Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
2012-11-12 16:48 UTC
Neil I was never an enemy, I have always respected council and what they have done, especially during your term. No one has done more damage to the council name than Estel. Did he deserve a community device yes, did he act childish afterwards, yes. I want to publicly state some old maemo users asked me to run so Estel didn't get voted into council but sadly he did. We dug our graves and now we can lay in it. Please ban Estel from the mailing list or at the very least limit him from number of mails he can send to the
Mailing list daily. I want Estel to stay around. The old Estel, not the current one.
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:01 AM, Niel Nielsen <nieldk@gmail.com> wrote:
> While you are right about that IP not for certainty belongs to the same router (btw its called dynamic IP), it could hold as evidence anyway.
> 1 it is very - very - unlikely that the IP would be dynamically assigned to another router, which would then connect to Maemo.
> 2 despite ISPs being assigned dynamically, very likely the same router would keep the IP, even for years
> 3 might not even be dynamic, X can sign up (pay) to be guaranteed a static IP (this would actually just be a reserved, dynamic IP)
>
> It is sad to read this trolling, inconstructive, critisism of working council, Estel, is your goal to dismentle the community? Even a previous 'enemy' of mine (no worries Arie, no worries, you had some valid critism) is going against you Estel. I think you, even off council, would help and get more benefits, from assisting in the hard times confronting the community et al.
>
> /Niel
>
> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Ilya Skriblovsky wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just want to add some fresh opinion to this horrible flame. It's "fresh" because I don't really know the background: I don't know why Estel was banned and why it is so opposite to the Council.
> (Though I'm subscribed to this list, I'm rare reading it further subject line because starting with Community Awards discussion in June, 95% of mails here are full of flame and lacking of any constructive).
>
> But this situation seems very ugly to me. Screenshot with blurred IP addresses is certainly not an evidence at all. If screenshot was with exact IP match as Mohammad said, then I miss the point for blurring other IPs.
> If all blurred IPs are the same and same with Estel's, please publish original screenshot. If they differ — please remove the ban, admit your mistake and stop this shame.
>
> (By the way, even if all IPs are the same, it is not 100% evidence of identity of these accounts since if mentioned Polish network provides variable IP addresses, it's not a wonder if several IPs will accidentally match somewhen. Deep login history research is the only way to be 100% sure.)
>
> Yours,
> Mitrandir
>
>
> 2012/11/12 twilight312@gmail.com <twilight312@gmail.com>
> On pon 12 lis 2012 14:58:00 CET, Reggie Suplido <reggie@internettablettalk.com> wrote:
>
> > Stop playing with community man. Here's the proof:
> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A7gWTNeCMAAyhVX.png
>
> Another thing about this pathetic incident - I see few other names listed there. While "Letsee" was my account - that I have never concealed in any way, signing posts from there as "/Estel" - there is also aquamarine.
>
> Who is that person and what happened with this account? Was it banned in Reggie's madness too? Have this person tried to contact TMO admins, or just gave up on Maemo, after being treaten like that?
>
> /Estel
>
>
Mailing list daily. I want Estel to stay around. The old Estel, not the current one.
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:01 AM, Niel Nielsen <nieldk@gmail.com> wrote:
> While you are right about that IP not for certainty belongs to the same router (btw its called dynamic IP), it could hold as evidence anyway.
> 1 it is very - very - unlikely that the IP would be dynamically assigned to another router, which would then connect to Maemo.
> 2 despite ISPs being assigned dynamically, very likely the same router would keep the IP, even for years
> 3 might not even be dynamic, X can sign up (pay) to be guaranteed a static IP (this would actually just be a reserved, dynamic IP)
>
> It is sad to read this trolling, inconstructive, critisism of working council, Estel, is your goal to dismentle the community? Even a previous 'enemy' of mine (no worries Arie, no worries, you had some valid critism) is going against you Estel. I think you, even off council, would help and get more benefits, from assisting in the hard times confronting the community et al.
>
> /Niel
>
> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Ilya Skriblovsky wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just want to add some fresh opinion to this horrible flame. It's "fresh" because I don't really know the background: I don't know why Estel was banned and why it is so opposite to the Council.
> (Though I'm subscribed to this list, I'm rare reading it further subject line because starting with Community Awards discussion in June, 95% of mails here are full of flame and lacking of any constructive).
>
> But this situation seems very ugly to me. Screenshot with blurred IP addresses is certainly not an evidence at all. If screenshot was with exact IP match as Mohammad said, then I miss the point for blurring other IPs.
> If all blurred IPs are the same and same with Estel's, please publish original screenshot. If they differ — please remove the ban, admit your mistake and stop this shame.
>
> (By the way, even if all IPs are the same, it is not 100% evidence of identity of these accounts since if mentioned Polish network provides variable IP addresses, it's not a wonder if several IPs will accidentally match somewhen. Deep login history research is the only way to be 100% sure.)
>
> Yours,
> Mitrandir
>
>
> 2012/11/12 twilight312@gmail.com <twilight312@gmail.com>
> On pon 12 lis 2012 14:58:00 CET, Reggie Suplido <reggie@internettablettalk.com> wrote:
>
> > Stop playing with community man. Here's the proof:
> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A7gWTNeCMAAyhVX.png
>
> Another thing about this pathetic incident - I see few other names listed there. While "Letsee" was my account - that I have never concealed in any way, signing posts from there as "/Estel" - there is also aquamarine.
>
> Who is that person and what happened with this account? Was it banned in Reggie's madness too? Have this person tried to contact TMO admins, or just gave up on Maemo, after being treaten like that?
>
> /Estel
>
>
RE: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
2012-11-12 16:50 UTC
This: "because maemo.org is overgoing "hostile takeover" by so-called
Community Representatives?"
Give it a rest already, it's getting boring, and you are starting to come
across as a petulant child. No one is performing a hostile takeover".
These folks volunteered, and the community by and large, supports them and
appreciates their willingness to work for the community. You are rapidly
destroying whatever positive benefit you've brought to the Maemo community
over the years-you should reflect on that. Maybe maemo.org isn't the place
for you anymore, if you disagree so strongly with the way the community is
headed-if that's the case, I wish you well in wherever you end up. If not,
and you chose to stay, you should reflect on why you feel the need to
continually, and relentlessly (and from my point of view: baselessly) attack
the current BoD and Council. Stand back and let them do their work, and if
you don't like the way it's being done, you have the same choice you would
have with your own country's government: either vote for someone else, or
run for office yourself.
Disagreeing with decisions made, is not why you were banned (from my point
of view), and, as a lowly maemo.org member with only a few karma, I fully
support the actions taken against you so far. I also wish that you aren't
permanently banned, and can come to terms with the direction the community
is headed and can once again be a productive member of that community-but
not if you cannot stop the nonsense both on TMO and in the mailing list.
_____
From: maemo-community-bounces@maemo.org
[mailto:maemo-community-bounces@maemo.org] On Behalf Of
twilight312@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 6:03 AM
To: List for community development
Subject: Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
On pon 12 lis 2012 14:47:38 CET, Andre Klapper <andre_klapper@gmx.net>
wrote:
> The attitude and wording shown in your email might provide enough reason
> to justify that decision now, even if it was initially wrong?
> Being pissed off is no sufficient reason to miss basic manners.
>
> andre
>
> --
While I also doesn't like his tone, lets be serious here. You would be
extremely happy, if your account, PM's, and all posts would disappear, just
because maemo.org is overgoing "hostile takeover" by so-called Community
Representatives?
And this part, especially:
> The attitude and wording shown in your email might provide enough reason
> to justify that decision now, even if it was initially wrong?
I hope, that you're not talking serious. Here, in Poland, this was way of
thinking, that Communist dictatorship presented for 50 years, and I'm not
eager to see it again, anywhere.
Let's ban everyone, and delete everything, just in case. Those, who will
react with respect and love for new Dictatorship, will be proven worthy.
Others? It's their fault, after all, they reaction *after* is enough to
justify moderation abuse *before*.
---
No matter of his inappropriate wording, he should be - first of all -
excused by people responsible.
Also, I can hardly imagine, how ivgalvez can stay in Board and Council
without burning to red (through pink and violet) from shame.
But, considering low morals of most people being Maemo "rulers" now, he
won't have any problem with this, probably... We already had Chair being
glue to chair, despite numerous fails, and overall catastrophical results of
anything, that he touched. I don't expect Ivan to present more ammount of
personal honour, sadly.
Now, feel free to ban me permanently from maemo.org, for writing the above.
If this is how this community looks now - with losers appointed to TMO
moderators, rogue IRC chanops, hopeless Board that is too "high" to
communicate with Community without Public Relation Department, and
marionette Council - I don't want to be a part of this anymore.
After all, it's only 50 days to zero-hour (unless Nokia save the day, and
decide to pay longer). Only one hope, now, is in Maemo's FOSS spirit, taking
shelter somewhere else, due to work of really dedicated people. Sure,
maemo.org domain is lost to "hostile takeover" by compromitted (and
compromised) Foundation, but fortunatelly, it's not the thing, that matters
most.
I'm really sure, that Maemo's spirit will be preserved in other, more
friendly place.
/Estel
Community Representatives?"
Give it a rest already, it's getting boring, and you are starting to come
across as a petulant child. No one is performing a hostile takeover".
These folks volunteered, and the community by and large, supports them and
appreciates their willingness to work for the community. You are rapidly
destroying whatever positive benefit you've brought to the Maemo community
over the years-you should reflect on that. Maybe maemo.org isn't the place
for you anymore, if you disagree so strongly with the way the community is
headed-if that's the case, I wish you well in wherever you end up. If not,
and you chose to stay, you should reflect on why you feel the need to
continually, and relentlessly (and from my point of view: baselessly) attack
the current BoD and Council. Stand back and let them do their work, and if
you don't like the way it's being done, you have the same choice you would
have with your own country's government: either vote for someone else, or
run for office yourself.
Disagreeing with decisions made, is not why you were banned (from my point
of view), and, as a lowly maemo.org member with only a few karma, I fully
support the actions taken against you so far. I also wish that you aren't
permanently banned, and can come to terms with the direction the community
is headed and can once again be a productive member of that community-but
not if you cannot stop the nonsense both on TMO and in the mailing list.
_____
From: maemo-community-bounces@maemo.org
[mailto:maemo-community-bounces@maemo.org] On Behalf Of
twilight312@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 6:03 AM
To: List for community development
Subject: Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
On pon 12 lis 2012 14:47:38 CET, Andre Klapper <andre_klapper@gmx.net>
wrote:
> The attitude and wording shown in your email might provide enough reason
> to justify that decision now, even if it was initially wrong?
> Being pissed off is no sufficient reason to miss basic manners.
>
> andre
>
> --
While I also doesn't like his tone, lets be serious here. You would be
extremely happy, if your account, PM's, and all posts would disappear, just
because maemo.org is overgoing "hostile takeover" by so-called Community
Representatives?
And this part, especially:
> The attitude and wording shown in your email might provide enough reason
> to justify that decision now, even if it was initially wrong?
I hope, that you're not talking serious. Here, in Poland, this was way of
thinking, that Communist dictatorship presented for 50 years, and I'm not
eager to see it again, anywhere.
Let's ban everyone, and delete everything, just in case. Those, who will
react with respect and love for new Dictatorship, will be proven worthy.
Others? It's their fault, after all, they reaction *after* is enough to
justify moderation abuse *before*.
---
No matter of his inappropriate wording, he should be - first of all -
excused by people responsible.
Also, I can hardly imagine, how ivgalvez can stay in Board and Council
without burning to red (through pink and violet) from shame.
But, considering low morals of most people being Maemo "rulers" now, he
won't have any problem with this, probably... We already had Chair being
glue to chair, despite numerous fails, and overall catastrophical results of
anything, that he touched. I don't expect Ivan to present more ammount of
personal honour, sadly.
Now, feel free to ban me permanently from maemo.org, for writing the above.
If this is how this community looks now - with losers appointed to TMO
moderators, rogue IRC chanops, hopeless Board that is too "high" to
communicate with Community without Public Relation Department, and
marionette Council - I don't want to be a part of this anymore.
After all, it's only 50 days to zero-hour (unless Nokia save the day, and
decide to pay longer). Only one hope, now, is in Maemo's FOSS spirit, taking
shelter somewhere else, due to work of really dedicated people. Sure,
maemo.org domain is lost to "hostile takeover" by compromitted (and
compromised) Foundation, but fortunatelly, it's not the thing, that matters
most.
I'm really sure, that Maemo's spirit will be preserved in other, more
friendly place.
/Estel
Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
2012-11-12 16:52 UTC
Yes, We all want the old estel please come
On 11/12/12, Arie Mark <arie@everythingn9.com> wrote:
> Neil I was never an enemy, I have always respected council and what they
> have done, especially during your term. No one has done more damage to the
> council name than Estel. Did he deserve a community device yes, did he act
> childish afterwards, yes. I want to publicly state some old maemo users
> asked me to run so Estel didn't get voted into council but sadly he did. We
> dug our graves and now we can lay in it. Please ban Estel from the mailing
> list or at the very least limit him from number of mails he can send to the
>
> Mailing list daily. I want Estel to stay around. The old Estel, not the
> current one.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:01 AM, Niel Nielsen <nieldk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> While you are right about that IP not for certainty belongs to the same
>> router (btw its called dynamic IP), it could hold as evidence anyway.
>> 1 it is very - very - unlikely that the IP would be dynamically assigned
>> to another router, which would then connect to Maemo.
>> 2 despite ISPs being assigned dynamically, very likely the same router
>> would keep the IP, even for years
>> 3 might not even be dynamic, X can sign up (pay) to be guaranteed a static
>> IP (this would actually just be a reserved, dynamic IP)
>>
>> It is sad to read this trolling, inconstructive, critisism of working
>> council, Estel, is your goal to dismentle the community? Even a previous
>> 'enemy' of mine (no worries Arie, no worries, you had some valid critism)
>> is going against you Estel. I think you, even off council, would help and
>> get more benefits, from assisting in the hard times confronting the
>> community et al.
>>
>> /Niel
>>
>> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Ilya Skriblovsky wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just want to add some fresh opinion to this horrible flame. It's "fresh"
>> because I don't really know the background: I don't know why Estel was
>> banned and why it is so opposite to the Council.
>> (Though I'm subscribed to this list, I'm rare reading it further subject
>> line because starting with Community Awards discussion in June, 95% of
>> mails here are full of flame and lacking of any constructive).
>>
>> But this situation seems very ugly to me. Screenshot with blurred IP
>> addresses is certainly not an evidence at all. If screenshot was with
>> exact IP match as Mohammad said, then I miss the point for blurring other
>> IPs.
>> If all blurred IPs are the same and same with Estel's, please publish
>> original screenshot. If they differ please remove the ban, admit your
>> mistake and stop this shame.
>>
>> (By the way, even if all IPs are the same, it is not 100% evidence of
>> identity of these accounts since if mentioned Polish network provides
>> variable IP addresses, it's not a wonder if several IPs will accidentally
>> match somewhen. Deep login history research is the only way to be 100%
>> sure.)
>>
>> Yours,
>> Mitrandir
>>
>>
>> 2012/11/12 twilight312@gmail.com <twilight312@gmail.com>
>> On pon 12 lis 2012 14:58:00 CET, Reggie Suplido
>> <reggie@internettablettalk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Stop playing with community man. Here's the proof:
>> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A7gWTNeCMAAyhVX.png
>>
>> Another thing about this pathetic incident - I see few other names listed
>> there. While "Letsee" was my account - that I have never concealed in any
>> way, signing posts from there as "/Estel" - there is also aquamarine.
>>
>> Who is that person and what happened with this account? Was it banned in
>> Reggie's madness too? Have this person tried to contact TMO admins, or
>> just gave up on Maemo, after being treaten like that?
>>
>> /Estel
>>
>>
>>
>
On 11/12/12, Arie Mark <arie@everythingn9.com> wrote:
> Neil I was never an enemy, I have always respected council and what they
> have done, especially during your term. No one has done more damage to the
> council name than Estel. Did he deserve a community device yes, did he act
> childish afterwards, yes. I want to publicly state some old maemo users
> asked me to run so Estel didn't get voted into council but sadly he did. We
> dug our graves and now we can lay in it. Please ban Estel from the mailing
> list or at the very least limit him from number of mails he can send to the
>
> Mailing list daily. I want Estel to stay around. The old Estel, not the
> current one.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:01 AM, Niel Nielsen <nieldk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> While you are right about that IP not for certainty belongs to the same
>> router (btw its called dynamic IP), it could hold as evidence anyway.
>> 1 it is very - very - unlikely that the IP would be dynamically assigned
>> to another router, which would then connect to Maemo.
>> 2 despite ISPs being assigned dynamically, very likely the same router
>> would keep the IP, even for years
>> 3 might not even be dynamic, X can sign up (pay) to be guaranteed a static
>> IP (this would actually just be a reserved, dynamic IP)
>>
>> It is sad to read this trolling, inconstructive, critisism of working
>> council, Estel, is your goal to dismentle the community? Even a previous
>> 'enemy' of mine (no worries Arie, no worries, you had some valid critism)
>> is going against you Estel. I think you, even off council, would help and
>> get more benefits, from assisting in the hard times confronting the
>> community et al.
>>
>> /Niel
>>
>> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Ilya Skriblovsky wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just want to add some fresh opinion to this horrible flame. It's "fresh"
>> because I don't really know the background: I don't know why Estel was
>> banned and why it is so opposite to the Council.
>> (Though I'm subscribed to this list, I'm rare reading it further subject
>> line because starting with Community Awards discussion in June, 95% of
>> mails here are full of flame and lacking of any constructive).
>>
>> But this situation seems very ugly to me. Screenshot with blurred IP
>> addresses is certainly not an evidence at all. If screenshot was with
>> exact IP match as Mohammad said, then I miss the point for blurring other
>> IPs.
>> If all blurred IPs are the same and same with Estel's, please publish
>> original screenshot. If they differ please remove the ban, admit your
>> mistake and stop this shame.
>>
>> (By the way, even if all IPs are the same, it is not 100% evidence of
>> identity of these accounts since if mentioned Polish network provides
>> variable IP addresses, it's not a wonder if several IPs will accidentally
>> match somewhen. Deep login history research is the only way to be 100%
>> sure.)
>>
>> Yours,
>> Mitrandir
>>
>>
>> 2012/11/12 twilight312@gmail.com <twilight312@gmail.com>
>> On pon 12 lis 2012 14:58:00 CET, Reggie Suplido
>> <reggie@internettablettalk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Stop playing with community man. Here's the proof:
>> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A7gWTNeCMAAyhVX.png
>>
>> Another thing about this pathetic incident - I see few other names listed
>> there. While "Letsee" was my account - that I have never concealed in any
>> way, signing posts from there as "/Estel" - there is also aquamarine.
>>
>> Who is that person and what happened with this account? Was it banned in
>> Reggie's madness too? Have this person tried to contact TMO admins, or
>> just gave up on Maemo, after being treaten like that?
>>
>> /Estel
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
2012-11-12 16:58 UTC
understood Mate, never considered you an enemy, sorry if that wasnt clear
in that mail. I have always respected you a lot :)
/Niel
On Monday, November 12, 2012, Arie Mark wrote:
> Neil I was never an enemy, I have always respected council and what they
> have done, especially during your term. No one has done more damage to the
> council name than Estel. Did he deserve a community device yes, did he act
> childish afterwards, yes. I want to publicly state some old maemo users
> asked me to run so Estel didn't get voted into council but sadly he did. We
> dug our graves and now we can lay in it. Please ban Estel from the mailing
> list or at the very least limit him from number of mails he can send to the
> Mailing list daily. I want Estel to stay around. The old Estel, not the
> current one.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:01 AM, Niel Nielsen <nieldk@gmail.com<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'nieldk@gmail.com');>>
> wrote:
>
> While you are right about that IP not for certainty belongs to the same
> router (btw its called dynamic IP), it could hold as evidence anyway.
> 1 it is very - very - unlikely that the IP would be dynamically assigned
> to another router, which would then connect to Maemo.
> 2 despite ISPs being assigned dynamically, very likely the same router
> would keep the IP, even for years
> 3 might not even be dynamic, X can sign up (pay) to be guaranteed a static
> IP (this would actually just be a reserved, dynamic IP)
>
> It is sad to read this trolling, inconstructive, critisism of working
> council, Estel, is your goal to dismentle the community? Even a previous
> 'enemy' of mine (no worries Arie, no worries, you had some valid critism)
> is going against you Estel. I think you, even off council, would help and
> get more benefits, from assisting in the hard times confronting the
> community et al.
>
> /Niel
>
> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Ilya Skriblovsky wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just want to add some fresh opinion to this horrible flame. It's "fresh"
>> because I don't really know the background: I don't know why Estel was
>> banned and why it is so opposite to the Council.
>> (Though I'm subscribed to this list, I'm rare reading it further subject
>> line because starting with Community Awards discussion in June, 95% of
>> mails here are full of flame and lacking of any constructive).
>>
>> But this situation seems very ugly to me. Screenshot with blurred IP
>> addresses is certainly not an evidence at all. If screenshot was with exact
>> IP match as Mohammad said, then I miss the point for blurring other IPs.
>> If all blurred IPs are the same and same with Estel's, please publish
>> original screenshot. If they differ — please remove the ban, admit your
>> mistake and stop this shame.
>>
>> (By the way, even if all IPs are the same, it is not 100% evidence of
>> identity of these accounts since if mentioned Polish network provides
>> variable IP addresses, it's not a wonder if several IPs will accidentally
>> match somewhen. Deep login history research is the only way to be 100%
>> sure.)
>>
>> Yours,
>> Mitrandir
>>
>>
>> 2012/11/12 twilight312@gmail.com <twilight312@gmail.com>
>>
>>> **
>>>
>>> On pon 12 lis 2012 14:58:00 CET, Reggie Suplido <
>>> reggie@internettablettalk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Stop playing with community man. Here's the proof:
>>> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A7gWTNeCMAAyhVX.png
>>>
>>> Another thing about this pathetic incident - I see few other names
>>> listed there. While "Letsee" was my account - that I have never concealed
>>> in any way, signing posts from there as "/Estel" - there is also *
>>> aquamarine*.
>>>
>>> Who is that person and what happened with this account? Was it banned in
>>> Reggie's madness too? Have this person tried to contact TMO admins, or just
>>> gave up on Maemo, after being treaten like that?
>>>
>>> /Estel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'maemo-community@maemo.org');>
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>
>
in that mail. I have always respected you a lot :)
/Niel
On Monday, November 12, 2012, Arie Mark wrote:
> Neil I was never an enemy, I have always respected council and what they
> have done, especially during your term. No one has done more damage to the
> council name than Estel. Did he deserve a community device yes, did he act
> childish afterwards, yes. I want to publicly state some old maemo users
> asked me to run so Estel didn't get voted into council but sadly he did. We
> dug our graves and now we can lay in it. Please ban Estel from the mailing
> list or at the very least limit him from number of mails he can send to the
> Mailing list daily. I want Estel to stay around. The old Estel, not the
> current one.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:01 AM, Niel Nielsen <nieldk@gmail.com<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'nieldk@gmail.com');>>
> wrote:
>
> While you are right about that IP not for certainty belongs to the same
> router (btw its called dynamic IP), it could hold as evidence anyway.
> 1 it is very - very - unlikely that the IP would be dynamically assigned
> to another router, which would then connect to Maemo.
> 2 despite ISPs being assigned dynamically, very likely the same router
> would keep the IP, even for years
> 3 might not even be dynamic, X can sign up (pay) to be guaranteed a static
> IP (this would actually just be a reserved, dynamic IP)
>
> It is sad to read this trolling, inconstructive, critisism of working
> council, Estel, is your goal to dismentle the community? Even a previous
> 'enemy' of mine (no worries Arie, no worries, you had some valid critism)
> is going against you Estel. I think you, even off council, would help and
> get more benefits, from assisting in the hard times confronting the
> community et al.
>
> /Niel
>
> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Ilya Skriblovsky wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just want to add some fresh opinion to this horrible flame. It's "fresh"
>> because I don't really know the background: I don't know why Estel was
>> banned and why it is so opposite to the Council.
>> (Though I'm subscribed to this list, I'm rare reading it further subject
>> line because starting with Community Awards discussion in June, 95% of
>> mails here are full of flame and lacking of any constructive).
>>
>> But this situation seems very ugly to me. Screenshot with blurred IP
>> addresses is certainly not an evidence at all. If screenshot was with exact
>> IP match as Mohammad said, then I miss the point for blurring other IPs.
>> If all blurred IPs are the same and same with Estel's, please publish
>> original screenshot. If they differ — please remove the ban, admit your
>> mistake and stop this shame.
>>
>> (By the way, even if all IPs are the same, it is not 100% evidence of
>> identity of these accounts since if mentioned Polish network provides
>> variable IP addresses, it's not a wonder if several IPs will accidentally
>> match somewhen. Deep login history research is the only way to be 100%
>> sure.)
>>
>> Yours,
>> Mitrandir
>>
>>
>> 2012/11/12 twilight312@gmail.com <twilight312@gmail.com>
>>
>>> **
>>>
>>> On pon 12 lis 2012 14:58:00 CET, Reggie Suplido <
>>> reggie@internettablettalk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Stop playing with community man. Here's the proof:
>>> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A7gWTNeCMAAyhVX.png
>>>
>>> Another thing about this pathetic incident - I see few other names
>>> listed there. While "Letsee" was my account - that I have never concealed
>>> in any way, signing posts from there as "/Estel" - there is also *
>>> aquamarine*.
>>>
>>> Who is that person and what happened with this account? Was it banned in
>>> Reggie's madness too? Have this person tried to contact TMO admins, or just
>>> gave up on Maemo, after being treaten like that?
>>>
>>> /Estel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community@maemo.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'maemo-community@maemo.org');>
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>
>
Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
2012-11-12 17:19 UTC
Hey Folks,
It was me who banned JCDenton and aquamarine aswell and I added some more points
to Estels account 'after' he was banned for one month already (Letsee account
got him some extra juice).
Estel got banned for 3 days initially for being not so nice to people...
Clear rules state 'do not have a second account beside', starting with Letsee
which was not posted from at first so I left it alone but made other mods aware
of it. Some one noticed him posting on that account, banned it permanently and
added points to Estel's account... 1 month ban.
I did not follow the IP after that till someone pointed at JCDenton considering
to be Estel, checked the IP again and voila another account shows... seems Estel
did use a not working fake mail account and was forced to open another.
JCDenton got a "One-Touch-Ban and Clean" click which is only possible with
accounts not posted much and newly created (to ban Spambots).
For the screenshot Reggie made available: I think he missed to blur the top. He
has a strict policy when it comes to securing or sharing privat data. I can
assure you that 'yes' it was a search for a single IP and they matched Estel
JCDenton Letsee and aquamarine while in the picture JCDenton has no more posts
as I deleted them so no match for posts.
Estel, I sent a warning out to you at least twice. There are rules and if you are
not up to playing by them you may leave or get banned. Your choice.
Regards,
Ruediger Schiller
--
http://dostorugas.org
It was me who banned JCDenton and aquamarine aswell and I added some more points
to Estels account 'after' he was banned for one month already (Letsee account
got him some extra juice).
Estel got banned for 3 days initially for being not so nice to people...
Clear rules state 'do not have a second account beside', starting with Letsee
which was not posted from at first so I left it alone but made other mods aware
of it. Some one noticed him posting on that account, banned it permanently and
added points to Estel's account... 1 month ban.
I did not follow the IP after that till someone pointed at JCDenton considering
to be Estel, checked the IP again and voila another account shows... seems Estel
did use a not working fake mail account and was forced to open another.
JCDenton got a "One-Touch-Ban and Clean" click which is only possible with
accounts not posted much and newly created (to ban Spambots).
For the screenshot Reggie made available: I think he missed to blur the top. He
has a strict policy when it comes to securing or sharing privat data. I can
assure you that 'yes' it was a search for a single IP and they matched Estel
JCDenton Letsee and aquamarine while in the picture JCDenton has no more posts
as I deleted them so no match for posts.
Estel, I sent a warning out to you at least twice. There are rules and if you are
not up to playing by them you may leave or get banned. Your choice.
Regards,
Ruediger Schiller
--
http://dostorugas.org
Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
2012-11-12 17:48 UTC
Thanks for this very clear, precise and explaining mail Ruediger.
/Niel
On Monday, November 12, 2012, chemist wrote:
> Hey Folks,
>
> It was me who banned JCDenton and aquamarine aswell and I added some more
> points
> to Estels account 'after' he was banned for one month already (Letsee
> account
> got him some extra juice).
>
> Estel got banned for 3 days initially for being not so nice to people...
> Clear rules state 'do not have a second account beside', starting with
> Letsee
> which was not posted from at first so I left it alone but made other mods
> aware
> of it. Some one noticed him posting on that account, banned it permanently
> and
> added points to Estel's account... 1 month ban.
>
> I did not follow the IP after that till someone pointed at JCDenton
> considering
> to be Estel, checked the IP again and voila another account shows... seems
> Estel
> did use a not working fake mail account and was forced to open another.
> JCDenton got a "One-Touch-Ban and Clean" click which is only possible with
> accounts not posted much and newly created (to ban Spambots).
>
> For the screenshot Reggie made available: I think he missed to blur the
> top. He
> has a strict policy when it comes to securing or sharing privat data. I can
> assure you that 'yes' it was a search for a single IP and they matched
> Estel
> JCDenton Letsee and aquamarine while in the picture JCDenton has no more
> posts
> as I deleted them so no match for posts.
>
> Estel, I sent a warning out to you at least twice. There are rules and if
> you are
> not up to playing by them you may leave or get banned. Your choice.
>
> Regards,
> Ruediger Schiller
>
> --
> http://dostorugas.org
>
/Niel
On Monday, November 12, 2012, chemist wrote:
> Hey Folks,
>
> It was me who banned JCDenton and aquamarine aswell and I added some more
> points
> to Estels account 'after' he was banned for one month already (Letsee
> account
> got him some extra juice).
>
> Estel got banned for 3 days initially for being not so nice to people...
> Clear rules state 'do not have a second account beside', starting with
> Letsee
> which was not posted from at first so I left it alone but made other mods
> aware
> of it. Some one noticed him posting on that account, banned it permanently
> and
> added points to Estel's account... 1 month ban.
>
> I did not follow the IP after that till someone pointed at JCDenton
> considering
> to be Estel, checked the IP again and voila another account shows... seems
> Estel
> did use a not working fake mail account and was forced to open another.
> JCDenton got a "One-Touch-Ban and Clean" click which is only possible with
> accounts not posted much and newly created (to ban Spambots).
>
> For the screenshot Reggie made available: I think he missed to blur the
> top. He
> has a strict policy when it comes to securing or sharing privat data. I can
> assure you that 'yes' it was a search for a single IP and they matched
> Estel
> JCDenton Letsee and aquamarine while in the picture JCDenton has no more
> posts
> as I deleted them so no match for posts.
>
> Estel, I sent a warning out to you at least twice. There are rules and if
> you are
> not up to playing by them you may leave or get banned. Your choice.
>
> Regards,
> Ruediger Schiller
>
> --
> http://dostorugas.org
>
Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
2012-11-12 18:51 UTC
I wish we could stop wasting time on Estel and keep maemo alive, this is a time where we have to band together more than ever :)
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:58 AM, Niel Nielsen <nieldk@gmail.com> wrote:
> understood Mate, never considered you an enemy, sorry if that wasnt clear in that mail. I have always respected you a lot :)
>
> /Niel
>
> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Arie Mark wrote:
> Neil I was never an enemy, I have always respected council and what they have done, especially during your term. No one has done more damage to the council name than Estel. Did he deserve a community device yes, did he act childish afterwards, yes. I want to publicly state some old maemo users asked me to run so Estel didn't get voted into council but sadly he did. We dug our graves and now we can lay in it. Please ban Estel from the mailing list or at the very least limit him from number of mails he can send to the
> Mailing list daily. I want Estel to stay around. The old Estel, not the current one.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:01 AM, Niel Nielsen <nieldk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> While you are right about that IP not for certainty belongs to the same router (btw its called dynamic IP), it could hold as evidence anyway.
>> 1 it is very - very - unlikely that the IP would be dynamically assigned to another router, which would then connect to Maemo.
>> 2 despite ISPs being assigned dynamically, very likely the same router would keep the IP, even for years
>> 3 might not even be dynamic, X can sign up (pay) to be guaranteed a static IP (this would actually just be a reserved, dynamic IP)
>>
>> It is sad to read this trolling, inconstructive, critisism of working council, Estel, is your goal to dismentle the community? Even a previous 'enemy' of mine (no worries Arie, no worries, you had some valid critism) is going against you Estel. I think you, even off council, would help and get more benefits, from assisting in the hard times confronting the community et al.
>>
>> /Niel
>>
>> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Ilya Skriblovsky wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just want to add some fresh opinion to this horrible flame. It's "fresh" because I don't really know the background: I don't know why Estel was banned and why it is so opposite to the Council.
>> (Though I'm subscribed to this list, I'm rare reading it further subject line because starting with Community Awards discussion in June, 95% of mails here are full of flame and lacking of any constructive).
>>
>> But this situation seems very ugly to me. Screenshot with blurred IP addresses is certainly not an evidence at all. If screenshot was with exact IP match as Mohammad said, then I miss the point for blurring other IPs.
>> If all blurred IPs are the same and same with Estel's, please publish original screenshot. If they differ — please remove the ban, admit your mistake and stop this shame.
>>
>> (By the way, even if all IPs are the same, it is not 100% evidence of identity of these accounts since if mentioned Polish network provides variable IP addresses, it's not a wonder if several IPs will accidentally match somewhen. Deep login history research is the only way to be 100% sure.)
>>
>> Yours,
>> Mitrandir
>>
>>
>> 2012/11/12 twilight312@gmail.com <twilight312@gmail.com>
>> On pon 12 lis 2012 14:58:00 CET, Reggie Suplido <reggie@internettablettalk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Stop playing with community man. Here's the proof:
>> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A7gWTNeCMAAyhVX.png
>>
>> Another thing about this pathetic incident - I see few other names listed there. While "Letsee" was my account - that I have never concealed in any way, signing posts from there as "/Estel" - there is also aquamarine.
>>
>> Who is that person and what happened with this account? Was it banned in Reggie's madness too? Have this person tried to contact TMO admins, or just gave up on Maemo, after being treaten like that?
>>
>> /Estel
>>
>>
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:58 AM, Niel Nielsen <nieldk@gmail.com> wrote:
> understood Mate, never considered you an enemy, sorry if that wasnt clear in that mail. I have always respected you a lot :)
>
> /Niel
>
> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Arie Mark wrote:
> Neil I was never an enemy, I have always respected council and what they have done, especially during your term. No one has done more damage to the council name than Estel. Did he deserve a community device yes, did he act childish afterwards, yes. I want to publicly state some old maemo users asked me to run so Estel didn't get voted into council but sadly he did. We dug our graves and now we can lay in it. Please ban Estel from the mailing list or at the very least limit him from number of mails he can send to the
> Mailing list daily. I want Estel to stay around. The old Estel, not the current one.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Nov 12, 2012, at 11:01 AM, Niel Nielsen <nieldk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> While you are right about that IP not for certainty belongs to the same router (btw its called dynamic IP), it could hold as evidence anyway.
>> 1 it is very - very - unlikely that the IP would be dynamically assigned to another router, which would then connect to Maemo.
>> 2 despite ISPs being assigned dynamically, very likely the same router would keep the IP, even for years
>> 3 might not even be dynamic, X can sign up (pay) to be guaranteed a static IP (this would actually just be a reserved, dynamic IP)
>>
>> It is sad to read this trolling, inconstructive, critisism of working council, Estel, is your goal to dismentle the community? Even a previous 'enemy' of mine (no worries Arie, no worries, you had some valid critism) is going against you Estel. I think you, even off council, would help and get more benefits, from assisting in the hard times confronting the community et al.
>>
>> /Niel
>>
>> On Monday, November 12, 2012, Ilya Skriblovsky wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just want to add some fresh opinion to this horrible flame. It's "fresh" because I don't really know the background: I don't know why Estel was banned and why it is so opposite to the Council.
>> (Though I'm subscribed to this list, I'm rare reading it further subject line because starting with Community Awards discussion in June, 95% of mails here are full of flame and lacking of any constructive).
>>
>> But this situation seems very ugly to me. Screenshot with blurred IP addresses is certainly not an evidence at all. If screenshot was with exact IP match as Mohammad said, then I miss the point for blurring other IPs.
>> If all blurred IPs are the same and same with Estel's, please publish original screenshot. If they differ — please remove the ban, admit your mistake and stop this shame.
>>
>> (By the way, even if all IPs are the same, it is not 100% evidence of identity of these accounts since if mentioned Polish network provides variable IP addresses, it's not a wonder if several IPs will accidentally match somewhen. Deep login history research is the only way to be 100% sure.)
>>
>> Yours,
>> Mitrandir
>>
>>
>> 2012/11/12 twilight312@gmail.com <twilight312@gmail.com>
>> On pon 12 lis 2012 14:58:00 CET, Reggie Suplido <reggie@internettablettalk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Stop playing with community man. Here's the proof:
>> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A7gWTNeCMAAyhVX.png
>>
>> Another thing about this pathetic incident - I see few other names listed there. While "Letsee" was my account - that I have never concealed in any way, signing posts from there as "/Estel" - there is also aquamarine.
>>
>> Who is that person and what happened with this account? Was it banned in Reggie's madness too? Have this person tried to contact TMO admins, or just gave up on Maemo, after being treaten like that?
>>
>> /Estel
>>
>>
Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
ilyaskriblovsky at gmail.com
Okay, much cleaner now
Mitrandir12.11.12 21:48 Niel Nielsen написал(а):
Thanks for this very clear, precise and explaining mail Ruediger.
/Niel
On Monday, November 12, 2012, chemist wrote:
Hey Folks,
It was me who banned JCDenton and aquamarine aswell and I added some more points
to Estels account 'after' he was banned for one month already (Letsee account
got him some extra juice).
Estel got banned for 3 days initially for being not so nice to people...
Clear rules state 'do not have a second account beside', starting with Letsee
which was not posted from at first so I left it alone but made other mods aware
of it. Some one noticed him posting on that account, banned it permanently and
added points to Estel's account... 1 month ban.
I did not follow the IP after that till someone pointed at JCDenton considering
to be Estel, checked the IP again and voila another account shows... seems Estel
did use a not working fake mail account and was forced to open another.
JCDenton got a "One-Touch-Ban and Clean" click which is only possible with
accounts not posted much and newly created (to ban Spambots).
For the screenshot Reggie made available: I think he missed to blur the top. He
has a strict policy when it comes to securing or sharing privat data. I can
assure you that 'yes' it was a search for a single IP and they matched Estel
JCDenton Letsee and aquamarine while in the picture JCDenton has no more posts
as I deleted them so no match for posts.
Estel, I sent a warning out to you at least twice. There are rules and if you are
not up to playing by them you may leave or get banned. Your choice.
Regards,
Ruediger Schiller
--
http://dostorugas.org
Mitrandir12.11.12 21:48 Niel Nielsen написал(а):
Thanks for this very clear, precise and explaining mail Ruediger.
/Niel
On Monday, November 12, 2012, chemist wrote:
Hey Folks,
It was me who banned JCDenton and aquamarine aswell and I added some more points
to Estels account 'after' he was banned for one month already (Letsee account
got him some extra juice).
Estel got banned for 3 days initially for being not so nice to people...
Clear rules state 'do not have a second account beside', starting with Letsee
which was not posted from at first so I left it alone but made other mods aware
of it. Some one noticed him posting on that account, banned it permanently and
added points to Estel's account... 1 month ban.
I did not follow the IP after that till someone pointed at JCDenton considering
to be Estel, checked the IP again and voila another account shows... seems Estel
did use a not working fake mail account and was forced to open another.
JCDenton got a "One-Touch-Ban and Clean" click which is only possible with
accounts not posted much and newly created (to ban Spambots).
For the screenshot Reggie made available: I think he missed to blur the top. He
has a strict policy when it comes to securing or sharing privat data. I can
assure you that 'yes' it was a search for a single IP and they matched Estel
JCDenton Letsee and aquamarine while in the picture JCDenton has no more posts
as I deleted them so no match for posts.
Estel, I sent a warning out to you at least twice. There are rules and if you are
not up to playing by them you may leave or get banned. Your choice.
Regards,
Ruediger Schiller
--
http://dostorugas.org
Re: Banned from maemo.org - someone went ape shit nuts?!
2012-11-12 19:01 UTC
On pon 12 lis 2012 16:20:25 CET, Ilya Skriblovsky <ilyaskriblovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just want to add some fresh opinion to this horrible flame. It's "fresh"
> because I don't really know the background: I don't know why Estel was
> banned and why it is so opposite to the Council.
> (Though I'm subscribed to this list, I'm rare reading it further subject
> line because starting with Community Awards discussion in June, 95% of
> mails here are full of flame and lacking of any constructive).
>
> But this situation seems very ugly to me. Screenshot with blurred IP
> addresses is certainly not an evidence at all. If screenshot was with
> exact IP match as Mohammad said, then I miss the point for blurring
> other IPs. If all blurred IPs are the same and same with Estel's, please
> publish original screenshot. If they differ — please remove the ban,
> admit your mistake and stop this shame.
>
> (By the way, even if all IPs are the same, it is not 100% evidence of
> identity of these accounts since if mentioned Polish network provides
> variable IP addresses, it's not a wonder if several IPs will accidentally
> match somewhen. Deep login history research is the only way to be 100%
> sure.)
>
> Yours,
> Mitrandir
Thank you for fresh, clear, and sane opinion. I also think, that we all need to take deep breath, state basic principles, and reconstruct what happened. So, point 1, about basic principles:
On pon 12 lis 2012 16:27:11 CET, Ilya Skriblovsky <ilyaskriblovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> And of course saying that "attitude and wording" of email with
> complaining to ban can justify this ban in any way — This is certainly
> immoral and shows the lack of will to solve the incident. Answer to the
> facts first and after cause will be clear, then say all you want about
> wording.
>
> Presumption of innocence is the holy thing, really.
>
> Yours,
> Mitrandir
I think it's clear to any civilized person, and no one will try to disagree with you, here. Hurting innocents, for "higher case", then justifying it afterwards, is lack of civil responsibility, one of worst examples. It should be fought with fire in both small things (like here), and big ones - the latter seed from the former, and finally, result in great catastrophes.
Thus...
On pon 12 lis 2012 16:39:29 CET, Andre Klapper <andre_klapper@gmx.net> wrote:
> Thanks for a fresh opinion, but I have become unwilling as it's simply
> enough at some point.
> Lots of previous talk, simply check the mailing list archives.
>
> andre
> --
> Andre Klapper | Bugmaster
> http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/
...doesn't sound like good excuse.
On pon 12 lis 2012 17:16:14 CET, Marcin Mielniczuk <marmistrz@linux.pl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just wondering, as I couldn't be up to date lately: why has been Estel
> banned? (a link or so is enough)
> --
> Marcin
I have been banned due to, exactly, this post:
http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p=1287822&postcount=48
Yes, seriously. For our unbeliveably fair and neutral moderator, chemist, it was enough for ban. What is more spicy, this exact same case was reviewed earlier, by moderator sjgadsby, and he just warned every participant (including me), to not continue. His recommendations were followed to the single line - yet, after 4-5 days, chemist decided, that he need to show his presence and how important he is, issuing ban. Of course, he haven't punished anyone else arguing there - I said, that his neutrality is legendar, didn't I?
While it was clearly unfair, I have *never* mentioned it in public. I have created account to contact administrators about mentioned doubts, and I have denied (in polite message) Woody's lie (done on purpose) about my disappearing being my attempt to scam people, that pre-ordered replacement bodies for N900. This sole reaction - in defense of collaborative project - was cause of extending ban to 6 December 2012.
On pon 12 lis 2012 18:19:26 CET, chemist <chemist@dostortugas.org> wrote:
> Hey Folks,
>
> It was me who banned JCDenton and aquamarine aswell
Great job, chemist! You have banned someone out of blue sky (aquamarine) and we would never know about it, if your madness wouldn't result in banning JCDenton! Let's light a candle for aquamarine, as - whoever she/he was - it's probably lost to Community, with all her/his potential.
Furthermore, you seem to be quite proud of banning innocent people for "higher cause", just because it seemed to you, that they may be me?
Maybe you have banned someone else "for me", too? C'mon, share your great deeds with us.
> I did not follow the IP after that till someone pointed at JCDenton
> considering to be Estel, checked the IP again and voila another account
> shows... seems Estel did use a not working fake mail account and was
> forced to open another. JCDenton got a "One-Touch-Ban and Clean" click
> which is only possible with accounts not posted much and newly created
> (to ban Spambots).
bullshit - Letsee was new account, yet, single post from there was left in place. You have banned JCDenton using post removal, due to plain laziness.
Not to mention, that your "theory" proved to be wrong, as it was assumed on sole NAT IP of provider, which is very risky way of banning people, and every beginning admin/moderator know that.
Now, Mr. Failman, instead of excusing JCDenton, you're again proud of yourself!
> For the screenshot Reggie made available: I think he missed to blur the
> top. He has a strict policy when it comes to securing or sharing privat
> data. I can assure you that 'yes' it was a search for a single IP and
> they matched Estel JCDenton Letsee and aquamarine while in the picture
> JCDenton has no more posts as I deleted them so no match for posts.
Nice story. Still no idea, how you can share with us such lack of responsibility, skills, and just plain brainless actions, without burning from shame.
So, basically, you just confirmed your guilt, without any reegrets?
> Estel, I sent a warning out to you at least twice. There are rules and
> if you are not up to playing by them you may leave or get banned. Your
> choice.
Frankly - I see it as personal offense, when you suggest I might be breaking your pathetic "rules" to take part in so corrupted, decomposed, and pathetic forum as TMO. It was wrong from the start, and now, it become decomposing swamp, plagued by brainless, egomaniac mods, that didn't care for hurting innocent people, if it boost own ego enough.
After what you have done, by banning at least two innocent people (maybe more, who knows), just because you "though" they may be me, you're not only complete ZERO as a moderator. You're zero as member of community, too. Be gone, in all shame possible.
/Estel
> Hi all,
>
> Just want to add some fresh opinion to this horrible flame. It's "fresh"
> because I don't really know the background: I don't know why Estel was
> banned and why it is so opposite to the Council.
> (Though I'm subscribed to this list, I'm rare reading it further subject
> line because starting with Community Awards discussion in June, 95% of
> mails here are full of flame and lacking of any constructive).
>
> But this situation seems very ugly to me. Screenshot with blurred IP
> addresses is certainly not an evidence at all. If screenshot was with
> exact IP match as Mohammad said, then I miss the point for blurring
> other IPs. If all blurred IPs are the same and same with Estel's, please
> publish original screenshot. If they differ — please remove the ban,
> admit your mistake and stop this shame.
>
> (By the way, even if all IPs are the same, it is not 100% evidence of
> identity of these accounts since if mentioned Polish network provides
> variable IP addresses, it's not a wonder if several IPs will accidentally
> match somewhen. Deep login history research is the only way to be 100%
> sure.)
>
> Yours,
> Mitrandir
Thank you for fresh, clear, and sane opinion. I also think, that we all need to take deep breath, state basic principles, and reconstruct what happened. So, point 1, about basic principles:
On pon 12 lis 2012 16:27:11 CET, Ilya Skriblovsky <ilyaskriblovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> And of course saying that "attitude and wording" of email with
> complaining to ban can justify this ban in any way — This is certainly
> immoral and shows the lack of will to solve the incident. Answer to the
> facts first and after cause will be clear, then say all you want about
> wording.
>
> Presumption of innocence is the holy thing, really.
>
> Yours,
> Mitrandir
I think it's clear to any civilized person, and no one will try to disagree with you, here. Hurting innocents, for "higher case", then justifying it afterwards, is lack of civil responsibility, one of worst examples. It should be fought with fire in both small things (like here), and big ones - the latter seed from the former, and finally, result in great catastrophes.
Thus...
On pon 12 lis 2012 16:39:29 CET, Andre Klapper <andre_klapper@gmx.net> wrote:
> Thanks for a fresh opinion, but I have become unwilling as it's simply
> enough at some point.
> Lots of previous talk, simply check the mailing list archives.
>
> andre
> --
> Andre Klapper | Bugmaster
> http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/
...doesn't sound like good excuse.
On pon 12 lis 2012 17:16:14 CET, Marcin Mielniczuk <marmistrz@linux.pl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just wondering, as I couldn't be up to date lately: why has been Estel
> banned? (a link or so is enough)
> --
> Marcin
I have been banned due to, exactly, this post:
http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p=1287822&postcount=48
Yes, seriously. For our unbeliveably fair and neutral moderator, chemist, it was enough for ban. What is more spicy, this exact same case was reviewed earlier, by moderator sjgadsby, and he just warned every participant (including me), to not continue. His recommendations were followed to the single line - yet, after 4-5 days, chemist decided, that he need to show his presence and how important he is, issuing ban. Of course, he haven't punished anyone else arguing there - I said, that his neutrality is legendar, didn't I?
While it was clearly unfair, I have *never* mentioned it in public. I have created account to contact administrators about mentioned doubts, and I have denied (in polite message) Woody's lie (done on purpose) about my disappearing being my attempt to scam people, that pre-ordered replacement bodies for N900. This sole reaction - in defense of collaborative project - was cause of extending ban to 6 December 2012.
On pon 12 lis 2012 18:19:26 CET, chemist <chemist@dostortugas.org> wrote:
> Hey Folks,
>
> It was me who banned JCDenton and aquamarine aswell
Great job, chemist! You have banned someone out of blue sky (aquamarine) and we would never know about it, if your madness wouldn't result in banning JCDenton! Let's light a candle for aquamarine, as - whoever she/he was - it's probably lost to Community, with all her/his potential.
Furthermore, you seem to be quite proud of banning innocent people for "higher cause", just because it seemed to you, that they may be me?
Maybe you have banned someone else "for me", too? C'mon, share your great deeds with us.
> I did not follow the IP after that till someone pointed at JCDenton
> considering to be Estel, checked the IP again and voila another account
> shows... seems Estel did use a not working fake mail account and was
> forced to open another. JCDenton got a "One-Touch-Ban and Clean" click
> which is only possible with accounts not posted much and newly created
> (to ban Spambots).
bullshit - Letsee was new account, yet, single post from there was left in place. You have banned JCDenton using post removal, due to plain laziness.
Not to mention, that your "theory" proved to be wrong, as it was assumed on sole NAT IP of provider, which is very risky way of banning people, and every beginning admin/moderator know that.
Now, Mr. Failman, instead of excusing JCDenton, you're again proud of yourself!
> For the screenshot Reggie made available: I think he missed to blur the
> top. He has a strict policy when it comes to securing or sharing privat
> data. I can assure you that 'yes' it was a search for a single IP and
> they matched Estel JCDenton Letsee and aquamarine while in the picture
> JCDenton has no more posts as I deleted them so no match for posts.
Nice story. Still no idea, how you can share with us such lack of responsibility, skills, and just plain brainless actions, without burning from shame.
So, basically, you just confirmed your guilt, without any reegrets?
> Estel, I sent a warning out to you at least twice. There are rules and
> if you are not up to playing by them you may leave or get banned. Your
> choice.
Frankly - I see it as personal offense, when you suggest I might be breaking your pathetic "rules" to take part in so corrupted, decomposed, and pathetic forum as TMO. It was wrong from the start, and now, it become decomposing swamp, plagued by brainless, egomaniac mods, that didn't care for hurting innocent people, if it boost own ego enough.
After what you have done, by banning at least two innocent people (maybe more, who knows), just because you "though" they may be me, you're not only complete ZERO as a moderator. You're zero as member of community, too. Be gone, in all shame possible.
/Estel
and have accumulated 75 points which according to the rules[1] is banned
for 30 days. If he keeps creating and posting from new accounts, and reach
100 infraction points, he will automatically get banned permanently.
I'm not sure about mailing list rules. I don't even know who the admin is
now.
[1] http://talk.maemo.org/faq.php?faq=vb3_board_faq#faq_tmorulestext
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Thomas Perl <th.perl@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Let's stop feeding the troll at this point and end the thread here.
> I'm sure Reggie knows how to run a forum and when to ban someone.
>
> Thanks,
> Thomas
>