chris_wot

Except that didn’t stop others from being banned. But hey, admins could never be damned with accusations of consistency (or basic fairness).

The hardware, software maturity (I’m looking at Gnome here), and lack of wanting tinker with the core OS and wanting to use an M5.

FWIW, in terms of software maturity - I think some might find that funny as I contribute to LibreOffice code :-)

My son setup Gamepass a few years ago. It was the biggest rip off I've ever seen. So many things about Microsoft are out of kilter. I'm about to migrate my daughter away from a 3 year old Lenovo Yoga to a Macbook Air M5 - it's just too hard to administer, its now sluggish and the AI is completely in the way. She doesn't need it, and despite a few business practices of Apple I don't really like if I have to choose between them and Microsoft, then I choose Apple.

I was not like this as a teenager. I went through DOS, Windows 3.1x, Window 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000/XP and then all the way to Windows 7. I have completely changed my mind now, it's really only Apple I want to use. Everything about Apple is easier.

Even more incredible that someone who represents an organisation is allowed to edit the English Wikipedia under that username! Anyone else would have their account banned.

But hey, don't expect consistency or fairness from the ones on the English Wikipedia.

If you quote the dictionary to win an argument, quote it in full. There are two definitions of obscure in the Cambridge dictionary. The other is:

obscure (adjective)

not clear and difficult to understand or see:

- Official policy has changed, for reasons that remain obscure.

- His answers were obscure and confusing.

- "the syntax itself is obscure"

Could you use it in production?

Do you have proof there are more editors now? By an order of magnitude? Or don’t mean there are people who like to participate in Wikipedia drama and who don’t actively contribute to article creation?

Not more obscure than Brainfuck.

Given the people now running the English Wikipedia, this is hardly surprising. Most of these folks have no real interest in article creation, only drama and fiddling with things like categories.

I dunno about stuck, but I get a lot of errors that prevent me from submitting new prompts.

I missed that, which is a pity as it's a fruitful story and I must have slipped up as it looks quite a-peeling. Certainly I clicked on this story as it stood out from the bunch.

iOS and macOS aren't even close to the awfulness of search on Windows.

That's nothing. He have Surface Pro laptops, and of course it has Copilot built in. I tried to open an app by typing in a search. On versions without Copilot turned on, instantly finds the app. On a Surface Pro, takes a good 20-30 seconds for it even start the search.

Complete rubbish. Not a single person in the organisation likes the new Outlook.

Indeed. The person who responded made the following points:

* BHG then made a thuggish and threatening post on your user page:

* BHG later characterised this like "oh but he was trolling me and I merely asked him one time on his talk page to stop (which is allowed)", which is bollocks because the "one time" is a long, angry screed written in a menacing tone.

And yet, no action was taken against her. I wonder why that was? And yet I was the one who was indefinitely banned. There was clear bias, and Wikipedia lost a good contributor. One I would say did far more than she ever did (she dealt with categories and dead links, and one article relating to Ireland).

Incidentally, if you want to know what the poster missed... it was that it was a one-way interaction ban. BHG was never, not even once, admonished for the way she treated me. In fact, her supporters actively encouraged her to attack me. When she attacked me, I was unable to defend myself or respond. Does that sound like procedural fairness to you?

Funnily enough, she did this to one too many people and was banned. I was banned by her supporters, not by ArbCom. It's what is known as a kangaroo court.

But hey, fairness and impartiality on Wikipedia was something that was lost a long time ago. Wikipedia is continuing to slide into obscurity. The ones who are active are most interested in drama, and not content. I feel sorry for those who are there for the content.

How was I instigating constantly, Chris? Can you provide any evidence of that? Perhaps an ArbCom investigation?

You can't, because that never happened.

But hey, keep defending BrownHairedGirl. You seem to be fine with her constant abuse!

And why was that interaction ban enacted? It was immenseley unfair. It was pathetic in fact, given it was a one-way ban, and she had consistently denigrated me. Unless you think that's justice.

So no, not the pot calling the kettle black in any way. She had her coiterie of followers, and she was banned as a bully. They enabled her.

I commented on BrownHairedGirl’s RFA. The most toxic user ever on Wikipedia.

I can assure you, there are those on Wikipedia who committed far worse offenses and they remain.

Like I say - a cesspool that doesn’t respect article writers.

Good for you I guess.

Everything I ever added was kept, and I was permanently banned. I created [ciation needed], started the admins noticeboard, reworked the USA Patriot Act article, wrote numerous articles for WiR with extensive referencing, contributed to peer review and good article reviews, and a shitload more, but nope. Not good enough.

Why anyone would contribute to that cesspool is anyone’s guess.

To purchase a subscription, you need to value and trust the service. To trust the service the provider needs to show it can be trusted.

It’s Facebook. Why would anyone trust them?

Provide some evidence to back up you assertions. Don't tell someone else to do it for you.

The Panopticon was taken from prison design and he used to it expand the idea that it was coopted by government over the rest of society.

... because it makes some decent points?

I can not understand why Foucault is taken seriously. In fact, I cannot understand how Sociology is taken seriously. In my uni course, the textbook tried to claim that childhood development is a myth. When I pointed out the decades of child development psychological studies and research, I was told "we aren't studying psychology, we are studying sociology."

Great! And yet there is an entire field that claims the direct opposite of what is being espoused and this is the best argument they could give me.

Windows Explorer always freezes for me. Teams is constantly interrupting me with popovers to tell me about features I’ll never use. on startup, it takes some time for panels to load.

The file system still uses drive letters. Can’t they scrap the old file system folder layout to something… organized?

No more ask.com toolbars being installed without asking.

I'll be honest - I've never heard of this! Thanks for the info.

I keep saying this (and I keep getting voted to oblivion) but we really need an alternative to DNS.

Michel Foucault's Panopticon is alive and well I see.

I contacted TM Bank and they would't let me do this.

The same thing you did. What sort of question is that?