THE DECEMBER BLOCK
Salient points of this block
1. Terms of unblock included supplying diffs to edits by FT2 - which edits were immediately oversighted. This was a gross breach of trust.
2. The final reason for the block was 'legal threat', even though there never was a legal threat.
3. I have never accused FT2 of practising zoophilia. My issue with this editor was (and remains) his biased and slanted editing aimed at normalising the practice of bestiality, and his arbitrarily blocking or banning of editors who aimed at restoring NPOV to the articles on this subject.
Tuesday 4 December
The run-up to the block was my canvassing in the December Arbitration committee elections in Wikipedia. I regarded one the candidates, who operated under the pseudonym 'FT2' as a pernicious and destructive influence on the encyclopedia, because of his biased and slanting editing in the area of pseudoscience and alternative sexuality.
16:24 - I went too far and made a comment which I regret, but which I unreservedly apologised for: “OK I'm sorry for that. I will delete it and promise to make no further remarks of that sort if you remove the block. Please. edward 18:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
18:30 - A discussion which clarifies what my allegations actually are. “I repeat, these are nothing to do with his private life. He has made public statements in articles in WP that are POV, and intended to support human sex with animals. His private life is his own affair. His public statements are such as to bring disrepute to the project. edward (buckner) 18:51, 4 December 2007 (UTC)†[Note that FT2 has alleged that this claim came 'much later'. This diff clearly disproves that.
18:54 - Scribe challenges me to produce any edits. “You have still yet to provide a single diff of these allegedly POV edits. WjBscribe 18:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)â€
18:57 - I comment on the absence of diffs. “On the other talk page, someone disputed whether I have links. Yes I do. I had hoped we could do without that. I would be happy if FT2 withdrew, and we ended this. It is not in the interests of this project to escalate this.â€
19:36 – Scribe unblocks (see block log below). I apologise again. “It was a momentary aberrationâ€.
19:44 - Again I emphasise that my issue is what FT2 writes in Wikipedia, not what he may or may not do in his spare time.
QUOTE
The block has been removed, as I apologised. I leave it up to you as to guidelines on what to do with the page. It mostly consists of links, and some discussion. My point relates only to PUBLIC statements, on WP, made by the user in question. [Damian] 19:44, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Wednesday 5 December
20:00 - a dialogue with Scribe. This shows that my apologies about my remarks during the campaign, my offers of blanking page and so on, were accepted, Berry and others. Postlethwaite was mildly reproved for having escalated the situation (which he certainly did – “you're cruising for block No.2â€). Berry “I don't think threatening more blocks here is wise. [Damian] is not a troll, he is a longstanding solid contributor in good standing.â€
20:17 I ask for help from Giano on the evening of the 5 December - this part contains the now infamous remark "I have contacted the relevant organisations. " That evening I made the blog post which referenced the Zoophilia article. Note this post did not mention FT2 by name - it simply criticised the extreme bias that I saw in the article.
Thursday 6 December
The Yogacara network replicates the blog Thu, 2007-12-06 09:16.
I take a morning off work to delete the blog post and ask Veggieboards to remove a thread. I strike through my vote in the elections. I retire from Wikipedia. My talk page for 13:15 shows me apologising to Ryan Postlethwaite under duress. “Ok I no longer plan to pursue in any context. You win.†This caused some puzzlement, the reason was WP:IP. I deny ever having made legal threat.
The ANI page shows clearly the unblock was made by Postlethwaite (13:15 UTC), but then reapplied by Scribe. The chronology here is important, and to be read with the block log showing Scribe blocks at 14:53 for “serious off-wiki campaign of harassment and attacks against another editor†even though I had removed everything and had made promises.
Saturday 8 December
The two Zoophilia edits are oversighted. See here for details on what the edits contained, and here for some of the evidence that they were oversighted.
