Wikipedia Sucks!

Page 1 of 1

Author:  CrowsNest [ Wed Mar 21, 2018 5:17 am ]
Post subject:  Hillbillyholiday

It seems Hillbillyholiday's mission to troll Wikipedia as some kind of giant performance artistry, is finally over. After numerous violations leading to short blocks and restrictions, which he has thumbed his nose at, he has now earned a year long block. And when he is discovered socking around it (or someone imitates him to set him up), it will be converted to indefinite, then a ban.

The final act.....

He had achieved his main aim, to exploit Wikipedia's vulnerability to lies, deceit, mob rule and general hypocrisy, to get the Daily Mail 'banned'. It seems that if he even had a plan for an encore performance, it wasn't as well thought out.

Post Mail-ban, he's tried to engineer some drama around BLP enforcement by making it seem as if his legitimate efforts to defend living people were being obstructed by the rules-bound clueless fucks who infest Wikipedia's governance system right up to the very top. He has failed. There's been no mass outpouring of anger, no groundswell of resistance, no peasant led revolt. Indeed, there's been no real backlash of any kind.

There's been some quite ironic turns of events actually. He's getting no credit for those aspects of his edits that are absolutely defensible, and has indeed suffered quite badly at the hands of the usual misrepresentations and other games that are a regular feature of an AN/I report. I guess what goes around, comes around. Some of this is normal and everyday dysfunction, but some is not - it is almost as if he has completely lost all credit/standing previously accrued, both for the Mail ban and as a long term editor.

He has certainly singularly failed to replicate what Hex/Scott managed to achieve back in the day, eventually leading to the adoption of BLP-PROD. His only friends these days appear to be Guy Macon, EEng, Gerda and Martinevans. Which must be embarrassing. I'm wondering if the truth behind the Wikipedian's general disinterest in his plight now, is a desire to ensure none of this becomes a mainstream story, lest it undermine what they collectively did to the Mail, at Hillbilly and Guy Macon's urging.

I'm wondering if the Wikipedians were onto him as soon as it became apparent that he was probably lying about his mother being in fear of the nasty Daily Mail journalist who sought to identify this anonymous coward who boasted of being untraceable (a quite clueless boast as it turned out) - why else would he decline Jimmy Wale's generous offer to take up his cause against the evil Mail as they sought their right of reply?

In the aftermath, and indeed before for those who bothered to do their due diligence, he didn't make for a very convincing hero or indeed victim, when he happily boasted of the duplicitous techniques he used to fuck the Mail and even repeats the Mail's slurs on his own talk page, even linking to their story which identities him. This isn't a guy whose fears and distress were genuine, this is a guy who poked the bear so he could cry crocodile tears when the bear bit back. ... genda.html

If these people are exposed as policy ignoring asshats who demonstrably don't believe in adhering to even the most basic aspects of Wikipedia if it contradicts their own agendas, which are rabidly political despite all their talk of reliability, well, you have to question everything they ever did in the name of what is 'good for Wikipedia', right?

So yes, Wikipedians, you carry on pretending like this guy wasn't once your fucking hero, hailed to the rafters and offered your undying gratitude/sympathy for tackling this major problem. One that you've done very little to actually fix by the way - the Mail is still massively used as a source on Wikipedia - making it appear like the only reason for it all was as a PR stunt and a means to give a wider voice to your pathetic libtard agendas, already enthusiastically pushed in your so called encyclopedia.

At time of writing, the Wikipediots are still desperately trying to justify why they singled out the Mail, and are still amazingly reluctant to make the same general declaration of unreliability to the other mass market British tabloids.'re_going_to_declare_the_Daily_Mail_an_unreliable_source_(and_I_think_we_should)_we_should_do_the_same_to_the_Daily_Express

Their pathetic excuses reveal the truth - it has got FUCK ALL to do with reliability or BLP or indeed any kind of evidence based case singling it out. It is all about their feelings, prejudices and politics, and the fact the Mail's huge popularity was causing them problems because people overwhelmingly trusted it, and so wanted to use it as a source.

Pre and post-ban they still use other tabloids, but not on the same scale. The majority of the Wikipediots just don't really care, and are happy to pretend general policy and case based discussion covers it (just as it supposedly covered the Mail). The Wikipediots who subsequently went after the Mail, were just heartily sick of losing too many case based debates, and simply wanted to send a message. This Mail hating troll Hillbilly recognised and exploited it.

The unpallatable, unspoken truth for the Wikipedians, is that he played them as much as he played the Mail, Guardian, the WMF and even dear Jimbo, they were just too fucking stupid, and too eager to act on their own prejudices, to see it.

The journalists, columnists and editorial staff whose careers he maligned, the people he lied about, smeared and trashed using Wikipedia's platform, in a massively ironic industrical scale breach of BLP, they took revenge in the arenas they either don't control at all, or have very little influence over. It probably isn't even over yet.

In a way, he has been successful in creating a piece of performance art. For his own particular editor trajectory does highlight very well the dark, twisted, self-deceiving nature of those at the heart of Wikipedia. Trust these people to tell you anything at all? Are you insane?

Author:  CrowsNest [ Wed Apr 18, 2018 1:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hillbillyholiday

The Wikipedians are finally beginning to accept that Hillbillyholiday has no respect for community norms (chiefly, don't deceive your fellow editors, even if you think you are as right and justified as Moses himself). A community ban proposal has been tabled, and is getting landslide support.

Why didn't they realise he was this kind of guy when he lied his ass off to get the Daily Mail banned (and then contemptuously flaunted the fact he did it, in their faces)? Because in that case, they agreed with him. There are even Wikipedians lamenting the fact they have to ban someone they do often agree with, and are trying to find ways they can engineer some kind of exemption/redemption without causing a riot for forgiving the unforgivable, the crime they hate the most, block evading sock-puppetry.

What they don't seem to understand, is HH has never really ever been a Wikipedian in the true sense of that word (just like Eric Corbett, who was also famously given that tag). His behaviour has always been closer to that of a critic, the way he crusades and disrupts and holds those who disagree in contempt. He has previously claimed this is some kind of performance art, and you can certainly see why.

There's been some suggestion, on both behavioural and technical evidence, that he may even be the "Best Known For IP" vandal, who has been a scourge of the Wikipedians with his righteousness for years. Wouldn't that be delicious?

Here's some free advice for the Wikipediots, since they really don't seem to get it: when you've got a guy who holds you all in contempt and believes he is one hundred percent correct, and who knows his continued presence as a ban evading sock who largely makes edits you agree with is going to cause lots of hilarious strife, there's not a fucking chance in hell he is going to choose to go the route of public humiliation and restriction, over a lifetime of open socking. He will do what he does until he either gets bored of it, or you make it clear banned means banned, that every last edit he makes will be reverted. You've been down this road many times before with other campaigners, has doing anything less ever resulted in redemption?

Of course, there also the added benefit that the more he socks as IPs, the closer he gets to achieving one of his other likely long term goals - getting IP editing banned, either completely, or on all BLPs.

Author:  Graaf Statler [ Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hillbillyholiday

Hillbilly's and Flodders (Well know by the Dutch readers, about the family Flodder who got a house in a better neighborhood) are alway's, always welcome on Wikipedia as long they are productive. They love digital scum there. The best way to become a arb or a sysop is to troll yourself in to heaven.
You know that is swarm intelligence, yes, for me it was also new, but let me explane how it works. Take as much trolls as you can, make your Wiki to a digital trash can, and should Fuckt checkers! You are the fuckt checkers of this world, start to giggle, become a member of the #Metoo I never answer any question or email mouvement, and the money rush in.

A very interesting business concept for me as a outsider. It's a complete new way of running a business for me, and it seems to be the future in 2030. And one of the most interesting examples is still Natuur12 who trolled me out in the way a child of five years should do, who was supported by the Meta stewards and later by fat boy Alexander, and who became a Arb on WP-NL after his troll-me-in-to-heaven action. He trolled me out together with Ymnes boy who has de hersenen van een garnaal like we say in Holland. The brain of a shrimp. Yes, that behaving is highly appreciated on Wikipedia. And don't say it's not true of niet onderbouwd , because I have documented it!

Author:  Graaf Statler [ Wed Apr 18, 2018 7:57 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hillbillyholiday

Never new family Flodder made a American episode. Well, have a look here, partly Dutch, partly in English.. It's out of the eighties, the nineties and very populair, it was a kind of Dutch Hillbilly's.

Author:  Kumioko [ Wed Apr 18, 2018 2:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hillbillyholiday

I'm really surprised it took this long frankly. Usually the community is pretty fast to block anyone who doesn't instantly know the nuances of Wiki editing. I can't help but wonder if the reason this went on as long as it did is because so few people are really editing actively these days.

Author:  CrowsNest [ Wed Apr 18, 2018 4:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hillbillyholiday

Kumioko wrote:
I'm really surprised it took this long frankly. Usually the community is pretty fast to block anyone who doesn't instantly know the nuances of Wiki editing. I can't help but wonder if the reason this went on as long as it did is because so few people are really editing actively these days.
What? HH was an established, but lapsed, editor, who went from hero to zero in 13 months, despite only being really active post Mail ban (Jan 2017) in March 2018 and Summer 2017. His Summer edits earnt him a 24 hour, week and then month long block. The March edits saw him blocked for a year, upgraded to indefinite. That's how hard he was trying to get this outcome.

Author:  Graaf Statler [ Thu Apr 19, 2018 2:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hillbillyholiday

Often you see that fallen star effect. In the time I got that global lock Natuur12 and the complete insane Ymnes where the two rising stars. They were supported by the complete Dutch wiki community, in everything. The complete simple Ymnes was even a candidate as a arb, but they considered him as to young, keeping on to tell him he was a star writer. What of course was nonsense, the guy could hardly write his one name. I think it is younger, good willing person with a serious massive mental problem, like so many have there.

And Natuur12 many times scooped up how much he was drinking in public in that time. Whiskey, everything. You can find it back in his users history. But, he was supported by them till the end, they even elected him as a arb two times. Just like they did with Edo, that ORTS person, they keep on supporting him. Of course it's insane to support someone who has sent racist emails and don't want to say sorry, it's complete against the terms of use of the Foundation, but they do.
Only for Ymnes I feel really sorry. The guy has no idea what is going on, he is not able to understand what is going on. And no they use him as there doormat, they block him, and they humbled where they can. But in a legal way he is responsabel for everything he did on wikipedia, and he must be know by his real name, because he is involved with Wikimedia-NL! And that is the real scandal! To misuse this vulnerable person in the way they did.
Or what to think of Moira, who doxxed me on purpose, I got in a short time a mail of De Wikischim, your identity is now public. It was there begin of there smear shame and blame campaign, but for me they can fuck themself. I am who I am, now more than 65 years.

It is their mistake! They had to understand Ymnes was not able to recognise what copyright violations are, and they had to stop Natuur12 with his insane global lock plan together with Trijnstel, based on nothing! Because it was in a split second clear Ymnes was wrong, and my work was no copyvio!

It was and is from the first moment on clear those people where acting like schoolchildren. I blame them for this blocking fiasco, not Ymnes. I blame the Duch community, the hard core of the cabal. Because they play this kind of dirty games. And I think because Natuur12 was involved in the INeverCry case it's the same story. I have read INeverCry somewhere on Meta wrote he has a mental problem, and showed even a picture with his medicines. How can such a person get a so responsible position?

But do you know had a serious mental defect according to them? ME! I was the madman, the fool and the idiot, it is told many times in public, and if you don't believe me have a look on my blog. They all are a bunch of lying bastards there.

Author:  Sadface [ Fri Apr 20, 2018 9:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hillbillyholiday

Sometimes the truth hides in plain sight...

I think it is self-explanatory - someone confused their "good hand" and "bad hand" sockpuppets. Delicious carbuncle

Heh heh, well it does get confusing sometimes..! --Hillbillyholiday

Yes, the same Vanity Fair piece was raised above, back in October, by an editor with the ridiculously strange name of User:Shrinkydink07. Martinevans123

Wait, wasn't that one of our socks? I tend to lose track. --Hillbillyholiday

D'oh!! Martinevans123

Most intriguingly, the circus metaphors (eg. "My friends at the Circus are gonna love that one..") are clearly nods towards the British Intelligence Services.

Author:  CrowsNest [ Thu May 16, 2019 3:06 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hillbillyholiday

Someone might want to investigate whether or not Hillbillyholiday = MarchOrDie.

MarchOrDie has shown a marked disregard for other users opinions about what is or is not a BLP violation [[77]], [[78]] in essence (I suspect I am being generous) saying that everyone but them is wrong [[79]] and declaring the discussion over (in their favour, see below), edit warring (but making sure not to breach 3RR, just [[80]]. And now engaging in (what are) PA's [[81]]. It is clear this has now crossed over into tendentious editing and battleground mentality.

The users behavior is now being hugely disruptive, and I suspect is not going to go away. As it is clear they have decided what the policy is and everyone else is wrong.Slatersteven (talk) 10:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC) ... llyholiday ... MarchOrDie

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group