View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:46 pm




Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Kupdung 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4447
Reply with quote
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =855658383

This motherfucker.....words fail me.
Quote:
This editor, at least, has no interest in following or even visiting (and never has) the Wikipedia criticism and hate sites, which by all accounts appear to be significantly populated by people who have been blocked or banned by those committed to keeping the encyclopedia free of PoV, financial exploitation, vandalism, disruption, trolling, and other divisive behaviour.
He is either lying, or telling the world he is the sort of stupid ass who maligns people based on hearsay.

Not a great look for the "Editor in Chief" of Wikipedia's mighty newsletter. Do your fucking research.

Mind you, it's better than how he recently came across in an incident covered by another "hate site".....

https://thewikicabal.com/2018/08/16/kud ... s-marbles/

Losing his marbles is a fucking generous way to describe this freak's regular departures into areas of outright trollery and the formenting of discord in all areas of Wikipedia. Maybe he's got a competition going with The Rambling Man, who can be the most tiresome Whiny Little Bitch without ever being told to just fuck the hell off out of it if Wikipedia or your fellow Wikipedians are making you even a tenth as miserable as you claim.

At this point, he would be smart to admit to actually being mentally ill, or at the very least having undiagnosed impulse control or social interaction issues. Because if he wants people to think what he's doing is the product of calm and rational thought, well, they will.

Hence I suspect nobody will be shedding a tear in learning he is properly taking his ball home. Having already handed in his Admin toolbelt due to the above incident, he has posted a job vacancy for EiC from 31 August, and stated his intention to "retire from Wikipedia at the end of the month".

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =855657415

I'll believe it when I see it, as it seems to me like he has probably said this before.

In true Kupdung style, there's just no place on Wikipedia where he won't make it all about him. The following is the Wikipedia equivalent of crashing a wake just to tell everyone all about how you're sad because your wife is cheating on you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =855413511

Despite all his words about how crucial it is, his reign as EiC is ending no differently to all the rest......
Quote:
With Bri and myself having very limited time time this month for all the cleaning up and preparation for the August issue, there may well be a delay getting it out. It may also not have the same quantity of content. Suggestions welcome. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:39, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
At the end of the day, if he really is going, then what sort of epitaph does he deserve? Well, I can think of nothing more fitting than to say, if you're so bad you make Gamaliel look like the good guy, then you really are a nasty piece of work.
Quote:
Rosie, entering my 80th decade very soon, all my life I have been an ardent supporter of gender equality. However, following recent criticisms from an arbitrator I am withdrawing my active support for Women in Red, and will no longer be actively helping to rescue bios about women, translate, or write them. I just thought you ought to know. I may even consider writing a Signpost article about the misandry male editors and admins occasionally have to put up with. I'm so sorry. I thought I had been doing the right thing for this lady's RfA here and defending it again here. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:02, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

The "misandry" that you have to put up with over the course of your entire life probably doesn't equal what a single one of these women has to put up with on a single day on Wikipedia. I'm glad you have been an ardent supporter of gender equality your entire life, but so have many other men, and we haven't withdrawn that support because one woman made a polite request of us. Why are you posting here? Are you expecting the Ekklesiazousai to proclaim you Proud Defender of Women and beg you not to depart? Gamaliel (talk) 21:49, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Rubbish, Gamaliel. You should know me better, and nowhere have I said or even inferred that I have had to put up with "misandry" over the course of my entire life - I haven't. Quite to the contrary, I have been an active campaigner for gender equality (and LGBT) for decades before Wikipedia was conceived. GorillaWarfare has now apologised. I wrongly assumed that she was an active member of WIR, and I apologise for that error. I think we can close this. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:48, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

User:GorillaWarfare does not have to apologise for anything. Her request is one that could be reasonably made by any editor. Xxanthippe (talk) 07:49, 13 August 2018 (UTC).

@Xxanthippe: you need to pipe down, you were the cause of all this. When you are a bit calmer, you can join me and Ritchie in the pub. Mine's a glass of cool Tavel, or if you're buying dinner, a robust Vacqueyras or Gigondas will do fine with wild boar or caramelized saddle of hare. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:10, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Nothing will convince us more of your commitment to gender equality than you telling a woman to pipe down. Gamaliel (talk) 12:55, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

I have stricken my apology above. I assumed I had caught you at a bad time and that was why you'd reacted so disproportionately, but you've continued to react in this over-the-top manner and I am not willing to put up with it. I do hope it's not the case that I've caught you at a bad time—if it is, I hope things improve for you, but I'm also only so willing to accept people mistreating me regardless of what is going on with them. I made a polite request that you not refer to me by my real name when referring to others by their usernames, you reacted explosively, and after seeing you appear on my watchlist on several editors' talk pages to share that you'd left Women in Red because of our conversation (despite me not being an active member of WiR) I decided the best thing to do was circle back to post asking why you'd reacted so disproportionately and apologize since it seemed I'd been misunderstood. You didn't actually answer my questions but rather made another jab at me. I decided to let it go given things seemed to be settled... until I saw you'd posted on Rosiestep's talk page once again, this time telling Xxanthippe to "pipe down" and calm down, and telling them they "were the cause of all this". I posted to say that no, my request was separate from whatever conversation Xxanthippe was having and you told me to "Give it a rest now Ms GorillaWarfare" (I see you removed the "Ms" later because it was a "typo"...), that I'd "pompously declared [your use of my real name while referring to the others you listed by their usernames] to be an mysoginism", and "Gert over it". You need to stop making these accusations against me; I have done nothing wrong, and I have treated you only with respect. I would like the same from you. GorillaWarfare (talk) 06:50, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Into the fucking sea with you!


Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:34 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4447
Reply with quote
:lol: #MeToo?
Quote:
Can I ask some advice? I'm getting rather fed up with the constant failure to assume good faith with members of WP:WIR, not to mention the antagonistic misandry that seems to permeate all their discussions. I'm seriously thinking of taking this to WP:ANI. WCM 19:11, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

A couple of coincidences: WIR is a good project but there may be some partial truth in WCM's claims - on a unconnected incident I withdrew my support for WIR earlier today. Also, looking at the Elisa issue somewhere else, I wasn't going to bother chiming in, but I do concur with Tony. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:41, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Obviously this supposed partial truth turned out to be a complete misrepresentation, something Kupdung learned of in the space of 24 hours. And yet strangely, he never saw the need to go back and correct his statement. Perhaps he was too embarrassed at seeing nobody else agree with him, just a bunch of people further disagreeing with WCM.

Into the sea!


Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:04 pm
Profile
Psyop
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 5:56 pm
Posts: 1621
Location: #Bbb23
Reply with quote
Kupdung ;)

_________________
#BbbGate


Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:22 pm
Profile YIM
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 2:14 am
Posts: 372
Reply with quote
Considering a solid 20% of all the pageviews for that blog I did on Kudpung came from Thailand, where Kudpung just happens to live?

Hypocrisy!

_________________
De facto globally banned on all Wikimedia sites. Editor of The Wiki Cabal. find me on the Wikipediocracy Discord.


Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:02 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4447
Reply with quote
Quote:
Notwithstanding, Philafrenzy is a valuable contributor to the encyclopedia and will learn from the issues highlighted in this RfA. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:36, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
The issues highlighted are close paraphrasing, overuse of non-free imagery, a lack of understanding of what COI is, and creating copious amounts of stub articles without any intention of taking them further, indeed leaving some lacking references to back claims he included, leaving that to another day.

A scary insight into what Kupding, champion of RfA reform, thinks a valuable contributor to Wikipedia looks like. After SEVEN YEARS of solid editing experience. Three of those four issues have legal implications, while the fourth directly undermines the perceived quality of Wikipedia.

The guy is only a valuable contributor in the sense he is clearly stupid enough to think editing Wikipedia is a good use of his time. And stupid enough to pick Ritchie as a nominator for RfA. And stupid enough to run for Adminship without any relevant experience in admin related processes.

And while simply being another warm body with the time and energy to scribble on the walls a lot, for years, with absolutely no awareness of critical processes like RfA, is a definition of a good editor that many in the movement willingly support, it is an odd position for a supposed grand sage of Teh Wiki with Specialism in RfA like Kudung to hold.

Maybe the guy needs to step back and wonder if the reasons RfA is such a horrible and broken process, is rather because Wikipedia itself is a horrible and broken encyclopedia project? Is it really feasible to expect first world standards of elections, in an objectively third world or even Middle Ages society?


Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:21 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:01 pm
Posts: 268
Reply with quote
CrowsNest wrote:
Specialism in RfA


This word caught my attention in the same RfA (question #15). Has special(i)ty become too mundane? I keep getting distracted by stray meanings barking at me...

Phil-a-frenzy wrote:
(Q14) I am under no illusion that there is still plenty to learn Dolotta.


;)

The best I've read about RfA recently was a link TheDJ added to JimboTalk which gives the perspective of an outsider:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wiki ... _2014.webm

I posted it in another thread over there.

Edit: just for the record I hadn't read the thread on Richy333's nominations here (§) yet.


Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:00 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4447
Reply with quote
Oh dear. Alzheimer's maybe?
Quote:
Secondly, nowhere on Wikipedia have I hinted, inferred, or otherwise, that I have, or my be retiring. I will thank you for sticking to facts rather than making assumptions and publishing them, especially where it inappropriate. All you do is fan the flames yourself. More on this when my health improves. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:26, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =855657415
Quote:
Otherwise, it's throwaway comments like this that have led me to shorten my temporary work on the magazine. and retire from Wikipedia at the end of the month.
Anyway, FWIW, here's what he claims is the reality today. Tune in tomorrow for a different version, no doubt......
Quote:
All I have signaled, and on-Wiki, is my desire to withdraw from NPP after mollycoddling it for years, and the fact that this will be my last month as E-in-C of The Signpost. - which is what I intended from the moment I took over the temporary editorship. I have slowed down in the last week or so due to some personal circumstances which are no one's business but my own.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:38, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
I don't think getting your ass handed to you by Gorilla Warfare really counts as a personal circumstances.....


Sat Aug 25, 2018 7:03 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 2:14 am
Posts: 372
Reply with quote
Looks like blog 3 won't be very complimentary. ;)

Of course I didn't expect him to retire and was surprised he said he was going to, so the fact he isn't now going to retire in no way surprises me, but does show a certain lack of integrity.

His turn around was less than a week from brushing off the drama to steaming back in on full war mode! This is way more blatant than I expected.

_________________
De facto globally banned on all Wikimedia sites. Editor of The Wiki Cabal. find me on the Wikipediocracy Discord.


Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:08 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 4447
Reply with quote
Integrity was never his strong suit. But this whole Alzheimer's vibe he has going on now, definitely feels like a new phenomena. Genuinely could be Alzheimers.....

https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php? ... d=18330818


Sun Aug 26, 2018 8:32 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:56 pm
Posts: 266
Reply with quote
It's called gaslighting, and it's a popular tactic on some parts of the internet. Simply deny what is blatantly true, even in the teeth of evidence on the same screen as your denial. It's astonishingly hard to believe that someone is telling barefaced lies and so the reader tends to rationalise it away: cognitive dissonance kicks in, and readers process the contradiction in terms of who they believe rather than what they can see.

It is a technique for consolidating and increasing the user's power and influence. There's a handy popular description here.


Sun Aug 26, 2018 9:18 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 44 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group ColorizeIt.
Designed by ST Software.