Beeblebrox stands for reelection to ArbCom
Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2021 1:56 am
.
BADSITEBADSITEBADSITE
https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/
https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=2277
I'm mildly amused that William s insisting that describing an edit as obnoxious is appallingly egregious behavior not befitting an admin. Obviously I do not agree, I described an edit, not a person.... Beeblebrox (talk) 20:12, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
....and thinks, gee, he's exactly what we need on the body tasked with showing exemplary behaviour, by edict and example.It's troubling that you are apparently unable to see the obvious direction this discussion is going in, and that you seem unable to grasp the equally obvious distinction between criticizing an edit and criticizing an editor. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:40, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
I see two possibilities here. Either Beeblebrox is grossly mischarcterising the strength/substance of opposing arguments, which should be a good enough reason for anyone to not want him anywhere near ArbCom, or he is such an absolute incompetent that he genuinely doesn't know, as one of Wikipedia's allegedly highest functioning functionaries, how to approach a situation where perfectly sensible and indeed urgently required policy changes are beign frustrated by absurd arguments.I've been banging my head on this particular wall for years, progress has been painfully slow. I wrote the five-year rule (if you get desysopped for inactivity and did not use admin tools in the five years proceeding that, you have to go back to RFA to get tools back) to see if it was even possible to make the tiniest change to the policy, and turns out it was, if you aim low. Every single time we see the mysterious argument that that there are these mythical admins who are doing admin work, but somehow only in invisible ways that are never logged, for years at a time, and they totally exist, there may be upwards of two of them so we can't change the rules. I support any effort to make the rules more reasonable than the laughably low standard we have now, but if you're going to go there, come correct or don't come at all. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
I still don't get why a person would go through our list of admins, find the ones who are inactive, hack their password, all to post a racist comment that was detected pretty much immediately and reverted and then the admin account was blocked. Seems like an awful lot of legwork for temporary vandalism. We're lucky that they were so clumsy. Liz Read! Talk! 21:47, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
@Liz: being unable to comprehend why trolls do the things they do is a sure sign that your brain is in good working order. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:26, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
What a fucking dickhead.Either they didn't know or they didn't care, since as far as we can be ascertained they did not use the tools. Indeed, one does wonder why they bothered. This clearly wasn't some "white hat" hack aimed at pointing out security flaws. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:51, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
What a pathetic worm.I'm not going to dignify half-baked loaded questions not posted on the question page with answers post-election. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:51, 7 December 2021 (UTC)