How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Because no one else is doing it--not even the media.
User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Critic
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 45 times

How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Sat Jul 03, 2021 8:12 pm

What a week it's been for Slate "journalist" Stephen Harrison and Wikipedia "editor" Guy Macon. Roles that used to mean something, back in the day. In a time before Wikipedia.

I bet they were feeling really good about the "story" they had collaborated on, a long awaited review of Wikipedia's war against the Daily Mail. More on the actual story here. This will be more of a meta analysis. A journey through space and time, looking for meaning in this crazy universe. So hold onto your butts.

Also, I was biding my time so I could properly savour the glory. So what? I'm only human, after all.


So the story dropped on July 1st. Unfortunately for them, reality had already spoiled the party. Big time. Who knows, maybe it wasn't even a coincidence. Floquenbeam working with the Resistance? Stranger things have happened.

For reasons only he will ever know, Harrison chose to print this line......
Macon told me that he was able to brush off the attack, writing, “I have been on the Internet since the days of USENET and have reached the point where the trolls are either amusing or boring.”
I'm not saying Harrison can't quote a Wikipedia editor if he wants, but if he's a journalist, he should be wary of committing the words of a fantasist, in print.

Maybe Macon really is in denial, maybe he is just a born liar, but the sad fact for him, and for us all, is that reality doesn't care what he thinks about himself. Because this isn't a matter where he gets to own his truth. This is a matter where there is an objective truth to be found. And he should support that, given his dislike of pseudoscience and general quackery.

For Harrison's benefit, let's remind him of reality. Because this quote is so untrue even a majority of Wikipedia editors recognise Guy Macon as anything but the person to be put in the same room as a troll. He is someone widely known even among his peers, who are generally no saints, for his lack of civility. For his questionable temperament, his snark, his domineering nature. His total inability to let shit go.

Because boy oh boy, this was most definitely not the week to be daring reality to make a fool out of you. Not that it's hard to find examples of Macon failing to uphold the minimal standards of civility, especially when he feels under attack. Accepting of course, that the current minimal standard is a long way from the written policy, which has essentially been deprecated in practice, and carves out a clear exception where users are obviously being "baited". But still Macon stands out in his field. Like a scabby scarecrow.

For this was the same week Macon absolutely lost his mind, and he lost it over being blocked for 48 hours for a gross violation of civility. He had allegedly mocked the gender of another editor.

I say allegedly, but this is Wikipedia, where they're bizarrely quite proud of the fact there is no justice in wikiland. So if someone says you mocked someone's gender, and they block you for it, and that block is neither immediately undone or appealed on the grounds you did not do that, well, like it or not, you did it. You have limited options to restore your good name once the block has expired, which I'll come to in a minute.

And he most assuredly took it as an attack. Him, a man who has never been blocked in fifteen years of editing? How very dare they.

What followed can be seen here..... ... 1031609738

As an aside, regarding Macon's ongoing disputes with objective measurable reality, this is a good time to remind people that between 2006 and 2009, Guy Macon only made 30 edits to Wikipedia, and in 2010, arguably his first year as a Wikipedian, he only made 310 edits. So you do the math. Not that 10 or 11 years unblocked is anything to sniff at. It's just not fifteen.

For background, as an old white straight geek (I know, what are the chances of a veteran Wikipedia editor meeting that description?), Guy Macon has struggled with the use of singular "they" as a preferred pronoun. Back in May 2019, he was advised by Wikipedia Administrator Floquenbeam that if he couldn't handle User:Fae's stated preference for "they", he should just avoid mentioning Fae ever again. But if he couldn't, he was given a clear warning that "if Guy does choose to refer to Fæ again, he'll be blocked for personal attacks/harassment for using anything besides the singular 'they'".

It was a mark of Macon's overall reputation, that this shameful rebuke didn't even really feature as a specific talking point in his application to become an Administrator that Harrison somehow missed. It perhaps just blended in to a broad backdrop of snark and aggression and a general love of drama, that somehow Harrison also missed.

It obviously stuck in Floquenbeam's mind, since when Macon decided he had more to say to Fae some years later, he was Johnny on the spot. And it was very much a two footed lunge from Macon, with a post to Fae's talk page that rather over-egged Guy Macon's apparently new approach to the "they" problem - just call Fae by his username.

Floquenbeam saw that as a deliberate act, ignoring his previous warning, hence his immediate application of a block. And this is quite standard on Wikipedia, even if it was a little surprising to see such an established user being subjected to the usual educate, warn, short block for a first offence, longer block for further offences, disciplinary cycle.

Floquenbeam at least, and perhaps others, have seemingly quite rightly decided that not even an excuse of autism can really explain why someone would craft a post as pointedly ungrammatical as that. For he refused to undo the block. It was eventually undone, but only because an alternative measure that achieves the same result, was enacted. A permanent ban on Macon ever mentioning Fae anywhere on Wikipedia.

It is certainly curious gjven what followed in his post block testimony, that Macon found himself having to agree to a binding order to avoid doing something he apparently could and should have taken under voluntary advertisement way back in 2019. Is that explained by autism? I'm not a doctor, but I have my doubts. Someone who doesn't have autism but simply has the sort of temperament that sees them unable to control themselves in the face of trolls or attacks, would of course also feel that urge to scratch that itch.

An open and shut case then, certainly given Wikipedia doesn't do diagnoses, no? Of course not. It's Guy Macon, so there was to be drama. Or to be fair, an attempt to create drama, before a largely disinterest audience. For in context, as things go on Wikipedia, while some have objected, and certainly in the very serious context of what Guy is claiming Floquenbeam is doing to him, the number and tone of the objections marks this out as an exceedingly uncontroversial block.

It is a sad reality of the Wikipedia community's inability to govern itself properly, that a block of any veteran, if it's not for literally shooting someone in broad daylight in Wiki Fifth Avenue, is usually contested. Some believe such things should never even happen. A compete opposite to the idea everyone is equal under the wikilaw.

Guy Macon tried his hardest to get a bigger and hotter reaction. He took quite the journey all told, in pursuit of a storm. In just a couple of days, he went from holding the Wikipedia community hostage, to wishing to move on with his life. Even though nothing of substance really happened in the mean time.

The hostage situation began when he retired, stating he was withholding his edits unless or until Floquenbeam admitted he had acted rashly, with emotion, or the Wikipedia community decides to formally vacate his given reason for the block. Both being designed to remove the suggestion that Macon was acting with malice or even cruelty, and agreeing with the version of reality that Macon put forward, that this was all just some giant misunderstanding, a failure to assume good faith or take into account his autism, or indeed that he is just an old duffer who is struggling with the shifting stands of society.

Shall we gloss over the parts where he even seems to think everyone is out to get him, inventing made up rules that only apply to him, and that some mysterious cabal is trying to force him off of Wikipedia? Oops, I guess I just mentioned it.

While a handful of users have agreed, to one extent or another, that really is, relatively speaking, a sign of community disinterest. Floquenbeam is a scary dude, a real hard nosed bastard, so there was never a realistic chance of him admitting fault, but he's not so powerful someone wouldn't at least try to go the other route and ask the community to consider the request to vacate. But nothing. Crickets.

A little embarrassing, even. And as Macon seems to at least know, being a veteran and all, that if you have to actually ask for something like this yourself, as in literally draft the request and ask for it to be posted to a noticeboard from wiki prison, or post it yourself post release, you're unlikely to succeed. You have already lost. Wikipedia being the ultimate game of how to make friends and influence people.

He has seen the writing on the wall, it seems. His demands will go unanswered, his retirement, regretted by some, but ignored. And so he has swiftly changed tack. In a post that seems to imagine some great tumult has occurred, bearing in mind this is a community that can and will have actual genuine revolts if need be (see Framgate), he now calls for calm.

It really is quite ridiculous in context, well worth quoting, for humour purposes.
Let me end with this;

To those who have expressed support; please don't escalate this. That is not what I want. Just let it go.

To those who have criticized me; you got your way. I have stopped editing. Please let it go.

To Floquenbeam; please consider what a number of editors have told you and consider walking away and letting other administrators deal with any future issues. You really can trust the other administrators to do the right thing.

I appreciate the emails I have received and would welcome more like them. I will reply to every one, but I want to take a break from this and move on with my life for at least a couple of days. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:51, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Let it go.....let it go.....fucking Disney.

This is the man Harrison immortalised in print, and used as source for many things about how Wikipedia works. Someone incapable of ignoring or laughing off any kind of attack, even though that is how he sees himself. Someone incapable of acting calmly and rationally, of recognising when someone has a different interpretation than you, and finding a reasonable resolution. Not because they're just angry, although that never helps. It's because of their thin grip on reality. Or their love of a fight, or attention, or drama. Or worst of all, a desire to be the thing they claim to resemble the least. A troll.

Someone who could not and should not be trusted with fairly and accurately describing the reliability of a newspaper. Someone whose claims should always be fact checked. Always.

Because it is no accident that the wide gulf between perception and reality that you see when Macon is discussing himself, is also readily seen when he is discussing the reputation of the Daily Mail.

He is, in a word, a fire starter. A twisted fire starter. And they're not known for their value to society. They're not known for their ability to hold down responsible jobs, like holding Faculty at a Journalism School.

Someone whose own sense of self importance, genuinely seems to think the Wikipedia community was just about to reach DEFCON ONE to rectify this terrible injustice, until he stepped up, Jesus like, and called for calm. Telling them to wait while he wanders off into the wilderness to await advice from the man upstairs. Or whatever the mythology is for whatever crackpot belief system he ascribes to. Because he for sure as shit isn't welcome at Atheist Club any time soon. Not with that Messiah complex.

He's moving on with his life. Denying the reality, that for the last ten years, being a professional Wikipedia bastard, is his life. And he can't quit now. Not while he has just got journalistic recognition for his works!

I mean, fuuuuuck. There's not doing your job very well, and there's just, well, SUCKing. Eh Stephen?

That line of his about Macon's fantasy idea of how he thinks he deals with trolls, was followed swiftly by this line.....
Still, there is plenty of evidence that one reason people are discouraged from editing Wikipedia is because of past issues with harassment of its contributors.
Not that I've seen. But they do tend to be whiny little bitches whenever their patently half-assed efforts to build an encyclopedia are criticised, that's for sure.

I have seen studies that show a lot of people, a large majority of the potential workforce of Wikipedia, either choose never to engage, or soon leave after only a brief period of engagement, due to one really massive problem. Civility. Or a lack thereof, among the established Wikipedia editors. Women in particular, are turned off by snark, aggression, intolerance, and just plain rudeness.

At its extreme, is the inarguable fact that most people would choose not to work with lunatics. Why collaborate online with people you would cross a street to avoid?

Oh, and I nearly forgot. There is indeed a renewed interest in protecting Wikipedia editors from harassment, and the increasing incidence of people like Guy Macon being advised by Wikipedia Administrators to stay away from people like Fae, was an example of it. But they are thankfully rare.

On a final note, there's this line too.....
Well, ronsmith7, today is your lucky day because this journalist is interested in those issues. 
....all I can say say is, thank you for your interest. :lol: :ugeek:

For those who don't know, the stunningly handsome and wonderfully insightful ronsmith7 had noticed quite a few interesting things that seemed to be holding up the Wikipedia editor's sluggish implementation of the Daily Mail ban.....
1. The widely held assumption among Wikipedia editors that if something only appears in the Mail and nowhere else, it can be assumed to be not relevant to Wikipedia, is probably false.

2. The widely held belief among Wikipedia editors that 1. can be worked around if a reliable source reprints material "according to the Mail" and can thereafter be presumed to be reliable, is also probably false.

3. Disagreement among many Wikipedia editors over what is the presumed cause of the Mail's unreliability for the purposes of Wikipedia, whether it is specific journalists, departments, titles, or the entire organization, from the editors all the way to the ownership (an alleged deliberate business model, if you will). Even a presumption of historical reliability, is now disputed.

4. Disagreement among Wikipedia editors as to how to actually deal with an instance of a piece of information being found in Wikipedia, that is only sourced to the Mail. Do you remove it all, or only remove the link to the source (leaving the information), or only remove the source and tag the information as needing a better source.
Stephen seems to have overlooked all of that. Which begs the question, was he writing for the benefit of Ron at all? Or was he writing at the behest of someone who really hates Ron? Some daft bastard who thinks Ron works for the Daily Mail, perhaps? A right fucking lunatic. Who can know. A journalist must protect their sources, right?

I wonder if he wants another go?

Or shall we try and find Ron a serious journalist?

Maybe we can find a journalist so good, they take Stephen's job working Slate's Wikipedia beat, and Stephen has to go work for WikiTribune. That's still open, right?

Fucking sucks, eh Stephen? People fucking with your livelihood. Especially when they're a cracker short of a Wikipicnic.

You take care now.

User avatar
Sucks Admin
Posts: 2660
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 235 times
Been thanked: 473 times

Re: How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Post by ericbarbour » Sun Jul 04, 2021 8:05 pm

damn, he really got to you.....

If anyone should be writing a book about Wiki editing abuses, it should be you.

This Daily Mail nonsense will be like the Israel-Palestine editwars, I suspect. At first the "house opinion" will prevail as Gerard and his fuckbuddies pull endless dirty tricks to force the issue. Eventually there will be multiple arbitrations and they will lose ground.....always happens, even if it takes 10+ years.
As a reminder: Why Wikipedia Will Fail, 2015

User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Critic
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Mon Jul 05, 2021 1:08 pm

Unsurprisingly, Guy Macon's idea of walking away for a bit, is to spend just one whole day away from Wikipedia, before returning to engage in some mindless housekeeping of his own user space. He's been consolidating archives and renaming sub pages, which necessarily then means having to go around random pages to retarget links to his archives.

Almost as if that had been the entire purpose of his efforts, to give him a reason to light up assorted watchlists, logs, edit filters and edit histories with his name.

I don't think I have ever seen a more pathetic attempt by a Wikipedia editor to try and signal to people he has GONE, but he hasn't really gone YET, so if there is something they want to say or do to make him happy and entice him back, like getting his block for mocking a person's gender vacated, they should do it now.

Love him now, or lose him forever. Or see him tomorrow doing the same sort of thing. Maybe even for a third day, before he finally realises, nobody cares.

Although if he's already reduced to this sort of lame edit.....
4 July 2021 diff hist  +32‎  User:Guymacon ‎ {{R from alternative spelling}}
4 July 2021 diff hist  +31‎  User:GUY MACON ‎ {{R from alternative spelling}}'s hard to see what else he could do fill up a second or even third day's worth of busy work.

What an absolute loser.

Not that anyone will care about this small but important detail either, it being just another reminder that you can't ever expect what comes out of Guy Macon's mouth to be true, but he has with these trivial edits, immediately shown his retirement statement, to be a lie. Pissing around with your archives is not content work, sure, but neither is it just editing your essays. And it doesn't look like those essays that he has now renamed were at the suggestion of other editors either, does it?

And pissing around with your archives, is not retirement. It's hanging around your office, like a loser, hoping your boss will reverse his decision to give you a formal warning, which was in reality just a subtle reminder that your value to the company has come to an end, and that it really is high time you were leaving.

After all, it would be tough for everyone involved if all the primary actors behind the Daily Mail ban, ended up either being banned or having utterly disgraceful sanctions in their permanent record. It could suggest the whole thing needs to be reviewed, to see if things really were done honestly, with pure motives.

Not the sort of thing that would force an internal review, probably. They did after all, just quietly try to pretend Hillbillyholiday and just gone on holiday. But something that could convince a legislator or a lawyer that there's smoke in them there hills.

User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Critic
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Tue Jul 06, 2021 12:47 pm

This is just tragic.
17:00, 5 July 2021 diff hist  +6‎  User talk:Guy Macon ‎ A <div> gets lonely without a matching </div>. Help a <div> find their soulmate today! current
This pointless edit, and four others, which achieved the important task of making sure the tables of contents in his archive pages are also slanted like his actual page, is all he has managed to find today, in terms of busy work that will remind people he is retired but not retired.

I fear his sudden fascination for putting things on a lean, and using words like div (British slang for someone who is a bit of a dopey bastard, possibly for medical reasons), might be a sign that he realises, on some level, that he has monumentally screwed up.

At this point, it may be a good thing that he is letting people know he is still breathing on the daily. Because we can't be too far away from him slitting his wrists, if things carry on as they are.

I'm assuming these edits aren't enough evidence that he needs the Coffee treatment. When users are obviously in crisis, and continuing engagement with Wikipedia is obviously not good for their mental health, they can and have previously locked them out, for their own good.

Someone please, just say hello. Let him know he hasn't been forgotten. Let him know that he has a way out. Either swallow his pride and just unretire, and take the hit all budding Reichstag Spidermen must take, or walk away. Show his Wikipedia bretheren that he is deadly serious about feeling betrayed by their refusal to vacate that shameful blot on his formerly pristine block record.

On second thoughts, maybe not. Say and do nothing that might make him think there is a reason to hang around on Wikipedia, in the vain hope someone in his former community notices him.

A life may depend on it. Not a great life. Not someone who would be missed by many in the real world, that much is clear. But a life is a life. And suicide is a sin.

I mean, sure, most of you didn't think he was made of the right stuff to be an Administrator, and that has meant people like Bradv have needed to say and do things since then to justify their opinion that he would have made a fantastic Administrator.

Awful things. Truth denial and evidence suppression at its finest. Proper culty stuff.

But protecting a man from the consequences of his own actions, in these times, is a fruitless task. And abandoning him now, when he has failed you all, is a sin as well.

For what is Wikipedia, if not a brotherhood? A brotherhood of evil, sure, but a brotherhood all the same.

You're a man down. A scourge of pseudoscience. A destroyer of snake oil peddlers. A champion of the integrity of all the Marek Kukulas out there.

He's a big great hole.

He can't count on the support of Guy Chapman after all, who also thought he would have made a fantastiic Administrator. So much so, he would have nominated him. Chapman is currently absent from Wikipedia too, having been ever so gently reminded that Wikipedia is not the place for off topic inflammatory commentary.

I honestly don't know what's come over the darker depths of Wikipedia these days. It never used to be like this. They used to double down, and have each other's backs.

I blame those bastards at the Foundation. Goddamned purists.

Come on now, people. Let's have a bit of self respect. Embrace who you are, who you have always been.

Blood is blood. Support your brother.

Because if you're not being scum, and reliably so, well, that's me out of a fucking job, isn't it? Serious stuff, losing your job, in these times especially.

But wait. What have I missed? How could I have been such a fool!

Of course. Floquenbeam. The scourge of the Foundation. The Champion of the self-governance myth. The mighty Pheonix. He for whom even Arbitrator Bradv, for his weakness in the face of the enemy, is a subordinate, not a superior.

He too, supported Guy Macon for Admin. Which carry's with it great significance that he should be the man to strike him down.

So this, to the cult, would be like a cleansing. A true act of self governance. An authorised hit. A message. From the man himself. And there's me, having temporarily totally forgotten why Floquenbeam is seen as the hard nosed bastard of Wikipedia. Now don't I feel silly?

And he didn't even see it coming. Ouch.

Now I get it. Now I get why Macon must be frozen out. Now I get why even Bradv is reduced to only trivial signs of sympathy for his former protege. Now I get why they're not pandering to his ego.

For he has cause, does he not? This was, on the face of it, a way worse betrayal than that of the mighty Jytdog? Whose very shameful rebuke of course garnered reams and reams of outrage and sympathy. A veritable stadium concert, to Guy Macon's intimate evening of folk music. And one that unlike his case, was totally in their hands to remedy.

But they choose not to.

That's cold. What a bunch of bastards you really are. Which I guess, isn't exactly news.

Ah well. It's not like he didn't know what he was signing up for, was it? Even wrote some of the leaflets for General Floq. in his fight against the Empire. Isn't that a hoot!

Chin up, Guy. There's a certain humour to it, after all. I'm just saying.

User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Critic
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Wed Jul 07, 2021 8:35 pm

Another day, another manufactured reason to keep posting to Wikipedia.

Guy Macon retired on 29 June, stating....
I will no longer be contributing to Wikipedia other than maintaining certain essays that some users have told me they find useful..
He has edited Wikipedia on seven of the nine days since.

Must be some fucking useful essays, right?

I'm just saying.

Guy, nobody cares that you're retired. Nobody cares that your block log says you're a filthy piece of shit.

Whoever that is posting on Jimmy's page, if they were trying to help you, they had clearly already failed before you felt the need to pathetically ask them to stop their heroic efforts.

Stop finding excuses to come back. Everyone is fine with you not being around. Just like most people were fine with you not being an admin.

Why? Because they know you're coming back, without anyone doing anything to persuade you to come back.

They think you're a pathetic addict, who doesn't have the stones to leave Wikipedia.

And you keep proving it to them.

At best, you were everyone's favourite useful idiot. And they always come back.

If you're not around, they have to do work. Work they find difficult, because, for normal people, it's pretty hard to replicate your particular brand of batshit. The wierd illogical if not nonsensical posts that persuade most people that Wikipedia is a crazy farm, and they're better off out of it.

Hey, maybe you're the reason all the cranks are there to begin with? Maybe they're recognising a fellow nut job?

User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Critic
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Thu Jul 08, 2021 4:57 pm

Yet another day when Guy Macon couldn't keep away from Wikipedia. ... 1032579227

I known he must be frustrated, but to be relieving your stress by searching for old images of children in bikins? Sick.

I kid.

He doesn't need to search, he's got these links stored on all his devices.

I'm just saying.

Needless to say, none of the links are about the Mail specifically, or they didn't need to be. They're at best, about celebrity culture in general. But that doesn't cut it for Guy Macon. It doesn't matter if every other paper is doing it, he is only interested in whether the Mail is doing it. Proving yet again, this is nothing but a hate campaign.

What is the point he is even making? None of these links could be used as sources in Wikipedia, even before the Mail ban.

As always with Guy Macon, fraudster that he is, you need to actually check the links. "" there implies a citizen petition. It was of course, started by a Guardian columnist, who presumably tried his level best to blast it all over the Guardian and Twitter. The results speak for themselves.

And to remind everyone, if Guy Macon cared about kids, he wouldn't be claiming that the Mail has lied about Marek Kukula. Who did a darn sight more than just print photos of 14 year olds in bikinis because celebrity culture. His interest was in photos of children as young as ten, being raped by men.

But hey, what am I thinking? That was only reported by a British newspaper as a conviction at Crown Court. It could be faked!

It isn't, obviously.

But you know Guy Macon. He doesn't care. He'll say ANYTHING if he thinks it will harm the Mail.

Sick fuck.

Now you know why NOBODY on Wikipedia wants him to come out of retirement. He's an embarrassment.

User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Critic
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Fri Jul 09, 2021 8:19 am

Has this Guy entered a how to lose all your dignity competition without telling anyone? ... 1032610134

At this point, the word loser just doesn't seem to cut it.


:lol: :jerkoff:

What the actual fuck? People had stopped showing any signs of giving a shit well before six days had elapsed, for fecks sake. Ain't nobody going to war over his sorry ass, that's for sure.

It has got to be the Marek Kukula comment. That shit was beyond stupid. You can understand how most editors felt they had no choice to follow their stupid rule, whilst at least having the decency to admit it did sound stupid when applied in that situation. But Macon actually took glee in it. That's clearly opened a lot of eyes as to the sort of freak he really is.

Do you think he read my mind and realised I was planning to use a sock to ask at AN if the Communitah might consider vacating his block? Not because I agree with his case you understand, simply because it's hard to watch someone spiralling like this, and talking Macon back from the ledge is just the decent thing to do. Is what I would say.

And what does he think is going to happen in six months? Why set a time limit at all? Does it take six months to figure out whether he really does have a medical excuse, or if that's just another thing he would use to garner sympathy, and he really is the kind of asshole who would use someone's username a massive amount of times in one unsolicited post, just to make some lame point about how he's TOO OLD and the world is MOVING TOO FAST and he just wants to GET OFF (to pictures of fourteen year old girls in bikinis no doubt).

User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Critic
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Mon Jul 12, 2021 12:32 pm

He still can't take having more than one day off Wikipedia at a time, managing to go clear on only the 6th, 9th and 11th this last week.

His excuses for returning are getting even more pathetic too.

Guy, dude, nobody cares. Except us grave dancers.

The sooner you give up and return to editing, like the Useless Idiot you always were, the sooner you will be able to put that utter humiliation behind you.

User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Critic
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Thu Jul 15, 2021 6:44 pm

Well, he gets his first ever two day coin (13 & 14th July), but his falling off the wagon was utterly pathetic (to an article talk page)......
Please stop pinging me. I have stopped editing Wikipedia articles. In fact, you really should stop pinging anyone who is already actively participating in a discussion as well as those who you know have purposely left the discussion. The repeated pings are really annoying. We all have watchlists and seldom need to be pinged. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:40, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
What the fuck are you looking at your watchlist for, when you're supposedly retired, you LOSER.

And what the hell is this (posted to himself!)....
Can cow dung and cow urine cure Covid-19?

In the US, quacks have recently discovered that while the substantial contributions they have made to key politicians means that they can freely advertise pills and creams that make your penis or breasts larger or will burn fat without dieting or exercise, if they attempt to branch out and sell magic Covid pills, the government will come down on them like a ton of bricks.

Meanwhile, in India, political activist Erendro Leichombam and journalist Kishorechandra Wangkhem and have been held in prison for more than 45 days without trial under the Indian National Security Act. Their crime? They posted on Facebook that cow dung and cow urine will not cure Covid-19.

They posted after the death of Tikendra Singh, head of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party in the state of Manipur. Singh had claimed that traditional Indian medicine, including cow dung and cow urine, was a cure for Covid-19.

Source: ... al/684133/

--Guy Macon (talk) 14:47, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Is that what he calls a user essay now?

What an absolutely pathetic example of humanity.

User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Critic
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: How fitting that Slate should choose an unstable narcissist to represent Wikipedia

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Fri Jul 16, 2021 6:48 pm

Officially in loser town...... ... 1033918141

Adjusted his talk page archiving from 7 days to an oddly specific 64 days.

And he's done that AFTER the "Final word on quitting Wikipedia" was archived. ... 1033740983

Is there any point even trying to understand why this nut case does what he does?

I shall document for the coroner regardless, and let him figure it out.

Post Reply