Meta:Requests for adminship/Stemoc

The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a closed Meta-Wiki request. Please do not modify it.

Stemoc edit

Stemoc (talk • contribs • count • logs • page moves • block log • CA • email)
Ending 5 October 2014 22:46 UTC

I don't usually nominate folks for adminship or any other rights, unless I genuinely believe that a project would benefit from it. In my humble opinion that's clearly the case here. Stemoc might look like a newbie to some people (which I don't blame them), but that will change when I say that he was formerly active as Cometstyles (talk · contribs). As Cometstyles he had admin and bureaucrat rights on this project (previous RfA and RfB) and he also had the global rollback rights from 2008 until February 2009. Due to some disagreements he left back then, though in good standing. It's a while ago, I know, but now he is back, and fully. He is active in placing tags on vandalism and spam pages, and reverting vandalism. Both in the SWMT as here on Meta. He is very friendly and always happy to help people; both here and on IRC. Which is why I think he should be given back the admin tools on this "new" account of him - like he also requested lately. Last but not least, he accepted my nomination. Trijnstel_talk 22:46, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I totally accept :) ..--Ste moc 00:09, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support - as nom. Trijnstel_talk 22:46, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per the nom. Sa vh ^ñ 22:52, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose, for now, not convinced by the communicative abilities. An admin should be able to look back properly, more if something went wrong 5 years ago. Sa vh ^ñ 13:58, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Why not? Alan ^(talk) 22:56, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sure. Natuur12 (talk) 23:01, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support I enjoy working with this user especially in the cvn-sw IRC channel. This user has helped me a lot and is super friendly! Good luck! --Eurodyne (talk) 02:38, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes definitely. Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 04:32, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Welcome back :-) Ajraddatz (talk) 04:41, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support encounter with his works on commons sometimes. Welcome back :) ~ Nahid ^Talk 07:57, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Glaisher (talk) 15:21, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Welcome back! Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 15:25, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cometeeeey :DDDD --MF-W 17:34, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support OK --►Cekli 829 18:11, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kolega2357 (talk) 06:43, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wagino 20100516 (talk) 18:07, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Jusjih (talk) 05:23, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:00, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Why not? — revi ^{^} 13:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cometsyles retired in a blaze of drama when their bid for stewardship started failing amid evidence of their abuse of OTRS access. To the best of my knowledge, they have never admitted to the pretty serious violations that happened back then, and I have no idea if they are still claiming that the OTRS admins altered logs to that effect. While people grow up and become more mature, and I am in full support of second chances, I think the first step to prove maturity is admitting one's mistakes instead of blaming on other and address them. Especially with the recent violations that took place by others, I cannot support somebody with a history of abuse of private information without some pretty good explanations for their actions and assurance that it will not happen in the future. Yes, admins do not have access to as much private informations as OTRS agents or stewards, but they still do to some extent. Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 14:40, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be the best description of events that I found. I too would like to hear from Stemoc what has changed since then; it is very similar to a recent case which has gone on here. I am not interested in pillorying someone for actions taken five years ago, but I would like to make sure that Stemoc knows those aren't appropriate. Ajraddatz (talk) 15:46, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't really see that page before today..no need to try to clear it cause its not like anyone will ever believe me. Just to clear that section, I NEVER abused my OTRS privileges, infact, I barely used it.. I only kept it incase I ever needed it for my cross-wiki related work (better to have it and not use instead of needing it and not having it) and I'm really sad that i lost my previous HDD due to a virus infection because I would really like to know who gave them those "forged" logs..wow LOL, all this time i was trying to figure out why people were mass-opposing me and now I know why....Snowolf, the person i "guess" that gave you that log replaced certain words, i never used the words "OTRS", i used the words "IRC".. I often on IRC LOG EVERYTHING including joins/parts which means if a user joined IRC before they "identified", their IP will be shown and over the last 3 years i was on IRC adn wikimedia, i was able to track and report over 2 dozen "socks" with legit accounts across wikimedia....the first line is correct, i did say "No-one uses their real names as their OTRS real name anyways" , the other lines are not correct, neither were they posted in the same hour let alone the same day..and the second line "It was only for fun and wasn't meant to be serious stalking"< I have never ever said that and the following line "- I do this for many OTRS volunteers" < I never said that either, what i said was and quote "- I do 'this' for everyone that comes on "IRC" (i.e if someone joined IRC without a cloak)....so i was maligned and my words not only misconstrued but deliberately "changed" to make it sound like i was violating trust. If you want to discuss this Snowolf, ask me on IRC..I let this go 5 years ago cause it gave me a lot of pain, heck i ignored this wiki for the last 4 years because It made me sad and what i said on my userpage then stays true today. I will repeat, i had NEVER in my 7 year and 8 months on wikimedia had ever abused any of my rights or privileges. The sad part is back then, no one bothered to ask me what happened as my side of the story was just not believable enough for them to accept as fact...thanks for bringing this up snowy, I kept wondering why you were being a bit hostile towards me on IRC since i came back..now I know...--Ste moc 17:04, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, are you saying you've never seen the page Ajr is linking to? Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:09, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, its the first time i have laid my eyes on it and I was on IRC 18 hours a day back then and no one told me and linked me to it..If i had known, I would have been able to fight my case then and not leave....--Ste moc 17:38, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am very puzzled by this, as you directly replied to a link to it during your run for steward, see question 5 here... Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 17:41, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't seen my RfS in 5 years, I refused to go over it as it made me sad, so what i said above is exactly what i answered in my RfS, I never committed a crime, someone "deliberately" replaced one word with another and made it look like I did and I explained it exactly how it happened there. I'm not in the habit of digging graves so I don't want to talk more about it as that would mean that I would be be forced to 'actually' release details as to who may or why they may have done this which obviously i refuse to do..I'm happy to discuss on this further though...Atleast i was able to clear one thing today from my past--Ste moc 18:08, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's a big deal if you don't remember the statement, it's been 5 years, though I think the records at question 5 show that you did read it at the time, and emphatically denied its accuracy. You will had to forgive me, but even if we ignore the whole discussion about whether the logs were altered or not to include the infamous quote, the core problem as I see it, according to an OTRS admin, you accessed confidential information from OTRS wiki to find out the real life identity of another OTRS volunteer. I quote directly OTRS admin User:Daniel: "Cometstyles used a list of OTRS agents, located at OTRS-Wiki, to attempt to find information out about a fellow volunteer, X. This immediately followed (as in, 24-48 hours after) X being promoted within a set of IRC channels, where Cometstyles felt he would be a better person to fill the position than X. In a fit of petulance, Cometstyles resigned his positions within this set of channels immediately, and proceeded to use the OTRS-Wiki details to Google search the details. He then 'bragged' about this to a fellow Wikimedian, who didn't have access to this OTRS data.". This part of the statement, as I see it, is unrelated to the latter part relied on logs from X as to what the justification for this was, which is what prompted the whole debate about the accuracy of the logs between yourself and User:Rjd0060 at question 5. This is an OTRS admin making a statement about abuse of OTRS access by an OTRS volunteer, and while I do not always see eye to eye with the OTRS admins, I have no reasons to doubt their honesty and integrity, and I have to take their statements at face value. I also add that your retirement statement, still visible on your former user's userpage, dismisses the concerns of those who opposed your candidacy based on this breach with the sentence, and I quote, "All those that opposed me always had an axe to grind with me. I stepped on too many toes and I'm saddened to see that the enwiki cabal have again managed to literally "fuck me up" again, and people always wondered why i hated enwiki so much. I love enwiki, i just hate its politically driven admin community who'll do everything they can to make sure they stay in power, and even block those people who questions their leadership and decision making skills.". Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 18:11, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I did write that 5 years ago, and then I left. Not related to this but since you brought it up, In the last 5 years, has the english wikipedia grown? I have read so many articles regarding this and honestly, the answer is no. What Daniel wrote about what happened is what i would say in one word is "Misinformed". That is not what happened and I explained this 5 years ago and today and if you refuse to accept my reply then that is your choice. Everyone that has "really" known me over the last 7 odd years knows that I can be trusted and I follow the rule to the letter, even when i'm not happy with some decisions. The one thing i have always sucked at is explaining myself. I can't help it, I'm short tempered and so I always have to keep myself happy so that i do not lose my cool but i usually end up losing it anyways..hehe..its my kryptonite and Jasper Deng, I'm not immature, I just behave less maturely on IRC because I know most users there are themselves kids. I have been on IRC for as long as i have been on wiki and I generally ended up helping new users, generally kids so i figured the best way to make them feel welcomed is to be just like them....not to mention i was born with a ridiculously huge funny bone. The ONE thing i always wanted from contributors was to judge me on my edits, my contributions and that is what I still hope for to this day...as funny or immature as i act on IRC, My work and contributions always tell a different story. I hope my comments today have cleared up some of those misunderstandings but if it hasn't, I'm happy to discuss this on my talk page. My biggest regret honestly was to leave wikimedia then, but then I realized years later that this was one of the things i actually excelled at and thus why I came back. I never created a new account or hid my identity, I even chose a nickname which smart enough users would be able to guess ;) I have nothing to hide cause I did nothing wrong. A misunderstanding cost me my RfS. I just hope another doesn't cause me to leave for good...this time...Please continue asking question though...I will try to explain everything as much as i 'legally' can..--Ste moc 18:51, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's been a lot of focus, both back in 2009 and now, on the issue of the IRC logs. However, I think they are distracting from the central point of this. An OTRS admin, back in 2009, stated you disclosed private information from the OTRS wiki / OTRS system to a non-OTRS agent. This, as I understand it, contained details about the real name of an agent. Is this not what happened? Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 19:26, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
again, not true as i had said earlier, I barely used or visited OTRS and the permission sections i was under was usually empty the random few times i went there. I'm not sure what that OTRS admin is talking about. The closest i can remember discussing anything related was to a user on IRC after my RfS began to plummet to find out what was happening..--Ste moc 00:52, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- IRC drama imported into the wiki by selective quotation of private logs is a classic of RfA which always makes me ashamed of entering IRC. --Nemo 17:18, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Based on this, does not understand the seriousness of wheel warring. Also per Snowolf. In my opinion, I also sometimes thinks he acts a bit immaturely on IRC too.--Jasper Deng (talk) 17:28, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very limited recent experience, and while I've never heard of you before today, Snowolf's concerns are well, concerning, even if old. Courcelles 03:52, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I get the sense that you're a nice guy, but I'm sensing some difficulties in communication, unfortunately. --Rs chen 7754 05:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

After the appointed time has passed, this request is has the required support of 75% (Meta:Administrators#Policy_for_requesting_adminship), albeit narrowly. Done --MF-W 22:20, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]