Seems that Rlevse has returned as PumpkinSky SPECIFICALLY to poison the well at FAC.

He caused the "sour grapes" effect at the recent RFC at WT:FAC over Raul654's "Director for Life" RFC


And Rlevse caused the nastiness and viciousness at Wt:FAC in general


But Elen of the Roads says he's not to be blocked for that or for a few copyvios here and there!

but, but! There's ax grinding against SandyGeorgia by three who are three grinding an axe: Rlevse, TCO who unvanished, and Alarbus

Wait! She forgot to mention Wehwalt. (This should distract them all from Malleus's cunt problem at the Civility Arbcom)

Where do we find the SPI? Wasn't that the one that TCO wrongly accused of being Mattisse (which was goofy as all heck), bringing Risker down on his head? In other words, I belive someone has checkuser data on BarkingMoon, and can say where he geolocates

Matisse must be climbing the walls!

From User talk:Raul654:
Raul loves to break out the pitchforks. Someone should stick a fork in him, he's stuck them in so many others, there are only a few Wikipedians who have done more damage than him.

Well, he hasn't been "confirmed as a sockpuppet" as Raul654 claims.


The real problem is that PumpkinSky was one of 4 editors who dared to oppose Raul's "Director for Live" Rfc

The bloody nerve! So Raul654 and SandyGeorgia et al are going to pick them off one by one. All the other FAC slaves kowtowed.

All evidence is that PumpkinSky was extremely productive and an asset to wp.

Others found him kind, gracious and helpful


But SandyGeorgia sees it all as a plot against her and FAC

No wonder wp is dying! Drive off the productive editors!

Once again, vested Admin Moni3 uses her admin tools to block at SandyGeorgia's beckening! Blocks PumpkinSky!

It is interesting they tagged the account http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PumpkinSky
The tag claims he's blocked, but he is not, and hopefully will not be.
After all Prioryman  (T-C-L-K-R-D) AKA Vanished user 03 AKA ChriO also came back and is allowed to stay.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...er%3APumpkinSky

PumpkinSky has been blocked since 00:00, 2 February 2012 UTC.

Oh well... But how he abuses multiple accounts? His other accounts are blocked, and he was not banned or something. Why ChriO was treated differently?

There hasn't been a CU; it is merely vested admin's Moni3's abuse of admin tools (once again) . There's no proof that I'm aware of.

Rlevse was accused of plagiarism, while ChrisO/Prioryman merely engaged in abusing BLPs, edit warring, and POV editing. I guess there is a difference in severity.

Accused (by SandyGeorgia) but not proved.

The vast amount of his mainspace edits were constructive, says CU Amalthea.

Where is the CU, or is this another instance of SandyGeorgia manipulating Arbcom and everyone else to block a constructive editor because of one of her peeves?

The Arbcom is being totalling undermined and has lost all credibility (if they had any.)

But what is more severe?

And what this https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w...oldid=474489625 is about? Is TungstenCarbide is also Rlevse
Ah, I see, wikipidiots believed that PumknPi (T-C-L-K-R-D) is PumpkinSky (T-C-L-K-R-D) because their user names are alike, but now they confirmed PumknPi (T-C-L-K-R-D) is not PumpkinSky (T-C-L-K-R-D) , which means PumknPi (T-C-L-K-R-D) is not Rlevse, but then it means that PumpkinSky (T-C-L-K-R-D) whoever he is was not abusing multiple accounts, and should be unblocked.

Accused is not the same as proven. PumpkinSky was accused by SandyGeorgia. But so far the checks on his edits have not revealed massive copyvio. When SandyGeorgia blanked one of his DYKs on the main page, the evidence of copyvio was borderline - something any of us could have mistakenly done.

I can't let this slide. Everyone outside of the Wikipedia-world knows what plagiarism is. No one outside of the Wikipedia world will know what any of the these "abusing BLPs, edit warring, and POV editing" buzzwords are supposed to mean. Couldn't you have said, "defamation, arguing, and inserting personal bias"?

Poor guy.... goes to show you that Randy's wiki-addiction is stronger than any principles he claimed to have, as he was an arbitrator who came down particularly hard on returning "vanished" users.

Randy's problem is that he's not particularly smart (witness the whole Randy in Boise situation, and not knowing what plagiarism is). That the guy feels that he must write "Featured Articles" is a symptom of Wikipedia's perverse system of climbing the ladder.

As for Mr. Raul:



Well you can't remember because this is another one of your fantasies.... (we can ask Everyking about Raul's "recollections"). To set the chain of events straight, Rlevse said he'd quit, then started editing again a few days later, then "vanished".

Funny that. Wikipedia's principle that discourages "vanished" or "banned" or "blocked" from editing is so weirdly moralistic. It's not like it's some minor little corner of the internet that's easy to ignore. Especially not so if the person trying to do the ignoring has dedicated a significant amount of time in the past to learning the way editing the website works.

Or simply 'disagreeing with Cla68'.

It's the Great Pumpkin, Jimmy Wales!

It looks that rather sooner than later they will have to stop blocking socks of banned editors simply because most "new" editors will be socks of old, banned ones.

just a coinkidink - although I'm tempted to have some fun with this. There are a whole bunch of variations on that account name and only one of them is me - just goes to show how gullible and idiotic some of these blocking admins are.

Oh, and by the way, Tnxman307 is a Bastard. He made me reboot my modem and get a new account - I want those 45 seconds of my life back, dammit.

Look at the FAC crowd who blocked Rlevse without a CU

This is totally corrupt!

I wonder how many editors have been blocked/banned without any kind of due process but merely out of whim.

SandyGeorge has been warned to stop the personal attacks, calling editors socks without any attempt at proof, by Elen of the Roads

Yet the same Elen supported the block

Raul addes sockpuppet tag to BarkingMoon - tho there's no evidence he's Rlevse's sockpuppet

Tnxman is another "evil patroller". Blocking people forever seems to make his little pee-pee hard.

This thread is veering toward Annex material. You folks are talking about Raul and SandyGeorgia as if they were "celebrities". Not recommended.

Not as celebrities, but as chronic abusers of power and purveyors of corruption that serve to drive other editors away and contribute to the nasty atmosphere at wp.

Here are Raul654 and Moni3 tag teaming to label PumpkinSky as a sock of Rlevse

Rlevse has been an enormous positive contributor to wp, whatever his human faults. Treating him this way diminishes wp.

And as someone said above, at this point many/most new editors that are able to stick it out are socks anyway, this is an exercise in vindictiveness.

This ganging up on particular editors is unseemly, merely because of a personal grudge.

How exactly? You mean the 'Awesome Wikipedian' awards?

Well, ok, I received an "Awesome Wikipedian Award".

But also, just look at the kerfufle that SandyGeorgia kicked up about copyvio:

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/PumpkinSky

Look at the huge number of edits PumpkinSky made (whether or not it is Relvse). Nothing so far has been found to be a major problem. Just because PumpkinSky disagreed with Raul and SandyGeorgia. Really? It's for the good of the 'pedia?

Good for you. Thread annexed, per [[WR:ANNEX]].

Why were these edits oversighted?

They weren't, but they were revdel'd.

OMG

In the email exchange, Will Beback threatens Rlevse that if he doesn't leave the project, Will will publicly release details he dug up about Wikipedia editing by Rlevse's wife. Rlevse, understandably angered by the threat, then curses at Will Beback.

This is unnerving. I'm actually starting to feel bad for Rlevse, or at least his wife. And I certainly don't like him, and I especially didn't like him when he was on ArbCom running around yelling about "banned means banned" and being a generally abusive asshole. Now that he's down on the ground though... yeah, I feel a little bad for him - some kind of boyscout code or someting. Especially since I'm not too keen on some of the other players on the other side of this equation and how they've acted. And no, I don't mean Sandy... oh ok, lemme say it, I mean Will Beback. And then I don't really like Cla's opportunistic questions to Will either which have more to do with grudges (however well deserved) than what this is really about... gee, I guess I just don't like anybody on there.

A plague on all six houses, and someone should probably point out to Rlevse personally that it's about time he made it official, made a real account here and started spilling the goodies under his Wikipedia name.

Here is the email exchange which was revdeleted:

Rlevse:
Will Beback sent this to me and I refuse to condone blackmail. Note I have twice in this thread asked him to leave me alone and yet he persists. The full thread is presented below with personal email redacted. Since he refuses to wait for Arbcom to handle this, which is what I wanted, I feel I have no other recourse other than to post here since he's clearly stated he will make the alleged posts without waiting for arbcom. He also appears to be ignoring an AN thread about me being banned where not banning is the clear consensus. Does this mean Will alone decides who edits and doesn't edit wiki and under only his conditions?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



· Thanks for admitting you were in shanigans behind my back! And AC was in on it!

You are now blocked from my email account. So don't bother sending me things again.

R



· ---- Will Beback <will's email> wrote:

The ArbCom is already aware of these allegations, which we all agreed need > not be aired publicly so long as Rlevse did not return, and which > NewYorkBrad told me would be dealt with if Rlevse should return. > > There is no question that Rlevse has returned, although the current account > has been blocked. > > Despite my request, Rlevse has not committed to not returning again. > Therefore these issues should be dealt with publicly to prevent a repeat. > > -Will >

Rlevse: I readily admitted I am PSKY so what's the news? I am not BM as you and others claim. > >You haven't violated anything? HA. Try blackmail of me. Hounding and stalking of >others, etc. >Now that your blackmail backfired, go for it. But be careful, it could and >should backfire on you. >AC--you have full notice of this. >Will--leave me alone, no, don't leave me alone, it'll be more proof of how you >hound and stalk other editors. >R

· ---- Will Beback <will's email> wrote:
> Ah, so it is you. > > I haven't engaged in any "shenanigans". I haven't violated any Wikipedia > policies, in letter or spirit. > > Since you do not seem to care about the issue, I will post a full account > of your work as a bureaucrat and the participation of JoJo. > > See also: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bur...#Rename_un-vani shed_editor > > >

Rlevse: Will: Proof I called your bluf and sent this to arbcom and am not afraid of you. > > > > Now you leave me alone. > > > > R


· > > ---- r's email wrote:
> > > Just so you guys know...do or not do what you want. All I ask for is a > > receipt that this was received and read. > > > > > > R > > >


· > > > > Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 18:35:10 -0500

> > > > From: <r's email> > > > > To: will's email > > > > Subject: Re: Wikipedia Rlevse > > > > > > > > And OBTW, I've sent this attempt at blackmail to arbcom. > > > > > > > >


· > > > > ---- r's email wrote:

> > > > > You are so full of shit and the biggest hypocrit ever. Your threats > > don't scare me. The good thing this every day more and more people become > > aware of your shenanigans. You can kiss my ass. > > > > > > > > > >


· > > > > > ---- Will Beback <Will's email> wrote:

> > > > > > After your original departure, I participated in the clean-up > > effort to address your many problem edits. As part of that effort I came > > across your history of closing AFDs as a bureaucrat, in particular those in > > which user:JoJo participated. I have not discussed this matter publicly, as > > I thought that there was no point in dragging your name through the mud if > > you'd left the project. But if you keep returning then the whole "RTV" > > thing was just a deception too and I will air it publicly. > > > > > > > > > > > > Since you've returned once, and possibly twice, without > > transparency I am now looking for an assurance from you that you will not > > do so again. Please reply at your earliest convenience. Otherwise I'll > > assume this is part of an ongoing pattern which is likely to be repeated, > > and act accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Will > > > > > >

I suspect that Rlevse would like to return to editing WP without being forced to grovel as Raul654 and others would probably require him to do otherwise, and is the usual procedure with indef blocked or RTV editors.

Vaguely reminiscent of the FT2 blackmail thing.

So, wikistalking and blackmail...

Nothing's too shitty for the regulars.

Yup. But in the big scheme of things he's not exactly the kind of former Wiki editor one can muster much sympathy for. Sort of like Rodhullandemu but different issues. I dunno, it's just a faction fight among the inner circle. I'm not sure why we should give a shit. Probably just annex it.

About the Will Beback stuff. Will Beback says he notified the Committee about the Jojo stuff and they (specifically NewYorkBrad) said they would address it if Rlevse returned. Rlevse returned. Will neglected to remember that ArbCom had said they would handle it (if, in fact, they really said or meant that) and jumped right into it, utilizing WP's old school methods of intimidation, coercion, and threats of wiki-humiliation, with which he appears to be familiar.

You have to understand it from Will's perspective. It was his information. He found it! It belonged to him to utilize it as he saw fit. It fits in with what Kelly Martin has said in this forum about Wikipedians using and trading information for their personal agendas.

You could extend this principle in all sorts of ways, even into real life. You could say e.g. that when different people belong to the same political party, and clearly vote not because of specific issues but simply because they trust the party they are voting for, then this is 'meatpuppeting'. It violates the 'crowdsourcing' principle that every actor in the game must act on the basis of issues and content alone, and not other things like trust, personal relationships, geography etc. This way we could ban all political parties whatsoever.

Ideally, there would just be one party, the Wikipedia party, and any vote against that party is punishable by banning, execution, imprisonment, forcible dismemberment and disembowelling. The possibilities are endless and interesting, as well as entertaining. Let's have some more of this please.

Meanwhile, it seems that at least one of the arbitrators might see this as the last straw. I was just starting to wonder why we hadn't heard about the Timidguy/Beback thing, but apparently there was more evidence coming in.

Let's cut to the chase: anyone got some bikini photos of Rlevse's wife?

Wikipedia would be a much nicer place if it gave the boot to its veteran bullies and blackmailers, instead of their victims. I hope Rlevse is able to find a way to continue contributing to the project.

Don't hold your breath on this. As one of my friends said :"Of course, Wikipedia needs its bullies — it does not pay salaries, but there is the psychic pleasures of bullying. Obviously not everyone is a bully. There are some good-hearted admins. But the patterns of the social dynamics of Wikipedia are almost designed to cultivate a collection of bullies to do the work, and provide structural support for that bullying "

Every enduring Wikipedia problem results from lack of a reliable, efficient, fair decision-making process.

Lot's of people know this, few understand how to do it differently, and fewer still will actually do what would be necessary: set up such process, demonstrate it, and use it to beneficial effect. Instead, it's much easier to just complain about what *they* do.


That's fairly accurate.

Funny, but the Delanoy Brothers' connection came out here on WR - straight from the Horsey's mouth, too!

Have they actually outed themselves on WP? Or is MBisanz just repeating what he read here?

That looks pretty serious. Is Davies an Arb? I guess he must be.

Well I'd like to know how PumpkinSky (apparently Rlevse) visited all sorts of HELL on FAC as SandyGeorgia claims and destroyed the moral at FAC and the "collegial" atmosphere. Is someone just questioning the fossilized procedures of FAC or daring to vote against Raul's "Director for Life" RFC enough to decimate the place?

SandyGeorgia is blaming Sue Gardner, Elen of the Roads, Risker, an arbitration in 2009 (or 2010, she can't remember which) as well as Rlevse, Rlevse's wife, BarkingMoon, PumpkinSky, Wehwalt, TCO, Alarbus‎, Matisse, Arbcom, Ched (am I forgetting someone?) Oh, yeah, various arbs.- all these for the current malaise at FAC.

If SandyGeorgia had just shut her mouth and not posted everywhere about all of this, there won't be any fuss or demoralization at FAC.

Maybe she's (successfully) distracting the Arbcom and wasting their energy, so they'll never get it together to post a decision on Malleus's cunt arbitration. All the trouble she causes makes Malleus look like an angel!

He doesn't try to viciously destroy "enemies" as she does. He just spouts off a little.

Wikipedia is pretty efficient at turning bullies/blackmailers into victims and vice-versa. Rlevse may be a prime example of this having bullied plenty of people himself while he occupied the upper-echelons of the star chamber.

+14334534

You're one to talk......

I would have talked about the TimidGuy case, but I'm not ADHD enough to understand it.

DO NOT feel sorry for Randy Everette. He has abused process many, many times in the past.
This is what happens to a dysfunctional organization--it becomes more dysfunctional, not less.
The trolls and bullies force out the honest people, and then they fight among themselves.

I would dare to predict that, if they can't deal with Will decisively, the whole thing will start to decay.
Any little shreds of "civility" on AN will disappear, and the POVers and patrollers will start battling in earnest.
And away will go the remaining content-writers.

When Daniel Brandt "outs" Wikipedians for a good cause, he gets banned.

When Will Beback "outs" Wikipedians out of pure spite, he gets praised.

I don't get it, Big Dan.