Friday, 29 August 2008

Majorly RfC

So I created an RfC on myself. Following a rather disasterous RfA that I nominated, it was felt by some people that my actions on, and surrounding that RfA were inappropriate, or in some people's word's "despicable". Now, I offered to nominate Jamie months ago, after noticing her good work on articles on Christian Music. I started to talk to her on IRC, and after much persuasion she accepted a nomination. I regret very much that I did this. If I'd known how vicious the RfA crowd were this week, I'd have kept well away. As it happens, I didn't. Jamie unfortunately had the kind of username that gives away age. It seems the age crowd only like coming out at certain times: just a couple of months ago, another editor passed his third RfA without a big problem. And of course, we all know of Anonymous Dissident, who passed with 165 supports and a single oppose, in 2007. The age crowd must have been on vacation that week. I wonder if they'd have opposed if they had seen it, or knew his real age? I can only guess yes. Looking at some of the age opposes, some of them are well-reasoned, but others are just really awful. Consider oppose #1: "Kid admins have generally poor judgement". This shows that this particular opposer is already biased before they voted. OK, we all have our standards. This editor has made it clear they never support teenagers. But my issue here is not the fact they have their standards, or their opinion. It's the blatant abuse of the process. When voting, you are supposed to review the candidate yourself for a good idea of what they're like. It's rather clear that this editor, and others neglected this important part of the process. It's all very well them saying they did afterwards, but the fact is, they have generalised, and stereotyped this editor without giving them a fair analysis.

So, since my candidate is getting this rather poor treatment, I am naturally angry. I make a few comments, to the point of proposing that people don't actually have to look at contributions anymore, but can oppose for whatever reason they like (it's a vote after all). I start "badgering" a few people. Such people would not need badgering if they gave the candidate a fair review. You don't see me questioning the user who had issues with Jamie's AfD votes do you? That's because it's a completely fair oppose, and shows the user took the time to review her fairly. I'll "badger" votes that do not do this. It's incredibly easy to vote on an RfA. You can vote with "per above", "Not enough experience", "needs more time" etc - all are more acceptable that someone stating "Kid admins generally are immature". The funny thing is, I've not seen one smidgen of evidence proving that statement is true. Judging by some of the voters on the RfA, and the behaviour I've seen of some adult admins, I'd say the opposite is true. Jamie's conduct through the RfA was pretty exceptional. Obviously, hardly anyone noticed this under the dust cloud.

What is now really irritating me, is that some of the opposers are using me as the scapegoat for causing her RfA to go downhill! The only people causing her RfA to go anywhere are the opposers. If they want to make frankly ridiculous votes saying "The nominator's behaviour is less than satisfactory", that's their lookout. I would hope such votes are discounted in the end - even the age ones are better than that. Really, these people are that desperate to oppose someone, that when they find nothing wrong with the candidate, they move to the nominator! Actually I've seen similar - where people oppose per whoever is supporting, and their contributions. It's so unbelievably negative. And to think that if she had simply left the fact she's in school of her userpage, she'd probably be doing so much better now! It really sucks.

And now on to me. An admin by the name of Jennavecia, probably better known as LaraLove has decided I should be desysopped. This is following from nearly 9 months of particularly unpleasant encounters with this woman - I had, for a while been considering to create a requests for comments page on myself - I know I'm controversial, and have done some stupid things. She told me that an RfC was in the works. However I have grown impatient, and wish to get this thing out in the open, so I created it myself. Soon after its creation, Giggy whom I nominated for bureaucrat on Commons, spewed out a load of diffs, dating back to late 2007. There were so many! I went through each and every one. There was, perhaps, fewer than 5 really serious incidents. Each I admitted to and apologised for as necessary. There were a great many where he presented the evidence in a skewed manner, apparently deliberately linking to logs in such a way to make me look worse than I was. There were cases where I did minor things like endorse the block of someone, expressed my feelings about the BAG process and protected a page, which I began discussion on a mere 19 days later. Others were more major, but I don't need to discuss those here. I admitted I was wrong there and then, and no more needs to be said there.

Anyway, a bunch of people have turned up, and if I wasn't all too awake this morning, I could have sworn I most of those people somewhere else - wait, I remember - RfA! Yes, it's every chronic opposer on the block, from Iridescent to Kojidude, to Malleus Fatuorum to Friday! They're all there, and they're all agreeing. I don't know what to think of this. I really don't.

Then Jenna, aka Lara showed up, and proposed I be desysopped. Unlike the other people who made statements or proposals, Lara had nothing pleasant to say about me. This doesn't surprise me. She has told me before that she doesn't like me, and the feeling is mutual. What I don't understand, is why does she dislike me so much? I mean, I don't think Friday and I will ever agree on anything, but at least he had something positive to say, along with a lot of negative. Her description of me sounds like that of a vandal, or banned user. Now, as someone who has been on this site for over 2 years, and dedicated a hell of a lot of time to various aspects of the site, I am pretty offended to be described so harshly. Perhaps it's all true, but still, it's not nice to read. Then again, with my experience of Lara, she does say exactly what she thinks, though on-wiki she's mild compared to off (and where she thinks I can't see).

Anyway, I was given the choice - RfA or ArbCom? It was an easy choice. Just looking at the shithole I threw poor Jamie into, I'd go for ArbCom any day. If they desysop me, so be it. If not, I'll take the points from the RfC into account, and step back from RfA for a while. I actually want to do something else for a bit anyway, so it works out well either way for me.

6 comments:

Lara Love said...

Majorly, I did not call for your desysop in my original summary. I called for your reconf RFA and either mentorship or civility parole. It was later that I stipulated that you should be desysopped, after your responses.

Additionally, your continued comments on my on-wiki vs off-wiki behavior is laughable. You openly admit that you are completely different online than you are IRL. I'm completely the same online as I am IRL. The thing is, I make good efforts to censor myself on-wiki as policy and community standards dictate. That's a good thing, contrary to your skewed belief system. Your claim that you "will get away with" continued misbehavior is sad. You just don't get it.

Repeatedly claiming I only have things to say behind your back is also laughable. I've called you out in public several times, always to your great dismay. It is you who prefers it be kept private. And you want to then make such private logs public. Give me a break. Private correspondence are not relevant on-wiki. ArbCom has made this clear. Only in cases of clear harassment are there exceptions, and while I may hurt your feelings, it's not harassment.

You continue to say that you and I are "as bad as each other", yet you whine to everyone about how "vicious" I am. Well, if you are admittedly just as bad as me, then you are vicious as well. And I don't disagree with that. Your comments regarding my employment were vicious. The difference is that you don't hurt my feelings. You just make me laugh, because your claims lack evidence. I mean, big deal. I never claimed I wasn't a bitch. And regardless of what you claim, I am a bitch on-wiki. I just chillax on the language.

One wrong after another. Your actions are wrong and so are your words. Wake up, Majorly. I'm not on some rampage of hate because I don't like you. Granted, I don't like you, but I constantly bring up your pathetic actions because you continue to display them. You didn't initiate that RFC to get feedback. You called what you thought was my bluff, and you got handled as a result. You then attempted to turn tail and run like you did with your RFA, but this isn't RFA. This is RFC, and you can't just withdraw and hide. You opened it up, and now it's for the community to use.

You need to figure out which you prefer, Majorly. Would you like me to keep my comments in public, which is how I prefer it, or do you want me to keep them private? Because no matter how I comment, you complain that it should be the other way. You complain that I'm mean, taking any opportunity to snipe at you, but how often do you refute my claims? Rarely, if ever. You dance around them, or completely ignore my views and simply comment on the fact I've have expressed them. So pick one. Do you want my criticism to be public, or do you want me to keep it in pms with you and behind your back? And note that me shutting up is not an option until you grow up, learn to behave, and start taking responsibility for your actions.

Majorly said...

The thing is, you are different on the wiki, than off. I received some interesting logs of yourself and some other editors discuss me and a couple of other editors. You wouldn't dare call what you called me in private, and behind my back on the wiki. I know very well you were terrified I'd post the log of the conversation we had. It would reflect poorly on you, and rightfully so.

I am not "completely" different, as you put it. In real life, I am quieter but I do say things as they are. On-wiki I am simply more vocal than in real life. It's easier for me to type than to talk, at times.

I have never said you only say things behind my back. You do it in public, in PMs, *and* behind my back. I'm very willing for logs to be posted. You were, however, terrified that I would, and declined my offer to post. It is you, not I who wants it kept off the wiki. You've hurt my feelings, attacked my character, destroyed my dignity, and at one point I even emailed Lar to desysop me and delete my userspace, I was that upset at your behaviour. People know I have made some bad decisions. No one else has been as much of a bully as you have about it. No one else goes out of their way as much as you to attack Majorly. You are far from perfect Lara. Please don't lecture me on good behaviour. The log I received is just an example of your ridiculous behaviour. It's hard to believe the person in the log is an adult in her mid-20s, and not an 8 year old in a secret club bitching about people they hate. That, Lara, is pathetic.

I am as bad as you in other ways. I don't consider myself the same as you in this regard. We both have our bad points. You "chillax" on the language because you fear the consequences. This is why you don't want logs posting.

Please don't lecture me about pathetic actions. C'mon Lara - you're a mother in her 20s with a couple of kids here. I'm not the one here who spends their life in a silly online club, which is based around a bath garment, bitching about other editors, and speaking like my 14 year old sister does. I'm far from perfect, as we know. Try to set an example if you're going to call me up on my behaviour. Act your age.

My RfC was to get an idea of how to continue my Wikipedia career. So far, it's pretty clear to me - stop voting on RfAs. Desysopping is punitive, but I've accepted you're going to take me to ArbCom. I'd prefer that any day to an RfA.

This last bit I'm confused by. Your comments to me are nearly all done in private. What I want is you to act like you do on IRC on the wiki. Or better, vice versa. I'll answer your question: I want your comments about me made in public, on the wiki. If you want to call me a "fucktard", "cocky asshole", "moron" or "fucking douche", do it on the wiki so that everyone can see.

Lara Love said...

Majorly, you're an idiot. Here it is in public. I'm not going to be persuaded to break Wikipedia policy because you're too dense to understand the acceptability of one acting within community standards when they would much prefer to express themselves more blunty.

Also, note, those logs that you think are so epic have been leaked to a many people and forwarded to ArbCom, so you're not special in that you're privy to that exchange. That editor, who is no longer with us, is gone now much because he leaked those logs. Regardless, there's nothing actionable in them. I apologized to Ryan for what I said, but you'll get no such apology, because the difference between you and Ryan is that I respect him and I trust him with most things, so for that reason, I recognized that my disrespect was unwarranted and gave him the apology he deserved.

As for me being terrified... terrified of what? Hahaaha. Yea, no. I didn't give you permission because it was from NINE MONTHS AGO, and I don't recall the conversation. Of the only two pieces you quoted, I gave you permission to post them both. I'm pretty sure me calling you a fucktard has gotten me kicked from en-admins at least once. Certainly I'm not terrified of anyone on wiki knowing I'm a bitch.

It's just so amusing! It's not as if I'm some angel on wiki, like you're asserting. Please. If you're not paying attention, ask around. I'm not one to spread rainbows and butterflies around the project. I most certainly speak my mind, I just limit the expletives.

Get a grip, Majorly. You've shown in this RFC that you are not capable of grasping all the issues. And when you attempt to turn criticism on those doing the criticizing, it's a sure sign that you lack a defense.

Why not go ahead and remind everyone that we're on Wikipedia to build an atlas, so they should all get back to work.

Majorly said...

I know the scale of the logs. You respect Ryan, yet call him all sorts of shit behind his back, and claim you were "joking"? That reminds me of something.

Don't pretend you don't call me names on-wiki because of the rules. Start doing it, and people who don't use IRC can see exactly what you're really like.

The fact the log is 9 months old is irrelevant. You've been just as nasty and a bully since then, frequently. If you aren't terrified, stop being two faced and act like you do on IRC (like a silly spoilt child). Of course, this would damage your rep immensely, so you'd never do it.

The fact a load of people have piled on my RfC is meaningless. I don't care to listen to a bunch of idiots frankly. If you think I'm so bad, take me to ArbCom and stop faffing around with vague threats.

Lara Love said...

What is "faffing"?

And where did I claim that I was joking in that convo?

And who said I have a good rep on wiki?

Man, you are dense. I'm not different on wiki than off. Just censor my language. Shall I break out some crayons and construction paper and draw that out for you? [[WP:CIV]] dude. I don't agree with all the aspects and think it's bullshit how it's selectively enforced, but I make some attempts to follow it, so get over it. One of your problems is your frequent inability to follow this policy. Urging others to break this policy does not look good for your case either.

If you want people to know how I am, just direct them to this blog. I mean, I have directed people here, to show your attitude toward your RFC and those who have participated in it... them being "a bunch of idiots" and all.

agk said...

Tsk. Can we put drop the bats and leave the vicious ping pong ball where it is, Lara and Alex?

This discussion *really is not* going anywhere. I strongly suggest, to go high-and-mighty for a moment, that you two disengage from one another.

Insulting and calling spade (both features of comment from either end) is a waste of time.