Revision as of 20:34, 20 March 2005 editMarkSweep (talk | contribs)12,015 edits my view← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:55, 20 March 2005 edit undoThe Number (talk | contribs)329 edits MS's viewNext edit → | ||
Line 41: | Line 41: | ||
Since I don't want this debate to turn into a big troll fest regarding TheNumber's whereabouts and identity, '''I will personally revert any and all contributions on this topic in the present subsection'''. Constructive discussion of TheNumber's behavior and ways to modify it is what this debate should be about instead. --] 20:34, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC) | Since I don't want this debate to turn into a big troll fest regarding TheNumber's whereabouts and identity, '''I will personally revert any and all contributions on this topic in the present subsection'''. Constructive discussion of TheNumber's behavior and ways to modify it is what this debate should be about instead. --] 20:34, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC) | ||
: Ways to modify: It's really very simple. All Wyss has to do is stop calling me Ennis (and insulting me accordingly) while at the same time trying to interrogate me for a source about Sollog (Ennis) whereas if I were Ennis, they'd be no need of a source. It's this '''inconsistency''' I object to plus the obvious bias of an Administrator who, when asked for sensible help, blatantly ignored the civility code and said: "I am not your '''fucking'''''Italic text'' monkey". methink the wrong person has been chosen for censor - look within Wikis. | |||
This area is for the discussion of The Number's behaviour and I submit that this behaviour has largely (though not entirely) been because of Wyss's continuous abuse. ] 20:55, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:55, 20 March 2005
This could be considered an alternative summary, but I've already edited the main summary, which I do not principally disagree with. These are my personal comments, so I've put them on the talk page.
There is no question that The Number is not being a productive contributor at the time of writing, and has in fact not ever been. He/she has demonstrated a stunning lack of good faith, and in fact seems hell-bent on seeing everyone in as bad a light as possible.
That's not to say he/she is alone in this. Wyss, Gamaliel, Ashley Pomeroy and others have happily indulged him/her in this behavior by responding in kind. Since they are contributors while The Number could arguably hardly lay a claim to that title, I am naturally inclined to give them more leeway than someone who seems to spend all time on Misplaced Pages making provocative comments on talk pages, but that doesn't mean they can be excused for not exhibiting the maturity to ignore or defuse baseless provocation. In particular, Wyss's stubborn insistence on claiming or amassing evidence for the assertion that The Number is John P. Ennis AKA Sollog in disguise was not productive, and just gave The Number more bait to troll upon (and I do call these activities trolling, as in "making statements that are deliberately provocative for the sake of getting heated arguments on irrelevant topics").
It is possible that The Number could be compelled to make valuable contributions rather than lash out at people who offend what seem to be hair-trigger sensibilities, but given his/her gleeful delight in doing so, I consider it unlikely. JRM 17:03, 2005 Mar 20 (UTC)
- How interesting. 'Respected contributors' are not expected to meet the same standards of behaviour as others. So Wyss, for example, is allowed to continually and obsessively address me as a known pornographer (John Ennis) and that's acceptable on the grounds she is a 'respected contributor'. Well, well. The Number 19:03, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I agree with JRM, except that it's been months since I've gathered any evidence that any sockpuppet/user was Ennis. I was/am still relatively new to WP and did allow myself to be pulled into being trolled now and then. Then, having completely disengaged from any discussions with The Number, s/he returned recently, littering my talk page with unprovoked personal attacks, interspersed into discussions that had nothing to do with The Number. When I revereted these, The Number claimed to be the victim. Now that I better understand the "dynamics" of WP trolls I can say I wouldn't have bothered responding to the The Number's attempts to bait me. Live and learn, I guess. I can only add that The Number's whole contribution history is one of trolling and baiting with no work on articles (except adding one link to the Sollog page?). Wyss 17:22, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- If someone tells an untruth then that is de facto, a lie but to call that someone a liar is 'uncivil'. What a weird world Wikis live in. I am wrongly accused of 'littering'. This person who has insisting that I am John Ennis harasses me asking me (supposedly John Ennis) for a source that I, (supposedly John Ennis) am not in prison! The Number 19:03, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
My sort-of alternative summary thing
I contemplated bringing an RfC myself, but The Number's edits were essentially harmless, albeit that they had a habit of filling up the talk pages with cruft. I will admit to goading and/or responding excessively to the chap, as I myself am relatively new to Misplaced Pages, although I now realise that he is a relatively minor pest, and I now 'blank' him entirely. For what it's worth I am absolutely convinced that he is a sockpuppet of John Ennis, and that - even if he is not (and he resembles the recently-banned WikiUser in some respects) - he is irredeemable and worthless.. The following is the RfC summary I wrote a month or so ago, but never got around to actually posting:
"This all derives from the 'Misplaced Pages Vs Sollog' affair. Sollog is the pen name of John P. Ennis, a domain name trader and convicted criminal who drives traffic to his websites by writing conspiracy-related nonsense. After creating the page, it was listed for deletion; Ennis opposed this, but in the process the page was rewritten into its current form, a form which contains a lot of unflattering information regarding Ennis' criminal record. Irony. After vandalising the page and several others, and harassing and threatening various Wikipedian editors - to the extent of telephoning Jimbo Wales himself, and posting vile insults about Mr Wales' close family on a webpage he created for that very purpose ('wikisucks.com') - Ennis fell silent.
For a short while. He re-emerged as various transparent sockpuppets, all of which were easily spotted by their inability to act like normal people. The Number has continued the personal attacks, although he has not yet substantively edited a single non-user page. The Number is clearly a John Ennis sockpuppet, albeit one pretending to be a normal person, badly. The Number strenuously denies being a sockpuppet of John Ennis, and claims to be a resident of the UK, but the only proof he provides of this is dubious, to say the least, consisting mostly of information which is either unverifiable or which is available on the internet. Requests for a photograph - not necessarily of himself, but of something, anything - are met with the usual excuses; a lack of time, a lack of technical expertise, no access to hosting, and so forth.
The Number is presumably therefore Ennis attempting to 'build capital' as a trusted Misplaced Pages editor before going on to vandalise Sollog with a shield of righteousness. He also has a habit of losing his cool, using insulting language, and threatening people. He also uses a sub-sockpuppet, 'Sollogfan', as a peculiar 'foil'. In a comical turn, The Number took to arguing that I was a Sollog sockpuppet, despite abundant and publicly-available evidence that I am both a normal human being and that I am who I say I am; he seemed to be using this tactic in order to goad me into posting my home address and telephone number, without much success. He has otherwise gone out of his way to insinuate that he is trying to find out where I live.
Ennis is, essentially, a nasty pest. Although he has not actually used 'The Number' to vandalise Misplaced Pages, his behaviour here could be construed as advertising, and his habit of filling up talk pages tends to obscure valuable information as it becomes archived. As for personal attacks, this one suggests that the good people of Salisbury are inbred - which is probably true, but for an outsider to claim this to be in the case is an insult - whilst this one implies the Mr Wyss above is akin to Hitler , and this one implies that a chap called Saxifrage is as thick as a mouldy old plank. The last edit contains two of The Number's most obvious traits; a habit of arguing incorrect and irrelevant points in excessive detail, and a preening self-regard. I also include the future contents of the 'Response' section (!) as an example of The Number's inability to... well, just inability.
I argue for a perpetual block; judging by Ennis's own websites, he has nothing to offer Misplaced Pages, or indeed society at all, and The Number's edit history to date has amounted to a book-length display of sophistry and mania." -Ashley Pomeroy 18:26, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I note the following untruth and ask that the typist asks himself what tellers of untruths are called: "Requests for a photograph - not necessarily of himself, but of something, anything - are met with the usual excuses;" This untruth will no doubt be ignored - as to be expected. The Number 19:03, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Amazingly, I sat in a pub near Salisbury and stated what was on the wall of the pub. That, apparently, was not proof. OK then Mr Untruth, you set me ANY task to prove I am in the UK except providing a photo of myself with a UK background as surely that too could be faked, and I will comply. (I know you won't though) The Number 19:03, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- To refer to me as an outsider of Salisbury is an insult. They just pile up! The Number 20:19, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
MarkSweep's view
I'm adding this here because I'm not a neutral outside party: I've been peripherally involved in an earlier stage of this debate and have been following the recent discussions on Talk:Sollog without actively contributing.
First, and most importantly, let's not make this a debate about whether The Number is or isn't Sollog. This is precisely the direction TheNumber has been trying to take, but this is not what this RFC should be primarily about. TheNumber's recent strategy has been to react angrily to real or perceived accusations that he/she is Sollog/Ennis, often sidelining debates and painting herself/himself as the victim of attacks. At a point in the past, this may even have been justified: TheNumber has been consistent in claiming that he/she is based in the UK, several editors have expressed doubt, some of them have even been asked to stop pursuing this line of debate. Nevertheless, TheNumber has been unusually vocal and detailed in trying to convince everyone of his whereabouts. Since neither side can offer any definitive proof one way or the other and the debate cannot possibly be resolved, any attempt to raise this issue again should be seen as trolling.
So this RFC is about the behavior of TheNumber, and not about any factual claims regarding his/her whereabouts. I have endorsed the summary of the dispute statement, because I agree that TheNumber has been a source, catalyst, and strange attractor of hostility, pointless acerbic debate, and other bad behavior. I would consider this RFC a success if TheNumber could be convinced to (1) focus on issues of his/her own behavior (rather than insisting on beeing seen as the victim of a conspiracy) and (2) promise to substantially reduce the abrasive behavior.
Since I don't want this debate to turn into a big troll fest regarding TheNumber's whereabouts and identity, I will personally revert any and all contributions on this topic in the present subsection. Constructive discussion of TheNumber's behavior and ways to modify it is what this debate should be about instead. --MarkSweep 20:34, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Ways to modify: It's really very simple. All Wyss has to do is stop calling me Ennis (and insulting me accordingly) while at the same time trying to interrogate me for a source about Sollog (Ennis) whereas if I were Ennis, they'd be no need of a source. It's this inconsistency I object to plus the obvious bias of an Administrator who, when asked for sensible help, blatantly ignored the civility code and said: "I am not your fuckingItalic text monkey". methink the wrong person has been chosen for censor - look within Wikis.
This area is for the discussion of The Number's behaviour and I submit that this behaviour has largely (though not entirely) been because of Wyss's continuous abuse. The Number 20:55, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)