Is this the same Wikipedia of the famed WP:BOOMERANG, which must share equal billing as the most successful gang-deployed policy free weapon as WP:NOTHERE, for removing users who are engaging in WP:BATTLE?Jake wrote:As for Mr. Marek, as irritable as he can sometimes be, I'm afraid he has a point - on Wikipedia, any show of acquiescence or concession to a hostile user, or especially group of users, just makes your own situation worse. Over the years, people on WP have just gotten too good at extending dispute cycles until they get what they want, and they'll always use past precedent against you if they can.
It isn't hard to understand Marek's longevity, and it has crap all to to do with his obstinancy.
In his case, he suffered the inevitable consequence of doing the same hostile battleground crap again and again, namely Sandstein properly fucked him, using his discretionary powers. It was a perfectly valid block, totally in line with policy and the general principles of how to handle disruptive users.
He got away with it because a gang came to his rescue, for rather obvious reasons. A prominent member of that gang, NewYorkBrad, couldn't even be bothered to say why he was opposing Sandstein's sanction, he just said it should be lifted, and lifted it was. Brad faced no consequences for this obvious act of unaccountable weight throwing. Not because he is stubborn or obstinate, nor because he was hostile. Only because he was acting for the right gang. The House Gang.
A big facilitator in Brad being allowed to do what he does, white knighting for toxic little rats like Marek, is of course, none other than Jake. Brad is a member of Wikipediocracy, but as a far as Jake is concerned, if you want to use that supposedly independent platform to hold scum like Brad to account, you can fucking swivel.