JamesBWatson

User avatar
Ross McPherson
Gregarious
Posts: 638
kołdry
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:55 pm

JamesBWatson

Unread post by Ross McPherson » Wed Dec 31, 2014 11:26 pm

JamesBWatson is a seriously important dude at WP, an admin who has had oversight powers. In my opinion he represents everything that is worst about the world's free encyclopaedia. The philosopher Plato would undoubtedly share this opinion, if he were not dead. Plato was no friend to mob rule and he believed that the best natures become the worst natures once corrupted by a misgoverned community (Republic, 495A). Yes, James is a man who might have been a better man had he never been a Wikipedian.

James is not his real name, nor is Watson, nor is B part of his real name. As he says on his current user page since at least 2010 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =634695508
I now regret having chosen that username, because it gives the impression of being a real name, so I feel I am deceiving people, albeit unintentionally, whereas if I had chosen an obviously fictitious name, such as "Mountain Jumper", nobody would think it was my real name, so there would be no deception. I have considered changing my username, but I have been so active under this one that changing might cause unnecessary confusion.
I feel sorry for anyone in the world who really is named James Watson - the one with the pseudonym does not try to make himself popular with people whose toes he treads on with impunity and there must be hundreds of deranged and embittered people out there who would like a word with James some day. He seems to spend hours and hours and hours every day deleting, reverting and blocking, deleting, reverting and blocking, deleting, reverting and blocking. His rationale is good in a specious kind of way:
Unfortunately, in an encyclopaedia which anyone can edit, a lot of the editing is not of a good quality. Wikipedia's success therefore depends to a great extent on a large number of volunteers who give up a considerable amount of their own time to clean things up, improve the quality of what is there, and remove what is not so good. Some Wikipedians choose not to spend time on that, but to concentrate only on writing new content. That is absolutely fine, but sometimes those who make that choice disparage and vilify the work of others who make a different choice, and that is not absolutely fine. Writing content and cleaning up what is there are both essential and constructive parts of building the encyclopaedia. Some people make balanced contributions to both areas, others choose to concentrate on one area or the other. Whichever choice we make we can all respect others who contribute in different ways.
He admits to wasting too much time at WP and he once linked his user page to [[Wikipedia: It is not the end of the world]]:
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... _the_World), which closes with this sage advice: Wikipedia can be used to escape from the real life. But real life can also be used to escape from Wikipedia. Don't hesitate to do so. He doesn't link to it anymore.

James was instrumental in blocking me forever but I am not after revenge. I am thankful to him for bashing me to my senses. The best thing that can happen to James, in my opinion (and Plato's) is for him to be blocked too. I don't think there is any other way for him to recover his sanity or redeem his true nature. Any man willing to donate so much time to public service must have a truly good side. But after years as an anonymous gaoler and bruiser for the Wikipedia rehabilitation system, counteracting villains and fixing other people's problems all day every day, as an enforcer for established gangs, his character must be truly spotted and twisted by now.

This thread is not just for James but for any other cases of apparently good people enslaved to a bad cause. They are the real victims of Wikipedia.
Thoroughly impartial

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by EricBarbour » Thu Jan 01, 2015 5:37 am

His 2010 RFA:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... mesBWatson

Wit and wisdom (if you can figure out what the hell he's saying, please enlighten us)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... favoritism

We still haven't figured out his real name, but I can tell you this: he's probably a graduate of Oldham Hulme Grammar School (T-H-L), he's probably (yet another) IT professional or student thereof on Wikipedia, and he switched from content to patrolling vandalism in May 2009.

Also, I would classify him as an "evil patroller". He has blocked more than 9500 user accounts, in only 4 years. There are numerous cases of him permanently blocking someone for some terrible crime, like "spamusername", and obliterating all the evidence. Only the worst patrollers do things like this. Loves to delete things. This explains why there are so few complaints about him on noticeboards -- he makes damn sure no one can complain.

Here are typical examples
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:C ... ialsabbagh
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:C ... charbharti

He sure likes to delete pages, too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:A ... mesBWatson

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Poetlister » Thu Jan 01, 2015 10:40 am

There's at least one fairly notable James B. Watson, a celebrated anthropologist; fortunately for him, he's no longer with us. He also has no WP article, though he should pass WP:PROF.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Ross McPherson
Gregarious
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:55 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Ross McPherson » Thu Jan 01, 2015 11:28 am

Poetlister wrote:There's at least one fairly notable James B. Watson, a celebrated anthropologist; fortunately for him, he's no longer with us. He also has no WP article, though he should pass WP:PROF.
Here is a better candidate: James B Watson, serial killer. I got that from Murderpedia (I am unable to supply the link so Google your way there)

His real name was Charles Gillam and the site characterizes him as a Hermaphrodite "Bluebeard" slayer of wives. A sexual problem, a misogynist - how Wikipedia can you get! The shoe fits.
Thoroughly impartial

User avatar
Boing! said Zebedee
Gregarious
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:47 pm
Wikipedia User: Boing! said Zebedee
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Boing! said Zebedee » Thu Jan 01, 2015 2:10 pm

I've met the editor known as JamesBWatson - we were both at the famous Manchester meet that included Eric Corbett, Sitush, Iridescent, RexxS, HJ Mitchell and others (and every one of them a gem).

He's always struck me as one of the most reasonable and most balanced of all Wikipedia admins, and if he's among the worst you can find then Wikipedia is in a much better state than many of us think.

My only minor beef is that he's the one who persuaded me to run for admin and I wish I never had, but I can't really hold that against him.
We still haven't figured out his real name
I know his real name and the address of his hat (because I posted it back to him after Harry had been sitting on it at the meet), but unlike some here I have respect for the privacy of individuals.

Alan

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13965
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Zoloft » Thu Jan 01, 2015 2:31 pm

Boing! said Zebedee wrote:I've met the editor known as JamesBWatson - we were both at the famous Manchester meet that included Eric Corbett, Sitush, Iridescent, RexxS, HJ Mitchell and others (and every one of them a gem).

He's always struck me as one of the most reasonable and most balanced of all Wikipedia admins, and if he's among the worst you can find then Wikipedia is in a much better state than many of us think.

My only minor beef is that he's the one who persuaded me to run for admin and I wish I never had, but I can't really hold that against him.
We still haven't figured out his real name
I know his real name and the address of his hat (because I posted it back to him after Harry had been sitting on it at the meet), but unlike some here I have respect for the privacy of individuals.

Alan
You would be surprised at how many here would be entirely uninterested in the address of his hat.

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


User avatar
Boing! said Zebedee
Gregarious
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:47 pm
Wikipedia User: Boing! said Zebedee
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Boing! said Zebedee » Thu Jan 01, 2015 2:35 pm

Zoloft wrote:You would be surprised at how many here would be entirely uninterested in the address of his hat.
Well, I had assumed that the man and his hat are co-resident - and there *are* people who would like to have that information.

Alan

User avatar
SB_Johnny
Habitué
Posts: 4640
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:26 am
Wikipedia User: SB_Johnny
Wikipedia Review Member: SB_Johnny

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by SB_Johnny » Thu Jan 01, 2015 3:23 pm

Boing! said Zebedee wrote:
Zoloft wrote:You would be surprised at how many here would be entirely uninterested in the address of his hat.
Well, I had assumed that the man and his hat are co-resident - and there *are* people who would like to have that information.

Alan
Maybe they're not getting along.
Image
This is not a signature.

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Cla68 » Thu Jan 01, 2015 4:18 pm

Does his admin log show that he is heavily active on WP during normal, weekday work hours? If so, it means that he is addicted to Wikipedia. That's not necessarily a crime, of course, but it means that instead of doing something productive for his employer and his community, he is wasting everyone's time fiddling with a website that needs to be put out of its misery.

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12061
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Thu Jan 01, 2015 5:27 pm

Cla68 wrote:Does his admin log show that he is heavily active on WP during normal, weekday work hours? If so, it means that he is addicted to Wikipedia. That's not necessarily a crime, of course, but it means that instead of doing something productive for his employer and his community, he is wasting everyone's time fiddling with a website that needs to be put out of its misery.
Hmmm. A bit presumptuous, isn't that?

If he's on WP during "normal, weekday work hours" that automatically means he's diddling with WP on the job; and therefore that automatically means he's "addicted."

You forgot only one thing: ".....and that means he is a minion of, ummmmm, whom exactly? Could it be ................. SATAN!!!"

Yeesh.

Image

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31432
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Vigilant » Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:31 pm

Well, Tim,

Do you think that people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?
Who was it that Jimbo said it was perfectly fine to contact their employers and if they didn't want that kind of scrutiny then they shouldn't edit from work?

Sauce for the goose.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Boing! said Zebedee
Gregarious
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:47 pm
Wikipedia User: Boing! said Zebedee
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Boing! said Zebedee » Thu Jan 01, 2015 6:56 pm

Cla68 wrote:Does his admin log show that he is heavily active on WP during normal, weekday work hours? If so, it means that he is addicted to Wikipedia. That's not necessarily a crime, of course, but it means that instead of doing something productive for his employer and his community, he is wasting everyone's time fiddling with a website that needs to be put out of its misery.
That does assume that everyone has employers and specific work hours - I don't, and neither do many others.

Alan

User avatar
Peryglus
Banned
Posts: 345
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 8:34 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Peryglus » Thu Jan 01, 2015 8:50 pm

Vigilant wrote:Well, Tim,

Do you think that people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?
Who was it that Jimbo said it was perfectly fine to contact their employers and if they didn't want that kind of scrutiny then they shouldn't edit from work?

Sauce for the goose.
Everybody deserves anonymity if they want to have it, asshole or not.
(All proceeds donated to Save the Content Writers.)

User avatar
Ross McPherson
Gregarious
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:55 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Ross McPherson » Thu Jan 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Boing! said Zebedee wrote:I've met the editor known as JamesBWatson - we were both at the famous Manchester meet that included Eric Corbett, Sitush, Iridescent, RexxS, HJ Mitchell and others (and every one of them a gem).

He's always struck me as one of the most reasonable and most balanced of all Wikipedia admins, and if he's among the worst you can find then Wikipedia is in a much better state than many of us think.

My only minor beef is that he's the one who persuaded me to run for admin and I wish I never had, but I can't really hold that against him.
We still haven't figured out his real name
I know his real name and the address of his hat (because I posted it back to him after Harry had been sitting on it at the meet), but unlike some here I have respect for the privacy of individuals.

Alan
The strangest thing about serial killers like James B Watson is how normal, even pleasant they can seem. This guy had many wives and murdered most of them. I have seen him described at one site as "a model prisoner".

I don't know how the Wikipedian James came by his pseudonym but an admin with powers of oversight, named after a serial killer, when just about all he does is block and delete - I find that a bit creepy. A community that would give him those powers - that too is creepy. I haven't yet found a Wikipedia article about James B Watson, serial killer. He has to be in there somewhere.

However, I don't think we should be publishing his real name. As far as I can find out so far, nobody ever learned the serial killer's real name either. It is enough to know that Jimbo's James is a model Wikipedian, eliminating other editors with great gusto and secrecy.
Thoroughly impartial

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31432
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Vigilant » Thu Jan 01, 2015 9:15 pm

Peryglus wrote:
Vigilant wrote:Well, Tim,

Do you think that people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?
Who was it that Jimbo said it was perfectly fine to contact their employers and if they didn't want that kind of scrutiny then they shouldn't edit from work?

Sauce for the goose.
Everybody deserves anonymity if they want to have it, asshole or not.
So, when are you taking Jimbo and ARBCOM to task?
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Boing! said Zebedee
Gregarious
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:47 pm
Wikipedia User: Boing! said Zebedee
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Boing! said Zebedee » Thu Jan 01, 2015 9:31 pm

Ross McPherson wrote:It is enough to know that Jimbo's James is a model Wikipedian, eliminating other editors with great gusto and secrecy.
And that would be eliminating other editors who sit here and criticize without revealing their own Wikipedia usernames so that we can evaluate their elimination for ourselves?

Alan


User avatar
Ross McPherson
Gregarious
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:55 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Ross McPherson » Thu Jan 01, 2015 9:50 pm

Boing! said Zebedee wrote:
Ross McPherson wrote:It is enough to know that Jimbo's James is a model Wikipedian, eliminating other editors with great gusto and secrecy.
And that would be eliminating other editors who sit here and criticize without revealing their own Wikipedia usernames so that we can evaluate their elimination for ourselves?

Alan
I have given multiple clues here about my WP identity. Anyone who is willing enough to follow the trail of bread crumbs should find time enough to investigate my case in depth. So be my guest. However, I don't lay claims to being a special case. I am just another Wikipedian more sinned against than sinning. So I won't go back under any circumstance.

I am not the issue here. I am not an admin with powers of oversight. I am not the one you should be worried about.
Thoroughly impartial

User avatar
Boing! said Zebedee
Gregarious
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:47 pm
Wikipedia User: Boing! said Zebedee
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Boing! said Zebedee » Thu Jan 01, 2015 9:57 pm

Ross McPherson wrote:I have given multiple clues here about my WP identity. Anyone who is willing enough to follow the trail of bread crumbs should find time enough to investigate my case in depth. So be my guest. However, I hope you won't name me. They wouldn't have got rid of me if people bother to sift through evidence and many will not do that even if a worthy such as yourself should pronounce me innocent. However, I don't lay claims to being a special case. I am just another Wikipedian more sinned against than sinning. So I won't go back under any circumstance.
If you don't want to say who you are then I really don't want to intrude by trying to work it out - and I would not, of course, publicize any suspicions anyway. But staying anonymous while criticizing the admin who blocked you doesn't really lend credibility to your criticism.

Alan

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31432
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Vigilant » Thu Jan 01, 2015 10:06 pm

Boing! said Zebedee wrote:
Ross McPherson wrote:I have given multiple clues here about my WP identity. Anyone who is willing enough to follow the trail of bread crumbs should find time enough to investigate my case in depth. So be my guest. However, I hope you won't name me. They wouldn't have got rid of me if people bother to sift through evidence and many will not do that even if a worthy such as yourself should pronounce me innocent. However, I don't lay claims to being a special case. I am just another Wikipedian more sinned against than sinning. So I won't go back under any circumstance.
If you don't want to say who you are then I really don't want to intrude by trying to work it out - and I would not, of course, publicize any suspicions anyway. But staying anonymous while criticizing the admin who blocked you doesn't really lend credibility to your criticism.

Alan
But anonymous admins outing and blocking named editors is just peachy?
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Ross McPherson
Gregarious
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:55 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Ross McPherson » Thu Jan 01, 2015 10:12 pm

Boing! said Zebedee wrote:
Ross McPherson wrote:I have given multiple clues here about my WP identity. Anyone who is willing enough to follow the trail of bread crumbs should find time enough to investigate my case in depth. So be my guest. However, I hope you won't name me. They wouldn't have got rid of me if people bother to sift through evidence and many will not do that even if a worthy such as yourself should pronounce me innocent. However, I don't lay claims to being a special case. I am just another Wikipedian more sinned against than sinning. So I won't go back under any circumstance.
If you don't want to say who you are then I really don't want to intrude by trying to work it out - and I would not, of course, publicize any suspicions anyway. But staying anonymous while criticizing the admin who blocked you doesn't really lend credibility to your criticism.

Alan
As I said, if you think it is necessary - be my guest. I am reluctant but ready to trade shots with James and his pals.
Thoroughly impartial

Rembrandt
Contributor
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2014 4:12 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Rembrandt » Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:18 am


Sitush
Retired
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Sitush » Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:35 am

Does it really matter which photo he features in? What difference is it going to make to anything? This place is good sometimes, pathetic more often.

User avatar
SB_Johnny
Habitué
Posts: 4640
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:26 am
Wikipedia User: SB_Johnny
Wikipedia Review Member: SB_Johnny

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by SB_Johnny » Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:47 am

Vigilant wrote:Do you think that people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?
Do you think that people who observe and criticize people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?

(Not judging at all, of course.) :whistle:
This is not a signature.

Sitush
Retired
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Sitush » Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:55 am

Vigilant wrote:Do you think that people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?
Suitably ambiguous criticism, I guess, but why this obsession with people who are supposed to be working? Plenty of people don't work, work odd hours or work very little, for all sorts of reasons. I'm one of them.

User avatar
Notvelty
Retired
Posts: 1780
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:51 am
Location: Basement

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Notvelty » Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:26 am

Peryglus wrote:
Vigilant wrote:Well, Tim,

Do you think that people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?
Who was it that Jimbo said it was perfectly fine to contact their employers and if they didn't want that kind of scrutiny then they shouldn't edit from work?

Sauce for the goose.
Everybody deserves anonymity if they want to have it, asshole or not.
Bullshit.
-----------
Notvelty

User avatar
Notvelty
Retired
Posts: 1780
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:51 am
Location: Basement

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Notvelty » Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:31 am

Sitush wrote:Does it really matter which photo he features in? What difference is it going to make to anything? This place is good sometimes, pathetic more often.
But you're fine with one of yours demanding to know which wikipedian username is linked to criticism.

By fuck if wikipedians aren't gigantic hypocrites.

And, no, I'm not interested in a discussion borne of an illiteracy that cannot tell the difference between "everyone deserves" and "people can make use of".
-----------
Notvelty

Sitush
Retired
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Sitush » Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:35 am

Notvelty wrote:
Sitush wrote:Does it really matter which photo he features in? What difference is it going to make to anything? This place is good sometimes, pathetic more often.
But you're fine with one of yours demanding to know which wikipedian username is linked to criticism.

By fuck if wikipedians aren't gigantic hypocrites.

And, no, I'm not interested in a discussion borne of an illiteracy that cannot tell the difference between "everyone deserves" and "people can make use of".
One of mine? The alleged hypocrisy is in wanting to out someone but doing so while wearing the cloak of anonymity. I didn't say it, so don't start accusing me of illiteracy.

User avatar
Notvelty
Retired
Posts: 1780
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:51 am
Location: Basement

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Notvelty » Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:43 am

Sitush wrote:
Notvelty wrote:
Sitush wrote:Does it really matter which photo he features in? What difference is it going to make to anything? This place is good sometimes, pathetic more often.
But you're fine with one of yours demanding to know which wikipedian username is linked to criticism.

By fuck if wikipedians aren't gigantic hypocrites.

And, no, I'm not interested in a discussion borne of an illiteracy that cannot tell the difference between "everyone deserves" and "people can make use of".
One of mine? The alleged hypocrisy is in wanting to out someone but doing so while wearing the cloak of anonymity. I didn't say it, so don't start accusing me of illiteracy.
"One of yours" as in "a fellow wikicultist"

I'm quite comfortable throwing around the illiteracy tag when the target doesn't know what "hypocrisy" means.

Hint: Vig won't have a whine to his mother if someone works out who he is.
-----------
Notvelty

Sitush
Retired
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Sitush » Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:46 am

Notvelty wrote: "One of yours" as in "a fellow wikicultist"

I'm quite comfortable throwing around the illiteracy tag when the target doesn't know what "hypocrisy" means.

Hint: Vig won't have a whine to his mother if someone works out who he is.
I haven't got a clue what you are talking about now. Not for the first time, I must admit.

User avatar
SB_Johnny
Habitué
Posts: 4640
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:26 am
Wikipedia User: SB_Johnny
Wikipedia Review Member: SB_Johnny

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by SB_Johnny » Fri Jan 02, 2015 2:20 am

Sitush wrote:
Notvelty wrote: "One of yours" as in "a fellow wikicultist"

I'm quite comfortable throwing around the illiteracy tag when the target doesn't know what "hypocrisy" means.

Hint: Vig won't have a whine to his mother if someone works out who he is.
I haven't got a clue what you are talking about now. Not for the first time, I must admit.
This is not a signature.

Sitush
Retired
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Sitush » Fri Jan 02, 2015 2:26 am

I'm deaf and always have been. Videos don't usually mean anything to me, just as nursery rhymes didn't all those years ago.

User avatar
eagle
Eagle
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by eagle » Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:36 am

I agree with other posters that if someone is having trouble understanding the position of another participant on a thread, it is better to politely clarify the position than to post a video clip to a Waynes World skit. There are too many cultural layers and differences for the video clips to communicate unambiguously. 99% of the time, I do not bother to play the clips because I assume that they are not worth the bandwidth that they consume.

On the more general question of admin anonymity, I believe that if admins had to disclose their real names, they would feel more accountable and would be less likely to slip down the cyberbully slope. I also believe that once Wikipedia divided into two camps -- the content creators and the "enforcer goons" the "us" vs. "them" tensions were created. The private IRC was also a major contributor to the "us" vs. "them" mentality. There is an old saying that "To a hammer, everything looks like a nail." I think that once someone invests a substantial amount of time on recent changes patrol or anti-vandalism, they start to resent or distrust all content change.

Perhaps Wikipedia can cure this problem by more interaction and conversation. What would happen if all the private IRCs were shut down, and if admins were force to take a 3 month holiday from their tools every two years?

WP discussions are highly toxic and full of cyberbullies. People carry wikigrudges for years, and there are many hidden alliances and palace intrigue. I would hope that Wikipediocracy would avoid similar pitfalls and focus on a professional level of analysis and criticism of Wikipedia without dropping down to their toxic levels. Thanks.

User avatar
Notvelty
Retired
Posts: 1780
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:51 am
Location: Basement

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Notvelty » Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:55 am

Sitush wrote:I'm deaf and always have been. Videos don't usually mean anything to me, just as nursery rhymes didn't all those years ago.
This must have been tough to do then:

diff
-----------
Notvelty

User avatar
Notvelty
Retired
Posts: 1780
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:51 am
Location: Basement

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Notvelty » Fri Jan 02, 2015 4:07 am

It's a good start, eagle. I'd go further and suggest that the very best think wikimedia could do right now would be to move lila sideways and place a proper MD/Board Chair in the role. Part time, full control, generous stipend. I'm thinking of someone who used to edit wikipedia with username starting with tha...

Also, agree on videos. I'm aware that I can let smart-arse get in the way of getting my point across online. It's more fun that way.
-----------
Notvelty

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31432
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri Jan 02, 2015 4:39 am

SB_Johnny wrote:
Vigilant wrote:Do you think that people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?
Do you think that people who observe and criticize people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?

(Not judging at all, of course.) :whistle:
When I block and/or ban people who want to participate in a putatively volunteer cooperative venture, you'll have me dead to rights.
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
eagle
Eagle
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by eagle » Fri Jan 02, 2015 6:05 am

Vigilant wrote:When I block and/or ban people who want to participate in a putatively volunteer cooperative venture, you'll have me dead to rights.
Isn't this the heart of the problem? Given the size of the WMF budget, it could afford a paid, professional customer service staff to address problems with the accountability that comes with holding a paid position that reports to a supervisor. Most Wikipedians have a sense of entitlement (arising from their volunteer efforts) coupled with the knowledge that the person who is most persistent (or the best game player) will win out in any dispute. So, people do not back down in the face of conflict with other anonymous users. Some volunteers are not competent. Some volunteers are mis-trained or mis-informed. Some volunteers are tone deaf. Yet, others are motivated by POV-pushing agendas or paid advocates. It takes a lot of tact, maturity and sophistication to bring harmony to such a "collaborative effort."

The type of people we need to be administrators would never agree to undergo the RFA process. Instead, we have teens, college students and basement dwellers entrusted to carry out this role.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31432
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Vigilant » Fri Jan 02, 2015 6:32 am

eagle wrote:
Vigilant wrote:When I block and/or ban people who want to participate in a putatively volunteer cooperative venture, you'll have me dead to rights.
Isn't this the heart of the problem? Given the size of the WMF budget, it could afford a paid, professional customer service staff to address problems with the accountability that comes with holding a paid position that reports to a supervisor. Most Wikipedians have a sense of entitlement (arising from their volunteer efforts) coupled with the knowledge that the person who is most persistent (or the best game player) will win out in any dispute. So, people do not back down in the face of conflict with other anonymous users. Some volunteers are not competent. Some volunteers are mis-trained or mis-informed. Some volunteers are tone deaf. Yet, others are motivated by POV-pushing agendas or paid advocates. It takes a lot of tact, maturity and sophistication to bring harmony to such a "collaborative effort."

The type of people we need to be administrators would never agree to undergo the RFA process. Instead, we have teens, college students and basement dwellers entrusted to carry out this role.
The bolded part is true at every level in the WMF.
They have never built a professional organization in any department as far as I can tell.

I've done 8 startups and hired over 100 people (primarily engineers) and almost nobody currently within the WMF would make it past my initial hiring filter.
Certainly, many of them would be immediately terminated upon my hiring.
Brandon Harris, Ryan Kaldari and Oliver Keyes would be/would have been up against the wall on day one.
Sherry Snyder aka WhatAmIDoing...
Mo:elMan, Forrester, most of middle management.

The further I try to outline the worst of them, the more I'm convinced that they all need to go.


I posit that no real deficit in WMF's engineering efforts would occur if the entirety of the WMF engineering staff (outside of maintenance IT) were summarily fired and replacements sought from a blank slate.

Can anyone show me what detriment would be incurred under that scenario?
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

User avatar
Ross McPherson
Gregarious
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:55 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Ross McPherson » Fri Jan 02, 2015 8:16 am

eagle wrote:
Vigilant wrote:When I block and/or ban people who want to participate in a putatively volunteer cooperative venture, you'll have me dead to rights.
Isn't this the heart of the problem? Given the size of the WMF budget, it could afford a paid, professional customer service staff to address problems with the accountability that comes with holding a paid position that reports to a supervisor. Most Wikipedians have a sense of entitlement (arising from their volunteer efforts) coupled with the knowledge that the person who is most persistent (or the best game player) will win out in any dispute. So, people do not back down in the face of conflict with other anonymous users. Some volunteers are not competent. Some volunteers are mis-trained or mis-informed. Some volunteers are tone deaf. Yet, others are motivated by POV-pushing agendas or paid advocates. It takes a lot of tact, maturity and sophistication to bring harmony to such a "collaborative effort."

The type of people we need to be administrators would never agree to undergo the RFA process. Instead, we have teens, college students and basement dwellers entrusted to carry out this role.
No arguments from me there. JamesBWatson isn’t really a serial killer, as far as I know, but he is a serial thug. Wikipedia put him in that role. He probably believes it really is all in a good cause.

Anyway, since I have been prodded to open up a bit, I’ll lift the lid far enough to set him a challenge.

‘James’ argued for my indefinite block on the grounds that I was trying to deceive people – this despite open declarations by me for years about my methods. If I wasn’t trying to deceive people, he said, I must be mentally defective, since it was obvious that some people would be deceived. Either way, I shouldn’t be editing Wikipedia.

Well, the shoe is on the other foot now. Until the other day, I genuinely believed that James B Watson was his real name. Of course that was my mistake since I never read his open declarations, but ‘James’ can’t defend himself that way since he wouldn’t allow me to defend myself that way either. Anyone with a working brain knows that some people will assume ‘James B Watson’ is his real name.

It is difficult to criticize Wikipedians who use their real names – there are issues of liability and social justice that make this difficult. ‘James’ has been using a real name to stifle or prevent criticism. He knows it will fool some people, if not all. That is deception. Or else ‘James’ is mentally defective. A serial killer’s name! How crazy can you get.

‘James’, you can’t be trusted with an admin’s responsibilities. In fact, according to your own condemnation of me, you can’t even be trusted to edit Wikipedia. You should block yourself indefinitely.

What is there to fear from an indefinite block? A lot actually. As your colleague Jehovah Jehochman once observed, an indefinite block is hell. Wikipedia is not some minor blog you can put behind you happily. It is everywhere on the internet, like a disease, except it promotes itself as a charitable encyclopaedia. It is the encyclopaedia anybody can edit – anybody but liars, cheats and mental defectives such as you and me. You are about to find yourself alienated from the internet, if you have any sense of decency.

But I think you are so hooked into Wikipedia you will never leave it. You will cling to it with all the trembling fervour of an addict. Good luck.
Thoroughly impartial

Sitush
Retired
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Sitush » Fri Jan 02, 2015 8:16 pm

Notvelty wrote:
Sitush wrote:I'm deaf and always have been. Videos don't usually mean anything to me, just as nursery rhymes didn't all those years ago.
This must have been tough to do then:

diff
It wasn't tough, nor should it have been. It's a bit weird that you felt it necessary to dig around so much to find some "dirt", but hilarious that you understand so little about the subject. I speak pretty much normally also, although I can slur a bit when tired and I don't have much in the way of the local accent.

Someone above mentioned the old chestnust of admin holidays. It probably would be a good idea in theory but the number of admins is (I think) still falling and the number of admins that actually do admin stuff is probably falling disproprtionately greater. As with the idea of fixed terms, it assumes a pretty big pool of people with reasonable experience who not only could fulfil the role but in fact are prepared to do so.

I've no idea of a solution to the general problem of admin abuse but I don't deny that there are and have been some problematic people in the role. In any society, there will be some dodgy people and there will be some who sort of exemplify Acton's "power corrupts" thing - that's life.

User avatar
Notvelty
Retired
Posts: 1780
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:51 am
Location: Basement

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Notvelty » Fri Jan 02, 2015 10:00 pm

Sitush wrote:
Notvelty wrote:
Sitush wrote:I'm deaf and always have been. Videos don't usually mean anything to me, just as nursery rhymes didn't all those years ago.
This must have been tough to do then:

diff
It wasn't tough, nor should it have been. It's a bit weird that you felt it necessary to dig around so much to find some "dirt", but hilarious that you understand so little about the subject. I speak pretty much normally also, although I can slur a bit when tired and I don't have much in the way of the local accent.
When a wikicultist says something, 10 and more years of experience tells me they are generally full of shit. The only variable is "how much" and "in what direction".

For example, you said:
Sitush wrote:I'm deaf and always have been. Videos don't usually mean anything to me, just as nursery rhymes didn't all those years ago.
Now, this raised an alarm for me, because while I can completely understand an aversion to silly video quotes (it seems all the rage with the kids these days), the completely unnecessary bit about nursery rhymes struck me as over-egging the pot.

And when you add the previous diff to this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =393693650

well, it just seems to unlikely to me that someone who was able to accomplish so much against so great odds is unable to lip read.

Now, you may well be telling the complete truth (about not getting videos at all), heck, I rarely get the videos and I hear as well as any other man (i.e. not as well as my wife would like). But you'd be an exception in 10 years. Call me a raving cynic.
Sitush wrote: Someone above mentioned the old chestnust of admin holidays.
Then wouldn't it be a good idea to quote what they actually said? Again, call me cynical, but when someone says that, I immediately approach their recount with at least one raised eyebrow. Now, once more, you might be the one out of a million, but when most people quote something completely off-topic and then respond to something else, what they are doing is trying to re-frame the conversation to something that suits them.

Perhaps I'm being unfair here - I'm quite willing to accept that I may be. If I am being unfair, then I apologise (note that I have not said "if you feel I am being unfair"), however you do seem to be finding new and exciting ways to set off my cynicism.
Sitush wrote: I've no idea of a solution to the general problem of admin abuse but I don't deny that there are and have been some problematic people in the role. In any society, there will be some dodgy people and there will be some who sort of exemplify Acton's "power corrupts" thing - that's life.
In any functioning society, this is controlled by.. and you'll never guess... knowing who the person in power is. Of course, since Wikipedia seems to seek out sociopaths and create a welcoming atmosphere for them to play around without fear of repercussion, it can hardly be termed a functioning society.
-----------
Notvelty

User avatar
Ross McPherson
Gregarious
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:55 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Ross McPherson » Sat Jan 03, 2015 1:00 am

As an editor for WP, I always stuck with the facts and tried to report the available sources accurately, much to the annoyance of agenda-pushers, including those who drove me out. I haven't changed since then so I now have to update this thread. After further online searches, it is apparent to me that the serial killer is more often known as 'James P Watson'. However, my opinion of JamesBWatson remains unchanged.
Thoroughly impartial

Sitush
Retired
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Sitush » Sat Jan 03, 2015 1:40 am

Notvelty wrote: For example, you said:
Sitush wrote:I'm deaf and always have been. Videos don't usually mean anything to me, just as nursery rhymes didn't all those years ago.
Now, this raised an alarm for me, because while I can completely understand an aversion to silly video quotes (it seems all the rage with the kids these days), the completely unnecessary bit about nursery rhymes struck me as over-egging the pot.

And when you add the previous diff to this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =393693650

well, it just seems to unlikely to me that someone who was able to accomplish so much against so great odds is unable to lip read.
I can lipread. I taught myself and that is why my deafness was not diagnosed until I was five. That doesn't mean I can lipread video clips and, indeed, it is because lipreading such things is so difficult that subtitling etc exists. You clearly haven't got a clue about deafness. What is your fucking point?

People wasted their time telling me nursery rhymes and fairy tales etc as a toddler and, of course, I heard none of it. So don't waste yours with crappy video clips, perhaps?
eagle wrote: Perhaps Wikipedia can cure this problem by more interaction and conversation. What would happen if all the private IRCs were shut down, and if admins were force to take a 3 month holiday from their tools every two years?
Happy now? You can lower that eyebrow. If you'd used the thing just below it, you would have found this yourself without even leaving this page but, yeah, mea culpa.

User avatar
Ross McPherson
Gregarious
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:55 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Ross McPherson » Sat Jan 03, 2015 2:07 am

Here is a well-written article from the 1922 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, titled Case of J P Watson the Modern Bluebird. Actually that should be Bluebeard but it is well written in spite of that typo.
http://scholarlycommons.law.northwester ... ntext=jclc

The authors consider the possibility that Watson's first victim was actually a case of accidental drowning, though there is no doubt that he murdered the other wives. After her, he enjoyed the thrill of killing. Similarly I think JamesBWatson probably bashed his first Wikipedia victim more or less by accident, being driven by WP precedent and policy. Later he came to enjoy it and it was all deliberate.

The article also points out how unlike a serial killer he appeared. He was highly intelligent and habitually exhibited a respectful attitude towards others (when he wasn't killing them). I highly recommend the article as a good read and as a pointer to the sort of behaviours we can expect in a poorly governed, online community like WP.

Take an anonymous nerd, put him in the way to exercise his will over others, remove the fear of consequences, then add water and stand back! A monster takes shape.
Thoroughly impartial

User avatar
Boing! said Zebedee
Gregarious
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:47 pm
Wikipedia User: Boing! said Zebedee
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Boing! said Zebedee » Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:22 pm

Ross McPherson wrote:As I said, if you think it is necessary - be my guest. I am reluctant but ready to trade shots with James and his pals.
Not at all, no - I respect your privacy as I respect his.

Alan

User avatar
Boing! said Zebedee
Gregarious
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:47 pm
Wikipedia User: Boing! said Zebedee
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Boing! said Zebedee » Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:24 pm

Sitush wrote:I can lipread.
I can testify that he can lipread "Who wants a pint?" very well indeed ;-)

(And I must put myself in a situation where I can ask that question again one of these days)

Alan

User avatar
Boing! said Zebedee
Gregarious
Posts: 639
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 7:47 pm
Wikipedia User: Boing! said Zebedee
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Boing! said Zebedee » Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:28 pm

Sitush wrote:
Vigilant wrote:Do you think that people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?
Suitably ambiguous criticism, I guess, but why this obsession with people who are supposed to be working? Plenty of people don't work, work odd hours or work very little, for all sorts of reasons. I'm one of them.
Same here - I work freelance and am free to choose my own working hours.

Alan

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Cla68 » Sat Jan 03, 2015 12:36 pm

Boing! said Zebedee wrote:
Sitush wrote:
Vigilant wrote:Do you think that people who are assholes to other people online while they're supposed to be working deserve to remain anonymous?
Suitably ambiguous criticism, I guess, but why this obsession with people who are supposed to be working? Plenty of people don't work, work odd hours or work very little, for all sorts of reasons. I'm one of them.
Same here - I work freelance and am free to choose my own working hours.

Alan
I think most of the people, including you all, who work their own hours are better able to control their WP/social media time because, knowing how much and what needs to get done each day, they are better able to balance their priorities.

In my experience, however, many, if not the majority, of WP admins/power editors who have been identified by participants here or at Wikipedia Review, have been shown to be employed in office jobs and editing/adminning WP heavily on their employer's time. Doing it a little is probably no big deal, as long as they're getting their work done. The problem is the people who are obviously putting WP first and their work second. This includes most of WP's activists or agenda-driven editors who obsessively watch their articles all day.

User avatar
Ross McPherson
Gregarious
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 3:55 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Ross McPherson » Sat Jan 03, 2015 8:56 pm

How much time somebody spends at WP is not important. How they spend it is. Somebody might be retired, on vacation, convalescing or chronically ill or simply full of enthusiasm for a subject and all these people could spend long hours at WP every day working constructively and sanely, so long as they understand that the encyclopaedia really does not value them as people. Their work is a unit of production in a great collective and Siberia is just around the corner the moment they get in the way of an important comrade, who could also end up out in the cold sooner or later, if he doesn’t first get run over by a motorcade of commissars in a hurry to embrace the latest manifesto.

The question is – what sane person works in that environment by choice for years? It is home only to the deluded. The collective doesn’t care if the workers are deluded so long as they keep meeting their quotas. And yet the individual's work only lasts if it is neglected, as a monument to a period of rampant, short-lived growth, like schools and railway stations in the middle of nowhere, gathering weeds where there was supposed to be a town by now.

Then there are the James B Watsons of this strange world. James knows that the workers are not really expressing themselves in the articles they construct. That is why he doesn’t bother to construct anything himself, though he could if he wanted – he is trained as a mathematician. Instead he pulls things down, he pulls them apart and rearranges them, and along the way he eliminates protestors, a bit like a mathematician dealing with units of production. He gets a name for himself as a reliable and committed partisan. That is how he expresses himself.

Some day, while he is cooling his feet in Siberia, or scraping himself off the tyres of the motorcade he failed to dodge, he will have time to reflect on what he has actually done and if it has been worth it. If he is anywhere near decent or sane, he will realize that it wasn’t. In his case, however, the pain isn’t just self-inflicted. Others are paying for his delusions.

It is a paradise for serial killers. And what does the world get in return? An encyclopaedia it can’t bank on, a smourgesboard of titillating factoids amid gathering cobwebs. Was it worth it? Hell no.
Thoroughly impartial

Sitush
Retired
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:12 pm

Re: JamesBWatson

Unread post by Sitush » Sun Jan 04, 2015 2:06 am

Boing! said Zebedee wrote:
Sitush wrote:I can lipread.
I can testify that he can lipread "Who wants a pint?" very well indeed ;-)
Yes. I tend not to realise what is going on when someone says "it's your round". :banana:

Post Reply