QUOTE(Alison @ Thu 22nd October 2009, 10:55am)
May be ... but more likely the whorehounds of wiki-hell will descend upon 67.160.100.233 digging up some microscopic poo-poo and tripping him up on a technicality.
67.160.100.233 is right, there is something wrong going on, but unfortunately they lack the skill and knowledge to present it all ... and the anon status will work against them.
The "
it's me" summary messages are a little bit revealing, n'est-ce pas?
it's me, John, saw typo,
fixing my own typo. By the way, it's still me, John,
it's me, John, correcting pub info ,
For Shankbone though, continued criticism and attention is a risk. He would have a lot more to gain, and create more cool, by coming over to the dark side and spilling beans. Who outside of the Israeli Consulate - and uninformed elderly politicians - really believes in the "leading Wikipedian" tosh?
His worst enemies are not the likes of Wikipedia Review, but his fanboi sets. Unless he outgrows them all, and the limits of "being one of us", he will end up as being "someone who once uploaded lots of snapshots to the pee-dia". This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: