Who is Cbrick77 (aka "Chris)?, Newbie joins the planning committee for Cirt/Jayen carnival Options

[Jagärdu]

Who is Cbrick77 (aka "Chris") and why is this newbie so interested in creating workshop proposals at the arbitration case between Cirt and Jayen? It certainly has Jayen perplexed and I can't imagine anyone is convinced by the protestations that this is his first account. So who the hell is he? A returned former admin or Arb who left the project with his tails between his legs? Another manifestation of ChrisO -- which would be funny for a number of reasons. Imagine ChrisO thinking to himself that signing his name "Chris" is like hiding in plain sight and therefore a wonderful disguise. I know there are people here who want to play this guessing game so let's hear it.

[Hipocrite]

John254/Kristen Eriksen?

[Jagärdu]

John254/Kristen Eriksen?

Now that wound be fun. It is also quite plausible. If it is true I really hope that he uses a second account to make contradicting proposals like he did last time.

[-DS-]

Wikistalk results

Hmmmmm.....

[Jagärdu]

Wikistalk results

Hmmmmm.....

So making a reverting vandalism edit at the Harlem Renaissance article is his call sign?

[Hipocrite]

Wikistalk results

Hmmmmm.....

So making a reverting vandalism edit at the Harlem Renaissance article is his call sign?

Yes, it is.


(updating as I go through the puppets.)

This post has been edited by Hipocrite: Tue 2nd August 2011, 5:45pm

[-DS-]

Wikistalk results

Hmmmmm.....

So making a reverting vandalism edit at the Harlem Renaissance article is his call sign?

Yes, it is.


(updating as I go through the puppets.)

You sure you didn't confuse that second diff with something else? I'm pretty sure Sophie wasn't Mr. John254.

[Hipocrite]

Wikistalk results

Hmmmmm.....

So making a reverting vandalism edit at the Harlem Renaissance article is his call sign?

Yes, it is.


(updating as I go through the puppets.)

You sure you didn't confuse that second diff with something else? I'm pretty sure Sophie wasn't Mr. John254.

I'll take that bet.

EDIT: On further research, I wouldn't take that bet. (ref http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=29340&st=40)

This post has been edited by Hipocrite: Tue 2nd August 2011, 6:24pm

[Jagärdu]

Wikistalk results

Hmmmmm.....

So making a reverting vandalism edit at the Harlem Renaissance article is his call sign?

Yes, it is.


(updating as I go through the puppets.)

OK so who wants to bet on how long it will take the nitwits to figure it out? I say Cbrick is still amending his proposals come tomorrow morning.

[-DS-]

Wikistalk results

Hmmmmm.....

So making a reverting vandalism edit at the Harlem Renaissance article is his call sign?

Yes, it is.


(updating as I go through the puppets.)

OK so who wants to bet on how long it will take the nitwits to figure it out? I say Cbrick is still amending his proposals come tomorrow morning.

That depends. Roughly how long will it take for Coren or some other Arb to see this thread, block Chris and then claim all the credit while denying that he saw it on WR?

[Mathsci]

Wikistalk results

Hmmmmm.....

So making a reverting vandalism edit at the Harlem Renaissance article is his call sign?

Yes, it is.


(updating as I go through the puppets.)

OK so who wants to bet on how long it will take the nitwits to figure it out? I say Cbrick is still amending his proposals come tomorrow morning.

That depends. Roughly how long will it take for Coren or some other Arb to see this thread, block Chris and then claim all the credit while denying that he saw it on WR?

Risker ran a checkuser on Chester Markel on June 19. Would she not have picked up on any other socks at the time?

[tarantino]

Risker ran a checkuser on Chester Markel on June 19. Would she not have picked up on any other socks at the time?

If someone consistently uses different user agent strings and ISPs for each account, checkuser isn't going to find anything.

Mantanmoreland used to use long distance dial up accounts to make it appear his alternate accounts were editing from a different metropolitan area. It only takes one slip up to get caught, though.

This post has been edited by tarantino: Wed 3rd August 2011, 2:05am

[Jagärdu]

Risker ran a checkuser on Chester Markel on June 19. Would she not have picked up on any other socks at the time?

If someone consistently uses different user agent strings and ISPs for each account, checkuser isn't going to find anything.

Mantanmoreland used to use long distance dial up accounts to make it appear his alternate accounts were editing from a different metropolitan area. It only takes one slip up to get caught, though.

Mathsci there is just too much circumstantial evidence here not to consider something of the nature that tarantino suggests. Cbrick did not edit often prior to this. Basically on a handful of days in prolonged sessions. It would be very easy not to have slipped up in such a scenario. Currently there is a hilarious conversation going on between Cbrick and Off2riorob on Cbrick's talk page. Cbrick apparently claims to be a 16 year old screen writer.

This post has been edited by Jagärdu: Wed 3rd August 2011, 3:04am

[No one of consequence]

Based on the circumstantial evidence alone, I would remove the workshop proposals from the case page and copy them to the user's talk page. Commenting in Arbitration really should be limited to "vested" editors -- not necessarily the parties only, but people with a demonstrated and reasonably long-term interest in Wikipedia. This account is too new and too specialized to be anything but a sock or a reincarnation.

[-DS-]

Risker ran a checkuser on Chester Markel on June 19. Would she not have picked up on any other socks at the time?

If someone consistently uses different user agent strings and ISPs for each account, checkuser isn't going to find anything.

I've found that different user agent strings alone are enough for a checkuser to deem a sock "unrelated". I once ran a sock on my home IP (the Wikipediots know the IP range), but CU deemed it unrelated to me because I used a different browser than usual.

[Mathsci]

Based on the circumstantial evidence alone, I would remove the workshop proposals from the case page and copy them to the user's talk page. Commenting in Arbitration really should be limited to "vested" editors -- not necessarily the parties only, but people with a demonstrated and reasonably long-term interest in Wikipedia. This account is too new and too specialized to be anything but a sock or a reincarnation.

I agree with that.

In the MMN case, when Chester Markel appeared to be too quick off the gun with his proposals, his responses made it even more evident that something fishy was going on.

[Jagärdu]

Wikistalk results

Hmmmmm.....

So making a reverting vandalism edit at the Harlem Renaissance article is his call sign?

Yes, it is.


(updating as I go through the puppets.)

OK so who wants to bet on how long it will take the nitwits to figure it out? I say Cbrick is still amending his proposals come tomorrow morning.

That depends. Roughly how long will it take for Coren or some other Arb to see this thread, block Chris and then claim all the credit while denying that he saw it on WR?

Well it's the morning and I don't see any moves to block the account or move his bogus proposals.

Based on the circumstantial evidence alone, I would remove the workshop proposals from the case page and copy them to the user's talk page. Commenting in Arbitration really should be limited to "vested" editors -- not necessarily the parties only, but people with a demonstrated and reasonably long-term interest in Wikipedia. This account is too new and too specialized to be anything but a sock or a reincarnation.

I'm not sure how the arbs and/or clerks don't get suspicious enough to at least check the edit history of an account that shows up out of the blue to make workshop proposals without any prior engagement with the issues being discussed. That alone should smell foul enough to get someone to investigate. But of course it's not like there are any sockmasters out there who love to make disruptive workshop proposals at arbitration ... I mean its not like there's a precedent to be suspicious ... right? What do you say John254?

[Mathsci]

Is it normal that a 16 year old would discuss a pornographic anime image?

First diff
Second diff

All the editing is a bit odd.

[Jagärdu]

Is it normal that a 16 year old would discuss a pornographic anime image?

First diff
Second diff

All the editing is a bit odd.

Quite clearly not the comments of a 16 year old, or the type of concern that a 16 year old would have. Once again it baffles the mind to consider how little concern anyone has really expressed about this on-wiki. You have to imagine that one of the arbs has stumbled upon this thread at this point.

Also note these two edits to the infamous Joel Anderson entry of Cirt's pufftastic political campaigning days. Hardly a coincidence.

Here's another topic that you expect a lot of 16 year olds to take interest in: labor induction.

This post has been edited by Jagärdu: Wed 3rd August 2011, 12:34pm

[No one of consequence]

I've found that different user agent strings alone are enough for a checkuser to deem a sock "unrelated". I once ran a sock on my home IP (the Wikipediots know the IP range), but CU deemed it unrelated to me because I used a different browser than usual.

Either your ISP assigns a dynamic IP that changes frequently, or the person who ran the check needs a refresher course in basic methods.