Kompowiec2 WMF Banned
-
- Sucks Mod
- Posts: 860
- Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 11:54 pm
- Has thanked: 43 times
- Been thanked: 177 times
Kompowiec2 WMF Banned
It looks like the WMF just banned another editor. This time it was Kompowiec2 who only had 7,059 so the WMF is sticking to their policy of only banning people with low edit counts and no support structure.
It looks like this fellow was already banned by the EnWP arbcom back in 10 February 2014. They've done some editing on Commons as recently as July 2019 but I don't see anything obvious that shows what they did to get banned.
Here is the URL: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Kompowiec2
It looks like this fellow was already banned by the EnWP arbcom back in 10 February 2014. They've done some editing on Commons as recently as July 2019 but I don't see anything obvious that shows what they did to get banned.
Here is the URL: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Kompowiec2
#BbbGate
-
- Sucks Warrior
- Posts: 749
- Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:22 pm
- Has thanked: 72 times
- Been thanked: 48 times
Re: Kompowiec2 WMF Banned
I approved this post, but the speculation is thin. "How to practice child love" is the title of a book (or computer file) that has appeared in many news stories, and many Wikipedians will start articles about something they see in the news. The page in question, "History of Child Pornography" is archived on archive.org, could indicate a possible special interest in child porn, however, all we know here is that the editor touched that page, we do not know the author of the page. The words "Black Cat" and "David Hamilton" occur in the article, and it is possible that the disambig was legit, the user may have seen the page in Recent changes. However: 07:25, 10 February 2014 JzG deleted page History of Child Pornography (Unreferenced apologia for child pornography). This is quite unusual as to deletion policy. The page was indeed unreferenced, but that's not normally enough for instant deletion. If the page was offensive, simply deleting it with nothing more would be odd. He also deleted the Talk page. Essentially, the editor who created the page was hidden by JzG.
Any admin could find out.
Nevertheless, I find this in the end: The user was blocked the same day as the article was deleted, at 08:24, 10 February 2014, with ArbCom appeal necessary. This has the appearance of a Child Protection action. The user continued to be active globally and on Commons, but I saw no sign of child porn interest there. Of course, I might have missed something.
Any admin could find out.
Nevertheless, I find this in the end: The user was blocked the same day as the article was deleted, at 08:24, 10 February 2014, with ArbCom appeal necessary. This has the appearance of a Child Protection action. The user continued to be active globally and on Commons, but I saw no sign of child porn interest there. Of course, I might have missed something.
-
- Sucks Mod
- Posts: 500
- Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:24 am
- Has thanked: 635 times
- Been thanked: 286 times
Re: Kompowiec2 WMF Banned
Complaints about Kompowiec2 and several other alleged Wikipedia pedophiles came pouring into Trust and Safety following their ban of Fram.Kumioko wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:00 amIt looks like the WMF just banned another editor. This time it was Kompowiec2 who only had 7,059 so the WMF is sticking to their policy of only banning people with low edit counts and no support structure.
It looks like this fellow was already banned by the EnWP arbcom back in 10 February 2014. They've done some editing on Commons as recently as July 2019 but I don't see anything obvious that shows what they did to get banned.
Here is the URL: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special ... Kompowiec2
-
- Sucks Warrior
- Posts: 681
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:27 pm
- Has thanked: 15 times
- Been thanked: 45 times
-
- Sucks Warrior
- Posts: 749
- Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:22 pm
- Has thanked: 72 times
- Been thanked: 48 times
Re: Kompowiec2 WMF Banned
Obviously I don't know, but I wondered the same, and because T&S complaints are confidential, this is looking like a complainer telling the story. I have no idea whether Kompoiec2 is or was a pedophile, but I do know that, on occasion, people have been attacked as such when they weren't. It's a cracker-jack accusation, gets people quite riled up, who are not necessarily careful about, you know, evidence and a showing of present risk.
(And boredbird here may simply be repeating a rumor, etc. However, repeating rumors without providing qualification -- such as where the rumor was heard -- is irresponsible. Boredbird stated it as a fact.)
(And boredbird here may simply be repeating a rumor, etc. However, repeating rumors without providing qualification -- such as where the rumor was heard -- is irresponsible. Boredbird stated it as a fact.)
-
- Sucks Warrior
- Posts: 681
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:27 pm
- Has thanked: 15 times
- Been thanked: 45 times
Re: Kompowiec2 WMF Banned
On WPO there is a thread for pedos, where Katie wrote she made a report to T&S and there was no answer for a month. As someone who does not know those editors it seemed to me that the issues were many years old and current editing patterns were not a clear issue or not an issue at all. That case imho was not a serious issue, although the T&S handling was lackluster, as usual.
The rumor might come from there, but I wonder if there is anything more substantial, that BoredBird is aware of and willing to share.
Note: I don't mind if it's a rumor if that's made clear, or the sources linked so we can check the reliability of the claims. Please don't blame BoredBird: responsibility is not a value that is commonly found in wikipedia culture.
-
- Sucks Warrior
- Posts: 749
- Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:22 pm
- Has thanked: 72 times
- Been thanked: 48 times
Re: Kompowiec2 WMF Banned
That does not establish what boredbird reported, as JuiceBeetle points out.JuiceBeetle wrote: ↑Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:15 amOn WPO there is a thread for pedos, where Katie wrote she made a report to T&S and there was no answer for a month. As someone who does not know those editors it seemed to me that the issues were many years old and current editing patterns were not a clear issue or not an issue at all. That case imho was not a serious issue, although the T&S handling was lackluster, as usual.
(1) "Blame" is not a reality in my ontology. As a story, an interpretation, it is generally useless for mature adults.The rumor might come from there, but I wonder if there is anything more substantial, that BoredBird is aware of and willing to share.
Note: I don't mind if it's a rumor if that's made clear, or the sources linked so we can check the reliability of the claims. Please don't blame BoredBird: responsibility is not a value that is commonly found in wikipedia culture.
(2) Responsibility is also an interpretation, but quite a useful one. Those with no responsibility have no power. They go together. Yes, the wiki was a device for avoiding personal responsibility, and this, then, quite well explains what the founder of Wikiversity called "Wikipedia Disease."
On WPO, this is the thread mentioned. It is in a member-only area. I objected to the kind of speculation found in that thread, by Katie, and that is why I was banned from WPO (in 2014, as I recall).
From what is shown there, it appears that the editor in question was 15 when blocked from en.wiki. An interest in the topics is not abnormal from a male of that age, and none of that establishes the person as a "pedophile," but the word is used very, very loosely in popular speech and among Wikipedians. Going after children as pedophiles. Way to go, guys, and this is all part of the story of how Wikipedia criticism falls into the gutter.
I'm far more interested in how BrillLyle came to be banned. Seems she was a whistle-blower. Still active, posted today on WPO.
-
- 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: Kompowiec2 WMF Banned
This is typical JzG. You've seen all the material from the book wiki, so you know how stupid and sloppy and irrational Guy can be. Calling him a "mature adult" is not really recommended. There are some "mature adults" in the WP gang, but I suspect they have always been in the minority. If anything, since 2010 it has gotten worse/more juvenile.Abd wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2019 1:05 amHowever: 07:25, 10 February 2014 JzG deleted page History of Child Pornography (Unreferenced apologia for child pornography). This is quite unusual as to deletion policy. The page was indeed unreferenced, but that's not normally enough for instant deletion. If the page was offensive, simply deleting it with nothing more would be odd. He also deleted the Talk page. Essentially, the editor who created the page was hidden by JzG.
Get used to their erratic methods of dealing with anything related to "child love". Editing by pedophiles goes back to 2003 at least and will always be one of their important problems.
And if I may, it is my worthless opinion that "Trust and Safety" is a joke operation. Every one of the insiders who performed that duty in the past (notably Cary Bass, Godwin, Beaudette, Alexander) was prone to censorship, silencing criticism, weirdness and general paranoia. Do NOT expect T&S to actually do their "job" properly. But that's only my shitty opinion.
(PS: looked at Kompowiec2's history. He's obviously a Polish "brogrammer" type. His edit histories in various WPs and Wikibooks (most of his edits were on pl.wikibooks.org) appears rather innocuous. There are some spam reports referencing his en-WP account. The only clues are those comments on his talkpage. It appears that the histories have been heavily censored. Otherwise I can find no clear reason for the WMF to "sanfranban" him. Other than "maybe" writing something about "child love".)