Floquenbeam

[JuiceBeetle]

The "purpose of the protest resignation" was to affect change [...] no one requested a resysop before that change was achieved. - Floq
You did - on the 12 June. Leaky caldron (talk) 16:59, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Hmmm, that's technically true, but that resysop request was a protest in the same spirit as all the desysop requests, so the resysop request should count as an honorary desysop request. Κσυπ Cyp 17:25, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
I'll stick to the bare facts, thanks. I fail to see how a resysop request can be an honorary desysop request, in any language. Leaky caldron (talk) 17:32, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

"should count as an honorary desysop request"
Some so-called admins have an obfuscation machine instead of brain.

"WE ARE THE WIKIPÆDIA. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE. YOU WILL BE WIKIFIED." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cyp)
WikiFried brain. So that's how he calls it.

[CrowsNest]

Wow. He's smashed through 100 opposes with no signs of the bleeding stopping yet, which has dragged him into the discretionary zone. This is a show of community disapproval five times the size of the anti-WMF protest resignations he seems to want to take credit for sparking.

It says everything about this arrogant prick that, other than trying to claim credit for the Admin strike, he's gone mute, seemingly intent on a repeat of the RexxS tactic of forcing Bureacrats to debase themselves by endorsing a candidate who is at the very least, clearly far too divisive to be trusted with the role of Administrator, especially one with his established history of movement breaking acts of 'civility disobedience'.

Shameful.

[CrowsNest]

Shall we Christen this the Black Kite rule.....

What finally sways it for me is that not just one but all three of the editors on my personal "so consistently clueless that one can safely make decisions based on the principle that doing the opposite of what they support will be the right thing" list are lined up in the Oppose column, so if nothing else an extra vote on the other side of the line will go some way towards cancelling that out. ‑ Iridescent 07:23, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Says it all that Floquenbeam attracts the support of Administrators who quite happily rank editors by how much their opinion matters.

That's who the 100+ opposers are to these arrogant pieces of shit - invisible.

Lest we forget, people who are actually consistently clueless, are banned from Wikipedia in short order. What clueless means in this context, is having an opinion on a matter of wikipolitics (civility, role of the wmf, importance of adminship) that the elite super-Administrators disagree with.

[JuiceBeetle]

Down to 74%... walk of shame.

Favorite (thoughtful) comments selected:
https://wikipedia-accountability.netlif ... /comments/

And yet another sockpuppet/meatpuppet/brainless mob:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... get=Vadder

[CrowsNest]

Nearly summed up by an opposer......

The candidate's behaviour in this entire Fram ordeal was explicitly a combination of being pointy, soapbox and righting great wrongs (by the T&S), some of the most common issues that administrators regularly warn ordinary editors not to do.

......the sheer arrogance of this shitheel, and the utter ridiculousness of over 300 editors, mostly Administrators, cheering and hollering from the rooftops in support and queuing up to lick his ringpeice during this vs farcical reaffirmation of his God-like status.

There was me thinking all editors are equal.

Just under two hours now until the Council of Elders puts the crown on Mr. Piggy

[CrowsNest]

Hilarious how people are creaming their pants that he has got the record number of support votes.

He also has the record number of oppose votes.

The only relevant figure is 73.9%, which is close to a record, as a genuinely pathetic result.

I mean, it is an absolutely basement level score in terms of community confidence - in the past five years, only two people have passed RfA with a lower percentage, and only two more with the same figure (when rounding to 74%).

When you look at the last two years, it is only RexxS who finished lower, and there is clear daylight to the next best, at 77%.

Bargain basement stuff this. Embarrassing for a candidate who claimed he had the support of 95% of the community.

[CrowsNest]

Down to 73.7%

What a piece of shit to have dragged everyone through this. It was obvious where this was going days ago, he should have withdrawn, if only to wait six months as a few have suggested is all that would be needed to change their minds (shades of RexxS again). How is he not an attention seeker? How is he not arrogant? How is he not self-absorbed?

How can you possibly think you are fit to serve, with ultra-detailed last minute opposition like this......

At the end of the day, Floq gets things done. He is a competent, active admin whose service I value. I tend to find the outcomes of Floq's adminning desirable far more often than not. The thing is, I also expect to see from Floq, more than I do any other admin I can think of, angry-seeming, sometimes rash, and often profanity-laden comments/decisions. One could argue his actions regarding Fram fall into one of these categories, but again, my oppose isn't specifically because of that. Nobody expects or wants admins to be robotic, so I'm also not saying an occasional emotional response or f-bomb should be a deal-breaker. That it seems so frequent is the problem. If Floq indicated (even now!) any kind of interest to change any of this behavior to lead by example, rather than -- on this page as elsewhere -- seemingly doubling down on it, I wouldn't be in this section. It pains me to be in this section, when I actually really appreciate a lot of what Floq does, and with some many people I like and respect in the support section, but I couldn't get over feeling like a hypocrite for ends-justify-the-means supporting when this behavior would lead me to oppose at any other RfA. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 17:31, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

No way in hell are concerns like this waved away by the three supports required, but when so many are blank or bland.

The Bureaucrats will completely ignore this obvious weighting problem this candidate has with demonstrating he has meaningful support at even a two thirds level, which would have to be the hard minimum to show he has obtained an endorsement.

[CrowsNest]

He honestly needs the support of utter mongs.......

Support. It's a shame, but it seems that WP:IAR is just too much for some editors to get their head round. zzz (talk) 16:57, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Per the most recent ArbCom clarification....

Ignore all rules (IAR)
6.1) One of Wikipedia's central rules – to "ignore all rules" – permits a user to ignore any rule that prevents improving or maintaining Wikipedia. When users decide to ignore a rule, they must be able to show what they were prevented from doing and why being so prevented was detrimental to Wikipedia.

Passed 7 to 0 at 13:31, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

What was Floquenbeam being prevented from doing? Unblocking Fram. How did not being allowed to unblock Fram harm Wikipedia?

No answer will be forthcoming, because this was not about improving Wikipedia in any way, shape or form.

Even if you believe the garbage about how harassers should be exclusively dealt with by ArbCom, Fram didn't need to be unblocked to participate in a Case, he can take part via email, which is of course how he will be dealt with now, which seems to be acceptable to Floquenbeam, so what is this moron going on about?

[CrowsNest]

This is definitely all about Floquenbeam's divine right to be an arrogant old guard admin to whom the current standards need not apply. Look at Bbb23, himself arrogantly assuming Floquenbeam would just pass, and only voting when he realizes he might not. His given reasons? Floq. is just an oddball. Jesus. An oddball wouldn't pass today. And that's a good thing. Oddballs are unpredictable.

[CrowsNest]

Obvious canvassing is obvious.......

Support. Denisarona (talk) 13:36, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
Support. Shearonink (talk) 14:36, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
Support. --Michael Greiner 14:40, 28 July 2019 (UTC)