Ottava leaves Wikipedia Options

[everyking]

It looks as if OR has put the dreaded Folantin on the defensive.

As long as OR doesn't take the bait and lash out, then I think that he's scoring some major points here...

Good job!

However, Folantin provides this fascinating view of how he's helping Wikipedia :

I even bought and read the only full-length biography of Shah Abbas then available - it's in French.

My, we are impressed, aren't we!

As I've read this thread in the last few days, I've just shook my head in exasperated confusion. Why exactly are you defending Ottava? Didn't you ever read that thread where Ottava ranted about his psychotic extremist views until he finally had to be banned? He's unfit for Wikipedia for the the same basic reason that he was unfit for WR: he picks fights, attacks without provocation, and causes disruption until he becomes completely unbearable.

[A Horse With No Name]

He's unfit for Wikipedia for the the same basic reason that he was unfit for WR: he picks fights, attacks without provocation, and causes disruption until he becomes completely unbearable.

If I didn't know better, I would guess that OR was really Sarah Palin.

[CharlotteWebb]

If I didn't know better, I would guess that OR was really Sarah Palin.

Not very nice. That is, I think she would find that suggestion deeply offensive.

[A Horse With No Name]

If I didn't know better, I would guess that OR was really Sarah Palin.

Not very nice. That is, I think she would find that suggestion deeply offensive.

You betcha?

[Somey]

As I've read this thread in the last few days, I've just shook my head in exasperated confusion. Why exactly are you defending Ottava? Didn't you ever read that thread where Ottava ranted about his psychotic extremist views until he finally had to be banned?...

Actually, I think Mr. Fieryangel was on one of his hiatus-periods at the time. In any event, this could be one of those "enemy of my enemy" sort of situations - Moreschi and Folantin were quite heavily involved in Mr. Fieryangel's own issues with Wikipedia, and not in a good way.

Besides, I don't think he's defending Ottava so much as merely agreeing with his assessment of Moreschi and Folantin. It may look like he's defending him, but I suspect Mr. Fieryangel would admit quite readily that he wouldn't get along so well with Mr. Ottava personally, if it were to ever come to that.

[Jon Awbrey]

Just bumping Ottava, His Hands Waving Fare Thee Wales, E-Quivocal back on top for a bit, y'know, for Old Slimes' Take.
And Stop Calling Him "OR" !!!

Jon

[Random832]

All of the fun that comes from using the term "hijinx" (or "hijinks") is derived from being about to use three dotted letters in a row. Sheesh.

Öŕ ĵüśť ďőť ‘ėṁ äĺĺ àńď ĺėť ģŏď ŝöṙṫ ‘éḿ ȯůť… (as Grawp and/or Ryulong would surely say).

ü ṙ ḋöïṅ ïṫ ṙöṅġ.

[Kelly Martin]

Besides, I don't think he's defending Ottava so much as merely agreeing with his assessment of Moreschi and Folantin. It may look like he's defending him, but I suspect Mr. Fieryangel would admit quite readily that he wouldn't get along so well with Mr. Ottava personally, if it were to ever come to that.

Indeed. Remember that most alliances in Wikipedia are ephemeral, and that the mere fact that two people argue the same points does not mean that they are acting in concert. I think it's safe to say that, where Moreschi is concerned, Fieryangel is not an unbiased source.

[the fieryangel]

As I've read this thread in the last few days, I've just shook my head in exasperated confusion. Why exactly are you defending Ottava? Didn't you ever read that thread where Ottava ranted about his psychotic extremist views until he finally had to be banned? He's unfit for Wikipedia for the the same basic reason that he was unfit for WR: he picks fights, attacks without provocation, and causes disruption until he becomes completely unbearable.

....because Moreschi and Folantin are worse, because they do their dirty work in camera.

At least OR looks you in the face when he punches you in the nose....

I think it's safe to say that, where Moreschi is concerned, Fieryangel is not an unbiased source.

What does it matter whether or not I'm an unbiased source? We're talking about Wikipedia, not anything remotely important....

Shoot 'em all and let God sort 'em out. I'm not picking sides here, but I'm definitely happy that somebody has finally put all of this evidence in front of arbcom. If OR gets punished, he probably deserves it. But Moreschi and Folantin do as well.

Just to temper this a bit, I've just been informed that Moreschi is only 18, and was only 15-16 when he became an admin. That explains quite a bit of the childish behavior and stupidity of his actions. It's a pity that these things are not made apparent, but Wikipedia should not be placing kids in these sorts of positions to begin with.

Actually, I don't care who 'wins' here, because I'm done playing the WP game. I'm just happy that the jig is up for those two clowns. And if they go down, then a lot of other people are going down with them. If Wikipedia would learn not to put children in positions of power, then these sorts of things would not happen.

Moreschi and Folantin were quite heavily involved in Mr. Fieryangel's own issues with Wikipedia, and not in a good way.

And if anybody hadn't figured this out by now, you were definitely not paying attention! And now that I know that this person was only 15 when he did these things, it makes a whole lot more sense.

By the way, I wonder if he ever ended up selling that softshell jacket, size small, in black?...

[SB_Johnny]

@the fireyangel: looks like he's blowing it now. Any advice for him?

[Malleus]

If Wikipedia would learn not to put children in positions of power, then these sorts of things would not happen.

Quite.

[SarekOfVulcan]

All of the fun that comes from using the term "hijinx" (or "hijinks") is derived from being about to use three dotted letters in a row. Sheesh.

Öŕ ĵüśť ďőť ‘ėṁ äĺĺ àńď ĺėť ģŏď ŝöṙṫ ‘éḿ ȯůť… (as Grawp and/or Ryulong would surely say).

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1732348...1732454#1732454

[Nerd]

If Wikipedia would learn not to put children in positions of power, then these sorts of things would not happen.

Quite.

It's difficult if you don't know their age to begin with.

[SB_Johnny]

If Wikipedia would learn not to put children in positions of power, then these sorts of things would not happen.

Quite.

It's difficult if you don't know their age to begin with.

Well, your honor, she typed like she was 18!

[Malleus]

If Wikipedia would learn not to put children in positions of power, then these sorts of things would not happen.

Quite.

It's difficult if you don't know their age to begin with.

But it's not difficult when you do. Except that all sorts of clowns come shouting and screaming "Ageism" at you if you do.

[everyking]

Although virtually everyone seems to agree now that something has to be done about Ottava, Ottava himself is now proposing that several of his enemies be desysopped, topic banned, blocked, and/or admonished.

[Milton Roe]

Although virtually everyone seems to agree now that something has to be done about Ottava, Ottava himself is now proposing that several of his enemies be desysopped, topic banned, blocked, and/or admonished.

No! How out-of-character.

Rarely does one encouter self-righteousness this pure. Though on Wikipedia it seems to be common. Idle question: do such people gravitate there, or does the WP environment actually bring out and nurture such tendencies, in otherwise not particularly disfunctionally inflexable people?

It 's a veritable Electronic Crucible. Where is our Arthur Miller to chonicle it, allegorically?

[Jon Awbrey]

Although virtually everyone seems to agree now that something has to be done about Ottava, Ottava himself is now proposing that several of his enemies be desysopped, topic banned, blocked, and/or admonished.

I'm going to ban them all, Sir.



Finally, something we agree on …

Jon

[dogbiscuit]

Rarely does one encouter self-righteousness this pure. Though on Wikipedia it seems to be common. Idle question: do such people gravitate there, or does the WP environment actually bring out and nurture such tendencies, in otherwise not particularly difunctionally inflexable people?

There is definitely something about the Wikipedian environment that catalyses this behaviour.

Reflecting on my own experiences, as someone who recognises a strong self-righteous streak in himself, the environment is one where after trotting along on your own merry way, someone lifts a rope across the path and then when you complain you are faced with the suggestion it was your fault for not seeing this deliberately laid trap. The natural reaction is outraged indignation at such obvious perfidy.

There are two or three ways to go: fight fire with fire; use your own righteous indignation to drive through a campaign of reform as you discover that such behaviour is not only condoned but endorsed by the powers that be; or slink away as you recognise that you have sunk into the murky world of fighting on points of principle.

The sanest fall into the latter category after passing through the middle phase. The less robust may be stuck in the middle phase, and the weakest are condemned to be trapped in the eternal torment of the first.

Most are weak.

[MZMcBride]

Rarely does one encouter self-righteousness this pure. Though on Wikipedia it seems to be common. Idle question: do such people gravitate there, or does the WP environment actually bring out and nurture such tendencies, in otherwise not particularly difunctionally inflexable people?

There is definitely something about the Wikipedian environment that catalyses this behaviour.

Reflecting on my own experiences, as someone who recognises a strong self-righteous streak in himself, the environment is one where after trotting along on your own merry way, someone lifts a rope across the path and then when you complain you are faced with the suggestion it was your fault for not seeing this deliberately laid trap. The natural reaction is outraged indignation at such obvious perfidy.

There are two or three ways to go: fight fire with fire; use your own righteous indignation to drive through a campaign of reform as you discover that such behaviour is not only condoned but endorsed by the powers that be; or slink away as you recognise that you have sunk into the murky world of fighting on points of principle.

The sanest fall into the latter category after passing through the middle phase. The less robust may be stuck in the middle phase, and the weakest are condemned to be trapped in the eternal torment of the first.

Most are weak.

This is likely (hell, it is) a topic for another thread / discussion area, but I'm curious what your analysis is of those who post on this site regularly. Of course it could be awkward and far too meta to post those thoughts here, but I'd still be interested in them. For all the neuroses and quirks of Wikipedia's contributors, I've found that the people who spend a measurable amount of time solely criticizing Wikipedia are far more interesting. Your mileage may vary, of course.