Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ Bureaucracy _ Thogo blocks Thekohser on Meta
Posted by: thekohser
This http://www.wikipediareview.com/Image:Thogo.jpg blocked me http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AThekohser on the Meta project.
That was disproportionate and rude!
It all was prompted by a http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Public_speakers&diff=prev&oldid=1641779 from Gerard "Hoi!" Meijjeisensenn. (Since he can't ever seem to spell my name or nickname correctly.)
Gerard threatened me with a "blog", as you see... so maybe Thogo got it lost in translation and thought Gerard meant a "block".
Posted by: Shalom
This http://www.wikipediareview.com/Image:Thogo.jpg blocked me http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AThekohser on the Meta project.
That was disproportionate and rude!
It all was prompted by a http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Public_speakers&diff=prev&oldid=1641779 from Gerard "Hoi!" Meijjeisensenn. (Since he can't ever seem to spell my name or nickname correctly.)
Gerard threatened me with a "blog", as you see... so maybe Thogo got it lost in translation and thought Gerard meant a "block".
Epic win!
Of course the other ones you could remove and get away with it, but Jimbo Wales and Angela Beesley? That's a provocation! Of course, the general logic is on your side, but to exclude Jimbo as a public speaker ignores the fact that he has actually done a public speech on behalf of Wikipedia in the last 6 months (for the NYC meetup).
Posted by: Sarcasticidealist
Wow - I ranked Gerard fairly high in the Board election (though lower than Kohs), but he's completely out of line here. I think there's a case to be made for http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=1641844&oldid=1641832, but http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=1641783&oldid=1641771 is just indefensible.
Posted by: thekohser
Wow - I ranked Gerard fairly high in the Board election (though lower than Kohs), but he's completely out of line here. I think there's a case to be made for http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=1641844&oldid=1641832, but http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=1641783&oldid=1641771 is just indefensible.
And Gerard struck http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=next&oldid=1641855, and http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=next&oldid=1642221. (Aren't there rules against that?) And he zapped me via private e-mail, too!
I seem to have really touched a nerve -- Gerard doesn't want me speaking publicly on the subject of the Wikimedia Foundation, its projects, or even wikis in general. After all, I might say something REALLY SUBVERSIVE:
http://wikipediareview.com/images/3/3d/AACP_Pres...n_Wikipedia Review.ppt
Posted by: LaraLove
Props to Majorly.
Greg, in your entry on the public speakers page, you should change your first name to your last, when protection lifts of course. Make it more formal.
Posted by: Kato
Greg got dissed by Yann (T-C-L-K-R-D)
, that moustachioed guy with the picture of another moustachioed guy behind him, on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Public_speakers!
Also on the talk page, an editor who put himself forward to speak in Asia declares that Wikiprojects have been "the biggest waste of time in my life" and asks to be removed from the list. He's left http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Waerth as well. Great stuff.
Oh good grief... there's Shankbone again. 
Hornets nest etc.
Posted by: Cla68
Greg got dissed by Yann (T-C-L-K-R-D) , that moustachioed guy with the picture of another moustachioed guy behind him, on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Public_speakers!
Also on the talk page, an editor who put himself forward to speak in Asia declares that Wikiprojects have been "the biggest waste of time in my life" and asks to be removed from the list. He's left http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Waerth as well. Great stuff.
Oh good grief... there's Shankbone again.
Hornets nest etc.
That talk page and Waerth's rant are two of the funniest things I've read on an "official" Wikimedia page in a long time. Great work guys. GerardM appears to be a natural http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manzai#Boke_and_tsukkomi. To be clear, I'm not saying that Greg is the boke.
Posted by: dogbiscuit
Although Greg delights in being disruptive to make a point (and I can understand how that gets under people's skin) I think it is indicative of Wikipedia that they are incredibly sensitive to any sort of criticism. I think it is an indication not only of the immaturity of Wikipedia, but of the immaturity of Wikipedians.
Although there is a healthy cynicism as to whether it can be achieved, I think Greg is in the heap of reformists who believe in Wikipedia to the extent that it could be reasonably competent given the right support. The teenage immaturity of assuming that the Wikiverse is perfection and those who are not True Believers is a major block to Wikipedia gaining respect and credibility.
The acid test for Wikipedia in my book is in the implementation of flagged revisions and whether, given a basic software tool, Wikipedia can evolve a process that can turn the hotch-potch of different qualities of articles into something that resembles something trustworthy and ethical. (I seem to recall that the cast of Eastenders had a hit with Something Out of Nothing, so it can be done).
Posted by: EricBarbour
Good move. Several parties were edit warring who ought to know better. While the protection is in place, I suggest a discussion about the goal of the page and the processes for maintaining and updating it as I outlined above. ++Lar: t/c 21:10, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
When you had followed this fracas, you would have found that thekosher has been blocked for threatening behaviour. Also, it does little good to block in the first place when multiple admins take offence. Thanks, GerardM 21:07, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
You were edit warring too. ++Lar: t/c 21:10, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Indeed - perhaps I was too circumspect initially. — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:14, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Snigger.
Posted by: thekohser
And Gerard "Hoi!" Meijssen http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=next&oldid=1642490, even 8 hours after page protection and several rebukes on his Talk page.
I'm the one who got a 24-hour block, though.
Great points above, Dogbiscuit.
Posted by: Moulton
There it is again — disappointment, disillusionment, frustration, cynicism, and (for some) a tinge of bitterness at having wasted so much time and energy on a failing system.
Posted by: Abd
But I'll answer very briefly: to an off-wiki structure which will respect their experience and value their time, not waste it in yet more battles and endless discussions that go nowhere or worse.
Posted by: Moulton
Anyone who is seriously interested in writing a definitive encyclopedia article on a subject which they have bothered to research would simply post it on Google Knol and be done with it.
Wikipedia remains as a battlefield for those who are more interested in fighting battles than in writing definitive articles of an encyclopedic nature.
Posted by: LaraLove
Good to know Meta has its share of shitty admins who need their bit yanked from them.
Not even looking at this from the Kohs perspective, just the fact that an admin is continuing to edit war through protection... stupid, stupid, stupid.
Someone should block his ass for a good 48 hours.
Posted by: LaraLove
Haha, and Waerth's contribution really was like Eeyore dropping in during a nice honey lunch to whine about the 100 Acre Woods being a horrible place to live. This after having not come out of his little shaky shelter to talk to anyone for months.
Posted by: thekohser
I have to say that Lar and Majorly (Lar, though, with measurably more effort exerted against the crazy-talkers) are really shooting straight on this debate, and while it may damage them in the WikiMMORPG, I'd like to offer my public thanks here.
It's really quite funny how a page that was getting one to three page views per day is suddenly Grand Central Station for Meta drama.
Anyway, I'm blocked now, indefinitely, by some French PhD.
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
That talk page and Waerth's rant are two of the funniest things I've read on an "official" Wikimedia page in a long time.
I didn't find anything amusing about his statement. Looks like half of it is sad-but-true and the other half is sad-if-true.
Posted by: Milton Roe
Haha, and Waerth's contribution really was like Eeyore dropping in during a nice honey lunch to whine about the 100 Acre Woods being a horrible place to live. This after having not come out of his little shaky shelter to talk to anyone for months.
What do you expect? It's the future. The Hundred Acre Wood is rapidly being replaced by a suburb in East Sussex.
Posted by: Moulton
That does it. I'm swearing off French Fries until you get unblocked.
Posted by: Apathetic
Doesn't this belong in 'Support Group' ?
That does it. I'm swearing off French Fries until you get unblocked.
Just call them Freedom Fries and you'll be ok.
Posted by: CrazyGameOfPoker
That does it. I'm swearing off French Fries until you get unblocked.
Well he got unlocked.
And then immediately reblocked.
Posted by: thekohser
I think it would be in everyone's http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guillom&diff=next&oldid=1643412, tell me what's a-happenin'!
Posted by: Apathetic
I think it would be in everyone's http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guillom&diff=next&oldid=1643412, tell me what's a-happenin'!
You do realize this is a global project and not everyone has English as a first language, yes?
Posted by: thekohser
I think it would be in everyone's http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guillom&diff=next&oldid=1643412, tell me what's a-happenin'!
You do realize this is a global project and not everyone has English as a first language, yes?
Yes, I do!
And, therefore, perhaps they likewise fail to fully comprehend the heretofore English-only communications that led up to this kangaroo court banning.
Are people with tools, who don't fully understand English, able to fully appreciate the subtleties of a disagreement that has entirely taken place using the English language?
If you had a breach of contract dispute that took place in Minnesota, would you want your case tried in a court in Lima, Peru, where the judge and jury have English as a second language?
Posted by: Lar
I think it would be in everyone's http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guillom&diff=next&oldid=1643412, tell me what's a-happenin'!
I think it would be in your best interests if you ixnayed on the ockingmay. Because really, it's not helpful. WR is now the extension of every noticeboard of en:wp and soon enough same same for meta, I'm thinking.
Posted by: Guido den Broeder
Perhaps it needs to be, if meta is going down the same hill.
Anyway, added my 2 cents.
Posted by: Kelly Martin
Someone should block his ass for a good 48 hours.
Posted by: Cla68
I notice that no speakers are listed for the Asia region.
Posted by: LaraLove
Someone should block his ass for a good 48 hours.
O, yay! More corruption!!
Posted by: One
You do realize this is a global project and not everyone has English as a first language, yes?
Yes, I do!
And, therefore, perhaps they likewise fail to fully comprehend the heretofore English-only communications that led up to this kangaroo court banning.
Are people with tools, who don't fully understand English, able to fully appreciate the subtleties of a disagreement that has entirely taken place using the English language?
If you had a breach of contract dispute that took place in Minnesota, would you want your case tried in a court in Lima, Peru, where the judge and jury have English as a second language?
Why would they do that? Litigation is one of our great industries. Thanks to the magic of the Alien Tort Claims Act, citizens from Lima, Peru can sue each other in Minnesota!
Posted by: thekohser
I'm still indefinitely blocked on Meta. Just didn't want that point lost in the discussion of infinitives.
Posted by: dtobias
Maybe if you would give some indication that you won't be deleting people from the speaker list (at least without consensus), you could get unblocked? Indef-blocking you was a vast overreaction, but you did do some silly stuff to provoke it.
Posted by: thekohser
Maybe if you would give some indication that you won't be deleting people from the speaker list (at least without consensus), you could get unblocked? Indef-blocking you was a vast overreaction, but you did do some silly stuff to provoke it.
Blocks are supposed to be preventative, not punitive. I'm being punished for something that I gave 2 weeks' notice of doing, then allowed another 2 weeks for response time. My efforts uncovered one speaker who was unambiguously disappointed by his Wikimedia experience, who would have otherwise been equally eligible for outside contact as Jimmy Wales. Note, Jimmy Wales has NEVER edited that Public speakers list. The list wasn't even alphabetized before I got there. Come on, Dan -- you can do better than "silly stuff", can't you?
Posted by: thekohser
I'm unblocked now. By Mike Lifeguard, of all people!
Posted by: The Joy
I think it would be in everyone's http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guillom&diff=next&oldid=1643412, tell me what's a-happenin'!
I think it would be in your best interests if you ixnayed on the ockingmay. Because really, it's not helpful. WR is now the extension of every noticeboard of en:wp and soon enough same same for meta, I'm thinking.
WR is not an extension of Wikipedia and should never aspire to be. We need to preserve our independence in order to remain relevant as a critics' site. Our bitter satire, righteous, and occasional jab comes with being critics.
Nevertheless, it's probably best not to make fun of someone's attempt at English. Modern English is considered one of the hardest languages to learn. As an American from the American South, many would say that I've never spoken "English" in my life... y'all. I tell you, it's pronounced "crayons" not "crowns." Ya damn Yankees!
Good news with the unblock, Greg!
Posted by: Abd
Congratulations. Now, don't make him regret it!
Posted by: Random832
quantity.
Posted by: Lar
quantity.
quality.
Posted by: The Joy
Could a kind mod move the conversation about the English language to a separate thread?
Posted by: Cedric
Could a kind mod move the conversation about the English language to a separate thread?
Mod note: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=26642
Posted by: thekohser
Looks like some IP cowards and JzG couldn't let the sleeping dog lie! (http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=next&oldid=1684836 through the edits.)
Posted by: thekohser
Folks, we're talking about an IRC discussion to form "consensus" about how my listing on the Meta Public Speakers page should appear.
I was not invited to this IRC discussion.
I was not told the IRC discussion had taken place.
I was not notified that my listing on the Meta Public Speakers page was being changed.
Yet, I was briefly blocked from the Meta site, because I had the nerve to notify the page readers of my intent to change it (in two weeks' time), after allowing another two weeks' time to allow my PERSONAL E-MAILS to all affected parties to have their effect.
If you want to know how the French think of due notification of public characterization of others, simply http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Thekohser&oldid=1717567#IRC_discussions.
-- -- Good idea! Let's also ask George Bush about what he wants to see in his public characterisation, along with all others BLP. DarkoNeko 20:23, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
-- -- -- I think Gregory Kohs is well-aware of BLPs and the sorry state they are in on Wikipedia. No need to be sarcastic, Darko, and "per IRC" is just about the worst thing you can claim is a consensus. Majorly talk 20:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
-- -- -- -- I happen to agree with Darkoneko, that an organization that has so emphatically proven that it lacks accountability and professional management of knowledge, yet upholds itself as "the sum of human knowledge", ought to better engage the living subjects of its articles to determine if they wish to have their Wikipedia article in an unfettered, a semi-protected, a fully protected, or a deleted-and-salted context. If I had a gun that I knew fired safely 99 times out of every 100 times fired, but 1 time out of 100, it fired backwards into the face of the shooter, I would expect that if I distributed these guns as "the sum of ballistic excellence", I may have some very disappointed customers in a short while. But, enough of my free lesson in ethics. What Majorly said is probably sufficient, "per IRC" is almost the punchline of a Wikipedia joke. -- Thekohser 20:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Posted by: thekohser
I wonder if JzG gives himself a boner with how http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JzG&diff=prev&oldid=1719524.
Posted by: victim of censorship
I wonder if JzG gives himself a boner with how http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JzG&diff=prev&oldid=1719524.
All Wikipediot Admins are "Tough talking" when the conversation is one sided, and
can be revised and rewritten, so as the admin is right and the poor slob, who disagrees with
the admin, looks wrong.
Wikipedia, in IMHO, is a very evil, hate filled, enterprise, deceiving the true nature of Wikpeidia.
I't about thuggery and power over those who are outside Wikipedia. Since Wikipedia is untouchable, at less in the us due to section 230, the goons on wiki prety much can do and say what they want, with out fear of being accountable in the real world.
I seath with hatred for Wikipedia and what it represents.
Posted by: Nerd
I wonder if JzG gives himself a boner with how http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JzG&diff=prev&oldid=1719524.
All Wikipediot Admins are "Tough talking" when the conversation is one sided, and
can be revised and rewritten, so as the admin is right and the poor slob, who disagrees with
the admin, looks wrong.
Wikipedia, in IMHO, is a very evil, hate filled, enterprise, deceiving the true nature of Wikpeidia.
I't about thuggery and power over those who are outside Wikipedia. Since Wikipedia is untouchable, at less in the us due to section 230, the goons on wiki prety much can do and say what they want, with out fear of being accountable in the real world.
I seath with hatred for Wikipedia and what it represents.
Blah blah blah. You must have told us dozens of times now. We get it, you hate Wikipedia passionately. Thank you for your opinion. I am sad that you "seath with hatred" over a website - I hope this does not make you angry in your real life endeavors, otherwise you are probably not a good person to be around. Have a peaceful day.
Posted by: Digwuren the Grey
I've been watching farewell speeches for two years, looking back at earlier ones. Where it is still possible to reach these retired editors, some have left email turned on, some of them could be brought back in, but to what? That's the question I'll be working on. Email me!
But I'll answer very briefly: to an off-wiki structure which will respect their experience and value their time, not waste it in yet more battles and endless discussions that go nowhere or worse.
That might be a worthy ideal.
One of Wikipedia's nastiest cultic features is the prospensity to monopolise communication between participants, and then use that monopoly to excommunicate people who leave or fall out of favour otherwise. The Suppressive Disruptive User gambit is not new, of course, but it *does* make it hard to gather any significant number of ex-users together. Of course, if they don't get together, it is easy for every SP/DU to assume he or she is alone -- an outcome that suits the cult well.
Posted by: thekohser
...it *does* make it hard to gather any significant number of ex-users together. Of course, if they don't get together, it is easy for every SP/DU to assume he or she is alone -- an outcome that suits the cult well.
I thought Wikipedia Review was the largest gathering of ex-users?
Posted by: wikademia.org
This http://www.wikipediareview.com/Image:Thogo.jpg blocked me http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AThekohser on the Meta project.
That was disproportionate and rude!
It all was prompted by a http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Public_speakers&diff=prev&oldid=1641779 from Gerard "Hoi!" Meijjeisensenn. (Since he can't ever seem to spell my name or nickname correctly.)
Gerard threatened me with a "blog", as you see... so maybe Thogo got it lost in translation and thought Gerard meant a "block".
i second that...
if something is "disproportionate and rude" , does that qualify as "trollish"?
Posted by: Trick cyclist
if something is "disproportionate and rude" , does that qualify as "trollish"?
How can it be when its a Meta admin?
Posted by: thekohser
Looks like Jonathan Hochman had to http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=prev&oldid=1810078 as mindless busy-body.
Oh, and then... http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=next&oldid=1810078.
Actually, it's probably going to bring me more business as a speaker if prospective suitors see that I've been "banned". That's probably more in line with the new direction of "outside" interest in Wikipedia.
Posted by: Alison
Looks like Jonathan Hochman had to http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=prev&oldid=1810078 as mindless busy-body.
Oh, and then... http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=next&oldid=1810078.
Actually, it's probably going to bring me more business as a speaker if prospective suitors see that I've been "banned". That's probably more in line with the new direction of "outside" interest in Wikipedia.
Well I've just removed it. Fair is fair. I can see one other banned (and desysopped) person on that list that's not been tagged like that.
Posted by: MBisanz
Looks like Jonathan Hochman had to http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=prev&oldid=1810078 as mindless busy-body.
Oh, and then... http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_speakers&diff=next&oldid=1810078.
Actually, it's probably going to bring me more business as a speaker if prospective suitors see that I've been "banned". That's probably more in line with the new direction of "outside" interest in Wikipedia.
Well I've just removed it. Fair is fair. I can see one other banned (and desysopped) person on that list that's not been tagged like that.
I see at least two other banned users.
Posted by: thekohser
The Meta-based Public speakers page that caused such a furious din many months ago has settled into receiving http://stats.grok.se/meta.m/201007/Public_speakers per day.
And my name is still proudly listed there.
Was it all worth it, Mike.lifeguard and Gerard M?