Ritchie333

[CrowsNest]

Just about sums Ritchie up.....

Pants, next time you feel the urge to use the "F" word, take this advice from OR - "next time you think you're right and someone else is being a jerk, write whatever you were going to post on-wiki in a text file instead, or maybe in a vent email to a friend, or even, if you must, in an edit window, but wait till tomorrow to decide if it's really worth posting. I've saved myself so many snarky comments that way". I do this, you'd be surprised at the amount of times I've been looking at a preview window reading something approximating "Well fuck you too", and thought "what blowback will I get if I hit 'publish changes'" (there's that thing about thinking one move ahead like chess again) and closing the browser and walking away without posting it. Or if you can, use it in mainspace cited to a reliable source. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:57, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

It is so like this dumbass to equate chess with the ability to not blurt out the first thing that comes into your head.

Such. A. Dumb. Fuck.

But a Wikipedia Administrator.

He's such a dumb fucker, he doesn't present this as the ordinary every day common sense that we teach children (without even really thinking of it as tuition), he presents it as the wise words of Opabina, as if she has ever shown herself remotely capable of saying something profound and laden with wisdom.

Showing what she's all about, and thus what her dumb followers are made of, she's somehow taken the simple thing we teach kids, and roped unwitting friends into it. Who the fuck wants to receive emails like that? 'Whaaahh, I want to say something mean to someone on Wikipedia but I'll get in trouble, so please sympathise with me'. Get a fucking life you pathetic loser, is the sort of reply I hope she receives. True friends give you the unvarnished truth.

[CrowsNest]

Fuck me. The original comment.....

Like a game of chess, you need to think a couple of moves ahead. Even if you are certain a block is absolutely the right thing to do and can confidently back it up with policy, it is always a good idea to go straight to ANI and say what you have done and why, appreciate the block may be controversial, and be willing to listen to objections, and sign off with "if any administrator has a good reason to disagree with the block, please reverse it without waiting for my permission". Anything you can do to prove to the community that it's nothing personal. Worked example here. I appreciate you did post on ANI, but you only posted your opinions, not that you'd blocked. You certainly can't mute the fan club that turns up objecting to the block, so you need to accommodate for that possibility before blocking. Otherwise you get this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:11, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

This isn't an example of chess strategy, this is simply a (very wrong attempt) to state what is BASIC ADMINISTRATOR POLICY.

It is so like the dumb ass that Ritchie is, which is so often revealed in his attempts to Administrate, to present the following of basic policy as something that is really really hard, requiring a lot mental effort, including that really really difficult thing that we know only Shaolin monks really master.....foresight.

The proper policy, obviously, is that you should only ever be unilaterally blocking people if you are sure of the policy merits. The Administrator's noticeboard exists and should be consulted before you block, if there is any reason you think there will be disagreement, but Wikipedia has no need or use for Administrators who are so uncertain of themselves they run there every time they block a 'face' for approval, or are so incompetent their judgement of what is absolutely correct always need review, or worse, are so pathetic as to be fine with regularly seeing blocks they placed as absolutely legitimate, being overturned by people who simply disagree.

Given the amount of times Ritchie has knowingly been controversial with his Admin powers, he really does have a cheek lecturing any of his peers about what is and is not correct procedure.

[CrowsNest]

Yezh, Ritchie is the very last Administrator to be talking about who should be using a noticeboard and when......

I was going to try and sort something out this evening with MPants and some of my more favourite arbs and oversighters via email, but events overtook themselves. Operative phrase here is "via email", not on wiki. I'm not going to jump and down and say "good block", but you did what you had to and policy backs you up totally. I do think there is a wider issue to be looked at, and I think treating it as "MPants is habitually incivil" is too naive a handling of the situation. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:51, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

On finding it just too difficult to defend the indefensible in public, you resort to going behind everyone's back trying to secure deals to somehow get around what you yourself admit is backed by policy?

Yeah, that's the role of a Wikipedia Administrator.

[CrowsNest]

Ritchie on Ritchie (spoiler alert, he thinks he's awesome).....

......You've seen me dragged to ANI more than a few times, just like you have, but you've managed to lose your admin tools and get Arbcom sanctioned, while every time I've been yanked there it closes as "no action". I'd like to think it's because I try and respect other people's views, see where they're coming from, and calm things down. .....Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:38, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Picked at random, these three examples show what is the far more likely explanation.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... al_attacks

Propose ending with the strong suggestion that both users be growed-ups, leave each other be, and go do something else, without all the bureaucratic minutiae of an IBAN either way, and with the understanding that if that doesn't work, the bureaucratic nightmare is the next option (and with all the ensuing bickering about who edited what first, and with what intention). I like both these folks; I wish they liked each other, but they don't seem to. So put on your adult pants, and go your separate ways without needing the forms filled out in triplicate. GMGtalk 23:09, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

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

... In addition, it would have been wise *ahem* on Ritchie333's part to at least pretend to confer with the blocking admin--if only out of courtesy, blue line and all that......Drmies (talk) 01:13, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... _Main_Page
(was never actually closed by an Administrator, but saw no participation from Ritchie, despite....)

I notice that User:Ritchie333 has been quite active since this section started, but hasn't responded to the WP:INVOLVED allegations here or elsewhere. This of course violates WP:ADMINACCT. ......Fram (talk) 09:55, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

In all three cases, all very different both in the reason for the report and why it was closed as no (serious) action against Ritchie, the common thread with all of them is, ironically, the complete opposite of Ritchie's idea of how he is perceived. Namely, he doesn't respect his colleagues, doesn't get where they're coming from, and doesn't calm things down.

If there is a difference between him and the person whose relative misfortune he was gloating over here
(The Rambling Man) that explains why he has remained an Administrator, it can only be because he is a little less stubborn, offensive and arrogant. Not enough to make him a good or even acceptable Administrator, he is after a all, all those things in spades, but crucially, never too much and never over something that really matters (or if so, he backsides or demures only at the last minute), hence the lack of any real will to take serious action against a fellow Administrator. He gets criticism aplenty at AN/I from his peers however, and that should be proof enough that he is not what he thinks he is. But as he has shown many times, there are peers he respects, and peers he does not. And rather than keeping it to himself, he acts on it.

[CrowsNest]

Unsurprisingly, as Ritchie's AN/I thread on TRM rolls on, wasting everybody's time, except TRM, who is of course relishing the platform, several editors have been forced to conclude much of this farce is due to his lack of judgement and communication skills as an Administrator, as it is about the personality defects of TRM.

He will ignore these observations of course, because they conflict with his fantasy version of his perceived reputation that he so recently revealed above.

[CrowsNest]

I can't email you Tryptofish, so I can't say this off-wiki, but if you need a good listener to get you through tough times, drop Megalibrarygirl an email. She's more than just a kick-ass Wikipedian, she's a kick-ass human being full stop. (I think enough people have picked up on that through various other things I've said elsewhere). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:50, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Tryp's problems are of course a little more complex than 'people think I suck but I disagree'.

But hey, Ritchie wouldn't be the dumbass that he is, if he didn't so readily assume that the situations were comparable or that the sticking plaster is transferable. Soothing a bad case of the sads in the sort of one dimensional reality challenged individual like Ritchie, is a frankly skill most women are quite capable of, having seen or indeed raised children themselves.

There are no life lessons or words of advice that will help Trp, or certainly none that haven't already been tried, and apparently rejected.

[CrowsNest]

Wow.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Comm ... _March.jpg

Ritchie really does not know a thing about copyright basics, does he?

Unsurprisingly, when he gets pushback from fellow Administrators enforcing the actual law so the WMF doesn't get sued, he doesn't reflect on whether or not it's him who is the problem, he runs straight to a Wikipedia user renowned for copyright disruption borne of wilful ignorance, looking for support.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =875910982

What more does this guy have to do before someone takes him to ArbCom? A lot more, hence why Wikipedia sucks.

He may even be drunk, it is Friday lunchtime after all.....

[CrowsNest]

Seriously, what on Earth is this utter obsession with Brexit all about? He somehow shoehorns mention of it into nearly every post he makes on Wikipedia.

Be grateful you used a named account and not an IP address, because if you had used the latter, I would do a WHOIS lookup, and if I found it was a school or public library (as it almost certainly was) I would telephone the secretary / administrator and tell them what was going on. It's a trick James O'Brien has used on Brexit fruitcakes, and it works rather well. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:50, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

The fact he is even writing this nonsense about looking up IPs shows he is falling apart at the seams.

Still, as is normal, his habit of not being able to resist splurging his personal business all over Wikipedia means that in that very same post, we now know why he is depressed......

If by "immediate family" you mean the woman I married, no the Decree nisi is scheduled to be finalised next Friday, although it's none of your fucking business.

My guess is she left him after he couldn't or wouldn't do something about his Wikipedia addiction.

Btw, this is what it looks like when Wikipedians get divorced......

The woman is precise, excising him out of her life in one smooth cut.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =861343410

Ouch.

In contrast, she was removed from Ritchie's userpage in the two week time period in June between him losing his shit and blanking his userpage, and restoring it. In his grief, I guess he could only face doing it offline, not leaving a specific diff to remind him of his failure.

Given the timings, I wonder if he had to remind her she still had him mentioned on her page. I bet that just eat away at him, the fact it was there, and she is so uninterested in Wikipedia nowadays that she didn't remember or didn't care to remove it until he whined.

I wonder if Wikipedia was the cause of their breakup on another level too, namely Ritchie's attitude to the problems editors like his wife faced. Did he really help her out just to get in her knickers? He talks a good game, but when push comes to shove, how many times does he actually do something that improves the environment?

Of course, he could be entirely blameless. But really, this guy? He can barely meet the obligations of being an Administrator, so a marriage, well......

[CrowsNest]

This is priceless.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.p ... =341305561

Sure, if everything worked perfectly, if Wikipedia governance worked as advertised, then you would be absolutely entitled to assume a long serving Wikipedia Administrator with 130+ GAs to their name, at least knows the very basics about copyright.

As he has been in many other ways elsewhere, Ritchie is the stand out example that such assumptions that Wikipedia works as advertised, are faulty and dangerous.

Why doesn't he get it?

RITCHIE, YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF COPYRIGHT IS BEYOND A JOKE, AS YOUR UPLOADS AND EDITS TO COMMONS ARE SHOWING. YOU NEED TO SHUT THE FUCK UP AND START LISTENING TO WHAT THEY ARE TELLING YOU*

See, I put it in all caps, but I bet he still doesn't get the message.

(* - well, you probably don't, but it would be the right thing to do, otherwise I'm just going to keep calling you out for it).

Last we forget, it was Ritchie who was so recently advocating a prolific Wikipedia license patroller be blocked for incompetence, and there are countless Wikipedia editors who seem to just assume that whatever Ritchie uploads is legitimately transferable to Commons, so the effects of his utter stupidity goes waaaay beyond the impact of his uploads alone.

In other news, tracking his attempted insurrection slash pity party at Casa Giano, I do so hope Ritchie follows this advice.....

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... 8517#p8517

I doubt he will, not out of any ethical concerns, but rather simply because he's too stupid to understand what Iridescent is advising him to to (at best, totally ring fence his legitimate uploads, at worst, fraudulently present them as pre-migration uploads). If Ritchie can't get his head around who owns the copyright to a screen shot, he sure as shit won't understand any of that.

[CrowsNest]

Did Ritchie really just compare Fae to a comedy character, specifically a little bald fat bloke in comically tight hotpants and string vests, who prides himself on being "the only gay in the village"? And did he feel like that was an OK thing to do because he has gay friends who are nothing like that, so that we're clear he means to insult Fae specifically, not all the gays in general, some of whom Ritchie has found to be kind and considerate people. And did he say this in the context of wanting everyone to know how he hates Fae for being one of those people who needlessly inflame already tense situations? And did he do all this on the highly visible ArbCom requests page, where Fae and all involved in the dispute, which Ritchie acknowledged was winding down, would see it?

Why yes, yes he did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =886144834

Just so we're all crystal clear, THIS GUY IS A WIKIPEDIA ADMINISTRATOR.

He's a fucking moron is what he is. No need to speculate why his wife left him. None whatsoever.