[00:37:29] @Bukkit https://terribletvshows.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=Wayside&diff=prev&oldid=212981 Care to explain your vandalism here? :/ [00:37:34] [url] Difference between revisions of "Wayside" - Terrible Shows & Episodes Wiki | terribletvshows.miraheze.org [00:40:06] Escalated to the SN: https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Stewards%27_noticeboard#Concerning_behavior_from_a_Meta_patroller. [00:40:22] [url] Stewards' noticeboard - Miraheze Meta | meta.miraheze.org [00:40:37] Well, what he did wasn't funny, and I am very disappointed in him. [00:41:11] Indeed it is not funny [00:42:47] I'm going to just give him a firm warning on his talk page on the terribletvshowswiki. As for you, @Bukkit, don't EVER do that again. You've been warned on another wiki for inappropriate behavior. [00:49:12] yes, buckkit disappointed. Those reception wikis are scum too, that I have to agree. They only tell lies, even so, there was no need for him to vandalize, because he is not outside of politics. [00:50:04] And what do you mean with "final warning"? Who has to choose if it should be blocked / have its rights revoked are the administrators [00:50:34] Dude, how are they scum? Not only that, but the "lies" you worded so poorly is too much of a stretch. It's mostly on what other users or people think of different media. [00:52:18] Not quite true. They criticize some games/series because the media spoke. But I won't go into details because that's not the point here. [00:52:58] That's literally proving my point further. Criticizing games and/or other types of media is pretty much on point. [00:53:04] The point is Bukkit, which despite being on any wiki, is wrong to vandalize a wiki that is in politics [00:53:46] Yes, and we're all disappointed in him. [00:54:45] @Doug I almost forgot to mention these deleted revisions of the comments Bukkit has wrote last month: https://rottenwebsites.miraheze.org/w/index.php?action=historysubmit&type=logging&title=Unused&revisiondelete=1&ids%5B46823%5D=1&ids%5B46822%5D=1 (They can't be seen by non-admins though. [00:54:47] [url] Permission error - Rotten Websites Wiki | rottenwebsites.miraheze.org [00:55:09] I think we've dragged the topic on long enough and I think @Bukkit gets the point by now. His patroller bit has been revoked so I suggest we change topics now. [00:56:40] Good point. [00:56:48] I hope he makes a real change in his behavior, and talk to Doug, who is a good steward, how much time will he have to request a patroller again. [00:58:07] He created a new account? [00:58:12] Your IP exemption rights have been revoked too! [00:58:31] https://terribletvshows.miraheze.org/wiki/Topic:Wntbhaeeqn40rhfb Before we switched topics, I have also warned him. [00:58:34] [url] Warning on inappropriate behavior and vandalism: on User talk:Bukkit | terribletvshows.miraheze.org [00:58:38] Okay, I think that's grave dancing now. Please disconverse. [00:58:46] (re to YellowFrogger) [00:59:03] Ok [00:59:32] I do not like this. I feel bad. [01:03:17] I like coffee [01:03:28] with milk [01:03:46] and bread [01:05:37] 🤔 [01:05:46] 🥶 [01:52:14] @DarkMatterMan4500, thanks for the links. Not sure why those comments are revision deleted, though, and would personally recommend unrevision deleting them [01:52:46] Ask RhinosF1. [01:53:27] Why? [01:53:34] You're the local sysop [02:01:01] Command sent from Discord by YellowFrogger: [02:01:01] . [02:01:07] I mean for the reason he asked me to hide those. [02:03:52] DarkMatterMan4500, I mean, you can unhide them :) [02:04:41] I have unhidden those. [02:04:47] oh, thanks :) [02:13:34] @dmehus I do not understand. the user asked to change their wiki address, and these things are done in phabricator [02:17:35] @YellowFrogger, I do not see a point in a user requesting a database rename for a wiki with zero content, on a wiki just created. They can request a new wiki :) [02:19:39] Looks like DoveTheWingedWarrior has requested a new wiki [02:19:46] so wiki creators can review it in due course :) [02:20:35] @dmehus i didn't know the wiki was empty, it requested a new wiki now [02:21:12] I agree with dmehus [02:22:58] thanks, Agent. YellowFrogger, yeah, I undeleted the wiki to be sure, and indeed it had nothing other than the default Main Page [02:23:09] so seemed pretty common sense for them to just request a new wiki [02:23:09] I've never seen you agreeing with me, so it's nothing new :) [02:23:36] YellowFrogger, I'm agreed with you, I think? [02:23:45] [[Meta:Community portal]], no? [02:23:45] https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Meta:Community_portal [02:25:02] but normally domain requests are handled in the phab so i thought that was the best thing to do, also it didn't say to delete the wiki on the community noticeboard which led me to try to help with that so the issues being resolved is the most important :) [02:25:20] Ok, Just jooking to agent [02:25:42] YellowFrogger, yep, definitely, but in some cases like this it makes sense to go with this option. Procedurally, it's way more efficient [02:25:59] Also, it's better because wiki database name changes aren't tracked in Special:RequestWikiQueue [02:32:57] @Agent declined request #22293, oh [02:34:01] insufficent details [02:34:03] He changed wiki scope [02:34:19] out of nowhere he did it [02:34:22] oh what [02:34:24] you're right [02:34:51] I remember what you said about what he is, but I can't say here [03:11:40] oh wow [03:11:52] he changed his Spacepedia scope after Agent declined it? [03:12:28] dmehus: before [03:37:03] yeah, doug [03:37:45] @dmehus He's lost, being the same user who had plans for another wiki a week ago [03:49:18] yeah [07:33:30] I wonder if anyone here ever encountered the situation which is like an extramarital child of a celeb vandalizing Wikipedia page of said celeb because I did :ThinkingHardMH: [07:33:45] witnessed that [07:36:11] I decided to check the page one day and noticed its content was wiped out except for first paragraph and infobox I started looking into edit history, maybe there is a reason and saw all the silly changes [16:51:45] here where I live, everything happens, imagine [17:11:17] https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/615786602454581249/930146793352736788/juu.PNG [17:11:46] The weather here is very pleasant: 29 degrees Celsius, 85 degrees Fahrenheit [17:11:54] I'm starting to wear a coat [17:36:02] tn: what happened with https://mobile.twitter.com/TheresNoTimeFor/status/1480484970187612163 [17:36:02] [Twitter] Sammy 🪤 (@TheresNoTimeFor): Just had a tiny little QoL change I proposed to Wikipedia's CSS added to MediaWiki core - I'd be a little proud of that, if it wasn't ripped without attribution as passed off as the dev's own modification. Much too annoyed to work out if its a CC BY-SA 3.0 violation 😡 | 0 RTs | 4 ♥s | Posted: 2022-01-10 - 10:21:37GMT [17:50:20] https://twitter.com/PaulBrandITV/status/1480596421766176769 [17:50:22] [Twitter] Paul Brand (@PaulBrandITV): EXCL: Email obtained by @itvnews proves over 100 staff were invited to drinks party in No 10 garden at height of lockdown to “make the most of the lovely weather”. ⏎ ⏎ We’re told PM and his wife attended, with staff invited to “bring your own booze!” ⏎ ⏎ https://www.itv.com/news/2022-01-10/email-proves-downing-street-staff-held-drinks-party-at-height-of-lockdown https://pbs.t [17:50:23] RhinosF1: [18:26:40] paladox: there's an investigation for a reason [18:26:53] imagine trusting the investigation [18:26:56] it's not independent [18:27:11] and the women leading it was known to prevent embarrasing stuff from becoming public knowledge [18:29:10] We know it's embarrassing anyway [18:29:24] I trust you can't make it look better [18:37:27] It's about as independent as you will get in Government [18:38:58] Which is 0% [18:39:20] about as independent as any independent investigation [18:42:33] remember the guy that was running the investigation then found to have been at a party himself 😂 [18:42:45] oh and it was denied first time then evidence gathered showing he was [18:45:09] was strange that someone who worked for boris would run it anyways. [18:45:54] The Met have already declined to investigate for criminal offences anyway, so the independence of the investigation is probably irrelevant as with all the information out there, the public can make their own inferences eitherway [18:46:18] Yeh i was speaking to a met officer about that [18:46:25] he thinks the leadership are incompetent [18:47:05] also was talking to us about the Met would have probably known about the parties because they have officers there. [18:47:07] and also [18:47:30] one tory said he thinks the mets chief is repaying a favour (e.g. by keeping her in officer she's letting them off the hook) [18:47:43] so it's all corruption. [18:48:50] remember when labour was accused of that cash for something (forgot the name of) a couple of decades ago the met didn't refuse to investigate. They investigated. [18:49:25] I mean, the IOPC rejected a referral over it, so the Met's refusal to investigate was deemed not corruption [18:49:31] the met need to be depoliticised [18:49:44] the chief should not be able to be apointed by the home officer or the london mayor [18:50:23] All Chief Constables are political appointments, except the 3 specialist forces [18:50:35] It should be an independent process. [18:51:08] Policing shouldn't be controlled by politicians [18:51:16] as long as they are independent i don't care which political way they lean as long as they are competent and it's decided independently [18:52:42] The only way to remove politics from policing is to go to a full monarchy - as long as politics has oversight over rule of law, policing will always have a political aspect [18:53:04] indeed doesn't mean you carn't try and make it as independent as possible [18:53:21] i personally think the met is the worse police force in the UK right now lol [18:53:22] It is as independent as possible as-is [18:53:34] not when the home officer can remove/apoint a chief. [18:53:42] it should be like the supreme court. [18:53:58] independent [18:54:09] It should be an panel of senior ex-police officers [18:54:12] The Home Office do not have that power [18:54:28] It is the Mayor of London that has that power, technically [18:54:29] it's been said in the news they do though unless i misread it [18:55:03] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/home-secretary-appoints-cressida-dick-as-next-commissioner-of-the-metropolitan-police [18:55:04] [url] Home Secretary appoints Cressida Dick as next Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police - GOV.UK | www.gov.uk [18:55:33] The Mayor of London is responsible for policing in London, including the appointment of the Commissioner, in consultation with the Home Office [18:55:47] apparently it's the otherway around [18:55:53] i mean for appointments [18:56:17] that being home office responsible for appointing whilst getting consultation from the mayor [18:56:24] The Home Office formally appoint on behalf of the Queen, but the Mayor retain responsibility [18:57:45] The Mayors office is also responsible for oversight of policing within London - so failing to investigate, such complaints would fall under the purview of the Mayors office [18:58:07] dmehus: my 2.5 RSE session was as boring and time wasting as expected [18:58:29] tbf i don't like kahn too much [18:58:38] like he doesn't do too much as is [18:59:02] * RhinosF1 doesn't know much about him [18:59:15] he is better then the other guy though [18:59:25] but still this is just hold your nose and vote moment [19:00:00] i don't like Andy Burnham either [19:00:33] i will never vote labour if someone from the hard left becomes leader. [19:00:40] *again [19:02:18] But given the offence would only invoke a fine, it is unlikely the police would do anything even if they found evidence of a breach - almost two years on. [19:02:35] and yet they are still prosecuting people... [19:02:48] Wes Streeting brought up the case only last month [19:02:57] it's one rule for us and one for them [19:04:17] How many people have they prosecuted 2 years after the offence took place for this legislation? [19:04:43] I haven't looked at a figure, only know that one is being prosecuted [19:04:57] Which case? [19:09:38] Plus most forces have a policy of not investigating retrospective violations of the Coronavirus regulations, likely because it is a waste of resources, time and public money for many forces that are already struggling under current case work [19:25:24] https://twitter.com/wesstreeting/status/1467816972759019523?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw [19:25:25] [Twitter] Wes Streeting MP (@wesstreeting): So people in Ilford are being prosecuted for doing something that the Prime Minister appears to have done - ON THE EXACT SAME DAY - without any consequences for him. ⏎ ⏎ It really is one rule for them and another for everyone else with the Tories. | 626 RTs | 1720 ♥s | Posted: 2021-12-06 - 11:23:31UTC [19:25:25] [Twitter] Quoting: Tristan Kirk (@kirkkorner): The Met Police happens to be, this week, prosecuting an alleged illegal gathering on December 18 last year. ⏎ ⏎ Not in Downing Street, but a house in Ilford. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FF6iCZ0X0AMI1oP.jpg | 10341 RTs | 28721 ♥s | Posted: 2021-12-06 - 09:31:09UTC [19:29:28] The thread makes a key point in why that might be - evidence in the form of a police officer witnessing the events. Delay prosecutions etc. are not unheard of, the standard and quality of evidence does not decline over time if it is written down at the relevant time. The question would be, "what evidence is there of this breach?" and if its "a police witness statement written in December 2020" then that would be the critical [19:29:29] difference and it wouldn't be a "historical" event [19:30:51] Plus there have been cases where people appeal the fines, and it takes months to go to court [19:31:33] And that does read like a court schedule, so it's not an investigation, rather a court hearing [21:09:47] @Owen what are your thoughts on all these parties No 10 has had? [23:37:14] Is IRC down or something?