Average Wikipediocrazy "discussion"

[Archer]

I'm still a bit miffed that Zoloft banned me for no apparent reason. I was not out of line. Wikipedia frowns upon disagreement and debate, presumably because they undermine the illusion of "consensus" and encourage critical thought on part of the editor, who is normally expected to launder propaganda from "trusted sources". However I'm at a loss to explain why WPO - allegedly a critics' forum - seems to resent argumentation or criticism of Wikipedia policy. I sent an email a few weeks ago requesting some explanation for the ban, which they've ignored. Perhaps I should send another.

It would be easy enough to make a sock if I just wanted to post there, but it's the principle of the matter that bothers me.

[boredbird]

I'm still a bit miffed that Zoloft banned me for no apparent reason. I was not out of line. Wikipedia frowns upon disagreement and debate, presumably because they undermine the illusion of "consensus" and encourage critical thought on part of the editor, who is normally expected to launder propaganda from "trusted sources". However I'm at a loss to explain why WPO - allegedly a critics' forum - seems to resent argumentation or criticism of Wikipedia policy. I sent an email a few weeks ago requesting some explanation for the ban, which they've ignored. Perhaps I should send another.

It would be easy enough to make a sock if I just wanted to post there, but it's the principle of the matter that bothers me.

Why is it always sloppy seconds with us? That's it, we're not the incels we're the inslops.

So what is it this time, or shouldn't I ask?

[Archer]

Why is it always sloppy seconds with us? That's it, we're not the incels we're the inslops.

I'm not partial to WPO and I would probably still make most of my critique here.

So what is it this time, or shouldn't I ask?

As in, why was I banned? I'd like to know myself.

[boredbird]

So what is it this time, or shouldn't I ask?

As in, why was I banned? I'd like to know myself.

So you don't know why, really? No idea even?

[Archer]

So what is it this time, or shouldn't I ask?

As in, why was I banned? I'd like to know myself.

So you don't know why, really? No idea even?

That's what I said.

[badmachine]

what did you go by over there? maybe we could take a look and figure it out

[Archer]

what did you go by over there? maybe we could take a look and figure it out

Same as here, "Archer". See the note/link at the end of https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... 837#p29837. I suppose that would be my best guess, but merely contradicting an admin is not grounds for a ban.

[ericbarbour]

but merely contradicting an admin is not grounds for a ban.

Oh yes it is. Now it is.
Ten year ago it wasn't.....

[Archer]

but merely contradicting an admin is not grounds for a ban.

Oh yes it is. Now it is.
Ten year ago it wasn't.....

Would anyone else in that thread have been banned? Even MidsizeJake seemed to understand and agree with most of my argument (https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 57#p359757), though his assessment of the block itself is patently absurd: "I'd say his problem is that he just seems too opinionated in general". Banned from a critics' forum for being opinionated? Come on now. There's also this incomprehensible reply by Elinruby, written on the previous page in some or other dialect: https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 25#p359325

[badmachine]

what did you go by over there? maybe we could take a look and figure it out

Same as here, "Archer". See the note/link at the end of https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... 837#p29837. I suppose that would be my best guess, but merely contradicting an admin is not grounds for a ban.

ah i see now. you ran afoul of the tranny protectorate. just make a sock if you really want to post there, but i would stay away from anything transgender-related. the trannies must be protected from truthful mean words at all times or else they will shoot up a school or something.