User talk:Essjay

Changing username

I already have done it. Please, see User talk:Vít Zvánovec. Thanks. -- Zacheus 10:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll take a look. Essjay (Talk) 11:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

IRC

you were looking for me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Henna (talk • contribs) 11:29, November 26, 2006 (UTC)

Yes; I was wondering what the latest stable release of Vandal Fighter is, because my old copy of CDVF died on me. I read the VF page, but it's very confusing as to what is the most recent stable version, and what is still in development. Essjay (Talk) 11:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

3.3 is a version that should work, but I'm not working on it anymore, 3.5 is the newest should be reasonably stable, and the lastest is from svn. Henna 12:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Checkuser

Could you reconsider your decision on Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/PANONIAN? If someone is using sockpuppets to make death threats, we need to block the main account, not just the sockpuppets. Thanks. --Tango 15:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll take another look at it. Essjay (Talk) 11:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! --Tango 11:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

No problem; as it turns out, there's not evidence connecting the two. Essjay (Talk) 11:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Jews for Jesus

Hi Essjay. Regarding the mediation on this article. I understand you've been busy, but I think you made a bad mistake closing this mediation. The mediation was filed a long time ago, and the parties agreed to it. Then there was a huge pause, because nobody from the Mediation Committee responded. Meanwhile the parties waited for something to happen. Eventually we found out you were on Wikibreak, so we contacted another committee member. That member marked the request as 'accepted', but then did nothing else. Nobody in the dispute has much idea what is supposed to happen next, so we waited to be contacted by the committee. Nothing happened. Then you came along and closed the mediation. What exactly were we supposed to have done in the meantime?

Can I strongly suggest that you re-open the mediation. If someone tells us what the next step is we'll be happy to do it. DJ Clayworth 04:29, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

As strange as it may sound, the reason the mediation was closed is because nothing happened. The Guide to accepted cases addresses this issue: Acceptance of cases on RFM is only a preliminary step, where we certify that the policies of the Committee have been met by the request, it is not a guarantee of mediation. Individual mediators, like individual parties to a mediation, are free to decide which cases to participate in; if a case is not taken up by a mediator within thirty days (roughly), it is closed as stale. In these situations, if the issue is still in need of mediation (you might be surprised by the number that have been resolved on thier own by the time a mediator takes it up or the thirty days runs), and all the parties are still willing, we ask that you file a new request; this indicates for us that there is still an issue needing resolution, and the parties are still agreeable to mediation (like the status of the dispute, willingness to participate in mediation can change a lot over the course of thirty days, and a new request will certify that there is still willingness to mediate.)

Unfortunately at this time, the Committee is down to a handfull of active mediators, and so it's even more the case that not all cases will end up being mediated. My advice, if you are all still interested in the process, would be to file a new request, and once accepted, look out in the community for someone you all can agree on to assist in the process, and ask that person to take the role of mediator; we're always open to the idea of "guest" or "special" mediators, especially when we are shorthanded. Essjay (Talk) 11:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

IE

You're user page doesn't look right in Internet Explorer (version 6). I thought you might want to know.  The Transhumanist   04:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. I don't use IE, so it's a bit hard for me to check. What is it that doesn't look right? (A screenshot would be helpful, if you can provide one.) Essjay (Talk) 11:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser#PANONIAN

Hi! It is recently declined, but it would solve a dispute, and can clear whether PANONIAN made death threats on Wikipedia, or not, or did he broke the 3RR by IP(s), or not, so I'd like to ask you to change yr vote, and put it into the pendig part, to help us solve this problem. Thanks! --Vince ^{hey, yo! :-)} 08:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Already responded above. Essjay (Talk) 11:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Essjay bot archive limit for ANI

This should be lowered to 200KB at most. Even 300KB is too high and, because it archives all conversations by date regardless of whether it will afterwards exceed 300KB, we end up with, for example, a 380KB archive at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive148. —Centrx→talk • 08:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Bring it up on the talk page of AN; if there is consensus to change it, I'll be happy to do so. Essjay (Talk) 11:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)