Betacommand RFAR #3 - Wikipedia Review

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

Betacommand RFAR #3

Options

that one guy	Fri 6th January 2012, 2:44pm Post #1
Doesn't get it either. Group: Contributors Posts: 231 Joined: Fri 2nd May 2008, 4:35pm From: A computer somewhere in this world Member No.: 5,935	With all the drama over at the MF/Civility case and some interesting happenings over at the TG case, this one sort of got left behind though now it's at voting. we have this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arb...acommand_banned Where the hell did that come from?

Replies

EricBarbour	Fri 13th January 2012, 9:12pm Post #2
blah Group: Regulars Posts: 5,919 Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am Member No.: 5,066 WP user page - talk check - contribs	"Betacommand is a divisive figure" MY ASS. He's been stirring up shit for more than four years. And Arbcom, in their staggering patheticness, is now helping him. December 2007, anyone? BC is a major example of how sick and raving mad the glorious Wikipedia "community" really is. He has intractable admin friends, and intractable admin enemies. And the shit boils on, year after year.

Ego Trippin' (Part Two)	Fri 13th January 2012, 9:30pm Post #3
New Member Group: Contributors Posts: 47 Joined: Sun 13th Feb 2011, 3:07am From: Ohio Member No.: 42,413	QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Fri 13th January 2012, 4:12pm) "Betacommand is a divisive figure" MY ASS. He's been stirring up shit for more than four years. And Arbcom, in their staggering patheticness, is now helping him. December 2007, anyone? BC is a major example of how sick and raving mad the glorious Wikipedia "community" really is. He has intractable admin friends, and intractable admin enemies. And the shit boils on, year after year. Eric, surely the fact that BC has "intractable admin friends, and intractable admin enemies" means that he is, ipso facto, divisive on Wikipedia. If you think that I was expressing pleasure about ArbCom apparently letting BC escape without a ban once again, you're wrong. Like you, I have a low opinion of BC and his supporters. My interest here is in the unusual public fractiousness of the Arbitration Committee in this case, and what that means for the upcoming year.

EricBarbour	Fri 13th January 2012, 9:39pm Post #4
blah Group: Regulars Posts: 5,919 Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am Member No.: 5,066 WP user page - talk check - contribs	QUOTE(Ego Trippin' (Part Two) @ Fri 13th January 2012, 1:30pm) Eric, surely the fact that BC has "intractable admin friends, and intractable admin enemies" means that he is, ipso facto, divisive on Wikipedia. Just to amplify: I was being ironic. This goes far, far beyond "divisive". By showing how deep and hopeless the divisions in Wikipedia (and now Arbcom) are, BC's case makes a perfect demonstration that Wikipedia should be shut down entirely, and all the Arbcommers ("reformers" or not) need to be kicked to the curb. This is the kind of petty shit that eventually causes outright civil war. Another thing Wikipedia is, but won't admit: a slow-motion gang war.

Posts in this topic

that one guy Betacommand RFAR #3 Fri 6th January 2012, 2:44pm

melloden With all the drama over at the MF/Civility case a... Fri 6th January 2012, 3:18pm

Ego Trippin' (Part Two) [quote name='that one guy' post='292777' date='Fr... Fri 13th January 2012, 8:43pm

carbuncle Little-known secret - Betacommand himself is a bot... Fri 6th January 2012, 3:20pm

EricBarbour "Betacommand is a divisive figure" MY AS... Fri 13th January 2012, 9:12pm

Ego Trippin' (Part Two) "Betacommand is a divisive figure" MY A... Fri 13th January 2012, 9:30pm

EricBarbour Eric, surely the fact that BC has "intractab... Fri 13th January 2012, 9:39pm

Ego Trippin' (Part Two) Just to amplify: I was being ironic. This goes fa... Fri 13th January 2012, 10:03pm

1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)

0 Members:

Display Mode: Switch to: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Outline

Time is now: 22nd 5 13, 9:48am