User talk:Jscott

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I say go for it. We all have to pump our resumes wherever we can, Jimbo. --Jscott 19:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Can you explain what you mean by that? Is there any particular reason why you think it's worthwhile to be snide to me? I have a strong interest in getting history right, and that does not include "pumping my resume" whatever that means. I think my record speaks for itself, there's no need to 'pump' anything. --Jimbo Wales 15:05, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, geez, I didn't even have a chance to spiff up the place before you dropped by!

I doubt I'm saying anything you haven't heard (and dismissed out of hand) before, Jimbo, but you are now eating the same dog food that many, many, many people are having to eat at the hands of your project. The rules that Wikipedia are currently following (which you have broken on notable occasions regarding both your entry and selected others) make it nearly impossible for people to have much control over entries on themselves, and in point of fact, the rules force a conspiracy of rejection of the person contributing things, even indirectly. Obviously, your stature within this community has allowed a lot of stuff to slide that other notables don't get, but your "founder" fight is just going to tarnish you without getting what you want, i.e. Larry Sanger's bullet-riddled body lying in a gutter somewhere.

By the way, I'm giving a small talk about your project at Notacon. (www.notacon.org) Speaking information is here at the bottom. You're more than invited to come; I'll even throw you a few bucks to get you to come by and join the festivities. Don't be shy. --Jscott 16:19, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Notacon

Heya, I'm going to be a speaker at Notacon too [1], on the subject of cryptography. I've got a fair familiarity with Wikipedia myself -- several dozen articles and a a few thousand edits under my belt -- Can I help out with the Wikipedia session?  :) - Elonka 19:30, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Jason, if you're around, please take a look at Phreaking, and verify the information about you and Lucky225 on the Wawina N2. If you please. :) --Othtim 07:16, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka

Thank you very much for your support in my RfA. Unfortunately consensus was not reached, and the nomination was not successful. However, I do appreciate your comments, am still in support of the Wikipedia project, and will continue to contribute without interruption. Thanks again! --Elonka 10:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I know what you mean

Hi, I've been editing WP for only a month now. I just want you to know that I've read your articles and after some experiences I've had the past week, I now know exactly what you mean. I've been vigorously editing some articles that have been AfD'ed, improving them to the point that even the original nominator changed minds and decided to vote to keep the article. Despite that, the articles were still deleted. I fear that this place just has too many flaws inherent to the system. Wikipedia's AfD system is horribly flawed in that anyone can pass by, vote "delete" and never come back, and their vote will still be considered even if someone spends time and effort fixes the article. Also, the mere fact that a single admin has so much power (deleting articles, blocking users, etc) shows that Wikipedia naively places too much trust in individual people. Yes, while what they do can be contested, it places the work and responsibility on those inconvenienced, rather unfairly. I fear that most of my hard work will be lost in the future to just any bozo who comes along and determines the topic "not notable". Sorry, just wanted to rant to someone who knows how crappy the system is. Shrumster 23:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if I'm using your talk page to rant about stuff. Just this week, I ran into another one of your criticisms of Wikipedia, namely Anti-Elitism. As an ichthyologist and an editor, I try my best to make some articles better. I recently did this on the Goblin Shark page, and then someone just came along and rearranged the way I had arranged the sections. I tried to tell them my reasoning on the talk page, but they just waved "consensus" in my face, without really addressing my points. All-in-all, waste of my time. I'm better off publishing some real work out there, rather than trying to "make the web not suck", and having my time wasted. I now know what you mean. Shrumster 08:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] notacon talk

I liked your Notacon talk, but found the Movable Type comment form on your blog inscrutable so I figured I'd drop my comment here.

"I enjoyed listening to it. I was surprised that it was not "chock full of profanity" which is what the archive.org page says. I edit Wikipedia occasionally and also have a page about me there. Since the new bio rules there is a big warning on my page's talk page [the page about me, not my user page] that warns that I edited MY OWN PAGE and I'm also an editor. OOGA BOOGA I remember the days before the strict BIO rules.

You say goat-suh? I've always said goat-see." Jessamyn (talk) 02:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --Elonka 05:28, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Dear Bonehead

Your entire contribution history over the past four years amounts to nothing but an amalgam of self-promotional spam, vandalism, trolling, and harassment. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] Can you think of any reason why we should keep you around here? east.718 at 10:06, February 24, 2008

[edit] Please consider taking the AGF Challenge

I would like to invite you to consider taking part in the AGF Challenge which has been proposed for use in the RfA process [56] by User: Kim Bruning. You can answer in multiple choice format, or using essay answers, or anonymously. You can of course skip any parts of the Challenge you find objectionable or inadvisable.--Filll (talk) 14:16, 13 April 2008 (UTC)