שיחת משתמש:Yonidebest

מתוך ויקיחדשות, מקור החדשות החופשי
קפיצה לניווט קפיצה לחיפוש

בעוד שעה וחצי תופנה לדף המשתמש שלי בפרויקט המקביל ויקיפדיה. אם ברצונך לעבור קודם זמן זה, לחץ כאן. ניתן להשאיר גם כאן הודעות, אבל איני בטוח כרגע כמה אתרום בפרויקט זה וכל כמה זמן אבדוק דף שיחה זה.

אני חושב שזמני התגובה באתר השתפרו. אבל יתכן שרק התרגלתי לזמן האיטי. None 18:58, 6 דצמבר 2005 (UTC)

עמוד ראשי[עריכה]

נראה לי שלא נכון לשנות את העיצוב של העמוד הראשי מספר שעות לפני הפתיחה הרשמית. בוא נבנה משהו כמו ויקיחדשות:עמוד ראשי חדש וכשהוא יהיה ברמה ראויה נעביר אותו. כרגע העיצוב לא מספיק וחבל לעשות שינויים מרחיקי לכת בזמנים לא נכונים. תודה, Avichai 23:30, 31 דצמבר 2005 (UTC)

כן, זה בדיוק מה שחשבתי לי... זה למה החזרתי את העיצוב הקודם קודם לכן... Yonidebest Ω Talk 23:31, 31 דצמבר 2005 (UTC)
סבבה.

מפעיל מערכת[עריכה]

היי יוני. הח'ברה ממטא, כפי שצפיתי מראש, רוצים הצבעה של הקהילה בעבור המינוי. עם כן, אם אתה רוצה להתמנות (ובכנות, אני לא רואה סיבה ממשית למה צריך) - הם מבקשים שתפתח הצבעה. זהר דרוקמן 00:12, 11 ביולי 2007 (IDT)

sysop flag[עריכה]

Hello Yonidebest

unfortunately, per request of some users, I had to freeze your sysop flag on this project. Please open a vote for a regular adminship and get a clear and explicit support from this community of users. I'll gladly restore your sysop rights after that

Sorry for the misunderstanding. Thank you. meta:User:Paginazero not logged

--87.9.80.247 00:23, 11 ביולי 2007 (IDT)

  • I am sad to see that vandals and other trolls can effect this decision. Yonidebest Ω Talk 13:31, 12 ביולי 2007 (IDT)


Hello again, Yoni. When I first saw your request I thought that yours was the usual case of a "sysop-in-pause", who had the sysop rights removed for long inactivity and asked for having them back when the pause was over.
That's why I activated your flag and that's the explanantion I gave to the users that contacted me (Rotemdanzig and Havelock). I also asked them explicitly if you were actually vandalizing of doing any harm to the project because, if you weren't, there was no reason to remove your flag.

I agree that is not "wiki" to have a project "owned" by a user or a small group of users, nevertheless, it's not "wiki" as well not searching for collaboration and consent. Those users complained a lack of collaborative attitude from you.

By being not active on the project for a long time, you lost contact with the community (few users, ok, but they are the actual community now, like it or not), and you have to get back this lost contact by talking with them. Of course, they have to reciprocate your goodwill and attitude to collaborate.
After having tried, if you think you're facing a wall and the project is actually "owned" by a small group of users not welcoming newcomers (or "old" newcomers like you) please ask for a comment from the whole community of meta on meta:Requests for comments.

Hope this helps. Bye. --87.14.79.240 13:25, 15 ביולי 2007 (IDT) meta:User:Paginazero not logged

As the rest is known, I would only like to say that it is a bit absurd to say that I, of all people, am trying to keep this a "private" project. Several "proofs", if you will, for that is that I have not acted to removal of rights for any of the other active sysops, such as Rotemliss, but spoke highly of them. Moreover, I'm the chief lobbist for the wikinews project on he.wikipedia, advertising it, asking other people to join and so on. I have on many occasions spoke about my wishes for this community to grow. I have no objections to any user. I do object to the use of which yoni had put his sysop rights, such as enforcing a "comments" script on the project with the expressed disagreement what's there of the community. משתמש:Havelock 21:33, 15 ביולי 2007 (IDT)

  • You are trying to keep the project private. You said that I don't need the sysop tool because you deal with the vandalism and Rotemliss deals with the tech stuff, so no more help is needed. This is not how things work within Wikimeida projects. If I can help, and I have shown no sign of unwillingness to cooporate (you know I worked hard on the main page to design it to your satisfactory), I have never and would never vandal, I have only helped. You have never turned to me and warned me about any action I have made. One bright day I wake up and I have no sysop tools. Thats how it went down - don't try and change the facts. Fact is that I am worthy of being a sysop and that I am willing to cooporate. Fact is that I do need the sysop tool as much, perhaps more than you do. Right, you deal with vandalizm and Rotemliss deals with tech stuff - but that doesnt mean that I can't deal with vandelism and tech stuff too. There is no limits on the amount of sysops, and I see no reason why I shouldn't be a sysop. Furthermore, I don't see why you need to be a sysop. If all you do is deal with vandalizm, then you can waive your sysop tools and allow me and Rotemliss to deal with vandalism and tech stuff. If fact, when you sum up my contirbutions against yours, sysop wise, my marginal utility is higher than yours, as I help also with the tech stuff and also with the vandalism, while you deal only with vandalsim. To windup things, you have requested to remove my sysop tools with no evidence of non-coorporation, and for all the wrong unWikimedian reasons. Paginazero, I once again urge you to stop this nonsense and allow me to help the project as I have helped it until this day. If Havelock is unwilling to accepct others' help, something should be done about him too. Yonidebest Ω Talk 21:47, 15 ביולי 2007 (IDT)
    • Yoni, you don't try to change the facts. You have abused your sysop rights the moment you have writen your "comments" script in to the project monobook with no aprovement - if that's not "evidence of non-coorporation" I don't know what is. The reasons I have stated on the village pump was that you shouldn't get the sysop with no agreement by a wider community. After that, seeing that you were not presuaded, I've started mentioning the other problems - dealing with your not-so-positive record on he.wikipedia and the above script. As I said before, I would be glad to keep you as a community member, but since you use your rights to put in scripts which were not accepted but acutaly rejected - you will have to go either through me or Rotemliss to put it in the site protected pages etc.. I will say that I have no obviouse objection to any other positive co-operating user to become sysop. Havelock 22:32, 15 ביולי 2007 (IDT)
      • I have been testing it to see how it works and what other think of it. You might not like it, but you are not the king. This script can be removed with one single edit. But instead of rapprochement, you decided it was best to create anger and frustration. Irritation and aggravation. Quarrels and strife. You never approached me with your concerns. You acted in a despicable way. I anyone is unwothy of sysop tool - it is you - who cannot choose the right path to solve a dispute. The first step in solving a dispute is turning to the other side and notify him of your opinions. But you skipped the most basic step there is. You are the one who abused you seniority. What the heck - Why didn't you turn to me? Why do I find you were unhappy with the applying and testing of the script only now? I have no "not-so-positive record on he.wiki" and saying presenting me as if I were a vandal or some sort of banned and nuisance user in he.wiki is plain slander. Paginazero, this has gone too far. I see that Havelock is unwilling to accecpt my help. He did not turn to me to discuss any issues. He worked behind the scenes to remove my sysop, without allowing me to comment before the sentance was made. The only problem is that "he fells" I am uncooporative, whil I have gone far and beyond to please him at any chance (for instance, I hade revised nad re-revised the main page to his satisfactory). He is now trying to present me as a nuisance and this is where I draw the line. It is unWikimedian to allow one user to control a project, especially in this case. I urge you to reinstate me as sysop so that I can continue to help this project. Havelock, I'll take the highway and say that I don't mind if you keep your sysop tools, as I am sure you can use them to deal with an ocational vnadalism, but I urge you to stop this nonsense and allow me to resume my help. You may have been more active in the past few months, but it for sure doesn't mean you are a "the man". You should be more open-minded and allow other to contribute, otherwise, no one will ever step foot in this place. You should be more tolerant. The last thing I can advise you is to turn to your fellow wikinewsman and advise him of any issues you have. Paginazero, please. Yonidebest Ω Talk 22:58, 15 ביולי 2007 (IDT)
        • You are confusing two different issues - the abuse of your sysop rights in implementing a script without any approvement from the comunity is one thing - for which I've decided I must ask for a recall of your status so the community can decided on it. On the actual script itself I have started a post on the village pump in which it was discussed and again - rejected. I do not wish to stop you from contributing to the site, but I feel that while you do sometimes co-oporate on minor things, such as comsetics on the mai page, on much larger you do things on your own, sometimes in complete contradiction to the community decision. I would welcome anyone who wants to be sysop and contribute and do not shows these and other not-so-positive characteristics that you are showing. Would have even not mention you being sysop without the community acceptance if not for your problematic actions. Havelock 23:22, 15 ביולי 2007 (IDT)
          Oh, and as one who deals a-lot with the tech side, you should know that any tests should not be comited on the project monobok, especially if the community disaprove of them. Havelock 23:22, 15 ביולי 2007 (IDT)
          • "Abuse"? Huh? You know I am working on this. We have had a discusion on this. I know you are against it, but this doesn't mean I am not allowed to test it and present it to others. I remind you over and over agian, you don't own this site. I have the full right to add scripts to the monobook just as you have the full right to remove it. As a tech guy I can tell you that the test need to be checked out by the users. I had check for bugs and found no more. The next step is to allow others to find bugs. Anyhow, If you think I made some sort of abuse (btw, demagogy tactics are not the way to explain you side. please avoid using the word abuse), why didn't you turn to me and advise me of the issue? As I said, you decided to remove my tools without deliberation. This is not the Wikimedian way of how things work here. I would like you to give examples to your words "in complete contradiction to the community decision", especially since you keep claiming there is no community. Has it gone down to false accusations? I am sorry to say, but it seems that you are the one who is unworhty of being a cummunity member. You see, discussion and deliberation is an important part of being a cummunity member. You have prooved beyond reasonable doubt that you are unwilling to discuss and prefer to work behind the scenes to get what you want. For heaven's sake, why did you not turn to me and explain the issue? What do you think I am - A psychic? I can't read your mind but I know this - seniority or not - this is not the way Wikimedia should work. You cannot hijack ones' sysop tools talking to him. You have my Msn messenger, even a small msg you didn't bother to send. Disgrace. Yonidebest Ω Talk 23:44, 15 ביולי 2007 (IDT)
            • Yoni, in case you don't recall - I was the one for it, with the sole reservation that we, as few regularly constant users, cannot be the ones to decide such a thing for the entire site. I said that because we do not, in fact, own the project. I compared it to house-sitting: we can, and should, sweep the dust and fix any running taps, but we cannot build, or break for that matter, a new wall. This is our site to keep, not to run - to make sure that when the community grows it will have a site it can work with and develop. Once you have taken up the liberty of testing on the entire project after the only conversation about the matter resulted in a most definite not right now - then this is abuse.
              As I said, we can not do things that change the site, only small things, say like putting on a new coat of paint (e.g. the minor redocartion you did on the main page, of which I've not only not-objected but encouraged). But appointing a sysop is a BIG thing - if that sysop turns out not to be welcomed by the community it is a trouble to vote him off his rights and a general repelent to other potential users. So you have to make do - you have to run the proccess down with what you have - the community we have now, which, in your case, was not asked for it opinion nor spoken out in favoure of you when you did. Noticed that, have you? No-one had said, so far, that you are a good choice for sysop here. You are right - it is not a matter of first-come-first-served (or -appointed) - you have to gain the community trust. You cannot just restore your old status when the community has changed completely just because you had it before. And you should not have it renewed when no-one is speaking out for you. Havelock 21:24, 16 ביולי 2007 (IDT)
            • Havelock, I recall perfectly fine. You said you reject because there is no community. Thus, all-in-all, you opposed it and are tring to force your opinion on others. Besides, as I said before, I am tring it out and allowing others to view the feature so that they can make a informed decision. I am a sysop. You had acted behind the scenes to remove my status without no legitimacy. I am entitled to be a sysop as much, and more, that you are, as my contributions show. You have abused your tiny seniority and mislead a steward. I would think that this shows you are unwilling to be a fine and fair member of this community. In anycase, I disagree with your comparison. We are the cummunity. We are not here to hold it for others. We are here to build it and attract others. So if a new "wall" is in order, we should build it. I suggest you stop saying we are not a community, because it proves my point that you are not king and you alone should not decide whether or not I should be a sysop or not. My contirs speak for themselves - I am worthy. I you can remove my sysop tools, I don't see why I can't get yours' removed. You see, you are not king and thus you do not get to decide whether or not I can keep my sysop - just as I cannot turn to a steward and ask that your sysop tools be removed. Besides, I as oppose to you, would never ever do such a disgraceful thing.
            • Paginazero, it is clear that Havelock has abused his "seniority" and misleading you to think I am a menace user. My contribs here speak for themselves. I have done nothing to deserve such behavior from Havelock. It is clear that he is unwilling to cooperate himself. I urge you once more to reappoint me, as Havelock had no right to come to you and complain about me (If I had done this, would you have taken his sysop tools away?), especially when his alligations had no grounds. Furthermore, I suggest you talk to him and calm him down. Explain to him that Wikimedia is about sharing and cooperation, and if he is still unwilling to accept others' help, you should strip him of his sysop tools, just as I got my sysop tools stripped for exactly the same reasons (false reasons, of course - I have never done anything that is uncooperative - and in fact I don't understand why Havelock didn't turn to me and explain his apprehensions with me. This lack of initial deliberation shows he is unwilling to cooperate at all). Havelock, I have nothing more to say. I can only hope that Paginazero will return you back to your senses. Yonidebest Ω Talk 19:59, 17 ביולי 2007 (IDT)
              • I have said all that I have to. You have yet to be approved by the community, you have preformed an act of abuse by putting a script which had no acceptence from the community and implemting it on the entire project and so on and so forth, all that I had said above. As for your allegations toward me, I am the main lobist for this project, asking all the time for help of everyone I meet, do not intefere with their work and continuing to encourage (also) you to contribute. As I said before, I would not have even commented on your not-approved status if you had not implemented the script with no acceptence. In no way I had abused my "seniority", nor have I tried to enforce my opinion on others. I had invited you to raise a vote for your status and I even didn't remove the script but open a discussion about it at the Village Pump (the script was subsequently removed by Rotemliss, who had also objected to the matter, thus proving how wrong was it to put without the community approving).
                I see no more reason to repeat all that I had said above. if you will retain the community trust and it's members will appoint you as sysop - then I would not object on the matter. Since you have not, in fact, accomplished this - I feel this is all. Oh, and don't accuse me and my so-called 'abuse of seniority', when it was you who had claimed sysop rights for in sole evidence of your own seniority without consulting the community, or even notifying it's members. Havelock 21:54, 17 ביולי 2007 (IDT)