The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Unbelievabale blocks
Web Fred
post Tue 31st January 2012, 1:43am
Post #41


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:29am) *

QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 30th January 2012, 4:38pm) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Mon 30th January 2012, 2:58am) *
...and I stand by each and every one of my blocks...


You blocked me once or twice.

Cunt.


Link to the blocks and I'll see if they were justified, as I saw it at the time. Otherwise, I don't think I *am* a cunt, because if I were, I wouldn't give a toss about you. Clearly, I give a toss about my reputation, but not with those who call me a cunt with no apparent reason. Up to you.


The justification of the blocks bears no relationship to my opinion of you.

Anyone who has ever blocked me is a cunt.

Except for Chillum, he's a mother-fucking, cock-sucking cunt.

Be grateful that you're just a cunt.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Tue 31st January 2012, 1:46am
Post #42


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Mon 30th January 2012, 9:56pm) *

QUOTE(Zoloft @ Sun 29th January 2012, 10:21pm) *

"Do you think that's air you're breathing now?"
--Morpheus

In The Matrix, interesting things happened. Does WebHamster calling RH&E a "cunt" really have to substitute for Neo fighting with Agent Smith? If so, I want my money back!


I'm not that bothered about being called a cunt; it's a meaningless epithet, and water off a duck's back. I've lived in Merseyside, so I know its meaninglesness. I'd be more concerned by other epithets, but, to be honest, not many of them.

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sat 28th January 2012, 11:35pm) *

QUOTE(Abd @ Sat 28th January 2012, 10:36pm) *


Waste of time.


I was sure nothing will come out of this, but I strongly believe that administrative abuse should be documented. If I wrote the same request on Wiki it would have probably be deleted. At meta it stays.
The more people are to read it the better.At least the dishonest bully Gwen Gale will think twice before issuing another bad block.


No. As pointed out above, wrong venue.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Tue 31st January 2012, 1:52am
Post #43


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:39am) *

QUOTE(Malleus @ Mon 30th January 2012, 6:36pm) *

QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 30th January 2012, 4:38pm) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Mon 30th January 2012, 2:58am) *
...and I stand by each and every one of my blocks...


You blocked me once or twice.

Cunt.

And also a liar, according to an email I received from him.


Please elucidate, but take great care before doing so. Bear in mind I know not only who you are, but also exactly where you live. Not that I would take advantage of that myself, of course, but others might, and I wouldn't want you to come to any harm, particularly since ArbCom seem to have it in for you, if I read between the lines of the discussions that they still lovingly think are secret. To quote Willie Nelson "they ain't". Otherwise, happy birthday for a coupla weeks ago, and keep on furtling those ferrets. Best wishes, Eric, but you need to know who your allies are, and don't piss them off.


LMAO, hey Mal, this southern Nancy thinks he can take you.

Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Tue 31st January 2012, 1:52am
Post #44


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:43am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:29am) *

QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 30th January 2012, 4:38pm) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Mon 30th January 2012, 2:58am) *
...and I stand by each and every one of my blocks...


You blocked me once or twice.

Cunt.


Link to the blocks and I'll see if they were justified, as I saw it at the time. Otherwise, I don't think I *am* a cunt, because if I were, I wouldn't give a toss about you. Clearly, I give a toss about my reputation, but not with those who call me a cunt with no apparent reason. Up to you.


The justification of the blocks bears no relationship to my opinion of you.

Anyone who has ever blocked me is a cunt.

Except for Chillum, he's a mother-fucking, cock-sucking cunt.

Be grateful that you're just a cunt.


Forgive me if I don't take you seriously. Your attitude is probably part of why I blocked you, and, to be honest I make no apology for that. As regards Wikipedia, you might just want to grow up a little.

This post has been edited by Encyclopedist: Tue 31st January 2012, 1:53am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Tue 31st January 2012, 1:55am
Post #45


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:52am) *
... you might just want to grow up a little.


Many have tried to persuade me, but I see absolutely no purpose in it. As a dyed-in-the-wool hedonist I've discovered over the decades that there is absolutely no advantage in "growing up".
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Vigilant
post Tue 31st January 2012, 1:57am
Post #46


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri 24th Oct 2008, 2:04am
Member No.: 8,684

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:39am) *

QUOTE(Malleus @ Mon 30th January 2012, 6:36pm) *

QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 30th January 2012, 4:38pm) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Mon 30th January 2012, 2:58am) *
...and I stand by each and every one of my blocks...


You blocked me once or twice.

Cunt.

And also a liar, according to an email I received from him.


Please elucidate, but take great care before doing so. Bear in mind I know not only who you are, but also exactly where you live. Not that I would take advantage of that myself, of course, but others might, and I wouldn't want you to come to any harm, particularly since ArbCom seem to have it in for you, if I read between the lines of the discussions that they still lovingly think are secret. To quote Willie Nelson "they ain't". Otherwise, happy birthday for a coupla weeks ago, and keep on furtling those ferrets. Best wishes, Eric, but you need to know who your allies are, and don't piss them off.

AHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

SCARY FACE, GRRRRRR

You remind me of Jeff Merkey
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Tue 31st January 2012, 2:02am
Post #47


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:55am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:52am) *
... you might just want to grow up a little.


Many have tried to persuade me, but I see absolutely no purpose in it. As a dyed-in-the-wool hedonist I've discovered over the decades that there is absolutely no advantage in "growing up".


Then editing Wikipedia is not for you, and you've retrospectively validated my blocks of you. Editing WP is not for children, of any age, in my opinion, although those who can do so constructively deserve the kudos; but it's not some online game. Perhaps you can find some online tarts via MS Messenger who would be willing to show you their fannies, because that's where I think you belong, if only to get some experience of real life. Myself, I'm no longer 14. Cheers.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Tue 31st January 2012, 2:06am
Post #48


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Mon 30th January 2012, 7:15pm) *

QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Mon 30th January 2012, 11:38am) *

Cunt.


evilgrin.gif

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sun 29th January 2012, 9:58pm) *
...a view of the article history of Cilla Black will show that, and I was perfectly prepared to discuss the policy issues involved in that, and other cases.


Yes, but will you be willing to admit that Dionne Warwick's interpretation of Burt Bacharach's tunes was superior to Cilla Black's? ermm.gif

QUOTE(Abd @ Mon 30th January 2012, 10:29am) *

Humans are designed to form functional communities, face to face, it's instinctive.


Except when you have the urge to do it doggy-style. wacko.gif


More like "A Horse With No Point", although I'll give credit for it being late at night, and you are probably intixocated.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Tue 31st January 2012, 2:12am
Post #49


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Mon 30th January 2012, 6:02pm) *

Myself, I'm no longer 14. Cheers.

Some man-children never seem to grow up.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Tue 31st January 2012, 2:19am
Post #50


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 2:02am) *

QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:55am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:52am) *
... you might just want to grow up a little.


Many have tried to persuade me, but I see absolutely no purpose in it. As a dyed-in-the-wool hedonist I've discovered over the decades that there is absolutely no advantage in "growing up".

Myself, I'm no longer 14


You're still banned though, I'm just blocked. Just shows what a cunt they think you are I suppose.

So being a grown up had no benefit at all now did it?


QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 2:06am) *

More like "A Horse With No Point", although I'll give credit for it being late at night, and you are probably intixocated.


Is that what happens when one ingests too much Tixylix cough medicine?

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 31st January 2012, 2:12am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Mon 30th January 2012, 6:02pm) *

Myself, I'm no longer 14. Cheers.

Some man-children never seem to grow up.


Thank fuck for that I say.

There's nothing worse than having to behave grown up and have to do grown up things when one doesn't have to.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Tue 31st January 2012, 2:24am
Post #51


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Tue 31st January 2012, 2:19am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 2:02am) *

QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:55am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:52am) *
... you might just want to grow up a little.


Many have tried to persuade me, but I see absolutely no purpose in it. As a dyed-in-the-wool hedonist I've discovered over the decades that there is absolutely no advantage in "growing up".

Myself, I'm no longer 14


You're still banned though, I'm just blocked. Just shows what a cunt they think you are I suppose.

So being a grown up had no benefit at all now did it?


QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 2:06am) *

More like "A Horse With No Point", although I'll give credit for it being late at night, and you are probably intixocated.


Is that what happens when one ingests too much Tixylix cough medicine?

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 31st January 2012, 2:12am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Mon 30th January 2012, 6:02pm) *

Myself, I'm no longer 14. Cheers.

Some man-children never seem to grow up.


Thank fuck for that I say.

There's nothing worse than having to behave grown up and have to do grown up things when one doesn't have to.


Thanks for convincing me that you're a waste of space, and of my time. I was coming round to that opinion, but you saved me the timel
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Tue 31st January 2012, 2:27am
Post #52


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 2:24am) *


Thanks for convincing me that you're a waste of space, and of my time. I was coming round to that opinion, but you saved me the timel


It's a pity you couldn't have saved bandwidth as well by quoting correctly.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mbz1
post Tue 31st January 2012, 7:37am
Post #53


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm
Member No.: 25,791



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:25am) *

QUOTE(Malleus @ Mon 30th January 2012, 4:16am) *
Hmm. You stand by all your blocks?

Not necessarily; being human, I am bound to make mistakes. But at the time I made those blocks, I sincerely believed they were necessary to protect Wikipedia from "clear and present danger", and that's the bottom line as far as I'm concerned. Editing WP should be denied to those who do not subscribe to its principles, and as far as I'm concerned, those who I blocked failed to subscribe, and accept the rules of the game. Of course, they were free to challenge my blocks by requesting unblocking, and I'd say that about 1 in 100 did so. However, only 1 in 10 of those were successful, and some of them I revisited myself and changed my opinion- and TBH, few Admins in my experience have ever been prepared to do that.



Do you then believe then that admins who banned yourself "sincerely believed it was necessary to protect Wikipedia from "clear and present danger""?
Another point to make is this: Do you understand that a single mistake could make a good faith contributor to leave. Remember !! (T-C-L-K-R-D) ]. The mistake was fixed, the admin who blocked him was desypoed but the user is gone.
Besides how many users you blocked appealed the block proves absolutely nothing. See the beginning of this topic. Gwen Gale blocked an established editor, who just made a good faith, encyclopedic edit as vandalism only account, and he has never asked to be unblocked.

This post has been edited by mbz1: Tue 31st January 2012, 3:48pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Zoloft
post Tue 31st January 2012, 9:12am
Post #54


May we all find solace in our dreams.
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,332
Joined: Fri 15th Jan 2010, 11:08pm
From: Erewhon
Member No.: 16,621



*sigh*

Another really subtle fart joke wasted.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Tue 31st January 2012, 9:17am
Post #55


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Zoloft @ Tue 31st January 2012, 9:12am) *

*sigh*

Another really subtle fart joke wasted.


Fart jokes are never truly wasted, and are always accepted with hilarity by this viewer.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Wed 1st February 2012, 1:00am
Post #56


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(mbz1 @ Tue 31st January 2012, 7:37am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Tue 31st January 2012, 1:25am) *

QUOTE(Malleus @ Mon 30th January 2012, 4:16am) *
Hmm. You stand by all your blocks?

Not necessarily; being human, I am bound to make mistakes. But at the time I made those blocks, I sincerely believed they were necessary to protect Wikipedia from "clear and present danger", and that's the bottom line as far as I'm concerned. Editing WP should be denied to those who do not subscribe to its principles, and as far as I'm concerned, those who I blocked failed to subscribe, and accept the rules of the game. Of course, they were free to challenge my blocks by requesting unblocking, and I'd say that about 1 in 100 did so. However, only 1 in 10 of those were successful, and some of them I revisited myself and changed my opinion- and TBH, few Admins in my experience have ever been prepared to do that.



Do you then believe then that admins who banned yourself "sincerely believed it was necessary to protect Wikipedia from "clear and present danger""?
Another point to make is this: Do you understand that a single mistake could make a good faith contributor to leave. Remember !! (T-C-L-K-R-D) ]. The mistake was fixed, the admin who blocked him was desypoed but the user is gone.
Besides how many users you blocked appealed the block proves absolutely nothing. See the beginning of this topic. Gwen Gale blocked an established editor, who just made a good faith, encyclopedic edit as vandalism only account, and he has never asked to be unblocked.


I was not banned by Admins; I was banned by ArbCom, who quite plainly were looking for an excuse to do so, and who managed to find a vague, unsubstantiated pretext for doing so. As for "clear and present danger", that's a non-starter since it is apparent from their deliberations on my adminship that they thought I had been a poor Admin for a long time, although (a) nothing had been done about that, either formally or informally until the Malleus thing blew up, giving them a reason for acting, regardless of the merits, and (b) having being forced into the position of acting, they took any opportunity they could to not only desysop me, but also ban me. Well, on reflection, that isn't my loss: it's Wikipedia's and I am currently doing what I can at Commons. But there are still vandalised pages on my watchlist that remain vandalised, and there's nothing I can do about that except when the time is right to forward the list of them I've collected and forward it to Cade Metz at The Register under the banner "This is what happens to Wikipedia when you ban people who know what they're doing". As for Gwen Gale, and her blocks, it's nothing to do with me. I've repeatedly asked for examples of blocks I've made that didn't benefit the encyclopedia, and ArbCom didn;t provide them and I suspect neither will anyone else. Meanwhile, best wishes to all at UK postcode M32 8DR.

Evenin' all!

This post has been edited by Encyclopedist: Wed 1st February 2012, 1:03am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mbz1
post Wed 1st February 2012, 5:50pm
Post #57


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm
Member No.: 25,791



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Wed 1st February 2012, 1:00am) *


I was not banned by Admins; I was banned by ArbCom, who quite plainly were looking for an excuse to do so, and who managed to find a vague, unsubstantiated pretext for doing so.

But why would they desysop a prominent, good faith admin?
Are you suggesting that members of govcom together with Jimbo ohmy.gif conspired against you with no good reason? Are you suggesting that there was not a singly decent and honest member of govcom to stop this unwarranted persecution? scream.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 1:22am
Post #58


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(mbz1 @ Wed 1st February 2012, 5:50pm) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Wed 1st February 2012, 1:00am) *


I was not banned by Admins; I was banned by ArbCom, who quite plainly were looking for an excuse to do so, and who managed to find a vague, unsubstantiated pretext for doing so.

But why would they desysop a prominent, good faith admin?
Are you suggesting that members of govcom together with Jimbo ohmy.gif conspired against you with no good reason? Are you suggesting that there was not a singly decent and honest member of govcom to stop this unwarranted persecution? scream.gif


Look at the evidence presented by Elen of the Roads in my ArbCom case; there's nothing there that couldn't have been dealt with *at the time it arose* and, if there appeared to be a problem, sorted before it even hit ArbCom. I was open to negotiation, except that nobody ever negotiated with me, and the background involves Roger Davies's apparent hatred of me since the Cilla Black incident; you'd have to go way back in the history to see that, but he was a prime mover in my desysopping, behind the scenes, perhaps, and for that alone, he should be shot- slowly. Elen was given a poisoned chalice to deliver- and managed it with some aplomb, not that my case hadn't been predetermined by those who hated me. So much for that; there are many good-natured people who've been pushed beyond natural limits by those who just don't get it, and I am only one.

As for the collective decisions of ArbCom, they are just that- collective and their discussions are- or were- secret, and they don't give dissenting viewpoints on their decisions, and I have never received any communication from an Arb that said that he/she disagreed with the decision- that's collective responsibility to the point of being a ducks arse, and although it has some benefits politically, it ain't human. Likewise my appeal to Jimbo; his starting point was my ArbCom, and that must have coloured his opinion. Not once did he ask me for clarification of anyathing he found. But it's worse than that- he's so far out of it that his stated default stance is to back up ArbCom without question, which he has consistently done in the last couple of years or so. That, sadly, only supports the contention that he really would prefer to be somewhere else and not take on that role. OK. Let him pass it back to the WP community; meanwhile, ubergod he is not, he's become just some media hack who goes round the world on expenses selling an unrealistic and impractical dream.

Apart from that, like most active Admins, I'd attracted some criticism, most of it factional in nature, but that's just par for the course. I wasn't going to ignore WP policies just because some people didn't approve of my way of applying them- if this had been a general issue for me, there would have been an RFC/Admin long before my ArbCom case- but there wasn't. If anyone cares, go through my Talk page archives- ignore the death threats because although upsetting, they are meaningless in real terms- and contrast the balance of praise/criticism and enquiry & advice/other discussion.

That's all for now. I have to sort out my stuff to move house in a couple of weeks, so I'll be busy.

This post has been edited by Encyclopedist: Thu 2nd February 2012, 1:31am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mbz1
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 4:31am
Post #59


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm
Member No.: 25,791



Encyclopedist, I would like to ask you, if, when you supported Gwen's RFA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...hip/Gwen_Gale_2 were you aware about these statements of her made by one of her other accounts Wyss (T-C-L-K-R-D) ?
QUOTE
I'd also suggest that the wanton enabling of trolls and fools on Wikipedia gives the petty cyber-castle builders endless excuses to waste time on them with RfArs, RfCs, mentor committees, IRC watchlist feeds, loopy talk page discussions/scoldings, insincere civility patrols and other process-oriented, attention-getting stuff they think will help them get elected to roles in the bureaucracy... anything to avoid true volunteer work, the writing of an encyclopedia founded on scholarly principles. Wyss 18:06, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

QUOTE
I don't like the notion of wading through a cyber-waste dump of coddled trolls, fools and mob-think police to edit the 1% of articles most Wikipedians don't care about. Wyss 07:06, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

QUOTE
However, ridding WP of fools and trolls would eliminate (in my humble opinion) about 80% of the site's active user base along with at least half of its admins. I think Wales has known this for years and has his own reasons for not doing it. So what is Wikipedia truly efficient at?

If Wikipedia is so inefficient at generating quality content (hundreds, sometimes thousands of person-hours will wontedly result in a mediocre, unscholarly article), what is Wikipedia efficient at? Traffic is the name of the game, as is fame. Encyclopedia writing is not a mass market hook

Scholastically inclinced reference projects, while perhaps exciting to weird (grin) people like me, are in truth boring to most but without selectivity as to participating editors, WP's content will be driven by mob tyranny. Face it, half of all people are of below average cleverness, and many of the other half are either indifferent to volunteering their time to an academic project or shouldn't be trusted if they do express interest, since maybe half of them would come only as articulate hucksters. Worse, qualified people tend not to have a lot of spare time, so online projects like this risk attracting more than their share of tossers and impaired outcasts, even into its bureaucracy (or dominant clique) who themselves have not a clue how or why they are being used in the furtherance of non-encyclopedic goals. How's that for stark talking? Wyss 15:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

QUOTE
Once you've read Wikiruth, it's hard to think of Wikipedia as anything other than an autistic care ...

I mean, I understand people change, but the above was said not by a teenaged girl. It was written by 30 years old woman(no outting, info is taken from her bio written by herself on Wiki).
Her performance as an admin demonstrated she did not change.

This post has been edited by mbz1: Thu 2nd February 2012, 5:17am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jd turk
post Thu 2nd February 2012, 11:35pm
Post #60


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon 5th May 2008, 12:56am
Member No.: 5,976



QUOTE(mbz1 @ Wed 1st February 2012, 10:31pm) *

Encyclopedist, I would like to ask you, if, when you supported Gwen's RFA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...hip/Gwen_Gale_2 were you aware about these statements of her made by one of her other accounts Wyss (T-C-L-K-R-D) ?


I've been gone from here for weeks now, and I return to find Mbz1 still swinging at Gwen Gale, using 6+ year old diffs as evidence. It actually makes me feel good, there's at least something in my life that's consistent.

As for bad blocks, they're not just exclusive to Gwen or any of the other couple of admins brought up in this thread. What bothers me the most about bad blocks is when an admin issues one, then vanishes. The recent (probably 3 months, maybe?) example that comes to mind involved an admin swooping in and leveling a block on a good faith editor with over a thousand edits, and no warning. When the confusion happened, the admin just split. The block was rightfully overturned, the admin waited out the anger, then came back and all was calmer and forgiven.

There's no accountability for the bad blocks. There should be a permanent record for admins, like there is at the long-term abuse page for the blocked.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

4 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd 10 17, 7:42am