Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Andrew Gray: Leave, all of you
> Wikimedia Discussion > General Discussion
Infoboy
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...ust/078379.html

QUOTE
On 01/08/07, Steve Summit <scs at eskimo.com> wrote:

> Though one or two of the questions were snide, I have to assume
> that at least a few of them were in good faith: editors unaware
> of Slim's storied history, who came across the Slashdot thread
> and thought she might like to know about it.

Okay, cards on the table, time for a slightly embarrassing admission.
*I* don't know SlimVirgin's storied history. Or, oh, whoever else it
is we seem to discuss regularly; all the participants in that
attack-sites debacle seem to have backstories I don't understand. I
basically don't remember much our internal politics before a few
months back; it all seemed to drift past me and/or I didn't care. Do I
have to lose my cabal license?

There are a large number of people - long-experienced editors, with
good standing in the community and clearly not crazy - who basically
have no idea what the *fuck* all this is about, and are not happy
about it all. Oh, we recognise the names as "harbingers of trouble",
since wherever they're mentioned a lot of smoke and mirrors and
violent disagreement about internal meta-stuff follows, but we have no
idea of the context or the history behind it all. It doesn't mean
anything to us; it's just... noise.

But it's noise that's swallowing our project and wasting our time. We
have a community on enwiki of, what, ten thousand active editors? How
come obscure political bickering centering around half a dozen of them
seems to take up so much time?

When people try - honestly and in good faith - to find out what on
earth is going on, they get rebuffed, yelled at, discouraged. We grow
up an elaborate culture of secrecy - this sort of thing must be Very
Significant, all the noise made about it, but yet it isn't ever
discussed freely or explained; confusing things like oversight are
thrown around to further confuse matters. I can see why people would
end up reading Wikipedia Review to try and understand what's going on.

All this is a net detriment to the project. It's internal
navel-gazing; most of us are oblivious to it or actively discouraged
from discussing it. It serves to reinforce the non-existent impression
of a central cabal, it wastes the time of productive editors, and it
provides an easy angle for trolls to disrupt and smear our work. And,
of course, the "attacks" perpetuate it all.

Wikipedia has never been bylined. We have a culture that discourages
the individual ego; we are a collaborative work. This stupid situation
around a tiny handful of editors is consuming the project's resources,
burning up our goodwill and credibility both among the outside world
and among our own community. It's time to put a stop to it.

Please leave. All of you. The project is more important than your
pride, and you are dragging it down; this situation is never going to
improve unless someone walks away.

Tidy up the loose ends, sign out of your account, and walk away. Take
a break. It's August, the sun's shining, it's the perfect season to go
for a walk in the hills and reflect. Then come back under another
name, if you want to continue working here - I would be sorry to see
hard-working editors leave. Right now, you are *net detriments* to the
project, no matter how many thousands of edits you rack up; I'm sorry
to say it, and I feel a heel for doing it, but it's true.

This is not an attack. This request has been a long time in the
making, and it is perfectly serious. Please treat it as such.

--
- Andrew Gray
Somey
Extraordinary!

And later, he adds this:
QUOTE
I am not calling for this because it's what Wikipedia Review demand - I don't know what Wikipedia Review want, to be frank.

Of course, this is part of the essential problem. Despite the fact that Mr. Gray's suggestion is one of the best ideas WikiEN-L has ever produced, he still buys into the idea that this website is an organized, united, ideologically-monolithic community/entity that "wants" things, and no doubt carries various other anthropomorphic attributes.

We're just a bunch of people who, for the most part, don't think Wikipedia is the greatest thing since sliced bread. It should be obvious to anyone that we're not a homogenous entity, but to them, it isn't -- probably because they're the ones being criticized, and it feels nicer to think of oneself as being criticized by "it" instead of "them."

Still, the predictable response has already been posted, to the effect that "appeasement is not going to work." I disagree, however: Look at how little criticism we've had of the BLP policy since it was liberalized. Look at how few people have been "outed" since then (bearing in mind that SlimVirgin was identified well over a year ago, and we had actually redacted her name from the website prior to this latest incident).

To be honest, if the dozen or so high-ranking "cabalists" were to leave, and they do all know who they are, that in combination with the BLP improvements could easily cause this website to become a ghost town within six months.
Disillusioned Lackey
They sound a bit upset.

Probably quite a shock to realize that the transparent egalitarian ideal is a crock of peaches.
Infoboy
QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 1st August 2007, 12:04pm) *

To be honest, if the dozen or so high-ranking "cabalists" were to leave, and they do all know who they are, that in combination with the BLP improvements could easily cause this website to become a ghost town within six months.


Yep, and they simply don't realize it. 99% of the Wikipedia drama, fighting, and nonsense are caused by less than 1% of the active user base.

* SlimVirgin
* Jayjg
* Ryulong
* Tony Sidaway
* Cyde (seems to have grown much quieter)


At the top of the list.
blissyu2
I can't remember making any demands. Should we make demands? Let's see. Here's my list of things that I'd like:

1) Unban all of my accounts and promise never to ban me again
2) Delete & oversight any Requests for Arbitration against me
3) Ban Antaeus Feldspar and Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters for harassment
4) De-sysop Thebainer, Longhair, Tannin, ARYaktos and anyone else who got made in to admin because of how abusive they were towards me
5) A public apology from Jimbo
6) The User:Zordrac/Poetlister page to be undeleted
7) For Poetlister, RachelBrown, Taxwoman and all the others to be unblocked
8) For Runcorn to be unblocked
9) For Karmafist to be unblocked
10) For Everyking, Karmafist and Guanaco, all of whom were de-sysopped for posting on Wikipedia Review, to be reinstated as sysops
11) For Guy, Arniep, Vulturell, and every other user who was banned for protesting the unfair ban of Poetlister to have their bans lifted
12) For Port Arthur massacre, Lockerbie Bombing, 9/11, George W Bush and all other controversial articles to no longer be controlled
13) For all of SlimVirgin's and SlimV's edits to be un-deleted and un-oversighted
14) For Wikipedia Review to have its own article on Wikipedia
15) For Blu Aardvark, Mistress Selina Kyle, Rootology, Badlydrawnjeff, and any other users who were banned for doing the right thing to have their bans lifted
16) For Wikipedia to de-sysop Raul654, Snowspinner, SlimVirgin, Jayjg, MONGO, Crum375 and anyone else who is severely abusive and controlling
17) For Crum375 to be banned as a sock puppet of SlimVirgin
18) For all policy pages (e.g. WP:V) to no longer be controlled
19) To remove any hint of WP:BADSITES
20) To get rid of the WP:No Legal Threats rule
21) To seriously alter the WP:NPOV rule to allow a new rule WP:EXPERTS to allow for people who actually know what they are talking about to contribute
22) For Wikipedia to allow and acknowledge actual criticism

There. Can anyone think of any other demands?

Wow, I didn't know we were allowed demands. Who are we holding hostage anyway? I can't remember trying to blackmail anyone or doing anything. It is so nice to get to make demands for free.
Somey
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Wed 1st August 2007, 2:24pm) *
Wow, I didn't know we were allowed demands. Who are we holding hostage anyway?

I've got a fairly cute brunette down in my basement at the moment, but that has nothing to do with Wikipedia, really.

Well, at least I don't think it does, anyway...
BobbyBombastic
Just saw this on Kelly's blog where she discusses this and touches on another blog post where Ben Yates is advocating that the identity of admins be disclosed to avoid this type of thing.

A comment on Kelly's blog that may get some attention:

QUOTE
Anonymous said...

...The conflicts are personal, and they are focused on the persons involved in this conflict...

I've had the impression for a long time, Kelly, that you have some visceral, pathological hatred of Jay and Slim that is entirely personal. It's just my opinion from watching you over the last few years.

But maybe I'm wrong, maybe you're interested in the well being of the project and view these two as a threat to it. But I think it's more likely that they rejected you in some way. Perhaps Jayjg let you know that edit summaries like this and this don't rise to the maturity and decorum expected of arbitrators?

Whatever it is, Kelly, maybe you could convince that I'm wrong, and that you don't have a personally motivated cocklebur shoved up your ass about these two.
blissyu2
There was one good reply to Andrew Gray's message:

QUOTE
I would like to second all of what Andrew has said above.

This incessant cacophony of personal drama is drowning out useful
conversations actually relevant to the building of the project. It is
causing stress and emotional pain for many of us. It's completely
unnecessary, and is within your power to stop. Hand in your bits, and
step away from the project for three months. Get some fresh air. Say
hi to your friends and family. And don't worry about what's happening
here, because others will be rising to take your place in sharing the
workload; that's how we work. Go. We can afford to spare you, for as
long as you need. We'll see you again, because those who care about
this project can never stay away permanently. But staying in the
heart of the fire out of pride, or ego, or vanity, is folly, and can
only lead to madness.


Ah, the Wikipedia mailing list is a goldmine right now. And the sad thing is that they are banning this on-wiki so it looks even worse for them that this is on the mailing list (and far more public).
the fieryangel
I really think that it's too late for that. With the flap about the Bulgarian nurses and all of that which was just published in Le Monde, this is going to be an issue. Floflo is French. This is big news in France. If somebody makes a WP connection with this, she's going to be the center of something that she probably didn't even consider....

Even if they all leave, it's not going to go away.

All that WE can go is to keep the heat going....but I think that the circumstances have already cooked a good number of gooses already.....
LamontStormstar
QUOTE(Infoboy @ Wed 1st August 2007, 12:13pm) *

Yep, and they simply don't realize it. 99% of the Wikipedia drama, fighting, and nonsense are caused by less than 1% of the active user base.

* SlimVirgin
* Jayjg
* Ryulong
* Tony Sidaway
* Cyde (seems to have grown much quieter)


At the top of the list.



It's also all the people who follow and support them

Think of Hilter. Hitler started something and everyone followed. (By the way Goodwin's law = automatic victory in any argument)


QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Wed 1st August 2007, 12:24pm) *

I can't remember making any demands. Should we make demands? Let's see. Here's my list of things that I'd like:

1) Unban all of my accounts and promise never to ban me again
2) Delete & oversight any Requests for Arbitration against me
3) Ban Antaeus Feldspar and Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters for harassment
4) De-sysop Thebainer, Longhair, Tannin, ARYaktos and anyone else who got made in to admin because of how abusive they were towards me
5) A public apology from Jimbo
6) The User:Zordrac/Poetlister page to be undeleted
7) For Poetlister, RachelBrown, Taxwoman and all the others to be unblocked
8) For Runcorn to be unblocked
9) For Karmafist to be unblocked
10) For Everyking, Karmafist and Guanaco, all of whom were de-sysopped for posting on Wikipedia Review, to be reinstated as sysops
11) For Guy, Arniep, Vulturell, and every other user who was banned for protesting the unfair ban of Poetlister to have their bans lifted
12) For Port Arthur massacre, Lockerbie Bombing, 9/11, George W Bush and all other controversial articles to no longer be controlled
13) For all of SlimVirgin's and SlimV's edits to be un-deleted and un-oversighted
14) For Wikipedia Review to have its own article on Wikipedia
15) For Blu Aardvark, Mistress Selina Kyle, Rootology, Badlydrawnjeff, and any other users who were banned for doing the right thing to have their bans lifted
16) For Wikipedia to de-sysop Raul654, Snowspinner, SlimVirgin, Jayjg, MONGO, Crum375 and anyone else who is severely abusive and controlling
17) For Crum375 to be banned as a sock puppet of SlimVirgin
18) For all policy pages (e.g. WP:V) to no longer be controlled
19) To remove any hint of WP:BADSITES
20) To get rid of the WP:No Legal Threats rule
21) To seriously alter the WP:NPOV rule to allow a new rule WP:EXPERTS to allow for people who actually know what they are talking about to contribute
22) For Wikipedia to allow and acknowledge actual criticism

There. Can anyone think of any other demands?

Wow, I didn't know we were allowed demands. Who are we holding hostage anyway? I can't remember trying to blackmail anyone or doing anything. It is so nice to get to make demands for free.



If that's too complicated for them, I suggest: take the hands of all the abusive administrators, and with a hammer break all of their fingers.
Jonny Cache
QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Wed 1st August 2007, 10:19pm) *

If that's too complicated for them, I suggest: take the hands of all the abusive administrators, and with a hammer break all of their fingers.


You think they type with their phingers ???

Jonny cool.gif
blissyu2
It looks like Kelly Martin's blog is about to be labelled an attack site.

Will Kelly Martin be banned out of this? If so, Kelly Martin automatically gets invited here. We can still hate her, but she should be participating here if she gets banned for being a critic.
LamontStormstar
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Thu 2nd August 2007, 2:26am) *

It looks like Kelly Martin's blog is about to be labelled an attack site.

Will Kelly Martin be banned out of this? If so, Kelly Martin automatically gets invited here. We can still hate her, but she should be participating here if she gets banned for being a critic.


If Kelly gets banned for complaining about admin abuse, out of respect people at least should refer to her by her new gender instead of her old.
BobbyBombastic
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Thu 2nd August 2007, 9:26am) *

It looks like Kelly Martin's blog is about to be labelled an attack site.

Not according to Slim [1]
QUOTE

:::Kelly Martin criticizes; she doesn't defame, she doesn't out people, she doesn't stalk them or encourage others to do so. There's no comparison. [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] <sup><font color="Purple">[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|(talk)]]</font></sup> 01:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


I wonder if she still thinks that...
GlassBeadGame
In terms of Jayjg recent hyperbole Kelly Martin has "raped" SlimVirgin. This despite her unusually rigorous efforts to hide the weapon.
blissyu2
QUOTE(BobbyBombastic @ Fri 3rd August 2007, 3:24am) *

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Thu 2nd August 2007, 9:26am) *

It looks like Kelly Martin's blog is about to be labelled an attack site.

Not according to Slim [1]
QUOTE

:::Kelly Martin criticizes; she doesn't defame, she doesn't out people, she doesn't stalk them or encourage others to do so. There's no comparison. [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] <sup><font color="Purple">[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|(talk)]]</font></sup> 01:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


I wonder if she still thinks that...


You're linking to a quote from May. Kelly Martin's blog is in late July-early August. I'd like to see a response from SlimVirgin now about it. I have seen a few things on the mailing list that suggest that people are removing links to it on-wiki. I haven't found anything explicit though. But I am sure if you dug well enough, you could find the appropriate links.
Joseph100
QUOTE(Infoboy @ Wed 1st August 2007, 1:45pm) *

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...ust/078379.html

QUOTE
On 01/08/07, Steve Summit <scs at eskimo.com> wrote:

> Though one or two of the questions were snide, I have to assume
> that at least a few of them were in good faith: editors unaware
> of Slim's storied history, who came across the Slashdot thread
> and thought she might like to know about it.

Okay, cards on the table, time for a slightly embarrassing admission.
*I* don't know SlimVirgin's storied history. Or, oh, whoever else it
is we seem to discuss regularly; all the participants in that
attack-sites debacle seem to have backstories I don't understand. I
basically don't remember much our internal politics before a few
months back; it all seemed to drift past me and/or I didn't care. Do I
have to lose my cabal license?

There are a large number of people - long-experienced editors, with
good standing in the community and clearly not crazy - who basically
have no idea what the *fuck* all this is about, and are not happy
about it all. Oh, we recognise the names as "harbingers of trouble",
since wherever they're mentioned a lot of smoke and mirrors and
violent disagreement about internal meta-stuff follows, but we have no
idea of the context or the history behind it all. It doesn't mean
anything to us; it's just... noise.

But it's noise that's swallowing our project and wasting our time. We
have a community on enwiki of, what, ten thousand active editors? How
come obscure political bickering centering around half a dozen of them
seems to take up so much time?

When people try - honestly and in good faith - to find out what on
earth is going on, they get rebuffed, yelled at, discouraged. We grow
up an elaborate culture of secrecy - this sort of thing must be Very
Significant, all the noise made about it, but yet it isn't ever
discussed freely or explained; confusing things like oversight are
thrown around to further confuse matters. I can see why people would
end up reading Wikipedia Review to try and understand what's going on.

All this is a net detriment to the project. It's internal
navel-gazing; most of us are oblivious to it or actively discouraged
from discussing it. It serves to reinforce the non-existent impression
of a central cabal, it wastes the time of productive editors, and it
provides an easy angle for trolls to disrupt and smear our work. And,
of course, the "attacks" perpetuate it all.

Wikipedia has never been bylined. We have a culture that discourages
the individual ego; we are a collaborative work. This stupid situation
around a tiny handful of editors is consuming the project's resources,
burning up our goodwill and credibility both among the outside world
and among our own community. It's time to put a stop to it.

Please leave. All of you. The project is more important than your
pride, and you are dragging it down; this situation is never going to
improve unless someone walks away.

Tidy up the loose ends, sign out of your account, and walk away. Take
a break. It's August, the sun's shining, it's the perfect season to go
for a walk in the hills and reflect. Then come back under another
name, if you want to continue working here - I would be sorry to see
hard-working editors leave. Right now, you are *net detriments* to the
project, no matter how many thousands of edits you rack up; I'm sorry
to say it, and I feel a heel for doing it, but it's true.

This is not an attack. This request has been a long time in the
making, and it is perfectly serious. Please treat it as such.

--
- Andrew Gray


You (your beloved project) has sown a lot of bad and angry seed...

Now that seed is germinating and it will be a bumper crop of hate for the WackyWiki Farm.
BobbyBombastic
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Thu 2nd August 2007, 5:04pm) *

You're linking to a quote from May. Kelly Martin's blog is in late July-early August. I'd like to see a response from SlimVirgin now about it.


I did so to illustrate any hypocritical reaction that she is most likely sure to have. She has probably changed her opinion about now.

QUOTE
I have seen a few things on the mailing list that suggest that people are removing links to it on-wiki. I haven't found anything explicit though. But I am sure if you dug well enough, you could find the appropriate links.

Someone had removed Kelly's blog during the BADSITES thing because of her worst wikipedia in the world entry. I haven't seen anything recent, but it wouldn't surprise me.
blissyu2
Wow, she labelled Anthony as the worst wikipedian in the world? Is that the same Anthony that was commenting in that thread with all of the brilliant (and quotable) quotes? Is that the same Anthony that is on here?
BobbyBombastic
*nevermind* :-D
The Joy
I found this quote rather humorous. Gamaliel does realize that not everyone that posts here is out to destroy WP, right?

"If they are sensible, then why are they on Wikipedia Review?" -Gamaliel (source)

My reply to Gamaliel would be:

"Only Sith deal in absolutes!" -Obi-wan Kenobi, Revenge of the Sith
Cedric
QUOTE(BobbyBombastic @ Thu 2nd August 2007, 11:54am) *

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Thu 2nd August 2007, 9:26am) *

It looks like Kelly Martin's blog is about to be labelled an attack site.

Not according to Slim [1]
QUOTE

:::Kelly Martin criticizes; she doesn't defame, she doesn't out people, she doesn't stalk them or encourage others to do so. There's no comparison. [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] <sup><font color="Purple">[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|(talk)]]</font></sup> 01:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


I wonder if she still thinks that...

Not a chance. Scroll down a little to see that KM linked to Blissy's blog entry here summarizing coverage of the Slim/Linda "spy scandal". I'd say the gloves are about to come off.
blissyu2
QUOTE(Cedric @ Fri 3rd August 2007, 12:28pm) *

Not a chance. Scroll down a little to see that KM linked to Blissy's blog entry here summarizing coverage of the Slim/Linda "spy scandal". I'd say the gloves are about to come off.


Link?
jdrand
QUOTE(Infoboy @ Wed 1st August 2007, 12:13pm) *

QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 1st August 2007, 12:04pm) *

To be honest, if the dozen or so high-ranking "cabalists" were to leave, and they do all know who they are, that in combination with the BLP improvements could easily cause this website to become a ghost town within six months.


Yep, and they simply don't realize it. 99% of the Wikipedia drama, fighting, and nonsense are caused by less than 1% of the active user base.

* SlimVirgin
* Jayjg
* Ryulong
* Tony Sidaway
* Cyde (seems to have grown much quieter)


At the top of the list.

Definitely Ryulong. I have had contact with him.
FNORD23
QUOTE(Infoboy @ Wed 1st August 2007, 12:13pm) *

QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 1st August 2007, 12:04pm) *

To be honest, if the dozen or so high-ranking "cabalists" were to leave, and they do all know who they are, that in combination with the BLP improvements could easily cause this website to become a ghost town within six months.


Yep, and they simply don't realize it. 99% of the Wikipedia drama, fighting, and nonsense are caused by less than 1% of the active user base.

* SlimVirgin
* Jayjg
* Ryulong
* Tony Sidaway
* Cyde (seems to have grown much quieter)


At the top of the list.


You forgot:

MONGO
Morton Devonshire
Crockspot
Et Al
blissyu2
QUOTE(FNORD23 @ Fri 3rd August 2007, 9:14pm) *

You forgot:

MONGO
Morton Devonshire
Crockspot
Et Al


Et Al? Who is this Et Al guy? I keep seeing his name come up all the time! He seems to be responsible for everything bad that happens anywhere.

First he's on the list of most abusive users: "SlimVirgin, Jayjg, Et Al", then he's on the list of admins going crazy over userbox deletions: "Kelly Martin, Tony Sidaway, Et Al", then he's involved in a massive cover up of SlimVirgin posts: "Jayjg, ElinorD, Crum375, Et Al". And now this! I mean whoever this guy is, it seems that HE is the root of all of our problems! I mean we need to expose him, out him, and find out who this Et Al fellow is and bring him to justice!
LamontStormstar
I made a poll of who had done the most damage to wikipedia. I left out names I didn't know about, but SlimVirgin won by a landslide. I did have SlimVirgin and Jayjg condensed as one, though.

ElinorD has been drinking a lot of the coolaid lately. Her and Riana are some new people and whenever I look at block logs I see these two coming up a lot and I have never heard of them. Usually it's other people like Doc Glasslow, but the old people dissappeared and now it's these new girls.
blissyu2
I had never heard of ElinorD until this past week, when she suddenly popped up to mass delete, revert, threaten, and ban users for anything to do with SlimVirgin. Either she wants to get in to her pants, or she for some reason thinks that SV needs protecting. Maybe ElinorD has deduced that helping SlimVirgin gets you power.
Cedric
QUOTE(Joseph100 @ Thu 2nd August 2007, 12:06pm) *

You (your beloved project) has sown a lot of bad and angry seed...

Now that seed is germinating and it will be a bumper crop of hate for the WackyWiki Farm.

As was true in ages past, so it is true today: those that sow the wind shall reap the whirlwind.
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Thu 2nd August 2007, 9:28pm) *

QUOTE(Cedric @ Thu 2nd August 2007, 8:58pm) *

Not a chance. Scroll down a little to see that KM linked to Blissy's blog entry here summarizing coverage of the Slim/Linda "spy scandal". I'd say the gloves are about to come off.



Link?

It's still here. KM has changed the text since I last saw it, but the link is still there.
GlassBeadGame
QUOTE(Infoboy @ Wed 1st August 2007, 12:45pm) *

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...ust/078379.html

QUOTE
Please leave. All of you. --
- Andrew Gray



Get thee to a Gnu-nnery.
blissyu2
It seems that the mailing list is no longer talking about the issue, after a bunch of threads talked about "moving forward". Of course, they haven't found anything else to talk about, so now they are all simply feeling bad about the whole thing.

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...read.html#78379

Oh, it seems that a slow learner added a post today, a day after they've closed the thread:

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...ust/078671.html

But posts like "The encyclopedia" by Kamryn Martika (is this an admin? Kelly Martin?): http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...ust/078546.html

And "Moving forward" by Armed Blowfish (post now deleted, apparently because she wrote to say that Wikipedia Review were NOT stalkers and harassers, after I'd written to her): http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...ust/078568.html

And "Are there really articles on Wikipedia that need fixing, or just gossip that needs hashed?" by KP:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...ust/078625.html

While some people kept getting back to the SV topic, now they are simply analysing how they responded to the SV topic, rather than the actual SV topic. LOL.

The problem is that there's no new things being published at the moment. And of course the next big thing to be published about this will be MUCH bigger. It will be either:

1) "Lockerbie bombing truth finally revealed - person who manipulated the story was actually a secret agent called Linda Mack" followed by "Who then edited a Wikipedia article on the topic" followed by "Who is currently Wikipedia's most powerful editor, SlimVirgin" followed by "Holy shit what the fuck is Wikipedia doing allowing this kind of thing?" and a massive outrage

OR:

2) "SlimVirgin had changed history on Wikipedia, manipulating it to her own ends, and to the ends of a secret government agency designed to pollute truth", after an expert in to the topic (e.g. Ludwig) looks at what truth she changed on topics like Lockerbie bombing, and they do a thorough, professional analysis on the controversial issues, especially the ones that she has controlled. Followed by "Wikipedia pandering to the wishes of the secret service". Followed by "Wikipedia: Can't be trusted anymore".

Or alternatively there will be nothing more.

It'll either come out as a professional review of her articles on Wikipedia, or as a criminal review in to her role in covering up the Lockerbie bombing investigation and perverting truth.

Wikipedia maybe can cope with it if its just a professional review. It'll be like the Nature review, only with regards to one editor. But they wouldn't cope at all if it was the other kind.

Ludwig at least was suggesting that it was probably the other kind.
BobbyBombastic
QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sat 4th August 2007, 6:43pm) *

But posts like "The encyclopedia" by Kamryn Martika (is this an admin? Kelly Martin?): http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...ust/078546.html


Kamryn is a member here http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=1776

Kamryn added a link to WR as evidence in an Arbcom case once and got blocked for it, I believe. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...er:KamrynMatika .

I think it was during the charlottewebb arbitration but I could be wrong http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...n/CharlotteWebb . someone will correct me if im wrong.


The Joy
I still think this is the best "Leave WP" message:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_tal...of_God_LEAVE.21

Poor Loomis51, banned from the site months later.

I don't have the WP:AN link but someone there thought it was something from a Lovecraftian novel.
KamrynMatika
QUOTE(BobbyBombastic @ Sat 4th August 2007, 8:10pm) *

QUOTE(blissyu2 @ Sat 4th August 2007, 6:43pm) *

But posts like "The encyclopedia" by Kamryn Martika (is this an admin? Kelly Martin?): http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...ust/078546.html


Kamryn is a member here http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=1776

Kamryn added a link to WR as evidence in an Arbcom case once and got blocked for it, I believe. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...er:KamrynMatika .

I think it was during the charlottewebb arbitration but I could be wrong http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...n/CharlotteWebb . someone will correct me if im wrong.


actually it was for adding the link to the essjay article. and then yeah i got warned when i linked here during an arbcom case and the page was deleted with my diffs not being restored. elinord is basically an asshole.

and not just because s/he blocked me. i see him/her all over the place harassing people with "admin warnings" full of doublespeak that basically amount to "do as i tell you or you get banned"

i actually thought for a while she might be a slimvirgin sockpuppet based on the amount of time she spends defending slimvirgin.
blissyu2
Yes okay, anyway sometimes its a bit hard to figure out who is who. I thought Kelly Martin used a pseudonym? Not a Cow? Non Bovine Ruminations? Scott Broening? I dunno.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.