ArbCom election 2018

[CrowsNest]

It is somehow fitting that an Administrator who is basically unblockable, has used his invulnerability to poke a stick in the eye of another unblockable.....

There is an account, User:Dr Aaij, who claims to be you, and has followed you to some pages, even responding to you (like here). Obviously, since this account is not mentioned on your user page, and it doesn't fit the description of your alternative accounts in your candidate statement, it has to be an impersonator, otherwise you would have failed to follow policy (WP:ALTACC and deceived the voters. If this somehow isn't an impersonator, when do you plan to withdraw your candidature? Fram (talk) 21:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk ... =858182196

[Graaf Statler]

Hmfff. Here Drmies is twisting my words. I didn't say or meant he was Moira-NL, i said the account was managed by page watchers in the same way as the MoiraMoira account was.
What is now out of the air by the way.

IF they did a CU on the Dr Aaij account and the Drmies account they would be surprised what they found...........
Whole Wikipedia will be shocked afterwards. Dr Aaij is a man with many, many mystery's and secrets, just like almost every wikipedian from the Dutch wikipedia stable.

[CrowsNest]

To illustrate the utter joke that this election really is, NewYorkBrad is considered the best Arbitrator ever. This guy.......

For blocking while involved in a dispute, Boing! said Zebedee! is desyopped. They may re-apply via a normal RFA at any time.

Excessive and unwarranted, even assuming there was any misconduct. Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:59, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Your tax dollars at work.

That's their best Arbitrator saying that there are basically no circumstances where an Administrator stops being an Administrator after making an involved block.

It explains very well, why involved blocks are so commonplace.

To restate the policy......

In general, editors should not act as administrators in disputed cases in which they have been involved. This is because involved administrators may have, or may be seen as having, a conflict of interest in disputes they have been a party to or have strong feelings about. Involvement is generally construed very broadly by the community, to include current or past conflicts with an editor (or editors), and disputes on topics, regardless of the nature, age, or outcome of the dispute

Brad wants people to believe there are no circumstances when this can be breached in a way that the community loses all trust in the Administrator.

Is he serious? You bet. You watch, this half-assed bullshit is likely to have a material effect on the outcome of this case, even though he doesn't appear to have even assessed what happened.

[CrowsNest]

Hmfff. Here Drmies is twisting my words. I didn't say or meant he was Moira-NL, i said the account was managed by page watchers in the same way as the MoiraMoira account was.
What is now out of the air by the way.

IF they did a CU on the Dr Aaij account and the Drmies account they would be surprised what they found...........
Whole Wikipedia will be shocked afterwards. Dr Aaij is a man with many, many mystery's and secrets, just like almost every wikipedian from the Dutch wikipedia stable.

Just be glad it is another example of Drmies choosing to post on a Wikipedia user's talk page, even though they know they can't respond. He does that rather than post where the claims were made, obviously because he is a coward, and because his words are never meant for the person, but everyone else. It illustrates very well his utter lack of self-control, and his inability to predict the consequences of his actions. Or perhaps he can foresee them, but does not care - posting like this of course makes it more likely someone will create a sock, either to attempt to respond, or harass Drmies. Maybe he even wants that outcome.

In English, we call this evidence of a lack of class.

But hey people, vote for him, you know he is the candidate that best represents who you people really are.

[CrowsNest]

I cannot believe he answered it.....still, I guess that's proof of a basic truth of Wikipedia, there are different levels of user, some you can ignore, some you can't.

Fram, you know damn well it's me ("I have an account I use for teaching Wikipedia classes"), and if this hadn't been a public act of politicking (you could have asked me privately first), you might realize that I didn't "declare" that one account from this account because I don't want to invite the harassment that I receive here to be exported to my students. As an admin and a former arb, I suppose I asked to be harassed; my students haven't. You're the second one to bring this up here, and so I guess I will retire Dr Aaij after the semester is over. Why don't you ping WhenDatHotlineBling while you're at it--here's a recent account.

This is Drmies all over.

He knows damn well given the content/tone of the question that Fram asking him privately would not have persuaded him his answer was not bullshit, so Fram would conclude Drmies does not deserve his dirty laundry not being kept a secret. He is making that point merely to reflect attention onto Fram.

Claiming he gets harassed simply because he is an administrator and former Arbitrator, is also classic Drmies. For as start, he did fuck all as an Arbitrator - by his own admission, the most important (and controversial) things he did were done in secret. So who would even know what he did, to know he deserved harassing for it? People like us. People not remotely unaware that he has a teaching account, and therefore quite able to harass his students, if we wanted to.

Which brings me to how fucked up it is that he readily assumed the people who hate him, would see nothing wrong with targeting his innocent students. Who does he think we are? Him? And what does that say about him, fearing this students might be harassed, but not having done very much to keep his alternate account a secret, to properly protect them. Almost as if this fear is entirely manufactured.....

It is obvious why he kept the account a secret. First, he just likes breaking the rules and getting away with it. He does it all the time, with countless other rules. Second, he just didn't want the hassle of his students bothering him on his main account, or other editors asking questions about his teaching editing, on his main account. Third, he didn't want it to be too easy for people to realise he had an undeclared COI for certain edits he is making on his main account, like writing the biographies of colleagues (but he also wanted certain people to know he did, to flaunt the fact he can and was breaking that rule too).

Claiming he is going to now stop teaching and it is all Fram's fault, which is code for others to start harassing him as revenge, is the vengeful nastiness we have all come to expect from Drmies. "I guess" is the giveaway - I'm thinking if Fram is suitably punished and Drmies isn't compelled to declare the alternate, Drmies will magically stop caring that the cat is out of the bag. Lucky students.

As you might expect, Fram didn't take this bullshit lying down.......

Then don't use that account to do regular editing mixed with your standard account. I wasn't aware that approving regular DYKs (having nothing to do with your class) or voting in AfD's (again having nothing to do with your class) is accepted for accounts you use "for teaching Wikipedia classes" and which you apparently set up "not to invite harassment". If you don't want an undeclared (at your main account) sock to get into the trouble your regular account gets (or so you claim), then don't use it for regular editing in support of people you support as Drmies as well, or to edit articles you created (which you did repeatedly). You did a very poor job keeping these two separate, making it effectively an undeclared sock you use for regular editing. That I'm the second one to bring this up here only shows how ineffective you are in keeping it a secret. Not a surprise, seeing how effective you were in unbanning a known delirious sockmaster (and probable pedophile), but don't let such things stop you from running for ArbCom and being outraged at people publicly declaring your secrets after you first rubbed it into their noses. Why should anyone vote for an ArbCom candidate who is not trustworthy and not good at defending enwiki against even the most blatant disruptive editors? Fram (talk) 05:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Is that a question, or harassment?

I bet Fred Bauder is interested to know which.

[CrowsNest]

I think he's properly thrown in the towel now. Campaigning Drmies appears long gone.

How does one reconcile that Drmies apparently sees this as a good use of AN/I.....

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

...when just days ago, he said this.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =870592065

....about this 'report'.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... IVIL_issue

You can reconcile it one way - Drmies is fine with people politicking on AN/I when the issue is one he supports (treating all IPs like they are moron vandals until proven otherwise), he is not fine if it is an issue he finds uncomfortable (is it becoming more commonplace for editors to tell each other to fuck off?).

Just another in a long line of examples of who Drmies really is when not trying to appear to be a good person for the benefit of voters, an example of what he really does with his privileged position of Administrator (and hence why he specifically, is harassed).

They're not all like this, but they are clearly all OK with it occurring, given Drmies is not and likely never will be, desysopped, much less get blocked.

[Graaf Statler]

Hmfff. Here Drmies is twisting my words. I didn't say or meant he was Moira-NL, i said the account was managed by page watchers in the same way as the MoiraMoira account was.
What is now out of the air by the way.

IF they did a CU on the Dr Aaij account and the Drmies account they would be surprised what they found...........
Whole Wikipedia will be shocked afterwards. Dr Aaij is a man with many, many mystery's and secrets, just like almost every wikipedian from the Dutch wikipedia stable.

Just be glad it is another example of Drmies choosing to post on a Wikipedia user's talk page, even though they know they can't respond. He does that rather than post where the claims were made, obviously because he is a coward, and because his words are never meant for the person, but everyone else. It illustrates very well his utter lack of self-control, and his inability to predict the consequences of his actions. Or perhaps he can foresee them, but does not care - posting like this of course makes it more likely someone will create a sock, either to attempt to respond, or harass Drmies. Maybe he even wants that outcome.

In English, we call this evidence of a lack of class.

But hey people, vote for him, you know he is the candidate that best represents who you people really are.

That's the way these guys operate, including Midsize Jake. You can never defend yourself or pointing out these guys are just lying trolls, because before you have the change to defend yourself you are mute or blocked. Or uncle Jake has put the topic in a members only section on Wikipediocrazy. It is there system. Or you get even a letter from your local Wikimedia chapter of a lawyer how knows everything from potatoes like the Greeks say. (Xeri patatas.)

And yes, vote for the new Dutch Erasmus, the best Dutch export product ever because we are ride of this idiot here. And I asked it before, why don't you Americans not take the rest of this complete idiots too? You have already Drmies, Effeietsanders, and I am happy to do the paperwork to send you the rest of this fools including the staff of that Dutch chapter and it's director! Get lost out of my country, bunch of wiki fools! Keep your crazy foundation there if you like this kind of fools so much on the other side of the ocean, but not here!

[Dysklyver]

Drmies is coming under fire for his undeclared socks now.

There is an account, User:Dr Aaij, who claims to be you, and has followed you to some pages, even responding to you (like here). Obviously, since this account is not mentioned on your user page, and it doesn't fit the description of your alternative accounts in your candidate statement, it has to be an impersonator, otherwise you would have failed to follow policy (WP:ALTACC and deceived the voters. If this somehow isn't an impersonator, when do you plan to withdraw your candidature? Fram (talk) 21:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Then don't use that account to do regular editing mixed with your standard account. I wasn't aware that approving regular DYKs (having nothing to do with your class) or voting in AfD's (again having nothing to do with your class) is accepted for accounts you use "for teaching Wikipedia classes" and which you apparently set up "not to invite harassment". If you don't want an undeclared (at your main account) sock to get into the trouble your regular account gets (or so you claim), then don't use it for regular editing in support of people you support as Drmies as well, or to edit articles you created (which you did repeatedly). You did a very poor job keeping these two separate, making it effectively an undeclared sock you use for regular editing. That I'm the second one to bring this up here only shows how ineffective you are in keeping it a secret. Not a surprise, seeing how effective you were in unbanning a known delirious sockmaster (and probable pedophile), but don't let such things stop you from running for ArbCom and being outraged at people publicly declaring your secrets after you first rubbed it into their noses. Why should anyone vote for an ArbCom candidate who is not trustworthy and not good at defending enwiki against even the most blatant disruptive editors? Fram (talk) 05:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

[Graaf Statler]

Drmies is coming under fire for his undeclared socks now.

There is an account, User:Dr Aaij, who claims to be you, and has followed you to some pages, even responding to you (like here). Obviously, since this account is not mentioned on your user page, and it doesn't fit the description of your alternative accounts in your candidate statement, it has to be an impersonator, otherwise you would have failed to follow policy (WP:ALTACC and deceived the voters. If this somehow isn't an impersonator, when do you plan to withdraw your candidature? Fram (talk) 21:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Then don't use that account to do regular editing mixed with your standard account. I wasn't aware that approving regular DYKs (having nothing to do with your class) or voting in AfD's (again having nothing to do with your class) is accepted for accounts you use "for teaching Wikipedia classes" and which you apparently set up "not to invite harassment". If you don't want an undeclared (at your main account) sock to get into the trouble your regular account gets (or so you claim), then don't use it for regular editing in support of people you support as Drmies as well, or to edit articles you created (which you did repeatedly). You did a very poor job keeping these two separate, making it effectively an undeclared sock you use for regular editing. That I'm the second one to bring this up here only shows how ineffective you are in keeping it a secret. Not a surprise, seeing how effective you were in unbanning a known delirious sockmaster (and probable pedophile), but don't let such things stop you from running for ArbCom and being outraged at people publicly declaring your secrets after you first rubbed it into their noses. Why should anyone vote for an ArbCom candidate who is not trustworthy and not good at defending enwiki against even the most blatant disruptive editors? Fram (talk) 05:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I real can't understand why nobody asked these guy a few critical questions before, both in his powerful role as a arb and a sysops on WPNL with his strange trolling sock Natuur12 as in the same roll with his Drmies account. Because both Crow and I made very, very clear something stinks and burns here for a long, long time.

[Dysklyver]

I real can't understand why nobody asked these guy a few critical questions before, both in his powerful role as a arb and a sysops on WPNL with his strange trolling sock Natuur12 as in the same roll with his Drmies account. Because both Crow and I made very, very clear something stinks and burns here for a long, long time.

I imagine it is because while it is relatively easy to know that someone is socking, it is much more difficult to get them to admit to it on-wiki. Drmies has now in replying to the "peanut gallery" said just enough to show that he is at the very minimum misleading people over his alternative accounts. If he wasn't a bigwig admin then he would already be cu-banhammered. I doubt he will lose out on anything much as a result of any of this, but it will erode some of his position, maybe enough to stop him getting appointed as arb.

It is possible when he replied first (mostly it seems a reply to the comment I posted there), he assumed that I was just a troll (like "Vote (X) for change" for example), and that everyone would ignore it. Possibly he assumed it would strengthen his position. In reality I was just putting forward a question that dozens of Wikipedians were already thinking about, and the fact Drmies entertained it for a moment created a position for others to slip in and ask related questions.

It is possible they would have asked these questions anyway, but I doubt it, unless you give the sharks something to chew on they don't bite.