Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ Editors _ Baseball Bugs
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
There's a discussion on ANI (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=338213798&oldid=338211255#User:Dream_Focus) about whether a user should be banned for referring to Roman Polanski as a child rapist on Jimbo's talk page, per BLP.
There seem to be a lot of Polanski defenders on Wikipedia.
The following post disturbed me the most, though. Apparently, statutory rape against a 13-year-old isn't the same as statutory rape against a child.
QUOTE
Polanksi was convicted of statutory rape, and there is no question whatsoever that he committed that crime. Calling him a "child" rapist, however, is a question of definition, as his victim was 13 years old, not 5 or something. So it's best to stick to what he was convicted of and avoid emotionally-charged terminology. â†Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:50, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps it's another example of why Wikipedia is broken - because they generally believe a 13-year-old isn't a child.
Posted by: Deodand
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sat 16th January 2010, 6:22pm) 
There's a discussion on ANI (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=338213798&oldid=338211255#User:Dream_Focus) about whether a user should be banned for referring to Roman Polanski as a child rapist on Jimbo's talk page, per BLP.
There seem to be a lot of Polanski defenders on Wikipedia.
The following post disturbed me the most, though. Apparently, statutory rape against a 13-year-old isn't the same as statutory rape against a child.
QUOTE
Polanksi was convicted of statutory rape, and there is no question whatsoever that he committed that crime. Calling him a "child" rapist, however, is a question of definition, as his victim was 13 years old, not 5 or something. So it's best to stick to what he was convicted of and avoid emotionally-charged terminology. â†Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:50, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps it's another example of why Wikipedia is broken - because they generally believe a 13-year-old isn't a child.
That's because in legal terms, a 13 year old isn't, in most jurisdictions. It's statutory rape rather than "child rape".
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(Deodand @ Sat 16th January 2010, 11:31am)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sat 16th January 2010, 6:22pm)
There's a discussion on ANI (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=338213798&oldid=338211255#User:Dream_Focus) about whether a user should be banned for referring to Roman Polanski as a child rapist on Jimbo's talk page, per BLP.
There seem to be a lot of Polanski defenders on Wikipedia.
The following post disturbed me the most, though. Apparently, statutory rape against a 13-year-old isn't the same as statutory rape against a child.
QUOTE
Polanksi was convicted of statutory rape, and there is no question whatsoever that he committed that crime. Calling him a "child" rapist, however, is a question of definition, as his victim was 13 years old, not 5 or something. So it's best to stick to what he was convicted of and avoid emotionally-charged terminology. â†Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:50, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps it's another example of why Wikipedia is broken - because they generally believe a 13-year-old isn't a child.
That's because in legal terms, a 13 year old isn't, in most jurisdictions. It's statutory rape rather than "child rape".
Yes, though in Polanski's case, since heavy drugging was involved (not something his victim brought or ordinarily used) it was rape-rape, not "only" statutory-rape.
Posted by: Limey
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 16th January 2010, 6:54pm)
Yes, though in Polanski's case, since heavy drugging was involved (not something his victim brought or ordinarily used) it was rape-rape, not "only" statutory-rape.
Well in a miscarriage (or victory if you a particular point of view) of justice, he was charged only with statutory rape.
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(Limey @ Sat 16th January 2010, 12:21pm)
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 16th January 2010, 6:54pm)
Yes, though in Polanski's case, since heavy drugging was involved (not something his victim brought or ordinarily used) it was rape-rape, not "only" statutory-rape.
Well in a miscarriage (or victory if you a particular point of view) of justice, he was charged only with statutory rape.
Yes, which the system forgot about at sentencing time, in contravention to prior agreement. Then said, "We can discuss that little matter if you come back and submit to arrest." To which Polanski said "Gee, and you want me to take YOUR WORD on that?"
Basically a pox on everybody involved in this FUBARed case. Perhaps they should just start over and re-try him for the same crime, slate clean. An appeals judge could actually set it all aside and make them do that.
Posted by: Somey
The problem in this case, really, is that the person who made the initial post to Jimbo's talk page (as reported to AN/I by Tony Sidaway (T-C-L-K-R-D)
) is the notorious Dream Focus (T-C-L-K-R-D)
, who apparently has never met a BLP he didn't want Wikipedia to keep, often for practically no legitimate reason whatsoever other than "there are multiple Google hits."
I personally don't think Jimbo's talk page is anything to get worked up over - I realize that it's one of the most-watched pages on WP, but if search engines aren't indexing it and everybody is signing their entries to make it clear they're just one person's perspective/opinion, relatively little harm is done beyond the usual potential for rumor-mongering (which could start almost anywhere on the internet).
Meanwhile, Mr. Sidaway could be looking for cases of unchecked BLP defamation to less-than-famous people and fix them, but of course that would generate waaay less drama, so that idea's a non-starter.
Posted by: Krimpet
QUOTE(Deodand @ Sat 16th January 2010, 1:31pm)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sat 16th January 2010, 6:22pm)
Perhaps it's another example of why Wikipedia is broken - because they generally believe a 13-year-old isn't a child.
That's because in legal terms, a 13 year old isn't, in most jurisdictions. It's statutory rape rather than "child rape".
According to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child:
QUOTE(UN Convention on the Rights of the Child)
For the purposes of the present Convention, a child means every human being below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.
The age of majority in most of the US, including California where the rape took place, is 18; ergo, it's perfectly reasonable to say the victim was a child.
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
I take the point I may have been wrong, but how about this.
Calling Roman Polanski a child-rapist - does it do him any real world damage? Could he win libel action? I doubt it.
Yet the editors who care so much about this seem happy when others are libelled and damaged. Shame some of the thousands of people with inaccurate BLPs on Wikipedia haven't made a few half decent films, if they had they might have an army to look after their pages!
Posted by: RMHED
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sat 16th January 2010, 6:22pm)
There's a discussion on ANI (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=338213798&oldid=338211255#User:Dream_Focus) about whether a user should be banned for referring to Roman Polanski as a child rapist on Jimbo's talk page, per BLP.
There seem to be a lot of Polanski defenders on Wikipedia.
The following post disturbed me the most, though. Apparently, statutory rape against a 13-year-old isn't the same as statutory rape against a child.
QUOTE
Polanksi was convicted of statutory rape, and there is no question whatsoever that he committed that crime. Calling him a "child" rapist, however, is a question of definition, as his victim was 13 years old, not 5 or something. So it's best to stick to what he was convicted of and avoid emotionally-charged terminology. â†Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:50, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps it's another example of why Wikipedia is broken - because they generally believe a 13-year-old isn't a child.
Baseball Bugs is a frequent turd in the AN/I swimming pool. Though to be fair he's no worse than many others.
Posted by: SB_Johnny
QUOTE(Somey @ Sat 16th January 2010, 2:44pm)
Meanwhile, Mr. Sidaway could be looking for cases of unchecked BLP defamation to less-than-famous people and fix them, but of course that would generate waaay less drama, so that idea's a non-starter.
Well, to be fair, if he's a "true believer" (I wouldn't know him from Adam), then going whole hog on making the high profile BLPs would be important. Keeping an eye on the low profile ones would require a lot of work from a lot of responsible-type folks. Those are in short supply.
QUOTE(RMHED @ Sat 16th January 2010, 6:15pm)
Baseball Bugs is a frequent turd in the AN/I swimming pool. Though to be fair he's no worse than many others.
He's amusingly witty though. Credit where credit's due.
Posted by: BelovedFox
Getting out of the muck that is the whole Roman Polanski story, and referring to the topic at hand:
It does appear that Baseball Bugs is evidence that a) too much humor is a bad thing (or perhaps the inability to take the right things seriously?) and b) spending too much time on administrator's noticeboards does lead to rather reflexive and unhelpful behavior (or he was just drawn to it, and hasn't changed a bit.)
On the plus side, I think most users have realized that he would be a very poor administrator because of that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Baseball_Bugs
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(RMHED @ Sat 16th January 2010, 6:15pm)
Baseball Bugs is a frequent turd in the AN/I swimming pool. Though to be fair he's no worse than many others.
BB tends to be a little funnier than most of the AN/I addicts, and for some time he was a wonderful irritant who brought out the worst in Tanthalas39. But outside of snide wisecracks, he offers relatively little of value to Wikipedia.
Posted by: Deodand
BB on ANI sort of reminds me of a local politician I deal with. Whatever the situation, regardless of whether it's out of his area of knowledge, he feels the need to comment on every single damn thing, even if those comments are useless and add nothing of value to the conversation.
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
His edits to AN/I number http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Contributors.php?wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&grouped=on&page=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27+noticeboard%2FIncidents.
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Sun 17th January 2010, 3:27am)
BB tends to be a little funnier than most of the AN/I addicts, and for some time he was a wonderful irritant who brought out the worst in Tanthalas39. But outside of snide wisecracks, he offers relatively little of value to Wikipedia.
For a while there I thought you were him, actually. Who else gives a fuck about Tanthalas39 (who?).
Posted by: TungstenCarbide
BaseballBugs came and baited me once on my talk page. I kinda feel sorry for him though - I suspect he gets all his social interaction from wikidrama.
Posted by: victim of censorship
QUOTE(TungstenCarbide @ Sun 17th January 2010, 7:30pm)
BaseballBugs came and baited me once on my talk page. I kinda feel sorry for him though - I suspect he gets all his social interaction from wikidrama.
I think you right, which if that's the case, would be very sad indeed! Another misfit with the power of wiki to hurt others.
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sun 17th January 2010, 8:06am)
For a while there I thought you were him, actually. Who else gives a fuck about Tanthalas39 (who?).
Mrs. Tanthalas39?
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sun 17th January 2010, 7:06am)
His edits to AN/I number http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Contributors.php?wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&grouped=on&page=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27+noticeboard%2FIncidents.
Is that an all-time record or something? That seems like an awfully high number, especially for a non-administrator.
QUOTE
Who else gives a fuck about Tanthalas39 (who?).
Well, it's common knowledge that Tanthalas39 is the only Wikipedia user I really care about, ever since he helped me deal with that terrifying emotional meltdown I had back in 2008, when I heard that In Harm's Way was cancelled.
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 17th January 2010, 5:17pm)
QUOTE
Who else gives a fuck about Tanthalas39 (who?).
Well, it's common knowledge that Tanthalas39 is the only Wikipedia user I really care about, ever since he helped me deal with that terrifying emotional meltdown I had back in 2008, when I heard that In Harm's Way was cancelled.
I had an encounter with Tanthalus39 way back when he was just a user. My impression was that he was as nakedly ambitious and dickheaded a user as I'd ever seen. Clearly a martinet in embryo, and headed upward. I made up my mind to watch him and oppose his RfA, when it inevitably happened. Then, of course, I missed it.
But my fears seem to have been confirmed.
Posted by: Malleus
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Mon 18th January 2010, 1:15am)
QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 17th January 2010, 5:17pm)
QUOTE
Who else gives a fuck about Tanthalas39 (who?).
Well, it's common knowledge that Tanthalas39 is the only Wikipedia user I really care about, ever since he helped me deal with that terrifying emotional meltdown I had back in 2008, when I heard that In Harm's Way was cancelled.
I had an encounter with Tanthalus39 way back when he was just a user. My impression was that he was as nakedly ambitious and dickheaded a user as I'd ever seen. Clearly a martinet in embryo, and headed upward. I made up my mind to watch him and oppose his RfA, when it inevitably happened. Then, of course, I missed it.
But my fears seem to have been confirmed.
He's no worse than loads of other administrators.
Posted by: The Joy
QUOTE(Malleus @ Sun 17th January 2010, 8:45pm)
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Mon 18th January 2010, 1:15am)
QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 17th January 2010, 5:17pm)
QUOTE
Who else gives a fuck about Tanthalas39 (who?).
Well, it's common knowledge that Tanthalas39 is the only Wikipedia user I really care about, ever since he helped me deal with that terrifying emotional meltdown I had back in 2008, when I heard that In Harm's Way was cancelled.
I had an encounter with Tanthalus39 way back when he was just a user. My impression was that he was as nakedly ambitious and dickheaded a user as I'd ever seen. Clearly a martinet in embryo, and headed upward. I made up my mind to watch him and oppose his RfA, when it inevitably happened. Then, of course, I missed it.
But my fears seem to have been confirmed.
He's no worse than loads of other administrators.
You seem to say that a lot about every Wikipedian. Who is the worst Wikipedian in your view?
Posted by: Malleus
QUOTE(The Joy @ Mon 18th January 2010, 2:54am)
QUOTE(Malleus @ Sun 17th January 2010, 8:45pm)
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Mon 18th January 2010, 1:15am)
QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 17th January 2010, 5:17pm)
QUOTE
Who else gives a fuck about Tanthalas39 (who?).
Well, it's common knowledge that Tanthalas39 is the only Wikipedia user I really care about, ever since he helped me deal with that terrifying emotional meltdown I had back in 2008, when I heard that In Harm's Way was cancelled.
I had an encounter with Tanthalus39 way back when he was just a user. My impression was that he was as nakedly ambitious and dickheaded a user as I'd ever seen. Clearly a martinet in embryo, and headed upward. I made up my mind to watch him and oppose his RfA, when it inevitably happened. Then, of course, I missed it.
But my fears seem to have been confirmed.
He's no worse than loads of other administrators.
You seem to say that a lot about every Wikipedian. Who is the worst Wikipedian in your view?
You don't seem to be able to read. I was talking about administrators, not wikipedians.
Posted by: victim of censorship
QUOTE(Malleus @ Mon 18th January 2010, 4:19am)
QUOTE(The Joy @ Mon 18th January 2010, 2:54am)
QUOTE(Malleus @ Sun 17th January 2010, 8:45pm)
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Mon 18th January 2010, 1:15am)
QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 17th January 2010, 5:17pm)
QUOTE
Who else gives a fuck about Tanthalas39 (who?).
Well, it's common knowledge that Tanthalas39 is the only Wikipedia user I really care about, ever since he helped me deal with that terrifying emotional meltdown I had back in 2008, when I heard that In Harm's Way was cancelled.
I had an encounter with Tanthalus39 way back when he was just a user. My impression was that he was as nakedly ambitious and dickheaded a user as I'd ever seen. Clearly a martinet in embryo, and headed upward. I made up my mind to watch him and oppose his RfA, when it inevitably happened. Then, of course, I missed it.
But my fears seem to have been confirmed.
He's no worse than loads of other administrators.
You seem to say that a lot about every Wikipedian. Who is the worst Wikipedian in your view?
You don't seem to be able to read. I was talking about administrators, not wikipedians.
Raul654 (T-C-L-K-R-D) Gamaliel (T-C-L-K-R-D) Jimbo_Wales (T-C-L-K-R-D)
Mod note: Corrected link. -The Joy
Posted by: The Joy
QUOTE(Malleus @ Sun 17th January 2010, 11:19pm)
QUOTE(The Joy @ Mon 18th January 2010, 2:54am)
You seem to say that a lot about every Wikipedian. Who is the worst Wikipedian in your view?
You don't seem to be able to read. I was talking about administrators, not wikipedians.
Baseball Bugs is not an administrator. That's why I got confused. I seem to be trapped in WR's No Man's Land these past few days. Yeesh!
At least we can both agree BB should not be an administrator (right?). I find anyone that keeps on AN is A-) Looking for drama, and/or B-) Trying to make his/her self important for their impending RFA.
Posted by: Deodand
QUOTE(The Joy @ Mon 18th January 2010, 5:11am)
QUOTE(Malleus @ Sun 17th January 2010, 11:19pm)
QUOTE(The Joy @ Mon 18th January 2010, 2:54am)
You seem to say that a lot about every Wikipedian. Who is the worst Wikipedian in your view?
You don't seem to be able to read. I was talking about administrators, not wikipedians.
Baseball Bugs is not an administrator. That's why I got confused. I seem to be trapped in WR's No Man's Land these past few days. Yeesh!
At least we can both agree BB should not be an administrator (right?). I find anyone that keeps on AN is A-) Looking for drama, and/or B-) Trying to make his/her self important for their impending RFA.
You forgot C - about to get blocked, but then they hang around ANI for very different reasons
Posted by: Trick cyclist
QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 18th January 2010, 12:17am)
Well, it's common knowledge that Tanthalas39 is the only Wikipedia user I really care about
Somey! How can you do this to me! You might at least have told me we were breaking up before announcing it to the world! My heart is dashed.
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Malleus @ Sun 17th January 2010, 8:45pm)
He's no worse than loads of other administrators.
Just louder and coarser.
As for Mr. Bugs, in real life he is an adult employed at Northrop Grumman (he once signed in as an IP by error and that factoid popped up).
QUOTE(Trick cyclist @ Mon 18th January 2010, 8:34am)
QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 18th January 2010, 12:17am)
Well, it's common knowledge that Tanthalas39 is the only Wikipedia user I really care about
Somey! How can you do this to me! You might at least have told me we were breaking up before announcing it to the world! My heart is dashed.
You know that line from "The Fantasticks" -- without the hurt, the heart is hollow.
Posted by: victim of censorship
QUOTE(The Joy @ Mon 18th January 2010, 5:11am)
QUOTE(Malleus @ Sun 17th January 2010, 11:19pm)
QUOTE(The Joy @ Mon 18th January 2010, 2:54am)
You seem to say that a lot about every Wikipedian. Who is the worst Wikipedian in your view?
You don't seem to be able to read. I was talking about administrators, not wikipedians.
Baseball Bugs is not an administrator. That's why I got confused. I seem to be trapped in WR's No Man's Land these past few days. Yeesh!
At least we can both agree BB should not be an administrator (right?). I find anyone that keeps on AN is A-) Looking for drama, and/or B-) Trying to make his/her self important for their impending RFA.
BB acts like one with the enabling of other admins...
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Mon 18th January 2010, 2:04pm)
QUOTE(Malleus @ Sun 17th January 2010, 8:45pm)
He's no worse than loads of other administrators.
Just louder and coarser.
As for Mr. Bugs, in real life he is an adult employed at Northrop Grumman (he once signed in as an IP by error and that factoid popped up).
QUOTE(Trick cyclist @ Mon 18th January 2010, 8:34am)
QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 18th January 2010, 12:17am)
Well, it's common knowledge that Tanthalas39 is the only Wikipedia user I really care about
Somey! How can you do this to me! You might at least have told me we were breaking up before announcing it to the world! My heart is dashed.
BBugs is still a punk
You know that line from "The Fantasticks" -- without the hurt, the heart is hollow.
Posted by: Tarc
QUOTE(Somey @ Sat 16th January 2010, 2:44pm)
The problem in this case, really, is that the person who made the initial post to Jimbo's talk page (as reported to AN/I by Tony Sidaway (T-C-L-K-R-D) ) is the notorious Dream Focus (T-C-L-K-R-D) , who apparently has never met a BLP he didn't want Wikipedia to keep, often for practically no legitimate reason whatsoever other than "there are multiple Google hits."
Ugh. Apart from a BLP issue, Dream Focus is also one of those twits who has argued vociferously to keep every CountryX-CountryY relations article. Because, y'know, there's such a rich history between http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Estonia–Luxembourg_relations
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Tarc @ Mon 18th January 2010, 10:32am)
QUOTE(Somey @ Sat 16th January 2010, 2:44pm)
The problem in this case, really, is that the person who made the initial post to Jimbo's talk page (as reported to AN/I by Tony Sidaway (T-C-L-K-R-D) ) is the notorious Dream Focus (T-C-L-K-R-D) , who apparently has never met a BLP he didn't want Wikipedia to keep, often for practically no legitimate reason whatsoever other than "there are multiple Google hits."
Ugh. Apart from a BLP issue, Dream Focus is also one of those twits who has argued vociferously to keep every CountryX-CountryY relations article. Because, y'know, there's such a rich history between http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Estonia–Luxembourg_relations
Egad, I LOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE those zany articles! For some time, they were all over AfD!
Posted by: Deodand
A Horse, do you really think you're the person to criticise somebody who posts irrelevant, desperately-trying-to-be-funny comments all over the wiki and wants to be an admin?
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Deodand @ Mon 18th January 2010, 1:12pm)
A Horse, do you really think you're the person to criticise somebody who posts irrelevant, desperately-trying-to-be-funny comments all over the wiki and wants to be an admin?
Uh, yes.
Besides, I am not being critical of BB. I acknowledge that he is a little funnier than most of the Wiki characters. And I did appreciate his Tan baiting.
By the way, Deodand, who are you on Wikipedia?
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 18th January 2010, 12:17am)
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sun 17th January 2010, 7:06am)
His edits to AN/I number http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Contributors.php?wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&grouped=on&page=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27+noticeboard%2FIncidents.
Is that an all-time record or something? That seems like an awfully high number, especially for a non-administrator.
Yes. The tool featured in above url lists all editors of a given page, sortable in several ways (most usefully by number of edits, which is the default).
He passed JzG some ten months ago, during or shortly after his RFA, at which time they both would have had roughly 2,950 AN/I edits.
JzG has only 112 AN/I edits since that point, while Baseball Bugs has over 2,000.
Posted by: Apathetic
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Mon 18th January 2010, 2:03pm)
QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 18th January 2010, 12:17am)
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sun 17th January 2010, 7:06am)
His edits to AN/I number http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Contributors.php?wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&grouped=on&page=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27+noticeboard%2FIncidents.
Is that an all-time record or something? That seems like an awfully high number, especially for a non-administrator.
Yes. The tool featured in above url lists all editors of a given page, sortable in several ways (most usefully by number of edits, which is the default).
He passed JzG some ten months ago, during or shortly after his RFA, at which time they both would have had roughly 2,950 AN/I edits.
JzG has only 112 AN/I edits since that point, while Baseball Bugs has over 2,000.
I http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Baseball_Bugs&oldid=290674510#Talkback (scroll up - HTML parser not recognizing period) to shy Baseball Bugs away from the page where he holds handily the number 1 contributor spot (even above the archiving bot). I also wrote an essay entitled WP:RUBBERNECKING on the subject...
Posted by: SB_Johnny
QUOTE(Apathetic @ Mon 18th January 2010, 2:16pm)
I http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Baseball_Bugs/Archive011#WP:ANI.2C_Cubs.2C_etc to shy Baseball Bugs away from the page where he holds handily the number 1 contributor spot (even above the archiving bot). I also wrote an essay entitled WP:RUBBERNECKING on the subject...
If somebody's going to be making lists, it should be for people who out-edit the bots on drama pages.
And while you're at it, please bring the bodies a bit closer. Hard to see out of the passenger window!
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Mon 18th January 2010, 7:21pm)
If somebody's going to be making lists, it should be for people who out-edit the bots on drama pages.
Well the bot typically edits AN/I only three times a day, at even 8-hour intervals (though it might go into some kind of "angry mode" and archive more frequently upon noticing that the page is fucking huge).
However since 2009-03-13, the Friday (!) on which his RFA closed, this fool has edited AN/I at the rate of about 7.8 per day on 261 different days.
While this excludes the 11 days he was completely inactive and the 39 days he confined himself to other pages, it still can't be healthy.
Posted by: gomi
[Moderator's note: Somey deleted silly speculation accusing people of being others, threatening to derail the topic. The same names were reposted, and I removed them. Stop it, or the thread will be closed. Edit: Off-topic posts now moved to the tar pit.]
Posted by: RMHED
QUOTE(gomi @ Mon 18th January 2010, 10:44pm)
[Moderator's note: Somey deleted silly speculation accusing people of being others, threatening to derail the topic. The same names were reposted, and I removed them. Stop it, or the thread will be closed. Edit: Off-topic posts now moved to the tar pit.]
Well I for one am glad that all those posts saying Somey is really [name redacted] were deleted, it's exactly that sort of nonsense we just don't need.
Oh shit...
Posted by: Tarc
QUOTE(Apathetic @ Mon 18th January 2010, 2:16pm)
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Mon 18th January 2010, 2:03pm)
QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 18th January 2010, 12:17am)
QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sun 17th January 2010, 7:06am)
His edits to AN/I number http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Contributors.php?wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&grouped=on&page=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27+noticeboard%2FIncidents.
Is that an all-time record or something? That seems like an awfully high number, especially for a non-administrator.
Yes. The tool featured in above url lists all editors of a given page, sortable in several ways (most usefully by number of edits, which is the default).
He passed JzG some ten months ago, during or shortly after his RFA, at which time they both would have had roughly 2,950 AN/I edits.
JzG has only 112 AN/I edits since that point, while Baseball Bugs has over 2,000.
I http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Baseball_Bugs&oldid=290674510#Talkback (scroll up - HTML parser not recognizing period) to shy Baseball Bugs away from the page where he holds handily the number 1 contributor spot (even above the archiving bot). I also wrote an essay entitled WP:RUBBERNECKING on the subject...
Eh, Bugs just likes to meddle in policy like ChildofMidnight does, but without CoM's unbridled assholishness. He's mostly harmless.
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(Tarc @ Mon 18th January 2010, 10:45pm)
Eh, Bugs just likes to meddle in policy like ChildofMidnight does, but without CoM's unbridled assholishness. He's mostly harmless.
Well, I suppose he can technically be considered "harmless" while still pursuing psychologically unhealthy obsessions. That is, until he has to be made a ward of the state, at which point his upkeep could end up costing the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars per year. With that level of near-constant exposure to ANI, I'd say he's got about 18 months to go before that happens - but that's only because it'll probably take about 17 months for the authorities to find him!
The http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Baseball_Bugs&oldid=290674510#Talkback posted by Mr. Apathetic (Xeno) above is actually quite illuminating if you read the whole thing - Mr. Bugs looks like a fairly clear case of "Defender of the Wiki" syndrome, with almost no self-awareness or circumspection regarding his WP activities at all.
Posted by: Adrignola
Interesting events going on at Commons. See the thread on the http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems#User:Ww2censor and the user's http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Baseball_Bugs#Please_be_civil.
Some past event has led to a distinct distrust and dislike of Commons administrators. To the point that an admin was called ignorant and a 24 hour block was provided.
Posted by: victim of censorship
QUOTE(Adrignola @ Sat 6th August 2011, 9:10am)
Interesting events going on at Commons. See the thread on the http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems#User:Ww2censor and the user's http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Baseball_Bugs#Please_be_civil.
Some past event has led to a distinct distrust and dislike of Commons administrators. To the point that an admin was called ignorant and a 24 hour block was provided.
love it when the rats start to gnaw on each other...
Posted by: victim of censorship
QUOTE(RMHED @ Sat 16th January 2010, 6:15pm)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Sat 16th January 2010, 6:22pm)
There's a discussion on ANI (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=338213798&oldid=338211255#User:Dream_Focus) about whether a user should be banned for referring to Roman Polanski as a child rapist on Jimbo's talk page, per BLP.
There seem to be a lot of Polanski defenders on Wikipedia.
The following post disturbed me the most, though. Apparently, statutory rape against a 13-year-old isn't the same as statutory rape against a child.
QUOTE
Polanksi was convicted of statutory rape, and there is no question whatsoever that he committed that crime. Calling him a "child" rapist, however, is a question of definition, as his victim was 13 years old, not 5 or something. So it's best to stick to what he was convicted of and avoid emotionally-charged terminology. â†Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:50, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps it's another example of why Wikipedia is broken - because they generally believe a 13-year-old isn't a child.
Baseball Bugs is a frequent turd in the AN/I swimming pool. Though to be fair he's no worse than many others.
Baseball is not a turd, more like a used tampon...
Posted by: A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(victim of censorship @ Sat 6th August 2011, 10:53am)
Baseball is not a turd, more like a used tampon...
Oh, the places he's been and the things he's seen!
Posted by: lilburne
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Mon 8th August 2011, 1:53am)
QUOTE(victim of censorship @ Sat 6th August 2011, 10:53am)
Baseball is not a turd, more like a used tampon...
Oh, the places he's been and the things he's seen!
OTOH Bugs is probably correct regarding those images. They seem to have come from someone's personal photo album/scrapbook, and look to be genuinely the property and work (with the exception a couple of scanned postcards) of the person behind the flickr account. Unless this is a deliberate attempt to wash over 1000 images, there is far too much personal detail on the photos for it to be anything else.
Posted by: mydog
QUOTE(lilburne @ Mon 8th August 2011, 4:08am)
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Mon 8th August 2011, 1:53am)
QUOTE(victim of censorship @ Sat 6th August 2011, 10:53am)
Baseball is not a turd, more like a used tampon...
Oh, the places he's been and the things he's seen!
OTOH Bugs is probably correct regarding those images. They seem to have come from someone's personal photo album/scrapbook, and look to be genuinely the property and work (with the exception a couple of scanned postcards) of the person behind the flickr account. Unless this is a deliberate attempt to wash over 1000 images, there is far too much personal detail on the photos for it to be anything else.
If that's true (and it looks like it is), it should stay at the deletion discussion. Bugs has the annoying tendency to never shut up, as this thread indicates. He shouldn't have posted the thread in the first place, but more importantly, he shouldn't keep replying to every single person's post. As they say, when you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.
Posted by: Maetu
It seems to me, and given the latest block despite the overturn, BB seems to be nothing more than a troll who made the right friends. I don't know how the guy has any time to edit article space because he seems to spend most his time getting in to just about every AN/I thread going and making half-assed comments. I don't think I've ever seen a worthwhile opinion from him.
Posted by: victim of censorship
QUOTE(Maetu @ Wed 12th October 2011, 2:37am)
It seems to me, and given the latest block despite the overturn, BB seems to be nothing more than a troll who made the right friends. I don't know how the guy has any time to edit article space because he seems to spend most his time getting in to just about every AN/I thread going and making half-assed comments. I don't think I've ever seen a worthwhile opinion from him.
What do you expect from a ratboy of wiki.
Posted by: Tarc
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Sun 7th August 2011, 8:53pm)
QUOTE(victim of censorship @ Sat 6th August 2011, 10:53am)
Baseball is not a turd, more like a used tampon...
Oh, the places he's been and the things he's seen!
Reminds me of the Top 10 list of rejected Dr. Seuss books
1. The Cat in the Blender
2. Herbert the Pervert Likes Sherbert
3. Fox in Detox
4. Who Shat in the Hat?
5. Horton Hires a Ho
6. The Flesh-Eating Lorax
7. The Grinch's Ten Inches
8. Your Colon Can Moo---Can You?
9. Zippy the Rabid Gerbil
10. Are You My Proctologist?
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(Maetu @ Wed 12th October 2011, 3:37am)
It seems to me, and given the latest block despite the overturn, BB seems to be nothing more than a troll who made the right friends. I don't know how the guy has any time to edit article space because he seems to spend most his time getting in to just about every AN/I thread going and making half-assed comments. I don't think I've ever seen a worthwhile opinion from him.
I once held the same opinion. Then I realized that much of what he does or says is mockery and satire. His approach is rather similar to MZMcBride's.
Posted by: Maetu
QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 13th October 2011, 12:32pm)
QUOTE(Maetu @ Wed 12th October 2011, 3:37am)
It seems to me, and given the latest block despite the overturn, BB seems to be nothing more than a troll who made the right friends. I don't know how the guy has any time to edit article space because he seems to spend most his time getting in to just about every AN/I thread going and making half-assed comments. I don't think I've ever seen a worthwhile opinion from him.
I once held the same opinion. Then I realized that much of what he does or says is mockery and satire. His approach is rather similar to MZMcBride's.
Either way it's not helpful and only makes most situations worse. Whether it's mockery/satire or trolling it amounts to the same thing.
His little thank you on the unblock only makes it look like it's going to enable his behaviour further.
Posted by: Tarc
QUOTE(Maetu @ Thu 13th October 2011, 11:46am)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 13th October 2011, 12:32pm)
QUOTE(Maetu @ Wed 12th October 2011, 3:37am)
It seems to me, and given the latest block despite the overturn, BB seems to be nothing more than a troll who made the right friends. I don't know how the guy has any time to edit article space because he seems to spend most his time getting in to just about every AN/I thread going and making half-assed comments. I don't think I've ever seen a worthwhile opinion from him.
I once held the same opinion. Then I realized that much of what he does or says is mockery and satire. His approach is rather similar to MZMcBride's.
Either way it's not helpful and only makes most situations worse. Whether it's mockery/satire or trolling it amounts to the same thing.
His little thank you on the unblock only makes it look like it's going to enable his behaviour further.
Since there's really nothing wrong with his behavior, it really isn't a problem to continue. Stop being a thin-skinned whiner.
Posted by: Maetu
QUOTE(Tarc @ Fri 14th October 2011, 1:58am)
QUOTE(Maetu @ Thu 13th October 2011, 11:46am)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 13th October 2011, 12:32pm)
QUOTE(Maetu @ Wed 12th October 2011, 3:37am)
It seems to me, and given the latest block despite the overturn, BB seems to be nothing more than a troll who made the right friends. I don't know how the guy has any time to edit article space because he seems to spend most his time getting in to just about every AN/I thread going and making half-assed comments. I don't think I've ever seen a worthwhile opinion from him.
I once held the same opinion. Then I realized that much of what he does or says is mockery and satire. His approach is rather similar to MZMcBride's.
Either way it's not helpful and only makes most situations worse. Whether it's mockery/satire or trolling it amounts to the same thing.
His little thank you on the unblock only makes it look like it's going to enable his behaviour further.
Since there's really nothing wrong with his behavior, it really isn't a problem to continue. Stop being a thin-skinned whiner.
It is a problem, his behaviour is disruptive. He frequently disrupts and derails discussions, antagonizes other users, etc with his off-topic child-like behaviour in threads.
Posted by: EricBarbour
QUOTE(Maetu @ Tue 18th October 2011, 4:02pm)
It is a problem, his behaviour is disruptive. He frequently disrupts and derails discussions, antagonizes other users, etc with his off-topic child-like behaviour in threads.
Well, since Wikipedia is set up to reward trolling, you've got a problem.