ID Cabal Request for Comment Options

[Bob Boy]

Odd nature is asking that Giggy remove any references to actions of the Intelligent Design Cabal from off-wiki forums (including Wikipedia Review). Good luck with that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_tal...ersonal_attacks

[Moulton]

Filll has made a good faith effort by recently removing content referring to Moulton from his blog.

Since Filll doesn't accept comments at his blog, I stopped visiting it. Now I can't even remember what he had posted there.

Meantime, FeloniousMonk had posted on-wiki a scathing indicitment of me. Two days ago, he deleted the entire page, even though both FM and Filll still link to it in at least three different RfC's or RfAr's.

Meantime, on Dave Souza's talk page, we find this:

Moulton pages

Hi Dave. I understand Moulton's user pages were deleted because they revealed a user's identity, however I'm concerned that this eliminates some useful evidence in the ID discussions. Particularly, User_talk:Moulton/Answers is now redlinked at the ID RfC talk page. Would you have any objection to me linking this archival version instead? It may have been redacted, as I can't find any mention of the user's identity there. I'm also concerned that the evidence Filll linked to has been deleted, but I hesitate to contact FM about it directly. Gnixon (talk) 15:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

To quote Darwin almost 150 years ago, "I cannot think now on the subject, but soon will." . . dave souza, talk 16:28, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I found a copy of FM's evidence that was linked to by Filll, but I haven't looked through that page to see if it reveals personal info. Gnixon (talk) 16:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

A big difference is that Moulton has steadfastly rejected the principle of anonymity of everyone on the internet and Wikipedia, including himself. He has been very open repeatedly about his name and other personal details. However, I and the other editors I know have not repeated this information that Moulton has revealed about himself. If he wants to advertise his personal details that is fine, but I personally do not think it is a good idea and I decline to assist him in this effort of advertising his personal information on the internet and Wikipedia if I can avoid it. That does not mean that links that are necessary to discuss Moulton's activities will always be devoid of this sort of information, because of his irresponsible wantonly cavalier attitude.--Filll (talk | wpc) 17:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

You have a right to have your anonymity protected to whatever extent is reasonably consistent with your preferences and behavior. Thus I don't think we should link to material that gives your name as discovered through emails. Is the material above okay in that respect? Gnixon (talk) 18:51, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Filll, can you please link me to where Moulton revealed his full name on Wikipedia? Because it is my understanding that it first appeared on a subpage of FeloniousMonk's userspace, which has now been deleted, placed there by FM, not Moulton. Certainly I could be mistaken, however, so would appreciate your assistance in this matter, as you seem to be fully aware of such things. LaraLove|Talk 01:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if Filll realizes that, while it's not hard to track down my surname, I have never posted it on-wiki. But FeloniousMonk did post that in the now-deleted evidence page that both FM and Filll still link to in the various Requests for Spammish Inquisition currently underway on the English Wikipedia.

Edited to add in LaraLove's post.

This post has been edited by Moulton:

[Cla68]

Filll has made a good faith effort by recently removing content referring to Moulton from his blog.

Since Filll doesn't accept comments at his blog, I stopped visiting it. Now I can't even remember what he had posted there.

Meantime, FeloniousMonk had posted on-wiki a scathing indicitment of me. Two days ago, he deleted the entire page, even though both FM and Filll still link to it in at least three different RfC's or RfAr's.

Meantime, on Dave Souza's talk page, we find this:

Moulton pages

Hi Dave. I understand Moulton's user pages were deleted because they revealed a user's identity, however I'm concerned that this eliminates some useful evidence in the ID discussions. Particularly, User_talk:Moulton/Answers is now redlinked at the ID RfC talk page. Would you have any objection to me linking this archival version instead? It may have been redacted, as I can't find any mention of the user's identity there. I'm also concerned that the evidence Filll linked to has been deleted, but I hesitate to contact FM about it directly. Gnixon (talk) 15:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

To quote Darwin almost 150 years ago, "I cannot think now on the subject, but soon will." . . dave souza, talk 16:28, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I found a copy of FM's evidence that was linked to by Filll, but I haven't looked through that page to see if it reveals personal info. Gnixon (talk) 16:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

A big difference is that Moulton has steadfastly rejected the principle of anonymity of everyone on the internet and Wikipedia, including himself. He has been very open repeatedly about his name and other personal details. However, I and the other editors I know have not repeated this information that Moulton has revealed about himself. If he wants to advertise his personal details that is fine, but I personally do not think it is a good idea and I decline to assist him in this effort of advertising his personal information on the internet and Wikipedia if I can avoid it. That does not mean that links that are necessary to discuss Moulton's activities will always be devoid of this sort of information, because of his irresponsible wantonly cavalier attitude.--Filll (talk | wpc) 17:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

You have a right to have your anonymity protected to whatever extent is reasonably consistent with your preferences and behavior. Thus I don't think we should link to material that gives your name as discovered through emails. Is the material above okay in that respect? Gnixon (talk) 18:51, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Filll, can you please link me to where Moulton revealed his full name on Wikipedia? Because it is my understanding that it first appeared on a subpage of FeloniousMonk's userspace, which has now been deleted, placed there by FM, not Moulton. Certainly I could be mistaken, however, so would appreciate your assistance in this matter, as you seem to be fully aware of such things. LaraLove|Talk 01:22, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if Filll realizes that, while it's not hard to track down my surname, I have never posted it on-wiki. But FeloniousMonk did post that in the now-deleted evidence page that both FM and Filll still link to in the various Requests for Spammish Inquisition currently underway on the English Wikipedia.

Edited to add in LaraLove's post.

Filll and FeloniousMonk are quickly painting themselves into a corner, if they're not in one already. Of all the examples of Wikipedia editors self-destructing, this could end up being one of the most spectacular examples.