Jossi Fresco, Cult Propagandist ("retired") Options Rating

[Anaheim Flash]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jossi

[Proabivouac]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jossi

His retirement appears to have been prompted…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jossi
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=259291631

…by this devastating broadside from Durova:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Durova/S.../Jossi_evidence

This post has been edited by Proabivouac: Sun 21st December 2008, 10:08am

[wikiwhistle]

I have heard that his behavour on the prem rewat articles has been not just allowed, but praised by the powers that be. He'll be back- he just wants the powers that be and others to turn up on his page begging him to stay or something.

Could you please change the heading- I'm up early for me and I thought it meant he was actually dead.

[Kelly Martin]

Jossi made the mistake of going up against an anti-Scientologist. That makes him opposed to Wikipedia's house point of view, which, of course, cannot be allowed to stand.

[wikiwhistle]

Oh come on, he does actually have a WP:COI, at least when it comes to the Prem Rewat articles, and has been allowed to carry on editing them. He also seems to have been erm, following Cirt around across several articles he/she created or has been involved with.

[Kelly Martin]

Oh come on, he does actually have a WP:COI, at least when it comes to the Prem Rewat articles, and has been allowed to carry on editing them. He also seems to have been erm, following Cirt around across several articles he/she created or has been involved with.

Jossi's conflict with Cirt is facially obvious; Cirt is actively forwarding Wikipedia's house POV of anti-Scientologism, and more generally anti-cultism, while Jossi is a facially obvious pro-cultist. The conflict was inevitable. That Jossi would lose it is also inevitable, as Wikipedia is consistently anti-cult, except when the cult in question is the Cult of Wikipedia.

[Cedric]

The conflict was inevitable. That Jossi would lose it is also inevitable, as Wikipedia is consistently anti-cult, except when the cult in question is the Cult of Wikipedia.

Ah yes, the First Wiki Commandment: "The wiki is thy cult; you shall have no other cults before it."

[Anaheim Flash]

I have heard that his behavour on the prem rewat articles has been not just allowed, but praised by the powers that be. He'll be back- he just wants the powers that be and others to turn up on his page begging him to stay or something.

Could you please change the heading- I'm up early for me and I thought it meant he was actually dead.

OK 'pologies. I was up late and happy to be distastefully ironic - anyway 'management' stepped in and made the change.

AF

[Anaheim Flash]

Oh come on, he does actually have a WP:COI, at least when it comes to the Prem Rewat articles, and has been allowed to carry on editing them. He also seems to have been erm, following Cirt around across several articles he/she created or has been involved with.

Jossi's conflict with Cirt is facially obvious; Cirt is actively forwarding Wikipedia's house POV of anti-Scientologism, and more generally anti-cultism, while Jossi is a facially obvious pro-cultist. The conflict was inevitable. That Jossi would lose it is also inevitable, as Wikipedia is consistently anti-cult, except when the cult in question is the Cult of Wikipedia.

You think Cirt was the only editor Jossi was chasing down and using admin privileges to undermine ? And where, in three years of active pro (Prem Rawat) cult editing and super heavy article ownership, until The Register finally put him in the cross hairs, did Jossi suffer from Wikipedia's "consistently anti-cult" position ?

Also how is Jossi "facially obvious pro-cultist" in a general sense ? Why would Cirt, (if it is the case that Cirt is anti Scientology) matter to Jossi whose only obsession was surely the Rawat cult ? Or am I missing some cabal issue ? And in which case how come the cabal is no longer providing Jossi protection ?

AF

[Cla68]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jossi

Jossi is on thin ice because of his misuse of the admin tools related to the Sarah Palin article a couple of months ago. So, I think he's trying to disappear for the moment in order to avoid further sanction. Disappearing temporarily when the spotlight gets turned on you appears to be a frequently used tactic by some experienced editors/admins.

[CharlotteWebb]

Jossi is on thin ice because of his misuse of the admin tools related to the Sarah Palin article a couple of months ago.

I'm not convinced that was "misuse" any more than Splash's unprotection of the Steve Irwin article in a strikingly parallel scenario. There was a request for arbitration but arbcom unanimously rejected hearing it.

Or maybe there's an unspoken "subject is dead so vandalize away" mentality I'm not privy to, I really don't know (aside from sex and nationality of the subject this is the only tangible difference).

This post has been edited by CharlotteWebb: Mon 22nd December 2008, 1:01am

[Cla68]

Jossi is on thin ice because of his misuse of the admin tools related to the Sarah Palin article a couple of months ago.

I'm not convinced that was "misuse" any more than Splash's unprotection of the Steve Irwin article in a strikingly parallel scenario. There was a request for arbitration but arbcom unanimously rejected hearing it.

Or maybe there's an unspoken "subject is dead so vandalize away" mentality I'm not privy to, I really don't know (aside from sex and nationality of the subject this is the only tangible difference).

I think the evidence section in the Palin case shows fairly clearly that Jossi shouldn't have done what he did. I'm not familiar with the Irwin situation, I'll have to look into it.

[Anaheim Flash]

Jossi leaves himself an epitaph

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jossi

which attracts some comment

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=259446263

and the commenter then get's a smack down from a coupla a guys who are still hard for Jossi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:PatW#Jossi.27s_pages

one of who is Arcayne who's also a Shankbone admirer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Arcayne#...dians_I_Respect

and another is the newly elevated Risker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Risker

AF

[Sceptre]

I'm thinking on whether to propose some admonitions and restrictions in the workshop to take effect once he returns: on one hand, quitting then resurfacing a few months later is a common get-out-of-Jail-free card, but on the other hand, it may be just dancing on his grave.

[wikiwhistle]

I'm thinking on whether to propose some admonitions and restrictions in the workshop to take effect once he returns: on one hand, quitting then resurfacing a few months later is a common get-out-of-Jail-free card, but on the other hand, it may be just dancing on his grave.

It would just be common sense to discuss anything needing doing before his possible return.

Why would Cirt, (if it is the case that Cirt is anti Scientology) matter to Jossi whose only obsession was surely the Rawat cult ?

Because Cirt brings NPOV to the wiki's coverage of a lot of different cults, so a lot of true believers/groups/those who are paid to keep those articles a certain way would love to see him/her blocked, restricted from those articles or de-adminned.

[One]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=259446263

and the commenter then get's a smack down from a coupla a guys who are still hard for Jossi

I'm not "hard for Jossi," but that comment was a pretty snide remark from an old adversary hoping to get the last word on Jossi's own talk page.

Interesting sister thread on an "ex-premie" message board. It has more posts than this thread.

[Anaheim Flash]

I'm not "hard for Jossi," but that comment was a pretty snide remark from an old adversary hoping to get the last word on Jossi's own talk page..

There’s a circle squared there – snide and Jossi being eternally matched. User:PatW is hardly a Wikipedia adversary, never having made it in either the cabal stakes or stand out MMPORG hysteria. What his comment on Jossi’s page did was show:
a) Jossi has by no means retired – otherwise he’d have chosen wikideath and there’d be no User page.
b) That self advertizing on User pages is permitted for some people but not others – even after they've “retired”.
c) That despite having been shown to be an abuser of admin status Jossi will still get backing from wikipedos who should know better, and in Risker’s case should be avoiding anything so partisan.

Interesting sister thread on an "ex-premie" message board. It has more posts than this thread.

Your sister ? Hardly surprising that thread has more posts than here, the Rawat cult is just a blot amongst many stains on Wikipedia but for those anti Rawat guys, Jossi quitting WP is like Goebels saying he would never attend a Nuremburg Rally again

AF

[One]

I'm not "hard for Jossi," but that comment was a pretty snide remark from an old adversary hoping to get the last word on Jossi's own talk page..

There’s a circle squared there – snide and Jossi being eternally matched. User:PatW is hardly a Wikipedia adversary, never having made it in either the cabal stakes or stand out MMPORG hysteria. What his comment on Jossi’s page did was show:
a) Jossi has by no means retired – otherwise he’d have chosen wikideath and there’d be no User page.
b) That self advertizing on User pages is permitted for some people but not others – even after they've “retired”.
c) That despite having been shown to be an abuser of admin status Jossi will still get backing from wikipedos who should know better, and in Risker’s case should be avoiding anything so partisan.

1. People retire as they retire. Usually they fail; I believe it's an empirical fact that most users come back. But this fact does not imply that user pages should be used for posting offensive material about the departed individual. Recall User:Piperdown. Suppose that someone posted on his user page that Piperdown was probably a paid shill for Overstock.com, and that Wikipedia was better off without him. Would that be appropriate? Yes or no?

2. Who is forbidden from advertising on their own userpage?

3. Risker said (correctly) that the comment was inappropriate. That doesn't mean she supports anything more than the rules of Wikipedia. I would do the same thing if someone posted garbage about my least favorite Wikipedians. The comments were so clearly snide that even the last commentator on this thread said so. "Jim" is manifestly no fan of Jossi, but finds that Pat's remark was rude.

Your sister ? Hardly surprising that thread has more posts than here, the Rawat cult is just a blot amongst many stains on Wikipedia but for those anti Rawat guys, Jossi quitting WP is like Goebels saying he would never attend a Nuremburg Rally again

AF

Way to pick metaphors, "Anaheim Flash."

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

I have witnessed and faced Jossi's pro-cult bias beyond the Premmie issue. It is understandable to a degree, there are pretty heavy set "anti-cult" or reactionary elements in society. And could have been worse.

Its not a big issue for an editor but it is a big issue for an admin using admin powers acting on topics where they have an obvious COI interest or they really does not know what they are talking about.

He should not have been allowed to use that weight on cult related topics but I suspect it was a sop, or indulgence, thrown to him by the Wiki-Popery in reward for his services rendered.

Andries (spell?) also incurred his attentions on the Sai Baba side.

I also noted how quick and adept he was at removing himself from RfCs and the likes, and being allowed to, despite obviously being involved.

Probably another admin perk ... would an capo admin hold another admin to 'have' to be involved in a case or would they let them slip out a side gate before the gassing?

This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: Wed 24th December 2008, 3:37am

[EricBarbour]

Jossi is on thin ice because of his misuse of the admin tools related to the Sarah Palin article a couple of months ago. So, I think he's trying to disappear for the moment in order to avoid further sanction. Disappearing temporarily when the spotlight gets turned on you appears to be a frequently used tactic by some experienced editors/admins.

You just hit the nail on the head. Some admins do this regularly.

In fact, favored toad JzG is doing that right now.

Please do not try to provoke me to anger, it's not difficult to do, so it's not in the least bit clever, and experience indicates that some at least who deliberately make my life more miserable than it needs to be, have been banned and stayed that way. Make an effort to assume good faith and let's see if we can't get along. Guy (Help!) 22:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
* Please see User:JzG/Harassment links.
the internets is populated by eggshells armed with hammers

He's one to talk......