Misplaced Pages

User talk:Newyorkbrad: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:10, 3 February 2015 editNewyorkbrad (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators45,502 edits just for laughs: response← Previous edit Revision as of 15:15, 4 February 2015 edit undoVynwood (talk | contribs)46 edits A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove messageTag: WikiLoveNext edit →
Line 95: Line 95:
(To unsubscribe, remove your username ].) 03:11, 2 February 2015 (UTC) (To unsubscribe, remove your username ].) 03:11, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Harej@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Meetup/DC/Invite/List&oldid=643292200 --> <!-- Message sent by User:Harej@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Meetup/DC/Invite/List&oldid=643292200 -->

== A barnstar for you! ==

{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ]
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Barnstar of Diligence'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | I have been following the GamerGate arbcom process, and through it your participation has always struck me as thoughtful and rational with well-reasoned statements supporting your choices (far above and beyond every other arb). With the size of the case, it's fitting that this should be the last one you sit through as arb.

Conversely I am disappointed that so many external parties are blasting the outcome, but the fact that both of the opposing external parties involved seem to disapprove just goes to show that the decision was probably the right one! ] (]) 15:15, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
|}

Revision as of 15:15, 4 February 2015

This is Newyorkbrad's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Archiving icon
Archives

Index of archives



This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Arrow's impossibility theorem

Arrow's impossibility theorem is one of the most elegant theories in econmics. In summary, it say that no voting system can distinguish between three candidates perfectly, such that if a every person prefer candidate "better," to candidate "worse," candidate worse cannot win, and the order in which votes are counted is irrelevant, and that no voter has all the votes.

Because this applies to every voting system, it also applies to arbcom. If you were to switch your vote on 4.2 NorthBySouthBaranof admonished from oppose to support, 4.1, which you also oppose, but is passing and more severe than 4.2 would fail.

In effect, because you are "opposing" both, you are, in effect, supporting 4.1 vs 4.2. I just thought you might want to be aware of this. Hipocrite (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

PS: My statement about vote counting order is insufficient, but the only relevant condition here. Hipocrite (talk) 17:20, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

I'll take another look at this. I'm well aware of Arrow's Theorem and vote-counting problems. I may write an essay about its relevance to wiki on my wikiblog sometime, and I've been meaning to write up a discussion of its application in the U.S. Supreme Court since the first time I read the chapter of Super Chief about Bell v. Maryland. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:41, 26 January 2015 (UTC)


It would be nice if ArbCom recognized that a plurality vote for a "finding of fact" does not carry the same final weight as a simple plurality vote on an actual sanction of any sort. The vote needed for an actual sanction should be greater than that needed for a finding of fact, which is generally not highly debated in practice by the members. And I still think someone who speaks normal English should rewrite the boilerplate invariably attached to every decision. Cheers. Collect (talk) 21:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Actually, someone (I think it might have been Rich Farmbrough) did a nice job at rewriting some of the boilerplate principles on a PD talkpage a couple of cases ago. I leave to my successors the task of improving on and adopting some of his suggestions. No comment on what it might be "nice if ArbCom recognized," since I ain't gonna work 'round there no 'more, except to note that adopting a sanction requires a majority and not a mere plurality. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
And still "simple majority" seems a tad weak when it comes to major blocks or bans - on a current case, a majority may be six or fewer, which seems to be less than we would require at AN/I for a block or ban <g>. Collect (talk) 23:08, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Saturday February 7 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon

Saturday February 7 in NYC: Black Life Matters Editathon

You are invited to join us at New York Public Library's Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture for our upcoming editathon, a part of the Black WikiHistory Month campaign (which also includes events in Brooklyn and Westchester!).

12:00pm - 5:00 pm at NYPL Schomburg Center, 515 Malcolm X Boulevard (Lenox Avenue), by W 135th St

The Misplaced Pages training and editathon will take place in the Aaron Douglas Reading Room of the Jean Blackwell Hutson Research and Reference Division, with a reception following in the Langston Hughes lobby on the first floor of the building at 5:00pm.

We hope to see you there!--Pharos (talk) 06:03, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

just for laughs

I see you don't really "do" userboxen (I use only a few myself) but knowing you as I do I thought you'd appreciate this. Note the bananas. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:14, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

This user was on the English Misplaced Pages's Arbitration Committee.


I previously shared this within the Committee, but my views on leaving ArbCom might best be reflected in this video reflecting the recent transfer of the Chief Judge position on the Ninth Circuit from Judge Kozinski to Judge Thomas, beginning around 27:50.

Less flippantly, I'd like to thank everyone in the community who entrusted me with this responsibility for three terms, and I look forward to doing other work around the wiki. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:05, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

As one of them (not from the beginning, as my user is only 5 years old, and when a friend told me he was an arb once I had no idea what that meant), and also as someone who isn't into userboxes: I was asked about one, and here it is for you, as a reminder
This user has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian.

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:15, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

  • I went hunting for a suitable barnstar but none of them seemed suitably battle-scarred or said "congratulations on surviving". Thank you for your many years of service, Newyorkbrad; I hope you'll stick around and work on some other things as well. I'm sorry that your last case had to be such a messy one. Risker (talk) 02:10, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Congrats from me too. :-) On the Star Trek matter, I left a note on the ANI thread. I'm just popping by here because I left several pings in that edit and I wasn't sure if all those I pinged got the pings. No worries if you did get it, but there are several pings I should follow up from a while ago that I got no answer to if there is some problem with pings. Carcharoth (talk) 23:06, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I did get those pings and appreciated them. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

"Courtesy Blanking" of entire Gamergate case

Would you please review the "courtesy blanking" by Guerillero of over 1.8 million bytes of community evidence and debate in the recently completed Gamergate case and, if you feel such a draconian step was unmeriited, work towards its restoration? LINK Thank you, —Tim Davenport /// Carrite (talk) 21:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

I will leave this for the current arbitrators and clerks to address. However, please note that even when a page is "courtesy blanked," the entire contents are still available in the page history in case there is reason to look at them. Courtesy blanking a page is by no means the same thing as deleting the page. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:02, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Museum hacks and museum edits

Hello there!

Upcoming events:

  • February 6–8: The third annual ArtBytes Hackathon at the Walters Art Museum! This year Wikimedia DC is partnering with the Walters for a hack-a-thon at the intersection of art and technology, and I would like to see Wikimedia well represented.
  • February 11: The monthly WikiSalon, same place as usual. RSVP on Meetup or just show up!
  • February 15: Wiki Loves Small Museums in Ocean City. Mary Mark Ockerbloom, with support from Wikimedia DC, will be leading a workshop at the Small Museum Association Conference on how they can contribute to Misplaced Pages. Tons of representatives from GLAM institutions will be present, and we are looking for volunteers. If you would like to help out, check out "Information for Volunteers".

I am also pleased to announce events for Wikimedia DC Black History Month with Howard University and NPR. Details on those events soon.

If you have any questions or have any requests, please email me at james.hare@wikimediadc.org.

See you there! – James Hare

(To unsubscribe, remove your username here.) 03:11, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diligence
I have been following the GamerGate arbcom process, and through it your participation has always struck me as thoughtful and rational with well-reasoned statements supporting your choices (far above and beyond every other arb). With the size of the case, it's fitting that this should be the last one you sit through as arb.

Conversely I am disappointed that so many external parties are blasting the outcome, but the fact that both of the opposing external parties involved seem to disapprove just goes to show that the decision was probably the right one! Vynwood (talk) 15:15, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

User talk:Newyorkbrad: Difference between revisions Add topic