Forum:Request for de adminship on desencyclopedie

Hello.

I would like to ask for the unsysoping of the buraucrat Thaumasnot on the desencyclopedie wiki. It's a long time thought decision, which was ultimately taken with the reaching of a Godwin point recently. The reason I should ask for this unsysopage are multiple, but the first one is that thaumasnot is considering the desencyclopedie as is personnal owns, and not as a wiki, by abusive use of sysop power, and systematic refuse of community decision arguing that there is a conspiracy of contributors leaguing against him personally. I would also plot that is is constantly insulting, both directly or undirectly, or provocating various contributors and administrator. i think an eye here is largely sufficient, even with a simple google traduction of the page, and this just one into many others. In continuation of this, he is systematicly trolling on various consensus, by attacking credibility of contributors, blocking every possibility of going on, most contributors being bored by those interventions. Also he is carrying problems by maintaining racist article against the decision community, and is responsible of the departure of at least eight trusted contributors, and estimated twice and a half this number into new user. More of this is detailled here. If you got doubt on this, ask also other actives contributors and aministrators to confirmate the behaviour of this user. For what I know, such type of behaviour as no sense on a wiki.

hoping you will do something, regards. --El kloklo 20:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I certainly back el kloklo's demand. It's not worth spending hours working without pay to improve a wiki if your only rewards are insults, humiliations, vandalisms on your edits and the impossibility to change anything due to one person's conservatism and greed for power. --Psychoparten 10:01, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not an admin on Désencyclopédie but a regular contributor and as smart and brillant may be Thaumasnot as an author, he lost all his credibility in terms of managing this particular Wiki, always looking for conflict and never changing his mind on any point, should it be benigne or important. Several regular users have left Désencyclopédie in the last 12 monthes because of his behavior or his provocation and the balance between his positive and negative contributions clearly goes on the wrong side. We asked him several time to try to change the way he acts but he never took our requests in consideration. I hate what happens now but I think it's the only way to make the things change. Regards. --WiiKend

As a new user, I would like to ask that my opinion on the matter should be taken with extreme caution and in your judgement you should take into account my time spent on this project. That said, from my understanding I do think that there is an issue which must be tackled now and with emergency. Indeed every contributor in this community should be considered as a person and treated as one should be in real life. Provocative speeches are verily a demeaning way to convey an opinion and not helpful to build a peaceful community whose aim is to achieve the best results by doing voluntary work. --Bucenghuf 12:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I won't repeat everything that has been said here, just that I support El Kloklo's demand. Thaumasnot's behaviour wouldn't be much of a problem for a simple user, but I think an administrator has to show a minimum of respect and self-control, which he clearly lacks. --Tiennos

I will say this : lots of angry talking and ad hominem attacks, and lots of happy confusion between provocative attitude (which is ultimately benign) and administrative abilities. The facts are that these people happily sling mud in a poor "reversal" of my attitude, but moreover, want to add injury ton insult by degrading my status, which is pointless, since all real issues (not PERSONAL ISSUES) were solved in debates. I don't think any of their rants can be taken seriously, they are even citing silly jokes (godwin point) as insults, which is pretty amusing and ironic in the context of a humor site. Thaumasnot 13:12, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, here's what Marie Irène (sysop and bureaucrat) said :

"OK, I give my point of view after having witnessed a huge deterioration in the situation, and I certainly should have played my role before.

Thaumasnot is not the supreme authority of the Désencyclopédie after wikia, but just an admin doing his job quite correctly, with from time to time some mistakes and conflicts which he could avoid, should he put a bit of humility in what he says. The conflict between him and el kloklo seems to go beyond the mere management of a wiki and to be part of the realm of personal affinities, which is not something new, since he is an easily dislikeable figure (see WiiKend case or several conflicts with myself).

Far from trying to clean Thaumasnot from the accusation of him causing a bad ambiance, one is forced to admit two things :


 * 1) Thnot doesn't ban his opponents, he only uses rhetorical devices to insult them - anyone can choose between answering and continuing the war of words
 * 2) If there must be a conflict regarding edits or protection, I suggest you not to let yourself be intimidated. In an edit conflict with admins or UPTC (that is, well-known users), I advise you to tell me about it on my user page, or else to tell Ducon, so that we can act as a counterweight : I'd rather virtually fight with Thaumasnot than seeing the most liked contributors go away

The big problem, as Psychoparten remarked, is that I have let the situation get worse without doing the slightest damn thing, but I won't let guilt overcome me or justify myself since after all we're not on Wikipedia-I was naively believing that conflicts would get solved by themselves.

To try to prevent it in the future, I draw attention on the fact that you can ask me, or indeed Ducon, to act directly, and that Thaumasnot won't block a 2/3 decision. I take decisions objectively and in the sole interest of the site, and in that sense I can't admit that the site should lose such contributors as El kloklo or WiiKend to the benefit of Thaumasnot - the opposite is also true.

If I had to sum up this message - I am at the same hierarchichal level as Thnot, if you feel that a decision is arbitrary or unfair, you just have to tell me (or Ducon) so that it is redebated and reverted.

Now, I don't want to mind your business and interfere with your actions at Wikia, seems like I came too late to prevent it, I just want to say that I want Thaumasnot to keep his rights. You can translate it in English to defend yourself on the wikia page if you feel like doing so ; El kloklo I sincerely hope that you will come back and trust me."


 * I'm feeling very disappointed by this request. Thaumasnot has always been an excellent administrator and he has always been very invested in the Désencyclopédie. The way he talks to other people didn't specially change for years, just some new members feel more thin-kinned than older ones (and perhaps some of them are more greedy for power too). Now I think that it will teach to Thaumasnot that, with the exception of some old members, not everybody may stand his violent irony and stupid jokes and that he could calm down a little. But I can't express how I feel chocked by this request. -- Zalibus 16:04, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Zalibus, there is no such thing as "violent irony" in what Thnot says. As he clearly pointed out here, he "throws his criticisms in a completely honest way, without bothering with comic phrasings". Indeed, calling people who frequent the Jabber chat the dumbasses or telling admins that they behave like Hitler or commit a genocide because they are doing their job is nothing but honesty, that is : he wants his "rivals" as he seems to consider us to either submit or go away, and he has launched a bullying campaign to reach his goal. --Psychoparten11:16, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

As I said before, my decision is done by a long time reflexion of several months. I knew clearly that it will degenerate in an open conflict, by possible leaving of users. I've tried in multiple occasion to solve the problems, but each time, insult and provocation become more violent, until an unsupportable point was reached. As I expected, Thaumasnot is arguing that the conflict is of a personnal order against him, and trying to provocate by decridiblizing my request. I haven't verified, but he is also probably arguing in the desencyclopedie that my arguments are no sense or the like, and continue to write provocation. Saying that insult are normal on an humour wiki could be heard if these are moderated, and not growing more violent each time people show sign of boredom. And I think taht saying that resisting insult is a form of natural selection is at my mind unacceptable for administrators on any wiki, even the humourous ones. To both Zalibus and Marie Irene, I would said that this conflict would have normally never happened if Thaumasnot was able to take care of the problems he provocated pastly. Long time before your both arrival, thaumasnot opposed to community in an affair of deletion of a racist article, finding nothing more than provocating the users which ask for the deletion. It resulted in the departure in more than three quarter of the user. He didn't take care of this and continue to provocating and insulting people, and by this way continue to making user flee, even then an administrator one. With those elements, I can't believe he will improve anymore. I don't feel angry against Marie Irene in any case, but my decision is taken. I maintain my request for the de adminship of user Thaumasnot, and I maintain my decision of leaving the wiki if it is not accepted. I think that a trusted user of wikia which understand french, or even a autamatic generated traduction on the various forum, and user talk page for the two years of adminship of thaumasnot could be enough. El kloklo
 * Thaumasnot He insulted almost all members. And it marks many point Godwin. Utilisateur:Zonork

Well, I certainly don't support racist clichés, and even all kinds of clichés. The "racist" article was based on a funny word play ("musulman" = muslim à la superman), and other users supported the decision. furthermore, I didn't oppose the whole rewriting of the article, since it was only a stub. 2-3 users fled (as is predictable any time an article touches on a sensible subject matter), but certainly not 3/4 of all users : this is a wildly, grossly inflated figure. This is a VERY old issue, and since I have been here since 2 years and am the most experienced and knowledgeable user of the wiki, certainly you can bring some issues back from the distant past. El kloklo will have to prove all his diffamatory points and should be held accountable for all he says.

He says : "Saying that insult are normal on an humour wiki could be heard if these are moderated, and not growing more violent each time people show sign of boredom" However, gratuitous, over-the-top insulting, which I cultivate, is surely a comical device, and if not, he is free to ignore. He has a good point though : I will not "improve", and so won't he.

The goal of his request is also very strange. I am the technical leader of the wiki. I built its modern form nearly from scratch, and I never misused my power by vandalizing (another diffamatory assertion) or banning based on management conflicts. When wiki management debates grow serious, I always respond usefully (even detractors can attest to that). El kloklo simply plans to "lower" my opinions by removing a status, because he has absolutely no reason to remove me from handling technical problems. This is simply a hateful request. Thaumasnot

I was never plotting this issue as a personnal conflict as Thaumsasnot said, I would have act differently, like asking for his ban inspite of his removal of administrator right. I never said too he was vandalizing or banning people. But saying that his wiki management was used rightfully is false. I don't think that, first of all, a single contributor/administrator should attest of building a wiki from scratch were there was at least 4K more articles and a community of ten persons around him, which flee due to such behaviour, but that's ignoring the act of the few remaining. Nobody could attest to be the leader, technical or not, of any wiki, because wiki, by definition, is owned by his community. And it's not possible to said that thaumasnot respond usefully when wiki management grow seriously when it's need at least four continuous months of debate to obtain some evolutions, which were blocked agaisnt the community's majority decision, thaumsnot saying that he estimated the different possibility, and choose it alone, because he thought it was best in spite of other advice. And there is a clear limits between insult for the fun, and continuous insults and provocation, Which of course could be ignored, but when any debate start like "you're a pityful admin unable to do other things than automated task" or "you're bastards which are only trying to agress my very myself" and the like, it's a good way to close any further advances. About my accusation for the fleeing users, I am not able of giving name because I wouldn't connect to the wiki while this conflict is open, but anyone which ask La guenon qui pleure or Estonius which fled at this period could get enough information. I think there are still contactable, but PiRK could also testimonize that plot. I think that having such a behaviour on a wiki, even an humourous one, and pretending to be the leader, is not good for the wiki and all the climat in, which is actually very low as every one could asset. El kloklo07:22, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not approve this request . And I am  very chocked   by it  .  I just  would  like to say that it  has been two years since Thaumasnot undertook managment duties and that the quality of his contributions, both as an administrator and a writer , has been of outstanding value to the site . I am a regular reader and I may fix spelling errors here and there,  I  just  can say that once one gets past the thrashy remarks, thnot has always handled himself as a professional , has always been fair and  never banned his opponents .--Marie Sandale 08:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I am getting tired of seeing Thaumasnot defending himself of all remarks made about him by saying they are just personal attacks. On more than one occasion he disregarded what others had to say by claiming that they are useless and/or unable to make a good decision (based on nothing but his personal opinion of them). And then when someone disagrees with Thaumasnot about something it's automatically rejected because of it being an ad hominem attack from some angry and revengeful guy (just like he did right here)... I've had enough of seeing him show no respect at all for the users spending their time to help the wiki. --Tiennos

Tiennos is sampling my arguments that most attacks are ad hominem. So what, if he doesn't prove otherwise ? To disregard other opinions because one is of the opinion that they are wrong, is completely normal. So what ? To say that "it's automatically rejected because of it being an ad hominem attack from some angry and revengeful guy" is completely non-sense, since all debates (featured article system, welcome page design) were solved by consensus, even if this was tedious (and naturally so, since it is a complicated subject matter). After all the lies thrown into thispage and my rebuttals, I can't even imagine how they can go on complaining about my discarding of their remarks as ad hominem.

Beyond the inconclusiveness of their arguments and their inadequacy with a request for removing admin rights, I must say that El kloklo's lies and misunderstanding are incredible. When I say I built it nearly from scratch, it is in a technical sense : I actually built the UnNews section, the featured article system, the deletion and community forums. To say anything less than that I am the technical leader is absolute non-sense, and he knows it. To say that I am not the technical leader because I didn't write 4K articles goes a long way to show how he is cruelly misled about his ability to hold a serious argument.

"four continuous months of debate :" well prove it, or troll elsewhere, El kloklo. Each issue was solved in less than a month. If he wants to string together all issues throughout the years, yes, of course, I was the main factor of conflicts for 2 CONTINUOUS years.

He says "when any debate start like "you're a pityful admin unable to do other things than automated task", it's a good way to close any further advances", he completely ignores the fact that this was in response to a counter-decision against my own decision that even Tiennos and Wiikend, who intervene here against me, supported. And he also knowingly omits the fact that I let the counter-decision happen and didn't revert the counter-decision after I said, "you're a pityful admin unable to do other things than automated task", which was just in the continuity of a year-long battle of words, not a knee-jerk reaction. El kloklo, once again, knows it very well.

All this is truly getting ridiculous and incredible. After so many blatant lies, it can be argued that it is El kloklo himself who could be banned. I am appalled by his diffamatory methods, and how he can expect anything out of it. Thaumasnot
 * Debate about Best Of : began September, ended February. Yes, it was not 4 months, indeed. --Psychoparten13:35, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually there where 2 separate debates about Featured articles (Best of). The first one started in september but had absolutly no result (beside a dispute between 2 admins, Zalibus and PiRK) and the second one ran from january to february, this one resulting on some changes in the way the votes are conducted and in the look and feel of the front page. --WiiKend
 * Thanks Psychoparten for "stringing together all issues throughout the years". Thaumasnot 15:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, the problem of best of was first exposed in september, later in november or december, i don't record exactly, generating a bad weather in all the wiki, and was re opened in january, and finally concluded in february. So it have a sense to talk about a 4 month continuous debate. The starting of debate was as simple as that, no vote of user have to be interpreted by thaumasnot for taking final decision. It could have be begnigne if it wasn't of the point that he interpreted somes against vote as for vote, arguing that the argumentation is a for disguised, even if we got clearly definite section for the various vote for against and neutral/blank. By the faculty as taking all but simple argumentation as ad hominem attacks like he said, I couldn't believe it has sense if at least half of the active users are pretending to attack him personnaly, like when he said things like as usual, i'm alone against a meute (litteral defintion : pack of beast) of mauvaise foi (near word of maleficence). And when he said he built the wiki from scratch as a technical leader, if it's true he do things he said, he doesn't did all the technical things on the wiki alone, that's reducing to void the effort of others contributors like PiRK or Ducon, or again Estonius. An there were more than one conflict, where again thaumasnot used abusive insult and provocation, which resulted in departure of contributors like Sequosmik. Or another action was teh debate with Ducon about redirection(in ducon's discuss page), that if i share thaumasnot point of view, i never accepted his method of insulting and provocating which result nothing more but void, as Ducon felt agressed and blocked his mind. Again, what I'm asking is the de adminship of Thaumasnot. If this require my own banishment and de adminship, I will gladly accept it, in objective to make the wiki better to contribute and no more a place of provocation, conflict and free insults. El kloklo18:04, 26 March 2009 (UTC)