Wikipedia Sucks!

One thing is for sure, mendaliv, I shouldn't hire you as my lawyer. At first you are trying to sell a debacle as a victory, and second to accuse your WMF colleges of unethical behaviour because in the ToU is civility not described is so rediciles, I can't simple understand a lawyer come up with this. But you never know, I have seen in my life many complete insane lawyers and prutsers.
And for the rest is the choice of your allied absolute not what you should call the top segment of Wikipedia.
In different words, you are making the complete fool out of yourself mendaliv, and I should be a bit careful with all that journalists hanging around on WO and Sucks at the moment.

Auggie wrote:This is why I find it frustrating to listen to wiki-lawyers. The wannabes on Wikipedia do not think or talk like real lawyers. Real lawyers do not obsess about speculative outcomes that never happen in real life. They don't blather on about injunctions, jury trials, or constitutional crises, when their clients are simply trying to pay for a speeding ticket. It's nonsense. Jimbo feeds into it when he talks about "constitutional order". Newyorkbrad is another offender, turning ArbCom into his own personal legal playground. Maybe he finds it fun to blow off steam in an environment where he can spar against laypeople over inconsequential bullshit. I'll bet it is.

It's a autistic guy who talk like a little professor and there are many of them on Wikipedia. Worst of all, people believe them, sometimes, even outside wikipedia. And sometimes they even have a title, you can't understand how they got it. But in general they are telling a lot of legal bullshit and a "lawyer" who's best company is Vig is of course a shitty fake lawyer.

Graaf Statler wrote:

Auggie wrote:This is why I find it frustrating to listen to wiki-lawyers. The wannabes on Wikipedia do not think or talk like real lawyers. Real lawyers do not obsess about speculative outcomes that never happen in real life. They don't blather on about injunctions, jury trials, or constitutional crises, when their clients are simply trying to pay for a speeding ticket. It's nonsense. Jimbo feeds into it when he talks about "constitutional order". Newyorkbrad is another offender, turning ArbCom into his own personal legal playground. Maybe he finds it fun to blow off steam in an environment where he can spar against laypeople over inconsequential bullshit. I'll bet it is.

It's a autistic guy who talk like a little professor and there are many of them on Wikipedia.

I really agree with this. I agree with Auggie, too.

These wiki-wannabe lawyers are clowns.

Moral Hazard wrote:No more TRANSFORMER!

I don't know if it is transformer but all these wiki lawyers use some legal computer program and produce only tons and tons legal bullshit info. Only, because of there autism they don't see any connection and my compliments for building in this way the ultimate legal fire pill. With all you beautiful academic titles. Unfortunately not even the Jones lawyers can help you out of you legal shit pile anymore.
No, they can't. Two old man has you complete in there power.

And for mendaliv his information, the danger for the chapters is in Europe, not in America. And for WMF too. Because for sure the European judge will not accept there financial construction and the protection they thought they had with there Verenigingsstructuur. Just like there ToU will not accepted in Europe, there strange banner and grands from uncle WMF construction will not accepted by a European judge. It stinks.
Probably European judges will see chapters as offices of WMF and be responsible for the content. Because in practice they are not at all independent of Wikipedia what they claim. Or independent of WMF. And WMF has not any protection of section 230 in Europe and properly also not in Amarica, but to be sure we must wait the result of the Lomax law case.

Without any computer, I the only the computer I have used is between my ears.

mendaliv wrote:Honestly the Wikipedia mentality about copyright borders on sovereign citizen levels of obsessiveness. Like the endless pontificating about that Bridgeman Art Gallery case.

I really, really do feel fearful about what would happen if this community got obsessed with other legal topics.

Leave it to real experts, fake lawyer. Find a job by MacDonalds or Twitter, there they love guys like you.

Starke Hathaway wrote:Oh Lord, if I'm reading that Linkedin page correctly, lil' Bobby hasn't even started law school yet. I shudder to think how dramatic he'll be once his 1L year gets fully underway.

That's complete normal on WP.

Engelfriet came in in 2004 in the Wikimedia house.

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.

Dit is een kans die we niet mogen laten liggen. Eindelijk het gedacht van iemand die het zou moeten weten. Ik zou graag hebben dat we een tekstje maken met duidelijk onze meest prangende juridische vragen op een bondige duidelijke wijze. We kunnen hem niet een lap tekst van 6 pagina's gaan bezorgen. Ik denk dan vooral aan vragen aangaande auteursrechten (Fair use, citaatrecht en al de rest), welke wetgeving van toepassing is (USA, BE, NL , allemaal, enz..) Lopen wij als vrijwilligers een risico? Lopen moderators een speicaal risico? Iets zoals dat met Hein en Muijz, kunnen we daar last mee krijgen en in welke mate, ook persoonlijk?

Aan de tekst werken op Wikipedia:Beleid voor gebruik van media/vragen aan jurist graag en overleg op Overleg Wikipedia:Beleid voor gebruik van media/vragen aan jurist --Walter 20 nov 2004 16:51 (CET)

It was fur sure Engelfriet.

Tja, vragen aan wie? Het was inderdaad een ad-hocpagina, maar aangezien hij nog steeds bestaat (en mij ook niet bekend is of de vragen erboven ooit beantwoord zijn), ben ik maar opnieuw begonnen. Nu speelt tijdsdruk geen rol, en kunnen we eens rustig bekijken hoe we vragen als deze alsnog aan een deskundige kunnen voorleggen. Er was voldoende consensus dat Arnoud Engelfriet de aangewezen persoon is, en zijn blog op ius mentis is een prima manier om hem te benaderen. Ik zou alleen willen voorstellen niet alles rijp en groen op zijn blog te pleuren, en niet alles tegelijk (anders heeft hij een fulltime job aan ons voor no fee).
Goed, ik was dus eerst, en die vier vragen hangen natuurlijk samen dus kunnen als één behandeld worden. Ik zal ze nog even herhalen in het Auteursrechtencafé, dat is wat vindbaarder. Zodra er vijf mensen zijn (inclusief ikzelf) die dit een goede vraag vinden, meld ik deze op de blog van Arnoud. De volgende die een vraag heeft (of een oude vraag nieuw leven wil inblazen) doet hetzelfde: melden in het Auteursrechtencafé en wachten tot er vijf voor zijn. Ik zou geen vraag formuleren die een dissertatie vergt (maar dan komen er ook geen vijf voorstanders). Klinkt dit als een zinnig idee? - Art Unbound 3 apr 2009 19:41 (CEST)

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overleg_W ... aan_jurist

2004 isn't it?

Opleiding
2008 Master informatierecht
2006 European trademark and design attorney
2004 European patent attorney
2002 Nederlands octrooigemachtigde
1999 M.Sc., technische informatica (Eindhoven)

https://www.emerce.nl/interviews/social ... enverstand

In 2008 Engelfriet finished his master Law, the other educations are about other things. Pattens, he was in no way in 2004 a ICT lawyer, other than self declared.

Here you see he is the authority

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cate ... lfriet.jpg


In short, Engelfriet was unlicensed in 2004 (no master law, no specific education for this part of law), just a blogger, and there is a whole status build around him before and he has even now his own law school. In 2008 he finished his law school. And when I asked him several times by email, Arnoud, when did you finish your law school he always answered I was a confused person and he was saying he didn't understand my emails. So I have verified the facts several times, but I got or no answer or he putted the blame on me.

And he Arnoud, what about what you wrote not long ago on your blog. Copyvio is about the same as a not working taillight of your bicycle. A fine therefor is 55 euro, and as we have seen by "de rijdende rechterr" what made you so upset one picture cost you hundreds of euro's.
Are this the advices you are giving in general for your 210 euro a hour, Arnoud?

mendaliv wrote:Think this thread by Swarm on WP:FRAM might have enough behind it to get people interested again.

I don't think so, mister lawyer. And we have a saying in Holland. Schoenmaker blijf bij je leest. Every man to his own trade.
You have some basic knowledge of law, but you are in no way a all round professional licensed lawyer. So be honest about that, just like I am. Because for sure I have legal skills too but I will never, never claim to be a skilled expert. What you also not are in this field despite your tough avatar.

It would be interesting to hear how Mendaliv squares his distaste for people strictly enforcing the rules surrounding the criteria for returning Administrator toolsets (Yelyos case), to his evident desire to see the rules for determining a failed unblock being converted to a community ban, as non-negotiable (Elisa.rolle case).

I mean, he claims to be a lawyer, so he is surely au fait with procedural objections, and we know from his whining about Fram that he is a big fan of natural justice. He cannot be blind to the existence of both as issues in the latter. Ritchie presented it as a standard offer, which it was obviously not, and that was just symptomatic of his total failure to warn the user what they were about to do.

Had they not been so poorly advised, there is a good chance the basic validity of their indefinite block would have come up in the review of the Fram case, leading to it being overturned as entirely tainted simply by his questionable practices, if they are unwilling to go so far as to say it stemmed from his questionable ethics.

Pending his explanation, which will likely not be forthcoming, protected as he is in Uncle Jake's bosom, it seems to me that Mendaliv is happy for any rule to be strictly enforced, if it makes it less likely the abuses of Fram will be seen for what they were.

I guess we can't rule out Fram is paying him for his services as a shyster. I doubt he gets work otherwise.

mendaliv' wrote:It scares me to think that people like Guy Macon are taken seriously anywhere. His whining about the captcha system violating ADA is probably equally unhinged.

It scares me you are maybe really a lawyer working in the field. Poor clients of you. Because this is not about the person Guy Macon, but about what he is saying. And what he is saying is 100% correct, there is not any hard evidence.

The Giraffe Stapler is losing his damn mind

http://wikirev.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=2249
Ah yes, the intersection of insanity, logorrhea and poor English comprehension.

I always though America is a modern country, but don't they have electricity where you are living and are still using gaslicht, mendaliv?
Is not good for your eyes.

mendaliv' wrote:It scares me to think that people like Guy Macon are taken seriously anywhere.

Yet another thing that everyone serious critic knows about Wikipedia, that this dipshit has only just figured out.

Medaliv is a Wikipedian. So he shares collective responsibility for Macon still being allowed to say anything on Wikipedia.

Wikipediocracy can hardly take a strong line on not allowing utter retards edit Wikipedia though, it would mean most of their membership would have to be banned. Mendaliv included.