So what's up with the en:Arbcom these days?

[Guido den Broeder]

I got banned again last year from en:Wikipedia for no apparent reason, courtesy of Fram, and need to appeal to Arbcom's mailinglist as it involves several privacy issues.

However, nobody is home.

No response to my plea, no message that my mail was rejected either.

Any thoughts?

[Kumioko]

My thoughts are that's typical arbcom. They require people to contact them but most of the time none of the arbs are around...too busy. Unfortunately most of the arbs are completely worthless, thats kinda how they got the job. If you don't do anything you can't get blamed for anything. On a happy note several are members here so your post is certain to attract some attention. Maybe they'll PM you.

My understanding though was that BURob13 was responding to everything which was driving the other arbs up the wall. He would frequently respond and then one of the others would have to walk it back because he said something that was wrong. If that has now changed, then it may be a while before anyone else gets around to it...if it didn't go straight to Junk mail.

At the end of the day though the arbcom is absolutely worthless just like the people in it. They have no interest in doing anything beneficial for the project or the community and only want to stroke their own egos. Again, they are completely worthless.

[Midsize Jake]

At the end of the day though the arbcom is absolutely worthless just like the people in it. ... Again, they are completely worthless.

This is just unfair. Everyone knows that the value of a human body once distilled down to its basic chemical components has been rising lately, to as much as $4.00 USD by some estimates. So with 12 members, Arbcom could be worth as much as $48.00 USD, which would almost be enough to buy a new inkjet printer, or even dinner at a nice restaurant.

[Kumioko]

Fair point..nearly worthless.

[The Garbage Scow]

At the end of the day though the arbcom is absolutely worthless just like the people in it. ... Again, they are completely worthless.

This is just unfair. Everyone knows that the value of a human body once distilled down to its basic chemical components has been rising lately, to as much as $4.00 USD by some estimates. So with 12 members, Arbcom could be worth as much as $48.00 USD, which would almost be enough to buy a new inkjet printer, or even dinner at a nice restaurant.

Or 48 items from the McDonalds dollar menu!

The Arbcom email response rate has become really bad over the past few years. Like those data scraper sites that require you to send them faxes or whatever to get your info removed but never respond or remove the info. The appearance of openness to communication is enough sometimes, I guess.

[Guido den Broeder]

If I didn't know better, I would say that they seem to have given up on the idea of Wikipedia having a future.

A future where it still has editors.

Or maybe that's what I know.

[Anroth]

'No apparent reason' really now?.

Given you were banned by the community twice and unbanned by arbcom twice, I cant see an appeal to arbcom going anywhere. They are not overly fond as a group of giving more chances once they have been burned already, and they are less likely to overturn a community ban in the same circumstances.

Realistically you have two options: Get an appeal posted per WP:Standard offer, promising to avoid the stuff you did before, possibly offering a voluntary topic ban. Assuming you have not been socking the entire time it would probably be accepted under those conditions.

Or just create a new username and avoid like the plague any of your former topics of interest. And no one will know or care.

-edit- although given your avatar here is of the 12 year old girl who got you into trouble, perhaps you are unable to stay away from those topic?

[Midsize Jake]

-edit- although given your avatar here is of the 12 year old girl who got you into trouble, perhaps you are unable to stay away from those topic?

I was going to ask about that, but got distracted (not by the 12-year-old girl, though, I swear). I have removed the avatar in question and Mr. den Broeder will have to make do without one until he promises not to do things of that nature here again. We've had problems like this before, so everyone should please try to remember that we only allow people to use photos of now-deceased Italian actresses taken directly from Fellini movies as avatars, and only then if the photos are from the middle-aged phase of their careers or later. Also, the actresses should not be wearing bright-orange jumpsuits.

[Guido den Broeder]

You need to take into account that none of what Fram says is actually true, and that I was unbanned for good reasons. This is not a case of someone getting a lot of chances, but of bad blocks.

There is no stuff in need of avoidance, no topic where I misbehaved.

Kristina got me into trouble? What on Earth are you thinking of ...

[Guido den Broeder]

-edit- although given your avatar here is of the 12 year old girl who got you into trouble, perhaps you are unable to stay away from those topic?

I was going to ask about that, but got distracted (not by the 12-year-old girl, though, I swear). I have removed the avatar in question and Mr. den Broeder will have to make do without one until he promises not to do things of that nature here again. We've had problems like this before, so everyone should please try to remember that we only allow people to use photos of now-deceased Italian actresses taken directly from Fellini movies as avatars, and only then if the photos are from the middle-aged phase of their careers or later. Also, the actresses should not be wearing bright-orange jumpsuits.

FYI, I am the photographer and copyright holder of the picture that you removed.

Kristina is a personal friend and her article, as I found it, had some serious issues. The edits I made had full consensus. Exactly because this is a young girl, IMHO it is advisable that someone who knows her keeps an eye on the lemma.

[tarantino]

-edit- although given your avatar here is of the 12 year old girl who got you into trouble, perhaps you are unable to stay away from those topic?

I think your choice of avatar is creepy, Guido, regardless if she's an actor in your low budget horror film. Your 60 and she's 12, FFS, and your prose about her on wikisage bio only doubles down on that.

With symmetrical features, 'bottomless grey-blue eyes' and lavish long hair, Pimenova has been called 'the most beautiful girl in the world' since age eight, and has attracted millions of followers on the social media. In some pictures, however, she looks too sexy for her age, according to public comments.

[Guido den Broeder]

Lyrda wrote that, and it's a quote. Not sure what my age has to do with anything.

The movie is creepy, it's horror.

[Anroth]

I meant 'trouble on ENWP'. As it was your editing around her, your promotion of the film you were both involved in, that led to your second ban.

Kristina is a personal friend

How can I put this politely, 12 year old girls do not have 'personal friends' who are 50+ old men (who are not related to them).

There is also the nagging suspicion in my head that your interest and financial backing of the film was driven by her involvement in it.

[Midsize Jake]

FYI, I am the photographer and copyright holder of the picture that you removed. ... Kristina is a personal friend...

I'm glad to hear all that, and please don't take this to mean that anyone here assumes your actions, etc., towards the person in question are in any way inappropriate; it's just that for our purposes, as a public forum that allows user avatars and (usually) strives to avoid the appearance of impropriety, it just looks bad for us when members use photos of other people as avatars in general. Especially when those people are underage, of course. Even with their express permission and their parent's permission, it doesn't matter in terms of the forum's general reputation and all that sort of thing... It's just bad for business, on our side.

[Guido den Broeder]

I meant 'trouble on ENWP'. As it was your editing around her, your promotion of the film you were both involved in, that led to your second ban.

Kristina is a personal friend

How can I put this politely, 12 year old girls do not have 'personal friends' who are 50+ old men (who are not related to them).

There is also the nagging suspicion in my head that your interest and financial backing of the film was driven by her involvement in it.

Perception, perception. I didn't promote the film on ENWP, I merely made some factual updates to the already existing draft.

[Anroth]

please don't take this to mean that anyone here assumes your actions, etc., towards the person in question are in any way inappropriate;

*raises hand*

Except me, I totally think its inappropriate.

[Guido den Broeder]

please don't take this to mean that anyone here assumes your actions, etc., towards the person in question are in any way inappropriate;

*raises hand*

Except me, I totally think its inappropriate.

Yes, we got that. So if you had it your way, children would never be allowed to act. Unless we also had child directors and child producers, of course.

[Midsize Jake]

Yes, we got that. So if you had it your way, children would never be allowed to act. Unless we also had child directors and child producers, of course.

Y'know, I don't think that's quite the point he was trying to make there, but if you'd prefer we can strike that insinuation by Mr. Anroth from the thread. Or really, now that I look at it again, maybe it would be better just to delete the whole thread...

It's unfortunate, because there probably are some people out there who are interested in Arbcom's recently increased tendency to not respond to certain inquiries, or act in an expeditious manner in general. Maybe we could, you know, start over!

[Guido den Broeder]

FYI, I am the photographer and copyright holder of the picture that you removed. ... Kristina is a personal friend...

I'm glad to hear all that, and please don't take this to mean that anyone here assumes your actions, etc., towards the person in question are in any way inappropriate; it's just that for our purposes, as a public forum that allows user avatars and (usually) strives to avoid the appearance of impropriety, it just looks bad for us when members use photos of other people as avatars in general. Especially when those people are underage, of course. Even with their express permission and their parent's permission, it doesn't matter in terms of the forum's general reputation and all that sort of thing... It's just bad for business, on our side.

Hm, you yourself use an image with someone else in it as an avatar. In fact, most people here do.

[Guido den Broeder]

Yes, we got that. So if you had it your way, children would never be allowed to act. Unless we also had child directors and child producers, of course.

Y'know, I don't think that's quite the point he was trying to make there, but if you'd prefer we can strike that insinuation by Mr. Anroth from the thread. Or really, now that I look at it again, maybe it would be better just to delete the whole thread...

It's unfortunate, because there probably are some people out there who are interested in Arbcom's recently increased tendency to not respond to certain inquiries, or act in an expeditious manner in general. Maybe we could, you know, start over!

It doesn't bother me all that much. At least he said it, while others think it and then make up other stuff to get me banned.

I'm a chess player. I've had friends of all ages all my life. The idea that you shouldn't be friends with someone from a different age group is entirely alien to me.

[Midsize Jake]

Hm, you yourself use an image with someone else in it as an avatar. In fact, most people here do.

Okay, sorry - when I wrote "other people," I should have qualified that more, perhaps by writing "other people who aren't immediately recognizable by practically everyone who might conceivably visit the site as being someone other than the member whose avatar it is."

[Ming]

Ming would suggest that the failure to let go of the issue and just find a different avatar is highly indicative of a problem here.

[Guido den Broeder]

And if I had done the opposite you would have found fault in that as well.

In reality, I just pointed out a fallacy in Somey's reasoning. I'm perfectly ok with uploading a different avatar, I just want equal rules for everyone. Your avatar is immediately recognizable as someone else, too. So is his.

Let's face it, the problem is in your mind.

[Kumioko]

Honestly even if you hadn't done anything people are going to find something to blame you for if you have been banned. There are so many Wikipedia policies that once someone has been banned there are an infinite amount of things to target them for.

[Guido den Broeder]

Honestly even if you hadn't done anything people are going to find something to blame you for if you have been banned. There are so many Wikipedia policies that once someone has been banned there are an infinite amount of things to target them for.

That is where Arbcom should step in, but they seem afraid of characters like Fram.

Community bans have two requirements: they should be decided by uninvolved users, which clearly isn't the case here, and there must be a valid reason for a ban, like continuous disruption, which there isn't. I wasn't even warned, didn't fight over anything, nada. Only constructive editing and consensus building.

[Kumioko]

Honestly even if you hadn't done anything people are going to find something to blame you for if you have been banned. There are so many Wikipedia policies that once someone has been banned there are an infinite amount of things to target them for.

That is where Arbcom should step in, but they seem afraid of characters like Fram.

Community bans have two requirements: they should be decided by uninvolved users, which clearly isn't the case here, and there must be a valid reason for a ban, like continuous disruption, which there isn't. I wasn't even warned, didn't fight over anything, nada. Only constructive editing and consensus building.

It's not that they are afraid of Fram, they a) just don't care and b) are basically worthless when it comes to doing anything.

Given that you aren't an admin and are banned and have already been unbanned by them once, they aren't likely to do anything so here is where the catch 22 comes in. You can either just leave and not edit anymore or you can create a new account, continue to edit and then if you get caught, you get blocked again and called a sockmaster. Either way its a lose for you but the arbcom nor is anyone else going to unblock you at this point so don't expect that to happen.

It's frankly one of the reasons I just continue creating new account after new account and every time I get one blocked, I have 20 or 30 more to use. Because I know at this point I am not going to get unblocked, so there is no reason to even try and I have absolutely nothing to lose by continuing to sock.

The absolutely worst thing they can do to me is delete my contributions and I make that more painful by making sure I revert lots of vandalism and things like that, so if they do, they are restoring vandalism that I removed. They are deleting articles I created that are notable and meet the Wikipedia standards, they are hurting themselves every time they revert or delete my contributions because...they don't care as much about the project as they do about making sure I cannot edit it. I am never going to stop though and I encourage you not to either. If you want to edit, do it, if they delete it or revert it, then that's on them.

[Zoloft]

New Wikipediocracy policy: Don't use pictures of underage children in your avatars. Yes, we had two previous instances. Yes, it contributed to their being banned here. Also, no animated GIFs as avatars either.

Thank you and have a nice day.

[Anroth]

Community bans have two requirements: they should be decided by uninvolved users, which clearly isn't the case here, and there must be a valid reason for a ban, like continuous disruption, which there isn't. I wasn't even warned, didn't fight over anything, nada. Only constructive editing and consensus building.

While Fram may have proposed the ban, almost no one else who participated had anything more than a passing prior involvement with you given you had been banned from ENWP for a significant amount of time and had zero interest in the subjects concerned. The two main reasons you were banned (for the second time) by the community in 2017 were -

1. COI editing. ENWP is far less tolerant these days (since at least 2013 onwards) of editors who edit articles with a conflict. Especially when they do it in a promotional manner. And your editing on Paraduin certainly fell into that category. And thats not even starting on the Pimenova related stuff. You might have got away with it in 2010, you had no chance of getting out without some form of sanction in 2017. Thats just the way ENWP is currently. And you can blame spammers, fringe POV pushers, quacks/pseudomedical for that escalation.
2. Unrepentent and denial of obvious sockpuppetry.

In combination you were unlikely to get much slack - why should editors give the benefit of the doubt to a liar who wanted to push their own agenda? Had you either not been caught, or at a minimum just owned up to the sockpuppetry, you might have escaped with a topic ban. You didnt even have to believe it. If you are going to lie about operating sockpuppets, then just lie about being sorry for doing so for fucks sake.

[Guido den Broeder]

New Wikipediocracy policy: Don't use pictures of underage children in your avatars. Yes, we had two previous instances. Yes, it contributed to their being banned here. Also, no animated GIFs as avatars either.

Thank you and have a nice day.

It's always good to have rules, but I don't think you're quite there yet.

How about:
- our own baby pictures;
- a picture of Justin Bieber when he was 17;
- a picture of Anne Frank;
- a picture of Anne Frank's statue;
- a picture of an adult playing a minor;
- and what if a user is a minor themselves?

Also, the meaning of underage differs depending on where you live, or on the topic.

[Guido den Broeder]

Community bans have two requirements: they should be decided by uninvolved users, which clearly isn't the case here, and there must be a valid reason for a ban, like continuous disruption, which there isn't. I wasn't even warned, didn't fight over anything, nada. Only constructive editing and consensus building.

While Fram may have proposed the ban, almost no one else who participated had anything more than a passing prior involvement with you given you had been banned from ENWP for a significant amount of time and had zero interest in the subjects concerned.

You are quite mistaken. Salvidrim!, for instance, is the one who introduced the false claim that I had used sockpuppets. Future Perfect, with Fram, started the false claimed that I had made legal threats. They were found incorrect yet keep bringing it up as fact.

The two main reasons you were banned (for the second time) by the community in 2017 were -

1. COI editing. ENWP is far less tolerant these days (since at least 2013 onwards) of editors who edit articles with a conflict. Especially when they do it in a promotional manner. And your editing on Paraduin certainly fell into that category. And thats not even starting on the Pimenova related stuff. You might have got away with it in 2010, you had no chance of getting out without some form of sanction in 2017. Thats just the way ENWP is currently. And you can blame spammers, fringe POV pushers, quacks/pseudomedical for that escalation.

COI policy has stayed pretty much the same. The only new thing is that it's now suggested to create a new article in draftspace (which didn't exist ten years ago), which I did. There is nothing there 'to get away with'. Editing articles that have personal significance to you is not forbidden, and the same rules apply to the result as in all cases.

Promotion is an unrelated issue. The deletion discussion of Paraduin was about notability. However, if you can point out something promotional in the Paraduin article, please do. I don't want it to be promotional.

2. Unrepentent and denial of obvious sockpuppetry.

People saying so doesn't make it true. I've only ever edited under my own name, like I am doing here.

As far as 'my agenda' goes, we are not all the same. Wikipedia is not a hobby to me. I edit mostly for damage control. If there hadn't been an article about Kristina, that got thrashed by Drmies, I probably wouldn't have returned.

[Ming]

Lawyering over the exact boundaries of acceptability is an even worse sign.

[Bezdomni]

Also, no animated GIFs as avatars either.

I'll try to sort out how to make a decent photograph of my WO:NewRulez-offending avatar.

I want to try to catch the smiley blinking. Also, I need the right ambient light for the photo: I may need to wait for the next storm.

[Guido den Broeder]

Lawyering over the exact boundaries of acceptability is an even worse sign.

A phrase commonly uttered by WP Admins when they can't explain their actions, meaning exactly nothing.

Hiding behind an array of different aliases, THAT is a bad sign.

[Ming]

Lawyering over the exact boundaries of acceptability is an even worse sign.

A phrase commonly uttered by WP Admins when they can't explain their actions, meaning exactly nothing.

You know exactly what it means, which is not nothing.

[Guido den Broeder]

You are a good, loyal troll.

And then of course we have involved pov editor Only in death, who demands private information regarding my relationship with Kristina, and when he doesn't get it takes revenge by seeking to get me banned.

[Anroth]

COI policy has stayed pretty much the same. The only new thing is that it's now suggested to create a new article in draftspace (which didn't exist ten years ago), which I did. There is nothing there 'to get away with'. Editing articles that have personal significance to you is not forbidden, and the same rules apply to the result as in all cases.

Promotion is an unrelated issue. The deletion discussion of Paraduin was about notability. However, if you can point out something promotional in the Paraduin article, please do. I don't want it to be promotional.

No, it is not a 'unrelated' issue. You were editing articles on which you both had a COI being intimately involved with them, and editing them in an overly promotional manner. 7 or 8 years ago you could have got away with editing articles you have a potential COI with, while the wording has not changed, currently if a COI comes to light you will be told not to edit them directly, and if you persist, you will end up blocked or under a restriction. RE paraduin, you can write something in completely neutral language but it doesnt stop being promotional when its essentially trying to use wikipedia to give your non-existant micronation some sort of validity.

People saying so doesn't make it true. I've only ever edited under my own name, like I am doing here.

This is either a flat out lie, or the evidence to the contrary is completely fabricated. If your argument is genuinely that all the evidence to the contrary is a fabrication, I suggest you appeal on that basis and see how far it gets you.

And then of course we have involved pov editor Only in death, who demands private information regarding my relationship with Kristina, and when he doesn't get it takes revenge by seeking to get me banned.

I have neither 'demanded' any private information (I dont need it) nor sought to get you banned. You are already banned from ENWP, and the only reason I am not paging the mods to ban you here is because this board does not have (as far as I am aware) a population of minors. Were you a member of any of the forums I *am* a moderator on (quite a few gaming related ones) which do have underage members, you would have been banned on sight as a safeguarding issue. You raise far too many red flags that you would be allowed to remain.

[Guido den Broeder]

People saying so doesn't make it true. I've only ever edited under my own name, like I am doing here.

This is either a flat out lie, or the evidence to the contrary is completely fabricated. If your argument is genuinely that all the evidence to the contrary is a fabrication, I suggest you appeal on that basis and see how far it gets you.

I did. They unbanned me.

There is no 'all the evidence' (obviously, there can't be any evidence). All there is, is a vague comment by a Dutch user in the CU wiki. Arbcom decided that this was quite unconvincing.

[Guido den Broeder]

Promotion is an unrelated issue. The deletion discussion of Paraduin was about notability. However, if you can point out something promotional in the Paraduin article, please do. I don't want it to be promotional.

(...) RE paraduin, you can write something in completely neutral language but it doesnt stop being promotional when its essentially trying to use wikipedia to give your non-existant micronation some sort of validity.

Thank you for confirming your pov as well as that there was nothing wrong with the article.

For those interested, this 'non-existant' micronation has produced a novel, co-produced a feature film, and manages Wikisage. It is recognized by other 'non-existant' micronations.

And then of course we have involved pov editor Only in death, who demands private information regarding my relationship with Kristina, and when he doesn't get it takes revenge by seeking to get me banned.

I have neither 'demanded' any private information (I dont need it) nor sought to get you banned. You are already banned from ENWP, and the only reason I am not paging the mods to ban you here is because this board does not have (as far as I am aware) a population of minors. Were you a member of any of the forums I *am* a moderator on (quite a few gaming related ones) which do have underage members, you would have been banned on sight as a safeguarding issue. You raise far too many red flags that you would be allowed to remain.

Interesting to see you suddenly reply in the I-form, after hiding your WP-identity during all your personal attacks in this thread.

You need to see a psychiatrist, that is all I have left to say to you. I'm not responsible for your continued inappropriate thoughts, nor am I interested in your gameplay. I will, however, notify Arbcom of your contributions to this topic.

[Anroth]

You need to see a psychiatrist, that is all I have left to say to you. I'm not responsible for your continued inappropriate thoughts, nor am I interested in your gameplay. I will, however, notify Arbcom of your contributions to this topic.

Hey, I'm not the one with galleries of pre-teen girls so you can step right back from that one. I am sure Arbcom will give your thoughts the consideration they deserve. Until my interaction with you here I was largely ambivalent to your fate. Your comments have certainly put that to rest.

[Guido den Broeder]

Hey, I'm not the one with galleries of pre-teen girls (...)

It is indeed very fortunate that you were not the photographer assigned for this job. Now that we have established that you are a coward and a pervert, can we please get back on topic?

You can either just leave and not edit anymore or you can create a new account, continue to edit and then if you get caught, you get blocked again and called a sockmaster.

Maybe. I'm not quite there yet. But if Arbcom keeps silent, they shouldn't be surprised if that happens.

[Anroth]

Hey, I'm not the one with galleries of pre-teen girls (...)

It is indeed very fortunate that you were not the photographer assigned for this job. Now that we have established that you are a coward and a pervert, can we please get back on topic?.

Well if the topic is about you being unbanned, I think it's fairly certain that's unlikely to happen. And even if they did think about it, I would be contacting the wmf as a safeguarding issue.

[tarantino]

Guido, I doubt you could find one person here that agrees with you on the concerns raised about you in this thread. Additionally, you must refrain from calling other forum members cowards and perverts if you want to continue posting here.

[Guido den Broeder]

Really. I already found four in this short thread alone. Who are you again?

Oh right, you're the one with a link to an inappropriate image in your signature, and who called me a creep for posting a picture of Kristina.

For your information, taking pictures on the set of 'The Russian Bride' to post them on the social media was simply one of my production tasks. My avatar was such a picture. Of Dasha, Kristina's character, in one of the scenes. Not of Kristina, the girl, in her own bed. There were a dozen people in that room at the time.

You can find many more pictures on my professional Instagram, and I uploaded a few to Commons.

[greyed.out.fields]

This is all very amusing, but unfortunately it would appear likely to end rather soonish.
So, here's the link - it may be the broederbond for you: https://www.wikipediasucks.co


<sings>
Bekämen doch die Lügner alle Ein solches Schloss vor ihren Mund!
Statt Haß, Verleumdung, schwarzer Galle Bestände Lieb' und Bruderbund.
</sings>

[Midsize Jake]

This is all very amusing, but unfortunately it would appear likely to end rather soonish.
So, here's the link - it may be the broederbond for you: https://www.wikipediasucks.co

Are you suggesting we're planning to mute or ban Mr. den Broeder? Nonsense! As a matter of fact, I've already started my own Kristina Pimenova National Monument planning committee, and we'll have a complete merchandising operation up and running by the end of next week.

Wait a minute, this is Saturday, isn't it? What am I doing sitting in front of this stupid computer? Right, that's it, I'm off to the local American Legion fish fry for the night.

[Poetlister]

Wait a minute, this is Saturday, isn't it?

Once again, we see how US-centric Americans are. Going by Universal time (T-H-L), that was posted on Sunday.

[Anroth]

This is all very amusing, but unfortunately it would appear likely to end rather soonish.
So, here's the link - it may be the broederbond for you: https://www.wikipediasucks.co

Aw I have my own thread there. How cute. How full of wrong...

[Guido den Broeder]

Are you suggesting we're planning to mute or ban Mr. den Broeder? Nonsense! As a matter of fact, I've already started my own Kristina Pimenova National Monument planning committee, and we'll have a complete merchandising operation up and running by the end of next week.

Wait a minute, this is Saturday, isn't it? What am I doing sitting in front of this stupid computer? Right, that's it, I'm off to the local American Legion fish fry for the night.

Good to see that some of the spirit of the old boards still remains, my friend.

Merchandise is coming, to support a worldwide distribution. A calendar, perhaps. Maybe a game, or action figures. And naturally we plan to crown miss Pimenova as the first queen of independent California.

[Ming]

This is all very amusing, but unfortunately it would appear likely to end rather soonish.
So, here's the link - it may be the broederbond for you: https://www.wikipediasucks.co

Aw I have my own thread there. How cute. How full of wrong...

Ming has to settle for a few snide (and deeply wrong-headed) analyses from Krähennest.

[Midsize Jake]

Merchandise is coming, to support a worldwide distribution. A calendar, perhaps. Maybe a game, or action figures. And naturally we plan to crown miss Pimenova as the first queen of independent California.

FFS, leave California out of it - unless you actually want people to immediately assume you're some sort of Russian provocateur, that is. The only people who can get away with that (i.e., without being assumed to be Russians) are diehard anti-Republicans who were definitively born and raised in California. (I'm not saying you wouldn't fit right in amongst them, though, since you probably would.)

Anyhoo, I just noticed that you're using a photo of yourself as an avatar on Everipedia, and it's not a bad photo, so I'm going to restore your avatar privileges in the hopes that you'll do the same here - mind you, I'm not insisting, but if you do that I'll edit out the distractionary avatar-related material in this thread since I'm such a nice guy and all. (And most of it won't make any sense anyway.)