Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-06-07 Polish Cabal and myself as its leader/Archive 1

message: As a possible member of the alleged Polish Cabal™ I'm definitely not impartial in this case, but wanted to add my 2 eurocents here. In the theory of communication the basic problem with any kind of compromise solution (and mediation in particular) is that both sides should be left with some sort of a possible and acceptable exit. In this very conflict Elonka leaves us (I mean me and Piotrus, can't speak for others) with no acceptable outcome at all. 
She continues to spread her campaign aimed at all wikipedians even distantly related to Poland on a variety of pages. She calls us names (nationalism is a grave offence to me), suggests our bad will, some sort of a conspiracy, suggests that wikipedia would be better off without us, and so on - yet without providing any evidence and without even attempting at mediation. As we say here in Poland it's hard to prove one is not a camel. It would be really great if we could find some solution acceptable to both sides. So far all attempts at reaching terms with Elonka were unsuccessful, as can be seen at our notice board. There even a small favour Piotrus has done to Elonka (translation of some page) was treated as an evidence against him. this discussion is particularly instructing as it seems all attempts at shaking hands with Elonka were met with more and more slander, accusations and suggestions of conspiracy (I never thought starting an RfC could be an argument to prove some alleged guilts). Definitely not the way to go - though I can think of no better way to settle the apparent problem Elonka has with us as a group (informal and disorganised as it is). //Halibutt 07:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Elonka raised some valid points, while I think the case is overblown by both sides' dealing with it emotionally rather than addressing the real problems we have here. OTOH, if only the cabal or whatever took it upon itself to deal with trolls that put the entire Polish wiki-community in bad light, that would have helped a mile. On a side note, the hypocricy of the statement above is very unhlepful. --Irpen 16:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What valid points? What trolls? It would be great if you would be more specific. The only unconstructive behaviour in the related discussion was already mentioned by Halibutt, and yes, it would be great if the respective community would deal with it - but I am afraid it is not the Polish community which encourages him.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 18:30, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: I'm tired of repeating for a year that Piotrus is the most problematic admin in Wiki and that he should have been defrocked months ago, when he indulged in wheel warring to encourage his comrades-in-arms, Molobo and Halibutt, to further revert warring despite numerous 3RR violations on their part. 
Not only did he fail to discontinue his shameless POV-pushing wars after many warnings on my part, but most recently he and Molobo unleashed a series of nightmarish revert wars on dozens of articles (see here for a characteristic edit). And, as I repeated ad nauseum before, they turned the Polish notice-board into a black book, used solely for the purpose of recruiting fresh revert warriors. 
The very fact that Elonka almost verbatim reiterated my conclusions, expressed so many times before, is sufficient evidence that this mediation is pointless and that we should move on to desysoping procedures at last. Piotr's behavior here has demonstrated conclusively that for him Wikipedia is little more than a Polish propaganda machine and that he is not interested in NPOV editing. His recent passionate defense of Molobo from permablocking provides an instructive sidelight as to what his agenda here is. 
Neither there is anything new in his dirty trick of starting a RfC or RfM to divert attention from his own unspeakable offenses against the spirit and letter of WP guidelines. I pointed out to some of his transgressions in the RfC against myself which was started by him and Hali similarly in bad faith and which they never fail to recall in every dispute with/or without myself (Piotr never fails to do so on Template_talk:Did you know every now and then, you may check it even today). In this way his actions are strikingly similar to those of another notorious POV-pusher, User:Bonaparte. He practiced the same tricks but it did not save him from being permabanned. 
Let me hope that the three editors that inflicted on themselves the general indignation and ire of WP community - Halibutt, Molobo, and Piotr - will be reformed without the necessity of their permablocking, as was the case with Bonaparte. It seems to me the only way to stop their meaningless carnage of articles and to cool them off is to desysop Piotrus. He never uses his tools for any purpose other than intimidating those editors who do not share his nationalist mythology and who he habitually refers to as "vandals" and "trolls". --Ghirla -трёп- 21:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thoroughly concur. Ghirlandajo's experience is my own. Desysoping Piotrus is thoroughly in the interests of the wikipedia project. I add further call for a genuine mediation, rather than the farcical one instigated here by the perpetrator. - Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 21:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I cannot speak for Piotrus here, but feel free to start a RfC or some other procedure concerning yours truly. It would be lovely to finally see some diffs and links rather than constant accusations unsupported by anything. But how is that related to this case? Is the point raised by Piotrus any less valid because you don't like him personally? //Halibutt 22:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I like Piotrus. You've got me all wrong there. I would happily put links up and all that, but I'll got better things to do than go after someone. - Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 23:02, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  No offence Calgacus, but if this is how you like me, I pray that I never get on your bad side. Could you expand on how desysoping me would benefit the project?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 23:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I have serious concerns that, with your very limited WP experience, you can properly assess the scale of disruptiveness of Piotr's edits and adjudge what constitutes the abuse of admin's powers. If you bothered to follow a link to RfC that Halibutt courteously provided above, you would see the diffs and stuff. Since you seem to support Piotr's wheel warring to unblock his pets trolls (see Molobo's block log, for example), I leave to leave this unprofitable discussion in disgust. If a defrocking process against Piotr is launched, I will certainly add my two cents there. After about hundred times as much edits here as yourself, I may advice you to consult the policies and to learn what is personal attack before attempting to mediate something. Otherwise, you may get yourself into trouble. Good bye, Ghirla -трёп- 07:06, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  As near as I can tell, though Keitei has less than 1000 edits on Wikipedia, Keitei was also an admin on Uncyclopedia, with thousands of edits there. . And Ghira, I hope you'll stay.  I'd like you see you contribute to the discussion in good faith, to help air grievances in a civil manner.  This format seems relatively good -- It's not a trial, and Keitei has no authority to make any binding decisions.  This is mainly just a discussion page, where we can keep everything in one place and try to work things out between ourselves.  Why not give it a try? --Elonka 17:15, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this mediation valid?