|
|
Post by The Dark Knight on Mar 18, 2016 14:34:32 GMT
Any regular readers will know I'm no admirer of Cla68, yet I have to feel sympathy with the way WO has just thrown him under the bus. His WP account was indeffed on 13 March, and it's one of those extra special sekret evidence blocks, so cannot be undone without arbcom clearance.
Seasoned critics will know that arbcom have every reason to want rid of him, since, despite the many idiotic ways how he goes about it, he was at least a regular exposer of WPs faults, and not in the happy clappy Village Pump fashion.
What's fascinating here is how WO have reacted. Their regular members have just rolled over and accepted the block is legit, even though they cannot know for sure what happened. Worse, they're allowing his blocker to state on WO that they can get fucked if they think they'll be getting an explanation from her. Beeblebrox is on scene too, just to give his opinion that this is how it's going to be, so deal with it, bitches.
Without cooperation from these scum, they never will know - not unless Cla68 makes a statement that is detailed enough to convict him, but vague enough to be agreed as the truth by arbcom. Knowing Cla68, he probably won't acquiesce in such a way, and they won't either, not when it's in their interests to let people continue to assume it's all perfectly above board.
Even if he has been caught bang to rights, even if he's not even bothered about the block (and I have my own theories why he wouldn't be too concerned to see this account become dormant), you would have thought the reaction to it on WO would be quite different. They do, after all, have plenty of actual examples of such blocks being used in less than honest ways, to silence critics and eliminate dissent.
Beeblebrox's statement is also bullshit - there's plenty of precedent of such blocks being explained on WP in sufficient detail to suppress dissent while maintaining the basic purpose of the sekrecy. But of course, that only happens when the blocked person is an insider, not a critic. There wouldn't be half as many critics if we didn't already know how often such blocks are simply political acts.
In short, this is a WO trustee, being treated on WO by WPians exactly how they would be treated if it was all happening on AN/I. As always, there has been zero benefit, information wise, to allowing various WPians to get comfortable and feel welcome at WO. All it has brought is aggravation and annoyance at their behaviour (speaking as a genuine critic - there maybe no one left on WO who feel the same).
What better example of the seamless integration and supplication of WO into the cult? Well, until another occurs next week I suppose.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Knight on Mar 18, 2016 19:16:12 GMT
Ha. Leave it to Vig. to actually turn the thread back around to examining WTF really happened and whether the usual shenanigans are involved. He even gives us a shout out by linking to our Mathsci-Mastcell blog post for context (come on over Vig, you're wasted on WO). Credit to KingsIndian too (I'm worried how often I keep saying that) - even though he's an immersed Wikipedian, he's doing a better job at digging down to the WTF nature of the block than many of WO's regular "critics". As I suspected, Cla68 is not that bothered if he is unblocked. Which is good, as it's unlikely he will be. Clearly he thinks this WP account has outlived its usefulness, although his claim this is part of a general awakening at the futility of editing WP seems dubious. Also unsurprisingly, he has posted his explanation of the block which is a mixture of believable (Mastcell was stalking him, and seized on an opportunity when it presented itself) and batshit insane (this is all part of the sexist "pro-science" cabal's agenda). It does appear that the block is dubious given the facts - if they are all the facts - but WO has a long way to go before that thread presents a coherent case for anyone to be marching on WP with torches or getting on the phone to AP's Wikipedia desk. As is usual with Cla68 dramas, in particular this science cabal hobby horse, it's incredibly difficult to follow - and I suspect that is because, as seems usual for him, none of what is being posted by him is really meant for the general readers or the uninitiated - it's meant for the other participants in the drama, namely arbcom, Mastcell, and other cabal members. Noticeably, Cla68 hasn't even commented on his fellow Trustee Crabby Kelly giving it to him with both barrels based on what she simply "understood" to have happened. A possible sign that Cla68 is being readied for a forced expulsion from WO as well? Perhaps they've rumbled him for being the sort of lone wolf I outlined here. As I predicted, the thread will go nowhere without the other side's full account of what happened and who said what, when, and why, which they will not give, as it's not in their interests to do so. If WO had its eyes on the "mission", it would be hammering home that message to all readers, rather than trying to tease out details from Cla68 and carry on as if their thread was an alternate AN/I block review. Leave that shit to the Dennis Brown's of the world (assuming you can stop them using WO as the alternate AN/I, as they so love to do). I note with some amusement that Cla68's indef is considered a worthwhile topic of discussion for WO-MB, even though it's unlikely to interest anyone not already bashing away on WP/WO 24/7. I'm not saying that's wrong, but I think it must sting a bit to all those other people who have tried to have the circumstances of their bans discussed on WO to the same level of concern/detail, and failed, because Greg/Mission/fuck off. |
|
larkin
Junior Member
Posts: 95
|
Post by larkin on Mar 18, 2016 19:20:29 GMT
Any regular readers will know I'm no admirer of Cla68, yet I have to feel sympathy with the way WO has just thrown him under the bus. His WP account was indeffed on 13 March, and it's one of those extra special sekret evidence blocks, so cannot be undone without arbcom clearance. <snip> Worse, they're allowing his blocker to state on WO that they can get fucked if they think they'll be getting an explanation from her. <snip> What better example of the seamless integration and supplication of WO into the cult? Well, until another occurs next week I suppose. How many of these secret bannings are there these days? I thought they were reserved for obvious psychopaths like Demiurge and Coat. I suspect these days if you utter the slightest dissent "off-wiki", you are silenced. So much for the people's encyclopedia. That was the divine Molly right? We'll do her first over at site. This weekend if we have time. International Poetry Day 2016 is on Monday and takes precedence, but we should be able to fit her in. I think WO is now sufficiently suspect to countenance caution with IPs when posting. Added: I shall have to hold fire on Molly for a while until I finally research what Gamergate was all about. Should be able to use the flipper sex though. Rest of it pretty tedious to tell the truth. Is Molly really into Satanism or is that just a flipper thing? Also does she really rescue cats or is that just a satanist flipper thing, the poor bastards? Help appreciated. |
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Knight on Mar 18, 2016 20:03:44 GMT
Demiurge etc were WP:OFFICE bans, applied across all WMF sites. That's a whole different kettle of fish to this, which is just an indef block from WP based on non-public evidence - hence why it cannot be undone without consulting arbcom first (because, for reasons best known to the Wikipediots, arbitrators are trusted with private material - you know as well as I do that people are mad if they trust the likes of Drmies with anything).
No evidence has been passed from WO in this case, but on the issue of whether or not WO is complicit, deliberately or otherwise, in WP bannings which involve non-public (or difficult to find) info, then who can say. They will vehemently deny it ever happens, but I'd argue the depth and breadth of the cross-pollination between the two sites makes it an inevitability for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by on Mar 18, 2016 20:24:12 GMT
It is all about wether one should name one ms "Victoria Nakamine"...or not.
The article in question was formerly a FA with her name in it. Alas, this year her name must be oversighted...
|
|
larkin
Junior Member
Posts: 95
|
Post by larkin on Mar 18, 2016 21:06:28 GMT
Demiurge etc were WP:OFFICE bans, applied across all WMF sites. That's a whole different kettle of fish to this, which is just an indef block from WP based on non-public evidence <snip> Ah yes, thanks for that. Appreciated. As I've said before I'm really not very knowledgeable about Wikipedia. |
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Knight on Mar 18, 2016 21:34:39 GMT
It is all about wether one should name one ms "Victoria Nakamine"...or not. The article in question was formerly a FA with her name in it. Alas, this year her name must be oversighted... Cla68? Whoever you are - on point of fact, while this would appear the most likely explanation, nobody else actually knows whether this is the case or not - no details have been given by the blocker, and Mastcell is certainly saying nothing. It could be about something completely different, and it perhaps suits Cla68/you to act like it's about this issue (although you would have thought the blocker would have said something, but again, that assumes it's in her interest for the truth to come out as well). I would be inclined to believe this was the (nominal) issue at hand, if he/you didn't appear to ready and willing to abandon the Cla68 account. In those terms, this has to be the least bothered any WP addict has ever been at the news their supply has just been cut off, their ability to trade on their record/experience/knowledge, gone at a stroke, their ability to fight the cabal, nullified. I cannot in all seriousness believe Cla68/you have simply grown tired of WP and are willing to walk away now, so either there is something else going on here, or he/you are confident of over-turning this on appeal (and I question where that believe comes from, since if all the facts are on the table, your case seems weak at best, all things considered). I think there's more to this than meets the eye, more even than a simple case of a classic arbcom head shot. The fact that none of WO's staff seems remotely bothered about this either, that's telling too. Your/Cla68's work as a critic has never particularly sat right with me, and I Don't Want To Believe the conspiracy theories that are currently running through my head right now. |
|
|
|
Post by ericbarbour on Mar 19, 2016 22:20:33 GMT
(come on over Vig, you're wasted on WO) Eh, don't waste your breath. Vig'll go down with the ship eventually. And I still dunno what to say about Cla, he's mastered the black art of being obtuse and passive-aggressive. Plus I expect he will be unbanned in a few months, rendering all this moot. It's happened before! |
|
|
|
Post by Flip Flopped on Mar 21, 2016 1:02:27 GMT
And I still dunno what to say about Cla, he's mastered the black art of being obtuse and passive-aggressive. Plus I expect he will be unbanned in a few months, rendering all this moot. It's happened before! Yes, quite. I suspect to patch this up Ainsworth has to wait until White (aka Gorilla Warfare) ends her term on ArbCom. I'm supposing Ainsworth wrote her an email that didn't sit right and that got him banned. I base that supposition on his ongoing obscurantist crusade against anti-sexism, political correctness, or some such. Agreeing with TDK, I sense friction between Ainsworth and the WO elite. I also doubt Ainsworth will stop editing WP; it's a crusade for him. |
|
|
|
Post by The Sorrow on Mar 21, 2016 5:35:31 GMT
I'm still trying to figure out who moved the WO thread about Cla's ban to the Embarrassment Forum and for what reason. No one seems to know.
|
|
|
|
Post by Flip Flopped on Mar 21, 2016 20:46:46 GMT
I'm still trying to figure out who moved the WO thread about Cla's ban to the Embarrassment Forum and for what reason. No one seems to know. A. I really hope there is actually a WO subforum titled "Embarrassment." Once the forum goes belly up, the person turning out the lights can move many, many threads there. B. If A., then it's hilarious Ainsworth's (aka Cla) WP ban thread was moved there. C. Those with the opportunity to move the thread include Burns, McGeady, McConomy, Kelly Martin, Scott Martin, Cassidy, and Platt. C. Is the thread still in the "Embarrassment" forum or was it moved back into public view? |
|
|
|
Post by The Sorrow on Mar 22, 2016 3:22:01 GMT
I'm still trying to figure out who moved the WO thread about Cla's ban to the Embarrassment Forum and for what reason. No one seems to know. A. I really hope there is actually a WO subforum titled "Embarrassment." Once the forum goes belly up, the person turning out the lights can move many, many threads there. B. If A., then it's hilarious Ainsworth's (aka Cla) WP ban thread was moved there. C. Those with the opportunity to move the thread include Burns, McGeady, McConomy, Kelly Martin, Scott Martin, Cassidy, and Platt. C. Is the thread still in the "Embarrassment" forum or was it moved back into public view? You have to be logged in to see it. It's called the "Wikimedian Folks Too Embarrassing for Public Viewing" forum. |
|
