I dare any of you to explain this
-
ericbarbour
- Sucks Admin
- Posts: 5136
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
- Location: The ass-tral plane
- Has thanked: 1371 times
- Been thanked: 2115 times
-
The End
- Sucks Fan
- Posts: 245
- Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:45 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: I dare any of you to explain this
Looks like a bot or a very focused editor. 
"In the long run, volunteers are the most expensive workers you'll ever have." -Red Green
"I am a dark bouquet of neuroses..."
- Jerry Holkins, Penny Arcade
"I am a dark bouquet of neuroses..."
- Jerry Holkins, Penny Arcade
Re: I dare any of you to explain this
These days, an account making a stream trivial but good edits will most likely be trying to mature itself to break 500/30 protection. That's obviously not this guy's reason though (he did recently break the 500 barrier, but it's taken him 11 months to do so). As such, he has just been granted the ExtendedConfirmed user right automatically.
My best guess is that it is an established Wikipediot, probably an admin, having a little holiday doing mindless grunt work, to destress. The focus on political articles suggests that is his main area, so obviously a stressful life for his main account.
Wikipedians are addicts, so of course if they're not at crisis point, they can't simply destress by taking a complete break, that would just make them feel worse. Sweating, fidgeting, distraction, it would ruin their time at the beach. Even while not nominally doing whatever it is they normally do to get their buzz, they still need that hit of dopamine and the comforting presence of the edit window in their lives.
Hilariously, despite doing nothing but mindless little changes on what his fellow addicts should instantly see is a holiday account, he's still been hassled by template nazis twice, once to remind him to use edit summaries (not a requirement), and a ridiculous Discretionary Sanctions Notification, which is not meant to be issued to anyone who merely breathes on a politics article.
They also got an ArbCom election advertisement. It says a lot that this guy is eligible under the technical requirements, but their vote would be worthless in the election, since it would either be a sock vote or a vote by someone who has no business voting. You might as well let a dog vote, for all the sense it makes.
Crucially, not one person has simply posted a human sounding message, enquiring what's up? A non-judgemental query to ask if this his only Wikipedia account, and if not, why he isn't complying with policy to link it to his main account.
Because that's the hilarious thing here - it is pretty obvious this is an undeclared alternate account. They're obviously aware of it, they just haven't bothered to do anything that would protect Wikipedia or potentially catch an admin red handed violating one of their most sacred rules.
My best guess is that it is an established Wikipediot, probably an admin, having a little holiday doing mindless grunt work, to destress. The focus on political articles suggests that is his main area, so obviously a stressful life for his main account.
Wikipedians are addicts, so of course if they're not at crisis point, they can't simply destress by taking a complete break, that would just make them feel worse. Sweating, fidgeting, distraction, it would ruin their time at the beach. Even while not nominally doing whatever it is they normally do to get their buzz, they still need that hit of dopamine and the comforting presence of the edit window in their lives.
Hilariously, despite doing nothing but mindless little changes on what his fellow addicts should instantly see is a holiday account, he's still been hassled by template nazis twice, once to remind him to use edit summaries (not a requirement), and a ridiculous Discretionary Sanctions Notification, which is not meant to be issued to anyone who merely breathes on a politics article.
They also got an ArbCom election advertisement. It says a lot that this guy is eligible under the technical requirements, but their vote would be worthless in the election, since it would either be a sock vote or a vote by someone who has no business voting. You might as well let a dog vote, for all the sense it makes.
Crucially, not one person has simply posted a human sounding message, enquiring what's up? A non-judgemental query to ask if this his only Wikipedia account, and if not, why he isn't complying with policy to link it to his main account.
Because that's the hilarious thing here - it is pretty obvious this is an undeclared alternate account. They're obviously aware of it, they just haven't bothered to do anything that would protect Wikipedia or potentially catch an admin red handed violating one of their most sacred rules.