Should Abd haz buttonz?, tell me about your childhood Options

[SB_Johnny]

Well, not quite a masterpiece, but hey, I'm a part-timer.

WP:RFA would be more fun if I could say things like that, no?

[It's the blimp, Frank]

People will abandon or refuse to start editing the project if they know that having disagreements with an admin can make them appear in that sort of list. -- Enric Naval

Well, it beats being summarily banned, which is more typically the case.

Do we want Admins here compiling scathing indictments of their fellow editors? —Albatross (talk)

Couldn't hurt.

[Abd]

Well, not quite a masterpiece, but hey, I'm a part-timer.

WP:RFA would be more fun if I could say things like that, no?

Wikiversity is a far more open place, by nature. SBJ apparently does not know the history. Enric Naval has been a major factor in the banning of experts from the wikipedia Cold fusion article. I answered his questions thoroughly. SBJ doesn't like thorough answers, and that dislike represents part of the problem (on all wikis) but it should be understood that the present discussion isn't toward deciding anything. If a mentor agrees, by Wikiversity policy, I become a probationary custodian. The process isn't a contested one at this point. The time for all this discussion would be later, with a consideration of full custodianship. I could have, procedurally, ignored all the questions at this time. I chose not to. That's all.

The arguments there are singularly evidence-free. I was a probationary custodian for more than a month, involved in controversy then, with no sign of the abuse of powers that is being alleged as likely. Those allegations are coming from highly biased persons, just a few. The discussion is not generally followed, until there is a decision to be made about full custodianship, because, at this point, it's only a formality. If the volunteer mentor had not been on vacation, a fact I didn't notice until I put up the candidacy, I'd already have the bit (it's done immediately, without discussion.) To avoid any appearance of impropriety, I have not communicated with Jtneill off-wiki, on this. No email. It's all open, hence the flies are attracted.

SBJ should know better, but he doesn't. When he ran into difficulties at Wikiversity, he bailed. When the way was paved -- by me -- for him to do something simple and useful, he returned, much to Ottava's dismay. But the fact is that without my work, he'd have had nothing to do. He doesn't like thorough discussion, he's of the old school that, in fact, is responsible for the decline and fall of the wiki model. To move into the future, something else is needed, and thorough discussion is part of it, but not "thorough discussion" just anywhere, that's what good process would establish. It will all be visible later, Wikiversity is a model. And I don't need custodial tools, at all, to accomplish my goals at Wikiversity. The idea that I'd abuse them is pure bullshit, the very opposite of what I believe in and have demonstrated, but being asserted by people who have themselves been abusive with whatever power they possessed, including the power to lie on wikipedia and get away with it.

SBJ doesn't lie, he simply gets in over his head.

I'm not normally watching Wikipedia Review now, I saw this because I pushed the wrong button.

[Ottava]

I'm confused as to why Abd thinks Temporary Custodianship is a given. He assumes all of these rights and such out of nowhere.

[SB_Johnny]

I'm confused as to why Abd thinks Temporary Custodianship is a given. He assumes all of these rights and such out of nowhere.

Actually, it really is a given, assuming James signs on the dotted line.

SBJ doesn't lie, he simply gets in over his head.

Yeah, that's my cross-wiki career in a nutshell. I liked the feeling of being helpful and trusted to be helpful, but the politics are bad enough to ruin the experience.

[Ottava]

I'm confused as to why Abd thinks Temporary Custodianship is a given. He assumes all of these rights and such out of nowhere.

Actually, it really is a given, assuming James signs on the dotted line.

Not necessarily. Community consensus still rules and I don't think Jtneill would want to cross the community especially when JWS and Moulton are prominently on one side.

[Abd]

I'm confused

Indeed.

as to why Abd thinks Temporary Custodianship is a given. He assumes all of these rights and such out of nowhere.

Uh, the policy on custodianship is explicit, and precedent follows it and is clear. Anyone may become a Wikiversity custodian if another custodian agrees to mentor. There is no procedure for a decision based on a discussion. Discussion is required for permanent custodianship. Consider Salmon of Doubt. Controversial. SBJ agreed to mentor and set the bit, since he's a 'crat. He also set conditions, and apparently felt that he could handle supervising SOD; indeed, there were no problems. Probationary custodianship on wikiversity is quite safe, as long as the mentor is active.

Actually, it really is a given, assuming James signs on the dotted line.

Right. James made the offer, I didn't ask for it. We could have done it immediately, a month ago, but I was travelling, etc. James could change his mind, of course. I suspect he won't, but my crystal ball is in the shop.

Not necessarily. Community consensus still rules and I don't think Jtneill would want to cross the community especially when JWS and Moulton are prominently on one side.

Of course consensus rules, but the community has not been asked, and won't be. I withdrew the candidacy, it was started in error (I didn't realize James was on wikibreak) and was just attracting flies. I'll discuss it with James when he returns. No sense bothering him now. But this thing about JWS and Moulton being on the same side is weird. Same side as each other? They always have been. Same side as me? Didn't Ottava just try to use alleged hostility toward Moulton as his reason to oppose the candidacy? And JWS opposes everyone.

Ah! I get it! This is Ottava Rima. Never mind, it's all clear now.

This post has been edited by Abd:

[Enric_Naval]

(...) SBJ apparently does not know the history. Enric Naval has been a major factor in the banning of experts from the wikipedia Cold fusion article.

And now I'm being painted as some sort of big bad villain.

I answered his questions thoroughly. SBJ doesn't like thorough answers, (...)

And SBJ only opposed him because of spurious reasons.


Remember, Abd is never wrong. It's always someone's else fault that everything goes belly-up when he enters the field.

[Abd]

(...) SBJ apparently does not know the history. Enric Naval has been a major factor in the banning of experts from the wikipedia Cold fusion article.

And now I'm being painted as some sort of big bad villain.

I answered his questions thoroughly. SBJ doesn't like thorough answers, (...)

And SBJ only opposed him because of spurious reasons.


Remember, Abd is never wrong. It's always someone's else fault that everything goes belly-up when he enters the field.

Never wrong? Wow! I hadn't noticed that. Are you sure?

Hadn't noticed the spurs on SBJ either.

[Enric_Naval]

Oh, look, Abd is doing it again:

And Enric Naval, who has a huge axe to grind, since before I ever encountered him, he's behind a series of bans that have warped Wikipedia consensus,

Oh, I am also forcing his hand to go back to arbcom. How evil of little me:

and, apparently, I'm being forced to take this back to ArbComm for enforcement of prior decisions. ''Forced,'' I'm quite reluctant.

Followed by some mixed commentary about other editors in the request.

[Abd]

Oh, look, Abd is doing it again:

And Enric Naval, who has a huge axe to grind, since before I ever encountered him, he's behind a series of bans that have warped Wikipedia consensus,

Oh, I am also forcing his hand to go back to arbcom. How evil of little me:

and, apparently, I'm being forced to take this back to ArbComm for enforcement of prior decisions. ''Forced,'' I'm quite reluctant.

Followed by some mixed commentary about other editors in the request.

Hmmm.... "evil." while the site is banal, nevertheless, within the terms of the drama, the word is appropriate for vicious stupidity and a willingness to lie to gain a desired outcome. I think it's gone far enough.

All this for a 48 hour block with no effect whatever. I have a lot of RL responsibility in the next month, but it's clear that this pack of dogs isn't going to stop, so I might as well go ahead when I find time. If ArbComm doesn't like it, tough.

Enric already tried to coerce me from doing the study on Netknowledge.org, imagining that I'd care if I don't become a sysop. Maybe I'll start tightening that up.

Never poke a bear with nothing to lose.

[Abd]

This was really a beaut. High drama over nothing. Enric Naval comes positively unglued. Sandstein closes with what I've come to expect: he drops his paper-weight brain on the problem.

I didn't comment on WMC, period. Not one part of that MfD vote was about WMC. It was about a page, only it was only procedural.

"Silly drama" referred to people so obsessed about the page, so much so that even though the original objections -- to the edit summaries in the original deleted page -- had been addressed by the new version, that they were insisting on deleting it. BozMo was clearly frustrated by the insanity of it.

This is the truth: my !vote on that MfD would probably match WMC's. I'd !voted in a previous MfD to support Keeping one of his pages. I'm far more congenial with WMC than with most of these idiots.

Anyway, I'd looked in the evidence I presented on this discussion, about my AfD participation. Damn! I was really wasting a lot of time working on Wikipedia, for a while there! I was doing good work, the radio amateurs were grateful, for example. I stopped that when the thousand cuts became just too much, while the "community" did nothing. I'd often intervened when I saw others being abused; but people stopped showing up when I was hauled before AE for something new that was harmless. To be fair, one of the main defenders was indeffed. By the same people. That was part of the climate change mess, but it was taken up by ArbComm too late to help him.

And Enric has taken the obvious meaning of "polls" in the MYOB ban, the specific an explicit permission given me, and twisted it completely out of recognition, until it means nothing, maybe I'm allowed to vote for Arbitrators or something. I've been commenting in AfDs all year, and almost every AfD is a "dispute," AfDs are always structured as polls, and this was never considered a problem, it was only when it touched on something of possible interest to the cabal, or they saw it as an opportunity to try to ding me, that this utterly stupid argument came up.

There was some very cogent argument presented by several editors in this AE request. Useless, because Sandstein doesn't understand "cogent." He just understands how to push a block button. Totally useless, I wouldn't be editing anyway for the next 48 hours. That was another gem in this AE request. TenOfAllTrades, filing the request, suggests that a week ban is too little because I wouldn't feel it, since I'm hardly editing. Thus betraying a punitive intention, blocks are supposed to hurt. And I think they really think this way.

The only disruption here was the AE request. And that's obvious. So .... I'll use this.

I have a different mission now. I'll exact a price for this, or gain a different benefit. There are at least two possible beneficial outcomes.

1. A set of vicious liars, mostly worse than those already sanctioned in the climate change mess, get what they've long deserved and the project is freed from them. Small benefit, though, others will take their place.

2. I get fully banned, which frees me to do whatever the hell I please, with no sense of obligation to respect "consensus," there. Respect is a two-way street.

This is all justified by the value to the project of going after serious abusers, who have long been driving away many other editors, most of them without it even being noticed. I'll be starting with issues that ArbComm already decided, but these "owners" have long defied ArbComm, which was mostly too distracted and to paralyzed to deal with them.

I'll present an opportunity to the new arbitrators; we'll see if they take it up. Some are smart enough. Iridescent got elected!

However, I've already found that I have much better things to do off-wiki, and, to the extent that there is any future to WMF wikis, I suspect it is at Wikiversity, which is far more open to functional structure and behavior.

Along the way, some previous injustices might get fixed. I'm not talking about myself. I never thought of myself as being that important as an editor. Some of my process insights might be important, but you can lead a horse to water....

This post has been edited by Abd:

[Adrignola]

However, I've already found that I have much better things to do off-wiki, and, to the extent that there is any future to WMF wikis, I suspect it is at Wikiversity, which is far more open to functional structure and behavior.

And Wikibooks. Right? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/evilgrin.gif)

[Abd]

However, I've already found that I have much better things to do off-wiki, and, to the extent that there is any future to WMF wikis, I suspect it is at Wikiversity, which is far more open to functional structure and behavior.

And Wikibooks. Right? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/evilgrin.gif)

Yes, Wikibooks, though I see Wikibooks as becoming a "publishing arm" of Wikiversity. I.e., Wikiversity, as a very open academic community, develops books, building them as part of the activity of educational resources. Wikibooks has policies that are too restrictive to be reliable for content building, but it could be a great place to put finished texts, Wikiversity is sloppy, fertile,

I have some Wikibooks projects in mind, but ... if I'm going to write a book, why don't I publish it traditionally? What's the reason to do it on Wikibooks? After all, the workman, the meat.

But classes can develop books as group projects, so the work is shared, and this content being free is appropriate.

I have the impression of Wikibooks as being a bit stalled, and I think I'm pointing to a possible cause: too much work is involved in a book, and, just as a book, it doesn't fit well as a wiki project. However, there are some books being worked on, on Wikiversity, now, that will be serious academic publications.

And one of them almost got deleted, because the editor was using categories in a weird way, to organize a lot of material. Maybe, but it looked very weird, which, to some people, means Delete. Especially people who come to Wikiversity with a Wikipedia State of Mind.

Come on over to Wikiversity, Adrignola, we can use you, with your courage and good sense.

There are still problems at Wikiversity, we are not out of the woods, but there is visible light. Even Ottava is making jokes, and, damn! I think Moulton is doing some serious work. Still the Clown Sock, but, hey, it takes all kinds. Getting some Atrocious Song Parodies, no extra charge.

(I have a serious proposal to make about Clown Socks....

[SB_Johnny]

He haz buttons now. Those who enjoy Ottava watching might want to see what dear Jeffrey tries to do about it.

And yes, I hit the button, but only because teh rulez said I should.

Good luck, Abdul.

[Ottava]

He haz buttons now. Those who enjoy Ottava watching might want to see what dear Jeffrey tries to do about it.

And yes, I hit the button, but only because teh rulez said I should.

Good luck, Abdul.

Great, purely abusing your ops. Like most abusers of the WMF, you don't give a damn about the community. You are some piece of work.

[SB_Johnny]

He haz buttons now. Those who enjoy Ottava watching might want to see what dear Jeffrey tries to do about it.

And yes, I hit the button, but only because teh rulez said I should.

Good luck, Abdul.

Great, purely abusing your ops. Like most abusers of the WMF, you don't give a damn about the community. You are some piece of work.

Jeffrey Peters: you know that the "community" isn't in your head, right?

You've pretty much done your worst to me, so your lame attempt on meta ain't worrying me all that much. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

[Lar]

Jeffrey Peters: you know that the "community" isn't in your head, right?

Are we talking about "the community" of voices in his head? There might be one, who can say?

[GlassBeadGame]

Jeffrey Peters: you know that the "community" isn't in your head, right?

Are we talking about "the community" of voices in his head? There might be one, who can say?

The ultimate in "User Democracy." It allows you to do whatever it is you want. Nobody outside the "the community" need be considered.

[SB_Johnny]

Jeffrey Peters: you know that the "community" isn't in your head, right?

Are we talking about "the community" of voices in his head? There might be one, who can say?

The ultimate in "User Democracy." It allows you to do whatever it is you want. Nobody outside the "the community" need be considered.

In my community, you're all made of LEGOs.

Just saying, and capitalizing LEGO because Lar will hit me if I don't.