Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dylan Flaherty (talk | contribs) at 03:41, 25 December 2010 (→Unrelated: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Conclusions

Yes, this was an obvious imposter, most likely the AfricaTruth/AfricanTruth person.

I'll leave you with a puzzle. Here are three recent statements made on Misplaced Pages. One comes from a respected admin who's notable enough to have a biographical article, another from a famous lawyer who likewise has a biographical article, and one was the statement that got an old Irish man indefinitely banned as a menace to Misplaced Pages. See if you can match them up without cheating.

1. "I see overwhelming ANI again with lots of lies."
2. "Thank you so much for piling on. I will give your opinion exactly as much weight as I have always given it."
3. "Are you an idiot, or only pretending to be one?"

What makes one worse than the other? Here's a hint: two of them are heavily involved in conservative politics, while one is just an ordinary guy whose lifelong conservativism is tempered with principle, piety and kindness.

In my short time here, I believe I've done much good, but I've also twice been falsely accused of being a sock, banned from interacting with an unstable individual who stalked my edits and banned from even talking about the idea of making Sarah Palin slightly more neutral. Entirely by "coincidence", before the Palin ban could expire so I could launch an RfC, many of the same people who have opposed my edits all along managed to pile on to an AN/I report to have my ban broadened to the entire site and extended indefinitely. And, of course, it's now a certainty that any number of people who, in the future, support some of the changes I've made will be falsely identified as my sock and permanently blocked.

I'm told that it would be easy to get the indefinite block removed: all I'd have to do is lie. I would need to play a particular role, where I'm contrite, admit guilt, and promise never to sin again. I should throw myself at the feet of the lynch mob and beg them to take me back, accepting onerous conditions that would prevent me from actually doing anything upon my return. I think it should be very clear why that would require undermining my own integrity and would be entirely unacceptable.

Misplaced Pages gets the editors it deserves. I'll leave it at that. Dylan Flaherty 18:40, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Just for the record, I did leave an uncivil comment on your talk history. I'm sorry, I'm having a bad day (got into an argument with my own mother on Christmas Eve, dealing with shenanigans on here). It's not an excuse. I just want to clarify: what I meant by my recent comment (which you don't have to read, or you can if you want, it was short), is that as long as you continue to fail to see the problems with your editing, then your editing will not be constructive to Misplaced Pages as a whole. I'd even be glad to take you under my wing to help establish a pattern that the community will take, and I'm sure there are other long time editors and/or admins who would do the same. Please just understand that the problem does lie with your current editing style; it is not with a cabal of careless administrators. But it can be remedied, if you're willing to put aside the old way of doing things. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:26, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Magog, yes, you called me a dick. It was uncivil, perhaps even a personal attack, and nothing much happened. Likewise, when Rubin called that guy an idiot or when THF called me a liar three times, nothing happened. When I spoke sharply, but not quite uncivilly, to a woman whose only interactions with me have involved piling on AN/I reports and demanding more of my blood, I was banned.

Really, how can I take any of this seriously? Where is your credibility? Ban Rubin and THF, then talk to me. Oh, wait, you can't or won't or both. Given this, there's nothing for me to apologize for, nothing for me to promise, nothing for me to say. If my supposed failure to be collegial, as Becritical puts it, were actually reason enough for a permanent ban, then Misplaced Pages would be deserted, and you wouldn't be here, either. Obviously, the stated reason is not accurate. There's a lot more to it, or really, a lot less. Dylan Flaherty 01:59, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry to see you accept this lying down. I do support you not editing right now, but only because you tend to engage other quarrelsome editors, who equally deserve to be banned, in their quarrelsome behavior. This behavior doesn't further the articles, it just makes things unpleasant, and takes up all the time we could be editing articles. In other words, you do fail to be collegial sometimes. But I simply cannot see that you would have to give up your integrity to get unbanned. All you need to do is what I recommended over at AN/I, which is to 1) agree to try to be civil and collegial and 2) try to notice that people, even POV pushers, often have real points to make. If admitting to having acted in an uncollegial way or see other's valid points would be to compromise your integrity, then really you don't belong at Misplaced Pages. But I think you do, and since you have a good grasp of policy and are an energetic editor, I really hate to see you go. BTW, you are probably a sock of someone or have other experience, else you wouldn't have been so good at wiki editing right off . BE——Critical_{__Talk} 00:52, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

As you said, I was banned for angering people who deserve to be banned, but they were not banned. I would have say that my integrity is intact but Misplaced Pages's is not. I will not even pretend that this ban is anything but the most ridiculous bit of petty injustices.

As for being a sock, I'd hate to break this to you, but nobody is just a sock; they have to be a sock of someone else, and there is nobody else. The reality is that I was dragged to AN/I over and over again, until my mere presence was excuse enough to ban me. And, although I worked hard and stuck my neck out to help you, you joined in the lynching. What do you have to say for yourself? Dylan Flaherty 01:59, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I "joined in the lynching" in order to give you a way out, which I outlined above. I was under the impression you dragged others to AN/I a lot? And I know Misplaced Pages can be unjust... which is what I said above. It's unjust that you were banned and others not. BE——Critical_{__Talk} 02:06, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Except that I don't have a way out. The only way the ban will be removed is if I play the game, which I am physically incapable of doing. I will not lie. Dylan Flaherty 02:15, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Please read WP:GAB for your way out, Dylan. Thoroughly. Also see WP:Blocks and bans: this is a redirect page that exists mostly to show that a block is not a true ban. You are currently blocked, not banned. If "playing the game" (i.e. editing WP) is "lying", you never would have been here to begin with. Right? Using this page as a soapbox with no real intention of getting unblocked usually leads to revocation of talk page privs. That's just how it normally goes in most cases. Play by the rules or you're out: not an unfair request of anyone, really. Doc talk 02:27, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I would accept an unblock, but not by lying, so it's not going to happen. Dylan Flaherty 02:59, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't contest that if you deserve a block/ban, there are a bunch of others around here that also deserve one. But I do say that you were blocked for your actions, not the actions of others. If you had been polite and collegial during whatever drama you were involved in, didn't edit war, and listened to others when they had a technically correct point no matter how much you disagreed with their overall outlook, I don't believe you'd be blocked now. That's what WP editors are supposed to do, and that's all you have say you'll do to get unblocked. BE——Critical_{__Talk} 02:40, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Just to restate what Doc has to say; playing by the rules refers to the manner in which you interact with others not the things you have to say. Other Wikipedians are very tolerant of differing viewpoints. What other Wikipedians are not tolerant of is attitudes and behaviors which are beligerant, obnoxious, or rude. You can hold, and express, any opinion you wish, so long as in doing so you don't behave poorly. --Jayron32 02:43, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I believe that the examples above disprove your claim. Incivility is just fine for some. For others, different standards apply. It would be great if Misplaced Pages actually enforced its own rules with some level of consistency, but that's simply not the case. Dylan Flaherty 02:50, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

One of the important pillars of WP. Doc talk 02:48, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

See above. I was more civil than THF or Rubin, but they're still standing. Dylan Flaherty 02:50, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Look Dylan, Misplaced Pages is NOT a civil system (not that those are fair). You don't have civil rights here. Misplaced Pages is only as fair as the members of its community are in a particular case. Accept it or stop editing. Just be glad you don't live in WP in real life. And be surprised, because it took you this long to learn this. Which means, WP is surprisingly good considering what I just said. But if you choose to stay, remember that no one is interested in what others did, but in what you did. They're judging you relative to what should be, and perhaps to the overall norm, rather than relative to those who were uncivil to you. BE——Critical_{__Talk} 03:11, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'll call your bluff. I can "1) agree to try to be civil and collegial and 2) try to notice that people, even POV pushers, often have real points to make." and yet I'm still banned. Dylan Flaherty 03:17, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

If another administrator thinks the level of my overall incivility raised to that of Dylan's overall, in the interest of fairness I will happily submit to a block. In fact, I request that someone block me. Now I haven't read your comments, Dylan, so that's a real big gamble for me. I only have to say I didn't call you a dick, I simply referred you to a section in that essay which applies to life in general. Also, I recommend taking some time off; I don't say that to patronize you, but just because I can clearly see the WP:MASTADON effect (which to be fair, we all have). Magog the Ogre (talk) 03:18, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Magog, I looked in the history and found where you said some unkind things and then reverted yourself. The self-revert is enough for me; a block would be ridiculous. Dylan Flaherty 03:36, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

As for the rest, "recommending" that I take some time off would be more significant if my block were not indefinite. :-) Dylan Flaherty 03:36, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Unrelated

Not that it necessarily matters at this point, but Roscelese is correct here. Dylan Flaherty 03:41, 25 December 2010 (UTC)