Glorious Kudpung takes on another prominent Wikiwoman

[Jans Hammer]

Whatever 1500 word stew Molly is cooking on Chris, it's probably not without bite, or overly sweet.

She's already at 1,510, so I guess she'll need a bigger extension.

It's too rambling (said the guy who posts his own rambling posts) - she would do good to tighten it, and she probably can. Chopping off 10 words from 1,500 is usually easy anyhow.

Meh, there1, that is merely a revival of the old Aug.2018 spat2.
The igniting on-wiki point is fairly described in Molly's present sandbox, as

In a discussion on Kudpung's talk page (link to full discussion), Kudpung wrote a comment pinging me that stated in part, Let's see what {{U|Ritchie333}}, {{U|Joe Roe}}, {{U|Boing! said Zebedee }}, {{U|Ad Orientem}}, and {{U|GorillaWarfare|Molly White}} from among our most experienced and respected admins say, and the many other admins who commented there. As you can see, he added a second parameter to the {{U}} template specifically so that my username would display my real name, something he did not do with the other administrators mentioned.

Molly basically self-ignited: What Chris probably knew, is what everyone either knew or easily could have know, and that "what" is found in the very first sentence on Molly's WP-Userpage, as it was in Aug.20183 : "Hello, I'm Molly White, or GorillaWarfare." (It was only later, 3.Sep.2018, she changed it to: "Hello, I'm GorillaWarfare, or Molly White.", hence swapping the order of personal addressing preference).

Note! Don't revive that discussion here, because Jake (wikipediocracy admin) may censor you away, as a reminiscence shows here4.

Refs.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =936012523 (Cached)
2. https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 64#p224039
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =845147417 (Cached)
4. https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 50#p224479 (Cached)

Surely the reason this escalated as it did was due to his improbably absurd reaction to being politely asked in future to refer to her by her username. At some point he offered that he was an old fashioned English guy who believed it was more respectful to refer to woman by their first name.

[Moral Hazard]

Evidence should focus on the defendant's clear and most severe wrongdoing.

Weak and unclear evidence:
Kudpung (T-C-L) addressed GW both as GorillaWarfare (T-C-L) and as "Molly". GW's user-page had long invited people to call her "Molly".

Who knows what Kudpung was thinking? Maybe he wrote "Molly", because they were familiar --- or as part of his habit of familiarizing himself with powerful editors, especially administrators (and especially arbitrators): In this scenario, Kudpung could have identified Molly by her user-name GW, so others would know whom he was addressing (without having to disable NoScript, etc. ).

GW failed to present evidence that

• all the other persons had identified themselves as CIS-male and had also invited the public to call them by their real-life names and
• Kudpung had previously addressed them by their publicized real-life names.

Even if she had, it is unclear what Kudpung's double-address means.

Too much of GW's account consists of her imputation of malice to Kudpung, rather than a description of behavior that clearly violates the ToS and WP policy.

[DexterPointy]

...
Surely the reason this escalated as it did was due to his improbably absurd reaction to being politely asked in future to refer to her by her username. At some point he offered that he was an old fashioned English guy who believed it was more respectful to refer to woman by their first name.

Politely asked miss out on what was asked, and in particular the absurdity of it (the reasoning/motivation of it, standing in contradiction to existing basic fact, the "Hello, I'm Molly White, or GorillaWarfare.").
Chris certainly could have, and should have, handled it differently, but when travelling at speed, then: Unexpected absurdities are very difficult to handle. Quick! How would you respond to someone who politely asked you not to use his/her name, because of your shirt's perceived mismatch to the colour of whatever? (right, at speed, perhaps something like: "Mind taking you medication", or "You really shouldn't have accepted the offer of having a lobotomy").

[Vigilant]

In the GW/K dustup, I found GW's comment pretty mild and then Kudpung loses his fucking mind in response.

YMMV

[Moral Hazard]

It would have been biased for Kudpung not to unleash his personality on GW; he unleashes it on everybody else who disagrees with him.

[Jans Hammer]

...
Surely the reason this escalated as it did was due to his improbably absurd reaction to being politely asked in future to refer to her by her username. At some point he offered that he was an old fashioned English guy who believed it was more respectful to refer to woman by their first name.

Politely asked miss out on what was asked, and in particular the absurdity of it (the reasoning/motivation of it, standing in contradiction to existing basic fact, the "Hello, I'm Molly White, or GorillaWarfare.").
Chris certainly could have, and should have, handled it differently, but when travelling at speed, then: Unexpected absurdities are very difficult to handle. Quick!

How would you respond to someone who politely asked you not to use his/her name,

because of your shirt's perceived mismatch to the colour of whatever? (right, at speed, perhaps something like: "Mind taking you medication", or "You really shouldn't have accepted the offer of having a lobotomy").

I'm struggling to understand what you are saying. But I would simply have apologised and respected the request. Absolutely no reason to remove the control rods over such a minor issue.

[Randy from Boise]

...
Surely the reason this escalated as it did was due to his improbably absurd reaction to being politely asked in future to refer to her by her username. At some point he offered that he was an old fashioned English guy who believed it was more respectful to refer to woman by their first name.

Politely asked miss out on what was asked, and in particular the absurdity of it (the reasoning/motivation of it, standing in contradiction to existing basic fact, the "Hello, I'm Molly White, or GorillaWarfare.").
Chris certainly could have, and should have, handled it differently, but when travelling at speed, then: Unexpected absurdities are very difficult to handle. Quick! How would you respond to someone who politely asked you not to use his/her name, because of your shirt's perceived mismatch to the colour of whatever? (right, at speed, perhaps something like: "Mind taking you medication", or "You really shouldn't have accepted the offer of having a lobotomy").

Lemme guess.... Illinois + legal marijuana + first experience with chronic

RfB

[Midsize Jake]

Note! Don't revive that discussion here, because Jake (wikipediocracy admin) may censor you away, as a reminiscence shows here4.

I can assure you that the posts I removed in that instance had nothing to do with GW's "order of personal addressing preference," other than the last one, in which you were quoted (by GW herself, no less) using the "c-word."

Still, it would have been a worthwhile point if it hadn't been saddled with all that additional baggage, so I could conceivably clean it up and reconstruct that part of the discussion if you like. But this might be one of those "careful what you wish for" situations.

[DexterPointy]

Note! Don't revive that discussion here, because Jake (wikipediocracy admin) may censor you away, as a reminiscence shows here4.

I can assure you that the posts I removed in that instance had nothing to do with GW's "order of personal addressing preference," other than the last one, in which you were quoted (by GW herself, no less) using the "c-word."

Still, it would have been a worthwhile point if it hadn't been saddled with all that additional baggage, so I could conceivably clean it up and reconstruct that part of the discussion if you like. But this might be one of those "careful what you wish for" situations.

Attempting to continue a conversation after a 16 months long break(?) in a "conceivably clean" variant, i.e. a censored/manipulated variant.
Really??!?

[Midsize Jake]

Attempting to continue a conversation after a 16 months long break(?) in a "conceivably clean" variant, i.e. a censored/manipulated variant.
Really??!?

I'm not suggesting that we actually resurrect the thread (i.e., post more stuff to it). I'm just offering to make it easier for you to claim that you made this point about GW's user page at the time the dispute actually happened, as opposed to only bringing it up now, 16 months later.

I mean, you can make that claim now regardless and I'll back you up, but maybe you'd rather have the actual posts to link to. Mind you, I'm not saying it's worth doing for either of us, it's just that you brought up the dread spectre of censorship, and I'm admitting that my efforts in that regard were a bit more "ham-fisted" at the time than I would have liked.

But yes, I'm also not going to restore a bunch of posts that make this site look like a den of idiot misogynists who freak out when the "mythical real girl on the internet" shows up and actually takes a shot at answering a question or two.

[Moral Hazard]

The management has the confidence of the old timers and the relative new people, such as myself.

Write the management if you have an issue. Sarcastic criticism of the management does not help.

Avoid fighting with the management or drawing the attention of the great old ones (T-H-L).

[Poetlister]

Surely the reason this escalated as it did was due to his improbably absurd reaction to being politely asked in future to refer to her by her username. At some point he offered that he was an old fashioned English guy who believed it was more respectful to refer to woman by their first name.

Obviously, that is not how old-fashioned English gentlemen behave! They would probably call her "Miss White". But I suspect that she would not care to be called "Miss".

[DexterPointy]

Jake, you're now, today, reconsidering your censorship from 16 months ago, thus only now, 16 months late, attempting to tackle some kind of addressing of what I asked 6.Sep.2018.
Well, the interesting thing in that thread, was the conversation with Molly, and that can't simply be revived & continued as if time had stood still. So, no, don't bother now digging up the deleted data, - it would, today, serve little to no purpose (or at least, will certainly not serve its original purpose).

Incidentally, I also, back at that time, wrote Molly (by email), asking her if she had any copy/copies, which she had not. Furthermore, she did not seem butt-hurt by my provocative pointyness. Essentially, you appear to have exercised censorship rooted in you feeling butt-hurt-by-proxy, and that using a proxy, whom was not herself being butt-hurt.

[Midsize Jake]

Incidentally, I also, back at that time, wrote Molly (by email), asking her if she had any copy/copies, which she had not. Furthermore, she did not seem butt-hurt by my provocative pointyness. Essentially, you appear to have exercised censorship rooted in you feeling butt-hurt-by-proxy, and that using a proxy, whom was not herself being butt-hurt.

Why not ask me (or one of the other admins/mods here) for copies?

We certainly don't mind if you have them, the problem was that we had them. Also, I disagree that wanting to maintain the site's reputation as a place for non-sexist discussion of women and women's issues (on WP or elsewhere) amounts to being "butt-hurt," but I guess everyone has their own definition of that term.

[DexterPointy]

Why not ask me (or one of the other admins/mods here) for copies?

I'd say I did, by using the term "anyone" (found in 6.Sep.2018 posting). Anyone encompasses everyone, as in "anyone, without any exception or exceptions" or as in "everyone, including Jake, not excluding Jake".

[Midsize Jake]

I'd say I did, by using the term "anyone" (found in 6.Sep.2018 posting). Anyone encompasses everyone, as in "anyone, without any exception or exceptions" or as in "everyone, including Jake, not excluding Jake".

Hmm... Okay, maybe, but in case I wasn't clear before, I wouldn't include copies of other people's deleted posts, only yours and responses that quoted you.

[DexterPointy]

I'd say I did, by using the term "anyone" (found in 6.Sep.2018 posting). Anyone encompasses everyone, as in "anyone, without any exception or exceptions" or as in "everyone, including Jake, not excluding Jake".

Hmm... Okay, maybe, but in case I wasn't clear before, I wouldn't include copies of other people's deleted posts, only yours and responses that quoted you.

Well, as I already noted/hinted, it's too late for being of any real value now.
But for future prevention: How about setting/configuring this phpBB installation, to include an emailed copy of what's getting posted: Copying posting's content into the notification mail, which is presently (as desired) being emailed to thread subscribed users?

[Vigilant]

GW provides her evidence

In video form

[Moral Hazard]

Her submission had been edited sufficiently. Good.

She could have focused on Kudpung's reaction rather than sharing a Cornell "study" on naming women.

The defense of Katherine Maher was a digression. Speaking of airfare:

[Jans Hammer]

It's all a bit low key - the Evidence stage. The most that seems likely is an admonishment, warning to watch watch his step, cut back on the rhetoric, etc.

[Zoloft]

This is the point at which a real Wikipedian would make it worse.

[Giraffe Stapler]

This is the point at which a real Wikipedian would make it worse.

You think Kudpung is going to be called a misogynist and just take it? From a bunch of women? Time to prove how much those men-haters hate men!

[Poetlister]

This is the point at which a real Wikipedian would make it worse.

That sounds like the "No true Scotsman" joke. Any real Wikipedian would make it worse. Kudpung is not doing that. Well, he's not a real Wikipedian.

[Cla68]

The case page is funny. Several of the commentators not-so-subtly imply that Kudpung's behavior is motivated by misogyny and white supremacy. It makes ArbCom look like Maoist struggle session.

[Vigilant]

Miss Vain weighs in

I suspect that this will be the tipping point for this case.

[Moral Hazard]

The case page is funny. Several of the commentators not-so-subtly imply that Kudpung's behavior is motivated by misogyny and white supremacy.

Kudpung is an asshole while GW and Missvain have been quite sympathetic. Alas, they have made me take Kudpung's side here, a grievous injury that I shall not soon forget.

Unfortunately I see Kudpung's behavior towards her as a part of a larger pattern of unacceptable interactions with minority [?] editors—a mindset that should not be allowed to fester within our community and especially within our administrator corps.

At very least, "mindset" violates WP:NPA (T-H-L).

Many feminist (T-H-L)s, especially on Wikipedia, have been corrupted by postmodern (T-H-L) academics, who claim to have a powerful theory for which they accumulate evidence consistent with it (while ignoring discordant evidence). This approach turns intelligent people into prickly fanatics, who desperately need cognitive behavioral therapy (T-H-L) or scientific (T-H-L) research, so that they may gain the habit of looking for alternative explanation (T-H-L)s.

People are being too coy to mention it, but in this case the female editor in question [Missvain (T-C-L)] was previously caught red-handed doing undeclared paid-editing (in a very high-profile case which even made the mainstream non-technical press), and as such is aware that her creations are subject to a higher degree of scrutiny than would be usual for someone with 20,000 page creations. Insinuating that she's being targeted because she's female is unfair; the edits of people involved in other paid-editing scandals such as Gibraltarpedia (T-H-L) are subject to just as intense a degree of scrutiny.
‑ Iridescent (T-C-L)
08:40, 10 January 2020

Both GorillaWarfare and Missvain reveal too much about their personal lifes. The Englishmen who read their discussions of anxiety, etc., have better things to do. Given Kudpung's age, I suspect that he could care less about GW's self-declared queerness or Mv's being "minority" (?).

Missvain declared that she suffers anxiety whenever somebody discusses her on Wikipedia. She should seek help for her Wikipedia addiction.

[Vigilant]

Both GorillaWarfare and Missvain reveal too much about their personal lifes. The Englishmen who read their discussions of anxiety, etc., have better things to do. Given Kudpung's age, I suspect that he could care less about GW's self-declared queerness or Mv's being "minority" (?).

Missvain declared that she suffers anxiety whenever somebody discusses her on Wikipedia. She should seek help for her Wikipedia addiction.

Given the stated goals of diversity, equity and inclusiveness by the new WMF regime, do you think this is a smart move by GW and MV?


It's cynical and manipulative, but it's only Kudpung...

[DexterPointy]

... Missvain declared that she suffers anxiety whenever somebody discusses her on Wikipedia. She should seek help for her Wikipedia addiction.

She shouldn't be on Wikipedia at all. (Who the fuck would eat hazelnuts, knowing they were allergic to hazelnuts.)

[Poetlister]

... Missvain declared that she suffers anxiety whenever somebody discusses her on Wikipedia. She should seek help for her Wikipedia addiction.

She shouldn't be on Wikipedia at all. (Who the fuck would eat hazelnuts, knowing they were allergic to hazelnuts.)

The clue is in her user name - Miss Vain. As Oscar Wilde said, "There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about."

[No Ledge]

The clue is in her user name - Miss Vain. As Oscar Wilde said, "There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about."

I too found her username curious. Little Miss Vain is part of the Little Miss series. Little Miss Vain lives in Prettyville. Her beauty would make Little Miss Splendid jealous.

But I think she's right about the practice of new page patrollers tagging new articles for proposed deletion.

"Proposed deletion (PROD) is a way to suggest an article or file for uncontroversial deletion." ... "PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected."

What kind of new page patroller expects that an author won't object to deletion of an article that they just created?

PROD tags should be used on articles that have gone unloved for a long time, whose authors haven't edited (in that topic area) for a long time.

[Randy from Boise]

The clue is in her user name - Miss Vain. As Oscar Wilde said, "There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about."

I too found her username curious. Little Miss Vain is part of the Little Miss series. Little Miss Vain lives in Prettyville. Her beauty would make Little Miss Splendid jealous.

I think you're on to something with the children's book origin for the name, because SS in real life doesn't seem to have the glamor shots/look-at-me vibe whatsoever...

But I think she's right about the practice of new page patrollers tagging new articles for proposed deletion.

"Proposed deletion (PROD) is a way to suggest an article or file for uncontroversial deletion." ... "PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected."

What kind of new page patroller expects that an author won't object to deletion of an article that they just created?

PROD tags should be used on articles that have gone unloved for a long time, whose authors haven't edited (in that topic area) for a long time.

I don't think the PROD definition means that there is expected to be nobody with skin in the game to object, only that "the nomination is so uncontroversial an application of notability rules and past precedent that no reasonable Wikipedian would be expected to object." This is why anybody can end a PROD nomination simply by pulling down the flag — "I object, take it to AfD for a full debate."

Of course, jilted original writers could also do this, so only the most incompetent pieces on the most inapplicable topics would be truly worthy candidates for the PROD abattoir.

RfB

[Giraffe Stapler]

I have always assumed that the "Miss Vain" username came from her DJ name "Sarah Vain" (which I assumed probably came from the early '90s club hit MIster Vain (T-H-L)). But, please, carry on guessing why she called herself that and what it might mean. Extra points if you can relate it to her mental state or physical appearance. Sometimes it embarrasses me that I hang out here.

[Randy from Boise]

I have always assumed that the "Miss Vain" username came from her DJ name "Sarah Vain" (which I assumed probably came from the early '90s club hit MIster Vain (T-H-L)). But, please, carry on guessing why she called herself that and what it might mean. Extra points if you can relate it to her mental state or physical appearance. Sometimes it embarrasses me that I hang out here.

Where else is someone named "Giraffe Stapler" gonna hang out, pray tell!

RfB

[No Ledge]

I have always assumed that the "Miss Vain" username came from her DJ name "Sarah Vain" (which I assumed probably came from the early '90s club hit MIster Vain (T-H-L)). But, please, carry on guessing

I've never heard of that "club hit". On the other hand, That probably is irrelevant, though it is ranked on Billboard's all-time chart.

[Midsize Jake]

I have always assumed that the "Miss Vain" username came from her DJ name "Sarah Vain" (which I assumed probably came from the early '90s club hit MIster Vain (T-H-L)). But, please, carry on guessing...

Well, a lot of us are pushing 60 at this point, so it's easy to forget all about the whole "DJ name" thing.

In this photo, I can't see enough detail on the CD-R's to tell what she's actually playing, but that's definitely a Denon DN-S1000 scratch player she's using, and one of the women in the background is dressed in a roller derby outfit.

Click to enlarge

[Poetlister]

I don't think the PROD definition means that there is expected to be nobody with skin in the game to object, only that "the nomination is so uncontroversial an application of notability rules and past precedent that no reasonable Wikipedian would be expected to object." This is why anybody can end a PROD nomination simply by pulling down the flag — "I object, take it to AfD for a full debate."

Of course, jilted original writers could also do this, so only the most incompetent pieces on the most inapplicable topics would be truly worthy candidates for the PROD abattoir.

RfB

It's a way of biting newbies who might not understand what's happening, or who have made a few edits and then don't log in again until their article is gone. I've seen that often enough.

[Jans Hammer]

WTF!

Not so much a smoking gun but a smoking pile of bullshit.

link

[Vigilant]

WTF!

Not so much a smoking gun but a smoking pile of bullshit.

link

That reads like someone had a brain injury.

[Giraffe Stapler]

I've never heard of that "club hit". On the other hand, That probably is irrelevant, though it is ranked on Billboard's all-time chart.

Sorry, it looks like I messed up the link. The right link is Mr. Vain (T-H-L). If you didn't go to dance clubs or bars that played that type of music, you might have missed it, but it was a huge hit at the time.

"Mr. Vain" achieved huge success worldwide, reaching number one in Australia, Austria, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and Zimbabwe. In the United States, it peaked at number 17 on the Billboard Hot 100 and number two on the Dance Club Songs chart.

[Vigilant]

So vain.

[Randy from Boise]

WTF!

Not so much a smoking gun but a smoking pile of bullshit.

link

That reads like someone had a brain injury.

Word count = 2,195

They are NOT a winner...

RfB

[Vigilant]

If I didn't make it clear with lots of bold explicitly stating as much, I don't intend my evidence to say that GW should be sanctioned. She - and all of us - have suffered enough here. Recommend sentencing both parties to "time already served". I have no comment about the other issues involving Kudpung, because frankly I didn't look into them. Looking into this one was rough enough, and I am quite, quite glad that I'm not an arb that has to.

GW isn't a party to this case.

Kudpung is.

If you can't 'look into' the issues around the named party, what is the fucking point of commenting there?
Clerks should just strike the entirety of GRuban's statement and partial ban his ass from */Case/* for about a year.

[Randy from Boise]

I'd very much like to see Arbcom rule that Pudkung has "lost the confidence of the community" and put him up for a confirmation vote at RFA, but I really don't see that as a likely outcome here. He'll be gently scolded.

If he gets hauled before this Arbcom again in the coming year for something else, he's toast.

RfB

[Vigilant]

With FoF6 from Portals stating

6) BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs) has repeatedly engaged in personal attacks and assumptions of bad faith, including stating that editors are either liars or lying ([1], [2], [3], [4]); labeling editors with opposing viewpoints to hers in portal matters as 'portalistas', which she defined as 'those editors who have engaged in misconduct to subvert the application of community consensus to portals' (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive311#Civility issues with User:BrownHairedGirl); and questioning the intelligence of those participating in portal edits and discussions with accusations of mendacity, 'Dunning–Kruger conduct', and being a 'low-skill group' (Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1023#Portals, NA1K's evidence, BHG's evidence).

And that leading to remedy 4

BrownHairedGirl desysopped

4) For numerous violations of basic policies and generally failing to meet community expectations and responsibilities as outlined in Wikipedia:Administrators#Accountability and Wikipedia:Administrators#Administrator conduct, BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs) is desysopped. She may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.

How is it not certain that Kudpung isn't going to get the same treatment?

[Osborne]

I'd very much like to see Arbcom rule that Pudkung has "lost the confidence of the community" and put him up for a confirmation vote at RFA, but I really don't see that as a likely outcome here. He'll be gently scolded.

How on Earth is that an option, even? He practically was given back the admin rights under the cloud. That shouldn't have happened in the first place if anyone had a tiny bit of WP:COMMONSENSE (T-H-L), instead of indulging in bureaucratic reality-denial:

While I believe in my heart that this is behavior unbecoming of being an admin, I see no policy-based reasoning to deny this resysop request.

The question in a resysop request is not whether to deny it, but whether to accept it. Do you accept the resysop request after "behavior unbecoming of being an admin"?
The question was asked backwards in an apparent manifestation of authority bias. Guess what happens, when an editor makes any kind of request. It is debated to no end whether that request should be accepted. Predetermined decisions based on status.
Sometimes when I read that editor equality is a fundamental principle in Wikipedia, I just cringe.

[Moral Hazard]

WTF!

Not so much a smoking gun but a smoking pile of bullshit.

link

That reads like someone had a brain injury.

Word count = 2,195

They are NOT a winner...

RfB

The evidence includes at least one case where Kudpung and GorillaWarfare joined forces in opposing some sexist comments.
GW's accusations should have mentioned such evidence in passing, for fairness (real and rhetorical).

[Poetlister]

I'd very much like to see Arbcom rule that Pudkung has "lost the confidence of the community" and put him up for a confirmation vote at RFA, but I really don't see that as a likely outcome here. He'll be gently scolded.

If he gets hauled before this Arbcom again in the coming year for something else, he's toast.

RfB

Saying he has "lost the confidence of the community" would set a dangerous precedent. Next thing you know, there would be an RfC asking if an Arbcom member, or even the whole Arbcom, has "lost the confidence of the community". If that passes, would Arbcom take any notice?

[Jans Hammer]

Does the decision on BHG give us any hope that they will follow a similar path with Kudpung or are the 2 cases so far apart in fundamentals?

[Randy from Boise]

With FoF6 from Portals stating

6) BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs) has repeatedly engaged in personal attacks and assumptions of bad faith, including stating that editors are either liars or lying ([1], [2], [3], [4]); labeling editors with opposing viewpoints to hers in portal matters as 'portalistas', which she defined as 'those editors who have engaged in misconduct to subvert the application of community consensus to portals' (Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive311#Civility issues with User:BrownHairedGirl); and questioning the intelligence of those participating in portal edits and discussions with accusations of mendacity, 'Dunning–Kruger conduct', and being a 'low-skill group' (Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1023#Portals, NA1K's evidence, BHG's evidence).

And that leading to remedy 4

BrownHairedGirl desysopped

4) For numerous violations of basic policies and generally failing to meet community expectations and responsibilities as outlined in Wikipedia:Administrators#Accountability and Wikipedia:Administrators#Administrator conduct, BrownHairedGirl (talk · contribs) is desysopped. She may regain the administrative tools at any time via a successful request for adminship.

How is it not certain that Kudpung isn't going to get the same treatment?

Different rules for different tools.

t

[Poetlister]

Arbcom has never exactly been a beacon of consistency. No doubt, the members are clever enough to be able to explain away the inconsistencies as being due to special factors.