> JzG sez the Durova business is because Greg K wants her speaking fees

the fieryangel

QUOTE

One thing is abundantly clear: User:Wikipedia Review (Grgory Kohs) wants Durova and Jehochman out of the market. He is a competitor in the field of talking about Wikipedia, SEO and conflict of interest. His perspective is not quite the same as that of the average Wikipedia - which is why he's banned, I guess - and he has pursued a concerted campaign, with the able assistance of several Wikipedians who should know better, to damage Jehochman and Durova. Attempts to promote Kohs' theory caused significant escalation of the dispute.

Geez, it's just all so simple when Guy explain it to you, isn't it???

Disillusioned Lackey

QUOTE

JzG sez the Durova business is because Greg K wants her speaking fees, ....in his Arb-com testimony...

I though that Durova didn't MAKE any money at these conferences.

Besides, didn't she complain her expenses weren't adequately covered, at the SMX conference? (tactless, by the way).

Greg is jealous of her? He's been given more speaking fees than she, to date, problably. Now, I wonder if she will admit she is jealous of Greg's entrepreneuring on her candidacy, via the DUROVA FOR ARBCOM STORE.

There is surely more money in Durova mugs and doggy t-shirts (ON SALE NOW FOLKS, GREAT XMAS GIFTS FOR THE KIDS) than Durova's speaking fees.

cyofee

Someone should write a statement testifying that Kohs is working for Durova - he even opened an e-store in support of her Arbcom candidacy. Obviously, because of his history with Wikipedia and being paid to do things about it, Durova is his client. Ergo, Durova should be banned, if anything for being associated with the infamous, evil Kohs.

Disillusioned Lackey

QUOTE(cyofee @ Sat 24th November 2007, 10:24am)

Someone should write a statement testifying that Kohs is working for Durova - he even opened an e-store in support of her Arbcom candidacy. Obviously, because of his history with Wikipedia and being paid to do things about it, Durova is his client. Ergo, Durova should be banned, if anything for being associated with the infamous, evil Kohs.

Cyofee, you can't apply cynical logic to high camp.

That's like trying to liken Karl Marx to the Marx Brothers

FORUM Image

Somey

QUOTE

...he has pursued a concerted campaign, with the able assistance of several Wikipedians who should know better, to damage Jehochman and Durova. Attempts to promote Kohs' theory caused significant escalation of the dispute.

I suppose the fact that both Durova and Jehochman wrongly (and publicly) accused Kohs of unethical activities - before Kohs even wrote a peep about either one of them - never actually occurred to ol' JzG, then?

At this point, I'd have to say that Guy Chapman's lying is waaaay out of control. Maybe it has been all along, but if they don't do something about it soon I suspect we're going to have to take it to the media directly - instead of just putting the info out there and hoping somebody notices, like we usually do. This is just getting ridiculous.

Disillusioned Lackey

GETTING ridiculous?

Somey.

It has BEEN ridiculous for months, if not years.

It is getting hilarious, not ridiculous.

Somey

QUOTE(Disillusioned Lackey @ Sat 24th November 2007, 12:12pm)

GETTING ridiculous?

I know, I know... I meant by their standards, not real-world standards. By real-world standards, the whole thing would be... I dunno, I don't think they've invented a word that really describes it. The best I can come up with is "farcical," but that just doesn't seem sufficient, somehow.

Cedric

QUOTE(Somey @ Sat 24th November 2007, 12:21pm)

QUOTE(Disillusioned Lackey @ Sat 24th November 2007, 12:12pm)

GETTING ridiculous?

I know, I know... I meant by their standards, not real-world standards. By real-world standards, the whole thing would be... I dunno, I don't think they've invented a word that really describes it. The best I can come up with is "farcical," but that just doesn't seem sufficient, somehow.

How about "farcical expressions of impotent rage"? I daresay Guy lacks both Greg's level of intellegence and Greg's level of skill with regard to satire. Further, Guy is all too aware of this. For chrissakes, Greg, don't post any pics of yourself wearing tight shorts on the internet. Guy's head might explode!

Disillusioned Lackey

QUOTE(Somey @ Sat 24th November 2007, 12:21pm)

QUOTE(Disillusioned Lackey @ Sat 24th November 2007, 12:12pm)

GETTING ridiculous?

I know, I know... I meant by their standards, not real-world standards. By real-world standards, the whole thing would be... I dunno, I don't think they've invented a word that really describes it. The best I can come up with is "farcical," but that just doesn't seem sufficient, somehow.

Completely insane?