| |
|
  |
 JzG up to his old tricks on the Spam Blacklist |
|
|
| Kato |
|
dhd
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined:
Member No.: 767
|
It turns out that JzG is up to his old tricks in the quieter environment of the Spam Blacklist. Apparently, last month, he unilaterally placed a couple of legitimate links on the "Spam blacklist" to enforce some content dispute he was involved in over Cold Fusion. Funnily enough, he did this shortly after I theorized here: QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 27th December 2008, 6:16pm) 
JzG has always been paranoid/obsessed/fixated with arbitrary bits of information which he alone judges to be "spam".
This "spam" notion is so riddled with discrepancies, anomalies and hypocrisies that only JzG has been able to fathom it.
Anything he comes across at any given time can potentially be removed by him as "spam". And the editor who added the removed material can quickly be denounced as someone "not cut out to be a Wikipedian" and may be added to his enemy list.
Some well respected spam supervisor bod picked him up on it (He actually wrote several scathing posts to JzG): http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...energytimes.comQUOTE(Abd to JzG bolding mine) Blocking and banning people who hold a minority position and advocate it is highly unlikely to improve the encyclopedia; it's more likely to make it dull and less useful. When I'm researching a topic, I want to know about the minority positions, in an NPOV but relatively complete manner, not just majority views.
....
[JzG]'s been asked to revert the blacklisting on the grounds of conflict of interest, if nothing else, and he's refused. So ... we will now see if it is legitimate to make "fringe" arguments and RS arguments in blacklisting, if mission creep has overcome the restraints on the blacklists, and if an administrator can protect his own edits to an article by blacklisting. If that's happened, broader community attention will be necessary, I'm afraid. This part of this affair could end quickly, right here. --Abd (talk) 22:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC) and sums up QUOTE(Abd to JzG) [this is] not the mission of the blacklist; instead, it was here used outside its mission by an administrator with clear involvement, in promotion of his "anti-fringe" POV, not in pursuit of true NPOV and balance, on the face of it, but of a "side." JzG responds in the way only he knows how: QUOTE(JzG) Perhaps we can think again if we ever get rid of the ring of POV-pushers, but the fringe types are too much of a problem right now, they got far too embedded and lots of folks are having to work very hard to pick apart all their nonsense and move back towards policy compliance on several articles. Guy (Help!) 21:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
So JzG is doing this all over again. Abd's assessment of JzG here could be applied to a dozen conflicts initiated by JzG in the past, word-for-word. Surely this berserker should be banned by now? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Bottled_Spider |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 533
Joined:
From: Pictland
Member No.: 9,708
|
As Wiki tragicomedy goes, Guy's involvement in the Cold Fusion moshpit is moderately interesting. Abd's summing-up of Mr. Angry's performance is here; the associated talkpage, complete with a nice Guy whine is here. Abd's reply is rather long-winded - all he needed to say was " In short, JzG, you screwed up", which he did. Imagine the drama if JzG went temporarily insane® and blocked Abd for his impertinence. I'll pay someone money if they can engineer that. |
|
|
|
|
|
| dtobias |
|
Obsessive trolling idiot [per JzG]
Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,213
Joined:
From: Boca Raton, FL, USA
Member No.: 962
|
This is rather old news now.
JzG's general attitude, in this and other issues, is "I'm right. I'm always right. It's blatantly obvious I'm right, and anybody with the slightest bit of common sense can see that clearly. Hence, it shouldn't even be a matter for debate. Anybody attempting to debate me on this must be a troll, a POV pusher, or an idiot, and all people like that should be banned. It's frustrating that occasionally somebody who's too much of a vested contributor to ban will have the temerity to debate me on things like this, which forces a useless and time-wasting discussion to start; the proper way to deal with this is to close discussion as soon as possible and then delete or archive it so it doesn't erupt again. It's even better if discussion can be forestalled before it even has a chance to start; I just need to sweep in, do a mass purge of the offending links, add it to the blacklist, block the users who were adding the link, and make a brief announcement after it's a fait accompli."
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Bottled_Spider |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 533
Joined:
From: Pictland
Member No.: 9,708
|
QUOTE(dtobias @ Sun 15th February 2009, 2:47pm) JzG's general attitude, in this and other issues, is ...... illustrated perfectly in the overrated movie Good Morning Vietnam, when the irritating Robin Williams character says to JzG a rather anal officer " You are in more dire need of a blowjob than any white man in history". |
|
|
|
|
|
| EricBarbour |
|
blah
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined:
Member No.: 5,066
|
At least Abd is honest. QUOTE WELCOME TO Abd TALK
Before reading User talk:Abd
WARNING: Reading the screeds, tomes, or rants of Abd has been known to cause serious damage to mental health. One editor, a long-time Wikipedian, in spite of warnings from a real-life organization dedicated to protecting the planet from the likes of Abd, actually read Abd's comments and thought he understood them. This is charming. QUOTE Guy is quite skilled at making whoever's arguing with him seem like the unreasonable parties in the debate, and he's got a fairly powerful clique of others who have his back, enabling him to carry on being the Judge Dredd of Wikipedia, acting as prosecutor, judge, jury, executioner, undertaker, and obituary writer for everybody he decides, on his own recognizance, to be a spammer, POV-pusher, or holder of nonconformist opinion. *Dan T.* (talk) 01:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC) This appears to be a case of one crazy bastard versus another..... the cold-fusion dispute is turning into yet another Objectivism War. Best not to take sides. (But it's still okay to downgrade Guy. He always deserves abuse.) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jon Awbrey |
|
Ï„á½° δΠμοι παθήματα μαθήματα γÎγονε
Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,783
Joined:
From: Meat Puppet Nation
Member No.: 5,619
|
QUOTE(Kato @ Sun 15th February 2009, 2:13am) It turns out that JzG is up to his old tricks in the quieter environment of the Spam Blacklist. Apparently, last month, he unilaterally placed a couple of legitimate links on the "Spam blacklist" to enforce some content dispute he was involved in over Cold Fusion. Funnily enough, he did this shortly after I theorized here: QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 27th December 2008, 6:16pm)
JzG has always been paranoid/obsessed/fixated with arbitrary bits of information which he alone judges to be "spam".
This "spam" notion is so riddled with discrepancies, anomalies and hypocrisies that only JzG has been able to fathom it.
Anything he comes across at any given time can potentially be removed by him as "spam". And the editor who added the removed material can quickly be denounced as someone "not cut out to be a Wikipedian" and may be added to his enemy list.
The term SPAM has a technical and even a legal definition, referring to unsolicited mass mailings or postings. The term SPAM does not refer to the isolated posting of references to sources of information about whose relevance to the topic at hand reasonable people might tend to have a variety of opinions. As always, Wikipediots use words any ole way they damn well please and then wikipontificate against all the uncleansed souls who decline to wash their own brains in Jimbo's patent pending Brand Of Identity-Disputed Powdered Instant Softdrink (BOIDPIS). Jon (IMG: http://wikipediareview.com/stimg9x0b4fsr2/1/folder_post_icons/icon9.gif) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Son of a Yeti |
|
High altitude member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 415
Joined:
From: A hiding place in the Himalaya
Member No.: 8,704
|
QUOTE(Bottled_Spider @ Sun 15th February 2009, 6:24am)
Imagine the drama if JzG went temporarily insane® and blocked Abd for his impertinence.
In my opinion this you demand the impossible. Or maybe you've simply misspelled "temporary sane"? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Bottled_Spider |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 533
Joined:
From: Pictland
Member No.: 9,708
|
QUOTE(Son of a Yeti @ Mon 16th February 2009, 4:08pm) QUOTE(Bottled_Spider @ Sun 15th February 2009, 6:24am)
Imagine the drama if JzG went temporarily insane® and blocked Abd for his impertinence.
In my opinion this you demand the impossible. Or maybe you've simply misspelled "temporary sane"? I'd written temporarily insane bracket r close-bracket, which the board translated into the Robin-the-Boy-Wonder symbol. insane(r ). That's better. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Milton Roe |
|
Known alias of J. Random Troll
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined:
Member No.: 5,156
|
QUOTE(dtobias @ Sun 15th February 2009, 7:47am)
This is rather old news now.
JzG's general attitude, in this and other issues, is "I'm right. I'm always right. It's blatantly obvious I'm right, and anybody with the slightest bit of common sense can see that clearly. Hence, it shouldn't even be a matter for debate. Anybody attempting to debate me on this must be a troll, a POV pusher, or an idiot, and all people like that should be banned. It's frustrating that occasionally somebody who's too much of a vested contributor to ban will have the temerity to debate me on things like this, which forces a useless and time-wasting discussion to start; the proper way to deal with this is to close discussion as soon as possible and then delete or archive it so it doesn't erupt again. It's even better if discussion can be forestalled before it even has a chance to start; I just need to sweep in, do a mass purge of the offending links, add it to the blacklist, block the users who were adding the link, and make a brief announcement after it's a fait accompli."
Yep the Lewis Strauss/Ayn Rand syndrome, which we've discussed before. Strauss, persecutor of Oppenheimer. If you disagreed with a Strauss position, he would repeat his argument, assuming you'd misheard or were just stupid. If you continued to disagree after that, he'd assume you were a traitor. Rand was much the same, except with less patience. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) |
|
|
|
|
|
| Castle Rock |
|
Senior Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 358
Joined:
From: Oregon
Member No.: 3,051
|
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Mon 16th February 2009, 11:37pm) QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 17th February 2009, 12:21am)
How long before JzG storms off again in a fit of pique, pens some nasty delusional attacks against his "enemies", sulks for a couple of weeks, before returning to start the cycle all over again?
And when we say "start the cycle all over again," in JzG's case we mean it literally. I hate you so much right now. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Kato |
|
dhd
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined:
Member No.: 767
|
Classic JzG: QUOTE(JzG) Abd's rather strident crusade on behalf of Jed Rothwell, now topic banned from this area, seems to me to be disruptive. Enric Naval is focusing on content and we are discussing things perfectly calmly, Abd is focusing largely on asserted bad faith and personalising the dispute. This is simply not helpful in this highly contentious area of content. that Abd has been beating the lenr-canr drum at numerous venues , I am minded to ask for a restriction preventing him from continuing to pursue his esoteric views of content and blacklisting policy.
...
As an aside, having accused me of edit-warring, Abd then went and restored the disputed content. He forgot to mention that, didn't he? If I am edit-warring, then so is he! Sauce for the goose.
...
As far as I am concerned this is a good-faith debate between Enric and myself, Abd playing the part of the peanut gallery . Guy (Help!) 09:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC) Has JzG's outrageous hypocrisy and lack of self awareness ever been more obvious? He managed accuse the bloke of asserting "bad faith and personalising the dispute" - while repeatedly assuming bad faith and personalising the dispute.JzG is a Wikipedia legend. --------------------------------- Oh and JzG's talk page charm is back as well. He deletes Abd's query on his talk page with: QUOTE(JzG) Go away, you are being tiresome JzG must be the Worst Wikipedian in history? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Bottled_Spider |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 533
Joined:
From: Pictland
Member No.: 9,708
|
JzG. His mind beats time like clockwork. I like the way he tries to restructure reality on & with his talkpage. He follows the same agenda time after time. And why not? Why change something if it works? Here is a breakdown of the latest spasm. Hmm. Breakdown. Prophetic word, perhaps? Date of excerpt is Monday 16 February; times are UTC ....... [1] 21:47. Standard complainant (Abd) makes standard complaint. [2] 22:09. Guy replies. Complete with not-so-veiled threat. [3] 22:11. Guy makes quick correction, justifying whatever Wiki shit he's on about a bit more. [4] 22:52. Abd replies. Long-winded, but gets his point across. Returns the threat, but with more panache. [5] 23:05. Guy says to himself "fuck it" and deletes the entire thread. Edit summary : " Go away, you are beiong (sic) tiresome". Heh! Actually, I'm pleased to see the real Guy is "bouncing back". He must be finally getting over that stuff with his old dad. Good. I predict much JzG-based fun over the coming weeks and months (if he lasts that long). You go, Guy! |
|
|
|
|
|
| dtobias |
|
Obsessive trolling idiot [per JzG]
Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,213
Joined:
From: Boca Raton, FL, USA
Member No.: 962
|
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 17th February 2009, 2:08am) The issue is a moron? ---------------- Now playing: Kathleen Edwards - Back to Mevia FoxyTunesQUOTE(Kato @ Tue 17th February 2009, 5:51am)
JzG is a Wikipedia legend.
He also has accused Abd of having a "hobby horse", and of beating dead horses. A dead hobby horse, maybe? |
|
|
|
|
|
| EricBarbour |
|
blah
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined:
Member No.: 5,066
|
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Tue 17th February 2009, 10:04am) Jossi's out
Slim's doing her bi-annual lay low til the shit dies down routine, this time donning full hairshirt
JayJG's in between laying low between schiessesturms, getting his posse' "back" in order
JzG's back to his flaming, outrageous embarrassment of WP No need to vote on this. After a few more weeks of today's Abd war, Guy will win first place by acclimation. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif) Have you seen Abd's talk page today? Every day he looks more and more like a "good" version of FT2--similar verbal diarrhea, but far more honest. And his battle with Hu12 is reaching a new level of hysterics. If this keeps up, Abd will deserve some kind of award for standing up to the cabal. I need to start a new thread about Hu12. He's a real prize--a hyper-censor and "silencer", using the spam list as a club. Plus a first-class wikilawyer and word-twister. Totally intolerant of criticism, uses admin tools in a pathetic ham-fisted way. Mebbe he needs to take a page from Guy's Book Of Non-Negotiation, and just throw childish tantrums instead. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/yecch.gif) (And now he's attracting the wrong kind of attention.) |
|
|
|
|
|
| dtobias |
|
Obsessive trolling idiot [per JzG]
Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,213
Joined:
From: Boca Raton, FL, USA
Member No.: 962
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 17th February 2009, 8:37pm) And his battle with Hu12 is reaching a new level of hysterics. If this keeps up, Abd will deserve some kind of award for standing up to the cabal. I need to start a new thread about Hu12. He's a real prize--a hyper-censor and "silencer", using the spam list as a club. Plus a first-class wikilawyer and word-twister. Totally intolerant of criticism, uses admin tools in a pathetic ham-fisted way. Mebbe he needs to take a page from Guy's Book Of Non-Negotiation, and just throw childish tantrums instead. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/yecch.gif) (And now he's attracting the wrong kind of attention.) Hu12's a corrupt little scum bag. He was exposed as such during the Overstock.com-Gerard banscam. Judd created an account (something he had to do everytime he needed to present a much-needed WP:POINT) to ask Hu12 how it was that he and Gerard came to the conclusion that there was supposedly a team of Overstock.com spammers that had to be banned from WP. Hu12 could offer nothing to back up his claim. He/she is a dishonest admin, along with Gerard, and their lies have gone unchallenged since. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Abd |
|
Postmaster
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
|
QUOTE(Kato @ Sun 15th February 2009, 7:13am)
So JzG is doing this all over again. Abd's assessment of JzG here could be applied to a dozen conflicts initiated by JzG in the past, word-for-word. Surely this berserker should be banned by now?
(I'm not an admin or "supervisor," just an editor with some clarity and persistence. I've said many times I don't need admin tools and if I had them I'd be tempted to use them, the only thing that would be useful in my "meta" work -- i.e., on process -- would be the ability to see deleted contributions.) After trying unsuccessfully to resolve this through lesser means (I'm a firm believer in WP:DR, which actually works if used with care and caution), after JzG MfD'd the evidence page I'd presented in an RfAr he'd filed, and it was practically demanded I file an RfC, though I'd have continued efforts short of that, I did it. And there is, as some have noticed, an outcry to ban me. WP:DGAF. If I can't follow WP procedure and policy, as it was intended and written, because some admin has a following dedicated to protecting him from the consequences of his actions, please, block me or ban me, I will be grateful. But I don't think it's going to happen. See, this case appears to be right on track to go to ArbComm, it made the required stop at RfC, and the principles are so clear that response has been limited to the lame "He didn't do anything wrong," as if violating fundamental admin policy isn't wrong, or, "he did the wrong thing but it was for a good cause," (when, in fact, there has never been a determination that these actions were good, rather, some haven't been challenged yet, more than the first step in WP:DR, precisely to avoid disruption), and "Abd is a [fill in the incivility and irrelevancy]," which is a well-known argument practically guaranteed to fail outside of the riots at AN and AN/I. I could be blocked and banned immediately, and this train would still make it to ArbComm. All the work has been done. There is no need for pile-on or supportive comments, and, indeed, please do not go to the RfC and add irrelevancies there. It is only about failure to recuse when involved. That's why it will succeed. Let his side bring up all the irrelevancies they want, they will only hasten the day of reckoning. (But if someone has new evidence to present on that specific issue, not already presented, sure, but please keep the focus, and, I'd suggest, any examples of failure to recuse should be recent, not before January of this year, when it should have become clear to him that there was a problem.) There is only one response that might protect JzG's admin bit, I've been begging for it for months: someone he trusts points out to him that admission of error is a sign of maturity, it endears the one admitting to the community, the first time it's done, it completely defuses the issue, because, remember, Wikipedia does not punish (it appears that he has broken that principle as well, but never mind), and, so, would he please write "My bad. Admins should not use tools where they are involved. I won't do that again." It would all go away. Unless he does it again. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |
