Vigilant@Wikipediocracy wrote:So, here at the end of time, we see that the case is all about Laura Hale and her undisclosed, paid, conflict-of-interest editing while being protected by multiple wiki insiders, the Chair of the board, a trust and safety member and a member of ARBCOM.
Would FramGate have even happened if this information had been known at the outset?
Conspiracy to commit obstruction of justice would be the charge for the complainants if this were a court of law.
You fuckers owe Fram a massive apology.
You owe people a blog post.
No way in hell can you expect readers to wade through 100 pages of garbage to determine if these accusations are true, or even defensible.
No way in hell can you plausibly act like you think these are true, but decline the opportunity to present such an explosive scandal in a format easily digested by outsiders, and most importantly, by the media.
You can hand the task off to some other chump if you want, but there's clearly no good reason why you would do so. You clearly want to be seen as the primary author, and you're clearly in the best position to know where you even have to begin the Herculean task of standing this bullshit up.
The only plausible reason you want to hand it off, with your "blessings", is you're too chicken to actually put your name on it, to expose yourself to the inevitable howls of laughter and massive lawsuit.
You're the guy who has got a massive boner just because the Foundation decided to use expensive lawyers to fight off Abd's entirely reasonable request to know why he was banned, or have it removed from the public record. So we all know you know
that if the media prints these allegations, the defamed parties are going to go nuclear on whoever the media identities as the source. These are career ending allegations, make no mistake.
As we already know, the only mentions of the foundational stone of this conspiracy theory that have appeared in the media so far, have been attributed as the unverified claims of a bunch of randoms at some place called Wikipediocracy. And even that mere basic factual claim, is supposedly easily verified through public records, according to CSI:Fuckwit. The media knows nothing said in those threads can be trusted, they know they have a defensible claim that if the shit hits the fan, they were deliberately misled into reporting libel.
I'm fine with people bravely putting their head above the parapet for the cause. But under no circumstances should you do so just to take the bullet that is rightly intended for this slimy little coward.
This isn't a game. This is about ruining people's lives. You better believe the stakes are high.
There is obviously a part of me that even wants this potential blog post to be the thing that ultimately destroys Wikipediocracy, an outcome that would mean the cause of serious and credible Wikipedia criticism would be immensely strengthened. But that place has a habit of making innocent and ill-informed people carry the can for their ill intent.
If Vigilant won't write it, it has to be either a work of their nominated anonymous coward CornPoke McGilliguddy (although I think since he was since later claimed by Zoloft, it would actually have to be one of their infamous pieces that is literally by-lined as "Anonymous Coward"), meaning the whole site gets torpedoed. If not, it has to be one of the other scum, an Eagle or Jbhunley, someone absolutely deserving of a shit sandwich for their breakfast, lunch and dinner. I can virtually guarantee whose names won't be on it, and if you don't know who they are, you probably shouldn't even be considering taking on the task.
Let nobody forget, Vigilant believes anyone sued after making these claims, would win, because truth is an absolute defence. That's true cowardice right there, not even prepared to stand behind what he insists is the absolute truth.
Say nothing if you agree with the entirety of this post, Vigilant.