Ivanvector

Editors, Admins and Bureaucrats blecch!
Post Reply
User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Ivanvector

Post by CrowsNest » Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:18 pm

Look at this classic example of a dipshit Wikipedia Administrator's warped logic and general understanding of their role.....
A number of comments above appear to be referencing my close of a previous discussion as a warning against incivility. I want to be very clear that it was not, it was a pledge by MjolnirPants to be more respectful of editors with differing viewpoints, and in the same discussion I somewhat endorsed aggressive treatment of overt racists.
For a start, there is no difference between warning a user to be more civil, and warning them to be more respectful of those with differing viewpoints, since being an asshole to those who disagree with you covers the vast majority of incivility that is found on Wikipedia, as solid research has shown, mostly originating from a hard core of toxic editors just like Mjolnirpants, as it happens. That this Administrator doesn't get that, explains why nothing has changed since that by now very old research finding.
I agree that we shouldn't need to warn editors not to respond to confrontation with descriptions of violent sexual acts, and at the same time I agree that we should do so in this case since MjolnirPants doesn't seem able to draw that line for themselves.
You would only not need to give such warnings, if the Administrators enforced the very policies that exist to try to ensure the only people on the site for very long, are those who don't need such warnings, because they just don't do it. As subsequent events showed, resorting to giving such warnings to such a long established editor as Mjolnirpants was very much a case of too little too late, proof you should have acted, and acted decisively, the very first time he issued a threat of violence.
I oppose any restriction that is generally worded as to prevent MjolnirPants ridiculing overt racists in ways that do not describe violence.
And the policy basis for this is what, exactly? Which Wikipedia policies says it is OK to ridicule anyone, for any reason?
Frankly if racists don't edit Wikipedia because they fear abuse from editors like MjolnirPants, that's a good thing. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:27, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Newsflash. Not only are racists not the least bit intimidated by the sort of abuse eminating from the likes of Mjolnirpants, who personifies completely the label "keyboard warrior", someone in this incident actually provided hard evidence of the not very surprising and entirely predictable eventuality, that all Mjolinirpants achieved was to get racists riled up and want to come to Wikipedia to cause trouble. A psychologist would probably say he did it deliberately, because he needs people to fight a righteous war with online, to give himself a sense of self-worth, and because most likely, he's too chicken shit to go on an actual counter-demonstration.

None of this has occurred to this Wikipedia Administrator, hence the site's well documented problems with both preventing an atmosphere of general toxicity, and preventing people like Mjolnirpants from thinking they have a green light from the Administration to do what so clearly comes naturally to them, for they are as immature and lacking in intelligence as the very people they are trying to ridicule.

People like Ivan do more damage to Wikipedia than any racist editor, they're just too stupid to see it. Fortunately there are ways to make them suffer for their ignorance, both personally and institutionally, which is an entirely ethical thing to do since it is by now well established that no other means of feedback is effective on the cult of Wikipedia.

HTD.

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

Re: Ivanvector

Post by CrowsNest » Fri Feb 22, 2019 2:52 pm

The fact that Ivanvector is the one who had to eventually block Mjolnirpants for whatever the original version of this post was......
I've been told by four different admins that they're all aware we have a racist, POV pushing child rape advocate <outing redacted>.
......is the reality of what happens when you let people like Ivan believe they are competent and trusted.

The fact he basically bottled it, pretending like the block is made in his personal capacity as a single Administrator for that single incident (despite already admitting he was too emotionally involved in the rapidly unfolding car crash that led up to it), shows what he is all about. He still thinks there is some way his boy can be rehabilitated, to be turned back into just a useful riler or racists, like that was all he ever was.

The massive AN/I thread for Mjolnirpants that he is choosing not to even attempt to summarise, despite his block effectively making it null and void in the short and most likely medium term, was revealing this was far from who MP was, it was but one aspect of his emotionally stunted, deliberately provocative and entirely selfish existence on what is laughing promoted as an exercise in collaboration.

It seems to be a tradition among certain Wikipedia Administrators who simply lack the necessary temperament and judgement to be anywhere near the role, that when all is crashing down around a favourite user, they swoop in to be the one to place the inevitable block when it has become absolutely obvious it is going to happen, as if somehow they will then be able to have a say on how, when and if they return.

Sadly for Ivan, an Administrator even worse than him has done the right thing, and classified the block accordingly, as befits the final ignominious offence - any and all appeals to be submitted to ArbCom. Not perfect, not a guarantee he will only be allowed to return with a cast iron guarantee of perfect behaviour, but about as best that can be hoped.

Still, he isn't done yet.......
Just pointing out that MjolnirPants is not banned. The idea of banning them has never been suggested. At the most extreme end of proposed sanctions they might have been blocked for a while until they acknowledged some suggestions from other editors, but an outright ban has never been on the table. The current oversight situation is an unfortunate side show. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:01, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Not banned. Quite the step down from someone being hailed by many as an asset to the project. What was on the table was an indefinite block, in the AN/I thread he refers to here......
For what it's worth, since we're all weighing in, the reason I restored Amorymeltzer's original removal of what was not oversighted was specifically to avoid the exact drama-fest which is currently playing out on this page, after having speedy-closed the long ANI discussions for the same reason. Everyone, please, remember that we're all on the same team here. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:11, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Drama? All on the same team?

No dude, I don't think you are. There's the team fighting for policy, rarely seen on Wikipedia, and the team that sort of does that but with massive exceptions and huge hypocrisies, and there's whatever the fuck team this firefighting shit show is meant to be representative of, a team I've only ever seen the dumbass Ritchie openly declare he is a member of.

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

Re: Ivanvector

Post by CrowsNest » Fri Mar 22, 2019 12:35 am

Behold, the mighty moral authority of a dipshit Wikipedia Administrator.....

(Warning: ridiculously large page, see MelanieN if you think that's not cool)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =888640349

How thick, malicious or just plain incompetent do you have to be, to even post such a thing?

I might be imagining it, but it wasn't this bad even five years ago. They just weren't this fucking stupid.

As if you couldn't guess, Ivan was promoted in 2016. That's not a misprint, it is not meant to be 2006.

Post Reply