User talk:Wally/El C advocacy

This page is for all past, present and future enquiries or statements regarding my representation of User:El_C. For general comments or requests for assistance, please see User_talk:Wally. For issues relating to the User:Instantnood case, please see here. Wally

Was noted in reply

Greetings, Wally.

Of course Sam Spade ought to know of my request for assitance, and he does as I noted this in my response to his comment here immediately upon submittion. Just to make it clear that would not initiate such a request without making him privy to it. That certainly would not be a goodfaith gesture on my part.

Regards, El_C 08:16, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

My reply is @ User_talk:Sam_Spade#A_Request_for_Assistance_re._You. I also left a note @ User_talk:El_C#As_polite_as_always. Cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 12:34, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Please relay this message to Sam Spade

I would prefer if he ceases from placing comments on my talk page while the dispute is ongoing. I request that these would be relayed through you instead.

Thanks, El_C 08:56, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

User_talk:SlimVirgin#Downsides_of_being_Spacedout / User_talk:El_C#Downsides_of_being_Spacedout. I think my position is clear, and I of course agree that you acting in your clients stead would be in his best interests. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 09:10, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sounds like a sensible plan

For some reason I cannot get the Commedia out my head lately (it can't just be the drugs!). It's almost as if I forgot how profound it is. Yes, that sounds like a very sound, rational plan; I am fully committed to it. I remain quite hopeful that a constructive resolution will prevail. All the best, El_C 05:45, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Regarding El C

El C and I both made modest edits to one another’s talk pages, AFAIK w/o significant incident. That is discussed in some detail @ User_talk:El_C#User_talk:Sam_Spade.23skinhead. As I believe (please correct me if I am wrong) he is no longer impaired, I don't intend to forgo editing pages (and talk pages), which El_C has disagreed with me about, for much longer. I am interested in where we are going w all this however, and might agree to avoid certain key pages for a much longer period of time, if he were to do likewise. Racialism is a particularly good example of a page I don't think El C ought to be editing, and which I would be willing to agree to avoid long term, if he were to do likewise. Unfortunately, Socialism is a far more important page, and last I knew it was locked up because of me and El C. these are of course my ideas and interpretations. He, for his part, seems to want me to stop using shorthand when discussing w him. That’s not something I intend to make any solemn vows about, but I think the two of us agreeing to improve our level of civility regarding one another could prove beneficial. One thing that irks me is his repetition of the fact he dislikes me, or that I make him uncomfortable. I don't like him either, but hadn't felt a need to mention it until just now (here). It especially annoys me when he mentions such to persons who haven’t had a chance to form their own opinion regarding myself, and I feel in these situations in particular that it borders on a personal attack. In any case, I'd like to hear your thoughts on where were going w all this, and what needs done to get there. Cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 16:15, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Having just read the above note, Wally, I am beginning to think that perhaps Arbitration would, in fact, be the best remedy to this. El_C 16:32, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Go for it, I welcome the opportunity to be acquitted once again. You might want to have a look at previous cases however, I doubt you'll find much precedent for whatever it is you intend to charge me with. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 16:48, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Sam Spade

Once again is an interesting comment which I care not to be provided an answer to, Wally. Oh, I'd win an Arbitration case, I'm very confident of that. The question is whether the effort is worth it considering Sam Spade will probably be penalized relatively mildly. Instead of Arbitration, I could much more effortlessly ignore/call-him-on whenever he is in breach of WP:Civility. Can Sam Spade do without saying BS, etc. ? I certainly don't think his euphemism for shorthand (as if I could care less about shorthand) is really going to hold up in such instances.

As an aside, I find is interesting how Sam Spade comments on which page/s –I– ought not to edit. Note what he said several months ago on Peer Review in this extension:

I would like to note that I personally have found El_C incapable of neutrality and factual accuracy in relation to matters of racist and communist POV. (italics is my emphasis) [1]

Matters of, how very enigmatic. Now, examine the evidence, Wally. I am principal author of the following articles pertaining to 'racist' ot 'communist'-related POV. My article on The Destruction of the European Jews or the Central African Federation (white minority rule) or for that matter, White minority rule, among others, all enjoy overwhelming consensus from the community (and were never challenged by Sam Spade) ? Likewise, note the overwhelming consensus that my versions continue to enjoy in Neo-colonialism or surplus-value, theories very central to the communist POV.

Yet to Sam Spade I am –incapable– of neutrality and factual accuracy. It appears that thus far the Wikipedia community begs to differ. Goodfaith?

Lastly Wally, note what you already know: that Sam has been snide and insulting to several editors in the past – whereas I have not. This, in itself, perhaps is more noteworthy than anything said thus far in this dispute. El_C 17:39, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Racialism#Fraudulent_article.

(Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 22:12, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

And so, Wally, Sam Spade lists the talk page section I wrote into while I was sick two weeks ago and that myself and Sam Spade have already discussed, directly. He also notes me being unwell in the his first comment here. Again, the direction and consistency of faith does not seem to be good, certainly un-editorial. Fact is, Wally, that Sam Spade remains the sole person to argue for my –incapability– of neutrality and factual accuracy in relation to matters of racist and communist POV, yet the –multiple articles– listed above demonstrate that the community considers me quite capable to write on these matters. Well, at any rate, I am yet another serious editor who needs to establish a detente with Sam Spade, which I think is very, very suggestive. El_C 23:33, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Mediators

Hi, Wally. Jwrosenzweig, a Mediation Committee member, has requested that we select Mediators we are comfortable with. The problem is that I don't know and have not heard of any of them, save two, Danny and Ed Poor (whom I -only- exchanged a brief sentence or two with: here and here respectively). Still, both Danny and Ed Poor enjoy my confidence as Mediators for this case. El_C 04:32, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Re:

I have replied @ Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation#User:El_C_and_User:Sam_Spade and User_talk:Sam_Spade#A_Request_from_El_C_and_Myself respectively. Cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 13:42, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I also commented on this, but S.S. immediately removed my comment ([2]. Essentially, he's attempting to drag in ElC's supposed difficulties with other editors, and I'm offering to present evidence of S.S.'s own numerous run-ins with a number of editors (including myself; at one point in our dispute he claimed that he'd never had serious problems with anyone else, so it was interesting to see that this had been rumbling on). Sorry to take up space on your User page with this, but S.S. seems to be very good at behaving abominably (both serially and in parallel), but playing the system in order to get away with it. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:26, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Mediation

Please see User_talk:Sam_Spade#Mediation. Cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 16:36, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Words in my mouth

I would very much appreciate if you not present my position for me. I find your summary of my position on this matter consistently unfortunate. As always, its just fine to go to me and say "I think what your saying is X, is that correct?", thereby giving me an opportunity to clarify "no, actually I was meaning Y" (or XY, etc..). Essentially I see you presenting an atmosphere of me being afraid of, or concerned by, potential arbitration. That could not be less true. I don't so much oppose arbitration as I do escalation of trivial matters. If I felt El C needed to be banned, I would have no qualms about moving efficiently and vigorously in that direction. If I felt I had committed some offense grievous enough to deserve censor, I would apologize. Those circumstances are not the case here. We have an entirely less serious matter we are dealing with, one that I have no fear of presenting before the arbiters, but also one I have no intent in bothering them with. In summary, feel free to come to me and clarify what you see my position to be, such dialogue would be welcome. Do not however speak for me to others, and if you do, expect immediate objection. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 20:03, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

See my reply @ User_talk:Sam_Spade#Words_in_my_mouth. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 20:41, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

El C

Hi Wally, I recently noticed a post from Sam Spade, I believe addressed to you, characterizing El C as "haughty and difficult to interact with." [3] I'm not involved in this dispute, so I hope you don't mind that I add this note. I'd like to say that I've found El C to be one of the most reasonable editors on Wikipedia. His contributions are insightful and scholarly; and he is invariably reasonable in debate. I'd say he's in fact one of the easiest editors to get along with, and he's widely respected, both for his interactions with others and for his edits. I hope this opinion may be of some use to you. SlimVirgin 21:11, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

I'm back!

Hi Wally, I hope you are well. While we have spoken through email and I have said this privately, I just wish to reiterate here publicly how pleased I am with your truly outstanding advocacy work on my behalf. Well done! And thanks!

Best regards,

El_C 21:03, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Greetings

I request progress Re: El_C forthwith. El_C requested your assistance 01:27, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC), and you requested mediation 02:40, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC). Since then I for one have been distracted in my wikipedia volunteership by the lack of progress and dialogue, the amount of times I have spent checking and reading over the pages in question alone subtracting mightilly from my volunteeerinsm on this site. I am not alone in that, certainly, and our mediator is also not unique in having an engaging and demanding personal life. I insist that matters be addressed and resolved, or at least that clear effort be made. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 21:11, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It might be worth pointing out that SS has for a while (since about 19 March) been telling people seeking his help that he's too busy at the moment because he's moving house... Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:09, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Re: the above

Hi, Wally. Can you please direct the following question to Sam Spade, who writes above:

Since then I for one have been distracted in my wikipedia volunteership by the lack of progress and dialogue, the amount of times I have spent checking and reading over the pages in question alone subtracting mightilly from my volunteeerinsm on this site. I am not alone in that, certainly (italics are my emphasis)

I'm confused, which other editor/s is Sam Spade (to cite him), for one, is refering to. Thanks, I appreciate all your help and efforts. El_C 22:25, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Let me get this straight, your pointing out that you havn't bothered to keep up with the mediation process? Obviously I already know that, since that is the very basis of my complaint! Speak to me directly or don't bother, if I get another complaint from Wally about the usage of his talk page I'm going to resume taking you to task on your talk page rather than here. These games and attempted hijinks are most tiresome. (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 11:34, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Re:Re: The above

Wally, if you do issue a complaint in this case, I am willing to have Sam Spade speak to me directly on my talk page (of course, I'll simply answer him by refering him to you, but still, I will not delete or modify his comments therein). Please see my additional response on my talk page space. I apologize for not having conveyed to you this request through email. That was an oversight on my part, though, I felt I was polite with respect to how my question was phrased. El_C 12:33, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

User:Sam Spade/Report rogue admin

Hi, Wally. Please see this and comment if you like. Thanks. El_C 22:40, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

I am livid with rage. That Sam would attempt to do such a thing is not only a mockery of everything Wikipedia stands for — it is an open-faced attack on the democracy of the project. If you are such a terrible user, why were you just made an admin by an overwhelming majority?

The wikipedia is not a democracy. The majority has no claim to the truth. Sam Spade 11:12, 29 May 2005 (UTC)