Wikipedia Sucks!

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jo ... ulture-war

Funny as hell. As if it were "news", it took the Fram bannination to make this journalist notice that "The community that labors every day to polish the crown jewel of the collaborative internet fiercely guards its ability to police itself. As befits the most committed members of a project dedicated to decentralization and transparency, Wikipedians don’t take well to top-down decisions."

They don't like being the SUBJECTS of top-down rule, but they LOVE to dish it out to others.

Hilariously, he quotes from the Wikipediocracy thread about the Fram mess:
http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... 3&start=50
About time someone noticed that there are "critics of Wikipedia". Even if it's just a BuzzFeed article.

Yes, I sent Mr. Bernstein an offer of the book wiki notes.

Though the foundation does not disclose the nature of the offenses it investigates, it is widely held among Wikipedians that “office actions” apply only to extreme cases: child pornography, pedophilia advocacy, terrorism, realistic threats.

I didn't even had a traffic ticket the last 30 years! Not even for wrong parking my car!
This is really unbelievable and a perfect proof what a deformation a SanFanBan is with publications of a a doxxed users name! Under a CC license.

Well, I'd leave a comment if I had a throwaway Facebook account.

Perhaps someone can post it for me.....

Good writeup. Captures the horridness and dysfunction of it all well. Wikipedia has gotten away with not being held to public account like Twitter and Facebook for far too long.

If you want to speak to independent analysts (people who know the ins and outs but are not Wikipedians), consult the Wikipedia Sucks! forum.

It contains details like the fact ArbCom were told of the forthcoming ban in advance, recorded in their minutes of their regular conference call with the Foundation, and they raised no objections on behalf of the community. Nor did they apparently tell the Foundation what has since come out (or tell the community at the time) - that an ArbCom Case was being considered against Fram, filed by an Arbitrator if necessary, but for all sorts of reasons of dysfunction, as well as presumably the general cultural acceptance of Administrators like Fram, it never happened.

As I said, it's a pretty good write up. They clearly took their time, and it is a rare delight to see a piece by a journalist that doesn't make any obvious errors, and as critics you can only really point out what are in the grand scheme of things, minor issues.

This is why the community were afraid of the press getting hold of the story, as I explained here. They inevitably came out of it seriously badly. The better the quality of the piece, the worse they were going to look. And remember, this is Buzzfeed News, currently considered RS!

The WMF have been ghosting the community since the 21st, knowing the only work left that needed doing, was preparing this press release.......

In a statement to BuzzFeed News, the organization said it had leveled the ban to maintain "respect and civility" on the platform. "Uncivil behavior, including harassment, threats, stalking, spamming, or vandalism, is against our Terms of Use, which are applicable to anyone who edits on our projects," it said.

Revenge.

And this......

Fram declined to speak to BuzzFeed News for this story.

.....just nails him. Here was his chance to defend himself, put the entire experience into a narrative that persuades the public he has been treated unfairly or even fitted up, and he decided he couldn't. The man who always has a thousand words to defend himself, when faced with the prospect of committing that to a place where he would be literally going on the record, and he bottled it.

The Wikipedians seem intent on deluding themselves the at this was a good piece for them. Gonna cost the WMF in donations, and persuade potential reporters they can't trust Trust & Safety.

That's some strong weed they must be smoking.

SanFanBan gate? It can bring them down. Because if the press and the public ever found out how that SanFanBans in the era Alexander are used to mute people how where critical and right about there Brussels pirate adventure no one will give them one dollar or euro anymore. No one! They will end up broke and smeared with pitch and feathers.

Graaf Statler wrote:I didn't even had a traffic ticket the last 30 years! Not even for wrong parking my car

But you did make a few "legal threats". To those little bastards, a legal threat is worse than actually shooting someone in the head. Because it makes THEM look like the bad guys. Ha ha.

And remember, this is Buzzfeed News, currently considered RS!

And I predict that the little TINCers are plotting to "punish" Buzzfeed as we speak. Months from now, after this report is forgotten, some officious little twat will start a campaign to make BuzzFeed an "unreliable source", and add all BuzzFeed references/links to the spam blacklist. Classic Stalinism, make them into "unpersons".

ericbarbour wrote:

Graaf Statler wrote:I didn't even had a traffic ticket the last 30 years! Not even for wrong parking my car

But you did make a few "legal threats". To those little bastards, a legal threat is worse than actually shooting someone in the head. Because it makes THEM look like the bad guys. Ha ha.

If you say to them he listen, in this way you are breaking the law is that a legal threat according to them.

From 2009 on I pointed them on the fact there "knowlege collection" was according to the Dutch legalisation not build up as is requested by the Dutch copyright law. And I pointed them on the fact copyleft and our copyright law are conflicting and in the way they are collecting there "knowlege" it can even considered as a crime. Because they do it organised and that is the tricky part. That is what can change copyright violations in a criminal criminal offence.
And that was the "legal treat"

So, if I say to someone he listen my friend, you are driving with four tires without any profile and you are drunk and driving without a drivers license, you can get in trouble is that according to the brave Wikipedians a "legal threat". They simple have no idea what a legal threat is, a legal treat is when I say I sue you, and the rest is bullshit. A warning is simple not a legal threat and you simple don't have to break the law. And special not if you are a guest in a other country what WMF is.

I don't know about America, but here you simple don't have to pee and poop on the street and if you do so don't be surprised uncle Alex Voss takes the digital Roundup and spray it from your pirate flag till your feet on it. Because that is what has happend.

Europe is a mysterious continent what is the closest to the Byzantium empire with all that kings and knights and we have a long, long tradition of chopping heads of off pirates. But we do it in our way.
But let they never, never say they where not warned for a long, long time.