Odd Nature has been personally attacked! Options Rating

[Giggy]

Still, I will try to ratchet down on my use of the term to only egregious cases.

Thanks - the last thing we need (in general) is moar drama.

[powercorrupts]

I always assume that Odd Nature = FeloniousMonk anyway. Am I wrong?

Yeah, you're wrong. (Not a personal attack.)

But seriously, I think we all (tried to) agree at (one of) the RfC that describing folks as a "cabal" is mean. Putting aside one's opinions as to if they actually are a cabal, I think the best advice for both sides is to not give the other side any opportunity (prospero/Dragon; this is aimed at you, mostly... make of it what you will).

It has little to do with being mean, although my calling OM OrangeClownFish probably was. The fact of the matter was that my use of the term was clearly demonstrated by the further pile on by ID editors both on my talk page and at WQA. If they don't want to be called a cabal, they shouldn't act as one. Still, I will try to ratchet down on my use of the term to only egregious cases.

I still stand by my fundamental beliefs. Maybe I'm unique, but never have I seen such a disruptive, rude, loutish bunch of scientists in my life. Yes, I've been around plenty, since my father would take me to the various international developmental biology meetings he attended when I was younger. The class of the persons I met there was on a whole different level then what I see with those associated with Wikiproject ID.

We can see they are a cabal, but how do we know they are scientists?

[Bob Boy]

Moulton, could you please refresh us on some of the real-world identities of some of the IDCab, particularly Jim62sch? Are they real scientists?

[Proabivouac]

I always assume that Odd Nature = FeloniousMonk anyway. Am I wrong?

Yeah, you're wrong. (Not a personal attack.

How do you know this? B's evidence looked fairly compelling, and was not publically rebutted in any way.

[LaraLove]

I resent these personal attacks from Dragon695, and request an immediate retraction and apology. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Everyone wants retractions and an apology. But if this person got it, would it be sincere?

I had not seen that. He has absolutely no right whatsoever to ask anyone for a retraction or an apology, and he should feel utter shame for even requesting it considering the filthy waste he spewed out about me, giggy and the_undertow. And now, not only has he refused to retract any of it AND refused to apologize, but he has twice now said that he was going to discuss this with me. Turns out that in addition to being completely hateful, he's also either a straight up liar or incapable of admitting when he's erred, and taking the time to deal with it.

Half the shit these over-sensitives claim to be uncivil comments or personal attacks are not even close to such. And what's further amusing is that Filll keeps a subpage of such abuses of these policies. It's utterly hilarious considering what he'll jump to claim as an attack against one of his own while being appalled if someone else makes the same such claims. This whole situation is fucktarded. After all the shit they've dished out to other editors, it's literally laughable to see them demand retractions and apologies. Especially Orangemarlin.

[Giggy]

I always assume that Odd Nature = FeloniousMonk anyway. Am I wrong?

Yeah, you're wrong. (Not a personal attack.

How do you know this? B's evidence looked fairly compelling, and was not publically rebutted in any way.

Sorry, I haven't seen the evidence you're referring to. (I just checked and Odd nature isn't mentioned here as far as I can see.)

Can you clarify? I was going by what I thought to be the case based on discussion here and elsewhere, but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

[Proabivouac]

I always assume that Odd Nature = FeloniousMonk anyway. Am I wrong?

Yeah, you're wrong. (Not a personal attack.

How do you know this? B's evidence looked fairly compelling, and was not publically rebutted in any way.

Sorry, I haven't seen the evidence you're referring to. (I just checked and Odd nature isn't mentioned here as far as I can see.)

Can you clarify? I was going by what I thought to be the case based on discussion here and elsewhere, but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

The original allegation was here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...e#FeloniousMonk
I am not aware that anyone has substantially rebutted this. I've been told behind the scenes that it's not so, but no actual evidence was produced to this effect. It is very strange that FM didn't participate in the arbitration, and that no effort was made to publically address B's allegation.

[GlassBeadGame]

I resent these personal attacks from Dragon695, and request an immediate retraction and apology. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Everyone wants retractions and an apology. But if this person got it, would it be sincere?

I had not seen that. He has absolutely no right whatsoever to ask anyone for a retraction or an apology, and he should feel utter shame for even requesting it considering the filthy waste he spewed out about me, giggy and the_undertow. And now, not only has he refused to retract any of it AND refused to apologize, but he has twice now said that he was going to discuss this with me. Turns out that in addition to being completely hateful, he's also either a straight up liar or incapable of admitting when he's erred, and taking the time to deal with it.

Half the shit these over-sensitives claim to be uncivil comments or personal attacks are not even close to such. And what's further amusing is that Filll keeps a subpage of such abuses of these policies. It's utterly hilarious considering what he'll jump to claim as an attack against one of his own while being appalled if someone else makes the same such claims. This whole situation is fucktarded. After all the shit they've dished out to other editors, it's literally laughable to see them demand retractions and apologies. Especially Orangemarlin.

It is hardly my place to suggest additional process or another layer of cranky dispute resolution for their club, put I can't resist suggesting some form of dueling to address these "personal attacks" that compromise the honor of noble Wikipedians. Perhaps they could be played out with a selection of oddly shaped dice assigned based on edit counts, admin status, etc. If the dice call for it the dueler would be "dead" and his/her account forfeited. Survivors might receive "dueling scars" to augment their ~~~~ signature. At least the whining would abate.

[Giggy]

Responding to Proabivouac.

A rebuttal to that would be nice. I looked through it all and perhaps the biggest problem with it (though it certainly looks suspicious without knowing any more) is that it could be applied to many other users.

This post has been edited by Giggy: Fri 4th July 2008, 2:31am

[Proabivouac]

I resent these personal attacks from Dragon695, and request an immediate retraction and apology. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Everyone wants retractions and an apology. But if this person got it, would it be sincere?

I had not seen that. He has absolutely no right whatsoever to ask anyone for a retraction or an apology, and he should feel utter shame for even requesting it considering the filthy waste he spewed out about me, giggy and the_undertow. And now, not only has he refused to retract any of it AND refused to apologize, but he has twice now said that he was going to discuss this with me. Turns out that in addition to being completely hateful, he's also either a straight up liar or incapable of admitting when he's erred, and taking the time to deal with it.

Half the shit these over-sensitives claim to be uncivil comments or personal attacks are not even close to such. And what's further amusing is that Filll keeps a subpage of such abuses of these policies. It's utterly hilarious considering what he'll jump to claim as an attack against one of his own while being appalled if someone else makes the same such claims. This whole situation is fucktarded. After all the shit they've dished out to other editors, it's literally laughable to see them demand retractions and apologies. Especially Orangemarlin.

It is hardly my place to suggest additional process or another layer of cranky dispute resolution for their club, put I can't resist suggesting some form of dueling to address these "personal attacks" that compromise the honor of noble Wikipedians. Perhaps they could be played out with a selection of oddly shaped dice assigned based on edit counts, admin status, etc. If the dice call for it the dueler would be "dead" and his/her account forfeited. Survivors might receive "dueling scars" to augment their ~~~~ signature. At least the whining would abate.

While grave incivility occurs on Wikipedia on a daily basis, editors are obliged to allege personal attacks and collect evidence to this effect. They are treated as slip-ups on the part of their opponents, and their number and quality, along with those of other slip-ups, determine the outcome of content disputes indirectly, through disciplinary measures. If you don't feel personally attacked, you're not playing it right.

[Lar]

Moulton, could you please refresh us on some of the real-world identities of some of the IDCab, particularly Jim62sch? Are they real scientists?

Exactly why would it help matters to out people here who wish privacy? I'd rather not see that sort of thing. Regardless of whether you agree with them or not, regardless of whether they have been acting inappropriately. Do not sink to the level of those arrayed against you.

[Bob Boy]

Moulton, could you please refresh us on some of the real-world identities of some of the IDCab, particularly Jim62sch? Are they real scientists?

Exactly why would it help matters to out people here who wish privacy? I'd rather not see that sort of thing. Regardless of whether you agree with them or not, regardless of whether they have been acting inappropriately. Do not sink to the level of those arrayed against you.

I would normally agree, but that group is not above outing other people to achieve their goals - from what I recall, that's exactly what dragged Jim and Orangemarlin into arbitration before - weren't they outing people?

[Moulton]

What would be an alternative term to describe this?

The allied editors from the Wikiproject on Intelligent Design.

[Lar]

Moulton, could you please refresh us on some of the real-world identities of some of the IDCab, particularly Jim62sch? Are they real scientists?

Exactly why would it help matters to out people here who wish privacy? I'd rather not see that sort of thing. Regardless of whether you agree with them or not, regardless of whether they have been acting inappropriately. Do not sink to the level of those arrayed against you.

I would normally agree, but that group is not above outing other people to achieve their goals - from what I recall, that's exactly what dragged Jim and Orangemarlin into arbitration before - weren't they outing people?

You may well be right. But I nevertheless say " Do not sink to the level of those arrayed against you." YMMV of course and I wish you the best in any case.

[Moulton]

Moulton, could you please refresh us on some of the real-world identities of some of the IDCab, particularly Jim62sch? Are they real scientists?

Jim Schuler works for the IRS in Philadelphia. Note his other contacts and references. Do you recognize the other names?

Odd nature (Paul Mitchell) works at Macy's San Francisco Operations Center.

But wait! What is this?!?...

Statement to the Associated Press [In reply to]
Mr. Merkey--

But back in 2006 you were saying something entirely different:

"I can share with the community that Mr. Wales deletion and rewrite of the article was in no way was based on any legal solution or legal resolution -- he did it solely of his own initiative and as a courtesy after performing a through review of the entire history of the article."

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Electi...n/MerkeyArchive
I'm wondering what the AP will think of your past statement, which totally contradicts your statement to them shared here. There is no middle ground between the two. Either you being untruthful then or you are being untruthful now. Which is it?

Paul Mitchell, FeloniousMonk
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

So Paul Mitchell is FeloniousMonk. Which seems to support the theory that Odd nature is a sock puppet or meat puppet of FM.

Previously, I wondered who CabalCounterIntelligenceUnit was.

Here is an interesting comment posted to Larry Fafarman's blog by none other than that mysterious agent whom Guettarda blocked for impersonating Filll.

This post has been edited by Moulton: Fri 4th July 2008, 7:19am

[LaraLove]

Here's a good one. The hypocrisy is ripe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=215759974

White pride is considered an anti-Semitic and racist term by the Anti-defamation league. I stand by my consistent statements over the past couple of years that naively supporting racist code-words is still racist. And as far as admins go, I had enough of admins supporting racist POV-pushers on this project. And maggot, please redact your personal attack for stating my well-founded opinion is fallacious.

Edit summary: White pride=White supremacism=KKK=Neo-nazism. Give me a break.

And note that he refers to SynergeticMaggot as simply "maggot" when asking him to retract his "personal attack" in calling his fallacious argument... uh, fallacious. And then he basically surmises that those who were raised to believe white pride is not inherently racist are white supremacist, KKK-affiliated neo-nazis.

Ya know, I think this pretty much sums up his issues:

I changed my mind. I have to stand up to what is right. You'll laugh at me, call me names, or threaten me with a block. But how do you think the Nazi's ended up killing Jews? Or the KKK lynch blacks? Do you think it came to them in a vision, one day they weren't doing it, the next they were? No, it came from words and ideas. Those words and ideas inspired others, and the next thing you know it's Kristallnacht. And I have no clue today where those ideas start, and I have no clue where they may end up. But words have power. DHMO has stated that he does not believe White Power is racist or anti-semitic. That is his opinion. Mine is that White Pride is no different than any other racist group in the US. In fact, others back me up, specifically the Jewish Anti-defamation League. Yes, they're Jewish. Yes, they're sensitive to all attacks. But they know where words lead, and we've been down that path so many times, and it never ends up good for we Jews.

I have chosen in my life to resist all anti-semitism and racism wherever I see it, because I know my forefathers ignored it, and I don't have many forefathers left because they didn't stand up to it. You might be right that Wikipedia goes blind, but I'm going blind by reading how White Power is completely acceptable, and that admins here can have that racist/anti-semitic background. So, I've had to read where I'm a member of some ridiculous cabal, that my feelings on anti-Semitism should be dismissed (you ask how this is related, it is because I was offended by someone using the term Jew Comedian, and the undertow said that that is not offensive, when it is, and DHMO supports that opinion).

Why should I ignore it? Why should I be the one who reads this offensive language and sit back and smile? Where does this lead? Words matter, because they hurt. I'm saying "the emperor has no clothes" (i.e., that DHMO is making statements that are offensive, and you chastise me. How fair is that? What would you like me to do? Pretend that the gas chamber isn't a shower? Because that's the logical conclusion from accepting hurtful ideas and words. So maybe instead of taking what appears to be a gleeful opportunity to slap me about side my head for expressing an opinion, you could think about those words and ideas expressed by individuals here can be so uncivil as to be hateful and emotionally painful. I cry every time I read of racism or anti-Semitism in words, because I know what they mean. They mean I'm less of of a person, for no other reason but that I was born as a Jew.

Note that at no point during any of this did anyone make an antisemitic comment. No one. No one even spoke to him. He twice referred to giggy as white power. How utterly ridiculous. And he wants retractions for shit like what's quoted a few posts up and someone calling his ridiculous argument fallacious. Give me a break. He has no evidence at all to back up any of his claims in this. It's all about his feelings and assumptions. It's pathetic. I get people are sensitive about this subject, and rightly so. But this is over the top and gives him no right to mislabel people racists and then refuse to apologize once he realizes and admits that they are not racists.

And the Jew comedian incident was over this comment:

The section was only added recently. I agree it needs expanded. There should definately be a mention of [[Ari Shaffir]], a brilliant (in my opinion) Jew comedian. He did a piece in his series 'The Amazing Racist' in a Ku Klux Klan robe, it was hilarious and has had many hits on youtube.

[guy]

Moulton, could you please refresh us on some of the real-world identities of some of the IDCab, particularly Jim62sch? Are they real scientists?

What if they are? On WP, personal expertise is irrelevant, only WP:RS, WP:V and the alphabet soup.

[prospero]

Moulton, could you please refresh us on some of the real-world identities of some of the IDCab, particularly Jim62sch? Are they real scientists?

Jim Schuler works for the IRS in Philadelphia. Note his other contacts and references. Do you recognize the other names?

Odd nature (Paul Mitchell) works at Macy's San Francisco Operations Center.

But wait! What is this?!?...

Statement to the Associated Press [In reply to]
Mr. Merkey--

But back in 2006 you were saying something entirely different:

"I can share with the community that Mr. Wales deletion and rewrite of the article was in no way was based on any legal solution or legal resolution -- he did it solely of his own initiative and as a courtesy after performing a through review of the entire history of the article."

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Electi...n/MerkeyArchive
I'm wondering what the AP will think of your past statement, which totally contradicts your statement to them shared here. There is no middle ground between the two. Either you being untruthful then or you are being untruthful now. Which is it?

Paul Mitchell, FeloniousMonk
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

So Paul Mitchell is FeloniousMonk. Which seems to support the theory that Odd nature is a sock puppet or meat puppet of FM.

How does one bring this to SSP without being banned? Seems like better than just speculative evidence to me.

[Moulton]

Notice this...

Moulton

Conducting a campaign against Wikipedia

...and the Wikipedians who compose WikiProject Intelligent Design. The resulting disruption of Wikipedia includes meatpuppets and proxies recruited and directed by Moulton to edit on his behalf.

• 28 August 2007 A blog entry at Blogspot about his colleague's Rosalind Picard, Wikipedia bio. In the comments he outs the employer of one Wikipedia editor commenting there: [212]

• 18 September 2007 Another blog entry at Blogspot about his colleague's Wikipedia bio attacking the editors of "WikiProject Intelligent Design", "Now we are engaged in a great wiki war", etc.: [213]

Put this newest information together with the evidence posted on-Wiki by User:B that Odd nature is a sock puppet or meat puppet of FeloniousMonk and what do you get?

I get, at the very minimum that FeloniousMonk, Odd nature, and Blogger Skip are functionally indistinguishable in terms of their obsession with and loathing of that vile miscreant and reprehensible reprobate known far and wide in teh Intarwebs as "Moulton".

[Bob Boy]

You may well be right. But I nevertheless say " Do not sink to the level of those arrayed against you." YMMV of course and I wish you the best in any case.

I understand where you're coming from. I generally subscribe to the goose/gander school, myself.