Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:38, 19 November 2007

is turned off on my talk page. Feel free not to sign your comments if you don't want to.

Archives

Main talk ∞ 1 ∞ 2 ∞ 3 ∞ 4 ∞ 5 ∞ 6 ∞ 7 ∞ 8 ∞ 9 ∞ 10 ∞ 11 ∞ 12 ∞ 14 ∞ 15 ∞ 16

"it's very scary that three people endorsed a response in less than a minute"

Apparently they're all collaborating on IRC, if SPUI's outside view is correct. --NE2 23:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Of course they are. Assuming that people who act like that are collaborating on IRC stopped being a wild conspiracy theory a loong time ago. -Amarkov moo! 23:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Assuming that's sarcasm, what exactly are you saying? That I've fallen victim to a hoax? --NE2 23:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

No, that isn't sarcasm. People collaborate on IRC (or some other chat program, same difference). A lot. These people may not in fact be doing so, but there's no reason to assume that. -Amarkov moo! 23:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Meaning no reference to any specific dispute here, of course WP actions, especially malicious ones, are coordinated on IRC. As you observe, Amarkov, this ceased being a wild conspiracy a long time ago.Proabivouac 23:24, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why "especially malicious ones" are coordinated on IRC. We have official IRC channels for lots of things, and I doubt anyone's so silly as to expect us to believe that no coordination goes on there. -Amarkov moo! 23:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Because the more questionable the motivations (or faulty the logic,) the more reason participants have to hide them from recoverable scrutiny. IRC-based decision making denies targets the ability to respond before everyone has made up his/her mind, and provides a place to trash the reputation of established contributors without them having any idea what's going on until it's too late. Of course, there are good reasons to user IRC, but the longer you hang around, the more you'll see just how abused this is. Yet I can recall only one situation in which anyone was held to account, and then only sort of.Proabivouac 23:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Miltopia AN/I comment

If I read you right, I think you and I are on the same page. If Miltopia's banned, so should MONGO, and if not MONGO, then not Miltopia. I posted suport of THAT idea on the page. If I've misinterpreted you, please let me know so I can adjust my comment? And if I read it right, I'm right there with you. thanks. ThuranX 23:49, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not necessarily an "all or none" case, but the standards being applied to Miltopia, if applied to him, would most certainly have resulted in a ban a long time ago. -Amarkov moo! 23:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

No, it's rarely open and shut when it comes to popularly contentious editors, but yes, I think we're in harmony. Block one, block the other. Block only one, then it's a bad block. Frankly, I'd like to see both deep six'd and wikidrama down 5% per month. LOL.ThuranX 23:51, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Me

Please help me understand why you believe I am harmful to the project. Feel free to respond to me on my talkpage or here if you prefer.--MONGO 02:23, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Because you are continually incivil to those who you disagree with, and more importantly, you justify this by saying that the people you're incivil to are all trolling or otherwise disruptive. -Amarkov moo! 03:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of that fully. I don't agree with assessment that I am continually incivil though..that seems very broad, to be honest.--MONGO 03:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Anyway...I am pleased you took this down...thank you.--MONGO 06:58, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 13:47, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:14, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:20, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration

I have added your name to involved parties in the MONGO 2 arbitration case as shown here--MONGO (talk) 06:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)