Read it here

When did anyone here say this about Sandy? If it was said, it's highly uncalled for!

I do apologize for my getting User:Sarah Ewert (now User:Sarah) and Slim Virgin mixed up. Sorry, Sarah Ewert!

Ipse Dixit —

BADSITES Are Like Rock'n'Roll …

Jonny

Expect more of this as time goes by. Wikipedia needs this site.

They seem to all forget about Karmafist, who was banned for bragging here about his subtle vandalism. And everyking was desysopped for his "role" in deleted revisions that were considered a privacy concern. Adrian has mentioned a third person - Guanaco, it was said? - who got in trouble due to some part his posting here.

I believe too that Werdna's fourth RFA - never mind, they were subtle about it (they spelled it W-R or r-e-v-i-e-w) or whoever said that was heresay. I remember someone saying that Werdna was getting in trouble there.

I believe Ms. Georgia is referring to this topic, started by new member Zeraeph, who in fact has not posted to any other topic here. And while I don't think we necessarily need to be told that she doesn't have OCD or Tourette's Syndrome, the fact is, he made the claim, and she's now claimed otherwise. Since we have no proof AFAIK, and the Editors forum is now visible to search engines, I've removed the offending paragraph as being "slightly over the top."

It may be that SandyGeorgia is a control freak of some kind, but I see no need to single her out among all the thousands of others on Wikipedia that fit that description...

WR has improved while WP has gotten worse.

Indeed. I've had some major ROFL moments on WR, but not really many on WP.

QUOTE

Yes, I know there's trolls and stalkers and LaRouchies and banhammered ripened socks there. I'm not one of them. I've been editing this site since 2002, my only other account opened in May 2003, and this one was registered in late 2004. So, if I sign up there just to shoot the shit about Wikipedia, in a non-abusive and non-personal manner, is that a problem?

Is it just me, or does the term "ripened sock" remind anyone else of their laundry basket. Come on, "come clean"

My socks aren't ripened damnit. I need a good ripe sock stew.

Its christmas afterall!

Since registering here I haven't been promoted to ArbCom and Jimbo hasn't sent me any emails...

...not that he had previously.

My Wiki life has been ruined.

Jimbo sent me email once saying I should find a different hobby... haven't listened yet.

Raise your hand if you disapprove of messages of disapproval.

No, I support disapproval. Disapproval is the way.

Any WR contributors who stoop so low as to participte in the notorious attack site (suppressing gag reflex) Wikipedia should be banned from the Wikipedia Review.

I disapprove of suppressing the gag reflex.

The gag reflex is nature's way of expressing disgust and disapproval of that which is unappetizing.

No joke. Really.

I always put "gag, vomit, retch" next to any mention of AOL in my writings, for instance.

I have qualms about that.

Jimbo should find another hobby.

The funny thing about Wikipedia Review is that I'm sure the single most infuriating thing about it to people like Jimbo and the other little fellows that believe they still run Wikipedia is that they have zero control over this website and it's content.

That in particular must absolutely infuriate them.

No one is stopping them from paying a visit and contributing to the conversation.

Yes, and that's an enjoyable and most pleasant Christmas thought.

Ah yes, I wondered if you LaRouchist ripened socks fine folks would take notice of that posting. Hello, everyone.

It's worth noting that the response to my WP:AN thread was pretty overwhelmingly "Don't worry, it's OK, lots of people do it." Because of the prolific nature of some of the drama-magnet bad guys, it's easy to forget how many Wikipedia editors and admins are reasonably and easy-going.

Which, to my mind, calls into question why the whole WP:BADSITES fiasco has been so trying. Could it be that a clique created that policy proposal to serve their own interests, and almost managed to push it through despite the community's consensus that it was a bad thing?

Oh, and I'm sure you all have discussed this more extensively, but has anyone ever even tried to explain why protecting "real world identities" is of such crucial importance for Wikipedians, and what purpose is served by masking the IP addresses of contributors?

Well, so crucial that they folded immediately on threat of lawsuit and revealed an IP address to a POV-pushing company trying to squelch its opponents, anyway... when others like the ISP involved stood their grounds.

What? What? When was this? I never heard of this, or I'm not remembering.

Heh, welcome Eleland.

I must say that asking questions like that is likely to get you in trouble on WP! Probably from a minority of people, but they are rather loud and for some reason or another have enough "power" to make you miserable. That's probably only if you are inclined to join a policy discussion on WP or the mailing list, though.

But there appears to be a revolution of sorts regarding these people, so perhaps you'll be ok in the long run.

Welcome and thanks for joining.

I probably sound like a recording when I say this any more, but Wikipedia inexplicably adopted a mish-mash of unsustainable policies and practices, in the fine tradition of the misguided miscreant in any memorable Greek Tragedy.

Well, policy discussions are another matter. I've edited guidelines and essays, but only just poked my toes into the policy swamp. Actually, the worst I've seen yet was the evisceration of WP:RS, which I'm pretty sure resulted from SlimVirgin or somebody losing an argument due to quotes from the page, and then setting out to destroy it. The lead section now reads, THIS IS A GUIDELINE NOT A POLICY, IT IS WORTHLESS, IGNORE IT, HEIL SV (or something). I tried to fix that, not really knowing at the time why the hell it read that way, and was reverted summarily. That's when I came to understand how screwed up and WP:OWNed the policy pages truly are.

That being said, the POV-pushing on policy is actually less serious than one might think. Even the tortured and convoluted primary/secondary distinction which has been warred onto WP:OR is not really all that damaging (not least because it's fucking incomprehensible). It's pretty clear that policy is honoured mostly in the breach, anyway. What matters is the number of henchmen you recruit, not the quality of your arguments. Wikiality and so forth.

Anyway, thanks for the welcome, and the warning.

See thread about "Video Professor" which I started, Root.

Greg

Outrageous. The more they try to bury this one the worse it will become.

Worth a blog post, easily, for WR.

God Bless Us, Every One!

Because Wikipedia is an attack site. If you use your real name there, you my be relentlessly libeled by pseudonymous contributors without warning, and the management will publish these slanders indefinitely if they find pleasure in your suffering.

Well now. They DO have their principles. Or they dont. Or the have ideals. Or something.

(I'm so confuuuused )

Confusion is the first step toward Enlightenment.

What about 2girls1cup?





Wow, Jimbo has a lot of pictures of himself looking creepy.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=180153606

Are you aware that Wikipedia gives a certain class of users the ability to see your IP address, and that Durova might contact the press if she detects WP:COI.

Pfft. It doesn't require reviewing logs to see IP addresses.

I've mentioned this before of course, but this is just a lie. We don't "actively" review our logs - there are only two people who can actually look at them. Selina never looks at them at all, and I hadn't looked at them in almost 4 months before last week, when someone claiming to be a "Wikipedian" made a violent threat against one of our members.

It's true that if you post something, your IP address will be visible to the admins here, but obviously that doesn't require access to logs. If you don't post anything, you could be a lurker-member or just a casual unregistered visitor, and it wouldn't make any difference - you're just as invisible.

As for trying to figure out where people are, or work, if we did that more than zero times, we wouldn't be around long, would we? To my knowledge, we've never handed over IP info or e-mail addresses to anyone, including (maybe even especially) Daniel Brandt. Admittedly, we have let it be known that certain members use Tor proxies, but we've never revealed IP/timestamp pairs for those proxies, and in any case, Wikipedians have done that themselves plenty of times. Many, many more times than we have, in fact. (To be fair though, it's not really an issue for us if people use Tor, unless they're leveling sock-puppet allegations against other members while using it.)

And just what the heck is a "company proxy server," anyway? Isn't the whole point of a "proxy server" to prevent everyone from knowing who owns it?

Man, I wish this JzG dude would just stop lying and stop pulling these moronic statements out of his arse... for his own good!

More of Guy talking out of his ass, what's new though?

I assume he means that some companies route all their Internet access through one server so they have the same IP address whichever of many hundreds of PCs is used.

On the Internet, no one knows if you're a dog.

But if you're a jerk or an idiot, people can quickly figure that out, no matter how one tries to disguise it.

Yeah, I'm not sure what JxG was on about there, either. Was he thinking that if I disagreed with the WR admins, they'd call up my workplace and harass my bosses? In any case 1500 people at this site alone go through this proxy, and I'm pretty sure the other two Canadian sites use the same IP.

Eleland, when JzG types, there's no telling from a reality-based perspective what he's actually implying. Indeed, in this case, I suspect that the implication would indeed be that your IP address would be released by one of the board ops here, at which point several of us would call your workplace and harass your employers. According to JzG, it might even lead to worse things, such as kidnapping or murder (at least from Tony Sidaway's perspective, that's what "being in Wikipedia" can lead to).

Welcome to our non-harassing, non-murdering board.

Greg

Well, I seem to recall that somebody was "raped" (by having an ED page made about them) already. Can't be too careful...

I like that. I think I'm going to quote you (don't worry, you'll get the credit).



Never happen. I don't know what kind of drugs JzG was on at the time, but they must be really good drugs.

It does. I cannot imagine how Durova's "super sekrit" saga would have played out three years ago before the rise of WPReview. Even "good" Wikipedians are getting sick of the arbitrary way dialogue is controlled and manipulated on-wiki.