Zscout370 deadminned, Per Arbcom Options

[Bob Boy]

Looks like this fiasco has bled over onto Dmcdevit's steward candidacy.

[Robster]

Looks like this fiasco has bled over onto Dmcdevit's steward candidacy.

I'm sure McDevitt isn't helping himself by publicly bullying "Oppose" voters.

[Amarkov]

I guess this means "badsites" has morphed into "badnews"?

No, because then they'd have to admit that the horrible sites being critical of Wikipedia are news sites. I'm sure there's quite a bit of speculation about making The Register an attack site.

[Somey]

Dmcdevit is one of the most paranoid whack-jobs they've got.

As we're so fond of reminding people, he's the one who's been almost single-handedly keeping the Poetlister block from getting reviewed or even questioned, with such thrillingly hilarious leaps of Durova-like logic as, "Out of all the Runcorn socks who were blocked, only one of them has made any sort of objection, which of course proves that account is a sock puppet." (Or words to that effect.)

Of course, if Dmcdevit weren't doing that, Dave Gerard would probably take up the slack...

[Rootology]

Looks like this fiasco has bled over onto Dmcdevit's steward candidacy.

That is fine, if it stinks his Stewardship bid. Anyone engaged in actively harassing and working to undermine the encyclopedia doesn't need to be a Steward. What happened to Zscout370 was simply inappropriate and not supported by policy or the community.

The Arbitration Committee, Stewards, Checkusers, and Jimmy Wales serve at the pleasure of the community and with the permission of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees serves exclusively at the pleasure of the Wikipedia editing community.

It's about time that everyone began to realize where authority on the projects actually exists, and it's sure as hell not Jimmy Wales. I said it before: by the end of 2008, unless things change, there will be active steps to eliminate what little legitimate "authority" Jimmy Wales mistakenly believes he holds on Wikipedia. With him goes the Arbcom.

I'd guess that Arbcom Version 2.0 will be actively voted up like the current one, but the actual selection process done by the b'cats, who are also exclusively elected by the Community. Jimmy Wales is now irrelevant to process or the encyclopedia.

[Robster]

It's about time that everyone began to realize where authority on the projects actually exists, and it's sure as hell not Jimmy Wales. I said it before: by the end of 2008, unless things change, there will be active steps to eliminate what little legitimate "authority" Jimmy Wales mistakenly believes he holds on Wikipedia. With him goes the Arbcom.

Only if the Sole Flounder isn't breathing by the end of 2008.

There is a personality cult at the core of WMF/Wikia/WP that will keep the Sole Flounder propped up and in apparent power long after any other organization would have cut ties.

I fear that his corruptive influence will live as long as he does... <North Korea>or longer</North Korea>.

[Miltopia]

Dmcdevit is as unrepentant as Durova... I've switched to oppose.

It's amazing how stubbornly people will refuse that such a vast community is wrong and they are right. I bet these guys can hold their breath for a really long time.

[tarantino]

There is a personality cult at the core of WMF/Wikia/WP that will keep the Sole Flounder propped up and in apparent power long after any other organization would have cut ties.

I fear that his corruptive influence will live as long as he does... <North Korea>or longer</North Korea>.

I exploit you still you love me
I tell you one and one makes three
I'm the Cult of Personality

[Firsfron of Ronchester]

As we're so fond of reminding people, he's the one who's been almost single-handedly keeping the Poetlister block from getting reviewed or even questioned, with such thrillingly hilarious leaps of Durova-like logic as, "Out of all the Runcorn socks who were blocked, only one of them has made any sort of objection, which of course proves that account is a sock puppet." (Or words to that effect.)

I don't know that I'd say he's single-handedly keeping the Poetlister block from being reviewed, although that is possible. Here's the thing, though: He investigated the account, and e-mailed ArbCom with the recommendation to block it. ArbCom responded, and he indefinitely blocked the account. He was very quick to communicate with ArbCom on the matter, but when I e-mailed him requesting diffs showing the account was used abusively in 2007, I received no response. He continued editing Wikipedia for a month while I waited for e-mails. I never received any.

I finally brought this up on AN/I, and it was only then that he responded. Still with no diffs, though. I've repeatedly asked for diffs, and they repeatedly have not been forthcoming. If there's a claim that someone used sockpuppets abusively, I think it's fair to provide diffs actually showing the account was used in abusive sockpuppetry.

The block on the Poetlister account appears to me to be completely without merit, but because it's an ArbCom block, nothing can be done to correct the problem. Dmcdevit is on the ArbCom mailing list and has their ear. He therefore doesn't need to provide actual diffs, or even bother to respond to a genuine request for the actual diffs showing evidence of abusive sockpuppetry.

I oppose this sort of behavior, and voted against Dmcdevit on his stewardship candidacy last week: I said my one interaction with this user was very frustrating, and it was. I said he exhibits terrible communications skills, and that's absolutely true. I don't think that can be disputed by anyone. This new situation only highlights how poor his communications skills really are. You ask for someone to be de-sysoped, you make sure they actually know it, and why.

Meanwhile, a user who is so dedicated to Wikimedia that despite an indefinite block is still a regular contributor to Wikimedia projects (and has the trust of the WikiQuote community so firmly that she is a well-respected admin there) is unable to participate on WP because of an unresponsive, unrelenting admin. I see no purpose to the block, and it only hinders WP/WQ project coordination.

[Bob Boy]

Dmcdevit seems to be getting more strident as his steward candidacy ever-so-slowly begins circling the drain...though he's still over 80%, looks like.

Same meme being pushed here as in the Durova/!! affair - minor mistake, quickly undone! Now move along and get back to work, drones!

Arbitration!

This post has been edited by Bob Boy: Sun 16th December 2007, 1:13am

[michael]

I first learned that this action had been taken on "Wikipedia Review." That is not the place where I would like to think administrators would need to consult for incident reports. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:08, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

OH YES, finding this out on WR first is NOT good. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Holy shit this is gold. WR, becoming the source for Wikipedia news? Hahahaha...I never expect THAT to happen, ever.

Dmcdevit is at 80.8% now...the question is, how many stewards do they pick? Surely they're not going to make all candidates with 30 votes and 80% or higher stewards. There has to be a cut off point somewhere.

[Bob Boy]

Dmcdevit is at 80.8% now...the question is, how many stewards do they pick? Surely they're not going to make all candidates with 30 votes and 80% or higher stewards. There has to be a cut off point somewhere.

The interesting part is that the 'support' votes have dried up since this broke (with some even being cancelled) and the 'oppose' votes are racking up fast. Whoever linked his candidacy page from WT:RFAR is a frigging genius. Either Dmcdevit's supporters have already voted or they refuse to touch this with a ten-foot pole.

Interesting how these people can't refrain from controversy during elections - Durova blocked !! while she was up for ArbCom. Or maybe it's just that they've come to take their "untouchability" for granted.

[Bob Boy]

Oh, and support just dropped below the 80% mark (79.8% with Iamunknown's and Jehochman's votes - so I suppose they could round up). Before the screwup, he was running at 87%. And voting closes in a matter of hours.

This post has been edited by Bob Boy: Sun 16th December 2007, 3:54am

[Poetlister]

he's the one who's been almost single-handedly keeping the Poetlister block from getting reviewed or even questioned,

There's Lar too, and his Steward campaign is going very well in a Tammany Hall manner.

http://en.wikiquote.org/w/index.php?title=...48&oldid=618990

[guy]

Either Dmcdevit's supporters have already voted or they refuse to touch this with a ten-foot pole.

SlimVirgin opposed. Clearly, his usefulness to the Cabal is severely reduced.

[Bob Boy]

Hmm...looks like Dmcdevit and Luna Santin discussed this in IRC and agreed to post it on-wiki. Names are named.

[Yehudi]

[17:25.46] <Luna-San> Right. I haven't checked if the WN article still exists.
[17:26.05] <Dmcdevit> Well, thy published it , I thinnk, but they have no standards.

Nice to know what a potential Steward thinks of a Wikimedia project. Anyone like to post this on the Wikinews Village Pump?

[Rootology]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...ation#Zscout370

Josh "I enable stalking and harassment of my peers" Gordon has already summarily rejected this.

They need to issue an apology to Zscout, and name the incompetent arbitrators that authorized this retaliation harassment of deadminning him for affecting the Carolyn Doran article in a way that wouldn't be pleasing to the WMF and Jimmy Wales.

Who authorized it? Who gave the go-ahead to retaliate on Zscout outside of policy?

And oh yes, it was outside of policy: the BLP deletions thing is so heavily disputed it's absurd. It has no support except for the hard-core BLPists, and ArbCom has no authorization, rights, or mandated community support to make policy.

Who authorized it?

[Herschelkrustofsky]

Newyorkbrad comments:

I first learned that this action had been taken on "Wikipedia Review." That is not the place where I would like to think administrators would need to consult for incident reports.

Wikipedia Review: If it matters to Wikipedia, read it here first!

[tarantino]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...ation#Zscout370

Josh "I enable stalking and harassment of my peers" Gordon has already summarily rejected this.

They need to issue an apology to Zscout, and name the incompetent arbitrators that authorized this retaliation harassment of deadminning him for affecting the Carolyn Doran article in a way that wouldn't be pleasing to the WMF and Jimmy Wales.

Who authorized it? Who gave the go-ahead to retaliate on Zscout outside of policy?

And oh yes, it was outside of policy: the BLP deletions thing is so heavily disputed it's absurd. It has no support except for the hard-core BLPists, and ArbCom has no authorization, rights, or mandated community support to make policy.

Who authorized it?

In the Luna_Santin IRC log, Dmcdevit says it was Steve and James, with Blnguyen joining the conversation later.

[17:31.08] <Dmcdevit> Erm, I didn't realize they weren't public. I don't think anyone is trying to keep that from th public, I wasn't consciously not mentioning their names. It was Steve and James wo were in the channel.
[17:31.36] <Luna-San> Ah, okay. Isn't that only two, though?
[17:32.10] <Luna-San> (Not that two is a bad number, I'd just heard three)
[17:33.09] <Dmcdevit> Well, that's their decision, really, as the actual arbitrators. But, personally, yes if it's urgent. And there is even precedent for that (Everyking, off the top of my head).
[17:33.38] <Dmcdevit> The 3 number comes from Blnguyen, who came to the computer in the middle. I may have been unclear.