Fred is Fried, Synaptic re-uptake dangerously depleted Options

[LamontStormstar]

18:52, 15 October 2007 Ryulong (Talk | contribs) deleted "WP:CLOWN" ‎ (db-banned)
18:51, 15 October 2007 Ryulong (Talk | contribs) deleted "WP:Clown" ‎ (db-banned)

[Poetlister]

In Poetlister's case, you simply have to go back to the original "offense," which was to challenge Slimmy & Co. on the issue of whether or not there should be lists of prominent Jewish people on WP. It wasn't even her idea, but because her IP address was close to that of some friend of hers who roped her into participating in the argument, they just auto-assumed that she was the same person.

To some extent, her participation here as a staff-admin (the real reason for the ban) wasn't even her "fault." She'd barely made 80 posts when Lir decided to add her to the staff group, and that was mostly because he liked her, and (clever fellow that he is/was) he knew that everyone else did too. She didn't ask for it - I was actually the one who first suggested it. And at the time, she'd just been given "the business" by the WP'ers, and probably felt like WR was the more congenial website to be involved with... and of course it still is, most days.

At no time has Poetlister ever vandalized a WP page, used an offensive epithet against another user, or even made a non-constructive edit, AFAIK. She's banned from WP because she's a WR staff-admin, simple as that. The sock-puppet allegations are a red herring, a distraction ploy, a joke.

So why not just admit it? It's almost stupid not to.

Great post - thanks. And for any friendly ArbCom members, I'm an admin on Wikiquote - they don't think I'm a dangerous anything who needs a block.

[GlassBeadGame]

The following qoute from Mr. Wales is found in the current version of WP:ArbCom:

The Arbitration Committee [...] can impose a solution that I'll consider to be binding, with of course the exception that I reserve the right of executive clemency and indeed even to dissolve the whole thing if it turns out to be a disaster. But I regard that as unlikely, and I plan to do it about as often as the Queen of England dissolves Parliament against their wishes, i.e., basically never, but it is one last safety valve for our values. – January 2004

How is possible that this remains acceptable to this day? Mr. Wales is not the executive of WMF. He is not even the President of the Board. He is only an ordinary Trustee. He is no more the executive than he is Queen of England. By what authority does he assert that ArbCom serves at his pleasure? Could this be at the root of why ArbCom is FUBAR?

[guy]

To some extent, her participation here as a staff-admin (the real reason for the ban) wasn't even her "fault." She'd barely made 80 posts when Lir decided to add her to the staff group, and that was mostly because he liked her, and (clever fellow that he is/was) he knew that everyone else did too. She didn't ask for it - I was actually the one who first suggested it.

I promoted Somey and Poetlister because the one asked nicely, and the other claims to be a cute female

Missing something here - when did either Somey or Poetlister claim to be cute?

I never got to the bottom of whether Somey pretended to Lir that he was a cute female; if he didn't then Lir probably took Poetlister by surprise by making her an admin. Actually, it was my fault for declining the job.

[Piperdown]

I think we all know why the Arbcom is falling apart. Because they have dared to question the actions of the users known as "Jayjg" and "SlimVirgin".

It would be interesting to figure out what percentage of former Wikipedia editors attain that status by SlimVirgin/Jayjg related "burn out."

We'd have to divide the group up into those who were burnt out in the sense that their interactions with SlimVirgin left them feeling exhausted and eager to leave, and those -- like most of us -- who had their account methodically doused with gasoline and set alight, thus being burned out.

Phrasing the distinction in a sentence:
SlimVirgin leaves some, like Fred Bauder, burnt out from Wikipedia;
while others, like myself, are burned out of Wikipedia.

Can someone remind me again how:

Baudy is still on ArbCom ?

Mantanmoreland was allowed to continue his sockpuppet farming after his tag team socking in the summer of 2006?

Jayjg is still a CheckUser and Administrator ?

SlimVirgin/SweetBlueWater/Sunsplash/Candi/Sarah is still an admin ???

This post has been edited by Piperdown: Wed 17th October 2007, 12:33am

[blissyu2]

Can someone remind me again how:

Baudy is still on ArbCom ?

Not for long, apparently. But it seems that while its quick and easy to get in to adminship and arbcomship, its next to impossible to get out. Fred Bauder himself complains about this often.

Mantanmoreland was allowed to continue his sockpuppet farming after his tag team socking in the summer of 2006?

One rule for you, one rule for them.

Jayjg is still a CheckUser and Administrator ?

One rule for you, one rule for them.

SlimVirgin/SweetBlueWater/Sunsplash/Candi/Sarah is still an admin ???

No, you don't understand. Sock puppets are okay. There are legitimate reasons for them. SweetBlueWater was a legitimate way for SlimVirgin to pretend to have more credibility than she really had. Sunsplash was a way for SlimVirgin to avoid being stalked harassed bothered caught doing anything wrong.

I would have thought you already knew the answers to these questions, so they are somewhat rhetorical questions.

[LamontStormstar]

I promoted Somey and Poetlister because the one asked nicely, and the other claims to be a cute female

Missing something here - when did either Somey or Poetlister claim to be cute?

I never got to the bottom of whether Somey pretended to Lir that he was a cute female; if he didn't then Lir probably took Poetlister by surprise by making her an admin. Actually, it was my fault for declining the job.

Somey has used variations on his name like Zummie or something that sounded female.

Can someone remind me again how:

Baudy is still on ArbCom ?

Mantanmoreland was allowed to continue his sockpuppet farming after his tag team socking in the summer of 2006?

Jayjg is still a CheckUser and Administrator ?

SlimVirgin/SweetBlueWater/Sunsplash/Candi/Sarah is still an admin ???

Who is Candi?

This post has been edited by LamontStormstar: Wed 17th October 2007, 4:32am

[jorge]

Who is Candi?

It's what she called herself before she called herself Sarah, after she called herself Linda etc.

[Chris Croy]

Words, words, and more words, and most of them deftly dodge the actual problems.

A. There's a lot of tension between two major camps: The people like Jimbo and the people like Matthew Brown. People like Jimbo are merciful and think people really deserve second chances. People like Matt want to ban them all and move on with their lives. These perspectives are irreconcilable.

B. ARBCOM'S DELIBERATION PROCESS BLOWS ASS. It encourages nitpickery to a degree I consider utterly intolerable. They essentially vote on what they think of INDIVIDUAL FUCKING SENTENCES. I don't know why they started doing it, but the person responsible should be forced to single-handedly police New Pages for a week. They should go back to the old method of one arbiter writing a decision and people concurring or dissenting.

---

How is possible that this remains acceptable to this day?

Fun fact: Those featured article reviewers people love to bitch about? Powerless.

Consensus is built among the reviewers and nominators, and the featured article director (Raul654) determines whether there is consensus.

His opinion is the only one that matters. Everyone tolerates this state of affairs because he's a truly benevolent dictator. Same goes with Jimbo. If he starts flagrantly abusing his power in some way, then he'll be brought into line.

Edit: Fixed a serious brainfart, Fred -> Matt.

This post has been edited by Chris Croy: Wed 17th October 2007, 10:38am

[LamontStormstar]

Who is Candi?

It's what she called herself before she called herself Sarah, after she called herself Linda etc.

Worth looking into. What was Candi's last name?

People like Jimbo are merciful and think people really deserve second chances.

I am watching the original star trek series on DVD. I've not seen it before. In many of the episodes the enterprise crew ends up where there's this villain or villains who are basically without any conscience (often the villains are just sadistic like these people who had strong telekinetic powers) at all and I'd see that and think they should get revenge. But each time, they forgive and try to make peace and things. It's really weird!


This post has been edited by LamontStormstar: Wed 17th October 2007, 11:02am

[GlassBeadGame]

B. ARBCOM'S DELIBERATION PROCESS BLOWS ASS. It encourages nitpickery to a degree I consider utterly intolerable. They essentially vote on what they think of INDIVIDUAL FUCKING SENTENCES. I don't know why they started doing it, but the person responsible should be forced to single-handedly police New Pages for a week. They should go back to the old method of one arbiter writing a decision and people concurring or dissenting.

Yes, I have noticed this and find it irritating too. I almost included it a list of criticism of ArbCom in this thread, but I thought perhaps I was meta-nitpicking myself. I'm now convinced that it is a serious criticism because it make it impossible to determine a holding, or that part of the opinion which is a the heart of the decision, from dicta, or those part of the opinion that are merely ancillary. This is related to another factor I should have added. ArbCom decisions, per Bauder's own pronouncements, do not control future decisions of similar disputes. This is madness. It makes it impossible for editors to order their conduct to predictably conform to rules. It is a sort of lawlessness that permits endless abuse.

[guy]

Worth looking into. What was Candi's last name?

I don't think she had one. It was the name of the slim virgin in the story from which she derived the name SlimVirgin, so is unlikely to be a useful lead.

[nobs]

B. ARBCOM'S DELIBERATION PROCESS BLOWS ASS. It encourages nitpickery to a degree I consider utterly intolerable. They essentially vote on what they think of INDIVIDUAL FUCKING SENTENCES.

[Redacted by editor] After the brutal, merciless MONGO case, they hammered out "A website that engages in the practice of publishing private information concerning the identities of Wikipedia participants will be regarded as an attack site whose pages should not be linked to from Wikipedia pages under any circumstances. Now many of the same authors say, "Obviously we need to make an exception for prominent people whose viewpoint we support."

This post has been edited by nobs: Thu 18th October 2007, 8:50pm

[LamontStormstar]

Worth looking into. What was Candi's last name?

I don't think she had one. It was the name of the slim virgin in the story from which she derived the name SlimVirgin, so is unlikely to be a useful lead.

I thought that was a middle-eastern name. Candi is sort of an American prostitute name.

[GlassBeadGame]

Obviously we need to make an exception for prominent people whose viewpoint we support

This is a central feature and core value of the dysfunctional social networking community.

[Piperdown]

Who is Candi?

Apology in advance, for i hate people (except for Tobias) who quote song lyrics. But you've just teed it up nicely and I can't pass it up:

Sarah came from Cambridge, U.K
Hitch-hiked her way across wikipedia

Plucked her old accounts on the way
Shaved her slimv edits and then she was a sock
She says, hey baudy, take a walk on the wiki side
Said, hey gary, take a walk on the wiki side

Candi came from out of wikipurgatory
In the backroom she was arbcom's darling

But she never lost her account
Even when she was double voting
She says, hey babe, take a walk on the wiki side
Said, hey babe, take a walk on the wiki side
And the arbcoms go...Doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo, doo

[Chris Croy]

This is related to another factor I should have added. ArbCom decisions, per Bauder's own pronouncements, do not control future decisions of similar disputes. This is madness. It makes it impossible for editors to order their conduct to predictably conform to rules.

There's an arguable rational basis for disregarding precedent on Wikipedia. No-one wants newcomers to be expected to read up on past ArbCom decisions before getting into heated debates. No arbiter wants to be obligated to read up on the past several years of decisions for the sake of consistency. I'm not saying these are necessarily better than precedent and stare decisis and all that, but they're worth keeping in mind.

[guy]

Worth looking into. What was Candi's last name?

I don't think she had one. It was the name of the slim virgin in the story from which she derived the name SlimVirgin, so is unlikely to be a useful lead.

I thought that was a middle-eastern name. Candi is sort of an American prostitute name.

The main temple in the Prambanan complex is Candi Shiva Mahadeva, also known as Loro Jonggrang, which means "the slim virgin".

http://www.indonesiaphoto.com/content/view/122/42/

This needs to go in the FAQ.

[Jonny Cache]

http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loro_Jonggrang

Jonggrang Cachi

[GlassBeadGame]

This is related to another factor I should have added. ArbCom decisions, per Bauder's own pronouncements, do not control future decisions of similar disputes. This is madness. It makes it impossible for editors to order their conduct to predictably conform to rules.

There's an arguable rational basis for disregarding precedent on Wikipedia. No-one wants newcomers to be expected to read up on past ArbCom decisions before getting into heated debates. No arbiter wants to be obligated to read up on the past several years of decisions for the sake of consistency. I'm not saying these are necessarily better than precedent and stare decisis and all that, but they're worth keeping in mind.

I can understand wishing to save the user the trouble of reading past decisions. ArbCom members not reading decisions is the height of laziness, something that seems to be coming home to roost.

But let's look at even the user. Much of time they are editing quietly and uncontroversially. Probably no need to keep up with the decisions, and no harm in not doing so. Now suppose the same user wishes to engage in a risker course, maybe embark on a campaign to do something they are aware might be controversial. They know they are skating on thin ice. They ought to be able to review relevant ArbCom cases and rely on the holdings. Even if they don't want to make the effort themselves, they ought to be able to ask advice from others who have taken the trouble to acquaint themselves with ArbCom decisions. Under the current system this is a useless activity because ArbCom will not be bound by the fools on ArbCom. So no matter how motivated to make informed and measured decisions you are no better off than those who would act ignorantly. Besides you can't make use of stare decisis when cases are about social network influence and not the rule of law.