User talk:JoeJShmo

Support

I just looked through all the bullying you have been subjected to from the Wikipedia gestapo, and want to commend your incredible ability to keep your cool. Bravo. I was threatened today with an AE, and fixed my rant (I admit it was a rant) to hopefully comply with the bizarre restrictions that are unequally enforced. Stay strong and brave. DaringDonna (talk) 20:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! It's nice to see a friendly face in this cold place. I just took a look at your edit history- I'm impressed by what you've managed to do. Very accurate description of what I've been put up against. The hypocrisy and double standards are hardly even subtle. "Eisav soneh es yaakov"- they'll never let us forget it. I saw one of them who said a contributor was 'POV' on Israel... because "he's Jewish". They're shameless. And by the way, I love your user page. JoeJShmo^💌 20:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you about my user page. I was inspired by an interview Michael Rapaport had with Bari Weiss. His stand up shows have been cancelled because of threats of violence against him because of his views, and perhaps also because he is Jewish. I thought, if he can be brave like that, and pay the price, maybe I can do something small like make a meaningful user page. BTW, I am being stalked. I had a slightly threatening visit on my talk page from Nableezy, who asked me to explain what I meant by "Wikipedia Gestapo," which I mentioned here. I did not know I had to explain myself to anyone in private conversations I might have on talk pages. I told him it was obviously just a joke. Everyone knows Wikipedia is the free-est, most democratic and open forum for discovering the truth. Stay well. DaringDonna (talk) 18:18, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Wow. Kudos to Barry Weiss and to others like him. Mattisyahu comes to mind, his shows also got canceled because he's pro Israel. It seems to be a common tactic of that side to stifle dissenting speech and shut down voices they don't like. I suppose the truth hurts; it can be scary to realize how sad it is that one has filled the vacuum of meaning in their life with a fallacious cause who's roots can often be traced back to common anti-Semitism. And your last sentence made me lol! All the best, don't lose heart. The truth is on our side, after all.

(btw, I see one of the stalkers of my talk page already replied to you. I removed his comment. He somehow managed to completely mischaraterize what you were saying; he's done the same to me many times. Just ignore him.) JoeJShmo^💌 22:19, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I just saw the AfD.. thank you.

You actually put a smile on my face. That was he first time anyone has ever acknowledged me in an AfD discussion before. :) 9t5 (talk) 00:56, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome! JoeJShmo^💌 02:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Tban

Your tban and ECR cover comments written anywhere and I have removed those comments that violate the restrictions at HumansRightsIsCool user talk. Selfstudier (talk) 08:52, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't know whether it's common practice to consider giving advice to other editors in following EC guidelines as violating a topic ban, in fact I didn't even consider that a possibility seeing to how illogical that would be, but I strongly suspect it isn't. If you tell me it is, I won't restore my comment, I'll just rewrite it to address your concerns. Also, your raising of ECR is entirely moot as: 1. I am EC and 2. I am under the impression that ECR doesn't apply to user spaces. For the record, I didn't realize the topic ban extended to talk pages, as I assumed that was exempt subject to the same rules as ECR being inapplicable to user space. JoeJShmo^💌 09:07, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

No objection to your giving advice, every objection to your commenting about the conflict, which are the parts I removed. Selfstudier (talk) 09:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

No problem. I'll reword that. JoeJShmo^💌 09:13, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Upon further inspection I take issue with the breadth of your removal. I cannot in good faith seriously construe linking the rules of ARB on the conflict and informing the user of the 1RR rule as falling under the spirit of the topic ban. Do you have reason to believe this is common practice or is this your own judgement call. JoeJShmo^💌 09:18, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish: Is my removal reasonable? Selfstudier (talk) 09:22, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I'll take this to mean it was your own judgement call. In the future, I encourage you to ask for advice whether something specific falls under a topic ban before you remove it, not after. JoeJShmo^💌 09:29, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

No, I won't be doing that and I am only doing it now because you are contesting the obvious. Selfstudier (talk) 09:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

This hardly qualifies as obvious, but I digress. JoeJShmo^💌 09:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@Doug Weller @Red-tailed hawk any input? Also, can someone clarify why the practice is apparently to treat such a topic ban as applying to userspace if the Committee thought it logical to exempt userspace from the conflict area in regards to regular PIA restrictions? If this is because of the 'broadly construed' language, I'd ask the same question in regards to why an admin would apply a ban in a wider manner than the Committee generally thought appropriate. JoeJShmo^💌 11:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I think it's useful to remember that the principles of general site-wide policies like WP:TBAN are still also in force, and not only ArbCom stuff. We don't get to pick and choose; they all apply. Left guide (talk) 12:12, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

It is bad practice to alter comments that have been replied to, creates a false impression. Selfstudier (talk) 15:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Should've struck it. JoeJShmo^💌 15:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. That's incredibly deceptive since I wouldn't have replied were it not for the removed material; that's what I was replying to. I've reverted that edit. Please strike it if need be. Left guide (talk) 17:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Per WP:BANREVERT, Anyone is free to revert any edits made in violation of a ban or block, without giving any further reason. That said, refactoring other users' comments is generally frowned upon, so it's usually better to simply revert the entire edit rather than to censor specific sentences. @JoeJShmo, it's the umpteenth time you're refusing to get the point, and I fear you're heading towards getting blocked from editing. — kashmīrī ^TALK 09:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

The question here is whether the edit a specific part of the edit was in fact in violation of a ban. And I'm tired of your characterizing normal discussion as refusing to get the point. You've done this countless times; it's unhelpful and stifles discussion. Please stop it. JoeJShmo^💌 10:07, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Violation of a ban and ecr, both. Selfstudier (talk) 10:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

You must've missed it above when I told you I am EC. That's never been revoked. JoeJShmo^💌 10:11, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

I thought the 1521 edits involved an EC restriction, my apologies. Just a tban breach then. Selfstudier (talk) 10:17, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

It was a topic ban violation. If you continue to violate your topic ban you will be blocked. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:10, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, I was not aware that topic bans apply to userspace, as I assumed that was subject to the same exception as ECR. Now I know better. JoeJShmo^💌 10:13, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Also, the question I was discussing with selfstudier was whether the specific sentence linking the ARB rules and the 1RR rule fell under the spirit of the topic ban. Perhaps you can clear that up. JoeJShmo^💌 10:19, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

That makes no sense; WP:ECR makes no exceptions for userspace. Something isn't adding up here. Left guide (talk) 10:29, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

It says it in ARBPIA. See Definition of the "area of conflict". Not sure if this is specifically by PIA and not by all ECR. Either way, I had previously assumed a topic ban in PIA wouldn't be more wide spread than the original area of conflict itself. JoeJShmo^💌 10:39, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

The more I think about it, the more I wonder why the practice here is apparently to treat the breadth of a topic ban as wider than the Committee thought it logical to define in regards to regular PIA restrictions... JoeJShmo^💌 10:47, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

@JoeJShmo you are hereby topic banned from making any edits that relate to the Arab-Israeli conflict (broadly construed) anywhere on Wikipedia.[1] Which part of "anywhere on Wikipedia" you don't understand? Also, a detailed explanation has been linked for you as WP:TBAN – can you please indicate which policy wording there you find unclear? — kashmīrī ^TALK 14:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

AE appeal declined

Hi JoeJShmo, I've closed the appeal you filed against your topic ban as declined as there was not a consensus to overturn it. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:06, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

That's alright, you're just doing your job ;). By the way, where do I go to do a regular appeal of the ban when I feel that's appropriate?* JoeJShmo^💌 12:16, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

That was the right place to appeal it. The procedure and places to appeal are listed at Wikipedia:Contentious topics#Appeals and amendments. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

hello fren

I want to give you some tips (how not to get into trouble) but your email is disabled :( . Emdosis (talk) 01:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I just enabled it but the 'email user' option isn't showing for me right now. Perhaps it takes some time to process. JoeJShmo^💌 02:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

July 2024

To enforce an arbitration decision, and for violating your topic ban., you have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 1 week. You are welcome to edit once the block expires; however, please note that the repetition of similar behavior may result in a longer block or other sanctions.

If you believe this block is unjustified, please read the guide to appealing blocks (specifically this section) before appealing. Place the following on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Please copy my appeal to the [[WP:AE|arbitration enforcement noticeboard]] or [[WP:AN|administrators' noticeboard]]. Your reason here OR place the reason below this template. ~~~~}}. If you intend to appeal on the arbitration enforcement noticeboard, I suggest you use the arbitration enforcement appeals template on your talk page so it can be copied over easily. You may also appeal directly to me (by email), before or instead of appealing on your talk page. 

ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:17, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

---

Reminder to administrators: In May 2014, ArbCom adopted the following procedure instructing administrators regarding Arbitration Enforcement blocks: "No administrator may modify a sanction placed by another administrator without: (1) the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or (2) prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" [in the procedure]). Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped."

Kindly point me to the diffs in question. JoeJShmo^💌 09:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish I see you're referring to a certain comment I left on a user's talk page. That comment was in reference to arguments being made against users being banned largely based off vague references to their block log. The fact that the editor making the arguments had been dragged to AE in regards to PIA was completely irrelevant to the arguments he was making, and that I was agreeing to. I then made the point that the tactic he was arguing against is commonly used to against editors with a right-leaning POV. I was referencing such a POV generally, not specific to PIA. Please explain your reasons for characterizing this as a violation more clearly. Or perhaps you misread my intentions, in which case I welcome you to remove the block. JoeJShmo^💌 10:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

This, this, and this are all violations that took place after you were warned. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:01, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish I responded to the first diff above. And the last diff is laughable to interpret as falling under the topic ban. As for the second diff, I do see your point. But is one diff really enough for the one week site wide block? JoeJShmo^💌 19:22, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish You again fail to respond or explain yourself further short of providing diffs. You did this last time too, and it took being dragged to EA for you to further explain yourself. Please engage in discussion on talk pages. JoeJShmo^💌 23:28, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what more you want than diffs to clear violations of your topic ban. Yes, a single edit is enough, but you had multiple violations. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

If a single edit is enough than the point is moot. However, for the record, the first diff did not fall under the topic ban as I explained above, and neither did the third diff, which is obvious. Discussing the oversized presence of a certain admin in the IA space of Wikipedia has nothing to do with the conflict itself. I will also note your message to the user there, in which you characterize a discussion of the potential of appealing a topic ban as falling under the topic ban. If you truly believe that, I'm afraid I have little chance of helping you see any error you may have made here. However, I'll leave this comment here for the record. JoeJShmo^💌 23:55, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Any comments related to the topic area, not just the real world conflict but anything about the topic area itself, is covered. You can keep arguing this, but its going to end with either a WP:CIR or a WP:NOTHERE indef block. Or, and this is the wiser move, consider that people who have tens of thousands of edits have a better understanding of the rules here, and try to adapt to them. nableezy - 01:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

StarMississippi

@Star Mississippi just saw your comment on the crypto request. I am actually EC (just subject to a topic ban in IA) and am fully able to edit in the crypto space. You've misread my intentions here, and I'd appreciate if you struck the end of that comment and clarified. I raised the request because I thought those sanctions may have been outdated. Thank you. JoeJShmo^💌 01:51, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

I have done so. Apologies for misreading, I thought E/C had been removed.

I still think you have your hands fun with difficult areas and jumping into another is not wise. Star Mississippi 02:08, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

This is a prime example I advocated for reducing Joe's topic ban to a simple "indefinite until appealed" topic ban, rather than a topic ban until "re-extended-confirmed". It causes too much confusion. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 03:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't see what's causing any confusion here; the provisions are clearly set forth in the topic ban notice above, the Arbitration noticeboard closure, and the AE log entry. Left guide (talk) 04:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

I hear you, I'll take that point. Thanks for clearing this up! JoeJShmo^💌 04:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)