The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Nutters - what happens when you let anyone edit, or why boners like Rodhullandemu shouldn't try digging for my info
MaliceAforethought
post Thu 28th July 2011, 5:13am
Post #41


u Mad?
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue 21st Jun 2011, 6:54am
From: Wonderland
Member No.: 57,801



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Thu 28th July 2011, 5:01am) *

QUOTE

His spy work is obviously paying off. So out with it Phil, don't hide your sniping like AC, tell the whole world.


MA, you've now had my reply to your PM; so, I'm calling your PM, and raising you. I doubt you play poker, but, er, it's about time perhaps that you understood the basics. A fortuitous release of otherwise confidential information can only come from two possible sources, the profiles of which are intrinsically different. You think you've kept those cards close enough to your chest to escape scrutiny. But you think incorrectly. Whereas one line of enquiry may occasionally take a wrong turn, the longer it goes on, the more likely it is to be heading in the right direction. And even if the preceding is bollocks, how certain can you be that you ain't going to be bang to rights later today?

In short, once your cover is blown, where's your value?

Sleep well.


If you've not understood the value here is the information, you're more off than I imagined. Just in case I haven't been clear, come out with it mate - stop PMing impotent threats and get it off your chest.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Thu 28th July 2011, 5:32am
Post #42


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(MaliceAforethought @ Thu 28th July 2011, 6:13am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Thu 28th July 2011, 5:01am) *

QUOTE

His spy work is obviously paying off. So out with it Phil, don't hide your sniping like AC, tell the whole world.


MA, you've now had my reply to your PM; so, I'm calling your PM, and raising you. I doubt you play poker, but, er, it's about time perhaps that you understood the basics. A fortuitous release of otherwise confidential information can only come from two possible sources, the profiles of which are intrinsically different. You think you've kept those cards close enough to your chest to escape scrutiny. But you think incorrectly. Whereas one line of enquiry may occasionally take a wrong turn, the longer it goes on, the more likely it is to be heading in the right direction. And even if the preceding is bollocks, how certain can you be that you ain't going to be bang to rights later today?

In short, once your cover is blown, where's your value?

Sleep well.


If you've not understood the value here is the information, you're more off than I imagined. Just in case I haven't been clear, come out with it mate - stop PMing impotent threats and get it off your chest.



Information? What information? All I see is a string of tl;dr boring discussions from ArbCom, a mere handful of which have told people stuff they didn't already know, or suspect; well, hot dog!

"Bureaucracy is boring" is the bottom line of your so-called revelations, and I'm frankly amazed that you think that anyone cares. No doubt you think that like Julian Assange, you're performing some sort of public service, but, er, you ain't, as far as the outfall from this appears to be.

Whereas some anally-retentive Wikipedia-knobs might want to hear what ArbCom might have said about them, when it comes to the bottom line, nothing you can post, as far as I can see, is going to change that. They might get some personal satisfaction from some sort of ex-post facto vindication, but tough; it's too late for them as far as WP is concerned, and if you think that your revelations are going to cause a sea-change in the governance of Wikipedia, then you are seriously mistaken.

The best you've managed is a flurry of worry about the security of one, or perhaps two, mailing-lists. Bottom line is that although ArbCom may not have wanted their private discussions made public, tough shit, but no decision they've made is likely to be even reviewed as a result of your revelations.

And that, in the final analysis, makes your revelations somewhat pointless, but in terms of individuals, poisonously harmful.

All I can suggest is that you consult a decent lawyer as soon as you can, because I think you're going to need one.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MaliceAforethought
post Thu 28th July 2011, 5:41am
Post #43


u Mad?
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue 21st Jun 2011, 6:54am
From: Wonderland
Member No.: 57,801



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Thu 28th July 2011, 5:32am) *

Information? What information? All I see is a string of tl;dr boring discussions from ArbCom, a mere handful of which have told people stuff they didn't already know, or suspect; well, hot dog!

"Bureaucracy is boring" is the bottom line of your so-called revelations, and I'm frankly amazed that you think that anyone cares. No doubt you think that like Julian Assange, you're performing some sort of public service, but, er, you ain't, as far as the outfall from this appears to be.

Whereas some anally-retentive Wikipedia-knobs might want to hear what ArbCom might have said about them, when it comes to the bottom line, nothing you can post, as far as I can see, is going to change that. They might get some personal satisfaction from some sort of ex-post facto vindication, but tough; it's too late for them as far as WP is concerned, and if you think that your revelations are going to cause a sea-change in the governance of Wikipedia, then you are seriously mistaken.

The best you've managed is a flurry of worry about the security of one, or perhaps two, mailing-lists. Bottom line is that although ArbCom may not have wanted their private discussions made public, tough shit, but no decision they've made is likely to be even reviewed as a result of your revelations.

And that, in the final analysis, makes your revelations somewhat pointless, but in terms of individuals, poisonously harmful.

All I can suggest is that you consult a decent lawyer as soon as you can, because I think you're going to need one.


If analyzing the system and where it went wrong is boring for you, feel free to sod off. One things the leaks keep showing is the groups in power watching this site; they can learn something or not as they choose.

You're just upset that you tried to claim credit for the leaks, did some half-arsed digging into me and ended up with nothing but your own foibles put out there for everyone to review. Because really mate, if you had anything, you'd have posted it by now instead of puffing your chest.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Thu 28th July 2011, 6:01am
Post #44


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE

If analyzing the system and where it went wrong is boring for you, feel free to sod off. One things the leaks keep showing is the groups in power watching this site; they can learn something or not as they choose.

You're just upset that you tried to claim credit for the leaks, did some half-arsed digging into me and ended up with nothing but your own foibles put out there for everyone to review. Because really mate, if you had anything, you'd have posted it by now instead of puffing your chest.


Where on earth did you get that shite? I've no interest whatsoever in the internals of ArbCom unless it affects me; and when you posted that thread, you were extremely selective and thus unfair. However, Mr David Gerard, when you call me "mate" and talk about "puffing your chest", you forget that I know you from years and years ago, and am familiar with the language used by Australians resident in the UK. If this is not the case, feel free to state otherwise. On the other hand, please feel free to rebut the "half-arsed digging into me".


Let's be clear here; we are heading for the Royal Courts of Justice unless there are some revelations. My solicitor is currently involved in a conspiracy to provide firearms case in Liverpool, but has put me on hold should the need arise. I'm not saying he's good. But, er he's fucking good.


Now, do you feel lucky?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MaliceAforethought
post Thu 28th July 2011, 6:13am
Post #45


u Mad?
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue 21st Jun 2011, 6:54am
From: Wonderland
Member No.: 57,801



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Thu 28th July 2011, 6:01am) *

Where on earth did you get that shite? I've no interest whatsoever in the internals of ArbCom unless it affects me; and when you posted that thread, you were extremely selective and thus unfair. However, Mr David Gerard, when you call me "mate" and talk about "puffing your chest", you forget that I know you from years and years ago, and am familiar with the language used by Australians resident in the UK. If this is not the case, feel free to state otherwise. On the other hand, please feel free to rebut the "half-arsed digging into me".


I'm quite certain Mr. Gerard will be pleased as punch to hear you'll be taking him round the bend. And of course the courts will lend grave weight to your lingistic genius. It's in the bag mate, go forth and conquer!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A Horse With No Name
post Thu 28th July 2011, 12:52pm
Post #46


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,471
Joined: Mon 26th Jan 2009, 1:54pm
Member No.: 9,985



Eh, phooey...this is no fun! hrmph.gif

Malice...got any swimsuit photos of Elen of the Roads? I wouldn't mind seeing her besides the seashore. evilgrin.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
InkBlot
post Thu 28th July 2011, 1:47pm
Post #47


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri 18th Aug 2006, 1:35pm
Member No.: 343

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Thu 28th July 2011, 1:01am) *

...However, Mr David Gerard, when you call me "mate" and talk about "puffing your chest", you forget that I know you from years and years ago, and am familiar with the language used by Australians resident in the UK...


What, that's it? Lord, I watch enough BBC America I can't even find most of my other cable channels anymore, and I could pull that sort of language off easily.

I feel let down, I honestly do.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MaliceAforethought
post Thu 28th July 2011, 2:57pm
Post #48


u Mad?
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue 21st Jun 2011, 6:54am
From: Wonderland
Member No.: 57,801



QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 28th July 2011, 12:52pm) *

Eh, phooey...this is no fun! hrmph.gif

Malice...got any swimsuit photos of Elen of the Roads? I wouldn't mind seeing her besides the seashore. evilgrin.gif


This is either her or some random woman on my harddrive. YMMV.

Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Proofreader77
post Thu 28th July 2011, 5:38pm
Post #49


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon 25th Jan 2010, 5:30am
From: California
Member No.: 16,819

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



If there's going to be bikinis, I may be forced to participate. ;-)

Nothing much say at the moment, other than MaliceAforethought has certainly earned a character in the Wikipedia documentary/musical ...

And lest this be considered off-topic, let it be noted that Rodhullandemu's declaring himself deceased on his user page, tipped the dominoes to my indef. (How? You'll have to wait for the film release to find out. :-)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Sat 30th July 2011, 1:47am
Post #50


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(Proofreader77 @ Thu 28th July 2011, 6:38pm) *

If there's going to be bikinis, I may be forced to participate. ;-)

Nothing much say at the moment, other than MaliceAforethought has certainly earned a character in the Wikipedia documentary/musical ...



You were blocked for failing to use Wikipedia for its intended purpose and for failing to respond to perfectly good advice, as here where you seem to think that financial donations to WMF absolve you from being egregious, and ignoring policies and guidelines. - they don't, and you had adequate advice of that.

Define "fruitcake"?

This post has been edited by Encyclopedist: Sat 30th July 2011, 1:48am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Proofreader77
post Sat 30th July 2011, 5:05am
Post #51


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon 25th Jan 2010, 5:30am
From: California
Member No.: 16,819

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Hmmmm ... let's see ... the first person who dropped Proofreader77 into ANI improperly ... has now been banned.

Proofreader77 documented Rod's declaring himself "Deceased"... and Rod is now banned.

The admin who improperly blocked Proofreader77 for documenting Rod's virtual suicide on Wikipedia had been previously de-sysopped ... and will no doubt lose the tools in the future again.

Proofreader77 donated $1,000 to Wikipedia before he had ever been blocked.

Gwen Gale (ridiculously) blocked Proofreader77 (his first block) for discussing the $1,000 donation to Wikipedia ... because Proofreader77 had been documenting Gwen Gale's absurd misuse of the tools ... And clearly blocking a $1,000 donor for talking about donating money to Wikipedia is about as highly absurd as any admin is likely to reach.

Meanwhile ... Godwin thought he could mock the FBI ... and he learned otherwise.

Perhaps Hollywood is eagerly awaiting a Wikipedia documentary musical ... which should come out about the time Wikipedia collapses from terminal nitwittery.

And, of course, MaliceAforethought has stepped forward in a timely manner ... to bring some previously smokey nitwittery into the fresh air ...

... where hopefully there are many more bikinis to come. :-)





User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sat 30th July 2011, 5:39pm
Post #52


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Proofreader77 @ Fri 29th July 2011, 10:05pm) *

Hmmmm ... let's see ... the first person who dropped Proofreader77 into ANI improperly ... has now been banned.

Proofreader77 documented Rod's declaring himself "Deceased"... and Rod is now banned.

The admin who improperly blocked Proofreader77 for documenting Rod's virtual suicide on Wikipedia had been previously de-sysopped ... and will no doubt lose the tools in the future again.

Proofreader77 donated $1,000 to Wikipedia before he had ever been blocked.

Gwen Gale (ridiculously) blocked Proofreader77 (his first block) for discussing the $1,000 donation to Wikipedia ... because Proofreader77 had been documenting Gwen Gale's absurd misuse of the tools ... And clearly blocking a $1,000 donor for talking about donating money to Wikipedia is about as highly absurd as any admin is likely to reach.

Meanwhile ... Godwin thought he could mock the FBI ... and he learned otherwise.

Perhaps Hollywood is eagerly awaiting a Wikipedia documentary musical ... which should come out about the time Wikipedia collapses from terminal nitwittery.

And, of course, MaliceAforethought has stepped forward in a timely manner ... to bring some previously smokey nitwittery into the fresh air ...

... where hopefully there are many more bikinis to come. :-)

Could somebody summarize this case? At a quick glance, Proofreader77 was apparently indeffed for mocking and getting into an argument with major-dramaqueen Rodhullandemu (see the person named on the arbcom-l heading this thread). The beginning of this happened on Jimbo's talk page, no less, which is not the place for people to have spats. And it started as to whether or not somebody should understand a reference to Monty Python's skit about nobody expecting the Spanish Inquisition. Irony.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...reader77_blocks

It did not help that Rodhull was acting in a seriously crazy way, and was about to be banned himself by Arbcomm. I think for being hysterical and insulting, but am not sure, since most of the edits on that decission have been kindly removed, so that we cannot see how much provocation Proofreader had. From Arbcom-l, apparently part of it was threats to kill himself, and a message left on his userpage suggesting that was deceased, which could be taken as a suggestion that he'd gone off to do just that.

Proofreader77 then had the bad sense to crow about the fact that the editor he was arguing with was probably nutters. Depressed at best, a manipulating malingerer at worst.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=344081837

Teh Communiteh then, after disposing of Rodhull, failed to have the sense to consider that some of Proofreader's problems might have been triggered by having to deal with Rodhull. Was Proofreader hounding anybody else? Or was this a personal thing between two editors, at least one of whom was in need of a shrink?

I think it comes down to what does one do with a thin-skinned drama-monger on WP? Bait them or ban them? ArbComm seems to have come to the conclusion with Rodhull that the answer is "ban them."

Perhaps the tools should have been given to Proofreader77 so he could block Rodhull, instead of taunting him? wink.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gomi
post Sat 30th July 2011, 6:02pm
Post #53


Member
********

Group: Members
Posts: 3,022
Joined: Fri 17th Nov 2006, 6:38pm
Member No.: 565



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Fri 29th July 2011, 6:47pm) *
QUOTE(Proofreader77 @ Thu 28th July 2011, 6:38pm) *
Nothing much say at the moment, ...
You were blocked for failing to use Wikipedia for its intended purpose and for failing to respond to perfectly good advice, as here ... and ignoring policies and guidelines.

What a complete load of bullshit. The wiki-powerful do these things all the time. As we've seen, 85% of Wikipedia is chatter only vaguely connected to "its intended purpose". Morons like Raul654 (T-C-L-K-R-D) (was it him, or a different moron?) publish lulz-y cat pictures, others collect porn, and most of the arbitrators and many senior Wikipedia potentates haven't created a meaningful article in years, if ever. Wikipedia bans people who challenge its power structure, who show disrespect to its high priests, and otherwise puncture the reality distortion field there. It has nothing to do with specific behaviour, except as an excuse.

I know nothing of Proofreader's assertions, but yours is completely bogus.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gomi
post Sat 30th July 2011, 6:09pm
Post #54


Member
********

Group: Members
Posts: 3,022
Joined: Fri 17th Nov 2006, 6:38pm
Member No.: 565



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Wed 27th July 2011, 10:32pm) *
All I can suggest is that you consult a decent lawyer as soon as you can, because I think you're going to need one.
QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Wed 27th July 2011, 11:01pm) *
Let's be clear here; we are heading for the Royal Courts of Justice unless there are some revelations. My solicitor is currently involved in a conspiracy to provide firearms case in Liverpool, but has put me on hold should the need arise. I'm not saying he's good. But, er he's fucking good. ... Now, do you feel lucky?

Oh my, I should have read further back. I had no idea that Encylcopedist, in addition to being an impotent wanker, was also the completely delusional RH&E. Serves me right for not paying attention. I wouldn't have bothered contradicting him, under the principle of "never wrestle with a pig -- you get all dirty and the pig enjoys it." Yeesh.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Sat 30th July 2011, 7:52pm
Post #55


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(gomi @ Sat 30th July 2011, 7:02pm) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Fri 29th July 2011, 6:47pm) *
QUOTE(Proofreader77 @ Thu 28th July 2011, 6:38pm) *
Nothing much say at the moment, ...
You were blocked for failing to use Wikipedia for its intended purpose and for failing to respond to perfectly good advice, as here ... and ignoring policies and guidelines.

What a complete load of bullshit. The wiki-powerful do these things all the time. As we've seen, 85% of Wikipedia is chatter only vaguely connected to "its intended purpose". Morons like Raul654 (T-C-L-K-R-D) (was it him, or a different moron?) publish lulz-y cat pictures, others collect porn, and most of the arbitrators and many senior Wikipedia potentates haven't created a meaningful article in years, if ever. Wikipedia bans people who challenge its power structure, who show disrespect to its high priests, and otherwise puncture the reality distortion field there. It has nothing to do with specific behaviour, except as an excuse.

I know nothing of Proofreader's assertions, but yours is completely bogus.


ORLY? His Block log shows otherwise. Proofreader77 had been disruptive for months, had failed to learn from several blocks, and tried to bribe his way out of it by claiming to have contributed financially- Wikipedia doesn't work like that, much as you and he might possibly want it to.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Vigilant
post Sat 30th July 2011, 8:32pm
Post #56


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri 24th Oct 2008, 2:04am
Member No.: 8,684

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sat 30th July 2011, 7:52pm) *

QUOTE(gomi @ Sat 30th July 2011, 7:02pm) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Fri 29th July 2011, 6:47pm) *
QUOTE(Proofreader77 @ Thu 28th July 2011, 6:38pm) *
Nothing much say at the moment, ...
You were blocked for failing to use Wikipedia for its intended purpose and for failing to respond to perfectly good advice, as here ... and ignoring policies and guidelines.

What a complete load of bullshit. The wiki-powerful do these things all the time. As we've seen, 85% of Wikipedia is chatter only vaguely connected to "its intended purpose". Morons like Raul654 (T-C-L-K-R-D) (was it him, or a different moron?) publish lulz-y cat pictures, others collect porn, and most of the arbitrators and many senior Wikipedia potentates haven't created a meaningful article in years, if ever. Wikipedia bans people who challenge its power structure, who show disrespect to its high priests, and otherwise puncture the reality distortion field there. It has nothing to do with specific behaviour, except as an excuse.

I know nothing of Proofreader's assertions, but yours is completely bogus.


ORLY? His Block log shows otherwise. Proofreader77 had been disruptive for months, had failed to learn from several blocks, and tried to bribe his way out of it by claiming to have contributed financially- Wikipedia doesn't work like that, much as you and he might possibly want it to.

Don't you and Ottava have some sort of 12 step meeting to go to?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sat 30th July 2011, 10:37pm
Post #57


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sat 30th July 2011, 12:52pm) *

QUOTE(gomi @ Sat 30th July 2011, 7:02pm) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Fri 29th July 2011, 6:47pm) *
QUOTE(Proofreader77 @ Thu 28th July 2011, 6:38pm) *
Nothing much say at the moment, ...
You were blocked for failing to use Wikipedia for its intended purpose and for failing to respond to perfectly good advice, as here ... and ignoring policies and guidelines.

What a complete load of bullshit. The wiki-powerful do these things all the time. As we've seen, 85% of Wikipedia is chatter only vaguely connected to "its intended purpose". Morons like Raul654 (T-C-L-K-R-D) (was it him, or a different moron?) publish lulz-y cat pictures, others collect porn, and most of the arbitrators and many senior Wikipedia potentates haven't created a meaningful article in years, if ever. Wikipedia bans people who challenge its power structure, who show disrespect to its high priests, and otherwise puncture the reality distortion field there. It has nothing to do with specific behaviour, except as an excuse.

I know nothing of Proofreader's assertions, but yours is completely bogus.


ORLY? His Block log shows otherwise. Proofreader77 had been disruptive for months, had failed to learn from several blocks, and tried to bribe his way out of it by claiming to have contributed financially- Wikipedia doesn't work like that, much as you and he might possibly want it to.

Well, I don't know Proofreader77, but he edited on WP for some time before being zapped. He started in Feb 2008, and got his first block from Gwen Gale in Dec 2009, for what looks very much like an attack of mania or holiday cheer on Jimbo's TALK page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=334805756
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=334823988

He seems to have ticked off Gwen Gale and RH&E both. Going on Jimbo's talk page to give suggestions is almost a right-of-passage (though putting sonnets there and bragging about one's WMF donations isn't).

Though WP would been better off if they'd just taken the Lar-suggested route and collapsed all this stuff and told Proofer to sleep it off, or else go back on his lithium. (As I said in another thread, too bad they didn't run this guy past Casliber). Editors with problems like this should be blocked for a week or a month at a time--- not for 31 hours, then moved up to indefinite. Stupid. Somebody as experienced as Gwen Gale should know better. Does nobody use intermediate length blocks anymore?

As it was, Proof77 warred with people who would one day themselves be banned, like RH&E and Tombacker321.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gwe....B7_contribs.29

It's pretty bad to see somebody with 5000 article space edits taken out like that, as though they were some some high school vandal. That goes double for RH&E (even more content added), though his brain probably needs a lot more adjustment.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Proofreader77
post Sun 31st July 2011, 6:11pm
Post #58


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon 25th Jan 2010, 5:30am
From: California
Member No.: 16,819

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



For purposes of on-topic discussion for this thread:

(1) Proofreader77 posted precisely two replies to Rod (the only time he had ever interacted with Rod) ... before Rod posted "Deceased" on his own userpage.

(2) Proofreader77 posted a subtle notice on the Administrator's Noticeboard that someone should check into the situation (since it could have been indicating suicide).

For the rest of the story of Proofreader77 ... and Roman Polanski (since his arrest inspired an SPA to attempt to stack the deck in that article) ... you'll have to wait for the movie. :-)


[NOTE: Narrative notes are in 3rd person for Google's benefit.]

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Vigilant
post Sun 31st July 2011, 7:45pm
Post #59


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri 24th Oct 2008, 2:04am
Member No.: 8,684

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Proofreader77 @ Sun 31st July 2011, 6:11pm) *

For purposes of on-topic discussion for this thread:

(1) Proofreader77 posted precisely two replies to Rod (the only time he had ever interacted with Rod) ... before Rod posted "Deceased" on his own userpage.

(2) Proofreader77 posted a subtle notice on the Administrator's Noticeboard that someone should check into the situation (since it could have been indicating suicide).

For the rest of the story of Proofreader77 ... and Roman Polanski (since his arrest inspired an SPA to attempt to stack the deck in that article) ... you'll have to wait for the movie. :-)


[NOTE: Narrative notes are in 3rd person for Google's benefit.]

Is your name Bob Dole?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Proofreader77
post Sun 31st July 2011, 8:15pm
Post #60


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon 25th Jan 2010, 5:30am
From: California
Member No.: 16,819

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



OFF-TOPIC DATA [Real life identity of Proofreader77 according to Proofreader77]:

QUOTE(Vigilant @ Sun 31st July 2011, 12:45pm) *

QUOTE(Proofreader77 @ Sun 31st July 2011, 6:11pm) *

...

Is your name Bob Dole?

As user:Proofreader77 on Wikipedia indicated, Proofreader77's real life identity is Jim Boke Tomlin.

Proofreader77 lives in California ... along with Google, Wikipedia ... the Los Angeles D.A. who sought Polanski's return to California ... the aforementioned anti-Polanski SPA ... the aforementioned now-banned individual who first improperly dropped Proofreader77 into ANI ... and an administrator who gave Proofreader77 a Socratic barnstar for his use of sonnets in an RFC.

Oh, and, Hollywood is in California, too. :-)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

4 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st 11 17, 2:23am