Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN post

Discussions about Sexism at Wikipedia
User avatar
neved
Gregarious
Posts: 926
kołdry
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 5:22 pm
Location: Here, for whatever reason, is the world. And here it stays. With me on it.

Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN post

Unread post by neved » Wed Jul 17, 2013 9:31 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... dmin_issue
Today LadyofShalott, administratrice extraordinaire, turns 25 yet again. She likes champagne and chocolate, and giftcards for the iTunes store. She graciously accepts compliments about the beauty of her mind and her body. Drmies (talk) 17:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

What is the admin issue that you seek assistance with? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 17:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I know this is intended to be joking and all, but perhaps we could avoid making jokes about other users' bodies and how people should praise them (or not praise them)? A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 17:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Quite. Unless I'm missing something here, this comes off...rather improper. Ironholds (talk) 17:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Jesus, tough crowd! And did Ironholds really just lecture Drmies about impropriety? --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:51, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
(ec) Bushwa, Drmies and LoS are very good friends, and this is obviously a well-intended and humorous note with not a hint of impropriety about it. You folks need to re-discover your sense of humor. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:52, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hence "unless I'm missing something here"; if I am, great :). Floquenbeam, if you have an issue with my conduct I invite you, as I have invited others, to discuss it with me and offer me a chance to participate in the conversation. Ironholds (talk) 17:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Even if LoS were to be personally fine with having her body discussed on AN, it still wouldn't be an appropriate conversation to have on a website that's struggling to not objectify, offend, and drive off female editors who might be reading. Like I said, I get that Drmies is making a friendly joke and doesn't intend harm, but the outside world reading this is going to get the impression that Wikipedia admins are cool with discussing female contributors' bodies for their own amusement, because lol-isn't-it-fun-to-talk-about-women's-bodies-publicly-even-when-their-femininity-has-nothing-to-do-with-this-website. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 18:00, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Why not hat the discussion then, rather than drawing more attention to it? Obviously not everyone appreciates this humourous post. Fine. Why not close it, insted of turning it into something bigger? ---Sluzzelin talk 18:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Because I think it's important to make the point that, at least from my perspective, this is Not Okay. I would like people who read this section to see that not everyone thought it was awesome, funny, and appropriate for this noticeboard, because obviously a notable portion of male editors think it's harmless to say things like this and it alarms me that readers would be left with the impression that everyone here does. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 18:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey folks. Obviously this is a really complex issue and it's hard for us as a community to wade into it. We want, very much, to retain a sense of fun and lightheartedness and there can be a beauty to compliments that we don't want to miss, and at the same time, we also want to retain an atmosphere of being able to question - because these "cases" are in some sense the places to have the hard conversations because it's here that the stakes are low (ish). We can have a sense of good faith that Drmies means well, and we can have some faith that the compliment will be received in the spirit it's intended without damaging reputation, so we can look at it and ask the hard questions about "Huh. How would a new editor see this? Are there patterns that we may be blind to that may create?" I will say that the same compliment from two different people has a very different flavor to it, so that's part of what's so sticky, and intention is so hard to read on text, so it's worth asking if we err on the side of safety in how we publicly frame things...but we have an environment of non-censorship that is crucial to who we are. I think it's important for A fluffernutter is a sandwich! to be able to raise the questions, and also for the compliment to be honored as it was both meant and perceived. I don't have resolution on this (there clearly isn't one). BTW, Happy birthday, LadyofShalott!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gyoung (talk • contribs) 18:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
"We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children." Golda Meir

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31489
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Vigilant » Wed Jul 17, 2013 9:42 pm

It would have been fine if they'd talked about sticking her in the throat and watching her die slowly.

Oliver Keyes aka Ironholds says these types of things on IRC, dontchaknow?
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Triptych
Retired
Posts: 1910
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 12:35 am
Wikipedia User: it's alliterative

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Triptych » Wed Jul 17, 2013 10:02 pm

Just goes to show once more that WP:AN/ANI are chat forums. It's not people trying to build the project, and it's not people trying to make the project run smoothly. It's an extension of the online social activity of the participants, a lot like IRC, and probably complemented by IRC in most cases.
Triptych. A Live Journal I have under other pseudonym, w. email address: Tim Song Fan. My Arbcom Accountability Project: in German. In art.

User avatar
neved
Gregarious
Posts: 926
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 5:22 pm
Location: Here, for whatever reason, is the world. And here it stays. With me on it.

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by neved » Wed Jul 17, 2013 11:20 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =564713567
I agree with Fluffernutter on this one. The sexism comes in because you are appearing to belittle women who do not "graciously accept compliments" about their bodies, and to insinuate that LadyofShalott is an administratrice extraordinaire at least in part because of this gracious acceptance. It implies that any female administrator who does not appreciate commentary about their physical appearance (something that should have absolutely no relationship to Wikipedia) is somehow less extraordinary. And perhaps just as importantly, nobody can really conceive of you posting something about a male administrator's birthday, age or his preferred gifts on the Administrator's Noticeboard. Even at the best of times, it's a rather bizarre post. Risker (talk) 22:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
"We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children." Golda Meir

User avatar
DanMurphy
Habitué
Posts: 3136
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 11:58 pm
Wikipedia User: Dan Murphy
Wikipedia Review Member: DanMurphy

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by DanMurphy » Wed Jul 17, 2013 11:22 pm

Good lord. "Drmies" comment was clearly well-intentioned, not creepy, and should have been either ignored or greeted by a chorus of "happy birthdays."

Instead you've got the squawking of a group of people who apparently learned their social skills in a petri dish. Oliver Keyes' opinions on "appropriate" behavior are just sauce for the goose.

User avatar
Mason
Habitué
Posts: 2273
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:27 am

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Mason » Thu Jul 18, 2013 12:50 am

DanMurphy wrote:Good lord. "Drmies" comment was clearly well-intentioned, not creepy, and should have been either ignored or greeted by a chorus of "happy birthdays."

Instead you've got the squawking of a group of people who apparently learned their social skills in a petri dish. Oliver Keyes' opinions on "appropriate" behavior are just sauce for the goose.
Ignored? That's not how Wikipedians roll. If they were capable of ignoring things that didn't concern them, the noticeboards would be barren wastelands.

User avatar
Mason
Habitué
Posts: 2273
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:27 am

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Mason » Thu Jul 18, 2013 12:54 am

And is it just me, or is Ironholds starting to remind anyone else of Russavia?

After all, Russavia's schtick was trolling while claiming to be Very Much Against that sort of thing... Ironholds has long been fond of wildly inappropriate commentary, and now he's Very Much Against anyone referencing a body part on a noticeboard? I call bullshit.

User avatar
neved
Gregarious
Posts: 926
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 5:22 pm
Location: Here, for whatever reason, is the world. And here it stays. With me on it.

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by neved » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:32 am

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =564629489
Per your request at AN, I'm notifying you (in case the notification system doesn't) that I've commented on you at user talk:Fluffernutter. If you honestly shared Fluffernutter's concern about attracting and retaining more female editors who might be offended by what Drmies said, wouldn't your first step be to resign your adminship and WMF position? --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
"We can forgive the Arabs for killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their children." Golda Meir

User avatar
Jim
Blue Meanie
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:33 am
Wikipedia User: Begoon
Wikipedia Review Member: Jim
Location: NSW

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Jim » Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:12 am

DanMurphy wrote:Good lord. "Drmies" comment was clearly well-intentioned, not creepy, and should have been either ignored or greeted by a chorus of "happy birthdays."

Instead you've got the squawking of a group of people who apparently learned their social skills in a petri dish. Oliver Keyes' opinions on "appropriate" behavior are just sauce for the goose.
It might not seem that huge to some people, but to see an admin and a WMF employee reacting in such a pathetically ignorant way to a couple of excellent content contributors having a bit of fun on someone's birthday, for God's sake, actually might be a more important reason for me to give up on the place entirely than some of the "bigger" issues.

They don't pay me, so if it isn't fun, guess what...

I'll be fascinated to see how much kickback there is against Ironholds and his lady - I see there's a bit...

Wer900
Gregarious
Posts: 698
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Wer900

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Wer900 » Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:37 am

Jim wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:Good lord. "Drmies" comment was clearly well-intentioned, not creepy, and should have been either ignored or greeted by a chorus of "happy birthdays."

Instead you've got the squawking of a group of people who apparently learned their social skills in a petri dish. Oliver Keyes' opinions on "appropriate" behavior are just sauce for the goose.
It might not seem that huge to some people, but to see an admin and a WMF employee reacting in such a pathetically ignorant way to a couple of excellent content contributors having a bit of fun on someone's birthday, for God's sake, actually might be a more important reason for me to give up on the place entirely than some of the "bigger" issues.

They don't pay me, so if it isn't fun, guess what...

I'll be fascinated to see how much kickback there is against Ironholds and his lady - I see there's a bit...
Ironholds is in no position to talk about inappropriate comments. :hamsterwheel:
Obvious civility robots are obvious

User avatar
Jim
Blue Meanie
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:33 am
Wikipedia User: Begoon
Wikipedia Review Member: Jim
Location: NSW

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Jim » Thu Jul 18, 2013 3:06 am

Wer900 wrote:
Jim wrote:It might not seem that huge to some people, but to see an admin and a WMF employee reacting in such a pathetically ignorant way to a couple of excellent content contributors having a bit of fun on someone's birthday, for God's sake, actually might be a more important reason for me to give up on the place entirely than some of the "bigger" issues.

They don't pay me, so if it isn't fun, guess what...

I'll be fascinated to see how much kickback there is against Ironholds and his lady - I see there's a bit...
Ironholds is in no position to talk about inappropriate comments. :hamsterwheel:
Well, yeah - I should have said "especially that WMF employee" - but I see another one "surfaced" (as they irritatingly like to say) in the noticeboard discussion -Gyoung (T-C-L). Circling the wagons to defend the indefensible? Probably found out on WMF IRC... :XD

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31489
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Vigilant » Thu Jul 18, 2013 7:35 am

That's a fucking beating.
I would be blushing bright red if someone ever said anything like that about me.
Oliver Keyes must be some sort of sociopath.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk: ... back_today
Note

Per your request at AN, I'm notifying you (in case the notification system doesn't) that I've commented on you at user talk:Fluffernutter. If you honestly shared Fluffernutter's concern about attracting and retaining more female editors who might be offended by what Drmies said, wouldn't your first step be to resign your adminship and WMF position? --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I saw, Floquenbeam, and have commented. Ironholds (talk) 23:13, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't care too much about puerile behavior. I'm not the boss of anyone here, can't control it even if I wanted to, and it's easy to avoid 90% of it by not frequenting IRC channels. But it gets in my craw when someone who does engage in lots of it decides to lecture someone else doing something at least two orders of magnitude less offensive. It is prima facie evidence that you care more about the ability to tell others what to do than you care about making WP welcoming to editors. This was, I believe, a major theme in the opposes in RFA's #1-4, it isn't my imagination. I don't need background in why you felt justified in making some of the comments you've made on IRC; taken in isolation, they're unimportant (and anyone would understand momentary frustration with Keifer). But they aren't isolated; taken together, they're a pattern of behavior incompatible with someone who wants to maintain and expand female editing, or any type of editing, really. They're a pattern of behavior incompatible with representing Wikipedia as a community liason and an admin. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't planning on justifying the comments, or taking them in isolation: that would imply I thought they were acceptable. I was planning to explain the, as you put it, pattern, and why it is (or more accurately, was) there. In any case, I've made the offer; you're welcome to take it up, or not to. But I would like to think that, were our positions somehow reversed, I would be willing to at least listen to you. Either you're right, and my actions are being accurately represented and are completely indefensible, or you're wrong, and you're writing off a long-term contributor without being willing to listen to both sides. In either case, an informed decision can be reached with 5 minutes of your time. I hope you might find it in you to at least listen, even if you do so skeptically or while firmly believing nothing I say could make a difference to your opinion. Ironholds (talk) 02:03, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Well it's not like I'm going to hat the discussion here; if you have something to say, I'll at least read what you write. But yes, it will be with a skeptical attitude. By the way, I"m not "writing off" a contributor; I don't think you should be banished, or banned, I think you should no longer represent WP as an admin and a WMF liason. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:17, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay. Do you have any objection to me emailing you? The Streisand Effect is live and well. Ironholds (talk) 02:22, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not thrilled about it, but if there's a legitimate reason to do so, no I don't object. Probably won't get a response today, though. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm genuinely grateful. That's fine; I'm on a plane for most of tomorrow, so we can probably pick the conversation up anew on Friday, if my email leaves you with a reason to do so. If it doesn't, don't sweat it. Ironholds (talk) 02:31, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, we don't want to see your explanations or apologies in public.
Have you apologized to Kiefer yet?
I mean a real apology, not this, "I'm sorry you made me hit you" shit.

Edit: It gets better and worse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk: ... y_and_mind
Body and mind
No one is changing anybody's mind here, let's call it a day. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 00:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Dear Fluffernutter, I also gladly accept compliments about the beauty of my mind and my body. Drmies (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure they're both utterly delightful and I congratulate you on your efforts in pursuit of them :) I'm sorry that mess came down on your shoulders; I'm perfectly aware you meant no harm to either LoS or the project, but just sort of put your foot in an institutional-level issue that you didn't see coming. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 20:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I would normally respect your (Fluffernutter) right to say something, even if I thought it a misinterpretation, except for 3 issues:

Your characterization of Drmies' edit as "making jokes about other users' bodies and how people should praise them (or not praise them)" is deeply unfair (my empahsis added, to highlight the part I felt was particularly unfair, though I object to the entire characterization). Such comments run a great risk of appearing so silly or over the top that they are likely to make others tune you out, and actually harden their position.
Mr "Punch a hole in their windpipe, light them on fire" Ironholds (username linked so he's notified I'm talking about him here) is the last person on the planet in a position to lecture anyone about appropriate ways to address or talk about others; he needs to address his own serious shortcomings first. The fact that he is still on the WMF payroll and an admin here is an order of magnitude much more damaging to any desire to retaining and attract new female editors than Drmies' comment.
And then I remembered something else, googled it, and confirmed it: you're an IRC friend of Ironholds, and evidently participate in sex/body image/joking behavior yourself, which is much more raw than Drmies' (see, for example, meta:IRC/Quotes/archives/2011). So publicly calling out someone else over this is hypocritical. OK for you, just not for others? And please, please don't say "but that was IRC". Stereotypes and hateful talk and behavior get propagated and passed on to new, relatively young editors on IRC too (I saw quite a few such young editors in the IRC logs on Meta). If you actually care about the bigger issue, change your own behavior first.

--Floquenbeam (talk) 23:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Floquenbeam, as I've already told you, if you'd like to talk about my behaviour I'm happy to do so, and put that quote (and others) in context. If you're just interested in judging me based on what has been communicated to you, that's your prerogative, but it's not going to be helpful or productive. In the meantime, the fact that I happen to agree with Fluff is not something that has any impact on the validity of her comments. Ironholds (talk) 23:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Er, right, ok Floq. I'm not sure what you mean by your first point - that I was insinuating that Drmies was insulting LoS's attractiveness, and thus misrepresenting him? If so, you've misread. My point was that whether we're praising or insulting a female admin's attractiveness, neither of those would be appropriate for a noticeboard - it is in pretty much no case appropriate to go into the attractiveness of a female editor's body on AN. As for your second point, I'm not really sure why your opinion that Ironholds should be fired has any bearing on my pointing out inappropriate behavior by someone else. And as for your third...well, you're obviously not familiar with Jabberwocky if you think that quoting a poem - a nineteenth century children's nonsense poem - is akin to plunking down on a public noticeboard and talking about how hot I think a fellow editor's body is.

I'm frankly aghast at the level of vitriol that's being directed against me this afternoon for daring to speak up in response to something I found sexually objectifying and inappropriate. I doubt anything I say is going to convince you and some others that I'm not a horrible, horrible censorship nazi who's out to get your right to speak freely about women's bodies wherever and whenever you please, and I'm just disappointed that so many people seem to think the problem here was my daring to contradict Drmies's right to comment on LoS's body, rather than Drmies making a well-intentioned joke that was nonetheless problematic. I doubt it's going to be worthwhile to continue this conversation given your position. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 23:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

As I just said above, I'm not upset that you somehow tried to "censor" Drmies; I never used that word, that's not what I said, it's not what I meant. I object to your description of his entire comment as "making jokes about other users' bodies", and your claim that he is saying people "should" praise, or not praise, them.
Ironholds' participation in that thread is related to your position because (a) you're friends with someone who has done much worse, and I have yet to see any criticism of that; and (b) I suspect the AN thread was brought up on IRC, and that's why he showed up to agree with you so fast.
If you're going to summarize your comments in that IRC log as "quoting a poem", then you're being dishonest, either with yourself, or with me. You obviously know there are several young impressionable editors on that channel, and you were modelling behavior for them that is anathema to what you claim to care about.
Like I said, if someone who was not being hypocritical had brought this up in a reasonable way, I'd have had no objection.
And yes, I suppose refusing to respond is, of course, your prerogative. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I offer this for a fourth time: if you want to discuss my actions in more detail, I am happy to do so. Until then, it seems unfair to say "based on my understanding of the situation, which I actively refuse to accept additional data into, X and Y and Z are true". Ironholds (talk) 23:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
(I would note that I saw the thread because I was browsing AN, not because of anything on IRC. A lot more editors also showed up; to my knowledge there is no Birthday Wishes Cabal, although it'd be a nice project). Ironholds (talk) 23:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Way to miss the point you two twits.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

dogbiscuit
Retired
Posts: 2723
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Wikipedia User: tiucsibgod

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by dogbiscuit » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:58 am

Vigilant wrote: Way to miss the point you two twits.
But as you know, they are not missing the point, they know damn well that they've been caught bang to rights playing power games on Wikipedia, and rather than back down they are scrambling madly to try and pretend they are on a moral high ground.

Ironholds makes me vomit with his brazen hypocrisy, he really is a little shit.
Time for a new signature.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31489
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Vigilant » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:23 am

dogbiscuit wrote:
Vigilant wrote: Way to miss the point you two twits.
But as you know, they are not missing the point, they know damn well that they've been caught bang to rights playing power games on Wikipedia, and rather than back down they are scrambling madly to try and pretend they are on a moral high ground.

Ironholds makes me vomit with his brazen hypocrisy, he really is a little shit.
You are absolutely correct.

The rest of the people on wikipedia who don't call him out on his shitty, shitty behavior are guilty by omission.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Triptych
Retired
Posts: 1910
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 12:35 am
Wikipedia User: it's alliterative

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Triptych » Thu Jul 18, 2013 11:10 am

Drmies (talk) 17:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC) at WP:AN wrote:Today LadyofShalott, administratrice extraordinaire, turns 25 yet again. She likes champagne and chocolate, and giftcards for the iTunes store. She graciously accepts compliments about the beauty of her mind and her body.
It's obviously inappropriate, further improper, for the official admin noticeboard that is supposed to deal with weighty issues, but actually never really does, and actually is just a fun-time social outlet for those who frequent it.

First this person "Drmies" just retired, but of course came back after a week, because doggone it, WP:AN/ANI are just so much fun for their regulars.

On the actual characteristics of the statement, it has a tittering and flirtatious and "tee hee" tone to it. He says "administratrice" ala dominatrix. He muses about the beauty of her 25-year-old body (it'd be interesting here to know Drmies' age, I'd suspect well over, he says he's got three kids at his user page, if he's this "Badmachine" pictured at the bottom, to me that looks late 40s.) Calls for champagne and chocolates, what else in Drmies' imagination should such a sparkling and sweetly-framed miss enjoy in her lace-appointed boudoir on her birthday?

Has Ladyofshalotte spoken on the question. I guess I'd accord some weight to that, but whatever she says, I still think it's a sexually-toned comment that really has no place where he put it. Even if their relationship means it might be okay in some more private venue, whatever that might be (please, not Wikipedia IRC). I agree with Risker and Fluffernutter and whomever else that criticized it.
Triptych. A Live Journal I have under other pseudonym, w. email address: Tim Song Fan. My Arbcom Accountability Project: in German. In art.

User avatar
eppur si muove
Habitué
Posts: 1978
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 1:28 pm

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by eppur si muove » Thu Jul 18, 2013 11:35 am

Er Triptych "turns 25 yet again" implies at least 27, probably more.

dogbiscuit
Retired
Posts: 2723
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Wikipedia User: tiucsibgod

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by dogbiscuit » Thu Jul 18, 2013 11:39 am

Triptych wrote:On the actual characteristics of the statement, it has a tittering and flirtatious and "tee hee" tone to it. He says "administratrice" ala dominatrix. He muses about the beauty of her 25-year-old body (it'd be interesting here to know Drmies' age, I'd suspect well over, he says he's got three kids at his user page, if he's this "Badmachine" pictured at the bottom, to me that looks late 40s.) Calls for champagne and chocolates, what else in Drmies' imagination should such a sparkling and sweetly-framed miss enjoy in her lace-appointed boudoir on her birthday?

Has Ladyofshalotte spoken on the question. I guess I'd accord some weight to that, but whatever she says, I still think it's a sexually-toned comment that really has no place where he put it. Even if their relationship means it might be okay in some more private venue, whatever that might be (please, not Wikipedia IRC). I agree with Risker and Fluffernutter and whomever else that criticized it.
But you've missed the point of how he crafted the comment - note the "25 again" which is basically saying she could be anything up to 60. It was just a very stylised quote.

The telling off should have been for posting personal chat on administration pages, the rest is straying into the world of political correctness. It seems looks are the new fat - as John Inverdale found out when he hamfistedly tried to compliment this year's Wimbledon champion on succeeding without being a pin-up. If you saw the circus that went on around Sharapova (where on court a couple of years ago I saw literally 100 cameras pointing at her and 2 at her opponent for a whole match) then you'd realise that Inverdale wasn't being as inappropriate as he was cast.

On Wikipedia it now seems we are encouraged to ogle at "lady gardens" and objects inserted therein, pornography that degrades the people within it, and observe people delight in the joys of pedeophilia without being judgemental but we are not supposed to acknowledge that Wikipedians are human beings in any way.
Time for a new signature.

User avatar
Triptych
Retired
Posts: 1910
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2013 12:35 am
Wikipedia User: it's alliterative

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Triptych » Thu Jul 18, 2013 12:09 pm

dogbiscuit wrote:But you've missed the point of how he crafted the comment - note the "25 again" which is basically saying she could be anything up to 60. It was just a very stylised quote.
I did blow by that, though I don't think that's the pivotal question. Her userpage doesn't really clue anyone in as to age, though she posts artistic works of young women in the 25-year-old range. Checked out her contribitutions, she has not commented on the Drmies WP:AN flare-up.
Triptych. A Live Journal I have under other pseudonym, w. email address: Tim Song Fan. My Arbcom Accountability Project: in German. In art.

Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Hex » Thu Jul 18, 2013 12:28 pm

dogbiscuit wrote:the rest is straying into the world of political correctness
Actually, it's called discouraging the creation of a sexualized environment.

Fluffernutter was absolutely on the mark. That was a breathtakingly dim post by Drmies.
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13982
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Zoloft » Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:05 pm

Context and environment is everything. I might have some banter and even some off-the-line comments between friends, but not during the company teleconference, with 100+ people watching.

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


Malleus
Habitué
Posts: 1260
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 2:48 pm
Wikipedia User: Eric Corbett
Wikipedia Review Member: Malleus

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Malleus » Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:15 pm

Hex wrote:
dogbiscuit wrote:the rest is straying into the world of political correctness
Actually, it's called discouraging the creation of a sexualized environment.

Fluffernutter was absolutely on the mark. That was a breathtakingly dim post by Drmies.
What's "breathtakingly dim" is you and your kind, who seem to labour under the delusion that you're running some kind of correctional institution.

Malleus
Habitué
Posts: 1260
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 2:48 pm
Wikipedia User: Eric Corbett
Wikipedia Review Member: Malleus

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Malleus » Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:24 pm

Hex wrote:
dogbiscuit wrote:the rest is straying into the world of political correctness
Actually, it's called discouraging the creation of a sexualized environment.
Have you discussed that with your admin collleague Ironholds? Or is this simply an attempt to divert attention away from him?

User avatar
Kiefer.Wolfowitz
Gregarious
Posts: 956
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:25 pm
Wikipedia User: Kiefer.Wolfowitz
Contact:

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Kiefer.Wolfowitz » Thu Jul 18, 2013 2:51 pm

Could this be merged with the discussion "Down with Ironholds", perhaps beginning with my tripartite posting on this topic?
Kiefer.Wolfowitz wrote:Fluffernutter (T-C-L) and Ironholds (T-C-L) tried to school Drmies (T-C-L) on the sexual/textual politics of objectifying the female body on Wikipedia (at WP:AN (T-H-L)):
Today LadyofShalott (T-C-L), ''administratrice extraordinaire'', turns 25 yet again. She likes champagne and chocolate, and giftcards for the iTunes store. She graciously accepts compliments about the beauty of her mind and her bodyDrmies (T-C-L) 17:35, 17 July 2013

What is the admin issue that you seek assistance with? A Quest For Knowledge (T-C-L) 17:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I know this is intended to be joking and all, but perhaps we could avoid making jokes about other users' bodies and how people should praise them (or not praise them) Fluffernutter (T-C-L) 17:45, 17 July 2013 Quite. Unless I'm missing something here, this comes off...rather improper. Ironholds (T-C-L) 17:47, 17 July 2013

Jesus, tough crowd!
And did Ironholds really just lecture Drmies about impropriety? Floquenbeam (T-C-L) 17:51, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Bushwa, Drmies and LoS are very good friends, and this is obviously a well-intended and humorous note with not a hint of impropriety about it. You folks need to re-discover your sense of humor. Beyond My Ken (T-C-L) 17:52, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hence "unless I'm missing something here"; if I am, great :). Floquenbeam, if you have an issue with my conduct I invite you, as I have invited others, to discuss it with me and offer me a chance to participate in the conversation. Ironholds (T-C-L) 17:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Even if LoS were to be personally fine with having her body discussed on AN, it still wouldn't be an appropriate conversation to have on a website that's struggling to not objectify, offend, and drive off female editors who might be reading. Like I said, I get that Drmies is making a friendly joke and doesn't intend harm, but the outside world reading this is going to get the impression that Wikipedia admins are cool with discussing female contributors' bodies for their own amusement, because lol-isn't-it-fun-to-talk-about-women's-bodies-publicly-even-when-their-femininity-has-nothing-to-do-with-this-website. Fluffernutter (T-C-L) 18:00, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Why not hat the discussion then, rather than drawing more attention to it? Obviously not everyone appreciates this humourous post. Fine. Why not close it, insted of turning it into something bigger? Sluzzelin (T-C-L) 18:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Because I think it's important to make the point that, at least from my perspective, this is Not Okay. I would like people who read this section to see that not everyone thought it was awesome, funny, and appropriate for this noticeboard, because obviously a notable portion of male editors think it's harmless to say things like this and it alarms me that readers would be left with the impression that ''everyone'' here does. Fluffernutter (T-C-L) 18:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Floquenbeam (T-C-L) followed-up with a discussion on Fluffernutter's talk-page:
Dear Fluffernutter (T-C-L),
I also gladly accept compliments about the beauty of my mind and my body.
Drmies (T-C-L) (talk) 10:29 pm, Yesterday (UTC+2)

I'm sure they're both utterly delightful and I congratulate you on your efforts in pursuit of them :) I'm sorry that mess came down on your shoulders; I'm perfectly aware you meant no harm to either LoS or the project, but just sort of put your foot in an institutional-level issue that you didn't see coming.
fluffernutter (T-C-L) 10:45 pm, Yesterday


I would normally respect your (Fluffernutter) right to say something, even if I thought it a misinterpretation, except for 3 issues:
  • Your characterization of Drmies' edit as "making jokes about other users' bodies and how people should praise them (or not praise them)" is deeply unfair (my empahsis added, to highlight the part I felt was particularly unfair, though I object to the entire characterization). Such comments run a great risk of appearing so silly or over the top that they are likely to make others tune you out, and actually harden their position.

    Mr "Punch a hole in their windpipe, light them on fire" Ironholds is the last person on the planet in a position to lecture anyone about appropriate ways to address or talk about others; he needs to address his own serious shortcomings first. The fact that he is still on the WMF payroll and an admin here is an order of magnitude much more damaging to any desire to retaining and attract new female editors than Drmies' comment.

    And then I remembered something else, googled it, and confirmed it:
    • you're an IRC friend of Ironholds, and evidently participate in sex/body image/joking behavior yourself, which is much more raw than Drmies' (see, for example, meta:IRC/Quotes/archives/2011).
    So publicly calling out someone else over this is hypocritical. OK for you, just not for others?
    And please, please don't say "but that was IRC". Stereotypes and hateful talk and behavior get propagated and passed on to new, relatively young editors on IRC too (I saw quite a few such young editors in the IRC logs on Meta). If you actually care about the bigger issue, change your own behavior first.
--Floquenbeam (T-C-L) (talk) 1:08 am, Today (UTC+2)


Floquenbeam,
as I've already told you, if you'd like to talk about my behaviour I'm happy to do so, and put that quote (and others) in context. If you're just interested in judging me based on what has been communicated to you, that's your prerogative, but it's not going to be helpful or productive. In the meantime, the fact that I happen to agree with Fluff is not something that has any impact on the validity of her comments. Ironholds (T-C-L) (talk) 1:12 am, Today (UTC+2)


Er, right, ok Floq.
I'm not sure what you mean by your first point - that I was insinuating that Drmies was insulting LoS's attractiveness, and thus misrepresenting him? If so, you've misread. My point was that whether we're praising or insulting a female admin's attractiveness, neither of those would be appropriate for a noticeboard - it is in pretty much no case appropriate to go into the attractiveness of a female editor's body on AN. As for your second point, I'm not really sure why your opinion that Ironholds should be fired has any bearing on my pointing out inappropriate behavior by someone else. And as for your third...well, you're obviously not familiar with Jabberwocky if you think that quoting a poem - a nineteenth century children's nonsense poem - is akin to plunking down on a public noticeboard and talking about how hot I think a fellow editor's body is.

I'm frankly aghast at the level of vitriol that's being directed against me this afternoon for daring to speak up in response to something I found sexually objectifying and inappropriate. I doubt anything I say is going to convince you and some others that I'm not a horrible, horrible censorship nazi who's out to get your right to speak freely about women's bodies wherever and whenever you please, and I'm just disappointed that so many people seem to think the problem here was my daring to contradict Drmies's right to comment on LoS's body, rather than Drmies making a well-intentioned joke that was nonetheless problematic. I doubt it's going to be worthwhile to continue this conversation given your position.
A fluffernutter (T-C-L) is a sandwich! (talk) 1:27 am, Today (UTC+2)


As I just said above, I'm not upset that you somehow tried to "censor" Drmies; I never used that word, that's not what I said, it's not what I meant. I object to your description of his entire comment as "making jokes about other users' bodies", and your claim that he is saying people "should" praise, or not praise, them.
Ironholds' participation in that thread is related to your position because
  • (a) you're friends with someone who has done much worse, and I have yet to see any criticism of that; and
    (b) I suspect the AN thread was brought up on IRC, and that's why he showed up to agree with you so fast.
If you're going to summarize your comments in that IRC log as "quoting a poem", then you're being dishonest, either with yourself, or with me. You obviously know there are several young impressionable editors on that channel, and you were modelling behavior for them that is anathema to what you claim to care about.
Like I said, if someone who was not being hypocritical had brought this up in a reasonable way, I'd have had no objection.
And yes, I suppose refusing to respond is, of course, your prerogative. --Floquenbeam (T-C-L) (talk) 1:47 am, Today (UTC+2)

I offer this for a fourth time: if you want to discuss my actions in more detail, I am happy to do so. Until then, it seems unfair to say "based on my understanding of the situation, which I actively refuse to accept additional data into, X and Y and Z are true". Ironholds (T-C-L) (talk) 1:53 am, Today (UTC+2)
(I would note that I saw the thread because I was browsing AN, not because of anything on IRC. A lot more editors also showed up; to my knowledge there is no Birthday Wishes Cabal, although it'd be a nice project). Ironholds (T-C-L) (talk) 1:54 am, Today (UTC+2)
Floquenbeam took Ironholds up on his offer, to discuss matters on Ironholds's talk-page:
.... If you honestly shared Fluffernutter's concern about attracting and retaining more female editors who might be offended by what Drmies said, wouldn't your first step be to resign your adminship and WMF position?
Floquenbeam (T-C-L) 23:12, 17 July 2013

...

I don't care too much about puerile behavior. I'm not the boss of anyone here, can't control it even if I wanted to, and it's easy to avoid 90% of it by not frequenting IRC channels.
But it gets in my craw when someone who does engage in lots of it decides to lecture someone else doing something at least two orders of magnitude less offensive.

It is prima facie evidence that you care more about the ability to tell others what to do than you care about making WP welcoming to editors. This was, I believe, a major theme in the opposes in RFA's #1-4, it isn't my imagination.
I don't need background in why you felt justified in making some of the comments you've made on IRC; taken in isolation, they're unimportant (and anyone would understand momentary frustration with Kiefer).
But they aren't isolated; taken together, they're a pattern of behavior incompatible with someone who wants to maintain and expand female editing, or any type of editing, really. They're a pattern of behavior incompatible with ''representing'' Wikipedia as a community liason and an admin.
Floquenbeam (T-C-L) 01:50, 18 July 2013


I wasn't planning on justifying the comments, or taking them in isolation: that would imply I thought they were acceptable. I was planning to explain the, as you put it, pattern, and why it is (or more accurately, was) there.
In any case, I've made the offer; you're welcome to take it up, or not to. But I would like to think that, were our positions somehow reversed, I would be willing to at least listen to you.

Either you're right, and my actions are being accurately represented and are completely indefensible, or you're wrong, and you're writing off a long-term contributor without being willing to listen to both sides. In either case, an informed decision can be reached with 5 minutes of your time.
I hope you might find it in you to at least listen, even if you do so skeptically or while firmly believing nothing I say could make a difference to your opinion.
Ironholds (T-C-L) 02:03, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


Well it's not like I'm going to hat the discussion here; if you have something to say, I'll at least read what you write. But yes, it will be with a skeptical attitude.
By the way, I"m not "writing off" a ''contributor''; I don't think you should be banished, or banned, I think you should no longer represent WP as an admin and a WMF liason.
Floquenbeam (T-C-L) 02:17, 18 July 2013


Okay. Do you have any objection to me emailing you? The Streisand Effect is live and well.
Ironholds (T-C-L) 02:22, 18 July 2013

I'm not thrilled about it, but if there's a legitimate reason to do so, no I don't object. Probably won't get a response today, though.
Floquenbeam (T-C-L) 02:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Last edited by Kiefer.Wolfowitz on Thu Jul 18, 2013 3:07 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Kiefer.Wolfowitz (T-C-L)
You run into assholes all day; you're the asshole.

Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Hex » Thu Jul 18, 2013 3:00 pm

Malleus wrote: What's "breathtakingly dim" is you and your kind, who seem to labour under the delusion that you're running some kind of correctional institution.
Image
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

dogbiscuit
Retired
Posts: 2723
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Wikipedia User: tiucsibgod

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by dogbiscuit » Thu Jul 18, 2013 4:42 pm

Zoloft wrote:Context and environment is everything. I might have some banter and even some off-the-line comments between friends, but not during the company teleconference, with 100+ people watching.
Agreed, and my answer reflects the fact that I can't take Wikipedia seriously in that regard. It is hypocritical to be bemoaning some comments which perhaps were misplaced but well-intended if mildly sexist while supporting content that objectify women in the worst possible ways with the declaration of NOTCENSORED. It's an interesting comparison that our dear readers magically have the ability to discern the good and educational side of the pornographic content, but will be damned into being a misogynist by some lightweight banter.
Time for a new signature.

User avatar
HRIP7
Denizen
Posts: 6953
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Jayen466
Wikipedia Review Member: HRIP7
Actual Name: Andreas Kolbe
Location: UK

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by HRIP7 » Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:09 pm

Just in case anyone needs the info, LadyofShalott has made 1,200 edits to Drmies' talk page. He has made 400 to hers. They're friends.

When I saw the post, I actually thought it was quite sweet that someone wanted to break the monotony of the usual backstabbing at the administrators' noticeboard with a post about something nice. A bit like bringing a bunch of flowers into an abattoir (with predictable results).

I guess that shows how perceptions can differ. (For what it's worth, my wife felt the same way.)

User avatar
SB_Johnny
Habitué
Posts: 4640
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:26 am
Wikipedia User: SB_Johnny
Wikipedia Review Member: SB_Johnny

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by SB_Johnny » Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:16 pm

HRIP7 wrote:Just in case anyone needs the info, LadyofShalott has made 1,200 edits to Drmies' talk page. He has made 400 to hers. They're friends.

When I saw the post, I actually thought it was quite sweet that someone wanted to break the monotony of the usual backstabbing at the administrators' noticeboard with a post about something nice. A bit like bringing a bunch of flowers into an abattoir (with predictable results).

I guess that shows how perceptions can differ. (For what it's worth, my wife felt the same way.)
:agree:
This is not a signature.

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13982
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Zoloft » Fri Jul 19, 2013 7:21 pm

LadyofShalott wrote:Sorry for editing through the hat, but as the person for whom the birthday wishes were intended, I will take the liberty. Drmies is indeed a good friend of mine, and I appreciate the good wishes. I also understand the concerns that others have raised. I don't want to stir the drama, so I'll end by saying thank you for the good wishes and return you to your regularly scheduled topic-hatting. LadyofShalott 13:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
permalink

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


roger_pearse
Regular
Posts: 324
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 6:41 pm
Wikipedia User: Roger Pearse
Contact:

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by roger_pearse » Sat Jul 20, 2013 8:25 am

DanMurphy wrote:... a group of people who apparently learned their social skills in a petri dish.
ROTFLMAO! Nice turn of phrase.

(And quite right too).

User avatar
Kiefer.Wolfowitz
Gregarious
Posts: 956
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:25 pm
Wikipedia User: Kiefer.Wolfowitz
Contact:

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Kiefer.Wolfowitz » Sun Jul 21, 2013 7:55 pm

Posted in the Down with Ironholds thread:

Ironholds (T-C-L) wrote this reply to Floquenbeam (T-C-L):
Hey Floquenbeam (T-C-L)

Sorry for the delay; I was travelling, and then recovering from travelling. So, in order:

I have just taken a look at the 2012/2013 logs on bash; using find, I can't see any examples of inappropriate commentary by myself. If you can point me to a comment there that is inappropriate, I'm happy to discuss it. If what you mean is "I looked at the GNAA logs, and" - you should be aware that they're pretty well known to be deliberately falsified. See ArbCom's attitude towards them.
I certainly do understand the possible damage; see the section below.
What led to your involvement in this was me saying that a comment by another editor was potentially inappropriate, unless contextually justified. Hypocricy is "one rule for me, one rule for [every/someone] else"; I don't think I've made any bones about the fact that my prior commentary was inappropriate, so I'm not quite sure why you identify it as hypocricy. Nor do I think I ever said anything about blocks.
Yep.
Yes, certainly. Having said that I don't seem to have a recall mechanism, and so I'm not sure how community demand would be demonstrated.


I consider myself an honourable person, even when dealing with dishonourable individuals, or otherwise honourable ones taking dishonourable actions - and make no mistake, I consider your perpetuation of a conversation started via email a dishonourable action. If you think you've eliminated the reasons for having it via email, you're wrong.

An honourable person has a lot of traits; one of them is that they respect their leaders and the people with authority over them, and that's what I do. I, in the heat of the moment, am not the best person to identify the costs and benefits of having me around in a position of responsibility in the community or at the Foundation - community and Foundation leaders are.

In regards to my Foundation role, I sat down with Sue on Friday, explained the situation to her and made clear that if she asked for my resignation, I would provide it. Not happily, because I enjoy the work I do, but not grudgingly, either; Sue's job is, amongst other things, to keep an eye on public perception. If she wants me gone, she's better-qualified to decide I'm a risk than I am. She accepted my statements, and actively refused to permit me to resign. From my point of view, I've taken the honourable action, there: accepting that there are areas others are more qualified in than me, and relying on them for navigation in those fields.

In regards to my community role, the same process applies; reach out to the appropriate arbiter and see what they say. In this case, that's the arbitration committee: they are the supreme body for dealing with user conduct issues, they are community elected, and community approved. I'm disappointed to see you accuse them of, essentially, being scared, because they haven't immediately rushed out screaming "BURN THE WITCH" - which is apparently your preferred outcome. They aren't bowing to politics, they're applying policy - both arbitration policy, which the community actively endorsed, and elements of both arbitration precedent and project-wide policy since 2007. If they decide policy extends to the point where I can be sanctioned, I'm okay with that. If they don't, they don't. But either way, I've not seen any evidence they're driving in the direction they want due to politics. If they were, the case would simply never have been accepted.

I appreciate you're likely to find both these answers and the thinking behind them unsatisfactory. Nevertheless, I thought it best to be transparent. Ironholds (T-C-L) (talk) 8:07 pm, Today
I responded with this message to Oliver Keyes ( Okeyes (WMF) (T-C-L) ):

Ironholds (T-C-L) / Oliver:

Are you alleging that any of the logs in which you are cited have been fabricated?
Which ones?
Why have not the other participants in those chats come forth and said that such logs cannot represent the truth?

You should be aware that resigning your position may have consequences for your eligibility for unemployment benefits, particularly in the USA.
Why not ask that your title be renamed to something like "Assistant Director for Special Projects" (which would not suggest that you be representing Wikipedia editors)?

Kiefer.Wolfowitz 9:32 pm, Today (UTC+2)
Kiefer.Wolfowitz (T-C-L)
You run into assholes all day; you're the asshole.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31489
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Vigilant » Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:35 pm

Someone should ask him, straight up, if he did write those things.

He's a slippery, slimy type of character who refuses to answer the allegations, preferring to dance around the issues try to impugn sources instead of directly denying that we wrote those execrable words.

Don't let this worm slip off the hook that he made for himself.
Don't let the WMF and ARBCOM look the other way.



Ask him if he wrote those things.

When that question is answered, ask him, "Where is this apology that you reference in the ARBCOM case?" and watch the little shit squirm.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

Malleus
Habitué
Posts: 1260
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 2:48 pm
Wikipedia User: Eric Corbett
Wikipedia Review Member: Malleus

Re: Ironholds lecturing Drmies on LadyofShalott's body AN po

Unread post by Malleus » Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:42 pm

He will slip off the hook, we both know that. Just the way it is is.

Post Reply