Sam Blacketer Options Rating

[tarantino]

Are there any of you Wikipedians out there who have met the most secretive of the current arbs, Sam?

It's probable that he's using a pseudonym. Though he used to sign his emails "Sam Blacketer London E15", all the phone books and people directories I checked show no instances of that name anywhere in the UK. Additionally he is the only one out the 13 who does not have either the CU or oversight tools and has not verified his identity with the WMF. I thought there was a requirement that you must be at least 18 to be an arb. How has he proven this?

This post has been edited by tarantino:

[Alex]

It does seem a little strange that in December 2006 he was completely new, and less than a year later he was an Arbitrator. I may have expected such a thing in 2003, but not 2007. Seems he pushed all the right buttons.

It is interesting how checkuser/oversight rights are handed out to Arbitrators. For example, Charles Matthews and Sam are the only ones without CheckUser, and FayssalF and Sam are the only ones without Oversight (I think). Surely if one has access to CheckUser, one should have access to oversight as well? Especially as an Arbitrator. Makes no sense.

And Sam Blacketer almost certainly is a pseudonym.

[tarantino]

And Sam Blacketer almost certainly is a pseudonym.

As mentioned in this thread here. the pseudonymous Sam Blacketer attacked Greg by name on wikien-l. Only Alex rightly called him on it.

On Nov 24, 2007 4:22 PM, Majorly <xxxxx at googlemail.com> wrote:

> On 24/11/2007, Sam Blacketer <xxxxx at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I hope Greg Kohs is as sick as a parrot.
> <http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l>
> Why would you say something like that?
>

Because it shows the utter pointlessness of Wikipedia Review, an attempt for him to
make money by writing supportive articles on his clients. As the header
says, "get paid to edit ethically" and that means that both the payments and
the edits are ethical, as opposed to Wikipedia Review when they were neither.

--
Sam Blacketer
London E15

So we have a UK Wikipedian, with what can be construed as a misleading identity, that is well-versed in the MMORPG and exhibits antipathy towards Greg. Why does this sound familiar?

[tarantino]

And Sam Blacketer almost certainly is a pseudonym.

As mentioned in this thread here. the pseudonymous Sam Blacketer attacked Greg by name on wikien-l. Only Alex rightly called him on it.

On Nov 24, 2007 4:22 PM, Majorly <xxxxx at googlemail.com> wrote:

> On 24/11/2007, Sam Blacketer <xxxxx at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I hope Greg Kohs is as sick as a parrot.
> <http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l>
> Why would you say something like that?
>

Because it shows the utter pointlessness of Wikipedia Review, an attempt for him to
make money by writing supportive articles on his clients. As the header
says, "get paid to edit ethically" and that means that both the payments and
the edits are ethical, as opposed to Wikipedia Review when they were neither.

--
Sam Blacketer
London E15

I revisited this a few days ago, and I've figured out who Sam is. If Jimmy and the voters had known what his older account was, he probably wouldn't be an arb today.

You played a great round of Wikipedia this time, Sam.

[zvook]

I revisited this a few days ago, and I've figured out who Sam is. If Jimmy and the voters had known what his older account was, he probably wouldn't be an arb today.

You played a great round of Wikipedia this time, Sam.

How did you link Fys with Sam Blacketer? Was it just by looking at likely candidates in topic areas and timing, and following the various rabbitholes thereof? It's been noted that the accounts were deliberately overlapped to make this difficult to near-impossible.

[tarantino]

How did you link Fys with Sam Blacketer? Was it just by looking at likely candidates in topic areas and timing, and following the various rabbitholes thereof? It's been noted that the accounts were deliberately overlapped to make this difficult to near-impossible.

Something I found on WP. I don't want to say exactly what because people may avoid doing it in the future. Edits times and interests were then compared to confirm it.

Here's a chart of the overlapping edit histories. Sam is blue and Fys is red.

(IMG:http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg231/sonitnarat/sam.png)

[RMHED]

How did you link Fys with Sam Blacketer? Was it just by looking at likely candidates in topic areas and timing, and following the various rabbitholes thereof? It's been noted that the accounts were deliberately overlapped to make this difficult to near-impossible.

Something I found on WP. I don't want to say exactly what because people may avoid doing it in the future. Edits times and interests were then compared to confirm it.

Here's a chart of the overlapping edit histories. Sam is blue and Fys is red.

(IMG:http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg231/sonitnarat/sam.png)

Looks like somebody's got a little bit too much time on their hands. It really isn't important you know, it's just a sodding website.

[The Joy]

How did you link Fys with Sam Blacketer? Was it just by looking at likely candidates in topic areas and timing, and following the various rabbitholes thereof? It's been noted that the accounts were deliberately overlapped to make this difficult to near-impossible.

Something I found on WP. I don't want to say exactly what because people may avoid doing it in the future. Edits times and interests were then compared to confirm it.

Here's a chart of the overlapping edit histories. Sam is blue and Fys is red.

(IMG:http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg231/sonitnarat/sam.png)

Looks like somebody's got a little bit too much time on their hands. It really isn't important you know, it's just a sodding website.

No, it is not "just a website." How many times do we have to say it here? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif)

[RMHED]

How did you link Fys with Sam Blacketer? Was it just by looking at likely candidates in topic areas and timing, and following the various rabbitholes thereof? It's been noted that the accounts were deliberately overlapped to make this difficult to near-impossible.

Something I found on WP. I don't want to say exactly what because people may avoid doing it in the future. Edits times and interests were then compared to confirm it.

Here's a chart of the overlapping edit histories. Sam is blue and Fys is red.

(IMG:http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg231/sonitnarat/sam.png)

Looks like somebody's got a little bit too much time on their hands. It really isn't important you know, it's just a sodding website.

No, it is not "just a website." How many times do we have to say it here? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif)

Yes it is "just a website", albeit one that punches way above its financial weight. Wikipedia isn't important, at best it's useful, at worst it's libellous. If you or others want to imbue it with power it doesn't have, then that's up to you.

[UseOnceAndDestroy]

Yes it is "just a website", albeit one that punches way above its financial weight. Wikipedia isn't important, at best it's useful, at worst it's libellous.

Wikipedia holds itself out to be an encyclopedia and so invites its audience to trust it (despite the well hidden "ignore us, we're crap" disclaimer). It's an attempt to enclose, own and control knowledge on a substantial scale, and the efforts of its unpaid labourers to downplay the implications of that enterprise don't make it any less poisonous.

The "just a website" ploy - which seems to get pulled out by every other wikipediot that blows through here - is as disingenuous as the "just a mop" dismissal of adminship.