WP Sado-Masochism Festival — It's 2017 Arbcom Election Time!

[DHeyward]

To get back on track here, if editors are unable to either understand reasoned argument or effectively communicate their own argument, ARBCOM is probably a poor choice. But it's apparently not a disqualifying disposition.

Strongest Possible Support - "Snarky and iconoclastic. A reasonable and intelligent person."

I would agree that Drmies is "Snarky and iconoclastic. A reasonable and intelligent person." That's not what I criticised. I understand that he believes I misunderstood him and a person with greater understanding than me might have considered that beforehand. I failed the same test. But I am not running for ArbCom and have no doubt where an RfA would end.

[CrowsNest]

To get back on track here, if editors are unable to either understand reasoned argument or effectively communicate their own argument, ARBCOM is probably a poor choice. But it's apparently not a disqualifying disposition.

Strongest Possible Support - "Snarky and iconoclastic. A reasonable and intelligent person."

I would agree that Drmies is "Snarky and iconoclastic. A reasonable and intelligent person." That's not what I criticised. I understand that he believes I misunderstood him and a person with greater understanding than me might have considered that beforehand. I failed the same test. But I am not running for ArbCom and have no doubt where an RfA would end.

He believes you were trying to support your "colleague" nay "friend", Anythingyouwant, he believes you were trying to make excuses for Moore, and he doesn't believe you or Anythingyouwant were trying to uphold BLP - quite the reverse, he accused him of knowingly POV edit warring and so by extension you of being a supporter of such practices.

He said all that, in an AE report filed by a known POV warrior bitching about how Anythingyouwant isn't working to find consensus. He said these things the day after both of you had already worked toward a satisfactory outcome on the talk page, which essentially does what the people who were concerned about re. BLP wanted, and no longer has the article saying what Drmies and the rest of the people for whom BLP is in this case a terrible inconvenience, seems to want it to say.

You my friend are very understanding if you just let all that slide as some kind of misunderstanding. These are not misunderstandings. These are the acts of a person without a shred of good faith or integrity in their body. These are the acts of someone who knows they are a powerful admin arguing with someone who is not and never will be an admin.

Considering you would never actually get justice for any of these crimes if you reported them, then "Fuck off, douchebag." is the only understandably human response. It is only robots or game players or people so addicted to Wikipedia they're happy to eat shit and say it tastes like strawberry, who would react to such treatment with faux politeness or worse, actual remorse.

The fucked up thing here, is there were people lining up to urge Drmies to stand again. Here's some of the plaudits he received....

-judgement
-good and fair-minded
-experienced, and neutral
-deft touch
-balls
-ability to actually understand the point at issue

It strikes me there's a lot of denial going around about who these people really are, what they really do. Or people just don't bother doing even the most basic research. There are better people than this on Wikipedia, people who are light years better in terms of temperament, people skills and clue. They would make fine Arbs.

Everybody's going around scratching their heads at why editors in general appear to be giving up on ArbCom, the elections, their main function, or trying to get community buy-in to reform it. People in general have just seemingly washed their hands of the whole lot. The answer's been staring them all in the face for years - seriously bad people managing to get onto the panel, even when there have been better options on the ballot. It's come to a head this year, where the number of genuinely good candidates has dropped to a laughable one, maybe two at a push, and people seem to actually be seriously considering a TRuMp candidate, just to blow it all up.

They might just do that. A panel with this guy on it being the last ever ArbCom, that seems right, considering what he did to you would disqualify anyone from holding a janitorial position in a university, never mind a tenured post. In theory, it is behaviour that is not accepted on Wikipedia, and he should be the one receiving warnings and threats, not the other way around. But of course you can't really achieve that culture in practice if the community lacks the sort of leadership by example and decision that is required in ArbCom.

[Randy from Boise]

To get back on track here, if editors are unable to either understand reasoned argument or effectively communicate their own argument, ARBCOM is probably a poor choice. But it's apparently not a disqualifying disposition.

Strongest Possible Support - "Snarky and iconoclastic. A reasonable and intelligent person."

Guess who's voter guide that came from.....

That's not a bad 8 word assessment, if I do say so myself. If I were to double the length, I might add: "Can sometimes be a bit of a douche."

I like him, don't get me wrong...

RfB

[CrowsNest]

To get back on track here, if editors are unable to either understand reasoned argument or effectively communicate their own argument, ARBCOM is probably a poor choice. But it's apparently not a disqualifying disposition.

Strongest Possible Support - "Snarky and iconoclastic. A reasonable and intelligent person."

Guess who's voter guide that came from.....

That's not a bad 8 word assessment, if I do say so myself. If I were to double the length, I might add: "Can sometimes be a bit of a douche."

I like him, don't get me wrong...

RfB

Now I just want to know the Carrite douche percentage stats.

Actually, can we have a scale that measures in units of TRuMp?

[Volunteer Marek]

Sock hunters of Wikipedia, you're looking for a rude, opinionated, militant left, policy abusing, clique forming, bully boy who admires Drmies. Should be easy to narrow down that search!

Edit: Actually, that was disappointingly easy. Tarc got banned in September 2015, the same month that car crash of an editor Snooganssnoogans was birthed into the Wikiverse.

You're joking, right?

[Volunteer Marek]

I haven't seen it mentioned here yet and I don't know how many are watching but there is a discussion on Jimbo's talk page here:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales%20 about the significant drop in voting for Arbcom than last year. According to this link:https://vote.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special ... ist/673%20 only about 320 total have voted so far and the vast majority are admins, former arbs, WMF employees and functionaries.

The argument could be made that it's due to no mass message being sent out yet, however, since there was a link on the watchlists and all the regulars know this is the time, it's really a pretty weak argument. If the community really cared, they would vote and they shouldn't need to be spammed with notices just to get them engaged.

This gives some insight into how the majority of the editing community who are doing the real work to improve Wikipedia feel about the arbcom; they don't have the time to bother with them. The arbcom as an organization is no longer needed in Wikipedia and the community is showing that in the lack of votes.

What's funny is seeing people from Commons like Michael Maggs or Meta members who have almost zero involvement in EnWP voting for the EnWP arbitration committee.

Usually you get hit with that "Voting is now open" banner plus the spam on your talk. That hasn't happened this year. Yet.

[Volunteer Marek]

To get back on track here, if editors are unable to either understand reasoned argument or effectively communicate their own argument, ARBCOM is probably a poor choice. But it's apparently not a disqualifying disposition.

Strongest Possible Support - "Snarky and iconoclastic. A reasonable and intelligent person."

I would agree that Drmies is "Snarky and iconoclastic. A reasonable and intelligent person." That's not what I criticised. I understand that he believes I misunderstood him and a person with greater understanding than me might have considered that beforehand. I failed the same test. But I am not running for ArbCom and have no doubt where an RfA would end.

He believes you were trying to support your "colleague" nay "friend", Anythingyouwant, he believes you were trying to make excuses for Moore, and he doesn't believe you or Anythingyouwant were trying to uphold BLP - quite the reverse, he accused him of knowingly POV edit warring and so by extension you of being a supporter of such practices.

He said all that, in an AE report filed by a known POV warrior bitching about how Anythingyouwant isn't working to find consensus. He said these things the day after both of you had already worked toward a satisfactory outcome on the talk page, which essentially does what the people who were concerned about re. BLP wanted, and no longer has the article saying what Drmies and the rest of the people for whom BLP is in this case a terrible inconvenience, seems to want it to say.

You my friend are very understanding if you just let all that slide as some kind of misunderstanding. These are not misunderstandings. These are the acts of a person without a shred of good faith or integrity in their body. These are the acts of someone who knows they are a powerful admin arguing with someone who is not and never will be an admin.

Considering you would never actually get justice for any of these crimes if you reported them, then "Fuck off, douchebag." is the only understandably human response. It is only robots or game players or people so addicted to Wikipedia they're happy to eat shit and say it tastes like strawberry, who would react to such treatment with faux politeness or worse, actual remorse.

The fucked up thing here, is there were people lining up to urge Drmies to stand again. Here's some of the plaudits he received....

-judgement
-good and fair-minded
-experienced, and neutral
-deft touch
-balls
-ability to actually understand the point at issue

It strikes me there's a lot of denial going around about who these people really are, what they really do. Or people just don't bother doing even the most basic research. There are better people than this on Wikipedia, people who are light years better in terms of temperament, people skills and clue. They would make fine Arbs.

Everybody's going around scratching their heads at why editors in general appear to be giving up on ArbCom, the elections, their main function, or trying to get community buy-in to reform it. People in general have just seemingly washed their hands of the whole lot. The answer's been staring them all in the face for years - seriously bad people managing to get onto the panel, even when there have been better options on the ballot. It's come to a head this year, where the number of genuinely good candidates has dropped to a laughable one, maybe two at a push, and people seem to actually be seriously considering a TRuMp candidate, just to blow it all up.

They might just do that. A panel with this guy on it being the last ever ArbCom, that seems right, considering what he did to you would disqualify anyone from holding a janitorial position in a university, never mind a tenured post. In theory, it is behaviour that is not accepted on Wikipedia, and he should be the one receiving warnings and threats, not the other way around. But of course you can't really achieve that culture in practice if the community lacks the sort of leadership by example and decision that is required in ArbCom.

or... you haven't the foggiest idea of what you're talking about.

[CrowsNest]

or... you haven't the foggiest idea of what you're talking about.

Well, obviously I disagree. If only there was some way we could resolve this impasse. On the one side, there's you, a Wikipedian, claiming I'm clueless. And then there's me, with all my facts and dates and quotes and reasoning. God, how will anyone ever decide who is right?

[Volunteer Marek]

or... you haven't the foggiest idea of what you're talking about.

Well, obviously I disagree. If only there was some way we could resolve this impasse. On the one side, there's you, a Wikipedian, claiming I'm clueless. And then there's me, with all my facts and dates and quotes and reasoning. God, how will anyone ever decide who is right?

Dude. You called the fact that someone said something on Wikipedia a "crime" that should be "reported" and which "deserved justice". And we're not talking about something awful or out of line. Just one editor being mildly critical of another editor.

Also, you think Snooganssnoogans is Tarc.

Those aren't "facts and dates and quotes and seasonings". Those are stupidities.

[CrowsNest]

or... you haven't the foggiest idea of what you're talking about.

Well, obviously I disagree. If only there was some way we could resolve this impasse. On the one side, there's you, a Wikipedian, claiming I'm clueless. And then there's me, with all my facts and dates and quotes and reasoning. God, how will anyone ever decide who is right?

Dude. You called the fact that someone said something on Wikipedia a "crime" that should be "reported" and which "deserved justice". And we're not talking about something awful or out of line. Just one editor being mildly critical of another editor.

Also, you think Snooganssnoogans is Tarc.

Those aren't "facts and dates and quotes and seasonings". Those are stupidities.

Seriously? This is the best you could come up with? Not even worth answering. Pure desperation.

[CrowsNest]

Looks like TRM has effectively given up, judging by the morose tone of his talk page posts.

Ealdgyth has told him she voted for him, apparently not seeing the irony that her comment is in the same section as where Iridescent is begging TRM not to GA review one of EEng's articles because it would create World War III due to their past history of conflict (I thought inter-editor conflict was impossible when you were dealing solely with no nonsense personalities who are all about the encyclopedia?).

As if he hadn't done enough unintentionally, TRM actually seems to be purposefully trying to wreck his own chances by suggesting that if he is elected, first thing he's doing is to rummage through the arbcom-archives and release to the community any information he deems they would find informative as to their working practices. Naturally his focus is the usual me me me, but I imagine if he found material of interest that related to other cases, he'd deem it releasable for the same reasons.

[DHeyward]

To get back on track here, if editors are unable to either understand reasoned argument or effectively communicate their own argument, ARBCOM is probably a poor choice. But it's apparently not a disqualifying disposition.

Strongest Possible Support - "Snarky and iconoclastic. A reasonable and intelligent person."

Guess who's voter guide that came from.....

That's not a bad 8 word assessment, if I do say so myself. If I were to double the length, I might add: "Can sometimes be a bit of a douche."

I like him, don't get me wrong...

RfB

lol. I like him too. And added that other thing too.

[CrowsNest]

To get back on track here, if editors are unable to either understand reasoned argument or effectively communicate their own argument, ARBCOM is probably a poor choice. But it's apparently not a disqualifying disposition.

Strongest Possible Support - "Snarky and iconoclastic. A reasonable and intelligent person."

Guess who's voter guide that came from.....

That's not a bad 8 word assessment, if I do say so myself. If I were to double the length, I might add: "Can sometimes be a bit of a douche."

I like him, don't get me wrong...

RfB

lol. I like him too. And added that other thing too.

Is this some kind of abusive relationship thing? The worse he treats you, the better you like it? Cannot get my head around it. What's to like? Is it like the admiration of the bad boy you can never be? Baffled. The other day he indef blocked a user who had made 1 edit, not vandalism just unsourced but sourceable, and he justified it as NOTHERE. The reason? He obviously suspected that "RedditUser9" was one of the people who had been giving him shit on Reddit. There was nothing else to it but the name, the edit itself was innocuous, and if he was using CU data he certainly didn't mention it. That's next level corruption there, since he basically knows nobody will call him out for it, because who does that? Step to the snarky douche Arb for basic and obvious corruption, against a user you don't even know? Either of you feel like you have enough wikistatus to be stepping to your bro to engage in a bit of ADMINACCT? Let's test how deep this affection goes.....can it break the bonds of the brotherhood? Do you dare take the ultimate test of just how unreasonable and unintelligent he might be capable of being (because on the face of it, if there is no unseen evidence to justify this block, this was a crazy and stupid move, completely and totally off the charts).

[CrowsNest]

Mailer Diablo just gave a very good explanation as to why it's a good idea not to have a watchlist, in response to Bishonen, who seems to have had no idea why people would even do such a thing (no surprise, she's not exactly open minded or all that smart). To summarise...

-it lowers wikistress
-focuses your time on content creation
-reduces ownership tendencies
-reduces mistakes made by not looking at the full page history
-stops you from gawping at drama
-there are easier ways to keep track of stuff that is genuinely important

Bearing in mind this is a guy who is laughingly dismissed by some as not a content creator, or worse, a career wiki-wonk (at 24% main space, he fits Carrite's definition to a tee), it is refreshing to see this perfect reminder that Wikipedia is full of people who wouldn't know a wise person who is totally focused on the real goals of Wikipedia, if he hit them in the face.

Naturally, Ealdgyth has him down as "Oppose". She says she "Cannot support a user who has made less than 500 edits in the last year." Seriously, she actually says that, like it makes perfect sense when talking about a guy whose career average is almost 5,000 a year.

I'm telling you now, Wikipedia will ultimately fail because its loudest and rudest supporters, are the ones with the least amount of CLUE about the project. Examples like this which prove it, can be found literally every single day.

They're too stupid to see it, because they're busy OWNing shit or being knee deep in drama to protect their pathetic little clan, or just generally insulting their fellow editors, often over incidents triggered by simple mistakes where stress and lack of due care and attention is a factor.

These are the people who will eventually persuade the likes of Mailer Diablo, despite all their evident commitment to the idea of Wikipedia, that there are just better things in life to spend your time on. Then they'll have an ArbCom comprising the likes of Bishonen, Ealdgyth and TRM, because nobody else will want the job. And six months later, it will be just a flaming ruin., with people standing around happily declaring they don't even want to piss on it.

[CrowsNest]

Bishonen is also trying to start some shit with Alex Shih. She's basically trying to shame him into answering questions from someone he is ignoring because they're a troll, in his view. As everyone here knows, it's a rule of the Wikipedians that if you label someone a troll, that entitles you to not answer their questions, and not suffer any consequences. It's a fucked up system with some pretty obvious flaws, but it's the system they operate, and Bishonen uses it to her advantage many times. So it seems off for her to be trying to pressurise him into answering. Well, maybe not so odd when you realise which specific question she would like answered.......

One of the voter guide writers mentions that shortly after announcing your candidacy, you "popped over to the Wikipediocracy (widely described as a site critical of Wikipedia) message board" ostensibly as a way to canvass off-wiki. No other candidates have done so. Do you find that to be appropriate? What's your position on "stealth canvassing'?

I don't know whose guide says this, but I think we need to find out.

[Zoloft]

Bishonen is also trying to start some shit with Alex Shih. She's basically trying to shame him into answering questions from someone he is ignoring because they're a troll, in his view. As everyone here knows, it's a rule of the Wikipedians that if you label someone a troll, that entitles you to not answer their questions, and not suffer any consequences. It's a fucked up system with some pretty obvious flaws, but it's the system they operate, and Bishonen uses it to her advantage many times. So it seems off for her to be trying to pressurise him into answering. Well, maybe not so odd when you realise which specific question she would like answered.......

One of the voter guide writers mentions that shortly after announcing your candidacy, you "popped over to the Wikipediocracy (widely described as a site critical of Wikipedia) message board" ostensibly as a way to canvass off-wiki. No other candidates have done so. Do you find that to be appropriate? What's your position on "stealth canvassing'?

I don't know whose guide says this, but I think we need to find out.

Randy from Boise seems to have read them all. Randy?

[CrowsNest]

Bishonen is also trying to start some shit with Alex Shih. She's basically trying to shame him into answering questions from someone he is ignoring because they're a troll, in his view. As everyone here knows, it's a rule of the Wikipedians that if you label someone a troll, that entitles you to not answer their questions, and not suffer any consequences. It's a fucked up system with some pretty obvious flaws, but it's the system they operate, and Bishonen uses it to her advantage many times. So it seems off for her to be trying to pressurise him into answering. Well, maybe not so odd when you realise which specific question she would like answered.......

One of the voter guide writers mentions that shortly after announcing your candidacy, you "popped over to the Wikipediocracy (widely described as a site critical of Wikipedia) message board" ostensibly as a way to canvass off-wiki. No other candidates have done so. Do you find that to be appropriate? What's your position on "stealth canvassing'?

I don't know whose guide says this, but I think we need to find out.

Randy from Boise seems to have read them all. Randy?

Turns out it was Carrite's guide, but his version says merely this.....

After the start of the election Alex has popped over to the Wikipediocracy message board to say hello (don't hold it against him, New York Brad periodically does the same thing).

[CrowsNest]

I have reviewed the guides, categorising recommendations as strong or weak support/oppose, plus neutral and no comment. It seems to predict the following result......

Callanecc will poll top, having only registered supports, three strongly, or neutral. Second will see Katie steam in as the surprise people's favourite - only one oppose, but having two more supports where Callanecc got neutrals.

There will be clear daylight from those two, to the next three finishers, who all have smaller but still sizable support bases, but clearly have their detractors or waverers. If we assume a higher drag factor from having two opposer's instead of one, and a lower boost from having less strong supports, then their finishing order will be Rick, Worm and Opabina.

Next will be a dead heat between PMC and Rob, two very well supported candidates, but seemingly without star power. You can't split them, by virtue of one having one more oppose, the other having one more strong support, but if we weight the oppose more, Chaos beats Rob by a nose.

Next comes the people who really do divide opinion - the difference in net levels of confidence as we drop down the order, is frankly huge. Alex Shih just shades it over SmCandlish, with the only real differentiator of their similar profiles being one guide which strongly opposes one but strongly supports the other, suggesting Alex's numerical support advantage otherwise, winning the day for him.

Next comes the bottom of the barrel, the first candidates who actually have net negative levels of confidence. Amazingly, Mailer Diablo has been totally punished for his crime of taking some time out, now being deemed comparable in stature to scum like TRM. You would assume Diablo beats TRM because he simply has less detractors, but don't rule out a surprise reverse, since TRM has more numbers and a higher strength of support.

With only one support among a sea of opposes, it's not hard to guess who will be occupying the lonely position of the next galaxy over from even the likes of TRM, in the final tally.

[Poetlister]

Also, you think Snooganssnoogans is Tarc.

I don't think he really does. It looks like a subtle joke.

[Tarc]

Sock hunters of Wikipedia, you're looking for a rude, opinionated, militant left, policy abusing, clique forming, bully boy who admires Drmies. Should be easy to narrow down that search!

Edit: Actually, that was disappointingly easy. Tarc got banned in September 2015, the same month that car crash of an editor Snooganssnoogans was birthed into the Wikiverse.

Then by all means, file that sock request. is in hand.

Anyways,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ss_message?

is a hoot. They're still scrambling to get a mass notification out, although Gerda Arendt doesn't want to trust the unwashed masses with something so precious as Wiki-democracy.

[CrowsNest]

Sock hunters of Wikipedia, you're looking for a rude, opinionated, militant left, policy abusing, clique forming, bully boy who admires Drmies. Should be easy to narrow down that search!

Edit: Actually, that was disappointingly easy. Tarc got banned in September 2015, the same month that car crash of an editor Snooganssnoogans was birthed into the Wikiverse.

Then by all means, file that sock request. is in hand.

Your overconfidence and known lack of tradecraft makes it a tempting proposition.....I almost launched into a long post outlining my philosophy, credentials and other reasons why you really shouldn't be so casual with who you invite to a wiki-party, but then I thought, it's Tarc, why waste the effort, he's never given any indication he has the capacity to appreciate true art or real justice, even though he has often tried to masquerade as an artiste and judge.

Needless of say, Snoog is an obvious retread of an obnoxious editor who seems to have gone far enough in this new identity to likely be somewhat annoyed at being unmasked, so he has it coming. As such, he will probably find his way to me or a fellow traveller, regardless of whether he is you. Indeed, it is almost more motivating to begin the game given who he is, than who you are/were.

[Tarc]

Sock hunters of Wikipedia, you're looking for a rude, opinionated, militant left, policy abusing, clique forming, bully boy who admires Drmies. Should be easy to narrow down that search!

Edit: Actually, that was disappointingly easy. Tarc got banned in September 2015, the same month that car crash of an editor Snooganssnoogans was birthed into the Wikiverse.

Then by all means, file that sock request. is in hand.

...blather...

Perhaps when your introduce yourself by a name I may recognize, from Wikipedia/WR/ocracy or wherever you crawled out from under, I may actually be able to place a value upon your opinions and observations. Until then, you're filed under "nil".

Even though I am proudly a free-loving anti-GG, antifa, social justice warrior, I did not return to the Wikipedia it further those aims. At the moment I just rather enjoy muddying the waters of the Wiki-cesspool that is the American Politics topic area. Hell, I even voted against myself at DRV once.

[CrowsNest]

[normal Tarc service, orisit?]

Noted. Filed under "cool story bro". Out of respect for Kingsindian's desire for a navigable thread, if you really want to play more, take it elsewhere.

[CrowsNest]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =813098275

Here's Floquenbeam dismissing a lame but harmless joke poking fun at the dysfunction of the electoral process, as the work of a "smug little shit", seems over the line even for him. The specific wording used, is reminiscent of the old days, where Jimbo tried to enforce admin standards by blocking Bishonen for using literally these same words to dismiss a user.

Amazing to think this sort of thing doesn't even raise an eyebrow these days, never mind prompt a clear message from anyone in a leadership role to remind people it isn't normal, and is still, theoretically, considered conduct unbecoming an admin, certainly given they are still, theoretically, held to a higher standard.

ArbCom are there to provide leadership. Theoretically.

[Tarc]

[normal Tarc service, orisit?]

Noted. Filed under "cool story bro".

I kinda figured you'd be a coward and decline to put a name to your face. Welcome to the Ignore List.

[CrowsNest]

The Rambling Man has peppered the talk pages with semi-coherent conspiracy theory rants against the WMF and the other candidates. Clearly this is a continuation of his effort to tank his own campaign. I think, just like his inspiration, he rather liked the idea of standing to boost his profile and get more use out of his soapbox on the campaign trail, but is properly shitting himself at the thought of winning and so having to actually do the job. You cannot imagine a single other candidate or current Arb bearing to even be in the same mailing list as him. Shame on anyone who, for whatever reason, from thoughtlessness to sheer malice, thinks this guy would be a safe pair of hands to trust the delicate and sensitive matters ArbCom deals with.

[Salvidrim]

Btw, Salvidrim is a member here, and may want to comment, though I am not sure it would be a wise thing to do when being the subject of an ArbCom case (which looks likely to be accepted).

[CrowsNest]

Btw, Salvidrim is a member here, and may want to comment, though I am not sure it would be a wise thing to do when being the subject of an ArbCom case (which looks likely to be accepted).

[CrowsNest]

There's another voter guide.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:The_ ... ll/ACE2017

I will not be updating my vg forecast with it, since I am confident it will have minimal impact on other people's intentions, for various reasons.

[DHeyward]

[normal Tarc service, orisit?]

Noted. Filed under "cool story bro".

I kinda figured you'd be a coward and decline to put a name to your face. Welcome to the Ignore List.

You seem to know my name so what's your name so I can put a face to it?

[Poetlister]

A name.

It is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other word would smell as sweet;

[Randy from Boise]

I finally received notification of the election on my User Talk page today... This should have happened the day voting opened, or one day previous...

RfB

[Kumioko]

It seems to have accounted for only a modest increase in votes and voters.

[Ming]

I finally received notification of the election on my User Talk page today... This should have happened the day voting opened, or one day previous...

RfB

It seems to be going off sporadically. Ming got it on one machine the day after voting started, but on Ming's other usual machine it didn't show up for most of a week.

[Boing! said Zebedee]

I finally received notification of the election on my User Talk page today... This should have happened the day voting opened, or one day previous...

RfB

They apparently had all kinds of technical difficulties creating the list of eligible voters and only got it sorted yesterday. There's some discussion here - linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ss_message[/link]

[Carcharoth]

I finally received notification of the election on my User Talk page today... This should have happened the day voting opened, or one day previous...

RfB

They apparently had all kinds of technical difficulties creating the list of eligible voters and only got it sorted yesterday. There's some discussion here - linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... ss_message[/link]

From that page, there is a section: Getting some kind of message out. Am I reading that right? A sitting candidate in the election (User:BU Rob13) generated a list of voters to be used to determine who is eligible to vote, says it is not perfect but "better than nothing", and offers it up to the election commissioners for them to use. How is that acceptable? (Mainly the appearance that such an action produces and the lack of judgement in seeing that candidates shouldn't be getting involved in the mechanics of the election.)

[Poetlister]

Am I reading that right? A sitting candidate in the election (User:BU Rob13) generated a list of voters to be used to determine who is eligible to vote, says it is not perfect but "better than nothing", and offers it up to the election commissioners for them to use. How is that acceptable? (Mainly the appearance that such an action produces and the lack of judgement in seeing that candidates shouldn't be getting involved in the mechanics of the election.)

It's up to the commissioners what to do with the list, but it does look stupid.

[TNT]

Am I reading that right? A sitting candidate in the election (User:BU Rob13) generated a list of voters to be used to determine who is eligible to vote, says it is not perfect but "better than nothing", and offers it up to the election commissioners for them to use. How is that acceptable? (Mainly the appearance that such an action produces and the lack of judgement in seeing that candidates shouldn't be getting involved in the mechanics of the election.)

It's up to the commissioners what to do with the list, but it does look stupid.

something something vote rigging? I doubt it, but it does raise a worrying concern that the candidate thought this was appropriate..

[Kingsindian]

Hopefully not necessary now that we have a clean source file. ~ Rob13Talk 20:18, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

From a cursory glance, they used some other method to get the list of people.

Generating a query on Quarry should not be necessary. The list of voters who are eligible for this election has been emailed to the commissioners. (It somehow got garbled the first time, but this time it should work.) It does not filter for activity within the last year. I believe we gave the same list to the commissioners last year, and that Mdann52 found some kind of solution for this then — assuming my memory is correct. Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

[TNT]

Hopefully not necessary now that we have a clean source file. ~ Rob13Talk 20:18, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

From a cursory glance, they used some other method to get the list of people.

Generating a query on Quarry should not be necessary. The list of voters who are eligible for this election has been emailed to the commissioners. (It somehow got garbled the first time, but this time it should work.) It does not filter for activity within the last year. I believe we gave the same list to the commissioners last year, and that Mdann52 found some kind of solution for this then — assuming my memory is correct. Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Ah, right then..

[Kumioko]

Am I reading that right? A sitting candidate in the election (User:BU Rob13) generated a list of voters to be used to determine who is eligible to vote, says it is not perfect but "better than nothing", and offers it up to the election commissioners for them to use. How is that acceptable? (Mainly the appearance that such an action produces and the lack of judgement in seeing that candidates shouldn't be getting involved in the mechanics of the election.)

It's up to the commissioners what to do with the list, but it does look stupid.

something something vote rigging? I doubt it, but it does raise a worrying concern that the candidate thought this was appropriate..

As I have mentioned elsewhere I have strong suspicions (as do others) that BU Rob is a sock of some previously blocked editor anyway. So this conduct along with the obvious hat collecting that Rob has been doing just help illustrate even more why they shouldn't be on Arbcom....or even an admin!

[Tarc]

Am I reading that right? A sitting candidate in the election (User:BU Rob13) generated a list of voters to be used to determine who is eligible to vote, says it is not perfect but "better than nothing", and offers it up to the election commissioners for them to use. How is that acceptable? (Mainly the appearance that such an action produces and the lack of judgement in seeing that candidates shouldn't be getting involved in the mechanics of the election.)

It's up to the commissioners what to do with the list, but it does look stupid.

something something vote rigging? I doubt it, but it does raise a worrying concern that the candidate thought this was appropriate..

As I have mentioned elsewhere I have strong suspicions (as do others) that BU Rob is a sock of some previously blocked editor anyway. So this conduct along with the obvious hat collecting that Rob has been doing just help illustrate even more why they shouldn't be on Arbcom....or even an admin!

BU Rob13 does have a curious start to his editorial career.

June 2015 creation date
1st edit to to a Template deletion discussion. Edits after that carry out delinking, etc...type actions of other TfDs

9 June 2015, already using HotCat

User talk page as of 10 June 2015. Several users drop by to note his New Page Patrol and other actions and give him suggestions. Responses are of the "Gee I'd love to but alas I'm not auto-confirmed yet" variety.

Answers given at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/BU Rob13 (T-H-L) when asked about past accounts were evasive and unconvincing.

[Salvidrim]

Am I reading that right? A sitting candidate in the election (User:BU Rob13) generated a list of voters to be used to determine who is eligible to vote, says it is not perfect but "better than nothing", and offers it up to the election commissioners for them to use. How is that acceptable? (Mainly the appearance that such an action produces and the lack of judgement in seeing that candidates shouldn't be getting involved in the mechanics of the election.)

It's up to the commissioners what to do with the list, but it does look stupid.

something something vote rigging? I doubt it, but it does raise a worrying concern that the candidate thought this was appropriate..

As I have mentioned elsewhere I have strong suspicions (as do others) that BU Rob is a sock of some previously blocked editor anyway. So this conduct along with the obvious hat collecting that Rob has been doing just help illustrate even more why they shouldn't be on Arbcom....or even an admin!

BU Rob13 does have a curious start to his editorial career.

June 2015 creation date
1st edit to to a Template deletion discussion. Edits after that carry out delinking, etc...type actions of other TfDs

9 June 2015, already using HotCat

User talk page as of 10 June 2015. Several users drop by to note his New Page Patrol and other actions and give him suggestions. Responses are of the "Gee I'd love to but alas I'm not auto-confirmed yet" variety.

Answers given at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/BU Rob13 (T-H-L) when asked about past accounts were evasive and unconvincing.

Of course he was asked in the current election as well, but there's not much to see in in his answer

[AndyTheGrump]

If BU Rob13 does get elected to ArbCom, I suspect his contributions will fall firmly into the 'meh' category. His responses to the questions for candidates read to me like someone going out of their way to give whatever answers are most likely to see him elected. I suspect he's more interested in winning the election than actually doing anything of significance. In the interests of impartiality, I'll refrain from drawing parallels...

[Kumioko]

If BU Rob13 does get elected to ArbCom, I suspect his contributions will fall firmly into the 'meh' category. His responses to the questions for candidates read to me like someone going out of their way to give whatever answers are most likely to see him elected. I suspect he's more interested in winning the election than actually doing anything of significance. In the interests of impartiality, I'll refrain from drawing parallels...

I concur, his entire editing career is as if he knew exactly what he needed to do to be an admin from his first edit and crafted his edits to do that. As with many admins he isn't an editor, he is a politician!

[Tarc]

Of course he was asked in the current election as well, but there's not much to see in in his answer

Not all that uncommon for people to cling to numerical fixations across identities, so...who was banned in June 2015, username ending in "13" ?

[Salvidrim]

Of course he was asked in the current election as well, but there's not much to see in in his answer

Not all that uncommon for people to cling to numerical fixations across identities, so...who was banned in June 2015, username ending in "13" ?

.... Holy shit.



Are you serious or just facetious? BU Rob13 was created 7-June-2015 in the middle of Technical13's ArbCom-evading Wikibreak, before he came back and starting defending himself with claims of being in talks with WMF and such, and then was ArbComBanned by motion. If you have any other evidence and this is a serious allegation it may well be worth investigating but I can't imagine nobody might have tried to look into this already.....

[Carcharoth]

I was still trying to work out the best way to find either: all editors blocked in June 2015, or all editors with '13' in the name (any hints there, surely there is an easy way to do this?). But then got distracted by Salvidrim's connecting the dots from what Tarc said. Having said that, this does look like the "he speaks German" level of correlation. If (and only if) a '13' connection was there, then there will be other connections as well (behavioural ones).

A refresher: the arbitration request for Technical 13.

[Salvidrim]

I was still trying to work out the best way to find either: all editors blocked in June 2015, or all editors with '13' in the name (any hints there, surely there is an easy way to do this?). But then got distracted by Salvidrim's connecting the dots from what Tarc said. Having said that, this does look like the "he speaks German" level of correlation. If (and only if) a '13' connection was there, then there will be other connections as well (behavioural ones).

A refresher: the arbitration request for Technical 13.

T13 immediately jumped to mind because I was kind of involved with him prior to the ArbCom case and we've been FB friends (whatever that's worth) since 2014 or something.

[Tarc]

Of course he was asked in the current election as well, but there's not much to see in in his answer

Not all that uncommon for people to cling to numerical fixations across identities, so...who was banned in June 2015, username ending in "13" ?

.... Holy shit.



Are you serious or just facetious? BU Rob13 was created 7-June-2015 in the middle of Technical13's ArbCom-evading Wikibreak, before he came back and starting defending himself with claims of being in talks with WMF and such, and then was ArbComBanned by motion. If you have any other evidence and this is a serious allegation it may well be worth investigating but I can't imagine nobody might have tried to look into this already.....

At the moment I'd place it in the "educated/reasonable conjecture" category. The two accounts are very deep into automation, bots, template intricacies, etc... I'm a bit wrapped up atm (I am, not regrettably, still an MMORPG nerd and we're raiding atm, short break), but I'll put these up for perusal

BU Rob 13, 8 June 15 - 19 June 15
Technical 13, 25 May 15 - 19 May 15

Squeaky-new Rob13 is in a flurry from June 8-13.

Technical 13 notified Doug Weller he has mail on 29 May, inactive til 11 June when he drops User:Technical 13/Drafts/Response (T-H-L), obv initially written off-wiki, small updates over 6 hours.

This editing is in tandem, but is largely minor number updates on one hand, and Twinkle stuff on the other. Would not be difficult to do side-by-side. After that, in the last few days of T13s activity, the edits of both ebb and flow as the focus on one account takes away from the other.

I have no axe to grind against either, I don't recall any interaction between myself and Technical13, just poked around in some old discussions and he stuck out in an odd way. Rob is certainly some departed user, and this was the first of the narrowed possibilities that I went "hmmm".

There's people here that are far better at this sort of thing than I, so if this is enough of a starting point, have at it.