Pathoschild Options Rating

[Ottava]

So, Pathoschild was given information showing that Poetlister was emailing from three different accounts on Wikisource requests for personal information and also passing himself off as a new female identity.

He also had information that Poetlister had a new name, Longfellow, and kept the information even though Longfellow was used to run for admin -while- harassing people on other names.

He was given information from myself and from others asking for it to be dealt with and shared. He was given it in both his Steward and Wikisource CU capacity.


The best part? All of the Stewards are circling around him for confirmation, as if a major breach of trust and the aiding of one of the nastiest cross-wiki sock puppets and harassers who was caught passing himself off as another woman.

It is amazing how the firestorm on the global CU list and other email lists is completely ignored to re-elect a guy who has shown not only incompetence but willful abuse of power to aid a well-known harasser.



As a side note, it isn't too surprising to see SB Johnny and Abd go and support Pathoschild even though he has a track record of doing very little but causing problems and making bad judgments. Hell, WR has a lot of talk about problematic behavior. But their statement is just bs politics that is one of the major reasons why the WMF has such problems.

This post has been edited by Ottava:

[CharlotteWebb]

Ottava's objections about this candidate are legitimate, but his lack of credibility is likely to outweigh any concerns about said candidate schmoozing with the poetguyim. Unfortunate, really.

Perhaps you'll meet better results if you ask, humbly if possible, for somebody else to speak in your stead.

[-DS-]

Damn, I tried to add an oppose, but got reverted.

[Adrignola]

It is amazing how the firestorm on the global CU list and other email lists is completely ignored to re-elect a guy who has shown not only incompetence but willful abuse of power to aid a well-known harasser.

I don't see how you'd know if there was or wasn't a firestorm on the CU list. Any information on that list is privileged and confidential and anyone disclosing it to you risks removal.

You should ask yourself why "Poetlister" and "Longfellow" are not globally locked before targeting specific individuals for not taking action you believe they should have taken.

[Ottava]

It is amazing how the firestorm on the global CU list and other email lists is completely ignored to re-elect a guy who has shown not only incompetence but willful abuse of power to aid a well-known harasser.

I don't see how you'd know if there was or wasn't a firestorm on the CU list. Any information on that list is privileged and confidential and anyone disclosing it to you risks removal.

You should ask yourself why "Poetlister" and "Longfellow" are not globally locked before targeting specific individuals for not taking action you believe they should have taken.

I'm friends with 8 people on the list and talked through email with 2 WR members who are on that list. IRC has a lot of CUs, mind you, and a lot of people who are too timid to make public statements pass on things to those like me for a reason.

And risk removal? I was the one who submitted info to be on the list and it wasn't. The only one who needs to be removed is Pathoschild for aiding one of the nastiest people who ever came to Wiki.

[SB_Johnny]

I'm friends with 8 people on the list and talked through email with 2 WR members who are on that list. IRC has a lot of CUs, mind you, and a lot of people who are too timid to make public statements pass on things to those like me for a reason.

People from the CU list are sharing confidential info with you? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hmmm.gif)

[Ottava]

I'm friends with 8 people on the list and talked through email with 2 WR members who are on that list. IRC has a lot of CUs, mind you, and a lot of people who are too timid to make public statements pass on things to those like me for a reason.

People from the CU list are sharing confidential info with you? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hmmm.gif)

And I share things with them.

I would have to do this if you wouldn't have removed our CUs without community discussion.

[Abd]

As a side note, it isn't too surprising to see SB Johnny and Abd go and support Pathoschild even though he has a track record of doing very little but causing problems and making bad judgments. Hell, WR has a lot of talk about problematic behavior. But their statement is just bs politics that is one of the major reasons why the WMF has such problems.

Well, I asked Lar about his opposition, that concerns me. I !voted there because I saw Ottava oppose, and when Ottava opposes, it's because he has an axe to grind. Otherwise he'll play Nice, long as he can. It's part of his strategy, and it must have been working for a long time.

And I'd seen Pathoschild implement the "local decision" view as to Thekohser, doing a lot of work to make it real, later undone by Mike.lifeguard based on mysterious "discussions." Pathoschild was the good guy, even if it looked bad that he went around blocking Thekohser on local wikis. It was the proper, simple, compromise. And then any sysop at a local wiki could unblock, as some did. Then with Mike's action, a 'crat became necessary, which isn't terrible, but which then allows the spurious "global ban" argument to be used, it sucks in naive users.

Why does Ottava make welcoming users his most prominent activity? Because it creates a positive name recognition, it can serve him later. It's really funny him talking about politics.

Ottava is, I predict, on the edge of being banned from meta. He's lied to the stewards on the Permissions page, as can be seen at permanent link current link. Check out his cited "discussion." He showed and described a Revision from history, thus excluding most of the votes in the direction Ottava hates. Only later, when the real close is shown, does he make his "7 day" argument, taking a position that is entirely new and entirely invented, that comments after the "deadline" are void, thus turning a Community Review into an election, while, at the same time, he's arguing that Steward confirmations aren't elections....

So a steward isn't deceived and closes in the routine direction, and Ottava naturally attacks the steward. He's done this over and over, it has become totally predictable. Cross Ottava, you will be harassed.

People who have not seen Ottava's behavior frequently comment as if he's sane. See Djsasso trying to argue rationally. Ottava is not rational. That is not a personal attack, it's a regretful conclusion from long observation. He's high-functioning, but he is truly a pathological liar, probably believes his own rationalizations. Or he's a psychopath, totally gone.

Ottava is playing a truly useful role. He is showing how vulnerable WMF wikis are to politics. He's done enough to get a dozen editors indeffed, on meta, but he hasn't even been warned recently, much less short-blocked. How someone could do what he's done and have a clean block log is astonishing. It indicates pull, strings behind the seems, which is what Ottava constantly claims.

See the meta RfC on Ottava for a small fraction of his deceptions.

Why am I exercised about this? Because I saw Ottava, on Wikiversity, abusing others, trying to drive away newcomers, feeding their fears (see the User:KBlott affair on Wikiversity), bullying and threatening, and attacking all attempts to restrain him. I knew that trying personally to stop it would not be popular on Wikiversity, but I'm involved in WV for the long haul, and I didn't need sysop tools, for myself. I only needed them to serve the community, as I did. It will take time for the smoke to clear from that.

This post has been edited by Abd:

[SB_Johnny]

I'm friends with 8 people on the list and talked through email with 2 WR members who are on that list. IRC has a lot of CUs, mind you, and a lot of people who are too timid to make public statements pass on things to those like me for a reason.

People from the CU list are sharing confidential info with you? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hmmm.gif)

And I share things with them.

Wow. Which CUs?

[SB_Johnny]

How someone could do what he's done and have a clean [http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AOttava+Rima block log] is astonishing. It indicates pull, strings behind the seems, which is what Ottava constantly claims.

You know wikimarkup doesn't actually work on web forums, right? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

You're behind the times anyway.

[Ottava]

I'm friends with 8 people on the list and talked through email with 2 WR members who are on that list. IRC has a lot of CUs, mind you, and a lot of people who are too timid to make public statements pass on things to those like me for a reason.

People from the CU list are sharing confidential info with you? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hmmm.gif)

And I share things with them.

Wow. Which CUs?

I can tell you that Pathoschild and John Vandenberg were no longer two that I shared with after they did that during the Poetlister/Longfellow matter.




Abd


I welcome people as well as other odd end jobs. It is something to do when recent change patrolling. I also spend a lot of time archiving.

[SB_Johnny]

I'm friends with 8 people on the list and talked through email with 2 WR members who are on that list. IRC has a lot of CUs, mind you, and a lot of people who are too timid to make public statements pass on things to those like me for a reason.

People from the CU list are sharing confidential info with you? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hmmm.gif)

And I share things with them.

Wow. Which CUs?

I can tell you that Pathoschild and John Vandenberg were no longer two that I shared with after they did that during the Poetlister/Longfellow matter.

Let's rephrase: they shared (and or still do share) CU findings and information with you that are not otherwise public?

[Ottava]

Let's rephrase: they shared (and or still do share) CU findings and information with you that are not otherwise public?

IP addresses? No. I couldn't use IP addresses if I had them. I don't know how to work that part of things.

Do they tell me if a user who is active at Wikiversity socked elsewhere? Yep. Is that private info? Not really. Not all socks who are blocked have pages saying all of their socks or says who the user is and doing what.

Do they tell me if there are responses when I send in information about socking? Normally.




And WizardOfOz's revenge block is priceless. Shortly after he is forced to accept his block of Guido was wrong he blocks me for the same thing. Nice.




Peter Damian

Your vote counts at Meta: "To comment, please log in with an account that has edits (on any wiki) before February 1st 2011." http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm

Their bot isn't within policy to disregard your comments as confirmation is not a "vote".

This post has been edited by Ottava:

[SB_Johnny]

Let's rephrase: they shared (and or still do share) CU findings and information with you that are not otherwise public?

IP addresses? No. I couldn't use IP addresses if I had them. I don't know how to work that part of things.

Do they tell me if a user who is active at Wikiversity socked elsewhere? Yep. Is that private info? Not really. Not all socks who are blocked have pages saying all of their socks or says who the user is and doing what.

Do they tell me if there are responses when I send in information about socking? Normally.

Okay. Still, not very wise to feed the Ottavan Inquisition.

And WizardOfOz's revenge block is priceless. Shortly after he is forced to accept his block of Guido was wrong he blocks me for the same thing. Nice.

Keep on shovelling if you want to make it stick. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

[Lar]

Peter Damian

Your vote counts at Meta: "To comment, please log in with an account that has edits (on any wiki) before February 1st 2011." http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm

Their bot isn't within policy to disregard your comments as confirmation is not a "vote".

If that's the case than none of these comments should have been stricken, Pathoschild's tool is for checking votes for new stewards.... Oops.

[Ottava]

Peter Damian

Your vote counts at Meta: "To comment, please log in with an account that has edits (on any wiki) before February 1st 2011." http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards/confirm

Their bot isn't within policy to disregard your comments as confirmation is not a "vote".

If that's the case than none of these comments should have been stricken, Pathoschild's tool is for checking votes for new stewards.... Oops.

Yep, but Lar -

Confirm isn't a vote yet most people are only voting, which is stupid. Remember previous years? We had lists of concerns and positive attributes. The committee looks at those, see how often they were brought up, and decide on that. Perhaps people just putting up "keep" without a reason should be notified as they aren't doing their friends any favors by not putting a reason, even a stupid reason like mine (which is just "trustworthy and helpful").

[jayvdb]

I'm friends with 8 people on the [checkuser] list..

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[Ottava]

I'm friends with 8 people on the [checkuser] list..

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

4 of them are facebook friends at least. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

I met 2 of the ones that edit here in real life and a few others that don't in real life.

But anyway, John, are you saying that we weren't, at one time, friends? If so, I'll accept that. I probably should have known that before trusting you with information on Poetlister and expecting you to deal with him so his harassing emails asking for person information from me or him trying to convince me he was some new female identity that he most likely stole would finally end.

I considered us friends when we use to work together at Wikiversity in 2008. I helped you out in the ArbCom election when various ethnic groups upset at you started canvassing because of what I thought was a friendship. Hell, I helped spread positive statements about you during the last election under the assumption we were still friends.

Perhaps I was just naive and just being used by a guy who wanted power. Is that what you are trying to say?

[Wikicrusher2]

I'm friends with 8 people on the [checkuser] list..

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

4 of them are facebook friends at least. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

I met 2 of the ones that edit here in real life and a few others that don't in real life.

But anyway, John, are you saying that we weren't, at one time, friends? If so, I'll accept that. I probably should have known that before trusting you with information on Poetlister and expecting you to deal with him so his harassing emails asking for person information from me or him trying to convince me he was some new female identity that he most likely stole would finally end.

I considered us friends when we use to work together at Wikiversity in 2008. I helped you out in the ArbCom election when various ethnic groups upset at you started canvassing because of what I thought was a friendship. Hell, I helped spread positive statements about you during the last election under the assumption we were still friends.

Perhaps I was just naive and just being used by a guy who wanted power. Is that what you are trying to say?

Must every thread you are involved in turn into narcissistic conflicts and irrelevant personal WP drama? It seems that in every post you make, the whole show revolves around you. Also, ethnic groups? What was that about?

This post has been edited by Wikicrusher2:

[jayvdb]

Perhaps I was just naive and just being used by a guy who wanted power. Is that what you are trying to say?

Yes, that is it. You've summed it up very well. Thank you.