Discord

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

Re: Discord

Post by Graaf Statler » Tue Oct 15, 2019 8:47 pm

I think if Abd opens this forum he only see Juicy and Timmy boys there postings...... :roll:

User avatar
JuiceBeetle
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 681
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: Discord

Post by JuiceBeetle » Tue Oct 15, 2019 9:16 pm

And your nonsensical rants plaguing all the topics...

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

Re: Discord

Post by CrowsNest » Tue Oct 15, 2019 9:29 pm

JuiceBeetle wrote:And your nonsensical rants plaguing all the topics...
Do you know any other word but "rant"?

Not to get all native, but it at least implies more than a sentence, at the very least.

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

Re: Discord

Post by Graaf Statler » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:49 pm

Anyway, i have deleted my last message because that is simple not treu. Sweety is far from autistic and really my Sweety.

But for the rest I don't think a trolly Troll insulting Timmy, the IQ 200+ postings of Abd inclusing his [foe]s, our mystery princess of the shadow and darkness and all kind of gamers Discord talk will bring us closer together or will build strong new bridges. The only result till now is a even wider and wilder river between us.

I am really wondering what you guys on the other side of the river expect from this strange and insane whisper campaigns and a tree house with a oracle.

Hopping we will buy your crap? Seems to me very unlikely.

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

Re: Discord

Post by Graaf Statler » Tue Oct 29, 2019 8:25 pm

Abd, I had a look in vetting and I really don't get what you write here:
======================================================================================================================
Abd today 12:39
Rule 0: Whatever someone with a ban button says, don't do X or you will be banned, do X and expect to be banned. Rule of the Universe. Apparently your parents never explained this to you, Myself. Maybe it's about time you learned. This predates the invention of writing.


RhinosF today13:36
@Abd they can’t see that

Abd today om 14:00
yes, but anyone can show it to them. And if they are readmitted by a mod, they will be able to see it. See, Rhinos, I write for the future, not just for today. They also need to know, I'd suggest, that this server has 12 moderators, and any one of them can ban or unban. I find it remarkable that someone can be completely certain that they are right, that it is obvious and unchallengeable that they are right, yet not one person is willing to support their position and stand. It shows how deep our self-delusions can be. Or he actually knows better and it is all a joke and trolling. but then, the "tears" were pretend. this sucks six ways till Sunday. This is also for others. This server allows high freedom of self-expression, but there are limits, and people will tell you, here, when you are crossing limits. The first response will be mild, but if no attention is paid, it gets tougher. Pay attention to social reality! Don't be surprised if a community spits you out if you defy it.


======================================================================================================================
Rule number one: Kick every troll-DSM-5 sysops as hard as you can in his balls.
Rule number two: Trol him ten times more than he does you but read first the rules very, very carefully.
Rule number three: Don't break any rule yourself! Never! But let him break the rules as many times as posible.
Final: Complain, keep on complaining and at the end let him booted out because of breaking the rules time after time.

It is at simple as that, Abd. And much more effective than what you suggest. :D

But I really don't know if it is a rule of the Universe.:roll:

It seems you forget all the time I am raised by a partizan mammy. :mrgreen:

User avatar
Abd
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 749
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:22 pm
Has thanked: 72 times
Been thanked: 48 times

Re: Discord

Post by Abd » Sat Nov 02, 2019 12:59 am

This is long because I examine in detail a conversation that took place on the Discord, in the low-security Smithery channel. I cannot be expected to see Graaf Statler's responses here, because I have him on Ignore. ("Foes list"). Someone could perform a public service if

(1) I have misunderstood Statler and this commentary is unfair, or,
(2) Graaf is not understanding. Is there anyone he trusts who could explain this thing to him?

Graaf Statler wrote:Abd, I had a look in vetting and I really don't get what you write here:
Abd today 12:39
Rule 0: Whatever someone with a ban button says, don't do X or you will be banned, do X and expect to be banned. Rule of the Universe. Apparently your parents never explained this to you, Myself. Maybe it's about time you learned. This predates the invention of writing.

I.e., before written rules, which Graaf believes must be strictly followed, but completely neglects that societies interpret and enforce rules through agents authorized by the sovereign. The rules are as the agents interpret them, not as an alleged offender interprets them, and "ignorance of the law is no excuse." Which includes ignorance of the entire structure that enforces the law. (But sometimes ignorance will affect how a judge treats an offender. Ignorance that was not truly culpable may be forgiven, fines and sentences may be minimal and token, etc.)
RhinosF today13:36
@Abd they can’t see that

Abd today om 14:00
yes, but anyone can show it to them. And if they are readmitted by a mod, they will be able to see it. See, Rhinos, I write for the future, not just for today. They also need to know, I'd suggest, that this server has 12 moderators, and any one of them can ban or unban. I find it remarkable that someone can be completely certain that they are right, that it is obvious and unchallengeable that they are right, yet not one person is willing to support their position and stand. It shows how deep our self-delusions can be. Or he actually knows better and it is all a joke and trolling. but then, the "tears" were pretend. this sucks six ways till Sunday. This is also for others. This server allows high freedom of self-expression, but there are limits, and people will tell you, here, when you are crossing limits. The first response will be mild, but if no attention is paid, it gets tougher. Pay attention to social reality! Don't be surprised if a community spits you out if you defy it.

The Discord Owners, like the Owners of Sucks, are very patient and dislike banning anyone, but they will, when the necessity is obvious enough, and they also trust others with tools, and this has been going on for a very long time with human society. Most of the time, I have Statler on Ignore here, because of the very low value of reading his comments, in my opinion. But I looked at this one as the latest in this thread on the Wikipiocracy Discord server. I've now been given additional tools by the Owner. But I am not quick to use tools, and I consult the community first, and I've always done that, except where actions could be easily reversed. (Most wikis are like that, but delete material on that server, and it's gone. Same here, by the way. Poor design, there should be a "hide" tool that works like deletion except mods can still see it and recover it, provide copies to the author. I.e., nice stuff that makes deletion less offensive.)

Myself has some very strange ideas about human society, and even about his own country, and legal process there. Further, his understanding of what others write is extremely poor, so he "refutes" comments when what he is refuting, furiously, is his own imagination. He refers to DSM-5, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, but I don't think he knows much about it. He uses it as an insult, which is insane, and I'm sure a classification could exist there for this!

What has become obvious is that Statler is set off by anyone showing that he's spouting nonsense. He then embarks on a crusade against such fascist propaganda.
Rule number one: Kick every troll-DSM-5 sysops as hard as you can in his balls.
And if the sysop is a woman? Graaf is stuck in the 20th century. And aggressive.
Rule number two: Trol him ten times more than he does you but read first the rules very, very carefully.
Graaf is rule-obsessed. Wikipedia is explicitly not rule-bound. (WP:IAR)\. But what he is declaring as a practice would, if discovered, and by the guidelines, get him promptly and reliably banned.

Neither does much of human society operate through strict, literal rules. He thinks of rules as rigid things. In fact, rules are always subject to interpretation, and police and judges -- and wiki and forum and discord administrators and moderators -- have discretion, and Statler's latest rants have been about this. I'll get to that below.

Rule number three: Don't break any rule yourself! Never! But let him break the rules as many times as posible.

Now, there is a real strategy here. However, he's totally missed something. If an officer is acting according to the intention of the rules and public welfare, that is, what is behind the rules, they will not be sanctioned just because a troll -- and Statler is describing trolling -- thinks they broke a rule, and if he keeps claiming that they are breaking rules, and violates warnings from moderators, there is no rule preventing a moderator from blocking them. Statler apparently believes that moderator powers are only what are mentioned in the rules (which is nothing, here) and that the only behavior which is prohibited is what is explicitly prohibited in the Rules. Therefore, in his world, he can do whatever he pleases and a moderator cannot do anything about it. Which is insanity.

Yes, it is possible to troll an administrator into violating a clear rule, and, yes, I did it once on Wikipedia, and the person was desysopped. But not only was that a very rare action, if I had repeated this behavior, I'd simply have been banned much sooner than I was. What I did was to call his bluff, as to something he had prohibited that was not any violation of policy or guidelines, where he threatened that if I did X, which was completely harmless, he would prove that he would enforce what he declared, in a context where his right to do that was before the Arbitration Committee. He blocked me in the middle of a case over his right to ban. This demonstrated that he was a clueless idiot, in spite of being an actual scientist. I pushed his button with an obviously harmless edit, I went to bed, he blocked, and when I looked at Wikipedia in the morning, all hell had broken loose and the Committee was considering emergency desysop. Predictable.

And as a result of the whole sequence, he was indeed desysopped in the final decision. And I was site-banned for three months, and more. They shoot the messenger. And that's what happens when you defy people with the tools. I do not fill up fora whining about what happened. I set it up and I take responsibility for it, and the sequence demonstrated things about Wikipedia that I sought to demonstrate.

Final: Complain, keep on complaining and at the end let him booted out because of breaking the rules time after time.
It's very rare and it doesn't happen because of some user continually complaining. The usual consequence of that is that the user is banned, that is what is actually reliable. Letting oneself be a visible target of abuse is a reasonable tactic, but continual complaint is not a part of that. It has the opposite effect.

It is at simple as that, Abd. And much more effective than what you suggest. :D
What I suggested was not a method for reaching a goal, it was a method of avoiding being blocked if that's not what one wants. This is common for Graaf: he imagines he is being told what to do. In fact, he is being told the natural consequence of his behavior. And that has been shown many times.

But I really don't know if it is a rule of the Universe.:roll:
It's a law of human society, everywhere and for as long as I know about. It's tribal law and it continues with more structured societies. I do know, and whatever Graaf does not understand, he shows contempt for. That has its own consequences.

It seems you forget all the time I am raised by a partizan mammy. :mrgreen:
I have forgotten nothing. Graaf, though, is fighting against ghosts, creations of his imagination, whereas his mother actually fought real Nazis.

Graaf many times has claimed that Dutch law is very, very strict, and he was repeating this ad nauseum on the Discord server,

Myself [Graaf Statler]:Name it as you want, it is our realety. In Holland you can start with a traffic ticket you can't pay and up in prison.
Myself:With 50.000 euro debt.

So I mentioned a case in the U.S., actually it was for a parking citation. The judge sentenced me to two hours in jail, and I ended up getting ice cream (at a point where I was living in my car and had very little money, it was a special treat.) I was simply pointing out that judges do not necessarily "throw the book" at violators, and this is true all over the world. I was not claiming that a judge would necessarily be lenient. Judicial discretion can cut both ways.
Holland you don't end up with two hours, Abd. People have end up on the street for a small fine they didn't pay.and sorry, no ice cream.
[6:33 PM]Myself:I have a link for you......
[6:34 PM]Myself:https://www.nationaleombudsman.nl/dossier/dossier-schulden

So I looked at that. Chrome automatically translates pages for me, and this had nothing to do with the question being discussed, which has often been the case with "evidence" that Graaf cites. It's about the national ombudsman, as the link implies.

I replied
Discretion of the judge, always. And I'm sure that's true in Holland. If not so, remind me to never cross that border. The ice cream came from another inmate who was being transferred, moved to my cell in holding -- for such a short term they did not want to put me in the main population -- and he had ordered all this ice cream and couldn't take it with him. Hence. . . Another time I was sentenced to a day for not being able to pay a modest traffic fine, and told to wait in the jury box while he threw the book at a series of people who made excuses. And then the bailiff came up and asked me a question, went back to the judge's chambers, and then the judge came out and told me, "You can go. And if you do things like that, you will never have trouble in your life." What I notice is that nobody has asked what I did. It's a big piece of my life story. Apparently people are not interested in a Get Out of Jail Free Card, especially Graaf who has a completely one-track mind, it can be summarized as "I am right and everyone else but a few friends -- who are not here and are not saying anything -- are wrong."

Graaf replied:
Myself:Abd, I am talking about HOLLAND!!!!!
[6:38 PM]Myself:Read the link!

and I had read the link. I responded:
So, now, I turn off Myself as to my seeing his raving personally. The link he provided was a complete waste of time. I did read it. Completely irrelevant. I'm sure that judges also have discretion in Holland. Hence I reduced the temptation to waste more time.

Graaf continued to rant:
[6:42 PM]Myself:A judge has no freedom, he MUST follow the law, Always!
[6:43 PM]Myself:Dysk knows this, that is the reason he say I am right. He is a lawyer, Abd.
[6:44 PM]Myself:"I'm sure that judges also have discretion in Holland."
[6:45 PM]Myself:NO! if something is a law never!
[6:46 PM]Myself:You simple know NOTHING about the European legal system. Really nothing Abd! It is complete bullshit you try to sell here!

And so I looked up "judicial discretion in the Netherlands, and replied (now addressing the Discord community, not him.)
Ah, Myself was fully FOS. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20639821?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. It's like he's talking about a different country. Utterly and completely misleading. Ignorant and highly opinionated, trolling, or insane. Take your pick, I have no crystal ball. I have seen some indications of all three, but that's certainly not proof. Still, this judicial discretion thing is ample to show that he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, about his own home nation.

From that paper:
One of the striking peculiarities of the Dutch criminal justice situation is the wide discretionary power of the judiciary with regard to sentencing. The judge may sentence at her discretion as long as she takes into consideration the severity of the offense, the circumstances under which the offense has been committed, and the personal and social background of the offender.

Dysk does appear to be a lawyer, though the exact situation is unclear. I have never had a disagreement with Dysk about law. And Dysk has not said that Graaf is "right" on this issue.

In another case that Statler often mentions, a teenage kid used a copyrighted photo and was found liable for a large fine. That may not be typical, perhaps, and Statler had no information about the ultimate outcome. The circumstances there were that the kid owned a blog and used a photo without realizing it was copyrighted. Statler was claiming that a teenage Wikipidian might end up "decades later" with a big fine. Different circumstances, no test case known, just Statler's legal theories. Yes, it is not impossible, but how likely is it?

In the case he described, that of the teenager and copyvio, the penalty appears to have been widely seen as unfair, indicating that this could be discretion at the high end. Unlike what Statler has been claiming, drastic penalties may be unlikely. More likely, reasonable and fair ones, considering the circumstances. Someone who is creating an article for Wikipedia, who will not profit from it, and where this is really just a proposal, with many others looking at it and sharing possible responsibility, is very different from the situation of that kid. For starters, most wiki users are anonymous, and penetrating the veil of anonymity "decades later" is very unlikely.

Statler went on to claim, with a barrage of messages, that I was lying, attempting to deceive, and proof of everything wrong with Wikipedia, which is just plain bizarre.

I am continuing to keep Statler on Ignore, which means that I will not see most of his ravings. But if someone quotes him, I will see it, I have very, very few people on Ignore. (Foes list, here). If anyone has any question relating to this or anything I write, ask me! I've simply made a choice that the probability is great that I'm better off not reading his material.

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

Re: Discord

Post by Graaf Statler » Sat Nov 02, 2019 1:23 am

Abd, just a simple question. Don't you still doesn't understand why WMF has booted you out?

You are talking as if you where you a Dutch legal expert, but in fact you are a Google prins living in a total different country with a total different legal system. You have not even the slightest idea where you are talking about, but still you have a extreem strong opinion.

And nothing helps. Despite Whaledad has asked the advice of a legal expert in his function as a Arb, Abd is a better Dutch legal expert.
Abd with google and Google translate is a Google professor, the best of this world.. And if you give a link what matters it is a uninteresting link. Because it doesn't fit in Abd's mind setting. Or the lawyer is a prutser, Abd had done it much better.

he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground, about his own home nation.


No Abd, even Dutch lawyers don't, only you know about Holland. But you know, in general Dutch people don't know anything about there own country. And do you know who else have not even a clou? Dutch judges.

User avatar
Carrite
Sucks Critic
Posts: 376
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2018 3:59 am
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Discord

Post by Carrite » Sat Nov 02, 2019 2:29 am

CrowsNest wrote:
JuiceBeetle wrote:And your nonsensical rants plaguing all the topics...
Do you know any other word but "rant"?

Not to get all native, but it at least implies more than a sentence, at the very least.



"Bizarre psychotic monologues?"

"Illiterate blatherings?"

"Epithet-sputtering paranoid rages?"

"Unmedicated episodes of Tourrette's spew?"

"Diseased splatterings of inanity and venom?"

"Tedious dumpings of intellectual dung?"

It does indeed seem that "rants" is inadequate for the simpleton bilge that Sancho is infllcting upon those unfortunate enough not to have foe-ed him...

RfB

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Discord

Post by ericbarbour » Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:20 am

Carrite wrote:"Bizarre psychotic monologues?"

"Illiterate blatherings?"

"Epithet-sputtering paranoid rages?"

"Unmedicated episodes of Tourrette's spew?"

"Diseased splatterings of inanity and venom?"

"Tedious dumpings of intellectual dung?"

YOU'RE THE EXPERT!

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

Re: Discord

Post by Graaf Statler » Sat Nov 02, 2019 9:08 am

Unmedicated episodes of Tourrette's spew, Timmy? :roll:

Post Reply