Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Auto movil

(Auto movil | talk | contributions)

Statement of the dispute

This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections should not edit here.

Description

User Auto movil has engaged in personal attacks on at least two editors on VfDs and/or their talk pages. In some instances these personal attacks have threatened physical violence. In most instances Auto movil engages in multiple edits/revisions of his abusive comments -- sometimes removing the attacks altogether after some time, other times replacing some abusive comments with other abusive comments.

These attacks have been in violation of

Users subject to uncivil comments or personal attacks from Auto movil:

Evidence of disputed behavior

Comments about Jewbacca

Note: I (Jewbacca) do not believe that I have had any interaction at Wikipedia with Auto movil before the first comment below.

All comments are in sequential order (oldest to newest)

I've already voted, but I spent another few minutes looking at the page, and at Jewbacca's user page, and it seems we're dealing with a right-wing zealot whose main contribution to Wikipedia is in policing articles for content he doesn't approve of. I regard that as a negative contribution (my own work here is mainly in writing articles from the ground up, which I think entitles me to take a strong position on such matters). I'm modifying my vote to Strong Keep. The article is flawed in that it seems, at least in part, to be a repository for invented ethnic slurs, but there's nothing inherently wrong with having such an article here. Auto movil 05:17, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Source [1]

User modified above with further attack at [2]

I would add that there's a small number of active contributors here who are very good at causing trouble while keeping their hands clean -- making it seem as though other people are attacking and persecuting them, complaining to admins, generally gaming the system, while the truth is that they're addicted to controversy and chaos, and actively seek it out. I don't like people like that, and it would upset me if I had chanced to run into one earlier. Best wishes, and all respect for the genuinely good work you've done. Auto movil 21:33, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Source (Jewbacca's user page) [3]

Thank you for leaving the comment on the main page, despite 'vandalism' trumpeted elsewhere, and changes of policy. That seemed a very decent thing to do, and I appreciate the sentiment. I think I disagree with most of your views (and it would seem that we're likely to meet again, in conflict), but in the future I will certainly follow your stated guidelines inre: your pages. Auto movil 21:30, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Source (Jewbacca's talk page) [4]

Oh God, has someone done an offending thing? I'm actually starting to like you, and I'll just leave it at that. I admire your focus on things that are important to yourself, regardless of political implications or complexities. This doesn't mean I'll be nice to you the next time we come into conflict (I won't), but I can say that I think your project is admirable. One has to appreciate encomia from one's political adversaries, and this has been one from me. I'll kick your ass next time, etc., but if you get the chance, you give some too, to your adversaries -- make sure you stress that this is a collegial mindspace, despite differences. Oi! Auto movil 04:53, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Source (Jewbacca's talk page) (including physical threat) [5]

After these comments, I notified Auto movil on my talk page that I would file an arbitration request if he persisted in his attacks.

Please cease leaving threatening and harrassing comments to me or any other editor, such as User:Viriditas. This is a final warning before I file an arbitration request. Thank you. Jewbacca 05:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

He replied:

File an arbitration request, Jewbacca, because nobody has threatened you or anyone else, and you're acting like a pussy-ass system-gamer, and nobody likes whiners such as that, and please quote me on every particular. I look forward to describing how disgusting this initiative is. Keep in close touch please. Auto movil 05:07, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Source (Jewbacca's talk page) [6]

He also added:

Good, my friend. Why don't you sue me too? We'll have a good time with this. Auto movil 05:12, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Source (Jewbacca's talk page) [7]

He then added to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Admin enforcement requested this request:

User Jewbacca: This user starts conflicts and works the system, putting other users in frequent jeopardy by threatening and initiating arbitration on very slim premises. Any conflict with this user, warranted or not, will end in formal arbitration and Admin involvement, to the effect that sanctions will be levied against users whose 'crimes' are limited to saying uncomplementary things about User: Jewbacca. Request admin attention. Auto movil 05:34, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I am unsure what he is referring to as I have never initiated arbitration on any user.

Source [8]

He also added to Wikipedia:Requests for mediation this request apparently to stave off any request for comment/mediation/arbitration I may file:

Jewbacca is litiginous, involves admins, and is skilled in gaming the system. He has accused me of some crime involving saying bad things about him on his Talk page, the details of which I don't fully understand. He threatens heavy sanctions, and may construct a case based on edits or whatever -- I dont know what. I want this to stop, and specifically for Jewbacca to be prevented from attacking and threatening people in the future. This is a user who keeps his hands mostly clean, yet engages in constant battles with other users, most of which he seems to win by seeming 'innocent.' The battles are constant, and I want them to stop. Auto movil 06:05, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Source [9]

Comments about Viriditas

The comments directed toward Viriditas seem to have begun after Viriditas left the following comment on Auto movil's talk page:

Please review official policy, Wikipedia:No personal attacks, Wikipedia:Civility, and Wikipedia:Wikiquette. Calling other editors right-wing zealots is not acceptable. --Viriditas | Talk 22:18, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Calling a user a 'right wing zealot' in public discourse is appropriate, if a a user is, in fact a right-wing zealot -- and I am astonished that you would take issue with such a thing, and would make a note of your odd reaction by leaving a faux-outraged message on my talk page. Don't even. You want to cause trouble, I suggest you do it with me. I would like to hear from you soon. Auto movil 00:27, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Source V's talk page [10]

Calling a user a 'right wing zealot' in public discourse is fair, if that user is, in fact a right-wing zealot. You, sir, are a piece of shit. I am astonished that someone would feign outrage over such a thing, and I note your odd over-reaction on my talk page, and Kid, if you would like to cause trouble, I am certainly your man. I would like to hear from you very soon about your outrage and grievances, and please notify me of your feelings as soon as possible via my talk page. Auto movil 00:32, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Modified version of above with added personal attacks.

Source V's talk page [11]

Did I mention that I think you're an idiot? Please let this incite you to cary this greivance to admins. Hello -- you are a piece of garbage, and you started this. Auto movil 00:32, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Source V's talk page [12]

Yes it is, and you're actually, since I think of it, a piece of shit fuckwad. How dare you post this on my page? Auto movil 01:02, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Posted in response to V's original comment on Auto movil's talk page

Source Auto movil's talk page [13]

Yes it is, and you're actually, since I think of it, a piece of shit fuckwad with whom I would love to undergo civility arbitration (this is my page, and mine alone), except you're too much of a cowardly, vomit-stained dog's carcass to have anything to do with fairness. Does this incite you? Oink. Auto movil 01:02, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Modified version of above with added personal attacks.

Source Auto movil's talk page [14]

Does this not make sense to you? I would direct attention to what I initially posted. That was innocuous. Now I am calling you, yourself, a shit-stained, ass-snorkeling fuck puddle. And we can arbitrate that. Auto movil 01:02, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Modified version of above with added personal attacks.

Source Auto movil's talk page [15]

Hi, Viriditas, You left a note on my talk page accusing me of things, then deleted my response from your talk page, saying, 'deleted personal attack.' I'm hereby on the record calling you a system gamer who can dish it out but can't take it. Please notify an admin and tell on me, and please delete this in an offended panic. The crucial converse is that you, Vriditas, stop leaving provocative notes on people's talk pages. Is that amenable? Auto movil 04:10, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Source V's talk page [16]

Applicable policies

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

(provide diffs and links)

Comment by Viriditas on Auto movil's talk page asking Auto movil to not engage in personal attacks, violate wikiquette, and violate cilivlity: [17]
Response by Jewbacca on Jewbacca's talk page asking Auto movil to cease personal attacks immediately: [18]

Users certifying the basis for this dispute

Jewbacca 06:57, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
Viriditas | Talk 07:25, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Other users who endorse this summary

(sign with ~~~~)

MPerel 08:55, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
Carrp 16:23, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Jayjg | (Talk) 20:46, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Response

Much of what I'd like to say has already been included in this complaint by User Jewbacca. I'll add this at the moment: If Jewbacca were to stop making complaints, and having other users make complaints, to me privately and to the Wikipedia community at large, there would be no issue. I've initiated nothing. This user seeks out trouble and makes it his mission to complain and be 'offended' at minor criticism, even when the criticism is of a sort that the Wikipedia community (including myself) takes in stride. This is a user who conducts campaigns against ideas, views, and people. His history is easily-reviewed, and I suggest people review it.

I have no interest in communicating with this user again. I notice that the most relevant 'complaints' are talk page entries that were changed by me within minutes, during composition, but presented here as though they were public text. These are quite juicy. I wish I had something like this to present. I made a mistake in getting angry, when spurious threats of violations and sanctions were sent to me.

It is possible to use juridical means to construct a 'case' against a user, using false outrage. In my experience, such cases gain legitimacy by their very existence, even when they are nothing more than tools of harassment and intimidation. That is what this 'case' is -- a means of silencing mild criticism by escalating, and threatening outrageous sanctions. I have no interest in communicating with these users. I would like them to go away.

However, since this particular teapot-tempest has already been launched to bizarre proportions, I am quite happy to pursue this and other arbitrations, regarding any and all current or future disputes initiated by user: Jewbacca, to the exclusion of any other work I would do on Wikipedia.

I would also suggest to user: Jewbacca that another recourse is civil court, where he can file charges of Wiki-criticism, and perhaps win millions in damages, for extreme pain and suffering -- before the judgement is summarily overturned in Superior Court, when the judge discovers that he and others have been secretly howling at the defendant, whooping up a 'case' through sneaky threats and intimidation.

The guidelines:

General hints for dispute resolution

Whatever the nature of the dispute, the first resort should always be to discuss the problem with the other user. Try to resolve the dispute on your own first.
For disputes over user conduct, before requesting community comment, please wait until at least two people have contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and failed to resolve the problem.
Don't forget to follow Wikiquette. Wikiquette is more important in resolving a dispute, not less.

None of these were followed (see below). I would like User:Jewbacca to go away and perhaps help in building an encyclopedia.

From User:Jewbacca's talk page:

Hey man, This 'dispute' would be easy to resolve if you and your boys would stop contacting me. See my response on the relevant page. It baffles me what you think you're battling against, but I think this is, at best, a Pyrrhic one. Why would you expose yourself in public with charges such as this?

Also please see the relevant guidelines for conflict resolution. Sending threats but refusing to communicate in an adult fashion is not what's specified. Auto movil 20:15, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I have not contacted you outside of Wikipedia pages. I have not asked anyone to contact you outside of Wikipedia either. If you have evidence to the contrary please post it in the RfC. Thank you. --Jewbacca 20:17, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

No, I'll post on your talk page first. Please review the guidelines for arbitration. Auto movil 20:20, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If you have evidence of me or others sent by me contacting you outside of Wikipedia pages, please post it here as well as in the RfC for all to see. --Jewbacca 20:22, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

Jewbacca, the RfC is liable to go badly for you. I will either discuss our supposed 'grievance' on your or my talk page, or I will put my lawyer-hat on and a big mess will happen in public. It's not my mess; it's yours. Auto movil 20:27, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If you're giving me the option, as I read it, I would like to see this discussed fully at the RfC. Thank you. --Jewbacca 20:28, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

Please review the guidelines on arbitration. You have been asked nicely to resolve this conflict privately, and you have repeatedly refused. This is against Wikipedia policy, and I will ask one more time that this conflict be resolved privately. Auto movil 20:55, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Auto movil 18:59, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[Repeatedly deleted by user: Jewbacca -- evidence of efforts by user: Auto movil to settle disputes, detailed below.]

I endorse #3 in this section, and dispute the previous entries. If you would like to delete this entry, or institute a 'revert war,' please signal your deletions to this page. I will not add or modify any comment here. My proposal is clear -- no contact between you, your ostensible allies, and myself. Please review policy. Auto movil 00:02, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I will endorse this section in its entirety and apologize for any offense taken by any parties, and I will never initiate contact with any user named in this arbitration again. With this, I would prefer to assume that this action is 'over.'

I would caution user:Jewbacca that a long term of carefully skirting the guidelines (see records) has left him exposed. I would counsel good behavior, and not to count any 'victories.' I expect nothing in my inbox, and no incitements on my talk page.

I'm also going to say this very strongly: If I get a hint of a harassing email in my private inbox, user:Jewbacca is going to have to explain a lot in public, which perhaps nobody has had the time to file for arbitration for, in the past. User:Jewbacca is well-known to the admins, for being in constant controversy (please see public records).

I endorse this section in its entirety, apologize for any offense taken by any parties, and shall never again initiate contact with any user named in this arbitration. If any further demand is requested, I conditionally agree to that demand as well. This dispute is moot and over. Auto movil 00:11, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Comments about this Response

Auto movil has made repeated claims above about threats, harrassment and intimidation. I would ask Auto movil to please include direct evidence of these charges in his response section so they can be evaluated. Jewbacca 22:00, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

I am happy to arbitrate with you, user:Jewbacca.

from xxxyyy1238@hotmail.com: You are an asshole and you'll be in big trouble if you try to pull any fancy shit especially against iSrael. Yuop have been warned

Shall I post all 30 of them? Or would you like to settle this calmly in private (as I hope), instead of whooping up a public spectacle?

Auto movil 22:15, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Please post all 30 of them with full headers (blocking out your email address if you desire) at /Emails received by Auto movil so they can be evaluated and perhaps a developer can determine an IP address correlation between the email senders and an editor at Wikipedia. Thank you. --Jewbacca 23:04, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

You're really determined to take this to the end, aren't you? I don't understand why a sane person would pursue a campaign like this, knowing it will end in the opposite of what he wants. My email address is apparently compromised already, and if you don't know or have access to it, it's [address removed -autom].

We'll certainly have the conflict you want, but I'm stating publicly again that in accordance with Wikipedia policy, disputes should be settled privately. I am amenable to settling this dispute privately, and if you choose to go against Wikipedia policy and refuse, that is a decision that you make in public. Auto movil 23:26, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I ask that until Auto movil posts the alleged emails sent to him with full headers, these claims should be dismissed without prejudice. --Jewbacca 23:36, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

Dispute was attempted to be settled privately, both by Jewbacca and by Viriditas (see in evidence section above). After both requests to cease personal attacks were made, Auto movil continued with attacks as detailed above (all edits in the evidence section are in chronological order). --Jewbacca 23:38, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

Jewbacca, you're going to get in a whole lot of trouble. What you're doing now is 'lying,' and everybody has access to the relevant files. I notice that you didn't take up my offer of settling this 'dispute,' but only furthered it. I offer that we settle our differences privately. I think you don't want things to be settled, and instead want to win a 'battle,' involving any and all Wikipedia people necessary. I am quite amenable to settling our differences privately. Auto movil 23:46, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I notice you make many allegations without providing the evidence. Latest allegation is that I am "lying". Please substantiate this and all claims you make so we can fully understand the situation. Thank you. --Jewbacca 23:48, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

I notice you make many allegations too, User:Jewbacca. I will say again that I am quite amenable to settling this dispute privately, according to Wikipedia policy. If user:Jewbacca chooses to violate policy by perpetuating the 'dispute,' that is his decision. Auto movil 00:03, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

"I notice you make many allegations too, User:Jewbacca". Yes and I have provided diffs for all of them. Please extend the same courtesy. --Jewbacca 00:07, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)

He's not trying to settle this, is he? Read my posts (above). If you want more, perhaps a battle, you know where to find me. Auto movil 00:11, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Outside view

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.

Auto movil claims that he "...would like User:Jewbacca to go away...", implying that Jewbacca is the cause of the conflict. From all of the evidence presented it certainly appears that Auto movil is the aggressor. Looking at their user contributions, Auto movil has made numerous derogatory comments on both Jewbecca's and Veriditas's talk pages (see Evidence of disputed behavior above). If Auto movil had truly been trying to settle a dispute in a reasonable manner there's absolutely no way he would have made this statement to Veriditas: "Now I am calling you, yourself, a shit-stained, ass-snorkeling fuck puddle." Completely unacceptable behavior. Carrp 20:32, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

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

Carrp 20:32, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Jayjg | (Talk) 20:48, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC) Auto movil seems to be carrying on a campaign of attacks and intimidation against Jewbacca and Viriditas with no motivation I can discern.
MPerel 00:28, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC) Odd unexplainable behavior by Auto movil, seems to be trying to lure Jewbacca into engaging him outside of Wikipedia, which is a little creepy.
Ashley Pomeroy 10:11, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC) I have had no interaction with anybody on this page of any kind whatsoever. I have no position on the hot political or social topics of today. I read through the RfCs for entertainment, as I like to watch a good scrap. This page leaves with with an unfavourable impression of Auto movil, who nonetheless seems a fascinating chap.
Rhobite 23:49, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC). I haven't had much contact with any of these editors either, and I also agree that Auto movil appears to be the one escalating this argument. Please stop, and remember what started this argument. A single VfD vote? It's a very insignificant thing to get worked up about.

Comments about this Outside view

Carrp is one of at least three users taking part in this behavior. This statement is not objective, relies on text hunted-up from erased edits (public for mere moments before being changed, but presented with mock-outrage, as 'evidence' of terrible crimes), and User: Carrp is also involved in the actions in question, and is not a neutral party.

I have had zero involvement with this dispute between you, Jewbacca and Viriditas. If you believe this is untrue, please provide evidence that I have participated in the dispute. The only interaction I have had with you was on a VfD. We disagreed on the validity of the page, but I don't remember you personally attacking me and I definitely didn't attack you. My outside view was based only on the evidence provided on this page. As for relying on "text hunted-up from erased edits", I took a look at how you edited the insult to Viriditas. It wasn't any better since it read: [19]: "Yes it is, and you're actually, since I think of it, something like a piece of shit, with whom I would love to undergo civility arbitration. Oink oink, my lovely." Carrp 03:39, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Carrp: That is on my talk page. I will erase it right now if it will help end this dispute, but this is the context: While I don't know what this dispute is 'about,' I have received weird emails to my personal account, presumably from someone hunting up 'auto movil' on Google. Perhaps this was not by user:Veriditas. If not, I apologize.

One party to this 'dispute,' not myself, doesn't want it to stop. He finds more locii of conflict and perpetuates it, apparently seeing the arbitration process as 'punishment' rather than a means of resolution. It is not. And the simple solution is simply to stop the conflict.

I will endorse and follow any suggestion that includes no contact between user:Jewbacca and myself, also including others, such as user:Veriditas, who seem allied with him. This is an entirely fair position, in accordance with both the letter and spirit of Wikipedia policy. I would be curious what the counterproposal might be. Perhaps one is to be attacked or hounded? Wikipedia policy is very clear, and I have cited it above. I shall cite it again.

I'll also, again, cite user:Jewbacca's record, which seems to show quite a history of conflict, interpersonal weirdness, and continually skirting the edge of acceptable behavior.

I admit my crime: I yelled at him.

Re: Jayjg's comment (and I'm editing here to include MPerel's comment), User:Jewbacca and others are instigators who cause trouble and act innocent. I have no wish ever to have contact with User:Jewbacca again. Auto movil 21:17, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Discussion

All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to this page's discussion page.