RexxS for Adminship

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

Re: RexxS for Adminship

Post by CrowsNest » Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:11 am

:lol:
Unlike certain over [sic] ballots where "I hate unelected bureaucrats dictating to us the shape of our bananas" or "ah wanna make Americha great again lock Hillary up!" carries as much weight as everyone else, "It is April 2nd and I have not been to the pub so I will treat this RFA with the same flippancy as the candidate." doesn't. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
For one, shut the fuck up you whiny little bitch. Your whole point is mooted by RexxS' statement that he stood by any and all (presumably reasonable) consequences of his deliberate choice of how, when and why to run for Adminship. He was good enough to say those people who opposed solely because of it, are entitled to their "right" to oppose. If you're upset that someone with more class than you is not an Administrator, then fucking resign already.

For two, stop your lying ass bullshit. People aren't stupid. They know you're a lying sack of shit, so they know to always double check the source when you're claiming to quote anyone. This time the quote was accurate, but you had of course missed out the part which undermined your belief the vote should have been discounted.......
Least this !vote be discounted due to April Fool confusion let me be clear that opposition is based on the factual evidence of serious attitude and behavioural concerns expressed by many experienced editors
Anyone up for blocking Ritchie? He's told about ten lies in and around this one RfA alone.

No? Yeah, I didn't think so. :roll:

This is why people are so careful about who they give power to.

Even better. He only let that post stand for four minutes. Did he withdraw it because it was bullshit? No.
best leave it
The fucker thinks he's right, he just wants to tell himself he's taking the high road.

You're the one in the gutter Ritchie, with all the other slime.

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

Re: RexxS for Adminship

Post by CrowsNest » Thu Apr 11, 2019 3:01 pm

THE FIX IS IN

Promoted, with 63.6% support of Bureaucrats (7 for, 4 against), supposedly seeing a consensus in a 63.9% RfA (the oft-quoted 64.1% ignoring the fact the final support came seconds before it was protected in preparation for closure).

Civility has been depreciated at the highest levels of Wikipedia governance, as per the clearly stated wishes of the Bureaucrat who decided to open the 'crat chat, despite it falling pretty far outside their discretionary zone of 65%-75% (he needed 168 supports just to finish on 64.6% and so get in on rounding).

We still don't even really know what the valid reason was for ignoring the range. There were not enough obviously invalid oppose votes that could be ignored to reach 64.5%. The Bureaucrat who made the decision, tried to argue it was because RexxS is merely a long serving editor. But if he stands by that, he is basically admitting he was just looking for any excuse. It definitely wouldn't stand if proposed as a policy change, codifying as it does, Vested Contributions. Was it IAR? Clearly not, as it wasn't even remotely an uncontroversial benefit to Wikipedia.

The desperation was clear when other Bureaucrats, the ones who believed they saw consensus, argued that somehow this half-dead dog had in fact numerically reached the range, thereby avoiding the issue of their land grab. How? By ignoring the obviously invalid votes, and the voters who only cited the manner in which RexxS stood. That was a joke in of itself, even more so when RexxS had said quite rightly, if they think that is sufficient reason to opppse, they have the "right" to have their reasons counted as much as anyone else's. Clearly they have no such right. When Bureaucrats are in town.

We certainly know why they closed it so fast, even though the seven day time period is not a hard limit, Bureacrats being allowed to "extend RfAs beyond seven days or restart the nomination to make consensus clearer", in "exceptional circumstances". Curiously, the reason it was closed and called in for a discussion between Bureaucrats, was supposedly the existence of exceptional circumstances. Logically, for an RfA complicated by a messy start and with only one real point of contention, you would think extension or restart would be the way to go.

But no. The trend was clear. Maxim needed to act if he was going to pull this off at all. He could see the writing on the wall. Having been dumped down to ~60% after a day or so, RexxS had long passed the peak support he was ever seemingly going to attain, reaching the sunny uplands of precisely two thirds support (66.6% recurring) for all of 22 minutes, and it was only ever going downhill after that, certainly after the roller coaster ride of people fighting over whether he was even really good enough to finish above 65%.

A pretty miserable endorsement for one so highly thought of by such bastions of integrity, like Kudpung, Drmies, Ritchie, or Iridescent, all promoted to Administrator in a different time, when the true nature of the Wikipedia community had yet to be fully understood. The demographic angle was not lost in the minorities of Wikipedia, these old white assholes rooting for an old white asshole on the basis he's not as much of an asshole as they are, so give him what he is entitled to. But they are minorities for a reason.

You simply don't keep an old white dude who doesn't suffer fools gladly out of favour on Wikipedia. The best you can hope for, as someone who values a different kind of collaborative environment and discourse, an inclusive and respectful community, can merely hope, with enough allies and people who read the news, you can, or so it was thought, keep them out of the rarified air of being considered of a higher standard of Wikipedian. One of just 100 or so with real power. There was a clear means of doing that, or so it was thought.

That battle of wills between New and Old Testament was seemingly won, with just over a day left to run, the looming prospect of him finishing outside the range did not even trigger a late swing of support. Admittedly there can't have been anyone who was likely to support who hadn't already been canvassed. Late deciders, and the few who changed their minds, reflected what the community as a whole apparently wanted - that RexxS not finish inside the discretionary zone. They clearly wanted him to fail automatically, having never seen anyone finish below the range and still get called in.

If any Bureaucrat had made it clear their interpretation of the range was that he could still be called in even if he finished on 64 or even 63, it is clear the community would have pushed him further down, to avoid it. They didn't want to keep humiliating him, it clearly pained many to be forced to have to oppose, he was already at record levels of opposition, but unfortunately that is what the process requires, and in no small part, was the result of RexxS' astonishing arrogance to try and stare them down.

Much has been made of how traumatic this all was for poor RexxS. Little has been made of how easy it would have been for him to avoid it all. Step 1, don't even risk being thought of as showing contempt for the process. Step 2, don't run at all when you knew fine well the premise on which you did so, that Adminship is still No Big Deal, is itself an open sore of community division. Step 3, have the good grace to withdraw when it was clear to do otherwise was going to ensure this RfA would be historically divisive. Step 4, don't be the sort of dick whom casts himself as reasonable and diplomatic, then use the emotional blackmail of this apparently being a one time offer to achieve 63.9%.

Maxim clearly saw that this dog wasn't going to hunt no matter how long you ran it, or even if you restarted it. So he did the only thing that was possible to make it appear like their services were needed, to rule on whether RexxS' services were needed. This dog needed a mercy killing, Maxim instead decided to administer mouth to mouth.

The tone set, the Bureaucrats desperate to nail this fix then merely proceeded to agree to such absurdist positions as, when a historically large and uniform body of opposition coalescing around a single issue, civility, borne out of policy and historically seen as eminently strong reasoning in prior Bureaucrat chats, was in fact weak when pitted against an admittedly larger support, but one which on that very same issue was fractured, between total denialism, depreciation of what is policy, and support with reservations and a hope the candidate will be better.

They collectively looked at that, and laughingly told us the support had the stronger argument. The rookie Primefac even insulted people's intelligence by suggesting no consensus on that issue defaults to promotion, the exact opposite of what long standing practice is, namely to maintain the status quo. You can see why he needed to go there, RexxS having unwisely rejected the premise that in these times of division and fool me twice over civility, it was for him to prove to doubters that their fears were unfounded. We were even treated to the sight of the Bureaucrats even deciding to put themselves above the community in deciding how much evidence is enough, or arguing that the way you judge if an Administrator is uncivil, is if he has been blocked for civility. Ab-surd.

It is clear the smallest cohort of support was the one that said the opposers were not saying anything worth listening to at all, they were either not getting the nuance/context, not giving RexxS his due credit for long service, or just being plain wrong, and yet Maxim has rewarded them with the title of winningest argument. It is total coincidence I guess that it seems to match his personal view. It is no comfort that this is going to lead to plenty of highly experienced and respected Wikipedians thoroughly questioning the value of the bronze, silver and even gold sashes of office awarded to them by this very same community, on the basis that they really aren't that fucking stupid. ReadS was opposed, by an actual Bureaucrat, ferchrissakes.

It is remarkable to think that when you take out all the support which was predicated on him sticking to his promise to be a better person with the badge, he would have finished so low not even Maxim could have called it in. Their ultimate finding that concerns over his civility were insufficient to oppose, in part because many claimed they are meritless and others relatively unimportant, has ironically mean the extra votes secured from supporters who had serious reservations over his civility, is what helped him achieve what he otherwise would not have if he had refused to acknowledge concerns over his civility.

To put that more simply, he succeeded because he promised something the Bureaucrats have ruled he did not need to promise. Civility depreciation in action.

The Bureaucrats ignored it of course, because it illustrates very well the con-trick they just pulled. Much like their trickery over the discretionary range, if they had announced before their discussion that one possible route to promotion, the only viable one really, was to declare the matter of 'Is RexxS too much of a dick to be an Administrator?', on the community's current view of civility enforcement, to be narrowly settled in his favour, it is likely those who supported based on promises given to be less of a dick, would have been reconsidered, and likely moved to neutral if not oppose.

We can't know for sure, but a sure-fire route to test this theory would have been for the Bureaucrats to pass the decision back to the community, extend the RfA for a couple more days and direct them that in their opinion the numbers no longer matter, he is presumed to have passed pending further discussion on the one critical issue identified. As such, they are to now concentrate their minds on coalescing around a view as to whether or not RexxS as he stands before you today with his eleven years of service is civil enough to be an Administrator.

The lack of consensus evident from that exercise in generously throwing RexxS a lifeline on the basis he has said he will not run again, a perfect example of the sort of thing Bureaucrats are empowered to do for the good of Wikipedia, would be so obvious as to be inescapable.

The situation as it stands now is clear. RexxS is an Administrator, and all expectations, statements and promises made to the effect of him having better conduct than he did before achieving that status, is null and void. No complaints or concerns about his civility can legitimately be heard, not by other Administrators or even the Arbitration Committee, unless it is agreed by the majority that the incidents are worse than those seen in this RfA, or are more frequent. Because the bar of what the community has said is acceptable, has been set by this decision.

To put that into context, to put this decision into stark refief, it was shown in this RfA that in the space of a year, the most recent year before this RfA, RexxS has called two editors prats.

In the one case it was for violating a self-defined idea of what is best practice in the coding of Lua modules, a content dispute he had yet to test against consensus, and a conduct dispute he had let fester for eighteen months, in a topic area where he specifically intends to act as an Administrator.

In the other, it was edit warring in violation of WikiProject editor's (entirely mythical and anti-wiki) supposed sovereign rights to dictate what notices they could be given, a content dispute of mind-numbing triviality that at that point had only been tested against the views of those project members, of which RexxS was one, and which, while it did not result in sanctions when it finally did reach AN/I, did see several editors apportion blame on both sides for having caused drama and disruption.

Did the Bureaucrats ever get to the stage where they discussed the discussion of RexxS' civility to the point they were aware of and had dismissed the potential for further drama and disruption around the critical area of civility, if they promoted RexxS? Unless their secret agenda is to hasten the destruction of Wikipedia, and hey, who doesn't want that ;) , they clearly did not. Rather troublingly, especially after they pressured him to withdraw his withdrawal, the intent seems to have been to hammer home a point to the effect the disagreement is just noise, and their clear vision has cut through it to reveal what truly benefits Wikipedia. Ignoring it. Sorry, discounting it.

The RexxS that stood by his principles, that all reasonable opposers were created equal and he did not want to be the latest example of how divided the community is, because after all it's no big deal and he didn't really have any need or particular desire for the extra buttons and was not seeking or seeing it as a matter of prestige, is the same RexxS that when he withdrew on principle, had apparently betrayed his supporters, who supported him because he had principles, and had not just a need but a right to the tools, as befits a man of his prestige in their eyes. If there as no fix, no brown envelopes, no government within a government working to its own agenda, then this is....illogical.

The RexxS that asked you to do nothing but trust his record of eleven years and his promises that his twelth year would see a marked improvement, now that during this process he had had his eyes opened to how poorly he is seen by many in the community, is the RexxS that is now an Administrator on the basis those promises need not be kept and he himself is wrong, because there is consensus the community that in practice, he is already meeting the high standards of Wikipedia Administrator.

On that score, I think everyone can agree. RexxS has the confidence of 63.9% of the Wikipedia community that he will be no worse that what is unfortunately the current standard of Wikipedia Administration, assuming he keeps promises that 63.6% of the Elders of Wikipedia have agreed he need not keep, in recognition of the perversity of holding him to a higher standard than is already de facto good enough.

It remains a fact that 90+ Wikipedia editors, a clear and obvious outlier of a shellacking in what is for all intents and purposes, a vote, were explicit in their belief he was not good enough according to the standard that already exists, unmoved by any arguments that their concerns were unimportant or misguided or just plain erroneous, unmoved by any promises the candidate made to do better, unmoved by the prospect that he would not be asking for their trust again.

That is a heavy cross to bear. It is perhaps a mark of Wikipedia's tendency to self-destruction, that it may yet break the spirit and confidence of an editor who, when he was just an ordinary if long serving volunteer, was undoubtedly not the worst performing editor they have on their books. If you perhaps pretend for example that even the policy of 'don't call people prats' is merely an aspirational goal for the rank and file, not the already firmly established minimum acceptable standard of basic editors, with any and all violations deemed unacceptable.

A standard that is theoretically never excused only mitigated, with even the newest of editors theoretically having to work quite hard to avoid a permanent exclusion if a pattern emerges and there is reason to believe they really should know better but can't or won't, perhaps on some level because they think or have been given reason to believe that sometimes there is some situation where there is not just mitigation, but a valid excuse.

It begs the question, does that not make him wonder, in his real world outreach efforts, when he stands before people asking them to commit themselves to Wikipedia the way he has done and was used to laud him for this role, if he has not rather undermined his credibility somewhat. Fatally so perhaps, if the sharp new recruits look up the credentials and performance reviews of their teacher and mentor. It is never wise to teach from a position of ignorance of one's own standing or your subject matter, much less with hypocrisy.

Of course, in that crucial respect, research has already shown that it always was a myth that there is a general trend in Wikipedia editors to be blunt, grumpy, rude or even abusive, as if it were somehow an unavoidable or excusable component of their work, and that while pervasive, the worst offenders were just the newbies and the anonymous cowards. The facts turned those assumptions right in their head, debunking any idea that experience or real life skin in the game has any effect, reinforcing the idea it is just a handful of highly toxic repeat offenders who do the worst damage. RexxS is as experienced and attached to a real persona as any editor could be. He is also now charged with being the very thing that researchers identified was a barrier to the theory becoming the reality......
Depressingly, the study also found that very few personal attacks are moderated. Only 17.9% of personal attacks lead to a warning or ban. Attackers are more likely to be moderated if they have launched a number of attacks or have been moderated before. But still, this is an abysmal rate of moderation for the most obvious and blatant form of abuse that can happen in a community.
Even if RexxS appreciated just how galling it would be to be an editor warned by him for incivility, and so never dares to go near that side of Wikipedia moderation, which seems unlikely in of itself both as a general reality of the role and specifically because he said one of the places he intends to serve is the Pentagon of that side of things, it is inevitable that his presence in that group, just as Kudpung et al before him, has thoroughly undermined the authority of those who do.

In conclusion, to quote one very prescient opposer.....
Oppose per above. Nobody in this community takes WP:Civility seriously. At this point, it's more of a joke than a pillar or rule. I don't think this would be a step in the right direction with respect to that problem. Ikjbagl (talk) 18:15, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
One wonders if that vote was one of the ones either given little weight, or no weight at all. It almost has to be, for their decision to make any sense at all.

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

Re: RexxS for Adminship

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Apr 16, 2019 12:52 pm

On a weighted analysis, RexxS' level of support could have been as low as 135, and that is being generous. Even that would mean that to pass him fit to serve, the Bureaucrats needed to, for example, chuck out a whole 10 oppose votes in their entirety, and discount all of the rest by 10%, just to determine there is consensus that RexxS was a minimally acceptable candidate (65%).

Indefensible really. No big deal? You either trust me or you don't? :roll:

Full breakdown here.....

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... 9180#p9180

RexxS was already unhappy RfA is such a torturous process. All he did here, particularly after he did eventually choose to put the Bureaucrats in the "invidious position" of having to do what they so clearly did to pass him, was ensure future candidates will face an even tougher time.....

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... =19&t=1173

All things considered, was it worth it?

On the advice of Xeno, one of the Bureaucrats who found consensus to promote, his client should KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT.......
Hi RexxS, just wanted to suggest you don’t bother following along with any of the ongoing aftershocks of your RfA, they need not concern you at present. Roll up those sleeves, go forth and do good unto the wiki. Let me know if I can be of any assistance as you step into your new role. –xenotalk 15:35, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
Silence in the aftermath of this absolute clusterfuck, merely confirms all the worst fears of the opposition.

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

Re: RexxS for Adminship

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Apr 23, 2019 2:27 pm

So, some very wise people opposed RexxS for Admin because he appeared to lack the necessary judgement, and it therefore seemed likely he would probably abuse his admin tools in ways that embolden him in his didn't I already tell you that once dummy? attitude to people he is in disagreement with.

I guess nobody will be surprised then, that his first official Admin action that requires use of tools is to protect an article where he was recently making comments like this on the talk page.......
That's not your decision to make, as I've tried to explain to you. Wikipedia's content is determined by reliable sources, not editors' opinions and original research. --RexxS (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Still, this isn't a problem though, because being an Administrator is NOBIGDEAL, promoting someone who doesn't and probably never will understand the basic concepts involved is OK because they can always be censured by the community or desysoped but ArbCom, right?

Riiiight?

AHAAHAAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAH HA HA HA HA

The majority of the Wikipediots won't give a tiny rat's was that RexxS uses his tools this way. This is clearly how most of them want these things to be used, they want their Administrators to basically be seen as pricks with badges. The minority who see the problem here, not a month into his tenure when he was supposedly meant to be being careful, well, they can go fuck themselves, for all the good it will do to voice their concerns now.

Stupid motherfuckers.

He's also of course, already knee deep in the issue of what ArbCom are and are not allowed to do, commenting with all the gravitas of an Administrator now. Even though a lot of what he is saying is COMPLETE GARBAGE, only increasing the level of farce that has begun to take over the upper levels of Wikipedia governance. Another surprise there, eh? Didn't see that one coming at all. Wasn't flagged up as a likely issue in his RfA at all. Except that it was.

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

Re: RexxS for Adminship

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Apr 23, 2019 2:38 pm

:lol:
I'm sorry, BU Rob13, but that's not how AE actions should be working on Wikipedia

--RexxS (talk) 13:01, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
He's talking to a former Arbitrator!

No wonder he was opposed by so many Wikipedians whose roles and areas of interest makes them the ones more likely to know how AE is supposed to work. And no wonder that he was supported by so many who don't like the way it works, because it limits the freedoms of their corrupt perceptions of Adminship, and the freedoms of vested contributors they consider friends. People like RexxS, who was once the latter, but is now the former.

It was so fucking obvious what this RfA was all about. No wonder Bishonen kept her mouth shut. Anything she might have said would have given the game away.

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

Re: RexxS for Adminship

Post by CrowsNest » Thu Apr 25, 2019 2:42 am

:lol:

More garbage from the man now given the gravitas of signings his posts 'with love from your local Administrator'......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RexxS/2FA

Getting the name of the thing wrong is bad enough, but writing a whole essay on a false premise (2FA does not require use of a mobile phone), is epic fail.

And this is the guy who was supported by some people as a useful addition to the ranks of the technology minded genre of Administrators, so that rather shows how little weight the votes of those clueless fucksticks should have carried.

Who else has recently displayed this level of shocking ignorance? Bishonen, of course. Is that where the dumb bitch got it from? Or is this essay being penned on her orders? The necessary document to be waved by the #Resistance when someone proposes to make 2FA mandatory for all Admins, something Bishonen says she Does Not Want.

And as we know, what the Queen Does Not Want, Does Not Get Happened. She has people who do that for her, usually through some form of abuse of Admin powers, usually the softer gravitas type power because it gets less attention. The sort of power you can easily see RexxS calling on to defend his legitimacy as author of this piece of garbage in the forthcoming battle of wills, Defenders of The Wiki vs The Prats.

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

Re: RexxS for Adminship

Post by CrowsNest » Sat Apr 27, 2019 12:22 pm

Blocked Jongibson478 for WP:NOTHERE.

This guy was spamming a link into handful of articles on 25 April, got warned for spamming at 14:55, made precisely one more edit to Wikipedia at 15.20, which, while not very useful, perhaps even a test of the good faith of the spam warning, it was clearly not a repeat of his previous spamming behaviour, and was manifestly not remotely blockable in of itself for any reason. RexxS blocked him indefinitely at 16.16, with no warning and just the usual pointless but shitty template linking to that Lazy Administrator's Bible of an essay, by way of an explanatory note.

The only reasonable way to interpret RexxS' action here, is that he was looking for any excuse to block this guy, and has just done so despite the fact he has no real reason, in a clear and obvious breach of assume good faith. It probably helps to understand why he would be so careless and vicious with his brand new powers, when you realise the 15.20 edit was to an article RexxS considers one of his. Concerns about him abusing his tools to further his tendency toward ownership having of course been registered in his RfA.

For the last eleven years, he would have had to weigh up the merits of reporting such an editor to an actual Administrator, if he saw them as a potential threat to the good order of Wikipedia. Now he can just block them, no questions asked. If anyone else even noticed this shitty block, it doesn't seem like they care enough to ask him for an explanation, which is precisely the sort of Administrative culture people like Kudpung are aiming for. It is the culture that has got Wikipedia to where it is today, completely devoid of editors who can make it through their first ten edits in enough numbers to stop the rot.

Net positive? Well, he hasn't deleted the Main Page, so there's that for the RexxS fan club to cling onto I guess. Oh to have such HIGH STANDARDS.

This is presumably what RexxS The Administrator looks like when he is being careful and trying to follow policy and good practice. So you can image what he is going to be like in due course. Still, they way the existing members keep sniping at each other, he hardly lowers the bar all that much. Those lesser lights of standards and decorum all having been keen advocates of RexxS' good judgement in his RfA of course, so a nice piece of research there, Bureaucrats.

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

Re: RexxS for Adminship

Post by CrowsNest » Wed May 01, 2019 7:43 pm

Holy shit. Bureaucrat Wizardman retired from Wikipedia, and the only plausible explanation is that he was mightily pissed off that RexxS was promoted when he should not have been, according to Wizardman's reading of consensus........
This is a pretty clear "no consensus" to me. Both sides are pretty entrenched in their opinions; If the opposes were reluctant or weak perhaps I could look at differently, but looking at the weight of both sides I see absolutely no reason to go against the grain here.
While it may not be the main or the whole reason for his retirement, as a straw that breaks a camel's back, it has to have weighed a ton.

RexxS is the gift that just keeps on giving. Now we're also being treated to the sight of Rama being torn to shreds for doing something bad with his admin tools just because he thought he was right and believed it would be an uncontroversial benefit to Wikipedia, and ultimately because Adminiship is No Big Deal, riiiught? Everything can be reversed, no harm, no foul.

RexxS is a net benefit? To critics, yes, yes he has been, already.

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

Re: RexxS for Adminship

Post by CrowsNest » Sat May 04, 2019 9:17 pm

The very next RfA after RexxS saw a user pass with ease, despite there being not unreasonable grounds for concern. Since civility was not one of them, you did not see the strength or size of opposition that you did for RexxS, and the level of support for someone who is basically an unknown rookie in comparison (182 to RexxS' 163) shows that those who argued RexxS has wide support and respect as a familiar face and an old hand, really were kidding themselves. RexxS saw it, and he was shocked by it. Not enough to do the right thing, but that was hardly a surprise. He is what he is.

Not even the sight of a Bureaucrat simply retiring rather than having anything more to do with this farce, is seemingly going to make a single Wikipedian admit what is really fucking obvious, and is only going to be more obvious with each new RfA that passes after RexxS. His promotion was an instant watershed moment, a shocking reality check, and now he is going to be an ever present reminder of how easily the system can be gamed, no matter how perverse an outcome it produces.

The people who made this happen, who said black was white and up was down, by rights they should not be able to sleep at night. But they will. Shame plays no part of the Wikipedia experience.

It goes without saying, RexxS has basically done fuck all with his tools, and what little he has done, has been for his own personal benefit. Not really worth it, manifestly not a net benefit and likely never will be at this rate simply when measured by expended editor time, never mind the emotional cost. But hey, he and his supporters wanted to prove the principle that RfA could be gamed, that Adminship could be no big deal when they want, and a big deal when they want. They wanted to show Bishonen can do anything, so they did it. Good little user of course is continuing to undermine ArbCom. Good little user.

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

Re: RexxS for Adminship

Post by CrowsNest » Sun May 05, 2019 2:32 am

I will ask again, why is someone who knows nothing about 2FA, writing Wikipedia essays about his you should not use 2FA?
Why do we tell everybody never to write down their password, and then instruct them to do the analogous action with their 2FA scratch tokens? --RexxS (talk) 13:50, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
......other than because Bishonen thinks this of course...
IMO 2FA is more likely to shut out me, a technically ignorant admin, than to protect me from any would-be encroacher. (I have a very strong password, never used elsewhere.) ...... Bishonen | talk 10:48, 4 May 2019 (UTC).
PROTECT THE QUEEN!

What a prat.

And why were people allowed to call this clown a useful addition to the Admin ranks on the technical side?

For those who genuinely don't know, you don't write your password down because it is a SINGLE FACTOR OF AUTHENTICATION. As in, you find the piece of paper, YOU ARE IN THE ACCOUNT. The clue is right there in the name, and he still doesn't get it. A scratch code is equivalent to the answer to your security question in that single factor approach, but carries even less risk of writing it down. If you want 100% certainty you will never be locked out, in a password only system you would of course be tempted to write down your security question answer, even if you do not write down your actual password. In 2FA, the reality of you needing to write something down if you ever want 100% reassurance you will never be locked out, is accepted and built into the design. Technically minded Administrators don't need to have this shit explained to them, they're the ones who explain it to the muggles. It is the muggles who would think there is some kind of risk from not following advice that is only applicable to one system, when using the other.

(who wants to bet Bishonen has her passwords written down somewhere?)

Post Reply