SlimVirgin knows The True Policy Options

I bet she's having a good laugh at this post.

You don't think I'm right then? (Also note that I did a bit of reworking to that post thus be sure to read the final version.)

This post has been edited by SenseMaker: Sat 5th January 2008, 8:09pm

I bet she's having a good laugh at this post.

You don't think I'm right then? (Also note that I did a bit of reworking to that post thus be sure to read the final version.)

I'd say it's about right, for what it's worth.

SenseMaker may be right. A source I talked to who knew Mack from 1989 through the early 1990s said that he learned from one of his sources (whom he declined to name) that Mack had serious emotional problems and was taking large doses of medically-prescribed psychotropic drugs. (The source I talked to who relayed this information was not Patrick Byrne, although Byrne's description of Mack's behavior also suggests, it seems to me, that she may have had emotional problems.)

Either way, it doesn't help us much — she still has considerable power on Wikipedia. It may be a defect in the Web 2.0 model that such situations cannot be detected and avoided as easily on the anonymous web, as they can in real life.

SenseMaker may be right.

I agree -- his armchair psychoanalysis struck me as plausible. However, I'd like to point out that having a touch of psychopathology, and being evil, are not mutually exclusive. Being evil is a willful choice, not a compulsion. Some of SV's philosophical preferences definately creep me out.

Some of SV's philosophical preferences definately creep me out.

Some of SV's philosophical preferences definately creep me out.

Dude, will you please stop resurrecting ancient threads from the dead with completely pointless posts?

SenseMaker may be right. A source I talked to who knew Mack from 1989 through the early 1990s said that he learned from one of his sources (whom he declined to name) that Mack had serious emotional problems and was taking large doses of medic ally-prescribed psychotropic drugs. (The source I talked to who relayed this information was not Patrick Byrne, although Byrne's description of Mack's behavior also suggests, it seems to me, that she may have had emotional problems.)

Either way, it doesn't help us much — she still has considerable power on Wikipedia. It may be a defect in the Web 2.0 model that such situations cannot be detected and avoided as easily on the anonymous web, as they can in real life.

I'm not sure, Daniel, that this sort of stuff is legitimate background, and not just gossip. Lot's of people have taken drugs to help with emotional problems, its a bit like saying so-and-so was often in the pub drinking too much...

The interesting question, the only interesting question, about Slim is whether or not she is part of a power-structure controlling Wikipedia for political or business ends. I've had quite a bit of direct email contact with Slim and read enough of her posts to arrive at a few tentative but at least contemporary assessments of her 'state of mind'. For what its worth, here is my best guess:

1. Slim is part of a formal power structure on Wikipedia. She keeps referring to 'we' in her admin talk, and the 'we' certainly does not mean all administrators, let alone all editors. She refers to details of blocks and refers complaints on to other admin as though part of a bureaucracy. It COULD just be delusional, but I don't think so...

(Slim recently complained about 'losing her livelihood' too...)

2. Slim is genuinely promoting Animal Rights. What sort of people do that? Apart from Mr Hitler, they tend to be people who themselves feel victims, but are channelling their fear for themselves more constructively, to 'save' the animals. I think we should understand Slim as someone who 'believes' in their core activity, sees it indeed in semi-religous terms. That is why 'people' can be treated so casually/ autistically by her.

3. Slim spends an awful lot of time in really rather boring admin-talk debates. Only two kinds of people would do that:

a mad person (as suggested in the quote)
- or a bureaucrat being paid to do it.

Most of what Slim says is cogent and IMO reasonable, albeit partial. (She leaves out inconvenient facts and sprinkles her posts with stuff that is not verifiable, evidently enjoying the impression of access to more information than the rest of us...)

Jimbo, we know, hires people to make up for what he lacks, ie. edukayshun. Slim is a very suitable employee, but as Wikipedia is 'supposed' to be run entirely openly by equal volunteers, she has to be presented as such. Why does Wikipedia need to be presented as run by volunteers? It makes its 'encyclopaedic' authority much less. I should say the only advantage is in terms of propaganda. By denying having paid writers and editors, and adding the NPOV sugar coating, Wikipedia has a better chance of infiltrating its subtle messages into the public consciousness.

This post has been edited by flash: Wed 6th August 2008, 5:20pm

Jimbo, we know, hires people to make up for what he lacks, ie. edukayshun. Slim is a very suitable employee, but as Wikipedia is 'supposed' to be run entirely openly by equal volunteers, she has to be presented as such. Why does Wikipedia need to be presented as run by volunteers? It makes its 'encyclopaedic' authority much less. I should say the only advantage is in terms of propaganda. By denying having paid writers and editors, and adding the NPOV sugar coating, Wikipedia has a better chance of infiltrating its subtle messages into the public consciousness.

Jimbo doesn't have the money to hire someone to rub two nickels together for him. He leeches off of anyone he can (lately, that's been Wikia and its "angel investors") for whatever money he can scam, and when he does get some he spends it on himself, not on other people. Rest assured that Jimbo has no motivation to hire SlimVirgin to do what she does on Wikipedia; if she's been hired it's certainly not by Jimbo.

That said, it's entirely possible that whatever entity does pay Slimmy (if such an entity exists, which I am entirely uncertain of at this point; it seems more likely to me that Slimmy is supported by a trust fund or annuity of some sort and does what she does out of personal obsession rather than compensation) has also paid off Jimbo in some way, shape or form. Proving that, however, would be quite difficult.

I think you've passed well into the realm of conspiracy theory here, Flash. What exactly is Jimbo supposed to be getting from SlimVirgin that he couldn't get for free from any number of other admins?

As for your statement that she's part of a bureaucracy, sure she is. So am I. It's possible to be part of a bureaucracy - even part of a power structure - without having some sort of man behind the curtain pulling the strings.

I think everything's pretty much as it seems as far as Wikipedia's concerned; that's the alarming part.

I think everything's pretty much as it seems as far as Wikipedia's concerned; that's the alarming part.

I'm afraid I agree. I can't see any major facts clearly in evidence that can't be explained with the simplest of many possible hypotheses, which is that what we see on WP, is basically what there is. Never attribute to maniacal cleverness and inhumanly effective conspiracy, what can be just as easily explained by the very much more common human traits of ignorance, stupidity, and empire building. To which can be added the fear, egoism and sloth which routinely cause the inertia and reactionism that prevent institutional change everywhere.

"An explanation should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Einstein, echoing Occam's razor)

I'm afraid I agree. I can't see any major facts clearly in evidence that can't be explained with the simplest of many possible hypotheses, which is that what we see on WP, is basically what there is. Never attribute to maniacal cleverness and inhumanly effective conspiracy, what can be just as easily explained by the very much more common human traits of ignorance, stupidity, and empire building. To which can be added the fear, egoism and sloth which routinely cause the inertia and reactionism that prevent institutional change everywhere.

We have plenty of evidence of behind-the-scenes dealings between various editors, but those are garden variety "conspiracies" of the sort that plague all human activities. There's no reason to extend those conspiracies beyond the observed (or reasonably inferred) communications activities, and no cause to believe that such backchannel communications evidence a common cause or common leadership.

Wikipedia is a very large cart being pulled by ten thousand cats each individually yoked to it. No one cat can do much to alter its course, although some cats (for various reasons) are better at it than others. At any given time, no small number of the cats are attacking one another rather than pulling the cart. Others run around trying to convince their fellow cats to go in this direction or that, with various degrees of success, and others run around trying to foul the lines. The resulting disaster lurches about the landscape at random, leaving a trail of shredded grass and cat turds wherever it might go. One day, it will lurch over a cliff, and there will be much rejoicing.

Wikipedia is a very large cart being pulled by ten thousand cats each individually yoked to it. No one cat can do much to alter its course, although some cats (for various reasons) are better at it than others. At any given time, no small number of the cats are attacking one another rather than pulling the cart. Others run around trying to convince their fellow cats to go in this direction or that, with various degrees of success, and others run around trying to foul the lines.

(Most applicable free image I could find, I'm afraid.)

I'm afraid I agree. I can't see any major facts clearly in evidence that can't be explained with the simplest of many possible hypotheses, which is that what we see on WP, is basically what there is. Never attribute to maniacal cleverness and inhumanly effective conspiracy, what can be just as easily explained by the very much more common human traits of ignorance, stupidity, and empire building. To which can be added the fear, egoism and sloth which routinely cause the inertia and reactionism that prevent institutional change everywhere.

We have plenty of evidence of behind-the-scenes dealings between various editors, but those are garden variety "conspiracies" of the sort that plague all human activities. There's no reason to extend those conspiracies beyond the observed (or reasonably inferred) communications activities, and no cause to believe that such backchannel communications evidence a common cause or common leadership.

Wikipedia is a very large cart being pulled by ten thousand cats each individually yoked to it. No one cat can do much to alter its course, although some cats (for various reasons) are better at it than others. At any given time, no small number of the cats are attacking one another rather than pulling the cart. Others run around trying to convince their fellow cats to go in this direction or that, with various degrees of success, and others run around trying to foul the lines. The resulting disaster lurches about the landscape at random, leaving a trail of shredded grass and cat turds wherever it might go. One day, it will lurch over a cliff, and there will be much rejoicing.

I've been perplexed by the inaction on Jimbo's part when complaints about egregious behavior on the part of some WP's admins like JzG, Jayjg, and SV have been made to him, either on his talk page or by email (I've done both and I believe I'm not the only one). I've been tempted to think that there might be some grand conspiracy going on, such as that SV is a Wikia consultant or something like that. But, I think Kelly and others here are right in saying that it likely isn't that complicated or mysterious.

I think Jimbo's behavior during the Essjay fiasco gives a good clue as to what is really going on. Jimbo tried to hire Essjay after the scandal broke, right? I think that once Jimbo has established a friendly relationship with someone because they can help him in some way, and I think he and SV are friends by way of communication about issues in Wikipedia (remember the adage for how to succeed at work- "Solve the bosses' problems first"?), he is reluctant to take any kind of adverse action against that person unless he is compelled to do so.

This post has been edited by Cla68: Thu 7th August 2008, 1:59am

I've been perplexed by the inaction on Jimbo's part when complaints about egregious behavior on the part of some WP's admins like JzG, Jayjg, and SV have been made to him, either on his talk page or by email (I've done both and I believe I'm not the only one). I've been tempted to think that there might be some grand conspiracy going on, such as that SV is a Wikia consultant or something like that. But, I think Kelly and others here are right is saying that it likely isn't that complicated or mysterious.

I think Jimbo's behavior during the Essjay fiasco gives a good clue as to what is really going on. Jimbo tried to hire Essjay after the scandal broke, right? I think that once Jimbo has established a friendly relationship with someone because they can help him in some way, and I think he and SV are friends by way of communication about issues in Wikipedia (remember the adage for how to succeed at work- "Solve the bosses' problems first"?), he is reluctant to take any kind of adverse action against that person unless he is compelled to do so.

..mmmm very good, Cla68. Take a look at the history of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimbo_Wales page ...or the http://en.wikipedia.org/Rachel_Marsden page (before falling out with Jimbo, that is.) Slimy was the (self-promoted?) cleaning- lady of both pages. Oh, btw; most of the Marsden page (and its talk-page) seems to have disappeared down the memory-hole (But what a come-down in this world: from Cambridge graduate student to cleaner up of the biography of your boss´s mistress )

This post has been edited by The Adversary: Thu 7th August 2008, 1:51am

I think you've passed well into the realm of conspiracy theory here, Flash. What exactly is Jimbo supposed to be getting from SlimVirgin that he couldn't get for free from any number of other admins?

If you can get the milk for free, why buy the Slim(virgin)?

I think you've passed well into the realm of conspiracy theory here, Flash. What exactly is Jimbo supposed to be getting from SlimVirgin that he couldn't get for free from any number of other admins?

Mmmm... I agree, never invent a complicated explanation when a simple one may do... but most of the admins are teenage no-hopers like Anonymous Dissident or illiterate social defectives like Phil 'Toiletface' and David Gerard. The number of competent research-capable admin is much smaller. Maybe just one!

Add to which, most of the admin spend their time abusing their marvellous new powers, and do very little content checking. Slim used to do a lot of what she called 'copy checking'.

Is Jimbo really broke?

The Register seems to think there's a million bukcs floating about unaudited...the dodgy Chief Operating Officer of Wikiland

This post has been edited by flash: Thu 7th August 2008, 11:55am

I think you've passed well into the realm of conspiracy theory here, Flash. What exactly is Jimbo supposed to be getting from SlimVirgin that he couldn't get for free from any number of other admins?

Mmmm... I agree, never invent a complicated explanation when a simple one may do... but most of the admins are teenage no-hopers like Anonymous Dissident or illiterate social defectives like Phil 'Toiletface' and David Gerard. The number of competent research-capable admin is much smaller. Maybe just one!

Jesus Flash, your crusade against AD is getting boring. AD is not the problem, SV is. AD is not an ally of SV nor has he ever been one. Therefore, stop sidetracking discussions of SV with mindless pot-shots at AD.

I think you've passed well into the realm of conspiracy theory here, Flash. What exactly is Jimbo supposed to be getting from SlimVirgin that he couldn't get for free from any number of other admins?

Mmmm... I agree, never invent a complicated explanation when a simple one may do... but most of the admins are teenage no-hopers like Anonymous Dissident or illiterate social defectives like Phil 'Toiletface' and David Gerard. The number of competent research-capable admin is much smaller. Maybe just one!

Jesus Flash, your crusade against AD is getting boring. AD is not the problem, SV is. AD is not an ally of SV nor has he ever been one. Therefore, stop sidetracking discussions of SV with mindless pot-shots at AD.

No comment on SV, but I agree about AD... distractive, unwarranted and undeserved.

The number of competent research-capable admin is much smaller. Maybe just one!

That's because admins of that calibre mostly get disillusioned and give up. There is Charles Matthews, but he's stretched himself a bit thin.

I think you've passed well into the realm of conspiracy theory here, Flash. What exactly is Jimbo supposed to be getting from SlimVirgin that he couldn't get for free from any number of other admins?

Mmmm... I agree, never invent a complicated explanation when a simple one may do... but most of the admins are teenage no-hopers like Anonymous Dissident or illiterate social defectives like Phil 'Toiletface' and David Gerard. The number of competent research-capable admin is much smaller. Maybe just one!

Jesus Flash, your crusade against AD is getting boring. AD is not the problem, SV is. AD is not an ally of SV nor has he ever been one. Therefore, stop sidetracking discussions of SV with mindless pot-shots at AD.

What's up with all the baseless attacks on AD here? He's one of the better admins, and every time someone bashes him, it's some diffless stupidity. Present some evidence to back your claim, else have a seat.