Note the comment on this edit.

They certainly have put a lot of effort into something that's ultimately a complete waste of time...

Sheez, what am I saying? It's Wikipedia in a nutshell!


Mmmm, nutshells...

Thinking some more about JzG, I'm convinced the motivations for what he does are rooted more in frustration than anything else. He's on the losing side of a culture war; he can't get the masses on Wikipedia to consistently rally on his side against all the evil trolls, and he finds this very frustrating. Looking at it from his perspective, he seems to be wondering why, after he's consistently done all the right things -- become friends and enemies with the "right" people, brown-nosed Jimbo better than almost anyone, been part of all the right secret lists where the important stuff is decided... but still, when he goes out among the rabble on the public parts of Wikipedia, he isn't getting all the respect and obedience he deserves, no matter how much namedropping he does about how he's best-friends-forever with Jimbo. Trolls and troll-sympathizers are everywhere... they're on the ArbCom, they're running the wikien-l list and #wikipedia IRC, they're writing for sleazy tabloids like The Register... the Good Guys can't count on a fair hearing anywhere, so they just need to crank up the volume even more... all the while talking about how "stirring up drama" is what the Evil People are doing.

When the oarsmen row in largely independent directions, the boat meanders around in random directions.

Leadership means setting a direction that all the oarsmen agree to row toward, in concert.

Well, no question. I just wonder if there's any way left to ameliorate the situation at this point, without one side or the other completely disappearing from the scene. (This is assuming that by "one side or the other," we're talking about JzG vs. Wikipedia Review, or even JzG vs. all websites he finds objectionable.)

Probably not, right? It's clear he's reached the point where the end justifies the means for him... And since it's the internet, and every attack practically demands a counter-attack, the whole thing eventually spirals out of control. We're probably just as responsible for that as he is, but the chances of our starting to like JzG as a person and the things he does are far lower than the chances of him eventually getting fed up and leaving WP for good. That's not to say we're deliberately trying to drive him away (though I suppose some of us might be) - it's just a fact, as I see it.

By the way (and I may post some more about this later), I can finally confirm that JzG's statements about Andrew Morrow having been "jailed" are a gross distortion of the facts. Apparently Morrow did spend about a month in a county lockup after pleading "No Contest" to some sort of domestic abuse charge, which occurred in the midst of a child-custody dispute with his (now ex-) wife. However, that was several years before Wikipedia came into existence, it had nothing whatsoever to do with the internet (and did not involve "stalking" of any description), and he hasn't been back to the slammer at all since then. For JzG to keep saying this in connection with so-called "attack sites" is almost certainly libelous, not to mention the fact that it's a bit like saying that because one person on Wikipedia opposes bicycle-helmet laws, "Wikipedia opposes bicycle-helmet laws."

That sort of thing should only be reserved for legitimate generalizations, such as "Wikipedia supports naked short-selling."

Kudos for the prosecutor who put Morrow away for a month for his real domestic abuse, even if it didn't have anything to do with WP. I hope he learned his lesson. I wish JzG and the wiki-whiners would stop cheapening the cause of real abuse victims.

I suppose one might even theorize that Morrow's not wanting to go back to jail may have led him to shift the expression of his misogynistic tendencies (which may not have been apparent at all prior to the divorce/custody battle) to the internet. Apparently he's a programmer of some sort, though, so I suppose that probably would have happened anyway...

Either way, you're right - these kinds of distortions really do cheapen the cause of abuse victims, possibly even more so than their use of the term "stalking" in reference to identity-exposure of anonymous internet account names. After all, the degree to which it's legal to physically follow someone around to find out more about them is far less clear than the illegality of spousal intimidation or abuse. Ideally, nobody would do either one of those things of course, but there's still a fairly big difference between the two from a legal perspective.

In honor of JzG's little edit summary immortalizing my name once again, I have responded with a successful vandalistic attack within his beloved Wikipedia. My editorial spree has damaged over 30 pages in Wikipedia, it is shocking to the average user, and it has not been rolled back for over an hour now.

I hope you're happy, Guy Chapman?

Keep mentioning me in your notoriously belittling way, and I'll keep harming your project. I may even find some more dirt on you, like your fascination with giant garbonzos. If that's what you want, keep mentioning me. Keep mentioning me.

Greg

You really are above this, you know. He deserves a good visit to the courthouse to teach him and his ilk a bit of respect, Greg.

ps: And it's gazonga's, not garbonzos..

When you vandalize to "teach him a lesson", you're only confirming in his mind that you're an evil vandal in the first place.

Yup.

Hit him in the wallet.

Teach him some American values.

EQUALS

The stuff JzG calls Kohser is much worse and more personal than "evil vandal". By all means continue; JzG should have the fight he has pursued so enthusiastically.

"Garbonzos" is my little tribute to Selina's "British spellcheck" experiment. Remember, garbonzo beans --> chick peas?

Anyway, of course I'm above this. But, a little vandalism takes me 10 minutes tops, and it probably makes Guy blow red steam out of his ears. An international lawsuit would take me months of time, untold dollars, and really -- proof that Guy's blathering about me has compromised my reputation and ability to earn an income. In other words, an immensely difficult task.

Plus, the vandalism is funny. You'll see. I'll let everyone know what it was, once it's rolled back. So far, it's still in place. Tee hee.

Greg

Anyway, isn;t it garbanzos, not garbonzos?

He could be referring to the garbonzo dog doo-dah band...

Trouble is, as long as there are people like JzG running around finding lots of non-existent trolls, there is no attention paid to the real trolls. There are people systematically twisting WP, both the high level ones we discuss here and (more insidiously) the low level ones each racking up their hundreds of unremarked edits. JzG may not have the courage to address the high level ones, but he'd be far better off at least hammering the others.

"Troll -- in the dungeons -- thought you ought to know."
-- Professor Quirrell, in Harry Potter and the [Philosopher's/Sorceror's] Stone

Isn't JzG a troll?

I'm not a fan of vandalism, and I don't this this merits your .... uh .... attention. BUT the "consorting with animals" on the Durova article was priceless.