Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: CheckUser and Oversight elections
> Wikimedia Discussion > Bureaucracy
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Rick
The next CU and OS elections are coming up!
Kelly Martin
QUOTE(Rick @ Tue 4th May 2010, 7:02am) *
The next CU and OS elections are coming up!
Has the Cabal announced yet who is supposed to win them?
NuclearWarfare
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Tue 4th May 2010, 1:36pm) *

QUOTE(Rick @ Tue 4th May 2010, 7:02am) *
The next CU and OS elections are coming up!
Has the Cabal announced yet who is supposed to win them?


Timeline:
# May 1–8 – Preparation for election, including offers of nomination to selected candidates
# May 9–22 – Voting using the SecurePoll extension for a secret ballot
# May 22–27 – Arbitration Committee review of results
# May 28 – Announcement of results
Malleus
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Tue 4th May 2010, 2:36pm) *

QUOTE(Rick @ Tue 4th May 2010, 7:02am) *
The next CU and OS elections are coming up!
Has the Cabal announced yet who is supposed to win them?

No doubt if there are any winners who weren't supposed to win they'll be dealt with appropriately.
Gruntled
QUOTE(Malleus @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:08am) *

QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Tue 4th May 2010, 2:36pm) *

QUOTE(Rick @ Tue 4th May 2010, 7:02am) *
The next CU and OS elections are coming up!
Has the Cabal announced yet who is supposed to win them?

No doubt if there are any winners who weren't supposed to win they'll be dealt with appropriately.

Surely it's not a simple vote such that if you get x% you're in and if you get any less you're not. The closers have to determine whether there is a consensus to appoint. As anyone who follows RfA and RfB (presumably most people here) will know, consensus means whatever you want it to mean.
taiwopanfob
QUOTE(Gruntled @ Wed 5th May 2010, 11:08am) *

Surely it's not a simple vote such that if you get x% you're in and if you get any less you're not. The closers have to determine whether there is a consensus to appoint. As anyone who follows RfA and RfB (presumably most people here) will know, consensus means whatever you want it to mean.


Why vote in an election when, once the polls close, some agency is going to step in and make sure you voted for the right guy?

What is the point of using "secure" voting techniques in such an election?
SB_Johnny
QUOTE(taiwopanfob @ Wed 5th May 2010, 7:28am) *

QUOTE(Gruntled @ Wed 5th May 2010, 11:08am) *

Surely it's not a simple vote such that if you get x% you're in and if you get any less you're not. The closers have to determine whether there is a consensus to appoint. As anyone who follows RfA and RfB (presumably most people here) will know, consensus means whatever you want it to mean.


Why vote in an election when, once the polls close, some agency is going to step in and make sure you voted for the right guy?

What is the point of using "secure" voting techniques in such an election?

Simple:

1. The people who vote know who's in good standing with the cabal.
2. The people who vote tend to either support the cabal or are "trolls"
3. Aside from cabal supporters and trolls, nobody else is interested in the elections.
4. After the troll votes are discounted, the vote shows the world how wonderfully consensus-driven Wikipedia is.

Not all that mysterious, after all rolleyes.gif
Moulton
So, it's coming down to the Central Consensual Cabal vs the Terrible Taunting Trobal.
Eva Destruction
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:16pm) *

Simple:

1. The people who vote know who's in good standing with the cabal.
2. The people who vote tend to either support the cabal or are "trolls"
3. Aside from cabal supporters and trolls, nobody else is interested in the elections.
4. After the troll votes are discounted, the vote shows the world how wonderfully consensus-driven Wikipedia is.

Not all that mysterious, after all rolleyes.gif

Even simpler, in this case; only "pre-approved" candidates are allowed to stand in the first place. No prizes for guessing who dishes out permission to stand. I can see a good-intention reason for that—it stops the pedo-clique from being able to game their members into being the ones who make the decisions on kiddy-porn, for instance.
taiwopanfob
QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:21pm) *
Even simpler, in this case; only "pre-approved" candidates are allowed to stand in the first place.


What is the purpose of the five day post-election "review of results" by the ArbCommies?
Eva Destruction
QUOTE(taiwopanfob @ Wed 5th May 2010, 4:15pm) *

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:21pm) *
Even simpler, in this case; only "pre-approved" candidates are allowed to stand in the first place.


What is the purpose of the five day post-election "review of results" by the ArbCommies?

I think that's a clumsy wording for "verifying the winner's identities and checking with Godwin that there's no legal objection to the appointment". I don't know if they conduct any kind of background check, but I assume they do something, given that they insist on proof of identity before they enable any of these "ability to view sensitive material" powers. That's one Wikipedia policy I've no argument with at all, however much the information-wants-to-be-free hardliners whine about it.
Jon Awbrey
QUOTE(taiwopanfob @ Wed 5th May 2010, 11:15am) *

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:21pm) *

Even simpler, in this case; only "pre-approved" candidates are allowed to stand in the first place.


What is the purpose of the five day post-election "review of results" by the ArbCommies?


That's how long it takes to incubate an embryonic Goa'uld Wiki-Parasite.

Jon tongue.gif
Kelly Martin
QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 10:30am) *
I don't know if they conduct any kind of background check, but I assume they do something, given that they insist on proof of identity before they enable any of these "ability to view sensitive material" powers. That's one Wikipedia policy I've no argument with at all, however much the information-wants-to-be-free hardliners whine about it.
The "background check" consists of asking around the Cabal to see if anyone objects.

That window is also used to deal with the relatively unlikely situation in which a candidate which the Cabal wanted elected somehow failed to get the requisite votes. In this case the votes cast against that candidate will be scrutinized to identify what malcontents are opposing the will of the Cabal so they can be deal with appropriately.
Eva Destruction
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Wed 5th May 2010, 7:37pm) *

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 10:30am) *
I don't know if they conduct any kind of background check, but I assume they do something, given that they insist on proof of identity before they enable any of these "ability to view sensitive material" powers. That's one Wikipedia policy I've no argument with at all, however much the information-wants-to-be-free hardliners whine about it.
The "background check" consists of asking around the Cabal to see if anyone objects.

That window is also used to deal with the relatively unlikely situation in which a candidate which the Cabal wanted elected somehow failed to get the requisite votes. In this case the votes cast against that candidate will be scrutinized to identify what malcontents are opposing the will of the Cabal so they can be deal with appropriately.

Pretty much. But I'd like to think that in the current climate, they at least carry out some kind of cursory check, even if it's just googling the name to see if the first hit is "recently convicted sex offender whose hobby is editing Wikipedia from his cell".
taiwopanfob
QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 7:05pm) *
But I'd like to think that in the current climate, they at least carry out some kind of cursory check, even if it's just googling the name to see if the first hit is "recently convicted sex offender whose hobby is editing Wikipedia from his cell".


Considering the jobs the winners of these elections will be doing, this strikes me as the sort of thing that should be known to the electorate.

Before the polls open.

Maybe I missed something, but doesn't the WMF at least verify, in advance of the election, that all candidates meet the necessary conditions to stand as candidates?
NuclearWarfare
QUOTE(taiwopanfob @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:10am) *
Maybe I missed something, but doesn't the WMF at least verify, in advance of the election, that all candidates meet the necessary conditions to stand as candidates?

Depends on the election. Stewards and Board candidates have to verify their identities beforehand, but enwiki checkuser and oversight candidates do it after their election. Both receive access to the tools only after Cary confirms their identity though. How detailed of a process Cary uses to check identities, I have no idea.
Theanima
Well, the candidates are up!

For checkuser, we have Amalthea (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Jamesofur (T-C-L-K-R-D) , MuZemike (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Tiptoety (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

For oversight, we have Arbitrarily0 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Beeblebrox (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Closedmouth (T-C-L-K-R-D) , LessHeard vanU (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Valley2city (T-C-L-K-R-D) .
Eva Destruction
QUOTE(Theanima @ Fri 7th May 2010, 5:15pm) *

Well, the candidates are up!

For checkuser, we have Amalthea (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Jamesofur (T-C-L-K-R-D) , MuZemike (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Tiptoety (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

For oversight, we have Arbitrarily0 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Beeblebrox (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Closedmouth (T-C-L-K-R-D) , LessHeard vanU (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Valley2city (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

I can barely contain my excitement.
Theanima
QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Fri 7th May 2010, 5:24pm) *

QUOTE(Theanima @ Fri 7th May 2010, 5:15pm) *

Well, the candidates are up!

For checkuser, we have Amalthea (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Jamesofur (T-C-L-K-R-D) , MuZemike (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Tiptoety (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

For oversight, we have Arbitrarily0 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Beeblebrox (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Closedmouth (T-C-L-K-R-D) , LessHeard vanU (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Valley2city (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

I can barely contain my excitement.


Yes, it should be entertaining. The candidates aren't really surprising - none appear to be editors who spend their time writing and improving encyclopedia entries.
Apathetic
QUOTE(Theanima @ Fri 7th May 2010, 12:15pm) *

Well, the candidates are up!

For checkuser, we have Amalthea (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Jamesofur (T-C-L-K-R-D) , MuZemike (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Tiptoety (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

For oversight, we have Arbitrarily0 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Beeblebrox (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Closedmouth (T-C-L-K-R-D) , LessHeard vanU (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Valley2city (T-C-L-K-R-D) .


I expect we will also see these three (Ryan Postlethwaite (T-C-L-K-R-D) ; Lankiveil (T-C-L-K-R-D) ; Someguy1221 (T-C-L-K-R-D) ) stand for oversight.

(edit: removed Closedmouth, already noted)
Theanima
QUOTE(Apathetic @ Fri 7th May 2010, 6:10pm) *

QUOTE(Theanima @ Fri 7th May 2010, 12:15pm) *

Well, the candidates are up!

For checkuser, we have Amalthea (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Jamesofur (T-C-L-K-R-D) , MuZemike (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Tiptoety (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

For oversight, we have Arbitrarily0 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Beeblebrox (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Closedmouth (T-C-L-K-R-D) , LessHeard vanU (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Valley2city (T-C-L-K-R-D) .


I expect we will also see these four (Ryan Postlethwaite (T-C-L-K-R-D) ; Lankiveil (T-C-L-K-R-D) ; Someguy1221 (T-C-L-K-R-D) ; Closedmouth (T-C-L-K-R-D) ) stand for oversight.


Closedmouth is already there. Why do you think oversight?
Apathetic
QUOTE(Theanima @ Fri 7th May 2010, 1:12pm) *

QUOTE(Apathetic @ Fri 7th May 2010, 6:10pm) *

QUOTE(Theanima @ Fri 7th May 2010, 12:15pm) *

Well, the candidates are up!

For checkuser, we have Amalthea (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Jamesofur (T-C-L-K-R-D) , MuZemike (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Tiptoety (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

For oversight, we have Arbitrarily0 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Beeblebrox (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Closedmouth (T-C-L-K-R-D) , LessHeard vanU (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Valley2city (T-C-L-K-R-D) .


I expect we will also see these four (Ryan Postlethwaite (T-C-L-K-R-D) ; Lankiveil (T-C-L-K-R-D) ; Someguy1221 (T-C-L-K-R-D) ; Closedmouth (T-C-L-K-R-D) ) stand for oversight.


Closedmouth is already there. Why do you think oversight?


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=360740638

QUOTE

A few more invitations to stand for election have been offered for Oversight permissions; we are awaiting confirmation from those candidates that they are still interested.
Ottava
LessHeard is chosen even though he almost failed his re-RfA for his nasty personal attacks and abuse of others, yet Xeno is not up there even though he is rather polite.

LessHeard makes political attacks and does nothing but what he can show off during, while Xeno does most of the "slave work", is dutiful to the project, and tends to do most of his work quietly.

That is shameful.

The Arbitrators have really shown that they don't care about policy or the community with that choice.
Guido den Broeder
QUOTE(taiwopanfob @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:28pm) *

QUOTE(Gruntled @ Wed 5th May 2010, 11:08am) *

Surely it's not a simple vote such that if you get x% you're in and if you get any less you're not. The closers have to determine whether there is a consensus to appoint. As anyone who follows RfA and RfB (presumably most people here) will know, consensus means whatever you want it to mean.


Why vote in an election when, once the polls close, some agency is going to step in and make sure you voted for the right guy?

What is the point of using "secure" voting techniques in such an election?

The purpose of an election is to get a nice, clean list of future victims. smile.gif
Rick
Oh crap, I should've known that greedy bastard Tiptoety was going to be in the election. Someone bring up the thing about the cops! Oh, how I loathe that Tiptoety! He's already high enough (what with his global sysopness, his sysopness on Meta, his CheckUser and Oversight on Commons, and his sysopness on the Simple Wikibooks and Wikiquote) - he doesn't need to be any higher! I think Heimstern Läufer would be a much better candidate, seeing as he is an admin on a non-Wikimedia Wiki and that he would probably be the first such candidate.
Malleus
QUOTE(Rick @ Sat 8th May 2010, 1:11am) *

Oh crap, I should've known that greedy bastard Tiptoety was going to be in the election. Someone bring up the thing about the cops! Oh, how I loathe that Tiptoety! He's already high enough (what with his global sysopness, his sysopness on Meta, his CheckUser and Oversight on Commons, and his sysopness on the Simple Wikibooks and Wikiquote) - he doesn't need to be any higher! I think Heimstern Läufer would be a much better candidate, seeing as he is an admin on a non-Wikimedia Wiki and that he would probably be the first such candidate.

The election is just a joke isn't it?
NuclearWarfare
QUOTE(Rick @ Sat 8th May 2010, 12:11am) *

Oh crap, I should've known that greedy bastard Tiptoety was going to be in the election. Someone bring up the thing about the cops! Oh, how I loathe that Tiptoety! He's already high enough (what with his global sysopness, his sysopness on Meta, his CheckUser and Oversight on Commons, and his sysopness on the Simple Wikibooks and Wikiquote) - he doesn't need to be any higher! I think Heimstern Läufer would be a much better candidate, seeing as he is an admin on a non-Wikimedia Wiki and that he would probably be the first such candidate.


Is there any reason you essentially posted the same message on two separate threads? And, you know, did you ever think of asking Heim if he wanted to run?
A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Apathetic @ Fri 7th May 2010, 1:10pm) *


I expect we will also see these three (Ryan Postlethwaite (T-C-L-K-R-D) ; Lankiveil (T-C-L-K-R-D) ; Someguy1221 (T-C-L-K-R-D) ) stand for oversight.

(edit: removed Closedmouth, already noted)


Out of 11 million registered user, this is the best they can come up with? Dumb, dumber and Lankiveil. yecch.gif



QUOTE(Ottava @ Fri 7th May 2010, 1:54pm) *

LessHeard is chosen even though he almost failed his re-RfA for his nasty personal attacks and abuse of others, yet Xeno is not up there even though he is rather polite.


If less LessHeard and Xeno had a fist fight, who would win? unsure.gif

QUOTE(Ottava @ Fri 7th May 2010, 1:54pm) *

The Arbitrators have really shown that they don't care about policy or the community with that choice.


If their photographs on Hivemind are any indication, they also don't put much thought into personal hygiene, grooming and weight control. Come on, aren't there any hotties on Wikipedia who want to be an arbitrator? wacko.gif


QUOTE(NuclearWarfare @ Fri 7th May 2010, 8:41pm) *

Is there any reason you essentially posted the same message on two separate threads? And, you know, did you ever think of asking Heim if he wanted to run?


You're much too polite. hrmph.gif

QUOTE(Malleus @ Fri 7th May 2010, 8:18pm) *

The election is just a joke isn't it?


Speaking of joke elections...Malley, is there a new prime minister yet?
Malleus
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:10am) *
Speaking of joke elections...Malley, is there a new prime minister yet?

No, there isn't. Just the same unelected crap one we had before. I'm much more interested to see what Wigan can do against Chelsea on Sunday.
EricBarbour
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:16pm) *
1. The people who vote know who's in good standing with the cabal.
2. The people who vote tend to either support the cabal or are "trolls"
3. Aside from cabal supporters and trolls, nobody else is interested in the elections.
4. After the troll votes are discounted, the vote shows the world how wonderfully consensus-driven Wikipedia is.


Don't forget:

5. The current demented squabble over Jimbo deleting pornographic images from Commons is helping to distract attention away from the CU/Oversight elections. Remarkably convenient. yecch.gif

(And Tiptoety is still a little shit. Just for completeness.)
Ottava
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Sat 8th May 2010, 1:10am) *

If less LessHeard and Xeno had a fist fight, who would win? unsure.gif


LessHeard because Xeno wouldn't resort to such pettiness and LessHeard enjoys taking cheap shots.
Rick
QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sat 8th May 2010, 12:30pm) *

QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Wed 5th May 2010, 1:16pm) *
1. The people who vote know who's in good standing with the cabal.
2. The people who vote tend to either support the cabal or are "trolls"
3. Aside from cabal supporters and trolls, nobody else is interested in the elections.
4. After the troll votes are discounted, the vote shows the world how wonderfully consensus-driven Wikipedia is.


Don't forget:

5. The current demented squabble over Jimbo deleting pornographic images from Commons is helping to distract attention away from the CU/Oversight elections. Remarkably convenient. yecch.gif

(And Tiptoety is still a little shit. Just for completeness.)


Glad you agree. That cop wannabe needs to be taught a BIG lesson. He is a disgrace to Wikipedia; if he was stripped of his tools and blocked indeifintely without chance of coming back, Wikipedia would definitely be a better place.

QUOTE(Theanima @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:15am) *

Well, the candidates are up!

For checkuser, we have Amalthea (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Jamesofur (T-C-L-K-R-D) , MuZemike (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Tiptoety (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

For oversight, we have Arbitrarily0 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Beeblebrox (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Closedmouth (T-C-L-K-R-D) , LessHeard vanU (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Valley2city (T-C-L-K-R-D) .


Well, since there are only four CU candidates, there will be only one loser. I think the one we all want to lose is Tiptoety. Unfortunately, he is probably the least likely to lose.

I think a great movie would be the four CU candidates in a Survivor-like situation: they go through numerous activities and whoever has the least points at the end misses out on the promotion. I really, really hope that Tiptoety would end up being the loser.

QUOTE(Theanima @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:27am) *

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Fri 7th May 2010, 5:24pm) *

QUOTE(Theanima @ Fri 7th May 2010, 5:15pm) *

Well, the candidates are up!

For checkuser, we have Amalthea (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Jamesofur (T-C-L-K-R-D) , MuZemike (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Tiptoety (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

For oversight, we have Arbitrarily0 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Beeblebrox (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Closedmouth (T-C-L-K-R-D) , LessHeard vanU (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Valley2city (T-C-L-K-R-D) .

I can barely contain my excitement.


Yes, it should be entertaining. The candidates aren't really surprising - none appear to be editors who spend their time writing and improving encyclopedia entries.


That's not entirely correct. MuZemike, for example, is a heavy contributor; not long ago, he tripled the size of an article in just one edit ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ninja_Gaiden_II:_The_Dark_Sword_of_Chaos&curid=1564794&diff=345148575&oldid=341868761]), and he has quite a sense of humour (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:125.136.132.228&diff=360679519&oldid=359822826]). And Tiptoety, the one I hate, loathe, and despise, started his Wikipedia career as a contributor to the article about his police department. (This is exactly why Tyler should not be a CheckUser - he is a police cadet and is likely to give CU data to his cronies).
SirFozzie
QUOTE(Malleus @ Fri 7th May 2010, 9:23pm) *

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:10am) *
Speaking of joke elections...Malley, is there a new prime minister yet?

No, there isn't. Just the same unelected crap one we had before. I'm much more interested to see what Wigan can do against Chelsea on Sunday.


Bah. Who cares about the EPL Title, Fulham's going for the Europa League title mid-week! (yeah, I know I know, it's a two-bob title, but hey, gotta root for the Yank!)

We now return you to your normally scheduled discussion.
CharlotteWebb
QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 3:30pm) *

I don't know if they conduct any kind of background check, but I assume they do something, given that they insist on proof of identity before they enable any of these "ability to view sensitive material" powers. That's one Wikipedia policy I've no argument with at all, however much the information-wants-to-be-free hardliners whine about it.

Seems like one would need to know what that "something" is before forming an opinion on it.

QUOTE(taiwopanfob @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:10am) *

Maybe I missed something, but doesn't the WMF at least verify, in advance of the election, that all candidates meet the necessary conditions to stand as candidates?

Seems like a rational person wouldn't submit that information to WMF unless and until knowing he or she had some chance of winning... i.e. that the process is rigged in their favor (or at least, not rigged against them).

Of course if they don't meet the "necessary conditions" when announced as a tentative winner there should be plenty of runners-up. However there are not.

Of course if nobody qualifies I'd be tickled to death.
Kelly Martin
Possibly of some interest would be this, over on Commons. Apparently our little Portland whacker pissed someone off.
Theanima
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Sat 8th May 2010, 8:22pm) *

Possibly of some interest would be this, over on Commons. Apparently our little Portland whacker pissed someone off.


Abigor, the same admin who abusively retaliated against Ottava Rima and blocked him for a month.
EricBarbour
QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Sat 8th May 2010, 12:22pm) *
Possibly of some interest would be this, over on Commons. Apparently our little Portland whacker pissed someone off.

Ty pissed off a Commons porn-lover, to be specific. Because he deleted a priceless photo or two (or three). laugh.gif

You wanna Hasten The Day? Induce the Wiki-mutants to fight among themselves over issues like the Commons porn. Inclusionists vs. deletionists, Jimbo-lovers vs. "we don't need him anymore"ers, that kind of thing. Let the Glorious Project tear itself apart---from within.
Rick
Oh, man. If only Tyler would withdraw or be knocked off the election. Someone needs to bring up the police concerns.
Theanima
QUOTE(Rick @ Wed 12th May 2010, 7:20am) *

Oh, man. If only Tyler would withdraw or be knocked off the election. Someone needs to bring up the police concerns.


They do because...?
Cock-up-over-conspiracy
QUOTE(Rick @ Wed 12th May 2010, 6:20am) *
Oh, man. If only Tyler would withdraw or be knocked off the election. Someone needs to bring up the police concerns.

Are you going to tell us what he actually did Rick ... to you or not, I don't care. I am not going to judge you.

I would just like to see the evidence documented. It is what we are good for around here.

Thanks.
Eva Destruction
QUOTE(Cock-up-over-conspiracy @ Wed 12th May 2010, 3:39pm) *

QUOTE(Rick @ Wed 12th May 2010, 6:20am) *
Oh, man. If only Tyler would withdraw or be knocked off the election. Someone needs to bring up the police concerns.

Are you going to tell us what he actually did Rick ... to you or not, I don't care. I am not going to judge you.

I would just like to see the evidence documented. It is what we are good for around here.

Thanks.

For once I find myself agreeing with Cock-up. Either explain what your beef is with the guy, or shut up. WR isn't your personal attack site.
A Horse With No Name
QUOTE(Ottava @ Fri 7th May 2010, 10:32pm) *

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Sat 8th May 2010, 1:10am) *

If less LessHeard and Xeno had a fist fight, who would win? unsure.gif


LessHeard because Xeno wouldn't resort to such pettiness and LessHeard enjoys taking cheap shots.


Funny, I'd put my $$$ on Xeno -- he looks mild-mannered, but in a bar brawl I'd expect him to turn into a fighting machine.

QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sat 8th May 2010, 3:21am) *

Of course if nobody qualifies I'd be tickled to death.


Ooooh, mama...I didn't know you were ticklish. evilgrin.gif


QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 12th May 2010, 12:32pm) *
Either explain what your beef is with the guy, or shut up. WR isn't your personal attack site.


Or if you must make attacks, take a couple of shots at Lar. wink.gif


QUOTE(Malleus @ Fri 7th May 2010, 9:23pm) *

No, there isn't. Just the same unelected crap one we had before.


Well, congrats on getting new leadership. smile.gif
Rick
QUOTE
Are you going to tell us what he actually did Rick ... to you or not, I don't care. I am not going to judge you.

I would just like to see the evidence documented. It is what we are good for around here.

Thanks.

QUOTE

For once I find myself agreeing with Cock-up. Either explain what your beef is with the guy, or shut up. WR isn't your personal attack site.


Ummm, if you had read "High School Kid who Pretends to Be a Cop Up for CU", you'd know. That thread is all about how he was up for CU despite being a law enforcment cadet, meaning he would be very likely to misuse whatever CU data he gets. Oh, and what about the time when Peter Damian improved a stub article and Tyler reverted it all? And yet another reason I dislike Tyler is because HE'S GREEDY! He has admin (or better) powers on at least six Wikimedia projects, as well as being a global sysop! Also, he has used an IP address that is an open proxy, and vandalised while logged out!
NuclearWarfare
QUOTE(Rick @ Thu 13th May 2010, 1:53pm) *
he has used an IP address that is an open proxy, and vandalised while logged out!


Care to share your evidence?
Killiondude
QUOTE(NuclearWarfare @ Thu 13th May 2010, 9:25am) *

QUOTE(Rick @ Thu 13th May 2010, 1:53pm) *
Blah blah blah.


Care to share your evidence?

He seems like the type of person that has lots of evidence.
NuclearWarfare
QUOTE(Killiondude @ Thu 13th May 2010, 4:35pm) *
He seems like the type of person that has lots of evidence.


Of course.
Rick
QUOTE(NuclearWarfare @ Fri 14th May 2010, 2:25am) *

QUOTE(Rick @ Thu 13th May 2010, 1:53pm) *
he has used an IP address that is an open proxy, and vandalised while logged out!


Care to share your evidence?


Well, in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=195903356, the IP address 63.105.27.175, which is an open proxy, posts a comment on AIAV, then Tyler immediately changes the signature from the IP address to his username with the summary "oops forgot to sign in".
MZMcBride
You still haven't explained why you're so butthurt, Rick.
NuclearWarfare
QUOTE(Rick @ Fri 14th May 2010, 1:24am) *

QUOTE(NuclearWarfare @ Fri 14th May 2010, 2:25am) *

QUOTE(Rick @ Thu 13th May 2010, 1:53pm) *
he has used an IP address that is an open proxy, and vandalised while logged out!


Care to share your evidence?


Well, in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=195903356, the IP address 63.105.27.175, which is an open proxy, posts a comment on AIAV, then Tyler immediately changes the signature from the IP address to his username with the summary "oops forgot to sign in".


"You cannot view this diff because one of the revisions has been deleted."

In any case, this seems to have been in March 2008 (which also means that it may or may not have been an open proxy then). There are also no edits since 2008 from that IP, and there is no evidence that all the edits from the IP were actually made by him. Indeed, why would he be vandalizing his own user talk? Other people's user talk pages, I could understand, but his own?
Zoloft
QUOTE(NuclearWarfare @ Fri 14th May 2010, 2:20am) *

"You cannot view this diff because one of the revisions has been deleted."

In any case, this seems to have been in March 2008 (which also means that it may or may not have been an open proxy then). There are also no edits since 2008 from that IP, and there is no evidence that all the edits from the IP were actually made by him. Indeed, why would he be vandalizing his own user talk? Other people's user talk pages, I could understand, but his own?

Reichstag fire? evilgrin.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.