ScottishFinnishRadish goes on a Tban rampage

[Zoll]

Sheeeesh

Wasn't a Tban the reason Nishidani retired as well?

[Vigilant]

Sheeeesh

Wasn't a Tban the reason Nishidani retired as well?

Andre as well

By ScottishFinnishRadish...

You guys can work it out in this thread...

[Zoll]

Sheeeesh

Wasn't a Tban the reason Nishidani retired as well?

Andre as well

By ScottishFinnishRadish...

You guys can work it out in this thread...

Iennes, Dovidroth, and SPECIFICO as well by SFR. Looks like someone had enough.

[andre]

No comment.

[rnu]

Sheeeesh

Wasn't a Tban the reason Nishidani retired as well?

Retirement is a very relative term in Nishidani's case.
https://xtools.wmcloud.org/ec/en.wikipe ... nth-counts

[rnu]

Nableezy 90 days for WP:BATTLEGROUND editing
Iennis: indefinitely for casting aspersions as to the motives of other editors, personal attacks, and WP:BATTLEGROUND editing
Dovidroth: 90 days for WP:BATTLEGROUND editing
SPECIFICO: 60 days for WP:BATTLEGROUND editing
Andrevan; 90 days for WP:BATTLEGROUND editing
Someone has definitely had enough.

[rnu]

No comment.

Booooooring. Probably wise. But, booooooring.

[Hemiauchenia]

Suprised Marokwitz (T-C-L) or Homerethegreat (T-C-L) aren't getting sanctioned honestly.

[andre]

No comment.

Booooooring. Probably wise. But, booooooring.

Here ya go. Chew on that one.

link

[rnu]

I don't know whether by Wikipedia standards the tbans are justified, I just haven't followed things enough. But I think it should not be a single admin decision. At a minimum it should take two admins.

[orangepi]

Both Nableezy and Andrevan thoroughly deserve the ban.

No comment on the others, beyond "anybody who wants to second-guess this should have shown up and helped earlier".

[ArmasRebane]

I don't know whether by Wikipedia standards the tbans are justified, I just haven't followed things enough. But I think it should not be a single admin decision. At a minimum it should take two admins.

If it's contentious, it'll be litigated presently.

[iii]

But I think it should not be a single admin decision. At a minimum it should take two admins.

WP:CTOP (T-H-L) is the current incarnation of the "supercharged admins" rule. This was invented by arbcom back in the beforetimes to encourage bravery in the admin class and discourage wheelwarring when the arguments got heated. The archives of this forum and others also document instances where certain admins ran amok in those contexts, but generally speaking the visibility of the scenarios where this sort of thing happens ensures that you can't get too far in adminabuse world if this is the way you intend to do it. Successful longterm admin abuse requires subtler methods.

[rnu]

But I think it should not be a single admin decision. At a minimum it should take two admins.

WP:CTOP (T-H-L) is the current incarnation of the "supercharged admins" rule. This was invented by arbcom back in the beforetimes to encourage bravery in the admin class and discourage wheelwarring when the arguments got heated. The archives of this forum and others also document instances where certain admins ran amok in those contexts, but generally speaking the visibility of the scenarios where this sort of thing happens ensures that you can't get too far in adminabuse world if this is the way you intend to do it. Successful longterm admin abuse requires subtler methods.

I think any ban or block that is not for obvious vandalism should require two admins. I think if the standard is "you need to convince a second admin" instead of "you just have to hope that either the person doesn't bother to appeal or no admin cares enough to overturn" fair outcomes are more likely.

[iii]

I think any ban or block that is not for obvious vandalism should require two admins. I think if the standard is "you need to convince a second admin" instead of "you just have to hope that either the person doesn't bother to appeal or no admin cares enough to overturn" fair outcomes are more likely.

If you want to have fun, post it as a policy proposal at WP:VP (T-H-L). I anticipate you will find much delightful frothing at the mouth by certain admins and their sycophants.

[Hemiauchenia]

If I was really just highlighting pro-Israel editors who I disagreed with as "ideological opponents", then there are plenty I could have picked, but I chose not to do so. Marokwitz is quite belligerent, and Homere clearly gamed their entry into the topic area by doing mass edits to get themselves over ECP.

[Elinruby]

But I think it should not be a single admin decision. At a minimum it should take two admins.

WP:CTOP (T-H-L) is the current incarnation of the "supercharged admins" rule. This was invented by arbcom back in the beforetimes to encourage bravery in the admin class and discourage wheelwarring when the arguments got heated. The archives of this forum and others also document instances where certain admins ran amok in those contexts, but generally speaking the visibility of the scenarios where this sort of thing happens ensures that you can't get too far in adminabuse world if this is the way you intend to do it. Successful longterm admin abuse requires subtler methods.

I have thoughts on that but there's probably a better place to share them than this thread, where I haven't yet looked at what brought all this on.

[andre]

I think any ban or block that is not for obvious vandalism should require two admins. I think if the standard is "you need to convince a second admin" instead of "you just have to hope that either the person doesn't bother to appeal or no admin cares enough to overturn" fair outcomes are more likely.

If you want to have fun, post it as a policy proposal at WP:VP (T-H-L). I anticipate you will find much delightful frothing at the mouth by certain admins and their sycophants.

Pair adminning is a GOOD PATTERN. Unfortunately, there are too few admins, and admining is a completely voluntary task, which largely SUCKS! People beg and beg to be made admin, and then they have to SLOG IT. It's not fun. It's a chore. And if you let up on the activity, people CRITICIZE AND HARASS YOU!

[andre]

One last note about the pair adminship idea. A very constructive Wiki critic idea.

You need to make it easier, not harder, to become admin. Unbundling was one idea, but unbundling is hard. It also needs to be easier to be de-adminned as well. That will all help a lot, but those are RFA third rails for years, so might be tough.

Pair adminning assumes that adminship is a normal human job like any other, but it's really quite an odd task. It's an asynchronous information problem. It's a lone wolf thing that weird people do late at night. Sure, that's not entirely true, but you get my drift. Adminship IS fun. When you're blocking vandals and closing big discussions and having people all inquire your wisdom and advice, that's what people crave. But the cost of it is a lot of work. And a very very high standard.

Just like in policing - be more like the community and bridge the gap. Don't make it HARDER and make admins have more and more arcane rules and policies governing them, and making accountability the focus. Accountabilty for admins is quite high. In fact, admins are often functionary to the community and are basically servants to mob rule, and have very little autonomy in many cases. If they rule or do something "wrong," or out of community consensus at that time in history (there are wrong things that the community has come to consenus on either due to socks/canvassing or illegitimacy or just being WRONG HUMANS IN A WRONG PLACE AND TIME for the same reason that EVERYTHING IS EVERYWHERE)

Make adminship more like just a janitor mop job like it was always intended to be. The cleanup crew does not make big decisions like a judge or a king. They CARRY OUT A MENIAL TASK.

[Ming]

Make adminship more like just a janitor mop job like it was always intended to be. The cleanup crew does not make big decisions like a judge or a king. They CARRY OUT A MENIAL TASK.

Maybe that's all well and good, but having less cops isn't going to fix any of the problems around policing.

[andre]

Make adminship more like just a janitor mop job like it was always intended to be. The cleanup crew does not make big decisions like a judge or a king. They CARRY OUT A MENIAL TASK.

Maybe that's all well and good, but having less cops isn't going to fix any of the problems around policing.

Hey Ming, how ya doin buddy? But yeah, you're right. I meant to demilitarize the police.

[Midsize Jake]

Moderator's note: Several posts consisting of gratuitous off-topic "PvP" were deleted. As always, members are encouraged to avoid personal confrontations and "sea-lioning" behaviors whenever possible, especially if they aren't particularly funny. Members should also feel free to re-post any non-PvP thoughts (or whatever) that may have been removed along with the so-called "bathwater."

I doubt they'll ever impose a "two admins required to block" rule — obviously there would be fewer blocks, but any admin who proposed a block and couldn't get another admin to second it would be... embarrassed. Can't have that!

And what if the hoi polloi were to find out, or heaven forbid, the person who's actually being proposed as the block-target? Something like that could hang over the admin's head indefinitely, especially if the target was a well-established and/or well-liked user.

[Hemiauchenia]

Moderator's note: Several posts consisting of gratuitous off-topic "PvP" were deleted. As always, members are encouraged to avoid personal confrontations and "sea-lioning" behaviors whenever possible, especially if they aren't particularly funny. Members should also feel free to re-post any non-PvP thoughts (or whatever) that may have been removed along with the so-called "bathwater."

Many thanks for maintaining the forums decorum, Jake.

[MrErnie]

Popcorn is not pvp. It’s a forum icon.

[Midsize Jake]

Popcorn is not pvp. It’s a forum icon.

But it makes no sense in the context of the remaining posts, no...? I mean, admins go on topic-ban rampages all the time, so if that's a reason to make popcorn in itself, you'll probably have a stroke from the high blood pressure you'll get from all the salt, unless you don't put salt on your popcorn in which case what are you doing eating popcorn with no salt? That makes even less sense.

[andre]

Since you deleted my posts, I want to make clear that the above musings were after a lengthy page of me disagreeing with someone who is offtopic to name here. But I didn't say anything bad about SFR, as I said on wiki, his actions are reasonable and good adminning of the area and well within discretion. i won't be appealing mine, and nobody should appeal theirs. I also think people should be more charitable about the description. Not only was it not really a rampage but I'm sure it was an agonizing behind-the-scenes situation.

[andre]

people here can't read

[Midsize Jake]

WTF mate?

It looks like he was somehow prevented from updating Palestinian casualty figures (in the Casualties of the 2023 Israel–Hamas war (T-H-L) article) until after Christmas, which he apparently thought made them less impactful, and when he complained rather bitterly about it he was topic-banned from the entire I-P area by Mr. Radish. Is that at least a semi-accurate reading of the situation? I only looked at it for a couple of minutes.

I don't mean any disrespect here or anything, but let's not ignore the obvious. This has become more of a "slaughter" than a "war," and the Israelis are doing most (if not all) of the slaughtering at this point. It's hardly surprising that pro-Palestinian Wikipedians are going to get increasingly angry and frustrated when something appears to be unfair to their side (if not actually censorious) on WP. Not much fun for the admins of course, but at the same time, maybe they should nevertheless try to be more understanding, given the circumstances.

[andre]

people here can't read

[Midsize Jake]

Nobody has a right to update wikipedia's figures.

Is this Mr. Nobody person the only one with such rights? If so, that sounds like a bit more responsibility than one person should have.

Also, they weren't protesting the museum itself, they just wanted to hold a protest inside the museum, which would have "disrupted" some of the museum's activities but not necessarily caused the museum to close or cease operations.

[Elinruby]

Admins should block antisemites, not accusing any specific user, with extreme prejudice.

See, this is where you lose me. Are the numbers reliably sourced? Is there a reason to question them? At all? If Israel doesn't want people to protest its slaughter of civilians it should maybe stop slaughtering civilians. Why is it up to Wikipedia to censor an editor so that people won't protest?

He isn't an anti-semite if all he has done is bring reliable sources.

Surely I am misunderstanding this. If not, something is very wrong with your thinking here. Collective punishment is a war crime,

[andre]

people here can't read

[andre]

people here can't read

[Elinruby]

Admins should block antisemites, not accusing any specific user, with extreme prejudice.

See, this is where you lose me. Are the numbers reliably sourced? Is there a reason to question them? At all? If Israel doesn't want people to protest its slaughter of civilians it should maybe stop slaughtering civilians. Why is it up to Wikipedia to censor an editor so that people won't protest?

He isn't an anti-semite if all he has done is bring reliable sources.

Surely I am misunderstanding this. If not, something is very wrong with your thinking here. Collective punishment is a war crime,

Nothing in your last statement was related to anything I've said.
The diffs of Iennes' battleground rhetoric, and those for other users, are available on wiki and their treatment by SFR is proportionate.
Where did I mention collective punishment or war crimes?
This is the problem. Users conflating things.
Rhetoric and action are not the same.

It's related to the quote. Those are your words right? If all Ienines wanted to do was accurately update the statistics why would you call him an antisemite?

I am not conflating, I am informing you that collective punishment, killing a bunch of civilians, because Hamas, is a war crime and calling someone an antisemite who opposes that is outside of what I would consider rational thinking.

I am not talking about your block, I am objecting to your framing of the issue.

[andre]

people here can't read

[Midsize Jake]

I don't demand Israel stop the slaughter. I demand Hamas surrender and release the hostages. Same as U.S. Secretary of State Blinken.

I'm trying to be nice about this, but it does seem like your argument strategy often amounts to "You're wrong because I didn't say this thing that I'm saying you said even though you actually didn't say it."

[andre]

people here can't read

[andre]

people here can't read

[Elinruby]

Admins should block antisemites, not accusing any specific user, with extreme prejudice.

And that just happened to come out of your mouth as as the conclusion to a rant about how much harm a specific user was doing. Think about it is all I ask. And with that, I am out of this. I don't know you or him but I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Maybe you're right, who knows, but wanting to update the casualty figures doesn't begin to prove it, nor is the idea that doctors might protest a sufficient reason why he shouldn't

[andre]

people here can't read
I hope you've enjoyed my time here

[Vigilant]

Bye Felicia.

[Elinruby]

Iennes was not blocked for "he wanted to update the numbers on Christmas" and that's a foolish canard.
All the blocks were for extensive battleground rhetoric

ok, I got that.
Is Jake correct that the casualty figures are what he was upset about? Who specifically are you calling antisemitic in your version of events then? And why?

[andre]

dumb motherfuckers don't understand how wikipedia or communication works

[Vigilant]

Iennes was not blocked for "he wanted to update the numbers on Christmas" and that's a foolish canard.
All the blocks were for extensive battleground rhetoric

ok, I got that.
Is Jake correct that the casualty figures are what he was upset about? Who specifically are you calling antisemitic in your version of events then? And why?

I DID NOT CALL ANYTHING SPECIFICALLY ANTISEMITIC, I USED IT HYPOTHETICALLY
LEARN TO READ AND STOP PUTTING WORDS INTO MY MOUTH THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT WERE SAID
I DID NOT AND CAN NOT TELL YOU WHAT WAS ANTISEMITIC, I SAID IF ANY USERS, NOT NAMING ANY NAMES, WERE ANTISEMITIC THEY GOT BLOCKED ON SITE
AND THEN YOU BLAMED ME FOR ISRAEL AND GAZA'S COLLECTIVE PUNISHMENT
HMM... LET ME THINK

I think you're misreading that.

Take a break.
Come back refreshed.

[andre]

dumb motherfuckers baiting and misreading willfully

[andre]

ITT dumb motherfuckers

[Midsize Jake]

Your dishonest argumentation tactics are noted, though.

How are they "dishonest"? You wrote that "Nobody has a right to update wikipedia's figures," which is (a) wrong (lots of people do, even if the changes only last for a few seconds); (b) not what I claimed (I think what I claimed was simply that Mr. Iennes, as a pro-Palestinian Wikipedian, is presumably upset about what he perceives as unfairness at an unusually stressful and difficult time for Palestinians); and (c) distractionary, suggesting that maybe you'd rather argue over these "rights" instead of the behavior of the Wikipedians involved and whether or not Mr. Radish's response was appropriate.

I've noticed that you do this a lot, and you also jump to conclusions on occasion and sometimes make rather dubious assumptions. It doesn't necessarily make you a bad person, but I can see how it might be frustrating for others.

*Edit*
And apparently, when challenged you resort to accusing others of being "anti-semitic," which is obviously absurd. Surely you can see how this is problematic?

[andre]

Ha, the idea that I was the one being distractionary after you continually interpreted my statements opposite as what I wrote, deleted my posts, and took my statements out of context, intended to put words into my mouth and dishonestly mischaracterize my statements, then attack my tone and my person, classic sophistry
Good bye, idiots

[nableezy]

Im glad you all got the joy of experiencing a conversation with Andre.

[GizzyCatBella]

Im glad you all got the joy of experiencing a conversation with Andre.

Crazy..