User talk:Shell Kinney

Talk page Contact Email Adoptees Archives Articles Watching Awards Logs Sandbox Userspace

Wait - where did my life go?

Welcome to my Talk Page I am retired, so if you're looking to contact me, please use the box over there --->  Contact info Send me an email through Wikipedia or shell.kinneygmail.com ICQ: 12502641 Gtalk: shell.kinney Skype: shell.kinney  So long and thanks for all the fish Thank you for all of the warm wishes and generally nice thoughts sent in my direction. I have retired from all Wikimedia projects and turned in all my extra tools as a security measure (we all appreciate those now, don't we?). For those few of you who were disappointed at not getting a whole ton of gossip out of my explanation for leaving (and didn't think to ask me privately, duh) I can only offer this cartoon as penance. Best of luck to all of you and feel free to keep in touch (see above). Shell babelfish 11:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC) Evidence talk page I think we need to discuss our Evidence and started this section to allow input from others: [1]. I hope this is fully consistent with the purpose of Discussion page. Thank you for your previous comment.Biophys (talk) 21:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC) Thank you! Biophys (talk) 22:22, 13 April 2010 (UTC) Not sure where/how to address this I would like to note regarding your comment that EEML dealt only with accusations against members of the list. Evidence which was piled on myself and others by our antagonists, and my and others' evidence pointing to myself/others NOT being the source of WP disruption (rather, my accusers being the source of disruption) was never dealt with. I regret that I see the same pattern of involvement of aligned-by-POV editors and their production of mind-numbing litanies of charges as occurred at EEML.    Arbcom might consider that the two or three times I might have shown up somewhere that I hadn't already otherwise (because I had already edited on WP before bulk-reading my Email, sadly, I was informed that editing IPs were no longer available for me to prove my case) is not the massively disruptive influence on WP that some would seek to make it out to be, those same some appearing to now be on a campaign to tar any editor they consider a thorn in their side. I'm topic banned, yet it appears the life-energy-and-time-sucking gravity well remains.   Unfortunately, PL circumstances at the moment preclude my having the time to deal with EEML and its aftermath appropriately. Best regards,  PЄTЄRS VЄСRUМВА ►talk  22:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC) My Photo Uploads= Hi. Thanks for your interest and help. All The photos I've uploaded were either taken by me personally, or belong to my family. I will upload the non-croped photo of Sgt. Hyman "Hank" Bergman which is an original photo. Thanks.Legwarmers1980 (talk) 03:59, 18 April 2010 (UTC)legwarmers1980 Ping Response to Shell — Give it some time? Shell Kinney -- Your comment here in Request for clarification: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2 is relevant in the currently open Tang Dynasty thread: You explained that "You're back on the right path - give it some time before immersing yourself in a difficult environment again." Whether viewed from the starting point over a year ago, or construed in the terms of this one "clarification" thread, I have undoubtedly satisfied whatever anyone might mean by "'give it some time' before immersing yourself in a difficult environment again." Arguably, the effort to locate mentors and their comments in this thread was progress along "the right path" and yet, there is no joy in Mudville. Why? What distinguishes this Tang Dynasty thread from "the right path?" If this is not a "the right path", please explain it to those who have volunteered to explain such things to me. Ping. Shell Kinney -- Now what? Cui bono? This whatever-it-is is indistinguishable from punishment; and I'm left wondering what precisely am I being punished for? What recidivism is thus prevented? How are the volunteer mentors and others in the community expected to construe this thread? What are you going to do? I look forward to your further comments; and I continue to hope for action. --Tenmei (talk) 20:37, 26 April 2010 (UTC) Just in case you hadn't noticed, I haven't actually commented on your request at all. Your comments were very confusing themselves and you seem to have set up a confusing mentorship system with a large number private and public mentors. In my opinion, this is not going to go well, but as I was not around for the original case, I am deferring to the judgement of Arbiters who were there for the case and can hopefully understand a bit better what you are proposing. Shell babelfish 00:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC) I grasp the surface meaning of your words; but I also understand that there is more between the lines. --Tenmei (talk) 16:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC) Erm no, I'm pretty straight-forward, especially when writing online. What I said is what I meant - there are no hidden meanings there. Shell babelfish 01:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC) WP:AE#Result concerning Pmanderson Hi - as explained in that section, I'm unsure whether your extension of Pmanderson's topic ban was made in the exercise of the Arbitration Committee's binding dispute resolution authority. Could you please comment there? Thank you,  Sandstein  17:00, 27 April 2010 (UTC) Thanks for letting me know. I've left a detailed note on the AE thread. Shell babelfish 01:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC) I've requested that the Committee advise us about how to proceed.  Sandstein  07:15, 30 April 2010 (UTC) Message to All A great problem solver and a wonderful person. Edwin Black Washington DC (talk) 16:15, 28 April 2010 (UTC)