decided to merge his POV fork in.
Wikipedia Goop 3328 words of disorganized gibberish plus 4772 words of talk plus 7781 words in the AFD discussion/arguments plus a first deletion; plus the noise of a redirection; plus personal talk pages including this "encyclopedia quality" gem "by Joe/anyone can write an encyclopedia"A "minor-attracted person" is an individual who experiences sexual attraction to children or minors under the age of consent. This term is sometimes used as an alternative to the term "pedophile" or "paedophile," which is often associated with a clinical diagnosis and a particular pattern of behavior.
It's important to note that while minor attraction itself is not a crime, acting on these attractions is illegal and can cause harm to children. Many mental health professionals believe that minor attraction is a form of mental disorder that requires treatment, but there is still much debate and research in this area. Some individuals who experience minor attraction seek out support from mental health professionals or online communities, while others may struggle with feelings of shame and isolation. It's important to approach this topic with empathy and understanding, while also recognizing the need to protect children from harm.
The article goes on and on an on.. and there are many many articles on the similar topics that are equally or more whackedResponsibility is cool,
But there's more things in life,
Like getting your dick,
Rode all fucking night.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:22spears
Wikipedia is a total failure producing total Garbage.. it is being supplanted and will be less relevant within five yearsMinor-attracted person (abbreviated to MAP) is an umbrella term that covers a range of minor-related chronophilias,[1] including pedophilia and hebephilia.[2][3][4][5] The inclusion of ephebophilia under this category is controversial among some academics.[3][6]
This term, as well as its variants,[note 1] has been used in some scientific publications as a replacement for the words "pedophile" and "hebephile", as well as a catch-all for any group of people who feel sexually attracted to minors under the age of 17.[2] Further reasons for its usage include the lesser amount of negative connotation attached to it compared to other similar terms,[7] as well as the need of some mental health professionals and researchers to address persons who are attracted to minors in a way that does not imply that they have committed a sexual offense.[2][4]
.....
Jimbo as the ultimate authority
12) Jimbo Wales has ultimate authority on Wikimedia projects; as a foundation issue that is beyond debate. Though he is in many contexts an ordinary user whose edits and administrative actions are subject to change or reversal per normal community processes, when Jimbo acts with ultimate authority as project leader, every community member is expected and obliged to comply with his decisions, though discussion, criticism and request for reversal is permitted.
The Board of Trustees is empowered to review such decisions by Jimbo. Users who act in deliberate defiance of an authoritative action by Jimbo are subject to sanctions, including banning and desysopping, particularly temporary ("emergency") desysopping.
Passed 8-0 with 2 abstentions
Beyond the block they deleted the Gif and the explicit statements on talkYou have been blocked indefinitely from editing for what appears to be a pattern of uncomfortably pro-pedophilia edits, including an attempt to directly link the personal blog of a pedophile. I simply cannot see how this could be editing in good faith with the best interests of the encyclopedia. The GIF on your userpage is frankly not doing you any favors either.. PMC
curprev 08:48, 15 May 2023 GhostOfDanGurney talk contribs 1,684 bytes −207 Content clearly intended as sexually provocative (images and in some cases text) or to cause distress and shock that appears to have little or no project benefit or using Wikipedia only as a web host or personal pages or for advocacy, may be removed by any user (or deleted, subject to appeal at deletion review).
That's from here with the gist that it's gonna be another hell of a roller coaster ride.Prostasia have in the past threatened the peer-reviewed online academic journal the British Journal of Philosophy Sociology and History with court action after they published a paper critical of them. The BJPSH retracted the article without explanation. So I wouldn't be surprised to see Prostasia threatening Wikipedia, the WMF and EL-C after that. I think that this link is a repost of the paper in question.
IT GETS WORSE - the user who initiated the second ANI thread was later blocked by my "favorite" admin, only to be rapidly unblocked by Ritchie333. As usual, Bbb23's block was made with blatant disregard to policy, common sense, and basic human decency. Probably a UCoC violation too.ericbarbour wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2023 9:12 pmWhatever--22spears was permablocked earlier this morning. After another AFD and two other brutal screaming matches. The bastard has supporters too--fanatical supporters, spewing "reliable sources" and harrumphing like a gang of elderly white male perverts (which is quite possible for a WP editwar).
Stigma of Pedophilia is an extremely creepy article. Also under AFD after 3 weeks of 22spears grinding it to look like an apologia, and an attempt to "shame" society for finding those poor little oppressed pedophiles repellent.
The lunacy continues. With numerous socks of lunatics.
Also: I predict that Arbcom will go to absurd lengths to stay out of this. Because it really is that repellent. I could list some of their past half-baked decisions in this area.....it's Arbcom, of course it will be half-baked. They seem to prefer to avoid addressing pedophilic editing in general. This mess is most notorious--it almost tore Wikipedia apart in 2006. Jimbo stuck his stupid nose in, thus making it worse. Many of those administrators later quit WP. Surprising they haven't "blanked it as a courtesy" or some shit.
That is "ancient history" now. Jimbo was still regarded as the Inerrant God of Wiki. Bastards. Not anymore.Jimbo as the ultimate authority
12) Jimbo Wales has ultimate authority on Wikimedia projects; as a foundation issue that is beyond debate. Though he is in many contexts an ordinary user whose edits and administrative actions are subject to change or reversal per normal community processes, when Jimbo acts with ultimate authority as project leader, every community member is expected and obliged to comply with his decisions, though discussion, criticism and request for reversal is permitted.
The Board of Trustees is empowered to review such decisions by Jimbo. Users who act in deliberate defiance of an authoritative action by Jimbo are subject to sanctions, including banning and desysopping, particularly temporary ("emergency") desysopping.
Passed 8-0 with 2 abstentions
I wonder why Bbb23 is so keen on defending pedophiles? Could it be because he is one?Regardless of whether 22spears deserves to be blocked, the "comments" made by MPS are unacceptable. Here are some (without diffs):
"If you actually take the time to go through their contributions, it is clear that this user has been pushing a not very subtle pro-pedophile POV."
"This suggests to me that 22spears personally knows O'Carroll..."
"22spears Your use of someone's first name in your edits gave me the impression that you either know notorious pedophile Tom O'Carroll personally or are very familiar with them. That would explain why you refer to them by their first name, so familiarly. I didn't see you call Allyn Walker "Allyn" or James Cantor "James". It wasn't meant to be an accusation of wrongdoing. Since you seem very open to questions - do you know notorious pedophile Tom O'Carroll?"
---Bbb23 (talk) 00:31, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
Spot on.Shells-shells wrote: Someday a user will pass RfA and later turn out to be a robot. (Maybe it's already happened.) You read it here first: 21:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Alan Oscroft has BETRAYED his fellow pedophiles!!!Good block, and the block of MrPinkingShears was a bad one. I'm seeing a consensus forming for unblocking the latter. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:06, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
Spot on!Non-admin: this user has been pushing a not very subtle pro-pedophile POV -blocked for aspersions!
Admin: I have indefinitely blocked 22Spears for what appears to be an uncomfortable pattern of pro-pedophilia POV pushing. - not blocked for aspersions!
I'd put a laughing emoji here usually, except this isn't really very funny... Tewdar 09:06, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
Did someone else in your pedophile ring tell you that?I've seen a claim off-wiki (which might or might not be the same one) that connects 86sedan with another user account at a pedophilia-related site, but I didn't see any actual evidence to support the connection (other than the other identity mentioned the 86sedan Wiktionary block). Also, looking at all of 86sedan's Wiktionary contributions, I don't actually see any advocacy of any illegal act (though I guess something might have been deleted). I am disturbed by 86sedan's contributions here, but we need to be careful not to just believe allegations made against them without carefully checking. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:01, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
They removed the GIF from his userpage, but they still have not deleted it. Archive of GIF. I have a feeling that multi-decade sock farming is happening here. Many of the accounts defending him are 15+ years old. The user who created the GIF is an obvious SPA and sock of 22spears. Maybe even a sleeper too as their account was created in 2009. Ivancafe uploaded several other images with.. "interesting" names as well, but the GIF was the only one that was not deleted as a copyright violation. Interestingly, the only other userpage to use the GIF is Dronebogus, who is probably the sock master. One of users in the first ANI thread even linked to a study about long-term pro-pedophilia POV pushing on Wikipedia: https://books.google.com/books?id=uNKOA ... &q&f=falsewexter wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2023 12:23 amPerhaps it a high probability that "Wikipedia Administrators" are reading this blog;
Beyond the block they deleted the Gif and the explicit statements on talkYou have been blocked indefinitely from editing for what appears to be a pattern of uncomfortably pro-pedophilia edits, including an attempt to directly link the personal blog of a pedophile. I simply cannot see how this could be editing in good faith with the best interests of the encyclopedia. The GIF on your userpage is frankly not doing you any favors either.. PMC
curprev 08:48, 15 May 2023 GhostOfDanGurney talk contribs 1,684 bytes −207 Content clearly intended as sexually provocative (images and in some cases text) or to cause distress and shock that appears to have little or no project benefit or using Wikipedia only as a web host or personal pages or for advocacy, may be removed by any user (or deleted, subject to appeal at deletion review).
"The lunacy continues. With numerous socks of lunatics."
The lunatics actually think they are building an encyclopedia of some kind.
Call them what they are: Child rapists.
Treat them as they deserve to be treated: Kill them.
"Minor attracted person" is the same type of shitty language as "had sex with underage girls". I'm with Vig on this one, these people are rapists and should be treated as rapists.
Wikipedia and Wikipedians are of course the last people you would expect to make the mistake of conflating a thought with a crime, or for advocating the death penalty. But here they are, doing it for paedophilia. Massive over compensation methinks.High velocity lead poisoning is both cheap and 100% effective.
It's not accurate at all, since it suggests that an eighteen year old having "lust" for a seventeen year old is as evil as a fifty year old having "lust" for a seven year old."Minor-attracted person" suggests that paedophiles find children attractive in a similar way to everyday folk. A more accurate description using plain English words would be "person who lusts after children".
Most normal people understand that being "pubescent" does not equate to understanding sexual attraction or being grown up.On related note, I'm not happy that Wikipedia's article on Pedophilia (T-H-L) defines somebody as no longer being pre-pubescent at 13, cited to a single source - Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Text Revision by the American Psychiatric Association (T-H-L). There is no way on earth my kids had grown up enough to understand sexual attraction at that age.