The general Sarah Stierch thread

Editors, Admins and Bureaucrats Oh my!
Post Reply
User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 2116
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 98 times
Been thanked: 245 times

The general Sarah Stierch thread

Post by ericbarbour » Sat May 30, 2020 1:21 am

Today she was complaining on Twitter about the sheriff of Sonoma County refusing to enforce viral-control rules.
Screenshot_2020-05-29 Sarah Stierch on Twitter The Sheriff of Sonoma County is a joke Twitter.png
Screenshot_2020-05-29 Sarah Stierch on Twitter The Sheriff of Sonoma County is a joke Twitter.png (204.32 KiB) Viewed 1010 times
The jokes, they write themselves.....
Screenshot_2020-05-29 Sarah Stierch on Twitter The Sheriff of Sonoma County is a joke Twitter(1).png
Screenshot_2020-05-29 Sarah Stierch on Twitter The Sheriff of Sonoma County is a joke Twitter(1).png (35.18 KiB) Viewed 1010 times
And for completeness, let's not forget this 2019 thread.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1631

Sarah's Twitter can be "somewhat interesting" to serious Wikipedia followers. Partly because she is such an utterly clueless narcissist, and partly because you can have "fun" trying to figure out which of her Twitter followers are still anonymous Wikipedia editors or admins. Quite a few of them are. (if you feel like a bout of self-abuse, that is.)

User avatar
hyatt
Sucks
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2018 12:04 am
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: The general Sarah Stierch thread

Post by hyatt » Sat May 30, 2020 3:00 am

Stierch was an advisor to the Ada Initiative which was accused of running honey traps to falsely accuse leaders of the open source community of sexual assault.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 2116
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 98 times
Been thanked: 245 times

Re: The general Sarah Stierch thread

Post by ericbarbour » Sat May 30, 2020 8:13 am

hyatt wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 3:00 am
running honey traps
Heh, which links to this 2010 rant by Sarah's little (former?) buddy Valerie Aurora. And you probably remember Valerie's father Keith Henson, a hero to Wikipedia insiders because of his longtime opposition to the Church of Scientology. Because Wikipedia women were deeply involved in the Ada Initiative (Sue Gardner was one of their directors), you can't learn how it fell apart on Wikipedia. Most of the media reports and blog posts about the squabble from 2015 have quietly disappeared.

Note the comments, in which prominent coder Bruce Perens tries to put it all down to "autism". This was the open-source programming community at one of its lowest spots. The sexual abuse claimed by women usually did happen, but sometimes it was a revenge scheme--facilitated by the utterly toxic culture we live in. And I do think Valerie is nuts, sorry to say.

https://lwn.net/Articles/417952/

You need archive.org to see Valerie's 2007 rant accusing her father of molestation. And you can NOT read about this on Wikipedia.
https://web.archive.org/web/20080130145 ... keith.html

(Mind you, I also think the hacker world has a genuine sexism/abuse problem. Eric Raymond is no prize and Stallman, the untouchable GOD of open source, is history. But what Valerie and a few of her friends tried to pull was just as disgusting.) And we should probably start another thread for Valerie Aurora, perhaps....

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 2116
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 98 times
Been thanked: 245 times

Re: The general Sarah Stierch thread

Post by ericbarbour » Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:36 am

I bear news of Sarah's "rehabilitation":

Her Facebook now has more than 3300 followers. Most seem to be local people in Napa/Sonoma, some of them are clearly Wikipedians she remains "friendly" with. Doing a good job of making herself "prominent" in the Napa social scene. She's been splashing news of the wildfires on her page--actually doing a decent job of it. Damn; her posts often end up with scores of stupid memes appended by her fan following.
https://www.facebook.com/sarahstierch/p ... 6442124021

And there is NOTHING about her Wikipedia/WMF history on Facebook.

Her new vanity website is slightly more honest.

Maybe she should have become a journalist, and not a Wikipedia heeler?

User avatar
Eric Corbett
Sucks
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 12:47 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The general Sarah Stierch thread

Post by Eric Corbett » Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:37 pm

Perhaps unlike many others here I've got no objection at all to paid editing, so long as the product is good. So I couldn't care less whether Stiertch gets paid or not.

My beef with Stiertch has always been her obsession with a supposed "gender gap", and her fuzzy thinking around that issue. On her "vanity website" linked to above, she states very clearly that 9% of Wikipedia editors are women, in which number I assume she also includes girls. But that's a misleadingly precise number, not "about 10%" for instance, no, exactly 9%.

And she goes on to say "... because they'd rather not deal with this [locker-room type of environment], many female contributors choose to hide their sex." So how can she or anyone else know how many female editors there are? It's just sloppy thinking by a sloppy thinker.

User avatar
Kumioko
Sucks Mod
Posts: 722
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 11:54 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: The general Sarah Stierch thread

Post by Kumioko » Fri Oct 02, 2020 11:40 pm

I still remember when she worked at the WMF and got fired for writing articles for profit. She should have been desysopped, but because she was an admin, the rules didn't apply to her.
#BbbGate

User avatar
Eric Corbett
Sucks
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 12:47 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The general Sarah Stierch thread

Post by Eric Corbett » Sat Oct 03, 2020 3:14 pm

Kumioko wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 11:40 pm
I still remember when she worked at the WMF and got fired for writing articles for profit. She should have been desysopped, but because she was an admin, the rules didn't apply to her.
She should obviously have been dumped given the rules, but maybe the rules are wrong.

So many other of Wikipedia's rules are completely knuckle-headed after all.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 2116
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 98 times
Been thanked: 245 times

Re: The general Sarah Stierch thread

Post by ericbarbour » Sat Oct 03, 2020 9:17 pm

Eric Corbett wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:37 pm
Perhaps unlike many others here I've got no objection at all to paid editing, so long as the product is good. So I couldn't care less whether Stiertch gets paid or not.

My beef with Stiertch has always been her obsession with a supposed "gender gap", and her fuzzy thinking around that issue. On her "vanity website" linked to above, she states very clearly that 9% of Wikipedia editors are women
No argument from me. Thing is, she was pulling repeated backstabs and suck-ups to insiders. He actual content editing wasn't all that bad (if you don't count her tendency to write glowing WP content about herself and her Ada Initiative friends). Chasing power/support and writing usable content tend to conflict.

Let me remind you of this joke of an AFD
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ah_Stierch

User avatar
Eric Corbett
Sucks
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2020 12:47 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: The general Sarah Stierch thread

Post by Eric Corbett » Sat Oct 03, 2020 10:01 pm

I was very struck by this keep vote, from an administrator:

"I have met Sarah and like her."

Post Reply