How Long Before The Boot? Options

[Jonny Cache]

Been There, Done That

No Longer Curious …

So, er, what happened?

Alas! All the good histories are long stories …

Here's a point in medias e-rase …

Jonny

[ColScott]

Now. You are blocked under the other account so it is block evasion. Had you shown any promise of rational discussion here I would have ignored your return to wikipedia, but your rants have not not inspired me to turn a blind eye and also have discouraged me from bothering to afd your article, something I was going to do several weeks ago. Lesson to learn Murphy, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

Edit: I probobly should clarify before someone points out that the honey method frequently doesnt work on WP either, that although the honey method sometimes doesn work, the vinegar one alienates everyone including people like me or other wp users who still edit who might otherwise have been inspired to help.

The day I am forced to be nice to terroristic scum like yourself is the day I kill myself.

I will end up owning your sad little illegal cult.

[ColScott]

Look, Viridae blocked email like a true Defender of the Wiki!

ColScott: posting your alternate accounts to a public forum is a bad idea. Even for those who have "left" Wikipedia Review under the guise of... erm, anyway... it's much better to just hint at it and have people hunting them.

Or not make any at all and wait for your name to come up in discussions about sock(puppet)-sniffing :-D

Ummm, as stupid as most cultists are, I think the user name would have been a dead give away. Even Ryan Bushby could have figured out.

[taiwopanfob]

Ergo I can start a new account and edit the medieval philosophy article? Or are there bigger guns out there still?

There are other or bigger guns, as well as all you have is Viridae's current word: there is no guarantee it won't change at whim.

[Peter Damian]

Ergo I can start a new account and edit the medieval philosophy article? Or are there bigger guns out there still?

There are other or bigger guns, as well as all you have is Viridae's current word: there is no guarantee it won't change at whim.

There are other guns (see the other thread just underneath)

[taiwopanfob]

Now. You are blocked under the other account so it is block evasion. Had you shown any promise of rational discussion here I would have ignored your return to wikipedia, but your rants have not not inspired me to turn a blind eye and also have discouraged me from bothering to afd your article, something I was going to do several weeks ago. Lesson to learn Murphy, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

How on earth can you call for "rational discussion" and then in the same paragraph state you're failing to do the right thing on irrational, emotive grounds?

Because rational or at least civil discussion is more likely to inspire me to care about what Murphy wants.

Smart people who do not tolerate fools well generally speak their arguments in deeply sarcastic attacks against their perceived enemies.

I'm guessing you don't like being called a fool. The question here is not your personal feelings, but whether or not you actually are a fool.

This is not a question you can answer honestly. You should have withdrawn yourself from the debate, especially in light of your engagement with Murphy in an off-wiki forum (to wit: here).

But ethical matters like this are apparently beyond your typical teenage admin. There really should be a minimum age. Maybe 40? But age suggests identity requirements and, well, you don't need to recoil in terror at that suggestion, as it is expected.

Irrational uncivil discussion like what he actually displays is not going to do anything of the sort. And I frankly can't be bothered stick my neck out and arguing for someone who is frankly so nasty at every turn.

As Damian notes, you can't perceive the argument due to your own emotive responses. Congratulations, you've been trolled! And in that, you have disgraced yourself and the project. Might I suggest a resignation of your precious bit? (I'm serious: had it been me, I would.)

[WhispersOfWisdom]

But ethical matters like this are apparently beyond your typical teenage admin. There really should be a minimum age. Maybe 40? But age suggests identity requirements and, well, you don't need to recoil in terror at that suggestion, as it is expected.

Now that, is what I am talking about...

[Miltopia]

Viridae has been nothing been but open and friendly here. I hope that the staff and moderators aren't going to tolerate him being called "terrorist scum"; that's a really easy way to lose people like Viridae. And I for one would much rather see ColScott go than Viridae.

Should I take this to the WRR to avoid diverging the topic?

[Peter Damian]

Viridae has been nothing been but open and friendly here. I hope that the staff and moderators aren't going to tolerate him being called "terrorist scum"; that's a really easy way to lose people like Viridae. And I for one would much rather see ColScott go than Viridae.

Should I take this to the WRR to avoid diverging the topic?

I agree. The stuff on the WP talk page was amusing, almost. This has gone too far. Viridae is a reasonable bloke. I don't agree with the action he took here, but, .... too far.

[taiwopanfob]

Viridae has been nothing been but open and friendly here. I hope that the staff and moderators aren't going to tolerate him being called "terrorist scum"; that's a really easy way to lose people like Viridae. And I for one would much rather see ColScott go than Viridae.

The quote was "terroristic scum", perhaps a subtle difference. There is also the question of target: was the comment personal or general? That is, would Murphy say exactly the same thing to any administrator?

My guess is that he would (if he hasn't already done so). He'll probably say the same thing to any supporter of the BLP.

Given what is at stake, is Murphy really unjustified? If I had a BLP over there, I would be amazingly upset about it. I think anyone would be.

Should I take this to the WRR to avoid diverging the topic?

Since Viridae has blocked the guy at Wikipedia, I say Viridae has removed himself from being able to comment on the matter of Murphy v. Wikipedia here, as he is no longer an impartial source. A similar statement can be offered against Murphy though. And on those theories, if anyone need to be throttled, both should be: WR is not a court of appeal. Focus could be on discussing the generalities of this issue, and using only specific cases to highlight the arguments (whichever way they are argued).

[Viridae]

I usually overlook productive accounts even if they are being used for block evasion.

Ergo I can start a new account and edit the medieval philosophy article? Or are there bigger guns out there still?

Why contribute to the credibility of a deme that will turn around and use that credibility to discredit you?

Jonny

I had to finish the Medieval philosophy article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=198644009

I'm also curious to see what will happen.

Frankly I want to see that finished so I would have ignored you had i known the existance of your account - seems to me you would have been productive.

[Joseph100]

Now. You are blocked under the other account so it is block evasion. Had you shown any promise of rational discussion here I would have ignored your return to wikipedia, but your rants have not not inspired me to turn a blind eye and also have discouraged me from bothering to afd your article, something I was going to do several weeks ago. Lesson to learn Murphy, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

Edit: I probobly should clarify before someone points out that the honey method frequently doesnt work on WP either, that although the honey method sometimes doesn work, the vinegar one alienates everyone including people like me or other wp users who still edit who might otherwise have been inspired to help.

The day I am forced to be nice to terroristic scum like yourself is the day I kill myself.

I will end up owning your sad little illegal cult.

SING IT OUT BRO..... Wikipeidia = Cult of the lie,

[ColScott]

Hey Viridae, I suspect the new vandal is YOU.

Am I wrong?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Murphy

[Poetlister]

But ethical matters like this are apparently beyond your typical teenage admin. There really should be a minimum age. Maybe 40?

Not that I was expecting to become an admin in the next 13 years, but why 40? Do we have any reason to believe that the admins aged over 40 are more ethical than the teenage ones? Shrewder and wilier maybe.

[wikiwhistle]

Viridae has been nothing been but open and friendly here. I hope that the staff and moderators aren't going to tolerate him being called "terrorist scum"; that's a really easy way to lose people like Viridae. And I for one would much rather see ColScott go than Viridae.

The quote was "terroristic scum", perhaps a subtle difference. There is also the question of target: was the comment personal or general? That is, would Murphy say exactly the same thing to any administrator?

I think V. is involved with some of the Irish articles and hence this is a personal comment. I could be confusing V. with someone else though?

Since Viridae has blocked the guy at Wikipedia, I say Viridae has removed himself from being able to comment on the matter of Murphy v. Wikipedia here, as he is no longer an impartial source.

I think you're getting confused here- this is not wikipedia. Even there, editors aren't required to be neutral all the time in discussions about articles- and here there's no -requirement- of it, as I understand it. It's a discussion forum.

And I agree with the bloke who said Viridae might be driven off- as has happened with other contributors here in the last week or so, in response to Col and other flamers.

[Kato]

Some established user has taken it upon themselves to don a mask, create a sockpuppet and goad Murphy by filling up the biography.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/RTFA

We saw all this with the Brandt article. If someone struggles against the borg, the followers put on hoods and tighten their grip on the subject.

[wikiwhistle]

It says what he's like- as we've seen on this forum- and it seems to be sourced.


It just says he's a bit blunt etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=198703519

Squeakbox removed a sentence saying who he's married to (which was sourced.) I don't see why simply mentioning, backed up by a paper, who someone's married to is wrong, but then I don't know the backstory.

This post has been edited by wikiwhistle: Sun 16th March 2008, 11:35pm

[Viridae]

Viridae has been nothing been but open and friendly here. I hope that the staff and moderators aren't going to tolerate him being called "terrorist scum"; that's a really easy way to lose people like Viridae. And I for one would much rather see ColScott go than Viridae.

The quote was "terroristic scum", perhaps a subtle difference. There is also the question of target: was the comment personal or general? That is, would Murphy say exactly the same thing to any administrator?

I think V. is involved with some of the Irish articles and hence this is a personal comment. I could be confusing V. with someone else though?

Since Viridae has blocked the guy at Wikipedia, I say Viridae has removed himself from being able to comment on the matter of Murphy v. Wikipedia here, as he is no longer an impartial source.

I think you're getting confused here- this is not wikipedia. Even there, editors aren't required to be neutral all the time in discussions about articles- and here there's no -requirement- of it, as I understand it. It's a discussion forum.

And I agree with the bloke who said Viridae might be driven off- as has happened with other contributors here in the last week or so, in response to Col and other flamers.

Not leaving, I have thicker skin than that - especially when it comes to irrational ranters like JoJo and ColScott.

[Miltopia]

I'm glad to hear it. Nonetheless, I hope staff and moderators or WHOEVER is in charge hear that it's not just the target of such trash that won't want to stick around if it goes unchecked.

[Viridae]

I'm glad to hear it. Nonetheless, I hope staff and moderators or WHOEVER is in charge hear that it's not just the target of such trash that won't want to stick around if it goes unchecked.

Oh and thanks for the words of support Miltopia, appreciated.