Ritchie333

[CrowsNest]

SUCH A WEASEL HE EVEN MAKES IRIDESCENT LOOK ETHICAL

"People trying to get other people fired for expressing their views"
I'll ask here rather than clutter up the RFAR, but the same question I asked Collect; have you any evidence that anyone at any point has done this, and if not why are you raising it in an unrelated case unless it's an attempt to insinuate that someone (presumably Fae) has been doing it? WVS and Tech Ambassador are just on-wiki statuses, not real life jobs; "Fae tried to get SMcC fired from his job as Tech Ambassador" is equivalent to describing this as my "firing WBG from his job as a Rollbacker". (If you do take "fired" to have a definition broad enough to encompass "stripped of a Wikipedia user right", then people being "fired for expressing their views" happens routinely, up to and including people being "fired" from editing Wikipedia altogether, and you and I have both done our fair share of the firing.) ‑ Iridescent 09:56, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Oh right. I thought Tech Ambassador was a job, although possibly a part time one, and this was a request to dismiss them from that post. I'm afraid I'm not up to speed with all of these positions; I thought the WMF had enough spare cash to pay them, or am I just being naive in that respect? Anyway, my main point was that people (on both sides of this feud) have acted disproportionately. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:46, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

"Oh right" indeed.

A Wikipedia Administrator. And a fucking weasel. Worse, the sponsor of a good proportion of the site's other administrator's now.

The weasels don't fall too far from the tree, as my dear old Grandad used to say.

[CrowsNest]

I've said before that one of my best friends is transgender but she doesn't like to be used for political point scoring. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:26, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Don't use her then, you fucking idiot.

Just because she (presumably) doesn't know you're mentioning her there as if it somehow makes it sound like you understand trans issues (as if), doesn't mean you aren't using her.

Assuming she even exists of course. On the internet nobody knows you have no friends, much less friends who are minorities. He's probably got a dog though.

[CrowsNest]

Lolwut?

I read the "humour" piece and had no idea what it was really getting at, apart from some reference to Prince. If the joke's not obvious, I'm not surprised people took offence at it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:00, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

They're offended because the joke is super-obvious.

To quote one who did get it:

I'll just say that I, personally, felt a bit attacked when I read the piece. It felt like your typical "Haha these kids today, always whining about their pronouns. Back in my day men were men and women were women" type of thing. Perhaps that wasn't your intention. But sometimes what we intend to communicate and what we actually communicate are two different things. WanderingWanda (they/them) (t/c) 08:05, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Was he not literally just saying how he has a trans friend, as if somehow he is in tune with their perspectives?

[CrowsNest]

How many years experience has this fuckwit supposedly got?

What's the point of spending a load of time improving an article to GA status, then time waiting for and doing the review, if it can be deleted? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:19, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

It takes only two people to make a GA, one to write, one to review. If Wikipedia deletion was so predictable that two randomly picked but relatively experienced editors could with reasonable certainty predict what was and was not going to be worth doing, it would be very surprising indeed.

Not really having any idea whether your effort is going to be worth it, even if you're an experienced editor, is a defining feature of the Wikipedia experience. Many people, and for obvious reasons disproportionately the smart people, choose not to waste their time on such a fool's endeavour. Hence why Wikipedia is not and never will be a mass participation project in any sense of the manpower that would really be needed to complete their aims.

All they have is people like Ritchie. He thinks he's one of their rockstar editors, but you can see in everything he says and does, he really doesn't have the first idea. And if he's the best they have....

Partly due to their lack of numbers (so a self-perpetuating issue), but also chiefly because of their inherently warped model, it can be literally years between an editor publishing what he thought was policy compliant content, and it being ripped apart, if not deleted outright. This is frequently the case even in the extremely rare case of the 'ideal" scenario where the content is the result of collaboration by experienced editors, and the deletion is the outcome of a reasonably clueful debate between similarly experienced editors.

[CrowsNest]

Ritchie doing his best to make kids fail at Math.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =889415695

Piece of shit.

[CrowsNest]

Did Ritchie just suggest that if a Commons Administrator doesn't deal with a copyright issue the way he wants him to deal with it, someone might commit suicide?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.p ... =344123767

Yes, of course he did. If you didn't know by now that Ritchie is just that kind of person, someone who has totally lost the fucking plot, then where have you been? It's all here in this very thread.

The guy is a fruit loop. A complete and utter pscyho.

He's also, still, a Wikipedia Administrator.

He also, quite worryingly, a parent. Can you imagine someone this unable to keep things in perspective, being in charge of kids?

[CrowsNest]

We eventually got the full story behind the recent anecdote he shared with Eric Corbett, because, well, it's Ritchie, he can't fucking help himself...

...I recently ran into trouble in a discussion forum after somebody said (in summary) : "Anyone who cannot afford to buy a house only has themselves to blame. I worked on my own business for 7 years and bought a £250K house; anyone can do that and those that don't are lazy and bone idle and should not be complaining" to which I replied "You know what, if I went into a pub and pontificated like that, somebody would probably tell me to fuck off". Which of the two of us do you think was being more upsetting? I know which one I'd choose... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:48, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Neutral

Who has to choose? It is entirely possible that two people arguing in a pub can be massive knobs at the same time. Trust Ritchie not to appreciate that basic tenet of British society. Too close to it, I expect. Fucking pisshead.

[CrowsNest]

there is no correlation whatsoever between the support tally at RfA and how good an admin somebody actually is. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:34, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, and you're the prime example!

We need a second referendum alright, on this dipshit's fitness to serve.

[CrowsNest]

Oppose, (based on what i've read above) we don't need people like this [RexxS] being admins. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:50, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, this admin [Jimmy Wales] said "utter fucking bullshit", let's desysop him! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:55, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Prat.

Sarcasm only works if it is an absurd position the utterer would never take. Ritchie is of course in that cowardly group who, if they could find a way, would gladly see Jimmy desysopped.

His pathetic point is also rather undermined by the widely known fact that Jimmy the Administrator is already committed to never blocking anyone ever again, because screaming, whereas the fear is that RexxS really would start blocking people he had been mouthing off to minutes earlier, or indeed years earlier.

With equally questionable Administrators like Ritchie being the last line of defence to overturn highly questionable Administrator conduct like that, you can really see why some in the community are utterly opposed to making the situation worse.

[CrowsNest]

This reminds me, I really need to go and write up a recall criteria, because if enough people genuinely think I should no longer have the administrator tools, they should be able to get rid of mine. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:02, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

My track record of kicking people who I think need to be knocked down a peg or two has shot up and I suspect I'd have a similar trajectory to RexxS with lots more pile-on "civility problems" opposes. If I manage to lose the tools, I'll never get them back. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:13, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Oh, to possess a mind where this shit makes sense.