Vigilant!!!

For serious discussion of the "major" forum for Wikipedia criticism and how it fails.
User avatar
Abd
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:22 pm
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Vigilant!!!

Post by Abd » Sun Feb 02, 2020 3:39 am

Again, thanks to Vigilant for the incoming link.
  • Sucks is a forum for genuine criticism of Wikipedia and the critical communiy, the Treehouse is a Discord server, much more efficient for chat than phpBB fora, and, as well, there is wikitop.cc. Eric, with high experience and skill as a writer, is welcome in all three places, where real people may communicate, with some facilitation to avoid civility-destroying flame wars, without censorship. Yes, that is possible. The Discord server is not managed by me, though I have staff status. Invitation.
  • The former excessive tolerance on Sucks is no more. Because of this, with no examples -- quite the same as the old Offwiki claims -- I've been called a "dictator," but, in fact, I merely stood for basic civility, not as a baseball bat to squash enemies with, but for the promotion of communication. Vigilant hates this with a passion. It has become easy and quite satisfying to handle this troll.
  • Arguing with trolls is useless, I suggest Corbett needs to learn this. There are far more effective ways of handling trolling.
  • Trolls, having become skilled at manipulating ordinary humans, will demand that you do what would actually be best for you, knowing that the natural "avoiding domination" survival response will kick in. I've been demonstrating alternatives, and it's obvious that Vigilant considers this a threat, he is on WPO with links within minutes of a post here.
  • Back to what was here when Vigilant linked:
Well, Corbett has explained some more:
I do share one thought expressed on Sucks, which is that Vigilant is "a troll, pure and simple, and he's tolerated on Wikipediocracy for the entertainment value".
But my lasting aversion to Sucks stems from the rants against me made by Crowsnest that were allowed to stand. And to be perfectly honest I feel much the same way about the rants against me here on Wikipediocracy made by Vigilant that are allowed to stand.
So an open letter to Corbett:

I see similarities between you and Kumioko.

Crowsnest was not allowed to continue, but there had been a strong reluctance to block a content creator, who sometimes wrote well. The irony here is manifest.

Sucks had suffered from lack of active moderation. JuiceBeetle pointed to some problems, so Barbour invited him to mod, to vast derision from Vigilant and others on WPO, plus, of course, contempt from CrowsNest and Graaf Statler.

He's not a sock'em block'em kind of mod, and he displayed what I saw as excessive patience. I don't mind that if it can be balanced by others. In the end, there was a genuine consensus on Sucks, among the admins and mods: CrowsNest could not be allowed to continue his rants. He was defiant. Like you, Eric, on Wikipedia. The result was in both cases predictable. And the same with Graaf.

(And I'm not making you wrong for defying them, only pointing to the obvious.)

It seems clear at this point, WPO is not about to give up their favorite attack tyranno-skunk, though I suspect it's coming in the future.

Yet you somehow are not so averse to WPO, you are there commenting and have been for a long time. You don't have to give up WPO to comment here.

It's actually work to document what Vigilant does. From doing it, Vigilant's character has become crystal clear to me, including his vulnerabilities and obsessions. Well-presented, this could make it clear to others, and it could start to impact WPO's reputation. I don't have a crystal ball, but there are possibilities, and I can tell you that documenting what Vig does is vastly more satisfying than complaining about it, whining, and the rest. It is empowering to see him helplessly whining -- or snarling but nobody cares.

You could help. It is very rare, unfortunately, for collaboration and cooperation to actually take place. There have been some examples. The book wiki on the Logic Museum, but that has suffered from overcontrol and I don't know what else. Still, there is a lot of content that we will be releasing. You could help, as a writer.

What's stopping you?

I was banned from WPO in 2014 for almost exactly what you are doing now. I considered it a liberation.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 2082
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 90 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Vigilant!!!

Post by ericbarbour » Sun Feb 02, 2020 5:31 am

Abd wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 3:39 am
Crowsnest was not allowed to continue, but there had been a strong reluctance to block a content creator, who sometimes wrote well. The irony here is manifest.
Agreed. Crow was attacking people I had asked to join. And I admit to being too tolerant of outright maniacs and trolly types in the past. (Been very distracted and not able to watch this forum closely.) Crow has not been back since December and I doubt he ever will return. Even if he did I suspect the present mods would toss him.

I'd love it if "Vigina" showed up here to argue his case--but that will never happen. Like Wikipedia purging its crazier administrators and trying to "legitimize" itself, the heat death of the universe will probably happen first.
It's actually work to document what Vigilant does. From doing it, Vigilant's character has become crystal clear to me, including his vulnerabilities and obsessions. Well-presented, this could make it clear to others, and it could start to impact WPO's reputation. I don't have a crystal ball, but there are possibilities, and I can tell you that documenting what Vig does is vastly more satisfying than complaining about it, whining, and the rest. It is empowering to see him helplessly whining -- or snarling but nobody cares.
And you can't talk about this on Wikipediocracy openly. Not anymore.

This forum has had its problem users. ALL Wikipedia criticism forums have had problem users. I have been around long enough (2008) to remember that Wikipedia Review was an amazingly open and honest forum in dealing with WP abuses. People were rarely banned from WR. Then in 2012 Selina showed up and started actively causing problems. Since she was the sysop and DNS holder, she successfully ran WR into the ground. So many WR regulars went off, and what did they do? They started Wikipediocracy. And it worked decently well for the first few years. Then in 2014 the banninations started, and in 2015 the backstabbery became overwhelming. Vigina was present and probably partly responsible for all such backroom dealings.

But you can't talk about that on Wikipediocracy....why do these damn websites keep turning into little Church-of-Scientology style cults? I can see reasons for that on Wikipedia, they've tricked 2 generations of Internet users into trusting them blindly. There's far less reason for a forum to become a paranoiac cult-thing. It's only a forum for crissakes.

(Hmm, someone remind me to keep calling him "Vigina". Lol.)

User avatar
boredbird
Sucks Fan
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:24 am
Has thanked: 63 times
Been thanked: 28 times

Re: Vigilant!!!

Post by boredbird » Sun Feb 02, 2020 7:57 am

ericbarbour wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 5:31 am
.why do these damn websites keep turning into little Church-of-Scientology style cults?
Because they're run by sysops.

User avatar
Dysklyver
Sucks Critic
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:14 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Vigilant!!!

Post by Dysklyver » Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:07 am

boredbird wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 7:57 am
ericbarbour wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 5:31 am
.why do these damn websites keep turning into little Church-of-Scientology style cults?
Because they're run by sysops.
Every website is run by sysops, that in itself is not the reason. Instead I will suggest the reason is that nobody is being paid, so a particular type of person is being attracted. That type is the person who will do something for free because they believe in it, a cultist, an activist, someone with nothing better to do.
De facto globally banned on all Wikimedia sites. Editor of The Wiki Cabal. find me on the Wiki Treehouse Discord.

User avatar
Abd
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:22 pm
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Vigilant!!!

Post by Abd » Sun Feb 02, 2020 2:36 pm

ericbarbour wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2020 9:13 pm
Abd wrote:
Sat Feb 01, 2020 5:54 pm
Eric Corbett, where are you? I'm not going to burn my WPO access by pinging him myself, and I don't use WMF access because that would be a TOS violation, and I don't do that either. Does Eric have an account here?
I'll ask him but don't hold your breath. Tried to get Corbett here before, and the WPOites talked him out of it....
What amazes me is that he has given his reason as being the tolerance of CrowsNest here, and that's over. If there is some post he wants hidden or even deleted, he could ask. I don't get that the old Malleus is into collaborative content creation and curation. He obviously has the same objection about WPO. What, exactly, is the Big Deal? Are we street gangs? or high school cliques? My old Free Association/Delegable Proxy theory depended on the possibility of multiple top-level "meetings," with cross-membership, and it only takes a very few to belong to both to allow the structure to negotiate high consensus -- or delineate controversies clearly.

User avatar
Abd
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:22 pm
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Vigilant!!!

Post by Abd » Sun Feb 02, 2020 2:57 pm

Yet again, thanks for the incoming link, Vigilant. Every little bit helps.
  • "Sucks" did not declare Jihad, nor did I. In Islamic law, jihad must be declared by the sovereign. This is why independent terrorism is forbidden. Rather, there is a broader meaning to jihad, as reflected in the quite decent lede of the Wikipedia article.
  • However, I am operating under the rules of war, which legitimates what may otherwise be prohibited. In ordinary discussion, attempting to anger a participant is trolling and rightfully rejected in sane communities. However, ordinary discussion is not possible with dedicated trolls, so trolling them can become legitimate, and I've given, now, two examples. For the very same reason that trolls troll -- because it works -- trolling the troll can work, it can create exposure. The troll wants to make the target angry, knowing that anger leads to foolish action. Responding without anger angers the troll, this can be seen in the Reddit discussions. Stating fact is not an expression of anger and may or may not be trolling, it depends on context.
  • However, I have not only stated fact, I have also stated interpretations, and specifically certain ones that I expected would trigger Vigilant. To put it in his language, "Dance, monkey, dance!" And dance he did, posting maybe a hundred comments on Reddit. and now back to what was here when Vigilant posted the link:
ericbarbour wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 5:31 am

(Hmm, someone remind me to keep calling him "Vigina". Lol.)
There is a little bit of troll in you, Eric, or more than a little. That's sexist trolling, unless it is merely dumping (which is human and allowed, if limited). I prefer "Vigilant," because he is ever vigilant for any shit to throw. Poetlister's tag is worth repeating:
Nonentities, claiming to be vigilant, are jealous of people with real achievements. They proxy for banned user Timothy Usher, using his dubious claims in vain attempts to belittle them.
And now this Vigilante has been doing the same with the claims of the Smith brothers.

Within limits, trolling trolls is allowed in my universe. However, it's dangerous. Generally it is better to simply stay away from haters. But if everyone stays away except other haters or those who enjoy the spectacle, the haters and enablers take over. So there is a collective responsibility.

In the real world, this is jihad, explicitly limited and contained. Always, in legitimate jihad, peace is the goal, but protection is necessary for survival.

User avatar
boredbird
Sucks Fan
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:24 am
Has thanked: 63 times
Been thanked: 28 times

Re: Vigilant!!!

Post by boredbird » Sun Feb 02, 2020 4:57 pm

Dysklyver wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 10:07 am
boredbird wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 7:57 am
ericbarbour wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 5:31 am
.why do these damn websites keep turning into little Church-of-Scientology style cults?
Because they're run by sysops.
Every website is run by sysops
Nytimes.com is not run by sysops though I guess they must have some.
Abd wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 2:57 pm
Poetlister's tag is worth repeating:
Nonentities, claiming to be vigilant, are jealous of people with real achievements. They proxy for banned user Timothy Usher, using his dubious claims in vain attempts to belittle them.
And now this Vigilante has been doing the same with the claims of the Smith brothers.
I agree, it's a lot like the smears against Poetlister. You kind of remind me of Poetlister but without that sandwich.

User avatar
Abd
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:22 pm
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Vigilant!!!

Post by Abd » Sun Feb 02, 2020 6:18 pm

I worked with Poetlister on Wikiversity, and argued against his global ban applying to Wikiversity, if local consensus was for allowing him to continue there. I actually argued that it was safer -- much safer -- to allow that, because he would then have a WMF account with regular activity, visible to stewards, making it far more difficult for him to sock elsewhere, and doing useful work on WV. However, the 'pedians on Wikiversity argued that a "community ban" should be respected, the hell with local autonomy (even though earlier WV had defied Jimbo and stewards, successfully). So what happened? Poetlister created a new clandestine account and became a Wikiversity full custodian (sysop) and was running for 'crat when tagged. The punitive attitude of the WMF community created more disruption.

Poetlister is a cut above the usual 'pediot. At least one cut, maybe more. I would certainly welcome him here and the real critic community can form, with consensus-generating mechanisms.

User avatar
Abd
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:22 pm
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 41 times

Re: Vigilant!!!

Post by Abd » Sun Feb 02, 2020 8:40 pm

Again, brilliant. Vigilant's latest comment on the Sucks is going down WPO member thread:
Do I state the obvious? Okay, since you twist my arm....
  1. I'm not sad, at all. Insane depends on point of view, but, yes, in ordinary language, I'm old. So lets call it 1.5/3, but only on the first words!
  2. Impotent would imply some potent purpose, but there was no "threat," just an offhand comment in an important topic.
  3. The possible book is only that. Threats are potent or impotent, but not even being a threat, "impotent" is just a troll word, as we expect from Vigilant.
  4. The topic would be explicitly the question asked by Eric Barbour.
  5. The topic is difficult, it is essentially the problem of democracy, and I have over thirty years of writing into it. This was my expertise before I became a Wikipedian.
  6. Vigilant, however, wants us to pay no attention to the problem, because he is one who rides on system breakdown.
  7. He is an enemy of humanity, deserving of reprobation and isolation.
  8. That he has been tolerated has heavily damaged Wikipediocracy, compared to what it could have been.
  9. All this is becoming increasingly obvious from documenting his activities.
  10. He is obviously running scared, which he manifests by ramping up the crazy rhetoric.
but, yes, News at 11 or thereabouts.

User avatar
boredbird
Sucks Fan
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:24 am
Has thanked: 63 times
Been thanked: 28 times

Re: Vigilant!!!

Post by boredbird » Mon Feb 03, 2020 10:15 am

Abd wrote:
Sun Feb 02, 2020 6:18 pm
Poetlister is a cut above the usual 'pediot. At least one cut, maybe more. I would certainly welcome him here and the real critic community can form, with consensus-generating mechanisms.
If we can get Poetlister and friends posting over here that will increase participation by over 100% and also eliminate Sucks' gender gap. I don't think consensus will be a problem as they usually all agree.

Post Reply