| Revision as of 19:13, 25 November 2014 editJusdafax (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers101,858 edits →Blocked: I don't agree with this block← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:15, 25 November 2014 edit undoKs0stm (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators25,726 edits →Blocked: notice of ban from Gender Gap Task Force case pagesNext edit → | ||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
| :I agree that in some cases the word gangbang implies sex or in some way alludes in some metaphorical way to sex. Also, to Carol, I really would suggest that you follow the advice of Fluffernutter above. There are only a very few uses of user talk pages considered acceptable by users who are actively blocked, and any editing not included in those acceptable uses can and often does lead to the ability to edit even that restricted. ] (]) 18:45, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | :I agree that in some cases the word gangbang implies sex or in some way alludes in some metaphorical way to sex. Also, to Carol, I really would suggest that you follow the advice of Fluffernutter above. There are only a very few uses of user talk pages considered acceptable by users who are actively blocked, and any editing not included in those acceptable uses can and often does lead to the ability to edit even that restricted. ] (]) 18:45, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
| *I don't agree with this block. Yes, Carol is expressing herself forcefully, but I don't see that as a reason to shut her down for a week. The issue at hand is of considerable importance to numerous Wikipedians, some of whom may have difficulty standing up to the intimidating culture here, and a block at this juncture is counterproductive to open debate. I'd say it compounds the problem. ]]] 19:13, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | *I don't agree with this block. Yes, Carol is expressing herself forcefully, but I don't see that as a reason to shut her down for a week. The issue at hand is of considerable importance to numerous Wikipedians, some of whom may have difficulty standing up to the intimidating culture here, and a block at this juncture is counterproductive to open debate. I'd say it compounds the problem. ]]] 19:13, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | ||
| ===Ban from Gender Gap Task Force case pages=== | |||
| As a result of your poor conduct on the case pages, in spite of Bishonen's warning and ], I am, as an arbitration clerk, taking the additional action of barring you from participating on any of the Gender Gap Task Force case pages. For clarity, this means no editing the main case page, evidence page, workshop page, proposed decision page, or any of those pages' talk pages. This restriction is enforceable by block, if necessary. ] <sup>(]•]•]•])</sup> 20:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:15, 25 November 2014
Green Box Links to Barnstars, Archives, Other Stuff   Please post comments about the content of a specific article on the Talk Page of that Article if it is relevant to all editors. Otherwise I may move it there. Thanks. |
|---|
 |
 | This user wants to see everything in its place. |
Last of the Mohicans
|
The Working Man's Barnstar |
| For being the "Last of the Mohicans"--one of the few women who has not been driven off the Gender Gap Task Force or the GGTF ArbCom case. |
Hi, Carolmooredc. I have seen this rather amusing barnstar floating around and cannot think of anyone who deserves it more than you do. You have continued to Assume Good Faith, and have patiently answered even the most hostile statements, long after anyone else would have lost patience and concluded that they were being trolled. Just for the record, this is no longer a gender-specific barnstar, but the irony of the original version is just too perfect. Regards, —Neotarf (talk) 13:50, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. I actually looked up WP:NOTSUICIDE and I don't get it. As I asked at talk "Does it mean we can kick obvious trolls butts? Or that we should quit rather than commit suicide?" Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 13:56, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
- Ha, ha, enjoy. —Neotarf (talk) 15:01, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Feminists Engage Misplaced Pages
|
The Feminists Engage Misplaced Pages Award! |
| If Adrianne Wadewitz were here, she'd give you this award for all you have done! Djembayz (talk) 23:28, 10 November 2014 (UTC) |
- Back at ya! But you know my definition of feminist: any woman who doesn't take any bull in any part of her life. So that's most of 3.6 billion women on the planet :-) Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 23:55, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Kittens and puppies for helpful and friendly editors
Don't have energy to post separately. Especially for those who have seen through the nonsense of the last six months.
Also feel free to delete any of those negative/nasty/harassing comments I always get if anyone leaves them here, since I probably won't be allowed to.
Blocked
This , repeated on Jimbo Wales' talkpage is so far beyond the line that I have blocked you. It seems likely that you will be banned rather soon anyway, so I suggest that if you feel a pressing need to make some other (constructive) contributions to the arb proceedings until that time, you'd better contact the committee by mail directly. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:38, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- Please note that I warned Carol recently, explicitly about sexualized personal attacks such as "gang bang". I was in fact typing up my own block notice, Future Perfect got there just before me. Bishonen | talk 14:55, 25 November 2014 (UTC).
- Carol, when you've only got to convince one arbitrator to change its vote to oppose, it's best not to rock the boat. Recommend you stay away from the page-in-question. GoodDay (talk) 15:00, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- @User:Bishonen shows her ignorance. Probably more guys get gang banged by other guys in prison, torture chambers, fraternities, and militaries worldwide than women. It's actually a gender neutral term. (Not to mention "gang bangers" is a phrase for members of gangs who may or may not do any sexual gang bangs of males or females. So it's appropriate for individuals in question.) You say "attacks" - are their other terms you do not understand?
- Again, ArbCom dare not sanction King Corbett without having a couple sacrifices to throw to his subjects, like me and Neotarf. It's a joke. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 16:49, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- Where was gender mentioned? Rape is rape no matter the gender of the victim, surely? pablo 17:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- My point exactly. Bishonen should apologize to all the guys who have been raped and to all the gang bangers who haven't raped anyone. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 17:13, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- Now I am even more confused as to your point. pablo 17:24, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- Carol, that's quite enough of this line of discussion. I get that you're angry and trying to make a point, but it is absolutely unacceptable to...well, to do most of the things you're doing right now: compare other Wikipedians to rapists (or gang members), belittle male victims of rape, defend your saying horrible things about people because it happens to women too so it must be ok to do to men...none of those things are ok, and if you continue doing them I or someone else is going to have to remove your access to this talk page to stop them happening. You're blocked; you're intended to use your talk page to discuss and appeal the block, not continue any and all disputes you aren't able to let go of. Please give some thought to whether moderating yourself, even just somewhat, is more likely to pay off for you than continuing in the vein you've been going along in. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 17:27, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- My point exactly. Bishonen should apologize to all the guys who have been raped and to all the gang bangers who haven't raped anyone. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 17:13, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)In my version of the English language, "gangbanger" means someone who has taken an active part in a gang rape, and is therefore a shocking insult, quite inappropriate to use in this context. Throwing it around as an insult demeans all victims of rape by likening their ordeal to having a few nasty things said about them online. Get real, please. PamD 17:32, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- Having looked further (because I'm a retired librarian): WP has a dab page giving two meanings of Gangbanger; gives 3 meanings including "someone who gangbangs", and the def of the verb "gangbang" doesn't quite include rape explicitly; OED defines "gangbanger" as "A member of a criminal or street gang, esp. one who engages in gang violence; a gangster"; but to me personally, female 60+ UK English-speaker, it still sounds like a rapist. PamD 18:03, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- Where was gender mentioned? Rape is rape no matter the gender of the victim, surely? pablo 17:12, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker)Where I come from "gang bang" implies sex, but not necessarily rape (there is a whole genre of porn for it, some of which simulates rape, some of which is just an orgy involving only one girl). "Gang-banger" is a term for one who is in a gang, but does not specifically imply that the participate in gang-bangs. Its more of a synonym for thug/gangste/etc). Although I think Carol's post was improper for other reasons, I don't read it as her accusing anyone of actual rapes (even figurative ones). However, as part of the larger dispute here is that different words mean different things to different people, I do not preclude the possibility that people in other areas would read it as a sexual reference. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:11, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- I agree that in some cases the word gangbang implies sex or in some way alludes in some metaphorical way to sex. Also, to Carol, I really would suggest that you follow the advice of Fluffernutter above. There are only a very few uses of user talk pages considered acceptable by users who are actively blocked, and any editing not included in those acceptable uses can and often does lead to the ability to edit even that restricted. John Carter (talk) 18:45, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
- I don't agree with this block. Yes, Carol is expressing herself forcefully, but I don't see that as a reason to shut her down for a week. The issue at hand is of considerable importance to numerous Wikipedians, some of whom may have difficulty standing up to the intimidating culture here, and a block at this juncture is counterproductive to open debate. I'd say it compounds the problem. Jusdafax 19:13, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Ban from Gender Gap Task Force case pages
As a result of your poor conduct on the case pages, in spite of Bishonen's warning and the edit notice for the proposed decision talk page, I am, as an arbitration clerk, taking the additional action of barring you from participating on any of the Gender Gap Task Force case pages. For clarity, this means no editing the main case page, evidence page, workshop page, proposed decision page, or any of those pages' talk pages. This restriction is enforceable by block, if necessary. Ks0stm 20:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)