User talk:Moulton/Mu

From Wikiversity
Jump to: navigation, search

Edit Summaries from Edit War with Jim62sch[edit]


 (diff) 09:33, 16 August 2008 . . SB Johnny (Talk | contribs | block) 
   (User talk:Moulton moved to User talk:Moulton/dnull1: admin oversighting :-))

 (diff) 18:50, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block) (159,663 bytes) 
   (NewYorkBrad's Proposed Principles Fix redlinks.)

 (diff) 18:35, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block) (159,653 bytes) 
   (NewYorkBrad's Proposed Principles new section)

 (diff) 18:15, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block) (139,387 bytes) 
   (That's nothing. Do you have any idea how much I'm reviled by the musicologists 
    around here? They think my musical stylings are utterly atrocious.)

 (diff) 18:09, 15 August 2008 . . 71.242.27.212 (Talk | block) (138,022 bytes) 
   (rv vandalism -- you give ethics a bad name)

 (diff) 18:06, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block) (139,383 bytes) 
   (Petition for Redress of Grievance Time to update my signature line, too.)

 (diff) 18:04, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block) (139,379 bytes) 
   (I prefer Bon Jovi. Do you have a song request for my next musical parody?)

 (diff) 17:56, 15 August 2008 . . 71.242.27.212 (Talk | block) (137,830 bytes) 
   (Undo revision 307590 by Moulton (Talk)non licet bovi)

 (diff) 17:53, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block) (139,307 bytes) 
   (Reverting vandalism.)

 (diff) 17:47, 15 August 2008 . . 71.242.27.212 (Talk | block) (137,830 bytes) 
   (Undo revision 307587 by Moulton (Talk)does it hurt?)

 (diff) 17:43, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block) (139,307 bytes) 
   (Reverting vandalism.)

 (diff) 17:36, 15 August 2008 . . 71.242.27.212 (Talk | block) (137,830 bytes) 
   (Undo revision 307581 by Moulton (Talk)how late you stayin up?)

 (diff) 17:35, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block) (139,307 bytes) 
   (Reverting vandalism.)

 (diff) 17:31, 15 August 2008 . . 71.242.27.212 (Talk | block) (137,830 bytes) 
   (Undo revision 307578 by Moulton (Talk) 
    Yep, and no 3RR -- we can do this all night you fucking psycho.)

 (diff) 17:30, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block)  (139,307 bytes) 
   (Reverting vandalism. Wikiversity is not Wikipedia.)

 (diff) 17:26, 15 August 2008 . . 71.242.27.212 (Talk | block) (137,830 bytes) 
   (Petition for Redress of Grievance this is unsuitable for Wikipedia. 
    DO NOT REPLACE IT. See WP:Civil)

 (diff) 14:20, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block) (139,307 bytes) 
   (Petition for Redress of Grievance new section)

 (diff) 12:30, 15 August 2008 . . Moulton (Talk | contribs | block)  (137,830 bytes) 
   (Focus Feel free to signal when you are rolling your eyes, weeping in 
    despair, etc. Just be sure to use In-Band Signaling.)

Draft E-Mails to Jimbo[edit]

SB Johnny entreated me to redact the Media Ethics blog post with Jimbo's disturbing E-Mails. SB Johnny said he couldn't intervene with Jimbo until I took it down. So I did, and informed SB Johnny on IRC, and also on his talk page.

On IRC, SB Johnny suggested I compose E-Mail to Jimbo to inform him that I had redacted the publication on the Media Ethics Blog of the E-Mail transcript between Jimbo and myself of last Wednesday night and Thursday morning.

Here are the successive drafts of the E-Mail messages which SB Johnny proposed that I write.

Moulton's First Draft[edit]

On Monday morning on IRC, SB Johnny asked me to compose a message to Jimbo, telling him I took down the blog post, and apologizing for it.

Here is my first draft. Tell me what you think...

Dear Jimbo,

At the desperate behest of SB Johnny, I have redacted the blog post at the Media Ethics Blog where I cruelly exposed and humiliated you after you took leave of your senses and sent me hostile, aggressive, abusive, and threatening messages for having the temerity to consult with counsel whilst dealing with a person of your stature and character.

I regret that you lost your temper and behaved in such an embarrassing and childish manner, and I regret that I found it necessary to expose your foolish threat to ban me at Wikiversity for failing to accede to your desperate request to take down links to the blog which similarly exposes and embarrasses Paul Mitchell for engaging in a similarly abusive and immature manner.

Non Serviam,

Moulton

Is that sufficiently tactful and contrite?

Moulton's Second Draft[edit]

Apparently my first draft wasn't quite up to snuff in term of tact and diplomacy, so I consulted another wise and able counselor who proposed a massive rewrite. Here is my second draft, based on his suggestions.

Dear Jimbo,

I regret the turn of events which have arrested progress in jointly resolving our reciprocal and interlocking problems. As a gesture of my desire to reach a peaceable outcome, I have provided, per your request, a comprehensive list of the atrocious BLPs which, for two and a half years have defamed and libeled dozens of scientists and academics who never did Wikipedians any harm at all.

Now I believe that these atrocious BLPs are still a problem at Wikipedia. In particular, I am not happy with the biographies of James Tour, David Berlinski, and Guillermo Gonzales, just to give three disturbing examples. If you would permit and direct responsible editors to correct the travesties perpetrated by IDCab, I believe the harm to both the victims of those atrocious BLPs and the harm to the increasingly tarnished reputation of Wikipedia can be rehabilitated and remediated.

Thank you for your time and your consideration of this urgent and long-festering problem.

Your Fiery Guardian Angel,

Moulton

Is that better?

Third Draft[edit]

I did not write this draft. It was written almost entirely by my counselor, with minor copyedits from me.

Dear Jimbo,

I regret the turn of events which have hindered our resolving this problem peacefully. As a gesture of good will, I have removed content from my blog and Wikiversity pages that could be considered as offensive to the subject in question.

However, I still believe that there are problematic BLPs at Wikipedia which have been written by or with the help of the person in question. In particular, I am not happy with the biographies of James Tour, David Berlinski, and Guillermo Gonzales. If you would aid in the process of removing the unnecessary due weight given in each article to labeling these individuals as only known by a tenuous connection to "Intelligent Design", I would be much obliged.

These are professors who have been awarded significant research grants from many large and serious academic and governmental institutions (like NSF and NASA), and it is unfair that some articles go on to claim that no one respects them when the facts contradict this. In particular one article claims that Gonzalez "had no major grants during his seven years at ISU" while ignoring the fact that he actually did have grants from NASA and other organizations. Furthermore, it has an "Intelligent Design" tag at the top instead of a biography template, which unduly makes it seem as if he was a greater part of the ID movement than what is actually the case. These biographies, and a few other profiles, are unfairly targeted by some individuals to make it seem as if valuable professors are backwards.

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Barry

Moulton 20:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

While a third counselor of mine approved of the above draft, I can't send it as is, because it contains known falsehoods and counter-factuals. In particular, this sentence is not true (for two distinct reasons)...

As a gesture of good will, I have removed content from my blog and Wikiversity pages that could be considered as offensive to the subject in question.

While I have removed some content from the Media Ethics blog (at the behest of SB Johnny in return for his intercession with Jimbo), I have not removed anything at all from the Moulton Lava blog, nor have I removed anything from the diverse pages of Wikiversity. But more to the point, the phrase "could be considered as offensive" is vague and ill-defined, as it requires me to have (inaccessible) knowledge of the cognitive-emotive state of multiple anonymous subjects who might read the two blogs or the many pages here and possibly be offended. I am not sufficiently omniscient to be able to divine the cognitive-emotive states of multiple anonymous and unseen readers over such a vast and scattered space of writings.

Moulton 14:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Fourth Draft[edit]

This is a revised version of the third draft, which removes the passages which are not true.

Dear Jimbo,

I regret the turn of events which have hindered resolving our problems peacefully. As a gesture of good will, I have removed from my personal blog and from the Media Ethics blog content identified by you and others as objectionable.

As you know, I still believe that there are seriously problematic BLPs at Wikipedia which have been written by or with the help of the person in question. In particular, I am not happy with the biographies of James Tour, David Berlinski, and Guillermo Gonzales. If you would aid in the process of removing the unnecessary due weight given in each article to labeling these individuals as only known by a tenuous connection to "Intelligent Design", I would be much obliged.

These are professors who have been awarded significant research grants from many large and serious academic and governmental institutions (like NSF and NASA), and it is unfair that some articles go on to claim that no one respects them when the facts contradict this. In particular one article claims that Gonzalez "had no major grants during his seven years at ISU" while ignoring the fact that he actually did have grants from NASA and other organizations. Furthermore, it has an "Intelligent Design" tag at the top instead of a biography template, which unduly makes it seem as if he was a greater part of the ID movement than what is actually the case. These biographies, and a few other profiles, are unfairly targeted by some individuals to make it seem as if valuable professors are backwards.

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Barry

Moulton 19:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles[edit]

From IRC...

(01:25:46 AM) Moulton: How about Harden Not Your Heart, the third blog post at Moulton Lava?
(01:26:41 AM) JWSchmidt: Isn't that one of Jimbo's Wikipedia principles?
(01:27:09 AM) JWSchmidt: User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of Principles
(01:27:34 AM) JWSchmidt: "Anyone with a complaint should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity."
(01:27:51 AM) Moulton: That's the principle he evidently neglected to apply in that last e-mail to me, when he took leave of his senses, cursed me, and threatened to ban me from WV.

User:Jimbo Wales/Statement of principles

This is a statement of principles from Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales.
The original version of this page was published on 27 October 2001.

As we move forward with software and social changes, I think it is imperative that I state clearly and forcefully my views on openness and the license. This page, like all Wikipedia pages, is a living, dynamic document, which I will update and clarify as legitimate questions arise.

I should point out that these are my principles, such that I am the final judge of them. This does not mean that I will not listen to you, but it does mean that at some ultimate, fundamental level, this is how Wikipedia will be run.

(But have no fear, as you will see, below.)

  1. Wikipedia's success to date is entirely a function of our open community. This community will continue to live and breathe and grow only so long as those of us who participate in it continue to Do The Right Thing. Doing The Right Thing takes many forms, but perhaps most central is the preservation of our shared vision for the NPOV and for a culture of thoughtful, diplomatic honesty.
  2. Newcomers are always to be welcomed. There must be no cabal, there must be no elites, there must be no hierarchy or structure which gets in the way of this openness to newcomers. Any security measures to be implemented to protect the community against real vandals (and there are real vandals, who are already starting to affect us), should be implemented on the model of "strict scrutiny".

    "Strict scrutiny" means that any measures instituted for security must address a compelling community interest, and must be narrowly tailored to achieve that objective and no other.

    For example: rather than trust humans to correctly identify "regulars", we must use a simple, transparent, and open algorithm, so that people are automatically given full privileges once they have been around the community for a very short period of time. The process should be virtually invisible for newcomers, so that they do not have to do anything to start contributing to the community.

  3. "You can edit this page right now" is a core guiding check on everything that we do. We must respect this principle as sacred.
  4. Any changes to the software must be gradual and reversible. We need to make sure that any changes contribute positively to the community, as ultimately determined by me, in full consultation with the community consensus.
  5. The GNU Free Documentation License, the openness and viral nature of it, are fundamental to the long-term success of the site. Anyone who wants to use our content in a closed, proprietary manner must be challenged. We must adhere very strictly to both the letter and spirit of the license.
  6. The mailing list will remain open, well-advertised, and will be regarded as the place for meta-discussions about the nature of Wikipedia. Very limited meta-discussion of the nature of the Wikipedia should be placed on the site itself. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. The topic of Wikipedia articles should always look outward, not inward at the Wikipedia itself.
  7. Anyone with a complaint should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity. They should be encouraged constantly to present their problems in a constructive way in the open forum of the mailing list. Anyone who just complains without foundation, refusing to join the discussion, I am afraid I must simply reject and ignore. Consensus is a partnership between interested parties working positively for a common goal. I must not let the "squeaky wheel" be greased just for being a jerk.
  8. Diplomacy consists of combining honesty and politeness. Both are objectively valuable moral principles. Be honest with me, but don't be mean to me. Don't misrepresent my views for your own political ends, and I'll treat you the same way.

Moulton 06:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Questions and Answers with John W Schmidt[edit]

Listen

1) What do you hope the project can accomplish?
a) Raise awareness of ethical issues and the need to evolve from current practices to more ethical practices, a never ending progression. We are enroute to the elusive and asymptotic goal of ethical best practices.
b) Improve the general level of scholarship among those who elect to participate in the learning project on Wikiversity. Its not just about improving Wikipedia, it is also about encouraging and helping people to become better scholars and better thinkers.


2) What ethics/management issues are you particularly concerned about?
I'm concerned about the existing Regulatory Policies and Practices at Wikipedia and the sister projects. These range from lamentably dysfunctional to discouragingly unjust to atrociously corrupt. Many of these erratic and dysfunctional self-governance practices manifest themselves in the context of the BLP Problem (Biographies of Living Persons) as documented by Doc Glasgow and commented on by NewYorkBrad and many others.


3) Do you think this kind of project can help Wikimedians find ways to improve Wikipedia?
Yes, it will help individual learners find ways, but it's not clear that enough individuals will learn enough to make a difference with respect to Wikipedia. But I have little doubt it will help those who wish to learn how to reason more deeply about ethical issues and ethical conundrums. Its anybody's guess if those individuals can make a difference on Wikipedia.

Song: Salmon Writhing[edit]

Title: Salmon Writhing
Composer: Barsoom Tork Associates
Artist: Creedance Smearwater Reprisal
Midi: Bad Moon Rising (Creedence Clearwater Revival)

I see User:Moulton rising.
I see trouble on the way.
I see earthquakes and lightnin'.
I see bad vibes today.

Don't go around tonight,
Well, it's bound to cause you strife,
There's a Salmon rolling dice.

I hear hurricanes a-blowing.
I know the end is coming soon.
I fear rivers overflowing.
I hear the voice of rage and ruin.

Don't go around tonight,
Well, it's bound to take your life,
There's a Salmon on the rise

All right!

Hope you got your things together.
Hope you are quite prepared to die.
Looks like we're in for nasty weather.
One eye is taken for an eye.

Don't go around tonight,
Well, it's bound to take your life,
There's a Salmon on the rise.
Don't go around tonight,
Well, it's bound to cause you strife,
There's a Salmon on the ice.


CopyClef 2008 Creedance Clearwater Revival and Barsoom Tork Associates. All wrongs reversed.

A Cantorial Night Song[edit]

Title: Salmon Chanted, "Evening..."
Composer: Barsoom Tork Associates
Album: Non-Specific
Artist: Moulton
Midi: Some Enchanted Evening (Sequenced by Derek Vintschger)

Salmon chanted, "Evening, nice to see you, stranger."
You too may see a stranger across a crowded room.
And somehow you know, you know as sure as sin
You're gonna see that stranger again and again.

Salmon chanted, "Evening, someone may be laughing."
You too may hear them laughing astride Durova's broom.
And night after night, as strange as it seems
The sound of their laughter will sting in your dreams.

Who can explain it? Who can tell you why?
Fools give you reasons, wise men never try.

Salmon chanted, "Evening, have you snagged your true fish?"
When you feel so callous, and wroth upon your broom,
Then swim to my side, and make truth your own
Or all through your life you may scream all alone.

Once you have found truth, never let it go.
Once you have found truth, never let it go!

CopyClef 2008 Richard Rogers, Oscar Hammarstein, and Barsoom Tork Associates. All wrongs reversed.

Absolution[edit]

Title: Absolution
Composer: Barsoom Tork Associates
Artist: Moulton
Midi: Revolution (Beatles)

You say you want an admonition
Well, you know
We all want to teach the world
You talk of Darwin's evolution
Well, you know
We all want to heal the world
But when you talk about corruption now
Don't you know that you can toss me out
Don't you know it's gonna be a fright
A sight, all night

You say you want full absolution
Well, you know
We'd all love to see the play
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We're doing what we can
But when you want money
For people with minds that hate
All I can tell is brother you have to wait
Don't you know it's gonna be a fright
A sight, all night
Ah

Ah, ah, ah, ah, ah...

You say you'll write a constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You better free your mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Jimbo now
He ain't gonna ban this song no how
Don't you know it's gonna be all right
All right, all right
All right, all right, all right
All right, all right, all right

CopyClef 2008 John Lennon and Barsoom Tork Associates. All throngs dispersed.

Cognitive Shrink[edit]

Title: Cognitive Shrink
Composer: Janice Joplin and Barsoom Tork Associates
Artist: Durova
Midi: Mercedes Benz

ArbCom won't you buy me a cognitive shrink?
My friends all have schpilkes and I need a drink.
Worked hard all my lifetime, my edits all stink,
So Freud, won't you buy me a cognitive shrink?

Oh Freud won't you buy me a night on the couch?
My friends have neuroses and I'm such a grouch.
Let me prove that I'm worthy and nobody's slouch,
ArbCom won't you buy me a night on the couch?

Oh Wales, won’t you buy me a Wiki that's free?
Spamming with dullards is annoying me.
I wait for reverting each day until three,
So Wales, won’t you buy me a Wiki that's free?

Everybody!

ArbCom won't you buy me a cognitive shrink?
My friends all have schpilkes and I need a drink.
Worked hard all my lifetime, my edits all stink,
So Freud, won't you buy me a cognitive shrink?

That’s it!

CopyClef 2008 Janice Joplin and Barsoom Tork Associates. All songs abused.

Bok Choy to the World[edit]

Title: Bok Choy to the World
Artist: Basilisk of Calabash
Composer: Barsoom Tork Associates

FeloniousMonk was a bulldog,
Was a bad fiend of mine
He never understood a single word I said,
But I helped him think real fine.

Chinese Chef Chorus
Bok Choy to the world, all the noise and churls
Bok Choy to the Salmon in the deep blue sea
Bok Choy to you and me.

And now, Lettuce Spray...

Ahem!

It has come to my attention that the calumny, so recently directed at lettuce and squash, has now spread to other greens, including those we hold most sacred and dear.

I declare it unseemly and disrespectful to demean such highly sensitive herbs and I shall not hesitate to haunt those who obliviously delight in bringing such mean-spirited suffering to our beloved succotash.

I warn you, I am the very model of a modern major vegetable. I've information general, of animals and minerals.

I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters horticultural. I understand relations, both the simple and genetical. About binary contretemps I'm teeming with a lot o' clues, with many cheerful facts about the smoking of the bong o' juice.

I'm very good at watering and germicidal incubus; I know the scientific names of herbals categoricus: In short, in matters horticultural, microbic and debatable, I am the very model of a modern major vegetable.

ArbCom Song[edit]

Title: ArbCom Song
Artist: NewYorkBrad
Composer: The Revolving Doors and Barsoom Tork Associates
YouTube: Alabama Song

Show me the way
To the next wiki war
Oh, don't ask why
Oh, don't ask why.

Show me the way
To the next wiki war
Oh, don't ask why
Oh, don't ask why

For if we don't win
The next wiki war
I tell you we must die,
I tell you we must die

I tell you, I tell you,
I tell you we must die

ArbCom of Wikipedia
We now must say goodbye
We've lost our good old karma
And must have wiki, oh, you know why

ArbCom of Wikipedia
We now must say good-bye
We've lost our good old karma
And must have wiki, oh, you know why

Well, show me the way
To the next little war
Oh, don't ask why
Oh, don't ask why

Show me the way
To the next little war
Oh, don't ask why
Oh, don't ask why

For if we don't find
The next little war
I tell you we must die
I tell you we must die
I tell you, I tell you
I tell you we must die

ArbCom of Wikipedia
We now must say good-bye
We've lost our good old karma
And must have wiki, oh, you know why

CopyClef 2008 The Revolving Doors and Barsoom Tork Associates. All wrongs reversed.

What Kind of Troll Am I?[edit]

Title: What Kind of Troll Am I?
Artist: Moulton
Composer: Leslie Bricusse, Anthony Newley, and Barsoom Tork Associates
Midi: What Kind of Fool Am I?

(From "Stop the Scam, I Want To Beg Off")

What kind of troll am I, who never signed my name?
It seems that mine's the only clique I have been slinking with.

What kind of sham is this? An empty shell, a lonely cell
In which a hardened heart must dwell?

What kind of quips are these that lied with every diss?
That thundered empty words of Jove that left me alone like this?

Why can't I find remorse like any other man?
And maybe then I'll know what kind of troll I am.

What kind of clown am I? What do I know of strife?
Why can't I cast away the mask of play and have a life?

Why can't I find remorse, till I eschew this scam?
And maybe then I'll know what kind of troll I am.

CopyClef 2008 Leslie Bricusse, Anthony Newley, and Barsoom Tork Associates. All wrongs reversed.

Do You Really Want To Block Me?[edit]

Title: Do You Really Want To Block Me?
Artist: Gastrin Bombesin
Composer: Culture Club and Barsoom Tork Associates
Midi: Do You Really Want To Hurt Me? (Culture Club, 1983)

Give me pain
To rephrase my stain
Let me loathe with zeal
I have danced
Inside your eyes
How can snubs be real

Do you really want to snerk me
Do you really want to
Put me down
Precious disses
Words that burn me
Flamers never ask you why
In my heart
The fires burning
Choose my colour
Find a star
Killer pooches always tell me
That's a step
A step too far

Do you really want to block me
Do you really want to
Shut me up
Do you really want to snerk me
Do you really want to
Put me down

Words are many
I have spoken
I could waste ten thousand bytes
Wrapped in sorrow
Words are token
Come inside and snatch my fears
You've been talking
But believe me

If it's true
You do not know
Moulton posts without a reason
He's prepared
To let you crow

If it's bile you want from me
Then take it away
Everything is not what you see
It's Original Spin

CopyClef 2008 Culture Club and Barsoom Tork Associates.
Resurrection Hackware. All Wrongs Reversed.

Trout of Doubt[edit]

Trout of Doubt is an artist and programmer specializing in computer-human distraction and computer graffiti. He invented Pie-in-the-Face Menus, inspired Barsoom Tork to use the term CopyClef, built imaginative applications for the Revolving Door System, ported the SinCity computer game to several versions of Spammix, and did much of the core programming of The Sins, including the highly evolved code for the God Function which mediates the relationship between the player of a God Game and the behavior and fortunes of the characters inside the simulated world. His Intentional Design provides a rich range of possibilities for the God Character to capriciously alternate between benevolent nurturing and satanic tormenting of the hapless community of Sins. Trout also wrote the demonstrations that showed off the capabilities of the TerrorBot multiwiki reverting language created by the Warp-O-Matic Original Research spinoff Maim Alliance.

More recently, Trout has adopted the monicker of SinFlacker on Smashdot where he confidently styles himself as a tireless and masterful UberTroll. On Smashdot, Trout portrays a rabid, evangelistic, and zealotic publicist for Intentional Design and the Dyscovenant Institute in a proof of concept for his forthcoming sequel to the Sin franchise, SinScandal, loosely based on characters and themes from the Passion Story. One of the more intriguing features of this forthcoming SinDrama is the plot device of Recursive Self-Betrayal.

Pie-in-the-Face Menu[edit]

A Pie-in-the-Face Menu (sometimes called Soupy Sales Menu), is a circular popup menu where selection depends on direction. A Pie-in-the-Face Menu is made of several "wedges" around an Amygdalic Center and works best with a middle finger input, and well with a Montana Mouse. Pie-in-the-Face Menus work well with keyboard deceleration, particularly four and eight item menus, on the cursing keys and the numbnuts pad.

A wedge can lead to another Pie-in-the-Face Menu; selecting this may center the mouse turds in the new menu.

Pie-in-the-Face Menus are often context-oblivious, showing different idiocies depending on what the mouse tail was pointing at when the menu was digested.

Trout of Doubt invented Pie-in-the-Face Menus, to demonstrate the utility of the wedge strategy which tricks people into choosing from a small number of ill-fated options, each of which ensnares the hapless user in an unanticipated and demonic trap.

Pie-in-the-Face Menus are drawn as pie slices with a HOLE in the head for an easy way to exit the drama.