Wikipedia Sucks!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ember_2019

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ember_2019

Good post to kick this thread off.....

Meh. The real issue is when you look at the candidates, both successful and unsuccessful. Looking at the 2018 results, there was only one successful candidate (Joe Roe) who was new to the committee, and every other candidate over 60% support was a former arb; 2017 was slightly better, but those "new" people have mostly stepped down already. We are not renewing the committee; in other words, we are not growing new leadership. This is a significant failure on the part of the community. (Yes, it's on us, not on them. At least these individuals are trying to keep things going by standing for election.) I'm trying to figure out who our next generation of people willing to take on complicated roles will be, since I'm seeing fewer and fewer people willing to stand up. Arbcom's problems are only a symptom of the problems endemic to the community as a whole. Risker (talk) 03:03, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

The rot has set in. This is what institutional death looks like.

Due to the quorum crisis they're probably going to reverse their earlier decision to reduce the Committee from fifteen to twelve, but to be honest, that's only going to make this election look even more of a farce.

At time of writing, they need to elect nine Arbitrators to get back to a complement of fifteen, so you're unlikely to fill even half with completely new blood, most are going to be re-treads or returning players, assuming any of them even want to serve in what is going to be a crazy time for Wikipedia governance.

There may even be too few suitable candidates for the available seats this time around, meaning either some are not filled, or an absolute clown is elected. Hopefully The Rambling Man is going to see this as his best opportunity yet. I'd be jumping for joy of NewYorkBrad and Drmies are returned, a more obvious sign of desperation and despair you will struggle to find.

Be interesting to see who remembers, much less advances, the theory that the community no longer needs an ArbCom. A year is certainly a long time in Wikipolitics. But if they can't fill the required seats now, when it's importance has been massively increased, well.....

The sheer bullshit and vitriol that has surrounded the last few remaining Arbs' handling of the Eric Corbett case request, could prove more damaging to the chances of finding anyone stupid enough to stand for election, than any of the whole Fram saga.

Still, at least we know what the true editors want. Former Committee members to be back on the Committee, so they can make really useful decisions like kicking that toxic can down the road, year after year.

And Opabina. Literally the only person on the Committee who thinks they should not accept the case, even though she said she was amenable to a different scope (as usual, she was just lying)

RfC now open.

Be interesting to see if this year's candidates continue the fine tradition of promising reforms that aim to bring more transparency and proper case management to the process (i.e. adherence to timetables and telling people what's going on behind the scenes). Those promises have always been horseshit, these failures have been largely the same year after year, Committee after Committee.

But this year, holy cow, they have reached for even greater heights of mismanagement.

The Eric Corbett case has been in the Request phase for weeks, and should have been accepted long ago according to their own policy, having reached the threshold and the scope apparently being set, but it hasn't. And nobody knows why, because there is ZERO communications from the Clerks (and if there is nothing to say because the Arbitrators have all gone on their holidays, then let people know that!).

If that sounds ridiculous, the delays in the Antisemitism in Poland case are insane. That was due for a Proposed Decision on 14 July. The requests for information have been met with a sick combination of silence, and broken promises.......(last two sections)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1910#About

They want to blame Framgate, but really, it isn't that at all. It is a factor, but not an excuse. The only reason they are being so opaque, deaf even to direct requests for updates, is because these are both controversial cases, difficult to resolve to everyone's satisfaction. More than would be usual, since that is their basic purpose. How ironic that they wouldn't be so controversial if the problem actors had been dealt with earlier. Years earlier.

Case management. Easy to people who are familiar with the concepts and stood for election to actually serve in the role effectively. Impossible for the sort of rank amateurs who do get elected, in Wikipedia's warped idea of autonomous self-government.

As usual, there is no real outrage among the community that their highest body is so obviously dysfunctional, because they know deep down, none of them could do any better.

Vote for Opabina, if you want more of this shit......

......I didn't think the [Eric Corbett] case request that prompted all of this was well-posed or should have been accepted. I probably would've supported another effort to, if not exactly "clean" start, try to return to content work under a less attention-grabbing name. (Though given the history, I don't think a negotiated restart would have worked out.).......Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:56, 3 September 2019

What is she even proposing here? Not accepting a case because an attempt to give Eric a different account, which she doesn't even think would have worked, was a better way forward?

Vote for Opabina if you like your Arbitrators to be so comfortable with reimagining actual Wikipedia history they will present Eric thusly......

.....A long-standing volunteer who has made a lot of high-quality contributions to the project, and established a network of positive relationships with other long-standing volunteers, but also caused a lot of friction and frustration, has left under unpleasant circumstances...... Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:56, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

....like he was just some unfortunate case of digital hayvever.

You know it is at best romanticisim, at worst an outright deception. If you disagree, congratulations, you're the toxic fuck who is the real problem.

Eric was pure poison. His friends, rather his enablersrs, are some pretty sick people. Inexcusably evil. Calculated in their lies. Obvious in their tactics. Protect that shitheel at all costs, and fuck anyone who thought differently. Give no quarter, accept no liability, take no prisoners. Whatever it takes to clear any and all obstacles in the path of the One True Editor.

It was her job these past four years to stop that sort of unapologetic civil war by proposing workable solutions, up to and including showing a productive but disruptive contributor the door, for the greater good, not further enable it. It's no accident that in this period, his offending continued, people just gave up on reporting it, until the latest round of entirely foreseeable chaos. No surprise this period was recently repackaged by RexxS, the Administrator with a record level of community mistrust, wanting to sell that as success. Evil. Blatant.

There was one workable solution left. Extreme mentoring, erect a firewall between Eric and the wider community, and make the Arbitrators solely responsible for his behavior toward anyone allowed within his sphere of operations. Let them alone face the consequences for either enforcing, or choosing not to enforce, the basic standards of behavior required of anyone else. Hide it behind a screen, perpetuating the myth to the public that there are no sacred cows, everyone is equal, really.

She naturally didn't want to do that, nor would she have banned him. She wanted to release him back into the community, might even still find a way to do so behind the scenes, like it hasn't already been proven with his failed room-mate experiment, that the problem wasn't his name, it was him. The evil little bastard he calls a soul, and the evil scum who just love a bad boy. Including quite a few prominent Wikipedia women like Opabina, because, well, bad boys rule!

You vote for her again, she'll just do it again. If not Eric, then for some other absolute fucking pyscho who would tear your face off and eat it as soon as look at you, then file a claim against you for indigestion.

You get the Committee you deserve, it shapes the community you ask for. Leadership. And boy, do you stupid bastards deserve all the self-inflicted pain you have suffered this last decade. You genuinely could have all been building an encyclopedia instead of being Eric Corbett's punching bags and protectors all these years, it's not like his personal contributions, what he edited and who he helped edit, really adds up to much, is it? In the grand scheme.

I mean, I could lay out the facts and figures for you, to counter the ever present anecdotal heart warming tear jerking stories from people who never got on his bad side, and think crying about broken bones is for SJW pussies, but I don't want any suicides on my conscience, once the reality is laid bare. You already know it wasn't worth it, deep down. You know defending him wasn't even worth the principle, since all you did was persuade the Foundation that you really really can't be trusted.

Y'all be safe now. I have a sense you're not done killing each other yet. So, usual rules apply. Last man standing wins! The Crown is a little dented, I had to wrestle it off a vomit stained tramp outside a Manchester bar who was screaming about Jimmy and American child Admins and some bullshit. But I just kicked him in the nuts and he went down to like a sack of shit.

HTD.

Hmm. Stand for election, or stick your head in a meat grinder?

Shame on you all, committee members. You should all be recalled at once. You have proved you didn't deserve my vote, and managed to perform worse than I had thought you would. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:30, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

It's such a hard choice, is it not?

Who in their right mind takes lessons in shame from this woman? Unblocking Eric Corbett without permission was the highlight of her career as a Wikipedia Administrator.

CrowsNest wrote:Hmm. Stand for election, or stick your head in a meat grinder?

Shame on you all, committee members. You should all be recalled at once. You have proved you didn't deserve my vote, and managed to perform worse than I had thought you would. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:30, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

It's such a hard choice, is it not?

Who in their right mind takes lessons in shame from this woman? Unblocking Eric Corbett without permission was the highlight of her career as a Wikipedia Administrator.

I'd absolutely love to see her on Arbcom. I doubt she's that foolhardy, but thanks for the hint.

RfB

Carrite wrote:

CrowsNest wrote:Hmm. Stand for election, or stick your head in a meat grinder?

Shame on you all, committee members. You should all be recalled at once. You have proved you didn't deserve my vote, and managed to perform worse than I had thought you would. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:30, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

It's such a hard choice, is it not?

Who in their right mind takes lessons in shame from this woman? Unblocking Eric Corbett without permission was the highlight of her career as a Wikipedia Administrator.

I'd absolutely love to see her on Arbcom. I doubt she's that foolhardy, but thanks for the hint.

Well, she rather danced around it, but she finally admitted she does have a good excuse for not running.....

I wouldn't get elected.

She doesn't think the community supports her, but they're just gonna keep yapping away anyway, because she thinks she's right.

Yup, a true Eric Corbett loyalist. Arrogance personified.

This will be the same excuse all of Eric's enablers will use for why they don't have the guts to stand for ArbCom. They know what they are, they know they are a disgusting little minority, a cancerous tumor in the community, a bunch of arrogant loudmouths, slowly, inexorably poisoning the site with their bile, and blaming everyone else for the clear signs of decay all around.

Rather makes you wonder why NewYorkBrad and Opabina ever gave their warped views of what is right and proper, actual legitimacy on the Committee. There is no mandate for it. They are extremists, professional agitators, revolutionaries whose revolution cannot succeed because it is a horrible twisted vision of the future, where assholes and their friends get to decide if they have done wrong.

You really can pick 'em Timmy.

Jeesh, you can't even pass along her answer without spinning... Crow, you need serious help or a long vacation with no internet. Your soul is being consumed...

The good editor Yngvadottir wrote:I can't, for a number of reasons. It requires adminship, and I can't do that again (and might not even get promoted, the way things are now, let's not assume). It requires identifying to the WMF, and I don't trust them with my data. It requires being a political or legal animal, and I am very far from either. And even if I could talk myself into doing some sort of shieldmaid damn-the-torpedoes run, I wouldn't get elected. Thanks for your confidence, misplaced though it is.

RfB

It is of course insane people out of the community are elected often without any assignable skills. Although NewYorkBard was also not a great succes as a Arb. In this way it will always stay a amateurish Star Chamber, Tim.

Back on topic.

Dysk wrote:I'm personally wondering if TonyBallioni (T-C-L) will pick this year to finally run.

I don't think so, Dysk. because:

Timmy Tim wrote:Drmies has also indicated that he won't be running because the the workload.

It seems me clear Mies + socks doesn't want to have anything to do with the failed Eurocrap Revolution anymore. Mies is clever boy, and he understand when everything is lost and doesn't spend his time on a dead horse like wiki fools as Vig, Protrolsky, Mev and Timmy still are doing.

Timmy the Timmy boy wrote:Jim/Cullen already said, "No, thanks," citing reasons of time.

Same story Timmy. Jim is not as foolish as you and Vig with that Hale dead horse on WO. That horse is capable of dissolving you know.