Where did Jimbo say that?

So I'm guessing that one or both of two things have happened:[list]
[*] They are both — if ever they were 2 — already augmenting the portfolios of some old parallel or sleeper accounts, even better protected than their former accounts — and notice how the diversions of Wikipufferphish have almost made the use of TOR defensible now, especially for "special" cases.

Jonny

Why farming?

Factory farming is apparently cruelty to animals, according to SlimVirgin at least. So she had to abuse the 99% of editors who disagree with her, and then claim she was being bullied. Just because she insists its cruelty to animals, while everyone else in the world insists its not. She also needs the Wikipedia article to suggest its cruelty to animals.

I'm afraid I have to agree in this case - factory farming, especially of pigs and chickens, is exceptionally nasty. It's often enough to turn people who see it close-up into vegetarians.

Personally I can't, or at least don't, fault Slimmy for her position(s) on animal rights... though the tactics are pretty much the same, of course.

I don't blame Slim for her opinions on animal rights. I do blame her for censoring and slandering any other opinion other than her own.

Anyway, it looks like SlimVirgin is still on a semi-holiday:

Special:Contributions/SlimVirgin

Has she changed her account? Is she just trying a guilt trip similar to the one she tried in July 2006? Or has she really quit?

Linda has returned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ions/SlimVirgin

Linda has returned.

Special:Contributions/SlimVirgin

Nah, I can actually read all the 'tribs for today on one small page. More likely she has hired some WP:Don'tBeADecoy to keep her main sock warm. An obvious diversion.

We Ain't Gonna Bee WikiPhooled Agin …

Jonny

Ahh cunning, so you are saying she is giving the impression she is on holiday and in fact she is still editing away like a maniac? I presume though she would have to confine herself to mundane generic tasks because if she starts editing articles she knows about well, everyone will know.

And what about Dmcdevit, the admin who blocked me? He hasn't edited since this on 20 July...

Has she changed her account? Is she just trying a guilt trip similar to the one she tried in July 2006? Or has she really quit?

Still no Jayjg on the horizon.

A good post on wikien-l that insists on accountability and transparency concerning Jayjg departure.

In a tightly reasoned response Jimbo says "Troll, Troll, Troll …"

A good post on wikien-l that insists on accountability and transparency concerning Jayjg departure.

In a tightly reasoned response Jimbo says "Troll, Troll, Troll..."

[WikiEN-l] Jayjg is AWOL
Frank Bellowes fbellowes at gmail.com
Mon Aug 27 17:52:53 UTC 2007

Previous message: [WikiEN-l] Template standardisation draft/proposal
Next message: [WikiEN-l] Jayjg is AWOL
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

User:Jayjg has apparently been missing from Wikipedia since August 4th
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jayjg, shortly
before an ArbComm in which he is named as a party formally opened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...ns_of_apartheid
Perhaps also not coincidentally, one of the other editors named in the
case, User:Urthogie, has also disappeared without a trace.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Urthogie

Unlike Urthogie, Jayjg is a trusted user and admin who has access to
tools such as Oversight and Checkuser and is also on the ArbComm
mailing list as a former member of that body. He's well aware of the
custom of announcing when you are on "Wikibreak" or "Wikiholiday" but
has not posted any such announcement.

Further, he is also now at the center of a very serious allegation
that he misused his Oversight tools in order to coverup an old
incident of abusive sockpuppetry by one of his friends
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...ckpuppet.28s.29

The Sockpuppet case is old and evidently occurred when SV was still a
new editor though, given that she used an "alternate account" to
support her main account on various pages including "double voting" in
the instance of a Featured Article nomination, it would have been nice
had she simply publicly admitted her mistake and apologized. Instead,
she has sent out private emails explaining away the "alternate
account" by saying wikipedia was different then, she was new and her
double voting was simply a "mistake". I think we can excuse an old
mistake but a bit of contrition would have been nice.

In any case, the real problem is not SV's sockpuppetry but Jayjg's
agreement, in the past year, to coverup any evidence of this by
oversighting various edits.

Several respected editors have expressed concern about Jay's behavior
in the ANI discussion:

Gmaxwell: "Except it's already been before Arbcom and it appears that
they failed us. When oversight was first introduced the logs were
public. I noticed Jayjg's mass over-sighting of seemingly harmless
edits like spelling corrections with an summary of "pi". I brought the
issue up with Brion, who thought it looked odd so he temporally
removed oversight from Jayjg. [23]. Arbcom looked at the issue, and
apparently decided that it was all okay. Jay's access was restored,
the revisions stayed oversighted, and he continued mass over-sighting
old edits like these. I trusted then. Having seen the evidence I think
it would be unwise to extend the same trust again. --Gmaxwell 03:03,
25 August 2007 (UTC)"

"Although Sarah's actions are old enough to be uninteresting, as Dan
pointed out above, the possible appearance of coverup is very
interesting and important and should be fully resolved." (Gmaxwell)

Thatcher131: "Overly aggressive use of oversight by Jayjg was brought
up privately as an issue when oversight was first instituted, but the
concerns were apparently dismissed. This should be looked into again."

Jayjg really needs to explain himself but he has evidently decided to
abandon wikipedia, at least for the period of the ArbCom case against
him. Apart from an initial post opposing the ArbComm taking on the
case he has made no contribution to the ArbComm case, not to the
Workshop or Evidence page. In the past admins who have failed to
participate in an ArbComm case involving them have been desysopped.

Given Jayjg's unexplained absence, his failure to respond to one
ArbCom case against him, the serious questions that exist considering
his use of Oversight in another matter and the possibility that an
account that has quite a number of tools attached has been abandoned
and may be usurped by a hacker I'm wondering whether anything will be
done? Will Jayjg be desysopped and have his tools removed (and be
unsubscribed from ArbComm-L) at least as a precaution until he returns
and explains himself? Will he be deemed to have abdicated his
responsibilities by refusing to respond to an ArbComm case against him
and refusing to explain the Oversight situation?

At the very least Jimbo should direct the ArbComm to examine Jay's
possible abuse of his Oversight tools and investigate other possible
abuses. The dereliction of duty by a senior admin is a serious
problem which should not be swept under the carpet or overlooked.
Doing so only further damages Wikipedia's credibility in a year in
which we have taken a number of serious blows.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Previous message: [WikiEN-l] Template standardisation draft/proposal
Next message: [WikiEN-l] Jayjg is AWOL
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the WikiEN-l mailing list

[WikiEN-l] Jayjg is not AWOL
Jimmy Wales jwales at wikia.com
Mon Aug 27 18:11:42 UTC 2007

Previous message: [WikiEN-l] Jayjg is AWOL
Next message: [WikiEN-l] Jayjg is not AWOL
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let me nip this in the bud.

Frank Bellowes wrote:
> At the very least Jimbo should direct the ArbComm to examine Jay's
> possible abuse of his Oversight tools and investigate other possible
> abuses. The dereliction of duty by a senior admin is a serious
> problem which should not be swept under the carpet or overlooked.
> Doing so only further damages Wikipedia's credibility in a year in
> which we have taken a number of serious blows.

This entire email was ludicrous, frankly.

Jayjg (and SlimVirgin) have both been responsive and participating in
the discussion about this.

If people wonder why we do some discussions like this privately, Frank's
email is a good example of why... trolling.


--Jimbo



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Previous message: [WikiEN-l] Jayjg is AWOL
Next message: [WikiEN-l] Jayjg is not AWOL
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the WikiEN-l mailing list

A good post on wikien-l that insists on accountability and transparency concerning Jayjg departure.

In a tightly reasoned response Jimbo says "Troll, Troll, Troll..."

Jimbo is not someone who makes "waves" rather he follows in the community consensus, and right now, the community hasn't completely rejected Jayjg, and thus Jimbo won't. Jimbo is a classic leader who figures out where everyone is going and then pretends he is in front. Get everyone going in the direction you want to go, and then Jimbo will fall into line. It's pretty simple.

Jimbo's failure to acknowledge a problem here is simply evidence that one hasn't made a convincing enough case to the wider community.

I disagree with your interpretation Sensemaker- Jimbo personally intervened to ensure Jayjg was reappointed to the Arbcom despite not getting a majority approval from the community.

The implication of the emails is that Jayjg is "actively conversing" on the ArbCom list.

I smell a rat.

That list needs a leak immediately for the good of Wikipedia. Every time something goes private we need for people to be willing to spill everything, until the abusers have no choice but to leave or go public.

We should never ever give up. Never surrender to Wikipedia until they are driven in public before everyone.

That was literally years ago. The situation is different now.

Why would it be different? I believe Jimbo was supporting Jayjg for political and/or financial reasons so I doubt either of those situations has changed.

Jimbo by bypassing the community's wishes by forcing Jayjg's arbiter role on Wikipedia clearly doesn't give a shit about the Wikipedia community as such. The only solution long term will be to either completely out Jayjg (and all subsequent usernames he may take, to keep him under a visible leash so that he can't abuse the project), and/or to get the Board of Trustees and Wikipedia to simply dump Jimmy from having any legal or board control in any respect.

Jimbo Wale's usefulness to Wikipedia has expired.

Why would it be different? I believe Jimbo was supporting Jayjg for political and/or financial reasons so I doubt either of those situations has changed.

There is no need for a public flogging of Jayjg in vengence, accountability should be enough.

I find you, Infoboy, to be a bit extreme. I think things can be handled properly by ArbCom and Jimbo if they look at the facts. There is no need for a public flogging of Jayjg in vengence, accountability should be enough.

If it was for financial reasons that is a big story. Did Jimbo know Jayjg's identity at that time? That isn't clear to me and I haven't seen any evidence of that yet, but if you have some that would be juicy bit of gossip.

I really do think that Jimbo supports Jayjg for the same reason that Jimbo stood behind Essjay for so long, just because that is what Jimbo does. It doesn't have to be a conspiracy. Essjay was just a kid with too much time on his hands, but even then Jimbo stood by him.

And David Gerard demonstrates that the attack site is Wikipedia, not Wikipedia Review:

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...ust/079768.html

Go away, you trolling fuckwit.


- d.

I believe Jimbo and the WMF board knows and in fact requires that everyone on the Arbitration committee disclose their identity, so yes he would have known who Jay was.

{{Fact}}

Wow, reading Jimbo's comments really makes one have confidence in the project doesn't it:

> Don't members of the project deserve some sort of explanation,
> particularly when he is under scrutiny in one ArbComm case and on ANI?

When there is something to explain, we will explain it. Jeez.

> If there is no transparency then there is no ability for other admins
> or users to respond (and possibly refute) whatever private
> explanations Jayjg may have proffered for his actions. This is not how
> an accountable, transparent project works.

Stop trolling. Good grief. We are having a private discussion.

--Jimbo

Well if they weren't checking the real life identities of people who can check people's ip addresses and make the final decision on content of an encyclopedia that can be seen by so many people that would be worrying wouldn't it?

What may be more worrying is that those who have the ability to appoint those persons to the committee are not trustworthy persons themselves.

Remember that Jimbo also initially thought that Essjay's lies where no big deal.

I've been swapping some e-mails with Jimmy Wales, and in one of them he wrote:

Keep in mind that I strongly dispute the New Yorker's version of the events in question, and so drawing too many conclusions from that is something you should be careful about.

I really do think that Jimbo supports Jayjg for the same reason that Jimbo stood behind Essjay for so long, just because that is what Jimbo does. It doesn't have to be a conspiracy. Essjay was just a kid with too much time on his hands, but even then Jimbo stood by him.

On one hand, he seems well-intentioned.
On the other hand, he ignores very obvious problems.