Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: LamontStormstar

In one thread a ways back I speculated on Ryulong being the son of Jayjg and SlimVirgin.

In yet another thread somwhere someone else said that Ryulong obviously is a sock puppet of another administrator. I asked some questions and yada yada, nothing came of it.

I'll get right down to it.

Danny and Ryulong both moved from Brooklyn, New York to Florida.

See their IPs
http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/cgi-bin/girc.cgi?Na=Ryulong
http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/cgi-bin/girc.cgi?Na=Danny

Also old versions of Ryulong's userpage said he was from Brooklyn. It may still say it somewhere. Even if he deletes it, there are lots of mirrors. Danny's userpage says he moved from somewhere to Florida.


Wikipedia watch has:

Posted by: everyking

This is very weak. The only piece of evidence that strikes me as possibly meaningful is the page deletions, four minutes apart, but most likely it came up on IRC or in some backchannel way like that (does Danny hang out in IRC?). Why would he be using different accounts to do the same basic thing in such a brief span of time?

Posted by: jorge

Danny is gay.

Posted by: LamontStormstar

I also forgot some things. Ryulong and Danny both identify as Jewish.


Also, what's interesting is Jayjg

QUOTE(jorge @ Mon 1st October 2007, 2:45am)

Posted by: jorge

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Mon 1st October 2007, 10:46am)

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Mon 1st October 2007, 10:46am)

QUOTE(jorge @ Mon 1st October 2007, 2:45am)

Danny is gay.

Has he stated this?

Posted by: LamontStormstar

QUOTE(jorge @ Mon 1st October 2007, 2:55am)

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Mon 1st October 2007, 10:46am)

QUOTE(jorge @ Mon 1st October 2007, 2:45am)

Danny is gay.

Has he stated this?

Yes.

Posted by: jorge

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Mon 1st October 2007, 10:58am)

Posted by: guy

Do we know definitely that Ryulong is male?

Posted by: badlydrawnjeff

Posted by: jorge

QUOTE(badlydrawnjeff @ Mon 1st October 2007, 12:43pm)

Posted by: everyking

QUOTE(badlydrawnjeff @ Mon 1st October 2007, 12:43pm)

Posted by: Alex

Seriously Lamont, what crap is this??? They both edit way too much to be the same person - both have more than 30k edits I believe. They both IRC at the same time, and Danny would have done so at work, when he was working for Wikimedia. Would have looked slightly odd if he was using two IRC clients at the same time, don't you think? It's all just coincidences.

Posted by: guy

QUOTE(Alex @ Mon 1st October 2007, 1:39pm)

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(Alex @ Mon 1st October 2007, 8:39am)

Posted by: Krimpet

Ryulong/Danny would have to cover a lot of ground each day between Miami and St. Petersburg, considering the two cities are almost 300 miles away from each other and all -- maybe he's got a Tyler Durden split-personality thing going on?

Posted by: Nya

Also, Ryulong is apparently from Long Island, not Brooklyn, at least according to his old userboxes. They haven't been disappeared yet, but maybe they will after this thread.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ryulong&oldid=100813433

Posted by: jorge

Ryolong clearly seems to be a sock of somebody as they were far too familiar with Wikipedia on their first edits. I'd guess whoever it is set up that account as they thought whichever their other account is might be discredited/mocked if people knew of their interest/obsession with Power rangers.

Posted by: blissyu2

Before we do a poll on something like this, we need to discuss it and try to sort through the evidence, I think.

For what its worth, I like lots of quality "kids" shows. Of course, I don't consider them to be kids. Cartoons for example. I watch The Simpsons, South Park, sometimes Kim Possible, Naruto, and a bunch of other stuff. Well, not so much now that I don't have the Cartoon Network or Nickelodeon anymore, but yeah. Of course I don't watch Sesame Street anymore (at least not unless I'm babysitting - I still consider that to be quality) and I would never ever watch fucking lambchops playalong or Barney the crap dinosaur or any of those really mind numbingly awful ones.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Mon 1st October 2007, 10:07am)

Posted by: jorge

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Mon 1st October 2007, 3:07pm)

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 1st October 2007, 3:34pm)

The thing that's really at issue here is not one person's peculiar hobby — who really gives a flying filly? — and we wouldn't care a whit if they didn't ride their hobby horse all over everyone else's farms and gardens.

Jonny

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(jorge @ Mon 1st October 2007, 10:59am)

Isn't there a kids programme in Australia that is really famous? I can't remember what it is though.

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 1st October 2007, 3:34pm)

The thing that's really at issue here is not one person's peculiar hobby — who really gives a flying filly? — and we wouldn't care a whit if they didn't ride their hobby horse all over everyone else's farms and gardens.

Jonny

The question is, has Ryulong committed the ultrimate wiki crime — being in possession of two administrator accounts simultaneously?

Posted by: yow

Ryulong is fascinated by dragons ("Ryu" + "Long" = terms for "dragon" in Japanese and Chinese respectively) , and there is direct linkage from his http://web.archive.org/web/20020204063238/www.geocities.com/ryulong6787/about.html through his http://ryulong.deviantart.com/ (note ref to "Danny in the tube") and his current Wikipedia stuff.

Picture of Ryulong


profile
http://forums.henshinjustice.com/member.php?u=1749

http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Ryulong

Please note that his e-mail address in the Geocities page contains "Ryulong6787", a formulation someone here has noted before (he was born June 7, 1987). By the way, his name is Michael.

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 1st October 2007, 7:34am)

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Mon 1st October 2007, 10:07am)

Before we do a poll on something like this, we need to discuss it and try to sort through the evidence, I think.

For what its worth, I like lots of quality "kids" shows. Of course, I don't consider them to be kids. Cartoons for example. I watch The Simpsons, South Park, sometimes Kim Possible, Naruto, and a bunch of other stuff. Well, not so much now that I don't have the Cartoon Network or Nickelodeon anymore, but yeah. Of course I don't watch Sesame Street anymore (at least not unless I'm babysitting — I still consider that to be quality) and I would never ever watch fucking lambchops playalong or Barney the crap dinosaur or any of those really mind numbingly awful ones.

Yes, as usual, a poll is a pretty lame way to incite a discussion, but now that we're all incited …

The thing that's really at issue here is not one person's peculiar hobby — who really gives a flying filly? — and we wouldn't care a whit if they didn't ride their hobby horse all over everyone else's farms and gardens.

But that's just what they do, and they do it with the kind of FlyLord RoninBot SakéCrazed Samurai Knight Fever Mindlessness that might be the Tao Of Online Gamers, but that is wholly toxic to the project of writing an encyclopedia for the knowledge-seeking, not coup-counting public.

The supreme irony is that we can literally extract a general principle from Hao Rong Ryu's own dicta that would solve the problem of keeping these Terrible Tots from constantly tearing everyone else's hair out, as discussed here.

Jonny

Posted by: Jaranda

They aren't the same person.

Posted by: dtobias

This is the sort of thread that gives WR a bad name as an "attack site", when you go into flights of bizarre speculation about what the real-life relationship might be between various editors and admins, with digressions where you sneer at their apparent interests, hobbies, and so on. Can't you stick to actual proven facts that are relevant to conflicts of interest you're exposing, instead of random smears that you hope will stick?

Posted by: JohnA

I'd have to agree with Dan Tobias.

Lamont is guessing a relationship based on really circumstantial evidence. I think it's a conspiracy theory where after a while people believe the theory and ignore all countervailing evidence as a "smokescreen".

I don't think there's anything to see here, and I doubt this makes WR a better place than WP by proposing such bizarre theories without substantial evidence.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 1st October 2007, 1:50pm)

Posted by: Firsfron of Ronchester

QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 1st October 2007, 5:50pm)

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(Firsfron of Ronchester @ Mon 1st October 2007, 2:39pm)

Posted by: Kato

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 1st October 2007, 7:04pm)

QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 1st October 2007, 1:50pm)

This is the sort of thread that gives WR a bad name as an "attack site", when you go into flights of bizarre speculation about what the real-life relationship might be between various editors and admins, with digressions where you sneer at their apparent interests, hobbies, and so on. Can't you stick to actual proven facts that are relevant to conflicts of interest you're exposing, instead of random smears that you hope will stick?

I think some people have difficulty understanding satire.

Jonny

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(Kato @ Mon 1st October 2007, 3:55pm)

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 1st October 2007, 7:04pm)

QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 1st October 2007, 1:50pm)

This is the sort of thread that gives WR a bad name as an "attack site", when you go into flights of bizarre speculation about what the real-life relationship might be between various editors and admins, with digressions where you sneer at their apparent interests, hobbies, and so on. Can't you stick to actual proven facts that are relevant to conflicts of interest you're exposing, instead of random smears that you hope will stick?

I think some people have difficulty understanding satire.

Jonny

For once, I agree with Saint Tobias, and disagree with JC. What is this thread a satire of? Wikipedia Review?

Posted by: michael

QUOTE(yow @ Mon 1st October 2007, 8:07am)

Posted by: SqueakBox

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Mon 1st October 2007, 9:22am)

Posted by: guy

QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 1st October 2007, 6:50pm)

QUOTE(SqueakBox @ Mon 1st October 2007, 9:52pm)

Posted by: KamrynMatika

Lol, when I read this thread I thought he was taking the piss out of the SevenofDiamonds case. Guess it went over my head, eh?

Posted by: Castle Rock

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 1st October 2007, 12:28pm)

QUOTE(Firsfron of Ronchester @ Mon 1st October 2007, 2:39pm)

Who cares if someone edits kiddie shows? Someone has to (besides the kiddies). If there was a conflict of interest , I think it should be exposed, but I don't see anything like that here.

People have given you abundant good reason to care about the fact that someone with the mentality of an 8 year old on crack is taking major editorial control over the state of articles and the retention of editors in areas that he or she does not know squat about.

People have given you ample evidence to make it clear that there is an Inherent Conflict Of Interest between the Interest of people who are pathological liars — who lie about their names, their education, their personal data, their qualifications, and everything else they find it convenient to lie about — and the Interest of building an educational resource founded on reality and truth.

But you find it convenient to ignore all that, and you continue to disgust us with your moronic excuses for crimes against knowledge.

Go back where you can still win arguments by pretending to be ignorant, even moreso by actually being an ediot.

Jon Awbrey

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Mon 1st October 2007, 5:35pm)

Posted by: Kato

QUOTE(Somey @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 3:07am)

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Mon 1st October 2007, 5:35pm)

What the hell are you talking about? No credible evidence has been presented here. As for Ryulong asserting major control, I think that is in your mind only. Look at his edits and take off the tinfoil hat.

So what does everyone think, then? Should we move this thread to the tar pit, or maybe delete it completely?

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 1st October 2007, 10:07pm)

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Mon 1st October 2007, 5:35pm)

What the hell are you talking about? No credible evidence has been presented here. As for Ryulong asserting major control, I think that is in your mind only. Look at his edits and take off the tinfoil hat.

So what does everyone think, then? Should we move this thread to the tar pit, or maybe delete it completely? I mean, Lamont started it, and it's not like he isn't used to it...

I voted that they were the same person anyway, just so Lamont wouldn't feel like nobody loves him.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Kato @ Mon 1st October 2007, 8:19pm)

QUOTE(Somey @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 3:07am)

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Mon 1st October 2007, 5:35pm)

What the hell are you talking about? No credible evidence has been presented here. As for Ryulong asserting major control, I think that is in your mind only. Look at his edits and take off the tinfoil hat.

So what does everyone think, then? Should we move this thread to the tar pit, or maybe delete it completely?

Delete it completely? That seems a bit harsh. Could we at least keep in the tarpit for future reference?

Posted by: blissyu2

QUOTE(jorge @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 1:29am)

Isn't there a kids programme in Australia that is really famous? I can't remember what it is though.

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Mon 1st October 2007, 9:26pm)

Posted by: Derktar

Well let's put this to rest finally, http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=3325, old chap, we need your side of the story, will you abide?

Posted by: Firsfron of Ronchester

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 1st October 2007, 7:28pm)

QUOTE(Firsfron of Ronchester @ Mon 1st October 2007, 2:39pm)

Who cares if someone edits kiddie shows? Someone has to (besides the kiddies). If there was a conflict of interest , I think it should be exposed, but I don't see anything like that here.

People have given you abundant good reason to care about the fact that someone with the mentality of an 8 year old on crack is taking major editorial control over the state of articles and the retention of editors in areas that he or she does not know squat about.

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(Derktar @ Mon 1st October 2007, 10:54pm)

QUOTE(Firsfron of Ronchester @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 12:09am)

Posted by: The Joy

QUOTE(Somey @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 1:25am)

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(The Joy @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 12:48am)

Posted by: The Joy

Welcome to WR, Ryulong!

Posted by: Ryulong

QUOTE(Derktar @ Mon 1st October 2007, 11:54pm)

• I am not Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg's son
• I am not Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg
• I am not Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg's family member, gay lover, best friend forever, or something.
• I am, and have always been, male
• The only relative I have who edits Wikipedia (as far as I know) is my younger brother
• I've read WR since early August when it was directed to me that Ionas68224 was posting incomprehensible rants here saying that he was unjustly banned for directly disrupting my RfC
• I don't watch anime (I hate the entirely popular shit that's on Cartoon Network)
• I really go to the University of Miami (I'm sure that my IP's been checked)
• Half the shit Brandt found out about me that's listed in another thread isn't all that determining about my real identity (zomg my first name and birth date) and most of it is already on my user page in some form
• I'm not any higher-up's (actual Wikipedia "hierarchy" or the ones you have all developed) sockpuppet/meatpuppet/unwilling-puppet
• I'm much less important and omnipotent as a bunch of you make me out to be
• lol, lists

Posted by: BobbyBombastic

I notice Ryulong (conveniently) did not confirm or deny that he is SlimVirgin's poodle.

Posted by: Ryulong

QUOTE(BobbyBombastic @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 2:15am)

I notice Ryulong (conveniently) did not confirm or deny that he is SlimVirgin's poodle.

Posted by: Kato

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 7:10am)

Posted by: Ryulong

QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 2:26am)

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 7:10am)

[*]I'm much less important and omnipotent as a bunch of you make me out to be

Anyway, you're too modest. You've been quite important to the people you banned outside due process, the people who had their biographies deleted out of process, the people you accused of being sockpuppets of someone else out of process, etc etc.

QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 2:26am)

Posted by: Kato

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 7:41am)

Posted by: The Joy

It's not so much that you blocked an admin, CattleGirl, but the fact that she was blocked for not "contributing" to Wikipedia. I now feel the need to check my block log often to make sure you or another vandal fighter doesn't go off half-cocked and block my wiki-gnome account. Who are you to decide who's contributions, even small ones, to WP are useless to WP? Yes, many should focus on building WP's mainspace (I can think of a few admins who should be doing that), but you didn't even warn these people of their impending block. Why couldn't you have taken the time to work with those people to help them contribute more to WP instead of just arbitrarily banning them? The world won't end if you take the time to be more compassionate and understanding. Yeah, that sounds like hippie crap, but being... you know... nice doesn't cost a thing really.

You say you're learning from your mistakes, but your learning curb isn't very sharp, I must say.

Overzealous vandal fighters and overpopulated jellyfish... it's all a sign of worse things to come!

Posted by: Joseph100

OK the HIGH AND MIGHTY WIKIADAMIN ... then he will respond to this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Roskam&diff=prev&oldid=161016071

WHY ARE ACCOUNTS BANNED, for ONE EDIT and ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD REASON <SEE WP:BITE>, AND NO PROOF is PRESENTED OR DUE PROCESS IS GIVEN TO THE ACCUSED?

QUOTE(Joseph100 @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 1:47am)

Posted by: everyking

QUOTE(The Joy @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 8:05am)

Posted by: jorge

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 4:43am)

QUOTE(jorge @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 1:29am)

Isn't there a kids programme in Australia that is really famous? I can't remember what it is though.

The Wiggles is the most popular Australian kids entertainment group ever, and they are about 10 times more popular in USA than they are in Australia (they are still fairly popular here). Of course, if you're talking about ones that are famous in Australia, but unknown elsewhere, there's crap like Humphrey B. Bear, which is about the same level as Barney the Dinosaur. I approve of Wiggles. They are good. I'm not sure if they are worth US $250 million per year good, but they are very good.

Posted by: blissyu2

QUOTE(jorge @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 8:00pm)

OK, I remembered the name of the show, Bananas in Pyjamas:



In case some people didn't work it out already, this thread was not actually intended to be taken seriously

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 2:10am)

QUOTE(Derktar @ Mon 1st October 2007, 11:54pm)

Well let's put this to rest finally, http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=3325, old chap, we need your side of the story, will you abide?

I just find it hilarious that LamontStormstar is connecting "OMG THEY'RE JEWS", "OMG THEY'RE FROM NEW YORK", and "OMG THEY'RE IN FLORIDA" to try and make some sort of crazy conspiracy theory in his mind to state that I am the son of any Wikipedia editor, let alone Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg. I've never met these people in life, nor do I even speak to them on Wikipedia (except for the time where I asked Danny to nuke User talk:LamontStormstar after realizing that Lamont only created his user and user talk pages under that name that he connects with his account here).

Unless that mass of text was incomprehensible, here's the summary:

• I am not Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg's son
• I am not Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg
• I am not Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg's family member, gay lover, best friend forever, or something.
• I am, and have always been, male
• The only relative I have who edits Wikipedia (as far as I know) is my younger brother
• I've read WR since early August when it was directed to me that Ionas68224 was posting incomprehensible rants here saying that he was unjustly banned for directly disrupting my RfC
• I don't watch anime (I hate the entirely popular shit that's on Cartoon Network)
• I really go to the University of Miami (I'm sure that my IP's been checked)
• Half the shit Brandt found out about me that's listed in another thread isn't all that determining about my real identity (zomg my first name and birth date) and most of it is already on my user page in some form
• I'm not any higher-up's (actual Wikipedia "hierarchy" or the ones you have all developed) sockpuppet/meatpuppet/unwilling-puppet
• I'm much less important and omnipotent as a bunch of you make me out to be
• lol, lists

And just so you have "proof" of some of the "wild claims" that some of you don't believe due to the Essjay debacle:

http://img461.imageshack.us/img461/636/pa010001ob0.jpg

Oh, I was reading Discover Magazine's article about how there's a population boom in jellyfish, which mentioned Nemopilema nomurai, and I saw that someone screwed up the article.

• Distinct from your Name In Real Life (NIRL),
• Distinct from the Name Used By A Notable Or Otherwise Real Person (NUBANOORP),
• Distinct from the OGAS that you or anyone else uses in any other On-Or-Offline Game (OOOG).

Posted by: Viridae

QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 4:50pm)

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Firsfron of Ronchester @ Mon 1st October 2007, 11:09pm)

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 1st October 2007, 7:28pm)

QUOTE(Firsfron of Ronchester @ Mon 1st October 2007, 2:39pm)

Who cares if someone edits kiddie shows? Someone has to (besides the kiddies). If there was a conflict of interest , I think it should be exposed, but I don't see anything like that here.

People have given you abundant good reason to care about the fact that someone with the mentality of an 8 year old on crack is taking major editorial control over the state of articles and the retention of editors in areas that he or she does not know squat about.

No, what people have stated here is that it is "deeply disturbing" that an admin on Wikipedia watches kiddie shows, and that this someone has the "mentality of an 8 year old". Albert Einstein was a big fan of popular children's puppet shows of the 1940s and 50s (http://www.emmys.tv/media/releases/2006/rel_laarea_wrap.php) (http://www.povonline.com/cols/COL281.htm) while writing The Meaning of Relativity, Ideas and Opinions, and "Why Socialism?" Watching a certain TV show does not in itself prevent someone from being able to make a rational decision regarding editorial control over the state of articles, and it does not mean the person has the "mentality of an 8 year old".

Posted by: blissyu2

QUOTE(Viridae @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 11:30pm)

QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 4:50pm)

Why don't you edit the articles on your chosen field of study?

I actually don't do that much either because there is very little I can add to what is there - I have done a bit - large expansion to gene therapy for instance, but at the moment I am 1. writing a 20000 word thesis and 2. shithouse at writing to be honest - takes me a lot of effort to write well so I add content not as often as I would like

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 10:54am)

QUOTE(Firsfron of Ronchester @ Mon 1st October 2007, 11:09pm)

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 1st October 2007, 7:28pm)

QUOTE(Firsfron of Ronchester @ Mon 1st October 2007, 2:39pm)

Who cares if someone edits kiddie shows? Someone has to (besides the kiddies). If there was a conflict of interest , I think it should be exposed, but I don't see anything like that here.

People have given you abundant good reason to care about the fact that someone with the mentality of an 8 year old on crack is taking major editorial control over the state of articles and the retention of editors in areas that he or she does not know squat about.

No, what people have stated here is that it is "deeply disturbing" that an admin on Wikipedia watches kiddie shows, and that this someone has the "mentality of an 8 year old". Albert Einstein was a big fan of popular children's puppet shows of the 1940s and 50s (http://www.emmys.tv/media/releases/2006/rel_laarea_wrap.php) (http://www.povonline.com/cols/COL281.htm) while writing The Meaning of Relativity, Ideas and Opinions, and "Why Socialism?" Watching a certain TV show does not in itself prevent someone from being able to make a rational decision regarding editorial control over the state of articles, and it does not mean the person has the "mentality of an 8 year old".

Interesting you would have such a fact at your finger tips. Not deeply disturbing, but certainly mock-worthy. One contributing factor of WP's cruft problem is the fascination many editors have with juvenile, age-inappropriate topics.

Posted by: SomineSomiwhere

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 12:10pm)

Posted by: everyking

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 4:10pm)

QUOTE(Viridae @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 11:30pm)

QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 4:50pm)

Why don't you edit the articles on your chosen field of study?

I actually don't do that much either because there is very little I can add to what is there - I have done a bit - large expansion to gene therapy for instance, but at the moment I am 1. writing a 20000 word thesis and 2. shithouse at writing to be honest - takes me a lot of effort to write well so I add content not as often as I would like

Apparently that's a conflict of interest, or it becomes original research, or otherwise if you know what you're doing then they don't like it. Most of my edits (in terms of amount of material added) were to things that I knew a lot about. Of course, most of my fiddling (which accounts for most of the edits in terms of raw number of times I pressed edit) were to things that I didn't know a lot about.

Things may have changed once I'd run out of things to add on things that I had a fair amount of knowledge of. I wouldn't know because I didn't get to that stage. I was run out of town as a newbie basically.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(everyking @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 4:03pm)

Posted by: guy

QUOTE(everyking @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 9:03pm)

Posted by: Derktar

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Mon 1st October 2007, 11:10pm)

Posted by: jch

QUOTE(jorge @ Mon 1st October 2007, 2:03pm)

Posted by: LamontStormstar

This thread already unfortunately was moved to "editors" so google won't index it.

Also, it's not religion, but people being involved in a certain kind of organization. Like someone involved in PETA or NRA or something and that applied to Danny and Jayjg mainly, though Ryulong did say he had the same religion.

I still think the evidence proves a real life association between Danny and Ryulong. Not necessarily living together despite the same New York ISP, but likely wanting to leave near each other to meet, maybe business related or just some group.

The question might be, why of all people did Ryulong ask Danny to delete my talk page. Why not someone else? Good friends, no doubt. Also, why didn't he have Danny delete my userpage, too?

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 11:03pm)

Posted by: Ryulong

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Wed 3rd October 2007, 12:03am)

Posted by: LamontStormstar

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Mon 1st October 2007, 11:41pm)

Posted by: Piperdown

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Wed 3rd October 2007, 5:09am)

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Wed 3rd October 2007, 12:03am)

I still think the evidence proves a real life association between Danny and Ryulong. Not necessarily living together despite the same New York ISP, but likely wanting to leave near each other to meet, maybe business related or just some group.

The question might be, why of all people did Ryulong ask Danny to delete my talk page. Why not someone else? Good friends, no doubt. Also, why didn't he have Danny delete my userpage, too?

Verizon is a major Internet service provider in the northeast US that utilizes dynamic IP assignment. I wouldn't be surprised to share my IP address with tons of other editors in the New York metro area who subscribe to Verizon.

I have never met Danny outside of an IRC channel. And I chose him at random. Seriously, these delusions of grandeur are scary. He was there. I asked him to delete it. He obliged. Get over it.

Posted by: Joseph100

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Tue 2nd October 2007, 12:10am)

QUOTE(Derktar @ Mon 1st October 2007, 11:54pm)

Well let's put this to rest finally, http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=3325, old chap, we need your side of the story, will you abide?

I just find it hilarious that LamontStormstar is connecting "OMG THEY'RE JEWS", "OMG THEY'RE FROM NEW YORK", and "OMG THEY'RE IN FLORIDA" to try and make some sort of crazy conspiracy theory in his mind to state that I am the son of any Wikipedia editor, let alone Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg. I've never met these people in life, nor do I even speak to them on Wikipedia (except for the time where I asked Danny to nuke User talk:LamontStormstar after realizing that Lamont only created his user and user talk pages under that name that he connects with his account here).

Unless that mass of text was incomprehensible, here's the summary:

• I am not Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg's son
• I am not Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg
• I am not Danny, SlimVirgin, or Jayjg's family member, gay lover, best friend forever, or something.
• I am, and have always been, male
• The only relative I have who edits Wikipedia (as far as I know) is my younger brother
• I've read WR since early August when it was directed to me that Ionas68224 was posting incomprehensible rants here saying that he was unjustly banned for directly disrupting my RfC
• I don't watch anime (I hate the entirely popular shit that's on Cartoon Network)
• I really go to the University of Miami (I'm sure that my IP's been checked)
• Half the shit Brandt found out about me that's listed in another thread isn't all that determining about my real identity (zomg my first name and birth date) and most of it is already on my user page in some form
• I'm not any higher-up's (actual Wikipedia "hierarchy" or the ones you have all developed) sockpuppet/meatpuppet/unwilling-puppet
• I'm much less important and omnipotent as a bunch of you make me out to be
• lol, lists

And just so you have "proof" of some of the "wild claims" that some of you don't believe due to the Essjay debacle:
http://img461.imageshack.us/img461/636/pa010001ob0.jpg
Oh, I was reading Discover Magazine's article about how there's a population boom in jellyfish, which mentioned Nemopilema nomurai, and I saw that someone screwed up the article.

Posted by: The Joy

QUOTE(Joseph100 @ Sat 6th October 2007, 1:39am)

Posted by: Proabivouac

"Ryulong" is, in my experience, probably the most overtly abusive administrator on Wikipedia: one of many examples, he declined Gwen Gale's unblock request after being solicited to do so on IRC, then protected her user talk page on the novel grounds that he was going to sleep. The one time I thought to back him up, partly due to a desire to repair relations, I soon felt obliged to apologize to the person he'd accused.

It's been said that he blocks very many vandals and abusive socks. True. But simply blocking *every* new WP account would probably snag more malefactors than legitimate editors. I appreciate the need for a tough sheriff in town, but shooting straight and avoiding innocent bystanders is part of that job. Ryulong treats Wikipedia as a video game in which most other editors are, if not the centipedes, then the mushrooms. He needs to understand that there are real people involved besides just him.

However, he is certainly not Danny, Danny's son, etc., and the personal details he's provided in this thread are, to my knowledge, correct.

Posted by: Kato

I don't know. In a way, we have to admire an admin so corrupt he actually protected the page Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ryulong for months to prevent anyone bringing an rfc against him.

Ryulong is simply the Ãœbermensch of the young wikipedia admin class. And long may his powers continue. It makes our work much easier.

Posted by: Joseph100

QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sat 6th October 2007, 1:19am)

Posted by: LamontStormstar

QUOTE(Joseph100 @ Sat 6th October 2007, 12:44am)

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sat 6th October 2007, 3:19am)

Posted by: The Joy

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Sat 6th October 2007, 11:15am)

The important thing to understand is this — Ryulong is the future of Wikipedia.

S/he breaks all the rules that the others do and more, and s/he breaks them with such a wholly unabashed B.A. DICK attitude that it embarrasses the others that they ever bothered to Φutz around the bush about it.

The fact that s/he has gotten away with the Order of Button Brandishing that s/he has — and for as long as s/he has — is a sure sign that the Wikipedian Dike is now leaking to the point of hemorrhage.

Get thee to an Ark !!!

Jonny

Posted by: Joseph100

QUOTE(The Joy @ Sat 6th October 2007, 2:12pm)

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Sat 6th October 2007, 11:15am)

The important thing to understand is this — Ryulong is the future of Wikipedia.

S/he breaks all the rules that the others do and more, and s/he breaks them with such a wholly unabashed B.A. DICK attitude that it embarrasses the others that they ever bothered to Φutz around the bush about it.

The fact that s/he has gotten away with the Order of Button Brandishing that s/he has — and for as long as s/he has — is a sure sign that the Wikipedian Dike is now leaking to the point of hemorrhage.

Get thee to an Ark !!!

Jonny

Ryulong is the future and present of WP, unfortunately.

Who will guard the guards?

To get rid of an abusive administrator involves forming a lynch mob (see the resignations of Tony Sidaway and Kelly Martin as admins) as opposed to a Community committee as the real world would demand in a case of police brutality. To ask the police to police themselves is absurd as they are hesitant to condemn one of their own. I don't believe there has been an ArbCom with even one non-admin editor on board.

But there I go again believing that WP will reform itself from within. Believe me when I say that I've almost reached the point that there's nothing WP can do to convince me that it can be saved from its corrupted core. Even if Ryulong does leave (and we can be assured he hasn't come back under another account), there will always more Ryulongs coming to power on WP. Administrators are largely aloof regarding individuals like Ryulong and so far its only been stern warnings to Ryulong about his behavior. Slaps on the wrist for bad and morally corrupt administrators are not enough.

See the violence inherent in the system!

Posted by: Joseph100

QUOTE(Joseph100 @ Sat 6th October 2007, 4:41pm)

QUOTE(The Joy @ Sat 6th October 2007, 2:12pm)

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Sat 6th October 2007, 11:15am)

The important thing to understand is this — Ryulong is the future of Wikipedia.

S/he breaks all the rules that the others do and more, and s/he breaks them with such a wholly unabashed B.A. DICK attitude that it embarrasses the others that they ever bothered to Φutz around the bush about it.

The fact that s/he has gotten away with the Order of Button Brandishing that s/he has — and for as long as s/he has — is a sure sign that the Wikipedian Dike is now leaking to the point of hemorrhage.

Get thee to an Ark !!!

Jonny

Ryulong is the future and present of WP, unfortunately.

Who will guard the guards?

To get rid of an abusive administrator involves forming a lynch mob (see the resignations of Tony Sidaway and Kelly Martin as admins) as opposed to a Community committee as the real world would demand in a case of police brutality. To ask the police to police themselves is absurd as they are hesitant to condemn one of their own. I don't believe there has been an ArbCom with even one non-admin editor on board.

But there I go again believing that WP will reform itself from within. Believe me when I say that I've almost reached the point that there's nothing WP can do to convince me that it can be saved from its corrupted core. Even if Ryulong does leave (and we can be assured he hasn't come back under another account), there will always more Ryulongs coming to power on WP. Administrators are largely aloof regarding individuals like Ryulong and so far its only been stern warnings to Ryulong about his behavior. Slaps on the wrist for bad and morally corrupt administrators are not enough.

See the violence inherent in the system!

AMEN BROTHER...SING IT OUT.... WIKI IS THE DEVIL's BLOG.... Hallelujah.

PS... For Ryulong... I'm organizing an vandal party soon to have some fun with you and your bud Rob the java bean grower and librarian I'm planning a real nice party... coming soon to the house of wiki....

Posted by: Proabivouac

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Sat 6th October 2007, 3:15pm)

Posted by: Ryulong

Am I really the devil of the internets? And really, the only reason the RFC was protected is because someone decided to create account after account to harass me because of one block. I forgot it had been protected and I didn't do anything horrid that required it being created until recent (apparently).

And the random IRC attack is fun. It like no community website or forum has a place where only the higher ups http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showforum=10 can read, where discussions are made concerning the site, as well as the random sex joke or two.

I am so glad that I've registered such that I could put a select few onto the "Ignore" list for the occasional read.

Posted by: Kato

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Sun 7th October 2007, 9:56am)

Posted by: Proabivouac

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Sun 7th October 2007, 8:56am)

Posted by: Kato

Here's where Ryulong http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winning_Colors&diff=159251083&oldid=157763744 of a patently terrible article, simply because the editor who performed the service "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Patchcock".

Posted by: everyking

QUOTE(Kato @ Sun 7th October 2007, 10:58am)

Here's where Ryulong http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winning_Colors&diff=159251083&oldid=157763744 of a patently terrible article, simply because the editor who performed the service "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Patchcock".

Posted by: LamontStormstar

QUOTE(everyking @ Sun 7th October 2007, 3:20am)

Posted by: guy

So far as I can tell, Runcorn was doing what he was supposed to do - block genuinely abusive sockpuppets and protect good faith users. His only fault was to protect Newport.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(everyking @ Sun 7th October 2007, 6:20am)

QUOTE(Kato @ Sun 7th October 2007, 10:58am)

Here's where Ryulong http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Winning_Colors&diff=159251083&oldid=157763744 of a patently terrible article, simply because the editor who performed the service "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Patchcock".

I think that, as a rule, anyone who uses admin powers to damage article content for political reasons should not be an admin. Of course, in Ryulong's case, that's just one reason.

Posted by: Castle Rock

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Sun 7th October 2007, 5:56pm)

But it's a waste of breath talking about this stuff, as there's nobody left on Wikipediot Island who gives a Rat's Ass about the rules anymore.
Jonny

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Sun 7th October 2007, 9:03pm)

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Sun 7th October 2007, 5:56pm)

But it's a waste of breath talking about this stuff, as there's nobody left on Wikipediot Island who gives a Rat's Ass about the rules anymore.

Jonny

Or the policies have diverged so far from reality, that actions like you mentioned are the rules now. An example of this is User:SallyForth123, she has tons of block-evading sockpuppets, but only makes helpful edits. Yet someone wants to formalize her ban so they can revert all of her edits without even looking at them. Fortunately, someone shot that idea down, but it's a clear example of their mindset.

Posted by: ColScott

I swear I posted on this thread slamming Ryulong as the piece of crud he is. Why was I censored? I need to know to learn for the future.

Posted by: Nathan

I was thinking about talking to you about it privately but I was trying to figure out exactly how to do so while still being nice about it.

It's not the point of censoring for the sake of censorship, but the language was completely unnecessary.

I don't care about the attack but please use a little common sense. Since common sense is subjective, well, you know the rest.

Posted by: The Joy

QUOTE(ColScott @ Mon 8th October 2007, 1:05am)

QUOTE(Nathan @ Sun 7th October 2007, 10:03pm)

It's not the point of censoring for the sake of censorship, but you posted a blatant personal attack with unnecessary language.

The former is fine as long as you use a little common sense.

There's a common sense way to let Ryulong know he is a worthless fuck who should get hit by a fast moving bus?

Posted by: Proabivouac

ColScott, to wish such ill upon another is, at least, unbecoming. "Ryulong" makes mistakes because he's young, though bright perhaps not unusually reflective, and has been negligently handed responsibilities for which he's not yet qualified. What's your excuse?

Posted by: Jonny Cache

It's hard to talk about a post that I can't see, but wot the hecque …

I'm generally against deleting posts unless they constitute the sort of thing that would bring legal retribution against the whole Review, otherwise, it seems like moving objectionable posts to the tarpit et φeather barrel is the better course.

That's about all I can say without knowing what I'm talking about …

Jonny

Posted by: guy

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 8th October 2007, 12:54pm)

Posted by: Piperdown

QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Mon 8th October 2007, 7:08am)

Posted by: LamontStormstar

You know Wikipedia is headquarted in Florida so it's possible people move there with the intention of being inhouse staff at Wikipedia.

Posted by: Ryulong

Then that would mean I would have some urge to transfer to SFSU or UCSF next semester, wouldn't it? I really couldn't care less about working for the Foundation.

I've wanted to go to UM at least two years before registering for an account at Wikipedia, and where they are headquartered now is too far for a poor college student at one of the southernmost points of the state to commute to and from at any time (Mapquest says that its 4 hours by car, with toll roads). And I'm so sure that they have use for a chemist on the staff.

I don't know why you're dragging this out when I've flatly debunked any theory you could possibly bring up.

Posted by: The Joy

"On the Internet, no one knows that you're Danny's son."

I don't think Ryulong is Danny's son. Couldn't we discuss, you know, Ryulong's administrative incidents?

Honestly, though, I'm not in the mood to tear into Ryulong about his admin duties at the mean-time. I think he's already said what he's going to say about it... at least until next brouhaha if he's not careful.

So, Ryulong, why are you a "Vandal Fighter" when its the role most likely to cause great anger against you? I've never understand what satisfaction Vandal Fighters get just watching the Recent Changes page all day and searching for perhaps a needle in a haystack. I'd go mad after a short time and have to stop editing WP for a long time. I will admit a few years ago, I was greeted by many a giant wang on WP and it seems they've resolved that problem. Is this the work of Vandal Fighters or does some Anti-Wang Bot go around getting rid of them? These are serious questions and I hope you will answer though its your choice whether you wish to or not. It just seems to me that most Vandal Fighters have a... "aggressive" attitude more so than any other Wikipedian. Just an observation.

Posted by: Castle Rock

QUOTE(The Joy @ Sun 14th October 2007, 11:56pm)

Posted by: LamontStormstar

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Mon 15th October 2007, 12:00am)

Posted by: Castle Rock

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Mon 15th October 2007, 12:04am)

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Mon 15th October 2007, 12:00am)

I think they whitelisted the really nasty pictures so they just appear as wikilinks when they're put in the wrong places.

I have noticed the really nasty pictures being put into HTML table code so people can paste large amounts of HTML do it that way. Is there some computer software that people are using to convert images into HTML code? I googled and haven't found anything.

Posted by: LamontStormstar

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Mon 15th October 2007, 12:09am)

Posted by: Castle Rock

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Mon 15th October 2007, 12:13am)

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Mon 15th October 2007, 12:09am)

Other than the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&action=edit&oldid=141543921

Where did the goatse wikitable come from?

Posted by: LamontStormstar

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Mon 15th October 2007, 12:16am)

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Mon 15th October 2007, 12:13am)

QUOTE(Castle Rock @ Mon 15th October 2007, 12:09am)

Other than the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&action=edit&oldid=141543921

Where did the goatse wikitable come from?

http://www.phpriot.com/5434

Posted by: Jonny Cache

Lamont,

Until you get some more solid evidence to pack into your summer snowballs, could you please stop lobbing Dragon-Squared all these slowpitch softballs!? You know they just eat this stuff up like so much gelato, and all it does is let them use up a whole lot of our valuable airspace without having to face up to any truly hard questions.

Just A Serving Suggestion (JASS) …

Jonny

Posted by: The Joy

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 15th October 2007, 11:04am)

Lamont,

Until you get some more solid evidence to pack into your summer snowballs, could you please stop lobbing Dragon-Squared all these slowpitch softballs!? You know they just eat this stuff up like so much gelato, and all it does is let them use up a whole lot of our valuable airspace without having to face up to any truly hard questions.

Just A Serving Suggestion (JASS) …

Jonny

Posted by: Ryulong

QUOTE(The Joy @ Mon 15th October 2007, 7:31pm)

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(The Joy @ Mon 15th October 2007, 7:31pm)

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 15th October 2007, 11:04am)

Lamont,

Until you get some more solid evidence to pack into your summer snowballs, could you please stop lobbing Dragon-Squared all these slowpitch softballs!? You know they just eat this stuff up like so much gelato, and all it does is let them use up a whole lot of our valuable airspace without having to face up to any truly hard questions.

Just A Serving Suggestion (JASS) …

Jonny

Yes, my attempts at trying to understand Ryulong's reasons for wanting to be a Vandal Fighter, Anti-Vandal Warrior, Specialized Anti-Vandal Soldier (SAS) or whatever MMORPG militaristic term WP's Anti-Everyone-Who-Opposes-Us-Cabal (WP:AEWOUP) have turned into a goatse discussion. Of course, its my own fault for asking about WP's Anti-Wang Operations (WAWO) which may have little to do with Ryulong.

I asked a few months ago about why Vandal Fighters do what they do. Now that one of the most prominent of them has posted here, I thought I could him why he actually enjoys it as it seems tedious and mind-numbing to me.

Posted by: Proabivouac

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Tue 16th October 2007, 1:06am)

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Mon 15th October 2007, 9:06pm)

QUOTE(The Joy @ Mon 15th October 2007, 7:31pm)

I asked a few months ago about why Vandal Fighters do what they do. Now that one of the most prominent of them has posted here, I thought I could [ask] him why he actually enjoys it as it seems tedious and mind-numbing to me.

It is. That's why I spend more time now writing and expanding upon articles, and apparently making fodder for this board to feed off of with administrative actions. The buzz dies when you're reprimanded for doing what you think is right.

Posted by: dtobias

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 15th October 2007, 11:08pm)

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 15th October 2007, 11:43pm)

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 15th October 2007, 11:08pm)

Someday, if you're lucky, you'll get banned for doing what you think is right, and then you'll be here with us rolling stones.

But when you're rolling stones, you can't get no satisfaction … and you can't always get what you want!

Posted by: Somey

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Mon 15th October 2007, 8:06pm)

Posted by: Castle Rock

QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 15th October 2007, 9:25pm)

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Mon 15th October 2007, 8:06pm)

It is. That's why I spend more time now writing and expanding upon articles, and apparently making fodder for this board to feed off of with administrative actions. The buzz dies when you're reprimanded for doing what you think is right.

Hang on, though. Which one is it? You scaled back your "anti-vandal" activities because they were tedious, or because someone unfairly reprimanded you?

Personally, I couldn't imagine going for longer than 30 minutes doing that stuff before I started putting sarcastic quips in the edit summaries. I tried it a couple times on Uncyclopedia, actually... Of course, there you're encouraged to put sarcastic quips in the edit summaries... in fact, it's practically an art form. If one is constrained from doing that, then what's the point, even? I'd actually rather leave the vandalism in place.

Posted by: Somey

Sure, but those are block logs, not edit summaries for reverting "vandal" edits. Block logs disappear, for all practical purposes, but reverts stay in the page's history indefinitely, and people do notice them if the page is heavily viewed and they're looking for who wrote what when.


Of course, there's a collection of block log summaries from Uncyclopedia too:

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Forum:Who_has_the_best_joke_bans_ever%3F

Posted by: The Joy

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 15th October 2007, 10:32pm)

Let me recommend that you pick up a DVD of The Manchurian Candidate — the 1962 version with Frank Sinatra, Laurence Harvey, and Janet Leigh is far superior to the 2004 rendition. Your attempts at understanding are undermind from the get-go by the fact that you retain the brainwashing of your time as a Prisoner Of Wikipedia (POW). And you will remain their SlimVirtual WikiPOW until the day when you learn to drop the language that they burned into your brain for descrbing every action, every scene.

Jonny

Posted by: Ryulong

QUOTE(Somey @ Tue 16th October 2007, 12:25am)

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Mon 15th October 2007, 8:06pm)

It is. That's why I spend more time now writing and expanding upon articles, and apparently making fodder for this board to feed off of with administrative actions. The buzz dies when you're reprimanded for doing what you think is right.

Hang on, though. Which one is it? You scaled back your "anti-vandal" activities because they were tedious, or because someone unfairly reprimanded you?

Personally, I couldn't imagine going for longer than 30 minutes doing that stuff before I started putting sarcastic quips in the edit summaries. I tried it a couple times on Uncyclopedia, actually... Of course, there you're encouraged to put sarcastic quips in the edit summaries... in fact, it's practically an art form. If one is constrained from doing that, then what's the point, even? I'd actually rather leave the vandalism in place.

Posted by: Joseph100

QUOTE(jorge @ Mon 1st October 2007, 9:59am)

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Mon 1st October 2007, 3:07pm)

Before we do a poll on something like this, we need to discuss it and try to sort through the evidence, I think.

For what its worth, I like lots of quality "kids" shows. Of course, I don't consider them to be kids. Cartoons for example. I watch The Simpsons, South Park, sometimes Kim Possible, Naruto, and a bunch of other stuff. Well, not so much now that I don't have the Cartoon Network or Nickelodeon anymore, but yeah. Of course I don't watch Sesame Street anymore (at least not unless I'm babysitting - I still consider that to be quality) and I would never ever watch fucking lambchops playalong or Barney the crap dinosaur or any of those really mind numbingly awful ones.

Isn't there a kids programme in Australia that is really famous? I can't remember what it is though.

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 1st October 2007, 3:34pm)

The thing that's really at issue here is not one person's peculiar hobby — who really gives a flying filly? — and we wouldn't care a whit if they didn't ride their hobby horse all over everyone else's farms and gardens.

Jonny

The question is, has Ryulong committed the ultrimate wiki crime- being in possession of two administrator accounts simultaneously?

Posted by: LamontStormstar

I like how SineBot beat the vandal fighters

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ryulong&curid=10736166&diff=164902964&oldid=164902797

Posted by: LamontStormstar

Finally long after I posted about it on WR, we get:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARyulong&diff=164906124&oldid=164902964


A good 3 month ban.

07:45, 16 October 2007 Ryulong (Talk | contribs) blocked "68.75.167.159 (Talk)" (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 3 months ‎ (Abusing multiple accounts)

I remember back when IPs only got banned for hours or days for this.

Posted by: Ryulong

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Tue 16th October 2007, 3:56am)

Posted by: LamontStormstar

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Tue 16th October 2007, 1:06am)

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Tue 16th October 2007, 3:56am)

Finally long after I posted about it on WR, we get:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARyulong&diff=164906124&oldid=164902964


A good 3 month ban.

07:45, 16 October 2007 Ryulong (Talk | contribs) blocked "68.75.167.159 (Talk)" (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 3 months ‎ (Abusing multiple accounts)

I remember back when IPs only got banned for hours or days for this.

I've got something more effective in store.

Posted by: Joseph100

QUOTE(Ryulong @ Tue 16th October 2007, 3:06am)

QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Tue 16th October 2007, 3:56am)

Finally long after I posted about it on WR, we get:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARyulong&diff=164906124&oldid=164902964


A good 3 month ban.

07:45, 16 October 2007 Ryulong (Talk | contribs) blocked "68.75.167.159 (Talk)" (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 3 months ‎ (Abusing multiple accounts)

I remember back when IPs only got banned for hours or days for this.

I've got something more effective in store.

Posted by: Jonny Cache

QUOTE(The Joy @ Tue 16th October 2007, 1:18am)

QUOTE(Jonny Cache @ Mon 15th October 2007, 10:32pm)

Let me recommend that you pick up a DVD of The Manchurian Candidate — the 1962 version with Frank Sinatra, Laurence Harvey, and Janet Leigh is far superior to the 2004 rendition. Your attempts at understanding are undermind from the get-go by the fact that you retain the brainwashing of your time as a Prisoner Of Wikipedia (POW). And you will remain their SlimVirtual WikiPOW until the day when you learn to drop the language that they burned into your brain for descrbing every action, every scene.

Jonny

I saw the 1962 version a few years ago which I enjoyed. I'm not even bothering with seeing the remake.

I suppose I still feel that using reason will change the Ryulongs of WP, but you are right, Jonny, nothing is going to change Ryulong's behavior or any others like him. I do use the term "Vandal Fighter" derisively. Most I've seen are more obsessed with climbing up the social order of WP rather than really caring about the project itself. The fact that Ryulong isn't desysopped or even banned indicates that the community is more concerned about protecting its corrupt members rather than the project.