See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ANI..._block_messages.

Admin Bobak has been placing "creative" messages on the talk pages of users he blocks, to let them know they are blocked. Some of the messages are slightly humorous, most are very immature and childish, and a few are really bad. Most agree that these messages reflect poorly on Wikipedia and show unprofessionalism, but some, like Baseball Bugs, dispute this, saying vandals have no right to being treated politely.

"Wikipedia already has somewhat of a reputation as a place run by kids, and if hundreds of people are being blocked with Bobak's messages, that bad reputation is just being reinforced. We need mature admins, not apparently childish ones." -- Deli nk

Baseball Bugs is one of these Wiki-weirdos who run around creating chaos rather than content. For a while, he had a running feud with Tanthalas39, which was pretty pathetic given both men (and they are both adults) are truly weaponless in a battle of wits.

As for Bobak, he and DragonflySixtySeven should have a contest about who is the most childish admin when it comes to insulting blocked editors.

What is it about adminship: is there a "Leave Your Brains at the Door" sign outside of the RfA room?

No, they just think they're being funny with their big bad toys.

The excuse is that behaving childishly doesn't matter as those blocked are witches sockpuppets and vandals and therefore undeserving of anything better. The truth is that it is a simple but effective device to make it that much harder for the blockee, usually nothing other than an editor coming off second-best in a spat with an admin, to frame an effective response -- assuming they are foolish enough to want to appeal. The sarcastic message on the talk page clouds the victim's judgement by provoking anger and resentment, and unconsciously biases the reader against the appeal. A plan with no downside really.

I didn't find any of them particularly funny. I 'm also surprised that Bobak claims to be a lawyer, yet carries on this way.

If he was defending a client, I wonder how he would respond to a trial judge telling the accused "lulz! I've got a one-way ticket to Assrapeville with your name on it!"

He's guilty, so no need for decorum, right?

I'd be happy to bring up Baseball Bugs's RFA from March. Massive lulz, complete waste of time.

(Last year, instead of writing about baseball, he spent a lot of time "reverting" and "improving" the Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, and "Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories" pages.)

If that isn't enough warning that Bugs is a loose screw and ought to be banned, I don't know what is. He is a textbook example of an "editor" who adds very little content, and doesn't even deal with vandalism effectively, but does enjoy arguing with people at ANI.

Bobak (T-C-L-K-R-D) looks like a burnout case to me. He started out in 2005/06 actually adding some worthwhile material. But in the last year or so, very little content but plenty of whack-a-mole and trivial edits.

One would think a practicing lawyer would know better.

Bobak is an idiot who ought to be desysopped.

Lawyers are not comedians, nor does possession of a J.D. automatically mean one has style, let alone brains. (But, then again, no one ever accused Xeno of having a sense of humor!)



Oh, no, not another one! He has to stand in line, we already have a surplus!

Bobak is a lawyer? I'd have never guessed.