Malleus hates children? Options

[A Horse With No Name]

Nah, Malley doesn't hate kids -- but he is not shy about stating his concern about having minors as admins, as witnessed in his lively Oppose vote in the new Dylan620 RfA.

Malley, baby, it is a pleasure seeing an adult act like an adult!

[powercorrupts]

So far it is 63 supports to about 7 opposes and a few neutrals. They might have to promote this kid.

The first support:

1. Support. You'll make a great administrator. I feel really bad about not being able to come up with a good nomination statement, but I'm sure that I wouldn't be able to write anything as good as yours even if I had lots of time to work on it. —Soap— 5:22 pm, 18 April 2011, last Monday (3 days ago) (UTC+1)

:That's quite alright; I appreciate that you tried --Dylan620 (I'm all ears) 6:45 pm, 18 April 2011, last Monday (3 days ago) (UTC+1)


He probably would be a comparatively good administrator (I haven't looked at his 'contributions' - probably all GA edits 'n arse kissing), but that just isn't the point. I hope he gets the bit so we can rip the piss out Wikipedia for their inability to stop embarrassing situations from happening time and time and time again.

Not many big name supports I notice. Will they send in the cavalry I wonder? Or are they just desperate for admin they feel they can trust - ie to be at least potential putty in their hands, if not entirely the bone fide wanker they normally require to fill their ranks.

Of course it may be that the very idea of a 15 year old kid even being interested in Wikipedia, let alone being interested in adminship, is something of a wet dream for an encyclopedia that has been steadily losing whatever 'cool factor' it ever had. (hence all the painful 'awesomes' from the likes of Sue Gardner).

This post has been edited by powercorrupts: Thu 21st April 2011, 9:29pm

[Theanima]

I think he hates the idea of kids in a position of authority - an opinion many people share. To me though, I don't consider it authority, because nobody can control what I do on Wikipedia. Many will argue about the exceptional kids with ridiculously high IQs, but they are the exception - and they are still only kids. Allowing children to run a website like Wikipedia would be madness imo, but luckily most admins are in fact adults, despite the claims otherwise so we're not quite at that stage yet.

[melloden]

I think he hates the idea of kids in a position of authority - an opinion many people share. To me though, I don't consider it authority, because nobody can control what I do on Wikipedia. Many will argue about the exceptional kids with ridiculously high IQs, but they are the exception - and they are still only kids. Allowing children to run a website like Wikipedia would be madness imo, but luckily most admins are in fact adults, despite the claims otherwise so we're not quite at that stage yet.

I don't think it's the fact that they are in authority, but that they think they're special or superior as a result. If my boss was a prodigious 13-year-old, I wouldn't mind provided they acted like an adult and didn't gloat about his position. But if he were the "MySpacey" type, I'd personally pick him up and throw him out the window.

Unfortunately, not enough kids on Wikipedia have high IQs and "maturity" levels. People like Jasper Deng should never have been let in. Kids who try to act mature but end up sounding like a pompous old person should be kicked out, too.

[Malleus]

Nah, Malley doesn't hate kids -- but he is not shy about stating his concern about having minors as admins, as witnessed in his lively Oppose vote in the new Dylan620 RfA.

Malley, baby, it is a pleasure seeing an adult act like an adult!

I love kids ... no, no, that came out all wrong. I just think they should be kids.

[Malleus]

Unfortunately, not enough kids on Wikipedia have high IQs and "maturity" levels. People like Jasper Deng should never have been let in. Kids who try to act mature but end up sounding like a pompous old person should be kicked out, too.

Children are good impersonators; they learn to speak the lingo, often without understanding what it means. The arguments of those like Newyorkbrad who spout endless nonsense about "maturity" are at best naive.

This post has been edited by Malleus: Fri 22nd April 2011, 2:59am

[Malleus]

And true to form we get this. It just beggars belief.

[gomi]

And true to form we get this. It just beggars belief.

Each time we get enough distance from the last ludicrous outrage, or callous lack of action, NewYorkBrad reminds us that, rather than being some kind of adult supervision for the Wikipidiots, he is truly, truly one of them, and as boneheaded as the worst. Fifteen-year-old admins! What's next?

[Sololol]

Nah, Malley doesn't hate kids -- but he is not shy about stating his concern about having minors as admins, as witnessed in his lively Oppose vote in the new Dylan620 RfA.

Malley, baby, it is a pleasure seeing an adult act like an adult!

I love kids ... no, no, that came out all wrong. I just think they should be kids.

Yup. At 15 you should be out doing pretty much anything except playing online bureaucrat with a gaggle of argumentative and caustic adults. Kids will gain a greater understanding of group dynamics (backstabbing) and insights into human nature (yielding cynicism) but they'd get the same benefits from going to private school.

[powercorrupts]

Most mature adults here will know from (often bitter) experience that the one thing you just can't buy in life actually is experience. It's the truest adage of the lot. I wonder if the various claims of people's capacity for 'maturity' in their teenage years are a misunderstanding of it being a comparative term in regards to teenagers - ie they can be mature for their years.

The 'experience' a 15 year old kid will gain on the orgy of Wikipedia is how to enjoy your his/her metaphorical arse being felt by total creeps, and how to control others by having them to kiss, and fondle theirs. I'm sure this kid is ladled with love-bite 'rewards' already - a perfect candidate. And he will learn that all anonymous people can become statistics, and that on Wikipedia. 'knowledge' is merely disconnected units of 'verified information', a commodity to bartered on the ladder to institutional success.

Teenagers are said to be almost clinically mad at times(!), and the human brain is still actually physically developing (in the sense of configuring it's structure) into the 20's. What we call on-the-fly 'executive decisions' are things teenagers find particularly hard, as they need to come relatively naturally. Even the most rebellious kids are used to being herded, and often will line-up instinctively no matter who badly they are behaving. Which is no-doubt why many of the more predatory admin on Wikipedia will love they idea of easily-manipuable kids skipping around in their domain.

As a rule, the older you are the wiser you are, and it is nothing but simple wisdom for RFA voters to take all age into account. You can forget about super-high IQ's - anything over around average is meaningless in admin terms (where EQ should hold as much sway), and some people with high IQ's are quite clueless people in many different ways, even logically - as they can be prone to missing the wood for the trees, or completely missing important factors that can lead to the only correct decision possible. High IQ (not always an 'intelligent' test anyway), is a red herring - esp with kids.

Normal employers the world over find 'life experience' the easiest non-specific barometer to use in filtering the recruiting process, even in the country that voted the child-adult George Bush to represent them as its head of state.

This post has been edited by powercorrupts: Fri 22nd April 2011, 8:24am

[A Horse With No Name]

And true to form we get this. It just beggars belief.

It could be worse, Malley...imagine paying him to be your attorney in a court case! No wonder he's on Arbcom and not the Supreme Court!

Yup. At 15 you should be out doing pretty much anything except playing online bureaucrat with a gaggle of argumentative and caustic adults. Kids will gain a greater understanding of group dynamics (backstabbing) and insights into human nature (yielding cynicism) but they'd get the same benefits from going to private school.

99% correct - substitute "inner city U.S. public school" for "private school" and I would agree with you totally.

Children are good impersonators; they learn to speak the lingo, often without understanding what it means.

Bullseye!

[Gruntled]

At 15 you should be out doing pretty much anything except playing online bureaucrat

This is an RfA, not an RfB, or am I being too literal-minded? Of course, the argument against a minor being allowed to decide who else can be an admin is many times stronger than a minor being an admin himself. Yet bureaucrats don't even have to identify to the WMF so there could well be a 15 year old bureaucrat somewhere. (I can think of one bureaucrat on one site I edit who certainly gives the impression of being 15 or less.)

[victim of censorship]

Most mature adults here will know from (often bitter) experience that the one thing you just can't buy in life actually is experience. It's the truest adage of the lot. I wonder if the various claims of people's capacity for 'maturity' in their teenage years are a misunderstanding of it being a comparative term in regards to teenagers - ie they can be mature for their years.

The 'experience' a 15 year old kid will gain on the orgy of Wikipedia is how to enjoy your his/her metaphorical arse being felt by total creeps, and how to control others by having them to kiss, and fondle theirs. I'm sure this kid is ladled with love-bite 'rewards' already - a perfect candidate. And he will learn that all anonymous people can become statistics, and that on Wikipedia. 'knowledge' is merely disconnected units of 'verified information', a commodity to bartered on the ladder to institutional success.

Teenagers are said to be almost clinically mad at times(!), and the human brain is still actually physically developing (in the sense of configuring it's structure) into the 20's. What we call on-the-fly 'executive decisions' are things teenagers find particularly hard, as they need to come relatively naturally. Even the most rebellious kids are used to being herded, and often will line-up instinctively no matter who badly they are behaving. Which is no-doubt why many of the more predatory admin on Wikipedia will love they idea of easily-manipuable kids skipping around in their domain.

As a rule, the older you are the wiser you are, and it is nothing but simple wisdom for RFA voters to take all age into account. You can forget about super-high IQ's - anything over around average is meaningless in admin terms (where EQ should hold as much sway), and some people with high IQ's are quite clueless people in many different ways, even logically - as they can be prone to missing the wood for the trees, or completely missing important factors that can lead to the only correct decision possible. High IQ (not always an 'intelligent' test anyway), is a red herring - esp with kids.

Normal employers the world over find 'life experience' the easiest non-specific barometer to use in filtering the recruiting process, even in the country that voted the child-adult George Bush to represent them as its head of state.

Well Said!!! This is absolutely true. Wikipedia is sewer. True all the way up to the non-relevant "BUSH BASHING" nonsense.

The Bush is dumb is a liberal narrative, foisted by the likes of Dan "the liar" Rather and his Slanderous smear of Bush is a classic study in the liberal media paradigm of "not letting facts get in the way of the narrative you have"

Lets look at BERRY O and his failed presidency. Gas at 4 plus cents a gallon, joblessness at over 10 percent, Debt out of control due to Berry and his boys tax and spend ways. Berry is the true purulent man child, see his latest speech spewing demagoguery not seen in any president in history.

Any rate, are we looking at Wiki or more non- relevant "Bush Bashing". Let me know.

This post has been edited by victim of censorship: Sat 23rd April 2011, 5:29pm

[powercorrupts]

Most mature adults here will know from (often bitter) experience that the one thing you just can't buy in life actually is experience. It's the truest adage of the lot. I wonder if the various claims of people's capacity for 'maturity' in their teenage years are a misunderstanding of it being a comparative term in regards to teenagers - ie they can be mature for their years.

The 'experience' a 15 year old kid will gain on the orgy of Wikipedia is how to enjoy your his/her metaphorical arse being felt by total creeps, and how to control others by having them to kiss, and fondle theirs. I'm sure this kid has been ladled with love-bite 'Rewards' already - a perfect candidate. And he will learn that all anonymous people can become statistics, and that on Wikipedia, 'knowledge' is merely disconnected units of 'verified information', a commodity to bartered on the ladder to institutional success.

Teenagers are said to be almost clinically mad at times(!), and the human brain is still actually physically developing (in the sense of configuring it's structure) into the 20's. What we call on-the-fly 'executive decisions' are things teenagers find particularly hard, as they need to come relatively naturally. Even the most rebellious kids are used to being herded, and often will line-up instinctively no matter who badly they are behaving. Which is no-doubt why many of the more predatory admin on Wikipedia will love they idea of easily-manipuable kids skipping happily around in their domain.

As a rule, the older you are the wiser you are, and it is nothing but simple wisdom for RFA voters to take all age into account. You can forget about super-high IQ's - anything over around average is meaningless in admin terms (where EQ should hold as much sway), and some people with high IQ's are quite clueless people in many different ways, even logically - as they can be prone to missing the wood for the trees, or completely missing important factors that can lead to the only correct decision possible. High IQ (not always an 'intelligent' test anyway), is a red herring - esp with kids.

Normal employers the world over find 'life experience' the easiest non-specific barometer to use in filtering the recruiting process, even in the country that voted the child-adult George Bush to represent them as its head of state.

Well Said!!! This is absolutely true. Wikipedia is sewer. True all the way up to the non-relevant "BUSH BASHING" nonsense.

The Bush is dumb is a liberal narrative, foisted by the likes of Dan "the liar" Rather and his Slanderous smear of Bush is a classic study in the liberal media paradigm of "not letting facts get in the way of the narrative you have"

Lets look at BERRY O and his failed presidency. Gas at 4 plus cents a gallon, joblessness at over 10 percent, Debt out of control due to Berry and his boys tax and spend ways. Berry is the true purulent man child, see his latest speech spewing demagoguery not seen in any president in history.

Any rate, are we looking at Wiki or more non- relevant "Bush Bashing". Let me know.

The point was that Bush was a 'head of state' (not just the primary minister) - and the rationale is that many people at that time voted for what they saw in themselves - ie someone who represents them.

Bashing Bush is not strictly relevant here, granted - perhaps only in the sense of Wikipedia being naturally US-centric in values and attitudes etc - and I've seen that effect a number of articles on WP. Cultural-values warping consensus is way to deep for most of the admin class to get their heads around though. Mind you, I do find British administrators and editors excrutiatingly embarrassing at times too, so I wouldn't want to pick on America only.

This post has been edited by powercorrupts: Sat 23rd April 2011, 5:52pm

[Somey]

True all the way up to the non-relevant "BUSH BASHING" nonsense.

But it's not nonsense, and it is relevant. Like it or not, Americans have dominated Wikipedia and will probably continue to do so for several more years, until India and Russia take over (Wikipedia, that is - they won't take over America until another Republican is elected President of the US, which hopefully won't be for at least 6 more years).

The fact is, Americans as a general rule don't value work experience and expertise as much as people in Europe, and (I would imagine) people in Asia and most parts of Africa. Some of that is actually good, as it's based on an effort to empower women and minorities via equal-opportunity programs and such, which aren't so common in the rest of the world... but whether or not you support such programs, those things shouldn't apply to children. Most of that, I suspect, is due to the increased tendency of American "boomer" parents to foist off their child-rearing responsibilities onto others, including the TV, and buy into this whole idea that (their) children are brilliant little angels who are completely innocent and can do no wrong, when in fact they're often just as capable of mayhem and mischief as anyone else, if not more so - especially when they're connected to the internet. (And that's irrespective of their being targets for weirdos.)

It seems pretty clear to me that George W. Bush's parents did a terrible job of raising their son, who never would have been elected dog-catcher if it hadn't been for his family connections. (Of course, he wasn't elected President either, as both of those elections were rigged.) He had minimal experience for the job and it showed. And that's putting aside his extraordinary moral deficiencies, as only someone with no morality whatsoever would have gotten the country into a needless years-long war in Iraq, costing thousands of American lives, based on dishonestly manufactured "intelligence."

Meanwhile, the "Obama is a Failure" right-wingnut narrative, foisted by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News, is a classic study in the conservative media paradigm of "keep repeating the lies until someone believes them."

[Peter Damian]

Back on topic.

"The nobler and more perfect a thing is, the later and slower is it in reaching maturity. "

[victim of censorship]

True all the way up to the non-relevant "BUSH BASHING" nonsense.

But it's not nonsense, and it is relevant. Like it or not, Americans have dominated Wikipedia and will probably continue to do so for several more years, until India and Russia take over (Wikipedia, that is - they won't take over America until another Republican is elected President of the US, which hopefully won't be for at least 6 more years).

The fact is, Americans as a general rule don't value work experience and expertise as much as people in Europe, and (I would imagine) people in Asia and most parts of Africa. Some of that is actually good, as it's based on an effort to empower women and minorities via equal-opportunity programs and such, which aren't so common in the rest of the world... but whether or not you support such programs, those things shouldn't apply to children. Most of that, I suspect, is due to the increased tendency of American "boomer" parents to foist off their child-rearing responsibilities onto others, including the TV, and buy into this whole idea that (their) children are brilliant little angels who are completely innocent and can do no wrong, when in fact they're often just as capable of mayhem and mischief as anyone else, if not more so - especially when they're connected to the internet. (And that's irrespective of their being targets for weirdos.)

It seems pretty clear to me that George W. Bush's parents did a terrible job of raising their son, who never would have been elected dog-catcher if it hadn't been for his family connections. (Of course, he wasn't elected President either, as both of those elections were rigged.) He had minimal experience for the job and it showed. And that's putting aside his extraordinary moral deficiencies, as only someone with no morality whatsoever would have gotten the country into a needless years-long war in Iraq, costing thousands of American lives, based on dishonestly manufactured "intelligence."

Meanwhile, the "Obama is a Failure" right-wingnut narrative, foisted by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News, is a classic study in the conservative media paradigm of "keep repeating the lies until someone believes them."

You forget, I was born and raised in Chicago and know the kind of political crucible OBAMA had been trained in. And I know Bush was smeared with bold face lies by the leet.

The Resko thing, The blago thing, etc, are all what OBama is all about. The simple fact and the fact you and your libs can never cover up is Obama demagoguery, and south side political thuggery.

Finely, Obama is a failure... He's the laughing stock of the world. I have it from good, inside authority, the Chinese leaders think Obama is a fool.

His last speech has a hate fulled trad by a thin skin petulant man/boy.

This post has been edited by victim of censorship: Sun 24th April 2011, 4:47am

[lilburne]

Children are good impersonators; they learn to speak the lingo, often without understanding what it means. The arguments of those like Newyorkbrad who spout endless nonsense about "maturity" are at best naive.

[radek]

Back on topic.

"The nobler and more perfect a thing is, the later and slower is it in reaching maturity. "

Not true for mathematicians, broadly speaking. Or fruit.

[lilburne]

Back on topic.

"The nobler and more perfect a thing is, the later and slower is it in reaching maturity. "

Not true for mathematicians, broadly speaking. Or fruit.

Medlar, Quince. And some apple varieties need storing for several months before they are eatable.