JzG (Guy Chapman), How he helps Wikipedia Options

[Cedric]

It is interesting (for "interesting", read "appalling") sometimes what you can learn from a userpage:

I can be provoked, it's not even terribly difficult. You may find, if you provoke me enough, that I will do something I later regret. Only remember, you may regret it more. I am a middle-aged surly bastard who spends his working day wrestling spammers and beating Windows with a stick, but I am capable of seeing good in the most improbable people if they don't go out of their way to make me do otherwise.

This user posts using a British sense of humour and does not repress those instantaneous motions of merriment.

Wow. I was not previously aware that "British sense of humour" equals "sarcastic, misanthropic abuse". Still, I have a suspicion that many Scots and Welsh would react to Chapman/Guy/JzG's use of the word "British" here with a hearty "Fuck off, you English ponce!"

[Jonny Cache]

Yes, I can be more PC.

Guy Chapman, Gili Bar-Hillel & Co. delete articles on Wikipedia not for the substance that those articles merit, but rather for who is posting them. My advice: ignore Guy Chapman and Gili Bar-Hillel. They and Wikipedia thrive on this S&M attention. It is not for fact that people stay glued to Wikipedia but rather who wins the AFD vote.

I think that pointing to the link between sado-masochism and fascism is very apt, but I've been way too meek to say much about it. Why else would Jimbo & Company keep running back to a DunnoMatrix like SlimVirgin?

Jonny

This post has been edited by Jonny Cache: Sat 24th March 2007, 4:20pm

[guy]

I was not previously aware that "British sense of humour" equals "sarcastic, misanthropic abuse".

Nor was I.

[thekohser]

Well, the return of Gregory Kohs to editing Wikipedia sure didn't last long. Not with Guy Chapman flying around with his impermeable cape of admin-bit destruction. In mere minutes, he:

Re-blocked me;
erased my talk page;
erased a multi-referenced stub that I created about performance artist Liz Cohen;
erased some excellent editorial improvements that I had made to the article about the Czech Air Force;
but apparently left this edit alone;
deleted an article about the firm Wikipedia Review that had been created and kept by consensus WHILE I HAD BEEN BANNED, with no input from me.

Feel better, Guy?

My contact on the Wikimedia Board has been notified. We'll see if the sh*tstorm that I predicted shall ensue. It comes down to this:

Which is more decisive --

a Jimmy Wales unblock and support from one Board member...
- - OR - -
a community ban and a hyper-vindictive Guy on a bicycle?

Place your bets!

(Seriously, this would make for some good wagering.)

All because Durova (practically) calls me a liar, says she has proof of it, then won't e-mail it to me (even from a throw-away account). If this childishness stands, this is going to be the first chapter in my book that's going to make me a fortune: Wikidrama.

Greg

[Daniel Brandt]

Which is more decisive --

a Jimmy Wales unblock and support from one Board member...
- - OR - -
a community ban and a hyper-vindictive Guy on a bicycle?

Place your bets!

Guy will win. He wears a helmet, whereas Jimmy and the Board are afraid of their own shadows. But don't despair, we're in the early stages of an across-the-board Wikipedia flameout.

[Cedric]

Well, the return of Gregory Kohs to editing Wikipedia sure didn't last long. Not with Guy Chapman flying around with his impermeable cape of admin-bit destruction. In mere minutes, he:

Re-blocked me;
erased my talk page;
erased a multi-referenced stub that I created about performance artist Liz Cohen;
erased some excellent editorial improvements that I had made to the article about the Czech Air Force;
but apparently left this edit alone;
deleted an article about the firm Wikipedia Review that had been created and kept by consensus WHILE I HAD BEEN BANNED, with no input from me.

Feel better, Guy?

This user posts using a British sense of humour and does not repress those instantaneous motions of merriment.

Oh, that wacky "British sense of humour" strikes again!

[anon1234]

Personally, I would love to see some books on the high Wikipedia drama that we all know so well. Someday, SlimVirgin is going to make an appearance in a real world book about Wikipedia and all the abuses that go on there. I expect that it will be done by an author of prominence in the tech area, such as Steven Levy. Levy's books usually have a lot of focus on the characters and personalities involved in major technology events.

[Somey]

Guy will win. He wears a helmet, whereas Jimmy and the Board are afraid of their own shadows.

No question that Guy will "win," assuming one regards turning Wikipedia into a Major International Clown Festival as "winning." But I'd still say it's a mistake to see this sort of thing as a sign of Jimbo's power and influence slipping away...

IMO, what it really represents is the same crap we've been seeing all along: The most reactionary and least reasonable position always wins, on everything, and it matters little who comes up with it - as soon as someone dreams up something more reactionary and unreasonable than the previous version, they all get behind it like a bunch of zombielemmings!

And this is after JzG came achingly close to actually figuring out how to solve the BLP issue, only to fall back on the familiar strawman argument about how it would mean "deleting 95 percent of the biographies" on WP. It's almost like the embarrassingly poor logic of strawmen and rigid cult discipline is more comfortable for them, somehow.... But in that case, JzG's (and SlimVirgin's, btw) position was quite a far piece from being the most reactionary/least reasonable, so no dice on that one I'm afraid.

Anyway, it was just a matter of time before ol' Guy noticed the unblock and went apeshit, I suppose. He's good at that!

[everyking]

I find it impossible to comprehend the kind of mind that would revert or delete beneficial work on the encyclopedia because of a user ban (and in this case Greg was editing with Jimbo's own permission when he made those edits, stretching it about as far into the realm of the absurd as one can go). The sheer pettiness and blindness of it is simply staggering to me, to the point where it's very difficult to believe one could do it and still have the best interest of the encyclopedia at heart.

[guy]

No question that Guy will "win," assuming one regards turning Wikipedia into a Major International Clown Festival as "winning."

Ah, that explains user "Can't Sleep Clown will eat me".

[Daniel Brandt]

But I'd still say it's a mistake to see this sort of thing as a sign of Jimbo's power and influence slipping away...

It's not that Jimbo's power and influence are waning, so much as he doesn't know when it's time to use it. It's like that frog in a pan of water heating up slowly on the stove — it doesn't know when to jump out.

For Jimmy, and also for the rest of the Board of Trustees, they're in a desperate situation of "liability creep." That means they're in a situation that will only get worse in the upcoming months. Danny Wool and Brad Patrick got out in time; the rest of them are just now noticing that the water is getting a tad warm. (Apparently there's no liability insurance for the Foundation yet, and I don't think any insurer would touch them at this point.)

The current discussion on the wikiEN-L list under "Getting hammered" is interesting. There are a few, including Jimbo and SlimVirgin and some others, who realize that something has to be done. Then there are people like David Gerard and Geni who chime in with something completely diversionary and irrelevant, and downright stupid, and everything ends up in a mush of confusion. The people who have nothing to lose just don't get it, and a lot of them are admins. At some point Jimbo will have to say, "Shut up Gerard, or I'll ban you. I'm trying to have a serious discussion here!"

I really don't see Jimbo being able to do this. He sees himself as a nice guy who elicits solutions through nice compromises. By now it's to the point where the Foundation office cannot even use a new broom as a CEO. A broom won't do it. They need a steamroller to come in and squish some admins into pancakes, if they hope to start reducing their exposure to liability.

No sane CEO would take this job unless he had guarantees that it would be worth his time, and that his power would be almost absolute, and guarantees of an early-separation package if it doesn't work out. The Foundation doesn't have enough money to hire the sort of CEO they need, nor do they recognize that this is needed. It's up to Jimbo, and all he's been doing so far is sitting in that pan on the stove.

[thekohser]

I find it impossible to comprehend the kind of mind that would revert or delete beneficial work on the encyclopedia because of a user ban...

You'd find Guy Chapman's mind incomprehensible, then. Check out these deletions of content:

M-105:

along present day Pinnebog Road to its junction with present day M-142 to the north. It existed between [[1928]] and [[1939]].<ref name="delorme">{{cite book|last=DeLorme|title=Michigan Atlas & Gazetteer|origyear=2003|edition=11th Edition|pages=76}}</ref><ref name="bessert">[http://www.michiganhighways.org/master_list.html Michigan Highways: Master List 1918-Present] ''Christopher J. Bessert'' URL Accessed October 29, 2006.</ref>

Detsl:

Deleted the whole comment from a Talk page.

Czech Air Force, bad user's version:

From 1946, Czechoslovakia was in the political and military sphere of the [[Soviet Union]]. Indeed, since [[1955]], Czechoslovakia was a member of the [[Warsaw Pact]]. Because of this, Czechoslovakian air forces were armed with Soviet aircraft and utilized Soviet doctrines and tactical methods. The majority of aircraft were designed and manufactured by [[MiG]].

And Guy Chapman's preferred version:

In this time Czechoslovakia was member of the Warsaw Pact. Because of this reason, Czechoslovakian air forces were armed with Soviet aircraft, doctrines and methods of tactics. The types of air craft were mostly [[MiG]].

I just love that Guy!

Greg

[Somey]

They seem to be discussing it here on WP:AN:

Greg Kohs has only one agenda: his own personal gain. He is very very keen to use Wikipedia for this end, especially if he can "prove" that Jimbo was wrong to boot him in the first place. Problem is, he thinks Wikipedia is a failure as a business directory because we don't allow subjects to have editorial control. He also doesn't see a problem with conflict of interest. He also keeps coming back even though he is banned. Not just blocked, banned. If he wants back, he can go to ArbCom and get unbanned. Until that happens, he is a banned person. And yes I know that has uncomfortable overtones of Apartheid South Africa, and you know something? I don't care, not in this case.

Ouch! But after that, our new pal User:DennyColt objected to his deleting the Wikipedia Review article, so JzG undeleted it. (I guess it's pretty much Denny In Charge these days.)

My bad. It was previously deleted, I did not see the second AfD. It had only one semi-trivial independent source, and Kohs has been deleted as non-notable. I don't know of any evidence of notability for this one-man company which has never had turnover of more than a few hundreds of dollars. I have taken it back to AfD, which is what I'd have done if I hadn't been distracted last night and missed the second AfD.

And later, he thinks the better of it and tries to take a slightly softer approach (boldface mine, sorry):

He just doesn't get it. That does not make him a bad person, not everybody has to get the Wikipedia religion, but anybody who wants to edit has to accept the policies and cultural mores of the project - which Kohs does not. Add to that a generous dose of block-evasion with sockpuppets, including promoting his own for-pay project to authors of soon-to-be-deleted articles, and you have a persistent abuser we can do without. I'm sure Kohs is a really nice guy and good to his mother, but he is an unmitigated nuisance on Wikipedia.

At least his conscience should be assuaged now, eh?

[Cedric]

They seem to be discussing it here on WP:AN

I particularly liked this bit:

. . . Until that happens, he is a banned person. And yes I know that has uncomfortable overtones of Apartheid South Africa, and you know something? I don't care, not in this case.

There's that "British sense of humour" again. That Guy Chapman! He's a bigger laugh riot than P.W. Botha!

[Robster]

Which is more decisive --

a Jimmy Wales unblock and support from one Board member...
- - OR - -
a community ban and a hyper-vindictive Guy on a bicycle?

Place your bets!

(Seriously, this would make for some good wagering.)

As sorta-noted above, it appears we've reached the point where real control of the future of Wikipedia is about to be decided...

...and I don't think Jimbo Wales' vaguely-hippiesh "love, peace, and good faith" worldview can survive.

He's got to be squarely in the gunsights of the more reactionary WikiAdmins who've decided that good faith can go pound salt(ed articles) and believe that their faith is always right and everyone else is wrong.

And on the other side, he's got a Wikimedia Foundation that is showing signs of itching for some real control as well.

Some of his closest lieutenants have jumped over the port bow.

So, I wonder...

Will JzG and the small circle of admins oft-discussed here finally toss Jimbo under the wheels of his own bus?

I'm placing a small mental wager on the admins and I'm wishing Jimbo the best as he explores the next stage of his career.

Maybe Larry Sanger will hire him.

(cue insane laughter)

(and then a sigh as I realized I just blew off a perfectly good April Fool's joke 2 days early)

[anon1234]

Maybe Larry Sanger will hire him.

I actually think that Jimbo should jump ship to Citizendium. He has lost control of Wikipedia with many of his initiatives meeting resistance from the established admin powers that be. I think his differences with Larry are more about ego, and deep down they actually agree more than they disagree. Wikipedia is going to remain Citizendiums insane and out-of-control cousin and Jimbo would do well to disassociate himself with it over the long term.

[thekohser]

I find it impossible to comprehend the kind of mind that would revert or delete beneficial work on the encyclopedia because of a user ban (and in this case Greg was editing with Jimbo's own permission when he made those edits, stretching it about as far into the realm of the absurd as one can go). The sheer pettiness and blindness of it is simply staggering to me, to the point where it's very difficult to believe one could do it and still have the best interest of the encyclopedia at heart.

You think that was bad? How bad is it when JzG literally takes WP:OWNership of everything that is Kohs/Wikipedia Review/Centiare related, as in this action, where he deleted the following, and indefinitely blocked User:GuyCritic, without even a hint of CheckUser?

Typical Guy -- just can't stay away from the discussion, like a moth to a flame. I guess we should add the following other "suckers" to the list of people fooled by the Centiare project:

1. Search Engine Optimization through Semantic tagging (Date: 2007-03-29) Michael Milligan discusses how he's exploiting Centiare for his own SEO purposes.
2. Web Sites That Will Have an Impact in 2007 (Date: 2007-01-29) Dan Walker names Centiare among five sites to watch in 2007.
3. Semantic MediaWiki goes business (Date: 2007-01-12) Denny Vrandecic (one of the three leading developers of Semantic MediaWiki) shares his thoughts about Centiare.
4. Semantic MediaWiki Opens For Business (Date: 2007-01-05) Harry Chen's thoughts about Centiare.
5. Shel Holtz reports on Centiare (Date: 2007-01-01) This is an audio podcast of the Hobson & Holtz Report; Centiare mentioned about 60% into segment.
6. Move Over Yellow Pages (Date: 2006-12-27) Scott Baradell breaks the story about Centiare.

Please, Calton and Guy, show us how you'd refute each and every one of these professionals' opinion about Centiare. --GuyCritic 22:41, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Does Guy have some special right to block users who critique Guy?

I would appreciate if some of the active Wikipedians on here might at least question this move on Guy's talk page. He's (once again) gone way too far.

(Hasn't he?)

Greg

LATE EDIT: Holy crap, somebody has actually already addressed the issue! Bravo, User:Napoleon1815, bravo! Problem is, Napoleon's already been painted as a troll. What's needed is more credible support. But, who can stand up to Guy Chapman? He's invincible!

This post has been edited by thekohser: Tue 29th May 2007, 1:02am

[The Joy]

Napoleon has been indef blocked by Picaroon9288.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=134213681

This post has been edited by The Joy: Tue 29th May 2007, 4:30am

[Somey]

And the user who was the original subject of the AN/I posting (with contribs dating back to Oct. 2005) remains unblocked, despite two links to Centiare on his user page.

[guy]

Napoleon has been indef blocked by Picaroon9288.

Is he a sockpuppet of banned user Napoleon, or is that too obvious?