User talk:Slaunger/Archives/2013/8

Mellow

It's not too difficult to stay mellow in the face of raving outbursts. I seldom feel the need to personally defend myself from groundless attacks (I sort of think the truth is self evident, and the abuse is not worth dignifying with a retort). I don't even know what one should say to the compliment that I'd do anything to save a friend, maybe for an actual real life friend I would? But I wouldn't disavow any editor as a friend lest it be thought that I considered them an enemy! As it happens, I don't even know Bidgee and even a cursory look would show I've barely interacted with them at all. Oh well, life goes on as before :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 01:21, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Ford A

Tak, men hvad siger du til denne http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Quality_images_candidates/candidate_list#File:Ford_A_ver_1.jpg

med venlig hilsen

--Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 09:28, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Tripe and leather

Hi Slaunger,

Thanks for balloons!

You are right, rue des Tripiers means street of the dealers of tripes (kallun?), and rue des Tanneurs means Tanners street (garver?). Indeed, there is a link. We have a lot of tripe specialities in french cuisine: Tripes à la mode de Caen, andouillette, andouille, or tripoux (my father was fond of). I am not a fan...--Jebulon (talk) 20:57, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Dedicating an entire street for selling kallun?!? Wow. I have never tried it, but maybe I should. Or maybe I should just follow your advice. I trust your taste! ("garver" is right)--Slaunger (talk) 20:28, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

• Why not? 'Tripas' is a delicacy in the Porto region in Portugal. Only that they call 'tripas' not to the bowels (its literal translation) but also to the beast's stomac. It is such a strong tradition that we use to call 'tripeiros' (tripas' people) to the inhabitants of Porto! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:39, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

OK, both of you are invited to an andouillette party together in Paris. You' ll not walk alone: Mrs Jebulon is a great fan of andouillette.I'll provide red wine.--Jebulon (talk) 22:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Ahem ... thanks ... I ... guess. No, honestly, thank you very much for the invitation! It is weird with how strong an impact it has what you eat as you grow up and how that makes you think that something is not very attractive to think of eating. That is my immediate thought about tripe. But it is not rational and it should be challenged! After all: I did taste haggis in Glasgow some months ago, and that wasn't so terrible after all... (although it will never be one of my favorites either). And some years ago in Greenland I tasted raw liver (quite good) and instestines (less good) from freshly caught seal .

Note to self: Make Friskbagt rugbrød med varm leverpostej, bacon og ristede champignon med syltede rødbeder, hvis når parrene Jebulon og Alvesgaspar kommer til Viborg.

--Slaunger (talk) 19:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

• Jeg vil blive hædret! Kan vi tage vin (rød eller hvid?) og desserten?-- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:27, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

  Ja, da! --Slaunger (talk) 20:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Has it occured to any of you how weird the "Tripe and leather" sections heading is? I keep getting veeery strange associations... --Slaunger (talk) 20:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

The de-crat discussion

Thank you for being a gentleman and deleting the comments. It is very nice of you. I answer here, I hope you don't mind, because the de-crat discussion page is too long and my answer is a bit off-topic. Looking at the whole de-crat affair from a rationalistic point of view – you are right, but I look at it from an emotional (psychological) point of view and that is why I get another outcome and another solution to it. At this point it is a big mess, almost a chaos, the community is divided, the moods between the ones voting for and against are getting more and more polarized. Instead of doing something useful we are preoccupied with the voting. Honestly, I am tired of it. No matter how many keep or remove votes will still come to make the outcome clear, the community will stay divided for a long time after the de-crat procedure. Although you said it is not a de-admin or a banning, deep inside I feel that a de-admin procedure will follow very quickly after the de-crat, just to make the drama complete. Of course, both sides are guilty, nevertheless it makes me sad, that it has to go/end up in such a way. --Seleucidis (talk) 09:58, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree it is a good idea to continue the discussion here, thanks. It appears that Tm did not think it was a good idea to remove the comments from him and Ottava Rima:-( Maybe we should have proceeded our discussion on a user talk page in the first place. I share your concern about about the divisive outcome. And I also welcome your emotional/psychological viewpoint. I am also tired of the polarizing discussion. Given the current mess, the most gentle way this can land is for Russavia to voluntarily ask for his 'crat bit to be removed and state some of the things you wrote as answers. I can say personally, that if if I had been a 'crat and had seen that I had not backup from any fellow 'crats on the COM:AN discussion and that I did not still have the backup of approximately 80% of the community I would have stepped down immediately before anything like the current RfDB had even started, as that would be the best solution for the community.

By the way, you mentioned that Russavia was your friend, and it is my feeling that is one of the reasons that you are defending him. That is fine with me and sympathetic as well. I have a lot of friends here at Commons as well, but I think that I can say safely (without offending too many of them, but we will see ), that a quite a lot of them of them would make quite terrible 'crats. Maybe due to temper, or lack of knowledge about deletion policies, other Commons policies, a lack of interest and competence in bot approvals, or a lack of thick skin. That does not mean they are not very good contributors at Commons within each their own realm and speciality. For me it is the same thing with Russavia. I think he is an excellent and very productive editor within many areas. But regarding the 'crat role, I am having some serious doubts now due to this incident, as I have explained many places. But that does not mean I do not appreciate his many other qualities, and I also have no problem discussing other Commons matters with him as you can see on his talk page. --Slaunger (talk) 20:23, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh yes, I am a friend of yours, and I think I'm probably a good enough contributor, but as 'Crat, I should be a walking catastrophe...--Jebulon (talk) 22:46, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, I think you would be an example of competence and savoir-faire when compared with me! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:00, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Hahaha, yes you two honorable Commons users are perfect examples of what would make terrible 'crats, yet you are higly esteemed and hard working contributors to the project . --Slaunger (talk) 19:34, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

• Well, I was thinking about what you wrote above and I came to a few conclusions. Firstly, there are "3 musketeers", who follow Russavia everywhere he goes and use everything he says or does against him. One of the 3 musketeers even came to my home-Wikipedia, but was kindly and firmly asked to leave and never come back, because his edit was very close to a vandalism and censorship. Unfortunately there was no admin on en-wp to reproach the 3 musketeers, so they went on quarrelling under the guise of protecting the good name of Jimbo and when they were ready there, they decided to do exactly the same on Commons. Secondly, if the final decision will be based on counting votes, then the de-crat will divide the community for a long time and the history of the de-crat process can be and will be used by Wikipedia and Jimbo enemies to destroy the image of the project. Last but not least, from psychological point of view, we should find a solution that helps to build a bridge between Jimbo and Russavia, Jimbo felt offended, so he would like to get excuses and Russavia would like to avoid being rejected. The final decision should be based on factual accuracy rather than on counting votes. As for voluntarily resignation, well, if one is 100% guilty and has no support, then it is the only option, one admits being wrong and resigns, but that's not Russavia's case. I would do it, to be free as a bird in the sky:-) Seleucidis (talk) 19:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Seleucidis, thanks for your continued thoughtful comments on the matter. I enjoy discussing with you. You have some interesting view points, and I appreciate that, like a fresh breath of air (and you are mellow too). Yes, Russavia indeed seem to be hounded (I am not good at wikilawyering, so I do not know the correct terms), and/or harassed by a couple of editors (I think I know who you have in mind), and that is very regrettable. I hate these dramaescalating and completely unnecessary and demeaning comments, which are just personal attacks and completely unneeded. Like Ottava claiming Russavias massive contributions have no value at all and is dominated by copyvios and replaceable by a bot. That is just pure nonsense! A good example is the recent dialogue he had with Maersk regarding them changing their license from all rights reserved to a free license, allowing Commons to host their images. That is not something a bot does! I also agree with you that closure shall not be based on keep/remove !vote counting, but on the weight of the arguments given. Otherwise there would be not reason to state the opinions at all. Regarding resignation, I do not quite agree. It is not about guilt, it is about trust. It is a little bit like what happens from time to time that a minister steps down due to some perceived serious error, which had taken place and for which he had the responsibility. If trust is lost in the minister, he steps down (sometimes prodded by his boss), takes the responsibility and takes it as a man, and gets on with life. Later, maybe the same person becomes minister within another area, when somehow it has been proven by actual action, that past issues will not be repeated. That as life has given you experience you have gotten wiser and with better personal judgement. It just appears that in this case the prod (here the boss is the community) has to be made extremely explicit. I do not know a better solution at this stage, but have you got any better ideas to land this in a manner which is less divisive for the community? --Slaunger (talk) 19:59, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
    • We have opened the Pandora box and now we don't know how to close it. Trust, feeling of trust is subjective, I don't know how to fix that, probably only the passing time could answer us, if we were right or wrong. You can not make somebody trust you, as you can not make somebody love, no matter what you do. I understand that Russavia doesn't want to resign, probably if I was in his shoes I would do the same – wait till the end and it is definitely not a piece of cake. I have a joke: Russavia is the only one crat, who hasn't voted yet and is active, so maybe he can close it himself?:-) Silly idea, but maybe not completely. But now seriously. Perhaps the crats can close the voting on 25th of August without the judgement and immediately start the investigation to confirm, if Russavia had violated or not his crat-tools or any Wikipedia-Commons policies by uploading the painting and the video based – derivative works – on a photo of J. Wales. During the time needed for the crat-investigation (1 or 2 months) Russavia's access to the crat-tools should be temporarily suspended. If the outcome is in his favour – the access to the crat-tools will be returned, if not – not. I even think that such an investigation should have been done by crats much earlier. It would have saved us a lot of misery. The whole discussion however is a very important sign that something must be done and quickly to avoid such situations in the future and I mean some serious adjustments must be done in our licences and policies concerning derivative works of personal images. It should be clear stated what you can and what you can not do, and if this is not possible because of some higher laws, we should at least adjust the warning template we already use. Unfortunately there is always some risk, if personal images are free-licensed. This issue – derivative works of personal images – must be fixed, but I do not know who can do it and how. I am happy that you support a friendly approach. Seleucidis (talk) 19:22, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Penyulap

Would you mind to take a look, please? Something is going very wrong with the closure of Penyulap thread at AN/U -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:19, 22 August 2013 (UTC)