Tznkai saves the day Options

[Alex]

Well done to Tznkai, who proudly announces he has blocked half of Boston, whilst playing cops and robbers with Moulton. If his claim is true, about three million innocent people won't be able to edit Wikipedia. Nice one. The encyclopedia that anyone, except people who share the IPs of a banned user, can edit.

[The Joy]

I thought he just blocked the individual IPs and was only humorously entertaining the thought of banning much of Boston?

I remember Ryulong blocked much of Chicago trying to get rid of Joseph100.

[Kelly Martin]

Not enough drama in your life, Alex?

[Shalom]

Judge actions, not words. See Tznkai's block log: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&year=&month=-1

He's blocked about 12 individual IP addresses for 72 hours. This is not a rangeblock, and it's not long term.

[Moulton]

Mike.lifeguard and Mike Umbricht, however, really did permablock 260,000 IPs in five domains in three states (on both Wikiversity and the associated IRC channel.).

Here's the latest example...

(12:36:41 PM) Woolworths left the room (Kicked by Mike_lifeguard (You are not welcome here. Do not come back.)).
(12:36:54 PM) You have been kicked by Mike_lifeguard: (You are not welcome here. Do not come back.)

Note that "Woolworths" is a reference to the Woolworths Lunch Counter Sit-Ins that helped launch the US Civil Rights Movement back in 1960.

By the way, the actual lunch counter is now in the Smithsonian Institution.

[Lar]

Mike.lifeguard and Mike Umbricht, however, really did permablock 260,000 IPs in five domains in three states (on both Wikiversity and the associated IRC channel.).

Here's the latest example...

(12:36:41 PM) Woolworths left the room (Kicked by Mike_lifeguard (You are not welcome here. Do not come back.)).
(12:36:54 PM) You have been kicked by Mike_lifeguard: (You are not welcome here. Do not come back.)

Note that "Woolworths" is a reference to the Woolworths Lunch Counter Sit-Ins that helped launch the US Civil Rights Movement back in 1960.

By the way, the actual lunch counter is now in the Smithsonian Institution.

I find you trying to draw any equivalence whatever to the civil rights movement rather insulting, frankly, to the memory of those who actually were repressed in a meaningful way and risked life, limb, and property to try to change things.

You're unable to edit a few websites. Big deal.

Grow up, Moulton, and stop being so annoyingly narcissistic. It's not all about you, and you're not all that.

(dude, if **I** think you're narcissistc, you are...)

[tarantino]

You're unable to edit a few websites. Big deal.

Sure he can and there's little you can do to stop him because of the way those websites are run. You may find it annoying, but I know there's people that find you annoying too.

[Lar]

You're unable to edit a few websites. Big deal.

Sure he can and there's little you can do to stop him because of the way those websites are run. You may find it annoying, but I know there's people that find you annoying too.

Way to miss the point.

How about if I say

"You're unable to edit a few websites in exactly the manner you wish to. Big deal."

better?

I'm not at all annoyed by Moulton's narcissism. I find it laughable. Apparently you think he's right up there with MLK and Rosa Parks, though. Um... no. It's just a website.

[Moulton]

The point is that instead of teaching the youth of the 21st Century to evolve to where Rosa Parks and MLK took us, Wikipedia is regressing the youth of the 21st Century back to where humans were some 4000 years ago, long before Civil Rights, long before Due Process, long before the Rule of Law to an epoch of tribal warlords.

To my mind, regressing the governance culture back to the stone age tribal epoch is simply not a cool thing for WP to be doing.

[Random832]

Moulton - I believe you once called yourself a gadfly. I would remind you that there is a very short distance between being a gadfly and being a horse's ass.

[everyking]

What exactly was Moulton doing with regard to the election that led to these blocks? Nobody else seems interested in questions like that, but I am.

[Kato]

What exactly was Moulton doing with regard to the election that led to these blocks? Nobody else seems interested in questions like that, but I am.

Asking civil questions to the candidates, on "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit" - that professes a devotion to free discussion and openness. The questions were removed and Moulton's IP was blocked.

PS: mods, this should be in the Editors forum

[Viridae]

The point is that instead of teaching the youth of the 21st Century to evolve to where Rosa Parks and MLK took us, Wikipedia is regressing the youth of the 21st Century back to where humans were some 4000 years ago, long before Civil Rights, long before Due Process, long before the Rule of Law to an epoch of tribal warlords.

To my mind, regressing the governance culture back to the stone age tribal epoch is simply not a cool thing for WP to be doing.

Let me make this clear for you. In my house we don't do due process. WP is the WMF's house. Geddit?

[everyking]

Let me make this clear for you. In my house we don't do due process. WP is the WMF's house. Geddit?

Who built the house?

[The Joy]

Let me make this clear for you. In my house we don't do due process. WP is the WMF's house. Geddit?

Who built the house?

Anyone who has or continues to edit there. All readers and editors of Wikipedia are stakeholders and are what has made Wikipedia a "success."

[Viridae]

Let me make this clear for you. In my house we don't do due process. WP is the WMF's house. Geddit?

Who built the house?

Unpaid immigrant labour.

[Somey]

Moderator's note: Moved to "Editors" forum, probably while drunk

--------------------------------

I once thought about IP-blocking all of Boston just to get a respite from Moulton, but then I realized that I'd only be playing directly into the hands of the Bostonians. What's more, I'd probably lose my adminship over on the Henry James pornographic fan-fic forum.

[Moulton]

Odd Socracy Questions Wikipedia's ad hoc Ochlocracy

Moulton - I believe you once called yourself a gadfly. I would remind you that there is a very short distance between being a gadfly and being a horse's ass.

The 'gadfly' reference goes back to Socrates. He was an unpopular redhead, too.

What exactly was Moulton doing with regard to the election that led to these blocks? Nobody else seems interested in questions like that, but I am.

Asking civil questions to the candidates, on "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit" - that professes a devotion to free discussion and openness. The questions were removed and Moulton's IP was blocked.

Blocking the IPs is utterly pointless. With a keystroke or two I can log my router out of Verizon and log it back in again and receive a new random IP from a pool of 260,000 Verizon DSL IPs in Greater Boston. At first I would continue to use an IP until Rootology or Tznkai blocked it. Now I just automatically change IPs after every post. (Note that I still sign my posts, using links to bio/talk pages that Rootology has no power to baleet, even though he tries).

Here is an example of the questions I have posed to the ArbCom candidates. (With minor edits, this is the same set of questions I first posted here in Kato's thread on W-R.)

The point is that instead of teaching the youth of the 21st Century to evolve to where Rosa Parks and MLK took us, Wikipedia is regressing the youth of the 21st Century back to where humans were some 4000 years ago, long before Civil Rights, long before Due Process, long before the Rule of Law to an epoch of tribal warlords.

To my mind, regressing the governance culture back to the stone age tribal epoch is simply not a cool thing for WP to be doing.

Let me make this clear for you. In my house we don't do due process. WP is the WMF's house. Geddit?

WMF solicits donations to fund WP and sister projects, under its Mission Statement and tax-exempt status as a 501(c)(3) educational non-profit. Individual admins do not have the authority to abrogate the WMF Mission Statement or to repudiate WMF's representations regarding its status as a tax-exempt non-profit educational enterprise.

To my mind, discarding 4000 years of hard-won lessons of political history to inculcate the impressionable youth of the 21st Century into an anachronistic tribal warlord culture is an irresponsible disservice bordering on fraud. Shouldn't WMF be encouraging the youth of the 21st Century to adopt the teachings of Stephen Langton, Thomas Jefferson, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Mark Twain, Mohandas Gandhi, ML King, Thich Nhat Hanh, et al?

This post has been edited by Moulton: Thu 4th December 2008, 11:07am

[Viridae]

The point is that instead of teaching the youth of the 21st Century to evolve to where Rosa Parks and MLK took us, Wikipedia is regressing the youth of the 21st Century back to where humans were some 4000 years ago, long before Civil Rights, long before Due Process, long before the Rule of Law to an epoch of tribal warlords.

To my mind, regressing the governance culture back to the stone age tribal epoch is simply not a cool thing for WP to be doing.

Let me make this clear for you. In my house we don't do due process. WP is the WMF's house. Geddit?

WMF solicits donations to fund WP and sister projects, under its Mission Statement and tax-exempt status as a 501©(3) educational non-profit. Individual admins do not have the authority to abrogate the WMF Mission Statement or to the repudiate WMF's representations regarding its status as a tax-exempt non-profit educational enterprise.

To my mind, discarding 4000 years of hard-won lessons of political history to inculcate the impressionable youth of the 21st Century into an anachronistic tribal warlord culture is an irresponsible disservice bordering on fraud. Shouldn't WMF be encouraging the youth of the 21st Century to adopt the teachings of Stephen Langton, Thomas Jefferson, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Mark Twain, Mohandas Gandhi, ML King, Thich Nhat Hanh, et al?

They have no obligation to do any such thing. Ultimately they are allowed to do anything the law lets them get away with, and you can either put up with it or split.

[Moulton]

The point is that instead of teaching the youth of the 21st Century to evolve to where Rosa Parks and MLK took us, Wikipedia is regressing the youth of the 21st Century back to where humans were some 4000 years ago, long before Civil Rights, long before Due Process, long before the Rule of Law to an epoch of tribal warlords.

To my mind, regressing the governance culture back to the stone age tribal epoch is simply not a cool thing for WP to be doing.

Let me make this clear for you. In my house we don't do due process. WP is the WMF's house. Geddit?

WMF solicits donations to fund WP and sister projects, under its Mission Statement and tax-exempt status as a 501(c)(3) educational non-profit. Individual admins do not have the authority to abrogate the WMF Mission Statement or to the repudiate WMF's representations regarding its status as a tax-exempt non-profit educational enterprise.

To my mind, discarding 4000 years of hard-won lessons of political history to inculcate the impressionable youth of the 21st Century into an anachronistic tribal warlord culture is an irresponsible disservice bordering on fraud. Shouldn't WMF be encouraging the youth of the 21st Century to adopt the teachings of Stephen Langton, Thomas Jefferson, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Mark Twain, Mohandas Gandhi, ML King, Thich Nhat Hanh, et al?

They have no obligation to do any such thing. Ultimately they are allowed to do anything the law lets them get away with, and you can either put up with it or split.

If WMF adopts the practice of making one set of representations to the public (and to the IRS in terms of eligibility as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) non-profit educational foundation), and then thumbs its nose at the reasonable expectations of donors, it occurs to me that the project doesn't have much of a future.

A lot of volunteers put a lot of effort into crafting content that is supposed to represent the sum of all human knowledge. Subverting the advertised aims of the project to insidiously transform it into a farcical parody of a medieval MMPORG in which admins devolve the site into a "Mad Max" culture, riding around on open Jeeps with machine guns ablaze mowing down rival editors and baleeting their thoughtful contributions just makes for a run-on closing sentence that is so opaque, not even Kato could diagram it.