Beeblebrox admits revoking talk page access is routinely abused

Evil admin for many years, tossed out in 2020, now infesting Wikipediocracy
Post Reply
User avatar
Jake Is A Sellout
Sucks Fan
Posts: 185
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2021 1:01 am
Been thanked: 31 times

Beeblebrox admits revoking talk page access is routinely abused

Post by Jake Is A Sellout » Fri May 07, 2021 8:22 am

As usual, nobody on Wikipediocracy even spotted this, much less called it out. ... 46#p289207
In reality, it's drudge work. Category:Requests for unblock (T-H-L) is pretty much always backlogged because it is so very tedious to deal with. This is why we do things like remove talk page access, limit appeals to once every six months or even a year, etc.
Ah yes, it must be very tedious having to come with different ways to blow off wrongly blocked editors.


Their user page the the last public means by which a wrongly blocked editor can get an improper block overturned. As such, by rule, it shall only be locked for very good reason, such as, if the user has resorted to abuse, is otherwise continuing to do whatever it was that got them blocked, or is literally repeating the same appeal.

"Oh, this is so tedious" is not a good reason.

But yet, this is Wikipedia.

The community elected this prick back onto their Arbitration Committee, whose task is to ensure Admins are not abusing their powers, one of which is locking down talk pages.

So now you probably understand why Wikipedia is a closed shop. Now you probably understand what they really mean, when they say "Wikipedia isn't about justice."
What some folks here can't seem to wrap their minds around is the idea the majority of admins do all the boring stuff they do because they care about the project, not because it gives one an immense sense of power over others. There may be some who come into the job expecting it to be that way, but the shine wears off pretty fast.

They probably can wrap their heads around it, because in the case of handling unblock requests, it's just typically only a handful of Admins who do it. And what seems to define them, is not caring about the project. Because they quite happily bullshit people and abuse policy, locking talk page access at the slightest opportunity.

Caring about the project would mean that blocked users whose case isn't immediately obvious, are given every possible chance to overturn a wrongful block, beign treated with the utmost care and respect. Even if this proved to be seriously repetitive and in most cases pointless, they would want to do it.

The principle is the same in anti-vandalism Admin work. 99% of that work is the same, and trying to be nice and educate users and be cautious with your ban hammer, will ultimately be pointless. But there is a good reason why policy says this is how you show your care for the project.

A wrongfully blocked user who gets justice, probably turns into a highly productive and committed editor. A wrongfully blocked user who gets screwed over by 331dot, in a manner that seems to be all about 331dot abusing his power, well, they might turn into a real thorn in Wikipedia's side.

Beeblebrox doesn't appreciate any of this, because a) he's an utter prick, and b) he is too stupid to even know what it means to care about the project.

Post Reply