Wikiality:Complaints/Archive/2006-May 2007

This is where you write complaints about:


 * blocks
 * vanity
 * reverts

Pool Peeing
Please tell Kudzu to stop peeing in the pool. --Anonymous 21:06, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Racist?
I found this page and praised the idea; finally a forum for new realities, no more political correctness, etc... but I hoped that people that add stuff on this page would have understood Colbert's code, would have understood that blinding out tolerance, rational argument, truth etc. for a while was meant as a tool for reestablishing these values, and not as an opportunity for pseudo-idealists with hidden racism. When I read the articles about French people, my guts tells me, that something went wrong, or at least that it is hard to decide, at which point one can no longer decide if something turns wrong or not.
 * For the response to this comment, please click here--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 19:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

NOTE: Response copied below for archive--thisniss 00:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
 * What seems "racist" or otherwise prejudice is deliberate, but it is done to satirize the rampant racist and prejudiced reputation of Republicans, which they have cultivated over many, many generations.--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 20:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The Terms of Service state
Wikia, Inc. reserves the right to close, move, merge, or rename, a wiki for any reason. Wikia, Inc. shall not be held liable for any modification, suspension or discontinuance of any wiki, or of the service as a whole.

Kindly read them before re-creating pages -- Tawker 04:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * So, the very first thing you say to someone is a threat?--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 04:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * LOL!--MC Esteban™ 04:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I consider that a polite warning not to re-create pages that have been deleted. I would also have to disagree with calling people "nazis" - Stephen Colbert would never call a fan a "nazi."  Honestly, I don't mind a good joke but that statement crosses the line. -- Tawker 04:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmmm...it seems you are not sure what we here in the wikiality.com community consider humor. You are one person who disagrees with what you willingly placed into public (the article was based on what you did, then bragged about).


 * The rest of the Wikiality.com community do not consider the page "over the line", as none of this have chosen to place ourselves in public.--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 04:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * You placed yourself in the position to be parodied when you created your blog post. You have no right to restrict our speech as it is parody and satire.  --MC Esteban™ 04:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * If Tawker would like to have edits made to a page that references him, or to remove the page that he made about himself earlier (on which WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer based the "doesn't exist" page), I believe he has the right to request that. We are not in the habit of promoting a bullying atmosphere or making people feel threatened here.  The problem is not with the request, it's with the fact that no "request" was made.  Rather than simply asking one of our admins to do these things for him, Tawker had someone else - a Wikia admin (I presume?) with whom we had no prior contact - come onto our site to delete a page?  Then he edited an article to add details about himself.  Neither of these actions would be taken well at Wikipedia, and we all know it.  The problem here is NOT (primarily) what he wants - at least in my opinion - it's how he set about to get it.  He could have just asked.--thisniss 04:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you thisniss, two things I would change in your response is: (1) no pages were made referencing the person who posted. The page was created about a fictional character who exists only online, "Tawker".


 * And (2), the "Tawker" page was not originally created by User:Tawker, but by User:Davidj, but due to the wikia staff member deleting the page over and over all the history was also deleted.--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 04:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I had asked, my request was originally refused by WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer and the "fake deleted" page was up for ages - a friend found it while searching and found the empty page confusing, considering that it made sense to simply delete the page (removing it from search engines). Seeing the bad response I had recieved last time from WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer, I decided it was quicker simply to poke someone w/ the access to do it and avoid everyone a hassle.  After all, it was a page consisting of nothing - a pretty trivial delete. -- Tawker 05:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I think it is only going to inflate the ego of the online identity in question to keep fighting with him over this page. That page is such an insignificant part of the totality of this wiki - especially as a "does not exist" - that we should just 404 it and block the people who are causing us trouble. Just my 3cents. --thisniss 05:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thisniss, Whether the page stays or goes is of no consequence, but as you stated earlier it was the method Tawker used that is the problem. The page stays until Tawker can behave as part of the Wikiality.com community.


 * Tawker, you have no proof of what had been on the page before you went around the Wikiality.com community to have it (and its history) deleted.

Your responses in our prior "conversation" were as short and blunt as they are currently. And all the claims you are now making are questionable as is your judgement. Your behavior in this community is contemptable.--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 05:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * This is true Wikiality! Bring it on Tawker!  --MC Esteban™ 05:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I think we all need to ask ourselves "what would the Baby Jesus do" here. (I have no idea why or how this is relevant to a conversation which I'm admittedly gate-crashing, but my gut felt this statement HAD to be added!) --Careax 05:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * To add another lighter note, why not ask the bears :) - On a serious note, I poked WTV on IRC to try and get this sorted out and I got no response which well, wasn't promising. I'm sorry if I offended anyone, the objective was really just to try and prevent a huge ruckus (and save WTV some time at the same time) but apparently it's had the opposite effect.  So, I'll extend an olive branch and I hope people here can do the same. Deal? -- Tawker 06:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I am taking notes on the show right now...--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 06:41, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Huh? -- Tawker 07:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * When the show is on, I take notes and try to create pages relevant to this wiki. As far as your  situation, I have a couple emails out and it will be resolved after I recieve replies.--WatchTVEatDonutDrinkBeer 07:15, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, I would like to say to Tawker that if your aim was "to prevent a huge ruckus" there are many, many other ways you could have gone about this - and I suspect you know this. While certainly we look to him as our "Papa Bear" and guiding light of truthiness, Watch is not the only admin at this site, as the Wikiality:Administrators list shows.  If you simply wanted a page removed, you could have left a message with another administrator, or emailed the webmaster/owner of this site.  You could have registered your problem with the page in question on its talk page, or left a note on our Talk:Main Page or Complaints page.  Any of those are obvious and easy "no ruckus" solutions that are far less difficult and less invasive than bringing in people we don't know to delete pages at our wiki.  Come on - you know this was not cool.  If you really expected to be greated as liberators, if you really saw this simply as an "expedient," then I believe you would have taken a much more straightforward approach.  As it is, I find it curious that you would chose to have your friends (two, mind you - not just one other admin) do this late at night and at the same time that you, yourself were editing an article so that it would read more favorably toward you.


 * I would like to remind you once more that Wikiality.com is a satirical wiki. While I believe we should be - and are - an "equal opportunity offender," it is often true that the people we most directly "criticize" are the people we (secretly) like - and I know for a fact that the references to you in the wikinazi article were intended as a kind of playful, veiled "praise." It's unfortunate that you did not take it that way, but ultimately, none of that is the real issue here. As I said before, you have every right to express your objection to an article's content.  But you have no more right than any other user to abuse our editorial process, which means you cannot post content about yourself in an article without being subject to charges of vanity, you cannot expect to make changes to an article that we deem counter to the article's satirical content without having those changes rolled back, and you cannot delete articles without telling us why.  Again, while I myself am not a Wikipedia editor, I do know enough about Wikipedia's editorial policy (from my academic study of "wikiality" with a small "w") to know that such behavior would never be tolerated there. --thisniss 07:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, I do accept your point, on the first matter, I really did see it as a trivial matter (come on, a blank page is a blank page which is a blank page, nothing nada, zip, 0 content) and that was the page that was deleted, if you check the records, I also never edited it. As for the middle of the night, the world has 24 time zones, not exactly the middle of the night everywhere.  Ok, I did make the mistake of assuming this wiki was small enough to only have one admin, hey, I am believe or not human and I do apologize for being thick there.  Still, my only intent was to have a blank page which was simply screwing up search indexes removed.  The changing of the text was on another whole page altogether, I just dislike the term nazi, thats all and I figured if I did a find replace well, you know what i'm saying. -- Tawker 08:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, now that my indignometer has lowered from "hopping" to "steaming", I wanted to try to write a coherent response to your actions. As far as the "Tawker" page, I wouldn't have minded it's removal if you had taken the proper channels and requested it, or even if you had removed it yourself with an explanation. Instead, to my knowledge, you chose to have a Wikia admin do it. Then, you proceeded to threaten to have our site shut down if we restored the page, when you have neither the right nor the power to do so. No matter how you try to portray this, I strongly believe this was an attempt to bully and intimidate us. Not only that, but it was extremely hypocritical considering your position as some sort of vandal police at Wikipedia. You should know the rules of a wiki better than anyone, so your excuses hold no water. As far as Wikinazi goes, I'm sorry, it stays. I wrote most of the stuff on Wikinazi you took umbrage with, and I can attest to the fact that it was all in good fun, and most definitely in the spirit of Stephen Colbert. I repect that you are a fan, but you are also something of a Wiki celebrity, at least in terms of, and you seemed to embrace that fact. Therefore I felt you were fair game. Unfortunately for you, last night you became the butt of the joke with your attempted authoritarian antics and at this point you have only solidified your position as a totem for the term. Sucks to be you.

If you want me to accept an olive branch from you, you’re going to have to earn it. Try contributing to this site rather than controlling it and then maybe you will have a voice regarding the things we do around here. I suggest you start with an apology, or are you unable to admit fault like certain other people? If you can't or don't want to be a helpful part of this community, go back to Wikipedia, because we don't need or want you around here. --MC Esteban™ 16:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, this was previously nested in, Esteban said "formatting" yet my post has not been re-included so I'll assume removing it without replacing was a simple mistake on his part and not an attempt at censorship so i'll lump it all here.
 * Weird, when I originally saw the diff it didn't show the addition, just the removal, weird - so stricken -- Tawker 17:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I did reinclude it, check the history. --MC Esteban™ 17:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok, I think there was some misunderstanding. The page that was deleted was a redirect to a blank page - even the Google cache proves it.  You and I both know one cannot remove a page from the index without permissions, removing content from a page does not remove it.  Now, I think you may have mistaken my quoting of the TOS as a shutdown threat, it was more of a "please don't restore a blank page" and I was tired and possibly not thinking as well as I should be.  No, it wasn't a threat in any way, it was me trying to be polite (hell, there were people talking about local de-sysops here, which I opposed).  I'm sorry you saw it as a bully attempt, it really wasn't intended to be and I apologize if it came across that way. -- Tawker 17:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Could we just try a word that doesn't mean hate crimes, thats all I ask. I'm just find the word offensive - I have no doubt you can easily find a funnier word. -- Tawker 17:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I do believe I have apologized for my take and I'm sure you can see my side of the story now too, and everyone has had some sleep everything is calm and good now. At least so I hope. -- Tawker 17:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC


 * I would like to direct you to our disambig page Nazis, and to remind you once again that this is a satirical wiki. For a definition of satire, please see Wikiality:About.  You may also feel free to visit my user page, where I have an excellent quotation on the nature of satire, from one of my favorite German Commie Jewboys, Walter Benjamin, whose death was the result of historical Nazi persecution.  I'm sorry, but I do not take kindly to having my language policed.  That's how the Nazis started out, you know.--thisniss 17:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)  Oh, and FYI
 * In response to your claims about the "Tawker" page, this was not merely a "blank page". It was a page you yourself set up in the vein of our Things That Do Not Exist pages, such as Agent Orange or Fox Journalist, and that should be recognizable as a nonstandard blank page if you look closely at the link you provided.  However, you had your Wikia admin buddy remove the History of that page to cover your tracks as it's creator.  You could have just blanked it, but instead you chose the rather Orwellian method of throwing it down the memory hole.  -MC Esteban™ 18:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I've done a bit of separating to make this conversation more readable. I have not intentionally altered or deleted any comments, though I did move a comment so that it was not breaking up one of mine. Our convention for talk pages at Wikiality.com is generally to respond to the entirety of a person's comments, rather than to break them up, because breaking up a person's comments tends to create confusion on the page both in terms of the visual atmosphere and in terms of what's actually being said. It can also lead to "point-missing," both in the sense of non-It-Getting, and in the sense that one might accidentally or intentionally avoid responding to certain key points in someone's comments by breaking them up.

On the other hand, if you reply directly below the entire comment of the person before you, you can enumerate their points and everyone can reply in an orderly fashion. That way, everyone can participate in the conversation, and it doesn't feel like one big jumbled shouting match where people have to figure out where (or whether) they can jump in. Again, this is just the social convention we have at our wiki, and I'm sure other wikis do things differently. Perhaps you could think of our model more like the Quaker meeting model of "consensus" than the anarcho-syndicalist commune model. Just a style preference, prolly. We're all really into wearing greys and browns, and we actually like to be able to hear what the other folks here are saying. ;) --thisniss 18:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I think we can conclude this as officially resolved. Tawker has been properly mocked and user:Tawker blocked and marked as a troll.  Unless he can accept Jesus and learn to play with heroes properly, his wikilawyering and wikilobbying will lead to more permanent banishment.--Pro-Lick 18:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC)