Eric Corbett

Editors, Admins and Bureaucrats Oh my!
User avatar
Sucks Mod
Posts: 676
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: Eric Corbett

Post by JuiceBeetle » Sat Oct 12, 2019 1:23 pm

Complimentary Gender Desk article analyzing Corbett's, Vig's and Jake's recent clash:

User avatar
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Eric Corbett

Post by CrowsNest » Fri Nov 15, 2019 8:27 am

With people on this board ridiculously only just bothering to read up on the Corbett, I thought I'd check in and review what I'd missed in the last few weeks while Princess Mod and the fun time crew were being royal pains in the asses to serious critics, distracting from serious work like this.

Turns out that even after the hilarious consequences of him having been ArbCom blocked and seemingly gone forever, he was still able to generate some more hilarity.....

To state the obvious, if there as even a tiny slim sliver of a hope Eric could have escaped his block for evading scrutiny while a Case Request was on the docket, he has all but dashed it by embracing the life of a Kumioko-esque socky-wocky warrior, funking up RfA with his tiresome bullshit.

Undoubtedly this is his new existence, creating socks endlessly, some used clandestinely to feed his insatiable need to edit "productively", which he will tell himself is one in the eye of all his enemies, but in reality is just the insanity of an addict, and some caught easily because he wants to feed his need to criticise those enemies in their home turf, forgetting the golden rule of Wikipedia, you're either in or out, and there's nothing stopping critics being in, just as long as they pay the required price, namely 1 soul, as Eric was perfectly willing to do for over a decade. Because addict.

The recent hilarity? The usual.

* Continuing proof that even a simple thing like should we let other editors know this formerly productive editor decided to go rogue and piss all over the community, and how should we do it, is a question that consensus and policy apparently cannot answer. All because Eric is symbolic of the wider issue that continues to plague the project, the Vested Contributor problem.

* Long time enablers like (Administrator!) Ched getting bitch-slapped for not even being remotely factually accurate in what they claim is the recent history of Eric's terrible abuse at the hands the pernicious authorities.

* ArbCom candidate Laser Brain showing why you might vote for him - if you basically want to destroy Wikipedia from within. A true and long time friend and ally of Eric, it is fitting, that having been Eric's apparent goal for many a year now.

* Newly minted Admin Girth Summit, who despite having just been absolutely made a fool of by Eric's socky-wockys, expressing his hope Eric can be reformed and reintegrated. Can someone that delusional really be thought of as possessing good judgement? Apparently so. How appropriate of course that the person who basically said fuck you to the people pointing out in his RfA his username is potentially offensive, particularly to women, is one of the very last people on Wikipedia to speak warmly of Eric Corbett, as if he is or ever was a Wikipedian.

Eric richly deserved his reputation as a women hater, and it has always been the case that you would find signs of his way of thinking having much support in the who seek out power on Wikipedia, it being the ultimate sausage fest after all. Not even Cas Liber's Back To The Future run for ArbCom is going to change Eric's status now though, he has totally screwed any possible chance of a return, and most likely because that is exactly what he was aiming for. He couldn't secure the perfect matrydom, so setting himself alight before the Supreme Court so a handful of assholes, his last remaining supporters, could watch, was a pretty sad second option.

* Perhaps the greatest hilarity of all, is the sight of Scotty Wong rubbing it in like only he can, in a way that totally fits his latter day role in Eric's demise. Such a well crafted dagger to the heart, Giano even thanked him for it! What a dumbass.

* Assorted horrible urchins from the downtrodden underclass can be seen weeping for their fallen Hero, forgetting (or more accurately not even understanding) that he never did anything for any of them except perhaps make it more obvious to the Peelers that Wikipedia, while accepting and embracing assholery as a cultural value, really needed to pound on a few street urchins once in a while, for that sweet Federal grant money.

* A mass message from Karen Brown, Trust & Safety Specialist, landing in his in-tray, amidst all that whining and wailing, that's the icing on the cake. As much as you would like to think that was a deliberate act, it is merely yet more evidence that a big reason Eric came to be the problem he was, is that contrary to the conspiracy theories, to this day the WMF barely even know who he is. Sure, if FRAMBAN had succeeded he might have been the next person to receive one, but it didn't, so.....

User avatar
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:22 pm
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Eric Corbett

Post by Abd » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:44 pm

JuiceBeetle wrote:Complimentary Gender Desk article analyzing Corbett's, Vig's and Jake's recent clash:

Gender Desk is always interesting. On the issue of allegedly sexist language, something has been missed. "c- move" is used by men to insult other men, it is inherently sexist, implying that female is stupid and inferior to proper masculine behavior. "d- move" is used by men about other men, never about women. Neither term is in common use by women.

The "N" word is in common use by blacks. I was a prison chaplain and heard some hilarious stories told by black inmates (Muslims), about the "N- brothers." It is also used by rappers, affectionately. But I would not tell those stories except with high caution. Context matters.

Is "d-" sexist? Used by men in context, about men not usually, but it does make assumptions about gender, then. "Don't be a d-, then, means "don't act with stupid male insensitivity or aggression." Those are male stereotypes and it is sexist to assume that someone will display them if male. However, being male does correlate with testosterone, and testosterone will produce "d- behavior" in women. I remember a great piece by a trans woman -> man, who reported how astonished she was that she began ogling and wanting to wolf-whistle women as she ramped up the testosterone, behavior that she had thought offensive. (And it certainly can be.)

It's about context.

WP:DICK still works as a redirect. The essay title was changed to Don't be a jerk. Now this is what is weird. If someone says, "there was this jerk who heckled me," I would not imagine it was a woman. I've never heard a woman called a jerk. Even though Merriam Webster defines it as a "an annoyingly stupid or foolish person," or "an unlikable person; especially : one who is cruel, rude, or small-minded," the Urban Dictionary, in many contributed meanings, assumes a jerk is male in all of them.

The term that I have heard notably used for such people is "asshole," and there is no gender to that, though I still somewhat assume that an "asshole" is male. This is probably due to blatant assholery being more common with men than with women, who are more commonly socialized to be nice. And there is probably a hormonal connection.

No doubt, Eric Corbett was an asshole, who avoided filling his articles with his shit, but deposited it on talk pages. He was there to build an encyclopedia and to trash the community. And then there is Giano. . . .

Post Reply