|
|
|
Sir Fozzie's investigation, a proper sockpuppet report |
|
|
Proabivouac |
|
Bane of all wikiland
Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,246
Joined:
Member No.: 2,647
|
G-dett and Cool hand Luke's sections draw attention to idiosyncratic "phraseologies" shared by both Mantanmoreland and Samiharris accounts, with Alanyst providing edit time analysis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SirFozzi...igation/SandboxThis looks promising, to say the least. What is needed is more of the same. Such evidence, in combination with a plausible motivation scenario, was enough to convict Oldwindybear straightaway, and, after much strife, convince ArbCom in the SevenOfDiamonds case: I bear no ill will towards Mantanmoreland/Samiharris. The few interactions I've had with him were entirely positive, and several of his friends I would call mine as well. But as the evidence approaches the overwhelming - as I sadly imagine it will - the deception that has been foisted upon the project, up to the very highest levels of authority, and the questions of corruption which inevitably follow from its recognition…well, this is serious stuff, folks. There's a lot of money and more than one real-life reputation riding on these issues. A serious shake-up is in order - blocking one retired sock isn't remotely sufficient. Anyone who might reasonably be expected to have known about this should be very closely examined. This post has been edited by Proabivouac:
|
|
|
|
Peter Damian |
|
I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined:
Member No.: 4,212
|
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sun 10th February 2008, 1:44am) G-dett and Cool hand Luke's sections draw attention to idiosyncratic "phraseologies" shared by both Mantanmoreland and Samiharris accounts, with Alanyst providing edit time analysis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SirFozzi...igation/SandboxI ran an enhanced version of the Damian DIY checkuser as follows. Get up to 5000 edits from each user. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...=Mantanmorelandhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...rget=Samiharriscopy and paste these as VALUES into separate columns of a spreadsheet. Trim head and tail. enter the formula =value(left(CELL,5)) into the spreadsheet, where CELL contains the first edit of one user. Copy down. Likewise for the other user. This calculates the timestamp string as a day fraction. Sort each of the day fraction columns, then add a column to the right, numbering the rows from 1 to 5000 (or the actual number of rows, whichever is smaller). Then chart an x-y graph with the day fraction as x, and the number as y. Then you get a 'snake' shaped graph, which flattens out as the user makes fewer edits, and steepens as he or she makes more. The two graphs for Mantanmoreland and Samiharris are highly similar. Both stop editing at 5:30 UCL and resume 13:00. Rapid editing until 17:00, but a pretty consistent pace until 5:30. Strongly suggests the same user, based in eastern US, subject to the limitations we discussed in an earlier thread. (It may simply mean there are two different users with similar editing patterns). What is the background to this case, please?
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Sun 10th February 2008, 5:37pm) QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sun 10th February 2008, 1:44am) G-dett and Cool hand Luke's sections draw attention to idiosyncratic "phraseologies" shared by both Mantanmoreland and Samiharris accounts, with Alanyst providing edit time analysis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SirFozzi...igation/SandboxI ran an enhanced version of the Damian DIY checkuser as follows. Get up to 5000 edits from each user. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...=Mantanmorelandhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...rget=Samiharriscopy and paste these as VALUES into separate columns of a spreadsheet. Trim head and tail. enter the formula =value(left(CELL,5)) into the spreadsheet, where CELL contains the first edit of one user. Copy down. Likewise for the other user. This calculates the timestamp string as a day fraction. Sort each of the day fraction columns, then add a column to the right, numbering the rows from 1 to 5000 (or the actual number of rows, whichever is smaller). Then chart an x-y graph with the day fraction as x, and the number as y. Then you get a 'snake' shaped graph, which flattens out as the user makes fewer edits, and steepens as he or she makes more. The two graphs for Mantanmoreland and Samiharris are highly similar. Both stop editing at 5:30 UCL and resume 13:00. Rapid editing until 17:00, but a pretty consistent pace until 5:30. Strongly suggests the same user, based in eastern US, subject to the limitations we discussed in an earlier thread. (It may simply mean there are two different users with similar editing patterns). What is the background to this case, please? They both post from the same Verizon IP in Brooklyn, NYC, NY, USA. The older account has revealed his own previous socks through editing gaffes, two of which were quietly shown the door on the same day in 2006. And Arbcom did it with Checkuser proof then too. The socking is always abusive - consensus illusion, 3RR evasion, double voting The abuser has returned to the same abuse, although this time used a proxy for sock#2. Most of the time. Next case please. This post has been edited by Piperdown:
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
QUOTE(Moulton @ Sun 10th February 2008, 5:45pm) QUOTE(Moulton @ Sun 10th February 2008, 11:33am) In the real world of writing traditional encyclopedias, everyone knows who the authors and editors are. The sales force also know who the customers are.
In the bizarre world of Wikipedia, the game of concealing and revealing the identity of the players becomes more important than the purported goal of writing an authentic encyclopedia, or serving the consumer of the product.
It's astonishing how much technical work people have put in to address the bizarre world of Wikipedian anonymity. In the world of real encyclopedias, such games of concealing and revealing the identity of editors would never occur. I agree. Ironically, I don't think I should be allowed to edit one of the largest sites in the world, and usually the #1 google result for any subject or person, unless I did so under a real name, verified. I sometimes cheat on my true love Byrne and shop the Amazon. If you want to slag on something there, and be take n seriously, you have to sign up under a verified identity. I think a credit card. I realise that is not possible for many outside the UK/US, or practical for the number of people that edit WP. But it is for the admins and management of WP. There's not that many, they should be accountable, and their ID veirfied and presented. It's what real publishers do. The editors can continue the MUD games, but the admins who run the joint are the ones doing the real damage. WP has no credibilty has long as you have anonymous COIs, and outed COIs like Jossi, lol, being allowed to do the voodoo they do. Daniel Brandt has a WP:POINT and I have seen his light, hallelujah. This post has been edited by Piperdown:
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
The amazing G-Dett http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/G-Dett has found another "asked and answered" used in another completely independent thread/time. He is good, very very good. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=190360171Who is PTMcCain? I read his history and it looks oh so familiar to my tilting at MantanWindmills. How many of us have gone through this schtick with Gary? How many have been ralilroaded? PtMcCain was Shanghai'ed, big-time. He managed to raise a stink, I was a well-behaved ass kisser in comparison. If I would have known I was going to be banned out of the sweet blue for...nothing...I would have pulled a serious PtMcCain (or Giano) on the way out. This post has been edited by Piperdown:
|
|
|
|
WordBomb |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 513
Joined:
Member No.: 309
|
QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Sun 10th February 2008, 1:37pm) What is the background to this case, please? Best place to start is here. Then read this. As you'll see in the next few days, the number (and positions) of people who have known about this is shocking. As if that's not bad enough, they've spent the past 570+ days calling me a liar for raising the alarm of this fraud.
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Sun 10th February 2008, 6:06pm) QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Sun 10th February 2008, 1:37pm) What is the background to this case, please? Best place to start is here. Then read this. As you'll see in the next few days, the number (and positions) of people who have known about this is shocking. As if that's not bad enough, they've spent the past 570+ days calling me a liar for raising the alarm of this fraud. Do they still have an attack dog BLP of you, and are they still using "fuck off Bagley" all over WP? That's not nice. Daniel Brandt Deja Vu.
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...igation/SandboxThis is just rich. Slrubenstein comes in to say he doesn't care. It's good he cared so much to do that. Why does Slrube care? He was the Gerard Lackey who "reviewed" my unblock (original) request in Sept 2007 (see my user talk page link on my WR profile) with a "you just questioned Gerard's Vice Godkingness. How dare you, knave! You stay banned! Nevermind I didn't bother to investigate a damn thing except what my Vice Godking told me in the two minutes I took on this." I think that about sums up the knee deep bullshit that is slrube almost as well as he shows for himself on the diff at the top 'o this post. And nice work, Daniel T. You are a good man, even when you sometimes overlook the facts in some cases (yes, Daniel, there is an SEC Commissioner, and he did say "Naked short selling is a problem we are very concerined about" - see the NSS article where I managed to get that in there between getting sock 6RR'ed) in order to play the Rodney King role. This post has been edited by Piperdown:
|
|
|
|
Achromatic |
|
Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 191
Joined:
From: Washington State
Member No.: 4,185
|
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Sun 10th February 2008, 9:50am) I agree. Ironically, I don't think I should be allowed to edit one of the largest sites in the world, and usually the #1 google result for any subject or person, unless I did so under a real name, verified.
I sometimes cheat on my true love Byrne and shop the Amazon. If you want to slag on something there, and be take n seriously, you have to sign up under a verified identity. I think a credit card. I realise that is not possible for many outside the UK/US, or practical for the number of people that edit WP.
It's a good point. I remember when Amazon introduced the "Real Names" scheme, and it was amazing how night-and-day comments and reviews became. Be it positive, or negative, your input gained so much more value (granted, that's a relative judgment, based on what the original was), by virtue of the fact you were willing, in a public fora, to do the mind-boggling and put your name to it. Especially in such a place where there is a real value in COI, as I believe there is in WP. From publishers, authors, fans and critics trying to organize groundswells of opinion, through to religious ideologies/cults whitewashing what they can to seem more benevolent, there is something that can be had of it. If Amazon can do it, and do it successfully, why can't WP? Hell, even institute rules (moreso than there are) not allowing you to dismiss other contributors on the basis of your qualifications, but at least real names have value in accountability. But then, that wouldn't allow the inner circle to easily edit on their favorite closet subjects, from big chested girls to pro-pedo/zoo to adult diapers to, well, you name it. So it won't happen.
|
|
|
|
Amarkov |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Inactive
Posts: 646
Joined:
From: Figure it out and get a cookie
Member No.: 3,635
|
QUOTE(Achromatic @ Sun 10th February 2008, 1:31pm) QUOTE(Piperdown @ Sun 10th February 2008, 9:50am) I agree. Ironically, I don't think I should be allowed to edit one of the largest sites in the world, and usually the #1 google result for any subject or person, unless I did so under a real name, verified.
I sometimes cheat on my true love Byrne and shop the Amazon. If you want to slag on something there, and be take n seriously, you have to sign up under a verified identity. I think a credit card. I realise that is not possible for many outside the UK/US, or practical for the number of people that edit WP.
It's a good point. I remember when Amazon introduced the "Real Names" scheme, and it was amazing how night-and-day comments and reviews became. Be it positive, or negative, your input gained so much more value (granted, that's a relative judgment, based on what the original was), by virtue of the fact you were willing, in a public fora, to do the mind-boggling and put your name to it. Especially in such a place where there is a real value in COI, as I believe there is in WP. From publishers, authors, fans and critics trying to organize groundswells of opinion, through to religious ideologies/cults whitewashing what they can to seem more benevolent, there is something that can be had of it. If Amazon can do it, and do it successfully, why can't WP? Hell, even institute rules (moreso than there are) not allowing you to dismiss other contributors on the basis of your qualifications, but at least real names have value in accountability. But then, that wouldn't allow the inner circle to easily edit on their favorite closet subjects, from big chested girls to pro-pedo/zoo to adult diapers to, well, you name it. So it won't happen. Real name policies don't help. It's one thing if you want to wave around credentials, of course. But what if I just want to edit, and don't particularly care to be accountable? Well, then I claim to be a random person from San Jose, and who can prove me wrong? (I've done that before, obviously.) Even better, since my ISP allocates IP addresses over a wide range, I could create sockpuppets over the entire Southwest. And it's relatively easy to consider that "LegoMan 156" and "Dragonwarrior9" could be the same person. Will anyone think about whether "Andrew Q. Smith, Las Vegas bellhop", and "Enrique Gonzalez, accountant in Phoenix" are really one and the same? On Amazon, you must use your actual name; your credit card can't sockpuppet for you. That is the only reason why it works there. This post has been edited by Amarkov:
|
|
|
|
WhispersOfWisdom |
|
Lee Nysted
Group: Regulars
Posts: 543
Joined:
Member No.: 2,310
|
QUOTE(Achromatic @ Sun 10th February 2008, 4:21pm) QUOTE(Piperdown @ Sun 10th February 2008, 2:16pm) what is being talked about here in the amazon example is where your account gets a "Real Name" stamp from the site owner, and I think it's done by signing up with credit card information. Which would have to be real and not an alias in two different cities unless you're up to something illegal, lol.
Exactly. There is verification in place. Though, it also strikes me with another (not that they wouldn't think of plenty) reason it'll never happen on WP, "Discrimination against minors/those of us counter-culture rebels who refuse to enable Visa and Mastercard", etc. (Not that I think it's a perfect way, smells slightly of sites that want your CC no 'to verify age'...) Finally more sites are requiring the essence of what you are talking about, including MySpace. My problems with WP stemmed from the fact that anyone could open an account with my name on it, and claim they are me. Any one of us can still do that of someone else. I want nothing to do with WP and it took nearly a year to get out of there. I asked, politely, on Jimbo's talk page; NYB deleted the account with my name on the door. I still do not know how to log into an account there, with my name on it. Verification is a good thing. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)
|
|
|
|
WordBomb |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 513
Joined:
Member No.: 309
|
QUOTE(Achromatic @ Sun 10th February 2008, 5:31pm) It's a good point. I remember when Amazon introduced the "Real Names" scheme, and it was amazing how night-and-day comments and reviews became. Be it positive, or negative, your input gained so much more value ... To bring the conversation full-circle, here's what I discovered about Gary Weiss and Amazon.com book reviews. I suspect anybody following this issue will find many, many parallels. Warning: it's a long post, and all the reviews mentioned in it were mysteriously and simultaneously deleted the same day it was published, so most of the links to Amazon are broken. But because the original text is cited in the body of the post (which is why it's so long), you'll not miss anything. Irony Alert: Jimbo had this to say to Cla68 in reference to his decision to delete the AfD debate on Gary Weiss's article autobiography: QUOTE(Jimbo Wales @ Mon 13th November 2006, 01:42am) Cla68, I very much disagree with you about this. The page contained wildly inappropriate speculation that a notable author was sockpuppeting. As I am sure you are aware, many authors have had their careers badly damaged by being caught sockpuppeting at Amazon, etc., and it is deeply wrong for people to ask me to restore a page with such speculations in Wikipedia after the claims have already been investigated and dismissed. In case you missed it, that debate has been re-created here. This post has been edited by WordBomb:
|
|
|
|
WordBomb |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 513
Joined:
Member No.: 309
|
QUOTE(Amarkov @ Sun 10th February 2008, 6:31pm) Well, yes, they could demand to check your credit card. Amazon has no problem with that; they need your credit card to sell you stuff anyway.
But Wikipedia isn't selling you stuff. What excuse do they have for seeing your credit card?
Amarkov makes a great point here. As soon as credit cards enter the picture, you must meet " PCI Security Standards" which adds a degree of complexity that would make it impractical for a .org. I suspect the answer is to have some third party that does nothing but pass a token to non-commercial sites vouching for a user's credit card-verified identity. Let them take care of PCI compliance for everybody else. Let them also find a sustainable revenue model (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif) . This post has been edited by WordBomb:
|
|
|
|
Proabivouac |
|
Bane of all wikiland
Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,246
Joined:
Member No.: 2,647
|
From Alanyst and Cool Hand Luke: "removing/rv/rev duplicative text/language/etc." User:Mantanmoreland: QUOTE User:Samiharris: QUOTE User:Tomstoner: QUOTE
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
|
|
|
|
Achromatic |
|
Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 191
Joined:
From: Washington State
Member No.: 4,185
|
QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 12th February 2008, 4:55pm) My God. He did say "lack of a dispute". Morven actually wrote a whole paragraph along these lines on the rfc. Below, Morven discusses the most bitter and long running dispute in the history of Wikipedia, where details of gross malpractice by the named party have just been revealed only sentences earlier on the page.. QUOTE(Morven) Where's the dispute? RFCs are supposed to be a means of resolving an actual issue. I don't see an actual dispute being described here, and would suggest that the filers need to have an actual dispute with the users against whom they're filing to have standing.
Without such a current dispute, this is an unnecessary accusation against two established users whose current conduct is not apparently being called into question. Moreover, since Samiharris has indicated he has left the project, there appears to be no ongoing issue that will be remediable. ...completely out of his depth... (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif) Apropos of anything else, isn't standard procedure to get rid of both puppet and master, as a matter of principle?
|
|
|
|
Somey |
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,816
Joined:
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275
|
QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 12th February 2008, 4:55pm) My God. He did say "lack of a dispute". Morven actually wrote a whole paragraph along these lines on the rfc. It makes sense for Gary/MM though, seen in perspective. The dispute is between Overstock.com and Weiss - as long as User:Mantanmoreland and his various other accounts maintain the fiction that they're not Weiss, then he has to claim that the dispute has nothing to do with User:Mantanmoreland and his various other accounts, farcical though it may appear to everyone else. Morven, though... that's a pretty stupid move on his part. This is probably not the time to be taking over the steering wheel in Gary's little bumper-car ride. As for the rest, I hate to sound like Devil's Advocate, but I still doubt that Weiss has done anything illegal, or even legally actionable in a realistic sense. People like Jayson Blair and Stephen Glass, and other journos who have filed false news stories, were clearly in violation of their terms of employment, which are usually signed contracts and have provisions for recovery of damages by the employer, etc. I doubt that Gary would have had to sign anything for Forbes.com or Portfolio Trade Publishing stating that he wouldn't promote himself by using multiple accounts on Wikipedia and then lying about it. I wonder if they would even care, to be honest. I'd still have to say the big loser here is Wikipedia. Particularly if it's true that we're about to see over a thousand e-mails purporting to be from Gary in which he mentions (brags about, perhaps?) his WP editing activities, published by even a semi-reputable source. If I were SlimVirgin, JzG, Dave Gerard, or Jimbo, I'd be absolutely livid over that - they put their WP reputations (or notoriety, if you prefer) totally on the line for this guy, supporting him to an almost ludicrous extent, and he repays them by chattering about it via e-mail with people he doesn't even know personally? Hell, if I were doing what he's being accused of, I wouldn't tell a living soul, unless I had a psychiatrist, which I don't. ( Yet... (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif) ) I suspect we'll hear a lot of the predictable "but e-mails can be easily forged" sort of talk from these folks in the very near future.
|
|
|
|
Proabivouac |
|
Bane of all wikiland
Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,246
Joined:
Member No.: 2,647
|
QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 13th February 2008, 1:22am) Morven, though... that's a pretty stupid move on his part. This is probably not the time to be taking over the steering wheel in Gary's little bumper-car ride.
This can't be the same Morven who hunted me down for having a new username without having previously grovelled before the Committee? Who, after 10k edits, a clean block log, a perfectly respectable reputation, multiple nominations for adminship and no active disputes (unless he, too, was adminpuppeting for Elonka?) made up non-existent policies to justify his RWI trolling? And here he is making up more nonsense to defend an long-term pattern of blatantly abusive socking. Morven reasons: QUOTE "Moreover, since Samiharris has indicated he has left the project, there appears to be no ongoing issue that will be remediable." http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191027809Um, no, nice try…User:Samiharris is still editing the project as User:Mantanmoreland. This post has been edited by Proabivouac:
|
|
|
|
Proabivouac |
|
Bane of all wikiland
Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,246
Joined:
Member No.: 2,647
|
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Wed 13th February 2008, 1:56am) MONGO has agreed with Morven's view (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif) I guess that's the only way to defend his wikially at this point, since no remotely reasonable third party who's examined the situation would say that Mantanmoreland ≠Samiharris. Look, MONGO, I like Mantanmoreland too, and often agree with him in wikidebates. He stuck up for me a few times, and I appreciated it, and remembered it. On reflection, that's probably the reason I didn't take a closer look at this sooner. But let's face it 1) this kind of activity is dishonest, corrupt and wrong 2) He's stone cold busted. There's no way out now. Even if Wikipedia were to let him off the hook at first, a la Essjay, it won't go away. Really, should it? Morven's favoritism in this whole affair, involving many millions of dollars in real people's real money, and which significantly predates this RfC, is more than sufficient cause to seek (at least) his resignation. Morven helped fix Wikipedia to discredit Bagley- who, let's not forget, was telling the truth - and protect Weiss, who was lying through his teeth to protect his COI editing sockfarm, while bearing false witness against others by calling truthtellers liars and harassers. Mantanmoreland abused the harassment meme to suck honest people, some of whom have actually been real-world harassed (and unjustly,) into protecting him from the consequences of his dishonesty. And all the while Morven shilled for this game, while harassing (by Wikipedia's own definition) others and exposing them to defamation (by any standard) on the webpages he manages. This post has been edited by Proabivouac:
|
|
|
|
Kato |
|
dhd
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined:
Member No.: 767
|
Jimbo writes on WikibackQUOTE(Jimbo) Just to follow up.
I have my own opinions and beliefs, which I have expressed publicly and privately depending on where that might be appropriate. But me wondering about something enough to conduct a thorough investigation personally is not the same thing as "knowing".
To this date, I have seen no convincing proof that Mantanmoreland is Gary Weiss. I have seen a lot of bluster and nonsense from people I don't trust. I have followed a lot of blind alleys. But I have no proof. You'd have to be an idiot not to conclude that Mantan is almost certainly Gary Weiss after sifting through the WP diffs (many edits to Overstock, N-Shorts, Gary Weiss bio, articles on obscure mafia history etc etc) and Gary Weiss's blog / career (which has been obsessed with the very same topics down to his writing a whole book on the history of The Mob). Not conclusive proof, I know. But if you're not prepared to take Overstock's word on any of this, then just look it up yourself and see what I mean. I'm not following the later part of the Wikiback thread where Wales apparently admitted in private that Mantan was Weiss back in September 2007. A fact Wales alternatively describes as "nonsense conspiracy theories" whenever else he can. Could somebody expand on that, or find a link which discusses it? * edited to fix a link - Nathan
|
|
|
|
Kato |
|
dhd
Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined:
Member No.: 767
|
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Wed 13th February 2008, 6:08am) Mantanmoreland abused the harassment meme to suck honest people, some of whom have actually been real-world harassed (and unjustly,) into protecting him from the consequences of his dishonesty.
Well yes. This has been the problem all along. Manipulative characters have maneuvered people like JzG, Herbert and MONGO to beat the drums and whip "the community" into a frenzy of hate against outsiders like Judd Bagley for their own gain. These clueless tubthumpers don't have the capacity to discern what is really going on here, while the community at large is made up of malleable nerds with absolutely no idea about the world at all. The result: gross public miscarriage of justice that drags Wikipedia further into the mire. We told them this long ago, but to quote Jonny Cache, "all we got for our troubles was a constant stream of spit in our faces". Cool Hand Luke's post to Wikiback sums up the whole thing well: QUOTE(Cool Hand Luke) This is outrageous. God damned outrageous. And the moment I read the date, I remembered noting Mantanmoreland's puzzling withdrawal from Overstock articles mid-September. See here.
Meanwhile, we banned a user (Piperdown) for merely suggesting what Jimbo thought was probable. Meanwhile, I've been busting my butt to show that they're sock puppets (believing it fruitless to convince anyone of the COI issue), when in fact it was a damn open secret.
Look, I've got school work to do, and I should have gone to bed hours ago, but this is the most outraged I've ever been at Wikipedia, and I've seen my share of absurdity and abuse during the four years since I signed up for an account. (Feb 7, 2004 anniversary. Didn't even notice.) You're telling me that black is white. That WordBomb was right the whole time, and everyone sort of suspected it.
I hope that community heads roll.
Goodnight.
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
The elephant in the room - Yesterday Wikipedian user:PatrickByrne announced on his site that among thousands of emails between journalists, internet forum "bashers", money managers, and other...ahem..."sources", lol......., there are 1841 emails from Gary Weiss, many admitting to his editing of Wikipedia. Since the emails are with other people that are also involved in the Byrne saga, it's safe to assume that editing of WP means editing of WP articles in question.
And Mantanmoreland should be banned for Tomstoner/Lastexit alone, regardless of samiharris.
And no one has brought up Doright yet on WP. You should.
Now we have SlimVirgin/GeorgeWilliamHerbert lying on wikback/WP about screen shots, Morven putting up a Johnnie Cochrane routine on WP, and JzG beating the crazy drum again.
Mantanmoreland's Obi Wan Kenobi impression "These are not the socks you want, move along" [waves hand] is quite endearing.
And Byrne's saga is going to be going reliable source public - yet a small circle of morons on WP, and their godkingm, is going to just keep up the same lie until they get made to look very foolish in the media. Again.
This post has been edited by Piperdown:
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
QUOTE(Error59 @ Wed 13th February 2008, 11:00am) If Weiss had any balls
Ironically, ask Mantamoreland and his calvacade how many balls they think that Patrick Byrne has. This is an outside joke. QUOTE NEWSFLASH - The Magician Reveals A Secret February 12th, 2008 by Patrick Byrne
...one from within the network of Bad Guys got in touch with me and turned over 8,000 emails from a set of message board bashers, convicted stock swindlers, and financial journalists in their cahoots...All total shysters. They run up through sometime well into 2007.
....I know that I have them legally, and that the person who gave them to me had them legally as well (I’d just start posting the 8,000 emails and let the world decide, but I want this journalist to get the scoop).
What makes for fun reading are the several thousand emails of those well-known New York financial journalists. Understanding how they operate, and with whom, will be the stuff of textbooks someday.
Among those communications are 1,841 emails from a bent reporter named Gary Weiss. Among many other things, in several of those emails Gary Weiss freely discusses his editing of Wikipedia.
...we now also have incontrovertible proof of this also) that while Jimbo Wales has for months been publicly accusing Judd of being a “stalker†and such, Jimbo Wales has known all along that Gary Weiss was indeed using the sockpuppets that Judd has revealed. In other words, Jimbo knew that Judd was right, but he has been lying through his teeth to his own followers.
Again, I am stating this publicly here so that this evidence (including the emails of journalists), can be attributed to me, so that a good journalist can go ahead and publish without fear of legal repurcussion.
http://community.overstock.com/deepcapture...veals-a-secret/
|
|
|
|
thekohser |
|
Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined:
Member No.: 911
|
I didn't think I'd ever have anything to do with Weiss/Overstock/WordBomb/Bagley, but thanks to WAS 4.250, now I do! I feel so important! QUOTE :[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]], there is a ''lot'' more to it than that. For starters, there is an entire WAR that has been going on for two years that could have been avoided if COI in a nice friend had been taken as seriously as COI in Greg K. [[User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250]] ([[User talk:WAS 4.250|talk]]) 13:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC) In other words, it's kind of like what I've been saying for about 17 months now. Why was Wikipedia Review a serious conflict of interest (editing for pay in the disinfecting sunlight), when the Reward Board wasn't any conflict of interest, and thousands of "follow" links to Jimbo's for-profit Wikia site wasn't any conflict of interest? I'm fine if they slaughtered my attempt to start a business, if they would have also shut down the Reward Board and applied the actual "WP:External Links" policy to Wikia links. That's what Guy Chapman never got through his thick skull. I wasn't hell-bent on editing Wikipedia for payment. I was hell-bent on the equal application of the WP:COI policy (that only came into existence after the advent of Wikipedia Review). I guess that will be my Wikipedia legacy. Were it not for my business, WP:COI would not have been born when it was. Now, it's one of the most complex problems facing the entire project. Greg This post has been edited by thekohser:
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
my first take on the Kohsers activity on WP when I first ran into - gee, that's not right, that shouldn't be allowed on this snowwhite-pure no-COI site. Then I saw Greg's link to the "Reward Board" and thought "holy hypocracy, batman!".
Then I read articles on WP on companies, people, and though "Holy mother of god, these are not only awful, they're unprofessional, often anonymously autobiographical, and open to be vandalised at any time".
Then I thought, hmm. Maybe people like Greg should be editing them (openly, with any COI's disclosed on his user page, and without him having any administrative privilege ala a Jossi), getting his reward board mojo on for it, and if he does anything "wrong", the community could slap his hand and fix it.
I don't think even Greg's "boss's article" would be involved, lol. Greg, have you considered joining a "church", becoming their paid press official, and editing WP for them? I hear it pays real good.
This post has been edited by Piperdown:
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
Response: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191141059QUOTE(Mantanmoreland) I agree with Morven concerning this RfC, but there seems to be no consensus to delete this and put it in SSP where it belongs. Also Samiharris has quit the project, so this is moot.
I am not Samiharris, and neither I nor Samiharris have ever been blocked or even warned. There are no accusations of edit warring, and the POV pushing accusations come from Cool Hand Luke, who has been a partisan and aggressive editor in [[Patrick M. Byrne]], removing sourced material from the New York Times, claiming that a notable Times columnist, [[Joseph Nocera]], is an "advocacy" and not a reliable source[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Patrick_M._Byrne&diff=186656781&oldid=186166391]. He had an extensive but civil exchange with Samiharris on that point, in which he continued stubbornly to his POV position.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Patrick_M._Byrne#WEIGHT_and_Nocera]
Cool Hand and the others pushing this rely on statistics, because we have not ''behaved'' as socks. The section above is a good example. If I was Sami, would not I have chimed in in this faceoff between Sami and an administrator? A consensus was needed, and I could have supplied a consensus. I did not, because I have been trying my best to avoid all of these articles because of a steady drumbeat of off-wiki harassment, originating from an official of Overstock.com who is a banned user.
Similarly, I did not chime in when Samiharris was facing off against Cool Hand and others in Talk:Gary Weiss last December. In fact, I checked that Talk page and I have not one edit there while Sami has many. If we were socks, I'd be all over that talk page and the article.
Also our writing style is different, and I posted some diffs concerning that here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SirFozzie/Investigation/Sandbox#Evidence.2FDiscussion.2C_Section_4_Writing_Style].
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
|
|
|
|
WordBomb |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 513
Joined:
Member No.: 309
|
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Wed 13th February 2008, 4:07pm) Agreed. He'll get away with it. Someone like Weiss has clearly got friends who would post for him from one of the accounts. Laptop next to him, different IP, telling him what to type.
What makes this so strange is the fact that it's not like there's a lack of consensus and that this sort of stunt is needed to break a log-jam. Who's seriously defending Mantanmoreland anymore? Are they willing to extend this sort of test to every future case? Will they offer it retroactively to every disputed past case? Here's the real challenge: Will Gary Weiss allow himself to be put on a live *shudder* webcam for the whole hour?
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
here's a clue, WP'ians, and for a growing part of this, they are learning it....don't involve the following people in making any defintive decisions on this matter - witness, yes, decide, no:
Thatcher Jimbo FloNight Fred Slim Jay JzG Gerard
There is a cast of thousands who can look at this case that haven't had their reputations on the line in seeing it go away. Many are and that's good.
and when those User:PatrickByrne stashed emails come out, "many involving Wikipedia", don't be surprised if the loudest screamers on-WP are the biggest hypocrites off-wp. I know I can't wait for the 8000 emails to come to light. Don't tease us too long, PB.
if i was a nastypedian, I'd preemptively fess up. save your account reputations now, lol.
|
|
|
|
WhispersOfWisdom |
|
Lee Nysted
Group: Regulars
Posts: 543
Joined:
Member No.: 2,310
|
A kids version of peek-a-boo. How lame. Anyone else on earth would have been banned, deleted, and gone months ago. How can anyone at WP still look at this and keep a straight face. The whole scene is very 6th grade. I should know... I have a a sixth grader, have had two other 6th graders, and I WAS a sixth grader. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
|
|
|
|
WhispersOfWisdom |
|
Lee Nysted
Group: Regulars
Posts: 543
Joined:
Member No.: 2,310
|
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Sun 10th February 2008, 11:50am) QUOTE(Moulton @ Sun 10th February 2008, 5:45pm) QUOTE(Moulton @ Sun 10th February 2008, 11:33am) In the real world of writing traditional encyclopedias, everyone knows who the authors and editors are. The sales force also know who the customers are.
In the bizarre world of Wikipedia, the game of concealing and revealing the identity of the players becomes more important than the purported goal of writing an authentic encyclopedia, or serving the consumer of the product.
It's astonishing how much technical work people have put in to address the bizarre world of Wikipedian anonymity. In the world of real encyclopedias, such games of concealing and revealing the identity of editors would never occur. I agree. Ironically, I don't think I should be allowed to edit one of the largest sites in the world, and usually the #1 google result for any subject or person, unless I did so under a real name, verified. I sometimes cheat on my true love Byrne and shop the Amazon. If you want to slag on something there, and be take n seriously, you have to sign up under a verified identity. I think a credit card. I realise that is not possible for many outside the UK/US, or practical for the number of people that edit WP. But it is for the admins and management of WP. There's not that many, they should be accountable, and their ID veirfied and presented.
It's what real publishers do.
The editors can continue the MUD games, but the admins who run the joint are the ones doing the real damage. WP has no credibilty has long as you have anonymous COIs, and outed COIs like Jossi, lol, being allowed to do the voodoo they do.
Daniel Brandt has a WP:POINT and I have seen his light, hallelujah.
[u] ^ The reality 101 class that most of the kids at WP refuse to take. I must say the stock of WR is rising like a Phoenix from the dust in all of this.
|
|
|
|
Cedric |
|
General Gato
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,648
Joined:
From: God's Ain Country
Member No.: 1,116
|
Well, well! Isn't this precious!: QUOTE(Jimbo Wales @ Thu 14th February 2008, 12:43am on The WikBack) The quote above is misleading to whatever extent it is construed as me "admitting" or "knowing" that Mantanmoreland is Gary Weiss. In the quote itself, I am clearly expressing a belief that I held at that time. (I forget now just what prompted me to hold that belief at the time, or to voice that belief in that context, although as I remember it, it was in the context of an attempt to get Mantanmoreland to prove the opposite to me if he would.)
I have to date seen no proof (nor even persuasive or convincing evidence) that Mantanmoreland is Gary Weiss. Whether it is true or not, I do not know. What I current believe about it is not really at issue, since we do not ban people (or prevent their bans) based on hunches that I might have.
Also this from the AN page: QUOTE My saying at one point that I believed Mantanmoreland to be Gary Weiss is not a smoking gun or anything like one. They are apparently trying to spin this was me "knowing" and "lying" about it. The truth is that I do not know, I have my suspicions like anyone might, but there is no proof and I have tried (hard) to get proof.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Nevertheless, you must have had good reasons for a rather strong statement like that one. I for one would appreciate further, detailed explanation as to what exactly those reasons were, and also (equally important) who else can reasonably be assumed to have had those reasons available to them at or around the time you made that statement. User:Dorftrottel 12:02, February 14, 2008
If there were absolutely no grounds for suspicion whatsoever, then Bagley would not have been able to so successfuly exploit such suspicions. The fact remains that there is no proof, and there never has been. I would say that everybody here is by now so invested in one interpretation or another that ArbCom is probably the only venue for resolution of this matter. Guy (Help!) 12:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC) Naturally, Guy swallows Jimbo's "clarification" whole. Who's "wikilawyering" now? It is true that suspicion does not equal proof. Not in a court of law, anyway. But since when was that true on Wikipedia? Never that I have seen. Yet more proof that on WP, some editors are definitely more equal than others. Maybe we should start a pool as to what date and time we can expect Jimbo's inevitable non-apology apology concerning his "mistake in judgment", and his hippy-dippy "only love can make us whole" statement. Ugh!
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
But Jimbo admitting he had suspicion at least is something. Though it does probably cover himself and if (ha ha ha) Arbcom rule anything like we would like them to, he can brush it off as "bad judgement" - if GodKing would dare do that! Further to the above: QUOTE My saying at one point that I believed Mantanmoreland to be Gary Weiss is not a smoking gun or anything like one. They are apparently trying to spin this was me "knowing" and "lying" about it. The truth is that I do not know, I have my suspicions like anyone might, but there is no proof and I have tried (hard) to get proof.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
* Nevertheless, you must have had good reasons for a rather strong statement like that one. I for one would appreciate further, detailed explanation as to what exactly those reasons were, and also (equally important) who else can reasonably be assumed to have had those reasons available to them at or around the time you made that statement. User:Dorftrottel 12:02, February 14, 2008
* If there were absolutely no grounds for suspicion whatsoever, then Bagley would not have been able to so successfuly exploit such suspicions. The fact remains that there is no proof, and there never has been. I would say that everybody here is by now so invested in one interpretation or another that ArbCom is probably the only venue for resolution of this matter. Guy (Help!) 12:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
It's an interesting thought - yes, there is suspicion, I don't think anyone is denying that. For example, a post from Gary Weiss's blog saying how he has been in India for "the past few weeks" dated October 17 2006. It would be interesting if those who have been going through edits and compiling graphs could compare Mantanmoreland's edit times for the few weeks prior to that blog post and see if the times are significantly different to what is normally seen Whitstable 14:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
what's my smoking gun, among many, is Varkala
MM edited that obscure Indian town's article. The edit was out of "character", and months later the Wonderful Weiss wrote a Forbes piece with a byline from that town.
Riddle me this, WP'ians. Based on edit history, nevermind that Judd knows what the IP's were and can prove it.
Who else has the following negative, obscure, biases and interests in common?
Julian Robertson (sued Weiss, and MM+socks fought toothnail to keep BusinessWeek material on it out of BLP - there are 2 or 3 articles related to Robertson on WP that his socks went AFD on) Patrick Byrne The Naked City (TV series) -- "film noir" material Judd Bags Varkala Russ Baker Business Journalism, specifically Pump&Dumps can best be vigilante policed by abusive stock trading
1,841 Emails originated by GW that Byrne has obtained and stated that some of them detail Wikpedia activity he did. Which I know many on WP are waiting with baited breath to see. I've got the popcorn slowly popping in the crockpot waiting on that bomb.
And Judd has years of IP, alias (not just WP), etc, trails. I think he's got a lot more than we've seen too. I believe him and have been given no reason to disbelieve anything yet from him yet.
This post has been edited by Piperdown:
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
QUOTE(One @ Thu 14th February 2008, 2:52pm) Holy shit. I know you guys have seen this before, but I haven't. The Varkala edit is the most conclusive thing I've seen about Mantanmoreland's real identity. Over a million articles, and he happens to edit the one relatively obscure town in India where Weiss went on vacation the next month. Of course, AGFers like Morven, SV, and GWH are able to look at perhaps the best DUCK report ever assembled and see only a couple of random and-totally-non-Weiss editors--just like "10 million other" New Yorkers says GWH. I'm not optimistic this will be the silver bullet like it should be. weiss's forbes piece indicates that he married into a family from that town. the edit to WP was well before any mention of varkala by weiss in any of his realworld articles. so if a WP'ian argues that it was just a fan of weiss who saw the piece, got interested in the town, so edited it on WP, that would not hold up. i expected that the argument that weiss<>mm would be that mm is just a fan of weiss. well, the mm sock activity shows things done on wp that no fan would have known about prior to some of those things later being publicised. the robertson-related AFD's occurred long before the edit war occurred on WP that the Weiss-Robertson lawsuit, ironically detailed in Weiss's own former employer, BusinessWeek, should be included in the Robertson & Weiss BLPs. Or in Weiss's case, his autobiographical book jacket blurb. That's another smoker. No weiss-WP fan would have been alerted to be interested in those extremely obscure AFD's. Somone on WP already mentioned this in the Cavalcade of Matanmoreland Wikilawyering Venues that has occurred over the last week. all this guessing will, i believe, be made moot by the emails that are supposedly going to be exposed, per Byrne's Feb 12th website material. This post has been edited by Piperdown:
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
Things are moving fast. Who will be the first to respond to this diff?: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191424429One thing has been worrying me the more I watch this. All Jimbo has to do is say "I've met MM and he is not GW" and the whole case collapses. Would he go that far? Anything that can be corrupted will be corrupted, I guess! This post has been edited by The Wales Hunter:
|
|
|
|
WordBomb |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 513
Joined:
Member No.: 309
|
QUOTE(One @ Thu 14th February 2008, 10:52am) Holy shit. I know you guys have seen this before, but I haven't. The Varkala edit is the most conclusive thing I've seen about Mantanmoreland's real identity. It's even better than that. Here are the details: Weiss wrote this piece for Forbes.net, published October 17, 2006. Note the phrase: QUOTE(former journalist Gary R. Weiss) In the seacoast town in Kerala where I am writing this, with its fishermen’s huts, coconut palms… Five months earlier, on May 17, 2006, Mantanmoreland added this to the article on Varkala, India: QUOTE(Mantanmoreland) '''Varkala''' is a coastal Town in [[Kerala]] state, [[India]] (IMG: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/91/Varkala_beach.jpg/180px-Varkala_beach.jpg) (On that day, this image appeared in the article)Mantanmoreland's edits to that article were the 79th and 80th in its history, and he was likely the 30th individual to touch it. Mantanmoreland and Gary Weiss sure have a lot in common, don't they?
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Thu 14th February 2008, 4:31pm) QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Thu 14th February 2008, 4:22pm) I am disturbed by the thought that Sami and MM are not the same person. That is a possibility.
See my sig link. If you think that Judd is a liar and has forged screen shots, then it is a possibility. I don't think Judd is a liar. I base that on previous crucibles of claims and evidence. No, I agree. But it would be easier for them to discredit Sami = MM than MM = Weiss. So if they go for the easiest option, they'll hope the rest crumbles. Also, MM's eagerness to have both accounts answering questions at the same time yesterday suggests the SH account, which only used open proxies, was an account used by more than one persona all along.
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
Arbcom has opened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req.../MantanmorelandActive arbitrators are: 1. Blnguyen 2. Charles Matthews 3. Deskana 4. FayssalF 5. FloNight 6. FT2 7. Jdforrester 8. Jpgordon 9. Kirill Lokshin (Recused) 10. Matthew Brown (Morven) 11. Newyorkbrad 12. Paul August 13. Sam Blacketer 14. Thebainer 15. UninvitedCompany This post has been edited by The Wales Hunter:
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
WordBomb is SamiHarris (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif) From Thatcher: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...reland/EvidenceQUOTE The checkusers have investigated a suspicion that the SamiHarris account was set up by Wordbomb to falsely implicate Mantanmoreland in additional (post-Lastexit) sockpuppetry. The basis for this suspicion is that Wordbomb has also occasionally used proxify.com proxies [1] [2]. Due to the nature of proxy editing, it is unlikely that this suspicion can ever be proved or disproved
|
|
|
|
WordBomb |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 513
Joined:
Member No.: 309
|
QUOTE The checkusers have investigated a suspicion that the SamiHarris account was set up by Wordbomb to falsely implicate Mantanmoreland in additional (post-Lastexit) sockpuppetry. The basis for this suspicion is that Wordbomb has also occasionally used proxify.com proxies [1] [2]. Due to the nature of proxy editing, it is unlikely that this suspicion can ever be proved or disproved
NO WAY.NO WAY he actually wrote that! Look at the first of those two diffs [ 1]. The editor uses the word "irregardless". It is a well known fact that I would sooner eat my own left kidney than use the word "irregardless". And BTW...Thatcher hadn't even figured out that Samiharris was using Proxify until I told him last week (such is the degree of my intel gathering prowess). He thanked me by blocking the email-only account I used to contact him. If Thatcher is worth two bits as a checkuser, he better be compiling a list of all proxify users to see what else comes up.
|
|
|
|
The Wales Hunter |
|
Hackenslasher
Group: Regulars
Posts: 869
Joined:
Member No.: 4,319
|
Jimbo gives his evidence: Evidence presented by Jimbo Wales http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191555850QUOTE I have personally seen no persuasive evidence
Because there has been unseemly and false speculation in some quarters that I know this (or related claims) to be true, and that I have admitted as such in private forums, it is important for me to state what I know and what I don't know.
Claims about Mantanmoreland being author Gary Weiss have been floating around for a long time. Various claims of "proof" have been made, none of which I have found convincing. At times I have believed one way, at times I have believed another way. I have investigated the claims to the best of my ability and I have been unable to find proof one way or the other.
An email I sent to Mantanmoreland and others has been widely quoted as evidence that I supposedly "know" this claim to be true. Such interpretations are malarky, and most of the people making the claims appear to me to be acting in bad faith. What I said, at a point in time, was that I believed it to be true that Mantanmoreland == Gary Weiss. This was specifically in the context of a conversation in which I was trying to get more evidence... a proof, one way or the other. Me believing at a point in time in an investigation that something was true, is not the same thing as an assertion that it is true, nor of an "admission" or anything else.
Mantanmoreland steadfastly denies being Gary Weiss. Ask him yourself if you want to know.
Related allegations that I am protecting a "friend" are nonsense. Mantanmoreland and I do not get along well at all.
Related allegations that I have some vested interest in the underlying content dispute are even worse nonsense. I have no opinion about "naked short selling". I have never sold a stock short in my life. I have no financial interests of any kind. If you read anything otherwise, or hints to that effect, on the overstock.com blog or elsewhere, well, I don't know was else to say but: nonsense.
Regarding the specific claim at issue here, whether Sami Harris and Mantanmoreland are the same user, I can say quite firmly that I do not believe it to be true. I have interacted (argued!) with both users over an extended period of time by private email, and I have not seen any reason to think it true. The offsite "evidence" relating to this comes from a highly questionable source, and furthermore strikes me as completely unpersuasive. For all we know, these are faked screenshots from someone who has engaged in a campaign of harassment and bad behavior (on-wiki and off-wiki) that has been really astounding to witness.
I have reviewed my email archives to look for similarities between the users. I have examined email headers. I have looked for textual similarities, time patterns, etc. I see nothing to lead me to a conclusion that Sami Harris and Mantanmoreland are the same user.
For these reasons, I do not believe it to be true that Mantanmoreland == Samiharris.
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Fri 15th February 2008, 6:33pm) Enjoy, everybody, perhaps we should all club together and buy a statue for a small Indian town: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191676873To quote the image caption: "Mantanmoreland switched to Indian time at the same time W was in India" Looks like a Jackson Pollack masterpiece. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mantanm...d_date-time.pngIt's always been Varkala for me, babe. I googled MM, saw that on ASM, went to WP and Forbes for myself, and it was "Gary is MM" ever since. All is dancing after that was just entertainment and laughs, because I knew then, without even later seeing Wordy's IP evidence(s) that he's put together on-Wp,off-WP over a period of more than a year, well that was just "yup....yup....uh-huh....still?....jeez....whatanidiot...." for me. When we get to see the 1,841 emails in Byrne's stash hopefully soon and in a very reliable source way, it will be more than laughs, it will be roflmao's all around. Byrne says on his "Deep Capture" blog (2/12/08) that GW's emails admit editing WP. This post has been edited by Piperdown:
|
|
|
|
No one of consequence |
|
I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all
Group: Regulars
Posts: 635
Joined:
Member No.: 1,010
|
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 15th February 2008, 7:10pm) QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Fri 15th February 2008, 1:33pm) "Mantanmoreland switched to Indian time at the same time W was in India"
I mostly glaze over with all this discussion of internal wiki-wankery. Clearly we are examining evidence presented/discarded by people who are incapable of making any reasoned evaluation of evidence and who are unable to fairly apply rules to "evidence" in any event. But having said that I have to admit the the graphic analysis of the edits showing a clear diurnal flip contemporaneous with travel half-way across the world in a nice piece of evidence. Better than the "process" is capable of making use of I'm afraid. Wiki-wankery indeed. Although the "incapable of making reasoned evaluation" tars a lot of good-minded folks with an awfully broad brush. I for one have been aware of the allegations that GW=MM=SH but never took the time to undertake an exhaustive review. The Varkala Time Warp is truly a smoking gun and I suppose that people who are deeply into the controversy have known about it for some time, but as a casual reader of WR and a never-reader of any of the parties' blogs, I've never heard of it before. I am curious to see how Guy and Jimbo respond here, but don't be so "inside" yourselves that you assume that every fact you know was also known all along to all the Wikipedians involved.
|
|
|
|
Piperdown |
|
Fat Cat
Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined:
Member No.: 2,995
|
QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Fri 15th February 2008, 8:23pm) The Varkala Time Warp is truly a smoking gun and I suppose that people who are deeply into the controversy have known about it for some time, but as a casual reader of WR and a never-reader of any of the parties' blogs, I've never heard of it before. I am curious to see how Guy and Jimbo respond here, but don't be so "inside" yourselves that you assume that every fact you know was also known all along to all the Wikipedians involved.
It's been known to every Arbcommer 2006-2007, and up to the toppermost of the wikimost. They all read ASM religiously, and they all tried to make sure other WP'ians didn't. Now you know why. I found out, and verified on my own ability to click URL links lol, just by googling for few minutes. WP 'crats think we're stupid, us peasants toiling the article fields. I doubt Jimmyhat's flipflopping show, but I do believe his statement that he and MM don't get along. I would imagine that his first interaction was a legal threat, based on what i can see happened during the oct-nov 2006 GW article AFD cover-up. I am reading between the lines, and guessing what i would have done if I were GW. It's all so agatha christie.... This post has been edited by Piperdown:
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |