There'sNoTime
Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2018 2:02 am
There'sNoTime, or TNT to her time-poor friends, has no more time for Wikipedia. She cites feeling "feeling pretty overwhelmed with personal things", which is yet another sign that the only women who do seem to survive on Wikipedia, are those who would never say such a thing in the first place.
Speculation is rampant on that so called critic site Wikipediocracy, that she has been harassed into retirement by the butthurt wikifriends of Jytdog, who resent the fact the ArbCom Case she kicked off against him, saw him get a long overdue attitude correction. He ran for the hills rather than face the music, and plenty of Wikipediots are pissed because of it.
Maybe this is the reason, and maybe they're gullible enough to buy into it. Me, I remember this person as someone who had a chance to take a stand against this sort of behaviour more than a year ago, and in her wisdom, she decided to side with those who value Wikipedia's interests above those of real people. I don't forget those people. They are the real enemy, more so than the people simply doing it. Every mistake made on Wikipedia is reversible, until it is made evident it has "consensus".
What I think is very poor behaviour, which also has the potential to affect people's real lives, is that with all this speculation going on at Wikipediocracy, despite being aware of it, she's done nothing to confirm or deny it, in either place. While that may be what the Preventing and Reducing Harassment Handbook says to do in her own best interests, she willingly chose to be a part of both places, so she cannot now divorce herself from the responsibility of shutting that shit down, one way or the other.
Jytdog is blocked, but in being blocked he did not sign a waiver releasing everyone on Wikipedia of their obligations to treat him with decency, as so many Wikipedians seem to think is what a block does. If his followers are not the cause of her retirement, if he is not the cause of her retirement, he is owed that denial. And if it is the opposite, the victims are owed the public airing of this truth. Of their truth. Of Wikipedia's truth.
Here's hoping these personal issues are a result of a complete and total re-examination of her life choices, a reflection on what she was a part of for so long, and how she can pay off that debt to society. In my experience, we critics are rarely so lucky.
We are cursed to never forget, and watch them never learn.
HTD.
Speculation is rampant on that so called critic site Wikipediocracy, that she has been harassed into retirement by the butthurt wikifriends of Jytdog, who resent the fact the ArbCom Case she kicked off against him, saw him get a long overdue attitude correction. He ran for the hills rather than face the music, and plenty of Wikipediots are pissed because of it.
Maybe this is the reason, and maybe they're gullible enough to buy into it. Me, I remember this person as someone who had a chance to take a stand against this sort of behaviour more than a year ago, and in her wisdom, she decided to side with those who value Wikipedia's interests above those of real people. I don't forget those people. They are the real enemy, more so than the people simply doing it. Every mistake made on Wikipedia is reversible, until it is made evident it has "consensus".
What I think is very poor behaviour, which also has the potential to affect people's real lives, is that with all this speculation going on at Wikipediocracy, despite being aware of it, she's done nothing to confirm or deny it, in either place. While that may be what the Preventing and Reducing Harassment Handbook says to do in her own best interests, she willingly chose to be a part of both places, so she cannot now divorce herself from the responsibility of shutting that shit down, one way or the other.
Jytdog is blocked, but in being blocked he did not sign a waiver releasing everyone on Wikipedia of their obligations to treat him with decency, as so many Wikipedians seem to think is what a block does. If his followers are not the cause of her retirement, if he is not the cause of her retirement, he is owed that denial. And if it is the opposite, the victims are owed the public airing of this truth. Of their truth. Of Wikipedia's truth.
Here's hoping these personal issues are a result of a complete and total re-examination of her life choices, a reflection on what she was a part of for so long, and how she can pay off that debt to society. In my experience, we critics are rarely so lucky.
We are cursed to never forget, and watch them never learn.
HTD.