FORUM WARNING [2] Division by zero (Line: 2933 of /srcsgcaop/boardclass.php) FORUM WARNING [2] Division by zero (Line: 2943 of /srcsgcaop/boardclass.php) Jimbo calls for global ban on Thekohser -
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
Jimbo must not like living in a trailer park. Seems he has a lot of pent up anger. I wonder what the specific crime was, to call for this today? It's gotta be the trailer park, right?
QUOTE
Kohs is permanently and globally banned from all Wikimedia projects.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] 04:04, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Group: Contributors
Posts: 157
Joined:
Member No.: 19,790
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 3rd May 2010, 9:36pm)
Jimbo must not like living in a trailer park. Seems he has a lot of pent up anger. I wonder what the specific crime was, to call for this today? It's gotta be the trailer park, right?
QUOTE
Kohs is permanently and globally banned from all Wikimedia projects.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] 04:04, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
How about that. I didn't know that Wales still presumed to have the authority to declare someone banned permanently throughout the projects.
Group: Contributors
Posts: 10,222
Joined:
From: Greater Boston
Member No.: 3,670
QUOTE
Hi. Please enforce the global ban on Thekohser declared by Jimbo Wales in this edit. Thanks! — Jeff G. ツ 02:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not sure if this is a proper venue; while I personally support this idea, why not globallock the account instead of ask for enforcement to each local community? --Aphaia 02:46, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
And as far as I understand Jimmy has no special privilege to declare such a global ban unless he speaks on behalf of the Board. Thus your request is declined currently. Thanks. --Aphaia 02:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick responses. — Jeff G. ツ 03:03, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Kohs is permanently and globally banned from all Wikimedia projects.--Jimbo Wales 04:04, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Interesting. This reminds me of King Henry crying, "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?"
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,693
Joined:
Member No.: 9,267
QUOTE(Moulton @ Tue 4th May 2010, 1:46am)
QUOTE
Kohs is permanently and globally banned from all Wikimedia projects.--Jimbo Wales 04:04, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Interesting. This reminds me of King Henry crying, "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?"
I must say, this ban is utterly unfair ... I have put in just as much effort and energy and yet am only able to elicit a non-committal "indef ban" out of them.
I demand to be globally banned immediately and without having to establish a Yahoo Questions account.
This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy:
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined:
Member No.: 5,156
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 3rd May 2010, 6:36pm)
Jimbo must not like living in a trailer park. Seems he has a lot of pent up anger. I wonder what the specific crime was, to call for this today? It's gotta be the trailer park, right?
QUOTE
Kohs is permanently and globally banned from all Wikimedia projects.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] 04:04, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Awesome. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/blink.gif) Only the solar system and galactic bans are more awesome, Ms. Universe. Gotta be the trailer park. What else?
Group: Contributors
Posts: 10,222
Joined:
From: Greater Boston
Member No.: 3,670
QUOTE(Larry Sanger @ Mon 3rd May 2010, 9:41pm)
I didn't know that Wales still presumed to have the authority to declare someone banned permanently throughout the projects.
He did the same to me a year and a half ago. That was when he first threatened to shut down Wikiversity, declaring study materials there on "The Ethical Management of the English Wikipedia" to be "beyond the scope" of WMF-sponsored projects.
So this newest occasion would be the third time in a year and a half when Jimbo has invoked the same dictat to silence people who have investigated ethical lapses in his projects.
So I take it the idea here was for Mr. Guinzburg & Co. to get rid of the Rachel Marsden sex-chat quote from Jimbo's Wikiquote page, which they'd only just noticed?
I hate to say this, but Ms. Marsden's log of the sex chat probably wouldn't meet whatever sourcing guidelines are analagous to (and hopefully more stringent than) "WP:RS" for a professionally-produced encyclopedia, putting aside the question of whether or not Jimbo has admitted to their being substantially correct... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif) That's not to say the quote is inaccurate, or that Jimbo wouldn't have typed the line(s) in question; in fact, I'd say the quote's likelihood-of-accuracy is at least 90 percent. But sex-chat logs can be easily falsified, as my own experiences with at least two members of The Shaggs will attest.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
Phew, I can see why they'd want to ban me from Wikimedia Commons! Look at that line-up of contributions -- practically all of them fixated on tormenting Jimbo Wales.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 3rd May 2010, 10:54pm)
So I take it the idea here was for Mr. Guinzburg & Co. to get rid of the Rachel Marsden sex-chat quote from Jimbo's Wikiquote page, which they'd only just noticed?
I hate to say this, but Ms. Marsden's log of the sex chat probably wouldn't meet whatever sourcing guidelines are analagous to (and hopefully more stringent than) "WP:RS" for a professionally-produced encyclopedia...
I don't know... it was sourced to The Globe & Mail. Is that a disreputable source?
Anyway, you're right that this was a little mission of Jimbo's today -- what else could "per request" mean?
Jimbo loves the Truth, except when the subject is Jimbo.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
Oooh, now this is interesting. It would appear that a few members of the English Wikisource community retain a spine of their own. They even have the presence of mind to discover that maybe this all has to do with Jimbo's idiotic behavior on Wikiversity.
Alas, I have a feeling they will be beaten into submission by the drone bees.
I have to agree emphatically with Charles Matthews. Thekohser is such a master of words and images, he is an utter danger to all that Wikisource stands for. His every move is a puzzle, within a cryptogram, within an acrostic. Indeed, he could strike anywhere, so we must be ever vigilant against his threat. -- Reshokeht (talk) 14:52, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
Group: Contributors
Posts: 222
Joined:
Member No.: 18,566
I would like to congratulate Kohser on this achievement. He has managed to piss off Wales so much that he was banned from Wikimedia completely, per Wales' decree. Isn't Kohs now only like the second person to ever be banned across every project?
I don't know who to feel sorry for more: Kohs, who seems to live and breathe Wikipedia and Jimmy Wales, or Wales, who acts so completely clueless in pretty much everything he does.
Group: Contributors
Posts: 10,222
Joined:
From: Greater Boston
Member No.: 3,670
QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 4th May 2010, 12:28pm)
Randroids don't do "penance." That's for people who feel guilt.
Milton is correct. But while there is good evidence that Wales doesn't feel remorse, there is some evidence that he does feel bruised or wounded by negative characterizations, insults, and similar expressions of disrespect.
If that analysis is correct, then one possible gambit that (as far as I know) hasn't been tried in these pages is to sincerely pray for Jimmy -- pray that he finds his remorse.
Randroids don't do "penance". That's for people who feel guilt.
Sometimes penance is imposed by a Higher Power …
QUOTE
The death of Becket unnerved the king. The knights who did the deed to curry the king's favor, fell into disgrace. Several miracles were said to occur at the tomb of the martyr and he was soon canonized. Hordes of pilgrims transformed Canterbury Cathedral into a shrine. Four years later, in an act of penance, the king donned a sack-cloth walking barefoot through the streets of Canterbury while eighty monks flogged him with branches. Henry capped his atonement by spending the night in the martyr's crypt. St. Thomas continued as a popular cultist figure for the remainder of the Middle Ages.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,368
Joined:
Member No.: 81
It's unremarkable that Jimbo wants Kohs banned. What really disgusts me is the way some people are stepping up to justify and enforce Jimbo's edict, knowing perfectly well that it represents nothing more than a petty personality feud. Actually, Kohs has contributed far more Wikipedia content than Jimbo. Jimbo offers the project nothing more than tired platitudes on a good day and tiresome threats on a bad one.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
QUOTE(everyking @ Tue 4th May 2010, 1:35pm)
It's unremarkable that Jimbo wants Kohs banned. What really disgusts me is the way some people are stepping up to justify and enforce Jimbo's edict, knowing perfectly well that it represents nothing more than a petty personality feud. Actually, Kohs has contributed far more Wikipedia content than Jimbo. Jimbo offers the project nothing more than tired platitudes on a good day and tiresome threats on a bad one.
Remarkable that you'd continue to embrace a community and project that disgusts you so.
But, thanks for stating what should be the obvious.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,368
Joined:
Member No.: 81
QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 4th May 2010, 7:23pm)
QUOTE(everyking @ Tue 4th May 2010, 1:35pm)
It's unremarkable that Jimbo wants Kohs banned. What really disgusts me is the way some people are stepping up to justify and enforce Jimbo's edict, knowing perfectly well that it represents nothing more than a petty personality feud. Actually, Kohs has contributed far more Wikipedia content than Jimbo. Jimbo offers the project nothing more than tired platitudes on a good day and tiresome threats on a bad one.
Remarkable that you'd continue to embrace a community and project that disgusts you so.
But, thanks for stating what should be the obvious.
I don't think the project is defined by the dishonesty of its worst members. It's important to differentiate between the patient and the illness.
It's unremarkable that Jimbo wants Kohs banned. What really disgusts me is the way some people are stepping up to justify and enforce Jimbo's edict, knowing perfectly well that it represents nothing more than a petty personality feud. Actually, Kohs has contributed far more Wikipedia content than Jimbo. Jimbo offers the project nothing more than tired platitudes on a good day and tiresome threats on a bad one.
Remarkable that you'd continue to embrace a community and project that disgusts you so.
But, thanks for stating what should be the obvious.
I don't think the project is defined by the dishonesty of its worst members. It's important to differentiate between the patient and the illness.
When it comes to social diseases, they are in fact defined by the condition of their worst member.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,471
Joined:
Member No.: 9,985
QUOTE(Jon Awbrey @ Tue 4th May 2010, 2:38pm)
When it comes to social diseases, they are in fact defined by the condition of their worst member.
Calling Jimbo a "member" is correct in regard to medical terminology, but rather opaque in regard to genital-related epithets. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ermm.gif)
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
QUOTE(Abd @ Tue 4th May 2010, 2:28pm)
I commented in the Wikisource discussion. Fools rush in....
I know it's only been a couple of hours, but you seem to have stunned them into silence, Abd. Well done. Now what? Can a bunch of sheep be transformed into mighty lions, merely by reading your prose?
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,693
Joined:
Member No.: 9,267
QUOTE(everyking @ Tue 4th May 2010, 5:35pm)
What really disgusts me is the way some people are stepping up to justify and enforce Jimbo's edict, knowing perfectly well that it represents nothing more than a petty personality feud.
Actually, Kohs has contributed far more Wikipedia content than Jimbo. Jimbo offers the project nothing more than tired platitudes on a good day and tiresome threats on a bad one.
Yes, I never understood that part of human behavior.
Going back to the discussion of Wikipedia and social entropy, at what stage is the Wales relationship? Is he giving in or taking out more? How does it break down financially?
I always thought that it is was wrong to take all those five figure speaking fees and corporate endorsements as a personal benefit. Especially wrong if does not pay, or even chuck a $20 tip at, one of his unpaid serfs for doing the dirty on someone like TheKohser.
It is abuse of the system which is meant to be a 501 c registered trust.
What other leaders of a world renown "charity" uses charitable volunteers to go around stuffing and obstructing his personal critics ... especially where the criticism has some validity?
Group: Regulars
Posts: 3,270
Joined:
From: EN61bw
Member No.: 6,696
QUOTE(Cock-up-over-conspiracy @ Tue 4th May 2010, 3:50pm)
What other leaders of a world renown "charity" uses charitable volunteers to go around stuffing and obstructing his personal critics ... especially where the criticism has some validity?[/b]
That's actually pretty common. Look up David Miscavige, Sun Myung Moon, and that guy that Jossi used to shill for, for starters.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 4th May 2010, 4:40pm)
QUOTE(Abd @ Tue 4th May 2010, 2:28pm)
I commented in the Wikisource discussion. Fools rush in....
I know it's only been a couple of hours, but you seem to have stunned them into silence, Abd. Well done. Now what? Can a bunch of sheep be transformed into mighty lions, merely by reading your prose?
Doesn't seem terribly likely, does it?
A couple of thoughts. I've done something there that, if I valued my account, I'd never do. I told the community that if there are problems, they are the community's fault. It's not Jimbo's fault, it's not Kohs' fault, it's a collective fault. It's our fault. Most people will do almost anything rather than accept responsibility. It is much easier to blame others, and then imagine that if just these others can be excluded, desysopped, forced to stop exerting authority, or just shamed into silence, all will be well.
Once in a while, though, a community will recognize and accept a message like that, and act on it. More commonly, if they can reach the whistle-blower, they will tear him to shreds.
The wiki system that developed, with an administrative cabal, Jimbo called it, that was advised by the general community, depends on a coherent community, but the community is rarely coherent. It does tend to develop a general consensus, that slowly improves -- sometimes -- over time. When elements in the community slavishly follow the cabal, a loop is set up, the restraint that the community would exert over the cabal disappears.
When a group of people are volunteers, when their activity cannot be coerced, and when they are the largest contributor of value, collectively, to some project, they have the real power, unless their contributions are replaceable. However, typically, large volunteer groups working in an organization aren't organized, they depend on the organization for that.
If the editorial community were to self-organize, there would be no power that could prevent it from finding, on the one hand, internal consensus and thus coherence, an ability to act with one mind, or, on the other hand, to identify coherent subgroups that cannot agree, or which are not ready to agree, and which could therefore fission, partially or fully, both becoming, through this, freer and more efficient. When there is no critical property involved, fission can enhance the overall function of an organization. There are then two organizations which can sometimes cooperate and sometimes compete, and the sum of this can be greater.
There is no critical property involved in Wikipedia. If half the editors went one way and half the other, both halves could survive quite well. Well, there is one piece of critical property, I lied. The name, which then means the nameservers.
In the end, this must be faced, as a Foundation issue. Should there be one repository of "the sum of all human knowledge," or should there be many, each operating independently, developing different systems? All evolution teaches us that a single centralized asset is highly vulnerable and will ultimately be corrupted.
Fission, though, isn't possible without coherence, we've seen again and again that spin-off projects started by no more than a handful of editors discontented with Wikipedia dysfunction, don't have the support, generally, to survive.
If the community became coherent, it might not need to fission! There is no way to know in advance.
The mission of Wikipedia requires methods of finding consensus, but finding consensus is notoriously difficult, and facilitating consensus is a special skill, a profession. Wiki process for consensus-building was never created in a way that would allow efficient and reliable operation.
And those who understand how precarious the whole project is becoming, and who are attached to its success, are terrified at losing valuable administrators, whom they imagine are crucial to continued operation. When the cabal is looking at a dispute between an admin with 100,000 edits, considered crucial for the operation of certain areas of activity, and an editor, perhaps an SPA, with maybe a thousand edits, whom will they avoid offending?
The problem, of course, is that by becoming dependent upon that admin, the cabal has sacrificed neutrality, which was mission-critical. There would be ways to far more widely distribute the tasks that maintain the wiki, to make its operation far more efficient and sustainable, but ... trying to implement these typically runs into fierce resistance, most of all from the cabal, for its value to the project is dependent upon project inefficiency, and they believe that distributing power more widely would wreck the place.
Yes, it's stupid. It burns out the cabal admins and editors. But mostly they don't realize that until it's too late. When they burn out, they blame, on the one hand, the "trolls" and "vandals" and "pov-pushers" who, they think, made their work hell. And, on the other, they blame the rest of the community for not seeing things their way, for not always crushing these enemies of the wiki, i.e., whomever they are upset with at the moment.
WMC, having dominated for years, is now bitter and contemptuous of the powers-that-be on Wikipedia. He's far from the only one to go through this cycle.
I commented in the Wikisource discussion. Fools rush in ……
I know it's only been a couple of hours, but you seem to have stunned them into silence, Abd. Well done. Now what? Can a bunch of sheep be transformed into mighty lions, merely by reading your prose?
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 4th May 2010, 4:40pm)
I know it's only been a couple of hours, but you seem to have stunned them into silence, Abd. Well done. Now what? Can a bunch of sheep be transformed into mighty lions, merely by reading your prose?
I just checked. My edit of 18:21, 4 May 2010, is still the latest revision of the Wikisource Administrators' Noticeboard. It is now 01:37, 5 May 2010. This page had been quite active.
Reading over this, I'm getting a sense of Thekohser's biggest offense: he obviously doesn't take this matter SERIOUSLY. Here they are, discussing blocking him, and he comes in with this blatant sock, hilarious. Muggles, my conclusion. How dare he show such contempt of our Serious Process? Who does he think he is? Somebody special? I bet he thinks he's smart!
There are, in fact, serious issues here, and maybe someone will pick up on that. But meanwhile, a peer community which cannot tolerate jesters and clowns is on its way down, it's dying and it's just a matter of time. Sure, if a jester interrupts every process, it should stop, and usually it's enough to ask, politely. If not, okay, then some action is called for. But this is Thekohser himself, surely he has some rights on this page, he didn't start this mess. He'd behaved on Wikisource.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,693
Joined:
Member No.: 9,267
QUOTE(Abd @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:18am)
The wiki system that developed, with an administrative cabal, Jimbo called it, that was advised by the general community, depends on a coherent community, but the community is rarely coherent. It does tend to develop a general consensus, that slowly improves -- sometimes -- over time.
Fission, though, isn't possible without coherence, we've seen again and again that spin-off projects started by no more than a handful of editors discontented with Wikipedia dysfunction, don't have the support, generally, to survive.
Rather than use simple nuclear fission as an analogy ... I think a biosphere model is more applicable.
The Wikipedia as a Serengeti national park with various species adapting different survival methods from out and out big toothed carnivores, to plodding immovables (with big tusks), to herds of non-confrontational herbivores, to tiny poisonous blood sucking insects.
What exactly is WR in relationship to that ... poachers turned gamekeepers?
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined:
Member No.: 5,156
QUOTE(Cock-up-over-conspiracy @ Tue 4th May 2010, 8:00pm)
QUOTE(Abd @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:18am)
The wiki system that developed, with an administrative cabal, Jimbo called it, that was advised by the general community, depends on a coherent community, but the community is rarely coherent. It does tend to develop a general consensus, that slowly improves -- sometimes -- over time.
Fission, though, isn't possible without coherence, we've seen again and again that spin-off projects started by no more than a handful of editors discontented with Wikipedia dysfunction, don't have the support, generally, to survive.
Rather than use simple nuclear fission as an analogy ... I think a biosphere model is more applicable.
The Wikipedia as a Serengeti national park with various species adapting different survival methods from out and out big toothed carnivores, to plodding immovables (with big tusks), to herds of non-confrontational herbivores, to tiny poisonous blood sucking insects.
What exactly is WR in relationship to that ... poachers turned gamekeepers?
Is there something about the shear size of the elephant graveyard that will be needed to build Sanger's Ivory Tower? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)
QUOTE(Cock-up-over-conspiracy @ Tue 4th May 2010, 8:00pm)
QUOTE(Abd @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:18am)
The wiki system that developed, with an administrative cabal, Jimbo called it, that was advised by the general community, depends on a coherent community, but the community is rarely coherent. It does tend to develop a general consensus, that slowly improves — sometimes — over time.
Fission, though, isn't possible without coherence, we've seen again and again that spin-off projects started by no more than a handful of editors discontented with Wikipedia dysfunction, don't have the support, generally, to survive.
Rather than use simple nuclear fission as an analogy … I think a biosphere model is more applicable.
The Wikipedia as a Serengeti national park with various species adapting different survival methods from out and out big toothed carnivores, to plodding immovables (with big tusks), to herds of non-confrontational herbivores, to tiny poisonous blood sucking insects.
What exactly is WR in relationship to that … poachers turned gamekeepers?
Is there something about the shear size of the elephant graveyard that will needed to build Sanger's Ivory Tower? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif)
The Latitude of the Platitude is Inversely Proportional to the Incisiveness of the Attitude.
And Dat … sometimes … generally … Is Dat, Eh, Dude —
Group: Contributors
Posts: 271
Joined:
From: Melbourne, Australia
Member No.: 1,039
QUOTE(Abd @ Wed 5th May 2010, 2:28am)
I just checked. My edit of 18:21, 4 May 2010, is still the latest revision of the Wikisource Administrators' Noticeboard. It is now 01:37, 5 May 2010. This page had been quite active.
Most of these people are English Wikisource admins, where we have yearly reconfirmations. JeepdaySock is admin Jeepday. Jeff G and Darkoneko are the only people who are not regular contributors to Wikisource. The "silence" that you encountered is quite typical for Wikisource.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 483
Joined:
Member No.: 17,020
&oldid
QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 4th May 2010, 4:57am)
Oooh, now this is interesting. It would appear that a few members of the English Wikisource community retain a spine of their own. They even have the presence of mind to discover that maybe this all has to do with Jimbo's idiotic behavior on Wikiversity.
Alas, I have a feeling they will be beaten into submission by the drone bees.
Please don't put us on akward situations. I don't know if you're aware, buf [[User:Jeff G.]] has been going wiki by wiki asking for local blocks of Thekohser linking a couple of threads on some village pumps where you mention you consider him globally banned. [http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalismo_en_curso#Thekohser] [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wikiquote:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Global_ban_enforcement...
After the obligatory reference to "WR Trolls"...which includes people like NYBrad, CHL, and Alison, we then get :
:Hi Drini, I apologize for that. I didn't know there was a tool on meta for global lock. I appreciate you letting me know. I thought the only way was local blocks, and figured it best not to go on any big campaign to do it (why bother?) but just let it be known and be taken care of as necessary. But if there's a global lock, that's obviously the right tool to use.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] ([[User talk:Jimbo Wales#top|talk]]) 13:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
So, that would seem to suggest that not only did Jimbo actually get one of his minions to go around all WMF wikis and do this "burn the witch" schtick, but that he was completely unaware that there was a global ban button on his own servers...
# 04:41, 5 May 2010 Pathoschild (talk | contribs) changed status for global account "User:Thekohser@global": Set (none); Unset locked ‎ (converted to local blocks after discussing with drini)
....which remains "clear as mud"...but what else is new?
Group: Contributors
Posts: 242
Joined:
From: Adelaide, Australia
Member No.: 10,522
QUOTE
If there are any further infractions, it may be necessary for us to confiscate the man's computer and prohibit him from using the internet for a matter of years, or perhaps even for the rest of his life. So I hope he will learn his lesson now. Everyking (talk) 04:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Every user has the right to fork. It's my understanding that this user has already created a wiki of his own, so he's welcome to copy material under the GFDL and edit there. Will Beback talk 04:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined:
Member No.: 5,066
QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:34am)
So, that would seem to suggest that not only did Jimbo actually get one of his minions to go around all WMF wikis and do this "burn the witch" schtick, but that he was completely unaware that there was a global ban button on his own servers... ...words fail....
Heh heh. Why am I not surprised? Jimbo is no different than any number of abusive, shallow corporate minions that I have seen over the years. He doesn't know what he's doing, and flaunts his ignorance at every opportunity, yet enjoys the trappings of whatever miserable little power he has over other people.
Every time he posts something on his talkpage or on AN, he looks more and more like a Dilbert character.
Wikipedia is like World of Warcraft, with one major difference: in Warcraft, it's routine to recommend that people quit a guild "if the leader is an idiot". That phrase is so commonplace in Warcraft group websites, it's almost an official rule. But Wikipedia's leader has been proven to be an idiot, time and time again.......and yet they continue to follow him!
Group: Contributors
Posts: 10,222
Joined:
From: Greater Boston
Member No.: 3,670
QUOTE(Abd @ Tue 4th May 2010, 10:28pm)
There are, in fact, serious issues here, and maybe someone will pick up on that. But meanwhile, a peer community which cannot tolerate jesters and clowns is on its way down, it's dying and it's just a matter of time.
Because the issues are serious, it requires a jester to elevate them to general attention, in a way that (eventually) makes people stop and think.
There are serious absurdities in WikiCulture, and Greg is doing a fine job pointing them out.
Also, kudos to Milton Roe for his wonderful song parodies.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
QUOTE(Moulton @ Wed 5th May 2010, 6:53am)
There are serious absurdities in WikiCulture, and Greg is doing a fine job pointing them out.
For those keeping score at home, Kohs has just hit a double for the Wikisource team, but there's one out, and Manager Jimbo is coming out to the mound. He may be making a pitching change.
P.S. I could see how Wikisource, if it is as it appears, to be a true and authentic effort to dutifully reproduce public domain works, without agenda or personality tainting the effort, could really be an addictive environment for someone like me. However, it being under the umbrella of a corrupt regime, I couldn't possibly bring myself to complete work on more than just perhaps the one work that I'm interested personally in completing. (In other words, even if I score a run in this inning, there's only a couple more innings left, and it will probably be my last game with this team.)
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
QUOTE(Kevin @ Wed 5th May 2010, 4:52am)
QUOTE
If there are any further infractions, it may be necessary for us to confiscate the man's computer and prohibit him from using the internet for a matter of years, or perhaps even for the rest of his life. So I hope he will learn his lesson now. Everyking (talk) 04:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Every user has the right to fork. It's my understanding that this user has already created a wiki of his own, so he's welcome to copy material under the GFDL and edit there. Will Beback talk 04:39, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Some people have no sense of humor.
Yeah, we should draw and quarter them. (No, not take out the pastels or make up a bed for the guest. Or maybe we should. Some of these people seem to need some serious human company, i.e., smiling and laughing. That comment by Everyking was great. The global lock was lifted today. Well see if that holds.... I have now pointed out the obvious on Wikiquote. I have to be careful about this, I'm legitimately seen as an outsider on these wikis.
Anyway, I'm now an official Wikiquote editor, as of today. We'll see how long that lasts... See, I noticed that Koh's edits to the quotes for Jimmy Wales were all reverted, though almost all of them were fine, and he wasn't blocked when he made them. One edit was a tad, shall we say, provocative? If I get a mail from Mr. Wales saying that he'd like it quoted, fine. Frankly, those were mighty fine words, if he actually said them, my congratulations to him, but I wouldn't want to upset the muggles without a very good reason. I was tempted.
I did listen to his 2005 TED speech a bit. He said that he was trying to encourage more testing of Wikipedia quality. Apparently that message hasn't gotten out to the troops yet. Or was that then and this is now? I'm really not sure.
Group: Contributors
Posts: 1,682
Joined:
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 8,716
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:31am)
I did listen to his 2005 TED speech a bit. He said that he was trying to encourage more testing of Wikipedia quality. Apparently that message hasn't gotten out to the troops yet. Or was that then and this is now? I'm really not sure.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Wed 5th May 2010, 4:34am)
QUOTE
:Hi Drini, I apologize for that. I didn't know there was a tool on meta for global lock. I appreciate you letting me know. I thought the only way was local blocks, and figured it best not to go on any big campaign to do it (why bother?) but just let it be known and be taken care of as necessary. But if there's a global lock, that's obviously the right tool to use.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] ([[User talk:Jimbo Wales#top|talk]]) 13:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
So, that would seem to suggest that not only did Jimbo actually get one of his minions to go around all WMF wikis and do this "burn the witch" schtick, but that he was completely unaware that there was a global ban button on his own servers...
Jimbo was responding there to Jeff G. (T-C-L-K-R-D)
. I very much doubt that Jimbo instigated this. Jeff G. has been so outrageous that I have suspicions. Kohs, that isn't you, is it?
My sense is that Jimbo would just like the whole thing to quietly go away, and here comes Jeff G. stirring the pot. Using the global lock facility to block someone everywhere for reasons like this was probably not the intended use, and what then happens with local socks? Bad idea. If Jimbo wants a user blocked, he can do it himself, or ask a steward to do it, but he's not doing that because he knows how much damage it causes.
Notice: just let it be known and be taken care of as necessary. What is "necessary?" Pretty obvious, I'd say. That Kohs has an account does not create a necessity. If he uses it for disruption (which, by the way, would includes shouting "you are a bunch of stupid idiots" to a crowd of stupid idiots), that is when each account could be addressed, and the local community will take care of it, with Jimbo or stewards intervening when they see sufficient local support. If there is local consensus not to block, as there was at Wikisource and Wikiquote, no block. He's not stupid, or at least, tip o the hat to Greg, not that stupid.
Steward intervention will come when the wikigods see that a local community is divided and can't, in their view, find consensus.
What are the odds that Jeff G. is dinged soon? If he stops now, probably not, but if he keeps pushing this? I see that Kohs was also unblocked at de.wikipedia, where Jeff G had convinced them (or was that already there?) to block him based on this "global ban."
Kohs got away with a jab at Jimbo et al at Wikisource, I think he was counting on one free because of the whole flap there. That kind of pushing the edge is what got him banned. I can admire it at the same time as I see why he's banned. Ever see Hero (2002 film)? The Wikipedia article does it no justice at all. Amazing film.
On Wikiquote Kohs was gratuitously libeled. That's the community. It will ban Kohs for less uncivil but more cogent criticism, then tolerate unnecessary libel. Or will it? We'll see. However, Wikiquote refused to block Kohs, at least, so far.
QUOTE(Malleus @ Wed 5th May 2010, 7:33pm)
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:31am)
I did listen to his 2005 TED speech a bit. He said that he was trying to encourage more testing of Wikipedia quality. Apparently that message hasn't gotten out to the troops yet. Or was that then and this is now? I'm really not sure.
Wasn't it just bollocks?
No, it was a good speech. The reality that resulted is mixed.
His pronunciation of "Wikipedia" drives me nuts. I guess he has a right to establish the pronunciation, but I've always pronounced wiki as "wikee," but have made the i short in "Wikipedia," and that's what I've heard from many other people. Didn't realize that until I figured out what was irritating me about his pronunciation.
Group: Contributors
Posts: 1,682
Joined:
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 8,716
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:29am)
His pronunciation of "Wikipedia" drives me nuts. I guess he has a right to establish the pronunciation, but I've always pronounced wiki as "wikee," but have made the i short in "Wikipedia," and that's what I've heard from many other people. Didn't realize that until I figured out what was irritating me about his pronunciation.
His pronunciation is the least of the problems I have with Wales. His mad stare just freaks me out.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,441
Joined:
Member No.: 2,143
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:29am)
I very much doubt that Jimbo instigated this. Jeff G. has been so outrageous that I have suspicions. Kohs, that isn't you, is it?
No, Jeff G. is Jeff Guinzburg, and he's special. He's an administrator on Test Wikipedia, on the Admin Tools Wiki and he's one of the few people that knows how to massage photos. He even has his own fan club.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
QUOTE(Malleus @ Wed 5th May 2010, 8:34pm)
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:29am)
His pronunciation of "Wikipedia" drives me nuts. I guess he has a right to establish the pronunciation, but I've always pronounced wiki as "wikee," but have made the i short in "Wikipedia," and that's what I've heard from many other people. Didn't realize that until I figured out what was irritating me about his pronunciation.
His pronunciation is the least of the problems I have with Wales. His mad stare just freaks me out.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
QUOTE(tarantino @ Wed 5th May 2010, 9:28pm)
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:29am)
I very much doubt that Jimbo instigated this. Jeff G. has been so outrageous that I have suspicions. Kohs, that isn't you, is it?
No, Jeff G. is Jeff Guinzburg, and he's special. He's an administrator on Test Wikipedia, on the Admin Tools Wiki and he's one of the few people that knows how to massage photos... He even has his own fan club.
Clever, that Kohs. Nobody would believe it.
I know how to massage photos, it's getting the photos to massage me that's not so easy.
Once again, a terminal period in a URL appears to not be presented to the browser for links. The "massage photos" link must have a period added at the end, in the browser, to work.
Was it the photo of Kelly Madison that was "hand massaged" or something else? Those photos creep me out, I thought the photo of Jeff on facebook was a bit strange, but... it gets worse.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
QUOTE(ulsterman @ Thu 6th May 2010, 8:37am)
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:31am)
Anyway, I'm now an official Wikiquote editor, as of today.
You can't make up this sort of irony. Abd was warmly welcomed to Wikiquote by none other than Cirt.
I have nothing against Cirt, and I hope Cirt has nothing against me. I don't hold grudges and one of the blessings of getting older is that I don't remember who did what and said what unless it gets repeated a lot. Seems to me that I criticized Cirt strongly at one point, but, first of all, he's young, and one of the blessings of being young is that you get to change a lot, if you are willing. Compared to many others I've criticized, his response was moderate and thus hopeful.
(If you stay willing to admit error or at least to leave it behind and change when you are older, you can be young and old at the same time. Mazel tov.)
The routine welcomes at the various projects are a good thing, though, indeed, sometimes ironic. I remember seeing that an editor on Wikiversity, blocked by an admin, pointed out, it seemed bitterly, that he had been the one to welcome the blocking admin. Yes. So? I'd ask, "Did you welcome this new editor to gain an ally in your various causes?"
I was welcomed to Wikipedia, years after my first edit, by a sock puppet of someone who was, at that point, pretty much out to get me banned, due to off-wiki political agenda. Harmless, and, yes, ironic. Part of the game. Interestingly, the puppet master, later, became a bit of an ally, and some of his socks were actually easy to work with even in the "battleground" articles. There were others far worse. Wikipedia has often banned the wrong people.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch:
My edits restoring most of Koh's work on Jimmy_Wales still stand, fingers crossed, but I don't really care that much. That page is bloated, but bloated without all the bold is better than bloated with, unless one really does want to make the page look ridiculous. Greg had, overall, improved it, and even the outrageous quotation of Jimmy's words by a somewhat biased reporter, Rachel Marsden, was funny. I'll remember that one, and memorability is, in fact, a reason to have a quotation at Wikiquote, but putting that one in without consensus would simply be asking for trouble.
You aren't asking for trouble, are you, Greg? (Rhetorical question.)
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
I have submitted unblock requests on various Wikimedia projects where I have been blocked. So we'll see how that goes. Tried my first "table conversion" in Wikisource today. That was cool.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
QUOTE(Guido den Broeder @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:40am)
Meanwhile, you place on the Public Speakers list and you meta user page are once again under siege (sigh).
Ah yes, the all important public speakers list. I knew they'd be taking a few shots at that in the next couple of days. So predictable!
Guido, for fun, point them to my Wikisource contributions page and note that I'm obviously not "permanently blocked" from Wikimedia projects if I was just editing this morning.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:43pm)
QUOTE(Guido den Broeder @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:40am)
Meanwhile, you place on the Public Speakers list and you meta user page are once again under siege (sigh).
Ah yes, the all important public speakers list. I knew they'd be taking a few shots at that in the next couple of days. So predictable!
Guido, for fun, point them to my Wikisource contributions page and note that I'm obviously not "permanently blocked" from Wikimedia projects if I was just editing this morning.
Current revision as of 17:13, 6 May 2010 (view source) Abigor (talk | contribs) m (Protected "Public speakers": Counter-productive edit warring ([edit=autoconfirmed] (indefinite) [move=autoconfirmed] (indefinite)))
Group: Regulars
Posts: 425
Joined:
Member No.: 10,371
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 6:43pm)
QUOTE(Guido den Broeder @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:40am)
Meanwhile, you place on the Public Speakers list and you meta user page are once again under siege (sigh).
Ah yes, the all important public speakers list. I knew they'd be taking a few shots at that in the next couple of days. So predictable!
Guido, for fun, point them to my Wikisource contributions page and note that I'm obviously not "permanently blocked" from Wikimedia projects if I was just editing this morning.
Naturally, Abigor (the mentally disturbed guy who previously hacked my website and tried to destroy my database, and was granted the keys to the wikipedia database as a reward) immediately stepped in and blocked me as well. He is now editwarring on my talk page.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
QUOTE(Guido den Broeder @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:37pm)
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 6:43pm)
QUOTE(Guido den Broeder @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:40am)
Meanwhile, you place on the Public Speakers list and you meta user page are once again under siege (sigh).
Ah yes, the all important public speakers list. I knew they'd be taking a few shots at that in the next couple of days. So predictable!
Guido, for fun, point them to my Wikisource contributions page and note that I'm obviously not "permanently blocked" from Wikimedia projects if I was just editing this morning.
Naturally, Abigor (the mentally disturbed guy who previously hacked my website and tried to destroy my database, and was granted the keys to the wikipedia database as a reward) immediately stepped in and blocked me as well.
But, wait! How could that be? Abigor has the following Userboxes on his page:
*This user believes in assuming good faith and civility.*
*This user wants to be your friend.*
What if we don't want to be your friend, Huib Laurens?
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
What bugs me is that the decent Wikimedians on here at Wikipedia Review should jump to our aid, Guido. But, you just don't see that happen. I don't know if it's that they agree that I shouldn't be on the Public Speakers list, or that they don't care, or that they rather enjoy to the dramatic trauma that the battle delivers (entertainment value).
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
QUOTE(Guido den Broeder @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:40am)
Meanwhile, you place on the Public Speakers list and you meta user page are once again under siege (sigh).
It used to be that meta was a bit of a refuge, and a quite free place, frequented by many who understood the wiki vision and who supported and maintained it.
However, I noticed about two years ago that some meta administrators seemed to believe that they owned the place. Today, Abigor twice reverted the meta Public speakers list to a preferred version, once reverting Guido and then reverting IP (Kohs?), then full-protected it because of "edit warring."
Guido was preserving the status quo on that page from people who seemed to think that the Public Speaker page was for "speakers from the Foundation." The disclaimer standing on the page that contradicts that was added a few months ago by JzG, not exactly a supporter of Kohs, but JzG got it right that time.
On Wikipedia, that action by Abigor would be likely desysop, except for the reluctance of ArbComm to act against administrators who edit war with ordinary editors, it tends to consider the admin cabal to be "Wikipedia" and ordinary editors to be slaves, who are free to leave if they don't like it. On meta, Abigor didn't even discuss it. The Talk page has been quiet. The speaker page had likewise been quiet since March, when an IP removed Guido's name as "retired" and Guido restored that as "irrelevant," and certainly someone retired from an organization might often be an appropriate speaker about that.
In this case, Abigor blocked Guido for supporting what had been a standing consensus for some time, as "trolling." Guido removed the notice as a "pa," i.e., a personal attack, which it was. Abigor reverted, and asked Guido not to remove the notice. Guido removed it. Butter on the popcorn, please!
Abigor shouldn't touch the Guido talk page with a ten-foot-pole, nor Guido, but he might. Now, do I warn him or does someone else? I'm watching the page now. Does the meta community tolerate administrative bullying? Abigor clearly had a content position here, and enforced it by protecting into favored version and blocking the editor he was reverting. This is on Abigor's meta talk page:
Some people will say I am the Great Duke of Hell, ruling 60 legions of demons, but that is only when you make me mad.
Guido was mildly out of line, shouldn't have done that second revert without discussion, but Abigor is an admin and should know better. Someone should tell him. Or meta is toast as well. My guess at this point is that sensibility will prevail, Abigor will back down or at least stop acting, likely Kohs will be back on the speaker list. Or will we see the "60 legions of demons"?
I see, looking at the history of the Speaker list, that quite a few well-known Wikipedians supported Kohs' being listed, fairly recently. Abigor is acting against consensus, my guess, but one can never tell if the subterranean currents have shifted.
Hey, should I put my name on the speaker list? I'm currently in good standing on all the wikis, just some trifling topic bans on Wikipedia. I'm also an experienced public speaker.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 425
Joined:
Member No.: 10,371
Well, if anyone jumps to my aid it is a near certainty that they will get blocked as well, or worse, so I wouldn't recommend it.
It doesn't really matter much, meta is only about closing projects these days. On that note, I still have a watchlist of several hundreds of articles on nl:wikipedia and in two years time not a single non-bot edit has happened in any of them.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:55pm)
What bugs me is that the decent Wikimedians on here at Wikipedia Review should jump to our aid, Guido. But, you just don't see that happen. I don't know if it's that they agree that I shouldn't be on the Public Speakers list, or that they don't care, or that they rather enjoy to the dramatic trauma that the battle delivers (entertainment value).
Oh, give it some time, Kohs.
The place is falling apart, payroll has been late, so the room service is spotty. Still, the power is on, and I can make you some tea. Your preferences?
Guido, you should not have reverted more than once in this sequence, but definitely Abigor should not have done what he did. If you simply do nothing now, watch what happens. If nothing happens, you can know that the place has gone completely to hell and you might as well stop bothering to even watch.
You had off-wiki conflict with Abigor? Tsk, tsk. Can you document that? I do see he blocked you before.
(Given that you defied Abigor on your Talk page, Abigor then had an excuse to disable Talk access. However, tsk tsk, Abigor extended the block in doing that. And still hasn't discussed this with anyone else, at least not visibly. I am ... so ... tempted ..., but I'm going to see if a regular jumps in first.)
QUOTE(Guido den Broeder @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:08pm)
Well, if anyone jumps to my aid it is a near certainty that they will get blocked as well, or worse, so I wouldn't recommend it.
Really? I'd like to find out. Guido, there are editors who WP:DGAF, and some of them are administrators. I'm not, but if I'm going to get blocked on meta for warning an administrator -- you can be sure I'll do it politely -- I should find out as soon as possible so that I can avoid wasting more of my time.
QUOTE
It doesn't really matter much, meta is only about closing projects these days. On that note, I still have a watchlist of several hundreds of articles on nl:wikipedia and in two years time not a single non-bot edit has happened in any of them.
Wow. Bad sign, actually, though in a mature project it would be a good sign. Somehow I doubt that it's mature.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 425
Joined:
Member No.: 10,371
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 8:17pm)
You had off-wiki conflict with Abigor? Tsk, tsk. Can you document that?
Yes. There is actually a police file on him.
QUOTE
I do see he blocked you before.
The guy, who in real life is the same nutcase as on-wiki, has blocked me on various wiki's at every opportunity. He keeps stalking, using dozens of IP addresses (in addition to a great variety of wiki-socks) and has also threatened me on various occasions.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,919
Joined:
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019
Meta, edit warring on User:Thekohser. These actions were purely provocative. Trolling? The trolling here was from Abigor and Herbythyme. Quiet pages, till they came along. It's similar to Jeff G.'s actions.
QUOTE(Guido den Broeder @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:27pm)
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 8:17pm)
You had off-wiki conflict with Abigor? Tsk, tsk. Can you document that?
Yes. There is actually a police file on him.
QUOTE
I do see he blocked you before.
The guy, who in real life is the same nutcase as on-wiki, has blocked me on various wiki's at every opportunity. He keeps stalking, using dozens of IP addresses (in addition to a great variety of wiki-socks) and has also threatened me on various occasions.
Prove it. It's not that I don't believe you, but that it's useless if there isn't proof or at least strong evidence.
Group: Contributors
Posts: 382
Joined:
Member No.: 9,506
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:35pm)
QUOTE
Current revision as of 17:13, 6 May 2010 (view source) Abigor (talk | contribs) m (Protected "Public speakers": Counter-productive edit warring ([edit=autoconfirmed] (indefinite) [move=autoconfirmed] (indefinite)))
(Just a "minor" edit.)
Without commenting on the merits of his action, I just want to note that the protection is automatically marked as minor by the software, and there is no way to override it.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:31pm)
Meta, edit warring on User:Thekohser. These actions were purely provocative. Trolling? The trolling here was from Abigor and Herbythyme. Quiet pages, till they came along. It's similar to Jeff G.'s actions.
Messing with my User page that documents my contributions to the wiki world, is just utterly tasteless and juvenile.
I'll be in San Francisco later this summer. I have some ideas.
Group: Regulars
Posts: 425
Joined:
Member No.: 10,371
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 8:31pm)
Prove it. It's not that I don't believe you, but that it's useless if there isn't proof or at least strong evidence.
Been there already. Nobody cared.
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 6th May 2010, 8:53pm)
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:21pm)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:15am)
Greg is more likely to answer the troubled than to ask for troubles of his own.
Don't you know how provocative it is to be right?
No doubt you are quite right about that.
I usually offer to teach them to be always right themselves, which is quite easy actually. That tends to frighten them. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
QUOTE(Abd @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:31pm)
Meta, edit warring on User:Thekohser. These actions were purely provocative. Trolling? The trolling here was from Abigor and Herbythyme. Quiet pages, till they came along. It's similar to Jeff G.'s actions.
So, where are the pro-Wikimedians to explain how altering an out-of-process blocked user's User page, long after they're gone, is somehow beneficial to the non-profit mission of the Wikimedia Foundation? Where are you guys?
FORUM WARNING [2] Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home2/wikipede/public_html/int042kj398.php:242) (Line: 0 of Unknown)
Jimbo calls for global ban on Thekohser, and his bidding is done
