Wikipedia Administrator Moneytrees admits (away from Wikipedia of course) their copyright patrol is useless

Good, bad, biased, paid or what-have-you. There's an endless supply.
Post Reply
User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 717
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Been thanked: 113 times

Wikipedia Administrator Moneytrees admits (away from Wikipedia of course) their copyright patrol is useless

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Mon Sep 13, 2021 7:53 am

https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 34#p295082

You gotta love Wikipedia Administrators. They are nothing if not useless scum. It wasn't long ago that Moneytrees was exhorting his colleagues to come assist him in the area of copyright cleanup.

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... =13&t=2197

And yet here he is on Wikipediocracy explaining that for a while now, presumably because of the backlog, he, ONE OF THE ALLEGED COMMITTED AND HARD WORKING SPECIALISTS IN THIS AREA, has just been phoning it in, concentrating on quantity not quality, and thus doing a terrible job....
We've been taking broader strokes in deleting stuff from serial violators recently......so not much will be missed. That's the thing with most articles and contributors who mass produce articles and end up at CCI; there is so much crap to go through that's its just not worth doing a comprehensive check on an article; deleting it because it's probably copied and also terrible is simply easier. I try to stub an article down to a few sentences when I can, but I recognize that a lot of articles should simply be blown up.
Deleting it because it's PROBABLY copied? Wow. This is the problem with the new breed of Administrator, and indeed the problem with any Administrator nominated for greatness by that useless fuckstick Ritchie333, they haven't the first clue what Wikipedia is meant to be.

Wikipedia is a volunteer effort, so what Wikipedia needs to be is a place where the people who can't do a specific job that needs more hands, can be inspired and learn from people who are doing it right.

Moneytrees is not that person. Moneytrees was probably never all that good at copyright cleanup to begin with, and his sad addiction to the gamification PEEOWWWW PEEEEEOWWWW gotcha element of Wikipedia, has only made him even worse.

Would you be inspired by a useless twat like that? Would you want to volunteer your time to a community that probably doesn't even know and probably cares even less that this is how their copyright cleanup works? And if they do know, probably cheers him on for his RUTHLESS EFFISHUNCY?

Fuck that, is what I would say. If you're not paying me, then you better fucking make sure you don't expect me to do the same shit more than once because your stupid asses are just too lazy and ignorant to do your fucking bit properly.

I think the most disgusting element of this of course is the way he says one thing on Wikipedia, another on Wikipediocracy, in the sure fire knowledge most Wikipedia editors don't read that shit. He's clearly there for the same reason Beeblebrox and all the other scum are, not for an honest accounting of their damage to society as part of a pernicious cult doomed to fail at its ONE JOB for systemic reasons, but simply to get some therapeutic fellatio from Uncle Jake.

But that's just me. Probably why I'm considered too hostile and too ideologically pure for the Wikipediocracy forum. :lol:

You watch. Those sellouts will be offering him mint tea soon. The poor baby.

I suppose it makes sense. If Wikipedia actually died as a result of a catastrophic hemorrhaging of volunteers, those sad bastards would be as lost for what to do with their pathetic lives as the editors themselves. Isn't that a thought..... :ugeek: :lol: :oops:

:whambo:

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: Wikipedia Administrator Moneytrees admits (away from Wikipedia of course) their copyright patrol is useless

Post by ericbarbour » Tue Sep 14, 2021 7:56 pm

there is so much crap to go through that's its just not worth doing a comprehensive check on an article; deleting it because it's probably copied and also terrible is simply easier. I try to stub an article down to a few sentences when I can, but I recognize that a lot of articles should simply be blown up.
Golly. How CLEVER of him.

I figured that bullshit out more than 10 years ago. It already WAS, and would STAY, impossible to remove all the copyrighted content. Look at YouTube and all the copyrighted movies, tv shows and music posted on it (easily rippable with YT extractor websites). Despite rolling in $$$$$$$$, Google cannot deal with the vast constantly-roaring river of copyright abuse. Such crap would make it clear that the problem is too big and complicated for a few thousand "volunteer" deletionist gamers to handle. But the Cult lives on, and lies to itself constantly.

(Examples? Put this into the YouTube search box: "charles bronson film" You will get literally dozens of links to his old action films, most unpaid and unauthorized full rips. So much for "copyright".)

User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 717
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Been thanked: 113 times

Re: Wikipedia Administrator Moneytrees admits (away from Wikipedia of course) their copyright patrol is useless

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Mon Oct 04, 2021 8:44 pm

Just noting here for my own amusement (because it's not like Wikipediocracy can or will do anything about it), incidents like the recent spat on Van Der Graaf Generator show why it can often be quite hard to enforce copyright rules on Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... ermission,

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _Generator

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... fringement

Put simply, it is quite often the toxic combination of the ignorance and the arrogance of the Wikipedia Administrators themselves, and their toxic instinct to protect each other, that wastes the time and shreds the patience of those few users who have a clue, and have more than enough on their plate dealing with the allegedly less experienced users.

Not one but TWO Wikipedia Administrators, Ritchie333 and Jonbod, edit warred on that article over their utterly ignorant understanding of the very simple and widely understood issue of contributory copyright infringement. Put simply, and Wikipedia policy of course reflects this, knowingly linking to a site that infringes someone else's copyright, is not allowed. You need either explicit proof of permission, or a reasonable belief their use is fair.

It says a lot that the least embarrassing aspect of how Johnbod and Ritchie reacted to their new found knowledge that this was even a thing, was how they suddenly tried to scramble around those two exceptions, to somehow justify their edit warring.

They had no case, because of course people who manifestly had NO FUCKING CLUE this was even a thing, can hardly then claim that the reason they edit warred to keep the link in, was because they had properly considered the issue of whether or not linking to that site was risking contributory copyright infringement.

The really bad part is how ungracious and combative they were. An aggravating factor of course being their toxic assumption that just because the user they were opposing was a relative newbie, certainly when put against their long service (which only reminds us how long they simply swanned around Wikipedia never giving this issue a second thought), that he must be the one in the wrong.

No surprise, since it is rather obvious both are prototypical Wikipediots - old, male, white, socially inept.

It might look like a good thing that there were at least other Admins around who felt it necessary to tell Jonbod and Ritchie that they were wrong, but it wasn't a good thing that they felt the need, perhaps because they too felt their social inferiority when put alongside Ritchie and Jon, one definitely being a woman, the other probably and certainly being less experienced, to be so achingly deferential about it, one even chastising the wronged party for their tone in how they reacted to the obvious idiocy of editors who have no excuse for not having at least checked they were right, before they edit warred.

Worse, so much worse, and yet so unsurprising, was the arrival of Queen Bitch Bishonen, ever eager as she is to prove Wikipedia women can and often are as bad if not worse than the men, who asserted Jonbod's rights to be an asshole as his coping mechanism by threatening blocks. It must have provided some comfort, and Ritchie showed his colours by gloating about this to their enemy too.
14:55, 1 October 2021‎ Bishonen talk contribs‎  53,405 bytes −976‎  Undid revision 1047582983 by Woovee (talk). Yes, you are finished. Johnbod can remove what he likes from his talkpage, If you revert him again, you will be blocked.
Pride. That's all it is. Toxic masculinity writ large, as it pertains to the Wikipedia environment.

And so, despite ADMINACCT being a thing, and COMPETENCE, we are left wondering, because neither had the grace or humility to end the exchange properly, whether or not either of these Administrators actually even understand what they did wrong, and know not to do it again.

Pride.

Pathetic losers that they are, Ritchie and Jonbod both treat their status and length of service as a license to be assholes. And there isn't a damn person on Wikipedia or Wikipediocracy who will or even want to do anything about it. It is the accepted culture of this cult. Wikipediocracy have actually sided against the WMF many times when it has become clear they were trying to address this issue.

These people are scum. They deserve nothing but the swift strike of a shovel to the back of their head for the sheer cheek of trying to claim their existence and daily tedious toil is somehow of benefit to humanity.

Anyone who treats them as if they are worthy of anything more, as if their pride and arrogance and bullying is somehow justified and justifiable, especially if they give them a platform on a forum that is allegedly all about identifying the faults of Wikipedia, are a disgrace to humanity.

Needless to say, you're never going to see Moneytrees on Wikipediocracy even mentioning this issue of gross incompetence and chronic arrogance in the Admin ranks, and how it makes things so much worse in the area of copyright patrol. Ritchie was, after all, his RfA nominator, and Jonbod was after all, so gracious to support his nomination "for copyright work, despite the reasonable issues raised by opposers".

He knows who his betters are. He knows they outrank him, that he owes them. Even if it is incidents like this, and a simple reading of the Admin rule book, if not just simple common sense, that shows quite well that ignorant combative pride filled scum like this were never fit to be Admins in the first place, and the fact RfA doesn't identify their faults, and once passed, that it is a job for life on Wikipedia, is perhaps their biggest single governance issue.

Wikipedia is a cult.

Only a fool would join. Only an ass would join late.

They all have to die, so that we might be free of them once and for all.

HTD.

:flamingbanana:

Post Reply