Changes

One editor in the banning discussion suggests that I used multiple accounts to vote multiple times in Requested Move discussions. Although the post does not give the name of the RM in which this nefarious activity allegedly occurred, this is the closest thing I saw to a specific accusation. It is complete nonsense. In fact, the entire subject of multiple voting had never even come up earlier. The post was made by a drive-by editor who admits that he does not understand the situation. Yet it is now treated as a more or less official explanation o f why I was banned.

One editor in the banning discussion suggests that I used multiple accounts to vote multiple times in Requested Move discussions. Although the post does not give the name of the RM in which this nefarious activity allegedly occurred, this is the closest thing I saw to a specific accusation. It is complete nonsense. In fact, the entire subject of multiple voting had never even come up earlier. The post was made by a drive-by editor who admits that he does not understand the situation. Yet it is now treated as a more or less official explanation o f why I was banned.

In an Orwellian twist, the past is fair game too. Some oversighter has remove a post a made concerning my essay on gender categories, obviously to make me look worse. When I took my story to Wikipediocracy, I was blocked almost immediately with the notation, "If they didn't let you get away with this on Wikipedia, you certainly can't do it here." Going to Wikipediocracy is the logical next step after being banned from Wikipedia, and they were ready for me. There has been plenty of gloating along the way, and my real name has been given out several times. Both of these are normally serious violations of Wikipedia etiquette. So somebody with the authority to override standard procedure had it in for me.  

In an Orwellian twist, the past is fair game too. Some oversighter has removed a post a made concerning my essay on gender categories, obviously to make me look worse. When I took my story to Wikipediocracy, I was blocked almost immediately with the notation, "If they didn't let you get away with this on Wikipedia, you certainly can't do it here." Going to Wikipediocracy is the logical next step after being banned from Wikipedia, and they were ready for me. There has been plenty of gloating along the way, and my real name has been given out several times. Both of these are normally serious violations of Wikipedia etiquette. So somebody with the authority to override standard procedure had it in for me.  

Sue Gardner was executive director at that time. Based on what Gardner has said and written, I gather that I represent everything she hates about Wikipedia. I'm certainly "the crusty old desk guy who knows the style guide backwards." [http://m.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/520446/the-decline-of-wikipedia/] I'm also the guy who favors "accuracy" over "kindness."[http://suegardner.org/2013/09/04/how-wikipedia-got-it-wrong-on-chelsea-manning-and-why/] On top of that, I'm the guy who thinks "Ganges" is an excellent name for a river in India.[http://www.fastcompany.com/1739776/wikipedias-librarian-world]

Sue Gardner was executive director at that time. Based on what Gardner has said and written, I gather that I represent everything she hates about Wikipedia. I'm certainly "the crusty old desk guy who knows the style guide backwards." [http://m.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/520446/the-decline-of-wikipedia/] I'm also the guy who favors "accuracy" over "kindness."[http://suegardner.org/2013/09/04/how-wikipedia-got-it-wrong-on-chelsea-manning-and-why/] On top of that, I'm the guy who thinks "Ganges" is an excellent name for a river in India.[http://www.fastcompany.com/1739776/wikipedias-librarian-world]