Sam Blacketer Options Rating

[tarantino]

Are there any of you Wikipedians out there who have met the most secretive of the current arbs, Sam?

It's probable that he's using a pseudonym. Though he used to sign his emails "Sam Blacketer London E15", all the phone books and people directories I checked show no instances of that name anywhere in the UK. Additionally he is the only one out the 13 who does not have either the CU or oversight tools and has not verified his identity with the WMF. I thought there was a requirement that you must be at least 18 to be an arb. How has he proven this?

This post has been edited by tarantino: Wed 12th November 2008, 3:32am

[RMHED]

Yes lucky old David Boothroyd AKA as Wikipedia User Sam Blacketer, User Fys, User Dbiv and User David Boothroyd, was having his privacy protected by his chums.

Now if only other marginal BLP's could be so well cared for.

This post has been edited by RMHED: Sat 23rd May 2009, 9:46pm

[Milton Roe]

Yes lucky old David Boothroyd AKA as Wikipedia User Sam Blacketer, User Fys, User Dbiv and User David Boothroyd, was having his privacy protected by his chums.

Now if only other marginal BLP's could be so well cared for.

When is somebody going to mention on WP that having a BLP up on WP AND using your own name as username, doesn't allow you to use 3 other accounts, at least one of them a sock at the same time? For example: User:Fys doesn't exactly say "Unblocking user:Dbiv (my alternatve account)", now does he? That would be an edit dif comment we'd like to see.

As with the Weiss/Mantanmoreland case we're about to see much gaming of the system, carried on under the idea that is was necessary to protect the editor's privacy. And of course this will be used as a weapon against all anti-gamers.

Yes lucky old David Boothroyd AKA as Wikipedia User Sam Blacketer, User Fys, User Dbiv and User David Boothroyd, was having his privacy protected by his chums.

Now if only other marginal BLP's could be so well cared for.

They sort of are: BLPs can be deleted if the subjects ask for the dramatic force of the site on them.

Meaning what?

The problem is that they have to raise their profile to do this. It would be better if these were routine.

There's an understatement. It would be nice with wikiadmins had to put up with the same BLP crap that everyone does. But of course they don't. If they later become admins, then they game the system and maybe get a BLP deleted without anybody making the connection. Or not. If they get outed at WR first, well, then they get what they want, but not in the way they wanted it.

[MBisanz]

For example: User:Fys doesn't exactly say "Unblocking user:Dbiv (my alternatve account)", now does he? That would be an edit dif comment we'd like to see.

Milton, you missed both Charlotte's comment above and mine at WT:AC/N. Dbiv was renamed to Fys. But MediaWiki only renamed the first half of the block log (it was an error that was just fixed in 2009. So at the time, it read Dbiv unblocked User:Dbiv, but when it was renamed, it became Fys unblocked User:Dbiv. At the time it would have been (and at the related RFAR was) crystal clear what had occurred.

[Milton Roe]

For example: User:Fys doesn't exactly say "Unblocking user:Dbiv (my alternatve account)", now does he? That would be an edit dif comment we'd like to see.

Milton, you missed both Charlotte's comment above and mine at WT:AC/N. Dbiv was renamed to Fys. But MediaWiki only renamed the first half of the block log (it was an error that was just fixed in 2009. So at the time, it read Dbiv unblocked User:Dbiv, but when it was renamed, it became Fys unblocked User:Dbiv. At the time it would have been (and at the related RFAR was) crystal clear what had occurred.

Okay, I have to retract the sock comment (although having this coverred up by software screwups later is way convenient). I see that the "I'm not supposed to do this" relates to the unblocking himself. His reasoning is all-the-more precious: "Yes, I know I am not supposed to do this. Justification 1: Block was wrongly applied. Justification 2: I have a major edit which I am not going to lose come what may. WP:IAR applies."

Hey, I want WP:IAR to apply to me!


We've got your basic campaign bio-massager for Brit labour MPs, who sticks his own bio up on Wikipedia, then spends all his time writting canned political bios and posting them on WP. With a weeee bit more attension to Labourites.

Okay, so this is working, until he starts to rise in the ranks. He tries to get his own BLP deleted and is no more successful than anybody else usually is at this (extracting your own BLP off WP is ordinarily much like extracting teeth). He dares not make a stink about it, but progresses through a series of alternatve names. Soon, due to software screwups, there's hardly any trace of the old him at all. And now, he's way up to arbitrator! Who knows how long before he'll be arbitrating cases involving politicians' BLPs in the UK.

But, so sorry, he got outted on WR (you couldn't do that on WP, no matter how corrupt it was) and his real name and BLP name is known. So then (fancy that) Jehochman immediately NOW deletes his BLP for being non-notable. Nobody had noticed that it was non-notable before, even during its first RfD.

And yes, there was some overly private information in it, perhaps. All of it added by the subject. Who was now in a position of not being able to remove it, without notice.

WP: you're totally corrupt. You're full of people who cannot stand your own rules to apply to themselves. And full of other people who support this state.

WP, you make me puke.

[Alex]

WP, you make me puke.

If that's the case, why do you spend so much of your time on this forum talking about it? If something made me "puke" I would certainly keep away from it - although that may be difficult with Wikipedia, I'd at least stop yakking about it on webforums.

[A User]

WP, you make me puke.

If that's the case, why do you spend so much of your time on this forum talking about it? If something made me "puke" I would certainly keep away from it - although that may be difficult with Wikipedia, I'd at least stop yakking about it on webforums.

Roe's drama queen histrionics does get tiring