Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

You can talk about anything related to Wikipedia criticism here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

Post by Graaf Statler » Wed May 29, 2019 8:52 pm

BURob13 wrote:Hey Vig, I'm surprised you haven't commented on all the "YOUUUUU" declarations in Graaf's opening post on that site. He's legitimately talking like an old-timey movie villain. They're bolded and everything!

I don't think we ever get a answer of Vigilant, Rob. Because the high educated Vig is making form the first moment on the mistake I am Dutch, living in Holland and was a editor on the Dutch WP. And, because there is a server in Haarlem, Holland I am dealing with the Dutch jurisdiction. Abd is a American living in America and was a editor on the English WP, so he is under the American jurisdiction. But Vig is now for weeks and weeks making some crazy legal spaghetti of the Lomax law case where I have nothing to do with, I am just Dutch WP user how is only watching what will happend.

And that is because the brave Viligiant a total idiot is with a massive mental defect himself. I have nothing do with the Lomax law case, that man is complete crazy! Nothing, total nothing. It is a American law case and I am Dutch! Why doesn't he start to interfere a Chinese SanFanBan winner from Taiwan because that would be the same. I didn't start a law case, I have never claimed that.

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

Post by Graaf Statler » Wed May 29, 2019 11:08 pm

So in short,

So, you claim that a District Court judge, in a civil case in Massachusetts, will refer criminal charges against me, presumably to the California District Attorney(?)


NO, FUCKING AUTISTIC STUPIDE SHITHEAD, I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT OR CLAIMED THAT! I HAVE NO IDEA HOW YOU CAME TO THIS CONCLUSION AND IN GENERAL YOU ARE A COMPLETE FOOL!
Because, how for the hell could I witness for a user of the English Wikiuniversity as a Dutchman who was only active on the Dutch wiki projects?
YOU ARE IN GENERAL A COMPLETE WIKIIDIOT WHO IS JUST TALKING LOUD, OR BETTER IS SCREAMING OUT OF HIS WRONG END!



And have a nice day.

User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

Post by CrowsNest » Thu May 30, 2019 1:43 am

BU_Rob13 wrote:The published list of global bans is there so that people know to report instances of those editors popping up to the WMF.
Um, how about no? The only way this supposed purpose even makes sense is if the user coming back announces who they are. We can put aside the fact that unless you have CU data you obviously can't know if they are really them or an impersonator, because they would be blocked regardless. Wikipedia already has a facility for achieving this (rather pointless) functionality of letting the villagers know that if some dude claiming to be Kumioko turns up they need to be reported to the WMF (because of the threat to children), it is called a standard block (which encompasses the standard ban). Unlike a global ban, they are not compiled in a public list, nor are they applied for "no reason at all".

This would probably be a good time to note that the English Wikipedia community did eventually decide to delete its public list of users banned from the site for precisely the reason that it served no 'alert system' type purpose that looking up their individual status did not, and keeping such a public list in fact carried significant BLP issues.

Wikipedia of course keeps public records of so called 'long term abuse' cases, but it is the very fact these only exist as a means of comparing the known reasons why they were banned for the benefit of those looking out for returners, and typically in the far more useful scenario where they don't say, 'oh hay guys, it's me, banned user so and so'.

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

Can you believe this genius was on their Arbitration Committee?

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

Post by Graaf Statler » Thu May 30, 2019 7:55 am

CrowsNest wrote:
BU_Rob13 wrote:Can you believe this genius was on their Arbitration Committee?

O yeh. After I have seen what for complete lunatics are chosen in all those years in the Dutch Arbitration committee nothing surprise me anymore. And the best example of a high quality Arb is of course our Dutch pride, Drmies aka Natuur12.
Both a populair Arb in the English arbcom committee and the Dutch. The best and most genius troll how I have ever, ever seen and that is of course a great combination with Arb's like our Rob.

And I am still wonder what kind of high quality paddo's they are selling there in LA, because our friend Vig is still digging in my private live. Very strange he is now talking about "gainful employment" because in that same rapport is written I am running my one business. From 1991 on, and for me should a law cause in Holland just been two cups of coffee. A law cause in Holland is not very expensive and we have seen what Abd till now have reached till now with his 400 dollar. Money what some good soul has paid him back.

I only said at moment I am not involved in any law case at the moment, but who knows what the future will bring us. And a European law case about that SanFanBan, well that will be the real thing guy's! Because deformation is a crime in Holland, so we will end up before a criminal court! That would be fun! WMF in front of a Dutch criminal court! Without any protection of article 230! Under Dutch jurisdiction! That would be firework!

And for the rest, mind your own buisnes, Vig.

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

Post by Graaf Statler » Thu May 30, 2019 9:13 am

https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 00#p238260

WWHP wrote:The mistake I made was trusting Wikipedia, and that's where I find my problem, not in the trolls who are predicted to abuse it.

I'm here on this thread because it has to do with the Smith case and Abd, and since I publish a five-year case study into MediaWiki abuse, I assume that there would naturally be some like-minded folks at Wikipediocracy, which also critiques MediaWiki abuses.

What are you doing here?

This is indeed the tricky part of Wikipedia, it looks so solide. A foundation, even De Erasmusprijs out of the hands of our king, the founder got a honorary doctorate together with Timmermans in that time, they have a office with a director and staf in Utrecht, they cooperate with established institutions like UNISEF and Het Nationaal archief, it looks all very trustworthy. Also if you read the welcome pages, there is even a book written by Lodewijk what you can order how to edit wikipedia, it looks all so solide. BUT!

But if you have a closer look behind that facade you find slowly slowly out what is Wikipedia really is...... and than it is to late, you have been sucked into the wiki swamp.
Wikipedia is a a cesspit with sewers in every direction with desperate people in it locked up in a Hotel in California who have to lie till they die. Who are bluffing and bluffing in what is in fact the biggest pyramide game out of the history .

Wikipedia is a gift of the devil and all that money they have collected are the treasures of King Midas. The old story of Faust, the greed, the temptations, the devil himself.

And now there is a muslim, Abd, a orthodox christian with jewish roots, me, Statler, People of the Book, two very eccentric older gentleman.
Should it be a part of this strange wiki adventure? With even Tolkien in the house?
Well, that is a big responsibility, because a good reader understands the two of us have now the nuclear key in our hand........ Are the both of us the ones who can stop the brooms who have gone crazy where Jimmy is hoping for?

We will see....


User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4594
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1141 times
Been thanked: 1834 times

Re: Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

Post by ericbarbour » Thu May 30, 2019 9:14 pm

Yeah, that's a shitty thread.

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... =8&t=10205

Rome really should not try to engage with them. Vigilant is going "full retard" here, and as usual, it's not even "lulzy", much less informative.

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

Post by Graaf Statler » Thu May 30, 2019 11:24 pm

Yeh, better not to be there.

Smiley wrote:An apt metaphor for Wikipedia, although I imagine the staff at Bedlam cared more about the inmates.


The whole problem is Wikipedia and because of that Wikipediocrazy change indeed slowly in a digital Bedlam, a mental hospital. Because the only ones who like it there and still believe in there mission are the guys with a massive mental defect. I said it before, if there was some wiki panacee for wikipedia for sure WMF had used that years ago. But there is non, we are looking in the basement of a digital nuclear power plant what is running out of control. A kind of digital Tsjernobyl where the only staf what is still there a bunch of total lunatics is who simple doesn't understand what is going on is. The rest of the staff has run away, so the complete lunatics has taken over the command.
It is just waiting for the big boom and the mushroom if it goes on in this way. These people can't solve the problems, they even don't see them.
They are mental handicapped, you can't blame them.

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

Post by Graaf Statler » Fri May 31, 2019 10:21 am

TDA posted this link on Discord. Crow had found him.
"In addition, I'd like to include this statement from User:Jimbo Wales at Wikimania 2014 "A lot of users cost more than they're worth, and they should be encouraged to leave, and not in a bad way. One of the things I've always believed is letting people walk away with dignity. We don't have to shame them and scream at them and make them leave and then they're sad and annoyed and then they make sock puppets and then they come back and harass us for years."video This list does not allow people to walk away with dignity. This list causes more problems than it solves. WormTT(talk) 08:16, 17 September 2014 (UTC)"
This list causes more problems than it solves. What is clear. The autism and other metal defects of most wikipedians makes it for them impossible to oversee the consequences of there behaving.They simple are not able to understand those users on such a list return anyway, but that time with a digital axe in there hand and are now standing with there digital axes digital before the counter of WMF headquarters. Where is the staf and the director? Because want to have a little chat with them, see you in court.

Well, from one ex-staff member is it clear where he is, James.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/haleoluau?src=hash

He is lying with his nuts in the sand on Hawaii.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4594
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1141 times
Been thanked: 1834 times

Re: Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

Post by ericbarbour » Fri May 31, 2019 8:48 pm

Graaf Statler wrote:Well, from one ex-staff member is it clear where he is, James.
https://twitter.com/hashtag/haleoluau?src=hash
He is lying with his nuts in the sand on Hawaii.

Twitter is obv. paying him better.

Oh btw, here's "Vigilant" and others squabbling on Reddit's r/wikiinaction

https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c ... d_his_own/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c ... me_and_my/

Uh, gentlemen......this is a waste of time.....

User avatar
Graaf Statler
Side Troll
Posts: 3996
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 4:20 pm

Re: Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al

Post by Graaf Statler » Wed Jun 05, 2019 9:11 am

ericbarbour wrote:Uh, gentlemen......this is a waste of time.....

Yes, you are right. It is getting more rediciles by the day.

rhindle wrote:He is crowdsourcing legal advice. It is illegal to give legal if you are not a licensed attorney. I guess this thread could have some legal advice in it but it's more of an awareness of reality rather than giving any advice.

A typical wikipedian from the project where every opinion is valuable and counts.......

Post Reply