User talk:Irismeister
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hi!
Normally you could have left me a note here.
Due to:
- serial abusive bans, day in and day out;
- fierce competition for my total Wiki time;
- idiotic, endless requests for comments;
- absurd "arbitrations" from those who want me out from here, disgusted or silenced - or only making me lose time;
- deletion without trace (except for trusted third parties) of 53% of my material contributed to the English Wiki;
- public Wikithreats to end "threatening" with justice for my being insulted and libelled here in public :O);
I can no longer guarantee my presence here, let alone an aswer to you. Sorry about that!
Please contact me for emergencies only at danjipa-cut-my-nose> at freemail.iris-ward.com
Thanks a bunch and good luck :O)
Keep up the good fight against the Wiki Imperialists! They DO consider law and those who practice it to be terrorists. Ironic, because in actually they are the terrorists here. While I do not agree with your stance that a picture of a clitoris is "pornographic", I respect your opinion. And, please, do not let assholes here keep you from cotributing. It is impartial and honest people like us, who respect all opinions, beliefs, and ways of life, who are the ones that this project, and those like it, were meant for. This project was not meant for a bunch of immature and ignorant high-school dorks who cannot tolerate differences.172.209.134.155 16:48, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Barnstar awarded to Irismeister by WikiUser 19:58, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
for extreme patience, and dedication in editing The Wikipedia.
[edit] Least common denominator - "official" GREED - vs ALL other medicines
There is a very pertinent denomination, which settles the AM-CM debate. And this is GREED MEDICINE vs ALL other systems. We aren't allowed to practice medicine OUTSIDE the rules fixed by the BIG PHARMA sharks, now busy in fixing medical curricula as well. Of course these are only greedy fascists who would kill just about any medical system, medical research data, medical views or only effective new drugs - if it isn't theirs to sell ! Not recommended. The history of editing iridology and Alternative Medicine articles, plus the habits of Theresa, Rosie, David Gerard and Co in SUPRESSING reliable alternative medical information in Wikipedia did a LOT OF HARM to the cause of health in the general public and the cause of truth in general. Their habits of servile parrots repeating corporate media mantras and consummate mafiots patting the shoulders of corporate criminals, is exposed FOR AS LONG AS THEY CONTINUE to be puppets of corporate press and corporate policies. Recommended reading (besides previous articles on conventional medicine and stuff censored here in Wiki but safely guarded for the next legal breakthrough by a trusted third party, include:
• "The Truth About the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do About It," by Dr. Marcia Angell.
• "On The Take: How Medicine's Complicity with Big Business Can Endanger Your Health," by Dr. Jerome Kassirer.
• "Powerful Medicines: The Benefits, Risks, and Costs of Prescription Drugs," by Dr. Jerry Avorn.
• "Overdo$ed America: The Broken Promise of American Medicine," by Dr. John Abramson.
• "Critical Condition: How Health Care in America Became Big Business - and Bad Medicine," by investigative reporters Donald Barlett and James Steele.
• "The $800 Million Pill: The Truth Behind the Cost of New Drugs," by Merrill Goozner.
Happy AM editing - Sincerely, back here to stay - so better trigger those red alarms and hang on somewhere near the panick button, he he - irismeister :O°)
[edit] Criticism of Iridology is Biased
The majority of medical doctors reject all the claims of all branches of iridology en bloc and label them as pseudoscience or even quackery. Iridologists are rarely medical doctors; many training centers exist, but iridology is neither taught in mainstream medical schools, nor acknowledged by official medical organizations as a valid medical technique.
Mainstream medicine is dismissive of iridology largely because published studies have indicated a lack of success for the iridological claims. However, more and more medical institutes, health centers, reaserch organizations and universities staffed by ophthalmologists and certified medical doctors openly profess alternative iridologic opinions against "consensual medicine". For instance, scientific associations composed exclusively of medical doctors using iridology in their day to day patient care now exist in Germany, Greece, Italy, the Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia, Russia, the Philippines, Indonesia and Ukraine. They certainly would not like to see the information about their daily work being suppressed because of hidden agendas paid for by the Big Pharma Villains.
[edit] What is the relevance of the "no personal attack" policy?
Any arbitrator, sysop, and editor might consider whatever does not suit her personal humor, particular day in the monthly cycle, and so on, as a personal attack. Moreover, whatever some say is a personal attack others say it's only attention, care and indeed Wikilove. Who says what is what and what is not what in Wiki? Take my case study for instance: I had a six month assignment in commiting quality medical articles for Wiki. Well, six months later, half of my contributions have been deleted without a trace by people crying wolf while severly insulting, libelling and slandering me (by the expert opinion of my lawyers). In one instance, Theresa and Jwros felt personally attacked by me calling them "baby" while I should not consider them calling me a "nutcase" as a personal attack (by the enlightened ukaz of arbitrators). In a word, people, why don't you wake up and come to your senses. And while you are doing so, and in the process of arousal, why don't you ask yourself quies custodiet ipsos custodes. In conclusion, here I offer a minitext in order for you to help answering me with at least some sensible NON-PERSONAL, principial, relevant and creative stuff:
[edit] Positive diagnosis of censorship on Wiki and proposed cure for Wikicensors
One of my previous questions here has been deleted, en bloc, complete with evidence. More than HALF of my text contributed to Wiki has been deleted without a trace under the "personal attack" banner, doctrine, fallacy or whatever. So here is this interesting case for disfunctioning in my Wikicensors, which perhaps merits some qualified medical attention. Quoting from a famous textbook treating censorship as an institutional disease:
- There is a serious problem of "institutional impotence" for many bodies -- with many others operating under prison-like constraints, if only conceptually. Of course some form of "conceptual masturbation" -- perhaps characteristic of many conferences -- may provide a short-term satisfactory substitute. Or, as Dave Barry humorously indicates: "To the rest of America, making policy is a form of institutional masturbation; to Washingtonians, it is productive work. They love to make policy."
- At the other extreme, a rare form of erectile dysfunction is the permanent erection (priapism). By comparison, the concern has been expressed, notably by Cynthia Mahmood, that US policies with regard to terrorism could lead to a world where the United States is in a permanent state of "military arousal", perpetually fighting an ill-defined and elusive enemy. This could then be suitably named as "priapic warfare". Given US military admiration for Roman imperial endeavours, this suggests a line for further research (see Amly Richlin. The Garden of Priapus: Sexuality and Aggression in Roman Humour, 1983)
- Non-sexually related spontaneous erections happen often, especially in young men. These may perhaps be compared to the momentary enthusiastic responses of the young to social challenges. Premature ejaculation is often confused with erectile dysfunction. It is a condition in which the entire process of arousal, erection, ejaculation, and climax occur very rapidly, leaving the partner unsatisfied. This might usefully be compared to premature human responses to the challenges of the planet.
Rest assured, my office is still open for more individual medical and psychological attention for the diseased censors here. Sincerely, irismeister 11:33, 2004 Aug 19 (UTC)
RE: Proposed institutional treatment for Wikicensors who see personal attacks wherever they can't argue using aristotelic or boolean logic :O)
-end-of item-
Hello, I am being investigated for the criminal act of "voting for you" (back in April) -- would you please confirm whether (or not) you desired to vote to keep the page on Dan Waniek. Lirath Q. Pynnor
-
- Hi, dear Lir! Of course I agree with you in everything, and I am really grateful for the incredibly excellent job you did. This will never be forgotten! As for the criminal thing, please avoid me from now on, for anybody who touches my contributions in Wiki seems to be brutalized by Wikipolice :O) I was recently banned for editing my own page, and do not know for how long I am allowed to do it (to say nothing about other pages!). I touched the Wiki nerve and as all good diagnosers, I happen to have discovered how Wikipolice works: It doesn't. Anyway, all of those admin-sysop - "intellectual masturbators" should not have me encouraging them in their self-love activities any more. And they could as well kiss the body parts I use to sit good bye :O) - irismeister 16:06, 2004 Jul 24 (UTC)
The End of Evil :O) Building a single standard Wikipedia...
Bye for now, you all :O)
I quit Wiki, saying you all "thanks" and "bye for now" :O)
My decision is a consequence of conspicuous behavioral patterns of fellow Wiki "editors", leading, inter alia, to many disgraceful pages where most of their contributions are nothing but self-righteous instantiations of exclusive indulgement in conceptual "safe sex for one". Wiki was great when people cared to contribute encyclopaedic articles more than they cared for intellectual masturbation. Let me now leave such room free for wikipolice to walk at night, nice and smooothly :O) - irismeister 14:07, 2004 Jun 11 (UTC) Arbitration and de-adminship
Proof of blatant double standards
Request here was removed. There is ABSOLUTELY NO place in public Wiki space where this can be put without it being immedately removed or redirected by wikipolice to some 'quarantaine quarters. On the contrary, if admin complainants care to carry active editors in ludicrous "arbitrations" without trying to resolve dispute first, such complainants are heard and pampered viz. titillated. So they feel encouraged to "admin" even more in such masturbatory styles. Alas, they are also, by this very action, de facto, and automatically requesting review of their own administrative actions, AND desysoping. As I ALREADY stated, redirecting or CUTTING my request is NOT, repeat NOT a REVIEW of admin actions - but Wikipolice "maintanance" as usual. I therefore LEAVE WIKI having made my final point. - Good bye, and good riddance :O) irismeister 14:27, 2004 Jun 11 (UTC)
Proposed practical measures
- systematic inclusion of "Wikicreative indices" (WICI) on each editor's personal page;
- automatic addition of the "Wikipolice tag", when attributed by computed stats to personal signatures;
- real-time measures of the "Wikicreative index";
- NEVER delete thispage, even after I'm gone for good. This is essential for newcomers. They absolutely need this warning, so that their would-be, bona fide volunteer contributions would not be exploited.
- FINAL WARNING In my own half-year assignment I had to deal with aggressive, brutal, ignorant Wikipedia:Wikipolice. There is no doubt in my mind that Wikipedia has become a piratocracy. Basically, you would give time, energy, knowledge away for free, only to be insulted and libelled. That's how piratocracies work: They grab what they can and then they boast and tap each other on their respective shoulders about how democratic they are. They aren't. They are only pathetically brutal pirates, giving themselves a collective treat by pampering their "position" in wolf packing-order. If you want to give it a try at your turn, be ready to lose enormous amounts of time of your life, only because Wikipedia:Wikipolice takes advantage of your life, and try to smear you or your ideals, dragging you into unnecessary babysitting sessions with the incredibly ignorant "peers". Consider yourself warned! - irismeister 12:23, 2004 Jun 12 (UTC)
Emergency, Mayday, Wiki Wiki
Mayday! Dear visitor, the WikiRepublic is in danger! Wikipolice make their coup d'êtat! Please add your voice and come help John here wiki wiki. Thank you ! - Yours, - irismeister 17:25, 2004 May 19 (UTC)
Between heavy-duty editing sessions.
Otherwise I'm really dangerous !
Image sadly censored from Wiki
although it only showed a little dog
truly, a bit wagged...
[edit] Hi there!
[edit] Here are...
[edit] "A Few Interesting Messages"
[edit] Why Iris scanning is wrong
Irismeister, I re-wrote Iris scan to reflect your additions. I tried to present the information in a more neutral way. Take a look. Maybe it is more clear now? Kingturtle 21:46, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC) + ==Meaning well and talking hell==
======Just perfect!
Thank you, Kingturtle!======
Passionately,
Kingturtle,
Wikipedia is not a pulpit
It is. The cause of truth needs it. Has no other minister out of Orwell Land. Let's keep Wikipedians informed, not censored.
We don't want to get sued for copyright infringement
By whom? Me, the copyright owner? AND the author. Who also edited it for Wikipedian clarity? You must remain serios! And real. Did you hear about Fair Use? Did you read http://www.iris-ward.com/_HTM/SITE/PRIV/1051-PRIV.htm#Copyright%20Notice.
OK, please refer to my message, point by point, as much as you refer to your canned stuff. And please trim as you will, but by all means, do keep informative stuff IN before you "neuter" myself altogether.
The alternative is, of course, to kindly let me pack my bragware, complete with:
User:Irismeister
Iris_(anatomy)
Iridology
Iris_scan
... and close my Wikipedian career here, period.
Passionately the same,
Irismeister
20:12, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Getting to know wikipedia
Irismeister, your energy and knowledge will be of great use to Wikipedia. As you settle in with this community, please take a look (you may have read some of them already) at some pages to further your understanding of the community, and the wikipedia project. Sincerely, Kingturtle 22:16, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- <energy and knowledge will be of great use, etc...>
Kingturtle, This will take some time, but where there is a will... Thank you for the kind words which for me raise specters of higher standards. I can only keep them in iridial studies and proto-ionian Greek etymologies. Which brings me back to the design board : )
- Sincerely, best to you !
Irismeister
Friday, 2007-April-6, 11:20 Universal Time, 1,723,681 articles in Wikipedia, and growing, growing...
- "Remember! United we stand... Divided we fall... Well, well, well... well... Well, Stanley!"
[edit] Kingturtle honored the spirit of truth
Talk, Talk, Ollie! For....
Here is another nice mess you've got me into! Kingturtle honored the spirit of truth by putting back essential stuff he cut from my addition to Iris_scan. Wanna read it? Find it here. Be your own judge!
[edit] Good etiquette
Good etiquette on Wikipedia is to sign with your name, with three or four tildes, and that's it. Any more than that is just decreasing the signal-to-noise ratio for no gain. If I want to know the time, I'll look at my watch. Martin 00:28, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Yeah, Martin but this means moving your eyes from the screen, and having a watch on the wrist or something. I don't do this : O ) Yours, irismeister - and off goes one tilde just for you and I : O )
Wikipedia is here for the convenience of six billion people, only one of which is you. Your minor inconvenience in moving your eyes from the screen is irrelevant compared to the cumulative inconvenience of everyone else reading your words. Just think of others a bit, and we'll get along fine. Thanks for dropping the excessive signature. Martin 23:08, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)
You mean 6.5 G people, plus one - you ; ) And thank YOU for stopping the silly lecturing! How does it compare with a tilda (already dropped) considering your own kind bits in terms of noise?
Conveniently and Sine cera - ly yours,
~~
(off goes one more tilde just for you and me. I mean I, so that we'll add the economy of me vs I, one-more-bit increase in signal to noise ratio that is.)
Remember Ollie, Martin? A little bit of kindness goes a loooooong way : O )
[edit] Cura te ipsum
You are quite right! Fixed: Cura te ipsum. A bene placito, -- Viajero 09:27, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
Greetings, Irismeister. You're quite welcome. It's a fine article, and tweaking the links is the least I could do. The subject matter may be somewhat removed from my discipline, but I'd like to think I'm an all-inclusive student of science. :) Hadal 05:53, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Come for a vote
Irismeister, te rugăm să votezi cu da sau nu dacă vrei ca Wikipedia romanească să folosească un logo pentru Crăciun, pe pagina Wikipedia:Vot_Crăciun --Danutz 18 Dec 2003 19:32 (UTC)
[edit] MERRY CHRISTMAS !
MERRY CHRISTMAS ! irismeister 11:32, 2003 Dec 24 (UTC) Also at http://www.iris-ward.com
[edit] Phaistos Disc
Hi. Thanks for the kind words. Regarding Phaistos Disc: I noticed the article had no external links, so I thought I could add some. I just added one of the many links I found on Google during searching. I don't know much on Phaistos Disc. Now I added some more links. Have a look at them and if you find any that is innapropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia, feel free to remove it. I had just a quick look at them after searching on Google, so I hope you can check them. May you have Peace Profound, Optim 23:05, 18 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Optimus princeps, editori te salutant : ) Thank you very much for the editing, additions and organizing, all of which are excellent. They make the whole picture clearer. Sincerely, irismeister 16:47, 2004 Jan 19 (UTC)
- you welcome :) with Best Wishes for Peace Profound, Optim 20:35, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Dirty talk : )
Hello irismeister. :)
There have been some big changes to iridology since you last saw it. Please have a good look at it and then come and discuss any objections you may have on talk:iridology rather than reverting to a previous version. Thank you.
Latine loqui coactus sum.
Fabiform 02:36, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Hi, fab :)
Latin surprise for you here if you still think I go as low as personal attacks : ) Sincerely, irismeister 21:44, 2004 Jan 25 (UTC)
Hi irismeister. Of course you "go as low as personal attacks". That's half the content of your comments on talk:iridology. But anyway, I just came to let you know that I have changed my mind about mediation, and I wont be visiting iridology anymore either. I posted my reasons on theresa's talk page, so I wont repeat myself. "A kiss for a blow is always best, though it's not very easy to give it sometimes". Peace. Fabiform 04:28, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)
The other cheek
Hi, Faby ! I can only congratulate you for the wise decision. If it is any good, for what it is, it surely shows we didn't lose time there. Here is my other cheek, and if you still care, for what it's worth, there also is my kiss over yours : o O ) Please forget the Vicia in Vicia faba - it only means from the countryside . And if you still think it's... viciously ad hominem , it's, well, only an honor not to take it this way. The part you wrote about what iridologists say in their defense is perfect, well informed, and written with great style. It remained alive and well under all seasons ! Looking forward to have nobody out (and especially you back), - Sincerely, maybe also affectionately yours, irismeister 19:45, 2004 Jan 27 (UTC)
Symmultaneous editing
Sorry! I saw a lot of your edits on that page so it looked like you needed some help cleaning it up. - Lord Kenneth 19:14, Jan 27, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] "Free" speech - the "issue" here
The two photographs on this page (and on the iridology:talk page) have been censored. Free speech here is dead. Welcome to the Encyclopaedia Orwelliana of the Brave New World : ) It's a corporate watchdog. Beware! By Jim's own example (you know where, item # 1), you can't say anywhere in Wiki that corporations are criminals, even if they are. (Click here for a list of top 100 corporate criminals pleading guilty and fined as much as USD 500,000,000) Understand ? Truth is irrelevant. Still not understood? Truth is lie, and at best, it's only a "point of view" - henceforward called a "POV". Capisci ? What matters here is a tyrant's supreme thinking, precious indication and unchallengeable statement. Which tyrant, pray ? This is a superior creature, above mere authors - and all mortals for that matter. This is called "the Wiki editor" - usually not an author, very badly informed, not capable of judging the weight of evidence, but extremely trigger happy, hostile expert in bad manners. I decided to suspend all new articles to Wiki as a result. It's a waste of time. Sadly, I learn nothing new here. Editors who are not authors themselves, will never learn from me either, because their own ignorance is only surpassed by their own arrogance. They will only revert to the wrong version, cut without reading, and redirect - without knowing where. They will do this endlessly, until Wiki becomes irrelevant. Already I see the trend of deletion, redirection, and mediocrity surpassed only by the editor-to-author growing ratio. Wiki will become a kleptocracy and a kakocracy, not an ad-hoc-cracy and a meritocracy. Democracy is drowned in piratocracy. Long live the Patriot Act and the suspension of freedom for an obscure reason . However, I will remain here until I'm censored completely. I will fight on and edit mercilessly all disinformation, bad taste and lies. They kicked me out for vandalism, and they did not kick out the vandals - who were rewarded for their contribution . George Orwell must turn on his side in his tomb.
[edit] Edit comments
Could you refrain from adding disparaging remarks in edit summaries? It's not very nice. --mav
Well, mav perhaps I might . Provided... Please take a better look here, below:
[edit] Request for hard ban on Lord_Kenneth
User:Lord_Kenneth in talk mentions quote you're full of **** all... here unquote. Unworthy for lordship, methinks : ) Sincerely, irismeister 13:27, 2004 Feb 3 (UTC)
Unworthy for lordship, methinks : )
[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for comment
Hello Irismeister. I have asked you in the past not to be abusive towards other users on wikipedia, but since you don't seem to have changed your style of writing, I've listed a complaint about your conduct here: Wikipedia:Requests for comment. I only just submitted it, so you will be able to go and defend yourself if you wish to. fabiform | talk 12:04, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
[edit] The false editor syndrome
[edit] Symptoms and Signs
being polite is awfully annoying at times. - DavidWBrooks 16:56, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC) Politeness is a form of excess, mister David W Brooks. It is necessary. Excess of irrelevance is not necessary : )
"Eventually he'll get bored and go away. DavidWBrooks 15:58, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)"
Psychologists would be fascinated. DavidWBrooks 18:42, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I find it particlaly strange... theresa knott 19:29, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)
iridoligy has to be paid for by the patient. They might like an idea of how much.theresa knott 12:27, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Comments
The plague of terrestrial Israel has always been false, self-fulfilling prophecy, dear Ms Theresa Knott and mister David W Brooks! Look: "Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. " (Mt 24:11) "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world." (1Jo 4:1). Now corroborate with this:
"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves." (Mt 7:15).
Sincerely, irismeister 13:27, 2004 Feb 3 (UTC)
[edit] Request from No-One Jones - my pleasure !
I see you've been having trouble with young Lord Kenneth as well. You may wish to add your voice to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Lord Kenneth; you are far from the first person he has attacked. No-One Jones (talk) 13:34, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Critic of Puree Reason : )
no attempt to discuss rationally that I can detect
Needs reason, yeah... Very badly needed... I can see your point : ) So why not let us attempt to talk, then, like in not protecting the page ? : )
Also, I removed the "page is disputed" header. I'm not sure if this last was a good thing to do or not, and would welcome advice. I'll consider restoring it if requested. Tannin 14:21, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
By all means, please! It's really a mess right now, so the header is perhaps mandatory. Our friend Theresa has a known track record of vandalizing it repeatedly. Perhaps "cut and protect " is what she can do. Clearly, using the spell checking along with image editing facility in Word is not : )
Sincerely, irismeister 14:57, 2004 Feb 3 (UTC)
12764 total number of pages edited during the three months free speech Wiki period : )
[edit] Medical disinformation by theresa knott
It only means theresa knott is an arrogant ignorant, so busy in checking her spelling and sorting out her many conflicts that she doesn't mind being a paragon of disinformation. theresa knott needs constant baby-sitting, so that she will not mislead Wiki readers in matters of health. What Theresa thinks is strong enough to kill bacteria will only kill her critical judgement. Theresa needs training into the difference between bactericidal and bacteriostatical effects. She needs reading this loud: all bleaches, no matter what brand, have 5 1/2% Sodium Hypoclorite, which is the purification chemical until she understands it. She also needs un update of her knowledge reading the Guide for Removing Fecal Matter From a Swimming Pool (20:1 solution of sodium hypochlorite - 20 parts water to 1 part 12 percent sodium hypoclorite). Last, but certainly not the least, she should ask herself if she is not a better editor in other sections of Wikipedia where medical disinformation is not so blatant - like in drawing for kids and editing programs in basic or special English, which she really does perfectly. Sincerely, irismeister 14:33, 2004 Feb 7 (UTC)
[edit] Why Theresa is a dangerous editor for medical issues
Theresa, baby - you make mistakes after mistakes. After you messed the iridology article now you disinform us on the Talk:Sodium hypochlorite issue. It's one part bleach to FOUR parts water, baby. This is what 1: 5 means for us, common mortals way below your far greater knowledge. So here is a primer of the dilution thing for your instruction. Need not dilute/reverse/discuss let alone touch valuable contributions of competent editors like Anon. Here is why:
The dilution factor is the total number of unit volumes in which your material will be dissolved. The diluted material must then be thoroughly mixed to achieve the true dilution. For example, a 1:5 dilution (verbalize as "1 to 5" dilution) entails combining 1 unit volume of diluent (the material to be diluted) + 4 unit volumes of the solvent medium (hence, 1 + 4 = 5 = dilution factor). Sincerely, irismeister 14:50, 2004 Feb 7 (UTC)
[edit] Request for support in buying an English dictionary for theresa knott
Our colleague theresa knott who does not understand the difference between bactericidal and bacteriostatic activities, the meaning of dilution, let alone the past participle in English, should perhaps refrain from cutting valuable contributions and eliciting endless baby-sitting sessions. IMHO Theresa needs constant watch - and I volunteer my time to review all her contributions to Wiki untill she invests into buying a good English dictionary. Sincerely, irismeister 15:06, 2004 Feb 7 (UTC)
Above text returned. Please refrain from making personal attacks and insults. Thank you. Martin 15:25, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Thank you for not thanking me without knowing why : )
If buying a dictionary is an insult and leading readers into dangerous disinformation is not, then please choose the following favorite Wiki slogan: )
war is peace
lie is truth
ignorance is virtue (my favorite : )
Sincerely, irismeister 15:43, 2004 Feb 7 (UTC)
[edit] Help needed
Our distinguished colleague Theresa Knott (theresa knott) has recently misled readers in at least four major medical articles (Mycobacterium leprae, alternative medicine, sodium hypochlorite, and iridology). We need competent editors to check all her medical "contributions" in order to avoid the mess and possible death that may arise as a consequence of maintaining her constant pattern of disinformation. Her editing is a health hazard ! Sincerely, irismeister 15:34, 2004 Feb 7 (UTC)
PS If buying a dictionary is an insult and leading readers into dangerous disinformation is not, then please choose the following favorite Wiki slogan: )
war is peace
lie is truth
ignorance is virtue (my favorite : )
Sincerely, irismeister 15:40, 2004 Feb 7 (UTC)
- In case you didn't know already, irismeister is a quack and proponent of pseudoscience. It's not Theresa who is spreading false information. - Lord Kenneth 15:41, Feb 7, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] More iridology deniers
In case you have nothing else to do, mylord, use the scientific method in documenting your iridology denying virtues : ) Sincerely, irismeister 16:11, 2004 Feb 7 (UTC)
I regard this post as spam, and am therefore returning it from my talk page. Martin 15:56, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Returning again. Martin 15:59, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
My dear Martin, if you regard mail as spam, you may regard anything as anything . So ignorance is virtue - I assume this was your choice : ) Sincerely, irismeister 16:07, 2004 Feb 7 (UTC)
[edit] rude talk comments
I strongly suggest you stop violating our 'Respect other contributors' policy. For example, what you have said about theresa knott is not acceptable. Please stop calling her 'baby' and stop attacking her personally. I hope you take this suggestion to heart and help us build the encyclopedia. --mav 09:49, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
[edit] ignorance is still less acceptable than bona fide baby sitting : )
There is a policy of saving lives that goes in front of others, mav ! Medicine is about prevention. Incompetent editing is about disinformation. I can even more strongly suggest that you look into the disinformation and POV track record of editors before you care to suggest me anything. Please review your own policies and remember:
NOTE: Eliminating ignorance in medical information can save lives!
Hi Irismeister. I think that un-locking that page would be unwise at present. My judgement is that it would result only in another edit war. Given that your role here is under review by the arbitration comittee and that a result of that process is expected within a few days, I think that the prudent course for me to follow is to do nothing at present. Tannin 10:47, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Excuse me. I was confusing you with another user just now. Please disregard the above. Tannin 10:50, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
-
- I'll try again, now that I've remembered that you are not Mr Natural Health. If I were to unprotect the page, what would be the result? Would it simply turn into an area of edit war again? Or have you reached an agreement with the other contributors now? My feeling at present is that unprotecting it would simply return us to the edit war. (Sorry again for my confusion above.) Tannin
Hi, Tannin! Please revert the iridology page to a decent form, or at the very least de-freeze it. I highly appreciate your contributions, although a little bit less your censorship : ) Sincerely, irismeister 10:43, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC)
Thanks for removing irismeister's rant on my talk page. I'd have done it myself. I apologised because although what I said may very well be true, I really do believe that the best way to encorage new people to join the project is to be nice. I shudder to think what a newbie might think if they read some talk pages. Anyway, if in the future i make a formal complaint about him,(or someone else does) 'tis better If the rest of us try to act whiter than white. theresa knott 10:48, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- perhaps it's a good practice to read basic training you keep calling rant before you censor it : ) irismeister 11:24, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC)
Actually it's Mr Natural health who is under arbitration. Irismeister is a completely separate user. Fabiform considered breifly requesting mediation but thought better of it.theresa knott 10:51, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- perhaps Theresa is only afraid of revealing her knowledge/habits/character in the process : )irismeister 11:24, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC)
You have seen irismeister's contributions to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Irismeister right? I don't see any attitude change. Apparently we are babies, naive and dangerous (*sigh*). I know the page can't be protected indefinetly, but irismeister hasn't even gone quiet yet, let alone shown an inclination for contributing sensibly. Cheers, fabiform | talk 11:10, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- ignorance is extremely dangerous, offensive and no excuse that's for sure :) irismeister 11:24, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC)
My feeling at present is that unprotecting it would simply return us to the edit war.
Therefore it's much against the quality of the article... Sadly, I must agree that your feeling is probably correct : ) Sincerely, irismeister 11:24, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Matter of Theresa knott and Mr-Natural-Health/arbitrator discussion Only arbitrators are permitted to put stuff on the above page. You may want to revert your additions. theresa knott 14:33, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Disinformation
Only arbitrators are permitted to put stuff on the above page Negative. Read the header. And you can't cut this one too. He he. You cut too much already. Now, if you don't like using mirrors, why do you cut my answers to your talk page ? Suggestions, workarounds, ideas ? irismeister 14:40, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC)
If you can't or wont do that
Are you now entertaining us or what, our distinguished colleague in those Pharisean clothings ? First you call you fellow Wikipedians names, and then you apologize only to insult them further in the same breath ? The Empereor is naked, Theresa, and we can all see that. Furhtermore, there is nothing to see under such outfits. Who can't do what here? Are you following ? You cut stuff and then dear to write the above? There is a limit for indecent behavior, babe! This behaviour of yours is worse than petitio principii . It's worse than your recent personal insults, babe. This is double standard, censorship, withholding information, thought police, incompetence and seventeen counts of contempt of court . In short, you just deleted what you want me to produce, babe 8DEG). Caring for another lesson in sodium hypochlorite dislutions, or should we start with training you in basic, decent manners ? Lying to the select committee and deleting evidence is not good, repeat, NOT GOOD, babe! Sincerely, irismeister 14:40, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC)
Hi Irismeister. Re: "Where should evidence for this case be addressed lawfully, your honors ?" The two best places are Talk:Iridology (for discussion about the Iridology article) and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Irismeister (which was created when I complained about your conduct, so would be a good place to defend your conduct if you want to). fabiform | talk 15:03, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I have restored part of your comment, concerning your character assessment of Theresa, to /evidence. As you have noted, /arbitrator_discussion is reserved for arbitrators. The other part of your comment appears to be a suggestion regarding general Wikipedia policy, which is off topic. I recomment meta-wikipedia, or a page like wikipedia talk:policies and guidelines. I return the text in question below. Thank you. Martin 23:26, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
[edit] On bona fide editing and objective measures thereof
Since anything can be viciously invoked as a virtue and put on display like a Pharisee's clothing, I have three proposals for bona fide editing :
- citation index/indices (CI) Editors who cannot enter into a decent discussion about the nuts (NOT, repeat "NOT nutcases :) and bolts of the subject they "attack" need not apply for it (let alone the "quality" of editors.) A minimum of, say, one hundred Wiki articles initiated and written as full essays, not stubs, may be a precondition for entering discussions. Stubborn, vicious, ignorant contributions may thus be avoided, although the obstinacy sported as a Theresa trade-mark editing-style will perhaps never be avoided 8)
- the complaints-and-mediations-per-genuine-authoring (CAGA) ratio Editors making a Wiki living out of cutting things they never care to read, let alone understand, will be asked to produce this CAGA credential. Perhaps objective docimology and mediametry can help Wiki volunteers more than generous, endless reversals to the general direction of background noise.
- authoring-signal-to-noise-ratio (ASNR) For details on this initiative, please contact me.
Sincerely, irismeister 14:21, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC) (14,198+ edits in Wiki in three months, thanks in part to Theresa-watching 8DEG)
Vote for it ! We can all lose less time as a consequence.
NOTE: Eliminating ignorance in editing medical information can save lives!
[edit] Copywrite
Can you please clarify what you said on my talk page? You are saying that the picture that fabiform posted on iridology with permission from the "copyright owners" is in fact not their copy in the first place ? theresa knott 00:59, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Theresa, dear, would you please clarify first if you mean copyright ? : ) Sorry about the question, but we have a habit in medical Rx to be brought in prison for one missing letter or for "four parts" in lieu of "five parts"... Sincerely, irismeister 13:54, 2004 Feb 14 (UTC)
- Here you go with the insults again. Did you temporary ban teach you nothing? It would seem not. theresa knott 17:29, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Watch it Irismeister. --mav 09:52, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
-
- I watch it very carefully : ) You watch your spelling, and all menaces will be reported. If you now consider requests for clarifications as insults, perhaps you would fare much better without my annoying knowledge. Did you see why I decided to contribute to Wiki ? It becomes a place were culture is banned...
- We are in the process of creating what deserves to be called the idiot culture. Not an idiot sub-culture, which every society has bubbling beneath the surface and which can provide harmless fun; but the culture itself. For the first time, the weird and the stupid and the coarse are becoming our cultural norm, even our cultural ideal.
Carl Bernstein
Sincerely, irismeister 12:58, 2004 Feb 16 (UTC)
More aggression from the victim :) Conversations taking place on pages of people who had me banned for... personal attacks of their typos and (hold your breath, do not laugh yet :) - for "sexist" abuse of medical dosage corrections...
-
- Hear, hear! May you be rid of such abuse soon and permanently. Jwrosenzweig 22:14, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Highly seconded :) Dysprosia 22:20, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Thank you, it's very nice of you to say so. It is the support from my fellow wikipedians that keeps me sane when dealing with poeple like this. It seems, if our friend is to be believed, that I will have a short respite from the abuse for a while anyways. theresa knott 22:09, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Also, just in case you hadn't yet, I checked for "Daniel Armand Jipa" on the Web and couldn't find this name at all, nor was there any "Daniel Jipa" save one obscure Romanian hockey player, so I believe the plausible claims at Talk:Iridology are in fact untrue, as you no doubt suspected. Jwrosenzweig 22:55, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- I checked too. I'm as cetain as I can be that he is fibbing else I would never have made the comment. theresa knott 23:43, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)
The next step is to send a police officer to have me fingerprinted ! I am not on your Google search therefore I don't exist : ) : )) : ) BTW, what has sex to do with it, and who is a sexist in the first place ? : ) I wonder, why all this fuss on editors, which are not important - in lieu of the ideas they stand for ? Is the ego of one of us, anyone's ego, more important than the idea of saving lives by providing correct medical information in lieu of the cut-and-paste (with typos) incorrect, indiscriminate, non-judgemental local culture ? The shifted focus here is getting out of hand, pathologically. Therefore I will no longer maintain your game of pathologic refferals to persons rather than medical issues. We are not in a police state, not yet. I believe truth, quality and competence are far more important than egos and hunting for Jipa's fingerprints instead of looking into what he has to say ! Sincerely, irismeister 00:24, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC)
Irismeister, your pledge to not contact Theresa for a month lasted less than a day, by my count. I encourage you to leave her alone, truly. Many of us are tired of your continuing to bait her. If I say something you dislike on her talk page, talk to me about it. I'm more than happy to chat. Jwrosenzweig 00:04, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi, Jwrosenzweig, and welcome to my page where you will never be censored - that's for sure : ) Do you have something to say ? I mean - besides conjecturing about my fingerprints and my Google images ? Or more than sending police in for some iris images : ) Our common friend will not have the privilege to address questions to the nutcase, full of **** all the time, minor hockey player, and we'll ban you to teach you a lesson for insulting us in correcting our typos . But then again, aggressors are victims these days, war is peace, ignorance is virtue and... what do you want to chat about ? From your page I understand you are as curious as I am and this is a reason for joy : ) But I'm afraid I'm only competent in medicine, iris studies, proto-ionians and a few other "fringe" cultural issues like Orwelliana... In other words, who cares ? Do you ? Sincerely, irismeister 00:15, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC)
-
- That is quite possibly the most unusual nonsense I've read all day -- what on earth are you talking about? I am not conjecturing about anything other than the fact that any scholar of remote worth is listed on the Internet somewhere due to publications, speaking engagements, being quoted by other scholars, etc. If you are truly the expert in your field that you claimed to be, your name should appear somewhere. Your attempts to confuse the matter by tossing in red herrings involving the police and fingerprinting are not as amusing as you may believe them to be. I don't care to know your actual identity. I was simply curious if you were the expert you claimed to be -- in the absence of other evidence, you appear to have lied (I am, of course, open to you providing some proof that the name you gave is that of a legitimate scholar in the fields of medicine or iridology, but confess that I doubt it will appear). I will therefore view any future statements from you in the critical light they deserve. If you feel that the charges of sexism are based on the fact that you correct the typos or medical dosage of others, you are truly unaware of your own actions -- it is the tone and phrasing you use when speaking to others that marks you as someone who, whether or not you are sexist, adopts a sexist stance in an attempt to belittle or intimidate others. Everything I have ever seen you write here (I admit, I have seen a limited sample of your writing in articles and talk pages) indicates a person puffed up with a sense of his own self-worth and knowledge, but who is content to disrupt the work here by baiting and slandering those who disagree with him. If you feel this characterization is inaccurate, I would be most pleased to be directed to situations where you acted as a collaborative editor. If you feel you are not the person I describe, but have no evidence from this site to substantiate that feeling, I would strongly encourage you to act differently in the future by using a more conciliatory and open-minded tone and attitude in your interactions with others. I look forward to your response. Jwrosenzweig 00:56, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Excuse me ? Is iridology a PaperChase item, let alone a Medical Subject Heading ? Is any MD practicing iridology met anywhere with something else than pre-digested nonsense like the one you exhort right here ? Any suggestion will be highly appreciated. In the mean time please refrain from smear, character assasination, personal attacks and ad hominem ! In order to judge an expert, you need perhaps be an expert yourself. This is the essence of peer in the peer review. In the mean time please refrain your confessions to a more appropriate place than my talk page. And how about your own tone in an attempt to belittle or intimidate using red herrings ? Thank you very much in advance ! Why have not addressed the insults I got here from the very moment I started to talk quality issues ? It would have been much more interesting if you had offered me an example here of a more conciliatory and open-minded tone and attitude in your interactions with others . And a word of excuse: since I intend to continue with my 17,000 + page edits so far, and being quite busy with it, from now on, and for you and Theresa only, I am available for discussions of medical issues, not characters. Sincerely, irismeister 01:18, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC)
- Iris, if you feel I was personally attacking or belittling you, I hope you will accept my apology. Making an ad hominem argument, as I'm sure you are aware, is committing the logical fallacy of saying something like "you believe in alternative medicine, therefore you are a fool", which is blatantly false, and which I did not engage in above. I explained to you that you have taken actions that I see as consistent with a type of character, and invited you at least twice to make me aware of occasions that would convince me to change my mind--I believe this is open-mindedness. I am still open to seeing such things. The harsh words I used above are either accurate representations of your work here or are not. If they are not, show me where I have gone wrong. If they are, I am not "attacking" you, but telling the truth about what I have seen. I do not suggest that the actions you have taken here as an editor sum up your character as a person. I do think that they sum up your character as User:Irismeister, but as I said, am open to being convinced otherwise.
- Many of your comments are unintelligible to me: either you are familiar with a far different discourse than I am, or you are intentionally trying to obfuscate things. I will assume for the time being that you are used to a different conversational style...that said, it still doesn't mean that I understand statements such as "Is iridology a PaperChase item, let alone a Medical Subject Heading ? Is any MD practicing iridology met anywhere with something else than pre-digested nonsense like the one you exhort right here ?" I apologize for calling them nonsense....but they make no sense to me. I ask that you explain the sense in them to demonstrate to me their worth.
- I need no medical expertise to judge that a man claiming to be a medical expert ought to offer his real name if he is actually seeking to establish his expertise. Conversely, if it is your real name, I believe it is safe to say that anyone of note or renown in alternative medicine ought to have their name appearing somewhere on the Web -- it is a large and fairly well-documented community, in my experience. I don't understand your assertion that I have been using "red herrings". I assume this term is familiar to you? If so, please inform me which "red herrings" I used in my comments above, that I may avoid them in future.
- You can choose to respond or not respond to anything you like -- if you would rather not talk about your character, you can choose to do so. You cannot silence me, however. And if you do not wish to discuss yourself, I suggest you refrain from offering your name as proof of your expertise...someone who tells me who they are, I assume is willing to talk about who they are. But perhaps I am wrong in this.
- One final point: when you state the number of "page edits" you have made at Wikipedia, I have always seen you state a number that is roughly 10 times larger than the number of edits displayed under your user contributions. Do you edit under another username or as an anonymous user 90% of the time? If so, I wish you'd inform me of that name or IP -- it may be, as you imply, that I have misjudged you, and seeing the other ~90% of your contributions might well change my mind about your work here. Thank you. Jwrosenzweig 02:35, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
You are welcome, Jwrosenzweig ! Circularity in arguments, aka petitio principi in our case, is perhaps obvious. Let me try to put it like that: You (me, the quack) are not in Google, therefore you are not a world figure, therefore what you say about iridology makes you a quack. Quacks, everybody knows, have no right to express. Syllogistically as it follows, only non-quack editors (that is, people not competent in what they edit) must edit : ) Therefore I must excuse myself for being knowledgeable, sensitive and intelligent, productive in editing pages and willing to contribute here, Jwrosenzweig (please talk personally, for yourself, not in the ancient chorus mode we ;) so my next question to you would not be Knidic or Hippocratic which might embarass or make you lose time in Google searches ! As for the Google search algorithms, since you are neither willing not able to ask me directly what are my published works on the matter (rather than assume my identity/quality/expertize) perhaps an indication will help: Try "Dr " as a keyword. Also you seem to forget that there is more in the world than American culture, that Horatio is not alone, that Rosenkranz and Guildenstern must not be forgot, and Wiki is multi-lingual. Your kind apology is accepted, and if I somehow made you lose time or good will, please forgive me for being such a "quack, illiterate, nutcase, full of **** all the time and other similarly gentle peer reviews as I am getting used to since I crossed the 17,000 page edits line (try hard copy reference by clicking here, thank you very much !) " :0) Sincerely, irismeister 12:45, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC)
-
- I never claimed to be in Google, irismeister. And certainly I don't think "not being in Google" means you shouldn't edit here. I merely think it damages your claim to expertise. I did follow your advice -- Google returns no hits for "Dr. Daniel Jipa", "Dr. D. Jipa", "Dr. D. A. Jipa", "Dr Daniel Jipa", "Dr D. Jipa", or "Dr D. A. Jipa". If I didn't make it clear before, I would welcome hearing about your published works, though obviously they do not appear to have received much notice on the Internet. The Google search algorithm is imperfect, yes -- I assume that by saying this, you are implying that a number of web sites have mentioned you by name. May I have links to a few of them to verify this? I do not think I used the choral "we", but if I did, I apologize. I am speaking only for myself.
-
- There most certainly is more than one language...are you suggesting that your works have appeared in a language other than English? Or that your name is spelled differently in other languages? Please clarify for me, if you would. I have not called you a quack illiterate nutcase, so please do not suggest that I have. Also, your "try hard copy reference by clicking here thank you very much" link sent me to my own watchlist. I assume you are referring to the note at the top of the watchlist that says "X total pages edited since cutoff". This refers to the number of edits having taken place by anyone at Wikipedia on any article since the watchlist's cutoff point. Your list of contributions is available here unless I've typed it incorrectly, and certainly if you select "My contributions" from the bar on the left, you will see your actual number of contributions. You will have to count them by hand, but if you find that you've made more than 700 edits since September, I respectfully suggest you count again.
-
- What do you mean by claiming you wouldn't ask me a "Knidic or Hippocratic" question? Why not? I'm happy to take questions. And Irismeister, when you say "I must excuse myself for being knowledgeable, sensitive and intelligent, productive in editing pages and willing to contribute here, " I do hope you remember that many have found you insensitive, unproductive, and unwilling to be the kind of collaborative contributor we need here. You may think them incorrect...if so, as I've said before, why not point me to evidence of you working in the manner you describe above? But intelligence -- there I am sure you are correct. Until our next exchange of ideas, Jwrosenzweig 17:39, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
OK, now we agree on almost everything and could be friends, methinks. I like all your well made points. When I'll have more time we'll talk extensively despite my previous option to talk issues in lieu of characters. Page edit contributions can be only listed with numbers if you are logged under my account. Yes, I lost a lot of my time with hockey and yes, you are right I am an obscure Romanian : - ) Now back to some more fascinating pages in this addictive Wiki. Sincerely yours, irismeister 18:15, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC)
- I'm glad you're feeling friendly. I do think that your brief statement above is curious in avoiding multiple issues: what published works are written by you (you offered to tell me), why can't I find Dr. Jipa despite you implying that I could, why aren't you admitting you've made less than 700 edits (I can view your contributions and count them as easily as you can by following the link I gave you) or else letting me know what other names/IPs you've used here so I can see the work you've done, and why are you trying to avoid the issue of your conduct here with tangential references to hockey and the addictiveness of this Wikipedia? Am I to understand that you don't feel like talking about these things? If so, that's just fine. I hope you will understand if I take your silence on these matters as a kind of admission that there are no published works to find, that either you are not a doctor or not named Daniel Jipa, that you have made less than 700 edits to Wikipedia as of this time and date, and that you are not able to produce evidence of collaborative contributions here. Obviously, you don't have to care that I think any of these things, but if you can show me where I am wrong on any of these counts, I honestly and openly invite you to do so, and promise to be open-minded about the matter. You may well be a published author named Dr. Daniel A. Jipa who also was the "D. Jipa" who played hockey in at least one game in Romania, and who has edited here under any variety of pseudonyms to produce 15000+ edits in a few months, and who is a very good collaborative contributor. I would be happy to discover such a person (I like authors and doctors, am a big fan of ice hockey, especially the European style of it, and always like seeing that good collaborative contributions are being made here) and hope you will help me to do so. Thanks for being friendly, Jwrosenzweig 18:39, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
You are most welcome, Jwrosenzweig. I will no longer make exceptions of my issues per characters rule, admit to anything, sign everything, even send you published medical articles in Romanian as proof of my celebrity and genius :-) I am a local hero, you know, and Google will acknowledge me real soon now. One day I will make a *.jpg out of screen shots on my log to show you the numbers of page edits if you still care. In the mean time I'm busy increasing just that as my personal record, as you can see. How's the state of Washington faring for ice ? Thank you so much for being friendly :-) Sincerely, irismeister 19:04, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC)
PS. Funny thing - I just checked and it now reads 16512 total pages edited since cutoff . Will investigate. irismeister 19:11, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC)
- I am sorry to hear you won't be providing any of this info -- I think it would be interesting to read some of your published work. I don't know that you are a local hero, but if you're acknowledged soon by Google, good for you. Do act in a matter befitting a genius celebrity in the future, though, by not being unkind to others? I'd be open to the screenshot, but where will it be displayed? And did you read my explanation? I think you're just confused by the watchlist -- don't feel badly. I was confused by it too -- I think the developers ought to insert the clarifying text "X number of pages edited by anyone since cutoff" to emphasize that it's just a count of how many edits sitewide by anyone have happened in the timeframe you're watching. If you go to your contributions, though, you'll see that the numbers you've been claiming are not accurate. But yes, if you have screenshots, I'll look at them. Thank you for inquiring as to the weather here--it's actually pleasant today, around 12 degrees Celsius or so, with no ice. How is the weather in Romania today? Glad to know I'm "friendly", Jwrosenzweig 19:20, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I am in Paris, France right now, Jwrosenzweig, and spring is one month away. A cold humid breeze as usual, from Calais, but otherwise good air because of the strike of air controllers. NO LARGE AIRPLANES BUZZING US ! Perhaps you are right about user stats afterall. I am including the most recent view from Paris for you to judge : ) Sincerely, irismeister 21:58, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC) 
PS. I counted major edits in two languages for the last three months, and you were right, there are only 1700 - one order of magnitude lower. Thank you for pointing it out ! It's good to have friends :-) Sincerely, irismeister 22:13, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC)
[edit] Declaration of bias towards the benevolent dictator
Jim, who was involved so unceremoniously and personally in banning me for continuous, non-discreet and indiscreet multiples of 24 hours, talked to my lawyer who contacted him directly. I must declare, in bona fide that my personal esteem for our benevolent dictator increased as a first consequence. Jim honored the spirit of truth (as most benevolent dictators would do from time to time, he he :). No longer not recommended ! Therefore, my declaration of bias follows here:
- I hate dictators!
- Jim and I need not apply!
- I would still reject all dictators who accept me as a benevolent dictator :-)
[edit] Ending Communication
Based on what I perceive to be an implied legal threat at Talk:Iridology, I will not be talking to you any longer. If you leave messages at my user talk page, be aware that I will delete them unread; likewise, any attempts to contact me through other means will not be responded to. I would appreciate it if you respected my decision to do this: your implied threat of legal action leaves me no choice in this matter. Jwrosenzweig 01:52, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I respect your own choice, while I appreciate your unwillingness to remove libel, slander and other fellow editors' base insults a bit less. Nevertheless, please restore your own talk page as per Wiki policies, or else consider reporting yourself for a symbolic 24-hour ban. Hope this helps. Sincerely, irismeister 01:58, 2004 Feb 20 (UTC)
[edit] Reply to my talk page
Irismeister - this is a reply to the comment you left on my talk page. In it, I assume you are referring to my recent protection of Iridology. I protected it because Jwrosenzweig requested protection on the requests for protection page, and I did so without regard to who edited it last. Honestly, I know nothing about you or Iridology, I protected it because someone else wanted it. It will be unprotected when either (a) you guys come to an agrement on the talk page, or (b) discussion peters out and the article lies dormant. If the articles does go dormant (no comments in the talk page about a week or more), ask me and I'll happily unprotect it. →Raul654 02:24, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC) PS: Regarding the cat - it's not mine. Another user posted it, and then quit Wiki. I rescued it when it came up on the VFD. Happy editing.
[edit] IRC
I have moved this from Wikipedia talk:IRC channels as it appears to have nothing to do with the Wikipedia IRC channels. Perhaps you meant to post it somewhere else? Anyway, I couldn't see where it supposed to go, but clearly it wasn't supposed to go there. Angela. 06:42, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC)
---- Edit wars II and (poposed) III. How to avoid them ?
It seems that phase two of the iridology page edit wars will rage again
The declaration of war reads like this:My question is how to bring calm and serenity in David and Theresa, how to protect information, how to encourage them to always resort to documents in the talk page and (gasp) for myself - how to ignore the police alert attitude as put in evidence above outside the village pump? TIA - irismeister 19:55, 2004 Feb 19 (UTC)
- Well, folks, it look like irismeister is confident he's bored everybody to tears with a gazillion tiny legitimate edits, and is back to turning this article into an advocacy piece through a gazillion POV edits. It'll soon be time to get to work ... again. DavidWBrooks 16:27, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- I knew it wouldn't be long! I'm on dial up at the moment which is why I've been a bit quiet. I'm back on it tomorrow though. i notice that he is trying to inser the iris-ward link again. To irismeister - I will not allow you to insert bullshit into the page. I will not allow you to insert links to iris-ward. I don't care how much you harrass me, i don't care how much you follow me around wikipedia. I don't care how many compliants you make about me. Wikipedia will survive the likes of you - I will see to it that it does.theresa knott 19:20, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Stuff cut by Jwrosenzweig from his own talk page
[edit] Censored by sysop
Excuse me ? Is iridology a PaperChase item, let alone a Medical Subject Heading ? Is any MD practicing iridology met anywhere with something else than pre-digested nonsense like the one you exhort right here ? Any suggestion will be highly appreciated. In the mean time please refrain from smear, character assasination, personal attacks and ad hominem ! In order to judge an expert, you need perhaps be an expert yourself. This is the essence of peer in the peer review. In the mean time please refrain your confessions to a more appropriate place than my talk page. And how about your own tone in an attempt to belittle or intimidate using red herrings ? Thank you very much in advance ! Why have you not addressed the insults I got on the iridology pages from the very moment I started to talk quality issues ? It would have been much more interesting if you had offered me an example here of a more conciliatory and open-minded tone and attitude in your interactions with others . And a word of excuse: since I intend to continue with my 17,000 + page edits so far, and being quite busy with it, from now on, and for you and Theresa only, I am available for discussions of medical issues, not characters. Sincerely, irismeister 01:18, 2004 Feb 18 (UTC)
Ain't seen nothin' yet :-) Interested in follow-ups ? If you still think laughing is good for health, please contemplate the sequel here Sincerely, irismeister 22:31, 2004 Feb 19 (UTC)
[edit] Oups, Rosie, three fundamental inconsistencies today only : )
- My friend jwr, - *you just stated above precisely here that quote-I don't believe Raul has ever protected a page for me before, nor I him-unquote. Now please be so kind to higlight for my reading pleasure and apparently for ever increasing depth in understanding of human mysteries (not character :-) how's that with what you did in Raul's page ? - *you say there was an edit war in the iridology page as grounds for your request of page protection somewhere between Raul's broad shoulder and the poor compressed tomcat-in-the-glass. Clearly, it wasn't AFAIAC, there will never be or perhaps I am just - as you didn't care to dismiss - only a color-blind quack:-) - *you said you did read policies and Netiquette and now will check back to see. If you really do that, then please understand I can also read English :-) While editors admit when they concede a point, so that it is easier for us to discuss issues WHAT on EARTH and under Horatio's skies are you talking about when you smear me, call me a lier, and feed me so many personal questions that you don't let me talk issues let alone explain issues to you ? - You may also count to three as it pleases your personality, the quack is back :-) And having been trained into your tactics (strategy is too big a word for that) he is here to stay, ask Jim, and trust me :-)
- I take this opportunity if you allow me, to apply a kiss on both of Plautus' cheeks ;O) - Sincerely more belonging to Plautus, but yours, too - irismeister 00:31, 2004 Feb 20 (UTC)
[edit] Defiance of Wiki Rules, Contempt of Court, for the record
- :Iris, if you'd bothered to read the discussion you elbowed your way into, you'd see that my statement referred to the fact that other than today with Iridology Raul and I had not protected pages for each other, to my recollection. I have never called you a quack, and am not doing so now. I have no idea what you mean by color-blind. Why do you insist on insulting yourself by implying I made statements that I never did? Are you so convinced that those who disagree with you are brutish enemies that when they fail to insult you, you imagine things they might have said? If you think that wasn't an edit war, you obviously define "edit war" differently than this community has. Your third point is so convoluted that I do not understand the allegation you are making. I believe that my statements, which I have always endeavored to keep factual and aimed at demanding truthful, clear statements from you, are in perfect compliance with Wikiquette, except for the rare instance in which I realized I had misspoken and apologized. I have asked Jim about you, as you suggested. Jwrosenzweig 00:39, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC) - ---- - My dear genuine friend,
- My left elbow is delicately resting on a 17th century mahogany desk, and my right elbow is on a piece of furniture which the French keep calling un Davenport for obscure reasons. But this is Paris, a place where mysteries, from the catacombs to the general iris model of the Hausmannian city are legion. Should not delve myself into such magnificent mystery, let alone a conversation you had with Plautus, related par voie de consequence to our entertaining and so re-socializing commerce this evening. Protecting or not protecting, defense or accusation, who cares, really ? I don't. As one of my favorite authors, so unjustly pointed to as a leftist by the neocon cabal once wrote, as long as real issues are not allowed to enter into debate, what's the purpose in a debate ?. No, I am not convinced at all that those who disagree with me are brutish enemies and the proof is your kind consideration of my case for quackery and misrepresentations. I much enjoy the moment when they fail to insult me. I imagine things they might have said, like com'on, iris, you are not a nutcase, you are not a quack, you are not semiliterate, you are not quote-full-of-s*** all the time-unquote. I believe that even if you didn't say those nasty things yourself, having seen them with certified magnanimity, uttered as they were by a clique of our fellow editors, you'd care to just once, you know, just once make a new, more solid tradtion of no-name-calling. I imagine them kind, and considerate, just like you are, and as such, I enjoy your refreshing company, much unlike some other fellow editors who can only articulate four-letter words like STOP (referring to my editing.) Although I am much worse than you think and in the silence of the night, unseen, I often break the necks of flies, hunt croaches and run after mice, I have no habit of insulting myself. Also I believe that someone who observes a wrong being done and remains silent about it is as guilty as those who committed those wrong deeds themselves. Well, that's about all I wanted to say. It's 02:21 in the morning here in Paris, and with your permission I will go hunting for other rodents than the optical brand (of a well known corporation) still firmly resting in the palm of my left hand. If you wish, tomorrow I will explain color, color blindness and other interesting medical issues for you, as related to iridology, alternative medicine and our budding spring relationship, so far from the winter of our discontent. Who knows, if you stop asking me silly questions and say for the record I'm not a quack I might even talk ice hockey or send a reprint of my latest article :-) Sincerely, irismeister 01:27, 2004 Feb 20 (UTC)
[edit] More Edit Wars and Chasing Away Competence
[edit] Life in Wiki as usual :)
Now the next step is to ban me again for insulting editors by correcting their English, their grammar, their orthographical skills and their underlying thoughts, to say nothing about errors of information, content, fact and even disinformation. Frustrations vented elsewhere (anyway the following was cut and I am under renewed ban menace if I keep referring to viruses as something different from microbes in the disinfectant article and to theory as something different from belief.
[edit] Reflexology Edit War
"Belief" and "theory" are pretty much the same, in this context. I'm going to unprotect both the article and the talk page now. Then I'm going to start counting reversions. First one to go over 3 reverts per day gets a temporary ban. Agreed? --Uncle Ed 15:49, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Agreed :O) I mean in theory, although my belief is that you'll soon ban me :) Competence has a poor press these days... Sincerely, but respectfully dedicated to quality no matter what - and passionately the same,irismeister 15:54, 2004 Feb 20 (UTC)
More: The following was censored with the ban menace:
Removed POV, wikified, fixed grammar, improved English, typo spotted and fixed : O
This stub is incredibly puerile. It reads like a DIY manual, has no encyclopedic value, uses the second person, keeps referring to Hong Kong for obscure reasons or POVs, and the thinking behind it could be tremendously improved. Also the English used is less than basic and sometimes inintelligible. I suggest a complete re-writing by a competent editor. I must excuse myself for temporarily retiring from the list for these reasons: Volunteering for real authoring and more than grammar and typos, and having been chased away by some of the editors of this stub, I see no reason why I should write it myself only to be insulted for my efforts. Indeed, judging by the case histories of the medical, iridology, alternative medicine and conventional medicine articles, complete with the respective talk pages, I will no doubt face isolation, systematic sanitary reversals, systematic slander, libel, insults, page protections and the usual periodic pattern of bans again. Edit wars are artificially produced by a clique of fellow Wikipedians (aka the Gang of Four Sysops, which I will not name, since they know who they are, anyway - TFDR) most probably with hidden agendas against complementary and alternative medicine, and interested in withholding and supressing information in Wiki. They have the attitude of thought police, not of editors, and they use co-ordinated tactics of insult, derogative names, name-calling. Sometimes they attempt to proceed to character assasinations and go as low as losing time for fingerprinting and other detective work not worthy of the generous Wiki and Internet ideals and the standards of decency anywhere - in each community deserving this name. The bottomline: In the interest of quality and with respect for the time and energy of anybody editing Wiki, I will only check the accuracy of information and only at the first level - the basic nuts and bolts of English language, and the spelling of the medical articles for the time being. With apologies for all my friends and supporters who would perhaps expect more decent work from the holder of two medical doctorates, continuously insulted by less lucky and more frustrated colleagues venting their anger and anxiety in epthets such as nutcase, full of s***, illiterate, lier, I remain, Sincerely, the same - irismeister 15:23, 2004 Feb 20 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Plautus satire
Irismeister - while you might have a legitimate complaint against others, please do not post them to other users' RFC pages. There are other venues for it. Just to let you know, I did do some minor formatting on it to make it 'blend' into the area better, rather than cutting the straw poll in half. →Raul654 16:33, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] OK. Where should I complain about fellow editors w/being ignored ?
I understand, →Raul654. The only question I have here is where should I complain about fellow editors w/being ignored ? I will only maintain my 2 cents as relevant to contributions of Plautus satire to iridology, if you allow me. Incidentally, I hope that kitten will be finally NOT drowned in beer :-) Happy editing - irismeister 16:45, 2004 Feb 21 (UTC)
- I suggest you read Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. →Raul654 16:48, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)
OK, perfect ! Save that pint and happy editing :-) - irismeister 16:54, 2004 Feb 21 (UTC)
Just for information, the edit you made at 19:01, 24 Feb 2004 was your 956th contribution to Wikipedia, including minor edits. All of your edits at the time of writing this comment can be found on this page. Regards - MykReeve 19:31, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi Irismeister, I just moved your comment on Wikipedia:Matter of Irismeister evidence down to the bottom - we've created a section there for you to put all the things in your favor. You will see that there are records of some insults which were directed at you there already. :)
And about edits to iridolody before Febraury 10th... you were actually looking at the edits on Talk:Iridolody - that (fourth) page of talk was only created on the 10th February. For previous Iridology talk, see these pages (these all have their own page histories):
- Talk:Iridology/archive1 (3 Apr 2003 - 22 Jan 2004)
- Talk:Iridology/archive2 (22 Jan 2004 - 25 Jan 2004)
- Talk:Iridology/archive3 (25 Jan 2004 - 10 Feb 2004)
And for the edits to Iridology itself, see here:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Iridology&action=history
- you will see that this goes all the way back to 22:26, 6 May 2002
You are aware that you can click on any of the dates on those page histories to see what articles looked like on that date? Also, the cur link with show you the differences between that version and the current version, and last will compare that page with the previous version. fabiform | talk 19:08, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi again, you just said "the evidence was destroyed by the authors" - if you're talking about comments that anyone has made on wikipedia, they have not been destroyed. You will find them all in the old versions of pages, even if the comments have been blanked from the current versions. If you have problems doing what I was talking about above, I'll explain it more clearly. fabiform | talk 19:16, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi Irismeister. I'm sorry if it was disconcerting to see your comments moved down to the section we created for your defense. It's just that if you leave the comments up in with the evidence against you, it may be confusing for the arbitrators.... they may miss it all together. People wont even be able to tell that it's you speaking since none of the pieces of evidence have been signed by the contributors. Is there a particular reason why you don't like putting all the evidence in your favor in one place? We could try to work out another system that would be clear if you prefer? :) fabiform | talk 19:25, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)
During the legal procedures, I will only address the perpetrators of persitent, aggravated libel and slander against me in the presence of trusted third parties, complete with proofs of removal of time stamps and signatures - which are widely recognized as the golden standard of gathering and maintaining evidence in a trusted repository. - irismeister 19:41, 2004 Feb 26 (UTC)
[edit] Talk:Iridology archives
In response to your comment on the arbitration evidence page about being unable to access Talk:Iridology archives prior to February 10, 2004, they appear to have been moved, along with their edit histories to Talk:Iridology/archive1, Talk:Iridology/archive2, and Talk:Iridology/archive3 (with archive1 being the oldest set). --Delirium 19:52, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)
- After posting this, I see this was already mentioned above; my apologies for the redundant information. --Delirium 19:53, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)
No problem, Delirium. - irismeister 20:19, 2004 Feb 26 (UTC)
I would like to make a point: In the process of altering evidence of my case, as much as 90% of it is lost and the rest of the 10% was misinserted on purpose. This is a process of destroying evidence reminiscent of how DNA and some RNA viruses work: They insert their own genome into the host genome, using reverse transcriptase so they become obligatory parasytes. Viajero allegedly "moved" [[1]] the section of Theresa and Iris "conflict" to /Irismeister as stated here - [2] (where is that ?). The landing page was really "found" to be this one -[3] "only 90% thinner". I had to manually retrieve the history section, verify it, and reinsert it from the Conflict page history, as it should have been done by Viajero in the first place. With such evident disinformation and deletion of evidence, one could not oversate that clearly, a trusted third party repository, complete with time stamps MUST assist legal solutions. Such legal solutions concerning very weird Wiki "editing" habits include the outstanding case: It appears that all those who persistently libel me or only help the perpetrators of libel now alter evidence in panick and a spurious hope that truth will be not known - irismeister 20:19, 2004 Feb 26 (UTC)
In case you haven't read already: Wikipedia talk:Matter of Irismeister
Oh yeah, I did - and found it boring, my red friend : O) There is no better help than that you get from false accusers. Please sign anonymous insertions, including the above, and happy editing : O) - irismeister 00:22, 2004 Feb 27 (UTC)
[edit] A Rare Friendly Advice
Irismeister, you asked for some friendly advice...here it goes. you have a reputation of being hot-headed, uncompromising, stubborn and insulting. Wikipedia depends on a supportive community of trust and camaraderie. Regarding your current arbitration, my advice is to throw yourself at their mercy. Admit where you were wrong. Explain how you will change. Then, change. Begin to practice these behaviors:
- Make others feel welcome. Support their efforts. Pat them on the back. Make them smile. Be friendly - especially to those you've had conflicts with.
- Turn the other cheek. If insulted or baited, do not respond by insulting or baiting. If an edit occurs that you don't like, react calmly and maturely. Discuss issues civilly in the TALK arena.
- Give praise to others and their hard work. Especially to those you don't get along with.
- Forgive. And let that forgiveness remain. Let it sink in.
With time, under these behavior conditions, a difference will blossom. Kingturtle 00:27, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Good friends always give the best advice. I follow yours. Thank you ! Happy editing - irismeister 10:30, 2004 Mar 12 (UTC)
[edit] Mail from Mr-Natural-Health
An article never should contain a phrase like "non-point-of-view concept and a consensus-seeking proposal," in my opinion. Further, it is my understanding that you have been banned from this place for 10 days, as of yesterday. -- John Gohde, aka Mr-Natural-Health 14:43, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Not to my knowledge! Not yet :O) Methinks we are on the same side of the barricade, despite my being a MD. For one thing, I am not an AM denier ! Happy editing - irismeister 14:49, 2004 Mar 16 (UTC)
-
- If you are an MD, then I am the President of the United States. -- John Gohde, aka Mr-Natural-Health 03:55, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
-
-
- Good Morning, Mr President :O) - irismeister 09:40, 2004 Mar 17 (UTC)
-
Hi. I'm not sure if you're around at the moment, but on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Irismeister you said in respect to insults directed to you that there was a "full list with links available upon request". This is me requesting you for such a list with links. I'm asking for the benefit of the arbitration case. If you want to respond, please do so either here or on my talk page. If you don't respond, don't worry, it won't affect the course of arbitration. --Camembert
[edit] Thank you, Camembert!
So the smear campaign list is useless here. OK, but thanks for asking. Groucho Marx had put it better in the pre-Wiki interglaciation era - Should I accept being a member of a club who accepts "me" as a member ? :O) Yours, sincerely - irismeister 14:39, 2004 Mar 22 (UTC)
- You don't provide links to "diffs", particular versions of talk pages, or even which page these comments took place on, so we can't accept that as evidence. Please be specific. Martin 00:01, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
-
- Martin, thank you for the message. I'm afraid I'm quite unsure about the quality of the game you call "being specific". My lawyers have all the details and specifications, trust them. They point to some off-Wiki email archives, etc. IMNSHO repeatedly calling a doctor a lier in writing for obscure reasons is enough for most jurisdictions to accept cases of libel. Nothing you care to discuss, accomodate or only ask here can change the hard facts - already proven beyond all reasonable doubts by the crystal clear record of Wiki archives and carved in stone by trusted third parties (in cases of rampant deletetionism). A final simple statement will hopefully explain my thinking:
- Martin, thank you for the message. I'm afraid I'm quite unsure about the quality of the game you call "being specific". My lawyers have all the details and specifications, trust them. They point to some off-Wiki email archives, etc. IMNSHO repeatedly calling a doctor a lier in writing for obscure reasons is enough for most jurisdictions to accept cases of libel. Nothing you care to discuss, accomodate or only ask here can change the hard facts - already proven beyond all reasonable doubts by the crystal clear record of Wiki archives and carved in stone by trusted third parties (in cases of rampant deletetionism). A final simple statement will hopefully explain my thinking:
Wiki, tested by me in a three month intensive assignment is as such, a piratocracy - it takes everything from idealistic, competent authors, and dilutes their knowledge under a doctrine called NPOV whereby authoring is diabolized, and editing is promoted as panacea. The system of collective editing, neutralizing, and indeed castrating content is a caricature of the "adversarial" system. In its extreme instantiation which only seeks confrontation, imperialistic "promotion" of only one point of view, and posturing, which the United States of America exported, the system is something that someone wants to see everywhere. Thank the Lord, we are not there yet, nor will we ever be.
Different views exist also on the system that wants to relativize all points of view except one - the very one which favors the interests of imperialistic "promotion". Indeed, if we persist in this, we are only in sordid, poor dignification of piratocracy. By any other name, this will smell the same. We've seen that before. People put in jail for fictitious reasons, proven not guilty and then obliged to pay for room and board. We see this every day - diabolization of victims. Not interesting. Not recommended. I am sick and tired of the system that asks me to "prove" I was mistreated, when this is an eye-catching matter of fact for everybody who doesn't look the other way.
If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it. "Baby" is not an insult, "lier" is. Collegial shoulder patting is not harassment, calling fellows names is. While privileged admins indulge in censoring their own talk pages - a famous ground for banning - nobody is banned or asked to put excuses in writing. While non-privileged poor authors bring cutting-edge news everybody cries wolf and repeated banning ensues. You may get the full picture from running searches in Wiki archives. I will not lose my time for something that is so clearly in evidence and understood.
Proving that Wiki has double standards is not my best way to lose time. This is a lawyer's job. I am a medical doctor who writes Wiki articles, period. If you don't like me, or what I write, remember you don't have to like "opponents", you only have to like truth. Last, and certainly not the least, truth is not a point of view. Happy editing - irismeister 18:17, 2004 Mar 23 (UTC) :O)
- Thank you for your feedback. It is a matter of regret that you do not wish to spend the time to be specific in your claims - I will have to do the best I can with the information at my disposal.
- If you disagree with the "NPOV" policy so strongly, I would suggest that you contribute to some other encyclopedia or other educational text that does not have such a policy. There are many alternatives to Wikipedia out there. Martin 20:50, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- You got it all wrong, Martin. I disagree with Pharisees. If we REALLY follow NPOV, we MUST let ALL viewpoints compete without deleting them without reading/listening/putting them in writing as if they didn't exist. NPOV is REAL post hoc balance, not neutering and ante hoc castration (so that no mean, median an mode could possibly exist.) The golden, harmonic and time-honored MEAN can ONLY form with ALL POVs stated as such. You NEED to look in the right direction (not always in the laser "guide" aka YOUR own tubular vision), you need to listen, not to diabolize/ban/ask for "evidence" of mistreatment when this is absolutely evident to the point of catching anyone's eye. BTW - you may find it useful to read even the evidence in Wiki by running searches with "lier" and "quack". Even outside my lawyer's dossiers there is plenty for anyone to see and judge. Happy editing quand même - irismeister 08:59, 2004 Mar 24 (UTC)
[edit] More evidence for insult, harassment and libel from a trusted party
- Admission of tort, libel and harassment [4]
"I admit I said that he either needed to admit he didn't mean his 2nd statement, or else admit that he had been a liar in making his original statement. My patience was wearing thin, I admit. You may judge whether I have acted wrongly."
- You have eroded all the good will left in my body. Any more crap out of you, and I will "take steps". Better listen up good, because I'm one the oldest "old hands" around here and I know how to work the system. Don't get me riled up against you, or I will force you out!! (A word to the wise is sufficient.) [5] Hmm, Well, well, well !
If a senior sysop/admin cannot control his anger in writing, on the very page reserved for review of admin actions, what better proof we need ?
Am I the only one to think that Wikipedia is a place where people are banned on the basis of insults, libel and tyrannic movements of bile and phlegm, not of reason and higher neural functions ? - irismeister 18:43, 2004 Mar 30 (UTC)
"Irismeister is a quack and a nutcase. There! (Ah, that felt good to say!)
- BTW, the definition of libel is simple, and comes directly from the Wiki trusted, NPOV source:
-
-
-
- Libel and slander are two forms of defamation (or defamation of character), which is the tort of making a false statement of fact that injures someone's reputation. When the communication is in writing, it is termed "libel". If made via the spoken word, the correct term is "slander". Both acts share a common legal history, although they may be treated differently under modern legal systems. The statement need not be derogatory in itself to be actionable, as where it constitutes invasion of privacy or portrays the person in a false light, as by calling a prominent Democrat a Republican.
-
-
[edit] Kind message from new friends
anytime! Slrubenstein
I agree with some of the complaints you have written. Don't let the cabal oppress you. Lirath Q. Pynnor
[edit] Calling free speech trolling and censoring everything but censors :O)
Then revert it if you wish. Tannin
- On what purpose ? It's much more useful for both of us to see you revert it yourself, being ashame for calling free speech trolling and for censoring everything but censors :O) - Happy editing :O) - irismeister 09:21, 2004 Mar 31 (UTC)
[edit] Arbitration decision
You are banned from editing the Wikipedia for ten days, per the decision by the Arbitration Committee (see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Irismeister). You are also prohibited from editing Iridology indefinitely. You are instructed to desist making personal attacks and engaging in harassment, and reminded to discuss matters in accordance with good Wikipedia:Wikiquette. --Camembert
- To add to Lee's official note above, the arbitration committee also specifically instructs you to desist from attempting to intimidate other users by making unfounded legal threats or by any other means. Martin 23:14, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Back home
I'm back now, and will keep with ten days of censorship!
[edit] New Friends against Tyranny
I am somewhat familiar with your work in Romania. I will try to convince them that they, and not you, are the trolls. Lirath Q. Pynnor + + Thank you dearly! - irismeister 22:55, 2004 Apr 16 (UTC) + Just wandering - who censored my talk page in the mean time ?
Lir, and John, it's good for you to organize! I'm having my own network of friends off-wiki who monitor the Wiki thought police quite closely, using trusted third parties. Since everything is put into writing, we know who is who and who does what to whom. Chomsky once wrote about denial of reality, denial of justice and the inevitable decay and bitter downfall of the American sense of truth and honor. Let us prove Chomsky wrong! Sincerely, irismeister 22:35, 2004 Apr 16 (UTC)
[edit] Dor
Irismeister, unde eşti? Te tot aşteptăm pe Wikipedia română, şi nu apari! Ce s-a întâmplat. Sper că nu te-a supărat Gutza, că nu e el băiat rău numa că face tot timpul pe deşteptu şi pe corectu. Da nu se gândeşte că ai scris articole cu greu şi că ai muncit la ele. Te aşteptăm să vii. BTW, nu ştiu dacă ai auzit, este pe cale să fie lansată wikipedia în armâneashti (aromână), o avampremieră a paginii principale se află aici [[7]]. M-am gândit că ţi-ar plăcea poate. Cu multă bunăvoinţă, Danutz!
Dragii mei, suntem aici în resbel pentru principii de drept. Vin imediat acas-acas :O) - irismeister 17:36, 2004 Apr 18 (UTC)
[edit] You've got mail!
Welcome back! Out of boredom I started this project on alternative medicine. It should really infuriate RK!!! It is a manageable task. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. And, I plan on beating the science people at their own game. I am not sure what exactly you meant at the project talk page. I guess by now you have figured out that somebody moved your conventional medicine article? -- John Gohde, aka Mr-Natural-Health 03:05, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
-
- Hi John! Sooo good to hear from intelligent people. Such a refreshing company after Martin and Theresa and dissertations about tampons and my "offensive" statements of fact! Never mind CM moved out of harm's way - it was as predictable as my next impending ban :°) I like what you do in the project. Count on me from now on ! - irismeister 17:42, 2004 Apr 18 (UTC)
- Welcome back, Irismeister! Predictably, all h*ll broke loose in your absence. heidimo 16:05, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
-
- O) Heidimo, what you wrote about RK was top - to the point and perfect. When you heal by harmony, harmony becomes a way of life - and natural defense. Keep up the excellent, refreshing attitude! - irismeister 17:42, 2004 Apr 18 (UTC)
- Thanks! Would you like to see my new little joke? Click on my name and look at the last item on my page. heidimo 03:18, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
[edit] rm'd from Talk:Dan Waniek
It strikes my sense of humor that a project like Wiki is let at the hand of thought police officers. Competence is so badly needed. For instance in AM, John simply has no equal in this project. He had lost 90% of his precious time in discussions with Theresa, who is a thought police underintendent. John's comments count double and triple in AM discussions. Yet Wiki not only grabs his time, but adds the insult of censorship over the injury of pirating his contributions. Incidentally, problem-seekers (trouble makers), thought police corporals or edutainment sysops need not apply. While Wiki is still free (at least in appearance) you are kindly advised and invited to get an education before you contribute. Either you comply with the competence rule or Wiki will become a project in special English, for instructing people in drawing with Word and inserting tampons using anatomical drawings. As you see, I'm back! And wisdom is always in finding an alternative :O) irismeister 21:35, 2004 Apr 16 (UTC)
- So where's the competence in this word salad above, irisward? Did you actually have to say anything relevant about the Waniek article?--192.94.73.5 02:47, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Irismeister, please refrain from making personal attacks, as per the AC ruling. Having sly little digs at me and fabiform is offensive.It still counts as a personal attack even if most people do not understand it. It is enough the "we" understand it. theresa knott 11:24, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- I baaag your pp'aan, Ma'am? Since when people like you, unwilling and perhaps unable to tell the difference between four and five, make the rules and reminders here ? A kind reminder that the tone of your address and the way you continue to mix things up here (as they are in your head no doubt) are in violation of the arbitration committee's ruling against you. They have long since crossed all red lines of decency, and common sense. Please go back to buckets and spades, help fab with some encyclopedic dissertation about the fine aspects of tampons, complete with encyclopedical drawings, and by grace, let at least this page be thought police free ! - Stay away from this page, will you ! - irismeister 17:34, 2004 Apr 18 (UTC)
[edit] Arbitration reminder
(wearing hat as arbitrator) A reminder. You wrote:
- Theresa, who is a thought police underintendent
The arbitration committee has formally instructed you to refrain from personal attacks such as this one. I suggest that you do so. Martin 00:40, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- This is a statement of fact, Martin. Theresa has no competence whatsoever. We all know that. She is only employed by Wiki for what she does best - thought police. And I suggest you study the difference between facts and interpretations thereof. People, dear Martin, should not repeat as parrots what you would like to hear from them. The arbitration committee only arbitrated and I was banned for ten days, period. Now the ban is over. People are just people, Martin, not parrots in stupid games which you think you play by enforcing only the rules you are able to understand - because they are so stupid and biased only you could "suggest" them to anyone. Now ban me for stating facts ! You will only do me a favor :O) In the mean time, please refrain from using the language of police in adressing a fellow editor. I have double your age and triple your experience, to say nothing about the sense of humor, which you completely and absolutely lack - and possibly miss :O) So here is one last collegial reminder, man to man: Look into the log of your eyes before talking about straws in other people's eyes. Thank you ! - irismeister 17:26, 2004 Apr 18 (UTC)
(wearing hat as arbitrator) The arbitration committee ruling included a ban of ten days. However, there is no "period" there. The ban is indeed over, but the arbitration ruling also included other elements, which perhaps you have overlooked. To remind you:
- You are reminded to discuss matters in accordance with good Wikiquette, and are instructed to not engage in personal attacks or harrassment.
- You are prohibited from editing the article Iridology for an indefinite period.
- You are instructed to desist from attempting to intimidate other users by making unfounded legal threats or by any other means.
These Decrees have equal standing to your ten day ban from Wikipedia, and are endorsed by Jimbo Wales, who owns the server we are discussing this matter on. If you cannot abide by these Decrees, then you should leave Wikipedia.
Note that the ruling states that you are not to engage in personal attacks, period. This is irrespective of whether those personal attacks may or may not be "fact" or "opinion" or "interpretation". I hope that all this clarifies the situation for you. Martin 18:01, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Talking to your hat: give me a break, will you ! Talking to whatever that hat hides : I hope that "that" thing hears what I just told that hat. I could as well have spoken to my car - at least that thing listens. Period ! - irismeister 18:24, 2004 Apr 18 (UTC)
[edit] Arbitration sticker - post-it!
Remember ALL of the arbitration ? Please stick it ALL on the perpetrators' own talk page not here! And leave this space breathe freely, will you ? This is a free thinker's talk page. Thought police agents, communicators, hat-wearers, salesforce - this is a PRIVATE talk page. Do your job, and get out of here, will you ? - irismeister 18:38, 2004 Apr 18 (UTC)
[edit] Wikiproject on Alternative Medicine
Thank you for deciding to participate in the Wikiproject on Alternative Medicine.
I have been scrabbling to get this project operational. I actually only thought of the idea of starting this Wikiproject a few days ago. And, I believe that I have got most of the hard work done behind me. There is no need to fine tune all of these project pages for spelling, typos, and grammar checks until we have decided that we have got something that we are not going to make major changes in.
From my experiences with Pascal programming on PC's, I prefer to write in outline style with all the details hidden on separate project pages. This writing style should keep the main project page clean, lean, and simple to understand. As a result, we should have quite a few project pages and corresponding talk pages by the time that this project is operational.
To simplify the communication process, I have established a special project announcement page at: Announcements for CAM
This is the only project page that you really need to keep on your watchlist.
Rather than correspond individually to each participant, from now on, I will simply update this one project announcement page. The respective talk page will be used for private announcements, such as requests for participating in VfDs, Quickpolls, and Comments. It is way too time consuming to try to communicate individually with everybody in this place. So, this concept should make it quite easy to notify a large block of people about important CAM issues. So, pass the word along to your friends. The more people we get to add our announcement page to their watchlist, the more effective this announcement page concept will become.
Speaking of the talk pages, conversing on our project talk pages are actually one level more removed from the general public than conversations are on article talk pages. So, conversing on these project talk pages are in some ways more private than the usual talk page.
The next step will be the fun part of designing our Wikiproject article templates. We will need a bunch of them.
The basic strategy for this Wikiproject on Alternative Medicine will be as follows.
We will give the science people what they want. Therefore, they will have nothing to attack or complain about. The number of Edit Wars on the CAM pages will thus decrease, the Quality of CAM articles will increase, and the CAM articles will become more stable and less controversial. We will be providing new article ideas for the regular editors to work on in the areas of Famous People in CAM and the History of CAM. The CAM editors will be presented with ideas for new articles in the area of the philosophy of CAM. Further, the public coming in to read articles on CAM will have an easy to use Alternative Menu Interface on each article to navigate them through the areas of CAM that they are interested in. All of the above, should actually make Jimbo Wales very happy (as in better quality articles, more stable articles, more articles, and better user satisfaction from easier navigation).
Thus, if RK and any of his ilk, should decide to continue with their baseless attacks we will be in a very strong position to make them look really bad in public. Their utility to Jimbo Wales will vaporize literally overnight. And, they will no longer be able to justify their actions to anybody. Thus, with little effort on our part the current state of constant edit wars in CAM should disappear within a very short time period.
I, myself, have written several 100% original articles on CAM, including one on the philosophy of CAM, which have been virtually ignored by editors like RK. None of these articles of mine have been attacked, presumably because they are already following most of our Standards of Quality. So, since I wrote these 3 articles myself we will start out by fixing up these articles. I wrote them, so nobody will complain if we change them.
I happen to run an accredited web site on Health. So, I am thinking in terms of using a similar system as that used by the HONcode people in Switzerland. That is, we will keep a database of all the CAM articles we have fixed up, with dates of reviews, a possible numerical score, and maybe comments. This would be tied into the CAM menu interface that we will place in each CAM article fixed up by this project.
Next, we will fix up the articles worked on by Heidimo and then those by you. Finally, we will fix up the Alternative medicine article. By the end of this breaking-in process, we would have worked out all of the bugs in our Wikiproject and we will be ready to fix up all the other CAM articles written by other editors. By this time many other editors, would also have come across our templates advertising our Wikiproject and, thus, the number of participants in our project should grow dramatically.
So, I would expect that by the end of Summer the outcomes of our Wikiproject will be quite impressive, indeed. And, potentially a lot better than any other Wikiproject run by the science people.
For, the time being I would advise that you simply read through the various project pages and ask questions and make comments or suggestions on what we should change.
Remember, that the next announcement from me will be posted on our new Announcement project page. -- John Gohde, aka Mr-Natural-Health 03:42, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
OK! Sounds very promising and I agree on all aspects. I have a two week commitment to a medical problem, but then I will be dedicated soul and body to your project. You do things right, John! It's a welcome refreshement after these months in wiki - and also a reward of patience and prayers answered :O)- irismeister 08:50, 2004 Apr 19 (UTC)
[edit] fair play
My wife is a health professional, and has heard of iridology. She tells me that it is not accepted, nor rejected, but rather is on the edges of medicine, as is herbalism, chiropracty, accupressure, etc... So that is one peice of information about my views. Another is that I have followed some of your troubles, and the fuss regarding Dr Waniek, and I think the objections are mainly personal, persons you have not developed a good dialogue with (perhaps due to the language barrior) allowing their dislike of you, as well as their dislike of iridology, to affect their judgements in these matters. A great number of users here are skeptic's, and that causes trouble for those who write about "fringe" sciences/medicines. I suggest you try very, very hard to be polite, as establishing a good rapport with the "regulars" (like theresa knott, or jrosenzweig, for example) is an important part of being able to produce a quality article, rather than wasting our time fighting over misunderstandings and insults. Good day, good luck, and God bless. Sam Spade 19:39, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Welcome Back Irismeister
I am glad to see your back from that stupid ban, happy editing Iris! Comrade Nick
- Also, Iris I think you should become sysop you are such a good editor! Comrade Nick
-
- and Iris check this out, if you agree be a "member" say "yes" on my talk page Comrade Nick
[edit] Request for comment
Irismeister, please comment on the Talk: Traditional Chinese medicine page. Thanks! heidimo 03:23, 1 May 2004 (UTC)
- The need has passed, don't worry about it. Welcome back, again! heidimo 02:14, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Re messages
Your welcome Dr. Dan, I feel you do desevere honorable mention in Red Faction, because you are a great contibutior to this project and you fought hard against the cabal. (take the rose of resistance as a symbol of our struggle @)----^--) thank you comrade--Comrade Nick 02:07, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Does iridology work?
- "Does iridology work? ... This search strategy resulted in 77 publications on the subject of iridology. ... All of the uncontrolled studies and several of the unmasked experiments suggested that iridology was a valid diagnostic tool. ... In conclusion, few controlled studies with masked evaluation of diagnostic validity have been published. None have found any benefit from iridology."
- Ernst E. Iridology: not useful and potentially harmful. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000 Jan;118(1):120-1. PMID: 10636425
I got Free access to the full text of this study online by way of a link in another research paper. But, when I put it in the iridology article access was restricted for who knows what reason.
At any rate this paper stated point blank: All of the uncontrolled studies and several of the unmasked experiments suggested that iridology was a valid diagnostic tool. Therefore, it could be argued that the negative findings are entirely due to the built-in biases of the medical reviewers.
This is the best that I can do for the iridology article. In addition, the abstract on this study also states point blank: More than 1,000 licensed naturopathic physicians practice in the United States, and iridology is being described as "the most valuable diagnostic tool of the naturopath." Ergo, iridology is more legal in the US than some would like the public to believe.
Glad to see that you made it back. -- John Gohde 20:28, 15 May 2004 (UTC)
Glad to read you John! I had some business of the utmost importance to attend, and I'm only here for a few moments. Glad you are so knowledgeable about these iris-related materials. Look, my main problem with iridology is that it is not correctly DEFINED. We worked in a few teams for 20 years trying hard to change that misleading tag into "Iridial studies". Fortunately, we had important results. These come into at least three classes:
- the iris stroma changes in time, during disease and during health events;
- stromal changes are measurable, mainly in terms of overall transparency;
- light transmitted by the iris stroma and epithelia reaches peripheral retina.
There are important practical consequences for these findings:
- there are no disease tags in an iris image, nor can they be;
- iris "scan" is money wasted. Databases need refreshment every two years !!!
- "iridology" would better define its scope and methods.
Overall, there is much to be done! If the iris image can be analyzed and correlated with health and disease events, including for monitoring and predictive purposes, then these studies are yet to be performed and published! We only demonstrated a statistically significant heart disease image pattern compared to healthy controls. We only demonstrated better-than-random, quantifiable trans-iridial biological light effects. And we did not succeed in evangelizing either "iridologists" or biometricians and ophthalmologists in the mysteries of the iris image shift and drift. You can look here for the basics and here for some heated anti-biometry arguments, complete with a presentation of micro-changes in iris patterns, beautifully demonstrated. The pages take for ever to load but maybe it's worth waiting in terms of net results. Incidentally, John, just wait until my next ban... Yours - irismeister 11:09, 2004 May 16 (UTC) :O)
[edit] Comrade
Your welcome Comrade Dr. Dan. If you have any problems with sysops, or if your involved in an edit war contact me on my talk page, I back you up 110%! Just please don't leave wiki, because you are a great wiki-freedom fighter! @)---^------ Comrade Nick.
I won't, comrade, I won't. Seems that we are built of a strong fiber. Some fiber! Burn it, bend it, drown it in dirt - it just won't break or catch cold. Moreover, it multiplies during the night and makes stronger muscles every day. I simply have to attend a meeting abroad for ten days, but will ALWAYS come back. You may count on me! And you too, should you have the slightest hint of bad Wikicop behavior, or sysop police mentality, just drop one word to your comrade :O) - irismeister 11:28, 2004 May 17 (UTC)
They're Old English runes. I think I am more surprised that you have a suitable font installed! ᚣᚷᚷᛞᚱᚫᛋᛁᛚ 23:04, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
Everybody should have them ! - yours, irismeister 06:39, 2004 May 18 (UTC)
[edit] from User:talk:Jwrosenzweig
Dear Irismeister:
I have moved your comment here from Jwrosenzweig's page, since it seemed out of place there. You may wish to clarify what you mean when you say "Facing ... just me, face to face, like he will, soon," (below) since some members of the Wikipedia community may misinterpret it as some sort of physical threat.
Best wishes,
UninvitedCompany 02:26, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
while the perpetrator's pampered as he hides away!!! For the record, the perpetrator wrote that I was quote - an obscure Romanian hockey player - unquote and thus not qualified to edit iridology. Facing the consequences of his acts, or just me, face to face, like he will, soon, Jwrosenzweig asks for an arbitration and takes a Wikivacation considering himself beyond criticism. And you talk here about blaming the victims and removing "violations" - Why are you Wiki administrators so addicted to double standards ? - irismeister 20:20, 2004 May 19 (UTC)
-
- I don't see how that's a personal attack. Saying that you are not qualified to edit is incorrect--and merely incorrect, since this is a wiki after all--but you have made similar comments on the iridology talk page wrt being 'qualified', quite aside from the sexist and patronising comments you made against Theresa Knott. -- Jim Regan 21:04, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
Are you in all you minds, Jim Regan ? Who's sexist - me who asks at least an ersatz of sense from Mrs TK 'FIFTEEN times in a row, or she, who answers my AM questions offering streap tease, leather boots and shivers of anticipation ? - You must be into double standards or need some training into separating the wheat from the chaff. Come on iridology:talk page before my next impending ban for a change. You'll be well entertained by Theresa :O) irismeister 21:47, 2004 May 19 (UTC)
- I did read the page, tiresome as it was. All I saw was you reading innuendo into comments I interpreted otherwise. -- Jim Regan 22:43, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
-
- How about you theresa knott taking a good long holiday as another good editor :O) - irismeister 20:52, 2004 May 19 (UTC)
[edit] Your signature is requested!
I spent a half day of my life in developing my request for comment on Theresa_Knott. The rules for these things have been changed. My request has been re-written by somebody else and I can hardly recognize it.
So, I am requesting that you certify it by clicking here [8] . You know enough about what happen to post on the talk pages. Therefore, you can certify it. You need to sign under Users certifying the basis for this dispute. You are a witness to what happened. You know something about it. That is all the new rules require. -- John Gohde 17:27, 20 May 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Arbitration
Arbitration in your case has been accepted. Please submit evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Irismeister 2/Evidence. --mav 03:01, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
Leave me alone - I have no time to lose in "defending" myself for bogus arbitrations, meant only to keep my away from doing serious work in Wiki. Whenever a pair of creative, idealistic medical writers appears, a pack of wolves "arbitrates" their work, which by the way is free, not paid and volunteer, and might as well stop bluntly (if this weren't the purpose of arbitration harassment in the first place) - irismeister 23:55, 2004 Jun 1 (UTC)
I've put in an arbitration request re: Mr-Natural-Health. You may or may not wish to add to it. - David Gerard 11:10, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC) See above - irismeister 23:55, 2004 Jun 1 (UTC)
I write this here because I do not wish to disturb your thoughtful comments below. You are again instructed to abstain from personal attacks and other breaches of Wikipedia etiquette, and placed on personal attack parole. Sysops are authorised to apply 24 temp-bans on you, at their discretion, if you breach this instruction.
-
- Those sysops are also and hereby authorized to kiss some of my body parts good bye :O) The names of those parts are not made public but relax, all - they are used for sitting, if the environment is more confortable than Wiki :O) - irismeister 16:22, 2004 Jul 17 (UTC)
-
-
- Special note for David who edited my talk page, and banned me for writing into my talk page: Thank you for your commendable, honest, altruistic offer to be the first such sysop. You opened the list of volunteers :O) - irismeister 19:37, 2004 Jul 19 (UTC)
-
On a personal note, I am sorry that it has come to this, and that you have left with such a negative view of Wikipedia, and of our "neutral point of view". I hope you will find another place to contribute your knowledge to - perhaps one with a better policy regards bias? Best wishes. Martin 15:04, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
-
- Best wishes my dear RedDice :O) It almost brought a tear in my well trained eyes not to be able to help you with my own well documented bias any more :O) Bias, let it be understood, is leaning more and more on the good part of bright things :O) Not towards the stupidity of collective nonsense by design, but towards active ignorant arrogants to whom, sadly, I find no more time to administer sincere admonishments. So bye for now :O) Remember, now, that you are left on your own, try to behave yourselves while the baby sitter is out :O) irismeister 16:22, 2004 Jul 17 (UTC).
[edit] Hello there
Hi Irismeister. You might care to archive some of your 107 KB talk page.
- PS A real pleasure for me too, in doing business with you! Did you hear we two were a "bunch of fanatics" :O). The Wikipolice is feeling the heavy breath of more lambs near their thick shewolf's necks, methinks... (from here)
I'm pleased you're reading my work, but I'm less pleased that you're playing puns on my name, making it sound like I call you a "bunch of fanatics" or that I'm a member of the Wikipolice.
I have never dealt with you before, and hope you'll be polite enough to apologise. My contact with John and Heidi has been quite pleasant, and I intend to remain nice to you. But: Wikipedia:No personal attacks, please. JFW | T@lk 17:32, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Apologies? Hmm, since you want it as badly as you do, you have it :O) Incidentally, did you know what "apo" and "logos" stand for? As for archiving, no use - I quit Wiki saying you all thanks and bye for now - to leave it clean for wikipolice to walk at night, nice and smooothly :O) - irismeister 13:58, 2004 Jun 11 (UTC)
I have not taken the time to review the etymology of apology before requesting it from you. They are nevertheless accepted. JFW | T@lk 10:46, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Hey Iris
Hello Iris it's me Nick please vote for me for sysop here. [9]Comrade Nick
- Comrade Nick is one of the best admins already!!! He must only be CONFIRMED. irismeister 19:06, 2004 Jun 4 (UTC)
-
- The wiki-police shut down the votes. However I'm going to wait a month, before I request for adminship again. I really must thank you for your vote iris :0) Comrade Nick @)--^---.
[edit] Wikipolice
I can't comment on why the article was deleted in the first place but I just deleted your edit because it wasn't an article and thus registered as a speedy deletion. please bring up your concerns at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion where there is currently a discussion going on around this article. -- Graham :) | Talk 19:29, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- In fact, having just checked the deleted edit history of the article it was deleted because it was moved to Wikipedia:Wikipolice and cross-namespace redirects are not generally allowed. -- Graham :) | Talk 19:31, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
-
- Check again :O) The Wikipedia:Wikipolice pages disappeared from the Wiki, WITHOUT A VOTE and NOT from the real Web archives! Such is the way for Wikipolice to provide hard evidence that Wiki is a police state :O) irismeister 19:33, 2004 Jul 19 (UTC)
[edit] Hi again
E-mail me anytime Iris, wilhelm_vonriche AT yahoo.com Comrade Nick @)---^---
[edit] Notice to the Arbitration Committee
Go do your police on other pages! This is the page of a free thinker - and you are offtopic! Go away! irismeister 20:41, 2004 Jun 13 (UTC)
WITH ENEMIES SUCH AS THESE, WHO NEEDS HELP ? :O)
Beware ! Tyranny
Wikipedia is a police state moronocracy. This means the tyranny of morons, dressed up and sexed, so that they might fool the base of a pyramid scheme. They also look like pirates, but they are not up to the task, and therefore unworthy of the qualification of “ piratocratic oligarchy ”. I thought it was possible to contribute quality material to Wiki. Sadly, six month later, I found out it's not. Why did that happen ? I tried to test the following hypothesis : Wiki is no better than its police. The method was a six month immersive assignment. The material was a honeypot. The results are here : I caught a few Wikipolice flies and a huge male bee. The implications are tremendous : Basically, here is how Wikipedia works : Say you want to contribute. You volunteer your time and energy to document, author and edit whatever you happen to know best. This is the bright part of your Wiki career, and it takes less than 10 % of your time. 90 % of it is spent in dealing with “ contributors ” who are supposed to help you. Now what they do is first of all to patronize you. They gently massage your spine so that it will bend easily. Then they rub it until you are “ accepted ”, meaning you are in for the trouble of reading a ton of canned stuff, aka “ Wikirules, Wikilove, Wikipolice ” and other rubbish.
The name of the game
Wikirules may be nonsense for you, but they basically make sure for them that they will rob everything they can from what you do, that you can't say a word that does not please their ears, and that you co operate into submission in the best Stockholm syndrome tradition. They also empower Wiki thought police officers aka sysops and administrators who do nothing but prevent you from working right. Don't like it ? Hang on, there is more to come : Here is how they do it : They harass you, they intimidate, insult, use brute force against you, they come in pairs, like a pack of wolves in pecking order, and delete in a second, without warning, what you took months to build into something solid. There are countless examples. There is no use for you to lose time with it unless you have to, like I did, during my assignment. You may wonder, like me, what are the deeper causes of such a great project becoming a nightmare for the newcomers, which make up for the best part in the base of their oligarchic pyramid.
Pyramids
For Wiki is nothing but an old pyramid scheme sexed up. Wikipedia is only a giant with soft legs. It used to grow as long as newcomers were fooled into contributing for nothing. For a time, like any inert, mindless, directionless body, it will keep adding momentum. But like any other old pyramid scheme, it will crush onto its base once people discover how it works, or only the moronocracy in it.
The "Famous Fallacy" of NPOV
I have to warn you against the Famous Fallacy. This refers to the NPOV (non-point of view) editing thing. What is NPOV editing? It's castration and annihilation of volunteer contributors, at worst, and fiction at best. In the nitty-gritty, day-to-day “ co-operative authoring ” NPOV is wreaking havoc. NPOV is a hammer in the hands of barbarians. NPOV is the opium of the Wikipolice. With it, as a slogan, any moron behaving like a savage foot in huge boots shoots everybody in their leg. NPOV is the school bus finessing its parking movements inside the glass menagerie of fine arts. NPOV is also talk pages outweighting articles by a factor of one hundred to one. Everybody in talk pages is talking nonsense. Nobody listens. Cacophonies are aggravated by edit wars, people are insulting and shouting at each other, and lose 90% of their time in such nonsense called “ co-operative authoring ”. Why is this happening ? Are contributors enjoying the SM game? I don't think so. Of course this happens, because me, like any other human being, would like to be listened to, pampered as an author, or at the very least not insulted in nine out of every ten written words. And also because me, like yourself, and many other people, are the worst characters that existed :O)
More catholic than the Pope
But there is more : How come there is a “ NPOV ” bias to start with ? Well, my answer is very simple : There is no such thing as a NPOV. Indeeed, any rational human being would immediately react to the humongous, fictitious NPOV fraud ! For everything is a point of view, including the so called NPOV. Even God has a point of view. So are these morons dressed in Wikipolice fatigues acting like pirates let loose in a virtual world which is way beyond sense ? They seem so. However, they are not simply mindless brutes. They really believe there is such thing as a NPOV. So they deserve the lot of all those indulging in hybris : They are served with the very fiction they create, until they become saturated, sick and tired. Look behind you ! From the Athenian tyrants through the Inquisition and the French Revolution, all fictitious “ more catholic than the Pope ” players lost their war by the very rules of their fiction. Kronus ends up eating his own offspring. Until one of them becomes so indigest that the physiological process of throwing up the extra mouthful of your own stuff kills digestion.
How could it work?
Wiki could work if Wikipolice knew everything, could de everything, and if everybody would mean well. Clearly, egos, extra hidden agendas, and the facts accumulated so far show that the third condition is wishful thinking. And I'm not even sure about the first two. With wolves of the Steppes nobody would make up a good body of guardians for the flock of Wiki would be authors. Such wolves can produce nothing more than they understand : Misery, assasination, and theft. Plus the insult of hypocrisy over the injury of murder. That is, they will only cry wolf with chunks of lamb inside their big mouths.
Conclusion
Whoever is tolerant with the wolf is very cruel to the lamb. Authorship is both the soul and the flesh of all public manifestation. The bones make up for the rest of whatever moral fibers still exist. All of these could never be annihilated, no matter what “ overwhelming force ” is used, for this is the essence of things. We all have something to say because we are not the mindless stats which the governing bodies think we are. Their authority, by the way, is only derived from the consent of the governed. This was democracy, not a privileged, oligarchic caste ruling, not a thought police, and surely anything but tyranny. Once America was founded on the founding fathers' generous principles, things were very promising. With technoanimism and reliance on “ overwhelming force ” (of which Wikipedia is a “ cultural ” by product), the inevitable devolution and bitter fall of a society losing touch with sense, humanity, care, and reality, is here to stay. Sadly, Wikipedia has become a symptom of this rapid decay. Let's hope it will not take the time and contaminate the minds of generous, authentic and candid would-be new contributors.
[edit] Reversions
I am reverting everything you are editing not because of the content, but because you are only allowed to edit certain portions of Wikipedia, and those areas you are editing are not those portions. RickK 19:23, Jul 26, 2004 (UTC)
Is a kind invitation for all Wikipolice force and Wikicensors here to kiss select body parts of mine considered personal attack ? If so, please kiss the body parts used for sitting in any person of your choice, provided that person volunteers for such an action from such big mouths :O) - Sincerely, irismeister 12:46, 2004 Aug 16 (UTC)
Passed with one votes in favour, and none opposed so far :O).
[edit] Relevance of policies
[edit] What is the relevance of the "no personal attack" policy?
Any arbitrator, sysop, and editor might consider whatever does not suit her personal humor, particular day in the monthly cycle, and so on, as a personal attack. Moreover, whatever some say is a personal attack others say it's only attention, care and indeed Wikilove. Who says what is what and what is not what in Wiki? Take my case study for instance: I had a six month assignment in commiting quality medical articles for Wiki. Well, six months later, half of my contributions have been deleted without a trace by people crying wolf while severly insulting, libelling and slandering me (by the expert opinion of my lawyers). In one instance, Theresa and Jwros felt personally attacked by me calling them "baby" while I should not consider them calling me a "nutcase" as a personal attack (by the enlightened ukaz of arbitrators). In a word, people, why don't you wake up and come to your senses. And while you are doing so, and in the process of arousal, why don't you ask yourself quies custodiet ipsos custodes. In conclusion, here I offer a minitext in order for you to help answering me with at least some sensible NON-PERSONAL, principial, relevant and creative stuff:
[edit] Positive diagnosis of censorship on Wiki and proposed cure for Wikicensors
One of my previous questions here has been deleted, en bloc, complete with evidence. More than HALF of my text contributed to Wiki has been deleted without a trace under the "personal attack" banner, doctrine, fallacy or whatever. So here is this interesting case for disfunctioning in my Wikicensors, which perhaps merits some qualified medical attention. Quoting from a famous textbook treating censorship as an institutional disease:
- There is a serious problem of "institutional impotence" for many bodies -- with many others operating under prison-like constraints, if only conceptually. Of course some form of "conceptual masturbation" -- perhaps characteristic of many conferences -- may provide a short-term satisfactory substitute. Or, as Dave Barry humorously indicates: "To the rest of America, making policy is a form of institutional masturbation; to Washingtonians, it is productive work. They love to make policy."
- At the other extreme, a rare form of erectile dysfunction is the permanent erection (priapism). By comparison, the concern has been expressed, notably by Cynthia Mahmood, that US policies with regard to terrorism could lead to a world where the United States is in a permanent state of "military arousal", perpetually fighting an ill-defined and elusive enemy. This could then be suitably named as "priapic warfare". Given US military admiration for Roman imperial endeavours, this suggests a line for further research (see Amly Richlin. The Garden of Priapus: Sexuality and Aggression in Roman Humour, 1983)
- Non-sexually related spontaneous erections happen often, especially in young men. These may perhaps be compared to the momentary enthusiastic responses of the young to social challenges. Premature ejaculation is often confused with erectile dysfunction. It is a condition in which the entire process of arousal, erection, ejaculation, and climax occur very rapidly, leaving the partner unsatisfied. This might usefully be compared to premature human responses to the challenges of the planet.
Rest assured, my office is still open for more individual medical and psychological attention for the diseased censors here. Sincerely, irismeister 11:33, 2004 Aug 19 (UTC)
RE: Proposed institutional treatment for Wikicensors who see personal attacks wherever they can't argue using aristotelic or boolean logic :O)
-end-of item-
[edit] A question
Irismeister, i look at your user page, and all i see is hatred twards wikipedia.
if you hate it so much here, then why cant you just leave
[edit] An answer to the anonymous question above
- This Wikipedia is a fascist society in the making. Everything which simply does not fall inside the circle drawn by the party line is harassed, supressed, and censored. CUT - edited out on spurious reasons like "personal attack". Who can really attack police, could you tell me?
I do not hate anybody and anything. Since you ask, I really wonder how could you say such a thing, after you see the number of my articles and sleep time lost for an idealistic cause which is no longer Wiki's.
However, I want my opinions to be read and freely accessed wherever possible.
I want my medical information to be left in place, not removed because of hidden corporate agendas.
I see there simply is no way, because of how Wikipedia is organized - favoring censorship and helping those hidden fascist agendas to be fulfilled.
Kindly remember that people die right as you read this, only because of censorship of truth and promotion of lies.
All of this is not collateral damage, is simply disingenious pharisean hypocrisy.
All of which brings us all back to square one:
I will continue to express my opinions, exert my right to free speech, and deplore rampant fascism while it is still in the making.
Alas, the very moment I care to commit my time for editing, I see Wikipolice coming in and telling me what I ought to think, and how should I write according to THEIR opinion.
About the opinion of Wikipolice: This, of course, by decree, ukaz and "democratic" tyranny, is anything but opinion. They are ueberenchen, you see. They are an alien species, and whatever they do is right, and there is NO WAY they could be chacked. See ?
Therefore, this is saeva necessitas.
This is hubris!
This is fascism! Quies custodiet ipsos custodes?
so, my fellow editor wandering why I do not leave, here is why:
I understand I HAVE to leave contributing quality articles for someone less qualified than myself, and more prone to be silenced.
So, now you see how Wiki works ?
By candid, misplaced questions such as yours !
This is fascism, by definition - hidden agendas promoted to the "quality" of state policies by a coterie of Wikipolice thinking they could promote and sponsor THEIR terrorism like a sort of hidden benefit or something.
Stealing people's time, and people's work for free is wrong.
And stealing people's competent contributions of quality by taking advantage of their genuinely good will, only to cut their right to free speach is wrong.
Using a band of inarticulate, brute force, pack-of-wolf-ish "editors" editing nothing but OUTAGE is Wikipedic fascism.
I have a list of HUNDREDS of contributors to Wikipedia leaving it because of its inherent fascism. These people have been callously and cowardly libelled, dmeared, bitterly censored and disgusted. I will quote their names in the huge legal action I have prepared against the Wikipedic deniers of free speech!
This must change, or we will again reap the bitter crops grown out of this seed of discord, callousness and lies, as we did in Iraq!
As for your questions, in the limit of my for ever shrinking free time, I will answer them if I consider them to be genuine. Yours, by the way, was not a genuine question in my opinion. But you could do better, and so would I! - irismeister 20:20, 2004 Oct 9 (UTC)
[edit] Occupation of Palestine
Irismeister hi. The VfD of Occupation of Palestine has terminated long ago. The only reason the page doesn't have a proper "archival" notice is that nobody could agree on how it ended. Anyways the page lives, so please direct all your edits there. I reverted you without checking what you wrote. Thanks. Gadykozma 19:56, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Thank YOU! I already did so. Here it is just in case:
[edit] KEEP ARTICLE, END OCCUPATION AND COME INTO SENSES
irismeister 18:39, 2004 Oct 11 (UTC) (first we occupy, then we delete article on occupation, then what?) When the occupation will end (it's really a matter of when) we'll see about this occupation of Palestine page being deleted. In the mean time, what's the point in deleting a page on occupation, when occupation continues? Are we believing our own lies? Poor us!
[edit] Romania Pics
Actually I took the pictures of the martryii myself on a trip to Romania (Tulcea) last summer. I work with a group that is trying to help the orphans that the government is moving around and mistreating as they try to pretend to the EU that they don't have any more orphans. One example is that they are sending oprhans back to parents who have actually been dead for years and then abandoning them in those villages without anything. Thanks for your comments Pschemp 00:28, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Wow, Pschemp ! And they say there is no Providence :O)
[edit] Heartful Thanks
- ... And also your clean tidy pages, articles, and even driving licence are appreciated :O). We certainly need more of your candid, true editors like you! This was the ORIGINAL Wiki spirit, and with you I see it's not agonizing. Many thanks - irismeister 18:54, 2004 Oct 10 (UTC)'
Thank you; I'm glad someone appreciates these things. Michael Hardy 19:31, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Michael, Can you imagine? The archives of the Church mentioned the four, they were remembered in our calendar and all - and now they were found !!! And you took the picture !!!
BTW - Patriarchate is much better, indeed the only correct word :O)
[edit] in response to your email...
Dan, I am not currently active in the everyday community of Wikipedia. I do not know your recent history. I am, however, familiar with your ancient history - in which I found you to be confrontational and passive-aggressive.
Please fill me in on recent developments. How have you changed? How were the recent bans not warranted?
Sincerely, Kingturtle 21:52, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Dear Kingturtle,
Thank you for your nice letter. I'm OK, but due to medical activities and some new books I HAVE to give to the publisher there is no time left for Wiki. No, I didn't change - but that doesn't mean I'm hostile, only stubborn :O) Let me thank you again - for you were the first admin to welcome me, the one who encouraged me to be patient and... the last to help :O) Now I see so many portraits and new stuff you write that I am encouraged even more. I'll come back in Wiki with a different approach, letting opponents do their job and me doing mine. Never mind my bans - they are serial but actually help me more than real edits which are censored anyway. Of course they were abusive, but I don't really care much. We'll all do what we have and it's so so much peace in my mind! Take care, and keep up the great Wiki job, Kingturtle. Each time I think there aren't many idealists left I look at your user page :O) Sincerely, Dan
[edit] Legal threats
Dan, although I'm half-expecting a sarcastic response, I removed your legal threat aimed at TK and whoever from your userpage. If these people really annoy you, legal threats may make the situation worse rather than better. JFW | T@lk 16:23, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Note that I have blocked Irismeister for 6 hours for this threat. The threat is somewhat implicit, and more subtle than some, or I would have gone longer. Pakaran. 16:26, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
-
- I'm not sure about compliance with the Blocking policy. Irismeister is allowed to edit his own userpage; the threats were removed almost instantly. Threats are ArbComm stuff, not outright blocking stuff, IMHARUO (In My Humble And Relatively Uninformed Opinion). As the block is "only" 6h, I will not unblock Irismeister. JFW | T@lk 18:24, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Good! Gentlemen, this settles the issue! Just for once, and at least for the moment, I'll be non-observant :O) A personal word of thanks to Jfdwolff: thank you for the message on my talk page! Since I'm currently banned, I can't thank you in public (that was in my mail, during the ban). Besides, and anyway, I'm too busy spiralling out of the never ending incremental use of force against my freedom of speech. I can feel police panic in the air as good old admins lose their cool and commit such sordid unwikiness. It's denervation-hypersensitivity rebound phenomenon all over :O) This is not a legal, repeat not a legal... "treat" :O) - irismeister 19:04, 2004 Oct 19 (UTC)
- I never protected your user page, or edited it. I did ban you (arguably incorrectly, but following unwritten precedents) for making legal threats. Another sysop reverted them. Pakaran. 20:40, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- O) That's OK, JFW! It still worked, as if by miracle :O) Carol Davilla remained in history for many things. But my favorite is his famous quote on two of his colleague surgeons, Athanase (Demosthene) and Dan (yet another Dan). Davilla said: Rather than being operated by Athanase, I prefer to be killed by Dan. Dan operated. It was a success. Athanase became the military hospital director! In the future, if someone edits my user page, and especially bans me, I'd rather have you. Moreover, there is price of a pint of beer for the one who offers me my 100th ban :O) Privileges include brand choice, and back-of-the-envelope dedication for my upcoming book. It's a big surprise! No offense, JD :O) Hippocratic (brotherly) nonhypocritical thanks! - irismeister 12:00, 2004 Oct 20 (UTC)
[edit] Never fear, ^sban^s Dan is here. Hear yee, hear :°O)
Protected you didn't, I did :O) Edited you did, and too bad :O) Ban - (yawn) I'm used to it by now (my Christian name is Dan (it's something about Judgement, in Hebrew) :O) Unwritten precedents (hmmm? - watta ?). Legal treats ? A pint of beer :O) As for threats - gimme a break, brother, threats exists only for those who have something to fear - and thus are always threatened by that very fear to the point of living at the gun point and indulging in shooting sprees as collateral damage. - irismeister 21:00, 2004 Oct 19 (UTC)
[edit] Your userpage is protected.
Now you can stop harassing me. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 22:23, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
No, you start :O) Here:
It's unprotected, look :O)
[edit] Current requests
None so far
Yes, there are two now, unless you don't want them to be :O) - irismeister 22:04, 2004 Oct 19 (UTC)
01. (new request - please protect this page against modification by yourself, dear Neutrality :O ) 02. (previous request - please protect the page on User: irismeister here - [10] against vandalism by admin Pakaran. TIA - irismeister 19:32, 2004 Oct 19 (UTC)
Also please
01. either remove 'none so far' since there are TWO;
02. or do not wipe my request.
Why do you keep deleting them, anyway, dear Neutrality ?
[edit] TK - stop promoting porn in Wiki until you desensitize decency
- That is a bareface lie irismiester. You were not at the London wikimeet, even though you said you would be. I know this because I was there along with plenty of other people. What's more you are Dan Waniek. It's another lie when you say you are not. Theresa
Dear TK - if you insist in calling me a lier in public, and you can't prove this in a Court of Law, consider yourself warned - you lose more than time. This is not a threat. This is the 57th time I explain to you that you should behave like a grown up - responsible that is. Your public actions have public consequences. Call a medical doctor a lier in public and you make yourself your own legal file for libel. It's as you wish - I only have to place a phone call to my lawyer who has everything prepared, as you know. Let me explain that again: Justice is never a threat, no matter what your Wikipolice links and crash course taught you. They are wrong. You have no legal defense, TK. And you are liable. They will let you down for they have no money to give away for your fancy talk, painted tits, porn promotion, and erratic behavior including public offers to wear lather boots for me and I will not disclose your best yet :O) Fear not, though: I won't ask money from you, but I will put a decision of a Court of Law on your big untrained mouth! Fear of Justice is irrational. Fear not. I don't want money for you to pay for your bad behavior and insults, the misery you made to me and a few dozen others. But trust me - justice needs to be done, and I will not die before I'll have it in your case. This is a matter of principle. You could have stopped this - but you didn't because you think too high of yourself to formulate careful excuses, as needed. And as a friendly explanation, which I think might help you: Only people having something to hide, or already considering themselves guilty as you are, fear justice. If justice were a threat, would Judges be terrorists? No! Justice is a necessity. Without it, a naughty untrained girl like you can claim to be a a prima donna. Clearly, you aren't. You never edited a decent article in your life. Nil. Nada! You destroyed a few hundred, and you chased away several dozen decent, considerate, creative and lovely editors (the list of which I posess). Now bear with me that you are naughty and despite my repeated requests, you continue to be more than naughty. Ban me if you like for "personal attack" - you'll get your pint of coffe as promised, but you'll have to put up or shut up! Sorry about not letting you play with your favorite porn toy here in Wiki - but as long as Wiki is not Bomis, I won't let you delight in public porn. Your nerve and disgraceful disrespect for a fellow editor are enough. Enough is enough, TK - irismeister 00:49, 2004 Oct 21 (UTC)
[edit] On Real Issues and Wiki Diversion
You say that the image on Clitoris is pornography. How do you define that term? Previously, people opposing the image have defined it in very strange and POV ways. — David Remahl 11:35, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Use Bomipedia, as per Bomis guidelines :O) David, you know what porn is. What you don't know is what MDs like myself know - that the clitoris is not shown in its external avatara. 98% of this organ is only visible at dissection. Read the Australian studies, read Medline, Read Ovid and think for yourself, not out of the Wikipedian thoughtpolice box. The article you quote is only a diversion, to help us all lose time away from the real issues. Lancet editor Richard Horton said: "Democratic imperialism has led to more deaths, not fewer. This political and military failure continues to cause scores of casualties among non-combatants.". Do you see anywhere in Wikipedia a discussion on that real issue ? Meanwhile, the discussion on the clitoridial illustrative trivia has gone from trivia to grotesque. Happy illustration vote :O) - irismeister 11:47, 2004 Oct 29 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Irismeister 3 closed
[edit] Findings of Fact
1) Irismeister has violated the parole set on him in the last arbitration case dozens of times, and as a result has been given multiple temp-blocks.
3) Irismeister has knowingly and repeatedly violated ArbCom rulings:
- 4.2.2 Editing restrictions
- A. Editing by User:Irismeister of the article Iridology is prohibited for an indefinite period. order from Irismeister 1, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Iridology&action=history page history of Iridology (4 edits in violation)
- C. User:Irismeister is instructed to desist from attempting to intimidate other users by making unfounded legal threats or by any other means. order from Irismeister 1, example diff
[edit] Remedies
1) The personal attack parole on Irismeister is altered, such that if he makes further personal attacks or legal threats in the future, admins may ban him for a period of up to one month, or up to one year in more extreme cases.
7) Irismeister is banned for one year from editing Wikipedia.
Another admin will shortly issue the block. --mav 01:42, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- I just want to say that I find the severity of the ruling to be excessive, and I think it's too bad, Dan. I don't know what you did to warrant being blocked for a whole year. Maybe we'll all have each other banned before long. Everyking 04:03, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Unverified images
Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:
- Image:Iris.eye.205px-HIST-EQUA.jpg
I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 22:16, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.
Also Image:1408-LEGE-APDI-0001.jpg has no source or copyright license information. Thanks, Oliver Lineham 23:28, 2004 Dec 19 (UTC)
[edit] Block
You have been blocked for this threat, which violates the arbitration restrictions you are currently under. I'm about to log this block on WP:AN where the length will be discussed. You can edit your talk page while blocked. Dmcdevit·t 07:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- I have extended your block to an expiry time of "indefinite." I will remove the block when you formally retract all of your legal threats. ➥the Epopt 16:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- No. ➥the Epopt 17:39, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Yes. Oh yes! And you'll all see, when time will come. A whole select group
-
-
of "administrators" who indulged in libel and censorship, thinking themselves to be above the law continue to provide evidence. They will think better next time :-) In the mean time, again, if justice were a "threat", let me wonder: then what would lack of justice be for those who delete user pages?
irismeister 13:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC) Keep up the great work, and do yourself a favor by reversing my user page without deleting evidence, and by not vandalizing my user page again :-)
[edit] Support Group of Users formed
We are a group of users apalled by the censorship and "manners" of Wikipedia. We have all started a legal action on our own behalf and on our organization's behalf, against censorship in Wikipedia. The first step is to publicize all his actions and edits as wide as possible. Pending legal procedures you are advised not to censor his user page any more, irrespective of your "irresponsible" policies. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.255.145.157 (talk • contribs).
