Wikipedia:Mediation Committee/Nominations/Karmafist 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of an unsuccessful nomination to join the Mediation Committee. Please do not modify it.

[edit] Karmafist (2nd nomination)

Karmafist (talk • contribs • count) Hello again, at the behest of Redwolf24, i'm applying again to the join the Mediation Committee. I believe that i'm probably a borderline candidate for the committee, if not from the last candidacy, then from my unorthodox mediation methods.

Ultimately, my screenname comes from an attempt at mediation in 2000 when I was in college. A friend of mine tried to break up a fight between two people he knew and one of them accidentally punched him in the eye, bursting a blood vessel. When I saw him the next day and I asked him what happened, he just said "Oh, it was the Fist of Karma" and explained the rest.

That phrase just stuck with me, and so did that friend of mine's methods: I get into the heart of things. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but I get in there in one way or another and do my best to solve the problem. This has evolved over the past few weeks (I often use IRC to get things done as well as WP:AN/I and to a lesser extent WP:RFPP).

Ultimately I see my job on the MC as to act more as a member of a team rather than an individual, but I need to make sure I am active in spreading WP:CIVIL and Wikilove when it's threatened and helping quarrelling parties remember that. Karmafist 00:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Mediation Committee:

  • Neutral at this point. I am considering your nomination. Even though Redwolf24 did ask, I do find it troubling that you're applying again just two weeks after your previous nomination failed. Can you tell me why you believe that the Mediation Committee should reconsider their decision? Ral315 (talk) 13:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Oppose. We could use some more active mediators, but I find a few major faults with Karmafist. His treatment of Pigsonthewing goes too far. Even if a user acts unacceptably, there is no reason to use names which you know they dislike. It wouldn't have been too hard to refer to him as Andy or Pigsonthewing, his full name. Also, his interactions with Tony Sidaway and other users are often negative. Finally, and a very big thing here, I find hate lists despicable, particularly for a mediator. Labeling people as "Right Wing POV Pushers" is extremely strong. Ral315 (talk) 15:07, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Support. As for why he's back so soon... if I were to leave up his old nomination it would have passed by now, as Andre no longer has grounds for opposing, and he would have retracted. I had him run because I think he'll pass this one, and I really want him on board. Redwolf24 (talk) 23:08, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The referenced events give me cause to suspect that Karmafist may not be equipped to handle mediation as tactfully as is required. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 22:14, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Outside Opinions:

  • Wholly unsuitable. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive49#Threat, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive49#Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Pigsonthewing and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Abuse of admin powers by Karmafist. Andy Mabbett 08:15, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Please do check them, people like Pigs here are the reason why I considering taking Redwolf's advice and applying again. He's been in several revert wars over the past week(no doubt dozens, if not hundreds during his time here), basically trying to intimidate other users into seeing his viewpoint. This is what I see my role as in the mediation process, reaching out to trouble users such as Pigs and reforming them into users that can follow WP:CIVIL. You may also want to see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Pigsonthewing regarding the Pigs matter. If I'm part of your committee, I will work as your agent. If I'm not, I will continue to do what I can to spread peace upon Wikipedia. Like Tony said below, I am very flexible, but I won't stop in trying to reach that goal of spreading peace on Wikipedia no matter where I go. Karmafist 17:01, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
      • I have told you several times already, my name is not "Pigs". You have no right to try to "reform" me. Is this how you would mediate? Andy Mabbett 23:02, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
      • It's not a right Pigs, it's a responsibility. I'm an administrator and it's my job to help users whenever I can, even if they don't realize they need it. Karmafist 02:33, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
        • Users are allowed to deny official mediation- it cannot be "forced" upon anyone. Ral315 (talk) 07:33, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
          • True - but we're not discussing "official mediation", we're talking Karmafist's threats, inappropriate blocking and blatant dishonesty. Also, I've told Karmafist about half-a-dozen times, now: my name is not Pigs. Andy Mabbett 08:39, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
        • I've said this before, Andy's user name is Pigsonthewing, thus the shortening of the user name -- Pigs.It sounds like he's frustrated with this lack of cooperation on this point from my part, and I can only hope that he understands that this is how most other users feel when working with him. And as for Ral315's comment, I think that's one of the biggest problems with our current system here on Wikipedia: There's too much bureaucracy and too little to stop users from neverending low level disputes or whittling down policies through bending the rules until they're worthless instead of reforming them at Wikipedia:How to create policy. Only after that or if there's a situation where certain rules contract each other should WP:IAR be used. The biggest reason why I accepted Redwolf's nomination is to try and fix this in terms of disputes between users, things are just too ambiguous now. Karmafist 15:56, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Note that these links will expire when the pages are archived. Ral315 (talk) 13:00, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Neutral. I think Karmafist has much to learn as a mediator. The Coleshill, Warwickshire case could perhaps have been handled without reverting, blocking or protecting. Use of all three seems a bit excessive. Karmafist's approach here seems to have strayed from mediation into advocacy, and this may have exacerbated the conflict. There have been only two edits since I unprotected that article; no sign of warring, and no discussion in two days. Karmafist nevertheless shows flexibility and plenty of commonsense in his overall editing. --Tony SidawayTalk 13:19, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Neutral likewise, for similar reasons. Seems a very good editor generally, but for a mediator, Karm seems insufficiently sensitive to what inflames situations. One of the quickest ways of annoying people around here is accusing them of vandalism when you simply don't like their edits, and the careless and inappropriate use of a vandalism tag when blocking Pigsonthewing was one of the inflammatory factors recently.
Likewise, irritating a user with a contraction that he doesn't want (and which could be taken as insulting), in the belief that this will teach him some kind of lesson about obstinacy, doesn't seem to me an approach likely to help in mediation. Tear 16:30, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Comments:

The above nomination to join the Mediation Committee is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it.