Wednesday, June 3, 2015

Wikipediocracy's Messageboard Reduced to Flaming Lake of Shit

Since my last post on the paranoid world of Wikipediocracy, things have begun to melt down. Dan Murphy, who is an actual journalist with the Christian Science Monitor, was driven out by Greybeard for revealing his true identity as the former Intel executive Steven McGeady, who had a hard relationship with Wikipedia (look at his BLP.) Or was he driven out by McGeady's constant nonsense, take your pick. Triptych was thrown out for the fifth time for some piddling bullshit. And HRIP7 (Andreas Kolbe) lost his moderator status over things posted on Twitter by Lightbreather (possibly for this) though why people are being punished for other people's personal Tweets is beyond me.

Wikipediocracy was supposed to be better than Wikipedia Review, but once again control has passed to a cabal of Zoloft ("Monty" Burns), Midsize Jake aka Somey (true name unknown), with Steven McGeady footing the bills, which might explain all the purges and chess-piece moving. There is no open discussion of money on the messageboard.....maybe there should be.

Wikipediocracy's messageboard suffers from HRIP7's willingness to be friendly with members of the Wikipedia subculture, even though it's chock-full of lunatics, which may explain why The Devil's Advocate has been allowed to stay, despite his constant trolling. The subject of Wikipedia watching suffers from the fact that Tarantino has reams of information, but he sits on it for some bizarre reason. Allegedly Greg Kohs has a book written on paid editing but either has no publisher yet or is holding back. Did I also mention that there is a giant backlog of people who go through the process of joining and never make one post? I've seen that on other message boards, but on WO's messageboard Zoloft deletes "no comment accounts" for non-usage after two years or so. Finally, there is an account Encyclopaedia Dramatica members use to dish "Wiki sekrets" which was set up by an ED editor I'm not naming, and this account was accused of leaking material (to whom I don't know.) I emailed EricBarbour, his only comment was:

"I do not edit ED. Just like Wikipedia, ED has seen its glory days, and appears to be turning into another Web 2.0 
swamp of junk content. I've done my research and the book on Wikipedia history has been written, and now 
I'm really quite sick of the whole dirty business."
Posted by at

9 comments:

  1. AnonymousJune 3, 2015 at 6:19 PM

    Money should be openly discussed for a few reasons.

    Will the site ever recruit new trustees?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. StrelnikovJune 3, 2015 at 10:19 PM

      My question is why Andreas Kolbe lost his moderator status over somebody else's Tweets, if that is what really happened.

      Delete
    2. Gregory KohsJune 4, 2015 at 4:00 AM

      That's not what happened. There is a lot of spin and conjecture in the blog post here.

      Delete
    3. StrelnikovJune 4, 2015 at 6:28 AM

      Then what happened, Mr. Kohs? Dan Murphy is listed as "retired", HRIP7 no longer wears the green lettering. Triptych is doing the Van Slyke shuffle* again. I'm trying to stick to the facts, what little I know about them.
      ___________________

      * Flint, Michigan slang for being fired from the GM truck factory. Appeared in Ben Hamper's memoir "Rivethead."

      Delete
  2. SomeyJune 3, 2015 at 7:25 PM

    Yikes, I'm sorry to say that nearly everything in this post is completely inaccurate, but of course we all love the attention. So hey, keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. StrelnikovJune 3, 2015 at 10:00 PM

      So name all the inaccuracies, please.

      Delete
    2. SomeyJune 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM

      It would be easier to name the accuracies, not the inaccuracies. It's true that Murphy really is a journalist, and that we don't openly discuss the board's expenses, and that there really is an ED account that (we think) may have gotten access to the "book wiki" being maintained by Mr. Barbour and Mr. Damian. (Wikis are notorious for security breaches, and I don't really know why they use MediaWiki at all given that fact, but that's something you'd have to ask them.)

      Everything else is pretty much just-plain wrong. Specific to myself, I have little or no "control" on Wikipediocracy at all - my role is more like that of a consultant (and 1/12th of a Trustee vote) at this point. In the discussion of who to ask about being a moderator in the wake of Mr. Kolbe's resignation, for example, nobody has even suggested me, nor have I volunteered.

      Things aren't really all that bad there, to be honest - we had much worse periods at WR and got through them. You have to assume there will be ups and downs when running a site like that, and at least we have (mentally and financially) stable ownership now.

      Delete
  3. StanistaniOctober 17, 2015 at 9:20 PM

    Wikipediocracy has people retire from Administrator, Moderator, and Trustee roles, sometimes because of disagreements and other times because they move on to other things.

    This is the same as in any organization. We fill the holes and keep going. Andreas and a few other prized blog post writers moving to other venues hurt our blog output. We're going to have to find some more stellar writers.

    Would you have any suggestions? No, not you. Sorry. ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. StrelnikovOctober 18, 2015 at 12:01 AM

      Monty, Monty Monty.....

      Go jump off the Star of India.

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)