Not quite two weeks ago, I commented on what Durova would do now that she's no longer an admin. I left open the possibility that she would go troll, but thought it was unlikely. Well, it seems I was wrong. In the two weeks since her desysop, Durova has done her damndest to create maximal drama. She has, to date:
It is plainly obvious to me that Durova is seeking attention -- that is, trolling. It does seem that she is attempting to make herself seem important ("I receive communications from Angela Beesley as well as important Harvard students"). Her choice to go public on the request for Brandt's article was clearly drama-seeking; she could have easily gone to any of a number of people (say, Guy Chapman, who is still an admin last I checked) to obtain the deleted revisions for this anonymous individual privately, which would have served the needs of this "friend" without any of the drama. I suppose she could argue that her choice to make the request publicly is respecting "transparency", but I believe the real reason is to create drama.
Add to this her very dramatic publication of a satirical sockpuppet report, and it's all very clear that she's going for maximum drama. Good show, dear; I didn't think you had it in you.
An unanswered question (and one that I don't expect will be answered) is what Angela's role in the deletion request really was. Did Angela really ask Durova? Was the deletion request Angela's idea, or Durova's? Does Angela really think that this was a good idea? Is Angela trying to help rehabilitate Durova's image? If so, why?
- Nominated Angela Beesley's article for deletion (claiming a "personal communication with Angela")
- Made a very public display of asking for the deleted content of Daniel Brandt's article for a "Harvard PhD candidate" that she's supposedly helping
- Continually argued with Giano, in many cases gratuitously
- Commented broadly on various Arbitration matters
- Vigorously defended Mercury as "not her meatpuppet"
It is plainly obvious to me that Durova is seeking attention -- that is, trolling. It does seem that she is attempting to make herself seem important ("I receive communications from Angela Beesley as well as important Harvard students"). Her choice to go public on the request for Brandt's article was clearly drama-seeking; she could have easily gone to any of a number of people (say, Guy Chapman, who is still an admin last I checked) to obtain the deleted revisions for this anonymous individual privately, which would have served the needs of this "friend" without any of the drama. I suppose she could argue that her choice to make the request publicly is respecting "transparency", but I believe the real reason is to create drama.
Add to this her very dramatic publication of a satirical sockpuppet report, and it's all very clear that she's going for maximum drama. Good show, dear; I didn't think you had it in you.
An unanswered question (and one that I don't expect will be answered) is what Angela's role in the deletion request really was. Did Angela really ask Durova? Was the deletion request Angela's idea, or Durova's? Does Angela really think that this was a good idea? Is Angela trying to help rehabilitate Durova's image? If so, why?
moo
ReplyDeleteDurova is a mad woman. Angela says she did not request the deletion:
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Angela&diff=prev&oldid=175848237
L O L
If trolling is seeking attention, then your blog post here is a trolling as well.
ReplyDeleteThe word troll really just means 'i don't like what you are saying, you're not part of my group.' And that's the entire "logic" admins and even Jimmy Wales use to ban others from Wikipedia.
Kelly Martin isn't trolling in her own blog. I don't remember her inviting you or anyone else to read it after all, at least not as of late. You can't track someone down on the internet and then cry out "You're seeking attention!" A troll is intrusive, actively thwarting attempts to be ignored. The difference is that you are here reading this of your own accord, when you could easily dismiss Kelly Martin's "trolling" by not reading it, duh. Durova, on the other hand, forces herself into Wikipedia decision-making; while one could ignore her, it would then allow her to influence content in ways that may not be desirable.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to avoid Kelly Martin's influence you should not read her blog. If you want to counter Kelly's influence on others you should probably address whatever shortcomings you see in her posts and hope you are more persuasive than she. But coming uninvited to her blog and saying she's "trolling" is just the height of stupidity.
Kelly Martin's an awesome troll.
ReplyDeleteI challenge Durova to ban SlimVirgin. I'll stand on my chair and applaud, and then lose my balance and fall on my desk.
Kelly's making some sharp but crucial observations lately. She's capturing the sinking essence of the place as well as anyone. Her blog has become essential reading for Wikipedians. Long may it continue.
ReplyDeleteGood work.
Actually, Durova banning SlimVirgin is probably the only way to successfully rehabilitate herself with a bunch of people.
ReplyDelete"But coming uninvited to her blog and saying she's "trolling" is just the height of stupidity."
ReplyDeleteWho said Kelly is trolling? Did you read my sentence and understand it? Let me fill in the gaps. I said:
"If trolling is seeking attention [Kelly's definition], then your blog post here is a trolling as well."
Does that mean I am saying Kelly is trolling? No. I don't think so. It means I think her definition of troll might be too vague.
If you'd bothered reading beyond the first sentence you'd also see clearly that I am against use of the term trolling.
The verbal section of the SAT is going to be a real difficult one for you I'm afraid.
then your blog post here is a trolling as well
ReplyDeleteLOL, I think you'd better save some of that fear for yourself.
I think it's time to lighten up on Durova. Yes she definitely made big mistakes and maybe or maybe not she was acting out of mean spiritedness. Nevertheless, she does some good stuff and she's still a human being. She's been held accountable and is presently pretty miserable sitting in the penalty box by herself. I propose we just move on and stop kicking while she's down -- it demeans and diminishes us as much or more as it diminishes her at this point.
ReplyDeleteHaha, yes, Durova has proven to be a spectacular drama queen. This is true even down to the level of making new sections for her comments rather than adding them to the thread they are germane to.
ReplyDeleteGoing proactively to Beesley to talk about her article in order to launch a "courtesy" AfD, only for Beesley to have to later say Durova misrepresented or misunderstood their conversation, was gob-smacking stuff. That's really keeping your head down!
If Durova is miserable, she certainly isn't penitent or thoughtful. (At least, not genuinely thoughtful about her actions, maybe thoughtful about restoring herself "politically". Although my impression is rather that she feels no such restoration is necessary, preferring to point out that she still has ear of the right people... who cares about the unruly mob?)
Lately I saw her casually and unreasonably insist an IP editor was a sockpuppet... in a thread about unsubstantiated allegations. The levels of irony... you've gotta laugh!