Jump to content

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/GrazingshipIV

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As GrazingshipIV has removed the comment and Sam Spade has agreed on my Talk page (Danny), I hereby declare this dispute over and done with. The page has been archived. Time to move on with your lives. Danny 21:12, 15 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This page was opened 23:43, 11 May 2004 (UTC) and was certified as of 19:22, 13 May 2004.

Statement of the dispute

[edit]

This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct.

  1. This user has repeatedly attacked User:Sam Spade. He has preserved and "protected" a mentioning of Sam Spade as being a "racist" on his page, then deleted Sam Spade's comments regarding it.
  2. Apparant inability to respect or comprehend NPOV policy
  3. He has declined mediation in regards to this matter with Sam
  4. This user has behaved contentiously in the recent past, requiring temporary banning
  • Evidence of disputed behavior (provide diffs and links):
  1. Edit summary on User:Lord Kenneth (history): (Sam Spade other than being a racist troll-has a conflict of interest in reverting this page-thus there must be a policy consesus among legitimate users before the "wall of shame" can be taken down)
  2. From his talk page: -Sam is not African-american, he has sympathetic views towards white supremacy
  3. From Talk:Racialism which is the intention of white separatists like Spade and Vogel
  4. Edits to this page made by the user in question.
  5. Request for Admin Dispute described by many as Trolling
  1. Similar to above
  • Applicable policies:
  1. Wikipedia:No personal attacks
  2. NPOV
  • Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute (provide diffs and links):
  1. Mediation declined
  2. Request for respect of policy declined
  3. Request for an end to harassment by outside user declined
  • Users certifying the basis for this dispute (sign with ~~~~):
  1. Sam Spade 04:01, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  2. This is a "blanket certification", i.e. I will certify this regardless of any changes made by Sam Spade, unless stated otherwise. ugen64 19:22, May 13, 2004 (UTC)
  • Other users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

Response

[edit]

This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete.

Unfortunetly Spade, (formally Jack Lynch) does have or at least has had racist views, as can be demonstrated on my talk page as he used a racial slur. Spade has also repeatedly defended others who espouse racists views such as Paul Vogel. He also vandalized and trolled my user page on many occasions which one can see from viewing the history. In the lordkeeneth situation Spade was trying to remove something from someone's user page without permission because it involved him.

I will continue to battle racist trolls like Sam Spade as I battled Vogel to keep wikipedia free from racist POV. In short, I will call a spade a spade.

Spade has made little to no attempt at compromise in fact he has engaged in a vandalism campaign against me. The best solution to the conflict would be if he would stop trolling my talk page.

I would find no reason to call sam racist if he stopped promoting a racist agenda, which has continually particularly when he tries to apologize or engage in disinformation campaigns as he has done in white seperatism and racialism.

I also would like to add that charge #2 is ridiculous. Please review my edit history to see that I can very well comprehend the NPOV policy.


Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

  1. GrazingshipIV 04:30, May 12, 2004 (UTC)
  2. Although I believe that Grazingship has behaved childishly in this, I think that his intentions are good and beneficial to Wikipedia, and that no censure of any sort is appropriate. Snowspinner 05:13, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  3. 172 05:43, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  4. I don't know if Sam is racist but he does seem to spend a lot of time picking fights, holding grudges and acting out on them. Much of the problem seems to be that Sam made a comment on GrazingshipIV's talk page which he regrets and would like to disappear and Grazingship refuses to remove Sam's comment from his page. Sam shouldn't be removing material from someone else's talk page. That seems to be a more serious offence than anything Sam's accusing GrazingshipIV of having done. I suggest that both users refrain from commenting on each other's talk pages. However, I have to add that I reject the argument that someone who defends a racist must be a racist himself as a guilt by association fallacy. This is an especially dubious contention given the poor quality of Sam's advocacy on behalf of Vogel, a performance that would have had him disbarred had he actually been a lawyer. AndyL 06:17, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Bumm13 06:19, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Node 17:39, 12 May 2004 (UTC) - Agree with Snowspinner, AndyL.[reply]
  7. Comrade Nick @)----^-, I Happen to think Grazingship is a good contibutor.

Outside view

[edit]

This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.

  1. I think this dispute is most easily resolved if GrazingshipIV would remove the text that Sam finds offensive and Sam backs off. This is not, however, an endorsement of Sam, who has made several comments that I, at least, find contentious and sometimes offensive. I just don't think that Granzingship's strategy is the best way to deal with that. Danny 04:20, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

  1. —No-One Jones 05:15, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  2. 172 05:44, 12 May 2004 (UTC) Concur with Danny[reply]
  3. If he removed the statement (not the one I made BTW, I don't mind that) and refrained from accusing me of racism, etc.. I would find this matter resolved to my satisfaction. Sam Spade 04:48, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Since Grazingship clears material from his talk page regularly, remove both Sam's statement and Grazingship's comment, and end this dispute. --Michael Snow 17:52, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  5. I think it's fair for Grazingship to keep the comment Sam made about being a "negro" but should move on and remove the response. Sam's statement speaks for itself (as does the fact he finds it "funny"), there's no need to retain the accusation that he's a racist since once can deduce whether Sam's a racist from his own statement ie he hangs himself. I don't think it's necessary to have any wiki intervention in this, the matter is a mountain in a molehill but I think Grazingship should consider making a move on his own.-- AndyL 07:18, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  6. UninvitedCompany 20:33, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  7. This is most reasonable. However, Grazingship refuses to do this -- I inquired twice on IRC about it. The first time, he called Sam a "neo-nazi son of a *****" so I stopped the conversation, and the second time, he simply refused to remove his statement. ugen64 00:46, May 15, 2004 (UTC)
  8. I have followed Danny's course of action GrazingshipIV 19:29, May 15, 2004 (UTC)

Second Outside view

[edit]

This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.

  1. I think that both Sam and Grazingship have behaved childishly in this matter, and that they should both be censured. That said, typically one's own wishes are considered to be the guiding rule on one's own talk and user pages. Sam is known to bury things quickly on his page, making tracking down context and history difficult there too. Furthermore, I confess, I do find many of Sam's edits questionable, and I find him to be the Wikipedian I most often have a difficult time working with. I think that Grazingship is quite justified in feeling the frustration he feels towards Sam. I wish that he would find a more mature way of expressing it, however. That said, I also wish that Sam would stop provoking such frustration in people. And if I had to pick which of the two to get, I would pick Sam being less frustrating.
I firmly reject, however, the second charge, that Grazingship has difficulty with the concept of being NPOV. The charge seems ludicrous in the extreme, and I would like to see some evidence of it, lest the charge also be taken as a personal attack of its own. Snowspinner 05:12, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

  1. —No-One Jones 05:15, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  2. UninvitedCompany 20:30, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Third outside view: ignore this and let's get back to work!

[edit]

I do not always agree with GrazingshipIV, but this page seems to be much-to-do-about-nothing. From my experiences, I never take Sam Spade's frequent campaigns on the request for comments pages seriously. As a user, Sam's work is rarely, if ever, informed and scholarly. Although he's usually at the center (or the source) of disputes over articles on politics, he rarely shows attempt toward serious scholarship that would stand up in one of my colleagues' political science classrooms. Because his end goal is contributing unencyclopedic content to an encyclopedia, he has been using intimidation to keep competent users from getting in his way. That's the real reason behind one passive aggressive campaign after another by Sam Spade on the requests for comments pages. When I tried to stop him from mucking up articles on fascism with his wacky extreme libertarian POV fiction, Sam Spade cooked up one of his many ad hominem attack campaigns against me. And BTW, this works. Speaking for myself, I don't have the patience to deal with him, and I just ignore him and the serious damage he is doing to article after article.

Until a more credible user steps forward with complaints about GrazingshipIV, let's leave him alone, ignore this bullshit, get back to work. 172 05:41, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

  1. AndyL 06:20, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  2. —No-One Jones 06:40, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  3. GrazingshipIV 19:33, May 15, 2004 (UTC)

Fourth outside view

[edit]

Both users are trolls. Grazingship has also maintained from the first day that he appeared here that I vandalized his User page, and has refused to provide proof, to retract the allegation, or to apologize. RickK 05:45, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:

(Not a statement of support/opposition to any summary) I'm not familiar enough with GrazingshipIV's entire user history, but if one considers him a troll, he's a friendly troll. Sam Spade is a mean troll plotting against his 'enemies' at every step (e.g., aside from me, there's Danny and John). In contrast, I've never seen GrazingshipIV deliberatively act in a spiteful and vindicate way. If he's pissing someone off, he's just acting rashly at the whim of the moment. From my experiences, it's the passive aggressive trolls (e.g., Lir and his dozens of incarnations, Sam Spade, Veriverily, Cantus, and Jor) you have to watch out for. 172 05:57, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
(Not a statement of support/opposition to any summary) No proof or evidence has been presented to back up this claim of Grazingship maintaining RicKK is a vandal. Without proof, this user is smearing Grazingship's good name.172.193.147.211 18:00, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
How about this? and this?. And it's entirely possible that the actual vandal is the anon poster who posted this "smear" accusation. above. RickK 01:14, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
It is probably worth noting that GrazingshipIV has now appologized to RiclK, and that RickK accepted the apology on Grazingship's talk page. Snowspinner 13:48, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was coming here to post this. Grazingship has apologized. I will await further proof of his committment to Wikipedia. RickK 01:58, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Fifth outside view

[edit]

Note: this is intended only to shed light on the dispute over GrazingshipIV's talk page. Though I must ask that Sam and Grazingship refrain from editing it, anyone else should feel free to rework any distortions, omissions, errors in chronology, or other mistakes. Thank you. —No-One Jones 18:38, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Prelude to the dispute can be found in the discussion at Talk:Racialist, most of which was written in the minutes leading up to the initial post by Sam on Grazingship's talk page.

The dispute begins at 07:20, 20 Apr 2004, when Sam Spade posts the following to User talk:GrazingshipIV: I am not a racist, dumass. For all you know I'm a freakin' negro. [1] Graz responds Somehow I doubt it ;) and yes you are. [2], and then things get childish:

  • [S] am not. I'm Irish-German, and I have black friends and stuff. My one buddies wife is black, and he's a big white bastad, so there. :) [3]
    • [G] No I was saying your not black, your in fact a white racist as you have admitted too. thanks ;) [4]
  • [S] I may not be a racist, but you seem to insist apon being a dumass. [5]
    • [G] It's "dumbass" dumbass! And you are a racist idiot who everyone hates. [6]
    • [G] Talk about being a dumbass. Your a loser and we all know it. Get a life racist. [7]
  • [S] stop talkin about yo moms like that, foo ;) [8]

GrazingshipIV then puts up Sam's first statement and his disputed response thereto: -Sam is not African-american, he has sympathetic views towards white supremacy [9].

Three days later (April 23), Sam returns and removes both his original statement and Graz's response: [10]. Graz reverts [11] and then tacks on aka Jack Lynch to Sam's signature: [12]. Sam removes aka Jack Lynch and replaces it with rm trolling [13]. Graz reverts: [14]. Sam then adds the following: ah, so your a scok puppet then. care to enlighten me as to your previous incarnation, oh green and scaly one? [15]. Graz replies: Mr. Lynch your an idiot and stop commenting or editing my page or your going to get a vandal listing. [16], then removes the exchange [17]. All remains quiet. On May 1, Graz notes that his exchange with Sam "Will be removed Jan. 2005" [18]

Later (May 4) Sam posts the following on Graz's talk page (edit summary: Piss off, you hoser): Stop being such a bastard, or I'm gonna have to start focusing my time on the wiki complaining about you thru the proper channels (RFC, RfM etc..) instead of working hard improving articles, like I should be. Piss off, you hoser. In doing so, he erases the previous dialog between him and Graz [19]. Graz then reverts (edit summary: more spade vandalism) [20] and replaces Sam Spade's talk page with Stop advancing a racist agenda, and furthermore stop vandalizing my talk page. thanks jack. [21]

Two days pass. On May 6, Sam requests that Graz stop making personal attacks: Calling me a racist is a personal attack. That is against policy. Stop violating policy, please. [22]. Graz reverts (edit summary: removing racist troll comments) [23]. He then pushes back his previous deadline for removal to Feb. 2005 [24]. He responds on Sam's talk page: Actually I called you a white seperatist which according to you is not racist. You are no one to talk about policy. Eitherway, please stop editing my user page. thanks. [25]

On May 9, Graz adds a note to the exchange at the top of his talk page: Note: everytime this user [i.e Sam Spade] edits this talkpage the date will be pushed back a month [26]. Sam Spade replaces that message with the following: Note: everytime Graz acts like a troll he loses just a little bit more respect [27]. Graz reverts (edit summary: adding time due to racist troll vandalism) and changes the date to March 2005 [28]. Sam then changes the date to Dec. 20th 2012 [29]. Graz reverts (edit summary: trolling as usual by Sam Slur) and adds another month, bringing the date of removal up to April 2005 [30]. Sam changes Grazingship's note so that it says note: everytime Jack edits this page this date will be pushed forward one month [31]. Graz reverts (edit summary: Spade rampage) and adds another month [32]. Ugen64 then adds Wow, grazingship, just leave him the heck alone. [33], which Graz removes (edit summary: ??) [34].

At this point Sam shifts his focus to Wikipedia:Requests for mediation, adding himself to an ongoing request for mediation between Graz and Hcheney: I would like mediation w GrazingshipIV myself, due to repeated slander, harassment and abuse, most clearly evident on his talk page. [35]. Bcorr moves this into its own separate section: [36]. Sannse contacts Graz about this request [37]; Graz declines [38]. The date is now May 10.

On May 11, Sam Spade opens up this RfC page, and the rest is history.

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~):

  1. —No-One Jones 18:38, 14 May 2004 (UTC) I believe that these exchanges demonstrate very well what Snowspinner said about the childishness of all involved.[reply]
  2. Jwrosenzweig 19:27, 14 May 2004 (UTC) I'm afraid this does look accurate to me, and I hope it serves to remind Grazing and Sam, both of whom can do much better than this, of why this sort of thing wastes everyone's time and serves no purpose.[reply]
  3. GrazingshipIV 22:12, May 14, 2004 (UTC) I agree with most of the timeline that I can remember. I agree, the best solution is to drop the whole matter and keep on working. Neither Sam nor I will be able to change our opinion of each other (not that it really matters). This RFC page is a waste of time.
  4. Michael Snow 22:58, 14 May 2004 (UTC) I still think part of dropping the matter, as indicated by quite a few people above, is for Grazingship to remove the comment Sam objects to, or allow someone else to remove it. I have a standing offer to delete this RfC page if Grazingship will agree to that.[reply]
  5. Sam [Spade] 04:47, 15 May 2004 (UTC) Calling me a racist is a personal attck, see for yourself. Sam [Spade] 04:47, 15 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/GrazingshipIV&oldid=1251234906"