View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sun Sep 15, 2019 8:34 am




Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Anroth 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:01 pm
Posts: 246
Reply with quote
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... f=8&t=9197

where's Rogol? ;-(

He was so much better at ontologizin' than I'll ever be... that bigly pile-on data debate about (private) properties sounds daunting. ^^


Thu Apr 05, 2018 1:30 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 2716
Reply with quote
AndrewForson wrote:
This whole "free speech" thing is depressing. What Anroth means is that Erika is not free to say anything that upsets him, but he is free to say things that upset Erika. In short, he is a bully.

The whole thing is fucking depressing, Andrew. Wikipedia is in general depressing. The best thing to do is to stay as far from it as you can.
And what Erika is trying is impossible, being a part of the system and criticize it.
Crowsnest warned her, Renée did, but she didn't listen. Wikipedia is a sekt, you have to accept whatever the sekt decides without any critic.
The best thing she can do is to get blocked, to make five socks and vote openly or something like that.
Wikipedia is a addiction and that is on of the reasons only a few people dear to criticize Wikipedia. Because at the moment you do so you are out, and lose were you are addicted to. For here it should be far better to forget Wikipedia.

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:06 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3541
Reply with quote
Anroth wrote:
Ultimately a lot of people who are looking at the Wehrmacht are probably more interested in the military organisation than the political views of its officers.
Indoctrination of its future officers with the right political views was a big part of the organisation of the Wehrmacht, you dumb piece of shit. A decent encyclopedia would and should educate people of that fact. Wikipedia doesn't, because it is written and managed by morons like you.


Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:48 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3541
Reply with quote
Anroth is a video game addict.....

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 15#p218115

What a surprise. Wikipedia attracts gamers like flies on shit.

Well done Zoloft, you created a chill out room for video gamers.

Idiot.


Tue May 01, 2018 2:21 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 2716
Reply with quote
CrowsNest wrote:
Anroth is a video game addict.....

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 15#p218115

What a surprise. Wikipedia attracts gamers like flies on shit.

Well done Zoloft, you created a chill out room for video gamers.

Idiot.

It's ridiculous, but not a surprise. Of course is Wikipedia complete infected by gamergate and gamers, who else is so addicted to the internet as that group? Who else wants to spend hours and hours behind a computer? Yes Crowsnest, that are the users what needs the protection by Wikipediocrazy and it's mods. And yes, this are the fact checkers of her Majesty Maher with here lackey James Alexander.
And what Zoloft wants with Wpediocrazy? I really don't know, but it would be better if they putted the site on black if they don't want to get further involved.

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Tue May 01, 2018 3:24 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3541
Reply with quote
Midsize Jake wrote:
Graf wrote:
...human excrement... Hitcan clowns... soul sucking... corrupt fuck... atshit crazy... nest of guttersnipes... deadwood grifters... best paid internet troll of this world... they all fuck day and night!
See, this is the thing I worry about. Is it really better to use language like this, whether or not alcohol is involved, or is it just as effective to say that these people are "highly objectionable" and "of extremely dubious character"? I don't want to seem like some sort of pretentious language snob, but given that one might want to be quoted, not to mention respected, by people outside of wiki-land, it just seems like the latter approach might be better.

Am I wrong? :?

Midsize Jake wrote:
Anroth wrote:
Would you mind not quoting him? I have the half-baked loon on ignore for a reason ;)
So I'm just going to take a wild guess here and say you're more in favor of the "colorful" language?


Anroth is a cowardly runt. A Wikipedian's Wikipedian. It's pretty damn obvious what he was trying to do here, and it was not to register an objection to Jake's proposition. They tried the same desperate tactics with me, Anroth and the other cowards.

Putting aside the real motive, and indeed as a way of exposing it, here's a tip for Anroth and all the other little cowards Jake likes to protect - if you were genuinely intent on ignoring him, then you wouldn't keep mentioning him. You know how the ignore function works, so if you're dumb enough to put someone on ignore who you know is not going anywhere, and so will be quoted by others in future, well that's just your own stupid fault for being a sensitive little snowlake and thinking you can use gadgets to protect you.

Normal people, a classification which of course excludes Wikipedians like you, are perfectly capable of ignoring posts/people they want to ignore, by simply not reading them. The human brain is remarkable like that.

You know what Jake, we got an entire thread here that let's the world know Anroth is a highly objectionable person of extremely dubious character. I'd still prefer to just call him a cowardly runt, if only for brevity. There are other sound reasons, which people will know if they read my work.

You many not remember, since it's been that long now, but when I was a member of your site, I was perfectly capable of sticking to your language codes. Never called anyone a half-baked loon that I recall. Even though it is hard not to go an hour in there without thinking it. It didn't seem to matter though.

People like Anroth, because of who they are, what they are, will always hate reading the truth, especially when they resemble it so. What words you use to tell it, really doesn't matter. What excuses you give for protecting them, also don't, matter. People have their own words for it. You just used them yourself.


Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:55 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3541
Reply with quote
Quote:
I find it works much better if you just mute them completely. If there is anything in the ramblings someone else will quote the relevant bits.
Spoken like a true Wikipedian...

.....if there is something worthwhile written in the Daily Mail, it will be published by a reliable source.....

Newsflash, that's horseshit. I'd take him through the logic, even provide a few examples, if I thought he had the mental capacity to follow what I was saying, or the courage to admit its truth.

And what happened to this idea that putting people on ignore was for ignoring them? If others quoting them so they can be read is OK, why do they scream and cry so much when it happens?

Make your minds up, you silly little children. I remember one hilarious incident where one of the cowardly shits had put me on ignore. Cue them making a point in a thread I had made about two days previously in the very same thread. That may have been Anroth, or one of the other cowards, they tend to blur into one after a while. In fact, I think it happened more than once. Silly little children.

Is there any benefit to allowing these bird brained chicken hearted Wikipedians be members of a critic site?

Over to you Zoloft......

Oh, that's right. Cat got your tongue.


Sat Aug 25, 2018 3:38 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3541
Reply with quote
Quote:
Multiple people using the same account is trivially easy to spot both at a technical and behaviour level.
More Wikipedian logic. On what planet does this even make sense?

If they're logging in from different devices, then you have no way of proving they are the same person. Maybe they share a unique behavioural tic, but as the false positive rate of SPI shows, that isn't trivially easy to spot.

Behaving differently, indeed having completely different interests, isn't proof either way, not when you consider one of the reasons people split their contributions between multiple accounts, either to avoid scrutiny or to follow policy for avoiding security risks, is because of how hard it is to connect those accounts to one person, even if they have identical technical profiles.

And if it's two people using the same device, they still have no way of knowing, hence why policy says treat them as if they are the same person regardless of what they say or what you think you see.

Timing of edits is irrelevant too, I've seen people convicted and cleared in equal measure for editing at the same time and not editing at the same time. And since it is trivially easy to mask you true location, and even to mask your user-agent, there is really any reason to assign any confidence in technical data unless you are absolutely sure you are dealing with complete novices.

The Wikipediots see what they want to see, they're not remotely possessive of an analytical mind (that can earn you money, hence you wouldn't be wasting your time scribbling on Wikipedia, much less hunting socks there).

Once more, Anroth is shown to posses an anus where his mouth should be. Typical Wikipedian.


Sat Aug 25, 2018 3:56 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3541
Reply with quote
Even more garbage.
Quote:
there are plenty of admins and those with advanced permissions who read this board, if they honestly thought it was legit, a quiet checkuser would be run.
There are zero admins who, in this particular context, are going to leave a log entry that shows they are probing the private data of Drmies based on allegations made by an WMF Globally Banned user posting in what some Wikipedians still call a "hate site".

There is no such thing as a quiet CheckUser. On one level, they are all quiet, the vast majority of the cult members having no idea they are ever being performed unless a block results. But the idea you can somehow do one without someone else with a reason to notice, not noticing, is laughable.

By virtue of his useless stint on ArbCom, Drmies is a CheckUser, despite his technical inability, so he has the ability to see the logs for himself. Assuming he knows how, you can see him even being that useless. Who knows, maybe that's the only reason he even ran for ArbCom, to have access to that special dirt. But even if he wasn't, he has countless friends who are, who would let him know if someone was rummaging in his sock drawer.

I tell you what they are able to do, and that is make a false entry in the log as to why they ran the check. But that is hardly relevant in this context, since nobody would believe there was a legit reason to make this particular check.

Anroth must not have taken his chewy orange flavoured multi-vitamins today. He's said way more dumb things today than is normal even for him. Someone should whack a shovel around back of his head, see if it makes a difference as to what comes out of his word hole. Although if it results in radio silence, that would be fine too I guess. It's not like you can ask Zoloft to ban him for talking pure shite, they just don't do that. Inclusiveness......

Maybe that's it. Are they getting a grant for giving Anroth something to do on any given day?


Sat Aug 25, 2018 4:16 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 2:14 am
Posts: 361
Reply with quote
Anroth is totally wrong of course, but it is possible for the inner party to conduct checks without the outer party knowing.

_________________
De facto globally banned on all Wikimedia sites. Editor of The Wiki Cabal. find me on the Wikipediocracy Discord.


Sat Aug 25, 2018 5:03 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 41 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group ColorizeIt.
Designed by ST Software.