It is indeed a bit boring in wiki land, Madam gender.

Editors, Admins and Bureaucrats Oh my!

Moderator: Abd

It is indeed a bit boring in wiki land, Madam gender.

Postby Graaf Statler » Mon May 20, 2019 11:10 am

But this one is realy boring. Normal I enjoy your trolling, really, like this one again with peeing Dutch woman, with a touch of Renée framing, but this is of your weakest postings ever of you. You can much and much better. I am really disapointed.
We Dutch can better, we can even win the song contest, Madam. Dit is gewoon prutswerk!
If you troll Crow do it at least on a good way, not half.
User avatar
Graaf Statler
 
Posts: 3787
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am

Re: It is indeed a bit boring in wiki land, Madam gender.

Postby CrowsNest » Mon May 20, 2019 2:20 pm

It's garbage.

In her typical ignorant arrogance, she has assumed I wouldn't know why she mentions HIAB as if she randomly picked him as someone who I should look at instead of Dr. Wade. Now that is an impressive example of obsessive stalking.

That piece of reader trickery aside, the faults with the post will be obvious to anyone who cares to look at the forum and the thread. She's either very brave or very stupid to be rattling my cage again, and to make an issue out of this specifically, is pretty foolish. My sole aim is to expose what Wade is doing, and how and why it isn't being stopped. If GD wants to help me expose it while showing she is part of the problem too, then it's her funeral.
User avatar
CrowsNest
 
Posts: 4459
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: It is indeed a bit boring in wiki land, Madam gender.

Postby Graaf Statler » Mon May 20, 2019 4:13 pm

It is a rancorous posting of someone who is angry. And it makes clear GD has more than one editor, because I have to say the Madam Mies postings are absolute of a higher class. They always contain a lot of subtile humor and mockery and silent hints. Madam Mies has absolute class and style, but this is indeed complete rubbish.
User avatar
Graaf Statler
 
Posts: 3787
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am

Re: It is indeed a bit boring in wiki land, Madam gender.

Postby CrowsNest » Wed May 22, 2019 5:09 am

Tedious.
And while Crowsnest over at Sucks spins himself into a frenzy over some PhD who has figured out how to write Wikipedia articles about women scientists – and without the mentoring and showing of the ropes that men reserve for each other – he has totally missed that the arbcom, including Worm, has warmly welcomed the likes of the no-talent serial harasser Hell-in-a-Bucket back into the fold without so much as the blink of an eye. Well, Jesse’s message is that women just might not be as “inferior” as the autistic “Google memo” would have it, so maybe that just sticks in his Crow craw somehow (pun intended).
I didn't miss HIAB's return, I chose not to write about it. Why? Because it was part of an apparent shift in ArbCom practice, an attempt to remove this long standing and pretty accurate perception that their time limited site bans, typically a year, were de facto permanent, because nothing a convict ever said in an appeal was deemed good enough. So they've let many people back on appeal, and the nature of ArbCom cases means these people are by and large, wrong-uns. But if there has ever been any truth to the 'short leash' doctrine, it was here. Shit, one of these appeals was reversed by the community within hours.

Since this development painted ArbCom in a good light, a rare example of a self-reform going in the right direction, I chose not to publicise it, since we are not the WMF's PR department. The revelation that HIAB could and should have instead received a permanent global exclusion order, is not new, and would hardly be worth pointing out again (I'm quite sure I said it at the time). The fact their time limited bans are often wholly lenient, does not detract from the fact it was always wrong for the Wikipedia system to compensate for that by taking their mantra that their is no justice, to the extreme.

Rather than trying to pretend I should be doing something else than focussing on Wade (odd in of itself since HIAB was let back in ages ago), especially not by writing stuff that would benefit them, and worse, pretending like you just randomly picked HIAB rather than it being a case of you desperately wanting me to use my skills to smite your enemies, you should instead be making sure that what you are claiming about Wade, can be defended.

It is just so cringingly pathetic how you're trying to claim she's just some random PhD who is editing Wikipedia, so she should be left alone to do what she does. Is it ignorance? Are you just gobbing off without having fully understood who she is or what she does? I didn't pick her at random.

The five pages I've written about Wade demolish any idea she has figured out anything, except perhaps how to exploit Wikipedia for her own ends and deploy the usual tactics used by its editors when they don't want to accept responsibility for their actions. Although who knows, perhaps these were all qualities she already had, and it required no learning from the establishment scumbags, most but not all of whom who have penises.

There are of course no male only mentorship programs on Wikipedia, official or unofficial. The cult within a cult accept bad actors of any gender. The Asshole Hemegony is gradually being replaced by the Feminism Mafia though, which circles the wagons around the likes of Wade to shield her from and any all criticism, on the assumption it is all driven by sexist piggery. Not hard to see why she doesn't learn from her mistakes, indeed barely even seems to know she is making them.

The time will come that the women higher up the food chain who are protecting and enabling Wade will be examined, but there seems little point when they get less attention and are doing less damage, and cleary Wade would be doing what she does whether they were there or not.

It is quite obvious Wade doesn't want any mentoring, on Wikipedia she's pretty much a loner by default, only interested in churning out articles to achieve a self-set quota. She has been quite open about how she already thinks she's performing better than the average editors, in the process revealing she doesn't even understand the average Wikipedia editor is a fucking moron.

She has taken to readily admitting she has more to learn, but this sounds like PR to me, a sad play for sympathy, rather than genuine introspection. I've been judging her based on what she should already be capable of as a PhD and writer, and what she should have already learned after creating 600+ Wikipedia biographies. She sucks, badly.

If Wade is pissed at Google, she's got a funny way of showing it. She's been quite open about how she is seeking to exploit the symbiotic relationship between Google and Wikipedia. Every day, we are seeing that a resource making a correct factual claim about a woman scientist, is being bumped into second place in the search engine by a Wade created biography that has turned that correct fact into a clear error. Not content with that, she blasts the error across the internet on Twitter.

All of the problems with her output that I have identified still exist, neither Wade or anyone else seems bothered about fixing them, despite them being told many times that she is making mistakes. The root causes are clear - her haste, her total inexperience, and her questionable motives. Instead, she is just playing the victim and deploying half baked accusations against all her critics. No wonder you want to defend her, other than simply because she has ovaries of course, your schtick is virtually identical.

If that memo says women in technology are fucking morons who have shit for brains, then on a sample size of one, she's proving it handsomely. As well as what a thoroughly bad person she is.

You charge me with being in a frenzy. Guilty. I'm a vicious bastard. This is the Tyranny of Evil Men. This is the hate site. We are here to hurt people with our analysis, because it is clear that when it comes to Wikipedia, nothing else works. You want soft soap criticism, futile attempts to educate and negotiate, go see your Quisling mates at Wikipediocracy. I'm sure Timmy will be happy to clear Wade of all crimes, indeed I expect him to, the sensible position of any serious critic to take being to target anyone Timmy thinks is doing well.

In his pomp, Vigilant would have targeted Wade, until he got sunstroke while wandering the desert, scrambling his moral compass and sense of perspective. I'm not sure you ever had either, not when it comes to examining one of your own. I have no sacred cows, I will target those who warrant scrutiny, and if you think she doesn't, make your case with respect to her, not this lame bulshit.

You can't stop me any other way. The more bullshit you write about my motives and output, the more energy it will give me to keep the spotlight on Wade. When I've got ten pages of damning content, maybe then you will be prepared to admit what is obvious. It still wouldn't put her in my all time top five most targeted Wikipedians, all of whom are men.

If Wade retires and blames me, brilliant. If Wade is turned around, and begrudgingly admits I was the root cause, brilliant. If I cannot reform her, I will destroy her. I can, have and will continue to do this for every bad actor inside the cult, be they man, woman, or fish. I judge the content of their character, and I judge Wade to be lacking the same basic components the worst male editors tend to be missing. You will need to research her far more than you have before you can even pretend you can deny it.

It is an uncompromising position that has put us in the envied position of being so feared and so hated by Wikipedia, because we are right, they want to pretend we don't exist. Good. We are the darkness. We are the people who will take their very souls. People and entities who take this approach to criticism, eventually reach a breaking point. If the entity cannot be broken, we can break the important pieces. I enjoy it, and I am good at it.

If you thought I was anything else, clearly you were not paying attention.

HTD.
User avatar
CrowsNest
 
Posts: 4459
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: It is indeed a bit boring in wiki land, Madam gender.

Postby Carrite » Thu May 23, 2019 4:34 am

Bwaaaa-haaa-haaa! 666!!!!

!htarw ym leef dna em raeH

Jesus Christ, BLACK Crow, you really are delusional...

The correct line of criticism is that The Gender Warrior decries a lack of "mentorshp" reserved for The Mans on the one hand, and calls everything "Mansplaining" on the other.

What is the difference between "Mentorship" and "Mansplaining"?

It's all performance art, a big troll. There is no difference.

And you are also a troll.

"REACT TO ME ME ME ME!!!"

Whatever, little man, whatever...

RfB
User avatar
Carrite
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2018 7:59 pm

Re: It is indeed a bit boring in wiki land, Madam gender.

Postby Graaf Statler » Thu May 23, 2019 8:37 am

Carrite wrote:Bwaaaa-haaa-haaa! 666!!!!

!htarw ym leef dna em raeH

Jesus Christ, BLACK Crow, you really are delusional...

The correct line of criticism is that The Gender Warrior decries a lack of "mentorshp" reserved for The Mans on the one hand, and calls everything "Mansplaining" on the other.

What is the difference between "Mentorship" and "Mansplaining"?

This is OK.

Carrete wrote:It's all performance art, a big troll. There is no difference.

And you are also a troll.

"REACT TO ME ME ME ME!!!"

Whatever, little man, whatever...

If you want to discuss in this way, please do me a favour and fuck off to your one digital slums, Timmy.
User avatar
Graaf Statler
 
Posts: 3787
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am

Re: It is indeed a bit boring in wiki land, Madam gender.

Postby CrowsNest » Thu May 23, 2019 11:08 am

Carrite wrote:The correct line of criticism is
Ammma stop you there dude.

Should you ever find the stones to answer posts like this.....

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... 9620#p9620

.....then you can call me little man all you want.

Trolls set out to get a response, any response. Me, I could quite happily live without knowing what you think of my posts, assuming you are and remain of your current philosophical bent. As I'm sure I've said before. I make it quite clear when I am looking for your opinion......
I invite you to explain what you meant, with reference either to the GNG and the sources available, or whatever it is you think Levivich said which serves the same purpose. If you can't, then the charge of you having shit for brains, and the Wikipedia rules governing Afd failing to do their job and not waste everyone's time debating the merits of arguments made by people with shit for brains, stands.
It is a performance, in part, I grant you. I mean, you can't deny that's some sweet poetry right there.

:ugeek:
User avatar
CrowsNest
 
Posts: 4459
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: It is indeed a bit boring in wiki land, Madam gender.

Postby CrowsNest » Sat May 25, 2019 5:34 am

Gone a bit quiet w.r.t. me and mine now, has Ms. Desk.

Understandable.

https://www.wikipediasucks.co/forum/vie ... 9669#p9669

Pretty hard to fit stuff like that into her narrative of brave little Jess doing her best for the 'wimmin.

You want to help women, you find an actual feminist, be they man or woman. Not a clueless fuck who has clearly never even read any feminist theory, other than this idea if a man criticises you, he is a sexist pig.

Wade has shit for brains. If she is the future of feminism, then feminism is screwed. See what I did there? :roll:

Too fucking easy, this shit. Way too easy.
User avatar
CrowsNest
 
Posts: 4459
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: It is indeed a bit boring in wiki land, Madam gender.

Postby Graaf Statler » Mon May 27, 2019 1:06 pm

So you want to edit Wikipedia
Timmy asked wrote:>as one New York volunteer who had brought a lot of newbies into the system found out, when she was very publicly and without explanation banned from all the Wikimedia projects.

There’s a story there and I hope you tell it.

BrillLyle Tim. And for the rest it is a shitposting of Madam Gender. As usual.

So you think you might want to edit Wikipedia. But you don’t know how to start, or if it is a good idea. Or if all those horrible stories you have heard about it are true. Or maybe you think it’s a life skill, like knowing how to use Word, Excel, or the internet, and you want to be computer literate.

First of all, the stories are true.

The only right conclusion after this conclusion can be: Stay away out of that snake pit. It is Madam Gender troll shit as usual.
User avatar
Graaf Statler
 
Posts: 3787
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am


Return to Wikipedians

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest