Zoloft steps down from moderating

For serious discussion of the "major" forum for Wikipedia criticism and how it fails.
User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Zoloft steps down from moderating

Post by CrowsNest » Fri Mar 30, 2018 1:39 am

So, not only is Zoloft clearly not stepping down from moderating Wikipediocracy like he said he would, he seems to be actively trying to position it as part of the Resistance/Social Justice/Progressive movement, or whatever the fuck its called.

It's no coincidence, of course, that this is precisely where the most precious of Wikipediots like to position themselves too.

Laying down an acceptable publications list.......(what next, informing people Breitbart might not be a fair and balanced news outlet?)
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 71#p217171
Note: Evolution News is the propaganda organ of the Discovery Institute — which exists to promote ‘Intelligent Design’ in schools as part of a plan to displace Evolution theory with theistic Creationism.

TL;DR - Fake News
(he doesn't even bother to say if he's actually declaring the story in question to be fake, which would be good to know given its obvious relevance to Wikipedia criticism)

Shutting down obviously relevant topics of discussion based on his prejudices and desire to control what people consider important.....
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 76#p217276
It’s locked because the topic is a RWNJ obsession about a perceived injustice although the actual event was trivial. It’s a waste of our time.
Only a fool would fail to see the various Wikipedia criticism angles in this......
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/ ... -an-agenda?

Anroth, being an even bigger fool, had prior to that just claimed "no one cares who Cathy Newman is." Brain dead.

Whatever the fuck this is...
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 77#p217277
t’s widely regarded as improper to refer to a trans person by a name and identity they have left behind.
Is he laying down a new board policy? Or showing his support for one possible outcome of that Wikipedia edit dispute?

All told, it's shaping up rather nicely for Wikipediocracy to become just another tightly controlled tone policed venue for mutual back-slappery, where the lesser lights of the art of debate and inquiry congratulate each other for identifying the acceptable viewpoints and insulating themselves from contrary opinion, as if that is somehow going to ease the pain of what that sort of cowardly safe spacery has already reaped on the world.

As the man himself is fond if saying,.....
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 00#p215200
Bravo!

User avatar
Mutineer
Sucks Fan
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:11 pm

Re: Zoloft steps down from moderating

Post by Mutineer » Sat Mar 31, 2018 4:19 pm

Zoloft's "It’s widely regarded as improper to refer to a trans person by a name and identity they have left behind" is just such a pompous statement. So Bruce Jenner is now "Caitlyn Jenner." I don't speak mockingly of such a person, but who will the person be tomorrow. Maybe "Hex."
I am "Modsquad" here, and participate, but I don't want you to think we can't have an angry argument.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Zoloft steps down from moderating

Post by ericbarbour » Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:09 pm

CrowsNest wrote:So, not only is Zoloft clearly not stepping down from moderating Wikipediocracy like he said he would, he seems to be actively trying to position it as part of the Resistance/Social Justice/Progressive movement, or whatever the fuck its called.

It's no coincidence, of course, that this is precisely where the most precious of Wikipediots like to position themselves too.

Mutineer wrote:Zoloft's "It’s widely regarded as improper to refer to a trans person by a name and identity they have left behind" is just such a pompous statement. So Bruce Jenner is now "Caitlyn Jenner." I don't speak mockingly of such a person, but who will the person be tomorrow. Maybe "Hex."

Get used to it. This was their inevitable direction since 2014. It's why I quit in disgust in 2015 when they removed my moderator rights and shrieked at me for "daring to edit Encyclopedia Dramatica". Wikipediocracy is so pathetic by now that they don't have an ED article, and will probably never get one. Too lame and trivial.

I'd make more jokes about Hex but he's gone flouncing back to Wikipedia. His user page is risible--he might be the only admin doing this by now. Most of his "fellow janitors" are still abusing authority and shitting on content writers and petty vandals. And so, he bails the ocean out with his little teaspoon. :P

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Zoloft steps down from moderating

Post by CrowsNest » Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:45 pm

ericbarbour wrote:I'd make more jokes about Hex but he's gone flouncing back to Wikipedia. His user page is risible--he might be the only admin doing this by now. Most of his "fellow janitors" are still abusing authority and shitting on content writers and petty vandals. And so, he bails the ocean out with his little teaspoon. :P
This, I will never understand. Accepts Wikipedia is fundamentally broken, but sticks around to prevent harm. All he is doing is prolonging it, since with every edit, he is ensuring someone somewhere can claim Wikipedia works, simply by pointing to the fact there was an issue, and an "Administrator" fixed it.

These people need to wise up and realise the fastest way to reform Wikipedia, if we assume that is even possible, is to actively make sure some aspect of it which is teetering on the edge, actually fails, big time, so people notice. Even though he admits it's impossible not to notice the scale of the problems, people are seemingly ignoring them. So make sure they can't.

This is the guy who, through sheer bloody mindedness, pushed through BPL-PROD. A meagre reform, but reform nonetheless. So why did he stop? He should have kept pushing, kept kicking, kept challenging his peers to block him if they thought what he was doing was wrong. Be a disruptor, and proudly state you of all people are acting in Wikipedia's best interests.

This is why I have no respect for the reformers. They're just not even really trying. But they stay, even though they hate the place and the work they do makes them miserable (the digital equivalent of a sewage worker, but unpaid). It can only be addiction.

User avatar
AndrewForson
Sucks Critic
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 7:56 am

Re: Zoloft steps down from moderating

Post by AndrewForson » Sun Apr 01, 2018 11:19 am

Mutineer wrote:Zoloft's "It’s widely regarded as improper to refer to a trans person by a name and identity they have left behind" is just such a pompous statement. So Bruce Jenner is now "Caitlyn Jenner." I don't speak mockingly of such a person, but who will the person be tomorrow. Maybe "Hex."

In some circles perhaps. In other circles it's regarded as improper to refer to a titled member of the royal family or aristocracy by a name and identity they have left behind, but Wikipedians are for some reason less willing to go along with that particular set of conventions.

Neither of these conventions is quite the issue for an encyclopaedia, which is, should an encyclopaedia report the fact of a previous name and identity. Reporting that Caitlyn Jenner used to be called Bruce is not the same referring to them as Bruce. I can well understand that there are many reasons why the subject of a biographical article in an encyclopaedia might wish it not to mention certain facts about their past, but that does not automatically mean that it is improper for an encyclopaedia to do so.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Zoloft steps down from moderating

Post by ericbarbour » Sun Apr 01, 2018 9:05 pm

AndrewForson wrote:
Mutineer wrote:Zoloft's "It’s widely regarded as improper to refer to a trans person by a name and identity they have left behind" is just such a pompous statement. So Bruce Jenner is now "Caitlyn Jenner." I don't speak mockingly of such a person, but who will the person be tomorrow. Maybe "Hex."

In some circles perhaps. In other circles it's regarded as improper to refer to a titled member of the royal family or aristocracy by a name and identity they have left behind, but Wikipedians are for some reason less willing to go along with that particular set of conventions.

Neither of these conventions is quite the issue for an encyclopaedia, which is, should an encyclopaedia report the fact of a previous name and identity. Reporting that Caitlyn Jenner used to be called Bruce is not the same referring to them as Bruce. I can well understand that there are many reasons why the subject of a biographical article in an encyclopaedia might wish it not to mention certain facts about their past, but that does not automatically mean that it is improper for an encyclopaedia to do so.

Your blathering would have some validity, IF you were talking about an actual encyclopedia. Whatever Wikipedia is, I would not call it a "legitimate encyclopedia".

User avatar
AndrewForson
Sucks Critic
Posts: 266
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 7:56 am

Re: Zoloft steps down from moderating

Post by AndrewForson » Sun Apr 01, 2018 9:19 pm

Wikipedia claims to be an encyclopaedia, and the person whose comments I was quoting apparently believes that it is, or might turn into one some day. You don't, and, as it happens, I don't either. But the question about the extent to which an encyclopaedia, actual or potential, should defer to the preferences of its subjects in what it writes about them is of weight independent of those beliefs. You could have had a productive discussion on that topic if you had not been keener on displaying yourself as a blustering blowhard instead.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Zoloft steps down from moderating

Post by CrowsNest » Mon Apr 02, 2018 12:22 pm

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... 3741#p3741

Well done Zoloft. This is your fault, you have ruined what was a promising critic site with your weak and ineffectual leadership, and indeed your total and utter lack of belief in your actual mission. All you want to be is a safe space for fuckwits like Anroth. Your own cowardice means you're not even willing to say if you respect this guy and think he is knowledgeable or not (and in a way, saying you don't respect him but will still allow him to have his say, would make you look better than what the opposite implies).

This is why you were welcomed with open arms at Wikimania, you are their original and best useful idiot. You represent absolutely no threat, none whatsoever. They probably laughed the minute you left the room. Anroth probably laughs at how easily you are manipulated so that he can have an easy life, banning people like me who can quite easily dismantle his so called opinions with simple and obvious facts. He strikes me as being that sort of prick. A Wikipediot, in other words.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Zoloft steps down from moderating

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:33 am

Note: I've been absent for a while, taking a break. I'm back now and will pitch in.
Who's going to be first to say their first notable uptick in activity in years, albeit of questionable utility, and not including the blog, occurred when he wasn't pitching in?

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Zoloft steps down from moderating

Post by ericbarbour » Wed Aug 08, 2018 2:16 am

CrowsNest wrote:As the man himself is fond if saying,.....
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 00#p215200
Bravo!

Yeah, that settles it for me. Tarantino is clearly some sort of biased propaganda operative--his issues with Wikipedia have "major qualifications", making him no more trustworthy than the arrogant little shitheads who run Wikipedia itself. Other than being a leftist of "some description", I don't see why he considers running Wikipediocracy to be a useful time consumer. What the hell is he really trying to do?

Wikipediocracy started with a "mission statement" originally. It wasn't much but it was something. Now it's obvious that they don't have any "mission" except the usual website-run-by-small-dictators crap; you have "free speech" until you don't. Everything is quicksand. And suck up to the mods or they will censor/disappear you in a remarkably Stalinistic way.

Post Reply