Bbb23 chastised by Arbcom, quits Wikipedia (on April Fool's Day)

[rhinoroars]

ArbCom has informed me that I am using my CU privileges in ways that violate policy. They have ordered me to limit my checking to "non-discretionary" cases (not easy to define). They have warned me that if I check in a manner that they deem violates policy, my CU privileges will be removed without further warning.

I disagree with ArbCom's decision, but there's zero I can do about it. Nonetheless, I do not want to work for an organization that (1) hamstrings my ability to prevent disruption caused by socking, (2) micromanages my actions, and (3) is unappreciative of my CU work. For these reasons, I am leaving the project. I'm angry and upset at the moment, so I won't categorically say I will never return, but I don't plan on it.

Best wishes to all who do good work here. I will not be responding to messages posted to my Talk page. Bbb23 (not signing to avoid archival)

link

[Vigilant]

ARBCOMmies, are you allowed to comment on this?

[Randy from Boise]

Title of this thread notwithstanding, sounds like this is a real quit.

RfB

[10920]

Title of this thread notwithstanding, sounds like this is a real quit.

RfB

Seems real to me.

Would be shocked to hear this is a prank because it wouldn't make much sense as one.

A long time coming, really.

[AndyTheGrump]

So, did he get caught using his 'tools' for opposition research? I can't believe they've dished out a warning for Bbb23's standard MO, which is to issue blocks on the basis of 'checkuser' results that exist only in his head.

[Randy from Boise]

First Fram, then Kudpung, now BBB23... They are picking away at the problematic administrators.

RfB

[Vigilant]

If this is real, then I applaud ARBCOM here.

Reigning in the worst of the old school bullies is a laudable activity.

[Midsize Jake]

Seems real to me.

Has he ever done this before, or even threatened to? That's usually the most reliable indicator... I don't recall him doing this in the past, but I could easily have missed it.

I agree that they're better off without him (or "well shot of him" as they say in the UK), but to be fair, they do get a shit-ton of sock-puppet accounts over there, and keeping them out is not exactly a "fun job" for "nice people." If Bbb23 really is gone for good, that's going to leave a void — if they're super-lucky, they'll get a group of three or four admins coming in to pick up the slack who can actually work together and aren't just a bunch of power-obsessed sociopaths. While some of the newer admins would probably make for a big upgrade temperament-wise, I just don't think they're going to be that lucky.

[Alex Shih]

Yeah I think you missed it Jake. He also rage quitted in 2017 for several months. I don't think the reasons were explicitly stated, but if I remember correctly it was for similar reasons.

I actually don't have an issue with the way Bbb23 does CU, even when a lot of the times they violate policy as written per se. Arbcom did explicitly allow them to violate CU policy because it is convenient to do so, and it is this double standard that I find troubling. Good for them if this is not April Fool's.

[Pudeo]

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Audit/Statistics (T-H-L)

Bbb23 has been doing around 2,000 checks a month. There's no way all of those are policy-based, but suppose it's been allowed because someone has to deal with the socking.

[Vigilant]

Interesting and disconcerting to me are the parallels between Bbb23 and Fram in that they did work that seemed necessary and that nobody wanted to do.

Fram was murdered for looking into the terrible tendentious editing of the wife of the WMF chair.

Bbb23 was done in by investigating sockpuppeteers.

Theoretically opposite ends of the spectrum, but in reality, analogous to the Horseshoe_theory (T-H-L)

[rhinoroars]

His case is close to RHaworth (T-C-L) who did over 500000 or half a Million deletions.Now here
Bbb23 (T-C-L) does 40% of all Checkuser over 2000 out of a total of 5000
Heavy users are penalized.

But Bbb23 (T-C-L) he rightly chooses to leave with dignity rather than humiliation after that Arbcom note.
We need to applaud him for it.

[ZettaComposer]

Being a prolific contributor to an undesirable area does not give you the right to abuse the tools, and it's an open secret that Bbb23 has been doing it for a long time all over Wikipedia. I applaud whoever said "enough is enough" and did something about it.

[Jim]

His response to a complaint I raised was a large part of the reason I stopped contributing to the wikisphere.

Nevertheless, he's a symptom (albeit an inordinately harmful one), not the disease.

The disease is that characters like that can exist, for so long, with such percieved "power" and such impunity.

[Jim]

They are picking away at the problematic administrators.

Hmm... It almost feels like they really are (a bit).

Let's see where that goes...

[10920]

I actually don't have an issue with the way Bbb23 does CU, even when a lot of the times they violate policy as written per se. Arbcom did explicitly allow them to violate CU policy because it is convenient to do so, and it is this double standard that I find troubling. Good for them if this is not April Fool's.

If you don't have an issue, then why would you say good for them?


I'd say the majority of Bbb's checks are blatant 'fishing', which supposedly is not allowed. As I recall, he lied in the past about his misuse of checkuser tools especially with regards to RfAs.

[el84]

The head of en-wiki doesn't like it:

edited to add: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =948692174

dunno what the fuck happened then.

[Jans Hammer]

First Fram, then Kudpung, now BBB23... They are picking away at the problematic administrators.

RfB

Another good decision by a reforming committee. Bring on the next one.

[The Garbage Scow]

That's a Diva Quit if I ever saw one. He'll be back within a month or I'll eat my hat.

[Vigilant]

That's a Diva Quit if I ever saw one. He'll be back within a month or I'll eat my hat.

With any luck, he'll sock, get caught and be indeffed for it.

[el84]

That's a Diva Quit if I ever saw one. He'll be back within a month or I'll eat my hat.

With any luck, he'll sock, get caught and be indeffed for it.

And when that happens, there'll be a massive argument saying that whichever CU does the deed will have been "engaging in the same behaviour that Bbb23 was accused of" and tied up to the ANI stake.

[Vigilant]

Aloha Snackbar!

[Jans Hammer]

He's been fishing on an industrial scale for years. 60 a day. It went to his head and he should have been banned long ago.

[Black Kite]

The cynic in me wonders if ArbCom have been wanting to do this for ages, but held back because Bbb23 was basically doing most of the CU work - but now that ST47 is back and doing over 1,000 checks a month...

[Vigilant]

The cynic in me wonders if ArbCom have been wanting to do this for ages, but held back because Bbb23 was basically doing most of the CU work - but now that ST47 is back and doing over 1,000 checks a month...

How is it possible to do 1000 checks a month and not break policy?

[Jans Hammer]

Following multiple complaints to the Committee, as well as the results of checkuser block appeals considered by the Committee, we performed an audit of Bbb23's checkuser tool use. I will note that we did not calculate a threshold of acceptable errors, as has been discussed here, but instead reviewed whether or not there was a pattern of running checks on users that did not appear to be supported by policy. We contacted Bbb23 to ask about the standard he applies when deciding to check users, as well as request more detailed justifications of some individual checks. Following this conversation, the Committee sent Bbb23 a notice that reiterated checkuser policy, especially against fishing, and asked him to avoid performing checks that fall in the "grey area" around what is considered fishing. We also encouraged him to consult with other members of the checkuser team when in doubt of the validity of a check, and warned that further misuse of the checkuser tool would result in removal. I hope this provides a little more clarity.

GorillaWarfare (talk) 7:20 pm, Today (UTC+1)

[Black Kite]

The cynic in me wonders if ArbCom have been wanting to do this for ages, but held back because Bbb23 was basically doing most of the CU work - but now that ST47 is back and doing over 1,000 checks a month...

How is it possible to do 1000 checks a month and not break policy?

Quite easily, if you've got the spare time.

I see GW has clarified the situation - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =948725423

[Poetlister]

Reigning in the worst of the old school bullies is a laudable activity.

Allowing him to reign? Sounds like a very bad move.

[Poetlister]

if they're super-lucky, they'll get a group of three or four admins coming in to pick up the slack who can actually work together and aren't just a bunch of power-obsessed sociopaths. While some of the newer admins would probably make for a big upgrade temperament-wise, I just don't think they're going to be that lucky.

I can't see that any of the new admins will be allowed CU in the near future unless they manage to get elected to ArbCom.

[Vigilant]

I want to know what Vigilant thinks ——SN54129 18:30, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Come one, come all to the Vigilant variety show.

[Pudeo]

If he'd really quit, he'd atleast have requested desysopping at BN or threw in CU rights.

What's annoying about this is that clearly he's not retiring for real, he's just causing this drama because he couldn't take criticism. That's how "unblockables" are created, you can't even criticize one because there will be drama and supporters will go crazy.

[rhinoroars]

Reigning in the worst of the old school bullies is a laudable activity.

Allowing him to reign? Sounds like a very bad move.

He has not resigned either CU or Adminship if he resigns CU or loses CU due to inactivity not sure if Arbcom will restore it.
He is a CU and admin as of now.
If he leaves now he leaves in a dignified manner rather than be kicked out.He can return if he likes.
Arbcom only gave him a final warning and will not remove his CU tools as of now. Leave alone his Adminship

[Ryuichi]

If he leaves now he leaves in a dignified manner rather than be kicked out.He can return if he likes.

We have very different definitions of dignity.

[Eric Corbett]

Being a prolific contributor to an undesirable area does not give you the right to abuse the tools, and it's an open secret that Bbb23 has been doing it for a long time all over Wikipedia. I applaud whoever said "enough is enough" and did something about it.

Absolutely. Long overdue.

[ArsenalFan]

I actually don't have an issue with the way Bbb23 does CU

So you don't have an issue with innocent accounts like Dolfinz1972 (a completely different account from my original A Great Catholic Person) getting blocked and being marked as a sock for no reason?

Laughable.

[Black Kite]

So you don't have an issue with innocent accounts like Dolfinz1972 (a completely different account from my original A Great Catholic Person) getting blocked and being marked as a sock for no reason?

Laughable.

Oh, I dunno, the fact that Dolfinz1972 was indef-blocked for reverting TWELVE times on one article after two previous blocks for edit-warring seems reasonable to me. Since you were asking advice on how to avoid being outed as a sock, here's one - don't revert an article twelve times.

[ArsenalFan]

So you don't have an issue with innocent accounts like Dolfinz1972 (a completely different account from my original A Great Catholic Person) getting blocked and being marked as a sock for no reason?

Laughable.

Oh, I dunno, the fact that Dolfinz1972 was indef-blocked for reverting TWELVE times on one article after two previous blocks for edit-warring seems reasonable to me. Since you were asking advice on how to avoid being outed as a sock, here's one - don't revert an article twelve times.

Dolfinz1972 did revert a dozen times, but apparently, they were vandalism last time I checked those edits.

The article Donte Moncrief had unconstructive and poorly-written edits about him being signing for an NFL team after being a free agent. Dolfinz1972 reverting those edits is perfectly fine and acceptable.

[Poetlister]

Maybe you're right, but evidently not everyone agreed! Still, even if for the sake of argument Dolfinz1972 was being a block-worthy vandal, that doesn't necessarily make him a sockpuppet.

[Guido den Broeder]

Bbb23 did a CU on new user accounts and privately stored the results. Arbcom members have been aware for ages, and he wasn't alone in this.

[Earthy Astringent]

Title of this thread notwithstanding, sounds like this is a real quit.

RfB

Sweet baby Jesus I fucking hope it’s true. He’s been an asshole since he got his admin bits. Now that they’re gone he’s running away like he just had installed his ladybits. Time to dust off some burners and pour salt on the wounds.

[ArsenalFan]

Title of this thread notwithstanding, sounds like this is a real quit.

RfB

Sweet baby Jesus I fucking hope it’s true. He’s been an asshole since he got his admin bits. Now that they’re gone he’s running away like he just had installed his ladybits. Time to dust off some burners and pour salt on the wounds.

It is true, so let's all celebrate by saying "hell yeah"! Although Big Bullying Bozo 23 could return sometime, it's unlikely.

[ArsenalFan]

When criticizing or starting a thread about an administrator(s), remember, there are a few bonehead admins on this forum, such as Alex Shih (replace the 2nd H with a T?). Do not listen to a single thing they say, as they just attempt to start arguments that admins don't intimidate people.

Proof the admins including Bbb23 are such dummies:

I (A Great Catholic Person) got blocked in July 2017 the day before I left for a vacation by Bbw23 (as some people call him).

I asked to get unblocked so I can edit during my vacation (it lasted 13 days). Those retards declined and disregarded such plausible requests. I lied by saying my friends were the ones vandalizing on my IP. Bbw23 acted like he could help me, then started turning into an asshole by writing in a rude tone and ignoring my comments.

I then created a new account, but didn't have the rights my old account did, which ruined the vacation, and because of that, I fought with Todds(lu)t1 about an individual being added to the "July 12" births list; I thought he wasn't notable enough. He then reported me to ANI, where only one editor, Nfitz, defended me. Bbw23 lied to Nfitz about ignoring my unblock requests. Then I got blocked for two weeks, therefore I couldn't edit for the rest of my vacation.

I socked as Patriots50217; Bbw23 finally caught me after three months on 11/15/2017, erasing all the redirects I created, and deleting my article draft on "Pieology", a pizza chain in the U.S. growing in popularity. (Nothing beats Blaze though.) I was irate because that would have been my first article I ever created on Wikipedia under any account or user.

Bbw23 tagged the already-blocked Dolfinz1972 as a sock of AGCP in 3/2019 despite the two accounts looking different.

Flash forward to 4/1/2020, which will be known as Wikivictory Day, because Bbw23 announced he's leaving, and I get to sockpuppet again.

Thank you ArbCom. I have to praise you like I should.

[Poetlister]

He’s been an asshole since he got his admin bits. Now that they’re gone he’s running away like he just had installed his ladybits.

He still has his bits, and I don't think that his admin bit is threatened yet, even if he ever decides to return. But no doubt he values his CU bit more.

[Poetlister]

When criticizing or starting a thread about an administrator(s), remember, there are a few bonehead admins on this forum, such as Alex Shih (replace the 2nd H with a T?). Do not listen to a single thing they say, as they just attempt to start arguments that admins don't intimidate people.

You can't say "admins", as though every single admin behaves in the same way. Most admins have never or hardly ever been mentioned on here, and there's a reason for that. That's not to exonerate the bad admins, of course.

[Osborne]

But no doubt he values his CU bit more.

That's where the real juice is, baby!

[Ritchie333]

A good result here. The principal problem with Bbb23 is he can't or won't communicate with people and try and get a mutual understanding, so his actions are fundamentally equivalent to bullying. Arbcom made the right decision here, and the toy chucking that followed confirms they were right to take a stand.

And he HAS NOT retired, he's still around removing posts he doesn't like. And people wonder why Wikipediocracy exists....

[Poetlister]

And he HAS NOT retired, he's still around removing posts he doesn't like. And people wonder why Wikipediocracy exists....

Even people we disapprove of are entitled to remove talk page messages. If he does nothing else, he can't do any real harm. The removed post was by someone called Begoon. No doubt he can speak for himself, but he might note that this is a sort of response to a talk page message, although he said that he would not be responding. Another censored contributor is Ritchie333; again, he might be able to speak for himself.

[Giraffe Stapler]

Thank you ArbCom. I have to praise you like I should.

Ok, you get a pass on the first Moby reference, but keep it up and I guarantee you will get blocked here! (joke, probably)

[ArmasRebane]

And he HAS NOT retired, he's still around removing posts he doesn't like. And people wonder why Wikipediocracy exists....

Even people we disapprove of are entitled to remove talk page messages. If he does nothing else, he can't do any real harm. The removed post was by someone called Begoon. No doubt he can speak for himself, but he might note that this is a sort of response to a talk page message, although he said that he would not be responding. Another censored contributor is Ritchie333; again, he might be able to speak for himself.

It's totally within someone's remit to remove talk page messages, but it doesn't make them look any less thin-skinned.

[Midsize Jake]

Thank you ArbCom. I have to praise you like I should.

Ok, you get a pass on the first Moby reference, but keep it up and I guarantee you will get blocked here! (joke, probably)

But that's Fatboy Slim, isn't it? I mean, if you (or anyone else) ever see any Moby references, don't hesitate to use the "Report Post" button.