Shoemaker's Holiday flames out Options

[A Horse With No Name]

Here's some advice how to become a better Machavellian: accept the offer first, get the dude unblocked, wait an interval, and then lay into me.

You want to get laid?

[dogbiscuit]

Yeah, but the weakness of WR criticism has always been quality control. Notice how the spurious claim that I was doing original research went completely unchallenged here, even though the correction was actually done by Roger Davies and the Signpost had run a report on the Library of Congress's confirmation.

And the weakness of Wikipedians is that they never answer the question, but go off into the deep blue yonder.

Or was that, "Yeah",

You are entirely correct, I have no answer, Wikipedian processes and those who operate them are particularly pants and there is nothing to be done about it so there is no need to discuss it further.

I'll go with that unless you care to refute it in any detail.

[Wiki Witch of the West]

This post indicates just how clueless you are about what constitutes a significant critique. The result is that you have found yet another venue to embarrass yourself

Actually it's more of a segue into my opinion that part of the social glue which holds WR together has to do with the anthropological concept of the social construction of the Other.

You've spent quite a few posts calling me monstrous, either directly or indirectly. Why not just put me on ignore?

In order to play Saint George it's necessary to cast someone as The Dragon. You pop up to provide reminders of The Dragon role whenever I start to seem less worthy of skewering.

So sometimes I play along with the role in jest, and you accuse me of trolling.

[Somey]

Actually it's more of a segue into my opinion that part of the social glue which holds WR together has to do with the anthropological concept of the social construction of the Other.

I thought that was a sociological construction of an existential concept?

German existentialism, to boot.* That's supposed to be the really serious kind...

So sometimes I play along with the role in jest, and you accuse me of trolling.

Perhaps this is unfair, but you're not really here to provide critique, right? And defenses of Wikipedia can always be posted on Wikipedia itself. Besides, Mr. BeadGame believes (with some justification) that as a defender of WP's social-libertarian "allow anything" ethos, you contribute in some way to the corruption of the world's youth, which he's less likely to forgive than, for example, I am - I believe that the world's youth are already hopelessly corrupted, so I'm less likely to make an issue of it.


* Though I guess Jean Paul Sartre is the one who really popularized the whole thing.

[Jon Awbrey]

Actually it's more of a segue into my opinion that part of the social glue which holds WR together has to do with the anthropological concept of the social construction of the Other.

I thought that was a sociological construction of an existential concept?

German existentialism, to boot. That's supposed to be the really serious kind …

So sometimes I play along with the role in jest, and you accuse me of trolling.

Perhaps this is unfair, but you're not really here to provide critique, right? And defenses of Wikipedia can always be posted on Wikipedia itself. Besides, Mr. BeadGame believes (with some justification) that as a defender of WP's social-libertarian "allow anything" ethos, you contribute in some way to the corruption of the world's youth, which he's less likely to forgive than, for example, I am — I believe that the world's youth are already hopelessly corrupted, so I'm less likely to make an issue of it.

Good Grief — you put some Wiki-Twit on your Ignore List, and you still have to read their Ignoramities when someybuddy else quotes 'em.

Well, what the hell, just from my sampling of that involuntary samplitude, it looks like it's time to create a sooper-dooper Wiki-Pulp-It Subforum where Wiki-Preachers can get on their Soapboxes and their High Hobby Horses, as the case may be, and lecture us Unwashed Revuers on The Fine Art of Dehumanizing Da Udder — so's maybe we can finally start measuring up to the Wikipedia Standud of Civility.

There's that Orange again …

Ja Ja

[Wiki Witch of the West]

Actually it's more of a segue into my opinion that part of the social glue which holds WR together has to do with the anthropological concept of the social construction of the Other.

I thought that was a sociological construction of an existential concept?

German existentialism, to boot. That's supposed to be the really serious kind...

Perhaps originally. What I have in mind is the practical application of it in social sciences. To quote a few lines:

It has been used in social science to understand the processes by which societies and groups exclude 'Others' whom they want to subordinate or who do not fit into their society... Othering helps distinguish between home and away, the uncertain or certain. It often involves the demonization and dehumanization of groups, which further justifies attempts to civilize and exploit these 'inferior' others.

So sometimes I play along with the role in jest, and you accuse me of trolling.

Perhaps this is unfair, but you're not really here to provide critique, right? And defenses of Wikipedia can always be posted on Wikipedia itself. Besides, Mr. BeadGame believes (with some justification) that as a defender of WP's social-libertarian "allow anything" ethos, you contribute in some way to the corruption of the world's youth, which he's less likely to forgive than, for example, I am - I believe that the world's youth are already hopelessly corrupted, so I'm less likely to make an issue of it.

Perhaps you've been stalking the wrong posts, Somey. I'm one of Wikipedia's most vocal critics of the Arbitration Committee--at least the 2008 and 2009 editions of it. Remember that part of the reason I joined WR was because I thought Lara was getting scapegoated.

Of course I'm not as down on the place as you are. But part of the reason I'm not more popular around there is because I do call out problems in the place, in its mechanism, and particularly in some but not all of the people who run it. Remember the evidence I gave against Jossi? Remember how, once I saw good reason to believe that Mantanmoreland was devious I did a 180 on his issue?

A couple of months after I became an administrator I nearly joined WR. Had the form out, half filled, and then wondered whether enough of the people here would really hold a dialog that was worth the time.

[Random832]

Five messages since then and no response. Why are you willing to respond to everyone except me? Why do you hate me so much, Durova?

This post has been edited by Random832: Mon 23rd November 2009, 6:32pm

[Wiki Witch of the West]

Five messages since then and no response. Why are you willing to respond to everyone except me? Why do you hate me so much, Durova?

I don't actually hate you. Never thought about you much until JB's thread. You made a terrible impression.

[A Horse With No Name]

Five messages since then and no response. Why are you willing to respond to everyone except me? Why do you hate me so much, Durova?

She didn't acknowledge my smutty comment, either. Don't feel so bad, Random -- I like you. In fact, you get a big Horsey kiss! Mwah! Mwah! Mwah!

[Wiki Witch of the West]

Five messages since then and no response. Why are you willing to respond to everyone except me? Why do you hate me so much, Durova?

She didn't acknowledge my smutty comment, either. Don't feel so bad, Random -- I like you. In fact, you get a big Horsey kiss! Mwah! Mwah! Mwah!

Ooh, which smutty comment? Must've missed it.

[Random832]

Five messages since then and no response. Why are you willing to respond to everyone except me? Why do you hate me so much, Durova?

I don't actually hate you. Never thought about you much until JB's thread. You made a terrible impression.

You didn't even READ my explanation last week. I'll post it here again. If you have forgotten what you said, you can refer to your own PM box, or I can forward you a copy, or you can give me permission to release the whole exchange.

----

(This in response to your suggestion that I should have emailed you, and that my supposedly waiting until you offered to unban someone was evidence of bad faith.)

I don't generally do personal email - it honestly hadn't occured to me. I'm just more comfortable on forums and such. To make one thing clear - I wasn't "waiting" for anything - my questions were pretty much off the cuff. As for the circumstances that led to me thinking about it and putting together some questions at that time as opposed to any other particular time... well it comes down to A) you were around B) the topic had already been brought up by someone else, and you seemed to be accepting questions [compare your response to TFA on the FBI stuff].

(and this in response to your claim that i was willing to "push aside" his chances at being unbanned to "take a dig at" you)

Nothing was being pushed aside - the forum has room for lots of different topics to be discussed at the same time, and if a tangential discussion grows too large the moderators can split it to a separate topic afterwards. Maybe that's something I take for granted that isn't quite as obvious to someone who doesn't spend as much time on this forum.

And anyway, as I see it, the only way it could possibly have impacted his chances would be if it (unforeseeably) caused you, personally, to become so offended as to break off all communication. And that's in your hands, not mine.

----

The above was written, in general, in response to you asking for an explanation. You responded by saying you didn't even bother to read it.

----

I tried to help you by putting together a coherent list of questions for you to answer to clear things up about something that had been brought up by several people who were not me (and none of whom you reacted nearly as badly as to me), and which clearly isn't going to just fade away without clearing things up, and you responded by attacking me.

To think I even apologized [not that you read it] for repeating Somey's characterization of you as egotistical.

This post has been edited by Random832: Mon 23rd November 2009, 6:48pm

[Wiki Witch of the West]

Okay Random, we got off on the wrong foot. Publish my comments if you want to become enemies. If you do I'll be kinda sorry I didn't use any juicy expletives like I did with Shoemaker.

Bottom line from this perspective is that I've always really thought JB was sincere. First got to know Sir Fozzie during the JB thing, tried to reach out to JB. Apparently JB's been silent on WR for a really long time until he started the recent thread. Maybe you didn't realize it, but I'd actually like to bring both him and Eyrian back if they want to return to WP. Discovered after Eyrian's siteban that s/he had been doing good work in an area that needs more good editors (textile arts). Big misunderstanding there. Genuine olive branch.

Sometimes in life, it's all a matter of timing.

This post has been edited by Wiki Witch of the West: Mon 23rd November 2009, 6:49pm

[gomi]

Five messages since then and no response. Why are you willing to respond to everyone except me? Why do you hate me so much, Durova?

I don't actually hate you. Never thought about you much until JB's thread. You made a terrible impression.

You didn't even READ my explanation last week. I'll post it here again. .... I tried to help you by putting together a coherent list of questions for you to answer ... and you responded by attacking me.

I know you know this Random, but the modus operandi of Durova, Slim, and the worst of the Wikipidiots is exactly this: they select carefully what they respond to, what they acknowledge, and how the debate -- such as it is -- is framed. On-wiki, if you call them on this, it's a "personal attack" or some such.

Here, at least, we can say what they are: manipulative, lying, damaged, unstable, deceitful, intellectually-dishonest sacks of shit.

Seriously, it is ironic that the better approach than rational argument is to put them on the defensive, if you can, and over-the-top invective sometimes works, but other approaches are probably better, being less transparent.

[Random832]

(I apologize for the formatting problems, I accidentally deleted the content while editing)

QUOTE(Wiki Witch of the West @ Mon 23rd November 2009, 6:35pm) *

QUOTE(Random832 @ Mon 23rd November 2009, 6:31pm) *

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sun 22nd November 2009, 8:59pm) *


Five messages since then and no response. Why are you willing to respond to everyone except me? Why do you hate me so much, Durova?

I don't actually hate you. Never thought about you much until JB's thread. You made a terrible impression.


You didn't even READ my explanation last week. I'll post it here again. If you have forgotten what you said, you can refer to your own PM box, or I can forward you a copy, or you can give me permission to release the whole exchange.

----

(This in response to your suggestion that I should have emailed you, and that my supposedly waiting until you offered to unban someone was evidence of bad faith.)
QUOTE
I don't generally do personal email - it honestly hadn't occured to me. I'm just more comfortable on forums and such. To make one thing clear - I wasn't "waiting" for anything - my questions were pretty much off the cuff. As for the circumstances that led to me thinking about it and putting together some questions at that time as opposed to any other particular time... well it comes down to A) you were around B) the topic had already been brought up by someone else, and you seemed to be accepting questions [compare your response to TFA on the FBI stuff].


(and this in response to your claim that i was willing to "push aside" his chances at being unbanned to "take a dig at" you)
QUOTE
Nothing was being pushed aside - the forum has room for lots of different topics to be discussed at the same time, and if a tangential discussion grows too large the moderators can split it to a separate topic afterwards. Maybe that's something I take for granted that isn't quite as obvious to someone who doesn't spend as much time on this forum.

And anyway, as I see it, the only way it could possibly have impacted his chances would be if it (unforeseeably) caused you, personally, to become so offended as to break off all communication. And that's in your hands, not mine.


----

The above was written, in general, in response to you asking for an explanation. You responded by saying you didn't even bother to read it.

----

I tried to help you by putting together a coherent list of questions for you to answer to clear things up about something that had been brought up by several people who were not me (and none of whom you reacted nearly as badly as to me), and which clearly isn't going to just fade away without clearing things up, and you responded by attacking me.

To think I even apologized [not that you read it] for repeating Somey's characterization of you as egotistical.

Bottom line from this perspective is that I've always really thought JB was sincere.

JB's sincerity is not being questioned by anyone.

I still don't understand how you thought my posting what I did in that thread [much less posting a different thread about a different topic in a forum where dozens of different topics are discussed simultaneously every day] could have caused any problem for him.

This post has been edited by Random832: Mon 23rd November 2009, 6:59pm

[Jon Awbrey]

Choose One:

• EITHER
  Post the other half of the blasted conversation —
• OR
  Get A Room !!!

Jon

[A Horse With No Name]

I have not and will not without your permission, but I do have to ask which of your words you are so ashamed of as to consider allowing others to see what you wrote to be an attack on you.

Speaking as her proxy, I give you permission. Go ahead and publish -- and I want rights to the Spanish-language market.

[Wiki Witch of the West]

Choose One:

• EITHER
• Post the other half of the blasted conversation —
• OR
• Get A Room !!!

Jon

Sorry Jon, but check the comment underneath my avatar. I really don't want to see your fly or Random's.

[dogbiscuit]

Five messages since then and no response. Why are you willing to respond to everyone except me? Why do you hate me so much, Durova?

She didn't acknowledge my smutty comment, either. Don't feel so bad, Random -- I like you. In fact, you get a big Horsey kiss! Mwah! Mwah! Mwah!

She has given tacit agreement to my analysis of her position* though.






*Given your frame of mind, I hope such a double entendre of the weakest kind hasn't sent you into horsey reveries of her and Jimbo.

[Wiki Witch of the West]

Five messages since then and no response. Why are you willing to respond to everyone except me? Why do you hate me so much, Durova?

I don't actually hate you. Never thought about you much until JB's thread. You made a terrible impression.

You didn't even READ my explanation last week. I'll post it here again. .... I tried to help you by putting together a coherent list of questions for you to answer ... and you responded by attacking me.

I know you know this Random, but the modus operandi of Durova, Slim, and the worst of the Wikipidiots is exactly this: they select carefully what they respond to, what they acknowledge, and how the debate -- such as it is -- is framed. On-wiki, if you call them on this, it's a "personal attack" or some such.

Here, at least, we can say what they are: manipulative, lying, damaged, unstable, deceitful, intellectually-dishonest sacks of shit.

Seriously, it is ironic that the better approach than rational argument is to put them on the defensive, if you can, and over-the-top invective sometimes works, but other approaches are probably better, being less transparent.

Gomi, what's with this meme that links me to SlimVirgin at every available opportunity? She and I agree with each other about once every solar eclipse.

Five messages since then and no response. Why are you willing to respond to everyone except me? Why do you hate me so much, Durova?

She didn't acknowledge my smutty comment, either. Don't feel so bad, Random -- I like you. In fact, you get a big Horsey kiss! Mwah! Mwah! Mwah!

She has given tacit agreement to my analysis of her position* though.

*Given your frame of mind, I hope such a double entendre of the weakest kind hasn't sent you into horsey reveries of her and Jimbo.

Dogbuiscuit, that earns you a pat on the head and this visual.

[gomi]

Gomi, what's with this meme that links me to SlimVirgin at every available opportunity? She and I agree with each other about once every solar eclipse.

Simple. You argue the same way, using the same reprehensible techniques. That you disagree on the effluvium of Wikipedia content is, to me, utterly immaterial. You two are cut from the same cloth.