The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help

This forum is for discussing specific Wikipedia editors, editing patterns, and general efforts by those editors to influence or direct content in ways that might not be in keeping with Wikipedia policy. Please source your claims and provide links where appropriate. For a glossary of terms frequently used when discussing Wikipedia and related projects, please refer to Wikipedia:Glossary.

13 Pages V  1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> The idiocy and the irony, banning nonsense goes full circle
Kato
post Sat 5th September 2009, 1:29am
Post #1


dhd
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined: Fri 29th Dec 2006, 8:39pm
Member No.: 767



A few months ago, I was arguing here with Slim about how, back in the old days, she and others were targeting just about anyone as being a LaRouchie, and I described the chaos that witchhunt had caused. I especially noted an incident when herself and long time user (and another anti-LaRouche figure) 172 (T-C-L-K-R-D) discussed banning a totally innocent guy as a "New LaRouche editor" back in 2007.

Here is my post, Slim simply batted this incident off by not addressing it specifically - claiming that people weren't banned as LaRouchies without good reason.

QUOTE(Kato @ Sun 12th April 2009, 6:07am) *

Not necessarily so. The whole LaRouche vs anti-LaRouche thing was a farce that had spilled out all over Wikipedia. Wholly unrelated people were getting threatened by Wikipedia powerplayers as "LaRouchies" on a regular basis. People saw it with their own eyes and have not been swayed by Hersch at this site. It was outrageous, and one of my first posts at this site was to highlight one such offense.

In April, 2007, an editor went to SlimVirgin and Willbeback and wrote this about Mbhiii (T-C-L-K-R-D) :

QUOTE(User:172)
New LaRouche editor

This looks quite familar now. [10] Like the last HK sockpuppet blocked by SlimVirgin, HonourableSchoolboy, this account has been editing articles that appear in my recent contributions history or are linked to my userpage. Sigh. 172 | Talk 19:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Sadly, by now I can spot LaRouche propaganda from a mile away. 172 | Talk 20:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


The message to SlimVirgin has since been deleted. But the spirit of the message is typical. The accused had nothing to do with LaRouche, and his edits had nothing to do with LaRouche. Yet he was immediately attacked as a "New LaRouche" editor.

A group of editors, led by SlimVirgin, and accompanied by anti-LaRouche campaigners Chip Berlet and Dennis King (whose Conflicts Of Interest were never questioned) were allowed to treat Wikipedia like an anti-LaRouche version of the McCarthy witch-hunts. Thus creating massive bad feelings and subverting the whole culture of the place.


Well here comes the most ridiculous development yet. Having spent years orchestrating witch-hunts with Slim and Will against LaRouchies, former admin User:172 has himself been indefinitely banned by some lunatic administrator - on the declaration that he is the pro-LaRouche renegade Cognition (T-C-L-K-R-D) based on "checkuser evidence".

So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge account ever (going back to 2002), or WP's checkuser facitilities are so incompetent, it has convicted the Witchfinder General of being a witch! laugh.gif

And to cap it off. Slim was right in the mix during these latest banning discussions which nailed 172!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Malleus
post Sat 5th September 2009, 1:42am
Post #2


Fat Cat
******

Group: Contributors
Posts: 1,682
Joined: Mon 27th Oct 2008, 3:48pm
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 8,716

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Who is this LaRouche character, and why should I care?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kato
post Sat 5th September 2009, 1:47am
Post #3


dhd
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined: Fri 29th Dec 2006, 8:39pm
Member No.: 767



QUOTE(Malleus @ Sat 5th September 2009, 2:42am) *

Who is this LaRouche character, and why should I care?

I didn't know who he was either until I started paying attention to Wikipedia way back and noticed all manner of uncontroversial accounts and views being silenced due to allegations that the perpetrators were "LaRouchies". When they clearly weren't.

This has gone full circle, when one of the accusers, 172 (T-C-L-K-R-D) - a former admin dating back to 2002 - has just been indefinately (and falsely) banned as a LaRouchie himself, demonstrating the kind of bald poetic justice and lunatic irony only Wikipedia can provide.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gomi
post Sat 5th September 2009, 1:48am
Post #4


Member
********

Group: Members
Posts: 3,022
Joined: Fri 17th Nov 2006, 6:38pm
Member No.: 565



QUOTE(Kato @ Fri 4th September 2009, 6:29pm) *
So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge account ever (going back to 2002), or WP's checkuser facitilities are so incompetent, it has convicted the Witchfinder General of being a witch!

Almost certainly the latter. I was told confidentially that checkuser is (as it has always been) almost useless for any but the simplest forms of sockpuppetry. Many of these POV sock declarations derive from offline conversations among checkusers and other editors who keep files of old IP addresses for their nemeses, to use for later comparison. Never mind the half-life of a particular IP address, if the editor with the suspect POV edits from the same city, the same ISP, the same geographic area, or uses the same browser, computer, or operating system, from several years earlier then they feel that is enough for a "sock confirmed by checkuser" finding, effectively insulating it from question.

In a way, this is the most negative legacy of Poetlister. Wikipidiots were so aghast at having been led round the rosemary bush by PoetGuy, they have a hair-trigger now, and the gun cabinet isn't locked.

Of course, this isn't entirely new, either. Before he was defrocked, Jayjg (T-C-L-K-R-D) was fond of banning editors who hadn't edited in over a year, claiming "sock confirmed by checkuser". He just didn't care what people thought, and I'll bet they don't care much more now. They ban whomever they please, all the rest is window-dressing.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
One
post Sat 5th September 2009, 3:04am
Post #5


Postmaster General
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined: Tue 25th Dec 2007, 10:49am
Member No.: 4,284

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 5th September 2009, 1:29am) *

Well here comes the most ridiculous development yet. Having spent years orchestrating witch-hunts with Slim and Will against LaRouchies, former admin User:172 has himself been indefinitely banned by some lunatic administrator - on the declaration that he is the pro-LaRouche renegade Cognition (T-C-L-K-R-D) based on "checkuser evidence".

So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge account ever (going back to 2002), or WP's checkuser facitilities are so incompetent, it has convicted the Witchfinder General of being a witch! laugh.gif

And to cap it off. Slim was right in the mix during these latest banning discussions which nailed 172!

Actually, it doesn't look like there's any interleaving editing (a trait shared by Mantanmoreland/SamiHarris and PoetGang).

I don't get it either. But consider: what better way to exaggerate the Larouche peril than make your own evil sock master?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A Horse With No Name
post Sat 5th September 2009, 3:07am
Post #6


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,471
Joined: Mon 26th Jan 2009, 1:54pm
Member No.: 9,985



QUOTE(Malleus @ Fri 4th September 2009, 9:42pm) *

Who is this LaRouche character, and why should I care?


You shouldn't -- no one on this side of the Atlantic cares. bored.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kato
post Sat 5th September 2009, 3:53am
Post #7


dhd
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined: Fri 29th Dec 2006, 8:39pm
Member No.: 767



QUOTE(One @ Sat 5th September 2009, 4:04am) *

QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 5th September 2009, 1:29am) *

Well here comes the most ridiculous development yet. Having spent years orchestrating witch-hunts with Slim and Will against LaRouchies, former admin User:172 has himself been indefinitely banned by some lunatic administrator - on the declaration that he is the pro-LaRouche renegade Cognition (T-C-L-K-R-D) based on "checkuser evidence".

So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge account ever (going back to 2002), or WP's checkuser facitilities are so incompetent, it has convicted the Witchfinder General of being a witch! laugh.gif

And to cap it off. Slim was right in the mix during these latest banning discussions which nailed 172!

Actually, it doesn't look like there's any interleaving editing (a trait shared by Mantanmoreland/SamiHarris and PoetGang).

I don't get it either. But consider: what better way to exaggerate the Larouche peril than make your own evil sock master?

It clearly isn't the same guy. 172 has been editing intermittently for a while but when he reappeared recently, Slim was the first to welcome him back.

172 was a major WP editor for years. The idea that he has been banned for being a sock of one of his many arch-nemeses is too funny even for WP's standards. It's a bit like JzG getting banned indefinitely for being a sock of Jon Awbrey, or Jimmy Wales being shown to be a sock of TheKohser.

There's simply too much satisfaction to be had from him getting wrongfully banned in this manner. Given that he did it so often to other people, and that Slim steadfastly batted away any such notions herself that such a mistake could happen, refusing to acknowledge an example which featured 172 himself as the accuser two years ago.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
No one of consequence
post Sat 5th September 2009, 4:00am
Post #8


I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri 23rd Feb 2007, 2:34am
Member No.: 1,010

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(gomi @ Sat 5th September 2009, 1:48am) *

QUOTE(Kato @ Fri 4th September 2009, 6:29pm) *
So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge account ever (going back to 2002), or WP's checkuser facitilities are so incompetent, it has convicted the Witchfinder General of being a witch!

Almost certainly the latter. I was told confidentially that checkuser is (as it has always been) almost useless for any but the simplest forms of sockpuppetry.

Yes and no. But that is what appears to have happened here. A number of accounts share a single IP, and their edits overlap in such a way that reassignment from one editor or group to another editor or group is not possible. It appears to be a residential IP. In some quantum alternate universe, perhaps, by an amazing coincidence, Cognition moved in next door to 172 and has been poaching his wi-fi.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kato
post Sat 5th September 2009, 4:20am
Post #9


dhd
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined: Fri 29th Dec 2006, 8:39pm
Member No.: 767



QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Sat 5th September 2009, 5:00am) *

QUOTE(gomi @ Sat 5th September 2009, 1:48am) *

QUOTE(Kato @ Fri 4th September 2009, 6:29pm) *
So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge account ever (going back to 2002), or WP's checkuser facitilities are so incompetent, it has convicted the Witchfinder General of being a witch!

Almost certainly the latter. I was told confidentially that checkuser is (as it has always been) almost useless for any but the simplest forms of sockpuppetry.

Yes and no. But that is what appears to have happened here. A number of accounts share a single IP, and their edits overlap in such a way that reassignment from one editor or group to another editor or group is not possible. It appears to be a residential IP. In some quantum alternate universe, perhaps, by an amazing coincidence, Cognition moved in next door to 172 and has been poaching his wi-fi.

Get serious please. 172 was a liberal historian who wrote several highly accomplished featured articles in the early days of WP. He was an administrator, and held a high standard of what he considered scholarship.

Cognition was a LaRouchie who believed the World Wildlife Fund were behind a genocidal scheme to oppress the third world.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
No one of consequence
post Sat 5th September 2009, 4:29am
Post #10


I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri 23rd Feb 2007, 2:34am
Member No.: 1,010

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 5th September 2009, 4:20am) *

Get serious please. 172 was a liberal historian who wrote several highly accomplished featured articles in the early days of WP. He was an administrator, and held a high standard of what he considered scholarship.

Cognition was a LaRouchie who believed the World Wildlife Fund were behind a genocidal scheme to oppress the third world.

OK, and now they're sharing a single residential IP address. SlimVirgin thinks 172's account is compromised; if so, it happened before any of the edits currently in the checkuser database. If the account is compromised, a block is also in order until 172 can verify himself to a developer to get the password reset, in which case the account can also be unblocked.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
One
post Sat 5th September 2009, 4:44am
Post #11


Postmaster General
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined: Tue 25th Dec 2007, 10:49am
Member No.: 4,284

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 5th September 2009, 4:20am) *

Get serious please. 172 was a liberal historian who wrote several highly accomplished featured articles in the early days of WP. He was an administrator, and held a high standard of what he considered scholarship.

Cognition was a LaRouchie who believed the World Wildlife Fund were behind a genocidal scheme to oppress the third world.

172 was desysoped for his aggressive edit warring and POV pushing...twice! Is it really so inconceivable that he would create a ridiculous sock to be his nemesis and engender sympathy?

The only other credible explaination is that Cognition cracked his password after three years (and after 172 made only two edits over a 14 month period or so).

This post has been edited by One: Sat 5th September 2009, 4:50am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kato
post Sat 5th September 2009, 4:54am
Post #12


dhd
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined: Fri 29th Dec 2006, 8:39pm
Member No.: 767



QUOTE(One @ Sat 5th September 2009, 5:44am) *

QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 5th September 2009, 4:20am) *

Get serious please. 172 was a liberal historian who wrote several highly accomplished featured articles in the early days of WP. He was an administrator, and held a high standard of what he considered scholarship.

Cognition was a LaRouchie who believed the World Wildlife Fund were behind a genocidal scheme to oppress the third world.

172 was desysoped for his aggressive edit warring and POV pushing...twice! Is it really so inconceivable that he would create a ridiculous sock to be his nemesis and engender sympathy?

Listen, this is 172

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Privatiz...lain_accusation

QUOTE(One @ Sat 5th September 2009, 5:44am) *


The only other credible explaination is that Cognition cracked his password after three years (and after 172 made only two edits over a 14 month period or so).

Do you seriously think nobody ran an IP check on Cognition back in the day?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
One
post Sat 5th September 2009, 5:00am
Post #13


Postmaster General
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined: Tue 25th Dec 2007, 10:49am
Member No.: 4,284

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 5th September 2009, 4:54am) *

QUOTE(One @ Sat 5th September 2009, 5:44am) *


The only other credible explaination is that Cognition cracked his password after three years (and after 172 made only two edits over a 14 month period or so).

Do you seriously think nobody ran an IP check on Cognition back in the day?

People slip up.

Do you have another theory that involves Cognition using 172's current residential IP?

I'm interested on HK's thoughts about Cognition.

This post has been edited by One: Sat 5th September 2009, 5:12am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kato
post Sat 5th September 2009, 5:11am
Post #14


dhd
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined: Fri 29th Dec 2006, 8:39pm
Member No.: 767



QUOTE(One @ Sat 5th September 2009, 6:00am) *

QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 5th September 2009, 4:54am) *

QUOTE(One @ Sat 5th September 2009, 5:44am) *


The only other credible explaination is that Cognition cracked his password after three years (and after 172 made only two edits over a 14 month period or so).

Do you seriously think nobody ran an IP check on Cognition back in the day?

There are logs; we don't have to speculate. People slip up.

Do you have another theory that involves Cognition using 172's current residential IP?

I'm interested on HK's thoughts about Cognition.

Indeed.

I guess, on reflection and reviewing Cognitions's edits, that he could have been a construct devised by 172 to shame and smear the LaRouchies and add to the atmosphere of battle. It certainly worked if it was, as the "LaRouchies under the bed" meme engulfed Wikipedia.

I'm surprised WillBeback hasn't caused more of a stink about 172 being linked to Cognition given that he was a close ally. Recall that famous revelation from JoshuaZ, who admitted to creating an account with WillBeback to discredit enemy Jason Gastrich:

QUOTE(JoshuaZ)
I mentioned to Jayjg and Jimbo before there have been three accounts used by me previous. User:Rookwood was before I was an admin when I needed a fake individual to get in Jason Gastrich's good graces. User:CyberDalek was made with a similar idea in mind by me and Will Beback but it never got off the ground.


JoshuaZ resurfaces in the new discussion of the banning of Cognition. It's like old times.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Sat 5th September 2009, 6:09am
Post #15


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 5th September 2009, 12:11am) *
I guess, on reflection and reviewing Cognitions's edits, that he could have been a construct devised by 172 to shame and smear the LaRouchies and add to the atmosphere of battle. It certainly worked if it was, as the "LaRouchies under the bed" meme engulfed Wikipedia.

I don't suppose anybody has brought up the possibility that the IP-contributor info in the database just got f**ked up somehow? That kind of subterfuge seems awfully elaborate, even for an early-adopting WP ex-admin.

Much of 172's contribs seem to indicate a general effort to remove the historical context from articles on communism, socialism, and totalitarianism - IMO, it looks like he wants to destigmatize both terms, and try and bring the relevant articles more into the realm of political philosophy, rather than history. He completely gutted the article on Totalitarianism, for example, removing all mention of the Nazis, and suggesting that the Soviet Union essentially abandoned totalitarianism after Stalin's death.

However, looking over his contribs, I don't see anything overtly pro-Larouchian... Admittedly, I didn't look at all of them.

Very curious indeed! hmmm.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
One
post Sat 5th September 2009, 6:13am
Post #16


Postmaster General
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined: Tue 25th Dec 2007, 10:49am
Member No.: 4,284

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I remember 172 vaguely, and surveying his work refreshes my recollection. Kato is right that there's no damn way he's pro-Larouchian.

Possibilities suggested so far: 1) Cognition created to demonize Larouchians, 2) 172 account compromised, 3) massive IP table failure.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Sat 5th September 2009, 6:27am
Post #17


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(One @ Sat 5th September 2009, 1:13am) *
Possibilities suggested so far: 1) Cognition created to demonize Larouchians, 2) 172 account compromised, 3) massive IP table failure.

Don't forget the one where 172 and Cognition are using the same Wi-Fi network... dry.gif

OK, looking over Cognition's contribs, I'd say it's more likely that Cognition's account is the one that's been compromised, so maybe I'd tend to lean toward Option 1 after all - utterly insane though it may be. It's just not like a die-hard Larouche supporter to behave like this - like he's desperate to get the account unblocked and willing to say almost anything to make it happen.

There's something very weird going on here, but I must say, it's fairly entertaining at least!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Herschelkrustofsky
post Sat 5th September 2009, 6:47am
Post #18


Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,199
Joined: Tue 18th Apr 2006, 12:05pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 130

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Kato @ Fri 4th September 2009, 9:20pm) *

Get serious please. 172 was a liberal historian who wrote several highly accomplished featured articles in the early days of WP. He was an administrator, and held a high standard of what he considered scholarship.
172 was one of the most over-the-top, delirious POV pushers I have ever encountered at WP.
Enjoy this additional irony where 172 threatens to block Cognition for participating in an Adam Carr RfC.



QUOTE(One @ Fri 4th September 2009, 10:00pm) *

I'm interested on HK's thoughts about Cognition.
I believe Cognition to be young and female. I was unable to collaborate well with her, because she was famously hotheaded. But I liked her feistiness.


Here is an entertaining brawl between 172 and myself. Good times.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kato
post Sat 5th September 2009, 11:30am
Post #19


dhd
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined: Fri 29th Dec 2006, 8:39pm
Member No.: 767



QUOTE(One @ Sat 5th September 2009, 7:13am) *

I remember 172 vaguely, and surveying his work refreshes my recollection. Kato is right that there's no damn way he's pro-Larouchian.

Possibilities suggested so far: 1) Cognition created to demonize Larouchians, 2) 172 account compromised, 3) massive IP table failure.

I'm starting to think you guys are right, and Cognition was a phony account created to discredit LaRouchies. Which, if true, starts to explain many things from Wikipedia history. Also, if true, Slim knew nothing about it either and was out of the loop. But I doubt 172 worked alone.

I mean, Cognition really went out of his way to appear to be a pro-LaRouche crackpot.

The fourth option is the Somey one, where the new Cognition is the account which has been compromised.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lar
post Sat 5th September 2009, 12:40pm
Post #20


"His blandness goes to 11!"
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,116
Joined: Wed 26th Dec 2007, 6:04pm
From: A large LEGO storage facility
Member No.: 4,290



QUOTE(Somey @ Sat 5th September 2009, 2:27am) *

Don't forget the one where 172 and Cognition are using the same Wi-Fi network... dry.gif

Apparently doesn't fit the available data the way the first three options do.

CU data, and the CU who interprets it, lacks infallability. It helps to have multiple eyes but even then it's possible to be wrong. Nevertheless that option seems less likely... even less likely than a massive IP table error.

Sometimes the simpler explanation is better.

Here the simpler technical explanation points to a much more complicated social explanation though... that 172 ran a con for a long time is rather a complex (social) explanation.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

13 Pages V  1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd 9 17, 7:39am