Shalom, Weiss? you say goodbye, WP says hello hello...., Gary can't quit you, WP.... Options

[Piperdown]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=300649440

Gary Weiss is JohnnyB.

New Mexico, the mafia, NSS, etc. LOL.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ions/JohnnyB256

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Milton Roe]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=300649440

Gary Weiss is JohnnyB.

New Mexico, the mafia, NSS, etc. LOL.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ions/JohnnyB256

Well, he had that New Mexican uncle who was supposed to be Tomstoner (T-C-L-K-R-D) and Samiharris (T-C-L-K-R-D) . They both eventually got nailed as Mantanmoreland socks (due to Mantan editing from the New Mexican IP while on a trip there), but not before he'd put in a lot of biographical info on his supposed uncle with the financial interests. I half-believed him.

BTW, you mean JohnnyB256 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , not JohnnyB (T-C-L-K-R-D) . They are not to be confused.

[EricBarbour]

If I didn't know about Rabbi Weiss from news reports, on first seeing this article
I'd have to check and see if I had stumbled into Encyclopedia Dramatica by accident.
What a mess. Such a mess, it looks like a satire.

(Perhaps I should add some kind of zinger, say:
"Bureau of Prisons officials have listed Weiss for special nutritional requirements--he is to receive only pork and pork products for meals, five times per day.")

[Piperdown]

For you WP'ians who need new data to help you ferret out banned users on the WP:

Gary Weiss has taken to battling in favor of illegal stock market manipulation on political blog aggregator DailyKos.com, under the pseudonym “Tom Sykes”....Weiss has a rich history of abusive sockpuppeting, mostly for the purpose of attacking those who advocate ending illegal naked short selling...... one can tie a Yahoo username to a specific IP address, sans ambiguity.
Gary Weiss lives in Greenwich Village, NY, but in August of 2008 he bought a second home upstate (tellingly financed by the property owner, not a bank) in the tiny Sullivan County hamlet of Callicoon Center.
A few months ago, using the above-referenced method, I was able to determine that the Yahoo account belonging to user garyrweiss@verizon.net was accessing the web via IP address 74.64.81.92, which maps to within a few miles of Callicoon Center. Given the tininess of Callicoon Center, this is what one would expect of an instance of Weiss being online at his second home.
(Hint: remember that IP address, for we shall return to it shortly.)
We know that garyrweiss@verizon.net belongs to our Gary Weiss thanks to emails we’ve acquired between Weiss and kindred stock manipulator Floyd Schneider.....It took a few short hours to hit paydirt.
In short, email sent to tomsykes.kos@gmail.com (the address Tom Sykes lists as his own on dailykos.com) induced the recipient to visit the Yahoo message boards in such a way as to reveal his IP address to me.
The result: 74.64.81.92.
This IP address has been conclusively linked to garyrweiss@verizon.net, which in turn has been conclusively linked to Gary R. Weiss, the bumbling sockpuppeteer and defender of illegal naked short selling.
But wait, there’s more.
Among Weiss’s most notable accomplishments has been epic sockpuppeting on Wikipedia in order to cover-up evidence of the damaging impact of illegal naked short selling. Once this finally came to light, Weiss and his home IP address range, which is well known, were unambiguously banned from editing Wikipedia.
But what about Weiss’s new IP address, tied to his new, second home?
Well, as we’d expect, realizing that it was unknown by Wikipedia administrators, Weiss used it, on two occasions, to remove references to Mark Mitchell’s Dendreon-related reporting on deepcapture.com, which had been previously added to the Wikipedia article on Michael Milken. To see these edits for yourself, follow this link, which will show you the only two contributions made by IP address 74.64.81.92. To see the substance of the edits, click on the links that say “diff”. What you’ll then see is a before and after comparison, with the text in yellow being what 74.64.81.92 (Weiss) removed.
What could possibly be motivating Weiss to carry on in this manner?
I see one of two possibilities: either he’s like the 80-year-old Japanese soldier living in the jungles of Guam who refuses to accept that his “side” lost the war, or – as I suspect – he remains in active contact with his “side,” which remains mobilized and intent on subverting all that we’ve accomplished.
So what next?
Well, obviously, the editorial staff at dailykos.com will want to know that they’ve given forum to a deeply conflicted contributor who – beyond simply using a pseudonym – is actively pretending not to be Gary Weiss by referring to Weiss in the third person and linking to his own blog as though it were actually really relevant. You can let them know what we’ve discovered about Mr. Sykes by going here.
In addition, any active Wikipedians among you will probably want to make it known there that 74.64.81.92 is in fact the dread sockpuppet Mantanmoreland/Gary Weiss.

http://www.deepcapture.com/gary-weiss-disc...#comment-170533

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[No one of consequence]

For you WP'ians who need new data to help you ferret out banned users on the WP:

http://www.deepcapture.com/gary-weiss-disc...#comment-170533

Tom Sykes on Kos.

All three of these people (Byrne, Bagley and Weiss) seem like right nasty pieces of work. I wonder if Byrne and Bagley would voluntarily disclose their current IPs so we can purge Wikipedia of all 3 of them.

[Piperdown]

For you WP'ians who need new data to help you ferret out banned users on the WP:

http://www.deepcapture.com/gary-weiss-disc...#comment-170533

Tom Sykes on Kos.

All three of these people (Byrne, Bagley and Weiss) seem like right nasty pieces of work. I wonder if Byrne and Bagley would voluntarily disclose their current IPs so we can purge Wikipedia of all 3 of them.

byrne edits talk pages under his own name.

go fuck yourself.

[Somey]

...Tom Sykes on Kos....

You realize that "Tom Sykes" is Weiss, right? And that most of the bloggers he links to in his "diaries" are also Weiss?

Byrne may be a right-winger, but there's nothing particularly right-wing about the effort to stop NSS. Weiss is engaging in nothing more than sock puppetry and character assassination. I doubt that Mr. Bagley and Mr. Byrne have even 1/20th the number of active accounts on various websites now that Weiss has, and that's a conservative estimate.

[sbrown]

Yes but Weiss is one of a (small?) number of sockers protected by the cabal as the Rfar showed.

[No one of consequence]

...Tom Sykes on Kos....

You realize that "Tom Sykes" is Weiss, right? And that most of the bloggers he links to in his "diaries" are also Weiss?

Byrne may be a right-winger, but there's nothing particularly right-wing about the effort to stop NSS. Weiss is engaging in nothing more than sock puppetry and character assassination. I doubt that Mr. Bagley and Mr. Byrne have even 1/20th the number of active accounts on various websites now that Weiss has, and that's a conservative estimate.

Weiss accuses Byrne of stock fraud on his blog as Sykes. Byrne may be a nice guy for all I know, but Bagley has again used unethical and possibly illegal means to ID him. When the IP allegedly belonging to Weiss edited the Michael Miliken to remove negative information, he was reverted by an IP from Nevada, 71.83.125.186 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , who is probably Judd Bagley, adding negative information to multiple BLPs sourced to his own blog investigation. I just wish both of them would leave Wikipedia alone and take their shit elsewhere.

[Kato]

Byrne may be a nice guy for all I know, but Bagley has again used unethical and possibly illegal means to ID him.

Bagley's efforts to ID Weiss are nowhere near as nefarious and clearly illegal as the manner in which Wikipedia flushed out Poetguy and his socks.

I just wish both of them would leave Wikipedia alone and take their shit elsewhere.

If Wikipedia did its job properly and adopted legitimate measures to ensure that this crap didn't start in the first place, you'd never have to bother with Bagley at all.

If you don't like Wikipedia's utterly irresponsible and shambolic practices, then why are you still there defending it? You buy into this lunatic approach. Therefore you deal with the consequences. Defenders of the Wiki deserve Bagley, Byrne and Weiss causing mayhem all over their site, until Wikipedia gets its act together.

[No one of consequence]

Yes but Weiss is one of a (small?) number of sockers protected by the cabal as the Rfar showed.

But he wasn't protected because people knew he was Gary Weiss and there is some conspiracy to promote naked short selling among "top Wikipedians," he was protected because he got on the good side of a small number of influential editors and was obviously being harassed by someone using sockpuppets and unethical methods to try and ID him.

People are allowed to name their Wikipedia account anything they want to, and Gary Weiss naming his account "Mantanmoreland" is no more of an issue than someone naming their account "No one of consequence." At the time Mantanmoreland was being "protected", he had been previously caught socking but there was no current evidence that he was doing so, so he looked like the victim. The discovery of the open proxies and the edit analysis eliminated 90% of his support, and the Bassetcat discovery took care of the rest.

(And he was by no means a special case in being allowed to continue editing after agreeing not to use sockpuppets, many many editors have been given the same second chance.)

[dogbiscuit]

Weiss accuses Byrne of stock fraud on his blog as Sykes. Byrne may be a nice guy for all I know, but Bagley has again used unethical and possibly illegal means to ID him. When the IP allegedly belonging to Weiss edited the Michael Miliken to remove negative information, he was reverted by an IP from Nevada, 71.83.125.186 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , who is probably Judd Bagley, adding negative information to multiple BLPs sourced to his own blog investigation. I just wish both of them would leave Wikipedia alone and take their shit elsewhere.

It seems to me that you have fallen for the Wikipedianism that somehow an IP address is a highly secret and personal piece of information rather than part of the mechanics of the Internet. It's like complaining that someone took your photograph while standing outside Buckingham Palace. It was the SlimVirgin trick of suggesting that putting an image into an email was spyware - a meme that still lives on today that using an everyday mechanism that every single website uses (and could have been blocked) was akin to putting software onto the PC to nefariously track and log activities.

Weiss/Sykes has been publicly libelling Byrne as well as trying to subvert the stock market by encouraging and lobbying for fraudulent trading as well as misleading investors and you suggest that a simple trick of using an image file to establish the real identity of a blogger is an illegal act shows how sucked into the Wacky Wiki World you are.

Wikipedians have never seemed to get over the fact that Weiss fooled them and their enthusiasm for silly rules that led them down a path of backing the wrong horse. You are still more fixated on the arbitrary rules rather than understanding that Wikipedia is being used as a tool to abuse real people, and that real people have a right to use whatever legitimate (real world) means they can to defend themselves.

[No one of consequence]

It seems to me that you have fallen for the Wikipedianism that somehow an IP address is a highly secret and personal piece of information rather than part of the mechanics of the Internet. It's like complaining that someone took your photograph while standing outside Buckingham Palace. It was the SlimVirgin trick of suggesting that putting an image into an email was spyware - a meme that still lives on today that using an everyday mechanism that every single website uses (and could have been blocked) was akin to putting software onto the PC to nefariously track and log activities.

In this case Bagley says he used javascript code to capture Weiss' user name, email address and IP address. (That also means, presumably, he captured the same information for everyone who read the message containing the embedded code.) To me, this is unethical, and it also appears to be a violation of Yahoo!'s TOS (see para 6a). I don't know whether or not it is illegal as "Sykes" yells on his blog. If Yahoo Finance visibly tagged every post with its IP address (as some boards do), it would be a different matter.

Wikipedians have never seemed to get over the fact that Weiss fooled them and their enthusiasm for silly rules that led them down a path of backing the wrong horse. You are still more fixated on the arbitrary rules rather than understanding that Wikipedia is being used as a tool to abuse real people, and that real people have a right to use whatever legitimate (real world) means they can to defend themselves.

So, CheckUsers should freely give IP information about Wikipedia editors to people who complain? Without waiting for law enforcement or the civil courts to determine the legitimacy of the complaints? Because IPs are no big deal, after all.

[dogbiscuit]

In this case Bagley says he used javascript code to capture Weiss' user name, email address and IP address. (That also means, presumably, he captured the same information for everyone who read the message containing the embedded code.) To me, this is unethical, and it also appears to be a violation of Yahoo!'s TOS (see para 6a). I don't know whether or not it is illegal as "Sykes" yells on his blog. If Yahoo Finance visibly tagged every post with its IP address (as some boards do), it would be a different matter.

Unethical is to knowingly disseminate false information about a person. I fail to see what is unethical about establishing the real identity of a person who is defaming you, especially when that person is deliberately and unethically representing themselves as something other than they are. There is nothing wrong with a bit of trickery to do that. You may not approve of the method, but I am surprised that you could describe it as unethical to reveal someone who is deliberately disguising themselves to do harm to others.

Wikipedians have never seemed to get over the fact that Weiss fooled them and their enthusiasm for silly rules that led them down a path of backing the wrong horse. You are still more fixated on the arbitrary rules rather than understanding that Wikipedia is being used as a tool to abuse real people, and that real people have a right to use whatever legitimate (real world) means they can to defend themselves.

So, CheckUsers should freely give IP information about Wikipedia editors to people who complain? Without waiting for law enforcement or the civil courts to determine the legitimacy of the complaints? Because IPs are no big deal, after all.

That was something of a non-sequitor. The point was that Wikipedians got themselves into a position of taking sides, and all the thinking after that point was based on that initial assumption that Weiss, in whatever guise, was the Good Guy and therefore all of WordBomb's actions must be viewed in a negative light, with no attempt of giving the benefit of the doubt, or consideration that there may have been legitimacy in his arguments - especially when the rules were neither readily available nor fairly applied. This assumption, that WordBomb is an evil character still pervades Wikipedian thinking, when actually WordBomb behaved quite ethically compared with the deceit and bad faith of the various Wikipedians involved.

In UK courts, any case is tried without the jury or magistrates knowing what the previous offending record is - this reduces the bias of assuming that someone with a track record of offending will be found guilty other than by the evidence presented. Wikipedia would have done well to remember that when people like JzG were venting their spleens over a mainly imaginary track record of offences against the State to ensure the continuing banning of WordBomb and the raising to sainthood of Mantanmorland.

[Somey]

So, CheckUsers should freely give IP information about Wikipedia editors to people who complain? Without waiting for law enforcement or the civil courts to determine the legitimacy of the complaints? Because IPs are no big deal, after all.

What they should do is what they're (ideally) supposed to do, which is check out the validity of the complaint by verifying the evidence it contains, and looking for corroborating evidence, possibly discussing the case with others who are more familiar with it, etc.

Try to look at it this way: Most police departments operate "tip lines," so that people can call in their suspicions of criminal activity without necessarily identifying themselves. No honest policeman would ever go out and arrest someone solely on the basis of one anonymous tip, right? The honest policeman would check any accused people for criminal records, look for clues, check with informants - in other words, do the job.

But even if he didn't want to do the job, what that policeman wouldn't do is immediately call the accused person, tell him "we got a tip about you," and then begin a discussion of how best to find the tipster and eliminate him.

It's easy in retrospect to look at criticism of the way Wikipedia handled the Weiss case, and say "look at these wackos, thinking there was a conspiracy on WP to promote naked short selling." Clearly there was no such conspiracy, but there was an ongoing effort by WP insiders and power-user admins to protect Gary Weiss, and by extension, his ability to influence and practically control a specific set of articles. The point is, that amounts to the same thing.

[No one of consequence]

What they should do is what they're (ideally) supposed to do, which is check out the validity of the complaint by verifying the evidence it contains, and looking for corroborating evidence, possibly discussing the case with others who are more familiar with it, etc.

Try to look at it this way: Most police departments operate "tip lines," so that people can call in their suspicions of criminal activity without necessarily identifying themselves. No honest policeman would ever go out and arrest someone solely on the basis of one anonymous tip, right? The honest policeman would check any accused people for criminal records, look for clues, check with informants - in other words, do the job.

I think the problem is that the tipster was not an anonymous do-gooding citizen. I don't know the exact sequence of events, and I don't want to overstretch the analogy, but if a policeman happens on a bar fight, and breaks it up and sends both patrons home with a warning, he might be dubious when, the next morning, one patron calls him to report the other patron as having committed a crime. And it would hurt his cause even more if he followed the policeman's girlfriend home and made annoying phone calls to her.

But even if he didn't want to do the job, what that policeman wouldn't do is immediately call the accused person, tell him "we got a tip about you," and then begin a discussion of how best to find the tipster and eliminate him.

Fortunately for Mr. Weiss, he picked the right wiki-friends. Not everyone would have done that.

[Somey]

I think the problem is that the tipster was not an anonymous do-gooding citizen. I don't know the exact sequence of events, and I don't want to overstretch the analogy, but if a policeman happens on a bar fight, and breaks it up and sends both patrons home with a warning, he might be dubious when, the next morning, one patron calls him to report the other patron as having committed a crime. And it would hurt his cause even more if he followed the policeman's girlfriend home and made annoying phone calls to her.

Well, like you say, you don't know the exact sequence of events...

Two things here: First, Bagley has always maintained that he felt he was "doing Wikipedia a favor" when he reported that Mantanmoreland was likely to be Weiss, and that he actually thought someone would say "thanks for the heads-up!" or something to that effect. (You can ask him...)

Second, Bagley, and to a lesser extent Byrne as well, have since maintained that they're not all that interested in being "Wikipedians" and would, indeed, leave the site forever - I vaguely recall the term "in a heartbeat" being used at one point - if they thought they could trust the WP'ers left behind to keep Weiss's activities under control. Some Wikipedians supposedly tried to give them that assurance in the Mantanmoreland ArbCom base, as I recall - but the fact is, they can't keep Weiss's activities under control, couldn't even if they wanted to, because Wikipedia simply does not have effective preventative measures in place against abusive editing - other than page protection, which can just as easily be used to prevent ameliorative or corrective editing.

Meanwhile, Weiss has steadfastly refused to admit that he's ever edited Wikipedia at all. At this point, I (for one) don't believe a word he says about anything, including the notion that he wants to protect us all from the evil right-wing agenda, or that Byrne is some sort of terrible businessman.

[No one of consequence]

Two things here: First, Bagley has always maintained that he felt he was "doing Wikipedia a favor" when he reported that Mantanmoreland was likely to be Weiss, and that he actually thought someone would say "thanks for the heads-up!" or something to that effect. (You can ask him...)

Wikipedia is just not equipped to deal with the argument that "Weiss should not be here because he is trying to destroy the free market system and ruin my company's business" any more than Wikipedia can choose sides on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, Macedonia, or Pallywood. What is supposed to happen is that people who behave badly get kicked out, and people who behave nicely talk about article issues and work out their disputes. Obviously this system breaks down quite often, probably more often than the founders imagined, but one of the reasons it breaks down is people who are not interested in becoming editors and engaging their opposition on the issues, fighting citation with citation, going through mediation, and so forth, but rather go around shouting, "Smith is BAD, get rid of him."

Second, Bagley, and to a lesser extent Byrne as well, have since maintained that they're not all that interested in being "Wikipedians" and would, indeed, leave the site forever - I vaguely recall the term "in a heartbeat" being used at one point - if they thought they could trust the WP'ers left behind to keep Weiss's activities under control. Some Wikipedians supposedly tried to give them that assurance in the Mantanmoreland ArbCom base, as I recall - but the fact is, they can't keep Weiss's activities under control, couldn't even if they wanted to, because Wikipedia simply does not have effective preventative measures in place against abusive editing - other than page protection, which can just as easily be used to prevent ameliorative or corrective editing.

Byrne and Bagley don't have to keep Weiss in check any more than ScienceApologist has to keep homeopaths in check or the IDCAB has to keep IDers in check. When people appoint themselves as defenders of the ONE TRUTH (whatever it may be for them), they often get into trouble.

[Kelly Martin]

It seems to me that you have fallen for the Wikipedianism that somehow an IP address is a highly secret and personal piece of information rather than part of the mechanics of the Internet.

Wikipedians are unreasonably protective of IP addresses, to be sure. Back in late 2005 I was in a stupid conflict with Durin; during the course of a series of emails with him he revealed his IP address to me by sending email to me using Hotmail (which, in 2005 at least, put the sender's IP address in the headers). I subsequently noticed this same IP address lurking about on IRC and outed him as such. He responded by filing an administrative claim against me for abuse of checkuser, and I don't think he really believed me that I got his IP address from his email headers. I've also gotten IPs for quite a few people just by giving them a link to my blog or to one of the websites I control and noting the subsequent referral.

Those of us who have some modicum of understanding of how the Internet works know that IP addresses are usually easily discovered, and that if you do reveal yours by some means then it's your fault for not taking sufficient steps to protect it. Unfortunately, the majority of Wikipedians is not even remotely educated as to the realities of how the Internet works.

It's like that stupid badware popup: "Your computer may be broadcasting an IP address right now!" First time I saw that I thought, "I should hope so; it won't work if it doesn't." To the majority of people out there, computers are indistinguishable from magic. It's these people who see the Internet as a mythical place separate from the rest of the world, instead of the giant mass of (virtual) telephone wires (or "tubes", to channel a disgraced former Senator) that it really is.

[tarantino]

In this case Bagley says he used javascript code to capture Weiss' user name, email address and IP address. (That also means, presumably, he captured the same information for everyone who read the message containing the embedded code.) To me, this is unethical, and it also appears to be a violation of Yahoo!'s TOS (see para 6a). I don't know whether or not it is illegal as "Sykes" yells on his blog. If Yahoo Finance visibly tagged every post with its IP address (as some boards do), it would be a different matter.

What "Sykes" said happened was he was sent a Yahoo search link from "Dangelo" that returned the following two results.

Byrne is a gold shill

O'Byrne gold whore

Now normally if you try to use html in yahoo group posts it will display as plain text. However, if those posts are displayed in search results the markup works. In this case the results window will automatically load an image from antisocialmedia and run an activemeter script if you have js enabled.

[Somey]

Wikipedia is just not equipped to deal with the argument that "Weiss should not be here because he is trying to destroy the free market system and ruin my company's business" any more than Wikipedia can choose sides on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, Macedonia, or Pallywood.

Well then, it should get itself "equipped," don't you think?

Byrne and Bagley don't have to keep Weiss in check any more than ScienceApologist has to keep homeopaths in check or the IDCAB has to keep IDers in check.

Of course they do - for the same reason Weiss does. They're protecting their livelihoods. If Wikipedia content didn't threaten their livelihoods, they wouldn't be doing this shit. That I can guarantee you!

When people appoint themselves as defenders of the ONE TRUTH (whatever it may be for them), they often get into trouble.

With who? You?

[WordBomb]

...Tom Sykes on Kos....

You realize that "Tom Sykes" is Weiss, right? And that most of the bloggers he links to in his "diaries" are also Weiss?

Byrne may be a right-winger, but there's nothing particularly right-wing about the effort to stop NSS. Weiss is engaging in nothing more than sock puppetry and character assassination. I doubt that Mr. Bagley and Mr. Byrne have even 1/20th the number of active accounts on various websites now that Weiss has, and that's a conservative estimate.

Weiss accuses Byrne of stock fraud on his blog as Sykes. Byrne may be a nice guy for all I know, but Bagley has again used unethical and possibly illegal means to ID him. When the IP allegedly belonging to Weiss edited the Michael Miliken to remove negative information, he was reverted by an IP from Nevada, 71.83.125.186 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , who is probably Judd Bagley, adding negative information to multiple BLPs sourced to his own blog investigation. I just wish both of them would leave Wikipedia alone and take their shit elsewhere.

Don't worry. Utah is still not Nevada, and I have no desire to improve your silly encyclopedia. So cram it.

In this case Bagley says he used javascript code to capture Weiss' user name, email address and IP address. (That also means, presumably, he captured the same information for everyone who read the message containing the embedded code.) To me, this is unethical, and it also appears to be a violation of Yahoo!'s TOS (see para 6a). I don't know whether or not it is illegal as "Sykes" yells on his blog. If Yahoo Finance visibly tagged every post with its IP address (as some boards do), it would be a different matter.

What "Sykes" said happened was he was sent a Yahoo search link from "Dangelo" that returned the following two results.

Byrne is a gold shill

O'Byrne gold whore

Now normally if you try to use html in yahoo group posts it will display as plain text. However, if those posts are displayed in search results the markup works. In this case the results window will automatically load an image from antisocialmedia and run an activemeter script if you have js enabled.

Circle gets the square. This is one of the cooler exploits on Yahoo Finance I've discovered.

[EricBarbour]

Wikipedia is just not equipped to deal with the argument that "Weiss should not be here because he is trying to destroy the free market system and ruin my company's business" any more than Wikipedia can choose sides on the status of Nagorno-Karabakh, Macedonia, or Pallywood.

Well then, it should get itself "equipped," don't you think?

Ya know, Thatcher, people keep telling me what an upright, honest and good administrator you are.

In which case, here's a red-hot example of why Wikipedia needs major reforms.
No matter which side you take in this Weiss/Bagley nonsense, regardless of
whether Bagley is a conservative and Weiss is a liberal or whatever,
it should not be happening at all, period. Are you agreed or not?

So, if you're the good upstanding Wiki-citizen that everyone says you are.....
start pushing for reform. You could start with changes to make sockpuppeting
more difficult. Require some minimal kind of identification verification to allow
editing access. It's not censorship, it's user management.

(Lotsa luck. Most admins appear to be socking right along with Weiss, on a variety
of subjects that interest them personally. An example that came to light today.
If you can't push for reform of this, you and they are fundamentally no better
than Weiss. Sorry to give you that bad news.)

This post has been edited by EricBarbour:

[Cla68]

By the way, Weiss just attacked Byrne again on his blog.

[Somey]

By the way, Weiss just attacked Byrne again on his blog.

The man's gone completely off the deep end. He still thinks the SEC is going to prosecute Patrick Byrne for some metaphorical, and probably jocular, comment he made in a conference call four years ago?

I fear his Wikipedia experience has not done much to improve his psychological well-being. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unhappy.gif)

[WordBomb]

By the way, Weiss just attacked Byrne again on his blog.

The man's gone completely off the deep end. He still thinks the SEC is going to prosecute Patrick Byrne for some metaphorical, and probably jocular, comment he made in a conference call four years ago?

Particularly when everything Patrick predicted in that call has since proven accurate. Weiss is so far over the edge I seriously almost feel sorry for him.

Almost.

I just nailed Weiss sockpuppeting on DailyKos.com. It's a very familiar story. The one difference is that, unlike on Wikipedia, when confronted with the evidence, Kos banned Weiss immediately.

[EricBarbour]

I just nailed Weiss sockpuppeting on DailyKos.com. It's a very familiar story. The one difference is that, unlike on Wikipedia, when confronted with the evidence, Kos banned Weiss immediately.

And I went and tried to post it on his blog as a comment. Bet it never sees light of day.

Perhaps you guys should take up a collection to buy Gary some reasonably strong
antipsychotics.....it would be the humane thing to do.

[CharlotteWebb]

but rather go around shouting, "Smith is BAD, get rid of him."

Sorry, who was "Smith" again? Somebody told me once, but I forgot. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

[Mike R]

but rather go around shouting, "Smith is BAD, get rid of him."

Sorry, who was "Smith" again? Somebody told me once, but I forgot. :P

raul=smith, banned user=scibaby

[Cla68]

JohnnyB256 appears determined to ensure that no mention of the recent Register article on Byrne and Weiss makes it into Wikipedia. At first, he cited BLP concerns, but would not allow mention of the source in an edit which didn't mention anyone by name (notice in the edit summary that he sneaks in an insult for Bagley). Here is his response to my question about whether he might be acquainted with Gary Weiss or not.

[Somey]

Here[/url] is his response to my question about whether he might be acquainted with Gary Weiss or not.

Well, at least he doesn't just blank the entry when asked by an AnonIP 80 minutes later... That's the nice thing about ol' Gary, he's always looking out for the "little guy"! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Actually, by the time most people read this, he will have blanked it.

[Cla68]

Here[/url] is his response to my question about whether he might be acquainted with Gary Weiss or not.

Well, at least he doesn't just blank the entry when asked by an AnonIP 80 minutes later... That's the nice thing about ol' Gary, he's always looking out for the "little guy"! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

Actually, by the time most people read this, he will have blanked it.

I want to start a Wikipedia article on Deep Capture, but I need more than just the Register article as a source to justify it. All I can find in Google searches are mentions in blogs. If anyone has any other reliable sources, please let me know. Once the article is started, I'll of course link to it from Patrick Byrne's bio and will be interested how JohnnyB265 reacts.

This post has been edited by Cla68:

[Piperdown]

Those interested in the neverending rest of the story will enjoy this new wordy bomb. And it doesn't even mention good ol' Gary even once (shocking!), but does feature his wikidiki kiwi partner, johnny hemp. Who ironically is actually a player, not just a has-been ex-journalist.

http://www.deepcapture.com/the-stories-beh...-lawsuit-story/

The Facebook material word puts up is a new twist. And since he'd already featured WP on an earlier movie, no mention of it here. This movie is probably there to go with the articles out today featuring a lawsuit settlement that plugs deepcapture a bit.

That Word is good....he's very very good....

And WP's favorite scribe, Cade, has some interesting input:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/09/ov...k_settles_suit/

[Somey]

That Word is good....he's very very good....

True, but he should put the journalists and hedge-fund managers in differently-shaped (or colored) boxes, to accentuate the intermingling effect (given that that's the whole point of the exercise). Also, I think he misspelled the word "complicit" in there somewhere...

[Milton Roe]

Don't worry. Utah is still not Nevada, and I have no desire to improve your silly encyclopedia. So cram it.

(IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif) Right. It's southern Idaho that is actually Utah. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/confused.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/frustrated.gif)

[Cla68]

Those interested in the neverending rest of the story will enjoy this new wordy bomb. And it doesn't even mention good ol' Gary even once (shocking!), but does feature his wikidiki kiwi partner, johnny hemp. Who ironically is actually a player, not just a has-been ex-journalist.

http://www.deepcapture.com/the-stories-beh...-lawsuit-story/

The Facebook material word puts up is a new twist. And since he'd already featured WP on an earlier movie, no mention of it here. This movie is probably there to go with the articles out today featuring a lawsuit settlement that plugs deepcapture a bit.

That Word is good....he's very very good....

And WP's favorite scribe, Cade, has some interesting input:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/09/ov...k_settles_suit/

A new editor removed the Register story and rewrote the part about Copper Trading in the Overstock.com article.

[Piperdown]

A new editor removed the Register story and rewrote the part about Copper Trading in the Overstock.com article.

AmishPete, the amazingl born again SPA POV Warrior on the Byrne/Ostock/NSS saga really really doesn't like Mr. Byrne, lol.

14:24, 9 December 2009 (hist | diff) Overstock.com ‎ (→Board of Directors: Dr. titles only used for medical doctors)

Johnny is not a fan of Cla68. Go figure!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=330685874

He's concerned about his neutrality, lol. Johnny's about as neutral as a neutron wordbomb.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Piperdown]

A new editor removed the Register story and rewrote the part about Copper Trading in the Overstock.com article.

AmishPete, the amazingl born again SPA POV Warrior on the Byrne/Ostock/NSS saga really really doesn't like Mr. Byrne, lol.

14:24, 9 December 2009 (hist | diff) Overstock.com ‎ (→Board of Directors: Dr. titles only used for medical doctors)

Johnny is not a fan of Cla68. Go figure!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=330685874

He's concerned about his neutrality, lol. Johnny's about as neutral as a neutron wordbomb.

And again, Johnny is just not satisfied with Cla68's example. This protesttoomuch is written by Johnny Hempton, timesharing with Gawy on the B256 alias.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=330743405

Oh, whatever is Cla68 to do to satisfy JohnnyB256? That must occur before Charles can be crowned. One must satisfy "Johnny". Kiss his ring, Chas! His neutrality, editing skilz, self-control, and wise judgment are beyond the scope of your lowly self....and besides, David Gerard said you're not really there to write an encyclopedia, so there it is.

Have you considered kissing Mike Godwin's ass? He and Jimbo sure don't like you much. Something about not being a bullshitter. Qualifications must be in order. Maybe Fred can put in a good word.

[One]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/09/ov...k_settles_suit/

That's not a big settlement...

[Cla68]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/09/ov...k_settles_suit/

That's not a big settlement...

Want to make a wager on how long the edit will remain if I try again to add that Register article as a source to either the Overstock or Byrne articles?

This post has been edited by Cla68: