We can't stop here! This is bat country!

[Zoloft]

Not your usual AN/I dispute.

Amanda Lollar (apparently Batworld (T-C-L)), from Bat World Sanctuary (T-H-L), demands the banning of Mary Cummins (T-C-L) (apparently her real name), for posting "adding false and defamatory statements."

Mary Cummins responds with a defense that she's just defending "100% the truth ."

It's this bat lady...

Mary_Cummins.jpg

(from Wikimedia Commons)

...vs this bat lady...

amanda1.jpg

(from Batworld.org)

For some reason I feel this dispute just cries out for the delicate touch of Jimbo Wales.

[EricBarbour]

Once again, two "professionals" (a term I use advisedly) bring their long-festering personal animosity onto Wikipedia. And find, to their amazement, that
Wikipedia is ten times crazier than either of them.

Times like this, one misses that pint of ether.

[DanMurphy]

Once again, two "professionals" (a term I use advisedly) bring their long-festering personal animosity onto Wikipedia. And find, to their amazement, that
Wikipedia is ten times crazier than either of them.

Times like this, one misses that pint of ether.

Never. Gets. Old. They "banninated" Ms. Cummins for "legal threats". Who was right here? Dunno. I suspect they both were "wrong" somehow or other. But why get in the way of the teenagers running the most important encyclopedia in human history?
Addendum: They banninated the"batworld lady" too. Positively Solomonic.

[Michaeldsuarez]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mary_Cummins#Blocked

The Wikipedians forced Mary Cummins to say "I will not edit" three times. The Wikipedians even pressure this inexperienced user into surrendering her rights to discuss the alleged issues with the article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMary_Cummins&diff=525037181&oldid=525035599

There goes her freedom of speech and her right to use the talk page. Blocked users ought to have wiki-attorneys who would advise them against surrendering their rights. Jimbo said COI users ought to be allowed to leave comments on talk pages.

[EricBarbour]

They've been creating blogs to attack each other--which have become virtually ALL of the top Google hits. Most of them
appear to be the work of Ms. Lollar. And inevitably, Google, the owner of Blogspot, is helping her. It's been going on
for at least 6 years.

http://truthaboutmary.wordpress.com/
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorro ... again.html
http://laanimal-friends.blogspot.com/20 ... cates.html
http://civil-lawsuit-los-angeles.blogsp ... mmins.html
http://marycummins.blogspot.com/
http://www.animaladvocates.us/batWorldLawsuit/
http://laanimalfriends.blogspot.com/

I suspect Colbert would have a field day with this.

And this one defies description.
http://richieramone-fan.blogspot.com/

[Michaeldsuarez]

They've been creating blogs to attack each other--which have become virtually ALL of the top Google hits. Most of them
appear to be the work of Ms. Lollar. And inevitably, Google, the owner of Blogspot, is helping her. It's been going on
for at least 6 years.

http://truthaboutmary.wordpress.com/
http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorro ... again.html
http://laanimal-friends.blogspot.com/20 ... cates.html
http://civil-lawsuit-los-angeles.blogsp ... mmins.html
http://marycummins.blogspot.com/
http://www.animaladvocates.us/batWorldLawsuit/
http://laanimalfriends.blogspot.com/

I suspect Colbert would have a field day with this.

And this one defies description.
http://richieramone-fan.blogspot.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mary_Cummins&diff=525037181&oldid=525036204:

This woman [Amanda Lollar] has posted about me [Mary Cummins] all over the Internet. She made over 40 websites, blogs, Twitter ... devoted just to me. I only comment about her in my own website.

[Zoloft]

There must be something in the guano.

[lilburne]

There must be something in the guano.

Pandas are just as bad, there are two opposing warriors on that subject. Spilled over onto flickr a few years back which prompted a contact of mine to draw a panda vomiting a rainbow, flickr creating a special Explore page using it as a backdrop:
http://www.flickr.com/explore/panda

[Anroth]

There must be something in the guano.

My partner (works in biodiversity recording, makes me do bat surveys with her at dawn & dusk occasionally) concurs they are literally 'batshit crazy' - having encountered both previously.

[Zoloft]

There must be something in the guano.

My partner (works in biodiversity recording, makes me do bat surveys with her at dawn & dusk occasionally) concurs they are literally 'batshit crazy' - having encountered both previously.

Too bad. Bats are cute lil mites. In my younger spelunking days I used to encounter them often. I would wait near an entrance until they came roaring out in the thousands.

[HRIP7]

Once again, two "professionals" (a term I use advisedly) bring their long-festering personal animosity onto Wikipedia. And find, to their amazement, that
Wikipedia is ten times crazier than either of them.

Times like this, one misses that pint of ether.

Batty indeed. Yet another article that seems to be mostly of interest to the subject and a person who hates them. This sort of thing is such a big part of the everyday reality of Wikipedia: far divorced from all the sanctimonious spiel about people editing to help the little kid in India, or Africa, or San Salvador ...

Flagged revisions, anyone? Tighter notability criteria?

The number of articles keeps rising, while the number of editors and admins is dropping.

[Zoloft]

Once again, two "professionals" (a term I use advisedly) bring their long-festering personal animosity onto Wikipedia. And find, to their amazement, that
Wikipedia is ten times crazier than either of them.

Times like this, one misses that pint of ether.

Batty indeed. Yet another article that seems to be mostly of interest to the subject and a person who hates them. This sort of thing is such a big part of the everyday reality of Wikipedia: far divorced from all the sanctimonious spiel about people editing to help the little kid in India, or Africa, or San Salvador ...

Flagged revisions, anyone? Tighter notability criteria?

The number of articles keeps rising, while the number of editors and admins is dropping.

The bats will be back. The editors won't be, scared by all the flapping around aimlessly amid dark spaces ruled by little rancid creatures who follow sounds only they can hear.

If only these creatures were bats. Bats are cute.

[Michaeldsuarez]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mary_Cummins#Blocked

The Wikipedians forced Mary Cummins to say "I will not edit" three times. The Wikipedians even pressure this inexperienced user into surrendering her rights to discuss the alleged issues with the article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMary_Cummins&diff=525037181&oldid=525035599

There goes her freedom of speech and her right to use the talk page. Blocked users ought to have wiki-attorneys who would advise them against surrendering their rights. Jimbo said COI users ought to be allowed to leave comments on talk pages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mary_Cummins&diff=525096386&oldid=525046780

Kim Dent-Brown declined Mary Cummins's unblock request and says that Mary Cummins must completely surrender her rights to freedom of speech. The sysops are robbing people of talk page access.

[Anroth]

Kim Dent-Brown declined Mary Cummins's unblock request and says that Mary Cummins must completely surrender her rights to freedom of speech. The sysops are robbing people of talk page access.

Wikipedia is a private server. You dont have freedom of speech/expression on it.

[Michaeldsuarez]

Kim Dent-Brown declined Mary Cummins's unblock request and says that Mary Cummins must completely surrender her rights to freedom of speech. The sysops are robbing people of talk page access.

Wikipedia is a private server. You dont have freedom of speech/expression on it.

Kim Dent-Brown is a "volunteer", not the owner. Kim Dent-Brown's authority ends where policy and the community say it ends. What policy gives Kim Dent-Brown the right to demand that Mary Cummins give up access to the article's talk page?

In addition, since Kim Dent-Brown is the one who blocked Mary Cummins, shouldn't a different sysop had reviewed the unblock request?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Block_reviews:

Since the purpose of an unblock request is to obtain review from a third party, the blocking administrators should not decline unblock requests from users they have blocked.

[Anroth]

Kim Dent-Brown declined Mary Cummins's unblock request and says that Mary Cummins must completely surrender her rights to freedom of speech. The sysops are robbing people of talk page access.

Wikipedia is a private server. You dont have freedom of speech/expression on it.

Kim Dent-Brown is a "volunteer", not the owner. Kim Dent-Brown's authority ends where policy and the community say it ends. What policy gives Kim Dent-Brown the right to demand that Mary Cummins give up access to the article's talk page?

By her rights as an Admin. By convention (and precedent) admins can set all sorts of unblock criteria. (For them personally, another admin might come along later and have a different idea.) You are right of course that as the blocking administrator she should not be handling the unblock request. Unfortunately the block policy only says 'should not handle' not 'must not handle'.

However in this case, as it was a block for NLT - technically all Mary Cummins should have to do is say 'I will not make any further legal threats on-wiki' to be unblocked. Anything else is hoop-jumping that is not required by policy - but also not forbidden.

[Hersch]

OK, who wants to write this up for the blog?

[Anroth]

I vote zoloft solely for the amazing choice of thread title. Otherwise I will do it at the weekend.

[isaan]

Before writing up a blog post, someone should get a clue. I read this as a rather straightforward but nasty attack on Lollar and her Bat World Sanctuary by a former disgruntled intern worker. She did a reasonable thing by requesting that Wikipedia either stop the defamation or delete the article, and was largely treated like crap there and banned, although the defamation is removed for now.

They've been creating blogs to attack each other--which have become virtually ALL of the top Google hits. Most of them appear to be the work of Ms. Lollar.

How in the (bat) world did you come to this conclusion? Your links indicate exactly the opposite, that it's the former intern Cummins doing all the online dirty work related to Lollar.

Seriously, people, look up the links and the successful lawsuit. There is no indication that anyone agrees with the allegations made against Lollar or the Bat World Sanctuary.

[Tarc]

Before writing up a blog post, someone should get a clue. I read this as a rather straightforward but nasty attack on Lollar and her Bat World Sanctuary by a former disgruntled intern worker.

That was my takeaway from this as well, the intern comes across as a bat-crazy version of Orly Taitz.

This does have ED potential, though.

[Michaeldsuarez]

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikipedians_in_Exile#Unblock_negotiations_and_conditions

The Wikipedians consider every little thing to be "outing". Everything Mary Cummins said was available publicly.

[Hersch]

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikipedians_in_Exile#Unblock_negotiations_and_conditions

The Wikipedians consider every little thing to be "outing". Everything Mary Cummins said was available publicly.

This point has been raised before, and my blog-post sense is tingling. Who wants to write a blog article on the irony involved where editors are preoccupied with protecting their sacred anonymity, as they churn out defamatory material about defenseless public figures who are anything but anonymous?

[Zoloft]

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikipedians_in_Exile#Unblock_negotiations_and_conditions

The Wikipedians consider every little thing to be "outing". Everything Mary Cummins said was available publicly.

This point has been raised before, and my blog-post sense is tingling. Who wants to write a blog article on the irony involved where editors are preoccupied with protecting their sacred anonymity, as they churn out defamatory material about defenseless public figures who are anything but anonymous?

I would like to weave that theme and the bat-facts in this topic into a slugjtly gonzo blog post.

[Hersch]

I would like to weave that theme and the bat-facts in this topic into a slugjtly gonzo blog post.

Gonzo is OK, but make sure that it is slugjtly so.

Edit: could we mix our metaphors and include references to bat-signals, batmobiles, etc.?

[Zoloft]

slugjtly

Ah, the joys of posting from my smartphone.

[EricBarbour]

Ah, the joys of posting from my smartphone.

Next time:

[Hersch]

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikipedians_in_Exile#Unblock_negotiations_and_conditions

The Wikipedians consider every little thing to be "outing". Everything Mary Cummins said was available publicly.

This point has been raised before, and my blog-post sense is tingling. Who wants to write a blog article on the irony involved where editors are preoccupied with protecting their sacred anonymity, as they churn out defamatory material about defenseless public figures who are anything but anonymous?

I would like to weave that theme and the bat-facts in this topic into a slugjtly gonzo blog post.

How does that look for Tuesday? Because otherwise, I got nothin'.

[Zoloft]

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikipedians_in_Exile#Unblock_negotiations_and_conditions

The Wikipedians consider every little thing to be "outing". Everything Mary Cummins said was available publicly.

This point has been raised before, and my blog-post sense is tingling. Who wants to write a blog article on the irony involved where editors are preoccupied with protecting their sacred anonymity, as they churn out defamatory material about defenseless public figures who are anything but anonymous?

I would like to weave that theme and the bat-facts in this topic into a slugjtly gonzo blog post.

How does that look for Tuesday? Because otherwise, I got nothin'.

I'll work on it now.