Should valued contributers be treated differently? Options

[mbz1]

What about when valued contributors are also trolls and hounds?

this.

You do realize that my statement was about Mila, right?

Well,if your "statement" was about me, is a good example of your usual trolling with not a single fucking difference to confirm it,
and my response to it is a very good example of what I should not have done:responding to trolls = feeding the trolls.

Generally speaking I have never seen any valued contributor who was a troll and/or a hound.

This post has been edited by mbz1: Tue 27th December 2011, 3:53pm

[Vigilant]

What about when valued contributors are also trolls and hounds?

this.

You do realize that my statement was about Mila, right?

Well,if your "statement" was about me, is a good example of your usual trolling with not a single fucking difference to confirm it,
and my response to it is a very good example of what I should not have done:responding to trolls = feeding the trolls.

Generally speaking I have never seen any valued contributor who was a troll and/or a hound.

In 10 seconds:
Giano
Malleus
SandyGeorgia
SlimVirgin
Durova
Ottava Rima

[mbz1]

What about when valued contributors are also trolls and hounds?

this.

You do realize that my statement was about Mila, right?

Well,if your "statement" was about me, is a good example of your usual trolling with not a single fucking difference to confirm it,
and my response to it is a very good example of what I should not have done:responding to trolls = feeding the trolls.

Generally speaking I have never seen any valued contributor who was a troll and/or a hound.

In 10 seconds:
Giano
Malleus
SandyGeorgia
SlimVirgin
Durova
Ottava Rima

I see no differences.
Being rude # being troll and/or hound
Socking # being troll and/or hound
abusing admin tools is not always equals being trolls and/or hounds

This post has been edited by mbz1: Tue 27th December 2011, 4:44pm

[melloden]

What about when valued contributors are also trolls and hounds?

this.

You do realize that my statement was about Mila, right?

Well,if your "statement" was about me, is a good example of your usual trolling with not a single fucking difference to confirm it,
and my response to it is a very good example of what I should not have done:responding to trolls = feeding the trolls.

Generally speaking I have never seen any valued contributor who was a troll and/or a hound.

In 10 seconds:
Giano
Malleus
SandyGeorgia
SlimVirgin
Durova
Ottava Rima

If some quiet article-writer like User:Sasata (T-H-L-K-D) called someone a cunt, would as much drama erupt?

[Peter Damian]

If some quiet article-writer like User:Sasata (T-H-L-K-D) called someone a cunt, would as much drama erupt?

Why would someone who mainly writes on fungal taxa need to call anyone a cunt? It's somewhat different when you are trying to persuade some Randy from Boise that the Dark Ages really did exist, together with their dates, or that Ken Wilber is not in fact a philosopher. Look for the areas where Randy and friends hang out, and you will find 'cunts' galore.

[mbz1]

What about when valued contributors are also trolls and hounds?

this.

You do realize that my statement was about Mila, right?

Well,if your "statement" was about me, is a good example of your usual trolling with not a single fucking difference to confirm it,
and my response to it is a very good example of what I should not have done:responding to trolls = feeding the trolls.

Generally speaking I have never seen any valued contributor who was a troll and/or a hound.

In 10 seconds:
Giano
Malleus
SandyGeorgia
SlimVirgin
Durova
Ottava Rima

If some quiet article-writer like User:Sasata (T-H-L-K-D) called someone a cunt, would as much drama erupt?

Probably not, but is this Malleus who is guilty of initiating the drama? He only used the word. Drama was started and fed up by others.

[Web Fred]

What about when valued contributors are also trolls and hounds?

Difficult to edit when users create a climate of hostility, and calling another user a cunt is pathetic. I imagine that person banging their head on the keyboard in a fit of rage.

I see nothing wrong in calling someone a cunt... if in fact they are one, or are behaving like one.

One someone is pissing you off and you have to remain civil then any reply you give is just the passive-aggressive equivalent. Say it how it is is the only way to go, then at least people know exactly what you mean, and there are no misunderstandings.

[mbz1]

What about when valued contributors are also trolls and hounds?

Difficult to edit when users create a climate of hostility, and calling another user a cunt is pathetic. I imagine that person banging their head on the keyboard in a fit of rage.

I see nothing wrong in calling someone a cunt... if in fact they are one, or are behaving like one.

One someone is pissing you off and you have to remain civil then any reply you give is just the passive-aggressive equivalent. Say it how it is is the only way to go, then at least people know exactly what you mean, and there are no misunderstandings.

I probably agree with this. I believe it is more honest to say what you think in an open than to troll, make false accusations and hound a person.

[Peter Damian]

There has been a lot of discussion about Malleus and his use of the c-word. Perhaps we can glance at the edit which occasioned all this drama.

We ought not to admin bash across the board, I can think immediately of many admins who appear to be proper and honest human beings. Unfortunately though I can think of far more who appear to be dishonest cunts. Malleus Fatuorum 03:38, 21 December 2011 (UTC)" [1].
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=466966253
[/url]

Then the block hammer fell. Two points: the context of use. (1) There is a frivolous and a serious use of the c-word in English. The first, as in 'you silly c--t' is trivial and affectionate. The second, as here, is used to signify deep moral error, even evil, or hatred of evil. (2) The remark was at an RfA, which for the earnest type of Wikipedian is a sort of cathedral or deeply hallowed ground, where the chosen ones are anointed by a 'bureaucrat' who is something like Zadok the priest.

Thus, Malleus' action was something akin to calling Queen Elizabeth a foul name during her coronation at Westminster Abbey in 1953, or whenever it was. No wonder the Wikipedians want to burn him at the stake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGLN1kREJ2Q&t=5m10s

He added the following explanation shortly after

I would be very happy to provide examples, and I'm rather puzzled that you appear not to understand the difference between an honest cunt and a dishonest cunt. They're both cunts, but one believes (s)he's defending Wkipedia, whereas the other is just a self-important wanker. Is that clearer? [[User:Malleus Fatuorum|Malleus]] [[User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum|Fatuorum]] 06:13, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Tue 27th December 2011, 5:08pm

[Tarc]

If some quiet article-writer like User:Sasata (T-H-L-K-D) called someone a cunt, would as much drama erupt?

Why would someone who mainly writes on fungal taxa need to call anyone a cunt? It's somewhat different when you are trying to persuade some Randy from Boise that the Dark Ages really did exist, together with their dates, or that Ken Wilber is not in fact a philosopher. Look for the areas where Randy and friends hang out, and you will find 'cunts' galore.

Perhaps someday, Randy from Boise remembers the time he and some fellow Boiseans bought some weak schrooms from those shifty folk down in Cheyenne. He will decide to go edit Psilocybin (T-H-L-K-D) and talk about how its high ain't so great after all. It will only be a matter of time before the quiet Mr. Sasata drops a c-bomb in frustration, then gets blocked for "biting the newbies".

[gomi]

[Modnote: Off-topic thread about (anti-)Americanism split to here.]

[Web Fred]

As my comment to get back on topic got mixed in with the anti-American sub-thread I'll replicate it here.

In response to the thread title:

Indubitably. Yes, valued contributors should be treated differently. Isn't that how good CEO acquisition is achieved? You give the honey to the best of the best so that they will join your venture.

Give valued contributors the honey and it will attract more valued contributors. Basic psychology isn't it?

Sooner or later you end up with more VCs than cunts, PoV-pushers and power hungry admins. Speaker of the latter, self-nominated RfAs should be banned. The best admins are those that don't really want the job.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

I see nothing wrong in calling someone a cunt... if in fact they are one, or are behaving like one.

One someone is pissing you off and you have to remain civil then any reply you give is just the passive-aggressive equivalent.

You have a point. Some "valued contributors" have elevated that tactic almost to an art form.

[that one guy]

I think "valued contributers" (sic) is a loaded statement. What determines "valued"? One could argue Malleus is due to the sheer amount of mainspace work he does. But here's the catch: for every Malleus, Giano, Bugs, etc there's probably another editor in the wings adding content and not causing drama. The only reason that Malleus, Giano, and the like are "big name editors" are because they're attention whores. They want to get more credit than their name in the edit history so they stir shit up so people will go "WE CAN'T BLOCK THEM, LOOK AT THE WORK THEY'VE DONE!" while they get to sit back and watch the drama erupt over them. It's pathetic and only gives incentive for others to try. It's no better to me than an admin who brags about how many blocks they've made because it makes their e-peen feel huge.

And yes Ottava, this includes you.

This post has been edited by that one guy: Wed 28th December 2011, 10:14pm

[Detective]

It's no better to me than an admin who flouts their block log length because it makes their e-peen feel huge.

I couldn't make out what you meant there. Do you mean flaunts not flouts?

And yes Ottava, this includes you.

+1

[that one guy]

It's no better to me than an admin who flouts their block log length because it makes their e-peen feel huge.

I couldn't make out what you meant there. Do you mean flaunts not flouts?

And yes Ottava, this includes you.

+1

Thanks, and I adjusted the wording to be more clear. (after I made this post anyway)

[Tarc]

What about when valued contributors are also trolls and hounds?

this.

You do realize that my statement was about Mila, right?

Well,if your "statement" was about me, is a good example of your usual trolling with not a single fucking difference to confirm it,

Do we really still need diffs to show your assholish behavior, Mila? I think you've reached a level of wiki-infamy where your antics are common knowledge by now.

[mbz1]

What about when valued contributors are also trolls and hounds?

this.

You do realize that my statement was about Mila, right?

Well,if your "statement" was about me, is a good example of your usual trolling with not a single fucking difference to confirm it,

Do we really still need diffs to show your assholish behavior, Mila? I think you've reached a level of wiki-infamy where your antics are common knowledge by now.

Hey, I am an asshole, I do not shy away from that at all.

Well, if a self-admitted asshole alleges that my behavior was "assholish" it means that I probably was very good.

I should admit, tarc, that at one point a few days ago for whatever reason I thought that I am starting seeing something human in you. I was mistaking. you were, are, and always will be a dirty troll, and a very stinky self-admitted asshole, and with this you are added to my ignore users list.

This post has been edited by mbz1: Thu 29th December 2011, 4:34am

[Wikifan]

Do we really still need diffs to show your assholish behavior, Mila? I think you've reached a level of wiki-infamy where your antics are common knowledge by now.

get bent tarc. just because editors have failed to send your ass to AE doesn't mean you're less of a douche.

not everyone has the time like nableezy. wikipedia is his fucking life.

This post has been edited by Wikifan: Thu 29th December 2011, 7:18am

[Tarc]

Well, if a self-admitted asshole alleges that my behavior was "assholish" it means that I probably was very good.

The difference between you and me is that, while we both may be assholes, you pretend that you are not. Its like the difference between Republicans and Democrats when it comes to sex scandals. Politicians from both parties get embroiled in them, but it is the Republicans that come off more hypocritical given their staunch stances on family values.

Do we really still need diffs to show your assholish behavior, Mila? I think you've reached a level of wiki-infamy where your antics are common knowledge by now.

get bent tarc. just because editors have failed to send your ass to AE doesn't mean you're less of a douche.

I guess this means I'm off the Christmas Hanukkah card list for next year?

This post has been edited by Tarc: Thu 29th December 2011, 3:46pm