19:05, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Makes sense to me! :-) – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:07, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
Done, thanks for your advice. :)--Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 19:10, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
No problemo, thanks for doing the work. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:12, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Wording[edit]

I think you may have accidentally deleted or omitted some words in this edit. --Yair rand (talk) 19:16, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Mm yes, thanks. Now fixed. – Ajraddatz (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Ombudsman[edit]

Will you let me know if you do something with the information, or if you don't do something? For all I know, you may have never even received it. β€” Alexis Jazz (ping me) 09:01, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Apologies for the slow reply; I replied via email last night. – Ajraddatz (talk) 21:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)