Original research talk page

I wonder how convincing the sekret evidence will be that Dhaluza, Vassyana and FullStop are sockpuppet-stalker-rapist-vandal-trolls. They have opposed the mighty Linda Sarah and all the evil truth personal attacks must end! What I find really intriguing is SlimVirgin's Usual Toadies throwing up their hands and refusing to take sides. Perhaps her Evil Claw of Wikipedia Control is running low on batteries?

It is even better because originally, if I recall correctly, Vassyana was on the other side. He was persuaded that source typing, as defined, was nonsensical. I think he has had his Wipiphany.

Slim is back to full strength now: the accusation of personal attacks when calling other people dishonest, the blind repeating over and over again of the "obvious" that you must be idiotic not to understand, the avoidance of question answering by asking other questions that she has no interest in, and the unilateral editing of the policy page (because she is right) while demanding consensus (i.e. unanimity in the Slim dictionary) for any other changes that she disagrees with.

All over something that really is not important if you really go with the fundamental concept of NOR: "don't make stuff up."

I am trying to catch up on all the original research chatter but wow is there a lot to sort through. Cogden's RFC seems to be of some interest to the general topic.Cogden's RFC

Dollars to donuts this dispute revolves around the issue of whether WP has a functional guideline for accuracy, excellence and ethics in crafting encyclopedic articles worthy of a responsible publication.

Welcome to the Review EternalIdealist!

As for the OR "policy" page, It's probably changed so much since I last looked at it months ago I could probably barely recognize it.

Diagnostic Pre-Test —

Q1. What is the biggest piece of Original Research in the (W)hole of Wikipedia?

Jonny

Crum375 admits that The Cabal dictates policy because they know better than stupid peons. Admission there IS a Cabal. Has anyone run in to other open admissions about The Cabal? How common is it for them to be so open about that kind of control?

SlimVirgin is going to great lengths to demonize Vassyana so the current shit on the original research talk page seems like a good example of her public harassment tactics.

I looked over the history of original research policy and it is a nasty mess. It seems like every decent soul interested in finding middle ground or better terms or clarifying the language used in that whole primary secondary tertiary mess is eventually driven away by the actions of a select few. Those few like SlimVirgin seem to have a good understanding of when and how to interrupt the page to most effectively derail anything they dislike. They intimately know certain aspects of psychology and social engineering on top of their obvious command of quirks in Wikipedia social interactions.

This is curious and makes me wonder if Vassyana was privately intimidated into giving up. Vassyana gives up on policy. I wonder how long it will be before he is hounded off the entire thing. Opposing SlimVirgin so plainly is sure to have marked Dhaluza and Vassyana as trolls that need to be removed from the site unless I completely missed something.

I think your interpretation of Crum's statement slightly dramatises what he says, which is deliberately ambiguous (a typical Crum technique to which his response would be "I don't see how you could interpret it that way, stupid boy"), though I do not disagree. I thought the original statement of Slim was far more worrying:



In other words, I am a special user with veto over these pages. Absolutely atrocious behaviour... and absolutely typical that meatpuppet Crum is straight in there with the backup plan to give the illusion of consensus. It is a technique she has used before (for example on Factory Farming), to paraphrase: "You are arguing with me, I am right, therefore I refuse to continue to discuss this on the talk page with you; saying I am wrong is a personal attack and therefore I no longer have to abide by any rules as I see fit."

The most sensible thing is to bail out of the NOR debate, refuse to acknowledge that NOR has any consensus and edit under IAR to one's own reasonable interpretation of sound policy.

She'll find a way to block or silence her adversaries, no matter what tactic they use.

Keep in mind that WP operates like a character-driven drama, where some characters behave like Agent Smith.

It was the "Consensus is achieved by getting the editors who have historically contributed to a given policy to indicate their approval in an active manner. If such an editor reverts, it is a clear sign of no consensus." that lead me to think of The Cabal. It read to me that a small handful of clique insiders have the final word on policies everyone else be damned.

I totally missed that comment by SlimVirgin. Crum375 is a meatpuppet for SlimVirgin or is he just another devoted suckup?

If Dhaluza, Fullstop or any of the other people opposing SlimVirgin just back out and go on their merry way ain't it likely that SlimVirgin's posse will wikistalk those people and hound the hell out of them when they edit "counter to policy"? From what I have read that would be a common tactic of theirs.



Is this a broader problem in Wikipedia or is it limited to a small handful of influential characters?

Crum's modus operandi is well established. Some say s/he might be a sock, but it is clear there is at least off-wiki communication to elicit support - no sign for ages, then an argument blows up and backup arrives within minutes. Well versed in 3RR-avoiding tag teaming.



I'm not sure they have the time, they don't tend to stalk explicitly, unlike Guy who gets a zeal for investigating edits to prove his point.




There are little mini-series in various areas of interest where you start to recognise the main players: its a bit like various editions of Star Trek where the plot is similar as are the characters.

However, Slim has a special history with regards to policy, and there are a relatively few people who patrol policy to ensure their perception of consensus stays put. As an example, take a look at the response when someone on-side makes a change to policy: no stability queries, its all "what a good change", "go, go". The current change being mooted on synthesis has been pointed out many a time as a useful change, but if your face does not fit, simply proposing change will get you hounded out, even if the suggestion is uncontroversial.

Totem and Taboo


I saw the same tactic being widely used, trickle down, to subordinate sub-cabals in the WP dominance hierarchy.

My and Wordbomb's analysis suggest it is extremely unlikely that the Crum and SlimVirgin accounts are being operated from separate computers.

There's a well-known email post by Jimbo that amounts to a Declaration of Insouciance (WP:We Don't Give A Damn — We Don't Have To) for the Wikipedia Cabal. It's probably the last time that Jimbo ever told the truth about anything of substance related to Wikipedia. I'm sure that there are at least a couple of copies of it around here somewhere.

Jonny

So SlimVirgin has declared that she's special and gets to dictate what the true policy is. Is that surprising?

You display a very good understanding of the dynamics around SlimVirgin. I understand SlimVirgin almost exactly the way you appear to. I can also add that SlimVirgin doesn't act out of malice on her part, but rather I believe that she is what one would calls a "borderling personality" (look it up.) She has "control issues" and gets a lot of psychological satisfaction by being in "control" of things she believes are important on Wikipedia. Of course she does have some political positions, but you can analyse these separately from her "control" issues. If you can figure out a way to let SlimVirgin feel in control and that you highly respect her and you ask her for permission, you can then make the changes you desire. It should be completely unnecessary to pander towards a borderline character like SlimVirgin, but she has established a domain of "control" on Wikipedia and thus that is what you have to do.

I will repeat: swallow your ego when dealing with SlimVirgin and be sure to constantly compliment her and only make suggestions and try to convince her that the changes in question are her idea.

Of course, just me saying this on this board will fuck with SlimVirgin as she will often respond by making it even harder to figure her out. Just remember that SlimVirgin wants to be in control, her ego and self-worth depends on it. She is a very fragile women who overcompensates.

Does it feel as if one is "walking on eggshells" when dealing with her?

«We are all frail»

But don't be fooled by her studied act —

SlimVirgin is about as fragile as a Mack Truck.

Jonny

I would put money on that you are wrong. I think that I understand her much better than you.

SlimVirgin is very fragile. Let me explain myself better...

I don't mean "fragile" in the stereotypical female sense that she will break down and cry but rather she has a tendency to exhibit unstable behavior under stress and that she gets stressed when she thinks she is losing control over arbitrary Wikipedia topics that she apparently values. SlimVirgin, when she feels that she is losing control, stops acting rationally. She loses it and starts being more aggressive and resorting to transparent but effective manipulation tactics. Pushed farther she starts to exhibit manic / pseudo-psychotic features such as not requiring any sleep (i.e. mania), and reactionary paranoid thinking (i.e. psychosis.)

As an observer or victim of SlimVirgin, this can appear to be extreme manipulation by someone with super human endurance bent on evil, but I am positive that SlimVirgin believes the paranoid theories that she doles out (at least when she is in the moment), and acts this way not because any logical reason but rather because of her dysfunctional psychological make-up. Once the moment of stress passes and SlimVirgin regains the control that she needs, she regains her composure (i.e. the paranoia and mania receeds.) Although she remembers the paranoia and believes it even when she isn't in an immediate stress situation and spends a lot of energy to build up her power to deal with those who threaten her control (i.e. mental well-being).

SlimVirgin also has a low degree of self-worth. This is why she can't often admit to being wrong, especially in directly confrontational situations, because her self-esteem is fragile and easily threatened. If SlimVirgin only cared about making significant contributions to Wikipedia or biasing its coverage, she could have gone about it much more effectively but it wouldn't have met as effectively her unique psychological needs. It is because of her long-term editing strategy (or lack there of) that I don't think that is evil, rather she is fragile/damaged.

Make no mistake, the above description is of someone who is very fragile. I am a strong advocate of the position that SlimVirgin is not well and is as a result quite fragile. Everything about SlimVirgin that I have read supports an interpretation that she is unstable and has control issues.

I do pitty SlimVirgin as a person. She obviously uses Wikipedia as an escape from reality where she can maintain a sense of the control and peer respect for her talents that she so obviously craves. SlimVirgin's borderline personality is also less apparent through the online medium thus on Wikipedia this doesn't hurt her as much as it probably has in her previous face-to-face relationships.

I bet she's having a good laugh at this post.

You don't think I'm right then? (Also note that I did a bit of reworking to that post thus be sure to read the final version.)

I'd say it's about right, for what it's worth.

SenseMaker may be right. A source I talked to who knew Mack from 1989 through the early 1990s said that he learned from one of his sources (whom he declined to name) that Mack had serious emotional problems and was taking large doses of medically-prescribed psychotropic drugs. (The source I talked to who relayed this information was not Patrick Byrne, although Byrne's description of Mack's behavior also suggests, it seems to me, that she may have had emotional problems.)

Either way, it doesn't help us much — she still has considerable power on Wikipedia. It may be a defect in the Web 2.0 model that such situations cannot be detected and avoided as easily on the anonymous web, as they can in real life.

I agree -- his armchair psychoanalysis struck me as plausible. However, I'd like to point out that having a touch of psychopathology, and being evil, are not mutually exclusive. Being evil is a willful choice, not a compulsion. Some of SV's philosophical preferences definately creep me out.

Dude, will you please stop resurrecting ancient threads from the dead with completely pointless posts?

I'm not sure, Daniel, that this sort of stuff is legitimate background, and not just gossip. Lot's of people have taken drugs to help with emotional problems, its a bit like saying so-and-so was often in the pub drinking too much...

The interesting question, the only interesting question, about Slim is whether or not she is part of a power-structure controlling Wikipedia for political or business ends. I've had quite a bit of direct email contact with Slim and read enough of her posts to arrive at a few tentative but at least contemporary assessments of her 'state of mind'. For what its worth, here is my best guess:

1. Slim is part of a formal power structure on Wikipedia. She keeps referring to 'we' in her admin talk, and the 'we' certainly does not mean all administrators, let alone all editors. She refers to details of blocks and refers complaints on to other admin as though part of a bureaucracy. It COULD just be delusional, but I don't think so...

(Slim recently complained about 'losing her livelihood' too...)

2. Slim is genuinely promoting Animal Rights. What sort of people do that? Apart from Mr Hitler, they tend to be people who themselves feel victims, but are channelling their fear for themselves more constructively, to 'save' the animals. I think we should understand Slim as someone who 'believes' in their core activity, sees it indeed in semi-religous terms. That is why 'people' can be treated so casually/ autistically by her.

3. Slim spends an awful lot of time in really rather boring admin-talk debates. Only two kinds of people would do that:

a mad person (as suggested in the quote)
- or a bureaucrat being paid to do it.

Most of what Slim says is cogent and IMO reasonable, albeit partial. (She leaves out inconvenient facts and sprinkles her posts with stuff that is not verifiable, evidently enjoying the impression of access to more information than the rest of us...)

Jimbo, we know, hires people to make up for what he lacks, ie. edukayshun. Slim is a very suitable employee, but as Wikipedia is 'supposed' to be run entirely openly by equal volunteers, she has to be presented as such. Why does Wikipedia need to be presented as run by volunteers? It makes its 'encyclopaedic' authority much less. I should say the only advantage is in terms of propaganda. By denying having paid writers and editors, and adding the NPOV sugar coating, Wikipedia has a better chance of infiltrating its subtle messages into the public consciousness.

Jimbo doesn't have the money to hire someone to rub two nickels together for him. He leeches off of anyone he can (lately, that's been Wikia and its "angel investors") for whatever money he can scam, and when he does get some he spends it on himself, not on other people. Rest assured that Jimbo has no motivation to hire SlimVirgin to do what she does on Wikipedia; if she's been hired it's certainly not by Jimbo.

That said, it's entirely possible that whatever entity does pay Slimmy (if such an entity exists, which I am entirely uncertain of at this point; it seems more likely to me that Slimmy is supported by a trust fund or annuity of some sort and does what she does out of personal obsession rather than compensation) has also paid off Jimbo in some way, shape or form. Proving that, however, would be quite difficult.

I think you've passed well into the realm of conspiracy theory here, Flash. What exactly is Jimbo supposed to be getting from SlimVirgin that he couldn't get for free from any number of other admins?

As for your statement that she's part of a bureaucracy, sure she is. So am I. It's possible to be part of a bureaucracy - even part of a power structure - without having some sort of man behind the curtain pulling the strings.

I think everything's pretty much as it seems as far as Wikipedia's concerned; that's the alarming part.

I'm afraid I agree. I can't see any major facts clearly in evidence that can't be explained with the simplest of many possible hypotheses, which is that what we see on WP, is basically what there is. Never attribute to maniacal cleverness and inhumanly effective conspiracy, what can be just as easily explained by the very much more common human traits of ignorance, stupidity, and empire building. To which can be added the fear, egoism and sloth which routinely cause the inertia and reactionism that prevent institutional change everywhere.

"An explanation should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Einstein, echoing Occam's razor)

We have plenty of evidence of behind-the-scenes dealings between various editors, but those are garden variety "conspiracies" of the sort that plague all human activities. There's no reason to extend those conspiracies beyond the observed (or reasonably inferred) communications activities, and no cause to believe that such backchannel communications evidence a common cause or common leadership.

Wikipedia is a very large cart being pulled by ten thousand cats each individually yoked to it. No one cat can do much to alter its course, although some cats (for various reasons) are better at it than others. At any given time, no small number of the cats are attacking one another rather than pulling the cart. Others run around trying to convince their fellow cats to go in this direction or that, with various degrees of success, and others run around trying to foul the lines. The resulting disaster lurches about the landscape at random, leaving a trail of shredded grass and cat turds wherever it might go. One day, it will lurch over a cliff, and there will be much rejoicing.

(Most applicable free image I could find, I'm afraid.)

I've been perplexed by the inaction on Jimbo's part when complaints about egregious behavior on the part of some WP's admins like JzG, Jayjg, and SV have been made to him, either on his talk page or by email (I've done both and I believe I'm not the only one). I've been tempted to think that there might be some grand conspiracy going on, such as that SV is a Wikia consultant or something like that. But, I think Kelly and others here are right in saying that it likely isn't that complicated or mysterious.

I think Jimbo's behavior during the Essjay fiasco gives a good clue as to what is really going on. Jimbo tried to hire Essjay after the scandal broke, right? I think that once Jimbo has established a friendly relationship with someone because they can help him in some way, and I think he and SV are friends by way of communication about issues in Wikipedia (remember the adage for how to succeed at work- "Solve the bosses' problems first"?), he is reluctant to take any kind of adverse action against that person unless he is compelled to do so.

..mmmm very good, Cla68. Take a look at the history of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimbo_Wales page ...or the http://en.wikipedia.org/Rachel_Marsden page (before falling out with Jimbo, that is.) Slimy was the (self-promoted?) cleaning- lady of both pages. Oh, btw; most of the Marsden page (and its talk-page) seems to have disappeared down the memory-hole (But what a come-down in this world: from Cambridge graduate student to cleaner up of the biography of your boss´s mistress )

If you can get the milk for free, why buy the Slim(virgin)?

Mmmm... I agree, never invent a complicated explanation when a simple one may do... but most of the admins are teenage no-hopers like Anonymous Dissident or illiterate social defectives like Phil 'Toiletface' and David Gerard. The number of competent research-capable admin is much smaller. Maybe just one!

Add to which, most of the admin spend their time abusing their marvellous new powers, and do very little content checking. Slim used to do a lot of what she called 'copy checking'.

Is Jimbo really broke?

The Register seems to think there's a million bukcs floating about unaudited...the dodgy Chief Operating Officer of Wikiland

Jesus Flash, your crusade against AD is getting boring. AD is not the problem, SV is. AD is not an ally of SV nor has he ever been one. Therefore, stop sidetracking discussions of SV with mindless pot-shots at AD.

No comment on SV, but I agree about AD... distractive, unwarranted and undeserved.

That's because admins of that calibre mostly get disillusioned and give up. There is Charles Matthews, but he's stretched himself a bit thin.

What's up with all the baseless attacks on AD here? He's one of the better admins, and every time someone bashes him, it's some diffless stupidity. Present some evidence to back your claim, else have a seat.