EEng's unusable talk page

Editors, Admins and Bureaucrats blecch!
Post Reply
User avatar
ChaosMeRee
Sucker
Posts: 225
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2023 11:59 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 154 times

EEng's unusable talk page

Post by ChaosMeRee » Wed Jan 17, 2024 12:04 pm

Looks like things are heading for an epic battle (as long as Ritchie333 has the bottle). Ritchie hasn't dropped the issue since this sub-section was shut down as too distressing for all involved. Pussies. There isn't even any swearing in it except one "shitty" and one "hell" (unusual for a matter involving EEng).

Note the subtle reference to Rambo.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... e_archives
I'll give EEng some more time to archive his talk page further, but I've got a feeling I'm going to get to a point where I've asked ten people, all of whom have instantly agreed on bot archiving, and question why he's being stubborn about it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

You may have noticed that nowadays everything is advertised as being curated. My talk page is curated. I'm not annoyed or anything, but you don't need to push. EEng 00:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

In case you didn't see it, I put a link to your comment at EEng's talk page, in the interests of transparency. In one fish's opinion, EEng should not be required to use any kind of bot archiving, so long as he archives manually to an extent that satisfies those who care. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
I doubt anyone has a clue what EEng means by "curated". Unless it is this.....
I prefer to do my own archiving -- I'm just lazy about it. In the past all that's been necessary is a few gentle cracks of the whip. Once, just to please Ritchie, I even got it down to 200K (IIRC)! EEng 23:17, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

.....

To be clear, I always want to archive my talk page. Just like I always want to clean the garage and fix that leaky faucet. Every Saturday I wake up and say, "Dammit! Today I'm gonna fix that leaky faucet, clean the garage, and archive my talk page!" But then I hit the snooze button. EEng 14:47, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

.....

Why not use an archiving bot? Takes a few seconds to set up. —DIYeditor (talk) 15:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Because it's indiscriminate in what it archives. EEng 18:30, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
It seems like, as is usual for EEng, an attempt to fuck with people by being a clever dick. He could have given a simple commitment here. I will manually archive my talk page so that it complies with TALKCOND. But that's too close to what a normal decent human being would do for EEng's liking.

So we are instead in this situation where EEng has given no commitments on how he intends to stop being the cause of disruption, rather he simply gives only vague and frankly pathetic explanations for why it will probably continue.

If says a lot that this makes it all sound like EEng is a child and it is the sad lot of Wikipedia Administrators to keep haranguing him to tidy his room just to ensure all the adults in the Wikipedia house can go about their daily business (which sadly includes directly interacting with EEng).

That would certainly make for a hilarious proposal at the Village Pump....

Since EEng seems intent on behaving like a child, and his friends seem determined to encourage him in this belief this is how a Wikipedia editor should behave (and we do know EEng is not actually a child, he's a man in his twilight years), which of his friends should be appointed his Wiki-Legal Guardian?

This person would be responsible for passing on any required messages in a manner he finds convenient, and to edit any replies so that they're useful for the purposes of adult to adult communication (i.e, remove all childish banter, in-jokes, whining, clever dickery, and pass on whatever remains in terms of clear statements and firm commitments, if any actually exist).


Can't see any takers, can you?

Wikipedia expects all editors to act like mature human beings for a reason. Children are a pain in the ass, a hindrance to productive work. They have absolutely no concern for anything but their own selfish interests. No interest in anything but their own entertainment. No care for anyone's feelings except their own.

It amuses me to see how easy it might be to make the case that EEng should be site banned not because he violates this policy or that, but that he would violate the theoretical policy Wikipedia editors must act like mature adults (WP:BEHAVE!), and that such a policy might actually need to be written if he remains on Wikipedia any longer.

The suggestion Ritchie annoying him is the issue here of course hilarious, exactly how a spoilt little child would react, and a not so subtle message for his friends. All part of the jester's "job" of baiting Administrators for simply doing their actual jobs. The number of people who have said EEng's talk page is literally a source of annoyance to them over the years, surely numbers in the hundreds by now.

As we see in that debate, I think EEng has probably already realised (if he hasn't been doing it deliberately for a long time already) that he can get a lot more laughs out of this issue by ensuring his talk page does meet the guideline ("exceeds 75 KB in wikitext or has numerous resolved or stale discussions"), but still absolutely fucks most people's machines by requiring a ton of memory to process the assorted crap his "curation" has deemed are essential elements of his online persona. According to one person there, it already requires 300mb to handle his talk page, which was already at 1mb of raw text.

The comment by Tryotofish is typical of the attitude of Team Asshole, and mirrors the ongoing issue with EEng and incivility. The "people who care" are the ones with policy and common sense on their side (policy being to follow the guidelines unless you have a good reason not to, and common sense being to not be an asshole). The people who don't, think EEng should be allowed to do what he likes, because he's special, valuable or entertaining. Or because Wikipedia would somehow less fun if everyone obeyed the rules. Or as one Administrator recently put it, Wikipedia has a commitment to diversity, as if EEng is some fucking retard and his disruptive idiosyncrasies are a protected characteristic.

Good on Ritchie then, if he is going to bring this issue to a head (if he has the bottle). Like all bullies, these assholes have been getting away with it for years simply because being intimidated by a group of nasty little cunts always works online (hence Wikipedia's ongoing issue with being unattractive to women), and people who aren't born assholes, have always backed down in the face of such things. Or in the last case, shut it down for being too distressing.

EEng has of course always encouraged the fighting. It entertains him. He is the little kid whose name calling and taunting at the front of the group starts the battle, then he runs to the rear behind his mates when the pushing and shoving starts. His mates being too stupid to see the little shit isn't worth fighting for at all.

Sadly for Wikipedia, a proper fight where people get stabbed and their game is OVER, has never been the result of any of the flashpoints EEng is the ultimate instigator of. The worst that happens is that EEng goes to "jail" for 72 hours, which is no deterrent, because he simply carries on his taunting from his "holding cell", then resumes the provocation the moment he is released, throwing around references to "lethal injection" to describe proposals to indefinite block him. Prick.

Here's hoping for a proper fight.

It would be just so fitting if an issue as trivial as talk page archiving is what leads to the epic fight needed to get an Arbitration Case filed which then gets EEng rightfully banned as being well overdue.

And also hopefully some of the Administrators who have consistently defended, excused and assisted EEng, despite NEVER having a single policy to hand to justify it, much less any IAR derived common sense argument (the number of bytes/hours wasted on this guy, and lost in the people he drives away, far exceeds the bytes/hours of productive work he has given Wikipedia). Pricks.

If a proper fight does happen and people are unsure of whether people like Tryptofish deserve to be stabbed first, here is what passes as fun on EEng's talk page.....
EEng, making sure that you are aware of what Ritchie said here: [248]. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:01, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

And by the way, I had no difficulty leaving that comment. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:04, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
What Tryptofish is of course (quite deliberately) failing to mention is that EEng had by then manually archived something like twenty sections (more than most normal established editors have on their entire page I would have thought). And he only did it because people were making serious noises about imposing an archive bot on him.

If must have ABSOLUTELY KILLED EEng to have to manually archive threads which contained such gems as....
I think it would be an excellent idea to make EEng an administrator (as if that would give him a special right to unroll edits!), because then he could save everyone else time by just blocking himself. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:59, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
Ha Ha Ha so funny.

But most definitely stale.

Perusing that pile of SHITE did amusingly identify a suitable candidate for who might best serve the role of EEng's Wiki-Legal Guardian......
Since EEng is answering why the edits deserved undoing rather than the actual question of why he had the right to undo them: The flip side of being "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" is that anyone can also disagree with your edits and undo them. So EEng has at least as much right to undo them as you had to make them in the first place, setting aside your rhetorical fallacy of asserting that the entries were well made as a premise of a question asking why they were judged not to be so. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:12, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
.....although clearly even they need to consider whether their deep love for their little boy is interfering with their ability to answer questions on their behalf the way a mature and responsible parent would. Perhaps David is better seen as a slightly older and slightly more mature but still very adolescent older brother. A kind of pseudo parent to the little orphan boy EEng.

Whatever they are, with playmates/pseudo-parents like this.....
Hey, I have a great idea! Why don't we all post as many messages as we can telling EEng how we think he should think about managing the issue of having too many messages on his talk page! He'll be back up over 1M bytes in no time! —David Eppstein (talk) 18:44, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

I have an even better idea! Why don't we all post as many messages as we can telling EEng how we think he should think about managing the issue of having too many messages on his talk page! He'll be back up over 1M bytes in no time! --Tryptofish (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
......your future is inevitable.

Here's to a proper fight.

Dead kids all over the shop. Blood all up the walls. Screaming. Crying.

NewYorkBrad a thousand miles away, in his tails, being toasted by his learned chums.

Might be the only way anyone outside of Wikipedia sits up and pays attention.

The lunatics didn't take over the asylum.

Those damn pesky kids did.

Time for some adult supervision. Time for the Foundation to take control.

A handful of the more competent Administrators can stay, to can take care of the usual sniffles and boo boos, the adults will deal with the little arsonists and pint sized psychopaths.

Thanks Ritchie, you tried your best, but we'll take it from here.

Here's your gold watch. It has an inscription on the back of it. And we really mean it....

You are and always were a useless cunt.

:flamingbanana:

Post Reply