User talk:Alienus

I'm not doing this. I have no confidence whatsoever in Wikipedia's brand of justice and I know that the end result of arbitration will be my departure, so I'm just going to walk away right now. Wikipedia just isn't worth it. It's not fair enough to deserve my time and trouble. Please remove my account, I won't be back. You "win". Al 19:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

---

Various emails alerted me to the fact that this page has accumulated a variety of pleas for my return, all of which I've summarily deleted. Apparently, I am far more popular in death than in life. For some reason, people are confusing me with drama queens like SlimVirgin, who leave in a huff only to slink back once their petulant little point is made.

To be quite clear, there is no use in coming back because Wikipedia is not a place that allows people to fix problems with controversial pages without themselves becoming the targets of vulgar vandals (The+Invisible+Man), chronic reverters (LaszloWalrus) and power-mad admins (Tony Sidaway). Even if I returned and survived the RfAr without being entirely castrated, it would still only be a matter of time before the weight of those spurious blocks pulls me down.

Sadly, Wikipedia is a house of cards in the wind, a sandcastle built at low tide. In the last few days alone, I've seen sigificant decay in some of the articles I used to protect, and it will only get worse. Nothing I've done will have any lasting positive effect. And even when some other Don Quixote shows up to tilt at POV, they too will eventually fall to the chronic incompetence and megalomania that afflicts so many of the admins.

The only way I could return is by apologizing for my multitude of supposed sins and promising I'd be all better, but the truth is that I regret nothing. I did what I believed to be the right thing and I would do it all over again just the same way, except even more effectively. I am quite proud of what I've done, so I have nothing to apologize for and apologize for nothing. It is you who owe me an apology, and I shall never receive it.

The only way I could even consider picking up where I left off is if I were in a position of sufficient power to be safe from such nonsense. In other words, I will return if Jimbo personally appoints me to ArbComm, just as he did with Jayjg. If ArbComm is full, this can be fixed by displacing Jayjg. Barring that unlikely event, this is my last note.

Please do not reply here. Just Protect the page or delete it or whatever. I don't really care; it's your Wikipedia now. I'm just another casualty of Wikipedia's inability to police itself. This wannaba encyclopedia is either going to change its policies radically or it will continue to alienate the editors it most needs and fall into further decline and disrepute, until some other site replaces it. The future is in your hands. Goodbye and good luck. Al 07:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Is there a way to appoint Al to the arbcom? Im seriously asking. Anyone? Could Jimbo be convinced? It is possible but if is there is a serious chance I'd make it a mission to do my best to make the case that we need Al on that body, provided he returns to continue his good work. It would really shake things up here and we'd see a major rise on confidence and return of many good users should the corruption and ills be remedied by an action like this, even if only symbolic. What is the first step? Get to know Jimbo? Write letters, phone calls, big donations$$$? Wikipedia can be worth it, and its worth it to try to fix it. This would be a major step in the right direction. I relate very well to exactly how Alienus feels. I would like him to come back, and hope he does pending his appointment to arbcom. If we get hundreds of new users here who start a petition and campaign to turn Wikipedia around, get correct its weak points, and make it a much better place, Al will come back and so will many more, while the bad editors will have to mend their ways to the new vibrant Wiki culture. Am I being utopian? It starts with a vision....Giovanni33 03:45, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't support something like that unless Al were to show that he understands how Wikipedia works, which he hasn't done. Someone on ArbCom should have dispute resolution skills, and understand better ways to approach content disputes than by repeatedly reverting, which he has specifically rejected even trying. I wish Al would come back and just try to apply some of the advice he's been given, but he seems reluctant to do so. -GTBacchus^(talk) 06:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Someone with his history of blocks on arbcom? LaszloWalrus 07:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure, why not? We are all only human. The only difference between his record of blocks and others who have a "clean" record is just that: someone chose to make it part of his record. It does not not mean those who have a "clean" record do not have worse 3RR or other equal "violations." Lets be critical when reviewing evidence, esp. evidence of accusations only. I know admins who have violated the 3RR numerous times, called editors "edit warriors," etc--yet have a clean record without any blocks.

AL does have a good understanding of how Wikipedia works. You comment about his areas of weakness, and may be relevant or true, but I'm sure that can be fixed. To me its clear that his plus side far outweights it, even if true, in my opinion. The only reason he is reluctant to come back now is because he is being treated unfairly, number of those with power seem to be determined to get rid of him, which is a shame given his positive role in helping to balance article content for NPOV. He is needed by Wikipedia. Giovanni33 12:36, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Jimbo is free to appoint and remove arbitrators at his pleasure. You might want to make this suggestion on his talk page, rather than here. Nandesuka 14:30, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Giovanni33, I'm not sure where you're getting that he "has a good understanding of how Wikipedia works". I consider learning to stop running one's head into walls a prerequisite to a "good understanding". Alienus never picked up on some basic, basic things about Wikipedia. I'm not trying to be rude, but I could provide numerous examples of him really not "getting it". Those you say were "determined to get rid of him" - at least some of that motivation was just determination to convince him to edit harmoniously, which he kept refusing to do. I'm afraid you're not reflecting reality here, Giovanni. -GTBacchus^(talk) 17:46, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree GTB: at least some of that motivation. Al could be abrasive at times and needlessly inflammatory... hmmm, perhaps he would make a good admin. 8P ^^James^^ 19:56, 8 July 2006 (UTC)