Glorious Kudpung takes on another prominent Wikiwoman

[Jans Hammer]

Re BARC, a strange coincidence today. BARC was mentioned here last night - long forgotten actually sensible idea.

Kudpung has now just deleted some old drafts relating to BARC and then, in the polemic he is building, adds his WO put down from 2015. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =935387311

[Poetlister]

The British government is well aware of that. Last year, Boris Johnson tried more than once to dissolve Parliament but was unable to as this requires a two-thirds majority. It took ages to get that majority.

[Moral Hazard]

Kudpung (T-C-L) has now just deleted some old drafts relating to BARC and then, in the polemic he is building, adds his WO put-down from 2015.

I've ''never'' felt the need to follow blogs or that vile place they call ''Wikipediocracy (T-H-L)'' for which I find the advert here, however critical of it, totally unnecesary (having never been there, I wouldn't be surprised if it's the main hangout for the leaders of the anti-admin brigade and their coat-tail snatchers).

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Kudpung/sandbox&diff=prev&oldid=935387311 diff

Having read the full contribution, I worry that Kudpung (T-C-L) overdosed on Thai coffee (T-H-L)s or something more potent (or under-dosed …).

[Jans Hammer]

or maybe absinthe

[Vigilant]

He's never been here nor read anything from here, yet we're a vile place of anti-admin opposition...

Snowflake culture at its finest.

[Jans Hammer]

He's never been here nor read anything from here, yet we're a vile place of anti-admin opposition...

Snowflake culture at its finest.

8/2/4 now + Xeno. Shouldn't this be kicked onto next stage by clerks now?

[Vigilant]

The writing is on the wall.

I had (perhaps naively) hoped this might be resolvable as a declined case request, one that delivered structured feedback that Kudpung would take on board and self-moderate, but since they have chosen not to engage further at the request stage, I would accept the case. There do not exist community processes to adequately or effectively address the concerns raised. –xenotalk 12:15, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Prepare your orifice, Kudpung.

[Randy from Boise]

Re BARC, a strange coincidence today. BARC was mentioned here last night - long forgotten actually sensible idea.

Kudpung has now just deleted some old drafts relating to BARC and then, in the polemic he is building, adds his WO put down from 2015. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =935387311

So you want to get your message out. Where do you turn?: If we were to read everything this article suggests we would have no time to get on with our other work let alone what we do on Wikipedia. I'm a very busy admin (sometimes) and I've never felt the need to follow blogs or that vile place they call ''Wikipediocracy'' for which I find the advert here, however critical of it, totally unnecessary (having never been there, I wouldn't be surprised if it's the main hangout for the leaders of the anti-admin brigade and their coat-tail snatchers). [July 11, 2015]

THE ANTI-ADMIN BRIGADE

• Guerillero (Former Arb, Administrator since 2011) - Case filer

• Missvain (Administrator since 2012) - Leading complainant

• GorillaWarfare (Arb, Administrator since 2010) - Leading complainant

[Randy from Boise]

In reading over the request comments, several made by Kudpung's legion of Christmas card recipients, it is clear that there remains a reasonable chance that he skates with an admonishment.

The total number of comments to date, 34, does not indicate a seething caldron of passionate sentiment about him. While there is truly zero chance he makes it through another RFA, there's a decent chance he doesn't have to go through one.

RfB



The Legion of Christmas card recipients:

• Andrew Davidson
• Anna Frodesiak
• Atsme
• Barkeep49
• Bluerasberry
• Boing! said Zebedee
• CambridgeBayWeather
• CAPTAIN RAJU
• Chris troutman
• ClemRutter
• Cullen328
• Davey2010
• Dennis Brown
• DGG
• Doc James
• Drmies
• Fram
• Gerda Arndt
• Guy Macon
• HJ Mitchell
• Insertcleverphrasehere
• Iridescent
• JarrahTree
• Jorm
• K.e.coffman
• MelanieN
• MER-C
• Nosebagbear
• RexxS
• Scottywong
• Serial Numbe 54129
• SMcCandlish
• Softlavender
• SoWhy
• Voceditenore
• WereSpielChequers
• Worm That Turned
• Xaosflux

[Vigilant]

It would be a quick way to short circuit all of the sturm und drang of a full blown case.

If ARBCOM accepts a case concerning admin behavior, the defendant must pass a new RfA within 30 days or lose the tools.

I strongly suspect a wave of admin attitude improvement would occur.

[Osborne]

Can somebody point me to the magical tool that marks common pages of editor interactions? I'd very much like to locate the exchange between Kudpung and me in which he went after me as a "paid editor"...

Fancy
https://tools.wmflabs.org/interaction-t ... 1576195200
Set the startDate

Nonfancy
https://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/editorinteract.py

[el84]

It would be a quick way to short circuit all of the sturm und drang of a full blown case.

If ARBCOM accepts a case concerning admin behavior, the defendant must pass a new RfA within 30 days or lose the tools.

I strongly suspect a wave of admin attitude improvement would occur.

I'd say that this was an excellent idea. Being an excellent idea means that they'll never implement it though.

[Jans Hammer]

Wikizero

What do we know? This looks like all girls together discussing the ACE2019, including our hero, Kudpung....

https://www.wikizero.com/en/User_talk:B ... id_Zebedee

[Eric Corbett]

Wikizero

What do we know? This looks like all girls together discussing the ACE2019, including our hero, Kudpung....

https://www.wikizero.com/en/User_talk:B ... id_Zebedee

But will being in with the in crowd help him? Or will it bring them all tumbling down?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOWO--z1S8A

[Vigilant]

Houston, that's a go

[Poetlister]

Surely it's obvious that this is an anti-admin forum. Just look at how many anti-admin people are on here, such as NYB, Beeblebrox, etc.,etc.

[Jans Hammer]

Unusual delay. No clerks?

[Beeblebrox]

There's a standard 24-hour hold once the case is confirmed as accepted, that was up just a few hours ago. From what I gather I would expect it to be open today.

[DexterPointy]

Back in the summer of 2015, Kudpung teamed up with his friend Worm That Turned (T-C-L) to propose formation of a Bureaucrats' Administrative Review Committee (BARC), which would have established a mechanism outside of Arbcom for the discipline of rogue administrators. The RFC failed of passage by a vote of 115 (for) to 77 (opposed), thanks to Wikipedia's idiotic Minority Rules pseudo-consensus vote-counting system, which makes the American electoral college look like an exercise in democracy...

link

The numbnuts who ruled that a 60-40 landslide was a victory for the minority was MDann52 (T-C-L) .

RfB

P.S. I get WTT's recusal now. Good move, Dave.

To be fair, to do something as major as setting up a new disciplinary committee would require much more than a simple majority. It's effectively a constitutional amendment.

Look at the stats-table at top in "BARC only has support among non-admins"
: The BARC proposal got support from 77% (rounded from 0.7653...) of Editors.
Hence it's Administrators, Bureaucrats, and Arbitrators - causing the majority to be "only" 62-38.
Therefore, the actual support, when ignoring groups apt for recusal, is 77-23 NOT 62-38.
Well, 77-23, is a qualified majority, regardless of whether you pick a qualified majority to mean 2/3 or 3/4.

[Poetlister]

Look at the stats-table at top in "BARC only has support among non-admins"
: The BARC proposal got support from 77% (rounded from 0.7653...) of Editors.
Hence it's Administrators, Bureaucrats, and Arbitrators - causing the majority to be "only" 62-38.
Therefore, the actual support, when ignoring groups apt for recusal, is 77-23 NOT 62-38.
Well, 77-23, is a qualified majority, regardless of whether you pick a qualified majority to mean 2/3 or 3/4.

That's an excellent point. However, I doubt that many of the Administrators, Bureaucrats, and Arbitrators could be persuaded that they should recuse. Anyway, if the crats all oppose the idea, who would run this process?

[Vigilant]

And it's a case now ... named Kudpung.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... se/Kudpung

[Osborne]

Therefore, the actual support, when ignoring groups apt for recusal, is 77-23 NOT 62-38.

That's an excellent point. However, I doubt that many of the Administrators, Bureaucrats, and Arbitrators could be persuaded that they should recuse. Anyway, if the crats all oppose the idea, who would run this process?

There's no need for a crat to make policy changes. It's a "self-governing community", isn't it? At least in theory.
However, it would be a smoother transition if a crat would take matters in hand. A reminder that the community gave them elevated rights for the reason to serve the community should be helpful. If not, WP:COI also applies.

Unfortunately, that's not what happened. The policy-making and policy-executing roles are separated in democracies, but not in Wikipedia.
Iron law of oligarchy (T-H-L) applies instead, resulting in that outcome.

[Ming]

Unfortunately, that's not what happened. The policy-making and policy-executing roles are separated in democracies, but not in Wikipedia.
Iron law of oligarchy (T-H-L) applies instead, resulting in that outcome.

,,, in which said article uses WP as an example.

[DexterPointy]

Look at the stats-table at top in "BARC only has support among non-admins"
: The BARC proposal got support from 77% (rounded from 0.7653...) of Editors.
Hence it's Administrators, Bureaucrats, and Arbitrators - causing the majority to be "only" 62-38.
Therefore, the actual support, when ignoring groups apt for recusal, is 77-23 NOT 62-38.
Well, 77-23, is a qualified majority, regardless of whether you pick a qualified majority to mean 2/3 or 3/4.

That's an excellent point. However, I doubt that many of the Administrators, Bureaucrats, and Arbitrators could be persuaded that they should recuse. Anyway, if the crats all oppose the idea, who would run this process?

Well, I actually started drafting a new thread for this forum, aiming at booting & running a process for "all" WP-Editors, to create a desysop process, but then realised that I can't afford the time & work that'd call for.
Though, if anyone want to throw themselves (their time & efforts) into leading & administering such a process, and if sufficiently many others here (and possibly elsewhere too), are willing to throw their time & efforts into assisting the labouring of the process, then ... the TL;DR of it, is: Use WP and Google as platforms. Run it outside WP on Google Services (using some of GDocs-suite services, eg. GSheets, and Google Groups), and use WP only for: Inviting Editors, and WP-Identity verification (using a manual handshaking token mechanism, i.e. a "Please post this hash on your Talk-page"-protocol-thingy).

[Poetlister]

Therefore, the actual support, when ignoring groups apt for recusal, is 77-23 NOT 62-38.

That's an excellent point. However, I doubt that many of the Administrators, Bureaucrats, and Arbitrators could be persuaded that they should recuse. Anyway, if the crats all oppose the idea, who would run this process?

There's no need for a crat to make policy changes. It's a "self-governing community", isn't it? At least in theory.
However, it would be a smoother transition if a crat would take matters in hand. A reminder that the community gave them elevated rights for the reason to serve the community should be helpful. If not, WP:COI also applies.

Unfortunately, that's not what happened. The policy-making and policy-executing roles are separated in democracies, but not in Wikipedia.
Iron law of oligarchy (T-H-L) applies instead, resulting in that outcome.

Remember the case of Fred Bauder, who went berserk and was blocked, but then unblocked himself and carried on. A crat rightly desysopped him, there was a great hooha and it had to go to Arbcom.

[Vigilant]

Some performance art on the evidence page.

curprev 19:05, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 8,375 bytes -8,434‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": Move to userspace for shortening undo
curprev 18:30, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 16,809 bytes +2,096‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": A year later... undo
curprev 17:07, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ m 14,713 bytes +1‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": * undo
curprev 17:06, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ m 14,712 bytes +16‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": "sisterhood" undo
curprev 17:03, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ m 14,696 bytes +1‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": Atkinson undo
curprev 17:02, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 14,695 bytes +118‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": Ti-Grace Atkison undo
curprev 17:00, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 14,577 bytes +4,957‎ →‎Evidence presented by GRuban: Note, Kudpung and GorillaWarfare are '''on the same side'''. Strongly so. undo
curprev 16:26, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 9,620 bytes +1,227‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Megalibrarygirl undo
curprev 16:13, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 8,393 bytes -10‎ →‎Evidence presented by GRuban: Mostly sisters undo
curprev 15:58, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 8,403 bytes +727‎ →‎Evidence presented by {your user name}: Reserving some space undo

Is the final product going to be some form of interpretive dance?

[Jans Hammer]

Some performance art on the evidence page.

curprev 19:05, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 8,375 bytes -8,434‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": Move to userspace for shortening undo
curprev 18:30, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 16,809 bytes +2,096‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": A year later... undo
curprev 17:07, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ m 14,713 bytes +1‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": * undo
curprev 17:06, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ m 14,712 bytes +16‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": "sisterhood" undo
curprev 17:03, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ m 14,696 bytes +1‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": Atkinson undo
curprev 17:02, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 14,695 bytes +118‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": Ti-Grace Atkison undo
curprev 17:00, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 14,577 bytes +4,957‎ →‎Evidence presented by GRuban: Note, Kudpung and GorillaWarfare are '''on the same side'''. Strongly so. undo
curprev 16:26, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 9,620 bytes +1,227‎ →‎"Sisterhood," Atkinson famously said, "is powerful. It kills. Mostly sisters.": Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Megalibrarygirl undo
curprev 16:13, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 8,393 bytes -10‎ →‎Evidence presented by GRuban: Mostly sisters undo
curprev 15:58, 15 January 2020‎ GRuban talk contribs‎ 8,403 bytes +727‎ →‎Evidence presented by {your user name}: Reserving some space undo

Is the final product going to be some form of interpretive dance?

Now he's took the whole lot down. Have to say I'm disappointed. Was hoping for a smoking gun

[Midsize Jake]

Now he's took the whole lot down. Have to say I'm disappointed....

I suspect Mr. Ruban ran into the same problem others have run into when trying to defend Mr. Kudpung: If you quote him in order to convince others of his non-malicious intent, you necessarily have to include the quotes themselves, which act as strong prima facie evidence of someone who is arrogant, imperious, narcissistic, and increasingly erratic, not to mention a little weird.

He's not the only Wikipedian for whom that applies, but he's probably the most prominent over the course of the past decade or so.

[el84]

Therefore, the actual support, when ignoring groups apt for recusal, is 77-23 NOT 62-38.

That's an excellent point. However, I doubt that many of the Administrators, Bureaucrats, and Arbitrators could be persuaded that they should recuse. Anyway, if the crats all oppose the idea, who would run this process?

There's no need for a crat to make policy changes. It's a "self-governing community", isn't it? At least in theory.
However, it would be a smoother transition if a crat would take matters in hand. A reminder that the community gave them elevated rights for the reason to serve the community should be helpful. If not, WP:COI also applies.

Unfortunately, that's not what happened. The policy-making and policy-executing roles are separated in democracies, but not in Wikipedia.
Iron law of oligarchy (T-H-L) applies instead, resulting in that outcome.

Remember the case of Fred Bauder, who went berserk and was blocked, but then unblocked himself and carried on. A crat rightly desysopped him, there was a great hooha and it had to go to Arbcom.

A 'crat who is now a member of ArbCon, no less.

[Beeblebrox]

Remember the case of Fred Bauder, who went berserk and was blocked, but then unblocked himself and carried on. A crat rightly desysopped him, there was a great hooha and it had to go to Arbcom.

A 'crat who is now a member of ArbCon, no less.

That never should've been a full case, the whole thing was an exercise in process for process' sake. A simple motion upholding Maxim's desysop of Fred was all that was needed.

But then I wouldn't have had the fun experience of Fred trying to turn around and literally blame the entire affair on me, that was special.

[Vigilant]

Remember the case of Fred Bauder, who went berserk and was blocked, but then unblocked himself and carried on. A crat rightly desysopped him, there was a great hooha and it had to go to Arbcom.

A 'crat who is now a member of ArbCon, no less.

That never should've been a full case, the whole thing was an exercise in process for process' sake. A simple motion upholding Maxim's desysop of Fred was all that was needed.

But then I wouldn't have had the fun experience of Fred trying to turn around and literally blame the entire affair on me, that was special.

From what I've read, Fred Bauder appears to have been clinically insane.

[Randy from Boise]

I'm not sure this is a big enough matter to be accepted and get him, but it's definitely gonna put him on Arbcom's radar.

Kudpung is an unstable person who has lost the trust of the community. That's pretty widely accepted. But getting to a case that will pull his tools is a tricky matter — I don't think he has shit on enough of The Right People yet. But the fact that it's Guerillero filing the complaint at Arbcom hints that he's really close to getting squished by a truck.

RfB

BUMP.

This is right on target. Clip and save.

tim

P.S. Outcome is going to be an admonishment, and a mealy-mouthed one at that.

[Vigilant]

I'm not sure this is a big enough matter to be accepted and get him, but it's definitely gonna put him on Arbcom's radar.

Kudpung is an unstable person who has lost the trust of the community. That's pretty widely accepted. But getting to a case that will pull his tools is a tricky matter — I don't think he has shit on enough of The Right People yet. But the fact that it's Guerillero filing the complaint at Arbcom hints that he's really close to getting squished by a truck.

RfB

BUMP.

This is right on target. Clip and save.

tim

P.S. Outcome is going to be an admonishment, and a mealy-mouthed one at that.

I dunno.

WP:FRAM is a thing.

[Randy from Boise]

I'm not sure this is a big enough matter to be accepted and get him, but it's definitely gonna put him on Arbcom's radar.

Kudpung is an unstable person who has lost the trust of the community. That's pretty widely accepted. But getting to a case that will pull his tools is a tricky matter — I don't think he has shit on enough of The Right People yet. But the fact that it's Guerillero filing the complaint at Arbcom hints that he's really close to getting squished by a truck.

RfB

BUMP.

This is right on target. Clip and save.

tim

P.S. Outcome is going to be an admonishment, and a mealy-mouthed one at that.

I dunno.

WP:FRAM is a thing.

He is one incident short of a tar-and-feathering. They will give him the feathers this time. Next time maybe he gets the tar.

tim

[Vigilant]

If you're right, he'll probably Diva Quit at that point.

[Vigilant]

Let the whining commence

[Randy from Boise]

Let the whining commence

Iridescent does nail it, however...

I think I have better things to do with my time then get involved in something as blatantly "verdict first, trial later" as this one. I've semi-joked before that it's possible to predict the outcome of arbcom cases before they even take place just by looking at the personal grudges of the participants and calculating how far they each think they'll be able to push their preferred outcome and still call it a compromise, but I'm not sure I can recall an example this blatant before. Why not just save everyone the time and jump straight to "Kudpung admonished" now?'' ‑ Iridescent 15 January 2020

This case was one incident premature.

RfB

[Vigilant]

I suspect you're both wrong here.

[DexterPointy]

Now he's took the whole lot down. Have to say I'm disappointed....

I suspect Mr. Ruban ran into the same problem others have run into when trying to defend Mr. Kudpung: If you quote him in order to convince others of his non-malicious intent, you necessarily have to include the quotes themselves, which act as strong prima facie evidence of someone who is arrogant, imperious, narcissistic, and increasingly erratic, not to mention a little weird.

He's not the only Wikipedian for whom that applies, but he's probably the most prominent over the course of the past decade or so.

George Ruban moved it to his own userspace, because the 1000 word limit suddenly struck him,
- and I assume he did so, because he clearly said so, when he also did so.

Young padawans', diligence train you must.
Assumptions from nothing, replace facts, they can not.

[Midsize Jake]

George Ruban moved it to his own userspace, because the 1000 word limit suddenly struck him,
- and I assume he did so, because he clearly said so, when he also did so.

I saw that, but his intent there was fairly clear, no? He thought he could "correct the record" by reproducing various Kudpung quotes in their entirety, along with short contextual explanations — in other words, implying that those who accuse him of creepiness or sexism are cherry-picking lines out of context, and thereby ignoring the full context which he feels is exculpatory.

If he can do that, and then go back and read the results (even in-process results) and not think he's actually making things worse for Mr. Kudpung, then I'd say he has a serious perceptiveness problem.

You may well be right, though. It's only been what, about 4 hours since he moved all that stuff... so I guess we'll find out tomorrow or thereabouts.

[Silent Editor]

This case was one incident premature.

RfB

I'm not so sure: If Kudpung is merely admonished, then an appeal to Trust and Safety from one of his high profile victims might be effective - and Arbcom might be overruled... which would not be a good look for Arbcom.

[Osborne]

I'm not so sure: If Kudpung is merely admonished, then an appeal to Trust and Safety from one of his high profile victims might be effective - and Arbcom might be overruled... which would not be a good look for Arbcom.

If he has stepped on the toes of someone closely related to prominent wmf figures, then yes. Otherwise, TnS has no incentive to do anything.

[DexterPointy]

Speaking of high profile contributors to the case, then something is coming down the mountain @ "Evidence extension".
Whatever 1500 word stew Molly is cooking on Chris, it's probably not without bite, or overly sweet.

[Midsize Jake]

Whatever 1500 word stew Molly is cooking on Chris, it's probably not without bite, or overly sweet.

She's already at 1,510, so I guess she'll need a bigger extension.

[Eric Corbett]

This case was one incident premature.

RfB

I suspect you're right.

[Icewhiz]

Whatever 1500 word stew Molly is cooking on Chris, it's probably not without bite, or overly sweet.

She's already at 1,510, so I guess she'll need a bigger extension.

It's too rambling (said the guy who posts his own rambling posts) - she would do good to tighten it, and she probably can. Chopping off 10 words from 1,500 is usually easy anyhow.

[Moral Hazard]

Her prose needs a severe editor.

Is there still a bulletin board at which she could offer to pay, e.g., Eric or a friendly English-educated barrister committed to the empowerment of women and queerfolk in tech and the internet?

[Randy from Boise]

Her prose needs a severe editor.

Is there still a bulletin board at which she could offer to pay, e.g., Eric or a friendly English-educated barrister commited to the empowerment of women and queerfolk in tech and the internet?

I hear that all you have to do is run an ad on ODesk and the applicants come rushing out of the woodwork from all sides...

RfB

P.S. The ghost of Greg Kohs would insist that I remind you that it is spelled c-o-m-m-i-t-t-e-d.

[Poetlister]

Her prose needs a severe editor.

Is there still a bulletin board at which she could offer to pay, e.g., Eric or a friendly English-educated barrister commited to the empowerment of women and queerfolk in tech and the internet?

I hear that all you have to do is run an ad on ODesk and the applicants come rushing out of the woodwork from all sides...

RfB

P.S. The ghost of Greg Kohs would insist that I remind you that it is spelled c-o-m-m-i-t-t-e-d.

Quite right. Also, he might not like queerfolk as one word.

[DexterPointy]

Whatever 1500 word stew Molly is cooking on Chris, it's probably not without bite, or overly sweet.

She's already at 1,510, so I guess she'll need a bigger extension.

It's too rambling (said the guy who posts his own rambling posts) - she would do good to tighten it, and she probably can. Chopping off 10 words from 1,500 is usually easy anyhow.

Meh, there1, that is merely a revival of the old Aug.2018 spat2.
The igniting on-wiki point is fairly described in Molly's present sandbox, as

In a discussion on Kudpung's talk page (link to full discussion), Kudpung wrote a comment pinging me that stated in part, Let's see what {{U|Ritchie333}}, {{U|Joe Roe}}, {{U|Boing! said Zebedee }}, {{U|Ad Orientem}}, and {{U|GorillaWarfare|Molly White}} from among our most experienced and respected admins say, and the many other admins who commented there. As you can see, he added a second parameter to the {{U}} template specifically so that my username would display my real name, something he did not do with the other administrators mentioned.

Molly basically self-ignited: What Chris probably knew, is what everyone either knew or easily could have know, and that "what" is found in the very first sentence on Molly's WP-Userpage, as it was in Aug.20183 : "Hello, I'm Molly White, or GorillaWarfare." (It was only later, 3.Sep.2018, she changed it to: "Hello, I'm GorillaWarfare, or Molly White.", hence swapping the order of personal addressing preference).

Note! Don't revive that discussion here, because Jake (wikipediocracy admin) may censor you away, as a reminiscence shows here4.

Refs.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =936012523 (Cached)
2. https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 64#p224039
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =845147417 (Cached)
4. https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 50#p224479 (Cached)