Durova Offers "Mentoring" Services Options

Oh, I had no interest in learning to game the system. I was more interested in the purported objective of the site, which was to craft encyclopedic articles that rose to respectable journalistic standards of accuracy, excellence, and ethics on online media.

Alas, I discovered (much to my chagrin) that those playing the game had no interest in that objective.

Now my objective is to understand how Wikipedia managed to morph into an MMPORG of the sort that the Durovas of the world spend their lives learning to manipulate for fun and profit.

This post has been edited by Moulton: Fri 21st December 2007, 1:27pm

If you want a mentor, try Tony Sidaway or Daniel. SlimVirgin even. Much nicer
people.

Uhm.. Tony Sidaway, a mentor? I don't exactly have fond memories of him.

Oh, she's fantastic at gaming the system. She can harass a person
and get them blocked for harassment. Absolutely brilliant!

But is that really what you want to learn from a mentor?

No, me neither.

That was my point with the Spears analogy.


Although, how does Durova harass a person and get them blocked for harassment?


This post has been edited by LamontStormstar: Fri 21st December 2007, 3:28am

Although, how does Durova harass a person and get them blocked for harassment?

I have a theory about how that might be done.

When I was engaged in an otherwise congenial e-mail exchange with Durova, she suddenly and unexpectedly declared that she no longer wished to continue our conversation, indicating that she would consider any further traffic to be harrassment. That stance left no room for an expression of perplexity as to what had triggered her dramatic and unexplained reversal.

Something similar to that happened in my E-Mail conversation with Jim62sch.

Although, how does Durova harass a person and get them blocked for harassment?

I have a theory about how that might be done.

When I was engaged in an otherwise congenial e-mail exchange with Durova, she suddenly and unexpectedly declared that she no longer wished to continue our conversation, indicating that she would consider any further traffic to be harrassment. That stance left no room for an expression of perplexity as to what had triggered her dramatic and unexplained reversal.

British law disagrees. Sexual content can be harassment. Threats of
physical harm can be harassment. Obscenely offencive material -
as in, calling someone a Nazi, not just comparing them to a Nazi, but
actually saying they are a Nazi - can be harassment. But there is a
right of peaceful protest. Peaceful protest is not harassment.

Durova was basically threatening you with defamation. It is obscenely
offencive, it my view, for her to accuse you of harassment when she
is the one making the threats.

Actually, calling you a harasser probably is obscenely offencive, and
therefore harassment according to British law... if I can just find a case
to confirm....

Oh, I disagree with Durova, Jim62sch, and the others as well. I am inclined to believe they are merely misinformed and misguided, rather than pathologically misanthropic mendactors of misjudgment.

I had hoped that Sheffield Steel would get his wish, but that was not to be (at least not in the original venue of the soap opera).

Just as at the end of an episode of any good soap opera, I am somewhat interested in seeing what happens next. If Durova can steer Moulton towards productive contributions, I will be very impressed. Sheffield Steel (talk stalk) 20:14, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I disagree with Durova, Jim62sch, and the others as well. I am inclined to believe they are merely misinformed and misguided, rather than pathologically misanthropic mendactors of misjudgment.

Durova has gotten a kid kicked out of school, ruining his career dreams.
Rather than have any remorse, she considers this to be experience that
makes her qualified to deal with similar situations in the future. If you
try to explain to her that she hurts people, she will call you
condescending, then charge you with spam and harassment.

Now, tell me, how do you interpret that as merely misguided? To me,
that proves she has absolutely no conscience, no ethics, no basic
sense of decency.

When I was engaged in an otherwise congenial e-mail exchange with Durova, she suddenly and unexpectedly declared that she no longer wished to continue our conversation, indicating that she would consider any further traffic to be harrassment.

I believe this happens shortly after the point that they discover you are their intellectual equal or superior. At that point, their power position is untenable, so they abort the conversation and disengage in a way that suggests any further action on your part will be equated with that of a socially-maladjusted derelict.

I got this type of feedback once from Charles Matthews, after I e-mailed him with a reasoned comment that suggested his stubbornly incorrect interpretation of the facts surrounding the Arch Coal fiasco was "some form of mental problem bordering on sociopathy."

He replied: "I want to hear nothing more from you. Clear?"

End of debate between intellectual equals, I guess.

Durova has gotten a kid kicked out of school, ruining his career dreams.

Refresh me on that story with a link, please?

Greg

This post has been edited by thekohser: Fri 21st December 2007, 3:21pm

Remorse is an interesting emotion -- one that is relatively uncommon in our culture.

My theory about why remorse is so rare is because we have adopted a popular cultural practice that displaces remorse.

The popular cultural practice of shaming and blaming tends to make people defensive rather than contrite, mainly because judgments of guilt are usually accompanied by sanctions and punishments.

Many of the characters in the Wikipedia soap opera are Snape-like in their glee at meting out sanctions and punishments. Perhaps that is the unhealthy culture they were steeped in during their most impressionable formative years.

We're lucky she didn't use the word "training" instead …

(That's Durova, I mean, not Britney Spears or her mom.)

Fantastic news!

I've been on pin-&-needles waiting for the next Cody Banks sequel. This one should be a riot.

Jonny

When I was engaged in an otherwise congenial e-mail exchange with Durova, she suddenly and unexpectedly declared that she no longer wished to continue our conversation, indicating that she would consider any further traffic to be harrassment.

I believe this happens shortly after the point that they discover you are their intellectual equal or superior. At that point, their power position is untenable, so they abort the conversation and disengage in a way that suggests any further action on your part will be equated with that of a socially-maladjusted derelict.

I got this type of feedback once from Charles Matthews, after I e-mailed him with a reasoned comment that suggested his stubbornly incorrect interpretation of the facts surrounding the Arch Coal fiasco was "some form of mental problem bordering on sociopathy."

Durova does this as a standard practice. She did it with Kohs, and I've seen her do it at least two other times. Which given I dont see everything she does all the live long day indicates that she probably does this as a standard modus operandi.

And Moulton, your analysis is spot-on. She seeks to annihilate anyone who is her intellectual equal. Anyone less, isn't worth the vitriol.

Durova has gotten a kid kicked out of school, ruining his career dreams.

Refresh me on that story with a link, please?

Greg

Oh sweet mother of G-d let this not be true. Does anyone know who this poor soul is?

This besides losing Tim H. his post as cong. press office? Sullying his good name?

Oh, I disagree with Durova, Jim62sch, and the others as well. I am inclined to believe they are merely misinformed and misguided, rather than pathologically misanthropic mendactors of misjudgment.

Durova has gotten a kid kicked out of school, ruining his career dreams.
Rather than have any remorse, she considers this to be experience that
makes her qualified to deal with similar situations in the future. If you
try to explain to her that she hurts people, she will call you
condescending, then charge you with spam and harassment.

Now, tell me, how do you interpret that as merely misguided? To me,
that proves she has absolutely no conscience, no ethics, no basic
sense of decency.

Yes, yes, yes. A thousand times yes.

You are probably lucky, Moulton. Getting mentored by Durova would probably
be worse than being banned. Durova is the sort of person who will get a kid
kicked out of school, ruining his career dreams, and accuse you of harassment
and threaten to throw you in jail if you peaceably and privately protest to her
about it.

I agree.

This post has been edited by Disillusioned Lackey: Fri 21st December 2007, 3:43pm

Moulton, your analysis is spot-on. She seeks to annihilate anyone who is her intellectual equal. Anyone less, isn't worth the vitriol.

In the interests of accuracy in attribution, that was Greg's analysis, not mine. Nonetheless, I have known other instances of that remarkable character trait, which evidently traces back to Cain's jealousy of his more accomplished brother.

Moulton, your analysis is spot-on. She seeks to annihilate anyone who is her intellectual equal. Anyone less, isn't worth the vitriol.

In the interests of accuracy in attribution, that was Greg's analysis, not mine. Nonetheless, I have known other instances of that remarkable character trait, which evidently traces back to Cain's jealousy of his more accomplished brother.

Hm³, the way I remember the story, it wasn't so much that Abel was more able, per se, merely that he was more favoured by an arbitrary, capricious, and inscrutable authority who didn't like having his caprices questioned.

Jonny

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache: Fri 21st December 2007, 4:24pm

I was gonna edit accomplished to distinguished, but then I would have had to further edit distinguished to extinguished.

I was gonna edit accomplished to distinguished, but then I would have had to further edit distinguished to extinguished.

Jes doin' my part for the Underdog, Ma …

Jonny

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache: Fri 21st December 2007, 4:45pm

it wasn't so much that Abel was more able, per se, merely that he was more favoured by an arbitrary, capricious, and inscrutable authority who didn't like having his caprices questioned.

Jonny

You mean ... they had Wikipedia even then?

You mean ... they had Wikipedia even then?

Apparently they had sheep, and keepers of sheep, so I guess that's pretty much the same thing, right?

I mean, one might easily interpret Genesis as meaning that God was basically a carnivore, and didn't want to eat vegetables, so when he showed (or "shew") a clear preference for Abel's sheep offering over Cain's vegetable offering, the result was completely predictable. Cain, feeling horribly ripped off, took out his anger on his brother, because God himself could not be effectively attacked. He is (or was), after all, God.

Now, admittedly, Cain probably overreacted, but remember, there were only four people in the whole world at that point, so how hard would it have been for God to have given Cain at least some DAP, even if it wasn't all that sincere? Not hard, right? It's not like He had billions of people to show respect to or anything like that. So He was clearly being, well, kind of a jerk.

Now, one might ask, what does this have to do with Wikipedia? Or, more specifically, Durova's "mentoring services"? That's the real question here. In a general sense, one might view Cain's reaction to being dissed as similar to that of the WP user who loses an edit war - you have two sides fighting for territory, and more often than not some admin comes along and makes a decision that unfairly favors one side over the other. The losing side is angry, but can't do anything about the admin, who has banning authority, so the next best thing is to attack the other side and try to bring the other user(s) into disrepute, so that they eventually get banned.

Durova's intentions by "mentoring" people are, in effect, to prevent them from obtaining what they would consider to be a fair resolution of whatever issue concerns them. Since the only effective means of getting justice on Wikipedia is by sneak attack, following Durova's prescribed behavioral plan (i.e., always be civil, calmly discuss the problem on the talk page, and so on), simply results in further frustration. But from WP's perspective, that's useful because it spreads out the frustration reaction over time, rather than have it all happen in one big flaming incident.

I'm rambling, aren't I?

Actually, you are doing remarkably well for someone who is not a diploma carrying graduate of the Post-Apocalyptic Seminary of Neuro-Mathematical Systems Theology.

This post has been edited by Moulton: Fri 21st December 2007, 9:09pm

In the interests of accuracy in attribution, that was Greg's analysis, not mine. Nonetheless, I have known other instances of that remarkable character trait, which evidently traces back to Cain's jealousy of his more accomplished brother.

I thought that was Joshua Zelinsky.

I'm climbing off the ceiling. Sorry. They pissed me off when they turned this into a conversation about Britney Spears. It's bad enough to have to see that kind of crap on CNN. But I probably overreacted.

Then I'm sure the next month or so of news about her sister Jamie Lynn's pregnancy will upset you a whole lot? I saw it as one of the top 12 hits on Google News today.

Many of the characters in the Wikipedia soap opera are Snape-like in their glee at meting out sanctions and punishments. Perhaps that is the unhealthy culture they were steeped in during their most impressionable formative years.

Snape seems more bitter than gleeful (and the final book of the series gives a lot of backstory to his position). Umbridge is the one who really seems to get gleeful about being punitive.