Wikibooks:Arbitration/Panic2k4 vs. SBJohnny/Plaintiff Rebuttal

From SB_Johnny
I'm not going to make a lengthy rebuttal here: I think Panic's tone and the things he's said in response to the various "charges" speak for themselves only too well. Panic has a long history of disruptive behavior on Wikibooks, beginning with the troubles with Paddu and the moderators who got involved there, later with darklama, James Dennet, and finally with me.

The issue with Panic is not edit warring... in fact he seems to see "reverting" to be an aggressive act. What he does instead is act uncivilly on talk pages, in such a way as to exert control of the conversation and in turn the editing process.

His inability to work with others was inherent in the decision to make his "fork" early on. When his fork was disallowed, he returned to the main book, and apparently just kept arguing with Paddu until his "opponent" finally left the project and he could go ahead and do what he wanted.

Paddu objected to the fork at least in part because these forks were in part copy-pastes of Paddu's work, and so weren't properly attributing in the history page. My guess is that this is where the idea of "using the GFDL as a weapon" came in, and Panic has since been using the GFDL as a justification for editorial control of the book.

In his response to Darklama, Panic seems to have taken the tactic of just saying "well, too bad. Same thing happened to me a while ago, but now I'm the guy in charge, so now you'll have to deal with me." It's clear that he probably thinks this is actually the "proper way", since he provides this link in his "defendant's reply".

In summary, what we have in Panic is someone who doesn't (or won't) work well with others, but or some reason insists on working on wikibooks, which is by it's very nature a collaborative project. He's very careful not to "violate policies" (though he has a hard time with WB:CIVIL), but continually violates the spirit of the project. His potential as a good contributor is undermined by his unwillingness to collaborate in a collegial manner.

The three blocks were for the following reasons:
 * Block 1: Bossing around a new user on talk pages (violating WB:CIVIL). This was a very short block, intended as a warning (previous written warnings were not being heeded).
 * Block 2: Shortly after the first one, when Panic claimed that it was his "right" to do that, and would continue doing so (using a rather uncivil tone, on darklama's talk page). This block was longer, in part to give Panic some time to reconsider his behavior here, and in part to allow the other two users interested in contributing to discuss the book and how to improve it.
 * Block 3: Another 2 week block, this time for rearranging talk pages again. The talk pages were reorganized during his "absence" because Panic had apparently been moving them around and reorganizing them (see Paddu's comments on the "Charges" page). He may also have done this because I was no longer interested in arguing with him ad infinitum. Regardless of whether his intent was to push my buttons or to reassert his authority over the C++ book, it was time to stop him (and hopefully get him to try again to take a civil approach to all involved).

In conclusion, I think my actions were perfectly reasonable. I had tried cajoling, discussion, and explanation... all fruitless, as Panic is interested only in making others see things from his point of view, rather than trying to understand theirs. Both James and Paddu made it clear from the beginning that they would not be willing to contribute to the book if it meant being harassed by Panic. Panic has all along been impossible to work with (either intentionally or unintentionally), has not been willing to budge an inch, and has ignored warnings. There was no option left but to block him for a cooling off.

I still hope Panic can become a good contributor, but he's going to need a moderator working with him for this to happen. As I have mentioned before, I am no longer willing to do it, in part because Panic's hostility is now directed at me as much as at anyone else, and in part because I'm just tired of doing it.

From darklama
I agree with what SB_Johnny said above and including most importantly this isn't about any edit warring. My inviting Paddu was due my belief it is as important part as recent events are in regard to Panic having trouble working together cooperatively. The only part I disagree with is SB_Johnny's suggestion that Panic needs moderation, because that has already been tried for about 5 months without any progress or change. I believe its unreasonable for anyone to need to moderate someone endlessly on working together and being civil.