High School kid who pretends to be a cop up for CU?, ...and ArbCom asked him to stump??? Options

[the fieryangel]

The good sire Tarantino, who is currently away, has apparently discovered a very interesting situation involving Tiptoety (T-C-L-K-R-D) who has been asked by Arbcom to stand for the Check User elections. Since he is a clerk at Wikipedia Sockpuppet investigations, this might seem like a reasonable nomination. However it would seem that Mr. Tiptoety has a rather...how shall we say?....strong interest in law enforcement in general, sometimes to the point of pretending to be a police officer, even though he appears to be in High school (or at least, was at the time of his adminstration nom.):

# Strong support Seen this user around many times while doing vandalism reverts. I would like to see a police officer be an admin on Wikipedia. NHRHS2010 talk 10:33, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment I've always been curious, since it appears the user is still in high school (I could be wrong about that), in what capacity he serves as a police officer (this is per the userbox on his user page). Tiptoety, could you clarify that? Katr67 11:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment More than that, it would appear that this user is also an emergency responder - seems bizzare to be both, and still in high school (by the looks of things). Having said that, I would certainly like to hear why NHRHS2010 thinks that we need a police officer as an admin on Wikipedia. A police officer, in my opinion, won't necessarily make any better an admin than (for want of a better expression) a normal person. TheIslander 13:19, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment: If either of you have any evidence or proof that he is, indeed, a high school student, hadn't you best provide it here rather than simply making it seem as though Tiptoety is fabricating his identity? Otherwise it would seem you're derailing this RFA with non-issues that could sway people in their support or dissent. Thank you. Jeffpw 13:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Whilst I totally agree with Jeffpw that this does not seem to be helpful in terms of this RfA, it is hard to reconcile this diff [1] with the assertions of being a law enforcement officer. Normally the police don't get grounded by their parents ...... Pedro : Chat 13:39, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment Quite right, Jeffpw, I should have cited what Pedro just has. Appologies. TheIslander 14:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment - I admit that dif is disconcerting. That said, it could have been a joke. Until Tiptoety is here to answer for himself, I am giving him the benefit of the doubt and assuming he was being playful when he put that on his page. Naturally, if it turns out he has misrepresented who he is, I will withdraw my support. Not for his age (I know other teen admins here who do a great job), but for the misrepresentation. Jeffpw 14:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, i am a student in a high school, but also serve as an employee of the Police Bureau as a Law Enforcement Cadet. I looked for a userbox that would state that but was un-able to find, so i used the next best thing. A police cadet does the same things as a police offices, except they are under 21 which means no gun, and can not operate and emergency vehicle with lights and sirens. Take a look here: [2]. Cheers! Tiptoety 14:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for clearing that up, Tiptoety. I was sure there must be some logical explanation for that. You seemed to have too strong an ethical code to have lied to the community. If you need help making a police cadet userbox, hit me up. It goes without saying you have my continued support for this nomination. Jeffpw 14:40, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment Yes, thank you Tiptoety for clearing that up. I figured it was something like that, judging by your interest in search and rescue. I in no way meant to imply that being in high school is a reason to oppose, nor was I saying you attempted to misrepresent yourself on purpose. It is bothersome to know, however, you don't know enough about wikicoding to perhaps "subst" the userbox and then change the text to more appropriately reflect your status. Katr67 15:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment Echoed - thanks for clearing that up, Tiptoety. Having said that, I still wonder about the Emergency Responder box... TheIslander 16:47, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Response - Thank you to everyone who understood the situation! I am glad that is cleared up, and have fixed the userbox issue on my userpage. On the topic of the first responder box, I am indeed a first responder (it stems from my work with Search and Rescue). Cheers! Tiptoety 18:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

In case anyone's in any doubt, Tiptoey has always been clear on this and isn't trying to mislead anyone - see this conversation for example. — iridescent 19:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Tiptoey I'm concerned by this "A police cadet does the same things as a police offices" which I highly doubt. Without going through the DPSST I doubt you can arrest anyone as a cadet (other than citizens arrest) or issue citations. Is this correct? Aboutmovies 19:33, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Is this really relevant anymore to this RfA? It's been cleared up that he wasn't intentionally misleading anyone, if you wish to argue what a police cadet can and can not do, wouldn't it be better to use email, or a talk page instead? KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 23:45, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

No it has not been cleared up. This user has a history of misrepresentation (I don’t care if its intentional or not) including where in the oppose section someone pointed out this user did this which is far more troubling than the userbox issue. But Tiptoey says it was a misunderstanding, but says they are basically a cop minus a gun. I don’t think that’s true. Simply put, Tiptoey made a mistake, now he just needs own up to it completely. It’s the same thing as the copyvio issue. He’s trying to wriggle around it and make it seem not so bad, which is not owning up to the problem. Own up to the problem, reform, and come back to RFA in a few months. And I’m not sure why you think this was resolved. The only action in this thread of the RFA contributed by Tiptoey since their comment I quoted, is that he removed the user box, that doesn’t address the other claim of being a police officer made by this RFA candidate, which seems to continue when you make comments about cadets being cops minus a gun. Aboutmovies 00:09, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

How is this relevant to this RfA? That is what I am asking. How is the difference between being a cadet and an actual police officer relevant to this RfA? KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

It's (possibly weakly) relevant 'cause it shows trust issues. There was confusion as to how a high school person could be a Police Officer, and Tiptoety cleared that up. However, since that things have surfaced where Tiptoety has claimed to be a Police Officer, yet he states here that he is not. There are definite honesty issues here, which is why this is being discussed. TheIslander 01:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

It is relevant because as many people have pointed out, can Tiptoey be trusted with the tools.?To analyze this you start with the editors trustworthiness. The above issues demonstrate their are issues with that trustworthiness. Note, its not that there is from a WikiPedia editing difference, anything relevant to cop vs. cadet. It has to do with Tiptoey's response to this issue of misrepresenting himself as a police officer, and then when called on it trying to mitigate it by saying, well I'm a cadet so the only difference is I don't have a gun so really its no big deal. Yes, it is a big deal. I don't know about you but I don't go around WikiPedia telling people/implying to others that I'm a lawyer, when really I'm a law student. First it's border line illegal (impersonating a law enforcement officer is usually illegal), and second what good does it do for the project? Look, we all make mistakes, but if you want to be an admin you better own up to those mistakes, whether that be copyvio issues or saying you are a cop when you are not. Notice below the person who added the info about the claim of being a cop is apparently a law enforcement person, so I'll take their word that their is serious issue and difference with cadet v. cop. Aboutmovies 05:09, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Then the response to this issue has been (at least to me) more of a trying to avoid responsibility That raises issues of trust, and that is obviously related to being an admin.

Ummm, I still don't get it, maybe it's how we are interpreting this section of the discussion, but Tiptoety states "I looked for a userbox that would state that but was un-able to find, so i used the next best thing." Also in this conversation he states that he is a cadet. So he couldn't find the correct userbox, that makes him untrustworthy? He made a mistake with adding content that was a copyvio. Mistakes happen, people are human. I dunno, this is just my 2 cents, but it seems like your consistent issue about this is very overbearing. He's made some mistakes, if you choose to oppose because of them that is your prerogative. But you seem to be making a big deal over the comment "A police cadet does the same things as a police offices, except they are under 21 which means no gun." What does that have to do with this RfA? I just don't get it. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether it's relevant to this RFA or not, but in terms of the link above where Tiptoety says "I am a police officer" -- Tiptoety, please don't do that anymore. It's well-intentioned, but misleading. I don't think it reflects on your honesty or anything like that (particularly since you're kinda like a police officer), but it's a bad idea for a variety of reasons. That said, I haven't had the pleasure of meeting the candidate on here, so I'm not expressing any opinion of the RFA (and from all accounts he seems like a good guy). --TheOtherBob 18:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

No you don't seem to get it, its not about the userbox, its about his responses after the userbox part was "fixed" if you will. Note, again, there are two instances where it appears Tiptoey has represented he is a cop, the userbox, and far more troubling the Admin noticboard incident. Those are both mistakes, and the problem I have is Tiptoey's response to the community's concerns about the userbox, and more importantly the second incident. I asked a simple question, you have decided that you wanted to say its not relevant, all I want is a response from the candidate. Now if you really want to analyze the userbox, its not that he couldn't find the right userbox, its how he responded to the concern, oh its no big deal since a cadet is really just a cop without a gun. Well a private citizen is really just a cop without the authority, but if I misrepresent that I am a cop when I am not, then I get a free ticket to jail. So the problem I have is that Tiptoey was trying to downplay these misrepresentations, instead of owning up to the mistakes. Changing the userbox is the first step, but this comes across as very insincere when you try to downplay the problem. Aboutmovies 21:15, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Aboutmovies's comment was below mine, but I'm pretty sure it responds to the one above mine. To be clear, I don't hold any opinion here other than that Tiptoety shouldn't claim to be a police officer until he is one. --TheOtherBob 21:37, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

From IP information gleaned from Wikipedia Watch and Sam Spade, which I won't go into here, it would appear that Tiptoety has a history of making claims about being a law enforcement officer on other sites.

Now, does Wikipedia really want a younger kid who has obviously has a law enforcement fetish to handle this type of serious information? I see red lights going off all over the place here and this person seems to me to be the very last person who should have access to CU tools on the English Wikipedia.

[EricBarbour]

It's good that his nomination is questioned.

Wonder if people remember what a Cabal butt-nozzle Tiptoety really is?

Does anyone remember this? Wherein that snotty teenaged cop-wannabe blocked a series of accounts, based on extremely sketchy evidence, directly on the instigation of Guy, Will Beback, GWH and (inevitably) The Slim Bitch.

And I still think this was a classic.
(You remember--it started out as an April Fool's joke.
Makes one wonder if Tip's nose is buried up Raul's ass.)

This post has been edited by EricBarbour:

[Peter Damian]

And let's not forget this

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=240980810

Reverting edits on the great French writer Balzac because the editor was banned.

The appalling Stifle is also a candidate in these elections. Are ordinary peasant users allowed to vote in these? (I haven't worked out how).

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[the fieryangel]

Off of Tiptoety's nomination statement :

it states that CheckUsers may release the data of an editor "Where it is reasonably necessary to protect the rights, property or safety of the Wikimedia Foundation, its users or the ''public''." Because of this, I am not opposed to releasing the information of a specific user (should the situation warrant it) to another single user for the purpose of contacting law enforcement but will not release the information to the community at large as it serves no purpose and violates the person's privacy. I am also willing (and have done so in the past) to contact the authorities myself should the situation call for it (to reduce drama, and to protect the person in question).

So, we're going to start releasing CU data to LE as part of SOP?

...this really, really stinks....

[EricBarbour]

Voting starts July 28, AFAICT.
And apparently any editor "in good standing" can vote.
So, login first thing Tuesday morning, and go to town.....

[GlassBeadGame]

Off of Tiptoety's nomination statement :

it states that CheckUsers may release the data of an editor "Where it is reasonably necessary to protect the rights, property or safety of the Wikimedia Foundation, its users or the ''public''." Because of this, I am not opposed to releasing the information of a specific user (should the situation warrant it) to another single user for the purpose of contacting law enforcement but will not release the information to the community at large as it serves no purpose and violates the person's privacy. I am also willing (and have done so in the past) to contact the authorities myself should the situation call for it (to reduce drama, and to protect the person in question).

So, we're going to start releasing CU data to LE as part of SOP?

...this really, really stinks....

WMF doesn't even bother to set forth a reasonable TOS agreement and now we have a high school student (is he a minor too?) ready to release on his own initiative private information to law enforcement. To what possible end given that any and all use of the website is permitted by the absence of a TOS? Surely if a credible threat of harm is made they wouldn't leave it in this youngsters hands? Yet here he is just itching to engage law enforcement. The Privacy Policy is the sole acceptance of any responsibility by the WMF board of trustees for what happens on the site. The trustees need to step-in themselves or instruct Gardner here and, without regard to any community process, make it clear this kid doesn't get access to this information.

[sbrown]

a high school student (is he a minor too?)

Doesnt a checkuser have to prove hes over 18?

[Kelly Martin]

From IP information gleaned from Wikipedia Watch and Sam Spade, which I won't go into here, it would appear that Tiptoety has a history of making claims about being a law enforcement officer on other sites.

Now, does Wikipedia really want a younger kid who has obviously has a law enforcement fetish to handle this type of serious information? I see red lights going off all over the place here and this person seems to me to be the very last person who should have access to CU tools on the English Wikipedia.

We have a term for people like this in the ham radio community. They're called "whackers". They're a serious problem (for lots of different reasons) and we really don't need them running around anywhere. (BTW, the "cadet" program he's in is probably this one.)

I don't think Wikipedia should have sworn officers acting in any role that gives one access to "private" information; the risk of putting that person into a conflict between their duties as a sworn officer and their obligations to the Wikipedia community are too great. The WM privacy policy does not allow the willy-nilly release of checkuser information to law enforcement, and (at least when I was a checkuser) the decision to make such a release was supposed to be referred to Wikimedia's General Counsel. I don't believe that an 18 year old tyro has the requisite world experience to make that judgment call responsibly.

[EricBarbour]

And in passing, let's talk about Stifle.

Ignoring NPA policy. Protecting his user talkpage, via misdirection.
(He and A Nobody (T-C-L-K-R-D) have quite a twisted history.)

The old-time cabal likes him. Esp. Jayjg. And he hates Giano and Geogre.

And he seems to have it in for Peter Damian.
And anyone who participates on WR. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif)

Also, I view the position of regular contributor to WR as incompatible with adminship. Stifle (talk) 14:16, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Legendary for punitive blocks to silence critics, and for blanking talkpages for same.
I've been going thru his logs, and I don't see any substantial article contributions.....
but he sure does enjoy marking pages as patrolled, blindly deleting "nonfree" images,
and sniping at people on their talkpages. In short, a classic robotic deletionist.

Humorless asshole. Might make a good police officer, given better supervision.
But for Wikipedia (where "supervision" is a joke), he's a poor match.

I'd post more links to his stupid, wikilawyering activities, but there are too many to list.
Go thru past Deletion Reviews for some examples.

This post has been edited by EricBarbour:

[EricBarbour]

Fieryangel: care to share more about Tiptoety's off-wiki activities? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)

(Cuz I keep coming up with bizarreness like this and this.)

This post has been edited by EricBarbour:

[Kelly Martin]

Fieryangel: care to share more about Tiptoety's off-wiki activities? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)

(Cuz I keep coming up with bizarreness like this and this.)

Honestly, I don't think either of those is our cop wannabe, especially the second (which recites incompatible personal details).

[A Horse With No Name]

And in passing, let's talk about Stifle.

Please, I am having my dinner. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif)

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

A teenage kid who enjoys dressing up in uniform and confuses himself with police officers ... it all smacks of suppressed authoritarian homo-eroticism to me.

And, certainly if Tiptoety, himself does not harbor elements of authoritarian homo-eroticism (sneaking up in the dark on 'tip-toe', no doubt, to catch wrongdoers in the act), he must surely be the image of homo-erotic fantasy. I am having flashbacks of George Michael here.

I wonder if he gets a stiffie at the though of being empowered with a shooter in the near future, and will find satisfaction in the power to BAN, BAN, BAN and PUNISH dissident voices off the Pee-dia in the meanwhile? BTW, do we know if he is good looking ... is he all fit and tanned?


I think we ought spare no extra efforts discussing the matter but introduce him to leading Wikipedian David Shankbone, and his camera, to get some pictures of him in his uniform as evidence right away.


As for the Balzac topic? Good God! If being French is not enough to have one's Pee-dia page erased from the American Wiki, the man was probably a communist as well.

This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy:

[Milton Roe]

A teenage kid who enjoys dressing up in uniform and confuses himself with police officers ... it all smacks of suppressed authoritarian homo-eroticism to me.

And, certainly if Tiptoety, himself does not harbor elements of authoritarian homo-eroticism (sneaking up in the dark on 'tip-toe', no doubt, to catch wrongdoers in the act), he must surely be the image of homo-erotic fantasy. I am having flashbacks of George Michael here.

I wonder if he gets a stiffie at the though of being empowered with a shooter in the near future, and will find satisfaction in the power to BAN, BAN, BAN and PUNISH dissident voices off the Pee-dia in the meanwhile? BTW, do we know if he is good looking ... is he all fit and tanned?


I think we ought spare no extra efforts discussing the matter but introduce him to leading Wikipedian David Shankbone, and his camera, to get some pictures of him in his uniform as evidence right away.

(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/09210_170649_village_people_1.jpg)

[MZMcBride]

Fieryangel: care to share more about Tiptoety's off-wiki activities? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)

(Cuz I keep coming up with bizarreness like this and this.)

Honestly, I don't think either of those is our cop wannabe, especially the second (which recites incompatible personal details).

Wait a minute. Do you mean to suggest that there may be more than one "Tiptoety" on the Internet? Heretic.

[the fieryangel]

Fieryangel: care to share more about Tiptoety's off-wiki activities? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/happy.gif)

(Cuz I keep coming up with bizarreness like this and this.)

I can't do that here, but I can explain how Tarantino was able to find this: The IP information found on wikipedia-watch leads to what appears to be a real name, which also appears to be the name of an account which also edited Wikipedia. This name has posted on quite a few LE forums saying things which suggest that this person is not just a cadet, but a real police officer.

I suppose that anybody could find this out now, once you've got the IP off of the chat cache on WW...

[Grep]

Perhaps the effete Old Country has something to say here after all. The principles underlying the Data Protection Act are that personal data must be
* Fairly and lawfully processed
* Processed for limited purposes
* Adequate, relevant and not excessive
* Accurate and up to date
* Not kept for longer than is necessary
* Processed in line with your rights
* Secure
* Not transferred to other countries without adequate protection

While the WMF is not, alas, subject to UK law, a responsible organisation might like to consider the principles while formulating its policy and practice. It might be instructive to consider how CheckUser data is handled by WMF. I wonder how many of the eight principles are actually being adhered to. Could it be -- None?

This post has been edited by Grep:

[Viridae]

And in passing, let's talk about Stifle.

Please, I am having my dinner. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/sick.gif)

Stifle won't get anywhere near the nmbers required because of past behaviour.

PS this site is somewhat difficult to post to using an iPhone while using full mode (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif) (not a complaint more an observation)

[Grep]

... their obligations to the Wikipedia community ...

Tell us more about these "obligations" of which you speak.

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

This name has posted on quite a few LE forums saying things which suggest that this person is not just a cadet, but a real police officer.

Uh-oh ... Hold on.

You are saying he is a real police officer ... pretending to be a teenager to edit on the Wikipedia ... self-presenting to become an admin/checkuser ... and then having access to private personal information about other Wikipedia users?

So, how many more "law enforcement", "private investigators" or "intelligence operators" are lurking round the back end of the Pee-dia admins pages? By probability alone, there have got to be more than one. Well, OK, perhaps there is not much evidence of "intelligence" but you get what I am saying.

And the 'Village Pump People' sang ...

(IMG:http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll191/Shrlocc/09210_170649_village_people_1.jpg)

Young man, there's no need to feel down.
I said, young man, pick yourself off the ground.
I said, young man, 'cause you're in a new town
There's no need to be unhappy.

Young man, there's a place you can go.
I said, young man, when you're short on your dough.
You can stay there, and I'm sure you will find
Many ways to have a good time.

It's fun to edit at the Wik-i-Pedi-A,
It's fun to edit at the Wik-i-Pedi-A.

They have everything that you need to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys ...

Young man, are you listening to me?
I said, young man, who do you want to be?
I said, young man, you can make real your dreams.
But you've got to know this one thing!

No man does it all by himself.
I said, young man, put your pride on the shelf,
And just go there, to the Wik-i-Pedi-A.
I'm sure they can help you today.

They have everything that you need to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys ...

Its fun to edit at the Wik-i-Pedi-A,
Its fun to edit at the Wik-i-Pedi-A.

This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: