* Is it true you compromised the English Wikipedia admin account Cool3 in c. November 2009, and used it until it was discovered and desysopped? Majorly talk 20:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC) o Further, how much did you pay for it? Do you think that buying admin accounts is conduct unbecoming of a steward? Why or why not? ++Lar: t/c 01:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
"Compromised" is a loaded term, and my wallet has nothing to do with my Steward candidacy. (Unless, that is, Steward bits can be purchased like Wikimedia Foundation board seats can be? If that's the case, how much do I need to shell out for this Steward-level user right?) -- Thekohser 05:22, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Let's say it more clearly then: Mr Kohs, were you using the account User:Cool3? --Philippe 20:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, there's your entertainment for the weekend......
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 5th February 2010, 12:30am)
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 4th February 2010, 7:53pm)
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 4th February 2010, 8:02pm)
Ah. Is he one of those waddling guys with bulging eyes at teh meet-ups?
If Hivemind is any indication, that's half of the men on Wikipedia.
I prefer to think its just the folks on hivemend.
I referred a non-Wikipedian friend of mine to Hivemind for reasons too convoluted to go into here; he observed that a Wikipedia administrators' convention would be a bad place to pick up women. I'm afraid that somebody qualified to make the assessment might say it would be a bad place to pick up men, too.
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Thu 4th February 2010, 5:52pm)
I might vote for Razorflame in the hope he wins and finally gets to ejaculate.
Ah. Is he one of those waddling guys with bulging eyes at teh meet-ups?
HE'S GONNA BLOW!
QUOTE(Sarcasticidealist @ Fri 5th February 2010, 4:37am)
I referred a non-Wikipedian friend of mine to Hivemind for reasons too convoluted to go into here; he observed that a Wikipedia administrators' convention would be a bad place to pick up women. I'm afraid that somebody qualified to make the assessment might say it would be a bad place to pick up men, too.
For pedios, though, it might be the happy hunting grounds...Young man!
Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,471
Joined: Mon 26th Jan 2009, 1:54pm
Member No.: 9,985
QUOTE(Sarcasticidealist @ Thu 4th February 2010, 11:37pm)
]I referred a non-Wikipedian friend of mine to Hivemind for reasons too convoluted to go into here; he observed that a Wikipedia administrators' convention would be a bad place to pick up women.
We could put Lar in a wig and a dress and pretend that he's Susan Boyle.
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Sat 6th February 2010, 3:23am)
QUOTE(Sarcasticidealist @ Thu 4th February 2010, 11:37pm)
]I referred a non-Wikipedian friend of mine to Hivemind for reasons too convoluted to go into here; he observed that a Wikipedia administrators' convention would be a bad place to pick up women.
We could put Lar in a wig and a dress and pretend that he's Susan Boyle.
If all else fails we can whip the horses' eyes and make them dream a dream...
Sorry, Jim Morrison quote I just butchered there...couldn't resist...
This post has been edited by RDH(Ghost In The Machine): Sat 6th February 2010, 4:10am
It looks like Lar is having a bit of a tough go at his reconfirmation. It wouldn't really change much though, since he's an ombudsman for the next year, and can't be a steward or checkuser at the same time.
I wonder who the Wikimedia Foundation officials are that select the commission members. Are ombudsmen members voted on by the WMF board? Also it says the "ombudsman's real identity must be disclosed to the Foundation legal counsel." That's a bit different than when they hand out checkuser or oversight. They only have to identify to Cary Bass.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,116
Joined: Wed 26th Dec 2007, 6:04pm
From: A large LEGO storage facility
Member No.: 4,290
QUOTE(tarantino @ Mon 15th February 2010, 10:02pm)
It looks like Lar is having a bit of a tough go at his reconfirmation. It wouldn't really change much though, since he's an ombudsman for the next year, and can't be a steward or checkuser at the same time.
If I am not reconfirmed then when I'm done being an Ombudsman I don't go back to being a steward.
I find the forces arrayed against me pretty ironic. The two major factions are the bunch cheering on Proabivouac's campaign of lies, smears and blackmail, and the bunch who think en:wp doesn't have a BLP problem and who thought Doc went too far deleting .00001% of the problematic articles... with a good dose of those who think the Lar-SV case came out wrong, and a dash of the "WR is evil" crowd for good measure. And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.
Most other stewards just keep their heads down and don't let anyone know what they think about anything.
301 - this isn't actually a footnote. It's just a number.
QUOTE(tarantino @ Mon 15th February 2010, 10:02pm)
It looks like Lar is having a bit of a tough go at his reconfirmation. It wouldn't really change much though, since he's an ombudsman for the next year, and can't be a steward or checkuser at the same time.
If I am not reconfirmed then when I'm done being an Ombudsman I don't go back to being a steward.
I find the forces arrayed against me pretty ironic. The two major factions are the bunch cheering on Proabivouac's campaign of lies, smears and blackmail, and the bunch who think en:wp doesn't have a BLP problem and who thought Doc went too far deleting .00001% of the problematic articles... with a good dose of those who think the Lar-SV case came out wrong, and a dash of the "WR is evil" crowd for good measure. And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.
Most other stewards just keep their heads down and don't let anyone know what they think about anything.
301 - this isn't actually a footnote. It's just a number.
I find the forces arrayed against me pretty ironic. The two major factions are the bunch cheering on Proabivouac's campaign of lies, smears and blackmail, and the bunch who think en:wp doesn't have a BLP problem and who thought Doc went too far deleting .00001% of the problematic articles... with a good dose of those who think the Lar-SV case came out wrong, and a dash of the "WR is evil" crowd for good measure. And to top it off, Durova(301) too, who apparently thinks I'm too much of a glory hound for her taste.
So.....not so much fun helping to run that madhouse, eh? Suffering from a bit of backstabbing? I could have warned you.
Stewards/elections 2010, Good luck Greg!
Thu 4th February 2010, 2:55am
