Ritchie333

[CrowsNest]

Dumbass.

Praxidicae asked you to leave her alone and you present evidence that you're doing exactly the opposite. It seems to me as though you routinely check their contributions and involve yourself in them, which after being asked not to, is hounding. You went so far as to blank their userpage, which although the content was not necessarily nice, should not have been done by you as you are heavily involved. It's evident you have caused this editor distress and that you do not see a problem with it. The best course of action now, and what I ask of you to do, is to ensure your editing does not converge with Praxidicae's. You're both constructive editors and nothing good will come of this. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 14:33, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

How about asking Praxidicae to leave ME alone? Praxidicae, do not ever post on my talk page ever again. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:58, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

[CrowsNest]

Dumbass.

[JuiceBeetle]

Huff and puff: retired because of an ArbCom IBAN

Buildup:
21 November 2018 - AN report
16:50, 18 July 2019 user page edit

The mob is already preparing Framgate2:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... Praxidicae

[CrowsNest]

I love how they're all totally surprised. They should read our forum more. This thread details pretty well that Ritchie has a serious temper problem, this isn't the first time he has singularly failed to uphold the 'higher standard'. And of course the precious fuck sees an interaction ban as a scarlet letter and would rather dramatically retire than take his medicine.

The little coward didn't even publicly acknowledge the iban - to the causal observer he just retired because he was pissed off Fastily wants to delete one of his images. Maybe the reason he told him to fuck off was because he already knew of the forthcoming iban, then again, maybe he didn't, and that was just a timely reminder that he's not Administrator material.

The community reaction is hilarious. They want a whole public case for a pissant issue like this? How does that fit with their long standing desire for proportional reactions?

Floquenbeam of all people has no issue with the secrecy. How could he, it was done by the Holy Arbcom. If they want a hero against injustice, I guess the mob will have to look elsewhere. Floq. appreciates what a lucky break for Ritchie this really was, since as any fool could surely appreciate, being bad enough to earn an interaction ban with another user, would surely warrant loss of your Administrator privleages, in a well functioning self-governing community.

[CrowsNest]

At least now Wikipediocracy has a thread on Ritchie. A shame that all it has in it is a bunch of Wikiprats repeating what they're saying on Wikipedia, plus Kumioko being Kumioko, plus Vigilant blaming the Foundation, like he has A FUCKING CLUE who Ritchie is.

[CrowsNest]

No consensus for an interaction ban or any other sanction.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:00, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Looks like ArbCom really should have done something when they observed Bbb23 has a habit of shutting down AN/I threads in favour of abusive Admins, instead of pretending it wasn't an issue.

[CrowsNest]

Either ArbCom are now interpreting WP:HARASSment the way the Foundation wants, albeit being rather lenient on the sanctions, or there is secret evidence that the likes of Bbb23 hasn't seen.

Pretty obvious which one is the truth.

If the community doesn't like it, they can elect new Arbitrators, right? Or they can suck a dick.

SELF GOVERNANCE.

[CrowsNest]

There was a consensus on the Committee for wording which indicated that the i-ban on Richie was imposed by ArbCom as it was felt he had over-stepped the mark. SilkTork (talk) 15:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Congratulations, you caught one incident out of a dozen.

And the precious fuck still retired.

[CrowsNest]

Starting to look like Ritchie brought his personal issues into play, in his defence to ArbCom, given all this crap about secrecy being warranted so the parties could speak freely. It fits his over-sharing style. If that reduced his sanction to a mere iban, he should count himself lucky, not flounce off the project like he has been harshly treated.

[CrowsNest]

Unsurprisingly, every part of this statement....

You're a real talent, a decent human, and someone who cares about the encyclopedia; we need that here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:39, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

....can be contradicted by the assorted contents of this thread.

I repeat, Wikipediocracy only began a thread on Ritchie today.

Is it any wonder that Wikipediocracy became the lap dog of the scummiest of the Wikipedians, and we became the site they like to pretend just does not exist?

Go there for the gossip and griping and general fandom, come here for the unvarnished truth about who and what the Wikipedians really are.