Coren's Off-Wiki Activities, Would you have voted for him if...? Options

[Coren]

Moderator's note: This topic was split from the Sam Blacketer thread, as the material deals primarily with Coren (T-C-L-K-R-D) 's "off-wiki" activities, which were presumably not related to those of "Sam Blacketer." In addition, several posts containing speculation relating to Mr. Coren's activities on Usenet in the mid-1990's, and how they might be in some way related to Mr. Boothroyd's activities on Usenet in the mid-1990's, were split from there and moved to a non-public forum. Please note that an extremely large number of people were active on Usenet in the mid-1990's, including several WR members. Past Usenet activity is not necessarily evidence of collaboration, or even personal familiarity, though it could be evidence of one's having had a poorly-developed social life during that time.

_______________________________

I don't think that Coren has much of a choice but to do that, as we shall see shortly...

(Read my last akahele post for clues about this...)

Oh, wait! I realize you might be talking about http://gai-eros.org

And here I thought you were talking about something interesting.

For those of you not in the know, I am the system administrator for a Francophone alternative erotica archive site. It's pretty much the French equivalent of the Nifty archive, though nowhere near as large or old (gai-eros is only 13 or so years old). Not only is it boringly legal, but I don't actually have much to do with the contents itself.

(Note: very much NSFW address).

Someone once said that the Internet is but trolls and porn. I dunno about just the trolls, but good ol pr0n is pretty much universal. I do have very strong convictions on the topic of free speech and sexual freedom, and erotica is the intersection of the two. :-P

At any rate, if anyone was hoping to scare me away with this, or blackmail me... hah!

And no, it's not even a secret from ArbCom. I don't publicize my association with the site on Wikipedia for the simple reason that enwp isn't about getting traffic for a site I'm maintaining, and I very much doubt it's notable enough to be an article topic (though, IIRC, it got some very nice positive press coverage some years ago).

As for what this has to do with my being an Arbitrator... well, I'll be damned if I can guess. I promise to recuse if *any* website I am the sysadmin for ends up being involved in a case? Heh.

-- Coren

This post has been edited by Somey:

[Somey]

And no, it's not even a secret from ArbCom. I don't publicize my association with the site on Wikipedia for the simple reason that enwp isn't about getting traffic for a site I'm maintaining, and I very much doubt it's notable enough to be an article topic (though, IIRC, it got some very nice positive press coverage some years ago). ... As for what this has to do with my being an Arbitrator... well, I'll be damned if I can guess...

I take it you don't believe that the "community," had they known about this prior to the ArbCom election, would have cared one way or the other? And you believe that it wouldn't have reduced your vote count significantly?

I'm not saying it would have, but that strikes me as being the actual issue here - not whether or not it would have any effect on how you vote in ArbCom rulings, now that you're in.

[Kato]

As for what this has to do with my being an Arbitrator... well, I'll be damned if I can guess. I promise to recuse if *any* website I am the sysadmin for ends up being involved in a case? Heh.

-- Coren

I remember your answers to the questions during the Arbitration election. They stank. We highlighted them here:

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...ndpost&p=141422

[Coren]

I take it you don't believe that the "community," had they known about this prior to the ArbCom election, would have cared one way or the other? And you believe that it wouldn't have reduced your vote count significantly?

I'm not saying it would have, but that strikes me as being the actual issue here - not whether or not it would have any effect on how you vote in ArbCom rulings, now that you're in.

Given that the vast majority of enwp users are American, it probably could have. (Then again, it's even more likely that being openly Republican or Democrat would have had more impact).

On the other hand, that kind of thing is pretty hard to guess in advance -- it may have had no effect, or it may have had a positive effect (there are, after all, a surprisingly large number of libertarian wikipedians and votes against me might have roused them to support in backlash).

More importantly, it has no bearing on whether I can do the job right or not, it's part of my professional life (which, frankly, is no damn business of anyone except insofar as it can affect my neutrality), and I couldn't possibly think of a good reason to disclose them or any other client that I do system administration for on-wiki.

*shrug*

It's also possible that the fact someone could have a smaller chance of being elected if they are known to be socialist, or gay, or jewish, or black. In all honesty, does it matter? Should we require disclosure of all those things because it might affect votes?

-- Coren

[Kato]

It's also possible that the fact someone could have a smaller chance of being elected if they are known to be socialist, or gay, or jewish, or black. In all honesty, does it matter? Should we require disclosure of all those things because it might affect votes?

But it wasn't any of those things.

Coren, back in December when you were trying to get elected, you wrote:

A serious reexamination of Wikipedia governance will become increasingly important as time passes;

No shit. When do you start?

[thebainer]

I take it you don't believe that the "community," had they known about this prior to the ArbCom election, would have cared one way or the other? And you believe that it wouldn't have reduced your vote count significantly?

Why would computer nerds disapprove of a porn site?

[Coren]

A serious reexamination of Wikipedia governance will become increasingly important as time passes;

No shit. When do you start?

To some degree, it has already started. The audit subcommittee is a step in the right direction (though not as far as I would have wished). Have you seen my original review board proposal?

It's always a bit depressing to feel like you're rearranging deck chairs, and the very great inertia of such a large apparatus as Wikipedia is... overwhelming.

I am, after all, just 1/15th of the Committee. And the Committee has influence but little "legislative" power; even if all the cats could be herded in the same direction, we could not effect revolution.

I plan on revisiting the theme of governance in a few months; to start a real public discussion about moving a little closer to a constitutive system with actual teeth. Expect much wailing and gnashing of teeth as the more anarchist elements of Wikipedia battle this with conviction and zeal.

Ad-hoc governance was good enough to bootstrap the project, but I don't believe it's enough now. *Changing* things will be hard. I'm willing to take the banner up, but I obviously won't be able to singlehandedly give you the revolution you are hoping for.

I can, however, do my best to push in the right direction.

-- Coren

[Coren]

Why would computer nerds disapprove of a porn site?

Because it has teh gayz? :-) But then again, there is a number of hot girl-on-girl action in the archive too, so it would have been a toss-up. :-P

-- Coren / Marc

[No one of consequence]

And no, it's not even a secret from ArbCom. I don't publicize my association with the site on Wikipedia for the simple reason that enwp isn't about getting traffic for a site I'm maintaining, and I very much doubt it's notable enough to be an article topic (though, IIRC, it got some very nice positive press coverage some years ago). ... As for what this has to do with my being an Arbitrator... well, I'll be damned if I can guess...

I take it you don't believe that the "community," had they known about this prior to the ArbCom election, would have cared one way or the other? And you believe that it wouldn't have reduced your vote count significantly?

I'm not saying it would have, but that strikes me as being the actual issue here - not whether or not it would have any effect on how you vote in ArbCom rulings, now that you're in.

Of the terms French Alternative Erotica web site, the only one I can imaging Wikipedians objecting to is "French."

[tarantino]

Of the terms French Alternative Erotica web site, the only one I can imaging Wikipedians objecting to is "French."

Different strokes for different folks, and all that stuff I guess.

[Coren]

Different strokes for different folks, and all that stuff I guess.

Uhuhuh. You said "stroke". Uhuhuh. :-D

-- Coren

[the fieryangel]

It's also possible that the fact someone could have a smaller chance of being elected if they are known to be socialist, or gay, or jewish, or black. In all honesty, does it matter? Should we require disclosure of all those things because it might affect votes?

-- Coren

Yes, and you should also be required to disclose your real life identities, occupations and other things that might affect your positions as an arb.

(Actually, the website wasn't the issue, although that was known...)

[Kato]

Why would computer nerds disapprove of a porn site?

Because it has teh gayz? :-) But then again, there is a number of hot girl-on-girl action in the archive too, so it would have been a toss-up. :-P

-- Coren / Marc

Different strokes for different folks, and all that stuff I guess.

Uhuhuh. You said "stroke". Uhuhuh. :-D

-- Coren

I don't know "teh gayz", but I reckon the material about sex with horses would probably have put off a few voters on your Arbitration election bid.

[Somey]

Of the terms French Alternative Erotica web site, the only one I can imaging Wikipedians objecting to is "French."

Perhaps... I mean, personally I doubt that having "admin of a French erotica site" on one's wiki-resumé would have made that big a difference overall. I, for one, wouldn't have had a problem with it, given that the "You must be an adult to enter this site" warning stays in place - something that doesn't exist on Wikipedia, I might add... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/rolleyes.gif)

Of course, I myself am something of a nerd, and male, and fairly liberal-minded, so I'm more likely to not care. IMO, women of all political/religious stripes would have been more likely to object than men, and religious conservatives looking to stir up trouble for others would have objected most of all - but then again, User:Ottava rima opposed you anyway, so maybe not much difference on that score either.

It also might have occurred to a few people that the experience Mr. Coren has gained from administering such a site might color his perceptions of how people behave online, and what they're likely to do in the event of a dispute... But personally, I doubt that any but a tiny handful of WP'ers really think in such subtle and complex terms. (And to be fair, I doubt much of anyone does these days.)

Still, I've found it's best never to underestimate Wikipedians' propensity for self-righteousness and hypocrisy! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)


Btw, I suppose we'll want to split most of this Coren-related stuff to another thread soon, since it's off-topic for this thread....

[GlassBeadGame]

I take it you don't believe that the "community," had they known about this prior to the ArbCom election, would have cared one way or the other? And you believe that it wouldn't have reduced your vote count significantly?

Why would computer nerds disapprove of a porn site?

Again, Wikipedians are not all that matters. It probably wouldn't matter in an election on Wikipedia. It might well matter in the wider world. Especially given:

• Wales' Bomis past.
• Moeller "sex with children is ok if the kids consent" statement.
• FT2 "sex with animals is ok"statements.
• The volume of pornographic images contained on Wikipedia.
• David Gerards "skull dance"'response to thwarted efforts at some minimal limits on the offensive material.
• WMF's refusal to take any steps at all in the direction of child protection.

Given all of this another Wikipedian selected for a position of trust with a career in pornography might in fact matter.

[Coren]

I don't know "teh gayz", but I reckon the material about sex with horses would probably have put off a few voters on your Arbitration election bid.

I suppose, though there is some rather icky stuff involving the "wrong" body excretions in there that probably would give some even more pause. (The french slang word you're looking for is "crade").

I don't actually write any of this, I manage the CMS that stores it. Given the stats, I can tell you there are more people who actually enjoy the really... different... stuff than you might guess (though most of the traffic goes to the "tame" stuff).

I'm still quite mystified about why any of this would impact my ability to be an Arb.

-- Coren

[Casliber]

<snip>
Incidentally, "Marc-Andre" is a fairly common first name, and "Pelletier" is, last I checked, the second most common last name in Quebec (second only to Tremblay) -- I'd be careful to ascribe things you find to a random "Marc-Andre Pelletier" to me. In fact, I even know of one that's a dentist that flies small prop planes that was born on the same day I was (which, lemme tell you, makes getting insurance a pain).
<snip>
-- Coren

Wow, never knew any in Oz (surname Pelletier that is), but then again there are very few francophones here. Ya learn something new every day (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

[Coren]

Wow, never knew any in Oz (surname Pelletier that is), but then again there are very few francophones here. Ya learn something new every day (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)

It's a common French name, though especially so in Quebec. It means furrier, if you're wondering. It's very common especially in Quebec because 3 or the the original 100 settlers (the "Cent Compagnons") were Pelletiers; and I'm in the 14th (very prolific) generation off of the Guillaume branch. Not counting the later arrivals, the original 3 have, I think, around 25000 living descendants in Quebec and New England (though, in the States, the name has often been spelled "Peletier" over the years).

-- Coren

Well, that's one of the things that I wanted to have discussed. There are other issues which are being examined. It would seem that other venues are also discussing these issues.

My main question is why weren't these issues discussed before, as in before the arbcom elections?

Well, for your first point, there is the obvious question: Why not just ask me? I mean, too simple? Too straightforward?

As to your "main question", the answer is trivial: Because it had no effing relevance to those elections? I suppose that's also too simple for your tastes -- it is much more fun to evoke all sorts of silly conspiracies and covert things for some people.

-- Coren

[Kato]

In that particular case, I was that Marc-Andre. I think my stance of freedom of expression is well known. And, again, that still brings the same question forward (which nobody has answered with anything else than victorian outrage that I might be *shudder* involved in the pr0n "millieu"): what the hell does that have to do with my capacity to be an Arbitrator?

-- Coren

Is it now "Victorian" to shudder at the idea that you managed a website promoting bestiality?

One of the more curious features of hard-core Wikipedians is the inability to understand boundaries, and the inability to differentiate between exploitation and erotica. During the numerous debates about pedophilia and sexualized images of children on Wikipedia, it became apparent that many Wikipedians actually saw the matter as one of Freedom of Speech. This was extraordinary to observe. Wikipedians also seemed unable to distinguish between what was adult pornography, and what was gross exploitation / abuse of vulnerable subjects.

Another feature of their arguments was the use of cringy Internet-speak to defend themselves. Lots of "Think of The Children" mocking against complainants.

Coren, you can write things like "pr0n" all you like to try to play the site down, but a place that advocates abusing animals isn't anything to do with "pr0n" or "freedom of speech".

[Coren]

Is it now "Victorian" to shudder at the idea that you managed a website promoting bestiality?

[...]

Coren, you can write things like "pr0n" all you like to try to play the site down, but a place that advocates abusing animals isn't anything to do with "pr0n" or "freedom of speech".

Your definition of "promoting" lies somewhere outside of reality, Kato. Stories about people defecating on each other, or having sex with animals, or rape fantasies, or -- well, you get the idea -- do not "promote" any of those things. Nor do stories about graphic murders, vast conspiracies, or sex and corruption in the government (or perhaps you'd turn away Christie, Moliere and Huysmans as promoting those things)?

You may not like such tales, and you are in no way obliged to write or read them. You may disagree that they are literature. (Indeed, most of what is on gai-eros is prurient trash in my own opinion as well (though there are a few genuine gems)). Nevertheless, the ability to read and write those stories are a matter of freedom of expression.

-- Coren