Admin watch, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes Options

[Peter Damian]

Apologies if this is already on another thread

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tony1/AdminWatch

The talk page is quite funny

[Kato]

That Tony1 (T-C-L-K-R-D) guy is a real ballbreaker but he demands respect, even from WP critics.

He doesn't give a crap about who he pisses off, because he usually seems to be in the right, and there is nothing the mandarins of Wikipedia can do about it. He's one of the only people at WP you would actually want on your staff if you were creating a credible Encyclopedia, and hence one of the only people who will not be railroaded.

I hope he causes a real stink, for the entertainment value alone.

[Son of a Yeti]

Apologies if this is already on another thread

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tony1/AdminWatch

The talk page is quite funny

Horror of horrors! What if he succeeds?

Can you imagine Wikipedia without wheel wars and rogue admins?

[Kato]

Despite a bunch of admins (led by that rather sinister busy-body MBisanz (T-C-L-K-R-D) ) trying to strangle Tony1's admin-watch scheme at birth, Tony is still beavering away at refining his project.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tony1/AdminWatch

As I've said before, if anyone can pull something like this off, that Tony1 guy is surely the most likely. He seems completely different to your average Wikipedio. Shame he hasn't become a critic yet, because we could do with someone like him on our squad.

[Peter Damian]

Despite a bunch of admins (led by that rather sinister busy-body MBisanz (T-C-L-K-R-D) ) trying to strangle Tony1's admin-watch scheme at birth, Tony is still beavering away at refining his project.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tony1/AdminWatch

As I've said before, if anyone can pull something like this off, that Tony1 guy is surely the most likely. He seems completely different to your average Wikipedio. Shame he hasn't become a critic yet, because we could do with someone like him on our squad.

Tony is a good guy who has been with the project some time. He is professional copy writer and really cares about the quality of the writing that goes into articles. Also (if I remember right) he has something on his user page about not giving a f--- about being an admin.

[Basil]

Tony is a good guy who has been with the project some time. He is professional copy writer and really cares about the quality of the writing that goes into articles. Also (if I remember right) he has something on his user page about not giving a f--- about being an admin.

I expect that will have something to do with this.

[Obesity]

I expect that will have something to do with this.

That was more than 3 years ago, and I suspect his RfA has very little to do with Tony's unwillingness to be promoted to administrator (which many have begged him to seek since then).

Tony is the project's preeminent style guru and a professional writer; he has been burned far too often by administrators who do not appreciate, understand or support the content creators with whom he works most closely.

So I doubt he feels sore about an unsuccessful RfA 3 years ago; if anything, I suspect it has more to do with his being needlessly blocked a month or two ago. More than that, though, I think Tony has simply witnessed an unacceptable amount of abuse of editors at the hands of incompetent and unhelpful administrators over several years. Apparently, he wishes to document these abuses, independent from the tiresome, moronic circus that is AN/I, which is populated and run by the very abusive figures it purports to monitor (as a side complaint, do we *really* need JzG to compulsively respond to every complaint with the childish and mocking chant of "ZOMG admin abuse". Guy, that wasn't funny the first, fortieth, or four hundredth time).

I think it's Admin Watch is a great idea, as long as it's run by Tony.

[Eva Destruction]

I expect that will have something to do with this.

That is brilliant – like Wikipedia's version of a "where are they now?" feature.

[Kato]

Scroll down the deletion debate page for Tony's comments last week, which are worth a read. He deftly tears the opposing arguments apart one by one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mis...ony1/AdminWatch

Comments by Tony1:

* It is extraordinary that a process for the independent scrutiny of admin actions in relation to the policy guidelines is sufficiently threatening to attract two attempts in one day by admins to derail it.
read on...

[Queeran]

Hey look - they had a nice pile-on on WP:ANI, followed by starting to ban people from wikipedia merely for contributing to this one. Guess it fails for the same reason anything else fails, you have to get anything with a prayer of sanctioning admins for abuse past the rest of the abusive shits. Front and center on the block, the ever-abusive dickweed JzG, and following up the equally malicious jpgordon, with an assist from Tanthalas39, who first says no policy is being breached, then comes back and declines the unblock anyways. I wonder who sent him a nice threatening, private email saying "you'd better be on board or I'll cause you trouble" - just the sort of shithead move JzG always pulls and everyone lets him get away with.

And of course, they're in full abuse mode now...

[LessHorrid vanU]

Hey look - they had a nice pile-on on WP:ANI, followed by starting to ban people from wikipedia merely for contributing to this one. Guess it fails for the same reason anything else fails, you have to get anything with a prayer of sanctioning admins for abuse past the rest of the abusive shits. Front and center on the block, the ever-abusive dickweed JzG, and following up the equally malicious jpgordon, with an assist from Tanthalas39, who first says no policy is being breached, then comes back and declines the unblock anyways. I wonder who sent him a nice threatening, private email saying "you'd better be on board or I'll cause you trouble" - just the sort of shithead move JzG always pulls and everyone lets him get away with.

And of course, they're in full abuse mode now...

I think Admin Watch has a better chance of being a useful resource without the likes of WhoWatches taking instances out of the blue and saying, "See, ADMIN ABUSE!!!" He did it with me as an example, and he wouldn't listen to any response and just re-iterated a couple of misconceptions regarding admin judgement and said me doing otherwise was abuse. Also, he didn't notify me that he was using an action of mine as an example, someone else let me know, but when he was being discussed at ANI he complained bitterly about not being notified...

I support Admin Watch as a concept, because it is true that posting stuff on Admin Noticeboards does tend to bring out a protectionist sentiment in the readership - who are largely either admins or admin wannabe's. A board where non flagged editors can co-ordinate to reveal patterns of abuse (or at least, non optimal actions) from a particular admin could be useful, providing it isn't... er... "overscrutinised" by likely subjects. It would also be more effective if it wasn't populated mostly by individuals with an anti-Admin advocacy tendency (although it should be recognised that someone with such a viewpoint is more likely to suffer from admin abuse than those who are unfortunate to catch a sysop with a grudge). In fact, I may even offer to patrol it to ensure against coercive editing if it gets to a reasonable standard (and, er, they would be happy for an admin to be so involved).

[Queeran]

What you really MEAN to say is YOU abused someone, you got caught, and rather than just fess up to it and fix your own mistake, you're a typical scumwad abuser who decided to kill the messenger.

Face facts. You made a block that wasn't in line with policy, then you admitted openly that you do this all the time by making a default "policy" to block for 31 hours as a base.

Of course, since you're an abusive jerk admin, you have no problem lying through your rotten teeth about what you did and what the situation is any more than JzG, jpgordon, or the rest of the scum do.

And then of course there's the lying scum shit going on even more right now - Black Kite lying his fucking face off claiming a commenter was a "TOR Proxy" (I call bullshit, there's no fucking proxy there, I scanned it myself and it has only one edit anyways), Scarian making threats against Malleus Fatuorum, the whole nine yards.

This instance is just another example of how you shithead lying admins cover up for each other, especially the wikilawyering bit. You don't really want to see wikipedia cleaned up, you'll never consider the possibility that you were wrong, and you don't even want to see anyone attempt to point out when another admin screwed up unless they bend down, crawl, kiss your boots, and lick something grosser first. I went through this shit when I was falsely accused of being a sockpuppet for no reason other than a jumped-up cocksucker of an admin decided they needed someone new to abuse in order to "extend" an arbcom block, I watched the same thing happen to at least a dozen other people, and of course any attempt to fix it fails miserably thanks to "people" (if you even fucking qualify as such) like you.

I call it as I see it. You don't "support" fixing the system. You're the judo arm of the misinformation operation, the Microsoft "embrace, extend, redirect" player, just as JzG is the crazy asswad with a hammer who thinks his job is to smash everything in sight.

[Black Kite]

And then of course there's the lying scum shit going on even more right now - Black Kite lying his fucking face off claiming a commenter was a "TOR Proxy" (I call bullshit, there's no fucking proxy there, I scanned it myself and it has only one edit anyways), Scarian making threats against Malleus Fatuorum, the whole nine yards.

TOR check for that IP

I've locked WhoWatches talkpage after his latest unblock rant. I don't usually do that, but this was just getting pointless, as no-one is going to unblock. He was only derailing what was previously quite a useful discussion on AdminWatch (which I don't have any objection to if it's run properly, and Tony1 is probably the person to make sure it does).

BK

This post has been edited by Black Kite: Fri 2nd January 2009, 10:48pm

[Queeran]

Quoth the lying shitfucking asswad Black Kite, "No further reason for unblock has been given, so declined per all 5 unblock requests above. Given the views in this particular "request", I am now protecting the page."

What a real surprise there - Black Kite lets slip what he's really about, which is making sure that nobody can ever question administrator actions. And of course the "tool" he refers to never returns anything but a positive, I just ran it on my own machine and it lied there too.

I guess it's true: all wikipedia admins, large and small, are nothing but abusive lying shitfuckers. The only surprise here is that he let it slip why he and all the other abusive fucks are REALLY so concerned about this and doing their best to threaten and harass people off the project and derail the rest of it to where it's going to fail just like anything else that might have actually worked.

[Peter Damian]

[ blanked - all these people, including the admins, are nutcases. Everyone on Wikipedia, including myself, is a nutcase]

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Fri 2nd January 2009, 11:17pm

[Castle Rock]

What you really MEAN to say is YOU abused someone, you got caught, and rather than just fess up to it and fix your own mistake, you're a typical scumwad abuser who decided to kill the messenger.

Face facts. You made a block that wasn't in line with policy, then you admitted openly that you do this all the time by making a default "policy" to block for 31 hours as a base.

Of course, since you're an abusive jerk admin, you have no problem lying through your rotten teeth about what you did and what the situation is any more than JzG, jpgordon, or the rest of the scum do.

And then of course there's the lying scum shit going on even more right now - Black Kite lying his fucking face off claiming a commenter was a "TOR Proxy" (I call bullshit, there's no fucking proxy there, I scanned it myself and it has only one edit anyways), Scarian making threats against Malleus Fatuorum, the whole nine yards.

This instance is just another example of how you shithead lying admins cover up for each other, especially the wikilawyering bit. You don't really want to see wikipedia cleaned up, you'll never consider the possibility that you were wrong, and you don't even want to see anyone attempt to point out when another admin screwed up unless they bend down, crawl, kiss your boots, and lick something grosser first. I went through this shit when I was falsely accused of being a sockpuppet for no reason other than a jumped-up cocksucker of an admin decided they needed someone new to abuse in order to "extend" an arbcom block, I watched the same thing happen to at least a dozen other people, and of course any attempt to fix it fails miserably thanks to "people" (if you even fucking qualify as such) like you.

I call it as I see it. You don't "support" fixing the system. You're the judo arm of the misinformation operation, the Microsoft "embrace, extend, redirect" player, just as JzG is the crazy asswad with a hammer who thinks his job is to smash everything in sight.

So that was you then? Usually when you complain about a block its because one of your trolling socks got smacked down.

[Black Kite]

Black Kite, as I remember, was the one Wales warned me off criticising (private email). He contributed to my RFAR, talking about some evidence againts Phdarts (an anti-pedophile editor I had defended). Later, on this forum, he admitted he knew nothing about Phdart's editing. Just indef blocked because he was told to. Right? Do you have children, Black Kite?

Hmm, I think you need to go and read that conversation again. I do have children as it happens - but that doesn't mean I blocked Phdarts for his views, because ... er ... it wasn't me that blocked him....

And of course the "tool" he refers to never returns anything but a positive, I just ran it on my own machine and it lied there too.

Really? For any interested observers, running the TOR check (here) on any random IP will prove you wrong (again) quite quickly there.

This post has been edited by Black Kite: Fri 2nd January 2009, 11:26pm

[Queeran]

I don't have "trolling socks", or any "socks" for that matter except the nice woolen ones I put on my feet before inserting my feet into my shoes.

So I guess you can just bite me, shitboy.

[GlassBeadGame]

A thread discussing a Wikipedia users attempt at monitoring/documenting abuse is once again spiraling down into revisiting complaints by offended Wikipedians and defensive whining on the part of Admins. All of which is tedious. This should be addressed on Wikipedia itself, with the meta-aspects and prospects or limits of reform discussed here. But that is not possible because Wikipedia is so fundamentally dysfunctional that Wikipedians are not even capable of conducting the discussion on their own website. So feel free to have at it here but please at least ask yourself why you need have the discussion here. It is a community so FUBAR that not just the dissidents, but the police too need to seek asylum in order to speak out.

[Black Kite]

Strangely I tend to call bullshit as I find it, but if you want to characterise that as "defensive whining" then so be it *shrug*. I would've thought more to the point was that what was potentially a useful discussion (on AdminWatch) which I'd guess was of interest to the assembled masses here, was getting bogged down by our footwear-related friend.

BK