SashiRolls requests a hearing

[iii]

The dragging of feet is being done in hopes that you shoot yourself in the foot or flame out in agony. Patience is a virtue in this scenario and on Wikipedia generally.

Incidentally, if the SashiRolls account is going to get blocked again, can you make sure that it happens exactly 366 days after being unblocked? Thanks in advance.

[Jim]

...can you make sure that it happens exactly 366 days after being unblocked? Thanks in advance.

Tsk, you shoulda got the stakes into escrow before initiating the match-fixing. Noob.

[Pudeo]

Calls for a close have been already made, but Neutrality (T-C-L) just got in time to make another oppose.

Just to refresh your memory, Neutrality is the user who polished Tim Kaine (T-H-L)'s WP article right before he was accounced as Hillary Clinton's running mate. The New York magazine even made a story about the coincidence, as did The Atlantic.

[iii]

coincidence

The most likely explanation is that Wikipedia power-users are just prepping Kaine’s page following the breadcrumb trail left by media reports citing “Democrats close to Hillary Clinton” naming Kaine as the odds-on favorite.

Can we dispense with the promotion of fringe political conspiracy theories, please? I know they're common currency these days, but there is more than enough to criticize Wikipedia for without engaging in innuendo that is explained away by, y'know, reading.

Thanks in advance.

[Pudeo]

Can we dispense with the promotion of fringe political conspiracy theories, please? I know they're common currency these days, but there is more than enough to criticize Wikipedia for without engaging in innuendo that is explained away by, y'know, reading.

Thanks in advance.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the Clinton campaign used over 1 million USD on Internet/social media presence. Obviously you have to be a conspiracy nutter to believe any of this ended up in Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anyone can edit.

[Midsize Jake]

According to the Los Angeles Times, the Clinton campaign used over 1 million USD on Internet/social media presence. Obviously you have to be a conspiracy nutter to believe any of this ended up in Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that anyone can edit.

Is that all? The Russians put up at least $50M against her, and that's just the amount we know about.

Seriously, everyone knew Tim Kaine was in the Top Three at least two weeks before the announcement. This is standard procedure - if you want to make the point that User:Neutrality (T-C-L) is probably a Democrat, then just say so, that's fine. When you imply (or otherwise insinuate) that these people are acting as part of some shady conspiracy or other, without credible evidence of same, you just empower them further.

[iii]

diversion tactics

Yeah, go ahead and ignore the evidence you fucking linked to. It's fine. We can accommodate you.

[Pudeo]

Seriously, everyone knew Tim Kaine was in the Top Three at least two weeks before the announcement. This is standard procedure - if you want to make the point that User:Neutrality (T-C-L) is probably a Democrat, then just say so, that's fine. When you imply (or otherwise insinuate) that these people are acting as part of some shady conspiracy or other, without credible evidence of same, you just empower them further.

The article had 75 edits by Neutrality in two days. Quite an investment of time and work. No - there's no evidence, but you can't be so naive to think that didn't reek of paid editing. And there is no concrete proof of Cirt's paid editing either. Just pointing out rather suspicious stuff.

[iii]

The article had 75 edits by Neutrality in two days. Quite an investment of time and work.

Have you spent any time at all looking in to how Wikipedians "work"? That is not "quite an investment". 75 edits on one article in two days is the kind of bullshit that Wikipedians (including myself) routinely pull. They/we/all reading this are obsessive layabouts. There are members of this and other criticism boards that have been screaming this point for more than a decade, but clearly their message has not been received.

No - there's no evidence, but you can't be so naive to think that didn't reek of paid editing.

It doesn't. Ask people who have looked into paid editing.

And there is no concrete proof of Cirt's paid editing either. Just pointing out rather suspicious stuff.

Cirt's cardinal sin is not paid editing (are you listening, SashiRolls?) and I encourage you to dig through the copious amounts written about him to understand exactly what his sin was. I understand that you fell for this argument as one of the hoped-for means to win political disputes, but this is not what is going on. You need to up your criticism game or get a grip. Either one.

[Midsize Jake]

Have you spent any time at all looking in to how Wikipedians "work"? That is not "quite an investment". 75 edits on one article in two days is the kind of bullshit that Wikipedians (including myself) routinely pull. They/we/all reading this are obsessive layabouts...

Well... 75 edits in two minutes would certainly be suspicious, and 75 in two hours too, if they're substantive edits. But two days, that's plenty of time for these guys.

I just took a look at it, and while I still can't quite agree with Mr. Pudeo's conclusion, it does look like Mr. Neutrality made a lot of substantive additions during the 48-hour period starting around July 22, 2016 with this revision (retitling the "Abortion" section as the "Reproductive Rights" section - you'll recall that Kaine's "personally I'm pro-life" stance was a big potential sticking-point for progressives, so it's no surprise that they did that first). This is puffing-up, not "polishing," though I can understand our Republican friends not wanting to make the distinction.

Basically, this is a situation where one can insinuate that he's a paid Democratic Party operative and right-wingers will probably believe it, since apparently they'll believe anything, or one could go with the more realistic explanation - which is that he's a Democrat who's just doing regular Wikipedian stuff, possibly with the help of friends (also Democrats of course) who are supplying him with verbiage to add because he's an admin and therefore it's less likely to be reverted. The latter explanation is at least 90 percent more likely than the former and - this is what I want to stress here - still looks like a form of manipulation, only to a larger group of people in a more plausible way. So why does Mr. Pudeo not take that approach? We're not low-information voters here - Wikipedia criticism is supposed to be a highbrow pursuit, even if we do occasionally indulge in a little mudslinging and shit-flinging now and again.

Anyhoo, I guess this is the problem with discussing these things so close to a US election. Hopefully things will settle down afterwards.

[iii]

The latter explanation is at least 90 percent more likely than the former and - this is what I want to stress here - still looks like a form of manipulation, only to a larger group of people in a more plausible way. So why does Mr. Pudeo not take that approach? We're not low-information voters here - Wikipedia criticism is supposed to be a highbrow pursuit, even if we do occasionally indulge in a little mudslinging and shit-flinging now and again.

I have learned the hard way, quite recently, that you should take people at their word, so I am of the opinion that Pudeo and SashiRolls actually believe(d) that this claim has strong plausibility. That's the environment in which we find ourselves, but it isn't so strange as "paid editing" has been a real bugaboo in Wikipedia worlds since Jimbo Wales had, like, a good thirty second think about it and made some weird hard-to-follow proclamations on the subject back in 2006 or whatever. Someone else can go dig that up. In any case, the progeny of that nonsense is that Wikipedia now has a policy WP:PAID (T-H-L) that is as silly as any you'll find over at that website and continues to be the source of much consternation and mud-dragging both here and there. OMGPAID, like OMGBLP (though that one has been losing cachet as of recent) remains something of a point-scorer for Wikipedia arguments. The side effect of this is now everyone is obsessing over "dark money" infused here and there and everywhere.

But can I make a plea on behalf of the principle of William of Ockham? There are simpler explanations to be had here.

[Midsize Jake]

But can I make a plea on behalf of the principle of William of Ockham? There are simpler explanations to be had here.

Obviously. Also, don't forget Hanlon's Razor, in which one might explain Mr. Neutrality's behavior on July 22, 2016 as a form of incompetence (of the heavy-handed variety), since almost anyone should have easily realized that personally "taking point" on the Kaine article and adding most of the new content himself would look suspicious to at least some of the Republicans.

That said, the article's size after he was finished was much more appropriate (in Wikipedia terms) for a VP candidate, given his increased "notability" and the corresponding increase in traffic the article was bound to get. (The article on Mike Pence also doubled in size during the week after he was announced as the Republican VP pick - in both cases the articles went from about 60K to about 120K. As to whether the additions to the Pence article were more "negative" than what the Republicans might have preferred, that probably depends on one's perspective and maybe that's another discussion. But we should probably note that Mr. Neutrality made some of the Pence additions as well.)

[Bezdomni]

The one thing that my daughter specifically remembers about that time period was the gorilla warfare. (She came to give me a hug first thing one morning and saw me hunched over the computer in archi-geek mode poring over a DIFF.) The night before, it had finally been agreed on the talk page that a gorilla poll had no place on JS's BLP because there was never actually a poll comparing Jill Stein's chances in the election to Harambe's. I told her that [blink]Neutrality[/blink] had put the gorilla back on the page, which, I must say, did make her laugh.

A P...P...P... poll released on July 30 showed her trailing a nonexistent candidate called "Independent [[Killing of Harambe|Harambe]]" in general election polling.§

source

original addition

In their defense, it seems to have been a minor mess-up that could've happened to anyone with rollbacker rights, whether they happened to be named Neutrality or not.

Regarding the importance of being neutrality on Wikipedia, I recommend this old text from the Book of Neuteronomy, as it helps explain why undue criticism should be taken with a pillar of salt.

So, in sum, I understand that Mr. N "does not have fond memories of [me] following [them] around [to the Jill Stein page] and battlegrounding" cleaning up after they lost control of their roller-backer-sabre. Still, while they may have lost control of their toolz, I still think they are a net neutral in the projects, and would never call for their public neutering.

[iii]

The night before, it had finally been agreed on the talk page that a gorilla poll had no place on JS's BLP because there was never actually a poll comparing Jill Stein's chances in the election to Harambe's. I told her that [blink]Neutrality[/blink] had put the gorilla back on the page, which, I must say, did make her laugh.

The revert you cite does a lot more than reintroduce a problematic line about a gorilla.

But, anyway, I dug back into the talk archives and you spent far too much time pounding your chest over Harambe. The goal of the people who were politically opposed to you was to contextualize Stein's polling numbers as being low. The Harambe line, which really is completely unsupported by the source identified, was a poor attempt to try to write something to that effect. But that's a simple thing to change and move on.

Instead, you went on and on and on. As we discussed before, it's annoying. There is a long history at Wikipedia where the long-winded are kicked out. So stop doing that. Make your point, win your change, and go somewhere else for a bit.

[Poetlister]

This is an atrocious violation of WP:AGF. How can someone called Neutrality be biased?

[Bezdomni]

The dragging of feet is being done in hopes that you shoot yourself in the foot or flame out in agony. Patience is a virtue in this scenario and on Wikipedia generally.

Incidentally, if the SashiRolls account is going to get blocked again, can you make sure that it happens exactly 366 days after being unblocked? Thanks in advance.

GMG was good to me once (as is pretty well known), exonerating me for an IgnoreAllRules TalkPage comment regarding one particular "copy/glue". I had to risk a block to signal it (the "copyvio" text had even been the subject of an RfC, which does rather distribute any blame that might be due for recycling Yashar Ali's prose about Jill Stein's retirement plan into her BLP).

As such, GMG knows I have "enemies", so I don't suppose his comment is exclusively based on anything I might do.

Also, I really think that the fact ArbCom dragged their feet for over a year and in the end never acted on their info concerning Sagecandoer should be included in the case (as long as jytdog is permitted to dig up every edit I've ever made he wants to point out, perhaps some of the actually rather embarrassing structural issues might be dealt with in the appeal too...)

Meanwhile, I'll keep my gag on and behave in my user cell while jytdog steers wide of my recent contributions to meta (why?) or to fr.wp (why?), while dissing my English-French phoneme help at wikiV as a copy from another mediawiki site, (am I not allowed to share my own work?). Perhaps I should add a link to "Dearest creature in creation" to suggest that "stranger does not rhyme with anger"...

Can anyone translate what follows into non-Wikipedian language?

'''Go with, Per Jytdog's analysis''' It's in depth and rather well explains the complicated issues that have extended this appeal matter out (although probably the user rather 'knew' sage candor/cirt was a bad actor because sage candor/cirt was a bad actor, obnoxiously bad as it turns out).

source

the user?

is un-personalization toxic? You be the judge...

• User neglects to give any specifics about what user feels is "glowing terms". User fails to give any specifics about which accounts. User fails to give any individual edits from those accounts. User fails to make any suggestions on what would satisfy user to remove the tags. Sagecandor (talk) 17:32, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
• User neglects to mention he removed material not sourced to the show itself, no mention of any episode number, where or when from the show material came from, and user made zero efforts to do any due diligence whatsoever. Sagecandor (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
• <...> User provides zero sources to back up their claims and their personal opinions of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. We don't just disappear articles and turn well sourced articles into redirects because someone doesn't like the well researched content.
• <...> User again fails to provide any specifics or sources to back up their spurious claims. User engages in proposing a paradox — User simultaneously says we should cover "the notability of it", while at the same time proposing to do away with the page with a redirect. source

NB: for the last two you have to open the hatted "closed discussion" on Whataboutism (Dispute Resolution). I was not involved.

I did send ArbCom these four citations in July November 2017. (§)

[tarantino]

Can anyone translate what follows into non-Wikipedian language?

'''Go with, Per Jytdog's analysis''' It's in depth and rather well explains the complicated issues that have extended this appeal matter out (although probably the user rather 'knew' sage candor/cirt was a bad actor because sage candor/cirt was a bad actor, obnoxiously bad as it turns out).

source

AlanScottWalker is, like you, abstruse in his own special way.

[iii]

Also, I really think that the fact ArbCom dragged their feet for over a year and in the end never acted on their info concerning Sagecandoer should be included in the case (as long as jytdog is permitted to dig up every edit I've ever made he wants to point out, perhaps some of the actually rather embarrassing structural issues might be dealt with in the appeal too...)

Meanwhile, I'll keep my gag on and behave in my user cell while jytdog steers wide of my recent contributions to meta (why?) or to fr.wp (why?), while dissing my English-French phoneme help at wikiV as a copy from another mediawiki site, (am I not allowed to share my own work?). Perhaps I should add a link to "Dearest creature in creation" to suggest that "stranger does not rhyme with anger"...

Unload here and elsewhere as above, but if your goal is truly to get unblocked, simply don't do it on that website. It just encourages those who would point and shout and demand you remain kicked out. Trust me, keeping the "gag on" is the only thing you can do if you want to get unblocked, and the delay tactics continue to be intentional. We know that you know how to stir up shit. How long can you bide your time before you get so upset that you lose it? A week? A month? Let them get upset themselves. It's more delicious that way.

I did send ArbCom these four citations in July November 2017.

Maybe you've figured out by now that ArbCom is a lethargic group whose main goal is to ignore as much as they can. Fortunately, you no longer have to deal with them. I suggest steering clear of their nonsense as much as possible.

[Volunteer Marek]

Well, this is going to be funny.

[Boing! said Zebedee]

I see the unblock request has been closed as accepted and SashiRolls has been unblocked. I say welcome back.

[Bezdomni]

Thanks to everyone here (and elsewhere) who helped with/by putting together (and forth) the evidence that suggested I might not be crazy about Sage, etal. Thanks also to those who helped me keep cool while a few wanted to dispute my good egginess. Though I imagine some may think me crazy now for saying so, I was particularly touched by Bishonen's comment, after which I was pretty sure I would be unblocked. (In her public comments she had always been scrupulously fair with me prior to this, but it did make me feel good to be called an "impressive" excavator... since -- at least in principle -- it wasn't my own grave I helped dig.)

I'm surprised so many people would have preferred to hit me on the head with my shovel, which didn't seem particularly wise, but that's OK.

I'm glad to have had those two blocks more or less vacated. For those who wondered why I appealed, I felt I had to give en.wp the chance to recognize the error, even if it meant having my ears boxed for those things I'd already served "time" for. (There is no deadline.) I also thought it would be instructive to see who would comment. Mr. Marek, for example, kept his promise and didn't oppose. (Thanks, Marek. ^^)

[Midsize Jake]

Well then, congratulations, well done (!), and I think I can speak for all of us when I say that they'll just put you through the whole thing again without a millisecond's hesitation at the very first sign of anything they can (mis-)interpret as "tendentious behavior" on your part.

[Katie]

Well done, SashiRolls! I'm happy to see that most people on the AN thread had some common sense and voted to unblock you.

[Poetlister]

We need a emoticon. In the meantime, for victory.

[WhoReallyCares]

Yes, congrats Mr Sashi.

If you stay away from American politics you should be fine. Actually, you may wish to avoid America altogether. Europe is probably another no-go area; ditto Australasia, Africa and the Middle East. I'd also advise you to avoid history, economics, religion, food and drink, music, anthropology, psychology, etc etc.

Simply put, these losers hold grudges for years, and you've exposed their lies, deceit and staggering incompetence. They'll be watching you!

[Dysklyver]

I say, well done.

[Bezdomni]

post-mortem: I popped the dates into a web-calculator, because as KI predicted, indefinite blocks are not infinite. Mine was 500 days.

The situation with Cirt was very unfortunate.

[...]

I do not think we made the wrong decision and I do not think the suspicions were lucky either; the evidence was not strong enough to meet the bar [...]

source

Maybe the O'McBar just needs to be closed. Or not. What do I know? Crowsnest is now asserting that "Cirt-Sagecandor was #Resistance all the way" in a Sucks thread called secret agents, which links to a snapshot of this very page. I swear that text keeps getting longer each time I look at it.

To those who offered huzzahs, thanks. I'm sorry I didn't reply earlier. That whole affair was an embarrassing mess. Meanwhile, the WikiCabal has gone dark. I wonder what this augurs.

Eggplant powa' !!!

[Midsize Jake]

Crowsnest is now asserting that "Cirt-Sagecandor was #Resistance all the way" in a Sucks thread called secret agents, which links to a snapshot of this very page. I swear that text keeps getting longer each time I look at it.

I kept hitting page-down, over and over, hoping each time that this would be the last time...

Who here said that CrowsNest was a "Putin operative"? I'm not seeing anything in the (admittedly cursory) searches I just tried... For the record, I think that's an absurd claim - Russians and their hired guns don't operate at all like he does, and he wouldn't have lasted more than a few hours in their employ, IMO. If anyone finds something like that here, please let me know - especially if it's in one of the public forums. I might want to delete it before he gets a chance to screen-shot it and embarrass us with it later.

As for the rest of it, he makes a few good points (as he often does), but I didn't say that the notion of User:Neutrality being a paid Democratic operative during the run-up to the 2016 election was a wacky conspiracy theory, much less impossible - I just said that I thought it was very unlikely under the circumstances. (It's all in this very thread btw, a few posts above this one.) And personally, I don't think it would have been any more or less "corrupt" to gather together one's Democratic-Party friends to help write, assemble, and "feed" content for Tim Kaine's Wikipedia article than it would have been for Mr. Neutrality to do it all by himself. Maybe I'm in the minority for thinking that, but it seems perfectly reasonable to me, if that's what all those Democrats want to do with their free time.

IMO it shouldn't be necessary for me to say this, but it's in the nature of politics (and political parties) for people to take it all very seriously - and in many cases, especially now, seriously enough to make their activity relating to it seem indistinguishable from something they'd otherwise be doing for money, fame, power, sex, thrills, ad nauseam. Others will disagree, and that's fine, but let's not pretend we're talking about some company's new Fleshlight™ competitor or the latest model of the Dyson™ vacuum cleaner. Politics is a Big Deal, and sometimes you have to adjust your assumptions accordingly.

[iii]

Today I learned that I'm an agent of the Guerrilla Skeptics movement. If I am, it's as a useful idiot and their team is far more clever than I had given them credit for. Wow!

[iii]

As for the rest of it, he makes a few good points (as he often does), but I didn't say that the notion of User:Neutrality being a paid Democratic operative during the run-up to the 2016 election was a wacky conspiracy theory, much less impossible - I just said that I thought it was very unlikely under the circumstances.

At any given time, there are certainly people being paid by political groups to do one thing or another. The question relevant for those of us interested in Wikipedia criticism is, "Are they being paid to edit Wikipedia?" The evidence presented that this was the case was scant, and I think it is important for people to be honest about this.

I think entertaining the certainty that paid editing is the only explanation for obsessive Wikipedia editing is something of a poison pill on criticism sites. Granted, anything close to such talk is swiftly shut down over at Wikipedia, and that really IS a problem because it forces the discussion to happen only at BADSITES and reinforces the under-siege mentality that can lead people to believing that there really are spooks behind every corner.

To be clear, I think it important to have it out with such suspicions. There may be no satisfying resolution for these doubts/concerns/accusations, but that's okay too. At least we can talk about it here.

[Kumioko]

Well done, SashiRolls! I'm happy to see that most people on the AN thread had some common sense and voted to unblock you.

Congrats and its good to see an outlier of hope in the sea of toxicity that is Wikipedia. Personally, if I were you, I would just call it a win and walk away from Wikipedia and never edit. As was mentioned above by others, the chances are super high that its a setup and someone will just reblock you with whatever arbitrary notion they decide on.

[Vigilant]

This is one of the best things ever.

You should ask the community to apologize and to list the things they did wrong.

[iii]

This is one of the best things ever.

You should ask the community to apologize and to list the things they did wrong.

Like the community ever apologizes for anything.

But, really nice to see you back, Vig!

[The Garbage Scow]

This is one of the best things ever.

You should ask the community to apologize and to list the things they did wrong.

I always enjoy a good grovel.

[tarantino]

I wonder what will happen. Maybe Deputy Goldenring will come out of retirement (§) just to put in a good word for me and end up checkusered. In any case, I won't be allowed to mention teh kabalahz, I suppose.

SashiRolls has made ~1400 edits since his unblock in November, and GoldenRing (T-C-L) is back patrolling arbcom enforcement.

I have circumstantial evidence that GoldenRing has another active admin account. We'll see if I can develop it into something substantial. Or perhaps a passing checkuser could investigate.

[Poetlister]

Or perhaps a passing checkuser could investigate.

Good idea. That would give us an excuse to complain about overactive checkusers.

[Bezdomni]

SashiRolls has made ~1400 edits since his unblock in November, and ...

pleads temporary insanity.

I'm sure at least a third of those donations to the letterbox are polishing my own previous faulty donations to the letterbox. And gosh, I'm feeling lucky. I've now met the l-e-g-e-n-d-a-r-y Polisher of Cobwebs (T-C-L)!

So, I'm terribly curious which admin you think Goldenring is, of course. They haven't said hello or offered me any cakes since their return, but then again neither have I. I saw the Snoog's edit history was up for review at AE recently and that GR got involved. I'm still barred from talking there and since I wouldn't have had that much I would have wanted to say anyway, I suppose that's for the best.

[Dysklyver]

Someone on the Discord pointed out that Sashi is busy earning a Boomerang at ANI.

[Bezdomni]

Why doesn't that surprise me?



Anything interesting being said?

[Black Kite]

Someone on the Discord pointed out that Sashi is busy earning a Boomerang at ANI.

As I have *tried* to point out to him, there's nothing here worth a sanction against Snoogans (there might well be, but he hasn't demonstrated it), and unfortunately when people who have previously had issues with other editors decide to bring sub-par filings to ANI, this is what happens. Personally I'd just shut the whole thread down with "FFS give it a rest, both of you" but I've commented now, so ...

[Bezdomni]

Yeah, well, I seriously thought that copyvio was supposed to be a big deal. Since then, I've read some old stuff Collect was involved in regarding more run-of-the-mill type copyvios (edit: finding them not adding them) and am left puzzled. It would certainly seem like the WMF would have an interest in not leaving themselves open to copyright complaints, but this sort of gets into the problem Vigilant & NYB are discussing in another thread concerning non-employees acting like employees. It's no big deal. I'm not going to dig into it anymore... I do wonder who that Kolya cat is though (and why Jorm got involved).

[Black Kite]

Yeah, well, I seriously thought that copyvio was supposed to be a big deal. Since then, I've read some old stuff Collect was involved in regarding more run-of-the-mill type copyvios (edit: finding them not adding them) and am left puzzled. It would certainly seem like the WMF would have an interest in not leaving themselves open to copyright complaints, but this sort of gets into the problem Vigilant & NYB are discussing in another thread concerning non-employees acting like employees. It's no big deal. I'm not going to dig into it anymore... I do wonder who that Kolya cat is though (and why Jorm got involved).

Copyvio *is* a big deal, but when you're bringing someone to ANI based on 3 diffs from the last 30 months, one of which is a bit flaky anyway, you need to do better (as I've said twice now - I didn't get an answer the second time).

[Bezdomni]

What kind of answer are you looking for? I'm puzzled. Like I said, if you turn in a paper that's plagiarized you fail (or the teacher gives you a break), if you plagiarize an article as a journalist you get canned & embarrassed... at Wikipedia, apparently, not so much. As Levivich (sort of) suggested in the thread, Snoogans is usually pretty careful to use quotation marks when quote-farming. I assume they don't often mess up.

[MrErnie]

Jorm's a drama SPA.

[Poetlister]

If there's a really serious copyvio, it gets attention. Marginal instances from two years ago quite rightly get less attention, and leave the complainant open to charges of being petty.

[Vigilant]

Jorm's a drama SPA.

He's always been a self righteous blabber mouth with a hilariously unearned and inflated sense of value.

He's an average coder but a shit tier architect.
He has a bunch of random tattoos that attempt to fill the void where his honor should reside.

He now works for JOINGO, the maker of gambling software used to fleece people with addictive personalities, as a GUI drone.

There's no topic Brandon Harris won't comment on and few that's he's actually competent to opine on.

He's issued a blanket challenge for physical combat to anyone who dares to call him a racist... so I did and he's never said, "Boo"

[Pudeo]

Snoog is an American politics machine that apparently has put quantity over quality. But I've noted that copyvios/close paraphrasing sometimes must be done in these controversial articles because every sentence will contested on the talkpage if it's not exactly as in the source.

[Bezdomni]

I appreciate the comments. There's truth in what you say, Pudeo, about the problem of every sentence being contested leading to quotation being the path of least resistance. And yes, Poetlister is right too, I hadn't thought enough about the fact that though the violation was still in the entry 6 days ago, it had actually been done a long time ago. Yesterday, I was looking through some of the examples in a copyvio case from some years ago and those I looked at it were well below 82% (27/33 word) copies, but it's true that was a long time ago and not in American politics. Quotation marks are probably the simplest solution.

In any case, it's true Snoog's steamroller approach annoys me as much as my over-attention to details of how they spin seems to annoy them, so I'd probably be wiser not to take them to drama boards. Like I read elsewhere, they're probably not all bad...

[C&B]

Well, SR made about a year.

[Bezdomni]

The dragging of feet is being done in hopes that you shoot yourself in the foot or flame out in agony. Patience is a virtue in this scenario and on Wikipedia generally.

Incidentally, if the SashiRolls account is going to get blocked again, can you make sure that it happens exactly 366 days after being unblocked? Thanks in advance.

Sorry bud, 363.

Well at least now we know that criticizing a mandarin like El C is the best way to get blocked. I wonder if they will continue editing 13 hours a day 7 days a week. I suggested that they should probably cut themselves a break as they were violating all sorts of labor laws making themselves work so much. I don't think they liked that much, given they gagged me for pointing it out.

Here is a permanent link to the information El C wanted to keep hidden. I do so hope Eternal Reaper (who first hid it after it had been sitting around for a month or two on en.wp) will come dance on my tomb (perhaps even here). ^^