Shoemaker's Holiday flames out Options

[CharlotteWebb]

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.

There's one person you forgot to mention, but whom I'm sure would appreciate a similar gesture of good faith. ☢

[Random832]

My bad habit of editing my posts to add additional points has caught up to me. I'm sorry if anything anyone responded to was lost. (does anyone know if prior versions of posts are recoverable?)

[A Horse With No Name]

*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.

Horsey may be horny, but Horsey ain't a slut. Horsey is very particularly about where Horsey plants his pole - Horsey is looking for the gates of heaven, not any open door.

(Why is Horsey using the third person to describe himself? Horsey's "I" key is still working on Horsey's keyboard. Hmmm. Horsey is confused. )

[Wiki Witch of the West]

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.

Weird. Gonna fix a rare steak tonight and chew on that. What do you actually see as similar?

"Reprehensible techniques"? Please explain. Seriously.

She and I happened to be right about Poetlister more than a year apart (hi there dude, I know you're back but ain't gettin' mah panties in a wad about it this time). And after locking horns with SV in a serious way over the disruptive editing guideline (which I still think she gutted and ignored evidence, then walked away from the aftermath) I stood up for her at Slashdot when the absurd meme about her being an MI5 agent surfaced. More a matter of being a decent human being than anything else then, because there was a clothespin on my nose while I did that. Was really wishing she had taken COFS to arbitration as followup to the guideline change she had insisted upon.

(In case you're not up on the background, COFS was the third of four WP Scientology arbitrations. I believe it could have been avoided if the guideline hadn't been changed per her insistence, and my ED biography got started and expanded in a major way hours after two of my evidence posts to that case. Can't prove whether that's cause and effect or coincidence, but to this day rather resentful about the matter).

So what, stylistically, is similar? SV and I happen to wear a matching set of X chromosomes. What else? If there's a genuine misunderstanding here, let's clear it up.

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.

There's one person you forgot to mention, but whom I'm sure would appreciate a similar gesture of good faith. ☢

Burntsauce? Would check with Alison about that. Standard Offer also applies.

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?

I'm a female with blue eyes and long honey blonde hair who's size four, and looks 28 at age 41. Do you really imagine I need your assistance getting laid?

This post has been edited by Wiki Witch of the West: Mon 23rd November 2009, 7:11pm

[A Horse With No Name]

I'm a female with blue eyes and long honey blonde hair who's size four, and looks 28 at age 41. Do you really imagine I need your assistance getting laid?

Looks 28?

[GlassBeadGame]

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

Because examining you through the lens of your monster-ness is productive to understanding Wikipedians. Monster = Distortion + Display. Defines you, and many Wikipedian's, nicely. Certainly makes you like Shankbone, Gerard, JzG, Wales.

But it does not make you like SlimVirgin, who has a element of concealment in her character, which you lack. She is much more complex than you.

[Wiki Witch of the West]

I'm a female with blue eyes and long honey blonde hair who's size four, and looks 28 at age 41. Do you really imagine I need your assistance getting laid?

Looks 28?

Taken last year on my fortieth birthday. Shrug, runs in the family. Most of us get carded well into our thirties.

This post has been edited by Wiki Witch of the West: Mon 23rd November 2009, 7:23pm

[GlassBeadGame]

I'm a female with blue eyes and long honey blonde hair who's size four, and looks 28 at age 41. Do you really imagine I need your assistance getting laid?

Looks 28?

Taken last year on my fortieth birthday. Shrug, runs in the family. Most of us get carded well into our thirties.

That's interesting. I don't make comments about negative aspects of people's appearance, but your image of yourself is profoundly distorted.

Put that on the white board, too.

[A Horse With No Name]

Taken last year on my fortieth birthday. Shrug, runs in the family. Most of us get carded well into our thirties.

Carded for what, delusional behavior? That doesn't look 28 to me..

This is Horsey's idea of 28! Grrrrrrrrrrr!

This post has been edited by A Horse With No Name: Mon 23rd November 2009, 7:30pm

[Wiki Witch of the West]

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

Because examining you through the lens of your monster-ness is productive to understanding Wikipedians. Monster = Distortion + Display. Defines you, and many Wikipedian's, nicely. Certainly makes you like Shankbone, Gerard, JzG, Wales.

But it does not make you like SlimVirgin, who has a element of concealment in her character, which you lack. She is much more complex than you.

David Shankbone: I don't agree with everything he does, but I do happen to believe he became the target of an honest-to-goodness stalker. That trumps everything else in my book. Expressing this with due respect especially toward Firey Angel, with whom I sympathize and wish there were a good solution for. Really wishing I knew a solution for the latter dilemma.

David Gerard: someone who's usually impressed me as better in the concrete than in the abstract. David and I have polite differences of opinion about the long term effectiveness of "liberating" media content from museums. It surprised me that he still came quite close to defending Mantanmoreland very late in the game after the abusive socking was obvious to nearly everyone. Nonetheless, the guy's heart seems to be in the right place. He was the only one on the arbitration list who took my evidence about Jossi seriously (or even appeared to read it) before--in the third relevant arbitration case--I finally walked the tightrope of publishing a major part of the evidence onsite. Major security concerns there regarding the editor(s) Jossi had been targeting. If the current and active arbs had paid attention to David the Jossi issue might have resolved months sooner.

Jimbo? A much nicer person than I am. I mean that sincerely and take it any way you like.

Taken last year on my fortieth birthday. Shrug, runs in the family. Most of us get carded well into our thirties.

Carded for what, delusional behavior? That doesn't look 28 to me..

This is Horsey's idea of 28! Grrrrrrrrrrr!

Sweet, dude. And you pretended to be a pastor?

This post has been edited by Wiki Witch of the West: Mon 23rd November 2009, 7:48pm

[dogbiscuit]

Taken last year on my fortieth birthday. Shrug, runs in the family. Most of us get carded well into our thirties.

Carded for what, delusional behavior? That doesn't look 28 to me..

This is Horsey's idea of 28! Grrrrrrrrrrr!

...and time for frivolity and delusion, but not to answer any serious criticism... Slim doesn't do frivolity, but otherwise the same diversionary techniques. Myself, I'll stick with lusting after Rachel Stevens.

[GlassBeadGame]

David Shankbone: I don't agree with everything he does, but I do happen to believe he became the target of an honest-to-goodness stalker. That trumps everything else in my book. Expressing this with due respect especially toward Firey Angel, with whom I sympathize and wish there were a good solution for. Really wishing I knew a solution for the latter dilemma.

David Gerard: someone who's usually impressed me as better in the concrete than in the abstract. David and I have polite differences of opinion about the long term effectiveness of "liberating" media content from museums. It surprised me that he still came quite close to defending Mantanmoreland very late in the game after the abusive socking was obvious to nearly everyone. Nonetheless, the guy's heart seems to be in the right place. He was the only one on the arbitration list who took my evidence about Jossi seriously (or even appeared to read it) before--in the third relevant arbitration case--I finally walked the tightrope of publishing a major part of the evidence onsite. Major security concerns there regarding the editor(s) Jossi had been targeting. If the current and active arbs had paid attention to David the Jossi issue might have resolved that issue months sooner.

Jimbo? A much nicer person than I am. I mean that sincerely and take it any way you like.

It's like reading a Basque World Map.

[A Horse With No Name]

Sweet, dude. And you pretended to be a pastor?

Quite successfully, too.

But if I could be a clergyman, I want to be like this reverend:

[Somey]

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?

Well... those things might be thought of as "piling on," but what I really meant was that you haven't gone out of your way here to point out systemic (or endemic) flaws in the WP models of governance or even content development, the latter of which I would consider you something of an expert on. So the assumption tends to be that you don't see anything wrong with those things, and that the current troubles (if they can be called that) are simply due to "having the wrong people on board." The further implication being that the "right people" are just waiting in the wings to take over, right?

I guess it might be nicer if some of us would cut down on the nastier comments about you, but alas, most of them have had WP accounts at some point in the past.

[One]

Lotta high-scoring snark going on here. Not interested in that, but could someone point me in the direction of this supposedly important "JB" thing?

[Wiki Witch of the West]

Taken last year on my fortieth birthday. Shrug, runs in the family. Most of us get carded well into our thirties.

Carded for what, delusional behavior? That doesn't look 28 to me..

This is Horsey's idea of 28! Grrrrrrrrrrr!

...and time for frivolity and delusion, but not to answer any serious criticism... Slim doesn't do frivolity, but otherwise the same diversionary techniques. Myself, I'll stick with lusting after Rachel Stevens.

Doing photography on a serious level develops a serious respect for models. Modeling is a talent and an underrated one. People who see my albums usually ask "Where are you?" and get the answer "The one behind the camera." I've got some talent for still photography, much less for videography, and negligible for being in front of a camera. Usually I make myself scarce when someone else wields a camera. But that doesn't negate the plain fact about a quirk of genetics. Shortly before my father went to work for NASA he had a university faculty position and took some of his students out for drinks after class. They all thought it was a hoot that he was the only one the bartender carded.

Sweet, dude. And you pretended to be a pastor?

Quite successfully, too.

But if I could be a clergyman, I want to be like this reverend:

rofl, I loved that sketch.

Lotta high-scoring snark going on here. Not interested in that, but could someone point me in the direction of this supposedly important "JB" thing?

JB196 = Looch.

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?

Well... those things might be thought of as "piling on," but what I really meant was that you haven't gone out of your way here to point out systemic (or endemic) flaws in the WP models of governance or even content development, the latter of which I would consider you something of an expert on. So the assumption tends to be that you don't see anything wrong with those things, and that the current troubles (if they can be called that) are simply due to "having the wrong people on board." The further implication being that the "right people" are just waiting in the wings to take over, right?

I guess it might be nicer if some of us would cut down on the nastier comments about you, but alas, most of them have had WP accounts at some point in the past.

Consider what's come this direction: if I answer every snark I'm egotistical, if I don't I'm blowing people off. Kinda throws the focus off from the reviewing that normally takes place here (and yes in principle am down with that).

First there was the ritual hazing thread, now the get to know you thread. Some of the WR regulars will decide I'm worth talking to, and others will still behave as if I'm the thing they used to have nightmares about when they were six years old.

"Mom! There's a Durova under my bed!"

This is shakedown time. No worries. The people who want to get to know the human being, will. Then we can get back to WR'ing.

This post has been edited by Wiki Witch of the West: Mon 23rd November 2009, 7:58pm

[A Horse With No Name]

Usually I make myself scarce when someone else wields a camera.

Shortly before my father went to work for NASA he had a university faculty position and took some of his students out for drinks after class. They all thought it was a hoot that he was the only one the bartender carded.

A professor who gets his students drunk? Where did your dad teach, Faber College?

This post has been edited by A Horse With No Name: Mon 23rd November 2009, 8:06pm

[Somey]

David Gerard: someone who's usually impressed me as better in the concrete than in the abstract... (snip) He was the only one on the arbitration list who took my evidence about Jossi seriously (or even appeared to read it) before--in the third relevant arbitration case--I finally walked the tightrope of publishing a major part of the evidence onsite. Major security concerns there regarding the editor(s) Jossi had been targeting. If the current and active arbs had paid attention to David the Jossi issue might have resolved months sooner.

That's not inconsistent with Dave's original purpose in becoming a WP high mucky-muck, though, which was to "keep the Scientologists from taking over." As such he could be expected to oppose most forms of abusive religious-cult activity on WP - something I also respect him for, up to a point. That point being the one at which he begins to accuse innocents of being involved so that he can railroad them into bans and other kinds of nastiness...

The reason he supported Mantanmoreland/Weiss, in case you hadn't yet made the connection, is because Gary Weiss was opposing Patrick Byrne and Judd Bagley, who are both Mormons. The LDS church has grown to the point where it can hardly be called a "cult" anymore, but there are still many cult-like aspects to its belief system, and they do have quite an active presence on WP, which I suspect Dave finds rather objectionable. However, he probably feels compelled to hold his tongue because of Michael Snow and other prominent Mormons in the WP hierarchy.

[A Horse With No Name]

Some of the WR regulars will decide I'm worth talking to, and others will still behave as if I'm the thing they used to have nightmares about when they were six years old.

"Mom! There's a Durova under my bed!"

To which Mom says: "Junior, do something productive -- go on Wikipedia and categorize some of those photographs that nice Mr. Shankbone uploaded to the site."

[Somey]

Consider what's come this direction: if I answer every snark I'm egotistical, if I don't I'm blowing people off.

Well... as someone who has most definitely accused you of being egotistical in the past, I still believe that's somewhat justifiable regardless of whether or not you answer snarky comments, or defend yourself in general. It's due more to your history of imposing yourself into leadership roles and overstating the importance of your contributions (including negative contributions) to various initiatives, as you did in the Alkivar ArbCom case, IMO.

To some extent, I'd say your best approach would be to actually embrace your own egotism, admit that it exists, and essentially just go with it. The ability to laugh at oneself takes the edge off of characteristics that others generally consider unpleasant - in my case, for example, I admit that I behave like a know-it-all, and since I can't actually control it, I manage to get along with people by making fun of myself. (I am, in fact, a complete idiot.)

As for the "blowing people off" part, often that's two sides of the same coin. Egotism implies the existence of an ego facade, which I suspect is quite strong in your case. People don't defend their own egotism in itself, but they must defend the facade, or risk loss of self-esteem. The stronger the facade is, the more likely you are to ignore attempts to break it down; in that respect I actually envy you. Unfortunately, the more you expose your ego in public, the more people will try to destroy the facade - "the harder they come, the harder they fall," as they say. In some respects this is tantamount to my suggesting that you reduce your public visibility, but to be fair, I generally suggest that to almost everyone.