ArbCom are no longer my friends, a woman scorned Options

[LessHorrid vanU]

Posted on Giano's talkpage. I never thought I'd see the day...

[Alex]

Posted on Giano's talkpage. I never thought I'd see the day...

Is there any particular arbitrators she's referring to?

[Giggy]

Posted on Giano's talkpage. I never thought I'd see the day...

Don't be too surprised, it's not like she provided evidence or anything.

[LessHorrid vanU]

Posted on Giano's talkpage. I never thought I'd see the day...

Is there any particular arbitrators she's referring to?

Any and all that didn't give her the free pass she wanted in the recent SlimVirgin/Lar matter?

[Alex]

Posted on Giano's talkpage. I never thought I'd see the day...

Is there any particular arbitrators she's referring to?

Any and all that didn't give her the free pass she wanted in the recent SlimVirgin/Lar matter?

Well I've not really been following that. Other than the Arbcom case, is there anywhere I can read that can summarise what the situation with that is?

[LessHorrid vanU]

... stuff ...

Well I've not really been following that. Other than the Arbcom case, is there anywhere I can read that can summarise what the situation with that is?

Yup.

[Milton Roe]

Posted on Giano's talkpage. I never thought I'd see the day...

Is there any particular arbitrators she's referring to?

Any and all that didn't give her the free pass she wanted in the recent SlimVirgin/Lar matter?

Maybe those bad ones that nailed FM.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Giano_II

Some of them no doubt do their best, Fred. But some are determined to stick up for their IRC mates ahead of any other consideration, or to do down people they don't like regardless of the facts. And some of them do nothing at all, which means that those who want to work don't have time to do it properly, so they come out with decisions that clearly show they've not read the evidence. It's always been like that to some extent, but it looks worse now than it's ever been. In addition to that, though, we have this new imperialist dictator thing, where some of them genuinely believe they can go around changing policy, and blocking good content contributors who really haven't done much wrong — while not allowing them to file RfArs and telling other admins not to unblock them. If we've had this before to any great degree, I certainly don't remember it. SlimVirgin talk|edits 22:26, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/huh.gif) Why, the very idea that a good-content contributor should be blocked and other admins told not to unblock them! Land sakes. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) What is WP coming to, these days? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)

Oh, wait-- anybody who has disagreed with SlimVirgin's POV in the past is a BAD-CONTENT contributor. By definition. So tag-team blocking them would have been okay. And that's why she doesn't remember ever seeing anything else.

[Heat]

She can't be talking about FM since he's not been blocked.

[Milton Roe]

She can't be talking about FM since he's not been blocked.

Good point. Just defrocked. Who, then?

[maggot3]

I presumed it was OrangeMarlin, even though he wasn't actually blocked.

[Proabivouac]

She can't be talking about FM since he's not been blocked.

Good point. Just defrocked. Who, then?

Probably Giano and/or Peter Damian. Who knows? It could be a lot of people by now. The point is that the ArbCom's blocks are increasingly blatantly political. Even with a true "rogue administrator" like Ryulong, most of his blocks are against actual vandals. The Committee shows no sign of caring about content. Its function is only to control the high-level politics of the project, and especially to purge it of its own critics.

This post has been edited by Proabivouac:

[Peter Damian]

I presumed it was OrangeMarlin, even though he wasn't actually blocked.

Possibly me as we (i.e SV and I) had an email exchange about this a few days ago. I have generally always stood up against the criticism of her on WR.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[flash]

Posted on Giano's talkpage. I never thought I'd see the day...

Especially this bit?

In addition to that, though, we have this new imperialist dictator thing, where some of them genuinely believe they can go around changing policy, and blocking good content contributors who really haven't done much wrong - SlimVirgin

That's what makes Slim so sinister No wonder simple folk- like PD evidently - still think 'she' is worth defending!

In passing:

MiniConspiracy theory: SlimVirgin will have been involved in the 'special Jimbo block' of PD by Jimbo - clearly the two act strategically on all matters.

Either the SV is literally insane, (ie. is unaware of the fact that 'it' has blocked many good content contributors while invariably acting as an imperialist dictator, changing the rules as suits, or this is part of some cunning plan to oust another admin...

This post has been edited by flash:

[Piperdown]

Bauder's line is just priceless.

In the context of Bauder emailing Judd Bagley with an admission (That email is on ASM) that he, a sitting arb, knew that Weiss sockpuppeted abusively ( this was the 2006 era abuse of TomStoner-Lastexit-Mantanmoreland), and created/guarded his own BLP, and pumping and dumping references to his own nonbestselling book all over WP.....well, Fred Bauder - defrocked from the Colrado Bar and the WP Bar - calling out the current WP Arb for being less than competent is a hoot.

The Arbcom that kissed Linda and Gary's abusive asses unconditionally in 2006-7, then gave it up to the 2008 Arb who refused to do anything about it but didn't stop the community (they stopped banning people for it) from doing something about it....well....Bauder's Arbcom is the Nixon Administration compared to the 2008 Arb's GW Bush Administration.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Herschelkrustofsky]

[/quote]

SlimVirgin: If we've had this before to any great degree, I certainly don't remember it.

I would hazard a guess that these abuses are far more memorable when done to you, than they are when you are doing unto others.

Subsequent edit: And St. Tobias, as he often does, hits the mark with unerring accuracy.

[Krimpet]

Probably Giano and/or Peter Damian. Who knows?

Wow, I can picture the uneasy smirk on your face when you posted that. Who could've possibly been banned by ArbCom recently? I wonder...

I sincerely hope SV isn't referring to your ban, considering how your outing, insulting, and smearing people on BADSITES (including moi for one, of course) seems to be completely against everything she publically condemns.

[Moulton]

She can't be talking about FM since he's not been blocked.

Good point. Just defrocked. Who, then?

Probably Giano and/or Peter Damian. Who knows? It could be a lot of people by now. The point is that the ArbCom's blocks are increasingly blatantly political. Even with a true "rogue administrator" like Ryulong, most of his blocks are against actual vandals. The Committee shows no sign of caring about content. Its function is only to control the high-level politics of the project, and especially to purge it of its own critics.

Now you see why the Founders ruled out Bill of Attainder in the US Constitution.

Painful history reveals that Bill of Attainder is a corrosive and corrupting practice that eventually sinks any government that adopts and employs it as a regulatory tool.

Per Hammurabi's first three laws (which deal with banishment and proving just cause), Giano is right to tell them to go jump in the lake.

[Proabivouac]

I sincerely hope SV isn't referring to your ban, considering how your outing, insulting, and smearing people on BADSITES (including moi for one, of course) seems to be completely against everything she publically condemns.

So the Review is only a BADSITE when you're outed? As you're aware, I was myself outed on WR. You took that identification, pretending that it was the fruit of your own genius, and posted it to Wikipedia, falsely claiming that I'd intended to evade the Arbitrator's meaningless wikisanction, as if it were inconceivable that I hoped to avoid further attacks on my name - attacks which you cheerfully perpetuated. I don't remember you calling the Review (or Wikipedia for that matter) a "BADSITE" then. Truthfully, I was treated far more respectfully here (as are you) than you and your IRC buddies treated me on Wikipedia. You turned Wikipedia into a BADSITE for me, and, I'll wager, enjoyed every moment of it. I'm not happy to be blocked, but it beats bowing down to the likes of you.

[Piperdown]

WP:HAMSTER is born

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=247854459

Revision as of 21:56, 26 October 2008 (edit) (undo)
Giano II (Talk | contribs)
(What a hoot! How to live dangerously. Join the Arbcom & entrust your personal details to Jimbo's crew. I currently wouldn't trust them with the name of my kid's hamster)

WP:HAMSTER is not to be confused with WP:GERBIL (the anonymous WP'ian's inalienable right to declare any BLP to be gay in a very googlable way, based on reports in blogs of gerbil handling practices)

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Krimpet]

I sincerely hope SV isn't referring to your ban, considering how your outing, insulting, and smearing people on BADSITES (including moi for one, of course) seems to be completely against everything she publically condemns.

So the Review is only a BADSITE when you're outed? As you're aware, I was myself outed on WR. You took that identification, pretending that it was the fruit of your own genius, and posted it to Wikipedia, falsely claiming that I'd intended to evade the Arbitrator's meaningless wikisanction, as if it were inconceivable that I hoped to avoid further attacks on my name - attacks which you cheerfully perpetuated. I don't remember you calling the Review (or Wikipedia for that matter) a "BADSITE" then. Truthfully, I was treated far more respectfully here (as are you) than you and your IRC buddies treated me on Wikipedia. You turned Wikipedia into a BADSITE for me, and, I'll wager, enjoyed every moment of it. I'm not happy to be blocked, but it beats bowing down to the likes of you.

Good job straying from the point again. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif) I'm not going to rehash my version of those events again and again, as much as you like to. (I'll repeat this, though: had you ever considered, um, telling me that your real name was the issue, instead of instantly going into your usual attack-dog mode and simply reverting me with the vague accusation of "violating WP:HARASS"?)

Back to the point of this thread, I really hope it isn't your ban that SlimVirgin is referring to. I've always thought she has good intentions, though very frequently misguided. But if she doesn't understand why your ban was completely warranted... I really don't know what to think anymore.