User talk:bradv

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2600:1012:b042:b106:5d42:b518:a8dd:5fc (talk) at 00:12, 13 March 2020 (→‎Refactoring: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27

j'accuse

I find the complaints lodged against Kudpung to be so weak that they're laughable. I also find your assessment of Kudpung's behavior unreasonable and your decision to remove his mop unmerited. While I have great respect for our admins that remain polite and unflappable in every circumstance, I think that attitude is neither required nor reasonable for all admins. While you may think that you protected this project by punishing Kudpung or preventing personal attacks, your actions today have only played into the hands of a certain clique of editors who took advantage of this opportunity to remove an obstacle to their plans. You, especially should know that those folks will turn on you. I can only assume that you've joined the "hasten the day" crowd. (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) Chris Troutman (talk) 01:08, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for sharing your opinion. It was not an easy decision to make, and certainly not something I take any joy in. I hope that I have explained myself clearly throughout the process, and I hope that if you have any particular questions about why I commented or voted the way I did you would feel free to ask. I do believe this decision is unfortunately what's best for the long-term good of the project, even if in the interim it makes people sad or upset. It didn't need to come to this. – bradv🍁 01:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 13

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
  • A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

  • Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous



Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for managing safety issues on Wikipedia. Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:04, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cuties for you!

For doing what the people ask and then taking abuse for it. Natureium (talk) 22:20, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Bradv. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Doug Weller talk 11:25, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom

Are you an Arb, or just a clerk? -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 19:06, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) He's a member of Arbcom. Praxidicae (talk) 19:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But he used to be "just a clerk".--Bbb23 (talk) 19:24, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Was he a good clerk? -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 21:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you're asking whether I had the wherewithal to distinguish between an insulting off-topic comment and one that actually informs the arbitrators and helps them to make good decisions, I think I did okay. – bradv🍁 21:12, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Spoilsport. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 21:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
PS. Give Guy Macon a mop too. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 21:27, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you and I both supported him. Guy is a good editor, and I still think he would do fine with a mop. Either way, I really hope we haven't lost him over this. – bradv🍁 21:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Only my second ever vote in all this time. Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 21:42, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So much for cautious optimism

Five hours, 11 minutes after you "cautiously unprotected" Talk:North East Delhi riots they're back! Threatening to bring down the wrath of Indian law. NedFausa (talk) 04:14, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NedFausa, I'm still cautiously optimistic that the issues that led to the talk page being protected won't be repeated, or if they are, that we can deal with them promptly. I do hope I'm right. – bradv🍁 04:59, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Refactoring

Please don’t refactor other editors comments. It is in poor taste and unnecessary except in cases of vandalism or BLP-violations. Inappropriate and ultimately very disappointing from an admin.