Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ Bureaucracy _ Wikisource RfC
Posted by: Ottava
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Wikisource_adminstration_problems.
If this is the wrong forum to post a message about it, then I apologize. There is no longer a visible thread on the matter, so I started this.
Posted by: Doc glasgow
Wikisource is the toilet of Wikimedia.
It is full of utterly unsourced alleged quotations - it has no responsible quality control nor even theoretically adequate BLP response.
That it recruits the worst of admins surprises me not.
In this one instance, I'd agree with jimbo and simply delete the entire project as an educationally worthless moral hazard.
Posted by: thekohser
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Sun 2nd January 2011, 8:37pm) 
It is full of utterly unsourced alleged quotations
Could you provide three examples, please?
Posted by: Doc glasgow
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 2:28am)
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Sun 2nd January 2011, 8:37pm)
It is full of utterly unsourced alleged quotations
Could you provide three examples, please?
Good grief - my bad!!
I misread "wikiquote" for "wikisource". So easily done, I mean one WMF toilet looks so much like another.
If you want examples of BLP problems on Wikisource, all you need to do is hit the random article function a couple of times.
Sorry for the mixup.
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Sun 2nd January 2011, 9:33pm)
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 2:28am)
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Sun 2nd January 2011, 8:37pm)
It is full of utterly unsourced alleged quotations
Could you provide three examples, please?
Good grief - my bad!!
I misread "wikiquote" for "wikisource". So easily done, I mean one WMF toilet looks so much like another.
If you want examples of BLP problems on Wikisource, all you need to do is hit the random article function a couple of times.
Sorry for the mixup.
Just so you know, FloNight, guardian of Wikiquote, was the one to spot Poetlister at Wikisource while the admin at Wikisource did nothing even with full knowledge. So, comparing the two Quote gets a point.
Posted by: thekohser
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Sun 2nd January 2011, 9:33pm)
Good grief - my bad!!
I misread "wikiquote" for "wikisource". So easily done, I mean one WMF toilet looks so much like another.
If you want examples of BLP problems on Wikisource, all you need to do is hit the random article function a couple of times.
Sorry for the mixup.
You know you did it again, right?
Posted by: Doc glasgow
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 3:33am)
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Sun 2nd January 2011, 9:33pm)
Good grief - my bad!!
I misread "wikiquote" for "wikisource". So easily done, I mean one WMF toilet looks so much like another.
If you want examples of BLP problems on Wikisource, all you need to do is hit the random article function a couple of times.
Sorry for the mixup.
You know you did it again, right?
I always go into the wrong toilet
Posted by: Zoloft
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 2:59am)
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 3:33am)
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Sun 2nd January 2011, 9:33pm)
Good grief - my bad!!
I misread "wikiquote" for "wikisource". So easily done, I mean one WMF toilet looks so much like another.
If you want examples of BLP problems on Wikisource, all you need to do is hit the random article function a couple of times.
Sorry for the mixup.
You know you did it again, right?
I always go into the wrong toilet
The women must love you wandering in while they're powdering their poses.
Posted by: Detective
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 10:59am)
I always go into the wrong toilet
I'm getting confused here. Isn't it Wikipedia that has all the disgusting porno articles?
Isn't it Wikipedia where the good doctor is an admin? What is there in Wikiversity or Wiktionary or any of the other alleged toilets to match what the good doctor happily tolerates on Wikipedia?Posted by: melloden
QUOTE(Detective @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 5:56pm)
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 10:59am)
I always go into the wrong toilet
I'm getting confused here. Isn't it Wikipedia that has all the disgusting porno articles?
Isn't it Wikipedia where the good doctor is an admin? What is there in Wikiversity or Wiktionary or any of the other alleged toilets to match what the good doctor happily tolerates on Wikipedia?Basically, every project other than Wikipedia and possibly Commons (when you take out the child porn) is a poorly-designed, poorly-executed, unpopular, failing, miserable, dirty, half-baked rotten mess. Sort of like Sarah Palin making Baked Alaska with a campfire. The other projects are fourth-rate junkyards where trolls and power-hungry people hang out.
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(Detective @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 12:56pm)
QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 10:59am)
I always go into the wrong toilet
I'm getting confused here. Isn't it Wikipedia that has all the disgusting porno articles?
Isn't it Wikipedia where the good doctor is an admin? What is there in Wikiversity or Wiktionary or any of the other alleged toilets to match what the good doctor happily tolerates on Wikipedia?Wikipedia banned Poetlister and ensured that his socking harassment was not allowed to happen on that project.
Even with overwhelming evidence of abuse, the CUs at Wikisource knowingly helped and encouraged Poetlister to have a new account, run for adminship, and keep the other accounts used to harass people.
Posted by: Adrignola
QUOTE(Ottava @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 1:04pm)
Even with overwhelming evidence of abuse, the CUs at Wikisource knowingly helped and encouraged Poetlister to have a new account, run for adminship, and keep the other accounts used to harass people.
Hypothetically, what if Poetlister were editing under a new name on another project where CUs were notified, no abuse was seen, enforcement of non-socking was performed through regular checks, and where actual positive contributions were being made? Would you hold it against CUs at that project if nothing malicious continued to occur, or do you feel they'd be obliged to "out" the user as soon as possible? What if it were a smaller project with no familiarity with the negative actions associated with the term "Poetlister"? Are you convinced that there is no possibility that this person could contribute constructively? Just curious what the limits are in your mind, for providing background to the RFC referenced as this thread's topic.
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(Adrignola @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 3:11pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 1:04pm)
Even with overwhelming evidence of abuse, the CUs at Wikisource knowingly helped and encouraged Poetlister to have a new account, run for adminship, and keep the other accounts used to harass people.
Hypothetically, what if Poetlister were editing under a new name on another project where CUs were notified, no abuse was seen, enforcement of non-socking was performed through regular checks, and where actual positive contributions were being made? Would you hold it against CUs at that project if nothing malicious continued to occur, or do you feel they'd be obliged to "out" the user as soon as possible? What if it were a smaller project with no familiarity with the negative actions associated with the term "Poetlister"? Are you convinced that there is no possibility that this person could contribute constructively? Just curious what the limits are in your mind, for providing background to the RFC referenced as this thread's topic.
Poetlister doesn't make positive contributions. It doesn't matter where on the WMF he is, he has spent over 4 years stalking various editors and seeks to get back onto en.wikipedia any way he can to help further get revenge on others.
The other projects are merely pawns to that end. This has been seen over and over, and he has stolen multiple real life identities to aid in that.
The guy belongs behind bars for his multiple identity thefts.
Edit for Somey:
Poetlister is not Amy Emberson.
Amy Emberson is a real person.
He is using a college email address with her name in it.
If that isn't identity theft, what is?
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(Ottava @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 2:34pm)
Poetlister doesn't make positive contributions. It doesn't matter where on the WMF he is, he has spent over 4 years stalking various editors and seeks to get back onto en.wikipedia any way he can to help further get revenge on others.
The other projects are merely pawns to that end. This has been seen over and over, and he has stolen multiple real life identities to aid in that.
The guy belongs behind bars for his multiple identity thefts.
The other projects are merely pawns to that end. This has been seen over and over, and he has stolen multiple real life identities to aid in that.
The guy belongs behind bars for his multiple identity thefts.
I fear you go too far, Mr. Ottava. The term "identity theft" doesn't at all describe what Mr. Poetguy was doing - "misappropriation of image," sure, but not "identity theft." (At best it might be grounds for a civil case, though I doubt it.) And of course you also used the word "stalking," which isn't an accurate description of what he was up to either.
I'm not saying he was a good guy or anything like that, and you're correct in that he's apparently trying to get back into en.wp in any way he can, but AFAIK he's fairly careful to avoid activities that are clearly and plainly illegal.
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 3:44pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 2:34pm)
Poetlister doesn't make positive contributions. It doesn't matter where on the WMF he is, he has spent over 4 years stalking various editors and seeks to get back onto en.wikipedia any way he can to help further get revenge on others.
The other projects are merely pawns to that end. This has been seen over and over, and he has stolen multiple real life identities to aid in that.
The guy belongs behind bars for his multiple identity thefts.
The other projects are merely pawns to that end. This has been seen over and over, and he has stolen multiple real life identities to aid in that.
The guy belongs behind bars for his multiple identity thefts.
I fear you go too far, Mr. Ottava. The term "identity theft" doesn't at all describe what Mr. Poetguy was doing - "misappropriation of image," sure, but not "identity theft." (At best it might be grounds for a civil case, though I doubt it.) And of course you also used the word "stalking," which isn't an accurate description of what he was up to either.
I'm not saying he was a good guy or anything like that, and you're correct in that he's apparently trying to get back into en.wp in any way he can, but AFAIK he's fairly careful to avoid activities that are clearly and plainly illegal.
See my above edited message and the email I forwarded to you.
The individual is a real person and the email is real. Poetlister was passing him off as that person. What, do you want him trying to charge payments to their credit card too?
Posted by: lilburne
QUOTE(Ottava @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 9:45pm)
The individual is a real person and the email is real. Poetlister was passing him off as that person. What, do you want him trying to charge payments to their credit card too?
I have an email under the name of lilburne, but lilburne died 350 years ago. I'm pretty sure that there are other lilburne's alive today today though. Is that identity theft? Of course it isn't. I have email addresses, a facebook account, a twitter account, a LJ account, under my primary pseudonym. In fact my primary pseudonym has accounts on all social networking sites. Identity theft?
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(lilburne @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 5:36pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 9:45pm)
The individual is a real person and the email is real. Poetlister was passing him off as that person. What, do you want him trying to charge payments to their credit card too?
I have an email under the name of lilburne, but lilburne died 350 years ago. I'm pretty sure that there are other lilburne's alive today today though. Is that identity theft? Of course it isn't. I have email addresses, a facebook account, a twitter account, a LJ account, under my primary pseudonym. In fact my primary pseudonym has accounts on all social networking sites. Identity theft?
I said a real name and a real email address.
It was a university email address with someone who is registered at the university. This was not something he just made up on his own.
Posted by: lilburne
QUOTE(Ottava @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 10:46pm)
It was a university email address with someone who is registered at the university. This was not something he just made up on his own.
If that is the case then all the response emails will be going to that email addy won't they, so either he owns that account, or that account holder is in cahoots.
PS I can get an email address set up at a University without any bother as I know a couple of sysadmins.
PPS I can also get a legitimate email address by registering as a distance learning student.
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(lilburne @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 6:03pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 10:46pm)
It was a university email address with someone who is registered at the university. This was not something he just made up on his own.
If that is the case then all the response emails will be going to that email addy won't they, so either he owns that account, or that account holder is in cahoots.
PS I can get an email address set up at a University without any bother as I know a couple of sysadmins.
PPS I can also get a legitimate email address by registering as a distance learning student.
He stated that he can "receive" emails from the account but can't send them.
So, you do the math.
Posted by: lilburne
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 1:06am)
He stated that he can "receive" emails from the account but can't send them.
So, you do the math.
Probably true. I receive emails from a number of accounts but, unless I frig about in the email client associating SMTP posting hosts with specific email identities, the sending always goes out via the default SMTP posting host. Of course one could probably do it by the web client but who wants to screw about with that. When the wife was doing an OU course there was an email address for the OU but we may have accessed it by pop3 and used our default SMTP to post through.
Currently in addition to 'unlimited' email accounts via the ISP, have 4 active Y! email accounts which I've not logged into via web for years, but regularly access via pop3. Plus a couple of active AOL accounts which are also pop3 accessed. There is a LJ account which forwards email to my main account, plus a few accounts associated with web hosts that also forwards email.
When posting almost everything goes through the default SMTP so if you email one of the yahoo accounts the response won't come back from yahoo. Unless of course I've set up a rule especially for you.
Posted by: Somey
Poetguy has used misleading e-mail addresses before, including addresses containing real names, meant to make us think he's a specific other person who actually exists. Unfortunately, the laws regarding this kind of e-mail impersonation are just as far behind the curve as most other internet-related laws, in virtually all Western democracies. Again, I'm not suggesting that his behavior is excusable, morally defensible, or even tolerable in a civilized society, but I doubt you could get him thrown in jail or even fined for it, and he's certainly not doing it to steal anything - at least not anything tangible.
I guess what I'm saying is that if you're going to throw around terms like "identity theft" and "stalking," you've got to have something better than this to work with. Call it what it is - malicious impersonation. Exaggerating the offense only encourages whatever real criminal impulses he may actually have, by making him think he's got nothing to lose by taking it to the next level.
If Wikipedians can curtail their misuse of the word "stalking" - given that they were, at times, some ofthe worst abusers of this term in the history of written language - then so can you, just like everyone else here.
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(Somey @ Tue 4th January 2011, 1:44am)
Poetguy has used misleading e-mail addresses before, including addresses containing real names, meant to make us think he's a specific other person who actually exists. Unfortunately, the laws regarding this kind of e-mail impersonation are just as far behind the curve as most other internet-related laws, in virtually all Western democracies. Again, I'm not suggesting that his behavior is excusable, morally defensible, or even tolerable in a civilized society, but I doubt you could get him thrown in jail or even fined for it, and he's certainly not doing it to steal anything - at least not anything tangible.
I guess what I'm saying is that if you're going to throw around terms like "identity theft" and "stalking," you've got to have something better than this to work with. Call it what it is - malicious impersonation. Exaggerating the offense only encourages whatever real criminal impulses he may actually have, by making him think he's got nothing to lose by taking it to the next level.
If Wikipedians can curtail their misuse of the word "stalking" - given that they were, at times, some ofthe worst abusers of this term in the history of written language - then so can you, just like everyone else here.
The way I see it.
1. The email is registered to a university that does not have open email registration.
2. The email's name is that of someone enrolled at the university.
3. If he is impersonating the individual to attend the university then he lied on his entrance application and broke laws doing so.
4. If he didn't, then he stole someone's email address or impersonated them somehow to get access to their email address. That is a crime in the US - the Sarah Palin hacked email account case.
3 or 4 are crimes and the possibility.
The school itself is part of the University of London system, which makes falsifying information about yourself in some way to get privileges there most likely a crime. I know of one person who sent me an email BCC that was sent to an employee of the school to expose Poetlister's act.
Posted by: lilburne
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 2:47pm)
3. If he is impersonating the individual to attend the university then he lied on his entrance application and broke laws doing so.
4. If he didn't, then he stole someone's email address or impersonated them somehow to get access to their email address. ter's act.
1. Which laws be specific.
2. You haven't ruled out connivance.
"I know of one person who sent me an email BCC that was sent to an employee of the school to expose Poetlister's act."
Isn't that being rather stalky itself possibly getting someone in trouble on their course simply for playing a game on a website?
Why not simply email the account and ask whether they are aware of the usage?
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(lilburne @ Tue 4th January 2011, 11:17am)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 2:47pm)
3. If he is impersonating the individual to attend the university then he lied on his entrance application and broke laws doing so.
4. If he didn't, then he stole someone's email address or impersonated them somehow to get access to their email address. ter's act.
1. Which laws be specific.
2. You haven't ruled out connivance.
"I know of one person who sent me an email BCC that was sent to an employee of the school to expose Poetlister's act."
Isn't that being rather stalky itself possibly getting someone in trouble on their course simply for playing a game on a website?
Why not simply email the account and ask whether they are aware of the usage?
1. I'm sure there are multiple laws that apply. Falsifying governmental documents is normally a crime to ensure people don't.
2. Doesn't seem likely knowing Poetlister's background. The girl appears to be a Freshman/Sophmore now and not someone he would have just happened upon.
And notifying about improper use of an email account is standard, especially when there is suspicion of it being fraudulently used. Emailing the account wont do anything as the email is most likely hacked. That is like asking a burglar if he owns the house instead of calling the police when you have a strong suspicion he doesn't.
Posted by: lilburne
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 4:29pm)
1. I'm sure there are multiple laws that apply. Falsifying governmental documents is normally a crime to ensure people don't.
2. Doesn't seem likely knowing Poetlister's background. The girl appears to be a Freshman/Sophmore now and not someone he would have just happened upon.
And notifying about improper use of an email account is standard, especially when there is suspicion of it being fraudulently used. Emailing the account wont do anything as the email is most likely hacked. That is like asking a burglar if he owns the house instead of calling the police when you have a strong suspicion he doesn't.
1. A University application is NOT a government document.
2. When I was last an freshman I was over 40.
3. If what you said is true that he can't email from the account he probably doesn't have control of it.
Sounds to me that you are making trouble for someone in RL for something that is occurring online.
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(lilburne @ Tue 4th January 2011, 11:41am)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 4:29pm)
1. I'm sure there are multiple laws that apply. Falsifying governmental documents is normally a crime to ensure people don't.
2. Doesn't seem likely knowing Poetlister's background. The girl appears to be a Freshman/Sophmore now and not someone he would have just happened upon.
And notifying about improper use of an email account is standard, especially when there is suspicion of it being fraudulently used. Emailing the account wont do anything as the email is most likely hacked. That is like asking a burglar if he owns the house instead of calling the police when you have a strong suspicion he doesn't.
1. A University application is NOT a government document.
2. When I was last an freshman I was over 40.
3. If what you said is true that he can't email from the account he probably doesn't have control of it.
Sounds to me that you are making trouble for someone in RL for something that is occurring online.
Have you ever applied for a college or university? They have documents that you sign that say that the information is sworn to be correct and that the information deals with residency and other things that can change the amount of money you make.
It is fraud if you falsify those documents, and seeing as how the university is a UK run university, it has serious consequences.
And this person is not 40. I've already explained that we know who the individual is. Why do you keep persisting in such strangeness? Why also would you defend illegal and completely awful behavior?
Posted by: lilburne
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 7:45pm)
QUOTE(lilburne @ Tue 4th January 2011, 11:41am)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 4:29pm)
1. I'm sure there are multiple laws that apply. Falsifying governmental documents is normally a crime to ensure people don't.
2. Doesn't seem likely knowing Poetlister's background. The girl appears to be a Freshman/Sophmore now and not someone he would have just happened upon.
And notifying about improper use of an email account is standard, especially when there is suspicion of it being fraudulently used. Emailing the account wont do anything as the email is most likely hacked. That is like asking a burglar if he owns the house instead of calling the police when you have a strong suspicion he doesn't.
1. A University application is NOT a government document.
2. When I was last an freshman I was over 40.
3. If what you said is true that he can't email from the account he probably doesn't have control of it.
Sounds to me that you are making trouble for someone in RL for something that is occurring online.
Have you ever applied for a college or university? They have documents that you sign that say that the information is sworn to be correct and that the information deals with residency and other things that can change the amount of money you make.
It is fraud if you falsify those documents, and seeing as how the university is a UK run university, it has serious consequences.
And this person is not 40. I've already explained that we know who the individual is. Why do you keep persisting in such strangeness? Why also would you defend illegal and completely awful behavior?
What makes you think you know anything about the email account the relationship or otherwise with poetlister? You know nothing about it. From what I recall he had contacts in the London BDSM Scene. The person whose account you are whining about could also be part of that scene, or not, and may well have agreed to forward emails to him for shits and giggles. You simple do NOT know.
What is clear from your previous posts is that he doesn't have control of the email account. This you have no reason to believe that he has phished it or done anything illegal. All you have is that he has given out the email to one or more people.
What is the problem that has you so riled up did you propose marriage, did you pay for photos that never came, or something else?
Posted by: Ottava
QUOTE(lilburne @ Tue 4th January 2011, 3:10pm)
You simple do NOT know.
It is odd how someone who never saw the emails, has no information on it, sure goes on and on about what others don't know.
Either you are making things up, or you are Poetlister. Which is it?
Somey, can we do an IP check to see if lilburne is Poetlister?
QUOTE
What is the problem that has you so riled up did you propose marriage, did you pay for photos that never came, or something else?
I'm not the one riled up.
You've been quite rabid in your making up things and the such. It is odd. You've lied, made things up, went on and on, for what reason? Poetlister, is that you?
Oh, look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nastytroll, editing in the same way Poetlister use to do - generic UK related edits as if he couldn't help being drawn to revealing his location in such an obvious manner.
How interesting.
Posted by: lilburne
You have Poetlister on your brain, and Cirt has Shutterbug on his. What is it with wiki dummies?
Posted by: RMHED
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 8:48pm)
Somey, can we do an IP check to see if lilburne is Poetlister?
Somey can we do an IP check to see if Ottava is a caustic Catholic cunt?
Posted by: SB_Johnny
QUOTE(RMHED @ Tue 4th January 2011, 4:43pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 8:48pm)
Somey, can we do an IP check to see if lilburne is Poetlister?
Somey can we do an IP check to see if Ottava is a caustic Catholic cunt?
{{duck}}
Posted by: Infomercial
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Tue 4th January 2011, 7:56pm)
QUOTE(RMHED @ Tue 4th January 2011, 4:43pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 8:48pm)
Somey, can we do an IP check to see if lilburne is Poetlister?
Somey can we do an IP check to see if Ottava is a caustic Catholic cunt?
{{duck}}
{{duck}}{{goose}}
Posted by: EricBarbour
QUOTE(Infomercial @ Tue 4th January 2011, 5:00pm)
QUOTE(SB_Johnny @ Tue 4th January 2011, 7:56pm)
QUOTE(RMHED @ Tue 4th January 2011, 4:43pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 8:48pm)
Somey, can we do an IP check to see if lilburne is Poetlister?
Somey can we do an IP check to see if Ottava is a caustic Catholic cunt? {{duck}}{{goose}}Can I have a drink?
Posted by: CharlotteWebb
QUOTE(RMHED @ Tue 4th January 2011, 9:43pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 8:48pm)
Somey, can we do an IP check to see if lilburne is Poetlister?
Somey can we do an IP check to see if Ottava is a caustic Catholic cunt?
Neither would surprise me.
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(RMHED @ Tue 4th January 2011, 2:43pm)
QUOTE(Ottava @ Tue 4th January 2011, 8:48pm)
Somey, can we do an IP check to see if lilburne is Poetlister?
Somey can we do an IP check to see if Ottava is a caustic Catholic cunt?
You know that won't work, as all those are no longer in the same place. Basically, they are everywhere.
There is a theory that they all STARTED in one place, like the Hibernians or the Eagle Forum. Very like the "Out of Africa" hypothesis for humans themselves. And for the C^3 people, this place would probably be Rome. Although Greece and even Jeruselem have good claims. But Ottava is not in Rome.
Posted by: Somey
Indeed, we are fairly limited in what we can do with mere "IP checks." However, I've been learning how to juggle batons recently, which is fairly impressive when I manage to keep them going for more than a few seconds.
I'm afraid Mr. Lilburne's apparent wish to mitigate and/or minimize Poetguy's various misdeeds related to the use of deceptive e-mail addresses does put him in the hot-seat, as far as current Poetguy Suspects™ are concerned. As has often been the case in the past, though, we have no technical evidence to indicate that he's Poetguy, and if he is, I'd say he's doing a much better job of altering his "online persona" for this account than he had been with some of the other more recent attempts.
He might even have finally twigged to the fact that even if you can't convince yourself that you're not more clever than everybody else, simply pretending that others might be more clever than you are will get you at least halfway to where you want to go, assuming where you want to go is The Vast Lake of Shit That Is Wikipedia.
One person (I'd rather not say who) suggested that Mr. Lilburne might be someone other than Poetguy who wants us to think he's Poetguy, for reasons that are both mystifying and unlikely to make any sense even if they're ever explained. Still, we've seen weirder things on the interwebs, and Poetguy did make a few friends here and there, some of whom may still support him - and who knows, maybe even help him. 
Posted by: lilburne
QUOTE(Somey @ Thu 6th January 2011, 10:00am)
Indeed, we are fairly limited in what we can do with mere "IP checks." However, I've been learning how to juggle batons recently, which is fairly impressive when I manage to keep them going for more than a few seconds.
I'm afraid Mr. Lilburne's apparent wish to mitigate and/or minimize Poetguy's various misdeeds related to the use of deceptive e-mail addresses does put him in the hot-seat, as far as current Poetguy Suspects™ are concerned. As has often been the case in the past, though, we have no technical evidence to indicate that he's Poetguy, and if he is, I'd say he's doing a much better job of altering his "online persona" for this account than he had been with some of the other more recent attempts.
He might even have finally twigged to the fact that even if you can't convince yourself that you're not more clever than everybody else, simply pretending that others might be more clever than you are will get you at least halfway to where you want to go, assuming where you want to go is The Vast Lake of Shit That Is Wikipedia.
One person (I'd rather not say who) suggested that Mr. Lilburne might be someone other than Poetguy who wants us to think he's Poetguy, for reasons that are both mystifying and unlikely to make any sense even if they're ever explained. Still, we've seen weirder things on the interwebs, and Poetguy did make a few friends here and there, some of whom may still support him - and who knows, maybe even help him.
You shouldn't tease him like that.
But damn that's convoluted.