|
I appreciate Murphy's brief timeline, which he posted today on his forum thread. The sequence in these lines is what I needed for now:
23/Apr 18:51 Murphy makes first post "find Erik"
23/Apr 19:30 user:Erik puts on his WP user page that "I'm from Chicago, IL and am a graduate of University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign."
23/Apr 20:19 GarethFT posts link to CV on Kraft's site (since removed by Kraft)
23/Apr 20:52 JesterJJZ posts Kraft address and phone
24/Apr 10:41 user:Erik says on ANI that "It is not funny to be outed"
24/Apr 12:27 user:Erik removes the "I'm from Chicago" saying "Removed incriminating evidence"
Murphy says he still believes that the two Eriks are the same person. I think they are two people, and User:Erik tried to use the 33-year-old Erik Kraft as a shield for a while, in order to throw off Murphy and friends. This is an issue that will hopefully be resolved soon. If Erik Kraft wants to help resolve it, and he is a separate person, he will at some point be willing to swear under oath that he made certain posts, and did not make other posts. We know a lot about Erik Kraft, age 33. We have his picture and we know his history. He may be out of the country at the moment, but that's a small matter in the long run, because someone named Erik Kraft, age 33, is a known quantity. I think he is innocent and was used by User:Erik to obscure User:Erik's real-life identity. I hope Erik Kraft is willing to help us prove it.
But whether you accept my theory that User:Erik played games and pointed the finger at Erik Kraft, or whether you accept Murphy's theory that they are both the same, the consequence of either theory is that each reflects very poorly on that 24-year-old Wikipedia editor, User:Erik.
Murphy is in a position to get checkuser data from the Foundation on User:Erik. That would be worthwhile and he should pursue it. Even if Murphy doesn't want to sue anyone, this checkuser data will be useful for Wikipedia itself. If User:Erik is even half as devious as it now appears, regardless of whether there are two Eriks or not, then Arbcom won't want him to create a new username and continue on Wikipedia. Because if Arbcom lets him to this, then Murphy can sue the Foundation. The checkuser request should go to Mike Godwin and should be presented by Murphy's lawyer, and it should be formal and well-constructed.
At a minimum, there is very strong evidence of trickery by User:Erik that involved an innocent party, Erik Kraft. At a maximum, we may even be looking at attempted identity theft.
If User:Erik was merely clumsy, instead of devious, then by now I would have expected a lengthy explanation and apology for his clumsiness, posted somewhere for all to see. No, I think he had Murphy in his sites when he posted that picture, and had a pretty good idea that Murphy would try to find him. He voted to "keep" the Murphy bio years ago, and he's been consistent in his position that Murphy is notable; User:Erik is a committed inclusionist. If User:Erik was merely clumsy, by now he'd say so, and admit that he was wrong to bait Murphy. And he would profusely apologize to Erik Kraft, thereby clearing up the matter of whether there are two Eriks.
How many of you expect that User:Erik will do any of this?
|
Don Murphy brings the Apocalypse!
