How Long Before The Boot? Options

[ColScott]

I'm glad to hear it. Nonetheless, I hope staff and moderators or WHOEVER is in charge hear that it's not just the target of such trash that won't want to stick around if it goes unchecked.

are you 7 years old?

[dtobias]

are you 7 years old?

You're the one whose maturity is put in question by comments like that.

[ColScott]

are you 7 years old?

You're the one whose maturity is put in question by comments like that.

Wtf are you talking about? Guy acts all offended just like my seven year old niece would, so I asked him if he was seven. If he is older then that is just sad man.

[Somey]

Look folks, like it or not, we've always been more tolerant of people who are unwilling subjects of BLP articles on WP than just about any other class of member. Even to the point of tolerating this particular subject against the wishes of one of our own moderators, which quite frankly was one of the most difficult things we've ever done, if not the most difficult since I've been on the staff here. (Admittedly, the whle thing with Blissy was pretty bad too... )

Sure, it would be better if Mr. Murphy here wouldn't use phrases like "terroristic scum." But WP must be made to understand that these are the feelings they generate. This is the result of their action or inaction; this is what they have built. It's not what I or Wikipedia Review or Don Murphy have built, and we're under absolutely no obligation whatsoever to accept their arbitray and capricious "policies" with respect to their effect on anyone's life and reputation.

As onerous and unsavory as it is, these points have to be made; these issues have to be addressed. Someone has to do it. If people are offended or insulted, so be it.

Having said all that, our willingness to put up with this stuff isn't unlimited. If Murphy weren't a BLP subject, he probably would have been asked to vacate the premises quite some time ago... And yes, every new incident brings us closer to that point despite his having that status. But none of that changes the situation regarding the article about him. That remains as long as the article exists, and as long as he objects to its existence.

[ColScott]

Look folks, like it or not, we've always been more tolerant of people who are unwilling subjects of BLP articles on WP than just about any other class of member. Even to the point of tolerating this particular subject against the wishes of one of our own moderators, which quite frankly was one of the most difficult things we've ever done, if not the most difficult since I've been on the staff here. (Admittedly, the whle thing with Blissy was pretty bad too... )

Sure, it would be better if Mr. Murphy here wouldn't use phrases like "terroristic scum." But WP must be made to understand that these are the feelings they generate. This is the result of their action or inaction; this is what they have built. It's not what I or Wikipedia Review or Don Murphy have built, and we're under absolutely no obligation whatsoever to accept their arbitray and capricious "policies" with respect to their effect on anyone's life and reputation.

As onerous and unsavory as it is, these points have to be made; these issues have to be addressed. Someone has to do it. If people are offended or insulted, so be it.

Having said all that, our willingness to put up with this stuff isn't unlimited. If Murphy weren't a BLP subject, he probably would have been asked to vacate the premises quite some time ago... And yes, every new incident brings us closer to that point despite his having that status. But none of that changes the situation regarding the article about him. That remains as long as the article exists, and as long as he objects to its existence.

I am just not sure what you would like me to do. Be NICE to people like Viridae and Ryulong? Is that what you want?

I just threw up in my mouth.

Look folks, like it or not, we've always been more tolerant of people who are unwilling subjects of BLP articles on WP than just about any other class of member. Even to the point of tolerating this particular subject against the wishes of one of our own moderators, which quite frankly was one of the most difficult things we've ever done, if not the most difficult since I've been on the staff here. (Admittedly, the whle thing with Blissy was pretty bad too... )

Sure, it would be better if Mr. Murphy here wouldn't use phrases like "terroristic scum." But WP must be made to understand that these are the feelings they generate. This is the result of their action or inaction; this is what they have built. It's not what I or Wikipedia Review or Don Murphy have built, and we're under absolutely no obligation whatsoever to accept their arbitray and capricious "policies" with respect to their effect on anyone's life and reputation.

As onerous and unsavory as it is, these points have to be made; these issues have to be addressed. Someone has to do it. If people are offended or insulted, so be it.

Having said all that, our willingness to put up with this stuff isn't unlimited. If Murphy weren't a BLP subject, he probably would have been asked to vacate the premises quite some time ago... And yes, every new incident brings us closer to that point despite his having that status. But none of that changes the situation regarding the article about him. That remains as long as the article exists, and as long as he objects to its existence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Don_Murphy#Content_dispute

RTFA is clearly somebody I outed using a sockpuppet. He is determined to push his new article through. Why is that okay? He uses a puppet but no one else gets to?

I am seriously considering giving prizes- like posters, tickets, dvds- to fans so that they will edit that article every minute of every day until they are forced to protect it permanently.

[Somey]

I am just not sure what you would like me to do. Be NICE to people like Viridae and Ryulong? Is that what you want?

Not at all - I'm saying there are ways to attack people you oppose, even violently oppose, without lowering this website's standards (of discourse, behavior, whatever you want to call it) to the point at which people start leaving because we "haven't banned you yet." Which, presumably, would be counter-productive.

For example, instead of "terroristic scum," you could have written "revenge-driven brain donors," "arrogant little basement-dwellers," or even just "twatfaces." The word "terroristic" is too connotative, and a hot-button for almost everyone... and "scum" (while nowhere near as bad) is just, well, overused.

I am seriously considering giving prizes- like posters, tickets, dvds- to fans so that they will edit that article every minute of every day until they are forced to protect it permanently.

Good idea!

Unfortunately, I already bought a copy of "Shoot 'Em Up"...

[Kato]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Don_Murphy#Content_dispute

RTFA is clearly somebody I outed using a sockpuppet. He is determined to push his new article through. Why is that okay? He uses a puppet but no one else gets to?

It could be any number of people. Not necessarily someone you outed. In fact, I tend to think it is a more experienced figure, and certainly a regular reader of this site.

Whoever it is, they know what they're doing. And they know how to poke a fire.

[ColScott]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Don_Murphy#Content_dispute

RTFA is clearly somebody I outed using a sockpuppet. He is determined to push his new article through. Why is that okay? He uses a puppet but no one else gets to?

It could be any number of people. Not necessarily someone you outed. In fact, I tend to think it is a more experienced figure, and certainly a regular reader of this site.

Whoever it is, they know what they're doing. And they know how to poke a fire.

Yes but doesn't it violate their own policies?

This post has been edited by ColScott: Mon 17th March 2008, 3:23am

[Phil]

I was wondering who that RTFA character was. He obviously has experience editing and have some idea of the conflict. Why the fuck he would want to start the conflict up again with his possible name to out I have no idea.

[Somey]

Why the fuck he would want to start the conflict up again with his possible name to out I have no idea.

You assume that any person who edits anonymously on Wikipedia, particularly to "stir up shit," doesn't want his real identity exposed.

Incorrect assumption.

[Phil]

Why the fuck he would want to start the conflict up again with his possible name to out I have no idea.

You assume that any person who edits anonymously on Wikipedia, particularly to "stir up shit," doesn't want his real identity exposed.

Incorrect assumption.

Point taken.

Still I am interested in who wants to stir this conflict up. It is, as previously said, an obvious previous Wikipedia editor. Likely someone who holds a grudge. Someone who knows a lot about the dispute/conflict. Who does that narrow it down to? A lot of people who Mr. Murphy has possible crossed.

Also, I'm surprised that none of the admins have stepped in to ask who the hell this guy is, why he started adding controversial edits to a controversial page, with a high degree of experience. Methinks they might overlook policy/reason for a taste of sweet sweet vengeance. Assuming they have reason.

[The Joy]

Great. Another DennyColt and/or David Spart.

[Ryulong]

I am just not sure what you would like me to do. Be NICE to people like Viridae and Ryulong? Is that what you want?

I just threw up in my mouth.

Okay, I'm tired of being your new target.

When I posted something to the effect of mentioning your wife, I was under a mistaken premise that your marriage was recent, which is why you had been using a new account to add that information to the article on you (something you seem to do every so often). I did not mean to offend you, but I neglected posting again, because it just seems that the thread went downhill much too fast.

RTFA's contributions do appear to be questionable. He goes straight for the article, as do a couple of other accounts.

[ColScott]

I am just not sure what you would like me to do. Be NICE to people like Viridae and Ryulong? Is that what you want?

I just threw up in my mouth.

Okay, I'm tired of being your new target.

When I posted something to the effect of mentioning your wife, I was under a mistaken premise that your marriage was recent, which is why you had been using a new account to add that information to the article on you (something you seem to do every so often). I did not mean to offend you, but I neglected posting again, because it just seems that the thread went downhill much too fast.

RTFA's contributions do appear to be questionable. He goes straight for the article, as do a couple of other accounts.

More than questionable son. He is clearly familiar with Shitapedia well beyond even my own knowledge. He spent 3 hours editing my article with personal crap.

[Moulton]

Is there anyone left who is not in a state of disgust over something or other?

[UseOnceAndDestroy]

Is there anyone left who is not in a state of disgust over something or other?

Me! Me!

I'm just having a hard time remembering which thread the point I was trying to make is in...

[AB]

Had you shown any promise of rational discussion here I would have ignored your return to wikipedia, but your rants have not not inspired me to turn a blind eye and also have discouraged me from bothering to afd your article, something I was going to do several weeks ago.

The failure is yours.

Even if he is a total jerk, ColScott is still
a human being, with all the rights that
entails. Anyone who doesn't recognise
that isn't worth rationalising with.

Lesson to learn Murphy, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

If you want honey, why will you not
accept GAs as bribes? Are GAs not
honey to pro-WP people like you?

This post has been edited by AB: Mon 17th March 2008, 8:10pm

[Miltopia]

ColScott, objecting to you throwing around "terroristic scum" has nothing to do with being immature. Names like that add nothing to a Wikipedia critique, and though I'm not perfect in that regard, I'd like to think my hyperbole is interpreted (correctly) as intentional and humor-intentive (even if not actually funny) rather than malicious. I mean, I can just imagine you spitting those words out, so thick was the venom. And there's the behavioral standards, like Somey said: I don't like people thinking badly of me unless its due to my own words or actions, and that sort of language adds on to Wikipedia Review's already inaccurate reputation. And finally, there's the simple fact that Viridae doesn't deserve it.

So lets see your niece pull that paragraph off, ColScott. Or you, if stooping to this abuse is a sign of "maturity".

[ColScott]

ColScott, objecting to you throwing around "terroristic scum" has nothing to do with being immature. Names like that add nothing to a Wikipedia critique, and though I'm not perfect in that regard, I'd like to think my hyperbole is interpreted (correctly) as intentional and humor-intentive (even if not actually funny) rather than malicious. I mean, I can just imagine you spitting those words out, so thick was the venom. And there's the behavioral standards, like Somey said: I don't like people thinking badly of me unless its due to my own words or actions, and that sort of language adds on to Wikipedia Review's already inaccurate reputation. And finally, there's the simple fact that Viridae doesn't deserve it.

So lets see your niece pull that paragraph off, ColScott. Or you, if stooping to this abuse is a sign of "maturity".

If your virgin ears hurt you can have me done for Definition of Character.

I find it hard to read your stuff without laughing.

[Peter Damian]

If your virgin ears hurt you can have me done for Definition of Character.

I find it hard to read your stuff without laughing.

Playground bully. What's with 'Definition of character'? Either you can't spell, or you are not funny.

'If your virgin ears hurt'? What? 14 year old playground bully.

The best way to get to know producer Don Murphy, if you can't meet him in person, is to read the book Killer Instinct, by his producing partner Jane Hamsher (ex-punk editor of San Francisco's Damage fanzine) about their experience on Oliver Stone's Natural Born Killers.

Hamsher describes Murphy as "the impending horror...stoked on caffeinated diet Coke and Froot Loops, loaded down with magazines and comic books, action toys and pretzels and Pez, ready to tear the head off Hollywood." (pg. 1)

Don's father was an affluent Long Island ad man. He did his undergraduate work at Georgetown University as film critic for the student paper and head of the campus film program. He avoided Georgetown Law School and entered the USC graduate film program. After teaming up with Hamsher, they found a script by the undiscovered Quentin Tarantino that led them to Oliver Stone, who directed Natural Born Killers with a $35 million budget.

Jane met Don at USC film school in the fall of 1987. Don wanted to be a director-writer. Most of his peers thought of him as a goofball. He dressed like a slob. "...[O]ne of Don's great gifts is complete obliviousness to what anyone thinks about him." (pg. 9)

Don came from Long Island. He seems to know everything about Twilight Zone and comic books. He loves junk food and '70s bubble-gum music, Nintendo and pinball. Don doesn't drink or smoke or take drugs.

I hadn't heard of this person before. Sort of fits. Except for the drugs bit. Sounds coked-up to me.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Wed 19th March 2008, 8:24pm