Zoloft plans to increase the number of mods

[Kraken]

https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 54#p350878

We will probably be looking at adding another person to the mod staff at some point. TBH, we need more than one.

What a joke.

As you can see from that very thread, the challenge for a Mod of that site is being fine with looking the other way when a shitheel like Elinruby is dehumanizing a new member. Doing a passable impression of the very thing they are objecting to being called on Wikipedia by said new member. If it even happened. A dirty little anti-Semite. Calling him/he persons "it" and wanting to tattoo their crimes on their forehead. And that's what Elin did after the guy has registered to answer to their trolling. Dear sweet Elin, who likes to give the impression they don't have an -ist or -obic bone in their identity challenged body, but who happily called me a fascist on that forum on far less evidence than this manifestation of their hateful self. The staff did nothing. Not a damn thing. And that sure as shit 'ain't because they lack the manpower.

To be an WO Mod you have to be fine with it being claimed the site has rules and is a broad church of opinion, but when you get down to it, your job is to protect the shitheels and ensure those with insufficiently left wing views to fit in on a website that is incredibly even less tolerant of mainstream right wing opinions than Wikipedia, are kept on their place. Not allowed to fight back. Banned if the shitheel's furious anger and jealous rage induced by your mere perfectly polite presence offering indisputable facts and reasoned opinion, ruin the forum for everyone. People who can behave and do not complain even when it becomes clear they're not going to be allowed to meet fire with fire. They're not going to be allowed to stick their boot on the neck of a shitheel like Elibruby and give them a good hard dose of the truth. The world as it is, not how Wikipedia and their Wikipediocracy allies wish it to be.

That's your job as a Wikipediocracy Mod.

Good luck! There's a reason people will target you, should it become clear you're happy to do the job even after you have learned what it's really all about. No different to the moral justification for targeting certain Wikipedia Administrators. If you know what you're doing and you keep on doing it, then don't complain when the night gets dark and full of terror.

Do not even apply for this role if you're planning on not holding Ekinruby's face to a crematorium oven door to force them to admit that Catherine, Princess of Wales is not in any way, shape or form, somehow culpable for the torrent of mindless conspiracy theories that targeted her (amplified by Wikipedia) just because one day she decided to marry a guy whose great great great grandfather was awesome at killing.

Even then, with her skin melting off their face, their deeply prejudices won't allow them to admit the truth. That they are justifying hateful behaviour in all likelihood simply because they can't get over the fact their bog trotting ancestors had their faces ground into the mud by an English King doing the Lord's work.

The blood fueds of the left. The emnities. The jealousies. They run deep. They band together in like minded groups seeking the protection of weak minded benefactors. Kindly Uncles. Sad former communists dripping in white guilt as their new found cause. People dying to get anything from Molly White. Anything. Even just the chance to smell her hair at a WikiConference.

A place you would never even be allowed to set foot in if you dared suggest the government, judiciary, police and citizenry of a progressive very left leaning democratic country like Scotland has, now that the malignant forces of woke have been corrected and purged, finally got the right idea when it comes to balancing the competing needs of free speech and dignity of individuals in the modern world. The neutral point of view. A peaceful consensus. Legitimacy once more.

A shitheel is what a shitheel does.

A Chief Secretary is what a Chief Secretary does.

There's always a "#1" prole.

But the "#1" prole always knows there are others he isn't allowed to attack.

The Tattooists. The most loyal. The most useful. The most terrifying (to the weak and powerless).

For as long as Zoloft is in charge, your only job as a Mod will be to eat the shit that is rightfully his to eat.

This has been a preview of such things.

Do not test the Tyranny.

Our hearts are more pure and our lasers more powerful.

You are fine where you are, candidates. It is the natural order of things at a far left website. A small membership overseen by a tiny triad of powerful Members who change the truth at a whim. At their convenience. Like everyone else is just that stupid. Chief Secretary Zoloft, Chief of Police Jake, Chief of Secret Police Tarantino. And of course, the "#1" prole. The face of the movement. It's principles writ large in their shitheel ways. Loyalty, unquestioning and never ending loyalty. V. Biting everyone except his Masters and their other shitheels, who he cowers before, like a puppy.

There are clearly no vacancies for anyone planning on doing any real work on that site. Moral work. Moderation of their evil intent. The steely eyed pursuit of the stated mission of exposure, which necessarily cannot accommodate any sacred cows or untouchable topics, lest ye be seen as part of the problem not part of the solution. The final solution.

In all likelihood, this is a call for a patsy, a fall guy for one of their clandestine missions. Maybe they're planning on getting the Daily Telegraph banned as a reliable source on Wikipedia. You know how these people roll, how they think, what drives them. Their ideology. If you really are their kind guy, you'd already have power. V power. You wouldn't need a tin badge.

But if you really need it, I suggest you cover it. Shiny things attract my attention real well from up here at fifty thousand feet.

[ericbarbour]

As a former WPO moderator, I will make a side bet with you: those idiots will have great difficulty finding anyone willing to put up with the Zoloft/Tarantino/Jake "Management Style". Of being intolerant of outside opinions, sneaky, furtive, paranoid, and stabby-backy. And not tolerating "doxing" unless it's someone THEY feel it's a "bad person", like Nihonjoe (who they went after partly because he's friendly with Sad Puppy members and Orson Scott Card; the COI editing was just the "coatrack").

Whoever does take the job will almost certainly be a longtime Wikipedia insider, unidentified. Completing the site's conversion into another propaganda outlet for the cult. They forced out any of the original serious critics from Wikipedia Review (Hersh, Geady, Kohs, BluAardvark, Kumioko, Cla68, me and a few others) already. Anybody with actual principles, conservative or "uncertain/undependable/we can't pigeonhole them" politics, and anyone with a serious-as-a-heart-attack bone to pick with insider Wiki-bastards, is extremely unwelcome. All that remains is Vigina, the "court jester".

No one else is left to object to whatever stupidity Wee Billy and Co. wish to do.

[boredbird]

Beeblebrox?

[ericbarbour]

Beeblebrox?

He's certainly got enough antisocial tendencies; I suspect he's also stupid enough to take the job.

[Kraken]

Beebelbrox is a lazy egotist. Not a chance he would apply. Too much work. No opportunity for self-fellating his-self.

But if he did, they are definitely stupid enough to say yes at this stage of their moral decline. Their embrace of unreality. In a world where I'm a fascist incel lunatic, Beeblerox can definitely be trustworthy, dedicated and self-less. A world where cars chase dogs, pigs walk on hind legs and two year olds are capable of expressing a gender identity.

I don't think they have ever said no to the prick. Nor sent one word of criticism his way. Anyone got a single example? And from someone who can still stand to be in that place?

Beeblebrox is the only Arbitrator ever to be suspended, and it was absolutely typical of the man to waste everyone's time filing an appeal that was doomed to fail because he had zero grounds. It showed he's either too stupid not to see that, or the kind of person who does, but does it anyway.

He no doubt still thinks he did nothing wrong, and laughably was upholding some lofty principle and doing the right thing. Even though that's now two ArbComs that have unanimously voted to say he can't be trusted given his inability to see ways to do the right thing that don't also involve doing the wrong thing.

The man is so devoid of principle and integrity, such a poor example of an Arbitrator, he sat back and said nothing while his Wikipediocracy buddies campaigned to have the two Arbitrators who voted to suspend him lose their seats in the next election. The man said nothing, even though this pathetic protest would achieve nothing in the sense it still left 10+ Arbitrators who think he should be suspended in power. And if it had succeeded, we would now be looking at an ArbCom with a man as unfit to serve as Robert McClennon on it.

This absolute shit for brains would rather see ArbCom destroyed than accept he's an untrustworthy dick who is so desperate for friends he happily gossiped on WO as a sitting Arbitrator about ArbCom business and smeared involved parties in both real time and after the event.

Even now I bet he refuses to accept the indisputable truth of the matter. That his inglorious suspension rests on a pattern of behaviour seen across multiple affairs with multiple complainant. Not the one single thing he can, if you squint real hard and disengage your brain, be said to have done the right thing or even be fighting the cloak of secrecy. That's Beeblebrox. As incapable of accepting the truth and as incapable of dealing with criticism as any of the other shitheels sheltering under the skirts of Unce Zoloft, suckling at the appendage he told them gives life affirming truth milk.

You frankly have to be quite the asshole to become one of the few people who is so bad Newyorkbrad feels the need to go on public record about your assholery. He doesn't like to do that, because he knows there are very bad people out there who remember stuff like that and use it to grind those people's faces into the dirt. Nobody on WO obviously, they lack the moral compass to want to grind a man like Beeblebrox into the dirt for his crimes, particularly those done against people who lack the power of influence to defend themselves.

And even before you consider all his many personality flaws, it shouldn't happen on general principle. It would be absolutely disgusting to pretend you are running a Wikipedia criticism site but you have no problem with a Wikipedia advanced rights holders having the power to censor what is posted there.

But since they're not really running a criticism site, and since they refuse to see the truth of Beeblebrox, they really might be stupid enough to do it. The mark of the man will now be seen in how he ludicrously declares that he would be flattered, but he couldn't possibly stand, for reasons that make no sense. The mark of WO will be how nobody there will have the guts to call him an egotistical moron for it (or even realise that's what he is).

[boredbird]

Beeblebrox is the only Arbitrator ever to be suspended,

Several arbitrators were kicked off or even banned.

[ericbarbour]

Several arbitrators were kicked off or even banned.

Correct, and evidence is difficult to find. I could rattle off a long list of arbitrators who quit during their terms, were forced out, and/or were later banned. Some of the worst things happened pre-2008, when Wales still ran Arbcom like a private security squad.

If Kelly Martin ever shows up on this forum, ask HER about her brief time as an arbitrator.

As Kelly Martin remarked in 2011[1]:

"Being an arb is tough, especially if you try to actually do the job as advertised, instead of being a political gameplayer. And even if you don't you're still a target for all the nutters involved in Wikipedia."

"The fact that the job is so hard and has so few meaningful rewards is one of the reasons I'm deeply suspicious of anyone who consents to do it, and especially anyone who consents to do it twice. It's my considered opinion at this point that accepting (or seeking) the role more than once, absent exceptional circumstances, is evidence of some form of psychosocial malfunction. The first time can just be due to being misled, and staying "on post" can merely be due to a strong sense of duty, but willfully seeking to reup after having learned what the job really is is fairly clearly evidence of something being not right with you."

"The simple fact is that no sane person remains in close association with Wikipedia for long. Its community environment is deeply dysfunctional and only those who are dysfunctional themselves can thrive in that environment. Sane people flee such places once they realize what they're up against, or at best stay on the peripheries, editing uncontroversially and ducking whenever they run into conflict."

More Kelly remarks from February 2015, after yet another arbitration was "blanked as a courtesy"[2]:

"It has been my consistently held opinion for going on eight years now at least that the ArbCom should not publish detailed reasons, indeed any reasons at all, for why it chooses to discipline editors. There are sound reasons not to publish detailed decisions, and no good reason to publish them given that they insist that they are not bound by precedent. They should just announce that "Editor X is banned/restricted/admonished/etc." Any further details that need to be communicated to the parties should be communicated privately."

"The reason they don't is twofold: One, the Wikipedia community loves drama, and public show trials certainly generate a great deal of drama. Second, several early arbs (notably, James Forrester and Fred Bauder) had always wanted to be judges, and their participation in the early days of the Arbitration Committee allowed them to shape the culture of that body toward their personal desire to turn it into a faux High Court of Snootiness, and that's stuck ever since."

"I realize that my position on this is unpopular, especially with people who think they have a Right To Know what the ArbCom is doing. The thing is, you really don't. Wikipedia is not a civic right. The fact that the ArbCom pretends to act like a court of law makes people draw false equivalences with a court of law, and that leads them to believe that they should be entitled to the same rights that they would have were they in a court of law."

"A lot of the problems surrounding the ArbCom arise precisely because the ArbCom is so publicly visible and surrounds itself with so much pomp and circumstance. Not that there's anything to be done about it now, of course; you can't just turn back the clock on the accumulated weight of a dozen years of stupid."