Anonymous escalated content dispute beyond imagination and outed sexual harassment allegations against Wikipedia admin

You can talk about anything related to Wikipedia criticism here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ognistysztorm
Sucks
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2022 1:39 am
Been thanked: 3 times

Anonymous escalated content dispute beyond imagination and outed sexual harassment allegations against Wikipedia admin

Post by Ognistysztorm » Wed Nov 09, 2022 1:48 am

Taiwan News reported that Anonymous escalated content dispute beyond imagination and outed sexual harassment allegations against Wikipedia admin.

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4703442 Anonymous hacked Chinese websites in response to supposed CCP inteference of a BLP article.

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4707834 Anonymous hacked UN, where they outed the allegations.

https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan ... 2003788129 Taipei Times

https://www.rfa.org/mandarin/Xinwen/6-1 ... 1737.html Radio Free Asia

https://news.cts.com.tw/cts/internation ... 5137.html Taiwanese TV report

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMd8dtcSX2A Again, contains comments from a Taiwanese government official

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhFyNsYE3lQ TVBS, one of the largest TV stations there


Brief background on Wikipediocracy regarding the edit conflict leading to this:
https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 16&t=12744

After Drmies became aware of these allegations, he pruned the concerning article further reeking of "retaliation":

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1120822092

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1120822209

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 561 times
Been thanked: 953 times

Re: Anonymous escalated content dispute beyond imagination and outed sexual harassment allegations against Wikipedia adm

Post by ericbarbour » Thu Nov 10, 2022 9:16 am

I certainly hope he makes more enemies, the little twit.

User avatar
boredbird
Sucks Mod
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:24 am
Has thanked: 386 times
Been thanked: 152 times

Re: Anonymous escalated content dispute beyond imagination and outed sexual harassment allegations against Wikipedia adm

Post by boredbird » Thu Nov 10, 2022 6:10 pm

Taiwan News wrote: On Page Two, the group cites a comment on Rate My Professors by a student of one of his classes who wrote "He [Drmies] sexually harasses his students (especially female ones) and is constantly vulgar, rude, and sexual in communications."
Especially female ones?

User avatar
Ognistysztorm
Sucks
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2022 1:39 am
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Anonymous escalated content dispute beyond imagination and outed sexual harassment allegations against Wikipedia adm

Post by Ognistysztorm » Thu Nov 10, 2022 6:14 pm

A hunch appeared that sexual harassment problems in Wikipedia could be more widespread than thought. How many more exactly is still not known.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 561 times
Been thanked: 953 times

Re: Anonymous escalated content dispute beyond imagination and outed sexual harassment allegations against Wikipedia adm

Post by ericbarbour » Fri Nov 11, 2022 1:29 am

Well....Rate my Professors is a shitty website to use or even to look at casually. But let us check what they're saying. (And yes, this is going a bit OT. I will drag it back to the original editwar shortly.)

https://www.ratemyprofessors.com/professor?tid=997791
He was a really bad professor. He was unclear on his assignments and expectations. The class was managed poorly. His interactions with students, especially women, were unprofessional to say the least. Avoid.
If it was possible to rate this professor less than a 1, I would. He is rude, vulgar, and condescending. He is never clear with his assignments or feedback. I know students have reported him for his behavior but nothing ever came of it. He really should not be teaching. Avoid.
Creeps on the girls in class, making them uncomfortable. Extreme far left, so don't be a centerist or you'll be marked down. Condescending and rude. AVOID
Dr. Aaij is by far the worst college professor I've ever had. In his responses to you, he is degrading & belittling. He wants you to have the same passion as him for Lit. He has expectations that are unclear & unreachable. Deducts significant points for minor mistakes. Would NEVER take a class with him again. A 4.0 student, & almost didn't pass.
He's both a terrible professor and terrible person overall. He sexually harasses his students (especially female ones) and is constantly vulgar, rude, and sexual in communications. One female student withdrew because he kept making comments about her body. He shouldn't be a professor, period, and I've never felt this way about anyone before.
took his online course and it was extremely difficult. Not clear on what he expected or what he qualified as good work. Takes off lots of points for the smallest of things. Very nitpicky and can come off as taunting/rude in emails. Came into his class with a 4.0 Gpa and an A in all classes but got my first C from him. WOULD NOT TAKE AGAIN.
He will be a hard professor but he WANTS his students to critically think/shape their own opinions based on their experiences with English. It is so important to attend class and ENGAGE with the course content. Any time you are confused about something, reach out and talk so you can work on your problems or at least get an idea of his expectations.
Kind of a bully. I worry about his mental health. He has tenure, so protected. A blemish on Auburn really. Not at all neutral, don't let him know you have conservative ideas he will pounce on you and degrade you in front of your peers. Stay away.
Dr. Aaij is the worst professor I have had, he is so inconsiderate when grading, I got an awful grade and was told to seek tutoring when I responded to a discussion board online, my writing was nothing worse than past classes which I have aced. I do not suggest taking him.
Expectations are unclear, deducts points heavily for disagreeing with his viewpoint. Heavily penalizes a lack of clairvoyance.
If you can help it take someone else. He kinda belittles, he'll ask you your answer & tell you how wrong you are like you're an idiot for not having a English professer type answer. He grades very hard so be careful with how you answer things. He is very too sexual when he speaks about the readings & he is always discussing gender, race & politics.
If you are conservative, don't let him know it. You wont pass. If this guy didn't have tenure, he'd likely already have been fired.
This guy is wicked smart; he speaks at least 3 languages (probably 5) and, while not a native English speaker, far outdistances your (and my)ability to craft an English sentence. Don't try to argue; try to learn. He is funny and fair. His tests are meant to challenge not to confuse, but they are difficult; make no mistake about that. Roll Tide.
I passed the class, but don't like him. Maybe if he just stuck to the curriculum it wouldn't be that bad. He's far left and is always trying to push his views on everyone. Trump won the election, deal with it! But yeah, as long as you pretend to agree with him as I did you'll pass the class.
The guy is a Grammarian by nature and by design. He has mastered at least two, but probably four languages--one of which is sarcasm. He is quick-witted and razor sharp. He expects you to read the syllabus and do your work; that is not unique. He will hold you accountable for the work. His tests are difficult--perhaps the most difficult in the dept
lol EVERY BIT AS DEPENDABLE AS WIKIPEDIA

That's going back to 2017--most reviews before that (all the way back to 2007) were favorable. He must be pissing off a lot of Gen Zers, I have to assume. It always amazed me that tenured professors (at least, at any schools that still do the tenure madness) can get away with literal murder AND incompetence, sometimes for decades, without being physically attacked. Since no sane person would trust the posts on Rate My Professors anyway, none of this amounts to an actual shit. But it DOES explain how he's reached the pinnacle of "Wikipedians" while being an abusive, arrogant, narcissistic jerkoff. Wikipedia often operates like a dysfunctional college department.

This is exactly the kind of garbage Anonymous nerds would post to defame someone they disliked. Or it could be honest and verifiable. We will never know for certain.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 561 times
Been thanked: 953 times

Re: Anonymous escalated content dispute beyond imagination and outed sexual harassment allegations against Wikipedia adm

Post by ericbarbour » Fri Nov 11, 2022 2:15 am

Now, back to the main subject--the squabble over the Cyber Anakin article.

Goddamn, it's still going on today. Started in May 2018 at 2700 bytes, IP addresses expanded to 7k-plus bytes. Started to grow AGAIN in early 2020. More IPs, plus Sideswipe9th, took it up to 25k bytes as of June of this year. At peak it looked like this. That is really NOT a bad article, if the bulk of the references are believable. But it still had the look of something Mr. Anakin and his hacker buddies would assemble to glorify him.

Then Softlemonades, a classic Wiki-Freak who only showed up in March of this year, started hacking at it. That is NOT a "good editor". He/Shit/whatever seems to have a weird relationship with anything to do with Anonymous or Wikileaks. Butchering content almost randomly.

Ognisty, old chap, I could have warned you that posting your long summary on Wikipediocracy was a waste of time. It is ACTUAL CRITICISM of Wikipedia, and they're already generally hostile to ACTUAL CRITICISM. Plus they have short attention spans and don't like tl:dr posts.

User avatar
Ognistysztorm
Sucks
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2022 1:39 am
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Anonymous escalated content dispute beyond imagination and outed sexual harassment allegations against Wikipedia adm

Post by Ognistysztorm » Fri Nov 11, 2022 5:00 am

ericbarbour wrote:
Fri Nov 11, 2022 2:15 am
Now, back to the main subject--the squabble over the Cyber Anakin article.

Goddamn, it's still going on today. Started in May 2018 at 2700 bytes, IP addresses expanded to 7k-plus bytes. Started to grow AGAIN in early 2020. More IPs, plus Sideswipe9th, took it up to 25k bytes as of June of this year. At peak it looked like this. That is really NOT a bad article, if the bulk of the references are believable. But it still had the look of something Mr. Anakin and his hacker buddies would assemble to glorify him.

Then Softlemonades, a classic Wiki-Freak who only showed up in March of this year, started hacking at it. That is NOT a "good editor". He/Shit/whatever seems to have a weird relationship with anything to do with Anonymous or Wikileaks. Butchering content almost randomly.

Ognisty, old chap, I could have warned you that posting your long summary on Wikipediocracy was a waste of time. It is ACTUAL CRITICISM of Wikipedia, and they're already generally hostile to ACTUAL CRITICISM. Plus they have short attention spans and don't like tl:dr posts.
I'm more amazed that nobody else has talked some sense into them yet, particularly as they had driven out the IP editors with policy thumping. Inmates running the asylum.

User avatar
Ognistysztorm
Sucks
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2022 1:39 am
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Anonymous escalated content dispute beyond imagination and outed sexual harassment allegations against Wikipedia adm

Post by Ognistysztorm » Mon Nov 28, 2022 6:55 am

ericbarbour wrote:
Fri Nov 11, 2022 2:15 am
Now, back to the main subject--the squabble over the Cyber Anakin article.

Goddamn, it's still going on today. Started in May 2018 at 2700 bytes, IP addresses expanded to 7k-plus bytes. Started to grow AGAIN in early 2020. More IPs, plus Sideswipe9th, took it up to 25k bytes as of June of this year. At peak it looked like this. That is really NOT a bad article, if the bulk of the references are believable. But it still had the look of something Mr. Anakin and his hacker buddies would assemble to glorify him.

Then Softlemonades, a classic Wiki-Freak who only showed up in March of this year, started hacking at it. That is NOT a "good editor". He/Shit/whatever seems to have a weird relationship with anything to do with Anonymous or Wikileaks. Butchering content almost randomly.

Ognisty, old chap, I could have warned you that posting your long summary on Wikipediocracy was a waste of time. It is ACTUAL CRITICISM of Wikipedia, and they're already generally hostile to ACTUAL CRITICISM. Plus they have short attention spans and don't like tl:dr posts.

As feared, the "bad editor" has initiated an AfD on the article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... omination)

The coincidental timing with the anti lockdown protests in China is very startling.

Post Reply