Rich Farmbrough, Bot Developer, Arbitration request in progress Options

[Wikitaka]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ARB...Rich_Farmbrough

Any1 with more info?

[Somey]

There's a lot of misquoting going on there. In particular, Mr. Farmbrough refers to the assertion (which he deems false) by his opponents that edits made by him and his bot(s) "frequently do more harm than good." In fact, Mr. Hersfold actually said that Mr. Farmbrough and his bots "make large numbers of edits ...which not infrequently (do) more damage than harm." (Italics mine.)

Clearly, in an ideal scenario, Mr. Farmbrough's edits would do a great deal of harm, instead of the "damage" they do now. The implication here is that on Wikipedia, damage is not harmful, and harm is not damaging - which of course is something we've always known about Wikipedia, for many years. (Or at least I have, even if some hard-cases refuse to believe me.)

Anyway, it's just nice, finally, to see someone admit to that formally, particularly in an ArbCom case that's going to be accepted (barring several of them actually reading this WR thread, which we know isn't going to happen).

[Elara]

The implication here is that on Wikipedia, damage is not harmful, and harm is not damaging - which of course is something we've always known about Wikipedia, for many years

Well, there's a goddamned shock.

I'm never sure if these people are experiencing some form of social cognitive dissonance, or if they have somehow actualized collectivist thinking to the point of viewing the world through lenses I can't quite grasp, but the shrapnel from the implosion of any form of positive control is going to bounce around for some time.

Maybe this piece can be examined and held out to arms length and some wikipedant can go "hmm. Maybe we shouldn't have done that". I'm not gonna hold my fucking breath on that though.