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

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> CAMERA banning, April/May 2008
MaliceAforethought
post Fri 1st July 2011, 9:48pm
Post #1


u Mad?
***

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




In April 2008 a pro-Palestinian group revealed that CAMERA, an Israeli nationalist media watchdog group, recruited a couple dozen people to counter perceived anti-Israeli editing (just read the article). The expected fecal hurricane emerged at ANI with some of the accused calling the emails fabrications ("The (e-mail) protocols of the elder of CAMERA") or accusing EI of hacking/infiltrating the group. Some admins ban a few offenders and issue a statement.

What ARBCOM does: They take the case and, a month after the admins have finished dealing with the problem, issue a milk-water weak ruling, hilariously finding that membership in a group whose express purpose is POV canvassing/meat-puppetry is not itself a policy violation. General amnesty issued for all others involved.

Residual Questions: Why accept a high profile case only to do nothing? How did the information come out?

What the Leak reveals: The point of accepting the case wasn't to look into a POV pushing group but to prevent a witch-hunt for the remaining handful of active CAMERA members, hence the amnesty. A far more lenient stance than those adopted on the Scientology/LaRouche editors. Jayjg shows up to run interference for the group. The leak was not fabricated and came from a group member disturbed by the willingness of a professor and media professional to subvert Wikipedia's intent. Some group members are still active under the same names while the banned editors reincarnated (Zeq=SOL GOLDSTONE, Dajudem=Stellarkid) into the currently active group. So, protecting partisans with agendas is more important than protecting Wikipedia from them. Unless they are Scientologists or something.


*****************************************************************************

From sam.blacketer at googlemail.com Wed Apr 23 20:42:28 2008
From: sam.blacketer at googlemail.com (Sam Blacketer)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:42:28 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
Message-ID: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>

The Israel lobbying case has the potential to cause serious disruption if we
don't get what we do right. Suggestions of organised POV pushing
co-ordinated offwiki are clearly troubling. However I'm not sure, on a
strict reading of the pdf linked on the ANI page, that this is made out. It
is an appeal for people to "ensure accuracy and fairness", "to ensure that
.. articles are free of bias and error, and include necessary facts and
context". On the surface that is exactly what all editors should be doing.

Three important issues that might be settled:

a) Was the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America's
campaign an attempt to subvert NPOV? A clear lead might be helpful.
b) Several real names have been connected to Wikipedia accounts. It looks
like this was in good faith attempts to stop policy being broken, but was it
reasonable?
c) Should Zeq have been blocked for a year? The indefinite topic ban seems
eminently reasonable.

So I'm inclined to accept the case. My concern is that this case has a good
chance of spinning way out of control and into surrogate arguments over
Israel/Palestine. I wanted to check on the list whether others were thinking
along the same lines, because this is one sort of case where we get problems
if the committee presents a divided front.

--
Sam Blacketer
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Wed Apr 23 20:48:44 2008
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:48:44 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140804231348m7a157e10pcb6724f9370f6585@mail.gmail.com>

2008/4/23 Sam Blacketer <sam.blacketer at googlemail.com>:

> The Israel lobbying case has the potential to cause serious disruption if we
> don't get what we do right. Suggestions of organised POV pushing
> co-ordinated offwiki are clearly troubling. However I'm not sure, on a
> strict reading of the pdf linked on the ANI page, that this is made out. It
> is an appeal for people to "ensure accuracy and fairness", "to ensure that
> .. articles are free of bias and error, and include necessary facts and
> context". On the surface that is exactly what all editors should be doing.
> So I'm inclined to accept the case. My concern is that this case has a good
> chance of spinning way out of control and into surrogate arguments over
> Israel/Palestine. I wanted to check on the list whether others were thinking
> along the same lines, because this is one sort of case where we get problems
> if the committee presents a divided front.


I'd advise the arbcom to just say: "Experienced contributors, please
come to these articles and help our new contributors to add their
valuable insights with NPOV as the foremost concern. We know they're a
morass, but please help anyway. Admins, please don't block or ban
people hair-trigger."

The reason I say this is that we have *endless* campaigns, of varying
degrees of organisation, to POV-push on Wikipedia, and every time (1)
NPOV is the cure for stupid (as Phil Sandifer puts it) (2) we get more
than a few good new contributors out of it, as people realise that
NPOV is actually the best way to make sure their POV is properly
presented in Wikipedia. (Not "pushed", but "properly presented.")

Reiterating this may turn the drama down a bit. We've been here
before, lots and lots.


- d.
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Wed Apr 23 20:49:57 2008
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:49:57 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <fbad4e140804231348m7a157e10pcb6724f9370f6585@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>
<fbad4e140804231348m7a157e10pcb6724f9370f6585@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140804231349i1b4b1a8dve1e8e3c86cc441f5@mail.gmail.com>

2008/4/23 David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>:

> I'd advise the arbcom to just say: "Experienced contributors, please
> come to these articles and help our new contributors to add their
> valuable insights with NPOV as the foremost concern. We know they're a
> morass, but please help anyway. Admins, please don't block or ban
> people hair-trigger."


And if they were really pushing Jayjg as a role model, then I'm sure
Jay will have a whale of a time helping these people become good
contributors. (Even if there's little more frustrating than people you
pretty much agree with making dicks of themselves in the process.)


- d.
----------
From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Wed Apr 23 20:55:17 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:55:17 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <480fa297.2533440a.5c10.5e65@mx.google.com>

Add one issue to yours:

These things are part of the real world. So they happen. So the community
should have it honestly stated, they happen, they aren't easy to deal with,
and these are our norms and how we try to handle them.


Paul.
----------
From newyorkbrad at gmail.com Wed Apr 23 21:24:54 2008
From: newyorkbrad at gmail.com (Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia))
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:24:54 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <480fa297.2533440a.5c10.5e65@mx.google.com>
References: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>
<480fa297.2533440a.5c10.5e65@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <c52819d30804231424q3cd936d9r31e5dc78915f9291@mail.gmail.com>

The first step is to change the name of the request. The case appears to
allege lobbying activity coordinated by an American group, not an Israeli
one.

There is also the question of whether the users who have been blocked based
on the ANI discussion (e.g., Zeq) should be unblocked to allow them to
participate in the case (only). That would seem appropriate based on past
practice.

Newyorkbrad
----------
From charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com Wed Apr 23 21:53:23 2008
From: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com (Charles Matthews)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:53:23 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
Message-ID: <20080423214931.UPIF29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>

"Sam Blacketer" wrote

> So I'm inclined to accept the case.

I've voted to reject already (no diffs). Accepting cases on the basis of off-wiki stuff and furore is not a great idea. We'd end up handing down an opinion rather than an Arbitration, IMO. No "executive decisions", please, when we can wait, see, and do a quick case if matters really boil up on the site.

Charles
----------
From sam.blacketer at googlemail.com Wed Apr 23 21:59:39 2008
From: sam.blacketer at googlemail.com (Sam Blacketer)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:59:39 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <6a8d9d700804231453x49506eb3k9ee25c703689d68@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700804231453x49506eb3k9ee25c703689d68@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e75b49f70804231459w556bdb3cl81733d6c08ba2490@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 10:53 PM, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> From what I can tell this CAMERA thing was mostly a mailing list, with
> few actual Wikipedia editors on it. Yet so far two editors have been
> banned entirely, and a third banned from "Arab-Israeli conflict
> topics" - all based, apparently, not on any specific on-Wikipedia
> actions, but merely for being members of that list. The witchhunt
> continues, with others being accused of membership, or being forced to
> prove they are not. A special template has been invented to tag any
> articles mentioned on the mailing list, with suitably hysterical prose
> to go with it. It might well behoove the Committee to look into which,
> if any, of these actions were appropriate.
>

I'm with Jay on this; I fear unless something comes from Arbcom, there will
be a mass witchhunt of supposed or suspected CAMERA mailing list editors -
when it's all really a storm in a teacup.

--
Sam Blacketer
----------
From blnguyen2230 at gmail.com Thu Apr 24 00:46:33 2008
From: blnguyen2230 at gmail.com (Blnguyen)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 17:46:33 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <20080423214931.UPIF29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
References: <20080423214931.UPIF29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
Message-ID: <87ffb69e0804231746q48bf6b88ida7d072e163fb5ae@mail.gmail.com>

Except that a few guys have been banned by Moreschi based purely on emails.
If Moreschi was petitioning to have these guys banned by Arbcom, it would be
different.

Imagine some admins being desysopped for random racist ranting on IRC (it
happens)

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 2:53 PM, Charles Matthews <
charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:

> "Sam Blacketer" wrote
>
> > So I'm inclined to accept the case.
----------
From user.jpgordon at gmail.com Thu Apr 24 01:16:18 2008
From: user.jpgordon at gmail.com (Josh Gordon)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 18:16:18 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <87ffb69e0804231746q48bf6b88ida7d072e163fb5ae@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080423214931.UPIF29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<87ffb69e0804231746q48bf6b88ida7d072e163fb5ae@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <99c65f730804231816y35f2a664sd6b6e7fa3d5343b5@mail.gmail.com>

Well, except. This isn't random racist ranting; this isn't about opinions
held or ideas expressed. This is about a specific plan to gain a POV
advantage by gaming the system.

Zeq's either being disingenuous or an idiot; I can't tell which. "I won't
answer any questions on Wikipedia about anything other than what I've said
on Wikipedia". Can that be interpreted any way but "yes, those emails are
authentic and I'm zeqzeq2 at whatever.com"?

--
--jpgordon ????
----------
From blnguyen2230 at gmail.com Thu Apr 24 01:19:10 2008
From: blnguyen2230 at gmail.com (Blnguyen)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 18:19:10 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <99c65f730804231816y35f2a664sd6b6e7fa3d5343b5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080423214931.UPIF29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<87ffb69e0804231746q48bf6b88ida7d072e163fb5ae@mail.gmail.com>
<99c65f730804231816y35f2a664sd6b6e7fa3d5343b5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <87ffb69e0804231819i103dc6b3i52a4e5571833db1b@mail.gmail.com>

Well he could always have lied up front, like many people who reincarnate to
get a clean block log.
----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Thu Apr 24 01:51:57 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 21:51:57 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <99c65f730804231816y35f2a664sd6b6e7fa3d5343b5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20080423214931.UPIF29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
<87ffb69e0804231746q48bf6b88ida7d072e163fb5ae@mail.gmail.com>
<99c65f730804231816y35f2a664sd6b6e7fa3d5343b5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700804231851s16f8b0e2n9c3cd3709e7d486a@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 9:16 PM, Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, except. This isn't random racist ranting; this isn't about opinions
> held or ideas expressed. This is about a specific plan to gain a POV
> advantage by gaming the system.
>
> Zeq's either being disingenuous or an idiot; I can't tell which. "I won't
> answer any questions on Wikipedia about anything other than what I've said
> on Wikipedia". Can that be interpreted any way but "yes, those emails are
> authentic and I'm zeqzeq2 at whatever.com"?


It's obvious that Zeq was on the mailing list. However, the real issue
is, what did he do?
----------
From stephen.bain at gmail.com Thu Apr 24 02:38:17 2008
From: stephen.bain at gmail.com (Stephen Bain)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:38:17 +1000
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f30e42de0804231938l378b4109n6dd92acfc80629d9@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Sam Blacketer
<sam.blacketer at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> So I'm inclined to accept the case. My concern is that this case has a good
> chance of spinning way out of control and into surrogate arguments over
> Israel/Palestine. I wanted to check on the list whether others were thinking
> along the same lines, because this is one sort of case where we get problems
> if the committee presents a divided front.

I'm also inclined to accept, and I think your summary of the issues in
play is a good one.

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> I've voted to reject already (no diffs). Accepting cases on the basis of off-wiki stuff and furore is not a great idea. We'd end up handing down an opinion rather than an Arbitration, IMO. No "executive decisions", please, when we can wait, see, and do a quick case if matters really boil up on the site.

Normally I'd agree, but I think (at least) three users getting banned
on the basis of this business certainly counts as things boiling up.
Accepting this would at least funnel the hysteria into relatively
limited channels.

--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain at gmail.com
----------
From charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com Thu Apr 24 07:55:21 2008
From: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com (Charles Matthews)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 8:55:21 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
Message-ID: <20080424075418.XRJD29112.aamtaout04-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>

Blnguyen wrote
>
> Except that a few guys have been banned by Moreschi based purely on emails.
> If Moreschi was petitioning to have these guys banned by Arbcom, it would be
> different.

We may have to lift some bans, based on Moreschi exceeding any reasonable interpretation of his right to act in that way. We can do that without a case, though.

Charles
----------
From charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com Thu Apr 24 08:05:59 2008
From: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com (Charles Matthews)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 9:05:59 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
Message-ID: <20080424080713.MOSU17393.aamtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>

> I'd be tempted to accept it for much that reason -- if only to make it very
> clear that McCarthy-style questionings are not an acceptable response.
>
> Kirill

If we want merely a "clarification" and unban some people, we can do that quickly, on a motion. A large-scale case is likely to drag on, and if at all based on off-wiki evidence will prove troublesome, I think.

The case acceptance is a good place to get opinions such as Kirill's circulated and noted. What good can we do here? I'm thinking much more in terms of trying to have a calmer response on-wiki, than to prevent off-wiki "lobbying" discussions in the future (we have no chance of doing that).

Charles
----------
From paulaugust.wp at gmail.com Thu Apr 24 14:58:00 2008
From: paulaugust.wp at gmail.com (Paul August)
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:58:00 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Israel lobbying request
In-Reply-To: <3f797b9a0804232228u51b0b7fegea856a12e32efcfd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e75b49f70804231342l3a2b5d8es982cc6809e2baec@mail.gmail.com>
<f30e42de0804231938l378b4109n6dd92acfc80629d9@mail.gmail.com>
<3f797b9a0804232228u51b0b7fegea856a12e32efcfd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <29C10990-89BA-45BF-8CB1-A770AC384F9B@gmail.com>


On Apr 24, 2008, at 1:28 AM, Kirill Lokshin wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Stephen Bain
> <stephen.bain at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Sam Blacketer
>> <sam.blacketer at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > So I'm inclined to accept the case. My concern is that this case
>> has a good
>> > chance of spinning way out of control and into surrogate
>> arguments over
>> > Israel/Palestine. I wanted to check on the list whether others
>> were thinking
>> > along the same lines, because this is one sort of case where we
>> get problems
>> > if the committee presents a divided front.
>>
>> I'm also inclined to accept, and I think your summary of the
>> issues in
>> play is a good one.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 7:53 AM, Charles Matthews
>> <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I've voted to reject already (no diffs). Accepting cases on the
>> basis of off-wiki stuff and furore is not a great idea. We'd end
>> up handing down an opinion rather than an Arbitration, IMO. No
>> "executive decisions", please, when we can wait, see, and do a
>> quick case if matters really boil up on the site.
>>
>> Normally I'd agree, but I think (at least) three users getting banned
>> on the basis of this business certainly counts as things boiling up.
>> Accepting this would at least funnel the hysteria into relatively
>> limited channels.
>
> I'd be tempted to accept it for much that reason -- if only to make
> it very clear that McCarthy-style questionings are not an
> acceptable response.
>
> Kirill

Yes.

Paul August


From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Sun May 11 09:34:32 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Sun, 11 May 2008 10:34:32 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] FW: Evidence from Shalom on the CAMERA lobbying case
Message-ID: <4826be23.19e7300a.06df.38f5@mx.google.com>

Forwarded by request. The user gave their real name, but I have removed it.
Other than that, it's exactly as sent.




From: Shalom
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 8:39 AM
To: FT2
Subject: Evidence from Shalom on the CAMERA lobbying case

Dear FT2:
?
I've been hesitant to reveal my awareness of the CAMERA lobbying campaign on
Wikipedia, which is now at arbitration.? For reasons of privacy, which will
become apparent, I prefer not to give a full report in public view.
?
I live in the Boston area, which is where CAMERA headquarters are located.?
Andrea Levin, the director of CAMERA, once gave a lecture at Maimonides
School, where I was a student until 2001.
?
I am an Orthodox Jew and a religious Zionist.? I celebrated Israel's 60th
anniversary of independence a few days ago.? Broadly speaking, I support
CAMERA's goal to provide Americans with neutral information that presents
Israel's side of the ongoing conflict with the Palestinians.? There is
nothing more frustrating than to read about an Israeli attack on militants
in Gaza where the author conveniently forgets to mention that Hamas has been
shooting rockets at the Israeli town of Sderot for the last seven years.?
CAMERA organizes letter-writing campaigns and other methods of advocacy to
combat pro-Palestinian bias.? They even managed to get an on-air correction
from one of the major TV news networks which had used a video clip to
illustrate an Israeli attack when that video clip was showing an unrelated
event, if I recall correctly.? Honesty, in media reporting and elsewhere, is
a virtue I fully support.
?
In the context of Wikipedia, most of my current article writing is
translating articles about Israeli places and roads from the Hebrew
Wikipedia into English.? In the broadest sense, writing about Israel on
Wikipedia is a form of advocacy, but I do it with the most peaceful
motives.? Simply, our encyclopedia needs articles about small towns and
villages in Israel, and I am able to write those articles.
?
On March 24, my mother forwarded me a message from a family friend, who
himself received it from the jewishsharon at yahoogroups.net email list.? At
that time I had quit Wikipedia, but I was still reading the noticeboards, so
I took notice of a posting at the Conflict of Interest noticeboard about
edit warring at the CAMERA article.? I understood what it was about, so I
posted?the email message anonymously.? (Someone else took a few minutes to
format it.)? My IP address was 71.174.111.245.?
?
Link to Conflict of Interest Noticeboard archive:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Con...oticeboard/Arch
ive_23#An_email_that_may_be_relevant
?
EdJohnston left a message on that IP's talk page seeking confirmation of my
source for this message.? I logged in under an alternate account name,
User:Kivel.? (My sisters call me "Kivel" as a nickname.)? From that account,
which has email enabled to the same address (yrobinso at gmail.com) as my main
account, I forwarded the message to EdJohnston.? I have not been involved in
the CAMERA lobbying dispute since then, but I am generally aware of recent
developments.
?
I sent Gilead Ini the following message on March?24?in response to his
request for editors to help advocate for Israel on Wikipedia:
________________________________
?
Dear Gilead:
?
As a recently retired Wikipedia insider (User:Shalom) I am not able to help
directly with your stated mission, but I can offer a few points of advice.
?
Wikipedia is a dot-org, not a dot-com.? This is actually very important to
me.? I've contributed hours of my life to this project because I believe in
its goals as a volunteer nonprofit.? The homepage of the English Wikipedia
is en.wikipedia.org, and of the Hebrew Wikipedia is he.wikipedia.org.? There
are about 250 language editions.
?
Be careful not to fight too hard about Israel-related articles (or any other
articles).? The "three-revert rule" prohibits users from undoing someone
else's edits more than three times in a 24-hour period in order to promote
discussion.? There is an elaborate dispute resolution process, building from
third opinion to mediation and finally to the Arbitration Committee, which
has heard at least three cases in the last three years relating to editors
fighting about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
?
Your intention probably is to monitor some high-profile articles on Israel,
but you should also work to create new articles.? Believe it or not, about
half of the towns and villages in Israel don't have articles about them on
the English Wikipedia.? Before I started translating articles from the
Hebrew Wikipedia, it was more than half.? Completing the English Wikipedia's
coverage of non-controversial Israel topics is a great way to advocate for
Israel without getting bogged down in conflicts.
?
Best regards,
_______________________________
?
It's hard for me to endorse a ban on an organization whose goals I support,
but I reluctantly concede that the methods of the CAMERA advocacy team on
Wikipedia are hostile to our collaborative enterprise.? I wish my advice had
reached more receptive eyes.


?
I encourage you to share this message with the Arbitration Committee email
list, and please tell me that you did so.? What happens from there is beyond
my control.? If you wish to state publicly that I provided information
relevant to this case, I have no objection.
?
If you want me to forward email messages in my archive directly to you
personally, or to the Committee's email list, please ask.
?
Shalom
-----------
From jwales at wikia.com Wed May 14 23:49:39 2008
From: jwales at wikia.com (Jimmy Wales)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 19:49:39 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] [Fwd: Anti-Israel Agenda of Wikipedia]
Message-ID: <482B7A93.60702@wikia.com>

FYI

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Anti-Israel Agenda of Wikipedia
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 21:30:11 +0200
From: Deb <ddlj at iafrica.com>
To: <jwales at wikia.com>



Dear Sir



As you are the founder, I believe, of Wikipedia, I feel it is imperative
that you are made aware of the blatant agenda that is occurring on this
very well-known resource.



It is clear from the report below there is a clear anti-Israel agenda
which undermines the democratic character of Wikipedia and serves only
to tarnish its image as an objective purveyor of information.



I have pasted for your information the following disturbing
?HonestReporting? report on Wikipedia.



Hopefully Sir, in order to retain the credibility of your site you will
put a stop to this horrendous campaign of misinformation,
disinformation, lies, deceit and the delegitimisation of a people and
their nationhood.



I cordially await your reply.



Thank you,



Regards

Debbie Mankowitz

The Association For Fair Media

Johannesburg

South Africa

*Exposed - Anti-Israeli Subversion on Wikipedia *

*Dear HonestReporting Subscriber,*

Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia anyone can edit, may strive for pure
democracy, but that doesn't mean it's always fair. Our colleagues at
CAMERA learned this the hard way last month when their effort to fight
anti-Israel bias on Wikipedia ended in several members being banned from
the site and bad press for the organization. CAMERA's campaign involved
recruiting volunteers and instructing them in the basics of Wikipedia
participation. The Palestinian advocacy group, Electronic Intifada (EI),
however, branded the effort "a plan to rewrite history" and filed a
bitter complaint with Wikipedia administrators, resulting in unusually
stiff penalties for the CAMERA volunteers involved.

EI's chief evidence against CAMERA was a series of private e-mails
exchanged by CAMERA staff and their volunteers. An EI staff member
infiltrated the group and turned the e-mails over to Wikipedia, claiming
they revealed a plot by CAMERA to manipulate Wikipedia and to pass off
"crude propaganda as fact." An investigation followed, resulting in two
indefinite bans and several shorter-term bans for CAMERA members.

**A closer look at Wikipedia's inner workings, however, reveals there is
more to the story. Research carried out by Social Media expert Dr. Andre
Oboler, a Legacy Heritage Fellow at NGO Monitor, reveals that it was EI,
not CAMERA, that manipulated Wikipedia to achieve its ideological goals.**

Dr. Oboler and HonestReporting also found that despite Wikipedia's clear
policy against political advocacy, initiatives such as "Wiki Project
Palestine" and the Yahoo group "Wikipedians for Palestine" used the
Wikipedia platform to promote their ideological views, largely unopposed
by the Wikipedia community. CAMERA, however, was singled out by the
administrators in order to "send a strong message to lobbying groups,
campaigns and other advocacy groups.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents/Statement_re_Wikilobby_campaign>"

*WIKIPEDIA AND THE NEUTRAL POINT OF VIEW*

With nearly 60 million visitors a month
<http://siteanalytics.compete.com/wikipedia.org+youtube.com/?metric=uv>
and 10 million entries in 253 languages, Wikipedia has become a primary
resource for students across the world. A Google search for almost any
topic will return a Wikipedia entry at or near the top of the list of
results.

But despite its popularity, Wikipedia does not always provide the most
accurate information. What sets the encyclopedia apart from other
sources is its reliance on the "wisdom of crowds
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds>" - allowing any user
who spots an error in any entry to simply change it himself, anonymously
if he chooses.

Not surprisingly, this feature turns controversial topics such as
"Jerusalem" or "Terrorism" into battlegrounds between people with
sharply different agendas. To counter the problem, Wikipedia established
the neutral point of view
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view> (NPOV) as
one of its guiding principles. The NPOV policy is meant to ensure all
sides are presented equally on a topic until a consensus eventually
emerges, a process that can take many months of intense debate.

Unfortunately, NPOV is another noble goal not always applied equally by
Wikipedia users. Dr. Oboler tracked the activity of Wikipedia user
Bangpound, an individual revealed to be EI staff member Benjamin
Doherty, who appears to be looking to spin EI's view of CAMERA's
campaign. Here is how Dr. Oboler describes his activity:

At **14:08** on April 21 EI boasted publicly to someone thought to be a
member of CAMERA's staff that CAMERA and its editor have been exposed.
He links to the EI article about CAMERA [accusing CAMERA of a Wikipedia
conspiracy]. At **14:26** the same person edits the CAMERA page making
it say "**CAMERA also attempts to use Wikipedia to covertly disseminate
discredited pro-Israeli propaganda.**" They add that EI have e-mails
that "**outlined an attempt to subvert Wikipedia editorial controls and
leadership structures**" - an accusation designed to make Wikipedia
editors see red. At **14:44** they edited the Wikipedia page on reliable
sources adding "**CAMERA cannot possibly be considered a reliable
source**" and again they outline their accusations. These edits appear
aimed both to discredit CAMERA and to promote EI. It was clever
marketing as well as clever advocacy, and it took under half an hour.
[For the full transcripts of these edits see Dr. Oboler's research
<http://www.zionismontheweb.org/internet_warfare/the_role_of_Electronic_Intifada_in_the_Camera_story.htm>

on Zionism on the Web].

But according to Dr. Oboler, EI's manipulations on Wikipedia pale in
comparison to other pro-Palestinian groups such as "Wiki Project
Palestine" - an effort supposedly aimed at improving articles related to
Palestinian culture and society but misused to promote a political
agenda, and the Yahoo group "Wikipedians for Palestine."

The real organized effort [to recruit outsiders to promote
pro-Palestinian views on Wikipedia] appears to be from "Wikipedians for
Palestine," a group that was advertised to individuals both on Wikipedia
and through at least one Palestinian campaigning organization. That
group was active for over two years. It was detected, questions were
raised on and off Wikipedia, and then ?nothing seemed to happen, then or
now.

People commenting on the CAMERA case who were shown to be involved in
this Palestinian group first proclaimed the group's innocence. Then they
made a number of misleading claims off Wikipedia, stating, for example,
that they "never recruited neophytes to edit Wikiepdia," and that their
group is "independent and never bankrolled and backed by any
organization, let alone one as well staffed and funded as CAMERA." They
were challenged by an administrator to give access to their group so the
archives could be checked, as was done to CAMERA. They promptly deleted
the group - destroying all archives.

Wikipedia apparently dropped the issue because no one had infiltrated
the group or had evidence revealing the content of the deleted archives.
According to Dr. Oboler, it is impossible to know exactly what it
accomplished over the past two years.

What is clear is that its claims on the group's home page were designed
not only to defend themselves but also to attack CAMERA. The group may
or may not have actually recruited people who were not editors, but they
certainly tried to. The penalties to CAMERA are for trying to recruit
people, not for any problematic editing on Wikipedia (itself a very
unusual thing in a Wikiepdia investigation - normally only actions on
Wikipedia are considered).

*COMMON FORMS OF ANTI-ISRAEL **B**IAS ON WIKIPEDIA*

Anti-Israel bias in Wikipedia takes three primary forms: vandalism,
blatantly false allegations, and attempts to marginalize the Israeli
perspective.

Vandalism, such as efforts to change Jerusalem
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem> to 'Capital of Palestine,'
tends to be relatively harmless. Editors discover these kinds of changes
quickly and "revert" them to the 'community consensus
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus>'. Wikipedia allows
editors to be notified by email if someone has changed a favorite entry.
It also keeps a history of all changes, making it easy to restore the
original content.

A more insidious form of bias is the use of false information. An
example can be seen on the 'Egypt <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt>'
'Camp David Accords <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_david_accords>'
entry, where clear anti-Semitic incitement in the Egyptian press was
dismissed as simple 'Anti-Zionist criticism'. This entry alone attracts
150,000 viewers a year, and the related 'Egypt
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egypt>' entry, which doesn't mention the
issue at all, is viewed 3.5 million times annually.

More common are attempts to marginalize Israeli and Zionist content and
lend more weight to the Palestinian or Arab narrative. The entry
"Massacres committed during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_committed_during_the_1948_Arab-Israeli_war>,"

for example, lists only those allegedly committed by Jews. Another
example is the original 'Hebrews <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrews>'
entry, which fails to mention the undisputed fact that Jews always
prayed in Hebrew, and that it became their primary everyday language in
Israel since the early 20th century.

This category also includes entries that serve to diminish the
perception of threats against Israel. For example, several Iran articles
are apologetic about Iranian president Mahmoud Admadinejad's
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad#Criticisms_of_statements_and_social_issues>

calls for erasing Israel from the map, reassuringly explaining the
threat as mistranslation of Farsi, which supposedly only meant 'erase
off the pages of time.' However they fail to mention that the same
slogan was also painted on ballistic missiles in Iranian army parades.

*PRO-PALESTINIAN ADVOCACY: WIKIPROJECT **PALESTINE*

A WikiProject is a Wikipedia's community feature allowing people with
common interests to collaborate on particular encyclopedia topics. A
project's homepage is essentially a central billboard allowing users to
share articles of interest with the Wikipedia community.

The 'Palestine Project
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Palestine>' goals,
stated on its page, fall within the accepted Wikipedia guidelines: To
"Maintain information on Palestine including history, culture, geography
and contemporary political, socio-economic and ideological context;
Improve Palestine-related articles by expansion, verification and
copyediting." And finally: "Be thorough and watch for POV in
particularly controversial articles."

Despite the warning, however, the actual content promoted by the project
appears geared towards online advocacy. There are 210 articles marked as
"high importance". About half are related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Many appear because of their influence on public opinion on the
Palestinian cause.

In its hall of fame for best articles, the Palestine Project page lists
four best biographies. One is by Norman Finkelstein
<http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=8&x_nameinnews=169>, a
staunch supporter of the Palestinian cause, whose controversial
bestseller "The Holocaust Industry" accused Jews of exploiting the
Holocaust for financial and political gain.

There is also a large number of small articles that appear to have been
posted to add weight to the Project's page, giving it the appearance of
significant substance. Many of these articles are posted by anonymous
users so that they will be difficult to track. This is particularly
suspicious behavior considering the community-building nature of
WikiProjects.

According to Dr. Oboler, the entire project appears to be an organized
effort to promote the Palestinian point of view on Wikipedia.

In trying to kill off an attempt by CAMERA to get pro-Israel people
involved in Wikipedia, Electronic Intifada may just have thrown a
spotlight on the real and far more successful campaign to control
Wikipedia... the campaign that caused CAMERA so much concern in the
first place.

*THE PRO**B**LEMS ON WIKIPEDIA*

A study <http://www.useit.com/alertbox/participation_inequality.html> of
user involvement on Social Media sites such as Wikipedia suggests that
only 1% of site visitors become heavy contributors. But according to Dr.
Oboler, the involvement of more people and greater diversity ultimately
benefits sites like Wikipedia:

CAMERA was right about the problems on Wikipedia. People should consider
getting involved in Wikipedia and making use of the resources they have
(such as books) to improve the accuracy of articles they take an
interest in (on any topic imaginable). The first goal must be to improve
Wikipedia. That this helps reverse manipulation of the truth is one side
effect. Good well-sourced arguments will not only expose mistakes, they
will also make Wikipedia better.

Editing Wikipedia is not hard and, in time, people will learn how it
works and become part of the community. If you do want to get involved,
pay attention to the policies, the five pillars and other information
you will be shown when you join. If you run into problems there are
plenty of people on Wikipedia more than happy to help or provide clarity
about Wikipedia itself.

The truth will win out, but someone needs to make sure it is heard,
footnoted and properly sourced.

//Dr. Oboler is also a post-doctoral fellow in Political Science at
////B////ar-Ilan//// ////University//// where he is researching online
public diplomacy. This research covers Facebook, YouTube, Flickr, Google
Earth and Wikipedia among others online platforms. More on his research
can be seen at ////http://www.zionismontheweb.org/internet_warfare/////
. Details on Wikipedia (the background data of which was shared with
HonestReporting) are being added during this week.//



*Honest**Reporting**.** com** *

*Click here to comment on this special report.
<http://backspin.typepad.com/backspin/2008/05/special-report.html>*

*Thank you for your involvement in responding
to media bias.*
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MaliceAforethought
post Fri 1st July 2011, 9:51pm
Post #2


u Mad?
***

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



From rlevse at cox.net Mon May 5 10:03:33 2008
From: rlevse at cox.net (Randy Everette)
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 06:03:33 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] CAMERA lobbying issue
Message-ID: <013501c8ae97$470bceb0$8001a8c0@EveretteCentral>

Can someone CU this situation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_tal...tration/CAMERA_
lobbying/Evidence#meatpuppetry



Judadem, Dadujem I believe live in the same house if not being the same
person. Davidg may be involved too, and perhaps others.



Please advise.



r/

Randy Everette

Clerk of the case
-----------
From user.jpgordon at gmail.com Mon May 5 14:52:30 2008
From: user.jpgordon at gmail.com (Josh Gordon)
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 07:52:30 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] CAMERA lobbying issue
In-Reply-To: <013501c8ae97$470bceb0$8001a8c0@EveretteCentral>
References: <013501c8ae97$470bceb0$8001a8c0@EveretteCentral>
Message-ID: <99c65f730805050752m377e8198l357fb29f8eb282d@mail.gmail.com>

Same IP, different computers. (Judadem signs himself Davidg.)

On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 3:03 AM, Randy Everette <rlevse at cox.net> wrote:

> Can someone CU this situation:
-----------
From rlevse at cox.net Mon May 5 20:18:27 2008
From: rlevse at cox.net (Randy Everette)
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 16:18:27 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] CAMERA lobbying issue
In-Reply-To: <99c65f730805050752m377e8198l357fb29f8eb282d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <013501c8ae97$470bceb0$8001a8c0@EveretteCentral>
<99c65f730805050752m377e8198l357fb29f8eb282d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <016901c8aeed$2e0c9d80$8001a8c0@EveretteCentral>

So is there enough to block them or do we think they are different people and meats? Blockable or not? Should I post any of this on the case talk page?



r/

Randy Everette
------------
From rlevse at cox.net Sun May 18 21:22:14 2008
From: rlevse at cox.net (Randy Everette)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 17:22:14 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] FW: I am the one that leaked the Camera emails and have
a request
Message-ID: <015a01c8b92d$3e38dd00$8001a8c0@EveretteCentral>

This person emailed me this about the CAMERA case. I do not plan to respond
to her but am simply forwarding this to arbcom.

r/
Randy Everette

-----Original Message-----
From: Stetson Kennedy [mailto:stetson.kennedy.jr at gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 5:09 PM
To: Rlevse
Subject: I am the one that leaked the Camera emails and have a request

Dear Rlevse,

My name is Susan and I am the one that shared the CAMERA emails with
Electronic Intifada. Below is a copy of one of the emails that has not been
published (but the administrators should have access to) so that they can
verify who I claim to be.

I am writing because I have a request for consideration. I know that I
should have asked sooner, but I am not a Wikipedia editor (til about an hour
ago) so I did not have a way to reach you or anyone else. I also suspect
that my request is something that would add more fuel to the fire if added
to the evidence page...and it seems there is enough of that already.

Specifically, I would like to ask if the Committee members might reconsider
the amnesty being extended to Donna Halper, instead proposing a ban on her
IP address (even if done privately). When I began receiving the CAMERA
emails, the aspect of it that was most troubling to me was the fact that the
group's membership included two media professionals (Ini and Halper), who,
compared to the man-on-the-street, should know better. In fact, Halper, a
professor of communications at two universities, teaches classes on media
ethics.

One of her contributions to the group was an offer to use her university
resources to assist in citing an obscure/fringe reference intended to
delegitimize the existence of the Deir Yassin massacre....a pivotal event
which is often cited as validation that the large-scale Nakba (ethnic
cleansing) which happened a month later was triggered by the victims'
genuine fear of massacre.

To deny that this event ever occurred is about as verifiable and hateful as
claiming that the Holocaust never existed (and both kinds of statements
really make me see red). It was this series of emails that triggered my
approaching EI (and others) to see if anything could be done about stopping
the effort (I had no idea who Zeq and Dajudem were in your world).

With regard to Ms. Halper's intentions, in her 4/10 email to the group she
notes "Anything I can do to help, that's what I wanna do." and her edits
seem to be following the "stay away from these sites for a bit" so that you
can get on the administrator track. I am also a bit concerned in that her
email below she states that she can't even count the number of myths she's
corrected on Wikipedia. Her most obvious Wikipedia logon doesn't seem to be
that old, making me wonder if she has other logons out there.

I think that a ban on her IP site (done privately) would let her know that
such things are unethical but at the same time would not cause her any
embarrassment career-wise. While I don't know whether her actions warrant
sanction in the Wikipedia world, I am confident that this transgression
would be considered quite reprehensible in the academic ethics arena and so
am requesting that perhaps the Wikipedia sanction by proxy would serve as a
preferred slap on the wrist.

In fact, I think she might prefer the ban, as I suspect she is probably a
bit fearful knowing that her email is out on the EI site for anyone to read
and to post on her wikipedia entry (because of my intimacy in the case, I
guess I'm the only one that has put 2+2 together). You can assure her that
the one person out there who "knows" and is quite bothered by her role in
this, would be satisfied with the ban which I'm sure would provide her with
a welcome piece-of-mind. It would also truly help me personally in closure
on this as it was really her and Ini that got under my skin
exclusively...and her going scot-free still nags at me.

Thank you for your consideration and if you need anything else from me,
please let me know..Susan

PS-- I should probably also take this opportunity to apologize for all the
drama this caused and for not contacting you directly (I am sorry for your
troubles on this). To be honest, (1) I didn't (and still don't) know the
process for how to report something like this; (2) was pretty sure (and
think I was on the mark with this assessment) that I wasn't going to
believed; and (3) was told by an acquaintance that one of the members on the
Arbitration committee (hand-picked by the owner) was an "interested party,"
and that going there for recourse would be like going to the local sheriff
to expose the KKK only to learn that the sheriff had membership (hence my
Stetson Kennedy moniker).

My acquaintance was mistaken, in that the person they mentioned is not part
of your committee, but I thought it might be important to share since one of
your remedies is about urging the community to speak out. These three
concerns are some of the (albeit perhaps perceived) roadblocks which might
explain why an individual, such as myself, would feel uncomfortable and
skittish about approaching Wikipedia directly and might help in finding
methods for making it easier for future ratfink/stoolie/whistleblowers such
as yours truly.











Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 21:39:47 -0400
To: isra-pedia at googlegroups.com
From: dlh at donnahalper.com
Subject: [Isra-pedia] Re: Discussion of Wikipedia on New Republic

At 06:19 PM 3/31/2008, you wrote:


This article in the New Republic about Wikipedia wars may be of
interest to some of you.

I've been an educator and a free-lance writer for 30 years and I can't even
count the number of myths, urban legends, and mis-statements I've corrected
on Wikipedia. I tell my students not to use it as a reference-- check it
quickly to get started, maybe, but rely on it? Not so much. That said, I
have been a fan of the New Republic for ages -- they've been pro-Israel for
a long time, and as one of the moderates on this list (that is, I lean left
on some issues, right on others), I like the fact that they can be
pro-Israel and anti President Bush. That scores lots of points with me.
8-)

Okay, now that I've probably offended some of you, the real problem-- as
we've discussed-- is how lacking in credibility Wikipedia often is, and how
they seem unwilling to live by their own definitions-- that "point of view"
thing is especially arbitrary, as we've discussed. While wikipedia tries to
pass itself off as a reference work, we all know too well that some of its
editors can be quite stubborn when they believe they are right.

I spend about 10 hours a week correcting Wikipedia entries, mostly in my
areas of expertise (media, women's history, and American Jewish history).
But I've had editors take me to task about the corrections I've made about
media history and media criticism, even when I documented them and showed
what I felt was very credible and neutral sourcing. Sometimes, it seems a
few people have turned Wikipedia into their own little fiefdom, and they
don't want an objective reference work-- they want something that will
reinforce their own particular beliefs. I am glad we are all working
together to change some of the bias that is built into the process.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"isra-pedia" group.
To post to this group, send email to isra-pedia at googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
isra-pedia-unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/isra-pedia?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
-----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Sun May 18 21:26:11 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2008 17:26:11 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] CAMERA privacy issue
In-Reply-To: <009001c8b86a$0c5c5140$8001a8c0@EveretteCentral>
References: <009001c8b86a$0c5c5140$8001a8c0@EveretteCentral>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700805181426x11a0f2a9xe81cfe228ea0b4f0@mail.gmail.com>

It was only a "privacy violation" in the very broadest sense of the
term. The editor in question has essentially outed himself:

"bangpound is a name I use elsewhere on the internet, and i want my
names to be in sync so that i am less anonymous and unknown."
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=206227192

And, indeed, he uses that name all over the internet:
http://digg.com/users/bangpound
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article2242.shtml bangpound.org/
http://fightbigmedia.meetup.com/134/members/736689/

The fact that the CAMERA group was "outed" by Electronic Intifada
members is undoubtedly relevant; this is part of intra-organization
rivalry.

Are you planning to redact all the evidence alleging that
[[User:Gni]] is "Gilead Ini"?

On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 6:04 PM, Randy Everette <rlevse at cox.net> wrote:
> I had to clean up the CAMERA evidence page due to a privacy violation. It
> was made by user Oboler and I told him not to do it again. I redacted the
> private info, saved off a copy of the page, deleted the page, then recreated
> it with the saved info.
>
>
>
> r/
>
> Rlevse
-----------
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
the fieryangel
post Fri 1st July 2011, 9:56pm
Post #3


the Internet Review Corporation is watching you...
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,990
Joined: Tue 21st Nov 2006, 9:49pm
From: It's all in your mind anyway...
Member No.: 577



It is perhaps important to note that Moreschi (T-C-L-K-R-D) was a tween administrator at the time and is barely a "young adult" right now. This is the person who was banning these people...

It's understandable that a child would make such mistakes. What is not understandable is the fact that a child is given this kind of power, given the circumstances....
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wikifan
post Fri 1st July 2011, 11:11pm
Post #4


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat 28th Aug 2010, 2:58pm
Member No.: 26,203

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I wasn't around during the CAMERA issue - or at least not aware of it and don't remember much about it.

I know CAMERA has become a card many editors have played to smear other users. Electronic Intifada is an extremist website that provides a platform for Hamas and Hezbollah. CAMERA and EI are like day and night.

The leaks talk of a "witch-hunt." I have to agree with that. It is so-called "pro-Israel" editors who have been intimidated and attacked, while those on the other aisle have remained relatively immune. And I bet many of the EI mouthpieces and followers still contribute to Wikipedia.

Although, I do remember the pro-Israel socks and I can't support that.



User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sololol
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 12:23am
Post #5


Bell the Cat
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun 10th Apr 2011, 6:32am
Member No.: 50,538

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Thanks for slogging through the dung heap for these, Malice. Many interesting morsels.

QUOTE(MaliceAforethought @ Fri 1st July 2011, 5:48pm) *


The reason I say this is that we have *endless* campaigns, of varying
degrees of organisation, to POV-push on Wikipedia, and every time (1)
NPOV is the cure for stupid (as Phil Sandifer puts it) (2) we get more
than a few good new contributors out of it, as people realise that
NPOV is actually the best way to make sure their POV is properly
presented in Wikipedia. (Not "pushed", but "properly presented.")

Reiterating this may turn the drama down a bit. We've been here
before, lots and lots.
- d.

There are endless campaigns to POV-push? Perhaps so, but I can only think of four in the I/P area off the top of my head (CAMERA, Nocal/CAMERA, Jiujitsuguy and Jayjg, maybe 3.5) where hard evidence has surfaced, two of which involved Jayjg. Perhaps they should formalize the factions if they aren't going to do anything to stop them.



QUOTE(Wikifan @ Fri 1st July 2011, 7:11pm) *

I wasn't around during the CAMERA issue - or at least not aware of it and don't remember much about it.

I know CAMERA has become a card many editors have played to smear other users. Electronic Intifada is an extremist website that provides a platform for Hamas and Hezbollah. CAMERA and EI are like day and night.

The leaks talk of a "witch-hunt." I have to agree with that. It is so-called "pro-Israel" editors who have been intimidated and attacked, while those on the other aisle have remained relatively immune. And I bet many of the EI mouthpieces and followers still contribute to Wikipedia.

Although, I do remember the pro-Israel socks and I can't support that.

The last bit is good news but you've just committed the same slur against supposed "EI mouthpieces" that must fuel these claimed CAMERA witch hunts. The difference is that your claim is, so far, baseless. You could be right, but nothing has surfaced. On the other hand, evidence has surfaced that a good chunk of the Israeli nationalist editors are coordinating their activities to vote stack, harass opponents and employ sockpuppeteers to help out. "Dajudem" here is none other than Stellarkid. She's still at it three years later. Nocals been at it for five-six. Most of them aren't related to CAMERA but a few are. I'd hoped all of this might shed light on how these groups form (organically or outside coordination, most likely a mixture of both) but it looks like the Arbs only knew what was published.

Also, have you actually read the Hamas/Hezbollah perspective? If there were a group trying to put up that PoV as neutral they'd get hammered by everyone.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Heat
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 12:36am
Post #6


Tenured
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 726
Joined: Mon 5th Mar 2007, 2:46am
Member No.: 1,066



One problem, wikifan, is that a group of "pro-Israel" editors including Jayjg and Zeq harassed and hounded a series of editors who were either pro-Palestinian or merely critical of the pro-Israel editors off of Wikipedia by edit warring, conducting witch hunts and virtual lynch mobs etc.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wikifan
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 12:39am
Post #7


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat 28th Aug 2010, 2:58pm
Member No.: 26,203

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE
The last bit is good news but you've just committed the same slur against supposed "EI mouthpieces" that must fuel these claimed CAMERA witch hunts. The difference is that your claim is, so far, baseless. You could be right, but nothing has surfaced. On the other hand, evidence has surfaced that a good chunk of the Israeli nationalist editors are coordinating their activities to vote stack, harass opponents and employ sockpuppeteers to help out. "Dajudem" here is none other than Stellarkid. She's still at it three years later. Nocals been at it for five-six. Most of them aren't related to CAMERA but a few are. I'd hoped all of this might shed light on how these groups form (organically or outside coordination, most likely a mixture of both) but it looks like the Arbs only knew what was published.

Also, have you actually read the Hamas/Hezbollah perspective? If there were a group trying to put up that PoV as neutral they'd get hammered by everyone.


Did I strike a nerve Sol? Aren't you being a tad bit hypocritically since you were banned for straight up sock-puppetry? The leaks specifically refer to EI agents infiltrating this CAMERA cabal and exposing them. He certainly wasn't acting alone. And he/she obviously has/had ties to Wikipedia. So who were his allies? Compare the number of so-called pro-Israel editors railed at AE to Palestinian/Arab nationalists. The math speaks for itself.

And yeah, I'm quite familiar with the terrorist behaviors of Hamas and Hezbollah. And I know quite a few editors sympathize with their political philosophy and do their best to sugar-coat or simply censor reliable sources that might make their darling resistance gangster movement look bad.

EI and CAMERA simply aren't in the same league. EI lobbies for irrational Islamists and terrorists while CAMERA is simply an Israel advocacy group. Big deal. According to their Wikipedia article, CAMERA has been successful at exposing media bias and mainstream newspapers have provided corrections. All EI can do is smear and brand all things Israel as part of some epic lobby that wants to stifle discussion. Yawn.

QUOTE
One problem, wikifan, is that a group of "pro-Israel" editors including Jayjg and Zeq harassed and hounded a series of editors who were either pro-Palestinian or merely critical of the pro-Israel editors off of Wikipedia by edit warring, conducting witch hunts and virtual lynch mobs etc.


I don't know who Zeq is. Who are these "series of editors?"



This post has been edited by Wikifan: Sat 2nd July 2011, 12:41am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Michaeldsuarez
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:03am
Post #8


Über Member
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 562
Joined: Mon 9th Aug 2010, 7:51pm
From: New York, New York
Member No.: 24,428

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Fri 1st July 2011, 5:56pm) *

It is perhaps important to note that Moreschi (T-C-L-K-R-D) was a tween administrator at the time and is barely a "young adult" right now. This is the person who was banning these people...

It's understandable that a child would make such mistakes. What is not understandable is the fact that a child is given this kind of power, given the circumstances....


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...guo12_2#Support

Wikipedians still believe in granting children power.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Tarc
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:36am
Post #9


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,124
Joined: Fri 7th Mar 2008, 3:38am
Member No.: 5,309

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Fri 1st July 2011, 5:56pm) *

It is perhaps important to note that Moreschi (T-C-L-K-R-D) was a tween administrator at the time and is barely a "young adult" right now. This is the person who was banning these people...

It's understandable that a child would make such mistakes. What is not understandable is the fact that a child is given this kind of power, given the circumstances....


Now I'm pissed off.

It wasn't a "mistake" in any way, shape or form you stupid cunt, what the fuck do you know about any of this? I was one of the editors targeted by these isra-pedia vermin...specifically named by Zeq as he coached his CAMERA-buddies on how to cozy up to me, in some bizarre attempt to get me to be more sympathetic to their editing.

Moreschi, Chris o, and Future perfect deserve all the praise possible for diving into this shitstorm and taking care of it, despite Jayjg's behind-the-scenes attempts to soften the blows.

God damn.


QUOTE(Heat @ Fri 1st July 2011, 8:36pm) *

One problem, wikifan, is that a group of "pro-Israel" editors including Jayjg and Zeq harassed and hounded a series of editors who were either pro-Palestinian or merely critical of the pro-Israel editors off of Wikipedia by edit warring, conducting witch hunts and virtual lynch mobs etc.


Wikifan is just a sock of one of these shitheads, someone in the zeq, isarig, humus sapiens, etc... era. Don't buy the innocent "who are these guys?" act for a second.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wikifan
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:48am
Post #10


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat 28th Aug 2010, 2:58pm
Member No.: 26,203

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE
Wikifan is just a sock of one of these shitheads, someone in the zeq, isarig, humus sapiens, etc... era. Don't buy the innocent "who are these guys?" act for a second.


Heh. Prove it.

This post has been edited by Wikifan: Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:49am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
the fieryangel
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 8:18am
Post #11


the Internet Review Corporation is watching you...
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,990
Joined: Tue 21st Nov 2006, 9:49pm
From: It's all in your mind anyway...
Member No.: 577



QUOTE(Tarc @ Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:36am) *

QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Fri 1st July 2011, 5:56pm) *

It is perhaps important to note that Moreschi (T-C-L-K-R-D) was a tween administrator at the time and is barely a "young adult" right now. This is the person who was banning these people...

It's understandable that a child would make such mistakes. What is not understandable is the fact that a child is given this kind of power, given the circumstances....


Now I'm pissed off.

It wasn't a "mistake" in any way, shape or form you stupid cunt, what the fuck do you know about any of this? I was one of the editors targeted by these isra-pedia vermin...specifically named by Zeq as he coached his CAMERA-buddies on how to cozy up to me, in some bizarre attempt to get me to be more sympathetic to their editing.

Moreschi, Chris o, and Future perfect deserve all the praise possible for diving into this shitstorm and taking care of it, despite Jayjg's behind-the-scenes attempts to soften the blows.

God damn.


Why don't you huff and puff some more?

Moreschi was on a power high, from the minute he got those tools. He's made some horrible decisions and has never gotten called on it.

The problem is that he came across as a stupid fifty-something Opera queen. When I found out that he was in his teens, my jaw literally fell on the floor.

There is absolutely no excuse for putting children in this sort of position, especially stupid children who behave like stupid adults and abuse that power. That point isn't negotiable with me, so either just drop it or talk to somebody else.

Now, in a group email sent 13/03/09, which was received by Greg, Somey, Kato, Alison and myself, Newyorkbrad said that he could not be involved in any matters involving Israeli foreign policy for "for independent but salient reasons. ".

What's going on here?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 2:12pm
Post #12


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:18am) *

Now, in a group email sent 13/03/09, which was received by Greg, Somey, Kato, Alison and myself, Newyorkbrad said that he could not be involved in any matters involving Israeli foreign policy for "for independent but salient reasons. ".

What's going on here?

One can guess. APAC once retained or consulted Ira to do something for them, so he found it a convenient reason to recuse on grounds of conflict.

I don't really think it's his volunteer work with Chip down there at the Southern Poverty Law Center.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sololol
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 3:53pm
Post #13


Bell the Cat
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun 10th Apr 2011, 6:32am
Member No.: 50,538

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Wikifan @ Fri 1st July 2011, 8:39pm) *



Did I strike a nerve Sol? Aren't you being a tad bit hypocritically since you were banned for straight up sock-puppetry? "

There's a slight difference between committing wiki-seppuku and spending years harassing political opponents on an economy sized package of socks. Things were set up so that we'd confirm the veracity of the other leaked emails if I was banned. Because if they were real I didn't have the patience to edit anymore. I'd already gotten harassed by Brewcrewer and sock friends before I brought up the issue of their canvassing group, sticking around didn't seem interesting.
QUOTE
The leaks specifically refer to EI agents infiltrating this CAMERA cabal and exposing them. He certainly wasn't acting alone. And he/she obviously has/had ties to Wikipedia. So who were his allies? Compare the number of so-called pro-Israel editors railed at AE to Palestinian/Arab nationalists.

Reread the Stetson Kennedy email. Stetson leaked the emails to EI not because she disagreed with the message but the methods. Same with Shalom. This isn't an espionage war between two opposing NGOs, the group was exposed when sympathetic parties were no longer comfortable with what was happening. Laudable.

This post has been edited by Sololol: Sat 2nd July 2011, 3:53pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sololol
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 5:07pm
Post #14


Bell the Cat
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun 10th Apr 2011, 6:32am
Member No.: 50,538

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 2nd July 2011, 10:12am) *

QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:18am) *

Now, in a group email sent 13/03/09, which was received by Greg, Somey, Kato, Alison and myself, Newyorkbrad said that he could not be involved in any matters involving Israeli foreign policy for "for independent but salient reasons. ".

What's going on here?

One can guess. APAC once retained or consulted Ira to do something for them, so he found it a convenient reason to recuse on grounds of conflict.

Wowzers. After poking around I can't blame NYB for not wanting more Israel related headaches. He represented some big name investors suing an Israeli government owned defense company for refusing to do business with Hugo Chavez. If that wasn't enough, one of these investors was Rabbi Moshe Talansky (NYB had represented him in at least one other case), a pivotal witness for the prosecution in the ongoing corruption trial of Israeli PM Ehud Olmert, amongst other things
Or it could be something else. Israeli politics beat the hell out of American any day.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 5:09pm
Post #15


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Sololol @ Sat 2nd July 2011, 10:07am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 2nd July 2011, 10:12am) *

QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:18am) *

Now, in a group email sent 13/03/09, which was received by Greg, Somey, Kato, Alison and myself, Newyorkbrad said that he could not be involved in any matters involving Israeli foreign policy for "for independent but salient reasons. ".

What's going on here?

One can guess. APAC once retained or consulted Ira to do something for them, so he found it a convenient reason to recuse on grounds of conflict.

Wowzers. After poking around I can't blame NYB for not wanting more Israel related headaches. He represented some big name investors suing an Israeli government owned defense company for refusing to do business with Hugo Chavez. If that wasn't enough, one of these investors was Rabbi Moshe Talansky (NYB had represented him in at least one other case), a pivotal witness for the prosecution in the ongoing corruption trial of Israeli PM Ehud Olmert, amongst other things
Or it could be something else. Israeli politics beat the hell out of American any day.

bored.gif Mild interest. Did both sides call each other Nazis?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sololol
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 5:49pm
Post #16


Bell the Cat
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun 10th Apr 2011, 6:32am
Member No.: 50,538

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:09pm) *

bored.gif Mild interest. Did both sides call each other Nazis?

At bare minimum. Judging by the spin put on the case in the Israeli media (something like "Greedy self-hating investors sue Israeli defense company to force disclosure of military technology to Iranian puppet regime in Venezuela") and Talansky's portrayal as Ehud Olmert's Benedict Arnold, I'd imagine that anyone even tangentially associated with him could expect about a warm welcome as a door-to-door salesman peddling Finkelstein books and flotilla tickets in Kiryat Arba.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Tarc
post Sun 3rd July 2011, 2:37am
Post #17


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,124
Joined: Fri 7th Mar 2008, 3:38am
Member No.: 5,309

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Sat 2nd July 2011, 4:18am) *

QUOTE(Tarc @ Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:36am) *

QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Fri 1st July 2011, 5:56pm) *

It is perhaps important to note that Moreschi (T-C-L-K-R-D) was a tween administrator at the time and is barely a "young adult" right now. This is the person who was banning these people...

It's understandable that a child would make such mistakes. What is not understandable is the fact that a child is given this kind of power, given the circumstances....


Now I'm pissed off.

It wasn't a "mistake" in any way, shape or form you stupid cunt, what the fuck do you know about any of this? I was one of the editors targeted by these isra-pedia vermin...specifically named by Zeq as he coached his CAMERA-buddies on how to cozy up to me, in some bizarre attempt to get me to be more sympathetic to their editing.

Moreschi, Chris o, and Future perfect deserve all the praise possible for diving into this shitstorm and taking care of it, despite Jayjg's behind-the-scenes attempts to soften the blows.

God damn.


Why don't you huff and puff some more?


Go wrap your dick up around your ass and fuck yourself, crackhead. When you get targeted by an off-wiki group, then you can open your mouth. Whatever beef you have with Moreschi being a teenager didn't have a damn thing to do with this case.


QUOTE(Wikifan @ Fri 1st July 2011, 9:48pm) *

QUOTE
Wikifan is just a sock of one of these shitheads, someone in the zeq, isarig, humus sapiens, etc... era. Don't buy the innocent "who are these guys?" act for a second.


Heh. Prove it.


Just another quacking Zionist, that's all we need to know.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wikifan
post Sun 3rd July 2011, 3:04am
Post #18


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 204
Joined: Sat 28th Aug 2010, 2:58pm
Member No.: 26,203

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE
Just another quacking Zionist, that's all we need to know.


u mad? Who's the "we?" You and Nab? Smearing other editors with bullshit accusations of sock-puppetry?

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Adversary
post Mon 4th July 2011, 6:51pm
Post #19


CT (Check Troll)
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 801
Joined: Sat 20th May 2006, 12:09am
Member No.: 194



QUOTE
was told by an acquaintance that one of the members on the
Arbitration committee (hand-picked by the owner) was an "interested party,"
and that going there for recourse would be like going to the local sheriff
to expose the KKK only to learn that the sheriff had membership

Yeah, we have not forgotten how "the owner"(!) handpicked Jayjg for arb.com, even when Jayjg didn´t get enough votes from "the community".
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kelly Martin
post Mon 4th July 2011, 10:02pm
Post #20


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

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



QUOTE(The Adversary @ Mon 4th July 2011, 1:51pm) *
Yeah, we have not forgotten how "the owner"(!) handpicked Jayjg for arb.com, even when Jayjg didn´t get enough votes from "the community".
Somewhere I may still have the pre-MailMan ArbCom archives (the ArbCom moved to mailman in late 2005 sometime), and I have to wonder if there is any discussion of that appointment in those. (If MA has that archive I'd be very surprised.) It's probably lost, but it might be on an old laptop hard drive or drive image somewhere. The benefit of searching for it has not, as of yet, exceeded the cost of doing so, and so I haven't bothered.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  1 2 >
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: 22nd 11 17, 7:35am