User talk:Kudpung

Hi, welcome to my talk page!

If you are new to Wikipedia, please read A primer for newcomers, it will probably answer most of your questions.

Online now? It is 7:43 AM where this user lives near Udon Thani, Thailand

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Kudpung closed

An arbitration case regarding Kudpung has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

For his failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, Kudpung's administrative user rights are removed. He may regain them at any time via a successful request for adminship.
Kudpung is admonished for failing to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator. In future, he is urged to ensure that he remains civil in his interactions with both new and regular editors, and responds to feedback on his conduct objectively and with an assumption of good faith.
Arbitration is supposed to be the final step in the dispute resolution process. The community is reminded that attempting to have a community-wide discussion of problematic behavior early on can prevent unnecessary escalations.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 22:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regretfully it came to this Kudpung, your sysop flag was removed following a request by ArbCom at WP:BN. You may seek restoration via WP:RFA at any time. Best regards, — xaosflux ^Talk 00:29, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Regretful, Xaosflux? I heard the rounds of applause and the popping of champagne corks in the Arbcom office from here ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:52, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Kudpung on the ArbCom decision

Please note that the following is a personal statement, made solely to explain my thoughts in response to the ArbCom decision. It is not in any way an attempt to re-debate any of the issues raised though I am well aware it will be discussed in both positive and negative tones both on and off Wiki. Well, there isn't really going to be much of a statement, but as an editor to join the club of what may be some of the English Wikipedia's most prominent users to be desysopped in quick succession for reasons other than breaches of T&U and serious abuse of tools or trust, there are a couple of things that need to be said.

As expressed by a very large number of users, BrownHairedGirl's desysoping was a catastrophic misjudgment by the Arbitration Committee. I will not characterize on the Committee's final decision in my case - which I am forced to accept anyway - but the way they reached it was flawed. There are so many parallels to this statement that I do not have the energy to pick them out and list all the total errors in the so called FoF, or to analyse the spite, vengeance, personal attacks and disingenuous comments voiced by both involved and totally uninvolved users; those are the elements, far more than the outcome, that make the case hard to swallow and why I have campaigned for years to keep non-involved editors away from ANI and Arbcom cases and to clean up RfA.

I quite clearly made my commitment to the Arbcom case in the 1,000 or so words at Statement by Kudpung and with equal clarity misguidedly put my faith in the Committee - any later claims that I had not taken part and which were used by the drafters in their FoF, and which 'lack respect for the Committee' are either deliberate or unintentional untruths. But I take being removed of my tools for using my Miranda rights after the first indictment as almost an unintended compliment.

From this, 9 years ago to the day (a 100+ support was quite a big thing in those days) and this piece of incredible irony, to the news I woke up to this Sunday morning is a very big loss of altitude and demonstrates that the Committee will not only pass judgement, but will deliberately make harsh examples of those who have done a lot for the project and made a name for themselves for the good things, and will fall hardest.

The comments here: [1], [2] , [3] reiterate the comments following the BHG desysoping.

It's a shame that so many people, including those in elected office - even the Arbitration Committee - treat, or have treated, such a serious project as Wikipedia as a place to anonymously vent their real-live frustrations and inadequacies and play power games in Wikipedia, making it not much better than a MMORPG, or in the case of some, use it for financial gain with impunity, or as a platform for some socio-political movements. The page analysis shows a remarkable imbalance between involved and non involved participants and possibly even also reveals who has an axe to grind.

The remedy cited "conduct" concerns, not "trust" concerns, and the only tools I will miss are those concerned with the trust for viewing of deleted material for COI, UPE, SPI, and blocking blatant vandalism (I never worked at AIV) and especially spam, areas in which I have at times been very active and in which the hundreds of hours are not reflected in an edit count even a high as 100K. I can easily live with that as can other editors who for various reasons have voluntarily handed in their tools such as Boing! said Zebedee to mention just one.

I would like to thank Lourdes most sincerely who was the only person who had the courage to speak in my defence - which illustrates what ominous powers and influence the Committee exerts - and I hope that having done so will not reflect badly on her. My thanks also to GRuban whose short but hugely important observation went totally unheeded by the drafting and voting arbitrators. My greatest respect goes out to Buffs who in the face of a lot of thoroughly unwarranted criticism has valiantly, but unsuccessfully attempted to preserve the integrity of the Committee and its process. I hope he will continue to do so on future dubious cases and without the barracking from the sidelines.

To anyone who has, or claims to suffer from PTSD as an explanation for their curious mode of collaboration, they really have my sympathy, but perhaps they will take a moment to reflect how stressful a) going through RfA in the first place is, and b) being subject to an almost 2 month long online virtual-reality Arbcom case can be, particularly one that is a show trial and kangaroo court which accords less dignity to the the accused than a court of criminal law in a civilised democratic country. Try to imagine getting over the last ten minutes in a passenger plane that's definitely going to crash. I have. It's a lot worse than simply being fired for breaking the company's rules.

Finally, I will mention this quote from another admin which has been on my user page for a very long time: A personal attack is something that is personal. It has to target somebody specific, and it has to target their identity. Jehochman [4]. It's hardly surprising that by now I certainly have a much reduced respect for an Arbitration Committee that relies entirely on prima facie evidence and does not properly examine the evidence (despite whatever might be claimed), and where many of whom are absent at any one time or recusing themselves for various reasons best known to themselves.

It's also not astonishing that having been instrumental in successfully bringing about some of the most important changes on Wikipedia, having spent lots of money and time attending Wikimanias and meet ups, and my thorough disillusionment with the way the WMF 'manages' its projects, that while I am proud to have been part of it, I have no desire at my age to continue in these backroom charades which ironically, are behind what is still one of the most visited websites ever and the best source of traditional encyclopedic knowledge in the world. (So that concludes yet another pompous speech by Kudpung) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Semi) Retirement

I'm sorry too, Kudpung. I really enjoy working with you. --valereee (talk) 23:08, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sad to see this as well. I hope you'll still be involved. Many of us still appreciate all the work you've done for this project. I've also removed the LTA who was just trolling you. Ignore him, he has no life. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:59, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I never saw any problems in your conduct, Kudpung, but I'm that guy, too. I'm pondering cursing out the arbs that voted for this ridiculous slap in the face. This website is going downhill fast and you may as well bail now, as things won't get any better in the near term. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:31, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be little room here for old men with common sense and a singular goal of creating an accurate, relevant, and readable encyclopedia. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 01:38, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to see this happen. Puddleglum ^2.0 03:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It actually should be Retirement but as I use Wikipedia daily for other reasons, I'm likely to edit the occasional typo I see, or add a source somewhere, or remove some blatant promo. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:53, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Despite some weird, snide, and irrelevant comment on the Arbcom case, health permitting I will be at Wikimania 2020 in Bangkok for all the days (pre and post) of the conference. Looking forward to meeting old friends who can make it there, and some new ones I haven't met face-to-face yet, and my enemies? Well don't let that put you off from coming - you will find that my 'bark is definitely worse than my bite' (if the non BE speakers among you can understand the expression). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:42, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My condolences, and thank you for staying to give as much as you feel able to give. --GRuban (talk) 13:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
❤️ 15:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]