Manipulation of BLPs, now open Options Rating

[It's the blimp, Frank]

This is shaping up as a standard arbcom matter with a popular (in some circles) senior editor.

Cirt has gone to ground and hasn't edited since July 25. He'll stay quiet until about a month after the arbcom cases are over. Arbcom will get played with the, "but Cirt hasn't edited..it's just not fair to pass judgement...I sure hope he doesn't leave...we should just close these cases while doing nothing..." card.

It's so often repeated it's gone beyond a cliche.

I would venture a guess that there is an implicit arrangement, a hidden social contract, wherein the editor in trouble goes away for a bit and the arbcom can play a bit ignorant and the problem just ... goes ... away.

The editor doesn't get any severe sanctions for showing up and arguing (creating drama and strife are always bad) and the arbcom doesn't have to be the big meanie (aka, do their fucking job for a change) and everyone who matters (not the great unwashed masses, heaven forbid) walks away satisfied by the kabuki theater.

That's where my money is.

The Cirt case was hived off, and also has its own thread here.

[Vigilant]

So what you're saying is that Cirt is Cbrick77. Ding, ding, ding.

Wouldn't that be fun.

It would be funny, but there's no need for it.

Cirt keeps quiet for a month and nothing comes of this.

Disclaimer: I've never had any contact/conflict with Cirt of any kind. I'm just watching from the sidelines and eating popcorn.

The thing that's really funny is that, from any reasonable outside perspective, Cirt is as guilty as a puppy sitting next to a pile of poo.
* He OBVIOUSLY wrote political hit pieces with an eye towards attempting to move the debate on the ground.
* He is clearly writing promotional articles about businesses either for money or for other considerations.
* He is so, so clearly an edit warrior with honed skills at wikilawyering who has driven multiple editors from the site with his "dispute resolution" skills (laughably named).

Any of these would be enough to indef/community ban a lesser editor. Will Beback is pulling out the stops to make sure that whatever lands on Cirt is full of feathers instead of the much deserved lead.

The sideshow here is the dancing around the topic of admins/senior editors and the extra privileges and consideration they are accorded.

I may die from a popcorn overdose in the next few days.

[Jagärdu]

So what you're saying is that Cirt is Cbrick77. Ding, ding, ding.

Wouldn't that be fun.

It would be funny, but there's no need for it.

Cirt keeps quiet for a month and nothing comes of this.

Disclaimer: I've never had any contact/conflict with Cirt of any kind. I'm just watching from the sidelines and eating popcorn.

The thing that's really funny is that, from any reasonable outside perspective, Cirt is as guilty as a puppy sitting next to a pile of poo.
* He OBVIOUSLY wrote political hit pieces with an eye towards attempting to move the debate on the ground.
* He is clearly writing promotional articles about businesses either for money or for other considerations.
* He is so, so clearly an edit warrior with honed skills at wikilawyering who has driven multiple editors from the site with his "dispute resolution" skills (laughably named).

Any of these would be enough to indef/community ban a lesser editor. Will Beback is pulling out the stops to make sure that whatever lands on Cirt is full of feathers instead of the much deserved lead.

The sideshow here is the dancing around the topic of admins/senior editors and the extra privileges and consideration they are accorded.

I may die from a popcorn overdose in the next few days.

Not much to add to that summary, except that there has been a very slow, but steadily growing crowd of people who are fed up with this. Back in the early days it was pretty much just Cirt against a bunch of NRM members and maybe a handful of concerned citizens. That handful does seem to have grown. Jimbo, quite notably, got involved in a couple of these situations, including the Daryl Wine Bar incident, and it wasn't to support Cirt. DGG seems to have turned firmly against Cirt's activities despite being an inclusionist. And so on. This current situation is just a teaser though. I think you'll be able to get even fatter off of popcorn when the sequel comes out, whenever that is.

Ach, so. But it was EricBarbour's pun, not mine.

A horse is a horse, of course, of course. I knew Mr. Ed. Mister Ed was a friend of mine. And Will is no Mr. Ed.

OT, but WTF is that?

A seahorse, of course.

Something definitely fishy about it for sure.

There is nothing quite as embarrassing as sticking your hoof in your gills.

This post has been edited by Jagärdu: Fri 5th August 2011, 4:15pm

[Herschelkrustofsky]

Will is clearly hoping to shape the way the case is heard.

The sheer scale of the anti-cult, anti-demogogue, and other activist activity that Will has been involved with over the years in Wikipedia will take a lot more than 500 words and 50 diffs to show in an evidence section. I get the sense that WP's administration is just waiting for someone to put it all together to justify a topic ban for Will on everything but basket weaving and Norteño music (no offense to the editors who edit those topics).

Incredibly, he's still at it, even when facing an ArbCom case clearly requested with him in mind. When this sketchy BLP material was removed from the LaRouche article, Will immediately added it to a another LaRouche article. His attempts to manipulate the ArbCom case remind me a lot of how Mantanmoreland used to act whenever admin spotlight was shown on his actions.

Cirt has gone to ground and hasn't edited since July 25. He'll stay quiet until about a month after the arbcom cases are over. Arbcom will get played with the, "but Cirt hasn't edited..it's just not fair to pass judgement...I sure hope he doesn't leave...we should just close these cases while doing nothing..." card.

Cirt knows how to play possum, which is a clever tactic. I don't think Will Beback is capable of pulling that off. When challenged, he gets more manic, more fanatical, and more territorial about the articles he WP:OWNs.

[RMHED]

I don't think Will Beback is capable of pulling that off.

Yeah, Will Beback probably even struggles to pull himself off.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

I think what Jehochman says here is actually correct.

[Jagärdu]

I think what Jehochman says here is actually correct.

Jehochman is correct? Time to build that bomb shelter.

[Daniel Brandt]

Multiple choice question: Why is Arbcom unable to examine the BLP issue, and should disqualify itself as utterly incompetent, and admit that the BLP issue cannot be solved given the nature of Wikipedia specifically, and Web 2.0 crowdsourcing in general?

A. The Brandt case is too embarrassing for Wikipedia and would invite adverse publicity.

B. Brandt is banned and everyone on Arbcom is prohibited from mentioning his name.

C. The Brandt bio is scraped and still available all over the web, which means that any BLP remediation efforts by Wikipedia, at any given time, cannot solve the problem for the BLP victim. Wikipedia does not claim copyright on the defamatory and/or privacy-invasive information it publishes, the Foundation disclaims all responsibility, and no one can stop the scrapers even if the article is deleted.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

Can someone tell me what is meant by "SEO-like activities" in this post?

[Jagärdu]

Can someone tell me what is meant by "SEO-like activities" in this post?

Search Engine Optimization

[EricBarbour]

Can someone tell me what is meant by "SEO-like activities" in this post?

Search Engine Optimization

In other words, one of the Most Evil Things You Can Mention On Wikipedia.

A phrase they like to toss around whenever they want to harass Greg Kohs again. Because they're
convinced that he's editing WP just to get higher search results for certain information (which is
somewhat true--if you could get massive Googlejuice just by posting something on a website run
by a third party, wouldn't you do it too?)

Of course, this is also why Willie-Poo and Cirt spent so much time posting Bad Things about
"evil men" like LaRouche and Scientologists--because they, too are doing exactly what Greg does.
The difference: Greg is honest, not out to defame someone, and unwilling to play psychopolitics
with the WP Gang--which, of course, means that he's Public Enema Number One in that
Wiki-Freaky-Deaky Show.

Well? Anyone want to disagree?

[No one of consequence]

Well? Anyone want to disagree?

It doesn't appear to have anything to do with Kohs in this case. If you read the evidence in the Cirt case and the Cirt RFC/U, it appears that the allegations include adding information and links to biographies to raise their google ranking, when such biographies also contain improperly included negative information.

[Jagärdu]

Well? Anyone want to disagree?

It doesn't appear to have anything to do with Kohs in this case. If you read the evidence in the Cirt case and the Cirt RFC/U, it appears that the allegations include adding information and links to biographies to raise their google ranking, when such biographies also contain improperly included negative information.

Indeed, I'm unsure what this has to do with Kohs, though it's pretty amusing how often he gets linked to anything brought up on this board. Time to start a game of 6 degrees of Kohs? Though to the point, anyone who pushes a POV, especially creating articles on topics that probably shouldn't be covered is engaging in this. Usually I don't think people are even intelligent enough to understand the full potential of what they are doing, just trying to cram their shitty POV down everyone else's throat. I do believe that Cirt understands what he's up to. 100%.

[EricBarbour]

It doesn't appear to have anything to do with Kohs in this case.

It doesn't, I was just using him as a counterpoint example of their hypocrisy.

Plus, Willie and Hochman are already demanding that the case be closed.

Comment by parties:

It looks like nothing further productive can be done. Let's close this case, and bring any lingering concerns about policy to WT:BLP, or about specific incidents to WP:BLPN. Thank you for your efforts. Jehochman Talk 20:35, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

I have to agree. This doesn't seem to be going anywhere, and no on can agree on what its scope is or should be. If there are genuine disputes that require the committee's attention it'd be best to start over with a fresh request. Will Beback talk 06:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

[It's the blimp, Frank]

Do you think that Willie and Hochman have actual legitimate fears that something may come of this?

[No one of consequence]

Do you think that Willie and Hochman have actual legitimate fears that something may come of this?

At the present time, no. The only one presenting evidence in the BLP case is Waalkes (T-C-L-K-R-D) , who, as a new editor with few edits, would be barred from participating under the same proposal advanced in the Cbrick77 (T-C-L-K-R-D) situation. This is probably not a bad thing. While I understand the misgivings about Beback's behavior, it is not appropriate that the evidence against him comes from an account that is either (1) a newbie with little experience in dispute resolution, (2) an alternate account evading scrutiny, or (3) a reincarnation of a banned user. If Waalkes is the only person who thinks that Wil has behaved inappropriately, then there shouldn't be a case at all.

(Note that the proposal to bar newbies from RFAR allows for the editor to request a waiver from any arbitrator to offer a case.)

On the other hand, if someone else wants to step forward and offer evidence, Arbcom should definitely open a case.

It seems that there was a lot of interest in a BLP case, at least until the Cirt case was opened. Whoever else wanted to have a case on BLPs in general seems to have disappeared.

[Jagärdu]

It seems that there was a lot of interest in a BLP case, at least until the Cirt case was opened. Whoever else wanted to have a case on BLPs in general seems to have disappeared.

Trust me, that was by design. I'll have to hand it to arbcom here, because it looks like they did manage, in the end, to make a lot of the mess they didn't want to deal with go away by simply ignoring editors, creating confusion, and taking a long time to do anything. I wouldn't be surprised if having Cirt wait to respond in his case isn't by design as well. If not arbocom's then certainly his, but I have a feeling it is in the best interest of both parties and that there is an agreement in place. Not over arbcom-L of course ... since they surely learned that lesson. As I said previously I think people need to stay tuned for the sequel if they want to see anything really happen.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

Whoever else wanted to have a case on BLPs in general seems to have disappeared.

Maybe others are simply discouraged by the way the case is formulated, which seems to preclude any actual corrective action.

[No one of consequence]

Whoever else wanted to have a case on BLPs in general seems to have disappeared.

Maybe others are simply discouraged by the way the case is formulated, which seems to preclude any actual corrective action.

Hence the argument for closing the case and starting fresh. I suggest closing the case and posting a notice to the effect that "Arbcom is aware of complaints of improper editing of biographies that go beyond the present Cirt-Jayen case, but we recognize that the manner in which we opened the BLP case was flawed. It was not sensible to try and hold an omnibus/kitchen sink case. Any editor who wishes to file an arbitration case under the usual rules and procedures may do so, and such requests will be evaluated individually."

[lilburne]

On the other hand, if someone else wants to step forward and offer evidence, Arbcom should definitely open a case.

It is a pointless waste of time. The system is broke and arguing about individuals is plain stupid. because even if one beat up on WBB and SV it doesn't fix the other editors doing the same thing in other places.

You can look at this exchange that I had with them back last February when I quizzed them about the process, and what I got was flannel. Now you can read the whole exchange just start search the page for 'lilburne' or you can just skip to my summary of it.

But it really isn't about WBB, SV, Cirt, or any of the rest. It is the process that can proceed year after year, and result in articles like that one, that is in need of fixing not just these editors.
Berlinski is another one where for years the owners of the article have known that he isn't really ID, for one he doesn't believe that God had anything to do with it. But they fought tooth and claw to keep him as leader of the ID movement. Though to their credit they did give up on that one.

Its the process, policies, and the way the site operates that is the problem, the individual editors are just turning the handle of the sausage machine, and ArbCom doesn't appear to be the venue for fixing any of it.