Apparently, MZMcBride is being desysopped. I didn't think that he was an abusive admin, but he made some serious mistakes in the way he went about doing admin work.

I guess if we want to try to relate this to the "big picture", it shows that Wikipedia, in my opinion, needs a more formal, structured system to help guide its admins in how they perform project maintenance.

Seeing MZMcBride get desysopped while other actual abusive admins are able to retain the bit is just ridiculous. It's also good to see where some of the Arbs stand on the matter, and I'm a bit surprised by a couple. Should be interesting to see how some of these arbs vote in the future on desysopping motions.

All I can add here is that arbcom is a place to bring cases of admin misconduct and misuse of tools, so people concerned should do so.

Tell that to Viridae, among others, of course. Maybe tell it to some current RFC commenters. I'm not sure how many would agree.

He has resigned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=282027735

He wasn't that bad by today WP standard. And now he resigned at the same time when Guy and his faithful choir of sycophants threaten to ban anyone who claims cold fusion is not a Nobel deserving scientific breakthrough.

You either added an extra "not" in there or you're misreading the situation rather profoundly. Guy thinks (rightly, from everything I've seen) that cold fusion is hookum.

Yes? So I misread the RfC. But it's still POV galore.

I think that JzG has just received his third strike and his admin privileges are as good as gone. The only thing in the way is the time it takes to wait for everyone to weigh-in on the RfC and then for someone to take it to ArbCom and then wait for ArbCom to vote on it. The new arbcom is trying to send a message. If you look at the last few case decisions, they haven't held back too much in imposing sanctions and corrective action.

JzG blocked 5 IPs for "block evasion", stating or implying that the edits were by Jed Rothwell, even though two of them are from the wrong geographical area and were unsigned; Jed Rothwell consistently signs his edits.

© Over a period of more than one year, JzG persistently directed uncivil comments and personal attacks at other editors. These comments frequently included obscene and vulgar language and abuse. Many of the incivil and offensive comments were contained in edit summaries so that they are permanently logged in page histories. Often, although not always, the inappropriate comments accompanied otherwise proper commentary, edits, or administrator actions, and the comments were often, although again by no means always or nearly always, directed at users exhibiting problematic behavior (but this generally is not a mitigating circumstance). JzG continued to make some of these types of comments even after Wikipedia:Requests for comment/JzG2 called his attention to substantial community concern about his style and other users characterized it as conduct unbecoming an administrator.
Passed 9 to 0 at 00:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC).

(D) JzG has taken several overly harsh administrator actions and made unnecessarily rude comments to new editors, thereby reducing the chance that these potentially valuable contributors would continue editing Wikipedia.
Passed 8 to 0 (with 1 abstention) at 00:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC).

Tell that to Viridae, among others, of course. Maybe tell it to some current RFC commenters. I'm not sure how many would agree.

Or maybe it's better to just say something like "While it's a place to bring such cases, it's not necessarily a place to expect results."

I'm sure there are a few other applicable responses, but I'll just stick with those two.

Amazing. MZM AND Guy, in the same week.
Never thought I'd say this, but "things are looking up".

In case you haven't noticed, this ArbCom is quite a bit different than last year's in both composition and philosophy. It's much more law and order. If you have a case of administrative misconduct, I believe that we will apply these standards across the board.

Seeing MZMcBride get desysopped while other actual abusive admins are able to retain the bit is just ridiculous. It's also good to see where some of the Arbs stand on the matter, and I'm a bit surprised by a couple. Should be interesting to see how some of these arbs vote in the future on desysopping motions.

I think that JzG has just received his third strike...

I guess if we want to try to relate this to the "big picture", it shows that Wikipedia, in my opinion, needs a more formal, structured system to help guide its admins in how they perform project maintenance.

I think that JzG has just received his third strike and his admin privileges are as good as gone. The only thing in the way is the time it takes to wait for everyone to weigh-in on the RfC and then for someone to take it to ArbCom and then wait for ArbCom to vote on it. The new arbcom is trying to send a message. If you look at the last few case decisions, they haven't held back too much in imposing sanctions and corrective action.

What a f**king waste of time and energy. I can understand why MZM quit -- it was either that or being bored to death by that tiresome Sanhedrin.

I haven't left, and currently have no plans of doing so. Am I discouraged? Absolutely. But there remains a lot of work to be done and very few seem willing to help. From all of the indications I see, Wikipedia has no signs of dying anytime soon. So as it continues to be used as often as it is, the critical biography-related problems must be addressed.
As for the de-adminning, events are still unfolding. We'll see what happens. In the mean time, I've posted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MZM...sing_grievances for all those interested.

I must admit I had extremely little faith in arbcom, but they did desysop Aitias, a classic example of an abusive admin, which restored my belief that the system does work if you try and use it. I'm all for a deadminning system, but if the one we have generally works (imo) then perhaps we don't need a new thing.

I haven't left, and currently have no plans of doing so. Am I discouraged? Absolutely. But there remains a lot of work to be done and very few seem willing to help. From all of the indications I see, Wikipedia has no signs of dying anytime soon. So as it continues to be used as often as it is, the critical biography-related problems must be addressed.

As for the de-adminning, events are still unfolding. We'll see what happens. In the mean time, I've posted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MZM...sing_grievances for all those interested.

I haven't left, and currently have no plans of doing so. Am I discouraged? Absolutely. But there remains a lot of work to be done and very few seem willing to help. From all of the indications I see, Wikipedia has no signs of dying anytime soon. So as it continues to be used as often as it is, the critical biography-related problems must be addressed.

As for the de-adminning, events are still unfolding. We'll see what happens. In the mean time, I've posted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MZM...sing_grievances for all those interested.

MZMcBride has now submitted a request for adminship. It seems to be going quite well too, at 81% support.

MZMcBride has now submitted a request for adminship. It seems to be going quite well too, at 81% support.

He's already down to 73%, with six days to go and most of the RfA's celebrated malcontents not yet weighing in. As much as I like MZM, I would put money down that this is going to fail.

P.S. As the day progressed, this RfA sank like the proverbial lead balloon -- it is far below the 70% mark, with no signs of ascension. MZM, you ought to save face and bow out now!

I was tormented by the idea of being de-adminned when I felt the community still had confidence in me. We'll see what happens. --[[User:MZMcBride|MZMcBride]] ([[User talk:MZMcBride#top|talk]]) 19:58, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose per the points explained by SoWhy above. MZMcBride is one of the most arbitrary, abusive and uncommunicative admins I know. I do not trust him in the slightest. — Aitias // discussion 09:16, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't mince your words now! GARDEN 09:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I suppose you'd know all about that. Black Kite 12:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

What's your new account name Aitias? Majorly talk 14:04, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

This practice of returning just to oppose people you dislike is tiresome. The points you just raised about MZMcBride could equally apply to your behavior over the last few months, Aitias. Acalamari 15:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

This isn't RfA or RfC Aitias. Your admonishments are better served at his talk page, so as not to distract from the core issue here.--Tznkai (talk) 15:43, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

@Acalamari: Writing "to oppose people you dislike" under every comment from me on RfAs is kind of funny (as it doesn't apply, the point is not that I would not like MZM, but simply that I don't trust him with the tools), however it's unnecessary and pointless and therefore you sould consider stopping it. — Aitias // discussion 16:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Whether or not my current RFA passes or fails (I still have hope that the community will find forgiveness), I'll be taking a break the minute it closes. I've been active on this project day after day for a very long time. It's taken a toll and Durova is completely right that I need a break.

I'm announcing it in advance to make sure that I don't leave anything unattended. There's little around here that others can't handle, but if there's something in particular that you need from me, put it below and I'll try to take care of it before taking my break.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:40, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

How long do you intend to break for? Majorly talk 01:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, I don't know for sure. "Until it feels right," I guess. I can't imagine it will be less than two weeks. I can't imagine it will be more than two months. So somewhere between those two, I suppose. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Whether or not my current RFA passes or fails (I still have hope that the community will find forgiveness), I'll be taking a break the minute it closes. I've been active on this project day after day for a very long time. It's taken a toll and Durova is completely right that I need a break.

In case you haven't noticed, this ArbCom is quite a bit different than last year's in both composition and philosophy. It's much more law and order. If you have a case of administrative misconduct, I believe that we will apply these standards across the board.

In case you haven't noticed, this ArbCom is quite a bit different than last year's in both composition and philosophy. It's much more law and order. If you have a case of administrative misconduct, I believe that we will apply these standards across the board.

In case you haven't noticed, this ArbCom is quite a bit different than last year's in both composition and philosophy. It's much more law and order. If you have a case of administrative misconduct, I believe that we will apply these standards across the board.

Whether or not my current RFA passes or fails (I still have hope that the community will find forgiveness), I'll be taking a break the minute it closes. I've been active on this project day after day for a very long time. It's taken a toll and Durova is completely right that I need a break.

I think the odds of Jayjg being topic-banned, despite his obvious partisan position on the subject, are slim and none. Or should I say, SlimVirgin and none. It would not surprise me if Slim weighs in to carry water for J.

C'mon, even Gomi must have noticed the difference in ArbCom this year: