Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Demiurge1000 (talk | contribs) at 02:49, 14 August 2013 (→Separate but equal: very prolific content creator). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Notes

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.18 (Darwin)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=
=oCnW
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

Mentioned

Please see User talk:Previously ScienceApologist#unblocked. You enacted a topic ban of this editor from fringe science under WP:ARBPS in January 2011 and people are now discussing whether it remains in effect. Two relevant AE threads may be found at:

• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive81#Arbitration enforcement action appeal by JPS
• Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive103#VanishedUser314159

One relevant question might be whether SA ever met the terms which you set for resetting the topic ban from indefinite back to its original one year length. So far as I can tell, such a resetting of SA's ban was never formalized or logged. As the banning admin you probably have the last word, though an AE thread would allow more people to express an opinion. At the moment there is no active request from SA regarding his ban. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 06:02, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I have started a WP:AN thread about the topic ban, because the issue wasn't really addressed in the unblock discussion. Someone not using his real name (talk) 19:31, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

There's also now an ArbCom clarification request here. Someone not using his real name (talk) 21:31, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Email request

DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·cont) Join WER 06:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Carification request archived

This note is to inform you that the Science Apologist topic ban clarification request has been archived, with no action taken on the matter.

For the Arbitration Committe, — ΛΧΣ 19:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Separate but equal

Congratulations, Timotheus Canens! You have, with your recent judgment on the Kiefer.Wolfowitz and Ironholds proven yourself to be a supporter of the separate-but-equal status of content contributors vis-à-vis those of power and influence on Misplaced Pages, as well as their sockpuppets, meatpuppets, paid editing clients, and shills. In addition, you have maintained the legal fiction that Ironholds (talk · contribs) is somehow completely separate from Okeyes (WMF) (talk · contribs)—a pathetic lie formulated in order to indemnify a WMF employee of the grave responsibilities that come with his post. You seek nothing but power and influence, just like those you support, and will go to the ends of the earth to seek it, ignoring the fact that Ironholds made a statement in his vandalism far more potent and degrading than anything that Kiefer.Wolfowitz ever said. As with the other Arbitrators, you also declined to investigate power-players like Beeblebrox (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) and Demiurge1000 (talk · contribs), who appear to have the ability to violate Misplaced Pages policies blatantly (Beeblebrox writing civility essays about his right to tell people to fuck off and Demiurge1000 contacting users privately against their will) while still being empowered to enforce them at venues like AN/I and AE, filled with mutual masturbators who form warring cabals that aim principally at content editors.

You may hide behind the blanket of "judicial independence" for your abject refusal to do what is right and give Oliver Keyes sanctions commensurate with his misconduct on IRC channels as well as on Wikimedia sites (better yet, acknowledge that based on the existence of a freenode: prefix on Misplaced Pages, coupled with the fact that Wikimedia-branded channels on freenode have Wikimedian chanops and focus on Wikimedia, that said channels are admissible as evidence on a regular basis). You may revision-delete or oversight this post as "rossly insulting, harmful, or degrading material" in order to pacify civility robots, or simply to bury evidence of your own wrongdoing. You can block me for 24 or 48 hours to shut me up, as you are an exalted, honored Arbitrator and I am nobody but a content editor who lacks significant power and toils away so that people like yourself can extol the benefits of Misplaced Pages to the public. You can even have administrator friends create hundreds of socks and confirm them in order to rig the coming ArbCom elections in favor of yourself and your friends. But what you can't do is fool yourself into thinking that none of this happened—that you, the great Timotheus Canens, have been a fount of honor, virtue, and service whom many have looked up to. You can yet change your behaviors and undo your unjust behavior towards Kiefer.Wolfowitz, and on a broader scale you may even go after power players and AN/I bottom-feeders—yet it is from these groups that you derive most of your power, and for that reason you likely have no inclination of changing your behavior.

I would like to think I'm wrong, but every indication is that I'm right. You just lost your credibility today, Timotheus Canens. It'll be hard to earn it back. Wer900 • talk 20:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what you think that diff shows, but it doesn't appear to have anything at all to do with me. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I think he's referring to your essay, boss. Cla68 (talk) 22:41, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

There's a diff, in a sentence referring to my various misdeeds, saying I "contacted someone against their will" whatever that even means, and the diff is an edit by another user, from 2011, at Simple. In a sentence about me, but not related to me. But you know what, the more I think about it the less I care, so let's just forget I even brought it up. This rant actually has nothing to do with me, Wer is just trying to stir up drama by slamming as many people as he can and shouldn't have even responded to this nonsense. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:57, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Beeblebrox, stop being disingenuous. You know you wrote the essay telling people to fuck off, the diff is for Demiurge1000, whom I also named. The error I made is nothing more than a minor ordering error that you are inflating. You, not I, are the most efficient drama-producer here. In order to right wrongs that nobody but a process-abuser like yourself would have seen, I have identified each user by his misdeed. Nobody is as stupid as you would like us to believe. Wer900 • talk 00:30, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Ah, Wer900. Were you the guy that was claiming KW was a "content creator" and Ironholds was not? Really? Wake me up when there's something new. Honestly, the more you talk on-wiki, the sillier you look. Off-wiki - no comment. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:34, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Ironholds remains a power player and a WMF employee, and seems to have only created a few articles last year. As far as I see, he has only one DYK in 2013. Looking at his edit count, it is clear that the vast majority of his edits are to non-content pages (many of his content edits being bot edits). For all of his content work, he appears to have wasted far more time. And I haven't even told you about his extensive use of his WMF accont.

And what about you, Demiurge? Are you going to deny that you wrote the cited diff? Are you, Beeblebrox, going to disclaim ownership of your essay telling critics to fuck off? It's not impossible that you'll do such a thing, and even if you didn't you'd be protected by the separate-but-equal system that exists on Misplaced Pages. Every word you and Beeblebrox say, the more you sound like the hypocrites, cheats, and liars that you really are. Wer900 • talk 01:08, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Something vexes thee? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 02:49, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

You're loudly complaining about the "fuck off" essay while being just as uncivil.... Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

You're correct. He's managed to embody an internal contradiction in order to buttress his own actions. *ponders* Wer900, it's time to run for Arbcom! →StaniStani  03:25, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

So any criticism of another user's actions is now considered "incivility"? The civility policy is about treating other users with the respect accorded to any human being that one may interact with in person, and people who try to conflate incivility with criticisms are often hypocrites themselves—people who themselves seek power for its own sake, people who game the system for personal gain. I haven't traversed the political oceans of Misplaced Pages to nearly the same extent you have, and for that reason I may not know that I am being uncivil and hence a hypocrite.

You policy-citers really ought to read the civility policy for once. In particular, the "Identifying incivility" section lists actions that are considered uncivil, and I believe I have done none of those. I did commit some degree of incivility and apologize for that, but I am not sure that it is part of a broader pattern and is largely in response to disingenuousness by Beeblebrox and Demiurge1000. Stanistani/Zoloft, I see no internal contradiction, except in people like Timotheus Canens and Beeblebrox. Wer900 • talk 04:01, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." Oh, and Here I am User:Stanistani. Over there is some guy named Zoloft, who has no real connection to me. Just as here exists User:Ironholds, and up there is some other guy named User:Okeyes_(WMF) (no relation). →StaniStani  05:45, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Ah, The Truth™ in its most unadulterated form... Wer900 • talk 19:37, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

What I'm curious about this the part about "You can even have administrator friends create hundreds of socks and confirm them in order to rig the coming ArbCom elections in favor of yourself and your friends". Is there any evidence of this? IIRC, only about 1000 accounts voted in the last election, so I would think several hundred sockpuppets would have been somewhat noticeable, right? Mark Arsten (talk) 17:22, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

The election of Nicolás Maduro to the Venezuelan presidency did involve plenty of fraudulent entries on the voter list as well as voter intimidation, allowing him to edge out Henrique Capriles by a relatively small margin. It was rigged, everybody noticed, but would it change anything? Just as Maduro is still the President of Venezuela, T. Canens and other bad arbitrators can remain on the committee through rigging, even if it is blantantly obvious. The WMF probably won't even bat an eye, given the sorts of people over there. And even if only a small number of socks were created, they could change the results of the election and could most definitely unduly influence debate on the candidates. Wer900 • talk 19:37, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Cool story bro. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:38, 14 August 2013 (UTC)