This ridiculous post seems to be Ming's best attempt to goad us into gracing him with his own personal thread. So let's put him out of his misery and dive right in.....
In this one post, Ming reveals what he is all about - a throughly shit critic who can't even acknowledge basic and obvious facts, someone who is utterly self absorbed, totally addicted to the libtard narrative which has become a feature of Zoloft's not so independent forum, someone who is only really interested in attacking people from behind the safety of his protected little bubble, and even then not being above taking cowardly swipes at those he doesn't want Zoloft to force him to cohabit with. A snivelling little snowflake if ever there was one.Ming wrote:Wikipediocracy has become infected with boring. Less of an infection, more of a cancer I'd say. As in it hasn't come from without, but from within, as a slow, almost unnoticed, mutation.
Ming looks back at the WR link, and pokes around there, and it's striking to Ming how much more, well, intelligent discussion seemed to be back then, Ming really needs to drop this libtard schtick - the rise of the alt-right hasn't somehow dumbed down the rest of society, they're as intelligent as they were before, so something else must be to blame for this perception, and I stress it likely is just a perception, not a reality ignoring Jon Aubrey's tiresome rambling crap (which seems to be one of the things that killed it: at any rate, he seems to have kept on yammering long after anyone else felt moved to respond). This is the first time I have ever seen anyone claim Awbrey was the reason for WR's decline, much less demise. Perhaps Ming isn't so good at divining the reasons for a forum's failure as he wants people to think? I have no knowledge of Awbrey, but would I be surprised to learn he and Ming were past combatants on Wikipedia? Sad if he's held a grudge all that time.
We've had one Aubrey-like belaborer here This is me, right?, and a whole run of people complaining about how they were Done Wrong, It's a Wikipedia criticism forum you ignorant piece of shit, what kind of arrogant fuck takes the stance that the victims of Wikipedia are to be treated as the enemy? Ming doesn't seem to have the first idea that one way to reinvigorate Wikipediocracy would be to actually turn all those people from complainers into actual critics. Lord knows I tried my best in that regard, but did he help? Did he fuck. His idea of helping people, can be seen in his advice to Brille Lyle as she recently complained in this thread - http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... =16&t=9158 - despite being the first responder, his contribution amounted to nothing but an attempt to rationalise her treatment and defend her tormentors. That entire thread is noteworthy in showing the stark contrast between the approach of people who post here, and those who stay in the safe space of Wikipediocracy. All that forum does for people like Brille, is keep them hooked, keep them battling the cultists, and offer so called advice that is only ever going to compound her misery, as she continues to try to interact with Wikipedia and the Wikipedians as if it or they are remotely normal. We need an entirely new term for these people - pseudo-critics isn't nearly enough to convey their real capacity for compounding people's suffering and betraying their supposed cause. How about Quisling's? Honestly, when the fuck did Wikipediocracy become an unofficial help forum? and yet another person who has to say something about everything even though it typically isn't something particularly cogent. Obviously a jibe at Kumioko, currently still an active member of that forum. The coward isn't brave enough to mention him by name, not that even if he did, the staff would take any action to enforce their desired environment. Mustn't do anything to upset the clique or unduly stress the people Zoloft respects by holding them to any kind of standard. And if Ming genuinely feels this way, Ming needs to explain why he has such a dim view of my abilities or intelligence. If he had done his research, and that's never a given with this lazy fuck, he'd have seen I have made the same observations before, both in the venues criticising Wikipediocracy, and indeed there. Unlike Ming though, I wasn't a coward about it, I addressed him directly. That the Wikipediocracy staff took no notice, yet banned me, doesn't seem to have impacted Ming's assessments. Poetlister has tried Really? When? If and when he posts, it's usually just a pointer to something with a brief but typically entirely misleading explanation, and so it rarely measures up to the competition - timely example - http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... f=8&t=9181 , and Ming has tried We noticed. God loves a trier. His theory of unassailable articles turned out to be fake news. Finding it curious that Wikipedia doesn't allow BLP subjects to be sources for their own articles, is a mark of this guy's epic capacity for slow learning - http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... f=8&t=9180 - haven't looked into it further, so don't be surprised if even this example turns out to be fake news. This is typical of his so called criticism. , and people simply aren't that interested in anything Well, do the math. If supposedly only you and Poetlister are trying to make Wikipediocracy interesting....... except to go on about how Fram is such a bad person Really? This probably accounts for 1% of the text posted in the forum in the last month, if that , which is true, I sense a butt coming along.... but Bingo! Ming is a Wikipediot apologist, hands up who is surprised at this shocking revelation? people have run-ins with Fram almost without exception because they write crap and won't back down from doing that. Without exception? This sounds like and indeed smells like bullshit. Fram's two most recent targets were Martinevans for posting links to copyrighted YouTube vids, and Blofeld for ancient copyright violations. In both cases, it is inarguable that it was Fram who was overplaying his hand, and Fram who wouldn't back down. What kind of fucking lazy prick, doesn't admit that? This prick. So desperate is he to construct this epic whinge of a post, he makes the same mistakes he always does, assuming other people are thick.
Going on about people being WMF supporters is a very bad sign, Only in the sense that Wikipediocracy tolerates posters like Ming subtly and casually distorting reality. What Kumioko was on about (and it is admittedly hard to parse, but who is to blame for that being a feature of the forum? Not I.) is that the Wikipediocracy forum has become overly biased toward sympathising with the WMF rather than those they ban. This isn't wholeheartedly supporting the WMF, but it is tacit endorsement when being asked to choose between the mother ship and the enemy aliens. Kumioko argues that this is because it has become difficult to distinguish the posters of Wikipediocracy and Wikipedians in general, and this is borne out by the obvious fact most Wikipedians are indeed mithering critics of the WMF, but incredibly reluctant to find common cause with those they deem unpersoned. especially since it doesn't seem to Ming that anyone here is actually in that camp. Ming does so love to not notice things only he has said his opponents said exist. What Ming sees is that the quality of discourse has taken a severe decline, partly, perhaps, because a bunch of people gave up and quit. We all know the history, who has left and when. Again, he takes us for fools. The only way this is objectively true, is if the decline is measured over several years, surely well beyond the timeframe Ming is seeking to reference. All of which time, Ming and Poetlister, and all the other part time pseudo critics who are pretty soft on Wikipedia aa a concept and Wikipedians and trend more to blaming the WMF/Jimmy for everything, have been posters there, protected and coddled by Uncle Zoloft. Funny that.....I'll tell you who does appear to have left very recently - some of the vociferous members of the cowardly little group of fucks who called for my head. It is almost as if they weren't members of Wikipediocracy because they were interested in Ming and Poetlister's material. They were there of course, because wherever I am, die hard Wikipediots and their apologists come to decry me. Not the usual residents of the sleepy safe space that is Wikipediocracy of the last few years, who they see as no threat whatsoever. If only Ming would find the backbone needed to come here and argue his case.
If he has a single blog post in his locker, let alone one other critics couldn't pick apart easily or that the Wikipediots would be so frightened of for its factual accuracy and cutting intent, they'd actually decry it, I'd be amazed. The guy doesn't know much, doesn't think much, and doesn't care about anyone else's plight but his own. A true poster boy for the sort of person who is really behind the gradual decline and pacification of Wikipediocracy, after an admittedly promising start.