Ritchie333

Discussions on Wikimedia governance
User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
kołdry
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Poetlister » Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:25 pm

Osborne wrote:
Ritchie333 wrote:Can anyone tell me when was the last time Praxidicae expanded an article that wasn't a direct consequence of reverting somebody?
https://en.wikiscan.org/utilisateur/Praxidicae
Article diffs excluding reverts -6.8 M

Numbers don't lie.
So helikes making articles smaller as well as deleting them? That's a net figure; obviously, many of his enlargements will be adding deletion templates, so the true net figure will be even more negative.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Osborne
Habitué
Posts: 1259
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:29 pm

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Osborne » Thu Oct 03, 2019 9:52 pm

Guess, who's ahead of her in this race:
https://en.wikiscan.org/utilisateur/Bbb23
Article diffs excluding reverts -12 M

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Poetlister » Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:21 pm

Osborne wrote:Guess, who's ahead of her in this race:
https://en.wikiscan.org/utilisateur/Bbb23
Article diffs excluding reverts -12 M
Where does he find the time with all his vital work blocking suspected socks? :blink:
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Ritchie333
Gregarious
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:20 pm
Wikipedia User: Ritchie333
Location: London, broadly construed

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Ritchie333 » Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:24 pm

How do I get a figure of -80K? That makes me sound like I'm some sort of clod hopping deletionist. I was in the black until 2017.

Edit - Aha, might have been stuff like this; also scrubbing copyvios down to a basic stub instead of deleting them.

User avatar
C&B
Habitué
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 2:16 pm
Location: with cheese.

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by C&B » Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:37 pm

That Utiliseur tool is fantastic! Looks too good for the WMF :) who made it?
"Someone requests clarification and before you know it you find yourself in the Star Chamber."

User avatar
Bezdomni
Habitué
Posts: 2935
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
Wikipedia User: RosasHills
Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Bezdomni » Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:47 pm

Also
Volunteer Marek: -7.3M ( § )
Drmies: -51M ( § )

Wikiscan was funded by the WMF, it was made in France.
los auberginos

User avatar
C&B
Habitué
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 2:16 pm
Location: with cheese.

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by C&B » Fri Oct 04, 2019 2:58 pm

I apologise for my WP:ABF :) it's a smart bit of kit though, compared to what gets hosted at thingmy. Must be the French artistry!

What does the + / - mean, Bezdonmi?
"Someone requests clarification and before you know it you find yourself in the Star Chamber."

User avatar
Bezdomni
Habitué
Posts: 2935
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:07 pm
Wikipedia User: RosasHills
Location: Monster Vainglory ON (.. party HQ ..)
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Bezdomni » Fri Oct 04, 2019 3:12 pm

My assumption is that the + is for inclusionists and the - is for deletionists (whereas the previous figure is an absolute value). But I'm doing a lot of guessing with that tool, I've never found a manual. (I did post the grant info (probably late 2017) but I think that was on WR-2, which is no more.)

Also, I noticed recently that the "reverts" percentage is now 0 for all users. This may be due to the fact that I used the data at AN/I to identify someone for whom a (very) substantial portion of their edits were reverts (alternately, it may be due to a malfunction).

I like the blue drama ice-caps in the graphics, but haven't understood exactly what they refer to.
los auberginos

User avatar
C&B
Habitué
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 2:16 pm
Location: with cheese.

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by C&B » Fri Oct 04, 2019 4:58 pm

Ah, the number of bytes added/removed?

Yes, that's the danger of highlighting management's faults in a suggestion box; they take the box away :)
"Someone requests clarification and before you know it you find yourself in the Star Chamber."

User avatar
Jans Hammer
Gregarious
Posts: 835
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 11:59 am

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Jans Hammer » Wed Oct 16, 2019 10:26 am


Alex Shih
Regular
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 4:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Alex Shih
Actual Name: Alex Shih
Location: Japan

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Alex Shih » Wed Oct 16, 2019 11:25 am

Hahaha, just how pathetic can Chrissymad's "private" whining and this batch's incompetent and biased dysfunctional arbcom can get? Shouldn't have continued improving the encyclopedia, Ritchie.

Carcharoth
Habitué
Posts: 1220
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:44 am
Wikipedia User: Carcharoth

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Carcharoth » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:01 pm

Andrew D makes a good point about both editors doing New Page Patrolling being able to explain the interactions. I don't know whether those commenting there are just ignoring what Andrew D have said (which would be them engaging in groupthink), or whether they haven't noticed it yet. When you have very active users in a particular area, it is difficult to implement an interaction ban without causing problems.

User avatar
Mason
Habitué
Posts: 2273
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:27 am

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Mason » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:03 pm

Mkdw wrote:If only it has been limited to that since his IBAN. Ritchie has continued to discuss Praxidicae on off-wiki forums, continues to discuss the matter with ArbCom, and now violated his sanction on-wiki. We have received several complaints from editors within the English Wikipedia community and it may very well escalate to a point beyond ArbCom's purview. Mkdw talk 06:55, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Bolding mine. Doesn't look like anyone on that talk page picked up on that bit, which I interpret as "knock it off or T&S is going to office-ban you."

Alex Shih
Regular
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 4:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Alex Shih
Actual Name: Alex Shih
Location: Japan

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Alex Shih » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:08 pm

"We have received several complaints", again this is steaming pile of bullshit. We all know it's the same group of friends that chatters away constantly on IRC. I would love to see Mkdw makes his dumb threat become reality; can you imagine if T&S gets involved again? Gee

el84
Gregarious
Posts: 627
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:59 pm
Actual Name: Andy E
Location: イギリス

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by el84 » Wed Oct 16, 2019 12:16 pm

Carcharoth wrote:Andrew D makes a good point about both editors doing New Page Patrolling being able to explain the interactions. I don't know whether those commenting there are just ignoring what Andrew D have said (which would be them engaging in groupthink), or whether they haven't noticed it yet. When you have very active users in a particular area, it is difficult to implement an interaction ban without causing problems.
I doubt they care enough beyond "must be showing to be tacking that evil stalking that is going on".

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31490
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Vigilant » Wed Oct 16, 2019 1:11 pm

Mason wrote:
Mkdw wrote:If only it has been limited to that since his IBAN. Ritchie has continued to discuss Praxidicae on off-wiki forums, continues to discuss the matter with ArbCom, and now violated his sanction on-wiki. We have received several complaints from editors within the English Wikipedia community and it may very well escalate to a point beyond ArbCom's purview. Mkdw talk 06:55, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Bolding mine. Doesn't look like anyone on that talk page picked up on that bit, which I interpret as "knock it off or T&S is going to office-ban you."
That implies to me that mkdw knows that there is already a dossier on Ritchie at the WMF.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

Carcharoth
Habitué
Posts: 1220
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:44 am
Wikipedia User: Carcharoth

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Carcharoth » Wed Oct 16, 2019 1:23 pm

In related news (as this interaction ban was imposed in camera, IIRC):

ArbCom are struggling to meet their commitments:
Private Cases RfC Timing

I was wondering whether the RfC set to be taking place under ARBCOM auspices about private cases et al, is planned to be before or after the ARBCOM elections? Nosebagbear (talk) 21:54, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

The original plan was to have it as soon as possible. Due to our reduced numbers right now we have not had the time to get it set up. We know how important this RFC will be and how patiently people have been waiting for it. It's something we will have to consider. Mkdw talk 03:08, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

el84
Gregarious
Posts: 627
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:59 pm
Actual Name: Andy E
Location: イギリス

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by el84 » Wed Oct 16, 2019 1:28 pm

Carcharoth wrote:In related news (as this interaction ban was imposed in camera, IIRC):

ArbCom are struggling to meet their commitments:
Private Cases RfC Timing

I was wondering whether the RfC set to be taking place under ARBCOM auspices about private cases et al, is planned to be before or after the ARBCOM elections? Nosebagbear (talk) 21:54, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

The original plan was to have it as soon as possible. Due to our reduced numbers right now we have not had the time to get it set up. We know how important this RFC will be and how patiently people have been waiting for it. It's something we will have to consider. Mkdw talk 03:08, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
1/4 of them (and an ex-arb) rushed over to Ritchie's page to defend their actions. I think their priorities are rather skewed at the moment.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31490
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Vigilant » Wed Oct 16, 2019 1:31 pm

el84 wrote:
Carcharoth wrote:In related news (as this interaction ban was imposed in camera, IIRC):

ArbCom are struggling to meet their commitments:
Private Cases RfC Timing

I was wondering whether the RfC set to be taking place under ARBCOM auspices about private cases et al, is planned to be before or after the ARBCOM elections? Nosebagbear (talk) 21:54, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

The original plan was to have it as soon as possible. Due to our reduced numbers right now we have not had the time to get it set up. We know how important this RFC will be and how patiently people have been waiting for it. It's something we will have to consider. Mkdw talk 03:08, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
1/4 of them (and an ex-arb) rushed over to Ritchie's page to defend their actions. I think their priorities are rather skewed at the moment.
They get distracted by shiny, jangled keys.

This ARBCOM is really pretty incredible in their comprehensive fail.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Osborne
Habitué
Posts: 1259
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:29 pm

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Osborne » Wed Oct 16, 2019 2:35 pm

Ritchie knew this would happen. He did not do it last time, I wonder why he did it now.
The reason stated in the block log:
linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =921463695[/link]
Looks like Prax's CSD was removed by Ritch, and the article improved, considerably:
linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 1910152200[/link]
Mkdw wrote:Ritchie has continued to discuss Praxidicae on off-wiki forums
Coming up next: enforcement of interaction bans with the Alexa monitoring technology, donated by Amazon (along the 1 mill bucks). Proper, Chinese government surveillance - level shit.
Joke aside, boundaries has to be drawn to the policing. People need to and have a right to discuss their own sanctions, and people they get involved with. Ritchie did so respectfully. There's nothing punishable in his actions.
Mkdw wrote: continues to discuss the matter with ArbCom
Sounds like appealing an iban is now a violation of the iban... Intentionally created catch-22.
Mkdw wrote: and now violated his sanction on-wiki.
WP:5P5, aka. WP:IAR. The most agreed-upon policy, that's only used to game the rules, but never, when there's an edit undeniably improving the encyclopedia.
Mkdw wrote: it may very well escalate to a point beyond ArbCom's purview.
That would be fascinating. Child abusers? No problem for TnS. Admins violating ToU, CheckUser policy, Adminacct policy? No problem for TnS. Ritchie talking about his iban? That's a threat to the community.

User avatar
Ritchie333
Gregarious
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:20 pm
Wikipedia User: Ritchie333
Location: London, broadly construed

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Ritchie333 » Wed Oct 16, 2019 3:34 pm

I am not prepared to edit Wikipedia while the likes of PreMedicatedChaos are being incredibly rude and casting aspersions without evidence. I expect that sort of thing from people who support Trump.

User avatar
Osborne
Habitué
Posts: 1259
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:29 pm

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Osborne » Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:03 pm

Ritchie333 wrote:I am not prepared to edit Wikipedia while the likes of PreMedicatedChaos are being incredibly rude and casting aspersions without evidence. I expect that sort of thing from people who support Trump.
Wikipedia worked like that since the beginning: people take the toxicity, until they burn out. I would be surprised, if this is news to you. Let's see what's behind this punishment, instead:
1) Previously you refrained from removing a deletion tag, so to avoid violating your iban. I honestly wonder why did you remove it now, on a different article? The block was expected to happen.
2) This is a violation of some very strict rules, where a neutral person would apply ignore-all-rules, so what's the real reason for a one week punishment, and a threat of escalation from Mkdw? (without commenting on Prax...)

Alex Shih
Regular
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 4:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Alex Shih
Actual Name: Alex Shih
Location: Japan

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Alex Shih » Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:15 pm

This needs to escalate. This arbcom claims they are busy, but finds time to keep a list of people that they follow everywhere both on wiki and off wiki? Ridiculous.

User avatar
Ritchie333
Gregarious
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:20 pm
Wikipedia User: Ritchie333
Location: London, broadly construed

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Ritchie333 » Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:18 pm

Alex Shih wrote:This needs to escalate. This arbcom claims they are busy, but finds time to keep a list of people that they follow everywhere both on wiki and off wiki? Ridiculous.
You can escalate it if you like; I find the stupid drama on my talk page to be mentally exhausting and making me want to go and do something else. So I will.

I stated my position and how what I was doing was improving the encyclopedia. You can accept that or you can stick your fingers in your ears and shout "laa laa laaa".

Looks like Vigilant was right after all.

Katie
Gregarious
Posts: 674
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:47 pm

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Katie » Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:26 pm

DeltaQuad revdevelled a bit of text from Jbhunley's post about Chrissymad/Praxidicae - however, contrary to what she says, it was not a "hell of an accusation" - unless Jbhunley added something more to it, which isn't borne out by the history, he simply said the e-mail could show something about Chrissymad/Praxidicae's "real world behavioural pattern". DeltaQuad also messed up on the revdel, as the edit by Jbhunley is still able to be clicked on in the article history and thus I made an archive of it to prove what I said: linkhttp://archive.is/aYBoi[/link]. This is simply a horrible reason for revdelling, possibly out of favouritism.

ReaperEternal
Contributor
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2019 5:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Reaper Eternal
Actual Name: Brian Phillips

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by ReaperEternal » Wed Oct 16, 2019 4:27 pm

Ritchie333 wrote:Looks like Vigilant was right after all.
The current arbitration committee is doing their best to push me into the HTD camp.

User avatar
C&B
Habitué
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 2:16 pm
Location: with cheese.

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by C&B » Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:32 pm

Katie wrote:and thus I made an archive of it to prove what I said: linkhttp://archive.is/aYBoi[/link].
:like: :applause:
"Someone requests clarification and before you know it you find yourself in the Star Chamber."

Alex Shih
Regular
Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 4:14 pm
Wikipedia User: Alex Shih
Actual Name: Alex Shih
Location: Japan

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Alex Shih » Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:36 pm

Interesting. I am assuming the e-mail received by mistake was a e-mail sent to a member of ArbCom and forwarded by that committee member. Now I am really curious on what that is about.

User avatar
C&B
Habitué
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 2:16 pm
Location: with cheese.

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by C&B » Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:36 pm

Ritchie333 wrote: I find the stupid drama on my talk page to be mentally exhausting and making me want to go and do something else
But You Must know This, it is the People on your Talk in your (V vociferous!) Defence, ex. Rambling Man :flaming-v:
"Someone requests clarification and before you know it you find yourself in the Star Chamber."

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31490
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Vigilant » Wed Oct 16, 2019 5:53 pm

Ritchie333 wrote:
Alex Shih wrote:This needs to escalate. This arbcom claims they are busy, but finds time to keep a list of people that they follow everywhere both on wiki and off wiki? Ridiculous.
You can escalate it if you like; I find the stupid drama on my talk page to be mentally exhausting and making me want to go and do something else. So I will.

I stated my position and how what I was doing was improving the encyclopedia. You can accept that or you can stick your fingers in your ears and shout "laa laa laaa".

Looks like Vigilant was right after all.
Welcome home.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

Katie
Gregarious
Posts: 674
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:47 pm

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Katie » Wed Oct 16, 2019 6:17 pm

Jbhunley made an edit, changing it from "Praxidicae" to "the author's", as it was unclear from context who the author was. The edit in question is here: linkhttp://archive.is/okuHM[/link]. He commented that it seemed as if it was being sent to the target, presumably himself since he said it was addressed to him, but that he could have been mistaken about it.

User avatar
C&B
Habitué
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 2:16 pm
Location: with cheese.

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by C&B » Wed Oct 16, 2019 6:21 pm

Any idea the content?
"Someone requests clarification and before you know it you find yourself in the Star Chamber."

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Poetlister » Wed Oct 16, 2019 9:01 pm

Osborne wrote:
Mkdw wrote: it may very well escalate to a point beyond ArbCom's purview.
That would be fascinating. Child abusers? No problem for TnS. Admins violating ToU, CheckUser policy, Adminacct policy? No problem for TnS. Ritchie talking about his iban? That's a threat to the community.
Has Ritchie annoyed anyone with significant clout at WMF HQ? Has he been banned on severl sites? Those are the only possible reasons for T&S to intervene.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Ritchie333
Gregarious
Posts: 537
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 4:20 pm
Wikipedia User: Ritchie333
Location: London, broadly construed

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Ritchie333 » Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:30 am

Poetlister wrote:Has Ritchie annoyed anyone with significant clout at WMF HQ? Has he been banned on severl sites? Those are the only possible reasons for T&S to intervene.
I don’t think so; I have several emails from Sydney Poore and Claudia Lo asking me about how to improve the general shape of the community. I’ve not seriously followed up on them as I just don’t have the time.

Carcharoth
Habitué
Posts: 1220
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:44 am
Wikipedia User: Carcharoth

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Carcharoth » Thu Oct 17, 2019 10:35 am

Alex Shih wrote:This needs to escalate. This arbcom claims they are busy, but finds time to keep a list of people that they follow everywhere both on wiki and off wiki? Ridiculous.
FWIW, clarified here (by PMC) and here (by Mkdw).

EDIT: things blowing up a bit on Ritchie's talk page.

el84
Gregarious
Posts: 627
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:59 pm
Actual Name: Andy E
Location: イギリス

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by el84 » Thu Oct 17, 2019 12:26 pm

As they're reading this:

Hi, PMC. Hi, Mkdw. Hi, rest of Arbcom.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... _amendment

Can you kindly go do what your community actually voted you in for and deal with these Arbitration clarifications and amendments? None of you have responded there (once again) in over a week.

Thanks.

User avatar
Mason
Habitué
Posts: 2273
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:27 am

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Mason » Thu Oct 17, 2019 3:48 pm

Perhaps a clever coder can write a script that says "An editor you are banned from interacting with made the most recent edit to this article. Are you sure you want to save your changes?"

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Poetlister » Thu Oct 17, 2019 4:08 pm

Mason wrote:Perhaps a clever coder can write a script that says "An editor you are banned from interacting with made the most recent edit to this article. Are you sure you want to save your changes?"
Would that be enough? Suppose the other editor made major changes, then there were a few other, maybe minor, changes, then you came along and interacted with the major edit.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Mason
Habitué
Posts: 2273
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:27 am

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Mason » Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:06 pm

Poetlister wrote:
Mason wrote:Perhaps a clever coder can write a script that says "An editor you are banned from interacting with made the most recent edit to this article. Are you sure you want to save your changes?"
Would that be enough? Suppose the other editor made major changes, then there were a few other, maybe minor, changes, then you came along and interacted with the major edit.
With clever enough coding, you could get it to give a full analysis of the forbidden editor's contributions and even offer odds of getting a block if you proceed. Forbidden editor made one minor edit 3 years and 300 edits ago? 10% chance of a block. Forbidden editor made literally the previous edit? 100%.

Carcharoth
Habitué
Posts: 1220
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2015 1:44 am
Wikipedia User: Carcharoth

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Carcharoth » Sat Oct 19, 2019 11:21 am

Not sure if anyone noticed, but an AN discussion that has been going for less than 24 hours has overtunrned the block and Ritchie has been unblocked by Thryduulf who has allowed discussion to continue. This is a real slap in the face to PMC, the arbitrator who blocked, and to a lesser extent a slap in the face to ArbCom.

Discussion as of 11:20 UTC 19/10/2019

The summary by WTT is a good one:
Moot now as the block is overturned but since I said it on ACN, I'll repeat it here. Seen though the optics of additional information, I absolutely understand why PMC blocked Ritchie. There was consensus among the committee that he had overstepped the line with regards to following Praxidicae's edits - especially around CSD. It was also clear that both parties wanted to stop interacting with each other. As such, the committee implemented an IBAN, the same IBAN that had not quite gained community consensus at AN previously. Since then, Ritchie has referred to Praxidicae multiple times, leading to the first block - those are IBAN violations, plain and simple. Since his return, he has stopped referring to Praxidicae, but he has been making comments about her on an off wiki forum, ones that cross a line based on information Arbcom has received (and Ritchie is aware of). So when Ritchie directly reverted Praxidicae, I understand why PMC has blocked.
Personally, I believe this should have been passed to AE - I don't like Arbs enforcing their own decisions, but what's done is done. WormTT(talk) 08:05, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

User avatar
Dysklyver
Cornishman
Posts: 2337
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2017 2:02 pm
Actual Name: Arthur Kerensa
Nom de plume: Dysk
Location: England
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Dysklyver » Sat Oct 19, 2019 11:42 am

Mason wrote:
Poetlister wrote:
Mason wrote:Perhaps a clever coder can write a script that says "An editor you are banned from interacting with made the most recent edit to this article. Are you sure you want to save your changes?"
Would that be enough? Suppose the other editor made major changes, then there were a few other, maybe minor, changes, then you came along and interacted with the major edit.
With clever enough coding, you could get it to give a full analysis of the forbidden editor's contributions and even offer odds of getting a block if you proceed. Forbidden editor made one minor edit 3 years and 300 edits ago? 10% chance of a block. Forbidden editor made literally the previous edit? 100%.
This is a very good idea. :D
Globally banned after 7 years.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31490
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Vigilant » Sat Oct 19, 2019 3:39 pm

(after edit conflict) With respect, not a total fucking mess. It still has a lot of good editors and good admins, including Ritchie, who soldier on trying to write an encyclopaedia. This bunch of Arbs, on the other hand ... dredging up old diffs that can be plausibly explained by new page patrolling (which the encyclopaedia needs); bending over backwards to interpret fixing valid concerns flagged by another editor (and saving an article, both needed by the encyclopaedia) as malicious stalking; devaluing the concept of harassment by assuming bad faith to construct a pattern in bad faith; apparently taking all complaints as automatically justified, thereby throwing out the entire concept of blocking as prevention and further casting the concept of harassment in a dubious light that doesn't at all benefit the community; and as Ritchie says, steadfastly accusing him of lying. And if I understand the dark hints correctly, we're to abase ourselves before Arbcom's judgement and accept this abuse of the community and aspersions against the whole wiki collaborative ethos because they're just doing it before "Trust & Safety" does it? Arbcom are supposed to be upholding our rights and our mission in the face of WMF tyranny, not (as it appears to me from what has been said above) jumping in first saying "Like it or they'll do the same or worse." I hope Ritchie does return, again, because we need editors and admins who work for the good of the project. I don't always agree with Ritchie (or for that matter with Fram), but they aren't the problem with this place. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31490
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Vigilant » Sat Oct 19, 2019 4:07 pm

It appears that ARBCOM is becoming the new Trust&Safety with secret emails and private 'hearings' and special friends who take your side adn block your enemies. All while completely ignoring the tasks that are on their plate.

Wheels within wheels of corruption and incompetence.

en.wp should change ARBCOM's marching orders and insist that all cases, hearings, motions, etc must be done on wiki, in public.
The current crop of ARBCOMmies are NOT to be trusted.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31490
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Vigilant » Sat Oct 19, 2019 4:53 pm

Now we have a thread crossing.
Dubious “arbitration decision” that was short-circuited behind the scenes to avoid community scrutiny aside, we have a very troubling trend here. We have an arbitrator here that demonstrated zero understanding on how arbitration enforcement usually works, in addition to questionable understanding on common blocking practices, in particular Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Duration_of_blocks and WP:EXPLAINBLOCK. This is precisely why templates like {{Uw-aeblock}} exists. We initially had no idea whether or not the block was enforced as an arbitrator, or in their capacity as an administrator. We also initially had no idea whether or not the block was an arbitration enforcement over an arbitration decision on an interaction ban, or simply a block over violation of a mere interaction ban. All of these are important details that needs to be spelled out explicitly when the blocked is being made, not afterwards.

This ongoing trend of skipping over WP:AE for requesting arbitration enforcement, in addition to having arbitrators following editors around on and off Wikipedia, and hastily enacting disproportional sanctions while failing to follow any of the common administrative practices and procedures (instead of assessing the situation in order to make an informed decision that are explained with clarity and appears neutral to all parties), is frankly depressing. Alex Shih (talk) 17:10, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Odds that both Ritchie and Alex are gone from en.wp by Christmas?
Done in by the T&S Force Recon team?
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Poetlister » Sat Oct 19, 2019 7:36 pm

Carcharoth wrote:Not sure if anyone noticed, but an AN discussion that has been going for less than 24 hours has overtunrned the block and Ritchie has been unblocked by Thryduulf who has allowed discussion to continue. This is a real slap in the face to PMC, the arbitrator who blocked, and to a lesser extent a slap in the face to ArbCom.
Jolly good. Nobody should be above the rules, not even an Arb, not even the ArbCom collectively. But alas this sort of thing is all too rare.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Moral Hazard
Super Genius
Posts: 3401
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 4:46 pm
Wikipedia User: Kiefer.Wolfowitz
Nom de plume: Kiefer Wolfowitz
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Moral Hazard » Sat Oct 19, 2019 10:01 pm

Vigilant wrote:Odds that both Ritchie and Alex are gone from en.wp by Christmas?
Done in by the T&S Force Recon team?
Rename Arbcom as Arbitration Kill
Kiefer.Wolfowitz (T-C-L)
“Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker's game because they almost always turn out to be—or to be indistinguishable from—self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time.”
Neal Stephenson (T-H-L) Cryptonomicon

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Poetlister » Sun Oct 20, 2019 2:37 pm

Would T&S really want another hoo-ha on the scale of Framgate, or maybe two in parallel? It would be a huge popcorn event, but it could be a turn-off for donors if this sort of thing keeps happening.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

AngelOne
Regular
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2014 6:39 pm

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by AngelOne » Thu Jun 24, 2021 7:22 pm

Ritchie is appealing the iban.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Poetlister » Thu Jun 24, 2021 8:27 pm

AngelOne wrote:
Thu Jun 24, 2021 7:22 pm
Ritchie is appealing the iban.
So far nine other editors have stuck their noses into this, including Floquenbeam (or Floq, as he describes himself). :popcorn:
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: Ritchie333

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Fri Jun 25, 2021 3:17 am

I actually think the interaction ban should be "enhanced," so as to prevent Ritchie333 from using the bathroom for non-face-splashing purposes only between the hours of 12pm to 4pm.

Post Reply