Ottava leaves Wikipedia Options

[SB_Johnny]

I do feel a little sorry for Ottava (but only a very little). Perhaps adding a little sugar and spice could reduce his toxicity, if that's the right WP term. Certainly going out with a bang rather than a whimper in his flame war with Risker will not exactly endear him to ArbCom if and when he decides to come back officially in 6 months time,

That sort of reminded me of when he jumped on IRC a few dramas ago and said something like "I suppose you're going to accuse me of being paranoid now"... he more or less just proved everyone else's point.

Just curious though: what's this "petition" stuff about? Has ArbCom ever been over-ridden by petition?

What petition? And no. Though it is technically possible if enough of the community disagrees, to simply ignore an arbcom decision, I really doubt that would happen here.

It's on the decision talkpage somewhere, iirc. I was just curious if that sort of thing happens. It's just somehow hard to believe that this drama has actually come to an end.

[Mathsci]

I do feel a little sorry for Ottava (but only a very little). Perhaps adding a little sugar and spice could reduce his toxicity, if that's the right WP term. Certainly going out with a bang rather than a whimper in his flame war with Risker will not exactly endear him to ArbCom if and when he decides to come back officially in 6 months time,

That sort of reminded me of when he jumped on IRC a few dramas ago and said something like "I suppose you're going to accuse me of being paranoid now"... he more or less just proved everyone else's point.

Just curious though: what's this "petition" stuff about? Has ArbCom ever been over-ridden by petition?

What petition? And no. Though it is technically possible if enough of the community disagrees, to simply ignore an arbcom decision, I really doubt that would happen here.

It's on the decision talkpage somewhere, iirc. I was just curious if that sort of thing happens. It's just somehow hard to believe that this drama has actually come to an end.

Yes, at the end of this thread.

Time for the Christmas Panto. Who'll play Widow Twankie and when's the puppet show?

This post has been edited by Mathsci: Sun 20th December 2009, 12:40pm

[Malleus]

Stephen Bain added some last minute votes; remarkably, after everything that's happened, he's against banning Ottava: "I see no reason not to at least try rehabilitative remedies." Have they not been tried already? Has Stephen even read the case? It's a little disturbing that by this point there'd be anyone at all (except Malleus, of course) opposed to a ban.

It's nothing personal, I'm opposed to any editor being banned as things stand. Specifically, I'm opposed to the inherent dishonesty in the way that editors are banned, and the hopelessly pedantic distinction between blocks and bans, neither of which can be enforced anyway, so what's the point?

[Nerd]

Stephen Bain added some last minute votes; remarkably, after everything that's happened, he's against banning Ottava: "I see no reason not to at least try rehabilitative remedies." Have they not been tried already? Has Stephen even read the case? It's a little disturbing that by this point there'd be anyone at all (except Malleus, of course) opposed to a ban.

It's nothing personal, I'm opposed to any editor being banned as things stand. Specifically, I'm opposed to the inherent dishonesty in the way that editors are banned, and the hopelessly pedantic distinction between blocks and bans, neither of which can be enforced anyway, so what's the point?

Sometimes I wish I were banned so I could carrying on editing anyway, just to show how pointless bans are.

[Malleus]

Stephen Bain added some last minute votes; remarkably, after everything that's happened, he's against banning Ottava: "I see no reason not to at least try rehabilitative remedies." Have they not been tried already? Has Stephen even read the case? It's a little disturbing that by this point there'd be anyone at all (except Malleus, of course) opposed to a ban.

It's nothing personal, I'm opposed to any editor being banned as things stand. Specifically, I'm opposed to the inherent dishonesty in the way that editors are banned, and the hopelessly pedantic distinction between blocks and bans, neither of which can be enforced anyway, so what's the point?

Sometimes I wish I were banned so I could carrying on editing anyway, just to show how pointless bans are.

Given that there's no practical difference between a block and a ban, no matter what the wikifaithful parrot at RfA, Horsey has already proved how pointless they are, in spades.

[The Joy]

Stephen Bain added some last minute votes; remarkably, after everything that's happened, he's against banning Ottava: "I see no reason not to at least try rehabilitative remedies." Have they not been tried already? Has Stephen even read the case? It's a little disturbing that by this point there'd be anyone at all (except Malleus, of course) opposed to a ban.

It's nothing personal, I'm opposed to any editor being banned as things stand. Specifically, I'm opposed to the inherent dishonesty in the way that editors are banned, and the hopelessly pedantic distinction between blocks and bans, neither of which can be enforced anyway, so what's the point?

Sometimes I wish I were banned so I could carrying on editing anyway, just to show how pointless bans are.

Thanks to Greg, the WP:BAN policy reads (bold is my emphasis):

Banned users' user pages may be replaced by a notice of the ban and links to any applicable discussion or decision-making pages. The purpose of this notice is to announce the ban to editors encountering the banned user's edits. Indefinitely site-banned users may be restricted from editing their user talk page or using e-mail if they are disruptive.

So Ottava can continue editing his talk page as long as he doesn't do anything disruptive like continuing his fights there.

With a site like Wikipedia, you can never really ban someone. They can technically come back anytime they wish and, as long as they do not draw negative attention to themselves, they can usually go along editing merrily.

[A Horse With No Name]

Sometimes I wish I were banned so I could carrying on editing anyway, just to show how pointless bans are.

Been there, done that...got the t-shirt made from child labor, too!

Given that there's no practical difference between a block and a ban, no matter what the wikifaithful parrot at RfA, Horsey has already proved how pointless they are, in spades.

Well, don't forget Law/The Undertow -- he actually got a bunch of admins (including at least three members of Arbcom) to play along with the charade of his post-banned sock!

[Malleus]

Sometimes I wish I were banned so I could carrying on editing anyway, just to show how pointless bans are.

Been there, done that...got the t-shirt made from child labor, too!

I've occasionally been tempted as well to prove to the fools who think otherwise how easy it would be to take over a dormant administrator account (not any old dormant account, but some), but I haven't as yet. Hardly any point either, as even dying doesn't lose you the bit.

This post has been edited by Malleus: Mon 21st December 2009, 2:16am

[A Horse With No Name]

They can technically come back anytime they wish and, as long as they do not draw negative attention to themselves, they can usually go along editing merrily.

Well, arbitrator Anne "Risker" Clin openly stated that she approves certain sock accounts. Plus, CHL/One claims that Mantanmoreland is still editing -- no block on that sock. So who is f**king whom?

I've occasionally been tempted as well to prove to the fools who think otherwise how easy it would be to take over a dormant administrator account (not any old dormant account, but some), but I haven't as yet. Hardly any point either, as even dying doesn't lose you the bit.

It ain't worth the bother, Malley. Trust me, adminship is just like Gertrude Stein's opinion of the city of Oakland, California: when you get there, there is no there there. That is why people (mostly kids) with no brains thrive in admiship while anyone with half-a-life gets bored and leaves.

[Malleus]

It ain't worth the bother, Malley. Trust me, adminship is just like Gertrude Stein's opinion of the city of Oakland, California: when you get there, there is no there there. That is why people (mostly kids) with no brains thrive in admiship while anyone with half-a-life gets bored and leaves.

I'm quite sure you're right. I could probably count on the fingers of one hand (using binary notation) the number of times I found there was something I wanted to do that I couldn't, and almost all of them were to do with moving pages or deleting sandbox pages.

This post has been edited by Malleus: Mon 21st December 2009, 2:24am

[The Joy]

It ain't worth the bother, Malley. Trust me, adminship is just like Gertrude Stein's opinion of the city of Oakland, California: when you get there, there is no there there. That is why people (mostly kids) with no brains thrive in admiship while anyone with half-a-life gets bored and leaves.

I'm quite sure you're right. I could probably count on the fingers of one hand (using binary notation) the number of times I found there was something I wanted to do that I couldn't, and almost all of them were to do with moving pages or deleting sandbox pages.

You'd think the developers could give you those tools as an editor in good standing. It's not like admins work with a full set of tools anyway.

If adminship were something automatic you gained gradually over time while "in good standing," maybe there would be less drama in going through RFA and less privilege in being one.

Then again, my idea of how adminship should be gained would mean that Giano, Malleus, Ottava, and Kurt would be admins by now. Hmmm... maybe that's not such a bad idea!

Returning to Ottava, I like radicals like him and Giano, but I don't think it would work out between us if we crossed paths on Wikipedia in content or policy areas. I can be as stubborn as both of them. It's easy for me as an outsider to root for them, but if I were more deeply involved in WP's processes and community, I couldn't stand the tension they bring.

[A Horse With No Name]

Then again, my idea of how adminship should be gained would mean that Giano, Malleus, Ottava, and Kurt would be admins by now. Hmmm... maybe that's not such a bad idea!

It would benefit the project to have intelligent adults who are genuinely concerned about content to be admins, rather than the OCD cases and clueless kids. It is a shame that one of the current RfA candidates, a highly intelligent content creator with the handle of Polargeo, is getting such a rough treatment from the usual suspects -- none of whom contribute one word of genuine scholastic input to the site's contents. It is also amusing (in a sick way) to see someone like Tan sneer at Polargeo for perceived incivility -- getting a lecture from Tan on incivility is like getting a lecture from Tiger Woods on marital fidelity.

[Milton Roe]

It ain't worth the bother, Malley. Trust me, adminship is just like Gertrude Stein's opinion of the city of Oakland, California: when you get there, there is no there there.

That may have been true during the 13 years when Stein lived there from 1878-91, leaving at age 17. At that time Oakland was just the "wrong side of the tracks" of San Francisco (or wrong side of the bay if you will), and there really was no "there" there. No large buildings...

The ghetto-fication and urbanization (complete with skyscrapers) we know as Oakland today, is all post WW II. I still remember (having been in Oakland not long before) my shock at hearing Sinatra sing in 1965 (in my favorite of his albums), an even older song by Alec Wilder & William Engvick:

That year in Oakland High
when I was seventeen
The grass from there to San Jose was high and cool and green
I see it now

Too brash and young was I to know what time could mean
The old Acacia, long cut
down, was felt but never seen
I see it now

That world I knew is lost to me
Loves have come and gone

The years go racing by, I live as best I can
And all at once I know
it means the making of a man
I see it now

The lyrics are by Californian Engvick, who was born in 1914 and would have been age 17 in Oakland high school about 1931, a time when you could be nostalgic about high school in Oakland (no more!).

I was sometime before I realized just why an Acacia tree could be "felt" but never seen. . Obviously some transcribers of the lyrics of this song don't get it, either, because they transcribe it "the old Acacia lawn [sic] cut down". No clue.

There, have I derailed the thread enough? Pre WW II California fascinates me. Most of the things that make it suck now, weren't there, then.

[Mathsci]

Ottava has now been blocked from sending WP email. I'm not sure whether he can still edit his talk page.

This post has been edited by Mathsci: Tue 22nd December 2009, 7:52am

[Viridae]

Ottava has now been blocked from sending WP email. I'm not sure whether he can still edit his talk page.

He still has talk page access.

Stephen Bain added some last minute votes; remarkably, after everything that's happened, he's against banning Ottava: "I see no reason not to at least try rehabilitative remedies." Have they not been tried already? Has Stephen even read the case? It's a little disturbing that by this point there'd be anyone at all (except Malleus, of course) opposed to a ban.

It's nothing personal, I'm opposed to any editor being banned as things stand. Specifically, I'm opposed to the inherent dishonesty in the way that editors are banned, and the hopelessly pedantic distinction between blocks and bans, neither of which can be enforced anyway, so what's the point?

Sometimes I wish I were banned so I could carrying on editing anyway, just to show how pointless bans are.

Thanks to Greg, the WP:BAN policy reads (bold is my emphasis):

Banned users' user pages may be replaced by a notice of the ban and links to any applicable discussion or decision-making pages. The purpose of this notice is to announce the ban to editors encountering the banned user's edits. Indefinitely site-banned users may be restricted from editing their user talk page or using e-mail if they are disruptive.

So Ottava can continue editing his talk page as long as he doesn't do anything disruptive like continuing his fights there.

With a site like Wikipedia, you can never really ban someone. They can technically come back anytime they wish and, as long as they do not draw negative attention to themselves, they can usually go along editing merrily.

Indeed, and as long as they aren't drawing attention to themselves, they aren't causing problems so who cares if they are there.

[A Horse With No Name]

Ottava has now been blocked from sending WP email. I'm not sure whether he can still edit his talk page.

Of course he can edit it -- only the OR account has been disabled. If he can shed that skin and take on a new persona, the Wiki is all his!

[Nerd]

Ottava has now been blocked from sending WP email. I'm not sure whether he can still edit his talk page.

Of course he can edit it -- only the OR account has been disabled. If he can shed that skin and take on a new persona, the Wiki is all his!

I expect he has created a new account already.

[Malleus]

Ottava has now been blocked from sending WP email. I'm not sure whether he can still edit his talk page.

Of course he can edit it -- only the OR account has been disabled. If he can shed that skin and take on a new persona, the Wiki is all his!

I expect he has created a new account already.

I rather doubt it. It's always a mistake to judge others by one's own standards.

[everyking]

Here are 30 people who somehow avoided Ottava's wrath and never got to see what a lunatic he really is. I suppose if he never came at you hurling insane accusations from out of nowhere, it would be easy enough to imagine that he was just a poor, maligned content creator.

[Malleus]

Here are 30 people who somehow avoided Ottava's wrath and never got to see what a lunatic he really is. I suppose if he never came at you hurling insane accusations from out of nowhere, it would be easy enough to imagine that he was just a poor, maligned content creator.

You've apparently not been keeping up. I've fallen out with Ottava several times, and he with me. I just don't get my knickers in a twist about it like so many others do.