Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:14, 6 March 2009

Middle 8 is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Misplaced Pages soon.

(What's So Funny 'Bout).... The Golden Rule

Note: I've edited WP in the past. I left in good standing, and have returned with a new account because of privacy and harassment concerns. Please do not speculate about any earlier account(s) I had, or link me to identifying specifics. I am aware of WP:SOCK and WP:OUTING and related policies; I heed them and ask others to do the same. Thank you, and happy editing!

Old alternate account, no longer active: User:Bodhi Agonist.

If you leave a message here, I'll respond here unless you request otherwise; it's much easier for me to keep conversations in one place.

Serious question

My hypothetical question on User talk:VirtualSteve was very serious. I had been thinking of raising it in another forum. Particularly if the user may have committed fraud in real life, do you think[REDACTED] should allow them to reincarnate and possibly move towards an admin role? Looking forward to discussion. Kevin McCready (talk) 19:13, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

You're asking what WP policy should be on editors who "may have committed fraud in real life"?? That's a topic I hadn't pondered, to be honest. Are you asking whether a background criminal check should be a prerequisite to adminship, or something? Again, I really hadn't given the matter much thought. --Middle 8 (talk) 19:37, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

P.S. - I'm not sure exactly what you have in mind above, but in any case, be sure to refrain from naming any editor with their real name, or implying that any editor broke the law. You don't want to run afoul of WP:OUTING or WP:LIBEL, among other things. I suspect the result (for any editor violating these) would be a significant block or ban. --Middle 8 (talk) 22:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the email

I'll keep your secret that you are a member of Politburo, best friends with Michael Jackson, and was formerly known as the Fifth Beatle.  :) However, despite your credentials, I am going to strongly disagree with you on Acupuncture. There's just not enough reliable sources supporting its usefulness. But, let's not get into a discussion about that article here, I've replied to you at Talk:Acupuncture. But if anyone asks if you did a bong with Ringo, I'm going to have to give you up. OrangeMarlin 20:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Reported to AE

You have been reported to WP:AE for violations of the Pseudoscience Arbitration. Please look here. ScienceApologist (talk) 20:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Obviously a WP:POINT violation, and dismissed as such. Your approach continues to be heavy on the heat (drama) and short on the light (anything having to do with calm exchange of ideas). Obviously, you're intent on continuing the behavior that got you topic-banned in hopes that the community will decide to embrace you, but you offer a false choice between poor content and being an asshole. You need to develop more constructive ways of dealing with people with whom you disagree. Driving us all off with a stick isn't going to work, dude. You're certainly not going to succeed in driving me off. All I need to do is edit as I usually do; you can file all the petty complaints that you want, but no one's buying into them. So, as long as I don't bait you and don't get roped in by your attempts to bait me, I think I'll be acting in the best interest of the project. --Middle 8 (talk) 07:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Unfair and unethical treatment of your complain

Are you aware that ScienceApologist was instrumental in having MartinPhi permanently banned because Martin talked about what was/is common knowledge about SA. See In fact, SA has pissed so many people off and has been such a braggart about his qualifications that his name is plastered around the Internet and it is unrealistic to call who he is a secret.

Levine as much as said SA outted you here: With regards the WP:OUTING, I'd like to comment that before SA's post about Middle 8's occupation, I had absolutely no idea who this editor was in real life. Now, that I know this editor's occupation, I am fairly confident I know exactly who Middle 8 is in real life. -- Levine2112 discuss 06:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

It is becoming an ethical question that the admins are supporting SA but running off his opponents. You also noted that you are less inclined to edit. I have virtually stopped and most people in the frontier subjects are gone. I am not recommending action, just informing. The best thing to do in Misplaced Pages is to go to CitizendiumTom Butler (talk) 18:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate your support. I hadn't realized the exact circumstances of Martinphi's ban: that really does kick the hypocrisy up to new levels. Apart from that, I think it was OK for Jehochman to close the cases, but not to slander my motives. I also think that SA's continued misconduct should eventually be dealt with sternly, even if they want to coddle him for now (which I think is a bad idea). This was my comment to Jehochman.

As for CZ, I tend to agree in theory, but the place ranks depressingly low in search engines, and editors don't seem too prolific; they erred by not fully forking WP. Quantity matters as well as quality. They could have gone online with thousands of OK WP articles, and gradually improved them. As it is, the place seems dead; they lack articles on the most basic topics. Also, the user interface sucks. I don't really know how the editing environment is, but it appears to be a hell of a lot better than around here.

People keep editing WP because they know others read WP, yet WP continues to suck. It's a problem, probably best solved at the demand end: what we should be doing is warning students, colleagues, family members et. al. about how seriously unreliable WP really is. There are some excellent criticisms around; I certainly plan on collecting and linking to some. I will recommend CZ to people with the caveat that it errs ridiculously toward quality over quantity. Beyond that, any one person can't really change WP, and is likely to go bananas trying. Sincere best wishes and thanks for your kind and sane words. regards, Middle 8 (talk) 21:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Martinphi deserved his ban. SA was hounded. CZ has terrible articles, mainly because expert editors are not so expert. The homeopathy article is written by potion pushers. And....ah, never mind. OrangeMarlin 21:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

@OM: Yes, CZ has its own particular factors tilting it toward suck, and I wouldn't disagree that you've identified some. How seriously they operate, I'm not sure. Time for wb, catch you later. cheers, Middle 8 (talk) 07:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Here is one for your list. But be careful. They tend to eat editors who do not blindly support Misplaced Pages.

I agree that change will not come from within. The bigger it gets, the more funding Misplaced Pages needs for legal and server upkeep. The only realistic way to cause change is via an informed public cutting off donations.

I think Misplaced Pages is an excellent idea but there are too many people like SA who have no scruples about how to discourage new thought ... and too many people like Orangemarlin here who have no problem with being part of the Tyranny of the majority. They have driven off just about all of the editors who should be here to balance that NPOV everyone talks about. MartinPhi was about the last one, so what Orangemarlin is really saying is that Martin had to go so that SA would have less opposition to do what he did to you.

Sorry to turn this into a rant. Coming in close contact with people who exhibit such closed minds and willingness to "win" at any cost always makes me cranky. Tom Butler (talk) 01:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

No, I appreciate your thoughts and think you make some good points. I agree that SA's entire M.O. is to drive editors he disagrees with off WP, and that he is going about it the wrong way: experience has shown that it is possible to improve content without being a dick or a hopeless drama queen. Off to real life for awhile. regards, Middle 8 (talk) 07:38, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I've commented on Jehochman's page, pointing out one of the ways in which Tom Butler's description of events is flawed. That is that during the ban discussion, MP twice outed another editor. He was also found to have used a sock to attack other editors. As an aside, I'm a general supporter of SA (not always), and I have no idea who he is in real life. Verbal chat 08:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)