Gerard blocks Giano for sockpuppetry, invokes good/bad hand accounts policy - wrongly Options

[privatemusings]

hee hee

impressively dumb!

(sorry DG, you're a pussycat, I know... but that was spectacularly useless!)

[everyking]

None of these joke account sockpuppets should be allowed, and they certainly should not be allowed to run for ArbCom. Just before I found about about this incident, I was thinking about asking some tough questions on "Catherine's" questions page about the disruptive nature of the candidacy. On the other hand, this idea that it was a "good hand/bad hand" situation or that it was deceptive sockpuppetry is simply ludicrous, as there was clearly no malice or deception involved in it. Gerard just saw it as an opportunity to take Giano down a notch, to pursue the grudge, and his conduct (in this as well as many, many other instances) certainly warrants desysopping.

[Giano]

None of these joke account sockpuppets should be allowed, and they certainly should not be allowed to run for ArbCom. Just before I found about about this incident, I was thinking about asking some tough questions on "Catherine's" questions page about the disruptive nature of the candidacy. On the other hand, this idea that it was a "good hand/bad hand" situation or that it was deceptive sockpuppetry is simply ludicrous, as there was clearly no malice or deception involved in it. Gerard just saw it as an opportunity to take Giano down a notch, to pursue the grudge, and his conduct (in this as well as many, many other instances) certainly warrants desysopping.

I'm jolly glad you didn't ask any questions, Everyking - I've always quite respected you. The very funny thing is no-one seems to have noticed that she threw most of the questions out of the window, there was no way in hell she could posible have got onto the Arbcom or was serious candidate. I really thought everyone knew who she was, after the questions she asked on MBisanz's page even he must have known, it is inconceivable. As for the candidate statement.....Never mind the poor old thing is dead now - we shall not see her like again because parodying and satyring the Arbcom and state of Wikipedia is no longer allowed. Perhaps it never was. I doubt Gerard was allowed to do this without some form of permission from somewhere, but it will always be a secret who gave the go ahead.

Giano

[Cla68]

None of these joke account sockpuppets should be allowed, and they certainly should not be allowed to run for ArbCom. Just before I found about about this incident, I was thinking about asking some tough questions on "Catherine's" questions page about the disruptive nature of the candidacy. On the other hand, this idea that it was a "good hand/bad hand" situation or that it was deceptive sockpuppetry is simply ludicrous, as there was clearly no malice or deception involved in it. Gerard just saw it as an opportunity to take Giano down a notch, to pursue the grudge, and his conduct (in this as well as many, many other instances) certainly warrants desysopping.

I'm jolly glad you didn't ask any questions, Everyking - I've always quite respected you. The very funny thing is no-one seems to have noticed that she threw most of the questions out of the window, there was no way in hell she could posible have got onto the Arbcom or was serious candidate. I really thought everyone knew who she was, after the questions she asked on MBisanz's page even he must have known, it is inconceivable. As for the candidate statement.....Never mind the poor old thing is dead now - we shall not see her like again because parodying and satyring the Arbcom and state of Wikipedia is no longer allowed. Perhaps it never was. I doubt Gerard was allowed to do this without some form of permission from somewhere, but it will always be a secret who gave the go ahead.

Giano

There are different ways to protest the mismanagement of Wikipedia. I usually just go to Jimbo's talk page and ask him straight up why he doesn't help fix the darn thing, but that obviously hasn't worked very well. Another way is to humourously mock one of the administrator election processes, like Giano was doing in this situation.

Thus, what Gerard was really doing in response, although perhaps unintentionally, was trying to discredit and suppress someone who was trying to call attention to what Giano appears to believe is a broken institution in Wikipedia. If intentional, it was goon work.

This post has been edited by Cla68: Thu 20th November 2008, 6:09am

[Herschelkrustofsky]

I usually just go to Jimbo's talk page and ask him straight up why he doesn't help fix the darn thing, but that obviously hasn't worked very well.

...and behold! This debate is now raging on Jimbo's talk page! Will Beback is at his sphincter-clenching, humorless best as he attempts to present a defense of Gerard -- only to run afoul of his erstwhile Siamese twin SlimVirgin, who has a new axe to grind, namely that checkusers are bad.

[Pumpkin Muffins]

..and behold! This debate is now raging on Jimbo's talk page!

Annnd we have a block. 55 hours for calling Gerard a disgrace.

[The Joy]

..and behold! This debate is now raging on Jimbo's talk page!

Annnd we have a block. 55 hours for calling Gerard a disgrace.

I have this deep, dark feeling that an indefinite block/ban will be coming for Giano. This isn't like the IRC disputes of the past. Either Gerard stays or Giano stays. Both cannot co-exist on the project.

Honestly, I'm filled with seething rage with how Giano and those like him have been treated. If he is banned/blocked indefinitely for standing up to the likes of Gerard, then what remains of Wikipedia's community will be over. You Wikipedians will have civil war without end until Jimbo and his loyal stewards step in and squash the insurrection.

I don't believe I've ever witnessed an online community implode before. I think I may very soon.

Edit: And just to remind everyone of Jimbo's threat to Giano:

You are misrepresenting that conversation. I was directly referring to DTobias's remark, just above, and someone mistook that part of my remarks as referring to you. It did not. I referred to people who are not here to build an encyclopedia. Your content contributions are voluminous, high quality, and much appreciated.

That doesn't change the fact that your behavior in terms of trolling and carrying on the way you do is unacceptable. You know this. And you will either change it or be banned from Wikipedia. You have caused too much harm to justify us putting up with this kind of behavior much longer.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 01:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=173588881

[Lar]

I don't believe I've ever witnessed an online community implode before. I think I may very soon.

Seen it before. Didn't like it then. Doubt I'd like it now... So I hope you're wrong.