Bot War
Bot WarThe current [started 2014-11-26] unacceptable battle of bots reminds me of two rams bashing their heads together. --- Except it is at a much faster rate (former figure of 64 per second - incorrect)
If you find it too disruptive, I can turn off the SharkBot. It is not my intent to use it against the wishes of the community; it is intended as a tool to protect the community.
Notably, it appears Manorainjan is only using a 'bot to assist in page (re)creation; it appears that each page has its own script that has to be invoked manually. Thus, it appears that Manorainjan is spending 12 or so hours per day essentially manually fighting against the SharkBot. One can only imagine what possesses an individual to engage in such pointless futility.
{I don't think that is correct. At present (12/12/2014) the pages are being recreated every few minutes even though they are not being deleted. Any other edit rises like a bubble up the RecentChanges list as the other entries are recycled.}
Since I wrote the original text, it looks like Manorainjan has gone to a bit more effort to automate his 'bot. I've currently got the SharkBot's auto-delete turned off, because there's no point in running it continuously against continuous page creation. And it's fascinating to watch; such an amazing amount of effort for nothing. It's not like the pages he created are serious content -- most of them would have been deleted or edited heavily by now even if he wasn't banned.
No, leave the Shark on continual patrol, circle a little wider, consuming more than one fish at a time.
Doesn't that accomplish what is needed?
I have made some changes.
It's curious how much Manorainjan's behaviour is like the infamous RA, whose interaction here was at least partly responsible for the introduction of the EditCodeWord. I wonder if they share personality characteristics. Apparently, in person, RA was highly affable and agreeable. It was only in front of a keyboard that he became a bully and an irritation, apparently convinced that his disruption was positive and would lead to some greater good. Of course, it wasn't and it didn't. He insisted he was a "righter of wrongs", but seemed utterly unable to recognise that the only "wrongs" were being done by him.
What is it about open wikis that attracts such people? Or are they no more attracted to open wikis than anything else, and it's just that there's enough of them around that we'll inevitably encounter one here every so often?
It is a commons area, like in school a hall or a playground, full of witnesses. And the teachers are about their business in their classrooms (except for the occasional hall-or-playground-monitor)
The characteristics and reasons are spelled out in: http://www.urbandojo.com/2010/06/16/bullying-reasons-why-do-people-bully-others-why-do-bullies-bully/
{Thank you for this. It does not however give any clues as to how to interact with someone who gives every sign of not having respect for the feelings of others, while at the same time declaring himself an expert in community and psychology.}
If he or she is, it might simply be an experiment to see if the WikiCommunity Works. Testing such factors as ego satisfaction, challenge of authority, community cohesiveness, anger management, community resolve, attention and treatment of newcomers and new ideas, surviability and what is said at: the TragedyOfTheCommonsCantHappenHere and TheOtherThings. I doubt if this is what the signs of his/her actions and interations indicate, however we can use this Episode as if it were such an experiment to determine for ourselves. In any case, the wiki has survived other such episodes before, and it will eventually see an end to this one
[Yeah. I doubt this will end up measuring up to GrammarVandal.]
To be honest, this is quite exciting (nearly amazing) incident (are phase or happening better words?). I might start thinking this is an advantage of a virtual world, where things can be created and destroyed many times over and over again without causing any noticeable permanent damage. You might say the distortion in the RecentChanges was quite a damage, but thanks to the SharkBot it is no longer. Furthermore it even caused new (potentially more advanced) things to be created.
Since I am new myself (joined 2 years ago [as of 20141212]), I had no impression of how annoying an uncontrolled presence of such a being could be and how the community and the administration would act to keep the order. So I am kind of happy to gain that new experience (even though I am an observer who didn't contribute to the whole thing at all). So the appearance of such an incidents every now and then has something useful to the recently joined people.
On the extra page: I have got another convincing example for the ridiculousness of the self-proclaimed experts.
{One of the things which is not possible while RecentChanges is being changed so heavily is the routine activity of pruning RecentChanges and moving entries into the current file of ChangesInMonth - currently ChangesInDecemberFourteen. The move of data can be made but RecentChanges cannot be edited by hand when it is changing rapidly. See ChangesInMonthDiscussion.}
I would have been willing to let TheHardBanned talk except for CategoryNone but now that he has demonstrated true disrespect by not backing off even after SharkBot did (at the request of me and some others although I can't say if because of), I too want him HardBanned. -- JoshuaHudson
Responsibility: Now since You got me HardBanned? I can safely rely on that You got to revert every edit I do. In consequence I do not have any responsibility any more for my edits. I can do whatever. I do not need to worry about anything. You took full responsibility for my doings. Whole Wiki has become my SandBox now Thank You ;-)
This statement on the wiki is FALSE. It is a statement of blackmail. We are all responsible for our actions even if it is believed that they are going to be reversed. -- JohnFletcher
To give an example, repeated deletion of RecentChangesThatBypassesEditWar constitutes an EditWar.
Bot war appears to have ended sometime between 2014-12-15 and 2014-12-22. Hard to tell exactly when because it kept disappearing off of NewRecentChanges faster than the normal timeout.
I think things were quiet by the 17th. It has now restarted on 23rd. He remains responsible for his actions, as we all are. I think it is a pity because some of the early contributions he made were in the spirit of this wiki. I am encouraged by the way the rest of us have been able to get on with contributing in our different ways. I believe that there is a community here. It is not the same one which was here earlier. It is a different community. -- JohnFletcher
True, I have come to accept that arguments and differences with those who enjoy arguing is a lose/lose proposition and just encourages flames. -- DonaldNoyes.20141224
{Historically, blocking on IP ranges has not worked well, for various reasons. -- DaveVoorhis}
I hope there is plenty of space on the fileserver. The delete from RecentChanges this morning was about 250,000 bytes of rubbish. -- JohnFletcher
{I've sent a message to Ward. It's starting to look like CodeWord time. -- DaveVoorhis}
This wiki is now the subject of an endurance test, as explained on DolphinScriptNews?. It is an abuse to use a general facility for testing without the consent of the community involved. Testing should be applied to a test facility so that it does not inconvenience others. -- JohnFletcher
see: TwentyYearsNextMarch, RecentChangesThatBypassesSpammer
CategoryWiki CategoryCommunity
EditText of this page
(last edited December 26, 2014)
or FindPage with title or text search