Mantanmoreland goes socking? (Again?), LOL Options

[Piperdown]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sus.../Mantanmoreland

a big birdie tells me he's gotten caught again on off-WP sites sockpuppeting with new names, lol. Looks like this "bassett" guy on WP is up to the samiharris-mantanmoreland legacy.

At this point, anyone without a non-SPA history of some length on WP should be Checkusered if they edit the Patrick Byrne-Overstock-Naked Shorting trifecta of "let's fuck Byrne!" that's been going on, on-WP for years.


And who's the last person who should be doing a checkuser on Gary Weiss's socks or potential socks? (um, after Slimmy that is)?

Thatcher.

LOL. Thatcher, you've already been proven a wikifraud on the Gary Saga. Turn over the bullshit story to someone else. No one believes you any more on this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req.../Mantanmoreland

Nevard is not Weiss, that's not news. Bassett's activity smells of Team Gary.

Tor proxies by any chance? Maybe Gary's gotten smart enough to get one of his associates to take up his man-love torch for Byrne.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[everyking]

This all reminds me of something. See if you can guess who said the following about whom: "He showed no remorse and no understanding of the gravity of what he did. ... He should not again be given another opportunity to violate the trust of the community." Because I think that sounds like the perfect attitude to adopt in dealing with the situation at hand.

[dogbiscuit]

This all reminds me of something. See if you can guess who said the following about whom: "He showed no remorse and no understanding of the gravity of what he did. ... He should not again be given another opportunity to violate the trust of the community." Because I think that sounds like the perfect attitude to adopt in dealing with the situation at hand.

There are large amounts of humble pie to be eaten.

A wise response from the community would now be to show good faith and unban WordBomb. I would note that WordBomb has always behaved well on Wikipedia in spite of provocation. I'm sure that is a safe action, WordBomb has little interest in editing Wikipedia as far as I am aware.

[WordBomb]

A wise response from the community would now be to show good faith and unban WordBomb. I would note that WordBomb has always behaved well on Wikipedia in spite of provocation. I'm sure that is a safe action, WordBomb has little interest in editing Wikipedia as far as I am aware.

Not entirely true. Earlier this week, I was shocked by the stubbiness of the article on David P. Broder, and began doing the research to expand it, but then remembered that I'm not allowed. I must admit that if unbanned, I will almost certainly work on improving that article.

Oh yeah...for the past few months I've also been contributing to the Spanish language Wikipedia...so far without incident. If that's a technical violation of my ban, then they might have to reset the clock (back to infinity).

[Heat]

A wise response from the community would now be to show good faith and unban WordBomb. I would note that WordBomb has always behaved well on Wikipedia in spite of provocation. I'm sure that is a safe action, WordBomb has little interest in editing Wikipedia as far as I am aware.

Not entirely true. Earlier this week, I was shocked by the stubbiness of the article on David P. Broder, and began doing the research to expand it, but then remembered that I'm not allowed. I must admit that if unbanned, I will almost certainly work on improving that article.

Oh yeah...for the past few months I've also been contributing to the Spanish language Wikipedia...so far without incident. If that's a technical violation of my ban, then they might have to reset the clock (back to infinity).

It's not. You've only been banned on English wikipedia. You're free to edit any other wikis and, in fact, good behavior on those wiks can be used to support a case for unbanning on en.wikipedia.

[Shalom]

In all seriousness:

I came too late to this discussion to pile on my support for banning Mantanmoreland. If he never edits Wikipedia again, it won't be too soon. It's better for me not to say more about that.

I think it's a little early to talk seriously about unbanning WordBomb, though I would consider it a few months into the future. Everyone else in a similar situation is asked to wait a year from the last time they abusively use sockpuppets. In WordBomb's case, I think his most recent sockpuppet, Post Doctorate y-o-y, was blocked in January 2008. (See [url]block log.) Come back in 2009, after staying clean for a year, and then we can talk. However, as a matter of principle, I have to agree with what WordBomb wrote on his blog: "When you're right, you're right."

The other issue that needs to be resolved is outing SlimVirgin. I think a lot of people will want to keep you banned forever unless you offer some kind of explanation for why you absolutely had to do that. I don't support outing of Wikipedia editors regardless of whether I personally am friendly with those editors or not.

This post has been edited by Shalom:

[WordBomb]

The other issue that needs to be resolved is outing SlimVirgin. I think a lot of people will want to keep you banned forever unless you offer some kind of explanation for why you absolutely had to do that. I don't support outing of Wikipedia editors regardless of whether I personally am friendly with those editors or not.

Excellent points, all. However I will point out that the SV=LM connection was made here by Daniel Brandt (I believe), months before I came along.

[Shalom]

The other issue that needs to be resolved is outing SlimVirgin. I think a lot of people will want to keep you banned forever unless you offer some kind of explanation for why you absolutely had to do that. I don't support outing of Wikipedia editors regardless of whether I personally am friendly with those editors or not.

Excellent points, all. However I will point out that the SV=LM connection was made here by Daniel Brandt (I believe), months before I came along.

I know this is hypocritical of me to say, because I think the Sweet Blue Water connection is relevant to the current arbitration case, but your posting that information was a breach of the Wikimedia Foundation privacy policy, if only because you also posted an IP address and named a geographic location to go along with it. Now, I'm fully aware that your own geographic location and real-world identity has been dragged into this also, so it may seem like fair game to do the same to SlimVirgin, and I have no doubt that it was fair with respect to Mantanmoreland (that was basically a conflict-of-interest content problem when you boil it down to its essence). But I guess that's what bothers me more than just the question of who was the first to say SV=LM. I would add that you posted some details on your blog about LM that, to the best of my knowledge, Daniel Brandt would not have known without your saying so.

To Dogbiscuit: I don't really care about closure. I care about fairness. For now, I think fairness dictates that WordBomb stays banned, but that could change with a few months of good behavior or even no behavior at all. As a practical matter, it's in ArbCom's hands, and I'm not going to join ArbCom anytime soon.

[Gold heart]

The other issue that needs to be resolved is outing SlimVirgin. I think a lot of people will want to keep you banned forever unless you offer some kind of explanation for why you absolutely had to do that. I don't support outing of Wikipedia editors regardless of whether I personally am friendly with those editors or not.

Couldn't agree with less. It should be mandatory that all administrators be accountable and public. If they don't want to go public, then resign the task. And this has more to do with credibility than anything else. If you want the "professor of philosophy" at Yale University, then you can get him/her on the internet, or write. No big secret, no big deal. Why is it such a big deal for Wikipedia, what are they trying to hide? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mellow.gif)