Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Avala/Evidence

Anyone, whether directly involved or not, may add evidence to this page. Please choose an appropriate header for your evidence and sign your comments with your name.

This page is not for general discussion - for that, see talk page.

If you disagree with some evidence you see here, please provide counter-evidence, or an explanation of why the evidence is misleading. Please do this under a seperate header, to seperate your response from the original evidence.

Be aware that the arbitrators may at times rework this page to try to make it more coherent.

Snowspinner's

See User:Snowspinner/Avala Evidence

Nikola answered in here why did I call Snowspinner a "drveniadvokat". Because she was answering my question to another user. Nikola also found where GP is insulting me. I think Nikola had a hard time to find this so I would like to thank him alot. Anyways all this can be found inside of Snowspinners evidence. [[User:Avala|Avala|★]] 19:53, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

User:GeneralPatton has inserted a heap of lies at Snowspinner's evidence page directed at Avala and me. I will call several users who know the language in question but are fairly neutral to the issue to give an answer to this once and for all:

• Does "choban" means "shepherd" and is it derogatory
• Does "pickica" means "little cunt", "little bird" or "little one"
• Does "serem ti sliku kralja petra" really means "I shit on picture of King Peter" or "oh, I’m so scared your highness"
• Does "drveni advokat" means "wooden lawyer" or "dickhead" and how derogatory it is

Nikola 19:40, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Since I've been called to translate, here I my answers:

• Yes, and in usual contexts yes, AFAIK.
• The first one.
• The first.
• Verbatim it's the first, but since I'm not a native Serbian speaker I don't know how derogatory that would be.

(Disclaimer: this translation does in no way prejudice my opinion about the Avala case which I am about to express when I find some time. It is merely that - a translation.) --romanm (talk) 20:20, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Notice that Romann is a native Slovenian language speaker, not a native Croatian or Serbian speaker, so it’s understandable he’s confused with the various slang. Romann have you ever taken a course on any of these languages? GeneralPatton 20:23, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I've also been asked to translate. "čoban", "pičkica", "serem ti sliku kralja Petra" -- those are all profanities, plain and clear insults. I saw GeneralPatton say several of those and I noted already on tangentially related pages that this is plain rude and that I don't have any particular desire to be associated with it.

The phrase "drveni advokat" means "wooden lawyer", but I don't really know what this idiom means (it sounds like a Serbian idiom, and I don't know many of those) though it does sound like something that would be used in a derogatory manner.

Overall I don't know much of the issues at stake here... this petty-insult-related quabble doesn't sound like something too interesting. If Avala's guilty of anything, I'd say it's those reversions he used to do, that were against wikiquette. Being insulted by GP doesn't seem relevant. --Joy [shallot] 21:05, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

On the insultiveness of this phrase, I supply this Google search[1] which shows how people use it in reference to themselves. I think that this makes it clear that the phrase is not particulary insultive.

Translations:

"... But if I have to be wooden lawyer of DOS, then I have to say..."[2]

"...now I shouldn't be wooden lawyer, but our sportsmen should present..."[3]

"...Actually, here I'm like some sort of wooden lawyer to them..."[4]

"Sorry, you were talking to Srki, it wasn't my intention to be wooden lawyer :)"[5]

Nikola 08:29, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

---

Please reffer to my awnsers at User:Snowspinner/Avala Evidence and User:Orthogonal/Avala_evidence. GeneralPatton 21:35, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

GP has not edited Snowspinner's subpage since I have asked for these translations and on Orthogonal's subpage he replies to a completely unrelated matter, again in an attempt to denigrate me. Nikola 22:17, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Nikola, I think i've awnserd this on those pages. I really don’t understand why you are getting all emotional over this, I really do not mean to as you say “denigrate “ you. I think your unsuccessful RfA nomination by Avala and the numerous comments by other users speak for themselves. It’s funny how in more than 3000 edits of mine the only controversial thing seem to be about a dozen of thease edits and exchanges of mine with Avala and yourself. At the same time you’re the one that’s just constantly engaged in revert wars and POV wars with numerous users. Not to mention that Avala also seems to get himself into trouble a lot, but at least he’s not an intentional POV warrior, he just seems to have some problems in communicating with some other users. I really wish you weren’t so openly hostile to and distrustful of most Croat and Bosniak editors, especially User:Asim_Led who’s made that wonderful page about Sarajevo almost all by himself. I wish you could be more open-minded to people of other nationalities and faiths, since you really can be a good editor when you don’t let yourself get too emotional about issues. GeneralPatton 23:04, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This is all a bunch of lies, from the beginning to the end. Nikola 23:18, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Nikola, saying something is a lie is a harsh accusation, so where is your evidence, where is your rebuttal? Point out what you think are lies and set the record straight. I’d really appreciate to see something more substantial than just harsh words, one sentance accusations devoid of any real substance.GeneralPatton 23:44, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I don't feed the trolls. If someone is interested in detailed rebutall of these lies, ask me here or on my talk page and I'd be glad to answer. Nikola 23:54, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Nikola, I have over 3000 edits on a wide variety of issues and topics and nobody has ever called me a troll, I really find this insulting. I asked you to respond with substance, and instead you’ve responded with a derisive accusation. Again, I just wish we had a better and more constructive dialogue, just like I do with almost all other users here. Nikola, we’re writing an Encyclopedia, not waging a war. Please use reason, not emotion. GeneralPatton 23:57, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

First of all, he doesn't have 3000 edits :) He edits in streams, amassing tens of edits for what people usually need 1-2 edits. He probably has about 300-600 regular edits. For an extreme example, see [6]. Nikola 00:08, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Again, I see no substance in your awnser. I invite everyone to look at my contributions, and it is close to 3000 edits, and what's that bad with editing in streams? Nikola, you're avoiding the real issues, the way how I edit is really a non issue and inconsequential in this whole arbitration. It’s certainly better than these two, I at least try to add new information instead of engaging in revert wars. [[7]] [[8]]. Nikola, i really don't know why you so passionately see this as some kind of an ideological battle instead of a cooperative project aimed at creating a superb online resource that tries to provide fainress and balance to all sides, not just your own. GeneralPatton 00:23, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Avala's

See User:Avala/Answer

orthogonal's

I should note that I didn't know Avala except from occasionally hearing his name at third hand in #wikipedia IRC, and from what I heard I assumed he must be a troll of the worst sort. Indeed, I still don't know Avala, having spoken to him for only a moment or two in IRC -- and I think he can be abrasive.

At the time I also barely knew Snowspinner (but had a favorable impression of him, and even planned to vote for him for ArbCom), when Snowspinner asked those of us in IRC to take a look at his "Avala Evidence" page. When I did, I was struck that Snowspinner's "evidence" included Avala's nominations and votes on Requests for Adminship -- including Avala's vote against Snowspinner.

My feeling then and now, is that while one might disagree with another's vote, sanctioning someone for how they choose to vote makes a mockery of idea that a democratic vote means one should be free to vote one's uncoerced conscience.

Even then, I still assumed that Avala must be a "bad troll", because, well, that's all I'd heard of him in IRC. Still, I thought it advisable to take a closer look at Snowspinner's "evidence", given what Snowspinner was willing to call evidence.

In summary, what I found was a an amazing pettiness and an untiring willingness on Snowspinner's part to peck away at Avala's apparently honest efforts to contribute to the Wikipedia community, until Snowspinner managed to provoke an angry or defensive reaction -- which then Snowspinner added to his list of Avala's "crimes". Snowspinner seems to have taken many opportunities to criticize or misconstrue Avala, but few or no efforts to grant Avala (who unlike Snowspinner is not a native speaker of English) the benefit of the doubt, try to understand Avala's positions, or to reach a modus vivendi with him.

But what is worse, as Snowspinner's feelings about Avala's vote makes clear, is Snowspinner's tendency to proclaim that there is a single community consensus on wikipedia (the spirited and unending debate on VfD presents evidence to the contrary), that Snowspinner knows what the consensus is, and that deviation from that consensus is, or should be, actionable.

Snowspinner writes "Avala also regularly demonstrates a lack of understanding of Wikipedia conventions, policy, making spurious listings or votes on ViP, RFA, and FAC.... My concern is the larger issue of not seeming to work within the context of Wikipedia conventions and engaging with the community - particularly when combined with his nomination of User:Nikola Smolenski, which demonstrated a lack of understanding of what people look for in an administrator."

Spurious listings and votes? Spurious according to whom? To Snowspinner and some soi-disant "community conventions" that Snowspinner, who has been at wikipedia less than four months, claims to be spokesman for.

"[A] lack of understanding of what people look for in an administrator"? What people? People who agree with Snowspinner, apparently. A Democrat might claim that a particular Republican nominee "demonstrate[s] a lack of understanding of what people look for in an administrator." Or a Tory might claim it of a Labour candidate. But all that means is they disagree with the candidate; that they have different values, different criteria by which they judge a candidate.

Snowspinner seems to go further: he claims not only that Avala is wrong for having opinions and values different than Snowspinner's, but that Avala is in the wrong -- and subject to sanction -- who holding views and having values than are not Snowspinner's opinions and values.

I see Wikipedia's diversity of values and opinions to be a strength that we draw on to make a better, and more well-rounded, encyclopedia. Snowspinner implies not only that difference is bad, but that Snowspinner is the one to judge what differences should be allowed -- and which should send someone to Arbcom. Such a narrow and stultifying view seems to me to be antithetical to what we are here for, and to what a wiki -- a envoronment where anyone may edit -- stands for.

I looked only at the "evidence" Snowspinner has amassed, so anyone can easily make his own evaluation, just as I did.

My (incomplete) point by point refutation to Snowspinner's evidence (with some additions from User:Zocky) can be found here: User:Orthogonal/Avala_evidence. -- orthogonal 17:34, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I encourage the Arbcom to look into orthogonal's counterclaims against me here, if only so he will stop trying to twist my words and give up his bizzare and increasingly harassing jihad against me. Snowspinner 04:37, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)

I think that orthogonal said everything that I wanted but in such a fluent English using beatiful and neutral forms. On the other hand Snowspinner says following ...who is also native English give up his bizzare and increasingly harassing jihad against me. I think that the reader can choose on his own. [[User:Avala|Avala|★]] 19:32, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)