The Portal Carbuncle bursts again (now at Arbcom)

[Ming]

Twenty-one involved parties, so far: the portal battle take a trip to ARBCOM

Ming never could figure out the utility of portals, but apparently they are so important They Must Be Defended To The Death. Or maybe they are so verminous They Must Be Eradicated At All Costs. One thing for sure: cleaning up after the last RFC has brought out the worst in a lot of people.

[Randy from Boise]

Yeah, this is gonna make a huge fucking mess of an Arbcom case, with a lot of emotionally-invested long-term Wikipedians trying to take a chunk out of one another in what they perceive to be a zero-sum game.

RfB

[Poetlister]

BD2412 is very much an insider and will no doubt suffer little or no damage.

[Eric Corbett]

Yeah, this is gonna make a huge fucking mess of an Arbcom case, with a lot of emotionally-invested long-term Wikipedians trying to take a chunk out of one another in what they perceive to be a zero-sum game.

RfB

One can but hope.

[Beeblebrox]

This has been a long time coming. I imagine the absurdly-long list of involved parties will be reduced if and when the case is accepted, but there is clearly a behavioral issue or two here above and beyond the underlying dispute. I'm not sure who exactly is doing what but this has been dragging on for far too long.

My personal take on that is that portals are not particularly useful and are generally poorly maintained, and the like 3-5 people who are so staunch in their defense of them simply aren't enough to maintain the entire system.

[Earthy Astringent]

Whatever happened to Delicious Carbuncle? You don’t see “carbuncle” used often in a sentence. I’m surprised it’s in my mobile’s dictionary.

[Poetlister]

Whatever happened to Delicious Carbuncle? You don’t see “carbuncle” used often in a sentence. I’m surprised it’s in my mobile’s dictionary.

I think there are two different meanings of carbuncle here. In the thread title it refers to "a painful local purulent inflammation of the skin and deeper tissues with multiple openings for the discharge of pus and usually necrosis and sloughing of dead tissue". I doubt that Delicious Carbuncle evokes that image; a red precious stone seems more plausible.

[Randy from Boise]

Whatever happened to Delicious Carbuncle? You don’t see “carbuncle” used often in a sentence. I’m surprised it’s in my mobile’s dictionary.

I think there are two different meanings of carbuncle here. In the thread title it refers to "a painful local purulent inflammation of the skin and deeper tissues with multiple openings for the discharge of pus and usually necrosis and sloughing of dead tissue". I doubt that Delicious Carbuncle evokes that image; a red precious stone seems more plausible.

Dunno, maybe it's my background in punk rock showing, but I always assumed that "delicious carbuncle" was a gross out user name that managed to get past the name censors.

Karl Marx had "carbuncles," hemorrhoids.

RfB

[Ming]

Showtime!

[DexterPointy]

Arb. Case was accepted: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case&oldid=928095381
Arb. Case currently open: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Portals

Essentially it's User:BrownHairedGirl and User:Northamerica1000 being the keyplayers.
Having read too much related to, and surrounding, this case to link here, then, about those two:

• BHG (BrownHairedGirl) : I had never heard of her before, until only 2-3 days ago, but she strikes me as being very sane.
• NA1k (Northamerica1000) : I've had dealings with him (and some of his posse) before. He's one of the most incompetent people roaming free on WP (Incompetent at a very fundamental cognitive level, direly lacking in common sense, lacking sound judgement & evaluation capabilities). Furthermore: Anyone not having infinite patience, should avoid directly engaging in arguing with him.

[Ming]

Could we merge this with the existing thread?


Moderator's Note: Done.
Registered members, see also: The Transhumanist and Portals.

[DexterPointy]

Strange: BHG has not (yet) entered anything into the Evidence-section of the Arb Case, and "Evidence closes 20 Dec 2019", i.e. that's basically now!
She's previously acted as a bit of a one-man-army, all over WP concerning portals, fighting the portal-muppets,
- so: Her absence from the Evidence-section gotta be tactical or strategic.

---

Uh! Update: Correcting myself.
She has (only ~4 hours ago) asked for an extension on the Evidence Talk page.

[DexterPointy]

The Arb.Case is now currently in the "Workshop"-phase, and Northamerica1000 hasn't there made a single posting (in stark contrast to BHG, having supplied a fairly steady stream of comments).

[Vigilant]

That entire workshop is just ass.

I felt my brain cells losing the will to live as I tried to read through it.

[Eric Corbett]

That entire workshop is just ass.

I felt my brain cells losing the will to live as I tried to read through it.

You have brain cells?

[Vigilant]

That entire workshop is just ass.

I felt my brain cells losing the will to live as I tried to read through it.

You have brain cells?

Yay!

Vewy good, Ewic!
Supar try!
Middle school grade insult, at least, for sure this time!


Go back to your pints, you steaming tosspot.

[DexterPointy]

That entire workshop is just ass.

I felt my brain cells losing the will to live as I tried to read through it.

You have brain cells?

Yay!

Vewy good, Ewic!
Supar try!
Middle school grade insult, at least, for sure this time!


Go back to your pints, you steaming tosspot.

Hitting back on "You have brain cells?" is about as difficult as getting a dead horse to stop moving. ... Opportunity wasted.

[Eric Corbett]

Hitting back on "You have brain cells?" is about as difficult as getting a dead horse to stop moving. ... Opportunity wasted.

Vigilant is a one-trick pony.

[Vigilant]

Hitting back on "You have brain cells?" is about as difficult as getting a dead horse to stop moving. ... Opportunity wasted.

Vigilant is a one-trick pony.

Says the habitual lush who wrote the original, juvenile insult, "You have brain cells?"

This seems rich, even for you.

Weren't you the one who boldly declared you'd leave if I came back?

Also, viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2897&p=60123#p59989

You are the quintessential wikipedian.

You puff yourself up for substandard writing; you are only better than most of the teenagers there.
You rant and rave about how nobody respects "content contributors", yet play the martyr at the drop of a hat.
You storm of in a diva-esque fit every so often and go fishing for "Please come back" messages on your talk page.
When you do flounce back in for the fortieth time, you have the sickly glow of misplaced pride as a nimbus.
You claim to set no stock in the others at wikipedia, yet you fight with the lowest of the low on AN/I, rolling, pig-like, in the muck with the rest of the literary lepers.
Were you to gain the upper hand and acquire the mystical "bits", you'd be as foul a tyrant as has ever disgraced the halls over there.

You are the fucking posterboy for wikipedia.

You are everything about it that I despise.

That was six years ago and it still rings true today.

As you were, ferret fiddler, as you were...

[DexterPointy]

[Osborne]

Have fun, kids, but don't break anything!

[MrErnie]

The PD has been posted, and it (surprisingly - to me) comes down really hard on BHG. It felt like most of the discipline would be dropped on NA1000. However we've got a few supported remedies for a 1 way IBAN, a topic ban, and a desysop - all for BHG. There's a unanimously supported FoF that NA1000 did nothing wrong.

[Vigilant]

There are 7 votes to desysop.

Many of those reference ADMINCOND in one way or another.

I suspect this will be Kudpung's downfall as well.

[Icewhiz]

The PD has been posted, and it (surprisingly - to me) comes down really hard on BHG. It felt like most of the discipline would be dropped on NA1000. However we've got a few supported remedies for a 1 way IBAN, a topic ban, and a desysop - all for BHG. There's a unanimously supported FoF that NA1000 did nothing wrong.

This is indeed a very surprising result - I was expecting IBANs/TBANs all around. It seems the new committee is looking to actually evaluate evidence - rather than just "ban them all". However, being the first case on the docket this year, perhaps they will turn towards ban them all down the line.

The finding that BHG was involved in performing deletions of sub-pages of deleted portals - is a bit sketchy - and may have a chilling effect on other admins.

Looking at this from the outside, it seemed like BHG was much more in the wrong than NA1K (if he was wrong at all).

[DexterPointy]

If they had bothered spending the time needed to actually examine how NA1000 operates and argues, not just looking at what's been "narrowly" presented in the case, then it'd be clear that NA1000 should be thrown the hell out of WP. What BHG has accused NA1000 of, is pretty darn accurate.

[Beeblebrox]

The case was about behavior around portals, and the committee isn't an investigative body anyway.

[Vigilant]

Nine votes to desysop.

Stick a fork in it, she's done.

[DexterPointy]

The case was about behavior around portals, and the committee isn't an investigative body anyway.

Expressions about behaviour, isn't same as behaviour.

[Eric Corbett]

The case was about behavior around portals, and the committee isn't an investigative body anyway.

Expressions about behaviour, isn't same as behaviour.

I think that's way too difficult a point to get across to ArbCom; all they do is listen to the echo.

[Osborne]

... and the committee isn't an investigative body anyway.

It should be and I get the impression sometimes it is: without investigating the facts they would be just led by the nose.

[Eric Corbett]

... and the committee isn't an investigative body anyway.

It should be and I get the impression sometimes it is: without investigating the facts they would be just led by the nose.

Which they are.

[Beeblebrox]

I guess I should've said the committee usually isn't an investigative body. Stuff like admin socking is in fact investigated by the committee, but when it comes to full cases, we rely on the community to submit evidence. It's enough work without us going looking for problems. So the decisions made are only as good as the evidence presented. It does sometimes happen that someone stumbles onto something while reviewing that evidence. (and of course none of this applies in weird nonstandard cases like with Fram, which hopefully will not be repeated)

I don't think it is even up to us to change that, that's the role we are elected to fulfill.

[Vigilant]

... and the committee isn't an investigative body anyway.

It should be and I get the impression sometimes it is: without investigating the facts they would be just led by the nose.

Fram would like a word...

[Osborne]

Fram would like a word...

Lol, you should add that to your signature, so you don't have to post it in every topic

[Vigilant]

Fram would like a word...

Lol, you should add that to your signature, so you don't have to post it in every topic

You should head over to sucks and deal with Abd.

[Osborne]

You should head over to sucks and deal with Abd.

[Vigilant]

You should head over to sucks and deal with Abd.

Good luck.

[Dysklyver]

The portal namespace should have been deleted the first time around. But nah, people gotta argue.

[Poetlister]

The portal namespace should have been deleted the first time around. But nah, people gotta argue.

Are you trying to reduce Drama God? What's the point of Wikipedia if people can't have endless silly arguments?

[Icewhiz]

I think ARBCOM members should consider whether forcing BHG out of the project - because this is what a desysop + TBAN + 1-way IBAN means - is worth being a stickler to the letter of the law (and bit beyond) in INVOLVED.

BHG may have been in the wrong - heck - from my reading of the evidence she was in the wrong. But it was a portal-focused dispute. Being desysoped is effectively forever - big slap in the face. The TBAN ain't too bad in this case (easy to avoid portals). A 1-way (or 2-way) IBAN? That makes editing very-very unfun for an editor who makes many edits to many pages. Figuring out whether you are IBAN safe can be a 2 minute exercise per edit (because you need to check the entire history). And that, for an edit that would've taken you 10 seconds.

I doubt the BHG account will continue to be active post-case.