New Israel/Palestine ArbCom case, Jayjg is one of the parties? No way! Options Rating

[Warui desu]

Shouldn't opposes have detailed rationales than just statements like "too draconian" or "too stupid?"

They should, if wikipedia was actually about rational debate and not about the number of "me too!"'s posting.

[EricBarbour]

Well, I hope that the next book written on Wikipedia's history by Andrew Lih or whoever addresses the years 2005-2009(?) when a few cabals led by admins basically had a free hand to do what they wanted to in certain topic areas.

Whoever writes such a book will have plenty to write about. The Israel gang is only the most obvious and egregious abuser of NPOV.

Don't forget the bestiality gang, the pedophilia gang (which has been little documented), and the various gangs focusing on fancruft subjects (Simpsons, Futurama, South Park, Star Trek, Stargate, etc.)....plus a number of disputes over ethnic-related articles (Armenian vs. Azeri, Serbs vs. everyone else, on and on).

There was a recent WR thread about the bizarre edit scene surrounding Barry Manilow.
It doesn't even scratch the surface of the crazy.

[The Adversary]

Well, I see that no one has mentioned one of the most farcical "cases" involving Jayjg.

Well remembered. For those interested in the original topic as observed here on the Review, look here.

Oh yes. And note that the person who got PalestineRemembered off the hook, by showing that he indeed had quoted from a book, and not from some neo-Nazi web-site, was one of the few editors in WP´s I-P region at the time who actually read books: Zero0000. Name sounds familiar? No wonder they disliked him, for the same reason they disliked KimvdL: they revealed their lies (In Kim´s case: the lies of Guy M.)

[Kato]

The "evidence"* at this case is a riot.

Evidence presented by Coppertwig

Unwelcome statements about editors

Scott MacDonald: "POV pushing", "articles distorted by him" [591]
G-Dett: "tricked", "donning his Humpty Dumpty mask", "giant egg", "doesn't know what the idiomatic phrase 'what is today' means" [600], "transgression", "shell game" [601], "editorial dishonesty" [602]

"Giant egg"? Is that a personal attack?

This statement by DocGlasgow is deemed inappropriate because it calls Jayjg a "POV pusher". If that were the case, then Jayjg and SlimV would have been banned long ago as barely a day went past without them making that accusation of others.

*"Evidence" at Wikipedia Arbitration sessions really just means numerous interferers showing up and poisoning the well with any assertions they can get away with.

[Eva Destruction]

[size=4]
G-Dett: "tricked", "donning his Humpty Dumpty mask", "giant egg", "doesn't know what the idiomatic phrase 'what is today' means" [600], "transgression", "shell game" [601], "editorial dishonesty" [602]

"Giant egg"? Is that a personal attack?

If anyone's going to play a shell game surely a giant egg is most qualified?

[KimvdLinde]

Oh yes. And note that the person who got PalestineRemembered off the hook, by showing that he indeed had quoted from a book, and not from some neo-Nazi web-site, was one of the few editors in WP´s I-P region at the time who actually read books: Zero0000. Name sounds familiar? No wonder they disliked him, for the same reason they disliked KimvdL: they revealed their lies (In Kim´s case: the lies of Guy M.)

Yeah, JayJG and SlimVirgin were the main reasons I was gone from Wikipedia for a long time. I am now back, but limit myself to a few fields with little if no issues, parrots and horse mainly......

[Herschelkrustofsky]

Au contraire.

I think that this: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Allegations of apartheid was the most farcical case involving Jayjg. This was when Jayjg and cronies, furious at not being able to remove their hated Israel and Apartheid article, conspire to create a whole series of controversial articles on every nation on the planet "and allegations of Apartheid". Swamping deletion debates with coordinated cronies to keep each and every one of the offending articles. Essentially setting light to half of Wikipedia in their fury.

This act was perhaps the most disruptive WP:POINT escapade in the site's history. And Jayjg got away with it.

SlimVirgin and the usual gang suit up to defend Jayjg and turn the workshop into a meandering mess; there's a nice little conversation between SlimVirgin and 6SJ7 about how PR could still be a holocaust denier and how he could still be a visitor to the holocaust denial website, they just don't know; there's a nice little insinuation by SlimVirgin (who obviously hasn't read the book) that PR got his material from the holocaust denial web site because of some verbiage that appears in the website but not in the book (execept, ooops.... it's pointed out later by someone who has read the book that that verbiage does appear in the book). Basically the usual misdirection, false accusations, innuendo, and clouding the issue that these guys are so good at.

Here's a great quote. Having conceded that PalestineRemembered didn't get the cite from a Holocaust denial site and that the allegation was false, Slim notes that PalestineRemembered going to such as site is "not beyond the bounds of real possibility"!

The point is that PalestineRemembered has edited in such a way that his taking material from a Holocaust denial site is not beyond the bounds of real possibility, given his obsession with "Zionists."

Marvellous. It's like Witch-Trials never happened.

Good times.

[The Adversary]

Here's a great quote. Having conceded that PalestineRemembered didn't get the cite from a Holocaust denial site and that the allegation was false, Slim notes that PalestineRemembered going to such as site is "not beyond the bounds of real possibility"!

The point is that PalestineRemembered has edited in such a way that his taking material from a Holocaust denial site is not beyond the bounds of real possibility, given his obsession with "Zionists."

Marvellous. It's like Witch-Trials never happened.

Good times.

Anyone remember "Alice in Wonderland"; where the Queen punish you for the sins you might commit?

[Kato]

Anyone remember "Alice in Wonderland"; where the Queen punish you for the sins you might commit?

Watch your tongue, you Giant Egg.

[Kato]

More comedy here from that old PalestineRemembered arbitration case.

So Jayjg went to the Admins noticeboard to publicly make a false allegation about PalestineR sourcing Holocaust Denial websites. Then people complained vociferously about the allegation. But according to Slim, it's actually their fault, not Jayjg's:

I believe in being responsible and using common sense. What a responsible admin would have done in this case is quietly e-mail Jay and point out to him that there was evidence that PR had taken the material from a legit source.

[Lar]

More comedy here from that old PalestineRemembered arbitration case.

So Jayjg went to the Admins noticeboard to publicly make a false allegation about PalestineR sourcing Holocaust Denial websites. Then people complained vociferously about the allegation. But according to Slim, it's actually their fault, not Jayjg's:

I believe in being responsible and using common sense. What a responsible admin would have done in this case is quietly e-mail Jay and point out to him that there was evidence that PR had taken the material from a legit source.

I could be mistaken but I believe that both SV and Jayjg have been sanctioned, or at least cautioned, (I can dig up cites if it's important) for doing things publicly (rather than first emailing or otherwise quietly contacting someone).

Perhaps it is faulty logic but does that mean SV therefore is not a responsible admin under her own definition?

[The Adversary]

More comedy here from that old PalestineRemembered arbitration case.

So Jayjg went to the Admins noticeboard to publicly make a false allegation about PalestineR sourcing Holocaust Denial websites. Then people complained vociferously about the allegation. But according to Slim, it's actually their fault, not Jayjg's:

I believe in being responsible and using common sense. What a responsible admin would have done in this case is quietly e-mail Jay and point out to him that there was evidence that PR had taken the material from a legit source.

I could be mistaken but I believe that both SV and Jayjg have been sanctioned, or at least cautioned, (I can dig up cites if it's important) for doing things publicly (rather than first emailing or otherwise quietly contacting someone).

Perhaps it is faulty logic but does that mean SV therefore is not a responsible admin under her own definition?

Cough, cough.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...ests#October_08

The Committee reminds the users who brought the matter into the public arena rather than to a suitable dispute resolution process—in particular, SlimVirgin—that dispute resolution procedures rather than public invective remain the preferred course for addressing matters of user conduct.

[Heat]

An arb has noticed Jayjg's "lack of participation" in his own ArbComm case

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=286022545

Hi Jay, I would like to see you participate in the Workshop of the West Bank case, or some indication of why you are unable to do so, privately if need be. There are some proposals that affect you, and your lack of participation, without an explanation that I am aware of, is very unusual to say the least. You were in the thick of this West Bank mess when it happened; now we are trying to sort this out in what should be a collaborative process, and your absence would be unfortunate. It is good that you have submitted evidence, but it is also important to share your views on how you receive the evidence submitted by others, and the resulting proposals. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">[[User:Jayvdb|John Vandenberg]] ^{'''([[User talk:Jayvdb|chat]])'''}</span> 16:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Can you hear the sound of drums?

And on the workshop page itself, it appears that Kirill's proposals have some support where it counts http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=286872461



This post has been edited by Heat: Thu 30th April 2009, 4:20pm

[Milton Roe]

An arb has noticed Jayjg's "lack of participation" in his own ArbComm case

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=286022545

Hi Jay, I would like to see you participate in the Workshop of the West Bank case, or some indication of why you are unable to do so, privately if need be. There are some proposals that affect you, and your lack of participation, without an explanation that I am aware of, is very unusual to say the least. You were in the thick of this West Bank mess when it happened; now we are trying to sort this out in what should be a collaborative process, and your absence would be unfortunate. It is good that you have submitted evidence, but it is also important to share your views on how you receive the evidence submitted by others, and the resulting proposals. <span style="font-variant:small-caps">[[User:Jayvdb|John Vandenberg]] ^{'''([[User talk:Jayvdb|chat]])'''}</span> 16:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Can you hear the sound of drums?

In the WP Kangaroo Kourt of the Vigilante Kommittee, one is supposed to act as one's own counsel if one can't find anybody who is willing to do it. There's no pool of public defenders that the Kourt can appoint for you if there's nobody left of your side who has any credibility. Which is the case, here.

I'd shed more tears if Jayjg hadn't abused this very system himself many a time. What goes around, tends to come around. The fickle finger of wiki power has put the writing up on the wall about this sort of thing for some time, and Jay hasn't translated it.

Let me help:

MENE, MENE, TEKEL, and PARSBONE. This is the interpretation: MENE: fate and abuse have numbered the days of your Kabal and brought it to an end. TEKEL: you have been weighed on the scales of Arbcom and found wanting: PERES-BONE, your advocacy gig is divided and given to supporters of Shimon Peres and David Shankbone.

Not much time left, bub.

[Heat]

Voting has begun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...oposed_decision

[Herschelkrustofsky]

I am concerned about the obligatory show of "even-handedness," in that the findings of fact against G-Dett are very weakly supported by the evidence (particularly when compared to those against Jayjg,) yet the penalties proposed are equivalent (except that G-Dett cannot be deprived of checkuser, oversight, etc., since she doesn't possess these gnarly powers.) Jayjg's recidivism ought to be sufficient grounds for a permanent, unqualified banning from the project.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

The fickle finger of wiki power has put the writing up on the wall about this sort of thing for some time, and Jay hasn't translated it.

See Heinrich Heine's commentary.

[Cla68]

I am concerned about the obligatory show of "even-handedness," in that the findings of fact against G-Dett are very weakly supported by the evidence (particularly when compared to those against Jayjg,) yet the penalties proposed are equivalent (except that G-Dett cannot be deprived of checkuser, oversight, etc., since she doesn't possess these gnarly powers.) Jayjg's recidivism ought to be sufficient grounds for a permanent, unqualified banning from the project.

The thing is, G-Dett is more intelligent than 99% of regular Wikipedia editors, including myself. I don't know why she is wasting time with editing Wikipedia and humiliating Jayjg when she should be writing books, which I, for one, would be buying and reading. Banning her from the I/P articles does her a favor. If she wants to make any other subject's articles great, she should be able to do so effortlessly.

Banning editors like Jayjg, on the other hand, from the I/P articles should be no big deal. He doesn't deserve to edit them. He's a POV-pusher and an unethical internet participant. Ban him, forget about him, and let's get back to doing what we like to do, building NPOV (we try to anyway) articles about historical subjects that we find interesting.

This post has been edited by Cla68: Sun 3rd May 2009, 1:45pm

[The Adversary]

I am concerned about the obligatory show of "even-handedness," in that the findings of fact against G-Dett are very weakly supported by the evidence (particularly when compared to those against Jayjg,) yet the penalties proposed are equivalent (except that G-Dett cannot be deprived of checkuser, oversight, etc., since she doesn't possess these gnarly powers.) Jayjg's recidivism ought to be sufficient grounds for a permanent, unqualified banning from the project.

The thing is, G-Dett is more intelligent than 99% of regular Wikipedia editors, including myself. I don't know why she is wasting time with editing Wikipedia and humiliating Jayjg when she should be writing books, which I, for one, would be buying and reading. <snip>

I´ll join the queue for those wanting to buy any book written by G-Dett.

My own favourite G-Dett-ism was during the Matanmoreland-case, when she wondered if there was any sense in her providing more evidence, or if she could rather spend her time baking bread ......for her cat

[Kato]

Arbitrators need to be careful when they restrict the likes of Jayjg. Having seen the Godfather style trail of revenge against those who challenged SlimVirgin last year (FT2, Lar, Charles Matthews etc), it is conceivable that a similar fate will await those arbs who vote against Jayjg.

Wily nested troublemakers can call on a flock of disciples to do the dirty work, while they themselves remove their fingerprints from the scene of the crime when the drama subsides.

Wikipedia has shown it is helpless in the face of such social manipulation and gameplaying. Expect a coordinated chorus of resistance to any restraints on Jayjg, followed by a covert operation of revenge against those who made the effort.