View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Sep 20, 2019 12:09 am




Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Ealdgyth 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3632
Reply with quote
My main issue with this person is the fact she applied for, and was waved through, the position of Adminship. Not because she had any need for it - as she promised, she has logged just 16 Admin actions in her 19 months in the role. But rather as if it were some kind of reward for her article writing. And some reward it was, with 250 supports, 2 neutrals and zero opposes. The latter clean sweep was only achieved when the sole editor who felt brave enough to point out it was a problem that she had no relevant experience or apparent need, was shouted down by people calling him a liar. He is owed an apology, since it has since been shown that their claims she had a need, based on her own statements, proved to be unfounded.

It is also hard not to assume this coronation didn't happen simply out of collective guilt that the Wikipedians aren't doing enough to make their women editors feel welcome and valued. Which was pretty stupid, as she made it absolutely obvious in her candidacy, if people weren't already aware of it, that her position on Wikipedia's gender troubles is that the women who want to edit should just grow thicker skin and adapt to the environment set by the men.

It is ironic that one reason she has not done some of the Admin work she promised, at ERRORS, is because she claimed she lacked the thick skin everyone seems to require to do it, because of a well known resident troll. She has no excuse now, that particular problem editor having been self-exiled. And yet, still no work at it from her.

She has, in reality, and as she promised in her candidacy, simply used her Adminship to be able to hold forth in discussions with the full gravitas of having her views seen as that of an Administrator. Accordingly, as she promised, quite a few editors with problems adhering to the expectation of civility and good temperament, but who are otherwise productive and competent, have benefited from her views as to which of those is more important. But only the ones she likes, not people like the ERRORS troll, so she doesn't even have the admirable quality of possessing of a consistent moral position on such things.

So why have I started a thread on her now? Well, I just noticed another unedifying aspect of how she uses her position.....

In the candidacy of another potential admin, Philafrenzy, who some here ironically speculate might even be a women, she has just eviscerated them with an extremely long forensic demolition of their use of sources. This is particularly unfair as the candidacy up to then was clearly already failing, and rightly so. But if by some miracle it was close enough to be deliberated beyond the mere numbers, she would get extra weight for that opposition because she is an Administrator, even though hers was not a view that is any more of less compelling because she has Admin experience (which, in reality, she does not).

It has weight for its specificity if we assume it has relevance, although even then it should be noted how she leaves it entirely up to everyone else to ascertain if these are recent failures, or issues randomly plucked from the candidate's seven year stint of active editing, in which time their understanding may have evolved. It isn't like it is uncommon for editors not to go back and fix their old mistakes from their early years. It is a flaw of Wikipedia. I have no doubt Ealdgyth herself likely has a few embarrassing screwups in her early history that have yet to be noticed, much less fixed. Her own candidacy was simply not concerned with that level of scrutiny at all.

Whether someone can use a source properly, is not a competency Administrators are really tested for at all. That is proved by just how bad at it so many of them actually are. She clearly has strong views that Administrators should first and foremost be stellar content writers, and she is perfectly entitled to that opinion. Many share it, even thought isn't official policy, and in many ways, a pretty dumb position, one whose benefits seem largely imagined. But it is strange then, that this is how she chooses to make that become a reality. By picking up individual in a very public and humiliating way, and arguably at a time when it was already moot. You do get the impression Ealdgyth is not minded to waste the fruits of any research.

It is an accepted fact of Wikipedia that if you think something is wrong at the systemic level, then you tackle the issue at the systemic level. And yet Eaglyth shows absolutely no sign of doing that, or even wanting to do that. She either just doesn't care, or is waiting for someone else to hear her views, and act on it on her behalf by proposing a policy/procedural change. She has just eleven edits to Village Pump (proposals), which is far below her interest in the parts of Wikipedia space that appeal to her (writing content and protecting the individuals who do it).

On Wikipedia, all editors are equal. There are no Queens and no serfs. And yet Ealdgyth arguably holds that position now, being the Queen of the faction who believe content is King. One wonders how she feels about the presence of another Queen on Wikipedia, Bishonen, who holds the same view, but with 10,000+ logged Admin actions, many of which were overtly beneficial to their common friends and shared causes, she can at least show how she has deserved the role. And she has undoubtedly done her best to tackle issues systemically, hampered as she is with the personality flaws she seems to share with Ealdgyth, given she also is quite prone to following Ealdgyth's strategy of unfairly targeting individuals to send a message.

Indeed, perhaps the better question is, does Bishonen not feel affronted at Ealdgyth's easy ascent to power? Then name Bishonen is one notable exception from that huge roll of support.....

Then again still, Ealdgyth can arguably feel aggrieved that Bishonen gained her crown at a time when the process was a little less vigorous than it is now, and she felt even less need to hide her true self, her true intentions, from the electorate.

Off with both their heads, I say. Metaphorically speaking of course.


Fri Aug 24, 2018 6:20 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3632
Reply with quote
Jesus.
Quote:
I'll try to get to this topic of TFA and FA and VA tomorrow... this day and yesterday have been beyond shitty for me (sick mare who colicked yesterday - she's recovering but it's eating a huge pile of time to monitor, plus last night a good friend was very very sick and in pain and we had to force her to call the paramedics and now it looks like she's terminal with cancer, heart problems, and a chest infection - I have the medical power of attorny for her so I have to deal with the hospital and docs... ugh) Ealdgyth - Talk 19:15, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
1. Why the hell are you even telling random people on the internet this stuff?

2. Why did you mention the sick horse before the terminally ill friend?

3. Why did you log in at all on a day like that?

A classic example of how Wikipedians are just fucking weird all round.

There's this gem too....
Quote:
I pay no attention to VA [Vital Article] status when scheduling for TFA [Today's Featured Article]
Hey genius, nobody would pay attention to it, because there's barely a handful of Featured Article status Vital Articles (because of niche artists like your good buddy Iridescent not being remotely interested in that aspect of 'building an encyclopedia'). It would be a fantastic sight to behold though, the hurricane obsessives and video game fanboys getting real mad because articles like Bronze Age, India and Economics were hogging that precious reward.


Fri Sep 07, 2018 6:29 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3632
Reply with quote
Wow.
Quote:
It's not just admins who can drive folks away - see Talk:Manchester Baby/Archive 1 where someone who basically exists to nitpick other editors managed to drive one of the more productive (if occasionally uncivil) editors away by repeated rename requests. I will freely admit I don't have as much time for WP right now, but I'm not sure I'll ever nominate another FAC while the insanity that is the "prose focus" remains there without any shred of worrying about the actual research. (Oh, and I agree with Iri's long post above...) Ealdgyth - Talk 11:43, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Said on another Administrator's page, which is also watched by a ton of other Administrators. Outcome? Nothing. Not even a warning.

This nasty bitch* is a perfect example of the only sort of women you will really find in any great number on Wikipedia - someone who is happy to act no differently to the dominant species. In terms of basic, obvious, conduct violations, it's amazing what she managed to pack into this one short post.

Those repeated rename requests were in fact just two, held two months apart, the second succeeding. Which one does she have a problem with? The one she doesn't agree with, obviously. No attempt to argue one was an abuse of process of incorrectly closed, other than this idea you are not allowed to revisit an issue if doing so goes against the wishes of a friend of hers, the infamous Eric Corbett.

The editor she is happily maligning, even blaming for Eric leaving Wikipedia, is Dicklyon. He edits under his real name, but this bitch doesn't see an issue with maligning a real person on Wikipedia for no better reason than Eric is a precious fuck. He has nearly 150,000 edits to Wikipedia, so if her characterisation of his primary drive was accurate, she needs to explain how it could low be that he is still free to edit. If she is so sure her slur is the truth, she is free to block them, the obvious truth is an accepted defence against accusations of Administrator bias.

Her claim Eric is merely occasionally uncivil, is of course the sort of fact free partisan bullshit which a big chunk of the Wikipedia Administration has become known for. That is what really drives people away. Does she care? Or course not. The truth conflicts with her fantasy, so she readily ignored the truth.

Speaking of which, it is pretty clear the idea FAC doesn't feature anyone worried about the quality of research, is another fantasy construction of hers. I don't know if she gets on with Brian Boulton, but he should be made aware of these comments if he is stupid enough to consider her a colleague. There is one prominent women Administrator who does nothing at FAC but challenge the quality of research, and you can probably appreciate the fact she most recently challenged a friend of Eric's during a FAC, who also briefly left Wikipedia as a result off their inability to accept other people have a right to comment on their work, is why she didn't merit recognition by this bitch.

The fact she gets away with saying stuff like this and literally NOBODY pulls her up, says everything you need to know about Wikipedia. In electing this vicious partisan bitch to a position where she can sit in judgement over other editors, assess their motivations and worth to the project, the community either didn't discover, or didn't care, that this is who she is. It is likely the latter, but even if it was the former, there is not one thing people having second thoughts could do about it.

In Wikipedia terms, she is a power bitch for life now. Untouchable, unaccountable. She deserves everything she gets, and more besides since the Wikipedia cult is very effective at shielding scum like this from the proper and just consequences for their actions. Not so effective that it isn't worth doing.

* - if Gender Desk is unhappy with me using gendered insults here, she can come here and explain to me how there could possibly be another woman on this planet who would not consider her a gender traiter, a man of Wikipedia in every respect that matters. As such, it is perfectly appropriate to use an insult that highlights her gender, lest readers make the mistake of assuming I'm talking about just another man of Wikipedia, when the unpallatable truth is that she is an example of what the male dominated environment of Wikipedia allows some women to be, if they do desire. And she clearly does.


Thu Oct 25, 2018 4:42 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3632
Reply with quote
Quote:
I'm sorry - but anyone that knew that Cirt was editing as Sagecandor and knew he was violating a topic ban - that's just wrong and unhelpful. That said, Sashi needs to take on board that he doesn't need to be the crusading investigative reporter for Wiki. Edit more articles, worry less about the political aspects of the behind the scenes stuff. :arrow: Ealdgyth - Talk 12:40, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Wrong and unhelpful? Wow. Harsh criticism. Not. How about this addition, you stupid bitch?* It was wrong and unhelpful, and blockworthy under Wikipedia policy as integrity destroying deception of the highest order?

Strange that a so called Wikipedia Administrator doesn't get that. Then again, why would she? She didn't become an Administrator to block people for a silly things like violating the published rules in a serious and egregious manner, therefore upholding the basic integrity of Wikipedia. She became one so she can make comments designed to protect editors who are capable of being that wrong, that unhelpful, that damaging to Wikipedia's integrity. Not cool, bearing in mind those who did so are not likely to be normal editors, but corrupt Administrators. Ealdgyth carries zero credibility as far as rooting out corruption, she is the corruption.

As far as I can see, nobody on Wikipedia is paying the slightest attention to "the political aspects of the behind the scenes stuff.", except to block people like Sashi when they point out obvious issues that need investigating by Wikipedia Administrators. That's you, you stupid bitch. If you didn't want the job, you shouldn't have accepted the invitation to your coronation, and instead should focus solely on what you claim is your only interest, writing articles. Leave matters of integrity to those who can credibly claim to be interested in that, and show they are with their actions, and appropriately strong words to describe incredibly bad behaviour.

Wikipedia needs a hundred more editors like Sashi and a hundred less Administrators like this bitch, if it is to even come close to looking like a website where people can trust the content being created is neutral. It isn't going to happen, so why waste a goddamned second even believing it will?

You are not going to stop being investigated just because you want it to happen. Not now, not ever. All you can do is keep suppressing the ability of insiders to investigate you. That is not a winning strategy. We were the people who exposed Cirt, you (or rather Bbb23) just blocked him when it became obvious not blocking him was a potential PR disaster.

If it were up to this bitch, he would likely still be unblocked, because he sure edited a lot of articles.....he was a very productive editor.

* - as above.


Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:58 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3632
Reply with quote
Wut?
Quote:
I wasn't going to comment here but I cannot sit on my fingers any longer. For those of you complaining that a note of "bringing gender into this"... I'm dismayed that you seem to think that the concerns of half the human population are not worth considering. Because that's what you're saying when you argue to keep gender out of this - you're saying that women's perceptions of how unwanted contact or unsolicited contact are perceived are not welcome or somehow unimportant to the situation. That at least a good chunk of half the population of the earth should not feel that a phone call out of the blue by someone they are in an editing conflict with on a website is creepy. And you're also saying that any women who feel that way should just keep quiet because ... here is where I completely fail to understand the point of view. It's not playing the "gender card", folks. It's trying to explain how this sort of contact is seen by a significant portion of the population. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:31, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Get the fuck out of here with this shit. Jytdog didn't think of, or deliberately set aside, any concern for how his unexpected phone call might be received, for the exact same reasons this woman picks and chooses when she'll stand for civility. If we take Jytdog on his word, he is at least working hard to make sure he always holds the social expectations and requirements of Wikipedia, as an equal and just as important requirement as the content policies. This woman, not so much. Hypocrites like this, are why feminists get such a bad time on Wikipedia.


Fri Nov 30, 2018 10:53 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 2789
Reply with quote
He?
If it is a man it's OK to call him, but if it is a woman not, and she is speaking on behalf of the half world population. But she is not playing her gender card. Interesting vision.

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Fri Nov 30, 2018 11:12 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3632
Reply with quote
God, what a horrible specimen, classic case of how the women who succeed at the Game of Wikipedia have to be twice as toxic as the men. Makes your skin crawl just reading them.

[quote]The irony of the filer mentioning that SMC was "encouraged to keep his contributions to a reasonable length" is withering. From watching this blow up, it basically boils down to the filer wanting SMC to apologize/retract/acknowledge something that the filer feels SMC wrongly said. Frankly, I don't blame SMC for eventually getting a bit curt in his replies, as the filer has gone on endlessly about ... something... and continued to do so even after SMC asked the filer to stop posting. At some point, you just have to stop, and this filing is ill advised. I recommend no action, although if this sort of continued posting keeps happening, the filer might find a boomerang in their future. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:26, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[/quote]

You can absolutely believe that she isn't even joking about not knowing what the complainent's issue is, but having the brass neck to demand he drop it anyway. She frankly could not give a fuck - reflexively and unquestionably defending the very worst scum of Wikipedia (and the unemployable transphobe Stanton McCandlish fits that bill to a tee), is totally her thing. This is why she wanted to be an Administrator. She doesn't block people, she protects those who should be blocked, usually for no higher reason than they help her do what she likes doing on Wikipedia.

Undoubtedly that will be the situation here (indeed there she is in April seeking out the scumbag for help dealing with "flagcruft" and him casting their duo as frustrated geniuses), it isn't like she patrols the AE board as a rule. Absolute scum. As anyone who has had any dealings with Stanton, you know for damn sure that any complaint which accuses him of misrepresentation of opponents in order to create straw men et al, and being a precious little bitch when called up on it, is going to be a legitimate report. He can't go a single day without being that sort of prick, it's a real personality defect of his.

Nearly two and a half years she's been an Administrator, and she has never blocked (nor unblocked) a single user. It clearly isn't because she is a liberal, or because she prefers to resolve things through discussion, as this comment shows. She just doesn't want to attract the attention it would bring. People would ask awkward questions, people would start noticing how she uses of rather abuses her position of trust. She would want to tell them to fuck off, she would want to tell them they should Respect Her Authoritah, and then the game would be up. So she does this, like a low rent part time version of the Ultimate Wiki Bitch, Queen Bishonen.


Tue May 21, 2019 4:33 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 3632
Reply with quote
It didn't take me too long to figure out the issue. During an argument over Manuals of Style, Stanton didn't spot that the complainant had brought up a second one, in addition to the one a different user he was originally arguing with. This difference voided some of Stanton's objections, but not all, but Stanton, being the inattentive arrogant oaf he is, failed to spot the change, and made continuing replies on the flawed assumption this second person was the first and they were still talking about their original guide.

After about the third attempt to correct him, it must have finally dawned on Stanton that he had fucked up, but in his characteristic style, to save face he just tried to bluff it out, endlessly repeating answers to questions no longer being asked, while mixing in replies to the new objections with the right context, all basically as set ups to the usual insulting remarks about his opponents supposed studidity, before of course declaring the whole thing was a waste of his time, so he was out of there.

Said user is understandably pissed off at being treated like an idiot, by someone who was themselves, being an idiot. All he wanted was an acknowledgement that Stanton had needlessly insulted his intelligence, and an apology for taking so long to realise his own mistake in a matter of basic comprehension. Stanton was having none of it. So the user has exercised their right to escalate it to AE, this topic area being subject to higher expectations of decorum, precisely because of Stanton's previous wars.

It is a common pattern, disputes between Stanton and countless other users often go this way, because the man's fragile ego can't take it when he is wrong, but his slapdash approach means he is often wrong, so he just attacks, or rather continues his attacks, and then hopes the system will protect him, because of course nobody has the time to wade through his endless diatribes to figure out what really happened.

Any sensible person would now be asking the question, did this bitch really not know what the complainent's issue was, or was she so used to seeing it, she didn't really need to look, she knew it would be an interpersonal dispute triggered and then worsened by Stanton, he will have done countless things wrong, stuff that he has done so often he really does need to be reminded he is not at liberty to do them anywhere, least of all there, so she needed to do whatever she can to protect him. If she needs to paint him as the victim, she will do so.

Shameless.


Tue May 21, 2019 5:13 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 8 posts ] 

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.