| |
|
  |
 Rachel Marsden: The Fundamental Schizophrenia of BLP |
|
|
| gomi |
|
Member
Group: Members
Posts: 3,022
Joined:
Member No.: 565
|
I am amused and befuddled by the current ArbCom case re Rachel Marsden. The ArbCom has come down with a bunch of tough-minded words about BLPs. On the one hand, I can see that the article would be embarassing and damaging to Marsden, resurfacing a 10-year-old false date-rape case and more recent criminal harassment charges. Marsden has apparently complained in person to Wales about this. While not finding any material unsourced, the ArbCom case says that the article is "too negative" and anyone can essentially blank it. Does this apply to Brandts article? To all BLPs? On the other hand, the statements in this article, while negative, were well-sourced, and all the information remains in the article history. Finally, and perhaps most bizarrely, SlimVirgin is the one who has stubbed and full-protected the page -- she isn't ArbCom and has not thus far been involved. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Somey |
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,816
Joined:
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275
|
...when Horseback riding becomes a way of life? Hey, I've seen it happen! I should hasten to point out here that I would fully support Marsden's efforts to have her Wikipedia bio completely removed, assuming that's what she's actually trying to do. But if not, i.e., if she just wants them to censor the article so that it tells the world only how super-wonderful she is, despite her [ CENSORED] past, then as far as I'm concerned it's just another way in which Wikipedia helps degrade Western culture, as they usually do. And hey, guess what! That's exactly what Slimmy is doing for her, right now!Of course, if she succeeds at this it'll be because she isn't a critic of Wikipedia, that's the long and short of it. After all, D-Brandt has plenty of media savvy (even if nobody knows who he is or what he looks like), and knows a few lawyers, and has a far better case, having not actually done much of anything wrong in his life to speak of. At least not that anyone knows about, anyway! (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Somey |
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,816
Joined:
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275
|
Hmm. I'd forgotten about her... I just feel really sorry for the horse! But hey, as long as we're doing a picture show, here's one of Rachel: (IMG: http://static.flickr.com/57/216978437_b9f9ab2d23_o.jpg) She's a hottie, huh? Apparently she'll sell you out to Richard Mellon Scaife or Karl Rove without even a second thought, but I could probably forget about the hate politics for one night, assuming she gave me the same consideration. And what is she standing in front of there, a concrete stairway into some sort of dungeon? I guess I'd better be extra-careful when we go out on our big date! |
|
|
|
|
|
| Somey |
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,816
Joined:
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275
|
Okay, before we get too carried away here, let's remember what Ms. Marsden actually wrote on her own ArbCom page. QUOTE I kindly request that this article about me be removed and, in the future, should another article be created about me, that the contributors stick to the documented facts about my career and life. It's hardly unequivocal, isn't it? It's clear she doesn't want the article removed for privacy reasons, because then she wouldn't have added the qualifying statement ("should another article be created," etc.). So, in effect, she wants the article deleted - presumably along with the unpleasant revision history - but then she apparently wouldn't mind a new article, without the nasty revisions visible to all, some time later on - and presumably under the ever-watchful eye of Slimmy & Co. Personally, I (and many others here, I suspect) would get totally on her side if she were to change her mind, and forcefully and unequivocally state that she doesn't want an article about her on Wikipedia at all, ever, and no foolin' around. (I'd support the removal of this discussion thread too, FWIW - call me the mean ol' censorship guy if you must...) But where there's smoke there's fire, and there's something about this woman that makes me somewhat skeptical. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Somey |
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,816
Joined:
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275
|
QUOTE(guy @ Fri 1st December 2006, 4:26am)  I thought the problem was that most of what she objected to was fully documented from reliable sources. Correctimundo! But naturally, Marsden herself isn't going to be caught saying that such sources are "reliable." This sort of thing came up during the lengthy BLP policy discussions a while back. The example used at the time was Jeff Gannon, the right-wing blogger who'd been given full press credentials at the White House in order to ask puff questions, who was later found to have been a male prostitute, with nude photos of himself on his website, a resume full of ridiculous exaggerations, the whole nine yards. The fact that he was a male prostitute is certainly undisputed, but the real problem, as we've all repeated over and over again, is that with a person like that, "anyone with an IP address" can insert all sorts of exaggerations and lies on top of it, and those things can remain there for months, maybe forever. And because the truth is already stranger than fiction to begin with, those insertions are more likely to be accepted by the RC patrollers in the first place... most of them aren't inclined to support Gannon's side of things anyway, after all. Anyhoo, that's the general argument - "we shouldn't allow ourselves to be censored by the very people who do bad things and then want to hide the evidence." And I might even agree with that, if it weren't for the fact that Wikipedia is open to anyone who comes along, and if I felt the Wikipedians in charge of this sort of thing could be trusted to do what's right in all cases when someone does come along with nothing but malicious intent. |
|
|
|
|
|
| taiwopanfob |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 643
Joined:
Member No.: 214
|
One of the complainants -- and a defender of Marsden -- in this case is "Arthur Ellis". An interesting name in that it is the pseudonym of the executioner in Canada (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_B._English). The things you find out at Wikipedia... I see that SV is arguing that RM's article should be deleted because it is all negative. Curiuosly, when examining the article at google's cache -- which looked fairly balanced and well sourced and -- I see it is linking to Gurmant Grewal. Funnily enough, Grewal's article still exists, well sourced, and is, if anything, even more negative than RM's ever can be (unless she once again takes up her meat-space stalking tendencies in the future). Both of these people appear to have chosen to live moderately negative lives. What is a biography supposed to say about this kind of thing, anyways? But like Somey, I say if the lady doesn't want an article at WP, just go ahead and delete it. No gnashing of teeth required. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Somey |
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,816
Joined:
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275
|
SLIMVIRGIN MASSIVE HYPOCRISY ALERThttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rachel_M...g_started_againI'd quote some stuff, but you almost have to read the whole thing to get the full effect. At least Slimmy has finally admitted to being a right-winger, for all intents and purposes. ...Oh, all right, here's one: QUOTE My view is that mistakes people make in their early twenties shouldn't be held against them by Wikipedia forever, especially if the mainstream media has stopped writing about it, and if the issue didn't lead to court action. We're an encyclopedia, not a tattoo service. SlimVirgin (talk) 21:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC) I mean, you see things like this, and you have to think, she's laughing at everyone. Wikipedia is basically her personal revenge platform at this point, and she certainly won't let it be anyone else's revenge platform, either. There's also some talk towards the end about Marsden's sexual harrassment cases "never seeing the inside of a courtroom." I think it's important here, in the interests of truth and accuracy, to point out that the overwhelming proportion of all sexual harrassment accusations are never brought to trial. Nobody wants to bring those kinds of cases to court; they're extremely ugly for both sides. They're almost always handled internally by the companies involved, or settled out of court, and for good reason. That kind of rhetoric is deceptive, and typically used by abusers and corporate shills to get the media off their backs. I'm not saying Marsden did (or didn't) do any of those things she was accused of, but she was formally accused, plain and simple. So... the fact that Slimmy uses that form of spin is suggestive, at least to anyone who's paying attention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| gomi |
|
Member
Group: Members
Posts: 3,022
Joined:
Member No.: 565
|
Sorry, just yankin' yer chain ... Now, to add something substantive: Slimey has just gone through another purge of her talk page (nothing new here),. Of more interest, in a perverse way, is her incessant addition of "barnstars" and other pseudo-awards to her personal page, like this. Beside the obvious approval-seeking, what is the psychology of this. It seems distrubed to me: she takes a variety of unpopular positions, quite publicly, frequently castigates other editors and admins, for actual misdeeds or because of raging hormones (who knows?), but collects these silly trinkets. A disturbed mind, if you ask me! This post has been edited by gomi: |
|
|
|
|
|
| jorge |
|
Postmaster
Group: On Vacation
Posts: 1,910
Joined:
Member No.: 29
|
QUOTE(gomi @ Fri 8th December 2006, 6:45am) Sorry, just yankin' yer chain ... Now, to add something substantive: Slimey has just gone through another purge of her talk page (nothing new here),. Of more interest, in a perverse way, is her incessant addition of "barnstars" and other pseudo-awards to her personal page, like this. Beside the obvious approval-seeking, what is the psychology of this. It seems distrubed to me: she takes a variety of unpopular positions, quite publicly, frequently castigates other editors and admins, for actual misdeeds or because of raging hormones (who knows?), but collects these silly trinkets. A disturbed mind, if you ask me! I believe she removed her poodle pic as it was replaced with a penis by the Jew hating vandal who is probably blocked user Brandon03. Also I see that SV's dancing penguin has unfortunately been deleted. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Somey |
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,816
Joined:
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275
|
QUOTE(gomi @ Fri 8th December 2006, 12:45am) Sorry, just yankin' yer chain ... Don't worry, it's a pretty long chain! (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) QUOTE(gomi @ Fri 8th December 2006, 12:45am) Of more interest, in a perverse way, is her incessant addition of "barnstars" and other pseudo-awards to her personal page... From what I've seen, people usually do that when they're feeling on the defensive amongst their peers... not that it takes all that much brilliant psychological insight to come to that conclusion... It's quite possible that there are all sorts of weird skeletons in her psychological closet, but then again, sometimes a nasty person is just a nasty person, any way you slice it. And while lots of people suffer tragedy and despair at some point in their lives, only a very small minority of them vow to wreak vengeance on the rest of the world for it, and relentlessly pursue their vengefulness for years and years on end, running rough-shod over other peoples' ideals, and all the while making innocent folks suffer right along with the "guilty." Regardless, I can't imagine there's any conceivable way she doesn't realize how unpopular she is! On a slightly deeper level, though, the barnstars could be both an intimidation technique - almost like rodentian ball-thrusting - and a form of self-delusion, something for her to look at on those occasions when she starts to feel a twinge of conscience or remorse at the way she's treated her fellow Wikipedians in the obsessive pursuit of her screwed-up personal agenda. |
|
|
|
|
|
| AV Roe |
|
Neophyte
Group: Contributors
Posts: 11
Joined:
Member No.: 455
|
QUOTE(gomi @ Fri 8th December 2006, 6:45am) Sorry, just yankin' yer chain ... Now, to add something substantive: Slimey has just gone through another purge of her talk page (nothing new here),. Of more interest, in a perverse way, is her incessant addition of "barnstars" and other pseudo-awards to her personal page, like this. Beside the obvious approval-seeking, what is the psychology of this. It seems distrubed to me: she takes a variety of unpopular positions, quite publicly, frequently castigates other editors and admins, for actual misdeeds or because of raging hormones (who knows?), but collects these silly trinkets. A disturbed mind, if you ask me! It's quite absurd considering the fact that the barnstars are meaningless and just individual expressions by individual editors, a circle of self-congratulation and ego-stroking. A number of editors have had the good sense to minimize the barnstars either by putting them on a page other than their main user page (an "awards" page) or by reducing their size so as not to be ostenatious. Slim seems to take them seriously and is committed to displaying them in as vainglorious a manner as possible - much like a senior flunky in a dictatorship displaying rows of ribbons and trinkets on his chest. See here I am, she's saying, "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough and doggone it people like me." |
|
|
|
|
|
| Ior |
|
Neophyte
Group: Contributors
Posts: 15
Joined:
Member No.: 246
|
QUOTE(gomi @ Fri 8th December 2006, 1:03am) QUOTE(Somey @ Thu 7th December 2006, 4:28pm)
SLIMVIRGIN MASSIVE HYPOCRISY ALERT
And in other news, SUN CONTINUES TO RISE IN THE EASTThis just in: SMOKING MAY LEAD TO CANCER |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |
