Wikipediocracy

Tarc wrote:

Vigilant wrote:

Tarc wrote:

Vigilant wrote:What's really striking is just how bad some of the people want to get rid of Kiefer.

You've got WormThatTurned turning in bullshit/false evidence after "recusing" himself from the case, getting called out on it, rightly, and then thrashing about.

I don't really get this line of attack. That he recused himself just means he's too involved in the matter to adjudicate it impartially, it has no affect whatsoever on his ability or right to comment on the case or give evidence. Arb cases, AN, ANI, Enforcement, etc... are chock full of "involved" commenters

When was the last time that you saw a judge recuse themselves from a case for being involved and then turn around and file a deposition?

I don't think such examples are terribly applicable to the insular Wiki-world. A recused Arb commenting or giving evidence doesn't carry any more weight then the input of others.

Vigilant wrote:

Tarc wrote:

Vigilant wrote:

Tarc wrote:

Vigilant wrote:What's really striking is just how bad some of the people want to get rid of Kiefer.

You've got WormThatTurned turning in bullshit/false evidence after "recusing" himself from the case, getting called out on it, rightly, and then thrashing about.

I don't really get this line of attack. That he recused himself just means he's too involved in the matter to adjudicate it impartially, it has no affect whatsoever on his ability or right to comment on the case or give evidence. Arb cases, AN, ANI, Enforcement, etc... are chock full of "involved" commenters

When was the last time that you saw a judge recuse themselves from a case for being involved and then turn around and file a deposition?

I don't think such examples are terribly applicable to the insular Wiki-world. A recused Arb commenting or giving evidence doesn't carry any more weight then the input of others.

Please.

Ironholds wrote: I will admit, I've been deficient in thinking

Tarc wrote:...I think at present, the Arb committee is as fractured and non-cabalistic as it ever has been, and the assumption that they'll just blindly accept whatever evidence that Worm has to give as the gospel truth is a bit naive.

This was an informal jokey exchange on IRC among people who know each other well: Ironholds, Kat and I have all known each other for years, and we are friendly. That's the context. A slightly broader point: IMO IRC is a medium that lends itself to, and is often used for, casual kibitzing -- it is essentially a social medium that provides a way for people to collapse physical distance and hang out together as though they were in the same room. In the same way that I don't think it would be useful to, years later, play back sections of a phone call or office water-cooler conversation, I also don't think it's useful to quote back sections of IRC dialogue. It's an ephemeral medium. Thanks Sue Gardner (talk) 16:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sue_Gardner

Peter Damian wrote:

This was an informal jokey exchange on IRC among people who know each other well: Ironholds, Kat and I have all known each other for years, and we are friendly. That's the context. A slightly broader point: IMO IRC is a medium that lends itself to, and is often used for, casual kibitzing -- it is essentially a social medium that provides a way for people to collapse physical distance and hang out together as though they were in the same room. In the same way that I don't think it would be useful to, years later, play back sections of a phone call or office water-cooler conversation, I also don't think it's useful to quote back sections of IRC dialogue. It's an ephemeral medium. Thanks Sue Gardner (talk) 16:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sue_Gardner

I thought about this. Has anyone here heard anyone by the coffee machine or water cooler talking about stabbing people through the windpipe or being sodomised with lube or whatever? If you did overhear that, would you edge nervously towards the door?

Peter Damian wrote:

This was an informal jokey exchange on IRC among people who know each other well: Ironholds, Kat and I have all known each other for years, and we are friendly. That's the context. A slightly broader point: IMO IRC is a medium that lends itself to, and is often used for, casual kibitzing -- it is essentially a social medium that provides a way for people to collapse physical distance and hang out together as though they were in the same room. In the same way that I don't think it would be useful to, years later, play back sections of a phone call or office water-cooler conversation, I also don't think it's useful to quote back sections of IRC dialogue. It's an ephemeral medium. Thanks Sue Gardner (talk) 16:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sue_Gardner

I thought about this. Has anyone here heard anyone by the coffee machine or water cooler talking about stabbing people through the windpipe or being sodomised with lube or whatever? If you did overhear that, would you edge nervously towards the door?

Vigilant wrote: No. I'd tell them to shut the fuck up and if I didn't like them then I'd walk down to HR and get their asses written up as psychos.

Having gone to college with a shoot 'em up killer and watched him do his thing on TV, I'd report this shit rather than let it slide.

dogbiscuit wrote:

Vigilant wrote: No. I'd tell them to shut the fuck up and if I didn't like them then I'd walk down to HR and get their asses written up as psychos.

Having gone to college with a shoot 'em up killer and watched him do his thing on TV, I'd report this shit rather than let it slide.

The disturbing thing about Ironholds is not only the casual use of violent imagery, but that he emphasised that he had assaulted people in the past. Add that to his self-proclaimed list of behavioural deficiencies (i.e. I am diagnosed anti-social so I can go around being vile and it is your problem as I should not have to accept restrictions nor do I have to attempt to restrict myself) and you have a recipe for disaster.

Vigilant wrote:Wow.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... 70573#Note

That makes a lot of sense. Recall exists, yes, and I'm open to it, but what precisely it constitutes - that is, the precise community disquiet necessary, whether it's a reconfirmation or a voluntary desysop, etc - is something that, I will admit, I've been deficient in thinking on, hence the not getting around to writing recall criteria. I'm willing to respect mechanisms other than ArbCom, but the precise details are, again, something I was deficient in identifying. Ironholds (talk) 23:02, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Would you like to borrow mine? You should come up with something; it's not really kosher to say you're open to recall, but unfortunately you can't be recalled because you haven't got any criteria. That's functionally indistinguishable from "I'm not open to recall". --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:24, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

That seems reasonable enough, and in the future I'm happy to use it - but as it says, fiddling recall about one way or another in situ is somewhat problematic. Ironholds (talk) 23:26, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

It's not problematic at all, when there is otherwise no way whatsoever to recall you. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

It seems clear we're not going to agree here. Once again, I consider the Committee pretty well suited to decide whether I'm competent enough to continue to hold the tools; for future instances, I will set up a recall mechanism, most probably based on yours, which seems eminently reasonable. On other points we seem to disagree, I'm afraid. Ironholds (talk) 23:37, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

But we don't disagree at all; I think my criteria are eminently reasonable; you think my criteria are eminently reasonable; the recaller and the recallee both agree on criteria, so there can't possibly be a problem in using them now. If your concern is that using my criteria would somehow be seen as "gaming", I assure you that saying you wish you could submit to a recall, but your hands are tied and you can't, will be seen as "gaming" by many, many more people. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:57, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

It's absolutely clear that he'd never retaint he bit and he's DESPERATE to hang onto it.

Peter Damian wrote:

dogbiscuit wrote:

Vigilant wrote: No. I'd tell them to shut the fuck up and if I didn't like them then I'd walk down to HR and get their asses written up as psychos.

Having gone to college with a shoot 'em up killer and watched him do his thing on TV, I'd report this shit rather than let it slide.

The disturbing thing about Ironholds is not only the casual use of violent imagery, but that he emphasised that he had assaulted people in the past. Add that to his self-proclaimed list of behavioural deficiencies (i.e. I am diagnosed anti-social so I can go around being vile and it is your problem as I should not have to accept restrictions nor do I have to attempt to restrict myself) and you have a recipe for disaster.

Sorry I missed that one. Where did Oliver Keyes admit to having assaulting people?

dogbiscuit wrote:

Peter Damian wrote:

dogbiscuit wrote:

Vigilant wrote: No. I'd tell them to shut the fuck up and if I didn't like them then I'd walk down to HR and get their asses written up as psychos.

Having gone to college with a shoot 'em up killer and watched him do his thing on TV, I'd report this shit rather than let it slide.

The disturbing thing about Ironholds is not only the casual use of violent imagery, but that he emphasised that he had assaulted people in the past. Add that to his self-proclaimed list of behavioural deficiencies (i.e. I am diagnosed anti-social so I can go around being vile and it is your problem as I should not have to accept restrictions nor do I have to attempt to restrict myself) and you have a recipe for disaster.

Sorry I missed that one. Where did Oliver Keyes admit to having assaulting people?

Bah! Can't find it. It was an IRC conversation where someone talked about wanting to punch someone and Ironholds said he'd done that. The other person misunderstood and Ironholds corrected saying that he had actually punched someone more than once at university. It's buried around here somewhere!

[19:54] <Bullzeye> I almost punched somebody out in college class today.
[19:54] <DanielB> lol
[19:54] <Ironholds> I have done that twice.
[19:54] <Cream> lol
[19:54] <Ironholds> Punched out, not almost punched out.


[19:58] <Ironholds> I would have done something different, but I admire the effort.
[19:58] <Mifter> so what happened next
[19:58] * MindstormsKid would have cheered Bullzeye on
[19:58] <Ironholds> You should however have instead taken your pen, punched a hole in her windpipe and looked on as her attempts to wave for help got increasingly feeble.

Peter Damian wrote:According to Sue Gardner, this is typically the kind of discussion that goes on at the water cooler between professionals.

Peter Damian wrote:

dogbiscuit wrote:

Vigilant wrote: No. I'd tell them to shut the fuck up and if I didn't like them then I'd walk down to HR and get their asses written up as psychos.

Having gone to college with a shoot 'em up killer and watched him do his thing on TV, I'd report this shit rather than let it slide.

The disturbing thing about Ironholds is not only the casual use of violent imagery, but that he emphasised that he had assaulted people in the past. Add that to his self-proclaimed list of behavioural deficiencies (i.e. I am diagnosed anti-social so I can go around being vile and it is your problem as I should not have to accept restrictions nor do I have to attempt to restrict myself) and you have a recipe for disaster.

Sorry I missed that one. Where did Oliver Keyes admit to having assaulting people?

Peter Damian wrote:Well he certainly mentions here:

[19:54] <Bullzeye> I almost punched somebody out in college class today.
[19:54] <DanielB> lol
[19:54] <Ironholds> I have done that twice.
[19:54] <Cream> lol
[19:54] <Ironholds> Punched out, not almost punched out.


[19:58] <Ironholds> I would have done something different, but I admire the effort.
[19:58] <Mifter> so what happened next
[19:58] * MindstormsKid would have cheered Bullzeye on
[19:58] <Ironholds> You should however have instead taken your pen, punched a hole in her windpipe and looked on as her attempts to wave for help got increasingly feeble.

So he boasts about physical violence at school, then immediately goes on about punching a hole in some woman's windpipe and looking on as her attempts to wave for help get increasingly feeble. According to Sue Gardner, this is typically the kind of discussion that goes on at the water cooler between professionals.

Peter Damian wrote:Well he certainly mentions here:

[19:54] <Bullzeye> I almost punched somebody out in college class today.
[19:54] <DanielB> lol
[19:54] <Ironholds> I have done that twice.
[19:54] <Cream> lol
[19:54] <Ironholds> Punched out, not almost punched out.


[19:58] <Ironholds> I would have done something different, but I admire the effort.
[19:58] <Mifter> so what happened next
[19:58] * MindstormsKid would have cheered Bullzeye on
[19:58] <Ironholds> You should however have instead taken your pen, punched a hole in her windpipe and looked on as her attempts to wave for help got increasingly feeble.

So he boasts about physical violence at school, then immediately goes on about punching a hole in some woman's windpipe and looking on as her attempts to wave for help get increasingly feeble. According to Sue Gardner, this is typically the kind of discussion that goes on at the water cooler between professionals.

Peter Damian wrote:Well he certainly mentions here:

[19:54] <Bullzeye> I almost punched somebody out in college class today.
[19:54] <DanielB> lol
[19:54] <Ironholds> I have done that twice.
[19:54] <Cream> lol
[19:54] <Ironholds> Punched out, not almost punched out.


[19:58] <Ironholds> I would have done something different, but I admire the effort.
[19:58] <Mifter> so what happened next
[19:58] * MindstormsKid would have cheered Bullzeye on
[19:58] <Ironholds> You should however have instead taken your pen, punched a hole in her windpipe and looked on as her attempts to wave for help got increasingly feeble.

So he boasts about physical violence at school, then immediately goes on about punching a hole in some woman's windpipe and looking on as her attempts to wave for help get increasingly feeble. According to Sue Gardner, this is typically the kind of discussion that goes on at the water cooler between professionals.

The Devil's Advocate wrote:

Peter Damian wrote:Well he certainly mentions here:

[19:54] <Bullzeye> I almost punched somebody out in college class today.
[19:54] <DanielB> lol
[19:54] <Ironholds> I have done that twice.
[19:54] <Cream> lol
[19:54] <Ironholds> Punched out, not almost punched out.


[19:58] <Ironholds> I would have done something different, but I admire the effort.
[19:58] <Mifter> so what happened next
[19:58] * MindstormsKid would have cheered Bullzeye on
[19:58] <Ironholds> You should however have instead taken your pen, punched a hole in her windpipe and looked on as her attempts to wave for help got increasingly feeble.

So he boasts about physical violence at school, then immediately goes on about punching a hole in some woman's windpipe and looking on as her attempts to wave for help get increasingly feeble. According to Sue Gardner, this is typically the kind of discussion that goes on at the water cooler between professionals.

Of course, he followed that up with "too much?" and a smiley face. It was clearly just being said for shock value. He seems to delight in saying offensive things now and again and I find it hard to hold that against him. Not that I think he didn't feel that way a bit, but that would be true for me and most, if not all, people as well in certain situations. Anyone here who has never expressed a desire for some dirty so-and-so to come to a fatal end in the near future, by your design or otherwise, is free to criticize him without being a hypocrite. Given that a member of this forum's staff once made a comment about wanting to slit some people's threats with box-cutters, I can hardly feel like it is appropriate for anyone here to react with indignation at a Wikimedia staffer making similarly violent remarks. The appropriate response in such situations is to express your shock or displeasure and wait for them to back off the comment. In this case, he backed off the comment without any real prompting.

Name: The Devil's Advocate

Apologist for: (check all that apply)

[ ] The French
[ ] Inclusionists
[ ] Jimbo
[x] Ku Klux Klansmen
[ ] Manscaping
[ ] Mimes 
[x] Misogynists
[x] Pedophiles
[ ] Quiche
[ ] Terrorists

Peter Damian wrote:I thought about this. Has anyone here heard anyone by the coffee machine or water cooler talking about stabbing people through the windpipe or being sodomised with lube or whatever? If you did overhear that, would you edge nervously towards the door?

Vigilant wrote:

Code: Select all

Name: The Devil's Advocate

Apologist for: (check all that apply)

[ ] The French
[ ] Inclusionists
[ ] Jimbo
[x] Ku Klux Klansmen
[ ] Manscaping
[ ] Mimes 
[x] Misogynists
[x] Pedophiles
[ ] Quiche
[ ] Terrorists
[x] Oliver Keyes

The Devil's Advocate wrote:

Vigilant wrote:

Code: Select all

Name: The Devil's Advocate

Apologist for: (check all that apply)

[ ] The French
[ ] Inclusionists
[ ] Jimbo
[x] Ku Klux Klansmen
[ ] Manscaping
[ ] Mimes 
[x] Misogynists
[x] Pedophiles
[ ] Quiche
[ ] Terrorists
[x] Oliver Keyes

You know, if you and Tarc are gonna make a list you should make it as complete as possible and add both your names, as well as Wikipediocracy to the list with a check next to each. I mean, unless you only use the term "apologist" when you want to malign someone for not agreeing with you and can not come up with a better line of attack.

Thu Nov 24 17:03:30 2011

101 06[17:14] * tommorris wonders if we could tempt the really fucking perverted by offering a premium Jimmy Wales [[RealDoll]].
102 15[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@host109-158-170-165.range109-158.btcentralplus.com) Quit (Changing host)
103 03[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@wikipedia/Panyd) has joined #wikipedia-en
104 [17:14] <_trollface_> still, a bobble head would be fun
105 [17:14] <_trollface_>

106 [17:15] <Ironholds> tommorris: we could have a Peter Damian one!
107 [17:15] <Ironholds> as anatomically vacant as a ken doll
108 [17:15] <tommorris> Ironholds: you have to pay extra for the shemale option
109 [17:15] <Ironholds> "punching him in the face feels like punching the real thing!"
110 [17:15] <tommorris> no, better yet, wire it up to a thread on Wikipedia Review. every time you punch it, it updates the post

The Devil's Advocate wrote:

Vigilant wrote:

Code: Select all

Name: The Devil's Advocate

Apologist for: (check all that apply)

[ ] The French
[ ] Inclusionists
[ ] Jimbo
[x] Ku Klux Klansmen
[ ] Manscaping
[ ] Mimes 
[x] Misogynists
[x] Pedophiles
[ ] Quiche
[ ] Terrorists
[x] Oliver Keyes

You know, if you and Tarc are gonna make a list you should make it as complete as possible and add both your names, as well as Wikipediocracy to the list with a check next to each. I mean, unless you only use the term "apologist" when you want to malign someone for not agreeing with you and can not come up with a better line of attack.

Peter Damian wrote:He’s talking about punching me too!

Thu Nov 24 17:03:30 2011

101 06[17:14] * tommorris wonders if we could tempt the really fucking perverted by offering a premium Jimmy Wales [[RealDoll]].
102 15[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@host109-158-170-165.range109-158.btcentralplus.com) Quit (Changing host)
103 03[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@wikipedia/Panyd) has joined #wikipedia-en
104 [17:14] <_trollface_> still, a bobble head would be fun
105 [17:14] <_trollface_>

106 [17:15] <Ironholds> tommorris: we could have a Peter Damian one!
107 [17:15] <Ironholds> as anatomically vacant as a ken doll
108 [17:15] <tommorris> Ironholds: you have to pay extra for the shemale option
109 [17:15] <Ironholds> "punching him in the face feels like punching the real thing!"
110 [17:15] <tommorris> no, better yet, wire it up to a thread on Wikipedia Review. every time you punch it, it updates the post

Vigilant wrote:What's really striking is just how bad some of the people want to get rid of Kiefer.

You've got WormThatTurned turning in bullshit/false evidence after "recusing" himself from the case, getting called out on it, rightly, and then thrashing about.

ARBCOM seems to be looking the other way on this because, like Oliver Keyes,WTT is in a higher caste than the accused.
Nick and Floquenbeam trying desperately to inject some good sense into the proceedings are being ignored and shushed to the corner. "The big people are talking now" type of head patting nonsense.

Worse yet, you have WTT and his grooming by Demiwit overshadowing the entire process.
Anyone who's been under the wing of that dragon should be watched pretty closely.
That Demiwit is allowed to participate in a case with one of his former proteges is as striking as it is vile.

Peter Damian wrote:Does anyone else here find this unbelievable and outrageous?

These are the people who banned me for supposed ‘harassment’ ?????

Peter Damian wrote:

Peter Damian wrote:He’s talking about punching me too!

Thu Nov 24 17:03:30 2011

101 06[17:14] * tommorris wonders if we could tempt the really fucking perverted by offering a premium Jimmy Wales [[RealDoll]].
102 15[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@host109-158-170-165.range109-158.btcentralplus.com) Quit (Changing host)
103 03[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@wikipedia/Panyd) has joined #wikipedia-en
104 [17:14] <_trollface_> still, a bobble head would be fun
105 [17:14] <_trollface_>

106 [17:15] <Ironholds> tommorris: we could have a Peter Damian one!
107 [17:15] <Ironholds> as anatomically vacant as a ken doll
108 [17:15] <tommorris> Ironholds: you have to pay extra for the shemale option
109 [17:15] <Ironholds> "punching him in the face feels like punching the real thing!"
110 [17:15] <tommorris> no, better yet, wire it up to a thread on Wikipedia Review. every time you punch it, it updates the post

Bloody hell I didn’t realise what a real doll was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Doll . Not like Barbie and Ken at all. So these nasty poisonous little creeps are saying there should be a sex doll of me, ‘anatomically vacant like Ken’, or perhaps with the ‘shemale option’. And suggesting that punching the doll in the face would feel the same as punching me. Presumably because it would feel good to punch me in real life. Does anyone else here find this unbelievable and outrageous?

These are the people who banned me for supposed ‘harassment’ ?????

DanMurphy wrote: In seriousness, I find it totally believable having watched Wikipedia for quite some time now. The thing to focus the criticism on of course is not Oliver Keyes - but rather on his bosses, starting with Sue Gardner.

Peter Damian wrote:

Peter Damian wrote:He’s talking about punching me too!

Thu Nov 24 17:03:30 2011

101 06[17:14] * tommorris wonders if we could tempt the really fucking perverted by offering a premium Jimmy Wales [[RealDoll]].
102 15[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@host109-158-170-165.range109-158.btcentralplus.com) Quit (Changing host)
103 03[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@wikipedia/Panyd) has joined #wikipedia-en
104 [17:14] <_trollface_> still, a bobble head would be fun
105 [17:14] <_trollface_>

106 [17:15] <Ironholds> tommorris: we could have a Peter Damian one!
107 [17:15] <Ironholds> as anatomically vacant as a ken doll
108 [17:15] <tommorris> Ironholds: you have to pay extra for the shemale option
109 [17:15] <Ironholds> "punching him in the face feels like punching the real thing!"
110 [17:15] <tommorris> no, better yet, wire it up to a thread on Wikipedia Review. every time you punch it, it updates the post

Bloody hell I didn’t realise what a real doll was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Doll . Not like Barbie and Ken at all. So these nasty poisonous little creeps are saying there should be a sex doll of me, ‘anatomically vacant like Ken’, or perhaps with the ‘shemale option’. And suggesting that punching the doll in the face would feel the same as punching me. Presumably because it would feel good to punch me in real life. Does anyone else here find this unbelievable and outrageous?

These are the people who banned me for supposed ‘harassment’ ?????

Peter Damian wrote:

Peter Damian wrote:He’s talking about punching me too!

Thu Nov 24 17:03:30 2011

101 06[17:14] * tommorris wonders if we could tempt the really fucking perverted by offering a premium Jimmy Wales [[RealDoll]].
102 15[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@host109-158-170-165.range109-158.btcentralplus.com) Quit (Changing host)
103 03[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@wikipedia/Panyd) has joined #wikipedia-en
104 [17:14] <_trollface_> still, a bobble head would be fun
105 [17:14] <_trollface_>

106 [17:15] <Ironholds> tommorris: we could have a Peter Damian one!
107 [17:15] <Ironholds> as anatomically vacant as a ken doll
108 [17:15] <tommorris> Ironholds: you have to pay extra for the shemale option
109 [17:15] <Ironholds> "punching him in the face feels like punching the real thing!"
110 [17:15] <tommorris> no, better yet, wire it up to a thread on Wikipedia Review. every time you punch it, it updates the post

Bloody hell I didn’t realise what a real doll was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Doll . Not like Barbie and Ken at all. So these nasty poisonous little creeps are saying there should be a sex doll of me, ‘anatomically vacant like Ken’, or perhaps with the ‘shemale option’. And suggesting that punching the doll in the face would feel the same as punching me. Presumably because it would feel good to punch me in real life. Does anyone else here find this unbelievable and outrageous?

These are the people who banned me for supposed ‘harassment’ ?????

TungstenCarbide wrote:

Peter Damian wrote:

Peter Damian wrote:He’s talking about punching me too!

Thu Nov 24 17:03:30 2011

101 06[17:14] * tommorris wonders if we could tempt the really fucking perverted by offering a premium Jimmy Wales [[RealDoll]].
102 15[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@host109-158-170-165.range109-158.btcentralplus.com) Quit (Changing host)
103 03[17:14] * Panyd (~Panyd@wikipedia/Panyd) has joined #wikipedia-en
104 [17:14] <_trollface_> still, a bobble head would be fun
105 [17:14] <_trollface_>

106 [17:15] <Ironholds> tommorris: we could have a Peter Damian one!
107 [17:15] <Ironholds> as anatomically vacant as a ken doll
108 [17:15] <tommorris> Ironholds: you have to pay extra for the shemale option
109 [17:15] <Ironholds> "punching him in the face feels like punching the real thing!"
110 [17:15] <tommorris> no, better yet, wire it up to a thread on Wikipedia Review. every time you punch it, it updates the post

Bloody hell I didn’t realise what a real doll was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Doll . Not like Barbie and Ken at all. So these nasty poisonous little creeps are saying there should be a sex doll of me, ‘anatomically vacant like Ken’, or perhaps with the ‘shemale option’. And suggesting that punching the doll in the face would feel the same as punching me. Presumably because it would feel good to punch me in real life. Does anyone else here find this unbelievable and outrageous?

These are the people who banned me for supposed ‘harassment’ ?????

Is that lawyer the WMF hired still snubbing you? I'd drop him a line. Threats of physical violence by a WMF employee need to be addressed.

DanMurphy wrote:I woke up this morning, saw the latest rape and death threats against women hacks in the UK, and decided to write something. This is how it came out.

Peter Damian wrote:I sent a fairly direct and clearly worded email to Gardner and Brigham. Tomorrow, phone.

DanMurphy wrote:I woke up this morning, saw the latest rape and death threats against women hacks in the UK, and decided to write something. This is how it came out.

Absolutely fantastic.

DanMurphy wrote:I woke up this morning, saw the latest rape and death threats against women hacks in the UK, and decided to write something. This is how it came out.

DanMurphy wrote:I woke up this morning, saw the latest rape and death threats against women hacks in the UK, and decided to write something. This is how it came out.

Vigilant wrote:

Peter Damian wrote:I sent a fairly direct and clearly worded email to Gardner and Brigham. Tomorrow, phone.

DanMurphy wrote:I woke up this morning, saw the latest rape and death threats against women hacks in the UK, and decided to write something. This is how it came out.

Absolutely fantastic.

I agree.

Perhaps it's time Oliver Keyes has his own wikipedia article.

DanMurphy wrote:I woke up this morning, saw the latest rape and death threats against women hacks in the UK, and decided to write something. This is how it came out.

… it's unlikely I will be commenting in this thread again. If people continue discussing it, here or elsewhere, I'd ask you to be careful with your language. Please be generous or at a minimum neutral in terms of how you characterize the behaviour of others. "Misogyny," for example, is a very strong word and a serious accusation: it shouldn't be lightly made. Thanks. Sue Gardner (talk) 17:05, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

"Misogyny" is the correct word to describe the advocacy of shooting named women and punching a hole in the windpipe of a woman to prolong her suffocation. It's also used by a leading newspaper: Murphy, Dan (1 August 2013). "In UK, rising chorus of outrage over online misogyny: Recent events in Britain draw more attention to endemic hostility towards women online". The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved 1 August 2013.
Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:26, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

DanMurphy wrote:Thanks for the kind words here. I really do believe casually expressed "jokes" about violence towards women is a form of misogyny.

Oh yeah: I'm a sort of reporter/columnist hybrid, so am allowed unusual leeway to express some opinion. It's different than the CSM's strictly hard news pages (which I also contribute to). Probably obvious, but in case it aint.

Peter Damian wrote:

… it's unlikely I will be commenting in this thread again. If people continue discussing it, here or elsewhere, I'd ask you to be careful with your language. Please be generous or at a minimum neutral in terms of how you characterize the behaviour of others. "Misogyny," for example, is a very strong word and a serious accusation: it shouldn't be lightly made. Thanks. Sue Gardner (talk) 17:05, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

"Misogyny" is the correct word to describe the advocacy of shooting named women and punching a hole in the windpipe of a woman to prolong her suffocation. It's also used by a leading newspaper:

Murphy, Dan (1 August 2013). "In UK, rising chorus of outrage over online misogyny: Recent events in Britain draw more attention to endemic hostility towards women online". The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved 1 August 2013.

Kiefer.Wolfowitz 20:26, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

How do you describe the proposal to buy sex dolls in the likeness of Jimbo Wales and (by Ironholds) Peter Damien and to use the latter as a punching bag? (24 November 2011, employed as "Wikimedia Foundation community liaison")

Mancunium wrote:Edit: blog.ironholds.org is now "403 Forbidden" to me, but I can still read it by following the link at GitHub: link

Cute he is.

Persuasive or credible, he isn't.
I would guess he is writing ''there'' because, well, you know.

DanMurphy wrote:I woke up this morning, saw the latest rape and death threats against women hacks in the UK, and decided to write something. This is how it came out.