SlimVirgin, Zeq, and Zero, Split from 'Tactics of the Master Baiters' Options

[The Adversary]

Apparently ms Hell cannot get into her head that one reason why she is so disliked is because she for many years protected some of the worst editors/harassers on WP. After IronDukes nasty baiting of Gnetwerker, she still tries to pass him off as a "popular and respected member of the community"

Another one WP-disaster/harasser she protected was User:Zeq; she unblocked him after he had published personal information on one of his opponents

Thank you very much. What does Zeq do next? Create articles (now both deleted) on two of his WP-adversaries; first, and second

So; here we have one nasty editor, who, with the help of ms. SV, is outing/harassing no less than 3 of his opponents on Wikipedia, but this is not enough to get him banned/blocked (Zeq was finally indef´d after the C.A.M.E.R.A. affair.)

[Hell Freezes Over]

Another one WP-disaster/harasser she protected was User:Zeq; she unblocked him after he had published personal information on one of his opponents

I unblocked Zeq because Zero indefblocked him, after Zeq posted on Zero's page, "Hope you enjoyed your holiday," or words to that effect. The edit was designed to show that Zeq knew who Zero was, but it did not tell anyone else who he was. Zero knew he should not have indefblocked someone for that, and especially not Zeq, given he was in constant conflict with him.

But you knew that already, didn't you, Adversary? I thought you didn't approve of admins who use their tools against opponents.

[Kelly Martin]

I unblocked Zeq because Zero indefblocked him, after Zeq posted on Zero's page, "Hope you enjoyed your holiday," or words to that effect. The edit was designed to show that Zeq knew who Zero was, but it did not tell anyone else who he was. Zero knew he should not have indefblocked someone for that, and especially not Zeq, given he was in constant conflict with him.

I believe you've answered the wrong question here, dear. What you've given us above is the pretext for your unblock; you have yet to tell us why you actually unblocked him. I'm sure there is someone here who can produce countless examples of you failing to unblock people blocked by admins who themselves were in conflict with the person they blocked.

I have never seen any Wikipedian admin unblock another user for the sole reason that the user unblocked had been blocked by an admin who was in conflict with the blocked user. There has always been an underlying ulterior motive by the unblocking admin, that being either political alliance with the blocked user or political opposition to the blocking admin.

[Hell Freezes Over]

I unblocked Zeq because Zero indefblocked him, after Zeq posted on Zero's page, "Hope you enjoyed your holiday," or words to that effect. The edit was designed to show that Zeq knew who Zero was, but it did not tell anyone else who he was. Zero knew he should not have indefblocked someone for that, and especially not Zeq, given he was in constant conflict with him.

I believe you've answered the wrong question here, dear. What you've given us above is the pretext for your unblock; you have yet to tell us why you actually unblocked him. I'm sure there is someone here who can produce countless examples of you failing to unblock people blocked by admins who themselves were in conflict with the person they blocked.

I unblocked Zeq first and foremost because he asked me to.

My feelings about it were twofold: first, I felt sorry for Zeq when he first arrived at WP. He was trying to put across an Israeli perspective, which was badly needed, and was struggling to do it with very poor English. Zero was very aggressive toward him, reverted almost all his edits, whether good or bad, and used the tools against him, blocking him twice. It went to ArbCom in the end. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...on/Zeq-Zero0000

Zero had a habit of using the tools in content disputes -- though in fairness to him, this was because he was "old school" and wasn't really an active admin, so he didn't quite get the need to separate the editor/admin functions.

I was in touch with Zero by email about this block, and he knew it wouldn't stand. He was just making the point that he had a right to defend himself, and I agreed with that, and said so at the time. But it's clearly absurd to indefblock someone for mentioning that you went on holiday, with no identifying details. What was I meant to say to Zeq when he requested an unblock? "No, you said the word 'holiday,' which is personal, so be off with you?" Or perhaps, "No, you're an Israeli with a politically incorrect POV, so you can bugger right off"?

This happened in May 2006. Why are you mentioning it now, almost three years later?

[Kato]

My feelings about it were twofold: first, I felt sorry for XYZ when he first arrived at WP. He was trying to put across an XYZ perspective, which was badly needed, and was struggling to do it with very poor English. Admin XYZ was very aggressive toward him, reverted almost all his edits, whether good or bad, and used the tools against him, blocking him twice.

Admin XYZ had a habit of using the tools in content disputes

And thus; irony and lack of self-awareness continues unabated.

Just admit it. There's no good or bad behaviour on WP, no right or wrong behaviour, no blockable or non-blockable behaviour. It's merely about who you are, who your friends are, and which mood you are in at a given time. If you've worked yourself up to the position of Grand Wazoo with powerful friends, and are in a certain mood, you can control proceedings by fiat, with vague justifications made after the point. Rookies, the naive, or the less time laden participants don't stand a chance.

That's the whole reason why people were complaining bitterly about Jossi, LaRouche, Gnetworker, Mantanmoreland, Iron Duke and scores of other episodes.

Almost everyone here has the sense that decisions were made on an uneven, arbitrary basis, dependent on whims rather than due process.

So people like Zeq, Jossi and Iron Duke got to walk and were supported, while others were badly mistreated. Many of us believe that the roots of this dysfunction stem from Wikipedia Social Network environment. Important decisions were being made not for the benefit of "knowledge" or any kind of productive process, but were due to Social Grooming.

If you check this SlimVirgin archived talk page, one can find Zeq, Jossi and Iron Duke all involved in the grooming process. Each of them giving SlimVirgin the heads-up on the same page. And that's how those editors got to flout Wikipedia norms for so long without challenge. They got "protection" from controlling figures in exchange for their loyalty. Outsiders were thrown to the dogs.

These examples are the definition of cronyism and systemic corruption. You cannot create the "Sum of Human Knowledge" through a process of cronyism and corruption without causing massive problems. What we see now on WR are the fruits of that wholesale disruption.

[JohnA]

And thus; irony and lack of self-awareness continues unabated.

Just admit it. There's no good or bad behaviour on WP, no right or wrong behaviour, no blockable or non-blockable behaviour. It's merely about who you are, who your friends are, and which mood you are in at a given time. If you've worked yourself up to the position of Grand Wazoo with powerful friends, and are in a certain mood, you can control proceedings by fiat, with vague justifications made after the point. Rookies, the naive, or the less time laden participants don't stand a chance.

That's the whole reason why people were complaining bitterly about Jossi, LaRouche, Gnetworker, Mantanmoreland, Iron Duke and scores of other episodes.

Almost everyone here has the sense that decisions were made on an uneven, arbitrary basis, dependent on whims rather than due process.

So people like Zeq, Jossi and Iron Duke got to walk and were supported, while others were badly mistreated. Many of us believe that the roots of this dysfunction stem from Wikipedia Social Network environment. Important decisions were being made not for the benefit of "knowledge" or any kind of productive process, but were due to Social Grooming.

If you check this SlimVirgin archived talk page, one can find Zeq, Jossi and Iron Duke all involved in the grooming process. Each of them giving SlimVirgin the heads-up on the same page. And that's how those editors got to flout Wikipedia norms for so long without challenge. They got "protection" from controlling figures in exchange for their loyalty. Outsiders were thrown to the dogs.

These examples are the definition of cronyism and systemic corruption. You cannot create the "Sum of Human Knowledge" through a process of cronyism and corruption without causing massive problems. What we see now on WR are the fruits of that wholesale disruption.

Listen to the man. You're absolutely spot on with that observation, Kato.

While WP has no formal editorial board or publisher and no-one to appeal to apart from the God-King or the anarchic mob, then the winners will be people like Sarah McEwan/Linda Mack/Slimvirgin who game the system entirely to service their personal prejudices and petty vendettas.