I'm asking for a w[a|o]ndering Arb to put things right for poor old Shiny.
He is completely uninvloved. There is no connection between Dark Clouds of Joy and Darkness Shines, barring a shared concern for BLPs and the word Dark.
Also, since you're lurking Beebleborx & BigAppleBradley, you ought to block Floq & Yamla and unblock Darkness Shines.
Darkness is worth ten of you; few people care more about BLPs. You won't do the right thing of course, and that is why we will continue to mock you until the heat death of the universe.
I've started a thread on the relevant dramaboard: here
Also, since you're lurking Beebleborxs & BigAppleBradley, you ought to block Floq & Yamla and unblock Darkness Shines.
I'm standing for re-election right now, it would be wildly inappropriate for me to involve my admin or functionary tools in this affair.
Re: Arbcom Elections 2021
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 4:04 am
by Smiley
As I keep saying, Dark Clouds of Joy is me, and you know very well that I am not Darkness Shines.
I'm glad that the stereotype of Wikipedia administrators as pompous, sanctimonious, power-drunk jobsworth arseholes actively hampering any improvements to the website if the requisite forms haven't been filled out in triplicate in exactly the right shade of blue ink between 2.16pm and 2.23pm on a Tuesday has turned out to be a myth.
Hello darkness my old friend
Re: Arbcom Elections 2021
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 4:13 am
by Beeblebrox
Don't take this wrong way, but I don't think i have the faintest clue who you are or were on-wiki. If you were Smiley~enwiki(T-C-L) I'm afraid the CU data is going to be a bit stale. However, I will pass this on to the committee, I know at least one arb has been double-checking the CU finding.
Re: Arbcom Elections 2021
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 4:15 am
by Smiley
You will be happy to know that I am now switching all my votes to Yes.
As I keep saying, Dark Clouds of Joy is me, and you know very well that I am not Darkness Shines.
Don't take this wrong way, but I don't think i have the faintest clue who you are or were on-wiki. If you were Smiley~enwiki(T-C-L) I'm afraid the CU data is going to be a bit stale. However, I will pass this on to the committee, I know at least one arb has been double-checking the CU finding.
Ira, you're not a gibbering idiot; a mandarin maybe; but surely no fool...
Could you please remove the sockpuppet tag from Darkness Shines' account? You don't have to take my word for it, although it would be nice if you did; there is absolutely no evidence for Yamla's accusation of sockpuppetry.
*fingers slow-clown-horn-of-death ominously*
Re: Arbcom Elections 2021
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 4:53 am
by No Ledge
Would it be helpful if you publicly revealed Dark Clouds of Joy data that the check user tool would show? Presumably you would have no way of knowing that if it wasn't you.
Presumably the other user has different check user data; but the assumption that each of you could have proxy data making the data inconclusive might require both you and the person you apparently joe-jobbed to reveal your true identities to verify you're different people.
Would it be helpful if you publicly revealed Dark Clouds of Joy data that the check user tool would show? Presumably you would have no way of knowing that if it wasn't you.
Good thinking, Batman!
Current IP: 82.132.231.160
ISP: Telefonica UK Limited / O2
UA: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:94.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/94.0
Shoesize: 10 (UK)
The usual method of appeal is to fix a fifty-dollar bill & a grovelling note onto a passing bird of prey in the hope that it will eventually find our secret lair.
Secretary-General, Wikimedia Affiliates Association
For so many reasons that should be obvious to you, though they boil down to - I'm in the same election, I don't respond well to individuals attempting to coerce actions on Wikipedia with threats and bans on a criticism site.
And then there's the reasons that aren't obvious to you. I don't play whack a mole, I don't get involved in the continuous sock hunting, I've got far better things to do with my time.
You caused this mess Smiley, by socking in the first place so blatantly in the first place. If you want someone to look at a block - you can use the myriad of routes to sort it - you've been around long enough to know them.
I don't participate here often, so I don't think you'll all miss me, but to be clear, I don't intend on participating here for the foreseeable.
I have tried both on here and on Wikipedia everything possible to sort this mess out. Mess that was in fact caused by Bbb23, Floquenbeam, and Yamla's paranoid overreaction.
At least, there are sufficient candidates now that people actually have a choice and maybe there will be some more as the deadline approaches. I really feared I would have to run again just to have more viable candidates than seats to fill
SoWhy not run anyway?
Because ArbCom is a hell of a timesink and I can honestly not guarantee I will have enough time to dedicate. Seemed unfair to run just to stroke my ego to keep the hat
For so many reasons that should be obvious to you, though they boil down to - I'm in the same election, I don't respond well to individuals attempting to coerce actions on Wikipedia with threats and bans on a criticism site.
And then there's the reasons that aren't obvious to you. I don't play whack a mole, I don't get involved in the continuous sock hunting, I've got far better things to do with my time.
You caused this mess Smiley, by socking in the first place so blatantly in the first place. If you want someone to look at a block - you can use the myriad of routes to sort it - you've been around long enough to know them.
I don't participate here often, so I don't think you'll all miss me, but to be clear, I don't intend on participating here for the foreseeable.
I don't get involved in the continuous sock hunting, I've got far better things to do with my time.
What, like serve on a Committee responsible for dealing with joe-jobbers and sockpuppets?
Eostrix?
Flyer?
Alahverdian?
This response is symptomatic of the terminal incuriosity, disregard for privacy, and cack-handed lethargy which besets ArbCom.
One fucking click!
Re: Arbcom Elections 2021
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 10:48 am
by Smiley
Moderator's note:
Dark Clouds of Joy, who is not anonymous, has upset various criminals and at least one multibillion-dollar government-backed propaganda operation in his quest to improve Wikipedia.
Darkness Shines, who is not anonymous but wants to be, appears to have upset most of the Indian subcontinent in his quest to improve Wikipedia.
If you are not concerned that the anonymous Yamla thoughtlessly and incorrectly linked these two editors in a public space, you should probably not participate on Wikipediocracy.
Dark Clouds of Joy, who is not anonymous, has upset various criminals and at least one multibillion-dollar government-backed propaganda operation in his quest to improve Wikipedia.
Darkness Shines, who is not anonymous but wants to be, appears to have upset most of the Indian subcontinent in his quest to improve Wikipedia.
If you are not concerned that the anonymous Yamla thoughtlessly and incorrectly linked these two editors in a public space, you should probably not participate on Wikipediocracy.
Probably should also fix up the link between Darkness Shines & DarknessShines2(T-C-L), an account which is listed as a sockpuppet, despite preceding him by several months.
Did anyone tell you that you can have up to six here before anyone asks if you actually have a meaningful question or any other burning reason to post?
That's three words. Did anyone tell you that you can have up to six here before anyone asks if you actually have a question?
Upon reading the contents of this forum thread, I found myself perplexed; rather than being perplexed by one individual or one post, or even one topic of discussion, however, I find myself perplexed in a general sense. That's why I ended my post with a period!
Upon reading the contents of this forum thread, I found myself perplexed; rather than being perplexed by one individual or one post, or even one topic of discussion, however, I find myself perplexed in a general sense. That's why I ended my post with a period!
Feel free, then, at any point, to ask some sort of direct question about something in the thread that specifically perplexed you.
I'm not sure I'll be holding my breath until then, but we'll see...
I hadn't read any of this thread so my decision (plus revert) wasn't influenced by it at all. It was seeing the thread on AN which Johnuniq(T-C-L) and Serial Number 54129(T-C-L) had a mild tussle over and thought "maybe I'll just do this so everyone can have a quiet life".
I hadn't read any of this thread so my decision (plus revert) wasn't influenced by it at all. It was seeing the thread on AN which Johnuniq(T-C-L) and Serial Number 54129(T-C-L) had a mild tussle over and thought "maybe I'll just do this so everyone can have a quiet life".
That sounds like a noble reason to do that.
Do you have any opinion worth mentioning on the rest of the stuff related to the block?
Do you have any opinion worth mentioning on the rest of the stuff related to the block?
Assuming that said blocked accounts are all traceable to Smiley / Hillbillyholiday, I do. From distant memory I recall we did a bit of work together on getting Bournemouth(T-H-L) to GA status, and I was sorry to hear that the Daily Mail threw shit at him for "This user hates The Sun and thinks anyone who treats it as a reliable source for a biography of a living person is stark raving mad." which was actually me.
The original trouble appears to have started in July 2019 with rib-tickling socks like There'll always be an EEngland!(T-C-L), presumably created to troll EEng(T-C-L), though I suspect he would actually find it funny. I think blocking the socks with a message like "cut that out and start improving content, for *$%@'s sake" would have been sufficient. However, once you reach that point, it just becomes a blood sport between socks having a laugh and admins ... not having so much of a laugh. I don't think there's any solution to that, and as long as Bbb23(T-C-L) still has the tools, nothing much is going to change. I did try and change this early in my admin career, but got resistance.
I also noticed when he first got indeffed in 2018 I said "'I'm sick and f***ing tired of removing citations to The Sun (we still have about 80) and The Daily Mail (over 1200) from BLPs. Can I have a second for unblocking Hillbillyholiday (who I see was de-facto banned with thoughtful comments like "let's lose the asshat") or do we have to take it to the WP:Dramaboard first?" so I might not be the most neutral person on this.
Re: Arbcom Elections 2021
Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:42 pm
by Mason
So, just to make sure I understand this correctly:
Darkness Shines, who was mistakenly accused of operating a particular sock account, must have that incorrect sock tag remain on his page to spite Hillbillyholiday, who has openly admitted to running the sock, even though the two (known) people are unrelated, because if a mistake in a sock identification is acknowledged, the terrorists win.
I have tried both on here and on Wikipedia everything possible to sort this mess out. Mess that was in fact caused by Bbb23, Floquenbeam, and Yamla's paranoid overreaction.
The jokes make it hard to understand what is happening.
Did you really ban NYB?
WTT, I don't believe that Smiley is threatening anybody, as much as being hilarious.
Being threatened with an envelopment that is able to use the GNAA to deliver the coup de grace would discombobulate the strongest among us.
Other arbitrators and administrators on Wikipedia can read our threads, and one of them can help DS.
None of us can immediately respond to all requests for help, especially those which we need not have read.
NYB seems to have behaved honorably in all cases and has actively tried to argue against some of the worst ArbCom decisions, and so he deserves some respect.
For Wikipediocracy's own good, we should be seen as treating him with respect and fairness.
The site functions better with active participation of NYB, WTT, Beebs, Guerrillero, GW, & Co., which has been jeopardized by the banning and threats (which seem to be jests).
I suggest you undo that immediately. Whatever moral high ground you had with regard to the possible misidentification of a sock evaporated with that. And the apparent joe-job signup of Brad at another sucky criticism site.
If you don't do that I think Jake should revoke your admin privileges here and unblock NYB himself.
The site functions better with active participation of NYB, WTT, Beebs, Guerrillero, GW, & Co., which has been jeopardized by the banning and threats (which seem to be jests).
Wikipedia administrators often reflexively ban (the wrong) people without a second thought.
In my experience WTT, Beebs, Guerrillero, GW, & Co have had the good grace to reply when asked simple questions. Newyorkbrad lurked throughout this shitshow and stayed quiet.
We exist to shine the light of scrutiny into the dark crevices of Wikipedia and its related projects; to examine the corruption there, along with its structural flaws; and to inoculate the unsuspecting public against the torrent of misinformation, defamation, and general nonsense that issues forth from one of the worldβs most frequently visited websites, the βencyclopedia that anyone can edit.β
Who exists to shine the light of scrutiny into the dark crevices of Wikipediocracy and its related projects; to examine the corruption there, along with its structural flaws; and to inoculate the unsuspecting public against the torrent of misinformation, defamation, and general nonsense that issues forth from one of the worldβs least frequently visited websites, the βforum that banned Wikipedians can still edit"?
Who exists to shine the light of scrutiny into the dark crevices of Wikipediocracy and its related projects; to examine the corruption there, along with its structural flaws; and to inoculate the unsuspecting public against the torrent of misinformation, defamation, and general nonsense that issues forth from one of the worldβs least frequently visited websites, the βforum that banned Wikipedians can still edit"?