Puts finger between teeth.

Bites.

It looks like SV's circle continues to shrink now that she's alienated the Checkuser community as well. It'll be interesting to see how many supporters she has left in the ArbComm. I'm sure Jpgordon and possibly FloNight (despite her "absence") have been lobbying in SV's defense in the first ArbComm case but will they still come to her side in the new one? And Jimbo has been conspicuous by not sweeping in with a deus ex machina show of support - of course ever since the Rachel Marsden scandal he has very little moral authority left at wikipedia - at least among experienced senior editors.

Between Slim Virgin and Rachel Marsden, that Jimbeau has utterly shocked me with his lousy taste in women!

Bunny-oglers find bunny-boilers ©. That's a Milton law. Bomis Jimmy is certainly the first, and has had his share of the second. And my share, too, god bless him.

According to checkuser and Arbcom layabout Matthew Brown Wikipedia Review is "a shifting mess of crazy and often malice" and that "listening and engaging with paranoids and obsessives to that degree [that Lar does] can affect one's thinking."

He also said;

QUOTE

On the other hand, I do not think he's doing so with any bad intent; I feel it has to do with a belief in engaging critics and listening impartially to all sides – noble intentions even if a bad idea in this case.

.. which is fair enuf, I guess

I've see Thatcher defend SV before, but, I don't think that's the case here;

QUOTE

Second, with respect to SlimVirgin and Lar. Lar pretty much has his hands tied. It would certainly be a breach of the privacy policy to discuss the results of the check, and it would be an ethical violation (if not a privacy violation) to discuss the reason for the check. So his hands are tied; SlimVirgin can slag off on him publicly and he can't defend himself. That's pretty low, and this is maybe the third time it has happened. (Once before on checkuser-L and once at [[Wikipedia talk:Checkuser]].) So I think it would be best for all concerned, if Slim believes that Lar is not trustworthy, that she make a formal request to Arbcom to consider the matter, and then keep it off the wiki.

Thatcher

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...uly/094577.html

and

QUOTE

We danced around this on checkuser-L for a week without really discussing the precise details; we are certainly not going into detail here on whether or not the request to compare user A and user B was valid. I really think it is time for Slim to put up or shut up. Ask Arbcom to review Lar's trustworthiness and judgement to use the tool, or don't, but please quit bringing it up on wiki. Smearing Lar's character when only about 6 people know the details, and those who do can't discuss it publicly, is unacceptable.

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...uly/094579.html

There's a way to allow Chinese (and others) to edit via open proxy now. I don't know if you've seen it yet or not.

The Tor-is-OK thingo was only added to that in the last few days, for the record.

Oh? Didn't you know? Slim has not forgiven Flo for taking these actions a few months ago:

1. Endorsing and voting for poetlister's RfB on wikiquote.
2. Encouraging ArbCom to take a second look at the evidence that got poetlister indef'd from en-wp, the result of which led to poetlister's return to en-wp recently.

Josh is still a tool, especially after what he did to John V, but I'm pretty sure that the days of Flo backing SV unconditionally are over. I'm sure even she has come around to how paranoid and out of touch SV is with other editors.

SV just admitted on Wikien that some of her past edits were oversighted:

"Gery, very few of my edits have been oversighted, so I'm sure you can
still find the post in question, if it ever existed."

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...uly/094744.html

Who was the admin candidate who got torpedoed when a checkuser said that the person had been editing via a TOR node?

CharlotteWebb

CharlotteWebb, nuked from high orbit by Jayjg I think, for no good reason.

If a user reverts, for example, a gross BLP-vio, the admin's reversion would also be oversighted, no? Having some oversighted edits isn't necessarily a nefarious thing.

CharlotteWebb

Yeah, I had basically completely forgotten that CharlotteWebb was taken down by SlimVirgin/Crum and involved Jayjg revealing Checkuser information. Maybe this has already been discussed in the context of Lar and I just missed it, but I find that astonishly hypocritical. Someone should definitely bring that to ArbCom's attention.

They seem to have done something similar at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Armedblowfish, though I haven't seen there who revealed that Armedblowfish was editing via Tor.

Yes, that probably would be an appropriate use of oversight. In the same Wikien thread, though, someone asks SV why her edits needed to be oversighted, and she gives an evasive answer and accuses the people asking the question of making a personal attack:

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikie...uly/094754.html

Anyone else notice that Felonious Monk and Crum have been absent from wikipedia? FM since a block of his was undone 3 days ago while Crum has been gone for 11 days.

ConfuciusOrnis appears to be gone, too.

It wouldn't have to be - it'd just show up as a null edit. I've deleted revisions in that situation before; I don't bother excluding the reversion, it's one less box to un-tick.



AB was openly using Tor; it's mentioned in the nomination - ip block exemption was one of the main reason for wanting to give her adminship.

I've never understood the open proxy thing, unless it's placed in the context of sockpuppet paranoia, which I understand even less.

No, I hadn't, actually. Does this mean that from now on, they're going to assume that anybody who hasn't actually asked for open-proxy permission, can't be in fear for political reasons, but must be a socker?

And what's happened to AOL, ComCast and all those other ISPs that use rotating IP addresses? They still doing it? Seems like every time I WHOIS an IP these days, it says they're in Lynchburg, VA.

Sorry for requesting the summary, but did it ever get leaked the results of the check as pertaining to SlimVirgin? i.e. did the check show one way or another that she had used socks? Because I seem to recall the thread having several people, Mackensen and Greg Maxwell, I believe, saying that the checkuser turned up some worrying results. What were those results?

No, despite all the thunder she's been spouting, only the fact that they were done was released...no data.

I can attest that the checkuser I did in 2006 did not reveal any evidence of sockpuppetry, or in fact of anything of interest at all.

I'm sure it's one of Slimvirgins's pathological "I'm a victim, I'm a victim" ploys.

Both her and Durova do this.

Again, there's got to be some kind of neuroleptic for this syndrome.

That is exactly what it is. She is running around waving the victim flag, while at the same time refusing to avail herself of any of the dispute resolution options available to her. It is shameful and disgusting; why the community continues to tolerate such disruptive and narcissistic behavior is beyond me.

It's obvious to me why *she* does it. It is distraction. In fact, it's rather patently boring normal behavior in the US politics/media sphere. Anytime someone accuses of X then suddenly throw your entire bodyweight (or in Slim's case, the desk she's sitting in if not the building) at another more compelling topic: your own victimization.

You've got to give it to her for how talented she is at this. It's pathetic, as a career skill, but credit where credit is due.

This bizarre behavior of hers has prevented her from being held to account for a goodly amount of time. And let's face it: It's the status quo for people in politics in the present day. It's how the newer awareness of sensitivity and psychology get misused, if not abused, by persons attempting to turn it on it's head - serving to confuse the well-meaning masses. Slim's behavior is rather normal, for anyone in politics in the U.S. today. It's media manipulation of perception. This is her forté.

As for the people who buy it. Well, most people are not all that terrifically smart. Wikipedia is only a sampling of that phenom.

Slim banks on that she's smarter than her adversaries.

When that falls through she's left squealing louder. More recently like a stuck pig.

Indeed, the trick is to keep repeating it over and over again - the reality of what you are saying is irrelevant.

Yeah, you see this everywhere in U.S. politics today...used to be, when a politician got caught riding dirty, they apologized and/or resigned. The Clintons raised the tactic of smearing your accuser to a high art form, and everyone does it now (in both parties).

What is interesting to me though is how she essentially brought this all down on herself in the first place. If she never created the original stub on Brandt in the first place, would this guy have been alerted to and subsequently taken such an active interest in her activities or in WP politics at all? I entirely doubt it. If she hadn't written that stub, the Seigenthaler and Essjay incidents would not have unfolded the way they did, with Brandt ramming the issues through and the WP community essentially blaming him and WR for exposing their problems.

It would seem to me that this LM/SV is in a similar situation as GW/MM was. That may be why she was so willing to support him, apart from the supposed Bryne-Cambridge connection. GW/MM's COI activities on the site against Patrick Bryne attracted a "nakedly" hostile response from JB/Wordbomb, that would have caused LM to feel sympathy for GW, as her own activities were already under a similar kind of heat from Brandt, so it was probably easy for her to view GW/MM as a fellow "journalist" and "victim of harassment," even though these guys were only trying, in their own respective ways, to correct the problems that these two entirely unethical "journalists" and "Wikipedians in good standing" were creating for them.

It would seem to me the only solution for the WP community would be for it to admit that it was played by Slim Virgin as much as it was by Mantanmoreland, and promptly ban all forms of the account. Because Jimbo, fool that he is, is not going to countermand his prior support for her, and because she's written so many of the policies they interpret and apply remedies based on, the Arbitration Committee is not going to be able to do this. It really would require a popular revolution, in the French sense of the term.

Theme already suggested: "LET THEM EAT DOG!"

It is indeed amazing how much damage SV has done in one way or another, and how much damage WP has tolerated rather than do something about her. I think, all in all, the only things Jimbo has tolerated more damage from on WP than SV, is his own policies and the delictations associated with his daliances.

I think, based upon history, we might even nominally begin to construct a "Jimmy Wales Relative Importance Scale," starting from #1 importance to him, and moving down:

1) Own pecker
2) Own policies
3) SlimVirgin
4) JzG
.
.
.
n) Wikipedia



Fill in the blanks.

G K Chesterton

And Jimbo, he often said to his guests when they sat down to dine,
"I don't care where the money goes if it doesn't get into the wine."

GK Asterton

You learn quickly.

Pffffffff. Used to be *when*. We had one big resignation and it was hardly voluntary. Don't you remember, "I am not a...."




Fiddlesticks.

Bill Clinton was the first Democrat to not roll over and say 'thank you sir may I have another' when someone smeared him.

That was unforgivable in certain circles. Their ability to fight back remains unmatched.

They weren't perfect, but who the heck is in Sin City.

(chokes while coughing a word that no one understands)

What, you mean a change of government?

(chokes while coughing a word that no one understands)

Declare victory with honor, then rapidly retreat in disarray...

It is not that I oppose your remedy, but I would never leave it in the hands of the "community."

Who else or what else is going to be in a position to do it? Larry Sanger, the exiled "co-founder of Wikipedia?" My greatest wish is for Jimbo et all to become the victims of their own success and get booted off the site by the community that is fed up with their bullshit.

Despite Giano's endless plotting about bombs in his briefcase this is never going to happen from within. Change your analogy. Not The Terror. Think Red Army sweeping through a crumbling Germany. I read Vollman's Europe Central in the last year. It has a character called "The Red Guillotine." Let her do the heavy lifting.

[Moderator's note: I have moved a number of off-topic posts to the Tar Pit. Please take personal attacks there. -- gomi]