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

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Nutters - what happens when you let anyone edit, or why boners like Rodhullandemu shouldn't try digging for my info
lilburne
post Sat 25th June 2011, 11:32pm
Post #21


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(powercorrupts @ Sun 26th June 2011, 12:15am) *

So Witt was another Phil Nash on Usenet around the same time? Or were you never on Usenet.


Even if he did post as Witt or Phil Nash on USENET, and even if he posted in those groups, sans all the headers, there is no way that one can assume that the post in question is from him. Much of the USENET trolling involve[ds] 'froggery'.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Sat 25th June 2011, 11:43pm
Post #22


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(powercorrupts @ Sat 25th June 2011, 9:30pm) *

QUOTE
I currently stand indicted, convicted, and due for sentence on charges of
"distributing indecent images of children" contrary to the Protection of
Children Act 1987. I have only pleaded guilty on legal advice on the basis that no
jury is likely to acquit me. Yet the images whereof I stand convicted are, by any
standard, simple nudity with no suggestion of sexual activity.


Typically Rod misses his wood for the trees. I think it's the distribution that's the particularly salient legal issue here old son, and the suggestion of sexual activity.


My own legal training and experience may now be a tad rusty, but this poster was claiming a defence that the images were not indecent, which is entirely plausible- it's not a criminal offence to sell baking powder or icing sugar as cocaine (actually, it's a fraud, but one unlikely to be prosecuted, given the circumstances)- so it's not a criminal offence to distribute non-indecent images of children, so you've missed the point there. I haven't seen the images, and have no personal knowledge of this case, if it is a real one, so I can't comment on the content of the images. However, without more, we haven't a clue whether this post is a fake or not, and it's unfair to speculate as far as I am concerned.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kelly Martin
post Sun 26th June 2011, 12:43am
Post #23


Bring back the guttersnipes!
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 3,270
Joined: Sun 22nd Jun 2008, 4:41am
From: EN61bw
Member No.: 6,696



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sat 25th June 2011, 6:43pm) *
it's not a criminal offence to sell baking powder or icing sugar as cocaine (actually, it's a fraud, but one unlikely to be prosecuted, given the circumstances)
Certainly is a crime here in the US, although I cannot speak to UK law, of course.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Sun 26th June 2011, 1:54am
Post #24


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Sun 26th June 2011, 1:43am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sat 25th June 2011, 6:43pm) *
it's not a criminal offence to sell baking powder or icing sugar as cocaine (actually, it's a fraud, but one unlikely to be prosecuted, given the circumstances)
Certainly is a crime here in the US, although I cannot speak to UK law, of course.


Hence my parenthetical comment. I remember a 1970s case in which the accused approached people and asked them "do you want to buy some shit?" (for younger readers, a synonym for marijuana) and actually sold them dried faeces. He was charged with deception and acquitted on the basis that the contract of sale was for the described item rather than the actual item. Overall, a sensible result, perhaps.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Sun 26th June 2011, 1:57am
Post #25


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sat 25th June 2011, 4:03pm) *
Time, I think to put up or shut up.

You first, sir.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kelly Martin
post Sun 26th June 2011, 2:21am
Post #26


Bring back the guttersnipes!
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 3,270
Joined: Sun 22nd Jun 2008, 4:41am
From: EN61bw
Member No.: 6,696



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sat 25th June 2011, 8:54pm) *

QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Sun 26th June 2011, 1:43am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sat 25th June 2011, 6:43pm) *
it's not a criminal offence to sell baking powder or icing sugar as cocaine (actually, it's a fraud, but one unlikely to be prosecuted, given the circumstances)
Certainly is a crime here in the US, although I cannot speak to UK law, of course.


Hence my parenthetical comment. I remember a 1970s case in which the accused approached people and asked them "do you want to buy some shit?" (for younger readers, a synonym for marijuana) and actually sold them dried faeces. He was charged with deception and acquitted on the basis that the contract of sale was for the described item rather than the actual item. Overall, a sensible result, perhaps.
It's not fraud here. It's "sale or distribution of a simulated controlled substance", and carries penalties that are only slightly less severe than "sale or distribution of a controlled substance", and far more severe than those for commercial fraud.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Sun 26th June 2011, 2:28am
Post #27


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Sun 26th June 2011, 3:21am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sat 25th June 2011, 8:54pm) *

QUOTE(Kelly Martin @ Sun 26th June 2011, 1:43am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sat 25th June 2011, 6:43pm) *
it's not a criminal offence to sell baking powder or icing sugar as cocaine (actually, it's a fraud, but one unlikely to be prosecuted, given the circumstances)
Certainly is a crime here in the US, although I cannot speak to UK law, of course.


Hence my parenthetical comment. I remember a 1970s case in which the accused approached people and asked them "do you want to buy some shit?" (for younger readers, a synonym for marijuana) and actually sold them dried faeces. He was charged with deception and acquitted on the basis that the contract of sale was for the described item rather than the actual item. Overall, a sensible result, perhaps.
It's not fraud here. It's "sale or distribution of a simulated controlled substance", and carries penalties that are only slightly less severe than "sale or distribution of a controlled substance", and far more severe than those for commercial fraud.


That depends where "here" is. In the UK, offering to supply a controlled drug is a criminal offence. Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. It doesn't matter that what is actually on offer isn't a controlled driug.

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Sun 26th June 2011, 2:57am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sat 25th June 2011, 4:03pm) *
Time, I think to put up or shut up.

You first, sir.


Which? It's your option. On balance, I think you must prove. I have seen nothing I need to disprove.

As Noel Coward said, "Knob, dear boy".
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post Sun 26th June 2011, 6:45am
Post #28


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

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm
Member No.: 4,212

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(lilburne @ Sun 26th June 2011, 12:32am) *

QUOTE(powercorrupts @ Sun 26th June 2011, 12:15am) *

So Witt was another Phil Nash on Usenet around the same time? Or were you never on Usenet.


Even if he did post as Witt or Phil Nash on USENET, and even if he posted in those groups, sans all the headers, there is no way that one can assume that the post in question is from him. Much of the USENET trolling involve[ds] 'froggery'.


There are three identities in question.

1. The owner of the CV of someone called 'Philip Howard Nash'. This is a real name and a real person - I have confirmed this from an ex-colleague.

2. The account called 'Witt', which has a long involvement with usenet. There is no question that there is a single person behind the account. Witt frequently posts a CV that is consistent with the CV in (1) above, and often signs their posts with 'Phil Nash' or 'PHN'.

3. The RodHull and Emu account. The owner of this account signs their emails 'Phil Nash', quite publicly. It has a CV (now deleted from their user page) which is the same as the CV in (1). It has an account on the commons which uploaded a family picture identical (and clearly the original of) a copy that is in British Army records.

There are many junctions between these accounts which are difficult to explain by anything other than numerical identity.

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Sun 26th June 2011, 12:30am) *

How am I supposed to answer that? I have no way of knowing. However, if you Google for "Phil Nash", or "Philip Nash", it's clearly not an uncommon name.


Why did you remove this information from your user page? http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=172781392 (in 20 November 2007). I am assuming that you are 'Rodhullandemu'.

Is it possible there were two people on Selby District Council both called 'Phil Nash'? The records are easily checked.

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Sun 26th June 2011, 7:00am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Peter Damian
post Sun 26th June 2011, 7:43am
Post #29


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

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined: Tue 18th Dec 2007, 9:25pm
Member No.: 4,212

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I accept RHE's claim above that he had no link to the usenet account 'Witt'. But let's focus on 'Witt'. Witt was 'Dean of Philosophy' at the so-called 'Pedo University' that operated from alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.pre-teen in the late 1990s.

According to one person "For at least several months in the fall of 1998 the pedophiles in the newsgroup calling itself "Pedo U" displayed photographs of female children being sexually assaulted and abused in absolutely horrific and terrifying ways....and to grotesque degrees. It was so bad that many adult "normal" people, who were unfortunate to click it on, reacted by crying or vomiting. Others were shaken and depressed. "

Witt said he held the position proudly "since I seem to be one of the few people who is not prepared to accept conventional wisdom (although that is, of course, an oxymoron). I'm prepared to argue a case that is based on scientific results rather than popular misconceptions. "

He would say things like “there is a huge difference between child porn and child abuse. They are not necessarily connected.” http://groups.google.com/group/alt.true-cr...21408c3a152d8c3

He would claim that research showed that the victims of child pornography were better socially adjusted than their peers. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activis...73b448545c3282e

Or that "there is a wealth of research material which concludes that (to put it in your crude terms) "sexual relations" between adults and "children" is (and I cannot emphasis this enough) NOT NECESSARILY HARMFUL." http://groups.google.com/group/alt.activis...9c8316b7ca188ed

You have a flavour. The ring was busted in 1998. "Attorney General Dennis Vacco ordered the raid as part of an international sting on a Byzantine kiddie-porn ring that called itself "Pedo University" and operated through the newsgroup. "BuffNET and Dreamscape were in possession of criminal images and a search warrant was executed," says Marc Wurzel, Vacco's spokesperson. Thirteen people, from New Zealand to Rhode Island, were ultimately arrested".

http://www.villagevoice.com/1998-11-24/new...-the-messengers
http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/05/013354P.pdf

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Sun 26th June 2011, 10:30am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MaliceAforethought
post Tue 26th July 2011, 1:15pm
Post #30


u Mad?
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue 21st Jun 2011, 6:54am
From: Wonderland
Member No.: 57,801



Apparently Phil is a bit butthurt that you blokes haven't given him enough attention lately. He's sent me this gem:

QUOTE
" Nutters - what happens when you let anyone edit, or why boners like Rodhullandemu shouldn't try digging for my info"

Too late. I have never dug for an Arbitrator's info. That applies also to those with access to en-functionaries-l. But most of them are not that private.

I've made enquiries outside Wikipedia for some people, and I know full well the subject of those enquiries, although at that time the Wikipedia connection wasn't obvious, although you have managed to make it so. Thanks for that.

So welcome to the real world of the internet; I know who you are, since I've been doing this sort of thing for nearly 30 years. I've no problem with you exposing ArbCom nonsense, not that it's particularly interesting to me- but just leave me out of it, OK?

I have enough on ArbCom that you haven't even seen, nor are even going to, that would make your "revelations" look you're an ice-cream salesman.

Let's just put it like this: Don't believe what you read.


His spy work is obviously paying off. So out with it Phil, don't hide your sniping like AC, tell the whole world.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
powercorrupts
post Tue 26th July 2011, 9:48pm
Post #31


.
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 716
Joined: Fri 27th Jun 2008, 10:27pm
Member No.: 6,776



QUOTE(MaliceAforethought @ Tue 26th July 2011, 2:15pm) *

Apparently Phil is a bit butthurt that you blokes haven't given him enough attention lately. He's sent me this gem:

QUOTE
" Nutters - what happens when you let anyone edit, or why boners like Rodhullandemu shouldn't try digging for my info"

Too late. I have never dug for an Arbitrator's info. That applies also to those with access to en-functionaries-l. But most of them are not that private.

I've made enquiries outside Wikipedia for some people, and I know full well the subject of those enquiries, although at that time the Wikipedia connection wasn't obvious, although you have managed to make it so. Thanks for that.

So welcome to the real world of the internet; I know who you are, since I've been doing this sort of thing for nearly 30 years. I've no problem with you exposing ArbCom nonsense, not that it's particularly interesting to me- but just leave me out of it, OK?

I have enough on ArbCom that you haven't even seen, nor are even going to, that would make your "revelations" look you're an ice-cream salesman.

Let's just put it like this: Don't believe what you read.


His spy work is obviously paying off. So out with it Phil, don't hide your sniping like AC, tell the whole world.


Yeah Rod, you know who Malice is and are not telling us - that is bad show man.

QUOTE

Hopefully the community's uncharacteristic enquitude continues.


Is that French?

QUOTE
Look at my Wikipedia/Commons contributions, and if you can see any agenda beyond keeping the project on track, feel free to kick me into touch. But please don't do it on the basis of unsubstantiated, incredible and irrelevant material. My desysop was shameful enough without bringing up stale material, and this new stuff reeks of paranoia.


I love the way Rod claims the child porn was all Secret Service "Aunt Sally" work and then 15 minutes later says it's all “unsubstantiated, incredible and irrelevant material.”

“Irrelevant”? He's been emailing Abd for legal advice! That particular email could have been written by Abd in fact.

I think Peter's post above says it all.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ottava
post Thu 28th July 2011, 1:33am
Post #32


Über Pokemon
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,917
Joined: Thu 31st Jul 2008, 6:35pm
Member No.: 7,328

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I just noticed this one from Frank/Cool Hand Luke:

QUOTE
I also agree with your point about the 6 months reconsideration. I'm not a wikishrink, but he does seem to be exhibiting warning signs of Ottava Syndrome.


Gesh Frank, are your only contributions to ArbCom-l references to me? Especially when I was gone?

And I find it really odd - I've never threatened to kill myself, never had any kind of fit, cry, or whatever, and when it came to my issues I had quite a lot of evidence supporting my side with a lot of people who agree with me. I love how he constantly tries to demonize me, and it is always amusing when people from the WMF are shocked that they enjoy my company irl because of all the really nasty things that are said like the above.

I do love how Frank takes a suicidal, abusive admin, pedophile and says that he is starting to exude signs of me. GREAT. Thanks! A guy who just spent thousands of hours writing content and wanting a handful of admin to leave me alone is equivalent of a person whose whole Wiki career was going about using his admin rights to harass others while he has all sorts of legal problems in real life and is clinically insane.

Completely unprofessional.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A Horse With No Name
post Thu 28th July 2011, 2:14am
Post #33


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

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



QUOTE
I wish I could tell him -- but I shouldn't -- how hard we worked to bend over backwards to make this work for him. - Newyorkbrad


I'm surprised that Newyorkbrad can even bend over forwards, let alone backwards! blink.gif

QUOTE
Either he is milking faux-disability for all its worth, or he's genuinely insufficiently coherent for continued contribution to the project. -- Coren / Marc


Oh, that naughty Quebec pornographer and his "milking" double entendres! smile.gif

QUOTE(Ottava @ Wed 27th July 2011, 9:33pm) *

Gesh Frank, are your only contributions to ArbCom-l references to me? Especially when I was gone?


Well, in fairness, he is distracted with a new job and a new wife. Now, which one do you think he'll keep longer? wink.gif

This post has been edited by A Horse With No Name: Thu 28th July 2011, 2:17am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Thu 28th July 2011, 2:20am
Post #34


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 28th July 2011, 2:33am) *

I just noticed this one from Frank/Cool Hand Luke:

QUOTE
I also agree with your point about the 6 months reconsideration. I'm not a wikishrink, but he does seem to be exhibiting warning signs of Ottava Syndrome.


Gesh Frank, are your only contributions to ArbCom-l references to me? Especially when I was gone?

And I find it really odd - I've never threatened to kill myself, never had any kind of fit, cry, or whatever, and when it came to my issues I had quite a lot of evidence supporting my side with a lot of people who agree with me. I love how he constantly tries to demonize me, and it is always amusing when people from the WMF are shocked that they enjoy my company irl because of all the really nasty things that are said like the above.

I do love how Frank takes a suicidal, abusive admin, pedophile and says that he is starting to exude signs of me. GREAT. Thanks! A guy who just spent thousands of hours writing content and wanting a handful of admin to leave me alone is equivalent of a person whose whole Wiki career was going about using his admin rights to harass others while he has all sorts of legal problems in real life and is clinically insane.

Completely unprofessional.


Suicidal- from time to time, yes. It goes with the commitment and lack of support I've received, particularly of late.
Abusive - OK, I've used abrasive language, but mostly to those who fully deserved it. 99% of my blocks have stood.
Pedophile - You really should ask your legal advisors whether you should have said that and I'm reserving my rights on that.
Harass - ditto
Clinically Insane- ditto. On that point, please read "An Unquiet Mind", by Kay Redfield Jamison. She may regard herself as "crazy", but I regard myself as "differently imagined", and it's not my problem that you, and others, cannot get a hold of that.

I have no axe to grind against Ottava, despite his somewhat precious and preposterously pretentious use name, but in my experience, he/she has been a useful contributor to Wikipedia, despite falling foul of the grunts that run it from the top down.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ottava
post Thu 28th July 2011, 2:36am
Post #35


Über Pokemon
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,917
Joined: Thu 31st Jul 2008, 6:35pm
Member No.: 7,328

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Wed 27th July 2011, 10:20pm) *


Pedophile - You really should ask your legal advisors whether you should have said that and I'm reserving my rights on that.
Harass - ditto
Clinically Insane- ditto. On that point, please read "An Unquiet Mind", by Kay Redfield Jamison. She may regard herself as "crazy", but I regard myself as "differently imagined", and it's not my problem that you, and others, cannot get a hold of that.



Those are his words, not mine. I am merely responding to the image that was created by the Arbitrators as context to CoolHandLuke setting me up as a person who is worse than all of the negatives provided.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Thu 28th July 2011, 2:47am
Post #36


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 28th July 2011, 3:36am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Wed 27th July 2011, 10:20pm) *


Pedophile - You really should ask your legal advisors whether you should have said that and I'm reserving my rights on that.
Harass - ditto
Clinically Insane- ditto. On that point, please read "An Unquiet Mind", by Kay Redfield Jamison. She may regard herself as "crazy", but I regard myself as "differently imagined", and it's not my problem that you, and others, cannot get a hold of that.



Those are his words, not mine. I am merely responding to the image that was created by the Arbitrators as context to CoolHandLuke setting me up as a person who is worse than all of the negatives provided.



The Arbs are easily fooled, and I think you'll find that even innocent repetition of libel isn't a viable defence in any common-law jurisdiction of which I'm aware. It's called "poisoning the well", and without justification as a matter of fact (since it can't possibly be within the "fair comment" defence), is equally actionable. If I were you, I'd see my attorneys as soon as their office opens tomorrow, with a view to drafting a suitable, and public, apology. People here are treading upon thin ice indeed, and the fact that statements are made on "teh Internets", in my experience, has significantly failed to be an acceptable defence. Wake up, peoples! This site has a legal status, which can be removed by a court of competent jurisdiction, and breaches enforced by injunction and damages. I'd have expected the Mods to have realised that, since they should know what they have signed up for, but if they don't, it's not my problem.

This post has been edited by Encyclopedist: Thu 28th July 2011, 2:50am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Thu 28th July 2011, 2:49am
Post #37


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Wed 27th July 2011, 7:20pm) *
despite falling foul of the grunts that run it from the top down.

Don't complain about it on WR. Write an article. (PM me for more information.)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
carbuncle
post Thu 28th July 2011, 2:56am
Post #38


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,601
Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm
Member No.: 5,544



QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Thu 28th July 2011, 2:20am) *

Suicidal- from time to time, yes. It goes with the commitment and lack of support I've received, particularly of late.

Yes, if people aren't going to support you, the only solution is to top yourself.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Thu 28th July 2011, 3:02am
Post #39


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(carbuncle @ Thu 28th July 2011, 3:56am) *

QUOTE(Encyclopedist @ Thu 28th July 2011, 2:20am) *

Suicidal- from time to time, yes. It goes with the commitment and lack of support I've received, particularly of late.

Yes, if people aren't going to support you, the only solution is to top yourself.



I was OK until the nitwits got involved. I'll just assume that you are no longer delicious.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Encyclopedist
post Thu 28th July 2011, 5:01am
Post #40


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu 13th Nov 2008, 12:11am
Member No.: 8,944



QUOTE(MaliceAforethought @ Tue 26th July 2011, 2:15pm) *

Apparently Phil is a bit butthurt that you blokes haven't given him enough attention lately. He's sent me this gem:

QUOTE
" Nutters - what happens when you let anyone edit, or why boners like Rodhullandemu shouldn't try digging for my info"

Too late. I have never dug for an Arbitrator's info. That applies also to those with access to en-functionaries-l. But most of them are not that private.

I've made enquiries outside Wikipedia for some people, and I know full well the subject of those enquiries, although at that time the Wikipedia connection wasn't obvious, although you have managed to make it so. Thanks for that.

So welcome to the real world of the internet; I know who you are, since I've been doing this sort of thing for nearly 30 years. I've no problem with you exposing ArbCom nonsense, not that it's particularly interesting to me- but just leave me out of it, OK?

I have enough on ArbCom that you haven't even seen, nor are even going to, that would make your "revelations" look you're an ice-cream salesman.

Let's just put it like this: Don't believe what you read.


His spy work is obviously paying off. So out with it Phil, don't hide your sniping like AC, tell the whole world.


MA, you've now had my reply to your PM; so, I'm calling your PM, and raising you. I doubt you play poker, but, er, it's about time perhaps that you understood the basics. A fortuitous release of otherwise confidential information can only come from two possible sources, the profiles of which are intrinsically different. You think you've kept those cards close enough to your chest to escape scrutiny. But you think incorrectly. Whereas one line of enquiry may occasionally take a wrong turn, the longer it goes on, the more likely it is to be heading in the right direction. And even if the preceding is bollocks, how certain can you be that you ain't going to be bang to rights later today?

In short, once your cover is blown, where's your value?

Sleep well.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

4 Pages V < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 27th 3 17, 6:18pm