Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ Admin retirements _ Tanthalas39 to Wikipedia: Go f**k yourself

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

Somewhat lost in the hustle and bustle of Wiki-drama was this nervous breakdown by admin Tanthalas39 on his user page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tanthalas39&diff=273706358&oldid=264562383

He came back two days later. Personally, I don't think anyone missed him. evilgrin.gif

Posted by: LaraLove

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 5th March 2009, 3:57pm) *

He came back two days later.

Two days is the average length of any Wikipedian retirement, no?

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(LaraLove @ Thu 5th March 2009, 4:29pm) *

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 5th March 2009, 3:57pm) *

He came back two days later.

Two days is the average length of any Wikipedian retirement, no?



It is usually 24 hours, I think -- a good night's sleep helps knocks the sense out of the people and they return to where they left off. fear.gif

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE
This place is insane. Every editor on here should be purged and the project carried on by entirely fresh minds.
And yet, you returned.
Masochist. Crazy man. Fool. angry.gif


Posted by: Son of a Yeti

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Thu 5th March 2009, 3:07pm) *

QUOTE
This place is insane. Every editor on here should be purged and the project carried on by entirely fresh minds.
And yet, you returned.
Masochist. Crazy man. Fool. angry.gif



Many happy returns!

Posted by: Cla68

Almost without exception, every time I hear of a Wikipedia admin burnout, when I check their contributions I don't see a whole lot of article writing, just mainly admin work. This guy is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Tanthalas39. Again, I believe the lack of an effective governance structure in Wikipedia contributes to admin burnout, because the admins don't really have any kind of established support foundation upon which to ground their activity, so they must feel like they're flailing away endlessly.

Posted by: Moulton

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Thu 5th March 2009, 6:16pm) *
I believe the lack of an effective governance structure in Wikipedia contributes to admin burnout, because the admins don't really have any kind of established support foundation upon which to ground their activity, so they must feel like they're flailing away endlessly.

To my mind, the lack of a functional community governance model at Wikipedia is a fatal flaw. Other large projects (notably http://www.debian.org/social_contract) have highly functional governance models that keep the project focused on producing high quality product with a minimum of sturm und drang.

Posted by: Alison

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Thu 5th March 2009, 3:16pm) *

Almost without exception, every time I hear of a Wikipedia admin burnout, when I check their contributions I don't see a whole lot of article writing, just mainly admin work. This guy is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Tanthalas39. Again, I believe the lack of an effective governance structure in Wikipedia contributes to admin burnout, because the admins don't really have any kind of established support foundation upon which to ground their activity, so they must feel like they're flailing away endlessly.

That is very true indeed. And in the last 12 months, there's been more admin burnout than ever before, and not just due to the increase in absolute numbers ...

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(Alison @ Thu 5th March 2009, 3:47pm) *
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Thu 5th March 2009, 3:16pm) *
Almost without exception, every time I hear of a Wikipedia admin burnout, when I check their contributions I don't see a whole lot of article writing, just mainly admin work. This guy is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Tanthalas39. Again, I believe the lack of an effective governance structure in Wikipedia contributes to admin burnout, because the admins don't really have any kind of established support foundation upon which to ground their activity, so they must feel like they're flailing away endlessly.
That is very true indeed. And in the last 12 months, there's been more admin burnout than ever before, and not just due to the increase in absolute numbers ...

I say: since the flagged-revs change is dying out, and there still is no
impetus to devise a usable BLP policy, and crazies like Jayjg, MZMcBride
and JzG keep on playing stupid political games.....

Let it go. Encourage it, in fact. Let more and more people burn out.

Hopefully, people will pass negative opinions of how Wikipedia operates,
and the bad word-of-mouth will discourage more and more of those
young students (which they are highly dependent on) from editing.

Just like Citicorp or GM. Don't bail them out, let them go under.
They deserve it, the hard assets are still there, and maybe
whichever group takes the assets over will manage them better.........

gee, I'm sooo cynical today.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Thu 5th March 2009, 6:16pm) *

Almost without exception, every time I hear of a Wikipedia admin burnout, when I check their contributions I don't see a whole lot of article writing, just mainly admin work. This guy is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Tanthalas39. Again, I believe the lack of an effective governance structure in Wikipedia contributes to admin burnout, because the admins don't really have any kind of established support foundation upon which to ground their activity, so they must feel like they're flailing away endlessly.


Well, Tan may also be burdened by a belated guilty conscience, as witnessed in this confession the day before his breakdown to Pedro about "gaming the system" to get his tools: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pedro/Archive_33#Hmm

Perhaps the only positive Tan gave Wikipedia was his User Page photo: we should thank him for encouraging safety belt usage.


Posted by: Cla68

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Fri 6th March 2009, 2:49am) *

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Thu 5th March 2009, 6:16pm) *

Almost without exception, every time I hear of a Wikipedia admin burnout, when I check their contributions I don't see a whole lot of article writing, just mainly admin work. This guy is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Tanthalas39. Again, I believe the lack of an effective governance structure in Wikipedia contributes to admin burnout, because the admins don't really have any kind of established support foundation upon which to ground their activity, so they must feel like they're flailing away endlessly.


Well, Tan may also be burdened by a belated guilty conscience, as witnessed in this confession the day before his breakdown to Pedro about "gaming the system" to get his tools: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pedro/Archive_33#Hmm

Perhaps the only positive Tan gave Wikipedia was his User Page photo: we should thank him for encouraging safety belt usage.


Whoa! That exchange opens up another, albeit related, can of worms concerning the role of adminship in Wikipedia's culture. Anyway, his choice of userpage photos was interesting.

Posted by: everyking

QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 6th March 2009, 12:47am) *

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Thu 5th March 2009, 3:16pm) *

Almost without exception, every time I hear of a Wikipedia admin burnout, when I check their contributions I don't see a whole lot of article writing, just mainly admin work. This guy is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Tanthalas39. Again, I believe the lack of an effective governance structure in Wikipedia contributes to admin burnout, because the admins don't really have any kind of established support foundation upon which to ground their activity, so they must feel like they're flailing away endlessly.

That is very true indeed. And in the last 12 months, there's been more admin burnout than ever before, and not just due to the increase in absolute numbers ...


I haven't observed an increase. I used to hear about admins quitting quite frequently, but now it doesn't seem so common. Then again, maybe it's just become so common that people don't think to comment on it anymore? Or it may be that I'm just not following events as well as I used to.

Posted by: Anonymous editor

Admins are quitting constantly.

Posted by: Alison

QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 5th March 2009, 9:21pm) *

Admins are quitting constantly.

I just did ohmy.gif Can't stand it any longer - I just had to get out. Eric Barbour pretty much got it right when he described admin/BLP work as just pushing against an overwhelming tide. And Milton is right in that the individual simply cannot fix the wrongs of the world ...

Posted by: UseOnceAndDestroy

QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 5th March 2009, 11:33pm) *

To my mind, the lack of a functional community governance model at Wikipedia is a fatal flaw. Other large projects (notably http://www.debian.org/social_contract) have highly functional governance models that keep the project focused on producing high quality product with a minimum of sturm und drang.


Quite right. Software projects need good quality contributions for the product to function. Wikipedia needs poor quality contributions to fuel its real product (which isn't "an encyclopedia"). Try using a linux distribution where untested code goes directly onto the end-users' machines.

Spring is almost here, it must be http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20080331/why-an-encyclopedia-is-harder-to-write-than-linux/

Posted by: Moulton

Dramaturgical Regurgitations

QUOTE(Alison)
Eric Barbour pretty much got it right when he described admin/BLP work as just pushing against an overwhelming tide. And Milton is right in that the individual simply cannot fix the wrongs of the world ...

All true. But we live in the age of Borat, Jon Stewart, and Stephen Colbert.

One individual cannot gain any purchase trying to fix the wrongs of the world, but there is a long tradition of satire, parody, comedy, and comic opera lampooning the ills of the world.

Under the circumstances, parody is emerging as the best game in town.

QUOTE(UseOnceAndDestroy)
Wikipedia needs poor quality contributions to fuel its real product (which isn't "an encyclopedia").

And I propose to lead the field in promoting utterly atrocious parodies.

Posted by: LaraLove

QUOTE(everyking @ Fri 6th March 2009, 12:06am) *

I haven't observed an increase. I used to hear about admins quitting quite frequently, but now it doesn't seem so common. Then again, maybe it's just become so common that people don't think to comment on it anymore? Or it may be that I'm just not following events as well as I used to.

Wikipedia:FORMER#Other
It was strong in December and January and has started to go back to normal levels since.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 6th March 2009, 2:16am) *

QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 5th March 2009, 9:21pm) *

Admins are quitting constantly.

I just did ohmy.gif Can't stand it any longer - I just had to get out.


Alison, if I can paraphrase Don McLean...that world was never meant for one as beautiful as you! evilgrin.gif

Posted by: Bottled_Spider

QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 6th March 2009, 7:16am) *
QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 5th March 2009, 9:21pm) *
Admins are quitting constantly.
And Milton is right in that the individual simply cannot fix the wrongs of the world ...

True. But on the way out, the individual could have left a "Fuck You, Jimbo! Up your Arse with a Coconut!" on some talkpage or other. Would have been nice.

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Fri 6th March 2009, 2:22pm) *
QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 6th March 2009, 2:16am) *
I just did ohmy.gif Can't stand it any longer - I just had to get out.
Alison, if I can paraphrase Don McLean...that world was never meant for one as beautiful as you! evilgrin.gif

Uuuungh!!!

Posted by: Son of a Yeti

QUOTE(Bottled_Spider @ Fri 6th March 2009, 9:09am) *

QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 6th March 2009, 7:16am) *

Milton is right in that the individual simply cannot fix the wrongs of the world ...

True. But on the way out, the individual could have left a "Fuck You, Jimbo! Up your Arse with a Coconut!" on some talkpage or other. Would have been nice.

Any volunteers?

evilgrin.gif


Posted by: wikiwhistle

QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 6th March 2009, 7:16am) *

QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 5th March 2009, 9:21pm) *

Admins are quitting constantly.

I just did ohmy.gif Can't stand it any longer - I just had to get out. Eric Barbour pretty much got it right when he described admin/BLP work as just pushing against an overwhelming tide. And Milton is right in that the individual simply cannot fix the wrongs of the world ...


What was the last straw? Mail me if you prefer.

Posted by: Random832

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Fri 6th March 2009, 7:51pm) *

QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 6th March 2009, 7:16am) *

QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 5th March 2009, 9:21pm) *

Admins are quitting constantly.

I just did ohmy.gif Can't stand it any longer - I just had to get out. Eric Barbour pretty much got it right when he described admin/BLP work as just pushing against an overwhelming tide. And Milton is right in that the individual simply cannot fix the wrongs of the world ...


What was the last straw? Mail me if you prefer.


How does she know you won't leak it to your buddy Proabivouac?

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(Alison)
Eric Barbour pretty much got it right when he described admin/BLP work as just pushing against an overwhelming tide.

I believe my original comment was something like
"bailing out the Pacific Ocean with a teaspoon"........

Sorry you had to quit, Alison. Please don't be tempted
to go back, it won't be any easier or more fun the
second time.

Posted by: Son of a Yeti

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Fri 6th March 2009, 1:13pm) *

Sorry you had to quit, Alison. Please don't be tempted
to go back, it won't be any easier or more fun the
second time.


But please keep hanging out on WR.

Alison, our postings are always a pleasant read.

smile.gif

Posted by: UseOnceAndDestroy

QUOTE(Random832 @ Fri 6th March 2009, 8:10pm) *

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Fri 6th March 2009, 7:51pm) *

What was the last straw? Mail me if you prefer.


How does she know you won't leak it to your buddy Proabivouac?

I couldn't guess what would be worth "leaking" - more likely its an overture to an attempt to recover a dropout to the cult.


Posted by: wikiwhistle

QUOTE(Random832 @ Fri 6th March 2009, 8:10pm) *

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Fri 6th March 2009, 7:51pm) *


What was the last straw? Mail me if you prefer.


How does she know you won't leak it to your buddy Proabivouac?


Cos she knows me a bit. I have never leaked anything to Proab from anyone, also Alison has mentioned on here that she sometimes chats to Proab, so if she wants to say anything to him, she'll say it herself. smile.gif

Posted by: Random832

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:23pm) *

I have never leaked anything to Proab from anyone,


Sure, pull the other one. rolleyes.gif

Posted by: wikiwhistle

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sat 7th March 2009, 4:10pm) *

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:23pm) *

I have never leaked anything to Proab from anyone,


Sure, pull the other one. rolleyes.gif


I honestly haven't. You can believe or spread and imply erroneous things about me all you like- but you cannot prove any of your obnoxious claims because they aren't true. Other people have passed on stuff of mine with out my consent, and I wasn't happy about it, but I can see why they wanted to do it, after they already had and I didn't have a choice but to accept it anyway.

I've chatted to him, like a lot of people do at some point, but I never revealed anything of anyone elses' or even of my own, only discussed in a very general way, things that he already knew or seemed to know in precise detail from other sources.

Posted by: Alison

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sat 7th March 2009, 8:10am) *

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:23pm) *

I have never leaked anything to Proab from anyone,


Sure, pull the other one. rolleyes.gif

This smacks of another, very recent happening here. Oh, delicious irony! rolleyes.gif

Post evidence, Random, or drop it.

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sat 7th March 2009, 4:23am) *

QUOTE(Random832 @ Fri 6th March 2009, 8:10pm) *

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Fri 6th March 2009, 7:51pm) *


What was the last straw? Mail me if you prefer.


How does she know you won't leak it to your buddy Proabivouac?


Cos she knows me a bit. I have never leaked anything to Proab from anyone, also Alison has mentioned on here that she sometimes chats to Proab, so if she wants to say anything to him, she'll say it herself. smile.gif

I've spoken with WW in person, and I do know her a bit. And as she points out, I chat with Proab all the time ... so what? rolleyes.gif

Posted by: wikiwhistle

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 4:20pm) *

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sat 7th March 2009, 8:10am) *

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:23pm) *

I have never leaked anything to Proab from anyone,


Sure, pull the other one. rolleyes.gif

This smacks of another, very recent happening here. Oh, delicious irony! rolleyes.gif

Post evidence, Random, or drop it.


He will find no evidence of my passing on any logs etc or even telling Proab anything he didn't already know, because I have not. He could perhaps try and twist any words of mine to say that, but they will always be able to be read in another way which will be the correct interpretation without someone trying to put a false spin on anything I've said.

I like to think Alison knows that I would never betray anyone's confidence like that, especially another ladies', though I will and have spoken to arbcom and to others who shared my concerns, about things I think think they need to know about other issues, as everyone should to stop people they believe are dodgy. And if I think someone is dodgy and have had a bad experience with them, or know that others have, I will speak out about it in a general way, but that's the right way to go to avoid allowing someone to go on and do the same thing to other people. I personally think that would be failing to do my duty to others and allowing people to possibly have a very unpleasant experience, making me partly responsible for that.

Posted by: Sarcasticidealist

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 9:22am) *
Post evidence, Random, or drop it.
Per dtobias's beloved [[WP:SAUCE]], I rather feel like I have to echo Alison here, lest I be more of a hypocrite than usual.

Posted by: Random832

It's all subjective (and therefore you will say entirely worthless), but I will outline my reasons for coming to this belief:

You were the other person involved in attacking Kylu, and the only one of the two who would plausibly have had direct access to the wikichix post that Proabivouac copied here on WR. You were also shockingly unconcerned about his access to such material for someone who had been (and continued to do so even in making light of Proab's access) so condemning of the idea of anyone not in possession of two X chromosomes being able to access the list. I believe the only reasonable explanation for this sudden reversal is if you were the source (and therefore if that were the case, you knew damn well he wasn't going to get anything other than stuff you had no problem sending him and thus saw no cause for concern)

If you were sincere in your claimed belief that Kylu shouldn't have access to wikichix-l (and I believe you were), then your reaction should have mirrored http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=23026&view=findpost&p=157805 - or, if anything, been stronger. That it didn't seems to imply that you have an additional piece of information (i.e. that you have control over what material gets forwarded to Proab).

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 11:22am) *

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sat 7th March 2009, 8:10am) *

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:23pm) *

I have never leaked anything to Proab from anyone,


Sure, pull the other one. rolleyes.gif

This smacks of another, very recent happening here. Oh, delicious irony! rolleyes.gif

Post evidence, Random, or drop it.

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sat 7th March 2009, 4:23am) *

QUOTE(Random832 @ Fri 6th March 2009, 8:10pm) *

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Fri 6th March 2009, 7:51pm) *


What was the last straw? Mail me if you prefer.


How does she know you won't leak it to your buddy Proabivouac?


Cos she knows me a bit. I have never leaked anything to Proab from anyone, also Alison has mentioned on here that she sometimes chats to Proab, so if she wants to say anything to him, she'll say it herself. smile.gif

I've spoken with WW in person, and I do know her a bit. And as she points out, I chat with Proab all the time ... so what? rolleyes.gif


Not that you don't have some very good qualities, Alison, but you are one of the most indiscreet people to ever pass through these parts...and that is saying a whole lot.

Posted by: Moulton

There are lots of ways to (intentionally or inadvertently) confirm an otherwise unproven assertion without passing the information directly.

Back in the 90s, I was completely in the dark about the role someone (whom I never spoke with in private) had played. So I boldly posted an assertion about her for which I had not a shred of evidence.

She immediately became incensed and demanded to know who had told me that, strongly hinting that it must have been leaked by the single person whom everyone knew was friends with both of us.

I responded that the person who told me was none other than the subject herself, who had confirmed my otherwise ungrounded theory by falsely claiming our mutual friend must have leaked it.

Oddly enough, she never let go of that erroneous indictment, notwithstanding the truth of the matter, that I had just made a good guess and published it as if I knew it for a fact.

It was a little like Claudius in Hamlet becoming visibly shaken when the play-within-a-play exactly mirrors his own nefarious misdeeds. Had Claudius been innocent, the scene would have gone by without him betraying the slightest hint of recognition.

Posted by: Random832

QUOTE(Moulton @ Sat 7th March 2009, 4:48pm) *

There are lots of ways to (intentionally or inadvertently) confirm an otherwise unproven assertion without passing the information directly.

Back in the 90s, I was completely in the dark about the role someone (whom I never spoke with in private) had played. So I boldly posted an assertion about her for which I had not a shred of evidence.

She immediately became incensed and demanded to know who had told me that, strongly hinting that it must have been leaked by the single person whom everyone knew was friends with both of us.

I responded that the person who told me was none other than the subject herself, who had confirmed my otherwise ungrounded theory by falsely claiming our mutual friend must have leaked it.

Oddly enough, she never let go of that erroneous indictment, notwithstanding the truth of the matter, that I had just made a good guess and published it as if I knew it for a fact.


There is, however, a difference between this and if you had instead published actual words written by her and not intended for your eyes - while what you did only weakly implied a leak, that would confirm it for certain (and only be possible if there had actually been one). It is not in dispute here* that _someone_ leaked / is leaking messages from wikichix-l to Proabivouac (either that, or he somehow gained direct access himself). The only question is who. And the only plausible suspect I can think of is wikiwhistle.

*The possibility remains, I suppose, that the message he posted was a fabrication, but it seems likely someone would have called him on it were that the case

Posted by: LaraLove

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sat 7th March 2009, 11:51am) *

It is not in dispute here* that _someone_ leaked / is leaking messages from wikichix-l to Proabivouac (either that, or he somehow gained direct access himself). The only question is who. And the only plausible suspect I can think of is wikiwhistle.

*The possibility remains, I suppose, that the message he posted was a fabrication, but it seems likely someone would have called him on it were that the case

To be fair, you don't know the member list of Wikichix, so to say "the only plausible suspect I can think of is wikiwhistle" is sort of silly. Only suspect out of whom? Not all chicks on WP are members of this group, and not all members of this group are chicks. It could be any number of people. WW said she didn't do it, Proab says he doesn't have access. That doesn't mean that one of Proab's cronies doesn't have access, pretending to be a female... or that he doesn't have a female crony on the list willing to spill the secrets.

Befriending someone like Proab is, in my opinion, ipso facto support of his actions. So for the sake of his cronies, I hope they've got a sturdy lock on the closet that holds their own skeletons, and no one who knows their secrets willing to spill them.

Posted by: Random832

QUOTE(LaraLove @ Sat 7th March 2009, 5:18pm) *

...or that he doesn't have a female crony on the list willing to spill the secrets.


Wasn't this precisely my hypothesis? And you're discounting WW's odd non-reaction to his having gotten his hands on a copy of that post.

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 4:22pm) *

This smacks of another, very recent happening here. Oh, delicious irony! rolleyes.gif

The difference is, all my cards are on the table now immediately after someone bothered to actually ask.

Posted by: Alison

QUOTE(LaraLove @ Sat 7th March 2009, 9:18am) *

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sat 7th March 2009, 11:51am) *

It is not in dispute here* that _someone_ leaked / is leaking messages from wikichix-l to Proabivouac (either that, or he somehow gained direct access himself). The only question is who. And the only plausible suspect I can think of is wikiwhistle.

*The possibility remains, I suppose, that the message he posted was a fabrication, but it seems likely someone would have called him on it were that the case

To be fair, you don't know the member list of Wikichix, so to say "the only plausible suspect I can think of is wikiwhistle" is sort of silly. Only suspect out of whom? Not all chicks on WP are members of this group, and not all members of this group are chicks. It could be any number of people. WW said she didn't do it, Proab says he doesn't have access. That doesn't mean that one of Proab's cronies doesn't have access, pretending to be a female... or that he doesn't have a female crony on the list willing to spill the secrets.

Indeed. It could be any of a number of other people that immediately come to mind, actually. I count four of five Chix members on WR right now, with little effort I'd also really like to know who it was who did leak that info, but he ain't tellin' dry.gif
QUOTE(LaraLove @ Sat 7th March 2009, 9:18am) *

Befriending someone like Proab is, in my opinion, ipso facto support of his actions. So for the sake of his cronies, I hope they've got a sturdy lock on the closet that holds their own skeletons, and no one who knows their secrets willing to spill them.

It's not ipso facto anything, any more than posting here is ipso facto support of WordBomb (remember those days?) I don't buy guilt by association at all, sorry.

Posted by: LaraLove

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:27pm) *

QUOTE(LaraLove @ Sat 7th March 2009, 5:18pm) *

...or that he doesn't have a female crony on the list willing to spill the secrets.


Wasn't this precisely my hypothesis? And you're discounting WW's odd non-reaction to his having gotten his hands on a copy of that post.

I'm not saying it's not WW. I'm saying that it's not clear, and that it's silly to claim she's the only suspect when you don't know who the other possible suspects are.

As far as your evidence goes, I find it compelling, but it's still not proof.

Posted by: Random832

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 5:34pm) *

Indeed. It could be any of a number of other people that immediately come to mind, actually. I count four of five Chix members on WR right now, with little effort I'd also really like to know who it was who did leak that info, but he ain't tellin' dry.gif

Of those, which others took up the strange position that it is more acceptable for Proabivouac to have access to that material than it is for Kylu?

Posted by: LaraLove

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:34pm) *

It's not ipso facto anything, any more than posting here is ipso facto support of WordBomb (remember those days?) I don't buy guilt by association at all, sorry.

Don't much care what you buy, Alison. I'm just stating my opinion. Feel free to disagree.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:34pm) *


It's not ipso facto anything, any more than posting here is ipso facto support of WordBomb (remember those days?) I don't buy guilt by association at all, sorry.


If the fact in question is the communication of specific information, evidence (here admissions) of a channel of private correspondence is certainly relevant. This is not "guilt by association." It is establishing a requisite fact in a chain of reasoning.

Posted by: Alison

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sat 7th March 2009, 9:38am) *

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 5:34pm) *

Indeed. It could be any of a number of other people that immediately come to mind, actually. I count four of five Chix members on WR right now, with little effort I'd also really like to know who it was who did leak that info, but he ain't tellin' dry.gif

Of those, which others took up the strange position that it is more acceptable for Proabivouac to have access to that material than it is for Kylu?

Listen to what Lara is saying. It could be any of a number of others - not even WR folks - that were silent on the matter. It's that simple. You're judging based on the one or two you see on here.

Posted by: LaraLove

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:41pm) *

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:34pm) *


It's not ipso facto anything, any more than posting here is ipso facto support of WordBomb (remember those days?) I don't buy guilt by association at all, sorry.


If the fact in question is the communication of specific information, evidence (here admissions) of a channel of private correspondence is certainly relevant. This is not "guilt by association." It is establishing a requisite fact in a chain of reasoning.

I don't think Alison leaked it, if that what you thought I was implying. I'm fairly certain her trustworthiness is of the highest level.

Posted by: Alison

QUOTE(LaraLove @ Sat 7th March 2009, 9:43am) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:41pm) *

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:34pm) *


It's not ipso facto anything, any more than posting here is ipso facto support of WordBomb (remember those days?) I don't buy guilt by association at all, sorry.


If the fact in question is the communication of specific information, evidence (here admissions) of a channel of private correspondence is certainly relevant. This is not "guilt by association." It is establishing a requisite fact in a chain of reasoning.

I don't think Alison leaked it, if that what you thought I was implying. I'm fairly certain her trustworthiness is of the highest level.

I didn't leak it. Absolutely not. And I was seriously annoyed at Proab for what he did, and told him so to his face.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(LaraLove @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:43pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:41pm) *

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 12:34pm) *


It's not ipso facto anything, any more than posting here is ipso facto support of WordBomb (remember those days?) I don't buy guilt by association at all, sorry.


If the fact in question is the communication of specific information, evidence (here admissions) of a channel of private correspondence is certainly relevant. This is not "guilt by association." It is establishing a requisite fact in a chain of reasoning.

I don't think Alison leaked it, if that what you thought I was implying. I'm fairly certain her trustworthiness is of the highest level.


I don't know either. She is not the only person who has made such admissions. I can't agree about her "trustworthiness" if by that you mean "the ability to keep information to herself." While I might "trust" her in many ways she has a reputation for revealing information that others might have thought should be kept to herself.

Posted by: tarantino

This branch of the thread has seriously drifted off, and should be moved.

With that said, it seems a bit strange that there's been little condemnation of wikileaker. S/he's probably an ex-arb who's retained CU and OS. The information s/he has access to and has leaked is arguably more sensitive.

Posted by: LaraLove

QUOTE(tarantino @ Sat 7th March 2009, 1:33pm) *

This branch of the thread has seriously drifted off, and should be moved.

With that said, it seems a bit strange that there's been little condemnation of wikileaker. S/he's probably an ex-arb who's retained CU and OS. The information s/he has access to and has leaked is arguably more sensitive.

I guess some of us aren't as worried about ArbCom's dirty little secrets getting released as we are about people's personal docs being dropped along with other such sensitive information that causes real world damage.

And wasn't it already established that Wikileaker screws around with information, so it's not in its original form, or was that someone else that took Arb comments from the list regarding Majorly and tweaked them to be harsher than they were?

Posted by: wikiwhistle

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 5:41pm) *

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sat 7th March 2009, 9:38am) *

QUOTE(Alison @ Sat 7th March 2009, 5:34pm) *

Indeed. It could be any of a number of other people that immediately come to mind, actually. I count four of five Chix members on WR right now, with little effort I'd also really like to know who it was who did leak that info, but he ain't tellin' dry.gif

Of those, which others took up the strange position that it is more acceptable for Proabivouac to have access to that material than it is for Kylu?

Listen to what Lara is saying. It could be any of a number of others - not even WR folks - that were silent on the matter. It's that simple. You're judging based on the one or two you see on here.


Are you saying I said that, Random, because I don't think that I would say that exactly, and I'm not sure what context that was in. What I can say is that I've never leaked anything off wikichix, and I've sworn to them that I haven't, however I've heard that several people are leaking info from there. I don't know who those people are, and that action is not condoned by me.

Posted by: Random832

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sun 8th March 2009, 12:01am) *

Are you saying I said that, Random, because I don't think that I would say that exactly, and I'm not sure what context that was in. What I can say is that I've never leaked anything off wikichix, and I've sworn to them that I haven't, however I've heard that several people are leaking info from there. I don't know who those people are, and that action is not condoned by me.


All I'm saying is you didn't seem particularly concerned about it at the time, contrasted with the kind of crap you were saying about Kylu being on the list. You even made jokes about it (at Kylu's expense, no less).

Posted by: wikiwhistle

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sun 8th March 2009, 12:27am) *

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sun 8th March 2009, 12:01am) *

Are you saying I said that, Random, because I don't think that I would say that exactly, and I'm not sure what context that was in. What I can say is that I've never leaked anything off wikichix, and I've sworn to them that I haven't, however I've heard that several people are leaking info from there. I don't know who those people are, and that action is not condoned by me.


All I'm saying is you didn't seem particularly concerned about it at the time, contrasted with the kind of crap you were saying about Kylu being on the list. You even made jokes about it (at Kylu's expense, no less).


I am totally concerned about it and I said so on wikichix itself. I do feel ambiguous about the Kylu situ. in as much as it's sort of a grey area and people were misled to an extent. But no-one's had a problem with Kylu on the list so it doesn't really matter. My concerns and joke about the Kylu situation only highlight how strongly I would feel about someone who is a self-identified man viewing women's private conversation (even though we can't keep it private and he probably didn't even have to view it directly himself.)

But on the other hand, Proab is sort of a friend. Some people support their friend no matter what they are like. I like to think that unlike some people I wouldn't go that far, but in such a way, I will be light hearted with a friend about some of his traits, but on the list I made it clear I wasn't happy about stuff being leaked. Plus- P. need not even have done anything himself- someone might be volunteering info to him if you see what I mean.

I suppose also, I'm not surprised some stuff was leaked from wikichix, so I can't get quite as worked up about it. But the list makes a big thing about not letting men on, you need to swear you are a woman to get on, so when I found out a bloke who to give a theoretical example might be referred to for instance as "Bob" (short for Robert) in his 9-5 job or whatever was allowed on there it seemed a bit wrong for a moment.

Posted by: Proabivouac

QUOTE(Random832 @ Sun 8th March 2009, 12:27am) *

QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Sun 8th March 2009, 12:01am) *

Are you saying I said that, Random, because I don't think that I would say that exactly, and I'm not sure what context that was in. What I can say is that I've never leaked anything off wikichix, and I've sworn to them that I haven't, however I've heard that several people are leaking info from there. I don't know who those people are, and that action is not condoned by me.

All I'm saying is you didn't seem particularly concerned about it at the time, contrasted with the kind of crap you were saying about Kylu being on the list. You even made jokes about it (at Kylu's expense, no less).

First, you demand evidence, and condemn that an accusation would be made without presenting it. When evidence is presented, you condemn that.

Lar has a problem, and lots of people know about it, but cover for him because he has power. Kylu is one of those who knew about it, but instead of backing whistleblowers he knew firsthand were telling the truth, he misused his admin powers to silence them. That's your Pristine Happy Magic Kingdom that was polluted and spoiled by this horrible leak (and there's more where that came from.)

Say, Random, you live in the same town as Kylu, and you're both coders…are you his friend IRL?




Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sat 7th March 2009, 8:25pm) *



Say, Random, you live in the same town as Kylu, and you're both coders…are you his friend IRL?



Sounds like Proab's squad all over it again. Still my favorite:



Posted by: Anonymous editor

QUOTE(Alison @ Fri 6th March 2009, 2:16am) *

QUOTE(Anonymous editor @ Thu 5th March 2009, 9:21pm) *

Admins are quitting constantly.

I just did ohmy.gif Can't stand it any longer - I just had to get out. Eric Barbour pretty much got it right when he described admin/BLP work as just pushing against an overwhelming tide. And Milton is right in that the individual simply cannot fix the wrongs of the world ...


Sad to see you go. You were a good 'un. An individual cannot do much, but it doesn't hurt not to shut the door entirely, because the tide may turn in the future. It might need your assistance.

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:List_of_administrators&limit=250&action=history, there were 991 active admins as of the 2008 July 21 update. It's now down to 941. During that time period (7 and a half months), there were 75 new admins (only counting RfAs, not bots that got flags through BAG) created.

That means 125 admins who were active back then are no longer active.* That's a lot of people.

*- I should note that I'm assuming that all the 75 admins created are still active. I haven't checked that, but I doubt more than 3 or so wouldn't be considered active by RickBot.

Posted by: Random832

QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sun 8th March 2009, 1:25am) *

First, you demand evidence, and condemn that an accusation would be made without presenting it. When evidence is presented, you condemn that.


What exactly was what you posted evidence of?

QUOTE
Lar has a problem, and lots of people know about it, but cover for him because he has power. Kylu is one of those who knew about it, but instead of backing whistleblowers he knew firsthand were telling the truth,


Telling the truth about what? About the allegations themselves? You haven't even shown that it was true, let alone that Kylu knew.

QUOTE
Say, Random, you live in the same town as Kylu,


Didn't even know that. It's hardly one of those towns where everyone knows everyone, what with the whole 795K people, another 65K-ish in marion county and an extra million or so in the MSA that could all plausibly be identifying as being from Indianapolis.

Posted by: Jon Awbrey

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 5th March 2009, 3:57pm) *

Somewhat lost in the hustle and bustle of Wiki-drama was this nervous breakdown by admin Tanthalas39 on his user page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tanthalas39&diff=273706358&oldid=264562383

He came back two days later. Personally, I don't think anyone missed him. evilgrin.gif


I'm guessing he had to run out for http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tanthalas39&oldid=274265410.

Ja Ja tearinghairout.gif

Posted by: Bottled_Spider

QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Sun 8th March 2009, 4:42am) *
I'm guessing he had to run out for http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tanthalas39&oldid=274265410.

Forget about it, as they say. We're talking complete makeover, here. Mousse, yes, but also hair dye, a really good shave, a haircut and a new personality. According to the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanis_Half-Elven#Appearance_and_traits for his "human" name he's a bearded, red-haired, half-elf who "seldom lies" and has "never completed the elven rite of adulthood". It's nice to see people (or half-elves) of this calibre as Wiki admins.

Posted by: LaraLove

QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sat 7th March 2009, 9:25pm) *

First, you demand evidence, and condemn that an accusation would be made without presenting it. When evidence is presented, you condemn that.

Lar has a problem, and lots of people know about it, but cover for him because he has power. Kylu is one of those who knew about it, but instead of backing whistleblowers he knew firsthand were telling the truth, he misused his admin powers to silence them. That's your Pristine Happy Magic Kingdom that was polluted and spoiled by this horrible leak (and there's more where that came from.)

Say, Random, you live in the same town as Kylu, and you're both coders…are you his friend IRL?

Just a lot of hypocrisy, Proab. Hypocrisy and revenge. Lar was a flirt. Shocker. People "covered" for him, according to you, "because he has power"... hmm, maybe they just feel like they have sort of a friendship with him, so they're just light-hearted about this particular trait of his. Or maybe they're just not all uber-sensitive about being hit on in text. Maybe you got kicked to the curb because you deserve it. I'm sure you don't see it, but plenty of other people do.

Watch out, Random, you're next. If you're really a woman, you better tell us now!

Posted by: Son of a Yeti

QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sat 7th March 2009, 6:25pm) *

Say, Random, you live in the same town as Kylu, and you're both coders…are you his friend IRL?


Say, Proab, you have views as opposite to mine as those of JzG...are you his friend IRL?

evilgrin.gif