Thread:Pluto2/@comment-1272640-20170412190958/@comment-258494-20170412212155

Pluto2 wrote: I'm done with the wiki.

I really am.

It's not fun for me anymore. It's not a good environment.

It's not just the trolls. It's that ROBERT is also a problem. Blocking someone for "disrespecting authority." Punishing me for actually expressing a desire to improve the wiki and help deal with the troll problem. Moving the goalposts. Making up rules as you go along, and never writing down these policies. Suggesting that all new users be screened just because of a few trolls. Demanding that others update articles when you could have done so in the same amount of time (if less!) yourself. Not being professional with the articles - having the words "stub starter" in the article itself is a no-no. It doesn't look good. Calling a renowned expert on Civil War survivors a fringe theorist. Blocking people on a regular basis for citing original research, all the while not actually defining the policy of the wiki on what original research IS. Blocking me for "not understanding my position". The Gerontology Wiki is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a part of the GRG. And you've completely misinterpreted my remarks on Elisabeth Ekenæs - everyone has. I bore no ill will towards her or her family. It was a case of my hoping that her suffering would end and that she would pass away peacefully in her sleep. Because dementia is a horrible thing. This wasn't "I want more deaths" like Timmy acts. This was "I hope she and her family don't have to suffer through this." But you all had to be self-righteous and completely misinterpret what I meant. Thanks for not stopping to consider what I meant. It really says a lot about you guys.

Perhaps I'll come back in the future. But that would require two things: you not being an authoritarian jerk, and the troll situation being taken care of. And neither of those are likely to happen.

P.S. Don't delete troll comments on my talk page. Your comment obove, in a summation, is a rant typical of why you are "done here". You blame others for problems but never take a look in the mirror.

"I'm done with the wiki."

No one asked you to be here. Your choice.

''"It's not a good environment". ''

I didn't design the Wikia system, whose open-source, unregistered and free registration model gives the benefit of the doubt to trolls. So, as for the environment, talk to Wikia.

''"Robert is also a problem". ''

That's a point of view opinion. I think you're a problem.

''"Blocking someone for disrespecting authority." ''

Have you watched a tennis match lately? Soccer match? Baseball game? NBA game? Boarded a plane? Throwing someone out for disrespecting authority is standard operating procedure across many walks of life. Society expects you to respect the system. If you don't, you don't have to, but there will be consequences for that disrespect.

"Moving the goalposts".

There's nothing wrong with that. It's to be expected. It's called "progress".

"Making up rules as you go along"

So, you don't think it's O.K. to come up with new ideas? Necessity is the mother of invention.

"Never writing down these policies".

Totally false...have you checked the Gerontology Wiki blogs? I think the rules are clearer here than for most Wiki's.

''"Suggesting that all new users be screened just because of a few trolls". ''

What? First you complain about not enough security, and now you complain of too much security. You can't have it both ways. And a suggestion is just that...a suggestion.

"Demanding that others update articles".

Wrong. I don't demand, I suggest.Further, you don't seem to understand that leaders, of necessity, need to delegate some tasks. The POTUS can't do every administrative task. You just don't seem to "get" something like this, which is so apparent to most.

"Not being professional with the articles"

You do understand that "professional" means "paid"? The Gerontology Wiki is a volunteer endeavor. If I choose to make an article stub, and I label it a stub, that's following enough courtesy...I've improved the Gerontology Wiki overall by starting a new article that can be expanded upon by others.

"Calling a reknowned expert on Civil War survivors a fringe theorist".

No. Your source is not the mainstream, accepted viewpoint. It is fringe theory.

"Blocking people on a regular basis for...original research".

I made it very clear in the rules that one of the core values of the Gerontology Wiki would be the same three core tenets of Wikipedia, one of which is "No Original Research" (as best as possible...in reality, some original research may slip through). So, I did the right thing after giving proper warning.

"Blocking me for not understanding my position"

That's another way of saying that you disrepected authority. Now, just as most referees will allow a little leeway before they throw someone out, so you had plenty of leeway for over a year, but you continually pushed and made yourself an issue where there shouldn't have been an issue. Blocking is not necessarily punishment but a way to protect the Gerontology Wiki. Even your long rant here today is wasting my time with a long response.

"The Gerontology Wiki is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a part of the GRG."

Who died and made you the Founder of the Gerontology Wiki? This is a major example of "not understanding your position" (i.e., arrogance). I was appointed by the founder of the Gerontology Wiki, Keith Cody, to my position...you weren't. I was here in 2007. You were how old then? Keith Cody has long been affiliated with the 110 Club and if he wants to affiliate with the GRG, that's his business, not yours.

"You've completely misinterpreted my remarks towards Elisabet Ekenaes...everyone has."

Actually, no, I didn't. I know what you meant. But why are you bringing up a 110 Club issue here? I already told you that the 110 Club owner, not me, banned you. But it's so much easier to "blame Robert", isn't it.

Second, "everyone has"...

That reminds me of when Sean Spicer missuote a few comments comparing Assad to another long-ago evil despot. He misspoke. He didn't mean to say it. But, he did. You can apologize, but don't get angry at others for getting angry at what you said, when what you said was inappropriate.

"You all"

When most people disagree with you, it might be time for some introspection.

"It really says a lot about you guys".

No, it really shows that you're projecting.

"Perhaps I'll come back in the future. But that would REQUIRE..."

You're not in position to give ultimatums.

''"You not being an authoritarian jerk". ''

How about you learn to respect authority and not resort to ad hominem fallacies?

''"the troll situation being taken care of." ''

But you contradicted my earlier idea.

"Don't delete troll comments on my talk page."

If the comments don't conform to the purpose, view, and appropriateness of the Gerontology Wiki mission, they may be deleted, whether you wish them to be there or not. Why would you want troll comments to remain, anyway?

P.S. I'm going to block you for your above post. But you weren't planning to come back, anyway.Ryoung122 (talk) 21:21, April 12, 2017 (UTC)