Users/jefftolentino

 InfoInfo
Search:    

Hello my name is Jeff

Donor.jpgI'm a donor.

Name
Jeff
Powers
• making coffee
• taking pictures
• invisibility
Weaknesses
• ice cream
Magic
• unicorns
Weapon
• Ti-89
Sidekick
Poox

Hi Ian Tillman!

Pictures

I enjoy taking pictures. Photography is cool.

Here are some pictures I've taken:
space.jpgspaceuppermarket.jpgupper marketbicycles.jpgbicyclescart.jpgcart

doves.jpgdovesmilkfarm.jpgmilk farmbarnowl.jpgbarn owl

You can see more stuff on my [WWW]flickr account.

I also do the Random Camera project, which includes silly pictures like these:
smiles.jpgsmilespianobar.jpgpiano barmonkeyhugs.jpgmonkey hugs and friendsshields.jpgshields

I also like to make photograms with instant film. Here are some polagrams I've made:
butchersapron.jpgbutcher's apronivy.jpgivywildstrawberry.jpgwild strawberryextralobe.jpgjapanese maple with extra lobe

Comments:

Note: You must be logged in to add comments

Is your brother James Tolentino? If so, I went to school with him. -JamesSchwab

Yes, James is my brother. He's doing graphic design in Venice Beach. He also enlightened me on bacon dogs. -JeffTolentino

Nice watermelon picture!
Protip: preview is your friend if you want to make a series of edits on a page —StevenDaubert

"hmmmm, did some fooling around and seems to work if I enter the time as 4:00PM (6 and a half hours later). Shows 4:00PM to when i'm logged in, and 9:30AM when i'm logged out. Noticed different times on other events too." — from the Events Board/Talk page. What is your time zone set to in your user settings (under your name in the upper right)? —PhilipNeustrom

2007-08-25 15:33:40   Thanks for the comment bar, philip. I've been meaning to do that. :) —jefftolentino

2007-09-03 06:43:12   Great picture of Richards bike tunnel —EdHenn

2007-09-04 18:27:58   Thanks for the good editing. Sometimes [[Include(PhotoRequest)]] are left on a page to get a non-copyrighted picture or to get a better picture. —JasonAller

2007-09-05 00:29:50   Heh, I didn't connect the you from this page and the you from the bike rides until just now. I've checked on your page before because I've wondered if you're related to a Leto Tolentino, who also lives in Davis and went to high school with my mom. Are you? —ElisaHough

2007-09-05 11:52:56   Yes, my mom too. She also tells me that you came to my first birthday party. —ElisaHough

2007-09-12 09:42:39   Jeff- thank you for helping— I somehow erased the Events Board and had no idea how to undo this!! —MaryBurke

2007-09-18 22:39:15   Hey, Jeff. Congratulations on such a cool mystery picture. I especially like the metal milk box because it's a relic from Davis's earlier years. —robinlaughlin

2007-09-19 15:40:28   Random Page is definitely the way to avoid Recent Changes braindeath! —PhilipNeustrom

2007-09-21 16:59:20   When I went to Sly Park, my buddy and I built the best shelter of anybody, but we didn't get to sleep in it. Did you graduate from DHS? Maybe you should add yourself to Graduates of the Davis Joint Unified School District. —NickSchmalenberger

2007-09-26 00:04:50   Full moon ride tonight at 9 pm, meet in Central Park! Maybe I'll bring pictures of us as kids. —ElisaHough

2007-09-26 19:34:31   Not sure if you got a real world distraction, but I just quickly tossed those images you uploaded into Bike Bridges. —JabberWokky

2007-09-26 20:14:51   Fantastic writing on the Bridges. That was a fun read. —JabberWokky

2007-09-26 21:41:19   Awesome contributions! BTW, I remember your brother from DHS and (I think) Holmes... —Graham.Freeman

2007-09-28 23:47:31   nice pics on the Critical Mass page. and i like th epics on this user page. since you like to solve math problems, can u prove that .999 repeating = 1? —JessicaRockwell

2007-09-28 23:57:44   but there's a mathematical proof. shall i tell you or have you work it out? —JessicaRockwell

2007-09-29 00:06:39   x=.999 bar
10x=9.999 bar
subtract x from both sides
9x=9
x=1
Q.E.D.
(as taught to me by Casey) —JessicaRockwell

2007-09-30 10:44:37   xie xie ni —JessicaRockwell

2007-09-30 15:45:04   I love your polaroid mystery pictures! —PhilipNeustrom

2007-10-01 01:01:50   thanks for posting the pics of mass. —PxlAted

2007-10-07 17:18:25   good mystery picture, I've got a photo of it as well. —JasonAller

2007-10-23 23:52:41   I'm not gonna let some n00b get away with sanitizing an entry. I have little tolerance for this crap in general, actually. I figure if I keep their stuff from being up too long and act quickly, they'll find that it isn't worth their time to trash the wiki and move on. Provides a disincentive to repeat the behavior in the future. Seems to work, with the notable exception of Steve Ostrowski who never got the cluestick. —WilliamLewis

2007-10-25 00:15:59   Hey, Thanks. I did want a better representation of the unit. It was my overall goal. Honestly I am new on here... I mean really it's a public posting site, not a video game or anything. I really didn't want that senseless editing war, but if someone really has the time/energy to waste on trying so badly to get rid of newcomer edits I just felt like playing along with it since I was bored at home anyways. haha.

Anyways, i'm happy somebody understands the idea of treating newcomers well. =) —ThUn

2008-01-03 12:31:23   Nice Featured Page! —JabberWokky

2008-03-29 14:55:57   Hi Jeff! I just came across a comment you left re Zocolo's in Sac. Finally, someone who agrees that it's nothing more than a noisy meat market. I met up with some friends there and that is exactly what I thought. When I shared this with them they got all, "How DARE you!!" —CurlyGirl26

2008-03-30 14:06:36   Last time I was at Zocolo's, I was just angry. To avoid the blowhard-y Zocolo's crowd, I now go to Tres Hermanas or Ernesto's. Both have good Mexi food; less douchebags.

Diet Coke, I know: Lame. I got addicted to it while in college trying to avoid the Freshmen 50 or whatever. I know it's totally gross, but. . .I love it! It's weird that I even drink it because I don't have to worry about calories or watching my weight and all I eat is crap, anyway. I'm trying to quit, though. —CurlyGirl26

2008-08-19 19:58:13   Good guess, Jeff! I never would have known that the photo was taken at Crepeville had I not been there. —CurlyGirl26

2008-10-10 07:05:44   Ok, so google maps approximates the distance from Covell to the dead end at about .17 km. Let's say you're riding on a 26x1.5 tire (around 40-559), which should have a circumference of around 201cm (we could do the roll-out test for better accuracy here). That gives us 84.6 tire revolutions to reach the wall. In the unreasonable 52/11, that's almost 18 pedal revolutions. A more reasonable gear of 42/20 gives 40 pedals. You said 45 which is pretty close. A gear of 42/23 (a bit low maybe, but way more reasonable than 52/11) gives 46 pedals. I'd say you nailed it.

Additional bonus points for revealing the little Montessori school without a wiki page behind the wall at the end of the Green Meadows greenbelt! That has to be a high score or something. —EdHenn

2008-10-16 05:05:37   So you grew up in Davis? I'm wondering if you're related to a Gina I went to school with. —EdHenn

2008-10-16 22:57:49   Don't think I've seen her since dhs... say hi for me! —EdHenn

2008-12-25 11:23:17   Merry Xmas everybody! —jefftolentino

2008-12-25 11:28:43   Merry Christmas! —JabberWokky

2009-05-12 19:11:55   I like the kiss. That's a nice one. —JabberWokky

2009-05-13 22:32:24   hi Jeff! nice photos on your page. it's true, i am a traitor. —IrinaChakraborty

2009-06-03 20:39:46   Love your polaroids! —PhilipNeustrom

2010-01-21 10:40:45   Your office neighbor saying Hi! (at least when I'm around!) —LeeY

2010-02-08 16:36:11   It's a bug in the wiki software. Sorry, didn't mean to clobber your question. —WilliamLewis

2010-03-03 09:04:49   [WWW]ROFL! —EdWins

2010-03-15 22:37:36   Best page idea ever! —TomGarberson

2010-03-16 00:04:19   Okay... let me just open the envelope... Aaaaand... the award for best new entry so far in 2010 goes to... Jeff Tolentino! For his work, "Inanimate Objects with Amusing Faces"! —JabberWokky

2010-03-28 10:10:05   Thanks! —WesHardaker

2010-04-02 23:53:34   Thank you! —IDoNotExist

2010-05-11 07:01:51   Hey, how is my suggestion not "do nothing, other than tools"? It is intended to be such, and if it's being misinterpreted, I'd like to fix that. Zero changes on the content and people side, only adding more ways to make the record of changes more open and easy to read. Right now there are a limited set of people who know how and have time to track down the information that is available scattered across several pages. —JabberWokky

2010-05-11 07:03:58   Ennui is a great entry! —JabberWokky

2010-05-11 08:13:28   6 is do nothing but one specific change. 7 is do nothing to people's rights to edit the wiki (including making sure everybody appears the same when editing), and allows for unspecified informational changes (the ones I list are tools I have and Jason had, so it's flattening the inequity there), but draws a clear line: all editors from first uncertain edit to burnt out gnome will remain equal when it comes to the actual content. No flagging within content, no rights given or taken due to any automated metric. What Bob can do, Connie can do. 8 is do nothing, including not opening up records so that they are easier to read (which creates inequity in what people can be aware of). 7 is an effort to share opportunity more evenly and explicitly draw a line to protect equal rights to content. —JabberWokky

2010-05-11 08:42:44   Well, there are going to be a bunch of changes, so do nothing is really "keep the interface as similar as possible to what we have now". —JabberWokky

2010-06-16 14:09:22   [WWW]http://vimeo.com/12555175 is the video. The time lapse section might be cut out and added to the wiki. —JasonAller

2010-07-08 11:57:04   haha thx, i've been going thru pages with the spellchecker on firefox and just correcting what catches my eye. —JoePomidor

2010-07-20 08:25:32   Explore is huge and very little should be added to it... and that was a great addition, in my opinion! —JabberWokky

2010-07-30 10:08:59   Hi Jeff, Send me an email re: City Commissions and let's see if we can find a time to talk. kemblepope [at] gmail dot com —KemblePope

2010-08-10 21:29:00   A noble effort with XYZ. I hope it gets through. —TomGarberson

2010-08-31 19:40:53   That's awesome, thank you so much, Jeff! —TomGarberson

2010-11-29 23:02:46   Sweet picture! :) —PhilipNeustrom

2010-12-06 08:47:44   Your reply on the RR fence page cracked me up. —TomGarberson

2011-01-28 08:01:52   Fantastic photo on Fog! —TomGarberson

2011-03-13 14:21:59   Thanks for your help on the Bar Taboos page. —Wes-P

2011-04-11 21:55:49   Hi Jeff, thoroughly enjoyed the Random Camera @ the MU! Thanks! —ForestNeel-Grant

2011-05-18 12:22:47   Anybody who creates a Talk page off a Talk page is a dork. Wait...

2011-05-18 12:22:58   Jeff, Jeff, Jeff. It's spelled Monticello. Come on now! —TomGarberson

2011-05-25 15:25:32   Yeah. Not cool. —TomGarberson

2011-08-27 19:20:49   As stupid as it may sound, I think the core wiki greatness is in the kind of stuff just created about the carpet cleaning. —JabberWokky

2011-09-14 02:39:16   The LoshJawson account is not JoshLawson and has nothing to do with Josh himself. It's a parody account that somebody else is using. On the other point, a few people have emailed or IMed me about banning William this evening, and at least one person hinted at it on the wiki. I think you're the first, however, to mention it openly on the wiki. Most seem to feel he's crossed some kind of line in their mind, but that a ban proposal "probably won't go anywhere". I don't know what that means, but I figured you'd at least like to know you're not alone in being concerned about the treatment of new editors. I even got an "I've been doing this for x years, and am an expert in internet blah blah, and you should ban WilliamLewis" email out of the blue. (It was polite, I'm not trying to mock the email or its intent). I get the idea sometimes that there's a silent audience that watches the active editors: I've sometimes gotten calls from people (usually business owners) who know all kinds of odd details about wiki culture but I've never seen edit or speak up. —JabberWokky

2011-09-19 01:22:41   new owner so you never know! —StevenDaubert

2011-09-23 11:50:20   while I understand the need to inject your flair into that article, the city has it's own term which Scott used correctly. Thanks —StevenDaubert

2011-09-23 14:06:43   it's my fault for giving him the image that has Davis statistics on it, they delineate between Sewer and Water manholes —StevenDaubert

2011-09-30 09:55:25   Jeff, the discussion has been dead for two weeks. Unless you have something else to add, the discussion should be deleted. —WilliamLewis

2011-09-30 11:05:31   Again, you are restoring a dead proposal. Unless you want to continue discussing why I need to be banned, the proposal should be closed. —WilliamLewis

2011-10-01 16:14:51   Me, too. (Of course I'd say that!) Really, discussion over content is disheartening enough. Policy is worse (the ban page would fit in there). Metapolicy (how should we deal with the pages dealing with proposed policy) is even worse. The antidote for me? Go out and take some pictures. The wiki always needs more. One more reason I need to move back to Davis... —WilliamLewis

2011-11-21 17:39:51   That Katehi is more dangerous to the campus community than her alleged health and safety issues is not an opinion. It's a fact. There would have been no hospitalized students if she had not sent in the police. "Some people feel" are weasel-words that should not be applied to facts. —WilliamLewis

2011-11-21 17:40:57   I agree with WL on this one. —CovertProfessor

2011-11-21 17:48:34   Not trying to downplay her actions here, but I think it serves the movement better to be objective in our editing here. Trying to be an adult. —jefftolentino

2011-11-21 17:57:07   I believe adults often express strong opinions, especially ones that they can back up with sound reasons, as WL did. —CovertProfessor

2011-11-21 18:08:27   Actually, I agree with Williams message here. Just trying to remove some of the more absolute language. I think it makes the statement stronger. —jefftolentino

2011-11-21 18:13:21   We miss you. Don't you think it's about time to officially rejoin the Davis Wiki community? Forgive us, please. It's the adult thing to do. ;) —ScottMeehleib

2011-11-21 18:14:49   I've missed you too. I've been working on the treatment plant articles. I will upload eventually. —jefftolentino

2011-11-21 21:15:45   90% of my editing is done on an iPhone. Sucks indeed. —ScottMeehleib

2011-12-06 10:42:49   That seems to get into the whole NPOV issue... besides which, Jeff Wood doesn't seem to disagree with the use of "casually." I guess I'm opposed to deleting a description just because someone doesn't like it. If it's actually inaccurate, sure. If there's a difference of opinion, both opinions can be represented on the page. If it's just that someone doesn't like it... well, I'd say tough patooties. —TomGarberson

2011-12-06 14:12:59   I honestly want to know how [WWW]this edit is offensive and me making it was in any way uncivil. —WilliamLewis

2011-12-07 15:51:44   Well said. Thank you. —JabberWokky

2011-12-07 17:03:36   Just a heads up to everybody. I'm stepping back again now. I made my statements and I want to let it go for a while myself. If it not the end of it, so be it. I can give it another try later. Thanks, JW, for the nod. In light of my own bad edits, I want to fix things up again. —jefftolentino

2011-12-07 18:07:26   I didn't see your post until after mine. Don't worry I am going to pull back for now and just let the mmen handle it at meggos suggestion —OliviaY

2011-12-08 20:23:21   My question was whether he meant to delete his comment or not. I believe that is separate from trying to start the conversation up again. —MeggoWaffle

2011-12-09 11:14:45   Yes, I think he should restore it if he didn't mean to delete it. Now, don't take this next part personally. I understand you think you are trying to keep the peace, but honestly, and maybe you don't realize this, it appears as though you are trying to assert authority. Both of your messages have been the equivalent of "well you have every RIGHT to wear that dress, but it makes you look really fat." Maybe he agreed with your post and that's why he deleted it, or maybe he just accidentally did so after the edit conflict. I think he's capable of making the decision on whether to restore his comment without you hinting about how much 'damage' it would do. —MeggoWaffle

2011-12-09 18:34:19   Eh? How did you get to sacwiki during the downtime? They are on the same server... —JabberWokky

2011-12-09 19:01:02   Ah! —JabberWokky

2011-12-11 20:08:33   Hey jeff- the sac test url wasn't supposed to be really passed around yet. The edits made to the site, until the import is finalized, are thrown out every time I do a re-import. But don't worry - I saved that crazy map trace you did of the Sac region on my computer :) —PhilipNeustrom

2011-12-12 08:37:06   Hey, Jeff - the test version was just replaced with a new test version. He emailed me: The only known problem with this import is the "All Pages" tab crashes right now. Aside from that everything should be good. The user information, includes and redirects should all be working now. Take a good look around and let me know if you spot any problems with the import!

(and just to reiterate, don't put anything even sort of important on the test site. I'll blow away the import when I do another import. All important stuff should still go on [WWW]http://sacwiki.org/ up until the point we do the final import and switch-over) —NicholasBarry

2011-12-12 11:35:37   Cool. You should comment on the Wiki Gatherings page about your interest! —NicholasBarry

2011-12-12 14:08:03   Hey, FYI, you can indent bullets in Localwiki. You just have to use the Indent button in the toolbar. —NicholasBarry

2011-12-17 16:27:29   Sure thing. I hope I didn't hurt your feelings - I know you mean well. —MeggoWaffle

2011-12-21 10:19:55   Jeff, thanks for all the great map edits on the new Sacwiki! (Isn't the map fun to play with?) —NicholasBarry

2011-12-24 17:33:20   I don't mind addressing the issue of opening up the wiki to underrepresented groups, but I'm thinking that that particular entry is somewhat poisoned with antagonistic stances. I'm not being down on the participants, but I think the mood or tone in that particular space isn't ideal for a productive discussion about issues. Gender issues is one reason I support pseudonyms, preferably ones somebody can relate to. My personal concern is the lack of older Davisites (above 60), as they are drastically underrepresented. I'm sure there are several other groups as well as those two. I did try to work with a couple of the homeless to get their views. I used to talk to George Swazo now and then about the wiki and Davis. —JabberWokky

2011-12-26 04:31:55   my words exactly, but I was slightly more vitriolic so I backed off —StevenDaubert

2011-12-26 06:49:22   I figured I'd help him prove his point. Amusingly, I would really like some good, solid anti-Occupy viewpoints represented on the wiki. Whatever that was, was not that. —JabberWokky

2011-12-26 19:29:59   And now we'll see just how well the wiki's messaging system works, if at all... —CovertProfessor

2011-12-26 19:39:35   Oh, I was upset with some of the recent conversation about (not at you). I couldn't believe some people were saying the things that they were saying. I suppose I should put it back.

But then again, I could ask you when your page is coming back. It was always such a nice page.

And yes, we can hope that the editor will see the little yellow flag. —CovertProfessor

2011-12-26 22:50:30   Thanks for your kind comments about my page. I'm behind on some of my restaurant reviews, but hopefully I will get to them soon. As for the Sac Wiki, I see the appeal, but I wouldn't be much help since I don't actually know all that much about the city. I just wanted to create a page for the ice cream place I'd heard about, but when I tried to edit the table I was getting a link that I couldn't delete, and had no way of telling if it was linking the way it should or not (it was for the address, so perhaps this relates to the cool mapping feature you mention). Of course, I could have RTFM, but I've never been very good about doing that. With the Davis Wiki, I could just click Edit and see how it was done. It's pretty rare that I actually had to consult a help page. And there is nothing worse than fighting wysiwyg, trying to figure out how to get it to do what you want it to do, when a clear and unambiguous code will specify exactly what should be done. —CovertProfessor

2012-01-03 15:20:56   Thanks for the tip about [sacramento]Downtown Plaza, and thanks for enduring harassment for the cause! Also, I love your profile page (this page). —NicholasBarry

2012-01-04 20:14:48   No Jeff, they're not the same group. The Quakers, the Friends and The American Friends Service Committee — they're closely related. These Friends are pacifists and it wouldn't be surprising to find some of them participating in the peaceful Friends of the West Pond activities. There's an idea on the Davis Wiki that things can be linked so the surfer, so to speak, will go all over the place. I don't know if there's an appropriate place on the page for the Friends from the Davis Friends Meeting since the surfer is probably expecting that "Friends" are for the West Pond. Perhaps there could be a comment to distinguish a link to the Quaker Friends. —BruceHansen

2012-01-04 21:52:55   I agree with your observation that the crosslink lacked relation and was difficult to understand. Bruce is big on word play - they both have the word 'friend' in the title. I think the page content makes it pretty clear that one group is focused on a pond. —EdWins

2012-01-04 22:32:56   I'm OK with whimsical linking, but this one was potentially confusing (from one group to another, perhaps falsely implying that the groups were connected) and so I deleted the link. I think the whimsical links work well only if it's obvious that they are just for fun. —CovertProfessor

2012-01-06 16:37:02   Hey, interested in getting together for a Davis edit party to play around with the new Sacwiki code? Not that it's anything new for you, since you've been working with it for a while now, but it could be fun to get together with some other editors. I just put together a page to suggest this gathering: Edit party to preview Localwiki code. —NicholasBarry

2012-01-09 12:16:20   Oh, don't worry, we're also doing Sacto edit parties, and we'll be promoting those in Sacramento. The Davis edit party (or parties) will be mostly to give Davisites a chance to see what the new site looks/feels like. —NicholasBarry

2012-01-11 10:22:58   Oh, I know. Anytime communication breaks down or is inefficient, tensions raise. I think it's just a typical human reaction to feeling misunderstood/frustrated. I wrote a reply to JW [WWW]on my page that also works as a reply to you, to explain why I commented. —EdWins

2012-02-07 15:57:54   Jeff, what good is it if the wiki mirrors content found elsewhere? Why not go to the original source? Besides, the text you restored was copied from another website without licensing information. We can't relicense other people's works under creative commons. Oh, and you clobbered the map point and removed an important suggestion that someone bring a USB extension cable to a dead drop. —WilliamLewis

2012-02-23 21:06:09   I'd personally like more deleting and reworking of comments into cohesive prose that respects and collects the combined views, but that's just me. The bit that boggled me in his comment wasn't about deleting — it was (paraphrasing) "I am going to tag all your uses of the word 'delete' anywhere on the wiki with a disclaimer that it does not match my personal meaning of the word".

And on a side topic, I supported the Ban William page because it's important for people to voice problems and point back to them when they reoccur. So watch it with blanket "you guys" statements... I may just have to start posting disclaimers on all your edits. Big pink ones. With bold and all caps. And blinking. Fuzzy, if I can manage that somehow. —JabberWokky

2012-02-24 07:49:52   Ok, I won't rehash then, either. I'll just say that I'm glad you came back to edit the wiki, as imperfect as the collaboration can be sometimes. —CovertProfessor

2012-02-24 08:20:24   I hope you don't mind my saying so, but it seems clear you're not entirely cool with it. It seems like you're still bitter or upset about it, given that you make some digs about it pretty regularly. I keep my mouth shut because I don't want it to blow up again, but it's frankly a bit frustrating to feel like I'm being demonized for it, along with some other editors, every time a new controversy comes up.

If you're cool with it, please stop trying to make the other side look bad. —TomGarberson

2012-02-24 09:52:11   By not naming names you mean you're just being passive aggressive about it. Well, there's nothing I can do to stop you. But as CP pointed out, there are some of us who feel that what you see as hypocritical is completely different. I don't think there's anyone here who wants to go through all the bullshit again. But if you're trolling and just want to provoke a reaction, keep up the good work. Each time you do it it's a little more frustrating than the last, feeling like I'm being insulted without responding (obviously, since I am responding). —TomGarberson

2012-02-24 10:44:14   You're wrong about why the Ban William Lewis page was deleted. In your mind, obviously I, CP, and others were motivated by censoring your opinion about William. If that were in fact the case, yes, it would be hypocritical to object to EW's removal of others' opinions from the page. But it's not the case. It was a failed ban proposal. It was deleted because it was a failed ban proposal. —TomGarberson

2012-02-24 11:41:14   [WWW]Ban Josh Lawson. Deleted 6 months before the Ban William Lewis proposal, after it became clear the proposal had failed. There was some important stuff on that page about people using the wiki to try to harm others, but the ban proposal (the topic of the page) failed. JW proposed deletion and I deleted it, because it needed to be cleaned up. If we need to revisit the issue, it'll take about 30 seconds to restore the page. Just like William's ban page.

You're ascribing sinister motives to something that wasn't sinister. You obviously think I'm lying when I tell you what my motive was. That's why I find it insulting. If you want to go on being an ass about it, like I said, there's nothing I can do to stop you. But I want to make sure you're aware that you are being an ass about it.

If there's a conversation that needs to be had about board members, tone, or dealing with new users, let's have that conversation. But that's a different matter and a different page. —TomGarberson

2012-02-24 13:24:25   Come on, man. Don't play that game. You've been calling everyone who disagreed with you on the BW page hypocrites and, implicitly, liars for months. If you're offended by the word "ass" I'll remove it. My point was that you need to look at what you're doing.

I'm tired of the passive aggressive shenanigans. If you think there's an important issue, let's deal with the important issue and clear the air. You obviously have a great deal of animosity towards your fellow editors here, and it's poisoning virtually every conversation you enter. I'd be happy to talk on the phone or in person if you think that might help. But the nonsense needs to stop. —TomGarberson (559) 355-5814

2012-02-24 16:04:39   My contribution to the BWL event was mainly to express why I thought that WL should not be banned (at the time, you said you liked my comment) and then to vote that the page should be deleted once it seemed as though the ban proposal had failed. I note that you were the one to finally delete the page, so I find it a bit puzzling that you are still harboring resentment after all of this time. I also think that rules can have exceptions. Don't you? For example, I think comments calling someone a derogatory name should be deleted, and I have consistently supported that exception to the rule. I thought that the BWL page was another exception. You disagreed. We could continue to talk about whether it ought to have been an exception or not, but saying that rules have exceptions (especially when the rules are constantly evolving in light of community discussion) is not inconsistent. —CovertProfessor

2012-02-24 16:47:39   Better to say that, then, than to rehash old wounds and accuse people of being inconsistent. I almost noted the exceptions myself in my original comment to him, but at some point my parentheticals get out of hand, i.e., I was just trying to keep things simple. I can't think of any analogous case where the wiki went along with deleting comments off of a page simply because someone else found them to be "unimportant" and "irrelevant." (Off-topic, yes — but these were not off-topic). —CovertProfessor

2012-02-24 21:16:33   Some Talk pages never disappear. —DonShor

2012-03-15 19:32:53   Really? —TomGarberson

2012-03-15 20:15:08   "Kids, you may think your only choices are to swallow your anger or throw it in someone’s face. There's a third option: you can just let it go, and only when you do that is it really gone, and you can move forward." -Ted Mosby

Just watched that episode. Seemed relevant. —TomGarberson

2012-03-15 20:51:00   You didn't make any point at all but thank you for deleting the page. Let's move on... —Users/PeterBoulay

2012-03-15 20:59:46   Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think you've edited the wiki since you proposed banning WL the last time. I don't think it's right for you to complain about the way other editors handle things if you're not even going to attempt to help yourself. It's very easy to sit on the sidelines and criticize, but a lot harder to actually get your hands dirty and try to deal with a situation as best as you see fit. You're saying we should try backoff editing, which can be a good solution in many cases, but when all you do is backoff and never edit, you're not really contributing at all, right? I guess what I am saying is that I would like to see you help out when there is a problem, not just criticize about the ways that others have done so.

In this case, I think the reverts were warranted. This isn't just a problem that came up today, but one that has been cropping up for months, so backoff editing wouldn't help, but would just delay the problem. I made one revert myself as a way of backing up TG, to let sritern know that TG was not being a dictator and that sritern's actions on the wiki over these many months were not acceptable to many editors. I still think that was the right thing to do and not a useless action.

2012-03-15 22:07:51   Was bringing up the WL ban again constructive? Was criticizing other editors constructive? It doesn't seem so to me. Constructive might have been to try talking with sritern yourself. I think then you might be in a better position to judge whether things were mishandled. Seriously, things look different when you're actually trying to work things out and you've not made any progress. I can't commit to changing my awful ways (my one revert??) because again, I think that was the right thing to do at the right time, for the reason I stated above. —CovertProfessor

2012-03-15 22:14:46   Jeff, is there something we can do that would help you get over your animosity? You say you want to see constructive editing from other users, but what you're doing is the exact opposite. You're trying to tear down the people you're pissed off at. You're trying over and over and over again. You're semi-covering it up with the passive-aggressiveness, but believe me, it's not fooling anyone.

If you're not willing to work this out, just stop. Seriously. Stop. You've done more to damage the tone and atmosphere of the wiki than any single other editor in the past 6 months or so, and you're still doing it. Unless you can set aside your animosity, by far the most constructive way you can contribute to the wiki is to stop editing. That would be a shame, because you used to be a good editor. But you've been shitting all over the wiki for months and it really, truly needs to stop. —TomGarberson

2012-04-03 17:51:18   Jeff, Brent was attempting to be funny (I think) whereas I was not. Your 'hilarious' comment makes no sense. I don't believe anyone here wishes to engage with your negativity, so please either contribute to the wiki or go back to lurking. —MeggoWaffle

2012-04-06 09:57:42   I didn't want to get involved with this wiki fray, but from an outside perspective (note I haven't edited on it at all on the topic matter). I don't think MW's comment came across tactful (I personally had never heard of 'check your privileged' til I saw the google link), I can see the bigger picture concern. If there were a group called "Enslave the Regents" protesting and trying to rein in the Regents of the UC, some people might take issue with the name. I guess what I saw was (from a zoomed out view). Person1: The name is messed up, shouldn't invoke slavery.
Person2: Chill out, who cares it's just a word.
Person1: Dude, check out history.
Person2: (joke about wiki page history)
Person1: Not funny, coming from a guy whose race hasn't been enslaved.
Person2: Don't bring my race into this. <delete convo thread>

I've been reading the back and forth between BL and CP, among others.

Personally, I think BL was a bit overly glib at first. I didn't know what check your privilege meant either, so I can understand that. And I think MW was offended a bit quick, but the issue clearly hits closer to her home than mine, so I can understand that.

I don't actually see it as a 'racist' attack, in the sense of the zoomed out view. Honestly, I lean more towards CP's rational point on BL's page about the issue. However, CP wasn't involved in the original thread. I think both BL and MW are at fault, and not for their standpoints but at their failure in communication. And hey, as others have noted, the wiki tends to be a poor communication medium for debate.

Overall, I am saddened by the back and forth, but I don't want to quibble over who was at fault or initiated it. It doesn't really matter. —EdWins

2012-04-06 10:03:39   I guess the word 'occupy' has less known, or maybe less publicized, connotations than slavery or enslavement. News has been full of uproar over the last few months over usage of that. [WWW]in homework, for example. "contained an extra-credit question that read, "A plantation owner had 100 slaves. If three-fifths of them are counted for representation, how many slaves will be counted?" I suppose my summarized conversation above can be repeated for this one, just swap a few words around. If someone were to comment people need to chill and it's just a word in a math problem, other people might be upset. Especially of those from different backgrounds, and I don't see (in such a context) a person as being racist for pointing that out. However, I stand by my comment of 30 seconds ago, I think both people could have, and should have, communicated better. —EdWins

2012-04-19 10:38:08   Thanks Jeff. I saw the horribly thought out Featured Page and had a kneejerk "revert it" feeling, and decided not to edit. That was a good path to take to fix the issues and keep the topic. —JabberWokky

2012-06-01 21:01:54   Why are you making it so much harder to reach 17000 pages? *cry* —BrentLaabs

2012-06-01 21:08:25   It does need resolution, but it got... sticky. Threats were made. —CovertProfessor

2012-06-05 11:41:44   Hi Jeff. I don't have time right now to look into the history, but why is a page about the J Street Co-op, a single building on a single lot, called Co-ops (plural) after Angel's request? If the page was a meta-page about the houses across the street — that is, a different page than it has been for years — the idea would make sense. But this remains a page about 234 J Street. Please enlighten me, or (weeks from now) I'll have the time to undo your renaming. (And thanks in advance for a response.) —DougWalter

2012-06-06 14:53:51   Quite frankly, I'm really upset at this assumption it has ever or will ever be treated causally, as I agonize over the ethics involved in each decision, and always aim for the maximally open presentation while trying to retain individual privacy for things like mental health issues or Social Security information. It is a very rarely used tool, and is always disclosed to the community when used.

It is not a joking matter to me. It is profoundly serious issue of community and ethics. —JabberWokky

2012-06-15 12:23:38   I tend to agree with you re: letting things fizzle out. However, the wiki is as consistent as the people who comprise it: pretty much zero consistency. Nothing wrong with that, as it matches the people of Davis. It does, however, make it laughable that "the wiki" does things, as if it were some monolithic entity or group walking in lockstep. —JabberWokky

2012-11-22 10:48:47   Thank you for your contribution. —TomGarberson

2013-02-26 16:24:15   Thanks Jeff! Not my ideal Monday :) —PhilipNeustrom

2013-02-27 15:47:21   Just an observation: in the last year or so, you seem to have time to criticize other editors, but rarely time to contribute productively to the wiki. That sticks in my craw. I wouldn't mind the criticism if it was coupled with more productive edits. —CovertProfessor

2013-02-27 19:29:27   I don't want to fight, either, so I'll make a few last comments to clarify where I am coming from, and then I'm done. First, it didn't bother me that you disagreed with the suggestion that we limit the number of pictures on a page. I'm not 100% sold on the idea myself. What bothered me was your accusation that we were trying to "punish him" or that he was getting "steamrolled." We were in the process of discussing what to do. All you had to do was to state your opinion and your reasons; it was not necessary to make accusations of other editors while doing so. Second, by "reaching out to him," I assumed you meant inviting him to discuss on the Talk page. If you did that, you must have done it by phone, because I don't see where you did it on the wiki. You had time to make all of these edits today, but no time to create his user page (which PeteB did) and invite him to the Talk page, which would have taken all of two minutes. The fact that you weren't in favor of the proposal made you the best person to do it (in addition to the fact that it was your suggestion) because he'd see an invitation from someone who was on his side. And yes, it was a constructive suggestion to reach out to him. I said that right away. Third and finally, I never said that all you do is criticize people. I'll just repeat again what I did in fact say: "...in the last year or so, you seem to have time to criticize other editors, but rarely [note this is different from "never"] time to contribute productively to the wiki."

Ok, one last thing. I also find these conversations draining and off-putting. We all do. But note that productive edits usually don't lead to them. So, conversations like this should not put you off from productive edits. Or, to put the point another way, and say what I'm really trying to say: Jeff, I value your productive edits. I'd like to see more of them. —CovertProfessor

2013-04-12 09:34:40   [WWW]Nice!! —CovertProfessor

2013-05-09 - Thanks for the comprehensive grocery shopping list. I work for Whole Foods Market and wanted to make sure that I gave you some updated prices from our store. Hit me up at daivs.info@wholefoods.com or kristen.tantarelli@wholefoods.com

2013-05-16 16:42:52   Jeff-Thanks for creating Shared IP Address. I'm just not comfortable trying to make one myself yet. —PeteB

2013-05-16 19:08:49   I'm trying to figure out in what circumstances you'd use your new Shared IP Address include? —JabberWokky

This is a Wiki Spot wiki. Wiki Spot is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that helps communities collaborate via wikis.