One more thing, Vigilant.

Editors, Admins and Bureaucrats Oh my!
Post Reply
User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

One more thing, Vigilant.

Post by Graaf Statler » Tue Apr 09, 2019 11:18 am

Not to open a other flame war, but.


Vigilant wrote:Piet,

Waarom lieg je altijd?
Je spreekt constant, maar er komt niets dan shit uit.


I know where you to reference, but I have no facebook, it is not mine. I never post on it and hardly look at it. Ir's my partners facebook and hidden for the same reason why you can't find anything of me on the internet. Again you where trying to mine data the state has adviced me to hide, no social media pleas what I don't have. And before you start to think I am a kind of criminal, it has to do with my black family story, but I don't give you details. But I am not a lier. Ik lieg niet. I have no social media.

It is removed by Jake. I have to reproduce it out of my memory. You quote out some page , I think this one.

Als ik het goed begrijp is deze vragenlijst ooit opgezet om t.z.t. voor te leggen aan een in auteursrechten gespecialiseerde jurist die aangaf dat hij wikipedia wel wilde adviseren (zie bovenaan deze OP). Of het daarvan ooit is gekomen weet ik niet. Wel merk ik op dat de vragenlijst onlangs nieuw leven werd ingeblazen, én dat vele vragen werden beantwoord door Gebruiker:Martin55. Maar Martin55 presenteerde zich in de Kroeg als zijnde géén jurist. Klopt mijn vermoeden dat deze antwoorden om die reden beter kunnen worden verwijderd, of klopt mijn interpretatie van de bedoeling van deze pagina niet? Hettie 2 apr 2009 12:45 (CEST)

It is about this edit.

Geen jurist.

Martin claimed not to be a jurist, lawyer.

But Borgdorff, a older very nice eccentric person said this:

Martin '55 heeft best wel een punt, ... hij brengt het echter te onduidelijk en wat verward. Dat vergt dus iets meer moeite dan men hier veelal gewend is. Niettemin: DA Borgdorff 6 apr 2009 04:08 (CEST)

Whit as result after the well know fox hunting with "lawyer" Robotje=>Ik ben lid van de Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland in first position........... ... _Borgdorff

Deze gebruiker, DA Borgdorff, kan niet meer aanmelden bij enig Wikimedia-project.

Deze gebruiker heeft misbruik gemaakt van sokpoppen. Er is een blokkade opgelegd conform de richtlijnen om bijdragen met de betreffende accounts en/of ip-adressen tegen te gaan.

On Jimmytalk now.
As suggested by others, I can't really comment on ongoing legal matters. I should also add that in general, for routine legal matters, they are handled by our very competent legal staff and don't necessarily rise to the level requiring board attention.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:11, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

well, Jimmy, sometimes they say money can buy anything. And I am really wonder where you have found that wonder legal team team of you with amazing lawyers, but surplice me. I myself will never claim I am a real lawyer, because in my opinion you have first to finish a decent law school before you can claim you are a lawyer. But, in strange Europe everybody can claim to be a lawyer, did you know that? And it appears every idiot can become a lawyer.
If my hairdresser want to claim he is a Hair-Lawyer he is complet free to do that. Or just lawyer. Well, Jimmy, that's the same with this jurist.

Door toeval heeft er gisteren een jurist en dan nog wel gespecialiseerd in auteursrechten contact genomen met Wikipedia via het formulier. Hij werkt ook nog voor Open Source bedrijven. Dit is geen wikipediaan maar meer tijdelijke toevallige bezoeker. Op mijn vraag of hij eventueel wat advies zou willen geven reageerde hij positief.

Walter 20 nov 2004 16:51 (CET)

2004 Jimmy? A lawyer Jimmy? Our very competent legal staff? with Gerlach, the legal oracle? And this "specialised Lawyer" who was claiming not long ago that copyright infringement is something as as if you had no tail light on your bicycle? Paul Brussel how is a laywer according to himself, and who didn't even understood public domain as Whally and i found out? And Jeroen N, the wiki-house lawyer who lost complete track in a discussion about licences on Quote time after time with me and again Whally? (Poor sock by the way, just like Schim.) Or our friend Bart who was connected to Wikipedia Legal according to his Linked? I have to say indeed a wonder team.
But this is a serous matter! Because I read someting in our newspaper!

In today's newspaper:
Magnetronmaaltijd en gaarkeuken: gevangenen worden slecht gevoed ... ~af77c58a/

It is about food in the prison and it is a scandal! The food! And I am a Food-Lawyer and you can hire me for better food!

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: One more thing, Vigilant.

Post by Graaf Statler » Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:14 pm

There bots don't check if something it right, but they only look to the authority of who is claiming something. If they precent the Pirate party as the leading party in Europe, and world famous Doc James say Alex Voss is a revolution, as he did, the computer takes him as the authority.
And that happens all the time.

The just upgrade queen of hearts Katherine. And look what she wrote on her twitter:
The people who edit Wikipedia are educators, physicists, nurses, grandparents, coders, professors, geologists, journalists, and more

A bot command. Why? There "bot status" had to upgrade, the computers check "Facts", and my "bot" status has to put down because I am complete right. And if the computers find out I am really the one I claim, really am that old Dutch gentlemen, really know Asma what now is easy to find, (Name partner+Ausma=>Rechtbank Arnhem, Kantongerecht Tiel, gemachtigde Martin, there complete systems and house of cards collapse.

And now Jimmy is presenting the legal tam as a very competent legal staff, but the bots already for sure have found I told the true. Just as with that Piet facebook, it is not mine. It's about cats and ice skating, not my hobby. I take only the pictures, but to be honest, I like not any form of sport. And that was the reason for that 18+ link in Vig's posting, I don't like porn. But to fool them I clicked a few times on the prorn hub, and you see it back. Because I think it lowers your status, watching porn.
Rediciles, if some like it, why not?

The same with child porn and porn on Commons. It is a bot honey pot to complete profiles. Or that Alice gender porn on WP NL.

And I came to the same conclusion as always, porn is the same like looking to people who are eating nice food in a restaurant. The food is fine, but I aso want to taste and smell it. So I only felt asleep if I looked at it, and didn't look at any more. But Vig had to upgrade a few thinks, to restore the balance because I am too clean. Just like they tried with thrashing my email to lower my status. I was complete right to kick them all out.

Post Reply