| Revision as of 18:51, 4 February 2014 editTParis (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators30,362 edits →Your comments at ANI: expand← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:02, 4 February 2014 edit undo138.162.8.57 (talk) Reply, sorry the .59 ID got blocked so I cannot reply after thisNext edit → | ||
| Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
| Greetings Tparis, I just wanted to respond to a comment you made at ANI. Your right, accusing someone of abusing the tools is a serious accusation as it should be. What's even more of a problem though is the general attitude of admins on this site to plead ignorance of the problem. Even in that discussion multiple people commented they didn't have an opinion about the editor. Which means they do, but don't want to get involved because that admin has a history of retalitory actions against users who speak out against them. Like confronting them and threatening them with blocks for "Personal attacks". If they supported them or didn't agree with my statements they would have said that. Instad they decided to stay out if it. That is a huge problem for me and it should be for you as well. Nyttend has already been brough to ANI multiple times and has survived a couple Arbcom decisions where he was a party because the processes in place to deal with Abusive admins and editors don't work here. The only thing I have left to do is to be vocal and raise awareness of the problem in the hopes that it will eventually be identified and fixed. ] (]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 15:08, 4 February 2014 (UTC)</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | Greetings Tparis, I just wanted to respond to a comment you made at ANI. Your right, accusing someone of abusing the tools is a serious accusation as it should be. What's even more of a problem though is the general attitude of admins on this site to plead ignorance of the problem. Even in that discussion multiple people commented they didn't have an opinion about the editor. Which means they do, but don't want to get involved because that admin has a history of retalitory actions against users who speak out against them. Like confronting them and threatening them with blocks for "Personal attacks". If they supported them or didn't agree with my statements they would have said that. Instad they decided to stay out if it. That is a huge problem for me and it should be for you as well. Nyttend has already been brough to ANI multiple times and has survived a couple Arbcom decisions where he was a party because the processes in place to deal with Abusive admins and editors don't work here. The only thing I have left to do is to be vocal and raise awareness of the problem in the hopes that it will eventually be identified and fixed. ] (]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added 15:08, 4 February 2014 (UTC)</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | ||
| :Is there admin abuse? Sure, no one can honestly deny that. But the real abuse here is the abuse of the word abuse. Cases of 'abuse' where the heat is much bigger than the actual substance. The amount of ANI threads doesn't matter if the multiple ANI threads you speak of against Nyttend were of similar strength of the one there that I closed. I don't know Nyttend from a door knob. I've seen the name but can't think of a single instance where we've ever said a word to each other. In fact, I can't think of a single time I've seen him involved in any issue.<p>The thing about admin abuse is that more often than actual real cases, it's an angry editor who refuses to acknowledge guilt or responsibility for themselves. I'm speaking from personal experience here. StillStanding-247 who made a very chilling remark and then claimed it was innocent banter, Joefromrandb who edit warred against an IP and then refused to read the policy when he got blocked, and recently EllenCT who accused me of admin abuse despite a very clear table showing that he definition of WP:CBAN actually hurts her argument instead of helps it. And now this most recent example of Nyttend.<p>Do you think everyone of us with the sysop bit just wakes up in the morning somehow feeling some sense of 'power' because we've got a bit in a database that says we can have extra functions on a website? Hell, the majority of admins regret ever running for RfA and wish they didn't feel a sense of responsibility for having done it and feel bad about quitting. Have you even seen my edit counts in the last 6 months? If there is admin abuse, it's by folks who are burnt out and made a bad judgement call. And we're so happy to ignore years of excellent contributions to condemn folks for a bad call. Those folks need to be forced to take a break, but that doesn't mean we have to crucify them to do it.<p>It's much easier to claim admin abuse than to prove it and that's all that happened on ANI yesterday and that's all you're doing here now. You again are claiming admin abuse without proving it. You're part of the abuse of 'abuse'. You devalue the word, you desensitize the rest of us to the real thing, and you legitimize efforts to block any kind of reform that would provide more accountability to admins because of how wildly you use the term.<p>That's not to say that admin abuse doesn't happen, but it's to say that the ratio of admin abuse and 'abuse' abuse is actually much lower than your words admit. I've seen admin abuse, I've been very vocal about it. I was one of the first few people to challenge ] on the issue that got his tools revoked before anyone even mentioned bringing it to Arbcom. I was vocal about David Gerrard's tool use to win a move war. I've got 3 admins on my watch list at this very moment that I'm keeping an eye on. The difference is that I'm waiting until I can substantially prove a history of admin abuse, whereas you'll run to ANI to make wild accusations with little supportive evidence. I'm direct and targetted, careful, and patient and you want this thing to be fixed overnight. You're incapable of distinguishing between general pissiness because someone rightly got blocked and actual admin abuse. You don't take into account that admins will naturally receive criticism from those who get blocked. You jump at any chance to jump on the admin abuse bus. By railing against one problem, you're actually working against it. You create (you literally are the reason for) the very 'admin shield' that you are angry about.<p>You want change? Strengthen your arguments.--v/r - ]] 18:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC) | :Is there admin abuse? Sure, no one can honestly deny that. But the real abuse here is the abuse of the word abuse. Cases of 'abuse' where the heat is much bigger than the actual substance. The amount of ANI threads doesn't matter if the multiple ANI threads you speak of against Nyttend were of similar strength of the one there that I closed. I don't know Nyttend from a door knob. I've seen the name but can't think of a single instance where we've ever said a word to each other. In fact, I can't think of a single time I've seen him involved in any issue.<p>The thing about admin abuse is that more often than actual real cases, it's an angry editor who refuses to acknowledge guilt or responsibility for themselves. I'm speaking from personal experience here. StillStanding-247 who made a very chilling remark and then claimed it was innocent banter, Joefromrandb who edit warred against an IP and then refused to read the policy when he got blocked, and recently EllenCT who accused me of admin abuse despite a very clear table showing that he definition of WP:CBAN actually hurts her argument instead of helps it. And now this most recent example of Nyttend.<p>Do you think everyone of us with the sysop bit just wakes up in the morning somehow feeling some sense of 'power' because we've got a bit in a database that says we can have extra functions on a website? Hell, the majority of admins regret ever running for RfA and wish they didn't feel a sense of responsibility for having done it and feel bad about quitting. Have you even seen my edit counts in the last 6 months? If there is admin abuse, it's by folks who are burnt out and made a bad judgement call. And we're so happy to ignore years of excellent contributions to condemn folks for a bad call. Those folks need to be forced to take a break, but that doesn't mean we have to crucify them to do it.<p>It's much easier to claim admin abuse than to prove it and that's all that happened on ANI yesterday and that's all you're doing here now. You again are claiming admin abuse without proving it. You're part of the abuse of 'abuse'. You devalue the word, you desensitize the rest of us to the real thing, and you legitimize efforts to block any kind of reform that would provide more accountability to admins because of how wildly you use the term.<p>That's not to say that admin abuse doesn't happen, but it's to say that the ratio of admin abuse and 'abuse' abuse is actually much lower than your words admit. I've seen admin abuse, I've been very vocal about it. I was one of the first few people to challenge ] on the issue that got his tools revoked before anyone even mentioned bringing it to Arbcom. I was vocal about David Gerrard's tool use to win a move war. I've got 3 admins on my watch list at this very moment that I'm keeping an eye on. The difference is that I'm waiting until I can substantially prove a history of admin abuse, whereas you'll run to ANI to make wild accusations with little supportive evidence. I'm direct and targetted, careful, and patient and you want this thing to be fixed overnight. You're incapable of distinguishing between general pissiness because someone rightly got blocked and actual admin abuse. You don't take into account that admins will naturally receive criticism from those who get blocked. You jump at any chance to jump on the admin abuse bus. By railing against one problem, you're actually working against it. You create (you literally are the reason for) the very 'admin shield' that you are angry about.<p>You want change? Strengthen your arguments.--v/r - ]] 18:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC) | ||
| ::You make some good points and I have stated repeatedly that it is a minority of admins who are abusing the tools. The problem is nothing is done about them so that makes the whole group look bad, especially when the stand together and defend an editor who obviously violated the rules. Arbcom has let multiple admins off the hook but then desysopped others for the same or lessor reasons. Whats worse is that Arbcom is the only ones who can remove the tools from an admin who is abusing them and not that many people are going to take the time to submit a complaint to Arbcom just to haev them deny it or spend a month and let them go. That message has been sent clearly and repeatedly that admins will be held to a lower standard than editors. You say its not abuse to bait an editor so the admin can have a reason to block them, I say different. You say that its ok for NYttend to threaten to block anyone who questions him on the grounds of personal attack, but then he can say anyhting to anyone he wants without remorse or consequences...again, I say that's wrong. Look at the case of another admin, one who I am friends with IRL and like very much as a person Sarah Stierch. She violated the rules to the point she lost her job at the WMF and hasn't edited since, still has the admin tools and no one has even asked to remove them as far as I know. There is another similar discussion about an editor on Jimbo's talk page for paid editing COI, nothing will happen to them either. I bet if that was an editor they would have been banned within 24 hours of that message on Jimbo's page. In fact, it has happened in the past several times. Sandstein is an infamous abuser of the tools but he stays close to arbcom and AE so no one touches him. I could list a dozen more off the top of my head where admins used their influence or the tools themselves to gain the upper hand for their own POV. I'm sick to death of it and if I have to go down in flames to bring enough attention to the problem then so be it. I also don't think all admins just wake up abusive, most of the time that get that way over time because they see that their actions are above reproach so they get bolder and bolder. I also want to be clear that I am not looking for admins to be stripped of the tools for one bad decision, but when a pattern of abuse has formed and nothing is done, then that is the admins fault as a group for allowing that to continue...hurting the project. And no matter what arguments are brough forward showing abuse (current case in point with Nyttend) someone always stands ready to justify it or give them a 4th, 5th or 6th chance because they are an admin. When I see admins actively doing something about these dangerous and reckless admins, then I'll let up...or I'll be banned from the project, whichever comes first. ] (]) 19:02, 4 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 19:02, 4 February 2014
| This is TParis's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 |
| If you have come here to change my opinion, be ready to also change yours. |
| USER PAGE | TALK PAGE | CONTRIBUTIONS | AWARDS | DASHBOARD | RECALL | MOTIVES | POLITICS | RTRC |
 Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Holiday wishes!
 |
I wish you success and happiness in your endeavours for this coming year, and I hope we'll be able to carry on improving the wonderful project that is Misplaced Pages together! Keep rocking on! :)
|
Merry Christmas!
Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Why did you threaten me?
Why have you threatened to block me for marking the lightbreather account as a SPA? That account is the very definition of an SPA. It edits Gun Control Related articles exclusively. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 19:15, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- You should also take a look at this: 172.129.246.164 Thanx --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 19:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
- If you post another SPA message in relation to LightBreather, I will block your account. Your behavior is disruptive. You're not labeling this user to notify others, you're doing it to harass them. Knock it off, I swear an ANI thread will support my action.--v/r - TP 05:20, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- I promise you that it is not my intention to harass anyone, and if you feel that it is disruptive, I certainly won't place the label anymore. I am here for Misplaced Pages and if you say not to use a tag, then that is good enough for me, I must not understand how to use it correctly, or I must not understand what an SPA is. So can you explain what I am misunderstanding? This is very frustrating. The lightbreather account edits only gun-control related articles, Not gun articles, but Gun Control related. Exclusively. The account's edits are so far to one side, that they pass my own, and I am pro-control myself. How is this not an SPA account? Or if it is an SPA, why can't I label it as such? --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 19:50, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- It's same spirit as WP:DTTR. He may be a SPA, but he also has several thousands of edits. Specializing in an area of Misplaced Pages isn't a crime.--v/r - TP 02:03, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- You make an excellent point, and I'll give LB some breathing room. But LB needs to hear (from somebody besides me) that the SPA label isn't going to simply go away just because mean 'ol Sue backed off for a while. Her behaviour will only draw attention from someone else. I wasn't the first to point out her SPAishness, and I doubt seriously if I will be the last. When I first met her, I thought I'd made a new friend. I tried to help her to not be so...activist, and she wouldn't have it, and her present mentor only seems to encourage her behavior. Perhaps someone like you can explain the issue to her in a way that she won't take as being confrontational. I dunno. Anyhoo, be well TParis. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 06:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- Each person's behavior and attitude will catch up with them in its own time. When you try to push it, it becomes disruptive. Anything but the natural flow is just going to be seen at ANI as an effort to get rid of an opponent.--v/r - TP 17:52, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- You make an excellent point, and I'll give LB some breathing room. But LB needs to hear (from somebody besides me) that the SPA label isn't going to simply go away just because mean 'ol Sue backed off for a while. Her behaviour will only draw attention from someone else. I wasn't the first to point out her SPAishness, and I doubt seriously if I will be the last. When I first met her, I thought I'd made a new friend. I tried to help her to not be so...activist, and she wouldn't have it, and her present mentor only seems to encourage her behavior. Perhaps someone like you can explain the issue to her in a way that she won't take as being confrontational. I dunno. Anyhoo, be well TParis. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 06:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- It's same spirit as WP:DTTR. He may be a SPA, but he also has several thousands of edits. Specializing in an area of Misplaced Pages isn't a crime.--v/r - TP 02:03, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- I promise you that it is not my intention to harass anyone, and if you feel that it is disruptive, I certainly won't place the label anymore. I am here for Misplaced Pages and if you say not to use a tag, then that is good enough for me, I must not understand how to use it correctly, or I must not understand what an SPA is. So can you explain what I am misunderstanding? This is very frustrating. The lightbreather account edits only gun-control related articles, Not gun articles, but Gun Control related. Exclusively. The account's edits are so far to one side, that they pass my own, and I am pro-control myself. How is this not an SPA account? Or if it is an SPA, why can't I label it as such? --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 19:50, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- If you post another SPA message in relation to LightBreather, I will block your account. Your behavior is disruptive. You're not labeling this user to notify others, you're doing it to harass them. Knock it off, I swear an ANI thread will support my action.--v/r - TP 05:20, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- You should also take a look at this: 172.129.246.164 Thanx --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 19:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Although I was originally in strong agreement that the SPA label applied to LB, they have begun to branch out now (to a small degree). Although gun control is still certainly their focus, it is not exclusive anymore, and the SPA label is just causing drama at this point. Additionally Sue, your editing has crossed the line into disruptive several times now, so I would be wary of bringing any accusations. LB has some major issues and might end up having a WP:CIR action in the future, but antagonizing them, and interfering with other editors work on articles where she happens to edit is not acceptable either. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:59, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
xtools
on: https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/ ok links: https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/ https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/articleinfo/ https://wiki.toolserver.org/view/User:tparis/Index not ok links: https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/ec https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/blame https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/rangecontribs https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/ipcalc try to redirect to: http://www.tools-webgrid-01.com:4086 should be: https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/ec/ https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/blame/ https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/rangecontribs/ https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/ipcalc/
Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 05:05, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Invitation to join WikiProject Freedom of speech
There is a WikiProject about Freedom of speech, called WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech. If you're interested, here are some easy things you can do:
- List yourself as a participant in the WikiProject, by adding your username here: Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Freedom_of_speech#Participants.
- Add userbox {{User Freedom of speech}} to your userpage, which lists you as a member of the WikiProject.
- Tag relevant talk pages of articles and other relevant pages using {{WikiProject Freedom of speech}}.
- Join in discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Freedom of speech.
- Notify others you think might be interested in Freedom of speech to join the WikiProject.
Thank you for your interest in Freedom of speech, — Cirt (talk) 04:13, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Eugh
Now that you mention it, I seem to remember that I promised Worm to stop talking about that. *shrugs* I dunno, willpower, man. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 23:37, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
- Haha, no good deed ;)--v/r - TP 23:43, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Your comments at ANI
Greetings Tparis, I just wanted to respond to a comment you made at ANI. Your right, accusing someone of abusing the tools is a serious accusation as it should be. What's even more of a problem though is the general attitude of admins on this site to plead ignorance of the problem. Even in that discussion multiple people commented they didn't have an opinion about the editor. Which means they do, but don't want to get involved because that admin has a history of retalitory actions against users who speak out against them. Like confronting them and threatening them with blocks for "Personal attacks". If they supported them or didn't agree with my statements they would have said that. Instad they decided to stay out if it. That is a huge problem for me and it should be for you as well. Nyttend has already been brough to ANI multiple times and has survived a couple Arbcom decisions where he was a party because the processes in place to deal with Abusive admins and editors don't work here. The only thing I have left to do is to be vocal and raise awareness of the problem in the hopes that it will eventually be identified and fixed. 138.162.8.57 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:08, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- Is there admin abuse? Sure, no one can honestly deny that. But the real abuse here is the abuse of the word abuse. Cases of 'abuse' where the heat is much bigger than the actual substance. The amount of ANI threads doesn't matter if the multiple ANI threads you speak of against Nyttend were of similar strength of the one there that I closed. I don't know Nyttend from a door knob. I've seen the name but can't think of a single instance where we've ever said a word to each other. In fact, I can't think of a single time I've seen him involved in any issue.
The thing about admin abuse is that more often than actual real cases, it's an angry editor who refuses to acknowledge guilt or responsibility for themselves. I'm speaking from personal experience here. StillStanding-247 who made a very chilling remark and then claimed it was innocent banter, Joefromrandb who edit warred against an IP and then refused to read the policy when he got blocked, and recently EllenCT who accused me of admin abuse despite a very clear table showing that he definition of WP:CBAN actually hurts her argument instead of helps it. And now this most recent example of Nyttend.
Do you think everyone of us with the sysop bit just wakes up in the morning somehow feeling some sense of 'power' because we've got a bit in a database that says we can have extra functions on a website? Hell, the majority of admins regret ever running for RfA and wish they didn't feel a sense of responsibility for having done it and feel bad about quitting. Have you even seen my edit counts in the last 6 months? If there is admin abuse, it's by folks who are burnt out and made a bad judgement call. And we're so happy to ignore years of excellent contributions to condemn folks for a bad call. Those folks need to be forced to take a break, but that doesn't mean we have to crucify them to do it.
It's much easier to claim admin abuse than to prove it and that's all that happened on ANI yesterday and that's all you're doing here now. You again are claiming admin abuse without proving it. You're part of the abuse of 'abuse'. You devalue the word, you desensitize the rest of us to the real thing, and you legitimize efforts to block any kind of reform that would provide more accountability to admins because of how wildly you use the term.
That's not to say that admin abuse doesn't happen, but it's to say that the ratio of admin abuse and 'abuse' abuse is actually much lower than your words admit. I've seen admin abuse, I've been very vocal about it. I was one of the first few people to challenge User:SchuminWeb on the issue that got his tools revoked before anyone even mentioned bringing it to Arbcom. I was vocal about David Gerrard's tool use to win a move war. I've got 3 admins on my watch list at this very moment that I'm keeping an eye on. The difference is that I'm waiting until I can substantially prove a history of admin abuse, whereas you'll run to ANI to make wild accusations with little supportive evidence. I'm direct and targetted, careful, and patient and you want this thing to be fixed overnight. You're incapable of distinguishing between general pissiness because someone rightly got blocked and actual admin abuse. You don't take into account that admins will naturally receive criticism from those who get blocked. You jump at any chance to jump on the admin abuse bus. By railing against one problem, you're actually working against it. You create (you literally are the reason for) the very 'admin shield' that you are angry about.
You want change? Strengthen your arguments.--v/r - TP 18:31, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
- You make some good points and I have stated repeatedly that it is a minority of admins who are abusing the tools. The problem is nothing is done about them so that makes the whole group look bad, especially when the stand together and defend an editor who obviously violated the rules. Arbcom has let multiple admins off the hook but then desysopped others for the same or lessor reasons. Whats worse is that Arbcom is the only ones who can remove the tools from an admin who is abusing them and not that many people are going to take the time to submit a complaint to Arbcom just to haev them deny it or spend a month and let them go. That message has been sent clearly and repeatedly that admins will be held to a lower standard than editors. You say its not abuse to bait an editor so the admin can have a reason to block them, I say different. You say that its ok for NYttend to threaten to block anyone who questions him on the grounds of personal attack, but then he can say anyhting to anyone he wants without remorse or consequences...again, I say that's wrong. Look at the case of another admin, one who I am friends with IRL and like very much as a person Sarah Stierch. She violated the rules to the point she lost her job at the WMF and hasn't edited since, still has the admin tools and no one has even asked to remove them as far as I know. There is another similar discussion about an editor on Jimbo's talk page for paid editing COI, nothing will happen to them either. I bet if that was an editor they would have been banned within 24 hours of that message on Jimbo's page. In fact, it has happened in the past several times. Sandstein is an infamous abuser of the tools but he stays close to arbcom and AE so no one touches him. I could list a dozen more off the top of my head where admins used their influence or the tools themselves to gain the upper hand for their own POV. I'm sick to death of it and if I have to go down in flames to bring enough attention to the problem then so be it. I also don't think all admins just wake up abusive, most of the time that get that way over time because they see that their actions are above reproach so they get bolder and bolder. I also want to be clear that I am not looking for admins to be stripped of the tools for one bad decision, but when a pattern of abuse has formed and nothing is done, then that is the admins fault as a group for allowing that to continue...hurting the project. And no matter what arguments are brough forward showing abuse (current case in point with Nyttend) someone always stands ready to justify it or give them a 4th, 5th or 6th chance because they are an admin. When I see admins actively doing something about these dangerous and reckless admins, then I'll let up...or I'll be banned from the project, whichever comes first. 138.162.8.57 (talk) 19:02, 4 February 2014 (UTC)