The TimidGuy case, aye, there's the rub Options

[Herschelkrustofsky]

TimidGuy is appealing his ban, which was executed by Jimbo in a GodKingly fashion at the request of Will Beback, who sent Jimbo a private email in which he alleged that TG was a paid advocate for the Transcendental Meditators. This situation raises numerous questions.

1. TG and WB have been going at if for a while as WP:ADVOCATES on opposing sides of the Transcendental Meditation issue. For argument's sake, let's assume that Will's allegations are correct, and TG is a paid advocate for TM. Does that make his editing more disruptive than that of Will, acting as an unpaid advocate against TM? Will's fanaticism on the topic is well known, and that fact that he is presumably doing it without compensation makes him possibly the more disruptive of the two, because he is so consumed with zeal to expose and discredit the meditators (misusing Wikipedia as a soapbox for that purpose), that he does it for free.

2. If Will has in fact acquired private information about TG's pay stubs and what not, is that not WP:WIKIHOUNDING?

3. How does WP:COI come into play when allegations are made based on evidence that is not in the public domain? Doesn't such an allegation axiomatically violate WP:OUTING?

The Arbs are already neck-deep in conundra over this. It should be interesting to see how it plays out. My personal take on it causes me to ask this: why is Will Beback still allowed to be editor, let alone an admin?

[SB_Johnny]

I haven't really followed arbcom cases in the past, but this is fascinating. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/popcorn.gif)

I'm curious though, is this really a "legal threat"? Some person named fladrif seems to think so, but hey, what do I know? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

[It's the blimp, Frank]

I haven't really followed arbcom cases in the past, but this is fascinating. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/popcorn.gif)

I'm curious though, is this really a "legal threat"? Some person named fladrif seems to think so, but hey, what do I know? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wacko.gif)

Who is fladrif, and how much is Will Beback paying him? Is fladrif actually "Firdalf" spelled backwards?

[Cla68]

The thing about Transcendental Meditation ™ is, why would any truly neutral editors be working in that topic? I imagine that the only editors interested in it would be followers of the philosophy, and those that hate it like a bad burrito. So the question is, who in that topic area is behaving the worst? I think the answer to that question is clear.

Since the last TM ArbCom case closed last year, the supposedly "pro" TM editors have carefully been trying to toe the line. Will Beback, however, can't abide that. So, he goes out and, at least twice that is known of, has discovered personal, private info about his TM editor adversaries that he believes proves an unacceptable COI on their part. He has emailed the information to admins who he believes are sympathetic to his cause, hoping that those admins will block or ban those editors and thereby get them out of his way. I believe at least one of those admins is a regular contributor here at WR.

Will Beback is the Oliver North of Wikipedia.

This post has been edited by Cla68:

[iii]

The thing about Transcendental Meditation ™ is, why would any truly neutral editors be working in that topic? I imagine that the only editors interested in it would be followers of the philosophy, and those that hate it like a bad burrito.

In spite of claims to the contrary, there are academics who study religious movements who don't hate the subjects they study "like a bad burrito", and they do write scholarly articles and books about these subjects. More often than not, though, followers don't appreciate anyone who isn't a follower saying anything about their religion that doesn't toe their line. There will always be people (often they tend to be ex-followers) who will act out of spite wherever mention of a particular religion is found, but it is a huge oversimplification and basically an act of drinking the religion-in-question's Kool Aid to claim that the only people interested enough in a religion are either the adherents or detractors.

[Herschelkrustofsky]

There will always be people (often they tend to be ex-followers) who will act out of spite wherever mention of a particular religion is found, but it is a huge oversimplification and basically an act of drinking the religion-in-question's Kool Aid to claim that the only people interested enough in a religion are either the adherents or detractors.

I wonder what Will Beback's actual motivation is. His cup runneth over with spite, and it's interdenominational spite -- he couldn't possibly be an ex-adherent to the broad array of religions and political groups he demonizes.

[iii]

I wonder what Will Beback's actual motivation is. His cup runneth over with spite, and it's interdenominational spite -- he couldn't possibly be an ex-adherent to the broad array of religions and political groups he demonizes.

Some people are motivated by a desire to destroy that with which they disagree. A kind of moral panic regarding minority ideologies can develop especially when one holds to a mainstream ideology that has similar features to the minority ideologies that one is opposing.

On the other hand, it is very easy for someone who is a true believer to mistake a person who is just dismissing favored arguments for one who is trying to rape, burn, pillage, and salt the earth. My advice is to try not to take things too seriously.