User talk:Durova/Mediation

Hang your dirty linen here; my clothes lines are waiting.

This is the mediation page for the Ghirla/Piotrus conflict. Let's do our best to centralize this discussion. Durova^Charge! 14:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Opening terms

Piotrus has offered mutual civility parole as a possible outcome of mediation. Although I don't have the power to impose that unilaterally I could initiate a proposal to have civility parole or possible adminship reconfirmation imposed on a community level. If you both agree to that possibility at the outset it could give this mediation some of the enforcement potential of an arbitration. Let's establish the possible community solutions at the outset so that you both know what you're getting into, and let's agree on what forum to use (a special WP:RFC or WP:AN come to mind).

I reserve the right to use my standard sysop powers but will do so conservatively: that means I'll block either of you if you do something really over the top such as posting curses on each others' user pages. You're both mature enough that this is unlikely. Durova^Charge! 15:17, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Piotrus reply

I agree to the above proposal, as in my case neither represents anything I have not agreed to myself - i.e. I am open to recall at any time, and I believe WP:CIV (civility parole) should be applied to every single wikipedian, so I have no problem if such a solution would be applied to both of us. I would however like to ask the mediator the following questions: (I don't need the reply now, it can be given at the end) if 1) whether either of us has been more uncivil then any average editor (thus creating a reason for the civility parole) and 2) I have misused my admin powers more than any average admin could do during two years of handling such powers (thus creating the grounds for a recall procedure). Also, if a civility parole is agreed upon, I'd like to stress that the question how it is observed and enforced - particulary who and where reports the possible violations, and who and how punishes the violator - must be cleary outlined and agreed (I'd suggest a standard ArbCom method, as per above example - why invent something new?). PS. If it is a mediation, I'd suggest moving it into some standard mediation metaspace.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  16:21, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Addendum. Please also note that from my perspective, this is not Piotrus vs. Ghirla. This is Ghirla vs. many editors he offended; thus I would not be satisfied with a solution which would prevent him from being incivil to me but do nothing to help other editors. I feel that enough other editors have endorsed my opinion of Ghira's incivility during both of the RfCs (and in many other cases, including mediations) that this is a reasonable request.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  17:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

So far all of this looks fine to me. To judge by Ghirla's response it seems to miss the point of his main complaint. As for enforcement, I think we can work that out and get community support for something acceptable. Let's figure out what we want the community to back before we offer the proposal. Also decide where to post the offer (Village Pump, AN, Mediation talk...) Durova^Charge! 23:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Ghirla reply

I don't object to a civility parole, either, although I consider the whole concept of civility blown out of proportion in Wikipedia and of marginal importance to this particular dispute. My grievances with Piotrus concern not his incivility, but his practices of forum shopping and canvassing, as delineated on his RfC. The civility parole will surely satisfy Piotrus, leaving me no choice but to tolerate his inevitable new sallies on public boards and user talk pages in a rather bleak future. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 18:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not aware of a specific remedy for forum shopping. When I deal with that on WP:RFI I usually scold the editor and if there are other reasons to block then I'm unlikely to be lenient. If you'd like to propose something that could work within the context of mediation then you're welcome to suggest it. Before we get into the merits of this case let's establish common ground about the potential outcome. Durova^Charge! 22:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to move my comment to another secton. As long as Ghirla acts in a civil way, I don't see the need for actions Ghirla describes forum shopping and canvassing, by which I assume he means my (and other) complains about what we perceive as incivility. Of course, occasionaly I may ask users to take a look at one article or another, which possibly might have at some point been edited by Ghirla, but this is in no way targeted at Ghirla. If you look at Portal talk:Poland/Poland-related Wikipedia notice board, you'll see that various users, myself included, ask others to look at various article; a practice also found at various other forums, not limited to noticeboards (peer review, in essence). I hope that none of such requests represents forum shopping and canvassing (an example of what exactly you mean by that would be appreciated so I can know what you want me to avoid). -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  00:22, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, whether or not forum shopping actually has occurred is something we can examine later. What matters now is that Ghirla perceives it as a major complaint. So provisionally, I'd like to entertain the possibility that each of you are presenting issues of substance so that we can discuss worst case scenario solutions.

To put this another way, both you and I (Piotr) have voluntarily put ourselves forward as admins open to recall. We both know what that could mean. In opening this particular mediation I'm asking you both to agree to potential remedies: no surprises. So if either of you succeed in convincing me fully I'll offer your solutions to the community and endorse them. If I'm less convinced I may still put something before the community with less force - either a milder alternative or without my full backing. Ideally you'd both iron things out without any call for outside action.

I'd like to add that I have a great deal of respect for both of you. Durova^Charge! 01:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Certainly a compromise is better than one-sided 'victory' that will leave the other side resentful. I am perfectly willing to analyze complains by Ghirla, address them and adjust my behaviour where needed. To be brief, show my good will and speed this up a little, I will make the use of User:Durova/Mediation and list 1) specific complains by Ghirla I have recognized as well as 2) my requests. I invite Ghirla to list there his other requests as well as recognize any of my own requests.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

OK, let's proceed further if we can. So far so good :) --Ghirla ^-трёп- 02:05, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Durova/Mediation - for you. Let's try to do this, who knows, maybe it will snow in hell and we will bury the hatchet in just a few edits... (I get poetic late at night... 4 AM).-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  02:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Let's start at the beginning

I'll wait to receive descriptions from both parties before replying. Could you each describe how this dispute got started? Diffs are welcome and important, yet I'd also like to hear it in your own words. Please present your own perspective rather than speculating on what the other guy might have thought. Durova^Charge! 02:45, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

4 AM short frank version, long with diffs RfC and particularly ArbCom (spent 1 hour writing ArbCom, 5 minutes here): I met Ghirla long time ago. I recognized him as an expert on Russia with a very strong pro-Russian POV. When we disagreed, he seemed extremly incivil, assuming bad faith and calling me and other names (russophobe, vandal, troll, long list, diffs at request). When I and others asked him to be more civil, he called us more names (stalkers, harassers, Ghirlandophobes, etc.). Then we started to report him at ANI/PAIN, with mixed results and growing hostility and bad faith assumptions on both side. Now we are here. If his incivility stops, I believe all problems will stop, we were just reacting and in a civil way at that. Philosophical late night speculation: we probably differ in understanding of what 'civility' is, but quite a few people agree with my view on civility (per RfCs, RfArb). If we cannot agree on that, slap an enforced civility parole on as many people as needed, let the community rule on cases, see who gets blocked and if they learn. Incivility leads to stress and pointless discussions, that detracts us from content editing which is one of the things I and Ghirla can both surely agree we'd rather be doing. If needed, slap the civ. parole on every Wikipedian. Civil Wiki is a good Wiki. Save the project. Off to sleep.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  03:06, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry that it took me so long to respond. I am basically offline these days and had to go about hundred miles to have an opportunity of posting here. Well, I can't recall when I first met Piotrus. It seems to have happened in December 2004, when he backed up User:Emax, a Polish editor with almost no command of English, unlimited will for revert warring, and tons of copyvio downloads. Previously, I have interacted rather much with Polish people, particularly of noble descent, and my interactions had been uniformly pleasant. I was so much disgusted with Emax's affair that left Wikipedia and made no editing from February to June 2005. When I returned, Emax had disappeared and Piotrus had become a sysop. I don't recall further conflicts with him during the following months, but I remember repeated clashes with User:Halibutt, who really seems to be a prisoner of his nationalist mythology. The community was fed up with his articles on Polish martyrdoms and the black book of "anti-Polish" editors he kept in his user space. When Piotrus nominated Halibutt for adminship, I energetically opposed the nomination, especially after seeing Piotrus unblock both him and Molobo, one of the most energetic revert warriors to plague Wikipedia at the time. As a response to this failed nomination, Piotrus opened his ill-advised RfC against myself. His attempts to incite blocks of myself on public noticeboards further escalated the situation, as did his secretive communications in Polish language and name-calling of myself. The diffs may be found on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Piotrus. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 06:24, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

---

Well I don't want to compel anyone to travel long distances just to participate in mediation. This can wait for the holidays. You're both among Wikipedia's top 100 most prolific contributors, so it's fair to say nobody is likely to leave the project soon and that it wouldn't be good for Wikipedia to lose either of you.

May I start with one request on each side?

• Ghirla, some of the diffs I've seen of your posts stoop to outright obscenity. If I had seen them when they were new I would have been faced with a very tough call because I usually block for that type of language and I don't think established editors get a special license to break site policy. So I'd be faced with the choice of either blocking unilaterally or running it by WP:AN first and then probably blocking you anyway. Clean it up, okay?
• Piotr, I'm glad to see you responded well to my request in this section to speak only about your own take on things rather than speculate about the other person's frame of reference. Yes I did intend that comment specifically toward you. It touches on one of the things I wrote at Wikipedia:No angry mastodons - very few people are really good at representing a point of view they disagree with. In this sort of conflict that could also give the impression of burning Ghirla's bridges ahead of him. Ghirla probably went 100 miles out of his way because he was concerned about what sort of impression you'd create on his behalf. This dispute would be easier to resolve if you'd make it a habit to respect that boundary.

Now I've got to get some rest - it's after two in the morning here in California and I'm just getting over a particularly bad migraine. I've skimmed the other evidence and will dig into it more thoroughly in a day or so. Happy holidays, Durova^Charge! 10:18, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Suspend mediation?

Since the arbitration committee decided to take the case I guess this is on hold. To the extent that you'd like to continue here you're welcome of course. Durova^Charge! 19:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I think that we should not leave the mediation, it seems to be doing much good. I am sure ArbCom can help, but the more we can resolve here, by ourselves - thanks to your great initative - the more we both will be happy with the part of the solution we devised ourselves, and the less work the always overworked ArbCom members will have to do.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  20:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Well thanks, I'm certainly willing to continue mediating if you both want to participate. I left an evidence statement expressing my respect for both of you. I find it a humbling experience to delve into either of your contributions. Durova^Charge! 06:14, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I've left a question for the arbitration clerk.[1] Perhaps the arbitration case could work on a cooperative basis with this mediation by fomalizing voluntary remedies such as civility parole. Then we wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel about enforcement mechanisms because they'd proceed through ordinary channels, but you'd both have the advantage of choosing your remedies rather than having them devised by the arbitrators. Considering the circumstances that looks like the best win-win solution. Durova^Charge! 20:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

It looks like the arbitration committee will wait for mediation to work. As of this post three arbitrators have agreed upon motion to defer. Durova^Charge! 23:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

A note, no Arbitrators have agreed, but rather interested individuals. Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 13:22, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

On that note, since Ghirla is on extended wikibreak, shall we wait for him of wrap the things up with ArbCom? -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  14:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I got a bad virus, then didn't check here when I confirmed Ghirla wasn't back. I've got no problem with waiting for his return. He did tell me before he left that the arbitration request couldn't have opened at a worse time for him. So - if you've no objection - holding pattern seems good. And thanks, Daniel, for the clarification re: the arbitration matter. I should have double checked that myself. Let's be patient. As Chick Hearn used to say, No blood, no harm, no foul. Durova^Charge! 01:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, obviously, as he is not active, the problem does not exist. I do hope he is back, but I'd wish to finish this issue ASAP.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk}  01:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

See also

• User talk:Durova/Mediation/Input