Wikipedia:Wikimediation/Deeceevoice

deeceevoice (talk · contribs) has been accused of maintaining long history of personal attacks and other conduct unbecoming a wikipedian.

Links

Previous arbitration case

• Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Wareware/Evidence

How that matter relates

• In short, Wareware, dang, bwoi. You a fool

Insulting arbcom

• "The Arb Com in this matter was incompetent and inefficient and lacking in the most rudimentary common courtesy. As far as I'm concerned, it isn't worth squat"

Original research

• I've merely skimmed this article and made some fairly superficial edits. But the treatment of this topic is, IMO, fairly superficial/pat. It treats white supremacy far too glibly as a phenomenon of extremist groups, when white supremacy is a doctrine which pervades white societies, generally. If one were to make an accurate list of "famous white supremacists," one would have to include people like Abraham Lincoln, Arnold Toynbee, Winston Churchill, etc., etc. Further, white supremacists do not necessarily believe in white domination of nonwhite peoples; but they must, first and foremost, believe in the inherent superiority of the white "race."

• "Lincoln would have cut his losses and readily sacrificed -- as did his racist running mate-turned-head-crakkka-in-charge (:p) -- the aspirations, civil rights and lives of black freedmen and women for the sake of political expediency and some semblance of peace."

• "White race riots were the usual craKKKa violence directed at black folks, often resulting in the burning of black homes, black schools, black business -- and black people. Lynchings. Black riots mostly result in property damage."

insults

• "my characterization of the low-minded, racist mental cretin is dead-on accurate"

Quotes

I'm originally from the South, Spade. It is common for people to use "cracker" and "redneck" in nonpejorative ways -- even "peckerwood." Get a clue. And listen to the nameless contributor. Since when the hell did presidents, dead or alive, become sacrosanct? Get off your high horse, Spade. You're 'bout the last person on this web site to preach about this sort of thing. Ya buggin', bwoi, and it's just plain laughable. *x* You come to the aid of a foul-mouthed, racist mental cretin/coward like Wareware and then want to chastise me for criticizing a foaming-at-the-mouth, rabidly racist dead prez? What are you doing -- testing some comedy shtick/routine for the road? Fine an' dandy. Just don't quit your day job. :p deeceevoice 8 July 2005 18:32 (UTC)

I don't care where you are from, if you are signifyin / frontin' or playin', this is not an acceptable way to conduct yourself here. I am not a "bwoi", and I would prefer not to have to waste my time gathering instances of you being rude in order to make a formal complaint.

I would have done that long before now, but your edits to articles has been of a professional nature. I would not disrespect any other user in this manner, nor will I tolerate such disrespect from anyone, regardless of race, sex, or religion. Please, be more considerate towards your fellow volunteers. ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 20:21, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Again, Spade, you are not the etiquette police -- nor are you qualified to be. Your admonition that I must show "respect" to a racist, segregationist, crakkka dead prez who showed my people only disdain and intolerance is about as ridiculous as it is pointless. Sorry to break it to you, but people are free to speak their minds here. If that offends you, then it appears the problem is yours -- not mine. Stop buggin', bwoi. Go preach to someone who gives a damn. You're boring me. *yawn* Kindly refrain from responding; I'll simply delete any entry from you before reading it. You are not welcome here. deeceevoice 20:31, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Comments

Looking at the situation, I notice two things. First, Deeceevoice makes good contributions to articles. Second, Deeceevoice is a bit inflammatory in her rhetoric on talk pages. I understand what she's saying about the culture she comes from, and I respect that - lord knows I've said some offensive things in front of my friends. But I do hope she can understand that not all of us are from that culture, and for some of us the words that don't bother her are a lot more upsetting, and can moderate her conduct - not just for Sam, but for a lot of people, some of whom I'm sure aren't going to speak up here, but who can pretty safely be assumed to exist.

Most of all, though, I hope she keeps contributing to articles. Snowspinner 21:44, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but this is a silly waste of time and completely unwarranted. I'm being charged with "original research" for some comments on an article discussion page? Pleeze! *x* deeceevoice 22:00, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

I think there's more to Sam's complaints than that. Snowspinner 23:26, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

I'll not be returning to this page. It's a waste of my time. Spade has made excuses for a creep who stalked me around this website, uttering foul, racist vitriol and tried to paint me with the same brush. I have no time for him, no patience for his petty whining. How to resolve this? I will not respond directly to him in the future; he doesn't exist. He has been asked to refrain from leaving comments on my talk page, and he should honor that. In the context of editing, I will continue to do what I do -- contribute to the quality of the web site. I'm out. deeceevoice 00:03, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Sam Spade is hardly morally qualified to accuse others of incivility considering his recent 'Report Rogue Admin' debacle and his own recent insults to another editor in good standing [1][2] [3] [4] [5], not to mention his pissy epistle to me, and his utterly complete failure to ever step up and offer an apology for his own misdeeds without being compelled. FeloniousMonk 00:29, 13 July 2005 (UTC)