Volunteer Marek

For serious discussion of the "major" forum for Wikipedia criticism and how it fails.
User avatar
sashi
Sucks Critic
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:01 am
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Volunteer Marek

Post by sashi » Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:12 pm

Ha. He's already gotten it down to one month, he'll probably be out of jail by sundown (in the US). I wonder if what Dan (Murphy, not the plumber) popped out of nowhere to revert at AE was actually a verbatim copy as advertised of what VM wrote to EEML back in 2009. I suppose I should download the originals from WikiLeaks and check to see if it matches word for word one of these days.

User avatar
Dysklyver
Sucks Critic
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:14 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: Volunteer Marek

Post by Dysklyver » Sun Mar 03, 2019 7:46 pm

He even ventured onto RationalWiki, where he wrote this:

Gender studies is a ridiculous pseudoscience, that claims your sex or in modern lingo, "gender", is just a matter of one's own choice and that being a male or a female is a "social construct". Virtually all the claims of gender studies are contradicted by modern sciences, such as biology.


https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Volunteer_Marek

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: Volunteer Marek

Post by ericbarbour » Mon Mar 04, 2019 3:09 am


I predict they will ban him within a few months. Marek is saying things the Gerard/Toulouse gang will "deplore".

Once again I quote my RationalWiki material. If you're looking for Wikipedia abuse, just follow FuzzyCatPotato around.
For many years the only mention of RW on English Wikipedia was in a paragraph of the Conservapedia article. It was first split off as a separate article in 2007, which was swiftly deleted by early arbitrator Mark Gallagher. [3] It was quietly recreated and re-deleted FIVE more times, with no AFD discussion or input and always by Wikipedia insiders, until August 2008, when an IP address deleted it and others started arguing to keep. [4] Another attempt to delete, in November 2008, also failed. Finally a proper AFD was started in March 2010. Trent Toulouse himself, and a moiety of sockpuppets, showed up to demand deletion. They failed.

The present RW article shows its first edit in April 2010. It was expanded greatly in June 2010 by Wikimedia India principal Vipul Naik. Thereafter, the primary author is "FuzzyCatPotato", a totally anonymous person who openly claims to be a director of the RationalMedia Foundation and a high-ranking RW sysop. And yet, sometimes denies being an "official RW spokesman". This is a classic example of COI abuse being tolerated by Wikipedia administrators, because someone wants it to happen. From 2015 on, FCP and other obscure WP accounts, especially conservative WP editor/addict Rothorpe, fought over the content.

Further attempts to blank or delete the article were treated as simple vandalism. Thanks to heavy editwarring and the silent involvement by high-ranking WP insiders, the edit history of this article probably cannot be trusted to be "accurate" or complete.

User avatar
Dysklyver
Sucks Critic
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:14 am
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 24 times

Re: Volunteer Marek

Post by Dysklyver » Mon Mar 04, 2019 8:24 pm

ericbarbour wrote:I predict they will ban him within a few months.


Banned as an imposter now. :mrgreen:
Last edited by Dysklyver on Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Volunteer Marek

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:23 am

:lol:
The sanction is overturned by a clear consensus of the uninvolved administrators commenting. GoldenRing (talk) 16:12, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, sure.

Which of these Administrators is actually uninvolved in the matter of Marek vs. Sandstein?

-Bishonen? Nope. Opposed Sandstein's original sanction, and has a long history of strong criticism of his actions.

-Black Kite? See Bishonen.

-NewYorkBrad? Nope. Also opposed the original action, and is a former Arbitrator who will absolutely not be seen as an impartial observer in any likely future debate over Sandstein's service to the AE board.

-TonyBallioni? Are you serious? The guy who says "VM didn’t add diffs because he assumed I knew what he was talking about"? How much more involved could you get?

-Drmies? Um, no. His comments about Sandstein's blocks of Malik Shabbaz alone after enough to utterly and permanently disqualify him. He's playing nice now in the hopes people forget. He always wants people to forget the shit he does for Malik.

-Fish+Karate. The guy who describes Sandstein as Judge Dredd is of course absolutely not neutral.

-Zero0000. Admitted himself he may be involved.

That leaves just Vanamode (for Marek) and TParis (for Sandstein). No consensus, defaults to decline.

The corruption factory has worked its magic once again.

User avatar
Tommy
Sucks Noob
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:31 pm

Re: Volunteer Marek

Post by Tommy » Tue Mar 05, 2019 1:23 pm

And Marek was making sockpuppetry accusations in his appeal itself.

He's got some serious admin friends. However, how long will they last with Marek's potty mouth?

TonyBallioni has all the hallmarks of a sleeper account going admin. Created in 2007, the account was dormant most of the time until August 2016. TonyBallioni then creates some content and does quite a bit of user talk. Playing nice, friendly, well meaning. And then shoots for RfA in October 2017. Once the RfA is out of the way, he winds down his content work and goes hat collecting.

EEML said they wanted to plant admins. Catholic material (Tony's content creation was lots of Papal conclaves) is right up the Polish alley. Is Tony an EEML plant?

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

Re: Volunteer Marek

Post by CrowsNest » Fri May 31, 2019 3:01 pm

:lol:

In the grave matter of Icewhiz vs. Marek at the Court of Arbitration Enforcement, things are getting interesting. More interesting even than than the propsect of Malik (not to be confused with Marek) getting what he deserves, or not, as the case may be.
I would like to make a general note that at this point an ArbCom case might very well be necessary. I actually have a very large number of diffs which document extremely problematic behavior from Icewhiz, particularly in regard to BLPs, use of sources, and misleading invocations of policy that spans the last two years which show a clear pattern of conduct. The diffs themselves might go well beyond the word limit at WP:AE.Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:17, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
I would suggest this needs to go to ArbCom now, otherwise we will be back here again soon, and the environment of AE with its associated peanut gallery is probably not conducive to such a complicated issue. Black Kite (talk) 23:00, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

There is very likely something actionable here, at least on the part of Volunteer Marek. But the (perhaps quite legitimate) scope of the complaint exceeds what can reasonably be reviewed and decided at AE by a single admin. We are best suited to dealing with cases involving one or two diffs of clear misconduct. I support a referral to ArbCom. Of course, if anybody else wants to spend half a day looking through all of this and coming to a decision, feel free... Sandstein 08:15, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Finally something Black Kite and Sandstein can agree on.

I have a hard time believing Marek really wants to be party to an Arbitration Case, but I can see how things might have gotten to the stage he might have thought this would be an effective defensive strategy and they would not call his bluff.

They might still not go there, after all, someone does actually have to file it. It says a lot about what Black Kite et al have been trying to achieve with the AE board that I cannot immediately recall any case where a report was punted back for a full Case, to see if there is some precedent for negating the need to file all the paperwork for a proper Request, or just refer them to the AE report. Even then, thanks to the influence of people like Opabina, you can't dismiss the possibility of them manufacturing some way of handing the ball back to the community.

Round and round and round we go, where it stops, nobody knows.

THREE QUATTOS ON THE LITTLE GREEN ONE.

:twisted: :ugeek:

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

Re: Volunteer Marek

Post by CrowsNest » Sat Jun 01, 2019 3:51 am

Referred to ArbCom. Or rather, closed as "Referred to the Arbitration Committee." with the only discernible effect being to archive the report. If they are expecting Icewhiz to file it, well, for obvious reasons I think we can in fact call this an effective defensive strategy on Marek's part after all. I tip my hat to him. Nicely done.

User avatar
sashi
Sucks Critic
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:01 am
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: Volunteer Marek

Post by sashi » Sat Jun 01, 2019 3:42 pm

JFG inquired as to who exactly El Sis & Co. referred it to, we'll see if she replies.

I suppose I could have almost commented, since (for some reason) El C named me in the case.

The best part was watching A. Wily Coyote wait to tell El C that VM already had been awarded an A. Wily for lifetime achievement in American Politics until after the case had been sealed up for vacuuming into the archives.

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

Re: Volunteer Marek

Post by CrowsNest » Sat Jun 01, 2019 11:38 pm

Interestingly, Icewhiz has filed a request.......and rather cleverly, he has given Marek second billing (which will of course infuriate him) as a supporting actor in a dispute about the Holocaust in Poland.

LET THE GAMES BEGIN.

:ugeek:

Post Reply