EXCLUSIVE: Pedophiles Find a Home on Wikipedia - FOXNews Options Rating

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

* Note to Fox News ... the Wikipedia servers keep many images that have been deemed even too tasteless or pornographic for its public face which only administrators can access. There are no age limits, guidelines or identity checks for such admins.

[Subtle Bee]

Well, Allie, maybe if Jimbo hadn't habitually lied, back-pedaled, and side-stepped on so many important issues over the past 4 years or so, he would have built up the necessary reputation capital that these current pronouncements of his would carry the necessary weight. Integrity earns loyalty from followers. Jimbo has so little integrity, it is no wonder so many community members dismiss him so easily now.

Past transgressions being what they are - I dunno - it's clear that Jimmy's completely run out of political clout. He's got kids, and I'm pretty sure he's got a low tolerance threshold for pedo stuff. However, he's just another punter on WP these days.

So who's providing direction? Nobody, that's who. ArbCom, maybe, but WP has been a rudderless ship for the longest time.

Yeah, Jimbo's problems go further than just one character flaw, and I don't actually think his moral flexibility has that much to do with his ebbing loyalty reservoirs (consider the audience). I also think the rudderlessness is somewhat intentional, or at least a comfortable accident - Jimbo gets to make "policy" pantomimes and deflect criticism, and these are either accepted (problem solved!) or rejected (hey, we have a zero tolerance "policy"), and the Board stays the hell out of it and preserves the basis for their functional immunity. Most importantly, everyone's mollified, and WP can keep on "serfing the internet"©.

I admit my analysis may be superficial and underinformed, but that's what I think a duck walks like.

[Jon Awbrey]

I admit my analysis may be superficial and under-informed, but that's what I think a duck walks like.

Ducks gotta waddle.

Jimbird gotta waffle.

You can tell them apart by the amount of syrup involved.

Jon

[Subtle Bee]

I admit my analysis may be superficial and under-informed, but that's what I think a duck walks like.

Ducks gotta waddle.

Jimbird gotta waffle.

You can tell them apart by the amount of syrup involved.

Jon

...or just by counting the swallows.

[Moulton]

Cloud Cuckoo Land

Wikipedia is spiraling rapidly out of control.

It's been out of control for as long as I've been observing it (for the past three years).

If the rate of the tailspin is increasing, it should be quite a spectacular crash when Cloud Cuckoo Land finally smashes into the ground truth.

[EricBarbour]

And Wnt is now helping write policy on how sexual content is to be handled on commons, while a Foundation board member is apologizing to an anonymous perv because some people questioned the appropriateness of the images he scraped off of Flickr.

Thank you

MRB, thanks for all of your work on Commons. I regret that you're being harrassed a bit this week, but I for one found your gallery of uploads to be an excellent example of a variety of photos curated for their illustrative or artistic value. It has been helpful to me in organizing my own thoughts about the current sexual content discussion. –SJ+ 05:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

* Yeah these are high quality contributions, they don't seem vulgar and each have unique criteria which fit into categories like others do not with their combinations to help demonstrate variety. TY© (talk) 07:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Look! It's Tyciol! Wiki's ickiest user!

Why isn't anyone banning HIM??.......

[Alison]

MRB, thanks for all of your work on Commons. I regret that you're being harrassed a bit this week, but I for one found your gallery of uploads to be an excellent example of a variety of photos curated for their illustrative or artistic value. It has been helpful to me in organizing my own thoughts about the current sexual content discussion. –SJ+ 05:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

* Yeah these are high quality contributions, they don't seem vulgar and each have unique criteria which fit into categories like others do not with their combinations to help demonstrate variety. TY© (talk) 07:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Look! It's Tyciol! Wiki's ickiest user!

Why isn't anyone banning HIM??.......

Too busy fapping to homegrown pr0nz on Commons?

[the fieryangel]

MRB, thanks for all of your work on Commons. I regret that you're being harrassed a bit this week, but I for one found your gallery of uploads to be an excellent example of a variety of photos curated for their illustrative or artistic value. It has been helpful to me in organizing my own thoughts about the current sexual content discussion. –SJ+ 05:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

* Yeah these are high quality contributions, they don't seem vulgar and each have unique criteria which fit into categories like others do not with their combinations to help demonstrate variety. TY© (talk) 07:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Look! It's Tyciol! Wiki's ickiest user!

Why isn't anyone banning HIM??.......

Too busy fapping to homegrown pr0nz on Commons?

Speaking of Homegrown porn, here's what's supposed to happen if somebody uploads a sex pic of YOU without your knowledge :

Deletion at the subject's request

If Commons hosts a media file of you

* which was taken in a private, non-public context,
* which shows you wholly or partially nude and/or engaged in sexually explicit conduct, and
* which you would like removed from Commons for privacy reasons,

please contact the Wikimedia Foundation. Your mail will be treated in confidence and will only be viewed by trusted volunteers who have identified themselves to Wikimedia Foundation by name. For further information see Meta:OTRS.

Anyone care to guess how this probably works in practice?

yeah, but she's a Hawt chick! Besides, it's educational! Free Kulture!

[Selina]

Lets not go offtopic, this is far more serious than a bit of boobs:

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showt...=0&#entry242007

[GlassBeadGame]

And Wnt is now helping write policy on how sexual content is to be handled on commons, while a Foundation board member is apologizing to an anonymous perv because some people questioned the appropriateness of the images he scraped off of Flickr.

Thank you

MRB, thanks for all of your work on Commons. I regret that you're being harrassed a bit this week, but I for one found your gallery of uploads to be an excellent example of a variety of photos curated for their illustrative or artistic value. It has been helpful to me in organizing my own thoughts about the current sexual content discussion. –SJ+ 05:54, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

* Yeah these are high quality contributions, they don't seem vulgar and each have unique criteria which fit into categories like others do not with their combinations to help demonstrate variety. TY© (talk) 07:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Look! It's Tyciol! Wiki's ickiest user!

Why isn't anyone banning HIM??.......

The mere existence of Tyciol with an active account on any WMF project makes Sue Gardner a bold face liar when she says Wikipedia has a "zero tolerance" policy toward pedophilia.

My guess is she knows that any reasonable project with so much participation by children should have a zero tolerance policy. A year ago I'd say she spoke in ignorance, just assuming that Wikipedia, on the side of goodness and light, surely has such a policy. But after the public exposure of pornography and "the community's" tantrum over threatening to take their porn away she spoke in, at best, willful disregard for the truth. Probably picked up the phone to Mr. Wales. That would explain his ridiculous, transparent and hamfisted attempt to revise history to make a mere user generated essay into "always had a policy."

[thekohser]

Lets not go offtopic, this is far more serious than a bit of boobs:

I approve.

I disapprove.

[Cedric]

Well, Allie, maybe if Jimbo hadn't habitually lied, back-pedaled, and side-stepped on so many important issues over the past 4 years or so, he would have built up the necessary reputation capital that these current pronouncements of his would carry the necessary weight. Integrity earns loyalty from followers. Jimbo has so little integrity, it is no wonder so many community members dismiss him so easily now.

Past transgressions being what they are - I dunno - it's clear that Jimmy's completely run out of political clout. He's got kids, and I'm pretty sure he's got a low tolerance threshold for pedo stuff. However, he's just another punter on WP these days.

So who's providing direction? Nobody, that's who. ArbCom, maybe, but WP has been a rudderless ship for the longest time.

Thekohser would be correct in suggesting that Jimbo's well-established history of mendacity and misdirection ought to be the reason for Jimbo's current lack of clout with "teh communitah", but I rather suspect it isn't. After all, there are plenty amongst the Frei Kultur Kinder are veracity-challenged as well, some more than Jimbo. Alison is right about the rudderless nature of WP governance; it descended into what amounts to a primitive feudal society long ago. From what I have gleaned from WP's history, it could very well be that Jimbo's loss of influence started about the time the WMF was set up and took over the domain.

As I have said before, Jimbo has become too much of a dilettante to be an effective dictator. Imagine what would happen to the dictator of a country if over time he decided he preferred the company of foreign diplomats to that of his old cronies and civil and military officials, and his contact with the later became more sporadic. What would happen to that dictator and his influence? Most likely, he would find himself deposed, perhaps murdered in the bargain, or at least reduced to the status of a figurehead. The later appears to be what has largely happened to Jimbo. It's not surprising really; as Jimbo gradually became less engaged with "teh communitah", his loss of influence was inevitable.

[Somey]

A year ago I'd say she spoke in ignorance, just assuming that Wikipedia, on the side of goodness and light, surely has such a policy. But after the public exposure of pornography and "the community's" tantrum over threatening to take their porn away she spoke in, at best, willful disregard for the truth...

I guess I'd have to agree. I mean, it's not totally inconceivable that she's been oblivious to this all along, seeing as how Foundation employees aren't supposed to influence or edit content directly anyway (not that she actually pays much heed to that stricture, as evidence by her own editing history). But I just don't see how she could have made some sort of innocent or erroneous assumption about this after all the time she's had on the job.

It makes you wonder what other things she'd be willing to lie about to ensure that the donations keep rolling in.

I suppose that if pressed, she could say that WP has "zero tolerance" of people who self-identify as pedophiles on Wikipedia itself. I don't believe User:Tyciol has ever done that - as I recall, he's always been very careful about the whole self-identification thing, and will make statements like, "adults who harm children should be severely punished," without mentioning that he (evidently) doesn't believe that sex with adults is necessarily harmful to children.

We'll probably get a lengthy e-mail from him too now, I reckon...

[thekohser]

It makes you wonder what other things she'd be willing to lie about to ensure that the donations keep rolling in.

"Jimmy has never done anything wrong."

(video link) 01:23

[carbuncle]

I suppose that if pressed, she could say that WP has "zero tolerance" of people who self-identify as pedophiles on Wikipedia itself. I don't believe User:Tyciol has ever done that - as I recall, he's always been very careful about the whole self-identification thing, and will make statements like, "adults who harm children should be severely punished," without mentioning that he (evidently) doesn't believe that sex with adults is necessarily harmful to children.

We'll probably get a lengthy e-mail from him too now, I reckon...

I have no idea if Wikisposure is reliable but here are some quotes that they allege come from Tyciol:

I live with my mom and lil bro who wouldn't get it, am 20 and been pedo for... well pretty much ever, moreso in the last five years. Not quite the exhibitionist yet, maybe I'll do that when I've a more marketably physique...

So far, I say I go as low as 14 because that's the legal limit in Canada. Any less, I wouldn't feel comfortable pursuing it so I wouldn't really be able to find out if it was right for me. I do think I'd be fine with 8-13 though, honestly. But even at 13 with a willing nubile girl who wanted me to come over I just couldn't do it. I'm the sort of person who runs back to wait for the police arrive after causing a public disturbance even though it's so minor it wouldn't have been pursued and I could have easily gotten away.

[Alison]

I have no idea if Wikisposure is reliable but here are some quotes that they allege come from Tyciol:

I live with my mom and lil bro who wouldn't get it, am 20 and been pedo for... well pretty much ever, moreso in the last five years. Not quite the exhibitionist yet, maybe I'll do that when I've a more marketably physique...

So far, I say I go as low as 14 because that's the legal limit in Canada. Any less, I wouldn't feel comfortable pursuing it so I wouldn't really be able to find out if it was right for me. I do think I'd be fine with 8-13 though, honestly. But even at 13 with a willing nubile girl who wanted me to come over I just couldn't do it. I'm the sort of person who runs back to wait for the police arrive after causing a public disturbance even though it's so minor it wouldn't have been pursued and I could have easily gotten away.

He's busy editing captions on pictures like this on Commons. When I look at this pic, I just see two cute kids in an old bathtub, complete with haircuts that their mommy did It creeps me out that others may look at pics like this in a .. different way

Then there's this and this. Gotta get rid of that pedo category!

[EricBarbour]

I suppose that if pressed, she could say that WP has "zero tolerance" of people who self-identify as pedophiles on Wikipedia itself. I don't believe User:Tyciol has ever done that - as I recall, he's always been very careful about the whole self-identification thing, and will make statements like, "adults who harm children should be severely punished," without mentioning that he (evidently) doesn't believe that sex with adults is necessarily harmful to children.

We'll probably get a lengthy e-mail from him too now, I reckon...

Let Tyciol email. Let him blubber.

Just remember, you banned his WR account, yes?
As Tarantino said last November,

I don't think any good can come from his user name being associated with WR.

[dogbiscuit]

Suggestion:

Let's put together an open letter to the WMF, specifically sent to Sue detailing in simple terms what the problem is with the WMF claim of zero tolerance, together with whatever appropriate corrective actions we can suggest to fix the most egregious elements of the problem.

Let's then make sure Fox et al have a copy, and remove once and for all the plausible deniability of the WMF on this issue. I'd assume that if Sue Gardner is a sane human being (which I am sure she is) that if the reality of the situation can be put to her without the spin of "it is all a horrible attack on Wikipedia without any foundation in fact by trolls" I would hope that this time around we could get some serious movement on the WMF taking responsibility for its web site (which regular readers will recognise as a regular theme of mine).

[GlassBeadGame]

I suppose that if pressed, she could say that WP has "zero tolerance" of people who self-identify as pedophiles on Wikipedia itself. I don't believe User:Tyciol has ever done that - as I recall, he's always been very careful about the whole self-identification thing, and will make statements like, "adults who harm children should be severely punished," without mentioning that he (evidently) doesn't believe that sex with adults is necessarily harmful to children.

We'll probably get a lengthy e-mail from him too now, I reckon...

Let Tyciol email. Let him blubber.

Just remember, you banned his WR account, yes?
As Tarantino said last November,

I don't think any good can come from his user name being associated with WR.

That's what zero tolerance looks like. He's had his right to reply and he is what he is.

[CharlotteWebb]

He's busy editing captions on pictures like this on Commons. When I look at this pic, I just see two cute kids in an old bathtub, complete with haircuts that their mommy did It creeps me out that others may look at pics like this in a .. different way

Seems obvious he's trolling for attention but it pains me to see his idiocy remain unquestioned on the image page.

• (cur | prev) 19:21, 13 June 2010 Tyciol (talk | contribs) m (2,234 bytes) (does anyone have any idea what SWANCE means? It obviously spells this but I can't find any data, like maybe an old basin company?) (undo)

The galvanized washing tub reads SWANEE, you illiterate fuck. As such it refers to the Suwannee River as slurred in the popular folk tune "Old Folks at Home", written by Stephen C. Foster in some deliberately clumsy ebonics, poised for adoption by slave nannies, show-minstrels, and the state of Florida (until a few years ago).

(Now stop staring at the photo, and go upstairs or something...)

This post has been edited by CharlotteWebb: Thu 1st July 2010, 3:02am