Wikiversity:Community Review/Ottava Rima 2

__NOINDEX__

Given that Ottava is no longer editing at this time I am archiving this Review since there is not much point in continuing a discussion about perceived problematic editing that is no longer occuring. --mikeu talk 16:00, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Ottava Rima
This is a community review to request that Ottava be blocked contributing to Wikiversity for the period of a year or indefinitely, and to be banned from chatting in #wikiversity and #wikiversity-en on freenode for a period of a year or indefinitely. The reason I seek this because Ottava has been been involved in:


 * 1) Harassment of Wikiversity contributors on Wikiversity and on IRC;
 * 2) Undermining the efforts to get academics involved by attacking academics working on Wikiversity with institutional support;
 * 3) Using other sites to canvas support for his positions, to continue harassment related to Wikiversity actions against him and to avoid responsibility for his actions on Wikiversity by engaging in those activities elsewhere;
 * 4) Being a disruptive influence on other Wikimedia Foundation projects, from which he has been banned indefinitely;
 * 5) Ignoring Wikiversity policy, except as it can help him further his own agenda or works against his own agenda;
 * 6) Claiming that he is Wikiversity.

Ottava has been blocked before for bad behavior. Blocking him again would not be without precedent.

'''IRC log note: Both IRC rooms have had open logging policies for a while and that the room is logged appears in the topic of at least one of these rooms, and has been for several months. This can be verified via logs. For this reason, IRC log excerpts are provided with out getting explicit permission from the users being quoted.'''

Harassment
In conversations on IRC, Ottava will accuse people he does not agree with of being liars. This has happened to me on several occasions.

When Ottava had the power to block, he made several threats to block people he did not like:

Ottava threatened to block a user: I have notified both of the two admin who are watching the page that you are trying to disrupt and you will most likely be blocked when they  log in. And this was followed by, You will be removed from this community following SB Johnny.

Ottava threatened another time: "Making things up is incivil. Now, you were warned about such statements in the top of this page and if you continue you will be  blocked. Your disruption of this community, as well as SB Johnny's,  Mu301's, and anyone else who wants to encourage you, is officially over."

Ottava made threats again: "Any attempts to disrupt will result in you being blocked, as two admin have promised to watch over the hearing to ensure that consensus  is respected and this policy measure is completed without distraction.  "

Ottava made another threat "Evidence has been provided in the previous sections. If you keep this  up, you will be blocked. "

Ottava threatened Stanistani with loss of cooperation: " I also find it strange how you can defend a user who has proven to  stalk multiple users at Wikiversity irl and do such over a 3 year  period. If you honestly feel that such behavior is acceptable, then you  can be certain that I could never work with you, and most people could  not as that is one of those bright lines that a lot of people are  completely uncomfortable with"

Ottava threatened to block SB Johnny and initiated a recall against him: "You have been recalled and a confirmation hearing conforming to policy has been put up here. If you want to go ahead and have your rights removed, then  that may help consideration of your years of nasty incivility,  inappropriate harassment, and creation a poisonous atmosphere when the  ban hearing is started following the confirmation hearing. Any attempts to disrupt will result in you being blocked, as two admin  have promised to watch over the hearing to ensure that consensus is  respected and this policy measure is completed without distraction."

Ottava posted a threat of blocking when he said others were watching and had assurances of blocks: "I have notified both of the two admin who are watching the page that you are trying to disrupt and you will most likely be blocked when they log  in. Statements like  this are unacceptable, especially when you posted claims about me that  lacked evidence and amounted to no actual violation. If you think SB  Johnny deserves to be an admin, then make an argument. You have failed  to do anything as such. And no evidence? There were multiple links, so  outright making false statements is not appropriate conduct for  Wikiversity."

Ottava threatened ABD with a block: "If you continue even though this long standing policy is -very- clear on the matter, you will be blocked and a ban proposal will be put up.  "  This despite community consensus that says that is not a blockable offense.

He threatened with a block again saying: "Anyone can be blocked for helping a user evade a block - reinstating a user's edits like that is helping them."

Ottava threatened Adambro with desysop on IRC if Adambro placed a block longer than 24 hours on Ottava. (The IRC logs were public but have subsequently been deleted.)

When Ottava had the power to block people, he in fact did block people he did not like:

Ottava blocked Gmaxwell using a single-edit excuse for the block.

Ottava blocked ABD based on a disagreement without providing adequate warning.

Beyond threats to ban others as a form of harassment, Ottava engages in trying to get others to take care of his problems, accuses people of colluding against him, accuses people of being liars, and makes absurd claims about his detractors.

When Ottava could not get people to do what he wanted, he tried to get his way by taking it off Wikiversity "The decision is not made by a Crat but by a Steward. A Crat merely judges if there is consensus. And if two Crats want to object to the process then Meta will process it anyway - after all, you opened the  door to ignoring policy and procedure for such."

Ottava engaged in harassment of Jack Merridew by making absurd claims about him that could not be substantiated: "You basically stole credit for over 100k worth of my work in order to justify getting adminship at Wikisource and then used that to get a ban  appeal. Unlike you, I don't claim the work of others. Now please go  wander elsewhere, you aren't welcome here. "

Ottava implied collusion and appears to threaten others that failure to comply with his views will result in them losing adminship on Wikiversity: "And because of my Meta RfC, SB Johnny, Abd, and even you wont dare to try and silence the community as you know that if you dare try you will  be removed for your abuse. It is about time light is shine on your  corrupt ways so that the community can overcome the chilling affect and  make its voice clear. Already 3 blatant supports and  2 other supports outside of that section. The hole will be patched up,  Abd will be removed from adminship, and those who continue to try and  put themselves above the community, like you, SB Johnny, and the rest,  will be dealt with once and for all." Ottava implied collusion: "To be honest, that vote there was one of the reasons why I feel you might be a person from WR or a friend of Kohs. It is hard to account for  some of your opposition without an adequate background to establish  such." Ottava accused Jtneill of being a liar: "Then why is it that you allow inactive admin to still have authority? That you side with people who create no content but still think they  should have adminship? Or that you would even consider Abd a legitimate  Custodian candidate when Moulton has pointed out that he is the exact  opposite of a scientist and an academic and has no place in an  educational environment? Why do your actions promote a system opposite  of what you claim to desire?"

Ottava accused some one of bullying and harassment with out providing any evident to support the claim: "You transformed it from something easy and fun to have a few friends do basic maintenance to a position of bullying and harassment that is your  "right" to have to wage war on your enemies."

Ottava harassed SB Johnny and provided unsubstantiated claims by saying: "You've never been on Wikiversity's side. You allowed those like Salmon of Doubt to outright troll and abuse, you violated the community's trust  multiple times, screwed with people like JWS and Moulton just for fun,  and do very little but cause disruption and violate our policies. You  provide no educational content. You have no positive relationship with  this community. You were even desysopped by Jimbo for outright abuse." Ottava made the unsubstantiated claim regarding SB Johnny: "You burnt your bridges here long ago, then you came back to cause disruption against Jimbo. You aren't welcome. You have done a lot to try  and bring down this community, probably more than anyone else. "

Ottava harassed and made an unsubstantiated claim when he said: "We don't have "special policies and qualities". The only policies that got passed were those passed in spite of your actions. Most global  sysops have more experience on these wikis and keeping them working than  you ever will. After all, they were actually put into a position of  trust by consensus. "

When confronted with unsubstantiated claims, he refuses to provide proof: "You haven't been around long enough to know who are standard members, how they act, and the rest. You have only been around during the summer  and only in areas with the trolling and disruption. If you want to say I  have no evidence, fine. I don't need to provide evidence to you about  it. "

Ottava was repeatedly asked to substantiate claims but did not: "Since Ottava Rima has not come forward with evidence to support the claim that Moulton was banned and that he has  made attacks, I view Ottava's block of Moulton to be a serious violation  of the civility policy"

He made other unsubstantiated uncivil claims about SB Johnny: "You were drama mongering and backroom dealing with people on IRC months before Moulton was banned. It seems like you are completely incapable of  admitting the sleaze that you have pulled on this community. Go keep  your drama on your own site and play your games there."

The following is an extract from a February 9, 2011 chat where he implies people are out to get him:

[07:00]  Wait. Don't start the war yet, Ottava. I don't have all the Omnimax Cinerama Technicolor Zoomar 3-D Cameras in position yet. [07:01]  And we need more microphone booms to pick up the death rattles, too. [07:02]  Wars are over rated. [07:03]  o.O [07:05]  But highly entertaining when dramatized on television in shows like Spartacus and Rome. [07:07]  I hate shows like the new Spartacus. They are basically just low quality porn combined with bad soap opera drama [07:17]  What if Abd and Ottava gave a war and no one came? [07:21]  Moulton: Isn't that par for course? [07:22]  Um, Moulton - Abd is warring against me, you, JWS, SB Johnny, Mikeu, Wikipedia, etc [07:23]  Haven't you seen his recent aiding KBlott in cross wiki sock puppetry to promote a very fringe POV while making nasty attacks on others? [07:23]  Ottava, you and Abd are simply providing me with material for a comic opera with lotsa bad puns and atrocious song parodies.

The following is an extract from a February 1, 2011 chat:

[07:15]  I have morals [07:15]  You might not agree with them [07:15]  There is a fine line there. [07:15]  but it doesn't mean I have done anythting amoral [07:15]  No murder [07:15] <Ottava> no stealing [07:15] <Ottava> no rape [07:15] <Ottava> nothing [07:15] <Ottava> definitionally, you are way wrong [07:15] <LauraHale> You sound pretty immoral to me because of your lack  of empathy. [07:15] <Ottava> otherwise, every self centered person is a psychopath, which would mean  most of the world is [07:16] <LauraHale>  You've stated a willingness to get rid of everyone on Wikiversity to  futher your own Wikiversity agenda. [07:16] <Ottava> Hell, your ranting is very self centered [07:16] <Ottava> It is motivated by a hurt ego [07:16] <LauraHale> In the context of a wiki, you're willing to committ  genocide. [07:16] <Ottava> because I didnt treat you like the princess you wish you were [07:16] <Ottava> If you want a sychophant, go find one [07:16] <Ottava> demanding everyone arbitrarily fulfill the role will get  you no where [07:16] <LauraHale> I guess that makes me overly capable of empathy to think genocide is bad. [07:16] <Ottava> I'm not here to fulfill your psychological inadequacies. [07:16] <Ottava> You aren't capable of any empathy :) [07:16]  <Ottava> You have proven tha [07:17]  <Ottava> that [07:17] <Ottava> You  are as self centered as I am [07:17] <LauraHale>  And I have the logs of your statements to support my claim of Ottava  believes in community genocide to support Ottava's world view. :) [07:17] <Ottava> tha is the amusing part [07:17] <Ottava> which community did I say to kill off? [07:17] <LauraHale> Wikiversity. [07:17] <LauraHale> Ottava's way or no way. [07:18] <LauraHale> Ottava was a bad boy. [07:18] <Ottava> Wikiversity removal would be genocide? [07:18] <Ottava> o.O [07:18] <LauraHale>  Ottava lost his privileges because he was willing to kill the community  to do his way. [07:18] <Ottava> Okay, now that is quite out of touch [07:18] <LauraHale> Wikiversity content =/= Wikiversity community. [07:18] <Ottava> Laura, do your parents know that you consider the  disabanding of an online website the equivalent of Nazis burning Jews  for their religion? [07:18] <Ottava> I think they fucked up in raising you.

Ottava made unsubstantiated allegations of sockpuppeting: "You were, and for very nasty stuff - sock puppetry, stalking, disrupting dozens of pages, etc. I only do what is best for encyclopedic articles.  You only do what is best for your own personal agenda. That is the  difference between us."

Ottava has made other unsubstantiated claims of sockpuppeting: "It was mostly sock puppetry, making gay slurs, making suggestions that they were middleschoolers, etc. "

Ottava made other unsubstantiated claims of sock puppetry in order to harrass JWS: "We all know that proxies are used in such situations. Sock puppetry catching is 90% behavior. The behavior that was there was 100% not that  of a new user and 100% including capitalization and language common for  it being a sock puppet. Furthermore, JWS, it has already been shown that  you've made a sock puppet and that there are plenty of others. If you  want, we can enforce a clean house on such as sock puppetry has a  history of being known to be disruptive."


 * (Related to sock puppetry allegations, Ottava has been accused of having his own sock. In [Ottava's defense], Ottava said: "It isn't undisclosed. Sj knows about the account and information on it  was provided to the Foundation via him. It is also known by multiple  admin. These are standard procedures across the WMF for dealing with  such accounts used for such reasons."


 * When asked to disclose other socks, Ottava said: "I'm not linking to it as it contains personally identifying information." "It is an account that the Foundation knows about used only to post up content that is similar in nature to content that I have produced  elsewhere. It was created to allow easy relicensing of content so that  there would be no future concerns between information published under my  real life name and that published as Ottava Rima.")

Ottava has allegedly made unsubstantiated claims of expertise in order to put down and harass others: Ottava: "I learned as an educator that the only way to ensure that the majority of children learn is to remove the tiny minority that are there to only  play games. " Challenged by Abd: "As to what Ottava has "learned," he didn't learn this from up-to-date  education courses nor from masters at the process. Playing games and  learning are the same thing, at best. "  Ottava, actively involved elsewhere on the page, never came back to substantiate his implied claim as an educator of children.

Related to the above, Ottava has been accused of incivility here, here, here, and here.

TeleComNasSprVen mentions Ottava's incivility: "Right now, I have seen more incivility coming from either Ottava or Abd more so than I have ever seen SB Johnny. "

In addition to the above, when Ottava does not get his way, he tries to use community consensus tools to get his way. An example of that is Trying to prevent SB Johnny from becoming a Custodian and Bureaucrat.

Ottava engaged in harassment when he opened a review against Mikeu. He also engaged in harrassment when he opened an earlier review of mikeu. He engaged in further harrassment when he initiated a review against abd.

Response
Wow, the lies above are unbelievable. It seems like Laura is just throwing everything possible for whatever reason. Like this: "Ottava engaged in harassment of Jack Merridew by making absurd claims about him that could not be substantiated:" Except that they were substantiated and well known. This proves that I wrote the content and this shows where Jack Merridew uses my name and content to justify getting adminship -without- notifying me or telling me he did that. Jack Merridew harassed many of my friends and was banned. I would not have supported him using -my- work to gain adminship. To say -I- am harassing him when I have never followed him anywhere yet he follows me is ridiculous. Everything above is just as absurd as this point and it boggles the mind that LauraHale is not blocked for outright lies and libel.

Just look at some of it: "Ottava has allegedly made unsubstantiated claims of expertise in order to put down and harass others". Really? What did I make up? I already put my academic record showing my multiple degrees, people know of my various publications, and I have tons of work here and elsewhere. "never came back to substantiate his implied claim as an educator of children" Really? Because Abd believes that children shouldn't be disciplined? I fulfilled the requirements for the Maryland Secondary Teaching Certification in 2005, which means that my knowledge of education is more recent than Abd's, who constantly tells everyone he has been an expert for decades and thus hasn't been involved in modern changes in education. But no, Laura wants to throw up whatever she can.

I do enjoy this one: "Ottava threatened Adambro with desysop on IRC if Adambro placed a block longer than 24 hours on Ottava." No. I told Adambro that if he used admin ops to block JWSchmidt because the two are in a long standing feud that I would overturn them and put it up for a desysop. I didn't threaten him if he was to block me. Admin do not have the right to use blocks to inflict pain on others as revenge for arguments and disputes. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Undermining academic involvement
Offline, I have discussed Wikiversity with many people. Much of this conversation occurred at RecentChangesCamp Canberra, where a number of academics and Wikiversitians were present. I asked people why they did not contribute more to Wikiversity. At least three people cited Ottava by name, saying they did not want to deal with him as he is a known trouble maker. One of them cited his activities on Wikipedia as evidence of this. Other people cited the politicking as a reason not to get involved. The academics I have talked to just want to accomplish their own objectives, without having to worry about the bureaucracy involved. This includes having to worry about being subject to a community review because someone disagreed with them.

Beyond my discussions, undermining academic involvement can be seen by Ottava's willingness to file community reviews against academics in good standing who get into conflict with him. Example: Community Review/Jtneill.

Ottava's attempts to get content, regardless of context, hampers legitimate academic efforts. In this case, he was trying to ban nude images from being uploaded to Wikiversity in order to protect children.

Ottava does not publish on Wikiversity under his real name. He does not present credentials on Wikiversity that can be verified. He does not appear to represent a university or larger academic department or university support. He then makes unsubstantiated claims that active academics publishing under their real names with institutional support do not behave like academics: ""is that the community was primarily concerned about civilit? Where was the discussion on civility? I find it very concerning that you make these claims yet there is nothing to back that up. As Moulton would say, that has no basis in real education or academia. You have to have both evidence and sound principles to follow. It requires direct evidence. You don't see a problem that there is many assumptions, grouped together voting, lack of discussion, and the rest? You don't see that just these very things are what tore apart this community for the past two years? And you don't think that by allowing non-regulars to vote would not split the community any further? Why would you think that any more than a small handful of people would ever trust you or side with you? You further the political factioning of this community."

According to JWSchmidt, Ottava did not evenly apply Wikiversity policy regarding use of real names: "Ottava Rima, why was Moulton singled out for his use of real world names when others such as KillerChihuahua were  allowed to make statements such as "My experience  with Barry is that he flouts all rules and rejects or mocks attempts to  work with him." (see this discussion)?"

Response
Imaginary and fanciful rewriting of history. Laura has never recruited anyone to work on classes nor can anyone say I have ever chased anyone away. I don't mess around with individual projects here, criticize content, or anything like that. Hell, I have very little actual presence beyond gnome work. And to top it off, this so unbelievably wrong: "Ottava does not publish on Wikiversity under his real name." I do, and if people actually knew anything about Wikiversity they would have known that. Also, I like how you try to say that pornography is some how necessary to academia instead of one of the major factors why both women and academics ignore the WMF projects. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:52, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Actions elsewhere
Rather than address problems on Wikiversity in a civil fashion, Ottava will approach people on other platforms and engage in behavior that would not be acceptable on Wikiversity. He has also made claims about Wikiversity off Wikiversity that are either not true or cannot be substantiated.

A February 16, 2011 example of this:

[14:54] * Joins: Ottava (~no@184.241.42.252) [14:54] <JWSchmidt> hi Ottava [14:59] <Moulton> It's the Ottavan Empire! [15:00] <JWSchmidt> so, Moulton, have you been bullying people? [15:01] <Moulton> Oh, it's worse than that. I've been singing duets with them. [15:01] <Moulton> Talk about torture. [15:02] <Ottava> http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JoshuaZ&curid=108454&action=history [15:02] <Ottava> That shows you are doing far worse [15:03] <JWSchmidt> it is strange how most people are proud of their wiki contributions and even make lists of their works, and then there are IDcabalists who want to hide their history and prevent people from discussing what they have done [15:04] <Moulton> Ha ha. JZ is begging The Dark One to protect him. [15:04] <Moulton> Is it not amazing how the Corrupt Ones come flocking to my door. [15:05] <JWSchmidt> The Dark One is known as a practiced censor of Wikiversity [15:05] <Ottava> JWSchmidt, Smectymnuus and many others used pseudonyms because of nasty attacks on their personal lives from others [15:06] <Moulton> What was Rumpelstiltskin's real name? [15:06] <JWSchmidt> I think that the IDcabalists can dish nasty attacks but they can't stand an honest discussion of their misguided behavior [15:06] <Ottava> If they out others then blank that [15:06] <Ottava> But outing them is not academic [15:06] <Ottava> it is bullying [15:07] <Ottava> Academia is not the realm of thuggery [15:07] <Moulton> Addressing a fellow scholar from Yale by his name is bullying? Golly. [15:07] <Moulton> Have you been reading George Orwell again, [redacted --Abd 18:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC) ? [15:07] <Ottava> Address a fellow scholar by the name he fucking published under instead of adding some name -you- feel is better fitting [15:07] <Ottava> Its called academic respect [15:07] <Ottava> which you lack [15:08] <Ottava> you lack method [15:08] <Ottava> you attack people out of revenge [15:08] <Ottava> you aren't engaging anyone properly [15:08] <Ottava> stop with the bullshit already [15:08] <Moulton> Can I quote you on that, [redacted --Abd 18:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC), and attribute it to the distinguished scholar for Catholic University of America? [15:08] <Ottava> I'm tired with you trying to use "academia" to justify thuggish tactics done only to hurt and bully others!!! [15:09] <Moulton> Have you taken that nap yet? [15:09] <Moulton> When one is tired, it is good to take a nap. [15:09] <Moulton> Would you like me to sing you a lullabye? [15:10] <Ottava> Moulton, what you are doing is against Maryland law and the law of many other states, you know [15:10] <Moulton> Feel free to request the Maryland State Police to have me arrested. [15:10] <Ottava> No, I'll have the Maryland State Policy file a subpeona for the files at Picard's lab [15:11] <Ottava> and then she will have to explain why the lab had invesigators [15:11] <Ottava> I mean seriously, is that what you want? [15:11] <Moulton> "Officer Bupkes, please go to Massachusetts and arrest Moulton. He addressed me by my real name." [15:11] <Ottava> It is more than just using real names [15:11] <Ottava> you are bullying people [15:11] <Ottava> you are stalking people [15:11] <Ottava> you are harassing people [15:11] <Ottava> It isn't acceptable human behavior. [15:12] <Moulton> Feel free to harass MIT all you like. May I quote you on your proposal to do that, [redacted --Abd 18:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC) ? [15:12] <Ottava> Moulton, if you keep it up someone will probably end up calling the cops. I didn't say I would. [15:12] <Ottava> But they will go after the various files [15:12] <Ottava> drag other people into it [15:12] <Moulton> Have you called them yet? Would you like me to look up their phone number for you? [15:12] <Ottava> You will only ruin everyone's life by attempting to ruin a few people's lives [15:13] <Ottava> Do you have any self awareness? [15:13] <Ottava> Any care? [15:13] <Ottava> I mean, god, you are acting like Abd [15:13] <Moulton> If I didn't care, why would I work so hard to enlighten you, Jeff? [15:14] <Ottava> You aren't trying to do anything but get some kind of sick pleasue by causing people pain [15:14] <Moulton> Are you in pain, [redacted --Abd 18:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC) ? [15:15] <Ottava> Fuck off Moulton and stop harassing people

When Ottava lost his privileges on Wikiversity, he tried filing a request on meta to avoid losing those privileges.

When Ottava was not successful at getting rid of SB_Jonny on Wikiversity, he took it to meta wiki. (He has done similar things, getting banned on commons after contacting Sue Gardner because he got into trouble for de-admining some one else. In another case, despite Ottava's problems with Jimbo's handling of Wikiversity in the past, Ottava appealed to Jimmy Wales to help him).

He has made claims on meta wiki regarding what will and will not be tolerated on Wikiversity: "Sorry, but penis images are not going to be used on Wikiversity, Wikisource, Wikiquote, or the other sister projects. They are only used  on Wikipedia. Your background and experience as both an editor of  Wikipedia and of the sister projects is lacking, so I do not expect you  to understand the matter. "

To avoid a public trail, Ottava sometimes uses e-mail: "You were warned about such things via email." He was warned off this type of action: "Being warned about "such things" off-wiki is irrelevant. "

Ottava was accused by JWSchmidt of colluding with others off wiki to ban another Wikiversity user: "Ottava Rima, is it not true that the  decision to ban Moulton from Wikiversity was made in secret, off wiki by  just a few people? Ottava Rima, were you part of the secret  off-wiki discussions where a few people decided to impose a ban on  Moulton? Ottava Rima, is it true that Moulton was  never community banned? Ottava Rima, please either respond here or  remove the block that you imposed on Moulton." This was an accusation that Ottava did not answer on Moulton's review page, despite actively contributing elsewhere on the page during the same time period.

While he avoids accountability for his own actions on IRC, e-mail and on Wikipedia Review, he seeks to hold others accountable for their actions on these places: " it is odd how he ignores his own incivility and SB Johnny's incivility at Wikipedia Review. "

Furthermore, it could be argued that Ottava sought to further avoid accountability for his actions on Wikimedia Foundation projects as a whole by taking his ban to ArbCom and not living with the consequences of his actions that resulted in his ban.

Attempts to get around accountability for his actions have been alleged on Wikiversity as they alleged to Wikipedia. SB Johnny alleges that: "Yes, you post stuff on WV to get around your WP ban."

Response
Some of the above I had to laugh at. Is Laura trying to suggest that the 1000 white penis images will be used? Or that emailing Abd to chastise him privately to save him from public embarrassment is bad? And the last part about my ArbCom ban is quite laughable. ArbCom even ruled that others could proxy my content, so where am I "getting around it"? Ottava Rima (talk) 15:48, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Disruptiveness
According to JWSchmidt, Ottava has been disruptive: "However, other abusive sysops such as Adambro and Ottava Rima were able to step up and  continue the disruption of Wikiversity by means of calling for and  imposing bad blocks in violation of Wikiversity policy." and "This past Summer, Ottava Rima took it upon himself to enforce Jimbo's absurd ban against Moulton."

According to abd, Ottava is disruptive: "Ottava, in response to my warning about disruption, started a process to topic ban me from making any edits to Wikiversity pages (which would be  a tad draconian for a sysop, eh?). "

Blocked elsewhere
He was indefinetely blocked on meta wiki.

He was indefinetely blocked on English Wikipedia.

Not interested in policy/Only interested in policy when it helps him
The following is an extract from a chat, where Ottava shows that he is not interested in policy, a comment in comment in contradiction to his behavior where he makes legalistic arguements to get rid of sysadmins, bueacrats and others who cross him:

[11:11] <SB_Johnny> "is X, Y, Z acceptable?" [11:11] I would suggest 22 questions as the maximum to allow per review, based on some theory that anything can be learned by answering 22 questions, if I'm remembering correctly [11:11] <SB_Johnny> and if it isn't, CR "has the weight of policy" [11:11] <SB_Johnny> good lord [11:11] <SB_Johnny> 22 is way too many [11:12] <SB_Johnny> 10 at most [11:12] <SB_Johnny> 5 or 6 much better [11:12] <mikeu_awy> yeah, 1/2 dozen [11:12] <SB_Johnny> the goal should be to get core principles, not specifics [11:13] <Ottava> The goal should be to stop boring people to death about things that dont matter [11:13] <SB_Johnny> a handful at most, never more than a handful :-) [11:13] <Juandev> hello guys [11:13] <SB_Johnny> heya Juandev [11:14] <SB_Johnny> we're talking about http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:SB_Johnny/CR_CR [11:14] * mikeu_awy need to head out now [11:14] <mikeu_awy> see you all later [11:14] <SB_Johnny> 'k, have a nice eve! [11:15] <Juandev> SB_Johnny: that sounds interesting [11:16] <SB_Johnny> well, it's aimed at trying to make these discussions more productive and less combative [11:16] <SB_Johnny> boring people to death might actually be a good thing, in that light [11:17] maybe like the Nomic game that was started at Wikiversity, maybe there should be a page to encourage people to play the Questions game [11:18] <Juandev> good night guys [11:18] <Ottava> How about this - we black list about 50 negative words

An example of this can be seen when Ottava ignores consensus on Wikiversity: "Thus, at this point the very rough consensus is for Undelete, particularly temporary undeletion, not Delete as Ottava implies."

Others have observed Ottava's lack of willingness to seek consensus: " I see no equivalent desire on Ottava's part to actually seek current consensus. And this is Ottava, not anyone else. "

While Ottava is not always willing to obey consensus, he is willing to call others out for not obeying consensus: "As Steward Mardetan has pointed out, all WMF projects need consensus to determine things and that adminship would require consensus."

As demonstrated above, Ottava ignored consensus when it came to Ottava taking independent action in defiance of consensus. When others do that he talks of banning them: "Furthermore, stiffling community processes and ignoring community  consensus is a bannable offense,"

In a case of rules are good with helping himself in regards to canvassing, Ottava urged SB Johnny to e-mail inactive custodians regarding the removal of their status, "Have you bothered to email them? And if someone who hasn't used their admin ops in over 2 years returns suddenly, are we to assume that they  are still up to date with our current standards and still trusted? I  have a feeling JWS wont think that is true regarding McCormack. ". SB Johnny did this. According to ABD, the consequences were: "What was effectively demonstrated was that these "inactive custodians" would still respond if suggested, which means that they are, in fact,  available if a need arises, and some of them specifically asserted that.  They were then attacked by Ottava, for whatever excuse he could think  up, dredging up old conflicts, real or imagined, etc. "

Response
Odd how LauraHale can claim I ignored consensus when I undeleted the page after there was consensus to undelete. More of reality not matching what LauraHale wished it to be. And the Privacy Policy is clear that posting logs is not acceptable. It doesn't matter if SB Johnny rewrote the top to say chat will be logged as that has no authority. And canvassing? That is utterly ridiculous when everyone in IRC is already a participant and discussions were posted everywhere. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:41, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

He has been blocked before
Ottava was blocked on Wikiversity before for this edit, with Dark Lama citing the cause as failure to be calm.

Ottava was blocked for two hours for " blatant incivility, persisting after a rejected warning. The incivility was not necessary in some way for the topic being discussed, it  appeared to be an old or outside conflict being brought it, with  reference to Wikipedia Review, see the Wikiversity:Custodian feedback  for links to the sequence."

Related to this, when Ottava has been warned that his behavior may lead to a block, he has removed the warnings. He has also asked admins to stop warning him of potential blocks and uncivil behavior.

Related to this again, Jtneill alleged: "I find it even more concerning that Ottava removed the incivility warnings and notification about his block, as well editing the log  history about his block/unblock. "

Ottava was blocked for 2 days for this comment: "We don't have "special policies and qualities". The only policies that got passed were those passed in spite of your actions. Most global  sysops have more experience on these wikis and keeping them working than  you ever will. After all, they were actually put into a position of  trust by consensus. "

Ottava was blocked by ABD: "Block is provisional, pending review, but given the seriousness of the disruption, I made it a year."

Beyond the blocks, Ottava has already been desysoped because of actions related to the things mentioned in this block request.

Ottava says: "Children only grow up when they are punished for inappropriate behavior, not when they are encouraged in it like you are doing." Despite being punished/blocked on Wikipedia (permanently), Wikiversity and meta, Ottava still has not learned his lesson.

Response
The removal of Abd from adminship twice verifies that LauraHale is making claims divorced from reality. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:37, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Ottava is Wikiversity
Ottava has repeatedly claimed that he is Wikiversity and that Wikiversity would not survive with out him. This type of understanding and claim are damaging to Wikiversity. Related to this, he would be happy to see Wikiversity be a failure and to lose a great many of its contributors.

An examples of this claim can be found on Jtneill's talk page: And as I stated, I did all the work that everyone else should have been doing. No one else will be doing it. There are some claims that they will, but those are false claims, like Abd admitting he wants to "take  over" Wikiversity as stated on WR. I will not have my academic work  associated with what Sj said was a failing project filled with  vandalism, trolls, and not even the decency to welcome new people. I did the work to make sure Wikiversity was not shut down and was  respectable. I always sought out advice from others before making decisions and always begged others to help out. This whole thing shows that Wikiversity is dying and deserves to die."

Others feel this way too, including ABD who said: "When I started to notice an accumulation of such things, I started to form a view that Ottava was "owning" the project, but I was not ready to  bring this up. It's difficult to prove, so I prefer to address specific  actions."

Ottava says: " If it will require a Meta vote to remove all administrators from Wikiversity and have it taken over by Global Sysops just to stop this  nonsense, then so be it."

Response
We have 6 active admin according the toolserver tool. For a year, I was one of the only fully active admin and yes, I did all the work. That can't be refuted just because LauraHale has some fanciful notion of history divorced from reality. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:36, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Truth and Reconciliation
Blocking is a tool for dealing with vandals, not a way to silence people who say what is on their mind. There are other people besides Ottava Rima who have done more damage to Wikiversity since the Hostile Takeover of Wikiversity in 2008. Why target Ottava for a block when others get away with causing more disruption of the Wikiversity community? It has been suggested that Ottava Rima makes unsubstantiated claims. Making unsubstantiated claims became a fundamental part of the Ruling Party's governing methods after the Hostile Takeover of 2008. If Wikiversity is going to return to being the peaceful learning community that existed before the Hostile Takeover of 2008 then we need a Truth and Reconciliation Process. I'd like to see Ottava lead a Wikiversity community discussion about his concerns. Every Wikiversity community member should be free to discuss the problems that confront Wikiversity, problems that erupted when a gang of Wikipedians disrupted Wikiversity. This community of scholarly learners needs protections against invaders from other Wiki projects and protection against abusive Wikimedia Functionaries who impose the divisive rules of other wikis on Wikiversity. I'd like to hear Ottava's complaints and, in particular, know more about secret off-wiki communications channels that have been used by those who imposed the Hostile Takeover of 2008 and who continue to deflect Wikiversity from its mission. We need a truth and reconciliation process that can clear the air, allow honest Wikiversity participants who were driven away from the project to return and remove sysop tools from those who have abused their positions of trust and responsibility. --JWSchmidt 14:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree that Wikiversity needs a Truth and Reconciliation Process. However, we need a new medium in which to conduct it.  I propose that we craft a Truth and Reconciliation Process by writing a Comic Opera about ourselves.  Each person who has a grievance can prepare one or more songs, duets, soliloquies, or production numbers to express their shpilkes in the genecktegessoink.  —Caprice 14:46, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Response from Ottava Rima
Laura Hale's recent statements are meaningless. I have broken no rules except to some how offended Laura one day in the past. I have never made any responses to any of her actions on Wiki, nor anything really regarding. As I've said in the past, I really don't care what she says or does and I have always ignored her.

My recent use of IRC was to tell Moulton to stop using real life information to harass other people as that is not appropriate for someone claiming to be an academic. If Laura wants to complain and post up such nonsense, that only shows problems about her. It is not acceptable to harass people through outing and we created the privacy policy just for that reason. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:33, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * "I have broke no rules."
 * Um, you just broke a rule of grammar. Caprice 15:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * My keyboard has 6 disabled keys so they don't always register. My "c" key is just the censor and doesn't have an actual key. I stopped caring so much about typos. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:07, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Um the missing 'n' in "broken" is also the very next letter you typed in the word "no." Is it an intermittent brokenness?  —Caprice 16:28, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, and? I type, it doesn't always register. Sometimes it registers multiple times because when I try to type fast I sometimes hit the keys that are broken multiple times. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Sometimes what I type doesn't register too. Sometimes I find I have to translate the message into a different language before it registers.  —Caprice 17:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Response from Abd
Well, the silent majority finally speaks. Been waiting for this. I request that my response section not be used for threaded comment, per the pending proposals that seem to have substantial support.

Laura, I know how much work it can be to write a documented report. It's insane. This really shouldn't have been necessary, with some saner structure.

Ottava has been highly disruptive. Ironically, he's been fairly quiet since he was indef blocked at meta. See m:Requests for comment/User:Ottava Rima, which has details about disruption at meta, and the recent disruption documented there was mostly related to Wikiversity, but Ottava was in hot water already.

I do not favor banning Ottava, but I do favor specific behavioral restrictions, enforced with blocks. Such restrictions have been set in the past: SBJ warned Ottava that if he repeated incivility toward me, he'd be blocked, and Ottava was, in fact, blocked twice under this, but then, strangely, Ottava was allowed to continue and when I, in turn, blocked Ottava for threatening Wikiversity users with being blocked (by "two custodians were were only waiting till they had time to "come on"), SBJ unblocked without setting any restrictions. (I disclosed "involvement" and requested immediate review at RCA.) I later warned Ottava of a topic ban on WV space, which was, in fact, what he had proposed for me. I was prevented from enforcing that.

Careful and selective bans, reliably enforced, could work. Ottava could continue his valuable contributions. I previously proposed something like this for JWS. It was ignored, but, then, it was proposed that JWS be banned, which got some support. Some elements in this community don't like restrictions, but then jump for maximum restriction. Lousy process. But, hey, "ban" is one word, and "selective bans, determined by [process] and reliably enforced by [process]" is many, and we are afflicted by people who imagine that a university can be run with sound bites.

Ottava has been so disruptive that I do understand that someone might think nothing short of a complete ban will work. Perhaps that's correct, but lesser measures, properly respectful of Ottava and expecting that he will sanely cooperate, should be tried. --Abd 17:42, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Response of Ottava to Abd

 * Laura has never been silent. She has been a vocal critic of me on IRC since last fall when I chastised her friend Jtneill. As a side note, many people have found your comments and actions disruptive. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:46, 16 February 2011 (UTC)