What about Beeblebub?

[Randy from Boise]

The illustrious author of The Unblockables and Give 'Em Enough Rope, the blocker of about 2500 editors, widely recognized as one of the worst administrators, states he is 41 years old. It is always a relief to find out these guys aren't 19 or something. Restores a bit of hope for the future.

Ah, yes, "The Unblockables". A deliberate and obvious attempt by an abusive patroller (who generates very little content himself)
to find and justify a way to get rid of people like Malleus and Giano. The people who write the content that makes Beeb's position possible, but
who are "uncivil" to minor power-abusers like Beeb. So long as Beeb remains an administrator and oversighter, Wikipedia will remain corrupt.
And continue to decline.

I've always found it very strange that in a supposed encylopedia project those who can't write are so eager to chase off those who can.

"Those who can, do; those who can't, teach; and those who can't teach, administrate..."

RfB

[Zoloft]

Beeblebrox reports Wer900 at AN/I

One of the benefits of this forum is the way it can make more people know about these reports than just the people who usually populate AN/I. Beeblebrox looks like he's hoping for Wer900 to be blocked as a result of his report, but there are enough people here who disapprove of Beeblebrox's conduct that it might be possible for this to become a case of WP:BOOMERANG for him.

Wow those are acutely overblown diffs. Dishonest, because people see all the links and say, "Look at all those diffs! This disruption must be stopped!" But actually there is nothing on the rye bread except mustard and lettuce. No meat.

[Triptych]

Beeblebrox reports Wer900 at AN/I

One of the benefits of this forum is the way it can make more people know about these reports than just the people who usually populate AN/I. Beeblebrox looks like he's hoping for Wer900 to be blocked as a result of his report, but there are enough people here who disapprove of Beeblebrox's conduct that it might be possible for this to become a case of WP:BOOMERANG for him.

Wow those are acutely overblown diffs. Dishonest, because people see all the links and say, "Look at all those diffs! This disruption must be stopped!" But actually there is nothing on the rye bread except mustard and lettuce. No meat.

Between rye bread, lettuce, mustard, stale cheese, and bologna sliced near-transparently thin (let's call that sandwich "the Stanistani") we're doing okay in the metaphors department.

The strategy "look at all those diffs! This disruption must be stopped!" is a well-used and proven tactic of the WP:AN/ANI set. You scour your target's thousand edits for the five or six where he's uncivil or just not nice, divorce them completely from any context such as "the other guy insulted me first, am I just supposed to sit there any absorb it," and pump up your abuse report with an impressive-looking collection of links that you're well aware a lot of people aren't even going to click, they'll just think "ooh, that's bad." The strategy has worked excellently most recently in influencing Jimbo's position on Kiefer Wolfowitz, he's convinced Kiefer is just some serial personal attacker and that his banning has naught to do with his activities to call attention to the defective child protection system, when in fact it's demonstrably there in the arbs' findings.

Edited for punctuation only.

[Triptych]

To take the first link in Beeblebollocks' abuse report for example, it's just as we're discussing. Wer900 responds to Resolute "you have relished in protracted incivility against many users, and are one of the main opponents of urgently needed Wikipedia governance reform. It is only your membership in the right cabals and your being a lapdog to the right power players that has stopped this case from going to the Arbitration Committee." Sure, it's aggressive language but if you look at the context, you find it's (administrator) Resolute that has set the tone: "attention whores don't like email because it doesn't give them the ego hit that using a very public forum does."

Plus there is room for some heated debate in that discussion, where Wer900 and others are trying to break through on the important proposition that Wikipedia's child protection policy *is* *not* *working* and Jimbo is taking the regrettable and wrongheaded stance that the existing policy is rigorously followed and ArbCom is handling it and there is no cause for alarm and everything will be just fine.

[Wer900]

Beeblebrox reports Wer900 at AN/I

One of the benefits of this forum is the way it can make more people know about these reports than just the people who usually populate AN/I. Beeblebrox looks like he's hoping for Wer900 to be blocked as a result of his report, but there are enough people here who disapprove of Beeblebrox's conduct that it might be possible for this to become a case of WP:BOOMERANG for him.

Wow those are acutely overblown diffs. Dishonest, because people see all the links and say, "Look at all those diffs! This disruption must be stopped!" But actually there is nothing on the rye bread except mustard and lettuce. No meat.

I've looked at the AN/I against me. It's preposterous, to say the least; Beebs wants to set a precedent for suppressing legitimate debate and wants a more cult-like Wikipedia dedicated to the Sole Flounder. I don't even know if I should respond to the trumped-up charges myself; it's all a load of crap.

EDIT: It is likely, though, that vapid cases on trumped-up charges have all of the requirements to go to ArbCom—no substance whatsoever. Beebs wanted to topic-ban me from Wikipedia governance discussions six months ago, anyway, so he does hold a grudge in this regard.

[Randy from Boise]

Beeblebrox reports Wer900 at AN/I

One of the benefits of this forum is the way it can make more people know about these reports than just the people who usually populate AN/I. Beeblebrox looks like he's hoping for Wer900 to be blocked as a result of his report, but there are enough people here who disapprove of Beeblebrox's conduct that it might be possible for this to become a case of WP:BOOMERANG for him.

Wow those are acutely overblown diffs. Dishonest, because people see all the links and say, "Look at all those diffs! This disruption must be stopped!" But actually there is nothing on the rye bread except mustard and lettuce. No meat.

I've looked at the AN/I against me. It's preposterous, to say the least; Beebs wants to set a precedent for suppressing legitimate debate and wants a more cult-like Wikipedia dedicated to the Sole Flounder. I don't even know if I should respond to the trumped-up charges myself; it's all a load of crap.

EDIT: It is likely, though, that vapid cases on trumped-up charges have all of the requirements to go to ArbCom—no substance whatsoever. Beebs wanted to topic-ban me from Wikipedia governance discussions six months ago, anyway, so he does hold a grudge in this regard.

I'd offer the friendly advice that you should take a day to write an article or something. They are going after you on NOTHERETOWRITEANENCYCLOPEDIA grounds and your last month has been heavy in the drama without much else. So write something, which won't totally dismiss the elastic NOTHERE argument, but will probably set some minds at ease.

RfB

[Vigilant]

Beeblebrox reports Wer900 at AN/I

One of the benefits of this forum is the way it can make more people know about these reports than just the people who usually populate AN/I. Beeblebrox looks like he's hoping for Wer900 to be blocked as a result of his report, but there are enough people here who disapprove of Beeblebrox's conduct that it might be possible for this to become a case of WP:BOOMERANG for him.

Wow those are acutely overblown diffs. Dishonest, because people see all the links and say, "Look at all those diffs! This disruption must be stopped!" But actually there is nothing on the rye bread except mustard and lettuce. No meat.

I've looked at the AN/I against me. It's preposterous, to say the least; Beebs wants to set a precedent for suppressing legitimate debate and wants a more cult-like Wikipedia dedicated to the Sole Flounder. I don't even know if I should respond to the trumped-up charges myself; it's all a load of crap.

EDIT: It is likely, though, that vapid cases on trumped-up charges have all of the requirements to go to ArbCom—no substance whatsoever. Beebs wanted to topic-ban me from Wikipedia governance discussions six months ago, anyway, so he does hold a grudge in this regard.

I'd offer the friendly advice that you should take a day to write an article or something. They are going after you on NOTHERETOWRITEANENCYCLOPEDIA grounds and your last month has been heavy in the drama without much else. So write something, which won't totally dismiss the elastic NOTHERE argument, but will probably set some minds at ease.

RfB

I noticed that Dickhead_administrators (T-H-L) is still a redlink.

[Wer900]

Beeblebrox reports Wer900 at AN/I

One of the benefits of this forum is the way it can make more people know about these reports than just the people who usually populate AN/I. Beeblebrox looks like he's hoping for Wer900 to be blocked as a result of his report, but there are enough people here who disapprove of Beeblebrox's conduct that it might be possible for this to become a case of WP:BOOMERANG for him.

Wow those are acutely overblown diffs. Dishonest, because people see all the links and say, "Look at all those diffs! This disruption must be stopped!" But actually there is nothing on the rye bread except mustard and lettuce. No meat.

I've looked at the AN/I against me. It's preposterous, to say the least; Beebs wants to set a precedent for suppressing legitimate debate and wants a more cult-like Wikipedia dedicated to the Sole Flounder. I don't even know if I should respond to the trumped-up charges myself; it's all a load of crap.

EDIT: It is likely, though, that vapid cases on trumped-up charges have all of the requirements to go to ArbCom—no substance whatsoever. Beebs wanted to topic-ban me from Wikipedia governance discussions six months ago, anyway, so he does hold a grudge in this regard.

I'd offer the friendly advice that you should take a day to write an article or something. They are going after you on NOTHERETOWRITEANENCYCLOPEDIA grounds and your last month has been heavy in the drama without much else. So write something, which won't totally dismiss the elastic NOTHERE argument, but will probably set some minds at ease.

RfB

I write about astronomy. I haven't found much news worthy of being written, so I haven't written. I understand where you are coming from, but I don't see anything to do yet. Once a day arrives that I have something to do, then I will definitely do so. If they are going after me on NOTHERETOWRITEANENCYCLOPEDIA grounds then they are smoking some pretty hard drugs—how much of the encyclopedia have they written in all their years here?

User:Wer900 has to be joking if he's hoping for this to be taken to Arbcom. There's enough here for an indefinite block without any further ado.WP:NOTHERE. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:20, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

[Poetlister]

I write about astronomy. I haven't found much news worthy of being written, so I haven't written.

I find it difficult to believe that astronomy is so brilliantly covered by Wikipedia that there is nothing to contribute.

[Jim]

I write about astronomy. I haven't found much news worthy of being written, so I haven't written.

I find it difficult to believe that astronomy is so brilliantly covered by Wikipedia that there is nothing to contribute.

There's a very bright star near the horizon this last few days here in Australia. It's probably Venus, but it looks way impressive. Star of Bethlehem stuff.

Oh, not what you were talking about? I'll get my coat.

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

I write about astronomy. I haven't found much news worthy of being written, so I haven't written.

I find it difficult to believe that astronomy is so brilliantly covered by Wikipedia that there is nothing to contribute.

Models for the probability distribution of stars in space (and time)? Jerzy Neyman's contributions?

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

Beeblebrox (T-C-L) was nuttier than usual, although as dumb as ever, at WikiProject Editor Retention (T-H-L) lately:
first dismissing and archiving my announced retirement (which was quickly reverted) and then "retiring" himself from the project

Retiring

I'm retiring from coming within fifty miles of this failed project. Crap like this is not helping with editor retention in any way.

This project's own guidelines say to "Nip aggressive conversation in the bud if it begins in your presence " but when I tried to do that on this very page I was not allowed to do so. This project is becoming a walled garden of whining, complaining, and personal attacks strictly controlled by a small cadre of users who seem very comfortable dictating rules as they see fit.

Consider this editor as one who was made less happy with Wikipedia by this project. Reply to this and tell me what an asshole I am all you like, I won't be reading it and you won't be hearing from me here again.
Beeblebrox (T-C-L) 01:18, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Dear Beeblebrox:
You are an asshole.
Thanks for reading.

[Wer900]

I write about astronomy. I haven't found much news worthy of being written, so I haven't written.

I find it difficult to believe that astronomy is so brilliantly covered by Wikipedia that there is nothing to contribute.

No, it's not, admittedly. With all of this drama going on around me, though, as well as real life, I lack the vigor to do much. Sometimes I will be tempted to rewrite an article, and I will do it. In fact, I was working on Chandra Wickramasinghe (T-H-L) until recently, to rid it of fringe cruft. If anyone wants me to improve an astronomy article I will be more than happy to attempt it. At the same time, though, my Wikipedia work centers on exoplanetology—a relatively "hot" field although one whose "news" has been primarily rehashed information as of late.

[Poetlister]

I write about astronomy. I haven't found much news worthy of being written, so I haven't written.

I find it difficult to believe that astronomy is so brilliantly covered by Wikipedia that there is nothing to contribute.

No, it's not, admittedly. With all of this drama going on around me, though, as well as real life, I lack the vigor to do much. Sometimes I will be tempted to rewrite an article, and I will do it. In fact, I was working on Chandra Wickramasinghe (T-H-L) until recently, to rid it of fringe cruft. If anyone wants me to improve an astronomy article I will be more than happy to attempt it. At the same time, though, my Wikipedia work centers on exoplanetology—a relatively "hot" field although one whose "news" has been primarily rehashed information as of late.

How about The Caledonian problem? That seems to be fairly notable but not to have an article.

[Captain Occam]

I'm inclined to agree with Count Iblis' suggestion here that this issue ought to be taken to ArbCom. Does anybody else agree with that?

[Wer900]

I'm inclined to agree with Count Iblis' suggestion here that this issue ought to be taken to ArbCom. Does anybody else agree with that?

I'm inclined to avoid ArbCom to the greatest extent possible, but then again it's the best and only "court" that Wikipedia has.

[Mason]

I'm inclined to avoid ArbCom to the greatest extent possible

A wise move. Why anybody would voluntarily put their fate in their hands is a mystery to me.

[Captain Occam]

I'm inclined to avoid ArbCom to the greatest extent possible, but then again it's the best and only "court" that Wikipedia has.

Well, if you care about anything actually being done about the conduct of Beeblebrox and his supporters, there's no other way that'll be possible. At this stage it's evident that it isn't going to happen in the AN/I thread.

You're in danger of being sanctioned whether you go to ArbCom or whether you just let the AN/I thread run its course, but at least ArbCom is likely to also do something about the other problematic users who are involved. It'll be very unfortunate if the AN/I thread gets closed with an indef block for you and nothing for anyone else.

[SB_Johnny]

At the same time, though, my Wikipedia work centers on exoplanetology—a relatively "hot" field although one whose "news" has been primarily rehashed information as of late.

Yep. Next time they put up an amazing telescope, maybe they should add a few pounds worth of redundant gyroscopic equipment. I was really bummed to hear the bad news about that.

[Wer900]

At the same time, though, my Wikipedia work centers on exoplanetology—a relatively "hot" field although one whose "news" has been primarily rehashed information as of late.

Yep. Next time they put up an amazing telescope, maybe they should add a few pounds worth of redundant gyroscopic equipment. I was really bummed to hear the bad news about that.

It's pretty sad, yes. But we're getting .

[greyed.out.fields]

I write about astronomy. I haven't found much news worthy of being written, so I haven't written.

I find it difficult to believe that astronomy is so brilliantly covered by Wikipedia that there is nothing to contribute.

There's a very bright star near the horizon this last few days here in Australia. It's probably Venus, but it looks way impressive. Star of Bethlehem stuff.

Strewth, cobber, that very bright star in daytime is called "the sun".

[Captain Occam]

This especially makes me want to see someone go ahead with the request, and to include Mathsci as a party even if he wouldn't have been included otherwise. Wer900, you and I both know that ArbCom (and more specifically AGK) has given you explicit permission to do that, and permission to do it on my behalf. But your and Cla68's hesitancy is reinforcing his mindset that nobody's allowed to.

I know it's probably going to happen before the end of the year, I'm just concerned the diffs that have already been assembled might be stale by then.

[Jim]

I write about astronomy. I haven't found much news worthy of being written, so I haven't written.

I find it difficult to believe that astronomy is so brilliantly covered by Wikipedia that there is nothing to contribute.

There's a very bright star near the horizon this last few days here in Australia. It's probably Venus, but it looks way impressive. Star of Bethlehem stuff.

Strewth, cobber, that very bright star in daytime is called "the sun".

Strewth, cobber?
If I were actually Australian, rather than just living here, I wouldn't know whether to laugh with that or at it.

Touche on the daytime star, though. (although I believe Venus is visible in daylight, you are correct that is not what I meant).

[Captain Occam]

I hope you're all still following the AN/I discussion, and in particular this portion of it. It's turning into a type of argument that I think we're all very familiar with by now.

[Triptych]

I hope you're all still following the AN/I discussion, and in particular this portion of it. It's turning into a type of argument that I think we're all very familiar with by now.

It should have been a slam dunk for Beebs and his henchmen: haul your surprised and unwarned target into ANI, trump up your prosecution speech with one actually problematic diff, one iffy one, and six fakes, and get a single irritable administrator from the score of blockaholics at the channel at any given moment to do your dirty work. With genuinely disgusting statements like "where have I seen those words grouped together... some list of things... oh yes, it was standard reasons in the drop down menu for blocking a user. This case is uncomplicated ... all do nicely as block rationales."

Don't play it straight by lodging your complaint and stepping back to let others consider it, rather micro-debate and counterpoint and needle and cast aspersions like "Wikipediocracy goat" every single person who doesn't think Wer900 has done anything much blockworthy.

At the end, a week later and counting, you and your crew pathetically grasp at straws and revert the closes of every previously uninvolved administrator. The gazelle is slipping the clutches of the mangy hyenas and you *just* *can't* *stand* *it*.

[Wer900]

I hope you're all still following the AN/I discussion, and in particular this portion of it. It's turning into a type of argument that I think we're all very familiar with by now.

It should have been a slam dunk for Beebs and his henchmen: haul your surprised and unwarned target into ANI, trump up your prosecution speech with one actually problematic diff, one iffy one, and six fakes, and get a single irritable administrator from the score of blockaholics at the channel at any given moment to do your dirty work. With genuinely disgusting statements like "where have I seen those words grouped together... some list of things... oh yes, it was standard reasons in the drop down menu for blocking a user. This case is uncomplicated ... all do nicely as block rationales."

Don't play it straight by lodging your complaint and stepping back to let others consider it, rather micro-debate and counterpoint and needle and cast aspersions like "Wikipediocracy goat" every single person who doesn't think Wer900 has done anything much blockworthy.

At the end, a week later and counting, you and your crew pathetically grasp at straws and revert the closes of every previously uninvolved administrator. The gazelle is slipping the clutches of the mangy hyenas and you *just* *can't* *stand* *it*.

The whole case has been a massive show of hypocrisy, led by Beebs and "uninvolved" Mathsci. They state that I have made accusations and cast aspersions when they have shown themselves, on the AN/I, to be prime examples of the object of their faux outrage.

[Captain Occam]

Wer900, why don't you quote the relevant part of the e-mail AGK sent you for ArbCom, where ArbCom gave you permission to start an arbitration case about Mathsci on my behalf? I think it's probably not a copyright violation if you quote just a few sentences from an e-mail, rather than quoting the whole thing. The reason why Mathsci has reverted every effort to close the thread is because he thinks you're lying that ArbCom gave you permission for that, but maybe he'll finally stop if he can see for himself what they told you.

[Triptych]

Now that the "block Wer900" proposal failed, his opponents like the misspelled Der Kommisar are moving on a week later to a unidirectional interaction ban (Wer900 may not ever mention Beeblebrox) like some consolation prize. How awful and abused the whole process is.

It looks real easy from the outside to say "Wer900, just go back to editing astronomy stuff and so forth" because he's valued for that, but the fact is that a content editor gets dragged into the administrative universe and it's psychologically something of a trap. It throws you off.

Mathsci said Wikipediocracy is the "kingdom of the trolls" though, that was kind of funny.

[Wer900]

Meanwhile, Mathsci continues to purvey lies. Beeblebrox takes it easy. Hilarity ensues.

[EricBarbour]

Mathsci said Wikipediocracy is the "kingdom of the trolls" though, that was kind of funny.

Takes one to know one.

[Zoloft]

Mathsci said Wikipediocracy is the "kingdom of the trolls" though, that was kind of funny.

Takes one to know one.

One day he will return here and claim the throne, as the rightful heir.

All that is tin does not glitter,
Most all those who wander are lost...

[Captain Occam]

Wer900, if you decide you want to respond to this, something I think you should know is that Mathsci appears to be violating the AE sanction he was placed under in December.

Per this AE thread, Mathsci is instructed to refrain from posting further enforcement requests regarding the interaction bans listed here on-wiki without prior private consultation and agreement from an uninvolved adminstrator familiar with the case.

Unless an uninvolved admin gave him permission to make his current AE report, he's violating that sanction. I think SightWatcher should know about this, and I'm not sure whether he does. I'll try to make sure he knows, but it would be helpful if you could mention it somewhere that he's likely to see it, such as in the AE thread.

[Wer900]

Wer900, if you decide you want to respond to this, something I think you should know is that Mathsci appears to be violating the AE sanction he was placed under in December.

Per this AE thread, Mathsci is instructed to refrain from posting further enforcement requests regarding the interaction bans listed here on-wiki without prior private consultation and agreement from an uninvolved adminstrator familiar with the case.

Unless an uninvolved admin gave him permission to make his current AE report, he's violating that sanction. I think SightWatcher should know about this, and I'm not sure whether he does. I'll try to make sure he knows, but it would be helpful if you could mention it somewhere that he's likely to see it, such as in the AE thread.

Dramatastic! He's still bleating about a case whose opening was blocked by both Viriditas and by an ANI. At least in my complaints about Beebs, I never used the same tired incident once it had been resolved.

[Wer900]

Over at Arbitration Enforcement, Mathsci continues his latest tempest in a teapot.

[Captain Occam]

Now also this amendment request.

I think this thread, and the AE thread about Sightwatcher, demonstrate something kind of important about Mathsci's motives. In the past, he's been able to blame his behavior on either Mikemikev or Echigo mole, and the arbitrators felt bad for him because everyone could see those were disruptive sockmasters. But at this point, Mikemikev and Echigo mole haven't made any socks in the past several months. I'd previously wondered what he would do if he didn't have a sockmaster to blame for everything he does. The answer apparently is to start blaming his behavior on me, even though I'm not socking.

Maybe this time, the arbitrators will understand that sanctioning Mathsci's opponents never causes any sort of long-term solution. Since 2010 at least eight of his opponents have been blocked or driven from the project (it's nine if you include Ludwigs2), but he always finds someone else eventually, and the cycle continues.

[Poetlister]

Over at Arbitration Enforcement, Mathsci continues his latest tempest in a teapot.

This is Mathsci. It's a tempest in a Klein bottle (T-H-L).

[EricBarbour]

This is turning into yet another Mathsci "LOOKATME LOOKATME" drama thread. The guy is a shrieking paranoiac, and if the Wikipedians keep him around, they are guilty of fueling his mental illness. And some of you gents are not helping, by "interacting" with him. It's what he wants.

(Weren't we talking about Beelzebub or Boobiehead or whatever?)

[The Joy]

This is turning into yet another Mathsci "LOOKATME LOOKATME" drama thread. The guy is a shrieking paranoiac, and if the Wikipedians keep him around, they are guilty of fueling his mental illness. And some of you gents are not helping, by "interacting" with him. It's what he wants.

(Weren't we talking about Beelzebub or Boobiehead or whatever?)

He chose the name of a science fiction character that had to cut out a chunk of his own brain in order to be stupid enough to be elected President of the Galaxy. Now, he is a Wikipedia administrator.

[Captain Occam]

Does anyone have any comments on the interaction bans that are being proposed?

Personally, I'm kind of pessimistic about whether these are going to pass. ArbCom has proposed similar motions twice before, here and here. Both times, the motion failed because they decided a full case was needed instead. (For example, see the comments by SilkTork and HersFold on the second motion.) But I guess it's possible they've changed their minds about that now.

I also think they're making a mistake not including TrevelyanL85A2 in the motion. He was the original editor whose one-way interaction ban Mathsci gamed in order to get him blocked, and if he's ever unblocked, the exact same situation will probably repeat itself involving him.

(Weren't we talking about Beelzebub or Boobiehead or whatever?)

Depending on whether there's anything else to discuss about the interaction bans, it might be worth splitting this part of the discussion into a separate thread.

[Peter Damian]

Does anyone have any comments on the interaction bans that are being proposed?

Personally, I'm kind of pessimistic about whether these are going to pass. ArbCom has proposed similar motions twice before, here and here. Both times, the motion failed because they decided a full case was needed instead. (For example, see the comments by SilkTork and HersFold on the second motion.) But I guess it's possible they've changed their minds about that now.

I also think they're making a mistake not including TrevelyanL85A2 in the motion. He was the original editor whose one-way interaction ban Mathsci gamed in order to get him blocked, and if he's ever unblocked, the exact same situation will probably repeat itself involving him.

(Weren't we talking about Beelzebub or Boobiehead or whatever?)

Depending on whether there's anything else to discuss about the interaction bans, it might be worth splitting this part of the discussion into a separate thread.

I'm practically having a Jon Awbrey moment here. Jon, like many members of the old guard Wikipedia Review had a sort of principle that WR was not the place to discuss Wikipedia in the way things were discussed on Wikipedia, and certainly not the place to import disputes. It's getting a little bit this way in this thread, no?

That said, it is worthwhile discussing interaction bans, but only as interaction bans in general, not any particular interaction ban. Do they have interaction bans in real life workplaces, for example? If not, why not? What makes Wikipedia different, and is that a good or a bad thing?

[Lukeno94]

I suppose the real equivalent of an interaction ban is a "restraining order" (at least in the UK)

[Anroth]

In UK workplaces they certainly do. Office-based at least. Get into a full on grievance procedure and HR will quickly forcibly keep employees apart (if they cant get rid of one). Where personality clashes hit things like work gangs, one will quickly transfer to another shift/gang.

The problem is not in interaction bans on wikipedia, it is that the people imposing them do for the wrong reason, they do it to the wrong people, and they quite often do it completely unfairly.

[Zoloft]

In some American workplaces:

"Gee, Rod, maybe you need to stay out of Gene's face for a while. In fact, consider that an order, hmmkay?"

[Wer900]

Does anyone have any comments on the interaction bans that are being proposed?

Personally, I'm kind of pessimistic about whether these are going to pass. ArbCom has proposed similar motions twice before, here and here. Both times, the motion failed because they decided a full case was needed instead. (For example, see the comments by SilkTork and HersFold on the second motion.) But I guess it's possible they've changed their minds about that now.

I also think they're making a mistake not including TrevelyanL85A2 in the motion. He was the original editor whose one-way interaction ban Mathsci gamed in order to get him blocked, and if he's ever unblocked, the exact same situation will probably repeat itself involving him.

(Weren't we talking about Beelzebub or Boobiehead or whatever?)

Depending on whether there's anything else to discuss about the interaction bans, it might be worth splitting this part of the discussion into a separate thread.

Congratulations, Mathsci, I'll now be asked to testify before the Kangaroo Court.

[Captain Occam]

Congratulations, Mathsci, I'll now be asked to testify before the Kangaroo Court.

What do you mean? You aren't included in the proposed interaction bans, so I don't think any of the arbitrators are asking you to comment on them, unless you want to.

[The Devil's Advocate]

On an actually relevant note, the case filed against Wer has died a silent death.

[Randy from Boise]

On an actually relevant note, the case filed against Wer has died a silent death.

I hope our friend learns from the experience and keeps the on-site criticism appropriate. If that ended at ArbCom, he'd be playing golf with Kiefer. And next time, it's probably gonna end at ArbCom...

RfB

[Wer900]

On an actually relevant note, the case filed against Wer has died a silent death.

I hope our friend learns from the experience and keeps the on-site criticism appropriate. If that ended at ArbCom, he'd be playing golf with Kiefer. And next time, it's probably gonna end at ArbCom...

RfB

Tell me, how am I supposed to improve? I never did or said anything I thought would be grossly degrading to Beeblebrox. If I did, I would like to know. I'm being honest here.

[Zoloft]

On an actually relevant note, the case filed against Wer has died a silent death.

I hope our friend learns from the experience and keeps the on-site criticism appropriate. If that ended at ArbCom, he'd be playing golf with Kiefer. And next time, it's probably gonna end at ArbCom...

RfB

Tell me, how am I supposed to improve? I never did or said anything I thought would be grossly degrading to Beeblebrox. If I did, I would like to know. I'm being honest here.

Criticize prickly admins over HERE. It's what we're for among other things.

[Wer900]

On an actually relevant note, the case filed against Wer has died a silent death.

I hope our friend learns from the experience and keeps the on-site criticism appropriate. If that ended at ArbCom, he'd be playing golf with Kiefer. And next time, it's probably gonna end at ArbCom...

RfB

Tell me, how am I supposed to improve? I never did or said anything I thought would be grossly degrading to Beeblebrox. If I did, I would like to know. I'm being honest here.

Criticize prickly admins over HERE. It's what we're for among other things.

That may be best for my own good standing on Wikipedia. However, that's a lot like the Chinese government's approach to "press freedom"—let a few newspapers and television channels in Hong Kong publish what they would like, just to give the impression to a completely idiotic person that "we have a vibrant opposition press". Wikipedians cannot shuffle off criticism onto "that bad site" because they don't want to hear it.